[jasonlaramburu]

> People horrified to enter a hospital despite needing medical care.

I have not heard of anyone who is ‘scared’ to go to the hospital. I have heard of many hospitals in coastal states being forced to turn away elective procedures due to lack of bed space (from covid cases).

Have you ever stopped to consider that, lockdown or not, people simply aren’t choosing to do the things they used to? There are no restrictions against travel, yet people aren’t taking as many vacations. Most states today have no restrictions on dining, yet restaurant revenues are down by half. The service and hospitality industries were going to take a hit from covid regardless of lockdowns.

[abduhl]

It's hard to square your comment that there are "no restrictions against travel" with reality. These are just three examples I happen to know of off the top of my head. The remainder of the assertions in your post suffer from the same fundamental flaw.

Hawaii: The islands of Oahu, Maui, Molokai, Lanai, and Hawaii continue with the state’s pre-travel testing program. Travelers must have their negative test results prior to departing as an alternative to Hawaii’s mandatory 10-day quarantine.

Beginning December 2, Kauai is temporarily pausing participation in this pre-testing program. All incoming trans-pacific and inter-county travelers to Kauai will face a mandatory 10-day quarantine.

https://www.gohawaii.com/travel-requirements

Chicago: Anyone traveling from a state on the Orange list is directed to obtain a negative COVID-19 test result no more than 72 hours prior to arrival in Chicago or quarantine for a 10-day period (or the duration of their time in Chicago, whichever is shorter). Anyone traveling from a state on the Red list must quarantine for a 10-day period or the duration of their time in Chicago, whichever is shorter. The Order is subject to the limited exemptions outlined in the ‘Exemptions tab’.

https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/sites/covid-19/home/emergenc...

Massachusetts: All visitors entering Massachusetts, including returning residents, who do not meet an exemption, are required to:

Complete the Massachusetts Travel Form prior to arrival, unless you are visiting from a lower-risk state designated by the Department of Public Health. Quarantine for 10 days or produce a negative COVID-19 test result that has been administered up to 72-hours prior to your arrival in Massachusetts. If your COVID-19 test result has not been received prior to arrival, visitors, and residents must quarantine until they receive a negative test result.

Failure to comply may result in a $500 fine per day.

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-travel-order

[jasonlaramburu]

That’s three states out of 50 and Hawaii is the only one with any sort of enforcement. I travelled to NM (also subject to a 14 day quarantine). Zero enforcement, totally voluntary and business travel exempted.

[abduhl]

Ignoring the obvious here that your original statement was there are “NO” travel restrictions, your reply is a no true Scotsman fallacy. There are clearly travel restrictions but you, and most other people, are not adhering to them. Just like the majority of lockdown rules. Maybe if people like you had followed the travel restrictions we wouldn’t be in our current position where you’re still arguing that curtailing fundamental freedoms is necessary?

If you don’t get a ticket, does that mean that no speed restrictions exist?

[jasonlaramburu]

> Maybe if people like you had followed the travel restrictions

Excuse me, I was traveling for business. I complied with the regulations exactly as they are written.

You can complain about people ‘not following the rules’ all you want but it changes nothing. There are no meaningful travel restrictions enforced anywhere on the US mainland. Without enforcement, Americans do not and will not follow them.

Hawaii is the only state with actual enforcement and compliance.

[gnusty_gnurc]

> Have you ever stopped to consider that, lockdown or not, people simply aren’t choosing to do the things they used to?

So we don’t need mandates?

[jasonlaramburu]

Mandates will increase compliance and save more lives.

Sorry but your position contradicts itself and smacks of confirmation bias. If the US government really were systematically corrupt and authoritarian, why would they want to curtail economic activity? They would tell everyone not to worry about COVID and keep driving, eating out, shopping etc to maximize tax revenue and the availability of bribes.

I have read that many people believe outlandish conspiracy theories because humans have trouble accepting the reality that sometimes, bad things simply happen for no rational reason. It is easier for many to believe that a secret government cabal is conspiring to keep people in their homes than to accept that a deadly virus has infected millions of innocents and created massive global inconvenience.

[gnusty_gnurc]

> because humans have trouble accepting the reality that sometimes, bad things simply happen for no rational reason

I believe this and I think it applies to all the lockdowns and moral superiority stuff where people are shamed for not following NPIs that don't seem effective.

It's as though the pro-lockdown side can't accept that sometimes tragedy happens and we're relatively powerless to stop it. So, unable to accept that they point fingers to anyone around them. Who must we demonize? Hunt the witch!

They suppose there must be non-compliant people if the lockdowns aren't working. And so they fight the hidden enemy. As though if there's a minority of people not complying, that population wouldn't have been exhausted through infection after a year.

[jasonlaramburu]

>It's as though the pro-lockdown side can't accept that sometimes tragedy happens and we're relatively powerless to stop it

There are multiple countries (in both northern and southern hemisphere, islands and mainlands) that have eliminated community transmission of covid. It is wrong to say we are powerless to stop it. It is indisputable that if you and your family stay home, you will not get COVID. Likewise, common sense dictates that more people will stay home if required to do so by their government.

You are trying to make the argument, absent data, that the economic and social/emotional impacts of 'stay at home' orders are worse than the economic and social/emotional impacts of uncontrolled viral infection and death.

[gnusty_gnurc]

> You are trying to make the argument, absent data, that the economic and social/emotional impacts of 'stay at home' orders are worse than the economic and social/emotional impacts of uncontrolled viral infection and death.

My argument has the proof of vast majority of countries that’ve failed to mitigate spread with high tradeoffs and costs to society.

If Europe ostensibly can’t manage it - how is the US expected, given the elevated opinion of Europe most people on the pro-lockdown side tend to presume?

Where’s the evidence that NPIs are effective?

You want ivory tower detachment and ignorance? Suggest America just “be Australia or China.”

[jasonlaramburu]

>My argument has the proof of vast majority of countries that’ve failed to mitigate spread with high tradeoffs and costs to society.

These are anecdotes. You fail to show that the costs of NPIs to society are greater than the cost of uncontrolled spread (ie doing nothing).