This is an interesting read, I can't vouch for the accuracy of the summary but you can decide if its valid.
For me it comes down to this...How many people do you think is ok if they die from this.?
https://imgur.com/gallery/HAHU4vg
Well that's complicated and it is not like I can really put a number on it, which you obviously knew when you penned that question.
We cant prevent everyone from dying from it, so some death is inevitable, just like with everything else. Putting in draconian measures aimed to prevent all loss of life while at the same time destroying people's lives economically is unacceptable in my opinion.
Like I said, I'll deal with limited outside activities, but my support of this drops like a boulder off a cliff if you start threatening my shelter, my house. Likewise, I will not support absurd measures such as restricting hikes outside. The beach thing posted yesterday, after thinking about it, was more likely in response to spring breakers, who will party in close contact with each other. However, not allowing walking alone or with your spouse on a beach is absurd. I don't live near a beach, but if the city suddenly does not want to allow hiking in Wissahicken Park, a 23 mile long 2000+ acre property almost entirely forest, I'll be down there the day the measure is in place.
We are obviously not going the way of Italy, which did nothing at first and continued to import cheap workers from China to Milan after the outbreak was obvious. We closed off travel rather fast, so I feel we have already flattened the curve a good deal.
But at the same time, Italy has had enough exposure to develop heard immunity, as had Wuhan. Perhaps one of the reasons Wuhan is getting back to normal is because their immunity has stopped it from spreading. If we dont develop this here, this may not be the case.