There were also 3 other localized outbreaks (SARS in 2003, Swine Flu in 2009, MERS in 2012) so that to me sounds like we were 3 viral mutations away from this being the 4th global pandemic in 20 years.

If we're structuring business and our economies such that they fall over or require ~1 trillion dollars for bailouts, every 4-7 years on average, then something is vastly, massively, completely, extremely wrong with our approach.

I don't care how many economics nobel prizes are racked up by theorists; or about efficient market theory and blah blah blah. These systems are failing in the real world and that's the only existence proof needed.

Running a just-in-time razor-thin-margins all-profits-reinvested-no-savings business is great in theory but apparently the wind blowing from the wrong direction destroys it all. It has the feeling of the economics/finance version of a physicist assuming a spherical car in a perfect vacuum with a point source of gravity when designing a system that has to survive actual usage.

Those who prepare well (3-6 months of reserves) will be ok, other businesses will need to perish to teach others a lesson.

You are literally advocating "Privatize the gains, socialize the losses", no?

'It's ok that the (public) government bails them out, because the (private) companies made even more money'

A recession is not.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_Unit...:

1969, 1973, 1981, 1990, 2000, 2007 - a recession of US economy at least every 10 years, like a clockwork.

So, if you're a CEO of an airline and you're giving away 90% of your cash to shareholders instead of saving it to last few months when business declines, then it's an obvious failure of planning.

Or, more accurately, it's yet another case of "It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It."

CEO salaries and bonuses are tied to performance of the stock (because they are set by board of directors, who are there to represent shareholders). So they spend the money to buy back the shares which increases the share price and their bonuses.

It's really simple if you know the incentives.

The big problem is that companies are focused on the quarter rather than the decade. Imagine the innovation we would have in technology if companies were willing to take a loss for years on worthy inventions, rather than only putting forward readily profitable projects.

The point is, unprepared leaders will see their firms go out of business, but based on the number of firms that seem to never be prepared, it seems the standard incentive isn’t enough. Thus it warrants discussion on how to align leadership incentives to prepare in advance. If we had businesses that could weather 3 months of crisis, whatever the crisis without triggering a depression the entire economy would be better off. Yet here we are.