I realise this is an old post of yours, but your recent tweet drew me to it. I have subscribed to FET because I enjoy your ‘fresh’ thinking. However, where Covid is concerned, there are other ‘ fresh’ thinkers who have different views to yours, such as https://necsi.edu/systemic-risk-of-pandemic-via-novel-pathogens-coronavirus-a-note .
I think the difference is that they misunderstood the type of problem faced. They think it is a "risk of ruin" problem. It is not. Infection fatality rates etc were well established by then. We have the Princess cruise ship and many other cases that showed nothing out of the ordinary compared to other respiratory viruses.
Wouldn’t you be inclined to pay more attention to the Burnett & Doherty Institutes than an economist?
I realise this is an old post of yours, but your recent tweet drew me to it. I have subscribed to FET because I enjoy your ‘fresh’ thinking. However, where Covid is concerned, there are other ‘ fresh’ thinkers who have different views to yours, such as https://necsi.edu/systemic-risk-of-pandemic-via-novel-pathogens-coronavirus-a-note .
Would you care to “compare and contrast”?
Thanks
I think the difference is that they misunderstood the type of problem faced. They think it is a "risk of ruin" problem. It is not. Infection fatality rates etc were well established by then. We have the Princess cruise ship and many other cases that showed nothing out of the ordinary compared to other respiratory viruses.