The core of the analogy made was that economic models rarely account for basically any variables that all other reality-based models have to live on.
Yeah your analogy highlights the silliness of designing for EVERY particular catalyst for failure. But it’d be a better comparison if you were saying it’d be more like if plane builders never considered the possibility at all that they might encounter bad air, an adversarial’s airspace, or engine failure.
But plane builders do a whole lot more in terms of “what if bad thing x happened” than priests, politicians, and economists, maybe not JUST due to the direct, unambiguous impact of failure.
But plane builders do a whole lot more in terms of “what if bad thing x happened” than priests, politicians, and economists, maybe not JUST due to the direct, unambiguous impact of failure.