Lessons from COVID-19

[Tom_Mazanec]

"If you still believed that in 2020 or even the last decade you were not paying attention. See all anti-science anti-people pro-business decisions by the current government or TARP etc before. Or the whole general set up on health care and wellfare. See Inequality thread for some nice examples."

Agree wholeheartedly here, the last "Good Old Day" was December 11th in 2000. (Yes, had to check the date of suspension of Florida recount). After that the US has not based it's policies in reality. No doubt their odd election system has skewed results even before that.  (Now they have a reverse compass needle as El Prez, while Obama said :we cannot know which end of the compass needle is the right one.' sorry frustration speaking.)

By that standard, even before then. I remember "Tricky Dick". The reason DEcember 31, 2019 will be remembered as the end of The Good Old Days is because this pandemic and its consequences will hit everybody, very hard, right away.

[GoSouthYoungins]

Simple lesson for anyone who hadn't figured it out yet. Elon Musk is a bad man.

He has downplayed the virus at every opportunity. He tried to keep his bay area factory open despite orders to close it. He promised 1255 FDA approved ventilators but actually delivered BiPAP machines which are plenty abundant because aerosolizing COVID-19 isn't a good idea.


Equally simple: if someone refuses to recognize that Elon Musk is a con artists who seeks out crises  to exploit low-IQ/low-info virtue-signalers, that someone is a worthless void masquerading as a genuine human.

[blumenkraft]

Believe it or not, GSY, i'm glad you are still alive.

I really thought something might have happened to you.

But to your post, blame trump, he is in charge. Elon isn't!

[GoSouthYoungins]

Thank you. I'm alive and well.

I gave up trying to get through to people. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink / You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

Also I have new raised beds, chickens, goats, and a human to tend to. And I'm trying to put my writing energy into finishing a book rather than posting here. It's still great to read though.


I'm not comparing the blame Trump deserves vs Musk, I'm just pointing out what a complete ass-clown fraud Musk continues to prove himself to be.


https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/04/01/1585782924000/Elon-Musk-promised-ventilators--These-are-BPAP-machines-/

I'm sure he will manufacture invasive ventilators though. When? 3 months maybe, 6 months definitely. aka: never.


Another lesson from C19 that people are starting to realize: the modern economy is hyper-fragile and the financial system is a house of cards.

[longwalks1]

Posting here.  Mom and Dad 89 and 95 y.o.) under lockdown in senior place, rural Iowa.  Moi, I shuttle between 3 residential sites for mentally challenged under lockdowns, meds, overnights.  ...   Mar 13 - long day -  7 am to 7 pm ok, then an individual coughs, again, at risk for aspiration pneumo. I chide negelient staff, slow, give meds.  9 pm, more meds, very shallow breathing.  bad colour, I got 82 for pO2.  Nurse, 911, I follow ambulance  later to hospital, xrays, strep, influ neg.  She is released, I amdone at 2 am.  3 days later she is admitted.  Intubated.  NO NEW News.  3 days  later I go into do meds.  I don mask and ask how she is.  I state the mask is in case I am asymptomatic and carrying. There is really no one else to do meds.  I get email, she is negative, mask off.  She came back a few days later , did not improve, back in.  60 yr old mentally challenged.  Does not look good. I have seen 4 others die of aspiration pneumo since 1991 taking care of the mentally challenged.  So, I look back at all the years I and teams did right in managing dysphagias, cerebellar ataxias, ...   

    Meanwhile dad is getting cabin fever immensely.  I am trying to finesse getting the keys away from him for his car.  He calls up and want to come up,  get a bottle of wine and 1/2 gallon milk (3 oz wine at bedtime with mom) and have me drive him back and then take the car.   I know he will get tossed out of lockdown if he does that.  I say stay put, I will be by toningh.  I get on my bicycle.
   Wicked head wind, 15 miles - 25 km down to him, buy wine and milk and meet him and mom at the door.  Mission accomplished. 

    You just do what you can. when you can; seize the moment when needed.   I do have a covenant via L'Arche of a life dedicated to the mentally challenged. So I will just continue to walk 2 or 4 or 8 blocks to various work sites for my vocation. 

  Not too crazy yet in rural north central Iowa. South Dakota is being idiotic with no restrictions.   Minnesota 40 km north is much more locked down.  Hopefully they can get some crops in around here.    I just might hire somebody to put on new shingles on house, dad was delaying.  Peace out. 

[oren]

Thanks for sharing longwalks.

[TerryM]

Best of luck LongW!
Keep us informed.



Kassey & Pmt
What I was trying to express was that the Post-Pandemic era is liable to be so bad that everything preceding the pandemic will be viewed as favorable by comparison.


GSY
Great to read your words again!
Tesla's expanding PR expenses will be gobbling up much of what might have gone to pay back some of the creditors.
If the past is any indication, Musk's lobbyists will make sure that lots of federal funding will be flowing into Elon's Enterprises. Whether the public forgives Musk's unforgivable actions is another matter.


Tesla needs customers, but Spacex and Hyperloop need little other than generous government contracts, and regulatory agencies blinded by greed.
I fear that in the years ahead Musk's government contacts will keep him in business even as Elon's public image tanks.
Terry

[Neven]

And of course, we need to move parts of humanity to other planets where there is no coronavirus.

[Paddy]

One thing that I expect will happen from this at an individual level is that a lot more people will start to maintain a store of long lasting goods that they need at home, so that they don't end up out of pasta / tinned tomatoes / toilet roll / whatever the next time there's a crisis.

I also wonder if fewer people will want to board a cruise ship, after the various plague ship occurrences we've been seeing with this.

On a medical level, it's possible we may identify some new broad-spectrum antiviral treatments.  We'll certainly be able to rule out a lot of candidates for such treatment, given the number of trials under way.  And I'd imagine the world's intensive care capacity may get a significant upgrade.

On a systematic level of how the world runs?  Many countries may be a little quicker to respond the next time a new infection shows similar behaviour.  But remember that there have been a lot of false alarms and contained situations while waiting for the next viral pandemic, and there will be a lot more to come after this... which will likely wear down responsiveness all over again, over time.

[Archimid]

I think there is a very important lesson to be learned from the hospitalization of Boris Johnson. Given his age and disposition, he probably has a better than 90% of making it out with nothing but minor permanent loss of lung function. However, let's say the low probability event happens. What impact would such a loss have on world politics?

Now let's say we take the suicidal "die for the economy" approach. How many people of key importance like Mr. Johnson would die?  The damage to many plans with many years on the work can't be overstated or counted in dollars.

To save the economy we must save as many people as possible from covid 19, as quickly possible. If we do it smartly we can make a better world out of it.

Of course, that is difficult with Nero in charge.

[TerryM]

Ramen!!


Terry

[dnem]

Sorry El Cid. Tone can be hard to pick up sometimes. I think of myself as a realist too, and that's why I'm not very optimistic about the future. But I do hope there is some re-examination of globalism after this.

You said: "What I actually meant was that the world has been extremely interconnected for thousands of years and pandemics swept thru Eurasia quite quickly many centuries before capitalism and globalisation and disrupted trade and economy heavily."

I'm sure that is true and rare commodities have surely moved across continents for a couple of thousand years. But the complexity of modern supply chains makes them far less stable in the face of disruptions than the spice trade, or salt or what have you.  In the past, commodities moved because they were not available everywhere.  Since the rise of globalization, capital now moves freely around in search of the cheapest inputs of materials and labor. It is both dehumanizing and a disaster for the environment.  Layer on top of that the financialization of everything, which did not exist in ancient supply chains and IMO you have a much less stable, much more vulnerable world.

Stay safe.

[kassy]

Yes that is why i stated that the current one cannot be compareded to black death, Justinian plague or 1918 H1N1. The systems were different although more connectivity is the common factor it was just so much lower then today.

In 1918 they did not even have antibiotics while now we have all kinds of relatively cheap medicines but produced by China and India mainly. Some recent examples of problems include problems with pollution in some of the more common heart medicines made in both countries (this already had the EU looking into producing more locally, possibly) and the drought in 2019 stopped medicine production in South India where they make a lot of meds that are really common in the US (and probably EU to but the article was US centered).

We are optimizing for some peoples gain but we should optimize for us all. This also works much better in the long term.

Basically people living to a better standard will have less kids.

One area of the world which has so far defied that is sub Saharan Africa but that is one of those regions which just never benefited from the worlds developments. If you have no thrust in society at large you need a bigger family so they keep doing that.

We could have built a world were we would not screw over sub saharan africa but we did not because someone could make more dollars the other way.

Another thing. We know that demographics after change, see Japan for example or the EU a bit behind. This has also been known for ages so this means you have to invest in ways to work smarter. You can use robots etc for basic production then do the more important stuff with people.

Most of us are in the still ´winning´ places why its hard for us to aknowlege how much the current arrangements suck.

[bluice]

Dnem, global supply chains clearly have their problems, but trade can be a stabilizing factor too. Most importantly we nowadays have a tremendous capacity to quickly move surplus production to a location where it’s needed. Not so long ago a failed harvest meant a local famine and death.

I don’t disagree with you and I also think a lesson from Covid will be relocating production, but it’s important to remember global trade is not a black and white issue.

[Archimid]

You can't just "relocate production" of each critical component needed for any emergency that could come up. Things will be produced where they are most effectively produced, else things get very expensive and scarce.

[kassy]

You are assuming they are produced in the universally best place but the chains are optimized for labor costs, low cost for environmental harms etc.

If you see the current state of the planet at a broad level you know this is not true. We make all kinds of BS choices. The amount of money being wasted on graft and losing wars at the Pentagon would allow for all kinds of projects making the USA a better place but no lets spend some $$$ on bombing the middle east.

Optimal for $ is not optimal for people.

Don´t be a puppet.

[be cause]

.. that good posters are lost every time the trolls are given free rein and allowed to reign free . Every time we gain a Harpy we lose a Sam .. b.c

[longwalks1]

Or lessons not learned.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/04/07/the-chaotic-government-response-to-covid-19-resembles-the-failures-of-1914/

The Chaotic Government Response to COVID-19 Resembles the Failures of 1914    Patrick Cockburn. 

Then as now there was poor leadership – inadequately prepared and hampered by an initially mistaken strategy – sending frontline forces over the top to suffer massive losses. The difference is that then the casualties were in the British army and today they are in the NHS.

The analogy could go on: the best trained troops of the British Expeditionary Force were all but wiped out in the first months of fighting and were replaced by enthusiastic but ill-trained volunteers. How will all those volunteering for service in Covid-19 hospitals fare when they begin to fill up?

I do try to keep up with the journalism of Fisk, Erci Margolis and Cockburn. 

No coughing spells or fevers  in the residentials I work at yet.  As noted elsewhere, intubations - especially longer term have serious long term consequences.  I had not seen many intubations for epiglottal dysphagias over the years.  Antibiotics, oxygen and albuterol, etc. And when that did not work, death, with friends present.   The recent one, well to my untrained eyes, intubation for aspiration pneumos just decreases the functioning of the epiglottis.  She is back in the hospital, not intubated and DNR. 

[Archimid]

You are assuming they are produced in the universally best place but the chains are optimized for labor costs, low cost for environmental harms etc.

I think that we can safely assume most manufacturing operations are not highly optimized operations except for some notable exceptions.

If you see the current state of the planet at a broad level you know this is not true. We make all kinds of BS choices. The amount of money being wasted on graft and losing wars at the Pentagon would allow for all kinds of projects making the USA a better place but no lets spend some $$$ on bombing the middle east.

but that is precisely my point. We can indeed have local production of whatever we want, but someone has to pay for the inefficiencies.

Optimal for $ is not optimal for people.

absolutely.

[oren]

.. that good posters are lost every time the trolls are given free rein and allowed to reign free . Every time we gain a Harpy we lose a Sam .. b.c

Where indeed IS Sam? Did he bail out due to the incessant trolling and spamming?

[Tor Bejnar]

Sam posted on COVID-19 thread a couple hours ago.

[oren]

Phew.

[El Cid]

Dnem, global supply chains clearly have their problems, but trade can be a stabilizing factor too. Most importantly we nowadays have a tremendous capacity to quickly move surplus production to a location where it’s needed. Not so long ago a failed harvest meant a local famine and death.

I don’t disagree with you and I also think a lesson from Covid will be relocating production, but it’s important to remember global trade is not a black and white issue.

This would have been my answer to dnem had I not been asleep

[El Cid]

You can't just "relocate production" of each critical component needed for any emergency that could come up. Things will be produced where they are most effectively produced, else things get very expensive and scarce.

But that is exactly the point. Things WILL be scarcer and more expensive as globalisation turns back as it slowly will. The reduction of supply chains AND uncontrolled money-printing can only lead to one thing: inflation.

[blumenkraft]

You can't just "relocate production" of each critical component needed for any emergency that could come up. Things will be produced where they are most effectively produced, else things get very expensive and scarce.

I get some things might get more expensive in the short term, but it also contributes to local productivity, bringing up local value-adding which leads to more taxes raised which then can be used to drive the prices down again.

But how would diversifying production contribute to scarcity? Logic tells me the opposite would happen.

[El Cid]

blumenkraft,

Globalisation drove down prices of most things for 2 reasons:
1) They outsourced production where wages were lower
2) They outsourced production where it was more productive

Now, 1) led to stagnant wages in the developed world BUT it led to huge gains in living standards in the developing world. it also led to income gains for owners of capital, as firms made more profits. I attach the infamous elephant curve, see for yourself.

If you turn back globalisation, ie. bring back workplaces from the developing world, you will raise the living standards of the developed lower-middle class (aka "white trash" - not my words) and reduce living standards of the developing world. And all the while, producers prices will rise (as John in Chicago will be paided more than Ali in bangladesh). Ali will lose his job, John will get a new one.
This is good for many Americans and Europeans and probably not so good for many billions. Yet, it will likely happen as COVID and the trade war will start to reduce globalisation

[blumenkraft]

Well, that is not addressing my question at all.

How would diversifying production contribute to scarcity?

[bluice]

BL, the efficiency gains from comparative advantage of nations and economies of scale are real and contribute to overall productivity.  Such were utilized even in planned economies when the socialist bloc decided to produce machinery and optics in DDR, fruit and veggies in Bulgaria, grain in Ukraine etc.

However as always in economics there is no free lunch here either. When aiming for optimal productivity one loses resiliency. When the Soviet bloc collapsed so did the intra-bloc supply chains. Hence when the Wall came down there was no fruit in Moscow and no jobs for East German engineers.

Similarly we get very cheap consumer electronics because they are all are produced in vast quantities in China before being shipped by 20000 TEU container vessels to arrive just in time to their buyers. But if there is ever a problem in China the world will lack their flat screens and refrigerators.

The question is how much of productivity we are willing to sacrifice for resiliency. I think quite a lot when it comes to medical supplies, but probably a lot less for consumer electronics.

[blumenkraft]

The question is how much of productivity we are willing to sacrifice for resiliency. I think quite a lot when it comes to medical supplies, but probably a lot less for consumer electronics.

No question about that. I one-hundred percent agree. I stated above, that in order to overcome the synergy effects we are losing due to diversifying production we might have to subsidize them.

Perhaps i'm speaking Chinese here but what i was asking is "how would diversifying production contribute to scarcity?"

[bluice]

Moving production to more locations and smaller units would reduce the comparative advantage and economies of scale. That would make the output more scarce in the economic sense of the word.

If you mean scarcity as in the unavailability of goods, then localized production might actually improve availability. As an example if every European nation had a local producer of medical supplies supplying the local market only, all countries would probably have better access to medical supplies at the time of present crisis.

[blumenkraft]

If you mean scarcity as in the unavailability of goods, then localized production might actually improve availability.

Exactly. That's what i'm talking about.

[Archimid]

Scarcity is inevitable if you are subsidizing products to produce them locally. The moment the first politicians get elected who has better use for the subsidy funds, scarcity begins.

While governments are funneling money and prime resources are available, there is no reason for scarcity. Once the money flow stops scarcity begins. Sometimes, even if the money flows, corruption takes over and scarcity begins. Typically this is fixed by propaganda.

The ideal way is as old as humanity. Allies. You establish a strategic relationship with those that have what you don't. You give them what they need, they give you what you need. It works at the city level, at the county level, at the state level, and at the federal level. It also works at the international level when vane nationalism doesn't get in the way.

[Neven]

But what does concentrated wealth want?

[El Cid]

If you mean scarcity as in the unavailability of goods, then localized production might actually improve availability.

Exactly. That's what i'm talking about.

I totally agree with blueiece but not on this one.

Comparative advantage means that things are produced where it is most productive. Once you move to less productive countries, by definition you produce less OR worse quality, OR even both. This is clear from the experience of the East Bloc. My father waited 8 years for a Trabant.

Yes you can stop outsourcing but the price is either smaller quantity or worse quality. or both

[blumenkraft]

Comparative advantage means that things are produced where it is most productive.
...
Yes you can stop outsourcing but the price is either smaller quantity or worse quality. or both

So, that implies that only very few companies/countries/societies are inherently able to produce a specific product or provide a special service. Otherwise, this argument ends here, right?

I am so bold to say that if there is a local or regulatory disadvantage it can be accounted for via subsidies or taxation. I don't get how this is not a no-brainer.

This discussion is silly! Of course, almost any country in the world would be able to produce essential medical products and services locally. It's not a question of if, but how. Or willingness for that matter.

And it would obviously improve availability in case of emergency.

[Archimid]

But what does concentrated wealth want?

Concentrated wealth wants this to end as quickly as possible. To do that they are using the SIR model but optimized for time not life. In practice, that means implementing approaches like "its just a flu", "no masks", no tests, and "die for the economy".  The faster susceptibles become immune (or dead), the quicker herd immunity is achieved.

The rationale behind it is that time is money.

What they miss is that Life is everything. Everything is greater than money. To save the economy they should've optimized for life not time.

[Sigmetnow]

Lessons about taking time to appreciate and enjoy the little things in life. 

Australians Who Leave House Only To Take Out Trash Have Started Dressing In Costumes To Do it
https://www.sadanduseless.com/bin-isolation-outing/

[El Cid]

This discussion is silly! Of course, almost any country in the world would be able to produce essential medical products and services locally. It's not a question of if, but how. Or willingness for that matter.

And it would obviously improve availability in case of emergency.

blumenkraft,

We were NOT talking about basic medical supplies. Yes, most countries can do that. We were talking about the general effects of relocation and shorter supply chains and moving production to areas with less comparative advantage. This will most certainly and by definition lead to higher prices and/or lower quality.

Bluice wrote about it pretty well.

[blumenkraft]

El Cid, i was replying to this post:

You can't just "relocate production" of each critical component needed for any emergency that could come up. Things will be produced where they are most effectively produced, else things get very expensive and scarce.

[The Walrus]

Comparative advantage means that things are produced where it is most productive.
...
Yes you can stop outsourcing but the price is either smaller quantity or worse quality. or both

So, that implies that only very few companies/countries/societies are inherently able to produce a specific product or provide a special service. Otherwise, this argument ends here, right?

I am so bold to say that if there is a local or regulatory disadvantage it can be accounted for via subsidies or taxation. I don't get how this is not a no-brainer.

This discussion is silly! Of course, almost any country in the world would be able to produce essential medical products and services locally. It's not a question of if, but how. Or willingness for that matter.

And it would obviously improve availability in case of emergency.

Any country is able to produce any product.  Comparative advantage comes down to who can make it most efficiently.  Our entire society has shifted from everyone doing everything themselves to individual areas doing what they do best.  This is similar to the changing lifestyle from the jack-of-all trades mentality of the 19th century to the specialization in the 20th century.  How many individuals do their own carpentry, plumbing, or electric work today?

[gerontocrat]

Comparative advantage means that things are produced where it is most productive.
...
Yes you can stop outsourcing but the price is either smaller quantity or worse quality. or both

So, that implies that only very few companies/countries/societies are inherently able to produce a specific product or provide a special service. Otherwise, this argument ends here, right?

I am so bold to say that if there is a local or regulatory disadvantage it can be accounted for via subsidies or taxation. I don't get how this is not a no-brainer.

This discussion is silly! Of course, almost any country in the world would be able to produce essential medical products and services locally. It's not a question of if, but how. Or willingness for that matter.

And it would obviously improve availability in case of emergency.

Any country is able to produce any product.  Comparative advantage comes down to who can make it most efficiently.  Our entire society has shifted from everyone doing everything themselves to individual areas doing what they do best.  This is similar to the changing lifestyle from the jack-of-all trades mentality of the 19th century to the specialization in the 20th century.  How many individuals do their own carpentry, plumbing, or electric work today?

Adam Smith, "Wealth of Nations",  the "Manufacture of Pins & Division of Labour", now distorted.

Adam Smith also wrote on the need to moderate and regulate the markets.
Why ? To ensure the economy serves the people, not people the economy.
A bad joke. It bred "Social Darwinism" and its foul progeny - "Creative Destruction", etc etc etc

The statements in the posts above on Comparative Advantage are only true if the markets are not distorted.
e.g. Transport costs from China to Europe are cheaper than transport costs across Europe. Shipping fuel is untaxed, land transport fuel is taxed, often relatively heavily.

The markets are totally distorted.
Have you noticed the procession of the Warriors of The Free Markets banging on Governments' doors for ginormous handouts.
Won't the invisible hand of the market sort it out?

[kassy]

We need coordinate globally.

Also there are a ton of products we don´t really need.

Just some random examples:
EU is working on rules for 1 charger so people can just own 1 instead of having 7 for all the different devices they have. This alone would save tons of energy.

Planned obsolescence/must have newest stuff.

We are used to buying the newest phones to have the coolest gadgets or buying a new car so you have a newer one then the neighbor.

This can be changed. Tesla is building cars that should last longer then our usual automobiles. Not running on explosions helps but i am quite sure the ICE manufacturers are not building the best cars they can for economic reasons.

Then we buy tons of crap we hardly ever use, we could also not do that.

Then there is level 2 of handling it globally. Living standards should converge.

And the amount of money people get payed and have should converge too.

Now before someone shouts socialism i would like to mention that this is about solidarity.
The added effect is that it reduces pollution because the very rich pollute a lot more then average income people.

And there is another effect. Research into south or middle american indian societies during periods of climate change showed that highly stratified societies were much more likely to collapse then those who were more equal. Basically the latter could divert all their resources to solve the problem at hand while those with a non productive elite (like most of todays rich) failed to act in time and collapsed.

So the keyword is solidarity. We are one species on one planet. We also have only 1 future which is more and more likely to be really bad if we keep ignoring what science reports about reality.

Basically we have to get beyond nation states but that is the really hard part.
Would free up shit tons of resources.

In fact you could do beautiful things if you diverted half the fraud in the Pentagon to useful investments.

[kassy]

Also

Coronavirus: Exploiting nature 'drives outbreaks of new diseases'

There are strong indications of a wildlife source and a link to trade.

In the latest study, researchers trawled scientific papers for reports of diseases that have crossed from animals to humans, then combined this data with information on extinction risk compiled by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Wild animals at risk of extinction due to human exploitation were found to carry over twice as many viruses that can cause human disease as threatened species listed for other reasons. The same was true for threatened species at risk due to loss of habitat.

"As natural habitat is diminished, wildlife come into closer contact with people," Dr Christine Johnson of the University of California, Davis, US, told BBC News,

"Wildlife also shift their distributions to accommodate anthropogenic activities and modification of the natural landscape. This has hastened disease emergence from wildlife, which put us at risk of pandemics because we are all globally connected through travel and trade."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-52204724

[Sebastian Jones]

An observation out of the blue from a librarian in Edmonton, via Twitter:

"If anything, COVID-19 could be called the Cruise Ship Virus. It may not have originated there, but that totally helped spread it around the world. And unlike China, the cruise ship industry deserves all the hatred and judgement."

Having gone nose-to-nose against the industry, I'm inclined to agree with her. Ask Australia who they blame for their outbreak...

[kassy]

Well Norovirus might object since that is the OG CSV. 

They are one of those excesses which need rethinking. The effect on the target destinations are annoying and if you look just at numbers you probably find out that as a country you earn more from tourists that actually visit your country out of interest and sleep and eat locally.

Long ago i went on a trip to Greece with my mom. Her travel friend had an accident so she needed someone and i joined because the trip was great. So one day the guide announced we would have to go to bed early and get up at 4 or 5. Pretty early for a holiday. This allowed us to go to Delphi at opening hour which was the only way to avoid the crowds due to docking times and travel time from closest port.

We had 2 hours or so and then they came and it ruined the experience. We could look at things in detail but when the busses arrived that was not possible. Basically we were still there because our Greek guide also wanted to show us the crowds and how bad it got.

High end destinations like Venice should just plain refuse them.

[oren]

Regarding the localization of production, for some things it's just not possible. Many countries today do not, and can not, produce enough food to feed their population. Not enough available land, not enough available water, or in other words too much population. There is not much such countries can do to alleviate the problem, besides keeping increased emergency stocks of key food items. However even the best stockpiles cannot last more than a year or so in case of global trade collapse, be it due to plague, war, general food shortages or what have you.
Localizing medical production makes a lot of sense and is feasible, though of course costly. Consumer electronics and clothes people can do without for a long while, so localizing such will not be worth the extra cost. But food is the real monster in the room.
Of course, keeping your population in check and navigating demographics to sustainable levels could help, but no one is going to do that unfortunately.

[Tom_Mazanec]

Of course, keeping your population in check and navigating demographics to sustainable levels could help, but no one is going to do that unfortunately.

oren, actually Japan, Europe and even the United States (sans immigration) are doing or have already done that.

[El Cid]

Regarding the above, a total fertility ratio world map. Basically blue is shrinking population, green is stable/slowly growing, red/yellow is exponential growth.
The way to reduce births is "simple": reduce poverty, educate everyone (especially women), urbanization

[Jim Hunt]

Paul Krugman referencing the Financial Times on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1248205705737314304

"Bank of England to directly finance extra government spending.

Move allows ministers to spend more in the short term to combat coronavirus without tapping the gilts market."

This is basically the equivalent of minting a trillion-dollar platinum coin. It basically shows that advanced countries that borrow in their own currencies don't face financing constraints.

[Sigmetnow]

Fauci on Life After Coronavirus: We Should Never Shake Hands Again

The coronavirus will be the end of the handshake as we know it, if Dr. Anthony Fauci has his way.

The director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, one of the leading experts in the fight against COVID-19 the U.S., told the Wall Street Journal podcast on Tuesday that when the country begins to loosen lockdown restrictions, some behaviors must change.

“When you gradually come back, you don’t jump into it with both feet,” Fauci told podcast host Kate Linebaugh on The Journal, talking about what life might look like when it eventually starts returning to normal. “You say, what are the things you could still do and still approach normal? One of them is absolute compulsive hand-washing. The other is you don’t ever shake anybody’s hands.”

“I don’t think we should ever shake hands ever again, to be honest with you. Not only would it be good to prevent coronavirus disease; it probably would decrease instances of influenza dramatically in this country,” he later added. …

https://time.com/5818134/anthony-fauci-never-shake-hands-coronavirus/

Some alternatives:  Single nod.  Bowing.  Raised hand as if taking a pledge.  Palm or fist placed over the heart.  The Namaste hand position in front of the chest.  The Vulcan salute.