[DocSavage87]

Following the science (particularly as its conclusions shift with new data) does not preclude all other kinds of proper thinking.  It is necessary though not sufficient for an optimal response to the pandemic.  Science can be used to model what happens when 20+% of our country is not compliant with recommendations or even mandates.  We see that posting signs and even making fines will not prevent people from ignoring recommendations.  This is why there's room for heterogeneity in the response, e.g., implementation of the task force's reopening plan could be done at district and certainly state levels.  Some states like MA actually require 14 day quarantine for out-of-state visitors.  Even if it's not fully enforced it should lead to some incremental improvement in transmission across state lines.

Due to non-compliance and/or ignorance, the reality is that the US will be in slow/medium "simmer" mode unless it takes off in winter.  When states like TX or GA get hammered, there will be both state-wide as well as individual behavior changes that provide a negative feedback loop.  Unfortunately some of it is tied into socioeconomic differences since white-collar workers will be more able to self-isolate and do remote work than low income or retail workers.  Even in this bad scenario, it's unlikely that we all will get it because at least some highly paranoid, likely richer, and self-isolating groups in the US can limit their exposure.  Essentially some people in the US will be locked down in the social sense while still working remotely.  Then it's a question of timing on the vaccine and other factors like "herd immunity" within the non-compliant and sub-population required to work in high-risk areas.  If masks actually decrease severity of the disease based on size and location of inoculum, then even if the disease spreads among the compliant population we may see a drop in the IFR.

[DocSavage87]

Following the science (particularly as its conclusions shift with new data) does not preclude all other kinds of proper thinking.  It is necessary though not sufficient for an optimal response to the pandemic.  Science can be used to model what happens when 20+% of our country is not compliant with recommendations or even mandates.  We see that posting signs and even making fines will not prevent people from ignoring recommendations.  This is why there's room for heterogeneity in the response, e.g., implementation of the task force's reopening plan could be done at district and certainly state levels.  Some states like MA actually require 14 day quarantine for out-of-state visitors.  Even if it's not fully enforced it should lead to some incremental improvement in transmission across state lines.

Due to non-compliance and/or ignorance, the reality is that the US will be in slow/medium "simmer" mode unless it takes off in winter.  When states like TX or GA get hammered, there will be both state-wide as well as individual behavior changes that provide a negative feedback loop.  Unfortunately some of it is tied into socioeconomic differences since white-collar workers will be more able to self-isolate and do remote work than low income or retail workers.  Even in this bad scenario, it's unlikely that we all will get it because at least some highly paranoid, likely richer, and self-isolating groups in the US can limit their exposure.  Essentially some people in the US will be locked down in the social sense while still working remotely.  Then it's a question of timing on the vaccine and other factors like "herd immunity" within the non-compliant and sub-population required to work in high-risk areas.  If masks actually decrease severity of the disease based on size and location of inoculum, then even if the disease spreads among the compliant population we may see a drop in the IFR.