Florida had a lower death rate, despite its obviously elderly population, than states like NY & California where laws were far stricter. So I totally disagree with your assessment. John Hopkins just published a study a week or so ago showing that those states that had the strictest lockdowns only incurred a death rate 0.2% lower than others. Yet the economies in those states were hugely impacted. They went on to say that they would not recommend we follow similar guidelines or lockdowns the next time this occurs. Kids too have been very adversely impacted by some of these rules both developmentally and emotionally. Yet we have the politicians who were the most vocal about these rules caught on camera nearly every day flaunting the rules. "Rules for thee, not for me". That's what drives me nuts more than anything. We have a bunch of politicians who are true scum. Hopefully we have learned something from all of this, but somehow I doubt it.
I don't agree with that at all.
Being retired, my annual 'salary', barring pensions, is zero.
Investment income is another story. 
Florida had a lower death rate, despite its obviously elderly population, than states like NY & California where laws were far stricter. So I totally disagree with your assessment. John Hopkins just published a study a week or so ago showing that those states that had the strictest lockdowns only incurred a death rate 0.2% lower than others. Yet the economies in those states were hugely impacted. They went on to say that they would not recommend we follow similar guidelines or lockdowns the next time this occurs. Kids too have been very adversely impacted by some of these rules both developmentally and emotionally. Yet we have the politicians who were the most vocal about these rules caught on camera nearly every day flaunting the rules. "Rules for thee, not for me". That's what drives me nuts more than anything. We have a bunch of politicians who are true scum. Hopefully we have learned something from all of this, but somehow I doubt it.
At any rate I sense we're entering the political arena and I know from some of your posts that you and I will be on opposite sides of the fence. Best to resume discussions on the Lucid.
OTOH, one universal approach could have been disastrous if it was the wrong one. The 'science' changed every week if not almost every day.
The data is the data. It is a fact that Florida has a lower death rate than NY or California. IMO that's especially notable given the aged population of Florida. One would expect a significantly higher death rate, but that didn't happen.
Being retired, my annual 'salary', barring pensions, is zero.
Yeah, but how practical is it for business owners to pay everyone $50/hr? They'd be out of business in no time. As in so many owners are barely hanging on. Look at the number of business closures.
What was NY? Maybe it was just NY. But as I said, somehow the much older age of the Florida residents need to be accounted for.
Science changes with new data. It's literally sciences job to change as more information becomes available, problem was people don't understand that's how science works and expected the message to stay the same throughout the pandemic which in nonsense.
www.factcheck.org
NY was 344/100k
OK, so in looking at your data, Florida fared better than NY or NJ, both with stricter regulations and Florida with an older population. So to simply say states with tougher rules fared better is not accurate. The John Hopkins study is another data point that makes my point.
