There are two sides to this problem: health and economic impacts. Governments and/or regimes that abide to a civilized set of values should take care of both. How? Lockdown to avoid unnecessary deaths, concurrent with economic/financing measures to mitigate those who lost their jobs. In Portugal, which is far from being a rich country, we will be able to do that.
Of course, according to you, perhaps people should also stop being treated and protected from other diseases, which being natural, cause natural deaths.
But we have no road map for the current situation. We're all driving blind. Who's to say which method is the best. We won't know that until next year, maybe later. Then and only then will be be able to compare the various methods taken to see who made out the best. Even then, there will be tradeoffs. A lot depends where you stand. For someone like myself who's retired and old and worried about infections, then I side with greater isolation and shutdown. After all, I'm still going to get my pensions and Social Security. (well, maybe not.) But for the young guy who has to feed his family, he's willing to take a shot getting sick because he realizes he's going to be in terrible straits if he can't work and put food on the table.
You're also assuming economies will recover. Well, I have news for you. They won't. The US, Spain and others are about to absorb a huge hit. Printing money is a short term solution that will gain about a month or two but just add more debt that will have to be paid back next year like your charge cards. Many economies will go into the toilet. I was thinking just now of the Carribean Island economies that rely on tourist and cruise boats. What are they eating? What are Portuguese taxi drivers doing who use to wait at airports for new fares? What are they eating nowadays?
