Indeed, which is why it's on them not to go out. So long as nobody who has contact with old folks goes out, we're basically doing the UK plan ad-hoc. The rule shouldn't be "nobody go out" the rule should be "nobody with exposure to the vulnerable should go out" -- and if they do, they're being totally irresponsible.
I, however, am not, and I'm supporting the local economy.
This point of view strikes me as incredibly selfish. Some people who have exposure to vulnerable people might need to go out (to get groceries, medication, etc.) and you could still act as a vector to infect them. Surely your social life will survive two weekends away from the pub.
Old people need groceries and medicine, which in many cases they will have to go out for. (Not everyone has delivery available, or can afford delivery). On those trips they are likely to encounter younger people, including the workers at the grocery stores and pharmacies.
Young people also need groceries and medicine, and through the grocery store and pharmacy they are then one step from people who are one step from older people.
It only takes a handful of steps for your "nobody with exposure to the vulnerable" to be close to an empty set.
