Re:Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order t...
by michaelt on Thursday May 14, 2020 @08:56AM
(#23178880)
> I think (as is usually the case) the right approach sits directly in between the "open now" and "keep everything shut down" camps.
At least in my country, there's already been a lot of complaints about repeated changes to advice and rules.
I'm pretty sure the government's science advisers would ideally like to do a gradual, multi-stage re-opening with the option to roll things back if they need to. You know, reopen some schools next month with teachers under the age of 45, if death rates rise shut them down again, otherwise reopen more the month after, and so on.
The fear is that message is too complicated, and people who are told "here is a schedule for reopenings on a trial basis and subject to change" will hear "lockdown is over, I can finally visit my friends and loved ones" - and we'll get a second peak even worse than the first.
At least in my country, there's already been a lot of complaints about repeated changes to advice and rules.
I'm pretty sure the government's science advisers would ideally like to do a gradual, multi-stage re-opening with the option to roll things back if they need to. You know, reopen some schools next month with teachers under the age of 45, if death rates rise shut them down again, otherwise reopen more the month after, and so on.
The fear is that message is too complicated, and people who are told "here is a schedule for reopenings on a trial basis and subject to change" will hear "lockdown is over, I can finally visit my friends and loved ones" - and we'll get a second peak even worse than the first.