Must-read article in @TheEconomist, but it seems to me that it fails to consider a crucial intertemporal dimension of the multidimensional tradeoff we face:
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/04/01/covid-19-presents-stark-choices-between-life-death-and-the-economy 1/11

If too rapid removal of lockdown and social distancing ended up implying *millions* of dead, would future costs for the economy be lower? 2/11

My guess is that we’d be staring at much, much higher costs than even those of a months-long lockdown—much higher costs for both the economy and broader society, with the real risk of complete collapse of entire institutional systems. 3/11

So, when I consider an intertemporal dimension that I do not find in @TheEconomist’s article, my view is that the partial tradeoff it focuses on vanishes. 4/11

Since we do not yet have the ability to prevent the outcome in which millions die, lockdown and social distancing are absolutely the things to do (for countries that allowed the virus to spread pretty much unchecked until way too late) at least until we have that ability. 5/11

Whatever it takes, unless we really want to contemplate the tradeoff between pseudo-saving the economy and society today, and the still-too-high probability of watching them *really* disintegrate completely tomorrow. 6/11

It should then be obvious that “whatever it takes” does not mean we all sit still until a cure and/or a vaccine are found—if they are ever found. But it means that we cannot do anything but the maximum 7/11

to flatten the curve of the pandemic, ensure the viability of health care systems, and, meanwhile, prepare all the measures that will make it possible to lift restrictions gradually, in conditions of maximum safety, 8/11

including the ability to do large-scale testing and use strategies like South Korea’s or Singapore’s. “Perhaps no new treatments will be found and test-and-trace will fail” does not justify lifting restrictions before we are at least in the position to try test-and-trace. 9/11

Until then, the probability of hard-to-comprehend disaster with much, much higher future costs for economy and society than those contemplated by @TheEconomist is simply too high. 10/11

From my perspective, key questions are these: Are governments really acting to put in place the structure that is needed? Are they acting to ensure that it will be possible to coordinate strategies and protocols internationally? 11/11