The amount by which we should shrink the economy to save lives might be quite a different number. I haven't seen a good analysis of that case.
In general, shrinking the economy costs lives elsewhere such as by malnutrition or lack of money to spend on safety equipment. So the number ought to be lower.
If that isn't broken windows, I'm not sure why.
If so, I don't see the connection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
No relation to the other. Sorry - my mistake in assuming sufficient familiarity with both to disambiguate from context.
What is known is that it is incredibly contagious, so they're taking precautions for a worse-case scenario with these shut downs.
I've heard multiple times from the virologists at This Week in Virology that we're not going to know the real numbers until it's all over.
In addition to that, they are going to be highly variable depending on the demographics, pre-existing conditions, and the level of medical care you are able to get.
So it's going to be very difficult to calculate these sorts of metrics even when the actual infection/death rates are known.
Which is a big concern to the US, since there is no universal care. That said, I'm in Canada and the healthcare options in rural areas is often hit or miss -- sometimes just a clinic, sometimes just nothin.
This is a misstatement. Nobody is trying to stop the spread, they're trying to slow it within a bubble. The surrounding counties, cities, and states aren't under quarantine. The bay area is simply hitting the pause button, with a slight rewind, for three weeks. Once those three weeks pass, the pause button is released.
One thing is for sure, unless there's some compensation or forgiveness of late payments/credit score hits from the state, this is going to really harm the lives of those already struggling to afford the bay area.
I haven't been assuming that. I think this step is needed, but nobody has really defined precisely what success looks like. In 3 weeks I assume they re-assess and could very well leave restrictions in place.
I had assumed that as well. No reason things will look better by then, and the preventative measures taken in that time probably won't sufficient enough to otherwise resume normal life either.
Also, the cynic in me says that the government class wants to get people used to the idea of a shelter in place piecemeal, because it might not go over as well if they said 1 month straight out of the gate.