Even with restrictions, the virus will eventually spread to most of the population. The question is time scale. In New York—thanks to its density and reliance on public transportation—even a full lock down couldn’t avoid a brush fire that left the hospital system overwhelmed. That hasn’t been true in the rest of the country. In nearly states, the death rate is elevated less than 10% from normal levels. In 14 states, the death rate is lower than normal levels. That means that less restrictive measures could be implemented in those states while keeping the excess death rate to some acceptable level.

South Dakota never fully locked down, and the COVID-19 death rate there 4.5 per 100,000. That’s 1/3 the average for the country minus NYC and 1/30th the rate for NYC. And that’s a 5% increase over what the baseline death rate would have been in the state over that time period.

It’s also worth pointing out that nowhere has really “locked down.” Most people are still going to work and leaving the house. Minnesota has found that the stay at home orders reduced contact only by 55%: https://www.minnpost.com/health/2020/05/minnesota-has-update.... Under various scenarios, Minnesota projected a “do nothing” scenario at 57,000 deaths over the course of the pandemic, versus 26,000 deaths if the stay at home order were extended to September. But lifting the order on May 18 results in only a few thousand extra deaths compared to leaving it in place until September.

No other city in this country is anywhere close to NYC in terms of density. The R0 for NY is going to be naturally much, much higher. It's absolute lunacy to apply the same measures in Wisconsin as NY.

There's a lot more to it than that. Dig.

No. New York did not run out of hospital capacity. The goal is to approach but not exceed hospital capacity.