[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Protecting the vulnerable is all that's required. Shutting down the economy is not something that can be sustained, repeated or enforced.

There’s no clear definition of “vulnerable” for the virus. Yes, there are higher at risk groups but there are also those outwith having severe health impacts, and ultimately deaths.

Shutting down the economy can easily be sustained, repeated and enforced if that’s the most cost effective way of dealing with the virus.

In comparing the number of deaths in this country with that of others, I stand by my statement that it is too early to make those comparisons. Not only will there be future waves, but we are all counting differently.

You can continue to stand by statements all you like however when they are flawed and against all known evidence then it simply discredits your arguments.

Most people accept that we have to get the country back to work now, and if we have to mandate that masks be worn and proective screens erected to reassure those who are scared, so be it. But the economy must be working effectively again without delay.

Again based on the flawed belief that human behaviour returns to normal or that businesses can survive on reduced demand in the economy. For many they cannot - and when they scale back and put people on the dole the outcome is inevitable. An entrenched long term recession that will be harder to get out of and cost the public purse more in the long run.

Unless the Government intends to stimulate demand in the economy - but that goes against your ideology and defeats your original intent which is to keep the state out of it.

Doesn't it depend on what further measures are put in place.

Had they simply protected the vulnerable, the numbers would not have been anywhere near as high as they have been and the economy would still be in good shape. There was no need for this global over-reaction.

How would the numbers be lower by “protecting the vulnerable”. We protected the vulnerable, and everyone else while we were at it, and still had devastating figures.

It’s a flawed logic, ignores reality and distracts from the steps that we, and all other countries, must take if there’s to be any meaningful return to normal for the foreseeable future.

---------- Post added at 12:50 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Sadly, I think he is right, but I anticipate that a resurgence will be sooner rather than later. And indeed, if anyone thinks we will get everyone vaccinated in the near future, they are deluding themselves. No effective vaccine has been discovered yet, although I am told it won't be long before one is found. But then it needs testing on animals, testing on humans, it then needs to be mass produced, distributed to hospitals and doctors' practices and then inoculations will commence. This process will not have been completed until 2022 at the earliest, I would have thought.

Which is why elimination should have been the obvious choice. While it’s a high short term cost, it has the greatest long term gains.