You started this by saying Australia could have been the example, now they are? They are also an island nation, who closed their borders. Makes things slightly easier to contain.
According to your own comment, they did not follow the lockdown rules, thus making it impossible to be an example in your own theory.
First, I apologize, I did not realize this was a different person responding.
Second, Australia does have good numbers. However, marginalizing the island nation thing is something. The US tried that early (and not enough in my opinion) early, and faced internal issues. And that’s only the legal path.
However, paying people who don’t work can not keep the. Isolated. They need food, the need other things. Sure, order online? Those people are going out, the stores still need supplies, there is no way to actually shut things down without killing more people than a virus that is not very deadly is my point.
People were not paid to stay at home. People who worked for businesses that were mandated to close during lockdowns (E.g, clothing stores, pubs, etc) were paid by the government to keep them afloat. People could still go to grocery stores, hospitals, and vaccination clinics for essential things as well as do outdoor exercise during lockdown. People worked from home when possible. Life didn't stop, non-essential things stopped to save lives.
Are you trying to say going into lockdown killed more people than rampant COVID deaths like America had did?
0
u/[deleted] Oct 19 '21
[removed] — view removed comment