Perhaps I'm less of a relativist than you are when it comes to questions of rationality and morality.
I also find many of the current reactions to be irrational, fear based, and harmful.
The Stanford study has been re-analyzed by the original authors, and other authors in a separate analysis. The lower bound of the under-ascertainment rate estimate is on the order of 10 times smaller than the figure you cite (the figure you cite is from the flawed analysis).
Thus, assigning an IFR of ~0.1 is irresponsible at this moment.
But that aside, I'll grant you this: If the harms associated with allowing arbitrarily large mass gatherings are small enough, then I fully agree with your position (this is somewhat tautological, but I mean it: I could be wrong - it's an empirical question after all).
You can drive responsibly. You can't gather in mass gatherings responsibly, unless you quarantine yourself for 2 weeks right after attending the said mass gathering.
This is where I can begin to find agreement. As you say, the risk to healthy younger people is very small. In kids, it's probably smaller than a typical flu. My concern is that mass gatherings can have dramatic acute effects on large numbers of vulnerable people who never attended in the first place.
There's an empirical question here:
If a mass gathering of size X occurs, what is the expected death rate that occurs as a result? The degree to which vulnerable people are protected (through a combination of their own actions and other actions) will affect this number. If a mass gathering happens in a city, it could mean that the chances of being exposed to the virus simply by going grocery shopping skyrocket for
everyone in the city. It's worth thinking about what this means - does this mean that older folk now have to spend the little money they have on home deliveries? Well, maybe not if a government subsidy was put in place for this purpose. Or if community volunteer programs started springing up to help out.
Until these sorts of measures are in place, the argument here is that mass gatherings
(of above a certain size) pose an inordinate risk to others.
What I'm saying is no large concerts, sporting events, religious pilgrimages, etc.
Here's a pretty sobering series of network simulations. They're not perfect, and they lack some important variables, but they do illustrate the very interesting concept of
clusters.
Can’t I please just visit one friend?
Note: I'm
not saying I agree that visiting friends should be banned. That's not the point I'm making here.