The problem is that Argentina did not actually end up choosing either - it chose politics. And it keeps choosing politics.I mostly agree with your other comments, by the way. Argentina doesn't have a resilient economy, but while you might consider that it chose health over the economy, I don't think there was any choice to make.
About Brazil, YMMV... More than one Brazilian work colleague of mine has lost a parent or a family member to COVID, or had them in ICU. Being in Brazil has always been like living on a different planet, if you're lucky.It was pretty horrible last year in Arg. But to a certain extent, not heavily enforced like Peru and Chile.
however, Brazil was the best place to be last year in South America. It seemed as if nothing had happened. It was like living in a parallel universe.
They have shown over here in the UK that having schools open has limited effect on spread of the virus and the benefits far exceed taking these kids away from more education. The government have made a right pigs ear of this whole pandemic and I'm not surprised that they are now being met with opposition to their decisions.The problem is that Argentina did not actually end up choosing either - it chose politics. And it keeps choosing politics.
The result? Argentina is still at the bottom of the pile of the Lowly Institute ratings, as it is at the bottom of the pile in the Bloomberg ratings.
Even today we see this with the school debarcle. Still no hard evidence to show that schools lead to this situation as both CABA (with schools) and Provincia (without schools) are in the same situation despite the governments assuring us that "everything" measure they take is for "health".
A lazy or inept politician who can't employ their regular tricks to stay popular will always choose to make a show of things using "easy" targets - school kids are easier than inconveniencing "popular" people who are their bread and butter out in the conurbano (who still flock to crowded marketplaces and pack public transport often without any masks or control at all.) We would have probably seen the exact opposite if it were the previous party trying not to inconvenience its middle class bread and butter in the ciudad - either way, the same old and tired tactics and never ending foregivness/ short memories of voters are predicable as they have been in this country for decades now and never with any real result to show for it when you pause to look at the bigger picture.
(PS FYI the DNU rules at the time were to remain on the same block as the dog or only go within I think it was 400m... these people may or may not have been in other neighbourhoods.)
This.The problem is that Argentina did not actually end up choosing either - it chose politics. And it keeps choosing politics.
I said Argentina "had one of the world's hardest and longest lockdowns". The other day I saw an article in infobae comparing the stringency of the lockdown measures comparing Argentina with Spain (source). I now checked the data (from the University of Oxford comparing the measures of all countries; https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/covid-19-government-response-tracker#data) and put them together in Excel.You're mixing up (I suppose deliberately) the terms shutdown, standstill, impossible to travel, none of which equate to lockown. And yes, I was here all of last year. Nobody, least of all me, is saying the last 12-13 months were easy, but we were not ever locked down. You obviously missed where I mentioned where strict and extended lockdowns have been in place, I'll repeat this one for you: in Chile, in phase 1, where outside of an early-morning "exercise" slot people are not allowed to set foot outside their doors without permission (check here: https://www.gob.cl/pasoapaso/, just FYI I didn't see mention of kids, pets, or frustrated people-in-law). That is a lockdown. Please do everyone a favour and check the definition of lockdown before pushing your false narrative again.
Because you are. lockdown is lockdown:Why you are implying that I deliberately mixing it up I do not know.
Well, I am neither an English native speaker nor a Spanish native speaker. What I understood is that the broader term in Spanish "cuarentena" is used to describe "containment and closure" policies. I have rarely ever heard the equivalent term in English "quarantine", but almost always I read / hear about "lockdown" and "lockdown measures". So I thought they (english speakers) use lockdown in the Spanish sense of "cuarentena". If I am mistaken, then I will write next time Argentina had one of hardest and longest containment and closure policies implemented ...Because you are. lockdown is lockdown:
"A lockdown is a restriction policy for people or community to stay where they are, usually due to specific risks to themselves or to others if they can move and interact freely. The term "stay-at-home" or "shelter-in-place" is often used for lockdowns that affect an area, rather than specific locations".
As in: you can't go out anymore. Never happened here, and I'm writing this from Buenos Aires, as I've done from the moment I became a member of the forum here.
I get your Oxford graphics, I am only an engineer and I have no ambition to dispute Oxford University statistics. They're very informative, though based ( I think) on government statistics, otherwise there is no way Venezuela would be top of the pile. FYI my people-in-law are in Venezuela, I get near-daily reports on how things are going there. In any case, thanks for sharing.