April 1 Poll: End the lockdown?

[Moonglow]

End the lockdown today (April 1) and deal with the consequences?

-or-

Keep the lockdown in effect and deal with the consequences?


"Ending the lockdown" means governments lifting all restrictions on business, large gatherings, flights, and cross-border travel. If you believe the best policy falls somewhere between the two extremes, select the closest option in your own good judgment.

Also note that the question pertains to immediate action. If you believe the lockdown should be lifted, but in a week, two weeks, etc., you should cast your vote for "Keep the lockdown in effect".

Please post your reasoning for your vote, particularly if you vote "End the lockdown", since there are many varied and diverse reasons for wanting the lockdown lifted.

Finally, if you vote "Keep the lockdown in effect" and you have a firm idea of how long the lockdown should last, please post this info. However, please only post the figure if it's a definite amount of time, e.g. "2 weeks", "until May 1", etc., and not an indefinite amount of time, e.g. "as long as it takes", "when the number of new cases has dropped below...", "when the experts say so", etc.

If it involves my wife I say keep her locked up...

 

[Drawdown]

I see no difference under a stay at home order than I saw under a stay at home recommendation. The only thing that seems to have helped was stores starting to ration quantities so people were not so compelled to hoard.

 

[HumblePi]

Its BS. Period.

Then it's Trump's lies, Trump's bull**** -- take it up with him

 

[mike2810]

When this is all over I hope stores keep the 6 feet rule in place. Pretty nice not having someone crowd me as a try to check out at a store.

 

[CaughtInThe]

as the death toll rises i predict that some Trump supporters will every so slowly take a vacation from political message boards, twitter, etc. not all but a bunch.



then they'll come roaring back once the dead are forgotten.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

End the lockdown today (April 1) and deal with the consequences?

-or-

Keep the lockdown in effect and deal with the consequences?


"Ending the lockdown" means governments lifting all restrictions on business, large gatherings, flights, and cross-border travel. If you believe the best policy falls somewhere between the two extremes, select the closest option in your own good judgment.

Also note that the question pertains to immediate action. If you believe the lockdown should be lifted, but in a week, two weeks, etc., you should cast your vote for "Keep the lockdown in effect".

Please post your reasoning for your vote, particularly if you vote "End the lockdown", since there are many varied and diverse reasons for wanting the lockdown lifted.

Finally, if you vote "Keep the lockdown in effect" and you have a firm idea of how long the lockdown should last, please post this info. However, please only post the figure if it's a definite amount of time, e.g. "2 weeks", "until May 1", etc., and not an indefinite amount of time, e.g. "as long as it takes", "when the number of new cases has dropped below...", "when the experts say so", etc.

Let me be clear, I don't think forced lockdowns and economic amputation was the right cure, but now that we've started sawing, we have to cut through the bone, so to speak. If we abandon the policy now, we only get the downside of our choice.

 

[Waddy]

What is this "lock down" you speak of?

I was out at the lake today getting my pontoon boat ready, keeping my social distance, and I saw lots of people mingling together. The fishing dock has about a dozen benches and ALL of them were full, people sitting right next to each other. Others were playing basketball or picnicking. Looked like people enjoying some nice weather like any other Spring day. Walmart had hundreds of vehicles in the parking lot as I drove by.

I guess Americans aren't built for "social distancing".

 

[Phys251]

Shutting the country down is just as if not more devastating. Things get ugly quick if they cant keep a roof over their head.

So you want to sacrifice people to save the economy. Got it.

You are not "pro-life."

 

[COTO]

Sweden's limited response is not working all that great.

Neither is anyone else's.

"Off Guardian" is basically an outlet for Russian pseudo-science.

Genetic fallacy. And not only this, the experts they're citing don't work for them.

ZeroHedge is not even remotely credible.

Genetic fallacy.

The BBC is not made up of idiots. But they are reporting way too soon. The rest are idiots.

Ipse dixit.

Got anything other than transparent logical fallacies?

 

[Waddy]

Wow, this is getting to be like the "Global Warming" debate. One one side the people in a panic fearing the end is near, and on the opposite side the whatsthebigdeal "deniers". Both have their own set of "experts". But is this virus issue "settled science". We shall see.

 

[COTO]

Wow, this is getting to be like the "Global Warming" debate. One one side the people in a panic fearing the end is near, and on the opposite side the whatsthebigdeal "deniers". Both have their own set of "experts". But is this virus issue "settled science". We shall see.

At least people will get a better idea of what life will be like under climate austerity: no travel, no driving, no purchasing unnecessary products, no factory jobs, ...