Victoria hasn't exited lockdown. How can you say it worked?
> Suppression is a good strategy when the world is devoid of a vaccine.
I have heard the argument that suppression is a good strategy because a vaccine is soon to be approved.
If we can't develop a vaccine I would hope suppression wouldn't be the strategy.
Even parts of the country with a far greater number of infections than the Atlantic provinces are seeing numbers stabilize (e.g. Alberta) or decline (e.g. British Columbia). This is not the case in Ontario, where the spread is essentially uncontrolled. Measures need to be put into place because the living will continue to suffer as long as that spread is uncontrolled, and yes the loss of life matters as well. A few weeks to stabilize the situation will ensure that lives are not lost needlessly.
I live in a diverse area with lots of working-class people: It's not uncommon for kids in my school district to be using their parent's old phone as their online portal for distance learning. It's also not uncommon for parents who must work & can't afford child care to have an elderly relative watch their kids. Relatives that aren't always fluent English speakers, and often aren't equipped to help a kid navigate a curriculum spread across 5 or 6 different electronic systems.
Homeless people have been placed into accommodation (and is apparently proving to be cheaper than the previous services provided).
Medical care is fully available?
Malnutrition??
(Note that this isn't a hypothetical - we have real world examples - see New York a few months ago, or Spain.)
Do you actually have any info on those topics? If not how can you claim that it worked. Maybe it had just delayed inevitable but at higher overall cost.
I live in Toronto, Ontario.
Cardiovascular disease kills 655,000 Americans each year compared to Covid's 200,000.
So if you assume that Victoria can contact trace almost as well as NSW, I think its fair to say it's worked because they've got to a number where contact tracing is effective.