At some point, we'll have to make a decision about when we open back up for business. Do we stay shuttered in for another month, three months, or what?

At some point, if we stay closed "forever," the economy simply falls apart and we'll then have different problems causing many more deaths, not to mention civil disorder.

Totaly agree, but 2-3 weeks?
Most city outbreaks will hardly have peaked by then, if the other cities in the world are anything to go by.

No one knows the exact time we have to open back up.

Agree with you 2-3 weeks won't work in NYC for sure but maybe in more rural areas??

No easy answers. All we can do is band together, avoid the partisan carping, and strive to get it right. Some of this will be playing it by ear.

Wrong ............ this should be decided by the CDC.

What is many more? What is the basis for this statement?

Not a lot of people out of work in "rural areas".

Guess who survives in a crisis. The ones who are prepared. I was a team leader in our company's emergency response organization. We had a plan, we put our plan into action. We maintained our plan's readiness action items. That's why some don't panic at the first sign of trouble. My wife and I learned the hard way after surviving a hurricane direct hit. Now we are preppers. Get a plan, and be prepared next time.

Bilcon,
I went through Hurricane Katrina. Yes, you need to be able to protect yourself. When civil order breaks down the predators come out in droves. They go for the easy targets first. Older people are a prime target. Wealthy (by the predators standards) home owners in nice neighborhoods are prime targets. I know I was there. Anyone who was isolated. When the police were called it sometimes took hours not minutes for a response.

We didn't elect the CDC to make these types of decisions. The CDC can make recommendations, but the decision should be made by the elected Government officials.

You missed my point, or maybe I wasn't clear enough?

Dr. Birks was basically saying this yesterday. Playing by ear in the sense CDC and the various other authorities will have to make the best recommendations they can on incomplete data.

The basis for this statement is my best judgment and assessment.

Let’s say hypothetically the medical authorities determine zero risk of coronavirus is achieved by everyone staying housebound for one year. The problem is, if this is done nationally in all locations, the economy stops, goods eventually become scare, people run out of essentials and so forth. Medications become hard to get along with food. Older people start to get sick and die.

As food runs out, people, probably starting in ethnically diverse neighborhoods in the large cities, start to pillage and then eventually riot. Civil disorder would then ensue.

By the way, this is why many people do in fact have numerous firearms and ammo etc stockpiled. This is often laughed at by those who consider themselves more sophisticated and tend to favor strict gun restrictions. There may be a change of opinion, over time by some, on this issue.

In any event, at some point (and that’s the tough part … which point) we have to get back to business.

This is, unfortunately, a reality of life.

I think many on this board are in denial about it. There's also probably a correlation between those who deny this reality and who likewise abhor or otherwise don't own firearms.

It is my best judgment and assessment, to disagree.

Your "hypothetically" is bizarre, totally unreal, and has no basis whatsoever in the real world. It sounds like a weird novel.

This is a forum to share information, NOT alternate world theories.

Hey, you're entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to insult or argue with you over it.

I think my earlier scenario is, albeit uncomfortable, reasonable under the terms in which I outlined it. Feel free to ignore it.