Thanks. Having the actual article is key, because in the vast majority cases they're referring to the main impact of the epidemics was an actual loss of a significant portion of the workforce in a short period of time from death. In this case we actually have the opposite problem, a loss of a significant part of the work in a short period of time while the workforce size remains the same. As a result, it doesn't really make sense to apply the impact of past pandemics to today's unless you were to do so in a convoluted, "do the opposite" kind of way which isn't necessarily relevant either.Sorry, I should have posted it in the first post:
https://www.bccourier.com/the-fed-has-been-investigating-epidemics-for-600-years/
Thanks. Having the actual article is key, because in the vast majority cases they're referring to the main impact of the epidemics was an actual loss of a significant portion of the workforce in a short period of time from death. In this case we actually have the opposite problem, a loss of a significant part of the work in a short period of time while the workforce size remains the same. As a result, it doesn't really make sense to apply the impact of past pandemics to today's unless you were to do so in a convoluted, "do the opposite" kind of way which isn't necessarily relevant either.