Oh am I? Good of you to tell me what my argument should be as you completely avoid addressing any of the points I made or substantiating any of your own arguments. Small portions and sub-sectors of the economy are forecast and modeled, not the entire macroeconomic system, and not regarding drastic unprecedented changes. You keep saying over and over again that people examined the effects of the lock down on the economy before it was implemented, yet you remain unable to substantiate this claim with any kind of documentation whatsoever. I guess your proclamation of righteousness is sufficient is it?
I am not talking about the concept of a lock down as an idea, I am talking specifically about utilizing it as a modern policy for emergency response, which I documented and you conveniently misdirected from with your whole historical analysis of the concept. All those other modern examples you gave were of minor regional areas, not a nation wide shut down barring businesses from operating. This is no comparison at all. You are trying to compare cooking a burger on your back yard grill with a global McDonald's corporate empire and pretending they are comparable.
This is not just incompetence, it is sold as incompetence. It is INTENTIONAL SABOTAGE FOR PROFIT AND CONTROL. The more emergencies created, the more people like you rush to the government screaming "Please! Please strip my rights to keep me safe!" Meanwhile massive corporate entities get to destroy their competition via shutdowns while they remain operational. Then when the waves of bankruptcies hit, they can buy up all of their real assets at fire sale prices. This also all has the added benefit of being able to blame decades of economic mismanagement on this outbreak instead of the real perpetrators responsible. No it wasn't us doing our fraud or the massive inflation we created destroying the economy, it was because that darned virus! A global economic reset was in the works for a long time. This was just the perfect pretext they needed to roll it out and start burning it all down while not resulting in street lynchings for those responsible for robbing us all blind. A disaster for one is an opportunity for another, but you feel free to keep believing there is no motivation for this planned economic implosion.
Once again, it is the dissenting opinion's role to prove their point, not the other way around. If I wanted to argue that the sky was green, it'd be my burden to prove that, not your burden to prove that its blue. Please show me your own calculations rather than just blankly saying the professional opinion is wrong. You can claim whatever you want, global economic reset, zombies, lizard people, start with proving your claims rather than just blankly saying that no one could possibly come up with a model for all of this, and because they couldn't possibly, it must be another situation.
I know its a little unreasonable, but it'd be especially good if you collect all of the data yourself, since using data from a source you say is untrustworthy doesn't sound like the most concrete plan.