Read on Twitter
Paul Romer is a Nobel-winning economist. He advocates for moving toward a regime of wide-scale testing.
We don't have the capacity to do this *today*.
He argues we could have the capacity to do this within weeks.
It would cost a lot!
Keeping us locked up costs +++more. https://twitter.com/paulmromer/status/1248713245088780288
We don't have the capacity to do this *today*.
He argues we could have the capacity to do this within weeks.
It would cost a lot!
Keeping us locked up costs +++more. https://twitter.com/paulmromer/status/1248713245088780288
Speaking for myself here:
-> Our first priority right now is to push down the epidemic. The current shutdown is appropriate.
-> To me, Romer's idea is applicable to how we should think about the next phase.
-> To prepare for next phase, we need to start building test capacity.
-> Our first priority right now is to push down the epidemic. The current shutdown is appropriate.
-> To me, Romer's idea is applicable to how we should think about the next phase.
-> To prepare for next phase, we need to start building test capacity.
Why should we listen to an economist (like Romer) on this?
--> We should listen to docs on epidemiology (duh)
--> But economists can best evaluate cost of lockdown. Romer makes a clear case that the cost of a massively-large investment in testing <<< cost of long lockdown.
--> We should listen to docs on epidemiology (duh)
--> But economists can best evaluate cost of lockdown. Romer makes a clear case that the cost of a massively-large investment in testing <<< cost of long lockdown.
On Vox, @ezraklein reviews several of these 'next phase' proposals, including Romer's.
Klein notes that the technology and capacity for testing is not currently there.
But Romer might counter that's his point: even *massive* investment is justifiable. https://www.vox.com/2020/4/10/21215494/coronavirus-plans-social-distancing-economy-recession-depression-unemployment
Klein notes that the technology and capacity for testing is not currently there.
But Romer might counter that's his point: even *massive* investment is justifiable. https://www.vox.com/2020/4/10/21215494/coronavirus-plans-social-distancing-economy-recession-depression-unemployment
I certainly don't know enough about the technology or the science to say if 'mass testing' is the right strategy.
But the conclusion I draw from Romer is that making *huge* investments--way beyond what we have considered--to forestall extended lockdowns can make economic sense.
But the conclusion I draw from Romer is that making *huge* investments--way beyond what we have considered--to forestall extended lockdowns can make economic sense.
