At a Time of Lockdowns, Sweden Thankfully Tries Something Different
The jury is still out on whether their policy was better than ours. But we need different “laboratories” trying different techniques if we are to maximize our chances of quelling this pandemic.
It is black letter law in economics that competition brings about a better product, at a lower cost, than monopoly. Indeed, our anti-trust laws are predicated on little else. But this insight is not limited to the dismal science narrowly construed. It also has relevance to our present attempts to wrestle Covid 19 to the ground, and pin its shoulders to the mat.
In what dimensions, then, might this competition occur? Thank goodness we have several hundred nations, and not one World Government. That means that these jurisdictions can impose different levels of closures of their populations; they can do so on different dates; as well, the timing of their re-openings may vary. As well many countries have different numbers of subdivisions. In the U.S. there are 50. Canada has 10. Germany, 16, etc. Each of these smaller jurisdictions may utilize different techniques to quell the virus.
Is this the be-all and end-all of the matter? Of course not. It would be very difficult for any one consideration, such as this, to pull off a victory. It's not just Sweden, right? There are multiple laboratories in just the U.S. Georgia is different from Ohio is different from New York is different from California. And Germany is different from the UK, South Korea from Japan. How, then, do we learn anything useful from these very different experiments? How do we know whether one place is succeeding because of specific policies, or because of some other unknown factor or because of sheer luck, when we can't really control variables?
Saying the foregoing is like waving a red flag not in front of the bull, but in the face of econometricians. Their professional lives are dedicated to little other than such challenges. They eat, sleep, breathe these sorts of obstacles. “Can’t control variables?” Don’t tell that to a member of this tribe. Without diversity of approaches to this challenge, the job of these economic statisticians is dead in the water. With it, they may, or may not, be able to overcome these serious obstructions in time to do any good. Even if not, they may be able to uncover useful information for the next virus to come down the pike. It seems those little critters never give up. All the more reason for us to support institutional arrangements which will at least allow our econometricians to take a hack at them. In a word, different strokes for different folks.
Sometimes, in order to see the merits of any one suggestion, it helps to consider a hypothetical where its complete absence reigns. President Donald Trump can help in our deliberations on this matter.
In his view, he has “absolute authority” to reopen the economy, or not, exactly as he pleases. He also tweeted “Liberate Minnesota” in an attempt to undermine the authority of that’s state’s governor in his attempt to deal with the challenge of the pandemic on a more local level. (Of course, Trump has shifted his stance on this and many other issues. Broken field runners in football have nothing on our president. But that is a separate matter.)
Other statements in this regard from our Fearless Leader include the following: “For the purpose of creating conflict and confusion, some in the Fake News Media are saying that it is the Governors decision to open up the states, not that of the President of the United States & the Federal Government. Let it be fully understood that this is incorrect…” And then there was this, “The governors need to do the right thing and allow these very important essential places of faith to open right now, for this weekend… If they don’t do it, I will override the governors.”
Are there any guarantees that a diverse system, based on times of closures, dates of relaxing social distancing, severity of the lockdown, will solve this puzzle? No. Of course not. But which is better? The Trumpian direction of one size fits all, or having different folks try different remedies, and then, imperfectly, trying to figure out what works best? You don’t have be a victim of Trump Derangement Syndrome to see that this man is leading us in the exact wrong direction.
Thank God for Sweden. It is the poster boy for adopting an alternative policy. Right now, it does not look like a success. Health czar Anders Tegnell has had second thoughts. Next door Norway has so far suffered fewer deaths, proportionately. But if Sweden achieves herd immunity sooner, the tables may be turned. In any case, we can learn from that experiment. I am not supporting any one way of addressing this issue, certainly not the Swedish. I am, instead, calling for divergences, alternatives, diversity, variety, deviations from the norm. Let us not put all our eggs in one basket.
