Agree, everything is based on economic cost. What is 14,000 lives plus the cost of their health car until they die plus the many times more who will fill hospitals and ICU's at $1000's day per patient worth?The first answer is easy: 14,000 deaths is $68.6 Billion AUD. The thing is, though, that figure is based on 14,000 "average working Citizens" not the vast majority of COVID victims who are already retired and not contributing to the workforce or nations bottom line, but whose desperate need for protection has crippled the Federation and racked up a national debt that defies comprehension.
Given we've spent probably twice that already with JobKeeper/Seeker and other support payments, the economic cost v benefit doesn't stack up no matter how you move the microscope. Economically, we would have been better to do nothing at all except the initial lock-down in order to give the health system time to prepare.
And we wouldn't be in the situation we are now where people are not being allowed to go to their child's funeral, or see their father before he dies, or losing an unborn baby because the medical staff thought the border restrictions prohibited transport across state lines. For those of us old enough to remember that TV show Dinosaurs, I reckon they might have been on to something with Hurling Day....
The current cost is $124m / death.
The rough $ potential saving you are indicating is $7.3m/death.
Based on the fact most sub 60 years who die from CV-19 have underlying medical conditions and thus while working may not actually be making a positive contribution to the economy as a result of their heavily subsidized medical costs. Sub 50 year olds at risk include those on chemo, now just to personalise this, my wife at age 40 got cancer and fully recovered after 9mths of treatment. The costs for the diagnosis and treatment in Dubai starts at A$100k, none of which is covered by UAE govts, only health insurance and personal cost. While there maybe an argument (not saying I support) to let the 80 and 90's year olds meet their maker for the benefit of the rest of us, do you apply that to the sub 50/60's? People who are working, potentially still raising families etc, but have short term or longterm medical conditions that make them higher risk. People with diabetes are another example, high risk to the CV-19, but likely still working and raising families.
To make this more morally complex, if we are going to let these people die for the benefit of all of us to save $100B, why not limit the funding to their medical costs permanently and save us alot more money. In 2018, 350m claims were made to Medicare, not bad for a population of just 25m.
Of course the other issue, let the virus run free, what about the cost and impacts to the medical system including those who need treatment for other things and get pushed out?