SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the lockdowns-were-supposed-to-be-just-one-part-of-defense-at-depth dept.
Economists warn of 'widespread costs' from lockdown:
Blanket restrictions on economic activity should be lifted and replaced with measures targeted specifically at groups most at risk, say economists.
[...] They argue that while the extent to which the lockdown contributed to a subsequent slowing in the rate of new infections and deaths is not easy to estimate precisely, it seems clear that it did contribute to these public health objectives.
However, they say it is "very far from clear" whether keeping such tight restrictions in place for three months until the end of June when they began to be lifted was warranted, given the large costs. They say that the costs of carrying on with such a lockdown are likely to have become significantly greater than its benefits.
Debate over the global dilemma continues.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Booga1 on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:26PM (1 child)
The lifting of the lockdowns were not solely motivated by saving businesses, and certainly not saving people. No, it was about saving the states money. The lifting of lockdowns in many places were so the state could stop paying out unemployment. If you worked at a place that "reopened" then you were obligated to go back to work or forfeit your unemployment.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:11PM
At least in democrat run states, the goal is to get the Trump administration to make up for state shortfalls, while trying to shift the blame for the state lockdowns to it.
After November 3rd, they can get back to economic reality.