Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
1–10 of 60 posts
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#2Are there any papers coming to a similar conclusion that were released prior to December 2019? Just in case there's some bias from the current moment. Not saying there's necessarily any evidence of such in this one, but it'd be interesting to compare, at least.
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#3The very title of this paper suggests a deeply flawed conclusion. A sample size of one pandemic, from 100 years ago even, is used to generalize a conclusion that "Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not". Sure, there were multiple cities with varying levels of interventions, but you can only conclude that in the 1918 economy for that specific pandemic, the health interventions were good for the economy at that point in time.
I also agree with the other commenter that it may be better to see some research prior to December 2019.
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#4Are there any papers coming to a similar conclusion that were released prior to December 2019? Just in case there's some bias from the current moment. Not saying there's necessarily any evidence of such in this one, but it'd be interesting to compare, at least.
Well, we are currently running a global experiment to find out whether it is better for the economy to be negligent or have a robust public heath response during a pandemic. We'll know soon.
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#5when did the spanish flu become the 1918 flu? was it in the past few days?
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#6Are there any papers coming to a similar conclusion that were released prior to December 2019? Just in case there's some bias from the current moment. Not saying there's necessarily any evidence of such in this one, but it'd be interesting to compare, at least.
Well, we are currently running a global experiment to find out whether it is better for the economy to be negligent or have a robust public heath response during a pandemic. We'll know soon.
I would argue that in this context, you can't make conclusions about "the economy" in terms of objective good or bad. There are economies at varying topographies, scales, and market sectors. There are also philosophical differences in what a desirable economy looks like. For example, there's an increasing number of opinions that an economy heavily based on oil and gas energy, and military defense contractors, is not a desirable one.
Some others in a very small minority (possibly happening to be in power) may argue that parts of the economy that are not resilient to hardship are not desirable parts, and therefore should be culled when the opportunity presents itself. I would not be surprised if this was a factor in the decisions being made right now.
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#7when did the spanish flu become the 1918 flu? was it in the past few days?
1918 Flu is a more accurate name and you seem to not have had any trouble with the meaning, so what's the problem?
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#8when did the spanish flu become the 1918 flu? was it in the past few days?
It's sort of a revisionist history thing that's been picking up steam for a while.
I believe it really started gaining traction when the articles and such started going around about how it was called "Spanish Flu" because Spain was a neutral country in WWI and so wasn't suppressing reporting on the pandemic. Current research suggests it was just as bad everywhere and probably originated in America.
I don't terribly mind the change, I guess, since 1918 Flu helps ground it in time.
I think part of the change is also backlash to people calling our current pandemic the Chinese Flu
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#9when did the spanish flu become the 1918 flu? was it in the past few days?
1918 Flu is a more accurate name and you seem to not have had any trouble with the meaning, so what's the problem?
The problem is that it was being referred to as the Spanish Flu up until some people in the media took offense to Trump's coining of the phrase "Chinese Flu", so Spanish Flu needs to go if we're not wanting to look like hypocrites.
Re: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: 1918 Flu
#10The very title of this paper suggests a deeply flawed conclusion. A sample size of one pandemic, from 100 years ago even, is used to generalize a conclusion that "Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not". Sure, there were multiple cities with varying levels of interventions, but you can only conclude that in the 1918 economy for that specific pandemic, the health interventions were good for…
Are you implying that we can’t draw conclusions from limited data sets? Surely there must be some value in looking at the last event, even if it was 100 years ago...