If there was a strictly enforced lockdown for 2-4 weeks, it seems likely that:
The pandemic would dwindle down and end soon afterwards.
Many lives would be saved.
The economy would be able to re-open soon.
There wouldn’t be any sort of large-scale panic.
A potential downside is setting a precedent for too much governmental power. I don’t feel strongly about that but I suspect that the benefit of the government having such power outweighs the cost.
I’d expect that imposing China-style lockdowns in the West would require significant force and might end up causing a large-scale panic in and of itself.
I’d expect that any lockdown in the West wouldn’t have been effective enough to stamp out 100% of cases, and if you don’t eradicate it then you need ongoing measures or it will just flare up again later, so one strictly enforced lockdown wouldn’t cut it. (Though maybe you could do very rigorous contact tracing and lock down just people who might have been in contact with cases, which could be less costly than full lockdown but probably still need significant enforcement).
The other problem is that a super-strict lockdown tight enough to actually stop the virus in this manner would likely have a higher mortality rate than the virus. COVID spreads like mad, but it’s hit to average life expectancy seems to be pretty small.
If there was a strictly enforced lockdown for 2-4 weeks, it seems likely that:
The pandemic would dwindle down and end soon afterwards.
Many lives would be saved.
The economy would be able to re-open soon.
There wouldn’t be any sort of large-scale panic.
A potential downside is setting a precedent for too much governmental power. I don’t feel strongly about that but I suspect that the benefit of the government having such power outweighs the cost.
I’m skeptical of this.
Wuhan needed 2 months on lockdown: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_lockdown_in_Hubei
I’d expect that imposing China-style lockdowns in the West would require significant force and might end up causing a large-scale panic in and of itself.
I’d expect that any lockdown in the West wouldn’t have been effective enough to stamp out 100% of cases, and if you don’t eradicate it then you need ongoing measures or it will just flare up again later, so one strictly enforced lockdown wouldn’t cut it. (Though maybe you could do very rigorous contact tracing and lock down just people who might have been in contact with cases, which could be less costly than full lockdown but probably still need significant enforcement).
The other problem is that a super-strict lockdown tight enough to actually stop the virus in this manner would likely have a higher mortality rate than the virus. COVID spreads like mad, but it’s hit to average life expectancy seems to be pretty small.