[stupac2]

Moreover, if it's true that people are scared and won't go out, then lifting SiP should cause very little increased risk overall, and certainly with respect to Hospital Armageddon.

This is emphatically false. There's an asymmetry here where to successfully run a business without modifying staff levels you need a certain customer base that's going to be an appreciable fraction of normal (that will vary based on the business, but I'd guess most industries would be north of 50%), while to getting ~20% of the population exposed all at once is plenty to cause significant problems (NYC's antibody incidence was around 20%).

Just to be clear, my stance is that we should listen to the experts in epidemiology, public health, and economics, who nearly universally are recommending this course of action. I would really like to know why you think these people, who have spent their lives studying these topics or preparing for this situation, are all wrong.

[stupac2]

Moreover, if it's true that people are scared and won't go out, then lifting SiP should cause very little increased risk overall, and certainly with respect to Hospital Armageddon.

This is emphatically false. There's an asymmetry here where to successfully run a business without modifying staff levels you need a certain customer base that's going to be an appreciable fraction of normal (that will vary based on the business, but I'd guess most industries would be north of 50%), while to getting ~20% of the population exposed all at once is plenty to cause significant problems (NYC's antibody incidence was around 20%).

Just to be clear, my stance is that we should listen to the experts in epidemiology, public health, and economics, who nearly universally are recommending this course of action. I would really like to know why you think these people, who have spent their lives studying these topics or preparing for this situation, are all wrong.