4 ms·

I would argue the opposite is the case. The disease affects basically all countries, so what matters is the global supply of these goods. So we are better off i

I would argue the opposite is the case. The disease affects basically all countries, so what matters is the global supply of these goods. So we are better off if countries can specialize on their respective competitive advantages. In the scenario you propose, every country would have their own very inefficient mask industry which would now be just as or even more overwhelmed.

nradov 7y ago
We all understand Ricardo's law of comparative advantage. The problem is what happens in a supply chain disruption. In that case it's better to have at least some inefficient local capacity instead of nothing. As an extreme example, the US continues to manufacture it's own military aircraft instead of buying from China. Even though China might be willing to sell them cheaper than we can make them.
SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
The problem is that each individual country will (reasonably!) not allow critical medical supplies to be exported during a crisis. It worked out mostly okay this time, because the countries with large domestic mask production all got their crisis under control before the rest of the world got it. If the next pandemic happens in China and the US simultaneously, we're not going to have any masks at all. And note that "mostly okay" here doesn't mean we have anywhere close to enough masks. Just that, with extreme rationing, we can ensure most but not all doctors have the absolute bare minimum of protective gear.