Title says it all really...inviting the challenge. Vaccinate the vulnerable, obviously let anyone who still feels uncomfortable the continue to shield, then just open back up.
Let life resume. Why is this the wrong thing to do?
I'm not sure I want to go here...
tbh one reason is the impracticality of what you suggest in terms of let anyone who still feels uncomfortable then continue to shield. Can that actually work wrt pubs, clubs, other areas? Once you add in partners of those who are uncomfortable, along with that, then it's probably totally impractical. On another level, how about if they have children and are uncomfortable? They can't, realistically, take their children out of education, so mitigation is needed there to protect the parents off the back of that, if they're uncomfortable.
So, if you could do it, and get those who wanted things opening up completely to cover the pubs, clubs, teaching jobs etc. then yep, do it.
But, there'll not be *that* long after vulnerable have been vaccinated before everybody has been offered the chance to be. We're talking a matter of weeks in a pandemic that's been running over a year.
As for afterwards, it's releasing things with caution to see what happens, anyway. It all *seems* to be good, but until the world has been done and / or we have some time to check results, we don't *know*. So it's a release and observe, which is eminently sensible.
And with that, I'm running away before I'm called a lockdown lover, told I want everyone to be scared, and told that actually nope, I have no mental health issues as a result of this.