Well, we could just ‘appeal to authority’ on things but then why have Hacker News, where intelligent people can come and discuss things?
As for this specific question, it’s the same thing people said in 2007 about mortgages: “these are experts - what makes you think they haven’t adequately considered the risk?”
This is not an appeal to authority. The comment in question was insinuating that people (who?) will return using JIT inventories (return from what?) because they don't foresee the dangers the commenter in question can see. (What dangers? What does the commenter propose instead? To whom?)
What you mistake for an appeal to authority is in reality a plea to consider the question deeper than in a 147 character snide remark. After all there are people who spend day in, day out thinking about supply chains, so maybe they have thought about this deeper than what fits into that many characters?
For example one of the sibling comments here writes that while JIT might be in the companies interest it's not in society's interest. That is a super interesting question. Properly unpacking even just the question would take a lot more characters.
Or maybe there are some systemic biasses which makes logistic experts blind to these looming dangers?
Or maybe actually everything is fine and the sky is not falling? I assume people are not making as much money as they could, but is anyone going to go cold/hungry/loosing their job because of this incident in some way I don't see yet?
All of these questions and more could provide the substance for a worthy discussion in a way a snide remark can't.
As for this specific question, it’s the same thing people said in 2007 about mortgages: “these are experts - what makes you think they haven’t adequately considered the risk?”