Replies and Responses to my COVID-19 proposal

Comment: What are the chances of requiring 100% of the population to do the same thing on the same day every two or three weeks for three months? Zero. It's an interesting idea which, sadly, has absolutely no chance of happening.

Response: I think if there were push from the top in concert with national businesses and incentives we could get at least 85% the first week, hopefully more the second. The biggest problem I see is not participation but finding leadership to promote the idea. The polling places are already there and if people see a potentially very positive outcome you might very well get a large enough percentage. I think it's worth a try as the potential outcome is so beneficial for everyone. To do nothing is to wallow in misery and a disastrous economy for at least another year.

Comment: Logistically possible, yes. Politically possible, no. But the idea of testing everyone as often as possible, and allowing those who are negative to go about their business, does makes sense and might be doable.

Response: Isolation for those testing positive is the key, but it would require a carrot as well as a stick. It's the approach used well in South Korea. I think if you got businesses behind it (they have a lot to gain by reducing COVID) it could become the patriotic thing to do. Biden should at least be out there with a plan. Currently, there is nothing, and we can't count on Trump to do anything. Some infrastructure is already there, i.e. polling places, post offices and election judges could be the testers, supplemented with health personnel. The key is to isolate those who are positive, but give them an incentive to isolate themselves and their families.

Comment:I agree all this is good and probably necessary, but you seem to ignore that you live in the land of the anti-vaccers, where something like 70% of the population believes that angels intervene in their daily lives. People here are way too stupid to do anything as sensible as the testing protocol you describe.

Response: Agreed and that's why it would have to be a mandate, but you get businesses on board who agree to hire or reemploy only those people who have the certificates. You don't make it a government by force, rather a carrot, i.e., just like a driver's license you need this to get employed and this is how you get the certificate. It's free and you build in other incentives and make it look like it comes from the business community, not the government even though the government would bear most of the cost, but that cost would be far less than the chaos we now face.