I agree with the framing in this thread - and in particular with the & #39;negative externality& #39; comment.

All businesses want to ensure that they can survive, and will (rationally) make the decisions which are needed so that they can continue to operate, and make profits. 1/ https://twitter.com/MikeOtsuka/status/1320275635806285824">https://twitter.com/MikeOtsuk...

So... they push at the limits of any legal restrictions, determined to return, as far as possible, to normal.

A very good example is provided in this piece. 2/ https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/oct/24/how-londons-top-restaurants-are-skewering-the-covid-rules">https://www.theguardian.com/business/...

The impact on the spread of the virus of restaurants allowing larger groups to meet for business lunches is likely to be modest.

But, the impact on the spread of the virus of having students from across the world congregate in Unis, in shared accommodation, is anything but. 3/

If the Govt allows & #39;normal& #39; market incentives to operate - in particular in & #39;high-risk& #39; environments - the spread of the virus will not be effectively stopped.

It should step in, to ensure that the negative externalities are, as far as possible, reduced. 4/

That involves finding the resources to compensate those whose life and work will suffer, so that their market incentive to push at the limits of the law is reduced.

In the Uni context, online learning should - for now - have been prioritised. 5/

And yet - in all sorts of settings (eg Universities; local areas in tier 3 restrictions; isolation regimes) the Govt either has not acted, or has been too slow to act.

The inevitable effect is, alas, to undermine the effort to slow the spread of the virus. 6/6