The first sign of leadership issues was entering lockdowns without even vague exit criteria. It's also become clear there was (or is?) no endgame in mind.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/15/8340211...
Individual governments such as the UK have established less restrictive conditions.
The key point is building massive capabilities to test and contact trace so any further outbreak can be contained.
Otherwise we will be lurching from lockdown to lockdown.
Just because the US Federal government is unable to define criteria, because they don’t want to increase the manufacturing of test kits for political reasons doesn’t mean every other government has no clue.
Cite please?
This is the first time I've heard this. Could you expand on what you think these political reasons are?
The lockdowns have come as desperate measures in response to the general confusion and the progression of a deadly epidemic. California is vaguely looking to testing as mechanism for lifting the lockdown. Hopefully, they'll come up with good ideas. The epidemic is still running hot so do have time to think.
Having local authorities improvising isn't the best approach by any means. It's still a better approach than a mob of anti-vaxers, Proud Boys and other right wing types improvising or a president who doesn't know biology improvising, to illustrate the mess we're in.
This mess, however, is one of those situations where it's incumbent on the critic to come up with something actually better that can be implemented rather than whining that a given solution is far from perfect.
I'm not sure that we can build a health system capable of handling this a second time... I have the feeling that this will just result in the way people work changing.
Essential workers taking more power because we are all forced to acknowledge that they're essential. People able to work remotely doing that much much more. Wearing masks at the grocery. These are things I expect to be long-term, except for the first which has some obvious structural barriers.