5 ms·

Yes, this is what I was talking about. It was an avoidable tragedy.

• airstrike 4y ago
  That is literally the opposite of what is happening in TFA. If anything, you are arguing we're overpreparing.
  • dereg 4y ago
    I did not miss that in my comment.
    • ac2u 4y ago
      Yeah, lots of reactionary blasting of your comment from people who didn't realise your point was that in future, if the stocks aren't used, some smartass politician is going to be "see!?! we didn't need it! why should we replace the expired stuff?" and leave the stocks at a state where the usefulness for an emergency is nil. Unfortunately, there's no incentive when spending taxpayer money for the person who "buys" insurance for tail risk events.
  • cwkoss 4y ago
    I think the question is whether this surge of investment will lead to future complacency or whether the stockpile will be managed and maintained at this level into the future. The US trashed a bunch of masks without replacing them a few years before the pandemic - presumably because someone decided we were spending 'too much' on it. I hope this is just paranoid anxiety, but never underestimate the power of the federal government's ability to disappoint via reckless reactionism.
    • chiefalchemist 4y ago
      Not back-filling all in all was probably a reasonable decision at the time. On the other hand, a lack of on-shore manufacturing capacity to address any on-demand needs is less forgivable. How could we not have a scenario that would have exposed that?
      • chiph 4y ago
        That was the alarming part I saw at the beginning of the pandemic. I had no idea that medical mask/PPE manufacturing had been moved offshore to the extent that it had. It would seem to me to be a capability that any country should have as part of their national biodefense strategy.
        • chiefalchemist 4y ago
          What manufacturing hasn't been moved offshore? The majority of it to a country we're told is an enemy? Could the pro-globalization global elites be any less accountable?
          • airstrike 4y ago
            You were doing fine until "global elites". There's no organized cabal driving this outcome, just greedy humans solving for local optima that are globally suboptimal
            • chiefalchemist 4y ago
              Perhaps. From my vantage point, global elites and greedy humans are synonyms. That is, the greedy who - for their own benefit - pushed the globalization agenda, cleaned up financially, and now are too busy counting their booty to own their role in our current sideways-ness. That latter disconnect is common of elites of any sort. We're on the same page. p.s. It doesn't have to be "organized". When there's a common goal, and finite paths to that ends, human behavior automagically begins to synchronize and optimize. Another way to envision it is starlings. No conspiracy, yet highly (enough) organized and "in sync." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVko9jyAkQg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVko9jyAkQg
              • airstrike 4y ago
                I hate to break it to you but all humans are greedy. It's a feature, not a bug, and it is in our DNA. Some just don't have an avenue to manifest said greed but would very likely do so if given the opportunity. Just like you can't expect a woodchuck to not chuck wood, don't expect humans to not be greedy. That will only result in disappointment and resentment. Rather than trying to fix greed, embrace its inevitability and modify your goals so that you create systems which channel that greed into positive externalities.