4 ms·

I agree that price controls create shortages in the long term. The issue is that emergencies are about the short term. I would be very surprised if more money

by acover 6y ago

I agree that price controls create shortages in the long term. The issue is that emergencies are about the short term. I would be very surprised if more money would have helped produce more vaccines. Canada is burning a billion a day to keep everything in lockdown - money does not seem relevant to the current situation. Adding it in just makes everyone pay more for the same limited amount of vaccines.

nickpp 6y ago
This emergency does not seem short term. Pandemics generally aren't. There are already talks of new strains and corresponding vaccines in winter. Canada is burning billions because it has decided to prioritize COVID protection above everything else in life. It was clear from the beginning that lockdowns were a bad idea because they weren’t feasible in the long term. Alas, this is the path most of the world's government chose. We'll be paying the price for years to come...
- acover 6y ago
  The supply constraints for the vaccine are short term. > Canada is burning billions because it has decided to prioritize COVID protection above everything else in life. It was clear from the beginning that lockdowns were a bad idea because they weren’t feasible in the long term. Alas, this is the path most of the world's government chose. We'll be paying the price for years to come... How does this relate to money being a limiting factor for vaccine production?
  - nickpp 6y ago
    Do not underestimate the power of human creativity and antreprenorial spirit when correctly motivated. The ability to sell this vaccine at obscene profits would've been extremely motivating. Now I am not in pharma I don't know how exactly the extra money would've helped, but I know that in pretty much any business more money help with new hires and better people, new machines for production lines, more wild ideas being tested and discarded if not working. Also this is a supply chain issue and they would've been strongly incentivised by more profits. Even those damn syringes missing in Japan and little container bottles to store vaccines in. Finally at macro level better profits would've attracted and incentivised more entrepreneurs with more ideas and imagination. Remember, the very existence of the Moderna and BioNTech companies is due to the free market and private enterprise. Now on the more very short term an expensive vaccine would've reduce demand by making people consider alternatives and by making sure only people that really need it would get it. It would've avoided aberrations like vaccinating terminal patients or people who are not active and can very well wait for the price to come down wearing masks in the meantime. But I am afraid that the supply constraint for the vaccine is long term. Because the virus is changing. And our incentives are more aligned with prolonged lockdowns than vaccine production.
    - acover 6y ago
      > only people that really need it would get it I think this is where we disagree. If wealth was equally distributed I would agree but wealth follows a power law distribution. People with a 1000x less money than me but with 100x more risk should get the vaccine before me. Do you know of the mythical man month problem? It seems to apply here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
      - nickpp 6y ago
        > People with a 1000x less money than me but with 100x more risk should get the vaccine before me. And this is how you get shortages. Because there are a lot of people considering themselves at 100x risk (high demand) and very few people interested in serving them for no profit (low supply). The market laws are simple and implacable. This is our current strategy and I consider it disastrous. But you should be pretty happy with it then. The current vaccination is run exactly according to your priorities, so kudos! Again, I know too little about producing vaccines to know if this is a MMM situation, but based on my expertise in other fields, I highly doubt it.

by acover 6y ago

nickpp 6y ago

This emergency does not seem short term. Pandemics generally aren't. There are already talks of new strains and corresponding vaccines in winter. Canada is burning billions because it has decided to prioritize COVID protection above everything else in life. It was clear from the beginning that lockdowns were a bad idea because they weren’t feasible in the long term. Alas, this is the path most of the world's government chose. We'll be paying the price for years to come...

acover 6y ago
The supply constraints for the vaccine are short term. > Canada is burning billions because it has decided to prioritize COVID protection above everything else in life. It was clear from the beginning that lockdowns were a bad idea because they weren’t feasible in the long term. Alas, this is the path most of the world's government chose. We'll be paying the price for years to come... How does this relate to money being a limiting factor for vaccine production?
- nickpp 6y ago
  Do not underestimate the power of human creativity and antreprenorial spirit when correctly motivated. The ability to sell this vaccine at obscene profits would've been extremely motivating. Now I am not in pharma I don't know how exactly the extra money would've helped, but I know that in pretty much any business more money help with new hires and better people, new machines for production lines, more wild ideas being tested and discarded if not working. Also this is a supply chain issue and they would've been strongly incentivised by more profits. Even those damn syringes missing in Japan and little container bottles to store vaccines in. Finally at macro level better profits would've attracted and incentivised more entrepreneurs with more ideas and imagination. Remember, the very existence of the Moderna and BioNTech companies is due to the free market and private enterprise. Now on the more very short term an expensive vaccine would've reduce demand by making people consider alternatives and by making sure only people that really need it would get it. It would've avoided aberrations like vaccinating terminal patients or people who are not active and can very well wait for the price to come down wearing masks in the meantime. But I am afraid that the supply constraint for the vaccine is long term. Because the virus is changing. And our incentives are more aligned with prolonged lockdowns than vaccine production.
  - acover 6y ago
    > only people that really need it would get it I think this is where we disagree. If wealth was equally distributed I would agree but wealth follows a power law distribution. People with a 1000x less money than me but with 100x more risk should get the vaccine before me. Do you know of the mythical man month problem? It seems to apply here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
    - nickpp 6y ago
      > People with a 1000x less money than me but with 100x more risk should get the vaccine before me. And this is how you get shortages. Because there are a lot of people considering themselves at 100x risk (high demand) and very few people interested in serving them for no profit (low supply). The market laws are simple and implacable. This is our current strategy and I consider it disastrous. But you should be pretty happy with it then. The current vaccination is run exactly according to your priorities, so kudos! Again, I know too little about producing vaccines to know if this is a MMM situation, but based on my expertise in other fields, I highly doubt it.