It’s quite possible that the economic cost of our reaction to the coronavirus *should* be much greater than its direct cost. For example, if we could replace $2X of direct cost with X of indirect, we should maximize X, leading to massive economic cost but little virus impact.
-
-
Lives lost plus however you’d reckon the cost of sickness that doesn’t kill you. Same logic should apply however you slice it as direct vs indirect
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.