[evilgenius]

. Well, normal households can't create money through an act of law.

.

A country, even the USA can not print money indefinitely or they will end up like Zimbabwe with billion dollar bills good only for latrine paper.
For citizens there are sound reasons to borrow money such as a house to live in while building equity in it or a car to commute to a job that pays the bills. There are also unsound reasons for borrowing as well. Vacations, entertainment, excessive spending etc. All gain nothing for the purchaser and retain no value even to the point when the bills come due.
Governments also have good and bad reasons to borrow. An interstate highway system good, studies why monkeys clench their jaws bad. National defense , good,Pork barrel defense contracts the military does not need or want, Bad.
The present rescue package is and was necessary but we will soon come to the point where further spending will not save the economy or lives and will be beyond our ability to pay back and that debt if taken on will cause more harm then the Covid-19 will.

My heart tells me it's a bad idea to debate you about this because we are not that far apart. But spending on basic research is essential for any forward thinking economy. Investment done in such a manner by the government is derisively looked upon by most conservatives. They want direct links to their outcomes, not bounty that offers itself to more than a small group that initiated it. Studying grasshopper spit or monkey clenching is like that. The real trick lies in ensuring that the results are open to all, so that science can be advanced. For some, doing that also ticks too many xenophobic boxes.

Competition, if we can see it that way, can then be more about how we promote the educational landscape at home, or not. It's too easy to complain about immigration while doing nothing to promote the competency and capability of our own. We don't see the class struggle in how the process rolls out. It threatens the ease with which the in-group's progeny can succeed. It's the kind of thing that some have come to call racist. I don't think it is racism, but class struggle. There is plenty of evidence that people of all types, race being only one way of interpreting prevailing power, behave this way once they get into power.

[Newfie]

Yes, I miss typed, I meant folks who had been infected and received immunity.

So let me try this again...

So the comparison weals between STockholm and NY CITY.
One tried to lockdown hard.
One tried a very loose lock down.
......

It is too early to tell which city had the better outcome and why. Stockholm has about 1.8 million people and has very different living conditions then New York and much less ethnic diversity. Truly an apples to Oranges comparison before the different Covid-19 strategies. The government there has backtracked on one report saying they discovered an error in it that they did not make public as of yet. New cases countrywide in Sweden have not dropped off yet with a new daily high yesterday of 812.
A month or two from now things will be clearer.

I agree that it’s too early to tell with any certainty. 2 months even may be too early. It’s still an interesting question. We will see.

[Newfie]

Real,

Thanks for that response.

[Outcast_Searcher]

. Well, normal households can't create money through an act of law.

A country, even the USA can not print money indefinitely or they will end up like Zimbabwe with billion dollar bills good only for latrine paper.
Vacations, entertainment, excessive spending etc. All gain nothing for the purchaser and retai For citizens there are sound reasons to borrow money such as a house to live in while building equity in it or a car to commute to a job that pays the bills. There are also unsound reasons for borrowing as well.

...

The present rescue package is and was necessary but we will soon come to the point where further spending will not save the economy or lives and will be beyond our ability to pay back and that debt if taken on will cause more harm then the Covid-19 will.

Yes. And with all the new piled up debt, more taxes AND less spending should be the rule going forward (but it won't, for the usual litany of excuses, which means we just significantly accelerated the timeline of the debt problem -- best case).

I still think TPTB figure they can greatly discount the debt through another significant amount of inflation, like the 70's, and they'll resort to that if it begins to look like repaying the debt is in enough doubt to cause confidence problems. But of course, THAT causes greatly escalating interest rates, so I'm not convinced that works out too well over time.

I think the odds of multi-decades of relative US prosperity are being reduces significantly as this plays out. I hope I'm wrong.

I suppose one could diversify into more alternate currencies, ex-US stocks, etc. but that has risks as well. It's not like every other major country is IN ANY WAY some major bastion of financial strength, after all.

[Newfie]

None the less it seems too Alison has been dealt a blow.

I doubt it’s a knock out but it did show vulnerabilities.

Perhaps more interesting is the oil situation. If nothing else it shows we are not as much in control of things as we would like to think.

This interaction of the SA/Russia spat with the virus indicates we are not very agile or far thinking. That there are inherit weakness’ to the global financial “system.”

I do foresee some localization or essential resources. And an erosion of trust in the global markets.

How deep is anyone’s guess. This Covad seems to be more than a little tricky to quantify, that will make the recovery more difficult and push localization.

[REAL Green]

I do foresee some localization or essential resources. And an erosion of trust in the global markets.

I see more regionalism of an adapted globalism IOW value chains will continue but in regional less exposed circumstances. Some global ones will remain because they just can’t be adapted much o they are lost. This means only marginal improvements to the problems of brittle resilience of globalism. There is little that is sustainable about globalism but we are trapped in this with a carbon trap and path dependencies that got us to this point. Localization will get a nudge from the decline of globalism. The pandemic will get people to revaluate urbanization and the dangers inherent in globalization from travel and food sourcing but how much can we do. The world is in overshoot with population and consumption so we are again trapped. The system will resist proactive degrowth and even react irrationally to systematic forced degrowth that is not a policy but instead a result of a process of decline. What can come out of this last two years of decline is a realization globalism has peaked and appears to have more to slide down. This means the astute will plan accordingly. I recommend a thorough risk management evaluation of ones local of people and place in this time of decline. At least get mentally prepared. Life prevents material changes but not so much the mental kind. Modern life just works to confuse with the noise of propaganda and false hope so try to turn some of it off.

How deep is anyone’s guess. This Covad seems to be more than a little tricky to quantify, that will make the recovery more difficult and push localization.

I see a partial recovery in an overall decline so just a hiccup before more decline. The reality is globalism took a huge demand shock across the board for a significant amount of time. This will mean there will be GDP that will likely be gone for good. The fabric of the global system has been altered and frayed. We still don’t know how bad the damage nor how a self-organizing response will coalesce once lockdowns lift. There is then the tensions of further lockdowns in the fall/winter? This is not a good outlook because that means more demand shocks. Meanwhile, essential and vital resources like food and energy are being impacted. Food productivity has taken a huge hit in the last 2 years from economics, climate, and now a demand shock. Energy is now severely impacted. These two vital areas of the human system will likely not reboot to the level they were at. This is happening as we add 80MIL new consumers a year. Something will give because that is physics no amount of techno-optimism can argue away.

[Newfie]

It will interesting to see what happens in India and the area. Daily deaths are rising as they move to reduce lockdown.

I was predicting a huge hit there, which would further the fear and errors the markets. Now I’m not so sure. But it seems I’m far from alone, and in some way that might be an even bigger hit on globalization. Investors don’t like this uncertainty.

I still think the most likely outcome is a modest return to BAU, but at some lower level than before. But there remains a possibility of something more profound.

[JuanP]

I still think the most likely outcome is a modest return to BAU, but at some lower level than before. But there remains a possibility of something more profound.

That is exactly what I think, too.

[vtsnowedin]

Instead of BAU I think we will get "Business as Changed" BAC with some industries gone or greatly diminished (Air lines, cruse ships) with others modified or brand new growing by leaps and bounds.
Perhaps we will have an explosion of Door men that open the door for you so only he touches the handle. By appointment restaurant reservations so you are shown to your booth (negative air pressure) without waiting in line or needing to touch any surface. Ordering by the screen on the table and food and drink delivered by waiters in full PPE if not by a robot.
The drive in burger joint of the fifties where you eat in your car may have a resurgence.
We live in interesting times.

[evilgenius]

You can't be going for a 5 year plan. You know how poorly central planning is at answering perturbations within the economy.

[vtsnowedin]

You can't be going for a 5 year plan. You know how poorly central planning is at answering perturbations within the economy.

Who proposed a five year plan?

[evilgenius]

You can't be going for a 5 year plan. You know how poorly central planning is at answering perturbations within the economy.

Who proposed a five year plan?

I'm ribbing you because of the reliance upon nationalism over capitalism.

[vtsnowedin]

You can't be going for a 5 year plan. You know how poorly central planning is at answering perturbations within the economy.

Who proposed a five year plan?

I'm ribbing you because of the reliance upon nationalism over capitalism.

You feel you can not be capitalist and nationalist at the same time?

[evilgenius]

You can't be going for a 5 year plan. You know how poorly central planning is at answering perturbations within the economy.

Who proposed a five year plan?

I'm ribbing you because of the reliance upon nationalism over capitalism.

You feel you can not be capitalist and nationalist at the same time?

You don't want to conflate the two. The one has a truth detector that operates daily, markets. The other asks you to be a good fan and accept anything done in its name. I think in the aftermath of the pandemic many will want the sort of answers that only emotion can provide. Nationalism is good at providing those. It's not so good at dealing with the unintended consequences. Full scale war is only one of those. There are gradations that fill the space between an innocuous response and the worst sort of response. Some of those are defined by other sorts of wars. It would be different if nationalists didn't so often choose war. If I believed that reordering and getting right an educational system that placed far more Americans into higher skill level jobs as a matter of course was going to be the nationalist response I wouldn't be so pessimistic. But that's what the nationalist response should have been for the last several decades, while nationalism has only been getting stronger, and it just hasn't happened at any level that has had any impact upon issues such as immigration, or rust belt unemployment, or the nation's drug problem. It's far too easy to respond to the beat of a drum.

[vtsnowedin]

You can't be going for a 5 year plan. You know how poorly central planning is at answering perturbations within the economy.

Who proposed a five year plan?[/quote]
[Vtsnowedin]

You feel you can not be capitalist and nationalist at the same time?

You don't want to conflate the two. The one has a truth detector that operates daily, markets. The other asks you to be a good fan and accept anything done in its name. I think in the aftermath of the pandemic many will want the sort of answers that only emotion can provide. Nationalism is good at providing those. It's not so good at dealing with the unintended consequences. Full scale war is only one of those. There are gradations that fill the space between an innocuous response and the worst sort of response. Some of those are defined by other sorts of wars. It would be different if nationalists didn't so often choose war. If I believed that reordering and getting right an educational system that placed far more Americans into higher skill level jobs as a matter of course was going to be the nationalist response I wouldn't be so pessimistic. But that's what the nationalist response should have been for the last several decades, while nationalism has only been getting stronger, and it just hasn't happened at any level that has had any impact upon issues such as immigration, or rust belt unemployment, or the nation's drug problem. It's far too easy to respond to the beat of a drum.[/quote]


You are looking at Nationalism in view of what people have done in the past using that label for their propaganda. Hitler being exhibit A.
I am considering Nationalism as supporting positions and policies that actually support the countries interest in the long term thereby securing a safer and more prosperous future for all it's citizens.
Having all your critical drugs supplied by a competitor and possible future enemy is not in the nations interest. Being a good neighbor that treats other countries fairly promotes peace and is also in the nations interest.
Hopefully after Covid-19 we will have some intelligent leaders making wise decisions about what is in our interest and not have some despot ginning up the mob to seize power.

[REAL Green]

[Vtsnowedin]

I am considering Nationalism as supporting positions and policies that actually support the countries interest in the long term thereby securing a safer and more prosperous future for all it's citizens. Having all your critical drugs supplied by a competitor and possible future enemy is not in the nations interest. Being a good neighbor that treats other countries fairly promotes peace and is also in the nations interest. Hopefully after Covid-19 we will have some intelligent leaders making wise decisions about what is in our interest and not have some despot ginning up the mob to seize power.

Nationalism that is not clouded with destructive propaganda and extremism seeking conquest could be related to a type of localism. It could be constructed as a national level of ideas of localism. This is extremely important. People and place of nations that have commonality responding together to a situation in their common interest is very important. So, in this regard nationalism is an important response to the decline of globalism. Globalism cannot be rejected completely either because we went too far into it, we are now trapped in it for at least a generation or until collapse. Collapse is a potent force in front of us to avoid together because at this point it is our behavior that will collapse us. Maybe eventually collapse is inevitable because the planet wills it but right now it is us that can end it.

The global situation is one of overshoot with populations and consumption so this means nationalism will have to respect the nationalism of other nations in a multipolar globalism in decline. If we can avoid the destructive side of nationalism which is the extreme competitive side and instead focus on each nation of nationalist to find their place in an over crowded world then we see a modern version of a new nationalism. This new nationalism is a desirable force of change in a decaying globalism. A new nationalism is localism but at a global scale.

A world that shrinks its footprint will have to start with the nation state because that is the only effective mechanism at the moment. Regions within the nations can then do their part if the global family of nation states have stability. From regions then locals of small communities and individuals can play their part.

I am not at all certain nation states can make this leap of faith in each other’s best interest but it is the only way. So, if the great powers can get a taste of how bad it could get from the COVID demand shock maybe there will be more talk of cooperation at the international level. Globalism1 with American hegemony is over. A multipolar globalism2 of a declined economic global world that was a destructive hyper-capitalism is now a new reality albeit not realized by most people.

[vtsnowedin]

A world that shrinks its footprint will have to start with the nation state because that is the only effective mechanism at the moment. Regions within the nations can then do their part if the global family of nation states have stability. From regions then locals of small communities and individuals can play their part.

.

In a world that has 240,000 net new people every day who or what nation can shrink it's footprint?

[REAL Green]

A world that shrinks its footprint will have to start with the nation state because that is the only effective mechanism at the moment. Regions within the nations can then do their part if the global family of nation states have stability. From regions then locals of small communities and individuals can play their part.

.

In a world that has 240,000 net new people every day who or what nation can shrink it's footprint?

Nations will attempt to grow becuase of the natural urge to survival and individual wants of comfort and affluence. 240,000 new people a day is part of this but remember that population growth is focus somewhat in nations that are less relevant to consumption forces that influence footprints. The consumptive nations are trending down in population growth. Forces of change will force this footprint shrinking activity by coalescing in a self-organizing fashion as billions of decisions develop a force of risk off and safety on. Risk off is less organic growth. This may not be an overt policy push but an organic grass roots response. The fact that populations continue to grow matters initially by restricting any nations ability to respond with a smaller foot print. It is also the case that competitive forces prevent a mutual decline effort. Nations will try to edge out others. My point is a systematic force of change caused by abandonment, dysfunction, and the irrational in regards to the growth meme of a previous world pre-COVID demand shock is now in operation. Decline forces were apparent pre-COVID but COVID popped the growth bubble. Will a new bubble inflate? I was fooled in 08 but this time I am banking on degrowth forces. So, it is a condition of many forces in operation but some gaining traction and others declining.

[vtsnowedin]

Real Green:

My point is a systematic force of change caused by abandonment, dysfunction, and the irrational in regards to the growth meme of a previous world pre-COVID demand shock is now in operation.

I very much doubt that. A chaotic bag of mixed messages is more likely.
Consider China and India between them 36 percent of world population ,both rapidly modernizing and using more energy per capita each year. China's population growth is expected to reach zero about 2030 But India's not until about 2060. I'll believe a systematic force for degrowth in those two countries when I see it.

[REAL Green]

Real Green:

My point is a systematic force of change caused by abandonment, dysfunction, and the irrational in regards to the growth meme of a previous world pre-COVID demand shock is now in operation.

I very much doubt that. A chaotic bag of mixed messages is more likely.

I agree, I never said it was a dominant force more like a new force of an end and a beginning of a process of the end of growth as we knew it. This may be a new ceiling to future growth. This probably means a popped bubble with limited reflation. Just becuase China and India want to grow and attempt to grow does not mean it is real and productive. In many cases over the past decade we saw China's growth was partially mal-investment that is now dragging down good growth so now the nation is facing growth stalling forces. Excess capacity is everywhere and even the BRI now has stranded assets. One unit of debt is yielding a fraction of what it used to. The forces of growth good or bad are still strong but systematic degrowth is now a force that can be appreciated at least from those who know what to look for. In the past with easing and repression degrowth was papered over with happy face growth of all kinds.