If we just had the virus spread globally, additionally to the tens of millions dead we'd also have hundreds of millions ill people who couldn't work for a while and the health system would collapse. The economy would be affected by that also a lot.
So there wasn't the option to just ignore the virus to keep the economies prospering by sacrifying ~1% of the world population for that.
This was the fear indeed but now we have fixed that problem and like I said, we do it intelligently and everyone is up to speed on what to do, the hospitals are safe, the curve is flattened largely and we can get on with finding the line to be walked from a safe place instead of it all being thrown on us i confusion and hyteria. We won, we succeeded in what we set out to do at the start of the pandemic, bar some places like Brazil and Russia who are still catching up and some poorer countries who still have yet to see large outbreaks.
The only options right now are to let it slow bleed out and keep ontop of it while getting the world moving, there litterally is no other option unless you want more dead from the economical effects later on. Right now we are making more problems than we are fixing and causing more death than is needed and we've even gone on to long in some places where people are so fed up they are partying and ignoring the virus likely to cause more outbreaks, that's a problem right there that needs to be adressed and can't be rectified by force, the only way to fix that is for the virus to start killing young people to scare them (I'm joking btw) or you give them something to do in a safe enough manner to not have spreading occur.
There only was one way through this after control was lost and that is to balance the line of virus with a moving economy and right now politicians are so scared they're going to cause more deaths and ruination of populations. It was flatten the curve and save the health service, not hide from the virus until we starve it or we starve ourselves. It's ridiculous, it's a self fulfilling prophecy of destruction.
As for third world countries and hand to mouth regions, they have no options like we we do or at least very little leeway, they either starve or let the virus bleed on through. It's a shit prospect but they're doing the best they can do in their regions, attempting to stem the flow.
Oh and we know now that the initial models were off by some magnitude, it may not be enough of a gap to save the hospitals should a second wave emerge but we at least are on the lookout and can keep ontop of the problem as it emerges right from the get go but we can't do that if we hospitals have to start shutting down, nurses and doctors, police and EMT's and civil servants have to be laid off while supply lines break down and trade deals fall apart or rapid inflation makes anything we do worthless and total societal collapse happens. We need to maintain a certain amount of economical activity so society doesn't fall apart in the same way we can't just go full on and party like it's 1999 and let the virus have it's way with us. Find the line between and save as much lives as possible, go too far either side and that is where most deaths will occur. How is this so hard to understand, it's a simple concept and the definition of common sense, it's almost like we need to change the word "Economy" because people associate it with some magical well thay we can pull from in which we work along side for the fun of it instead of it being what it is, the work we do to keep ourselves fed, shelterd, hydrated and healthy. You wanna see a real calamity happen then continue standing in one place to stop the spread of the virus, you'll see real suffering that way and not just the vulnerable or old, it'll be right from the new born babies to the people in their prime to the people on deaths door anyway who have to suffer and die.