If we use my analogy of a sluice gate, and the flow of water, as the twin mechanisms of quarantine and the spread of infection respectively, then it become obvious that a closed sluice is no good. We need a certain amount of water through to get to the other side. We need a percentage of the population–the number I see is 60%–to have had the disease and developed immunity to it.
With this disease, many people will get it and develop immunity to it without ever even knowing they have had it. From one standpoint–that of their own experience–this is ideal. Yes, of course it makes them more infectious, but once a disease is on the march, the march must be completed. Farr’s Law must be satisfied. The Bell Curve needs to appear.
A vaccine will need to wait for the next appearance, and I suspect as with flus (there are, what, dozens if not hundreds of variants?), whatever iteration this thing presents will probably be slightly different than the one it is presenting today, diluting the effect of the vaccine.
There will clearly need to be a learning curve here with governments too, those with genuinely humanitarian intention, which is clearly not all of them, as to what policies best balance the physical health of their populations with their economic health.
We need to get smarter across the board in how we deal with these sorts of disruptions. Rule one, I would submit, is that human life is frail and finite and that we all die. It is reasonable and sane to do what we can to protect life, and to make it as healthy and comfortable as possible, but it is not, and never will be, worth the resources of a nation to save one life, or even a hundred.
Everything hangs in a variety of balances, and wisdom consists in finding the one which is best for all, and across all time domains.
It is a regrettable fact that the OBVIOUS economic idea is generally forgotten or ignored, that all policies of any sort can have varying effects on differing people, and can have one effect in the short term, and another entirely over the long term.
The obvious example is so-called Keynesian economics, whereby governments use their powers to print and borrow money to create short term and local illusions of prosperity. The money flows in, it is spent, and for a short time, things appear good. Then it ends. No matter how much money you spend, no matter how many people you give it to, it always ends.
And then things are worse, since natural market forces have been distorted by helicopter money. I have often compared this to the effect of drinking salt water for thirst.
Something like 2 million Americans die every year. A choice has to be made between them dying of some virus, and them dying of a heart attack waiting for a welfare check at the unemployment office. There are no risk free options.