This is a subverse designed to encourage adult discussion spanning the entirety of the political spectrum. All are welcome, from Libertarians to Authoritarians, Democrats to Republicans, An Caps to Anarchists, Socialists to Fascists to Communists, Green, Blue, Black, White, Purple with Yellow Polka dots, whatever color, persuasion, or affiliation, this is a place for you to post your thoughts, articles, and engage in discussion meant to foster understanding.
Politics is best when we try to avoid personal attacks, limits on discussion, censorship, trolling, shilling, racism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any other forms of bigotry and malfeasance.
Election 2020 Politics Sticky
Politics 2017 Christmas Theme sticky
Nov 2016 sticky on new CSS
This subverse belongs to the community of users. Users are invited to post meta-threads about v/politics and I will gladly sticky them. @flyawayhigh
Use the "Report Spam" link to report spam and someone will review the report. J-mods have the ability to remove duplicate noncommercial spam.
v/politics is for all politics.
v/uspolitics is for US politics only.
v/worldpolitics is for international or non-US politics.
v/politicalnews is dedicated to virtually censor-free politics and news
v/news is for news around the world.
v/usnews is for domestic news only.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] heygeorge ago
Restrictions haven’t loosened all at once where there were major outbreaks. And many people have changed their behaviors. So your interpretation of what the infection spike should look like is bogus, especially as we are learning more about the infection rate and how the virus actually seems to spread (such as the apparently low instance of contaminated surfaces spreading infection)
Have you seen this? I’ve been meaning to read the actual study to see if it’s meaningful, but life gets in the way.
https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/06/23/Less-than-half-a-population-needs-COVID-19-infection-for-herd-immunity-study-says/5531592933827/
[–] septenary [S] ago
Ultimately you can believe what you want, but you should understand that there are no medical and/or mathematical experts who predicted some scenario where lockdown measures were going to be good enough to achieve containment. That was considered off the table since January.
A "best case" scenario for COVID has been an extended/stretched out - but still even/predictable - curve, where the number of hospitalizations remain less than the number of hospital beds available.
Please note again that the notion of achieving and then potentially losing containment again of the virus has not been in even the dreams of experts past 1/2020.
[–] heygeorge ago
In January, there wasn’t even a proper established R0 based on anything solid.
It’s stupid to assume that models introduced in January (and since demonstrated to be inaccurate due to very limited data) are the sole arbiter of what the actual results will be like.
As to your further detailed analysis, and ‘experts’ have publicly stated this numerous times, the response of Americans (and particularly the New York metro area) was very unanticipated. The most optimistic models did not account for the level of compliance achieved by citizens following stay at home orders.