The difference will be that you'll have to live in a destroyed economy
The difference from what? The healthy booming economy after exponential growth in infection?
Before you start on me, I am not remotely advising we remain as we are if and until a vaccine, or that everyone can or should hide from the virus. What you say in your title I don't necessarily disagree with.
But so many people use that as a springboard for saying that we should not have done anything or should now end all restrictions. It's cloud cuckoo land to think that if we did that, we would have the schools, healthcare, economic activity we want.
A very key example to me is healthcare for non covid conditions. If people are concerned about this they would not be arguing to end all restrictions, they would be arguing to lock down hard and keep infection rates so low that it will be much more feasible, and much safer, for non covid hospital treatment to completely resume. They would be saying, if we can only do so much without infection levels getting out of control, put cancer treatment first, not my desire to go out. Also wanting to make sure the infection level does not get out of control and perpetuate a situation where treatment is unavailable and even if it were available, immuno compromised patients would be at huge risk leaving their homes to access it.
I think there needs to be a laser focus on getting non covid treatment back on track, and establishing the safest possible ways to do so. Getting the economy moving more in the safest possible ways is key for health and public services too. But it's a case of learning to live with it with the right priorities in place.