Nobody is "picking" a model. You used an outdated one. And no, the reason the numbers are going down is NOT because of people staying indoors. They were making projections, factoring that in, of how many would be infected and how many would die, based on nothing more than a glorified guess of how many people had come into contact with the virus before the stay at home orders started. They way overestimated the extent of how much it had already spread. And as such, they have cut their numbers in half.

You don't get to go back in time and use the doomsday models that fit your narrative. THAT is "picking" a model.

And how are asymptomatic carriers going to spread anything AFTER the stay at home is over? Even though I highly object to the decision to close everything, due to the massive economic impact, isn't the point of a quarantine supposed to be to let whoever has the virus either get well from home, or in the hospital, while everyone else who isn't sick doesn't get exposed? I don't see how people are going to emerge in great numbers carrying the virus.

My thing is that we're already seeing that most people who get the virus are going to be able to beat it without any problem. So if anyone is going to be quarantined, it should be the elderly and those with underlying health conditions. Let everyone else build the "herd immunity" while keeping the economy flowing. But I think even FORCING at risk people to quarantine is a violation of constitutional rights. Let them choose what risks they want to take.