Okay that’s one explanation. Obviously travel hubs were likely to get hit first, especially places with a lot of crowded public transit (e.g., NYC). But the Florida situation definitely warrants research.

Agreed that the healthcare system and overall economy are under great strain. The big question is would it be under less strain if we’d responded earlier and more aggressively, starting at the federal level? South Korea, Iceland, New Zealand, and others who did so are likely better off economically at this point. On the other hand, if after a failed early response we HADN’T locked things down in early March, would things be better now?

Sweden has 343 deaths per million. Assuming by some divine circumstance we managed to have similar transmission rates as them, we’d be at 113,000 deaths right now. If we ended up being more like the UK (which locked down belatedly), we’d be at 160,000 deaths. My personal guess is without lockdowns we might be at something like 200,000. Regardless, would the economy would be a lot better off in any of those situations? Hospitals being overwhelmed, doctors dying or quitting, and friends or family members getting sick or dying tend to disrupt economic activity.