Quote:
the underlying premise was always about controlling the disease proliferation,
No! The premise was flatten the curve to ensure that everyone who needed medical care could get it.
The premise was NEVER supposed to be controlling the proliferation, indeed, at the outset it was "we're pretty much all going to get this and the vast majority of us will be fine".
Governments ONLY job was to ensure enough public information for individuals to make their choices.
It is chilling that a mayor or county judge can (and it's immoral IMO) declare that some people are "essential" and others aren't. And yes, that's precisely what they did, if you say that my livelihood - the way I shelter and house my family, i.e my life - isn't "essential" that is immorality of a high order.
And I'll add this, 500,000 deaths is specious. When the number of total deaths in the USA for 2020 is released, that's total humans that died for any reason or circumstance, the number isn't gonna be 500,000 more than 2019. Not even close. I'd bet money it's closer to 50,000, where a 20k increase per year would have been more normal. And when you look at the demographics of those deaths, as sad as any death is on a human basis, the societal impact will be negligible compared to the societal impacts of the "solution".