... (ok, not all, but many)... When we went into lockdown they complained that it caused more harm than it prevented... that it wasn’t worth the jobs lost, freedoms curtailed, medical appointments postponed (though surely they’d have been postponed with or without lockdown!), increased risk of domestic violence and suicides etc.
Although I believe that lockdown was the right course of action given the circumstances we were in back in March, I accepted that the opinion that it was disproportionate had some merit.
However, we’re now coming out of lockdown, and gradually opening up. On balance I think the timing of this is right - keeping thinking shut down would cause more harm than good given infection rates are now low. However, to ensure we can continue this path back to normality, to help rebuild businesses, restore our mental health, retain our freedoms, and enable the NHS to open up fully to non-Covid provision, we need to be cautious....
The worst possible thing we could do is to say “screw this” and go back conpletely to normal, carrying on like it was 2019 and end up like Texas or other US states.... yet that’s what most of those who argued against lockdown seem to be in favour of, irrespective of the damage that would do to business, health and well-being.
They’ve shown that their anti-lockdown arguments were entirely hollow and their show of concern for the mental health etc was a charade, mere props to justify their self-centred existences, unwilling to look beyond their own gratification.