Read this earlier. This is an excellent article.

In short, Sweden accepts that health care is ALWAYS ABOUT TRADE OFFS.

And they believe that harsh regulations will naturally have positive AND negative deleterious consequences...and intelligently, take both into account.

"Fans of Sweden are right to point out that, in the first phase of the disease, the government had a light touch...But that was not a particularly successful approach. Sweden has a fatality rate of around 60 per 100,000, ten times that of Finland and Norway, which did lock down."
"Swedes’ freedom did not spare the economy, even though many deaths were among elderly people no longer working. Output in the second quarter alone shrank by 8.3%—also worse than the other Nordic countries. A high caseload is bad for the economy."
"Sweden’s new strategy for the second phase converges with Germany’s. Contrary to some claims, this is not dependent on herd immunity...entails rapid large-scale testing and contact-tracing so as to identify and suppress outbreaks early...accompanied by consistent [messaging]"
"Swedish policy is not libertarian, but that the government weighs up TRADE-OFFS of each restriction....when someone tests positive, their entire household must go into quarantine, but schoolchildren are exempt...gains are overwhelmed by the lasting harm to their education."
"Likewise, the quarantine lasts five to seven days, compared with two weeks elsewhere. The risk of spreading covid-19 in that second week is small and shrinking, but the harm to mental health of extended isolation is growing."
And what of masks? Govt experts argue evidence that masks help is weak, and that other measures work fine. In this, Sweden is out of step...If the disease charges back there, that is likely to change...its policy is based on evidence and pragmatism, not blind principle."

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.