The idea behind coordenated closure is to drive public life basically to a halt.
The idea behind 'self quarantaining' is to find out if you (having been in contact with a person who confirmed has it) have been affected. (You basically wait for 14 days to see if you get sick)
The idea to allow some people to go on paid sick leave for 10 days - is nothing. I look at it as play acting. (Not because I wouldnt want to grant them the 10 days, I'm living in a democratic socialist country, I think payed sick leave is a great idea.) But because "nothing ads up".
Virus incubation period (before you show symptoms) can be 12 days. (edit: Median of 5 days, so eh -
) You dont give it to the entire public. You dont demand it from big companies. And you dont have big public awareness campaigns or any checks to ensure that people really stay home during that time.
This - to me, is reducing public anxiety.
To 'curb' the curve, you need behavior change coordinatedly at the same time. (At least in a region.) 'Some companies' and voluntarily (can do so..), to me sounds like people relieving mental stress from perceived responsibilities, and not like an action that would be even remotely effective in what it is claiming to do. (At least, it would be a very none cost effective way to get to the impact on numbers that could be expected from that.)
Which - together with looking at the projected death rate for the US in the same models that had the UK change action (Imperial College London corona models), which hovers at around the rate everyone else in the world 'tries to get to' - has me believing the following.
The US will go for 'herd immunity' - unless individual regions (big cities) decide to go for a different (more costly) route. Which is also very reasonable.
And nationwide, those measures (looking at current projection models), are just fluff to relieve some of the stress people currently are in (because they consume whats going on in the rest of the world, and in big cities).
The 1000 USD for some people - should be a measure to address current stock market drops, mainly. Maybe. And at the same time it also addresses the issue of restaurants and cultural facilities being hit by even voluntary behavior change first and hardest.
Coordinated measures, in my mind begin, once big companies are asked to do something. Which would come in at a later stage in the US.
You basically have a bunch of measures, they all cost something, they all give you a certain time limited benefit - and in the end its mostly a 'game' (very wrong word in this instance, sorry) to get to the end of the year (or the end of two years, depending on vaccine availability) without major disruptions to the ability of your health system to keep working at expectend (even though stressed) levels.
Thats it.
And if your country should have lower population density, exponential growth throughout your entire population is less likely.
Big cities in the US might/will react entirely different though. So this also is, where part of the mixed messaging comes from.
-
Still, I can be wrong.
If stuff changes - you'd see measures that are far different though. (Nationwide school closures (if that is even an option in the US), curfews after work, ... )
Your 'playbook' is the UK. They also went with "we go for herd immunity" first (current projected death rate of 0.8% there).
If they start to freak, you freak.
(As a country. Big cities are allowed to implement harsher measures earlier. It makes sense there.)
--
Having some people go away for 10 days might also help to 'stagger' spread (they can then get it later..
). I don't know the calculations for that, but it is not to 'prevent you personally from getting sick, because your boss loves you'.
(For that 10 days is not enough.
) That and because of public perception that this is a pandemic, and the government has to do something - might explain why this is a thing (mixed calculation.).
Always touching 
] brb