My argument, to keep it simple, was meant to imply that the cost in lives and livelihoods if the economy remains shut down would be greater than the cost in lives and livelihoods if we open up and a number (many less than 2,000) of under-50s die.
There is no reasonable way you could take that argument to any conclusion that it isn't worth getting the vaccine. Do you genuinely think that arguing for an opening up of the economy is on the same track as arguing for stopping vaccination?
If the criteria is likelihood of someone dying of it as you alluded to then yes. Don't get me wrong, I am not going full Crodo and suggesting everyone stays at home until it is eliminated globally and if they stick to the target of everyone by the end of July then fine but equally wouldn't be happy if the rest of us are expected to pack onto trains and go back into offices while the vaccine is delayed to some time in the future.