What I like about what Dr. Anthony Fauci is saying is that it is ok to start opening the economy as long as people follow the process. That means most of the country has been in decline but there are a few places where it continues to (could still) spike. Optimistic caution is the way I look at it. 😬 Thus, those areas that have been in decline could start thinking about opening based on....
1. Decline in positive cases.
2 Capabilities to handle outbreaks.
3. Ability to contact trace and "snuff" out the spike.
We know as a nation we can't stop all risks. It would not be a wise expectation. No one should pretend there are no risks. However, there are risks if we keep the country closed as state budgets are going bust, people are struggling to pay their bills and other COVID collateral damage is starting to rise.
Goal and direction of research and testing.....
1. Improve fundamental knowledge
2. New point of care diagnostics
3. Characterize and test therapeutics
4. Safe vaccines
What I get out of this, and its only my interpretation, is that we are better prepared to handle cases than we were in the past. If a state (or county) have prepared themselves they can start to think about opening under the federal guidelines. They should follow those guidelines and not circumvent them (To the extent possible). Those are the essential arguments however one will need to watch the whole video to determine what they see. Just remember that selective attention can sort of skew what we pay attention to and what we ignore depending on our pre-existing beliefs. It takes a lot of personal insight to sort of weed out those "bias"(on both sides).
Senator Tim Scott made some really excellent comments about the ultimate goals and how the essential arguments changed. The goal never was to stop 100% of deaths but to ensure that hospitals are not overwhelmed. As the economy opens we will want to improve our capacity but the goal was not to shut everything down for extended periods of time. We are running into other problems by trying to stop the virus completely. He mentioned a false dichotomy and the need to rethink about our goals. It doesn't so much matter if you agree or not agree but that he had a new way of looking at the problem.
What might further add to this story are economic projects on what would happen if we do not open for another 2 months, 6 months, or 12 months? Its a little comparative but it might round out the issue for strategic thinking and choice. This virus and our choices will be reviewed, studied, and discussed in history books for a long time. I can only say we have gone a long way as a country and I'm impressed. There is a horizon we still need to cross.........