This week, I’ll stitch together some thoughts on our ticket off the Covid-19 train, also known as the “vaccine”. I am prompted by Georges Pearkes’ challenge to come up with why it might be a bad idea to given people $1500, or another monetary amount, as an incentive to take the vaccine. First things first, it’s very possible that our main problem next year is that we won’t have enough of this thing. Paradoxically, the prospect of a vaccine dealing a killer blow to the virus in the middle of next year has created an incentive for authorities to maintain tighter restrictions in the short run—well into Q1, at least—while we wait for the shot. After all, if the virus is gone tomorrow, the cost of an infection today increases, a lot. A reasonable counterpoint is that governments aren’t masochists, and some form of reopening will happen in Q1, but the point I am getting is simple in the end. Assuming the vaccine is rolled out by early Spring, on the back of a miserably semi-locked down winter, it’s more likely than not that people will be scrambling for a jab, especially in an environment where the vaccine becomes a ticket to otherwise restricted activities via a form of passport. In such a situation, we won’t have to pay people to take the shot. We’ll have to make sure it isn’t hoarded. As for the counterpoint, I am not convinced that the rise of anti-vaxxers—known in the literature as "vaccine hesitancy”—can be applied to predict a threat to the effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccine efforts. That said, early survey evidence suggest that hesitancy might be an issue, especially at the margin where the line between failure and success is drawn.
Read MoreI this video I discuss patriotism and nationalism in Europe and in the U.K., using the Brexit referendum as a case study. I open the video by reading an excerpt from a recent article in the Point magazine, in which editor Jon Baskin interviews Princeton professor George Kateb about his writings, ideas and thoughts on patriotism. The views expressed here are mine and mine alone, and as I say in the introduction, I am using Mr. Kateb’s arguments out of context, which is to say, I am using the very specific points he makes to Baskin as an amouche bouche for my discussion. I am not familiar with Mr. Kateb’s writings at large. Though I don’t mention him directly, I have also been inspired by recent comments by Douglas Murray, and conversations between him and other interviewers, relating to the oddness of being ashamed of one's history and heritage. I apologise for the cover of my notebook protruding annoyingly in the bottom of the frame.
Thanks, as always, for watching.
Read MoreI have belatedly revived my Youtube Channel, with two videos. The first elaborates on the points I made in my recent post about the state of the world—and my dissatisfaction of it—and the second updates my view on markets in line with points I made here, with a shout out to two other podcasts that I think you should check out; the BIP show and Odd Lots. I will try to do a video once a week, and I will think about uploading the MP3 files for people who prefer to listen, without watching. The point is that it’s impossible to start with an audio file and upgrade to a video, but the other way around is relatively easy. I am not willing to revive my Soundcloud account, though, but I think Squarespace supports an Apple podcast channel. Stay tuned. In any case, you head over to my Youtube channel and subscribe if you’re just interested in that type of content. Alternatively, I’ll post everything on the main blog.
Read MoreI have been warming up to this post for a few weeks, even if what’s being said mostly isn’t me saying it. As I have argued on previous occasions, it has become customary to claim that the world is going to hell in a hurry, and that the only solution to this problem is to tear civilisation down, and start anew. I am on record for rejecting both these hypotheses, though for the sake of argument, let’s say that I concede the former. Let’s say that I accept the premise that the way we’re doing things—capitalism, globalisation etc—is in need of fundamental re-design. What would be the most important prerequisite for such a project to succeed?
I’d argue that at whatever level of society such an endeavour is made, it can only prevail if everyone shares an objective method for sorting fact from fiction, truth from false, and sense from nonsense. Without such tools, any such project, at any degree of ambition, would fail. Luckily, humanity has powerful tools at its disposal for such inquiries in the form of science, technology and epistemology. Coupled with good faith, tolerance, compassion and mutual respect, I think that we could achieve just about anything that we set out to achieve. So, what are our chances? Based on the recent evidence, I’d say; slim to none.
Read More