Taleb's variation of Lindy's law says that whatever is fragile, will go bust. The life expectancy of non-perishable things is proportional to their current age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect Does that apply to country stability? Markets seem to think so, right now the US government can borrow at 2-3% for maturities extending to decades. Switzerland can borrow at even lower interest rates. These were two pretty big 'stability' havens over the last 100 years. Markets seem to think that will continue Yet, its possible that the Lindy Effect is offset by the Minsky Cycle culminating in a Minsky Moment. Stability leads to instability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsky_moment So, which theory wins out?
Both are valid and sensible. Minsky's observations don't detract from Lindy's law (and in any case the two tend to apply within different frames of reference).
Like a black swan, you really cannot predict when a country will go unstable, just look at history, a weaken country will hang on for a long time but will go bust rather quickly and unexpectedly. So lenders will collect their 2-3% until they cannot collect which they can never modeled, i.e., the Minsky moment. So it is like some of us selling options for a living.