3 ms·
The market clearly decided that investing a trillion dollars in speculative capacity was not valuable. Absent Federal intervention (in the US at least), where
by epc 6y ago
The market clearly decided that investing a trillion dollars in speculative capacity was not valuable. Absent Federal intervention (in the US at least), where would the money come from? Had the Trump Administration utilized the Defense Production Act to nationalize the necessary resources, then perhaps we would have had the necessary capacity by now, but it decided to go with "Warp Speed" instead.
- readams 6y agoObviously this would not happen with purely private investment.
- bluGill 6y agoEven if Trump had done that, he would have invested in the wrong vaccines. This is NOT incompetence, nobody had any reason to think mRNA would be the way to go 9+ months ago when the money was allocated.
- epc 6y agoThe point wasn't that mRNA was the way to go, the point was that the only reasonable way to prepare to mass produce any vaccines, mRNA or "traditional" formats, was for a government to either nationalize development of the production systems, or fork over billions of dollars to have the production lines ready for whatever vaccine was developed. Instead, the administration sat on its hands and said "what could we possibly do?" and the mess we have today (in the US at least) is the direct result.
- robocat 6y ago> The market clearly decided that investing a trillion dollars in speculative capacity was not valuable Somehow the investors need to get back their investment, cover their risk, and make a profit on top of that. Impossible? Even worldwide, the median per-capita household income is $2,920. 1 trillion is a lot of money. Edit: is there a name for the fallacy “something costs an individual $x, therefore the individual can afford to pay $x”, or the similar fallacy “something costs people an $x GDP, therefore the government should pay $x to fix it”.