Economists the world over have been trying to determine the potential economic impact of the swine flu outbreak.  Olivier Blanchard, the chief economist for the IMF, speaking at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace yesterday, said "The information that we have at this stage is it is a relatively minor (economic ) event."  And yet Bloomberg reports that there is a possibility the price tag could reach $3 trillion:

Regardless of what the long term impact will be on the global economy, it is clear that Mexico's economy is already taking a hit.  And Mexico's problems will likely affect the US economy in at least two ways, according to Ali Veshi, CNN's chief business correspondent:

1) America’s travel industry could lose a lot in a health crisis. As mentioned earlier, U.S. travel companies have already started responding to concerns about travel to Mexico, which only accounts for a small percentage of overall revenue. The real concern for the industry going forward is the fallout the flu scare could have on domestic travel, which accounts for almost 90 percent of total revenue.

2) U.S. agriculture exports could suffer. As with Russia’s recent example, many countries responded with bans on U.S. meat imports when small outbreaks of mad cow disease and foot-and-mouth disease led to some culling of herds in this country — bans that took years to overturn.

Meanwhile, Simon Johnson says economists should take note of how public health officials respond to crisis as compared with leaders of the financial sector.  

The biggest issue, of course, is that pre-emptively organizing for and dealing with health pandemics does nothing to ruffle the feathers of powerful interests in the health sector, be it doctors, health care providers, insurers or drug companies. They have built a system that derives its value partly from our being (appropriately, for the most part) worried.

In contrast, while finance talks a lot about risk, those involved in it have tried to create the impression that they understand and can manage risks — so, for a (modest?) fee, you don’t have anything to worry about. This, it turns out, is incorrect.

Sounds like he is glad economists aren't called upon to solve the swine flu outbreak.  Read his full post here.