What is the tenet upon which the public policy of lockdown by fiat experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is based on? The work approaches this question about the rationale of the mandatory shelter-in-place policy as an interpersonal exchange of rights, but where the exchange occurs coercively instead of voluntarily. It compares, in positive political economy terms, the normative principles of utilitarianism and Rawlsianism, and shows that lockdown by fiat is a policy that is closer to a maximin equity criterion rather than to a utilitarian one. The work moreover shows, also with the aid of a thought experiment and with factual applications, that the fiat redistribution of rights to liberty in favor of rights to health—from those least affected to those most affected by COVID-19—is, in the main, a policy choice that is to be expected under certain constraints.

在 COVID-19 大流行期间实施的法定封锁公共政策的原则是什么？这项工作将强制就地避难政策的基本原理作为一种人际权利交换来解决这个问题，但这种交换是强制发生的，而不是自愿发生的。它以积极的政治经济学术语比较了功利主义和罗尔斯主义的规范原则，并表明通过法令封锁是一种更接近于最大化公平标准而不是功利主义标准的政策。此外，这项工作还通过思想实验和事实应用表明，从受 COVID-19 影响最小的人到受 COVID-19 影响最严重的人，将自由权重新分配给健康权是在主要的，