[Veedrac]

This doesn't actually demonstrate that it's difficult, just that it's expensive. If the government is willing to eat any sunk cost from oversupply, everything becomes predictable. In the case of COVID, it's hard to imagine any quantity of hand sanitizer and respirators doing more damage than the harm they prevent.

[Sherl]

>expensive

you deal those with scenario planning, which might be the sole responsibility of pandemic unit. We use casual loop diagrams to understand effects when math cant be drawn out on abstract problems.

Its insanely expensive to satisfy 99% populations requirement versus 95% of populations requirement but when that happens and if the consequence are severe we manage those supply chains with redundancy and the costs are absorbed with other players. Sure, it would profitable to operate without this but my understanding is when this sh*t hits everything falls.

$15 billion savings in 2018 resulted in $12 trillion being wiped out in two weeks.

>https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/31/coronavirus-china-trump...

>https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market...

[hef19898]

For one product, yes. For multiple product sharing resources it gets difficult as over production for one product might directly result in shortages for another.

Production hand sanitizer and masks and such is being ramped up, now that Chinese factories are slowly going back online. Things like that take some time, so.