It's hard to prove a negative. Specifically, how do you prove something you can't directly observe is efficacious?
Take the coronavirus lockdown. If we shut down the world and lock everyone into their houses, the spread of the virus slows down dramatically and less people get infected. The hospitals aren't overwhelmed and millions of people don't die.
So let's say only 60,000 people die instead of 2 or 9 million. Does that mean the quarantines and all the government overreach didn't succeed? Of course not. So if you think the quarantines didn't work because not a lot of people are dead...I'm not going to bother explaining it to you. Just watch the video.
My beef with the government's emergency measures is the constitutionality. The government went full retard in a lot of cases and went too far. Like basically making it illegal to go outside. See the paddle-boarder get arrested in LA? Closing churches? Hassling gun stores? Tracking citizens and screening people at state borders?
So let's re-think what we've done. There's no reason call centers and office jobs can't be done from home for the time being. Some stuff needs to stay closed or someone needs to come up with a plan for businesses to re-open with social distancing in place and a way for health authorities to enforce it.
And perhaps to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed by COVID-19 patients, special pandemic hospitals should have been opened and all known or suspected cases sent there to keep regular hospitals open. Yes, the virus may still spread but someone who needs that cancer cut out of them or that stent put in might like to life rather than limping along some very elderly person isn't gonna survive the virus any how.
People have done a good job getting along so far and even voluntarily complying. There's no reason why we need a boot on our neck over a virus. But whatever we do, there will be a second wave and it will be just as bad, if not worse, when the world does re-open.
Balancing a lot of dead people versus civil liberties is difficult, but not that difficult. We are capable of a much better response from a health perspective and a constitutional one. It is possible to both praise the social distancing efforts while questioning their extent and efficacy. You are well aware I am critical of closing outdoor spaces (the real reason for the closure seems to be crowds, not spreading the virus). We can have a conversation about how-far is too-far.
The pushes we make for the government to chill out, respect our rights, and not be incompetent will dictate how awful the next wave will be.
For more content,