Having past events to look at doesn’t inherently make analysis of a sufficiently complex issue any more certain, it’s just another data point. The title was specifically used to draw an emotional response and it achieved that goal by at least one person. Concluding the argument with ‘there’s no precedent so we can’t say’ is lazy at best but the reality is the title was chosen for the exact reason you blame the audience for delivering on. Tons of information can be broken down and analyzed in a way that even aspects of it would have comparable historical events. I doubt the economists that did the research would devolve their efforts into ‘eh, no clue, never happened before, we’re really only able to have ideas about things that have historical patterns which is really inconvenient’.

What the commenter was doing is expressing frustration over a failed system the article is covering. Calling someone stupid for expressing frustrations in an online comment over a failed system the article is about seems detached from reality or overly emotional and self centered. Stop jerking yourself off sometimes and recognize people will respond to things with emotions at times, especially on something with the barrier of entry being ‘can access the internet’.