A CNBC article concludes with the suggestion that we just have to give up fighting pandemics and get the economy back to normal, the implication being that we can't survive otherwise
But why do we need to "get back" to anything if we can take care of business in a way that successfully reduces virus spread?
Surely there is another way to take care of your hair issues without sacrificing everyone with immune-system vulnerability to COVID19.
Delivery logistics could be improved so more people could get more products delivered to their homes so they don't need to go shopping as often. In fact, the postal service or some other delivery service could simply step up to the task of taking larger delivery trucks, maybe using public transit buses or school buses; to carry all the deliveries for a certain neighborhood on certain days of the week so people can get their fresh produce and dairy, for example, and only go to the store once every month or two for non-perishable supplies.
If jobs are lost in the restructuring changes, there should be ways to re-integrate out-of-work people into the economy by either creating new jobs or training them to relieve others by taking part-time positions or otherwise redistributing existing job-duties among more people.
In 1918, the Spanish Flu pandemic took place during a time without internet or smart phones. People couldn't communicate or coordinate activities remotely as we can now. They couldn't share pictures without meeting in person, and audio/video didn't exist. Text had to be written by hand or typed and printed without even photocopiers, let alone digital platforms.
With all this new information technology available to use today, we can surely do better maintaining a pandemic-secure economy/society than they were able to do in 1918 with the Spanish Flu.