While this makes some sense, the problem comes in when hospitals become entirely overwhelmed, and people start dying (unnecessarily) because there simply isn't enough care, beds, etc to go around. I don't think anyone wants to have such a situation happen on their watch, which is why the lock down seems like a decent idea, although not ideal either. (because of the other reasons you mention)
Part of me wonders if Americans might rethink the uniquely American approach to medicine, wherein hospitals necessarily operate at or near capacity at all times in order to make the profit “essential” for their functioning -- and seemingly at odds with alleged "rights" implied in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and whatnots --
But then another part of me observes that a number of states are still not in lockdown, or just started, and/or they're making idiotic exceptions for things like church, and they’re, not coincidentally, overwhelmingly Red, Southern, and Bible Belt states, which also--again, not coincidentally and overwhelmingly-- have the highest percentages of high risk populace—obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and so forth
So... probably not.
Edit: wrong link at top. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-hospitals/u-s-hospitals-halt-lucrative-procedures-amid-coronavirus-crisis-job-cuts-follow-idUSKBN21I388
Last edited: