[throwaway237683]

> even more people would have died if we didn't take costly measures to stop it.

The example of Sweden seems to disagree with this assumption. They never locked down, and the current mortality is (1,203 / 10,330,000) * 100 = 0.0116%

First case on Jan 31st, no lockdowns, death rate has already flattened. Where is that crazy scary exponential growth?

[JamisonM]

Sweden as the great success story when it is suffering the same economic devastation as its neighbors but a higher death rate is an interesting argument.

The thing about the lockdowns is that evidence so far indicates that stopping 80% of non-essential economic activities voluntarily is about as bad for the economy as stopping 90+% on a mandatory basis, but it seems that the health outcomes are much better in the latter situation.