[mindslight]

If 1-2% of people die quickly, the economy will not be fucked. That's a politicized untruth put out to counter other politicized untruths.

The people protesting and doing other stupid things are actually helping those of us that are isolating. The quicker they spread it and create herd immunity, the less time we have to wait. This obviously depends on whether an individual can get reinfected, but I haven't seen anything conclusive one way or another and it feels like this has also been misleadingly politicized.

Obviously a deluge of cases is absolutely terrible for the healthcare workers, as well as other essential employees that are exposed to the mob-herd (eg grocery store workers) and likely won't receive adequate healthcare. So I'm certainly not advocating, merely analyzing.

[etrabroline]

Why do you care more about "the economy" than the lives of 2% ~= 6 million people? The Fed could take back it's massive Wall Street bailout and give it to workers. Rich people would hoot and holler but no one would starve, and the public would be much less anxious to lift the quarantine.

>herd immunity

There is no natural herd immunity for the flu or common cold. It's totally possible that after a few months people who survive become reinfected, which would massively increase the death rate if you already have lung damage when you get it again.

[mindslight]

Try reading my whole comment instead of jumping at phrases that match your political attack target.

[etrabroline]

>The quicker they spread it and create herd immunity, the less time we have to wait.

If we are going to allow most people to become infected anyway, such that we encourage people to go to large gatherings without even wearing masks, then surely there is no reason to have any quarantine at all, so we wouldn't be waiting to lift it. But you seem to think we would still be waiting, just for a shorter amount of time, so you are clearly very confused about this whole situation.

>I'm certainly not advocating, merely analyzing.

So am I.