by Summary:
The worst thing for the economy would be not acting at all to prevent disease spread, followed by too short a lockdown, according to research based on US data.New research from the University of Cambridge suggests that there is no absolute trade-off between the economy and human health – and that the price of inaction could be twice as high as that of a 'structured lockdown.Economic damage could be worse without lockdown and social distancing – study
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
The worst thing for the economy would be not acting at all to prevent disease spread, followed by too short a lockdown, according to research based on US data.New research from the University of Cambridge suggests that there is no absolute trade-off between the economy and human health – and that the price of inaction could be twice as high as that of a 'structured lockdown.Economic damage could be worse without lockdown and social distancing – study
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Jodi Beggs writes Economists Do It With Models 1970-01-01 00:00:00
Mike Norman writes 24 per cent annual interest on time deposits: St Petersburg Travel Notes, installment three — Gilbert Doctorow
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Daniel Waldenströms rappakalja om ojämlikheten
Merijn T. Knibbe writes ´Fryslan boppe´. An in-depth inspirational analysis of work rewarded with the 2024 Riksbank prize in economic sciences.
The worst thing for the economy would be not acting at all to prevent disease spread, followed by too short a lockdown, according to research based on US data.
New research from the University of Cambridge suggests that there is no absolute trade-off between the economy and human health – and that the price of inaction could be twice as high as that of a 'structured lockdown.