4 ms·

It’ll be curious to see how that goes as their real estate sector continues collapsing

inglor_cz 4y ago
Even the "political stability" angle does not look so good after their chaotic Zero Covid policies that continue until today. These policies today look less rational and more like "we have a mad emperor on the throne" episode, especially when the rest of the world basically considers the epidemic history by now. Edit: Interesting that someone downvoted this. If I were a foreign investor, a chaotic policy of locking down big cities and subjecting foreign visitors to humiliating anal swabs etc. in order to keep down a respiratory virus with extreme R0 rate, much less deadly than original Covid, and with a ton of existing vaccines available, would be quite off-putting to me.
- warning26 4y ago
  You’ll find there are many who genuinely drink the kool aid, and maintain that the two month Shanghai lockdown was proof the CCP cares about people, as opposed to the evil west which prioritizes money over all else. For what it’s worth, I think the Chinese lockdowns made sense early in the pandemic, but at this point are solidly in the mad-emperor-on-the-throne territory.
- concinds 4y ago
  (First, I did not downvote) https://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1531768589098921985 https://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1531768589098921985 https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1539219754338160641 https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1539219754338160641 I think the 2 tweets above make a good case for an elimination strategy. Permanently circulating Covid means ever-increasing rates of long Covid, disability, unpredictably-disrupted large events (how can you plan anything a few months in advance with Covid still circulating?). And keep in mind that Covid isn't just for the old, the magnitude of risk increase is equal (proportional) for every age group; and that reinfections have worse outcomes (discredits "live with it"). The "live with Covid" strategy was never good, is still not good, will likely never be good, yet Western countries have burned down their political capital so much that if they ever try zero-Covid, they'd face civil unrest. Not a good situation they've built for themselves.
  - inglor_cz 4y ago
    There is a lot of human pathogens that I would like to see eliminated, but we have successfuly eliminated just smallpox and are on the verge of eliminating polio and dracunculosis, with the final success still eluding us. That is a rather modest success list for a technically and scientifically highly developed global civilization. I am fairly skeptical against the idea that Covid, with its enormous ability to spread, is going to be eliminated in our lifetimes. There is a lot of coronaviruses out there and they seem to be fairly resilient. Locking cities of the size of Shanghai down has serious downsides too, and, in public health, everything is a trade-off.
  - oneoff786 4y ago
    How can you plan anything if there’s a risk the entire city will be locked down? You can’t eliminate an endemic disease. It’s not a winnable battle.

Even the "political stability" angle does not look so good after their chaotic Zero Covid policies that continue until today. These policies today look less rational and more like "we have a mad emperor on the throne" episode, especially when the rest of the world basically considers the epidemic history by now. Edit: Interesting that someone downvoted this. If I were a foreign investor, a chaotic policy of locking down big cities and subjecting foreign visitors to humiliating anal swabs etc. in order to keep down a respiratory virus with extreme R0 rate, much less deadly than original Covid, and with a ton of existing vaccines available, would be quite off-putting to me.

warning26 4y ago
You’ll find there are many who genuinely drink the kool aid, and maintain that the two month Shanghai lockdown was proof the CCP cares about people, as opposed to the evil west which prioritizes money over all else. For what it’s worth, I think the Chinese lockdowns made sense early in the pandemic, but at this point are solidly in the mad-emperor-on-the-throne territory.
concinds 4y ago
(First, I did not downvote) https://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1531768589098921985 https://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1531768589098921985 https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1539219754338160641 https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1539219754338160641 I think the 2 tweets above make a good case for an elimination strategy. Permanently circulating Covid means ever-increasing rates of long Covid, disability, unpredictably-disrupted large events (how can you plan anything a few months in advance with Covid still circulating?). And keep in mind that Covid isn't just for the old, the magnitude of risk increase is equal (proportional) for every age group; and that reinfections have worse outcomes (discredits "live with it"). The "live with Covid" strategy was never good, is still not good, will likely never be good, yet Western countries have burned down their political capital so much that if they ever try zero-Covid, they'd face civil unrest. Not a good situation they've built for themselves.
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  There is a lot of human pathogens that I would like to see eliminated, but we have successfuly eliminated just smallpox and are on the verge of eliminating polio and dracunculosis, with the final success still eluding us. That is a rather modest success list for a technically and scientifically highly developed global civilization. I am fairly skeptical against the idea that Covid, with its enormous ability to spread, is going to be eliminated in our lifetimes. There is a lot of coronaviruses out there and they seem to be fairly resilient. Locking cities of the size of Shanghai down has serious downsides too, and, in public health, everything is a trade-off.
- oneoff786 4y ago
  How can you plan anything if there’s a risk the entire city will be locked down? You can’t eliminate an endemic disease. It’s not a winnable battle.