Wow -- seems very unlikely to happen though.
Wow -- seems very unlikely to happen though.
Chances are, some region will decide against doing that, and their outcome will provide a clear incentive for everyone else to be more rigorous about it.
I used to have a poster along these lines in my office. https://despair.com/products/mistakes
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/sweden-coronav...
Of course, some right-wing media outlets have still been touting this as a success and a model for a less economically-damaging approach— this article is from nine days ago, but it's not hard to find other similar ones:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-response-...
It's probably much too early to say one way or another, but I guess there is some value in having multiple approaches be tried. Particularly in a world where guys like Glenn Beck have gone on record saying they'd "rather die than kill the country."
The data might turn much worse, but right now I don't think it's bad for Sweden.
They will not revolt. They won't take power. They don't even vote today.
What about Sweden vs Norway -- sure, the data is 4X worse for Sweden, but we are only talking thousands of infections and hundreds of deaths. Maybe this can't scale to bigger countries though.
this will likely cause more business failures than a prolonged shut down. Starting up and shutting down a business is not free. There are legal costs and you need to source materials for operations. In the case of restaurants in particular, there will be loss due to spoilage