https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
There are only 12 states doing better on a death rate perspective than South Dakota. And they've been 5 times more effective at preventing deaths than New York.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covi...
I would say if they get a spike almost 6 months after literally never shutting down anything, they've done extremely well either way.
No state should care about infection rates among healthy populations. That's normal and expected and necessary to reach herd immunity. Hospitalizations would be alarming but hospitalizations have plummeted nationwide even as case counts have risen.
We are already well within range of an ordinary flu season as far as excess deaths goes: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
Also, draconian? What? In SF restaurants with outside seating are open and populated. State and national parks are largely open (unless closed due to fire / smoke hazard). A lot of stores are open for indoor shopping.
They have higher death rates than their neighboring countries. While the economic outcome doesn't appear to be better than the surrounding countries.
> South Dakota looks great.
https://covidtracking.com/data/state/south-dakota
Look at the hospitalizations. No, they're not doing good. They actually have one of the highest infection rates. And as you can see the deaths are increasing too.
> We've been locked down for half a year. Maybe you don't live in California but it's still full draconian lockdown here, and our state guidelines are crafted such that it is literally impossible for us to re-open.
I do live in CA. The last time the state started to reopen, with looser guidelines, the infection rates grew substantially. Deaths/day stayed pretty high for a long time, and is only slowly shrinking.
Also, how does that apply to my comment upthread?