No easy solutions, but I find myself much more respectful of the NZ, Australia, S.Korea, Singapore approaches.
There are some people arguing strongly for simply opening up and letting the virus take its course, or for putting elderly / higher risk into lockdown and telling the young to catch it. However I've yet to see anything resembling a plan from people arguing for that course of action. One that might say how that is done in practice and the likely cost in death and long-term disability. Happy to explore such discussions though, honestly and collaboratively.
As for us in UK and much of Europe, the opportunity to follow a 'reduce to zero' approach was passed up initially in being too slow to react / react fully, then again in the rush to encourage drinking in pubs, dining in restaurants and holidaying in other countries. Then with the schools and universities re-opening, we got an unsurprising thrust upwards, well above the R0=1 that we'd been teetering around. Entirely predictable, even back when lockdown ended and we saw the rush to open up.
I felt at the time of the opening up from 1st lockdown, that a 2nd lockdown would be seen as catastrophic for governments - an admission of failure. Whilst I'm slightly less convinced of that backlash now, the policy of neither letting it happen, nor driving cases down to zero, leaves them with opponents on both sides and very few supporters in the middle. For me such a middle ground was always going to trade a short term economic respite, for longer term economic pain (and a lot more deaths than a genuine attempt to get cases down to the levels trace and trace can cope with). I imagine some big names (and lots of small companies) will fold before the end of the year
I hope everyone is safe and able to manage the risk to yourselves and your loved ones.