There are 2 very big differences between death in an accident and death in an epidemic.
1. In an accident, death results from negligence. And every person chooses to take the risk and be careful as needed. (And a drunk person who endangers others is forbidden to drive, because then he is a criminal.) In an epidemic, death is certain for a certain percentage of the people who are infected. And a person who goes outside during an epidemic is similar to someone driving drunk and endangering others.
2. In an accident, the death is local; only those involved in the accident are harmed. In an epidemic, one person can spread the virus to the whole country and then everyone dies. Therefore dealing with an epidemic requires mutual responsibility, otherwise the epidemic will keep spreading. It is enough for one percent to violate the rules and the epidemic will not stop.

And in fact it would seem that the "do not be intimidated by any man" means that one should not be afraid of all those alarmists regarding the disaster supposedly expected from the "collapse of the economy." The economy is collapsing? Then you start over. You change the rules of the economy.
And one could add that in any case the economy is based on loans and interest, which are an explicit Torah prohibition.
And anyway, from the Torah's perspective too, the economy starts over every 50 years.
So seemingly an economy collapsing is a normal and not a flawed situation, unlike how it appears. It's just that it can be frightening, especially to those who have a lot of capital.

And still you haven't answered what the price is in matters of life and death versus monetary matters. How much is one person's life worth? How do you put a price on it?

In the Torah there is a prohibition, "Do not murder"; there is no prohibition, "Do not destroy the state's economy."

The differences are irrelevant. You asked whether there is a price to human life, and I showed you that there is.
I answered you that there is a price and that I do not have a sharp criterion. Like a hundred thousand other things that have no sharp criterion.
Why do I need a verse? It is simple logic.

You really confused me: the difference between the collapse of a single business and the collapse of a country's economy is important, but the difference between an accident involving a few people and the destruction of the whole nation because of one person spreading the virus is not important?

If they told the Rabbi that he had to put himself to death for the sake of economic growth, would he also agree?
So if the economy is so important, maybe we should send all the elderly to hell in order to help it. Where is the line?
If it's only a half-collapse, then it's okay to kill? How does a rabbi even begin to issue a halakhic ruling on this—based on the advice of an economist with interests?

You've managed to confuse me about what here is confusing you.
I'll answer again: there is a price to human life. Period. I don't have a clear line to determine what it is. Therefore each situation should be weighed on its own merits: how many human lives versus how much economic damage, and to whom.
Beyond that, it's worth not getting carried away. No nation is being destroyed because of the virus. But that's just a side point.

So I will summarize your answer as I understand it, with my limited understanding:
The Rabbi permits knowingly sending people to their deaths, in the category of murder "close to intentional," when
this is intended to save the collapse of the banks, the business owners, and the economic system practiced in the State of Israel.

In other words, the Rabbi permitted the decision-makers to violate "Do not murder" so that the economic theses of certain economists from the previous century would not turn out to fail the test of reality when that reality includes an epidemic.

The Rabbi does not base his words on the Torah at all when he decided that living according to the economic thesis in question is "the normal functioning of society," such that, by being so normal, it "justifies risking life." The Rabbi brought no proof that this is indeed "normal life." He simply states it or assumes it.

The Rabbi does not mention, even by hint, that these "normal lives" are contrary to the Torah.

I don't make a habit of lying, so I don't see why I should mention that this is contrary to the Torah. There is not, and never has been, even a single halakhic decisor in the world who disagrees with this. I explained that there is also life-saving necessity here, and it is permitted even aside from life-saving necessity. But as usual, you are categorical with no basis whatsoever (as I just pointed out to you in a parallel thread). Good luck.

If so, it turns out that Hitler, who was careful to save Germany and sent 6 million Jews to their deaths in order to save Germany's economy from collapse and the German people from humiliation, was actually a kind of righteous man.

And it seems that the Rabbi would have permitted that tyrant, may his name be blotted out, had he turned to the Rabbi for advice or a ruling on the matter, that it is permissible to send Jews to the crematoria and the gas chambers since what is at stake is saving the German economy and returning German life to normal according to their outlook. And it makes no difference whether their outlook is correct or mistaken, since there is not one decisor who disagrees.

Exactly.

This is what the prophet warns about:

"Because this people has approached Me with its mouth and honored Me with its lips, while its heart is far from Me, and their fear of Me has become a learned commandment of men; therefore, behold, I will continue to do wondrous things with this people, wonder upon wonder, and the wisdom of its wise men shall perish, and the understanding of its prudent men shall be hidden."

And the coronavirus came to expose the truth.

And in order to expose this truth here on the site, apparently it is indeed possible to pay with human lives through Her Faithful Czarina, Corona, long may she live.

"A man's spirit can sustain his illness,"
"A man's spirit can bear his Corona."

"Thorns and snares are on the path of the crooked; he who guards his life will keep far from them"—
A sarcastic jab lies on the crooked path; one who cares about his flour knows it.

I brought something nice that I saw: "his illness" = "his corona" in the Aramaic translation, and see Rashi there.
"Thorns and snares" is 328 and "corona" is 367, so it doesn't work out.

Listen, it turns out that all in all you're actually a likable guy, and I treated you with excessive aggressiveness. I won't continue with that mistake.

One last thing. This verse itself is also infected with magic. The verse says, "A man's spirit can sustain his illness, but a broken spirit—who can bear it?" Meaning: a person's spirit can enable him to hold out even through bodily sicknesses (or just motivation, or actual healing like a placebo), but if the spirit itself is broken and depressed, who can bear it? A connection like that is as enchanted as saying that Torah study can sustain the world.