Various sources I've seen suggest that the infection fatality rate for the non-elderly without serious co-morbidities may be around .04 (0.04%), much higher than influenza, but probably not worth shutting the world down for.
The IFR for the elderly is likely well over 1.0, I think, which is very bad. My hot take prediction is that we'll look back and realize we chose the wrong set of policies, trying to protect the general population from a relatively low risk, and giving very limited effort to extra protection for the high risk population.
We can excuse much of that because this was a novel virus, an expert predicted doom, and politicians - executives in particular - take grave risks if they appear to not be protecting the public, and the risks of inaction were more visible and salient than the risks of inaction. In other words, I don't think this is an example of government acting unexpectedly stupidly.
There's relatively little case for saying "they absolutely should have known better." Which is to say there's little reason to think government can do better in these situations where everyone turns to them for help and leadership. And that's worth pondering.
