Also not only does that number matter but also how fast people having it arrive at hospitals. If they are overwhelemed for two months, and their infrastructure breaks down, you'll have more deaths and a 'society stopped working' moment you dont want too many people to reflect on.
Also take the FOX numbers you posted there you had fatality numbers of 5% in people over 75? Now imagine, that that is the most loyal voterbase for politicians.
It is recognized by now, that you 'cant ruin young peoples prospects' over this, or ruin the economy, so people that are planning reactions are trying not to resort to full shutdowns of entire cities, if they can prevent them, even at death numbers that would be a little increased (depending on how much money you have to burn, Net Zealand afair still does it differently), but wearing facemasks f.e. is never considered to be 'a major sacrifice on part of citizens', because arguably - it isnt.
Also, the businesses hurting most (gastronomy, high foot traffic dependent ones), would take an almost equal hit from people changing behavior on their own (to have that coordenated still is better for the outcome), so its not all 'the states fault' people react differently during periods of perceived threat.
You can even criticize measures as 'too harsh' or 'too shortsighted', but especially in the US, at 7x (?) access deaths over a short period in cities like NY in the 'nobody new about it and acted like it wasnt there' scenario, it is easy to imagine a scenario where hospitals are overwhelmed. Which is what you trie to prevent as societies.
