I agree with all of that. It's a fine balancing act. I think it would be better for public discourse and public policy if the "authorities" simply acknowledged the balancing act and gave us something to work off so that we can see that they understand that there's a trade-off of lives either way and that there's no perfect solution and they are working on the best they can.
I mean, I think they do this. Every state in the US reports daily deaths. Many of them give a good picture of who is dying (age, preEx, etc.) and the CDC synthesizes and makes this public at the federal level. Most good media outlets here in the US have made their COVID coverage free to the public.
On the other side of the equation, the CBO makes their projections about the economic impact publicly available too.
My president tweeted like a month ago that "we can't let the cure be worse than the disease" which is basically coming out and saying that there's a trade-off, and not so subtly hinted at what side of the trade-off he prefers.
I think there's more than enough information and forthcomingness right now. Problem is, like many complicated issues, most people don't have the time or expertise to sift through it all. Since we have a representative democracy, we outsource a lot of that the representatives who sift through and call the shots for us. If there's something they miss, media and public protest can act to advocate.
Sorry for the US-Centric view, but it's what I know. And to be fair, it's much more of an issue here than it is in Australia ;)