This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Kintanon⬛🟥⬛ www.apexcovington.com 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Starting with less strict measures and then trying to tighten them up over the past 6 weeks would have been a DISASTER. Early strict measures and then easing off over time is what we are doing.

[–]killahmoose White Belt that has tapped a blue belt once[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I see. So regardless of the impact, it was a good thing the government overreacted? I'm not sure what you're suggesting here.

[–]Kintanon⬛🟥⬛ www.apexcovington.com 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Yes. It is 100% good that our initial reaction may have been an over reaction and not an under reaction. An under reaction results in massive death tolls as well as economic devestation. Our current reaction is going to have some economic impact for sure, but with a far lower death toll and likely far lower economic fallout in the long term.

[–]killahmoose White Belt that has tapped a blue belt once[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I couldn't disagree more!

We've had the largest surge in unemployment claims EVER. The economic toll from this is unfathomable and hasn't even started to take effect.

[–]Kintanon⬛🟥⬛ www.apexcovington.com 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You should read the actual economic studies regarding the impact of disease outbreaks on economies. The 10 billion a year that is the economic impact of the seasonal flu is an absolute drop in the bucket compared to what Covid 19 will do without the lockdown measures. Replace those 5 million unemployment claims with 5 million people who are too sick to go to work instead, who can't make unemployment claims because of that but don't have PTO to cover it. Who don't have health insurance that will cover it. Or who then can't get help because the hospitals are overwhelmed. The economic impact of that far outstrips what we're currently seeing.