To the Polypropylene Makers
lesswrong.com
lesswrong.com
I know some people really believe that people are only motivated by monetary incentives, but this isn't the reality of mankind. People do make sacrifice without monetary compensation all the time. (And many, many, did during covid)
Unlike what microeconomics-obsessed people think, workers don't make sophistivated economic calculations, instead they mostly care about being treated fairly.
And I glad people aren't like how microeconomics model them, because the world simply wouldn't work otherwise.
Busting a gut to make some shareholders/managers loads of money isn't exactly fair if you aren't also being rewarded.
On the other hand, in the UK the NHS has traditionally paid people extra on the understanding that these things happen. But when it did happen the staff were asking for even more. I know this probably comes across as right wing, but my point is how we reward people for black swan events.
Exactly. But it's not a matter of “being paid more than the marginal value of the additional work” as microeconomics tend to frame those things.
Symmetrically, people routinely accept pay cut or degraded work conditions when the company isn't going well, even though it makes no sense from a game theory perspective (it's basically a prisoners' dilemma yet people cooperate most of the time).
This factory could afford to upscale because they could sell their product for a much higher price, and pay their workers much more to do so.
However if they had already sold the factories output for the regular price via a futures contract (ie. 1 ton of polypropylene for delivery in June for $2000), then the story would be different.
Futures contracts are widely used as a way to take the risk out of doing things, but the side effect is your economy loses all incentive to be flexible to changing needs.
They may have existing futures contracts at the prior price and quantity but if quantity demanded has increased, then that means there are new orders as well that would be at the new, higher, market price.
The article is about them increasing their output. They could have sold the factories previous expected output via a futures contract. That doesn't stop them increasing output and selling in excess of any futures contracts.
Are people on average still not able to accept the whole thing was idiotic from start to finish? The very idea masking ever helped a single person avoid getting covid is just stilly at this point, right? Otherwise we'd still be doing it or at least getting the vaccine, I don't know anyone that's gotten it the last 3 years.
Article would have been better from the angle of, "look at all the stupid stuff people were doing, ha" not, "these people were HEROES!" At best they were misled, at worst, profiteer idiots.
I haven't gotten a diphtheria vax since I was a child. What a waste of time!
If masks don't do anything why do surgeons wear them?
The fact that the efficacy of a surgical mask is more difficult to prove does not mean that it doesn't work. And, as you point out, the major benefit is to the people around you so that you don't unintentionally spread the disease before you realize you have it.
You should either cite evidence or amend your claim.
Virus spread follows exponential/logistic growth. Something could reduce spread 5% per month and that would still have an extremely big impact in a pandemic that lasted years. It's not necessary for any of the precautions to have been remotely close to 100% effective to argue they were helpful and important.
Elderly in Sweden got hurt really badly while the very youngest didn't have the education losses seen elsewhere.
However, Swedes, unlike dumbass Americans, took sensible precautions even though there weren't required by law.
> Swedes were not forced to take action against the spread of the virus, but they did so anyway. This voluntary approach might not have worked everywhere, but Sweden has a history of high trust in authorities, and people tend to comply with public health recommendations.
> In its final report on the pandemic response, the Corona Commission concluded that tougher measures should have been taken early in the pandemic, such as quarantine for those returning from high-risk areas and a temporary ban on entry to Sweden.
You're taking some partial truths (sure, some responses were overblown, though some were frustratingly half-measures too) and making an enormous logical leap that the entire response was "idiotic from start to finish".
You can't assume that because we eventually ended certain interventions, they never did anything at all. You're retrojecting.
Only a week??? I mean, we are all going to be replaced with AI any day now, but were it not the case, I'm fully expecting to see an American company to offer, as a benefit, "we will collect and bring your remains to the workplace if you by accident die outside."