The idea of protecting the elderly while allowing the rest of the population does what they want was tried in Sweden. They have reported that their plan did not work. You can google "Sweden plan to protect elderly" if you want to read about it, but I'll post the chart of COVID deaths in Sweden, current as of May 14, just to provide a visual. [
www.statista.com]
"Quarantines are for infected people, not for the entire population." I agree 100%. But you have to know who is infected and who isn't to do this. Once testing and tracing are widely in place I really think we will be able to do this.
I haven't seen anyone say we need to stay in a lockdown until there's a vaccine. In fact, here in NY I'm seeing just the opposite. As of tomorrow (May 15) the vast majority of the state outside of New York City will be restarting their economy while at the same time people will continue wearing a mask and continue with social distancing. It's not one or the other - the two things can be done at the same time. Hospitalizations, intubations, and deaths statewide (including NYC) have declined every day for 30 days and if NY does this right they will continue to decline even as the economy is coming back. The rate of transmission right now is .7 (which in practical terms means that every 10 infected people will infect 7 other people.) If we can keep that number under 1 then we can open the economy and diminish COVID-19 at the same time.
AlbaNY_Ram