3 ms·

I don't know how serious these things are, but if the San Andreas fault can tens of thousands of people (I doubt it, but I haven't looked into it), then indeed

I don't know how serious these things are, but if the San Andreas fault can tens of thousands of people (I doubt it, but I haven't looked into it), then indeed this becomes the priority. Economic policy should indeed focus on trying to prevent this outcome. And if solar flares can cause a megadeath (and again, I don't know), then this becomes a priority too. Your attempt at proof by contradiction might be a list of things to prepare for. > All models are wrong, some are useful. A forecast that causes you to act overconfidently is worse than no forecast. All models are wrong, but some are worse than nothing.

spywaregorilla 4y ago
> Your attempt at proof by contradiction might be a list of things to prepare for. It's not a proof by contradiction. It's showing that there are many long tail risks that are potentially very dangerous but also very expensive to try and prevent. It's not wrong, it's just a really difficult concept. The Fed interest's rate is a single tool that can be moved up or down. What do you do with no model? How do you make decisions? Every decision, including making no changes, is very significant.