Viking, people not leaving their homes at all for the year would actually be way worse than doing nothing about the corona virus, because we need to go outside in order to obtain necessities such as food and water. Not to mention that people are already predicting what's currently being done about this virus would lead to an economic depression worse than the 30s, for obvious reasons.
yes, goodgame, I know. I am only suggesting it for 2-3 weeks.
Our country (and world) would come back from the recession (if it happened). it wouldn't be a 10 year long recession; more like a 9 month long one, if that.
@battle Master , the human race isn't going to go extinct. most people survive this - the more worrying thing is the possible economic depression (like goodgame said)
A brief comment regarding masks. For folks working close to the public such as cashiers I do not view it as being selfish to wear a mask. Of those individuals I know who are wearing masks a substantial number have chronic health conditions.
Beyond that at my own job here in New Jersey all those who do use masks have a bare handful that are being reused after an effort to clean them with alcohol or some other antiseptic.
There is no hording of these things. They do not seem to be available to hord.
The main arguement for their use by the folk employed maintaining "essential services" is to prevent the spread of this virus to our customers. One unknowingly ill worker could become what the epidemiologists call a super spreader. That is a status I fervently wish to avoid.
I can guarantee you that china fabricated (and grossly underreported) their number of cases and deaths. A study out of Sweden was able to map much of the early part of the outbreak (prior to the "change in how reporting was done") to a quadratic curve with a 0.99 correlation coefficient.
1. Disease infections follow an exponential curve, not a quadratic curve. 2. How TF can a correlation coefficient be 0.99? Population counting is a highly irregular game.
