Neoliberalism created long and often convoluted supply chains to countries with cheap labor. They were temporary disrupted by the
epidemic as China slowed down. in January and February. But as of March China restored over 80% of its production capabilities
disrupted by the virus). So now the question is how disruptive will the epidemics for the USA itself. Certain sectors a such are
airlines, oil industry, hospitality and restaurants are already feeling the impact.
As far as I understand that disease (highly infectious virus phenomena) can serve as a catalyst for the economic recession and as
such is a very serious economic challenge (betting
odds on a US recession recently jumped from 25% to 32% ), much less a public health challenge (despite MSM hyping the threat,
the mortality is probably between one and two percent), lower for younger folk and people without serious chronic diseases
(especially cardiovascular and lungs related; smokers can be added to the latter category), higher for people over 60 and with
chronic diseases. Data confirm that children and teenagers appear are both less susceptible to this infection (approx.
ten times less that people in their 30th) and if infected (typically in the family) have much better prognosis (almost no critical
cases). Like any flu epidemic this infection kills mainly old and already sick folk, especially with heart diseases, lung diseases
(including heavy smokers), and suppressed immune system.
In view of USA media hysteria about Coronavirus COVEL-19, we need to concentrate on facts, not fears. And below I will try to provide some of them (as little as know about this issue, as
I am a programmer, not a virologist ;-) Looks like healthy people younger then 60 have little to fear but fear itself. But fear is addictive
snfd it looks like panic, including panic buying had spread. Such events tend to increase the level of government control over
population. That's why they create fearful events or exaggerate naturally occurring events over and over
again
As far as I understand that situation this disease (highly infectious virus phenomena) is a serious economic challenge (creating
a possibility of
"Coronavirus recession"), much less a health challenge (mortality is probably between one and two percent), lower for younger folk
and people without serious chronic diseases (especially cardiovascular and lungs related; smokers can be added to the latter
category).
Neoliberal MSM, which are practically always are stock market cheerleaders, trying to detail Trump behaved horribly in this respect
spreading rumors and fear, often completely unsubstantiated, accelerating economic downturn. In this sense Trump has a point
when is called MSMS coverage of Coronavirus epidemics a hoax (Trump
campaign blasts media for 'massively dishonest' claim POTUS called coronavirus a 'hoax' Fox News). And Trump hit the nail in his famous "Caronovirus" (innocent misspelling) twit: "
Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) & @CNN are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus look as bad as possible
The main danger is a fact that Coronovirus hit the globalized supply chains and severely affected several industries such a
tourism and air travel. China slow down affects global production chains and might create a snowball effect. But the slowdown
was just two month long. As of March 1, 2020 China is back to over 80% of production. Still some unpleasant surprises are still possible:
If this virus shows up and hits hard in say Saudi Arabia and other oil producing nations the narrative
will totally change. It will go from just demand destruction from consuming nations to no supply coming out
of producing nations.
If supplies chains seize up. For any extend amount of time 1-3 months. Things will get a whole lot more
interesting than they already are.
If the numbers being reported out of Iran are anywhere close to reality the middle east is in for a rocky
ride as this virus spreads.
Frightened people often behave irrationally and that typically contributes to the economic downturn as well. Not the US economy was especially
healthy before this event. In August, a survey of economists by the National Association for Business Economics 72% of analysts
expected a US recession by the end of 2021. Of them 38% believed a recession will strike by the end of this year. A UN report
published in September similarly warned of a worldwide recession this year.
If coronavirus COVID-19 is like other Coronaviruses it probably, like President Trump suggested, will “go away” in April, as
temperatures warm. Most Coronaviruses are seasonal, but there was an outbreak in Dominical Republic resorts in summer 2018 which was
atypical. So it it’s not yet clear if the new virus will follow the same pattern — and experts caution against banking on the
weather to resolve this outbreak (Will the New
Coronavirus 'Go Away' in April - FactCheck.org)
Several days later, in a White House
meeting with state governors, he repeated the idea and was more specific on the outbreak’s timeline.
Trump, Feb. 10: Now, the virus that we’re talking about having to do — you know, a lot of people
think that goes away in April with the heat — as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April.
We’re in great shape though. We have 12 cases — 11 cases, and many of them are in good shape now.
At the time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had confirmed 12 cases in the U.S., although the
agency
announced an additional case in California that day. As of Feb. 13, the tally had risen to a total of
15.
Later in his remarks to the governors, Trump praised China for “doing a good job” with the outbreak, and
again mentioned his call with the Chinese leader.
“I had a long talk with President Xi — for the people in this room — two nights ago, and he feels very
confident,” Trump said. “He feels very confident. And he feels that, again, as I mentioned, by April or during
the month of April, the heat, generally speaking, kills this kind of virus.”
But time definitely works against the virus as more sunny days are more deadly for it.
On Feb 27, 2020 US markets just had their fastest ever correction (10% drop of S&P500), and things aren't looking great
economically for the next couple of months. Global recession is a real possibility by the middle of the year and central banks don't
have mach space for stimulus. In some places people are already scrambling for supplies, and they are likely panicking because
there are numerous infected people confirmed in the local area... not the best situation to be shopping in.
I am also concerned about the global supply chain disruptions, The impact on the supply chain is a delayed effect. Several major
manufacturers have already had to completely shut down manufacturing in China. That means that we will likely see spreading
shutdowns as well soon.
This page about is mainly unsubstantiated, inflated by MSM panic and false narrative. The level of Fearmongering in US MSM does not correlate with the known facts about
the virus. See also [ORIGINAL VIDEO] Torn - Natalie
Imbruglia (#Coronavirus Parody) - YouTube The panic can do more damage than the virus itself.
The situation with office and retail space after COVID-19 is simply bad. There will be no return to previous state. And this situation generall reflact that general situation in the US economy/ In this sense stock market is completely detached from reality, fueled by speculation and 401K inflows. The latter makes passivly managed funds like based on S&P500 index yet another Ponzi scheme.
when the tax rates increase even more, it just encourages automation or DIY (bring your own sheets to avoid paying the cleaning
fee), which just grinds down growth rather than accelerates it.
Notable quotes:
"... Applebee's is now using tablets to allow customers to pay at their tables without summoning a waiter. ..."
Companies see automation and other labor-saving steps as a way to emerge from the health crisis with a permanently smaller
workforce
PHOTO:
JIM THOMPSON/ZUMA PRESS
... ... ...
Economic data show that companies have learned to do more with less over the last 16 months or so. Output nearly
recovered to pre-pandemic levels in the first quarter of 2021 -- down just 0.5% from the end of 2019 -- even though U.S.
workers put in 4.3% fewer hours than they did before the health crisis.
... ... ...
Raytheon Technologies
Corp.
RTX
0.08%
,
the biggest U.S. aerospace supplier by sales, laid off 21,000 employees and contractors in 2020 amid a drastic
decline in air travel. Raytheon said in January that efforts to modernize its factories and back-office operations
would boost profit margins and reduce the need to bring back all those jobs. The company said that most if not all
of the 4,500 contract workers who were let go in 2020 wouldn't be called back.
... ... ..
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. HLT -0.78% said last week that most of its U.S. properties are adopting "a
flexible housekeeping policy," with daily service available upon request. "Full deep cleanings will be conducted
prior to check-in and on every fifth day for extended stays," it said.
Daily housekeeping will still be free for those who request it...
Unite Here, a union that represents hotel workers, published a report in June estimating that the end of daily
room cleaning could result in an industrywide loss of up to 180,000 jobs...
... ... ...
Restaurants have become rapid adopters of technology during the pandemic as two forces -- labor shortages that are
pushing wages higher and a desire to reduce close contact between customers and employees -- raise the return on such
investments.
...
Applebee's is now using tablets to allow customers to pay at their tables without summoning a
waiter.
The hand-held screens provide a hedge against labor inflation, said John Peyton, CEO of Applebee's
parent
Dine
Brands Global
Inc.
... ... ...
The U.S. tax code encourages investments in automation, particularly after the Trump administration's tax cuts,
said Daron Acemoglu, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies the impact of
automation on workers. Firms pay around 25 cents in taxes for every dollar they pay workers, compared with 5 cents
for every dollar spent on machines because companies can write off capital investments, he said.
A lot of employers were given Covid-aid to keep employees employed and paid in 2020. I
assume somebody has addressed that obligation since it wasn't mentioned.
But, what happens to the unskilled workers whose jobs have been eliminated? Do Raytheon
and Hilton just say "have a nice life on the streets"?
No, they will become our collective burdens.
I am all for technology and progress and better QA/QC and general performance. But the
employers that benefit from this should use part of their gains in stock valuation to keep
"our collective burdens" off our collective backs, rather than pay dividends and bonuses
first.
Maybe reinvest in updated training for those laid off.
No great outcome comes free. BUT, as the article implies, the luxury of having already
laid off the unskilled, likely leaves the employer holding all the cards.
And the wheel keeps turning...
Jeffery Allen
Question! Isn't this antithetical (reduction of employees) to the spirit and purpose of
both monetary and fiscal programs, e.g., PPP loans (fiscal), capital markets funding
facilities (monetary) established last year and current year? Employers are to retain
employees. Gee, what a farce. Does anyone really care?
Philip Hilmes
Some of this makes sense and some would happen anyway without the pandemic. I don't need my room
cleaned every day, but sometimes I want it. The wait staff in restaurants is another matter. Losing
wait staff makes for a pretty bad experience. I hate having to order on my phone. I feel like I might
as well be home ordering food through Grubhub or something. It's impersonal, more painful than telling
someone, doesn't allow for you to be checked on if you need anything, doesn't provide information you
don't get from a menu, etc. It really diminishes the value of going out to eat without wait staff.
al snow
OK I been reading all the comments I only have a WSJ access as the rate was a great deal.
Hotel/Motel started making the bed but not changing the sheets every day for many years I am fine as
long as they offer trash take out and towel/paper every day
and do not forget to tip .
clive boulton
Recruiters re-post hard to fill job listings onto multiple job boards. I don't believe the reported
job openings resemble are real. Divide by 3 at least.
"... De Garay explained that after receiving the second coronavirus vaccine dose, her daughter started developing severe abdominal and chest pains. Maddie described the severity of the pain to her mother as "it feels like my heart is being ripped out through my neck." ..."
"... The Ohio mother added her daughter experienced additional symptoms that included gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, heart rate, and memory loss. "She still cannot digest food. She has a tube to get her nutrition," De Garay said to Carlson. "She also couldn't walk at one point, then she could I don't understand why and [physicians] are not looking into why...now she's back in a wheelchair and she can't hold her neck up. Her neck pulls back." ..."
"... De Garay said she had joined a Facebook support group to help people cope with the unexpected events happening from the coronavirus vaccine trial, and she said it was shut down. "It's just not right," she said. ..."
"... Sen. Ron Johnson , R-Wis., has sent letters to the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna seeking answers about adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine following a June 28 press conference with affected individuals. The conference in Milwaukee included stories from five people, including De Garay ..."
"... The Wisconsin senator noted that some adverse reactions were detailed in Pfizer's and Moderna's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) memorandums following early clinical trials ..."
"... Those reactions included nervous system disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders for the Pfizer EUA memo. The Moderna EUA memo included reactions such as nervous system disorders, vascular disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, according to Johnson's letter. ..."
"... You missed the whole point! The issue is that the government is not acknowledging and and not reporting these side effects of the vaccine. Instead they are lying about the safety. If you are young, you are much more likely to get sick and injured by the vaccine than COVID. ..."
"... anyone under 25 should not get the vaccine because the percentages are about the same or worse having a negative impact from the vaccine versus the actual virus. ..."
"... With the Covid19 mortality rate among the children why even vaccinate? As a Chemist / Biochemist I learned that there is always unintended consequences. ..."
"... Vaccines may have long term effects that are not known today. ..."
"... The CDC's generic guidelines for getting a vaccine for any reason are very restrictive, first being, the disease you're getting vaccinated against has to pose a real, immediate danger. CV-19 poses virtually no danger whatsoever to kids under 14. Of all the deaths of children 14 and under in the last 18 months only .8% of them had a case of CV-19. That's 367 deaths out of over 46,000. (Data from CDC website) Forcing them to take an experimental vaccine that they absolutely don't need is criminal. As a parent, allowing your child to take the vaccine without spending a few hours doing some research is criminally negligent. This is like some terribly warped Kafka novel but it's real. ..."
Mother Stephanie De Garay joins 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' to discuss how her 12-year-old
daughter volunteered for the Pfizer vaccine trial and is now in a wheelchair.
An Ohio mother is speaking out
about her 12-year-old daughter suffering extreme reactions and nearly dying after volunteering
for the Pfizer coronavirus
vaccine trial.
Stephanie De Garay told "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Thursday
that after reaching out to multiple physicians they claimed her daughter, Maddie De Garay,
couldn't have become gravely ill from the vaccine.
"The only diagnosis we've gotten for her is that it's conversion disorder or functional
neurologic symptom disorder, and they are blaming it on anxiety," De Garay told Tucker Carlson.
"Ironically, she did not have anxiety before the vaccine."
De Garay explained that after receiving the second coronavirus vaccine dose, her daughter
started developing severe abdominal and chest pains. Maddie described the severity of the pain
to her mother as "it feels like my heart is being ripped out through my neck."
The Ohio mother added her daughter experienced additional symptoms that included
gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, heart rate, and memory loss. "She still cannot digest food. She has a tube to get her nutrition," De Garay said to
Carlson. "She also couldn't walk at one point, then she could I don't understand why and
[physicians] are not looking into why...now she's back in a wheelchair and she can't hold her
neck up. Her neck pulls back."
Carlson asked whether any officials from the Biden administration or representatives from
Pfizer company have reached out to the family. "No, they have not," she answered.
"The response with the person that's leading the vaccine trial has been atrocious," she
said. "We wanted to know what symptoms were reported and we couldn't even get an answer on
that. It was just that 'we report to Pfizer and they report to the FDA.' That's all we
got."
After her heartbreaking experience, the Ohio mother said she's still "pro-vaccine, but also
pro-informed consent." De Garay mentioned she's speaking out because she feels like everyone
should be fully aware of this tragic incident and added the situation is being "pushed down and
hidden."
De Garay said she had joined a Facebook support group to help people cope with the
unexpected events happening from the coronavirus vaccine trial, and she said it was shut
down. "It's just not right," she said.
"They need to do research and figure out why this happened, especially to people in the
trial. I thought that was the point of it," De Garay concluded. "They need to come up with
something that's going to treat these people early because all they're going to do is keep
getting worse."
Sen. Ron
Johnson , R-Wis., has sent letters to the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna seeking answers
about adverse reactions to the COVID-19vaccine
following a June 28 press conference with affected individuals. The conference in Milwaukee
included stories from five people, including De Garay.
The Wisconsin senator noted that some adverse reactions were detailed in Pfizer's and
Moderna's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) memorandums
following early clinical trials.
Those reactions included nervous system disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue
disorders for the Pfizer EUA memo. The Moderna EUA memo included reactions such as nervous
system disorders, vascular disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders,
according to Johnson's letter.
Pfizer and Moderna did not immediately respond to inquiries from Fox News about Johnson's
letters.
J jeff5150357 6 hours ago
My daughter had the same thing happen to
her after getting a flu vaccine 9 years ago. Within days of getting it, she went from being as
healthy as an ox to years of awful, unexplained illness. The short version is they concluded
that she had a severe adverse reaction to the vaccine, but from the delivery chemicals, not the
flu content itself. Formaldehyde was the likely major cause. Now she is getting ready to begin
college and is being required to get the Covid vaccine by her university and the NCAA for
athletics. It is causing her, my wife and I horrible anxiety and we feel like we are being
railroaded into something that could be very dangerous for her. Any discussion or concern
expressed on social media is immediately blocked. I know from years of working in the research
grants office at Yale University that the big pharma industry is powerful and will go to great
lengths to control the narrative. What I don't understand is why mainstream media and social
media are so willing to help them these days!
jeff5150357 4 hours ago
While the college experience is great for a young adult. I would look at getting a degree
online. Her future earnings will be based on her merit, not where she went to school. If
someone was telling me what to do with my personal health, and I was uncomfortable with their
prescription, I would follow my instincts.
LoraJane92649 jeff5150357 5
hours ago
If her flu vax is well documented she should be able to get a waiver. Hopefully you
have an able bodied family physician or medical team to advocate on your behalf.
G gunvald 7 hours ago
You know when you take it that there can be adverse
reactions. So, in that sense, you are informed. Any one of us could be the odd person. That
said, I have a problem with any child getting these vaccines, especially when most people
recover from the disease. It's one thing for me as an elderly person to make the decision to
take it as covid affects the elderly person more and I wanted to avoid that ventilator. Most of
my life has been lived and that's how I evaluated it. This will always come down to putting it
in God's hands.
TheTruthAsItIs gunvald 6 hours ago
You missed the whole point! The
issue is that the government is not acknowledging and and not reporting these side effects of the
vaccine. Instead they are lying about the safety. If you are young, you are much more likely to
get sick and injured by the vaccine than COVID.
D DontDestoryUSA
gunvald 4 hours ago
It's not being informed when you are forced to take a vaccination that they
clearly had trouble with past vaccination sounds like a lawsuit for the university is on the
horizon. With a big pay day
Tony5SFG 7 hours ago
"Ohio
mother said she's still "pro-vaccine, but also pro-informed consent." " And as a pediatrician
for over 40 yrs (retired now) and a 10 year member of my medical school's Institutional Review
Board (which had to approve all human research), THAT is a problem I have been bringing up As
far as requiring all young people, such as entering or in college, to get the vaccine Children
are a protected class and the informed consent for research on them is much more strenuous than
for adults And, requiring young people to take these new vaccines is the equivalent of doing
research on them. The issue of myocarditis is quite troubling. And while it has been seen in
natural infections, I have not yet seen an adequate risk - benefit evaluation regarding risking
natural infection versus vaccination And people say that the myocarditis is not severe, no one
can be sure of the long term effects of a young person getting it. The vaccines that we give
children have been used for decades and the risks/benefits have been well established
D DallasAmEmail Tony5SFG 6 hours ago
A friends daughter who just went through internship as
Physicians assistant based on the percentages in age groups believes anyone under 25 should not
get the vaccine because the percentages are about the same or worse having a negative impact
from the vaccine versus the actual virus. Yes, older age groups the percent having negative
impact from the virus is much greater than the vaccine, so yes older age groups should get the
vaccine. What really is bothersome is when Youtube removes Dr. Robert Malone video who helped
create the mrna vaccine express concern that normal testing has not happened and be cautious
about taking it, especially for the young.
marinesfather601 Tony5SFG 5
hours ago
With the Covid19 mortality rate among the children why even vaccinate? As a Chemist /
Biochemist I learned that there is always unintended consequences.
Hilltopper9 7 hours ago
Vaccines may have long term effects that are not known
today. The same could be said of all the chemicals we apply to our body daily through shampoos,
hair dyes, body lotions, and suntan lotions. Life's a gamble. It's up to each individual to
make the best decisions possible given the facts available.
A akbushrat
Hilltopper9 6 hours ago
The CDC's generic guidelines for getting a vaccine for any reason are
very restrictive, first being, the disease you're getting vaccinated against has to pose a
real, immediate danger. CV-19 poses virtually no danger whatsoever to kids under 14. Of all the
deaths of children 14 and under in the last 18 months only .8% of them had a case of CV-19.
That's 367 deaths out of over 46,000. (Data from CDC website) Forcing them to take an
experimental vaccine that they absolutely don't need is criminal. As a parent, allowing your
child to take the vaccine without spending a few hours doing some research is criminally
negligent. This is like some terribly warped Kafka novel but it's real.
F
Fauxguy930 Hilltopper9 5 hours ago
☢️ N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)nitrosamine is a
nitrosamine that has butyl and 4-hydroxybutyl substituents. In mice, it causes high-grade,
invasive cancers in the urinary bladder, but not in any other tissues. It has a role as a
carcinogenic agent. Ingredient in all shots. How did a carcinogen get FDA approved, oh it was
an emergency.
R RussellRika 6 hours ago
I have a
twelve year old, and not a chance I'd allow her to volunteer for any vaccine trial, and
especially not this one. She very much wanted to get a vaccine, until she started reading about
some of the adverse reactions. Sorry, but I'm a child, the benefit does not outweigh the risk.
MrEd50 6 hours ago
I took the vaccine because I'm 60 years old and work with special ed kids. My 18 year old child
refuses to take it and I support him on this. COVID shouldn't be an issue for most of us.
U.S. public health advisers will meet to discuss a potential link between Covid-19 shots
that use messenger RNA technology and heart inflammation after hundreds of vaccinated people
experienced a condition called myocarditis.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices will gather on June 18 to discuss an increase in reported cases of the condition,
particularly among adolescents and young adults. Covid vaccines made by Moderna Inc. and
partners Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE's use mRNA technology.
Since April, the CDC has seen a spike in reports of myocarditis along with pericarditis, an
inflammation of the membrane around the heart. The cases, while rare, have occurred mostly in
male teens and young adults.
The CDC has identified a total of 216 cases of heart inflammation after the first dose of an
mRNA shot, and another 573 cases after the second dose. The median age of people with
myocarditis or pericarditis following the first dose was 30, and 24 among the second-dose
cases. There were 475 cases identified among those under the age of 30.
Most patients have responded well to treatment and rest, according to the agency, and more
than 8 in 10 have had full relief from their symptoms. The agency is further examining the
cases by age.
About 130 million Americans have received the full two-dose regimen of one of the two
authorized mRNA vaccines. Many teenagers have now received their first dose of the
Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, which was cleared for adolescents 12 and older on May 10.
"We're still learning about the rates of myocarditis and pericarditis," Tom Shimabukuro, a
safety expert of CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, said
Thursday in a Food and Drug Administration panel meeting. "As we gather more information we'll
begin to get a better idea of the post-vaccination rates and hopefully be able to get more
detailed information by age group."
Shimabukuro said the U.S. data is consistent with findings from Israel's vaccinated
population.
"It's hard to deny that there's some event that seems to be occurring," said Cody Meissner,
head of the Pediatric Infectious Disease Division at Tufts Medical Center, at the FDA's
advisory committee meeting on Thursday.
Emergency meeting in eight more days.. ??? An emergency meeting would be something held
tonight; an emergency meeting that can wait days needs to call it differently --"out of schedule
meeting" or something like that.
What happens when you have inflammation and damage? You get scar tissue. Do you really think
that this doesn't have lasting effect? These guys will have problems ater in life with their
hearts and it won't because of McDonalds....
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced Thursday that it will convene an
"emergency meeting"
of its advisers on June 18th to discuss rare but higher-than-expected reports of heart
inflammation following doses of the mRNA-based Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.
The new details about myocarditis and pericarditis emerged first in presentations to a
panel of independent advisers for the Food and Drug Administration, who are meeting
Thursday to discuss how the regulator should approach emergency use authorization for using
COVID-19 vaccines in younger children.
As CBS reports, the CDC previously
disclosed that reports of heart inflammation were detected mostly in younger men and
teenage boys following their second dose, and that there
was a "higher number of observed than expected" cases in 16- to 24-year-olds. Last month,
the CDC urged providers to "ask about prior COVID-19 vaccination" in patients with symptoms of
heart inflammation.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.464.0_en.html#goog_595720652 Wall Street
Bounces, After Selloff Fed Boosts Liquidity NOW PLAYING SoftBank Said to Plan $14 Billion Sale
of Alibaba Shares China's Companies Have Worst Quarter on Record, Beige Book Says U.S.-Saudi
Oil Alliance Under Consideration, Brouillette Says ETF Volumes Surge in Current Market
Environment Investors Have Given Up on a V-Shaped Recovery, BNY's Young Cautions
We'll leave the judgment up to someone far more qualified...
Does anyone else not find it odd that after discovering 800 cases in the VAERS database the
"emergency" meeting is in 7 days ? ... and in the meantime, every public health authority
figure is encouraging parents to get their young children vaccinated ?
The reports of myocarditis or pericarditis were submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, a passive
reporting system run jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the
Food and Drug Administration, through May 31.
The bulk of the reports described heart inflammation appearing after the second of two doses
of either the Pfizer of Moderna vaccines, both of which utilize messenger RNA technology.
Authorities stress that anybody can submit reports through the reporting system but
authorities have already verified that 226 of the reports meet the CDC's working case
definition, Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a deputy director at the agency, said during a presentation of
the data. Followup and review are in progress for the rest.
Of the 285 case reports for which the disposition was known at the time of the review, 270
patients had been discharged and 15 were still hospitalized, officials said. Myocarditis
typically requires hospital care. No deaths were reported.
A slide on myocarditis reports post-COVID-19 vaccination is shown during the Food and Drug
Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting on June
10, 2021. (FDA/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
The CDC
announced last month that it was investigating reports of heart inflammation in teenagers
and young adults who received a COVID-19 vaccine, though it took no definitive action besides
saying it would continue reviewing case data.
An advisory committee to the agency, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, said
in a little-noticed update published dated May 24 and published on June
1 that data from VAERS showed that in the 30 days following the second dose of mRNA
vaccinations, "there was a higher number of observed than expected myocarditis/pericarditis
cases in 16""24-year-olds."
Data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, an active reporting system that relies on nine
healthcare organizations in seven states, did not show higher than expected cases, it
added.
"However, analyses suggest that these data need to be carefully followed as more persons
in younger age groups are vaccinated," the advisory committee's vaccine safety workgroup said
in its report.
Israel's Health Ministry
said that same day that it found 275 cases of heart inflammation among the more than 5
million people in the country who received a vaccine between December 2020 and May. An Israeli
study found "a probable link" between receiving the second dose of the Pfizer jab "and the
appearance of myocarditis among men aged 16 to 30," the ministry said.
Shimabukuro said the U.S. passive surveillance data "are consistent with the surveillance
data that emerged from Israel."
The figures are also consistent with other case reports and data from the Department of
Defense.
The vast majority of the U.S. reports deal with male patients. Approximately 300 preliminary
reports indicated the patients suffered chest pain, with nearly as many having elevated cardiac
enzymes.
Family members watch as a 12-year-old is inoculated with Pfizer's vaccine against COVID-19
at Dekalb Pediatric Center in Decatur, Ga., on May 11, 2021. (Chris Aluka Berry/Reuters)
A case report
examining myocarditis in seven adolescents following vaccination with Pfizer's jab,
published in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, this month, said
all seven developed the inflammation within 4 days of receiving the second dose, did not have
evidence of COVID-19 infection, and did not meet the criteria for MIS-C, a rare disease.
The seven males, between the ages of 14 and 19, all required hospital care but each was
eventually discharged.
Authors, who did not respond to requests for comment, said no link has been established
between the vaccines and myocarditis and that the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks.
But they also urged healthcare workers "to consider myocarditis in the evaluation of
adolescents and young adults who develop chest pain after COVID-19 vaccination."
A
commentary on the study published in the same journal, said "there are some concerns
regarding this case series that might suggest a causal relationship and therefore warrant
further analysis through established surveillance systems."
"First, the consistent timing of symptoms in these seven cases after the second
vaccination suggests a uniform biological process. Second, the similarities in clinical
findings and laboratory characteristics in this series suggest a common etiology. Finally,
these cases occurred in the context of a dearth of circulation of common respiratory viruses
known to be associated with myocarditis, and thorough diagnostic evaluations did not identify
infectious etiologies," they added.
The expected number of myocarditis/pericarditis cases in those aged 16 or 17, based on
background incidence rates and the number of doses administered to that population through May
31, is between two and 19. But based on the VAERS reports, the number is 79.
Likewise, the expected number for cases among young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 is
eight to 83. The number based on the reports is 196.
"In the 16- to 17 year-olds and the 18- to 24-year-olds, the observed reports are exceeding
the expected based on the known background rates that are published in literature," Shimabukuro
told members of a Food and Drug Administration vaccine advisory committee in the meeting on
Thursday, though he cautioned that not all the reports will "turn out to be true
myocarditis/pericarditis reports."
" Of note, of these 528 reports after second dose with symptom onset within 30 days, over
half of them were in these younger age groups, 12""24 years old , whereas roughly 9 percent of
total doses administered were in those age groups, so we "clearly have an imbalance there," he
added later.
A slide on myocarditis reports post-COVID-19 vaccination is shown during the Food and Drug
Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting on June
10, 2021. (FDA/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
Data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, which comes from nine healthcare groups that have
collectively administered over 8.8 million doses""only some 284,000 of those have been given to
12- to 17-year-olds""did not indicate safety concerns, with just 60 myocarditis or pericarditis
events reported through May 29, the doctor continued.
A Food and Drug Administration surveillance system, the Biologics Effectiveness and Safety
Initiative, which utilizes claims data from CVS and two other partners, has detected 99 cases
of myocarditis/pericarditis in the 42 days following vaccination among some 3.1 million shots
given to people between the ages of 12 and 64, the panel was told earlier by an official from
the drug regulating agency.
Another 1,260 were reported in people 65 or older through claims data from Medicare claims
data.
Neither number raised safety signals, Steve Anderson, director of the FDA's Office of
Biostatistics and Epidemiology said.
Dr. Cody Meissner, chief of the Division of Pediatric Infectious Disease at the Tufts
Children's Hospital, and a member of the panel that heard from Shimabukuro and others, said
after the presentations that he was "struck by the fact" that myocarditis "occurs more commonly
after the second dose."
"It's a pretty specific interval of time, it's primarily after the mRNA vaccines as far as
we know, we know that the consistent age, there's a lack of alternative explanations even
though these patients have been pretty well worked up, and it's a widespread occurrence
because, as you said, Israel has found a pretty similar situation," he said during the
meeting.
He asked Shimabukuro about the rates of blood clots seen in women between the ages of 30 and
49 after vaccination""most of the clots appeared in that population after getting a Johnson
& Johnson shot, though officials ultimately lifted a pause,
saying the benefits outweighed the risks ""and to restate the rate of incidence of
myocarditis in adolescents after a jab.
Shimabukuro said that in contrast with the clotting situation, when data showed "strong
evidence of a causal relationship fairly early on," further study is needed on heart
inflammation.
"At this point, I think we're still learning about the rates of myocarditis and
pericarditis. We continue to collect more information both in VAERS and continue to get more
information in VSD, and I think as gather more information we'll begin to get a better idea of
the post-vaccination rates and hopefully will be able to get more detailed information by age
group," he said.
"It's still early," he added, noting that authorization for a vaccine for 12- to
-15-year-olds didn't come
until mid-May while immunization of older adolescents largely came later than shots for
adults.
"I believe that we will ultimately have sufficient information to answer those questions,"
he said.
A general view of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in
Atlanta, Ga., on Sept. 30, 2014. (Tami Chappell/Reuters)
Another panel member, Dr. Jay Portnoy, director of the Division of Allergy, Asthma, &
Immunology at Children's Mercy Hospitals & Clinics, asked for a comparison between the
adverse events in vaccinated versus unvaccinated persons, saying if the adverse event rate was
lower in those who are vaccinated, then it would still be worth getting a jab.
Shimabukuro said a risk-benefit assessment would be provided by the CDC's advisory panel,
known as ACIP, on vaccines during a meeting next week.
A CDC spokeswoman also referenced the upcoming meeting, which will take place on June 18,
after saying reports of myocarditis remain rare, given that over 300 million doses have been
administered in the United States.
"Given the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses administered, these reports are rare. More
than 18 million people between ages 12-24 have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine
in the United States," she told The Epoch Times via email.
"CDC continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for everyone 12 years and older. Getting
vaccinated is the best way to help protect yourself and your family from COVID-19."
A Pfizer spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email that the company is aware of federal
data indicating "rare reports of myocarditis and pericarditis, predominantly in male
adolescents and young adults, after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination." It noted that federal officials
have not concluded that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines cause either condition, before expressing
support for an assessment of suspected adverse events.
"With a vast number of people vaccinated to date, the benefit risk profile of our vaccine
remains positive," the spokesperson added.
Moderna did not return an inquiry.
Dr. Monica Gandhi, professor of medicine and associate chief at the University of
California, San Francisco, told The Epoch Times in an email that in light of the increased risk
of myocarditis above expected rates among young people, especially after the second dose,
parents should keep a close eye out for when guidance is issued by federal authorities.
"Possibilities include only vaccinating children without prior infection as there is an
association between prior COVID and this adverse effect; giving 1 dose instead of 2 below the
age of 20; addressing the dosage of the vaccine (currently at 30 micrograms down to the age
of 12, which is the same dose as in adults); and extending the duration between doses 1 and 2
for younger people," she said.
"I look forward to ACIP guidance on this over the next few weeks."
BugMan 13 minutes ago
"The infamous spike protein of the coronavirus gets into the blood where it circulates
for several days post-vaccination and then accumulated in organs and tissues including the
spleen, bone marrow, the liver, adrenal glands, and in quite high concentrations in the
ovaries"; "a large number of studies has shown that the most severe effects of SARS-CoV-2,
the virus that causes COVID-19, such as blood clotting and bleeding, are due to the effects
of the spike protein of the virus itself."
I don't see how the CDC, Fauci, Wuhan (CCP), Fort Detrick, Ralph Baric, Peter Daszak and
the WHO are going to get out of this: the 'vaccine' mRNA spike protein is toxic, it is a
pathogenic protein that causes clotting, heart problems and may be associated with
infertility...
bringonthebigone 1 hour ago
The heart has almost no repair capability. Even mild damage at that age likely takes
years or decades off life expectancy. Seems likely the number of undiscovered cases far far
exceed the number reported.
I Write Code 1 hour ago
"Possibilities include only vaccinating children without prior infection as there is
an association between prior COVID and this adverse effect; giving 1 dose instead of 2
below the age of 20; addressing the dosage of the vaccine (currently at 30 micrograms
down to the age of 12, which is the same dose as in adults); and extending the duration
between doses 1 and 2 for younger people," she said
No kidding Doctor Obvious.
BUT extending the duration is probably the wrong move, or if you do, cut the second dose
by 90%.
Hear me now, believe me later.
MRob 5 minutes ago remove link
Watching latest Brett Weinstein interview, Dark Horse, guest claimed the numbers of
complications from the vaccine could be anything up to 100x the official figures. Unlikely,
but emphasises that the error bar is massive. Above reporting system is voluntary, and
people have been censored from knowing what to even look for, and propagandised from
considering their issues could be due to the vaccine. Vaccine complication groups of fb
were deleted, with 70k or 120k people in them. Such a screwed up situation. With the
suppression of ivermectin etc, this is nuremberg trials level for sure.
1. The vaccine is not tailored to the individual and therefore never 100% safe it is not
possible when working with statistics and probability as your guide.
2. The reporting system is next to non-existent even under vaers because that is the
measure of liability for those making people take gene therapies / vaccines.
Therein lies your two fundamental problems ... too fix it though you have too destroy
the whole system it should never have been put in place that way.
hoytmonger 36 minutes ago
In Idaho, the Idaho National Guard is "assisting" vaccination of students at their
middle school...
So the commenter on here, vasilievich mentioned he and his wife got the vax and his wife
went into cardiac arrest shortly after (4 days ago)...they are in their 80's...(God help
them)...several others have noted they knew people that went into cardiac arrest after the
vax...seems to be much, much more common than they are letting on...
Seabass120 36 minutes ago
My wife got her second Pfizer vacc and now cannot go into the sun without breaking out
into hives. Prior to the jab, she was outside daily.
JoKe Biden 27 minutes ago
Yep so predictable, some of the statements will read something like this.
The FDA and CDC have confidence that the vaccine is safe and effective in preventing
COVID-19.
The FDA has determined that the available data show that the vaccine's known and
potential benefits outweigh its known and potential risks in individuals 18 years of age
and older.
At this time, the available data suggest that the chance of heart inflammation
occurring is very low, but the FDA and CDC will remain vigilant in continuing to
investigate this risk.
_Rorschach 25 minutes ago
its not a vaccine
its gene therapy
ebworthen 38 minutes ago
An untested genetic experiment and not a "vaccine" in any sense of the word.
toady 19 minutes ago
"Just say no"
-Nancy Reagan
RawDrum 20 minutes ago
Imagine being a parent who got their teenage child injected with an experiment jab for
something they are at trivial risk of any impact from, that has no-one liable should it go
wrong, in an American for profit health insurance system, doing zero research and
outsourcing critical thinking to media, big tech and pharma corporations engaged in obvious
censorship and obfuscation, and that resulted in your child having an enlarged heart
impacting the rest of their shortened life.
YOLO!
LetThemEatRand 1 hour ago
"The chances of dying from COVID for the young are almost impossible to measure they are
so small" - doesn't matter. Any risk is too much. You must wear a mask and stay home and be
vaccinated when we're ready for that.
"The chances of dying from the COVID vaccine are unknown and documented cases of serious
side effects are growing." - it's a tiny risk, doesn't outweigh the benefit of the
vaccine.
RedSeaPedestrian 43 minutes ago
From Pfizer: "With a vast number of people vaccinated to date, the benefit risk profile
of our vaccine remains positive," the spokesperson added.
Tell that to the families that have had a loved one die from the "jab".
Farmer Dave 24 minutes ago
My dad has been fighting this for a month. He got the jab and ended up in the hospital
with blood clots and the heart inflammation. He is a tough old man and seems to be getting
better. I told him if he would have heeded my warnings about the jab he wouldn't be sick.
Anyone who gives this jab to a child is an idiot.
fackbankz 44 minutes ago (Edited)
If any other product killed 5000 people and injured 200,000, it would be pulled, not
pushed.
There is no such thing as "mild" myocarditis, especially in juveniles. If they live,
they will have a lifetime of heart problems and will likely never be able to enjoy fun
activities like sports or sex. I'm only saying this to inoculate you against the incoming
PR blitz of, "Oh, it's just a few mild cases of heart inflammation."
We must avenge this crime against humanity. My hope is that it is done through courts
and due process, but if ends up just being heads on pikes, so be it.
Dr. Gonzo 47 minutes ago
Biden is giving away 500,000 of these serums to our lucky Vassals. Eh hem. I mean
Allies. For a special thank you from the Empire.
nowhereman 19 minutes ago remove link
After asking yourself a couple more questions like that, and you begin to understand
that it's never been about a "virus" it's about the jab.
"Population decimated by rare blood clots", "Extremely rare side effects devastate
many", "Benefits far outweigh risks as die off causes labor shortages", "Scientists explain
how lab created viruses evolve naturally", "New variants cause only mild symptoms in
vaccinated travelers", "Annual vaccination necessary for return to new normal, CEO of
CALPERS says."
Headlines in a mentally ill society.
TieOneOn 47 minutes ago
Looks like 'Gain of Function' is full steam ahead......
Befits 10 minutes ago (Edited) remove link
They are not panicked. They will do a farce meeting and declare " the benefits of the
Covid 19 vax outweigh the risks". Even for the young men who " in very small number of
cases where there is no clear causal link between the Covid vax and myocarditis". Then when
the microphone is off and the transcription is ended they will laugh their asses off "
these fools will buy it
🤣🤣🤣🤣
". Cha Ching...
boyplunger7777 10 minutes ago
By late summer, should the general public begin to experience serious side effects, the
nation will go into full blown panic...
You_Cant_Quit_Me 9 minutes ago
They'll just say it's a variant of COVID-19 and blame that
Cabreado 38 minutes ago (Edited)
The CDC has been sufficiently exposed, and they're trying to save face with the
masses.
Good luck finding any non-corrupt oversight to resolve this situation... that of a rogue
CDC.
Otherwise it would've happened a long, long time ago.
Rubicon727 1 hour ago
What the CDC refuses to admit is the EU system, that keeps far more accurate deaths,
severe illnesses can be looked at any time of the day. Link to EUdraVigilance.com . They've shown many examples of severe
repercussions from the different kinds of Covid vaccines that have harmed, or killed people
for weeks now.
Now you tell us, how is it this is just NOW emerging from the CDC? Explain that.
Lt. Shicekopf 4 minutes ago
Why are kids getting jabbed? In the off chance they contract this virus there is a 99.8%
chance of recovery. I just do not get it.
AriusArmenian 3 minutes ago
Money.
allfactsmatter 21 minutes ago
The mrNA technology is a new technique for vaccine development.
Despite this, the Pfizer and Modern "vaccines" have been tested LESS than traditional
vaccines. Yet the FDA and CDC says the risks from these shots are acceptable.
Keep in mind that healthy young men have almost NO mortality risk from COVID, and
receive no benefit from these shots as a direct consequence.
Big Government and Big Pharma are gambling with people's lives with these Frankenvirus
vaccines.
liberty2 27 minutes ago
Not a vaccine, they label it as a vaccine to have immunity to lawsuits, no pun intended.
They also call it a vaccine to get emergency authorization. It's not APPROVED, only
authorized, there's a difference. There's NO law mandating the vax, NONE. Your employer can
be sued for discrimination or you can claim Workman's Comp if you should suffer side
effects.
Danoc 29 minutes ago
Can't wait for Fauci's next round of explanation.
opaopaopa 26 minutes ago
all rounds are the same:
"it's the Science"
fackbankz 10 minutes ago
"A few minor cases of heart inflammation, nothing to worry about. Benefits outweigh the
risks."
You know the drill.
Any other product that caused 800 cases of lifelong heart problems in young people would
have been pulled, not pushed, and it's probably a lot more than 800.
TonTon 58 minutes ago
Looks like they are hardly even checking for Myocarditis in the 50+ age bracket and
especially in the 65+ age bracket given it's less than the normal rate for this age group.
I'm sure they are just putting it down to some of the many coincidences happening after
people get the 'jab.' Given that the rate is less than normal though you could be forgiven
for thinking that they are ACTIVELY SUPPRESSING information on side effects. We are
experiencing and epidemic of coincidences these days.
The University of Michigan consumer confidence index fell to 82.8 in May, from 88.3 in
April. More importantly, the current conditions index slumped to 90.8, from 97.2 and the
expectations index declined to 77.6, from 82.7.
Hard data also questions the strength of the recovery. April retail sales were flat, with
clothing down 5.1%, general merchandise store sales fell 4.9%, leisure & sporting goods
down 3.6% with food & drink services up just by 3%.
United States industrial production was also almost flat in April, rising just 0.4%
month-on-month in April pushed by a 4% slump in motor vehicle production. You may think this is
not that bad until you see that industrial capacity utilization came at 74.7% in April,
significantly below the pre-pandemic levels.
Employment also questions the "strong recovery" thesis. Non-farm employment is still down
8.2 million, or 5.4 percent, from pre-pandemic level yet gross domestic product is likely to
how a full recovery in the second quarter.
These figures are important because they come after trillions of dollars of so-called
stimulus and the entire thesis of the V-shaped recovery comes from a view that consumption is
going to soar. Reality shows otherwise. In fact, reality shows that retail sales showed an
artificial bump due to the wrongly called stimulus checks only to return to stagnation.
The rise in inflation further questions the idea of a consumption boom, certainly for the
middle class. Why? If we look at the 4.2% rise in consumer price index in April includes a 25%
increase in energy, a 12% increase in utility prices, a 5.6% increase in transportation
services, a 2.2% in medical services etc. As consumers perceive a higher rise in prices,
especially in those essential goods and services that we purchase every day, consumption
decisions become more prudent and propensity to save rises. This is something that we have seen
in numerous countries. In Japan, years of "official" messages about the risk of deflation
clashed with citizens' perception of cost of living, and tendency to save increased, rightly
so. Citizens are not stupid, and you can tell them that there is no inflation or that it is
transitory, but they feel the rise in cost of living and react accordingly.
Two things should concern us. First, the weakness of the recovery in the middle of the
largest fiscal and monetary stimulus seen in decades, and second, the short and diminishing
effect of these programs. A two trillion stimulus package creates a very short-term impact that
lasts less than five months.
1 play_arrow
Onthebeach6 1 hour ago
Stolen election, Marxist takeover, BLM burning, looting and murdering, defund the
police, cancel culture, corrupt MSM and big tech, Critical race theory tearing down western
civilisation and the constitution torn up.
What a time to be alive!
Stimulus is mainly theft by the elites but it has a secondary purpose to keep the
consumer passive until the regime has consolidated its position.
Consumers should be a lot more than just unhappy.
Lordflin 1 hour ago remove link
So called stimulus is just a payoff to cronies and special interest... with a token toss
of a few coins out the window to the people as the curtained carriage barrels past and on
down the road...
lambda PREMIUM 34 minutes ago
I have seen this happening before my eyes in Africa about 20 years ago. Some rich
"elect" with heavily armed guards was throwing coins from a truck and the villagers were
busy collecting them off the mud while chanting "long live" for the guy.
HorseBuggy 1 hour ago
Before the pandemic a lot of people slaved away for pay that barely covered their basic
needs.
All of a sudden they are not going to the slave work, they are getting better money than
when they were slaving and being abused and now you are telling them go back to slave away
or else!
It could be very depressing for a lot of people and to make matters a lot worse, a lot
of people became very political in everything and workplaces are full of tension.
Helg Saracen 10 minutes ago
The situation is similar not only in the United States. Now in developed countries it is
almost everywhere something like this. It's just that Americans are still surprised by this
(unlike the rest, not "special"). An old friend of mine had a small restaurant chain. Due
to the hysteria around the covids, he is now virtually bankrupt (not yet bankrupt, but
close to it). And he is not alone in such a situation. He had to fire most of the workers,
waiters. No profit, no jobs. There are no new and old jobs - people simply have no money
for a normal existence. Everything is very simple.
What CDC knows what we do know to issue such draconian guidelines? This looks like is a
concentration camp not summer camp...
Notable quotes:
"... Two-layer masks should be worn at all times "" indoors and out ""except for eating, drinking and swimming ..."
"... Don't allow close-contact games and sports ..."
"... Avoid sharing of objects such as toys, games and art supplies ..."
"... Separate children on buses by skipping rows ..."
"... Divide children into "cohorts" and then keep them away from other cohorts ..."
"... Children should stay three feet away from kids in their cohort and six feet away from those outside their cohort; campers and staff should stay six feet from each other, as should fellow staff members ..."
"... While eating and drinking, stay six feet away from everybody, even your own cohort ..."
In April, the CDC published guidance
for operating youth camps that was the latest eye-rolling example of CDC maximalism that
conflicts with what we've learned about Covid-19.
Before we examine the CDC guidance, let's review some of the key things that we now know
about Covid-19 that we didn't in March 2020:
Covid-19 presents little risk at all to children. According to CDC data, only
295 children age 0-17 have died with Covid-19. Compare that to the CDC's estimation
that 600
died of the flu during the 2017-18 season.
Outdoor transmission pretty much never happens. An Irish
study of more than 232,000 Covid-19 cases found only 0.1% of cases were transmitted
outside.
Surface transmission isn't a material source of spread. The CDC has
declared the risk of contracting the virus by touching surfaces or objects is low, and
that rather than cleaning with disinfectant, "soap and water is enough to reduce risk"
(unless there's a known or suspected Covid-19 case in a community setting).
Vaccines are abundantly available. According to the CDC's vaccination data , 60.5% of U.S.
adults have have received at least one vaccine dose, and 48.4% are fully vaccinated. Gone
are the days when finding the vaccine was a challenge; today, anyone who wants the vaccine
can readily find it.
Covid-19 cases and deaths are in a free fall. The 7-day averages for cases and deaths
have respectively fallen 89% and 83% from
their peaks. On Sunday, the entire state of Texas
reported not a single death from the virus. Today, San Francisco General Hospital has
no Covid-19 patients for the first time
since March 2020.
With that knowledge in mind, here are some key ingredients in the CDC's recipe
for dystopian summer fun:
Two-layer masks should be worn at all times "" indoors and out ""except for eating,
drinking and swimming
Don't allow close-contact games and sports
Avoid sharing of objects such as toys, games and art supplies
Separate children on buses by skipping rows
Divide children into "cohorts" and then keep them away from other cohorts
Children should stay three feet away from kids in their cohort and six feet away
from those outside their cohort; campers and staff should stay six feet from each other, as
should fellow staff members
While eating and drinking, stay six feet away from everybody, even your own
cohort
Who exactly are these draconian, fun-killing guidelines meant to protect? The children
aren't in any meaningful danger"" the number of children who typically drown in a given
year is more than double the number of child Covid deaths we've observed in 15 months .
Meanwhile, against a backdrop of rapidly-vanishing Covid-19 infections across the country,
camp staff will have had more than ample opportunity to be fully vaccinated against Covid-19
before the first kids arrive.
We're told to "follow the science," but what is the CDC following? The agency's guidelines
read like they were written during the early dark ages of the Covid outbreak, when the peril
was still filled with overwhelming mystery, and "erring on the side of caution" still had a
trace of credibility.
As Columbia University pediatric immunologist Mark Gorelik told
New York Magazine , " We know that the risk of outdoor infection is very low. We know risks
of children becoming seriously ill or even ill at all is vanishingly small. And most of the
vulnerable population is already vaccinated. I am supportive of effective measures to restrain
the spread of illness. However, the CDC's recommendations cross the line into excess and are,
frankly, senseless. Children cannot be running around outside in 90-degree weather wearing a
mask. Period. "
Who cares what the CDC says? They have ZERO credibility and should be charged with fraud and
"Crimes Against Humanity"
UpTo11 4 hours ago remove link
Just went to a high school graduation ceremony in Texas. 1 student had a mask. No one else
in the stadium of 400. Not sure who wears masks anymore at all.
ChargingHandle 3 hours ago remove link
Come to oregon and you will see all species of sheeple wearing masks even when completely
by themselves.
GunnerySgtHartman 2 hours ago
I still see people wearing masks while driving their cars ... with nobody else in the cars
... talk about sheeple.
Snakerockhiker 3 hours ago
The CDC guidance has nothing to do with Covid-19 and everything to do with maintaining and
increasing fear, breaking down societal relationships, and ensuring people are following
operant conditioning protocols like Pavlov's dogs. A gang of criminals are running America's
medical heirarchy. We need to eliminate them.
The epicenters of work-from-home show the biggest drops in office occupancy rates, according
to Kastle’s “Back to Work Barometer†at the
end of April: in San Francisco, the occupancy rate was at 14.8% of the pre-Pandemic level, in
New York City at 16.2%, and in San Jose at 18.0%.
... ... ...
A survey by Accenture of 400 North American financial-services companies found that 80% of
the executives would like for workers to spend four or five days in the office post-Pandemic.
Many of them think that working at home makes training younger employees more difficult and is
hurting company culture.
But employees are looking for flexibility, now that they have proven that they can be
productive at home.
“You’ve seen the senior executives sitting in their
office and there’s nobody behind them,†Laurie McGraw, head of
Accenture’s capital markets industry team in North America, told
Bloomberg . “And then you see the entry-level folks starved for
in-person interaction because they need to be coached on a more regular basis. And then
there’s the vast middle that’s content to be
home.â€
The work-from-home year 2020 generated record profits for banks, proving that work-from-home
can be managed, and many employees question the need to commute every day. According to Rob
Dicks, Accenture’s talent and organization head for capital markets,
employees are likely to push back against a full-time return.
Despite whatever executives would like, the reality of the cost-cutting aspects of working
from home has already set in. According to Accenture’s survey, of the same
executives:
Nearly two-thirds expect to cut their office footprint by 11% to 40% over the next nine
months.
Over half are planning to relocate employees to new lower-cost locations.
9% said they’ll close their headquarters in a major market.
Financial firms have been all over the place with their plans.
Goldman Sachs, in an internal memo seen by
Bloomberg , told its US employees that they should be prepared to report to the office by
June 14, according to an internal memo seen by Bloomberg.
Vanguard Group, which employs about 17,300 people, is planning a hybrid model for most of
its staff, with many employees able to work from home on Mondays and Fridays.
Bridgewater Associates is going for the hybrid model as well and will allow their employees
to work from home at least part of the time.
Deutsche Bank, which employs about 8,000 people in the US, is planning to let its staff work
from home for up to three days a week. Separately, the bank had said that it wanted to reduce
its office foot print to cut costs.
Deutsche Bank is offering “flexibility†as an inducement for
hiring and retention. A survey had found that 90% of its employees wanted the opportunity to
work from home at least part of the time after the Pandemic. Office space will be reconfigured
to accommodate the hybrid model.
JPMorgan Chase told its employees in a
memo to report back to the office by early July on a “consistent
rotational schedule†that would allow staff some flexibility.
Dr. Henry Ealy and his team started looking at CDC data on COVID-19 cases and
fatalities in mid-March 2020, quickly realizing the agency was vastly exaggerating
fatalities
Over-reporting of fatalities was enabled by a March 2020 change in how cause of death
is reported on death certificates. Rather than listing COVID-19 as a contributing cause in
cases where people died from other underlying conditions, it was to be listed as the
primary cause
As of August 23, 2020, the CDC reported 161,392 fatalities caused by COVID-19. Had the
long-standing, original guidelines for death reporting been used, there would have only
been 9,684 total fatalities due to COVID-19
The CDC violated federal law, as the Paperwork Reduction Act requires data collection
and publication to be overseen by the Office of Management and Budget. Proposed changes
must be published in the Federal Register and be open to public comment. None of these
transparency rules were followed
We don't yet know who was responsible for altering the reporting rules in violation of
federal law. To identify the culprits, formal grand jury investigation petitions have been
sent to all U.S. attorneys and the U.S. Department of Justice, requesting a thorough,
independent and transparent investigation; a direct public effort to gather signatures also
commenced on the one-year anniversary of the CDC reporting change
DAILY UPDATE (April 29th to May 3rd): • First-Quarter 2021 GDP Annualized Inflation
Jumped to a 31-Year High of 4.1%, With Quarterly Real GDP Growth Hitting a Consensus 6.4%,
Still Shy of Pre-Pandemic Recovery • Monthly March Series Showed Broad Inflation Soaring
on Top of Still-Faltering Jobs and Economic Activity [See the headlined paragraphs in the
LATEST NUMBERS section]
• Fed Chairman Powell - "We've Got a Long Ways to Go" • March 2021 Money Supply
and Monetary Base Growth Continued to Explode • U.S. Government's Financial Condition
Deteriorated Sharply in 2020 [See the headlined paragraphs in the SYSTEMIC RISK section]
• G E N E R A L .. H E A D L I N E S .. -- Pandemic-Driven U.S. Economic Collapse
Continues to Harden in a Protracted "L"-Shaped Non-Recovery
-- Severe Systemic Structural Damage from the Shutdown Is Forestalling Meaningful
Economic Rebound into 2022 or Beyond, Irrespective of the Advances in Coronavirus Vaccines and
Treatments
-- Panicked, Unlimited Federal Reserve Money Creation and Federal Government Deficit
Spending Continue and Will Expand, Triggering Major Domestic Inflation
-- With Fundamental Dollar Debasement Intensifying, Holding Physical Gold and Silver
Protects the Purchasing Power of One's Assets, Irrespective of Any Near-Term Central Bank or
Other Machinations to the Contrary.
Scroll down for the latest ShadowStats outlook, headline economic news and background
information on the U.S. Economy, Financial System (FOMC), Financial Markets and Alternate Data,
also for Publicly Available Special Reports and Contact Information.
• L A T E S T .. N U M B E R S .. Still shy by an annualized quarterly 3.53% gain of
recovering the Pre-Pandemic Peak Gross Domestic Product Activity in Fourth-Quarter 2019,
annualized First-Quarter 2021 Real GDP Growth surged 6.39%, effectively matching market
expectations, picking up from the 4.33% growth pace of Fourth-Quarter 2020 (April 29th,
Bureau of Economic Analysis - BEA). Those 1q2021 and 4q2020 GDP gains followed an annualized
3q2020 rebound of 33.44%, against respective annualized 2q2020 and 1q2020 Pandemic-driven
collapses of 31.38% (-31.38%) and 4.96% (-4.96%). Where activity in 3q2020 and 4q2020 GDP was
boosted heavily by Inventory Building, 1q2021 GDP growth of 6.39% was softened by heavy
Inventory Liquidation. Reflecting same, "Final Sales," which is the GDP net of Inventory
changes, surged to 9.03% in 1q2021, versus 2.96% in 4q2020 and against 26.87% in 2q2020.
Continued Depression in Payroll Activity Belies Some of the Headline Boom in the Heavily
Gimmicked, Overstated Real GDP Numbers. Seasonally adjusted First-Quarter 2021 Payroll
Employment declined year-to-year by 5.6% (-5.6%), following an annual decline of 6.0% (-6.0%)
in Fourth-Quarter 2020. Outside of the current Pandemic-collapsed economy, that 1q2021 annual
Payroll decline was the deepest since the 1946 realignment of the post-World War II U.S.
economy to a peacetime footing. In contrast to collapsed annual Payrolls, 1q2021 Real GDP
gained a headline 0.4% year-to-year. Year-to-year change in Employment is a broad, direct
measure of underlying economic reality, suggestive at present of a much weaker headline GDP
circumstance than is being proffered to the U.S. Public and to the Equity and Currency Markets.
Discussed frequently here, much of the GDP gimmicking is tied to artificially depressed GDP
Inflation, which results in overstated, headline Real (Inflation-Adjusted) numbers. Expanded
detail of the current circumstance will be fully reviewed, along with related graphs in pending
No. 1460 .
First-Quarter 2021 GDP Implicit Price Deflator inflation surged to 31-year high,
annualized quarterly 4.07% (4.1%) Inflation, and 2-year high 1.85% (1.9%) year-to-year
Inflation. Today's (April 29th) then pending GDP release prompted Federal Reserve Chairman
Powell's warning at yesterday's FOMC Press Conference of a "temporary" jump in the FOMC's
targeted "Core" PCE inflation rate. That is the inflation rate for the GDP's dominant [68.2% of
nominal] Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) category (less Food and Energy). A subcomponent
of the aggregate GDP Deflator, the FOMC's targeted PCE Inflation Index (Excluding Food and
Energy) jumped to an annualized 2.3% in 1q2021 [above or at the FOMC Target of 2.0%-plus], up
from 1.3% in 4q2020, but down from a one-time spiked 3.4% in 3q2020. The FOMC targeted deflator
hit a one-year high 1.5% year-to-year reading, still well below target. Expanded discussion
follows in Nos. 1460 and 1461 , also see the FOMC discussion in the SYSTEMIC
RISK section.
(April 26) Real March 2021 New Orders for Durable Goods declined 0.2% (-0.2%) in the
month, having declined by 1.0% (-1.0%) in February (Census Bureau). Against
Pandemic-collapsed March 2020 activity, March 2021 Real New Orders surged 20.1%, where February
2021 annual change had been 0.0% against the February 2020 pre-Pandemic peak. Against that
peak, those same March 2021 orders were down by 0.2% (-0.2%), and also were down by 4.9%
(-4.9%) measured with a two-year stacked change (against March 2019), as commonly used with the
Cass Freight Index® (see the discussion in No. 1459 and pending 1460 on
Pandemic disrupted annual growth). Net of a sharp reduction in still-strong Commercial Aircraft
Orders, March 2021 Real New Orders gained 1.6% in the month, having declined by 3.0% (-3.0%) in
February, March activity gained 1.4% from its February 2020 pre-Pandemic peak.
(April 26) 2021 Annual Retail Sales Benchmark Revisions cumulatively reduced headline
annual nominal growth rates by a 10 to 20 basis points per year from 2016 to date (Census).
At the most extreme, the nominal level of March 2021 Retail Sales revised lower by 0.75%
(-0.75%), while the level of the Pandemic collapsed March 2020 number revised lower by 0.85%
(-0.85%). The average downside revision to the headline monthly sales level, in basis points,
was 66 in 2021, 57 in 2020, 48 in 2019, 27 in 2018, 20 in 2017, 8 in 2016, which had the effect
of spreading the easier growth rates over the full period of revision. See the April 15 Retail
Sales paragraph; extended detail and graphs follow in pending 1460 .
(April 16) Seasonally adjusted, the March 2021 Cass Freight Index® gained 3.4% in the
month, recovering its "Polar Vortex," weather driven 3.2% (-3.2%) plunge in February
(CassInfo.com - See detail at
https://www.cassinfo.com/freight-audit-payment/cass-transportation-indexes/march-2021 and
scroll down). The March 2021 unadjusted series gained 10.03% year-to-year, versus a
weather-deflated 4.16% in February and 8.61% in January. That weather driven, downside February
aberration, broke a rising string of annual gains back to 2.43% in October 2020. Such followed
a 1.84% (-1.84%) annual decline in September 2020, which then was the 22nd consecutive
year-to-year monthly decline. The recent monthly annual increases in Freight Activity were the
first since the Federal Reserve's tightening of November 2018 began strangling U.S. Economic
Activity. As much of the economy declined into an unofficial "recession," Freight Activity and
the Cass Freight Index® did, too. As of March 2021, the "Two-Year Stacked Change" in the
Index (March 2021 against March 2019) held negative for the 18th-straight month, albeit
narrowed to a negligible 0.08% (-0.08%) from 3.67% (-3.67%) in February 2021. Given the March
2021 rebound from February weather, ShadowStats estimates that re-stabilizing April 2021
activity could take that two-year stacked change back to an annual decline around 1.5% (-1.5%).
In like manner, March's "Two-Year Stacked Change" in U.S. Industrial Production held negative
for the 15th straight month, down by 3.74% (-3.74%) [see second paragraph following]. Although
Freight Activity and some parts of the U.S. economy [not yet Industrial Production] have
recovered 2020 pre-Pandemic levels, those pre-Pandemic levels already were below actual peak
Freight and Economic Activity at the end of 2018, when the Fed moved to slow the economy.
Freight and related areas such as Production and Manufacturing still have not recovered their
true (albeit unofficial) pre-recession peaks. -- ShadowStats regularly follows and analyzes the
Cass Freight Index® as a highest-quality coincident and leading indicator of underlying
economic reality. We thank Cass for their permission to graph and to use their numbers in our
Commentaries. Full economic analysis of the latest monthly and quarterly economic series
follows in No. 1460
(April 16) March 2021 Housing Starts and Building Permits both showed meaningful monthly
gains, with Starts rebounding sharply from a weather-driven February plunge. As with Real
Retail Sales, April's Starts activity likely will see some pullback from March's catch-up
surge (Census Bureau). March 2021 Building Permits gained a statistically significant 2.7%
in the month (90% confidence interval), having declined by a revised 8.8% (-8.8%) [previously
10.8% (-10.8%)] in February and having gained 10.7% in January. March Housing Starts jumped by
a statistically meaningful 19.4% in the month, rebounding from a weather-driven collapse of
11.3% (-11.3%) [previously 10.3% (-10.3%)] in February, and a revised January decline of 1.7%
(-1.7%) [previously 5.1% (-5.1%). As headlined, March 2021 Building Permits and Housing Starts
respectively gained 30.2% and 37.0% year-to-year against Pandemic-savaged March 2020 activity,
up respectively against their February 2020 pre-Pandemic peaks by 22.8% and 11.0%. That said,
both headline March 2021 Permits and Starts still held shy of ever recovering their pre-Great
Recession peak levels of activity, respectively by 22.0% (-22.0%) and 23.5% (-23.5%).
(April 15) Constrained by Motor Vehicle production issues for a second month, March
Industrial Production came in well below expectations, suggestive of slowing First-Quarter 2021
GDP (Federal Reserve Board). Nonetheless, disrupted by the Pandemic, year-to-year change in
March 2021 Industrial Production turned positive for the first time in 18 months (since
September 2019), gaining 1.02% year-to-year, having declined by 4.77% (-4.77%) in February
2021. Yet, that annual gain was against Pandemic-collapsed activity in March 2020. Against its
pre-Pandemic peak activity of February 2020, headline March 2021 production still declined by
3.40% (-3.40%), more in line with the February 2021 annual decline. A two-year stacked decline
(against March 2019) showed March 2021 activity down by 3.74% (-3.74%), versus 5.00% (-5.00%)
in February 2021. The issues here and the ShadowStats approaches to related reporting and
graphics are detailed in Benchmark Commentary No. 1459 , with extended detail in
Economic Commentary No. 1460 . Otherwise, March 2021 Industrial Production gained 1.44%
in the month (up by 0.89% net of revisions), having declined by 2.62% (-2.62%) in February.
Parallel numbers for March 2021 Manufacturing showed a monthly gain of 2.73% [2.11%
net of revisions], against a monthly drop of 3.73% (-3.73%) in February. Annual growth turned
positive by 3.14% in March 2021, versus 20 straight months of annual decline, from July 2019
through a 4.66% (-4.66%) drop in February 2021. March 2021 activity, however, was down by 2.06%
(-2.06%) against its February 2020 pre-Pandemic peak, and was down in a two-year stacked
decline of 2.34% (-2.34%) in March 2021, versus 4.99% (-4.99%) in February 2021. Mining
showed a monthly gain of 5.66% [5.83% net of revisions], against a monthly drop of 5.62%
(-5.62%) in February. Annual growth held negative at 8.82% (-8.82%) for the 12th month (since
April 2020), down by 10.39% (-10.39%) against its pre-Pandemic and pre-Oil Price War high,
versus a February 2021 annual decline of 15.20% (-15.20%). Utilities showed a record
monthly drop (since 1972) of 11.39% (-11.39%)[down 12.18% (-12.18%) net of revisions], against
a monthly gain of 9.18% in February. A March 2021 annual decline of 0.22% (-0.22%) was seen
there versus a 3.27% (-3.27%) drop against its pre-Pandemic high, and versus a February annual
gain of 9.15%.
(April 15) Extreme monthly Retail Sales volatility is likely to continue for another
month (Census -- see April 26 Benchmark Revision paragraph). ShadowStats standardly removes
growth due to inflation from the headline Retail Sales series, reporting it in Real or
Inflation-Adjusted Terms, deflated by the seasonally-adjusted CPI-U as otherwise calculated by
the St. Louis Fed. On that basis, the headline nominal March 2021 monthly Retail Sales gain of
9.8% was 9.1% in real terms, net of inflation.
Beyond large monthly swings in activity reflecting massive weather disruptions, and despite
intensifying Production issues, surging Motor Vehicle sales reportedly drove that greater than
expected 9.1% surge in Real Retail Sales, rebounding from a 3.1% (-3.1%) weather-driven plunge
in February; watch for a likely stabilizing 2.9% (-2.9%) pullback in April 2021 sales, which
appears likely to bring Real Retail Sales back into balance, with monthly growth stabilizing,
averaging around 0.9%. That said, Real Sales gained year-to-year by 24.4% in March 2021,
against Pandemic collapsed activity in March 2020. Against its pre-Pandemic peak of February
2020, March 2021 activity gained 15.9% (see the related discussion in No. 1459 and
pending 1460 . That annual gain, or change from pre-Pandemic peak activity, followed an
annual gain of 4.9% (previously 4.5%) in February 2021, and a revised 8.1% [previously 8.0%,
initially 6.0%] in January 2021.
(April 13) March 2021 unadjusted year-to-year March 2021 Consumer Price Inflation (CPI-U)
jumped 2.62% -- a one-year high -- as gasoline prices soared, not only fully recovering pre-Oil
Price War levels of a year ago, but also hitting the highest unadjusted levels since May of
2019 (Bureau of Labor Statistics - BLS). Headline March 2021 CPI-U gained 0.62% in the
month, 2.62% year-to-year, against monthly and annual gains of 0.35% and 1.68% in February.
That inflation pickup reflected more than a full recovery in gasoline prices, which had been
severely depressed by the Oil Price War of one year ago. Such had had the effect of depressing
headline U.S. inflation up through February 2021, including suppressing the 2021 Cost of Living
Adjustment (COLA) for Social Security by about one-percentage point to the headline 1.3%. By
major sector, March Food prices gained 0.11% in the month, 3.47% year-to-year (vs. 0.17% and
3.62% in February); "Core" (ex-Food and Energy) prices gained 0.34% in March, 1.65%
year-to-year (vs. 0.35% and 1.28% in February); Energy prices gained 5.00% in March, 13.17%
year-to-year (vs. 3.85% and 2.36% in February), with underlying Gasoline prices gaining 9.10%
in the month, 22.48% year-to-year (vs. 6.41% and 1.52% in February).
The March 2021 ShadowStats Alternate CPI (1980 Base) rose to 10.4% year-to-year, up from
9.4% in February 2021 and against 9.1% in January 2021. The ShadowStats Alternate CPI-U
estimate restates current headline inflation so as to reverse the government's
inflation-reducing gimmicks of the last four decades, which were designed specifically to
reduce/ understate COLAs. Related graphs and methodology are available to all on the updated
ALTERNATE DATA tab above. Subscriber-only data downloads and an Inflation Calculator are
available there, with extended details in pending No. 1460 .
(April 9) March 2021 Producer Prices exploded across the board, with record levels of
annualized First-Quarter 2021 Inflation of 8.99% for Total PPI-FD, 16.04% for PPI-FD Goods
Sector and 5.62% for PPI-FD Services Sector (BLS). Those record levels were in context of
the current PPI historical series that began in November 2009. On the more-meaningful Goods
side, Energy and "Core" inflation hit respective historic annualized quarterly peaks of 78.80%
and 7.11%, while annualized quarterly Food inflation slowed to 5.44% having its earlier
historic peak of 13.68% in Fourth-Quarter 2020. On a monthly basis, March 2021 PPI-FD Goods
gained a stronger than expected 1.67%, versus 1.44% in February, with March 2021 year-to-year
growth jumping to 6.97%, from 3.39% in February. Food, Energy and "Core" (net of Food and
Energy) Sectors respectively gained 0.48%, 0.91% and 5.88% in the month, and 5.05%, 24.26% and
3.47% year-to-year.
(April 7) Continuing sharp deterioration with the headline February 2021 Real Merchandise
Trade Deficit indicated a likely record First-Quarter 2021 trade shortfall, with a
corresponding hit to First-Quarter GDP. (Census / BEA). Still in sharp deterioration
against December 2020 and 4q2020 activity, the January 2021 Real Merchandise Trade Deficit
narrowed minimally in revision, accompanied by initial headline reporting of an accelerated
deepening in the February 2021 Deficit. Those numbers are on track for an historic, record Real
Merchandise Trade Deficit in 1q2021. In turn, that suggests a deepening quarterly hit to the
April 29th release of the "Advance" First-Quarter 2021 GDP. Expanded detail and graphs follow
in No. 1460 .
(April 2) Despite some monthly improvement, March 2021 Labor Details still indicate no
GDP recovery at hand (Bureau of Labor Statistics - BLS). Seasonally-adjusted March 2021
Payroll Employment declined year-to-year by 4.5% (-4.5%) versus a revised 6.1% (-6.1%)
[previously 6.2% (-6.2%)] in February 2021. That narrowed annual decline was helped by initial
year-ago Pandemic impact on labor conditions. February 2020 activity was the pre-Pandemic
series peak, and March 2020 data were net of minimal initial Pandemic hit, in advance of the
massive collapse seen in the April 2020 numbers. Against the Pre-Pandemic peak, March 2021 was
down by 5.5% (-5.5%), versus the headline virus-narrowed 4.5% (-4.5%). Discussed and graphed in
pending No. 1459 , and consistent with recent annual growth comparisons to pre-Pandemic
levels, a 5.5% (-5.5%) drop has not been seen since the 1946 post-World War II war-production
shutdown of the U.S. economy. That circumstances still indicates no imminent recovery in the
U.S. GDP, irrespective of usual reporting games played with the headline GDP series.
After thirteen months, the BLS still cannot count the Unemployed. Headline U.3
Unemployment also remained deep in non-recovery territory. The BLS acknowledged continuing
misclassification of some "unemployed" persons as "employed," in the Household Survey. Where
the count of the understated unemployed had an "upside limit" of 636,000 persons in March 2021,
the February 2021 upside estimate of understated unemployed was 756,000. The difference would
be a potential headline U.3 of 6.44% instead of today's headline 6.05%, which was down from a
headline 6.22% in February. Fully adjusted for COVID-19 disruptions, based on BLS side-surveys
of Pandemic impact, and with more than six million people missing from the headline U.S. labor
force, actual headline U.3 unemployment still should be well above 10%, the highest
unemployment rate since before World War II, outside of the Pandemic and possibly at the trough
of the 1982-1983 recession. Broader March 2021 headline U.6 unemployment [including some
decline in short-term discouraged workers and those employed part-time for economic reasons]
eased to 10.71% from 11.07% in February. Including long-term discouraged/ displaced workers,
the March 2021 ShadowStats Alternate Measure –- moving on top of the decline in U.6
–- notched minimally lower to 25.7%, from 25.8% in February 2021, reflecting some modeled
transition of "short-term" to "long-term" discouraged workers, with the Pandemic having passed
its 12-month anniversary. The latest Unemployment Rates are posted on the ALTERNATE DATA
tab (above).
• S Y S T E M I C .. R I S K -- The April 2021 FOMC Meeting produced no change in
Policy or Outlook (April 28th, Federal Reserve Board's Federal Open Market Committee [FOMC]
Statement and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome S. Powell's Press Conference). With no shift in
the FOMC economic or inflation outlook, existing stimulus and federal funds rate policies are
expected to continue through year-end 2023, as projected previously at the March 2021 FOMC
Meeting. That said, Chairman Powell forewarned of a possible "temporary" boost to the FOMC's
targeted Inflation Series, as discussed earlier in the second paragraph of the LATEST
NUMBERS section, and opening paragraphs on the GDP.
Today's Federal Reserve Press Release reconfirmed, once again: "The Committee [FOMC] seeks
to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run. With
inflation running persistently below this longer-run goal, the Committee will aim to achieve
inflation moderately above 2 percent for some time so that inflation averages 2 percent over
time and longer-term inflation expectations remain well anchored at 2 percent. The Committee
expects to maintain an accommodative stance of monetary policy until these outcomes are
achieved."
(April 27) March 2021 Money Supply and Monetary Base Continued to Explode (Federal
Reserve Board - FRB). Where the Pandemic began hitting the system hard in March 2020, the
Federal Reserve responded with a massive influx of Money Supply -- liquidity. Accordingly,
comparative year-to-year change in the various March 2021 Money Supply measures tends to be
depressed, against what otherwise was the February 2020 Pre-Pandemic trough in the various
Money Supply measures, before the March 2020 surge. Here is how the various measures shape up.
ShadowStats "Basic M1" (Currency plus Demand Deposits) gained by a depressed 62.1% year-to-year
in March 2021, versus 69.6% in February 2021, yet March 2021 was up by a record 73.6% against
that February 2020 Pre-Pandemic trough, contrasted versus the February 2021 62.1% change
year-to-year, and against that same February 2020 Pre-Pandemic trough. The Money Supply numbers
have been updated to the ALTERNATE DATA tab. See the detailed discussion and graphs in
No. 1459 and pending No. 1460 .
In like manner, March 2021 versus the February 2020 Pre-Pandemic trough, and February 2021
against the February 2020 Pre-Pandemic trough (and year-to-year) shape up as follows. Newly
redefined headline M1 was up a record 363.9% versus 356.9% (or 34.0% versus 32.1% on what would
be a more-consistent basis going forward). M2 was up 28.6% versus 27.0%, and M3 was up 23.4%
versus 22.5%.
On a parallel basis, although not hitting the record levels of the 2007-2008 Banking System
Collapse, the March 2021 Monetary Base change versus the Pre-Pandemic trough and February 2021
year-to-year change hit 69.0% versus 57.7%, with Currency at a record 17.8% versus 16.9%, and
with Bank Reserves surging 124.6% versus 101.9%, as though it were the 2007-2008 collapse.
The Money Supply Table and Graphs on the ALTERNATE DATA tab, and the data here,
again, reflect March 2021 Money Supply and Monetary Base growth against the February 2020
Pre-Pandemic trough level, which otherwise is muted by the crisis passing beyond its first
anniversary and against surging Money Supply growth in March 2020, as the FOMC entered its
initial panic.
(April 6th) U.S. Government 2020 Financial Statements. -- The deepening
deficit net worth of the U.S. Government's financial condition hit a record shortfall –
negative net worth – of $113.8 trillion in fiscal year 2020 (year-ended September 30),
widening from a $103.4 trillion negative net worth in 2019. That 2020 shortfall reflected
an operating deficit "Net Position" or operating negative net worth of $26.8 trillion in 2020,
widening from a Net Position deficit of $23.0 trillion in 2019, plus deepening unfunded Social
Security and Medicare net liabilities (Closed Group) of $87.0 trillion in 2020, versus $80.4
trillion in 2019. As did her predecessors, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen described the
current "Fiscal Path" as "Unsustainable," with the government's current Debt-to-GDP ratio at
100% in 2020, predicted to go to 623% before the end of the Century. Those indications are
overly optimistic in the extreme. Allowing for the "Unfunded" Liabilities, the Debt-to GDP
ratio was 531% in fiscal 2020. The 2020 Financial Report is available here:
https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/financial-report/ -- ShadowsStats will
provide extended analysis in pending No. 1461 .
Systemic Turmoil is just beginning, with both the Fed and U.S. Government driving
uncontrolled U.S. dollar creation, between unconstrained Money Supply growth and uncontained
Deficit Spending. Again, continued extraordinary Monetary and Fiscal Stimulus will be
needed at least into 2022, irrespective of the nature of the COVID-19 vaccines. Indeed, likely
leading into accelerating inflation, Hyperinflation, both extreme Monetary and Fiscal stimuli
are underway. Discussions on the inflation threat and re-accelerating money growth are found in
Special Hyperinflation Commentary, Issue No. 1438 , subsequent missives including
particularly No. 1451 and No. 1454 , with a fully updated and expanded review
pending in Benchmark Economic Commentary, Issue No. 1461 .
Economic, FOMC, financial-market, political and social circumstances all continue to evolve
along with the Pandemic and unfolding political circumstances. COVID-19 vaccines and improved
treatment hold out some prospect of limited economic improvement in 2021 or 2022. Still, many
segments and regions of the U.S. economy, and individual, personal circumstances have suffered
severe structural damage from the shutdown, areas that likely will take years to recover fully.
Accordingly, ongoing massive Fiscal and Monetary Stimuli will be needed and likely will expand
well into 2023, per both the current FOMC outlook and the ongoing ShadowStats assessment.
SHADOWSTATS ALERT: In context of the still-evolving Coronavirus Pandemic and related or
economic crises, near-term financial-market risks from negative economic, liquidity and
political issues, are intensified by potential Hyperinflation, long viewed by ShadowStats as
the ultimate fate of the U.S. Dollar. That said, irrespective of recent relative weakness
in gold prices and related Central Bank or other market machinations, the ShadowStats broad
outlook in the weeks and months ahead remains for: (1) A continuing and renewed deepening
(potentially hyperinflationary) U.S. economic collapse, reflected in (2) Continued flight to
safety in precious metals, with accelerating upside pressures on gold and silver prices, (3)
Mounting selling pressure on the U.S. dollar, against the Swiss Franc and other stronger
currencies, and (4) Despite recent extreme Stock Market volatility, continuing high risk of
major instabilities and heavy stock-market selling, complicated by ongoing direct, supportive
market interventions arranged by the U.S. Treasury Secretary, as head of the President's
Working Group on Financial Markets (a.k.a. the "Plunge Protection Team"), or as otherwise gamed
by the FOMC.
• P O S T I N G .. S C H E D U L E .. (Updated April 29th) -- Commentary postings on
www.ShadowStats.com are advised to Subscribers by a coincident e-mail, along with appropriate
links. [Subject to Change] Economic Commentary No. 1460 will post over this weekend,
reviewing recent economic, financial-market and monetary numbers and FOMC developments.
Benchmark Commentary No. 1461 likely will follow over the May 8th Weekend, updating the
ShadowStats Long-Term Economic and Inflation Outlook.
PENDING EVENTS AND DATA: The Census Bureau will publish March 2021 Construction Spending
and annual revisions on May 3rd at 10:00 a.m. ET, ShadowStats coverage should follow by
4:00 p.m. ET.
• ARCHIVES - VIEWING EARLIER COMMENTARIES. ShadowStats postings of December 2020
and before - back to 2004 - are open to all, accessible by clicking on "Archives," at the
bottom of the left-hand column of this ShadowStats homepage.
• ALTERNATE DATA TAB provides the latest headline data, exclusive ShadowStats
Alternate Estimates and related Graphs of Inflation, GDP, Unemployment, Money Supply [just
updated] and the ShadowStats Financial-Weighted U.S. Dollar. Data downloads and the Inflation
Calculator are subscriber only.
"... Since 2000, the US debt has increased about $20 trillion, roughly $1 trillion a year in deficit spending. In that same time, inflation adjusted GDP has risen one whole quarter. ..."
"... Throw the super rich into the mix and there is not much left for the little people. ..."
"... This "recovery" is based on liquidity, money printing and debt. May as well just make up the GDP numbers like the inflation numbers. ..."
There is an overly optimistic consensus view about the speed and strength of the United States' recovery that is contradicted
by facts. It is true that the United States recovery is stronger than the European or Japanese one, but the macro data shows that
the euphoric messages about aggregate GDP growth are wildly exaggerated.
Of course, Gross Domestic Product is going to rise fast, with estimates of 6% for 2021. It would be alarming if it did not after
a massive chain of stimuli of more than 12% of GDP in fiscal spending and $7 trillion in Federal Reserve balance sheet expansion.
This is a combined stimulus that is almost three times larger than the 2008 crisis one, according to McKinsey.
The question is, what is the quality of this recovery? The answer is: extremely poor.
The United States real growth excluding the increase in debt will continue to be exceedingly small. No one can talk about a strong
recovery when industry capacity utilization is at 74%, massively below the level of 80% at which it was before the pandemic. Furthermore,
labor force participation rate stands at 61.5%, significantly below the pre-covid level and stalling after bouncing to 62% in September.
Unemployment may be at 6%, but it is still almost twice as large as it was before the pandemic. Continuing jobless claims remain
above 3.7 million in April.
Weekly jobless claims remain above 500,000 and the total number of people claiming benefits in all programs -- state and federal
combined -- for the week ending March 27 decreased by 1.2 million to 16.9 million.
These figures must be put in the context of the unprecedented spending spree and the monetary stimulus. Yes, the recovery is better
than the Eurozone's thanks to a fast and efficient vaccination rollout and the dynamism of the United States business fabric, but
the figures show that a relevant amount of the subsequent stimulus plans have simply perpetuated overcapacity, kept zombie firms
that had financial issues before covid-19 alive and bloated the government structural deficit and mandatory spending.
Would the United States economy had recovered as fast as it has without the deficit-spending stimulus plans? Maybe. I believe
so because the entire recovery, both in markets and the economy, has been driven by the vaccine news and the process of inoculation.
Most of the programs that have been implemented have had a small impact compared to the re-opening of the hospitality sector and
the vaccinations. The entire economic crisis came from the lockdowns and the virus and the entire recovery is the re-opening and
the vaccinations.
My main concern is that this monster deficit and debt program has been set as the minimum for the next crisis. No one has analysed
if the spending plans have been effective. In fact, in the eurozone no one seems to be concerned about the fact that countries that
have spent between 20 to 30% of GDP in stimulus plans are now in stagnation. The mainstream message seems to be that if the spending
plans have not worked it is because they were not large enough. Very few seem to be discussing the waste in public funding when the
number one drivers of the recovery are the vaccine roll-out and the re-opening of the services sector.
It seems that governments want to convince us that they have saved the world when the reality is that the misguided lockdowns
were the cause of the economic debacle and lifting them is the main cause of the recovery. In the process, trillions have been squandered.
It is dangerous to accept that government spending no matter how much and what for is the only solution and even more dangerous to
believe that the shape of the recovery is only a function of the size of the stimulus package. The problem was the virus and the
government-imposed lockdowns, the solution is the vaccine and the re-opening. The problem was caused by government's lack of prevention
and excess of interventionism and the solution is not more intervention.
Bay Area Guy 38 minutes ago
Since 2000, the US debt has increased about $20 trillion, roughly $1 trillion a year in deficit spending. In that same
time, inflation adjusted GDP has risen one whole quarter. The other 19-3/4 years, real GDP declined.
This, despite the aforementioned $20 trillion in deficit spending. The "recovery" is not strong because we never got out of
the recession/depression that was caused by the dot.com bubble bursting as well
as the 2008 financial crisis.
When real GDP declines despite such massive infusions of debt, you're in big trouble. The fact that this also happened at a
time when population (both legal and illegal) was rising means that more people are trying to get a share of an ever-shrinking
pie. It's a recipe for disaster.
jim942 35 minutes ago
Throw the super rich into the mix and there is not much left for the little people.
GlassHouse101 53 minutes ago
"If you could print Prosperity, you would have thought they would have figured it out sometime over the past few hundred years."
- Buffett
khakuda 32 minutes ago (Edited)
This "recovery" is based on liquidity, money printing and debt. May as well just make up the GDP numbers like the inflation
numbers.
GeezerGeek 20 minutes ago
It's never made sense to me why consumer spending should be part of the gross domestic product. If .GOV passed out $20 trillion
and gave people one year to spend it, would the GDP really be increased? If we had to produce those products here in the USSA
it might come close to reality, but if all we spent the money on was stuff from Asia and nothing was produced here, the GDP would
crash in 2022 without another $25 trillion to keep things going.
We should be using a different yardstick for measuring the economy, using things like real production (cars, corn) and non-government
employment.
New weekly jobless claims likely
edged higher last week after plunging to the lowest level since the start of the pandemic.
The Department of Labor will
release its weekly report on new jobless claims on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics expected from the report,
compared to consensus data compiled by Bloomberg:
Initial jobless claims, week ended April
17:
610,000
expected vs. 576,000 during the prior week
Continuing claims, week ended April 3:
3.640 million expected vs. 3.731 million
during the prior week
Last week's new claims came as a
welcome surprise after more than a year of elevated initial filings. At 576,000, new claims broke below the Great Recession-era
high of 665,000 filed in March 2009 for the first time in more than a year. And claims have dropped precipitously from their
all-time high of 6.1 million from last spring.
But the labor market recovery has
still been choppy, and the general downtrend in new jobless claims over the past several months has come with some bumps higher.
Other reports have also underscored the stop-and-start nature of the rebound, with the
Federal
Reserve's latest Beige Book last week
noting that many regions continued to experience labor shortages as well as hiring
challenges over the past several weeks.
^DJI
+0.74%
Jobless claims preview: Another 610,000 Americans likely filed new unemployment claims
Emily McCormick
·
Reporter
Wed, April 21, 2021, 2:00 PM
More content below
More content below
More content below
More content below
More content below
More content below
NQ=F
+0.54%
^IXIC
+0.74%
SPY
+0.69%
YM=F
+0.78%
+2
New weekly jobless claims
likely edged higher last week after plunging to the lowest level since the start of the pandemic.
The Department of Labor
will release its weekly report on new jobless claims on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics expected from
the report, compared to consensus data compiled by Bloomberg:
Initial jobless claims, week ended April
17:
610,000
expected vs. 576,000 during the prior week
Continuing claims, week ended April 3:
3.640 million expected vs. 3.731
million during the prior week
Last week's new claims came
as a welcome surprise after more than a year of elevated initial filings. At 576,000, new claims broke below the Great
Recession-era high of 665,000 filed in March 2009 for the first time in more than a year. And claims have dropped
precipitously from their all-time high of 6.1 million from last spring.
But the labor market
recovery has still been choppy, and the general downtrend in new jobless claims over the past several months has come with
some bumps higher. Other reports have also underscored the stop-and-start nature of the rebound, with the
Federal
Reserve's latest Beige Book last week
noting that many regions continued to experience labor shortages as well as
hiring challenges over the past several weeks.
And even within the jobless
claims report, some metrics have remained stubbornly elevated and pointed to persistently high levels of unemployment.
Nearly 17 million Americans were still receiving unemployment benefits across all programs as of late March, including more
than 12 million Americans on the federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation
program, which each expire in September. And some individual states, including Nevada and Alaska, continue to post insured
unemployment rates that are well above the national average.
NOTE: At their peak in April 2020,
more than 6 million Americans made first-time claims for unemployment assistance in a single
week. And for 20 weeks in a row, more than a million people filed initial jobless claims.
As of March,
total employment in the U.S. was still more than 8 million below February 2020 levels. In
short, the labor market recovery still has a very long way to go.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) recently published state personal income and GDP data
for the fourth quarter and 2020 calendar year. Most states suffered a massive decline in GDP in
2020's second quarter as governors followed the advice of public-health officials to shut down
businesses to "flatten the curve."
But the new data show that states that allowed businesses to reopen sooner, and maintained
fewer restrictions for the rest of the year, recovered by year-end. Real GDP for private
industries fell 1.3% nationally at an annual compounded rate between the first and fourth
quarters, according to BEA.
Yet there was large variation among the states. Hawaii's economy declined the most (-9.9%)
-- no surprise given its dependence on tourism. Wyoming (-6.6%) and other energy-producing
states were also slow to bounce back. New York's (-5%) recovery was third worst, and even New
Jersey (-2.3%) and Connecticut (-0.3%) fared better. Utah performed the best, growing 4.3%. It
also has the sixth lowest per capita Covid death rate.
The situation with office and retail space after COVID-19 is simply bad. There will be no return to previous state. And this situation generall reflact that general situation in the US economy/ In this sense stock market is completely detached from reality, fueled by speculation and 401K inflows. The latter makes passivly managed funds like based on S&P500 index yet another Ponzi scheme.
Office and retail vacancies are up, driving rents down, but the first quarter vacancy
rate at regional and super-regional malls stands out. The
record
11.4% rate
is a 90-basis-point jump from the previous quarter, according to Moody's Analytics REIS.
The vacancy rate at those malls is up 0.4% year over year, with asking rents down 1%
and effective rents (which adds in other variables that affect occupancy cost) down 1.5%.
Given the ongoing structural changes in the U.S. mall sector, that's not likely the
bottom, according to a report from Moody's Analytics Senior Economist Thomas LaSalvia.
... "
Both office and retail are going through a structural change that will continue to
cause many firms to look closely at their respective footprints,"
LaSalvia said
.
"As their leases expire, it is likely some will move or downsize, putting further downward pressure on rents and vacancy rates
through this year and into 2022."
The fate of malls is the most dire. Retailers were already shrinking their footprints,
especially at malls, well before the pandemic. The flight of anchors has also picked up, as department stores like Nordstrom
and Macy's increasingly
shy
away from the mall.
Since the start of the pandemic, with retail businesses scrutinizing their store productivity more
closely than ever, much power has
shifted
away from landlords
, which are making more concessions to lease terms.
..."[R]
etail is slogging through the evolutionary process that started well before the
pandemic,"
LaSalvia said
. "Malls are of more concern than neighborhood centers,
but even then, it is unlikely that we will close down every single mall in the US."
9.1ontherichterscale
34 minutes ago
(Edited)
Who wants
to go to a mall to be immersed in all sorts of diversity?
Malls
were nice in the 1980s.
SMC
13 minutes ago
Strength through diversity expects that each human will on average, provide their best and not be silenced
or restrained by expectations of physical and/or intellectual equality.
Our
ancestors fought and bled so all citizens are free men and women. The virtual chains some citizens wear
today are of their own making. If they are not tossed aside, tomorrow they may real for all.
FurnitureFireSale
30 minutes ago
I
don't feel like dealing with hood rats. Most of America feels the same way, I suspect.
PGR88
26 minutes ago
(Edited)
Our
local mega-mall, when it was functioning "normally" a decade ago, needed an actual army of hired security
on Thursday/Friday/Saturdays to manage the local hood rats who crossed the highway from the ghetto, to
prevent them from tearing the place apart.
CheapBastard
25 minutes ago
Mall
vacancies and business closures all time high under Biden.
Fact
Checked : True ✔️
yerfej
11 minutes ago
Sometimes reality bites.
homeskillet
17 minutes ago
The Malls will also be listed as a Covid fatality, but they had many other underlying causes...
like a
motorcycle accident being listed as a Covid fatality.
itstippy
23 minutes ago
The
big mall in Madison, WI (East Towne Mall) has been dying for a couple decades now, but all kinds of Big Box
stores and chain restaraunts around it have been thriving. As mall traffic diminished every year, Gander
Mountain, Cabellas, Target, and many others built giant retail outlets in the same area stealing the mall's
business. Dozens of chain restaraunts moved in too. Traffic was busy, busy.
Now
the entire area, mall and surrounding retail, is dying. It started before the Covid-19 retail catastrophe
and I doubt it will reverse. People sit at home, buy stuff from Amazon, buy food from Go Grub, and get
social interaction on Twitter & Facebook.
The
mall has nothing left but a Sunglasses Hut and a store that sells cinnamon sticky buns.
arby63
29 minutes ago
Too much has changed for traditional malls to survive. I cannot imagine a solid path forward.
adr
25 minutes ago
(Edited)
You
can go to what was one of the busy high end malls outside Boston, and see half of it empty.
The
stores that are open only allow five to eight customers in at a time, and have a ten minute time limit for
you to spend inside. Stores worth going to have lines of people outside. You are also pretty much forced to
buy something, otherwise the people waiting in line scream at you for wasting their time.
The
food courts are open, but only for takeout. You can't sit in the mall and eat.
It is
just about the worst experience you can have. Then you can't even go to a bar, because all bars in
Massachusetts are still closed. You can only get alcohol if you are eating food.
After mixed messages in last week's claims data (low initial claims, record high pandemic
continuing claims), analysts expected a further fall in first time jobless benefit seekers but
were disappointed as claims rose from 684k the previous week to 719k last week.
... Total return swaps are brokered by Wall Street banks. They provide investors with
exposure to the profits or losses of stocks or other assets, without the investor actually
holding the underlying shares. Archegos's strategy backfired in recent weeks after ViacomCBS
and other stocks sold off. Mr. Hwang's firm was unable to meet its obligations to its banking
partners, which in turn liquidated large chunks of stock they had amassed to underpin the
trades. Among the banks
now facing steep losses are Credit Suisse Group AG and Nomura Holdings Inc.
"report on January personal income and spending shows just how important the stimulus
packages enacted by the federal government both last spring and last month have been to
sustaining the economy."
The truth of that was confirmed on the back end in this morning's report for February, in
which January's 10% increase in income was followed by a -7.1% decrease (red). January's
increase of 3.4% in spending was also partially reversed by a -1.0% decrease in February
(blue):
... ... ...
Employment is down over 5% since last February, while production is down 4%. Meanwhile,
income is down only 2.5%, and real sales have actually increased by nearly 5%! Most recently,
in the combined two-month period since December, two of the series – payrolls and real
sales – have increased, while the other two – industrial production and income less
government payments – have declined.
Since the Big Texas Freeze impacted probably substantially impacted all of these, the
underlying situation is presumably better.
The USA remains is secular stagnation mode caused by neoliberalization of the economy and
2008 financial crisis. Nothing can change that.
When Microsoft and Facebook are called high growth stock the question arise about the sanity
of the author. How they can achieve high growth? Facebook user base probably might even shrink,
not expand due to negative publicity as being a surveillance company and more and more obnoxious
censorship.
Microsoft achieved dominance in desktop long ago and with PC sales basically stagnant how it
can grow in its key market? Connections to PRISM also do not help.
Wall Street speculated on the identity of the mysterious seller behind the massive $10.5
billion in block trades executed on Friday by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The question is why did
these block trades occur? Does one firm know something others don't or were they somehow forced
to cut risk? Read More: 'Unprecedented'-
Wall Street Ponders Goldman's Block-Trade Spree
Much of the stock market's recent turbulence has been an after-effect of movements in the
bond market, where Treasury yields have been largely climbing since last autumn. Higher yields
can make investors less willing to pay high prices for stocks, with companies seen as the most
expensive taking the most pain. Companies that ask their investors to wait many years for the
payoff of big profit growth have also been hit hard.
The yield on the 10-year Treasury rose to 1.67% from 1.61% late Thursday. But that's still
below where it was last week, when it rose above 1.70% and touched its highest level since
before the pandemic began.
The higher yields helped lift stocks of banks, in part because higher interest rates allow
them to make bigger profits from making loans. Financial stocks also got a boost after the
Federal Reserve said it will soon allow
banks to resume buying back their own stock and to send bigger dividend payments to
shareholders. The Fed restricted such moves last summer to force banks to hold onto cash
cushions amid the coronavirus-caused recession.
Some of Friday's biggest gains came from energy stocks, which benefited from a $2.41 rise in
the price of U.S. oil, settling at $60.97 per barrel.
... ... ...
President Joe Biden is pushing for
big spending on the nation's infrastructure , as many past presidents have done to little
effect. "Whether or not it happens or doesn't happen, the market feels like there's more of a
possibility that it will happen," Plumb said.
... high-growth stocks were turning in a mixed performance on Friday. Apple rose 0.5%, but
only after swinging between gains and losses numerous times through the day. Microsoft rallied
1.8%, and Facebook climbed 1.5%, but Tesla dropped 3.4%.
In the background is a continuing stark
economic situation in the US : After shedding
140,000 jobs in December, the economy added back just 50,000 jobs in January. The country
is still short 10 million jobs from where it was pre-pandemic, and some 4 million workers have
dropped out of the workforce. In that context, it's hard to gauge just how much to worry about
overshooting it on the response.
When the most respected bank in the US feels compelled to publish A 42-page "guide to
bubbles and why we are not in one" in response to what is a clear outpouring of client concerns
that we are, in fact, in one we repsectfully leave it up to readers to read between the lines
and reach the obvious conclusion.
We say that because reading Goldman's actual lines is quite painful: in his (futile) attempt
to convince the bank's clients that US stocks are not, in fact, in a bubble, Goldman strategist
Peter Oppenheimer writes that "in recent weeks there have been growing concerns about a bubble
building up in the equity market and across financial markets in general" before eventually
concluding that "while there are pockets of excessive valuations in equities, and parts of the
market are justifiably de-rating as interest rates adjust, in our assessment only a few of
these common characteristics are currently present or being partially met. Importantly, the
absence of significant leverage (outside of the government sector) and the early stage of the
cycle suggest that the risks of an imminent bubble with systemic risks to the financial system
and economies is relatively low."
... ... ...
But wait, it gets even dumber, because in the very next attempt to refute the existence of a
bubble, Goldman says that there are only "a few" consistent hallmarks of financial bubbles,
with the majority "characterized by many, if not most, of the following":
Excessive price appreciation & extreme valuations
New valuation approaches justified
Increased market concentration
Frantic speculation and investor flows
Easy credit, low rates & rising leverage
Booming corporate activity
New Era narrative and technology innovations
Late Cycle economic boom
The emergence of accounting scandals and irregularities
Hilariously, despite admitting that there are bubble signs of 7 out of 9 categories, Goldman
claims there has been no emergence of accounting scandals and irregularities..
... ... ...
If we had to summarize Goldman's thesis it would be that while pockets of exuberance and
excessive price rises increase, they do not necessarily mean that a broader and systemically
dangerous bubble is forming more broadly.
In the S&P 500 -- the best- performing of the major equity markets -- the rise of
the past few years has been impressive, particularly in technology, but it's not nearly as
extreme as the explosive rise that accrued during the late 1990s
Fundamental EPS for the leading technology companies and for the more widely owned
retail stocks have significantly outstripped those of the rest of the market, so
outperformance has been supported by superior growth and fundamentals
The rally has been based on achieved reality, not purely on hope and possibility
(Goldman must be referring to the 21x forward PE multiple here which is based on some form
of "achieved" future reality).
While high valuations imply lower longer- term returns, they don't point to a
broad-based valuation bubble in equity markets
In any case, it was around point that we gave up on reading more of this drivel, and sent
our condolences to the junior analysts who had to work a soul-crushing 100 hours a week (even
though there are millions of 25-year-olds who would kill to work 200 hour weeks for half the
pay of a Goldman analyst) to put this together.
ay_arrow
JohnGaltsChild 6 hours ago remove link
There is no bubble.
Biden won fair and square.
There is no crisis at the border.
The government never surveils private citizens.
Critical race theory is not racist.
I'm a mindless robot.
Im4truth4all 6 hours ago
Add:
Epstein committed suicide.
The FBI is committed to truth and integrity.
The Supreme Court is committed to truth and integrity.
The democrat/marxists tell no lies.
And the list goes on ad infinitum.
stop_the_fraud 6 hours ago
Bitcoin is the new world currency.
Gold is a worthless pet rock.
EV's are the future.
JohnGaltsChild 6 hours ago
"Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"
Groucho Marx
Art_Vandelay 7 hours ago (Edited)
When the most respected bank in the US.
Respected by whom, again?
Buzz-Kill 6 hours ago (Edited)
Operated by FED thieves, with politicians close behind.
khakuda 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Go back to 1999 and you will see all of the street brokers saying the same thing. It's
different this time is basically what they are saying, which is what one always hears during
bubbles.
And the accounting irregularities usually appear after the decline when they can no longer
be hidden...think Madoff or Lehman.
Victory_Rossi 6 hours ago
I don't know why anyone would do business with Goldman at all. Even if you're greedy as
fvkc and think you'll be the special one that GS doesn't screw over, why take a chance? It's
like the parable of the scorpion or snake - you know what they are so why'd you pick it up.
Good luck Muppets!! You're going to need it.
Im4truth4all 6 hours ago remove link
"If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to
believe it yourself." - Joseph Goebbels
Art_Vandelay 6 hours ago
Is Goldman getting into the comedy business now? I was sort of laughing at their analysis
the whole way through.
Watching in Baltimore 6 hours ago
"I have no fears for the future of our country. It is bright with hope."
Herbert Hoover, March 4, 1929
Death2Fiat 6 hours ago
Take a look at the Fed's M* monetary base charts.
It's straight up. 90 degree angle all the way up.
Great Iota 5 hours ago (Edited)
No Bubble? I couldn't find a single stock that was worth investing (value). Think this was
the first time in 25 years that it has happened. All equity is either losing money per share
or for every $100 you invest, you make between .001 cent to $3.50.
I remember the days when you expected companies to earn $10 to $20 per $100 depending on
industry.
Now, you got virtual intangible assets like Bitcoin, which is a total scam, its not a
currency, has no real use, and is an exact definition of a Ponzi scheme. Brilliant idiots who
collect billions from the government for having a green company and at the same time invests
billions in a Ponzi scheme that consumes ridiculous amount of energy.
in 3 months, Bitcoin will undo all the green initiatives the democrats has pushed for in
the last 20 years. Grats morons!
No one knows how to calculate energy use?
cooll 7 hours ago
Goldman = contrarian indicator.
YesWeKahn 6 hours ago
Sure, based on goldman's logics, not only there is no bubble, this is actually a multi
generational bottom, they should sell all their other assets and buy stocks.
Last week the US Federal Reserve raised its growth forecasts for the US economy for this
year and next. Fed officials now reckon the US economy with expand in real terms by 6.5%, the
fastest pace since 1984, a few years after the slump of 1980-2. This is a significant rise from
the Fed's previous forecast. Also, the unemployment rate is expected to drop to just 4.5% by
year-end, while the inflation rate ticks up to 2.2%, above the official target rate set by the
Fed.
Driving this new optimism on growth is the fast roll-out of vaccines to protect Americans
from COVID-19 plus the huge fiscal stimulus package put through Congress that most mainstream
forecasters expect to add at least 1% point to economic growth and bring down unemployment.
But Fed chair Jay Powell made it clear that the Fed had no intention of raising its target
interest rate until 2023 at the earliest even if inflation accelerates. He wants to see the
unemployment rate drop to 3.5% and inflation averaging 2% or so. He would tolerate the economy
"running hot" until that happens because he reckons that any rise in inflation would be
transitory.
The implication of Powell's view was that the US economy was going to have a 'sugar rush'
from the fiscal stimulus and from the 'pent-up' demand of consumers with cash savings ready to
spend on restaurants, leisure, travel etc once the pandemic restrictions were relaxed. But as
every parent knows, giving a child too much sugar leads to a rush of energy. And then comes the
letdown and sleep. That is what Powell worries about, namely that after this burst of energy on
the 'sugar high' of government paychecks and restaurants meals, the US economy will slip back
into the low growth trajectory that applied before the pandemic slump.
Powell is also concerned about a potential relapse in the fight against the virus and
expects fiscal support from the stimulus starting to fade next year and worries that the labour
market will continue to struggle. So he expects 'core inflation' (excluding food and energy
prices) will fall back to 2 per cent next year and 2.1 per cent in 2023. So no inflationary
spiral.
It is significant that the long-term growth forecast by the Fed is just 1.8% a year, which
is hardly any higher than average real GDP growth of 1.7% since the end of the Great Recession
and before the pandemic.
This implies that the Fed reckons the US economy is going to drop back to the rate of growth
experienced in the Long Depression since 2009, and the 'sugar rush' is just that.
What this also implies is that contrary to the views of the Keynesians, the
multiplier effect of the fiscal stimulus will soon dissipate and then the US economy will
depend, not on consumers' pent-up demand but on the willingness and ability of the capitalist
sector to invest. It's investment not consumer demand that will matter in sustaining any
significant recovery; not sugar treats but on new energy in the form of new surplus value (to
use Marx's term for profits).
Financial investors are less convinced that Powell is right. After all, getting the US
economy to achieve a 3.5% unemployment rate and 2% inflation has been achieved only twice since
1960! So 'inflation expectations' among investors have been rising, suggesting an inflation
rate of 2.6% on a five-year view. As a result, US government bond yields have also risen
significantly, as bond yields suffer in real terms if inflation rises.
The view that the US economy may 'overheat' has been argued by Larry Summers, the
arch-Keynesian of several administrations. He fears that the fiscal and monetary stimulus will
lead to 'excess demand' and so drive up prices across the board, eventually forcing the Fed to
raise interest rates. Summers argues this, because this time last year, he was telling the
world that the COVID pandemic would have little long-lasting impact and the economy would
bounce back once it was over, just like seaside towns go to sleep in the winter and then wake
up when the tourist season starts. He seems to think that the US economy will revive of its own
accord and fiscal stimulus is unnecessary. But the experience of the last year has been much
longer and more damaging than a 'winter break'.
At the other end of the argument, Summers has been scathingly attacked by post-Keynesians
and leftists who reckon there is no danger of 'overheating' and rising inflation, because there
is plenty of 'slack' in the economy ie workers needing jobs and businesses needing to start up.
But what this view ignores is the 'hysteresis' effect on the economy from the pandemic slump;
namely that many workers have been forced to leave the workforce for good over the last year
and many small to medium businesses will never return. The Long Depression has seen a steady
reduction in estimates of US productive capacity.
That means the room for economic recovery is reduced unless investment in new means of
production and employment rises significantly. So there could be 'overheating' and higher
inflation, not because of pent-up consumer demand but because of weak productive capacity
– not 'too much demand' but 'not enough supply'.
What the last ten years has shown is that business investment growth has slowed as the
profitability of productive capital has fallen in the US. Cash-rich companies and investors,
borrowing at record-low interest rates, have preferred to speculate in financial assets. The
huge tally of bailouts by central banks and cuts in corporate taxation have been spent on
driving the stock and bond markets to all-time highs while the 'real economy' has stagnated.
The bottom 80% of American households, who drive the bulk of personal consumption expenditures
(PCE), continue to struggle to make ends meet.
And down the road, rising debt cannot be ignored. And it is not so much public sector debt,
which in the US is now well above 100% of GDP; more important is corporate debt. If interest
rates for firms do start to rise because of increased inflation, then debt servicing costs for
a whole swathe of so-called 'zombie' companies will become an excessive burden and bankruptcies
will ensue.
According to Bloomberg, In the US, almost 200 big corporations have joined the ranks of
so-called zombie firms since the onset of the pandemic and now account for 20% of top 3000
largest publicly-traded companies. With debts of $1.36 trillion. That's 527 of the 3000
companies didn't earn enough to meet their interest payments!
As before, the Fed is caught. If it does not end the monetary largesse at some point, then
inflation could rise which will eat into real incomes and drive up corporate debt costs. But if
it acts to curb inflation, it could provoke a stock market crash and corporate bankruptcies.
That is what happens when an economy is in 'stagflation': namely rising inflation and low
growth.
For example, the very sharp fall in stock prices in 1987 did not lead to economic recession
and prices recovered quickly. The reason then was that the profitability of capital in the
major economies had been rising for over five years and was at a relatively high level in 1987
and profitability continued to rise for another decade. But that is not the situation now. The
profitability of capital is near all-time lows and even a recovery in 2021 and 2022 will not
put levels back to that before 1997 or 2006. And corporate debt has never been higher
historically.
These underlying forces suggest that the 'sugar rush' will be just that – a short
burst followed by slumber at best.
"If it does not end the monetary largesse at some point "
There's the rub. Moral hazard is in full effect. Too big to fail has essentially been
codified by the politicians the capitalists have purchased. So, theoretically, how long can
it all go on, assuming the power elite all agree to keep the game up? I'm surprised they've
been able to do it this long
Reply
Doesn't the role of government debt in maintaining the nominal values of fictitious
capital, either directly or by preserving nominal value of the currency, mean that many of
the winners in the depression (those that have capital reserves always win distressed
properties in a depression, no?) will find an excessive debt an unbearable burden long
before they find the gigantic flow into the banks, the stock market and corporate bonds a
threat. Given the perception that the rest of the world will always bear the brunt of US
government contraction, isn't there likely to be a major political demand for
austerity?
If the US weren't the financial nerve center, I would expect a monetary crisis in
exports, but there is no reserve currency to compete. Making a basket of currencies work or
switching to Special Drawing Rights to replace the Fed have the problem of opposing the US
government while coordinating in a kind of monetary union with other states, which is not
what good bourgeois democracies do. Gold and oil, the commodities most likely to be sought
to preserve value are either too scarce or their markets too manipulated by a handful of
players. Although an inflationary crisis/dollar collapse seems unlikely (and fears of
hyperinflation wildly inflated, barring a military defeat of the US,) It's clear to me that
a stagflation scenario is probable.
Reply
I think it is Powell who is having the sugar high. If we examine Retail Sales for the
combined months January and February a strange combination is seen. In terms of adjusted
data, the two months were up by 5.1% on the previous year, but if we examine unadjusted
figures sales were flat. Thus it appears it is all in the adjustment, with the fall in
February effectively wiping out the rise in January. https://www.census.gov/retail/index.html
Thus a $900 billion injection was effective for only one month. Yes there will be a
short term boost from the $1,900 billion ARP Bill, but that has to be set against so many
negative potential events. First and foremost, the issue of interest rates. The 10 year
rate is above, what I called the red line at 1.6%, and markets, while not sneezing have
certainly got itchy noses. I would caution against using 1987 to substantiate the view that
market crashes do not cause recessions. Conditions now are very different and the economy,
because of inequality, is much more dependent on capital gains. Thus a market crash will
wipe out any gains from these relief packages. I have been trying to look up losses in the
global bond market, which amounted to $3 trillion when the rate hit 1.4%. It is likely now
to be in the vicinity of $5 trillion.
Anyway we will know more this Thursday when corporate profits are released. Once again I
will prepare a post which looks at the rate of profit both with and without subsidies.
Reply
Hi Michael, love the blog- I just had a quick question about the US stimulus package I
was hoping you could help with.
It's about the stimulus cheques- if I remember right they're about $1,400 each. This
helicopter money sounds good, but am I not right in thinking that a lot of this will just
go into the pockets of private landlords or other rentiers and will thus have a limited
effect in terms of boosting consumer spending?
Now, let's consider the stark contrast between Biden's presentation and a speech delivered
by Governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota at the CPAC conference. For those who don't know, Noem
is the one bright star in a year of Orwellian darkness and gloom. She's a strait-laced,
plain-talking, clear-thinking conservative who sticks to her principles like glue. She is a
stalwart, red-blooded American girl who believes in God, the Constitution and the United States
of America. Here's an excerpt from her CPAC speech:
"Now everybody knows that almost overnight we went from a roaring economy to a tragic
nationwide shutdown. By the beginning of 2020, President Trump had created 7 million new
American jobs. We had the lowest unemployment rate in over half a century, and unemployment
rates for black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans reached the lowest levels in history. More
than 10 million people had been lifted out of poverty and out of welfare. And all of that
changed in March .
Now, most governors shut down their states . What followed was record unemployment,
businesses closed, most schools were shuttered and communities suffered, and the U.S. Economy
came to an immediate halt. Now let me be clear, COVID didn't crush the economy, government
crushed the economy . And then just as quickly, government turned around and held itself
out as the savior, and frankly, the Treasury Department can't print money fast enough to keep
up with Congress's wishlist. But not everyone has followed this path. For those of you who
don't know, South Dakota is the only state in America that never ordered a single business
or church to close. We never instituted a shelter in place order. We never mandated that
people wear masks. We never even defined what an essential business is, because I don't
believe that governors have the authority to tell you that your business isn't essential.
" (" Kristi Noem
CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript", rev.com)
She's right, isn't she? No elected official has the right to close a business or a church
EVER. Period. We do not bestow those powers on our governors nor are they granted under the
Constitution. Neither war nor pandemic nor any other national emergency or crisis should
ever be used to strip Americans of the liberties that are guaranteed under the Constitution of
the United States . Biden was wrong to say that the "most important function of government
is to protect the American people." That's just wrong. The most important function of
government is to preserve and protect the liberties that are outlined in the Bill of Rights.
That's job#1: Defend Freedom at all cost . Everything else is a footnote. Here's more from
Noem:
"South Dakota schools are no different than schools everywhere else in America, but we
approached the pandemic differently. From the earliest days of the pandemic our priority
was the students, their wellbeing and their education. When it was time to go back to school
in the fall, we put our kids in the classroom. Teachers, administrators, parents and the
students themselves were of one mind to make things work for our children, and the best way
to do that was in the classroom. Now in South Dakota, I provided all of the information
that we had to our people, and then I trusted them to make the best decisions for
themselves, for their families, and in turn, their communities. We never focused on the
case numbers. Instead, we kept our eye on hospital capacity. Now, Dr. Fauci, he told me
that on my worst day I'd have 10,000 patients in the hospital. On our worst day, we had a
little over 600 . Now, I don't know if you agree with me, but Dr. Fauci is wrong a
lot."
Naturally, Noem got a standing ovation when she blasted the duplicitous Lord Fauci, the man,
who more than any other, bears responsibility for almost single-handedly plunging the country
into an unprecedented crisis. Here's more:
"Even in a pandemic, public health policy needs to take into account people's economic and
social wellbeing. Daily needs still need to be met. People need to keep a roof over their
heads . They need to feed their families. And they still need purpose. They need their
dignity . Now my administration resisted the call for virus control at the expense of
everything else. We looked at the science, the data and the facts, and then we took a
balanced approach . Truthfully, I never thought that the decisions that I was making were
going to be unique. I thought that there would be more who would follow basic conservative
principles, but I guess I was wrong."
Yes, she was wrong, but who could have foreseen that every reprobate Democrat governor in
the country would simultaneously take advantage of a public health crisis to impose de facto
martial law? We never saw that coming, although, we have to assume that there must have been
some tacit agreement and coordination among the governors and their paymasters that they would
fall-in-line when the time was right . Ahh, but that's conspiracy talk!
Damn right, it is! Here's more:
"Many in the media, criticized South Dakota's approach. They labeled me as ill-informed,
that I was reckless, and even a denier. The media did all of this while simultaneously
praising governors who issued lockdowns, who mandated masks and shut down businesses,
applauding them as having taken the right steps to mitigate the spread of the virus. At one
point, I appeared on George Stephanopoulos' Sunday Show. He had just wrapped up a segment
with New York Governor, Andrew Cuomo, where he asked Cuomo to give me some advice on how to
deal with COVID." (Loud Laughter)
In South Dakota, we did things differently. We applied common sense and conservative
governing principles. We never exceeded our hospital capacity and our economy is booming.
We have the lowest unemployment rate in the nation. We are number one in the nation for
keeping jobs, keeping businesses open and keeping money in the pockets of our people. The
people of South Dakota kept their hours and their wages at a higher rate than workers
anywhere else in the nation. And our schools are open . Our founding fathers established
our National Constitution, and the people of individual states crafted their own
constitutions that place specific limits on the role of government. Those limits are
essential to preventing government officials from trampling on people's rights."
The people themselves are the ones entrusted with expansive freedoms, the free will to
exercise their rights to work, worship and to earn a living. No governor should ever dictate
to their people which activities are officially approved or not approved. And no governor
should ever arrest, ticket or fine people for exercising their freedoms. Governors, and
members of Congress and the president have a duty to respect the rights of the people who
elected them, but it seems these days that conservatives are the only ones who know what that
means. Personal responsibility is considered a God-given gift in South Dakota. Personal
responsibility is not a term that conservatives have abandoned..
We should illustrate to the world that people thrive when government is limited, and
people's ingenuity and their creativity is unleashed. We should also remind the world what
happens when tyranny and oppression are allowed to thrive. God bless each and every one
of you and may God bless the United States of America."
By now, we should all realize that the greatest threat to personal freedom is always and
everywhere the State; that is the main lesson of this unfortunate Covid fiasco. The Democrat
governors usurped powers and issued edicts for which they had no authority and for which they
should be held to account. They should be impeached and prosecuted. They were undoubtedly
acting on behalf of criminal elites who fill their campaign coffers in return for assistance in
advancing their own self-centered interests.
If you haven't figured it out yet, we are in the fight of our lives with "do goodie"
billionaire climate alarmists who have inserted themselves into the political process and who
have the power to shut down the economy with the flip of the switch. These same buttinskis
have gone to great lengths to create the global health infrastructure along with significant
control of the mainstream media, that allows them to grossly inflate an aggressive but
thoroughly-manageable viral infection and transform it into the Black Plague. This, in turn,
creates the pretext for preventing people from running their businesses or attending school or
gathering with friends or family or traveling at will or doing any of the things that people in
a free country are at liberty to do. There is no way to reason with people who think that
the only way they can achieve their own malicious objectives, is by enslaving, incarcerating or
liquidating the millions of people who stand in the way of their grand design. We must
defend ourselves from these hostile elites by recommitting ourselves to the fundamental
principles upon which this country was founded. These are the same principles that Kristi Noem
has not only articulated so well in her speech, but also put into practice in her home state of
South Dakota.
We should never accept the oppressively dark and dystopian vision of Joe Biden.
That's not for us. We should aspire to Noem's "shining city on a hill", a place where people
can work when and where they please, travel when and where they please, and meet with friends
and family when and where they please. It's not selfish for us to want these things for
ourselves and our families. Freedom is a basic human necessity like eating, drinking or
breathing. We need freedom, just like we need leaders who believe as we do and who are
unshakable in their convictions. We need leaders like Kristi Noem who was as steadfast as
Gibraltar when everyone else went weak-in-the-knees. The woman is a real American hero and
a patriot.
Pandemic-Driven U.S. Economic Collapse Continues in a Hardening, Protracted "L"-Shaped
Non-Recovery
- Severe Systemic Structural Damage from the Shutdown Will Forestall Meaningful Economic
Rebound into 2022 or Beyond, Irrespective of Advances in Coronavirus Vaccines and
Treatments
- Panicked, Unlimited Federal Reserve Money Creation and Federal Government Deficit
Spending Continue and Will Expand, Triggering Major Domestic Inflation
- With Fundamental Dollar Debasement Intensifying, Holding Physical Gold and Silver
Protects the Purchasing Power of One's Assets
Scroll down for the latest ShadowStats outlook, headline economic news and background
information on the U.S. Economy, Financial System (FOMC), Financial Markets and Alternate Data,
also for Publicly Available Special Reports and Contact Information.
Why is it so expensive to get anything done in the US?
Neoclassical economics and the missing equation.
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
The US's high cost of living pushes up wages making it expensive to get anything done in
the US.
See where neoclassical economists go wrong?
Employees get their money from wages, and the employers pay the cost of living through wages,
reducing profit.
It is the US's employers who pay the high cost of living, via wages, reducing profit.
Do you really want to pay the US's high cost of living in wages?
No way.
You will have to off-shore to maximise profit.
The early neoclassical economists hid the problems of rentier activity in the economy by
removing the difference between "earned" and "unearned" income and they conflated "land" with
"capital".
They took the focus off the cost of living that had been so important to the Classical
Economists as this is where rentier activity in the economy shows up.
It's so well hidden no one even knows it's there.
The neoliberals picked up this pseudo economics and thought it was the real deal.
Things were never going to go well.
Imagine the Chamber of Commerce actively lobbying for state-supported child care, massive
increases in funding for public transportation, public education, public health, and
housing.
Perhaps we should take a look at China to learn how we too can become better capitalists,
and so help USA businesses focus on the business of business.
Western companies couldn't wait to off-shore to low cost China, where they could make
higher profits.
China had coal fired power stations to provide cheap energy.
China had lax regulations reducing environmental and health and safety costs.
China had a low cost of living so employers could pay low wages.
China had low taxes and a minimal welfare state.
China had all the advantages in an open globalised world.
What was Keynes really doing?
Creating a low cost, internationally competitive economy.
Keynes's ideas were a solution to the problems of the Great Depression, but we forgot why
he did, what he did.
They tried running an economy on debt in the 1920s.
The 1920s roared with debt based consumption and speculation until it all tipped over into
the debt deflation of the Great Depression. No one realised the problems that were building
up in the economy as they used an economics that doesn't look at private debt, neoclassical
economics.
Keynes looked at the problems of the debt based economy and came up with redistribution
through taxation to keep the system running in a sustainable way and he dealt with the
inherent inequality capitalism produced.
The cost of living = housing costs + healthcare costs + student loan costs + food + other
costs of living
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
Strong progressive taxation funded a low cost economy with subsidised housing, healthcare,
education and other services to give more disposable income on lower wages.
Employers and employees both win with a low cost of living.
Keynesian ideas went wrong in the 1970s and everyone had forgotten the problems of
neoclassical economics that he originally solved.
"Keynesian ideas went wrong in the 1970s" and from the 80s on because the (primarily)
Republicans had forgotten that Keynes originally stipulated that the government debt incurred
during "bad times" be liquidated during "good times". Since Reagan, Republicans have
increased debt to stimulate the economy, but failed to pay it down once that part of Keynes's
took effect. Republicans are the biggest half-Keynesians of all time.
Behind all this is the neo-liberal renunciation of any 'national' policies. Define a
'nation' as you will, it still is a valid category. It has definite 'needs' and requirements
to function well and continue as a viable entity. The 'national' government has functioned in
the past as the representative and facilitator for the 'nation.' "Drown that in a bathtub"
and you eventually eliminate the 'nation's' ability to function. The end stage of that
process is the collapse and extinction of the 'nation.'
The above process should be familiar to anyone who has studied the past few decades of
American history. What the proponents of the neo-liberal dispensation have not advertised, if
indeed they even know, is what replaces the 'nation?' An International Syndicate of
Oligarchs? If so, such an endeavour is doomed to failure. History has shown, time and again,
that the concept and practice of commercial business is not an adequate organizing principle
for large scale human society. It simply does not make allowances for human variability.
The best example of the point above that I can think of is the present dominance of short
term thinking and planning in the business sphere. Restricting the inputs of the decision
making process to short term issues, such as quarterly earnings and stock prices in the
bourse, leads to the dysfunctions bemoaned in the piece above. Offshoring a factory makes
sense from a short term business point of view, but ignores the long term 'national'
implications. Here is a direct conflict between the two methods of social organization. At
present the short term methodology is ascendant. Alas, it looks as if America is going to
have to learn this lesson of setting proper 'national' priorities the hard way; such as by
losing a war decisively.
I look on the bright side here. A small thermonuclear exchange between America and some peer
adversary will not only 'thin out' the population, but also bring on a nuclear winter and
retard the progression of global warming for a while. It might be the breathing space the
Terran human race needs to survive beyond the upcoming evolutionary bottleneck.
Millions of renters
have been unable to pay some or even all of their rent since March 2020, when the
pandemic struck . An analysis by the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank, found that
the amount of unpaid rent could
exceed $52 billion . It estimated that the average household that has fallen behind on rent
owed $5,586.
For a pump and dump to work, you need a certain type of investor—specifically, the type P.T. Barnum said is born every minute
(on platforms like Reddit and Robinhood, more like every nanosecond). To be nice, let’s call them dupes. “Greater fools” works
too. The Federal Reserve owns a share of the blame. You can’t pump without hot air, which the Fed has been supplying for way too
long. Sometimes these schemes last a while, even years. Pay attention to the stories told by presstitutes hyping many of today’s
overvalued stocks. The question arise: "Is today’s market a giant pump and dump?" The market is priced at 32 times earnings; the
historic norm is 16. Expect the inevitable Reddit group: r/StockBagHoldersClub.
Notable quotes:
"... Bull markets need fuel. When the marginal buyer is done, there are no more greater fools to buy in, no matter how well companies actually perform. The dream is priced in, and firms can only meet, not beat, expectations. ..."
"... For those lulled by today's bull market, remember that you own a piece of paper. Low-yielding U.S. Treasury bills and bonds are safe because they are backed by the U.S. government, by cash flow of tax dollars and by the country's assets (think land, not Fort Knox). Stocks are backed by expectations of future earnings, but if you overpay during periods of high expectations (like today), then your downside is huge. Crypto is backed simply by the faith of those who proclaim it is a store of value. Even art and exotic cars and silly NFT tokens are backed only by faith the wealthy will overpay for uniqueness. Faith becomes scarce when the selling starts. ..."
Remember that banker talking about losing 90%? He was talking about the late-'70s death
march down, characterized by stocks going up in the morning and then down in the afternoon --
optimists quickly stepped on by pessimists. Sure enough, after 2000, high-flying tech names
were down 90%. Many went to zero.
How do these bull bashes end? When the last skeptical buyer finally sees the light and buys
into the dream that every car will be electric, that crypto replaces gold and banks, that we
overindulge on vertically farmed "plant-based steaks" while streaming "Bridgerton" Season 5
before we hop on an air taxi for our flight to Mars. Those last skeptics (maybe already)
convince themselves there's no longer any downside. And then boom, it's over.
Bull markets need fuel. When the marginal buyer is done, there are no more greater fools to
buy in, no matter how well companies actually perform. The dream is priced in, and firms can
only meet, not beat, expectations.
For those lulled by today's bull market, remember that you own a piece of paper.
Low-yielding U.S. Treasury bills and bonds are safe because they are backed by the U.S.
government, by cash flow of tax dollars and by the country's assets (think land, not Fort
Knox). Stocks are backed by expectations of future earnings, but if you overpay during periods
of high expectations (like today), then your downside is huge. Crypto is backed simply by the
faith of those who proclaim it is a store of value. Even art and exotic cars and silly NFT
tokens are backed only by faith the wealthy will overpay for uniqueness. Faith becomes scarce
when the selling starts.
The US, UK and Euro-zone went on a joint economic suicide mission before 2008. What was the ponzi scheme of inflated asset prices that collapsed in 2008? "It's nearly $14 trillion pyramid of super leveraged toxic assets was built on the back of
$1.4 trillion of US sub-prime loans, and dispersed throughout the world" All the Presidents
Bankers, Nomi Prins.
Our bankers had distributed this load of old doggie-doo across the financial systems of the
US, UK and Euro-zone. When these asset prices collapsed, so did our financial systems. Bankers just need to create as many products as they can from something in the real world,
e.g. subprime mortgages.
They all go up together and down together. They call it leverage. I think they are doing the same with ETFs now, since no one worked out what they were up to
last time.
One of the biggest permanent changes coming out of the Pandemic is that businesses have
invested in technologies that have long been available, but that hadn't been deployed because
there was no visible need to deploy them, and because businesses were stuck in a rut, and
change is hard and costly – and the rules of inertia had taken over.
But now the Pandemic has forced businesses to change. There is no going back to the old
normal. And these technologies impact employment in both directions.
We encountered precisely that when we went cross-country skiing last week at Royal Gorge in
the Sierra Nevada, which we do every year. What is said to be the largest cross-country ski
resort in the US with 120 miles of groomed trails (if they're groomed) had fallen on hard times
years ago, filed for bankruptcy, and was acquired out of bankruptcy in 2011/2012. It is now
operated by Sugar Bowl Resort, the downhill ski area nearby. There have been some improvements
since then, such as new warming huts. But the resort remained largely low tech, or no tech. And
even there, things changed massively and permanently with the Pandemic.
The way it used to work: You stood in line every morning to buy old-fashioned trail passes
that you then stuck on your poles and that you then tried to scrape off at night. If you rented
equipment, you spent more time standing in line. There was a website, but you couldn't buy
anything on it. There were quite a few employees involved in dealing with the skiers that
wanted to buy trail passes and rent equipment. The place could get crowded, and customers
wasted time standing in line and dealing with logistics.
Now, the requirements of social distancing and contactless commerce forced the resort to
invest in an ecommerce website. You have to use the website to buy trail passes and pay
for and make reservations for the rental equipment (actually fitting the rental equipment is
still done in person at the lodge).
Trail passes are now rechargeable cards, similar to prepaid debit cards with a radio chip.
You get them at an ATM-type machine outside the lodge by holding the QR code -- that
black-and-white square-shaped maze -- of your reservation (paper or smartphone) under the
scanner. And it spits out the card. You can recharge the trail pass online and reuse next year
.
This should have been done 10 or 15 years ago. It's superfast and convenient, and you don't
have to stand in line anywhere. You can park, scan, and ski.
And the resort has gone entirely cashless. You can buy some corn bread, but you have to use
your card. Credit card transactions are automated. No one needs to balance the cash drawer or
count cash.
And some of the staff that used to deal with the trail passes and other stuff are now either
doing other things at the resort or are no longer needed at all.
But there are people who manufacture, install, and maintain the equipment, build and
maintain the ecommerce site, and deal with the other issues that tech produces. They're
different jobs and only have a small local component.
This is a permanent change. And it's an improvement for users of the resort. It may have
also reduced employment at the resort, while supporting employment at companies that provide
and service the technology.
I chatted with one of the employees at the resort. Trail pass sales were doing pretty good,
he said, but equipment rentals were down by about half compared to last year. He figured that a
lot of people have bought their own equipment.
It would make sense: quite a few people have apparently left San Francisco and other
high-cost Bay Area cities, and some of them have moved into the Sierra Nevada, including the
Lake Tahoe area and the whole strip along I-80, including Truckee, now that they're "working
from home" and can take a daily ski break between Zoom calls.
The healthcare industry has done a similar thing: Using technology to avoid contact, thereby
making a lot of basic stuff simpler and cheaper. At our healthcare provider, we could always
make a phone-appointment with a doctor. This was free and quick, and often all that's needed
for minor things, and avoided the time and cost of "going to the doctor." This was an
option.
Now telemedicine – or "virtual care" – has turned into a thing. Making video
appointments is now encouraged. Prescriptions are filled online and delivered. When that's all
that is needed, it saves time for the patient and the healthcare provider.
Obviously, telemedicine still doesn't work for many medical issues, but the routine issues
that doctors spend much of their time on can be handled that way.
Only some of these technologies are visible to patients. For the healthcare providers, it
meant investing in video tools and other technologies and in the infrastructure needed to
support this on a large scale.
The Pandemic has also pushed even reluctant consumers and businesses into ecommerce. In Q4
last year, when brick-and-mortar stores were open nearly everywhere,
ecommerce sales soared by 32% from a year earlier .
Package deliveries by UPS nearly doubled to 34 million packages a day, UPS chief information
and engineering officer Juan Perez said at a
Wall Street Journal event. And the company had to adapt and scale its digital technologies
to deal with it. The Pandemic drove some of the most significant changes in the company's
history, he said.
The entire ecommerce sector, likely the biggest beneficiary of the Pandemic, has invested
vast sums in technologies and infrastructure to deal with the surge in demand.
This now includes ski resorts and grocery stores and other previously unlikely suspects for
ecommerce. They will not go back to the old normal, nor will their customers.
While lots of office employees who now work at home will eventually return to the office,
the old times of nine-to-five every day at a desk farm are gone for many employees. Companies
have invested in technologies to succeed with their hybrid work-from-home models, and they are
cutting costs where possible by reducing the real estate footprint and related costs.
People who like working in an office can gravitate to employers that encourage or require
it. People who like working at home can gravitate to employers with hybrid models. Companies
will make one or the other a selling point when recruiting talent. That's how that will wash
out.
It will take years to sort through the issues that these sudden and often massive shifts
leave behind. But from what I have seen, many of the shifts are positives and should have
happened a long time ago – and only inertia prevented them from happening.
"... ... on Friday we reported that according to the latest EPFR fund flow data , $22.2Bn in new money flowed into equities last week, following the previous week's massive $46.2Bn inflow which was the 3rd biggest on record, bringing the total 16 week inflow to $436BN, a stunning burst of inflows as shown in the chart below. ..."
"... So bizarre has been this divergence - historically, investors have always pulled money during times of stress and heightened volatility, instead they are plowing record amounts of cash into stocks now ..."
"... "they're opting for parts of the market that have suffered the most, doubling down in arguably risky ways with triple-leveraged tech funds and options galore." ..."
"... "Historically it's been a bad signal that retail investors are piling into the market and a signal of a top," said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at National Securities Corp. And yet, as he admits in the very next sentence, " every time we tried to call a top in 2020 because of retail participation, it was wrong." ..."
"... Because in a centrally-planned "market" where the Fed guarantees no losses ever, why not buy any and every dip? Sure enough, that's what they did and boy did they buy the dip : ..."
"... lots and lots and lots of stimmy checks are about be deposited to daytraders' checking accounts ..."
"... As long as you feed $$ into the military industrial complex, the stock market goes up. The military is the key industry of the US and that will not change. ..."
"... Neoclassical economics is a pseudo economics that hides the inconvenient truths discovered by the classical economists. The classical economists identified the constructive "earned" income and the parasitic "unearned" income. Most of the people at the top lived off the parasitic "unearned" income and they now had a big problem. ..."
"... In 1984, for the first time in American history, "unearned" income exceeded "earned" income. ..."
"... It looks like a parasitic rentier capitalism because that is what it is. ..."
Something bizarre is happening in the stock market: for the past three weeks stocks - and especially tech - has gotten hammered,
with the Nasdaq briefly sliding into a 10% correction while the S&P has also been hard hit (although one can't say the same for reflation
stocks such as energy which have soared in recent weeks). Some other notable casualties: Apple has tumbled 15% since late January.
Tesla has lost more than a quarter-trillion dollars in market value in three weeks, and more than $1.5 trillion has been wiped off
the Nasdaq in less than a month.
And yet, despite this hit to risk assets on the back of the recent in surge in interest rates, accompanied by a parallel
spike in both the VIX, and its bond market equivalent, the MOVE index...
... on Friday we reported that
according to the latest EPFR fund flow data , $22.2Bn in new money flowed into equities last week, following the previous week's
massive $46.2Bn inflow which was the 3rd biggest on record, bringing the total 16 week inflow to $436BN, a stunning burst of inflows
as shown in the chart below.
So bizarre has been this divergence - historically, investors have always pulled money during times of stress and heightened
volatility, instead they are plowing record amounts of cash into stocks now - that Goldman's David Kostin dedicated his Weekly
Kickstart report to the topic. In a note titled "Rising rate anxiety roils share prices but also supports outlook for strong equity
inflows" , the Goldman chief equity strategist writes that as "rates rose, and equities fell, long-duration growth stocks plummeted,
but equity funds continued to see large net inflows."
Equity mutual fund and ETF inflows have totaled $163 billion since the start of February, the largest five-week inflow on record
in absolute dollar terms and third largest in a decade relative to assets. Even though the recent backup in rates has weighed
on equity prices broadly, the pace of inflows into equity funds during the last few weeks has accelerated compared with the start
of the year.
In contrast, weekly flows into bond funds averaged roughly $10 billion in February, 50% less than weekly inflows in January.
In addition, money market funds have seen net outflows of $34 billion during the past month.
... ... ...
According to Bloomberg, even though the market peaked almost a month ago, retail traders have plowed cash into U.S. stocks at
a rate 40% higher than they did in 2020, which was a record year. Yet one way retail capital allocation differs from the charts above,
is that "they're opting for parts of the market that have suffered the most, doubling down in arguably risky ways with triple-leveraged
tech funds and options galore."
Could it be that nothing but sheer stupidity and/or certainty in yet another Fed bailout is behind the record inflows? And is
Powell to blame?
Retail traders, many of them newbie investors, have consistently held strong, buying virtually every dip during what's been
the best start to a bull market in nine decades. But now the world is wondering how much it'll take for them to call it quits,
especially after a year in which retail traders were right way more often than wrong.
"Historically it's been a bad signal that retail investors are piling into the market and a signal of a top," said Art Hogan,
chief market strategist at National Securities Corp. And yet, as he admits in the very next sentence, " every time we tried to call
a top in 2020 because of retail participation, it was wrong."
Just how aggressive has retail buying been? According to data from VandaTrack, which monitors retail flows in the U.S. market,
retail investors snapped up an average of $6.6 billion in U.S. equities each week, up from an average $4.7 billion in net weekly
purchases in 2020 even as stocks swooned over the last three weeks.
They've doubled down on areas of the market that have been hit the hardest. Apple, which has plunged 15% since late January,
was the most-popular retail buy this past week. NIO Inc., the electric-vehicle maker down almost 40% since Feb. 9, was the second-most
popular. Next up were exchange-traded funds tied to the Nasdaq 100, the Invesco QQQ Trust Series 1 (ticker QQQ) and a triple leveraged
version (ticker TQQQ).
Because in a centrally-planned "market" where the Fed guarantees no losses ever, why not buy any and every dip? Sure enough,
that's what they did and boy did they buy the dip :
On Thursday, when the Nasdaq 100 fell as much as 2.9%, almost 32 million bullish call options traded across U.S. exchanges,
the fifth-most on record. The other four have all occurred within the last four months.
There is one fundamental reason why retail investors are buying: the just passed $1.9TN Biden stimulus ensures lots and lots
and lots of stimmy checks are about be deposited to daytraders' checking accounts:
"There's a lot of excess liquidity and we just had this $600 check going to many families in January," said Jimmy Chang, chief
investment officer of Rockefeller Global Family Office. "We're going to get an additional liquidity injection in the $1,400 check
and part of that money is going into risk assets."
Incidentally, the question of how much of Biden's $1.9TN stimulus will end up in the market is one we discussed last week in the
context of a recent
Deutsche Bank survey :
"Given stimulus checks are currently penciled in at c.$405bn in Biden's plan, that gives us a maximum of around $150bn that
could go into US equities based on our survey.
as we
reported
earlier today , Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson believes that the selloff has more room to go before it's over. Bloomberg agrees
and notes that "if past is precedent, that could mean the sell-off has more room to run. Retail investors tend to buy the initial
dips, and it's not until they capitulate and sell that markets ultimately bottom, according to Eric Liu, co-founder and head of research
at Vanda Research. The firm's data show that was the case in both selloffs in 2018, as well as roughly a year ago during the Covid
crash."
To Victoria Fernandez, chief market strategist for Crossmark Global Investments, their continued presence in the markets likely
means elevated volatility will persist. Still, that doesn't mean retail investors' efforts are misguided.
"Is there some dumb money in retail trades? Yes. But not all of it," she said. "Some of these people are doing their homework,
looking for opportunities and trying to take advantage of it. Some win, some lose -- it's really not that different than what
professionals do on an institutional basis."
Maybe there is dumb money in retail, but that's hardly what matters. What does matter - in our view - is what
we
reported earlier today, namely that last week we saw the biggest shorting among hedge funds since last May. And with the squeeze
having started on Friday and clearly continuing on Sunday, the upcoming "mega squeeze" (
which
we predicted earlier today ) is all that matters.
As such while Wall Street ruminates about the cause (and reflexive effect) of the current record capital inflows into equity stocks
amid growing market turmoil, the only thing that matters for this broken, illiquid market is positioning and right now the "max pain"
is higher. A lot higher, especially since the Fed will have no choice but to step in if stocks continue to fall as all the careful
centrally-planned work of the past 12 years would implode with a massive bang if it does not.
play_arrow 4
Hobbit of Hyperinflation 6 hours ago
Two words: THE FED.
SQRT 69 1 hour ago remove link
Three letters: PPT
DontFollowMyAdviceImaDummy PREMIUM 10 hours ago
probably going to sell off for another 8 to 10 business days and then the magic money pump machine will get activated along
with every stonk price target seeing huge price target increases because of fantasies about flying cars and infinite forever profits
by 2040...
Whats-A-Theta PRO 10 hours ago
As no one stops and asks what stocks are actually worth we shouldn't have too much trouble.
Chiefisme 4 hours ago remove link
There is a simple explanation. The market is rigged. The Fed is wildly "printing" money and supporting all of the markets including
equity to keep the faced going.
VioLaTor 5 hours ago remove link
Oil past 70 also this morning. I saw CW had a new podcast over the weekend, and on BB today to rally the troops. See what happens.
I think the new investors might well be learning that stocks also go down, and diversification is good. 10 year auction on Wednesday
will be interesting.
uhland62 7 hours ago remove link
As long as you feed $$ into the military industrial complex, the stock market goes up. The military is the key industry
of the US and that will not change.
You_Cant_Quit_Me 27 minutes ago
When you get nothing on your savings people move the cash elsewhere for higher yield. The FED is inflating bubbles in equities
and real estate
Sound of the Suburbs 4 hours ago
The wealth is there and then it's gone. At the end of the 1920s, the US was a ponzi scheme of inflated asset prices.
The use of neoclassical economics, and the belief in free markets, made them think that inflated asset prices represented real
wealth. 1929 – Wakey, wakey time
The use of neoclassical economics, and the belief in free markets, made them think that inflated asset prices represented real
wealth, but it didn't.
It didn't then, and it doesn't now.
Real estate - the wealth is there and then it's gone.
Get ready to put Australia, Canada, Norway, Sweden and Hong Kong on the list.
It's not real wealth. What is real wealth? Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe were never short of money. Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe
had created far too much money compared to the goods and services available within the economy causing hyper-inflation. States
can just create money, and the last thing you want is too much of the damn stuff in your economy. They had made so much money
it lost nearly all its value, and they needed wheelbarrows of the stuff to buy anything.
Money has no intrinsic value; it comes from what it can buy. Central bankers actually look at the money supply, and expect
it to rise in line with the new goods and services in the economy, as it grows. More goods and services in the economy require
more money in the economy. Paul Ryan was a typically confused neoliberal and Alan Greenspan had to put him straight. Paul Ryan
was worried about how the Government would pay for pensions. Alan Greenspan told Paul Ryan the Government can create all the money
it wants, there is no need to save for pensions.
What matters is whether the goods and services are there for them to buy with that money. That's where the real wealth in the
economy lies. They worked it out last time. The real wealth creation in the economy is measured by GDP. The transfer of existing
assets, like stocks and real estate, doesn't create real wealth and therefore does not add to GDP. Real wealth creation involves
real work, producing new goods and services in the economy. It took them a long time to disentangle the hopelessly confused thinking
of neoclassical economics in the 1930s.
This is the second time around and it has already been done.
Sound of the Suburbs 4 hours ago remove link
Neoclassical economics is a pseudo economics that hides the inconvenient truths discovered by the classical economists.
The classical economists identified the constructive "earned" income and the parasitic "unearned" income. Most of the people at
the top lived off the parasitic "unearned" income and they now had a big problem.
This problem was solved with neoclassical economics, which hides this distinction. It confuses making money and creating wealth
so all rich people look good. If you know what real wealth creation is, you will realise many at the top don't create any wealth.
Look what has happened to the US since they got confused between making money and creating wealth. In 1984, for the first
time in American history, "unearned" income exceeded "earned" income.
The American have lost sight of what real wealth creation is, and are just focussed on making money. You might as well do that
in the easiest way possible. It looks like a parasitic rentier capitalism because that is what it is. You've just got
to sniff out the easy money. All that hard work involved in setting up a company yourself, and building it up. Why bother?
Asset strip firms other people have built up, that's easy money. The private equity firms have found an easy way to make money
that doesn't actually create any wealth. Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy into a financial crisis.
They will load your economy up with their debt products until you get a financial crisis.
On a BBC documentary, comparing 1929 to 2008, it said the last time US bankers made as much money as they did before 2008 was
in the 1920s.
The bankers loaded the US economy up with their debt products until they got financial crises in 1929 and 2008. As you head
towards the financial crisis, the economy booms due to the money creation of bank loans.
The financial crisis appears to come out of a clear blue sky when you use an economics that doesn't consider debt, like neoclassical
economics.
CB Newkirk III 5 hours ago (Edited) remove link
All the Business Knowledge is in the algorithms (programs), and no one knows what they do, or how to maintain and upgrade them
for a changing environment. The just keep patching them and hope that it works. But hey, those graphs are nifty looking.
In our
call
of the day,
Miller
Tabak & Co's chief market strategist Matt Maley said investors need to be "very careful" about buying the dip when it comes to
the tech-laden index and should instead be selling the bounces.
...
the
FAANG Index -- which includes Facebook
FB,
+2.58%
,
Amazon
AMZN,
+0.77%
,
Apple
AAPL,
+1.07%
,
Netflix
NFLX,
+1.00%
and
Google parent Alphabet
GOOGL,
+3.10%
--
is only 6% off February highs and still sits above its 100 day moving average. "A break below that moving average would send up a
big warning flag on the group," he said.
...
The
price of Brent crude
BRNK21,
-0.56%
briefly
topped
$70 a barrel
for
the first time in a year after Saudi Arabia and Yemen rebels traded airstrikes.
Over the last month, Tesla has fallen from about $868 to $598, a plunge of about 31%. But it
isn't just Tesla investors that are feeling the pain: with the stock having risen in popularity
over the last 18 months, Tesla is now tied to numerous ETFs that it winds up pulling lower when
it underperforms. In fact,
Bloomberg notes that "at one point on Friday, every one of the 54 U.S.-based ETFs that have
assets under management exceeding $1 billion and more than 1% invested in Tesla had
fallen."
Mando Ramos 1 hour ago
A year ago today it was trading at $72 dollars a share, and it was criminally,
outrageously overvalued then. But as we've all learned in the last 10 years, crime actually
does pay
buzzsaw99 50 minutes ago (Edited)
the idea was to add tsla to the s&p is about fleecing all the index buyers. Read 401K
lemmings.
Xi the Pooh 51 minutes ago remove link
Tesla and Bitcoin are two bubbles that need popping. Useless overvalued garbage.
Son of Loki 17 minutes ago
What's the definition of malinvestment?
The NYSE and NASDAQ.
hedge4Gain 51 minutes ago
"Betting On A Dream": Could Tesla Be The Canary In The ETF Liquidity Coal Mine? Betting on
Tesla has always been like betting on a yellow school bus winning the 500 mile race or a
windmill in snowstorm.
Lordflin 35 minutes ago
The PPT and the CBs have your backs folks... you will be fine...
I recommend everybody to read it all, but here's the crucial paragraph for the topic being
discussed here:
Foreigners, who took up a great deal of Treasury debt during and after the Global Financial
Crisis of 2008-2009, have stopped buying Treasuries. China, the largest official holder of
US government bonds, isn't motivated to bail America out at the moment.
This Treasury debt buying spree during 2008-2009 is what the American people still call
"the Obama Recovery". In fact, Obama had nothing to do with it: it was China that saved the
USA from collapse in 2008 as it bailed it out.
But now it's different. On the USA is buying USA. The problem here is that we aren't
talking about manufacturing and commodities, but fictitious capital: you know something's
wrong when you have to buy your own debt in order to create a raison d'être for your
own debt's existence.
Bankers rule the world. Corporations are international fiefdoms serving the banks. The
deep state is just the goon squad to steal resources from locals, and to kill any uppity serf
who might have any aspiration for freedom. Trump was for show, so as to turn the guns on
pesky, uppity, and white Americans. I am both dreading and please they hate my side. Biden is
the senile old coot who just signs proclamations. The real advantage to Biden is he doesn't
tweet to stir up the masses. Apparently that was a no, no.
"In this episode of Keiser Report, Max and Stacy look at the 'growing concern that
market-based inflation expectations have become unreliable as indicators,' i.e. the central
banks have destroyed the price signal foundational to free and fair markets. In this
environment, we see Goodhart's Law at work: When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to
be a good measure. Billionaire hedge fund investor Paul Singer says of the 'market
craziness' that there is a 'scarcity of honest profits.'"
From Shadowstats most recent Flash Commentary on 24 Feb:
"Despite Happy Headline Gains in January 2021 Real Retail Sales, Production and
Construction, the Underlying Payroll Employment Numbers Tell the Opposite Story •
First-Quarter 2021 GDP Remains at Risk of Relapsing into Quarterly Contraction •
January 2021 Producer Price Index Monthly Inflation Hit a Record, 10-Year High • U.S.
Dollar Collapse Accelerates."
Shadowstats next Benchmark Commentary will cover "major definitional and accuracy issues
with current Federal Reserve and Federal Government Monetary and Economic data, along with
corrective approaches." Of course, that's one way of saying Here's how the government
lies about the economy and how you can see through them and come close to the truth
.
Would Putin or the Chinese allow their governments to operate in such a manner? IMO,
once the USA began to lie about the basic economic stats it became a failed state and has
been in decline ever since despite all outward appearances. Earlier this week, Strategic-Culture
published an Infographic to answer this question:
"Is the American Dream Still Alive?"
Do note the point of separation between productivity and wages that's been pointed at
now for several decades and how closely it follows Nixon's exit from the Gold Standard.
Perhaps we need an honest national dialog about declining expectations, rising
inequality, social depression and the failure of the status quo.
Even as the chirpy happy-talk of a
return to normal
floods the airwaves, what
nobody dares acknowledge is that
"normal" for a rising number of Americans is the
social
depression
of
downward mobility and social defeat
.
Downward mobility
is not a new trend--it's
simply accelerating.
As this RAND Corporation report documents, (
Trends
in Income From 1975 to 2018
) $50 trillion in earnings has been transferred to the Financial Aristocracy from the bottom
90% of American households over the past 45 years.
"The $50 trillion transfer of wealth the RAND report documents has occurred entirely
within the American economy, not between it and its trading partners. No, this upward redistribution of income, wealth,
and power wasn't inevitable; it was a choice--a direct result of the trickle-down policies we chose to implement since
1975.
We chose to cut taxes on billionaires and to deregulate the financial industry. We
chose to allow CEOs to manipulate share prices through stock buybacks, and to lavishly reward themselves with the
proceeds. We chose to permit giant corporations, through mergers and acquisitions, to accumulate the vast monopoly power
necessary to dictate both prices charged and wages paid. We chose to erode the minimum wage and the overtime threshold
and the bargaining power of labor. For four decades, we chose to elect political leaders who put the material interests
of the rich and powerful above those of the American people."
The reality is that the
middle class
has been reduced to the sliver just below the
top 5%--if we use the standards of the prosperous 1960s as a baseline.
Downward mobility excels in creating and distributing what I term
social
defeat
:
In my lexicon,
social defeat
is the spectrum of anxiety,
insecurity, chronic stress, fear and powerlessness that accompanies declining financial security and social status.
Downward mobility and social defeat lead to
social
depression
.
Here are the conditions that characterize social depression:
1. High expectations of endlessly rising prosperity instilled as a birthright no longer align with economy reality.
2. Part-time and unemployed people are marginalized, not just financially but socially.
3. Widening income/wealth disparity as those in the top 10% pull away from the bottom 90%.
4. A systemic decline in social/economic mobility as it becomes increasingly difficult to move from dependence on the
state or one's parents to financial independence.
5. A widening disconnect between higher education and employment: a college/university degree no longer guarantees a
stable, good-paying job.
6. A failure in the Status Quo institutions and mainstream media to recognize social depression as a reality.
7. A systemic failure of imagination within state and private-sector institutions on how to address social depression
issues.
8. The abandonment of middle class aspirations: young people no longer aspire to (or cannot afford) consumerist status
symbols such as luxury autos or conventional homeownership.
9. A generational abandonment of marriage, families and independent households as these are no longer affordable to
those with part-time or unstable employment.
10. A loss of hope in the young generations as a result of the above conditions.
The rising tide of collective anger arising from social depression is visible in
many places:
road rage, violent street clashes between groups seething for a fight, the destruction of friendships
for holding "incorrect" ideological views, and so on.
A coarsening of the entire social order is increasingly visible:
The
Age of Rudeness
.
Depressive thoughts (and the emotions they generate) tend to be self-reinforcing, and this is why it's so difficult to
break out of depression once in its grip.
One part of the healing process is to expose the sources of anger that we are
repressing.
As psychiatrist Karen Horney explained in her 1950 masterwork,
Neurosis
and Human Growth: The Struggle Towards Self-Realization
, anger at ourselves sometimes arises from our failure to live
up to the many "shoulds" we've internalized, and the idealized track we've laid out for ourselves and our lives.
The article
The
American Dream Is Killing Us
does a good job of explaining
how our failure to
obtain the expected rewards of "doing all the right things"
(getting a college degree, working hard, etc.) breeds
resentment and despair.
Since we did the "right things," the system "should" deliver the financial rewards
and security we expected.
This systemic failure to deliver the promised rewards is eroding the social contract and
social cohesion. Fewer and fewer people have a stake in the system.
We are increasingly angry at the system, but we reserve some anger for ourselves,
because
the mass-media trumpets how well the economy is doing and how some people are doing extremely well. Naturally, we wonder,
why them and not us? The failure is thus internalized.
One response to this sense that the system no longer works as advertised is to
seek
the relative comfort of echo chambers
--places we can go to hear confirmation that this systemic stagnation is the
opposing ideological camp's fault.
Part of the American Exceptionalism we hear so much about is a can-do optimism:
set
your mind to it and everything is possible.
The failure to prosper as anticipated is generating a range of negative emotions
that are "un-American":
complaining that you didn't get a high-paying secure job despite having a college degree
(or advanced degree) sounds like sour-grapes: the message is you didn't work hard enough, you didn't get the right diploma,
etc.
It can't be the system that's failed, right?
I discuss this in my book
Why
Our Status Quo Failed and Is Beyond Reform
: the top 10% who are benefiting mightily dominate politics and the media,
and their assumption is:
the system is working great for me, so it must be working great
for everyone
. This implicit narrative carries an implicit accusation that any failure is the fault of the individual,
not the system.
The inability to express our despair and anger generates depression. Some people will redouble their efforts, others will
seek to lay the blame on "the other" (some external group) and others will give up.
What
few people will do is look at the sources of systemic injustice and inequality.
Perhaps we need an honest national dialog about declining expectations, rising
inequality and the failure of the status quo
that avoids polarization and the internalization trap (i.e. it's your
own fault you're not well-off).
We need to value honesty above fake happy-talk. Once we can speak honestly, there
will be a foundation for optimism.
Canadian Cents@9 The book Capitalism on a Ventilator is a collection of essays or articles
produced by the Workers World Party, one of the Communist Parties in the US.
Amazon lists the book as currently unavailable (and asks if you want an email if it
becomes more available.)
It is indeed possible this is a surreptitious way of censoring the book, especially if the
unavailability means WWP (which operates the International Action Center) simply hasn't
complied with technical requirements imposed by Amazon.
Such as guaranteeing delivery within a limited number of days. Amazon has, apparently,
tightened up a lot to make it difficult for independents to sell on Amazon.
But it is also possible that the limited budgets and other resources led to limited
numbers of copies which are now sold out. When the new press run is complete, the book
becomes available again.
Rising yields will likely inject more volatility into financial markets as investors debate
when the Fed will be forced to tighten monetary policy, though that doesn't appear to be
anytime soon.
Fed chair Jerome Powell downplayed concerns this week about potentially higher inflation and
signaled that the central bank sees no need to alter its ultralow rate policies for the
foreseeable future. The Fed projects that inflation will remain at or below the central bank's
2% target through 2023.
Despite conventional thinking that rising long-term rates are bad for stocks, historical
data show that the broad S&P 500 has actually posted strong returns.
The S&P 500 has averaged an annualized total return of 13% and increased 81% of the time
during rising rate periods (13 out of 16), according to data from Truist Advisory Services.
Buffet repurchased its own stock. Which means he does not see attractive investments. But his
advice as for searching for yield and moving to junk bonds is a valid one.
Insurance represents the largest of Berkshire Hathaway's four "family jewel" businesses.
Though unlike other insurance companies, Berkshire takes a more equity-heavy approach when
investing its insurance float.
According to Buffett, Berkshire's insurance fleet has more capital deployed than any of its
competitors thanks to the financial strength of the operation and the "huge cash flow"
generated by the non-insurance businesses.
This combination allows Berkshire's insurance operation to "safely follow an equity-heavy
investment strategy," something that's "not feasible for the overwhelming majority of
insurers," Buffett wrote. For regulatory and credit-rating reasons, a lot of insurers have to
focus on bonds.
He noted that some insurers and bond investors "may try to juice the pathetic returns now
available by shifting their purchases to obligations backed by shaky borrowers." In other
words, they may allocate more of the portfolios to financial instruments like leveraged loans
and high-yield bonds, aka junk bonds.
"Risky loans, however, are not the answer to inadequate interest rates," he added. "Three
decades ago, the once-mighty savings and loan industry destroyed itself, partly by ignoring
that maxim."
Poofing money into existence has serous consequences: Eventual Economic Depression:
Here is my prediction (it is actually very positive ultimately).
1. Stock market is way, way, way too high for the underlying profitability of companies
and underlying demand (capacity to spend/budget/money in the pocket) from consumers.
2. FAATMAN companies' valuations are way to high. FAATMAN = Facebook, Amazon, Alphabet
(google), Tesla, Microsoft, Apple and Netflix. But this can be fixed. Keep reading!
3. I am expecting a Titanic level Market slide within 0-3 years. Down 70%. Great
Depression level. But much faster due to electronic age we live in.
4. I will go in with both feet with ALL my cash into the stock market at that time. My
jump-in level is 70% down from peak.
5. Interest rates tell you 90% of the story. This low of rates means DEMAND is very, very
weak compared to capacity (I refinanced my 15 year fixed rate mortgage at 2.2% APR). Which
means that average Joe does not have sufficient income to borrow and spend. Yes capacity to
produce in our beautiful god given economy is huge and ever expanding. That part is
correct!
6. Capacity of the economy is stupendously high due to extreme automation. Again, this is
the good part. Of course. Thanks to the IT guys like me.
7. Federal Reserve cannot do much at this point. Federal Reserve would be pushing on a
string and they know it.
8. One way to balance capacity and demand in our economy is through UBI (Universal Basic
Income). Otherwise known as John Maynard Keynes' helicopter cash or Clifford H. Douglas'
social credit.
9. If we don't do UBI we will at least need to do continuous stimuluses by the federal
government. Every six months.
10. UBI is better, simpler, more comprehensive, fairer way to stimulate the economy
continuously. I would called it: AUTOMATION DIVDEND. That is what it really is.
11. How long will it take for Americans to realize how economy really works (i.e.,
Keynesian economics). Don't know. But there is hope. Bernie Sanders and the Democrats in
general are not too far from seeing past the scarcity paradigm which conservatives
(Republicans) live in. It took me probably 2000 hours of intensely scouring the web to figure
out what is going on. Reading books and reading all kinds of blogs and comments in blogs to
figure out the truth about our modern credit based economy. By the way in my heart I am a
conservative (Republican). But I cannot vote for them because they (Republicans) are clueless
about how the economy really works.
12. It took elderly dying in the streets in the 30's for FDR to realize we need a social
security program.
13. A future UBI program should be simple in implementation. All who have SSN should get
non-taxable UBI (no exceptions). Babies and Billionaires included. I would start with $500
per month per SSN. This can be implemented very easily through a partnership between the
Social security administration + the Bankers. Very similar to how my mom's social security
benefits are deposited in her Wells Fargo bank account every month seamlessly.
14. Why pay billionaires UBI. Because it is only fair. Money printed is not the same as
money spent. If the billionaire does not spend it. The extra money does not "cost" any
resources from within our economy. Cool. Isn't it.
15. If inflation ensues I would implement a consumption tax (a national sales tax) to tone
down consumption and balance capacity and demand. By the way I would completely eliminate all
federal income taxes including social security taxes. If inflation ensues again raise the
national sales tax to balance capacity and demand. State and local taxes have to stay since
state and local governments can't print money.
16. If something like the above is not done. Capitalism will be destroyed completely. How
ironic, by conservatives themselves because they don't understand (Keynesian) economics.
17. Capitalism was rescued after the great depression by world war II spending, GI bill
spending, Marshall Plan spending, the space program spending, the welfare and food stamp
programs spending, the korean war spending, the vietnam war spending, the Reagan's star wars
defense programs spending and defense budget and other budget items spending in general. If
these "spendings" were not there than capitalism would have collapse by now due to
deflation.
18. Capitalism is too much focused savings and dies of deflation eventually when consumers
cannot borrow anymore!
19. This (Keynesian) economics only works because of automation and availability of
relatively cheap abundant energy supplies which power our machines and our computers.
20. If we ever cannot get cheap energy supplies Well back to few hundred million people on
earth total and scarcity!
In Western society, especially in American society, money equals status. The more money
you have the the more esteemed you are; I don't particularly care to have money except for
some of the nice things I can get like books, but then my ego or sense of self worth is not
tied to money, whereas for too many of the higher classes it is tied to a sense of personal
value; it also means political as well as social power. The wealthiest Americans are treated
like gods in our nation merely because they have wealth.
Having seen middle class customers lording themselves our my fellow employees was an
interesting experience. It convinced me that the money they had made them feel good; it will
take force of some kind to get a more equal and just society that does not depend on raw
wealth for a good life.
"... It's really quite simple actually. The same folks who did the 911 false flag attack crime are behind the virus hoax. Their ends have never changed; to acquire power and control (which they certainly already have) And to use any means no matter how ruthless and murderous to keep it. ..."
"... When you control all the money in the world, even if you don't have truth on your side, you have immense power. ..."
"... Forget the 99.99% Vs 00.01%. Imagine a few hundred who are running the Covid scam and vaccine poisoning programme and the couple of million opposing it. They are continuing. The opposition, in the meantime, is living on the internet posting 'truth's and pictures of Hitler. ..."
"... Just caught some more mainstream pish on how Fauci blamed his "country's ineffective pandemic response on an American "anti-science bias." He called this bias "inconceivable," because "science is truth." ..."
"... So Fauci stated "science is truth." – but that is what makes "Fauci" a charlaton in the eyes of real scientists; science is ever changing, evolving, ever questioned, enhanced and even proved incorrect. Today's theories (what he believes to be the truth), will be smiled upon in the future. ..."
Off-Guardian commenter, Maribel Tuff, expands their comment Above The
Line.
Bringing together the US emergency bank lending crisis and the now massive Covid response,
I've concluded that one of the main reasons it is happening, apart from the corporate looting,
is because of a historic event, the USA's economic collapse and the dollar's demise, which
started just weeks before this Covid operation kicked off, and has been put on hold by a world
wide manufactured economic 'freeze'.
THE END OF 'EXTEND AND PRETEND'
A few months before Covid appeared, the Fed were busy pouring literally trillions of dollars
into the US banks, to prevent inter-lending bank-runs which were starting to develop. These
were the same tectonic fissures that developed prior to the 2008 crisis, where the banks became
so distrustful of each other's solvency, that they massively increased interest rates to each
other to factor in the risk. If unsuppressed the lending rates would continue to rise, laying a
path to bank failures and a contagion which would eventually derail the economy and undermine
the dollar itself.
In September 2019 the Fed intervened in the repo. markets for four consecutive
days, pumping $75 billion per day into the banks, as the inter-banking interest rate –
the repo rate – peaked at a terrifying
10% [ 1 ]. If this
level were allowed to contaminate regular highstreet lending, it would cause widespread debt
defaults & insolvencies.
The dangers are far greater today because, unlike in 2008, Quantitive Easing (QE) has pushed
the Fed to the limits of its credibility, and are forcing them into causing some serious
currency debasement. If they continue with the forms of QE they are shackled to, then dollar
debasement becomes a certainty in a US economy that is far more fragile & indebted
generally and less able to cope.
The Fed must have known for a few years that QE was not returning the economy to economic
normality, and that they were still trapped in the solvency crisis of 2008. Knowing this, the
Fed were prepared for the latest crisis. They had made it possible to inject hundreds of
billions of dollars into the banking system discreetly, unlike in 2008, without any additional
Congressional fanfare, via the Financial Stability
Oversight Council , formed in 2010.
They had given themselves almost unlimited funds and the resources of the entire government
if necessary, to reassure the banks that collapse was impossible. This 'rescue operation' was
being played out, relatively unreported except in the financial press, only weeks prior to the
Covid flu appearing on the world stage. Issuing
..
cumulative repo loans totalling more than $9 trillion to the trading houses on Wall
Street that the Fed had been making from September 17 of 2019 – months before the onset
of COVID-19 anywhere in the world [ 2 ]
Unlike in 2008, this second use or continued use of mass Fed stimulus is not a new untested
idea and, by using it again or continuing to use it more intensely to stabilise the banks, it
would eventually lead the markets to conclude that we are locked in a never ending cycle of
stimulus, which will inevitably end in hyperinflation and dollar collapse.
That is an uncontroversial economic fact, and will be the conclusion of the Fed's current
policy. In that context, an external 'event' could be critical in taking the spotlight off US
finance and its woes.
The Fed
will not want to exit repo operations until they are absolutely certain the market can stand
on its own two feet. [ 3 ], [
4 ]
United States Overnight Repo Rate was at 0.11 on Friday January 15
But, as they well know given their experience over the past 10 years, the markets will never
be able to stand on their own feet in the current economic model. Now not only companies are
being kept afloat by low interests rates, the US itself is dependent and kept solvent by
low interest rates.
The fed has injected or made available over 9 trillion dollars to the banks in only 6 months
leading up to March 2020, that is over 40% of the USA's GDP, prior to Covid and represents
nearly a 40% increase in the USA's national debt!
So it is becoming very obvious that we are at the end of this particular monetary road, the
'extend and pretend' policy is finished and there is nothing in the economic tool box that can
stall the inevitable. Only an external 'divine' intervention could, even temporarily delay the
dollar's collapse. As an aside, I should add, although they may be affected later, this is not
happening in European or Asian banks, only in US banks.
THE DIVERSION
In my opinion, the US security agencies picked a scenario off the shelf, something they have
been justifiably rehearsing for years, the response to a deadly virus, which would produce the
required financial shutdown, suppress bank activity, and create a world crisis big enough to
eclipse the US economic crisis and produce a 'flight to safety' into the dollar, facilitating
an economic induced coma, allowing time, a breathing space and justifying massive emergency QE
injections into the US and world economy.
It could be sold as a period during which a restructuring of the world banking system could
take place and perhaps reschedule debt as well as redefine the mechanisms of a new reserve
currency.
This is what I think 'The Great Reset' really is about. It is being painted as something
intricate and nefarious on every level, but it's possibly more utilitarian than that, a
necessary dialog, where the subject of that dialog is sealed from the public, justified by
protecting our worried and panicky ears, and which concerns almost all western world
leaders.
I'm sure a major false flag terror attack would have been discussed as an alternative to
Covid, but the US is in no fit position economically to respond militarily, and without a
military response to a terror attack the US would fear looking weak. Although Wars have been
thought to resolve many an economic crisis, it is just as likely, in this instance, that a
proxy war with Russia or a direct war with Iran would precipitate a dollar collapse, rather
than create growth and a flight to 'safety'. China would no doubt gleefully humiliate the US
during such a conflict. So I speculate that major wars, as an economic solution, are off the
table, at least until this crisis is resolved.
Creating a virus out of thin air is a cruel and vicious deceit, but the Fed will no doubt
have claimed to its allies that it is far less painful than the total economic implosion we
will face in the brewing economic collapse, where financial contagion from the US would cause
most western financial institutions to become insolvent, debt would remain unpaid, trade would
cease, asset values would crumble, bank machines stop, riots start, martial law be declared,
and in many ill-prepared, import-dependent countries like the UK, rationing and eventually
hunger would begin.
This is the threat the fed would have made to their allies, as we know for a fact they did
in 2008, when asking for a united world central bank stimulus, making it appear vital to world
economic survival.
They would have claimed that this time around the economic dangers are of such a magnitude
that they even persuaded their foes, Russia and China, to partake in the hoax, because they are
also reliant on continued banking & economic stability, and would not be willing to risk
political instability at home caused by a second world economic depression.
By creating this suspension of an economic collapse, the US has cleverly turned the
dominance of the dollar into a matter of international survival, effectively holding the world
to ransom and blocking the baton of world reserve currency being dually transferred over to the
next economic ascendant, China, and where the US has effectively engineered themselves a seat
amongst the judges at their own bankruptcy hearing.
Believing this to be the case, I am less confused as to why most of the USA's allies were so
helpful and so consistent in making this Covid operation happen, and I have concluded it is
their belief in the integrated nature of the financial & currency markets and the threat of
economic collapse posited, as in 2008 by the Fed, that is causing their
complicity.
MUTUAL SECRECY
As each irrational, destructive lockdown measure is implemented I am quite sure that our
politicians, the very few that are in the know, say to each other: 'we are lucky because
"lockdowns" are as nothing, compared to the calamity that would overtake us in the event of a
dollar-induced economic collapse!' This, for me, explains their apparent insanity, lies and the
internationally co-ordinated nature of their response. They too are acting out of fear, not for
a virus, but for fear of anarchy and, by extension, the very real threat to their own lives
that would result.
The secrecy surrounding this operation is wholly consistent, because it is in nobody's
interests to break ranks. If anyone exposes what is really happening to the US economy then it
would precipitate the run on the banks, and then the dollar, that they are being told would
lead to a world economic catastrophe.
To explore this hypothesis, we can look at the varying responses of the world players, and
measure their reluctance or complicity in the scam, because at this turning point in history,
during these shifts of power, loyalty is not guaranteed.
Japan has been strangely reluctant to take part, indicating to me their brooding irritation
with US hegemony, which has been growing amongst their population for some years and expressed
through the Osprey protests . It looked at
one point like they were flirting with the idea of ignoring Covid altogether. Prompting the US
to 'invite' Japan to join 5-eyes, perhaps to exert more direct control over them, via their
security services?
Russia and China are reluctantly playing along for obvious economic reasons, but again we
see reluctance to go full hog, despite the attraction of introducing authoritarian measures at
home under the cover of Covid. Russia has even invented a non-existent vaccine for the
non-existent virus, giving themselves an instant opt-out when required. Whereas China is
preferring to just stop testing, and ignore the 'crisis' altogether, except for the odd
statement about how dangerous it all is.
Non-western Africa, is not taking part at all, in Nigeria there are very few cases, probably
because they are out of the loop on what is really happening, and see little evidence of a
virus in their population.
Germany although physically occupied by the US, like Japan, have a confidence and
independence that marks them apart from other vassal states. Having 'found' far fewer cases of
Covid, they have tried to preserve their precious economy from any serious harm for as long as
possible, demonstrating a cheekiness, consistent with their building of the Nord-stream
pipeline project to Russia, ignoring the US's repeated demands for them to stop.
In contrast, the USA's closest, most supine of allies, & the 5 eyes states, are
enthusiastically taking part, hyping the virus story to the n th degree of
absurdity. Notably the UK, France and Australia, each week pushing yet another absurdly fascist
response to a non-existent problem to scare their population stiff. In my view each allies'
response is calibrated to their financial dependency on the US and how 'captured' their leaders
are to US interests.
On the political and media front, alternative media, doubtless spurred on by seeded stories
and certain controlled opposition, unwittingly fans these flames by speculating on various
kingpins and ideologues central to the plot, like Bill & Malinda Gates, and playing up fear
stories of Marxist tyrannies, Communist takeovers, compulsory vaccines, tracking chips and
various accusations against the dangers of 5G – targeted for being predominately European
and Chinese technology.
The end result is a population left either paralysed by fear of the flu, or in terror of a
rising 'Marxist Fascist tyranny' run by 'jewish globalists' and oligarchs. Either way, everyone
is in too fearful a state to logically assess what is really going on around them.
I'm sure, in the dark bowels of Langley, Virginia, this scenario has been pre-rehearsed and
stress-tested for years, and pieced together from a huge portfolio of coups and psychological
terror operations from around the world.
Perhaps with lessons learned from Climate Change where, as with the weather, the common flu
can easily be weaponised. In the case of Covid via a swiftly implemented 'testing' regime,
simply testing for the common cold and producing millions of false positives, and a hysterical,
totally unquestioning mainstream media.
COVID OPPORTUNISM
International Covid panic created some short term, but worryingly for the USA, short-lived
'flight to safety'. 'International crisis' is the USA's traditional and most effective tool to
protect the dollar: normally US/UK media-manufactured. It was used to bolster a flagging dollar
via the media-created 'Euro crisis' or 'Greek debt crisis'. A series of hysterical panics made
'real' by US and UK financial press, quickly making the USA's economic woes old news, and
reducing the world reserve holdings of the Euro in only a matter of months.
Along with the 'flight to (dollar) safety', Covid has offered the opportunity to freeze the
USA's banking collapse with massive injections of cash. $9 trillions was available to US banks
up until March 2020, but in addition to this the Fed produced $5 trillion in economic stimulus
to the wider economy and a further 5 trillions recently.
Without this 'external threat' – a 'killer virus' – this amount of stimulus
would have immediately caused panic and threatened dollar credibility. However, with the virus
narrative and the world-unified stimulus response to the 'Covid pandemic', this modest flight
to (dollar) safety, along with the massive cash injections, looked justified and sensible.
It also looks to me like those in the 'dollar economic zone' – if there is such a
thing – have gone along with their own impoverishment and have wrecked their own
economies under the cover of Covid, to save themselves from a perceived greater economic
catastrophe, bank contagion, on the basis of what I believe is being secretly told them by the
USA, and based on what they have been witnessing in the US banking system prior to March.
It could easily be argued that we are being unwittingly drawn into a conspiracy to protect
the dollar and US hegemony, under the cover of Covid, that is not in our own best long-term
interests at all (currently being called the 'great reset').
Like Brexit and like the War on Carbon, I believe that if an operation or manufactured event
seems to offer multifaceted advantages to the USA and their Corporate & military elite,
then that operation has revealed its origins.
As it is the case with Covid, not only is there a freeze on the US economic collapse, but US
Corporations and Internet services are benefiting massively from the 'Covid illusion'.
Something that must be getting more obvious by the day, and must be giving honest foreign
leaders concerns as they see their retail sectors ravaged by Amazon and their cultural
institutions replaced by Netflix, Apple TV and Amazon TV.
And the proposed 'salvation' involves paying billions to US Pharma, for, at best, a very
doubtful vaccine. The least-honest politicians can no doubt engineer their 'shutdowns' to
preference US corporations, whilst acting as the viceroys of Empire.
This looting could just be a side-show to the main event of dollar 'transition' or collapse,
or it could be amongst the main aims of 'Operation Covid', it is difficult to tell, but it
looks like the rest of the world is being looted by US Corporations and their home grown
small-to-medium-size businesses bankrupted, with vast additional profits flowing to the USA's
richest, where we see the stella rise in the wealth of America's robber barons.
From renting taxis with Uber to replacing hotels with AirBNB flats, holding meetings on
zoom, spending 'cash free' via Visa, MasterCard et al and the Paypal cartel, ordering food
on-line with Uber eats and destroying local culture, all are being forced on a gullible world
public during the Covid selective collapse. It should be dawning on everyone by now that Covid
is a very, very Neoliberal Corporate virus, strangely working in the interests of a continued
US Corporate neoliberal rollout against our own national geopolitical interests.
It is not only the Corporates that benefit from US 'operations' like Covid, the security
state also demands their share of the spoils for assisting in and facilitating much of the
operation. US tracking apps, social media and communication platforms are being forced, as a
parasitical middle man, into every walk of our lives, taking a thin slice off everyday
activities, like an America tax.
The details of the implementation of the Covid operation aside, it is possible that many
inside the system regard the 'Great Reset' as not a conspiracy to oppress us, to exploit us and
destroy our lives in a Marxist tyranny as many believe, but rather regard it as a necessary
adjustment to an unbalanced economic system.
To see it like that we must believe that the current system is fundamentally flawed and that
good faith solutions are being sought. I think 'The Reset' is seen by many honest brokers
around the world as a genuine platform to resolve flaws in the current world economy, and to
manage a transition from the dollar, in a controlled fashion. We should not always think the
worst motives of everyone involved.
Having said that, I have no doubt that the US is busy trying to hijack the agenda to
preserve its own supremacy, even during its climactic demise. The US Military industrial
complex will be suspicious of any direction not determined by them, and I'm sure in Washington,
Brussels and Beijing there is a battle over the measures and direction we need to take.
Like it or not, there may be very good reasons for these discussions to be held in secret,
and we are left with only secondhand hints of the battles being fought over our current
economic future; like Universal income, a shared international reserve currency, digital
currencies or a cashless society, perhaps required through exchange controls or price fixing,
to fight coming hyper-inflation?
Many US shills will be telling the world, that this is a 'crisis of capitalism', a crisis of
western civilisation, and that we all need to preserve the US economy & dollar supremacy to
save the world.
I personally believe the US has set us up during this crisis, like they did in the last in
2008, where they dumped all their bad debt on European banks to 'share' the crisis out. Working
on the principle that: a problem shared is a problem halved, perhaps. Even if we are in this
crisis because of a US collapse, and the rest of us could survive relatively unscathed. A
'Reset' does appear to be one route that enables a slow deflating of the economic bomb sitting
under the US and which may affect the rest of us badly, if it goes off.
" SHE SWALLOWED
THE SPIDER TO CATCH THE FLY;
I DON'T KNOW WHY SHE SWALLOWED A FLY – PERHAPS SHE'LL DIE "
I reference the nursery rhyme as a cautionary tail, because this all started with the
relatively normal economic recession of 2007, which if the USA had allowed to burn through its
economy, would have been resolved in only a few years, and we would be living in normal times
now. But they didn't. The world's central banks were persuaded to take measures that caused
greater long-term harm, which in turn has led, in my view, to the 'Covid solution', a
provocation intended to temporarily justify even more of the poisonous QE and low interest
rates that didn't work before.
Whilst perhaps sold as a 'fire-break for a more long term solution to be found, I don't see
much evidence that the 'fire-break' is being used well. It seems more like a pause for the
always shortsighted American elites to loot as much as is possible from our states' coffers
before an economic tsunami hits.
A SELF-INFLICTED PROBLEM
I also believe the US never needed to be in this grave position it is today. Its problems
are very much self inflicted. Simply taxing its wealthy and cutting its outrageous military
spending would have averted a dollar crisis, leading instead to a slow drift from the dollar
over a few decades as China took up the strain. But that is another story related to America's
ideological, political and philosophical bankruptcy and scleroses, that has increasingly driven
them into an economic ditch over the past 45 years.
The Covid operation itself is a beautiful metaphor for the original banking crisis, which
triggered the Fed to use quantitive easing (QE) – a far, far more damaging response than
the original crisis itself, just as the lockdowns are far, far more damaging than this strain
of flu, naturally occurring or released deliberately as a marker.
If a consensus resolution is not found quickly for the transfer or sharing of the world
reserve currency, as the dollar is about to collapse, I have no doubt we will be required to
'swallow' a more drastic intervention than Covid to save the US economy and the dollar, each
solution proving more damaging than the last And of course, as the rhyme goes, we will
eventually swallow a 'horse' and be 'dead of course'.
If I am right guys, in one respect you can breathe a sigh of relief: world tyranny, forced
vaccinations with harmful DNA changes, sterilisations, and mass genocide are not the main aims
of this 'operation'. They may be the end result of it, if we are not careful, but I don't think
they are the main aims.
The US is trying to stall dollar relegation using the Covid operation, and make it a major
event, when previously the transition from old to new world reserve currency would have gone
almost unnoticed by most of us. The British ceded the Pound's world reserve currency status
relatively quietly after WWII, under US pressure to float the pound.
It is perhaps a measure of the utility that is now offered by the world's reserve currency,
to facilitate the uncontrolled looting of the rest of the world's economies, that it is now
such a prize and so hard to surrender. Without the dollar and its world reserve status,
enabling the US to print pieces of green paper in exchange for real goods, the US would
certainly be bankrupt.
But that is not our fault and it is not for us in the rest of the world to save them,
especially since it is their ideology that has inflicted so much harm on their own people and
the rest of world.
What we are witnessing is an attempt, through foul means, by another once great Empire to
postpone the inevitable. To fight off being consigned to obscurity.
So we exist in that mad time, that time of collapse and chaos before a new order asserts
itself, which could last a month or 100 years.
You can view Maribel Tuff's original comment
here .
The author wished to remain anonymous.
anti_republocrat , Jan 25, 2021 9:51 PM
I was initially not very aware of the liquidity problem that developed in September, 2019,
but I became aware of lots of weirdness quite early. Some examples are the FDA shutting down
the testing Dr. Hlelen Chu was conducting on stored sample in January. I concluded that the
federal government did not want her detecting SARS-CoV-2 in samples collected in 2019. Also,
in mid-March, Ben Swann released a video discussing the invalid comparison of Covid's CFR
with flu's IFR. If an apples to apples comparison had been made, people would have known that
flu is far more dangerous than Covid-19. A third weirdness was the CDC's changes to death
certificate criteria exposed by MN state senator Dr. Scott Jensen. He is now enduring
harassment from the state medical board and has had to defend his license to practice in MN.
About the same time, I became more aware of the liquidity issue and concluded that obscuring
that was a prime motivator for hoax, but there were several other motivations. Not all
participants in an event necessarily share the same motivation.
It became obvious to me early on that the Gates/Fauci/WHO/HHS crowd was lying about
Hydroxychloroquine in order to boost vaccine development. It was hard to link that interest
to multiple state governors deliberately committing genocide, but a FB friend yesterday clue
me into this article about the power and control of Anthony Fauci throughout the medical
establishment: https://kevinbarrett.heresycentral.is/2020/06/mccarthy/
Fear of such power may also be the reason that the FLCCC Alliance affiliated Eastern Virginia
Medical School has disfavored HCQ. They clearly believe, probably with good reason, that
Ivermectin is better, so they don't want to get smeared with HCQ while they're pushing an
even better alternative.
The third motivation is the desire to be rid of Trump. Trump was many bad things, but he
was also opposed to the US being controlled by an international globalist, technocratic Deep
State. He thus had opponents all over the West, not just in the US. Members of the Deep State
were in a perfect position to make sure the funders and controllers of the Democratic Party
apparatus were aware how they could use a pandemic and lock downs against Trump.
I'm sure individuals who participated in the hoax had varying levels of awareness, as Ken
McCarthy explained when interviewed by Kevin Barrett in the link above. Some actually
believed the Covid-19 narrative. Some were afraid to speak out, seeing the retribution faced
by others. But many were well aware of what they were doing, even to the point of deliberate
eldercide.
It's a good thing most of my life has passed, because death is the only cure for me. No
amount of de-programming or exposure to rats will make me unsee what I've seen.
The US with the largest military on the planet surrendering power to 'an international
globalist, technocratic Deep State."? I don't see that as a choice any US president would
make, or is making. Why would they, they hold all the cards and have created in their minds
the greatest empire in History.
If there are two alternative views of the future for America, one being pursued by Biden
and an alternative by Trump, both will involve American supremacy and control.
Norman E Anderson , Jan 25, 2021 8:34 PM
The Solution: A Global Rush to BitCoin.. pump BitCoin to the Maximum.. then dump it all
into their "LIBRA DIEM" just waiting to be offered at the right time.. all to Fund the
"balanced ERA 56 Per Diem Stipend" of the New Global Serf Class
Bitcoin will fail in the face of the e-yuan, following dollar collapse. China is way ahead
in making their digital currency official.
Lone Wolf , Jan 25, 2021 7:51 PM
This article could portray the absolute reality of the world situation but it will only be
read by 99.99999% of the world's population. Of that 0% will be capable of acting positively
in support of it.
This applies to every article that appears in OffGuardian. Words hold the ephemeral value
of 'chip paper', they are incapable of effecting a solution to a problem that cannot be
resolved by words alone.
Understanding this lies at the root of the REAL solution.
paranoid goy , Jan 25, 2021 1:20 PM
You know a thing as a simple truth by it being simple without being simplistic. But the
Bolsheviks never let a good crisis go to waste, so keep fighting Baal Gates' holy water!
Excellent post.
JdL , Jan 25, 2021 8:49 AM
"Off-Guardian commenter, Maribel Tuff, expands their comment Above The Line."
Who are "they" in this sentence? Please don't tell me this is some kind of genderless BS,
using the plural to mean singular just to avoid – GASP! – implying whether
someone is male or female.
I took it to be a deliberate use of a gender-neutral pronoun not out of political
correctness, but because it is an understood pen name and there's no reason to believe the
writer is one sex or the other. (Of course, it is still confusingly plural.)
Harry Rogers , Jan 24, 2021 11:29 PM
A couple of notes from history.
After the Vietnam War ended and a number of years later to buy anything in Vietnam you
needed lots of the currency called the Dong.
Gradually it wasn't called the Dong they were called "bricks". When you went to buy you would
ask "How many bricks?". Now a brick was about 100 Dong notes.
After the second world war in Germany some peole actually carried their Recih Marks in a
wheelbarrow when they went to buy something like bread etc.
Today the world debt is $57,917,909,049,231.
The simple thing about debt and money is that its all an illusion created for the benefit
of a robotic universe that needs to believe that the piece of cheap paper I hold in my hand
is of some value.
Also the US owes China owes Russia owes The EU owes Japan owes the UK owes ad infinitum.
See the silliness of it! Ooh lets panic what if China wants it money back ? Um not possible
and anyway its just numbers on a page.
What has real value?? Find out when life becomes live or die.
therevolutionwas , Jan 25, 2021 1:13 PM Reply to Harry
Rogers
Precious metals are not edible or useful unless you consider jewelery and semi-conductors
to be essential items.
Why do gold and silver have "real value"?
bypassing yr lame filter , Jan 25, 2021 2:22 PM Reply to therevolutionwas
Precious metals are not edible or useful unless you consider ornaments and semi-conductors
to be essential items.
Why do gold and silver have "real value"?
The spam fitler (spelling deliberate) here is obviously written by a member of the Borg as
you cannot even use words that contain the three letters j,e, and w in succession. Which is
why I had to write "ornaments" instead of the more exact name for shiny things worn as
ornaments.
That's why you should own it in the form of legal tender, such as sovereigns and
britannias.
Tony , Jan 24, 2021 9:08 PM
This is a crappy piece of writing which steals the correct economic analysis of people
like Jim Sinclair, Bill Holter and others, and warps it into the jack/jim (and their one
million aliases) trolling which has blighted OffG for months. This was obvious when it
appeared as a series of btl's recently. If anyone wants the full picture, they just have to
watch Bill and Jim's videos on youtube and elsewhere, where they make it abundantly clear
that this is a globalist problem, the people behind it don't fly flags, and they are only
interested in power through money and economic control.
Arby , Jan 24, 2021 1:26 PM
"This is what I think 'The Great Reset' really is about. It is being painted as something
intricate and nefarious on every level " The focus is narrow (but I appreciated the
interesting information) and, it seems to me, the author is here expressing an awareness of
that flaw. There's lots of speculation here as well and while I have no problem with that, a
humble approach would involve the admission of that fact. Why was Japan reluctant to jump on
the mankind-killing bandwagon? The author cites disaffection on the part of the Japanese
population. That tracks. But we also know that Japan wanted to have their Olympics and
thought that maybe they still could. Is Maribel certain that that wasn't the case? It wasn't
the Japanese people who turned on a dime. It was the government. The Japanese government
finally realized that the Olympics, which it wanted (for the prestige and the economic
repercussions of that I suppose), were not going to go ahead. On a dime, it suddenly viewed
corona as a super dangerous mankind-destroying bug and issued proclamation after proclamation
in its sudden supercharged flight down the road of fascism. Until then, while it acknowledged
the (non existent) Sars CoV 2 / covid 19 reality, it was not bothered by it.
Don't agree with everything you said, but nevertheless an informative article and firms up
much of what Catherine Austin Fitts has been saying: https://www.bitchute.com/video/RpRAvjoxVDCQ/
Tom , Jan 24, 2021 10:49 AM
"Whereas China is preferring to just stop testing, and ignore the 'crisis' altogether,
except for the odd statement about how dangerous it all is."
Maribel, can you list a reference showing China has stopped or reduced testing?
See comments below by others regarding PCR testing in China.
Sarah Jones , Jan 24, 2021 10:27 AM
They have prevented new relationships from beginning and erased those kids. It is genocide
from the ground up. Even couples are not likely to have kids under such uncertainty. The very
opposite of their claim of "saving lives". Those that do are being abused more than before
with masks during child birth and keeping the father out. Their relationship being sabotaged
with trauma from the beginning and then further trauma and destruction of the family with
parents involved in assaulting kids with "vaccines".
Sarah Jones , Jan 24, 2021 11:10 AM Reply to Sarah
Jones
Jeanice Barcelo explains how hospital birth is ritual trauma abuse to destroy the family
and how ultrasound is to destroy the eggs inside those babies so they are targetting a
generation ahead. It is satanists/ abortionists/ psychopaths behind covid not economists. It
is trauma to harm love and damage those kids and their future relationships to induce further
trauma. They said toilet paper was selling out as an inside joke about the young jerking off
to porn during "lockdown" and "social distancing".
Abortion is just fine if you want your ethnic group annihilated and erased from the face
of the earth.
Isaiah 3:12 (MCV) As for my people, children are their oppressors (infantile Cultural
Marxists), and women (Marxist feminists) rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee
cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 4:22 AM
China would "humiliate" the US in a war? That's just like a girl to worry about making a
dent on ego and overlooking a few dents on the planet How's it going in your basement darling
We're all suspended to your words and your little heart and your little brain all memory no
processor
" ..a proxy war with Russia or a direct war with Iran would precipitate a dollar collapse,
rather than create growth and a flight to 'safety'. China would no doubt gleefully humiliate
the US during such a conflict. "
The war would not be with China. During a conflict with Iran or proxy with Russia the US
is economically vulnerable to China's financial sabotage.
No time for a war with anybody . time to stop buying slavery products from China. China
and the cabal already humiliate everyone by corrupting our politicians. Not the US
The USA's Corporate elites, including Trump moved their manufacturing plant and expertise
to China to exploit their cheap labour, nobody forced them.
It was Corporate greed & vanity that caused the surrender of American manufacturing
power to China. American's thought they were superior to China but they have made themselves
her bitch.
Not even a war could save them now, unless they intended to have their military's spare
parts Fedexed over from China, during the conflict.
Also if China's economy were switch to a war footing, like a sleeping giant, it would dwarf
even the USA's military in a very short time, their capacity is the biggest in the world.
David Homer , Jan 25, 2021 4:12 PM Reply to Z=Anon
You are correct in everything except you have forgotten the fact that China imports most
of its iron ore, copper, aluminum, coal, oil, etc. They would be in trouble in a world war
situation.
messenger charles , Jan 25, 2021 4:38 PM Reply to David
Homer
They will invade Australia and New Zealand first in order to secure those minerals and
rely upon Russia for oil and gas.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 3:51 AM
What to do with our lives
Find food eat the food when you feel pressure download the
shit down
Anyone trying to prevent you to do any of those things, murder them
Tim Glover , Jan 24, 2021 3:35 AM
I haven't read the 487 comments so apologies, but the author seriously undermines their
argument by suggesting that the virus is a hoax. Exaggerated, yes, hoax, quite obviously not.
I have no doubt that there is truth in this article, but claiming that the virus does not
exist at all is untenable; the author should remove their blinkers and align their theory
with reality.
Tim, I used to think like you, but the original evidence has been extrapolated beyond all
reason by Con-19 artists. So now we must be pedantic and ask for evidence:
a. That the RNA fragments originally sequenced by Chinese scientists in Wuhan (not from a
virus but from patients bodily fluids) all belonged to a single strain of virus, putatively
named Covid-19 but never isolated for sequencing of a complete viral genome?
b. That the Covid-19 was exceptionally deadly; bearing in mind that the Chinese figures
for death among severely ill patients were comparable to normal U$ figures for death among
patients hospitalized with normal annual flu.
c. That the original Covid-19 strain is still extant? (assuming there actually was a
Covid-19 in Wuhan, which is not proven)
d. Assuming the orriginal Wuhan strain has died out (mutated), where is the evidence that
its mutant progeny are more deadly than the original Wuhan strain was ie, not much.
e. Last and most important, where is the evidence that the Westminster con artists
(Con-911, Con-WMD, Con-Viagra, Con-Sarin, Con-Novijoke) are not lying this time ? their lips
are moving.
I know from my personal experience that there is a new strain of virus, because I, and
many of my friends were seriously ill with it and 2 people died. many of the people affected
had no connection to each other. That this is not simply an unconnected anecdote is clear
from looking at the data which show that across the world there was a clear spike in
mortality in spring (The UK committed mass manslaughter in care homes but this is not the
case in other countries). It does not matter where it originated, or whether the genome has
been sequenced. I know the PCR test is useless. I know that there is hype, fear mongering and
exaggeration. I know masks don't work and lockdowns will kill more than they save by a wide
margin. Nonetheless, the virus is real.
Mike Ellwood (Oxon UK) , Jan 24, 2021 8:43 PM Reply to Tim
Glover
Whereabouts do you liveTim? I still don't know anybody who has been ill with supposed
Covid-19 ever since the "Pandemic" began, let alone, know anyone who died from it.
Were the other people who were ill, and especially the 2 who died, particularly old,
and/or did they have other serious health conditions?
And how do you know what you had was the "new strain"? The "new strain" is fairly new,
isn't it? Those poor souls must have died fairly quickly after contracting it.
And how many is "many"?
And how do you know that it wasn't "normal" flu? This is the flu season, after all,
assuming you live in the northern hemisphere. Flu can be quite dangerous too.
@Tim Glover: "I know from my personal experience that there is a new strain of virus,
because I, and many of my friends were seriously ill with it".
How do you know that the flu virus which made you and your friends "seriously ill" was
Covid-19?
I asked someone in England the same question at the start of the Con-19 hype last winter:
How did she know that her friend in the countryside and her relative in London, both of whom
told her they had it and it was their worst flu ever, had escaped death from a specific
headline-news "novel virus Covid-19", when there was so much boring ordinary flu about?
"Voila le Anglais avec son sang froid habituel (Here comes the Englishman with his usual
bloody cold)" -- Fractured French.
gary orlando , Jan 25, 2021 5:35 AM Reply to Tim
Glover
Tim, you have NO CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. "i WAS SERIOUSLY ILL" is an extremely
ignorant piece of so called evidence. there is NO NEW VIRUS. and virus DO NOT CAUSE ILLNESS
AND contagion is a myth. it IS ALL A lie. you are brainwashed.
therevolutionwas , Jan 25, 2021 1:23 PM Reply to Tim
Glover
Virus's are real and will remain real. They kill susceptible people all the time. And with
the lock down there are more people not carrying on with their normal lives, not eat right,
not getting enough sun, etc ..
Something is happening but you don't know what it is – do you, Mr Jones?
– B Dylan
You have a currently accepted narrative that saves you from questioning your current
worldview.
I don't think it helps to argue 'it is real!
Or it isn't real!
People are dying every day – and by far the most are dying in the ways they generally
do. WHO benefits for the official narratives?
That health as as joy in being as well as resilience to toxic stress and exposures, has an
arena of personal and collective responsibility is of course true.
So far you haven't felt to look into those who are offering excellent witness to the lack
of established facts at the basis of an incomprehensibly disproportionate coordinated
reaction that represents a hijacking of living selves – not cells.
So you are confident that because Dr WHO and the whole pharmaceutical establishment back
you up, you can state 'the virus is real', as part of an extremely invested establishment of
social and corporate identity in its theory.
A positive result and diagnosis for terminal cancer can operate a nocebo death sentence on
its recipient even if the test is in error.
This is similar to what is being perpetrated on the public mind – regardless whether
for private reasons great or small.
When dealing with the dissociated, one cannot simply tell them their experience is unreal.
Thus no one can tell the so called sheep to 'wake up'. No can I tell such woke people to stop
projecting and restore their recognition of another's presence – just because.
Joel Walbert , Jan 24, 2021 5:54 AM Reply to Tim
Glover
Zero evidence anywhere in the world of sars-cov2 having been isolated. Claims of such are
not evidence of it. Numerous FOIA requests in various places provided no evidence of
isolation. A CDC document states there is no isolated virus and that is in fact a computer
generation. People being sick and dying does not even almost prove a virus
messenger charles , Jan 24, 2021 11:30 AM Reply to Joel
Walbert
What they have allegedly 'isolated' has not been purified, and THAT is the crucial element
to this issue. All their 'papers' are a fraud.
That is precisely my point. The document I was referring to states clearly there are no
isolates and that the testing is based off computer generated sequences. I generally would
believe nothing from the CDC but when one of their own official documents admits fraud on a
grand scale, I feel I must trust that one. Its all about discernment.
The CDC document is titled,
CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel.
It is dated July 13, 2020. On page 39, in a section titled,
"Performance Characteristics,"
"Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays
[diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized
stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA "
Agreed. My friend is COO of big US pvt hospital group..he told me last April that their
hospitals(over 200) were near EMPTY and he was laying off staff left and right. Last Dec he
said their census was .." about normal for a flu season"..ie, no piles of bodies, no over
crowding.. ie, no real pandemic.
Fred762 , Jan 25, 2021 7:48 PM Reply to Joel
Walbert
USmonthly death totals from all causes have been FLAT for 5 years . therefore, NO
PANDEMIC
Joel Walbert , Jan 26, 2021 12:46 AM Reply to Fred762
Exactly. There are shockingly lower deaths from virtually all causes this past year
though. Fraudulent death certificates are the pandemic, not a computer generated viral
sequence.
Jacques , Jan 24, 2021 6:04 AM Reply to Tim
Glover
The virus IS a hoax. Some people say that viruses do not exist at all. Dunno. Even if they
do, the fairy tale of SARS-CoV-2 is complete bullshit.
Nobody has ever been able to present the alleged virus in an isolated form. The alleged
virus has never been proved to cause a disease. Period. If you or anyone claim that
SARS-CoV-2 exists, let me fucking see it. If you or anyone claim that the alleged SARS-CoV-2
causes the alleged diseases COVID-19, prove it. There are procedures for that. Such as Koch's
postulates.
None of that is done, therefore SARS-CoV-2 & COVID-19 must be considered a crock of
shit until proven otherwise. No data from the world over suggest that there is a pandemic.
End of story. That's your reality. Period.
messenger charles , Jan 24, 2021 11:19 AM Reply to Tim
Glover
The so-called virus has NOT been isolated nor has it, more importantly, been purified.
Sars Cov 2 otherwise known as Covid19 is 100% a lie and a criminal hoax. Research doctors Tom
Cowan, Stefan Lanka and Andrew Kaufman.
Mike Ellwood (Oxon UK) , Jan 24, 2021 8:44 PM Reply to messenger
charles
Also check out the website TheInfectiousMyth.com .
Yes, that man recently passed away but I leaned my foundational anti-COVID myth lessons
from his site as early as March.
Always knew pcr tests were BS.
Never knew a lot of the other COVID info till later.
From his web site or rather what was once his website:
"This was a database and web server owned by David Crowe. From the family of David Crowe,
we are sorry to share with everyone that David passed away on July 12th, 2020."
Paul Vonharnish , Jan 24, 2021 2:42 PM Reply to Tim
Glover
Hello Tim Glover: I see you've received many down votes for suggesting that a (covid)
virus does exist. Tsk, tsk, tsk I can only help you if you really want to be
helped Just repeat after me:
The Earth is flat.
Gravity is an illusion.
The Sun revolves around the Earth.
The moon is hollow and filled with cheese.
There's a white robed guy watching over everything .
The (above) white robed guy – loves everyone equally
You'll be better soon
messenger charles , Jan 25, 2021 4:26 PM Reply to Paul
Vonharnish
Actually the earth is a fixed globe at the centre of the universe (the pinnacle of God's
creation) with the sun and moon orbiting the earth.
Crikey – with friends like you – who needs enemies!
There are moments in life when a sense of lack can step forth in power and strut the stage
of the world like a giant!
(Yes sarcasm).
You get to set the measure of your receiving but not the timing and the manner of your
rewards. Life is meant to be a surprise!
Do you know what love is?
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 1:52 AM
Answer to Judith comment below, and my usual type of comment right on the head of that
confusing and propagandist article
You should blow your nose without a tissue. They are full of formaldehyde causes
skin irritation and attacks the nervous system it's a carcinogen too and it comes mainly from
China (and I believe Israel Chemicals is also mainly involved) also avoid bed sheets from
Ikea and Amazon and any made in china (I tested them in TSP concoctions), any cheap furniture
from the likes (fiberboards and pieces of wood stuck together with F. based glue offgasing
like crazy, laundry detergents filled with them to replenish any garment, making sure the
American population remains dumbed down and sick and dying. The US dollar doesn't exist, no
more than the freakin' kopec.
American people exists. American land exists. And they are fine.
But they need to be taken down are they Don't worry people of Europe If it is crushed it
is not to save you. It will go in the same pockets of the people who have been crushing you
for quite a while.
Oh yeah, if you have a properly responsive immune system, your respiratory system will
inflame and clog in a very alarming way from exposure to formaldehyde offgasing rings a
bell?!?!
Raymondo Don Sayo , Jan 24, 2021 1:42 AM
The author was just short of calling opinions other than his own as conspiracy theories
which is a base of ignorance. Too long of a rambling severely narrow minded road is this
article. Lots of good thoughts within.
Maybe you are the controlled op?
The case of Australia, the "Building 7" of the Coronavirus scheme, is a case in point that
entirely supports the author's case, as before we had more than 1000 cases and a handful of
deaths, the government declared it would pump $180 billion into the banks to stabilise them,
including for the first time in history, QE. So it printed all the money and handed it around
just as the graphs of infection were exponential, in mid-March. After that and the lock down
another $130 Billion was laid out for "job keeper", which is only going to hit the fan in
March as 500,000 workers find their jobs have actually disappeared.
But now it's Vaccines that are the growth factory, and everyone is clamouring for them
because otherwise we will remain locked in this prison for years. We can't leave as we won't
be insured and there is no guarantee we'll be allowed to return.
But meanwhile, along with the US, our stock market made record gains this last year.
DYOC.
Sadly I have to entirely disagree with the author when she writes that the Russians
produced an imaginary vaccine against a non-existent virus. It's simply not true – have
a look at this paper about the GE manufacture of SARS hybrid viruses, going on at the WIV
since 2007, and of course in North Carolina under Ralph Baric: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1931312820303024
" $130 Billion was laid out for "job keeper", which is only going to hit the fan in March
as 500,000 workers find their jobs have actually disappeared."
What is this end of March timeline even in Australia ? It's the same here in the UK when
the furlough period ends ? Am I missing something ?
Hi Grafter Here's what most of us missed..
Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said via Belarusian Telegraph Agency, BelTA., that
World Bank and IMF offered him a bribe of $940 million USD in the form of "COVID RELIEF AID."
In exchange for $940 million USD, the World Bank and IMF demanded that the President of
Belarus:
• imposed "extreme lockdown on his people"
• force them to wear face masks
• impose very strict curfews
• impose a police state
• crash the economy
Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko REFUSED the offer and stated that he could not accept
such an offer and would put his people above the needs of the IMF and World Bank. This is NOT
a conspiracy. You may research this yourself. He actually said this!
Now IMF and World Bank are bailing out failing airlines with billions of dollars, and in
exchange, they are FORCING airline CEOs to implement VERY STRICT POLICIES such as FORCED face
masks covers on EVERYONE, including SMALL CHILDREN, whose health will suffer as a result of
these policies.
And if it is true for Belarus, then it is true for the rest of the world! The IMF and World
Bank want to crash every major economy with the intent of buying over every nation's
infrastructure at cents on the dollar!!!
Which would tend to confirm what the Article stated??
Exactly what was running through my mind while reading this article
j. d. , Jan 23, 2021 10:41 PM
Your post is thorough and revealing – and counter-narrative, so it might get
shadow-banned
It is disappointing to realize that not only mainstream opinion, but also both sides of
the political aisle have pushed the idea that the economy faltered after covid was declared
an emergency. However, that's clearly not the case, as your article details.
Coventry League Capital Partners, a finance firm, also posted a blog way back in April
2020 that included a mishmash of tweets/posts from throughout 2019 about a pending financial
crisis given mass layoffs in some markets, an inverted yield curve, and bank liquidity
issues. If interested, below is the address to the article:
By September of 2019, the U.S. financial market was in full-blown crisis mode with massive
"repo" operations initiated by the Federal Reserve Bank (FED). Another blogger that provided
exhaustive detail in a series of real-time blog posts about the 2019 repo situation and
financial crisis is "Wall Street On Parade."
Are you two living in the same house with ten others?
Helen , Jan 23, 2021 10:41 PM
Interesting but fails to account for the original Wuhan theatre where China, against all
previously recognised pandemic planning, sold lockdown to the West. They did so restricting
it to one city and limiting overall damage to their economy. A kind of "how to"
demonstration. You also have their main western satellites, NZ and Australia the only ones to
have followed the Zero Covid policy of the CCP – a technique of pure tyranny.
China's CCP ended COVID charade in April by eliminating flawed PCR test as unreliable
diagnostic tool for COVID infections in individual clinical diagnosis of COVID disease which
definition was narrowed to initial interpretation as Unexplained (by long known before 2020
viral or bacterial presence), pneumonia for original interpretation as caused by long known
local environmental factors including man made factors like deadly therapies, medical
particle and wave diagnostic device malfunctions or inherent designer flaws as well as cases
of immunodeficiency or autoimmunity in pneumonia patients.
In other words COVID patient in China is not one who was PCR tested positive but one with
a documented form of pneumonia-like damage to lungs.The seasonal increase in in flu and
explained and unexplained pneumonia is behind recent new quarantine measures in China.
and still China plays this COVID game as it is too desirable to hold big stick of COVID in
their hands amid economic collapse programmed by reset.
PCR and serology is being used in China for general Epidemiological models not
specifically for COVID but for general epidemic situation assessment of all respiratory
diseases flu, common cold and pneumonia that are at local epidemic levels throughout the year
getting worse in winter season.
Last year mild season in China 75,000+ people died of flu, 5,000 officially died of COVID.
Do your math. It was much ado about nearly nothing, while real crisis of old people
needlessly dying of poverty, lack of medical access driven flu is ignored as nobody among
governments gives a damn as it cannot be sold as apocalypse to scare people into
submission.
Rumplestiltskin , Jan 24, 2021 3:09 AM Reply to Kalen
Great comment Kalen, interesting info re China not using the PCR to diagnose CV,
particularly since they sold an absolute shit ton of them to Australia via the mining magnate
what's his name. If we can break the governments reliance on the PCR test, this whole charade
collapses. Ive been saying this for months.
Superb comment- it is easier to point towards a bogeyman 'over there' or some exotic event
(bat cave) than to face the hard fact that the daemon is in your house and staring you right
in the face.
That wasn't followed in all of Australia really only Victoria and WA who got hyper excited
after the initial burst of enthusiasm qld has been more damaged by the planes not arriving
rather than any thing much needing locked up those important minerals we sell had to keep
moving I suspect plus we had a looming election which seemed to put the breaks on too much
enthusiasm so we just shut our border and went on with life until recently when we showed
signs of wanting to play that rush to the head seems to have stalled in Brisbane.,,
doesn't of course stop the believers carrying on around one .
and in my opinion the whole wuhan thing was so staged to make me question of any of it was
real,,,they either exported fear or thought they were actually under attack themselves given
those war games were held in wuhan
For 6 weeks since the alleged outbreak in Wuhan the residents of Wuhan were moving freely
around the rest of China but this virus never really showed up anywhere else in China apart
from Wuhan apart from the odd isolated outbreak that quickly vanished.
This doesn't tie in with a super spreading infectious virus.
Every so often the CCP will say there are small localised outbreaks and puff by magic they
quickly disappear.
It's just CCP propaganda and keeping their toe dipped in the water.
rraa , Jan 23, 2021 10:11 PM
I don't think the Chinese government is involved. People seem to think of China as one
giant homogenous BLOB that moves like a well oiled machine. In fact, regions have a LOT of
autonomy. I don't doubt that some individual Chinese scientists contributed to the Western
narrative. Remember that China overhauled it's entire medical system after Sars 2003. It has
a very modern and transparent pneumonia and respiratory illness surveillance system and all
the alphabet agencies of the West know what is going on it.
WHO published a notice on December 31 that was a very routine notice.
The whole thing took a life of it's own after four cases were reported in one day around Dec
26. If you read the very first paper with the virus sequence on Jan 11, it only mentioned a
novel coronavirus. But almost simultaneously a second paper was published with Edward Homes
as a co-author, the one with the batwoman scientist. This was the one that made the wild
claims about the virus being linked to bats and so on.
No I am not a CCP troll, I've been following the medical and scientific articles from the
beginning and trying to keep track of where the narratives emerged from.
China only locked down about 4% of its population. They did so because it was just before the
New Year and half a billion people were about to travel. Wuhan is a major rail hub. They
didn't want a repeat of Sars 2003. Even the Chinese in Wuhan were terrified by the Western
media. They don't live in some dark cave as the Western media would have you believe.
Nor does Beijing control every research institute and every research project in China as some
people seem to imagine it does. I don't think the virus "came from a lab" because if you read
the actual papers, you find the "new" virus is nothing more than a statistical result. It's
literally a software output, not something in a test tube.
I don't doubt thought that Fauci and Co were funding projects at the Wuhan lab so they could
scapegoat it for this theatre.
rraa – the actual papers that you write of that state a "new virus", are they the
papers that Drosten based his papers on? And the subsequent pcr fiasco?
The statistical result in the Chinese paper – was that based on the 4 cases?
I find what you wrote very interesting. It never occurred to me that the virus did not
come from the lab, but from just having been written about in a paper. I never believed it
was a virus from nature. (Not looking for an argument here about virus/no such thing –
just want some clarity from rraa)
I heard Dr Tom Cowan talk about this Chinese paper and its trip to Germany. But at that
point I thought it must have been the gain of function work in the US funded Wuhan lab.
Thanks.
Tomoola Sitchin , Jan 24, 2021 1:02 AM Reply to Judith
The Chinese provided a computer model of the virus, which Drosten has supposedly used to
configure his version of the PCR test, which is now used the world over.
No one has yet proved that the Sars-cov-2 coronavirus actually exists, other than on a
computer screen. For my money we are having a baddish flu, which has been conveniently
repackaged as Covi-19.
If you take out the mass death event during the 6 week period in March/April that was
brought upon the elders in care homes we are looking at one of the lower mortality rates of
the past two decades.
Those mass deaths were caused by pre-ordained policies, not a viral event, that were an
aberration from past years and in direct opposition of how the medical science states how the
viral season should be addressed for care homes, hospice etc.
I believe the current slight spike in mortality in the UK had been caused by the huge
uptake of flu shots.
The BMJ posted an article recently that flu shots can be successful in protecting against
one strain of influenza but they increase ones susceptibility to contracting other
viruses.
We are now in the middle of respiratory disease season.
Covid has conveniently completely eradicated all other viruses.
Yes it pays to go back and look at the original documents and who was involved there is a
panel the WHO calls together and who was on it and what they were supplied with and who
argued against .from all I ever read it was much to do about little but much convenience for
a range of agenda in which our mate faucci played a big role and has no doubt collected
billions..and never forget it played a big role in US elections and providing a divide
line
what I never quite get is what the UK is actually getting out of playing the game been awful
watching what you guys have done to yourselves.
Tomoola Sitchin , Jan 24, 2021 12:53 AM Reply to rraa
I would guess you are pretty near the mark and 77th Brigade probably think so as well
judging by the down votes.
A few weeks after Event 201, Gao published "A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health
concern" in the Lancet .[ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30185-9/fulltext
] This paper is filled with all of the "scary" buzz-phrases that were used to justify the
hysteria in the US and Europe. The same article featured "Clinical features of patients
infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China" by all-Chinese authors, with all the
nonsense about bats.[ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext
] Incidentally, it also says, "A novel coronavirus, which was named 2019-nCoV, was isolated
then from lower respiratory tract specimen and a diagnostic test for this virus was developed
soon after that." I'm not saying whether that's true or not, but that's the claim. The claim
is based on the referred paper "A Novel Coronavirus Genome Identified in a Cluster of
Pneumonia Cases -- Wuhan, China 2019−2020," authored in part by, who else? George Gao .
[ http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/a3907201-f64f-4154-a19e-4253b453d10c
]
China also served up some cartoonish snuff films, supposedly depicting the severe effects
of "Covid" and the draconian "lockdown" measures supposedly in response. This was exactly the
role scripted for China in the 2010 Rockefeller Lock Step "Scenario" report.
C'mon, man. Chinese government not involved? Grow up.
Maxwell , Jan 24, 2021 3:55 AM Reply to Fact
Checker
You would be hard pressed to illustrate that George Gao has any allegiance to China or the
Chinese people any more than you could prove the same for Fauci, Farrar, Elias (respective
countries and people) or any number of high profile technocrats.
In all cases their allegiance is to their ideology and big business.
We know this as the PCR test was designed by Drosten in the absence of having any virus
and the full genomic sequencing was done by Drosten going through the genomic database of
previous coronaviruses picking out bits and pieces of RNA sequences through sheer guesswork
and then adding on the theoretical RNA sequences supplied by the Chinese.
Drosten doesn't even deny he created the test with no virus available.
A week or so later China supplied the full genomic sequencing from the virus 'isolated' in
a human and it was exactly the same as Drostens computerised virus.
Oh the Chinese government is not involved? The Chinese government doesn't exist it is an
extension of the cabal. The Chinese people exist and they are being killed and enslaved by
their "Government" and it is a system that Rockefeller liked soooo much that he wants to
replicate it all over the world Biden is not American, Biden is CCP of America.
Wayne Vanderploeg , Jan 23, 2021 10:01 PM
This was a favorite on the Ray Rayner show in the Chicago area in the 60s. Or was it, "A
Fly Went By". No, It was the old lady one
Ben , Jan 23, 2021 10:00 PM
UK Government quietly changes law to give councils lockdown powers until July 17th, 2021.
At the same time, revelers at a party in Kensington are confronted by police, but no fines
issued. And Conservative MPs in Wales resign after discovered drinking in a pub whilst under
Drakeford's pub ban order
Politicians are inflicting lockdown misery on their electorate but breaking the rules
themselves because they know 'Covid' is a scam
A new 'ap' (for which you pay) can be added to your smartphone. The app enables users to
create a representation of their body structure in the form of a 3D avatar, with
accurate circumference measurements and total body fat assessment.
Heathtech company MyFiziq Limited has developed a dimensioning technology that enables its
users to check, track and assess their dimensions using a smartphone, from the comfort of
their home. The app enables users to create a representation of their body structure in the
form of a 3D avatar, with accurate circumference measurements and total body fat
assessment.
And here is the bait – "Associated company Bearn is unique in that it awards one
penny for each active calorie burned, enabling users to earn hundreds of dollars a year just
for staying healthy and making healthy choices."
Biomorphik (ie buy more) is a behavioural change company with a key goal being to
improve the health and wellness of people at a whole-of-society level through better
creation, measurement, storage, analysis, and access to data.
In other words, it is data-mining, disguised as keeping your healthy – to be used
against you in the future social credit system they are designing. At present, you are
rewarded for losing excess fat, but in the future you will be punished if you do not keep up
with the 'health' regime they have set for you.
Since this ap went on the market, the public demand has outstripped the supply, it is so
popular. Beware, I think it is a trap.
Reggie , Jan 23, 2021 9:10 PM
But the author is assuming that US wants to keep the dollar hegemony. I'm not so
sure about that. I think it's obvious that US's leaders are globalists and they want to see
the dollar die, in favor of a virtual world currency that they can use to manipulate the
sheep to their heart's content.
I also think the forced vaccinations, etc., ARE a primary reason for this fraud. The
pharma folks are globalists and forced vaxxes are their wet dream. And I do think that the
Bill Gay agenda of vaxxes does have something to do with his dream of population reduction,
and that's a globalist consensus, it's not just Bill's idea.
Eric McCoo , Jan 23, 2021 8:35 PM
It's obvious from its extremely defensive stance now and at the start that China is
involved.
In my view this is ultimately about digital ID and a Chinese style social credit system.
Some people might remember the UK government pushing a universal ID a number of years ago.
Scrapped in 2011.
'Identity cards were scrapped in 2011 – they're no longer valid and you can't use
them as proof of identify.
Mike Ellwood (Oxon UK) , Jan 23, 2021 9:41 PM Reply to Eric
McCoo
That's weird; I never had one. How many people got one? I'm talking about what must have
been modern ones (presumably issued by the Blair government, although I thought their plans
for ID cards had never got off the ground).
Actually, I'm old enough to have got a paper/card identity card, issued by the post-war
Labour government. I think I still have it somewhere. The number on that card became your NHS
number (although NHS numbers were revamped many years later).
Mike Ellwood (Oxon UK) , Jan 24, 2021 9:09 PM Reply to Eric
McCoo
Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of the partial rollout. I clearly wasn't paying sufficient
attention at the time!
Jeffrey Strahl , Jan 23, 2021 8:08 PM
And i didn't even see this.
"The details of the implementation of the Covid operation aside, it is possible that many
inside the system regard the 'Great Reset' as not a conspiracy to oppress us, to exploit us
and destroy our lives in a Marxist tyranny as many believe, but rather regard it as a
necessary adjustment to an unbalanced economic system.
To see it like that we must believe that the current system is fundamentally flawed and that
good faith solutions are being sought. I think 'The Reset' is seen by many honest brokers
around the world as a genuine platform to resolve flaws in the current world economy, and to
manage a transition from the dollar, in a controlled fashion. We should not always think the
worst motives of everyone involved."
Right! 🙂 We need to be adjusted to total remote control, social impact investing, ..
I'm sorry i gave this one 3 stars. 0 is what it rates.
Doctortrinate , Jan 23, 2021 8:34 PM Reply to Jeffrey
Strahl
as sending young naive men into a 300 machine gun wall of hell – was an unfortunate
miscalculation again and again and again.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:08 AM Reply to Doctortrinate
reference on this?
Doctortrinate , Jan 24, 2021 4:13 AM Reply to theobalt
parallels are ruthlessly profuse. Look to the Somme offensive.
I don't know how old you are but your education seems sadly lacking if you constantly have
to ask for references? Did you miss the lesson where you were taught to research?
My Grandson age 10 had just completed a term on WW! prior to lockdown, and here is a piece he
researched.
If these people in the money markets had not gotten into derivatives, tax avoidance
foundations, hedge coys etc I suspect we wouldn't be in this mess .the very people now
wanting socially responsible investment, save the planet etc are the very ones who created
the financial meltdowns and someone wants to tell me I should pay for all this
May Hem , Jan 23, 2021 10:16 PM Reply to Sarah
Jones
Thank you Sarah, for this valuable information. "Gaslighting" is the technique now being
used by mainstream media and the virtual virus planners to confuse and control us. And so
clearly explained by this video.
We need to be aware of these techniques so we can defend and keep our sanity.
One of the signs of the sociopath is a refusal to take responsibility. This reminds me of
the vaccine makers, and their refusal to take any form of responsibility for any damage
caused by their products.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:15 AM Reply to Sarah
Jones
it is not only a psyop it is real businesses closed, real people starving and not getting
medical care, real grandma's hearts broken, real people deprived of essential human contact.
It is a mass murder operation. Solution? A deadly vaccine experiment that will control the
killing of more But it will advance medical science to make valuable med for the remaining
500 mill I'm not trying to scare you dear I'm trying to get you on board
awildgoose , Jan 23, 2021 10:05 PM Reply to Jeffrey
Strahl
Precisely.
The entire point of the Confucius Institutes was to study Western culture and what makes
it tick.
The Chinese have understood that the West is filled with hysterical, hypochondriac
people.
They have exploited this understanding masterfully.
It would appear that China had a lot of help from dr Bruce alyward, a Canadian who by even
a small glimpse of his work trail suggests plenty of involvement with any number of gates
follies a short listen to his enthusiasm for wuhan methodology and his being convinced it was
going to kill millions makes the bloody run cold he is also fond of graphs etc. so no doubt
Ferguson fits in here somewhere and by the way he cites that many younger people were dying
in China, not just old folk he quite specifically says it isn't just an oldies disease so I
wonder what happened when it arrived on other shores obviously it transformed only to take
out the relatively old at end of average life so he was obvious fooled, mislead or just
whatever on his visit to fact find in China .it would seem he was most responsible for all
this carryon
Jeffrey Strahl , Jan 24, 2021 8:08 PM Reply to Edith
China got a lot of help. From the WHO, from Big Pharma, from Big Tech, from the mass media
(which are heavily tied into Big Pharma and Big Tech). That letter and Ivor's video go into
that.
Resistance needs to be organised to have any effect. Unions would have been best, but
they've been compromised
May Hem , Jan 24, 2021 3:19 AM Reply to AngryAngry
Great video. Thanks AA. Will share this around. I would much rather focus on solutions
rather than arguing where the virtual virus started.
Sarah Jones , Jan 23, 2021 7:35 PM
An apple a day keeps the covid away.
AngryAngry , Jan 23, 2021 7:34 PM
So, after watching Katherine Austin Fitts interview you thought it might be a good idea to
throw a few half truths, sound credible, add a few charts and make us believe a communist
take over/ depopulation/ creating an operating system in humans with a back door had never
been an elite plan for us cattle. How did OG let you in?
Ernest Judd , Jan 23, 2021 8:02 PM Reply to AngryAngry
Is this diatribe being addressed to the author of the article?
Researcher , Jan 23, 2021 8:45 PM Reply to Ernest
Judd
Get a new name. This one isn't valid. And stop using words I use. It's tiresome. Your
vocabulary is lacking but that shouldn't stop you from occasionally consulting a
thesaurus.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:26 AM Reply to Researcher
Oh madame
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:25 AM Reply to Ernest
Judd
I hope it is
Researcher , Jan 23, 2021 9:01 PM Reply to AngryAngry
Yes. They've been here everyday trolling the comments and they reformulated the 77th
script from "America did it" to this nonsensical screed.
Some of their initial attempts at diversionary tactics included attacking Dr. Reiner
Fuellmich, Bobby Kennedy Jnr, James Corbett and claiming US corporations and specifically,
tort laws were destroying upstanding European corporations like Bayer, VW, Deutsche Bank and
RBS. Fraudsters, polluters, money launderers and poisoners were now victims of the big bad US
of A. Who knew?
All of this to divert from the NGOs such as the WHO, UN, World Bank, BIS, IMF, WEF in
collusion with 197 governments and 1,000 corporations forcing Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 onto
the global population under the guise of a pandemic, and rebranding those two agendas as the
Great Reset and the 4th Industrial Revolution. (4th Reich)
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:27 AM Reply to Researcher
'at a girl
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:23 AM Reply to AngryAngry
Yeah. The number of short stops and "it might be" or it's possible that" when ever the
narrative leads to actual truth that this direction is a tissue of anti-US bs is certainly an
indication
Sam - Admin2 , Jan 24, 2021 2:45 AM Reply to AngryAngry
It's a perspective. Perspectives can be useful.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 4:15 AM Reply to Sam -
Admin2
I can't honestly use this one for anything valuable from my perspective
-CO , Jan 23, 2021 7:31 PM
For those of you who dwell on the perpetrators of the planned scamdemic here's a few apt
biblical quotes to consider and meditate upon if you feel so inclined.
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the
powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness
in the heavenly places." Ephesians 6:12.
Politicians + so-called "scientific advisors" and other gutless officials in positions of
power knowing of the fraud and deception and doing nothing to remedy it and using the just
following orders excuse:
"Ye are of the devil, as your father, and ye desire to do the lusts of your father. He was
a murderer from the beginning, and standeth not in the truth, because there is no truth in
him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father
thereof."
John 8:44
Lux et veritas
Moneycircus , Jan 23, 2021 7:24 PM
Eight marriages, 87 years but it was the Covid what got Larry King or at least it was with
him or came after him or something.
AngryAngry , Jan 23, 2021 7:35 PM Reply to Moneycircus
Took 91 year old Caprice Grandmother first – tragic💉💉💉
Researcher , Jan 23, 2021 10:27 PM Reply to AngryAngry
Oh Caprice. That ho' who was on that sho'.
Ernest Judd , Jan 23, 2021 8:03 PM Reply to Moneycircus
He died of old age.
Wayne Vanderploeg , Jan 23, 2021 10:08 PM Reply to Ernest
Judd
Exactly. However, a Covid body is worth extra cash. I am sure it must have tested
positive. How could it not. All that cash.
George Mc , Jan 24, 2021 8:43 AM Reply to Ernest
Judd
"Old age" was what they used to call it. We now know it was COVID. All the billions who
died in the past really died of COVID. All the documents of yore will have to be rewritten.
The Bible: Methuselah lived 969 years before he passed with the holy COVID.
Researcher , Jan 23, 2021 9:07 PM Reply to Moneycircus
His health started failing severely before covid and he stopped going to the RT studios in
2019.
It's interesting that they branded King as the first Covid19 famous death. They smeared
his name with a fake cause of death.
Just goes to show being an ass kissing, non journalist doesn't help you after you kick the
bucket.
killing of the king is done most month using numerology and astrology aka ritual via
sacrifice. it how they appease operate
larry KING signed a contract
what did he offer fuck all he took your time and kept the sheep entertained hypnotized.
Wayne Vanderploeg , Jan 23, 2021 10:05 PM Reply to Moneycircus
I was thinking the same thing when I saw it in the news. Fox, I believe. I held my sarcasm
back, though. It was the Down's Syndrome kids that got em Just kidding .
JuraCalling , Jan 23, 2021 10:07 PM Reply to Moneycircus
He invited it on his show as a guest. Brave but crazy.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:28 AM Reply to Moneycircus
I say the marriages in the times of fake woman's lib psyop is definately a comorbidity
that man is a hero
A bit off topic but just watched this very interesting dialogue between Ryan Christian and
Whitney Webb on Last American Vagabond. Lots of ground covered.
"SolarWinds Hack, Takeover of US,and the Final Stage of the War on You"
Tried to link but it would not copy successfully.
Fact Checker , Jan 23, 2021 9:18 PM Reply to Judith
Thanks for the tip!
Apropos of this article, Webb observes: "People really need to start, especially this
year, paying attention to the World Economic Forum people. If you're in independent media and
you're acting like this is not a trans-national push by the people you claim to be fighting
against, who have now all allied together in this transnational Blob to enslave
us all, c'mon people, get with the program. There's way bigger stuff going on that has way
graver implications than any previous year I've been alive."
Articles like this represent a desperate effort to maintain the illusion of the phony,
antiquated narratives of national rivalries, when the actual actors on the world stage are a
full generation past that.
She also calls out the Yuval Noah Harari's Davos 2020 speech that I've been highlighting,
which is excerpted in the "New Normal" mini documentary. She offers some great insight about
Mr. Harari's unconcealed disdain for the masses, concluding his speech by arguing that "the
elite" need to take hold of the potential of Total Information Awareness surveillance
technology, before "the rats" do!
Judith , Jan 23, 2021 9:55 PM Reply to Fact
Checker
Yes, I've watched Whitney on Last American Vagabond a few times. Mind like a steel
trap.
Today, as you pointed out – well, I've never seen her quite so emphatic. She was
really adamant, beyond just reporting. I found the dialogue very very interesting.
I followed up that interview with the latest James Corbett weekly "Solutions" episode with
Catherine Austin Fitts. Not as deep into the WEF, but certainly touching on the same
subject.
Moneycircus , Jan 24, 2021 5:37 AM Reply to Fact
Checker
If anyone's short of time listen from 20 minutes
Intelligence & organized crime syndicates
Russia as "look, squirrel" straw man for Israeli tech
(when Russia-Israeli tech tycoons are often one and the same)
Transnational corporate networks extend to U.S. tech & defense
Microsoft effectively offshored, embedded in Israel
Cyber attack will be "worse than Covid" -- promises Klaus Schwab
By targeting banks this ushers in new digital "store credit"
Big tech & defense-surveillance capitalists lock down the monetary system.
This year we will segue from Covid to a new hacking/digital scenario. Our saviours will
tell us lockdown has saved us while they ransacked and looted the economy. We will be told to
trust them. Digital ID-monetary system will be the physical aspect of that "trust".
Moneycircus , Jan 24, 2021 7:06 AM Reply to Moneycircus
Maggie , Jan 24, 2021 4:53 PM Reply to Moneycircus
Hi Moneycircus,
So have you any ideas HOW we stop them taking over our money?
Spent my whole life saving bits and bobs to enable us to enjoy a simple retirement and
investing in our Grandchildren's education. And now 'they' are going to steal our money via
the ID-monetary system? Because we will not have the right 'passport' because non of us, my
Husband and I or our children and grandchildren will be vaccinated?
Thank You All for the content and place to have real discussions on what is going on in
the world.
Kovid Krisis is the rich's cntl-alt-del of the world while they cook up a reboot of some
kind or another to save their capitalist empire from oblivion.
A MUST READ so we can all start following the money and talk about radical (root)
solutions.
Jubilee – Public Banking – Tax the Rich to 5x Base Pay – Establish 1x
Regional Base Living Income on 1040 hrs work/yr – Confiscate the World Financial
Digital Shadow Casino Money created in the last 30 years and redistribute equally into a
World Public Banks Trust Fund for each human born on Earth. And so on. Direct Democracy will
also get everyone to participate and create a true self-governing democracy.
Moneycircus , Jan 23, 2021 6:25 PM
Latest UK Column broadcast summarized
here , including this gem: Chatham House masterclass in manipulating public fear , part
of Jan 2019 influenza preparedness conference.
That echoes my thoughts on this completely. Thanks for putting into words what's inside my
head.
pantoufle , Jan 23, 2021 6:07 PM
This is the best explainer I've read so far of this entire disaster. Ties together almost
everything. And it originated in your Comments section. And you had the nous to publish it as
an article. Outstanding.
I used to love The Guardian. But that was many years ago. I never gave them any dough
(funny they never really asked for it in the old days–they didn't seem so desperate
until they became WokeNazis).
I just sent you guys 20 pounds.
theobalt , Jan 24, 2021 2:35 AM Reply to pantoufle
If you gave 20 lbs for this article, you're gonna have to give 1000 for each of the other
ones
tony_opmoc , Jan 23, 2021 5:58 PM
Excellent essay by Maribell Tuff, and whilst I missed it the first time around in the
comments (being serially banned here does have an effect on me), I think most of what he/she
wrote here is most probably true. I note that most of my comments here, no even longer go
into awaiting moderation. They just completely disappear, when I press send.
Where's Catte Black?
Tony
Edwige , Jan 23, 2021 5:26 PM
Venture capital in so-called edtech more than doubled in the last year:
Looks like some very wealthy people know "remote learning" isn't going away anytime
soon.
Roberto , Jan 23, 2021 6:31 PM Reply to Tim
Drayton
Now that's ironic. The principle of equality can only be sustained by force, but 'nature
is more forceful in the return', as observed by Francis Bacon, (albeit referring to the
suppression of habit, it holds true for everything).
There is no such thing as a classless society; in any historic example that's why there have
been Party bosses, nomenklatura, apparatchik, and the peasants, and of course the police
necessary to maintain the status quo with violence, or maybe just intimidation of the
especially meek.
How this succeeds in any example is evident by the result. The peasants always revolt; it
differs how long it takes, and the natural viability and civility of any society is in direct
inverse proportion to the number of police (visible or not) it requires to maintain
control.
With impeccable timing, just after I'd posted the above comments, a colleague sent me a
copy of the guidelines which our company now wants us to follow. Full PPE, endless washing of
hands, checking everyone's temperature every two hours, blah, blah, blah.
It appears that the money-grubbing, heartless wankers who own the company have, all of a
sudden, developed a deep concern for the well-being of the people who live in their
establishments and the staff who work with them. Remarkable, really, considering that they
hadn't previously seemed to give a solitary fuck about us. Praise be!
I shall now spend the rest of the evening feeling like a twat (as a kind of practice run
for tomorrow's shift, when I'll be kitted out in gloves, muzzle and apron).
Or I could just go for the nuclear option of phoning in
sick-of-this-fucking-ridiculous-shit.
You should blow your nose without a tissue. They are full of formaldehyde causes
skin irritation and attacks the nervous system it's a carcinogen too and it comes mainly from
China (and I believe Israel Chemicals is also mainly involved) also avoid bed sheets from
Ikea and Amazon and any made in china (I tested them in TSP concoctions), any cheap furniture
from the likes (fiberboards and pieces of wood stuck together with F. based glue offgasing
like crazy, laundry detergents filled with them to replenish any garment, making sure the
American population remains dumbed down and sick and dying. The US dollar doesn't exist, no
more than the freakin' kopec.
American people exists. American land exists. And they are fine.
But they need to be taken down are they Don't worry people of Europe If it is crushed it
is not to save you. It will go in the same pockets of the people who have been crushing you
for quite a while.
About 6 months ago my father in law ranted to me about how he hopes people never shake
hands again because it's so disgusting. All this talk makes me want to go the opposite
direction and shower less, share more gourds of mate with friends, kiss more people, etc.
That reminds me of the George Carlin bit in which he talks about swimming in a river (the
Hudson?) with his friends when he was a kid and ingesting all manner of nastiness (including
shit). He was of the opinion that this was what had given him an impregnable immune
system.
I can't help but compare that attitude to the nonsense we hear from the germaphobes among
us.
Pardon the vanity or self-indulgence, but this demands that I recycle a comment I posted
at this site last April:
Last month– a lifetime ago– the day after local (Pennsylvania, USA) officials
first announced the onset of the Megadeath Virus of Doom, I insouciantly wandered up to the
nearby supermarket– mostly to buy bagged salad, my one concession to eating produce. I
sailed through the door and stopped short at the sight of a shopping-cart "Trail of Tears";
forlorn customers in a line stretching from the (understaffed) checkout registers to the far
wall of the store, then winding around the corner and up the aisle.
As a retired employee of the state unemployment benefits agency who worked for years in
now-extinct Job Centers, I am familiar with crisis situations when "the lines are going out
the door", and people seem to arrive by the busload. So I turned around to leave. As I did, a
big, burly older man was entering the store; I'd seen him around the area, but we'd never
spoken.
He also stopped short, and said to me, "What's this all about?" I said, "Apparently a lot
of people think the world is coming to an end, and they want to make sure they have the
makings of their last meal." (Not to mention toilet paper for postprandial use.)
The man shook his head and said, "Christ! I played sandlot baseball for years, and the
ball used to get full of dirt, crud and even dog shit once in a while; we just picked it up
and kept on playing!"
I was gratified by this unsolicited validation. Of course, to the pro-pandemic Chicken
Littles, he may have played baseball but he's obviously no "team player".
Don't you remember a few months ago on Fox news across the pond in the land where you're
not free to say happy Xmas ? They carried a piece banning groups of any size singing 'Happy
Birthday'. Apparently the way we pronounce 'P' and ' B' is so forceful it could spray
everywhere with covid.
President Trum endoresd the idea even though it sounded like they were taking the iss.
Ersonally i think it's all ollocks. Still, it was a positive message to see all those poor
victims of a crippling virus stood 'in it together' having a sing along..
Willem , Jan 23, 2021 4:53 PM
One of my comments got deleted in the spam folder. In that comment I specifically
explained my work situation and the fanatics I am dealing with. Perhaps it was therefore
deleted because, even though the anecdote was true, I cannot prove that the anecdote was
true.
Or maybe the comment was just unlucky
Nevertheless, this experience was a good reminder for me that all anecdotes here should be
taken with a grain of salt since we are all anonymous commenters here (and therefore can both
tell true anecdotes or dream them up any way we please: no one can check the true factualness
of the anecdote)
But what I wanted to say can also be said without anecdotal 'evidence' which is this:
In science (any science, being it medical science, political science, economic science,
etc) there is theory and practice. And if the science is a true science, the theory should
always be confirmed by practice. And if practice doesn't follow the theory, the theory should
change.
Unfortunately we live in a topsy turvy world where practice should always follow theory.
And if practice doesn't follow theory it is discarded as an aberration, a chance finding,
unimportant, flawed, unscientific, finding and the theory remains standing unabated.
And this is the reason why we are in this mess. The economy isn't working, because the
theory is flawed, as is medical science on covid (and other diseases), and political science
(on for instance the definition what a democracy is). And all we scientists are supposed to
do is act as if the theory is sound and find confirmation that what should be true according
to theory, is essentially followed by practice.
And this can only be done by either censoring everything that doesn't fit the theory (and
there are many ways to censor) or finding more and more, sort of ontological arguments of why
God must exist.
And the problem with ontological arguments is that they have this fascinating feature of
finding the truth, against the odds, because the truth is so difficult to find (when the
theory is flawed) but still is found in an ontological argument.
This could be yet another reason why in epidemiology the Covid theory stands unabated. It
is difficult to understand, you have to go into great lengths to understand it and finding
the truth can be as difficult as an ontological argument, which can only be found by the
smartest of the smartest scientists. And so it is fun! Because trying to solve puzzles is
fun. Like alchemy
While in reality the truth is not so difficult to find. When I limit myself to covid, here
is a riddle: how can you say that there are excess deaths due to covid, if the average age of
death (81 years in NL) is the same as the average age of death in Covid (82 years)?
If you want to explain that and still hold that the theory stands unabated, you do need an
ontological argument, and this is what some epidemiologists are doing (others just ignore the
riddle, as if it doesn't exist).
And anyone (like me) who is crushing their thoughts and theories, is considered as
Archimedes considered the Roman soldier who was disturbing him on his thoughts on the
circles.
I am aware that this is also an ontological argument where I remain faithful to the idea
that epidemiologists can act rational as in that they do want to distill practice out of a
theory
What if all those epidemiologists are employed by the institutions that are controlled by
the same corporate structures who control the entire field of virology and genetics?
Yeah? try to say "fuck China" get ready for 20 downvotes
ted , Jan 23, 2021 4:31 PM
Very good analysis in my opinion. There has to be a reason for a relatively boring
respiratory season (outside of the few countries where hospitals bring elderly patients to a
somewhat earlier death than would have been the case absent medical intervention) turning
into endless economic suppression through endless lockdown.
Here in the US, the unimaginable levels of direct money transfers to households is fueling
nasty levels of inflation already. As an example, a haircut at my now rebel barber went from
US $18 last march to US $ 25 last week. A new housing bubble mania is taking hold, while
renters are permitted to not pay rent for the foreseeable future allowing more consumer
spending for a dwindling supply of goods and services, hopefully stimulating more hyper
inflation. Grandpa Joe promises 2 trillion more in direct money transfers soon. (remember how
outraged Americans were when Hank Paulson had the audacity to ask for 750 billion in 2008? .
ah the good times of yore).
Given the scale of direct cash transfers to individuals, I take issue with one part of the
argument. The goal here is not to save the dollar but to debase the dollar on a massive
scale. Hyper inflation of the dollar would shrink the value of debts held and promises made,
particularly in the colossal derivatives markets, as these are now obviously unwinding in an
uncontrolled fashion (thus the need for the incredible scale of money printing). The problem
is other currencies are so tied to the dollar that they have no choice but to follow the
American plan, debasing their currencies to try and keep an even footing with the US. This is
the only thing that would explain the EU's zeal for lockdowns that are well in excess of
anything in the US (I am writing from California). The EURO must trade on parity with the
dollar as the banking systems of both regions are deeply intertwined.
We are already seeing the outcome. The burden of planet covid/financial reset will fall
exclusively on the poor and working classes. those who do not have financial assets, while
the nominal wealth of the professional classes explodes (as it is presently doing). Something
like the upstairs/downstairs society of the 19th century is the result. Which is great for
political parties, because they only need to professional classes to win elections, while the
peons, who cannot even vote because they are increasingly not citizens or stripped of
citizenship through incarceration have no voice at all. Dickensian dystopia 21st century
style awaits.
RobG , Jan 23, 2021 4:07 PM
This article, as many others have pointed out, is certainly interesting, particularly how
it deals with the enemies du jour being in lockstep with it all, which is something the covid
believers always point to.
However, I do believe there's something very sinister behind the covid con. I say this
because you only have to look at how they are deliberately trying to destroy all human joy,
creativity and spirituality. Indeed, they are deliberately trying to destroy our human
society that's existed for tens of thousands of years.
Sarah Jones , Jan 23, 2021 6:32 PM Reply to livingsb
covid is a viral infectious disease. it infects people with narcissistic abuse techniques
like triangulation, smear campaigns, blame shifting, hoovering and gaslighting which the
infected individual then spreads further. a ponzi marketing scheme for the fake health system
which turns out to be the biggest destroyer of health made up of psychopaths with only the
very rare medical doctor speaking out tentatively about the narcassistic abuse and
destruction that is covid.
First, as to the article itself. I regard it as an intentional or possibly unintentional
limited hangout. The truthiness part of it is foremost the recognition that the Sept 2019
"repocalypse," with the massive intrusion of the Fed into the interbank lending, marked the
start of the collapse of the life support to the global financial system since early 2009.
The ensuing scamdemic was a diversion to the economic collapse and allowed our Owners to
decimate the fiat currencies through exponential printing, vastly increasing the "legal" debt
ultimately held against the 99.9%. I also give her credit for recognizing the fact that
covid-1984 is a non-existent artifact. I was considering doing a deconstruction of the
incorrect statements of this article, but decided that it was not really worth the hours
involved.
I would simply state that almost every step we are seeing has been planned since before
the official rollout of the Fed in the USA in 1913. One could reasonably build a case that it
dates back to John Dee and Kelly during the reign of the first Elizabeth. The ultimate aim is
to revert the planet to total control under a dystopian, neofeudal technocracy, drastically
cull the population, and to transform the remaining ones into genetically altered cyborgs
whose "minds" are part of the "cloud." The next step in the rollout will be a pseudo crypto
digital currency by all the world's central banks which will be in short order unified into
Earthcoin. This will be a de facto credit against a global company store such as many
sharecroppers and coal miners faced in the USA in past decades. One's means of existence can
be eliminated with the click of a mouse from a slight act of misbehavior, especially
thoughtcrime. In short a three tiered society where 95% will be serfs, 4.99% will be
technicians and enforcers, and the tiny remainder will be the owners. While not a great work
of fiction, The Hunger Games was a good projection of this society. I never bothered
to watch the film.
I wish to give the author thanks for giving me a good laugh with her statement that the
politicians of the world had to be convinced that the gigantic psyops would in the end prove
less disastrous to world's population than just letting the system collapse. As if they are
not also sociopaths who could not care less about the welfare of their constituents.
Hector , Jan 23, 2021 5:18 PM Reply to el
Gallinazo
I would give the films a go. I watched the first one several years ago at my other half's
insistence and was pleasantly surprised at the depth of its themes despite some duff acting.
The second film is also worthwhile but I wouldn't bother with the third and fourth.
Today my local news had a headline quoting our governor comparing our vaccine rollout to
the Hunger Games. I noticed several other states and cities doing the same about their own
vaccine rollout.
2fat2surf , Jan 23, 2021 3:57 PM
It's really quite simple actually. The same folks who did the 911 false flag attack crime
are behind the virus hoax. Their ends have never changed; to acquire power and control (which
they certainly already have) And to use any means no matter how ruthless and murderous to
keep it.
When you control all the money in the world, even if you don't have truth on your side, you
have immense power.
There is something sinister behind this.
JuraCalling , Jan 23, 2021 11:47 PM Reply to 2fat2surf
We know the truth. They know the truth. They have the power. We have nothing .It would
appear that it doesn't matter who has any truth on their side. It's power that shapes the
destiny of a race .
el Gallinazo , Jan 24, 2021 1:21 PM Reply to JuraCalling
"They have the power. We have nothing."
Disagree strongly. We outnumber the innermost cabal by about 7 billion to 1000. Wrap your
head around that. They maintain their power through the transmission depicted on the back of
the USA $1 Federal Reserve Note from the eye on the top down that pyramid. The way to combat
it is for us peons at the ground level of the pyramid to dismantle their transmission system
from the ground up , leaving our emperors eventually without any clothes. If one wishes to
find the savior who will save us, just look in the mirror. To do that successfully, we must
first dismantle their divide and control global psyops.
JuraCalling , Jan 24, 2021 3:17 PM Reply to el
Gallinazo
"Disagree strongly. We outnumber the innermost cabal by about 7 billion to 1000. Wrap
your head around that."
That would be great if it was a "how many people are in your gang" contest.
If 1,000 people are in a face off with 100 people, who has the advantage ?
Now. if that 100 people had machine guns, tanks and grenades, but the 1,000 were unarmed-
who has the advantage. Wrap your head around that.
"They maintain their power through the transmission depicted on the back of the USA $1
Federal Reserve Note from the eye on the top down that pyramid."
Who does. This is a global pandemic to cover a global takeover. Yes -- there's actually a
world outside of America. True story. In the greater scheme of things, America is 'the new
kid'. It's just the loudest and least clever. Does Schwab make his plans based on the US fed
res ?
It doesn't matter if our emperors have no clothes or if they have suits of armour. What
they do have is an arsenal of bio chemical weaponry and poisons along with the various
books of rules they can change on a daily basis that determine where we go, what we do, and
when. And, of course, the list of consequences for those who believe we don't have to.
There's a reason why the 'innermost cabal' are showing no fear against the vast
numbers that oppose it. And it's not bravery or stupidity.
Forget the 99.99% Vs 00.01%. Imagine a few hundred who are running the Covid scam
and vaccine poisoning programme and the couple of million opposing it. They are
continuing. The opposition, in the meantime, is living on the internet posting 'truth's and
pictures of Hitler.
Fact Checker , Jan 24, 2021 10:03 PM Reply to JuraCalling
" America is 'the new kid'. It's just the loudest and least clever."
Not the first time you've made me LOL, Jura, and I'm sure it won't be the last. To the
quick you cut.
George Mc , Jan 23, 2021 3:50 PM
Just caught some more mainstream pish on how Fauci blamed his "country's ineffective
pandemic response on an American "anti-science bias." He called this bias "inconceivable,"
because "science is truth."
Thus spake Zarafauci!
He also "compared those discounting the importance of masks and social distancing to
"anti-vaxxers" in their "amazing" refusal to listen to science."
Fauci IS Science!
Meanwhile Adrian Bardon, professor of philosophy, is amazed at Fauci's amazement at this
rejection of The Mighty Science, saying that "Denial is Everywhere"!
Ah well only one solution: a little brain operation to make everyone "see the Truth"!
Bob -Enough now , Jan 23, 2021 5:05 PM Reply to George
Mc
So Fauci stated "science is truth." – but that is what makes "Fauci" a charlaton
in the eyes of real scientists; science is ever changing, evolving, ever questioned, enhanced
and even proved incorrect. Today's theories (what he believes to be the truth), will be
smiled upon in the future.
Mike Ellwood (Oxon UK) , Jan 23, 2021 6:15 PM Reply to Bob
-Enough now
Yes one could keep wondering why anyone listens to that little man .how do these people
get to be the man of the moment he was there for the aids story and back for this game how
knows how many billion he has made from these games. Or why on earth anyone regards anything
he says as sane let alone science
JuraCalling , Jan 23, 2021 11:59 PM Reply to George
Mc
He's the leader of the pack for Scientism. Him and Gates the two-headed snake.
They believe if it can be quantified / measured. expressed in data- it's real. Anything
else is speculation and myth.
This is why the whole covid exercise has had two avenues from day one.
Avenue one: The alleged instructions passed to politicians by behavioural scientists(
meaning behavioural psychologists that teach them conditioning techniques that match those
imagined in the Lockstep paper)
Avenue two : The alleged data and results passed to them by other 'advisors' that call
themselves 'scientific advisers'. They talk about data, numbers, projections and use them as
a foundation to build the lockdown and oppression on. None of the numbers are available to
us.
note that no avenue is left open that leads to medical doctors and virologists that
want an open debate *
Note that neither the psychologists or number crunchers have faces and voices and nobody
is there to debate or discuss. Just to pass a script of instructions to the suited clowns who
don't know there arses from a hole in the ground.
The ritualistic physical instructions of social distancing and self isolating and the
grinding down of hope and personal willpower are to induce a semi-trance state.
Watch the deadness in every pair of eyes that have a mask underneath. Watch how they have
begun to avoid speaking and walk like they're in a minefield, zombie – like.
It's all priming. The de-humanizing is the prepping. It's winding us down like toys before
'resetting' us.
If the next step is the morphing of man and machine through their mad Nazi Science- and
every day suggests it is- then we are about to bring the curtain down on man as a species and
usher in their manmade man. What better way to cremate all previous belief systems
about God made man. They hijack natural selection and then bastardize that into unnatural
selection just after God is killed as an idea that was never quantifiable.
According to STR, Inc , a hotel industry
market data firm, 2020 was absolutely the worst year on record for hotels as industrywide
profits fell to zero , as the virus pandemic and resulting government-enforced social
distancing measures kept travelers at home.
STR's latest report said the US hotel occupancy rate was 44% for the year, down from 66% in
2019. This was the lowest occupancy rate on record. In an earlier
STR report, we noted weeks ago that the industry had one billion unsold room nights for the
first time, surpassing the record of 786 million in 2009.
Even though S&P Global Ratings warned a few months back that the hotel industry's
recovery may not occur until 2023, STR now believes a recovery in occupancy rates back to 2019
levels may not occur until 2024.
Best Western CEO David Kong recently told CNN that "If we don't get a vaccine soon and
business doesn't return, it's going to get much worse."
The economic consequences of these non-debated government policies have been catastrophic.
In the U.S. something like 60 million jobs have been lost, many never to return. A hundred and
fifty thousand restaurants have gone bankrupt. Only one in three museums will ever reopen. In
San Francisco they decided NOT to count the numbers of new homeless. No reason was given but
one can guess. The homeless situation in the U.S., in big cities in particular, was critical
even before the pandemic. Now the numbers are unprecedented. Not even during the 'Great
Depression' was there anything like the current level of those without basic shelter.
Food insecurity is at a crisis level. Feeding America , the largest hunger
relief organization in the US, estimates over 50 million people go hungry every night including
something close to twenty million children.
Since mid-March 2020, numerous surveys have documented unprecedented levels of food
insecurity that eclipse anything seen in recent decades in the United States, including
during the Great Recession. Over the past five years, US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
estimates of food insecurity in the United States have hovered around 11% to 12%.
As of March and April 2020, national estimates of food insecurity more than tripled to 38%
In a national survey we fielded in March 2020 among adults with incomes less than 250% of the
2020 federal poverty level (based on thresholds from the US Census), 44% of all households
were food insecure including 48% of Black households, 52% of Hispanic households, and 54% of
households with children. American Public Heath Association ( Dec 2020
)
And yet, congress just passed another defense budget increase. According to Defense
News
the final version of the 2020 defense appropriations bill, part of a broad $1.4 trillion
spending deal to finalize federal spending for 2020 and avert a government shutdown. The
defense bill would provide $738 billion.
Almost one in three households suffers hunger, regularly. Almost half of black and hispanic
households. Households with children are most vulnerable to the government policies. So half of
the kids in the U.S. have inadequate nutrition. Half will suffer long term developmental
problems, almost guaranteed.
So, given that there are countless medical professionals around the world who question the
effectiveness of Covid policy by government, who questions the World Health Organization and
CDC? One would think there would be a heated and exhaustive discussion about how to proceed.
Once it was clear that this was not a particularly fatal virus, there should have been wide and
far-reaching debate. But there was none.
And who are the authorities who dictate these policies? This also remains unclear. The head
of the WHO is
Dr.Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus . But the face of the pandemic is Anthony Fauci. Now
his role is also a bit unclear.
Fauci is director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). He
has held that position since 1984. It is unclear why he is the official advisor to
presidents.
But, the point is that Bill Gates controls forty percent of the WHO. So, take Norway, where
I live. Who advises the PM? Or advises her health minister? And it's worth noting that the
health minister is Bent Høie, from the ruling party, a conservative business-friendly
party.
Høie was born in Randaberg. He studied law at University of Bergen in 1991 and also
attended the Norwegian School of Hotel Management from 1991-93.
Well, I guess Hotel management is as good a background as any to make life and death
decisions about pandemics. One assumes the WHO and/or the CDC send advisors to talk to the
Minister of Health. But I am only guessing.
My point is that the decision-making process is utterly opaque. Nobody seems to have a clear
idea from where, exactly, the policy of lockdown (the quarantining of healthy people is, as far
as I can tell, utterly new) originated, or where the marketing and obvious fearmongering came
from.
For there has been a clear marketing apparatus in play, with all the mask adverts, the
social distancing, etc. And worth mentioning is that the eco outcry about plastic straws, a
genuine issue, really, suddenly receded and now, in the hysteria of mask wearing, the
environment has had to absorb 9 billion single-use cloth and plastic
masks .
The entire global economy is teetering on collapse. And this was intentional. This is
because of governmental actions, not because of a virus. Of course, western economies have been
teetering since 2008, if not before.
I'm not an economist, but this is the point where one must look at "The Great Reset"
.
Most of you have heard of it, its been on the cover of TIME magazine, and that photo of
Klaus Schwab and his Vulcan unitard suit has cropped up across all social media platforms. The
short version (for a long and exhaustive and insightful version see Cory Morningstar
here ) is that Schwab and his friends at the World Economic Forum have this idea, clothed
in perfect green attire, to "reset" the economies of the West (or of the world).
The word 'reset' is interesting. Who came up with that I wonder? It feels very computer-ish
and futuristic, and optimistic! And while much is made of certain aspects (natural capital,
social capital, a new deal for nature, social impact bonds, etc) the reality is that the
capitalist system, in the hands of the richest at any given moment (or we can say the ruling
class), drive corrections to the market. This helps consolidate wealth at the top, or transfer
more to the top.
And that is what this is, with the difference being that the plan is more about the
destruction of markets, the destruction of competition, and the hyper monopolization of nearly
everything. It entails a good deal of AI fantasy, but it also means a digitalization of
currency (so no grey economy, no borrowing from friends, no under the table work) and a massive
increase in surveillance and tracking. All of this is helped by the lockdown policies, the
so-called 'Reset' would likely be stillborn if not for the reaction to Covid.
Allow me to insert HERE a European
Commission statement regarding Covid19.
Now the new head of the European Commission is Ursula von der Leyen. Remember that much of
the Reset is driven by the ruling elite of Europe and North America. And these people share
common values and goals. Here is a brief biographical sketch on Ms von der
Leyen
"Von der Leyen's father's grandparents were the cotton merchant Carl Albrecht
(1875–1952) and Mary Ladson Robertson (1883–1960), an American who belonged to a
plantation owning family of the southern aristocracy from Charleston, South Carolina.
Her American ancestors played a significant role in the British colonization of the
Americas, and she descends from many of the first English settlers of Carolina, Virginia,
Pennsylvania and Barbados, and from numerous colonial-era governors.
Among her ancestors were Carolina governors John Yeamans, James Moore, Robert Gibbes, Thomas
Smith and Joseph Blake, Pennsylvania deputy governor Samuel Carpenter, and the American
revolutionary and lieutenant governor of South Carolina James Ladson.The Ladson family were
large plantation owners and her ancestor James H. Ladson owned over 200 slaves by the time
slavery in the United States was abolished; her relatives and ancestors were among the
wealthiest in British North America in the 18th century, and she descends from one of the
largest British slave traders of the era, Joseph Wragg."
I will return to why this has relevance. But I will only say here that all of the faces
fronting for the Green New Deal, and the Reset, are wealthy, from lineages of extreme wealth
and position. Today's theme is 'class'.
I can tell you only what I think Schwab and his colleagues want from this project. Let's
look at what is not going to return to normal after the lockdown.
Commercial airlines are going bust, and those that are still alive have drastically cut
routes and have limited their service. The days of cheap flights to warm beaches is gone, I
suspect, for good. Vacations will be limited and travel limited (well, unless you are very rich
like Gates and Schwab and Ms von der Leyen and Prince Charles and Jeff Bezos et al).
There are now sixty million people out of work in the U.S. The inevitability of the
Universal Basic Income is pretty clear. The question is how much does one mean by basic
?
Here I think one might do a quick history overview of apartheid South Africa, of the sugar
plantations of the 18th century in the Caribbean or, well, the Nazi work camp system. The new
capitalism that is imagined (and look, feel free to call it post-capitalism , or woke feudalism
or whateverthefuckever you want) has more in common with the aforementioned systems of
servitude and slavery than it does with anything else. It is class struggle, as Marx
emphasized. Jobs won't be coming back. There will be a gigantic surplus population.
And already one sees the gradual coalescing of a new caste system. People deemed 'important'
are allowed to go places and few questions are asked if they violate social distancing or mask
wearing. The new social apartheid, which began as a pseudoscientific method for disease
control, has now, in the brief span of a year, become a defacto class segregation. The rich are
exempt. Here is an article from the New York Post(Aug
15th) :
Meanwhile, billionaire David Geffen has been hanging on his yacht, Tom Hanks and Rita
Wilson are cruising Greece in another yacht after receiving "honorary" citizenship, Facebook
overlord Mark Zuckerberg has been trolling the waters off Hawaii in a $12,000 surfboard, Jeff
Bezos and his lady friend have been (multiple) house-hunting, buying up millions of dollars
in property in Los Angeles to build a compound while traveling via private jet to several
cities around the country, former Mayor Bloomberg splashed out $45 million on a Colorado
compound (joining a host of other billionaires buying in that state as well as Montana and
Wyoming); and others are spending millions to buy citizenship in "safe" countries like New
Zealand.
That 'compound' remark is worth noting. For this is the future for much of America. Gated
compounds for the aristos and the dirty, squalid, infected world for the proles. And look,
gated communities with private security have been in existence for forty years. Only now
the separation has deeper implications.
Of course, football can continue in both the US and UK, though basketball has been more
strictly limited (the perception is, of course, that basketball is an urban game and in a
league over 70% black).
It is amazing how these strictly-enforced behavioural rules are relaxed for the amusements
of the court. The rich can pretty much do whatever they want. Literally none of the rules apply
to them. There is a middle tier of affluent, those deemed necessary, for the moment anyway, who
get to move around more easily. For the millions now without income the restrictions will be
quite acute.
So, back to the Reset for a moment. I keep returning to the slave economies of times past
because this is increasingly what capitalism has been trending toward. The sugar plantations of
the Caribbean used slave labour. Imported from Africa. They sold that raw product in markets of
the metropole, to world markets. But on the plantation only master and slave relations existed.
And this is, in one sense, what is being normalized today. Slave relations. And like the gulf
Monarchies who use
'guest' workers (slaves, literally), Americans are close already to being guest workers in
their own country.
And like the Apartheid laws in South Africa, certain castes (replacing race in this case)
cannot go to the private beach of Mark Zukerberg. Or these days, often, any beach at all.
It's worth noting that the old 19th Century industrialist tycoons eventually became huge
philanthropists. Carnegie, Mellon, Peabody, Rockefeller even. They endowed education, built
libraries and hospitals. Today's tycoons create deceptive Green projects that are really just
more wealth-amassing schemes to displace indigenous people, steal land and property, and help
sell and normalize the police state.
Students throughout California are now stuck at home in hot, crowded rooms that
occasionally fill with wildfire smoke. 19% of these students are English language learners
and almost 13% of them have disabilities. Every day on Zoom they fall more and more behind
both academically and socially. In Los Angeles Unified, the state's largest district,
students are receiving 90-170 minutes of daily live instruction (depending on their age),
after which they are expected to do independent work. Compared to the traditional six or
seven-hour school day, online education is laughably inadequate. In real time, teachers and
families are watching important developmental windows close for vulnerable children.
Meanwhile the California Democratic Party and its affiliates tout virtual schooling as a
solution for mitigating COVID-19 transmission" Alex Gutentag ( The Bellows
)
Gutentag also notes that the California governor sends his kids to a private school with
in-person learning. Caste.
Not to mention that many children in the U.S. now live in highly-stressed homes. Over forty
million people are at risk of eviction because of unpaid back rent. None of these homes can
afford adequate food. They certainly cannot afford health care.
What happens when a child gets sick in today's America? I suspect for hundreds of thousands
they will, at best, get inconsistent attention from volunteer medical workers -- unless there
is a lockdown in effect. Then they get nothing.
As I say, this brutal reorganization of the economy bears no small similarity to a slave
economy -- but it is being sold to the public by pretending it is this new, technology-driven
Reset. (Own nothing and be happy).
What exactly does the government plan to do with those sixty million unemployed Americans?
What does the UK plan? or Germany or France? Or anywhere? The stimulus package went mostly to
big corporations. And media and state propaganda continue to provide endless distractions (see
assault on the
Capitol , and anything to do with Trump).
There is a clear belief in and emphasis on technology in all this. On AI and robotics and
transhumanism (sic) . This belief in AI to solve almost everything is reaching levels of
delusion that many people, even critics of the Reset, seem to ignore.
So how is it that people have so passively surrendered their rights? The answer is
complex.
First, the idea of cooperation and grass roots organizing have been relentlessly disparaged
in the media for decades. When unions were effectively destroyed under Reagan, along with them
went the last vestiges of collectivity. Hollywood has always made films about individual
triumph, almost never about revolutionary organizing. I think a large number of people today,
even those skeptical, suffer from a kind of inertia. And this too has been built into the
system. And it may well be an aspect of screen habituation.
But before that, people are afraid. The unseen enemy, the invisible virus, the plague, an
enemy that brings fevers and suffering, sickness and death. But that is only a part of the
problem. The Reset is presenting a future of total control for the ruling class.
Why would anyone support this madness? Well, first, because they are being sold on the idea
that it's green, and that THEY, themselves, will be in control. Sort of. And second, they have
limited options.
In a way the long shadow of the Reagan years are evident here. The destruction of unions,
coupled with the loss of real public education, has allowed for the rootless, lonely and
isolated 'individual' of contemporary America. And the utter absence of a real leftist
party.
But it's true for much of Europe, too. Here in Norway the wearing of masks is prevalent in
'high risk' red zones. And one still can't drive across the border to Sweden. I see enormous
stress indicators in children. Even in my children. And they are young. Nobody feels happy.
Isolation does not promote happiness.
Still, how likely is it that this Reset works? I think this question is ignored somewhat and
therefore we need to ask 'for whom does it work'? While there has been enormous amounts of
great stuff written about Schwab and the WEF I must digress a moment (although its not really a
digression, but only appears to be):
There is a basic problem with AI, deep learning, and natural language and, while it is about
language, it applies to other fields as well. This is the Frame problem . And the Frame
problem is intwined with the problem of time.
NOTE: The Frame problem "is the challenge of
representing the effects of action in logic without having to represent explicitly a large
number of intuitively obvious non-effects. But to many philosophers, the AI researchers' frame
problem is suggestive of wider epistemological issues." – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
– ed.
The Frame
problem is about relevance, and that the outlier issues, while statistically rare, are
actually what distinguish 'smart' people from 'not smart' people. Machine learning, AI, can do
a lot of things, but to over-applaud its achievements without admitting its profound
limitations is going to lead to some catastrophic mistakes and, no doubt, human tragedies.
So far the solution for the new AI cheerleaders is to make the real world like a lab. In one
sense, Singapore, with extensive use of AI via a very authoritarian state apparatus, has
already done this. China is a more complex discussion, and wanting to avoid any idea of an
'Oriental plot', I'm just going to take a Mulligan.
The ruling class anywhere is exempted in all such examples. The majority of humans will be
treated as rats in a lab test. Not even rats, but toys. In other words, highly, if not totally,
expendable.
But the problems with the Reset, and with all of the Green New Deal projects, are that they
operate in a computer model-based world that is rather significantly divorced from real life,
and certainly, intentionally, disregards class (and caste).
There are also new ideas like '
human capital bonds '. It sounds complex but this is just a more draconian loan arrangement
where, if you default, for example while going to medical school, even if you graduate you wont
be allowed to practice. Everything in this new economy gives people less power and less
autonomy.
The issues with all AI and with the advanced technology praised by the Reset are
philosophical more than scientific. Part of the problem is that the real world is enormously
complex. Like weather prediction, anything more than six or seven days out is all but
impossible. There are too many unknown factors and variables. This truth can be extrapolated to
just about any real world problem. But for all the growing skepticism about AI, the proponents
(who know these problems) continue to propagandize the benefits and the infinite possibilities
of an AI-dominated future.
The most absurd are the transhumanists. Given how little is actually known about
consciousness, and considering that all AI is just math, it seems almost infantile to think we
are going to learn better with implants, or work more efficiently. Alongside that is the issue
of prediction. Perhaps this was built into the Enlightenment, but what Adorno and Horkheimer
came to call 'instrumental thinking' is now embraced unquestioningly by the new peddlers of
AI.
Back to the philosophical issue. Wittgenstein famously said:
If a lion could speak, we would not understand it.
Language is part of a shared horizon of the world (as Steven Gambardella put it). Computers
can simulate thought, but only up to a point. (See Chinese Box experiment)
The whole modern conception of the world is founded on the illusion that the so-called
laws of nature are the explanations of natural phenomena. Thus people today stop at the laws
of nature, treating them as something inviolable, just as God and Fate were treated in past
ages. Ludwig Wittgenstein ( Tractatus )
AI is the Alchemy of the 21st century. The new Reset, driven by the high net worth figures
from Wall Street, Silicon Valley, or the Royal Houses of Europe, is a fantasy. But a fantasy
that is part of a long class struggle.
And at a certain point it doesn't matter, not totally, if AI works.
If
errors occur in computation, or in facial recognition, or in food allotments to the
projected new slave class, the billionaires on their yachts wont mind. If the implant in my
brain crashes during a scheduled update, that's just one less servant to feed.
And there is also a clear de-population agenda at work in all this. Certainly David
Attenborough and Baroness Goodall are big on getting rid of the indigenous people in Africa . Nearly all of the
pro-Reset leadership believe in depopulation. Prince Charles, another who prefers he keep his
privilege. It is not an accident that an Ursula von der Leyen is running point for the EU now.
A descendent of the biggest slave trader in Europe at one time. It speaks to exactly why a Hugo
Chavez, for example, so offended these people. Or an Evo Morales. Remember it was not so long
ago that the U.S. worked to control and neutralize African independence movements. While Cuba
and the U.S.S.R. helped to support those movements. Dick Cheney until the 90s called Mandela a
terrorist.
This intentional demolition of capitalism, as we have come to know it, is designed to
enclose populations via surveillance, digital tagging, health passports, and no doubt much
more. Again, if the digital tag doesn't work, so what? I happen to think much of this ruling
class dream is doomed to fail on the technical level. The problem is that it quite possibly
will work on a political and control level.
Depopulation is rebranded eugenics, and nothing else. The royals of Europe have always
longed for a return to what, for them, was colonial grandeur. The fantasy future is nostalgia
for the ruling class. The dream can be traced back to what the Empire has always done. They
destroy anything democratic and/or socialist. They support any dictator at any time because
they believe they deserve more and more of what is better. Let them eat cake.
They have crushed independence and autonomy for all of the 20th century and now into the
21st. The Mau Mau uprising in Kenya, the assassination of Lumumba, Vietnam, Indonesia and
Suharto, El Salvador ( U.S. support for Roberto D'Aubuisson, a fervent admirer of Hitler), or
Nicaragua, or Chile, the former Yugoslavia. One could go on and on and on. The U.S. support for
Papa Doc in Haiti, for Trujillo in the Dominican Republic. Nowhere, at any time, has the
Imperialist and colonial-loving ruling class EVER supported democracy or equality. Never,
nowhere, not once.
The problem is about perception . Take one of the biggest NGOs in the entire New Deal for
Nature; Conservation International . These people work with the WWF, with Club of Rome,
and We Mean Business. These are very wealthy business ventures. Now, Conservation International
also finances the Greta Thunberg films.
HERE is their board of directors, from their web page.
Perception. But Northrup Grummon and Riverstone Holdings. The first is a major player in the
defense industry, the industry that just got a trillion dollars, give or take, from the U.S.
Government. The second is a private equity firm focused on leveraged buyouts. Arnhold LLC is an
investment management company. Banco BTG Pactual S/A is an investment management company and
consultant to corporate trading. You get the idea. These are the people who have helped further
inequality, aided environmental destruction, and helped plunder the assets of countless
countries. The cynicism is jaw dropping, but many people just see Greta, see Green New Deal and
assume this NGO is an innocent well-intentioned and 'woke' eco-venture.
WHY would anyone think that suddenly these people are out to save the planet?
Well, they might think they ARE saving the planet, but not for you and me. For
themselves.
John Steppling is an original founding member of the Padua Hills Playwrights
Festival, a two-time NEA recipient, Rockefeller Fellow in theatre, and PEN-West winner for
playwrighting. He's had plays produced in LA, NYC, SF, Louisville, and at universities across
the US, as well in Warsaw, Lodz, Paris, London and Krakow. He has taught screenwriting and
curated the cinematheque for five years at the Polish National Film School in Lodz, Poland.
Plays include The Shaper, Dream Coast, Standard of the Breed, The Thrill, Wheel of Fortune,
Dogmouth, and Phantom Luck, which won the 2010 LA Award for best play. Film credits include 52
Pick-up (directed by John Frankenheimer, 1985) and Animal Factory (directed by Steve Buscemi,
1999). A collection of his plays was published in 1999 by Sun & Moon Press as Sea of Cortez
and Other Plays. He lives with wife Gunnhild Skrodal Steppling; they divide their time between
Norway and the high desert of southern California. He is artistic director of the theatre
collective Gunfighter Nation. Jan 19, 2021 1:40 PM
great piece. I am perplexed when we speak of the new era we are facing, as a new form of
feudalism. The feudal age it was not just a story between serfs and feudal lords, in Europe, we
also witnessed the birth of Medieval commune, the Municipalities, in which citizens gave
themselves the first laws and rights of free men. "During the 10th century in several parts of
Western Europe, peasants began to gravitate towards walled population centers, as advances in
agriculture (the three-field system) resulted in greater productivity and intense
competition
Such townspeople needed physical protection from lawless nobles and bandits, part of the
motivation for gathering behind communal walls, but also strove to establish their liberties,
the freedom to conduct and regulate their own affairs and security from arbitrary taxation and
harassment from the bishop, abbot, or count in whose jurisdiction these obscure and ignoble
social outsiders lay. This was a long process of struggling to obtain charters that guaranteed
such basics as the right to hold a market. The breakaway from their feudal overlords by these
communes occurred in the late 12th century and 13th century, during the Investiture Controversy
between the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor. Milan led the Lombard cities against the Holy
Roman Emperors and defeated them, gaining independence (battles of Legnano, 1176, and Parma,
1248). Meanwhile, the Republic of Venice, Pisa and Genoa were able to conquer their naval
empires on the Mediterranean sea (in 1204 Venice conquered three-eights of the Byzantine Empire
in the Fourth Crusade). Cities such as Parma, Ferrara, Verona, Padua, Lucca, Siena, Mantua and
others were able to create stable states at the expenses of their neighbors, some of which
lasted until modern times." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_commune
."
Usually such prediction are not worth electrons to are needed to display them on the screen
but the idea that "[paper gold" offer no hadge might be sound. Whether natural gat wil rally as
he predicts is another story ("Buy natural gas because Williams expects it to rally.") If the
stock market followed his forecasts he probably would be billionaire, especially with his
tendency to trade futures.
It is not clear how long the market can levitate at current high but some kind of 2008
reckoning might be in the cards. When and what might be the trigger is not clear. But as one
commenter said "I don't believe that all of the damage caused by our pandemic has been adequately
summed up" The disconnect between the actual economy and the stock market can't last
forever.
I've watched Williams accurately call many market twists and turns in the 15 years I've known
him. I know of more than a few money managers who trust his judgement. Williams has won or
placed well in the I've watched Williams accurately call many market twists and turns in the 15
years I've known him. I know of more than a few money managers who trust his judgement.
Williams has won or placed well in the World Cup
Trading Championship several times since the 1980s To make market calls, Williams uses his
own time-tested mix of fundamentals, seasonal trends, technical signals and intelligence
gleaned from the Commitment of Traders report from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(CFTC). Here's how he thinks about the three types of positions the CFTC reports. Williams
considers positioning by commercial traders or hedgers and users and producers of commodities
to be the smart money. He thinks large traders, mainly big investment shops, and the public are
contrarian indicators. Williams mainly trades futures because he thinks that's where you can
make the big money. But we can apply his calls to stocks and exchange traded funds, too. Here's
how he's positioning for the next few weeks and through the end of the year, in some of the
major asset classes and stocks. To make market calls, Williams uses his own time-tested mix of
fundamentals, seasonal trends, technical signals and intelligence gleaned from the Commitment
of Traders report from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Here's how he thinks
about the three types of positions the CFTC reports. Williams considers positioning by
commercial traders or hedgers and users and producers of commodities to be the smart money. He
thinks large traders, mainly big investment shops, and the public are contrarian indicators.
Williams mainly trades futures because he thinks that's where you can make the big money. But
we can apply his calls to stocks and exchange traded funds, too. Here's how he's positioning
for the next few weeks and through the end of the year, in some of the major asset classes and
stocks. To make market calls, Williams uses his own time-tested mix of fundamentals, seasonal
trends, technical signals and intelligence gleaned from the Commitment of Traders report from
the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Here's how he thinks about the three types of
positions the CFTC reports. Williams considers positioning by commercial traders or hedgers and
users and producers of commodities to be the smart money. He thinks large traders, mainly big
investment shops, and the public are contrarian indicators. Williams mainly trades futures
because he thinks that's where you can make the big money. But we can apply his calls to stocks
and exchange traded funds, too. Here's how he's positioning for the next few weeks and through
the end of the year, in some of the major asset classes and stocks. Williams mainly trades
futures because he thinks that's where you can make the big money. But we can apply his calls
to stocks and exchange traded funds, too. Here's how he's positioning for the next few weeks
and through the end of the year, in some of the major asset classes and stocks. Williams mainly
trades futures because he thinks that's where you can make the big money. But we can apply his
calls to stocks and exchange traded funds, too. Here's how he's positioning for the next few
weeks and through the end of the year, in some of the major asset classes and stocks.
Expect an extended stock market selloff
To make market calls in September, Williams turns to what he calls the Machu Picchu trade,
because he discovered this signal while traveling to the ancient Inca ruins with his wife in
2014. Williams, who is intensely focused on seasonal patterns that consistently play out over
time, noticed that it's usually a great idea to sell stocks -- using indexes, mostly -- on the
seventh trading day before the end of September. (This year, that's Sept. 22.) Selling on this
day has netted profits in short-term trades 100% of the time over the past 22 years.
... ... ...
One caveat: Watch the advance-decline line, one of Williams' favorite indicators. If fewer
stocks are declining relative to advancers on days the stock market is weak, or if there is a
broadening out of participation on up days, this is a sign the any selloff may be coming to a
close.
"If great breadth comes in to the market [on up days], then I will get bullish," he
says.
Gold offers no hedge
A lot of people think gold serves as a hedge during stock market declines, but this isn't
true, says Williams. Gold has slumped along with stocks in most of the major market selloffs.
He expects the same over the next three to four weeks. He's advising gold traders to sell any
rallies now, and then revisit when gold falls later this year to buy back lower.
To make this call, Williams looks at the typical seasonal pattern for gold that plays out
every year, and also the historical trends in election years. The conclusion: Gold typically
peaks around the middle of September then weakens for most of the rest of the year. This year,
gold has underperformed its typical seasonal pattern, which is bearish for the metal.
"Gold has not been able to stay in step with what happened in the past, therefore the
seasonal pattern should work this year," he says.
Another sign of potential weakness is the "crazy bullishness on gold" among the right-wing
pundits like Ron Paul who have a long-standing affinity for the medal.
"They're all on the bandwagon because of the rally in gold," he says.
As with gold, he expects a similar seasonal pattern in other precious metals and copper.
They will be weak from now through the end of the year, with a possible bounce in the middle of
October.
Michael Brush is a Manhattan-based financial writer who publishes the stock newsletter Brush
Up on Stocks. Brush has covered business for the New York Times and The Economist group. He
attended Columbia Business School in the Knight-Bagehot program. Günter
Wolfeschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff 11 hours ago Only this September there is a the Fed, a
pandemic, Robinhood and Trump, and his corrupt administration. Factor in those variables and
it's impossible to predict what the market is going to do. Will remain in all cash till after
the election. Stuart Young 11 hours ago I don't believe that all of the damage caused by our
pandemic has been adequately summed up. Our U.S. Government may suffer huge consequences as a
result of trillions of dollars in new debt. The law of gravity can be defied on so long. LT
Murray 1 day ago Valualtions are now about where they were in the summer when there was all the
talk about a V-shaped recovery that is now known not to be the case.
"... "We are more and more disoriented. There is a little good news, but at the same time there are new dimensions to the virus, and new variations that might turn out to be more dangerous. We now have this fake return to normal. The really frustrating thing is this lack of basic orientation. It's the absence of what [the philosopher and literary critic] Fredric Jameson calls 'cognitive mapping' – having a general idea of the situation, where it is moving and so on. Our desire to function requires some kind of clear coordinates, but we simply, to a large extent, don't know where we are." ..."
"... In his book, Zizek recalls the warnings of scientists after the SARS and Ebola epidemics. Persistently, we were told that the outbreak of a new epidemic was only a matter of time, but instead of preparing for the various scenarios we escaped into apocalypse movies. Zizek enumerates different scenarios of looming catastrophes, most of them consequences of the climate crisis, and calls for tough decisions to be made now. ..."
"... he coronavirus crisis is just a dress rehearsal for future problems that await us in the form of global warming, epidemics and other troubles. I don't think this is necessarily a pessimistic view, it's simply realistic. ..."
"... Now is a great time for politics, because the world in its current form is disappearing. Scientists will just tell us, 'If you want to play it safe, keep this level of quarantine,' or whatever. But we have a political decision to make, and we are offered different options." ..."
"... What if we will need another lockdown, even longer? Or multiple lockdowns? It's a sad prospect, but we should get ready to live in some kind of permanent state of emergency. ..."
"... The coronavirus epidemic is a universal crisis. In the long term, states cannot preserve themselves in a safe bubble while the epidemic rages all around ..."
"... It's tragic, I know, that all kinds of big companies are in deep shit, but are they worth saving? ..."
"... My formula is much more brutal, and darker. The state should simply guarantee that nobody actually starves, and perhaps this even needs to be done on an international scale, because otherwise you will get refugees. ..."
"... "I'm talking about what Naomi Klein calls the 'Screen New Deal.' The big technology companies like Google and Microsoft, which enjoy vast government support, will enable people to maintain Telexistence. You undergo a medical examination via the web, you do your job digitally from your apartment, your apartment becomes your world. I find this vision horrific." ..."
"... "First, it's class distinction at its purest. Maybe half the population, not even that, could live in this secluded way, but others will have to ensure that this digital machinery is functioning properly. Today, apart from the old working class, we have a 'welfare working class,' all those caregivers, educators, social workers, farmers. The dream of this program, the Screen New Deal, is that physically, at least, this class of caregivers disappears, they become as invisible as possible. Interaction with them will be increasingly reduced and be digital." ..."
"... "The irony here is that those who are privileged, those who, in this scenario, will be able to live in this perfect, secluded way, will also be totally controlled digitally. Their morning urine will be examined, and so on with every aspect of their life. Take the new analysis capabilities that can test you and provide results [for the coronavirus] in 10-15 minutes. I can imagine a new form of sexuality in this totally isolated world, in which I flirt with someone virtually, and then we say, 'Okay, let's meet in real life and test each other – if we're both negative, we can do it.'" ..."
"... As Julian Assange wrote, we will get a privately controlled combination of Google and something like the NSA ..."
"... Zizek divides workers during the crisis into those who encounter the virus and its consequences as part of their daily reality – medical staff, welfare-service people, farmers, the food industry – and those who are secluded in their homes, for whom the epidemic remains in the realm of the Lacanian spectral and omnipresent. ..."
Slavoj Zizek's 'Brutal, Dark' Formula for Saving the World
The pandemic is liable to worsen, ecological disasters loom and technological surveillance will terminate democracy.
Salvation will come only by reorganizing human society. A conversation with the radical – and anxious – philosopher
Slavoj Zizek
Share in Facebook
Share in Twitter
Send in e-mail
Send
in e-mail
Go to comments
Print article
Zen Read
Open gallery view
Slavoj Zizek.
This is not an easy time for Slavoj Zizek. Quite the opposite, and he's the first to admit it. Reoccurring panic attacks
incapacitate him for hours at a time and, unlike in the past, the nights have stopped providing him with an easy escape.
His sleep is wracked by nightmares of what the future holds for humanity. There are days when he fantasizes about being
infected by the coronavirus. At least, that way all of the uncertainty would come to an end, or so he imagines. Finally, he
would be able to cope with the virus concretely, instead of continuously being haunted by it, as some sort of a spectral
entity.
... ... ...
At age 71, Zizek is currently closeted in his home in Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, with his fourth wife, the Slovene
writer and journalist Jela Krecic, who is three decades younger than him. During the past couple of weeks the epidemic
seems to have faded in his country, with only two or three new cases being reported daily. But Zizek, who spoke to Haaretz
via Skype, is in no hurry to breathe a sigh of relief.
The epidemic was almost certainly the knockout punch for many businesses that were already barely
surviving before the shock.
Notable quotes:
"... Needless to say, a rebound from the lockdowns was inevitable. All sorts of activities like dentist appointments on hold (and dentistry personnel accounted for 10% of the job gains), and so there's pent up demand for medical procedures and treatments, as well as more mundane services that many regard as critical, like haircuts. ..."
"... Multiple factors are working together to bias observers to underestimate the severity of Covid-19 economic damage. ..."
"... The first is that it has hit parts of the economy that are relatively removed from media coverage: low income service workers and small business owners. ..."
"... Second is that in the middle income to better off sections of the country, things still look reassuringly normal. ..."
"... Third is that due to optimism bias and/or having experienced the 1987 crash, the dotcom bust, and 9/11, many people are predisposed to believe that even if the pain of spring 2020 is acute, that the economy will rebound and nearly all of the damage will be erased by year end or say at worst, mid 2021. Underscoring that it a widespread tendency to see Mr. Market at the economy. ..."
"... Colleges will have a lot of trouble this fall. ..."
"... PPP loans are keeping workers on the books through late June-mid July, depending on when the loan came in. Many employers, ranging from museums to small manufacturers are saying they have to make deep headcount cuts then ..."
"... Cutting across all the categories of businesses suffering from Covid-19 damage .restaurants, shops in office districts, merchants in college towns, small manufacturers ..."
"... State and local governments are already hemorrhaging jobs and it will get worse ..."
"... But wages have been largely stagnant since at least 2000, and spending increases since 2010 were powered by rising personal and corporate debts. ..."
"... Both 4-year and 2-year community colleges produce RN's. Both have clinical (hospital) requirements. Of course, 4-year colleges produce RN's with greater academic depth. Doesn't mean they are better nurses. But they are the ones roaming the ICU's because they have the greater depth of knowledge. ..."
"... governments will seemingly fail to recognize that strong keynesian intervention is mandated and has to be maintained for long if they don't want depression to keep its course while the usual hawks are already asking for termination of state aid programs. We had first epidemic negationism and now we face economic negationism as if the value of stocks would by itself fix everything back to normal. Harder times ahead unfortunately. ..."
"... I think most of the long-term job losses will be low income jobs (less than $40k/year). This is the group that recent statistics showed is at spending levels similar to last year, but much of that is supported by federal stimulus money ($600/wk unemployment, $1,200 check, PPP). When that dries up, that spending will likely decline. Many of those low income jobs will not have come back for two years as they are in hospitality and entertainment types of sectors. The drive-thru fast-food and takeout restaurants are doing fine – everything else is suffering and many will go permanently out of business. It is going to be a bloodbath in downtown areas in major cities. ..."
"... Combined with a 3 trillion dollar spending bill, we have an unprecedented increase in aggregate demand from the average American. Now that the economy starts to open up a bit, there is actually something to spend the money on other than Amazon purchases. ..."
"... One of the biggest ironies of all is that the health care industry is suffering because the expense of treating coronavirus is not offset by enough income but it is still crowding out other services. I doubt any big hospitals will go under, but the small rural ones have been dropping like flies for a few years now. ..."
"... people are putting off going in for imaging procedures and lab work because they are afraid the clinics and hospital labs are dangerous places. ..."
"... My son's lender gave him 3 months "forbearance". At the end of the three months they billed him for a triple mortgage payment. ..."
"... One of the difficult things about the current situation is the remarkable shortage of PPE and the difficulty the manufacturing sector seems to have both meeting the existing demand and coming up with improved products at scale. Since PPE is safety-critical (failures will cause injury or death), and since almost all manufacturing seems to have been outsourced to China where quality is suspect at best, it's hard to be optimistic about the situation improving. In fact, as new protocols evolve around the world in which PPE is the new normal, shortages and counterfeit products seem likely to get worse. ..."
"... Sporting events (not that I follow any) have economic impact and there will not be any residual demand when they are permitted. ..."
"... While not directly connected to the pandemic, it is overlapping in timing of the economic damage. The collapse of oil prices has laid waste to the shale revolution. ..."
"... GDP growth . Forget it, it's over . De-growth is the new normal. This reality will become apparent as the parasites – hedge funds, private equity et al – begin to fall later this year. ..."
"... for retirees (who are of course at higher risk of COVID-19 fatality spectrum) there is no -- absolutely zero -- desire to hit the malls and the large stores. ..."
"... The mid-level pub and restaurant trade will be decimated. There was over-supply before and this is now chronically exposed. All we passed were shuttered -- some offering take-out, which might be a life line but they are typically too far from the town centres to compete with the cheap kebab, chicken and Indian walk-ups. Plus, people won't pay a gourmet premium to spoon something out of a foil tray themselves. However, at the lower end of the market, those fast-food places with drive-thrus will be fine -- queues round the block at McDonalds, KFC and Starbucks. ..."
"... Here in Oregon we have had a serious outbreak of Covid in a seafood packing plant in Newport. And we learn that the majority of the workforce come from Guatemala, Serbia, and Ukraine. How can this make economic sense? ..."
"... A large greenhouse (64 acres under glass) near here was the largest COVID cluster outside of NYC. Two hundred "guest" workers were housed 4 to a room, 2 in each bed at cheap motels. The Canadian owners pay local workers and "guests " $13/hour. But the labor contactor gets an amount on top, plus there is the housing, food and transportation for the "guests". ..."
"... Home sales here are really hot – a big exodus from Seattle is driving it. ..."
"... real wages for USA men at the 50% percentile level are down -5.1% over the 1979 to 2018 time frame. ..."
"... Given that the USA has had infrastructure declining (lowering quality of life), housing, medical and educational costs rising in excess of inflation, USA wage earners were hurting, at the median level, well before Covid-19 and well before 2000. ..."
"... Shops are already going under here in Silicon Valley. I've driven down Santa Cruz Ave. in Menlo Park a few times over the last week and there are a fair number of empty storefronts. It is the fancy shopping street in town. Since I don't actually shop there I couldn't tell what sorts of shops had closed. ..."
"... It's going to be deep and lasting because it only increases the systemic problem of growing income inequality. There were viruses before and there will be more after. In this case, the response was to grow the ghetto, faster. Fintech has to go in for the kill shot here ..."
"... DC control technology can only increase income inequality so long as it is the primary recipient of MMT. It's one and zeroes, a completely arbitrary binary outcome. ..."
Too many people who should know better are taking a big bounce in retail sales as a sign that an economic
recovery is well underway. It is, but only in the sense that going from the ICU to a hospital bed could also
be defined as a recovery. In keeping, the Atlanta Fed's GDPNow forecast for the second quarter has improved
from negative 52.8% to a sunny negative 45.5%.
Needless to say, a rebound from the lockdowns was
inevitable. All sorts of activities like dentist appointments on hold (and dentistry personnel accounted for
10% of the job gains), and so there's pent up demand for medical procedures and treatments, as well as more
mundane services that many regard as critical, like haircuts.
Nevertheless, stock indices rising to new highs looks remarkably out of touch in light of the baked-in
and certain-to-continue-for-long-enough-to-matter damage. The true believers are in "Central banks are on
the case and will save us" mode. Perhaps they need to heed the warning, "Past results are no guarantee of
future performance."
Multiple factors are working together to bias observers to underestimate the severity of Covid-19
economic damage.
The first is that it has hit parts of the economy that are relatively removed from media coverage: low
income service workers and small business owners. Tell me how often CNN goes to interview the owner of a dry
cleaner or auto lube shop, even though small businesses have long been the generator of new jobs. Similarly,
notice how reports of Covid-19 infections at food processing facilities isn't covered until the capacity
taken out rises to a level where it might impact consumers. In keeping, Bloomberg had a story today,
More Food Shortages Loom With Outbreaks at 60 U.S Plants
, of outbreaks at non-meat processing
facilities, like fruit and vegetable packers and bakeries.
Second is that in the middle income to better off sections of the country, things still look reassuringly
normal. The lockdowns froze activity including business closures. I now live in a twee suburb, and in the
local shopping districts, there are not yet any vacant storefronts, even though some businesses in not so
prominent locations (a liquor store, the restaurant with the best pizza in the area, and an Olive Garden
branch, for starters) have folded; a lot of better restaurants have not reopened even though the lockdown
ended a couple of weeks ago.
On top of that, houses in tony suburban and exurban areas are in keen demand. So on top of feeling good
about their stock portfolios, upper middle class homeowners in those areas are positively chuffed about
reports of brisk property sales at strong prices.
Third is that due to optimism bias and/or having experienced the 1987 crash, the dotcom bust, and 9/11,
many people are predisposed to believe that even if the pain of spring 2020 is acute, that the economy will
rebound and nearly all of the damage will be erased by year end or say at worst, mid 2021. Underscoring that
it a widespread tendency to see Mr. Market at the economy.
This is far from a comprehensive list, but below are eight reasons why the deep damage to the economy
won't be reversed any time soon.
1. Business travel is not coming back any time soon. People are getting accustomed to Zoom. And word may
also get out that domestic flying is much worse than it used to be, which will be a deterrent to those who
might be so bold as to want to get on a plane. That is a fundamental blow to airlines, airport vendors,
hotels, restaurants, and convention centers. Hotel occupancy in April was 24.5% which if anything seems high
based on my personal datapoints. The pricings I see say that hotel operators are not expecting much if any
improvement through the summer. And as we discussed, hotels are at risk of creating a vicious cycle: they've
cut service levels drastically as a way to reduce the bleeding of the low occupancy rates. But even at
knocked-down prices, the degraded experience is enough to make travelers think twice about getting on the
road.
2. White collar workers will not be going back to offices in the old numbers. Elevators and public
transport, particularly commuter trains, are perceived as big risks. And a lot of cities can't cope well
with people driving in. NYC is extreme here but it's now short of parking space even with midtown looking
freakily underpopulated. Moreover, many large corporations, having had to figure out how to make work from
home manageable, have decided they can cope with it or even like it, so they plan to cut their office space
when lease renewals come up. That development will thin out tons of businesses near office buildings
4. Colleges will have a lot of trouble this fall. First, they are losing nearly all their
full-freight-paying Chinese students, between concern over US Covid-19 risks, Administration hostility, and
travel restrictions. That alone is a big blow.
On top of that, some are planning to reopen but MIT's announcement yesterday,
that it will not allow all students to return to campus,
probably represents a new normal. Well-placed
MIT alumni read the university's decision as driven significantly by a desire to protect faculty and staff;
I hear from sources with contacts at other universities that administrators that they see no way to put kids
in dorms without running unacceptably high Covid risks. Remember, even though kids almost never die of
Covid-19, but there is a risk of serious damage. 1/2 the asymptomatic cases on the Diamond Princess now show
abnormal lungs. And remember those cruises have half the people on board as crew, and the crew skews young.
College is a lot less appealing if you don't stay in a dorm.
Just as diminished activity in central business districts has negative knock-on effects to nearby
business, so to do hollowed-out colleges and universities have for their communities,
as described in more depth in a recent Bloomberg story
.
5. PPP loans are keeping workers on the books through late June-mid July, depending on when the loan came
in. Many employers, ranging from museums to small manufacturers are saying they have to make deep headcount
cuts then. Continuing unemployment claims already show that new hires are still being pretty much equaled by
job losses.
6. Cutting across all the categories of businesses suffering from Covid-19 damage .restaurants, shops in office districts,
merchants in college towns, small manufacturers Small
business owners have to guarantee loans personally unless they are able to finance their operations by
borrowing against real estate. Even SBA loans require a personal guarantee. So when consumers cheerily say
that restaurant owners or other operators will just declare Chapter 7 or 11 and then start their venture
afresh, they miss that these capitalists will be wiped out. They won't have the money to start over again.
And they may not have the pain tolerance either.
7. State and local governments are already hemorrhaging jobs and it will get worse. And in some, perhaps
many communities, the budget cuts will be so deep that they will degrade service levels. Less frequent
garbage collection and street repair is not good for business either.
8. The EU is not going to do enough stimulus to offset its own Covid-19 damage and Brexit is coming, a
shock to the EU and UK when both are already on the ropes. Roughly 25% of S&P earnings come from Europe. The
odds Italian banks will blow is rising all the time and that could be a CreditAnstalt-level event.
I'm sure readers can come up with additional items, but this list alone ought to be enough to curb the
enthusiasm of the economy cheerleaders. As Marshall Auerback said by e-mail:
American household spending in the 1960s was powered by rising wages and growing home equity. But
wages have been largely stagnant since at least 2000, and spending increases since 2010 were powered by
rising personal and corporate debts. House values are now stagnant at best, and will likely fall in the
months ahead. Faced with radical uncertainty, US consumers will save more and spend less. Even if the
government replaces their lost incomes for a time, people know that stimulus is short term. What they do
not know is when the next job offer – or layoff – will come along.
Moreover, people do distinguish between needs and wants. Americans need to eat, but they mostly don't
need to eat out. They don't need to travel. Restaurant owners and airlines therefore have two problems:
they can't cover costs while their capacity is limited for public-health reasons, and demand would be
down even if the coronavirus disappeared. This explains why many businesses are not reopening even though
they legally can. Others are reopening, but fear they cannot hold out for long. And the many millions of
workers in America's vast services sector are realizing that their jobs are simply not essential.
Universities have been very adept at squeezing themselves into occupations to make them a required
third party. So nursing was once an occupation that a lot of people could do but in many countries
now, if you want to be a nurse you have to be university qualified.
In previous times an
apprenticeship was the main requirement with state given examinations at the end of it. I think that
this could be true of doctors as well. But no in ore and more occupations, unless you have the
university qualifications, you can't do the job.
Let me just say that having college trained, licensed RN's are important. They are the one's who
actually make a hospital function. The skills needed to be a qualified RN are well beyond
apprenticeship.
I've spent some critical time in a hospital and the ability of attending RN's (both ICU and
general unit) to understand the broader implications of a doctor's directive and the comprehension
of computational details involved with medicine application is beyond me. It's too much work for my
mind; and I'm one of those licensed professionals mandated by the state.
And this ignores the "soft skills" needed to provide care to patients. (If you've ever been
tended by a male nurse, you'll know what I'm saying.)
Erm, I have been tended by a male nurse and I don't know what you mean.
What I have observed (as a patient and friend-of-patient) is that community college trained
nurses, who, in my part of the world, start working on wards in the first week, are better
nurses than the university-trained ones who don't see a patient until year two. Many would have
washed out early on if they had actually contact with patients right away. You can generally
spot them, they clutch their clipboards as if they were shields and flee to positions in admin
ASAP.
Both 4-year and 2-year community colleges produce RN's. Both have clinical (hospital)
requirements. Of course, 4-year colleges produce RN's with greater academic depth. Doesn't
mean they are better nurses. But they are the ones roaming the ICU's because they have the
greater depth of knowledge.
My main point was a simple one: modern day nursing skills cannot be gained through
apprenticeship. It requires sustained study, instruction, and clinical experience.
The epidemic was almost certainly the knockout punch for many businesses that were already barely
surviving before the shock.
And governments will seemingly fail to recognize that strong keynesian
intervention is mandated and has to be maintained for long if they don't want depression to keep its course
while the usual hawks are already asking for termination of state aid programs. We had first epidemic
negationism and now we face economic negationism as if the value of stocks would by itself fix everything
back to normal. Harder times ahead unfortunately.
Well said, Ignacio. I would add that this may be a knockout punch for globalization as we know it.
John Ralston Saul suggested this already happened two decades ago (it takes awhile for ideologies to die
in the minds of the elite, right?). I don't know how we are going to functionally transition to "positive
nationalism" (ie. citizen based economics) but you presented a key ingredient, IMHO, when you wrote:
"strong keynesian intervention is mandated and has to be maintained for long if they don't want
depression to keep its course"
There is only one reason to remove or not implement Federal support for the population at large and
SMEs: The "hawks" want (for them or for their clients) to buy properties and stuff on the cheap.
Yves, the "forgiveness terms" on the PPP loans have been amended from the initial up to 75% of
$100,000 spent on salaries within
eight
weeks of PPP loan distribution to a
24
week period. I believe this change will allow smaller businesses to survive for a longer
period.
I think these changes will help employees of only a limited subset of businesses, those
businesses that hadn't previously applied but which will now apply because of the changed terms.
The new terms don't increase the amount of the loan, they just change how much of it will be
forgiven. My company received a PPP loan under the original terms, the changes make the amount
forgiven somewhat greater, but the cash won't last any longer. The real beneficiaries of the
changes will be owners (including myself), who now will have to repay less of the loan.
No, this is the reverse. It's not a matter of distribution, it's a matter of how long the
business can afford to keep the staff.
Even assuming the PPP paid enough for full salary recovery (for some businesses, it doesn't; a
friend with a manufacturing business got only $420K versus her $700K payroll because some of her
employees are high skill and make over $100K), extending the time helps only for businesses that
were entirely closed, like restaurants. It did NOT increase the amount distributed. That was set
based on 8 weeks of payroll as 75% of the total distributed.
So if after paying full payroll for eight weeks (now eight weeks from when you started
supporting salaries) and your business clearly can't support the payroll, you will cut staff.
Moreover, the amendment on the fly was of limited help. A lot of business like restaurants (per
a WSJ story yesterday( didn't apply because the 8 week requirement was in affect when the program
had funds to distribute.
A zigzag economy. Or even better, stairsteppin down to lower states of 'commerce', much of it
'informal', out of the prying noses of taxman everywhere .. that too, uh, works in my admittedly
cloudy seer's eye.
If ever there was a time that the establishment would fight a job guarantee program it is now.
When they say they need to be able to "compete" it's all about bringing wages down. Nothing does that
more than mass unemployment. Every industry is going to squeeze wages to make up for lost demand that you
nor your children should hold your breath about returning. Sports and entertainment – big squeeze. Keep a
close eye on the battles with the unions.
I see people desperately mincing about like there will be a return to "like it was in 2019."
Wandering around in their deluded dreamworld as if all of this was like a season of the tv series Dallas
back in the eighties – an entire season written off as another characters dream.
In my little town of Sebastopol at least half the restaurants will go out of business, the one used
bookstore is shuttered and quite a few of the tourist dependent shops will be going out of business.
Vacation rentals are being allowed again, it's too early to tell if they will be OK yet.
July 4th will be a good indicator.
Real Estate prices are looking wobbly.
I did get my first haircut since January and now sport bright blue mohawk.
I think most of the long-term job losses will be low income jobs (less than $40k/year). This is the group
that recent statistics showed is at spending levels similar to last year, but much of that is supported by
federal stimulus money ($600/wk unemployment, $1,200 check, PPP). When that dries up, that spending will
likely decline. Many of those low income jobs will not have come back for two years as they are in
hospitality and entertainment types of sectors. The drive-thru fast-food and takeout restaurants are doing
fine – everything else is suffering and many will go permanently out of business. It is going to be a
bloodbath in downtown areas in major cities.
The economy will lose a significant amount of consumer spending when the below median income have
significantly lower income because they spend that income. That will reduce corporate revenues and sales tax
collection.
White collar workers working from home will do fine. They will also continue saving money instead of
spending it since they won't be travelling for pleasure or business or going out for food or entertainment.
Recent statistics indicate that in early June, the top 25% income category reduced their credit card
spending by 17% compared to pre-coronavirus while the lower income people reduced their spending 4%. This is
the same reason that the Republican tax cuts don't work to boost the economy – they give the money to people
who don't spend it, so it doesn't create economic growth, although it does create asset bubbles.
Reduced state and local tax revenues means the layoffs are already starting in the public sector. There
are so many public sector layoff requirements that saving a dollar in salary is only saving $0.30 in the
first year after laying off the employee. So the layoffs are likely to be deep. A cost effective approach is
that state and local governments will simply not hire to fill positions of recent retirees because then they
get 100% savings, so younger folks hoping for government work are going to be disappointed for at least a
couple of years. State and local governments reduciton in spending was a significant damper on the fianncial
crisis recovery and will be one here as well.
I think we are staring at 10% unemployment for at least 2 years. Real unemployment may be significantly
higher as discouraged workers don't get counted. Also, with so many baby boomers entering Social Security
eligibility, they may be forced to retire early and take reduced social security payments for the rest of
their lives. That will be a drag on the economy for the next 30 years as social security benefits
recirculate in the same month they get paid.
I don't think you are appreciating the magnitude of months on end of low wage workers salaries being
doubled, combined with a huge drop in federal tax revenue. Also, congress is certainly not stupid enough
to allow the additional unemployment benefits to expire going into an election (afterwards, certainly).
Combined with a 3 trillion dollar spending bill, we have an unprecedented increase in aggregate demand
from the average American. Now that the economy starts to open up a bit, there is actually something to
spend the money on other than Amazon purchases.
Consumption is our economy, and if you don't think we are going to continue seeing huuuge retail sales
numbers > earnings > GDP then you are way off base IMO. We are effectively already instituting a generous
UBI. Yes, many small businesses have and will tragically fail and we are in a complete mess in many ways,
but sectoral balance always wins out. The private sector hasn't had a surplus like this since I don't
even know when? WWII maybe? This certainly blows away the response we had in 2008.
All this spells term #2 for the Donald in my outlook. The dems threw everything they possibly could at
him and it failed miserably. And it serves them right, run a real candidate with real policy positions
instead of incessantly whining about the guy who is in there now. Not sure how long it is going to take
for the left to wake up
9. Low income people, with the most propensity to spend,
can't if they don't have income for a long time.
Here's a horrifying
thread with video and pics
of an 8 hour wait
to apply for UI in Kentucky. And there are people who applied
in March and April who still haven't been serviced.
As an extra bonus, (nonperformative) mask usage in the line looks like it's about 50%,
so some of these poor souls will soon have other things to worry about.
Mitch's solution for his hard-pressed constituents:
More judges.
One of the biggest ironies of all is that the health care industry is suffering because the expense of
treating coronavirus is not offset by enough income but it is still crowding out other services. I doubt any
big hospitals will go under, but the small rural ones have been dropping like flies for a few years now.
I
had my yearly yesterday and my new doc is voicing her frustration with the way information is so mishandled,
not to mention that the tests for antibodies are virtually useless, and she thinks it will take at least a
year to get some kind of yearly shot for corona.
We might never see an actual vaccination. She mentioned
that people are putting off going in for imaging procedures and lab work because they are afraid the clinics
and hospital labs are dangerous places.
> What is forbearance? It is a lender's temporary willingness not to collect interest or principal
payments on a loan.
My son's lender gave him 3 months "forbearance". At the end of the three months they billed him for a
triple mortgage payment. Fortunately he was able to remain employed and had banked the 3 payments. I expect he is one of the only
people to do so.
Such "forbearance" sounds like a vicious scam.
It is not at all a well known concept. It just lets you pay late with no penalty. It does not relieve
you of your obligation.
Having said that (and I need to turn in so I am not about to find the link) I am told a NY Post
article said that tenants in NYC were pretty much paying as usual, so they seemed to appreciate that this
forbearance business was not much of a break.
Just wait till federal tax time become 'un'-deferred. How many, especially the precarious within
the middleclasses, not be able to pay what's owed? .. or .. incensed at the transparently unfair
government/fed reserve plays, just throw up their proverbial hands, and say 'Screw this!!! Wall Street
made Bank thankyouverymuch! .. why am I not held to the Same standard??'
A minor point: I've read that if absolutely everyone wore a mask we could resume many of our activities.
Maybe. But personally, I find them semi-suffocating, even the fairly loose-fitting cloth variety. I believe
in their worth but the nauseating experience of light oxygen deprivation causes me to avoid most outings or
activities that require them. I can't imagine how medical professionals wear these things so often. Maybe it
takes some getting used to.
Is anyone else similarly annoyed? Again, I believe in the value of mask wearing; I just find it nearly
unbearable.
I find the most objectionable thing to be glasses fogging, with suffocation a close second. I imagine
one can eventually get used to it, since, e.g., surgeons wear them for hours at a stretch every day of
their working lives.
One of the difficult things about the current situation is the remarkable shortage of PPE and the
difficulty the manufacturing sector seems to have both meeting the existing demand and coming up with
improved products at scale. Since PPE is safety-critical (failures will cause injury or death), and since
almost all manufacturing seems to have been outsourced to China where quality is suspect at best, it's
hard to be optimistic about the situation improving. In fact, as new protocols evolve around the world in
which PPE is the new normal, shortages and counterfeit products seem likely to get worse.
Obviously this is one area where a wartime level of federally driven domestic production efforts would
make total sense, but this would require acknowledging that coronavirus is real, and with Donald "nothing
to see here" Trump in the White House this seems unlikely to happen any time soon.
I don't even notice mine, to the point where I sometimes try to spoon food thru it
I dunno, maybe it's because I used to have a beard? In combination with the fact that I was an avid
bicyclist so just walking around, let alone sitting in front of a computer, just doesn't require much
air?
I don't care for them, but since I am working at home and don't go anywhere -- my lovely and talented
wife also does shopping -- I only needed a mask once for an unavoidable shopping trip. She had a birthday.
We got a very nice pear torte from the local chocolaterie!
I do work, play games with the kids, and eat well. I putter about in the wood shop. (Hand tools are
the secret for avoiding masks there.) I'm really quite a bit happier than before the outbreak. We seem to
be able to hide out from the virus on our homestead in the Santa Cruz Mountains redwoods. With that, the
clean air, decreased car noise and no commute, I'm wondering why we didn't do this before!
I'm sure it will all come crashing down when school starts again, but for the moment, life is grand.
While I agree with this, I wonder if it's missing the other side. For example, when more people work from
home, they still need to eat and don't necessarily have time to cook. Will suburban and neighborhood
restaurants and delivery services see an uptick? Obviously, this doesn't help the city center businesses,
but maybe it evens out a bit when spread across the entire economy. That is, a lot of current businesses are
in a bad way, but maybe the economy will restructure around the "new normal".
Takeout is way less profitable than sitdown. Restaurants here closed after briefly trying takeout
because they could not make it work (three in a less than ten minute driving distance). The only ones I
anticipate that will do OK are venues with tiny sit down spaces, where they were set up as mainly
takeout.
Sporting events (not that I follow any) have economic impact and there will not be any residual demand
when they are permitted. And surely some people will be reluctant to enter arenas with thousands of screaming
fans. Locally, Syracuse has SU football and basketball (drawing 20-40,000), a triple A baseball team and a
minor league hockey team. I don't know how many game nights there are locally, but I'd guess 100+. There is
a certain amount of out of town people attending same.
Same is true for live entertainment or the NY State Fair (close to 100,000 daily attendance for a 2 week
run). All these things are cancelled and there won't be make up dates or residual demand.
The impact of non-events (like forgone haircuts or meals out) will take some time to work through the
broader economy. Also, habits will change even if there is a vaccine or miracle cure.
I suspect that the really interesting and alarming consequences are going to come from the interaction of
a number of these factors, sometimes in unforeseeable ways. Consider, for example, what other industries or
sectors are impacted by business travel: travel companies, foreign exchange companies, airport duty free
shops, taxi companies, car hire companies, makers of business travel applications for smartphones,
translators and interpreters, portable computers and electronics of all kinds, adapter plugs, expensive
luggage of all kinds, upper-tier restaurants and hotels where foreign languages are spoken, sources of
business entertainment, certain personal services, um, sometimes sought by travelling businessmen, security
staff at hotels, insurance companies, risk-management consultancies, medical and vaccination services,
dry-cleaning services, spas and beauty services, legal advisers on doing business, even the little shop in
the lobby that sells business books, expensive souvenirs and overpriced essentials that you typically
forget.
None of these industries will necessarily disappear, but all will lose the most lucrative part of
their business.
In conjunction with fewer tourists though, (which must now be a given) some or all of them
may go down, or at least be drastically reduced. And it's likely that there'll be a general retrenchment of
staff deployed abroad and the presence of international organisations. So if you do eventually get that trip
to exotic destination you have been promising yourself for some years, you may find that there are no decent
hotels or restaurants and no proper taxi service to your run-down hotel where nobody speaks English.
The other thing is tertiary education, where the problems go well beyond a lack of Chinese students (who can
still register to study remotely of course). A number of universities in Europe have simply cancelled all
in-person classes next year, and there is a huge and rather ill-directed effort under way to establish
complete online learning systems. Nobody has any idea what the long-term consequences of this will be, for
jobs, research, careers and even the survival of many institutions, but they won't be pretty. A lot of
degrees simply can't be done on line. And of course the economies of many towns and cities are partially
dependent on students and staff spending money, and buying and renting houses.
So if you live in a small but pleasant university town with a flourishing tourist industry, a science
park and an international conference centre, you own a restaurant and your brother owns a taxi company, it
might be time to consider something else.
While not directly connected to the pandemic, it is overlapping in timing of the economic damage. The
collapse of oil prices has laid waste to the shale revolution. Prior to the oil price war oil production and
the money being poured into it was actually a substantial portion of GDP growth. That isn't likely coming
back soon if every.
GDP growth . Forget it, it's over . De-growth is the new normal. This reality will become apparent as
the parasites – hedge funds, private equity et al – begin to fall later this year.
Anecdotals from my visit the past two days with my mother-in-law. A lot of pent-up cash from well-heel'ed pensioners who had booked expensive vacations but have now
cancelled. Several are going to replace not old but not new either cars using the holiday fund. So some
uptick will come from that.
As for retail, the garden centres were doing a good trade at the checkouts but the upscale cafes which
are usually attached are still closed and this is what makes the difference in this sector of retail's
business model here between break-even (at best) and good profits. But they'll survive.
However, for retirees (who are of course at higher risk of COVID-19 fatality spectrum) there is no --
absolutely zero
-- desire to hit the malls and the large stores. Even if it wasn't for trying to
maintain social distances, the prospect if you're in your seventies or eighties to queue (usually for a time
in the open air) for an uncertain wait
just to get in
is a huge disincentive.
Add in the lack of
catering and this is going to be hit very hard if my sampling is anything to go by.
The mid-level pub and restaurant trade will be decimated. There was over-supply before and this is now
chronically exposed. All we passed were shuttered -- some offering take-out, which might be a life line but
they are typically too far from the town centres to compete with the cheap kebab, chicken and Indian
walk-ups. Plus, people won't pay a gourmet premium to spoon something out of a foil tray themselves.
However, at the lower end of the market, those fast-food places with drive-thrus will be fine -- queues round
the block at McDonalds, KFC and Starbucks.
Residential real estate is also mixed. Nice places in good lots in ready-to-move-into condition have sold
-- retirees moving from London and the Home Counties have lots of equity and are buying for the long term
(well, as long term as you get aged 65-75) so aren't interested in the losing sleep over the possibility of
a 10 or 20% correction if one happens -- they want to move usually to be nearer family, to get out of
over-developed London and the South East and to enjoy a retirement lifestyle.
However, properties which are not retiree-friendly (e.g. not bungalows or apartments in full-service
blocks with lifts) are a serious drag on the market. This
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-70609848.html
had hung around for ages for the
vendor. I suspect it is an executor sale. Traditionally, disaster-areas like this property is would get
bought by developers (usually builders) to flip after gutting and refurbing but of course, this
business-model is
utterly
dependent on not overpaying in the first place in a falling market. Here,
the owner is just calling it quits and auctioning it off (very unusual in the UK property market but
probably the right thing to do as at least it'll be settled and they'll get their money without the hassle
and stress of something that might sit there unsold incurring maintenance costs and property taxes for a
year and even if it does sell, it'll be a low offer because of the condition it is in and would entail
possibly a collapse-prone chain that could all fall through at any minute). So residential real estate here
in the UK -- a crucial part of what props up the wider economy -- is showing early signs of stagnation and is
very quality- and price-dependent.
Here in Oregon we have had a serious outbreak of Covid in a seafood packing plant in Newport. And we
learn that the majority of the workforce come from Guatemala, Serbia, and Ukraine.
How can this make economic sense?
Clearly the wages are too low for native Oregonians. But Newport Seafood must pay gangmasters whose fees
include travel (bus from Guatemala, several planes from Serbia and Ukraine) plus accommodation for the
crews.
The set-up seems both crazy and an excellent way to spread the virus. Added to which many of the
Guatemaltecos speak a dialect called Mam which makes contract tracing more difficult.
Surely paying decent wages, in Oregon, Guatemala, Serbia and Ukraine, would be a tidier solution for all of
us.
A large greenhouse (64 acres under glass) near here was the largest COVID cluster outside of NYC. Two
hundred "guest" workers were housed 4 to a room, 2 in each bed at cheap motels.
The Canadian owners pay local workers and "guests " $13/hour. But the labor contactor gets an amount
on top, plus there is the housing, food and transportation for the "guests".
If one were cynical /s/ one might think the game is to have a reserve army of "guests", ready, willing
and able to displace any uppity locals.
Maybe if the Canadian owners paid $25/hour for locals, no guests would be required. BTW, they pay no
property tax on the $100M facility and get cut rate electricity.
Here in our small town (pop. around 14,000) the local food processing plant which cans peas, corn, and
other vegetables was the site of a 400% increase in CV cases. It is the biggest spike we have seen, going
went from 18 cases to almost 90 in the space of a couple of weeks, although our county is still doing
pretty well in general. The plant was shut down for a couple of week but now seems to be running again, I
assume with greater safety measures now implemented. At one time it was mostly local white guys who
worked in the plant but nowadays there is a much larger percentage of Hispanic workers.
Here in the suburbs of DFW houses are selling like hotcakes. Not exaggerating. Multiple offers and
prices over list. Selling in days after listing. I can't fathom this in Covid times. The uncertainty
alone makes that impossible to consider.
A family down the street just sold to move into a house a couple miles away that has a pool. Are they
not noticing that the economy is in shambles? Does it not occur to them that the knock-on effects might
eventually affect their household? Even if your job is safe now, it doesn't mean that it will be in the
future! Maybe now is not the right time to make a major upgrade like that! I just can't
In the meantime my taxes and insurance are going up.
Exodus from San Antone and Austin (and everywhere else) is what worries me bunch of rich folks
invading this place is the last thing i want.
Local PTB kept it in check for a long while yammering on about the radium in the water (you'd hafta
keep a sink-full overnight, in a closed up house, for 75 years for it to have a measurable effect)
Most of this clandestine effort was to keep the big cities from taking our groundwater but it had
the ancillary effect of limiting ingress to rich anti-science types(sigh).
The people who can afford to move right now I assume are not people i'd want as neighbors Todds and
Karens, bringing Civilisation to us hill people.
If you have plenty of cash, a downturn is the time to buy, assuming prices are cheaper. I'm not
sure they are, yet. Not enough forced sales yet, I'd imagine.
On the flip side, once you realize that your employer will probably let you telecommute from Vail,
CO, the condo in the big city may seem inconvenient to the slopes. I imagine there is some demand in
that dimension too. For the less adventurous, there are always the 'burbs.
I live on the North Olympic Peninsula. 'Tourism' is probably gonna suck going forward, especially if
lockdowns resume due to any future viral hotspot flareups. Our downtown has partially opened up, but for
how long ??
We also have 2 large building projects going on downtown – construction having begun last summer, came to
a standstill when the virus hit, then resumed. Both venues predicated to some extent on out of towners
spending their $$$ here. I think the virus just put the kibosh on those rosy plans.
Re: "American household spending in the 1960s was powered by rising wages and growing home equity. But
wages have been largely stagnant since at least 2000"
Starting the clock at 2000 glosses over the wage data from earlier years, which was none too good.
When women's earnings are added in the real wages at the 50% percentile level have risen a total of 6.1%
over the 40 year inclusive time frame.
Given that the USA has had infrastructure declining (lowering quality of life), housing, medical and
educational costs rising in excess of inflation, USA wage earners were hurting, at the median level, well
before Covid-19 and well before 2000.
One might argue that many wage earners have adjusted to this new normal BEFORE Covid-19 and this could
steel them somewhat for Covid-19 effects.
Shops are already going under here in Silicon Valley. I've driven down Santa Cruz Ave. in Menlo Park a
few times over the last week and there are a fair number of empty storefronts. It is the fancy shopping
street in town. Since I don't actually shop there I couldn't tell what sorts of shops had closed.
It is hardly the most important detail in the story, but I see 24 Hour Fitness is closing 100
locations. I would visit one when I was in Dallas. It was the best gym I've been to, lots of very well
selected equipment, the only place I ever saw with 2.5 dumbbell increments up to 52.5 lbs, many trainer
toys, pleasant space. This is a real shame, and I am sure other readers will see names of businesses they
patronized and liked.
It's going to be deep and lasting because it only increases the systemic problem of growing income
inequality. There were viruses before and there will be more after. In this case, the response was to grow
the ghetto, faster. Fintech has to go in for the kill shot here.
DC control technology can only increase income inequality so long as it is the primary recipient of MMT.
It's one and zeroes, a completely arbitrary binary outcome.
A: when the only difference is perception, electronic money.
Relative to the planet, let alone the universe, there is no such thing as an expert. Having tribes of
experts competing to see who gets to play God on any particular day can only result in a completely
artificial world.
The video game industry are making out like bandits, for now at least.
Wonder how this will impact the coming console generation though. How many people will have four or five
hundred spare smackers for a new system (or twice that for both new systems), plus new games at 60 bucks
each?
And will the assembly lines in Taiwan and China even be running? Nintendo was expecting to have its
production back up by this month, yet the Switch is still out of stock almost everywhere. And that's for an
existing, well established production line.
We need to abstract from pro-China propaganda here. The critique of the USA handing of the
epidemic is a better part of the article. It is true, that the US neoliberal elite was more
conserved about the health on military-industrial complex then about the health and well-being of
the American people.
Writes Margaret Kimberley (in "Opposing War Propaganda Against China," Jan. 25, 2020):
"Now whenever we see a reference to China in the corporate media we always see the words
communist party attached. This silly redundancy is war propaganda along with every other
smear and slur. We are told that 1 million Uighurs are imprisoned when there is quite
literally no proof of any such thing. China, the country which first experienced the COVID-19
virus, was the first to vanquish it, and has a low death rate of less than 5,000 people to
prove it. We depend here in America on China to produce masks and other protective equipment
but China is declared the villain. The country that within one month of realizing there was a
new communicable disease gave the world the keys to conquering it.
"Instead the country which fails where China succeeds, in providing for the needs of its
people and their health, is an international pariah, with most of the world barring Americans
from travel and turning us into a giant leper colony. Trump speaks of the "kung flu" and the
"Wuhan virus," but it is China which conquered the disease that has killed 130,000 Americans
and forced a quarantine which has caused economic devastation to millions of people here.
"But Americans get nothing but war propaganda. Trump and Joe Biden outdo one another
bragging about who will be tougher to China. This week we saw the U.S. government violate
international law again and close the Chinese consulate in Houston, Texas."
Writes Roxana Baspineiro in "Solidarity vs. Sanctions in Times of a Global Pandemic":
"Chinese and Cuban doctors have been providing support in Iran, Italy, Spain and have
offered their services and expertise to the most vulnerable countries in Latin America,
Africa, and Europe. They have developed medicines and medical treatments such as Interferon
Alpha 2B in Cuba, one of the potential medicines to combat the virus, which reduces the
mortality rate of people affected by COVID19. But above all, they have offered their interest
in distributing them to the peoples of the world without any patent or benefit
whatsoever."
Regardless of whether citizens of the US know about Chinese efforts, people in other nations
have noticed, according to Stansfield Smith, who writes:
"From the responses to the coronavirus pandemic, the world has seen the model of public
health efficiency China presented in controlling the problem at home. It has seen China's
world leadership in offering international aid and care. It has seen the abdication of
leadership by the US and even its obstruction in working to find solutions. Now the US still
cannot control the virus, and remains mired in economic crisis, while China is rebounding. In
sum, the pandemic has made the world look at both China and the US in a new light. And it has
dealt a serious blow to the US rulers' two decade long effort to counter the rise of
China."
... ... ...
The final section of the book, "Escalating anti-China campaign," is a diverse collection of
essays on subjects such as: US accusations of Chinese repression of Uyghurs; NATO exercises
that threatened to exacerbate COVID spread even while China was bringing aid to Europe; COVID
in the US armed forces; US military belligerence toward China; the color revolution in Hong
Kong; Vietnam's response to COVID; and a call from Margaret Flowers and the recently deceased
Kevin Zeese to replace the US pivot to Asia with a "Pivot to Peace."
Ajamu Baraka writes:
"The psychopathology of white supremacy blinds U.S. policy- makers to the political,
economic, and geopolitical reality that the U.S. is in irreversible decline as a global
power. The deep structural contradictions of the U.S. economy and state was exposed by the
weak and confused response to COVID-19 and the inability of the state to provide minimum
protections for its citizens and residents.
"But even in decline, the U.S. has a vast military structure that it can use to threaten
and cause massive death and destruction. This makes the U.S. a threat to the planet and
collective humanity because U.S policy-makers appear to be in the grip of a deathwish in
which they are prepared to destroy the world before voluntarily relinquishing power,
especially to a non-European power like China.
"For example, when Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo declared in public that the United
States and its Western European allies must put China in "its proper place," this represents
a white supremacist mindset that inevitably will lead to monumental errors of judgment."
So COVID-19 is, to put it mildly, a teachable moment. Looking around the world right now, we
can see who is learning and who isn't. As "Capitalism on a Ventilator" vividly illustrates,
China is leading the way, and the United States is slipping into obsolescence. Those who hope
to survive the coming travails can see who to follow and who to avoid.
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume is a writer living on the West Coast of the U.S.A. More of
Kollibri's writing and photos can be found at Macska Moksha Press .
The poverty myth that there is little or no poverty is all too common. In fact, the United
States has one of the highest poverty rates in the developed world. One study ranked the
United States 29 of 31 OECD countries in 2012. When it comes to child poverty, things are
even worse. A UNICEF report found that the United States ranked 34 of 35 developed
countries – only Romania had a higher child poverty rate.
Do you think a nation like this has the means to build Medicare for All? I don't think
so.
If you still believe that America's Sickcare is "the finest in the world" and is endlessly
sustainable, please study these three charts and extend the trendlines.
I've long been making the distinction between healthcare and sickcare : healthcare is the
service provided by frontline operational caregivers (doctors, nurses, aides, technicians,
etc.) and sickcare is the financialized system of Big Hospital Corporations, Big Insurers, Big
Pharma, etc. and their lobbyists that keep the federal money spigots wide open.
This financialized sickcare system is being consumed by the cancer of greedy profiteering
pursued by self-serving insiders. The delivery of healthcare is secondary to maximizing
revenues and profits by any means available .
To believe such a corrupt system is sustainable is magical thinking at its most
destructive.
Covid-19 is revealing this cancerous underbelly. Knowledge of the inner workings of
corporate administration is not evenly distributed, so every participants' experience of the
systemic dysfunction will vary.
Here is one MD's observations of the system's priorities. Others may have different views
but the maxim follow the money is clearly the correct place to start any inquiry of how
America's financialized sickcare functions in the real world.
From what I'm hearing from the front line, a not insignificant number of admissions are of
folks who would not have been admitted in March when there was fear of both the unknown and
systemic failure and, not coincidently, when COVID diagnoses didn't pay as much.
Today, the admission criteria for COVID is so much more flexible than for standard
diagnoses like CHF, and pays so much better than other diagnoses that our 'healthcare' system
is rapidly becoming a 'COVID care' system.
The surge in hospitalizations and subsequent COVID-identified deaths may be driven, in
part, to health systems adapting to new COVID revenue streams.
This would seemingly be good news, after all if it's the hospital administrator's desire
to fill empty beds that's driving admissions rather than infection rates, then systemic
failure can be averted through moderating those admission rates based on system capacity.
If your hospital fills up, just start sending the marginal cases
home--inpatient/outpatient; the outcome for the patient will be pretty much the same and
you've made as much money as your capacity will allow.
Unfortunately, our healthcare 'system' doesn't work like that.
Health systems are in the business of generating revenue, not value. Recent COVID-related
demand destruction has crushed that revenue so they're hungry for more.
Those in health-system operations and those in leadership live in two different worlds.
Leadership will push COVID admissions far beyond any operational limits in their quest for
short term performance. One cannot overstate their mendacity and drive for lucre.
Hospitals are becoming 'COVID factories' with all other admissions (which pay far less)
relegated to second tier status.
Health systems are evolving into an 'all COVID, all the time' format with the emphasis on
testing and (soon) vaccination, at the expense of all else.
Not a few systems of my acquaintance are laying off outpatient medical staff because their
supporting personnel have quit and are not replaced--those resources are being re-directed to
COVID testing and in preparation for mass vaccination.
For the health system in the business of generating revenue, it's an excellent tactic.
They save themselves significant overhead by not paying the clinicians and they make up the
revenue through high-margin COVID services and government bailout payments.
For patients who actually need healthcare, though, this tactic is deadly.
The perversion is end-stage, the health systems pretend to deliver healthcare and the
government pays them to continue the pretense.
There is no long term thinking here, no empathy for the workforce, no thought to the
mission beyond window-dressing--just a relentless, risk-adverse financialization machine.
Think of COVID as a new widget for which the customer will pay 2.5 times the going price
with no quality control, but only for a limited amount of time. Add in talentless,
rent-seeking leadership and all becomes clear.
Of course the real risk is that maxed out hospitals could find themselves in a situation
where admissions suddenly become driven by demand rather than the business model, with a true
non-linear path to failure laying beyond.
The longer daily national hospital occupancy stays above the approximate pre-COVID
capacity of 100k, the more likely you'll see systemic breakdowns--local at first, then
regional.
You won't see it in the press, the healthcare cartels have a pretty good lock on the local
media. Once news starts getting censored on social media, though, then you know it's
happening.
Hold me to that, And call me out in three months if I'm not right.
If you still believe that America's sickcare is "the finest in the world" and is endlessly
sustainable, please study these three charts and extend the trendlines.
The First World is leaving the "sweet spot" of its capitalist development stage, marked by
a relatively inflated petit-bourgeois middle class, and is reentering a proletarianization
phase. Call it the reproletarianization of the First World.
According to Time : "in addressing the causes and consequences of this pandemic –
and its cruelly uneven impact – the elephant in the room is extreme income inequality.
How big is this elephant? A staggering $50 trillion. That is how much the upward redistribution
of income has cost American workers over the past several decades." Economics as a zero sum
game in other words
By Arthur Allen, editor for California Healthline, joined Kaiser Health News in April
2020 after six years at Politico, where he created, edited and wrote for the first health
IT-focused news team. Previously, he was a freelance writer for publications such as The New
York Times, The Washington Post, Smithsonian, Lingua Franca magazine, The New Republic, Slate
and Salon. Earlier in his career, he worked for The Associated Press for 13 years, including
stints as a correspondent based in El Salvador, Mexico and Germany. He is the author of the
books "V
Kaiser Health News. accine: The Controversial Story of Medicine's Greatest Lifesaver" (W.W.
Norton, 2007); "Ripe: The Search for the Perfect Tomato" (Counterpoint Press, 2010) and "The
Fantastic Laboratory of Dr. Weigl" (W.W. Norton, 2014). Originally published at Kaiser Health
News
Kaiser Health News .
When he started researching a troublesome childhood infection nearly four decades ago,
virologist Dr. Barney Graham , then at
Vanderbilt University, had no inkling his federally funded work might be key to deliverance
from a global pandemic.
Yet nearly all the vaccines advancing toward possible FDA approval this fall or winter are
based on a design developed by Graham and his colleagues, a concept that emerged from a
scientific quest to understand a disastrous 1966 vaccine trial.
Basic research conducted by Graham and others at the National Institutes of Health, Defense
Department and federally funded academic laboratories has been the essential ingredient in the
rapid development of vaccines in response to COVID-19. The government has poured an additional
$10.5 billion into vaccine companies since the pandemic began to accelerate the delivery of
their products.
The Moderna vaccine, whose remarkable effectiveness in a late-stage trial was announced
Monday morning, emerged directly out of a partnership between Moderna and Graham's NIH
laboratory.
Coronavirus vaccines are likely to be worth billions to the drug industry if they prove safe
and effective. As many as 14 billion vaccines would be required to immunize everyone in the
world against COVID-19. If, as many scientists anticipate, vaccine-produced immunity wanes,
billions more doses could be sold as booster shots in years to come. And the technology and
production laboratories seeded with the help of all this federal largesse could give rise to
other profitable vaccines and drugs.
The vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna, which are likely to be the first to win FDA
approval, in particular rely heavily on two fundamental discoveries that emerged from federally
funded research: the viral protein designed by Graham and his colleagues, and the concept of
RNA modification, first developed by Drew Weissman and
Katalin Karikó at the University of Pennsylvania. In fact, Moderna's founders in
2010 named the company after this concept: "Modified" + "RNA" = Moderna, according to
co-founder Robert Langer .
"This is the people's vaccine," said corporate critic Peter Maybarduk, director of Public
Citizen's Access to Medicines program. "Federal scientists helped invent it and taxpayers are
funding its development. It should belong to humanity."
Moderna, through spokesperson Ray Jordan, acknowledged its partnership with NIH throughout
the COVID-19 development process and earlier. Pfizer spokesperson Jerica Pitts noted the
company had not received development and manufacturing support from the U.S. government, unlike
Moderna and other companies.
The idea of creating a vaccine with messenger RNA, or mRNA -- the substance that converts
DNA into proteins -- goes back decades. Early efforts to create mRNA vaccines failed, however,
because the raw RNA was destroyed before it could generate the desired response. Our innate
immune systems evolved to kill RNA strands because that's what many viruses are.
Karikó came up with the idea of modifying the elements of RNA to enable it to slip
past the immune system undetected. The modifications she and Weissman developed allowed RNA to
become a promising delivery system for both vaccines and drugs. To be sure, their work was
enhanced by scientists at Moderna, BioNTech and other laboratories over the past decade.
Another key element in the mRNA vaccine is the lipid nanoparticle -- a tiny, ingeniously
designed bit of fat that encloses the RNA in a sort of invisibility cloak, ferrying it safely
through the blood and into cells and then dissolving, thereby allowing the RNA to do its work
of coding a protein that will serve as the vaccine's main active ingredient. The idea of
enclosing drugs or vaccines in lipid nanoparticles arose first in the 1960s and was developed
by Langer and others at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and various academic and
industry laboratories.
Karikó began investigating RNA in 1978 in her native Hungary and wrote her first NIH
grant proposal to use mRNA as a therapeutic in 1989. She and Weissman achieved successes
starting in 2004, but the path to recognition was often discouraging.
"I keep writing and doing experiments, things are getting better and better, but I never get
any money for the work," she recalled in an interview. "The critics said it will never be a
drug. When I did these discoveries, my salary was lower than the technicians working next to
me."
Eventually, the University of Pennsylvania sublicensed the patent to Cellscript, a biotech
company in Wisconsin, much to the dismay of Weissman and Karikó, who had started their
own company to try to commercialize the discovery. Moderna and BioNTech later would each pay
$75 million to Cellscript for the RNA modification patent, Karikó said. Though unhappy
with her treatment at Penn, she remained there until 2013 -- partly because her daughter, Susan
Francia, was making a name for herself on the school's rowing team. Francia would go on to win
two Olympic gold medals in the sport. Karikó is now a senior officer at BioNTech.
In addition to RNA modification and the lipid nanoparticle, the third key contribution to
the mRNA vaccines -- as well as those made by Novavax, Sanofi and Johnson & Johnson -- - is
the bioengineered protein
developed by Graham and his collaborators . It has proved in tests so far to elicit an
immune response that could prevent the virus from causing infections and disease.
The protein design was based on the observation that so-called fusion proteins -- the pieces
of the virus that enable it to invade a cell -- are shape-shifters, presenting different
surfaces to the immune system after the virus fuses with and infects cells. Graham and his
colleagues learned that antibodies against the post-fusion protein are far less effective at
stopping an infection.
The discovery arose in part through Graham's studies of a 54-year-old tragedy -- the failed
1966 trial of an NIH vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV. In a clinical trial,
not only did that vaccine fail to protect against the common childhood disease, but most of the
21 children who received it were hospitalized
with acute allergic reactions, and two died .
About a decade ago, Graham, now deputy director of NIH's Vaccine Research Center, took a new
stab at the RSV problem with a postdoctoral fellow, Jason McLellan. After isolating and
obtaining three-dimensional models of the RSV's fusion protein, they worked with Chinese
scientists to identify an appropriate neutralizing antibody against it.
"We were sitting in Xiamen, China, when Jason got the first image up on his laptop, and I
was like, oh my God, it's coming together," Graham recalled. The prefusion antibodies they
discovered were 16 times more potent than the post-fusion form contained in the faulty 1960s
vaccine.
Two 2013 papers the team published in Science earned them a runner-up
prize in the prestigious journal's Breakthrough of the Year award. Their papers, which
showed it was possible to plan and create a vaccine at the microscopic structural level, set
the NIH's Vaccine Research Center on a path toward creating a generalizable, rapid way to
design vaccines against emerging pandemic viruses, Graham said.
In 2016, Graham, McLellan and other scientists, including Andrew Ward at the Scripps
Research Institute, advanced their concept further by publishing the prefusion structure
of a coronavirus that causes the common cold and a patent was filed for its design by NIH,
Scripps and Dartmouth -- where McLellan had set up his own lab. NIH and the University of Texas
-- where McLellan now works -- filed an additional patent this year for a
similar design change in the virus that causes COVID-19.
Graham's NIH lab, meanwhile, had started working with Moderna in 2017 to design a rapid
manufacturing system for vaccines. In January, they were preparing a demonstration project, a
clinical trial to test whether Graham's protein design and Moderna's mRNA platform could be
used to create a vaccine against Nipah, a deadly virus spread by bats in Asia.
Their plans changed rapidly when they learned on Jan. 7 that the epidemic of respiratory
disease in China was being caused by a coronavirus.
"We agreed immediately that the demonstration project would focus on this virus" instead of
Nipah, Graham said. Moderna produced a vaccine within six weeks. The first patient was
vaccinated in an NIH-led clinical study on March 16; early results from Moderna's
30,000-volunteer late-stage trial showed it was nearly 95% effective at preventing
COVID-19.
Although other scientists have advanced proposals for what may be even more potent vaccine antigens ,
Graham is confident that carefully designed vaccines using nucleic acids like RNA reflect the
future of new vaccines. Already, two major drug companies are doing advanced clinical trials
for RSV vaccines based on the designs his lab discovered, he said.
In a larger sense, the pandemic could be the event that paves the way for better, perhaps
cheaper and more plentiful vaccines.
"It's a silver lining, but I think we are definitely pushing forward the way everyone is
thinking about vaccines," said Michael Farzan , chair of the department of
immunology and microbiology at Scripps Research's Florida campus. "Certain techniques that have
been waiting in the wings, under development but never achieving the kind of funding they
needed for major tests, will finally get their chance to shine."
Under a 1980
law, the NIH will obtain no money from the coronavirus vaccine patent. How much money will
eventually go to the discoverers or their institutions isn't clear. Any existing licensing
agreements haven't been publicized; patent disputes among some of the companies will likely
last years. HHS' big contracts with the vaccine companies are not transparent, and Freedom of
Information Act requests have been slow-walked and heavily redacted, said Duke University law
professor Arti Rai.
Some basic scientists involved in the enterprise seem to accept the potentially lopsided
financial rewards.
"Having public-private partnerships is how things get done," Graham said. "During this
crisis, everything is focused on how can we do the best we can as fast as we can for the public
health. All this other stuff is going to have to be figured out later."
"It's not a good look to become extremely wealthy off a pandemic," McLellan said, noting the
big stock sales by
some vaccine company executives after they received hundreds of millions of dollars in
government assistance. Still, "the companies should be able to make some money."
For Graham, the lesson of the coronavirus vaccine response is that a few billion dollars a
year spent on additional basic research could prevent a thousand times as much loss in death,
illness and economic destruction.
"Basic research informs what we do, and planning and preparedness can make such a difference
in how we get ahead of these epidemics," he said.
I appreciate the recent re-look at the nexus of public investment funding private profit
in the pharma space. I'm not old enough to recall how things were done prior to the 1980s
with regards to promising academic discoveries getting commercialized in the United States.
There is also a glaring omission here in that there are mechanisms for the Federal Government
to take control of patents and price fix in an emergency, but it's clear that was never going
to happen and was never whispered in the lead up to operation Warp Speed. Pfizer keeps
pointing out they never took government money, which is a set up for them to set the price at
whatever they want while executives line their pockets.
The second point, that is not a focus of the article, is that these technologies are still
completely unproven. I am optimistic about the early results, though would feel better if
they were published in quality journals and not press releases. We simply don't know anything
about long term affects of dosing with this technology. These articles make it sound like
we're out of the woods and these vaccines are here to stay, but what if there are high
percentages of people that get major side effects? We still have no idea.
I was just thinking about that this morning. I thought about the little boy who cried
wolf. If Don had not tarnished his (??where-with-all??) by not leading. He still be the
Prez.
I applaud you for standing with power of your convictions. Not many have the integrity to
do so. This is meant sincerely.
On the other hand I think Larry has a point. Hopefully his and my concerns will prove to
be unfounded. I believe it is too soon to tell. Your question about the quantification of
risk is a fair question and is difficult for the layman judge.
I share the concerns that have been and are voiced here. Still, there is a class aspect to
it all. It seems as if this war is like every other war; the poors are sent in first. There
are many, perhaps the majority of volunteers, that need the couple of hundred bucks the
pharmas are offering the participants. They are the same people that line up to sell their
blood plasma every week. Big business, that. So, I woke up, looked in the mirror, and told
the old man there to "Suck it up, Buttercup."
And Lambert and others are right when they say our leaders should be first in line to roll
up their sleeves. Just don't forget the many that have already done so.
It was a revelation to me that RNA vaccines had been in the works since the 60s. That
makes me a little more in-favor of them. It is still frightening that this vaccine will be
mandated for all medical personnel before the rest of the population. Also interesting that
RNA gets greased up to slip past the enzymes(?) that destroy errant RNA I'm still trying to
think how that might not be such a good thing. But you are right – it looks like it
works. Extremely well in fact. But a timeline to prove it is safe? I'd say one or two
generations. If this mRNA slips past the mechanisms to protect the cell from foreign RNA then
it could hang around long enough to communicate itself back to the genetic DNA – it's
just that they don't quite know how that process works yet. And that's scary as hell.
(Lamarck's Signature). I'd say maybe we should not give this vaccine to anyone under the age
of 35 until we know more about possible negatives involving inheritance. Instead we should
produce good medicines to treat these infections.
Yes, we need volunteers. And they need to be fully informed. I hope you noticed this
remark in yesterday's Water Cooler. Of course, we don't know that the commentor's claimed
bona fides are factual, but if so, his/her take seems appropriate to me.
The publications and a full accounting of side effects are important for a new technology
like this. Traditional vaccinations are in the billions of doses at this point and quite
safe. For this new technology, it's quite hard to say. The publications might bowl me over
and convince me, but press releases do not.
It should be noted that, so far, we have proof of effectiveness in the form of press
releases that are intended to goose stock prices.
Long story, but the neoliberalization of basic biomedical science is complete. This was
foreseeable upon passage of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. I remember how such science was done
way back then. Scientists did science. Those without the patience and essentially
self-abnegation required for that, went to work at Ciba-Geigy or Burroughs-Welcome or Merck.
The system worked, more or less. At the time I was a very junior lab member, and I told my
labmates that Bayh-Dole meant only that we would pay for most science (at least) twice, the
first time when NIH/NSF/ACS/AHA/March of Dimes funded it and the second time when Big Pharma
"bought" it and charged what a false, not free, market in research and health care would
bear. They just stared at me, with stars in their eyes.
Dolly Parton is a great songwriter and performer but is also a shrewd businesswoman who is
hyper-focused on helping "her people" in the region where she grew up dirt poor. "Coat of
Many Colors" is one of the truly great autobiographical songs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_Many_Colors_(song)
1.So if there were to be no vaccine and the virus had it's way with us, killing 1% of us,
that's what, -- 3 million souls?
2. Alternatively, if there is a vaccine and everyone is vaccinated and that brings an end
to the pandemic, with deaths much curtailed, but 25,000 get Guillian Barre', that's still a
win right?
(Though not if you are one of the 25,000.)
3. Lastly, given their penchant for maximizing clicks and eyeballs,
how do you think the media would handle situations 1 or 2?
Trust in Public Health is easier to knock down than to build back up, especially
vaccines.
As Greg Brown says, "It's a long way up but it's a short way down."
South Dakota will be very informative on this front. It appears to be trying to drag-race
herd immunity through infection before a vaccine shows up. It will probably be the control
group for the statistical study of the relative efficacy on lives saved by a vaccine vs.
letting the disease take its natural course. Beer appears to be the placebo vaccine of choice
in South Dakota.
My reading of this is that even if Pfizer didn't take government money as part of the Warp
Speed initiative, as a mRNA vaccine it still likely builds on the earlier work. I have no
problem with pharma companies making a profit of their later work – they did do the
last critical developments – but nothing for the earlier work isn't right.
We pay for it but they profit from it. Why? Why is there for profit pharma and corporate
medicine to begin with? Why is there competition instead of cooperation in the production of
life saving/extending and other commonly needed goods and services? The provision of
pharmaceuticals and medicine are a free market failure. We are not adequately provided with
what we all must have at prices we all can afford. They've failed not because of the
scientists and medical practitioners who do the real work. They've failed because of the
capitalist parasites that own the corporations that employ the professionals who create the
products and provide the services on the ground.
One thought unsupported by any relevant technical expertise: the delivery mechanism sounds
well suited for bio weaponry given it bypasses your immune reaction to RNA.
The protein design was based on the observation that so-called fusion proteins -- the
pieces of the virus that enable it to invade a cell -- are shape-shifters, presenting
different surfaces to the immune system after the virus fuses with and infects cells. Graham
and his colleagues learned that antibodies against the post-fusion protein are far less
effective at stopping an infection.
Reminds me of this other mysterious shape-shifter: From Wikipedia:
Prions are misfolded proteins with the ability to transmit their misfolded shape onto normal
variants of the same protein. They characterize several fatal and transmissible
neurodegenerative diseases in humans and many other animals. It is not known what causes the
normal protein to misfold, but the abnormal three-dimensional structure is suspected of
conferring infectious properties, collapsing nearby protein molecules into the same shape.
The word prion derives from "proteinaceous infectious particle".
Long-term follow-up of individuals who have received this vaccine versus their placebo
compatriots is essential!
Not likely to be similar. The "shape shifting" of the viral fusion protein means that
different epitopes (i.e., different constellations of 3-D structure that elicit
immune/antibody responses) of the fusion protein, which is embedded in the viral membrane
envelope, are presented pre- and post-fusion. Antibodies against "post-fusion" fusion protein
are unlikely to work because fusion with the host cell is the key phase of infection. But,
and this is a big consideration, rushing into this is foolish, despite the rise in Big Pharma
stock prices.
COVID vaccine revelation sinks like a stone; disappears
In major media, certain stories gain traction. The trumpets keep blaring for a time before
they fade.
Other stories are one-offs. A few of them strike hard. Their implications -- if anyone
stops to think about them -- are powerful. Then nothing.
"Wait, aren't you going to follow up on that? Don't you see what that MEANS?"
Apparently not, because dead silence. "In other news, the governor lost his pet parakeet
for an hour. His chief of staff found it taking a nap in a desk drawer "
One-offs function like teasers. You definitely want to know more, but you never get
more.
Over the years, I've tried to follow up on a few. The reporter or the editor has a set of
standard replies: "We didn't get much feedback." "We covered it." "It's now old news." "There
wasn't anything else to find out."
Oh, but there WAS.
A few weeks ago, I ran a one-off. The analysis and commentary were mine, but the story was
an opinion piece in the New York Times. The Times called it an opinion piece to soften its
blow. I suspected it would disappear, and it did.
Its meaning and implication were too strong. It would be a vast embarrassment for the
White House, the Warp Speed COVID vaccine program, the vaccine manufacturers, the coronavirus
task force, and vaccine researchers.
And embarrassment would be just the beginning of their problem.
So here it is again. The vanished one-off, back in business:
COVID vaccine clinical trials doomed to fail; fatal design flaw; NY Times opinion piece
exposes all three major clinical trials.
Peter Doshi, associate editor of the medical journal BMJ, and Eric Topol, Scripps Research
professor of molecular medicine, have written a devastating NY Times opinion piece about the
ongoing COVID vaccine clinical trials.
They expose the fatal flaw in the large Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna trials.
September 22, the Times: "These Coronavirus Trials Don't Answer the One Question We Need
to Know"
"If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew
protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its
serious complications?"
"The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases."
"But that's not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine
candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the
problem."
"According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a
vaccine could meet the companies' benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild
Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk
of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death."
"To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting
seriously sick. That's not what these trials will determine."
This means these clinical trials are dead in the water.
The trials are designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which
nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm.
THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.
There. That's the NY Times one-off. My piece analyzing it went on much longer, but you get
the main thrust:
The leading vaccine clinical trials are useless, irrelevant, misleading, and
deceptive.
But now, it gets much worse. Because Pfizer has just announced their vaccine is almost
ready. CNBC headline, November 9: "Pfizer, BioNTech say Covid vaccine is more than 90%
effective -- 'great day for science and humanity'"
And not a peep about the NY Times one-off. That's gone, as if it never was.
Trump's coronavirus task force knows the truth. Biden's new task force, waiting in the
wings, knows the truth. But they don't care. They're criminals. They'd sell a car with a gas
tank ready to explode to a customer with cash.
But you care, because you can read and think.
You can raise hell.
Now, in case anyone is interested in knowing WHY the major clinical trials of the COVID
vaccine are designed only to prevent mild cases of COVID, I'll explain.
A vaccine maker assumes that, during the course of the clinical trial, a few of the 30,000
volunteers are going to "catch COVID-19."
They assume this because "the virus is everywhere," as far as they're concerned. So it'll
drop down from the clouds and infect a few of the volunteers.
The magic number is 150. When that number of volunteers "catch COVID," everything stops.
The clinical trial stops.
At this point, the vaccine maker hopes that most of the volunteers who "got infected" are
in the placebo group. They didn't receive the real vaccine; they received the saltwater
placebo shot.
Then the vaccine maker can proudly say, "See? The volunteers who caught COVID-19? Most of
them didn't receive the vaccine. They weren't protected. The volunteers who received the real
vaccine didn't catch COVID. The vaccine protected them."
Actually, the number split the vaccine makers are looking for is 50 and 100. If 50 people
in the vaccine group catch COVID, and 100 in the placebo group catch COVID, the vaccine is
said to be 50% effective. And that's all the vaccine maker needs to win FDA approval for the
vaccine.
But wait. Let's look closer at this idea of "catching COVID." What are they really talking
about? How do they define that? Claiming a volunteer in the clinical trial caught COVID adds
up to what?
Does it add up to a minimal definition of COVID-19 -- a cough, or chills and fever? Or
does it mean a serious case -- severe pneumonia?
Now we come to the hidden factor, the secret, the source of the whole con game.
You see, the vaccine maker starts out with 30,000 HEALTHY volunteers. So, if they waited
for 150 of them to come down with severe pneumonia, a serious case of COVID, how long do you
think that would take? Five years? Ten years?
The vaccine maker can't possibly wait that long.
These 150 COVID cases the vaccine maker is looking for would be mild. Just a cough. Or
chills and fever. That scenario would only take a few months to develop. And face it, chills,
cough, and fever aren't unique to COVID. Anyone can come down with those symptoms.
THEREFORE, THE WHOLE CLINICAL TRIAL IS DESIGNED, UP FRONT, TO FIND 150 CASES OF MILD AND
MEANINGLESS AND SELF-CURING "COVID."
About which, no one cares. No one should care.
But, as we see, Pfizer is trumpeting their clinical trial of the vaccine as a landmark in
human history.
And THAT'S the story of the one-off the NY Times didn't think was worth a second
glance.
Because they're so stupid? No. They're not that stupid.
They're criminals.
And the government wants you to take the experimental COVID vaccine, whose "effectiveness"
was designed to prevent nothing worth losing a night's sleep over.
The only worry are the adverse effects of the vaccine, about which I've written
extensively. These effects include, depending on what's in the vial, a permanent alteration
of your genetic makeup, or an auto-immune cascade, in which the body attacks itself.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that the coronavirus pandemic could lead to a
global economic collapse that would have a significant impact on the lives of millions of
people across the world.
Speaking at the virtual G20 summit of international leaders on Saturday, Putin warned that,
"despite some positive signals, the main risk is still the so-called stagnant mass
unemployment with a subsequent increase in poverty and social disorder."
"The coronavirus epidemic, the global lockdown and the freezing of economic activity
launched a systemic economic crisis, which the modern world has not known since the Great
Depression," he added.
Putin also lavished praise on the "massive contribution" of the US, which, along with
other countries, has joined together to "create a stimulus package for the world economy to
the tune of $12 trillion." Mainly put forward by large economies, including Russia's, the
stimulus is thought to have played a role in buoying fragile world markets.
"... And, objectively, how is the neoliberal model doing? For starters, there is so much money around that doesn't know what to do with itself, that the price of money (interest rates) has never been lower. Ever. Basic supply and demand. ..."
We really need to accept that we may not know what we think we know. For 40 years, we've all
been bleating the mantras of neoliberalism which were promoted as The Natural Order of Things,
but are in fact just a model, one of many.
And, objectively, how is the neoliberal model doing? For starters, there is so much money
around that doesn't know what to do with itself, that the price of money (interest rates) has
never been lower. Ever. Basic supply and demand.
At the same time, neoliberal governments, citing lack of money, have imposed austerity
measures on the working class, cutting services and support to such an extent that serious
social problems have arisen.
The reason the governments are short of cash is because they have continually reduced the
share of GDP that goes into public coffers.
Blind Freddy can see the resultant inequality is a highly undesirable state of affairs,
generating social unrest and unstable markets. Bizarrely, it is also contrary to the most basic
of economic truisms: give poor people money and they spend it right away, generating a ripple
of economic activity that reverberates through the real economy.
But according to neoliberalism, what we have here is perfectly fine because it accords
with the model. And then the High Priests move in and blow smoke over the whole thing with
incantations of why this must be so, again according to the model, which they themselves drew
up to coordinate the way we do things. And of course, they believe their economic theory is the
Natural Order of Things.
The pandemic has blown the lid off a few of those mantras. It'll take fifty years to
decarbonise? We advanced decades in a few weeks. There is no magic money tree? Yes, there is
and you just used it. Giving poor people money undermines the economy? No, it doesn't –
you've just proved it. Government debt is a drain on the economy? Not if it stimulates
activity. Tax is an expense that needs to be curtailed? No, it's an investment in the economy
for everyone.
There are so many things we think we know and many of them are nonsense. We need to take the
opportunity this disruption presents and design a society for humans, not for corporations.
"... A staggering 9.2 million jobs could be lost in the U.S. Travel & Tourism sector in 2020 if barriers to global travel remain in place, the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) revealed. ..."
A staggering 9.2 million jobs could be lost in the U.S. Travel & Tourism sector in
2020 if barriers to global travel remain in place, the World Travel & Tourism Council
(WTTC) revealed.
The new figure comes from WTTC's latest economic modelling, which looks at the punishing
impact of COVID-19 and travel restrictions on the Travel & Tourism sector.
According to the latest data, 7.2 million jobs in the U.S. have been impacted. If there is
no immediate alleviation of restrictions on international travel, as many as 9.2 million jobs
– more than half of all jobs supported by the sector in the U.S. in 2019 – would be
lost.
WTTC has identified the four top priorities which should be addressed, including the
adoption of a comprehensive and cost-effective testing regime at departure to avoid
transmission, the re-opening of key 'air corridors' such as between New York and London, and
international coordination.
The challenge of restoring safe travels in the new normal is one of the biggest issues
facing the U.S. as it grapples with a depressed economy devastated by the COVID-19 pandemic,
which has hit the Travel & Tourism sector particularly hard.
The WTTC Economic Impact Report for 2019 revealed that Travel & Tourism contributed
$1.84 trillion to the U.S. economy and was responsible for more than one in 10 (10.7%) American
jobs.
@zanon: "Actually economy is doing better than expected. Even though Covid will contintue
to be a threat against economic growth.
"U.S. GDP booms at 33.1% rate in Q3, better than expected"
LMAO. I guess you also think the stock market is an economic indicator that reflects the
well-being of normal people.
And yeah, if you pump $4,000,000,000,000 into a bunch of corporations and the ludicrous
stock market casino, the "economy" of any country will "do better".
If Greece during it's financial crisis had $4 trillion to spare and gave it all to their
oligarchs and robber barons, would Greece's "economy" mean the country was doing great? Give
me a break.
No matter the outcome, the fact that this election is so close is a clear indicator that
Americans aren't connecting material conditions on the ground -- a depression, pandemic,
low wages, etc -- to the consequences of politics. Which is an abject, disgusting failure
of Democrats.
We can observe the American economy has declined since 1980 relatively - but not by much.
It was China that skyrocketed.
This is why the political polarization in the USA right now is being fought mainly on
moral/ideological grounds. The American people still thinks it has sufficient time and
resources to first fight among itself (put the proverbial traun back on its tracks) - only to
then subjugate the rest of world (like it did in 1946 and 1992).
The Americans are still rationalizing in moral-ethic-ideological terms because their
economy stagnated and is degrading - but not collapsing. This still gives them a material
base to fuel their pride.
But pay attention: those data are in USD terms. Its industry was what declined the most in
the linked fact sheet above. Before the War of Secession, the South was richer in USD terms
than the North - but war quickly revealed most of the South's "GDP" was financialization
(speculation over the slaves' prices).
Again Ferdinand Pecora harking back to the 1930's as discussed in the past weeks
commentaries:-
Wilmarth's writing is so insightful and profound in its analysis of the similarities
between the banks of the late 1920s and today that it feels like the ghost of Ferdinand
Pecora might have been whispering in Wilmarth's ear. Pecora was a former prosecutor from
New York who was chosen to preside over much of the early 1930s Senate Banking hearings and
investigations of the corrupt Wall Street structure that led to the 1929 crash and Great
Depression.
Three banking names that played significant roles in the crash of 1929 and the
ensuing Great Depression were National City Bank, JP Morgan, and Chase National Bank.
National City Bank was the precursor to today's Citigroup, the bank that would have
collapsed in 2008 except for the largest taxpayer and Federal Reserve bailout in global
banking history. JPMorgan and Chase combined in 2000 to create today's JPMorgan
Chase.
In reality only passenger feet and commercial aviation consumption are highly elastic. Other
pasts oil consumption, including consumption by military and commercial tracking are much less
elastic.
And Amazon consumption partially compesates for drop is passenger car traffic :-)
In general oil consumption is a proxy of economic activity. As economic activity is resorting
the same will happen with oil consumption.
Thirty-five percent: this is the size of the spending cuts oil and gas companies are likely
to have made this year in response to the effects that the coronavirus pandemic is having on
demand, according to the International Energy Agency. And this is just the spending slump in
upstream oil and gas. This is just part of a wider trend of investment cuts in the energy
industry, according to the IEA, which earlier this month published an update of its World
Energy Investment report, first released in late spring.
At the time, some thought we were seeing the worst of the pandemic. They were, apparently,
wrong.
Demand for oil has certainly improved in some parts of the world, notably in Asia, where
governments have been more successful in containing the spread of the coronavirus than their
counterparts in Europe and North and South America. But even in China – the world's oil
demand recovery driver –the rebound is slowing down. After all, even though its domestic
demand may be improving, if regional and global demand is stalling, this will have a negative
effect on China as well.
According to the IEA, the impact that the pandemic is having on investments in the oil
industry will continue to be felt for years to come. This is hardly surprising: the agency
noted a 45-percent cut in investments by US shale oil companies this year, combined with a
50-percent jump in financing costs .
The number of active drilling rigs in the US may be rising, suggesting the beginning of a
recovery, but the total was still down 564 rigs on the year as of last week, so that recovery
will take a while.
Meanwhile, fuel stock updates from the Energy Information Administration are offering mixed
signals: last week, for instance, saw a major drawdown in distillate fuel stocks, which should
be good news suggesting demand for distillates is improving. The problem is that it is likely
that this improvement is a temporary occurrence rather than a trend. Air travel is still
greatly constrained, and the chances of any change in the status quo are slim.
Uncertainty: this is the keyword for not just the oil industry but for all others affected
by the pandemic to such a grave extent as to force changes in business models. Europe's Big Oil
majors are doing just that with their push into renewables and plan to greatly reduce the
contribution of their core business to overall earnings. USmajors are sticking with oil, and
they may well have a good reason to do it.
There has been a lot of government and activist talk about a green recovery from the
pandemic crisis. But the pandemic is still raging, and not only is it not abating, but it is
gathering strength. This would mean more money needed for stimulus measures. This, in turn,
would mean less money to spend on renewables, because despite the celebrated cost declines in
solar and wind, financial and regulatory support from governments remains essential for their
increased deployment.
The future remains marred in uncertainty that extends to the possibility of a rebound in oil
investments. According to some, such as BP, we are already past peak oil demand, so that would
mean less investment in oil production growth globally. Others, such as OPEC producers, hope
things will sooner or later return to normal, and the world's appetite for more oil will
continue to grow for at least a few more years before plateauing. And yet even OPEC is
preparing for a worst-case scenario.
The extended cartel OPEC+ is considering a delay in the next relaxation of oil production
cuts, from January 2021 to April, in response to the latest trends in Covid-19 infections. One
thing seems relatively clear, however. The longer the surge in new infections continues, the
longer it would take the industry to return on the path of recovery and growth.
Yeah .and how many of those deaths were from the complete mismanagement of the sick elderly
ie throwing them back into nursing homes. American facilities for many of our poorer, middle
class elderly are disgusting places of squalor and nosocomial infections. How many were among
elderly that were already on death's door step? This scamdemic has destroyed this country. If
there is one demographic in this country that should burning it to the ground it's young, white
20 something conservative males who are seeing their future destroyed before their eyes. Seeing
Americans walking around with what amounts to respiratory diapers on their face is disgusting,
pathetic and embarrassing. The elderly, who for the most part have overall lived the peak
American dream, are living in hysteria and fear. The boomers in America are confirmed now as
some of the most selfish, self absorbed, and enfranchised generations ever. To blame the covid
deaths on Trump is the most stupid and intellectually dishonest argument in this whole election
narrative. Dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery you want to wear a worthless diaper on your
face fine .don't force tyranny on the rest of us!
Although many details about the Great Reset won't be rolled out until the World
Economic Forum meets in Davos in January 2021, the general principles of the plan are clear:
The world needs massive new government programs and far-reaching policies comparable to those
offered by American socialists such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Rep. Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) in their Green New Deal plan.
Or, put another way, we need a form of socialism - a word the World Economic Forum has
deliberately avoided using, all while calling for countless socialist and progressive
plans.
"We need to design policies to align with investment in people and the environment,"
said the general secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, Sharan Burrow.
"But above all, the longer-term perspective is about rebalancing economies."
In a note which we are confident will go swimmingly with millions of Americans who lost
their jobs in the past six months, Goldman's economics team writes that "scarring effect" from
the pandemic recession has been "surprisingly limited" and the "damage has so far been much
less than initially feared" in what is likely the most upbeat take on the current economy and
one wonders if it involved any research outside of Tribeca.
After saying tthat the early weeks of the virus shock the Goldman economists "began to
closely track measures of long-term damage to businesses and the labor force" with many
businesses facing near-total collapses in revenue and 25 million jobs lost in little over a
month, "the threat of deep scarring effects loomed over the US economy." Instead, things have
been far better than expected.
Looking at the business sector first, Jan Hatzius and team write that the "scarring effects
on the business sector remain surprisingly limited" as commercial bankruptcy filings have run
below the pre-pandemic trend, most business closures during the worst months of the pandemic
have proved temporary, and new business formation has surged recently.
A similar cheerful conclusion emerges when Goldman looks at the labor force, with the
Goldman economists writing that "scarring effects on the labor force have also been less severe
than feared" , as unemployment has fallen sharply, "and most of the remaining job losers are
either still on temporary layoff or are in industries that should largely recover with a
vaccine." In addition, Goldman observes, "labor demand has rebounded much more quickly than
last cycle, reducing the risk of widespread long-term unemployment."
Ludicrous? Insane? Hilarious? Perhaps all three, yet here are some of the data Goldman used
to reach its arguably offensive to tens of millions of Americans conclusion:
The left side of Exhibit 1 shows that total commercial bankruptcy filings reported by the
American Bankruptcy Institute have actually run below the pre-pandemic trend. While a recent
San Francisco Fed report
noted with alarm that Chapter 11 bankruptcies are running at the fastest pace since 2013,
this largely reflects recent changes to the bankruptcy code and it has been more than offset
by declines in other commercial bankruptcy filings.
The right side of Exhibit 1 shows that Bloomberg's count of bankruptcies at large
companies did briefly spike to a level that approached the financial crisis peak. But as our
credit strategists have shown, the majority of these were firms already on a path to default
before the pandemic, not otherwise healthy businesses needlessly sunk by an unprecedented
shock.
In other words, Goldman contends that while there was a spike in defaults, it was largely
among those companies that were already levered to the hilt and would have filed anyway. The
covid crisis merely accelerated their demise, which come to thing of it, is what the covid
virus is also doing with most of the elderly people it affects and who die not so much from the
virus as due to other underlying, chronic or acute conditions, whose impact is merely
accentuated to the point of lethality by covid.
What about Goldman's optimistic take on the labor market?
Here the economists argue that the silver lining of the employment collapse was the very
high share of temporary layoffs shown in Exhibit 3, historically something which they say is "a
reliable signal of rapid recovery" even as those permanently laid off is an dangerously high
number, the highest since 2013, Goldman's spin notwithstanding.
To elucidate their point, Goldman next claims that just five months later, the number of
newly unemployed workers since the virus shock has indeed declined dramatically, and about half
still report that they are on temporary layoff. While not all of these workers will return to
their old positions, this nevertheless points to further outsized job gains in coming
months.
Here Bank of America disagrees, and lays out three cyclical forces today that spell out far
greater pain for the labor force than GOldman is willing to admit, to wit:
History repeats: skill mismatch yet again. Given the lack of demand for services-travel,
entertainment, etc.-there will likely end up being discouraged workers in this sector. The
skills are not easily transferrable to other sectors-particularly on the goods side of the
economy where demand has been resilient.
Disengagement from the labor force due to health or childcare: the threat of the virus
has left many people with extremely difficult decisions to make. Some may decide that the
risk of falling sick with COVID in their workplace is too significant and thus will
voluntarily leave the workforce, particularly for those who are close to retirement. Parents
also struggle with child-care issues-it may be hard for parents to fully return to work until
they are able to feel confident that their children can return to prior educational
arrangements or daycare. This could make it difficult to have two working parents-the burden
tends to be disproportionally on women. As long as the virus remains a threat, there will be
a portion of the workforce on the sidelines.
Reengagment in the labor force because of the "telepresence revolution": over the
medium-term, the shift toward greater virtual / remote working could be a positive for the
LFPR. According to the BLS's Time-Use Survey, about 8% of the workforce worked from home at
least one day a week prior to COVID. According to research from the Atlanta Fed in which the
authors compared the Time-Use Survey results to current survey analysis, they find that the
share of working days from home is set to triple after the pandemic. Similarly, the BofA
Global Research data analytics team surveyed the companies across the research coverage for
their latest expectations on the timing for return to the office - the results show that only
80% of employees will be expected to be fully back in the office by the end of 2021.
While Goldman acknowledges this, saying that "not all workers who lost jobs in
virus-sensitive industries will return to them when a vaccine becomes available, and many
layoffs are likely to prove permanent" but then adds that "workers who have to switch jobs or
even occupations already face much better prospects for re-employment than after previous
recessions."
So it's all good, see? Well, maybe not: even Goldman had to concede that long-term
unemployment rose in September and is likely to rise somewhat further in the October jobs
report as more workers who lost their jobs in the first month of the pandemic cross the
half-year mark. But even here Goldman finds a silver lining, and writes that "the rapid
recovery of labor demand and faster pace of labor reallocation is a striking contrast with past
recessions that should help most workers avoid the very long unemployment spells seen last
cycle."
In short, there is virtually nothing about the devastation endured by businesses and workers
that Goldman's well-trained economists can't spin into a positive outcome, and as they
summarize "scarring effects on businesses and the labor force have so far proven much less
severe than initially feared."
This, they conclude, "bodes well for the economy's medium-term recovery prospects and is one
more reason for Goldman's above-consensus 2021 growth forecast." What about the withdrawal of
fiscal support which has forced Americans to draw down drastically on
their savings which were boosted by the massive fiscal stimulus ...
NEVER MISS THE
NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Surely at least that has to be positive? Well, as Hatzius agrees, it does raise some risks
over the next few months, but then the chief economist counters that "we expect a vaccine and
further fiscal support next year -- including another round of small business funding, even in
a divided government scenario -- to limit the long-term damage and keep the economy on track
for a much more rapid than usual recovery."
To this all one can say is wow : and while we certainly would urge the Goldman economists to
read something like " A
devastating experience:' Temporary layoffs just became permanent for millions of American
workers , and "
Ex-Bankruptcy Judge Says Worse Is Yet To Come ", we have two questions: just why did
Goldman publish such a puff piece - what does it stand to gain by gutting its reputation for at
least pretend-objective analysis - and question number two: has anyone on the Goldman economics
team actually stepped one foot outside their academic tri-state ivory tower in the past
year?
Before juxtaposing the U.S. and alternative responses to the corona virus's economic
effects, [1]
I would like to step back in time to show how the pandemic has revealed a deep underlying
problem. We are seeing the consequences of Western societies painting themselves into a debt
corner by their creditor-oriented philosophy of law. Neoliberal anti-government (or more
accurately, anti-democratic) ideology has centralized social planning and state power in "the
market," meaning specifically the financial market on Wall Street and in other financial
centers.
At issue is who will lose when employment and business activity are disrupted. Will it be
creditors and landlords at the top of the economic scale, or debtors and renters at the bottom?
This age-old confrontation over how to deal with the unpaid rents, mortgages and other debt
service is at the heart of today's virus pandemic as large and small businesses, farms,
restaurants and neighborhood stores have fallen into arrears, leaving businesses and households
– along with their employees who have no wage income to pay these carrying charges that
accrue each month.
This is an age-old problem. It was solved in the ancient Near East simply by annulling these
debt and rent charges. But the West, shaped as it still is by the legacy of the Roman Empire,
has left itself prone to the massive unemployment, business closedowns and resulting arrears
for these basic costs of living and doing business.
Western civilization distinguishes itself from its Near Eastern predecessors in the way it
has responded to "acts of God" that disrupt the means of support and leave debts in their wake.
The United States has taken the lead in rejecting the path by which China, and even social
democratic European nations have prevented the corona virus from causing widespread insolvency
and polarizing their economies. The U.S. corona virus lockdown is turning rent and debt arrears
into an opportunity to impoverish the indebted economy and transfer mortgaged property and its
income to creditors.
There is no inherent material need for this fate to occur. But it seems so natural and even
inevitable that, as Margaret Thatcher would say, There Is No Alternative.
But of course there is, and always has been. However, resilience in the face of economic
disruption always has required a central authority to override "market forces" to restore
economic balance from "above."
Individualistic economies cannot do that. To the extent that they have a strong state, they
are not democratic but oligarchic, controlled by the financial sector in its own interest, in
tandem with its symbiotic real estate sector and monopolized infrastructure. That is why every
successful society since the Bronze Age has been a mixed economy. The determining factor in
whether or not an economic disruption leaves a crippled economy in its wake turns out to be
whether its financial sector is a public utility or is privatized from the debt-strapped public
domain as a means to enrich bankers and money-lenders at the expense of debtors and overall
economic balance.
China is using an age-old policy common ever since Hammurabi and other Bronze Age rulers
promoted economic resilience in the face of "acts of God." Unless personal debts, rents and
taxes that cannot be paid are annulled, the result will be widespread bankruptcy,
impoverishment and homelessness. In contrast to America's financialized economy, China has
shown how natural it is for society simply to acknowledge that debts, rents, taxes and other
carrying charges of living and doing business cannot resume until economic normalcy is able to
resume.
Near Eastern protection of economic resilience in the face of Acts of God
Ancient societies had a different logic from those of modern capitalist economies. Their
logic – and the Jewish Mosaic Law of Leviticus 25, as well as classical Greek and Roman
advocates of democratic reform – was similar to modern socialism. The basic principle at
work was to subordinate market relations to the needs of society at large, not to enrich a
financial rentier class of creditors and absentee landowners. More specifically, the
basic principle was to cancel debts that could not normally be paid, and prevent creditors from
foreclosing on the land of debtors.
All economies operate on credit. In modern economies bills for basic expenses are paid
monthly or quarterly. Ancient economies operated on credit during the crop year, with payment
falling due when the harvest was in – typically on the threshing floor. This cycle
normally provided a flow of crops and corvée labor to the palace, and covered the
cultivator's spending during the crop year. Interest typically was owed only when payment was
late.
But bad harvests, military conflict or simply the normal hardships of life frequently
prevented this buildup of debt from being paid. Mesopotamian palaces had to decide who would
bear the loss when drought, flooding, infestation, disease or military attack prevented the
payment of debts, rents and taxes. Seeing that this was an unavoidable fact of life, rulers
proclaimed amnesties for taxes and these various obligations incurred during the crop year.
That saved smallholders from having to work off their debts in personal bondage to their
creditors and ultimately to lose their land.
For these palatial economies, resilience meant stabilization of fiscal revenue. Letting
private creditors (often officials in the palace's own bureaucracy) demand payment out of
future production threatened to deprive rulers of crop surpluses and other taxes, and
corvée labor or even service in the military. But for thousands of years, Near Eastern
rulers restored fiscal viability for their economies by writing down debts, not only in
emergencies but more or less regularly to relieve the normal creeping backlog of debts.
These Clean Slates extended from Sumer and Babylonia in the 3 rd millennium BC to
classical antiquity, including the neo-Assyrian, neo-Babylonian and Persian Empires. They
restored normal economic relations by rolling back the consequences of debts personal and
agrarian debts – bondage to creditors, and loss of land and its crop yield. From the
palace's point of view as tax collector and seller of many key goods and services, the
alternative would have been for debtors to owe their crops, labor and even liberty to their
creditors, not to the palace. So cancelling debts to restore normalcy was simply pragmatic, not
utopian idealism as was once thought.
The pedigree for "act-of-God" rules specifying what obligations need not be paid when
serious disruptions occur goes back to the laws of Hammurabi c. 1750 BC. Their aim was to
restore economic normalcy after major disruptions. §48 of Hammurabi's laws proclaim a debt
and tax amnesty for cultivators if Adad the Storm God has flooded their fields, or if their
crops fail as a result of pests or drought. Crops owed as rent or fiscal payments were freed
from having to be paid. So were consumer debts run up during the crop year, including tabs at
the local ale house and advances or loans from individual creditors. The ale woman likewise was
freed from having to pay for the ale she had received from palace or temples for sale during
the crop year.
Whoever leased an animal that died by an act of god was freed from liability to its owner
(§266). A typical such amnesty occurred if the lamb, ox or ass was eaten by a lion, or if
an epidemic broke out. Likewise, traveling merchants who were robbed while on commercial
business were cleared of liability if they swore an oath that they were not responsible for the
loss (§103).
It was realized that hardship was so inevitable that debts tended to accrue even under
normal conditions. Every ruler of Hammurabi's dynasty proclaimed a Clean Slate cancelling
personal agrarian debts (but left normal commercial business loans intact) upon taking the
throne, and when military or other disruptions occurred during their reign. Hammurabi did this
on four occasions. 2
Bronze Age rulers could not afford to let such bondage and concentration of property and
wealth to become chronic. Labor was the scarcest resource, so a precondition for survival was
to prevent creditors from using debt leverage to obtain the labor of debtors and appropriate
their land. Rulers therefore acted to prevent creditors from becoming a wealthy class seeking
gains by impoverishing debtors and taking crop yields and land for themselves.
By rejecting such alleviations of debts resulting from economic disruption, the U.S. economy
is subjecting itself to depression, homelessness and economic polarization. It is saving
stockholders and bondholders instead of the economy at large. That is because today's
rentier interests take the economic surplus in the form of debt service, holding labor
and also corporate industry in bondage. Mortgage debt is the price of obtaining a home of one's
own. Student debt is the price of getting an education to get a job. Automobile debt is needed
to buy a car to drive to the job, and credit-card debt must be run up to pay for living costs
beyond what one is able to earn. This deep indebtedness makes workers afraid to go on strike or
even to protect working conditions, because being fired is to lose the ability to pay debts and
rents. So the rising debt overhead serves the business and financial sector by lowering wage
levels while extracting more interest, financial fees, rent and insurance out of their
take-home pay.
Debt deflation and the transition from finance capitalism to an Austerity Economy
By injecting $10 trillion into the financial markets (when Federal Reserve credit is added
to U.S. Treasury allocation), the CARES act enabled the stock market to recover all of its 34
percent drop (as measured by the S&P 500 stocks) by June 9, even as the economy's GDP was
still plunging. The government's new money creation was not spent to revive the real economy of
production and consumption, but at least the financial One Percent was saved from loss. It was
as if prosperity and living standards would somehow return to normal in a V-shaped
recovery.
But what is "normal" these days? For 95 percent of the population, their share of GDP
already had been falling ever since the Obama Depression began with the bank bailout in 2009,
leaving an enormous bad-debt overhead in place. The economy's long upswing since World War II
was already grinding to an end as it struggled to carry its debt burden, rising housing costs,
health care and related monthly "nut." 3
This is not what was expected 75 years ago. World War II ended with families and businesses
rife with savings and with little debt, as there had been little to buy during the wartime
years. But ever since, each business cycle recovery has started with a higher ratio of debt to
income, diverting more revenue from business, households and governments to pay banks and
bondholders. This debt burden raises the economy's cost of living and doing business, while
leaving less wage income and profit to be spent on goods and services.
The virus pandemic has merely acted as a catalyst ending of the long postwar boom. Yet even
as the U.S. and other Western economies begin to buckle under their debt overhead, little
thought has been given to how to extricate them from the debts and defaults that have
accelerated as a result of the broad economic disruption.
The "business as usual" approach is to let creditors foreclose and draw all the income and
wealth over subsistence needs into their own hands. Economies have reached the point where
debts can be paid only by shrinking production and consumption, leaving them as strapped as
Greece has been since 2015. Rejecting debt writedowns to restore social balance was implanted
at the outset of modern Western civilization. Ever since Roman times it has become normal for
creditors to use social misfortune as an opportunity to gain property and income at the expense
of families falling into debt. Blocking the emergence of democratic civic regimes empowered to
protect debtors, creditor interests have promoted laws that force debtors to lose their land or
other means of livelihood to foreclosing creditors or sell it under distress conditions and
have to work off their debts.
In times of a general economic disruption, giving priority to creditor claims leads to
widespread bankruptcy. Yet it violates most peoples' ideas of fairness and distributive justice
to evict debtors from their homes and take whatever property they have if they cannot pay their
rent arrears and other charges that have accrued through no fault of their own. Bankruptcy
proceedings will force many businesses and farms to forfeit what they have invested to much
wealthier buyers. Many small businesses, especially in urban minority neighborhoods, will see
yeas of saving and investment wiped out. The lockdown also forces U.S. cities and states to
cope with plunging sales- and income-tax revenue by slashing social services and depleting
their pension funds savings to pay bondholders. Balancing their budgets by privatizing hitherto
public services will create monopoly rents and new corporate empires
These outcomes are not necessary. They also are inequitable, and instead of being a survival
of the fittest and most efficient economic solutions, they are a victory for the most
successfully predatory. Yet such results are the product of a long-pedigreed legal and
financial philosophy promoted by banks and bondholders, landlords and insurance companies
reject economy-wide debt relief. They depict writing down debts and rents owed to them as
unthinkable. Banks claim that forgiving personal and business rents would lead absentee
landlords to default on their mortgages, threatening bank solvency. Insurance companies claim
that to make their policy holders whole would bankrupt them. 4 So something has to give: either the population's broad economic interests, or
the vested interests insisting that labor, industry and the government must bear the cost of
arrears that have built up during the economic shutdown.
As in oligarchic Rome, financial interests in today's world have gained control of
governments and captured the political and regulatory agencies, leaving democratic reformers
powerless to suspend debt service, rent arrears, evictions and depression. The West is becoming
a highly centrally planned economy, but its planning center is Wall Street, not Washington or
state and local governments.
Rising real estate arrears prompt a mortgage bailout
Canada and many European governments are subsidizing businesses to pay up to 80 percent of
employee wages even though many must stay home. But for the 40 million Americans who haven't
been employed during the closedown, the prospect is for homelessness and desperation. Already
before the crisis about half of Americans reported that they were living paycheck to paycheck
and could not raise $400 in an emergency. When the paychecks stopped, rents could not be paid,
nor could other normal monthly living expenses.
America is seeing the end of the home ownership boom that endowed its middle class with
property steadily rising in price. For buyers, the price was rising mortgage debt, as bank
credit was the major factor in raising property prices. (A home is worth however much a bank
will lend against it.) For non-whites, to be sure, neighborhoods were redlined against racial
minorities. By the early 2000s, banks began to make loans to black and Hispanic buyers, but
usually at extortionately high interest rates and stiffer debt terms. America's white home
buyers now face a fate similar to that which they have long imposed on minorities:
Debt-inflated purchase prices for homes so high that they leave buyers strapped by mortgage and
compulsory insurance payments, with declining public services in their neighborhoods.
When mortgages can't be paid, foreclosures follow. That causes declines in the proportion of
Americans that own their own homes. That home ownership rate already had dropped from about 58
percent in 2008 to about 51 percent at the start of 2020. Since the 2008 mortgage-fraud crisis
and President Obama's mass foreclosure program that hit minorities and low-income buyers
especially hard, a more landlord-ridden economy has emerged as a result of foreclosed
properties and companies bought by speculators and vast absentee-owner companies like
Blackstone.
Many businesses that closed down did not pay the landlords. Realizing that if they are held
responsible for paying full rents that accrued during the shutdown, it would take them over a
year to make up the payment, leaving no net earnings for their efforts. That was especially the
case for restaurants with compulsory limited "distance" seating and other stores obliged to
restrict the density of their customers. Many restaurants and other neighborhood stores decided
to go out of business. For hotels standing largely empty, some 19 percent of mortgage loans had
fallen into arrears already by May, along with about 10 percent of retail stores. 5
The commercial real estate sector owes $2.4 trillion in mortgage debt. About 40 percent of
tenants did not pay their rents for March, April and May, from restaurants and storefronts to
large national retail markets. A moratorium on evictions put them off until August or September
2020. But in the interim, quarterly state and local property taxes were due in June, which also
was when the annual federal income-tax payment was owed for the year 2019, having been
postponed from April in the face of the shutdown.
The prospective break in the chain of payments of landlords to their banks may be bailed out
by the Federal Reserve, but nobody can come up with a scenario whereby the debts owed by
non-elites can be paid out of their own resources, any more than they were rescued from the
junk-mortgage frauds that left over-mortgaged homes (mainly for low-income victims) in the wake
of Obama's decision to support the banks and mortgage brokers instead of their victims. In
fact, it takes a radical scenario to see how state and local debt can be paid as public budgets
are thrown into limbo by the virus pandemic.
The fiscal squeeze forces governments to privatize public services and assets
Since 1945, the normal Keynesian response to an economic slowdown has been for governments
to run budget deficits to revive the economy and employment. But that can't happen in the wake
of the 2020 pandemic. For one thing, tax revenue is falling. Governments can create domestic
money, of course, but the U.S. government quickly ran up a $2 trillion deficit by June 2020
simply to support Wall Street's financial and corporate markets, leaving a fiscal squeeze when
it came to public spending into the real economy. Many U.S. states and cities have laws
obliging them to balance their budgets. So public spending into the real economy (instead of
just into the financial and corporate markets) had to be cut back.
Sales taxes from restaurants and hotels, income taxes, and property taxes from landlords not
receiving rents. U.S. states and localities are having a huge tax shortfall that is forcing
them to cut back basic social services and infrastructure. New York City mayor de Blasio has
warned that schools, the police and public transportation may have to be cut back unless the
city is given $7 billion. The CARES act passed by the Democratic Party in control of the House
of Representatives made no attempt to allocate a single dollar to make up the widening fiscal
gap. As for the Trump administration, it was unwilling to give money to states voting
Democratic in the presidential or governorship elections.
The irony is that just at the time when a pandemic calls for public health care, political
pressure for that abruptly stopped. Logically, it might have been expected the virus to have
become a major catalyst for single-payer public health care, not least to prevent a wave of
personal bankruptcy resulting from high medical bills. But hopes were dashed when the leading
torch bearer for socialized medicine, Senator Bernie Sanders, threw his support behind Joe
Biden and other opponents for the presidential nomination instead of focusing the primary
elections on what the future of the Democratic Party would be. It decided to focus the 2020
U.S. election merely on the personality of which candidate would impose neoliberal policy:
Republican Donald Trump, or his opponent running simply on a platform of "I am not Trump."
Both candidates – and indeed, both parties behind them –sought to downsize
government and privatize as much of the public sector as possible, leaving administration to
financial managers. Past government policy would have restored prosperity by public spending
programs to to rebuild the roads and bridges, trains and subways that have fallen apart. But
the fiscal squeeze caused by the economic shutdown has created pressure to Thatcherize
America's crumbling transportation and urban infrastructure – and also to sell off land
and public enterprises, basic urban health, schools – and at the national level, the post
office. Fiscal budgets are to be balanced by selling off this infrastructure, in lucrative
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) with financial firms.
The neoliberal rent-extractive plan is for private capital to buy monopoly rights to repair
the nation's bridges by turning them into toll bridges, to repair the nation's roads and
highways by making the toll roads, to repair sewer systems by privatizing them. Schools,
prisons, hospitals and other traditionally public functions. Even the police are to be
privately owned security-guard agencies and managed for profit – on terms that will
provide interest and capital gains for the financial sector. It is a New Enclosures movement
seeking monopoly rent much as landlords extract land rent.
Having given $10 trillion dollars to support financial and mortgage markets, neoliberals in
both the Republican and Democratic parties announced that the government had created so large a
budget deficit as a result of bailing out the banking and landlord class that it lacked any
more room for money creation for actual social spending programs. Republican Senate leader
Mitch McConnell advised states to solve their budget squeeze by raiding their pension funds to
pay their bondholders.
For many decades, public employees accepted low wage growth in exchange for pensions. Their
patient choice was to defer demands for wage increases in order to secure good pensions for
their retirement. But now that they have worked at stagnant wages for many years, the money
ostensibly saved for their pensions is to be given to bondholders. Likewise at the federal
level, pressure was renewed by both parties to cut back Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,
with Obama's 2010 Simpson-Bowles Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform to reduce the
deficit at the expense of retirees and the poor.
In sum, money is being created to fuel the financial sector and its stock and bond markets,
not to increase the economy's solvency, employment and living standards. The corona virus
pandemic did not create this shift, but it catalyzed and accelerated the power grab, not least
by pushing public-sector budgets into crisis.
It doesn't have to be this way
Every successful economy has been a mixed public/private economy with checks on the
financial sector's power to indebt society in ways that impoverish it. Always at issue,
however, is who will control the government. As American and European industry becomes more
debt ridden, will they be oligarchic or democratic?
A socialist government such as China's can keep its industry going simply by simply writing
down debts when they can't be paid without forcing a closedown and bankruptcy and loss of
assets and employment. The world thus has two options: a basically productive public financial
system in China, or a predatory financial system in the United States.
China can recover financially and fiscally from the virus disruption because most debts
ultimately are owned to the government-based banking system. Money can be created to finance
the material economy, labor and industry, construction and agriculture. When a company is
unable to pay its bills and rent, the government doesn't stand by and let it be closed down and
sold at a distressed price to a vulture investor.
China has an option that Western economies do not: It is in a position to do what Hammurabi
and other ancient Near Eastern palatial economies did for thousands of years: write down debts
so as to keep the economy resilient and functioning. It can suspend scheduled debt service,
taxes, rents and public fees from having to be paid by troubled areas of its economy, because
China's government is the ultimate creditor. It need not contend with politically powerful
bankers who insist that the economy at large must lose, not themselves. The government can
write down the debt to keep companies in business, and also their employees. That's what
socialist governments do.
The underlying problem is finance capitalism. Its roots lie at the heart of Western
civilization itself, rejecting the "circular time" permitting economic renewal by Clean Slates
in favor of "linear time" in which debts are permanent and irreversible, without public
oversight to manage finance and credit in the economy's overall long-term interest.
It often is easier to get rich in such times of disaster and need than in times of normal
prosperity. While the U.S. economy polarizes between creditors and debtors, the stock market
anticipates fortunes being made quickly from the insolvency of business with assets and
property to be grabbed. Coupled with the Federal Reserve's credit creation to support the
financial and real estate markets, asset prices are soaring (as of June 2020) for companies
that expect to get even richer from the widespread distress to come in autumn 2020 when
evictions and foreclosures ae scheduled to begin again.
In that respect, the corona virus's effect has been to help defeat the financial sector's
enemy, governments strong enough to regulate it. The fiscal squeeze resulting from widespread
unemployment, business closedowns, rent and tax arrears is being seized upon as a means of
dismantling and privatizing government at the federal, state and local levels, at the expense
of the citizenry at large.
Notes
[1]WHEN CHINA SNEEZES: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic
Implications, Edited by Cynthia McKinney, Chapter 9, Economic Impact.
[2]
I provide a detailed history of Clean Slate acts from the Bronze Age down through Biblical
times and the Byzantine Empire in " and forgive them their debts" (ISLET 2018).
[3]
I provide the details in Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Destroy the
Global Economy ((SLET, 2015).
[4]
Lawsuits are exploding over the role of insurance companies supposed to protect business from
such interruptions. See Julia Jacobs, "Arts Groups Fight Their Insurers Over Coverage on Virus
Losses," The New York Times , May 6, 2020, reports that "insurance companies have issued
a torrent of denials, prompting lawsuits across the country and legislative efforts on the
state and federal levels to force insurers to make payments. The insurance industry has argued
that fulfilling all of these requests would bankrupt the industry."
[5]
Conor Dougherty and Peter Eavis, "In Commercial Real Estate, the Domino Effect Escalates,"
The New York Times , June 9, 2020.
The latest data compiled by the International
Labour Organization (ILO) sheds new light on COVID-19's "devastating" impact on the labor
market reveals a "massive" drop in labor income and hours for workers worldwide.
Global labor income plunged 10.7%, or $3.5 trillion, in the first nine months of 2020,
compared with the same period in 2019, ILO's new report found, which is one of the first
measurements to quantify the deep economic scarring that has left the global economy paralyzed.
The figure excludes income derived by governments to compensate for labor loss during the
pandemic.
The report, titled " ILO
Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work. Sixth edition," was published on Wednesday (Sept.
23), notes how global labor hour losses in the first nine months of 2020 have been
"considerably larger" than the estimate from the previous report issued in late June.
The report found the largest income loss was primarily in lower-middle income countries,
where the labor income losses reached 15.1%.
"Workplace closures continue to disrupt labor markets around the world, leading to
working-hour losses that are higher than previously estimated," ILO said.
The United Nations agency said global working-hour losses are expected to remain elevated in
3Q20, at 12.1%, or equivalent to 345 million full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs (based on a
48-hour working week). The revised downside projections for 4Q20 suggest a more pessimistic
outlook for the global economy is ahead .
ILO's baseline scenario, for working-hour losses, in the fourth quarter, is -8.6%. The most
optimistic is +5.7%, while the most pessimistic is -18%.
"The latest data confirm that working-hour losses are reflected in higher levels of
unemployment and inactivity, with inactivity increasing to a greater extent than unemployment.
Rising inactivity is a notable feature of the current job crisis calling for strong policy
attention. The decline in employment numbers has generally been greater for women than for
men," ILO said.
The driver behind increased working-hour losses in developing and emerging economies is that
informal employment continues to be affected by strict public health orders to mitigate the
virus spread.
ILO said there's a "clear correlation" between how much fiscal stimulus a country does and
working-hour losses. For example, more stimulus has offset a reduction in working hours. Many
of these stimulus packages have been observed in high-income countries, as emerging and
developing economies had limited borrowing capacity to finance such measures.
ILO Director-General Guy Ryder warned about a "huge fiscal stimulus gap," and the dire need
for governments to unleash more fiscal stimulus to mitigate additional stresses in the global
labor market.
"Just as we need to redouble our efforts to beat the virus, so we need to act urgently and
at scale to overcome its economic, social, and employment impacts. That includes sustaining
support for jobs, businesses, and incomes," Ryder said in a statement.
A record of 25% of all
personal income in the US is derived from the government via stimulus programs. Without
stimulus, the economy craters.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
With ILO's report noting more labor market stress is ahead for the final quarter of the
year, it all suggests there will be no "V"- shaped recovery in 2H20.
And this could be the moment where Wall Street realizes the shape of the recovery was never
a "V," resulting
in the next wave down in stocks.
Escobar reviews the UNGA's
first day that revealed Trump's desperation a few alluded to above. Psychohistorian will
be pleased to read Pepe's channeling his #1 premise:
" As for the 'rules-based international order,' at best it is a euphemism for
privately-controlled financial capitalism on a global scale ." [My Emphasis]
As I wrote yesterday, every national leader I read backed a Multilateral UN and its
Charter while including various degrees of reproach for the illegalities of the Outlaw US
Empire and its vassals, even the
Emir of Qatar :
"The outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic has reminded us that we live on the same planet,
and that multilateral cooperation is the only way to address the challenges of epidemics,
climate and the environment in general, and it's also preferable to remember this when
dealing with the issues of poverty, war and peace, and realizing our common goals for
security and stability....
"And during the unjust and unlawful blockade it is going through it also has securely
established its policy founded on respecting the rules and principles of international law
and the United Nations Charter, especially, the principle of respecting the sovereignty of
states and rejecting intervention in their internal affairs.
"And based on our moral and legal responsibilities towards our peoples, we have affirmed,
and we will continue to reaffirm, that unconditional dialogue based on common interests and
respect for the sovereignty of states is the way to solve this crisis which had started with
an illegal blockade, and whose solution starts with lifting this blockade."
If the Saudi blockade is "unjust and unlawful," then all those imposed by the Outlaw US
Empire are also.
Pepe apparently doesn't agree with Lieven's essay and writes:
"Sinophobia is the perfect tool for shifting blame -- for the abysmal response to
Covid-19, the extinction of small businesses and the looming New Great Depression -- to the
Chinese 'existential threat.'
"The whole process has nothing to do with 'moral defeat' [Lieven] and complaints that 'we
risk losing the competition and endangering the world.'
"The world is not 'endangered' because at least vast swathes of the Global South are fully
aware that the much-ballyhooed 'rules-based international order' is nothing but a quite
appealing euphemism for Pax Americana -- or exceptionalism [Neocolonialism].
"What was designed by Washington for post-World War II, the Cold War and the 'unilateral
moment' does not apply anymore."
As the dirty domestic underwear of the Outlaw US Empire becomes more visible to nations,
they are emboldened to stand up for themselves and join the Strategic Partnership's Eurasian
project.
Why does neoclassical economics produce ponzi schemes of inflated asset prices?
It makes you think you are creating wealth by inflating asset prices
Bank credit flows into inflating asset prices, debt rises faster than GDP and you
eventually get a financial crisis.
No one notices the private debt building up in the economy as neoclassical economics
doesn't consider debt.
This economics still has its 1920s problems. What is the fundamental flaw in the free
market theory of neoclassical economics? The University of Chicago worked that out in the
1930s after last time. Banks can inflate asset prices with the money they create from bank
loans.
Henry Simons and Irving Fisher supported the Chicago Plan to take away the bankers ability
to create money.
"Simons envisioned banks that would have a choice of two types of holdings: long-term
bonds and cash. Simultaneously, they would hold increased reserves, up to 100%. Simons saw
this as beneficial in that its ultimate consequences would be the prevention of
"bank-financed inflation of securities and real estate" through the leveraged creation of
secondary forms of money."
It looks like they did have some idea what the problem was.At the end of the 1920s, the US
was a ponzi scheme of inflated asset prices. The use of neoclassical economics and the belief
in free markets, made them think that inflated asset prices represented real wealth
accumulation.
1929 – Wakey, wakey time. Why did it cause the US financial system to collapse in
1929? Bankers get to create money out of nothing, through bank loans, and get to charge
interest on it.
Bankers do need to ensure the vast majority of that money gets paid back, and this is
where they get into serious trouble.
Banking requires prudent lending.
If someone can't repay a loan, they need to repossess that asset and sell it to recoup
that money. If they use bank loans to inflate asset prices they get into a world of trouble
when those asset prices collapse.
As the real estate and stock market collapsed the banks became insolvent as their assets
didn't cover their liabilities.
They could no longer repossess and sell those assets to cover the outstanding loans and
they do need to get most of the money they lend out back again to balance their books.
The banks become insolvent and collapsed, along with the US economy.
When banks have been lending to inflate asset prices the financial system is in a
precarious state and can easily collapse.
What was the ponzi scheme of inflated asset prices that collapsed in Japan in 1991?
Japanese real estate.
They avoided a Great Depression by saving the banks.
They killed growth for the next 30 years by leaving the debt in place.
What was the ponzi scheme of inflated asset prices that collapsed in 2008?
"It's nearly $14 trillion pyramid of super leveraged toxic assets was built on the back of
$1.4 trillion of US sub-prime loans, and dispersed throughout the world" All the Presidents
Bankers, Nomi Prins.
They avoided a Great Depression by saving the banks.
They left Western economies struggling by leaving the debt in place, just like Japan.
It's not as bad as Japan as we didn't let asset prices crash in the West, but it is this
problem has made our economies so sluggish since 2008.
In 2020, the world is a ponzi scheme of inflated asset prices.
The use of neoclassical economics and the belief in free markets, made them think that
inflated asset prices represented real wealth accumulation.
The central banks have to keep pumping in liquidity to stop all the ponzi schemes
collapsing.
If the ponzi schemes collapse, this feeds back into the financial system when bankers have
been lending to inflate asset prices.
play_arrow
Sound of the Suburbs , 1 hour ago
Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy towards a financial
crisis.
You don't want to leave them to their own devices.
On a BBC documentary, comparing 1929 to 2008, it said the last time US bankers made as
much money as they did before 2008 was in the 1920s.
Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy into a financial
crisis.
The financial crisis appears to come out of a clear blue sky when you use an economics
that doesn't consider debt.
The economics of globalisation has always had an Achilles' heel.
The 1920s roared with debt based consumption and speculation until it all tipped over into
the debt deflation of the Great Depression. No one realised the problems that were building
up in the economy as they used an economics that doesn't look at debt, neoclassical
economics.
Not considering private debt is the Achilles' heel of neoclassical economics.
Sound of the Suburbs , 1 hour ago
Come on.
Wakey, wakey.
You are just repeating 1920s mistakes.
The Americans wrapped a new ideology, neoliberalism, around 1920s economics and repeated
the economic mistakes of the 1920s.
Policymakers couldn't see what Glass-Steagall did, as they thought banks were financial
intermediaries.
It separates the money creation side of banking from the investment side of banking, and
stops bankers producing securities; they buy themselves with money they create out of
nothing.
"By early 1929, loans from these non-banking sources were approximately equal to those
from the banks. Later they became much greater. The Federal Reserve Authorities took it for
granted that they had no influence over these funds"
He's talking about "shadow banking".
They thought leverage was great before 1929; they saw what happened when it worked in
reverse after 1929.
Leverage acts like a multiplier.
It multiplies profits on the way up.
It multiplies losses on the way down.
Today's bankers seem to have learnt something from past mistakes.
They took the multiplied profits on the way up.
Taxpayers picked up the multiplied losses on the way down.
Mariner Eccles, FED chair 1934 -- 48, observed what the capital accumulation of
neoclassical economics did to the US economy in the 1920s.
"a giant suction pump had by 1929 to 1930 drawn into a few hands an increasing proportion
of currently produced wealth. This served then as capital accumulations. But by taking
purchasing power out of the hands of mass consumers, the savers denied themselves the kind of
effective demand for their products which would justify reinvestment of the capital
accumulation in new plants. In consequence as in a poker game where the chips were
concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by
borrowing. When the credit ran out, the game stopped"
The problem; wealth concentrates until the system collapses.
"The other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing." Mariner Eccles, FED chair
1934 -- 48
Your wages aren't high enough, have a Payday loan.
You need a house, have a sub-prime mortgage.
You need a car, have a sub-prime auto loan.
You need a good education, have a student loan.
Still not getting by?
Load up on credit cards.
"When the credit ran out, the game stopped" Mariner Eccles, FED chair 1934 -- 48
...... etc .....
x_Maurizio , 1 hour ago
DISAGREE ON EVERY SINGLE WORD, in particular with this:
rules/regulations/capital requirements have infected the global banking system and
rendered it a harvesting operation for retail and a derivatives rule/regulation/capital
requirment evasion device for the pursuit of profit
absolutely false.
Banking system is in the 4th part of a cycle that they have created !
The first part has been capital harvesting (1970-1980)
The second part has been deregulation and hunt for stellar return on investment
The third part is financialisation and plunder of real economy
The fourth part is the destruction of real economy through debt, deflation, extreme
financial activity seeking for Yields. The banks have been the fortresses of globalisation.
Commercial banking has been absorbed by investment banking. In this deflationary
environment Commercial Banking has practice NO ROI.
You want to see the Banks working again? Reintroduce the Glass Steagall and separate again
investment and commercial banking. Repeal all what has been done between 1987 and 1999. THAT
will stop globalisation, that will stop the slow bleeding-to-death of westerne economies,
that will save commercial banking and our capitalistic societies.
International Man : Thanks to the shutdowns, economic activity on main street is at a
standstill. Government, corporate, and personal debt is skyrocketing. Yet, the stock market is
in a mania. Has the stock market become out of touch with reality, and if so, what are the
consequences of that?
David Stockman : Both ends of the Acela Corridor have lost their marbles. This year, Uncle
Sam borrowed $4 trillion in six months, the Fed printed $3 trillion in three months, and Wall
Street drove the S&P 500 to 52X reported LTM earnings in the context of a deeper economic
plunge than occurred in the worst quarter of the 1930s.
Therefore, Washington has become disconnected from any semblance of fidelity to sound money
and fiscal rectitude, while Wall Street has turned into an outright casino, valuing stocks
based on endless Fed liquidity injections and the delusion that momentum chasing is an
investment strategy.
With respect to the rampant folly in the Imperial City, Treasury Secretary Stevie Mnuchin
has always reminded us of Alfred E. Neuman of "Me Worry?" fame at Mad Magazine. Recently, he
more than earned that moniker when, in the context of the current monetary and fiscal lunacy,
he proclaimed that, "Now is not the time to worry about shrinking the deficit or shrinking the
Fed balance sheet."
That was the so-called Conservative Party speaking, and it is a shrill reminder that the
Trumpified GOP has gone utterly AWOL when it comes to its true job in American democracy,
namely, resisting the Government Party (Dems) and its affinity for feeding the Leviathan on the
Potomac.
That is to say, according to even the Keynesian deficit apologists at the CBO, Uncle Sam
will spend $6.6 trillion during the current fiscal year (FY 2020) while collecting only $3.3
trillion in revenue. That's Banana Republic stuff -- borrowing 50% of every dollar spent.
Yet the advisory ranks of the potentially incoming Kamala Harris regency are even worse.
They are loaded with "deficits don't matter" ideologues and MMT crackpots who noisily argue
that massive monetization of the public debt is not just a virtue, but utterly imperative.
Needless to say, this bipartisan commitment to all-in stimulus is financial catnip to the
Wall Street gamblers because they are actually capitalizing into today's nosebleed stock
prices, not the present drastically impaired economy on Main Street but a pro forma simulacrum
of future prosperity based on the delusional presumption that massive debt and money-pumping
actually create economic growth and wealth.
The fact is, industrial production in August posted at a level first achieved in March 2006,
and manufacturing output weighed in at levels originally attained in December 2004. So the
misbegotten lockdowns and COVID-hysteria have cost the US economy 14–16 years of
industrial production growth, yet this massive setback was not caused by some mysterious
Keynesian-style faltering of "demand" that can allegedly be compensated for by new Fed credits
plucked from thin air.
To the contrary, the current depression is the result of the visible shutdown and quarantine
orders of the state, which are likely to linger for months to come or even intensify as the
fall-winter flu season arrives. Undoubtedly, the Virus Patrol will spur further outbreaks of
public fear based on "bad numbers" from the CDC, which are actually an agglomeration of cases
and deaths from normal influenza, pneumonia, and a myriad of life-threatening comorbidities,
not pure cases of the COVID alone.
But beguiled by "stimulus" and hopium, Wall Street completely ignores the contradiction
between over-the-top demand stimulus and what amounts to supply-side contraction owing to
economic martial law.
So, at 3400 on the S&P 500, the current LTM price-to-earnings ratio ranges between 52.1
times the earnings CEOs and CFOs certify on penalty of jail time ($65 per share) or 27 times
the Wall Street brush-stroked and curated version ($125 per share), from which all asset
write-offs, restructuring charges, and other one-timers/mistakes have been finessed out.
Of course, these deleted GAAP charges reflect the consumption of real corporate resources,
such as purchase price goodwill that gets written off when a merger or acquisition goes sour,
or the write-down of investments in factories, warehouses, and stores that get closed. As such,
they absolutely do diminish company resources and shareholder net worth over time.
But for decades now, Wall Street has so relentlessly and assiduously ripped anything that
smells like a "one-timer" out of company earnings filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) that it no longer even knows what GAAP earnings actually are.
And it pretends that these discarded debits (and credits) to income are simply lumpy things
that even out in the wash over time. They do not.
If ex-items reporting was merely a neutral smoothing mechanism, reported GAAP earnings and
"operating earnings" would be equal when aggregated over several years, or even a full business
cycle.
Yet during the last 100 quarters, there have been essentially zero instances in which
reported GAAP earnings exceeded "operating income."
So, in aggregate terms, several trillions of corporate write-downs and losses have been
swept under the rug.
During the second quarter of 2020, for example, GAAP earnings reported to the SEC totaled
$145.8 billion for the S&P 500 companies, while the ex-items earnings curated by the street
posted at $222.3 billion. That amounts to the deletion of nearly $77 billion of write-downs and
mistakes, and it inflated the aggregate earnings number by more than 52%.
The game is all about goosing the earnings number in order to minimize the apparent
price-to-earnings multiple, thereby supporting the fiction that stocks are reasonably valued
and that nary a bubble is to be found, at least in the broad market represented by the S&P
500.
Still, valuing the market at 52 times trailing-12-month earnings during the present parlous
moment in time -- or even 27 times if you want to give the financial engineering jockeys in the
C-suites a hall-pass for $77 billion of mistakes and losses this quarter alone -- is nothing
short of nuts.
Yet, the gamblers in the casino hardly know it.
Wall Street has already decided that current-year results don't matter a whit: the
nosebleed-level trailing P/E multiples currently being racked up are simply being shoved into
the memory hole on the presumption that the sell side's evergreen hockey sticks will come true
about four quarters into the future, and if they don't, a heavy dose of ex-items bark-stripping
will gussy up actual earnings when they come in.
Still, if you think that a forward P/E multiple of, say, 17.5 times is just fine and that
flushing the one-timers is OK, then you still need $193 per share of operating earnings by the
second quarter of 2021 to justify today's index level.
Then again, a 54% gain in operating earnings over the next four quarters ($193 per share in
the second quarter of 2021 versus $125 per share in the second quarter of 2020) is not simply a
tall order; it's downright delusional.
International Man : What could derail the Fed's ability to pump up the stock market casino
with all this easy money? They simultaneously want zero interest rates and more inflation. It
seems something has to give.
David Stockman : Yes, what's going to "give" sooner or later is the entire house of monetary
cards erected by the Fed and its fellow-traveling global central banks over the last several
decades. What they are doing is based on the triple error that inflation is too low, that
deeply repressed and falsified interest rates fuel real growth, and that private savers are a
hindrance to optimal economic function and need to be euthanized via confiscation of the real
(after-inflation) value of their capital.
In the first place, as Paul Volcker pointedly reminded, there is nothing in the pre-1990
textbooks that says 2.00% inflation is desirable and is to be pursued with fanatical intensity
-- even if actual inflation comes in only a few basis points below the magic target.
Indeed, if the 2% target is zealously pursued via prolonged pegging of interest rates to the
zero bound and the massive purchase of bonds and other securities, the result is actually
inimical to economic growth and sustainable gains in real wealth.
That's because falsified interest rates and inflated financial asset values lead to massive
malinvestment via rampant financial engineering in the corporate sector and reckless borrowing
to fund transfer payments and economic waste in the public sector.
Nor is that a mere theoretical possibility. The rolling 10-year real GDP growth rate has now
fallen to just 1.5% per annum, or barely one-third of the 3–4% per year rolling averages
which prevailed during the heyday of reasonably sound money and fiscal rectitude prior to
1971.
Beyond that, there really hasn't been any inflation shortfall from the 2% target, unless
measured by the Fed's flakey yardstick called the PCE deflator. For instance, since December
1996, when Greenspan uttered his irrational exuberance warning, the CPI is up by 2.09% per
annum and the more stable 16% trimmed-mean CPI is up by 2.12% per annum.
That hardly constitutes a "shortfall" from target, but the Eccles Building money-printers
make the claim anyway because the PCE deflator gained slightly less over that 23 year period,
averaging an increase of 1.71 per annum.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The truth is, no one except groupthink besotted central bankers would think that a mere 30
basis point shortfall over more than two decades justifies the massive financial fraud of
pumping trillions of fiat credit into the financial system.
That's especially the case because the PCE deflator drastically underweights shelter costs
and doesn't even measure the purchasing power of money against a fixed basket of goods and
services over time, anyway. Instead, it is actually a tool of GDP accounting that reflects the
changing mix of goods and services supplied to the household sector.
That is to say, if someone chooses to live in a tepee and spend nearly all of their paycheck
on computers, TVs, and other high-tech gadgets that have been rapidly falling in price, that
doesn't improve the exchange value of the dollar wages they earn; it just means that their
tepee may be getting crowded with tech gadgets.
The same is true of the aggregate level. Just because the mix of goods and services changes
over time, that doesn't miraculously rescue the purchasing power of the dollar
from the ravages of inflation .
Nor does it alleviate the savaging of lower- and middle-class living standards that are the
direct product of the Fed's misguided commitment to inflation targeting. In fact, during that
same 23-year period, the annual rate of increase for professional services, shelter, food away
from home, medical services, and education expense has been 2.6%, 2.7%, 2.8%, 3.5%, and 4.5%,
respectively.
So once you set aside the foolishness of 2% inflation targeting and the Fed's sawed-off
inflation measuring stick (the PCE deflator), what you really have is growth stunting monetary
madness. There is no other way to explain a Fed balance sheet that went from $4.2 trillion on
March 4 this year to $7.2 trillion by June 10.
After all, the first $3 trillion of Fed balance sheet took nearly 100 years to generate,
from its opening in 1914 to breaching the $3 trillion marker for the first time in March 2013.
That the Fed has now become a monetary doomsday machine, therefore, is no longer in doubt.
* * *
The truth is, we're on the cusp of a economic crisis that could eclipse anything we've seen
before. And most people won't be prepared for what's coming. That's exactly why bestselling
author Doug Casey and his team
just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse.
Click here to download the PDF now.
Israel raises an important question about the role on neoliberal MSM is spreading COVID-19
panic.
Notable quotes:
"... Sinaisky claims that they brought the pandemics upon us because of the high debt problem, or by their inability to continue colonial plunder. Alternatively, a notable commenter to his text suggests that it was done because of overproduction of capital. In other words, the bank-lending rate is so close to zero, or even negative, that the whole machinery of capitalism was deluged in a flood of capital, and needed a major war, or indeed a global pandemic, to use it up. ..."
"... Because of this freak combination of forces, Sweden left its health policy in the hands of local professionals and remained free, while its neighbouring countries transferred the responsibility to globalist politicians and embraced quarantine. ..."
"... Thus the liberal Blairite media (beginning with the NY Times and the Guardian) played a key part in the Corona crisis. They were the piper; but who ordered the piper? ..."
...Do the US plutocrats (that is, the American über-wealthy) control all that? I think
they would be amazed to learn that, especially "for generations", bearing in mind that the US
was not a very significant factor before the WWI. In my view, the rich are not that smart. But
the network exists; I have called its obscure controllers The Masters of Discourse .
Sinaisky claims that they brought the pandemics upon us because of the high debt
problem, or by their inability to continue colonial plunder. Alternatively, a notable commenter
to his text suggests that it was done because of overproduction of capital. In other words, the
bank-lending rate is so close to zero, or even negative, that the whole machinery of capitalism
was deluged in a flood of capital, and needed a major war, or indeed a global pandemic, to use
it up.
Finally, Sinaisky claims that "atomization of society, breaking up community solidarity,
eroding all non-monetary connections between people, destroying family relations and weakening
blood ties, is a long-standing plutocratic project. Now, using this fake pandemic, the
plutocrats have gone even further, now they train us to see each other not as friend, not as
brother, not even as a source of profit, but mainly as a source of mortal infection." I wonder
what makes him think that is an object of plutocratic desire? Certainly rich people want to
make money and have more power, agreed. Is it necessary for them to atomise society? Who will
they and their kids socialize with in such a ruined world?
I am not sure that there is a human agency with such goals. A non-human factor is a much
more suitable culprit. In the old days, such a culprit was called Satan, and there were mighty
organisations aka churches that fought Satan. In a charming movie, Luc Besson's Fifth Element,
'Love' defeats 'the Shadow', the personified evil that was about to obliterate Earth. Call it
Satan, call it Shadow, the thing surely has human collaborationists in the mainstream media. I
wrote about it in a piece called The Shadow of Zog . Indeed media
should be sorted out in order to deal with it.
Sweden, this lucky country that avoided lockdown and its consequences, was saved by a rare
media misstep. (This story has never been published though it is known to many Swedes.) Corona
propaganda was carried out by the same liberal Bonnier-owned newspaper, DN (Dagens Nyheter),
that played up Greta Thunberg. (Sinaisky's senses served him right: indeed Covid is a new Greta
multiplied by a factor of 50). The Greta campaign had as its favourite high horse
flygskam , or flight-shaming. Stop taking flights to lower carbon emissions ,
was the idea. Now we have no flights at all, so this movement disappeared after achieving its
goals.
In February 2020, the DN organised a week-long sleeper train culture trip to North Italy for
the Greta-following liberal elite. A berth on this train was priced starting at ten thousand
Euros. The group went up to the Italian Alps and down to the Carnival in Venice and finally
returned home, full to the brim with interesting experiences and coronavirus infections. A few
days after the train returned to Stockholm, the disease broke out at large. Many of the liberal
journalists that travelled on the Corona Express (as the train became known) fell sick, and
their close relatives suffered, too. This incident caused the death of many elderly Jews,
parents or uncles of those liberal journalists. It was a media phenomenon, and the
Jewish media reported that the death rate among Swedish Jews was 14 times higher than
their share of the population (well, it is not as bad as it sounds; only nine very old Jews
died, all over 80).
As the people in authority knew all about the Corona Express, the liberal lobby was too
ashamed to call for quarantine against the disease they has carried to Sweden. (Or they did
call, but in sotto voce.) Furthermore, the DN was their only significant liberal media outlet,
as Bonnier had sold his TV channel to a state-owned company in December 2019, making heaps of
money but losing his ability to influence people.
Because of this freak combination of forces, Sweden left its health policy in the hands
of local professionals and remained free, while its neighbouring countries transferred the
responsibility to globalist politicians and embraced quarantine.
Thus the liberal Blairite media (beginning with the NY Times and the Guardian) played a
key part in the Corona crisis. They were the piper; but who ordered the piper?
Testifying before the Senate Appropriations Committee Wednesday morning, CDC Director Robert
Redfield entered further into quack doctor territory, claiming that wearing a mask protects the
wearer against the novel coronavirus, even more so than a high-efficacy vaccine.
"These facemasks are the important, powerful public health tool we have," Redfield said,
while touching both sides of his mask and unconsciously contaminating it with his hands. "I
might even go so far as to say that this facemask is more guaranteed to protect me against
COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine," he added.
This appears to be another "scientific" evolution on masks from the "public health expert"
class. At first, we were advised not to wear masks. Then, the "my mask protects you. Your mask
protects me" mantra became the widely disseminated narrative. Now, masks apparently have the
incredible power of protecting the mask wearer from the virus.
In the February hearing, Redfield told Americans not to buy medical-grade
masks , saying there's "no role for these masks in the community."
There remains zero evidence that cloth masks or the earloop masks displayed by Redfield
helps to slow the spread of COVID-19 or protect the wearer from infection. No country in the
world has proven a link in slowing or stopping the spread due to mask wearing mandates, which
are in effect in countless nations.
Given the lack of demonstrated evidence supporting it, mask-wearing has become a cult-like religious
movement in the United States , one that relies on complete subservience to total
mysticism. Members of the mask movement frequently target Americans who engage in
non-compliance, likening these individuals to evil, plague-carrying menaces. Redfield's
testimony will only add fuel to the mask mania that is sowing discord in America.
In his testimony, Redfield added that a COVID vaccine probably won't be available to the
general public until
at least the second or third quarter of 2021.
"If you're asking me when is it going to be generally available to the American public, so
we can begin to take advantage of vaccine to get back to our regular life, I think we're
probably looking at third, late second quarter, third quarter 2021," he testified, adding
that first responders may have access to the vaccine before the end of the year.
Like many institutional bureaucracies in the federal government, the CDC has become plagued
with corruption and "woke" politics. A whistleblower recently revealed that the CDC was forcing
its staff to undergo "critical race theory" training.
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-4&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1305619445520318465&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmedical%2Fdr-quack-cdcs-redfield-claims-masks-guaranteed-protect-against-covid&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=219d021%3A1598982042171&width=550px
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Under Redfield's leadership, the CDC dropped the ball on preparing Americans for the U.S.
coronavirus outbreak, as shown through
internal emails displaying the bureaucracy as an organizational mess.
* * *
Thanks for reading! I would be honored if you are willing to support my work and subscribe to The Mass
Illusion, my newsletter for people concerned about our "new normal."
High-yield bond default rates may double as companies struggle with a protracted economic
downturn even as the Federal Reserve props up valuations, said Jeffrey Gundlach.
The investment grade corporate debt market has skewed toward lower quality BBB- rated debt,
but if just 50% of that were to be downgraded it could fuel a near doubling of the high-yield
market, Gundlach said Tuesday on a webcast for his firm's flagship DoubleLine Total Return Bond Fund .
Gundlach's views reflect broad skepticism about the market's connection to economic
realities. He criticized the Fed's emergency actions as buoying asset prices and spurring
unsustainable corporate borrowing binges.
Risk assets such as equities and high yield credit markets are responding to this support,
and government stimulus, disproportionately as the Covid-19 pandemic remains a threat to the
recovery, he said.
"It's foolhardy to believe that one can have this kind of a shock to an economy and it just
gets healed through a one-shot deal" from the Treasury, he said.
Gundlach pointed out that the global GDP forecast is -3.9%, whereas the U.S. lags at -5%
despite the country's response to the Covid-19 crisis being "one of the highest in the
world."
Highlighting the effect of the weekly $600 stimulus checks, he called it a distortion of the
personal-income spending picture akin to the Fed's effect on the markets.
"This is a large incentive to stay on public assistance," Gundlach said, noting that benefit
payments have exceeded many workers' regular income.
Gundlach also snubbed one of the market's favorite trades on a U.S. recovery, saying he's
"betting against" the inflation-linked bond market. TIPS products have seen some of the
strongest monthly inflows in four years, and market-implied expectations for inflation have
touched a 2020 high. Gundlach repeated that the impact of the pandemic is deflationary.
DISAGREE ON EVERY SINGLE WORD, in particular with this:
rules/regulations/capital requirements have infected the global banking system and
rendered it a harvesting operation for retail and a derivatives rule/regulation/capital
requirment evasion device for the pursuit of profit
absolutely false.
Banking system is in the 4th part of a cycle that they have created !
The first part has been capital harvesting (1970-1980)
The second part has been deregulation and hunt for stellar return on investment
The third part is financialisation and plunder of real economy
The fourth part is the destruction of real economy through debt, deflation, extreme
financial activity seeking for Yields.
The banks have been the fortresses of globalisation. Commercial banking has been absorbed
by investment banking. In this deflationary environment Commercial Banking has practice NO
ROI.
You want to see the Banks working again?
Reintroduce the Glass Steagall and separate again investment and commercial banking.
Repeal all what has been done between 1987 and 1999.
THAT will stop globalisation, that will stop the slow bleeding-to-death of westerne
economies, that will save commercial banking and our capitalistic societies.
Funny how "new normals" are rushing at us .9-11 was the new normal only 19 years ago, and
19 years later going on 20, a new "new normal" is upon us. The next "new normal" will only be
a few years away, 9 at the most Agenda 2030 and all that. By then, AI-enhanced RNA/DNA
altered "new humanity" will be upon us, and anyone not in this new "new normal" will be
outcast, shunned, shamed, and unemployed and if retired will not be able to get their SS and
MC.
"As it stands, there's only one thing we do know: the establishment at the core of the
Hegemon and the drooling orcs of Empire will only adopt a Great Reset if that helps to
postpone a decline accelerated on a fateful morning 19 years ago."
What?
I thought Covid 19 was a tool that the establishment is using to spark a Reset. And that
Agenda 21 is part of a Reset.
So why would the establishment object to a "decline"?
9/11 was just the first operation of the 21st century designed to accelerate the
disintegration of society and economy to achieve Agenda 21 . It was actually a continuation
of the 1975 TLC Project Democracy (sardonically named) that was kicked off by the Carter
administration in 1977 and went into warp speed under Reagan/Bush. Its continued ever since
but is picking up speed with the agreement of Agenda 21 in the 90's and its update Agenda
2030 in 2015. 2020 is the start of the final phase which will accomplish all of the
Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030, which is basically means total control over
every individual and all resources.
Its pretty much been an Open Conspiracy. Those who refused to question 9/11 will double up
on their blue pills to deny the Plandemic and expect a return to normal, dooming their
descendants to a life of serfdom should they be lucky enough to avoid the culling.
The new Normal will make some dystopian films seem like utopia. Watch some old movies and
TV series to remind you of old normal. They wont be available much longer unless you have the
DVD or VHS and a machines to play it. The tapes and discs age so don't last forever. Books
will last longer but those with digital collections will one day fund them disappeared
The beating heart of this matrix is – what else – the Strategic Intelligence
Platform, encompassing, literally, everything: "sustainable development", "global
governance", capital markets, climate change, biodiversity, human rights, gender parity,
LGBTI, systemic racism, international trade and investment, the – wobbly –
future of the travel and tourism industries, food, air pollution, digital identity,
blockchain, 5G, robotics, artificial intelligence (AI).
Since the US is a global has-been with most of its industry gone and living on debt
– it's probably useful for it to claim leadership of a "Strategic Intelligence
Platform". It can bury US problems internationally (same as it did with the dollar reserve)
but in a more comprehensive way than simple Globalization (only economic). If the USA NWO
claims international leadership of everything on all fronts, then they become the arbiters
(in their opinion) of everything everywhere on the grounds of a higher morality.
It actually looks more like the folie de grandeur of a old alcoholic than the
foundation of a new religion – and not something to pay attention to – apart from
the fact that he tends to get violent with anyone who disagrees.
Regarding your 50 questions, the fact that German and Russian intelligent warned the FBI
about an imminent Muslim terrorist attack is not compatible with the idea that there was a
controlled demolition.
Ah yes, the Beast reveals itself as a sensurround global hamster cage with a plethora of
control mechanisms hardwired through emergent software memes in celebration of the planned
future of total abstraction. Abstract reality. The hubris of the plutocratic, oligarchic and
technocratic elites is of a Promethean orgasm of trans humanistic values systematically
gorging itself on their perceived future of an enserfed humanity comprised of those who will
compromise truth, honor, justice, beauty and love–all in the service of mammon.
Not only is human nature to be subsumed to a mechanistic mindset gone ballistic in the
visions of absolute domination, but the ongoing assault on the natural world will be a
by-product of this Re-set. Stated simply, these schemers are playing God and have assembled
the tool-kit, which in their minds, will allow for no compromise, no mistakes. These people
are either spiritually vacuous or are imbued with an evil that totally negates a natural
order which is cosmic and universal in scope. Ultimately their dreams and schemes will
implode like the legendary Tower of Babel. Creation is not about to be undone by those who
have convinced themselves that they can control everything.
Mother Nature is not a mere lump of matter. She is a sentient being who is cosmically
connected and connective. Consider the storms, the blizzards, the fires and the systematic
destruction of our very atmospheres, to say nothing of oceanic life in all its magnificent
manifestations. Mama is not in a good mood and when she has had all she can take ..
" the fact that German and Russian intelligent (sic) warned the FBI about an imminent
Muslim terrorist attack is not compatible with the idea that there was a controlled
demolition."
How so? The US architects of a controlled demolition could have quite easily created fake
"chatter" and fake "intelligence" about an imminent Muslim terrorist attack.
@Intelligent
Dasein be found on Youtube titled "Former NIST Employee Speaks Out On World Trade Centre
Towers Collapse Investigation". It's 31 minutes long, but he says the following at
approximately 18 minutes in:
"Look at the symmetry. These buildings come straight down, or almost straight down.
Asymmetric damage does not lead to symmetric collapse. It's very difficult to get
something to collapse symmetrically because it is the Law of Physics that things tend towards
chaos. Collapsing symmetrically represents order, very strict order.
It is not the nature of physics to gravitate towards order for no reason. It will
gravitate towards chaos. It is very difficult to get a building to collapse
symmetrically."
@PetrOldSack
actor/author, how could he be, our cherished "thinkers" are as few and making up as they go,
seconded by the crude second tier public domain politicians, the corporate mongers, them
being even less prone to visionary skill. This "thing" can go wrong in all kinds of ways, but
real it is, and some derivative globally altered reality is there to stay. Brusquely,
genuinely."
The Atlantic tells us that "Overall, bots are responsible for 52 percent of web traffic"
and I think we're looking at Exhibit A.
an imminent Muslim terrorist attack is not compatible with the idea that there was a
controlled demolition
Q: Why not? In fact, just as the 3 WTC towers were pre-loaded with explosives, so the
alleged hijacker-piloted a/cs and resulting photogenic explosions were pre-planned 'Hollywood
special effects' as critical components. How else to convince the insouciant punters, except
with a well-scripted and executed 'whiz-bang?' Then, see the reports of putative Muslim
hijackers doing dope and/or booze with lap-dancing bar-girls beforehand. You do yourself a
disservice by denying *humongously obvious* controlled demolition. Tip: Try not to be
silly.
To unravel the enigma i wonder if one does not need to go completely eurocentric.
1848 unraveling the empires or at last a planting of the seeds.
1948 the new_world order is established. With its counterpart in the east. Essentially a
ynraveling of 1848 which was a crystallisation of the 30 year was and the peace of westphalia.
Neither established empire being a nation while a very different nationbuiling started in
europe compared to the pre-great war.
2048, no doubt some kind of replacing the new_world order with a new world_order.
One way or anothr to serve europes plutocrats. And with an eye on unraveling the previous 1948
situation. Soviets are gone, so now the disunited states of america has to go and be reduced to
a new balkans.
Perhaps sweeping away europe too this time. Arabobantustan unable to sustain a developed
economy certainly is on the timeline for europe.
Now. Regardless of whether the ghost of Herr Weishaupt is hanging around, the timeline is
awfully useful for anyone like the anglozionist cabal of assorted late 1800s multimillionaires
and their respective business empires cross inheritances into socalled NGOs. The names being
quite well known like rockefeller, carnegie, rhodes etc.
Then again maybe no one really knows what they are doing anymore and there is no plan at
all, just many very confused very badly planned plans. And all that will ensue is chaos and
destruction and no order afterwards worthy of the name. 150 years of pisspoor mismanagement
tends to have such consequences.
@Robert White
billion from its Term Securities Lending Facility. It wasn't until May 31, 2008, when JPMorgan
Chase closed its deal with Bear Stearns. However, the GAO reported that Bear Stearns "was
consistently the largest PDCF borrower until June 2008." The Fed shows that Bear Stearns
continued to receive funds until June 23, 2008.
This article pretty much sums it up as best as I can understand. I had often stated to
people of similar mind to watch for the next major 'move' after 9/11, it will be a dandy
because with possibly a few white knuckle moments, the Masters will have concluded that they
can get away with ANYTHING, internet or no. Truth simply fails to get traction in the minds of
the majority of 'screen zombies' and the majority is all they ever needed.
Now where things might get really scary is if/when they decide to implement the great cull.
From a dispassionate perspective, it is something they simply have to do. In 1950 the world
population was about 2 billion. Now it is about 8 billion. If a population graph was drawn from
say, 50,000 years ago it would be long and flat and then it would shoot up near vertically at
the end.
The problem now of course is that with technology and agricultural machinery of all sorts
the system doesn't even require the population of 1950. I recall one Master being on record as
mentioning 500 million as being ideal. That is somewhat more than a cull.
Some fools say that a war is imminent for that express purpose. Sorry wars (even nuclear,
which would affect the Masters too), won't result in the butcher's bill required. Only a global
pandemic could conceivably attain the goal and like a neutron bomb, leave the infrastructure
intact.
But this Covid is a hoax you say. Probably so, but what about this proverbial 'second wave'
that is repeated like a Hare Krishna mantra everywhere. What if they released a REAL nasty
virus (which we know they have somewhere) that has a proven vaccine for the 1% and then let the
fun begin knowing full well that they would not be fingered for it because a pandemic is
already on the move?
If it doesn't happen this fall then I may be wrong in my speculation. I always hope to be
wrong when dealing with topics of unfathomable evil.
Mama is not in a good mood and when she has had all she can take ..
Or, as some folks like to say, "God is mad". But it's all the same thing. Maybe the schemers
should be forced to read The Fisherman's Wife. However, they probably won't have any little
hovel to go back to.
@skrik neither
eyewitness testimony nor a visual documentation of the boarding process.
19 hijackers myth taken as " fact" by the 9/11 Commission. Any contradictions of this myth
were ignored by this Commission.
•By ignoring the numerous and glaring contradictions regarding the identities of the
alleged hijackers, the 9/11 Commission manifested its intent to maintain the official myth of
19 Muslim terrorists.
•By refusing to allow interviews with personnel who were responsible for passengers
boarding the four aircraft of 9/11, the airlines manifested their intent to conceal evidence
about the circumstances of the aircraft boarding.
When 9/11 occurred my immediate thoughts went back to an January 2001 when Lyndon LaRouche
warned that if John Ashcroft were to become Attorney General that then one could look forward
to a new Reichstag fire type situation occurring within the context of the fact that the world
financial system was finished and that the financial oligarchy was prepared to throw over the
chess board so to speak.
LaRouche was right and because his understanding of history was correct as it is based upon
a method of hypothesis that had already demonstrated the trajectories of economic collapse and
attendant political operations long before, with an understanding of how to get out of the mess
as demonstrated in history, particularly the Renaissance.
Of note here is a recent article of interest, which helps tell why LaRouche is hated!
This is a very interesting, all encompassing article, well done indeed. For a simpler and
perhaps more digestible and more narrowly focused look at the SARS-Cov2 issue specifically,
this is a worthwhile video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQE7S6c-SCk&t=50s
@PetrOldSack
ght in wars or participated in other combat operations in at least 24 countries. The
destruction inflicted by warfare in these countries has been incalculable for civilians and
combatants Between 2010 and 2019, the total number of refugees and IDPs globally has nearly
doubled from 41 million to 79.5 million .
These babies-loving American X-tians and other Samantha Powers and Obamas, have arranged quite
a spectacular mass slaughter of children of all ages to please the "deciders" (Masters of the
Universe).
None of the murderous idiots has been punished, yet Assange the truthteller is in a high-security
prison Belmarsh, handled by the same murderous scum. Kali , says: Next New
Comment September 11, 2020
at 12:24 pm GMT
@Majority of
One eation is not about to be undone by those who have convinced themselves that they can
control everything.
I couldn't agree more with this.
The intelligence of Existance Itself, the very Nature of Being is anathema to to those specs
of dirt who would attempt to determine the will of God.
The same sentience which is manifest in Man is repeated and applified throughout all of
existance. How could it be any other way when everything we experience is fractal? Just as God
may be experience at the centre of our very Being, so the same God is observed within the All of
Everything.
A great look into what is going on, and what is still to come. Yet the sleeping, brain dead,
face diapered, mind controlled masses of the global corporation formerly known as he United
States spend every waking hour saying "hooray for our guy". Never once does it occur to the
sheeple both are puppets, controlled by the international banksters and their minions.
One of these morons has undeniable ties to the Russian mob, while the other has deep ties to
the Chinese Communist Party. If that weren't bad enough, they both swear undying loyalty to
that little shit stain in the Middle East which seems to project more influence on world
politics than the two formerly mentioned giants.
I know it is no accident the printing of this article occurred on the anniversary date of
the last, greatest mind fuck to hit America since Dec. 7th, 1941. I guess the infidels have
been shown a lesson and the world is now safe for a one world government technocratic
Corporatocracy.
So here's to 3/11/2020(my official date for the roll out of the CV hoax), the ushering in of
a new slave system, and the idiocy and gullibility of the global citizenry.
So enjoy your new bosses, as they are going to be far more tyrannical than your old.
@Robjil
ry:'
[I see that the 1st image is not visible, kindly try this link: alleged 'recovered' flight
recorder ]
Q: How soft was that ground, anyway? Does anyone 'believe' that part of the official 9/11
narrative? Haw. Only the 'insouciant punters' were ever hoodwinked by such offensive, lying
rubbish, all faithfully echoed by the 'lame-stream media.' rgds
Condoleeza Rice resisting at Congressional enquiry "N-o-o-o" and then admitting in a faint
there was an "intelligence report" that said said "Ben Laden planning to use airplanes in
terrorist attack" was play acting to confirm what they wanted people to believe. You will
remember that you were taught to prepare in advance "red herrings" and leave deliberate
confusions behind you to cover your trail.
@Robert White
traitors and infiltrated enemies not by any brilliance of the vicious Chinese Communist mass
murderers -- if you like the idea of taking a van ride for expressing your anti-Government
thoughts you'll love the ChiCom "Model" being installed here now on all of us -- Ron Unz would
be one of the first for the van ride if he tried to run a site like this in China by the way --
there is zero disputing this fact. David Rockefeller gave us the CFR, Trilateral Commission
etc. and of course the WHO and:
https://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-true-agenda-of-the-who-a-new-world-order-modeled-after-china/
@Alfred Haw.
Or was that suppressed as well, along with the bulk-wreckage [=crime-scene evidence] which was
destroyed by being exported as scrap? Haw again.
Nitty-gritty: There is no need to posit any 'exotics,' from nukes to DEW; standard
explosives [both with OR without thermite/mate; only the 'best' tools = most suitable would
have been deployed]; standard explosives could quite easily do the job, for example det-cord
threaded into the floor-slab conduits can fully explain both the absence of floor in the rubble
plus the billowing pyroclastic white dust-clouds [incidentally, explaining scorched vehicles].
And so it goes. A term for such reasoning = Occam's razor.
The stock market now is completely disconnected from the economy. Stein's Law, which he expressed in 1976 states: "If
something cannot go on forever, it will stop."
Notable quotes:
"... Junk Bonds play a critical role in highlighted investor sentiment. When junk bonds (lower-rated debt) is performing well, then that means investors are taking more risks. When junk bonds struggle, that means investors are taking on less risk. ..."
"... At the same time, there is a divergence between the stock market (the S&P 500 made new all-time highs) and Junk Bonds (well below all-time highs and 5 percent off 2019 highs). ..."
As investors, we have several tools and indicators at our disposal.
Whether it is technical indicators such as Fibonacci levels, moving averages, or price
supports, or fundamental indicators such as corporate earnings or economic data, we have a lot
of information to use when making decisions.
Today's chart incorporates both. Junk Bonds play a critical role in highlighted investor
sentiment. When junk bonds (lower-rated debt) is performing well, then that means investors are
taking more risks. When junk bonds struggle, that means investors are taking on less risk.
So today, we highlight the Junk Bonds ETF (JNK). Using
technical analysis, we can see that JNK is trading near line (A), a price level that has served
as support and resistance over the past several years. It is currently serving as price
resistance.
At the same time, there is a divergence between the stock market (the S&P 500 made new
all-time highs) and Junk Bonds (well below all-time highs and 5 percent off 2019 highs).
So this is an important resistance test for junk bonds. Will Junk Bonds (JNK) break down
from here (bearish) or break out (bullish).
What happens here will send an important message to stocks (and investors)!
In a sense the USA is a theocratic society with neoliberal religion as the state religion. Not that different from the
USSR whioch also was a theocratic society with some perversion of Marxism as the state religion.
I capitulate. Ron you are correct, we are post peak.
Post Peak
OK, now what?
It is so strange to be post-peak and not have high prices for crude,
and food.
I guess that will be coming.
note- biofuels should not be counted in liquids tally. It is a different animal, with the
source being dependent on farming and soil, not drilling and geology. Just because ethanol is
used for propulsion shouldn't matter- electrons and batteries aren't counted either, and
rightly so. Those belong in a different category- transportation energy.
I have argued for several years that peak oil is a low price phenomenon, not a high priced
phenomenon.
The most overrated law in economics is that of supply and demand. This law suffers from
what Richard Feynman called "vagueness" (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw
). The problem is that it is always satisfied and hence gives absolutely no information about
prices.
Another problem with market theory (beyond vagueness) is that it lacks a time axis.
The theory states that the relationship between price and supply moves along the demand
curve, but doesn't say how fast, just that "in the long run" the system will reach
equilibrium. Being in equilibrium means being somewhere on the demand curve.
So for example, if prices go up, the demand quantity is expected to go down. The question
is when.
Where does this go wrong? In classical market theory, for example, unemployment is
impossible, because if labor supply outstrips demand prices (wages) should fall until until
equilibrium is attained. This has been observed to be false on many occasions, including
right now.
As Feymann states in the video, "If it disagrees with experiment, it's WRONG! That's all
there is to it." Classical economics isn't just too vague, it is wrong.
Keynes joked about this that in the long term we'll all be dead. He meant equilibrium will
never be reached, so we are never on the demand curve. He argued that "sticky prices",
meaning the unwillingness to accept pay cuts, kept labor markets permanently out of
equilibrium.
It's worth pondering whether oil prices are "sticky" as well. Saying yes is saying the law
of supply and demand doesn't apply (in the short term). This year we have seen that both
OPEC's politicking and panicky traders can cause wild swings in price unrelated to supply and
demand.
Where market theory is vague is the shape of the demand curve. For example, if oil supply
can't meet demand in the near future, as some here have posited, how high will prices go?
Some claim it will go over $200, as people get desperate for it. Some claim that higher
prices would increase efforts to find and drill more, putting a lid on prices. Some claim the
shortage would crash the world economy, depressing prices. Some claim that faced with oil
shortages, the world would simply switch to EVs, or stop wasting the gunk on poorly designed
transportation systems, so prices would stay more or less the same.
Who is right? Nobody knows. So we don't know the shape of the demand curve. The theory is
hopelessly vague.
I have argued for several years that peak oil is a low price phenomenon, not a high
priced phenomenon.
Schinzy,
The price of crude oil is only part of the Peakoil phenomenon. How much is left in the
ground counts, however more important is at which velocity the remaining Gb can be
extracted. I am not a geologist, but common sense says that when an oilfield is well depleted
(50-70%) the most of the remaining barrels will be extracted at a much lower speed, even at
very high oilprices. With secondary and tertiary EOR technology most conventional oilfields
will not produce the same or close to the same amount of barrels/day as before for many more
years. That's also my conclusion from what I have read more than a decade ago.
Of course with high oilprices new, relatively small, oil fields will come online and (more
advanced) EOR will start in other fields, but no matter how you look at it: depletion never
stops. With most oilfields in the world past-peak, only a tremendous amount of money (needed
to develop EOR) can prevent world crude oilproduction from falling like a rock. And all those
EOR technologies will deplete oilfields faster. Big gains in the beginning, more
disappointments later.
Will there be significant amount of shale oil developed in the future in other countries than
the U.S. ? If so, is that wise, regarding an already existing runaway climate change ?
To be clear; none more deserving of dignity than the working people of America; they keep the nation running; they are America's
better angels; and, they deserve to be better paid.
Those are lofty words. But what to do when there is not enough cookies for everybody. That's when economic ruptures occur (with
one form being Minsky moments)
In a sense, going back to Joan Robinson, the idea of rupture within the notion of historical time can also be found in Keynes,
although with an important difference. Here the emphasis put on irreversibility implies of course qualitative change, and indeed
the emphasis is put on the changing conditions underlying economic phenomena. Thus, for example, Joan Robinson discusses the notion
of scarcity in relation to historical time:
The question of scarce means with alternative uses becomes self‐ contradictory when it is set in historical time, where
today is an ever-moving break between the irrevocable past and the unknown future. At any moment, certainly, resources are
scarce, but they have hardly any range of alternative uses.
The workers available to be employed are not a supply of "labor", but a number of carpenters or coal miners. The uses of
land depend largely on transport; industrial equipment was created to assist the output of particular products.
To change the use of resources requires investment and training, which alters the resources themselves. As for choice among
investment projects, this involves the whole analysis of the nature of capitalism and of its evolution through time. (Robinson
1977: 8)
Although the emphasis on rupture is introduced, in this historical time, "where today is an ever moving break between the irrevocable
past and the unknown future," the sense of the "break," of rupture, is confined within the problems of capitalist accumulation,
of the problems posed by the right proportions of, following Robinson's example, carpenters and coal miners.
History here does not present alternatives and defines itself clearly and simply as "historical objectivism" in the continuum
of the capitalist relation, as contemplation of "what really was," that is, the "irrevocable [capitalist] past," and speculations
about an "unknown [capitalist] future."
In Keynes, the unknown character of this future is translated in the status of the long run expectations of the investors which,
to emphasize the difficulty of their modeling, in turn depends on their "animal spirits."
In Keynes, rupture as revolutionary, transcendental, rupture exists only in the form of a threat, implicit in the theoretical
apparatus, in the difficulty to endogenize variables, in the reliance on "psychological factors," on investors' animal spirits
which mysteriously respond to hints of this historical rupture, in the recognition of the difficulty to model behavioral functions,
etc.
This threat is recognized through the status of long run expectations of the investors.
In the case of the liquidity trap, in which the infinitely elastic demand for money curve is used to portray a situation of
hoarding that is, of capital's refusal to put people to work the threat is hanging over investors who perceive a gloomy future
without hope for their profit.
The truly unknown future from the capitalists' perspective, the true moment of rupture in their temporal dimension, is recognized
in order to be avoided, to organize the rescue of the capitalist relation of work. For this reason Keynes is not talking about
given functional relations, and is presupposing a moving marginal efficiency of capital schedule (Minsky 1975.
The future is there to puzzle the investors in the present. The aim of economic theory is to inform economic policy to limit
the puzzle within the borders of the capitalist relation of work. Although Keynes' theoretical apparatus is presupposing uncertainty
for the future, this uncertainty is seen with the sense of urgency typical of a world in transition. In the discussion of the
postwar Keynesian orthodoxy, it will be seen how this sense of urgency was lost, and the concept of time in economic theory changed,
although it was far from returning to the "timeless models" of the classical period.
@ 95 another rolling stone that illuminates the US necrotic process...unregulated dumping
of radwaste
tinyurl[dot]com/v3pva55
Evidently they actually spray the stuff on roads and, well, it's puckininsane stupid.
"..thing in this stuff and ingesting it are the worst types of exposure," Stolz continues.
"You are irradiating your tissues from the inside out." The radioactive particles fired off
by radium can be blocked by the skin, but radium readily attaches to dust,..."
(Honestly, I know it's hard to believe, but several immediate neighbors, possibly 1/3 of
the town, actually expect to be levitated to heaven in "rapture". Thus, according to their a
priori assumption, the poisoning is perfectly ok."
Anyway, both the bizarre beliefs and the idiotic actions (including with radwaste) are,
like Trump, a product, a manifestation. We agree.
About Rockefeller - Corbett Report has a very deep examination of that family and their
less well-known policy set.
"... $40s WTI and Brent are wholly unsustainable prices. I'd argue that $50s and $60s are also if growth is being sought outside of a few areas. ..."
"... SS, there is no doubt that the pandemic will hasten peak oil supply. Many shut-in wells will not re-open. Frac spreads are being sold for scrap. Rigs are being decommissioned. Plus we are still producing at 80 to 90% of former levels. That means depletion is still continuing. So when they do get around to producing flat out again, the oil will just not be there. ..."
"... close to 100,000 job losses in the oil industry, many folks in their 50s and 60s. Hard to see how they bring folks on for another boom with the loss of all that skilled labor. ..."
"... So, maybe $100 oil over a period of time could turn this tide, but sub-$50 WTI sure won't. ..."
"... Yes, the future is hard to predict. But absent some tremendous financial return potential, why would young people have any interest in making a career of US upstream E & P? ..."
OPEC peaked in 2016, Russia peaked in 2019, and the USA very likely peaked in 2019 also.
And the vast majority of all other nations have peaked also as evidenced by their continuing
decline. That should be enough evidence for anyone.
SS, there is no doubt that the pandemic will hasten peak oil supply. Many shut-in
wells will not re-open. Frac spreads are being sold for scrap. Rigs are being decommissioned.
Plus we are still producing at 80 to 90% of former levels. That means depletion is still
continuing. So when they do get around to producing flat out again, the oil will just not be
there.
As to the longevity of the pandemic, one can only guess. But things will never be back to
the free and easy ways of the past. International travel will never be back to what it once
was. There will be fewer travel vacations even within nations. The possibility of the virus
returning will forever be on everyone's mind.
Also close to 100,000 job losses in the oil industry, many folks in their 50s and 60s.
Hard to see how they bring folks on for another boom with the loss of all that skilled
labor.
Once that a, in most cases, curative combination of medicines is available and one or a
few very effective vaccins are registered and rolled out, it remains to be seen how 'normal'
life will get again.
I don't think the virus will be forever on everyone's mind. Already now many young people
have started to party like before the pandemic, even in Europe (infections rising in almost
all European countries, so a lot of 'Trumpites' and Bolsonarites' also in Europe).
When vaccines are widely available at least everyone who is planning to travel by plane
will be going to get a vaccin.
A good chance that vacations and air travel is close to normal somewhere in 2022 or 2023.
The pandemic will eventually subside an the US and other nations that have responded
poorly to the pandemic will eventually learn from nations that have responded relatively
better, compare Europe and US.
If peak supply is reached, but demand resumes 1% annual growth, I expect we will soon see
Brent at $65/bo+/-5 at minimum, by 2025 to 2030.
Dennis. Brent $65 in 2025-30 is only helpful if one or both of the following happens:
1. Capital markets continue to the pattern of 2015-19 and fund drilling that provides
marginal returns or losses, but has no hope of providing superior returns.
2. Some other new, economical supply source is discovered.
Low oil prices to 2025-2030 would seem to mean supply will be constrained unless one or
both of the above occur.
Conventional oil pretty much peaked in 2005.
I look at $10K invested in a major oil company in 2010. I look at $10K invested in a shale
company in 2010. I then compare that to the S&P 500 return since 2010, all other industry
groups, specific companies, etc.
Investing in oil is like investing in tobacco. The only allure is yield. Upstream E &
P will have to keep borrowing to pay the dividend even if oil returns to $50 Brent. Same with
$60 Brent.
Dennis. One thing that you are missing is just how poor the future of the upstream oil
industry is.
When the shale boom started, EV's were a pipe dream.
When the shale boom started, there wasn't widespread sentiment against oil. Global
warming/climate change was on the radar, but not like now.
BP is trying to remake itself in large part because they cannot find talented and skilled
younger workers who want to work for a fossil fuel company.
We have been in this industry since the 1970s. We have some of the best leases in our
field and have made more money in this industry than in our professions or in other
investments. There is a third generation in our family ranging from late teens to mid
twenties. None are interested at all in this family business/investment. Same for one of my
best friends who makes his living at this. Same for another, whose engineer son started
working with him out of college, but before oil crashed in 2014 left and took a job in a
"Green Energy" field.
Mike is in the same boat.
I know all of the major players in our field. All companies are family owned. There are a
total of four in all of those families working in oil and gas who are under the age of 50,
and those four are at or nearing 40, and started working in their family oil companies at
least over 15 years ago.
As I have posted before, our employees range from 47-61 years of age. The two we hired who
were in their twenties have both long ago left, and no longer work in upstream E & P.
We have participated in some Zoom meetings with the National Stripper Well Association.
Almost all on those meetings is old (50-80 years old).
We hope to sell out on the next recovery, if that ever comes. But we are concerned there
will not be any buyers.
So, maybe $100 oil over a period of time could turn this tide, but sub-$50 WTI sure
won't.
Yes, the future is hard to predict. But absent some tremendous financial return
potential, why would young people have any interest in making a career of US upstream E &
P?
I capitulate. Ron you are correct, we are post peak.
Post Peak
OK, now what?
It is so strange to be post-peak and not have high prices for crude,
and food.
I guess that will be coming.
note- biofuels should not be counted in liquids tally. It is a different animal, with the
source being dependent on farming and soil, not drilling and geology. Just because ethanol is
used for propulsion shouldn't matter- electrons and batteries aren't counted either, and
rightly so. Those belong in a different category- transportation energy.
I have argued for several years that peak oil is a low price phenomenon, not a high priced
phenomenon.
The most overrated law in economics is that of supply and demand. This law suffers from
what Richard Feynman called "vagueness" (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw
). The problem is that it is always satisfied and hence gives absolutely no information about
prices.
Another problem with market theory (beyond vagueness) is that it lacks a time axis.
The theory states that the relationship between price and supply moves along the demand
curve, but doesn't say how fast, just that "in the long run" the system will reach
equilibrium. Being in equilibrium means being somewhere on the demand curve.
So for example, if prices go up, the demand quantity is expected to go down. The question
is when.
Where does this go wrong? In classical market theory, for example, unemployment is
impossible, because if labor supply outstrips demand prices (wages) should fall until until
equilibrium is attained. This has been observed to be false on many occasions, including
right now.
As Feymann states in the video, "If it disagrees with experiment, it's WRONG! That's all
there is to it." Classical economics isn't just too vague, it is wrong.
Keynes joked about this that in the long term we'll all be dead. He meant equilibrium will
never be reached, so we are never on the demand curve. He argued that "sticky prices",
meaning the unwillingness to accept pay cuts, kept labor markets permanently out of
equilibrium.
It's worth pondering whether oil prices are "sticky" as well. Saying yes is saying the law
of supply and demand doesn't apply (in the short term). This year we have seen that both
OPEC's politicking and panicky traders can cause wild swings in price unrelated to supply and
demand.
Where market theory is vague is the shape of the demand curve. For example, if oil supply
can't meet demand in the near future, as some here have posited, how high will prices go?
Some claim it will go over $200, as people get desperate for it. Some claim that higher
prices would increase efforts to find and drill more, putting a lid on prices. Some claim the
shortage would crash the world economy, depressing prices. Some claim that faced with oil
shortages, the world would simply switch to EVs, or stop wasting the gunk on poorly designed
transportation systems, so prices would stay more or less the same.
Who is right? Nobody knows. So we don't know the shape of the demand curve. The theory is
hopelessly vague.
A comment posted on ^peakoil.com^ . Interesting .
"The price action of WTI shows it quite clearly that the non oil extracting part of the
economy can't afford to pay a high enough price that would allow the extracting, processing
and delivery of oil products to it.
It's that simple, most of the oil still in the ground will stay there unless somehow you
find a way to pay $100++ per barrel. The last 12 years has shown that we can't!
The best yearly average weekly price of WTI was right around $100
Average weekly price of WTI for years 2008 thru 2013 was $88.
Average weekly price of WTI for years 2014 thru 2019 was $53.
The trend is what it is and it shows no signs of changing, the price of WTI is still
hitting lower lows and lower high.
I have no idea what the future will bring but the next 3 years are going to be interesting
and not in a good way.
Have fun everyone."
Dennis,repeating myself ,the price of oil is going to trend down . Supply and demand
curves do not apply where the world^s economic system is now placed . Alimbiquated has done a
very good job explaining that .
Much of the fall in output of the other 9 is from Iran, Nigeria, Libya, and Venezuela,
much of that decline is due to political problems
No doubt it was. But political upheaval is part of the story, and always will be. There
will be political problems ongoing for decades. Dennis, if your model excludes political
problems, then you are living in a dream world.
Anyway, in addition to the political problems that you point out in those four nations,
which will most likely continue, we have the natural decline in the other five nations in the
chart below.
Yes and oil prices have been low from Nov 2018 until now, do you expect that to continue
for the next 10 years? I do not, perhaps that's the difference. 2025 to 2030 there is likely
to be a new peak for World C plus C centered 12 month average output probably 1 to 3 Mb per
day higher than the Nov 2018 peak. This assumes oil prices reach $64/bo or higher in 2020$ by
June 2030.
I seem to recall, not too long ago, various talking heads prattling on about how USA LTO
is now the new "swing producer"/source of swing supply. I guess we'll now get to see how well
it swings on and off, as swing producers are wont to do.
My WAG is that it doesn't swing back on so well, as the swing off phase seems to be damaging
(not just a tap you see), and when demand recovers after COVID, circa 2023, we'll see a price
run up. Perhaps it'll be a damaging price run up. 2023 will be in the middle of Biden's first
term, presumably.
And: Nigeria and Venezuela could ramp up their production only very, very slowly. They
could not stem the general trend. Lybia is too little to make any serious difference. The
only real wildcard is Iran. And it's the less probable to be played.
The economy will roll over soon, probably by early 2021. Whatever party has the presidency
won't matter. As the Dollar dies, so will the country because the dollar's status is the only
thing preventing hyperinflation and a total lockup of everything that moves at least for a
few months.
The carnival barkers in both parties are just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
If you haven't stocked up on food, water and ammo you better do so now.
Lawlessness in the major cities is just the opening act. Wait till people are hungry and
thrown out on the streets due to the stupidity of the Covid lock down madness.
I capitulate. Ron you are correct, we are post peak.
Post Peak
OK, now what?
It is so strange to be post-peak and not have high prices for crude,
and food.
I guess that will be coming.
NOTE:
biofuels should not be counted in liquids tally. It is a different animal, with the
source being dependent on farming and soil, not drilling and geology.
Just because ethanol is
used for propulsion shouldn't matter -- electrons and batteries aren't counted either, and
rightly so. Those belong in a different category- transportation energy.
I have argued for several years that peak oil is a low price phenomenon, not a high priced
phenomenon.
The most overrated law in economics is that of supply and demand. This law suffers from
what Richard Feynman called "vagueness" (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw
). The problem is that it is always satisfied and hence gives absolutely no information about
prices.
Another problem with market theory (beyond vagueness) is that it lacks a time axis. The theory states that the relationship between price and supply moves along the demand
curve, but doesn't say how fast, just that "in the long run" the system will reach
equilibrium. Being in equilibrium means being somewhere on the demand curve.
So for example, if prices go up, the demand quantity is expected to go down. The question
is when.
Where does this go wrong? In classical market theory, for example, unemployment is
impossible, because if labor supply outstrips demand prices (wages) should fall until until
equilibrium is attained. This has been observed to be false on many occasions, including
right now.
As Feymann states in the video, "If it disagrees with experiment, it's WRONG! That's all
there is to it." Classical economics isn't just too vague, it is wrong.
Keynes joked about this that in the long term we'll all be dead. He meant equilibrium will
never be reached, so we are never on the demand curve. He argued that "sticky prices",
meaning the unwillingness to accept pay cuts, kept labor markets permanently out of
equilibrium.
It's worth pondering whether oil prices are "sticky" as well. Saying yes is saying the law
of supply and demand doesn't apply (in the short term). This year we have seen that both
OPEC's politicking and panicky traders can cause wild swings in price unrelated to supply and
demand.
Where market theory is vague is the shape of the demand curve. For example, if oil supply
can't meet demand in the near future, as some here have posited, how high will prices go?
Some claim it will go over $200, as people get desperate for it. Some claim that higher
prices would increase efforts to find and drill more, putting a lid on prices. Some claim the
shortage would crash the world economy, depressing prices. Some claim that faced with oil
shortages, the world would simply switch to EVs, or stop wasting the gunk on poorly designed
transportation systems, so prices would stay more or less the same.
Who is right? Nobody knows. So we don't know the shape of the demand curve. The theory is
hopelessly vague.
I have argued for several years that peak oil is a low price phenomenon, not a high
priced phenomenon.
Schinzy,
The price of crude oil is only part of the Peakoil phenomenon.
How much is left in the
ground counts, however more important is at which velocity the remaining Gb can be
extracted. I am not a geologist, but common sense says that when an oilfield is well depleted
(50-70%) the most of the remaining barrels will be extracted at a much lower speed, even at
very high oilprices.
With secondary and tertiary EOR technology most conventional oilfields
will not produce the same or close to the same amount of barrels/day as before for many more
years. That's also my conclusion from what I have read more than a decade ago.
Of course with high oilprices new, relatively small, oil fields will come online and (more
advanced) EOR will start in other fields, but no matter how you look at it: depletion never
stops.
With most oilfields in the world past-peak, only a tremendous amount of money (needed
to develop EOR) can prevent world crude oil production from falling like a rock. And all those
EOR technologies will deplete oilfields faster.
Big gains in the beginning, more
disappointments later.
Will there be significant amount of shale oil developed in the future in other countries than
the U.S. ? If so, is that wise, regarding an already existing runaway climate change ?
The disconnect between the all time highs in the stock market and the broader economy has
never been greater (with even Janet Yellen , one of
the main architects of this disconnect, agreeing), and one of the places where this chasm is
most glaring, is in the staggering number of major corporations filing for bankruptcy in 2020.
Indeed, this year large US corporate bankruptcy filings are running at a record pace and are
set to surpass levels reached during the financial crisis in 2009 (when the S&P was far
from an all time high).
According to FT calculations , as of
August 17, a record 45 companies each with more than $1 billion in assets has filed for Chapter
11 this year; this compares with 38 for the same period of 2009 during the depths of the
financial crisis and is more than double last year's figure of 18 over the comparable period
.
In total, 157 companies with liabilities over $50 million have filed for Chapter 11
bankruptcy this year and as we warned several
months ago, many more are coming.
"We are in the first innings of this bankruptcy cycle. It will spread far across industries
as we get deeper into the crisis. It's going to be a bumpy ride," said Ben Schlafman, chief
operating officer at New Generation Research.
The spike in bankruptcies comes despite trillions of dollars in government aid to mitigate
the fallout of the coronavirus pandemic on businesses, highlighting the catastrophic and
lasting impact Covid-19 is having on the US economy. Or perhaps those trillions in government
aid are going to the wrong recipients, and as a result companies that stand to benefit from
mass defaults are now sporting record market caps. In fact, the irony is that in its pursuit to
crush monopolies such as Amazon and Google, the government has made them bigger and stronger
than they have ever been.
Meanwhile, with the US economy driving right over the fiscal cliff as Congress failed to
extend emergency covid benefits, sending spending by those receiving Unemployment Insurance
sharply lower ...
... and millions of Americans about to lose their job (again), a new default wave is just
waiting to be unleashed.
"Ending the $600 per week federal unemployment benefits will push tens of millions of
Americans into, or uncomfortably close to, poverty. They won't have the money to buy billions
of dollars worth of goods and services. As a result, the entire economy will suffer. Small
businesses will continue to suffer the most because they're already precarious," said Robert
Reich, Bill Clinton's labor secretary.
For now, the brunt of the default wave has been felt by oil and gas companies as low (and on
one historic occasion, negative) crude prices crippled dozens of businesses. There have been 33
filings to date according to the
Oil Patch Bankruptcy Monitor from Haynes and Boone, including Chesapeake, Whiting Petroleum
and Diamond Offshore Drilling. There were only 14 last year.
While not quite as bad as the E&P sector, retail businesses with assets of more than $50MM
have also been severely affected with 24 filing for bankruptcy, a three-fold jump from last
year. They have been among the hardest hit by the government-mandated lockdowns, which
prevented stores from opening and drove consumers to online retailers such as Amazon. Burdened
by debts, some of which were built up under private equity ownership, several prominent
retailers have been forced to file for Chapter 11.
Some of the most iconic names that have filed this year include Neiman Marcus, which
struggled for years with a heavy debt burden from its 2005 leveraged buyout by TPG and Warburg
Pincus, and which finally filed for bankruptcy in May with liabilities of $6.7bn. JCPenney,
also saddled with billions in debt, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in May. Brooks Brothers,
the venerable suit retailer that once counted Abraham Lincoln and John F Kennedy among its
clients, did the same in July.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
"The Covid-19 pandemic is reshaping consumer buying habits. Therefore, we will continue to
see large retail, energy, and transportation businesses taking advantage of the tools provided
by a formal bankruptcy to restructure to be more profitable and competitive in the long term,"
said Deirdre O'Connor, managing director of corporate restructuring at legal services group
Epiq.
And while several businesses tried to reopen in late May and June (and some amusingly tried
to unfile for bankruptcy just so they were eligible for bailout loans), a recent flare-up in
coronavirus cases and deaths in several US states choked the recovery, forcing many business
owners to close again.
"It pains me to say this, but bankruptcy is a growth industry in America," New Generation's
Schlafman dismally concluded.
The last recession, from 2007 to 2009, was brutal because of twin crashes in both the financial and housing markets. The
S&P
500 plunged 56%
from top to bottom, and
home
values fell 27%
. The daunting loss of wealth took years to recover and left prolonged scars on the U.S. economy.
These twin bubbles are detached from what's happening in the real economy, where unemployed has nearly tripled, from 5.8 million
workers in February to 16.3 million now. Most
broad
measures of economic activity
show that the coronavirus recession bottomed out in May, with gradual progress since then. But
we've only recovered about one-third of the jobs and output we've lost, and there's no sign of a quick improvement any time soon.
A return to normal only seems possible once there's a widely available coronavirus vaccine, maybe within 9 or 12 months.
The Fed's aggressive action is a political lifeline to President Trump, who would have a far worse mess to explain to voters if
the Fed weren't administering emergency CPR. As is, millions of Americans benefiting from the twin bubbles stoked by the Federal
Reserve might feel okay. The
S&P
500 set a record high this week
, with the index now up 52% from its bear-market low on March 23. Many analysts say it makes
no sense for stocks to be on a tear while the real economy is on its knees, but if you sold stocks today for a 51% gain that
would be real money in your bank account. Those gains are largely due to the Fed goosing asset prices, but that doesn't make the
money less real.
Homeowners are benefitting, too. Historically low mortgage rates
pushed
existing home sales
to the highest level in 14 years this week. Sales of new homes are soaring, too, and the increased demand
is pushing home values up.
This might seem unfair. The Fed's actions are benefiting shareholders and homeowners, who arguably need help least. But it's the
usual trickle-down wait for families not lucky enough to own stocks or real estate. But for all its might, the Fed has limited
power to reach into the economy and target aid beyond financial markets. That's Congress's job. And this economy would be
dreadfully worse if the stock-market was down 30% or 40% and homeowners were losing equity rather than gaining it.
This week's Trump-o-meter reads WEAK, the third-lowest rating, which is an improving over the FAILING and SAD readings of the
last several weeks.
Source: Yahoo Finance
More
Trump still faces an uphill path to reelection, on account of his dismissive response to the coronavirus, which has kept the
economy from entering the quick, V-shaped recovery he's hoping for. Democratic nominee Joe Biden leads Trump by
7.4
percentage points nationally
, a larger edge than Hillary Clinton had over Trump at the same point in 2016. Biden's Democrats
held a solid virtual convention this week, and Biden easily disproved Trump's claim that he's senile. Trump will now fill the
airwaves with his own four-day nominating convention, though he could be upstaged by the
mounting
uproar at the postal service
, the
strange
new indictment
of his 2016 campaign manager Steve Bannon or some other brewing scandal.
With 10 weeks until the election, the economy shows halting progress, suggesting it may not be much better by the time voters
cast their ballots. The Oxford Economics weekly economy tracker improved slightly this week, but initial unemployment claims once
again shot past the startling 1 million level. In
a
new Yahoo Finance-Harris poll
, 51% of respondents said they expect the economy to worsen within the next three months, while
only 31% expect it to improve. Trump obviously hopes otherwise, and he will likely claim exaggerated progress as the election
hits the home stretch. After all, look at that record stock market.
The broad market (S&P 500) is trading at the highest forward PE multiples since November
1999, but the financial press is rife with mendacious piffle claiming there is no bubble. For
example, in celebration of Tuesday's all-time high on the S&P 500, one James Mackintosh of
the Wall Street Journal minced no words:
Except, the Everything Bubble is in the imagination of the many investors complaining
about it. First, it isn't everything. Second, it isn't a bubble .
Right. Supposedly, the above statement is true because energy sector stock prices are in the
tank, but the market is being rationally led by the tech giants where allegedly solid prospects
for earnings growth are being rewarded with higher PE multiples owing to ultra-low interest
rates.
...Lower rates mean profits further in the future matter more to the share price , so
companies with steady earnings no matter what the economy does are worth more. Those that are
sensitive to the economy are worth less, because future earnings are expected to be hit.
Growth stocks do incredibly well, because their future earnings are expected to be higher
and, at least for those thought immune to economic weakness, worth more as well thanks to
lower rates.
Apply this framework and there's no bubble. U.S. stocks are more highly valued than in the
past because they are dominated by big growth stocks, themselves justifiably more highly
valued thanks to low rates.
The sheer laziness and conformism of today's so-called financial journalists is a wonder to
behold. When the leader of the tech growth stocks, Apple, crossed the $2 trillion market cap
barrier for the first time today, thereby embodying more market cap than the entire Russell
2000 of small cap US companies, Mackintosh's colleague at the Wall Street Journal spewed the
same groupthink:
The stock has more than doubled from its March 23 low, boosted by steady demand
for the company's devices and better-than-feared results in its core iPhone business as
millions of Americans work from home.
Steady sales growth is driving the string of achievements. Apple's sales rose to $260
billion in the fiscal year ended in September from $216 billion three years prior. The
company has even grown sales during the pandemic: For the quarter ended in June, they rose
11% from a year earlier to nearly $60 billion, exceeding Wall Street expectations. Earnings
surged to $11.25 billion.
Apple is not a growth stock. Period.
The three-year sales gain cited by the WSJ amounted to only 6.4% per annum, but also
reflects what amounts to journalistic malpractice.
That's because the starting figure of $216 billion for Apple's FY 2016 sales actually
reflected a 7.8% decline from sales of $234 billion in FY 2015. So the four-years growth rate
of sales through FY 2019 was, well, a mere 2.67% per annum.
Likewise, the 11% sales gain during the June 2020 quarter versus prior year is completely
misleading. During the past four quarters, the year-over-year sales gains have been all over
the lot, posting at 10.9%, 1.0%, 8.8% and 1.8% respectively. Accordingly, for the LTM period
ended in June, the sales gain was just 5.7% – hardly a barn-burning growth figure.
Likewise, the purported June quarter earnings "surge" to $11.25 billion was nothing of the
kind. During the 2018 June quarter, for instance, net income posted higher at $11.52 billion .
The surging at issue, therefore, was one of backward motion.
In fact, the only thing about Apple which has been in a growth mode during the last five
years is the company's PE multiple, which has essentially doubled from 14X to 35X at today's
record share price.
As to the actual 5-year trend of sales and earnings growth, not so much.
Back in June 2015 Apple was valued at $715 billion on the strength of its unparalleled tech
product franchise, which was reflected in $224 billion of annual sales and $50.7 billion of LTM
profits.
Still, there was a reason for the modest implied PE multiple of 14.1X : Namely, the tech
behemoth's growth rate was rapidly slowing – freighted down by the inherent limits
embedded in its enormous scale and the then modest expectations for earnings expansion in the
immediate years ahead.
Those modest expectations were accurate. Five years later, the LTM figures for June 2020
came in at $273.9 billion of sales and $58.4 billion of net income.
Yes, the latter figure represents a lot of profits, but it embodies hardly a modicum of
growth. In fact, Apple's five-year sales growth rate was just 4.1% , while its net income
growth rate clocked in at only 2.9% per annum.
Moreover, there has been no recent growth spurt to accelerate these five-year trend rates of
growth. The two-year growth rates are even slower, with sales posting at 3.6% per annum and net
income rising by just 2.03% per year. Wiser:
Getting Beyond ... Hastie, ReidBest Price: $1.07Buy New $14.14(as of 04:01 EDT -
Details)
Needless to say, the doubling of Apple's PE multiple has nothing to do with its punk
five-year net income growth rate of 2.9% per annum; it's about the Fed's radical repression of
interest rate and the resulting diversion of trillions of borrowed capital into the inflation
of risk asset capitalization rates.
Nor is Apple some kind of outlier, albeit it is the monster of the tech midway. Overall, the
so-called Fab Five (Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and Google) reflect the same multiple
inflation story; and they are obviously the pile driver that is pushing the heavily ETF and
indexer-driven stock market up into the nosebleed section of history.
Thus, back in June 2014, the Fab Five's combined market cap weighed-in at $1.63 trillion and
accounted for 9.5% of the overall S&P 500's market cap of about $17.0 trillion .
Fast forward six years, and the Fab Five were valued at today's close at $7.1 trillion ,
which accounts for 26% of the $27.7 trillion total market cap of the S&P 500.
So, yes, the term "pile-driver" is probably an understatement. Fully 50% of the S&P
500's $10.7 trillion market cap gain since June 2014 is attributable to the Fab Five.
At the same time, the combined net income of the Fab Five has risen from $76.3 billion to
$170.7 billion, meaning that the already frisky PE multiple of 21.4X for the group as a whole
in June 2014 has now stands at 42.0X .
Obviously, averages can be misleading, but they do not lie. The composite net income growth
rate of the Fab Five "growth stocks" has been just 14.4% over the past six years.
In a world which is literally unwinding at the seams owing to the Covid pandemic and a $260
trillion burden of debt, a valuation multiple equal to 42X or nearly three times the trailing
growth rate makes no sense whatsoever.
That's because the James Mackintosh groupthink cited above is marred with a mighty flaw. To
wit, you can't value earnings into the indefinite future owing to today's ultra-low interest
rates that are definitely not sustainable.
The Fed's policy of radical interest rate repression simply defies the laws of finance and
common sense because real yields are negative, and in the long-run negative real yields are an
oxymoron.
The chart below is the smoking gun. Once upon a time there was meaningful daylight between
the brown line (nominal yield on the benchmark 10-year UST) and the purple line (running
inflation rate measured by the 16% trimmed mean CPI).
That is, even so-called risk-free US Treasury debt had a real yield of 200-400 basis points
to account for taxes and a real return on investment.
But after the final leap into monetary madness commencing with the financial crisis of
2008-2009, the real yield had virtually disappeared; and then after the massive $3 trillion Fed
bond-buying spree commencing in mid-March, the benchmark security of the entire global fixed
income market went deeply negative in real terms.
As of the latest month, the running inflation rate clocked-in at 2.27% (June LTM) compared
to an all-time low yield on the 10-year UST of 52 basis points a few weeks back.
Needless to say, when the real cost of risk-free benchmark debt is negative 175 basis points
, you are not in an indefinitely sustainable steady state. You are actually courting financial
disaster.
That's especially because fiscal policy in the US and elsewhere around the world has become
completely unhinged.
So unless the Fed and other central banks continue their massive bond purchases in response
to this tsunami of public debt, the bond pits are heading for a train-wreck some time soon; and
if the central banks continue to print at current lunatic rates, the monetary system itself
will go into meltdown.
Still, the misbegotten idea that the stock market isn't overvalued because bond prices have
been massively inflated by central bank money-pumping is just one instance of the present
tyranny of groupthink – called to attention by Apple's crossing the $2 trillion market
cap barrier.
In fact, groupthink is omnipresent in the the mainstream narrative and so-called news. The
nearly universal belief that the Covid-lockdowns were necessary and effective and that the
coronavirus can be stopped by brute-force economic and social regimentation is another case in
point – underscored by a new analysis of the Swedish outcome.
The mainstream narrative, of course, is that Sweden's no lockdown policy – the
schools, restaurants, movies, gyms, malls etc. remained open – was a disastrous failure,
thereby vindicating the universal quarantine approach of Dr. Fauci, Governor Cuomo and the rest
of the Blue State Virus Patrol.
But that's based on the irrelevant observation that Sweden's overall WITH-Covid mortality
rate of 56 per 100,000 is far higher than that of Norway, Finland and Denmark.
The truth is, Sweden's mortality rate happened in the long-term care facilities, where 75%
of the country's 5,800 WITH-Covid deaths to date (August 18) have occurred, and which is
neither here nor there when it comes to lockdowns of the non-elderly population.
Fortunately, a breakdown of Sweden's WITH-covid deaths by detailed age brackets is readily
available and it puts the kibosh on Dr. Fauci's Lockdown Nation folly.
Number of WITH-Covid deaths/ Population/Rate per 100,000 by age cohort:
0-9 years: 1/1.22 million/ 0.08 per 100,000;
10-19 years: 0/1.19 million/ 0.0 per 100,000;
20-29: 10/1.31 million/ 0.77 per 100,000;
30-39 years: 16/1.37 million/ 1.16 per 100,000;
40-49 years: 45/1.31 million/ 3.42 per 100,000;
50-59 years: 162/1.27 million/ 12.8 per 100,000;
60-69 years: 398/1.14 million/ 34.8 per 100,000;
70-79 years: 1,250/.917 million/ 128.7 per 100,000;
80-90 years: 2,408/.425 million/ 567.0 per 100,000;
90 years plus: 1,512/.119 million/ 1,271.0 per 100,000.
So, yes, Sweden has a WITH-Covid mortality rate of 56 per 100,000 for the entire country.
But 26% of those deaths occurred among the population 90 years and older, which accounts for
just 1.1% of Sweden's population.
Similarly, 67% of the deaths were among the population 80 years and older and 93% were among
those aged 65 or more. By contrast, persons 65 and older account for just 19% of Sweden's
population, and the preponderant share of the latter, who have suffered serious illness or
death from the Covid, were already in long-term care facilities and programs.
Nudge: Improving Decis... Richard H. Thaler, Cas...Best Price: $5.26Buy New $9.75(as of
09:25 EST - Details)
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Needless to say, locking down the schools, gyms, restaurants and malls does nothing for the
institutionalized population of the vulnerable elderly and co-morbid. Sheltering and treating
the latter in place, rather than quarantining the younger, healthier populations, is the
self-evident answer.
Indeed, the virtue of Sweden's anti-lockdown strategy virtually screams out from the
schedule above. Sweden did not close its schools, yet there has been just one WITH-Covid death
among its 2.4 million school age children under 20 years.
Likewise, there have been just 71 deaths among its 4.0 million prime working and consuming
age population (age 20-49). That's a rounding error mortality rate of 1.77 per 100,000. Who in
their right mind would want to shutdown the economy based on such infinitesimal risks?
Stated differently, the risk of death from Covid in Sweden has been 720X higher for the
largely institutionalized 90 and over population compared to the prime working age group (20-49
years); and has also been 157X higher for the entire population 65 and over than for prime
workers and the population that is the preponderant patron of the social congregation sectors
of the economy.
Fortunately, Sweden also has readily available data on normal, year-in-and-year-out
mortality, which rate is about 862 per 100,000 for the total population. But when you breakdown
these normal mortality rates by age cohort and cause of death, the insanity of Lockdown Nation
become all the more apparent.
Specifically, there are about 3,429 deaths per year in Sweden from auto crashes, falls,
drownings, electrocutions, poisonings and other accidents, and these account for about 4% of
Sweden's 2019 death total from all causes of 89,000.
However, when you look at mortality rates per 100,000 from accidents alone, the starling
result is that the existing risk of death from accidents is far higher than from the Covid for
the entire 8.4 million population under 65 years of age, and for the young and middle-aged
decidedly so.
Mortality rates per 100,000 for accidents versus Covid and ratio of accident/Covid risk:
0-14 years; 1.38 versus 0.06=25X;
15-44 years: 12.3 versus 1.2=10X;
45-64 years: 20.6 versus 15.4=1.34X;
65 years & older: 115 versus 257=0.45X.
In short, when the ordinary risk of death is 10-25X greater for accidents than from the
Covid for the young and working population, you don't shutdown the economy and the main avenues
of social congregation.
Due to enlightened leadership by Sweden's health professionals and leading epidemiologists,
they got it right, and now both new cases and WITH-Covid deaths have virtually disappeared.
And that's to say nothing of the fact, that Sweden's Q2 GDP decline of just 8.6% was far
better than the double digit declines in the US and most European countries, which imposed far
more draconian lockdowns.
In America, by contrast, the tyranny of groupthink on the matter has become so great that
college football and in-person college classes are being closed from coast-to-coast when the
risk of serious illness or death among the college age population here, like in Sweden, is
virtually nil. Roacheforque , 1 hour ago
It never ceases to amaze me what social media has revealed. 90% of people who use social
media are FOLLOWERS. They may have original thoughts but are afraid to express them. So they
copy and paste other people's thoughts as their own, to either intentionally or inadvertently
encourage groupthink.
Social correctness, political correctness and the outrageous fear of 'being different" are
a huge part of the reason as to why meritocracy, individualism and the freedoms and liberties
that come with them, are under attack. It's presented as socialism or even collectivism, but
it's really about conformity, obedience and fear.
In a word "disgusting" to the exceptional people who used to thrive in the merit-based,
free market capitalist environment that is now being obliterated.
Salisarsims , 50 minutes ago
It's mostly sociopaths and psychopaths who thrive in capitalism, and there's nothing merit
based to most of corporate America.
snatchpounder , 38 minutes ago
It's mostly sociopaths and psychopaths who thrive in politics, and there's nothing merit
based to most of corporate America.
fify
worstpersonintheworld , 38 minutes ago
nah it's people with a functioning brain
Cluster_Frak , 8 minutes ago
I thought, it was all about being different among the liberal woke. However, the woke
proved themselves to be nothing but Bolshevik Facist. You either must think what they think
or you are discriminated against. It only took 10 years to reach a point of extreme
intolerance.
NIRP_BTFD , 43 minutes ago
The power of propaganda. People overestimate covid death toll by a factor of 100. Btw not
only in the UK.
UK public 'believe coronavirus death toll 100 times higher than it really is'
Here are a few takeaways from the Democratic Convention:
The Democrats are running on the
same platform they ran on in 2016. The Democrats put style above substance, flashy optics above
ideas or issues. The Democrats think that hollow tributes to "diversity" and "inclusion" will
win the election. The Democrats have abandoned white, working class voters opting instead for
people of color. The Democrats have learned nothing from Hillary Clinton's defeat in 2016.
In 2016, Democrat front-runner, Hillary Clinton lost the election because she failed to see
her support was eroding in the key Rust Belt states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
Trump won all three states with a measly 77, 651 votes total. All three states were expected to
go Democrat but flipped to the GOP due to Clinton's support for free trade and immigration
policies that cost jobs and imposed unwelcome demographic changes on the working people of
those states. The Democrats and Hillary have never accepted the factual version of how the
election was lost. Instead, they fabricated a conspiracy theory about Trump colluding with
Russia. Although the Mueller Report proved that the claims of meddling were baseless, Clinton
and the Dems continue to trot them out at every opportunity. On Tuesday at the convention,
Hillary again reiterated the lie that Trump stole the election. She said:
"Vote like our lives and livelihoods are on the line, because they are. Remember: Joe and
Kamala can win 3 million more votes and still lose. Take it from me. We need numbers so
overwhelming Trump can't sneak or steal his way to victory."
The determination on the part of the Democrats to mischaracterize what actually happened in
the election is not a trivial matter. It suggests that deception is central to their governing
style. Party leaders do not think their supporters are entitled to know the truth but rather
believe that events must be shaped in a way that best serves their overall political interests.
For Democrats, lying is not a personal failing, but an opportunity for enhancing their grip on
power. This is from an article in The Guardian:
"Donald Trump's electoral college victory rests on the shoulders of more than 200
so-called "pivot counties" across the US. That is, counties that voted for Barack Obama only
four years earlier. The most decisive of these swings occurred in Pennsylvania's Luzerne
county, nestled in the north-east part of the state There, voters gave Trump a nearly
20-point victory after going for Obama by almost 5% in 2012. But Trump's win in Luzerne
was also noteworthy for its magnitude. His 26,000 vote plurality in Luzerne comprised almost
three-fifths of his plurality in the state as a whole, and with it Pennsylvania's 20 coveted
electoral votes ." ("
The Forgotten review: Ben Bradlee Jr delivers 2020 lessons for Democrats" , The
Guardian )
Critical battleground states tilted in Trump's favor because Democratic policies had
decimated their communities and eviscerated their standard of living. Author Ben Bradlee Jr.
explains this phenom in his book "The Forgotten" which should be required reading at the DNC.
Here's a clip from the review at the Guardian:
"The Forgotten documents the ravages of deindustrialization, lost jobs, crime and drugs.
It captures the sense of displacement tied to a changing and less monochromatic America.
Once upon a time, Luzerne was home to coal and textiles, dominated by Protestants from
Wales and Catholics from Ireland and continental Europe. Not any more. Luzerne is poorer and
smaller, for many a less recognizable place. Not surprisingly, immigration and Nafta come in
for constant criticism. " (The Guardian)
This is the real reason Hillary was defeated. Russia had nothing to do with it. The Dems
abandoned the white working-class people who had always voted for them and began to cobble
together their Rainbow coalition. When Hillary denounced these people as "Deplorables", it
forced more of them to join Trump team. The rest is history. Here's more from the same
article:
"In the absence of a recession, however, the party stands to face the same electoral
map it did in 2016. In fact, Ohio now looks an even tougher nut to crack. Much as the
Democratic base loathes the president, reality cannot be wished away. Luzerne would be a
good place for the party to start addressing this reality. " ( The Guardian
)
The point we're trying to make is that the effectiveness of the Democrat Convention can only
be measured in terms of its impact on potential voters. So, why have the Dems shrugged off any
effort to reach out to the people who could help them win?
It's not that complicated. The Dems are merely abandoning the people who, they believe, will
leave anyway as their globalist economic agenda becomes more apparent putting more downward
pressure on overall living standards. It's worth noting, that when Obama left office in 2016,
this process was already well-underway. According to a Gallup poll, 71 percent of the people
said they were dissatisfied with the way things were going. (in Obama's last year.) Only 27
percent said they're satisfied. So, even though Obama's personal approval ratings remained
high, his handling of the economy was extremely unpopular. (except on Wall Street, of
course.)
During this same period, the PEW Research Center conducted a survey titled: "Campaign
Exposes Fissures Over Issues, Values and How Life Has Changed in the U.S" which showed why
Trump was steadily gaining on Hillary. Here are a few excerpts from the report:
"Among GOP voters, fully 75% of those who support Donald Trump for the Republican
presidential nomination say life for people like them has gotten worse "
"GOP voters who support Trump also stand out for their pessimism about the nation's
economy and their own financial situations: 48% rate current economic conditions in the U.S.
as "poor.
"Within the GOP, anger at government is heavily concentrated among Trump supporters
– 50% say they are angry at government "
"Among Republicans, a majority of those who back Trump (61%) view the system as unfair
among Trump supporters, 67% say trade agreements are bad thing "
"Half of Trump supporters (50%) say they are angry at the federal government . Anger at
government – and politics – is much more pronounced among Trump backers than
among supporters of any other presidential candidate, Republican or Democrat " ("
Campaign Exposes Fissures Over Issues, Values and How Life Has Changed in the U.S ", PEW
Research Center)
So, a higher percentage of Trump supporters think they are getting screwed-over by an unfair
system. They think "free trade" only benefits the rich, they think the government is
unresponsive to their needs, they think the system is rigged, and they're really, really
mad.
So, which speaker at the Democrat Convention addressed the concerns or complaints of white
working-class people who now almost-universally harbor these same feelings??
No one, because no one in the Democrat party plans to do anything about these issues, in
fact, just the opposite. Now that the Dems have been subsumed by Wall Street and their big
globalist donors, things are going to get dramatically worse for working people who will see a
vicious attack on essential social services and programs as soon as the election is over. The
massive build-up of debt– by mainly Democrat Governors who deliberately drove their
states into bankruptcy at the behest of Fauci's Vaccine Gestapo– will now be met by a
growing demand for austerity on a scale unlike anything we've experienced in the last century.
The country is being prepared for an excruciating restructuring that will create a permanent
underclass that will provide an endless source of sweatshop labor for the multinational
carpetbaggers. Those jobs will likely go to members of the Dems rainbow coalition while white,
working class people in America's heartland –with their strong sense of patriotism–
will be seen as a potential threat to the emerging new order.
It's clear that the Dems anticipate resistance to their plan by the contemptible way they
have branded struggling workers as "white nationalists" and "racists". But is it true or are
the Democrats and their deep-pocket allies preemptively denigrating these people and supporting
BLM rioters to head-off growing resistance to their strategy of total control through
widespread mayhem, decimation of the economy and extermination of the American middle class?
Author CJ Hopkins summed it up like this in a recent article at The Unz Review:
"What we are experiencing is not the "return of fascism." It is the global capitalist
empire restoring order, putting down the populist insurgency that took them by surprise in
2016.
The White Black Nationalist Color Revolution, the fake apocalyptic plague, all the
insanity of 2020 it has been in the pipeline all along. It has been since the moment Trump
won the election. No, it is not about Trump, the man. It has never been about Trump, the
man
GloboCap needs to crush Donald Trump not because he is a threat to the empire , but
because he became a symbol of populist resistance to global capitalism and its increasingly
aggressive "woke" ideology . It is this populist resistance to its ideology that GloboCap
is determined to crush, no matter how much social chaos and destruction it unleashes in the
process.. ." (" The White Black
Nationalist Color Revolution" , CJ Hopkins, The Unz Review )
Bingo. It is the "populist resistance to global capitalism" that is the defacto enemy of the
Party elite, the same elites who conspired with senior-level members of the Intelligence
Community, the FBI, the DOJ and the Obama White House to spy on the Trump Campaign, infiltrate
the presidential transition, and to try to topple the elected government. And while the coup
plotters have still not been brought to justice, they are now within spitting distance of their
ultimate objective, which is seizing executive power and using it to crush the fledgling
opposition, impose a one-party system of government, and transform America into a corporate
superstate ruled by Global Capital. Here's a clip from an article by Gary D. Barnett at Lew
Rockwell:
"By the end of this next planned phase of the 'virus' scare, a global reset of the world
economy will be ready to launch. This reset will be mammoth in scope, as everything we have
known will be restructured. Those out of work in the final stage will most likely stay out of
work, pushing the dependency state to new levels sought by the ruling class. Controlling
the population will be a key component of the plan, including population size, birth rates,
movement, and personal contact among individuals. The elimination of normal human interaction
is sought, and this is only the beginning . The ultimate goal is total control, and every
tool in the box of the tyrants will be used to gain that control. Restraint by the ruling
class will be non-existent, as this staged reset is now going forward at a very accelerated
pace." (
"The Economic Insanity of This Coronavirus Pandemic Plot and the Coming Global Reset ",
Lew Rockwell )
The coup plotters have chosen the candidates they want to carry out the next phase of their
operation. All they need now is to win the election.
Is Covid the most perfect distraction that could have hit the world? The timing couldn't
have been more perfect for the European and American economies. We know that there were major
problems in the financial system back in August-September 2019 when both the ECB and the Fed
declared that they would do what it takes. And since then we have seen massive injections of
liquidity in the form of QE and Repos.
The world was never informed what the financial problems were but it is obvious that this
was the hangover from the 2006-9 financial crisis which was never solved but just deferred with
the help of unlimited money printing and credit expansion. There was clearly something rotten
in the kingdom of the financial world.
So was it just coincidence that Coronavirus started spreading around the world in
January-February this year in the middle of a serious crisis in the financial system?
Throughout history, initiating a crisis has always been a popular remedy that leaders have
applied to divert attention from the real problem whether it be political or financial.
The normal course of action would be a military conflict. This would both enable massive
money printing and also alarming the people which would result in more votes for the ruling
government.
The American writer Henry Louis Mencken understood the purpose of these actions:
I am not someone who subscribes to conspiracy theories. But however the Coronavirus started,
the timing seems more than coincidental. CV has certainly diverted the attention away from the
underlying problems in the financial system and undeniably seems like a hobgoblin. But whether
it is a hobgoblin or not, it has allowed some governments around the world to blame it all on
CV and run huge deficits combined with massive liquidity injections.
The coming likely implosion of the financial system and depression will for decades be
blamed on a pandemic which was only a catalyst and never the cause of the fall of the global
economy. The real cause is a rotten financial system and an unmanageable debt burden which I
have discussed in many articles.
CORONAVIRUS – OUTCOME WORSE WITH AUTOCRATIC
LEADERS
If we look at the effects of CV on various countries the differences are astounding. Sweden
which has had virtually no lockdown saw an 8.6% fall in GDP in Q2. Much of the fall was due to
lower exports as other countries bought less Swedish products. Switzerland which only has had a
very limited lockdown had a 6.4% GDP fall in Q2.
If we then look at the two countries which have totally mismanaged the situation – USA
and UK, the outcome is disastrous. US GDP fell 32.9% in Q2 and the UK GDP was down 20.4%.
(MIS-)MANAGEMENT OF CV
It is clear that the countries that have big ego autocratic leaders have fared the
worst. Sweden and Switzerland have delegated the CV policy to health officials whilst in the US
and UK much of the policy, or lack of, has come from the top.
Sadly the US and the UK have both had high numbers of CV cases and deaths. And in spite of
major lockdowns, these two countries have seen a catastrophic decline in their economies, a
fall which will take many years to recover from.
BEST RUN COUNTRIES HAVE BEST CORONA
RECORD
It is clearly no coincidence that Sweden and Switzerland have strong and well managed
economies also whilst the US and the UK are running big deficits and debts. And with the poor
economic state of the two latter countries, their economies will continue to suffer badly.
Personally I don't believe that there will be an effective vaccine for years or ever.
Historically, any flu vaccine takes years to develop and is only effective in less than 30% of
vaccinated people.
We are also seeing CV coming back in many countries that have lifted the lockdowns like for
example Germany, Spain and France. Therefore it seems very likely that there will not be any
major global recovery in 2021 either.
The biggest dilemma is that CV is not the real cause of the economic downturn but only the
catalyst. As I explained above, the virus has allowed weak countries to print huge amounts of
worthless money to prop up a financial system in an economy which was already on the verge of
imploding before CV started. But fortunately for leaders such as Trump and Johnson they have
been lucky to hide their ailing economies behind the CV curtain. So for them CV has been a very
lucky excuse.
As the US, UK and many economies will be forced to continue or increase government handouts
to suffering people and companies, all these countries' will fall further into the quagmire of
debt, deficits and economic decline.
"... McLaughlin and Associates, a national survey research group requested by Trump to examine the findings, said the results were an effort on the part of "Democratic operatives" to "counter the enthusiasm of Trump voters." Meanwhile, the right-leaning polling agency, Rasmussen, reported that Trump enjoys a 44 percent approval rating, which reflects the usual margin of difference. ..."
"... At the same time, many people must be wondering how Joe Biden, 77, has been able to garner such glowing poll numbers. After all, when the former vice president finally ventured to speak in public after an 88-day disappearing act, it only served to make people question the possibility of his "cognitive decline," a subject the mainstream media seems unwilling to consider in any great depth. ..."
"... Although the United States has certainly suffered from a double whammy of Covid-19 and race riots, the situation does not appear to be as bleak as the media would have everyone believe. In May, for example, analysts expressed disbelief as the economy added 2.5 million jobs, with the unemployment rate declining to 13.3 percent from 14.7 percent. Market watchers had been anticipating a loss of 7.25 million jobs and an unemployment rate of 19.0 percent. Meanwhile, Wall Street continues to weather the storm. ..."
In an era of fake news, can we trust the MSM polls that show Trump badly trailing Biden in the race for the US presidency?
Consult just about any US media resource and a trend is quickly discernible: Donald Trump is sagging in popularity while his likely
Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, soars like an eagle. Are these polls really to be believed?
Is there a conflict of interest greater than that of the US media conducting a public opinion poll on Donald J. Trump?
It appears to be a self-indulgent activity, a bit like climate change activists gathering opinions on the merits of air travel,
for example, or a New York Yankees fan organizing a poll to determine who the best baseball player was, Babe Ruth or David Wright.
In other words, those asking the questions may be very tempted, in deference to their own prejudices, to get the answers they
seek.
Perform a quick Google search on 'Trump poll numbers' and you will likely experience some deja vu. As in 2016, when the media
showed Trump trailing far behind Hillary Clinton, the same media want us to believe that the presidential incumbent is now eating
Joe Biden's dust on the road to the White House.
The New York Times, for example, in an opinion poll it
conducted
in cahoots with ultra-liberal Siena College, showed Biden ahead of Trump by 14 percentage points, pulling 50 percent of the vote
compared with just 36 percent for the president.
In another survey, this one
carried out by USA Today and Suffolk University, Trump garnered 41 percent to Biden's 53 percent. What the poll failed to say,
however, is that in 2016, the editorial board at USA Today took the unprecedented step of taking
sides in that year's presidential race, declaring Trump "unfit for the presidency."
Suffolk University, meanwhile, is situated in snobby Boston, Massachusetts, a formidable Democratic stronghold where Hillary Clinton
secured 60 percent of the 2016 vote compared to Trump's 32.8 percent. No chance of bias there.
Then there was the poll by CNN,
which Trump regularly slams as 'fake news,' where it was said that the incumbent leader was trailing Biden by a whopping 14 points.
The Trump campaign, arguing that just 25 percent of the contacted respondents were Republican, condemned the survey as "defamatory,
and misleading" with the goal of creating "an anti-Trump narrative."
McLaughlin and Associates, a national survey research group requested by Trump to examine the findings,
said the results were an effort on the
part of "Democratic operatives" to "counter the enthusiasm of Trump voters." Meanwhile, the right-leaning polling agency,
Rasmussen, reported
that Trump enjoys a 44 percent approval rating, which reflects the usual margin of difference.
It's important to note that the media, which has a snarling political dog in the Trump-Biden fight, follows up on its dubious
polls with stories based on those very same polls. CNN, for example,
aired a segment that asked, 'What would happen if Trump lost in November but refused to leave office?' Even Fox News, considered
to be 'Trump friendly,' wondered if Trump would drop out of the race due to low poll numbers.
At the same time, many people must be wondering how Joe Biden, 77, has been able to garner such glowing poll numbers. After all,
when the former vice president finally ventured to speak in public after an 88-day disappearing act, it only served to make people
question the possibility of his "cognitive decline,"
a subject the mainstream media seems unwilling to consider in any great depth.
Although the United States has certainly suffered from a double whammy of Covid-19 and race riots, the situation does not
appear to be as bleak as the media would have everyone believe. In May, for example, analysts expressed disbelief as the economy
added 2.5 million jobs, with the unemployment rate declining to 13.3 percent from 14.7 percent. Market watchers had been anticipating
a loss of 7.25 million jobs and an unemployment rate of 19.0 percent. Meanwhile, Wall Street continues to weather the storm.
In short, the country remains resilient in the face of unprecedented challenges, yet Trump's popularity continues to dwindle.
Does the US leader have good reason to question the media-sponsored polls that show him in the basement, exactly where Joe Biden
has been organizing his campaign from for months, or should the American people trust the findings?
Given the way the mainstream media has treated Trump over the course of his first term in office, it seems that whatever the media
reports on the most divisive American president in living memory must be taken with a very generous handful of salt.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RT.
Robert Bridge is an American writer and journalist. He is the author of the book, 'Midnight
in the American Empire,' How Corporations and Their Political Servants are Destroying the American Dream.
The mafia methods used are often packaged as monopoly powers such copyrights, patents,
transformation of public goods into for profit private enterprizes (privatization), takeovers and
bankruptcy, private ownership of the highest levels of nearly all governments, and just 6 own 92%
of all media.
Takeover of Tik Toc by Microsoft is just one demonstrating of a wider trend -- the tend
toward gangster capitalism. BTW Chinese proposes complete divestment. That spells big trouble for
US heavyweights such as Amazon, Google and Facebook.
"We lie to deceive ourselves, we lie to comfort others, we lie out of pity, we lie out of
shame, to encourage, to hide our misery, we lie out of honesty. We lie for freedom."
Trump blames China every chance he can and the Democrats either agree or offer mealy-mouthed
protest.
Notable quotes:
"... It comes to light that at least 125 US companies owned or invested in by Chinese entities, including Chinese SOE, received hundreds of millions in PPP loans backed by the US SBS. ..."
"... This level of capitalust interconnection between elite investors and governments belies all the heated talk of cold war by politicians on both sides as well as useful idiots the world over. ..."
"... "If this is also national security, then US national security is synonymous with hegemony." ..."
China has never banned US high-tech companies from doing business in the country. What the
Chinese government demands is that what they do in China should comply with Chinese law.
That's all . It was some US companies that refused to comply with Chinese laws.
Google used to have a position in the Chinese market. It itself pulled out of China a
decade ago, while other companies were accused in the US of kowtowing to China when they
tried to design their specific versions for the Chinese market. This leaves no US internet
giant currently operating in China.
TikTok operates in the US in full compliance with US laws and is completely cut off from
Douyin, its Chinese equivalent. Users in the Chinese mainland cannot register for TikTok
even if they bypass the so-called great firewall . TikTok does not violate any US
law but fully cooperates with the US administration.
The US claim that TikTok threatens its own national security is a purely hypothetical
and unwarranted charge - just like the groundless accusation that Huawei gathers
intelligence for the Chinese government. This is fundamentally different from China's
refusal to allow the original versions of Facebook and Twitter to enter China and require
them to operate in accordance with Chinese laws.
In just three paragraphs, the Global Times killed two myths: that a "great firewall"
exists and that China censorship things from the West (i.e. that the Chinese people is
"living in the darkness").
I had a teacher who traveled to China recently. He went to a local bar (100% Mainland
Chinese) as soon as he landed. He was having difficulty accessing Google (I think it was
either Gmail or Google Drive). He tried, tried, tried but couldn't do it. When the locals
there realized he was trying to access Google products, they promptly and calmly told him he
should use VPN because Google didn't operate in China. No drama, no fear of a local police
officer suddenly coming to the place to arrest them.
They know what Apple, Google and Facebook are. It's just that China has better local
options for the same product.
Not that globalization is a one way street by any means.
It comes to light that at least 125 US companies owned or invested in by Chinese entities,
including Chinese SOE, received hundreds of millions in PPP loans backed by the US SBS.
This level of capitalust interconnection between elite investors and governments belies
all the heated talk of cold war by politicians on both sides as well as useful idiots the
world over.
Why even favorite Chinese PR flack Pepe Escobar recently characterized the Stupidity Trap
aka Thucydides Trap as childish nonsense.
"If this is also national security, then US national security is synonymous with
hegemony."
That is precisely the problem. Unfortunately, the current US economy has become dependent on
advantages arising from unrivaled geopolitical power. Take it away too suddenly, and there
would be a painful economic transition to become a normal nation again.
Plunge in Consumption of Services Leads to Record 32.9 Percent Drop in GDP
By DEAN BAKER
The saving rate hit a record 25.7 percent level in the first quarter, indicating that few of
the pandemic checks were spent.
The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) shrank at a record 32.9 percent annual rate in the second
quarter. While almost all the major categories of GDP fell sharply, a 43.5 percent drop in
consumption of services was the largest factor, accounting for 22.9 percentage points of the
drop in the quarter. Nonresidential fixed investment also fell sharply, dropping at a 27.0
percent annual rate. Residential investment fell at a 38.7 percent annual rate.
The plunge in service consumption was expected since this was the segment of the economy
hardest hit by the shutdowns. Within services, health care, food services and hotels, and
recreation were the biggest factors reducing growth by 9.5 percentage points, 5.6 percentage
points, and 4.7 percentage points, respectively.
Spending on health care services fell at a 62.7 percent annual rate in the quarter. This was
due to people putting off a wide range of medical and dental checkups and procedures, which far
more than offset the care needed by coronavirus patients. The annual rate of decline for food
and hotel services was 81.2 percent and for recreation services 93.5 percent.
Consumption of nondurable goods fell at a 15.9 percent annual rate. Declines in clothing and
gasoline purchases were the biggest factors, taking 1.0 percentage point and 0.9 percentage
points off the quarter's growth, respectively. Demand for durable goods fell at just a 1.4
percent rate, but this followed a decline of 12.5 percent in the first quarter. Interestingly,
spending on cars actually rose slightly in the quarter, adding 0.15 percentage points to
growth.
Consumption expenditures by nonprofits serving households rose at 182.5 percent annual rate,
adding 3.0 percentage points to the quarter's growth. This reflects the effort by private
foundations and charities to ameliorate the hardships being experienced by many households.
Both structure and equipment investment fell sharply in the quarter, declining at 34.9
percent and 37.7 percent annual rates, respectively. The drop in equipment investment is
especially striking since it fell at a 15.2 percent rate in the first quarter. Investment in
intellectual products fell at a more modest 7.2 percent annual rate. Residential investment
fell at a 38.7 percent annual rate, although this followed a jump of 19.0 percent in the first
quarter.
Exports and imports both fell sharply, with exports dropping at a 64.1 percent rate and
imports falling at a 53.4 percent rate. Because US imports are so much larger than exports,
trade actually added 0.7 percentage points to growth in the quarter.
Federal government spending rose at a 17.4 percent annual rate, driven by a 39.7 percent
increase in non-defense spending, presumably most of which is pandemic related. State and local
spending fell at a 5.6 percent rate, likely reflecting school closings in the quarter.
[Graph]
Prices fell sharply in the quarter, with the Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) deflator
falling at a 1.9 percent annual rate and the core PCE falling at a 1.1 percent annual rate.
These declines reflected sharp drops in the price of items such as gasoline, hotels, and
clothes. Many of these declines were already being reversed by the end of the quarter. They
will almost certainly not continue into the third quarter.
The savings rate soared to a record 25.7 percent. This reflects the jump in disposable
income attributable to the pandemic checks, coupled with the sharp drop in spending. Nominal
disposable income rose at a 42.1 percent annual rate. This rise was, of course, uneven, with
people who were still getting their regular paychecks or retirees seeing large jumps in income
from the pandemic checks, but with many of the unemployed seeing sharp drops.
With the economy mostly reopened, despite serious outbreaks of the pandemic in large parts
of the country, we are virtually certain to see strong growth in the third quarter. But even if
the economy grows at a 15 or 20 percent annual rate, it would be nowhere close to recovering
the losses from the last two quarters.
The shape of the rescue package currently being debated will also be hugely important. In
addition to the unemployment insurance supplements that will be necessary for laid-off workers
to sustain their consumption, state and local governments will need large amounts of money both
to avoid layoffs and to implement programs for the safe reopening of schools, workplaces and
businesses. In this context, it is very difficult to see any economic rationale for the $1,200
pandemic checks.
Another 1.416 million Americans filed new claims for unemployment benefits last weekOur
politicians want to encourage people "to go back to work", but for millions upon millions of
Americans the jobs that they once had are gone forever.
52 million Americans have filed new claims for unemployment benefits over the past 18
weeksBut many people that live in rural communities are feeling pretty good aboutthings right
now. Even though more than 52 million Americans have filed new claims for unemployment
benefits over the last 18 weeks, the official unemployment rate in many rural counties is
still in the single
digits.
New York's unemployment rate rose to 20.4% last month, according to state-level data
issued
Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics that detailed figures for some large metro areas.
That'sup from 18.3% in May and 15% in April.
Los Angeles, the second-largest U.S. city, has seen a similar level of joblessness.Its
unemployment rate recovered slightly in June but remains startlingly high -- at 19.5%, versus
20.6% in May, according to data published Friday by California's Employment Development
Department.
Census Bureau says that things are particular dire for Black and Hispanic renters This
month (JUNE), nearly 28% of Black renters say they haven't paid last month's rent, and \about
46% say they have slight or no confidence they'll be able to pay next month's rent, according
to figures from the Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey. Hispanic renters face similar
economic strain: 22% say they missed last month's rent and 46% fear they won't make rent next
month.
In April, 78% of those in households experiencing job loss felt that that situation would
be temporarily. But now, 47% think that job loss is likely to be permanent, according to The
Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
19 percent of all U.S. small businesses were closed, According to Jefferies,
Nearly a quarter of all small businesses in the entire country are closed
And the really bad news is that many of them will never end up reopening
As many as 76,000 small businesses in New York City – a third of the 230,000
citywide – may never reopen after forced to close during the COVID-19 lockdown,
business leaders have warned.
Nearly half of all small-business members of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce lost 100%
of their sales or closed down completely.
Yelp says that a whopping 60 percent of the restaurants that were initially listed
as"temporarily closed" on their site are now classified as permanetly
closed...
Air travel is another industry that is being absolutely devastated by this pandemic.After
a modest bounce in June, the number of air passengers is starting to fall again.The
resurgence of coronavirus infections is derailing the travel industry's modest recovery. The
number of air passengers processed through TSA security lines fell during the week ended July
20, compared with the prior week, according to Bank of America. This metric is down more than
70% from a year ago.
United (UAL) CEO Scott Kirby told CNBC on Wednesday that the airline doesn't "expect to
get anywhere close to normal until there's a vaccine that's been wiely distributed to a large
portion of the population" !! (Hello Big Pharma Inc.)
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/
(Whatever one might think about that blog, but most numbers are proberly back up
with so callled serious sources aka links.)
It is by far its worst quarterly plunge, and has thrown tens of millions out of work and
sent unemployment surging to 14.7 per cent, the US Government said on Thursday (local
time).
The Commerce Department's estimate of the second-quarter decline in the gross domestic
product marked the sharpest such drop, according to records dating back to 1947."
@ b who wrote
"
The economic damage the pandemic has caused in the U.S. is extreme:
"
The pandemic is a set up for the economic damage more than it caused itself, IMO. The
economic system started crashing last September. Empire has been in frantic mode. in case you
hadn't noticed, to find a patsy to blame for the economic crash. I believe that response to
the pandemic was designed to project the most economic impact to cover for the financial
structural deficiencies underneath. Jobs going away to automation is not a new trend, nor is
reduction of consumption due to less disposable income.....there really has been no economic
recovery for the masses since 2008.
And that great Man for Humanity, as some here still believe, Trump has been proposing
things like suspending the payroll tax which would kill the Social Security Insurance
program, pushing back the election to a better time`and deflecting responsibility for the
hundred thousand and counting dead because Empire is designed for profit, not people and
comparison with China's results are telling.
This is what living under the dictatorship of global private finance provides for the
masses which pales in comparison with public finance centered nations.
ll eyes are on the declining number of unemployed. The May and June jobs reports chronicle
the reabsorption of 5.3 million who lost their jobs in the COVID-19 pandemic. Twelve million
jobs to go to reach pre-pandemic employment.
Yet prior to the pandemic, there were 18 million Americans missing from the economy. These
persons were neither employed nor seeking employment -- nor retirees, students or in-home
caregivers -- and therefore were excluded from the Bureau of Labor Statistics count of the
workforce. In order that America emerge from the pandemic stronger than before, a concerted
initiative by federal and state governments to move them back into the economy -- using
existing resources -- must begin now.
...
Research on the social determinants of health finds that employment has a
very strong correlation with positive health outcomes. To exist as a non-participant in
the economy is thus an invitation to dire health outcomes including premature death.
What's more, these individuals are needed as contributors to our national commonweal,
fueling increased economic and social progress. And people engaged in productive activities
are much less likely to engage in negative and destructive behaviors.
... The USDA's food stamp program has a robustly funded, though underutilized, employment
and training grant. States use the excuse of USDA's partial match requirement as a reason to
opt out.
"... Some of the neoliberal countries may be at the stage of the collusion; some of them may find themselves at the stage of oligarchy; some of them may be at the stage of corruption culture. ..."
"... In Japan, since 1957, there were twenty-one prime ministers of whom 75% were one-year or two-year prime ministers despite the four-year term of prime ministers. The short life span of Japanese prime ministers is essentially due to the short term interest pursued by the corrupted golden triangle composed of big business, bureaucrats and politicians. Unless, Japan uproots the corruption culture, it will be difficult to save the Japanese economy from perpetual stagnation. ..."
"... In the U.S. the big companies are spending a year no less than $2.6 billion lobbying money for the promotion of their interests, while the Congress spends $ 2.9 billion and the Senate, $860 million for their respective annual operation. Some of the big companies deploy as many as 100 lobbyists. ..."
"... It is unbelievable that the amount of lobbying is as much as 70% of the annual budget of the whole legislative of the U.S. ..."
"... Under such lobbying system, each group should deploy lobbyists to promote their interests. The immigrants, the native Indians, the Afro Americans, the alienated white people and other marginal groups cannot afford lobbyists and they are often excluded from fair treatment in the process of making laws and policies ..."
"... In the case of the U.S. its rank increased from 18 in 2016 to 22 in 2019. Thus in three years, the degree of corruption increase by 22.2% ..."
"... The U.S. is the richest country in the world, but it is also a country where income inequality is the most pronounced. I will come back to this issue in the next section. In relation to the corona virus crisis, income inequality means an army of those who are most likely to be infected and who are unable to follow CDC guidelines of testing, self quarantine and social distancing. Finally, the privatization of public health services has made the whole country unprepared for the onslaught of the virus. ..."
"... The experience of Japan shows how this can happen. The economic depression after the bubble burst of 1989, Japan had to endure 30-year deflation. The government of Japan has flooded the country with money to restore the economy, but the money was used for the bail-out of big corporations neglecting the healthy development of the SMEs and impoverishing the ordinary Japanese people. South Korea could have experienced the Japanese-type economic stagnation, if the conservative government ruled the country ten more years. ..."
"... The neoliberal pro-big company policy of Washington has greatly depleted consumer demand and SMEs even before the onslaught of the coronavirus. ..."
"... Fourth, the U.S. economy is shaken up so much that the neoliberal regime will not able to recover the economy. Thus, the survival of neo-liberalism looks uncertain. But, if the coronavirus crisis continues and destroys SMEs and if only the big corporations survive owing to bailout money, neo-liberalism may survive and we may end up with authoritarian governance ruled by the business-politics oligarchy. ..."
For the last forty years, neo-liberalism has dominated economic thinking and the formulation of economic policies Worldwide.
But the corona virus crisis has exposed, in a dramatic way, its internal contradictions, its incapacity to deal with the corona
crisis and its incompetence to restore the real economy ruined by the crisis.
In this article, we will focus on the relationship between Neoliberalism and the Corona Crisis:
Neoliberalism has prevented the governments from controlling effectively the initial outbreak of the corona virus.
Neoliberalism has made the wave of virus propagation higher and wider, especially in the U.S.
Neoliberalism can shake the foundations of the U.S. economy.
Neoliberalism may not survive the corona virus crisis in the U.S.
To save democracy and the global economy, We need a new economic model which supports the future of humanity, which sustains human
livelihood Worldwide.
1. Neoliberalism and the initial Outbreak of the Corona Virus
The most important part of neoliberalism is the relation -often of a corrupt nature- between the government and large corporations.
By corruption, we mean illegal or immoral human activities designed to maximize profit at the expense of people's welfare. In this
relation, the government may not be able to control and govern the large corporations. In fact, in the present context, the corporations
govern and oversee national governments.
Hence, when the corona virus broke out, it was difficult for the government to take immediate actions to control the virus break-out
to save human lives; It was quite possible that the price of stocks and large corporations' profit had the priority.
The theory known as neoliberalism distinguishes itself from the old liberalism prevailing before the Great Depression.
It became widely accepted mainly because of its adoption, in the 1970s and 1980s, by Ronald Reagan , president of the U.S. and
Margaret Thatcher , prime minister of Great Britain as an economic policy agenda applied nationally and internationally.
The justification of neoliberalism is the belief that the best way to ensure economic growth is to encourage "supply activities"
of private sector enterprises.
Now, the proponents of neoliberalism argue that public goods (including health and education) can be produced with greater efficiency
by private companies than by the State. Therefore, "it is better" to let the private enterprises produce public goods.
In other words, the production of public goods should be "privatized". Neoliberals put profit as the best measure of efficiency
and success. And profit can be sustained with government support. In turn, the private companies' policy is that of reducing the
labour costs of production.
Government assistance includes reduction of corporate taxes, subsidies and anti-labour policies such as the prohibition of labour
unionization and the abolition of the minimum wage.
Reduction of labour cost can be obtained by the automation of the production of goods
Under such circumstances, close cooperation between the government and the private corporations is inevitable; even it may be
necessary.
But, such cooperation is bound to lead to government-business collusion in which the business receives legal and illegal government
support in exchange of illicit money such as kick-backs and bribes given to influential politicians and the people close to the power.
As the collusion becomes wider and deeper, an oligarchy is formed; it is composed of corporations, politicians and civil servants.
This oligarchy's raison d'être is to make money even at the expense of the interests of the people.
Now, in order to protect its vested interests, the oligarchy expands its network and creates tight-knit political community which
shares the wealth and privileges obtained.
In this way, the government-business cooperation can be evolved by stage to give birth to the corruption culture.
Some of the neoliberal countries may be at the stage of the collusion; some of them may find themselves at the stage of oligarchy;
some of them may be at the stage of corruption culture.
South Korea
When the progressive government of Moon Jae-in took over power in 2017, South Korea under the 60-year neo-liberal rule by the
conservatives was at the stage of corruption culture.
The progressive government of Moon Jae-in has declared a total war against the corruption culture, but it is a very long way to
go before eliminating corruption.
In South Korea, of six presidents of the conservative government, four presidents were or are in prison for corruption and abuse
of power. This shows how deeply the corruption has penetrated into the fabrics of the Korea society
In Japan, since 1957, there were twenty-one prime ministers of whom 75% were one-year or two-year prime ministers despite the
four-year term of prime ministers. The short life span of Japanese prime ministers is essentially due to the short term interest
pursued by the corrupted golden triangle composed of big business, bureaucrats and politicians. Unless, Japan uproots the corruption
culture, it will be difficult to save the Japanese economy from perpetual stagnation.
Lobbying and "Corruption Culture"
Many of the developed countries in the West are also the victims of corruption culture. In the U.K. the City (London's Wall Street)
is the global center of money laundry.
In the U.S. the big companies are spending a year no less than $2.6 billion lobbying money for the promotion of their interests,
while the Congress spends $ 2.9 billion and the Senate, $860 million for their respective annual operation. Some of the big companies
deploy as many as 100 lobbyists.
It is unbelievable that the amount of lobbying is as much as 70% of the annual budget of the whole legislative of the U.S.
True, in the U.S., lobbying is not illegal, but it may not be morally justified. It is a system where the law makers give privileges
to those who spend more money, which can be considered as bribes
Under such lobbying system, each group should deploy lobbyists to promote their interests. The immigrants, the native Indians,
the Afro Americans, the alienated white people and other marginal groups cannot afford lobbyists and they are often excluded from
fair treatment in the process of making laws and policies
Some of the developed European countries are also very corrupted. The international Transparency Index rank, in 2019, was 23 for
France, 30 for Spain and 51 for Italy.
In the case of the U.S. its rank increased from 18 in 2016 to 22 in 2019. Thus in three years, the degree of corruption increase
by 22.2%
What is alarming is that, in the corruption culture, national policies are liable to be dictated by big businesses.
In South Korea, under the conservative government, it was suspected that the national policies were determined by the Chaebols
(large industrial conglomerates), not by the government.
As matter of fact, during the MERS crisis in 2015, the anti-virus policy was dictated by the Samsung Group. In order to save its
profit, Samsung Hospital in Seoul hid the infected so that the number of non-MERS patients would not decrease.
In Japan, the Abe government made the declaration of public health emergency as late as April 6, 2020 despite the fact that the
infections were detected as early as January, 2020.
This decision was, most likely, dictated by Keiretsu members (grouping of large enterprises) in order to save investments in the
July Olympics. Nobody knows how many Japanese had been infected for more than three months.
Similarly, Trump was well aware of the sure propagation of the virus right form January, but he waited until March 13, 2020 before
he declared the state of effective public health emergency. The obvious reason was the possible fear of free fall of stock price
and the possible loss of big companies' profits.
The interesting question is: "The delayed declaration of public health emergency, was it Trump's decision or that of his corporate
friends?" It doesn't matter whose decision it was, because the government under neoliberal system is controlled the big businesses.
So, as in Japan, Italy, Spain, France and especially, the U.K, Trump lost the golden time to save human lives to keep profit of
enterprises.
God knows how many American lives were sacrificed to save stock price and company profit!
Thus, the neoliberal governments have lost the golden chance to prevent the initial outbreak of the dreadful virus.
2. Neo-liberalism and the Propagation of Corona-Virus
We saw that the initial outbreak of the virus was not properly controlled leading to the loss to golden time of saving human lives,
most likely because of the priority given to business and political interests.
The initial outbreak of the virus was transformed into never-ending propagation and, even now, in many states in the U.S. the
wave of the virus is getting higher and wider.
This tragic reality can be explained by four factors:
people's mistrust in the government,
unbounded competition,
inequitable income distribution,
the absence of public health system.
These four factors (above) are all the legacies of neoliberalism.
The people know well that the corrupted neoliberal government's concern is not the welfare of the people but the interest of a
few powerful and the rich. The inevitable outcome is the loss of people's trust in the unreliable government.
This is demonstrated by Trump's indecision, his efforts of ignoring the warning of the professionals, his fabricates stories and
above all, his perception of who should be given the right to receive life-saving medical care at the hospital.
Under such circumstances, Americans do not trust the government directives and guidelines, allegedly implemented to protect people
from the virus.
The guideline of the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) for self quarantine, social distancing and wearing face masks has little
effect. There is another product of neoliberalism which is troublesome. I mean its credo of unbounded competition.
It is true that competition promotes efficiency and better quality of products. However, as competition continues, the number
of winners decreases, while that of losers rises. The economy ends up being ruled by a handful of powerful winners. This leads to
the segregation of losers and leads to the discrimination of people by income level, religion, race and colour of skin.
In the present context, largely as a result of government policy, there is little to no social solidarity; each individual has
to solve his or her own problems. I was sad when I saw on TV a young lady in California saying:
"To be killed by the COVID-19 or starve to death is the same to me. I open my shop to eat!"
This shows how American citizens are left alone to fight the coronavirus. Furthermore, neoliberalism has another unhappy legacy;
it is the widening and deepening income inequality.
The U.S. is the richest country in the world, but it is also a country where income inequality is the most pronounced. I will
come back to this issue in the next section. In relation to the corona virus crisis, income inequality means an army of those who
are most likely to be infected and who are unable to follow CDC guidelines of testing, self quarantine and social distancing. Finally,
the privatization of public health services has made the whole country unprepared for the onslaught of the virus.
In fact, in the U.S. there is no public health system. For three months after the first breakout of the virus, the country lacked
everything needed to fight the virus.
There was shortage of testing kits and PPE (personal protective equipment);
there were not enough rooms to accommodate the infected;
there was shortage of qualified medical staff;
there was lack of face masks.
Thus, neoliberalism has made the U.S not only to lose the golden time to prevent the initial breakout but also it has let the
wave of virus to continue. Nobody knows when it will calm down. As a matter of fact, on July 4, there were 2.9 million infected and
132,000 deaths; this gives a death rate of 4.6%. Given U.S. population of 328 million, we have 402.44 deaths per million inhabitants
which is one of highest among the developed countries. The trouble is that the wave of virus is still going higher and wider. On
July 4, the confirmed cases increased by 50% in two weeks in 12 states and increased 10% to 50% in 22 states.
3. Neo-liberalism and the very Foundation of the U.S. Economy
The message of this section is this. The foundation of the American economy is the purchasing power of the consumers and the job
creation by small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The consumer demand is 70% of the GDP, the SMEs create 66% of jobs. Unfortunately,
because of neoliberalism, the consumers have become very poorer and the SMEs have been neglected in the pro-big-company government
policies. The COVID-19 has destroyed the SMEs and impoverished the consumers. Nobody would deny the contribution of neo-liberalism
to globalization of finance, the creation of the global value chain and, especially the free trade agreement.
All these activities have allowed GDP to grow in developed countries and some of new industrial countries. However, the wealth
created by the growth of GDP has gone to countries already developed, some developing countries and a small number of multinational
enterprises (MNE). The rich produced by GDP growth has led to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few privileged. What
is more serious is this. If the skewed income distribution in favour of a decreasing number of people continues for long, the GDP
will stop growing and decades-long deflation is quite possible, as it has happened in Japan.
According to the OECD data, in the period, 1975-2011, the GDP share of labour income in OECD countries fell by 13.8% from 65%
to 56%. In the case of the U.S., in the same period, 1970-2014, it fell by 11%. The falling labour-income share is necessarily translated
into unequal household income distribution. There are two popular ways of measuring income distribution: the decile ratio and the
Gini coefficient.
The decile ratio is obtained by dividing the income earned by the top 10% income earners by the income earned by the bottom 10%
income earners . The decile ratio in 2019 was 18.5 in the U.S. as compared to 5.6 in Finland. The decile ratio of the U.S. was the
highest among the developed countries. Thus, in the U.S. the top 10 % has an income 19 times more than the bottom 10%, while, in
Finland, the corresponding ratio is only 6 times. This shows how serious the income gap is in the country of Uncle Sam.
The Gini coefficient varies from zero to 100. As the value of the Gini increases, the income distribution becomes favourable to
the high-income households. Conversely, as the value of the Gini decreases, the income distribution becomes favourable to low-income
households. There are two types of Gini: the gross Gini and the net Gini. The former refers to Gini before taxes and transfer payment,
while the latter refers to Gini after taxes and transfer payment. The difference between the gross and the net Gini shows the government
efforts to improve the equality and fairness of income distribution The gross U.S.- Gini coefficient in 2019 was 48.6, one of the
highest among the developed countries.
Its net Gini was 38.0 so that the difference between the gross and the net Gini was 12.3%. In other words, the U.S. income distribution
improved only by 12.3% by government efforts as against, for example, an improvement of 42.9% in the case of Germany, where the gross
Gini was 49.9 while the net Gini was 28.5 The net Gini of the U.S. was the highest among the developed countries. The implication
is clear. The income distribution in the U.S. was the most unequal. To make the matter worse, the government's effort to improve
the unequal income distribution was the poorest among the developed countries. There are countless signs of unfortunate impacts of
the inequitable income distribution in the country called the U.S. which Koreans used to admire describing it as "mi-gook- 美國미국 –
Beautiful Country". Now, one wonders if it is still a "mi-gook".
The following data indicates the seriousness of poverty in the U.S. (data below prior to the Coronavirus crisis).
In the U.S. the richest 1% of the population has 40% of all household wealth. (2017 data)
More than 20% of the population cannot pay monthly bills.
About 40% do not have savings.
31% of private sector worker do not have medical benefits.
57% of the workers in the service sector have no medical benefits.
These data give us an idea on how so many people have to suffer from poverty in a country where per capita GDP is $65,000 (2019
estimate), the richest country in the world. Most of the Americans work for small- and medium-sized companies (SMEs). In the U.S.,
there are 30 million SMEs. They create 66% of jobs in the private sector. The SMEs are more severely hit than big companies by the
coronavirus.
In fact, 66% of SMEs are adversely affected by the virus against 40% for big firms. As much as 20% of SMEs may be shut down for
good within three months, because of the virus. Under the forty years of neoliberal pro-big corporation policies, available financial
resources and the best human resources have been allocated to big firms at the expense of the development of SMEs.
The most damaging by-product of neoliberalism is no doubt the widening and deepening unequal income distribution for the benefit
of the big corporations and the uprooting of SMEs. This trend means the shrinking domestic demand and the disappearance of jobs for
ordinary people.
The destruction of the domestic market caused by the shrinking consumer demand and the disappearance of SMEs can mean the uprooting
of the very foundation of the economy.
The experience of Japan shows how this can happen. The economic depression after the bubble burst of 1989, Japan had to endure
30-year deflation. The government of Japan has flooded the country with money to restore the economy, but the money was used for
the bail-out of big corporations neglecting the healthy development of the SMEs and impoverishing the ordinary Japanese people. South
Korea could have experienced the Japanese-type economic stagnation, if the conservative government ruled the country ten more years.
The neoliberal pro-big company policy of Washington has greatly depleted consumer demand and SMEs even before the onslaught of
the coronavirus. But, the COVID-19 has given a coup de grâce to consumer demand and SMEs To better understand the issue, let us go
back to the ABC of economics. Looking at the national economy from the demand side, the economy consists of private consumer demand
(C), the private investment demand (I), the government demand (G) and Foreign demand represented by exports of domestic products
(X) minus domestic demand for imported foreign products (M).
GDP=C + I + G + (X-M)
In 2019, the consumer expenditure (C) in the U.S. was 70% of GDP, whereas the government's spending (G) was 17%. The investments
demand (I) was 18%. The net exports demand (X-M) was -5%.
In 2019 the composition of Canadian GDP was: C=57%; I=23 %; G=21 %; X-M=-1%.
Thus, we see that the U.S. economy heavily depends on the private domestic consumption, which represents as much as 70% of GDP
compared to 57% in Canada. The government's contribution to the national demand is 17% as against 21% in Canada. In the U.S. a small
government is a virtue according to neoliberals. In the U.S. the private investments account for only 18% of GDP as compared to as
much as 23% in Canada. In the U.S., off-shoring of manufacturing jobs and the global value chain under neo-liberalism have decreased
the need for business investments at home. It is obvious then that to save the American economy, we have to boost the consumers'
income. But, the consumer income comes mainly from SMEs. We must remember that the SMEs create 66% of all jobs in the U.S. Therefore,
if consumer demand falls and if SMEs do not create jobs, the US economy may have to face the same destiny as the Japanese economy.
This is happening in the U.S. The corona virus crisis is destroying SMEs and taking away the income of the people.
The coronavirus crisis is about to demolish the very foundation of the American economy.
4. Corona Virus Crisis and the Survival of Neoliberalism
The interesting question is this. Will neo-liberalism as economic system survive the corona virus crisis in the U.S.?
There are at least four indications suggesting that it will not survive.
First, to overcome major crisis such as the corona virus invasion, we need strong central government and people-loving leader.
One of the reasons for the successful anti-virus policy in South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore was the strong central government's
role of determining and coordinating the anti-virus policies. As we saw, the gospel of neo-liberalism is the minimization of the
central government's role. Having little role in economic policies, the U.S. federal government has proved itself as the most incompetent
entity to fight the crisis. It is more than possible that the U.S. and all the neoliberal countries will try to get away from the
traditional neoliberal governance in which the government is almost a simple errand boy of big business.
Second, the people's trust in the neoliberal leaders has fallen on the ground. It will be difficult for the neoliberal leaders
to be able to lead the country in the post-corona virus era.
Third, the corona virus crisis has made the people aware of the abuse of power by the big companies; the people now know that
these companies are interested only in making money. So, it may be more difficult for them to exploit the people in the era of post-COVID-19.
Fourth, the U.S. economy is shaken up so much that the neoliberal regime will not able to recover the economy. Thus, the survival
of neo-liberalism looks uncertain. But, if the coronavirus crisis continues and destroys SMEs and if only the big corporations survive
owing to bailout money, neo-liberalism may survive and we may end up with authoritarian governance ruled by the business-politics
oligarchy.
5. Search for a New Economic Regime: Just-Liberalism
One thing which the corona-virus crisis has demonstrated is the fact that the American neo-liberalism has failed as sustainable
regime capable of stopping the virus crisis, restore the economy and save the democracy. Hence, we have to look for a new regime
capable of saving the U.S. economy and democracy. We would call this new regime as "Just-liberalism " mission of which is the sustainable
economic development and, at the same time, the just distribution of the benefits of economic development. Before we get into the
discussion of the main feature of the new regime, there is one thing we should discuss. It is the popular perception of large corporation.
Many believe that they make GDP grow and create jobs. It is also the popular view that the success of these large corporations is
due to the innovative managing skills of their founders or their CEOs. Therefore, they deserve annual salary of millions of dollars.
This is the popular perception of Chaebols in South Korea.
But, a great part of Chaebols income is attributable to the public goods such as national defence, police protection, social infrastructures,
the education system, enormous sacrifice of workers and, especially tax allowances, subsidies and privileges. In other words, a great
part of the Chaebols' income belongs to the society, not the Chaebols. Many believe that the Chaebols create jobs, but, in reality,
they crate less than 10% of jobs in Korea. We may say the same thing about large corporations in the U.S. In other words, much of
the company's income is due to public goods. Hence, the company should equitably share its income with the rest of the society. But
do they?
The high ranking managers get astronomical salaries; some of them are hiding billions of dollars in tax haven islands.
We ask. Are large corporations sharing equitably their income with the society? Are the corporate tax allowances they get too
much? Is the wage they pay too low? Is CEO's income is too high?
It is difficult to answer these questions.
But we should throw away the mysticism surrounding the merits of large corporations; we should closely watch them so that they
do not misuse their power and wealth to dictate national policies for their own benefit at the expense of the welfare of the people.
The new regime, just-liberalism, should have the following eight features.
First, we need a strong government which is autonomous from big businesses; there should be no business-politics collusion; there
should be no self-interest oligarchy of corruption.
Second, it is the time we should reconsider the notion of human right violation. There are several types of human right violation
in developed countries including the U.S. For example, the racial discrimination, the inequality before the law, the violation of
the right of social security and the violation of the right of social service are some cases of violation of human rights defined
by the U.N. The Western media have been criticizing human right violation in "non-democratic countries", but, in the future, they
should pay more attention to human right violation in "democratic countries."
Third, the criterion of successful economy should not be limited to the GDP growth; the equitable distribution of the benefits
of GDP growth should also be a criterion; proper balance between the growth and the distribution of growth fruits should be maintained.
Fourth, market should not be governed by "efficiency" alone; it must be also "equitable". Efficiency may lead to the concentration
of resources and power in the hands of the few at the expense of social benefit; it must be also equitable. As an example, we may
refer to the Chaebols (big Korean industrial conglomerates) which kill the traditional village markets which provide livelihood to
a great number of poor people. The Chaebols may make the market efficient but not equitable. The Korean government has limited Chaebols'
penetration into these markets to make them more equitable.
Fifth, we need a partial direct democracy. The legislative translates people's wish into laws and the executive makes policies
on the basis of laws. But, in reality, the legislative and the executive may pass laws and policies for the benefit of big companies
or specific group of individuals and institutions close to the power. Therefore, it is important to provide a mechanism through which
the people – the real master of the country – should be allowed to intervene all times. In South Korea, if more than 200,000 people
send a request to the Blue house (Korean White House) to intervene in matters judged unfair or unjust, the government must intervene.
Sixth, those goods and services which are essential for every citizen must be nationalized. For example, social infrastructure
such as parks, roads, railways, harbours, supply of electricity should not be privatized. Education including higher education should
be made public goods so that low income people should get higher education as do high income group.
This is the best way to maximize the mass of innovative minds and creative energy to develop the society. Above all, the health
service should be nationalized. It is just unbelievable to see that, in a country where the per capita GDP is $63,000, more than
30 million citizens have no medical insurance, just because it is too expensive. Politicians know quite well that big companies related
to insurance, pharmaceutical products and medical professions are preventing the nationalization of medical service in the U.S. But,
the politicians don't seem to dare go over these vested interests groups and nationalize the public health system. Remember this.
There are countries which are much poorer than the U.S. But, they have accessible universal health care insurance system.
Seventh, the economy should allow the system of multi- generational technologies in which not only high-level technologies but
also mid-level technologies should be promoted in such a way that both high- tech large corporations and middle-tech SMEs can grow.
This is perhaps only way to insure GDP growth and create jobs.
Eighth, in the area of international relations, it is about the time to stop wasteful ideological conflict. The difference among
ideologies is narrowing; the number of countries which have abandoned the U.S. imposed democracy has been rising; the ideological
basis of socialism is weakening. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit, 48% of countries are democratic, while 52% are not.
According to Freedom House, in 2005, 83 countries had net gain in democracy, while 52 countries had net loss in democracy.
But in 2019, only 37 countries had net gain while 64 countries had net loss. Between 2005 and 2018, the number of countries which
were not free increased by 26%, while those which were free fell by 44%. On the other hand, it is becoming more and more difficult
to find authentic socialism. For example, Chinese regime has lost its pure socialism long time ago. Thus, the world is becoming non-ideological;
the world is embracing ideology-neutral pragmatism.
To conclude, the corona virus pandemic has given us the opportunity to look at ourselves; it has given us the opportunity to realize
how vulnerable we are in front of the corona virus attack.
Many more pandemics will come and challenge us. We need a world better prepared to fight the coming pandemics. It is high time
that we slow down our greedy pursuit for GDP growth; it is about the time to stop a wasteful international ideological conflict in
support of multibillion dollar interests behind Big Money and the Military industrial complex.
It is therefore timely to find a system where we care for each other and where we share what we have .
***
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog
site, internet forums. etc.
Professor Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics and co- director of the Observatoire de l'Asie de l'Est (ODAE) of the Centre
d'Études de l'Intégration et la Mondialisation (CEIM), Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). He is Research Associate of the Center
of Research on Globalization (CRG).
Growing Social and
Wealth Inequality in America
PS likbez@46 reminded me of a line from the movie Reds. Warren Beatty's John Reed spoke of
people who "though Karl Marx wrote a good antitrust law." This was not a favorable comment.
The confusion of socialism and what might be called populism is quite, quite old. Jack
London's The Iron Heel has its hero pointing out even before the Great (Class) War that the
normal operations of capitalism, concentration and centralization, destroyed the middle class
paradise of equal competition. It wasn't conspiracies.
likbez 07.29.20 at 3:30 pm
@steven t johnson 07.29.20 at 3:14 pm (51)
Jack London's The Iron Heel has its hero pointing out even before the Great (Class) War
that the normal operations of capitalism, concentration and centralization, destroyed the
middle class paradise of equal competition.
I think the size of the USA military budget by itself means the doom for the middle class,
even without referring to famous Jack London book (The Iron Heel is cited by George Orwell 's
biographer Michael Shelden as having influenced Orwell's most famous novel Nineteen
Eighty-Four.).
Wall Street and MIC (especially intelligence agencies ; Allen Dulles was a Wall Street
lawyer) are joined at the hip. And they both fully control MSM. As Jack London aptly said:
"The press of the United States? It is a parasitic growth that battens on the capitalist
class. Its function is to serve the established by moulding public opinion, and right well it
serves it." ― Jack London, The Iron Heel
Financial capitalism is bloodthirstily by definition as it needs new markets. It fuels wars.
In a sense, Bolton is the symbol of financial capitalism foreign policy.
It is important to understand that finance capitalism creates positive feedback loop in the
economy increasing instability of the system. So bubbles are immanent feature of finance
capitalism, not some exception or the result of excessive greed.
A weekly survey showed food insecurity at a high in July
Millions are out of work as Congress debates new stimulus
[Image removed]
People wait in their vehicles to receive food at a drive-thru food
distribution event in Chula Vista, California, on May 1.
Food insecurity for U.S. households last week reached its highest reported level since the Census Bureau started
tracking the data in May, with almost 30 million Americans reporting that they'd not had enough to eat at some point
in the seven days through July 21.
In the bureau's weekly Household Pulse Survey, roughly 23.9 million of 249 million respondents indicated they had
"sometimes not enough to eat" for the week ended July 21, while about 5.42 million indicated they had "often not
enough to eat." The survey, which began with the week ended May 5, was published Wednesday.
The number of respondents who sometimes had insufficient food was at its highest point in the survey's 12 weeks. The
number who often experienced food insufficiency was at its highest since the week ended May 26.
Food Insufficiency
A growing number of survey respondents say they don't have enough to eat
U.S Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey
This follows deep recession resulting from the pandemic, which put millions of Americans out of work. Unemployed
Americans have been receiving an extra $600 per week benefit, which is set to expire at the end of July as Congress
debates a new relief package.
Other high-frequency data, including Household Pulse jobs numbers, indicate that the U.S. economic recovery may be
stalling out at virus cases spike around the country and states roll back their reopening plans.
"... The problem for the US is that China is the world's biggest semiconductor market and biggest chip importer on the world ..."
"... these bans are lose lose situation for both the US and China ..."
"... I do not think that Pompeo is smelling blood and moving for the jugular, its not such a situation as China is not that vulnerable, it is more likely to be US elite anger due to the US weakening and China gains during the Covid-19 crisis. ..."
"... Trump strategy of bullying works many times. Supposedly there should be costs for the US in soft power and world opinion, but we are not seeing them. ..."
"... I guess most of the world is too cowardly and prefers to go with the flow. They will abandon the US only after the US lost anyway. Well, it is not an easy situation. Still, the US reactions are very strong and hateful precisely because things are still not good for it and its decline is continuing, regardless of some tactical victories, where in some cases it is a lose lose situation anyway. ..."
A Significant Decline Is Coming For The U.S.james , Jul 27 2020 18:10 utc |
1
by Passer by
In response to several comments in the last
open thread (slightly edited).
Actually there is even some real, and not only relative, decline for the US, for example
US life expectancy is dropping. This is a pretty bad sign for a developed country. Same for
the UK by the way.
On the issue of China gaining during the Covid crisis, they gained in raw power, for
example gained in GDP relatively to the US. And they gained in debt levels too, relatively,
as US debt levels exploded due to the crisis. Now you have V-shaped recovery in China and
poor, W-shaped double dip recovery in the US. With far more debt added.
Of course there is the issue of public relations and soft power. On the one hand the US
blamed China for the pandemic, but on the other hand it embarrassed itself due to its poor
performance in containing the pandemic, compared to other countries. And the US lost points
around the world due to rejecting WHO right in the middle of the pandemic. Europe and
developing countries did not like that at all. Don't forget that Covid also weakened the US
military, they have problems with it, including on ships and overseas bases, and even broke
the biggest US exercise planned in Europe for the last 30 years. And the pandemic in the US
is still raging, its not fixed at all and death rates are increasing again.
Here for example, the futurologists from Pardee Canter that that China gained during the
crisis, in raw capabilities. Future research and relative power between countries is
their specialty :
Research Associate Collin Meisel and Pardee Center Director Jonathan Moyer use IFs
(International Futures) to explore the long-term impact of COVID-19 in China in this Duck
Of Minerva blog post" "Where broad measures of material capabilities are concerned, the
picture is clear: COVID-19 is closing the gap in relative capabilities for the U.S. and
China and accelerating the U.S.-China transition. Through multiple long-term forecast
scenarios using the International Futures tool,
Research Associate Collin Meisel and Pardee Center Director Jonathan Moyer explain on the
Duck of Minerva blog that China is likely to gain approximately one percent of global
power relative to the U.S. by 2030 due to the economic and mortality impacts of COVID-19.
This share of global power is similar to the relative capabilities of Turkey today.
On the issue of the USD, Stephen Roach
also says that there will be a significant decline in the medium term. And the argument
is pretty logical - if the US share in the global economy is declining (and it will be
declining at least up to year 2060), and if the level of US debts is reaching all time high
levels, then the USD will decline. I agree with that argument. It is fully logical.
On the chip/semiconductor issue. David Goldman is skeptical that the US will be able
to stop
China on this :
The chip ban gives the world an enormous incentive to circumvent the US
Basically Huawei still has advanced suppliers, from South Korea and Japan. And
some of them are refusing to yield. The problem for the US is that China is the world's
biggest semiconductor market and biggest chip importer on the world , which gives
enormous initiative for private businesses to circumvent US made equipment in order to export
to China. Then also China is stashing large quantities of chips. By 2025, it should be able
to replace foreign production with homegrown. So these bans are lose lose situation for
both the US and China - yes, this will cause come costs to China up to 2025. But it will
also lead to US companies, such as Qualcomm, to lose the Chinese chip market, which is the
largest in the world, and there is nothing to replace it.
These are hundreds of billions of losses for the US due to gradually losing the most
lucrative market. Thus, in relative terms, China does not lose from these games, as the US
will pay a large price just as China. It is lose-lose situation, but in relative terms the
same. US loses just as China loses. And do not forget that China warned that a full US attack
on Huawei will lead to Boeing being kicked from the country, which is becoming the biggest
aviation market in the world, and will lead to hundreds of billions of losses for that
company too, and will probably burry it under Airbus. China needs lots of planes up to 2028,
when they will replace them with their own, worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Elevating
Airbus over Boeing, which already has big troubles, will be a significant hit for the US
aerospace industry.
So China has cards to play too. On the issue of the US getting some countries to ban
Huawei, it is again lose - lose situation - that is both the US and some of its allies will
lose due to using more expensive 5G equipment and will lose more time to build their
networks. So China loses, and US and some allies lose, but in relative terms things remain
the same between them power-wise, as they both lose. Do not forget that Germany said that
it will continue to use Huawei equipment, and this is the biggest economy in Europe:
Germany's three major telecommunications operators Deutsche Telekom, Vodafone and
Telefonica have been actively promoting 5G in recent years. They implement the "supplier
diversification" strategy and use Huawei equipment in their networks among other vendors.
Peter Altmaier, German minister of economy, told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung on July
11 that Germany would not exclude Huawei from the country's 5G network rollout. "There can
only be an exclusion if national security is demonstrably at risk. However, we will
strengthen our security measures, regardless of which country the products come from," said
Altmaier. "There is no change in Germany's position," a spokesperson of the country's
Interior Ministry told local broadcaster ARD on July 16.
So we can say that probably half of Europe will be using Huawei. Still, as you said, a
large part of the world will exclude it. Maybe half of world's GDP. Unfortunately things are
not perfect. One bright spot in that is that Huawei is betting on emerging markets, and
emerging markets have higher growth rates than western markets - that is, they will matter
more in the future.
I would agree that the US is harming China, but the damage is not large IMO, as these are
mostly lose lose situations where relative power stays the same. And with time, there will be
significant damages for the US too, such as losing the biggest chip and aviation markets and
the empowerment of Boeing competitors such as Airbus.
So its not too bad in China. Thus, after mentioning all of this, I do not think that
Pompeo is smelling blood and moving for the jugular, its not such a situation as China is not
that vulnerable, it is more likely to be US elite anger due to the US weakening and China
gains during the Covid-19 crisis.
On Hong Kong China had no options. It was a lose-lose situation. If they allowed
everything to stay as it is there would be constant color revolution there and they will be
constantly in the media. Maybe it is better to stop this once and for all. They hoped that
the Covid crisis will give them cover to do this. It did not work very well.
Unfortunately it is right that the Trump strategy of bullying works many times.
Supposedly there should be costs for the US in soft power and world opinion, but we are not
seeing them.
I guess most of the world is too cowardly and prefers to go with the flow. They will
abandon the US only after the US lost anyway. Well, it is not an easy situation. Still, the
US reactions are very strong and hateful precisely because things are still not good for it
and its decline is continuing, regardless of some tactical victories, where in some cases it
is a lose lose situation anyway.
The data shows a
significant decline incoming for the US.
2019 China 1,27 times bigger in GDP/PPP
2030 China 1,8 times bigger in GDP/PPP
US debt to GDP 2019 80%
US debt to GDP 2030 125%
US debt to GDP 2050 230 %
The Highway Trust Fund (HTF) will be depleted by 2021, the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI)
trust fund by the beginning of 2024, the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) trust
fund in the 2020s, the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC) Multi-Employer fund at
some point in the mid-2020s, and the Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI)
trust fund by 2031. We estimate the theoretically combined Social Security OASDI Trust fund
will run out of reserves by 2031.
Military budget (before Covid estimates, Trump budget) 2019 3,2 % of GDP - 2030 2,5 %
of GDP (Could drop to 2,3 % of GDP due to Covid)
Civilian discretionary spending (before Covid estimates) 2019 3,2 % of GDP - 2030 1.8 %
of GDP (drop to all time low) (Could drop further due to Covid)
That is not to mention the big divide in US society, and the ongoing Covid crisis, which
is still not fixed in the US. But is largely fixed in China. Do you see the decline now? They
have a big, big reason to be worried. A significant decline is coming for the US.
Posted by b on July 27, 2020 at 17:53 UTC | Permalink
thanks for highlighting 'passer by's post b... i agree with them for the most part... it
reminds me of a game of chess where pieces are being removed from the board.. it is a lose-
lose, but ultimately, it is a bigger loss for the usa down the road... for whatever reason
the usa can't see that the financial sanctions, bullying and etc, only go so far and others
work around this as we see with russia, iran, venezuala and china in particular...
the one comment i would view differently then passer by is this one - "Unfortunately it is
right that the Trump strategy of bullying works many times. Supposedly there should be costs
for the US in soft power and world opinion, but we are not seeing them." i think the usa is
losing it's position in terms of soft power and world opinion but you won't be reading about
it in the western msm.. that is going to come out later after the emergence of a new reality
is very clear for all to see... the trump strategy is really more of the same and it is like
a medicine that loses it's power over time and becomes ineffective - sort of like
antibiotics...
In other words the western oligarchs will lose out to the eastern oligarchs in the Great
Trade War under the cover of a fake pandemic.
Or perhaps the global oligarchs in general just want the world to follow more in the
Chinese model where the population is more agreeable to total surveillance, social credit
scores and even more out right fascistic government/corp model under the cover of a fake
pandemic.
With respect to "bullying works", in international diplomacy it usually does since weaker
powers have more to lose in a direct diplomatic crisis with a larger power. This is not to
say that they won't push back, but they will be far more strategic in where they do. In
essence, weaker powers have fewer "red lines" but they will still enforce those, while
greater powers have more "red lines", because they have more power to squander on
fundamentally insignificant issues. However, weaker states will still remember being abused
and oppressed, so when the worms turns while they won't be the first to jump ship, they will
be more than eager to pile on and extract some juicy retribution once it is clear they will
not be singled out. I suspect the Germany will be the bellwether, when (if) Germany breaks
from the US on a key aspect on the transatlantic relationship that will be the signal for
others to start jumping ship. If Nordstream 2 go through, then there will be a break within 5
years; if Nordstream is killed, then the break might be delayed for 5 years or more but there
will still be a break when the US pushes Germany to support the next major US regime change
war in the Middle East.
The engineered collapse is being called the "Great Reset" by many outlets already. The
covid nonsense is just a cover for it. Instead of Saudi Arabian terrorist it is a basically a
harmless coronavirus. Just in the days immediately following 911 the "terrorist'' threat was
so overhyped that security theater was employed everywhere. Now sanitation theater is the new
act in town.
Where does anyone get these numbers about military spend as a % of gdp? Have you listened
to Katherine Austin Fitts on Corbett Report?
Posted by: oglalla | Jul 27 2020 18:27 utc | 4
Good to see your comment. Lots of anecdotal evidence nationwide about store closures and
many vacancies in business centers, particularly within economic engines of NYC and elsewhere
along the East Coast. IMO, lots of self-censorship by business media while the reality
reported by Shadowstats goes ignored. As for losing the status of #1 economy, that was always
going to occur once China or India became a moderately developed economy. It just happened
that China is far more efficient politically which allowed it to become #1. And until India
improves politically, it will continue to lag behind numerous smaller nations. Too bad there
isn't a place where one can bet on the great likelihood that the Outlaw US Empire will
outperform all nations in the production of Bullshit and Lies.
I also disagree with the comparison between USA and China gdp and other statistics.
China is not simply competing against USA but against the Empire: 5 eyes, NATO, Euro
poodles, Israel and the Gulf States and others like Mexico, Columbia, Brazil, India.
Anyone that is minimizing the conflict and the advantages of one side vs another is doing
a disservice.
CitizenX @ 26
Agree with your tone and content.
Particularly the third from last paragraph. I think people are missing by choice the growing
ground-swell of public opinion US wide as this blog shows, a multi-faceted detereation of US
political morals and legality.
Combined with a world wide growing awareness of how deranged American leaders now are.
Haterd consumes itself as dose greed.
My ear to the ground tells me, the protests at present are growing some in full sight some
not.
This is not buseness as usual. Then return to normal. The mood now is -- -- - let's settle
this thing once and for all, let's get the job done.
So my personal opinion ? we will see a US regime chainge faster than a lot here predict. Much
faster.
Passer by is correct, no doubt, thanks to incompetent leadership in the US, but this
economic horse race doesn't matter.
What matters above all is that nations should hold it together, "it" being sustainable,
survivable support systems capable of providing for mass populations.We have failed that test
here in our encounter with this pandemic. We have failed to develop a sustainable financial
system. We have failed to meet any sort of environmental goals. We don't even have
environmental goals! Our electoral system doesn't work, either, proof being the election of
this idiot atavistic rich boy. If anyone thinks the election of Trump reflects the will of
the majority of Americans, they are part of the problem.
China is in deep trouble. The CCP's greatest challenge is simply to hold "it" together.
The Party has to perform economic miracles or the country will collapse. Those groups not
satisfied with life in the PRC have no outlet for their voices to be heard. They cannot
protest. They are under the strict control of an increasingly sophisticated but tiny elitist
clique that is only 6.5% of the total population. This clique will not relinquish power and
permit more democratic expression. On the contrary, more and more suppression of dissidence
of any sort will happen. The social scoring system is an especially insidious program of
social control. China's collectivism has turned the country into an ant hill. It is extremely
productive, but people are not ants.
Passer by is looking at the world through a keyhole.
Nightmare' conditions at Chinese factories where Hasbro and Disney toys are made
Investigators found there were serious violations at the factories which were endangering
workers.
In peak production season, employees were working up to 175 overtime hours per month.
Chinese labour law restricts monthly overtime to 36 hours per month, but the report alleged
factories would often ask local governments to implement a "comprehensive working hour
scheme" to override existing legislation.
One wonders if China will run into the same problems of the US in the not too distant
future?
"The End of Sweatshops? Robotisation and the Making of New Skilled Workers in China"
Over the past four decades China has undergone a process of massive industrialisation that
has allowed the country to achieve remarkable economic growth. Because of its large
manufacturing capacity based on a seemingly unlimited supply of cheap migrant labour in light
industries, China has come to be known as the 'workshop of the world'. However, since the
early 2000s the country's labour market has experienced a remarkable transition from labour
surplus to a shortage of labour, which has led to sustained increases in the wages of
ordinary workers. In such a context, since 2015 robotisation has become a driving policy for
industrial upgrading for manufacturing in China, with the slogan 'replacing human workers
with industrial robots' (机器换人) frequently appearing in media
reports and official policy documents.
The early date of "full spectrum dominance" (1996 not 2010) suggests to me that the
doctrine was related the "end of history" thinking of that time. USA Deep State believed its
own propaganda.
It also strengthens my case for the proximate cause for the current conflict originating
in 2014 when the US Deep State suddenly realized the threat that Russia and China Alliance
posed to their plans for global domination.
Not only had they believed their own propaganda but they had overreached with their
attempt to force Russia to capitulate and had been distracted by Israel interests that wanted
to use USA for the greater Israel project.
When I wrote my economic analysis paper on China in 1999, it was quite clear that the 21st
Century was going to become the Asian Century as the Outlaw US Empire would be eclipsed by
Asia's economic dynamism. 20+ years later, my prediction holds true, and it's even stronger
now than then with Russia's resurgence. Both outcomes clearly go against the 500+ years of
Western Global Hegemony and goads numerous people. For students of history like myself,
what's occurring isn't a surprise thanks to the West's adoption of--or should I write forced
indoctrination into--the Neoliberal political-economic philosophy, which is akin to that of
Feudalism since it benefits the same class as that of the Feudal Era. China too was once
Feudal and suffered a massive Civil War that destroyed much of its structure, a conflict
known to the West as The Taiping Rebellion that lasted
almost 14 years, from 1850-1864. One might say that was the first half of China's overall
effort to overthrow Feudalism and Western Imperialism, as the second half began in 1927 and
finally concluded in 1949. That amounts to a large % of years for a newbie nation like the
USA; but for a nation like China inhabited by humans for over 1.3 million years and with
4,500 years of recorded history, it's really just another Dynastic Rollover--something
inconceivable to non-Asians.
In reality, China's a conservative nation, culture and society with a several thousand
year ethos of Collectivism, although that allowed a significant divergence in social
stratification due to the ruling Feudal ways. Those who have read The Good Earth have
an excellent grasp on the nature of Chinese Feudalism, which was embodied by the Kuomintang
or KMT--as with Feudal lords, KMT leaders were deemed "Gangsters" by US Generals and
diplomats during and after WW2. General Marshall wrote in 1947 it was clear to him that the
KMT would lose to the CPC, that there was no good reason to throw good money after bad, and
it would be best for the USA and the West to accept the fact of a Communist China (all noted
by Kolko in his Politics of War ). Contemporary China when compared to China as
depicted in 1931 by Pearl Buck is one of the most amazing human achievements of all time, and
the conservative Chinese government intends to keep it that way through a series of well
thought-out plans. That's the reality. It can be accepted and worked with as numerous nations
realize, or it be somehow seen as unacceptable and fought against in what will prove to be a
losing effort since all China need do is parry the blows and reflect them back upon its
opponent using skills it developed over several thousand years. It would be much easier to
join China than fight.
It's misleading to assess the National Military Capability of various countries in $US terms.
The West's M-IC is privately owned and puts shareholder profit before all else. And the
owners of the Western M-IC also own the politicians who facilitate and approve the rip-offs.
China and Russia's M-IC are owned and controlled by The People via the government and can
therefore get $2+ of value for every $1 invested. For example, one can buy some very nifty
twin-engine bizjets for less than half the price USG pays for a flying Batmobile (F-35) - a
glorified hot-rod with guns.
There is definitely a decline in the USA. Deaths of despair and from the coronavirus are
too great to ignore anymore. 150,000 dead and counting are not nothing. The Western Empire
has fallen. The U.S. federal government failed. The Imperialists are quarantined at home.
The question is if the 19th century North American Empire from Hawaii to Puerto Rico
survives. The Elite have bet it all on a vaccine or patentable treatment to give the
Pharmaceutical Industry billions of dollars. However, quick cheap paper monoclonal antigen
tests would make testing at home before going to work or school practical.
This would end viral transmission and the pandemic. No drug jackpot for the 10%. Instead
public health is ignored as Americans die. The silence is deafening. The protests in the
Pacific Northwest are not about slavery. They are about the 90% of Americans being treated as
disposable trash.
150,000 dead and counting are not nothing. The Western Empire has fallen.
No offense VV but I can't help thinking that you (and maybe some others) are talking past the
issue.
To be clear, the issue is this: Will the West's decline play a role in the US/Empire's
ability and willingness to confront Russia-China? Or is the oft-heard refrain that US/Empire
can not 'win' against China (implying that they shouldn't/won't bother trying!)
because of its decline (usually attributed to 'late-state capitalism') just wishful
thinking?
Virtually everyone here has agreed that the West - especially USA - hasn't fought the
virus correctly and with vigor. And virtually everyone agrees that there has been a relative
decline in USA/West and in some areas an absolute decline.
IMO what is ignored is that:
from the perspective of the US 'Deep State' or Western power-elite the failure to fight
the virus is a net positive if the repercussions are blamed on China (in addition to
other 'positives' from their perspective: saving on cost of care to elderly, boosting Big
Pharma profits, etc.) -
In fact, deliberate mistakes and mounting only a token effort (as we've seen)
is exactly what we should expect from a craven power-elite that want to further their
interests;
the overall decline, while troublesome - especially to the ordinary blokes who get the
short end of that decline - is not yet significant enough to prevent USA/Empire from
countering the Russia-China 'upstarts' aggressively.
I likened the hopefulness of the anti-Empire crowd about Western decline to their hopefulness
they previously expressed regarding Turkey. "Erdogan is turning east!" proved to be wrong.
Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Jul 27 2020 19:01 utc | 14 Within last 10 years China built
surface fleet which in terms of hulls (and "freshness") rivals that of the US. US economy
would have it bottom falling off if it tried to accomplish a similar task.
Nice to see you here again. Yes, I mentioned the relative navy building in the previous
open thread. China's navy will exceed US capability by 2050 and be on parity by 2030-2040
according to reports I've read. That's just ten years to twenty years from now.
Result: US gets kicked out of the South China Sea and has to share the Pacific, Indian
Ocean (as will India with gnashing of teeth) and even the Med with China. China will
undoubtedly project naval power all the way to the Med in support of BRI in the Middle
East.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 27 2020 20:43 utc | 27 There is decline, and while it has been
mostly relative it is also accelerating - but that hasn't significantly constrained
USA/Empire's response to the upstarts.
I agree. US military power isn't going away in ten years or twenty. China may achieve
parity at some point (and can do serious damage now). But that doesn't obviate the fact that,
short of nuclear war, the US is still in a position to throw its weight around and will
continue to do so until forced back by a (hopefully conventional) military defeat of serious
proportions, i.e., not just "give up and go home". And economic woes won't change that as
long as the taxpayer can be fleeced - and they will be, for at least a few more decades.
@ 62 A.L. "Would it be a surprise to you than there are many many protests in China at the
grass root level everyday?"
There are indeed protests all the time, which is the fire under the local Party leaders
that keeps them dancing. Usually the protests are against local corruption or mismanagement
and are not serious. People can get what they want this way. Each year at the general Party
gathering, however, special note is taken of "mass incidents", that is, protests on a larger
scale, and overtly political events such as those in the Uighur province of Xinjiang and in
Hong Kong. Any protest that challenges the control of the Party is not permitted. The current
protests in the US could not happen in China because they challenge political orthodoxy. The
Chinese don't just roll over on command for the CCP to scratch their bellies and the Party
knows just how volatile the political situation could be if mishandled. China is developing
into the ultimate surveillance state. There are lots of Chinese like that little guy that
stood down the tank at Tienanmen in 1989. Eventually that guy is going to say: "There is some
shit I will not eat!" The Party knows this.
Several years ago (close to 10) I noted that the US would be bringing back US companies
from China, that it would actually subsidize their relocation. It's only logical. I saw China
as becoming hostile to US corporations: in light of how things are going today it's the US
govt becoming hostile toward US companies in China. Make huge profits and then get free money
to return back to the US: and be welcomed as victorious troops arriving back from some
glorious war.
It's Musical Chairs. As the music plays more and more chairs are being removed. Capitalism
has been the most efficient economic system in which to trigger an economic collapse. WTF did
people think would happen with basing economic systems on the impossible, basing on perpetual
growth on a finite planet. All of this was readily foreseeable using SIMPLE MATH.
China is in deep trouble. The CCP's greatest challenge is simply to hold "it" together.
The Party has to perform economic miracles or the country will collapse.
How do you square your dire prediction of China's collapse with the
Edelman trust barometer of 2019 (warning: PDF file), where China scores 88 on the trust
index and the US scores 60?
The COVID-19 pandemic revealed that all the "leading" western countries are unable
to handle even a relatively moderate public health crisis. The neoliberal economic model
considers any aspect of society that isn't generating a profit as ideologically unsound and
targets these areas for "reform" (i.e. privatization).
Sometimes this is done outright, as when a public utility or service is sold to a private,
for-profit operator (e.g. British Rail in the UK). But when the government thinks the public
will resist and push back it is done by stealth, usually by starving the targeted
service/organization of funds and then farming out parts of it to for-profit companies in the
name of "efficiency", "innovation", "resilience" or some other neoliberal doublespeak concept
(they all mean only one thing of course: PROFIT). This is currently happening to the US
Postal Service.
Every public healthcare system in the so-called "advanced" nations encompassed by the
EU/NATO and Five Spies has been underfunded and subjected to stealth privatization for
decades. Furthermore, people in neoliberal societies exist to serve as fodder and raw
material for "the economy" (i.e. the plutocrat or oligarch class) and there is no mechanism
to deal with emergencies that can't be milked for a profit. Hence, the half arsed,
incompetent, making-it up-as-they-go-along response to COVID-19 that simply writes off older
and sick people as expendable.
Neoliberalism began as a US/UK project, that's why poverty, crime, inadequate health care
and social services etc. and governmental and societal dysfunction generally is more advanced
there than in, say, Canada and Germany.
So, yes, the US is in decline, maybe even collapsing, but that doesn't mean the imperial
lackey countries are immune to the forces tearing apart the United States. They are just
proceeding down that road at a slower pace. If the US falls, the west falls...globalization
takes no prisoners.
I live in Canada where sometimes people get a bit smug about how great everything is here
compared to the US. In British Columbia, for example, opiate overdose deaths are at a record
high and have killed many many more people than COVID-19 since the pandemic began. Housing in
cities like Vancouver is increasingly unaffordable, there aren't enough jobs that pay a
living wage, permanent homeless camps exist in city parks, there are entire blocks where
people who live in their vehicles park etc.etc.
The reality is that it's the west that is in decline, not only the United States.
China is developing into the ultimate surveillance state.
Posted by: jadan | Jul 28 2020 1:30 utc | 95
But don't you see, dear jadan, it is for the good of the people, if only the rest of the
world could see the benevolence of Big Brother we would all be much happier at least that is
what the thought police has told me to think. One government, one heart, one mind. Long Live
the PRC revolution./s
Amidst all of the nonsense in the discussion section of the following link, I believe
there are some germane comments from individuals that work in the semiconductor space that
touch on some of the challenges China's chip industry faces. link
I hope their hiring of 3,000 experienced chip engineers accelerates their learning curve.
Developing a chip industry on a moment's notice, let alone competing with Samsung and TSMC,
is no small chore.
One item not mentioned in the above article is whether China could build many consumer
components based on domestic 14nm (or larger) technology. Given China used to spend more
importing chips than oil, I assume that even less advanced chips used for TVs, etc. as
opposed to cellphones, would be very helpful for China's consumer electronics
manufacturing.
They are also making some strides in the flash memory and CPU space, but production
quantities are still very low.
Health, education, infrastructure, research and development. The backbone of prosperity.
These will all continue no matter trade war or cold war but barring hot war. There must be a
doubling time for this - something like an R0. Cold war and sanctions will only serve to
increase R&D
US mistakes, hubris ect move in the opposite direction, mistakes multiplying
mistakes.
@Schmoe 105
thanks, interesting. Here is a complementary tho less detailed article on some of the same
topics I ran across recently: China Speeds Up
Advanced Chip Development [semiconductorengineering.com]
One important point, clearly visible in the tables in the seekingalpha article linked by
Schmoe, is that the ultra-small 14nm/7nm stuff is for specialized (but strategically
important) applications. Most consumer electronics, industry, and everything else is 40-60nm
and up, although of course smaller has benefits to older applications in improve power (i.e.
mobile applications and servers) and cost (higher density/wafer)
US as an one excuse for its current hostilities against China is 'intellectual property'
theft. Makes me think of ninja Chinese sneaking around removing peoples brains.
But back to semiconductors. One of China's biggest imports is chips, mostly made by machines
using US tech. Many industries are highly specialized and it often makes sense from small
community level to national and global level to by a product from those that specialist in
that product.
China has been content to buy chips, but that will now change due to necessity. Yankistan can
now expect to get its brains hacked, but I am also reminded of the Scientists in the
Manhattan Project being the ones to pass on much information to the Soviet Union.
Yankistan will be leaking like a sieve. I guess that's why both oz and the poms are beefing
up their secret police laws. Wont be long before we are getting shot trying to run through
checkpoint charlie to the free east.
It is clear that the US is in decline. It is clear the US military is bloated and
overpriced but it can still turn most countries into rubble (even without using nuclear
weapons) and has done a few recently. Mostly the US uses its reserve currency status and
control of financial networks to punish countries that do not go along with its program. Can
you say sanctions. but as Hemingway said about bankruptcy - it happens slowly and then all at
once - is probably how it will continue to go. It is even losing its technological advantage.
Boeing used to be the leader and made reliable planes. Now they sometimes fall out of the
air. Things like high speed railways used to be the kind of thing the US did well. Now
California can't get one built. China has built thousands of miles of them. Russia built a 19
kilometer bridge to Crimea in 2 years after 2 years of planning. It appears to be competently
built on time and on budget. Do you really think this could happen in the USA now? In the 70s
the US was the leader in environmental actions. I wonder if the present day Congress could
even pass bills comparable to the Clean Air ACT or the Clean water bill. US national politics
are a mean joke. Our choice this year for President - two 70+ old white men with mental
issues. Our health system is overpriced. Medical bills are one of the main reasons for
personal bankruptcies. As others mentioned the US life expectancy is falling. As Dmitri Orlov
who watched the Soviet Empire fail said - Empire hollowed out the Soviet Union till it
failed, I see it doing the same thing in the US.
The current 'adjustment' in the USD & living standards is just what the doctor ordered
to allow elites to roll out "tech wave 2" - there is precious little gain to be had from
further staffing & wages cuts to the average shit-kicker, so now the bourgeoisie,
medicos, architects, academics, writers plus all the rest of the tertiary educated types who
blew hundreds of thousands on an education guaranteed to keep them employed, are about to be
tossed on the scrap heap.
We already know from previous stunts such as 911 & the 2008 'global financial
meltdown' that those most disadvantaged by this entirely predictable destruction of lives
will be easily diverted into time-wasting and pointless arguments about the real cause
of the mess.
This will allow the elites to use that diversion to funnel all federal funds into
subsidising the capital costs of the retooling, as both parties have begun to with the
despicable CARES Act, supported by the mad christian right in the senate, as well as the
so-called socialists in the Congress squad.
All the Cares Act does is inject capital into big corporations, boosting their stock price
& leaving citizens to lose most of their unemployment benefit. Citizens get evicted from
their homes. This time it will be tenants as well as home owners.
Both of those factions of elite enablers are going to create a great deal of noise and
crass finger pointing. The squad will jump up and down about this being a deliberate attack
on citizens by the elite while senate fundies will claim that this 'retooling' is the result
of unreasonable pay & working conditions demands by the communist unions.
What should be a universal expression of disgust will be reduced to just another culture
war.
Neither will ever admit that it is far too late to be worrying about cause, it is time to
concern themselves with effect, because to do so would create focus back on where the money
was going at time when it is important to be saying "everyone is hurting, including the
elites". Fools.
Eventually when the deed has been done assorted scummy senators & creepy congress
people will announce "It is time to move on" That will be a signal that treasury tanks are
dry, the elites have gotten everything which wasn't nailed down so now the citizens can roll
clawing & scratching in the mud.
I have no doubt that will be the direction of discussion here as well, it is much easier
to sit at a keyboard digging out obscure 'facts' that 'prove' one point of view or another,
than it is to leave the keyboard behind and put work into resisting the elites and in doing
so forcing a change that is more citizen friendly.
With the return of Russia to the geo-political arena, US can no longer destroy counties at
will through conventional weapons nor color revolutions and AQ freedom fighters.
Trump decided to go nuclear, so Russia placed its nuclear umbrella over it allies.
US can no longer destroy countries at will. It can attack a country and risk ensuring its own
destruction.
So back to hybrid war and proxie war ... but now the field is narrowed down to five-eyes and
in the case of China - India.
So to keep Russia out, yankistan has to rely on conventional war and hybrid war, though we
are looking at a country where the lunatics are in charge of the asylum so anything could
happen.
The MNCs producing it, the MSS, NSA and GCHQ, the IoT idiots and all authoritarians on the
globe. Consumers are happy with 3G: many don't even have 4G reception - give that to
them.
With IoT more unemployment, more electricity and Internet dependency, more chance of hacks
or natural disruptions (solar flares), more 1984.
The Chinese Communist Party wants a tributary international system where smaller countries
are deferential to larger powers, instead of a rules-based international order where
small countries enjoy equal rights.
The US/UK declining won't bother most billionaires with those passports: they just buy any
other. Stuck are the millions of others.
Equally "China" ascending brings joy for all billionaires around the globe holding stock
depending on Chinese near monopolies, including Anglo-es.
Some middle class Chinese are beginning to see that dying "rich" is is very limited goal,
as zero can be taken to the Here After and the price for this Now is too high. Money is not
everything. Welcome to this select club, Chinese brothers and sisters. Sure, a bit is good to
live but amassing is a waste of precious time and attention.
The US lacks the capacity to erect an "economic wall" that can stop China's
development. Trump's "trade war" was an attempt to do just that, and America got
steamrolled.
To be sure, the US can attempt even more irrational and desperate acts such as trying to
seize assets owned by Chinese people and organizations in the US, but that would be America
shooting itself in the head rather than just the foot.
The US simply does not posses the ability to "take the wind out of China's sails" .
That is not something that is within America's power to accomplish without going kinetic by,
for instance, trying to enforce a naval blockade of China's maritime transport routes. At
this point there are no economic measures America can take that will not do vastly more
damage to America than to China. Both trade war and bio attack were the best options America
had, and America has suffered grievously from those efforts with relatively minimal impact on
China. China's economy remains fundamentally strong while America's economy is
devastated.
As for disrupting China's international development efforts, America has been trying its
hardest for years now with the only impact being minor delays in China's plans. The only way
to truly disrupt China's international development efforts would be to offer a better deal,
but America no longer has anything to offer that is better. The only option left to America
to delay the BRI for longer would be a kinetic one, and the door is closing on that.
from the perspective of the US 'Deep State' or Western power-elite the failure to fight the
virus is a net positive if the repercussions are blamed on China (in addition to other
'positives' from their perspective: saving on cost of care to elderly, boosting Big Pharma
profits, etc.) -
It will not be possible to blame China, simply because no one believes the US press any
longer, and there is no convincing the woman or man on the street that US handling of the
virus has been in any way competent. We may not understand its virulence, and we perhaps
don't understand yet how to cope with it, but the example of China has been clear from the
earliest moments, and that speaks louder than any false rhetoric can claim.
We know what we have been experiencing in comparison with others who acted with celerity,
and that basically was what was needed. The US chose to go it alone, at its peril. It stuck
by a set of rules it had made for itself in these last years - rules which have not benefited
the people at large. It all comes down to that.
I would not quote a Zionist dominated source like Wikipedia on anything politically
sensitive and the article you refer to is in any case 10 years out of date. However if you
read it it refers to two foreign-owned firms, and it mentions that there are (In 2010)plans
to double wages in the next ten years which has happened. The article also states"
Strikes are not new in China. Chinese authorities have long tolerated limited, local
protests by workers unhappy over wages or other issues.[40] The Pearl River Delta alone has
up to 10,000 labor disputes each year. In the spring of 2008, a local union official
described strikes as "as natural as arguments between a husband and wife".[41] The Chinese
government sought balance on the issue; while it has recently repeated calls for increased
domestic consumption through wage increases and regulations, it is also aware that labour
unrest could cause political instability.[42][43]
In response to the string of employee suicides at Foxconn, Guangdong CPC chief Wang Yang
called on companies to improve their treatment of workers. Wang said that "economic growth
should be people-oriented".[44] As the strikes intensified, Wang went further by calling
for more effective negotiations mechanisms, particularly the reform of existing trade
unions. At the same time, authorities began shutting down some websites reporting on the
labour incidents, and have restricted reporting, particularly on strikes occurring at
domestic-owned factories.[46][47] Guangdong province also announced plans to
"professionalize union staff" by taking union representatives off of company payroll to
ensure their independence from management influence.
Which indicates to me that the suicides alerted the government to the fact that
these firms were making the lives of their workers miserable and took steps to improve the
control of them. They obviously realized that the Union officials had been bought by the
management. I wonder how the British government or the USG would have reacted? What I am
certain about is that the MSM would have been much less enthusiastic about reporting it.
IMO, taking a good look at Brazil's situation provides close to a mirror image for those
within the Outlaw US Empire having trouble seeing clearly. Too often we forget to look
South at the great sewer and its misery US Imperialism's created. It may be getting
defeated in Eurasia, but it's winning in Latin America.
That sewer of misery was running full flush during Susan Rice's rise through the
ranks.
National Security Adviser to Obummer 2013 - 2017,
US Ambassador to the UN 2009 - 2013
Do read the rest:
And well beyond South America.
Now she is close to seizing the prize of VP to Biden. She is a iron war horse of
formidable capacity and mendacity given her past roles. She has few redeeming features. She
will conform exactly to the dictats of the permanent state and she will easily step right
over Joe Biden as he either falls or is taken down at the most opportune time.
What drole sense of humour thought of this - the hapless Trump squeezed between two black
American presidents. Seems like something the Clintons dreamed up.
"It was asked upthread if the US citizenry would trade its no-longer existing Superpower
status for decent living standards.... There're only two forces keeping the American people
from attaining freedom from the above fundamental fear and having lifelong security: The
Duopoly and its Donor Class, the Rentier Class of Feudalistic Parasites that are the enemy of
virtually all humanity."
The US citizenry will choose decent living standards in a heartbeat, but the present
arrangement for eating off the labour of deplorables is just too profitable for the Duopoly
& Donor Class to be permitted to change for a couple decades more.
Perhaps they will move on when there is no more meat on the American corpse, or when they
have built up a sufficiently large group of useful idiots in China to begin eating off the
backs of deplorables with Chinese characteristics.
Anything is possible, with the right amount of moolah, even overcoming Confucian morals.
Joshua Wong comes to mind, who not only does idiotic, but actually looks idiotic.
On the issue of the USD, Stephen Roach
also says that there will be a significant decline in the medium term. And the argument
is pretty logical - if the US share in the global economy is declining (and it will be
declining at least up to year 2060), and if the level of US debts is reaching all time high
levels, then the USD will decline. I agree with that argument. It is fully logical.
Quibble on the significance of US dollar; from the cited article "Roach is calling for the
dollar to soon decline 35% against its major rivals". That would take the EURUSD back to its 2008 high. Not something
that changes the balance of power.
But I think the rest of the story is true.
Certainly in the US we have everything we need to reverse our decline, build a better life
for everyone living here, and stop trying to "compete" by sabotaging everyone else. Sadly
zero sign of this being a priority on either side of the mainstream political spectrum.
If JP Morgan, Gold Sacks and other major asset managers are betting on this 'bear' you can
be damn certain that they are doing everything in their power to make it a reality. They will
shakedown every gutless, spineless politician/health official/scientist they can find to
ensure their profits keep rolling in.
Yes, the conclusion we must take from this crisis is that the USA (and most of the West,
if not all the West) is now declining in absolute terms, not only in relative ones. That's
what makes this 2020 crisis special for the time period analyzed.
Relative decline is nothing special for the Americans. During the High Cold War itself
(1945-1969), the USA itself declined relatively to Japan, which simply grew even more. You
can even talk about a relative decline in relation to Germany during the same period, at
least in some areas. The difference lied in the fact that Germany and Japan were minuscule
countries under full military control and were fellow capitalist nations. When necessity
came, the USA simply ordered both countries to value their currencies in relation to the USD
and decades of geopolitical gain evaporated in five years. This is not the case with
China.
But what fascinates me more is the flux of History. The USSR was better than China in
almost every single relevant aspect in the 1950s-1960s, but it lost the Cold War because it
had the bad luck to face the capitalist powers at their historical best. China, being much
inferior, is being able to gain terrain over the capitalist powers for more than 40 years and
counting for the simple fact they were able to survive and live to see capitalism in its
decline.
That's why Putin correctly stated the end of the USSR was the biggest catastrophe of the
20th Century. If it could survive for mere 17 years more, it would've lived to face
capitalism on all fours, after the 2008 meltdown, and get a second chance.
China, being much inferior, is being able to gain terrain over the capitalist powers for
more than 40 years and counting for the simple fact they were able to survive and live to see
capitalism in its decline.
Posted by: vk | Jul 27 2020 19:35 utc | 21
I would say it was that China began opening itself up more to capitalist oligarchs and
intergrating itself into the world economy beginning with the Nixon years. In particular the
western oligarchs shipping their manufacturing base to china. That cheap Chinese labor was
too hard to pass up.
The engine of capitalism is cheap labor, slave labor if possible.
Now China has a decent size consumerist/middle class which gives it the leverage along
with the manufacturing. It not magic
Exactly so. Anyone can massage those data points to say anything they want. And that is
precisely what's being done by the USG. Since admitting that they are in decline is a non
starter for them, these types of numbers are always trotted out. That isn't to say though,
that everybody isn't massaging their numbers as well to cast them in a shining light for
whomever the audience for which it is intended.
I cannot take seriously any analysis that suggests another crippled fiat currency will
somehow supplant the USD. The Euro? That is laughable. Cleanest dirty shirt analogy still
holds true. Look at Japan over the past 30 years of debt accumulation to see how long this
can go on. The yuan is no better given China's own debt frenzy since 2008. The only economy
that is structured to weather the next 20 years of decline is Russia with abundant land,
ample hydrocarbons, a functioning domestic industrial/agricultural base, effective military
deterrence, little debt and ample gold reserves. Putin is is far from perfect but he's done
an incredible job preparing his country for what comes next.
All fiat is set for a dramatic decline against real assets. You need only look at all fiat
currencies dropping against the price of gold which is a surrogate for all hard asset prices.
Dirty fiat shirts one and all.
You can also just search for the Kitco Gold-Currency Price page if you do not wish to
click on the shortened link (but I confirmed destination on checkshorturl).
It's no longer the grand chess board in Eurasia. It is now a whack-a-mole policy.
The hydra's head (BRI) that is flowing out of the dragon will be popping up here and there.
Wherever it does, it has to be whacked like a mole. There is so much whacking (no pun
intended) that can be done before the empire exhausts itself. In a logistics game, the empire
will always lose, to the local actor with enough resources to devour it.
We've also seen that other local actors /empire lackeys (I'm looking at you India) can't be
much help stopping the hydra either.
On Roach's comments, when a Yale University senior fellow and former Morgan Stanley Asia
chairman tells you that the USD is about to drop precipitously, you can bet he's working
behind the scenes to make that exact event happen. Of course it's logical. He's part of the
creation of the chain of logic.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 27 2020 18:48 utc | 9
Bingo! Engineered collapse under the guise of a fake pandemic.
Nice review. Recall Global Times reported China's GDP rose 3.2% in 2Q versus a 5-9%
drop for Outlaw US Empire. Also recall the need to deal with Real GDP, not the falsified
numbers provided by USG that count negatives as positives. The following are Shadowstats "Economic Headlines" :
"Second-quarter 2020 Real New Orders for Durable Goods plunged an annualized 55% (-55%),
down 22% (-22%) year-to-year / June Cass Freight Index® continued bottom-bouncing,
running counter to the 'recovered' Retail Sales / June Building Permits and Housing Starts
saw some rebound in the month having collapsed respectively at annualized rates of 56% (-56%)
and 76% (-76%) in the quarter / Not-credible inflation-adjusted headline June Retail Sales
recovered pre-Pandemic levels in a stronger than expected real 6.9% monthly gain (nominal
sales gain of 7.5% held just shy of recovery) / Contracting for the third consecutive
quarter, second-quarter real Retail Sales fell at a 24.2% (-24.2%) annualized pace / On top
of downside revisions, June Industrial Production gained 5.4% in the month, fell 10.8%
(-10.8%) year-to-year, with Second-Quarter 2020 activity collapsing at a 42.6% (-42.6%)
annualized pace, following a first quarter drop of 6.8% (-6.8%)."
From the sidebar comment of 23 July:
"Reporting of Deepest-Ever GDP Decline Looms on July 30th • Annualized 49.1% (-49.1%)
Quarterly Plunge in Household Survey Employed Was Consistent With a Real Second-Quarter 2020
GDP Annualized Collapse of 50% (-50%) and Year-to-Year Drop of 16.1% (-16.1%) •
Potential Third-Quarter 2020 GDP Annualized 20% Rebound Still Would Be Down 12.7% (-12.7%)
Year-to-Year, Rivaling Great Depression Depths and Post-World War II Readjustment."
Although it's yet to be updated for 2Q figures, here's the GDP
chart , which in Real Terms is worse than the blue line depicts
So, contrary to JR's assertions, the Outlaw US Empire is in economic freefall. And unless
the eviction moratorium is extended nationally, a massive crisis awaits as noted by the
article I linked to in the Week in Review thread. Add the fact that most of China's ASEAN
trade partners have recovered from COVID while BRI Eurasian projects continue, China's
economy will continue to grow, which is where its focus is at as reiterated almost daily by
China's media and reported here.
As for the US Dollar, this William Pesek
item reviews the many times it was predicted to drown but didn't, although this time may
be different:
"More recently, Stephen Roach of Yale University has hit the speaking circuit to argue
that the 'TINA defense' – 'there is no alternative' – is no longer operative.
"'If TINA is the dollar's only hope, look out below,' Roach wrote in a
recent Bloomberg column . 'America's saving and current-account problems are about to
come into play with a vengeance. And the rest of the world is starting to look less bad.
"'Yes, a weaker dollar would boost US competitiveness, but only for a while.
Notwithstanding the hubris of American exceptionalism, no leading nation has ever devalued
its way to sustained prosperity.""
There're others cited by Pesek who provide decent reasoning for downgrading the dollar
which he balances against past history, thus leading to this conclusion:
"Yet the risk of a reckoning is rising along with awareness of how the Trump era is
exacerbating all of America's imbalances, and creating new ones few could have
predicted."
What's certain--a great many US citizens are going to experience incredible financial pain
for a considerable length of time, which may or may not alter the basic political situation
within the Outlaw US Empire.
Absolutely false numbers since actual Chinese economy is much larger than American one.
With or w/o PPP adjustments. I would go out on a limb here and state that at this stage in
2020 real size of Chinese economy is about 2.5-3 times larger than that of the US. In other
words--it already dwarfs US economy.
Military budget (before Covid estimates, Trump budget) 2019 3,2 % of GDP - 2030 2,5 % of
GDP (Could drop to 2,3 % of GDP due to Covid)
These are also meaningless numbers since they do not account for actual military
capability, especially when based on a fraudulent US GDP numbers. Within last 10 years China
built surface fleet which in terms of hulls (and "freshness") rivals that of the US. US
economy would have it bottom falling off if it tried to accomplish a similar task.
Amid all the strange, alarming and exciting things that have happened lately, the fact that
real long-term (30-year) interest rates have fallen below zero has been largely overlooked. Yet
this is the end of capitalism, at least as it has traditionally been understood. Interest is
the pure form of return to capital, excluding any return to monopoly power, corporate control,
managerial skills or compensation for risk.
If there is no real return to capital, then then there is no capitalism. In case it isn't
obvious, I'll make the point in subsequent posts that there is no reason to expect the system
that replaces capitalism (I'll call it plutocracy for the moment) to be an improvement.
But first let's look at the real 30-year bond rate. The US Treasury is currently offering an
inflation-protected 30 year bond at a rate of -0.3 per cent. That is, if you buy the bond at
say, age 35, you can get your money back, less a 10 per cent reduction in real value, when you
are 65. This rate has fallen from 2 per cent, when the bond was introduced in 2010, and started
declining sharply in late 2018, before the pandemic, and while the Federal funds rate was
rising.
In thinking about the future of the economic system, interest rates on 30-year bonds are
much more significant than the 'cash' rates set by central banks, such as the Federal Funds
rate, which have been at or near zero ever since the GFC, or the short-term market rates they
influence. These rates aren't critical in evaluating long-term investments.
The central idea of capitalism is, as the name implies, that of capital. Capital is
accumulated through saving, then invested in machines, buildings and other capital assets to be
used by workers in producing goods and services. Part of the value of those goods and services
is paid out as wages, and the rest is returned to capital, as interest on loans and bonds or as
profits for shareholders. Some of the return to capital is saved and reinvested, allowing
growth to continue indefinitely. Workers, on this account, can become capitalists too, by
saving and investing some of their wages. At a minimum, they should be able to save enough,
while working, to finance a decent standard of living in retirement.
But what happens if there is no return to capital? The collapse of interest rates on
government means that's already true for anyone who wants a secure investment. And the
situation isn't any different for the two remaining AAA-rated corporate borrowers, Microsoft
and Johnson and Johnson. Microsoft is currently offering a rate of 2.5 per cent on 30-year
bonds, and has exchanged lots of outstanding debt for new bonds at that rate (paying a 40 per
cent premium for higher-interest bonds). That's a real return of 0.5 per cent if you assume
that the Fed sticks to its current 2 per cent target and hits it on average. (There's a lot
more room for inflation to surprise on the upside, in my view). If you allow a 15 per cent risk
that Microsoft will go bankrupt some time before 2050, the expected real return falls to
zero.
To complete the picture of returns to capital, we need to look at stock markets and
corporate profits. That'll be the subject of another post.
John Quiggin 07.26.20 at 3:32 am (no link)
It's tempting to link all of this to the long-term historical decline in interest rates
that led 19th century economists, most notably Marx, to talk about the declining rate of
profit. But that decline came to an end in late C19. Real interest rates bounced about in the
20th century with no obvious trend. Much of the earlier decline may be have been due to a
reduction in default risk as capitalism became established, but that's just speculation on my
part.
Also, I plan to talk more about Keynes' thoughts on the euthanasia of the rentier, which
seems to be happening, although without much in the way of anaesthesia.
There is capital and then there is capital -- calling different things by the same name to
avoid (!?) confusion.
The process of capital investment -- using money to mobilize resources to strategically
alter the costs of production well in advance of sale or consumption -- that process has
always depended directly on the ability to assemble and exercise essentially political power.
There is nothing pure about it, and nothing at all, should you exclude any return to monopoly
power, corporate control, managerial skills or compensation for risk. The most substantial
returns from capital investment are only available to the fount of political power, the
state. The debility or senility of the state as provider of public goods might have something
to do with the inability to earn a return on investment.
Money, qua money -- "wealth" of the purely nominal sort unrelated to mobilizing resources
to productive purpose -- has only one purpose: insurance. "Insurance" in this very broad
sense can include cruel uses of money, facilitated by deflation: usury, debt peonage -- even
the words are cruel.
Central banks have been trained to flood the markets with "liquidity" to stave off the day
of reckoning for fraud and foolishness. It is as if the want to prove every bad thing the
Austrians ever said about them.
The true heart of capitalism is "other people's money". Borrowing money to lend money. For
this purpose, there is no one interest rate. There is borrowing at 0% to lend at 27% or 400%
or whatever horrific rate can be baked into a private equity deal or some crazy scheme of
insurance bound to drive up the cost of whatever services the purchase of which they finance
parasitically.
Hidari 07.26.20 at 9:10 am (no link)
If anything, this understates the matter, and understates what extraordinarily unusual
times we live in.
According to this site (and yes, it looks a bit dodgy, and no I have no idea who these
people are, so caveat lector) interest rates are the lowest, worldwide, generally speaking,
than they have been in 670 years.
This other dubious site makes the even more dubious claim (based on rather questionable
evidence), that current world wide interest rates are the lowest they have ever been
.
The first site suggests some opinions as to why this might be the case (assuming it is the
case), which I lightheartedly put forward as semi-serious 'solution' to this mystery.
1: Productivity Growth. As everyone has noticed, in the 'advanced' capitalist states,
productivity is dropping, as is 'inventiveness' broadly defined (this can be measured by
patents). Have you all noticed that when you were growing up, there was a life changing
technology development almost ever year or so, and since the development of the smartphone,
it's all basically stopped? (Electrification of existing commodities, e.g. cars, don't count,
and nor do things that don't exist and which will never exist, like genuinely self-driving
cars or moonbases/trips to Mars). CF John Horgan's The End of Science, and the concept of
'low hanging fruit' which all seem to have been pretty much picked by now. No new products
means no new firms to sell them, means less tax money, means less growth.
2: Demographics. Some 'optimists' have predicted that population will begin to drop this
century. Even assuming they are correct, which is dubious, have you ever considered what that
means? Old people are more conservative than young people, less productive, more sick, need
more care. Ageing societies are not politically liberal vibrant societies. What we are likely
to have is the worst of both worlds, in which population continues to increase for the next
few decades in the Global South, increasingly ravaged by climate change, and drops in the
Global North, meaning more conservatism, more Trumps, more of a 'gerontocracy', and of course
whipping up hostility to immigrants facing their burning countries might keep them in
power.
3: Economic Growth. Capitalism needs new markets, and now, as Branko Milanovic has pointed
out in 'Capitalism, Alone', there are no new markets. Everywhere is capitalist so there are
now no mechanisms available to 'pump prime' growth. There's no new source of cheap labour, no
new source of new consumers (China previously supplied that, keeping the global economy
booming in the 1990s and until 2008 but that effect seems to be failing).
Also, of course, climate change, the 'death of birth' the ongoing ecopalypse etc.
So, by the mid to late 21st century (science fiction, prediction alert!), negative
interest rates might be the norm. Indeed, this has already begun in Japan, which in many ways
shows the way ahead to our future: an ageing, conservative, sick population, in a low growth
country, where there is very little political or cultural change for decades, and where the
major political 'debates' are how best to keep out foreigners.
As John will presumably go onto argue, this will more strongly resemble societies from the
ancient world more than post-Renaissance capitalist societies, with gigantic inequality,
little scientific or economic growth (or change), huge swathes of the population kept
controlled and constrained via debt peonage (a sort of modern feudalism), increasingly
hollowed out and pointless 'democratic' polities, and real power remaining with a de facto
aristocratic class who made their money by inheriting it and kept it not by building things
and making them, but by tax dodging and other 'financial' tricks, in a mediatised world that
spends billions persuading the populace that none of this is happening (this is essentially
the story of Trump).
It seems to me that you are talking from the perspective of the financier, or saver, who
buys bonds and receives little, no, or negative return. But the capitalist is a
borrower, not a saver; a seller of bonds, not a buyer of bonds. She borrows money in order to
make investments in productive, as opposed to financial, capital.
So low interest rates suit the capitalist just fine. What can be a problem for the
capitalist is a low return on investment. Low growth – which we also have in the rich
economies – is therefore a problem for capitalism because it tends to imply a low
average return on investment. But in a world of zero interest rates, of course, you only need
a minimal return on your investment in order to make it profitable. So capitalists and
capitalism are still doing fine.
Put another way: when talking about 'the return on capital', at a minimum we have to
distinguish between the return on financial capital and the return on investment.
Final note: as you know, Larry Summers and co-authors have been writing about the secular
decline in interest rates and its causes for a few years now, as part of the discussion of
secular stagnation.
Will somebody finally admit that the Washington consensus (that a policy mix consisting of
tight fiscal policy and loose monetary policy) has been failure, on it's own terms. All it
has done has inflated asset prices to such an extent that nobody trusts their value (hence
negative expected return).
Secularly increasing the level of private indebtedness doesn't make the system more
resiliant. When you express it in those terms it sounds ridiculous, and yet that is what has
been official policy for thirty years.
We need to be aiming ot increase government debt at a rate sufficient to maintain the
money supply and should be aiming to gradually reduce the level of private indebtedness.
I need to make my macro policy ideas more complete I think before people misunderstand
what I mean.
We need
1. to run moderate deficits and securarly monetarise at least a significant fraction of
them
2. actively redistribute income
3. remove the tax incentives encouraging debt over equity
4. discourage speculative lending on a no redemtion basis (especially lending to risky
debters on the basis of expected asset inflation).
Tim Worstall 07.26.20 at 10:32 am (no link)
I think it's Tyler who says never reason from a price change?
"But first let's look at the real 30-year bond rate. The US Treasury is currently offering
an inflation-protected 30 year bond at a rate of -0.3 per cent."
How about a minor corollary, be careful of reasoning from a manipulated price?
What is the purpose of QE? To lower the risk free interest rate. We've a lot of QE at
present – some $7 trillion on the Fed balance sheet, something like that? That risk
free rate is definitely manipulated.
We can, of course, assume that the manipulation is going to last forever. But that would
be a strong assumption. If we're trying to think about the underlying structure of the
economy, rather than the current surface state of it, perhaps we might want to consider what
the risk free interest rate would be without the manipulation. What would the 30 year
inflation protected bond be paying in the absence of the $7 trillion of QE?
At a guess I'd say rather more than it currently is. Which is the same statement as QE
works at its declared aim. It being that absenceofQE interest rate that should inform this
speculation about capitalism.
Capitalism, briefly described, is the 'the rewards of saving, organized' or 'the principle
of indefinitely deferred consumption.' Everything else is the results of that. If you
repudiate that completely – then what are the implications? In the extreme, everyone
must consume everything immediately. One major motivation for this is that if nothing lasts
or is at high risk of being confiscated – in infinite regress.
"The central idea of capitalism is, as the name implies, that of capital. Capital is
accumulated through saving, then invested in machines, buildings and other capital assets to
be used by workers in producing goods and services. Part of the value of those goods and
services is paid out as wages, and the rest is returned to capital, as interest on loans and
bonds or as profits for shareholders. Some of the return to capital is saved and reinvested,
allowing growth to continue indefinitely. Workers, on this account, can become capitalists
too, by saving and investing some of their wages. At a minimum, they should be able to save
enough, while working, to finance a decent standard of living in retirement."
Sentence by sentence
" central idea " is not capital, I think, but capital markets. Perhaps a subtle
difference, but important nonetheless. Capital in this sense was held by Roman bankers I
think.
" capital is accumulated through saving " Historically capital was accumulated by robbery,
taxation, expropriation of church lands, state efforts to create currency -- accumulate gold
-- and a national market. Currently, capital is largely credit, from central banks, ordinary
banks and shadow banking institutions too numerous to name.
" invested in machines, buildings and other capital assets " I do not think a medieval
lord building a water mill was doing capitalism nor a central bank isn't. I don't think a
peasant in Tang China was doing capitalism nor do I think a George Washington buying property
claims on the frontier wasn't.
" Part of the value of those goods and services is paid out as wages " The labor is
borrowed first, then paid later. Currently that's usually two weeks later, but it has been
quarterly or even annually if I remember correctly.
" the rest is returned to capital, as interest on loans and bonds or as profits for
shareholders." Interest long predated capitalism so it's not even clear how this relates. But
if it does, interest historically was a kind of guaranteed profit, where risk was annulled by
a property claim in default of re-payment. But if memory serves, there were capitalist
enterprises predating a shares market, called partnerships, where ownership of the enterprise
and the ongoing profits may be conceptually distinct but weren't in practice.
"Some of the return to capital is saved and reinvested " Credit. Also, the difference
between a peasant saving and buying the neighbors' land when they fall on hard times is
different from a Rockefeller buying oil companies, much less a mutual fund buying stocks.
" allowing growth to continue indefinitely." In a fully developed capitalist economy,
growth is never indefinite, but always goes in cycles. If physical plant was a destructible
as money, stocks, bonds, etc., humanity might be back in caves?
"Workers, on this account, can become capitalists too, by saving and investing some of
their wages." A practical definition of capitalist would be someone who someone who invests,
in a factory or a hedge fund, to make a profit. There is a difference between a worker who
buys a house to live in and a capitalist who buys a house to rent out.
"At a minimum, they should be able to save enough, while working, to finance a decent
standard of living in retirement." This is a kind sentiment, which I approve. But given that
capitalist countries like imperial Britain in the nineteenth century did not provide enough
food for the majority of the working class to reach modern-day stature, this doesn't seem to
have much to do with economics. Pious wishes are not useful analysis in my opinion.
Anyone who actually read may think, quibble, quibble, quibble. But framing the issue like
this is misleading I think.
Normally (by which I mean during booms) in a capitalist economy part of aggregate demand
comes from net investment.
Continuous net investment requires more and more workers, which lowers unemployment and
increases the wage share; at some point profits fall too much, capitalists stop investing but
they don't buy consumer goods either, so this causes a paradox of thrift effect and a
crash.
The specific level of wages where this happens is not fixed though, and in recent times the
wage share fell throughout the cycle.
This means that through the cycle and even towards the peak the profit share is quite high,
but since capitalists don't want to invest in real capital anymore they invest in speculative
capital like houses, bitcoins etc..
Speculative capital reacts to increased demand in terms of price instead than in terms of
quantity (in the 19th century this speculative capital was mostly land), so as the profit
share increases throughout the cycle the wealth to income ratio increases. This increased
wealth with fixed income necessariously lead to lower returns on wealth (note, on wealth, not
on physical capital, as the profit share is still high).
This bubbly effect is needed to keep demand up so the government has to get along (e. G. If
the fed increased the interest rate now it would cause a huge crisis).
This is not really different from what happened pre WW2; IMHO it is just a consequence of the
winding down of the new deal, that caused the wage share to fall.
@Tim Worstall
We don't know what the "natural" interest rate would be, but my understanding is that the fed
can only push the interest rate up, not down.
In the end the interest rate reflects the expected return on new investment, but if nobody
wants to invest that rate is 0?
J-D 07.27.20 at 4:53 am (no link)
There's production of real goods and services, and then there's money. The relationship
between the amount of the first and the amount of the second is not straightforward, nor
even present in many cases (eg the roughly half of production that takes place in the
non-monetised sectors of the 'economy').
I'm not sure what difference it makes to your general point (maybe it makes none), but
since you refer in that easy way to 'production of real goods and services', I want to point
out that there's production of goods and then there's production of services.
Consider, as one example of each category, candles and haircuts.
Candles can be produced without being being consumed. The production of candles can easily
be understood as distinct from the consumption of candles. Some candles get produced and then
never get consumed. It makes sense, when referring to a business which sells candles, to ask
how many candles it has available for sale.
Haircuts cannot be produced without being consumed. The production of a haircut and the
consumption of a haircut are most easily understood as being the same event. It does not make
sense to refer to a haircut as produced but not consumed. It does not make sense, when
referring to a business which sells haircuts, to ask how many haircuts it has available for
sale.
Paul @7 A capitalist is an owner of capital: therefore a direct investor or lender.
Someone who operates on borrowed capital, seeking a profit over and above the market return,
is an entrepreneur. This, at least is the standard terminology.
In the standard classical or neoclassical model, the super-profits of the entrepreneur are
ultimately competed away. The things that matter, in the long run, are labour and
capital.
Risk and uncertainty change this, and I'll talk more about that soon.
Tim W. If the central bank can determine the rate of return to capital indefinitely into
the future, capitalism really is finished. The point of QE was to reduce short-term rates in
the emergency conditions of the GFC, The emergency has now become permanent, it seems.
@20 "If either US party genuinely cared about innovation or small businesses as the engine
of growth, we'd have had universal health insurance, "
A point Dean Baker has been making for many years. Although it's not quite as slam dunk as
he puts it as being. The US has a low rate of new business formation as a whole. And a high
rate for businesses designed or funded to expand into reasonably sized workforces. The bit
the US is missing is the small company that opens as and intends to remain small.
Which rather supports Baker's point actually. As such larger, better funded start ups etc
will have the money to be able to provide health care. In a manner in which the one man bands
the US is deficient in don't.
@25 " The point of QE was to reduce short-term rates in the emergency conditions of the
GFC,"
We seem to disagree on that point. The traditional tools work rather nicely in determining
short term interest rates. We do, generally, say that the central bank controls them after
all. It's the longer term that is more market influenced and that longer term that QE was
aimed at.
"If the central bank can determine the rate of return to capital indefinitely into the
future, capitalism really is finished."
And this:
"Amid all the strange, alarming and exciting things that have happened lately, the fact
that real long-term (30-year) interest rates have fallen below zero has been largely
overlooked. Yet this is the end of capitalism, at least as it has traditionally been
understood. Interest is the pure form of return to capital, excluding any return to monopoly
power, corporate control, managerial skills or compensation for risk."
It poses a difficulty, perhaps a decisive one, for investment, yes. But investment and
capitalism are not synonymous.
Well, assuming that we agree on hte following. A workers' cooperative is not capitalism.
Do we agree? But a workers' cooperative faces all the same decisions about how much of
current income should be put by for investment in future production and output. That it's the
income of the workers making the decision doesn't change the difference that the absence of
interest makes. It's still the same change in how much be given up now in order to gain
whatever in the future.
Investment, that is, not being the defining feature of capitalism. So changes in the terms
of investment don't, to me at least, seem to kill it off. Whatever it is that will be changed
is much wider than capitalsim – it would seem to be the terms of investment in whatever
socioeconomic system we've got.
As to what is the defining feature of capitalsim I take that to be that the investors
– the capitalists – are not part of whatever organisation is being invested in. I
don't see a zero interest rate as changing the desirability – say, investor
diversification, possibly limited liability, the possibility of mobilising the assets of tens
of thousands, millions, into a project – nor the undesirability – anomie and all
that of capitalism.
A zero interest rate changes all calculations about investment, not merely capitalist
ones.
@
"To complete the picture of returns to capital, we need to look at stock markets and
corporate profits".
and at some "Capitalists" – who always look at the whole "Picture" in order to only
play only the Casinos which offer the highest returns.
Like "the Stock" or the Real Estate Casino – and as the Real Estate Casino is
tanking BIGLY again -(even more "bigly" than in 2008) – there are only Stocks (kind of)
left –
and if – there – the gamblers will realise that the Party is over – too
– soon "the Utmost Clever Capitalist will have to go back to the "Liquidation Casino"
where y'all get EVERYTHING "for peanuts" – (Bugattis – Ferraris – Golden
Toilets – Whole Hotels and Casino – some tacky Chandeliers) – from the
STUPID -(and overextended) – Capitalist – like Trump.
As I hope that everybody here knows – that Trump already is bankrupt and after he will
be send back to golfing – he will have a very difficult time – finding one of his
golf courses – who still is profitable – and where his employers don't stare at
him – when he cheats – and behind his back tell each other:
"There golfs the Cheating Loser".
AND nothing – NOTHING hurts a Capitalist more -(besides losing all of his Capital)
–
than considered to be a really bad golfer!
One of the most frustrating aspects of any discussion of capitalism is that no two people
seem to mean the same thing with that term. The most common equivocation is, of course, its
redefinition into free markets plus democratic elections, cleverly allowing the No True
Scotsmanning of anti-communist dictatorships and monopolies as "not capitalism at all" and
enabling the person using this definition to tally the victims of capitalist expansion up to
a nice round zero.
To me, capitalism is a system where a minority of people own the means of production, and
the rest are legally free but forced to sell their labour to the former class to earn their
living. A few decades of very poor returns on bonds does not mean that there is a new system
of "no capitalism" with social arrangements as comparably different to capitalism as the
slave economies of antiquity, tribal societies, or Medieval feudalism, just as not having
free elections does not change the economic system into "not capitalism".
Regarding the reason for low returns, I get the problems of constantly reinflating
bubbles, but I would take one step further back and ask why they exist in the first place
when they had not existed for several decades c. 1940-1980ish. It seems to me as if the
underlying problem is low wage growth and inequality. It is a situation of too much money
sloshing around in the hands of billionaires and large companies, desperately trying to find
some worthwhile investment opportunity but coming up largely with (1) loaning it out or (2)
chasing speculative bubble after speculative bubble.
Why? Because most of that money is NOT being moved through the hands of the working class,
who therefore cannot buy enough stuff, and therefore investment into producing additional
stuff for the working class is not profitable. Too much money is constantly extracted from
the economy, so the economy regularly stalls and has to be kept from crashing by the next
injection of new money. But that injection goes to those who have enough money already to
lobby for getting more, and only rarely to those who would immediately spend it on a new car,
renovations, travel, clothes, better food, etc., so the downward spiral continues. (I see
that MisterMr has expressed a very similar view.)
But even if that were all resolved by returning to an economically sustainable high tax,
high wage system, we would next have to talk about sustainable consumption and limits to
economic growth.
So: what Hidari said, only I would use more present tense than future.
Climate change is now. Population grows and aging populations in one place combined with
too many young people with too little water and fertile land in another place is now. Very
nearly the whole world already having been turned into capitalist market is now.
Perhaps most importantly, because it is what stands in the way of solving any of these
problems: the malaise of contemporary politics in the richest countries seems to be precisely
that it is dominated by well-off retirees who more reliably vote than young and poor citizens
and who very reliably vote conservative. And it is not even only voting. When I was a young
adult in my home country I was very politically active. As I remember our meetings, the local
SPD (~labour) chapter was 2% young, progressive activists, 18% teachers and public servants
in their 50s, and 80% pensioners who would reliably elect the most conservative of the second
group to be chapter president, mayoral candidate, etc. The composition of the Tory party
membership in the UK is another case in point, as is the primary electorate of the two large
parties in the USA.
We are living in the world Hidari envisions for the second half of the century.
Lee Arnold,
I am a bit puzzled by your point "Regulations, zoning, government control, unions,
socialization of private financial losses, rent-seeking ("socialism" in the current
parlance)". Union power is at the moment extremely weak, and while the other factors are
stronger you are mixing extremely different things into one. I don't understand, for example,
how socialisation of losses would inhibit innovation, as it would allow an investor to take
more risks without going broke. Conversely, "regulations" is the exact opposite in that they
aim to keep investors from socialising losses.
I'm just curious why nobody addressed this sentence:
"Secularly increasing the level of private indebtedness doesn't make the system more
resiliant. When you express it in those terms it sounds ridiculous, and yet that is what has
been official policy for thirty years."
Are you all missing the wood for the trees? Seems to me everybody is looking for something
complicated when it is staring them in the face.
Pointing to negative interest rates on 30-year Treasuries doesn't mean that "capitalism"
is over. Capitalism is a whole series of political acts (laws, regulations, incentives) that
force the population to behave in a certain way. None of that has gone away, despite low or
negative interest rates. If you doubt it, note that–at least in the
USA–bankruptcy courts are about to have a world-historical run, dealing with an order
of magnitude increase in business and personal bankruptcy cases. How will society handle the
"social costs" of Covid-19? By putting people through a legal proceeding that largely imposes
those costs on those directly involved–because in the USA the legal system (AKA the
"real capitalism") absolutely believes in atomistic individualism, and all the manipulations
of the Federal Reserve do nothing about any of that.
What this does show is that the economics profession as a ridiculous
tendency–without which it would collapse back into the more realistic subject
"political economy"–to try to focus on "the economy" as if that were an entity
completely divorced from, independent of, and possibly epistemically prior to the
political/legal framework surrounding it. In the economics profession, an awful lot of work
is done by the phrase "all else being equal," where the most important causal
pieces–which are political–are studiously ignored.
@
"–at least in the USA–bankruptcy courts are about to have a world-historical
run"
and this morning I went through Stresa – where. it doesn't look a lot better
–
BUT in between all the emptiness and the closed symbols of Capitalism there was one
infinity pool – absolutely BEAUTIFUL -(as Trump would say) – with a BEAUTIFUL
view over the Lake and not a chaise empty – and when I came back to the Isola Pescatore
there wasn't a place empty at lunch – with all the usual joyful Lunchers from the
Homeland Italy and Switzerland, France, Germany – and I even saw an Old Dude with a
Oxfors University T-Shirt.
AND the two Mahogany Rivas in Front of the restaurant proved that Capitalism isn't dead
(yet) and that it will take a lot more to kill at least "Italian Capitalism".
John: It's not an easy step to equate long-term bond rates (e.g. the 30-year Treasury) to
overall capitalist profits. According to Dead Bearded German Guy Who Must Not Be Named in
Economics, the following is incorrect:
"Interest is the pure form of return to capital, excluding any return to monopoly power,
corporate control, managerial skills or compensation for risk."
Interest, monopoly power, corporate control, managerial skills, and compensation for risk
are determinants of profits from the point of view of individual capitalists, but Marx would
stress that these are superficial aspects of capital and that what matters in the end is
first, surplus labor converted into surplus value, and second the ability to realize surplus
value in a macroeconomic setting. Interest, dividends, rents, plus corporate profit and
proprietor/partner income taxes are all redistribution of surplus value according to him. I
am not in full agreement with Marx, as I think resource extraction and non-human labor are
also sources of economic surplus, but that is tangential to this point.
I would argue that the downward trend in long term interest rates over the past decade is
caused by an increased realization difficulty. Part of this difficulty is under-consumption:
the wage share of income has fallen over the past two decades, real median incomes have been
stagnant and in many regions real incomes lower than the median have fallen. The only way to
prop up consumer spending in such an environment, especially spending on longer-term durable
items such as houses and cars and longer-term intangibles such as education, is to have lower
interest rates.
Second, the falling long-term rate may be indicative of what some macroeconomists call
secular stagnation. As in perceived higher risk for investment projects due to lower
productivity growth (in fact, the main driver of equipment investment is to ratify new
technologies: potential productivity growth drives investment which drives actual
productivity growth). With low potential productivity growth, perceived investment projects
are riskier, causing a greater balance of capital to move to safe assets -- Treasuries --
thus driving down the T-bond rate.
What drives potential productivity growth is a black box, but the simplified heterodox
economics argument is that strong aggregate demand correlates with strong consumer spending,
which correlates with high relative wage costs, which correlates with increased productivity
gain searches looking for either Fordist or Marx-specific (i.e. labor-saving) innovations, or
niche-specific productivity gain searches where increased use-value for new commodities
translates into increased nominal productivity.
Overall, a Marxist or Marx-influenced economist would point to the low labor share as
pulling down productivity growth and thus pulling down long-term interest rates for safe
assets such a Treasuries, whereas a secular stagnation analyst would point to the lack of
epoch-making innovations (e.g., the end of geographical widening and capacity increasing for
electronic technologies as opposed to data processing deepening) plus reduced business
confidence in the post-2008 period and reduced global financial confidence in quick-flowing
capital post-1997 as depressing business investment and thus pushing down on safe asset
interest rates. The two explanations are not mutually exclusive.
None of this should point to either a coming end to capitalism or to Keynes's fairy tale
euthanasia of the rentier; as long as there is capitalism (and possibly even after
capitalism) there will be rentiers. But the trend in interest rates does point to the need
for global capitalism to have a new regime that discards neoliberalism. Low interest rates
correlate with stagnant or even falling real labor income, which correlates with populist
demagogy and increased international instability. Only when the international and domestic
political instability is sorted out is it possible to shift back to a non-neoliberal
capitalist regime and to usher in another 1945-1970 type growth period in which rentiers are
subdued but definitely not euthanized.
This is somewhat teased by JQs last comment up above, but real 30Y rates are not below
zero. Real rates including the risk and liquidity premium attached to Treasuries are below
zero and that's a different thing entirely.
From an investment market perspective – which is what's being measured in the rates
JQ cites – ever since Dodd Frank there has been an actual scarcity of UST paper of most
kinds. That seems hard to believe in the context of +20T of government debt, but in fact from
a supply/demand standpoint there is not near enough.
The reason is various collateral and settlement requirements imposed on banks post GFC. It
used to be that collateral was anything a counterparty was willing to accept, now its only
government paper – full stop. Accordingly the +$20T of debt (not all of which is held
in a way that can be used as collateral) is collateralizing several times that amount of
commercial and personal borrowing.
When economies grow the demand for Treasuries rises. When the economy contracts
uncertainty rises, demanding more collateral and increasing the demand for Treasuries. There
is no steady state that produces a liquidation. This is what 50bp of US10T means to the
investment markets and why its probable that it will eventually hit zero.
Whether that spells the end of capitalism or not seems dubious since JPM, Goldman, Citi et
all seem to have several Trillion of capital and lending acitivity that suggests things are
just fine.
Finally, as a practical matter, there is an over-abundance of money or money like
instruments. Everything from Bit-coin to collateralized debt all is available to fund the
capitalist, the entreprenuer, idiots and fools. This is what will end badly – not
government debt at Zero real coupon.
When reading about the past, present, and anticipated development of our political
economies, I have taken to substituting the neologism "Investorism" for "Capitalism." Marx
lies decades back in my reading, but I remember him saying that he was describing social
systems. Not religions or ideologies, except as they functioned in social systems. Capitalism
/ Investorism is the social system in which private investors – who, per #27, "are not
part of whatever organisation is being invested in" – call the shots. That the interest
rate has dropped below zero has many implications, many of which are opaque to me. But I
expect that the investing class is going to have 90% of the input (and a veto over) the
responses
I don't think I understand capitalism more than superficially. And as both the OP and the
comments demonstrate, neither does anybody else. I think nobody really has much of a clue,
neither the capitalists, the bankers, the Corporate Leaders, the economists, nor
unfortunately the anticapitalists, socialists and anarchists.
I was trying to make a comprehensive list of all of the reasons, given by both the left
and the right, for the perceived lack of jobs and business opportunities, despite the decline
of interest rates since around 1980. Whether the reasons are logical or not. So I gathered
disparate and opposite reasons under broad categories. Safety nets (Fake Dave #30) is a good
addition to the list: the left says we need them to reduce risk, the right says they slow
down growth.
Labor unions, always blamed by conservatives for impeding business, saw a decline since
around 1980 but of course their decline did not increase the rate of business startups.
Public sector unions are still under attack today for making government "inefficient" thus a
presumed drag on growth and opportunity. Libertarians e.g. Rand Paul even blame the
socialization of losses: I don't understand that, any more than you do. (Although they
scarcely practice what they preach.)
My point is that I don't think that any of the reasons, nor all of them together, will
explain what has been going on for 40 years. If you smooth out the graphs of 10-year, 30-year
Treasury rates and new business formation since around 1980, the declines look almost linear.
Maybe capitalism has been massively successful, so successful that it is putting itself out
of business, and we are growing out of it, just like Keynes and Schumpeter said we would.
While we are sorting it out, I would suggest creating a government monopsony that
guarantees human needs which will still allow private entrepreneurialism for innovations.
Not being an economist of any kind I can only offer my 2 cents worth for consideration.
There is so much money floating around in the upper reaches of the economy that interest
rates are of little concern to its denizens. Their problem is one shared with drug dealers;
where do you stash your money to keep it safe? Investing in zero or negative interest bonds
is like paying a small fee for a safety deposit box for your valuables. Having more money
than you could possibly spend makes it reasonable to buy luxury real estate and let it sit
empty. Property taxes and maintenance represent negative cash flow, but who cares?
@37
"I don't think I understand capitalism more than superficially. And as both the OP and the
comments demonstrate, neither does anybody else".
Hey!
I did – as I read the definition of "Capitalism" before commenting – and as the
definition says:
"An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by
private owners for profit, rather than by the state".
AND the Virus now made sure that even in the utmost "capitalistic" countries "the economic
and political system" HAS to be controlled by "the state"-(at least for the time being)
"Capitalism" is dead -(for the time being)
and let's NOT forget how the hunt for "good" returns – motivated all of these people
getting into the Stock Casino – during the lockdown – as there was nothing else
to do – for a lock downed Capitalist) – than calling his or her broker
–
And did you guys ever see the numbers of new "Investors(gamblers) during the lockdown? It
included ALL these retirees of my family who NEVER EVER would play with Stocks if there
(still) would be "decent" returns from saving accounts.
So in a very (ironius?) way the low interest rates created a whole new "class" of
InvestmentCapitalist who NOW pray that sooner than later "Capitalism" -(in accordance to the
words definition) returns to "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and
industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state".
Another revision by the IMF (the first one was some -2%, and I called here it was "too
optimistic").
I think a -6.6% fall in GDP is plausible for the USA. The USA, as the HQ of capitalism, has
tools and weapons that the rest of the world doesn't have, so, if they get lucky, a mere 6.6%
fall is possible.
But, all in all, I still think it's still too optimistic. For example, the IMF still refuses
to admit a second wave will come to the West.
"... The ruling effectively ends the privileged access companies in the United States had to personal data from Europe and puts the country on a similar footing to other nations outside the bloc, meaning data transfers are likely to face closer scrutiny. ..."
"... The so-called Privacy Shield was set up in 2016 by Washington and Brussels to protect personal data when it is sent to the United States for commercial use after a previous agreement known as Safe Harbour was ruled invalid in 2015. ..."
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Friday the United States was "deeply disappointed" in a ruling
on Thursday by Europe's highest court that a trans-Atlantic data transfer deal is invalid because of concerns about U.S. surveillance.
Pompeo said in a statement that the United States would review the consequences and implications of the decision by the Court
of Justice of the European Union that could disrupt thousands of companies that rely on the agreement.
"We are deeply disappointed that the Court of Justice of the European Union ... has invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield framework,"
Pompeo said.
"The United States will continue to work closely with the EU to find a mechanism to enable the essential unimpeded commercial
transfer of data from the EU to the United States," he added.
The ruling effectively ends the privileged access companies in the United States had to personal data from Europe and puts the
country on a similar footing to other nations outside the bloc, meaning data transfers are likely to face closer scrutiny.
The so-called Privacy Shield was set up in 2016 by Washington and Brussels to protect personal data when it is sent to the United
States for commercial use after a previous agreement known as Safe Harbour was ruled invalid in 2015.
More than 5,000 companies have signed up to it but the Privacy Shield was challenged in a long-running dispute between Facebook
and Austrian privacy activist Max Schrems, who has campaigned about the risk of U.S. intelligence agencies accessing data on Europeans.
(Reporting by Daphne Psaledakis; editing by Jonathan Oatis)
With tens of millions of Americans out of work, people fleeing cities for rural communities,
others working from home, online shopping flourishing, and the
virus remerging in many states forcing governors to pause or reverse reopenings,
consultancy firm KPMG
International has some bad news for those betting the economy is going to "rocket ship"
recovery as President Trump boasts about at press conferences and on Twitter. The consultancy
firm warns "social-distancing measures" will "dramatically cut the amount of miles Americans
travel by car" (fewer miles driven is terrible news for an economy driven by consumer
spending).
The effects of COVID-19 will be felt for years. The response to the virus has accelerated
powerful behavioral changes that will continue to shape how Americans use automobiles. We
believe the changes in commuting and e-commerce are here to stay and that the combined effect
of reduced commuting and shopping journeys could be as much as 270 billion fewer vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) each year in the US. -KPMG
Even the good news for the world's auto market seems to be bad news right now.
Day ago,
when detailing China's passenger auto sales plunge for the month of June, we noted that the
China Association of Automobile Manufacturers has been predicting for the last few months that
auto sales would fall between 15% and 25% for the year.
Those predictions have now been adjusted slightly upward , to a drop of 10% to 20%, despite
the fact that China's auto market still appears to be leading the global market into several
more years of deep recession. Recall, the auto market was already facing headwinds and China's
market specifically was already contracting for several years before the pandemic.
And while passenger vehicles fell 6.5% in June ,
as we noted , total vehicle sales rose 11.6% for the month to 2.3 million units, likely
helping lead to the revised predictions for the year. The driving force behind total vehicles
rising was a 63% surge in commercial vehicles, which also saw a 8.6% rise in the first half of
2020, likely due to vehicles being used to manage the spread of the virus in the country
... .... ....
This news comes despite better than expected results in May, where sales
showed a 12% increase year over year.
According to The
Detroit Bureau , premium and luxury passenger car retail sales led the charge in May,
rising 28% last month compared with year-ago results. Luxury vehicles maintained their strength
in June.
Recall,
we have recently noted that U.S. auto manufacturers are also teeing up sizeable incentives
to get buyers back into showrooms. Europe is following suit, with Volkswagen starting a sales
initiative to revive demand, including improved leasing and financing terms.
Posted by msmash on Friday July 10, 2020 @02:45PM from the closer-look dept. Technology
startups have been
laying off tens of thousands of workers to cope with the economic fallout of the
coronavirus pandemic, potentially blunting a key innovation pipeline for the enterprise
information-technology market, according to industry analysts. From a report: "Startups are
a great source of innovation in the IT industry, but are now especially cash constrained," said
Max Azaham, a senior research director at research and consulting firm Gartner. Mr. Azaham said
the coronavirus has made startup investors far more risk averse, resulting in a sharp downturn
in investment capital for IT companies looking to raise less than $100 million. As of last
week, nearly 70,000 tech-startup employees world-wide had lost jobs since March, led by
ventures in the transportation, financial and travel sectors, according to a report by
U.K.-based brokerage BuyShares.co.uk.
Startups in the San Francisco region, including Silicon Valley, have shed more than
25,500 jobs, including layoffs at high-profile companies such as Uber, Groupon and Airbnb, the
report said. Uber in May announced more than 6,500 layoffs, cutting roughly a quarter of its
workforce. A month earlier, Lyft said it would cut about 17% of its workforce, furlough workers
and slash pay in cost-cutting efforts to cope with lost sales during the coronavirus pandemic.
Startups developing artificial intelligence and other emerging digital tools fall under the
category of tech-sector employers, which have cut jobs for four consecutive months, said Tim
Herbert, executive vice president for research and market intelligence at IT industry trade
group CompTIA. The cuts included a record 112,000 layoffs in April, as tech companies scrambled
to slash costs, according to CompTIA's analysis of federal employment data.
During the pandemic, readers may recall several of our pieces describing what life would be
like in a post corona world.
From restaurants to
flying to gambling to hotels to
gyms to interacting with people to even
housing trends - we highlighted how social distancing would transform the economy.
As the transformation becomes more evident by the week, we want to focus on automation and
artificial intelligence - and how these two things are allowing hotels, well at least one in
California, to accommodate patrons with contactless room service.
Hotel Trio in Healdsburg, California, is surrounded by wineries and restaurants in
Healdsburg/Sonoma County region, recently hired a new worker named "Rosé the Robot" that
delivers food, water, wine, beer, and other necessities, reported
Sonoma Magazine .
"As Rosé approaches a room with a delivery, she calls the phone to let the guest know
she's outside. A tablet-sized screen on Rosé's head greets the guest as they open the
door, and confirms the order. Next, she opens a lid on top of her head and reveals a storage
compartment containing the ordered items. Rosé then communicates a handful of questions
surrounding customer satisfaction via her screen. She bids farewell, turns around and as she
heads back toward her docking station near the front desk, she emits chirps that sound like a
mix between R2D2 and a little bird," said Sonoma Magazine.
Henry Harteveldt, a travel industry analyst at Atmospheric Research Group in San Francisco,
said robots would be integrated into the hotel experience.
"This is a part of travel that will see major growth in the years ahead," Harteveldt
said.
Rosé is manufactured by Savioke, a San Jose-based company that has dozens of robots
in hotels nationwide.
The tradeoff of a contactless environment where automation and artificial intelligence
replace humans to mitigate the spread of a virus is permanent
job loss .
When we last looked at real-time consumer spending data
one month ago , we saw a stunning rebound in Bank of America credit and debit card spending
trends, with total card spending ex-autos essentially recovering pre-covid levels by early
June.
No doubt, a big part of this was due to the surge in Personal Income since the start of the
current recession, which as we explained earlier was a
function of the extremely generous fiscal stimulus which meant that on a per capita basis,
claimants received roughly $788/week ($41k annualized) on average, well above the usual amount
of roughly $300 in a normal labor environment ($15-$16k annualized).
Let it Go , 6 minutes ago
What consumers buy matters a great deal. When looking at the policies flowing out of
Washington it is clear many politicians seem to have no idea that all consumer spending and
purchases are not created equal. The fact is, consumers should take a long look at how their
purchases will impact the economy over time.
Where money flows and who it enriches is a key component of economics, the failure to
consider this is a blind spot many people have. The article below delves into this important
issue.
People are stupid.
Me, I have money in the bank, but a low income, so I spend less than my income, my
bank-account grows. That is me, in Old skool Europe. My bank-account = >
750.000€.
But I don't need it, I'm a minimalist, always was, but I like the thought that I have it, to
fall back when I'm tired.
America, credit cards, spends all you want. Even if you don't get it.
I remember that interview with a woman, after the sacking of Lehman Brothers. She made a
super-high figure income (more than I wish for), but she spend it all while it lasted.
And now she was on the streets and homeless. How is that even possible?
She worked for Lehman, but she was utterly stupid? "Can I apply for that job, coz I'm so
much smarter."
It happens here in the old continent too, but the impact is lessened, because of our
social systems.
I rest my case.
Let it Go , 44 seconds ago
Yes they are stupid! It is difficult to reconcile the fact that 60% of the millennials
surveyed say they believe they will be wealthy "within 1 to 10 years" considering that 59% of
those in this age group said they still live paycheck to paycheck . Making this even harder
to understand is it appears many people now feel that in order to be "rich," they need to be
worth an average of $2.3 million.
This amount is more than 20 times the actual median net worth of U.S. households. More on
the subject of wealth in America in the article below.
Existing theories of economics and the financial system cannot match successfully with
current conditions.
Long term data on stock index breadth, corporate earnings, Treasury yields and S&P
500 dividend yield strongly suggest a fundamental break with the past is in progress.
Past economic and financial system models, analytical tools and metrics will have to be
entirely reconsidered and reconstructed.
The Secular Systemic Shift now underway is so profound and so far-reaching and so
all-encompassing that it is probably analogous to the shift occasioned by the Age of
Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, the American Revolution and (later) the
Industrial Revolution.
Recently, in the wake of the dramatic, catalyzing events associated with the COVID-19
pandemic, analysts have struggled to match the action in the Economy with that of the
Financial System. Existing disparities of inequality and maldistribution have been
dramatically exacerbated as the financial indices have soared. In no quarter is there found
any real explanation for the utter failure of all existent theories to anticipate or explain
our current experience. The general reaction is one of befuddled annoyance. Irrespective of
viewpoint, left or right, economists and market analysts are trying to figure out why the
emergent reality does not conform to their model of how things should be and the default
tendency is to wag a finger of blame at the other side of the aisle.
In the Eisenhower era, corporations paid over 1/3 of the federal budget. Tariffs on imports
also paid a large percentage. The top marginal personal income tax rate was 70%.
In the 1960s, my father worked for Bell Aerosystems. The CEO made $120K managing 20,000
employees and building surface ship and rocket engines for Gemini and Apollo. Dad made $12K in
an administrative role and experienced machinists made $18K.
The system WORKED for most everyone.
Today, chief executives make 300X the earning of peons. Corporations pay only 6% of the
federal budget. Amazon paid ZERO corporate income tax. Apple paid 2%. Lockheed Martin paid
14%.
And where are they going to move, Colonel? Maybe LM will go to Russia or China? Maybe Amazon
will move to Alexandria and make life miserable there? Microsoft to Bangalore or Little
Rock?
Race to the bottom pandering to corporations, which has been the case for 40+ years now.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting corporations to pay taxes. I have no idea what
is the basis of the objection. Do any of the readers here pay more than corporations? I sure
do!
Germany eased strict social distancing restrictions on April 20 and started the process of
reopening its economy as the virus pandemic curve flatten. However, the consequence of closing
businesses and forcing people to stay home, along with shutdowns of international commerce,
resulted in a deep recession in the first half of the year for the exporting nation.
A new survey via the German Chambers of Commerce (reported by
Reuters ) said 83% of domestic firms with high international exposure had experienced a
collapse in revenues. Many of these firms, about 93% of respondents, said the global economy
could improve in 2021 or beyond.
The survey is an eye-opener for Europe's largest economy, and one of the largest exporting
nations in the world, suggesting a global economic recovery in the shape of a "V" is not
feasible for the back half of 2020. About 15% of the 3,300 companies surveyed said their annual
turnover is expected to be halved.
It was noted the impact of the virus-induced downturn, whereas at the start of the pandemic,
crushed travel and tourism, has now impacted other sectors and rippled through the economy in
the form of a demand shock.
Fifty-nine percent of respondents this month (July) warned of slumping demand for their
products and services, up from 57% in April.
Under such conditions, firms are unwilling to invest - more than half of the respondents
said they're cutting CapEx abroad, compared with 35% in April.
We noted on Tuesday, global CapEx is expected to be slashed, on average, 12%, which is much
larger than the 11.3% decline during the global financial crisis in 2008-09. Global
capital expenditure weakness suggests a weak recovery is ahead.
German Chambers of Industry and Commerce released a report on Wednesday indicating exports
will drop by 15% in 2020 with a slight recovery in 2021.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS
MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The German government has unveiled a $146 billion stimulus package to jump-start the
severely damaged economy. However, it appears the recovery, so far, has been a dead cat bounce
that will not revert to 2019 growth activity levels for the next several years, or
longer...
German industrial production has a long ways to go...
So what must be done to supercharge a recovery? Well, we offer insight here .
"... The "involuntary furloughs" would include up to 15,000 flight attendants, 11,000 customer service and gate agents, 5,500 maintenance workers, and 2,250 pilots. Another 1,300 management and support staff will be laid off on October 1, the company said. ..."
"... Delta Airlines told pilots in late June that it would send WARN notices to 2,558 pilots, or nearly 20% of its pilots, notifying them of potential furloughs. Last week, Delta said that it may cut the number of flights it had scheduled for August due to lack of demand. A month ago, Delta issued the mother or all revenue warnings . ..."
With Covid-19 cases surging in the US and in other countries, airline industry ticket sales
for both domestic and international flights are declining again, as demand has turned south,
according to a presentation to employees by United Airlines, filed
with the SEC on July 7.
UA's presentation included the two charts below of new ticket sales for future travel, by
"all carriers and sales channels," based on data by Direct Data Solutions (DDS) through July 2.
They show the percentage decline in industry-wide ticket sales for domestic and international
travel from the same period last year (in a 7-day moving average). The charts are titled,
"Increase in Covid-19 cases negatively impacting industry demand":
The first chart shows the decline in ticket sales for domestic flights, in terms of the
number of passengers (blue line) and dollar revenues by the industry (purple line):
This second chart shows the decline in international ticket sales in terms of the number of
passengers:
So that's the end of any pretense of a "V-shaped" recovery of ticket sales. And it's likely
that not just airlines are impacted by this resurgence in Covid-19 cases. But airlines are
already teetering on the edge.
Yesterday, United Airlines announced that 36,000 employees in the US, or 45% of its US
workforce, could face "involuntary furloughs" on on or after October 1. That's the day after
the restrictions attached to the $25 billion in payroll aid under the CARES act expire.
United's memo of the layoffs went out to employees in order to comply with a federal law
that requires employers to give employees at least 60 days' prior warning before mass layoffs,
the so-called WARN notices.
The "involuntary furloughs" would include up to 15,000 flight attendants, 11,000 customer
service and gate agents, 5,500 maintenance workers, and 2,250 pilots. Another 1,300 management
and support staff will be laid off on October 1, the company said.
"The reality is that United simply cannot continue at our current payroll level past
October 1 in an environment where travel demand is so depressed. And involuntary furloughs
come as a last resort, after months of company-wide cost-cutting and capital-raising," the
company said.
Delta Airlines told pilots in late June that it would send WARN notices to 2,558 pilots, or
nearly 20% of its pilots, notifying them of potential furloughs. Last week, Delta said that it
may cut the number of flights it had scheduled for August due to lack of demand. A month ago,
Delta issued the mother or all revenue warnings .
All airlines have been trying to cut their workforce with voluntary measures and have been
offering severance packages and early retirement packages to nudge employees out the door
without having to lay them off. Over the next few weeks, as the 60-day period before October 1
approaches, more airlines will follow United in announcing mass layoffs.
The drama of the dropping ticket sales due to the Covid-19 resurgence is not yet reflected
in the TSA's checkpoint screenings at US airports
– a measure of how many people are getting on a plane. They were still down 74.4%
yesterday, compared to the same weekday last year. They have risen since the low point in
April, but at a painfully slow pace.
The TSA checkpoint screenings are a lagging indicator. These people bought their tickets
often weeks or months ago. The declining ticket purchases in recent days will be reflected in
future TSA screenings:
Four months into the crisis, airlines are still only flying a quarter of the passengers that
they flew last year at this time, and they're having trouble hanging on.
United told reporters today that despite the radical cost cuts and capacity reductions, it
is still burning $40 million per day. That's $1.2 billion a month, month after month. And it
said that it could not count on further government support to cover payroll costs from October
1 forward. The company said that 26,000 employees had already taken part in the voluntary
severance programs so far this year.
The V-shaped recovery of airline stocks is also funny looking. The WOLF STREET airline index
of the seven largest US airlines – Alaska, American, Delta, JetBlue, Southwest, Spirit,
and United – remains in dismal territory, down 49% from the Good Times in mid-January
2020, and down 60% from the Better Times in January 2018 (market cap data via YCharts ):
The market cap of all seven airlines has plunged since mid-January, but with different
nuances, as of the close today:
United: -59%
Delta: -57%
American: -50%
Spirit: -50%
JetBlue: -48%
Alaska: -46%
Southwest: -35%.
It's going to be a long tough slog for passenger traffic to recover. In addition to the
issues related to the Pandemic, there is now a structural issue: Business travelers, the most
profitable segment for airlines, may not fully recover in a very long time because companies
have now discovered that video conferencing and video chats can effectively replace many
trips.
Sure, there will be some business travel after the Pandemic disappears as an issue, but a
lot less than there was before. This is a huge savings in time and money for companies. But
it's a deep long-term hole for airlines.
Despite the hope-restoring nonfarm payrolls "recovery" and the over-hyped bounce in retail
sales (ignoring the lack of 'V' in industrial production) and 'soft' sentiment surveys (which
are biased by their nature as diffusion indices to bounce back hard), for the sixteenth week in
a row, over 1 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits for the first time (1.314mm was
slightly better than the 1.375mm expected).
Source: Bloomberg
Texas, New Jersey, and Louisiana suffered the biggest increases in jobless claims in the
prior week...
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.393.1_en.html#goog_441484867
NOW PLAYING
Friday's April Jobs Report Leaves Economists Aghast
Airbus planning to cut 1,700 jobs in UK as result of coronavirus crisis
Airbnb Lays Off 1,900 Employees
Low-Paid Workers Hurt More During Surge Of Job Losses During The Pandemic
Accountability Might Be an Issue as Data Shows 500,000 Businesses Retained No Jobs Yet
Received PPP Loans
Pick your own fruit: Thousands of Finns replace foreign workers save summer strawberry
harvest
UK Chancellor Rishi Sunak slashes VAT on tourism and hospitality from 20% to 5% until
January
Meal deal among new UK £30 billion stimulus plans
That brings the sixteen-week total to 49.993 million, dramatically more than at any period
in American history. However, as the chart above shows, the second derivative is slowing down
drastically (even though the 1.314 million rise this last week is still higher than any other
week in history outside of the pandemic)
Continuing Claims did drop very modestly but hardly a signal that "re-opening" is
accelerating! And definitely not confirming the payrolls or sentiment data...
Source: Bloomberg
And as we noted previously, what is most disturbing is that in the last sixteen weeks, far
more than twice as many Americans have filed for unemployment than jobs gained during the last
decade since the end of the Great Recession ... (22.13 million gained in a decade, 49.993
million lost in 16 weeks)
Worse still, the final numbers will likely be worsened due to the bailout itself (and its
fiscal cliff): as a reminder, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act,
passed on March 27, could contribute to new records being reached in coming weeks as it
increases eligibility for jobless claims to self-employed and gig workers, extends the maximum
number of weeks that one can receive benefits, and provides an additional $600 per week until
July 31.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Finally, it is notable, we have lost 378 jobs for every confirmed US death from COVID-19
(132,309) .
Was it worth it?
The big question remains - what happens when the $600 CARES Act bonuses stop flowing?
New
research from Yelp shows that as of June 15, there were nearly 140,000 total business
closures on the website since March 1. When compared to similar research released in April,
which showed more than 175,000 business closures, these latest numbers indicate that more
than 20% of businesses closed in April have reopened.
In March, restaurants had the highest numbers of business closures listed on the app
compared to other industries, and the rate of closure has remained high. Of the businesses
that closed, 17% are restaurants, and 53% of those restaurant closures are indicated as
permanent on Yelp. Retail, however, is the hardest hit overall.
During the peak of the pandemic, the number of diners seated across Yelp Reservations
and Waitlist dropped essentially to zero. In early June, numbers of diners seated are down
57% of pre-pandemic levels.
Predictions about the restaurant industry's fate in a post-pandemic world
have been abundant throughout the crisis . The National Restaurant Association estimated
that 15% of restaurants could close, while Barclay's estimate is more optimistic, predicting
approximately 10% of restaurants will shutter permanently.
Though it's hard to find a silver lining in Yelp's data, some predictions have been more
dire still. In May, OpenTable said
one in four restaurants were at risk for closure, for example, though those numbers focus
on restaurants that use the reservations platform. Casual or fine dining sit-down restaurants
and mom-and-pop concepts that are not well capitalized are expected to experience the brunt of
this crisis. The
Independent Restaurant Coalition , for example, forecast that as many as 85% of independent
restaurants could permanently close by the end of the year.
Yelp's data does illustrate how some restaurants have been able to weather the storm,
however, reporting a 10-fold increase in searches for takeout since March 10, for example.
Takeout and delivery searches are up 148%, with Yelp predicting this off-premise trend could be
here to stay.
The research also shows that restaurants catering to group dining are making a comeback,
with fondue searches up 123%, tapas bars up 98%, hot pot up 49% and buffets up 17%. Conversely,
searches for cuisines that were popular during the past three months have begun to wane,
including pizza (down 28%), Chinese (down 26%) and fast food (down 18%).
While the pendulum has swung toward group dining, perhaps due to pent up demand after
three-plus-months of safer at home orders and dining room closures in some markets, this
interest could be short lived. This data was released before
a number of states --
New Jersey , New York
and California among them --
have delayed or re-closed some or all of their restaurants due to spiking coronavirus cases.
Extended closures will further challenge operators who are burning through cash to maintain
rent, labor and other costs. Restaurants with the strongest balance sheets and best access to
capital have the best chance to endure sustained closures. The industry will favor the haves
and weed out the have-nots, a trend that has become clearer as major chains like Taco Bell,
Domino's and McDonald's
have announced massive hiring sprees .
The virus pandemic and socio-economic shockwave across the US (read ad hoc protests and
riots), and more specifically in top metro areas, has created much uncertainty for city
dwellers who are now fleeing for suburbs.
Over the past several months, we have documented city dwellers leaving big cities for
suburbs, small towns and communities to isolate from the virus and socio-economic tensions
unfolding in many metros. While the exodus from cities is still in the early stages, it's now
believed by at least one expert, that city dwellers could continue to flee US metros for the
next 18-24 months.
"I think the next 18 to 24 months are going to show a lot of exodus out of central
business districts, as you can expect," Hessam Nadji, president and CEO of Marcus &
Millichap, who spoke with
CNBC on Tuesday.
"We're seeing there's a lot of office vacancy, for example, in the suburbs that have now
been absorbed; there's a lot of demand for rental homes that we're seeing because people are
fleeing especially hot spots like New York, but ... you just have to keep a long-term view on
it," Nadji said.
He said over the next several years - suburban areas will see exponential demand. Already,
real estate searches for suburban zip codes surged 13% in May, according to data via
Realtor.com.
We've already noted that New York and the Bay Area are seeing residents migrate to
suburbs.
Nadji said people are also fleeing to the outskirts of Seattle and Miami.
"It was a trend that was starting to happen already over the last two or three years. You
have to remember that 60% of millennials are now in their 30s," Nadji said. "While they
really enjoyed the lifestyle of central business districts and the lack of commuting ... we
were beginning to see them migrate back out as they were getting married and having kids,"
and the "health crisis has really accelerated that pattern."
He said the outbound migration from cities would also result in businesses chasing employees
to the suburbs. Nadji said people won't "permanently" lose interest in cities - at the moment,
this is an "overreaction" to the ongoing virus pandemic.
"We saw that [demand sap] post 9/11 and those tragedies, of course, because of the
reluctance to want to locate in high-visibility high rises in downtown[s]," Nadji explained.
"Eighteen to 24 months later, that [concern] began to dissipate. So, it's a normal reaction.
I just don't think we should count out the long-term prospects of the benefits of central
business districts."
What's different today is that the country has stumbled into one of the worst public health
crises in decades, tens of millions of people are unemployed, and the entire transformation of
the economy, which includes working remotely will lead to permanent population loss for city
centers - where living standards are in declines - as well as cost of living as a Manhattan
studio costs the same as a "mansion" in the suburbs.
Guess who is most excited about this exodus? Well, baby boomers, because they
bought/built oversized McMansions , with brick on front and stucco on back, in the late
1990s and early 2000s - and whose attempts to offload this real estate has been met with poor
demand... until now.
yellowsub , 8 hours ago
It can't last for 2 years, the property bubble in many areas outside of NYC on the NJ side
is already close to peak prices before the crash... Most of these areas are not places where
you want to raise your child in their schools.
"... This gradual, almost imperceptible erosion is the essence of neofeudalism, a process of transferring political and economic power from commoners to a new Financial Aristocracy/Nobility. ..."
Our society has a legal structure of self-rule and ownership of capital, but in reality it is a Neofeudal
Oligarchy.
Now that the pandemic is over and the economy is roaring again--so the stock market says--we're heading straight
back up into the good old days of 2019.
Nothing to worry about, we've recovered the trajectory of higher
and higher, better every day in every way.
Everything's great except the fatal rot at the heart of the U.S. economy hasn't even been acknowledged, much less
addressed:
every sector of the economy is nothing but one form of
neofeudal
extortion
or another.
Let's spin the time machine back to the late Middle Ages, at the height of feudalism, and imagine we're trying to
get a boatload of goods to the nearest city to sell.
As we drift down the river, we're constantly being
stopped and charged a fee for transiting one small fiefdom after another. When we finally reach the city, there's
an entry fee for bringing our goods to market.
Note that none of these fees were payments for improvements to transport or for services rendered; they were
simply extortion.
This was the
economic
structure of feudalism
: petty fiefdoms levied extortionate fees that funded the lifestyles of nobility.
This is why I have long called America's economy
neofeudal
:
we pay ever higher fees for services that are degrading, not improving.
This is the essence of extortion:
we don't get any improvement in goods and services for the extra money we're forced to pay.
Consider higher education: costs are soaring while the value of the "product"--a college diploma--declines.
What
extra value are students receiving for the doubling of tuition and fees? The short answer is "none." College
diplomas are in over-supply, and studies have found that a majority of students learn remarkably little of value
in college.
As I explain in my book
The
Nearly Free University and the Emerging Economy
, the solution is to
accredit
the student, not the institution
. If the student learned very little, he/she doesn't get
credentialed.
Were students to have access to the best classroom lectures online (nearly free), and on-the-job apprenticeships
in the workplace, (nearly free or perhaps even paid), learning would be significantly improved and costs reduced
by 80% to 90%.
In this structure, there's no need for costly campuses or administration; the entire structure of higher education
could be largely automated with software, except for the workplace apprenticeships which focus on case studies and
real-world projects that are creating value in the here and now.
Consider healthcare: has the quality of healthcare doubled along with costs?
Are Americans significantly
healthier as the costs of healthcare have tripled? The aggregate health of Americans has arguably declined, while
the stresses placed on frontline care providers by the ever-heavier burdens of compliance and paperwork have
increased.
What about the $200 hammers and $300 million F-35 aircraft of the defense industry?
Once again, as costs
have soared, the quality and effectiveness of the products being supplied has arguable declined.
How about state and local government services? Are they improving as taxes and junk fees rise?
Once
again, government services are often declining in quality as taxes and fees increase by leaps and bounds.
In sector after sector, the quality of the goods and services has declined while costs have soared. This is the
acme of neofeudalism:
insiders and the New Nobility are skimming fortunes as prices skyrocket and the
quality of the goods and services provided plummet.
Look at the cost increases in higher education, healthcare and childcare
and ask yourself if the quality
of those services have risen in lockstep with price increases.
This is nothing but neofeudal extortion.
The cartels raise prices and we're forced to pay them, just as
feudal commoners were forced to pay.
But extortion isn't the only feature of neofeudalism that is leading to collapse.
Just as important is
the slow erosion of commoners' self-rule and ownership of meaningful, productive capital.
This gradual, almost imperceptible erosion is the essence of neofeudalism,
a process of transferring
political and economic power from commoners to a new Financial Aristocracy/Nobility.
If we examine the "wealth" of the middle class/working class (however you define them, the defining characteristic
of both is the reliance on labor for income, as opposed to living off the income earned by capital), we find the
primary capital asset is the family home, which as I have explained many times, is unproductive--in essence, a
form of consumption rather than a source of income.
In a globalized, financialized economy, the only capital worth owning is mobile capital, capital that can be
shifted by a keystroke to avoid devaluation or earn a a higher return.
Housing and pensions are "stranded capital," forms of capital that are not mobile unless they are liquidated
before crises or expropriations occur.
I am also struck by the ever-rising barriers to starting or even operating small businesses, a core form of
capital, as enterprises generate income and (potentially) capital gains. (The pandemic has only increased barriers
that were already high.)
The capital and managerial expertise required to launch and grow a legal enterprise is significant, which is at
least partly why a nation of self-employed farmers, shopkeepers, artisans and traders is now a nation of employees
of government and large corporations.
What sort of capital can be acquired by the average commoner now?
Enough to match the wealth and
political power of financial Nobility?
Summary: "The U.S. government does not represent the interests of the majority of the country's citizens, but is
instead ruled by those of the rich and powerful, a new study from Princeton and Northwestern universities has
concluded."
Neofeudalism is not a re-run of feudalism. It's a new and improved, state-corporate version of indentured
servitude.
The process of devolving to feudalism required the erosion of peasants' rights to own
productive assets, which in an agrarian economy meant ownership of land.
Ownership of land was replaced with various obligations to the local feudal lord or monastery-- free labor for
time periods ranging from a few days to months; a share of one's grain harvest, and so on.
The other key dynamic of feudalism was the removal of the peasantry from the public sphere. In the pre-feudal era
(for example, the reign of Charlemagne), peasants could still attend public councils and make their voices heard,
and there was a rough system of justice in which peasants could petition authorities for redress.
From the capitalist perspective, feudalism restricted serfs' access to cash markets where they could sell their
labor or harvests.
The
key feature of capitalism isn't just markets-- it's unrestricted ownership of productive assets
--land,
tools, workshops, and the social capital of skills, networks, trading associations, guilds, etc.
Our system is Neofeudal because the non-elites have no real voice in the public sphere, and ownership of
productive capital is indirectly suppressed by the state-corporate duopoly.
Our society has a legal structure of self-rule and ownership of capital, but in reality it is a Neofeudal
Oligarchy.
The decline is visible, and so is the trajectory to collapse.
The unprecedented implosion of U.S. commercial real estate during the coronavirus pandemic
is likely to get worse as newly delinquent CMBS loans are surging as the list of retail store
closures continues to rise.
Trepp's June
CMBS remittance report showed CMBS delinquencies hit a high of 10.32%, not seen since 2012.
It was noted that that retail CRE loans were in rough shape.
Many retail shops are heavily indebted, some have already declared bankruptcy, while others
are quickly shrinking their operating size, by reducing store footprint to rein in cost as the
virus-induced recession, blended with a plunge in consumption, along with a shift to online, is
resulting in a rapid acceleration of the retail apocalypse.
Coresight Research's latest forecast has
upwards of 25,000 retail stores could close by year end.
Forbes has released an updated list of confirmed store closures. So far, it looks like
8,708 store units have or will shutter operations this year, and could quickly surpass 2019
totals of 9,302, in a matter of months.
With thousands of retail stores closing and the economy contracting, the next conversation
Wall Street will have is about deep economic scarring and permanent job loss.
Already, 3
million jobs have been eliminated from the economy, some of which have come from the
closure of retail stores. The bad news about permanent job loss is that it's a consumption
killer, resulting in less spending at retailers, suggesting an even greater amount of store
closures beyond anyone's wild guess could be seen over the next 12-24 months.
This all suggests there's no V-shaped recovery this year - one might want to hunker down for
a prolonged downturn, as explained here
.
"... I would submit that the legitimacy of the elite professional and managerial classes is being called into question, for want of performance or any sense of responsibility. The urban PMC are the core constituency of the establishment Democratic Party. The vestigial working class elements and the ideological Left are distant memories and oppressed minorities seeking social justice, mere props. ..."
"... The thing is, the political classes -- the millionaire media pundits, the politicians, the lobbyists, the generals, the journamalists, the manipulative political operatives and propagandists, the pious policy "experts", the highly paid executives and financial managers running monopolies into the ground and non-profits into irrelevance -- they have enacted their neo-liberal agenda and it doesn't work. ..."
"... This in a country that cannot manufacture PPE. Or win a war. Trump, in his fumbling way, might get the U.S. out of Afghanistan, but the NY Times -- who brought us WMD not that long ago -- reports the Russians are paying bounties on American soldiers killed. No report on the treatment of Julian Assange though. Boeing is going to get the 737 Max in the air real soon now. Citibank is borrowing at 0.03 from the Fed and lending to credit card users at 27% and may be insolvent. ..."
"... So, let us assume the Democrats, after nominating an elderly SOB who had a hand in the crime bill that gave the U.S. the highest incarceration rate in the world, the bankruptcy bill that saddled tens of millions with credit card and student debt that cannot be discharged, and every stupid war of the last nearly twenty years, will suddenly see the necessity of radical change. And, after making an alliance with conservative Republicans hostile to even Trump's fake populism in order to elect Biden, seeing the light on radical reform is so likely! So plausible. ..."
mainstream Democrats recognize the need for radical change, and Biden will align with
the mainstream position as he always has done
You said you would leave this, your third assumption, to comments, so here is my
comment.
The U.S. is in the midst of a deep legitimacy crisis and contrary to popular belief among
liberals, it is not Trump particularly whose legitimacy is being called into question. Oh,
sure, there have been relentless attacks on him -- from partisan opponents and from much of
mainstream media -- but like the "anti-racism" of the recent protests -- much of it is
dissembling and distraction. Charges of colluding with Putin to win the 2016 election turned
out to be fake news -- rather obviously so from the beginning -- but a big enough mob went down
that path with no self-awareness. I am not saying Trump is not an egregiously bad President; he
is. But, notice please, before you go assuming that mainstream Democrats are going wake up in
2021 wanting to govern in the real world , that they have not shown much inclination toward
truth-telling or critical realism these last 20 years.
It is July. By January 2021, the U.S. economy will have suffered a structural collapse in
multiple sectors. That is the economic consequence of the pandemic. Restaurants, shopping
malls, bars, colleges, hotels, airlines, cruise lines -- easily 15% of the workforce will be
unemployed and another 25% seriously underemployed.
Did I mention that the U.S. is undergoing a legitimacy crisis?? Whose legitimacy is being
called into question?
I would submit that the legitimacy of the elite professional and managerial classes is being
called into question, for want of performance or any sense of responsibility. The urban PMC are
the core constituency of the establishment Democratic Party. The vestigial working class
elements and the ideological Left are distant memories and oppressed minorities seeking social
justice, mere props.
I would say the Party establishment is confident they can put the
re-animated corpse of Biden into the White House. And look how gleefully they welcome
Republican never-Trumpers into the clubhouse! If you were one of the fools and tools who
thought Obama did not want Republicans to control Congress, you are getting another chance to
see how the Obama Alumni Association works with the Lincoln Project, how happy they are to
deliver the kind of policy that appeals to rich, old, suburban Republican women.
The thing is, the political classes -- the millionaire media pundits, the politicians, the
lobbyists, the generals, the journamalists, the manipulative political operatives and
propagandists, the pious policy "experts", the highly paid executives and financial managers
running monopolies into the ground and non-profits into irrelevance -- they have enacted their
neo-liberal agenda and it doesn't work.
We have just watched the once highly touted CDC completely botch the great Pandemic. They
could not devise a test. They screwed up the rules on who could or should be tested. They lied
early on about the need to wear masks. They staged a moral panic over a need for ventilators,
when ventilators are a terrible therapeutic alternative. In the new Puritanism, they shut down
public beaches but they watched passively as liberal heroes like Cuomo set off a holocaust by
sending COVID-19 patients to nursing homes.
This in a country that cannot manufacture PPE. Or win a war. Trump, in his fumbling way,
might get the U.S. out of Afghanistan, but the NY Times -- who brought us WMD not that long ago
-- reports the Russians are paying bounties on American soldiers killed. No report on the
treatment of Julian Assange though. Boeing is going to get the 737 Max in the air real soon
now. Citibank is borrowing at 0.03 from the Fed and lending to credit card users at 27% and may
be insolvent.
So, let us assume the Democrats, after nominating an elderly SOB who had a hand in the
crime bill that gave the U.S. the highest incarceration rate in the world, the bankruptcy bill
that saddled tens of millions with credit card and student debt that cannot be discharged, and
every stupid war of the last nearly twenty years, will suddenly see the necessity of radical
change. And, after making an alliance with conservative Republicans hostile to even Trump's
fake populism in order to elect Biden, seeing the light on radical reform is so likely! So
plausible.
And, what's the play? The carrot of bi-partisan cooperation coupled with the fearful stick
of abolishing the filibuster someday somehow if they don't play nice. You do realize that only
Republicans are allowed to manipulate the filibuster and only in ways that favor their agenda
of, say, stacking the courts? And, the strategic vision? Reinforcing the Rube Goldberg
contraption which is Obamacare? You do know Biden is on record as adamantly opposed to
Medicare4all? And, that Medicaid is a need-based nightmare of controlled deprivation? In a
country where public health is such a shambles that a pandemic is running out of control.
'All the attention in this thread so far has been on the political dimension of uncertainty,
but it seems to me the public health dimension is also crucial and quite up in the air. What
will the trajectory of the virus look like in the US over the next several months? Will
infections continue to explode out of control?'
Not just the public health, but the economic effects of the public health. As I pointed out
in a previous thread, it's not difficult to work out why Trump looked like he was going to win
in January: the stock market was booming, unemployment was low, crime was low, there were no
new wars it's not a mystery.
People vote with their wallets.
If Trump someone manages to face down the neo-liberals in his own party and arrange for a
gigantic stimulus bill (bigger than the last one) and keeps 'benefits' going past August, he is
in with a shout. If he doesn't, and if the economy continues its path to free fall, he will
lose.
People vote with their wallets. It is not difficult. You don't need to invoke Russia and
etc. to work out why Trump won in 2016 (the impact of the Obama stimulus package, which was too
small, hadn't et 'percolated through' to people's bank balances at that point). And, if Trump
loses in 2020, the reasons will be self-evident and nothing to do with 'people seeing through
him' or 'brave liberals averted a turn to fascism'. If he loses it will be because he screwed
up on the 'good' economy.
Three time best-selling book author Nomi Prins says long before the Covid 19 crisis, the
global economy was faltering big time. The Fed stepped in with the start of massive money
printing in late 2019 to save the day.
Prins explains, " We were already in crisis mode as I mentioned at the end of my last book
going into 2019."
"What did we see at the end of 2019? We saw this pivot, and I call it phase two. . . .
Central banks had pivoted to easing mode . . . . Come September, October, November and
December, the Fed is producing repo operations. Those are short-term lending operations
that are supposed to be the purview of the banks . . . . The Fed is not supposed to get
involved, but it did. The Fed had all kinds of excuses. It said it was not QE, but it was.
. . . The debt at the end of 2019 for the world was three times GDP. For every $3 borrowed,
only $1 of economic activity occurred. That's what we started 2020 with. Throw a pandemic
into that . . . and you have a long drawn out financial and economic crisis."
Now, the money printing has gone into overdrive to save the system from the virus crisis.
The social and economic damage, according to Prins, is profound and not going away. Prins
points out,
"We are not going to pay back this debt, and this is global. Nobody is even considering
trying to pay back the debt that has been created. Let's think about why that debt has been
created. It's not just because the economy slowed down. That's one reason and kind of an
excuse. The reality is the Fed is on steroids, and other central banks are on steroids . .
. throughout the world in a larger number and larger magnitude than in the wake of the
financial crisis of 2008. This means all this new debt created is even cheaper than the
debt created going into the 2008 crisis. So, more debt, created more cheaply, means less
incentive to pay it back and more incentive to push it down the road and grow it. You've
got this snowball of debt rolling down this high mountain, and it's rolling and growing and
getting bigger. The mountain, which is the main street economy, is coming down as the snow
ball is coming down, and the main street economy itself, that foundation, is really shaky.
. . . How does this end? It ends with us, the foundation, which is the main street economy,
by both that snowball of debt and the avalanche of the mountain. That's going to be a
multi-decade problem. "
Prins says this next stage has a brand new name and explains,
" I call this a 'Permanent Distortion.' I have not used this term in prior books, but I
am using it because . . . the disconnect between financial assets, equity markets and the
real economy . . . has become massive ...
There is going to be this endless supply of artificial stimulation into the markets. . .
. Former New York Fed President Bill Dudley said the Fed's balance sheet is going to $10
trillion. That's what I have been saying, and now he finally said it. That's not going away
anytime soon. That's not being unwound anytime soon. That becomes permanent lift to
financial assets . . . . In the wake of that, less real capital gets used for
infrastructure, research and development, growth and retooling the economy and getting jobs
into this new period."
Prins says gold prices are going to "follow the expansion of the Fed's balance sheet." It
is that simple, and Prins predicts,
"As we saw in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, gold and silver will have the
ability to go up quite substantially as the Fed's book increases in size, which we know it
is going to do. We have been told that multiple times by many different words by Federal
Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell."
In closing, Prins says, " We are continuing to drive up asset bubbles where we don't have
the real economy to back it up..."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
"The more this 'Permanent Distortion' gets bigger, the more the likelihood the next
crisis will happen... and it will be from a higher height. It will be from a larger bubble,
a bigger snowball accelerating downward more quickly. I don't think we are out of this
crisis. I think the markets are going to have a bumpy ride as the economy has a bumpier
ride ."
Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with three time best-selling author Nomi Prins.
The Central Banks will buy up the debt and then liquidate it. Some currencies may be
re-issued. Get over it. Not the end of the world.
hugin-o-munin , 20 minutes ago
I used to listen closely to what Nomi said before but now it is only more of the usual
talk. The world is a very slow place and it takes a long time until new realizations spread
but when they do there is little possibility to stop it. Right now the USD is dying as a
world reserve currency. It is slow and strictly kept away as a talking point in media.
The US behaves and continues down a path that is only accelerating this process because
it is not up to the US what happens to the USD, it is up to the rest of the world. This is
a truth that no American wants to accept but it is a fact. The more aggressive and arrogant
the US becomes the faster this will happen and a part of me thinks that is precisely the
plan. It will not matter what either the Fed or Treasury does.
Nomi talks about price inflation hitting smaller and poorer nations right now but
doesn't even come close to the fact that this is also happening in the US right now albeit
much slower. Greg Hunter was too stuck on finding ways to praise Trump as usual to even
push this question, if he even recognized it. The gospel from Wall Street and most
certainly Goldman Sachs that the USD can never be questioned is all over this interview and
which is why these 'former' truth tellers are just that - former.
algol_dog , 35 minutes ago
Futures at new highs tonight. This week will break S&P highs for the year. Amazing
time ...
Motorhead , 40 minutes ago
We've been hearing the same old stuff for easily 10-15 years from Jim Willie, Eric King,
Peter Schiff, various/numerous gold bugs. et al., ad nauseam. Yeah, one day, they might be
right, but repeating the same mantra for over a decade, one is bound to be right
eventually.
Balance-Sheet , 54 minutes ago
If it is permanent it is reality not a distortion and this is the point. The 1900s are
long over and will not be returning nor will the 1800s be returning for that matter.
Will the National Debt ever be paid off? No and there was never any intention to do
so.
The Fed is in charge and does not need to account to anyone other than Congress and its
Banking and Budgeting committees therefore provides explanations it hopes people can
understand though this might be ill advised in and of itself.
Will the Fed balance sheet go to 10T? It might but only if it seems necessary and that
depends of future circumstances which in very fluid conditions cannot be forecast
accurately especially when politicians snap the economy on and off again and again.
Do taxpayers have to pay back the Fed balance sheet? No.
Does the US Treasury or the Fed crowd out private investment making it less available or
at higher interest rates. NO! and obviously not, right? Everyone can see that.
The Gold Standard is o-v-e-r and there are no practical limitations to the amount of
dollars that can be authorized by Congress to the level deemed necessary.
Doesn't this mean the USG will issue unlimited e-dollars? No, anything can happen in a
thought experiment of course but the target is to make sure that the supply of USD is just
a little more than enough.
If a mistake is made can excess USD is issued can the excess be withdrawn? Yes, billions
of dollars die every day anyway as loans mature and all UST issues like bonds that mature
in Fed custody simply disappear automatically upon maturity. All of the 'dollars' and the
bonds are electronic and are simply deleted electronically invisibly and with no PR
issues.
Does Nomi Prins know this? Probably but, hey, she is trying to make a living here so
must slightly overfulfill your existing expectations. That is just excellent marketing- you
want the customer- that's you- to get a slightly heavy pour. :-)
indus creed , 58 minutes ago
Prins has co-hosted the TYT (The Young Turks) program on Youtube. In case you are
wondering, TYT are deluded, woke supporters of AOC/The_Squad types.
"... "In a period of protest and increasing anger about inequality, the differential inflation rate experienced by low- and high-income households is a concern," said Bloomberg Economics' Björn van Roye and Tom Orlik. ..."
The coronavirus is inflicting a price shock on low income Americans that risks further driving up inequality.
In a study released this week, Bloomberg Economics
estimated higher grocery and housing costs for lockdown necessities meant those households whose incomes are in the bottom 10%
currently face inflation of 1.5% compared with 1.0% for the top 10% and the official 0.1% overall average recorded in May.
Recalculating Inflation
'Have nots' suffered disproportionately as virus changed buying patterns
Note: Inflation for the lowest (highest) 10% takes the alternative CPI basket for the lowest (highest) decile of household income
before taxes from the 2018 Consumer Expenditure Survey
The explanation for the difference lies in how the Covid-19 pandemic has changed consumption patterns by forcing households to
buy more food while spending less on transportation or recreational activities.
"In a period of protest and increasing anger about inequality, the differential inflation rate experienced by low- and high-income
households is a concern," said Bloomberg Economics' Björn van Roye and Tom Orlik.
The suggestion the virus is less disinflationary than many economists believe poses a challenge for the Federal Reserve which
is eyeing a slower inflation rate than that experienced by lower earners, who are instead facing a steady erosion of their purchasing
power.
"Taken together with concerns about central banks bailing out investors ahead of firms and workers, and the benefits rich, asset-owning
households gain from quantitative easing, it adds to the sense that central banks are unintentional contributors to the problem of
inequality," van Roye and Orlik said.
"... So called “Democrats”, especially Biden himself, and Biden entourage are sellouts to financial oligarchy. They represent defeated in 2016 wing of the US neoliberal elite — adherents to classic neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization. ..."
"... To expect them to attempt anything of value other the kicking the neoliberalism can down the road is extremely naive. ..."
The more you tie your analysis of economic consequences to the assumption of a Democratic
victory in the Presidential election and a Democratic majority in the Senate, the more of it
will be at risk of being rendered moot by the Republicans retaining either the Presidency or
a Senate majority or both, but I guess you know that and are implicitly accepting the risk of
having to do a lot of rewriting in that event (if the book is supposed to appear after the
elections) or of the book rapidly losing value after the elections (if it’s supposed to
appear earlier).
By the same logic, the more you tie your analysis of economic consequences to one
particular the way the political strategic battle will play out following the election of a
Democratic President and Congressional majority, the more of it will be at risk of being
rendered moot by the Democrats pursuing a different strategy. Given the initial assumption of
a Democratic President with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, I suggest you
would do better with a short discussion at a very high level of generality about why
(a) you
expect the Democrats to have the necessary political determination to overcome obstructionism
by a Senate minority and/or the Supreme Court and
(b) you believe there are strategic and
procedural options available (not necessarily just one option) by which the Democrats could
overcome Senate and/or Supreme Court opposition to a substantial extent if not entirely. You
may be right in advising the selection of health care as the issue to fight on, but if the
Democrats choose a different one and achieve a similar procedural victory, the economic
consequences will be much the same, surely?
I’m assuming that the title is supposed to be a genuine indication of the main topic
of the book and not a way of disguising a real topic of ‘What’s Going to Happen
Next’ or ‘What Should Happen Next’, which would not be quite the same.
If the Democrats take the White House and Congress they’ll have a very short window
to get anything done. The plutocracy will react by weakening the dollar e.g. by moving small
amounts into the euro, cryptocurrencies and/or even the renmimbi. Interest rates will rise,
and this will frighten many (or most) of the Democrats into austerity measures to reduce the
budget deficit.
Thus will arise the old propaganda refrain that Democrats don’t know
what they are doing, and the resulting frustrations, and Fox News falsehoods, might prompt
voters to return Congress to Republican control in the midterms.
Therefore the Democrats should adopt a strategy of getting a few irreversible things done
at the very beginning by ditching the filibuster and passing some popular programs which
might ALSO help the party against Republican propaganda in future elections. This can be done
in healthcare, comprehensive immigration reform, infrastructure, and new constitutional
amendments.
Healthcare — Push for a public option so people can choose to join a national single
payer: “Health Care National Choice.” 70% of the people want this. This can grow
to subsume and finally eliminate Medicaid, which is a tough sell to many state governments
and their voters because they have to pick up half the Medicaid costs after several
years.
Immigration — Pass the total package: improved border security (including fencing)
and an expanded immigration court system + immediate citizenship for DACA and a path to
citizenship for the 11 million other illegals. “Comprehensive Immigration
Reform.” 70% of the people want this, too. It has been proposed a half-dozen times in
one form or another since Bill Clinton’s presidency, and the moderate Republicans come
on board, but the rightwing fringe opposes it so it doesn’t get passed, and then the
Republicans lie in the very next election that the Democrats want open borders. This insanity
has to stop — stop being victims of the rope-a-dope, and get rid of the filibuster!
Constitutional amendments — 1. Amendment against anonymous property holdings: A. End
to dark money campaign contributions. B. End to anonymous shell corporations. C. Any
candidate for US President must release the last ten years of tax returns.
Amendment against executive misconduct: A. Executive branch inspectors general shall not
be removed but by Congressional approval. B. Not complying with Congressional subpoenas is an
impeachable offense. C. In the case of House impeachment, “executive privilege”
is automatically voided. D. If a President is removed from office, all of his or her pardons
are automatically voided and the miscreants returned to jail.
likbez 07.05.20 at 2:29 am
So called “Democrats”, especially Biden himself, and Biden entourage are sellouts to financial oligarchy. They
represent defeated in 2016 wing of the US neoliberal elite — adherents to classic neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization.
To expect them to attempt anything of value other the kicking the neoliberalism can down the road is extremely naive.
In this sense Lee A. Arnold post ( 07.04.20 at 5:20 pm #12) is completely detached from reality.
"... I agree that globalism is/will be heading into the dumpers, but I see no chance that US-based manufacturing is going to make any significant come-back. ..."
"... What market will there be for US-manufactured goods? US "consumers" are heavily in debt and facing continued downward pressures on income. ..."
"... There will certainly be, especially given the eye-opener of COVID-19, a big push to have medical (which includes associated tech) production capacities reinvigorated in the US. ..."
"... More "disposable" income goes toward medical expenditures. Less money goes toward creating export items; wealth creation only occurs through a positive increase in balance of trade. And on the opposite end of the spectrum, death, the US will likely continue, for the mid-term, to export weaponry; but, don't expect enough growth here to mean much (margins will drop as competition increases, so figure downward pressure on net export $$). ..."
"... the planet cannot comply with our economic model's dependency on perpetual growth: there can NOT be perpetual growth on a finite planet. US manufacturing requires, as it always has, export markets; requires ever-increasing exports: this is really true for all others. Higher standards of living in the US (and add in increasing medical costs which factor into cost of goods sold) means that the price of US-manufactured goods will be less affordable to peoples outside of the US. ..."
"... I'll also note that the notion of there being a cycle, a parabolic curve, in civilizations is well noted/documented in Sir John Glubb's The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival (you can find electronic bootlegged copies on the Internet)- HIGHLY recommended reading! ..."
"... All of this is pretty much reflected in Wall Street companies ramp-ups in stock-buy-backs. That's money that's NOT put in R&D or expansion. I'm pretty sure that the brains in all of this KNOW what the situation is: growth is never coming back. ..."
"... Make no mistake, what we're facing is NOT another recession or depression, it's not part of what we think as a downturn in the "business cycle," as though we'll "pull out of it," it's basically an end to the super-cycle ..."
"... We are at the peak (slightly past peak, but not far enough to realize it yet) and there is no returning. Per-capita income and energy consumption have peaked. There's not enough resources and not enough new demand (younger people, people that have wealth) to keep the perpetual growth machine going. ..."
I agree that globalism is/will be heading into the dumpers, but I see no chance that US-based manufacturing is going to
make any significant come-back.
The world's economy is in contraction. Although capital, what actual capital exists, will have to try and do something "productive,"
it is confronted by this fact, that everything is facing contraction. During times of contraction it's a game of acquisition rather
than expanding capacity: the sum total is STILL contraction; and the contraction WILL be a reduction in excess, excess manufacturing
and labor.
What market will there be for US-manufactured goods? US "consumers" are heavily in debt and facing continued downward pressures
on income. China is self-sufficient (enough) other than energy (which can be acquired outside of US markets). Most every other
country is in a position of declining wealth (per capita income levels peaked and in decline). And manufacturing continues to
increase its automation (less workers means less consumers).
There will certainly be, especially given the eye-opener of COVID-19, a big push to have medical (which includes associated
tech) production capacities reinvigorated in the US. One has to look at this in The Big Picture of what it means, and that's that
the US population is aging (and in poor health).
More "disposable" income goes toward medical expenditures. Less money goes toward
creating export items; wealth creation only occurs through a positive increase in balance of trade. And on the opposite end of
the spectrum, death, the US will likely continue, for the mid-term, to export weaponry; but, don't expect enough growth here to
mean much (margins will drop as competition increases, so figure downward pressure on net export $$).
Lastly, and it's the reason why global trade is being knocked down, is that the planet cannot comply with our economic model's
dependency on perpetual growth: there can NOT be perpetual growth on a finite planet. US manufacturing requires, as it always
has, export markets; requires ever-increasing exports: this is really true for all others. Higher standards of living in the US
(and add in increasing medical costs which factor into cost of goods sold) means that the price of US-manufactured goods will
be less affordable to peoples outside of the US.
And here too is the fact that other countries' populations are also aging. Years
ago I dove into the demographics angle/assessment to find out that ALL countries ramp and age and that you can see countries'
energy consumption rise and their their net trade balance swing negative- there's a direct correlation: go to the CIA's Factbook
and look at demographics and energy and the graphs tell the story.
I'll also note that the notion of there being a cycle, a parabolic
curve, in civilizations is well noted/documented in Sir John Glubb's The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival (you can find
electronic bootlegged copies on the Internet)- HIGHLY recommended reading!
All of this is pretty much reflected in Wall Street companies ramp-ups in stock-buy-backs. That's money that's NOT put in R&D
or expansion. I'm pretty sure that the brains in all of this KNOW what the situation is: growth is never coming back.
MANY years ago I stated that we will one day face "economies of scale in reverse." We NEVER considered that growth couldn't
continue forever. There was never a though about what would happen with the reverse "of economies of scale."
Make no mistake,
what we're facing is NOT another recession or depression, it's not part of what we think as a downturn in the "business cycle,"
as though we'll "pull out of it," it's basically an end to the super-cycle.
We will never be able to replicate the state of things
as they are. We are at the peak (slightly past peak, but not far enough to realize it yet) and there is no returning. Per-capita
income and energy consumption have peaked. There's not enough resources and not enough new demand (younger people, people that
have wealth) to keep the perpetual growth machine going.
The
Close Relationship Between the Rich and Politics.
5.0 out of 5 stars
The
Close Relationship Between the Rich and Politics.
Reviewed in the United States on January 15, 2009
Verified Purchase
In this large book Kevin Phillips takes the reader on a lesson of economics and
politics. Much of the history in WEALTH AND DEMOCRACY is of the American variety. He does, however, examine Spain,
Holland,and Britain and the commonality these past governments have with the current American political and economic scene.
The biggest common thread is the shrinking of the middle class a/k/a stratification of wealth.
One of Mr. Phillips observations is that in the 1990s transnational corporations posted record earnings while hiring few
Americans. Sometimes slashing employment to boost the bottom line.
Along that line he quotes Peter Cepelli, a professor at Wharton School of Business- "Today, a CEO would be embarrassed to
admit he sacrificed profits to protect employees or a community."
He also describes the shifting of the tax burden from corporations to low and middle income individuals through FICA taxes.
His quote on page 242 sums up American politics of the 1890s- "For two or three decades, then, democracy was corrupted at
its constitutional core. Control of the Senate secured not just that chamber but the federal courts, the U.S.Supreme Court,
and the U.S. Army to the service of American industry and finance."
He demonstrates in this book that wealth has been a factor in the politics of the United States from the very start.
Finance (banking) has had it's proponents like Hamilton and some presidents through time while it has also had it's
opponents; most notably Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson.
The author takes a look at the worth of some former Cabinet members, Warren Harding's especially, although he wasn't the
only president to tap the wealthy for his service.
Another interesting point that Mr. Phillips makes is that globalization can be, and has been in the past, reversed.
One of the curious inclusions in this book is found on page 71. It's an excerpt of a letter from FDR to Col. Edmund Mandell
House. (House is a rather controversial, mysterious figure in American political history and the subject of conspiracy
theories. He was a close adviser to Woodrow Wilson during his presidency). "The real truth... is, as you and I know, that a
financial element in the larger centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson- and I am not wholly
excepting the Administration of W.W. The country is going through a repetition of Jackson's fight with the Bank of the
United Sates- only on a bigger and broader basis."
The author also quotes such figures as John Kenneth Galbraith and Thorstein Veblen
The moral of WEALTH AND DEMOCRACY as I take it, is that our economic ills now are nothing more than a recurring pattern
that has been experienced by various powerful governments in their heydays. Part of the problem is hubris or the belief
that it can't happen again.
This is a large book and some sections are laborious to read, but the message of the book is comprehensible and detailed
very well. It may just be the most detailed book on the subject of wealth and it's adverse affect on government, especially
a democratic form of government.
The imposition of the nationwide lockdowns required elite consensus. There's no way that a
project of that magnitude could have been carried out absent the nearly universal support of
establishment elites and their lackeys in the political class. There must have also been a
fairly-detailed media strategy that excluded the voices of lockdown opponents while– at
the same time– promoting an extremely dubious theory of universal quarantine that had no
basis in science, no historical precedent, and no chance of preventing the long-term spread of
the infection. All of this suggests that the lockdowns were not a spontaneous overreaction to a
fairly-mild virus that kills roughly 1 in 500 mainly-older and infirm victims, but a
comprehensive and thoroughly-vetted plan to impose "shock therapy" on the US economy in order
to achieve the long-term strategic ambitions of ruling class elites. As one sardonic official
opined, "Never let a crisis go to waste."
It was clear from the beginning, that the lockdowns were going to have a catastrophic effect
on the economy, and so they have. As of today, 30 million people have lost their jobs, tens of
thousands of small and medium-sized businesses have been shuttered, second quarter GDP has
plunged to an eye watering -45.5 percent (Atlanta Fed), and the economy has experienced its
greatest shock in history. Even so, pundits in the mainstream media, remain steadfast in their
opposition to lifting the lockdowns or modifying the medical martial law edicts that have been
arbitrarily imposed by mainly-liberal governors across the country. Why? Why would the
so-called "experts throw their weight behind such a sketchy policy when they knew how much
suffering it was going to cause for ordinary working people? And why has the media continued to
attack countries like Sweden who merely settled on a more conventional approach instead of
imposing a full-blown lockdown? Swedish leaders and epidemiologists were unaware that adopting
their own policy would be seen as a sign of defiance by their global overlords, but it was.
Elites have decided that there can be no challenge to their idiotic lockdown model which is why
Sweden had to be punished, ridiculed, and dragged through the mud. The treatment of Sweden
further underscores the fact that the lockdown policy (and the destruction of the US economy)
was not a random and impulsive act, but one part of a broader plan to restructure the economy
to better serve the interests of elites. That's what's really going on. The lockdowns are being
used to "reset" the economy and impose a new social order.
But why would corporate mandarins agree to a plan that would shrink their earnings and
eviscerate short-term profitability?
Why? Because of the the stock market, that's why. The recycling of earnings into financial
assets has replaced product sales as the primary driver of profits. As you may have noticed,
both the Fed and the US Treasury have taken unprecedented steps to ensure that stock prices
will only go higher. To date, the Fed and Treasury have committed $8 trillion dollars to
backstopping the weaker areas of the market in an effort to flood the market with liquidity.
"Backstopping" is an innocuous-sounding term that analysts use to conceal what is really going
on, which is, the Fed is "price fixing", buying up trillions of dollars of corporate debt,
ETF's, MBS, and US Treasuries to keep prices artificially high in order to reward the investor
class it secretly serves. This is why the corporations and Tech giants are not concerned about
the vast devastation that has been inflicted on the economy. They'll still be raking hefty
profits via the stock market while the real economy slips deeper into a long-term coma.
Besides, when the lockdowns are finally lifted, these same corporations will see a surge of
consolidation brought on by the destruction of so many Mom and Pop industries that couldn't
survive the downturn. No doubt, the expansion of America's tenacious monopolies factored
heavily into the calculation to blow up the economy. Meanwhile, the deepening slump will
undoubtedly create a permanent underclass that will eagerly work for a pittance of what they
earned before the crash. So, there you have it: Profitability, consolidation and cheap labor.
Why wouldn't corporate bosses love the idea of crashing the economy? It's a win-win situation
for them.
We should have seen this coming. It's been clear since the Russiagate fiasco that elites had
settled on a more aggressive form of social control via nonstop disinformation presented as
headline news based on spurious accusations from anonymous sources, none of who were were ever
identified, and none of whose claims could ever be verified. The media continued this
"breathless" saturation campaign without pause and without the slightest hesitation even after
its central claims were exposed as lies. If you are a liberal who watches the liberal cable
channels or reads the New York Times, you might still be unaware that the central claim that
the emails were stolen from the DNC by Russia (or anyone else for that matter) has not only
been disproved, but also, that Mueller, Comey, Clapper etc knew the story was false way back in
2017. Let that sink in for a minute. They all knew it was a lie after the cyber security team
(Crowdstrike) that inspected the DNC computers testified that there was no evidence that the
emails had been "exfiltrated". In other words, there was no proof the emails were stolen. There
was no justification for the Mueller investigation because there was no evidence that the DNC
emails had been hacked, downloaded or pilfered. The whole thing was a hoax from the get go.
There's no way to overstate the importance these recent findings, in fact, our understanding
of Russiagate must be applied to the lockdowns, the Black Lives Matter protests and other
psychological operations still in the making. What's critical to grasp is not simply that the
allegations were based on false claims, (which they were) but that a large number of
senior-level officials in law enforcement (FBI), intel agencies, media and the White House knew
with absolute certainty that the claims were false (from 2017 and on) but continued to
propagate fake stories, spy on members of the new administration and use whatever tools they
had at their disposal to overthrow an elected president. The guilty parties in this ruse have
never admitted their guilt nor have they changed their fictitious storyline which still
routinely appears in the media to this day. What we can glean from this incident, is that there
is a vast secret state operating within the government, media and the DNC, that does not accept
our system of government, does not accept the results of elections and will lie, cheat and
steal to achieve their nefarious objectives. . That's the lesson of Russiagate that has to be
applied to both the lockdowns and the Black Lives Matter protests. They are just the next phase
of the ongoing war on the American people.
The lockdowns are an Americanized version of the "Shock Doctrine", that is, the country has
been thrust into a severe crisis that will result in the implementing of neoliberal economic
policies such as privatization, deregulation and cuts to social services. Already many of the
liberal governors have driven their states into bankruptcy ensuring that budgets will have to
be slashed, more jobs will be lost, funding for education and vital infrastructure will shrink,
and assistance to the poor and needy will be sharply reduced. Shutting down the US economy,
will create a catastrophe unlike anything we have ever seen in the United States. US Treasuries
will likely loose their risk-free status while the dollar's as days as the "world's reserve
currency" are probably numbered. That "exorbitant privilege" is based on confidence, and
confidence in US leadership is at its lowest point in history.
It's not surprising that the Black Lives Matter protests took place at the same time as the
lockdowns. The looting, rioting and desecration of statues provided the perfect one-two punch
for those who see some tactical advantage in intensifying public anxiety by exacerbating racial
tensions and splitting the country into two warring camps. Divide and conquer remains the modus
operandi of imperialists everywhere. That same rule applies here. Here's more background from
an article at the Off-Guardian:
"It is no coincidence that another Soros funded activism group Black Lives Matter has
diverted the spotlight away from the lockdown's broader impact on the fundamental human
rights of billions of people, using the reliable methods of divide and rule, to highlight the
plight of specific strata's of society, and not all.
It's worth pointing out that BLM's activity spikes every four years . Always prior to the
elections in the US, as African Americans make up an important social segment of Democrat
votes. The same Democrats who play both sides like any smart gambler would. The Clintons, for
example, are investors into BLM"s partner, the anti-fascist ANTIFA. While Hilary Clinton's
mentor (and best friend) was former KKK leader Robert Byrd.
BLM is a massively hyped, TV-made, politicized event, that panders to the populist and
escapist appetite of the people. Blinding them from their true call to arms in defense of the
universal rights of everyone . Cashing in on the youths pent-up aggression . And weaponising
the tiger locked in a rattled cage for 3-months, and unleashed by puppet masters as the
mob
As a general rule of thumb, it is safe to assume that if a social movement has the backing
of big industry, big philanthropy or big politics, then its ideals run contrary to citizen
empowerment." (" The Co-opting
of Activism by the State ", Off-Guardian)
Black Lives Matter protests provide another significant diversion from the massive
destruction of the US economy. This basic plan has been used effectively many times in the
past, most notably in the year following the invasion of Iraq. Some readers will remember how
Iraqis militants fought US occupation forces following the invasion in 2003. The escalating
violence and rising death-toll created a public relations nightmare for the Bush team that
finally settled on a plan for crushing the resistance by arming and training Shia death squads.
But the Bushies wanted to confuse the public about what they were really up to, so they
concocted a narrative about a "sectarian war" that was intended to divert attention from the
attacks on American soldiers.
In order to make the narrative more believable, US intel agents devised a plan to blow up
the Shia's most sacred religious site, the Golden Dome Mosque of Samarra, and blame it on Sunni
extremists. The incident was then used to convince the American people that what was taking
place in Iraq was not a war over foreign occupation, but a bitter sectarian conflict between
Sunnis and Shia in which the US was just an impartial referee. The killing of George Floyd has
been used in much the same way as the implosion of the mosque. It creates a credible narrative
for a massive and coordinated protests that have less to do with racial injustice than they do
with diverting attention from the destruction of the economy and sowing division among the
American people. This is a classic example of how elites use myth and media to conceal their
trouble-making and escape any accountability for their actions.
Check out this excerpt from a paper by Carlo Caduff, an academic at King's College London,
in a journal called Medical Anthropology Quarterly. It's entitled "What Went Wrong: Corona and
the World After the Full Stop":
" Across the world, the pandemic unleashed authoritarian longings in democratic societies
allowing governments to seize the opportunity, create states of exception and push political
agendas. Commentators have presented the pandemic as a chance for the West to learn
authoritarianism from the East. This pandemic risks teaching people to love power and call
for its meticulous application . As a result of the unforeseeable social, political and
economic consequences of today's sweeping measures, governments across the world have
launched record "stimulus" bills costing trillions of dollars, pounds, pesos, rand and rupees
. The trillions that governments are spending now as "stimulus" packages surpass even those
of the 2008 financial crisis and will need to be paid for somehow. . .. If austerity policies
of the past are at the root of the current crisis with overwhelmed healthcare systems in some
countries, the rapidly rising public debt is creating the perfect conditions for more
austerity in the future. The pandemic response will have major implications for the public
funding of education, welfare, social security, environment and health in the future." (
Lockdownskeptics.org )
This is precisely right. The country has been deliberately plunged into another Great
Depression with the clear intention of imposing harsh austerity measures that will eviscerate
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and any other social safteynet programs that benefit
ordinary working people, retirees, or anyone else for that matter. None of it is random,
spontaneous or spur-of-the-moment policymaking. It's all drawn from a centuries-old Imperial
Playbook that's being used by scheming elites to implement their final plan for America: Tear
down the statues, destroy the icons and symbols, rewrite the history, crush the populist
resistance, create a permanent underclass that will work for pennies on the dollar, pit one
group against the other by inciting racial hatred, political polarization and fratricidal
warfare, promote the vandals who burn and loot our cities, attack anyone who speaks the truth,
and offer unlimited support to the party that has aligned itself with the corrupt Intel
agencies, the traitorous media, the sinister deep state, and the tyrannical elites who are
determined to control the all the levers of state power and crush anyone who gets in their
way.
I think there's a lot to what Mike says. However, if we accept his premise we must also
accept dangers of that premise.
Essentially, Mike is saying that Elites have used Covid & BLM etc shenanigans to advance
a political/economic purpose: ie that the Fed/Treasury will blast huge chunks of liquidity to
them via buying up any equities & bonds however dubious or junk they are. Secondary
benefits include across the board austerity & working people desperate enough to almost
sell themselves into slavery.
Elites have therefore bet BIG. Big returns but a potential for big losses Elites may have
to contend with a real economy which becomes so bad it affects the fictitious economy of
equities & bonds. An economy that no amount of Fed injections can save. And in trying to
save it, maybe the Fed will finally injure the dollar to the point where is effectively loses
it reserve status.
On Monday, Gilead disclosed its pricing plan for Gilead as it prepares to begin charging for
the drug at the beginning of next month (several international governments have already placed
orders). Given the high demand, thanks in part due to the breathless media coverage despite the
drug's still-questionable study data, Gilead apparently feels justified in charging $3,120 for
a patient getting the shorter, more common, treatment course, and $5,720 for the longer course
for more seriously ill patients. These are the prices for patients with commercial insurance in
the US, according to Gilead's official pricing plan.
As per usual, the price charged to those on government plans will be lower, and hospitals
will also receive a slight discount. Additionally, the US is the only developed country where
Gilead will charge two prices, according to Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day. In much of Europe and
Canada, governments negotiate drug prices directly with drugmakers (in the US, laws dictate
that drug makers must "discount" their drugs for Medicare and Medicaid plans).
But according to O'Day, the drug is priced "far below the value it brings" to the
health-care system.
However, we'd argue that this actually isn't true. Remdesivir was developed by Gilead to
treat Ebola, but the drug was never approved by the FDA for this use, which caused Gilead to
shelve the drug until COVID-19 presented another opportunity. Even before the first study had
finished, the company was already pushing propaganda about the promising nature of the drug.
Meanwhile, the CDC, WHO and other organizations were raising doubts about the effectiveness of
steroid medications.
Months later, the only study on the steroid dexomethasone, a cheap steroid that costs less
than $50 for a 100-dose regimen, has shown that dexomethasone is the only drug so far that has
proven effective at lowering COVID-19 related mortality. Remdesivir, despite the fact that it
has been tested in several high quality trials, has not.
So, why is the American government in partnership with Gilead still pushing this
questionable, and staggeringly expensive, medication on the public?
Manufacturing company 7-Sigma
made headlines when it decided to leave Minneapolis as a result of the company's plant
being burned by rioters. "They don't care about my business," 7-Sigma owner Kris Wyrobek old
the Star-Tribune . After more than 30 years in the city, the company isn't staying, nor are any
of the company's fifty jobs. But the costs of being victimized in protests is just one of many
reasons homeowners and businesses may be realizing life and business in central cities has lost
its luster. The ongoing threat of more business lockdowns, more riots, higher taxes, and
failing schools may induce many Americans to flee, once again, to the suburbs as their parents
or grandparents did.
This goes well beyond the fear of the disease many journalists have assumed is behind the
observed beginnings of an exodus from cities. Yes, many in the upper classes have fled the
cities for their mountain homes and yachts for "health reasons." But these people are
relatively few in number and their thinking quixotic. They can afford to drop everything and
leave cities overnight.
But the larger impacts are likely to be felt as middle class homeowners and business owners
conclude they'd simply rather avoid the edicts and neglect of mayors and city councils in
central cities who thinking nothing of issuing job-destroying "stay-at-home" orders while
allowing rioters and vandals free rein.
The real cost to cities is likely to emerge over time. It will come in the form of families
and shop owners who decide it's best to move their businesses ten miles down the road to a
neighboring city that will actually do something about rioters. It will come in the form of
families which decide their next home will be just a little bit farther from the urban
dictator-mayors who have the heaviest hands in enforcing lockdowns and business closures. It
will come in the form of potential new business owners and homeowners will be decide to never
purchase property to start a business in central cities in the first place.
The Decline
of Cities at Mid-Century
We may be seeing something reminiscent what happened in America's large central cities
during the 1970s and 1980s. Many Americans concluded these cities had become unlivable and
crime infested. Many concluded these were places that were quite inhospitable to doing
business. So they left. (Forced busing for "integration" purposes was a factor as well.)
In some cases, there were dramatic events that illustrated the trend. The late sixties in
New York saw several strikes by city workers. Transit and sanitation in the city became a
disaster. The 1977 blackout in New York City ended in widespread riots that induced many
businesses to pack up and never return. Many households followed.
But for the most part, cities saw an exodus that took many years and slowly hollowed out the
finances and tax revenues of big cities. Areas of Detroit fell into ruin. By the mid seventies,
New York City was lurching from one fiscal crisis to another.
St. Louis, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Detroit each shrank by more than 20 percent. Vast
stretches of urban land were left virtually deserted.
More than half of large cities lost population from 1950 to 1980.
There were other factors at work as well, of course. The central cities were often hit the
hardest as the old Rust Belt went into decline after the region was destroyed by labor unions
and city and state laws that made business in the region inefficient and uncompetitive.
Business owners and workers who possessed any real ambition or entrepreneurial spirit had good
reason to leave the region altogether.
City centers, built on an old manufacturing-based working class never recovered.
The situation today is a bit different. During the 1990s, core cities began to recover from
their mid-century decline and many officials and intellectuals in these areas began cultivating
the so-called " creative
class " (also known as the " bohemian bourgeoisie ") with the idea
that young artists, engineers, architects, and tech workers might be convinced to move into
city centers and and revitalize local urban economies. It appears to have worked in many
cases.
But in 2020 America the hey day of the new techno-city may be over.
Civil Unrest
The case of the Sigma-7 closure in Minneapolis is just the most famous case of central
cities' hostility to businesses within their borders. We're not hearing about the many small
less-notable businesses that won't re-open in the wake of riots. In other cities, such as
Chicago, city officials are now
begging retailers to not leave the city.
Meanwhile, a number of small businesses now within the "CHOP" zone in Seattle is suing the
city for abandoning businesses to the whims of the leftist mob.
As reported by the local NBC affiliate, local businesses have been threatened and harassed
by the bosses of the "Capitol Hill Occupation Protest" (CHOP) zone in the city. The city
government, the plaintiffs have concluded, essentially have abandoned these businesses to the
new "government":
The City's decision has subjected businesses, employees, and residents of that
neighborhood to extensive property damage, public safety dangers, and an inability to use and
access their properties.
Minneapolis and Seattle aren't the only cities the prospect of continued civil unrest. with
forty million new unemployment filings in recent months, the US faces a worrisome period of
highly elevated unemployment. Many of the worst-affected workers will be lower-income
populations living in core cities. This won't help the prospect of a speedy return to placid
city environments.
Regime Uncertainty
As government experts and media pundits emphasize growth in reported COVID-19 cases, the
prospect of renewed lockdowns now looms, as well. This is a threat at the state level and in
many suburban local governments. But experience strongly suggests that those political
jurisdictions controled by political leftists are likely to embrace the longest and harshest
lockdowns. In many states, such as Texas and Colorado and California and Pennsylvania, local
governments in big cities embraced lockdowns more enthusiastically than the surrounding regions
and at the state capitols. "Regime uncertainty" -- uncertainty about what business-killing
regulations a government might embrace next -- appears to be greater in central cities.
Business owners are likely to remember this. In the medium- and long-term, business owners
and potential business owners will gravitate to those areas where the threat of harsh lockdowns
is smaller.
The Rise of the "Work-at-Home" Trend
If the work-at-home trend persists, core cities will have lost one of their main draws:
namely, the prospect of a shorter commute for those who can afford a home close-in to the
employment centers. Even if daily commutes are just reduced -- say, to a three-days-per-week
schedule -- the commute-time cost of a home in the suburbs falls dramatically. Without the need
to sit in traffic five days per week, more expensive city homes and the congrestion and crime
of city centers becomes far less attractive.
Declining Tax Revenue and Urban Blight
On top of it all will come big cuts to city budgets as COVID lockdowns decimated
tax revenues . All cities and states
will be impacted , but if the most productive taxpayers move out of the core cities, it is
these areas that will feel the brunt of revenue shortfalls. In other words, a shift of
productivity toward the suburbs and small cities will hollow out big city budgets and school
district budgets as well. This will only encourage businesses and families to stay away in even
larger numbers. Families will seek to avoid school districts and decline, and employers won't
want to become part of a shrinking tax base where tax increases are frequently eyed by
politicians as a way out.
The Beginnings of a Trend?
All of this will take time to play out. Yes, we've started to see those with means leave big
cities already. The New York Times has reported on numerous former residents of New York City
who have left for the surrounding regions. The Times asks "is New York City worth it anymore?"
and points out "the pandemic send young New Yorkers packing."
But these remains a small percentage of the overall population. Most homeowners, families,
and business owners need time to move their businesses, sell their properties, and be convinced
it's time to move on.
None of this should be interpreted, however, as a trend away from metropolitan areas
overall. There appears to be little risk that large numbers of Americans will be quitting metro
areas for rural villages and towns. Some will. But most will notice that metro areas still have
most of the jobs, most of the cultural institutions, and most of the health care services. What
can't be said is that core cities have a monopoly on these resources. In recent decades,
suburbs and small cities have increasingly become places that host a wide variety of sports
teams, museums, convention centers, hospitals, and more. Metro areas are still a good place to
be. But old core cities? Not so much.
History will repeat itself as the grand experiment of bloated private finance capitalist
theft unravels and so it is worth reviewing how this transformation was achieved and to avoid old
errors and uninformed blunders.
Yesterday the shareholders of Lufthansa voted
to accept the government bailout:
Lufthansa (LHAG.DE) shareholders on Thursday backed a 9 billion euro ($10 billion)
government bailout, securing the future of Germany's flagship airline after it was brought
to the brink of collapse by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The plan, backed by 98% of the shareholder capital that cast a vote at the online
meeting, will see Berlin take a 20% stake in Lufthansa and two board seats.
Shares in the company, which employs around 138,000 people, closed 7.1% higher, having
risen strongly earlier after top shareholder Heinz Hermann Thiele dropped objections to the
deal.
Also on Thursday, European Union regulators approved Lufthansa's 6 billion euro
recapitalisation, part of the bailout deal, subject to a ban on dividends, share buybacks
and some acquisitions until state support is repaid .
The deal structuring is interesting and quite favorable for the government.
The government bought newly issued Lufthansa shares for a total of $300 million which will
give it 20% of the ownership of the company. These shares were valued at a quarter of their
current value. The government will additionally provide €5.7 billion in 'silent
capital'. That is a loan structured as a form of preferred shares that are entitled to a
preferred dividend. This will have to be paid back before other shareholders will again get
dividends. Lufthansa has a right to pay back the silent capital. But the 20% of the ownership
via shares will stay with the government until it decides to sell it.
An additional 3 billion euro credit line is
provided by a government owned bank.
This is a much better deal for the taxpayer
than in the U.S. where the airlines which were bailed out only had to provide stock
warrants which allow the government to buy some shares if it chooses to.
The Lufthansa deal prevents the bankruptcy of the company and a potentially unfriendly
foreign takeover. Lufthansa was quite profitable before the onset of the coronavirus crisis.
It is a good airline and it is now likely to survive. In a few years it will again make
profits.
Currently, the share price is about €10.4, which corresponds to a very generous
valuation of about 4 times estimated book value. It is also way higher than the €2.56
per share the German government paid. This discount of more than 75% suggests shares of
Deutsche Lufthansa are way overvalued.
The share price may currently be overvalued and may well sink. But without the bailout
deal the shares would have been worthless.
There is also a deal that will keep most of Lufthansa's employees in
their jobs :
[T]ough decisions lie ahead, with Lufthansa working on a restructuring plan in which up to
22,000 jobs could be at risk - although CEO Carsten Spohr told Bild newspaper that hours
and wages could be reduced by a fifth instead of axing a fifth of jobs .
This sounds like a company wide introduction of a four day work week though with only 80%
of the former full pay.
The cabin crew union has already agreed to such a deal and the pilot and ground worker
unions will likely also do so. There currently ain't many airline jobs available elsewhere so
for most of the employees this is a better deal than a potential long term unemployment.
I really like how this has turned out. A good company has been saved. The government has
set the right conditions and it may even profit from the deal. The shareholders have taken a
large haircut but will not lose all of their money. The employees will keep their jobs but
with a reduced time and pay.
It would have been better if all this had not been necessary. But in the current situation
it is the best that can be done.
All parties have taken a "we are all in the same boat" attitude to make this happen.
This should be an example for those bailout deals that will still have to be made.
--- Twice a year I ask readers to support this blog. Please consider contributing
.
Posted by b on June 26, 2020 at 18:13 UTC |
Permalink Yes, a Galaxy of difference between the cash giveaways called bailouts by the
Outlaw US Empire and the partial nationalization of the airline that gains something for the
German public in exchange for the infusion of capital. I expect to see more of this sort of
activity as the EU begins to overthrow Neoliberalism.
No comment on the shocking US corporate theft. Actually, here's one: that country is looking
worse than the USSR in the late 80's and the Marie Antoinette class will have to offer much
more than cake to avoid a revolution...
Revenue Increase €36.42 billion (2019
Operating income Decrease €2.0 billion (2019
Net income Decrease €1.21 billion (2019
Total assets Increase €42.66 billion (2019
Total equity Increase €10.15 billion (2019
So the German Gov't paid 10 billion for a 20% stake in a company that yielded only a 3-4 %
net profit at 100% of its total equity value. Never mind share valuations... can someone
explain how that is actually a good deal for the German Govt please? Perhaps i am just giving
the numbers a simplified look. Perhaps, given the immense power of private equity these days,
everything has become relative.
"According to our data, Deutsche Lufthansa AG ...
... and paid its CEO total annual compensation worth
€4.4m over the year to December 2018"
--------------------------------
Did our carsten spohr CEO:
take a cut, help the TEAM effort, fall on the sword ?
~4,400,000 EUR = carsten's take
Perhaps carsten provide the example to take a 90% cut of ~3,960,000 EUR, leaving him with
a "paltry"
~~~440,000 EUR ( ~10 x average_German_salary )
@~~~44,000 EUR salary, then employee cost = ~80,000 EUR
Granted, the Lufthansa deal is far less toxic than the corporate bailouts we have seen in the
United States, which are really just theft, and encouraging financially sloppy behavior and
effectively subsidizing stock-buy back programs and other financial engineering rubbish.
But I am still skeptical that it's all THAT good a deal. I mean, don't forget, if a
company goes bankrupt its assets don't go up in smoke. It goes into receivership, the
stockholders lose money, and the management that steered the company onto the rocks get
fired, and replaced with hopefully better managers. The planes are still there, the employees
are still working, etc. Granted that a government has a vested interest in not letting it get
chopped up and dispersed, there is no need to preserve either stockholders or current
management to keep the airline functioning.
The essence of capitalism is that people who make bad investments should lose money.
Granted, the Lufthansa deal is far less toxic than the corporate bailouts we have seen in the
United States, which are really just theft, and encouraging financially sloppy behavior and
effectively subsidizing stock-buy back programs and other financial engineering rubbish.
But I am still skeptical that it's all THAT good a deal. I mean, don't forget, if a
company goes bankrupt its assets don't go up in smoke. It goes into receivership, the
stockholders lose money, and the management that steered the company onto the rocks get
fired, and replaced with hopefully better managers. The planes are still there, the employees
are still working, etc. Granted that a government has a vested interest in not letting it get
chopped up and dispersed, there is no need to preserve either stockholders or current
management to keep the airline functioning.
The essence of capitalism is that people who make bad investments should lose money.
QANTAS CEO Alan Joyce took home A$23.9m in 2018.
In March 2020 he offered to work for free for the rest of the year ...
the Financial Year ...
which ends June 30, 2020.
If somebody still calls this "market economy" the normal way would be: bankruptcy, first are
served the employees, second the creditors. Shareholders lose, risk doesn't pay off all the
time (except you own the government). The trade mark "Lufthansa" would be part of the
insolvency estate, as well as all the planes. Used planes would be very cheap following the
market rule of high offer vs. low demand. Personal is available as well. Good conditions for
creating a new airline ... What exactly is the reason to throw billions of Euros into this?
The gouvernement could for a part of this money create a national state owned carrier out of
the insolvency estate.
The roadway to hell is paved with the best of intentions.
If a government is going to subsidize the transportation industry in its country to the
benefit of the most public, why start with airlines that serve the top few of the public.
Is this deal better than what is happening in the US? It is too soon to tell but I think
it is quite possible that the shift to fast train increases and airlines are reduced to more
intercontinental.
Without this action being done within a larger context of nationalization (partial or
otherwise) of segments of core economic sectors, I question its efficacy. Where is the public
discussion about bigger picture futures for countries?....crickets!!!
A similar deal as Lufthansa was done between the Hong Kong government and its flag carrier
Cathay Pacific. Even though Cathay's employees were some of the most vocal and organisers of
strikes and various anti-government protests and riots.
And, to top it off, this bail out violates one of the most sacred moral principles of
capitalism/liberalism: the risk is the onus of the entrepreneur by definition; that's what
justifies his absorption of the entire lucre if it pans out.
The worker gave up his freedom of enterprise in exchange for the security and constancy
("fixity") of the wage. Therefore it is his right within the capitalist moral code that
he/she be weathered from risk taken by his/her entrepreneur. Those Lufhansa workers should've
never have come to the point of taking a 20% cut in their salaries to cover for their bosses'
risks. Pandemics are natural disasters, and, for natural disasters, the capitalist system has
the insurance industry - which was created exactly for situations like these (as is well
historically documented).
Curious fact: in the 2008 meltdown, the USG had to bail out the world's biggest insurance
company - AIG - because it flat out went bust (too many of its clients went bankrupt at the
same time). Ironies of ironies - or, as I like to say, the farce of the "self-regulating"
myth of the "free market".
Yup, all around the world this is where the real fleecing of the poor and middle class will
happen. Take ungodly sums of money from the poor and give it to the rich and then the rich
can use loop holes not to pay it back. Any poor person not paying their taxes will go to
jail. Any CEO who finds a loop hole to not pay back will be obscenely rewarded. Welcome to
the real world Neo.
Similar to the model the Clark government came up with on Air NZ after the idiot private
shareholders nearly destroyed the airline in the noughties. Except the government insisted on
a complete takeover, then during the Natz term in office the shareholding by government has
been reduced to 52%. Everyone else was meant to be kiwi shareholder for such a 'strategic'
asset but of course the right left plenty of loopholes and the foreign ownership increased
dramatically.
The reason governments even neolib ones move to protect national airlines is simple. They are
needed in times of disaster or war to be used for emergency transport but the big one is the
way that landing rights were allocated back in the old days still holds largely. Losing an
airline to an overseas buyer can mean the destruction of the reciprocal basis upon which
international landing rights are allocated, if one allows their national carrier to be bought
by an external airline hell can be wrought with tourism.
Lufthansa may have 80 slots a week for landing in NY then departing. Emirates buys into
Lufthansa, get controlling stake, then then decides that all the NY slots be routed through
Dubai, then Germany loses access for tourists from amerika to Germany. Emirates hooks up the
new slots with the China timetable establishing new big route and Lufthansa goes down the
gurgler.
This stuff is common because slots at major airports are very hard to come by, no nation
state wants to lose them.
I dont wish to go deep in the numbers. But im sure the german government is not as corrupt as
usa in bailouts. Thats why its citzens still trust in its governing. Here in good o usa no
one trust government or even each other
Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jun 26 2020 23:40 utc | 34
??
Choosing winners/losers has worked out so well in the case of Amtrak to name one example,
pointing this out is riding a high horse?
But as you say, it has always been this way, it will always be this way, so we should just
ignore the fraud and incompetence that .gov bailout encourage and be a happy little debt
slaves..-got it,good point /sarc
The so called market purists who believe that capitalism is some thing sacred which must be
left free of interference from the people who use it pay for it and depend upon it always
miss the basic point especially if they are amerikan where high levels of selfish corruption
have endured for centuries. Not all administrations are that dissolute, the trick of
separating citizens from their government is advanced in amerika so far that most see
government as separate entity from citizens, whereas in Germany where standards are decaying
they have not decayed to the point that no one trusts all politicians all the time.
Therefore government ownership can be seen as citizen participation which is vital at a
time like this because the effects of a national airline failing extend well beyond a few
wealthy shareholders losing some wealth.
In the case of Air NZ the board was sacked, most senior execs were shown the door without
abnormal compensation & the shareholders were bought out at close to current market
valuation, they got pennies for their greedy investment.
I do not know the structure of the Lufthansa buyin but the fact that shareholders resisted
indicates that they don't feel as though they are going to do well from the deal.Perhaps they
had buyers for Lufthansa's international landing slots already lined up on the side and hoped
to make big bucks on that - screw German workers, small businesses dependent on tourism or
the public faced with uncertain travel routes.
One difference is the brand of the fiat notes (money): while Germany has the Euro - fairly
ok -, the US has the magic dollar, the world's trade and finance medium, so they can print
them almost scot-free.
The German central government deal with Lufthansa is indeed better than the self payment
of the privatized FED to its owner banks and friends for all Germans. Democratic governments
are openly elected every 4-5 years by the public; not so the FED directors.
The problem is that Germany is a capitalist State. That's not how a capitalist State
should work. This is a sign worse things are yet to come (decline). Take for example the
human body: you can feel the signs of old age, and you know they mean permanent decline, not
the beginning of something new. There is no alchemy in the real world.
I didn't propose Lufthansa to go down: I proposed for Lufthansa management to go down.
Chop some upper-management heads off and you get your solvency back. EUR 18 billion is
nothing for a company of that size: I'm sure if they gave up one year of their profits would
already be more than enough to cover for the hole.
Unless, of course, the hole is bigger than the officially declared.
The management of a company is not the company: the soul of a company is its
infrastructure, its organization and its workers - specially its highly specialized workers
(the ones with the "know-how"). The first hydroelectric dam of the USSR was built with
American engineers - not American management or American money. You don't have to have a
bunch of executives to build civilization and wealth; it is the worker who is the soul of
civilization and progress.
As I said: if Lufthansa was in such a good shape and only needed mere EUR 18 billion,
there would be a line of private banks offering the loan with generously low interest (as it
would be an automatic win for the bank, no matter how low the "return on capital"; and wins
are rare in today's world, so you can't be too picky). Either it did resort to the government
because it could (a show of strength to the German people) or its finances are not so great
as the owner of this blog state they are. I hope, for the general welfare of the German
people, that it was just a show of strength, because if it is dire finances, then those EUR
18 billion are just the amuse-buche.
P.S.: Governments owning some share of the key national companies is common practice in
the First World nations. In France, if I'm not mistaken, there's a Law where the government
must be the owner of at least 16% of the shares of every "strategic" companies. The UK
frequently nationalizes bankrupt companies it deems strategic - only to re-privatize them
later, when they are profitable again (the Thatcher method). If State ownership of shares was
equal to socialism, we would've been living in a socialist world many decades ago.
International Man : Recently, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said the central bank's money
printing is designed to help average Americans, and not Wall Street.
What's your take on this?
David Stockman : Yes, and if dogs could whistle, the world would be a chorus!
The truth is, in an economy encumbered with nearly $78 trillion of debt already --
including $16.2 trillion on households, $16.8 trillion on business, $23 trillion on
governments -- the last thing we need is even lower interest rates and even bigger incentives
to take on debt and leverage.
In fact, in a debt-saturated system, the Fed's massive bond purchases never transmit
anything outside the canyons of Wall Street. This money-printing madness only drives bond
prices higher and cap rates lower -- meaning relentless and systematic inflation of financial
assets' prices.
As a practical matter, of course, the bottom 90% don't own enough stock or even inflated
government and corporate bonds to shake a stick at. Instead, what meager savings they have
accumulated languish in bank deposits, CDs or money market funds earning exactly what the Fed
has decreed -- nothing!
So, when Powell says he's only trying to help the average American, you have to wonder
whether he is just stupid or the greatest lying fraud yet to occupy the big chair at the
Fed.
Then again, it doesn't really matter why.
The Fed is now a completely rogue institution that is a clear and present danger to the
future of prosperity and liberty in America. The tragedy is that the clueless speculators on
Wall Street and politicians in Washington don't even get the joke.
International Man : So far, the Fed has been able to successfully manipulate interest rates
to historic lows.
What are some catalysts that could cause the Fed to lose control and interest rates to
spike?
David Stockman : They are chasing their tail, faster and faster. The more they expand
their balance sheet, thereby injecting into the bond pits a massive artificial bid for
governments, corporates, munis, commercial paper and junk, the lower the yields go, and the
demand for more debt becomes greater.
Needless to say, when incomes drastically shrink due to the folly of Lockdown Nation, debt
should be liquidated, not massively increased. So, the Fed and its fellow-traveling global
central banks are setting up our Humpty-Dumpty economy for a very great fall.
That is to say, what will cause the central banks to lose control is the greatest wave of
debt defaults in recorded history. On that score, the Fed just issued its Flow of Funds data
for Q1, and it leaves nothing to the imagination. Total public and private debt on the US
economy now stands at $77.6 trillion, or 3.5X GDP, and we'll be lucky to post at $21 trillion
for the full year of 2020 GDP.
Recall that we supposedly got a wakeup call back in 2008, when the economy plunged into
financial crisis and the worst recession since the 1930s; way too much debt was widely
identified as the fall guy. But back then, total debt outstanding was just $52.6 trillion,
meaning that during the last decade of purported recovery, the US economy actually took on
$25 trillion of new debt -- a 48% increase.
Moreover, big-spending politicians were not the only culprit. That's because when the
central banks drastically falsify interest rates to sub-economic levels, everyone is
incentivized to borrow hand-over-fist. And, most often, it's for unproductive purposes, such
as more transfer payments in the government sector and more financial engineering among the
C-suites.
On the eve of the Great Recession, for example, total business debt (corporate and
non-corporate) stood at $10.1 trillion and has subsequently soared to $16.8 trillion. That
$6.7 trillion gain represents fully 98% of the $6.85 trillion increase in nominal GDP during
the same period.
This orgy of borrowing also means that business debt over the past 13 years has grown by
66.5% -- far more than the 46.7% expansion of nominal GDP. Accordingly, the business debt
burden on GDP has now gone off the charts, and at 78% of GDP, is more than double the
pre-1970 level:
Business Debt as Percent of GDP:
1955: 31%
1970: 47%
1980: 49%
1995: 55%
2007: 69%
2020: 78%
Stated differently, chronic financial repression and clubbing of interest rates by the
central bank have amounted to a slow-motion burial of the business sector in debt; debt that
in recent decades has been overwhelmingly allocated to shrinking the equity base of business
enterprises, thereby cycling wealth from the productive economy to the rent-capturing
precincts of Wall Street.
Indeed, the Fed's cheap credit never really leaves the canyons of Wall Street, where it
fulsomely rewards carry-traders and risk asset speculators because zero cost money is always
and everywhere the mother's milk of leveraged speculation.
It also causes corporate C-suites to become maniacally obsessed with goosing their stock
options via financial engineering gambits like stock buybacks, leveraged recaps and wildly
over-priced M&A deals as a substitute for organic growth. Yet these maneuvers merely
supplant equity and financial resilience with debt and financial fragility.
So when business bankruptcies soar to unprecedented levels in the month ahead as the
economy reels from the folly of Lockdown Nation, the financial fragility part will become
crystal clear.
But it also needs to be recalled that even as the interest rate clubbers at the Fed
fostered a massive explosion of business debt after the 2008 financial crisis, it did not
translate into any growth in productive investment at all.
In fact, real business CapEx minus current capital consumption (depreciation and
amortization charged to current period production) is today barely a tad higher than it was
20 years ago on the eve of the dotcom bust.
In short, the Fed has fostered a zombie economy, and it is the collapse of the zombies
that will eventually take it down.
David Stockman : Here's an eye-opener to put this madness in perspective. Annual federal
outlays posted at $3.896 trillion in 2014 and were the product of 225 years of relentless
expansion by the Leviathan on the Potomac.
But it now appears quite certain that the annual deficit in FY 2020 will actually be
larger than the total spending level that took more than two centuries to achieve.
That's right. Owing to the mushrooming coast-to-coast soup lines hastily erected by
Washington in response to the collapse of jobs, incomes and business cash flows brought on by
Lockdown Nation and the evaporation of tax revenues, Uncle Sam will borrow more this year
than the total spending just six years ago.
Stated differently, back in the day, we struggled to keep total federal spending during
1981 under $700 billion. By contrast, the Donald has borrowed nearly 4X that in the last 90
days!
So, yes, perhaps Trump's one truthful boast is that he is indeed the king of debt.
Needless to say, there is nothing remotely rational, plausible or sustainable about an FY
2020 budget that's going to end up with revenue south of $3 trillion and spending north of $7
trillion.
That's not even banana republic league profligacy; it's just sheer stupidity and madness,
bespeaking a bipartisan duopoly in Washington that has had its collective brains turned into
sawdust by the relentless, egregious money pumping of the central banks.
For want of doubt, just consider what has happened since March 11 on the eve of the
Lockdown Nation's commencement.
The public float of federal debt has soared from $17.85 trillion to $20.24 trillion,
gaining $2.39 trillion;
The Fed's balance sheet has exploded from $4.31 trillion to $7.17 trillion, gaining
$2.86 trillion.
The Fed has, therefore, effectively monetized 119% of the gain in the publicly traded
Treasury debt.
Of course, you can't blame the Donald alone for this insanity; he's been enabled by two of
the greatest crackpots to hold high economic policy positions in American history -- Treasury
Secretary Mnuchin and Fed Chairman Jay Powell.
As it has happened, we have closely observed every combination of Fed chairman and US
treasury secretary since 1970, when we headed off for our first job in the Imperial City,
eager to better the world and our own prospects, too.
So, we can say without reservation that the current duo is the worst combo of spineless,
principle-free empty suits to plague the nation during the last half-century. And it's not a
close call -- even against a ship of fools, which include John B. Connally, G. William
Miller, Ben Bernanke, Hank Paulson Jr., Timothy Geithner and Janet Yellen, among considerable
others.
After all, if the Treasury Secretary and Fed Chairman are utterly clueless about the grave
dangers of the fiscal and monetary bacchanalia now rampant in the imperial city, how in the
world will it stop except in some fiery collapse?
* * *
Unfortunately there's little any individual can practically do to change the trajectory of
this trend in motion. The best you can and should do is to stay informed so that you can
protect yourself in the best way possible. That's precisely why New York Times bestselling
author Doug Casey just released
an urgent new report on how to survive and thrive an economic collapse.
Click here download the free PDF now .
"Restaurant Of The Future" - KFC Unveils Automated Store With Robots And Food Lockers
by Tyler Durden Fri,
06/26/2020 - 22:05 Fast-food chain Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) has debuted the "restaurant of
the future," one where automation dominates the storefront, and little to no interaction is
seen between customers and employees, reported NBC News .
After the chicken is fried and sides are prepped by humans, the order is placed on a
conveyor belt and travels to the front of the store. A robotic arm waits for the order to
arrive, then grabs it off the conveyor belt and places it into a secured food
locker.
A KFC representative told NBC News that the new store is located in Moscow and was built
months before the virus outbreak. The representative said the contactless store is the future
of frontend fast-food restaurants because it's more sanitary.
Disbanding human cashiers and order preppers at the front of a fast-food store will be the
next big trend in the industry through 2030. Making these restaurants contactless between
customers and employees will lower the probabilities of transmitting the virus.
Automating the frontend of a fast-food restaurant will come at a tremendous cost, that is,
significant job loss . Nationwide (as of 2018), there were around 3.8 million employed at
fast-food restaurants. Automation and artificial intelligence are set displace millions of jobs
in the years ahead.
As for the new automated KFC restaurant in Moscow, well, it's a glimpse of what is coming to
America - this will lead to the widespread job loss that will force politicians to unveil
universal basic income .
"... The lockdown would have been survivable if the economy hadn't been over-indebted, over-leveraged, burdened by insanely high costs, stripmined by greedy monopolies, dependent on stock market fraud, destabilized by extreme inequality, corrupted by political pay-to-play and addicted to speculation. ..."
"... The top 5% technocrat/managerial class have done very well for themselves in the speculative run-up of destabilizing inequality, and since they run the narrative machines, we're swamped with happy stories about the economy, all of which boil down to this absurd fantasy: since I'm doing so well, everyone else must be doing well, too. ..."
"... Zombie corporations are rushing to borrow billions of dollars (thanks to the Federal Reserve) but increasing their debt is only doing more of what created their fragility in the first place . ..."
Once you allow your economy to become dependent on extremes of debt, leverage, inequality,
legalized looting, monopoly, pay-to-play politics and speculative asset bubbles, a depression
is inevitable.
The pandemic lockdown will be blamed for the Greater Depression, but the lockdown only
toppled all the dominoes that were already lined up. The lockdown would have been survivable if
the economy hadn't been over-indebted, over-leveraged, burdened by insanely high costs, stripmined by greedy monopolies, dependent on stock market fraud, destabilized by extreme
inequality, corrupted by political pay-to-play and addicted to speculation.
The apologists always blame depressions on central banks not printing money fast enough,
while overlooking the real drivers: debt, high costs and dependence on speculative bubbles. As
noted here many times, revenues and income can quickly slide lower, but debt must be serviced
regardless of revenues and income.
Once debt payments dominate expenses, any wobble in revenues / income / cash flow triggers
default.
Regarding unbearably high costs that only go higher, year after year: as noted here many
times, Sickcare Will
Bankrupt the Nation all by itself , never mind soaring higher education / student loan debt
serfdom, skyrocketing rents, junk fees, taxes, etc.
The truth is the cost of living is
unaffordable but we can't even acknowledge this obvious fact because even acknowledging it
would threaten the entire house of cards. So instead we play-act as if we believe the bogus
"inflation is dead" narratives.
The top 5% technocrat/managerial class have done very well for themselves in the speculative
run-up of destabilizing inequality, and since they run the narrative machines, we're swamped
with happy stories about the economy, all of which boil down to this absurd fantasy: since I'm
doing so well, everyone else must be doing well, too.
Since the top 5% own the lion's share of the nation's productive assets--stocks, bonds,
business equity, investment real estate, etc.-- the enormous asset bubbles have greatly boosted
their wealth and income. This has enabled the wealthy to service their debt or pay it off. The
bottom 95% aren't quite so well-placed to survive a decline in income.
Everyone who was barely keeping their head above water in making their debt payments is
already in default or will soon be in default. Since the banks and shadow-banking lenders have
gorged on the profits skimmed by loaning huge sums to marginal borrowers, now that these
marginal borrowers are defaulting en masse the banks and lenders are about to be crushed by one
wave of catastrophic losses after another.
Student loans--already in mass default. Credit cards--the wave is rolling in as we speak.
Auto loans--looking like Waimea Bay on a big day. Mortgages--better not to look.
Corporate debt has exploded to unprecedented levels, and this is what will break the
financial system. Zombie corporations are rushing to borrow billions of dollars (thanks to the
Federal Reserve) but increasing their debt is only doing more of what created their fragility
in the first place .
Being able to borrow more to service your old debts is not solvency, it's merely the
semblance of solvency. We're in the eye of the hurricane right now, as everyone holds their
breath and hopes some sort of magic will make all the debt that has to be serviced every month
vanish.
It's worth recalling that every dollar of debt is someone else's asset and the source of
their income. So when the defaults and bankruptcies sweep through the financial system, they'll
obliterate all the "wealth" of those holding bundled student and auto loan securities, mortgage
backed securities, corporate bonds, and destroy the income streams these trillions in debt
generated.
All the linked fragilities and dependencies of our economy are like lines of dominoes: one
default topples the entire line of dominoes of debt, leverage, derivatives, counterparty risk,
credit default swaps and most devastating of all, any certainty that borrowers won't default in
the future.
If banks and lenders can't lend with a high degree of certainty, lending dries up and
profits collapse, along with the consumer spending that was enabled by the borrowing.
Despite their high incomes and net worth, some consequential percentage of top 5% households
bringing in $300,000 a year are one layoff away from default: never mind their pristine 830
credit score; that was last month. Next month,next quarter, next year--all bets are off.
Once you allow your economy to become dependent on extremes of debt, leverage, inequality,
legalized looting , monopoly, pay-to-play politics and speculative asset bubbles, a depression
is inevitable. The only question is "when," and that's been answered, though nobody wants to
hear it: 2020 and beyond.
It didn't have to end this way. If our leadership / Power Elites had acted to reduce all
these painfully obvious speculative extremes, dependencies and fragilities and made even modest
efforts to limit the exploitation of predatory parasites that generated unprecedented
inequality and corruption over the past 12 years, the economy would have been much less brittle
/ fragile.
Unfortunately, the pandemic chart I composed on February 2, 2020 is still playing out,
increasing uncertainty.
What's the price of systemic fragility and uncertainty? I fear it will be steeper than we're
prepared to pay.
mad
rush " of people leaving the San Francisco Bay Area for rural communities, for Marin
County, Napa wine country, and south to Monterey's Carmel Valley.
"Relatively better performance of single-family homes in relation to multifamily condominium
properties clearly suggests migration from the city centers to the suburbs," Yun said.
" After witnessing several consecutive years of urban revival, the new trend looks to be
in the suburbs as more companies allow greater flexibility to work from home ."
And second-home buyers surged...
Individual investors or second-home buyers, who account for many cash sales, purchased 14%
of homes in May, up from 10% in April 2020 and from 13% in May 2019. All-cash sales accounted
for 17% of transactions in May, up from 15% in April 2020 and down from 19% in May 2019.
Readers now know that wealthy folks aren't just fleeing cities for rural communities - these
folks are leaving the country for the Caribbean as America implodes from within.
"... The fitness of U.S. employers was unsteady as well. The 2010s saw C-suites skeletonize their companies by spending profits on stock buybacks rather than CapEx, never mind setting funds aside for a rainy day. As a result, many firms–large and small–are long overdue for restructuring or liquidation, a Darwinian process that could hamper economic growth for years, possibly even a decade. ..."
Such economic fragility could mean that November's presidential election may not be the
game-changer many assume it will be. What is becoming clearer by the day is that the virus is
more of an accelerant than a prime mover, an added layer of malodorous excrement on a dung heap
already piercing the nostrils. Long before social-distancing went into effect pension systems
were teetering, rents and mortgages were unaffordable, real unemployment was higher than the
Bureau of Labor Statistics reported, industrial production was anemic, and inflation dwarfed
Consumer Price Index (food and energy is excluded). Worse, the most reliable consumers in the
U.S. economy heretofore have been Baby Boomers, now the most susceptible demographic to the
virus.
The fitness of U.S. employers was unsteady as well. The 2010s saw C-suites skeletonize their
companies by spending profits on stock buybacks rather than CapEx, never mind setting funds
aside for a rainy day. As a result, many firms–large and small–are long overdue for
restructuring or liquidation, a Darwinian process that could hamper economic growth for years,
possibly even a decade.
Against these headwinds, the next administration is facing monstrous storms ahead. Contrary
to the soothsayers of "V" shaped recoveries, the prospects for a robust rebound are fading by
the month. All this is to say that it might not matter who wins in November as much as
previously thought. If Biden wins his chances at stimulating economic recovery, then soothing
Washington's dysfunctional rancor, and speedily recalibrating U.S. trade vis-à-vis China
et al in a deglobalizing world are slim to none. A seasoned Trump second term might fair better
but whoever is elected president will experience far less freedom of maneuver as economic
turbulence resets the policy agenda.
Trump's struggles might be encouraging to the soporific septuagenarian Joe Biden whose
political fortunes appear ascendant, at least for the moment. As the Trump administration
scrambles to suppress the coronavirus brush fire and more incendiary economic conflagrations
spread democrats are foaming at the mouth. However, while the situation may oust a wobbly Trump
the economic woes of the country are severe enough to bury the Democratic Party the way the
Great Depression slaughtered the Republicans.
On these points, it seems to me that history does not rhyme as much as clarify. It appears
as though U.S. politics is headed for a permutation, a fundamental restructuring that will
change how Americans are governed every bit as much as it reshapes the economy. Thomas Kuhn's
classic The Structure of Scientific Revolutions reminds us that "crisis often proliferates new
discoveries," ones that often result in "paradigm destruction." Regardless of who is elected in
November, it is very likely the next president is fated to defend a besieged paradigm, a
twentieth-century government that lacks the policy tools, financial resources and transmission
mechanisms required to solve twenty-first-century economic puzzles.
As the election fast approaches Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Chairman Jerome
Powell–the dynamic duo of the wryly dubbed "Feasury"–are pulling out all the stops
to mitigate economic fallout. Many sectors are begging for federal help as are municipalities
who fear that recovery without federal money is doubtful. At their request, trillions more in
relief are likely on their way. The question is: will there be any ammunition left for the next
president, whoever he is, to govern effectively?
Cameron Macgregor is an entrepreneur, blogger and writer. He is the CEO of Ad Actum, a
Global Free Speech Alliance.
Exchange traded funds are bought and sold like shares but operate as index-tracking funds,
passively following specific indices such as the S&P 500, the benchmark index of America's
largest corporations and the index in which most people invest. Today the fast-growing ETF
sector controls
nearly half of all investments in US stocks, and it is highly concentrated. The sector is
dominated by just three giant American asset managers – BlackRock, Vanguard and State
Street, the "Big Three" – with BlackRock the clear global leader. By 2017,
the Big Three together had become the largest shareholder in almost 90% of S&P 500
firms, including Apple, Microsoft, ExxonMobil, General Electric and Coca-Cola. BlackRock also
owns major interests in
nearly every mega-bank and in major media.
In March 2020, based on its expertise with the Maiden Lane facilities and its sophisticated
Aladdin risk-monitoring software, BlackRock got the job of dispensing Federal Reserve funds
through eleven "special purpose vehicles" authorized under the CARES Act. Like the Maiden Lane
facilities, these vehicles were designed to allow the Fed, which is legally limited to
purchasing safe federally-guaranteed assets, to finance the purchase of riskier assets in the
market.
Blackrock Bails Itself Out
The national lockdown left states, cities and local businesses in desperate need of federal
government aid. But
according to David Dayen in The American Prospect , as of May 30 (the Fed's last
monthly report), the only purchases made under the Fed's new BlackRock-administered SPVs were
ETFs, mainly owned by BlackRock itself. Between May 14 and May 20, about $1.58 billion in ETFs
were bought through the Secondary Market Corporate Credit Facility (SMCCF), of which $746
million or about 47% came from BlackRock ETFs. The Fed continued to buy more ETFs after May 20,
and investors piled in behind, resulting in huge inflows into BlackRock's corporate bond
ETFs.
In fact, these ETFs needed a bailout; and BlackRock used its very favorable position with
the government to get one. The complicated mechanisms and risks underlying ETFs are
explained in an April 3 article by business law professor Ryan Clements, who begins his
post:
Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) are at the heart of the COVID-19 financial crisis . Over
forty percent of the trading volume during the mid-March selloff was in ETFs .
The ETFs were trading well below the value of their underlying bonds, which were
dropping like a rock . Some ETFs were failing altogether. The problem was something critics
had long warned of: while ETFs are very liquid, trading on demand like stocks, the assets that
make up their portfolios are not. When the market drops and investors flee, the ETFs can have
trouble coming up with the funds to settle up without trading at a deep discount; and that is
what was happening in March.
According
to a May 3 article in The National , "The sector was ultimately saved by the US
Federal Reserve's pledge on March 23 to buy investment-grade credit and certain ETFs. This
provided the liquidity needed to rescue bonds that had been floundering in a market with no
buyers."
Prof. Clements states that if the Fed had not stepped in, "a 'doom loop' could have
materialized where continued selling pressure in the ETF market exacerbated a fire-sale in the
underlying [bonds], and again vice-versa, in a procyclical pile-on with devastating
consequences." He observes:
There's an unsettling form of market alchemy that takes place when illiquid,
over-the-counter bonds are transformed into instantly liquid ETFs. ETF "liquidity
transformation" is now being supported by the government, just like liquidity transformation in
mortgage backed securities and shadow banking was supported in 2008.
Working for Whom?
BlackRock got a bailout with no debate in Congress, no "penalty" interest rate of the sort
imposed on states and cities borrowing in the Fed's Municipal Liquidity Facility, no
complicated paperwork or waiting in line for scarce Small Business Administration loans, no
strings attached. It just quietly bailed itself out.
It might be argued that this bailout was good and necessary, since the market was saved from
a disastrous "doom loop," and so were the pension funds and the savings of millions of
investors. Although BlackRock has a controlling interest in all the major corporations in the
S&P 500, it professes not to "own" the funds. It just acts as a kind of "custodian" for its
investors -- or so it claims. But BlackRock and the other Big 3 ETFs vote the corporations'
shares; so from the point of view of management, they are the owners. And as observed in a 2017
article from the University of Amsterdam titled "
These Three Firms Own Corporate America ," they vote 90% of the time in favor of
management. That means they tend to vote against shareholder initiatives, against labor, and
against the public interest. BlackRock is not actually working for us, although we the American
people have now become its largest client base.
In a 2018 review titled " Blackrock
– The Company That Owns the World ", a multinational research group called
Investigate Europe concluded that BlackRock "undermines competition through owning shares in
competing companies, blurs boundaries between private capital and government affairs by working
closely with regulators, and advocates for privatization of pension schemes in order to channel
savings capital into its own funds."
Daniela Gabor, Professor of Macroeconomics at the University of Western England in Bristol,
concluded after following a number of regulatory debates in Brussels that it was no longer the
banks that wielded the financial power; it was the asset managers.
She said :
We are often told that a manager is there to invest our money for our old age. But it's much
more than that. In my opinion, BlackRock reflects the renunciation of the welfare state. Its
rise in power goes hand-in-hand with ongoing structural changes; in finance, but also in the
nature of the social contract that unites the citizen and the state.
That these structural changes are planned and deliberate is evident in BlackRock's August
2019 white paper laying out an economic reset that has now been implemented with BlackRock at
the helm.
Public policy is made today in ways that favor the stock market, which is considered the
barometer of the economy, although it has little to do with the strength of the real,
productive economy. Giant pension and other investment funds largely control the stock market,
and the asset managers control the funds. That effectively puts BlackRock, the largest and most
influential asset manager, in the driver's seat in controlling the economy.
As
Peter Ewart notes in a May 14 article on BlackRock titled "Foxes in the Henhouse," today
the economic system "is not classical capitalism but rather state monopoly capitalism, where
giant enterprises are regularly backstopped with public funds and the boundaries between the
state and the financial oligarchy are virtually non-existent."
If the corporate oligarchs are too big and strategically important to be broken up under the
antitrust laws, rather than bailing them out they should be nationalized and put directly into
the service of the public. At the very least, BlackRock should be regulated as a
too-big-to-fail Systemically Important Financial Institution. Better yet would be to regulate
it as a public utility. No private, unelected entity should have the power over the economy
that BlackRock has, without a legally enforceable fiduciary duty to wield it in the public
interest.
@jadan
I believe Ellen Brown has long called for nationalization of the Fed.
She has been a tireless advocate for state banks and for public control of the money supply,
and a leading critic of the private control of the issuance of money through debt.
The Federal Reserve Act was created in conspiracy and its passage was a great crime against
the American people.
"You gotta hand it to the conspiracy theorists, because, in fact, there was a conspiracy,"
Roger Lowenstein told Ky Ryssdall during an interview on NPR about Lowenstein's book "America's
Bank."
The men who wrote the Federal Reserve Act even wore disguises and snuck off in the night to
a Victorian mansion on the ominously named Jekyll Island where they did their dirty work:
> Americans have trouble deciding what's fake and what's not
> until reality personally bites them on the ass.
> Posted by: jadan | Jun 20 2020 2:00 utc | 79
They know the economic devastation is real. There are 50,000 unpaid unemployment claims --
just in Kentucky. The establishment press has found a shiny new object called "Juneteenth"
but the catastrophe for 30 million unemployed workers is steady getting worse.
For the county I live in, out of 72,000 people, ten got sick and one died, for the past
six months. Meanwhile, about 350 people die every six months from all causes (about 1%). So
no one here knows anyone sick or dead from the virus, but the crisis, including getting food,
is everywhere.
With this "improvement" we hopefully might see the collapse of some of the most
reckless hedge funds the next year, or earlier. Adding to them a couple of private equity
sharks would be an icing on the cake, but this scum tends to be pretty resilient. They
are masters of offloading losses on public.
Disconnect between the stock market casino and the status of the USA manufacturing is
real and it can't last forever. The FIRE sector which dominates the USA GDP is parasitic
in nature, and parasite usually weakens the host to the point of collapse.
Moreover, Covid19 serves as a powerful catalyst for further degrading the neoliberal
globalization even in areas that are not connected with the role of China.
As Herbert Stein put it on a different subject, but which now is fully applicable to
the neoliberal globalization:
If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.
Per table 1 in https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45090.pdf ,
real wages for USA men at the 50% percentile level are down -5.1% over the 1979 to 2018
time frame. Now we can probably talk about over 10%.
That's another sign that the USA financial casino might eventually go the way of
Trump's Taj Mahal.
And many middle class lemmings who are completely indoctrinated into neoliberalism and
connected with it deification of markets might be mercilessly fleeced. Especially those
who recklessly play with the stock market having zero understanding of the economics, and
relying on some crazy "chartist" recommendations :-)
Or who stupidly preserved overweighed stocks allocation in the 401K plans after
retirement. That might includes some "Vanguard loving" folk, who posts here.
Another issue with all types of education is that lots of students, especially foreign students, depend very heavily on
restarats temp jobs and casual hospitality work.
4. Colleges will have a lot of trouble this fall . First, they are losing nearly all their
full-freight-paying Chinese students, between concern over US Covid-19 risks, Administration
hostility, and travel restrictions. That alone is a big blow.
On top of that, some are planning to reopen but MIT's announcement yesterday, that
it will not allow all students to return to campus, probably represents a new normal.
Well-placed MIT alumni read the university's decision as driven significantly by a desire to
protect faculty and staff; I hear from sources with contacts at other universities that
administrators that they see no way to put kids in dorms without running unacceptably high
Covid risks.
Remember, even though kids almost never die of Covid-19, but there is a risk of serious
damage. 1/2 the asymptomatic cases on the Diamond Princess now show abnormal lungs. And
remember those cruises have half the people on board as crew, and the crew skews young. College
is a lot less appealing if you don't stay in a dorm.
Just as diminished activity in central business districts has negative knock-on effects to
nearby business, so to do hollowed-out colleges and universities have for their communities,
as described in more depth in a recent Bloomberg story .
The coming college semester is a big question mark. The influx of students is entangled with real estate,
shopping and the biggest in my town, restaurants and bars. Not to mention the college sports season which
supported so many AirBnB's here.
They are starting the year early here (UNC Chapel Hill) and ending it early as well, on Thanksgiving! And
up to 1000 new students will be learning from home instead of coming to campus.
Big question mark -- MIT's president Reif yesterday noted that
"At least for the fall, we can only
bring some of our undergraduates back to campus."
and
"Everything that can be taught effectively
online will be taught online."
Courses are comparatively easy, but labs, research, and sports look doubtful if/when case counts start
marching up again.
"... Racism, especially directed toward blacks, along with “identity wedge,” is a perfect tool for disarming poor white, and suppressing their struggle for a better standard of living, which considerably dropped under neoliberalism. ..."
"... In other words, by providing poor whites with a stratum of the population that has even lower social status, neoliberals manage to co-opt them to support the policies which economically ate detrimental to their standard of living as well as to suppress the protest against the redistribution of wealth up and dismantling of the New Deal capitalist social protection network. ..."
"... This is a pretty sophisticated, pretty evil scheme if you ask me. In a way, “Floydgate” can be viewed as a variation on the same theme. A very dirty game indeed, when the issue of provision of meaningful jobs for working poor, social equality, and social protection for low-income workers of any color is replaced with a real but of secondary importance issue of police violence against blacks. ..."
"What's being protected? The social order that feeds the wealthy at the expense of the
working poor. " -- Neuberger
In the aftermath of these movements, the police increasingly presented themselves as a
thin blue line protecting civilization, by which they meant bourgeois civilization, from the
disorder of the working class. -- Mitrani
I think this ties in, if only indirectly, with the way so many peaceful recent protests
seemed to turn violent after the police showed up. It's possible I suppose the police want to
create disorder to frighten not only the protestors with immediate harm but also frighten the
bourgeois about the threate of a "dangerous mob". Historically violent protests created a
political backlash that usually benefited political conservatives and the wealthy owners.
(The current protests may be different in this regard. The violence seems to have
Sorry, but the title sent my mind back to the days of old -- of old Daley, that is, and his
immortal quote from 1968: "Gentlemen, let's get the thing straight, once and for all. The
policeman isn't there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder."
LOL!!! great quote. Talk about saying it the way it is.
It kind of goes along with, "Police violence is focused overwhelmingly on men lowest on the
socio-economic ladder: in rural areas outside the South, predominately white men; in the
Southwest, disproportionately Hispanic men; in mid-size and major cities, disproportionately
black men. Significantly, in the rural South, where the population is racially mixed, white men
and black men are killed by police at nearly identical rates."
I bang my head on the table sometimes because poor white men and poor men of color are so
often placed at odds when they increasingly face (mostly) the same problems. God forbid someone
tried to unite them, there might really be some pearl clutching then.
Great response! I am sure you have more to add to this. A while back, I was researching the
issues you state in your last paragraph. Was about ten pages into it and had to stop as I was
drawn out of state and country. From my research.
While not as overt in the 20th century, the distinction of black slave versus poor white man
has kept the class system alive and well in the US in the development of a discriminatory
informal caste system. This distraction of a class level lower than the poorest of the white
has kept them from concentrating on the disproportionate, and growing, distribution of wealth
and income in the US. For the lower class, an allowed luxury, a place in the hierarchy and a
sure form of self esteem insurance.
Sennett and Cobb (1972) observed that class distinction sets up a contest between upper and
lower class with the lower social class always losing and promulgating a perception amongst
themselves the educated and upper classes are in a position to judge and draw a conclusion of
them being less than equal. The hidden injury is in the regard to the person perceiving himself
as a piece of the woodwork or seen as a function such as "George the Porter." It was not the
status or material wealth causing the harsh feelings; but, the feeling of being treated less
than equal, having little status, and the resulting shame. The answer for many was
violence.
James Gilligan wrote "Violence; Reflections on A National Epidemic." He worked as a prison
psychiatrist and talked with many of the inmates of the issues of inequality and feeling less
than those around them. His finding are in his book which is not a long read and adds to the
discussion.
A little John Adams for you.
" The poor man's conscience is clear . . . he does not feel guilty and has no reason to .
. . yet, he is ashamed. Mankind takes no notice of him. He rambles unheeded.
In the midst of a crowd; at a church; in the market . . . he is in as much obscurity as
he would be in a garret or a cellar.
He is not disapproved, censured, or reproached; he is not seen . . . To be wholly
overlooked, and to know it, are intolerable ."
Racism, especially directed toward blacks, along with “identity wedge,” is a
perfect tool for disarming poor white, and suppressing their struggle for a better standard of
living, which considerably dropped under neoliberalism.
In other words, by providing poor whites with a stratum of the population that has even
lower social status, neoliberals manage to co-opt them to support the policies which
economically ate detrimental to their standard of living as well as to suppress the protest
against the redistribution of wealth up and dismantling of the New Deal capitalist social
protection network.
This is a pretty sophisticated, pretty evil scheme if you ask me. In a way,
“Floydgate” can be viewed as a variation on the same theme. A very dirty game
indeed, when the issue of provision of meaningful jobs for working poor, social equality, and
social protection for low-income workers of any color is replaced with a real but of secondary
importance issue of police violence against blacks.
This is another way to explain “What’s the matter with Kansas” effect.
MLK Jr. tried, and look what happened to him once he really got some traction. If the Rev.
William Barber’s Poor People’s Campaign picks up steam, I’m afraid the same
thing will happen to him.
I wish it were only pearl-clutching that the money power would resort to, but that’s
not the way it works.
In most countries, the police are there solely to protect the Haves from the Have-Nots. In
fact, when the average frustrated citizen has trouble, the last people he would consider
turning to are the police.
This is why in the Third World, the only job of lower social standing than
“policeman” is “police informer”.
The anti-rascist identity of the recent protests rests on a much larger base of class
warfare waged over the past 40 years against the entire population led by a determined
oligarchy and enforced by their political, media and militarized police retainers. This same
oligarchy, with a despicable zeal and revolting media-orchestrated campaign–co-branding
the movement with it’s usual corporate perpetrators– distorts escalating carceral
and economic violence solely through a lens of racial conflict and their time-tested toothless
reforms. A few unlucky “peace officers” may have to TOFTT until the furor recedes,
can’t be helped.
Crowding out debt relief, single payer health, living wages, affordable housing and actual
justice reform from the debate that would benefit African Americans more than any other
demographic is the goal.
The handful of Emperors far prefer kabuki theater and random ritual Seppuku than facing the
rage of millions of staring down the barrel of zero income, debt, bankruptcy, evictions and
dispossession. The Praetorians will follow the money as always.
I suppose we’ll get some boulevards re-named and a paid Juneteenth holiday to
compensate for the destruction 100+ years of labor rights struggle, so there’s that..
Homestead, Ludlow, Haymarket, Matewan — the list is long……
Working men and women asking for justice gunned down by the cops. There will always be men
ready to murder on command as long as the orders come from the rich and powerful. We are at a
moment in history folks were some of us, today mostly people of color, are willing to put their
lives on the line. It’s an ongoing struggle.
So how can a tier of society(the police)…. be what a society needs…? When as this story and many others show how and why the police were formed…. to break
heads. When they have been “the tool” of the elite…forever. when so many of them are such dishonest,immoral ,wanna be fascists. and the main direction of the US is towards a police state and fascists running the
show…. both republican and democrat. With technology being the boot on the neck of the
people… and the police are there to take it to the streets. Can those elusive “good apples” turn the whole rotten barrel into sweet smelling
apple pie? That is a big ask. Or should the structure be liquidated, sell their army toys. fill the ranks with people who are
not pathological liars and abusers and /or racists; of one sort or another. Get rid of the
mentality of overcompensation by uber machismo. and make them watch the andy griffith show.
They ought to learn that they can be respected if they are good people, and that they are not
respected because they seek respect through fear and intimidation. Is that idiot cry of theirs, .. the whole yelling at you; demanding absolute obedience to
arbitrary ,assinine orders, really working to get them respect… or is it just something
they get off on? When the police are shown to be bad, they strike by work slowdown, or letting a little chaos
loose themselves. So the people know they need them… So any reform of the police will go
through the police not doing their jobs…. but then something like better communities may
result. less people being busted and harassed , or pulled over for the sake of a quota….
may just show we don’t need so much policing anyway. And then if the new social workers
brigade starts intervening in peoples with issues when they are young and in school …
maybe fewer will be in the system. Couple that with the police not throwing their family in
jail for nothing, and forcing them to pay fines for breaking stupid laws. The system will have
less of a load, and the new , better cops without attitudes will be able to handle their
communities in a way that works for everyone. Making them a net positive, as opposed to now
where they are a net negative. Also,
The drug war is over. The cops have only done the bidding of the organized criminal elements who make their bread and
butter because of prohibition. our representatives can legally smoke pot , and grow it in their windowboxes in the capital
dc., but people in many places are still living in fear of police using possession of some
substance,as a pretext to take all their stuff,throw them in jail. but besides the cops, there are the prosecutors…. they earn their salaries by stealing
it from poor people through fines for things that ought to be legal. This is one way to drain
money from poor communities, causing people to go steal from others in society to pay their
court costs. and who is gonna come and bust down your door… when you can’t pay a fine and
choose to pay rent and buy your kids food instead…. the cops. just doing their
jobs.. Evil is the banality of business as usual
The late Kevin R C O’Brien noted that in every case where the Police had been ordered
to “Round up the usual suspects” they have done so, and delivered them where
ordered. It did not matter who the “Usual suspects” were, or to what fate they were to be
delivered. They are the King’s men and they do the King’s bidding.
To have a reasonable discussion, I think that it should be recognized that modern police are
but one leg of a triad. The first of course is the police who appear to seem themselves as not
part of a community but as enforcers in that community. To swipe an idea from Mao, the police
should move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea. Not be a patrolling shark that
attacks who they want at will knowing that there will be no repercussions against them. When
you get to the point that you have police arresting children in school for infractions of
school discipline – giving them a police record – you know that things have gotten
out of hand.
The next leg is the courts which of course includes prosecutors. It is my understanding that
prosecutors are elected to office in the US and so have incentives to appear to be tough on
crime”” . They seem to operate more like ‘Let’s Make a Deal’ from
what I have read. When they tell some kid that he has a choice of 1,000 years in prison on
trumped up charges or pleads guilty to a smaller offence, you know that that is not justice at
work. Judges too operate in their own world and will always take the word of a policeman as a
witness.
And the third leg is the prisons which operate as sweatshops for corporate America. It is in
the interest of the police and the courts to fill up the prisons to overflowing. Anybody
remember the Pennsylvania “kids for cash” scandal where kids lives were being
ruined with criminal records that were bogus so that some people could make a profit? And what
sort of prison system is it where a private contractor can build a prison without a
contract at all , knowing that the government (California in this case) will nonetheless
fill it up for a good profit.
In short, in sorting out police doctrine and methods like is happening now, it should be
recognized that they are actually only the face of a set of problems.
I spent some time in the Silver Valley of northern Idaho. This area was the
hot bed of
labor unrest during the 1890’s. Federal troops controlled the area 3 separate
times,1892, 1894 and 1899. Twice miners hijacked trains loaded them with dynamite and drove
them to mining company stamping mills that they then blew up. Dozens of deaths in shoot outs.
The entire male population was herded up and placed in concentration camps for weeks. The end
result was the assassination of the Governor in 1905. Interestingly this history has been completely expunged. There is a mining museum in the town
which doesn’t mention a word on these events. Even nationwide there seems to be a
complete erasure of what real labor unrest can look like..
Yeah, labor unrest does get swept under the rug. Howard zinn had examples in his works “the peoples history of the United
States” The pictched battles in upstate new york with the Van Rennselear’s in the 1840’s
breaking up rennselearwyk…. the million acre estate of theirs . it was a rent
strike. people remembering , we have been here before doesn’t help the case of the
establishment… so they try to not let it happen. We get experts telling us…. well, this is all new… we need experts… to
tell you… what to think. It is like watching the footage from the past 100 years on film of blacks marching for their
rights… and being told.. reform is coming.. the more things change, the more things stay
the same. decade after decade.century after century… time to start figuring this out people. so, the enemy is us…. now what?
Doubtless the facts presented above are correct, but shouldn’t one point out that the
21st century is quite different from the 19th and therefore analogizing the current situation
to what went on before is quite facile? For example it’s no longer necessary for the
police to put down strikes because strike actions barely still exist. In our current US the
working class has diminished greatly while the middle class has expanded. We are a much richer
country overall with a lot more people–not just those one percenters–concerned
about crime. Whatever one thinks of the police, politically an attempt to go back to the 18th
century isn’t going to fly.
” the 21st century is quite different from the 19th ” From the Guardian
“How Starbucks, Target, Google and Microsoft quietly fund police through private
donations”
More than 25 large corporations in the past three years have contributed funding to
private police foundations, new report says.
These foundations receive millions of dollars a year from private and corporate donors,
according to the report, and are able to use the funds to purchase equipment and weapons with
little public input. The analysis notes, for example, how the Los Angeles police department
in 2007 used foundation funding to purchase surveillance software from controversial
technology firm Palantir. Buying the technology with private foundation funding rather than
its public budget allowed the department to bypass requirements to hold public meetings and
gain approval from the city council.
The Houston police foundation has purchased for the local police department a variety of
equipment, including Swat equipment, sound equipment and dogs for the K-9 unit, according to
the report. The Philadelphia police foundation purchased for its police force long guns,
drones and ballistic helmets, and the Atlanta police foundation helped fund a major
surveillance network of over 12,000 cameras.
In addition to weaponry, foundation funding can also go toward specialized training and
support programs that complement the department’s policing strategies, according to one
police foundation.
“Not a lot of people are aware of this public-private partnership where corporations
and wealthy donors are able to siphon money into police forces with little to no
oversight,” said Gin Armstrong, a senior research analyst at LittleSis.
Maybe it is just me, but things don’t seem to be all that different.
While it is true, this is a new century. knowing how the present came to be, is entirely necessary to be able to attempt any move
forward. The likelihood of making the same old mistakes is almost certain, if one doesn’t try to
use the past as a reference. And considering the effect of propaganda and revisionism in the formation of peoples opinions,
we do need ” learning against learning” to borrow a Jesuit strategy against the
reformation, but this time it should embrace reality, rather than sow falsehoods. But I do agree, We have never been here before, and now is a great time to reset everything. With all due
respect to “getting it right” or at least “better”. and knowing the false fables of righteousness, is what people need to know, before they go
about “burning down the house”.
You know it’s not as though white people aren’t also afraid of the police.
Alfred Hitchcock said he was deathly afraid of police and that paranoia informed many of his
movies. Woody Allen has a funny scene in Annie Hall where he is pulled over by a cop and is
comically flustered. White people also get shot and killed by the police as the rightwingers
are constantly pointing out.
And thousands of people in the streets tell us that police reform is necessary. But the
country is not going to get rid of them and replace police with social workers so why even talk
about it? I’d say the above is interesting….not terribly relevant.
Straight-up fact: The police weren’t created to preserve and protect. They were
created to maintain order, over certain subjected classes and races of people,
including–for many white people, too–many of our ancestors, too.*
And the question that arises from this: Are we willing to the subjects in a police state?
Are we willing to continue to let our Black and brown brothers and sisters be subjected BY such
a police state, and to half-wittingly be party TO it?
Or do we want to exercise AGENCY over “our” government(s), and
decide–anew–how we go out our vast, vast array of social ills.
Obviously, armed police officers with an average of six months training–almost all
from the white underclass–are a pretty f*cking blunt instrument to bring to bear.
On our own heads. On those who we and history have consigned to second-class
citizenship. Warning: this is a revolutionary situation. We should embrace it.
*Acceding to white supremacy, becoming “white” and often joining that police
order, if you were poor, was the road out of such subjectivity. My grandfather’s father,
for example, was said to have fled a failed revolution in Bohemia to come here. Look back
through history, you will find plenty of reason to feel solidarity, too. Race alone cannot
divide us if we are intent on the lessons of that history.
It’s a good argument for keeping business small and evenly distributed. Promote the
distribution of small enterprises all around the countryside and it’ll be a preventative
against mergers and monopolies and giant corporations. Legislate for small business everywhere.
When mega corporations turn into godzilla they are no longer efficient. They just tweak the
statistics to imply that they are making such a profit that that means they are efficient.
Maybe their robots are. Maybe their security forces are. But rapacious capitalism is almost
comical, if not pathetic, when there is nothing left to rape. Which is where we now find
ourselves. They’ve been allowed to evolve into private monopolies and have sucked the
life out of the rest of the economy because they provide no employment, no training, no health
care, no responsible maintenance for themselves; they set up tax havens, etc. And they produce
way too much crap. We need far less consumption to save the planet. If we need monopolies to
create equal distribution let them be state-owned monopolies. States do a good job. I’m
thinking here of the State owned liquor stores in Utah. Even tho’ it’d be nice to
buy wine in the grocery store, the state does a good job of supplying booze at a good price.
(They are in the process now of setting up marijuana stores. Yes, Utah.) And they hire lotsa
people. And they generate a nice tax revenue. I think medical care should be the same way
– but on a national scale. This way we don’t need to bludgeon the poor. Until we
can turn things around, we need to give the poor a state owned and controlled place to live
– commonly thought of as a house. We’re gonna need to do food stamps too. If we
must put up with private enterprise at the expense of public welfare, just so that we keep a
certain optimism toward “free enterprise” and keep it nurtured because: sometimes a
great notion, then let’s restrict it from becoming a plague. But let’s not kill
capitalism just because it almost killed society. Let’s remake it. As it is now
it’s just dragging itself around like a cave troll. It is no longer fit for purpose.
Protect and serve MMT to the 10%. And no, the answer can not be give MMT to everyone and
complain about automation replacing the population. Also, slavery is not a white issue;
it’s a control issue, going back to Africa, which is once again being pumped with
debt.
Looking at how the term redneck was twisted to serve it’s current function is
revealing. Fear, insecurity, control. Educate your own.
Ending Emergency Unemployment Insurance Supplements
By DEAN BAKER
The Republicans have been working hard to ensure that the $600 weekly supplement to
unemployment insurance benefits, which was put in place as part of the pandemic rescue
package, is not extended beyond the current July 31 cutoff. They argue that we need
people to return to work.
They do have a point. The supplement is equivalent to pay of $15 an hour for someone
working a 40-hour week, and this is in addition to a regular benefit that is typically
equal to 40 to 50 percent of workers' pay. The supplement translates into an even larger
hourly pay rate for workers putting in shorter workweeks, which was the case for most
laid off workers in the restaurant and retail sectors.
It is hard for employers in traditionally low paying sectors to match these pay rates.
Even those of us who are big proponents of higher minimum wages would not advocate a jump
to more than $20 an hour at a point when businesses are crippled by the pandemic.
However, there is also the point that we don't want workers to have to expose
themselves to the coronavirus. That was the reason for the generous supplement. We wanted
to make sure that workers, who in many cases were legally prevented from working, did not
suffer as a result.
There is an obvious solution here. Suppose we reduce or end the supplement in areas
where the pandemic is under control.
This would not be determined by some Trumpian declaration that the pandemic is over,
but by solid data. The obvious metric would be positive test rates. Suppose that the
supplement was reduced or eliminated in states or counties where the positive test rate
is less than 5 percent. (This may not be the right rate.) This would mean that workers
going back to work would face relatively little risk of contracting the virus. It would
also give states incentive to conduct vigorous testing programs, as well as other control
measures, in order to get their positive rates down.
Our unemployment insurance system is badly broken and it would be desirable to have
more generous benefits, and also to focus more on work sharing, as other countries have
done. We can recognize this point and still agree that an arbitrary supplement to all
benefits is not the right long-term fix even if it was very good policy in the
pandemic.
"... This program is 100 percent listener supported! You can join the hundreds of financial sponsors who make this show possible by becoming a member on our Patreon page . ..."
Since April, he has uncovered how COVID-19
came
to be a boon for the ultra-wealthy , reporting that America's billionaires, including Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet,
Michael Bloomberg and others, accrued more wealth in the first three weeks of the lockdown than they made in total prior to 1980.
Billionaire wealth surged by $484 billion in just three months, while a record 40 million Americans filed for unemployment.
This economic phenomenon, the largest radical transfer of wealth out of the hands of taxpayers and into the hands of billionaires,
was the largest taxpayer bailout of the wealthy in American history.
As MacLeod reported,
In the last 30 years, U.S. billionaire wealth soared by over 1100 percent while median household wealth increased by barely
five percent. In 1990, the total wealth held by America's billionaire class was $240 billion; today that number stands at $2.95
trillion. Thus, America's billionaires accrued more wealth in just the past three weeks than they made in total prior to 1980."
While the pandemic and subsequent lockdown turned the world upside down for working-class people, forcing upon them school closures,
long lines at the grocery store, empty shelves, panic buying, record unemployment, and miles-long bread lines, little media attention
was given to the Billionaires buying islands and land where they could enjoy life in first-class bunkers built to withstand a nuclear
war.
If anything, the coronavirus has lifted the veil to expose the growing inequality in the United States, an unfortunate reality
in the world's richest country.
Macleod leaves us with a salient statistic, explaining that while Amazon owner Jeff Bezos makes $1 million every three minutes,
"Amazon staff, directly employed by Bezos, also
risk
their lives for measly pay.
One-third of all Amazon
workers in Arizona, for example, are enrolled in the food stamps program, their wages so low that they cannot afford to pay for food."
Alan MacLeod joins MintCast to explain all of this and how the coming economic crash that is expected to contract the economy
by 40 percent will only advance the interests of America's ultra-wealthy and increase their wealth even further.
America already faces a reality in which less than one thousand billionaires influence policies that ensure more tax obligations
for the working class to the benefit of ultra-wealthy oligarchs. Corporate media ensures this reality by presenting billionaires
in a positive light, often as philanthropists who run charitable organizations. Yet, in reality, they are little more than big fish
eating off of the hard work of the working class.
This program is 100 percent listener supported! You can join the hundreds of financial sponsors who make this show possible
by becoming a member on our Patreon page .
Subscribe to this podcast on iTunes
, Spotify and
SoundCloud . Please leave us a review and share this segmen t.
Mnar Muhawesh is founder, CEO and editor in chief of MintPress News, and is also a regular speaker on responsible journalism,
sexism, neoconservativism within the media and journalism start-ups.
MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
Roughly a third of Germans expect fewer business trips and more video conferences in the
years following the outbreak of the coronavirus, according to a study published on Thursday.
Explore dynamic updates of the earth's key data points Open the Data Dash Close
While that's slightly less than in the rest of the world, Germany's environment minister
sees an opportunity to improve the climate and the quality of life by commuting less.
"Nobody wants life to remain like it was during the pandemic," said Svenja Schulze, who
presented the study carried out by Ernst & Young and the Wuppertal Institut think tank.
"But we should keep some of the new routines."
About a quarter of employees worked at home at least part of the time during the pandemic,
according to the paper. Internet traffic related to video conferences rose 120% in a sample
measurement at a digital crosspoint in Frankfurt, the research showed.
According to the authors of the study, passenger traffic could be reduced long-term by
around 8% if home office and remote access are promoted.
Looks like there are some elements of systemic crisis of neoliberalism in the current
situation. a revived Cold War (against Russia and China) is a desperate attempt to find a
scapegoat and switch attention of population from the subservience of both Party to Wall Street
and MIC. To the "Full spectrum Dominance" doctrine which ensure record levels of military
spending, sealing money from working class and lower middle class. At the same time top 20% of
population still support neoliberalism so the current riots will pass like Occupy Wall Street
movement.
Notable quotes:
"... Today's mass unemployment also threatens those still employed, the remaining 120 million members of the U.S. labor force. ..."
"... the predictable results of mass joblessness in the U.S. are deepening social divisions, renewed racism, social protests, and government repression (often violent). ..."
"... By thereby blocking, if only temporarily, a powerful emerging opposition, Democratic Party leaders deterred mass opposition to bailouts, unemployment, minimal COVID-19 testing, and all the government's other failures. They just want to win the November 2020 election. Biden's vague "return to normal" promises are offered as soothing antidotes to the Trump/GOP's crisis-wracked, fear-mongering divisiveness. Trump plunges ahead with a radically pro-capitalist agenda coupled with reactionary cultural and political warfare against civil rights and liberties. ..."
"... Global isolation accompanies the U.S.'s declining economic and political footprints. Its technological supremacy is increasingly challenged globally and especially in and by China. ..."
"... Further China-bashing -- pursued by both major parties -- will only slow global economic growth just when many circumstances converge to make that the least desirable future. Record-breaking levels of government, corporate and household debt make the U.S. economy exceptionally vulnerable to future shocks and cyclical downturns. ..."
"... No "return to normal" after the combined systemic shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic and capitalist depression is likely. ..."
"... Richard D. Wolff, Professor of economics emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and a visiting professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New School University, in New York. Wolff's weekly show, "Economic Update," is syndicated by more than 100 radio stations and goes to 55 million TV receivers via Free Speech TV. His two recent books with Democracy at Work are Understanding Marxism and Understanding Socialism, both available at democracyatwork.info. This article was produced by Economy for All , a project of the Independent Media Institute. ..."
"... democracy needs an alternative! ..."
"... In a rather simplistic understanding of these issues, I too have often wondered about this endless "growth" goal. How can we have long-term a system, whose inner logic requires constant growth to remain 'viable' – on a planet with finite resources? A collision of the two seems inevitable at some point. Am I missing something? ..."
"... Economic growth and human population growth have been disasters for much of the animal/plant world (insects, large mammals, forests, oceans). ..."
"... Human focused economists seem to ignore this vitally important earth inhabiting non-human constituency in the quest for the, always assumed necessary, headline economic growth. ..."
June 10,
2020 Capitalism has always had business cycles. The capitalist enterprises that produce
goods and services are distinctively organized around the conflicted relationship of employer
and employees and the competitive relationship of markets. These central relationships of
capitalism together generate cyclical instability. Wherever capitalism became a society's
economic system over the last three centuries, business cycles recurred every four to seven
years. Capitalism has mechanisms to survive its cycles, but they are painful, especially when
employers fire employees. Widespread pain (unemployment, bankruptcies, disrupted public
finances, etc.) brought the label "crisis" to capitalism's cyclical downturns. Only on special
occasions, and rarely, did the cyclical crises in capitalism become crises of capitalism as a
system. That has usually required other non-economic problems (political, cultural, and/or
natural) to reach crescendo peaks around the same time as a cyclical economic downturn. Today
is a time of crisis both in and of U.S. capitalism.
U.S. economic policy now focuses on what is already the worst business cycle downturn since
the 1929 crash. As data accumulate, it may well prove to be the worst in global capitalism's
entire history. Forty million jobless U.S. workers find incomes lost, savings disappearing and
over-indebted family finances worsening.
Today's mass unemployment also threatens those still employed, the remaining 120 million
members of the U.S. labor force. Mass unemployment always invites employers to cut wages,
benefits and working conditions. If any of their employees quit, many among the millions of
unemployed will accept those abandoned jobs. Knowing that, most employees accept their
employers' cuts. Employers will justify them as required by "the pandemic" or by what they say
are its effects on their profits.
Led by Trump and the Republicans and tolerated by the Democrats' leaders, U.S. employers are
intensifying class war against workers. That is what mass joblessness accomplishes. On one
hand, Washington bails out employers with trillions of dollars. On the other, Washington
enables (by funding) a mass joblessness that directly undermines the entire working class.
Germany and France, for example, could not allow such joblessness because of their labor
movements' and socialist parties' social influences. In sharp contrast, the predictable
results of mass joblessness in the U.S. are deepening social divisions, renewed racism, social
protests, and government repression (often violent).
... ... ...
By thereby blocking, if only temporarily, a powerful emerging opposition, Democratic
Party leaders deterred mass opposition to bailouts, unemployment, minimal COVID-19 testing, and
all the government's other failures. They just want to win the November 2020 election. Biden's
vague "return to normal" promises are offered as soothing antidotes to the Trump/GOP's
crisis-wracked, fear-mongering divisiveness. Trump plunges ahead with a radically
pro-capitalist agenda coupled with reactionary cultural and political warfare against civil
rights and liberties.
It is the old GOP strategy but a much more extreme version. The Democrats counter with
reactionary responses: a revived Cold War (against Russia and/or China) and a domestic safety
less shredded than what the GOP plans. Culture wars are perhaps the only realm where Democrats
sense some votes in not caving further to right-wing pressures.
Alternating Democratic and Republican governments produced today's impasse. Global
isolation accompanies the U.S.'s declining economic and political footprints. Its technological
supremacy is increasingly challenged globally and especially in and by China. Efforts to
break that challenge have not succeeded and will not likely do better in the future. Further
China-bashing -- pursued by both major parties -- will only slow global economic growth just
when many circumstances converge to make that the least desirable future. Record-breaking
levels of government, corporate and household debt make the U.S. economy exceptionally
vulnerable to future shocks and cyclical downturns.
The U.S. population below 40 years of age struggles increasingly with unsustainable debts.
The jobs and incomes it faces have already undermined access to the "American Dream" they were
promised as children. Nor have they much hope for the future as today's pandemic-cum-crash
imposes more hardships on them. That protests surge, provoked further by government repression,
should surprise no one.
Repeated polls where half the young "prefer socialism over capitalism" reflect growing
antipathy to their deteriorating capitalist reality. In the Cold War-shaped U.S. school system
since the late 1940s, socialism's substantive theories and practices were not seriously taught.
Debates among socialists over how socialism was changing or should change remain largely
unknown. Today's growing interests in critiques of capitalism and in socialism's varieties
reflect young peoples' rejection of Cold War taboos as well as a capitalism that has failed
them.
No "return to normal" after the combined systemic shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic and
capitalist depression is likely. Many want no such return because they believe that that normal
led to both the pandemic and the economic crash. They also believe that the managers of that
old normal -- corporate CEOs in both their private and governmental positions -- should face
tough public scrutiny and opposition because of where that normal led and where it will likely
lead again.
Those managers are not solving the problems they helped to create: utterly inadequate
testing for the virus, bigger-than-ever bailouts for the biggest banks and corporations, mass
unemployment, and deepening wealth and income inequalities.
Why then keep those managers in power? We should not expect different results from them now
than when conditions were "normal."
Of course protests flared up in and around African American communities. Beyond their long
history of suffering social and employment discrimination and police oppression, it is
important to remember that those communities suffered worst in the Great Recession of
2008-2009. Their unemployment then shot up, they lost homes disproportionately to foreclosures,
etc. They have died from the coronavirus significantly more than white communities. Because of
disproportionate reliance on low-paid service sector jobs, they have once again suffered
disproportionately in 2020's crash of U.S. capitalism. When a president then blatantly panders
to white supremacy and white supremacists, while making and repeating racist comments, the
ingredients are in place to provoke protests. However useful for Trump/GOP electoral campaigns,
social protests and oppressive police responses add sharp social conflicts to the already
disastrous combination of viral pandemic and economic crash.
Trump is a product and sign of U.S. capitalism's exhaustion. The long, cozy governmental
alternation between GOP and Democrats after the trauma of the 1930s Great Depression had
achieved its purpose. It had undone FDR's redistribution of wealth from the top to the middle
and the bottom. It had "fixed" that problem by reversing the redistribution of wealth and
income. The ideological cover for that "fix" was bipartisan demonization of domestic socialism
combined with bipartisan pursuit of Cold War with the USSR. The major GOP vs. Democratic Party
dispute concerned the modes and extents of governmental support for private capitalism (as in
Keynes vs. Friedman, etc.). That minor squabble got raised to the status of "the major issue"
for politicians, journalists, and academics to debate because they caved to the taboo on
debates over capitalism vs. socialism.
Capitalism has so extremely redistributed wealth and income to the top 1 percent, so mired
the vast majority in overwork and excess debt, and so extinguished "good jobs" (via relocating
them abroad and automation) that the system itself draws ever-deeper disaffection, criticism,
and opposition. At first, deepening social divisions expressed the system's disintegration. Now
open street protests take the U.S. a step closer to a full-on crisis of the system.
Trump subordinated the old managers of capitalism by politically threatening them with
aroused, angry small businesses and middle-income workers. Trump promises the latter a return
to what they had before the upwards redistribution of wealth hurt them. He tells the old
managers that he and his base alone can secure their social positions atop an upwardly
redistributed contemporary capitalism. They will save the old managers from Bernie,
"progressivism" and "socialism." The Democratic Party's old, "centrist" leadership offers weak,
partial opposition, hoping Trump goes too far and implodes the GOP.
In the wake of the pandemic and the massive unemployment used to "manage" it, wages and
benefits will take major hits in the months and years ahead. Wealth will be further
redistributed upward. Social divisions will deepen and so will social protests. This crisis in
capitalism is also a crisis of capitalism.
Richard D. Wolff, Professor of economics emeritus at the University of Massachusetts,
Amherst, and a visiting professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New
School University, in New York. Wolff's weekly show, "Economic Update," is syndicated by more
than 100 radio stations and goes to 55 million TV receivers via Free Speech TV. His two recent
books with Democracy at Work are Understanding Marxism and Understanding Socialism, both
available at democracyatwork.info. This article was produced by Economy for All , a project of the
Independent Media Institute.
(IMO) things could've been righted in 2009-2010, when US capitalism had two wheels over
the precipice and the political will was there for systemic change.
instead the system floored the accelerator and the bus is off the cliff
If only Democrats, Pelosi and Bide were around to do something then! (sarc)
+2 The good ship America, capsized, can right itself and escape what seems to be
inevitable submergence by reversing regressive policies embraced by both political parties
since the Reagan "revolution". But both parties also seemed doomed to irrelevance, because
both have, as Wolff describes, just played musical chairs over four decades. Little surprise
that the only growing political affiliation is "Independent": democracy needs an
alternative! Even BEFORE COVID-19, those under 40 could not find sustainable employment,
and those over 40 were jettisoned as too expensive to maintain. Meanwhile the mainstream
media supply a steady diet of trivia and misinformation, gushing over stock market rebounds
or growth in Jeff Bezos' literal mountain of wealth, while a realistic 25% of the work force
(including those in the darling "gig" economy) don't have a job or a paycheck, and can't make
the rent. Unbelievable. And a disgrace in any country with the means to correct it.
The political response to this virus and the ensuing economic collapse is but one preview
to our future: we should study it, and hard. A vaccine may take a few years to put in place,
but there is no "vaccine" against profound environmental shifts on the horizon, broadly
labeled climate change. A response that avoids enormous human suffering requires planning and
transformations on space and time scales unlike anything we have faced heretofore. The bad
news: these shifts are already manifest and likely irreversible. The good news: a response
will require everyone's labor, creativity, and collaboration. This means planning,
cooperation, and work , much of which can't be automated easily. These are political
and economic transformations in which we will have no choice, if we are to survive.
Emphasizing that there will be radical reduction in energy/resource use in the near
future, either planned or unplanned. The Club of Rome models appear to be still spot on.
Good article that makes many valid points. One I disagree with though is:
will only slow global economic growth just when many circumstances converge to make that
the least desirable future
Why is growth always the goal? Given the looming climate change catastrophe, economic
growth is the enemy. We must figure out how to live in a zero-growth (i.e. balanced) economy
or we will kill off the human race. A lot of the tensions we see are because it is no longer
possible to "grow" the economy in a way that benefits all segments of society. Energy and GDP
are related. As we run out of the former the latter must adjust.
In a rather simplistic understanding of these issues, I too have often wondered about this
endless "growth" goal. How can we have long-term a system, whose inner logic requires
constant growth to remain 'viable' – on a planet with finite resources? A collision of
the two seems inevitable at some point. Am I missing something?
Economic growth and human population growth have been disasters for much of the
animal/plant world (insects, large mammals, forests, oceans).
Human focused economists seem to ignore this vitally important earth inhabiting non-human
constituency in the quest for the, always assumed necessary, headline economic growth.
As we follow in the path of our already distressed animal/plant kingdom, achieving a
"balanced" economy without a great deal of human distress seems unlikely to this reader .
"The top teams rushing to develop coronavirus vaccines are alerting governments, health
officials and shareholders that they may have a big problem : The outbreaks in their countries
may be getting too small to quickly determine whether vaccines work
A leader of the Oxford University group, one of the furthest ahead with human trials, admits
the reality is paradoxical, even "bizarre," but said the declining numbers of new infections
this summer could be one of the big hurdles vaccine developers face in the global race to beat
down the virus.
Even as new cases are growing worldwide, transmission rates are falling in Britain, China
and many of the hardest-hit regions in the United States -- the three countries that have
experimental vaccines ready to move into large-scale human testing in June, July and August."
Washpost
---------------
Well, pilgrims it would seem that the Post staff does not see the irony in their own
writing, or perhaps they do. There have been scattered evidences of rationality there lately.
Even as Democrat governors and mayors across the country drag their feet on the re-opening of
the American economy, infection rates are falling. In the Faucibirxist view of things
everything depends on vaccine development (or herd immunity post holocaust). But, alas there
just aren't enough new, vibrant infections to make development of the vaccines convenient. What
will happen to the flow of government money to these projects if this phenomenon becomes
general knowledge. Someone at the Post should be disciplined for this indiscretion. pl
"What will happen to the flow of government money to these projects if this phenomenon
becomes general knowledge."
Well Fauci is almost 80 so I think he's set for life. I hear the left wants lots of
redevelopment funds and jobs programs, with the attendant opportunities for graft that comes
with them, for thier cities which we are all assured had neither rioting nor looting.
Thank you Col. Lang for all the posts on novel coronavirus.
For shining light on this, this utter failure by the medical community and their various
and sundry enablers in government and in business.
On these liars and charlatans and killers and criminals.
The video below is about an hour long. It is a nurse, who worked in NYC hospital, the
alleged epi center of epi centers.
She basically says, without saying directly, but points to the fact that doctors were
murdering patients there, it seems.
She paints a picture of doctors not as scientists but as zealots, as neo neanderthals, as
craven monsters, who care not about life, the elderly, the sick, the least among us.
As Nurse Ratchets
Towards the end of video, she recounts her last day at this hospital, discussing a patient
she had nursed for many days, and who was doing fine, making progress, . . . and how she was
removed from his bed on direct orders, sent to the ER where she was not assigned, and 20
minutes later, the man she was caring for is dead.
These sorts of stories abound; this rage is not going away anytime soon. This is the rage,
and what caused it, that our "lords and masters" who censor us and tell us black is white,
and want to destroy our country. . . this is the rage they don't want to see expressed and
exposed. Will they get their way?
Well...they can always test their vaccines in the USA. We seem not to be faring as well and
can help out. (I believe this is a glass half-full moment.)
Trump needs to stop the $600 a week federal bonus to the unemployed. My neighbor told me
about how his daughter-in-law worked one day a week as a barmaid before the virus shut the
bar down and made a little over a hundred a week. Oregon unemployment pays her 150 a week and
with the added 600 she now makes over 7 times what she did working. How many protesters and
rioters are just as flush getting paid to party in the street? Most i'd say. That makes these
government funded protests a powerful voice and recruitment tool for the Democratic Party.
Ending the federal subsidy to the unemployed would reduce, if not stop, the demonstrations
and mau-mauing of the country.
Absolutely. There were howls of protests before Minneapolis when Georgia, Florida and
Texas started tellling people that if they recieved a recall to work notice from an employer
and refused to go they would be considered a voluntary quit and no longer eligable for
unemployment insurance payments. They'll howl again when they figure out this is all taxable
income.
Take everything the WaPo claims with a grain of salt. There is no real worry over lower covid
infections. What made Covid decrease was the lockdowns. Remove the lockdowns and covid
infection rates will climb, as we are seeing in the already reopened states.
Then when fall rolls around, and people are stuck indoors again, rates will skyrocket.
There will be plenty of test subjects for a vaccine.
With the spread rate of the coronavirus, any outbreak of the infection will peter out once
the total immunity rate of the population approaches 65-70 percent.
In Bergamo (Italy), 57 percent a population sample have tested positive for coronavirus
antibodies, which means that they must have had the infection before and are now most likely
immune.
If you are a Karen, then don't listen to me, but take it from the German government's very
own propaganda outlet, Deutsche Welle:
"Out of nearly 10,000 Bergamo residents who had their blood tested between April 23 and
June 3, 57% had antibodies, indicating they had come into contact with the virus and
developed an immune response.
Health authorities said the sample size was 'sufficiently broad' to be a reliable
indicator of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 among Bergamo province's population."
I noticed there are a lot of people here that still have faith in capitalism. The problem
is only with the demented variation found in the USA, they say; the European model is the way
to go, they say...
"... Moreover, people do distinguish between needs and wants. Americans need to eat, but they mostly don't need to eat out. They don't need to travel. Restaurant owners and airlines therefore have two problems: they can't cover costs while their capacity is limited for public-health reasons, and demand would be down even if the coronavirus disappeared. This explains why many businesses are not reopening even though they legally can. Others are reopening, but fear they cannot hold out for long. And the many millions of workers in America's vast services sector are realizing that their jobs are simply not essential. ..."
"... America's economic plight is structural. It is not simply the consequence of Trump's incompetence or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's poor political strategy. It reflects systemic changes over 50 years that have created an economy based on global demand for advanced goods, consumer demand for frills, and ever-growing household and business debts. This economy was in many ways prosperous, and it provided jobs and incomes to many millions. Yet it was a house of cards, and COVID-19 has blown it down. ..."
In the 1960s, the US had a balanced economy that produced goods for both businesses and
households, at all levels of technology, with a fairly small (and tightly regulated) financial
sector. It produced largely for itself, importing mainly commodities.
Today, the US produces for the world, mainly advanced investment goods and services, in
sectors such as aerospace, information technology, arms, oilfield services, and finance. And it
imports far more consumer goods, such as clothing, electronics, cars, and car parts, than it
did a half-century ago.
And whereas cars, televisions, and household appliances drove US consumer demand in the
1960s, a much larger share of domestic spending today goes (or went) to restaurants, bars,
hotels, resorts, gyms, salons, coffee shops, and tattoo parlors, as well as college tuition and
doctor's visits. Tens of millions of Americans work in these sectors.
Finally, American household spending in the 1960s was powered by rising wages and growing
home equity. But wages have been largely stagnant since at least 2000, and spending increases
since 2010 were powered by rising personal and corporate debts. House values are now stagnant
at best, and will likely fall in the months ahead.
Mainstream economics pays little attention to such structural questions. Instead, it assumes
that business investment responds mostly to the consumer, whose spending is dictated equally by
income and desire. The distinction between "essential" and "superfluous" does not exist. Debt
burdens are largely ignored.
But demand for many US-made capital goods now depends on global conditions. Orders for new
aircraft will not recover while half of all existing planes are grounded. At current prices,
the global oil industry is not drilling new wells. Even at home, though existing construction
projects may be completed, plans for new office towers or retail outlets won't be launched
soon. And as people commute less, cars will last longer, so demand for them (and gasoline) will
suffer.
Faced with radical uncertainty, US consumers will save more and spend less. Even if the
government replaces their lost incomes for a time, people know that stimulus is short term.
What they do not know is when the next job offer – or layoff – will come along.
Moreover, people do distinguish between needs and wants. Americans need to eat, but they
mostly don't need to eat out. They don't need to travel. Restaurant owners and airlines
therefore have two problems: they can't cover costs while their capacity is limited for
public-health reasons, and demand would be down even if the coronavirus disappeared. This
explains why many businesses are not reopening even though they legally can. Others are
reopening, but fear they cannot hold out for long. And the many millions of workers in
America's vast services sector are realizing that their jobs are simply not essential.
Meanwhile, US household debts – rent, mortgage, and utility arrears, as well as
interest on education and car loans – have continued to mount. True, stimulus checks have
helped: defaults have so far been modest, and many landlords have been accommodating. But as
people face long periods with lower incomes, they will continue to hoard funds to ensure that
they can repay their fixed debts. As if all this were not enough, falling sales- and income-tax
revenues are prompting US state and local governments to cut spending, compounding the loss of
jobs and incomes.
America's economic plight is structural. It is not simply the consequence of Trump's
incompetence or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's poor political strategy. It reflects systemic
changes over 50 years that have created an economy based on global demand for advanced goods,
consumer demand for frills, and ever-growing household and business debts. This economy was in
many ways prosperous, and it provided jobs and incomes to many millions. Yet it was a house of
cards, and COVID-19 has blown it down.
"Reopen America" is therefore an economic and political fantasy. Incumbent politicians crave
a cheery growth rebound, and the depth of the collapse makes possible some attractive
short-term numbers. But taking them seriously will merely set the stage for a new round of
disillusion. As nationwide protests against systemic racism and police brutality show,
disillusion is America's one big growth sector right now.
What I find amazing is that no side in the USA even blinked when the Congress authorized
spending USD 10 trillion to keep the system afloat. It's like if this never happened, or like
if it was a normal thing.
CDC consist of overpaid idiots. On 20 January, the first confirmed case in South Korea was
identified as a 35-year-old Chinese woman. The first South Korean national to be infected
occurred three days later was a 55-year-old man who worked in Wuhan and returned for a checkup
with flu symptoms. The two infection reports were publicly released on 24 January.
[1] At
this point team of CDC researchers should already be in South Korea. But nothing was done.
The technology was old, the data poor, the bureaucracy slow, the guidance confusing, the
administration not in agreement. The coronavirus shook the world's premier health
agency , creating a loss of confidence and hampering the U.S. response to the crisis
"World's premier health agency"?
I think the illusion the C.D.C. was the "world's premier health agency" comes from the
fact that the USA has, by far, the largest and most powerful pharmaceutical sector in the
world (which Americans call "Big Pharma"). If you have the biggest pharma, you will have the
most sheer volume of human trials and new drug patents. This, by osmosis, puts your country's
C.D.C. at the forefront of most drug regulation - which the rest of the world's C.D.C.s will
simply copy and paste for obvious reasons (i.e. they won't do the same work twice). That
doesn't mean your C.D.C. is "the premier". For instance, it could simply be the most corrupt,
the C.D.C. which is at the right place, the right time. An example for this is the USA's
airplane equivalent to the C.D.C., which sold itself off to Boeing, resulting in the 737 MAX
fiasco.
The stock market is BOOMING! Truly a remarkable recovery. It's almost as if the travails of
the last three months never happened. Everyone is happy and right back to where they were
financially. The future is so bright we gotta wear shades. Celebration time, come on! DOW 35K
by EOY2020!
The government is underwriting a booming stock market!
And no infrastructure related jobs program in sight even though it's been on the table for
more than a decade. Apparently the US infrastructure is just fine thank you. But the MIC and
intelligence community need more money.
The Democrats are complicit in this fiasco. Biden, LOL, weak.
As already noted by some commentators, the recent protests have almost as much to do with
a rapidly collapsing economy with horrible prospects of recovery for millions of people, as
with racism. There's a lot of resentment, unease and fear out there. Racism is only one
trigger for the ongoing unrest. There's also an element of blowing off some steam after the
COVID restrictions.
COVID is still a major issue BTW! But it seems as if the cost for herd immunity has now
been factored in and rationalized away and people are going to accept the sacrifices of tens
of thousands more dead and handicapped by after effects. Amazing how quickly COVID is
becoming a non-issue. The administration has very effectively sidestepped the problem, aided
and abetted by the media.
Any meager gains in employee pay and benefits eked out over the last 10 years as low
unemployment ("Thank god for all the crappy jobs, I have three of them!") finally pressured
some improvement, have been decimated. One step forward, ten back. Watch the Job Quality
Index (JQI).
Not only have millions lost their livelihoods but also their crappy healthcare
insurance.
The wealth divide is exploding as billionaires are reaping huge government largesse, much
of it tax free.
With millions of people remaining unemployed or under-employed over an extended period of
time and as the government begins to remove financial aid for the poorest, as homelessness
explodes, as people get sick and have no insurance, as personal debt balloons, etc. these
recent protests might look like playground tiffs.
It's remarkable to me that the stock market, even if decoupled from the real economy, is
this sanguine over future prospects.
Something seems very wrong with this picture. When the youngsters realize how much of
their future has been mortgaged to prop all this up, watch out.
I also expect the very heavy militarized responses to civil unrest to continue and
amplify. Protests will not be tolerated and a significant portion of the US citizenry will
fully support the harsh crackdowns in the name of law and order. The retired 401K set for
example. To be a protester will take guts and fortitude.
Well, at least we can look forward to the November election to fix all of this.
You cannot print money into infrastructure. That's money fetishism.
The Marshall Plan would be only USD 100 billion in today's values. It wasn't about the
money: the Marshall Plan worked because, in 1946, the USA was the financial center of the
world and had an excess industrial capacity large enough to rebuild a much smaller place
(Western Europe). USDs flowed into Western Europe, which could only buy American goods and
equipment - which the Americans had to sell. American resources then flowed to Western
Europe, which in turn flowed back to the USA in USDs. That the USD was backed by gold at the
time had nothing to do with this process, but it may have accelerated the universalization of
the USD.
The USA (I'm here including all of its provinces: European Peninsula, Latin America,
SE-Asia, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Australia) is a capitalist society,
which means it plans its economy according to the social profit rate. The social profit rate
is determined by the national average of profit rates among all the individual capitals in
said country. That means economy is always planned by the private, not the public, sector.
The White House is impotent here.
Profit rate self-regulates based on the different degrees of organic composition of
capital (OCC) of each country/region. To simplify, the tendency is this: value flows from the
countries with lesser OCCs to countries with higher OCCs. Taking the European Union as an
example, we have that Germany (the country with the higher OCC) will have large and chronic
trade surpluses with the rest.
However, the higher the OCC, the lower is the profit rate. As OCC gets to a certain
critical level, profit rates begin to plummet, and structural crisis of capitalism occur. In
order to stop this process, "financialization" begins.
The case of the USA is that its financialization process has been running for so long that
its already existing infrastructure is crumbling. However, the fact that it is crumbling is
just the symptom, not the cause. The real cause is that the USA begun to financialize first
because it reached an extremely high OCC first.
At first, the USA didn't rebuild its infrastructure simply because it is not profitable.
Now, it doesn't do it for the simple fact it can't: with much pain, it managed to bring
astronauts beck to the ISS; the infrastructural abyss is now at more than USD 1.1 trn and
widening. By now it would have to import a lot of material and expertise from other countries
if it really wanted to rebuild and update its infrastructure. Industry lost so much
importance in the US economy that, last year, American industry fell to a record level (due
to the trade war against China) and the US GDP actually rose - due to the financial sector
and services sector compensating for the loss.
The most extreme case of a First World country turning into a mere financial hub is the
UK: its trade deficit already is at a gargantuan -14%, and its budget only doesn't collapse
because its huge financial hub in London covers that up to more than 7% (i.e. halves).
Financial hub? Call it what it is. A laundromat for dirty money and ill-gotten gains. Problem
is, or problem for those who aren't the extractive wealthy elite which is most of us, more
and more money is dirty money and ill-gotten gains even if it is "made" legally. The most
recent multi-trillion dollar handout, looting and pillaging actually, to the wealthy
extractive elite as part of the so-called "stimulus package" was perfectly legal but dirty
money and ill-gotten gains nonetheless.
The stock market is not only a depravity indicator and an indicator of wealth disparity,
it's also a massive laundromat for legal and illegal ill-gotten gains. I would venture that
at least 30% of the stock market is comprised of black market illegal money being laundered
at any given time.
FIRE is a term used my Michael Hudson and other likeminded political-economists. He uses
it so often it's hard to provide the initial instance. However, Hudson did write two books
about how the FIRE sector gained its dominance, Killing the Host & J is for Junk
Economics . It this video interview
from 2017 , Hudson explains to Max Keiser about the latter book and how it relates to the
just completed election, which begins at the 12:45 mark. That website also links to all
previous Keiser Reports where I hope to find the specific interview that discusses the
FIRE sector. This one does too, but it's not the specific topic discussed. I guarantee you'll
learn a lot from the 10.5 minute interview!
Petri Krohn wants redistribution of wealth. Let's look at the idea.
The opposing viewpoint says wealth is not a pie. Wealth comes from growth, innovation,
creativity. It is many pies.
Of course, you can't bake your own pie without capital. So, how do we redistribute
capital?
You can get it from the government via the banks, if they are 'ordered' to grant loans.
They aren't. So, you can't get it from government or banks.
You can take it from the already wealthy. Taxes is the historic way to take wealth from
the wealthy. But the tax schedule no longer takes significant amounts from the wealthy. And
Congress is corrupted by the wealthy so that route is closed also. There will be no major new
taxes on the wealthy.
How can we redistribute wealth, then?
Simplest way is Development Zones with no taxes for a 5-10 years. Investors will pour
money in from around the world. New businesses can be started, innovation can be nourished
and people can prosper.
Use the system to expand the base of participation and do it in the zones of poverty and
redevelopment where the poor and disadvantaged are.
China does this. It works. Other nations do it. They call them FTZ (free trade zones).
Russia has some.
Trump was going to do this with his original Infrastructure program. The Dems stopped it.
Won't allow any progress.
But, this is the way to go. You raise people out of poverty, your increase their options
and income, you grow their region, and lots of new pies are baked.
And who, exactly, is going to do the hard labor required of these infrastructure
projects?
Certainly none of the horribly obese Americans I see waddling around, nor many of the
young folks stuck with their snouts into soma social media. Most of the youngsters I know
have zero clue about working with tools, doing a job right, working hard for not much pay,
etc. Males of color living in ghettos while their baby-mommas live off welfare? Hardly.
And where are people going to get the training needed? The Polytechnic Science trade
school in the city I grew up in - San Francisco - was torn down long ago. Few in the trades
can afford to live in San Francisco any more, even if they could get a job.
Maybe folks like my father who wielded a shovel building roads during the WPA and hated it
so much he joined the Army. In other words, hardworking immigrants, or first generation born
of immigrants with little education (my dad).
Posted by: Red Ryder | Jun 3 2020 19:14 utc | 15 says: 'How can we redistribute wealth,
then?'
An economy's wealth is what it produces. The U.S. produces a lot less then it consumes, so
it is in debt, and half of its population is poor.
The financial elites, who run the U.S. have gotten wealthy, not by producing something of
value, but by strip mining the financial assets of the rest of the population.
If you want to produce wealth, and distribute it properly:
1. Get rid of the U.S.$ as the world's reserve currency. This will allow U.S.$ to be
radically devalued.
2. With a devalued dollar, the U.S. will be forced into domestic production (i.e. real
wealth creation). Good paying jobs, producing real things, is a very effective way of
properly distributing wealth.
3. Carry out a massive infrastructure program to rebuild the U.S.' worn-out
infrastructure. The infrastructure itselr, as well as the good paying jobs associated with
creating it, is an effective way to distribute wealth.
4. Provide basic health-care and education (including university) to all. This is again a
very effective way of distributing wealth, while at the same time supplying a work force
capable of carrying out high value added jobs necessary for a goods producing economy.
5. Break-up or regulate the cartels. Profit margins and executive salaries have radically
expanded in recent years. This is a sign of lack of competition. Wherever there is inadequate
competition the economic actors need to be regulated or broken up. Lower prices, resulting
from a normalization of profits and exagerated salary disparities, is another excellent way
to distribute wealth.
6. Reduce military expenditures. Most of the military expenditures, beyond what is really
needed for defense, are nothing but waste, and at the same time a transfer of wealth from the
masses to the military industrial complex.
7. Pay for government sponsored health-care, education and infrastructure with a
significant increase in taxes on the wealthy.
8. The massive devaluation of the dollar, combined with infrastructure spending and
re-industrialization will no doubt cause significant inflation, at least in the short term.
Inflation will reduce both the value of financial assets and debt, again representing a
redistribution of wealth from the elites to the indebted masses.
Using the GINI index as a gauge (
https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2015/demo/gini-index-of-money-income-and-equivalence-adjusted-income--1967.html),
Income inequality increased substantially over the past 40 years, from a GINI coefficient of
0.36, moderate, to 0.46, extreme. This change happened as a result of deliberate economic
policies designed to enable the transfer of wealth from the masses to the elites. To reverse
this mal-distribution of wealth, the policies that led to this need to be reversed as
well.
And don't expect the Democrats to do it. They are fully in the pocket of the 'Globalists'
who have been the principle beneficiaries of this massive transfer of wealth since 1980.
@ Posted by: Winni Puu | Jun 3 2020 21:33 utc | 47
The problem with large infrastructure projects is that they do not only get old through
physical degeneration, but also through moral degeneration (i.e. they get outdated).
The USA had USD 1.1 trn in old infrastructure (mainly from the 50s-60s) which need repair.
However, if the USG spends those USD 1.1 trn, the American people will just be getting what
existed before - there's no technological advantage here. So, while the USA spends USD 1.1
trn on 50s technology, China will be spending the same on state-of-the-art, therefore getting
a military advantage (because better infrastructure attracts more wealth, both in the form of
foreign investment and in the form of rising productivity of labor).
Also, when you do this large-scale technological leap, it just can't be any kind of
innovation: it has to be a revolutionary technology, which both greatly increases labor
productivity and is future proof (i.e. can last at least 50 years, ideally at least 100
years).
So, this is not just your average bean-counting. When a given national government is so
far behind in infrastructure, it has a though decision to make: fix what already exists (with
minor and gradual improvements) or do you go all-in with a revolutionary technology to try to
do a "great leap"? And that's just the technocratic side of the problem - in capitalism you
have the factor that it is the social profit rate that decides what's built and what isn't,
by how much and when.
The boss of Amazon Jeff Bezos is 65 this year, is worth over a trillion dollars, assuming he
lives up the age of 90, converts the assets into cash, does absolutely nothing except
spending the money, he has $3 655 347 to run through each hour 24/7 for the rest of his life.
If one assumes he has to sleep, eat, go to the bathroom which cuts the number of spending
hours (say) by half, he must go through over seven million dollars each and every hour until
he drops dead.
This is obscene, it exceeds his needs by such a margin that one cannot but wonder at the
sanity of a society that cannot be bothered to address it. This is not to call for income to
be distributed equitably, that would destroy the only mechanism that past evidence shows is
the driving force for improving living standards for all, but for such distribution to be
sane, nothing more nothing else, sanity should inform the creation of laws governing income
distribution on every society, including the Republic's. Any such sane arrangements should
include the distribution of both income and accumulated wealth, the major disparity in
today's society isn't only in income distribution, but even more so in wealth ownership.
The U.S. has a service economy. Some 70% of its gross domestic product is generated by
personal consumption. The emergency measures taken to slow down the covid-19 pandemic decreased
consumption by a huge margin. The GDPNow model by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
shows the slump
:
The growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) is a key indicator of economic activity,
but the official estimate is released with a delay. Our GDPNow forecasting model provides a
"nowcast" of the official estimate prior to its release by estimating GDP growth using a
methodology similar to the one used by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.
...
Latest estimate: -52.8 percent -- June 1, 2020
The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the
second quarter of 2020 is -52.8 percent on June 1, down from -51.2 percent on May 29.
The GDPnow model gives a snapshot of GDP on any given day. It is not the GDP for the year,
which will be down much less, but just a moment in time.
With the lockdowns loosening the GDP will certainly increase again. But a haircut missed due
to the lockdown will not result in a desire to get two haircuts. The meals not eaten in a
restaurant during the last two month will not be made up by additional meals eaten after the
reopening. The losses are for real.
With the end of the lockdown half of the 40 million currently unemployed will likely soon be
back to work. The jobs of the other 20 million will not come back for a long time. The travel
and hospitality sectors will be most effected. People who do not make money can not spend
any.
The unemployed and the economy will not be impressed by Trump's current fake 'law and order'
show or by his pandering to Evangelicals.
If Trump is as smart as he claims to be he will ask Congress for a huge amount of money to
be spend on infrastructure programs over the next three years. That money should be shared for
projects on the national, state and local level. There are plenty of bridges, roads and rails
that need repairs or replacements.
But Trump isn't as smart as he claims and the people around him, as well as Trump himself,
are from the FIRE economy - the F inance, Insurance, and Real Estate sectors. Such people do
not value the real economy where real stuff is made and used.
The stock market, on which Trump is fixated, has long ceased to be a reflection of the real
economy. Propping it up again and again, as the Fed and the Treasury do, may well enrich
Trump's friends, but it does nothing for the voters he needs to get reelected.
Does he not understand that?
And why, by the way, ain't the Democrats out in front demanding that more be done to create
new jobs? They seem to have totally vanished from the scene.
Posted by b on June 3, 2020 at 17:35 UTC |
Permalink
"And why, by the way, ain't the Democrats out in front demanding that more be done to create
new jobs?"
Don't say ain't or your mother will faint.
Your father will fall in a bucket of paint.
Your sister will cry. Your brother will die.
Your dog will call the FBI.
"And why, by the way, ain't the Democrats out in front demanding that more be done to create
new jobs? "
Because the Dems are NOT an opposition party. The entire mess we are in, is a bipartisan
project accomplished over several decades. Although Trump is in the limelight right now, he
is actually a symptom of a much larger underlying disease, caused by both parties.
I don't think the Dems want to win. Nobody wants the next four years. Hell, nobody wants the
next eight years or twelve or sixteen. Except the criminally insane autocrats.
Not that I think the Dems in control of the executive and legislative branches would
change the course of events. The collapse is in full swing. It's a steam roller at this
point. A freight train. An avalanche. There's no more blood to squeeze from the rocks. Game
over. Except it and manage the decline as humanely and constructively and equitably as
possible or else let chaos reign and lead which is an existential gambit for sure but one the
extractive elites appear to have chosen.
The individual states need to realize they are on their own. Trump and Congressional gopers
and dems have abandoned them in favor of working full time for FIRE (very new and revealing
term for me) and various other elite interests. Each state will need to form various
alliances with other states to develop proverbial out of the box solutions including
developing independent import and trade agreements with China and the EU among others.
You cannot print money into infrastructure. That's money fetishism.
The Marshall Plan would be only USD 100 billion in today's values. It wasn't about the
money: the Marshall Plan worked because, in 1946, the USA was the financial center of the
world and had an excess industrial capacity large enough to rebuild a much smaller place
(Western Europe). USDs flowed into Western Europe, which could only buy American goods and
equipment - which the Americans had to sell. American resources then flowed to Western
Europe, which in turn flowed back to the USA in USDs. That the USD was backed by gold at the
time had nothing to do with this process, but it may have accelerated the universalization of
the USD.
The USA (I'm here including all of its provinces: European Peninsula, Latin America,
SE-Asia, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Australia) is a capitalist society,
which means it plans its economy according to the social profit rate. The social profit rate
is determined by the national average of profit rates among all the individual capitals in
said country. That means economy is always planned by the private, not the public, sector.
The White House is impotent here.
Profit rate self-regulates based on the different degrees of organic composition of
capital (OCC) of each country/region. To simplify, the tendency is this: value flows from the
countries with lesser OCCs to countries with higher OCCs. Taking the European Union as an
example, we have that Germany (the country with the higher OCC) will have large and chronic
trade surpluses with the rest.
However, the higher the OCC, the lower is the profit rate. As OCC gets to a certain
critical level, profit rates begin to plummet, and structural crisis of capitalism occur. In
order to stop this process, "financialization" begins.
The case of the USA is that its financialization process has been running for so long that
its already existing infrastructure is crumbling. However, the fact that it is crumbling is
just the symptom, not the cause. The real cause is that the USA begun to financialize first
because it reached an extremely high OCC first.
At first, the USA didn't rebuild its infrastructure simply because it is not profitable.
Now, it doesn't do it for the simple fact it can't: with much pain, it managed to bring
astronauts beck to the ISS; the infrastructural abyss is now at more than USD 1.1 trn and
widening. By now it would have to import a lot of material and expertise from other countries
if it really wanted to rebuild and update its infrastructure. Industry lost so much
importance in the US economy that, last year, American industry fell to a record level (due
to the trade war against China) and the US GDP actually rose - due to the financial sector
and services sector compensating for the loss.
The most extreme case of a First World country turning into a mere financial hub is the
UK: its trade deficit already is at a gargantuan -14%, and its budget only doesn't collapse
because its huge financial hub in London covers that up to more than 7% (i.e. halves).
While I agree with spending on infrastructure projects like we did during the great
depression and more, it should be noted that this is not going to save the service economy.
Very few people actually work in construction and allied trades directly. So while in normal
times, this kind of spending would be a huge shot in the arm because these folks would then
spend in the service economy, coronafear will reduce the effect considerably.
We have destroyed our economy and reduced our civil liberties, perhaps irrevocably, for a
virus that kills less than 1% of the population and almost all of whose victims are the
elderly and ill, usually both. As recently as a hundred years ago, humanity used to be faced
with diseases like smallpox, various plagues, and assorted bacteriological diseases that
would routinely kill 30-70% of the population ... and we kept on. What has happened to
us?
If she joined the ticket as former Vice President Joe Biden's running mate, our broken
land might mend.
We collectively must implore a reluctant Michelle Obama to make herself available to
join Joe Biden's ticket as the Democratic Party's vice presidential nominee. Let me explain
why.
On top of a global pandemic, our cities now are facing massive unrest, violence and
destruction, and threats to the social order, arising from yet another series of horrific
killings of unarmed African-American men and women by the police -- and all built upon
decades of racial injustice and inequality.
No, it is not about racism. Electing a Black president will not save America. The real
issue is the economic system. America needs
a major redistribution of wealth.
Does he not understand that ? Yes he does, all to well. Becouse they planned it that way,
when they deliberately released the corona virus germ warfare weapon!
As I wrote here 3 months ago 'they won't need so many strawberry pickers becouse ther won't
be so many to eat strawberry's! Think about it. Agend 21. Starts 2020.
The democrats are all part of this genocide.
How long has it taken to recruit train and equip the storm troopers on the streets of
America right now.
America will regret what it voted for /wished for.
Financial hub? Call it what it is. A laundromat for dirty money and ill-gotten gains. Problem
is, or problem for those who aren't the extractive wealthy elite which is most of us, more
and more money is dirty money and ill-gotten gains even if it is "made" legally. The most
recent multi-trillion dollar handout, looting and pillaging actually, to the wealthy
extractive elite as part of the so-called "stimulus package" was perfectly legal but dirty
money and ill-gotten gains nonetheless.
The stock market is not only a depravity indicator and an indicator of wealth disparity,
it's also a massive laundromat for legal and illegal ill-gotten gains. I would venture that
at least 30% of the stock market is comprised of black market illegal money being laundered
at any given time.
If Trump is as smart as he claims to be he will...
He doesn't need to be smart per se.
He just needs to be **smarter** than Joe Biden.
Just like he was smarter than Hillary + all the legacy media in 2016 to such an extent
that to deny they had been outsmarted... #Russiagate was born lol
The irony is that Biden is a lowlife who inflames hatred and reinforces divisions while
holding up a moral shield. He has always chosen expedient lies over the truth to get elected.
Support for him shows a desperate hate of Trump.
The Soviet Union collapsed because the Soviet Economic-Political Elite discovered that they
could make more money and have more power by breaking the Union apart to devour the public
utilities. The US Economic-Political elite have now made a similar decision. But whereas the
Soviet Union had hard assets that could be privatised for profit, the US has public expenses
that will be eliminated in order to free up resources for more financialization. The US elite
will break apart the US as a nation state in order to harvest public pension funds, social
security will be privatised and public debt will explode as the government (through the
Federal Reserve) will guarantee stock market prices - get ready for DOW 50,000 in the next 5
years and a 40 trillion national debt, also get ready for collapse of the US as a functioning
state the day after that.
FIRE is a term used my Michael Hudson and other likeminded political-economists. He uses
it so often it's hard to provide the initial instance. However, Hudson did write two books
about how the FIRE sector gained its dominance, Killing the Host & J is for Junk
Economics . It this video interview
from 2017 , Hudson explains to Max Keiser about the latter book and how it relates to the
just completed election, which begins at the 12:45 mark. That website also links to all
previous Keiser Reports where I hope to find the specific interview that discusses the
FIRE sector. This one does too, but it's not the specific topic discussed. I guarantee you'll
learn a lot from the 10.5 minute interview!
There is some evidence that "cooler heads" are exerting a "veto" influence on the Trump
admin, but who exactly they are is not apparent. But so far this year the US was on the brink
of a) attacking Iran with Air Force and missiles. b) dropping nuclear option on China through
withdrawal of HK privileges, sanctioning CPC officials, and cancelling thousands of student
visas. and c) ordering the military into the streets to "dominate" the protesters. All of
these events seemed a sure thing until they suddenly didn't in fact occur.
I expect some kind of "unity ticket" will be offered to the American people for November
and some degree of mild reforms initiated to help the vast majority get by.
Progressive Democrats had their best opportunity since the 1960s handed to them in the
wake of Trumps's election, and most of them effectively squandered it by allowing their
energy to be diverted into the Russiagate/impeachment nothing-burger box.
Petri Krohn wants redistribution of wealth. Let's look at the idea.
The opposing viewpoint says wealth is not a pie. Wealth comes from growth, innovation,
creativity. It is many pies.
Of course, you can't bake your own pie without capital. So, how do we redistribute
capital?
You can get it from the government via the banks, if they are 'ordered' to grant loans.
They aren't. So, you can't get it from government or banks.
You can take it from the already wealthy. Taxes is the historic way to take wealth from
the wealthy. But the tax schedule no longer takes significant amounts from the wealthy. And
Congress is corrupted by the wealthy so that route is closed also. There will be no major new
taxes on the wealthy.
How can we redistribute wealth, then?
Simplest way is Development Zones with no taxes for a 5-10 years. Investors will pour
money in from around the world. New businesses can be started, innovation can be nourished
and people can prosper.
Use the system to expand the base of participation and do it in the zones of poverty and
redevelopment where the poor and disadvantaged are.
China does this. It works. Other nations do it. They call them FTZ (free trade zones).
Russia has some.
Trump was going to do this with his original Infrastructure program. The Dems stopped it.
Won't allow any progress.
But, this is the way to go. You raise people out of poverty, your increase their options
and income, you grow their region, and lots of new pies are baked.
The 1% made their decision to milk all the wealth long before the USSR's implosion. The
regeneration of the Rentier Class began in Europe after the 1848 Revolutions and took
hold of power during the latter half of the Victorian Age of the British Empire. Hudson
explains how the erasure of Classical Economists from college curricula began after WW1 and
connects it to the privatization of the Treasury via the Fed in 1913. The demise of Simon
Patten and his school of thought was replaced by what became known as the Chicago School. Its
first attempt to gain all the wealth was destroyed by the Ponzi Scheme it engineered during
the 1920s. Forced underground from 1929-1945, it emerged from WW2 very strong since its
manipulation of the university educational system still held, and the Cold War was contrived
in part to make the Chicago School THE paramount economic thought center with Harvard as a
close second. There's more to the story, but that'll suffice for now.
At least this is what the brave people on FOX are saying. The ones who feel very secure in
their jobs. Just a few weeks ago the talking points were ... 'Democrats are traitors because
they are scared that the economic boom is going to start just before the election'.
These people really believe that all you need is another capital gains tax cut and
everything will go back to normal. Don't any of these people think about the permanent trauma
on the rest of us? Sure, once Fauci gives us the call clear, I'm taking the last of my
savings and going to Disneyland and going to go to restaurants. Heck no. I'm terrified.
Consumers even the most profligate ones are going to permanently change their behavior. BTW
if you are really cynical, many will become more cautious and some just might break down and
become drug addicts. I don't see a happy medium here.
"... The western response to the Coronavirus spoke loudly: The U.S. and Europe have appeared powerful because they projected the illusion of competence; of being able to act effectively; of being strategic in their actions. On Coronavirus, the U.S. has shown itself incompetent, dysfunctional, and indifferent to human affliction. ..."
The western response to the Coronavirus spoke loudly: The U.S. and Europe have appeared
powerful because they projected the illusion of competence; of being able to act effectively;
of being strategic in their actions. On Coronavirus, the U.S. has shown itself incompetent,
dysfunctional, and indifferent to human affliction.
Trump is fighting an existential war: on the one hand, the coming Election is not merely the
most important in the U.S.' history. It will be existential. No more is Blue/Red a contrived
theatre for the electorate – this is deadly serious.
For an important segment of the population (no longer the majority), to lose in this coming
election would signify their ejection from power and politics, and their substitution by a
culturally different class of Americans, with different cosmopolitan and diversity values. It
is the tipping point – two irreconcilable visions of American life believe that they can
continue only if they own the whole order, and the other side be utterly crushed.
And on the other hand, Trump sees the U.S. fighting a similarly existential war, albeit at a
global plane. He is fighting a hidden 'war' to retain America's present dominance over global
money (the dollar) – the source of its true power. For Americans to lose this parallel
competition to the EU's and China's multilateral values of global co-operation and financial
governance, would imply Americans' (i.e. white Anglo Saxon's) ejection from control over the
global financial system, and (again) their substitution by a quite different vision (i.e. a
Soros-Gates-Pelosi vision), advocating the 'progressive' values of ecological and financial,
global governance.
Again – two irreconcilable visions of the global order, with each party believing that
it must own the whole order to survive.
Hence Trump's full-spectrum disruption of China (and the whole multilateral ideology) to
maintain dollar hegemony. Europe, on one side, exemplifies the shift towards a transnational
regulatory and monetary super-state. And China , on the other,
is not only Europe's willing partner, but the only power capable of sitting atop this globalist
ambition, giving it the (required) financial weight and substance. This constitutes the
existential threat to the U.S.' exceptional control of the global financial system – and
therefore over global political power.
A sovereignty-ist Russia may not be as drawn to this cosmopolitan vision as China, but
really it has little choice. Because, as President Putin repeatedly points out, the dollar
constitutes the toxic problem plaguing the world trading system. And in this, Russia cannot
stand aloof. The dollar is the problem for the Middle East too, with its noxious corollaries of
oil, currency, trade and sanctions wars. The region will not long be able to sit on the fence,
keeping distant from this struggle for the global financial order.
The Middle East, as deference to the U.S. illusion of power wanes, has as little choice as
has Russia: It will be pushed to view the U.S. as its past, and to 'Look East' for its
future.
And Israel will cease to be the pivot around which the Middle East revolves.
Riots are not a political movement and they will dissipate soon. Leaving just strengthened the national-security state. That's
what will happen next.
Notable quotes:
"... If the combination of peaceful protesting, looting and violence witnessed across American cities over the past few days completely caught you off guard, you're likely to come to the worst possible conclusion about what to do next. The knee-jerk response I'm already seeing from many is to crush the dissent by all means necessary, but that's exactly how you give the imperial state and oligarchy more power. Power it will never relinquish. ..."
"... On the one hand, you can't pillage the public so blatantly and consistently for decades while telling them voting will change things and not expect violence once people realize it doesn't. On the other hand, street violence plays perfectly into the hands of those who would take the current moment and use it to advocate for a further loss of civil liberties, more internal militarization, and the emergence of an overt domestic police state that's been itching to fully manifest since 9/11. ..."
It's with an extremely heavy heart that I sit down to write today's post.
Although widespread civil unrest was easy to predict, it doesn't make the situation any less sad and dangerous. We're in the thick
of it now, and how we respond will likely determine the direction of the country for decades to come.
If the combination of peaceful protesting, looting and violence witnessed across American cities over the past few days completely
caught you off guard, you're likely to come to the worst possible conclusion about what to do next. The knee-jerk response I'm already
seeing from many is to crush the dissent by all means necessary, but that's exactly how you give the imperial state and oligarchy
more power. Power it will never relinquish.
What's happening in America right now is what happens in a failed state.
The U.S. is a failed state. Now the imperial national security state is going to flex at home like never before.
I spent the last decade of my life trying to spread the word to avoid this, but here we are.
I don't think people understand the significance of the President declaring "Antifa" a "terrorist organization". The Patriot
Act and provisions of the NDAA of 2012 make this frightening. Because Antifa is informal it puts all protestors in danger--like
declaring them un-citizens.
GOP @SenTomCotton : "If local politicians
will not do their most basic job to protect our citizens, let's see how these anarchists respond when the 101st Airborne is on
the other side of the street." pic.twitter.com/NyojLoOEAT
-- The American Independent (@AmerIndependent)
June 1, 2020
The pressure cooker situation that erupted over the weekend has been building for five decades, but really accelerated over the
past twenty years. After every crisis of the 21st century there's been this "do whatever it takes mentality," which resulted in more
wealth and power for the national security state and oligarchy, and less resources, opportunities and civil liberties for the many.
If anything, it's surprising it took so long to get here, partly a testament to how skilled a salesman for the power structure Obama
was.
Your election was a chance to create real change, but instead you chose to protect bankers while looting the economy on behalf
of oligarchs.
You and Trump aren't much different when it comes to the big structural problems, you were just better at selling oligarchy
and empire. https://t.co/QuSQNApeLY
The covid-19 pandemic, related societal lockdown and another round of in your face economic looting by Congress and the Federal
Reserve merely served as an accelerant, and the only thing missing was some sort of catalyst combined with warmer weather. Now that
the eruption has occurred, I hope cooler heads can prevail on all sides.
On the one hand, you can't pillage the public so blatantly and consistently for decades while telling them voting will change
things and not expect violence once people realize it doesn't. On the other hand, street violence plays perfectly into the hands
of those who would take the current moment and use it to advocate for a further loss of civil liberties, more internal militarization,
and the emergence of an overt domestic police state that's been itching to fully manifest since 9/11.
It's my view we need to take the current moment and admit the unrest is a symptom of a deeply entrenched and corrupt bipartisan
imperial oligarchy that cares only about its own wealth and power. If people of goodwill across the ideological spectrum don't take
a step back and point out who the real looters are, nothing's going to improve and we'll put another bandaid on a systemic cancer
as we continue our longstanding march toward less freedom and more authoritarianism
A pretty silly rant, but some point might worth your attention...
Notable quotes:
"... I don't believe Marxist Social/Communism is the answer, as it has proven to always fail, as it is at complete odds with human nature. It drains creativity and productivity because they aren't rewarded ..."
"... Protests and Maidan open up fabulous opportunities for protest leaders. Chocolate oligarch Poroshenko became president. The little-known leader of the party faction in the parliament, Yatsenyuk, became prime minister. ..."
Meanwhile, what is going to happen to assorted fascisms? Eric Hobsbawm showed us in
Age of Extremes how the key to the fascist right was always mass mobilization: "Fascists
were the revolutionaries of the counter-revolution".
We may be heading further than mere, crude neofascism. Call it Hybrid Neofascism. Their
political stars bow to global market imperatives while switching political competition to the
cultural arena.
That's what true "illiberalism" is all about: the mix between neoliberalism –
unrestricted capital mobility, Central Bank diktats – and political authoritarianism.
Here's where we find Trump, Modi and Bolsonaro.
...Even if neoliberalism was dead, and it's not, the world is still encumbered with its
corpse – to paraphrase Nietzsche a propos of God.
And even as a triple catastrophe – sanitary, social and climatic – is now
unequivocal, the ruling matrix – starring the Masters of the Universe managing the
financial casino – won't stop resisting any drive towards change.
... Realpolitik once again points to a post-Lockdown turbo-capitalist framework, where the
illiberalism of the 1% – with fascistic elements – and naked turbo-financialization
are boosted by reinforced exploitation of an exhausted and now largely unemployed
workforce.
Post-Lockdown turbo-capitalism is once again reasserting itself after four decades of
Thatcherization, or – to be polite – hardcore neoliberalism. Progressive forces
still don't have the ammunition to revert the logic of extremely high profits for the ruling
classes – EU governance included – and for large global corporations as well.
-- ALIEN -- , 2 minutes ago
Allowing the continued uncontrolled exploitation of planetary resources will lead to global
ecosystem collapse, killing most humans.
Cheap Chinese Crap , 10 minutes ago
Good God, it 's like this guy is giving a seminar in technocratic buzzword salad
recognition.
"It takes someone of Marx's caliber to build a full-fledged, 21st century eco-socialist
ideology, and capable of long-term, sustained mobilization. Aux armes, citoyens."
Aux armes, indeed. But not to erect an oligarchy of self-appointed experts to rule us with
an iron hand. I rather prefer the idea of pulling them off their comfy, government-compensated
sinecures and dragging them down into the mud with everyone else.
Anyone who thinks they are better qualified to run your life than you yourself is an enemy
of the Enlightenment. Away with them all.
Leguran , 1 hour ago
Something worthwhile to note is missing among Pepe's carnage....
What has happened is that
every imaginable organized group from doctors to pilots to lawyers, to farmers, to pharma
companies, etc. has carved out a special slice of the economy especially for themselves.
In
Feudal times rivers could not be navigated because cockroach lords would charge fees to use the
rivers. That is exactly the same arrangement today but instead of using force of arms, laws are
used. Our economy is choking on all these impediments.
mtumba , 2 hours ago
I agree that we need a revolution, and that the .01% globalist "elites" have proven to be
not only craven, arrogant and greedy - but also stupid beyond redemption.
But I don't believe Marxist Social/Communism is the answer, as it has proven to always fail, as it is at complete odds
with human nature. It drains creativity and productivity because they aren't rewarded, and it rewards laziness and inertia, because the absolute minimum of effort
results in the barest level needed to survive, which - oddly - is enough for many.
I think it would be great to give actual capitalism a try, with extremely limited govt - a
govt that ONLY provides for the common defense and enforcement of contract laws and protection
against crimes of violence and property theft. NOT crony-capitalism that takes command over the
resources of a nation's klepotcratic govt by the .01% richest and their sycophantic bottom
feeder lawyers, lobbyists, corrupt politicians and other enablers.
Snout the First , 3 hours ago
That was sure a lot of words, needlessly making something simple difficult. Here's what it
all boils down to:
- Who do you want setting prices? The market or a central planner?
- What percent of the economy do you want the government to own or control?
- What percent of your annual income do you want the government to take? Some small amount
to be used for valid purposes, the rest to be pissed away against your better interests?
PKKA , 3 hours ago
Protests and Maidan open up fabulous opportunities for protest leaders. Chocolate oligarch
Poroshenko became president. The little-known leader of the party faction in the parliament,
Yatsenyuk, became prime minister.
You know that on the project of an epic wall between Ukraine
and Russia, Yatsenyuk stole $ 1 billion but did not build a wall. A moron with a certificate
from a psycho hospital Andrei Parubiy became the speaker of parliament. You did not know that
Parubiy had a certificate of moronity from a psycho hospital? Now you know. Boxer Vitali
Klitschko became mayor of Kiev. Vitaly pronounces the words in syllables and wrinkles his
forehead for a long time before expressing a thought. You can even physically hear the creak of
gears as they spin and creak in Klitschko's head. Do you know what rabble passed in the
Ukrainian parliament? Bandits, crooks, nazis, morons, thieves and idiots! So the protests open
up fabulous career opportunities and enrichment!
play_arrow
Phillyguy , 4 hours ago
The American public has a front row seat, watching US economic decline. This process has
been ongoing since the mid 1970's, as corporate profits slumped. In response the ruling elite
enacted a series of Neo-liberal economic policies- multiple tax cuts for the wealthy, attacks
on the poor and labor, job outsourcing, financial de-regulation, lack of spending on public and
private infrastructure and spending $ trillions of taxpayer money on the Pentagon and strategic
debacles in Afghanistan (longest war in US history), Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen. In total,
these policies have been a disaster for the average American family.
The ruling elite are well aware of American economic decline, accelerated by the Coronavirus
pandemic. Fascism comes to the fore when capitalism breaks down, and under extreme conditions,
the ruling elite use fascism as an ideological rationale to harness state power- Legislature
and police, to maintain class structure and wealth distribution. Western capitalism is
incapable of reversing its economic decline and as a result, we are seeing fascism reemerging
in the US, EU and Brazil. Donald Trump is the face of American fascism. Michael Parenti
provides an excellent historical analysis of fascism. See: Michael Parenti- Functions of
Fascism (Real History) 1 of 4 Jan 27, 2008; Link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Bc4KJx2Ao
Vigilante , 4 hours ago
How come 'fascist' Trump is being attacked 24/7 by the Deep State though?
They should be on his side if your assertions are correct
Fascism resides mostly on the Left end of the spectrum...and 'Woke' capital is throwing its
lot with the 'progressives' these days
bshirley1968 , 4 hours ago
It's your perception he is being attacked. Dude, wake up.
The best the deep state has to run against Trump is Joe Biden? They are that stupid? They
are that weak? If they are that stupid and weak, how can they be a conceivable, real
threat.
You are being played. You imagine there are good guys that you can trust......and that is
why you are being played.
HomeOfTheHypocrite , 3 hours ago
The ruling class is currently divided between those who are ready to prepare fascism and
those who want to continue on with neoliberalism. Trump represents one faction of the ruling
class. His political opponents in the Deep State represent another. None of them have any
genuine concern for the fate of the American worker. Trump, if judged by his actions and not
his words, is nothing but a charlatan who mouths populist phrases while appointing billionaire
aristocrats to political positions and lavishing investment bankers with trillions of tax
dollars.
CatInTheHat , 2 hours ago
This is the problem with both sides cult followers: the insanity behind the idea that these
elite somehow have their hands tied behind their backs as they ALL move is toward fascism.
The 2 party system is a ONE party right wing fascist one. Trump is merely a figure head.
People listen to what a politician says and NOT what he does behind their backs.
Trump is 1000% Zionazi just like the rest of them
HomeOfTheHypocrite , 2 hours ago
"basically it looks alot like the age old battle between fascism and communism"
Perhaps on the streets, but not within the ruling class. The ruling class, including the
Democrats, are utterly opposed to communism or socialism. Every Democratic congressperson with
maybe one exception stood and applauded Trump's anti-socialist rants during his State of the
Union addresses. Nancy Pelosi: "We're capitalist and that's just the way it is." Elizabeth
Warren (supposedly a radical): "I'm capitalist to my bones."
"Let's say for example these protesters managed to organize well enough to stage a coup
d'etat and take over - what next ?"
There's little chance of that. They are completely disorganized and lack any sort of
political program. But, if you're giving me the task of developing a political program for
them, I'll try to offer some suggestions that could be accomplished without a Pinochet or
Stalin-style bloodletting.
1. Busting up the monopolies and cartels 2. Raising taxes on the rich 3. A government jobs program to combat unemployment 4. A massive curtailment of the military budget 5. A massive curtailment of the policing and prison budget 6. Free government healthcare (without banning private-sector healthcare)
The first three of these political tasks were accomplished in the US in the 1930s without
the need for "black ops, gulags, secret police, and all the rest of it." Major policy changes
have not always required mass repression. But they do require a serious enough political party
to disassociate itself entirely from the ruling class Democrats and Republicans. During the 30s
there was a significant rise in various populist and socialist parties. Much of FDR's policies
and statements were a response to the threat they posed to established power. There is a famous
quote where he talks about having to "throw a few of these [millionaires] to the wolves" in
order to save America from the crackpot ideas of the "communists" and "Huey Longians."
I completely share your concern related to the use of repression to implement social and
economic policies. Neither the fascists nor the communists have a thing to offer a free people
so long as they rely on tyranny to enforce their program. Above all democracy and the natural
rights of individuals must be preserved.
Jedclampetisdead , 5 hours ago
If this country has any chance, we have to execute the Zionist bankers and their minions
new game , 5 hours ago
What is and will be: Corporate Fascism.
I defy anyone to explain other wise.
Go to the World Economic Forum web page and meet your masters.
Billionaires shaping YOUR future with their fortunes from corporations.
Their wealth was had by joint ventures with bought and paid for politicians and lobbyist
crafted legislation to maximize their wealth. This fakdemic absolutely consolidates more
wealth
to fewer corporations by design. Serf and kings/queens. The club personified by immense
wealth disparity.
In a continuing process, the social scoring via digital systems will limit freedoms to state
approved corporate diktats
that clamp like a boot to the neck. **** here, 6 tissue sections and recycled bug **** for
food.
brave new gatsy world right now with the roll out out of 3 pronged vaccine controlling your
brains emotions.
It is all so obvious to anyone with an ability to see two steps into the future. navigate
the future accordingly.
They are in control, the first denial that must be removed to see clearly the next step. sad
but true.
Nathan Tankus continues his series on the Feds response to the coronavirus. This one I think
is interesting because he makes explicit the connection between monetary and fiscal policy
and how it affects the social situation.
The Federal Reserve's Coronavirus Crisis Actions, Explained (Part 7)
Riots, Municipalities and Monetary Policy
""It feels a little silly to be publishing a technical series on the Federal Reserve's
crisis response while the United States burns from another round of police murdering Black
people. On one level, what's happening has very little to do with the intricacies of central
banking. On another level, they are intimately related. Our macroeconomic policy mix is
centered around monetary policy and our fiscal safety net has been increasingly ripped apart.
Since fiscal policy is a much more flexible tool that can be targeted to specific sectors and
groups while replacing and increasing income and wealth, it is the best tool for dealing with
discrete social problems and making sure that no one is left behind. The last major challenge
to our economic policy mix came in the 1970s when Coretta Scott King co-founded the Full
Employment Action Council to advocate for a legally enforceable right to a job. . As Coretta
said:
When Martin Luther_King, Jr., left us in 1968, he was leading the struggle for jobs and
income for every American. Martin Luther King, Jr., understood that the right to sit at a
lunch counter is no right at all when you are without a job to pay for the lunch. He knew
that the right to_attend a college is no right at all without a job to finance the education.
And the right to live in a decent neighborhood is no right at all Without a job to pay the
mortgage or rent. Many of the gains of the last two decades are threatened by the disastrous
levels of joblessness among mmonty Americans. I fear that the civil rights legislation we
struggled for, and some died for, is about to be repealed by the harsh reality of high
unemployment and persistent poverty. [...]
In my view, it's important to contextualize monetary policy in this way as these political
issues are inseparable from the technical questions of macroeconomic stabilization. Trying to
analyze the technical details of monetary policy without this context is at its core an
analytical error. People live or die, and uprise or not, based on the macroeconomic and
social policy a society pursues. I write about and advocate shifting to a fiscal policy
centered macroeconomic policy framework where financial regulation plays a subordinate
distributional, and demand restriction, role because I think that framework is the only
that's up to the task of responding to climate change and the deprivation that's leading to
civil unrest.
That framework may seem unrealistic and far away, but social instability tends to make the
seemingly unrealistic possible. The New Deal was unimaginable in the years before it
happened- and so was reconstruction
The big announcement from this month, which is mainly a negative one, is the update to the
Municipal Liquidity Facility which made it far more restrictive than many had anticipated. It
feels like a painful irony that I'm writing about this just as a major metropolitan area
erupted. With that said, it's time to dig into the minutiae ...
TAC: Looking forward, if you do go back to Washington, what issues would you champion, and
what do you think America in 2021 should really focus on?
Sessions: Well, I have come to understand that the neocon foreign policy, the libertarian
free market ideology, beyond common sense, was not healthy, and resulting in damage to families
and to American citizens . It's our duty as public officials to protect American citizens
from damage from unfair foreign competition and other tactics. That's a big deal. I think our
Republican agenda has got to be more focused on helping American people fight back against
unfair attacks on our businesses, closing our factories, losing our jobs, transporting our
jobs. I'll be an advocate for that.
We have a nation, and the government's job is to protect the nation. President Trump said
it simply: Other nations protect their interests, why aren't we protecting ours? We don't
ever use a tariff? When people cheat you every day, how do you fight back, are you going to
drop bombs on them? Why don't you use tariffs, which Alexander Hamilton and George Washington
did at the very beginning of the republic, that's a perfectly normal response to an adverse
attack on your people. So those are the kind of things that I feel strongly about. I believe in
markets, competition, and international trade, but we can no longer sit quietly while are
savaged by very clever, devious mercantilists who want to advance their interests and weaken
the United States, while we sit there, based on some theory , that we can't impose a
tariff. Give me a break!
Also, we need to reestablish a foreign policy for this time in our country's history, and it
has to be really bipartisan. You remember the Kennan Long Telegram that laid the foundation for
the containment policy against the Soviet Union. It lasted for 40 years with basic bipartisan
support. That's the kind of thing we need to be rethinking today.
We cannot continue, as the president has warned us, getting involved in endless wars all
over the globe, thinking that we can just remake humanity. That's not conservatism.
Conservatism, as Bob Tyrell said, is a cast of mind, it's a thought process, about, 'wait, is
this realistic?
You sure this theory is going to work? Are you trying to put a square peg in a round
hole? It's just not going there. Aren't you getting feedback from reality, don't you adjust to
it?' Our fundamental goals are to make the American people happy, prosperous, and stable.
Family, traditions, culture, those kinds of things have got to be defended. And this
ideological view that we're not a nation, we're an idea, somehow our constitution is supposed
to apply worldwide, is ridiculous.
We have borders, and we have a right to defend those borders, to establish good, healthy
conditions within our country. Not just for the billionaires, wages need to go up for working
people. For example, for 20 years wages for average Americans did not increase. GDP was going
up, that seemed to be all the economists cared about, CEOs were making more and more money, but
the wages for the core American people were not going up. They have, under President Trump,
some, and we need to focus on that.
TAC: In both military and economic terms, how should we begin confronting China?
For starters, we need to take off the rose-colored glasses. This is a communist regime. We
can wish it weren't so, people hoped they would moderate when they got wealthier, but actually
the opposite is occurring. Xi Jinping is using technology to repress his people even more
ruthlessly. And they are not free market people. They are not free market people, they're
communists! They are using our free-market theories -- religion -- against us, to destroy us,
to gain market share, and they've been highly successful.
President Trump and I talked about it on the airplane a number of times during the
campaign, and he understands one thing: China needs our markets more than we need their
products.
We can make those products in the United States, we can make our drugs here, we can buy them
from Mexico, our neighbors like that, we can buy them from the Philippines, South Korea, Japan,
India, Vietnam, places that aren't threats to us strategically, and who will deal honestly with
us.
So we absolutely need to alter that supply chain system that has given China an advantage
over all the other nations of the world, and we can do that in a way that does not harm our
economy significantly.
As
Summit News reports , a video clip shows a black woman and former NAACP chapter president
trying to collect medication for her daughter outside a Target store in St. Paul telling
rioters "these motherf**kers need to go home!"
"Leave this shit alone – "these motherf**kers need to go home!" she shouts, "these
people don't give a damn about George Floyd."
Diane Binns, 70, of St. Paul is angry at the people here. Binns came here to get
medication for her daughter. pic.twitter.com/GA1EJpx4XL
The woman subsequently identified herself as Diane Binns, former president of the NAACP St.
Paul from 2016-2018.
Critically, for the narrative-minded among you, she says she attended the initial protest
against the killing of Floyd but after 30 minutes realized "it was going to be a riot, so I
left."
America is quickly descending into chaos as social unrest could spread to other major cities
this weekend. Wealth inequality in many inner cities is at record levels. More than 40 million
people are unemployed with a crashed economy, and people are already furious about virus
lockdowns. This all suggests a perfect storm of unrest could flare up across the country.
What's of particular interest is back in 2005, the PREP Act was brought into existence.
In essence the PREP Act provides for unlimited funding for drug companies to develop
'counter measures' , should a Notice of Declaration of National Emergency be
declared. Such declaration was made back in March of this year.
Under the PREP Act, drug companies are given COMPLETE IMMUNITY FROM ALL ACCOUNTABILITY,
ALL LIABILITY & ALL LAWSUITS.
By her latest count, there are 119 Covid19 vaccines under development worldwide.
2) CDC and AMA have been in cahoots over the flu and vaccines for years!
Read the start of paragraph 3 and all of 4.
"The probably biggest lesson we will learn from this pandemic is that we must work to change
that selfish mentality."
And this is sadly the biggest challenge of all. After many decades of neoliberal doctrine,
coupled with shunning positive patriotism (e.g. serving for the common good of a nation) as
"semi-fascist", we now reap what has been sowed.
But it must be the focus point of our work. Without it, every other effort regarding reviving
democracy, social security, and even changing the crazy geopolitics of our nations is
futile.
"The "western" cultures allow for more selfishness of the individual. But over the
longer timeframe [neoliberal] cultures that emphasizes personal liberty and ignore the
common good are likely to see their empire fail.
The probably biggest lesson we will learn from this pandemic is that we must work to
change that selfish mentality."
Ah, yes ... the common good ... the Great Leap Forward ... the Brave New World ...
individual rights reported as selfishness ... really?
Perhaps it's better to live with some risk and the admitted limited liberty and individual
rights afforded by a system of limited government (not that our governors are currently
acting in accordance to the laws they have sworn to uphold)?
Or perhaps one would rather have the false security of guaranteed life in a prison?
Btw, "empire failing" would be a great thing ... and individual rights and limited
governance are antithetical to empire.
"... "I understand that people are angry, but they shouldn't just endanger businesses without even a thought to enriching themselves through leveraged buyouts and across-the-board terminations..." ..."
"I understand that people are angry, but they shouldn't just endanger businesses without
even a thought to enriching themselves through leveraged buyouts and across-the-board
terminations..."
"Look, we all have the right to protest, but that doesn't mean you can just rush in and
destroy any business without gathering a group of clandestine investors to purchase it at a
severely reduced price and slowly bleed it to death," said Facebook commenter Amy Mulrain,
echoing the sentiments of detractors nationwide who blasted the demonstrators for not hiring
a consultant group to take stock of a struggling company's assets before plundering.
" I understand that people are angry, but they shouldn't just endanger businesses without
even a thought to enriching themselves through leveraged buyouts and across-the-board
terminations.
It's disgusting to put workers at risk by looting. You do it by chipping away at their
health benefits and eventually laying them off. There's a right way and wrong way to do this.
"
At press time, critics recommended that protestors hold law enforcement accountable by
simply purchasing the Minneapolis police department from taxpayers.
"... The failure of the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) against COVID-19, with nearly four times the annual budget of the WHO, is visible to the world. The CDC failed to provide a successful test for SARS-CoV-2 in the critical months of February and March , while ignoring the WHO's successful test kits that were distributed to 120 countries. ..."
"... Trump has yet to hold his administration and the CDC responsible for this criminal bungling. This, more than any other failure , is the reason that the U.S. numbers for COVID-19 are now more than 1.5 million and about a third of all global infections. Contrast this with China, the first to face an unknown epidemic, stopping it at 82,000 infections, and the amazing results that countries such as Vietnam and South Korea have produced. ..."
"... Taiwan was the first to inform the WHO of human-to-human transmissions in December, but was completely ignored. ..."
"... "Just how evil does this situation become? Is the general leadership of the American political economy trying to be evil just for the fun of it?" ..."
"... And at what point does the general indifference to this state of affairs that still, incredibly, obtains, turn over into mass outrage and condemnation? Skrelli, Bayer, and all the rest are frelling evil. Extortion writ large, with easily preventable death and suffering. ..."
"... As you note it's about profits. One of the disturbing condemnations of the now fading American Century, which most USians remain contentedly oblivious to is that during their watch as global hegemon, the US, in what can be seen, in the best light, as bad faith, worked to undermine the democratic functionality of international cooperative organizations like the WHO, the UN, etc. ..."
"... The intention of granting copyrights and patents was noble, to provide a limited monopoly on an invention or literary work for a limited period. IP has been distorted and twisted, extended to insane time limits to protect works that for any common sense thinkers have already become public domain (see, e.g. the Happy Birthday song, Mickey Mouse or re-formulation of a drug that's gone out of patent). Software should have had its own IP regime but that ship has sailed (thanks Bill G.). ..."
Donald Trump launched a new vaccine war in May, but not against the virus. It was against
the world. The United States and the UK
were the only
two holdouts in the World Health Assembly from the declaration that vaccines and medicines
for COVID-19
should be available as public goods , and not under exclusive patent rights. The
United States explicitly disassociated itself from the patent pool call, talking instead of
"the critical role that intellectual property plays" -- in other words, patents for vaccines
and medicines. Having badly botched his COVID-19 response, Trump is trying to redeem his
electoral fortunes in the November elections this year by promising an early vaccine. The 2020
version of Trump's "Make America Great Again" slogan is shaping up to be, essentially, "
vaccines for us" -- but the rest of the world will have to queue up and pay what big pharma
asks, as they will hold the patents.
Trump has yet to hold his administration and the CDC responsible for this criminal
bungling. This, more than any
other failure , is the reason that the U.S. numbers for COVID-19 are now more than 1.5
million and about a third of all global infections. Contrast this with China, the first to face
an unknown epidemic, stopping it at 82,000 infections, and the amazing results that countries
such as Vietnam and
South Korea have produced.
One issue is now looming large over the COVID-19 pandemic. If we do not address the
intellectual property rights issue in this pandemic, we are likely to see a repeat of the AIDS tragedy . People
died for 10 years (1994-2004) as patented AIDS medicine was priced at $10,000 to $15,000
for a year's supply, far beyond their reach. Finally, patent
laws in India allowed people to get AIDS medicine at less than a dollar a day , or $350 for a year's supply.
Today, 80
percent of the world's AIDS medicine comes from India. For big pharma, profits trumped
lives, and they will continue to do so, COVID or no COVID, unless we change the world.
Most countries have compulsory licensing provisions that will allow them to break patents in
case of epidemics or health emergencies. Even the WTO, after a bitter fight, accepted in its
Doha Declaration (2001) that countries, in a health emergency, have the right to allow any
company to manufacture a patented drug without the patent holder's permission, and even import
it from other countries.
Why is it, then, that countries are unable to break patents, even if there are provisions in
their laws and in the TRIPS Agreement? The answer is their fear of U.S. sanctions against them.
Every year, the U.S. Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) issues a Special
301 Report that it has used to threaten trade sanctions against any country that tries to
compulsorily license any patented product.
India figures prominently in this report year after year, for daring to
issue a compulsory license in 2012 to Natco for nexavar, a cancer drug Bayer was selling
for
more than $65,000 a year . Marijn Dekkers, the CEO of Bayer, was quoted widely that this
was "theft," and "We did not develop
this medicine for Indians We developed it for Western patients who can afford it."
This leaves unanswered how many people even in the affluent West can afford a $65,000 bill
for an illness. But there is no question that a bill of this magnitude is a death sentence for
anybody but the super-rich in countries like India. Though a number of other drugs were under
also consideration for compulsory licensing at that time, India has not exercised this
provision again after receiving U.S. threats.
It is the fear that countries can break patents using their compulsory licensing powers that
led to proposals for patent pooling. The argument was that since many of these diseases do not
affect rich countries, big pharma should either let go of their patents to such patent pools,
or philanthropic capital should fund the development of new drugs for this pool. Facing the
pandemic of COVID-19, it is this idea of patent pooling that emerged in the recent World Health
Assembly , WHA-73. All countries supported this proposal, barring the
United States and its loyal camp follower, the UK . The
United States also entered its disagreement on the final WHA resolution, being the
lone objector to patent pooling of COVID-19 medicines and vaccines, noting "the critical
role that intellectual property plays in incentivizing the development of new and improved
health products."
While patent pooling is welcome if no other measure is available, it also makes it appear as
if countries have no other recourse apart from the charity of big capital. What this hides, as
charity always does, is that people and countries have legitimate rights even under TRIPS to
break patents under conditions of an epidemic or a health emergency.
The United States, which screams murder if a compulsory license is issued by any country,
has no such compunction when its own interests are threatened. During the anthrax scare in
2001, the U.S. Secretary of Health issued a threat to
Bayer under "eminent domain for patents" for licensing the anthrax-treatment drug
ciprofloxacin to other manufacturers. Bayer folded, and agreed to supply the quantity at a
price that the U.S. government had set. And without a whimper. Yes, this is the same Bayer that
considers India as a "thief" for issuing a compulsory license!
The vaccination for COVID-19 might need to be repeated each year, as we still do not know
the duration of its protection. It is unlikely that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 will
provide a lifetime
immunity like the smallpox vaccine. Unlike AIDS, where the patient numbers were smaller and
were unfortunately stigmatized in different ways, COVID-19 is a visible threat for everyone.
Any attempt to hold people and governments to ransom on COVID-19 vaccines or medicines could
see the collapse of the entire patent edifice of TRIPS that big pharma backed by the United
States and major EU countries have built. That is why the more clever in the capitalist world
have moved toward a voluntary
patent pool for potential COVID-19 medicines and vaccines. A voluntary patent pool means
that companies or institutions holding patents on medicines -- such as remdesivir -- or
vaccines would voluntarily hand them over to such a pool. The terms and conditions of such a
handover, meaning at concessional rates, or for only for certain regions, are still not clear
-- leading to criticism that a voluntary patent pool is not a substitute for declaring that all
such medicines and vaccines should be declared global public goods during the COVID-19
pandemic.
Unlike clever capital, Trump's response to the COVID-19 vaccine is to thuggishly bully his
way through. He believes that with the unlimited money that the United States is now willing to
put into the vaccine efforts, it will either beat everybody else to the winning post, or
buy the company that is
successful . If this strategy succeeds, he can then use "his" COVID-19 vaccine as a new
instrument of global power. It is the United States that will then decide which countries get
the vaccine (and for how much), and which ones don't.
Trump's little problem is that the days of the United States being a sole global hegemon
passed decades ago. The United States has shown itself as a
fumbling giant and its epidemic response
shambolic . It has been unable to provide virus tests to its people in time, and failed to
stop the epidemic through containment/mitigation measures, which a number of other countries
have done.
China and the
EU have already agreed that any vaccine developed by them will be regarded as a public
good. Even without that, once a medicine or a vaccine is known to be successful, any country
with a reasonable scientific infrastructure can replicate the medicine or the vaccine, and
manufacture it locally. India in particular has one of the largest
generic drug and vaccine manufacturing capacities in the world. What prevents India, or any
country for that matter, from manufacturing COVID-19 vaccines or drugs once they are developed
-- only the empty threat of a failed hegemon on breaking patents?
Clearly the Trump and Johnson administrations are completely wrong in not supporting that
all COVID vaccines and medications be declared as public goods. This is an unprecedented
global threat requiring unprecedented global response.
But as a Canadian I have to reluctantly admit, there are legimate reasons to oppose the
WHO. Trump like a broken clock can be correct twice a day, even if he is wrong the other 1438
times a day.
The worst offence is that the WHO (World Health Organisation) is suppose to represent the
world, and yet it deliberately excludes Taiwan, which it a known part of the world with 24
million people.
Taiwan was the first to inform the WHO of human-to-human transmissions in December, but
was completely ignored. And Taiwan has best handled its response to the pandemic.
Personally I think that all countries should stop supporting the WHO until it restores
Taiwan's observer status it previous had until 2016. The only other reasonable option would
be to create an alternative health organisation to the WHO which does not exclude any part of
the world.
The WHO also has other failings, including corruption, exorbitant travel expenses, and an
unqualified president beholden to the CCP. But these failings pale in comparison to Taiwan's
exclusion, and hopefully the other failings can be fixed within the organisation.
"Just how evil does this situation become? Is the general leadership of the American
political economy trying to be evil just for the fun of it?"
And at what point does the general indifference to this state of affairs that still,
incredibly, obtains, turn over into mass outrage and condemnation?
Skrelli, Bayer, and all the rest are frelling evil. Extortion writ large, with easily preventable death and suffering.
it did NOT begin with trump.It's been there for most of my life. What will it take for ordinary people to get mad enough about it all to do something about
it?
Even in this article, the unspoken assumption is that our hands are somehow tied that these
corps have agency far beyond anyone else's but those corps can be seized, and exist only at
the pleasure of governments in the places they pretend to exist in.
They are a human creation an Egregore, set tottering about as if it were willful and
alive
but even Lefties treat them as untouchable godlike entities "oh, well lets appeal to
"Benevolent Capital, instead "
"Behold, I show you the last man.
'What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star?' thus asks the last man,
and blinks.
The earth has become small, and on it hops the last man, who makes everything small. His race
is as ineradicable as the flea; the last man lives longest.
'We have invented happiness,'say the last men, and they blink. They have left the regions
where it was hard to live, for one needs warmth. One still loves one's neighbor and rubs
against him, for one needs warmth
One still works, for work is a form of entertainment. But one is careful lest the
entertainment be too harrowing. One no longer becomes poor or rich: both require too much
exertion. Who still wants to rule? Who obey? Both require too much exertion.
No shepherd and one herd! Everybody wants the same, everybody is the same: whoever feels
different goes voluntarily into a madhouse.
'Formerly, all the world was mad,' say the most refined, and they blink
One has one's little pleasure for the day and one's little pleasure for the night: but one
has a regard for health.
'We have invented happiness,' say the last men, and they blink.""
As you note it's about profits. One of the disturbing condemnations of the now fading
American Century, which most USians remain contentedly oblivious to is that during their
watch as global hegemon, the US, in what can be seen, in the best light, as bad faith, worked
to undermine the democratic functionality of international cooperative organizations like the
WHO, the UN, etc.
Thus when emergencies arise such as international diplomatic crisis or pandemics, it is
found these organisations have been rendered untrustworthy, corrupted and unreliable;
unsuited to purpose. American exceptionalism?
It is clear now that the USA will not fund a national public health system to fight the
coronavirus epidemic. The only conclusion is the reason is to allow Pharmaceutical
Corporations to make huge profits by marketing patented drugs and vaccines to treat the
illness; if and when, they become available sometime in the future.
Due to incompetence, lack of money and bad messengering; the economic reopening of the USA
could kill close to a million Americans. To Republicans and Libertarians, this is of no
concern. Democrats may acknowledge the deaths but say they are unavoidable.
For the Elite keeping their wealth is more important than spending a portion to prevent
the huge costs in lives and treasure that will come once the Wuhan Coronavirus is established
across North America like the related common cold.
This is a teachable moment on the immorality of all "intellectual property". I am pleased to see that so many countries – other than the US and the UK –
can get together on the common decency of allowing everyone to live, and set that above the
"justice" of paying off intellectual property assignees. But these countries still have some
ways to go in understanding that this applies to all information. That the creation of
information can never be a living – in contrast to a living based on the creation of
essential goods and services, about which we are learning so much right now! – and that
information can never be owned.
They do not yet fully comprehend that all claims to own and extract rent from information
are in fact crimes against humanity.
The intention of granting copyrights and patents was noble, to provide a limited monopoly
on an invention or literary work for a limited period. IP has been distorted and twisted,
extended to insane time limits to protect works that for any common sense thinkers have
already become public domain (see, e.g. the Happy Birthday song, Mickey Mouse or
re-formulation of a drug that's gone out of patent). Software should have had its own IP
regime but that ship has sailed (thanks Bill G.).
Either a giant reform is due or people will ignore the law and infringe the IP. Chinese
companies do it with impunity. Maybe they're right to do so.
Patent applications for the top 20 offices, 2018
Rank Country Patent applications
1 China 1,542,002
2 U.S. 597,141
3 Japan 313,567
4 South Korea 209,992
If one sums up USA patent applications vs Asia (China, Japan, SK), it is USA 597K vs Asia
2066K.
So Asia is putting in patent applications, vs the USA, at a 3.46 multiple vs the USA.
It will be interesting to see if the USA attitude about the sanctity of intellectual
property changes when important key patents are held by the rest of the world.
Teachable moments. This could get really interesting if China or a non US & associated puppets develops
an effect Covid treatment first.
I will dream of something like this: China develops vaccine, offers it free to US on condition it reduce it's Dept of War &
Aggression by 80% and honor all existing and recently existing arms control agreement, and
withdraws it's Naval forces though out the world and confines them to the North Atlantic and
California coast.
I wonder if a geopolitically powerful nation/bloc of nations such as China/India/etc might
announce that they disregard pharma IP, & announce that they will adhere to the economist
Dr Dean Baker-type policy of open source pharma R&D/recipe publication, any private
manufacturer may manufacture & sell the resultant pharma SKU. I am referring to any type
of pharma or medical device (such as ventilators), not just a COVID-19 vaccine. I would
guesstimate that the "soft power" & goodwill generated by such a policy would be
extremely beneficial to those nation(s). Furthermore, the US if it tried to retaliate via
sanctions or other threats would get a corresponding additional decrease in soft power.
To be honest, in some instances Indian govt practices on pharma are quite bad. It is
extremely hard in some instances to recoup investments at prices they ask for.
What Are the Three Concurrent Crises of the Coronavirus Depression? Posted on
May 27, 2020 by Yves Smith Yves here. Like many of
those who are taking this crisis (or crises) seriously, Nathan Tankus has proposed launching
new government programs as a way to tackle specific problems created by the crisis. While this
is eminently logical as well as sound, don't expect anything like that to happen. As political
economist Tom Ferguson pointed out in a presentation we discuss today, the US and most other
advanced economies are taking a neoliberal approach, channeling money and aid through existing
institutions (too often private).
In the first month of this newsletter, I wrote a lot of more big picture pieces about the
nature of our current crisis. The last major piece I wrote on this topic was "How to Pay for the
Pandemic War" . My view hasn't changed much but it's always worth reiterating and restating
in new ways what our major problems are in order to conceptualize how to deal with them. One
way to think about this crisis is it's really three interrelated crises happening all at once.
An Interesting way to frame these crises is to differentiate them by the economists who focused
on their unique problems. We will take them in turn.
The Keynes Crisis
This crisis, and its association with Keynes, is the most obvious and straightforward. John
Maynard Keynes is renowned as an economic theorist who showed in his book The General Theory
of Employment, Interest and Money that there are no automatic processes operating in the
private sector to return economies to full employment and, in fact, they can sustain large
degrees of unemployment for significant periods of time. He referred to this as an
"unemployment equilibrium". While the book itself actually spends very little time on
government spending, the obvious conclusion of his work was that government spending had the
power to increase incomes and employment and thus could deal with shortages of demand. This
lesson, hard learned and easily forgotten, remains as relevant today as when it was first
taught during the Great Depression. It remained relevant a decade ago during the Great
Financial Crisis. We have a grievous lack of demand today, especially for labor.
The most obvious and straightforward way to increase demand is through government spending
and grants. It can be hard for analysts to really focus on this aspect of the crisis because it
is relatively analytically uninteresting. What needs to happen is painfully clear to everyone
but Donald Trump, congressional leadership and the most ideological economists. The only
analytically interesting point regarding the nature of this crisis as a demand crisis is that
despite the disruption to production, the demand effects are much more important and
foundational. Notwithstanding the difficulty that intellectually solved problems have for
holding the attention of analysts, this point needs to be pressed again and again. We have a
demand problem. The most persistent and problematic effects of a collapse in demand is the
social and skill effects on workers. Thus, a policy to increase demand should focus on direct
employment of labor. This problem needs to be responded to and the answer for how much to spend
is "Whatever It Takes" .
The Minsky Crisis
The Minsky Crisis is related to, but distinct from, the Keynes crisis. Hyman Minsky was a
mid-to-late 20th century economist who built his work on top of Keynes and a number of other
economists who were quickly ejected from mainstream conversation. His work grounded concerns
about overall demand, and the demand for labor, in balance sheets and cash flows between
economic actors. He focused his gaze on the causes of financial crises which he correctly saw
as distinct from demand problems. What's important about his work now is that it teaches us
that the most urgent problem of the sudden utter and complete collapse of payments which has
happened in the past few months is the corresponding collapse in cash flows and the threat of a
wave of defaults and bankruptcies. Especially as the production of services can't be safely
restarted (and certainly not at its previous level), the immediate cash flow problem can't be
solved by increasing demand.
As a result, businesses must be given direct grants from the federal government. The Small
Business Association's Payroll Protection Program is meant to do that. As I've discussed
at length however , it has a number of problems. My alternative proposal is an emergency basic
income for all businesses . Dealing with the cash flow problem in this matter can also help
to relieve the Keynes crisis by maintaining and/or increasing the business demand for labor. In
addition to the business cash flow problem, there is also the cash flow problem of households.
Providing them with direct cash payments is critical, as is extending the supplementary
unemployment insurance. In this respect, it's encouraging that the Treasury is now providing
unbanked and underbanked people access to their 1200 payments
with debit cards . Hopefully this will be expanded and improved upon in the weeks and
months to come. Of course, state and local governments also need
basic incomes and the safety net needs to be further nationalized. There is no reason that
the monetary burden of unemployment insurance should be placed on state governments.
The Means Crisis
The economist that this type of crisis is named after may be the most obscure one on this
list. Gardiner Means was one of the most important economists within the New Deal. First at the
Agricultural Adjustment Administration within the Agriculture department, then in other
positions throughout the government, he theorized both the causes of the Great Depression and
ways of remedying it using monetary policy, fiscal policy- and planning . One of his most
notable positions was with the National Resources Planning Board. He rejected the idea that
there was a "price mechanism" that allocated physical resources to different uses which
functioned in the American economy. Instead, he argued that prices were "administered" by
industrial businesses, especially the largest corporations. Instead of prices allocating
resources, it was the direct resource and spending decisions of businesses and governments
which directed them. The Means Crisis is thus the crisis of the physical allocation of
resources between different uses. To respond to it, we need to bring back the notion of
resource planning and the regulation of supply chains. The idea of resource planning has been
severely out of fashion for decades but it's hard to imagine it not making a comeback because
of the Coronavirus Depression. If it somehow doesn't revive in this crisis, the Climate crisis
will surely revive it.
What his work teaches us is we can't rely on prices to reallocate resources. Existing prices
and existing patterns of production and consumption can be sustained relatively easily by
private action. However, profit-seeking businesses are bad at reallocating resources in
response to crises. The uncertainty of how long the crisis will last and whether the costs of
retooling plants and restructuring supply chains can be recouped discourages bold action. It is
often perceived to be cheaper to simply leave productive resources unused than go through such
expenses and uncertainties. Even farms are letting crops rot and euthanizing
animals rather than trying to find ways to reorganize their supply chains. What Means work
teaches us is that the government should step into this breach. It should be directly
physically reallocating resources and organizing production through hiring workers and
guaranteeing private producers markets. Resources left unplanned, are predictably unorganized.
Private
Sector planning works at dealing with medium and long term resource questions but struggles
to move quickly and effectively in times of crisis.
Conclusion
One key ingredient in the policy mix which responds to this crisis should be an "Emergency
Responder Corps". As it happens, Representative Tlaib has made just
such a proposal . Such a labor force could help respond to all three crises at once. It
could be mobilized to facilitate the reallocation of resources, especially their delivery
directly to those who need it most. It would provide many households who are now facing
unemployment with an income- and thus a cash flow. This wouldn't be a cure-all- we still need
the suite of policy programs I described above. This crisis can be managed far better than it
is currently being managed. It is impossible to avoid pain- both medical and economic- at this
late date. However, we can relieve the worst symptoms and put our economy on the road to
permanent resource planning so that we don't ever have to be caught as unprepared ever again.
These three concurrent crises have lessons we badly need to learn in order to deal with the
next crisis- the Climate crisis.
In case you missed it (it seemed to miss most people's mailbox), here's a round-up of the
Second Month
Anniversary of this Newsletter Yesterday . If you are impressed by seeing the interviews,
prominent citations and praise Nathan Tankus' writing has gotten, please consider supporting
that writing by taking a paid subscription here .
The future has taken a hard turn towards the cliff. The Coronavirus Pandemic has turned
the exceptional nation into a pariah state. The governments of USA, Brazil, UK, Spain, Italy,
Sweden, France, Germany and Russia have been proven to be incapable of protecting their
populations. Corporations and/or oligarchs corrupted them. They simply serve to funnel money
to the 99%. The pandemic also shows that the failed states are incapable of addressing other
existential threats; climate change, living with the earth's limited resources or the
thousands of nuclear armed ICBMs. When the globe's tribute money stops flowing west, the
worldwide unpaid mercenaries will stop fighting. The problem is that in the global chaos, the
red button could be pushed and the earth irradiated.
Yes, our current governments are incompetent, but I would suggest willfully blind as even
governments on the gold standard could provide free food or large building programs; it is
not about being able to deal with the crises, but choosing not to as people like Donald
Trump, Nancy Pelosi, and Mitch McConnell have access to the same, or better, information as
any of us do; they just chose to ignore the screaming and game the crises for their own and
their patrons' benefit. The Treasury and the Fed both are saying in their opaque statements
that direct stimulus is needed. Our political leadership chooses to ignore the near certainty
of a second wave of infections, likely more virulent, and the even greater probability of the
economic collapse of the United States with all the likely riots, deaths, and possible
uprisings.
"These three concurrent crises have lessons we badly need to learn in order to deal with
the next crisis- the Climate crisis.'' NeedIng to learn, I suppose is ok, needing to act,
now, would be preferred. Not knowing how to solve a problem is not ness are in solving it, it
is done all the time in physics. It can be made complicated, to what I keep saying is the
outcome we are going to get: a much simpler set of living arrangements with reality. I do a
lot things on any given day, but I haven't stopped modeling 'reality' using systems theory,
since 2006. It always puts me on edge when economists quote other economists and various
theories of economics to explain reality. No offense, but all that leads to is some analysis,
on iffy data leading to maybe action, but action very limited to the status quo, the cannon,
and whatever's in the codex. I do think it was very well written and as far as economics all
in the relearn of possibility. People being reasonable and all, which they ain't. The
problem, let's call in an 'extinction level event' (really events) is that it needs to be
ameliorated, because 'stopping', is long past.
Alas, as Tankus points out, we do not need to learn lessons.
The Trump government quite intentionally chose to ignore the problem because the fallout
would allow them to achieve their neolib agendas behind the curtain of natural disaster. Just
like 9/11, COVID-19 enables further erosion of civil liberties. It will/has suspended
inconvenient banking and finance rules, etc.
While it will not restore jobs that were headed for obsolescence anyway, WS will restore
the NYSE numbers in time for the November election (barring a pandemic resurgence YTB).
I think "barring a pandemic resurgence" is an unrealistically optimistic assumption,
especially given the following:
Social pressure to relax shutdowns, especially in the US,
Lack of Covid19 herd immunity (which has to be well into the majority to be effective),
Likely absence of effective vaccines,
Likely absence of treatments better than marginally effective,
Early anecdotal evidence that even naturally acquired Covid19 antibodies may not confer
lasting protection from reinfection,
Likely Covid19 viral mutations (very much a known unknown),
Widespread worldwide Government incompetence, incapacity and uncoordination regarding Covid19
management strategies,
"Cat herding" problems in most countries.
Having said that Powell and Mnuchin are likely to throw every financial kitchen sink that
they can print, con, beg, borrow or steal at financial markets in a herculean effort to
protect their dear leader's electoral prospects for November.
More "interesting times" ahead I think.
The solutions discussed here in dry technocratic terms would be a revolutionary change in
power, wealth and expectations. They won't be happening unless things get much worse for the
decision makers.
I think this is an excellent break-down, and it's interesting to me that all three of
these seem to be weighing substantially on our present situation.
However, I see too much short-term optimism here. As best as I can tell, our elites have
gone completely mad and may be irredeemable at this point. I mean this for real. A huge swath
of elites and PMCs too believe that robots that can do all the *essential work* are *just
around the corner* -- that the elimination of the working class in less than a decade is
baked-in. TINA.
Roubini wrote the other day that if our cold war with China escalates, the re-shoring of
manufacturing would leave out workers because it'd all be done with automation. He's wrong
though. The re-shoring won't happen because all the capital investment will be in apps,
software, and robots, like Elon Musk's "alien dreadnought" concept. He *believes* this crap.
So do seemingly many Democrats who appear to be trying to legislate the working class out of
existence while offering a $4000 "coding school" credit as a consolation prize.
So I would add that there is a fourth economic crisis, which is the economic suicide pact.
Elites see Coronavirus as their comet Hale Bopp. They think they can see the robots (aliens?
alien robots?) waving at them from the sky. All they have to do is take the plunge -- commit
economic suicide -- in order to ascend to a higher state of existence. I think we can name
this mad cult the Exit Cult, after planet Exit in Bruno Latour's "A Fictional Planetarium".
The Exit doesn't have to be as literal as launching into space or to Mars. For the Silicon
Valley true believers, it's as much about *transcendence* from a lower/lesser version of
human to a "more advanced" form.
My policy solution for this 4th economic crisis? I think we should fund (whatever it
takes) construction of a very large rocket ship, big enough for all the elites to board to
make their Exit. Ahh yes, the ship will be pretty crowded, but we can promise them their own
private bunker-like dwelling on Mars when they get there. Convince them all to get on-board,
and then launch away! I wonder what the economic multiplier on *that* would be.
"Seems to me that a $30/hr minimum wage and a 20 hr work week would go a long way toward
righting the ship."
The Germans have long done this in economic crashes, insuring low unemployment, partial
subsidy of wages, less work hours and guaranteeing return to place of employment.
Can't have stability here though, it would reduce the desperation, poverty, foreclosures,
evictions and the capture of all assets and incomes to the pathological hoarders.
the third one ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardiner_Means
) interests me the most.
Ive considered myself a Doomer since the Second Invasion of Iraq sent me looking for the
unstated reasons.
From peak oil to peak pretty much everything, I went through the stages of grief and finally
accepted that This Can't Last ..and that it sure looks like Decline and Fall, to me.
so i started thinking about how to prepare for this, and learned that it does indeed "Take a
Village" but this presented it's own difficulty: namely that unless the crisis/crises is/are
evident, and more than obvious, people will stick to what they know.
Intellectual Theorising just isn't enough to justify even small disruptions to habit and
routine.
So even out here in my little petri dish of a county it's difficult to do anything that is a
clear break from Normal like a farmer's market(we have one,finally i have yet to attend(busy
or painful) hear tell it's rather bourgeois ) or some kind of functional public
transportation(regional and sporadic and authoritarianly unpleasant more and more people
walking last 10 years).
But in the midst of a crisis, it's really too late
That the idea of planning ahead outside of Market is regarded as either silly, dangerous or a
necessary evil to be handled and passed by, is a testament to how far we've come in the last
40 or so years .rather, how well we've been remade.
Since my Doomer Awakening(lol), I've tried to become an Appendix backupdrive of the
alimentary microbiome a library filled with classics, and a working giant garden that relies
on fewer and fewer inputs, with the seed saving and general 1850 AD knowledge base that I
figured might be useful.
but it won't be enough.
it takes time and resources and effort to switch gears so rapidly(20 years) as well as the
will and perceived need for doing so.
we've, instead, been trained to be practically the polar opposite: a shoegazing mob of
hyperindividuals myopically grasping at crumbs and stubble.
The writing I see on the wall in big red capital letters: "We near an End".
I believe there is only so much any individual or group or community can do for now. I
believe the highest and best actions we can take are to save as much knowledge as possible
and make sure it will survive to the next TWO generations. I am not sure the next generation
will be able to do much more than survive and help their children survive. To their children
will fall the task of rebuilding, reshaping, and reimagining a more Human Society. Knowledge
will be the most vital tool catalyzing that process.
I believe your library and your stored and taught ways are a highest and best use of the
time we have remaining. However, if you can, you should add knowledge up to circa 1980 to the
knowledge up to 1850. The classics are worth saving but I believe they will be less valuable
than technical monographs, texbooks, and the patent literatures. Wisdom, if lost, can be
relearned. I fear much of our technical knowledge and Science once lost may be lost
forever.
Before retirement I worked as an 'engineer' -- a remarkably flexible work category. My
schooling, training, and work experiences burden me with a particular regard for technology,
Mathematics, and Science -- that 10,000 readings of "Little Home on the Prairie" could never
expunge from my soul.
between 2002 and 2009, when the printer finally died, i printed out gobs of material
ATTRA, and all manner of diy and hacks for real life and big sand filters with biofilm and
just a whole lotsa stuff.
it's in boxes with mothballs and bar-bait.
this in addition to my sort of haphazard collection of textbooks and manuals and the whole
Foxfire series.
I worry about acidic paper, and silverfish and whatever else eats paper.
the Library is a funky broken down old trailer house.
there's only so much one can do.
I too, was struck by that Gardiner Means. No invisible hand of the market for that boy. It
is all really about businesses, especially the largest corporations, doing the actual
deciding. That is why so many economies have been decimated. They are run by people who only
think in terms of this financial quarter's targets and any bonuses up for grabs. Means has
lots of interesting thoughts and if you go to the Wikipedia page on his 1932 book "The Modern
Corporation and Private Property", you see the following-
'Berle and Means argued that the structure of corporate law in the United States in the
1930s enforced the separation of ownership and control because the corporate person formally
owns a corporate entity even while shareholders own shares in the corporate entity and elect
corporate directors who control the company's activities. Compared to the notion of personal
private property, say as one's laptop or bicycle, the functioning of modern company law "has
destroyed the unity that we commonly call property". This occurred for a number of reasons,
foremost being the dispersal of shareholding ownership in big corporations: the typical
shareholder is uninterested in the day-to-day affairs of the company, yet thousands of people
like him or her make up the majority of owners throughout the economy. The result is that
those who are directly interested in day-to-day affairs, the management and the directors,
have the ability to manage the resources of companies to their own advantage without
effective shareholder scrutiny. '
This article about the Beer Game suggests that the problem may be
more fundamental:
The Beer Game is an in-person supply chain simulator, where players play in teams of
four roles: beer retailer, wholesaler, distributor, and manufacturer. The goal is to
minimize costs, with the team who has the lowest costs winning. . . . a single, one-time
persistent bump-up in customer demand plunges the system into wild boom-bust oscillations.
Consistently. Consistently. Always.
Players communicate only via the market. The system always goes haywire – and stays
haywire – in response to shock.
Though having just finished Yanis Varoufakis's excellent Adults in the Room I have
little faith in the capacity of contemporary technocrats to plan effectively. The antagonists
in the book can be divided into two categories: scoundrels and cowards. The cowards are
utterly unreliable (Varoufakis considers some of the most reliable people are former "company
men" who turned coat). But even the scoundrels cannot be relied upon because the complexity
of the institutions and the cowardice of the people within them drains their ability to
act:
The cynic would say that Dr Schäuble was playing a larger game . . . Grexit to him
was an instrument with which to pursue his vision of a smaller, more disciplined Eurozone,
with the troika firmly entrenched in Paris. The cynic would be almost right. Except it
would not be the whole story. As I departed that day, I was not leaving behind me a
Machiavellian dictator; I was leaving behind a sunken heart, a man ostensibly more powerful
than almost anyone in Europe who nevertheless felt utterly powerless to do what he knew was
right. As the great tragedians have taught us, nothing causes greater wretchedness than the
combination of supreme authority and wholesale powerlessness.
Fantastic link. I usually think that game theory is a solution looking for a problem, but
that discussion of the Beer Game and fragility of supply chains was great.
I first became aware of Gardiner Means through listening to a web-lecture: William Waller:
Thorstein Veblen, Business Enterprise, and the Financial Crisis (July 06, 2012).
[https://archive.org/details/WilliamWallerThorsteinVeblenBusinessEnterpriseAndTheFinancialCrisis]
On first hearings of this lecture I noted: Veblen has no theory of markets ~minute 9:00 --
prices? Gardiner Means memo on where do Industrial prices come from.
Veblen when asked why he claimed to be an economist but never wrote about markets had
quipped "I would write about Markets, but I have never seen one outside of economics texts."
[Extremely LOOSE paraphrase]. Near here I recall a reference to Gardiner Means 1935 essay
"Industrial Prices and their Relative Inflexibility", published by the US Government Printing
Office. Strange after searching for almost an hour for a copy of this document -- which
inspired many economics research papers -- I was unable to locate an online copy of the essay
[my bad -- even Google Scholar indicated "NOT AVAILABLE" -- strangely?].
I've been citing John Kenneth Galbraith's New Industrial State for the notion of
large-scale private sector economic planning. Time to dig that book out and look at
Galbraith's bibliography.
Please post any references you find that terminate in downloadable papers or books by
Gardiner Means. I tried to find a copy of his paper "Industrial Prices and their Relative
Inflexibility" published by the US Govt. Printing Office 1935 but I couldn't find any web
copies.
The Depression is long enough ago and recent enough to serve as an interesting model for
the selective permanence of information.
Nathan Tankus has very neatly described the triple threats of Corona and thereby described
some of the avenues for making use of the Corona crisis by those less interested in the
Public Good than their own good. I have found similar clarity in his other posts.
The easiest way to register your disapproval is with your vote. Will it change things?
Absolutely not.
But I'm only asking for you to send a message. Asking you for more than that would be
presumptuous of me.
The media is quick to tell you that you only have two choices in our
"democracy" - Red Team or Blue Team.
That is a lie. The reality is that you have four choices.
Choice #1) Vote Team Neofeudalism
Do you enjoy being a serf? Then vote for the MSM-endorsed Republican or Democrat. Go Team!
If you think there is any
real difference then you
aren't paying attention .
Choice #2) Don't Vote
The game is rigged, so why participate?
Well, you got the first part right. It's all rigged, but you obviously don't understand the
game if you think you can opt out. We are all trapped in this system, and not voting is a
choice.
Think of it this way. Half of all eligible voters don't vote. Do you think that the political
class is worried about their legitimacy? Not in the slightest. If the voting rate dropped to
just 10% they still wouldn't care.
In fact, a disengaged, apathetic public is a close second preference to Choice #1 for the
ruling elite. Want proof? When is the last time (outside of the Sanders campaign) has any
politician done anything to increase the electorate? Historically the ruling class has always
tried to limit participation.
So the only message that you send by not voting is "I don't care" or "I give up."
Choice #3) Vote for someone you like
A.K.A. Throwing away your vote.
A.K.A. Helping Putin.
A.K.A. Voting for Trump (for people that flunked both math and civics).
The purpose of democracy is to vote for someone that represents your interests. The fact that
this logical, rational act has been demonized by the MSM is proof that the ruling elites don't
approve of this choice.
So if you want to tell the ruling class FU on their choices, this is an easy way to do it.
It's not the best way, but it is a way.
The reason that it's not the best way to send a message is because the Democratic Party truly
doesn't care if it loses to the GOP. The wealthy donors still win.
So as long as only a token number of voters vote for a 3rd party, then the ruling elite still
win. They just don't win in a manner that they would prefer, and that slightly annoys them.
Choice #4) Get Active. Get In Their Faces
The only way to really piss off the ruling elites is to threaten their power.
The Democratic Party establishment and the media will always be against everyone on the
left.
However, that isn't even the most important parts of the establishment, and it's something that
the Left absolutely must fix regardless of whether the strategy is to take over the Democratic
Party or jump to another party.
For starters, let's look at the one place where the Left should dominate - Labor Unions.
No left-wing movement worth a damn fails to have labor behind it. The rank-and-file are
generally economic leftists, but union leadership has often been totally corrupted.
That has to change.
The same goes for civil rights and enviromentalist groups.
Failure to do this will doom any leftist economic movement or party.
However, changing things > sending a message.
Halfway in between changing things and sending a message is primarying incumbents.
The political establishment gets furious when the grassroots challenges them.
You can tell by all the ways that they'll break every rule and violate every value when this
happens.
It's a true FU to the ruling class. It makes them fight over something they thought that they
had already won.
While Bernie's defeat (and abandonment of his own movement) was discouraging, there are
still people fighting the good fight.
For example, Justice Democrats have a 3 - 2 record in 2020 so far.
The DSA has 13 primary
challengers coming up.
This is only a request. You should only do what you are ready to do.
But I think it's not a bad strategy to act in a way most contrary to the wishes of the ruling
class.
Governments throughout the world and across the US justified extreme, draconian,
undemocratic, and unconstitutional (in most US states) "lockdown" and stay-at-home orders on
the grounds that the COVID-19 virus was exceptionally fatal.
In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) was claiming that the fatality rate was a
very
high 3.4 percent .
Yet as time went on, it became increasingly clear that such high estimates were essentially
meaningless because researchers had no idea how many people were actually infected with the
disease. Tests were largely being conducted on those with symptoms serious enough to end up in
emergency rooms or doctor's offices.
By late April, many researchers were publishing new studies showing that the number of
people with the disease was actually much higher than was previously thought. Thus, it became
clear that the percentage of people with the disease who died from it suddenly became much
smaller.
Now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released new estimates
suggesting that the real fatality rate is around 0.26 percent.
Specifically, the report concludes that the "symptomatic case fatality ratio" is 0.4
percent. But that's just symptomatic cases. In the same report, the CDC also claims that 35
percent of all cases are asymptomatic.
Or, as the Washington Post reported this week:
The agency offered a "current best estimate" of 0.4 percent. The agency also gave a best
estimate that 35 percent of people infected never develop symptoms. Those numbers when put
together would produce an infection fatality rate of 0.26, which is lower than many of the
estimates produced by scientists and modelers to date."
Of course, not all scientists have been wrong on this. Back in March, Stanford scientist
John Ioannidis was much, much closer to the CDC's estimate than the WHO. The Wall Street
Journal noted in
April :
In a March article for Stat News, Dr. Ioannidis argued that Covid-19 is far less deadly
than modelers were assuming. He considered the experience of the Diamond Princess cruise
ship, which was quarantined Feb. 4 in Japan. Nine of 700 infected passengers and crew died.
Based on the demographics of the ship's population, Dr. Ioannidis estimated that the U.S.
fatality rate could be as low as 0.025% to 0.625% and put the upper bound at 0.05% to 1% --
comparable to that of seasonal flu.
Not that this will settle the matter.
Proponents of destroying human rights and the rule of law in order to carry out lockdowns
will continue to insist that "we didn't know" what the fatality rate was back in March. The
lack of evidence, however, didn't stop proponents of lockdowns from implementing policies that
destroyed the ability of families to earn a living, and which also created social conditions
that caused child
abuse and
suicides to spike.
But for more sane people, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Those who
have claimed that lockdowns are "the only option" had virtually no evidence at all to support
their position. Indeed, such extreme over-the-top measures such as the general lockdowns
required an extreme level of high-quality, nearly irrefutable evidence that lockdowns would
work and were necessary in the face of a disease with an extremely high fatality rate. But the
only "data" the prolockdown people could offer was speculation and hyperbolic predictions of
bodies piling up in the streets.
But that became politically unimportant.
The people who wanted lockdowns had gained the obeisance of powerful people in government
institutions and in the media . So actual data, science, or respect for human rights suddenly
became meaningless. All that mattered was getting those lockdowns. So the lockdown crowd
destroyed the lives of millions in the developed world -- and
more than a hundred million in the developing world -- to satisfy the hunches of a tiny
handful of politicians and technocrats.
"... "Consumption and hiring started to tick up "in gross terms, not in net terms," Furman said, describing the phenomenon as a "partial rebound." The bounce back "can be very very fast, because people go back to their original job, they get called back from furlough, you put the lights back on in your business. Given how many people were furloughed and how many businesses were closed you can get a big jump out of that. ..."
"... IMO Trump now realizes that he was snookered by the medical equivalent of the Holy Office. Our Auto da Fe has been impressive and nearly fatal but not quite. Trump's statement that he will never shut the economy down again indicates to me that the "scales have fallen" from his eyes. ..."
"... One thing to note are all the diffusion indexes will show large upticks, because of the base effects. U6 will likely be more stubborn. ..."
"... he believes, the way to think about the current economic drop-off, at least in the
first two phases, is more like what happens to a thriving economy during and after a natural
disaster: a quick and steep decline in economic activity followed by a quick and steep
rebound.
The Covid-19 recession started with a sudden shuttering of many businesses, a nationwide
decline in consumption, and massive increase in unemployment. But starting around April 15,
when economic reopening started to spread but the overall numbers still looked grim, Furman
noticed some data that pointed to the kind of recovery that economists often see after a
hurricane or industry-wide catastrophe like the Gulf of Mexico oil spill." politico
******
"Consumption and hiring started to tick up "in gross terms, not in net terms," Furman
said, describing the phenomenon as a "partial rebound." The bounce back "can be very very
fast, because people go back to their original job, they get called back from furlough, you
put the lights back on in your business. Given how many people were furloughed and how many
businesses were closed you can get a big jump out of that. It will look like a V."" politico
--------------
Well, pilgrims, there you have it. If Politico thinks so, it must be so. Do I think the
Democratic Party grandees are deliberately suppressing the economy as long as they can and
bitching and whining as the GOP tries to crank up the machine? Yes, I do. Is that criminal?
Should it be criminal? IMO it should be but to prevent the disintegration of the Great
Republic, we must not treat it as such.
IMO Trump now realizes that he was snookered by the medical equivalent of the Holy Office.
Our Auto da Fe has been impressive and nearly fatal but not quite. Trump's statement that he
will never shut the economy down again indicates to me that the "scales have fallen" from his
eyes.
Are his attempts too little and too late? That could be. Or, maybe not.
The brawny beast that is America is gathering itself up, and looking once again at what
CAN BE, not at what is forbidden us by the Globalist nitwits who would destroy us and make us
into building blocks for their utopia. pl
What I don't understand is how prolonging the lockdown of reliably blue states like my own
WA furthers the Democrat election strategy -- assuming it is what you suggest.
It seems to me that when people in those states feel the totalitarian pinch on their own
livelihood, they might be more inclined to vote against the party that's doing it to them,
tipping the state into the purple or even red column.
Same goes for the battleground states. Seems like a surefire way to throw the election,
not win it.
Can someone explain how this is supposed to work?!?
One thing to note are all the diffusion indexes will show large upticks, because of the
base effects. U6 will likely be more stubborn.
The best comparisons will be unit volumes relative to prior to lockdown. For example,
number of flights or gas consumption prior to and after lockdown ends.
One indicator that I track is used car prices. It is starting a nice uptick particularly
for full size trucks. With all the incentives and financing options I would bet we'll see
growth in even new truck volumes .
On the flip side, IMO, the increased debt and the trillions that the Fed printed up for
Wall St will constrain growth in the medium term.
With respect, I don't agree with your view of what has happened from an economic and
medical sense although I agree with your view of the political machinations of the
democrats.
I said when all this started that the economy would bounce back quickly. I still believe
it will. I also believe that the lockdown was necessary, but now it is thought possible to
open up because the medical system and logistics have now caught up with the pandemic. The
lockdowns bought us time.
Fauci, Birx and Co. were talking of easing up three weeks ago at one of President Trumps
press conferences, I watched most of them live. I don't see the medicos as malevolent
globalists or anything other than public health officials doing their jobs under great
pressure and public scrutiny. I don't think they have drunk any of the numerous glasses of
kool aid that were proffered. They appear to me to have stuck stubbornly to the science.
We too are easing lockdown rules - allegedly in "a controlled and measured manner" but
that is actually BS. Everyone is sick of being cooped up and can't wait. We too have one
State leader - a leftist "democrat" that is dragging their feet in Queensland for political
reasons, our equivalent of Florida. Their borders are currently closed - when they reopen
there will be an absolute avalanche of tourists heading North, us included, to get some warm
weather, that will provide a huge economic spike.
Problem is things were frothy before covid, financial markets were well overextended, the
deficit was out of control, oil won't come back anytime soon. In many ways Trump is a lucky
general, gets to blame the slowdown on the virus and any faltering in the recovery on Dem
governors.
Here is a link to a poll that suggests the globalists have screwed up again (see bottom 1/3
of the link). A large % of Americans polled say they will now avoid products made in China
and would be willing to pay more for the same product if it's made in the USA. They also
think that trade restrictions and tariffs are a good idea. Basically, they like the Trumpian
model. China Joe and his boy Hunter are going to be perceived as being on the wrong side of
this issue by Trump.
you are right. We do not agree. IMO the country wide shutdown was never necessary. What
was needed was a strategy of protection for the vulnerable. The rest could have taken care of
themselves with anti-flu like treatment while therapies and vaccines were developed.
The Democrats deserve it and BTW I don't agree with any of the negatives you state with
regard to the pre-COVID state of things. You just don't like Trump. Neither do I
It is the strategy (poorly conceived) of people whose ideology blinds them to extant
reality, and who think they can mold that reality to their whims through sheer fervency of
their belief in their moral superiority to other, "lesser types." I can't think of a single
historical example where such a strategy has worked out, but there you have it. Then again,
according to them, history also fits into that concept of "malleable reality" as they see it.
They are the makers of history in their own estimation, rather than part of and subject to
it. This is why the Left has never been able to grapple with, and is often outright hostile
to, the notion of unforeseen consequences.
This past weekend our hotel parking lots were pretty full, this is normally a slow time in SW
Florida. It's likely restaurants will be allowed 100% capacity seating with bars opening this
coming Monday.
Reasonable people who want a real economy in the USA should all be voting for President
Trump. If he wins, and I think he will, we're going to have a real boom as smart EU money
moves into USA equities, particularly the NASDAQ.
" blame the slowdown on the virus "
Not gonna happen. He's going to blame the Democrats who issued all those EO declaring who was
essential and who was "seperate but equal". He'll blame China, rightfully so, for spreading
this as far and wide in the West as possible; he'll blame the academics and professional
"resistance" within and without the government for their incompetence and intransigence.
Corky,
"Seems like a surefire way to throw the election, not win it."
it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters now who counts them. Thus the statewide mailings
of ballots to maximize ballot harvesting. At the very least lots of local elections will get
stolen, probably a congressional one too, even if WA doesn't go for Trump in November.
"Both viruses remove marker molecules on the surface of an infected cell that are used by
the immune system to identify invaders, the researchers said in a non-peer reviewed paper
posted on preprint website bioRxiv.org on Sunday. They warned that this commonality could
mean Sars-CoV-2, the clinical name for the virus, could be around for some time, like
HIV...that the coronavirus was showing "some characteristics of viruses causing chronic
infection"."
It appears that an Intelligence report that's come out regarding the CCP and their virus by
French Intelligence (DGSE) isn't getting the traction it deserves.
Eleven years, , 'eleven years'BEFORE the EU signed off on the PRC/CCP Wuhan
lab construction, French DGSE warned that the PRC/CCP's lab was a construction leak and
bio-weapon making facility disaster waiting to happen.
Why was nobody listening at the time? Where were the FIVE EYES in all of this, were they
ignoring French Intelligence's warning, what? Where was the CIA in this? They're supposed to
be the 'external' watchdog, right? It was the Tenet/Goss handover time frame, 2004. But
surely the DGSE warnings had to have been 'flagged' by Langley for a closer scrutiny, right?
What was DIA's read on this at the time?
..."French diplomatic and security advisers, who argued that the Chinese reputation for
poor bio-security could lead to a catastrophic leak.
They also warned that Paris could lose control of the project, and even suggested that
Beijing could harness the technology to make biowarfare weapons."...
Another interesting cavet in the article relates to P4 labs everywhere (including U.S.
facilities)..... "A source told the newspaper: 'What you have to understand is that a P4
[high-level bio-security] laboratory is like a nuclear reprocessing plant. It's a
bacteriological atomic bomb."
An interesting development yesterday: Twitter have flagged a couple of Trump's tweets on
mail-in ballots as "Misleading". A link at the bottom of each tweet says "Get the facts about
mail-in ballots" and directs you to a piece written by Twitter on the subject quoting CNN
& WaPo as having contrary views to the President - hardly news in itself.
Are we seeing the beginning of another insurance policy, in case the economy recovers? It
appears to put Trump in a bind, as shutting down or sanctioning Twitter as a whole would not
only deny Trump his (until yesterday) unfiltered comms channel to his base, but also invite
cries of censorship by the MSM. If he does nothing, what is to stop Twitter 'correcting' more
of this messages? In a later tweet Trump directly
accused Twitter of "..interfering in the 2020 Presidential Election". It will be very
interesting to see how this develops. Here is the first of the offending tweets:
@Barbara
If Israel, Mexico, Great Britain, China, Ukraine, Canada, et.al can interfere in American
elections, and the USA can interfere in the elections of any nation it wishes, why should the
Masters and Commanders of the internet be forbidden the same hobby?
Have you never watched Network? https://americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechnetwork4.html
Same as it ever was.
"... So let's accept reality: median voters aren't driving outcomes anywhere. Bailouts for big business were not popular after 2008 and they are not now, either, especially when ordinary people languish unprotected. Governments and central banks may glance at polls, but they aren't doing what they are doing because of voter sentiment. ..."
"... Let's repeat: What needs to be moved onto the public balance sheet are the costs associated with safely redesigning work. I doubt that most businesses, especially smaller businesses, want to expose their workforces or their customers to serious risk. ..."
"... But if firms are not assisted with the costs of redesigning production for the safety of both, they will cut corners, dig in, and fight many salutary changes. ..."
"... Such aid, obviously, must be monitored closely, which would be easy to do by involving the workforce and looking at real outcomes. Blanket immunity is not a sensible option; whistleblowing laws badly need beefing up in enterprises of all types. ..."
"... The eurozone economy will shrink by 8 to 12 per cent this year, as the "sudden stop of activity" triggers a recession twice as deep as after the 2008 financial crisis, European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde has warned. ..."
"... With the American health care system you would be crazy to risk getting very sick (death might be better :( ) if you understand your health insurance coverage. ..."
"... Infection rates aren't the same everywhere, and the rates of re-opening shouldn't be the same everywhere. In NYC there is still substantial infection, and restrictions should remain. But in my community? I'm not certain that the strict lockdowns were ever warranted. Tens of thousands of people were forced into unemployment, and we've had a handful of deaths in one nursing home. Instead of permitting only the essential, we need to be prohibiting only the clearly dangerous, and using masks for the intermediate situations. Well, at least in my area. ..."
"... Well it's representative of something as the elementary schools reopened 3 weeks ago and retail mostly reopened with mask restrictions. Restaurants are open for takeout and outdoor seating. All to general approval with lines at many establishments. And small gatherings of ten people or less permitted. ..."
"... But are polls and "actual local sentiment" the appropriate parameters to use for making policy decisions, or should we try to quantify actual health risk and use that instead? Most people's ability to evaluate risk is quite poor, and they routinely overestimate the risks of highly visible or publicized dangers while underestimating risks elsewhere. [In my lightly affected area, an office worker is more likely to be killed in an automobile accident on the way to work than by a COVID-19 infection acquired there.] ..."
"... And at some point, we need to let the ~40 million people who lost jobs get back to work. When will that be? Should we wait until COVID-19 is completely stamped out and nobody is scared of it anymore? [That could be years from now, especially if vaccine development efforts go poorly.] If not that, then what metric should be used to determine when re-openings can occur? ..."
"... Paging Slavoj Zizek. The ideological coup de grace administered here where the talking heads managed to blame the quarantine for the virus' damage has been the greatest slight of hand trick in quite some time. ..."
"... Look, you need to realize that there has been no destruction of productive real capital whatsoever. Everything is still standing as it was three months ago. Factories, schools, homes, everything. The crops are (knock on wood) not failing yet either, except for that locust infestation in Eastern Africa and the Middle East that is going on right now. ..."
"... There is absolutely no rational reason why we should not be able to "pause" non-essential activities for however long is necessary to get rid of the virus, then go back to normal life. ..."
"... Things will take a turn for the better only after finance, big corporations and big business admit to their hysteria. They are in pretend mode now. Save face; get some bailout money. Trust us, we can bring the world out of this catastrophe. Because? We are The Free Market, the profit takers; what else is there? If it weren't all so tragic it would be fun watching them crash and burn. In the end they'll probably be as nasty and vindictive about their own self-imposed destruction as Dick Fuld was. Not with a bang; not with a whimper – just with a lot of recrimination and hatred. What else is new? ..."
"... Tom Ferguson made some great points on the social forces, such as how there is no OSHA, no whistleblower process, and no investment by government to help redesign production methods. We were already living in a new gilded age and now it's most likely to get worse. It will happen over 1-7 years, but the social forces look mostly negative. ..."
"... "Get 'em back on the hampster wheel before they start thinking of something better." ..."
It's worth your time because Ferguson looks at the official responses to the Covid-19 crisis
and explains things that might seem nonsensical, above all, why so many governments are
"reopening" even though polls pretty much everywhere say citizens want restrictions in place
longer. Ferguson cuts into the problem by focusing on worker safety as the real dividing
line.
The short version is "follow the money," as in big businesses think ending lockdowns will
help commerce, when as we know, that's not proving to be the case. Core observations (at 16:19
and 17:22):
So let's accept reality:
median voters aren't driving
outcomes anywhere. Bailouts for big
business were not popular after
2008 and they are not now, either,
especially when ordinary people
languish unprotected. Governments
and central banks may glance at
polls, but they aren't doing what
they are doing because of voter
sentiment.
So go back to first principles:
Investment approach to party competition - only appeals that
can be financed can make it in the public policy arena, no
matter how many people might benefit in general (Ferguson,
1995).
Where labor interests are weak or disorganized, power thus
passes by default to blocs of major investor groups. They
drives party competition, sometimes with labor groups in
alliance. The blocs can be empirically analyzed in
multidimensional policy space. Political money is the royal
road to understanding, but the full "spectrum of political
money" is rarely ascertainable. Some countries do have
reasonable data about campaign contributions, but many
don't, including many advanced countries - think Germany or
Italy. Most social scientists would rather study anything except
this subject. Aside: Event analysis often works fine as an
approach, e.g., Ferguson and Voth, Quarterly J. of Economics
2008).
That reinforces neoliberalism. Despite the uses of war metaphors, where combatants would set
up huge new bureaucracies to mobilize resources and people, governments are making
interventions in the Covid-19 crisis though existing firms. But one war analogy that is more
apt is that truth is always the first casualty. Ferguson comments on the terrible and
inconsistent statistics about infection levels and deaths, which are due not just from the
failure to run enough tests but as many suspected, also from the far from accidental failure to
do the best job of counting, particularly of nursing home deaths. One reason Belgium has had
such bad-looking results is that it's been an exception, with officials making considerable
efforts to keep accurate tallies.
The split on protecting workers versus businesses is largely but not entirely on class
lines, with private equity playing an outsized role in pushing for an end to lockdowns.
Ferguson notes that unions representing construction workers have been quietly pushing to end
lockdowns, while white collar workers who are not in a much different position than meatpackers
and retail store employees (in terms of working in close, high risk conditions) like health
care professional and educators, have been acting in a somewhat radicalized manner (nurses and
doctors speaking out; nurses engaging in walkouts; teachers threatening a strike in New York
City, which led to school closures). This parallels the at least 200 strikes chronicled by Mike
Elk at PayDay Report.
Notice this pushback it taking place despite safety needs operating against protests;
Ferguson drily commented on the shrinking of the public space.
Ferguson does think there's a sensible solution, although he recognizes it's not likely to
get done despite the relatively modest cost:
Let's repeat:
What needs to be moved onto the public balance
sheet are the costs associated with safely
redesigning work. I doubt that most businesses,
especially smaller businesses, want to expose their
workforces or their customers to serious risk.
But if
firms are not assisted with the costs of redesigning
production for the safety of both, they will cut
corners, dig in, and fight many salutary changes.
Such aid, obviously, must be monitored closely,
which would be easy to do by involving the
workforce and looking at real outcomes. Blanket
immunity is not a sensible option; whistleblowing
laws badly need beefing up in enterprises of all
types.
Ferguson also commented that the appearance that things were kinda-sorta stabilizing at a
bad new normal (if you consider 25% unemployment, properly measured, a spike in childhood
hunger, many unable to pay rents or mortgages and deferrals not long term solution) was
deceptive. In the 2008 crisis, where the damage was more localized, even with large sectors
impaired (residential real estate in certain countries; the banking system via housing-related
derivative bets), there was lots of G-7 and G-20 communication and a good bit of cooperation.
Trump's America First policy has put the kibosh on that. Ferguson is particularly concerned
about the parlous state of the EU/Eurozone. He sees a not-trivial risk of national politics
taking the fore, above all in Germany, leading to actions that could produce another Credit
Anstalt (with the most likely blowup taking place in the Italian banking sector).
As he concludes:
The atmosphere between the great powers often
more resembles the eve of the (failed) London
Conference of 1933 than what happened a decade
ago.
International economic coordination is just not
happening and as in the 1930s, emerging market
debt problems look overwhelming.
And I am too polite to note the possibility that
German domestic politics might yet produce a
disaster in the Eurozone that uncomfortably
resembles the 1931 breakdown, though the
domestic political constellation is not at all
comparable.
Let's hope somebody develops a vaccine.
There's a lot more meat in the talk and the Q&A, so I hope you can find the time to
listen to it.
Sadly, the CEO of Merck confirmed what ought to have been obvious (as your humble blogger
and Lambert have repeatedly pointed out in asides in posts and comments): a vaccine in even 18
months would be heroic. The comments from Merck are even more of a dampener by virtue of Merck
being a big vaccine player. From the Financial Times
today :
Merck chief executive Ken Frazier has cast doubt on the 12 to 18-month timeframe to
develop an effective coronavirus vaccine, describing the widely mooted schedule as "very
aggressive".
"It is not something I would put out there that I would want to hold Merck to," the US
pharmaceutical group's chief told the Financial Times, adding that vaccines should be tested
in "very large" clinical trials that take several months if not years to complete.
"You want to make sure that when you put a vaccine into millions if not billions of
people, it is safe," he said .
"Our experience suggests those are very aggressive compared to other timelines for getting
a safe and effective vaccine," Mr Frazier said when asked whether he thought the oft-repeated
goal was realistic.
And Christine Lagarde confirmed that the Eurozone had taken a worse hit than in the
financial crisis. Again from the pink paper
:
The eurozone economy will shrink by 8 to 12 per cent this year, as the "sudden stop of
activity" triggers a recession twice as deep as after the 2008 financial crisis, European
Central Bank president Christine Lagarde has warned.
Ms Lagarde painted a gloomy picture of how the eurozone will emerge from the coronavirus
pandemic as she told students on a live webinar that they faced "a massive economic crisis
and one that was literally unheard of in peacetime for the damage it is causing".
The ECB president, who will next week announce its latest monetary policy decision, said
the "mild scenario" it outlined this month for a 5 per cent contraction in the eurozone
economy this year was "in my humble view already outdated".
She said the eurozone economy was "very likely" to end up "somewhere in between the medium
and the severe scenario", meaning the economy would contract by 8 per cent or 12 per cent.
Adding that the bloc's economy shrank 4 to 5 per cent after the financial crisis over a
decade ago, she said "here we are talking about probably double that".
As Ferguson said, "If you want a happy ending, watch a Disney movie."
I don't agree that people are reluctant about reopening. Almost everyone I talk to who is
working and not retired in my rural area is all-in for reopening. Sure if you are an urban
person with uninterrupted income working from home your calculation may be different –
but for those who make their living working with their bodies, (I guess that's a pretty good
dividing line between working class and bourgeois), the shutdown has been a disaster and they
are getting very impatient with it. And the heavy-handed enforcement.
I know some more working class people that are leery (they cancelled camping with us)
– they know if they get sick it'll be possibly house losing expensive.
And they lost their house in the Great Recession too. This would be in exoburb Madison,
WI.
With the American health care system you would be crazy to risk getting very sick (death
might be better :( ) if you understand your health insurance coverage.
@furies: YMMV indeed. People in my semi-rural area are also pushing to open back up. Of
course, this probably has something to do with the fact that our infection rates are well
below the national average. [And less than 2% of NYC's rates.] Heck, things are so quiet here
that our hospitals ended up laying off staff, having postponed elective procedures and
screening exams in preparation for a COVID-19 wave that never came.
Infection rates aren't the same everywhere, and the rates of re-opening shouldn't be the
same everywhere. In NYC there is still substantial infection, and restrictions should remain.
But in my community? I'm not certain that the strict lockdowns were ever warranted.
Tens of thousands of people were forced into unemployment, and we've had a handful of deaths
in one nursing home. Instead of permitting only the essential, we need to be prohibiting only
the clearly dangerous, and using masks for the intermediate situations. Well, at least in my
area.
I suggest you look at Alabama and think twice. Our infection rates are spiking up and it
hasn't even been two weeks since restrictions were removed (save schools and colleges not
being in session).
Moreover, the urban/non-urban distinction looks spurious. Seoul, which has a big public
transportation network and is larger than NYC, has had all of two Covid-19 deaths versus over
20,000 for NYC. Hong Kong, another high density city, got the virus under control despite a
bad start. By contrast, low density, low controls Sweden moved into having the highest per
capita death rate in the world in the last week.
Well it's representative of something as the elementary schools reopened 3 weeks ago and
retail mostly reopened with mask restrictions. Restaurants are open for takeout and outdoor
seating. All to general approval with lines at many establishments. And small gatherings of
ten people or less permitted.
I'm not a pollster and I generally take them as relatively inaccurate but I get out a lot
and life goes on.
I suggest you read the post. It appears you didn't.
1. Your local restrictions are still very severe (except for the opening of schools)
compared to plenty of places. In most of the South, everything is open except schools, no
mask requirements, no limits on gathering size. Some places here for instance, like some gyms
and a very few churches, have voluntarily delayed opening to June 1 to get social distancing
procedures in place, and I stress those are self-imposed.
2. More important, you don't have any evidence of actual local sentiment. Your perspective
appears to reflect consumer, and not worker, sentiment.
Businesses are behind the anti-lockdown pressure and media reporting will reflect
government and business messaging. Have you spoken to any health care workers? Retail store
employees who are in a position to speak candidly?
Many are still staying home out of fear of coronavirus, so they see the lockdown lifting
as premature:
But are polls and "actual local sentiment" the appropriate parameters to use for making
policy decisions, or should we try to quantify actual health risk and use that
instead? Most people's ability to evaluate risk is quite poor, and they routinely
overestimate the risks of highly visible or publicized dangers while underestimating risks
elsewhere. [In my lightly affected area, an office worker is more likely to be killed in an
automobile accident on the way to work than by a COVID-19 infection acquired there.]
And at some point, we need to let the ~40 million people who lost jobs get back to work.
When will that be? Should we wait until COVID-19 is completely stamped out and nobody is
scared of it anymore? [That could be years from now, especially if vaccine development
efforts go poorly.] If not that, then what metric should be used to determine when
re-openings can occur?
With all due respect, you didn't answer my question. What metric should be used to
determine when re-openings can occur? If now is too early, then when?
And you misread me. I'm not cavalier about COVID-19. I'm well aware of how severe it is.
But I'm also alarmed by the job losses. We've literally thrown 20% of the workforce out of
work. Now I agree that some of those jobs were doomed anyway (like in the travel and tourism
industries), but I personally know nearly a dozen people who were ordered out of work who
could have kept working safely by wearing masks, cleaning shared contact surfaces, and
taking a few other precautions.
And your previous comments about Hong Kong are interesting. Authorities there imposed
restrictions that suppressed the virus even with their high population density, but they did
it without the tremendous job losses . I'm having a hard time finding firm statistics,
but it appears that fewer than 5% of HK workers lost their jobs. What did they do differently
so that people could keep working?
And regarding officials not wearing masks on TV? I totally agree with you. We desperately
need to be wearing more masks in the US. I'd just like to see more people be able to do so
from work. Especially for those who can't work from their computers at home.
Paging Slavoj Zizek. The ideological coup de grace administered here where the talking
heads managed to blame the quarantine for the virus' damage has been the greatest slight of
hand trick in quite some time.
Thank you for continuing to hammer home this point, Yves. I feel like I'm having this
conversation with almost everyone I know.
Look, you need to realize that there has been no destruction of productive real capital
whatsoever. Everything is still standing as it was three months ago. Factories, schools,
homes, everything. The crops are (knock on wood) not failing yet either, except for that
locust infestation in Eastern Africa and the Middle East that is going on right now.
There is absolutely no rational reason why we should not be able to "pause" non-essential
activities for however long is necessary to get rid of the virus, then go back to normal
life.
Not just that, but not doing so ensures there will be no return to normal, because until
an effective vaccine that can be produced and distributed in billions of doses becomes
available, there will be no return to "normal", whether shelter-in-place orders are in effect
or not.
From which it directly follows that the real problem right now is that we have a totally
dysfunctional socioeconomic system that is not fit to serve the needs of society and has to
go.
Yet who is your anger directed towards?
Looks like it is not the people who designed this system to serve own interest and who are
now clearly planning on sacrificing many millions of lives over the coming 2-3 years in order
to not have to change it. And on doing so while tricking much of the rest of the population
that this is being done for the common good
Me and most of my people are planning to stay locked down and let the yahoos get out and
test that herd immunity thing first. (No surprise that we are mostly able to work from
home.)
I'd be totally cool with it if it were 100% optional. Let the people have the freedom to
infect themselves if they want! But it's not optional if you have to risk exposure to feed
your family.
Our big concern had been one relative who works as a prison guard at Rikers. Luckily, she
broke her foot and has been on leave.
Still, my 19-year-old is dying (!!) to go back to college in Santa Cruz in the fall. I'm
worried about that second wave.
Here in Suffolk county Long Island (where those protesters were yelling at the TV newsguy the
other day), traffic has been ticking upward since last week.
Looks to be a meaty preso. I will dig into it later.
Unfortunately the freedom to "infect themselves" also increases the likelihood that they
will extend the time and extent of the pandemic.
In Orange County, CA where the beaches are crowded with lots of congregating younger
people, the number of infections is 3X's higher in the 18-24 Y.O. cohort than in the over 60
cohort. Not until more younger folks get hospitalized (and monetarily burdened) will the
concern for spreading the virus improve. Or when they take the virus home and their
parents/grandparents succumb.
Ferguson points out that he's heard (and he has impeccable contacts at that level) that
some central bankers and other government officials discussed how Covid-19 could helpfully
reduce pension obligations. So some parties are explicit about wanting to shorten the
lifespans of their citizens.
I like seeing the words "resources" and "management" together. Which reminds me -- has there ever been a starker illustration of the fundamental insanity
of our system than the COVID disruption?
So for a brief moment of two to three months we are forced to not waste our limited
nonrenewable resources on pointless activities with no long-term benefit to humanity such as
jetting around the globe for business meetings whose main goal is figuring out how to destroy
everything even faster and on vacations to exotic destinations. And what is the reaction?
Everything is falling apart
One would think that not having to waste our precious geological inheritance that will not
be regenerated for another 100-200 million years would be a reason to celebrate. But no,
instead the system is crashing and everyone is up in arms about why we are not burning our
proverbial furniture as fast as we can
An organized and thorough response from our federal government was necessary for the
country to see itself as one. The effort was negligent, disorganized and reflected the
management of a real estate swindler. Deficit spending, on behalf of the forty percent of the
country with little or no savings, should have been the priority and would be the priority of
a right thinking administration. About four one thousandths of the country has become
infected. What happens when an event occurs that affects eight one thousandths of our
citizens?
An organized and thorough response from our federal government was necessary for the
country to see itself as one. The effort was negligent, disorganized and reflected the
management
A+1–in that first statement– for seeing where step one was so misplaced -- imo
also
Kudlow talking about a "back to work bonus". How about a hotline into the TBTF tip sheet
boiler room to front-run then dump the next miracle vaccine Scam-Co fraud to be touted on
CNBC the next day? SEC will look the other way on their p-rn monitors, as usual.
I'm one of the yahoos out every day, which includes a 90 minute hilly trail run through
the woods at a few public "undisclosed locations". Hint: the governor of this state is in no
condition to chase me even if I was carrying a 200 pound backpack. Admittedly I'm pretty good
in the 60+ year old age group.
Up here in southwestern New York state, the insanely popular ice cream stand, famous in
our small village as being the local gathering place from Memorial Day weekend though Labor
Day, frequented by ice cream lovers wearing red MAGA caps .. remains closed. You can get your
ice cream cone fix at the tiny general store around the corner, but my local information
source reports that the ice cream scoopers are unmasked and ungloved, so older people are
staying away. We are currently sticking with the half gallon in the freezer and scooping our
own.
A Massachusetts ice cream shop temporarily closed and one of its employees quit after
the owner says his staff faced an onslaught of harassment when reopening for the first time
over the weekend after being shuttered amid the coronavirus pandemic.
..The TV station reported that Lawrence had asked customers to place orders an hour before
pickup, but on the first day back, his limited staff faced harsh comments and vulgarity
from angry customers who demanded ice cream.
"One of my best workers quit yesterday at the end of her shift, she stuck it through her
shift," Lawrence told Boston 25 News. "But the words she was called and the language, you
wouldn't even say in a men's locker room. And to say it to a 17-year-old kid, they should
be ashamed of themselves."
Because they stuck to ordering over the phone only, and taking the orders out to the
customers, they lost their composure. I can't and won't understand this outlook that a
business has to cater to me, right now, or I will harass you.
Regarding the vaccine: IMO, the big shortcut will be 3rd phase of clinical assays which
would need at least 60.000 subjects and a long lasting survey on efficacy. IMO we might run,
almost directly, for massive vaccinations without knowing the real efficacy and with more or
less good indications on safety. There are, here and there, subtle indications this could be
the way to accelerate this. Big pharma won't probably be big players in this game as they
will guard their backs against any potential problem.
Anectotally, in Madrid, with a neolib regional government, all communications,
applications, forms have been diverted to private autentication firms through a fee ignoring
the already existing official and free autentication methods. And it is not that easy to
notice this is the only way to do it. If someone is doing, for instance an application for
the recognition of dependent relatives, which requires certain amount of documentation, a new
bussines is contracting an agent that will do the bureocracy for you, and of course, eat on
the corresponding economic support for the dependent or those caring them. This is their way
to try to reduce the effectiveness of such programs: interposing middlemen here and
there.
And yeah, counting, 27.500 deaths so far when excess mortality has been about 43.000.
Neoliberals don't give a . on nursing homes even when they are running the businesses. In the
late years private equity has been investing heavily on nursing homes cos a growing industry
ya know? Let's not start with their business model because it is nauseating.
Chinese vaccine trials, with so supposedly low disease incidence, will have to move their
phase III to, let's say, Africa unless they do these at home with many millions individuals
in each trial. For instance the whole Hubei province should be a trial.
Things will take a turn for the better only after finance, big corporations and big
business admit to their hysteria. They are in pretend mode now. Save face; get some bailout
money. Trust us, we can bring the world out of this catastrophe. Because? We are The Free
Market, the profit takers; what else is there? If it weren't all so tragic it would be fun
watching them crash and burn. In the end they'll probably be as nasty and vindictive about
their own self-imposed destruction as Dick Fuld was. Not with a bang; not with a whimper
– just with a lot of recrimination and hatred. What else is new?
Tom Ferguson made some great points on the social forces, such as how there is no OSHA, no
whistleblower process, and no investment by government to help redesign production methods.
We were already living in a new gilded age and now it's most likely to get worse. It will
happen over 1-7 years, but the social forces look mostly negative.
I frequently think that the push to "open up" now is really a push to prevent people from
thinking about transformational politics and systems. Get 'em back on the hampster wheel
before they start thinking of something better.
Yes. And why is limited testing not a purposeful way to avoid responsibility for a better
documented catastrophe? Ya wanna look like Belgium? If you don't gather the data, they can't
hurt you, says the machine. It's all swept up as fog of war. A well-established practice,
which I seldom see considered by analysts.
Some things will be fixed, but some industries will be permanently affected. the amount of
long term damage is unclear. Unemployment probably will be higher as many jobs will simply be
eliminated and robots take place of regular workers.
Re-opening a fragile, brittle, bankrupt, hopelessly perverse and corrupt "normal" won't fix
what's broken.
The stock market is in a frenzy of euphoria at the re-opening of the economy. Too bad the
re-opening won't fix what's broken. As I've been noting recently, the real problem is the
systemic fragility of the U.S. economy, which has lurched from one new extreme to the next to
maintain a thin, brittle veneer of normalcy.
Fragile economies cannot survive any impact with reality that disrupts the distortions that
are keeping the illusion of "growth" from shattering. For the past two decades, every collision
with reality cracked the illusion, and the "fix" was to duct-tape the pieces together with new
extremes of money-creation, debt, risk and speculative excess.
While the stock market has soared, the real world falls apart. If your region needs a new
bridge built, count on about 20 years to get all the "stakeholders" to agree and get the thing
actually built. Count on the cost quintupling from $500 million to $2.5 billion. Count on
corners being cut as costs skyrocket, so those cheap steel bolts from China that are already
rusting before the bridge is even finished? Oops. Replacing them will add millions to the
already bloated budget.
Want to add a passenger stop on an existing railroad line? Count on 20 years to get it done.
The complexity thicket of every regulatory agency with the power to say "no" basically
guarantees the project will never get approved, because every one of these bureaucracies
justifies its existence by saying "no." Sorry, you need another study, another environmental
review, and so on.
Need a new landfill? I hope you started the process 15 years ago, so you'll get approval in
only five more years. Every agency with the power to say "no" will stretch out the approval, so
they have guaranteed "work" for another decade or two.
Did your subway fares double? Was the excuse repairing a crumbling system? Did the work get
done on budget and on time? You must be joking, right? All the fare increase did was cover the
costs of skyrocketing salaries, pensions and administrative costs. Repairs to the tracks and
cars-- that's extra. Let's float a $1 billion bond so nobody have to tighten their belts, and
have riders pay for it indirectly, through higher taxes to pay the exorbitant costs of 20 years
of interest on the bond.
Have you been thrown off your bicycle by the giant potholes in the city's "bike lanes"? The
city reluctantly admits that these streets that haven't been maintained for decades--yes,
decades. The city once paid for street maintenance out of its general budget, but alas, that's
been eaten up by skyrocketing salaries, pensions and administrative costs, so now we need to
float $100 million bond to fund filling potholes. If all goes according to plan (ha-ha), we
should be able to re-pave the streets that have been crumbling for 20 years in... the next 20
years.
These real-world examples are just four of thousands of manifestations of a broken system.
Rather than make tough choices that drain power and wealth from vested interests, we simply
borrow more money, in ever increasing amounts, to keep the entrenched interests and elites
happy.
There are two "solutions" in the status quo: dump the debt on taxpayers or on powerless
debt-serfs--for example, college students. (See chart below of the $1.6 trillion that's
stripmining student debt-serfs.)
Who benefits from selling all the municipal bonds, bundled student loans, etc. to investors
starving for a yield above 0.1%? Wall Street, of course.
The problem is that while debt has soared, productivity and earned income have stagnated.
The statistical narrative has been ruthlessly gamed to hide the erosion of living standards,
but even with the bogus "low inflation" of official statistics, wages for the bottom 95% have
stagnated for decades.
Measures of productivity have also been gamed to mask the ugly reality that the vast
majority of the U.S. economy is stagnating under the weight of interest payments on debt,
mal-investments in speculative gambles, higher junk fees and taxes, crushing regulatory
compliance, high costs imposed by monopolies and cartels and a well-cloaked decline in the
quality of just about everything the bottom 95% uses or owns.
What little productivity gains have been made have been skimmed by the top 5%. Coupled with
the Federal Reserve's single-minded goosing of the one signaling device it controls, the stock
market, the top 0.1% in America own more wealth than the bottom 80%.
If productivity stagnates and winners take all , the wages of the bottom 95% cannot rise.
Real wealth is only created by increases in the productivity of labor and capital; everything
else is phantom wealth.
The only way stagnant incomes can support more debt is if interest rates decline. Presto,
the Fed dropped interest rates to near-zero a decade ago. Of course you and I can't actually
borrow millions for 0.1%; that privilege is reserved for financiers and other financial
parasites and predators.
Debt-serfs were able to refinance their crushing mortgages to save a few bucks, and so they
can afford to 1) take on more debt and 2) pay higher taxes to fund the ballooning public
debt.
Every one of these extremes has increased the systemic fragility of the American economy.
This fragility is reflected in the impoverishment of the bottom 95%, the thin line between
solvency and bankruptcy, the decay of public trust in institutions run for the benefit of
entrenched interests, and the quickening erosion of America's social contract.
Re-opening a fragile, brittle, bankrupt, hopelessly perverse and corrupt "normal" won't fix
what's broken.
The top nine nations with the most coronavirus cases were members of the Western Empire
(former democracies weakened by corporations and oligarchs to promote global trade) or the
Elite reaching an understanding with Authoritarians. "Profit over lives" was the result.
Endless wars, offshoring, corruption, exploitation and despair led to the decreased life
expectancy in the USA and England.
The novel coronavirus pandemic is the direct result of these dysfunctional governments.
Corporations see the epidemic as a profit center for their magical treatment or vaccine.
There is no US national public health system. US hospitals and nursing homes primary purpose
is to make money for stockholders and mangers. It is of no matter that nearly 100,000
Americans have died so far with many more to come. No great wealth will be spent to fight the
pandemic nationally in the USA using the proven public health practices of universal testing,
contact tracing and isolation of the ill.
This is now a bipolar world. The USA and UK are pariah nations quarantined from the
nations that have controlled the virus. The Western Empire has fallen.
The Democrats are just as responsible for the mess as the Republicans. I have yet to
receive my mail-in ballot for the postponed June 2nd Maryland primary. Besides being
incarcerated at home, it looks like I am also disenfranchised. Yet, I am very lucky, once
again, but for how long?
Either a democratic constitutional government retakes control of the USA or a second civil
war between the credentialed and the left-behind is inevitable. The aristocracy always loses
but with wholesale chaos, major loss of life and redistribution of wealth.
This is an extraordinary dangerous time for Homo sapiens due the Pandemic and the
resulting Greatest Depression leading to unrest, scapegoating and confrontation which could
result in the use of nuclear weapons. Plus, climate change looms ahead. How can this possibly
be addressed if the developed world is unable to control a once in a century pandemic; let
alone, evolve a sustainable civilization that can survive on a finite planet.
Bevin @13 you seem to have somehow mixed up the future with the present, what you describe is
not what the UK is today.
Given the unprecedented outflow of Government funds due to Covid-19 support of society
something is going to have to happen to fund it, either borrowing in the markets or taxing it
back or letting hyperinflation rip. This would apply regardless of who was in power.
Not only is money being spent but tax revenues are being crushed. All of them. At the
national level Income Tax, Corporation Tax, VAT, Business Rates and local level Council Tax
plus any others I omit, are cratering. Something will have to give.
Unless Governments perform some kind of miracle and get economic activities back up very
quickly what you describe will be coming to a country near you, including the UK. We are
heading into the abyss and few understand that the life we have enjoyed was by running up
debt on our national credit cards and is in the rear view mirror, the future could be very
bleak. Your description of the UK might prove to have been too optimistic.
The Party in power is probably immaterial, but perhaps you could suggest an alternative to
"privatising and slashing benefits" as you put it?
I can't see any alternative to selling what assets they can (not much left now to
sell)(not many buyers either in the new debt maxed out World), cutting Government operating
costs (forget High Speed Rail and Trident replacement), reducing by capping all benefits
including all Government funded pensions, Civil Service, military etc as well as the State
Pension.
Using the fiat system to print money in order to keep some liquidity in a depressed market
will not - can not, in fact be inflationary much less the inanely hyperbolic 'hyper'
inflationary. The only danger is that rightist dingbats who see the revelation of free money
as they call it, may inspire a wake up in the fools who imagine that economies are actually
run on the 'balance the books' tosh.
Balance the books, the mantra that all governments, neolib, conservative and fascist have
been feeding to the population for the last half century has been a lie. The actual
government policies have been counter to that, so as to best enable their backers to steal
this nonsense 'money' as they desire.
All this 'money' that has been generated by so called 'financial service industries' is
'free' in exactly the same way and yet that isn't claimed to be inflationary, so it beggars
belief that any rational person could claim producing money in exactly the same way but 1) at
lower amounts than the city of london plus all the dodgy service industries across the UK who
make this 'money' while producing nothing up until the lockdown & 2) distributing that
direct to consumers thereby ensuring there will be no asset inflation is suddenly deemed to
be destructive. They only thing destroyed will be deceitful economists' & politicians'
already dubious credibility.
The top nine nations with the most coronavirus cases were members of the Western Empire
(former democracies weakened by corporations and oligarchs to promote global trade) or the
Elite reaching an understanding with Authoritarians. "Profit over lives" was the result.
Endless wars, offshoring, corruption, exploitation and despair led to the decreased life
expectancy in the USA and England.
The novel coronavirus pandemic is the direct result of these dysfunctional governments.
Corporations see the epidemic as a profit center for their magical treatment or vaccine.
There is no US national public health system. US hospitals and nursing homes primary purpose
is to make money for stockholders and mangers. It is of no matter that nearly 100,000
Americans have died so far with many more to come. No great wealth will be spent to fight the
pandemic nationally in the USA using the proven public health practices of universal testing,
contact tracing and isolation of the ill.
This is now a bipolar world. The USA and UK are pariah nations quarantined from the
nations that have controlled the virus. The Western Empire has fallen.
The Democrats are just as responsible for the mess as the Republicans. I have yet to
receive my mail-in ballot for the postponed June 2nd Maryland primary. Besides being
incarcerated at home, it looks like I am also disenfranchised. Yet, I am very lucky, once
again, but for how long?
Either a democratic constitutional government retakes control of the USA or a second civil
war between the credentialed and the left-behind is inevitable. The aristocracy always loses
but with wholesale chaos, major loss of life and redistribution of wealth.
This is an extraordinary dangerous time for Homo sapiens due the Pandemic and the
resulting Greatest Depression leading to unrest, scapegoating and confrontation which could
result in the use of nuclear weapons. Plus, climate change looms ahead. How can this possibly
be addressed if the developed world is unable to control a once in a century pandemic; let
alone, evolve a sustainable civilization that can survive on a finite planet.
This article underlines the point that I have tried to make that we have moved beyond the
neo-liberal stage. All that remains is for politicians and their owner/trainers to face up to
reality- if they don't make changes, the people will.
Already the crisis is well beyond the ability of either the UK or the US governments to
manage it- the measures needed involve a total repudiation of the policies of the past half
century. The reforms necessary begin with the kind of minimal socialist programme put forward
by Corbyn in the last two elections, but they will have to go much further. In the UK House
of Commons there are perhaps a dozen members who can see this. The political system is like a
beached whale, floundering around as it dies-only a lot less majestic.
It needs to be added, with special reference to those who venerate the EU, that the EU is
at least as vulnerable to the problems that its inbuilt bias towards neo-liberalism will
cause it as the system disintegrates.
Keynes gave the capitalist ruling class tools to extend its existence, the neo-liberals,
contemptuously dismissed them as cowardly compromises- "Real Men bust Unions" is the
neo-liberal motto. Now the reckoning is coming and Keynes is suddenly looking very clever.
And modern.
At the end of his essay today ,
Alastair Crooke asks a series of questions that many of us have already pondered and mostly
written about:
"Have governments given any thought to the implication of the financial crisis spreading
to the middle classes, for whom often their only cushion in life is the inflated value of the
house in which they live, but whose price may collapse? And if not, do they imagine that
their citizens will acquiesce to losing their homes because of Coronavirus? And that the
middle classes will still side with the élites?
"So much hangs on the evolutionary course of the virus. But judging this wrongly, risks
much. People will not so readily handover their homes and cars to the banks this time, as in
they did the wake of great financial crisis of 2008. Why would they? It was not their fault
[It wasn't their fault in 2008 either; it was massive Fraud that was never prosecuted and I'm
getting rather tired of that fact not being aired]. Convulsions ahead? The decay of an era,
and the inevitability of social and political mutation?"
IMO, within the Outlaw US Empire, the issue of state solvency will become paramount thanks
to the massive unanticipated shortfalls in revenue, an issue Hudson talks about in the video
I linked above. IMO, that issue has the power to cleave the states from the Union given the
Union's complete lack of interest in the wellbeing of citizens. It's very much like an
abusive marriage--When does the repeatedly beaten wife finally leave home or attempt to kill
her spouse? Aside from the very meager benefits from Social Security and Medicare, what ties
serve to promote loyalty to Washington, DC over your individual state? If the Union isn't
going to work for the goals articulated in the Constitution's Preamble, then why support it
any longer?
"... EU money intended for underfunded public-benefit research such as preparing for a pandemic has been diverted by the pharmaceutical industry into areas where it can make more money, according to a scathing new report. ..."
"... The target of the criticism is the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), a public-private partnership that was equally funded, between 2008 and 2020, by the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) lobbying group and the European Commission to the tune of 5.3 billion euros (US$5.8 billion). The money is supposed to go to areas of "unmet medical or social need," ..."
"... "We were outraged to find evidence that the pharmaceutical industry lobby EFPIA not only did not consider funding biopreparedness (ie, being ready for epidemics such as the one caused by the new coronavirus, COVID-19) but opposed it being included in IMI's work when the possibility was raised by the European Commission in 2017, ..."
"... "The research proposed by the EC in the biopreparedness topic was small in scope," ..."
"... "IMI's projects have contributed, directly or indirectly, to better prepare the research community for the current crisis, the Ebola+ programme or the ZAPI project." ..."
"... "belated interventions when an epidemic is already underway," ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
EU money intended
for underfunded public-benefit research such as preparing for a pandemic has been diverted by
the pharmaceutical industry into areas where it can make more money, according to a scathing
new report. Officials in Brussels wanted to co-fund research that would have ensured the
European Union (EU) was better prepared for a pandemic akin to the one we are experiencing
today. But their partners, the big pharmaceutical companies, rejected the proposal, ensuring
that taxpayer money would go instead into studies with more potential for commercial
application. In short big-pharma lobbyists were allowed to steer billions of euros of public
funds as they saw fit, a damning new report claims.
The target of the criticism is the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), a
public-private partnership that was equally funded, between 2008 and 2020, by the European
Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) lobbying group and the
European Commission to the tune of 5.3 billion euros (US$5.8 billion). The money is supposed to
go to areas of "unmet medical or social need," but, in practice, corporate priorities
dominate the decision-making, according to the
non-governmental organization Corporate Observatory Europe (COE).
"We were outraged to find evidence that the pharmaceutical industry lobby EFPIA not only
did not consider funding biopreparedness (ie, being ready for epidemics such as the one caused
by the new coronavirus, COVID-19) but opposed it being included in IMI's work when the
possibility was raised by the European Commission in 2017, " a new COE report
said.
The rejected proposal would have directed money into refining computer simulations and the
analysis of animal testing models, potentially speeding up regulatory approval of vaccines,
according to the Guardian. But a spokeswoman for the IMI called the report
"misleading".
"The research proposed by the EC in the biopreparedness topic was small in scope,"
she said. "IMI's projects have contributed, directly or indirectly, to better prepare the
research community for the current crisis, the Ebola+ programme or the ZAPI project."
ZAPI, or the Zoonotic Anticipation and Preparedness Initiative, was launched in 2015 with a
budget of 20 million euros (US$21.8 million) after the Ebola epidemic a year prior. The COE
report said it exemplifies a pattern of "belated interventions when an epidemic is already
underway," much like this year's emergency funding of coronavirus research.
The think tank questioned whether EU public money was well applied through IMI. Much of it
went into research into cancer, Alzheimer's disease and diabetes – areas that are
potentially profitable and thus are given close attention by private business. But epidemic
preparedness, HIV/AIDS, and poverty-related and neglected tropical diseases have been
overlooked by the initiative, the report said.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Lyttenburgh says:
May 25, 2020 at 5:00 am"I mean, geopolitically. It'll still likely to continue,
because money needs to be spent, research needs to continue, and military keynesianism
is, I believe, an essential component of the US economy."
Will a real breadwinner in da house of the US of A please stand up?
"Lockheed, the world's largest defense company, already has hired more than 2,365
new employees since March when many U.S. companies began furloughing or layoff workers
amid coronavirus stay-at-home orders. In addition, Lockheed is "actively recruiting for
over 4,600 roles," in 39 states and Washington, D.C., the company said in a statement
Friday.
"Northrop Grumman says it could hire as many 10,000 this year. Raytheon
Technologies another 2,000. Boeing, which is preparing to cut 10 percent of its
160,000-employee workforce as the airlines predict at least a three-year drop in sales,
is advertising more than 600 open positions in the United States, largely in its
defense, space, cybersecurity and intelligence units ."
[ ]
"Pay cuts, furloughs and a hiring freeze has hit Raytheon Technologies'
commercial business, a major supplier to planemakers. But it's a different story on the
defense side of the house where there are 2,000 job openings. Last month, the Air Force
chose Raytheon to build a new nuclear cruise missile, a project Hayes said could be
worth $10 billion over its lifetime.
"In recent years, Lockheed has been expanding its missiles and space businesses
as the Pentagon has increased focus and spending in these sectors.
[ ]
"Northrop Grumman, the fourth-largest U.S. defense company, expects "significant
headcount growth this year because of the program volume increases sales growth, as
well as the anticipated awards in the latter half of this year," CEO Kathy Warden said
on the company's quarterly earnings call last week.
"The company also has been increasingly winning classified contracts as the U.S.
military has shifted spending to develop new weapons to counter China . Northrop is
building a new stealth bomber and a new intercontinental ballistic missile for the Air
Force.
""We are actively recruiting for 10,000 open positions and we hired more than
3,500 people in the first quarter, which included more than 1,300 new hires in March,"
Warden said."
"Since [Trump] took office, only Fiat Chrysler and defense contractor Lockheed
Martin have added a meaningful number of net new workers.
Lockheed's U.S. headcount is up about 15%. Fiat's employment is up about 11%,
with some gains coming from broader North American operations. The net gain of jobs at
the two companies is about 22,800 since the end of 2016, according to company
disclosures."
See? Seeeee? How can you argue against the power of the Money, Professor? Cuz
war-machine choo-choo has no brakes.
"... "Well, I think it's automatic. Because they're already cutting. I mean, if you look, they're cutting back. Because it's it's market. It's demand. It's supply and demand. They're already cutting back, and they're cutting back very seriously," ..."
The United States is on track to cut 1.7 million barrels of oil production per day,
according to Reuters calculations of state and company data shared on Thursday. It was US
President Donald Trump that suggested
at the beginning of April, prior to the most recent OPEC deal signing that the United
States would cut its oil output as a natural response to the worsening market conditions. The
statement was not initially good enough for OPEC, who wanted more of a commitment from the
world's largest producer and consumer of crude oil.
"Well, I think it's automatic. Because they're already cutting. I mean, if you look,
they're cutting back. Because it's it's market. It's demand. It's supply and demand. They're
already cutting back, and they're cutting back very seriously," US President Trump said at
a press briefing early last month.
US Energy Secretary said last month that the DoE expected that production in the United
States would fall by between two and three million bpd by the end of the year -- it appears the
cuts have come even quicker than the department expected.
The need for the production cuts grew more evident as the United States shut down nearly all
activity in an attempt to flatten that curve of infections that sought to overwhelm the
country's healthcare system. Doing so, however, has idled much of the economy and crippled
demand -- and as such, its oil and gas industry that fuels that economy.
The cuts from US producers may seek to quiet the disgruntlement of OPEC and Russia, in
particular, who expressed their displeasure that the US would not require its producers to curb
production. After all, the US shale industry has benefited greatly from previous rounds of OPEC
cuts.
"... The findings paint a grim picture of the devastating and lasting impact recession has on corporate performance. To be sure, a shocking seventeen percent of the companies failed, were acquired or decided to go private. ..."
"... Meanwhile, three years after the recession forty percent of the companies hadn't recovered to precession sales and profit levels. And, approximately 80% of public companies had not rebounded to their pre-recession growth rates in sales and profits a full three years after the recession. ..."
"... Almost all business people agree that the current crisis marks an inflection point. The business world has changed and firms need to remake (i.e., downsize) their organizations to fit in the new normal. Companies will operate with a smaller footprint, but more debt. ..."
Submitted by Joe
Carson , former chief economist at Allianz
The Fed's debt-bridge policy is designed to improve the flow of credit to businesses to
avoid a devastating credit crunch. Never before has one of the monetary policy solutions to
combat recession been to extend credit to struggling, profit losing businesses.
There is no precedent for record business borrowing during a recession. The scale of
business failures during and after the economy exits recession will far exceed that of the
Great Financial Recession.
The Fed's Debt-Bridge Policy
The traditional way for monetary policy to build a bridge from recession to recovery is
through the lowering of official interest rates. In time, the reduction of interest rates
triggers a refinancing cycle, lowering interest costs, and improving liquidity positions. The
"reliquification" process enables firms (and individuals) to exit recession with stronger
liquidity and lower debt burdens.
With official interest rates relatively low the "reliquification" process was not a viable
policy option to combat the abrupt contraction in the economy. So policymakers were forced to
support the flow of credit to the economy by purchasing securities and provide direct financing
to sectors where it is not otherwise available or too costly.
So instead of contracting, which is the typical pattern during the recession, the flow of
private credit has exploded to the upside. Since the start of 2020, commercial and industrial
loans have increased over $750 billion to a record $3.1 trillion. That increase nearly matches
the cumulative increase in corporate bank borrowing of the past 6 years.
At the same time, US corporations have tapped the capital markets for hundreds of billions
of new debt. Through early May corporations have issued nearly $300 billion in new debt, twice
as much as the comparable period one year ago.
An addition of $1 trillion of new liabilities over a few months is a big number in the best
of times. Yet, record corporate borrowing during bad times increases the risk of business
failures and defaults. Here's why.
A Harvard Business study released in 2010 analyzed corporate performance during three global
recessions from 1980 to 2000. Sales and profit performance of 4700 public companies were
analyzed three years before and three years after the recession.
The findings paint a grim picture of the devastating and lasting impact recession has on
corporate performance. To be sure, a shocking seventeen percent of the companies failed, were
acquired or decided to go private.
Meanwhile, three years after the recession forty percent of the companies hadn't recovered
to precession sales and profit levels. And, approximately 80% of public companies had not
rebounded to their pre-recession growth rates in sales and profits a full three years after the
recession.
Almost all business people agree that the current crisis marks an inflection point. The
business world has changed and firms need to remake (i.e., downsize) their organizations to fit
in the new normal. Companies will operate with a smaller footprint, but more debt.
There is no precedent for record corporate borrowing during a recession. As a result,
investors need to brace for an economy unlikely to resemble the one before, with an uneven and
slow growth, and record corporate failures.
...China's Foreign Minister Yang Yi held a lengthy presser providing
detailed answers to many differing questions. The topic of "Wolf Diplomacy" is in the news
today and was asked about by CNN:
" Cable News Network : We've seen an increasingly heated 'war of words'
between China and the US. Is 'wolf warrior' diplomacy the new norm of China's
diplomacy?
Wang Yi : I respect your right to ask the question, but I'm afraid you're
not framing the question in the right way. One has to have a sense of right and wrong.
Without it, a person cannot be trusted, and a country cannot hold its own in the family of
nations .
... ... ...
"The world is undergoing changes of a kind unseen in a century and full of instability
and turbulence. Confronted by a growing set of global challenges, we hope all countries
will realize that humanity is a community with a shared future. We must render each other
more support and cooperation, and there should be less finger-pointing and confrontation.
We call on all nations to come together and build a better world for all." [My
Emphasis]
"... The coronavirus crisis has thrown the global economy into cardiac arrest, and now you are acutely aware of the very markets that you had previously just assumed would function as normal. The first indication was the precipitous drop in the stock market that took place in late February. Then, as the United States began to enter quarantine, the labor market collapsed and hundreds of millions of people were suddenly out of work. Shortages in a few key commodities -- masks, ventilators, toilet paper -- began to appear. ..."
How will the coronavirus transform the relationship between state and market? A look at oil,
food, and finance.
You pay little attention to the systems of your body --
circulatory, digestive, pulmonary -- unless something goes wrong.
These automatic systems ordinarily go about their business, like unseen clockwork, while you
think about a vexing problem at work, drink your morning cup of coffee, walk up and down
stairs, and head out to your car to begin your morning commute. If you had to focus your
attention on breathing, pushing blood through your veins, and metabolizing food, you'd have no
time or energy to do anything else. The body abhors the micromanaging of the mind.
The same applies to the world's markets. They whir away in the background of your life,
providing loans to your business, coffee beans to your nearby supermarket, labor to build your
house, gas to fill your car. You take all of these markets for granted. All you have to concern
yourself with is earning enough money to gain access to these goods and services. That's what
it means to live in a modern economy. The days of hunting and gathering, of complete
self-sufficiency, are long past.
And then, in a series of sickening shifts, the markets go haywire. As with a heart attack,
you no longer can take the optimal performance of these systems for granted.
The coronavirus crisis has thrown the global economy into cardiac arrest, and now you
are acutely aware of the very markets that you had previously just assumed would function as
normal. The first indication was the precipitous drop in the stock market that took place in
late February. Then, as the United States began to enter quarantine, the labor market collapsed
and hundreds of millions of people were suddenly out of work. Shortages in a few key
commodities -- masks, ventilators, toilet paper -- began to appear.
It is one of the central tenets of laissez-faire capitalism that markets behave like
automatic systems, that an "invisible hand" regulates supply and demand. Market fundamentalists
believe that the less the government interferes with these automatic systems, the better. They
argue, to the contrary, that markets should increasingly take over government functions: a
privatized post office, for instance, or Social Security accounts subjected to the stock
market.
Market fundamentalists are like Christian Scientists. They refuse government intervention
just as the faithful reject medical intervention. Much like God's grace, the invisible hand
operates independent of human plan.
Then something happens, like a pandemic, which tests this faith. States around the world are
now spending trillions of dollars to intervene in the economy: to bail out banks, save
businesses, help out the unemployed. Countries are imposing export controls on key commodities.
As in wartime, governments are directing manufacturers to produce critical goods to fill an
unexpected demand for greater supply.
These are emergency interventions. The market fundamentalist looks forward to the day when
stay-at-home restrictions are lifted, people go back to work, the stock market barrels back
into bull mode, and the invisible hand, with perhaps a few Band-aids across the knuckles,
returns to its job.
But some pandemics fundamentally alter the economy. In such emergencies, people realize that
an economy is constructed and thus can be reconstructed. Are we now at just such a moment in
world history? Will the coronavirus permanently transform the relationship between the state
and the market?
Let's take a look at three key markets -- oil, food, and finance -- to measure the impact of
the pandemic and the prospects for transformation.
Oil
Shutterstock
In 2007, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa
offered to forgo digging for oil beneath the Yasuni national park in exchange for $3.6
billion from the international community. No one took him up on the offer.
When the U.S. price of oil went below zero last week, I immediately thought of Correa's
offer. The mainstream scoffed at the Ecuadorian leader back in 2007. How on earth could you
possibly propose to keep oil under the earth? The world economy runs on fossil fuels. You might
as well ask your kid to keep her Halloween candy uneaten in the back of the cupboard.
Today, however, the world is glutted with oil. The global recession has radically reduced
the need for oil and gas.
In the United States, transportation absorbs
nearly 70 percent of oil consumption. With airplanes grounded, fewer trains and busses in
operation, and highways uncongested, the demand for oil has dropped precipitously. Businesses,
too, are using less energy. It's not just oil. Companies devoted to pumping natural gas out of
shale deposits are filing for bankruptcy as their market value drops precipitously: the price
of a share of fracking giant Whiting Petroleum fell from $150 a couple years ago to 67
cents on March 31.
It's gotten to the point that you almost can't give away the stuff.
After all, if you somehow found yourself with a bunch of barrels of oil, where would you
store it? Oil-storage tanks in the United State are near capacity. "Oil supertankers are
looking like petroleum paparazzi, crowding the Los Angeles shoreline, either as floating
storage or waiting on some kind of turn in sentiment," Brian Sullivan
writes at CNBC . "With prices higher in coming months, for now it pays to sit on oil and
hope to sell it for more money down the pipeline."
Oil-producing nations, after years of boosting their supplies, finally agreed in mid-April
to cut production
by 10 percent -- about 10 million gallons a day. In other words, they are deciding to leave
oil in the ground. Now, however, it doesn't even qualify as a half-measure, since demand has
dropped by 35 percent. The oil producers are awaiting the end of recession, when the
quarantined go back to work, and everyone jumps on their transport of choice to make up for
lost travel. They are awaiting a return to normal.
But the market for fossil fuels is not normal. The notion that the invisible hand will steer
economies in a sustainable direction is hogwash. We are long past the moment when we should
have paid Correa and everyone else to leave the oil and gas in the ground and move toward a
world powered entirely by clean energy. The market treats the environment either as a commodity
like any other or as an "externality" that doesn't factor into the final price of goods and
services. That is so nineteenth century.
Climate change demands an intervention into the energy markets with restrictions on
production, subsidies for clean energies like solar, and government purchases of electric cars.
Returning to "normal" after the pandemic is not a viable option.
Food
Shutterstock
Like the oil exporters, food producers in the United States are restricting production as
well.
In Delaware and Maryland, chicken producers are euthanizing
two million chickens because the processing plants don't have enough workers. Sickness and
death in these facilities, which has caused closures that are disrupting the supply chain, has
prompted Trump to classify
such plants as "critical infrastructure" that needs to remain open. Meanwhile, thousands of
acres of fruits and vegetables
are rotting in the fields in Florida because of the suspension of bulk food sales to
schools, theme parks, and restaurants. The shortage of pickers -- often migrant laborers whose
mobility has been restricted -- is complicating harvests.
Unlike oil, however, the overall demand for food remains high. The grocery business
is
booming . Food banks are
overwhelmed by a surge unlike any in recent decades. The U.S. Department of Agriculture
ordinarily could swoop in and buy up surplus production -- as it did for soybean growers during
the trade war with China -- for use in food banks and other distribution programs. But as with
so many other government agencies in the Trump era, the USDA has been slow
to act , despite repeated pleas from growers and governors.
The pandemic is highlighting all the problems that have long plagued the food supply. First,
there is the mismatch between supply and demand. Around
820 million people globally didn't have enough to eat in 2018, a figure that had been
rising for three years in a row, and contrasts with another rising number: the 672 million
obese people in the world. In the United States, fully 40 percent of food goes to waste every year.
So, obviously the invisible hand does a pretty poor job of achieving market equilibrium.
Second, despite a growing movement to eat locally and seasonally, the food system still eats
up a huge amount of energy. The problem lies not so much with bananas arriving by cargo ship,
which is relatively efficient, but with perishable items delivered by plane . And it's what we eat,
rather than where the products come from, that matters most. "Regardless of whether you compare
the footprint of foods in terms of their weight (e.g. one kilogram of cheese versus one
kilogram of peas); protein content; or calories, the overall conclusion is the same,"
writes
Hannah Ritchie. "Plant-based foods tend to have a lower carbon footprint than meat and dairy.
In many cases a much smaller footprint."
Third, because of economies of scale and abysmal labor practices, food in the industrialized
world is too often grown by agribusiness, processed by transnational corporations, and picked
or handled by workers who don't even make close to a living wage.
Returning to this kind of food system after the pandemic fades would be truly unappetizing.
The livable wage campaign must spread to the countryside, meat substitutes must get an
additional lift through government and institutional purchases, and innovative programs like
the Too Good to Go app in Europe -- which sells extra restaurant and supermarket food at a
discount -- must be brought to the United States to cut down on food waste and get meals to
those in need.
Finance
Shutterstock
The financial crisis of 2008-2009 exposed the fragility and fundamental inequality of the
global financial system. But all along the invisible hand has been pickpocketing poor Peter to
pay prosperous Paul. Bankers, stockbrokers, and financial gurus have constructed a casino-like
system that occasionally doles out a few pennies to the people playing the slots even as it
enriches the house -- the top 1-2 percent -- at every turn.
The most outrageous part of this scheme is that the financial crisis demonstrated just how
bad the financiers were at their own game. Not only did they not go to prison for illegal
activities, they were with a few exceptions not even punished economically for their market
failures. They were either too big, too rich, or too powerful for the government to allow them
to fail.
In The New Yorker , Nick Paumgarten quotes
a prominent investment banker at a bond fund:
"In the financial crisis, we won the war but lost the peace." Instead of investing in
infrastructure, education, and job retraining, we emphasized, via a central-bank policy of
quantitative easing (what some people call printing money), the value of risk assets, like
stocks. "We collectively fell in love with finance," he said.
After the last financial crisis, the wealthy, who are heavily invested in the stock market,
did quite well, while everyone else took a hit.
Explains Colin Schultz in Smithsonian magazine: "While families hovering around the
average net worth lost 36 percent over the past decade -- dropping from $87,992 in 2003 to
$56,335 in 2013 -- people in the top 95th percentile actually gained 14 percent in the same
tumultuous period -- going from $740,700 in 2003 to $834,100 in 2013."
The Trump administration is clearly in love with finance. Even before the pandemic hit,
Trump's tax reform provided the top six U.S. banks with $32
billion in savings . That's more than what the 2008 bank bailout provided (and remember,
banks mostly paid back those earlier loans). The stock market also benefited from
an unprecedented upswing in stock buybacks -- $2 trillion combined in 2018 and 2019 -- that
enriched shareholders at the expense of workers.
The $2 trillion in initial stimulus funds that the U.S. government is providing this time
around has gone to individuals (those Trump-signed checks in the mail), small businesses
(except when it went to big businesses), hospitals, and unemployed workers. There's also money
for farmers, schools, food stamps, and (alas) the Pentagon. Future rounds of stimulus spending
might include infrastructure, more aid to states and localities, and funds for smaller
banks.
There's not much enthusiasm, at least publicly, to bail out Wall Street. Stock buybacks were
explicitly excluded from the stimulus package. Meanwhile, the stock market has begun to climb
out of the basement in the last couple weeks, largely on the strength of the news of all this
new money being pumped into the economy.
But just as the tax bill was a covert giveaway to financial institutions, so have been
several of the administration's pandemic responses. Quantitative easing, by which the Federal
Reserve buys bonds and mortgage-backed securities, has increased the amount of liquidity
available to financial institutions.
In the latest effort, the Fed announced that it will buy $500 billion in corporate bonds,
but without
any of the strings attached to other assistance such as limits on stock buybacks or
executive compensation. The banks are even nickel and diming people by seizing
stimulus check deposits to cover overdrawn accounts.
Out of a total pie of around $6 trillion in potential stimulus spending, banks and major
corporations are well-placed to grab the lion's share.
Writes Nomi Prins at TomDispatch:
In the end, according to the president, that could mean $4.5 trillion in support for
big banks and corporate entities versus something like $1.4 trillion for regular Americans,
small businesses, hospitals, and local and state governments. That 3.5 to 1 ratio signals
that, as in 2008, the Treasury and the Fed are focused on big banks and large corporations,
not everyday Americans.
Invisible hand? Hardly. That's the very visible hand of government tilting the financial
markets even more in favor of the rich. As for the invisible enrichment that goes on beneath
the surface, otherwise known as corruption, the Trump administration has
gutted the oversight mechanisms that could bring those abuses to light.
It's time to end America's love affair with finance. That means, in the short term, higher
taxes on the very rich,
limitations on CEO pay built into all bailouts, and reviving all the reasonable proposals
for reforming the financial sector that were either left out of or didn't get full implemented
in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed in the wake of the last
financial crisis.
Post-Pandemic Economics
Shutterstock
The Black Death depopulated Europe, killing as much as 60
percent of the population in the middle of the fourteenth century. Feudalism depended on
lots of peasants working the land to support the one percent of that era. By carrying off so
many of these workers, the Black Death made a major contribution to eroding the foundations of
the dominant economic system of the time.
The coronavirus will not kill anywhere near as many people as the Black Death did. But it
may well contribute to exposing the failures of "free markets" and the scandal of governments
intervening in the economy on behalf of this era's one percent. The pandemic is already, thanks
to huge stimulus packages, undermining the "small government" canard. A state apparatus
deliberately hobbled by the Trump administration -- after earlier "reforms" by both parties --
did a piss-poor job of dealing with this crisis. That doesn't bode well for dealing with the
even larger challenge of climate change.
The short-term fixes described above in the oil, food, and finance sectors are necessary but
insufficient. They shift the balance more toward the government and away from the "free"
market. They're not unlike the New Deal: reforming capitalism to save capitalism. But this
pandemic is pointing to an even more fundamental transformation, to a new definition of
economics.
The tweaking of markets to achieve optimal performance is much like the rejiggering of
earth-centric models of the universe that took place in the Middle Ages. These models became
more and more complex to account for new astronomical discoveries. Then along came Copernicus
with a heliocentric model that accounted for all the new data. It took some time, however, for
the old model to lose favor, despite its obvious failures.
The global economy remains market-centered, even though the evidence has been mounting that
these markets are failing us and the planet. Tweaking this model isn't good enough. We need a
new Copernicus who will provide a new theory that fits our unfolding reality, a new
environment-centered economics that can maximize not profit but the well-being of living
things. John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy In Focus.
"... "According to CDC, the disease of obesity affects about 78 million Americans 1 and the ASMBS estimates about 24 million have severe or morbid obesity." ..."
And the government botching of this crisis continues...
'How Could the CDC Make That Mistake?' The government's disease-fighting agency is
conflating viral and antibody tests, compromising a few crucial metrics that governors depend
on to reopen their economies. Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas, and other states are doing the
same. https://tinyurl.com/y92ea59f
Nearly half of US states haven't contained their coronavirus outbreaks, a new study
finds https://tinyurl.com/yc72pd8t
And no, Sweden is not doing better...
Just 7.3% of Stockholm had Covid-19 antibodies by end of April, study shows
Official findings add to concerns about Sweden's laissez-faire strategy towards the
pandemic https://tinyurl.com/yahnmb3a
Finally, a large scale study on HCQ - 86,000 patients, with 15,000 receiving HCQ...
Blacks are *twice* as likely to get it as whites and Latinos. American Indians are *five
times* more likely to get it. They conclude the best indicator is poverty.
From The Lancet, a study of New York patients... Epidemiology, clinical course, and
outcomes of critically ill adults with COVID-19 in New York City: a prospective cohort study
https://tinyurl.com/yblmszsx
Between March 2 and April 1, 2020, 1150 adults were admitted to both hospitals with
laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, of which 257 (22%) were critically ill.
The median age of patients was 62 years (IQR 51–72), 171 (67%) were men. 212 (82%)
patients had at least one chronic illness, the most common of which were hypertension (162
[63%]) and diabetes (92 [36%]).
119 (46%) patients had obesity.
As of April 28, 2020, 101 (39%) patients had died and 94 (37%) remained
hospitalised.
203 (79%) patients received invasive mechanical ventilation for a median of 18 days (IQR
9–28), 170 (66%) of 257 patients received vasopressors and 79 (31%) received renal
replacement therapy.
The median time to in-hospital deterioration was 3 days (IQR 1–6).
In the multivariable Cox model, older age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1·31
[1·09–1·57] per 10-year increase), chronic cardiac disease (aHR
1·76 [1·08–2·86]), chronic pulmonary disease (aHR 2·94
[1·48–5·84]), higher concentrations of interleukin-6 (aHR 1·11
[95%CI 1·02–1·20] per decile increase), and higher concentrations of
D-dimer (aHR 1·10 [1·01–1·19] per decile increase) were
independently associated with in-hospital mortality.
Note: 36% had diabetes; 46% were fat. Like I've said before, "diabetes" is a code word for
"fat." And how many people in the US are fat and thus at risk? "According to CDC, the
disease of obesity affects about 78 million Americans 1 and the ASMBS estimates about 24
million have severe or morbid obesity."
So much for "let's just isolate the elderly"...so we can attend our baseball games this
summer and stuff ourselves with crap food...
Now we are coming to the new Digital Revolution, with workers being replaced by smart
computers and an AI future. Millions of office workers already function as a human interface to
the computer. You may have noticed this as you talk with them: they are trained to avoid making
decisions; they say sentences that were scripted for them, and the decisions are made by the
computer that was programmed to do their master's will. As lockdown had forced millions to
communicate with computers directly, a lot of workers became superfluous.
The process of shedding millions of workers in the existing economic system is likely to be
painful for the unemployed. The virus-blamed lockdown and digital control allows the owners of
the digital companies to carry out the revolution with minimal risks for them. What would need
an army and police involvement against riotous unemployed workers, can be achieved with greater
ease under threat of the pandemic. The economy will be modernized and made more efficient.
Alas, for us this script presages the fate of highly qualified weavers in 18 th
century England, even if we shall avoid the total AI takeover Terminator-style.
Probably the scariest piece of news is not about the numbers of "infected". It is a
meaningless word, for there are persistent carriers who do not succumb to disease; the vast
majority of the "infected" are asymptomatic, meaning they aren't sick and aren't infectious;
the number of "infected" is in direct proportion to the number of tests; the tests are dubious
at best, and none is verified by the methods accepted in pre-corona medicine, while the
methodology approved and enforced by the WHO can't be described as scientific. It is not about
deaths, for we do not experience more deaths than in 2018. Moreover, in many countries, notably
in France and in Norway there are 30% fewer deaths in certain weeks of April and May in this
year than in the last year.
The scariest piece of news is that Zoom is worth more than the seven
biggest airlines . These airlines with their accumulated labour (millions of working hours,
hundreds of thousands of employees, highly trained pilots, masses of sophisticated equipment)
just can't be worth as much as a job done in a month by a few programmers and which can be done
anew in a month. Money and stock market prices are useful tools if they measure human efforts;
they do not that anymore. What began with bankers earning more money in a day than a hundred
qualified workers and engineers in their lifetime, ended with the hi-tech lords earning more
than a million workers in their lifetime. It means that Money had banked on the Digital
Economy, a Union made in Hell, while the real economy came up for grabs. Money decided that we
won't fly anymore. They, the new masters, will fly in their private jets; the era of mass
access is over. You will get satisfied with Zoom and PornHub, instead of the real
thing.
Added to this the negative oil future price and the emission centres issuing more and more
money, trying to smother the fire with gasoline, and you will get a picture of the coming
world. There is probably no place for you and me in this world.
Is the great AI update of technology an objective need, and will it eventually bring good
for mankind? Perhaps. But it does not mean the process should be drafted by Money and the
Digital Economy, explained by MSM, justified by bio-horrors and carried on at public expense.
It has to be done differently if we want to preserve the achievements of the long (1945-2020)
peace stretch.
A lockdown in a lot of places seems to be justified on the basis of the fact that even if you
are middle aged, the chances of hospitalization are still around 5 percent, and in the US
going to the hospital for a week or weeks can leave you bankrupt.
@AP The interesting
& important thing to note is that fatalities are heavily tied to the related factors
of pre-existing conditions and advanced age. For example:
With CQ/AZ/ZN available everywhere, the bulk of the economy could reopen immediately with
or without masks. Given that psychology is important, odds are mask wearing will make the
restart more effective. However, masks provide partial protection at most.
@utu Epidemiology
uses R0 for an initial reproductive rate when a pathogen first invades a naive host
population. Re is the designation for later when immunity begins to exist and, for human
beings in the current pandemic, host behavior changes.
The most important aspects of economic life can proceed with only those
modifications.
Tourism is some 10% of world GDP. It's going to take a massive hit, lockdown or no
lockdown. Air travel took a massive hit before the lockdown, empty planes were flying often.
While the official lockdowns undoubtedly led to a contraction in economic activity, a huge
portion (probably most) of the economic damage would be incurred anyway. For example I will
personally not be eating out in the foreseeable future (a vaccine would change that), and I
did so at least every other month. It's not very frequent, but I visited relatively expensive
restaurants, so my reduced consumption probably disproportionately hits the higher end jobs
in the sector. I know people who used to eat out more frequently (and in expensive
restaurants), who are now staying home. Lazy people who had a gym membership to soothe their
conscience will now feel less guilty if they just cancel it.
Some people believe that if we just restrict or basically shut down huge sectors of the
economy, then the rest can still carry on as if nothing happened. That's just wrong. People
who work in restaurants or gyms are now going to reduce their own consumption, for example
they won't be buying new cars any time soon. This in turn reduces consumption by people
employed (or previously employed) in those sectors.
So unfortunately no, I don't think the rest of the economy could carry on like before.
@Anatoly Karlin The
lockdown actions in the US were, by my estimation, about 6 weeks too late. 6 weeks earlier
and maybe actions could have been phased in (monitor results) and not blanket panic. Even in
that time frame we had serious suspicion of asymptomatic spread. We could have started masks
for everyone, restricting air travel and cruises, isolated nursing home and started shutting
down schools. Yes, I know children don't get the large complications however, it beggars
belief that stuffed in schools then going home; kids would not be vectors.
In any case the US economy was primed to collapse anyway. Losing the China supply chain
was significant and would have happened even if no virus was found in the US.
P.S. I think it's going to get worse; (I'm surprised it already hasn't) but I think
unemployment is going to be bankrupting states.
America's billionaires saw their combined net worth soar by $434 billion between March 18
and May 19 while the coronavirus pandemic killed tens of thousands of people and ravaged the
U.S. economy, forcing more than 30 million out of work.
The report shows that the five wealthiest billionaires in the U.S. -- Jeff Bezos of Amazon,
Bill Gates of Microsoft, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway, and
Larry Ellison of Oracle -- saw their collective wealth grow by a total of $75.5 billion between
March 18 and May 19, a 19% jump.
Bezos -- the world's richest man -- saw his wealth jump by nearly $35 billion in the
two-month period. Yet even as Bezos' fortune continues to grow, Amazon
announced last week that it will not extend $2-an-hour hazard pay for warehouse workers
beyond the end of May.
A progressive organization of 23,000 physicians from across the U.S. demanded Thursday that
the American Hospital Association (AHA) divest completely from a dark-money lobbying group that
has spent millions combating Medicare for All and instead devote those financial resources to
the fight against Covid-19 and to better support for patients and healthcare workers.
Dr. Adam Gaffney, president of Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), said in a
statement that "the Covid-19 pandemic has stretched hospitals' resources to the limit, and the
AHA should not waste precious member hospitals' funds lobbying against universal health
coverage" as a member of the Partnership for America's Health Care Future (PFAHCF).
Because Medicare for All would provide a lifeline to hospitals in underserved areas that
have been hit hard by Covid-19, Gaffney argued, the AHA "cannot claim to represent hospitals
while also opposing a single-payer system that would keep struggling hospitals open." The AHA
represents around 5,000 hospitals and other healthcare providers in the U.S.
As Common Dreams
reported earlier this month, public health officials are accusing the Trump administration
of directing billions of dollars in Covid-19 hospital bailout funds to high-revenue providers
while restricting money to hospitals that serve low-income areas.
Tenet Healthcare, an investor-owned hospital company that has donated hundreds of
thousands to PFAHCF, has received $345 million in Covid-19 bailout funds, Axios
reported last month.
"The AHA should immediately leave the PFAHCF," Gaffney said, "and redirect that money to
supporting patients and frontline healthcare workers."
"As physicians, we can no longer tolerate a health system that puts profits ahead of
patients and public health," Gaffney added. "It's time for health professionals to hold
accountable the organizations that claim to represent us."
Formed in the summer of 2018 by an alliance of pharmaceutical, insurance, and hospital
lobbyists with the goal of countering the push for universal healthcare, PFAHCF's anti-Medicare
for All " army "
has grown rapidly since its founding, with the AHA joining the fray in 2019.
As The Interceptreported last
October, the for-profit hospital industry has played an "integral role" in the corporate fight
against single-payer.
COVID Kills Hospitality Industry, Crushes NYC Hotels, Triggers CMBS Implosion by
Tyler Durden Fri,
05/22/2020 - 09:15 The global hospitality industry is facing one of the worst crashes in
history, and New York City, the epicenter of COVID-19 in the US, has seen its tourism industry
decimated. With no rebound in sight, the second great depression for commercial real estate is
ahead and could lead to a massive default wave of shopping malls and luxury hotels.
Judging by the
ongoing collapse in commercial real estate, as we recently noted , CMBX 6, which track 25
commercial-mortgage-backed securities with high exposure to 2012 shopping mall loans, has
tumbled during lockdowns, resulting in a handsome payout for the likes of Carl Icahn, McNamara
and others who were short the tranche.
Last week we said, "keep a close eye on CMBX 9" with its "outlier exposure to hotels which
have quickly emerged as the most impacted sector from the pandemic, this may well be the next
big short."
The various CMBX series are shown in the chart below, with CMBX 9 most notable for its 17%
exposure to hotels.
While the broader market has rebounded, CMBX 9 has experienced a swan dive.
Several key observations in the Manhattan hotel industry have been seen this month, suggest
the tide is turning for the industry. Let's start with the newest piece of information is that
The Times Square Edition, a newly constructed multi-million dollar hotel located in Midtown
Manhattan, is set to pull the plug on operations by late summer.
Marriott International Inc. operates the hotel under the Edition brand, says it "has
provided advance notice to employees, government officials and union officials" that all
operations on the property will grind to a halt on August 13.
This suggests Marriot doesn't see a V-shaped recovery in the tourism industry this year.
Maybe Marriot is taking advice from Scott Minerd, the CIO of Guggenheim Investments, who
recently said a
recovery in the economy could take upwards of "four years ."
Bloomberg reviewed new documents in the ongoing foreclosure proceeding show Marriot
informed owner Maefield Development in March that "a cash shortfall due to the outbreak could
put the developer in default on its contract with the lodging giant."
Moody's Investors Service valued the mixed-use property at more than $2.4 billion in 2018 --
considering the economic crash and commercial real estate implosion, the value of the property
is likely much lower.
Even when New York City reopens, hotels in Manhattan generally rely on international travel
and large conferences, which are several things that may not return to 2019 activity trends for
several years. This has made it challenging for hotel operators to cover debt payments and
labor costs, suggesting defaults and closures could be dead ahead.
Jonathan Falik, CEO at JF Capital Advisors, recently told Bloomberg that too many rooms are
empty in the city and warns not all hotels will survive.
Last week, Sunstone Hotel Investors Inc. wrote down its Hilton Times Square hotel to less
than its $77 million mortgage. Sunstone is currently in discussions with lenders to either
restructure or handover the property.
Data firm Trepp said $1 billion dollars in late payments were seen in CMBSs used to finance
New York hotels. The second great depression in commercial real estate has arrived, many
shopping malls and hotels may not survive.
"... This whole crisis is all about recapitalization or restructuring the debt. The Fed is bailing out the creditors (Big Surprise!) and forcing corporate America through bankruptcy. ..."
We understood ourselves as the means that make the rich richer.
Then came the latest wisdom: "Money makes money." They have come to believe their own
lies, and those lies are being subsidised by our taxes. The moment when "everything" will
belong to One Account seems to be upon us. I expect foreclosures and bankruptcies amongst the
non-investing classes. All shortfalls to be augmented by tax money. Next, we await Zion
unveiling our new King. Once again, not one atom of deviation from the plan as laid out in
the Protocols. it is of utter importance that we do not turn upon another. In that sense, I
suggest more of Unz's readers start looking at Black people as possible comrades in this
engagement, we are confronted by a common enemy, the one that taught us the "value" of racism
in the first place. They have divided us, now they will conquer.
Or we can just stand together. If we refuse to fight, it will be us against Bill Gates'
robots, and his microcephalic pilots are still too young to be drafted. This is, however, our
last chance, I be thinking.
Been wondering some years now, why 'retailing' is such a popular investment, when nobody has
no money left to buy stuff with. Now we know.
Gilad, these are some thoughts I jotted down a few weeks ago.
This whole crisis is all about recapitalization or restructuring the debt. The Fed is
bailing out the creditors (Big Surprise!) and forcing corporate America through bankruptcy.
The Virus is being used as a pretext for forcing the economy into a kind of controlled
depression (demolition) and debt restructuring. The Virus and China are being used as the
fall guys for the collapse. In 2008-09 the Banks and WS were bailed out and not forced into
bankruptcy. The Fed then reinflated and drove up asset prices along with more than doubling
the debt from levels that were already overextended. In The Great Restructuring that's taking
place now, the Money Boys are basically transferring the income and assets of Main Street to
the Creditors as they deflate the debt and bail themselves out. The whole scam could more
accurately be called "The Great Heist" or the Money Power's perverted or mammonic version of
a Debt Jubilee.
Dear Corporate America: maybe
you remember the old Johnny Paycheck tune? Let me refresh your memory: take this job and shove it.
Put yourself in the shoes of a single parent waiting tables in a working-class cafe with
lousy tips, a worker stuck with high rent and a soul-deadening commute
--one of the tens of
millions of America's
working poor
who have seen their wages stagnate and their income
becoming increasingly precarious / uncertain while the cost of living has soared.
Unemployment and the federal
stimulus bonus
of $600 a week are far more than your
regular wages, including tips.
Exactly why do you want to go back to your miserable job and
low pay? Why wouldn't you take time off and enjoy life a little, which is what you've been wanting to
do for years?
Indeed--why not? The pandemic is giving many permission to get what they always wanted.
Consider
these examples:
1. The Federal Reserve has always pined for the power to bail out the top .01% / the New
Nobility the way they deserve, with unlimited money-printing and the Fed being able to buy every
rigged, fraudulent asset spewed by the New Nobility's financial and corporate predators and
parasites.
Yee-haw, the pandemic genie granted your wish: there's no limits on how many trillions you can
shove into the greedy maw of the top .01%, and bail out every single one of their predatory,
exploitive,
legalized looting
bets that went south.
2. Local officials always wanted to commandeer some motels and shove the homeless into them, to
clear the sidewalks and parks and then claim "homeless problem solved." Presto, your wish has been
granted.
3. Central government authorities have always resented all those pesky civil liberties
restraints on their unquenchable desires to control every tiny aspect of life, public and private,
and now--voila, the doors to Petty Authoritarian Heaven have opened. Question our authority? A
tenner
in
the gulag for you, Doubter of All That Is Great and Good.
4. Restaurant owners who on camera always have to say how much they love their customers and
business, never mind the money, who secretly have come to loathe their over-entitled,
self-absorbed, dilettante customers and are sick and tired of the soaring rent, business licenses,
insurance, payroll taxes and costs of ingredients.
You know what, pal? Here's the keys, you can re-open whatever the heck you want, I'm outta here.
I've been secretly wishing I could get out from underneath this crushing burden and get my life
back. Yes, it was exciting way back when, but now it's nothing but an endless grind that wasn't
making money even before the pandemic.
5. Since the financiers, Big Tech mini-gods and stock buyback crowd have looted and pillaged
their way to immense fortunes by lying, cheating, conniving and gaming, why not
follow the
money
just like the predators and parasites at the top of the heap?
Indeed, why not fudge the application for a federal small business loan and use the "free
money"
to
lease that shiny new Rolls Royce
you always desired? Well, haven't the authorities been begging
us to borrow and spend like there's no tomorrow?
6. Dear Corporate America: maybe you remember the old Johnny Paycheck tune? Let me refresh your
memory:
take this job and shove it, I ain't working here no more.
If there's a
will, there's a way, and I'm stepping off the rat race merry-go-round, thank you very much. You can
find some other sucker to do your dirty work and BS work, all for the greater glory and wealth of
your New Nobility shareholders. I'm outta here. So I won't get rich, that dream died a long time
ago. What I'm interested in now is getting my life back.
The pandemic might not follow the Central Casting script of a V-shaped return to debt-serf,
BS-work wonderfulness.
Everyone who was sick and tired of their pre-pandemic life and the
endless exploitation has had time to think things over, and some consequential percentage of them will
welcome "good-bye to all that" and others will decide not to go back, even if that is still an option.
It's called opting out, and it has always characterized the end of imperial pretensions,
pillaging, propaganda and predation. Financial parasites, beware the second-order effects of your
overweening dominance and limitless greed.
President Donald Trump told Republican senators during a private lunch Tuesday that he is willing to let expanded unemployment
benefits expire at the end of July, a decision that would
massively slash the incomes of tens of millions
of people who have lost their jobs due to the Covid-19 crisis.
The Washington Post
reported Tuesday that the president "privately expressed opposition to extending a weekly $600 boost in unemployment insurance
for laid-off workers affected by the coronavirus pandemic, according to three officials familiar with his remarks."
House Democrats passed legislation last week that would extend the beefed-up unemployment benefits through January of 2021 as
experts and government officials -- including Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell --
warn the
U.S. unemployment rate could soon reach 25%. The unemployment insurance boost under the CARES Act is set to expire on July 31, even
as many
people have yet to receive their first check.
"With nearly 1 in 5 Americans out of work, Donald Trump's plan is to cut off the boost to unemployment benefits and shower his
wealthy buddies with more tax cuts," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), one of the architects of the unemployment insurance expansion,
toldHuffPost . "This is the worst economic crisis in 100 years and Donald Trump is doubling down on Herbert Hoover's economic
playbook and pushing workers to risk their health for his political benefit."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) -- who
declared earlier this month that Congress will only extend the boosted unemployment insurance "over our dead bodies" -- said
after the private lunch that Trump believes the benefits are "hurting the economic recovery." Graham was one of several Republican
senators who
opposed the initial expansion of unemployment benefits as too generous.
An
analysis
released last week by the Hamilton Project, an initiative of the Brookings Institution, found that expanded unemployment benefits
offset "roughly half of lost wages and salaries in April." Unemployment insurance has "been essential to families, and is vital for
keeping the economy from cratering further," the authors of the analysis noted.
Ernie Tedeschi, a former Treasury Department economist,
estimated that "come July 31, if the emergency
UI top-up isn't extended, unemployed workers will effectively get a pay cut of 50-75% overnight."
"It's increasingly looking like there won't be enough labor demand to hire them all back at that point," Tedeschi tweeted.
The latest Labor Department statistics showed that
more than 36 million
people in the U.S. have filed jobless claims since mid-March as mass layoffs continue in the absence of government action to
keep workers on company payrolls. Despite the grim numbers, the Post 's Jeff Stein reported Tuesday that the White House
is "
predicting a swift economic recovery " as it resists additional efforts to provide relief to frontline workers and the unemployed.
On top of rejecting an extension of enhanced unemployment insurance, Trump last month
publicly voiced opposition to another round of direct stimulus payments, instead advocating a cut to the tax that funds Social
Security and Medicare.
Demanding McDonald's prioritize public health and worker safety over profits, hundreds of
employees at the fast food chain
went on strike Wednesday, a day before the company was set to hold its annual shareholders'
meeting.
Instead of distributing dividends to its shareholders, the striking employees are calling
for the company to use its massive profits to pay for safety and financial protections for
workers, scores of whom have contracted Covid-19 in at least 16 states so far.
Employees and strike organizers at the fair wage advocacy group Fight for $15 are demanding
hazard pay during the pandemic of "$15X2," paid sick leave, sufficient protective gear for
workers, and company-wide policy of closing a restaurant for two weeks when an employee becomes
infected, with workers being fully paid.
The strike is taking place at stores in at least 20 cities. Fight for $15 and the SEIU,
which is also supporting the action, say it's the first nationwide coordinated effort targeting
the company since the coronavirus pandemic began in March.
"... In France, confinement has been generally well accepted as necessary, but that does not mean people are content with the government -- on the contrary. Every evening at eight, people go to their windows to cheer for health workers and others doing essential tasks, but the applause is not for President Macron. ..."
"... What we have witnessed is the failure of what used to be one of the very best public health services in the world. It has been degraded by years of cost-cutting. In recent years, the number of hospital beds per capita has declined steadily. Many hospitals have been shut down and those that remain are drastically understaffed. Public hospital facilities have been reduced to a state of perpetual saturation, so that when a new epidemic comes along, on top of all the other usual illnesses, there is simply not the capacity to deal with it all at once. ..."
"... The neoliberal globalization myth fostered the delusion that advanced Western societies could prosper from their superior brains, thanks to ideas and computer startups, while the dirty work of actually making things is left to low-wage countries. One result: a drastic shortage of face masks. The government let a factory that produced masks and other surgical equipment be sold off and shut down. Having outsourced its textile industry, France had no immediate way to produce the masks it needed. ..."
"... In late March, French media reported that a large stock of masks ordered and paid for by the southeastern region of France was virtually hijacked on the tarmac of a Chinese airport by Americans, who tripled the price and had the cargo flown to the United States. There are also reports of Polish and Czech airport authorities intercepting Chinese or Russian shipments of masks intended for hard-hit Italy and keeping them for their own use. ..."
"... The Covid–19 crisis makes it just that much clearer that the European Union is no more than a complex economic arrangement, with neither the sentiment nor the popular leaders that hold together a nation. For a generation, schools, media, politicians have instilled the belief that the "nation" is an obsolete entity. But in a crisis, people find that they are in France, or Germany, or Italy, or Belgium -- but not in "Europe." The European Union is structured to care about trade, investment, competition, debt, economic growth. Public health is merely an economic indicator. For decades, the European Commission has put irresistible pressure on nations to reduce the costs of their public health facilities in order to open competition for contracts to the private sector -- which is international by nature. ..."
"... Scapegoating China may seem the way to try to hold the declining Western world together, even as Europeans' long-standing admiration for America turns to dismay. ..."
"... The countries that have suffered most from the epidemic are among the most indebted of the EU member states, starting with Italy. The economic damage from the lockdown obliges them to borrow further. As their debt increases, so do interest rates charged by commercial banks. They turned to the EU for help, for instance by issuing eurobonds that would share the debt at lower interest rates. This has increased tension between debtor countries in the south and creditor countries in the north, which said nein . Countries in the eurozone cannot borrow from the European Central Bank as the U.S. Treasury borrows from the Fed. And their own national central banks take orders from the ECB, which controls the euro. ..."
"... The great irony is that "a common currency" was conceived by its sponsors as the key to European unity. On the contrary, the euro has a polarizing effect -- with Greece at the bottom and Germany at the top. And Italy sinking. But Italy is much bigger than Greece and won't go quietly. ..."
"... A major paradox is that the left and the Yellow Vests call for economic and social policies that are impossible under EU rules, and yet many on the left shy away from even thinking of leaving the EU. For over a generation, the French left has made an imaginary "social Europe" the center of its utopian ambitions. ..."
"... Russia is a living part of European history and culture. Its exclusion is totally unnatural and artificial. Brzezinski [the late Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Carter administration's national security adviser] spelled it out in The Great Chessboard : The U.S. maintains world hegemony by keeping the Eurasian landmass divided. ..."
"... But this policy can be seen to be inherited from the British. It was Churchill who proclaimed -- in fact welcomed -- the Iron Curtain that kept continental Europe divided. In retrospect, the Cold War was basically part of the divide-and-rule strategy, since it persists with greater intensity than ever after its ostensible cause -- the Communist threat -- is long gone. ..."
"... The whole Ukrainian operation of 2014 [the U.S.–cultivated coup in Kyiv, February 2014] was lavishly financed and stimulated by the United States in order to create a new conflict with Russia. Joe Biden has been the Deep State's main front man in turning Ukraine into an American satellite, used as a battering ram to weaken Russia and destroy its natural trade and cultural relations with Western Europe. ..."
"... I think France is likelier than Germany to break with the U.S.–imposed Russophobia simply because, thanks to de Gaulle, France is not quite as thoroughly under U.S. occupation. Moreover, friendship with Russia is a traditional French balance against German domination -- which is currently being felt and resented. ..."
"... "Decades of indoctrination in the ideology of "Europe" has instilled the belief that the nation-state is a bad thing of the past. The result is that people raised in the European Union faith tend to regard any suggestion of return to national sovereignty as a fatal step toward fascism. This fear of contagion from "the right" is an obstacle to clear analysis which weakens the left and favors the right, which dares be patriotic." ..."
"... Since WWII the US has itself been occupied by tyrants, using Russophobia to demand power as fake defenders. ..."
"... " French philosophy .By constantly attacking, deconstructing, and denouncing every remnant of human "power" they could spot, the intellectual rebels left the power of "the markets" unimpeded, and did nothing to stand in the way of the expansion of U.S. military power all around the world " ..."
"... From her groundbreaking work on the NATO empire's sickening war on sovereign Serbia, the dead end of identity politics and trans bathroom debates, to her critique of unfettered immigration and open borders, and her dismissal of the absurd Russsiagate baloney, better than anyone else, Johnstone has kept her intellect carefully honed to the real genuine kitchen table bread and butter issues that truly matter. She recognized before most of the world's scholars the perils of rampant inequality and saw the writing on the wall as to where this grotesque economic system is taking us all: down a dystopian slope into penury and police-state heavy-handedness, with millions unable to come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or dental bill. ..."
"... The mask competition and fiasco shows the importance of a country simply making things in their own country, not on the other side of the world, it's not nationalism it's just a better way to logistically deliver reliable products to the citizens. ..."
"... Some hold that they never departed, but mutated tools including CFA zones and "intelligence" relations in furtherance of "changing" to remain qualitatively the same. Just as "The United States of America" is a system of coercive relations not synonymous with the political geographical area designated "The United States of America", the colonialism of former and present "colonial powers" continues to exist, since the "independence" of the colonised was always, and continues to be, framed within linear systems of coercive relations, facilitated by the complicity of "local elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest, and the acquiescence of "local others" for myriad reasons. ..."
"... After reading Circle in the Darkness, I have ordered and am now reading her books on Hillary Clinton (Queen of Chaos) and the Yugoslav wars (Fool's Crusade), which are very worthwhile and important. I would recommend that her many articles over the years, appearing in such publications such as In These Times, Counterpunch and Consortium News, be reprinted and published together as an anthology. Through Circle in the Darkness, we have Diana Johnstone's "Life", but it would be good also to have her "Letters". ..."
"... Mr. de Gaulle like other "leaders" of colonial powers did understand that the moment of overt coercive relations of colonialism had passed and that colonialism to remain qualitatively the same, required covert coercive relations facilitated by the complicity of local "elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest. ..."
In France, confinement has been generally well accepted as necessary, but that does not mean
people are content with the government -- on the contrary. Every evening at eight, people go to
their windows to cheer for health workers and others doing essential tasks, but the applause is
not for President Macron.
Macron and his government are criticized for hesitating too long to confine the population,
for vacillating about the need for masks and tests, or about when or how much to end the
confinement. Their confusion and indecision at least defend them from the wild accusation of
having staged the whole thing in order to lock up the population.
What we have witnessed is the failure of what used to be one of the very best public health
services in the world. It has been degraded by years of cost-cutting. In recent years, the
number of hospital beds per capita has declined steadily. Many hospitals have been shut down
and those that remain are drastically understaffed. Public hospital facilities have been
reduced to a state of perpetual saturation, so that when a new epidemic comes along, on top of
all the other usual illnesses, there is simply not the capacity to deal with it all at
once.
The neoliberal globalization myth fostered the delusion that advanced Western societies
could prosper from their superior brains, thanks to ideas and computer startups, while the
dirty work of actually making things is left to low-wage countries. One result: a drastic
shortage of face masks. The government let a factory that produced masks and other surgical
equipment be sold off and shut down. Having outsourced its textile industry, France had no
immediate way to produce the masks it needed.
Meanwhile, in early April, Vietnam donated hundreds of thousands of antimicrobial face masks
to European countries and is producing them by the million. Employing tests and selective
isolation, Vietnam has fought off the epidemic with only a few hundred cases and no deaths.
You must have thoughts as to the question of Western unity in response to
Covid–19.
In late March, French media reported that a large stock of masks ordered and paid for by the
southeastern region of France was virtually hijacked on the tarmac of a Chinese airport by
Americans, who tripled the price and had the cargo flown to the United States. There are also
reports of Polish and Czech airport authorities intercepting Chinese or Russian shipments of
masks intended for hard-hit Italy and keeping them for their own use.
The absence of European solidarity has been shockingly clear. Better-equipped Germany banned
exports of masks to Italy. In the depth of its crisis, Italy found that the German and Dutch
governments were mainly concerned with making sure Italy pays its debts. Meanwhile, a team of
Chinese experts arrived in Rome to help Italy with its Covid–19 crisis, displaying a
banner reading "We are waves of the same sea, leaves of the same tree, flowers of the same
garden." The European institutions lack such humanistic poetry. Their founding value is not
solidarity but the neoliberal principle of "free unimpeded competition."
How do you think this reflects on the European Union?
The Covid–19 crisis makes it just that much clearer that the European Union is no more
than a complex economic arrangement, with neither the sentiment nor the popular leaders that
hold together a nation. For a generation, schools, media, politicians have instilled the belief
that the "nation" is an obsolete entity. But in a crisis, people find that they are in France,
or Germany, or Italy, or Belgium -- but not in "Europe." The European Union is structured to
care about trade, investment, competition, debt, economic growth. Public health is merely an
economic indicator. For decades, the European Commission has put irresistible pressure on
nations to reduce the costs of their public health facilities in order to open competition for
contracts to the private sector -- which is international by nature.
Globalization has hastened the spread of the pandemic, but it has not strengthened
internationalist solidarity. Initial gratitude for Chinese aid is being brutally opposed by
European Atlanticists. In early May, Mathias Döpfner, CEO of the Springer publishing
giant, bluntly called on Germany to ally with the U.S. -- against China. Scapegoating China may
seem the way to try to hold the declining Western world together, even as Europeans'
long-standing admiration for America turns to dismay.
Meanwhile, relations between EU member states have never been worse. In Italy and to a
greater extent in France, the coronavirus crisis has enforced growing disillusion with the
European Union and an ill-defined desire to restore national sovereignty.
Corollary question: What are the prospects that Europe will produce leaders capable of
seizing that right moment, that assertion of independence? What do you reckon such leaders
would be like?
The EU is likely to be a central issue in the near future, but this issue can be exploited
in very different ways, depending on which leaders get hold of it. The coronavirus crisis has
intensified the centrifugal forces already undermining the European Union. The countries that
have suffered most from the epidemic are among the most indebted of the EU member states,
starting with Italy. The economic damage from the lockdown obliges them to borrow further. As
their debt increases, so do interest rates charged by commercial banks. They turned to the EU
for help, for instance by issuing eurobonds that would share the debt at lower interest rates.
This has increased tension between debtor countries in the south and creditor countries in the
north, which said nein . Countries in the eurozone cannot borrow from the European
Central Bank as the U.S. Treasury borrows from the Fed. And their own national central banks
take orders from the ECB, which controls the euro.
What does the crisis mean for the euro? I confess I've lost faith in this project, given
how disadvantaged it leaves the nations on the Continent's southern rim.
The great irony is that "a common currency" was conceived by its sponsors as the key to
European unity. On the contrary, the euro has a polarizing effect -- with Greece at the bottom
and Germany at the top. And Italy sinking. But Italy is much bigger than Greece and won't go
quietly.
The German constitutional court in Karlsruhe recently issued a long judgment making it clear
who is boss. It recalled and insisted that Germany agreed to the euro only on the grounds that
the main mission of the European Central Bank was to fight inflation, and that it could not
directly finance member states. If these rules were not followed, the Bundesbank, the German
central bank, would be obliged to pull out of the ECB. And since the Bundesbank is the ECB's
main creditor, that is that. There can be no generous financial help to troubled governments
within the eurozone. Period.
Is there a possibility of disintegration here?
The idea of leaving the EU is most developed in France. The Union Populaire
Républicaine, founded in 2007 by former senior functionary François Asselineau,
calls for France to leave the euro, the European Union, and NATO.
The party has been a didactic success, spreading its ideas and attracting around 20,000
active militants without scoring any electoral success. A main argument for leaving the EU is
to escape from the constraints of EU competition rules in order to protect its vital industry,
agriculture, and above all its public services.
A major paradox is that the left and the Yellow Vests call for economic and social policies
that are impossible under EU rules, and yet many on the left shy away from even thinking of
leaving the EU. For over a generation, the French left has made an imaginary "social Europe"
the center of its utopian ambitions.
" Europe" as an idea or an ideal, you mean.
Decades of indoctrination in the ideology of "Europe" has instilled the belief that the
nation-state is a bad thing of the past. The result is that people raised in the European Union
faith tend to regard any suggestion of return to national sovereignty as a fatal step toward
fascism. This fear of contagion from "the right" is an obstacle to clear analysis which weakens
the left and favors the right, which dares be patriotic.
Two and a half months of coronavirus crisis have brought to light a factor that makes any
predictions about future leaders even more problematic. That factor is a widespread distrust
and rejection of all established authority. This makes rational political programs extremely
difficult, because rejection of one authority implies acceptance of another. For instance, the
way to liberate public services and pharmaceuticals from the distortions of the profit motive
is nationalization. If you distrust the power of one as much as the other, there is nowhere to
go.
Such radical distrust can be explained by two main factors -- the inevitable feeling of
helplessness in our technologically advanced world, combined with the deliberate and even
transparent lies on the part of mainstream politicians and media. But it sets the stage for the
emergence of manipulated saviors or opportunistic charlatans every bit as deceptive as the
leaders we already have, or even more so. I hope these irrational tendencies are less
pronounced in France than in some other countries.
I'm eager to talk about Russia. There are signs that relations with Russia are another
source of European dissatisfaction as "junior partners" within the U.S.–led Atlantic
alliance. Macron is outspoken on this point, "junior partners" being his phrase. The Germans --
business people, some senior officials in government -- are quite plainly restive.
Russia is a living part of European history and culture. Its exclusion is totally unnatural
and artificial. Brzezinski [the late Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Carter administration's national
security adviser] spelled it out in The Great Chessboard : The U.S. maintains world
hegemony by keeping the Eurasian landmass divided.
But this policy can be seen to be inherited
from the British. It was Churchill who proclaimed -- in fact welcomed -- the Iron Curtain that
kept continental Europe divided. In retrospect, the Cold War was basically part of the
divide-and-rule strategy, since it persists with greater intensity than ever after its
ostensible cause -- the Communist threat -- is long gone.
I hadn't put our current circumstance in this context. US-backed, violent coup in Ukraine, 2014.
The whole Ukrainian operation of 2014 [the U.S.–cultivated coup in Kyiv, February
2014] was lavishly financed and stimulated by the United States in order to create a new
conflict with Russia. Joe Biden has been the Deep State's main front man in turning Ukraine
into an American satellite, used as a battering ram to weaken Russia and destroy its natural
trade and cultural relations with Western Europe.
U.S. sanctions are particularly contrary to German business interests, and NATO's aggressive
gestures put Germany on the front lines of an eventual war.
But Germany has been an occupied country -- militarily and politically -- for 75 years, and
I suspect that many German political leaders (usually vetted by Washington) have learned to fit
their projects into U.S. policies. I think that under the cover of Atlantic loyalty, there are
some frustrated imperialists lurking in the German establishment, who think they can use
Washington's Russophobia as an instrument to make a comeback as a world military power.
But I also think that the political debate in Germany is overwhelmingly hypocritical, with
concrete aims veiled by fake issues such as human rights and, of course, devotion to
Israel.
We should remember that the U.S. does not merely use its allies -- its allies, or rather
their leaders, figure they are using the U.S. for some purposes of their own.
What about what the French have been saying since the G–7 session in Biarritz two
years ago, that Europe should forge its own relations with Russia according to Europe's
interests, not America's?
At G7 Summit in Biarritz, France, Aug. 26, 2019. (White House)
I think France is likelier than Germany to break with the U.S.–imposed Russophobia
simply because, thanks to de Gaulle, France is not quite as thoroughly under U.S. occupation.
Moreover, friendship with Russia is a traditional French balance against German domination --
which is currently being felt and resented.
Stepping back for a broader look, do you think Europe's position on the western flank of
the Eurasian landmass will inevitably shape its position with regard not only to Russia but
also China? To put this another way, is Europe destined to become an independent pole of power
in the course of this century, standing between West and East?
At present, what we have standing between West and East is not Europe but Russia, and what
matters is which way Russia leans. Including Russia, Europe might become an independent pole of
power. The U.S. is currently doing everything to prevent this. But there is a school of
strategic thought in Washington which considers this a mistake, because it pushes Russia into
the arms of China. This school is in the ascendant with the campaign to denounce China as
responsible for the pandemic. As mentioned, the Atlanticists in Europe are leaping into the
anti–China propaganda battle. But they are not displaying any particular affection for
Russia, which shows no sign of sacrificing its partnership with China for the unreliable
Europeans.
If Russia were allowed to become a friendly bridge between China and Europe, the U.S. would
be obliged to abandon its pretensions of world hegemony. But we are far from that peaceful
prospect.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International
Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is
"Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century" (Yale). Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via
his Patreon site .
Josep , May 19, 2020 at 02:04
It recalled and insisted that Germany agreed to the euro only on the grounds that the
main mission of the European Central Bank was to fight inflation, and that it could not
directly finance member states.
I once read a comment elsewhere saying that, back in 1989, both Britain (under Margaret
Thatcher) and the US objected to German reunification. Since they could not stop the
reunification, they insisted that Germany accept the incoming euro. A heap of German
university professors jumped up and protested, knowing fully well what the game was: namely
the creation of a banker's empire in Europe controlled by private bankers.
Thorben Sunkimat , May 20, 2020 at 13:45
France and Britain rejected the german reunification. The americans were supportive, even
though they had their demands. Mainly privatisation of german public utilities. After
agreeing to those demands the americans persuaded the british and pressured the french who
agreed to german reunification after germany agreed to the euro.
So why did france want the euro?
The German central bank crashed the European economy after reunification with high interest
rates. This was because of above average growth rates mainly in Eastern Germany. Main
function of the Bundesbank is to keep inflation low, which is more important to them than
anything else. Since Germany's D Mark was the leading currency in Europe the rest of Europe
had to heighten their interest rates too, witch lead to great economic problems within
Europe. Including France.
OlyaPola , May 21, 2020 at 05:30
"namely the creation of a banker's empire in Europe controlled by private bankers."
Resort to binaries (controlled/not controlled) is a practice of self-imposed
blindness. In any interactive system no absolutes exist only analogues of varying assays since
"control" is limited and variable. In respect of what became the German Empire this relationship predated and facilitated the
German Empire through financing the war with Denmark in 1864 courtesy of the arrangements
between Mr. von Bismark and Mr. Bleichroder. The assay of "control of bankers" has varied/increased subsequently but never attained the
absolute.
It is true that finance capital perceived and continues to perceive the European Union as
an opportunity to increase their assay of "control" – the Austrian banks in conjunction
with German bank assigning a level of priority to resurrecting spheres of influence existing
prior to 1918 and until 1945.
One of the joint projects at a level of planning in the early 1990's was development of
the Danube and its hinterland from Regensburg to Cerna Voda/Constanta in Romania but this was
delayed in the hope of curtailment by some when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999 (Serbia not being
the only target – so much for honesty-amongst-theives.)
This project was resurrected in a limited form primarily downstream from Vidin/Calafat
from 2015 onwards given that some states of the former Yugoslavia were not members of the
European Union and some were within spheres of influence of "The United States of
America".
As to France, "Vichy" and Europa also facilitated the resurrection of finance capital and
increase in its assay of control after the 1930's, some of the practices of the 1940's still
being subject to dispute in France.
mkb29 , May 18, 2020 at 16:33
I've always admired Diana Johnstone's clear headed analyses of world/European/U.S./
China/Israel-Palestine/Russia/ interactions and the motivation of its "players". She has
given some credence to what as been known as French rationalism and enlightenment. (Albeit as
an American expat) Think Descartes, Diderot, Sartre , and She loves France in her own
rationalist-humanist way.
Linda J , May 18, 2020 at 13:21
I have admired Ms. Johnstone's work for quite awhile. This enlightening interview spurs me
to get a copy of the book and to contribute to Consortium News.
Others may be interested in the two-part video discovered yesterday featuring Douglas
Valentine's analysis of the CIA's corporate backers and their global choke-hold on
governments and their influencers in every region of the world.
Part 1
see:youtu(dot)be/cP15Ehx1yvI
Part 2
see:youtu(dot)be/IYvvEn_N1sE
worldblee , May 18, 2020 at 12:26
Not many have the long distance perspective on the world, let alone Europe, that Diana
Johnstone has. Great interview!
Drew Hunkins , May 18, 2020 at 11:03
"Decades of indoctrination in the ideology of "Europe" has instilled the belief that the
nation-state is a bad thing of the past. The result is that people raised in the European
Union faith tend to regard any suggestion of return to national sovereignty as a fatal step
toward fascism. This fear of contagion from "the right" is an obstacle to clear analysis
which weakens the left and favors the right, which dares be patriotic."
Bingo! A marvelous point indeed! Quick little example -- Bernard Sanders should have worn an American flag pin on his suit
during the 2020 Dem primary campaign.
chris , May 18, 2020 at 04:46
A very good analysis. As an American who has relocated to Spain several years ago, I am
always disappointed that discussions of European politics always assume that Europe ends at
the Pyrenees. Admittedly, Spanish politics is very complicated and confusing. Forty years of
an unreconstructed dictatorship have left their mark, but the country´s socialist,
communist and anarchic currents never went away. I like to say that the country is very
conservative, but at least the population is aware of what is going on.
Perhaps what Ms.
Johnston says about the French being just worn out, with no stomach for more violent conflict
also applies to the Spanish since their great ideological struggle is more recent. The
American influence during the Transition (which changed little – as the expression
goes: The same dog but with a different collar) was very strong, and remains so. Even so,
there is popular support for foreign and domestic policies independent of American and
neoliberal control, but by and large the political and economic powers are not on board. I do
not think Spain is willing to make a break alone, but would align itself with an European
shift away from American control.
As Ms. Johnston says, Europe currently lacks leaders
willing to take the plunge, but we will see what the coming year brings.
Sam F , May 17, 2020 at 17:45
Thank you Diana, these are valuable insights. Since WWII the US has itself been occupied by tyrants, using Russophobia to demand power
as fake defenders.
1. Waving the flag and praising the lord on mass media, claiming concern with human rights
and "Israel"; while
2. Subverting the Constitution with large scale bribery, surveillance, and genocides, all
business as usual nowadays.
In the US, the form of government has become bribery and marketing lies; it truly knows no
other way.
It may be better that Russia and China keep their distance from the US and maybe even the
EU:
1. The US and EU would have to produce what they consume, eventually empowering workers;
2. Neither the US nor EU are a political or economic model for anyone, and should be
ignored;
3. Neither the US nor EU produces much that Russia and China cannot, by investing more in
cars and soybeans.
It will be best for the EU if it also rejects the US and its "neolib" economic and
political tyranny mechanisms:
1. Alliance with Russia and China will cause substantial gains in stability and economic
strength;
2. Forcing the US to abandon its "pretensions of world hegemony" will soon yield more
peaceful prospects; and
3. Isolating the US will force it to improve its utterly corrupt government and society,
maybe 40 to 60 years hence.
Drew Hunkins , May 17, 2020 at 15:40
" French philosophy .By constantly attacking, deconstructing, and denouncing every remnant
of human "power" they could spot, the intellectual rebels left the power of "the markets"
unimpeded, and did nothing to stand in the way of the expansion of U.S. military power all
around the world "
Brilliant. Exactly right. This was the progenitor to our contemporary I.D. politics which seems to be solely
obsessed with vocabulary, semantics and non-economic cultural issues while rarely having a
critique of corporate capitalism, militarism, massive inequality and Zionism. And it almost
never advocates for robust economic populist proposals like Med4All, U.B.I., debt jubilee,
and the fight for $15.
Drew Hunkins , May 17, 2020 at 15:10
The book is phenomenal. I posted a customer review over on Amazon for this stupendous
work. Below is a copy of my review:
(5 stars) One of the most important intellects pens her magisterial lasting legacy
Reviewed in the United States on March 31, 2020
Johnstone's been an idol of mine ever since I started reading her in the 1990s. She's
clearly proved her worthiness over the decades by bucking the mainstream trend of apologetics
for corporate capitalism, neoliberalism, globalism and imperialistic militarism her entire
career and this astonishing memoir details it all in what will likely be the finest book of
2020 and perhaps the entire decade.
Her writing style is beyond superb, her grasp of the overarching politico-socio-economic
issues that have rocked the world over the past 60 years is as astute and spot-on as you will
find from any global thinker. She's right up there with Michael Parenti, James Petras, John
Pilger and Noam Chomsky as seminal figures who have documented and brought light to tens of
thousands (millions?) of people across the globe via their writings, interviews and speaking
engagements.
Johnstone has never been one to shy away from controversial topics and issues. Why?
Simple, she has the facts and truth on her side, she always has. Circle in the Darkness
proves all this and more, she marshals the documentation and lays it out as an exquisite gift
for struggling working people around the world.
From her groundbreaking work on the NATO
empire's sickening war on sovereign Serbia, the dead end of identity politics and trans
bathroom debates, to her critique of unfettered immigration and open borders, and her
dismissal of the absurd Russsiagate baloney, better than anyone else, Johnstone has kept her
intellect carefully honed to the real genuine kitchen table bread and butter issues that
truly matter. She recognized before most of the world's scholars the perils of rampant
inequality and saw the writing on the wall as to where this grotesque economic system is
taking us all: down a dystopian slope into penury and police-state heavy-handedness, with
millions unable to come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or dental bill.
Whenever she comes out with a new article or essay I immediately drop everything and
devour it, often reading it twice to let her wisdom really soak in. So too Circle of Darkness
is an extremely well written beautiful work that will scream out to be re-read every few
years by those with a hunger to know exactly what was going on since the Korean War era
through today regarding liberal thought, neocon and neoliberal dominance with its capitalist
global hegemony and the take over of Western governments by the parasitic financial
elite.
There will never be another Diana Johnstone. Circle in the Darkness will stand as her
lasting legacy to all of us.
Bob Van Noy , May 17, 2020 at 14:43
"As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding
it" ~Albert Einstein
Many Thanks CN, Patrick Lawrence, and Joe Lauria. Once again I must commend CN for picking
just the appropriate response to our contemporary dilemma.
The quote above leads Diana Johnstone's new book and succinctly describes both the
universe and our contemporary experience with our digital age. President Kennedy and Charles
de Gaulle of France would agree that colonialism was past and that a new world (geopolitical)
approach would become necessary, but that philosophy would put them against some great local
and world powers. Each of them necessarily had different approaches as to how this might be
accomplished. They were never allowed to present their specific proposals on a world stage.
Let's hope a wiser population will once again "see" this possibility and find a way to
resolve it
Aaron , May 17, 2020 at 14:18
Well over the span of all of those decades, the consistent, inexorable theme seems to be a
trend of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, a small number of individuals,
not really states, gaining wealth and power, so everybody else fights over the crumbs,
blaming this or that party, alliance, event or whatever, but behind it all there are two
flower gardens, indeed the rich are all flowers of their golden garden, and the poor are all
flowers of their garden.
It's like the Europeans and the 99 percent in America have all
fallen for the myth of the American dream, that if we are just allowed more free, unfettered
economic opportunity, it's just up to us to pick ourselves up by the bootstraps and become a
billionaire.
The mask competition and fiasco shows the importance of a country simply making
things in their own country, not on the other side of the world, it's not nationalism it's
just a better way to logistically deliver reliable products to the citizens.
AnneR , May 17, 2020 at 13:42
Regarding French colonialism – as I recall the French were especially brutal in
their forced withdrawal from Algeria, both toward Algerians in their homeland and to
Algerians within France itself.
And the French were hardly willing, non-violent colonialists when being fought by the
Vietnamese who wanted to be free of them (quite rightly so).
As for the French in Sub-Saharan Africa – they have yet to truly give up on their
presumed right to have troops within these countries. They did not depart any of their
colonies happily, willingly – like every other colonial power, including the UK.
And, as for WWII – she seems, in her reminiscences, to have mislaid Vichy France,
the Velodrome roundups of French Jews, and so on ..
Ms Johnstone clearly has been looking backwards with rose-tinted specs on when it comes to
France.
Randal Marlin , May 18, 2020 at 13:00
There may be some truth to AnneR's claim that Ms Johnstone has been looking with
rose-tinted specs when it comes to France, but it is highly misleading for her to talk about
"the French" regarding Algeria. I spent 1963-64 in Aix-en-Provence teaching at the Institute
for American Universities and talked with some of the "pieds-noirs," (French born in
Algeria).
After French President Charles de Gaulle decided to relinquish French control over
Algeria, having previously reassured the colonial population that "Je vous ai compris" ("I
have understood you"), there followed death threats to many French colonizers who had to flee
Algeria immediately within 24 hours or get their throats slit – "La valise ou le
cercueil" (the suitcase or the coffin).
In the fall of 1961, I saw Parisian police stations
with machine-gun armed men behind concrete barriers, as an invasion by the colonial French
paratroopers against mainland France was expected. The "Organisation Armée
Secrète," OAS, (Secret Armed Organization) of the colonial powers, threatened at the
time to invade Paris.
As an aside, giving a sense of the anger and passion involved, when the
death of John F.Kennedy in November 1963 was announced in the historic, right-wing
café in Aix, Les Deux Garçons, a huge cheer went up when the media announcer
proclaimed "Le Président est assassinée. Only, that was because they thought de
Gaulle was the president in question. A huge disappointment when they heard it was President
Kennedy. To get a sense of the whole situation regarding France and Algeria I recommend
Alistair Horne's "A Savage War of Peace."
OlyaPola , May 19, 2020 at 11:23
"They did not depart any of their colonies happily"
Some hold that they never departed, but mutated tools including CFA zones and
"intelligence" relations in furtherance of "changing" to remain qualitatively the same. Just as "The United States of America" is a system of coercive relations not synonymous
with the political geographical area designated "The United States of America", the
colonialism of former and present "colonial powers" continues to exist, since the
"independence" of the colonised was always, and continues to be, framed within linear systems
of coercive relations, facilitated by the complicity of "local elites" on the basis of
perceived self-interest, and the acquiescence of "local others" for myriad reasons.
Despite the "best" efforts of the opponents and partly in consequence of the opponents'
complicity, the PRC and the Russian Federation like "The United States of America" are not
synonymous with the political geographical areas designated as "The People's Republic of
China and The Russian Federation", are in lateral process of transcending linear systems of
coercive relations and hence pose existential threats to "The United States of America".
The opponents are not complete fools but the drowning tend to act precipitously including
flailing out whilst drowning; encouraging some to dispense with rose- tinted glasses, despite
such accessories being quite fashionable and fetching.
OlyaPola , May 20, 2020 at 04:32
" .. their colonies "
Perception of and practice of social relations are not wholly synonymous. A construct whose founding myths included liberty, egality and fraternity – property
being discarded at the last moment since it was judged too provocative –
experienced/experiences ideological/perceptual oxymorons in regard to its colonial relations,
which were addressed in part by rendering their "colonies" department of France thereby
facilitating increased perceptual dissonance.
Like many, Randal Marlin draws attention below to the perceptions and practices of the
pied-noir, but omits to address the perceptions and practices of the harkis whom were also
immersed in the proselytised notion of departmental France, and to some degree continue to
be.
This understanding continues to inform the practices and problems of the French state.
Lolita , May 17, 2020 at 12:05
The analysis is very much inspired from "Comprendre l'Empire" by Alain Soral.
Dave , May 17, 2020 at 11:27
Do not fail to read this interview in its entirety. Ms Johnstone analyzes and describes
many issues of national and global importance from the perspective of an USA expat who has
spent most of her career in the pursuit of what may be termed disinterested journalism.
Whether one agrees or disagrees in whole or in part the perspectives she presents,
particularly those which pertain to the demise (hopefully) of the American Empire are worthy
of perusal.
Remember that this is not a polemic; it's a memoir of a lifetime devoted to
reporting and analyzing and discussion of most of the significant issues confronting global
and national politics and their social ramifications. And a big thanks to Patrick Lawrence
and Consortium News for posting the interview.
PEG , May 17, 2020 at 09:11
Diana Johnstone is one of the most intelligent, clear-minded and honest observers of
international politics today, and her book "Circle in the Darkness" – which expands on
the topics and insights touched on in this interview – is certainly among the best and
most compelling books I have ever read, putting the events of the last 75 years into
objective context and focus (normally something which only historians can do, if at all,
generations after the fact).
After reading Circle in the Darkness, I have ordered and am now reading her books on
Hillary Clinton (Queen of Chaos) and the Yugoslav wars (Fool's Crusade), which are very
worthwhile and important. I would recommend that her many articles over the years, appearing
in such publications such as In These Times, Counterpunch and Consortium News, be reprinted
and published together as an anthology. Through Circle in the Darkness, we have Diana
Johnstone's "Life", but it would be good also to have her "Letters".
Interesting comparison between the aspirations of De Gaulle and Putin.
"Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history
that was past. His policy was to foster friendly relations on equal terms with all parts of
the world, regardless of ideological differences. I think that Putin's concept of a
multipolar world is similar. It is clearly a concept that horrifies the exceptionalists."
Agree with Johnstone.
OlyaPola , May 19, 2020 at 11:55
"Having a sense of history, de Gaulle saw that colonialism had been a moment in history
that was past. "
Mr. de Gaulle like other "leaders" of colonial powers did understand that the moment of
overt coercive relations of colonialism had passed and that colonialism to remain
qualitatively the same, required covert coercive relations facilitated by the complicity of
local "elites" on the basis of perceived self-interest.
The exceptions to such strategies lay within constructs of settler colonialism which were
addressed primarily through warfare – "The United States of America",
Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia, Indonesia, Algeria, Kenya, Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola refer –
to facilitate such future strategies.
"I think that Putin's concept of a multipolar world is similar."
As outlined elsewhere the concept of a multi-polar world is not synonymous with the
concept of colonialism except for the colonialists who consistently seek to encourage such
conflation through myths of we-are-all-in-this-togetherness.
Initially, we were told that the coronavirus lockdowns would just "temporarily" disrupt the
U.S. economy, but now it is becoming clear that a lot of the damage will be permanent.
We are starting to see businesses go belly up all over the country, and this includes some
of the most iconic names in the retail world. When J.C. Penney announced that it would be
declaring bankruptcy and closing
hundreds of stores , I warned that would just be
the tip of the iceberg , and that has definitely turned out to be the case. In fact, on
Wednesday many analysts were absolutely shocked when news broke that Victoria's Secret
has decided to shut down about 250 stores
Victoria's Secret plans to permanently close approximately 250 stores in the U.S. and
Canada in 2020, its parent company L Brands announced Wednesday.
L Brands also plans to permanently close 50 Bath & Body Works stores in the U.S. and
one in Canada, according to information the company posted online as part of its quarterly
earnings.
If this pandemic had passed quickly, perhaps those stores wouldn't have needed to be shut
down. But at this point it has become obvious that this virus is going to be with us for a long
time to come. In fact, the WHO just announced that on a global basis we just witnessed the
largest number of newly confirmed cases on a single day so far.
Pier 1 Imports, which previously said it would close half of its fleet of stores, now
plans to close all of its locations.
The retailer, based in Fort Worth, Texas, announced in a news release Tuesday that it was
seeking bankruptcy court approval to begin an "orderly wind-down" when stores are able to
reopen "following the government-mandated closures during the COVID-19 pandemic."
I was never a huge fan of Pier 1 Imports, but my wife liked to visit and see what they had,
but now we will never be able to do that again.
Something about that really saddens me.
Of course it isn't just retailers that are collapsing. Car rental giant Hertz
"is on the verge of bankrutpcy" , and things are not looking good at all
Hertz is on the verge of bankruptcy. At the end of April, it disclosed it had missed a
large amount of lease payments on its rental cars. Since then, it has entered into
forbearance and waiver agreements with these lenders that give it until May 22 to come up
with the money and a plan. Its cars, now parked at various parking lots around the country,
are collateral for this debt.
Some of you old timers might remember the old Hertz commercials featuring O.J. Simpson . Those were much
simpler times, and to be honest I really miss them.
Unfortunately, times have really changed, and I seriously doubt that Hertz will be able to
survive much longer in this very harsh economic environment.
Needless to say, a lot of businesses are going to die in the weeks and months ahead of us.
As I discussed
the other day , it is now being projected that approximately one out of every four
restaurants in the United States will be closing down permanently.
Can you imagine what this is going to look like?
We are going to have abandoned buildings all over the place, and this will especially be
true in our more impoverished communities.
The only chance we have of pulling out of this economic death spiral is if there is a full
scale return to normal economic activity all across America, but that isn't going to happen any
time soon.
Fear of COVID-19 is going to paralyze small and big businesses alike for the foreseeable
future, and every new outbreak is going to spark more overreactions.
Just days after reopening its American assembly plants, Ford temporarily shut down two
separate factories because employees tested positive for Covid-19.
One plant in Chicago that builds the Ford Explorer, the Lincoln Aviator and the Ford
Interceptor police car stopped operations Tuesday afternoon after two employees tested
positive for Covid-19. Then, Ford's plant in Dearborn Michigan that makes its bestselling
F-150 pickup, shut down Wednesday.
If we keep shutting things down every time someone gets sick, our economic problems are just
going to get worse and worse.
A new study suggests the number of Americans who will die after contracting the novel
coronavirus is likely to more than triple by the end of the year, even if current social
distancing habits continue for months on end.
The study, conducted by the Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy and Economics Institute at
the University of Washington's School of Pharmacy, found that 1.3 percent of those who show
symptoms of COVID-19 die, an infection fatality rate that is 13 times higher than a bad
influenza season.
Of course it certainly doesn't help that we continue to allow people from other countries
where COVID-19 is raging to fly into the U.S.
without any special screening whatsoever
A glamorous Russian blogger says she has proved that the US is open for foreign tourism
again, despite the pandemic, according to video obtained by DailyMail.com .
Sofia Semyonova, 33, a fitness model, told how she traveled on a crammed Aeroflot flight
with 500-plus passengers with 'no social distancing' from Moscow to New York City.
She used her B2 tourist visa to enter America from Russia's coronavirus epicentre 'in 30
seconds without any extra questions'.
I don't know how this could possibly be happening, but apparently it is.
Eventually, COVID-19 will literally be just about everywhere, and almost everyone in the
entire country will be exposed to it.
And fear of this virus will paralyze our economy for the foreseeable future.
So the truth is that the "for lease" and "space available" signs that you are now seeing are
just the start.
A lot more are coming, and it is going to be a very dark chapter for our nation.
"... Yes it took parasites, sociopathic oligarchs and a power drunk national security state to bring us to our current state of affairs, but it also took the rest of us. For far too long we as a people have been apathetic, hoodwinked spectators to the life unfolding around us. Voting for "the lesser of two evils" for decade upon decade thinking it might be different this time. Putting up with the economic game that's been put in front of us, despite the fact that it demonstrably and systematically rewards and incentivizes predatory and destructive behavior. As a people, we have been superficial, indifferent and gleefully ignorant of reality. It's time to change all that. ..."
"... I think one reason mass media puts so much emphasis on voting at the national level is the owners of these propaganda channels know voting will change absolutely nothing. The oligarchy and national security state are fully in charge, and they're not going to allow the pesky rabble to get in the way of such a lucrative racket by voting. Getting those who are politically inclined to spend all their time and energy on a rigged and completely corrupt phantom democracy in D.C. is a great way to keep them busy with nonsense. It's also a perfect way to demoralize that portion of the population which understands it's just theater. If you can be convinced that voting at the national level is the only way to change things, you're much more likely to recede into apathy and become intentionally disengaged. This happens to a lot of people, but it's a big mistake. ..."
There's a passage in Teddy Roosevelt's famous 1910 "Citizenship in a Republic" speech I want
to share with you today:
If a man's efficiency is not guided and regulated by a moral sense, then the more
efficient he is the worse he is, the more dangerous to the body politic. Courage, intellect,
all the masterful qualities, serve but to make a man more evil if they are merely used for
that man's own advancement, with brutal indifference to the rights of others. It speaks ill
for the community if the community worships those qualities and treats their possessors as
heroes regardless of whether the qualities are used rightly or wrongly. It makes no
difference as to the precise way in which this sinister efficiency is shown. It makes no
difference whether such a man's force and ability betray themselves in a career of
money-maker or politician, soldier or orator, journalist or popular leader. If the man works
for evil, then the more successful he is the more he should be despised and condemned by all
upright and far-seeing men. To judge a man merely by success is an abhorrent wrong; and if
the people at large habitually so judge men, if they grow to condone wickedness because the
wicked man triumphs, they show their inability to understand that in the last analysis free
institutions rest upon the character of citizenship, and that by such admiration of evil they
prove themselves unfit for liberty.
The above words strike me as a perfect description of the deep hole we find ourselves in
presently throughout these United States of America. It takes a whole nation to screw things up
as badly as we have, and boy have we ever.
Yes it took parasites, sociopathic oligarchs and a power drunk national security state to
bring us to our current state of affairs, but it also took the rest of us. For far too long we
as a people have been apathetic, hoodwinked spectators to the life unfolding around us. Voting
for "the lesser of two evils" for decade upon decade thinking it might be different this time.
Putting up with the economic game that's been put in front of us, despite the fact that it
demonstrably and systematically rewards and incentivizes predatory and destructive behavior. As
a people, we have been superficial, indifferent and gleefully ignorant of reality. It's time to
change all that.
You can consider today's post a rallying cry to step into the arena. Stepping into the arena
is often portrayed as becoming involved in national politics or some other large platform
action, but I see it differently. If you think the only way to have a real impact is by voting
or running for Congress, you're likely to give up and remain passive. The truth is your entire
life can be repurposed to be an expression of increased kindness, wisdom and strength. It's the
most impactful long-term action most of us can have on this earth, and anyone can do it.
Change yourself before trying to change the world. If enough people did this the world
would change without you even trying.
I think what keeps a lot of people on the sidelines of a conscious life is an inability to
intimately process the above. Many people discount the little things, the countless actions of
daily existence that impact those around you and cumulatively make you who you are.
I think one reason mass media puts so much emphasis on voting at the national level is the
owners of these propaganda channels know voting will change absolutely nothing. The oligarchy
and national security state are fully in charge, and they're not going to allow the pesky
rabble to get in the way of such a lucrative racket by voting. Getting those who are
politically inclined to spend all their time and energy on a rigged and completely corrupt
phantom democracy in D.C. is a great way to keep them busy with nonsense. It's also a perfect
way to demoralize that portion of the population which understands it's just theater. If you
can be convinced that voting at the national level is the only way to change things, you're
much more likely to recede into apathy and become intentionally disengaged. This happens to a
lot of people, but it's a big mistake.
When I look back at my life thus far, it was during my decade on Wall Street when I was the
most ignorant and superficial . So focused on stroking my ego, making a bunch of money and
career advancement, I lost a lot of who I am at my core during that time. I often wonder if
that's the case for a lot of people who achieve conventional success within the current
paradigm. It's fortunate I removed myself from that situation and began thinking more deeply
about who I am and what really matters.
Stepping up and getting into the arena will mean something different for each of us, but the
one word that keeps popping into my head is resilience. There are several clear ways to become
more resilient. There's mental and emotional resiliency, there's financial resiliency and
there's physical resiliency (where and how you live). I see all three as fundamentally
important and functioning best when working together. Resiliency starts at the most basic level
because if you and your family aren't resilient, then you won't be much use to anyone else. If
the people of a community or nation lack resiliency it provides the perfect space for
authoritarianism and evil to manifest and flourish.
Case in point, see the following comments by Alan Dershowitz during a recent interview.
"You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask... If you
refuse to be vaccinated the state has the right to take you to a dr's office & plunge a
needle in your arm." @AlanDersh take on vaccines &
masks is vile & un-American. pic.twitter.com/j2C1Rk3d7h
This is despotism plain and simple, and it's being expressed by a guy who still has
considerable influence despite his many Jeffrey Epstein related controversies. It's going to
take a resilient, courageous and ethical public to stand up to scoundrels like this and just
say NO. No, you will not grab me, drag me off somewhere and inject something into my body
without my consent. We've been passive spectators in the destruction of our society for far too
long. It's time to both say no and to create something better.
When I walked away from New York City and Wall Street ten years ago it was clear what sort
of trajectory the country was on, and it's only gotten worse since. We're now in the crucial
period spanning 2020-2025 that will decide what the next several decades look like. The big
battle for the future is here. Right now. If there's ever been a time in your life to step up,
this is it.
* * *
Liberty Blitzkrieg is an ad-free website. If you enjoyed this post and my work in general,
visit the Support Page where you can
donate and contribute to my efforts.
@Harold Smith There is an innocuous military term, incapable of maneuver , to
describe an army which is nothing more than a group of people in uniforms. They look like an
army but, when things go bad, they prove incapable of responding in a disciplined, purposive
manner. Arab armies come to mind.
Our government and much of our industry, especially defense and fintec, appear to be
incapable of maneuver. They're justself-seeking individuals with no loyalty to each other,
their clients, citizenry, or their country.
If we don't want to suffer an interim dystopia, we need to start work on a new
constitution because the old one is worn out and we're going over a cliff.
I keep harping on China because they read our Constitution and foundation documents and,
in 1950, drafted a 20th century constitution which is well worth reading. They've convened
every 10 years since then and amended it to keep it current. For them, the constitution is a
living document, not a totem, and they take it very seriously.
But it's not only Moderna's billionaire founder/CEO Stephane Bancel - once compared to a
post-scandal Elizabeth Holmes - who stands to profit from the action: the White House's new
vaccine czar also holds - or rather, held - more than 150,000 options contracts on Moderna
shares worht more than $12 million, and had resisted pressure to divest them despite the
blatant conflict of interest. We were joking yesterday when we speculated that he would
probably be glad to exercise these options at current prices. But just as every joke contains a
nugget of truth, that one turned out to be prophetic, too.
Alastair Crooke's in fine form today bringing Jung, Euripides, the Outlaw US Empire's
Culture Wars, and Zionist Imperialism together to illustrate "Our Civilisational Quagmire"
and the imperative of "Looking Truth in the Eye." But all that's initially hidden as he
begins by intoning:
"First, the bottom line: If you don't solve the biology, the economy won't recover."
A Truth far too many mostly in the West don't seem capable of grasping:
"But the biology is not solved, and the tension of trying to point in opposite directions
simultaneously is igniting a separate, raging political brushfire....
"The pretence that the U.S. and the global economy is about to snap back, as soon as virus
mitigation is lifted; the pretence that Covid-19 is either a fake (just another 'flu); or, is
'over'; the pretence that U.S. and Europe have competent and resilient political and economic
structures – and the pretence that once Covid is over, we will all return to a world,
just as it was?"
I wrote awhile ago that the pandemic provided an opportunity to use an analytical tool
known as the Franklin Reality Model to see the values and beliefs held by differing nations
and their cultures and ideologies as it exposes them so graphically they cannot be hidden by
any amount of spin or propaganda. The revelations provided my empirical basis for judging
Trump's response specifically and the West's generally to be one of complete Moral Failure.
And not just Trump, but Pelosi, Biden and the vast majority of Democrats, too--their shared
Neoliberal ideology's Immoral basis and Parasitic nature being one of the main roots of the
problem.
I suggest you read this
Atlantic article , "We Are Living in a Failed State: The coronavirus didn't break
America. It revealed what was already broken." And either before or during, take a gander at
this Real GDP
graph that still understates the genuine amount of GDP shrinkage since parasitic
financial "gains" are added to GDP instead of subtracted as a cost to the real economy.
Essentially since GHW Bush's recession, the real economy of the Outlaw US Empire's shrunk
about 1.5% annually or @45% overall with the vast majority of economic gains accruing to the
top 10%. That grim reality is the #1 reason why Trump won in 2016, and why he stands a very
good chance of losing in 2020--"It's the economy, stupid."
Re: Karl, did the 'West' (Anglo-Zionist world) buy (or actually promote) the 80's 'Greed is
Good' line, and ignore what Greenspan supposedly learned..."I have found a flaw...I made a
mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others,
were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity
in the firms."
Even the average American might be able to see that 'socialism' (i.e., Social Security, et
al) is better than 'trickle down'... to put it in simple terms. Neo-liberalism appears to be
killing many of us right now. The problem, seems to me, is how to turn the light bulb on for
Amerian non-voters... obviously Bernie would have 'had a heart attack' if he'd gotten the
nomination.
Re: Karl, did the 'West' (Anglo-Zionist world) buy (or actually promote) the 80's 'Greed is
Good' line, and ignore what Greenspan supposedly learned..."I have found a flaw...I made a
mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others,
were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity
in the firms."
Even the average American might be able to see that 'socialism' (i.e., Social Security, et
al) is better than 'trickle down'... to put it in simple terms. Neo-liberalism appears to be
killing many of us right now. The problem, seems to me, is how to turn the light bulb on for
Amerian non-voters... obviously Bernie would have 'had a heart attack' if he'd gotten the
nomination.
Greenspan issued his belated and stupendously weak mea culpa long after the horse left the
corral and had galloped several time around the planet. One vital component was already
deeply emplaced prior to his tenure that allowed those entities to "protect"
themselves--Regulatory Capture. Recall "Banking Crises" began to become regular occurrences
during Reagan/Bush. One of Hudson's great contributions is looking into how
political-economic theory was captured and transformed into just economic theory, which he
castigates as "Junk Economics" in his book of that title. At his website, there're numerous
essays that deal with that topic; out of the several dozen I might link to is
this one from 2011 . Discovering how we were manipulated into the Neoliberal religion
must be understood if we are to get out from under its boot, which is a tall task since
millions must become informed, and the Neoliberals control the media. You asked How. My
answer is for us to become informed such that we can inform others, which is why Hudson's
written an excellent series of books that make it all easy to comprehend and transmit--I
taught introductory college economics and know Hudson's works are vastly superior to the
texts we used. The two pertinent books for debunking Neoliberalism are Killing the
Host and J is for Junk Economics . For the overall historical perspective, his
trilogy that begins with and forgive them their debts will be a must, the second book
he says will be ready for publication by New Years.
I suggest you read this
Atlantic article , "We Are Living in a Failed State: The coronavirus didn't break
America. It revealed what was already broken."
And either before or during, take a gander at this Real GDP
graph that still understates the genuine amount of GDP shrinkage since parasitic
financial "gains" are added to GDP instead of subtracted as a cost to the real economy.
Essentially since GHW Bush's recession, the real economy of the Outlaw US Empire's shrunk
about 1.5% annually or @45% overall with the vast majority of economic gains accruing to the
top 10%. That grim reality is the #1 reason why Trump won in 2016, and why he stands a very
good chance of losing in 2020--"It's the economy, stupid."
President Trump said Wednesday the coronavirus
crisis is worse than the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and Americans won't allow it to go on any
longer.
"I don't think people will stand for it," Mr. Trump told reporters in the Oval
Office. "The country won't stand for it. It's not sustainable."
He said the pandemic "is worse than Pearl Harbor."
...Asked about soaring unemployment being a potential liability for him in an election year,
the president replied, "Nobody's blaming me for that. I built the greatest economy and I'm
going to rebuild it again. This was an artificially induced unemployment."
US Coronavirus "Bailout" Scam Is $6 Trillion Giveaway to Wall Street Michael Hudson April 21, 2020 6,800 Words
73 Comments Reply
Facing the Covid-19 pandemic, the US Congress rammed through the CARES Act -- which
economist Michael Hudson explains is not a "bailout" but a massive, $6 trillion giveaway to
Wall Street, banks, large corporations, and stockholders.
Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton discuss the enormous financial scam with Hudson, who reveals
how the economy actually works, with the Federal Reserve printing money so rich elites don't
lose their investments.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Just think of when, in the debates with Bernie Sanders during the spring,
Biden and Klobuchar kept saying, 'What we're paying for Medicare-for-All will be $1 trillion
over 10 years.' Well, here the Fed can create $1.5 trillion in one week just to buy stocks.
Why is it okay for the Fed to create $1.5 trillion to buy stocks to prevent rich people from
losing on their stocks, when it's not okay to print only $1 trillion to pay for free Medicare
for the entire population? This is crazy!
The idea is that only the rich should be allowed to print money for themselves, but the
government should not be allowed to print money for any public purpose, any social purpose --
not for medicine, not for schools, not for personal budgets, not for full employment -- but
only to give to the 1 percent.
People hesitate to think that. They think, 'It can't possibly be this bad.' But for those of
us who have worked on Wall Street, for 60 years in my case, that's what the numbers show.
But you don't have the media talking about actual numbers. They talk about just words, and
they use euphemisms. It's a kind of Orwellian vocabulary, describing an inside-out world.
(Intro – 1:58)
BEN NORTON: The world is suffering right now from one of the worst economic crises in modern
history. Definitely the worst crisis since the 2008 financial crash. And many economics experts
are saying that we're living through the worst recession actually since the Great Depression of
1929.
Well joining us to discuss this today, we have one of the best contemporary economists, who
is really well prepared to explain what has been going on in this global recession during the
coronavirus pandemic. And specifically today we're gonna talk about the $6 trillion bailout
package that the US Congress has passed.
The Trump administration is basically taking Obama's corporate bailout on steroids, and
injecting trillions of dollars into the corporate sector. And today to discuss what exactly the
coronavirus bailout means, we are joined by the economist Michael Hudson.
He is the author of many books. And in the second part of this episode we're gonna talk
about his book Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire . So that'll
be much more in the vein of kind of traditional Moderate Rebels episodes, where we talk about
imperialism, US foreign policy, and all of that.
Michael Hudson is also a former Wall Street financial analyst, so he's very well prepared to
talk about the financial thievery that goes on on Wall Street. And he is a distinguished
research professor of economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City.
So Michael, let's just get started here. Can you respond to this global depression that
we're living through right now amid the Covid-19 pandemic? And what do you think about this new
bailout that was passed?
(3:50)
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well the word bailout, as you just pointed out, really was used by Obama and
only applies to the banks. The word coronavirus is just put in as an advertising slogan.
Banks and corporations, airlines, have a whole wish list that they had their lawyers and
lobbyists prepare for just such an opportunity. And when the opportunity comes up -- whether
it's 9/11 with the Patriot Act, or whether it's today's coronavirus -- they just pasted the
word coronavirus onto an act, which should be called a giveaway to the big banking sector.
Let's talk about who's not bailed out. Who's not bailed out are the small business owners,
the restaurants, the companies that you walk down the street in New York or other cities, and
they're all shuttered with closed signs. Their rent is accumulating, month after month.
Restaurants, gyms and stores are small-markup businesses, small-margin businesses, where,
once you have no sales for maybe three months and rent accruing for three months, they're not
going to have enough money to earn the profits to pay the rents that have mounted up for the
last three months.
The other people that are not being bailed out are the workers -- especially the people they
call the prime necessary workers, which is their euphemism for minimum-wage workers without any
job security. There have been huge layoffs of minimum-wage labor, manual labor, all sorts of
labor.
They're not getting income, but their rents are accruing. And their utility bills are
accruing. Their student loans are accruing. And their credit card debts are mounting up at
interest and penalty rates, which are even larger than the interest rates. So all of these
debts are accruing.
The real explosion is going to come in three months, when all of a sudden, this money falls
due. The governor of New York has said, "Well we have a moratorium on actually evicting people
for three months." So there are restaurants and other people, individuals, wage-earners, who
are going to be able to live in their apartments and not be evicted. But at the end of three
months, that's when the eviction notices are going to come. And people are going to decide, is
it worth it?
Well, especially restaurants are going to decide. And they're going to say, "There is no way
that we can make the money to pay, because we haven't had the income to pay." They're going to
go out of business. They're not going to be helped.
The similar type of giveaway occurred after 9/11. I had a house for 20 years in Tribeca, one
block from the World Trade Center. The money was given by the government to the landlords but
not to the small businesses that rented there -- the Xerox shops and the other things. The
landlords took all of the ostensible rent loss for themselves, and still tried to charge rent
to the xerox shops, the food shops, and ended up collecting twice, and driving them out.
So you're having the pretense of a bailout, but the bailout really is an Obama-style
bailout. It goes to the banks; it goes to those companies that have drawn up wish lists by
their lobbyists, such as the airlines, Boeing and the large banks.
The banks and the real estate interests are going to be the biggest gainers. They have
changed the real estate law so that the real estate owners, for a generation, will be income
tax free. They are allowed to charge depreciation, and have other fast write-offs to pretend
that their real estate is losing value, regardless of whether it's going up and up in
value.
Donald Trump says that he loves depreciation, because he can claim that he's losing money,
and gets a tax write-off, even while his property prices go up.
So there's a lot of small print. The devil is in the small print of the giveaway. And then
President Trump has his own half-a-trillion-dollar slush fund that he says he doesn't have to
inform a Congress or be subject to any Freedom of Information law. He gets to give to his
backers in the Republican States.
And states and municipalities are left broke. Imagine New York City and other states. Most
states and cities, have balanced budget constitutional restrictions. That means they're not
allowed to run a deficit.
Now if these states and cities have to pay unemployment insurance, and have to pay carrying
charges on the schools and public services, but are not getting the sales taxes, not getting
the income taxes, from the restaurants and all the businesses that are closed, or from the
workers that are laid off, they're going to be left with a huge deficit.
Nothing is done about that. There has been no attempt to save them. So three months from
now, you're going to have broke states, broke municipalities, labor that cannot, whose savings
was wiped out.
As I'm sure you've reported on your show, the Federal Reserve says that half of Americans do
not have $400 for emergency saving. Well now they're going to be running up thousands of
dollars of rent and monthly bills.
So the disaster is about to hit. They will not be bailed out. But no major investor, really
will lose. You've seen last week, the stock market made the largest jump since the depression
-- the largest jump in in 90 years. And that's because Trump says, "The economy is the stock
market, and the stock market is the One Percent."
So from the very beginning, his point of reference for the market and for the economy is the
One Percent. The 99 Percent are simply overhead. Industry is an overhead. Agriculture is an
overhead. And labor is an overhead, to what really is a financialized economy that is writing
the whole bailout.
It's not a bailout -- it's a huge giveaway that makes them richer than they ever were
before.
(10:48)
BEN NORTON: Yeah and Michael, related to that -- you mentioned that fine print is important.
But I also have a kind of bigger question. And I don't really know where exactly these numbers
come from.
Officially the bailout is $2 trillion. Many media outlets reported it as effectively $4
trillion. But actually, according to Larry Kudlow -- who is the director of the US National
Economic Council, he's the Trump administration's kind of chief economist -- Larry Kudlow is
now saying that it's actually $6 trillion in total, which is a quarter of all of US GDP.
And that includes $4 trillion in lending power for the Federal Reserve, as well as $2
trillion in the aid package.
So there is discussion of this aid package, but actually the aid package of $2 trillion is
actually half the size of the $4 trillion that is given to the Federal Reserve.
What exactly is that $4 trillion that the Federal Reserve has? Is this some kind of slush
fund, or how does it work?
(11:52)
MICHAEL HUDSON: No, the Federal Reserve was given special powers to create 10 times as many
loans or swaps as others. The Federal Reserve represents the commercial banks and commercial
investors.
Now here's the problem: a lot of companies were issuing junk bonds. They were going way down
in price, especially junk bonds for the fracking industry. The Federal Reserve says, "We're
going to be backed up by the Treasury. We can just create -- as you know, Modern Monetary
Theory -- we can just create money on a computer, and swap. So we will, say, 'Give us your
poor.' It's like the Statue of Liberty: 'Give us your poor, your oppressed,' or Aladdin's old
lamps for new: Give us your junk bonds, and we will give you a bona fide Federal Reserve
deposit."
So the Federal Reserve has been pumping trillions and trillions of dollars into the stock
market. That's what's been pushing up the stock market, the Federal Reserve. The bailout has
gone to the stock market. As if the stock market got coronavirus! Stocks don't get coronavirus!
They don't get sick on the virus! And yet it's the stock market that's going up through the
Federal Reserve.
There's also another $2 trillion dollars, $2 to $4 trillion that the US government has, over
and above the $2 trillion that's going to the people. So most of the calculations that have
been published cite it as a $10 trillion bailout. Of which the newspapers, to avoid
embarrassing Mr. Trump, only refer to the money given to the the wage earners. And they're sort
of embarrassed that the vast majority are given to the financial sector that doesn't need a
bailout, but that doesn't want to lose a single penny from the virus.
So when you see the stock market recovered almost to what it was before the virus, while the
economy is going down, you realize, wait a minute they're saving the 1 percent, or the 10
percent of the population that own 85 percent of the stocks and bonds. They're saving the
banks. They're not saving the people, and they're not saving the economy; they're not saving
industry; and they're not saving small businesses.
So it's an amazing hypocrisy that the mainstream press is not discussing, which is why your
show is so important.
(14:29)
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Yeah and here in Washington, DC, we got I think $500 million from the, I
guess what you accurately describe as the stock market bailout. And that's a lot less than a
number of red states that are less populous than Washington, DC got. So there's a massive
shafting here.
And then the city has only been able to provide for certain parts of the economy.
Undocumented immigrants, who do a lot of work here, got nothing from the city. Vendors, which
are a big part of the informal economy in DC, even though they have to be regulated, got
nothing.
And then you mention all of these sectors of the economy -- young people, college-educated
young people who are deep in debt, and therefore less inclined to spend -- are getting shafted
here.
So you have called for a solution -- well I guess, knowing so many of those people, they
contribute so little to the economy because they can't; they're just putting all their money
into debt. So you have called for a debt jubilee.
You say that debts that can't be paid won't be, and this is the best way out.
Maybe you can explain to our viewers and listeners what that is and why it would be the best
remedy?
(15:42)
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well here's what happens if you don't write down the debts that are just
going to accrue in the next three months: If you don't say, "The rents will not have to be
paid, and workers will not have to pay the debts that mount up," if you leave those debts on
the books, and you make the workers liable to keep paying the student debts, and the other
debts, and the mortgage debts, and the rents, then they're not going to have any money left to
buy goods and services.
When it's all over, they're going to get their paychecks, and off the top is going to be the
wage withholding, and the tax withholding, and the Medicare, and if they don't want to get
kicked out of their houses, they're going to have to pay all of this money that's accrued while
they're not making an income.
So you're going to have a shrinkage of the economy, a vast shrinkage. How can they afford to
buy anything but the most basic necessities, the cheapest food, the necessary transport?
Obviously they're not going to buy the kinds of goods and services that are supposed to be part
of the circular flow.
Economics textbooks say employers pay the workers so the workers can have enough money to
buy what they produce. But the workers don't spend their income only on what they produce. They
spend most of their income on rent, on debt service, on taxes, on finance, insurance, and real
estate. And this is the only part of the economy that is being enabled to survive.
So how can you have the superstructure of rents and debts, of insurance charges, on an
economy that doesn't have the income to buy goods and services? And if they can't buy goods and
services, you're going to have the stores closing down, because people can't afford to buy what
the stores are selling.
You're going to have a whole wave of closures. And you're going to go down the streets, and
certainly in cities like New York, or where I live in Queens, just outside of Manhattan, where
block after block, they're going to be "For rent" signs. It's going to be empty.
And the only way to avoid that is for a debt write-down.
Now you've had this occurring for 5,000 years. I'll give you an example that may be easy to
understand.
In Babylonia, we have the Laws of Hammurabi, in 1800 BC. One of the laws says that when you
would buy beer or other things, they would write it on a tab in the bar, in the ale house, and
all the debts were owed when the harvest was in. You'd pay the debt seasonally.
Well Hammurabi said, if there's a drought, or if there's a flood, then you don't have to pay
the debts. Most debts were owed to the palace, and others.
The implied policy is that, "The reason we're doing this is, if we don't do that, then
you're going to have these debtors become debt servants, bond servants to the creditors;
they're going to owe their labor to the creditors; they're going to lose their land to the
creditors; and they won't be able to work on public infrastructure projects; they won't work
for Babylonia; they won't serve in the army, and we can be invaded; and they won't be able to
use their crops as taxes, because they'll owe the crops as debts. So we're going to write it
down."
So the whole idea for thousands of years, of every Near Eastern ruler starting his reign by
writing down the debts, was to begin everything in balance.
Because they realized, just mathematically, debts grow at compound interest. You've seen the
coronavirus increase at an exponential rate. That's how debts accumulate interest, at an
exponential rate.
But the economy grows in an S-curve, and then it tapers off. The American economy, the GDP
since the Obama bailouts of 2008, the entire growth of the GDP has only accrued to 5 percent of
the population. 95 percent of the GDP. But the population for 95 percent, the industry and
agriculture, that's actually gone down.
So we're already in a 12-year depression, the Obama depression, that they like to call a
recession, because most of the media are Democratic Party people.
But you're going to have this recession turn into a genuine depression, and it will continue
until the public debt, that is state and local debts, are written down; the mortgage debts
written down; and the personal debts written down, starting with the student loans, the most
obviously unpayable debt.
And the choice is, do you want to depression, or do you want the banks to be able to collect
all the economic surplus for themselves? Well Donald Trump, supported unanimously by the
Democratic Congress, says, "We want to protect the banks, not the population, not the economy.
Let the economy shrink, as long as our constituents, the donor class, are able to avoid making
a loss. Let's make the loss borne by the 99 percent, not our donor class."
(21:17)
BEN NORTON: Yeah, and Michael, you mentioned something, getting back to the Federal Reserve
and understanding how this whole system works. I mean frankly it seems to me to kind of be a
house of cards.
But you mentioned this idea of Modern Monetary Theory and just kind of creating money out of
nothing. Can you talk more about that? You know this is a term that's become more prominent,
especially on the left: MMT, modern monetary theory.
There are socialists who argue in support of MMT and then there are others who are kind of
skeptical of the whole notion that you can just print all this money to fund these social
programs that you want to create, and that it won't create inflation.
But at the same time, you and other people point out that that's exactly how the economy
already works. Where for instance, you want to fund a war, there's never -- you know frequently
when someone on the left asks for universal health care or free public education, members not
only of the Republican Party but many neoliberal Democrats often say, "Well yeah, where are you
gonna get the money from?" And the response of some of the MMT supporters is, "Well we just
fund the program, and we just create the money because we control the creation of the
dollar."
And we see that same attitude used actually by the Federal Reserve right now, but to bail
out Wall Street. "Yeah we're just gonna print" -- they printed $1.5 trillion, and then just
gave it, they just injected it right into Wall Street.
So does that not create inflation, or what exactly is happening economically there? I mean
to me, it seems like a scam; it seems like totally a scam.
(22:59)
MICHAEL HUDSON: Since 2008, you have had the greatest inflation of money in history. And you
have also had the greatest inflation in history, but it's entirely asset price inflation.
You're absolutely right: the money has gone into the stock market and the bond market, to
support bond prices, meaning you've had the biggest bond boom in history. You've had a huge
stock market boom. But consumer prices have gone down. So here you have an enormous amount of
money creation, and consumer prices and real wages have been drifting down.
So they are really two economies. The question is, are you going to create money for public
purposes by spending it into the economy, on industry, agriculture, and the goods and service
production and consumption economy Or, are you going to put it into the financial economy?
Well the whole way of our banking system is that banks create credit. If you go into a bank
and you take out a loan, you say, I'm gonna borrow $5,000 for something. The banker doesn't go
and say, let me see if we have any money to loan you; he says, okay I will write a loan on my
computer. I will credit your deposit with $5,000, and you will sign this IOU, and we have an
asset. And the asset is $5000, on which we're going to charge interest on what we pay you.
So it's just done by computer, on a balance sheet. And as long as money is created on a
computer, the only cost is the electricity used to make that debt record.
Now the banks, when they make loans, 80 percent are against real estate. So they say, in
case you can't pay, you're pledging your real estate – the home you're buying, or the
commercial building you're buying, as collateral. So we'll lend you up to 80 percent, maybe 100
percent, of the value of what you're buying, and that's the collateral we have.
So they lend against collateral. Well, if you lend the money against collateral to buy a
building, or to buy stocks and bonds, which are the other collateral, then obviously this money
you're creating to buy houses, or commercial real estate, or stocks and bonds are going to bid
the price up.
Banks don't give loans for people who say, I want to go shopping and buy more goods because
I need the money. That may be a little bit, that's what credit cards are for, but that's a
small portion of the overall money supply. So banks don't make loans to buy goods and services;
they make loans to buy assets that obviously inflate the price of assets.
And the more money that you pay for houses that are rising in price, or medical insurance,
or stocks and bonds, to make a retirement income for your pension fund; the more money you pay
for houses that are inflating in price because of bank credit, the less money you have to buy
goods and services.
So actually, the more money they create, the more consumer prices for goods and services
fall. It's the exact opposite of the usual theory.
On my website I have many articles about that, and I have something today in
Counterpunch on that. It's on how the economy works the opposite of the way the textbook
says.
Now unfortunately the left-wing doesn't really study finance and money much. The discussion
of finance and money has been monopolized by the right-wing, so left-wingers think, they don't
realize that they're picking up a kind of junk theory of monetary relations and debt relations
that's all picked up from the right-wing of the political spectrum.
It's a kind of parallel universe. That's not how the economy really works, but in a way that
sort of is easy to understand. And it's very easy to make an erroneous, oversimplified view of
the world easy to understand.
And when it's repeated again and again and again, in the media, the New York Times and
MSNBC, people really think that, well, maybe that's how the world works -- more money is going
to push up prices, so we better not push for it, we better go along with trickle-down
theory.
And most of the left believes in trickle-down theory. The Democratic Party leadership is
absolutely convinced, if you just give enough money to the top 1 percent, or 5 percent, or Wall
Street, it'll all trickle down.
(27:49)
BEN NORTON: Well of course the Democratic Party is not the left.
MICHAEL HUDSON: That's right, but it pretends to be. And it has crowded out the left. You
can see in the recent election primaries that its job is to protect the Republican Party from
any critique by the left, interjecting itself in between the Republican Party and any possible
reform movement.
BEN NORTON: Exactly.
(28:20)
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Well they stood up really strongly against the bailout -- I mean what was
it, 96 to nothing? And in the voice vote, I was listening to the voice vote last night in the
House; I didn't hear AOC's voice against it.
MICHAEL HUDSON: They did a voice so that everybody could say, "Oh it wasn't me!"
MAX BLUMENTHAL: No, no! So you mentioned that foreclosure king Steve Mnnuchin gets like a
$500 billion slush fund. I haven't heard much discussion about that. What will he do with this
sort of opaque slush fund, and how will this -- I mean it's a leading question, but how will
this kind of reinforce or consolidate inequality for the next generation?
(29:10)
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well gee, I hope he gives some of it to Kamala Harris, who was the attorney
general who let him do all of this, and who thoroughly backed him and led the foreclosure, was
the iron fist behind his foreclosure program. So I'm sure he'll press for Kamala to be the vice
president on the ticket.
The Democrats have a problem. How can they guarantee that they have their candidate win?
Their candidate is Donald Trump. How can they make sure that they have such a weak candidate
that he's sure to lose to Donald Trump? And the choice is, we'll get a vice president that's so
unpopular that they're sure to lose.
Now it's a race between Kamala Harris and the Minnesota lady.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Klobuchar? The one who throws staplers at her staff. She seems very
charming.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Uh, I don't know about that. But my wife can't even look at her on
television. But I think that the pretense is that she'll help get Minnesota, as if Minnesotans,
where I'm from, are so dumb just to vote for somebody from there. But by getting Minnesota,
they'll lose the whole rest of the country.
So I think she'll be the vice president, because that guarantees a Trump victory. And that
will enable the Democrats to say, here -- they'll have the president they want, that is for
their donor class, but they can say, "That's not us; that's the Republicans." So that's the
Democratic strategy.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Right, then they can raise loads of money for the "Resistance," and all of
the outside think tanks. And that was the old Republican, William F. Buckley strategy, is we're
better throwing rocks outside the building and raising a ton of money for the National Review
than actually having to govern. And that seems like the Democratic strategy.
But I guess I was asking about how you see the economy transforming, because the Obama
bailout sort of transformed it or consolidated the gig economy, where everyone has to work
three to five jobs, and what was supposed to be a highly educated middle class is deeply in
debt.
Where do you see it after this next tranche of stock market bailouts?
(31:29)
MICHAEL HUDSON: Ok, let's look at three months from now. Smaller companies are going to be
squeezed, because all of their expenses are going to go up. Small companies have had to run up
debts, and they have all sorts of other problems, and their earnings, their prospective
profits, are not going to look that good. Because there's not going to be a market for the
things that they sell, because of the debt deflation that I talked about.
So what's going to happen? You're going to have a bonanza for private equity capital. The
liquid, the 1 percent that have access to bank credit and have their own equity capital are
going to come in and pick up a lot of real estate that's going to be defaulted on -- just like
they did after Obama evicted his constituency, the mob with pitchforks, and evicted them.
Blackstone will pick up more real estate. Big companies are going to pick up small
companies. You're going to emerge with a highly monopolized economy, much more centralized.
The important thing to realize about free-market economics and libertarianism, is
libertarians advocate central planning, The Chicago School of monetarists advocate central
planning; the free marketers want central planning. But the banks are to be the planners, not
the government. They want to exclude the government from planning, except to the extent that
they can take over the government, as Trump has done, and plan all of the income to be
transferred to themselves from the rest of the economy.
So we're going to have a much more centrally planned by a coalition of monopolies and the
government. In the 1930s, that was called fascism.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: It's what we call a "public-private partnership" or something.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Right.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Just really quickly, and maybe we can kind of transition after this, but you
mentioned Blackstone. I think this is one of the key components of the bailout. They own so
much stake in so many of the companies getting bailed out. Can you just describe their role and
what they are?
(33:38)
MICHAEL HUDSON: It's appropriate that they were put in charge of bailout. So if they're the
largest company buying up defaulted real estate and buying, picking up the weak -- it's called
moving assets from the weak hands to the strong -- then they might as well be put in charge,
because they're going to be the company doing all the grabbing. So of course they're in charge
of it.
It's called grabitization. That was the Russian word for privatization in the 1990s. So
grabitization is I think a better word than public-private partnership. It's not really a
partner; it's sort of a one-way partnership; there's one subsidiary partner. It's really
financialization and grabitization.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Right, just the looting of state assets.
BEN NORTON: Going back one step here, Michael, you were talking about the way that people
should think about how the economy actually works. And I mentioned MMT. Can you kind of just
walk through that again? Because you were talking about how actually, when the Fed creates -- I
mean really to me, as someone, I'm definitely not an economics expert, I just don't understand
really how this whole process works, because to me it just seems simply like, they're literally
just creating money and just giving it to banks, and corporate elites, and rich people.
I mean maybe that's what it is. But I don't understand, this is like the biggest scheme I
can imagine, where the Federal Reserve is creating all of this money, printing -- they're
physically printing money is my understanding. And then they're just giving it to these banks,
to bondholders. And then, but you said that what does is, instead of actually creating
inflation, all that does is, if I understood correctly, it boosts the value of assets like real
estate, while at the same time deflating wages and commodity prices.
So if that's the case, then how should people who are advocating for socialized programs
like Medicare for All, free public education, and maternity leave, and childcare, and all of
these programs that the Bernie Sanders campaign and movement have been advocating for, how
should we talk about the way to pay for all of those programs, if the reality of the economy is
that the Fed is printing trillions of dollars, and then just giving that cash to banks?
(36:11)
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well I think the reason you're having trouble understanding MMT is because
what you described is what's happening, but you think, "But that's unfair!" And there's a
tendency to think, if it's unfair --
MAX BLUMENTHAL: It's not just unfair. It's the biggest scheme I can imagine. There's no
other word other than just a con scheme.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Yes, and the brain recoils from thinking, "Can the government really be
doing that to us?" Well, yes it can.
And just think of when, in the debates with Bernie Sanders during the spring, Biden, and
Klobuchar keep saying, 'What we're paying for Medicare-for-All will be $1 trillion over 10
years.' Well here the Fed can create $1.5 trillion in one week just to buy stocks.
Why is it okay for the Fed to create $1.5 trillion to buy stocks to prevent rich people from
losing on their stocks, when it's not okay to print only $1 trillion to pay for free Medicare
for the entire population? This is crazy!
The idea that only the rich should be allowed to print money for themselves, but the
government should not be allowed to print money for any public purpose, any social purpose --
not for medicine, not for schools, not for personal budgets, not for full employment -- but
only to give to the 1 percent.
People hesitate to think that. They think, 'It can't possibly be this bad.' But for those of
us who have worked on Wall Street, for 60 years in my case, that's what the numbers show.
But you don't have the media talking about actual numbers. They talk about just words, and
they use euphemisms. It's a kind of Orwellian vocabulary, describing an inside-out world that
they're talking about.
They will buy stock; they'll say we're going to buy a million shares of Boeing; they'll just
write a check, and the check will be from the Federal Reserve, and Boeing will get the money.
The Federal Reserve can create a deposit, just like a banker will write you a loan when you go
in and borrow. It's done on a computer – without levying taxes. The Fed can do the same
thing.
Stephanie Kelton, my department chairman for many years at the University of Missouri at
Kansas City, describes this. The University of Missouri's website, New Economic Perspectives
has a description of it. So if people want to google either her, UMKC, or what I've written, or
Randall Wray at the Levy Institute, you'll get walked through.
If you're not already thinking in terms of balance sheets, which most people don't, you have
to sort of just read it again and again, and then all of a sudden, "Ah, now I get. It's a
ripoff! It's created out of nothing. Now I get it."
BEN NORTON: It's just a house of cards. To me it proves the kind -- there used to be this
kind of very blunt orthodox Marxist view that the economy strictly follows politics, and it
seems to me this is a case where the economy is just created by politics.
MICHAEL HUDSON: That's true, and that's not an un-Marxist position. Marx did distinguish
between oligarchies and democracies, and finance capitalist economies and industrial capitalist
economies.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Right. And the $17 billion for "urgent national security measures" was
straight into the pockets of Boeing, which had its 737 maxes falling out of the sky, and had
been clamoring for this bailout for a long time.
I mean you saw 3M, the maker of these masks which are suddenly unavailable, gained a total
exemption from lawsuits, if the masks that it mass-produced now somehow failed.
So all of these things stuffed into the bailout were what industry and finance had been
clamoring for for years. And they finally had the opportunity to do it.
(Outro – 40:38)
BEN NORTON: All right, we're gonna take a pause there. That was the end of part one of our
interview here with the economist Michael Hudson. He is a Wall Street financial analyst, a
distinguished research professor of economics at the University of Missouri Kansas City, and of
course the author of many books on economics.
You can find some of his work at michael-hudson.com . We will link to that in the show notes. He
has interviews with transcripts and articles.
You can also find some of his economics work and the work of some of his like-minded
colleagues at the economics department at the University of Missouri Kansas City website. I
will link to that as well in the show notes. You can find the show notes at moderaterebels.com .
In part two of this episode, we're going to continue our discussion of the house of cards
that is the international financial system, the economic system. And in the second part we're
going to talk about his book "Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire."
This is an incredible book. You know here at Moderate Rebels, Max and I frequently talk
about the political and military side of imperialism. Michael Hudson just spells out, in
easy-to-understand terms, how imperialism works at an economic level, how the US government and
the Treasury, through the backing of military force, force countries around the world to buy US
bonds, Treasury bonds, and how there's basically just a con scheme where countries pay for
their own US military occupation through buying US Treasury bonds.
Michael Hudson explains that all in really simple terms. And we also talk about the rise of
China, and how China does pose a so-called threat, in scare quotes, to not the American people
but rather to the hegemony of the US financial system -- and the main financial instruments,
the weapons that the US uses to maintain that hegemony, the International Monetary Fund, the
IMF, and the World Bank.
And Hudson describes how, in his terms, the IMF, and the World Bank, specifically, are some
of the most evil institutions that are really maintaining the American dictatorial,
authoritarian chokehold on the global financial system.
If you want to support this program, Moderate Rebels, and the kind of independent interviews
we do like this, giving a platform to some of these voices who you're never going to hear in
mainstream corporate media, you can go to Patreon.com/ModerateRebels . Please consider supporting
us. And definitely join us in part. See you soon.
Oh and seems increasingly evident that the response to the virus was planned and exaggerated
in effort to distract from imminent financial collapse and provide cover for yet again
another bank and government bailout. While the people cower in their hovels the bankers are
popping champagne poolside on private refuges.
This effect is most notable in US maybe the erstwhile sole remaining "solvent" western
nation - only because they own the printer for worlds currency.
Coronavirus has already begun to undermine the legitimacy of the European project in a
greater manner that nationalist movements had hoped to achieve. European finance ministers have
clashed over all EU nations sharing "corona bonds" debt, while France and Germany responded to
Italy's request for ventilators with a refusal accompanied by closing their borders with Italy.
At around the same time, the United States imposed a unilateral ban on commercial flights with
the EU.
China's economic growth strategy and foreign policy aspirations are being frustrated in the
wake of Coronavirus, as developing countries are likely to scrutinize China's Belt Road
Initiative. Among Western policymakers anti-China sentiment is increasing. In the UK, there is
mounting opposition to Huawei building its fifth-generation mobile networks. In late March, the
United States abandoned its long-standing policy of maintaining a status quo vis a vis Taiwan.
President Donald Trump signed into law The Taiwan Allies International Protection and
Enhancement Initiative (TAIPEI) Act, which increases U.S. support for Taiwan and "alters"
engagement with nations that undermine Taiwan's security or prosperity. Beijing responded that
it would respond forcefully if the law was implemented, all the while China increases its
military drills around Taiwan. This is increasingly likely to occur while the United States
increasingly supports Hong Kong's independence movement and demonstrates willingness to
confront China in the South China Seas. Similarly, Washington is likely to be drawn into a
confrontation with North Korea as the collapse of North Korea's health system may threaten Kim
Jong-un's regime leading him to militarily lash out.
The latest phase of globalization spearheaded by the West entailed that service economies
were not responsible for the manufacture of the products they consumed. Instead, they depended
upon outsourcing production of cheap goods in distant shores creating unprecedented levels of
economic prosperity, which at its root was artificial. Liberal democracies did not reach "the
end of history," where conflict was to be consigned to the dustbin of history, but could easily
be unraveled by a virus emanating from a society it was reliant upon that did not share its
norms. In a similar vein, the Roman Empire's apex contained the seeds of its decay as it had
become overstretched and difficult to manage. The historian Edward Gibbon, in his 1776 book
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire , notes that Romans had become weak and
responded to the challenges of hyperinflation, civil wars and revolts by outsourcing their
duties to defend their empire in far flung regions to "barbarian" mercenaries such as the
Visigoths. Blowback occurred as these barbarians' increased economic production and their
ability to conduct warfare, which led them, ultimately, to turn against their benefactors and
sack the Roman Empire. Similarly, the West increased the prosperity of faraway nations and
ironically, as a result their military assertiveness by being beholden to extended global
supply chains. This along with the risk of globalization unravelling increases the prospects of
inter-state and great power conflict. All it took was a virus to detonate the fuse that was
shorter than anyone expected.
Barak Seener is the CEO of Strategic Intelligentia and a former Middle East Fellow at the
Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). He is on Twitter at @BarakSeener .
"... The US has spent over $200 billion on antimissile systems, and once they come off the drawing boards, none of them work very well, if at all. ..."
In the very near future, countries are going to have to choose whether they make guns or
vaccines
"There have been as many plagues as wars in history, yet plagues and wars take
people equally by surprise."
~ Albert Camus, "The Plague"
Camus' novel of a lethal contagion in the North African city of Oran is filled with
characters all too recognizable today: indifferent or incompetent officials, short sighted and
selfish citizens, and lots of great courage. What not even Camus could imagine, however, is a
society in the midst of a deadly epidemic pouring vast amounts of wealth into instruments of
death.
Welcome to the world of the hypersonic weapons, devices that are not only superfluous, but
which will almost certainly not work. They will, however, cost enormous amounts of money. At a
time when countries across the globe are facing economic chaos, financial deficits, and
unemployment at Great Depression levels, arms manufacturers are set to cash in big.
A Hypersonic Arms Race
Hypersonic weapons are missiles that go five times faster than sound – 3,800 mph
– although some reportedly can reach speeds of Mach 20, 15,000 mph. They come in two
basic varieties. One is powered by a high-speed scramjet. The other, launched from a plane or
missile, glides to its target. The idea behind the weapons is that their speed and
maneuverability will make them virtually invulnerable to anti-missile systems.
Currently there is a hypersonic arms race
going on among China, Russia, and the U.S., and, according to the Pentagon, the Americans are
desperately trying to catch up with its two adversaries.
Truth is the first casualty in an arms race.
In the 1950s, it was the "bomber gap" between the Americans and the Soviets. In the 1960s,
it was the "missile gap" between the two powers. Neither gap existed, but vast amounts of
national treasure were nonetheless poured into long-range aircraft and thousands of
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The enormous expenditures on those weapons, in
turn, heightened tensions between the major powers and on at least three occasions came very
close to touching off a nuclear war.
In the current hypersonic arms race, "hype" is the operational word. "The development of
hypersonic weapons in the United States," says physicist James
Acton of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, "has been largely motivated by
technology, not by strategy. In other words, technologists have decided to try and develop
hypersonic weapons because it seems like they should be useful for something, not because there
is a clearly defined mission need for them to fulfill."
They have certainly been "useful" to Lockheed
Martin , the largest arms manufacturer in the world. The company has already received $3.5
billion to develop the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (Arrow) glide missile, and the
scramjet-driven Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle (Hacksaw) missile.
The Russians also have several hypersonic missiles, including the Avangard glide vehicle, a
missile said to be capable of Mach 20.
China is developing several hypersonic missiles, including the DF-ZF, supposedly capable of
taking out aircraft carriers.
"No Advantage Whatsoever"
In theory hypersonic missiles are unstoppable. In real life, not so much.
The first problem is basic physics: speed in the atmosphere produces heat. High speed
generates lots of it. ICBMs avoid this problem with a blunt nose cone that deflects the
enormous heat of re-entering the atmosphere as the missile approaches its target. But it only
has to endure heat for a short time because much of its flight is in frictionless low earth
orbit.
Hypersonic missiles, however, stay in the atmosphere their entire flight. That is the whole
idea. An ICBM follows a predictable ballistic curve, much like an inverted U and, in theory,
can be intercepted. A missile traveling as fast as an ICBM but at low altitude, however, is
much more difficult to spot or engage.
But that's when physics shows up and does a Las Vegas: what happens on the drawing board
stays on the drawing board.
Without a heat deflecting nose cone, high-speed missiles are built like big needles, since
they need to decrease the area exposed to the atmosphere. Even so, they are going to run very
hot. And if they try to maneuver, that heat will increase. Since they can't carry a large
payload, they will have to be very accurate – but as a study by the Union of Concerned
Scientists points out, that is "problematic."
According to the Union, an object traveling Mach 5 for a period of time "slowly tears itself
apart during the flight." The heat is so great it creates a "plasma" around the craft that
makes it difficult "to reference GPS or receive outside course correction commands."
If the target is moving, as with an aircraft carrier or a mobile missile, it will be almost
impossible to alter the weapon's flight path to intercept it. And any external radar array
would never survive the heat or else be so small that it would have very limited range. In
short, you can't get from here to there.
Lockheed Martin says the tests are going just fine, but
then Lockheed Martin is the company that builds the F-35, a fifth generation stealth fighter
that simply doesn't work. It does, however, cost $1.5 trillion, the most expensive weapons
system in US history. The company has apparently dropped the scramjet engine because it tears
itself apart, hardly a surprise.
The Russians and Chinese claim success with their hypersonic weapons and have even begun
deploying them. But Pierre Sprey, a Pentagon designer associated with the two very successful
aircraft – the F-16 and the A-10 – told defense analyst Andrew
Cockburn that he is suspicious of the tests.
"I very much doubt those test birds would have reached the advertised range had they
maneuvered unpredictably," he told Cockburn. "More likely they were forced to fly a straight,
predictable path. In which case hypersonics offer no advantage whatsoever over traditional
ballistic missiles."
Guns or Vaccines
While Russia, China, and the US lead the field in the development of hypersonics, Britain,
France, India, and Japan have joined
the race too.
Why is everyone building them?
At least the Russians and the Chinese have a rationale. The Russians fear the US antimissile
system might cancel out their ICBMs, so they want a missile that can maneuver. The Chinese
would like to keep US aircraft carriers away from their shores.
But antimissile systems can be easily fooled by the use of cheap decoys, and the carriers
are vulnerable to much more cost effective conventional weapons. In any case hypersonic
missiles can't do what they are advertised to do.
For the Americans, hypersonics are little more than a very expensive subsidy for the arms
corporations. Making and deploying weapons that don't work is nothing new. The F-35 is a case
in point, but nevertheless, there have been many systems produced over the years that were
deeply flawed.
The US has spent over $200 billion on antimissile systems, and once they come off the
drawing boards, none of them work very well, if at all.
Probably the one that takes the prize is the Mark-28 tactical nuke, nicknamed the "Davy
Crockett," and its M-388 warhead. Because the M-388 was too delicate to be used in
conventional artillery, it was fired from a recoil-less rife with a range of 2.5 miles.
Problem: if the wind was blowing in the wrong direction, the Crockett cooked its three-man
crew. It was only tested once and found to be "totally inaccurate."
So, end of story? Not exactly. A total of 2,100 were produced and deployed, mostly in
Europe.
While the official military budget is $738 billion, if one pulls all US defense related
spending together, the actual cost for taxpayers is $1.25 trillion a year, according to
William
Hartung of the Center for International Policy. Half that amount would go a long way toward
providing not only adequate medical support during the Covid-19 crisis – it would also
pay jobless Americans a salary.
Given that there are more than 31 million Americans now unemployed and the possibility that
numerous small businesses – restaurants in particular – will never reopen, building
and deploying a new generation of weapons is a luxury the US and other countries cannot
afford.
In the very near future, countries are going to have to choose whether they make guns or
vaccines.
"In the worst-case scenario projected for a pandemic, Zylberman predicted that 'sanitary
terror' would be used as an instrument of governance....
"Agamben did square the circle: it's not that citizens across the West have the right to
health safety; now they are juridically forced (italics [Pepe's]) to be healthy. That,
in a nutshell, is what biosecurity is all about.
"So no wonder biosecurity is an ultra-efficient governance paradigm. Citizens had it
administered down their throats with no political debate whatsoever. And the enforcement,
writes Agamben, kills 'any political activity and any social relation as the maximum example
of civic participation.'"
Escobar's topic's been the subject of heated discussion here. How much of "reopening" in
meant to combat the implied totalitarian potential? Perhaps an entire thread ought to be
devoted? That such was a planned additional benefit of the COVID-19 attack seems very
reasonable. Since it was thought of, discussed and had books published about it seems to
indicate it ought to become a central topic at MoA.
On the one side, figures allied to American President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's vision for
an anti-Imperial world order lined up behind FDR's champion Harry Dexter White while those
powerful forces committed to maintaining the structures of a bankers' dictatorship (Britain was
always primarily a banker's empire) lined up behind the figure of John Maynard Keynes[
1 ].
John Maynard Keynes was a leading Fabian Society controller and treasurer of the British
Eugenics Association (which served as a model for Hitler's Eugenics protocols before and during
the war). During the Bretton Woods Conference, Keynes pushed hard for the new system to be
premised upon a one world currency controlled entirely by the Bank of England known as the
Bancor. He proposed a global bank called the Clearing Union to be controlled by the Bank of
England which would use the Bancor (exchangeable with national currencies) and serve as unit of
account to measure trade surpluses or deficits under the mathematical mandate of maintaining
"equilibrium" of the system.
Harry Dexter White, on the other hand, fought relentlessly to keep the City of London out of
the drivers' seat of global finance and instead defended the institution of national
sovereignty and sovereign currencies based on long term scientific and technological
growth.
Although White and FDR demanded that US dollars become the reserve currency in the new world
system of fixed exchange rates, it was not done to create a "new American Empire" as most
modern analysts have assumed, but rather was designed to use America's status as the strongest
productive global power to ensure an anti-speculative stability among international currencies
which entirely lacked stability in the wake of WWII.
Their fight for fixed exchange rates and principles of "parity pricing" were designed by FDR
and White strictly around the need to abolish the forms of chaotic flux of the un-regulated
markets which made speculation rampant under British Free Trade and destroyed the capacity to
think and plan for the sort of long term development needed to modernize nation states. Theirs
was not a drive for "mathematical equilibrium" but rather a drive to "end poverty" through REAL
physical economic growth of colonies who would thereby win real economic independence.
As figures like Henry Wallace (FDR's loyal Vice President and 1948 3rd party candidate),
Representative Wendell Wilkie (FDR's republican lieutenant and New Dealer), and Dexter White
all advocated repeatedly, the mechanisms of the World Bank, IMF, and United Nations were meant
to become drivers of an internationalization of the New Deal which transformed America from a
backwater cesspool in 1932 to becoming a modern advanced manufacturing powerhouse 12 years
later. All of these Interntional New Dealers were loud advocates of US-Russia –China
leadership in the post war world which is a forgotten fact of paramount importance.
It is vital to the United States, it is vital to China and
it is vital to Russia that there be peaceful and friendly relations between China and Russia,
China and America and Russia and America. China and Russia Complement and supplement each other
on the continent of Asia and the two together complement and supplement America's position in
the Pacific.
Contradicting the mythos that FDR was a Keynesian, FDR's assistant Francis Perkins
recorded the 1934 interaction between the two men when Roosevelt told her:
"I saw your friend Keynes. He left a whole rigmarole of figures. He must be a
mathematician rather than a political economist."
In response Keynes, who was then trying to coopt the intellectual narrative of the New Deal
stated he had "supposed the President was more literate, economically speaking."
In his 1936 German edition of his General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money
, Keynes wrote:
For I confess that much of the following book is illustrated and expounded
mainly with reference to the conditions existing in the Anglo Saxon countries. Nevertheless,
the theory of output as a whole, which is what the following book purports to provide, is much
more easily adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state.
While Keynes represented the "soft imperialism" for the "left" of Britain's intelligentsia,
Churchill represented the hard unapologetic imperialism of the Old, less sophisticated empire
that preferred the heavy fisted use of brute force to subdue the savages. Both however were
unapologetic racists and fascists (Churchill even wrote admiringly of Mussolini's black shirts)
and both represented the most vile practices of British Imperialism.
FDR's Forgotten
Anti-Colonial Vision Revited
FDR's battle with Churchill on the matter of empire is better known than his differences
with Keynes whom he only met on a few occasions. This well documented clash was best
illustrated in his son/assistant Elliot Roosevelt's book As He Saw It (1946) who quoted his
father:
I've tried to make it clear that while we're [Britain's] allies and in it to victory
by their side, they must never get the idea that we're in it just to help them hang on to their
archaic, medieval empire ideas I hope they realize they're not senior partner; that we are not
going to sit by and watch their system stultify the growth of every country in Asia and half
the countries in Europe to boot.
[ ]
The colonial system means war. Exploit the resources of an India, a Burma, a Java; take all
the wealth out of these countries, but never put anything back into them, things like
education, decent standards of living, minimum health requirements – all you're doing is
storing up the kind of trouble that leads to war. All you're doing is negating the value of any
kind of organizational structure for peace before it begins.
Writing from Washington in a hysteria to Churchill, Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden said that
Roosevelt "contemplates the dismantling of the British and Dutch empires."
Unfortunately for the world, FDR died on April 12, 1945. A coup within the Democratic
establishment, then replete with Fabians and Rhodes Scholars, had already ensured that Henry
Wallace would lose the 1944 Vice Presidency in favor of Anglophile Wall Street Stooge Harry
Truman.
Truman was quick to reverse all of FDR's intentions, cleansing American intelligence of all
remaining patriots with the shutdown of the OSS and creation of the CIA, the launching of
un-necessary nuclear bombs on Japan and establishment of the Anglo-American special
relationship.
Truman's embrace of Churchill's New World Order destroyed the positive relationship with
Russia and China which FDR, White and Wallace sought and soon America had become Britain's dumb
giant.
The Post 1945 Takeover of the Modern Deep State
FDR warned his son before his death of his understanding of the British takeover of American
foreign policy, but still could not reverse this agenda. His son recounted his father's ominous
insight:
You know, any number of times the men in the State Department have tried to conceal
messages to me, delay them, hold them up somehow, just because some of those career diplomats
over there aren't in accord with what they know I think. They should be working for Winston.
As a matter of fact, a lot of the time, they are [working for Churchill]. Stop to think of
'em: any number of 'em are convinced that the way for America to conduct its foreign policy is
to find out what the British are doing and then copy that!" I was told six years ago, to clean
out that State Department. It's like the British Foreign Office
Before being fired from Truman's cabinet for his advocacy of US-Russia friendship during the
Cold War, Wallace stated:
American fascism" which has come to be known in recent years as
the Deep State [ ] Fascism in the postwar inevitably will push steadily for Anglo-Saxon
imperialism and eventually for war with Russia. Already American fascists are talking and
writing about this conflict and using it as an excuse for their internal hatreds and
intolerances toward certain races, creeds and classes.
In his 1946 Soviet Asia Mission, Wallace said:
Before the blood of our boys is scarcely
dry on the field of battle, these enemies of peace try to lay the foundation for World War III.
These people must not succeed in their foul enterprise. We must offset their poison by
following the policies of Roosevelt in cultivating the friendship of Russia in peace as well as
in war.
Indeed this is exactly what occurred. Dexter White's three year run as head of the
International Monetary Fund was clouded by his constant attacks as being a Soviet stooge which
haunted him until the day he died in 1948 after a grueling inquisition session at the House of
Un-American Activities.
White had previously been supporting the election of his friend Wallace for the presidency
alongside fellow patriots Paul Robeson and Albert Einstein.
Today the world has captured a second chance to revive the FDR's
dream of an anti-colonial world . In the 21st century, this great dream has taken the form
of the New Silk Road, led by Russia and China (and joined by a growing chorus of nations
yearning to exit the invisible cage of colonialism).
If western nations wish to survive the oncoming collapse, then they would do well to heed
Putin's call for a New International system, join the BRI, and reject the Keynesian technocrats
advocating a false "New Bretton Woods" and "Green New
Deal" .
[1] You may be thinking "wait! Wasn't FDR and his New Deal premised on Keynes' theories??"
How could Keynes have represented an opposing force to FDR's system if this is the case? This
paradox only exists in the minds of many people today due to the success of the Fabian
Society's and Round Table Movement's armada of revisionist historians who have consistently
created a lying narrative of history to make it appear to future generations trying to learn
from past mistakes that those figures like FDR who opposed empire were themselves following
imperial principles.
Another example of this sleight of hand can be seen by the sheer number of people who
sincerely think themselves informed and yet believe that America's 1776 revolution was driven
by British Imperial philosophical thought stemming from Adam Smith, Bentham and John Locke.
Since the days of Adam Smith, free market capitalists have held that human beings are
rational actors who pursue economic gain for self-interested motives. But here is Patrick, a
free marketer if there ever was one, talking about a gift-sacrifice economy model in which
people – some people, at least – lay down their lives to keep the economic
engines revved.
Patrick's words reveal an unspoken truth about capitalism. For the system to work smoothly,
there have always been requirements of human sacrifice -- a certain portion of the population
was expected to act not as self-serving homo economicus, but self-sacrificing
homo communis , focused upon what benefits the collective at their own expense. If
these people can't social distance at the workplace, they are expected to show up anyway. If
there isn't enough safety equipment, they are declared essential workers who must put their
lives and that of their families at risk for the greater good.
But for whom and for what is this sacrifice intended? How much dying will be figured into
state budgets and gross domestic product (GDP)? When ranked by GDP, the U.S. is the wealthiest economy
in the world, but is a country's wealth something totally separate from, or even contrary
to, the health and life the majority of its citizens?
Wealth v. "illth"
To help us navigate these questions, it is useful turn to someone who offered potent
challenges to the economic calculus of his day: John Ruskin , the 19 th
-century art critic-turned-political economist. He was one of the most outspoken critics
of capitalism and prevailing economic ideas of the Victorian era , and his work presciently
points to shortcomings that have followed us into the present day.
Ruskin questions the premises on which free market capitalism is based, returning to first
principles: what is wealth? What do we value? How should we understand the relationship between
people, the economy, and the state?
In his view, economies are, above all, social systems whose true end is to benefit the
people, and not, as the Texan politician would have it, the other way around. Anticipating the
behavioral economics of our own day, Ruskin rejected the idea advocated by such economists as
John Stuart Mill that there could be a deductive science of economics based on the assumption
that the human being is "a covetous machine" that when applied to actual situations could take
"the social affections," the non-rational aspects of human behavior, into account. Ruskin
recognized that such a system implicitly removed the marketplace from the constraints of
religion and morality that are supposed to apply to all human behavior. He compared it to an
assumption that humans are essentially a skeleton with flesh, blood and consciousness as
add-ons founding "an ossifiant theory of progress on this negation of a soul."
Ruskin defined wealth quite differently from many of his contemporaries, and ours. For him,
wealth is anything that supports life and health, from the supplies in your storeroom to the
song in your heart: "There is no wealth but life. Life, including all its powers of love, of
joy, and of admiration. That country is the richest which nourishes the greatest number of
noble and happy human beings; that man is richest who, having perfected the functions of his
own life to the utmost, has also the widest helpful influence, both personal, and by means of
his possessions, over the lives of others." ( Unto this Last ).
By that definition, America is looking increasingly impoverished. And it is not a virus
which is stealing our wealth away.
Playing on the root of the word "wealth" from the Old English word "weal," signifying
health, Ruskin proposed that while wealth was anything life-supporting that could be used and
enjoyed, it had a dark counterpart that he called "illth" from the Old Norse word for bad
– the things that make people ill, their lives stunted and despairing, their environment
polluted. Wealth cannot be produced without illth, but great fortunes have been made by
extracting the means of wealth without paying the cost of illth. To take a Ruskinian example, a
factory that pollutes the water it uses, fouls the air and pays its workers below what a
healthy life requires will be more profitable than a business that cleans up after itself and
pays a living wage, but its illth becomes a form of national debt expressed in damage to the
health of others and the environment. Think of something like a toxic Superfund site.
Economists have a term for Ruskin's concept of illth, referring to it as "negative
externalities," even though they are not external to the capitalist economic system, but
intrinsic to it. The most daunting problems of the current age, environmental disaster and
inequality, are fueled by illth.
The Covid-19 crisis has merely amplified trends of rising illth, of despair, sickness, and
alienation, which have been on the rise for decades as globalization, money-driven politics,
decimated workers' rights, and privatization have tipped the economic balance far in favor of
the very few. If we are to judge a country's health not by GDP, which rises
in the face of a massive oil spill , but according to the criteria of the World Happiness Report (WHR), which measures
things like social trust and faith in institutions, America is in bad shape when it comes to
the ratio of wealth to illth. Scandinavian countries top the WHR, while the U.S. ranks a dismal
19 th .
According to the Columbia University study of the
2020 WHR report , the key factors that account for the relative happiness of Scandinavian
countries -- what makes them wealthy in Ruskin's terms -- are precisely those that have been
under pressure or cut back in the U.S. since the rise of neoliberalism: "emancipation from
market dependency in terms of pensions, income maintenance for the ill or disabled, and
unemployment benefits" together with labor market regulation such as a high minimum wage. Of
course, no one likes to pay taxes, but Scandinavian "citizens' satisfaction with public and
common goods such as health care, education, and public transportation that progressive
taxation helps to fund," meets with approval at all income levels.
Pandemics are exacerbated by illth. We can see it in communities of color where the
coronavirus strikes down those whose resources and access to health care have been limited by
discriminatory policies and high contact employment. We can see it in factory farms where
broken supply chains have caused farmers to euthanize livestock and plow under crops while
people across the country go hungry. Airlines got immediate stimulus aid in the U.S., but there
has been no subsidy for the restaurant supply chain that could be diverted for distribution by
food banks and favorably located restaurants thus sustaining at least some of our much-vaunted
small businesses. No one has to fly, but everyone must eat.
We sense illth accumulating in the comments of Las Vegas mayor Carolyn Goodman, who, in her
eagerness to get the casinos back in business, told an astonished Anderson Cooper on CNN that
she would offer up the city's workers as a "
control group " in a reopening experiment. If they weren't able to social distance, Goodman
was unconcerned: "In my opinion, you have to go ahead,"
she said . "Every day you get up, it's a gamble."
Ruskin saw the capitalists of his day as gamblers heedless of the costs they foisted onto
ordinary people: "But they neither know who keeps the bank of the gambling-house, nor what
other games may be played with the same cards, nor what other losses and gains, far away among
the dark streets, are essentially, though invisibly, dependent upon theirs in lighted rooms." (
Unto This Last ).
In other words, not only do capitalists gamble with other peoples' lives; they are oblivious
to the fact that there are other ways to arrange society, to deal the cards differently, more
fairly.
Witness the post-Covid reality imagined by Governor Cuomo. Instead of focusing on what
changes could better support the health and lives of ordinary people, he has
called in Google CEO Eric Schmidt to head a commission to reimagine New York state with
more technology permanently inserted into every dimension of civic life. A better deal for
Silicon Valley, to be sure. But what is in the cards for everyone else? When educational
platforms and health protocols are mapped by gigantic and unaccountable corporations, who gets
lost? Surely the answer is those who can least afford it.
President Trump says that it is time to move on
from the coronavirus and get on with economy. Ruskin would have recognized the deity worshipped
by country's leader, which he called the "Goddess of getting on." Only Ruskin recognized that
she tended to favor "not of everybody's getting on – but only of somebody's getting on,"
-- what he called a "vital, or rather deathful, distinction." For capitalists, getting on
post-Covid means executives working remotely while the rank and file return to the factory
floor without adequate face masks, and large corporations, not public input, determines the
blueprints for our lives.
The issue of worker safety does matter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, but
not because he fears that some will get sick or die, but for a potential "
epidemic of litigation ." In the next pandemic relief legislation, McConnell is looking to
solve the problem of worker safety by shielding corporations from lawsuits rather than
supporting Centers for Disease Control (CDC) mandated regulations that would both promote
safety and sort out what is and is not actionable.
The Visible Hand
Instead of Adam Smith's Invisible Hand, Ruskin advocated a Visible Hand of reasoned
management, a government which could allocate resources effectively and create stores of what
citizens most needed in a crisis. In our day this need not be a literal storehouse but surge
capacity. The Obama administration, for example, contracted with Halyard Health to design a
machine that could turn out 1.5 million N95 masks per day. They were ready to build the machine
in 2018 when the Trump administration
cancelled the program .
In Ruskin's view, the Visible Hand was the guardian of the lives of the citizens, especially
the poor, whose health and lives were their essential property. Ruskin actually defined an
economy as the wise management of labor, applying labor, carefully preserving what it produces,
and wisely distributing those products. A country's wealth is in the people's strength and
health, not their illness and death.
Ruskin's concepts of wealth and illth help us understand the centrality of ethics and
responsibility to economic activity, and how economies are not an assemblage of atomistic human
units but whole systems of people interacting, where the activities of some impact the lives of
all. His work indicates the need for a whole systems approach to a crisis in which what happens
on the beaches of Georgia impacts a nursing home in North Carolina, and visitors to New York
City or New Orleans can carry the infection home. The decisions of one business in a complex
international supply chain can impact the fate of millions.
In unregulated capitalism, Ruskin sussed out what Sigmund Freud might have recognized as the
death drive. Decisions about the economy, he held, must be informed by the essential biologic
basis of life itself: "The real science of political economy, which has yet to be distinguished
from the bastard science, as medicine from witchcraft, and astronomy from astrology, is that
which teaches nations to desire and labour for the things that lead to life; and which teaches
them to scorn and destroy the things that lead to destruction" ( Unto This Last ).
The Covid crisis has exposed contradictions in market and America First ideology. Without
federal aid to state and local governments, essential personnel are being laid off even as we
declare them heroes. Employer based insurance is failing, but few American politicians are
willing to fully embrace single payer insurance. Meat plant workers are declared essential, but
still subject to deportation, as if famed Revolutionary patriot Nathan Hale had said, "I
only regret that you have but one life to give for my country."
Ultimately, the most dangerous pestilence that threatens the country is not a packet of RNA
called Covid-19 but an economic and political system that does not value true wealth, and
promotes the life of the few while condemning the many to literal sickness unto death.
Excellent piece by Parramore. Ruskin is an interesting thinker whose ideas have direct
application to our situation. This was central:
President Trump says that it is time to move on from the coronavirus and get on with
economy. Ruskin would have recognized the deity worshipped by country's leader, which he
called the "Goddess of getting on." Only Ruskin recognized that she tended to favor "not of
everybody's getting on – but only of somebody's getting on," -- what he called a
"vital, or rather deathful, distinction." For capitalists, getting on post-Covid means
executives working remotely while the rank and file return to the factory floor without
adequate face masks, and large corporations, not public input, determines the blueprints
for our lives.
There's one thing I hope the Left learns before too long. Human beings have a religious
impulse. It's not as powerful or as central to our existence as the sexual impulse, but it's
there in all of us, even Richard Dawkins. Like the sexual impulse, the real question is where
will this religious impulse lead us. For the Right, their twisted unChristian conception of
Christianity is a powerful force within their political movement. In fact, it might be said
to be what holds it together and provides the energy for their unfortunate efforts.
Meanwhile, the Left, considering itself too firmly ensconced in modernity to recognize the
reality of the religious impulse despite modern science's identification of it, denies the
existence of this basic and potentially powerful human trait. We saw some of the activists
and organizers in Bernie's campaign employ deep organizing techniques which are basically
spiritual exercises. We know Thomas Berry's calls for a new religion focused on humanity's
relationship to the Earth and its creatures. The Left needs to acknowledge our spiritual
aspects and work to turn our religious impulse away from patriarchalism, misogyny and
homophobia of the Right and toward love for the Earth, our fellow humans and our fellow
creatures. That's where reside the power and persistence necessary to overcome our
religiously misinspired opponents.
There is a gene that creates within the brain a structure that either perceives 'god' (my
view), or generates a sense of spirituality in [sic] reality. The university of Waterloo has
been doing studies on this for at least thirty years. Anything we have evolved has a calorie
cost to maintain, so it must serve purpose in furthering life. There have been many debates
about this gene but no one can argue it's not about spirituality, and/or god, and/or what the
Druids what call magic. To me there's always been, that question, we can go back and have
data to 1/billion of 1/billion to 1/billion⁶⁶⁷(minus) of a second before
the inflation singularity that created this universe. But then, why? As the said in the
'Little Prince', 'it's only with the heart one sees rightly'.
The little prince is right. What we call spirituality is intelligence above what is
necessary our daily existence. Our "daily bread". Our sixth sense is probably more accurate
and reliable than all our rationalizations combined. But it is a thing that can't be
orchestrated by religion or politics. What happens between people in groups when fear is
eliminated is a sudden change toward choices that are the most sensible. As long as the
process isn't interfered with. That's the difficulty. It's like leaving nature alone long
enough for it to recover from human devastation.
What we call spirituality is intelligence above what is necessary our daily
existence.
(although if I was trying to do your comment complete justice, I would have to simply
re-quote the whole thing, it was that good)
Sometimes Susan the other, you're so profound, it almost hurts!
Certainly for me, I've got very little, comparatively, in my life right. I've passed on
opportunities which would made me rich beyond the dreams of avarice. And much else besides.
Mostly because I've overanalysed and rationalised things away. What I've got right has been,
conversely, down to following my intuition. If humanity could unlock that potential within
us, just think what we could do.
Have you ever seen
anything
in your life
more wonderful
than the way the sun,
every evening,
relaxed and easy,
floats toward the horizon
and into the clouds or the hills,
or the rumpled sea,
and is gone–
and how it slides again
out of the blackness,
every morning,
on the other side of the world,
like a red flower
streaming upward on its heavenly oils,
say, on a morning in early summer,
at its perfect imperial distance–
and have you ever felt for anything
such wild love–
do you think there is anywhere, in any language,
a word billowing enough
for the pleasure
that fills you,
as the sun
reaches out,
as it warms you
as you stand there,
empty-handed–
or have you too
turned from this world–
A response to Oliver's powerful poem from Thomas Berry:
The continuity between the human and the cosmic was experienced with special sensitivity
in the Chinese world [A] sense of the sacred dimension of the Earth is involved, a type of
awareness less available from our traditional Western religions. This lack of intimacy with
the natural was further extended when Descartes proposed that the living world was best
described as a mechanism, because there was no vital principle integrating, guiding, and
sustaining the activities of what we generally refer to as the living world.
Yet, strangely enough, a new sense of the sacred dimension of the universe and the
planet Earth is becoming available from our more recent scientific endeavors. The
observational sciences, principally through the theories of relativity, quantum physics,
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the sense of a self-organizing universe, and the more
recent chaos theories have taken us beyond a mechanistic understanding of an objective
world. We know there is a subjectivity in all our knowledge and that we ourselves,
precisely as intelligent beings, activate one of the deepest dimensions of the universe.
Once again, we realize that knowledge is less a subject-object relationship than it is a
communion of subjects, .
Thomas Berry, "The Gaia Hypothesis: Its Religious Implications" in The Sacred
Universe
I'm glad you are making this point to acknowledge:
Human beings have a religious impulse.
From my direct experience, Native Americans seem to center their activism in a Spiritual
Context. Prayer for Guidance–for courage–for wisdom–for
compassion–before starting up on anything. imo, it keeps the priorities in focus.
I'm posting in this thread even though I'm not sure it fits. The religious or spiritual
impulse appears to be universal, there doesn't seem any doubt about that. Here's an
interesting article on Big Gods, or moralizing Gods.
Big data analyses suggest that moralizing gods are rather the product than the drivers of
social complexity: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190320141116.htm
-- -- -- -- --
One prominent theory, the big or moralizing gods hypothesis, assumes that religious beliefs
were key. According to this theory people are more likely to cooperate fairly if they believe
in gods who will punish them if they don't. "To our surprise, our data strongly contradict
this hypothesis," says lead author Harvey Whitehouse. "In almost every world region for which
we have data, moralizing gods tended to follow, not precede, increases in social complexity."
Even more so, standardized rituals tended on average to appear hundreds of years before gods
who cared about human morality.
Such rituals create a collective identity and feelings of belonging that act as social
glue, making people to behave more cooperatively. "Our results suggest that collective
identities are more important to facilitate cooperation in societies than religious beliefs,"
says Harvey Whitehouse.
-- -- -- -
I can definitely recommend Ruskin's "Unto This Last". I obtained it(among several others
that had been on my list(from NC) for a while) just before Covid.
short book wonderfully written.
and kicks you in the gut like some new revelation.
turns out that divorcing "Economics" from "Political Economy" was a mistake.
treating the former as if it were a natural science, like Physics or Chemistry let alone Pure
Mathematics is deleterious.
It ignores and neglects all the amorphous and ephemeral things that make this Life worth
living .how can you quantify a sunset or a moonrise or the smell of your newborn's hair or a
first kiss?
the Economists have taken reductive essentialism to absurd extremes .and somehow convinced a
great many of us to go along to our ultimate destruction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHOhD0RT9NU
Marx called this sort of thing Reification .giving something a Quality it doesn't truly
possess. Money as the Holy Cracker in the Temple of Moloch.
or, the morality of a Serpent: I shall Devour.(see: Joseph Campbell:"a serpent is a "motile
alimentary canal")
we're expected to feed ourselves and our children into the flaming bronze maw of their idol(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moloch )
as if "The Economy" is some thunderstorm or Holy Mountain, instead of a Human Creation.
"There is no such thing as Society" .and "TINA" .and these moronic "protesters" holding signs
that say "Arbiet macht frie" apparently unaware of the provenance of that phrase .after all ,
we stopped really teaching the Humanities like History quite a while ago.
we forget that "They" require our assent and consent to this "sacrifice"(L:"to make holy")
that without that consent, they have nothing not even their precious wealth(which is what,
these days? electrons moving in a database, somewhere?).
now, "They" have as much as admitted that things like the Stock Market are disconnected
from Reality that the Casino doesn't need Main Street and Human Beings to function.
This, after decades of training us to believe just the opposite. Why else put a stock market
ticker at the bottom of every cable news channel as if all that mattered to us'n's?
One of my favorite words is Eudaimonia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eudaimonia ) but
you only learn about that from the Humanities.
another of my favorite words is Thaumazein "Wonder", or "Awe" also from ancient Greek
Philosophy
we've allowed the most withered souls to define the Good for us
Now, when all their works lie in ruins around us .and their narrow and anti-humanist,
mechanistic absurdity and cruelty are on full display has there ever been a better time to
turn away? To sit and think about what matters?
Withdraw your Consent.
" O happiness! O happiness! Wilt thou perhaps sing, O my soul? Thou liest in the grass.
But this is the secret, solemn hour, when no shepherd playeth his pipe.
Take care! Hot noontide sleepeth on the fields. Do not sing! Hush! The world is perfect.
Do not sing, thou prairie-bird, my soul! Do not even whisper! Lo- hush! The old noontide
sleepeth, it moveth its mouth: doth it not just now drink a drop of happiness --
-- An old brown drop of golden happiness, golden wine? Something whisketh over it, its
happiness laugheth. Thus -- laugheth a God. Hush! --
-- 'For happiness, how little sufficeth for happiness!' Thus spake I once and thought myself
wise. But it was a blasphemy: that have I now learned. Wise fools speak better.
The least thing precisely, the gentlest thing, the lightest thing, a lizard's rustling, a
breath, a whisk, an eye-glance -- little maketh up the best happiness. Hush!
-- What hath befallen me: Hark! Hath time flown away? Do I not fall? Have I not fallen --
hark! into the well of eternity?
-- What happeneth to me? Hush! It stingeth me -- alas -- to the heart? To the heart! Oh,
break up, break up, my heart, after such happiness, after such a sting!
-- What? Hath not the world just now become perfect? Round and ripe? Oh, for the golden round
ring -- whither doth it fly? Let me run after it! Quick!"
( http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/70 )
Hey Amphortas the Hippie!
I enjoy reading your comments and the slices of your life served up to us – you are an
interesting guy and a good antidote to me whenever I am disheartened by the stuff I am
bombarded with by the exceptional Americans foisted upon the world as typical.
Who would believe that I read Thus spake Zarathustra 'cause of your comments? I sent the link
on to my son who is 16 and has been physically separated from us for months caught in this
vortex. We'll see how it is taken compared to Mnm.
Thanks
Aww. Thanks, dude/dudette.
zarathustra is very accessible.
i've noticed that lots of people(like my wife) have been taught somehow that they can't read
stuff like that, so don't even try.
just another crime against us all.
aristotle can be pretty dense as can a lot of the more familiar
philosophers(hegel=ugh–) but Nietszche is pretty easy to get into, due to his style
.although some translations are better than others(I like the translation linked above for
Zarathustra the KJV Tone works for me.)
One shouldn't be intimidated by Marcus Aurelius, Herodotus or Boethius, either.
Isn't it ironic, that ruskin was able to see our issues and spoke to people with such
force as to effect our lives and in a sense is partly responsible for the world we have
today.
When he spoke at oxford in 1870 cecil rhodes was so impressed he supposedly carried a copy of
it with him in the future.
The ideas expressed by ruskin convinced rhodes that he needed to save "good english society"
from "the masses"(the poor english and all the rest of the savages who wouldn't understand
how to be proper."
Rhodes and his cohorts,in the british upper crust and media establishment created "the
british rountable" in 1891. These roundtablers did lots of things..Both through official
channels and by ways of running the largest newspapers who really perfected propaganda,
decades before goebbels. Eventually they formed in 1919, "the royal institute of
international relations" in britian. and "the council on foreign relations" in new york"
Generations of these members have really "made" the world that exists today. Which is why the
"conspiracy theories" exist . when people look at the lists of who
Personally, I think there ought to be study in the relationships these people had with each
other and with history. As with any family, they may be related, but not always on the same
page but still have the power of the family name and the prestige.
The council on foreign relations is the wellspring of "neoliberalism" neo consevatism too ,
for that matter. Their place in history is central. This is the axis of the "anglo-american
establishment"
Hence the folly of an economy based on debt rather than equity: it must continue to run or
risk cascading defaults.
Then why do we have government privileges for private debt creation in the first place?
Because subtle theft is easier and more "efficient" than honest sharing?
Perhaps science is the religion of the PMC. An unquestioning belief in anything
scientists/big pharma/tech wizzards throw on the table, whether it's GMOs, vaccines
containing mercury, thalidomide, social media, driverless cars or trips to Mars.
I use to go to Nevada regularly and mostly via the Donner Pass. Just a roundabout way of
suggesting that some might consider the Donner Party as the right way to have a society. They
almost made it over the pass, missing it by a couple of days, despite taking a
shortcut that was actually a longcut using bad information from a book, IIRC. They were told
repeatedly by those who had gone West before not to do so, but
In Nashville, TN last month, a masked protester at the state capitol carried a sign
"Sacrifice the Weak." I was shocked when a local news show reported on protesters and filmed
this sign along with other signs and protesters, and the reporter did not comment on this
horrible, Nazi-like statement.
Have there been any prominent religious leaders who have given counsel on the sacrificial
nature of a return to work to save the economy. At what point is the risk to human life and
health compensated by an economic return?
Come to think of it, does it not seem odd that with many prominent religious figures, none
of them seem to be willing to speak up on how greed is destroying the world and all of the
wealthy owners of capital that are its promoters? Greed is a major sin in almost every
religion, yet you hardly ever see any religious clergy give sermons on how widespread and
dangerous greed is or publicly admonish Wall Street if they hold themselves up to be the
moral leaders of society.
The fundamental problem we have with all the "very smart people" who think economics is a
science is that I can't write an equation that will convince these masters of the universe
that they shouldn't be @$$holes.
I can't tell anyone that even if it doesn't profit you there's a reason to choose to help
your fellow humans.
I also can't define a relationship that explains why even if you can figure out how to
stay within the letter of the law and exploit a loop hole to make more money but only in way
that hurts other people, you shouldn't do it. Or why you shouldn't write a law or lobby for a
law that exists only so it can be abused.
These guys will never accept the concept of illth because it challenges their concept of
wealth. And so it goes
I dont gamble with my life. The shrewd will take the necessary precautions and keep
themselves concealed as much as possible. The stupid will not take these precautions, likely
get sick and some will perish .
It amazes me that protesters and policymakers are still treating this as an impossible
tradeoff -- a false dichotomy -- between life and money, when it's clear that success lies
with practical solutions, of which there are many, to achieve both. Starting with masks!
I love the idea of billionaires leading the way, demonstrating the efficacy of their
reopening plans through personal example.
An excellent article on the WSWS:
"...In the "brutal economics" of capitalism, the lives lost to the COVID-19 pandemic are
simply the cost of doing business. While trillions of dollars have been spent propping up
financial markets, no serious efforts have been made to contain the pandemic, and whatever
mitigation measures have been put in place, including the closure of businesses, are being
rapidly abandoned.
"The efforts by the ruling class to counterpose workers' lives to livelihoods is an
entirely false choice. Both can be defended with the necessary allocation of social resources
to stop and eradicate COVID-19 and all other communicable diseases. Non-essential workplaces
must remain closed for as long as it takes for these measures to be put in place.
"But containing the pandemic requires an investment in social infrastructure that the
capitalist class is not willing to make. The COVID-19 pandemic has made clear the utter
incompatibility of the capitalist system with the preservation of the most basic social
right: the right to life." https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/05/16/pers-m16.html
"I also don't know why you would quote a Wapo article, uncritically, in response to fairleft.
Why would I care what they say about anything? They represent power. I consider them no more
reliable on pharma imperialism as they are on military imperialism."
oglalla@102
You answer the question yourself. Nobody is suggesting that anyone read the Washington Post
uncritically. I am surprised that you should accuse b of having done so. The evidence is that
he has read the Post critically-as we all have to do in a culture in which the major source
of news, for everyone, is a media compromised enormously by its allegiances, particularly its
allegiance to capitalism.
Read the Wapo critically and you will be left with a residue of information which can be
cross checked by various means, once you have done that you can evaluate the importance of
its conclusions. It is what we all have to do.
Maybe this story from the Toronto Star will help explain why so many people are dying:
"Three of the largest for-profit nursing home operators in Ontario, which have had
disproportionately high numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths, have together paid out more
than $1.5 billion in dividends to shareholders over the last decade, the Star has found.
"This massive sum does not include $138 million paid in executive compensation and $20
million in stock buybacks (a technique that can boost share prices), according to the
financial reports of the province's three biggest publicly traded long-term-care home
companies, Extendicare, Sienna Senior Living and Chartwell Retirement Residences.
"That's a total of more than $1.7 billion taken out of their businesses."
Beneath all the uninformed, pretentious anecdote swapping about stats and panaceas, the
drivelling over whether or not there is a pandemic or whether Bill Gates, Soros or the KKK
planned and executed it on behalf of haute finance, something very simple is taking
place.
Capitalism, which devours people and turns lives into capital, having made a pandemic disease
of the sort now surrounding us inevitable, is protecting itself. Its major fear is that if
there are too many victims-cf The Black Death- the price of labour may rise to the extent
that it impinges on the rate of profit. It dare not consider the possibility that the working
class will organise itself to put an end to the system, as an alternative to doing what men
have done throughout the history of epidemics- blaming everything on an angry deity or an
elite such as the Illuminati, the Council for Foreign Affairs or bloggers corrupted by
money.
It's not a popular position to point out that a particular financial risk is overblown. But
when everyone in Corporate America and investor-land is in "Where's my bailout?" mode, the
usual motivations are reversed. Normally, "Nothing to see here, move along" is the default
position when the great unwashed public worries about too much leverage, opacity, and tricky
practices. But when central banks are doling out trillions, sounding alarms, whether warranted
or not, is the way to get someone else to eat the risks you took for fun and profit. And as
we'll demonstrate, the Financial Times looks to have become an unwitting tool of CLO
(collateralized loan obligation) investors who haven't yet gotten their Fed handout.
The article in question is headlined: CLOs: ground zero for the
next stage of the financial crisis? The headline and the breathless tone set the reader up
for the idea that these complex structures will blow up the financial system, just the way
their cousins, collateralized debt obligations, did in the financial crisis.
But as we'll explain, the absolute size of the CLO market, and banks' not-much exposure to
the risky parts of it, means that absent fraud (or a systemically important bank and wobbly
bank having gotten high and binged, and the pink paper and others would likey have gotten wind
of that by now), there's no risk to the banking system. And in the hoary old days of the crisis
just past and its predecessors, that was the justification for throwing official money in big
volumes to clean up bad lending decisions: that as much as it would seem proper to let
incompetent institutions go tits up, letting banks fail tends to engulf even healthy banks,
since no one can tell from the outside very well how solvent a particular institution is, and
hurts innocents like depositors (even with deposit insurance, it is pretty much impossible for
a business of any size not to have way above the guaranteed amount in its accounts regularly,
if nothing else when it issues payroll).
So what the Financial Times piece is effectively getting worked out about is that some
investors will lose money. Newflash! Investing involves risk! Who'd have thunk it!
In other words, this Financial Times piece is implicitly selling the idea that the
consequences of some deep pockets taking hits is just oh-too-dangerous. This is Greenspan put
thinking on steroids. And sadly, it seems to be treated as a reasonable line of thinking.
Wealth must be spared. The hell with those who live from labor income.
What CLOs Are and Why Comparisons to CDOs Are Spurious
By way of background, a pet peeve of ours is that the financial crisis is widely depicted as
a housing crisis when it was in fact a derivatives crisis. If we had merely had subprime and
Alt-A loans go bust, the result would have been on the order of the S&L crisis plus maybe
another 50%. Bad but nothing like the seize up of the global financial markets that took place
in September 2008.
As we explained long-form in ECONNED, collateralized debt obligations consisting
substantially of the risky tranches of subprime mortgage bonds (the BBB and BBB- layers)
dressed up the part of of subprime securitizations that no one wanted to buy. The top tranches
of those CDOs, comprising 60+% of par value, were rated AAA.
But even that wasn't sufficient to blow up the global financial system. Demand by subprime
shorts and banks seeking protection for the loans they were advancing to the likes of subprime
lenders like New Century and IndyMac led to the use of substantially synthetic (made mainly of
credit default swaps rather than tranches of actual bonds with actual mortgage loans behind
them) as a way to generate artificially cheap insurance on the riskiest rated layer of subprime
debt. Those derivate exposure have been estimated at 4-6X the real economy exposures. The
reason the financial system blew up is that the side bets were a significant multiple of real
economy activity, and the parties on the wrong side of those wagers were systemically
important, highly leveraged players like AIG, the monolines, Eurobanks, Citigroup, and
Merrill.
It is also important to remember the base line. Banks have repeatedly managed to blow
themselves up in entirely conventional ways, with good old fashioned loans. Remember the Latin
American debt crisis? The commodities bust of the early 1990s, which crated energy and real
estate lenders in the oil patch? The afore-mentioned S&L crisis? The not as well publicized
LBO loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s? Oh, and how about one of the mothers of bad
lending, the Japanese commercial (and to a lesser degree residential) real estate bubble and
bust?
Now let's look at CLOs. They are intrinsically less risky than asset-backed-securities CDOs,
which the press took to calling just "CDOs".
Those CDOs were resecuritizations. They were created from the riskiest parts of mortgage
securitizations made of risky loans, as in subprime or Alt-As. Those tranches usually
represented only 3% of the entire deal. They'd be worth 100% if the losses on the subprime RMBS
was 8% or less, and totally wiped out if the losses were higher than 11%. Since subprime losses
averaged more like 40%, nearly all these CDOs were complete wipeouts.
By contrast CLOs are made from risky corporate loans, so-called "leveraged loans" typically
made when a private equity firm is buying a portfolio company. So they are more analogous to a
subprime RMBS (residential mortgage backed securitization) in terms of the risk level of the
assets. 1 Note that even with the high level of subprime losses, AAA
tranches of RMBS lost only 0.42% on average .
Even though there was a tidal wave of risky "leveraged loans" to fund deals at sky-high
prices right before the last crisis, and a lot of them wound up in CLOs, while their value
traded down afterwards there were no losses. Admittedly, the Fed dropping interest rates and
manipulating long-term rates lower allowed many of the pre-crisis loans to be refied at lower
rates. But the Fed didn't engage in measure intended to rescue corporate borrowers; they were
just lucky beneficiaries.
Nevertheless, CLO structures have been made more conservative since the last crisis.
See here for geeky details .
But with the bottom dropping out of the entire economy, a lot of former sure-looking bets
won't work out so well.
But should we even care about CLOs? First, the market isn't all that large. S&P in early
2020 pegged it at $675 billion. By contrast, the subprime market, depending on whether or not
you included Alt-As, was estimated back in the day at $1.3 trillion to a bit over $2 trillion.
And US GDP was $14.5 trillion in 2007 versus $21 trillion in 2019. Using Pimco's forecast of 5%
contraction for the full year, you still get roughly $20 trillion, showing that the relative
importance of subprime lending has fallen even further. And that's before you factor in the way
that credit default swaps greatly magnified the real economy exposures and concentrated them at
systemically important, fragile players.
This chart from Guggenheim Investors is a little dated, since it shows a smaller CLO market
size but it gives a good idea of who buys what:
The key bit: what do banks own? They are the ones that have to be saved even when they do
really dumb things; the other players are supposed to be savvy investors who can take
losses.
You can see that banks are the big owners of the AAA tranches, which have shown over time to
have enough loss protection that you'll get all your money. And they are listed third as owners
of other investment grade tranches, which means they are less important players than insurers
and money managers.
CLO holdings at U.S. banks increased by roughly 12% in 2019, to $99.5 billion, with a
number of banks growing their CLO securities exposure by double-digit rates, according to
year-end filings with the Federal Reserve .
What is perhaps most striking about the results is the high degree of concentration of CLO
debt inside the three banking entities, relative to the rest of the banking sector. At $80.2
billion, the three largest holders make up nearly 81% of all U.S. bank CLO holdings.
However, the size of CLO holdings as a percentage of the top-three banks' investment
portfolios is relatively small. For JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup, CLOs as a
percentage of total securities on book are 7.5%, 6.9%, and 6.0%, according to Y-9C data.
Now, at just under $100 billion, total U.S. bank exposure represents roughly 15% of the
$675 billion CLO market. Assuming that U.S. CLO AAA supply is around $400 billion and that
most of U.S. bank CLO holdings are AAA, then U.S. banks can be said to hold roughly 25% of
all AAA supply, according to researchers from Wells Fargo.
Japanese banks can also be expected to hold near the same amount, or around 25% of the
total AAA supply of U.S. CLOs, according to Wells Fargo.
So who is at risk? Apparently the equity tranche, the bottom 8.5% in the chart above:
Waterfall of payments in CLOs, via Morgan Stanley, which estimates that 85% of outstanding
CLOs in the U.S. may fail their junior over-collateralization (OC) tests as leveraged loans
default. pic.twitter.com/cx2GFlAXL5
To translate: securitizations have risk buffers in the form of overcollateralization and
excess spread. "Overcollateralization" results from the fact that the loans in a securitization
have a higher principal amount that than the total par amount of all the tranches. Say $100 of
loans have $103 of loans. The $3 is the overcollateralization and the CLO documents describe
who gets how much benefit from it. 2
What the tweet is saying is that the losses on the loans look like they'll get to be high
enough that the equity layer in some (many? most?) CLOs will stop getting interest payments.
But again, why should we care? If all the equity tranches stop paying out, that was shy of $60
billion in par value. And it's not a total bust since they got payments in full before their
investment crapped out. And the owners are primarily hedge funds. This is just not worth
getting lathered up about, particularly in comparison to all the other exploding
loss-bombs.
Likely Reason for the Financial Times' Hyperventilating
Despite being a "Long Read," meaning it presents itself as having more reporting behind it
than a typical story, it's remarkable to see the Financial Times duck the real story, private
equity leverage, which predictably leads lots of lenders holding the bag at the end of every
financial cycle.
And the article also sidesteps another key question: did CLOs make the situation worse than
the old-fasioned approach of syndicating leveraged loans (which foreign banks took down in size
in the first LBO wave in the 1980s)? Quite honestly, I suspect you can argue it both ways. On
the one hand, unless the benefit of CLO risk slicing and dicing went entirely to the sponsors
and packagers (possible), investors presumably were willing to accept lower interest rates to
get more finely tuned risk exposures. That would somewhat lower the cost of private equity
lending, but it's not clear that this made anything more than a marginal difference.
3
On the other, CLOs per the discussion above really did move a lot of the risky exposures out
of the hands of usually self-destructive banks and over to investors who bill themselves as
sophisticated and able to take risk.
The Financial Times account does provide market size (using JP Morgan data, which gives a
slightly higher level that S&P did), albeit a bit of the way into the piece, but no
distribution of exposures by rating or who the various investors are. And before the authors
get to that, they hand wring over a debt restructuring of medical staffing company Envision
Health. As vlade pointed out by e-mail:
The headline is fearmongering and a lot of comments lapped it up.
Thinking about it, the picking of the health company and saying how it's going to suffer
is also there, implying "if you don't bail out the debt, look at how bad things will
happen."
Vlade is not exaggerating. The article waves the "saving us from coronavirus" flag:
In the midst of a global pandemic, emergency rooms across the US have fallen strangely
quiet as patients with other illnesses have stayed away for fear of contracting Covid-19. As
a result, one of the surprising corporate casualties of the coronavirus crisis could be some
of the companies that provide staff for hospitals.
Envision, one of the largest medical staffing companies, completed a restructuring of its
roughly $7bn of debt this month as it moved to stave off bankruptcy.
US readers of this site know better than to see Envision as a good actor. As we've written
several times, based on the gumshoe work of private equity expert Eileen Appelbaum, KKR-owned
Envision and Blackstone's Team Health have been lead players in the "surprise billing" and
other price gouging schemes. The fact that Congress and some states have been working on
legislation to end surprise billing is why Envision's bonds are in trouble. And that reaction
also shows how important the fleecing is to the company's bottom line.
In fact, one has to wonder if the Envision staffing cuts mentioned later in the piece are a
shot across legislators' bows: "Nice ERs you have. Shame if something were to happen to
them."
This chart also serves to exaggerate how bad things are:
The viewer's eye naturally goes to the top line, for the BB tranches the yields have risen
the most. Those BB instruments are a mere 3-4% of the total value of the CLO market!
They are rounding error. By contrast, the AAA tranches are yielding pretty much what they did
in later 2019. Yes, they aren't trading the same as other AAA instruments, but seasoned
structured credit investors ought to know that these AAA creations can and often do trade down
in crises, unlike Treasuries and government guaranteed credits.
Moreover, eyeballing the charts, yields have improved since mid-late April, meaning
investors are less edgy, when even then, Reuters reported that new CLO deals were getting done
on reasonable terms.
From an April 22 story :
There has been US $39.4bn of US CLOs arranged this year through April 19, inline with the
US$38.7bn sold during the same period last year, according to the data from LPC, a unit of
Refinitiv. A record US$128.1bn of US CLOs was arranged in 2018.
US CLO issuance this year has been challenged as spreads on Triple A tranches, the largest
and most senior piece of the funds, have continued to widen, hitting an average of 136.2bp in
March, slightly tighter than the more than two-year wide of 138bp in February, according to
the data. The wide spreads can cut into returns paid to equity holders, who are paid last
after all other debtholders receive their distributions, and may cut into overall
issuance.
"Spread levels on US CLOs still look relatively attractive compared to other securitized
products and corporates," Collin Chan, a CLO strategist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch,
said in an email
"Although the arbitrage for new-issue deals has compressed, (CLOs) are still getting done
because equity investors still find the levels acceptable," Chan said. "Insofar that we do
not see significant spread tightening in the loan market while CLO spreads stay wide,
dealflow could certainly continue."
Now as the Financial Times article points out, some CLOs are more wobbly:
More than 100 CLOs were failing at least one trigger brought on by escalating triple C
loans, according to April data compiled by Barclays, with 40 failing tests for their triple B
rated tranche or higher -- debt that is regarded as investment grade. Twelve have also failed
tests up to the double-A rated tranche, according to BofA.
It's hard to know how significant this is without having dollar values. The Financial Times
also warns that one-third of the BBB tranches are on review for a downgrade, but again, I find
it hard to be sympathetic. If you bought BBB paper, you knew there was decent risk it would
decay into junk. However some of these bonds are held by life insurers, who are restricted in
how much they hold in non-rated/non-investment grade assets. They usually max out that bucket
with real estate. So if their BBBs get downgraded, they'd probably have to sell.
So why all this unseemly whining? The most obvious explanation is that the Fed isn't doing
much for CLOs. One has to wonder if money men have been playing up how bad things supposedly
are to get more rescue money.
From the Wall Street Journal on April 22 :
The Federal Reserve will lend $2.3 trillion to support the economy The Fed excluded some
securities tied to corporate loans and commercial real estate that were among the newest,
fastest-growing segments of the bond markets
The [$100 billion] TALF program won't include the vast majority of a popular structured
security known as a collateralized loan obligation, which is made up of corporate debt
generally used to finance buyouts. The program does include so-called static CLOs which don't
allow for reinvestment of loan proceeds, but those account for only a small share of the
market. The vast majority of CLOs allow such reinvestment and aren't included.
The central bank threw some small additional bones to the CLO market earlier this week, but
still left most CLOs ineligible.
From Bloomberg :
The Federal Reserve revised its Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility to allow CLOs
that hold a broader range of leveraged loans to be used as collateral.
The Fed will now accept new AAA CLOs with leveraged loans, including refinanced loans,
that priced as far back as January 2019, according to a statement Tuesday on the central
bank's website. Previously, eligible collateralized loan obligations could only hold
newly-originated loans .
Yet the changes will only go so far, market watchers say. The terms still require eligible
CLOs be static vehicles wherein managers can't actively trade the loans underpinning the
deals, a structure that makes up only a small portion of the market.
It is really a shame to see what has happened to the Financial Times. It was the only major
media outlet before the crisis where quite a few writers, particularly Gillian Tett but also
John Authers, Martin Wolf, and John Dizard, saw that risk was being underprices across all
credit markets and sent clear warnings that things could end very badly, when the US financial
press was uniformly in la-la land.
Since the crisis, the paper has gone firmly neoliberal, and perhaps due to the lack of time
to do reporting on top of being now the US editor, Tett veers from doing extremely insightful
pieces reminiscent of her glory days as capital markets reporter, to doing far too many
articles that have all the hallmarks of her having spent too much time with people talking
their book. Similarly, this CLO article does show the authors did a lot of legwork, yet somehow
missed or chose not to address the most important questions.
_____
1 And remember, at least so far, we don't have evidence of widespread lending
fraud, a big feature of the subprime mania. However, a key difference is that with
mortgage-backed securities, the mortgages are transferred through several intermediaries to a
trust and they stay there. Certificates are then sold that represent the rights to interest and
principal payments made to that trust. With CLOs and CDOs, they can be "static" meaning the
loans (or RMBS tranches) are set at the get-go and don't change, or "active," meaning a manager
can trade assets in and out from time to time, subject to overall restrictions. Most CLOs are
active.
2 I haven't seen any actual CLO documents, so some of my interpretations from
CDOs and RMBs may be a bit wide of the mark. RMBS had distinct waterfalls for principal and
interest payments. This chart covers only interest payments. It doesn't mention that the deals
almost certainly had "excess spread", meaning that loans that paid, say, an average of 7.5%
across the CLO would have total interest payments of only 7.2% across all CLO tranches. This
chart presupposes that the excess spread is already gone and required interest payments are at
risk, so the equity tranche takes the hit first.
The article does have good detail on this issue. Basically, downgrades of loans are
producing breaches of collateral quality tests, and that looks set to cut interest payments to
the equity layer:
Typically, CLOs are permitted under their own rules to hold up to 7.5 per cent of their
assets in triple C rated debt. If they stay within this threshold then managers of the CLOs
can treat the loans they own as if they are worth 100 cents on the dollar.
This is because when a CLO is created, the underlying portfolio of loans is larger than
managers need to pay off debt investors. This is known as over-collateralisation. So long as
the number of loans that are near to defaulting remains below the 7.5 per cent threshold, the
portfolio is treated as though there will be enough money left at the end to pay
investors.
However, if a CLO exceeds its triple C bucket, as many now have, then the lowest priced
loans above the threshold are required to be valued at a market price. In a crisis, with loan
prices having fallen sharply, this lowers the overall value of the portfolio of loans
reported by the CLO. That in turn can impact how investors are paid.
If the value of excess collateral slips by more than a few percentage points, managers
typically first cut off 50 per cent of any interest payments on the underlying loans that
would have gone to equity holders and use it to buy more loans, with the aim of increasing
the value of the portfolio and correcting the breach.
If the value of the underlying loans falls further, then all money is cut off to equity
investors. That money is used not only to pay interest to debt investors but to start paying
back the principal of the debt, beginning with the triple A rated bonds.
3 Even if private equity firms could achieve somewhat higher leverage levels,
that's not a big bennie. Private equity has for many years been sitting on tons of "dry
powder," meaning uncalled capital. So their equity isn't a scarce commodity. Thus the gain is a
marginal decrease in interest charges. Helpful but hard to see as significant.
The article is actually fascinating case of journalism.
It's obvious it's a reasonably well researched and all, but the main conclusions (CLOs
will kill us all, and securitised products per se are nuke equivalents) it draws (which are
actually not spelled out in the article as explicitly as in the headline) are just
nothingburgers when it could have been a great article on the PE leverage and how it makes
the current economic crisis worse.
One has to wonder whether the authors are dumb (unlikely, as the article has a lot of
detail), naive, or actively shilling for the investors (remember, FT is now owned by Nikkei,
and largest CLO holder is a Japanese bank) or some combination.
I know some of the FT's journalists. From conversations with them over the past dozen
years, your final phrase is spot on.
Shilling is probably the main cause. Why? Some of the younger journalists see colleagues
like Martin Wolf, Gillian Tett and Rana Foroohar on the celebrity circuit, appearing on talk
shows and at Davos and getting commissions from publishers. They wish to join these circles,
but financial institutions and other investors are gatekeepers, so they must cooperate.
If they can't join that celebrity circuit, they can advise governments and lecture at
Harvard like Camilla Cavendish, who never stops bragging about being responsible for the UK's
sugar tax and wagging her upper middle class finger at us plebs, or they can head public
affairs at big corporations or act as public relations advisers to oligarchs.
There are two classes of journalists at the FT. It does feel class based. There are the
reporters on the daily output, e.g. the banking team, and the weekly shills like Simon Kuper,
Robert Shrimsley and Jim Pickard.
Editorial control is more tightly exercised by Nikkei as time goes on.
Do you remember the FT's expose of the Presidents' Club a few years ago? That gathering
had been going on for thirty years and was an open secret. In order to show its right on
credentials and target a new readership, the FT deployed a dozen plus hacks, well, hackettes,
to infiltrate the gathering.
I'd add another class to the FT journous – FT Alphaville. For me, FTA is the only
part of FT worth reading. Paradoxically, it's the only one that's free.
As a regular reader of FT Alphaville and a subscriber to FT itself, I have to agree with
Ives' and vlade's observations on what once was a reasonable mainstream paper. They have
drunk the kool-aid.
But don't give up totally on the comments, there're plenty of ankle biters out there.
So I will put my quibbling hat on, and I should prophylactic-ally note I pretty much agree
with everything you wrote subject to a couple of caveats.
I wrote something up as a consultancy exercise on this early last year, which is why I am
under the misapprehension that I know a little about it. Also I know Mr. Rosner has been all
over this subject for a year, at least! Indeed definitely longer. Indeed Mr. Rosner has been
warning about the risks associated with this, and the BDC-type lending for quite some time!
But that is his "victory lap" to take.
1) BoE estimated global leveraged loan market as being around $3.2bn. They would have
agreed with Guggenheim about around 45%-50% of that market being CLOs. So its probably a
bigger market than S&P estimated. I think the BIS suggested $2.4bn for LL and once again
about 50% of that being CLOs. I suspect S&P were looking at only North America. But I
would still have guessed that $600bn number is too small. Europe?
2) Lobbying for free money! Yup, thats exactly why you hire financial PRs. If everyone
else is getting bailed out then, the Fin PRs need to show they are doing something. Call
Tracey Alloway! I am told the trade groups in DC are lobbying like crazy on behalf of the
shadow banks too! MBS REITS etc.
3) Totally agree re private equity being behind the push to rescue these guys. Personally,
I think they do have a nasty problem. The underlying leveraged loans need to eventually be
refinanced. If you deplete the pool of equity in the deals you will struggle to find more.
The CLOs will enter run-off mode and will not participate in new financings. That will happen
around 7.5% CCC content. The PE guys desperate need the CLOs to remain alive. In this kind of
structured credit, a shortage of any type of credit, either equity, mezz or one of the higher
credit tranches will kill new or rollover deals. So if you want to prevent a cascading series
of defaults resulting in pretty much ALL CLOs going into runoff mode, then you need the Fed
to step in.
4) Vlade is right. Japan in the form of Norinchukin or Japan Post own about 10% of all the
AAA tranches. The FSA did a review and suggested they lighten up a while back. Last time i
looked they had been doing so the glacial way, by allowing maturities to slowly reduce their
position.
It looks a lot like a death spiral too me.
All that said, I have a very tiny violin in my hands. While I dont blame our PE overlords
for trying to steal more money from the tax payers, I dont know why the tax payer should play
ball. Apologies for the inevitable typos and forgive if I have misunderstood or misreported
myself.
I think the whole CLO market is around 1trln (give or take a few hundred bln). So still a
small fraction of say junk bonds market, or even RMBS market.
The important thing is as Yves notes, in 2008 the RMBS market was overlaid by massive
derivative positions. I'm not aware of the CLO derivative market being there much. I know
that 15 years ago you had a lot of synthetic CLOs, but those went out of favour as the CDS
market liquidity (and especially CDS on leveraged loans) evaporated. They did start coming
back a bit, not still nowhwere near the glory days of 2005-6.
Anything with a substantial leverage will kill the financial system. Conversely, only a
few things that are not levered will.
My worry on EU banks are actually covered bonds. If the EU RE market tanks, it would kill
covered bond markets where they often require 80 or better LTV in the pool. And covered bonds
are a crucial funding vehicle for a lot of EU banks, so the states would have to step in (if
they were allowed to).
Working for two of the scummiest originators, I know well about the two Japanese banks you
name. For some reason, they allow another Japanese securities house to advise them into this
abyss.
Because interest rates should be indicative of risk – at least I think that is how
it used to work – then no bail for investors as all risk can have loss and total loss
at that.
The reason the last crisis was so bad in 2008 was, in my opinion and for the reason as
follows –
All business, all consumers, all people need certain basics to survive – Food –
Water -Shelter and Land upon which to do all the above.
-- -- So with all the lending – as much as possible then and today with PE and
leverage; risk be damned as they knew bailouts would be used in that great con and it's new
version of the old today- -- Its only outcome was to raise the cost of housing – rent
(land), business overhead, farm land prices thus products therefrom and everything produced
on the planet (people playing the real estate game and realtors and all associated, wrongly
believed they were gaining wealth but – it was zero gain because if you wanted to
continue living you had to pay the higher costs wrought by the great con game – this
con perpetrated by financial puffers and criminals – aided by many of the rest of us
who were conned into thinking this great inflation of assets was and is the only way –
the brave, heroic, patriotic – survival of the fittest, smartest, hard earned way to
get ahead – and be damned those who didn't jump on board the great gravy train robbery
–
Of course, as this is all now the norm, and all made proper by great grants made to the
institutions of higher learning (to make sure the proper economic and finance learning is
taught) and larger grants made to the institutions of government (to make sure the proper
economic and financial governing is practiced) so the rest of can be assured that the
criminals the corruption and fraud is protected by law and the aristocracy is free to do as
they wish – as of course is their inherited right.
So the planet burns and a virus is showing us how the (current false definition) Free
Market has – and continues to screw the vast majority of the planet out of the
planet.
I hope that more people really start to examine and propose alternatives to the current
FIRE sector Free Market which is and continues to be the true and only impediment to solving
the worlds problems IE sixth extinction event and global geochemical disaster (global warming
is one).
I propose taxing the crap out of rentier activities and financial predation – Tax
the crap out of those things known to cause asset price inflation and are destructive to the
planet and raise the cost of living.
The Free Market needs to mean Free From Rentier, Preditory, and Unnecessary overhead
tolls.
Currently the negative is taxed lightly and the positive is burdened –
Switch the burdens around and the easy money would be made by doing the right thing –
it would make earning money through financial predation much more difficult.
Anyway – some random thought to chew on –
And yes – should investors ever take losses on money lent on interest? – sure
they should – why I thought that is why interest was charged – shows ya how
little I know.
And if investors take losses based on False Warranties and Representations made by the
financial engineers – well let them engineers make it up to the investors –
instead of what happened in 2008 when Obama (I voted for him which makes me a sucker) saved
em from pitchforks.
Hi all, this one is right in my wheelhouse as I spent 10+ years working for one of the big
CLO Trustees.
Yves' take is generally correct. What I find most comforting is that there was never a
return of structures that incorporated a ton of CDS contracts. In fact, I haven't seen any
kind of return of CDS contracts at all. Good riddance! Those things were poison!
Lehman did a ton of those pre-crisis and when they went bust, they left a big legal and
financial mess as the deals couldn't function without Lehman in the middle of them. They had
way too many conflicting roles. I suspect a lot of them were created for Lehman to lay off
risk onto their wealth management customers and other marks.
CDSese trade, especially the indices and names that are in the indices, but those
generally tend to have a fairly liquid underlying bond market. And the overall CDS market is
fraction of what it used to be.
Fortunately though the more idiotic CDSes (like the LCDS – CDS on leveraged loans)
are gone, and as you say, the synthetic CLOs too..
Thank you for these details. A little surprising. And as if I didn't already hate PE
enough. One of the surprising things is that the Fed did actually show some restraint. I hope
it holds. I think we need to emancipate PE from the Market altogether.
Economics, the time line:
Classical economics – observations and deductions from the world of small state,
unregulated capitalism around them
Neoclassical economics – Where did that come from?
Keynesian economics – observations, deductions and fixes for the problems of
neoclassical economics
Neoclassical economics – Why is that back again?
We thought small state, unregulated capitalism was something that it wasn't as our ideas
came from neoclassical economics, which has little connection with classical economics.
On bringing it back again, we had lost everything that had been learned in the 1930s, by
which time it had already demonstrated its flaws.
The Mont Pelerin society developed the parallel universe of neoliberalism from neoclassical
economics.
FDR saved capitalism from itself with the New Deal.
Many right wingers weren't happy about this at all and longed for the good old days when they
had the economic freedom to make lots of money and bring capitalism to its knees.
Of course, they didn't take any responsibility for the problems they had caused and they
plotted to get back to the way things had been before.
In the 1980s they succeeded, but all the old problems would re-emerge.
As a CEO, I can use the company's money to do share buybacks, boost the share price, cash
in my share options and get my bonus.
Share buybacks were found to be a cause of the 1929 crash and made illegal in the 1930s.
What lifted US stocks to 1929 levels in 1929?
Margin lending and share buybacks.
What lifted US stocks to 1929 levels in 2019?
Margin lending and share buybacks.
A former US congressman has been looking at the data. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zu3SgXx3q4
At the end of the 1920s, the US was a ponzi scheme of over-inflated asset prices.
The use of neoclassical economics and the belief in free markets, made them think that
over-inflated asset prices represented real wealth accumulation.
1929 – Wakey, wakey time
Let's have another go.
Oh blimey, it's still the same.
Why did it cause the US financial system to collapse?
Bankers get to create money out of nothing, through bank loans, and get to charge interest on
it.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf
What could possibly go wrong?
Bankers do need to ensure the vast majority of that money gets paid back, and this is where
they keep falling flat on their faces.
Banking requires prudent lending.
If someone can't repay a loan, they need to repossess that asset and sell it to recoup that
money. If they use bank loans to inflate asset prices they get into a world of trouble when
those asset prices collapse.
As the real estate and stock market collapsed the banks became insolvent as their assets
didn't cover their liabilities.
They could no longer repossess and sell those assets to cover the outstanding loans and they
do need to get most of the money they lend out back again to balance their books.
The banks become insolvent and collapsed, along with the US economy.
When banks have been lending to inflate asset prices the financial system is in a
precarious state and can easily collapse. "It's nearly $14 trillion pyramid of super leveraged toxic assets was built on the back of
$1.4 trillion of US sub-prime loans, and dispersed throughout the world" All the
Presidents Bankers, Nomi Prins.
When this little lot lost almost all its value overnight, the Western banking system became
insolvent.
Western taxpayers had to recapitalise the banks and make up for all the loses the bankers had
made on bad loans they had made to inflate asset prices.
Free market thinking split into two separate paths in the 1930s.
We took the wrong path.
In the 1930s, Hayek was as the London School of Economics trying to put a new slant on old
ideas, while the Americans were working out what had gone wrong in the 1920s.
The University of Chicago had worked out what had gone wrong with free market thinking
before, but we followed Hayek who hadn't.
In the 1930s, the University of Chicago realised it was the bank's ability to create money
that had upset their free market theories.
The Chicago Plan was named after its strongest proponent, Henry Simons, from the University
of Chicago.
He wanted free markets in every other area, but Government created money.
To get meaningful price signals from the markets they had to take away the bank's ability to
create money.
Henry Simons was a founder member of the Chicago School of Economics and he had worked out
what was wrong with his beliefs in free markets in the 1930s.
Banks can inflate asset prices with the money they create from bank loans.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf
Henry Simons and Irving Fisher supported the Chicago Plan to take away the bankers ability to
create money. "Simons envisioned banks that would have a choice of two types of holdings: long-term
bonds and cash. Simultaneously, they would hold increased reserves, up to 100%. Simons saw
this as beneficial in that its ultimate consequences would be the prevention of
"bank-financed inflation of securities and real estate" through the leveraged creation of
secondary forms of money." https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Henry_Calvert_Simons
Real estate lending was actually the biggest problem lending category leading to 1929.
Richard Vague had noticed real estate lending balloon from 5 trillion to 10 trillion from
2001 – 2007 and went back to look at the data before 1929.
Henry Simons and Irving Fisher supported the Chicago Plan to take away the bankers ability
to create money. "Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." Irving Fisher
1929.
This 1920's neoclassical economist that believed in free markets knew this was a stable
equilibrium. He became a laughing stock, but worked out where he had gone wrong.
Banks can inflate asset prices with the money they create from bank loans, and he knew his
belief in free markets was dependent on the Chicago Plan, as he had worked out the cause of
his earlier mistake.
Margin lending had inflated the US stock market to ridiculous levels.
" . they plotted to get back to the way things had been before."
I've got a good idea, you'll like this.
You can attract modern liberals to dodgy, old, 1920's neoclassical economics if you bolt on
identity politics.
Inequality exists on two axes:
Y-axis – top to bottom
X-axis – Across genders, races, etc ..
The traditional Left work on the Y-axis and would be a problem as you want to increase Y-axis
inequality.
The Liberal Left will work on the X-axis.
You can increase Y-axis inequality while the Liberal left are busy on the X-axis.
The 1930's solution of the Chicago Plan was one way of keeping bank credit out of the
markets.
There are other ways.
You could use the corset controls the UK used before 1980.
This kept bank credit away from financial speculation and debt grew with GDP.
https://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/uploads/monthly_2018_02/Screen-Shot-2017-04-21-at-13_53_09.png.e32e8fee4ffd68b566ed5235dc1266c2.png
Before 1980 – banks lending into the right places that result in GDP growth (business
and industry, creating new products and services in the economy)
Debt grows with GDP
After 1980 – banks lending into the wrong places that don't result in GDP growth (real
estate and financial speculation)
Debt rises faster than GDP
OR ..
Richard Werner worked out what went wrong in Japan.
The BoJ used to use window/credit guidance to steer bank credit away from financial
speculation and towards business and industry.
This was the basis for all the Asian Tiger economies, until they discovered financial
liberalisation and the Asian Crisis followed shortly after that.
OR ..
Germany uses small non-profit banks that are very local to communities and businesses.
There is no gain from financial speculation and they are closely tied to the people they
serve.
Awesome piece, Yves! Remember your outstanding work from 10 years go) Couple of
questions:
1. Dont you think the derivatives will be a problem again? This time due to corporate credit
risk and FX moves? CDS exposure to GM, GE, Ford is many times their cash debt and should they
go down (even if the Fed holds bonds) the CDS losses could be in many trillions if we account
for all possible corporate defaults. Also, FX derivatives notional is orders of magnitude
larger than credit one and large swings in euro/dollar etc could also kill a lot of
players.
2. Isn't PE in trouble? Some of them are clearly OK but is it really true that all of PE
players are sitting on mountains of cash? I am far from this market, could anybody opine on
which PE firms could be hurt?)) TIA!))
apenultimate
on Thu, 05/14/2020 - 9:50am The past week's unemployment claims came out today, and add
another 2.98 million to the pile. This brings total unemployment claims for the past 8 weeks
(two months or so) to 36.5 million.
Determining unemployment percentages depends on what data you use. The Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) shows the employment numbers for the United States in August 2019 as ~157
million ( https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat08.htm ). Admittedly,
that's not March 2020 statistics, but employment numbers would not change all that much in half
of a year.
The St. Louis Federal Reserve has a different set of statistics that show 205.5 million
Americans employed in March 2020 ( https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LFWA64TTUSM647S
). (They show the August 2019 period with employment at 206 million.)
Why the huge difference? I have no idea. But going forward, I'll use both to determine
unemployment numbers. Remember that in early March 2020, unemployment was already around
3%.
Using the BLS statistics, we get an unemployment rate of 23.16% for the past 8 weeks. Add on
the previous 3% of people unemployed, and you reach 26.16% unemployment.
Using the St. Louis Fed statistics, we get an unemployment rate of 17.76% for the past 8
weeks. Add on the previous 3% of people unemployed, and you reach 20.76% unemployment.
The peak rate of unemployment during The Great Depression was 24.9%. The peak rate of
unemployment during the the Great Recession in 2008 was 10%.
According to BLS statistics, we are already greater than Great Depression unemployment
numbers.
According to the St. Louis Fed, we are already more than double Great Recession numbers and
only about 4 percentage points away from Great Depression peaks.
The Labor Department last week reported April unemployment for the United states at 14.7%,
but this according to their own admission was undercounting the real rates. Be careful of any
numbers coming out of the mainstream media or government sources.
Some jobs will definitely come back, but many will not. For example, JC Penny's reported
that they are permanently closing 200 of their 850 nationwide stores. Those jobs will not be
coming back. There are weekly reports of many cafes, restaurants, and small businesses
shuttering their doors for good. Those jobs will not be coming back.
Even for the companies that do not shut down, it may be a long haul before economic activity
has picked up enough to bring workers back. In most cases, it will not be a quick recovery.
Hang on for a very rough ride. 2 users have voted.
• Headline April 2020 Unemployment Really Was Around 20%, Not 15%
• Bureau of Labor Statistics Disclosed Erroneous Unemployment Surveying for a Second
Month
• About 7.5 Million People in the April Household Survey Were Misclassified as Employed
Instead of Unemployed, per the BLS
• Headline April U.3 Unemployment at 14.7%, Should Have Been 19.5%
• The BLS Had Disclosed the Same Surveying Error Last Month; Where Headline March 2020 U.3
Was 4.4%, It Should Have Been 5.3%
• Per the BLS, Headline Data Will Not Be Corrected: "To maintain data integrity, no ad hoc
actions are taken to reclassify survey responses."
• Nonetheless, Headline April Unemployment Soared to Historic Highs from March: U.3 from
4.4% to 14.7%, U.6 from 8.7% to 22.8% and ShadowStats from 22.9% to 35.4%
• More Realistic, Those Same Unemployment Numbers, Corrected: U.3 from 5.3 % to 19.5%, U.6
from 9.6% to 27.7% and ShadowStats from 23.7% to 39.6%
• April 2020 Payrolls Collapsed by an Unprecedented 20.5 Million Jobs
• Annual Growth in April 2020 Money Supply Measures Soared to Historic Highs
• U.S. Economic Activity Has Collapsed to Great Depression Levels, with the Federal
Reserve Creating Unlimited Money
stated in the very beginning of this video, that of people who were employed in February of
this year, nearly 40% of those earning $40,000 or less have become unemployed. This is an
unprecedented human tragedy that Congress in all their bailouts now totalling about $8 Trillion
have seen fit to throw a one time pittance of $1,200. With mountains of cash going to
corporations and lobbyists, Congress insultingly gave real suffering Americans a few pennies
and in effect told them that their lives do not matter to Washington DC.
I am still highlighting these because of their leading nature for the economy overall. These
were uniformly very negative:
the average manufacturing workweek fell -2.1 hours from 40.4 to 38.3 hours. This is one
of the 10 components of the LEI and will be a big negative.
Manufacturing jobs fell by 1.3 million. Manufacturing has lost 1.364 million jobs in the
past 2 months.
construction jobs fell by -975,000. In the past 2 months 1.08 million construction jobs
have been lost.
Residential construction jobs, which are even more leading, declined by -117,600. In the
past two months together there have been -119,200 lost jobs.
temporary jobs declined by -842,000.
the number of people unemployed for 5 weeks or less rose by 14.3 million.
Professional and business employment fell by -2.128 million, or -10.0% for the
month.
Amateur Socialist , May 9, 2020 8:43 am
This disaster is only getting started. Uncertainty regarding employment stability is
hitting health care workers. In the middle of a worldwide pandemic. People with relatively
secure jobs are wondering about their families and loved ones needing additional support.
Which will continue to limit discretionary spending and on it goes.
"Debts which cannot be repaid will not be repaid" as Michael Hudson has been warning for
decades. The thing about capitalism is that it works fine as a theory but it's just not
practical in the real world. The one that includes humans who are not economists.
the virus results to the population pale in comparison to the economic/social aspects.
We now know far more about Covid19 – the Lockdown should end
Gottlieb pointed to a study, which
has not yet been peer-reviewed, that examined outbreaks in 320 Chinese cities outside Hubei
province, where the coronavirus is believed to have originated, between Jan. 4 and Feb. 11 and
found only one outbreak that occurred outdoors.
But we digress: Blankfein actually made some good points about the situation facing the
American economy during one of his longest and most casual interviews since leaving Goldman
more than a year ago. The notion - pushed by CNN, MSNBC, etc - that President Trump is picking
'saving the economy' over 'saving lives' isn't really accurate, Blankfein explained, because -
and he's parroting an argument made by
an actual real-life ER doctor here - leaving the economy and more importantly the
health-care system closed for months risks serious repercussions for the public health.
"It's really health vs health, because poverty, GDP is really a health issue," Blankfein
said.
When I was in Sweden last summer, I was perplexed how unhealthy many Swedes look. The picture
in Denmark was completely different. Curiously, the Covid-19 incidence rates in Denmark, Norway
and Sweden mostly mirror my (superficial and subjective) impression of the health of the citizens
of these countries. Lots of obesity in Sweden, lots of cyclists in Denmark.
here are the numbers of deaths " due" to corona in Switzerland .
00 -19 years old 0 death
20 -29 years old 1 death
30 -39 years old 4 deaths
40 -49 years old 2 deaths
50 -59 years old 23 deaths
60 -69 years old 84 deaths
70 -79 years old 243 deaths
80+ years old 776 deaths
Total for that country 1133
"... It should be obvious that if leverage is used to fund the purchase of financial assets those assets will inflate in price greatly. If the leverage is not used for financial assets and is used instead for funding new production then financial assets stay in proportion to GDP. That is of course currently the fundamental weakness in western economies. ..."
When augmented with leverage, the exponential dynamic inherent in debt guarantees that
financial value runs away far ahead of any amount of GDP implied.
_________________________________________________
You changed the subject slightly.
It should be obvious that if leverage is used to fund the purchase of financial assets
those assets will inflate in price greatly. If the leverage is not used for financial assets
and is used instead for funding new production then financial assets stay in proportion to
GDP.
That is of course currently the fundamental weakness in western economies.
So when firms issue bonds and use the money to buy back their own stock then stocks become
over-inflated while obviously production stagnates. That practice used to be illegal and will
likely become illegal again when the recent damage this practice is eventually realized.
You are correct that the boom and bust cycles that are the direct consequence of the
instability that results from the mismatch of financial assets to productive assets is the
mechanism, for those who can take advantage of it, to transfer wealth from others to
themselves.
But just like a virus if the parasites become too lethal to the host the parasites will die
also.
"... What was "normal" for the past two decades was to turn a blind eye to the moral and financial bankruptcy of the American culture, the rot at the heart of its social, political and economic orders. The pandemic has shredded the putrid facade and revealed the rot, much to the dismay of the multitude of minions tasked with sanitizing the rot behind narratives promoting the normalization of predation, fraud and exploitation. ..."
"... As for winner takes all , this legalized looting is presented as a form of economic Darwinism that is nothing but the healthy manifestation of a free market. This is the Devil's handiwork, of course, presenting legalized looting that only benefits the few as the inevitable result of open markets. ..."
"... The greater the outrage of the technocrats and monopolists at being called what they are--evil--the greater the confirmation that the accusation is spot-on. The predators, looters and exploiters must strip away any moral assessment of their actions, as even the smallest shred of moral or karmic justice threatens their empires. And so economics has been reduced to bloodless quantifications of profits, costs and sales and obfuscatory mathematics designed to drain the risk of moral consequences from the parasitic pillage. ..."
Monopolies, quasi-monopolies and cartels are inherently exploitive and thus evil.
What was "normal" for the past two decades was to turn a blind eye to the moral and
financial bankruptcy of the American culture, the rot at the heart of its social, political and
economic orders. The pandemic has shredded the putrid facade and revealed the rot, much to the
dismay of the multitude of minions tasked with sanitizing the rot behind narratives promoting
the normalization of predation, fraud and exploitation.
What's been absolutely verboten is to call legalized pillage and predation what they really
are: evil. We've normalized exploitation and predation by the usual means: denial, legal
justifications, making excuses for the predators and the system that defends predation, and by
erasing the memory of a time when moral bankruptcy, predation and institutionalized fraud were
not yet normalized.
People have always been self-absorbed and greedy, so goes the excuse; or, greed is good
because that's the magic of the invisible hand at work.
By stripping fraud and predation of moral consequence, we've covered the putrid rot with a
thoroughly modern amorality which we can summarize as anything goes and winner takes all.
Monopoly, quasi-monopoly and cartels (i.e. Warren Buffett's entire portfolio) are presented as
the natural order of things rather than an evil construct of predation and exploitation that
benefits the few at the expense of the many.
Nothing outrages the apologists and the lackeys enriching themselves in the dens of thieves
more than accusations of evil, or indeed, anything smacking of moral standards or judgments.
Anything goes not just for individual choices, but for capital's choices as well, and so it's
simply not PC to question the morality of capital's predations.
As for winner takes all , this legalized looting is presented as a form of economic
Darwinism that is nothing but the healthy manifestation of a free market. This is the Devil's
handiwork, of course, presenting legalized looting that only benefits the few as the inevitable
result of open markets.
The greater the outrage of the technocrats and monopolists at being called what they
are--evil--the greater the confirmation that the accusation is spot-on. The predators, looters
and exploiters must strip away any moral assessment of their actions, as even the smallest
shred of moral or karmic justice threatens their empires. And so economics has been reduced to
bloodless quantifications of profits, costs and sales and obfuscatory mathematics designed to
drain the risk of moral consequences from the parasitic pillage.
POMPEO: Look, the best experts so far seem to think it was manmade. I have no reason to
disbelieve that at this point.
RADDATZ: Your -- your Office of the DNI says the consensus, the scientific consensus was
not manmade or genetically modified.
POMPEO: That's right. I -- I -- I agree with that. Yes. I've -- I've seen their analysis.
I've seen the summary that you saw that was released publicly. I have no reason to doubt that
that is accurate at this point.
Most of the West is still shut down but China is opening. Observers know that China is
becoming the world's top economy – the World Bank had already
given it that title in PPP terms in 2013 – and COVID-19 is sure to accelerate the
process by giving it a head start out of the economic slowdown. With cheap energy too .
As the coronavirus and its political combatants hold the world hostage, it is pertinent to
scrutinize the (geo) political and economic context within which the pandemic has emerged. Many
analyses view neoliberalism as the culprit, having given rise to a dismantling and
marketization of public services such as healthcare for which we are now paying the price. The
virus confirms the bankruptcy of neoliberal capitalism, based upon global production networks
of western corporations and Chinese factories, allowing the virus to spread across the globe.
Alas, neoliberalism is in trouble once again, perhaps terminally ill.
That said, the death of neoliberalism has been pronounced before, not least in the wake of
the 2007-08 financial crisis, from which it however quickly resurfaced stronger than before.
Moreover, western neoliberalism has witnessed a significant mutation over the last years, not
least to better accommodate the changing logics of global capitalism.
The coronavirus offers an opening to change the world for the better, not least by undoing
decades of neoliberalization to give vital professions in health care and education the
appreciation they deserve. Unfortunately, as detailed in Naomi Klein's ' The Shock Doctrine ', crises also offer
ample opportunity for the established order to realize ambitions which are inconceivable in
normal times. The global political economy before the outbreak of corona was defined by the
rise of a global billionaire class, tech platforms, and illiberal(izing) nationalist politics,
having jointly propelled a novel wave of (geo) political-economic restructuring which I have
called neo-illiberalism
. What will be the effects of coronavirus on this new status quo?
The New Normal
Alongside the 2008 financial crisis, the votes for Brexit and Trump have often been
described as ruptures to the neoliberal status quo. But as in the wake of 2008, the aftermath
of 2016 also brought about more of the same: more tax cuts for corporations and the rich, more
environmental and financial deregulation, more cuts in public services i.e. more policies of
neoliberal signature. That said, the politics peddling the same neoliberal policies has
substantially changed. Where preceding waves of neoliberalization have been variably executed
by centrist parties, seeing the center right commit itself to progressive politics in exchange
for center-left support for economic neoliberalization, since 2016 a new alliance has emerged
between center and far right, seeing the latter mainstream as center-right parties such as the
US Republicans and UK Conservatives have steadily radicalized themselves, thereby forsaking
their erstwhile commitment to what Tariq Ali has called 'the extreme center' .
Notwithstanding the fact that center-right parties co-produced the neoliberal world order, they
have since come to reinvent themselves as nationalist challengers to the 'globalist' status
quo, which they habitually present as leftist.
Where preceding waves of neoliberalization resulted in the limitation of democratic control
over economic policymaking, the present nationalist wave captained by Donald Trump and his
copycats is defined by efforts of political illiberalization , brazenly seeking to undo
the institutional setup of liberal-democratic checks and balances, seeing legislative and
judicial branches of government subjected to a power-hungry executive. Wider societal
counter-powers are also under attack, from academia and media to NGOs, along with attacks on a
range of constitutional basic and/or fundamental rights constraining the illiberal exercise of
absolute power. While this development heralds
the end of progressive neoliberalism , political illiberalization ultimately still protects
the
encasement of global capitalism , the core aim of the neoliberal project.
The rise of neo-illiberalism might be compared to a virus, whereby western liberal
democracies increasingly come to resemble illiberal democracies and (competitive) authoritarian
regimes elsewhere. Where illiberalizing regimes in Hungary and Poland are infecting the
neoliberal European Union (EU) as a whole, not least because of center-right political
cover offered by the European Peoples Party (EPP), neo-illiberalism constitutes a fundamentally
global phenomenon. For example, Brazil and India have recently embraced political
illiberalization without rejecting neoliberal economics, whereas illiberal China and Russia
have equally tightened their authoritarian rule. Amongst others, what unites these and other
regimes is the mobilization of divisive nationalisms, seeing variegated 'strongmen' adapt state
constitutions to their will, typically bulldozering pluralist political space whilst shielding
the respective neoliberal interfaces between national economy and global capitalism.
Global Capitalism
To grasp the rise of neo-illiberalism we need to go back to the turn of the millennium, a
time in which the various developments culminating in the neo-illiberal synthesis were put in
motion. Next to the terrorist attacks on US soil which ignited the gradual mainstreaming of far-right
narratives , the year 2001 is characterized by the entry of illiberal China into the
neoliberal World Trade Organization (WTO). Meeting in serene Doha following the riots of
Seattle, China's WTO entrance heralded a larger geographical shift captured by the famous
BRIC
acronym (Brazil, Russia, India, China) coined that year by Goldman Sachs economist Jim
O'Neill. O'Neill foresaw stronger economic growth in the non-west, and called upon western
leaders to incorporate leading non-western states into key governance platforms, which was
realized later that decade by elevating the Group of Twenty (G20) as the world's leading forum
on global governance.
Alongside the search for new markets and cheap labor, the 2000s were characterized by the
ascent of the financial offshore world
– a legal realm comprised of tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions where corporations and
the rich stash their cash and property – which became global capitalism's central
operating system by the turn of the millennium. Since then, offshore money from Russia and
elsewhere flooded into cities like London, igniting a spending spree on real estate, football
clubs, media conglomerates, and political influence. Amongst others things, the offshore world
enabled spectacular corporate fraud, such as that which led to the collapse of US energy giant
Enron, whose accounting gimmicks were copy-pasted by western banks, setting the stage for the
financial crisis later that decade.
The final key development traced back to the turn of the millennium is the birth of digital
platforms. Invented by Google as what Susanna Zuboff calls 'an automated architecture
functioning as a one-way mirror', surveillance capitalism has since grown into a worldwide machine dedicated to
behavioral observation, manipulation and modification, steadily enmeshing itself with the core
logics of capital accumulation. Crucially, digitization accelerated the aforementioned trends:
not only has digitization fueled global capital flight into offshore anonymity, it also
augmented the mainstreaming of far-right narratives via YouTube and Facebook algorithms. Much
like the invisible offshore world, the rise of surveillance capitalism largely went unnoticed,
assisted by anti-terrorism legislation like the 2001 Patriot Act enabling far-reaching
surveillance.
Growing up under the radar of the war on terror and financial turmoil, the first decade of
the twenty-first century saw the birth of a fundamentally global, offshore, digitized and
financialized hyper capitalism. Descriptions like shadow banks, phantom investments and dark
money do not do justice to their role as fundamental building blocks of the new world. Amongst
others factors, the offshore world was the ground zero of the financial crisis, where banks
kept their toxic investments. This new world is the 'home' of trillion-dollar tech companies,
who with other (shell) companies form an integrated web of corporate structures whose chief
ultimate owners constitute a global billionaire class of approximately two thousand individuals and families.
As such, this is also the world where neoliberal technocracy is increasingly fused with
oligarchy. Due to the spectacular growth of income and wealth inequality worldwide, oligarchic
enmeshment of the superrich and state power does not only define elites in Russia or the Gulf,
but increasingly defines western states such as the US, where multibillionaire
activists like the Koch brothers have effectively taken over the Republican Party.
Next to the economic recovery, the 2010s were defined by the increasing coalescence of
financial and technology sectors. Within a development model labeled The Wall Street Consensus by political economist Daniela Gabor, an adaption of the
neoliberal Washington Consensus within the framework of the G20, banks and financial
institutions worldwide have come to embrace financial technology (fintech), driven by an
insatiable hunger for personal data as raw materials for financialized surveillance capitalism.
Crucially, where Silicon Valley long enjoyed a global tech monopoly, the 2010s saw the arrival
of Chinese bigtech vying for global dominance. The western financial lobby has voiced its fears
of Chinese platforms like Alibaba and Tencent, which they describe as all American bigtechs
'rolled into one'
operating under tight control of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). These fears are not
unfounded: where Facebook encountered many difficulties in building a global cryptocurrency,
the Chinese central bank has developed its own alternative, and the CCP has recently ordered
China's banks and tech platforms to adopt it. In the words of Mark Zuckerberg: the American
state has to play a more active role 'otherwise our financial leadership is not
guaranteed'.
Whilst the rest of the world has steadily bought into Chinese technology, the other BRICs
have embraced (parts of) China's digital strategy. For example, where a small minority of
India's 1.4 billion population had a bank account in 2014, this number has since risen beyond a
billion. That said, these bank accounts are coupled to biometric personal data, and critics
identify this policy as part of Narenda Modi's political agenda to transform India into a Hindu
nationalist surveillance state. Taken together, around the time the coronavirus made the first
news headlines, the New York Times identified three
competing visions on the future of surveillance capitalism: where the Chinese are 'moving
fast and breaking things' without any regard for privacy and citizen rights, and the EU tries
to make a moral point around privacy and consent, with the US caught in the middle.
Nationalist Leninism
Although 'moving fast and breaking things' is a good description for Xi Jinping's China, it
should be remembered that this philosophy has long guided Silicon Valley, where asking for
forgiveness trumps begging for permission. The disruption of established industries, practices
and processes defines platforms like Uber, operating without any regard for the law or basic
decency. With the rise of western neo-illiberalism, moreover, this philosophy has also entered
into government. Brexit, for example, is best understood as a process of continuous disruption
of established political practices and procedures, from shunning press conferences to
unlawfully closing down parliament. As
The Economist noted: 'The Tories' disruptive strategies would not be out of place in
Silicon Valley'.
Where rampant digitization has disrupted a range of established industries since the turn of
the millennium, and set its sights on incumbent finance in the wake of the financial crisis,
the 2010s are marked by tech's infiltration of established politics. Where Facebook and Google
place their own employees in US political campaigns ever since the rise of Barack Obama, an
entire ecosystem of techno-metapolitical players has since grown up around these platforms:
next to dedicated bots and troll farms there now exists a media network dedicated to mainstream
far-right narratives, of which Breitbart News – financed by US billionaire Robert Mercer,
captained by the identitarian demagogue Steve Bannon – is the most prominent. The
adoption of far-right narratives by established media, whether global corporate players like
NewsCorp or national public broadcasters, brought right-wing culture wars into the established
arena of mass-mediated politics.
Other crucial players in this ecosystem are data analytics firms, like Cambridge Analytica
(CA), again featuring Mercer and Bannon, as well as Palantir Technologies owned by US tech
billionaire Peter Thiel. Where CA founder Alexander Nix was schooled at the elitist Eton
College alongside David Cameron and Boris Johnson, Thiel not only enjoys the ear of Trump as
advisor, but also those of Mark Zuckerberg as Facebook board member, where he kept the company
from fact checking political advertisements. Where US journalist Jane Mayer speaks of
'the Fox
News White House' to highlight the close relationship between Trump and the world's second
most powerful media magnate, in the digital age the world's first Twitter presidency might
equally be labeled the Facebook White House to emphasize the ways in which Trump has
become a digitally mass-mediated virus enabled by the world's most powerful media magnate. As
argued by Trump's digital campaign manager: 'without Facebook we wouldn't have won'.
The global rise of neo-illiberalism is covered with the fingerprints of tech firms: where
WhatsApp-mediated memes helped Jair Bolsonaro assume power in Brazil, the Philippines' Rodrigo
Duterte was an early adopter of Facebook's political capabilities. Once in power, moreover,
these 'strongmen' act like disruptive tech CEOs whilst demolishing liberal democracy, and
embrace surveillance tools to anchor their rule: in India, for example, encrypted WhatsApp was
recently found to be hacked, allowing Modi to track his political opponents. But although
Israeli spyware and Russian hackers play an important role in the cross-border spread of
neo-illiberal politics, to fully grasp the political possibilities of the digital age we need
to redirect our gaze to Beijing , where digital technology
is paramount in the exercise of social control.
In combining economic neoliberalization with illiberal political control since the late
1970s, the CCP has been one of the world's neo-illiberal vanguards. Experts describe the
governing ideology of the CCP as a
curious combination of nationalism and Leninism , following China's ideological rejection
of both the French and Russian revolutions, which according to
Wang Hui shaped up after the Cultural Revolution and was settled on Tiananmen Square.
Crucially, the rejection of
'two major emancipation movements – socialism and liberalism' – is exactly what
the western far right is after. In other words, what emerges under neo-illiberalism is a global
ideological convergence. Just consider this: at the height of the so-called European 'refugee
crisis' in 2015, which accelerated the mainstreaming of far-right narratives across the west,
neo-illiberal China also saw the emergence of its own Alt-Right lingo for 'libtards' or
'regressive liberals', with derogatory terms like
baizuo(白左) i.e. 'white left' popping up across the blogosphere.
Since 2016, this cocktail of nationalism and Leninism has put its mark on the west, with
nationalist projects like America First! and Brexit being guided by self-proclaimed
Leninists, like Bannon or Boris Johnson' advisor Dominic Cummings. Enabled by far-right culture
wars informed by another communist – Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci – these
disruptive Leninists have set their eyes on breaking down liberal democracy and the rule of
law. To do so, they pretend to represent 'the will of the people', and relentlessly discredit
the core infrastructure of liberal democracy, framing its key institutions as 'enemies of the
people', 'saboteurs', and 'traitors'. In the words
of Bannon , the identitarian toyboy of the billionaire class: 'Lenin wanted to destroy the
state, and that's my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of
today's establishment'.
Alibamazonia
Where economist Branko Milanovic foresees a
global clash between two ideal type political operating systems in the twenty-first century
– liberal capitalism captained by the US, versus political capitalism championed by China
– in reality the two have already substantially converged. Reduced to its core, where
China and the non-western world opened up economically in the image of the US and the west in
the closing decades of the twentieth century, today you can tentatively argue that the US and
the wider west are politically closing up in the image of China. The new synthesis is
neo-illiberalism, which speaks to what Thomas Piketty views as
'merchant nativism' i.e. the marriage between neoliberalism and identitarian nationalism.
Besides emphasizing a process of reglobalization rather than deglobalization, the rise
of neo-illiberalism also suggests that the center of capitalist gravity has shifted: where
parts of the traditional periphery have steadily assumed characteristics of traditional core
countries, the west has witnessed a reverse process of what the late Immanuel Wallerstein calls
semi-peripheralization. In the words of Martin Wolf : 'as western
economies have become more Latin American in their distribution of incomes, their politics have
also become more Latin American'.
Where historian Neill Ferguson once spoke of 'Chimerica' to emphasize the co-dependent
relationship between the world's two superpowers, today we can identify the contours of what
you might call 'Alibamazonia': a twenty-first century imperial federation of techno-nationalist
states, i.e. a global alliance between nationalist 'strongmen' and digital platforms. The
relationship is symbiotic, as the rollout of digital surveillance requires the rollback of
liberal democracy by design, which in turn strengthens illiberal political rule. In the words
of Susanna Zuboff: 'surveillance capitalism takes an even more expansive turn toward domination
than its neoliberal source code would predict Though still sounding like Hayek, and even Smith,
its antidemocratic collectivist ambitions reveal it as an insatiable child devouring its aging
fathers'. Indeed, digitization and surveillance not only disrupt Smithian competitive markets,
but also Lockean notions of private property, and ultimately threaten to undo all liberal
guarantees of individual freedom.
Besides heralding a territorial shift from west to east, amongst others symbolized by the
United Nations' (UN) recent contract with China's WeChat (Tencent) to streamline its digital
communication, neo-illiberalism also heralds a fundamental reconstitution between national and
global scales, respectively understood as public and private spaces, whereby decades of
neoliberalization transformed the former in the image of the latter, whilst the latter has
witnessed an extraterritorial shift into digital and offshore domains, giving rise to
private capitalist power of vast proportions, eating away at national states and international
state systems. This is the most banal explanation for the western rise of neo-illiberalism:
where decades of neoliberalism effectively put up the west for sale, neo-illiberalism heralds
the moment when neoliberalism's ultimate winners seek to buy up and privatize government
itself:
'neoliberalism's final frontier' .
Pandemic
Although coronavirus might be the final death knell to neoliberalism, it should be
remembered that neoliberalism is a highly mutable ideology – well equipped to utilize its
own failure for its advancement. Put differently, if neoliberalism is dying, we are looking at
a slow-motion demise: where some identified its imminent death after the dotcom crash at the
turn of the millennium, neoliberalism certainly lost its self-explanatory aura after the
financial crisis of 2008. Accordingly, although still carried forward by a centrist consensus,
western neoliberalism became more authoritarian. And where 2016 saw the centrist consensus
collapse, seeing neoliberalism's core economic project carried on by a decisive illiberal
politics, the question is whether today's coronavirus will bring an end to the economic
project. For example, the key pillars of that project, such as global capital mobility and
central bank independence, are still standing. Furthermore, although non-neoliberal policies
might well be enacted to stem the virus, like introducing capital controls, these might be
temporary measures to save the project in the long run.
That said, if coronavirus proves to be the final death knell to neoliberalism, which even
the Financial Times alludes
to, it still might prove a blessing for core features of neo-illiberalism. For example, where
the virus is regarded as an indictment of neoliberal globalization, it nonetheless fuels the
rollback of liberal democracy and rollout of digital surveillance. Indeed, for the world's faux
Leninists and tech billionaires the virus is the ultimate disruptive event to be exploited.
Where the US Republicans have used the pandemic to legislate neoliberal tax breaks and
deregulation, as part of a rescue package that trumps the 2008 financial bailout, we should not
underestimate the extent to which Trump might exploit the pandemic for his own benefit, not
least to escape the prospect of electoral loss and prosecution. Many 'strongmen' are embracing
the virus to anchor their rule, not least Victor Orbán cynically exploiting the virus to
accelerate Hungary's transformation from liberal democracy towards illiberal dictatorship, with
the EU once again looking the other way, thereby confirming its own neo-illiberal
corrosion.
Where many countries have yet to setup mass testing capabilities to track the virus and
create viable paths out of societal lockdowns, a whole range of states have watered down
privacy legislation to digitally track the virus, including left coalition governments like
Spain. In this sense, the virus has led to a reboot of neoliberalism's famous TINA mantra
– there is no alternative – because who cares about far-reaching surveillance when
lives are at stake? As argued by Jamie Bartlett, 'the looming dystopia to fear is a shell
democracy run by smart machines and a new elite of 'progressive' but authoritarian
technocrats'.
Mimicking core features of China's fin-tech-state integration, Apple and Google have joined
forces to allow governments to track the virus, whereas the US government has promised to
rollout a digital dollar and wallet as part of its coronavirus rescue package. Indeed, the
virus is a financial bonanza for tech companies, not least Thiel's Palantir having signed a
contract with the British National Health Service (NHS) to optimize data management. In one of
his first acts to tackle the virus, Dominic Cummings invited all bigtechs to Downing Street. As
noted in Wired magazine: 'for Cummings it's big
tech versus bad virus' . Palantir is currently in talks with governments across Europe.
Across the globe, the virus is spurring the development of digital apps, using locational
data and facial recognition technologies to track population health and whereabouts. In India,
Modi's henchmen are forcing citizens to take hourly selfies to track the virus through their
whereabouts, and non-compliance will result in enforced mass quarantine, where catching the
virus seems all but certain. In so doing, coronavirus threatens to deepen the ugly face of
neo-illiberalism, defined by mass incarceration programs, from Uighurs in China's Xijiang to
refugees indefinitely locked up along the Mediterranean and the US-Mexican border. And whilst
the pandemic has yet to reach the world's favelas and slums, threatening the lives of the most
vulnerable, lax responses to the virus in the developed world characterized by defunded health
care systems are making neoliberalism's implicit social Darwinist inclinations shockingly
explicit.
As the rise of neo-illiberalism signals profound geopolitical and economic shifts, the
pandemic might well be utilized to rewire the world's legacy operating systems. Are we moving
towards a financial reset, which was due in 2008 but was postponed via monetary gymnastics?
Will China liquidate its massive holding of US treasuries? Will the world's superpowers ramp up
the threat of war or will they compromise, or are we already looking at the contours of a new
settlement? Furthermore, with the world economy falling off a cliff, and the worst still to
come, many small-and-medium-sized enterprises are facing bankruptcy, whilst Amazon and a
handful other bigtechs are massively expanding their businesses. What will the post-corona
world look like? Will capitalism survive?
While we anticipate what might be coming, one of the biggest societal disruptions is the
loss of conventional social exchange, of physical closeness and contact, as we are all locked
up in our homes, forcing into digital interfaces, continuously leaking data into the expanding
machine of surveillance capitalism. Although there momentarily is no alternative, we'd better
make sure we seize the moment: the disruptive virus offers an incredible prospect for societal
reprogramming, for better and for worse. Lest we forget that this crisis is not merely
biological – it is deeply political.
Meaty stuff to digest on a Sunday. But very interesting. As to the 'name', I would suggest
crypto-neoliberalism.
One key take for me from the events of the last few months is that its increasingly clear
that when centrist/neoliberals are forced to make a choice between the far nationalistic
right and the populist left or Greens, they will pick the former every time. It's that
simple.
I think its an interesting idea that political movements are being shaped by the
techno-nationalism. Its certainly true that Tencent and Alibaba and Amazon and FB/Google have
a lot in common, and will see their own futures as mutually enmeshed with nationalist right
wing political movements. In China its very hard to see where Tencent ends and the CPP begins
– if Biden wins I think we'll see a similar enmeshing accelerate in the US (Trump being
too slow to realise that he needed those companies as his friends). In a smaller scale, the
same thing is happening in countries like South Korea. Europe is at a crossroads, simply
because it doesn't have those big data companies, so will face the prospect of keeping them
at arms length, or becoming enmeshed in their tentacles, and so becoming a battleground for a
sort of Huawai/Amazon battle.
I wonder if we are seeing a new schism developing between the large nations becoming
variants of techno-nationalisms, with mid sized countries from South Korea to New Zealand to
Norway to Canada and Chile, all trying to stay out of the fray, and perhaps co-operating in a
sort of Hanseatic league of smaller States trying to maintain some degree of
progressiveness.
PK: your last sentence is very interesting. I see those countries you mentioned as not yet
being "cryto-neoliberalist." I would like to think that they would co-operate in order "to
maintain some degree of progressiveness." However, our (Canada's) proximity to the US makes
it highly unlikely to last. Everything is so uncertain what with viruses running amok and
climate change marching onward. Who knows what is next?
There is an optimum size. It's not big and it's not small. It's somewhere in between.
Gotta have something to do with the maximum maintainable human synergy – aka politics.
Evolution seeks a central place to mutate, so for the sake of control, the wizards of our new
crypto-neoliberalism might want to do a massive project to issue citizenship rights to the
entire world. Digitally of course. For one thing, without individual human rights there can
be no local or regional sovereignty. And there will never be a global sovereignty until human
rights are guaranteed – traditionally by democracy but we have seen that it has it's
limits. But because there is a watershed whereby politics (sovereignty) always follows money
it would be smart to look to the actual source of "money" which is people. Whichever way they
are grouped. A smart crypto neoliberal, smarter than Zuckerberg, would first shuffle the
world's nations, then shuffle all their citizens, and then, blindfolded, reach into the mix
and pull out a name. Repeat until all the names are revealed – and each one is randomly
put in a group to be called their "peer group" or stg. like that. And all groups are
organizations of global peers with equal rights. And while that is being chopped up, a global
system of civil/environmental justice can be established gee this is sounding like a big
project maybe we should just stick with nations and give the smaller ones handicaps. This is
making me tired.
Open uncontrollable boarders are a neoliberal goal partly for labor arbitrage, but also to
reduce the power, by reducing its existence, of a nation-state to interfere with the creation
and domination of powerful international organizations like the IMF, or those agreements like
NAFTA. A new kind of economic colonization as ultimately it is being done by
non-nation-states. An economic Westphalia done in reverse.
How about klepto-neoliberalism. In fact I think neoliberalism has accomplished about
everything it can, so it's straight back to medieval times, with climate chaos leaving us as
a failed world, thus we get the dark ages. Unless of course people/citizens decided to take
action. As far as the post, ah, you just can't write like that. If he was a postdoc in my lab
that never would have seen the light of day. I have no idea who the intended audience is,
perhaps economists? The only thing missing was string theory. Historically, I do not believe
that the history of neoliberalism rolled that way. It didn't get better bigger & stronger
after 2008 not based on any risk analysis I've read – everything become deeply
destabilizing. Look kids in this country before the pandemic didn't have enough food now many
don't have any short of begging and handouts. The guy confuses nationalism vs. Nationalist
because he's working his argument backward. Obtuse and sensational at the same time. While
I'm at it, the only problem with democracy is there's not enough of it. Fascism? Where?
China? The EU? Nah.
Besides possessing even amplifying all the off-putting qualities of the term
'Neoliberalism' -- its smeared meanings and usages, its inherent oxymoronity, its ill-coinage
-- the term 'Neo-Illiberalism' is quite unnecessary given that Neoliberalism is anything but
dead. I believe the aftermath of the pandemic shows most uncomfortable promise of a great new
age of Neoliberalism. As currently configured the 'pandemic' policies in the US will result
in obliterating small and medium business, in widespread mortgage foreclosures, in personal
bankruptcies, in evictions and homelessness, and in a permanent loss of jobs with resulting
high levels of unemployment. The ruins will be grabbed up and consolidated by the large
Cartels, banks, and financial corporations.
The rest of this post interweaves dozens of themes and sub-themes without a coherence I
can perceive. The "key development" "the birth of digital platforms" sounds cool -- but what
is a digital platform when you strip away the 'cool'? It is marketing and media outlet. Are
the "behavioral observation, manipulation and modification" really so novel or so much more
effective? Is it more effective than the techniques of the Church practiced through early
education and socially enforced worship? Does it really lead to more sales, or the formation
of opinion any more effectively than radio or public speeches? Are the impacts of the
'digital platform' really as great and effective as Goggle and Facebook claim in their
advertising sales literature?
Mass surveillance was well underway long before the pandemic. I don't believe the pandemic
offers any better excuse for extending mass surveillance than the excuses already used. The
Internet and our phone systems offer ample hidden means to extend mass surveillance that need
no excuses since no one notices them. The post riffs on about "rampant digitization" and
"data analytics firms" as if they were critical tools of Neoliberalism. We live under the
watchful eyes of government panopticons, created to maintain control over the Populace. But
these panopticons are neither necessary for spreading Neoliberalism nor inherently Neoliberal
in their uses. The panopticons are enabled by digitization but they are hardly necessary to
control a population. The Gestapo was adequately served by neighbors, even family members
informing on each other.
Neoliberalism is alive and well and flourishing. Neoliberalism is an ideology created for
the Big Money by a large well-funded thought collective. It is designed to include multiple
layers and contradictions. The "key development" was not the development of digital platforms
-- the "key development" was the sale of Government to Big Money. This purchase enabled the
re-monopolization and consolidation of US Business, the Globalization of production, the
complete enthrallment of Labor, purchase of Education, Science, and the Media -- including
the Internet highways.
" One key take for me from the events of the last few months is that its increasingly
clear that when centrist/neoliberals are forced to make a choice between the far
nationalistic right and the populist left or Greens, they will pick the former every
time"
That has been true since 23 March 1933, when the German center decided it would rather
back the most vile, violent, radical Right rather than compromise with a moderate democratic
Left. That's the day that every single political party in Germany at the national level,
except the Social Democrats and the (banned & illegal, and therefore absent from the
vote) Communists decided it would be a good idea to give The Mustache the power to legislate
by decree.
The Centrists backed Nixon, Reagan, & Shrub, the Trumps of their respective times, all
manifestly unfit to govern.
As far as the name goes, I've got to pipe up from the peanut gallery and say,
'neoliberalism' has never been a good handle. After these many years, the average person is
not familiar with it. It implies 'some kind of liberal' and it implies 'no-harm-no-foul'. At
this point progressives know it means Bad Stuff but nobody else does. We have gone from bad
to worse by labeling 'centrism' as a bogeyman too, while most people find it a harmless
descriptor of reasonable people whose views are neither leftist nor rightist. So it is no
good as a better descriptor than 'neoliberal'.
The enemy, across the whole spectrum, is corruption. Call the DNC brand of it something
which the average person/voter can grasp.
'Illiberalism' is nothing new, but it is a useful term employed as it is here, in
describing the drive toward globalized fascism. Fascism has been described as "the iron hoop
that keeps the capitalist barrel from falling apart," and the steady steps of regimes to
circumscribe resistance today, paves the road towards crushing opposition tomorrow.
That may be one definition, but clearly it doesn't work that way as in operate and to
implement. Hitler and Mussolini didn't have skin heads doing the heave lifting they had all
unions buying into the master plan. And there was a master plan. Japan relied on a national
code of conduct based on the Bushidō Way and a real hatred of the Chinese.
Yup, you can't really argue with the substance of this. But the usual Open Democracy
blindspot is visible for all onlookers to see, even if the author is apparently oblivious to
it (although given the fancy footwork they need to employ to avoid it, you have to wonder if
they aren't all-too-well aware of it, but don't want to risk disclosure and the resultant
amplification).
Which is: somehow or other (and I really aren't sure how the non-authoritarian left ended
up being enmeshed and embroiled with the authoritarian left on this) the left as a whole has
become synonymous with being some sort of Lockdown Taliban. Only the purest, hardline-ist,
longest, unwavering-ist, toughest most lockdown-ey lockdown ev-ah is to be considered.
And it gets worse, folks. Having participated in the politicising of COVID-19 across
national boundaries, demonising dissenting approaches such as Sweden's and turning the rag
bag of current-knowledge and scientific theories into weaponisable collateral to be
factionalised and then acquired by and deployed by the right and the left in an ideological
turf war, the left has collectively painted itself into an ideological corner from which it
has no path to walk back from.
Proffering a policy response that is little more than lockdowns as far as the eye can see
is hardly likely to have voters flocking to political parties which have hitched themselves
to this wagon.
Or, they can try to wriggle their way out of this "There Is No Alternative"
humanity-under-house-arrest position without obviously surrendering to the opposing stand-off
with humanity-as-a-lab-experiment contrarians.
More likely, though, is the left will get bogged down, as it is continuing to do, in a war
of attrition. Yes, the Lockdown Fetish left can wave shrouds at the "gramps will just have to
jolly well take his chances if we are to be free" right. Neither is any better than the
other. Neither is going to make a breakthrough in popular opinion.
Honestly, I've been involved in the left side of politics for ages. Ending up, apparently
in perpetuity, as having set itself up for this sort of can't-win self-imposed rigid
positioning is as depressing as it is familiar.
Sounds like you are saying that the left has become intellectually stale and consumed with
petty quarrels. Hard to disagree and I also think the obsession with, say, insisting that
Sweden is wrong and that the lockdown consensus is right is an example of this. We are in a
whole new situation with the novel coronavirus and therefore experimentation is
necessary without reproach.
Yup, it's just like the border conversation – no solution on offer, just critique
with no dissent allowed. I keep thinking the cognitive dissonance will kick in at some point.
But for now at least the "solution" is just to keep narrowing the scope of acceptable
discourse.
What I find truly hilarious (and sad) is the faith in voting/democracy with the
consternation about voters continuing to vote "incorrectly."
Sorry to be the lone dissent on this, but the lockdown being turned into a "political
weapon:" that is s curious way of looking at the situation. If it is a weapon, who is it
being used against? (And by the left? Where is this left that is using the lockdown to attack
its enemies?) I guess I don't understand that part of it and perhaps I am completely ignorant
of the situation. But it seems to me the lockdown is more the result of public health
decisions, not some attempt to weaponize the situation and get even with anyone's
enemies.
I do think the pandemic response has been politicized though, but it seems to me
politicization is being generated by those who encouraged fascist militias to carry assault
rifles to lockdown protests at state houses, like in Wisconsin and Michigan. The
politicization seems far stronger to me from people like Chris Christie, who want to force
open the economy and claim everyone should just accept mass deaths (which will definitely
include those we can consider our loved ones).
And maybe the pandemic response has also been politicized a little by some economists, who
seem to think that because they know how to read a spreadsheet they can do this public health
thing themselves far better than any old clutch of medical doctors.
The left are using the COVID-19 to bash the right ("you want to end lockdowns and kill
people!") and the right are using COVID-19 to bash the left ("you want to continue the
lockdowns and kill people's livelihoods and freedoms so life isn't worth living!").
The public -- who are the voters, after all -- are merely caught in the crossfire.
In the absence of political credibility and media credibility, public opinion will simply
bypass both estates and make their own minds up. This is a societal lose-lose-lose.
Neither the left nor the right look like they are capable of leading opinion or
providing good governance. The media goes through the motions of ridiculing either the left
or the right but ends up merely looking ridiculous itself.
This is the stuff of failed states.
The ultimate loser in this scenario is always the left. While the right may be deranged,
the left is not only deranged, it's deranged in a internal dissent-riven, factionalist and
screeching banshee sort of a way. The right, which is merely deranged in an
internally-consistent and unified way looks the least-worst by comparison.
This sounds more like bothsiderism. Where is the left "using COVID-19 to bash the right?"
Do you mean some Twitter thing? Because if it is, this is definitely a case of "the right are
doing something bad so therefore the left must be doing something too," i.e. bothsiderism,
which I would consider a mirage.
Like I mentioned above, the right is showcasing fascist militias in state houses, and
their national politicians are calling for everyone to accept mass deaths so the economy can
get back to growth. And what is the left doing, by your description it sounds like they are
just getting behind the non-partisan public health response: the lockdown and social
distancing. I mean, is there really more to it than that? I am trying to consider your
argument carefully, but I'm not seeing the logic of it.
And besides, what do you mean, "the public" is caught in the crossfire? I would consider
myself a leftist, am I not a member of "the public?" And as a member of the public I find the
right is a palpable threat in this situation. A threat to me, my family, and my community.
And as a member of the public I too find the lockdown hard, oppressive, and worrying, but not
such a deadly threat. The lockdown is pretty much the only tool we have (and is not some
scheme concocted by the left), and still simply do not see how this is some weapon being used
to attack the right on any level that actually matters.
So the difference between the left/right "political responses" here: I don't think those
things are equivalent. And whether "the left is the ultimate loser", you haven't made clear
what they should be doing that they aren't already (should they have armed militias
intimidating elected politicians and calling for mass death too?). You seemed to mention they
should be "more open to options," but you didn't actually make a good case that they aren't
(again, is this some twitter thing? Because that is just the kind of mirage this looks like).
I have simply not hear any leftists do anything by accept policies put forward by medical
specialists.
Have a read of those or pick some random websites of your own choosing. Then come back and
try to tell me the left isn't using COVID-19 to ding the right and vice versa.
And yes, it is bothsidesism. Because both sides are being as bad as the other.
Just because you don't like it (and I don't like it either) doesn't unfortunately mean
it's not true.
No, it is an illusion of centrism (and face it: the Twitters is very much a factory of
illusions): following the advice of public health specialists simply isn't partisan
"weaponization". In fact, I would say the politicking involved here, which includes insisting
that listening to medical experts in equivalent to armed fascists marching through state
houses, is particularly egregious. As if centrists agree with those fascists and "mass
deaths" are called for at least that's the only conclusion I can come to after such
"bothersider" mystification. And that is exactly what this is, mystification of what is
really happening. And when that is the case, one can only ask who really wins here? I think
you're right, it isn't "the left," and I would also say it isn't the public alt large
either.
The results of a survey of 23,000 people in 50 states and the District: 93% of Americans
do not think the economy should reopen immediately.
Should we assume 93% of Americans are now considered "Left"? Regardless of how much some
people want to yell at each other on Twitter or the internet in general, this really is about
life and death. For some people, simply leaving their homes can be a death sentence. Maybe
they don't feel suicidal, yet.
Ideology does not conform with sanity or common sense, but some people would have you to
think different; facts also should agree with the approved ideology or else they are wrong.
The authoritarians, left and right, have doing this for a few years now.
I bet some well paid consultants are figuring out how to label the 93% as liberal moochers
or something.
And by the left? Where is this left that is using the lockdown to attack its
enemies?
Yes, can someone please tell me what the hell constitutes the left? It is incredibly
frusturating to read broad critiques of "the left" in a world when everyone from Nancy Pelosi
to George Soros to Bernie Sanders to Tony Blair to Xi Jinping fall under the heading of "the
left"
That is deliberate. The American left is mainly the DSA, the Greens with some other bits.
Bernie Sanders could be considered part of its rightwing. As the left was slowly destroyed
starting with the American Communist Party, then rolling rightward, what was acceptably
leftist or even liberal was gradually constricted. Now Senator Sanders is labeled a
socialist, which is a lie, but he labeled as such to smear his proposals as communism.
Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and G. H W. Bush would all be, or at perceived to be, to
moderate or even leftist . (Pardon me, I might be dying of laughter.)
In American politics, until a few years ago, there was no left since its remnants was
crushed by President Clinton.
The Democratic Party is now at best center-right and getting more so. It is a conservative
party much like the old Republic Party of the 1960s without a spine, more pro-war, more
authoritarian and comfortable using and being part of the police state and much more
corrupt.
The Republican Party is something new for the United States. It has a spine, it's
fanatically pro- wealth, and insane. Otherwise, it is much like the Democratic Party.
The differences in social issues are like the shell of a hermit crab. As soon as the money
is threatened they are discarded with the right soothing lies to quiet the true
believers.
A similar, but I guess less violent, process happened in Europe.
Clive, I beg to differ. Your own guy, at question time asked Borris "How on earth did we
get here?" Well, how did we? The post explains nothing. Your comments are all outcomes /
conclusions but not the mechanics of how it happened. I say with all due respect. Having two
incompetents as leaders is a start but not by far the whole answer.
Yes, if you can successfully pull off the line of attack you're suggesting the left tries
to pull off against the right, then you're definitely on to something.
But if this approach doesn't work (and it isn't -- read it and weep ; I
certainly do) how long do you want the left to keep going with it? Yes, sometimes persistence
pays off and repetition eventually yields results. However, sometimes it doesn't and it is
just flogging a dead horse.
How much longer should I give it? And if public perception is that your line of criticism
is only another variation on coulda-woulda-shoulda and England Derangement Syndrome, when
does what sounds like broken record'ing get to be simply annoying people rather than
converting them?
Put as simply as I can, is it worth my asking if the left seriously wants to govern or
does it just want to whinge?
An impressive description of world-historical developments. But there are some important,
I would say crucial, elements missing in this account. Here are a few of them:
1. What alternative would the author advocate? Is it a return to the "extreme center"?
Though the "center-left" is identified as "co-producers" of this world with the
"center-right," it is the latter, along with the various international representatives of
"Illiberalism" (China, Russia, Bolsonaro, etc.) that get almost all of the criticism. I
gather that the author is not advocating socialism. So what is the preferred model? Or,
worded differently, where is the *resistance* to this next stage of neoliberalism to come
from? The Obama or Clinton wings of the Democratic party? The "adults" on the Council on
Foreign Relations? A more authentic "mixed" economy or Social Democracy? I can't tell –
which keeps me from knowing how to interpret this.
2. Along those lines, completely missing from the framing of this article is the degree to
which the "illiberal" states of China, Russia, Iran, and others are attempting to *resist*
being swallowed up by US-led neoliberal globalization, and that an important part of what is
going on reflects this struggle between the old unipolar hegemon and the rest of the world.
This article collapses important distinctions between the US/West and the non-West in their
historical relation to neoliberal globalization. For most NC readers this is probably obvious
in the case of Russia, at least. Whatever we think of Putin's "authoritarianism," it does
*not* stand in the same relationship to global capitalism as that of Trump.
3. Similarly, while there is a lot here about the dangers of the Surveillance State (and
rightly so), I don't see much about how this might relate to global geopolitical conflict and
the military-industrial-intelligence complex. For example, I don't see anything about the US
military bases that surround China, Russia, Iran, etc., the steady expansion of NATO after
the fall of the Soviet Union, the role of US intelligence in the return of fascism to Brazil,
the destruction of lesser states that had the audacity to resist being absorbed by Western
Neoliberal advance (Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc.). Yeah, Steve Bannon is a right-wing s**t. But
he didn't do any of this -- he is just the political beneficiary.
There are several other missing elements in this story, but I'd settle for a discussion of
these.
You seem to leave out how the virus will change "personal rights". Rights for businesses
to disobey govt orders. In Michigan, it is rising to a collision between the right to disobey
the law in the name of freedom versus govt acting to protect its citizens. So that what we
will have at the end is businesses being able to operate outside the law while individuals
will have their rights stripped.
One example, which has been fought repeatedly in the past, is the right for businesses to
serve who they want. Michigan businesses are saying they don't have to follow rules put in
place due to COVID. Then, citizens are saying they don't have to follow those rules if they
don't want to. So businesses don't have to serve minorities if they don't want to. Doctors
don't have to care for/accept patients that may not be able to afford a premium price &
premium services. Where will it stop?
The virus is a bright light is casting in bold relief the deficiencies of society: the
replacement of minimum wage workers with prisoners, the loss of healthcare for the
unemployed, the forfeiture of education to inadequate broadband, the replacement of humanism
with AI but above all, the absence of true statesmen.
The Koch bro's & their ilk fancy themselves as Libertarian which is, essentially,
plutocratic social Darwinism. Ya know, that "Because markets / Go die" thing.
Now the the tech. billionaires present themselves as benign saviors of humanity. They
propose that a Public Private Partnership for a total surveillance state is the way to go.
(See 'The Intercept' article "New Screen Deal" in yesterday's Links – a must read).
PPP's are an essential "feature" of fascism. It appears to me that this is the direction the
US is headed.
I think much of this discussion will be upended by climate change and the ongoing collapse
of our high-tech, high-manufacturing, high-consumption societies. The surveillance dystopia
in particular, although looking fearsome at the moment, is especially fragile: in order for
mass digital surveillance like that to be possible it is not enough for governments and a
handful of corps to have big computers, rather the surveillance technology must be ubiquitous
and woven into the fabric of everyone's life. That means, inter alia, cranking out hundreds
of millions of smartphones, home appliances and sundry digital gadgets every year,
distributing them, keeping them powered and networked etc etc. Will we retain that capacity?
Highly doubtful IMO, although I won't attempt to predict a timeline.
Sorry to rant, but this post lit my short fuse when it started talking, out of the blue,
about national crypto currencies. That's a total oxymoron. All mixed up with offshoring and
secret capital stashed away on Pirate Island – they tossed in almost a nonsequitir:
national crypto currency. No. It is not crypto. It is digital. Digital currency and Crypto
currency are light years apart. They have nothing in common. Except that certain people are
interested in stripping democracy and nations of their sovereignty to control their money.
With an article like this the death of sovereignty is sneaking in the back door. And money
– its actual value – cannot be separated from sovereignty. Unless there is a
greater sovereignty to include it. And that requires a lot of work because if it is not
accomplished "neoliberalism" will eat up the planet, all its resources, starve anybody who
gets in their way, and jet off to Mars.
And the red herring about financialized surveillance is crypto-speak. Taking away our
privacy and human rights. Right. Well, the underlying reality which we might not notice, is
our national democratic sovereignty. I am not happy with the casual insouciance of this
post.
I have to say that I was rather disappointed (though not totally surprised given the
source) that the role of the Democratic Party establishment in supporting the move to
neo-illiberalism via its dedication to its Wall Street and Big tech clients and total
antipathy to any minor move to the left within the Party. This has served as an enabler to
the Republican right in their move into Neo-fascism and away from any semblance of
participative democracy in this country.
This screed is just a mess. Neo-liberalism has always been a thoroughly authoritarian
doctrine; it's initial laboratory was Pinochet's Chile. And '"liberal democracy" has always
been a contradiction in terms,- (what's the name of Japan's perennial ruling party?)
Electoral systems, if that"s the minimal criterion of "democracy," have been increasingly
hollowed out of what little popular efficacy they once had after 40 years of neo-liberal
ascendancy. CF. Colin Crouch's "post-democracy" or Sheldon Wolin's "inverted
totalitarianism". So the screed just combines nostalgia for nothing, for what never was, with
sub-Foucaultian paranoia, in the name of the vanity of being an academic intellectual.
There's no mention of the global debt load, 320% of global gdp, which had reached its limits
even before Covid-19, and which will collapse in the aftermath of the Covid-19 induced
depression. That would be the real start of any serious analysis, as the coming terrain of
future contention, rather than imagining that the masters of the universe could continue
their predatory reign in the absence of any sustainable basis for it.
The failed nations of USA, UK, Canada and Sweden haven't controlled the Wuhan coronavirus.
They are identified in the center in red. These neo-liberal governments won't spend money to
hire contact tracers, provide universal testing and quarantine the infected in safe secure
facilities. Instead they've come up with herd immunity, freedom and other nonsense to gloss
over the fact that the excess deaths are of absolutely no concern to the ruling
aristocracy.
The cure is to restore democracy. Halt the pandemic. Rebuild sustainable societies,
infrastructure and nations. This will be difficult unless the truth is recognized that the
reigning elite's ideology of profit over anything else is destructive and quite deadly.
Before coronavirus came to dominate the headlines, one of the most important stories of the
year was the signing of an agreement between the U.S. and the Taliban. The deal signed in Doha
on February 29 is a first step toward ending the U.S.'s longest war. After nearly two decades,
thousands of lost lives on all sides, and an estimated $1.5 trillion, the Trump administration
is finally acting on knowledge the U.S. government has long possessed: the war in Afghanistan
is unwinnable.
The parallels between the war in Afghanistan and the Vietnam War are striking. In the
Afghanistan Papers that were acquired by the Washington Post , the senselessness of the
war is laid bare by U.S. government officials. The papers are reminiscent of the Vietnam-era
Pentagon Papers and show that for years, the U.S. government has known that the war in
Afghanistan is a costly and deadly exercise in futility. Afghanistan's terrain, tribal
politics, and culture have long thwarted invaders. This is something that the British and the
Soviets, to the delight of U.S. officials in 1979, learned the hard way.
Yet despite clear lessons from the past and what should have been some institutional memory,
U.S. policymakers pursued financially and strategically ruinous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Estimated expenditures on these two wars and the larger open ended "war on terror" now exceed
$6.5 trillion. Rather than having made the U.S. more secure, these wars, and the unchecked
defense spending that they demand, make the U.S. more vulnerable to a host of internal and
external threats.
America's interventionist policies abroad and the cancerous growth of defense budgets, the
most recent of which is nearly $800 billion, compromise Washington's ability to grapple with
threats like crumbling infrastructure, an educational system that fails to deliver, and true
national preparedness for a crisis like the coronavirus. It is useful to think about what even
a small portion of the $6.5 trillion spent on failed wars could have done had it been spent on
infrastructure, world-class public education, accessible healthcare, and emergency
preparedness. If it had been spent intelligently and strategically, it could have been
transformative.
Instead, the U.S. public, as has so often been the case, continues to allow the
military-industrial complex to exercise undue influence. The companies that make up the vast
military-industrial complex in the U.S. spend millions lobbying Congress. These lobbying
efforts probably have the highest return of any investment on the planet. In exchange for
comparatively paltry campaign donations, members of Congress are persuaded to pass legislation
that yields billions in revenue for these companies.
Those who stand up to the calls for increased defense spending are said to be "soft on
defense" or even called "unpatriotic" by rival politicians and the platoon of retired colonels
and generals who act as paid cheerleaders for defense contractors. In his 1961 Farewell
Address, President Eisenhower presciently warned Americans about the power of the
military-industrial complex. In the often-quoted speech, Eisenhower argued that "we must guard
against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the
military-industrial complex." Eisenhower went on to say that a failure to guard against this
influence could lead to a "disastrous rise of misplaced power" that could "endanger our
liberties or democratic processes."
Americans have ignored Eisenhower's warning, and we are living with the consequences. The
insidious influence of the military-industrial complex infects both Congress and much of the
U.S. news media. Never was this more apparent than after September 11, when those who
questioned the march to war in Afghanistan and Iraq were demeaned or silenced. Real debate
about how to best respond to the threat posed by al-Qaeda and, more generally, militant
Salafism was quashed. Instead, the U.S. pursued the most expensive and, as time would prove,
counterproductive policies imaginable.
Nearly 20 years on, Afghanistan is slowly reverting to Taliban control. The invasion of Iraq
spawned the Islamic State and turned the country into an Iranian satellite. Neither of these
wars achieved their aims, but they did make hundreds of billions of dollars for defense
contractors. Low-cost and effective ways to combat terrorism are rarely considered. Such
methods do exist and often consist of little more than empowering local communities via very
specific tailored development projects. But such methods do not require hundreds of millions of
dollars' worth of drones and Predator-borne missiles. Thus, they receive little attention and
even less funding.
Now, as the U.S. winds down its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the "war on terror" is
passé. The new threats are the old threats: Russia and China. The pivot away from the
war on terror to renewed preparations for combatting China and Russia will be even more
profitable for the defense industry because this means increased funding for big-ticket legacy
weapons systems. The defense budget just passed by Congress is one of the largest in the
country's history and even funds the creation of a sixth military branch, the Space Force. The
demands for ever more defense spending ignore the fact that the combined defense budgets of
China and Russia equal a little more than a quarter of what the U.S. spends on defense. Nor is
there much discussion of the fact that a war between great powers is as unlikely as it is
unthinkable due to the threat of mutually assured nuclear annihilation.
In the same speech in which he warned Americans about the rise of the influence and power of
the military-industrial complex, Eisenhower argued that the only real check on this would be
"an alert and knowledgeable citizenry." One can only hope now that the U.S., and indeed the
world, face the threat of a global pandemic, that Americans will begin to question soaring
defense budgets and endless wars that contribute little to real security. Real security, as
this pandemic will demonstrate, is dependent on internal resiliency. This kind of resiliency is
built on sound infrastructure, accessible healthcare, a well-educated and healthy populace,
localized supply chains, and responsive and responsible government. The coronavirus pandemic
may finally force a rethink of how the U.S. government spends its citizens' money and how
willing it is to continue funding and fighting counterproductive wars.
Michael Horton is a foreign policy analyst who has written for numerous publications,
including The National Interest , West Point CTC Sentinel, The Economist , and
the Christian Science Monitor .
"... Hospital chains in USA are in the hands of private equity as are Care Homes and whole swathes of infrastructure. Where PE does not hold the equity, management has simply leveraged to the hilt as at Boeing. Using Debt to fund Share Buybacks is the biggest waste of capital and puts business in run-off like a Mutual Fund. In the time Covid-19 has been in the Media most Western governments could have set up a Manufacturing Facility to produce PPE to any specified design. It is not like starting a space program. ..."
"... The truth is that Politics is full of lawyers - nice schools, nice universities, nice offices with the highest-tech product being a PC and a Webcam. In the days when military service was combat related rather than pen pushing and degree chasing, and people actually knew how trucking functioned and machines ran in factories - it was evident how the command system worked from desk to shop-floor. ..."
"... Today it is all Windbaggery. Failure is too well rewarded and Success easily wiped from the Doers by the Talkers. ..."
"... They wondered if Wuhan was China's "Chernobyl Moment"...- in fact it is the Chernobyl for The Western Societal Model. After all, Wall Street should be able to fix this situation - Masters of The Universe - they are where the Physics grads go to program trading systems - that is where the talented are sucked into the Brave New World. Why hasn't Wall Street solved it. What has Jamie Dimon done - he is always ready with comments ..."
I tend to ignore academic articles contrasting 21st Century pandemics with those in
predominantly agrarian economies centuries ago. They are interesting in their own right but
not prescriptive in any way unless you are obsessed with Labour Theory of Value and Ricardian
Rent Theory.
That the global economy is in deep trouble was evident in 2019 and it is now enduring a
step-change down into the abyss. The frantic 2008 policy of propping up Asset (Debt) prices
with easy liquidity through Bank Money now meets the reality that Main Street is being
poleaxed even more than hitherto.
Hospital chains in USA are in the hands of private equity as are Care Homes and whole
swathes of infrastructure. Where PE does not hold the equity, management has simply leveraged
to the hilt as at Boeing. Using Debt to fund Share Buybacks is the biggest waste of capital
and puts business in run-off like a Mutual Fund. In the time Covid-19 has been in the Media
most Western governments could have set up a Manufacturing Facility to produce PPE to any
specified design. It is not like starting a space program.
The truth is that Politics is full of lawyers - nice schools, nice universities, nice
offices with the highest-tech product being a PC and a Webcam. In the days when military
service was combat related rather than pen pushing and degree chasing, and people actually
knew how trucking functioned and machines ran in factories - it was evident how the command
system worked from desk to shop-floor.
Today it is all Windbaggery. Failure is too well rewarded and Success easily wiped
from the Doers by the Talkers.
They wondered if Wuhan was China's "Chernobyl Moment"...- in fact it is the Chernobyl
for The Western Societal Model. After all, Wall Street should be able to fix this situation -
Masters of The Universe - they are where the Physics grads go to program trading systems -
that is where the talented are sucked into the Brave New World. Why hasn't Wall Street solved
it. What has Jamie Dimon done - he is always ready with comments
Time to Re-Engineer these Societies towards Substance and away from Speculation
"... Polls of life satisfaction taken since the outbreak began have reflected a rapid erosion as 33 million Americans have joined the unemployment rolls over the last months. NY Gov Andrew Cuomo said during a recent daily briefing that NY is seeing a spike in drug and alcohol abuse as people sit around all day with nothing to do and nowhere to go. ..."
"... But of course the tremendous levels of financial uncertainty coupled with the unique characteristics of this crisis make it pretty much impossible to model - any research is really an educated guess, at best. ..."
"... "Unemployment is going to have a very important impact on deaths of despair." ..."
"... His proposed strategies including investing more resources in helping unemployed people find meaningful work, and/or training the armies of contact tracers that de Blasio has now promised to hire to spot people at risk of self-harm. ..."
Doctors ,
scientists policymakers and even 'non-experts' posting on social media have argued that
shuttering the health-care system to all non-emergency care risks sparking other public health
crises from a spike in heart attacks and advanced cancer diagnoses, to so-called "deaths of
despair."
In some
areas, a spike in suicides has already been recorded since the start of the outbreak. And
now, a newly published paper released Friday has attempted to quantify deaths that might occur
because of the mental-health ramifications of widespread economic chaos caused by the crisis.
The research - which hasn't yet been peer-reviewed - found the isolation, grief and economic
hardship related to COVID-19 are conspiring to supercharge America's already-burgeoning
mental-health crisis, likely setting the stage for tens of thousands of suicides down the
line.
Specifically, the researchers tabulated that as many as 75k additional "deaths of despair"
could be caused by the outbreak and the economy-crushing measures implemented to stop the
spreads. "Deaths of despair" typically refer to suicides and substance-abuse-related deaths,
according to
Bloomberg .
The research was carried out by the Well Being Trust and researchers affiliated with the
American Academy of Family Physicians. One of the report's authors said he hopes the research
is eventually proven to be incorrect.
"I hope in 10 years people look back and say, 'Wow, they way overestimated it,'" said John
Westfall, director of the Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies in Family Medicine and
Primary Care, who co-wrote the report.
But the sizable spike in suicides, overdoses etc since the last major crisis (the financial
crisis) is reason to be concerned.
Even as the American economy rebounded after the last recession, suicides and overdoses cut
into Americans' life expectancy. Mental health experts worry that the economic uncertainty and
social isolation of the pandemic will make things worse at a time when the health care system
is already overwhelmed. The suicide rate in the US has already been rising for two decades, and
in 2018 hit its highest level since 1941, Bloomberg reported, citing a piece published by JAMA
Psychiatry (a prestigious medical journal) back in April.
"There's a paradox," said Jeffrey Reynolds, president of a Long Island-based nonprofit
social services agency, the Family and Children's Association. " Social isolation protects us
from a contagious, life-threatening virus, but at the same time it puts people at risk for
things that are the biggest killers in the United States: suicide, overdose and diseases
related to alcohol abuse."
Polls of life satisfaction taken since the outbreak began have reflected a rapid erosion as
33 million Americans have joined the unemployment rolls over the last months. NY Gov Andrew
Cuomo said during a recent daily briefing that NY is seeing a spike in drug and alcohol abuse
as people sit around all day with nothing to do and nowhere to go.
"One of the main things people should take away from this paper is that employment
matters," said Benjamin Miller, chief strategy officer at the Well Being Trust and a clinical
psychologist who worked on the paper. "It matters for our economic livelihood, and for our
mental and emotional health."
But of course the tremendous levels of financial uncertainty coupled with the unique
characteristics of this crisis make it pretty much impossible to model - any research is really
an educated guess, at best.
Still, the researchers believe it's a useful warning, and something important for policy
makers to keep in mind.
"It's useful to have a wake-up call," said Ken Duckworth, chief medical officer at the
National Alliance on Mental Illness. "Unemployment is going to have a very important impact
on deaths of despair."
Benjamin Miller, chief strategy officer at the Well Being Trust and a clinical psychologist
who worked on the paper, proposed several solutions that could be enacted to, uh, depress the
number of suicides.
His proposed strategies including investing more resources in helping unemployed people find
meaningful work, and/or training the armies of contact tracers that de Blasio has now promised
to hire to spot people at risk of self-harm.
Here Is The Real April Jobs Report: 42 Million Unemployed, by Tyler Durden Sun, 05/10/2020 - 15:30
Friday's job report - according to which a record 20.5 million jobs were lost in April, some
10x more than the depths of the Great Depression, resulting in a 14.7% unemployment rate - was
ugly enough as is, the NYT summarizing the catastrophic nature of the economic collapse with
the following creative front page.
The truth, unfortunately is even uglier.
While it is true that what the BLS reported that the April unemployment rate (UR) was less
than expected (14.7% versus consensus of 16.0%) and the drop in payroll employment of 20.5
million was also less than the 22.0 million expected, Standard Chartered bank has calculated
that adjustments to the headline unemployment rate push the effective number of unemployed to
42 million and the effective UR rate to 25.5%, higher even than the U-6 underemployment rate of
22.8%. Worse, if one treats underemployed in line with the U-6 methodology, the true April
unemployment number would rise to an mindblowing 27.5%.
How does one get these numbers? As the bank's chief FX strategist Steve Englander explains,
start with the 23.1 million unemployed as published by BLS. To this add 8.1mn people who have
dropped out of the labor force since February (previously the labor force had been growing
steadily, so these are likely unemployed).
Add back 7.5MM workers classified as 'employed but not at work for other reasons' –
BLS states that these workers are likely misclassified as employed, when they are in fact
unemployed. Involuntary part-time work for economic reasons has gone up by 6.6MM and we treat
these as half-unemployed (i.e., a contribution of 3.3MM).
This totals almost 42 Million effectively unemployed. Keep the civilian labor force
denominator at February's 164.5 million, which results in a 25.5% estimate for effective
unemployment, and if Englander treated involuntary part-time workers as completely unemployed,
the resulting unemployment rate would be at 27.5%.
Commenting on the April BLS report, Englander writes that "bad data for the mid-March to
April period is largely anticipated by investors; these data were neither good nor bad enough
to force investors to adjust expectations." He also expects the May labor data to show
deterioration at a slower pace, but think that investors are looking at the balance between
initial and continuing claims to assess the pace at which reopening would lead to better
labor-market outcomes.
And while a slowdown in the collapse is to be expected - after all, there are only so many
workers that can be fired - don't expect it any time soon. As we first noted on Friday, White
House economic adviser Kevin Hassett - who said
two weeks ago that Q2 GDP would be the biggest negative number since the great depression -
has set the groundwork for an even scariee number next month as the statistics catch up to the
reality, warning that unemployment could hit 20% in May, up from 14.7% in April, or rather down
from the real 27.5% unemployment rate.
" I think just looking at the flow of initial claims, it looks like we're probably going to
get close to 20 percent in the next report ," Hassett told CNN 's "State of the Union" on
Sunday, refusing to admit that the actual number when one eliminates the BLS fudges is already
far higher.
He added that the rate will depend on whether the virus "has really abated" and if economies
are "really going again."
"I would guess middle of summer is when we're going to start to go into the transition
phase," said Hassett, adding that he hopes the third and fourth quarters will bring "very
strong" growth.
"Just looking at the flow of initial claims that it looks like we're probably going to get
close to 20% in the next report," senior White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett says
about US unemployment. #CNNSOTU
pic.twitter.com/bTN85AJaMD
Looking ahead at the May data, Englander is similarly gloomy and warns that initial claims
have totaled 7 million since the April survey week and there is no sign that continuing claims
are turning down due to rehiring or reopening, adding that "at this point it does not look like
May employment data will show improvement or even stability. "
The incoming data look consistent with the baseline UR breaching 20% in May , especially
if the responses on "employed but not at work for other reasons" change.
In summary, the Trump admin is hoping that within a few months the bottom will be in for the
economy, it is also hoping that the official government reports eventually catch down to
reality, and that at some point the two series - the actual economy and how the government
actually represents it - will converge. The question is when, and just how massive the
discrepancy between truth and the "official data" will grow until that happens.
In less than three decades, a mere blink of the eye in historical terms, the United States
has gone from the world's sole superpower to a massive foundering wreck that is helpless before
the coronavirus and intent on blaming the rest of the world for its own shortcomings. As the
journalist Fintan O'Toole noted recently in the Irish Times:
"Over more than two centuries, the United States has stirred a very wide range of feelings
in the rest of the world: love and hatred, fear and hope, envy and contempt, awe and anger.
But there is one emotion that has never been directed towards the U.S. until now: pity."
Quite right. But how and why did this pitiable condition come about? Is it all Donald
Trump's fault as so many now assume? Or did the process begin earlier?
The answer for any serious student of imperial politics is the latter. Indeed, a fascinating
email suggests that the tipping point occurred in early to mid-2014, long before Trump set foot
in the Oval Office.
Sent from U.S. General Wesley Clark to Philip Breedlove, Clark's successor as NATO commander
in Europe, the email is dated Apr. 12, 2014, and concerns events in the Ukraine that had
recently begun spinning out of control. A few weeks earlier, the Obama administration had been
on top of the world thanks to a nationalist insurrection in Kiev that had chased out a mildly
pro-Russian president named Viktor Yanukovych. Champagne glasses were no doubt clinking in
Washington now that the Ukraine was solidly in the western camp. But then everything went awry.
First, Vladimir Putin seized control of the Crimean Peninsula, site of an all-important Russian
naval base at Sevastopol. Then a pro-Russian insurgency took off in Donetsk and Luhansk, two
Russian-speaking provinces in the Ukraine's far east. Suddenly, the country was coming apart at
the seams, and the U.S. didn't know what to do.
It was at that moment that Clark dashed off his note. Already, he informed Breedlove, "Putin
has read U.S. inaction in Georgia and Syria as U.S. 'weakness.'" But now, thanks to the
alarming turn of events in the Ukraine, others were doing the same. As he put it:
"China is watching closely. China will have four aircraft carriers and airspace dominance
in the Western Pacific, within 5 years, if current trends continue. And if we let Ukraine
slide away, it definitely raises the risks of conflict in the Pacific. For, China will ask
would the U.S. then assert itself for Japan, Korea, Taiwan the Philippines the South China
Sea?
...[I]f Russia takes Ukraine, Belarus will join the Eurasian Union, and, presto, the
Soviet Union (in another name) will be back...
...Neither the Baltics nor the Balkans will easily resist the political disruptions
empowered by a resurgent Russia and what good is a NATO 'security guarantee' against internal
subversion?
...And then the U.S. will find a much stronger Russia, a crumbling NATO and [a] major
challenge in the Western Pacific. Far easier to [hold] the line now in Ukraine than elsewhere
later" [emphasis in the original].
The email speaks volumes about the mentality of those in charge. Conceivably, the Obama
administration still had time to turn things around – if, that is, it had shown a bit of
flexibility, a willingness to compromise, and a willingness as well to stand up to the
ultra-nationalists who had led the anti-Yanukovych upsurge and opposed anything smacking of an
even-handed settlement.
But instead it did the opposite. Back in the 1960s, cold warriors had argued that if Vietnam
"fell" to the Communists, then Thailand, Burma, and even India would follow suit. But the
proposition that Clark now advanced was even more extreme, a super-Domino Theory holding that a
minor ethnic uprising in a part of the world that few people in Washington could find on the
map was intolerable because it could cause the entire international structure to unravel. NATO,
U.S. control of the western Pacific, victory over the Soviets – all would be lost because
a few thousand people insisted on speaking their native Russian.
Why such rigidity? The real problem was not so much a confrontation mindset as a phenomenon
that the historian Paul Kennedy had identified in the late 1980s: "imperial overstretch." Like
other empires before it, the U.S. had allowed itself to become so over-extended after
twenty-five years of "unipolarity" that strategists had their hands full keeping an
increasingly rickety structure together. Nerves were on edge, which is why an ethnic uprising
that might have been accommodated at an earlier stage of U.S. imperial development was no
longer tolerable. Because the rebels had run afoul of U.S. imperial priorities, they
constituted a fundamental threat and therefore had to be bulldozed out of the way.
Except for one thing: the structure was so weak that each new bulldoze operation only made
matters worse. Insurgents continued to hold their ground in Donetsk and Luhansk thanks to
Russian backing while the government grew more and more corrupt and unstable back in Kiev. In
the Middle East, the situation was so confused that U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar
were channeling money and arms to ISIS as it rampaged through eastern Syria and northern Iraq
and advanced on Baghdad. Thanks to the turmoil that U.S. policies were unleashing, millions of
desperate refugees would soon make their way to Europe where they would spark a powerful
nativist reaction that continues to this day. U.S. hegemony was turning into a nightmare.
It was no different in an America shaken by Wahhabist terrorism and dismayed by wars in the
Middle East that went nowhere yet never seemed to end. Donald Trump rode a wave of discontent
into the White House by promising to "drain the swamp" and bring the troops home. Conceivably,
he could have done just that once he was in office – if, that is, he had been serious
about downsizing U.S. imperialism and was capable of standing up to the CIA. But the
"intelligence community" struck back by launching a classic destabilization campaign based on
the theme of Russian collusion while Trump's foreign-policy ideas turned out be even more of a
mess than Obama's.
So the collapse intensified, which is why America is now such a helpless giant. A crazy man
is at the helm, yet the best Democrats can do is put up a candidate suffering from the early
stages of senile dementia, who may be a rapist to boot. No one knows how things will play out
from this point on.
But two things are clear. One is that the process d id not start under Trump, and the other
is that it will undoubtedly continue regardless of who wins in November. Once collapse sets in,
it's impossible to stop.
"This [real workers going back to work for their bosses' profits] must happen now, or we
are all doomed."
I really laughed at that.
What is doomed is the American empire. It will take a few years for that doom to play out,
but history books will likely put the date for the demise of the empire back in March.
The burger-flipping servant economy isn't coming back, and it will be decades before
America can rebuild a significant manufacturing economy. Get used to this "Greater
Depression" because it will be with us a while, particularly after the next couple waves
of the covid hit.
Hint: If you don't have a big 75" wall screen TV yet and want one, you might want to make
that investment before the "decoupling" goes any further. They will cost a year or two
salary afterwards.
Even some of the most ardent supporters of the fraud that is Keynesian economics now admit
the entire modern economic system is on the verge of collapse for one main reason: the marginal
utility of debt is collapsing, with ever more debt required to generate an increase in
underlying GDP.
And tied to that, is another reason why any day now the current system may be the last: the
marginal utility of every new QE is now declining to the point where soon virtually none of the
money created by the Fed out of thin air will enter the economy and instead will be stuck in
capital markets, resulting in hyperinflation for asset prices even as the broader economy
collapses. Or, as BMO's Daniel Krieter writes, "QE has fed through to the real economy in a
slower manner than previous QE campaigns" and for each dollar the Fed's balance sheet has
grown, M1 money supply has increased about $0.32, compared to $0.96 and $0.74 in QE1 and QE2.
"The expansionary policy thus far has mostly resulted in increased asset prices", BMO writes
concluding what had been obvious to us and our readers since 2009. Only now we are ten years
closer to what is the inevitable endgame, one where the Fed has no impact on M1, which will
also be known as the "game over" phase.
But let's back up.
Traditionally, as BMO explains, we analyze the business cycle from a classical economic
perspective where monetary authorities are more passive and "the invisible hand" guides
economies (this used to be the case before the Fed went all Politburo on the USSA and decided
to nationalize capital markets, crushing any "signal" the bond market may have; the final step
will be the launch of Yield Curve Control which will be game over for the market). In this
context, we look at interest rates, which can theoretically be defined as the rate that makes
the consumer indifferent between consumption today and consumption tomorrow. R* is the
(unknowable) natural rate of interest that supports full employment and stable interest rates.
In theory, if r<r*, then consumption today is preferable and the economy is expanding. If
r>r*, consumption saving is preferable and the economy is contracting.
In an expansionary phase, prices and consumption are increasing. Because prices and
investment opportunities are high, demand for money among consumers/businesses is high, and
interest rates (r) increase alongside borrowing . When r rises to the rate of r*, consumption
slows, earnings fall, and a recession ensues. R* falls as uncertainty and risk aversion grow.
This is a "business cycle" recession (and as long as the Fed is around, we will never have one
of those again as the Fed has now also killed the business cycle... just as the USSR tried to
do).
However, a recession can also be caused by some external shock to the economy that produced
further declines in r*. This is because r* is reactive to uncertainty with a strong negative
correlation. The greater the uncertainty, the lower r* falls.
In recession, r falls as consumption remains low as long as it is greater than r*. Defaults
accelerate the drop in r. With the passage of time, r* rises slowly as the uncertainty/risk
aversion surrounding the shock and/or end of business cycle fades. However the longer firms go
without earnings due to low consumption, the more defaults are realized and the more r drops.
At some point, the combination of falling r and rising r* results in r <= r*. Once this
happens, consumption/ investment picks up and the economy enters recovery.
In addition to accelerating declines in r, defaults experienced during recession also lower
the cost of labor and capital goods as the resources of failed companies are returned to the
economy. In addition, barriers to entry in certain industries fall as "old guard" firms go out
of business. Thus, as the economy enters recovery, this combination of cheaper labor/capital
goods and lower barriers to entry leads to strong business investment and increases growth
potential during the ensuing expansion.
This is how the world works in theory. Unfortunately, since 1913, theory has not worked due
to the intervention of the Fed. So now let's look at how all this works in reality, and
introduce an active central bank with a wider range of monetary policy tools at its
disposal.
As the economy cools, the central bank lowers r in an attempt to spur consumption by forcing
r<r*. Consumption increases in response, and recession/defaults are avoided. But business
resources aren't returned to the economy. Recovery will be less robust due to fewer relative
attractive investment opportunities. As Krieter argues, this was the experience of 2001.
Now in 2008, a shock in the form of subprime mortgages hits the economy and uncertainty
skyrockets. R* moves into negative territory as shown in a recent San Francisco Fed study. The
Fed moves rates lower, but is constrained by the zero bound. In order to further "lower r", the
Fed embarks on asset purchases during QE and is successful in spurring consumption, as
evidenced by the strong correlation between increases in excess reserves and increases in M1.
M1 is the most basic measure of money supply and includes essentially only cash and
checking/demand bank accounts.
The theory is that for a good or service to be consumed, it must be paid for out of M1.
Therefore, the increase in M1
following QE is a measure of the degree to which QE results in actual consumption.
Note "lower r" in quotation marks in the previous bullet because r is at the zero bound and
cannot (at least in the United States) be lowered further. Therefore QE increases money supply
which is meant to spur consumption, which is the same desired effect of lower interest rates.
In a sense, money supply increases are synthetic interest rate decreases (and synthetic capital
market increases) .
The combination of QE-driven consumption (r falling) and fading uncertainty after a trillion
dollar fiscal stimulus package (r* rising) ultimately pulls the economy out of recession.
However, the pace of response in 08/09 was slower. QE was not announced until late November
2008, after large defaults were already experienced. Fiscal stimulus in the form of the ARRA
package didn't arrive until February 2009 with an additional lag in implementation that
featured incremental defaults. In the end, almost a trillion dollars' worth of debt was
affected by default in 2008/09, but QE certainly prevented actual defaults from being likely
exponentially greater. BMO notes however that defaults avoided were once again economic
resources that were not returned to the economy and barriers to entry that are not lowered.
This argues that attractive investment opportunities following the financial crisis were not as
abundant as the depth of recession would suggest.
As a result, the recovery was slow, ultimately prompting the Fed to embark on additional
rounds of quantitative easing in an attempt to spur increased consumption.
Which brings us to the seeds of the Fed's own demise: the problem is that QE appears to be
experiencing diminishing returns, as evidenced by a falling correlation between excess reserves
and M1 in successive episodes of QE following the financial crisis. As QE leads to a direct
increase in bank reserves, only a fraction is translated into money supply growth, and thus
potentially consumption and investment. QE1 was highly effective and an important factor behind
pulling the economy out of recession. QE2 had a marginally lower, but still high, follow
through of .735 indicating that on average, $0.74 of each dollar of QE translated to increased
money supply. We observe elevated inflation and personal consumption rates during the period of
QE2 as evidence of its effectiveness. However, during Q3, the correlation fell to just $0.28
and resulted in very little inflation of GDP growth. Through this lens, the impact of QE on the
real economy has diminished over time.
How does BMO explain the diminishing impact of QE?
Diminishing marginal utility of consumption: QE (and monetary policy) is often referred
to as "borrowing from the future". However, there is only a limited amount of future
consumption that can be pulled into the current period via monetary policy. This could apply
to consumption of durable goods: as rates have been relatively low for a long period of time,
demand for credit no longer increases at the same rate with incrementally lower interest
rates. At some point, consumption does not bring sufficient to utility no matter how long
prices or interest rates are.
Wealth disparity: Wealth disparity exacerbates the impact of diminishing marginal utility
of consumption. For reasons discussed in further detail below, QE tends to inflate the price
of financial assets, making those who own the assets more wealthy. A large percentage of QE
money ends up in the hands of the wealthy, whose consumption patterns are unlikely to change
in response to a near term increase in wealth.
Inflation expectations: Finally, the crux of monetary policy plays on expectations.
Inflation is self reinforcing as demonstrated by a very high correlation between inflation
and inflation expectations. Around the introduction of QE, there was an expectation that it
could spawn runaway inflation. Having been through multiple rounds of QE without a large
increase in inflation, people have likely generally come to understand that QE is not likely
to result inflation, therefore there is marginally less impetus to consume now.
Following five years of no QE in the United States, it appears the utility of current QE has
increased modestly in comparison to QE3. However, the follow through to consumption still
remains well below levels experienced between Q1 and Q2. It is likely then that current QE is
unlikely spurring much consumption as r isn't influenced lower (via money supply increase) as
much as in the past and likely remains well above r*.
Worse, as we
discussed last week , one can argue that r* is likely lower now than potentially any point
in history, and according to Deutsche Bank it is at an all time low of -1%.
Not only is uncertainty extremely high, but the impact of COVID-19 arguably directly lowers
r*. Recall r can be defined as the rate of interest that makes consumption today indifferent to
consumption in the future. In all economic models, r is assumed to be positive. But when people
are afraid to their leave their house for fear of infection, future consumption actually is
more attractive than current consumption. So r* is arguably negative for fundamental reasons
for the first time. Greatly heightened uncertainty only pushes it even further negative.
When money supply goes up, but consumption fails to be generated (because r remains well
above r*), then savings rates mathematically increase. Therefore, the prices of financial
assets increase generally.
During times of risk aversion, bond prices increase first, but supply of safe assets is
limited, especially as the Fed buys a substantial portion of the Treasury market. Investors are
therefore pushed into riskier assets. But as long as r remains below r*, the more savings go
up, the greater the mechanical move in financial asset prices relative to real economic
activity.
This, according to BMO, is what's driving the paradoxical relationship between bond and
equity prices in recent weeks, and explains why stocks are performing so well despite the
outlook for the greater economy. Money supply that doesn't translate into consumption must
result in higher financial asset prices until defaults result in wealth destruction. What does
this mean for the recovery? The central bank is displaying reduced capacity to further generate
real economic activity as a result of accommodative policy over the past twenty years. This
means that recovery is unlikely until r* increases significantly , which only happens alongside
fading virus uncertainty. This will take a long time.
During that time, one of two things will happen. Either the government will continue to
assist companies in avoiding
bankruptcy, or it will not. If it does, confidence (and r*) will likely return relatively more
quickly at a huge cost to the government. However, there will not be a large return of economic
resources at the end of this recession and the ensuing recovery will be disappointing given the
degree of economic pain currently being felt.
If it does not, defaults could potentially reach historic proportions, and the recession
will be long and painful. However, using the "ripping the bandaid" analogy, this scenario would
result in likely the largest return of economic resources in the history of the country and
lead to a very powerful economic expansion in the wake of the current recession.
Ultimately, the truth likely lies in the middle. The government will continue to provide
relief, though not likely in scale large enough to save all businesses. Defaults and downgrades
will be staggering, but this will increase the capacity of growth in the ensuing economic
recovery.
What does this mean for risk assets? It means that risk assets are being technically
supported by stimulus measures so far, particularly QE that is no longer as effective as it
was. However, a large wave of defaults is unavoidable without an unlikely near-term (and
complete) solution to COVID-19. Heavy defaults, the kinds described in " Biblical"
Wave Of Bankruptcies Is About To Flood The US , will likely bring about another wave of
risk asset price weakness as wealth is destroyed and technical upward pressure on financial
asset prices and a higher percentage of savings demand is met with safe haven assets (Figure
3).
This also explains why the Fed was compelled to enter the bond market, as absent a direct
intervention in the secondary market, bond prices would crater and trigger a self-fulfilling
doom-loop, where lower bond prices lead to higher defaults, lead to even lower prices and so
on. For now, the Fed has managed to delay this process but there is only so much Powell can do
to offset the collapse in fundamentals which will lead to continued ratings erosion, and the
eventual defaults of countless companies, many of which the Fed will be directly invested in.
At that point, the Fed's action in the "market" will become the topic of non-stop Congressional
hearings, and will culminate with doubts emerging about the viability of the dollar as a
reserve currency.
Until this trigger level is reached, however, QE will continues to pose a technical
tailwind, influencing financial asset prices higher. This can be sustained until default rates
increase, which is likely not until June or later as government stimulus money starts to run
dry, and which point assets will likely take another nosedive lower, just as reports of a
second coronavirus pandemic result in (most Democratic) states shuttering again ahead of the
presidential election.
What happens then? Risk assets will continue to slide into the election and into 2021, at
which point as Nordea showed last week, we will hit a point where the lagged effect of the
flood central bank liquidity will finally hit into the S&P500, and result in one final
explosion in risk assets, sending stocks over 40% higher...
... although not of a benign nature but more of what one would expect to see in the Caracas
or Weimar stock market.
Before the April jobs report release, Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute
(EPI) warned on Twitter that Friday would be "the most cataclysmic #JobsDay of all of our lives" and shared a chart
showing how recent unemployment claims contrast with the past 80 years, before detailing
current conditions in a 22-tweet thread.
BRACE YOURSELF for the most cataclysmic #JobsDay of
all of our lives. This chart has monthly job changes over the past 80 years. We lost more
than 20 million jobs in April. There has never been anything like this. 1/ pic.twitter.com/eODWpeAb4X
While the 14.7% figure for April is significantly higher than February (3.5%) and
March (4.4%), it fails to capture the full scope of how U.S. workers have been impacted by
temporary business closures and hours reductions that have resulted from the ongoing global
health crisis. The report says 5.1 million Americans had hours cut in April.
Shierholz, senior economist and director of policy at EPI, explained that "only about
two-thirds of coronavirus-related job losses are showing up as unemployed -- the rest are
showing up as having dropped out of the labor force. If all coronavirus-related job losses
had shown up as unemployed, the unemployment rate would now be around 19.0%, not 14.7%."
"Further, about 7.5 million workers are likely being misclassified as 'employed, not at
work' instead of 'temporarily unemployed,'" she continued. "If they were classified correctly
AND all coronavirus-related job losses had shown up as unemployed, the unemployment rate
would be around 23.6%."
She also highlighted EPI's
estimate from April 30 that because of recent job losses, about 12.7 million Americans
have lost their employer-based health insurance -- which EPI researchers called a "
terrifying " indictment of the country's private, for-profit healthcare system,
particularly in the midst of a pandemic.
Former JPMorgan Economist: We Are Heading Towards A Weimar Republic Inflation Setup
by Tyler Durden Sat,
05/09/2020 - 21:30 Submitted by a former JPMorgan economist who wishes to remain anonymous
The everything bubble
Readers will have anticipated the bursting of the bubble that has been re-inflating ever
since 2009. Ultra-loose monetary policy, coupled with deflationary pressures from increased
aggregate supply and investors chasing yield at ever higher risk, meant that almost all asset
classes had reached all time highs just before entering the current bear market.
That there is a bubble, a massive one, is unquestionable. Readers will further have
anticipated that it didn't have to be a global pandemic to burst this bubble. This bubble was
practically looking for a prick - any prick - to burst it. Whether it was a credit event,
liquidity shortages that led to bankruptcies, a terrorist attack, a natural disaster or a bat:
markets had reached a level of fragility where they could not cope with the materialising of
such a tail risk event.
Too much had fueled this fragility: out-of-touch credit ratings, leveraged balance sheets,
stock buybacks, expansionary monetary policy and as a result: out-of-control credit and
debt.
Expect companies in energy to go bust first. Then retail and hospitality. At some stage
their bankruptcies will push creditors into a corner where such lenders will either have to be
bailed out or they will drop like flies (Lehman style). Already banks have slowed their credit
lines to corporates, like in 2008/2009, anticipating that some of their debtors will fail to
repay.
Sure, with more QE flooding the markets a complete wipe-out may be averted, as there is no
political appetite for mass insolvencies (especially in an election year in the US).
The bubble has reached a level where systemically relevant banks will be facing their Lehman
moment sooner rather than later. Lawmakers will not allow such systemically relevant lenders to
go under, as this would practically imply all lights to go out. So the real question at hand
is: at what cost?
At what cost to prevent the Deutsche Banks of this world from going bankrupt?
At what cost to keep the unemployed at bay, because for sure: no job, no income and no
prospects are a recipe for turmoil and civil unrest.
At what cost to counter big institutional sellers exiting the markets who want cash?
At what cost running the biggest budget deficit and current account deficit (in the
US)?
At what cost managing the havoc from Covid-19?
At what cost QE forever?
At what cost etc.
Crossing the Rubicon
On April 27, 2020 CNBC ran a story on "Why the coronavirus crisis may prompt central bankers
to scrap inflation targeting".
If central banks indeed abandon or modify inflation targeting we will certainly be crossing
the Rubicon. Admittedly, there is no other way in answering the above questions.
Policymakers continue to be behind the curve and obviously failed to learn from 2008/2009.
Their last resort is printing money and creating more debt. If central banks have no or a
soft-washed inflation mandate we are heading towards a Weimar Republic style inflation
setup.
With global output staying the same or declining, aggregate demand declining significantly
and the quantity of money in circulation multiplying (by means of handouts or universal basic
incomes), asset prices across asset classes being propped up by central banks, it becomes just
a matter of time until inflation goes from 'subdued' to 'out of hand'.
Asset allocation in this new set up
With central banks either purchasing corporate bonds or accepting them as collateral, it may
be soon until their mandate is being changed to facilitate the buying of equities, too. As
other commentators already noted: we may have abandoned free markets and now head to a
centrally planned set up.
The recent pick-up from the March 2020 lows in stock markets will be short lived. Nothing
has fundamentally improved, other than emergency liquidity provisions by central banks. Expect
a new selloff by year end - re-testing the lows of March - because perfidiously the Fed does
not yet own enough corporate debt/equity to control asset prices!
Central banks will be printing fiat money on a unprecedented scale. With potentially
negative interest rates even in the US, a slowing of global trade and thus reduced supply, the
risk of a surprise inflation increases markedly. If and when this feeds through, asset
allocation becomes key.
Look for uncorrelated asset classes or inflation resistant assets. There is a chance central
banks will own a good part of cross-sector corporate debt/equity when the dust settles and
inflation starts to go through the roof.
>The capitalists have painted themselves into a corner. There is no way out from this
crisis which does not
> involve the end of fifty years of neo-liberalism (and two centuries of the liberal
Political Economy).
I thought the same in 2008. Did not happen.
> Neo-liberalism, allied to warmongering in the MIC and dominating the political
process through its ownership
> of both its own party and the Opposition's, has so dominated US life that the kind of
reforms that Keynes saw
> as necessary to preserve the system from itself are unthinkable.
That's true but neoliberalism evolved in different direction: Trumpism ("national
neoliberalism") is essentially neoliberalism without neoliberal globalization. Domestically
it looks more and more like a unique "Americanized" flavor of neofascism. The latter
historically proved to be a resilient social system (Spain)
> The current policy of giving money in unlimited quantities to corporations, virtually
without condition,
> and invoicing the working class by pledging future tax revenues to repay the cost of
financing, is unsustainable.
OK. But what is the countervailing force ? There is none. By definition creating a viable
political opposition in a national security state is impossible. Note that the USSR crumbled
only when KGB changed sides. And that Nazi Germany did not crumbed until Soviets took Berlin,
and, despite all the misery of the last year of war, there were fierce fight for Berlin (and
heavy losses for Soviets)
> Neo-liberalism, the ideology of capitalist rule, has had its chance. The crisis that
we are in
> is showing how useless it is, how dangerous a society devoted to the profit of a few,
rather than the welfare
> of the many is. With every new twist and turn it demonstrates its inability to
govern.
Neoliberalism will most probably survive COVID-19 epidemic like it survived the crisis of
2008. You can argue whether quarantine was necessary or not and about the level of
incompetence of Trump administration, but you can't deny that the measures taken by the USA
government somewhat softened the blow and the social system remains intact.
Again, there is no viable countervailing force to MIC and financial oligarchy, and the two
party system is very resilient and essentially guarantee that the internal political
situation will stay this way. Looks like only external shocks or disintegration of the
country under the pressure from far right nationalists can crumble this system.
> What this adds up to- mass unemployment and increasing immiseration with no organised
voice to represent tens
> of millions of desperate workers and their families is the likelihood of a series of
explosions, riots,
> strikes, boycotts and direct actions.
In the USA the family of three can survive when each of the adults earn just $10 per hour
(which means income around $40K a year). Real misery is reserved mostly to single mothers and
unemployed. You can't compare the situation in the USA to the situation in "neoliberalized"
xUSSR countries where it is really about physical survival and large percentage of population
live of ~$2 a day. Do we see riots in those countries ?
> There is nobody to press reforms on the ruling class
With the
worst jobs report in history under our belt, which saw a record 20.5 million jobs lost in
April, and the stated unemployment rate at 14.7%, some cities have been hit worse than others
by the economic fallout from the pandemic.
To wit, after steadily increasing 2-3% every week for the past two months, the unemployment
rate in San Diego county is at an all-time high of just under 27% - exceeding the previous
record from 1933 set during the Great Depression, according to a report by the San Diego
Association of Governments (SANDAG).
Just a day after
announcing that about 33.5 million Americans have filed jobless claims since mid-March as
the coronavirus pandemic has caused lockdowns worldwide, the U.S. Department of Labor on
Friday revealed
the nation's official unemployment rate hit 14.7% last month -- its highest level since the Great
Depression.
Before the April jobs report release, Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute
(EPI) warned on Twitter that Friday would be "the most cataclysmic #JobsDay of all of our lives" and shared a chart
showing how recent unemployment claims contrast with the past 80 years, before detailing
current conditions in a 22-tweet thread.
BRACE YOURSELF for the most cataclysmic #JobsDay of
all of our lives. This chart has monthly job changes over the past 80 years. We lost more
than 20 million jobs in April. There has never been anything like this. 1/ pic.twitter.com/eODWpeAb4X
While the 14.7% figure for April is significantly higher than February (3.5%) and
March (4.4%), it fails to capture the full scope of how U.S. workers have been impacted by
temporary business closures and hours reductions that have resulted from the ongoing global
health crisis. The report says 5.1 million Americans had hours cut in April.
Shierholz, senior economist and director of policy at EPI, explained that "only about
two-thirds of coronavirus-related job losses are showing up as unemployed -- the rest are
showing up as having dropped out of the labor force. If all coronavirus-related job losses
had shown up as unemployed, the unemployment rate would now be around 19.0%, not 14.7%."
"Further, about 7.5 million workers are likely being misclassified as 'employed, not at
work' instead of 'temporarily unemployed,'" she continued. "If they were classified correctly
AND all coronavirus-related job losses had shown up as unemployed, the unemployment rate
would be around 23.6%."
She also highlighted EPI's
estimate from April 30 that because of recent job losses, about 12.7 million Americans
have lost their employer-based health insurance -- which EPI researchers called a "
terrifying " indictment of the country's private, for-profit healthcare system,
particularly in the midst of a pandemic.
@Hibernian That is angument for bailing out just " the payment system/ real economy and
per mark Blyth or John Kay( other people's money book) is like approximately 5% of the
economy ,the test is just incredible leverage and fool Hardy financialization.
Watch one of John Kay's talks on YouTube or mark Blyth talk about 2008.
Glass- steagall was not the sole cause of 2008, but it does need to be reinstated. Also
when the banks were recapitalized on the backs of savers, by cutting interest rates , to
almost nothing, the rational response was to take your money out, they make loans of ten
dollars on deposits of one dollar and barely even pay you for the privilege.
A jubilee is needed , during certain reigns in Egypt and china , Jubilee's / debt
forgiveness would happen as frequently as every 18 months.
Kings basically used to make the agreement , I'll give you a monopoly on banking but in
exchange don't think if the world's goes to hell , don't think you are getting 100 cents on
the dollar. Not running my kingdom for you to be made whole. It's worse nowadays because they
print the money put of thin air and expect to be repaid in full, austerity is a vicious
cycle, every dollar that goes to debt is one less to spend on consumption , so demand has to
go down, and it creates a vicious cycle.
Another thing china gets right is they owe money to themselves, not oligarchs like us, if
they want to they just agree not to pay themselves back.
Michael Hudson's book killing the host is also great.
That is an argument for bailing out just " the payment system/ real economy and per mark
Blyth or John Kay( other people's money book) that is like approximately 5% of the economy
,the rest is just incredible leverage and fool hardy financialization. America has ones and
zeros , and china has gold reserves , a better nuclear arsenal, competent leadership, more
human capital, infrastructure, means of production, antibiotics, rare Earth's, is the
greatest creditor nation I believe as opposed to the greatest debtor nation and approximately
82% of American weapon systems require at least one input from China.( Please don't argue
America has competent leadership , because competent leadership would have never allowed it
to get 10% this bad, the main argument against tariffs, is that they kick off a retaliatory
cycle, except the U.S. didn't retaliate until extremely recently.
Those factories were built initially by Rockefellers , Sam Walton, Kissinger and other
American oligarchs to get away from American labor, you reap what you sow, but globalists
could care less.
You don't have to like China but please realize the extra Herculean task of trying to lift
1.4 billion people out of poverty, and realize it will necessitate some tough decisions,
unlike America where the bottom 90-95% haven't gotten raises adjusted for inflation since
1983( the great decoupling)
And Americans love to cry about the Chinese not having political freedom, well when most
dissent is disingenious like tienneman square which was the CIA ( google tienneman myth, the
journalists admit it) and Hong Kong was the CIA and Soros ( you really think those people
organically waved American flags, stupid?)
who is a front man for the CIA if you didn't know, the uyghurs are Muslims that the US has
been cultivating since the 80s under Reagan and the national endowment for democracy( per
William engdahl) who have been knighted to sabotage one belt one road because the US is mad
at it's Navy getting end run arounded similar to how the British got mad at the Germans pre
world war 1 for building a railroad to Baghdad, so they could get oil without dealing with
the British Navy ( guess mackinder and Brzezinski aren't as smart as they think)
On top of that political freedom is somewhat of a dead weight loss, look at the division it's
caused in the US, I'd rather have clean water.( 3800+ US areas have water at least 2x worse
than Flint/ Google it)
We build more prisons, china just kills all the prisoners and people who love the killing of
unborn children bemoan the killing of actual child molestors.
Also please be aware the one child policy was imposed on china by the Rockefellers just
like they sterilized a third of Puerto Rican women by 1965 , by tying their tubes without
consent and telling them it was reversible.
How many people even know how Britain got Hong kong,? They fought two wars over the right
of court Jews( Sassoon) in Britain to flood china with opium, and when China lost not only
did they have to give up Hong Kong, they had to allow opium to flood their country and had to
pay for every dollar spent by both sides.( I'm pretty sure if I was Chinese, k would hate the
west on that fact alone)
Watch one of John Kay's talks on YouTube or mark Blyth talk about 2008.
Glass- steagall was not the sole cause of 2008, but it does need to be reinstated. Also
when the banks were recapitalized on the backs of savers, by cutting interest rates , to
almost nothing, the rational response was to take your money out, but they make loans of ten
dollars on deposits of one dollar and barely even pay you for the privilege.
A jubilee is needed , during certain reigns in Egypt and china , Jubilee's / debt
forgiveness would happen as frequently as every 18 months on average.
Kings basically used to make the agreement , I'll give you a monopoly on banking but in
exchange don't think if the world's goes to hell , don't think you are getting 100 cents on
the dollar. Not ruining my kingdom for you to be made whole. It's worse nowadays because they
print the money put of thin air and expect to be repaid in full, austerity is a vicious
cycle, every dollar that goes to debt is one less to spend on consumption , so demand has to
go down, and it creates a vicious cycle.
Another thing china gets right is they owe money to themselves, not oligarchs like us, if
they want to they just agree not to pay themselves back.
Michael Hudson's book killing the host is also great.
In France, a team of researchers has found the disease was already spreading there in
late December, one month before the first official cases were confirmed. The revelation
followed a study of 14 stored respiratory samples of patients who were admitted to
intensive care units with influenza-like symptoms in December and January.
The researchers identified a 42-year-old patient, whose last overseas trip had been to
Algeria in August, who developed symptoms after one of his children had a flu-like illness.
The patient, who had pre-existing asthma and Type 2 diabetes, was admitted to the ICU for
antibiotic therapy and discharged after two days.
This is a weak article. Indignation as for excesses of neoliberal social system that exists in the USA is a good thing only if
there is a plan to change the system. Eric Zuesse has none. Also for top 10% the US healthcare is very efficient; it is probably the best on the planet.
OK neoliberalism is bad. But what is the alternative? Return to the New Deal capitalism is impossible as management now
is allied with the capital owners and that destroyed fragile coalition of trade unions and apart of professional management that
existed during the new deal as a countervailing force for political power of the capital. Such coalition could exist if financial
oligarchy is suppressed and if taxes of millionaires income (especially income from stocks) were around 80%. As soon as JFK
lowered the taxed that was a writing on the wall: the New Deal is doomed. Financial oligarchy was suppressed and it did not like
it. So in 20180 they staged coup d'état and the New Deal was over.
The question is: what political coalition can take on financial oligarchy. There is no such coalition yet.
Notable quotes:
"... Americans generally are desperate to go to work even if they might be spreading the coronavirus-19. They need the pay and the insurance coverage in order to be able to buy medical care. If they don't pay for it they won't get it. So: whomever does show up for work might reasonably be especially inclined to fear likely to catch the disease from a co-worker there. This is one of the many reasons why socializing the healthcare function is vastly more efficient than leaving it to market forces . ..."
"... Furthermore, prisons are among the institutions that especially increase the spread of an epidemic such as Covid-19. And the United States has a higher percentage of its residents in prison than does any other country in the world . In fact, almost all of the Americans who are in prison are poor (since 100% of the poor cannot afford a lawyer), and the poorer a person is, the likelier that the individual is to get coronavirus-19. ..."
"... America has 655 per 100,000, or 4.5 prisoners for every 1.0 prisoner in the entire world), America has vastly more production of coronavirus-19 that's generated by its being a police-state than any other country does -- and this isn't even taking into consideration the rotten, overburdened, health-care system, and the billionaire-propagandized public contempt for the poor, that characterize America's culture, and that make those prisons, perhaps, the worst amongst industrialized nations. ..."
"... Furthermore, in America, "Approximately 95 percent of criminal cases are plea-bargained, in part because public defenders are too overwhelmed to take them to trial. 'That means the state never even has to prove you did anything. They hold all the cards.'" So, the Constitutional protections, such as trial-by-jury and all of the other on-paper protections, don't even apply, in reality, to at least 95% of criminal defendants. And, in many U.S. states, convicts -- and even ex -convicts -- aren't allowed to vote. America's billionaires also use many other ways to keep down the percentage of the poor who vote. ..."
"... In addition, prior to the coronavirus challenge, both America and UK have been reducing, instead of increasing, their social protections; and, therefore, they were the only industrialized nations where life-expectancies were declining even before the coronavirus-19 hit. The recognition and concern about this decline started in UK, but has now started to be published even in the U.S. ..."
"... In other words: coronavirus hit UK at a time when the Government was already moving away from socializing and into privatizing health care; and, as a consequence, the death-rates had already started increasing in 2015. Coronavirus kills mainly people who already have bad health; and, so, their population were maximally vulnerable to it at the time when this epidemic struck. ..."
"... Even prior to 2015, the U.S. was wasting around half of its entire public-and-private spending for health care -- it was the most inefficient healthcare system on the planet -- and therefore had significantly lower life-expectancies than all other industrialized countries did. But, now, those remarkably low life-spans are actually getting even lower. ..."
"... This is the reason why America is designed so as to fail the coronavirus-19 challenge. The power of big-money (concentrated wealth) is destroying this country. It controls both Parties and their respective media, so the public don't know (and certainly cannot understand) the types of realities that are being reported (and linked-to) here. ..."
"... The fact [the existence of ] corporate prisons exist is pretty much an open declaration that we're a kleptocracy, run by the uniparty. ..."
"... We give an EQUAL vote to children, imbeciles, hostiles, and those who don't even speak the language ..."
"... Democracy is not about efficiency but to keep a check on those in power. It preventing the concentration of powers. It all about checks and balances to preserve the citizens freedoms. ..."
Virtually all other industrialized countries have social-welfare systems in place, such as
health-insurance covering 100% of the population; and, consequently, the residents there don't
lose their health insurance if they lose their job -- they therefore aren't desperate to show
up for work even when they are sick or can spread an epidemic.
Americans generally are desperate to go to work even if they might be spreading the
coronavirus-19. They need the pay and the insurance coverage in order to be able to buy medical
care. If they don't pay for it they won't get it. So: whomever does show up for work might
reasonably be especially inclined to fear likely to catch the disease from a co-worker there.
This is one of the many reasons why socializing
the healthcare function is vastly more efficient than leaving it to market forces .
On April 23rd, Reuters
reported that, "U.S. workers who refuse to return to their jobs because they are worried
about catching the coronavirus should not count on getting unemployment benefits, state
officials and labor law experts say."
In such states, the unemployment-benefits system is being used as a cudgel so as to force
employees back to work, and therefore to increase the percentage of the population who will
become infected by the coronavirus-19.
Furthermore, prisons are among the institutions that especially increase the spread of an
epidemic such as Covid-19. And the United States has a higher percentage of its residents in
prison than does any other country in the world . In fact, almost all of the Americans who
are in prison are poor (since 100% of the poor cannot afford a lawyer), and the poorer a person
is, the likelier that the individual is to get coronavirus-19.
This is yet another reason why prisons are a prime place for the spread of the disease. And
on April 26th, the New York Times headlined "As Coronavirus Strikes Prisons, Hundreds of Thousands Are
Released: The virus has spread rapidly in overcrowded prisons across the world, leading
governments to release inmates en masse." Since America has more of its population in prison
than any other country does (lots more: whereas
"The world prison population rate, based on United Nations estimates of national population
levels, is 145 per 100,000" , America has 655 per 100,000, or 4.5 prisoners for every 1.0
prisoner in the entire world), America has vastly more production of coronavirus-19 that's
generated by its being a police-state than any other country does -- and this isn't even taking
into consideration the rotten, overburdened, health-care system, and the
billionaire-propagandized public contempt for the poor, that characterize America's culture,
and that make those prisons, perhaps, the worst amongst industrialized nations.
Taken all together (and to list the other details would fill a book), America's systematized
intense discrimination against the poor constitutes virtually an invitation to this country's
having exceptional vulnerability to any epidemic. The fact that America now has 33.3% of
the world's coronavirus-19 cases , though only 4.2% of the world's population, is actually
systemic, and not merely particular to this moment in this country, and in the entire world.
Donald Trump, and the current U.S. Congress, are part of a system of oppression, not really
exceptions to it (such as the billionaires' media pretend -- with Democratic billionaires
blaming "the Republicans," and Republican billionaires blaming "the Democrats"). The way this
Government performs is actually somewhat normal for this country since at least 1980 .
In addition, prior to the coronavirus challenge, both America and UK have been reducing,
instead of increasing, their social protections; and, therefore, they were the only
industrialized nations where life-expectancies were declining even before the coronavirus-19
hit. The recognition and concern about this decline started in UK, but has now started to be
published even in the U.S.
In other words: coronavirus hit UK at a
time when the Government was already moving away from socializing and into privatizing health
care; and, as a consequence, the death-rates had already started increasing in 2015.
Coronavirus kills mainly people who already have bad health; and, so, their population were
maximally vulnerable to it at the time when this epidemic struck.
Political-science studies that are based
upon decades of reliably reported data have established that ever since around 1980, the
United States has been a dictatorship: what the public wants (and even needs ) is basically
ignored, but what the super-rich (the country's actual dictators) simply want becomes reflected
in governmental policies. That's the very definition of a "dictatorship." The U.S. national
Government is responsive to the wants of its billionaires, not to the needs of the public (such
as protecting their health, education, and welfare, even when the billionaires don't want it
to).The findings in one of these studies are summarized well in a six-minute video, here .
Although the billionaires who fund America's liberal Party, the
Democratic Party, oppose the billionaires who fund the Republican Party (the conservative
Party -- the one that's overtly in favor of the existing wealth-inequality), this is purely for
PR purposes. Whenever the issue becomes their own wealth versus improving the wealth and
economic opportunity for the poor, they all go for expanding their own empire (sometimes by
funding a tax-exempt 'charity' that will increase, even more, their personal control over the
total empire -- by using that tax-exemption to leverage the operation, which will be controlled
by themselves instead of by the public tax-funded government). Such 'charities' are mainly
tax-dodges.
This is even proud policy ('fiscal
responsibility', etc.) in the Republican Party. Bailing-out investors is 'necessary', but
bailing out employees and consumers is 'fiscally irresponsible'. For example, on April 27th,
the Democrat David Sirota headlined "Red States Owe Workers More
Than $500 Billion -- The GOP Is Trying to Steal The Money: Trump is boosting a McConnell
plan to help states renege on promised retirement and health benefits to millions of workers
and retirees." And he is correct.
However, his Party is going to be compromising with that
(instead of adamantly refuse to accept it and then go on the political hustings shaming the
Republican President and Congress-members so as to break them on their blatantly scandalous
whoring to the entire billionaire-class, who want their investments to be bailed out before the
public is -- which might turn out to be never). It's a "good cop, bad cop," routine, to protect
the super-rich. It accepts holding the public hostage to what the big political donors want,
instead of focuses against that as being the central political issue of the moment, and of at
least post-1980 America.
They're just
trying to deceive their suckers into voting for Joe Biden, or else not voting at all; and, so,
their ad doesn't even so
much as just mention Biden. It's a Biden ad that makes no mention of Biden. It hides its true
motive. That's typical.
This is the reason why America is designed so as to fail the coronavirus-19 challenge. The
power of big-money (concentrated wealth) is destroying this country. It controls both Parties
and their respective media, so the public don't know (and certainly cannot understand) the
types of realities that are being reported (and linked-to) here.
A "good cop, bad cop" government is, in reality, all bad cop.
(I therefore proposed an Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution in order to rectify some of the reasons behind this structural failure of the
U.S. Government. Perhaps the only alternative to that would be violent revolution, but it would
probably make things even worse, not better.)
desertboy , 23 minutes ago
The fact [the existence of ] corporate prisons exist is pretty much an open declaration that we're a
kleptocracy, run by the uniparty.
Reign in Fact, 28 minutes ago
" The power of big-money (concentrated wealth) is destroying this country... This is
'democracy'-as-political-scam... "
No the scam is democracy itself. We give an EQUAL vote to children, imbeciles, hostiles,
and those who don't even speak the language, while allowing wholesale vote-buying bribery of
public unions.
No such system has ever thrived anywhere in the animal kingdom - equality without merit,
or rule by will of the laziest, weakest and dumbest - no matter how small the "society",
team, family, gang, union, band, corporation, religion or nation.
It can't and won't end well.
youshallnotkill , 15 minutes ago
Democracy is not about efficiency but to keep a check on those in power. It preventing the
concentration of powers. It all about checks and balances to preserve the citizens
freedoms.
The fact that you don't understand these where basics of why we have a republic is
testament to our failed school system.
Deep In Vocal Euphoria , 30 minutes ago
Demoracy...usa was a constitutional republic..........
AVmaster , 30 minutes ago
This hasn't been the american "design" since 23DEC1913......
Dragonlord , 1 minute ago
America's design to disable the freedom of state secession has ruined it. As a result, we
are facing the possibility of another civil war.
W
hen
the virus
came here, it found a country with serious underlying conditions, and it exploited
them ruthlessly. Chronic ills -- a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy,
a divided and distracted public -- had gone untreated for years. We had learned to live, uncomfortably,
with the symptoms. It took the scale and intimacy of a pandemic to expose their severity -- to shock
Americans with the recognition that we are in the high-risk category.
The crisis demanded a response that was swift, rational, and collective. The United States reacted
instead like Pakistan or Belarus -- like a country with shoddy infrastructure and
a dysfunctional government
whose leaders were too corrupt or stupid to head off mass suffering.
The administration squandered two irretrievable months to prepare. From the president came
willful blindness, scapegoating, boasts, and lies
. From his mouthpieces, conspiracy theories and
miracle cures. A few senators and corporate executives acted quickly -- not to prevent the coming
disaster, but to profit from it. When a government doctor tried to warn the public of the danger, the
White House took the mic and politicized the message.
Every morning in the endless month of March, Americans woke up to find themselves citizens of a failed
state. With no national plan -- no coherent instructions at all --
families,
schools, and offices were left to decide on their own whether to shut down and take shelter
. When
test kits, masks, gowns, and ventilators were found to be in desperately short supply, governors
pleaded for them from the White House, which stalled, then called on private enterprise, which
couldn't deliver. States and cities were forced into bidding wars that left them prey to price gouging
and corporate profiteering.
Civilians took out their sewing machines
to try to keep ill-equipped hospital workers healthy and
their patients alive. Russia, Taiwan, and the United Nations sent humanitarian aid to the world's
richest power -- a beggar nation in utter chaos.
Donald Trump saw the crisis almost entirely in personal and political terms. Fearing for his
reelection, he declared the coronavirus pandemic a war, and himself a wartime president. But the
leader he brings to mind is Marshal Philippe Pétain, the French general who, in 1940, signed an
armistice with Germany after its rout of French defenses, then formed the pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Like
Pétain, Trump collaborated with the invader and abandoned his country to a prolonged disaster. And,
like France in 1940, America in 2020 has stunned itself with a collapse that's larger and deeper than
one miserable leader. Some future autopsy of the pandemic might be called
Strange Defeat
, after the historian and
Resistance fighter Marc Bloch's
contemporaneous study of the fall of France
. Despite countless examples around the U.S. of
individual courage and sacrifice, the failure is national. And it should force a question that most
Americans have never had to ask: Do we trust our leaders and one another enough to summon a collective
response to a mortal threat? Are we still capable of self-government?
This is the third major crisis of the short 21st century. The first, on September 11, 2001, came when
Americans were still living mentally in the previous century, and the memory of depression, world war,
and cold war remained strong. On that day, people in the rural heartland did not see New York as an
alien stew of immigrants and liberals that deserved its fate, but as a great American city that had
taken a hit for the whole country. Firefighters from Indiana drove 800 miles to help the rescue effort
at Ground Zero. Our civic reflex was to mourn and mobilize together.
Partisan politics and terrible policies, especially the Iraq War, erased the sense of national unity
and fed a bitterness toward the political class that never really faded. The second crisis, in 2008,
intensified it. At the top, the financial crash could almost be considered a success. Congress passed
a bipartisan bailout bill that saved the financial system. Outgoing Bush-administration officials
cooperated with incoming Obama administration officials. The experts at the Federal Reserve and the
Treasury Department used monetary and fiscal policy to prevent a second Great Depression. Leading
bankers were shamed but not prosecuted; most of them kept their fortunes and some their jobs. Before
long they were back in business. A Wall Street trader told me that the financial crisis had been a
"speed bump."
All of the lasting pain was felt in the middle and at the bottom, by Americans who had taken on debt
and lost their jobs, homes, and retirement savings. Many of them never recovered, and young people who
came of age in the Great Recession are doomed to be poorer than their parents. Inequality -- the
fundamental, relentless force in American life since the late 1970s -- grew worse.
This second crisis drove a profound wedge between Americans: between the upper and lower classes,
Republicans and Democrats, metropolitan and rural people, the native-born and immigrants, ordinary
Americans and their leaders. Social bonds had been under growing strain for several decades, and now
they began to tear. The reforms of the Obama years, important as they were -- in health care, financial
regulation, green energy -- had only palliative effects. The long recovery over the past decade enriched
corporations and investors, lulled professionals, and left the working class further behind. The
lasting effect of the slump was to increase polarization and to discredit authority, especially
government's.
Both parties were slow to grasp how much credibility they'd lost. The coming politics was populist.
Its harbinger wasn't Barack Obama but Sarah Palin, the absurdly unready vice-presidential candidate
who scorned expertise and reveled in celebrity. She was Donald Trump's John the Baptist.
[
David
Frum: Americans are paying the price for Trump's failures
]
Trump came to power as the repudiation of the Republican establishment. But the conservative political
class and the new leader soon reached an understanding. Whatever their differences on issues like
trade and immigration, they shared a basic goal: to strip-mine public assets for the benefit of
private interests. Republican politicians and donors who wanted government to do as little as possible
for the common good could live happily with a regime that barely knew how to govern at all, and they
made themselves Trump's footmen.
Like a wanton boy throwing matches in a parched field, Trump began to immolate what was left of
national civic life. He never even pretended to be president of the whole country, but pitted us
against one another along lines of race, sex, religion, citizenship, education, region, and -- every day
of his presidency -- political party. His main tool of governance was to lie. A third of the country
locked itself in a hall of mirrors that it believed to be reality; a third drove itself mad with the
effort to hold on to the idea of knowable truth; and a third gave up even trying.
Trump acquired a federal government crippled by years of right-wing ideological assault,
politicization by both parties, and steady defunding. He set about finishing off the job and
destroying the professional civil service. He drove out some of the most talented and experienced
career officials, left essential positions unfilled, and installed loyalists as commissars over the
cowed survivors, with one purpose: to serve his own interests. His major legislative accomplishment,
one of the largest tax cuts in history, sent hundreds of billions of dollars to corporations and the
rich. The beneficiaries flocked to patronize his resorts and line his reelection pockets. If lying was
his means for using power, corruption was his end.
[
Read:
It pays to be rich during a pandemic
]
This was the American landscape that lay open to the virus: in prosperous cities, a class of globally
connected desk workers dependent on a class of precarious and invisible service workers; in the
countryside, decaying communities in revolt against the modern world; on social media, mutual hatred
and endless vituperation among different camps; in the economy, even with full employment, a large and
growing gap between triumphant capital and beleaguered labor; in Washington, an empty government led
by a con man and his intellectually bankrupt party; around the country, a mood of cynical exhaustion,
with no vision of a shared identity or future.
If the pandemic
really is a kind of war, it's the first to be fought on this soil in a century
and a half. Invasion and occupation expose a society's fault lines, exaggerating what goes unnoticed
or accepted in peacetime, clarifying essential truths, raising the smell of buried rot.
The virus should have united Americans against a common threat. With different leadership, it might
have. Instead, even as it spread from blue to red areas, attitudes broke down along familiar partisan
lines. The virus also should have been a great leveler. You don't have to be in the military or in
debt to be a target -- you just have to be human. But from the start, its effects have been skewed by the
inequality that we've tolerated for so long. When tests for the virus were almost impossible to find,
the wealthy and connected -- the model and reality-TV host Heidi Klum, the entire roster of the Brooklyn
Nets, the president's conservative allies --
were
somehow able to get tested, despite many showing no symptoms
. The smattering of individual results
did nothing to protect public health. Meanwhile, ordinary people with fevers and chills had to wait in
long and possibly infectious lines, only to be turned away because they weren't actually suffocating.
An internet joke proposed that the only way to find out whether you had the virus was to sneeze in a
rich person's face.
When Trump was asked about this blatant unfairness, he expressed disapproval but added, "
Perhaps
that's been the story of life
." Most Americans hardly register this kind of special privilege in
normal times. But in the first weeks of the pandemic it sparked outrage, as if, during a general
mobilization, the rich had been allowed to buy their way out of military service and hoard gas masks.
As the contagion has spread,
its victims have been likely to be poor, black, and brown people
. The gross inequality of our
health-care system is evident in the sight of refrigerated trucks lined up outside public hospitals.
[
Ibram
X. Kendi: Stop blaming black people for dying of the coronavirus
]
We now have two categories of work: essential and nonessential. Who have the essential workers turned
out to be? Mostly people in low-paying jobs that require their physical presence and put their health
directly at risk: warehouse workers, shelf-stockers, Instacart shoppers, delivery drivers, municipal
employees, hospital staffers, home health aides, long-haul truckers. Doctors and nurses are the
pandemic's combat heroes, but the supermarket cashier with her bottle of sanitizer and the UPS driver
with his latex gloves are the supply and logistics troops who keep the frontline forces intact. In a
smartphone economy that hides whole classes of human beings,
we're learning where our food and goods come from, who keeps us alive
. An order of organic baby
arugula on AmazonFresh is cheap and arrives overnight in part because the people who grow it, sort it,
pack it, and deliver it have to keep working while sick. For most service workers, sick leave turns
out to be an impossible luxury. It's worth asking if we would accept a higher price and slower
delivery so that they could stay home.
The pandemic has also clarified the meaning of nonessential workers. One example is Kelly Loeffler,
the Republican junior senator from Georgia, whose sole qualification for the empty seat that she was
given in January is her immense wealth. Less than three weeks into the job,
after a dire private briefing about the virus, she got even richer from the selling-off of stocks
,
then she accused Democrats of exaggerating the danger and gave her constituents false assurances that
may well have gotten them killed. Loeffler's impulses in public service are those of a dangerous
parasite. A body politic that would place someone like this in high office is well advanced in decay.
The purest embodiment of political nihilism is not Trump himself but his son-in-law and senior
adviser, Jared Kushner. In his short lifetime, Kushner has been fraudulently promoted as both a
meritocrat and a populist. He was born into a moneyed real-estate family the month Ronald Reagan
entered the Oval Office, in 1981 -- a princeling of the second Gilded Age. Despite Jared's mediocre
academic record, he was admitted to Harvard after his father, Charles, pledged a $2.5 million donation
to the university. Father helped son with $10 million in loans for a start in the family business,
then Jared continued his elite education at the law and business schools of NYU, where his father had
contributed $3 million. Jared repaid his father's support with fierce loyalty when Charles was
sentenced to two years in federal prison in 2005 for trying to resolve a family legal quarrel by
entrapping his sister's husband with a prostitute and videotaping the encounter.
[
Adam
Serwer: Trump is inciting a coronavirus culture war to save himself
]
Jared Kushner failed as a skyscraper owner and a newspaper publisher, but he always found someone to
rescue him, and his self-confidence only grew. In
American Oligarchs
, Andrea Bernstein
describes how he adopted the outlook of a risk-taking entrepreneur, a "disruptor" of the new economy.
Under the influence of his mentor Rupert Murdoch, he found ways to fuse his financial, political, and
journalistic pursuits. He made conflicts of interest his business model.
So when his father-in-law became president, Kushner quickly gained power in an administration that
raised amateurism, nepotism, and corruption to governing principles. As long as he busied himself with
Middle East peace, his feckless meddling didn't matter to most Americans. But since he became an
influential adviser to Trump on the coronavirus pandemic, the result has been mass death.
In his first week on the job, in mid-March, Kushner co-authored the worst Oval Office speech in
memory, interrupted the vital work of other officials, may have compromised security protocols,
flirted with conflicts of interest and violations of federal law, and made fatuous promises that
quickly turned to dust. "
The
federal government is not designed to solve all our problems
," he said, explaining how he would
tap his corporate connections to create drive-through testing sites. They never materialized. He was
convinced by corporate leaders that Trump should not use presidential authority to compel industries
to manufacture ventilators -- then Kushner's own attempt to negotiate a deal with General Motors fell
through. With no loss of faith in himself, he blamed shortages of necessary equipment and gear on
incompetent state governors.
To watch this pale, slim-suited dilettante
breeze into the middle of a deadly crisis
, dispensing business-school jargon to cloud the massive
failure of his father-in-law's administration, is to see the collapse of a whole approach to
governing. It turns out that scientific experts and other civil servants are not traitorous members of
a "deep state" --
they're
essential workers
, and marginalizing them in favor of ideologues and sycophants is a threat to the
nation's health. It turns out that "nimble" companies can't prepare for a catastrophe or distribute
lifesaving goods --
only
a competent federal government can do that
. It turns out that everything has a cost, and years of
attacking government, squeezing it dry and draining its morale, inflict a heavy cost that the public
has to pay in lives. All the programs defunded, stockpiles depleted, and plans scrapped meant that we
had become a second-rate nation. Then came the virus and this strange defeat.
[
Read:
Trump's coronavirus message is revisionist history
]
The fight to overcome the pandemic must also be a fight to recover the health of our country, and
build it anew, or the hardship and grief we're now enduring will never be redeemed. Under our current
leadership, nothing will change. If 9/11 and 2008 wore out trust in the old political establishment,
2020 should kill off the idea that anti-politics is our salvation. But putting an end to this regime,
so necessary and deserved, is only the beginning.
We're faced with a choice that the crisis makes inescapably clear. We can stay hunkered down in
self-isolation, fearing and shunning one another, letting our common bond wear away to nothing. Or we
can use this pause in our normal lives to pay attention to the hospital workers holding up cellphones
so their patients can say goodbye to loved ones;
the planeload of medical workers flying from Atlanta to help in New York
; the aerospace workers in
Massachusetts demanding that their factory be converted to ventilator production; the Floridians
standing in long lines because they couldn't get through by phone to the skeletal unemployment office;
the residents of Milwaukee braving endless waits, hail, and contagion to
vote in an election forced on them by partisan justices
. We can learn from these dreadful days
that stupidity and injustice are lethal; that, in a democracy, being a citizen is essential work; that
the alternative to solidarity is death. After we've come out of hiding and taken off our masks, we
should not forget what it was like to be alone.
This article appears in the June 2020 print
edition with the headline "Underlying Conditions."
We want to hear what you think about this article.
Submit a letter
to the editor or write to [email protected].
George Packer
is a staff writer at
The
Atlantic
. He is the author of
Our Man: Richard Holbrooke and the End of the American Century
and
The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
.
Even in blissful 'pre rona' December the Fed's repo market had been sounding the alarms that
a serious bubble recession was coming. Nothing apparently was fixed from the last wall street
megadooshbaggery meltdown. See:
This means that even those who built up real estate equity will have a difficult time
short term liquifying that equity, which means that Chase, Wells Fargo, et al have a lot of
pessimism about the US real estate market, the thing they have made so much money on last few
years, and which they were supposed to have fixed.
well pilgrims ;) not only is the economy enduring sudden searing pandemic pain, it is also
feeling the beginning of a big bubble popping recession, which everybody in the financial
world was already freaking about well before the rona arrived. Perhaps endless Fed QE can
prop up equities markets through November, perhaps, but then it's all bets off into 2021 as
numerous wall street debts scams will have to be deleveraged.
It's likely Fauci's incorrect simply because just as central planners routinely failed when
it came to planning economic outcomes in the 20th century, so does that same central planning
fail now. Fauci once again may be brilliant, but he's no match for a U.S. economy comprised of
hundreds of millions of individuals making infinite informed decisions every second of every
day.
The same applies to Bill Gates. Some believe that his undeniable genius as a businessman
positions him to knowledgeably opine on how we the U.S. and the world can come back from the
virus. Gates has observed that businesses would be troubled with or without the lockdowns,
unemployment would be higher with or without them, so the plan should be to continue them until
we're better situated in terms of a vaccine.
Is Gates right? It's once again difficult to know. For one, his analysis ignores the
"unseen"; as in what would individuals and businesses have done had the response of politicians
to the virus been something like "You're all adults. Be careful."
If so, it's not unreasonable to suggest that Fauci, Gates and other intelligent individuals
would have strongly called for Americans to shelter-in-place, and tens of millions would have
done just that. At the same time, Elon Musk and investors like Michael Burry might have
responded in more intrepid fashion; calling for individuals and businesses to work around a
virus of unknown lethality.
"... the nations CEO's become sort of one big club, and the top of the club is the head parasites pulling the strings on the stock market (outfits like Goldman Sachs). ..."
"... NO ONE wants to cross the head parasites, the corrupt political class turns to them as their economic brain trust, and the propaganda class (MSM) spin narratives that comport to the corrupt political class' interests and the corrupt status quo. ..."
As our guest puts it, the recently passed Trump "Bank and Landlord Relief" bill,
mistakenly named the Coronavirus bill, starts by providing banks with an even larger giveaway
of wealth than they received from Obama in 2008. Helping the banks, financial and real estate
sectors in a so-called free market system is conflated with helping the industrial economy
and general living standards for most Americans. The essence of a parasite is not only to
drain the host's nourishment, but to dull the host's brain so that it does not recognize that
the parasite is there.
One of the ways it does this is to entice most of the biggest companies onto the stock
markets, which in turn subordinates them to the financial sector -- more specifically, the
investment bankers. And then the nations CEO's become sort of one big club, and the top of
the club is the head parasites pulling the strings on the stock market (outfits like Goldman
Sachs).
NO ONE wants to cross the head parasites, the corrupt political class turns to them as
their economic brain trust, and the propaganda class (MSM) spin narratives that comport to the
corrupt political class' interests and the corrupt status quo.
This is why [neo]liberalism and neoconservatism are the two sides of the one political coin
that Americans are allowed to choose. Lean left? You'll get a liberal who mostly uses identity
politics to divide and rule. Lean right? You'll get a neocon who mostly uses foreign affairs to
divide and rule. But increasingly, the two cross-over, hence you'll see liberals harping 24/7
about Russiagate and neocons harping 24/7 about Iran, Islam and now China.
None of this is to say that Russia, China and Iran aren't competitors, because they are. But
the liberal and neocon fanatics turn them into existential, kill or be killed
competitors...
Looks like wishful thinking. Neoliberalism despite its trend for redistribution wealth up
probably will survive this crisis. One strong argument here is that the return to the New Deal
capitalism is not impossible as a weak alliance of management and trade union that existed after
WWII was dissolved long ago.
So there is not countervailing force for the dominance of financial capital. It captured that
state and MIC is just an extension of Wall Street -- it racketeers. The same is true about
intelligence agencies, which also are pretty closely connected with Wall Street, especially
CIA.
And so here we are at a fraught moment in the convergent crises of corona virus and the
foundering economic system that it infected, with all its frightful pre-existing conditions. Of
course, it isn't capitalism , so-called, that is failing, but the perversions of capitalism,
starting with the appendage of the troublesome term: ism . It isn't a religion, or even a
pseudo-religion like Zoroastrianism or communism. It's simply the management system for surplus
wealth. In a hyper-complex society, the management of wealth naturally grows hyper-complex,
too, with lavish opportunities and temptations for chicanery, cheating, fraud, and swindling
(the perversions of capital). It's in the interest of the managers to cloak all that
hyper-complex perversity in opaque language, to make it seem okay.
How many ordinary Americans have a clue what all the Municipal Liquidity Facilities, Primary
Dealer Credit Facilities, Primary and Secondary Market Corporate Credit Facilities, Money
Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facilities, Main Street New Loan Facilities and Expanded Loan
Facilities, Commercial Paper Funding Facilities currency swap lines, the TALFs TARPs, PPPs,
SPVs represent - besides the movement, by keystrokes, of "money" from one netherworld to
another (both conveniently located on Wall Street), usually to the loss of non-elite citizens
generally and to their offspring's offspring's offspring?
Real capital is grounded in the production of real things of real value, of course, and when
it's detached from all that, it's no longer real capital. Money represents capital, and when
the capital isn't real, the money represents nothing!
... ... ...
All this because we just can't face the task of reorganizing our national home economics to
suit new circumstances. So, nature will do it for us. Nature will furnish us with a marvelously
efficient black hole where we can conveniently stash our fake money so that we'll never have to
see it again.
Nature will bust up our giant institutions, our giant corporations, our giant networks of
financial obligations. And after a period of confusion and social disorder, some clever humans
will aggregate into smaller networks and re-organize their activities on a smaller scale that
actually supports truthful relationships between the production of things deemed to hold value
and money that represents those things.
The beauty of springtime is sublime and, as Edmund Burke noted, that very beauty provokes
our thoughts of pain and terror.
xxx 46 minutes ago
I'm not seeing it. The Federal Gub'mint will hand out free Netflix vouchers, along with
SNAP cards, and more than half of Americans will wallow in that like pigs in ****.
Unfortunately, there are just too many that want everything handed to them, and are "OK" with
living in a tiny shithole apartment and eating take-out the rest of their lives. Still
waiting for the "Revolution" that will never happen. They can just print money to infinity,
apparently. And it never inflates, or deflates.
xxx 39 minutes ago
The fed doesn't print money it creates currency ie bondage and they've created trillions
as of late and they're going to create many more trillions. Deflation followed by
hyperinflation, famine and a civil war that will make the last civil war look like child's
play in comparison.
xxx 31 minutes ago
Yes, but one would think that would have happened by this time already. After the last
printing frenzy, I was reading for years how "The End is near", "Hyperinflation",
"Deflation"...hell, Stockman wrote an article a week for like 8 years about that. And it
STILL hasn't happened. Why??? It's like fundamentals don't matter...economics doesn't
matter...so when DOES it matter? How many more trillions from now does it start to
matter?
xxx 12 minutes ago
I agree it's been quite a while since the fed killed the economy and debased the dollar
and I'm surprised the thieving bastards have kept this **** show going so long. But they
can't do it forever and the day of reckoning is coming.
xxx 17 minutes ago
They can only do it as long as the $ has reserve currency status. Once it loses that, all
hell breaks loose.
xxx 6 minutes ago
Reserve currency status will be lost and Amerikans will know true poverty. Not the poverty
we have today with obese useless people on welfare but real grinding poverty with famine. And
all fiat currencies will go to zero in this depression.
Before the coronavirus caused governments to impose lockdowns, whole economies, markets and
even currencies were already on course to be destroyed by a vicious downturn in bank lending at
a time of contracting trade and record debt. The additional strains from the virus have
intensified the crisis further and quickened the pace of all aspects of monetary
destruction.
The coronavirus has permitted America and other Western nations to adopt a war footing by
restricting personal freedom in the interest of the state. As tensions against China rise and
the global economic crisis escalates, these freedoms will be not be returned, being deemed to
be against national interest.
This is an election year for America and the political system is already ramping up blame
for the virus and her economic misfortunes against China. We are entering dangerous territory
when politics mobilises hate against a supposed enemy by using propaganda tactics which are
designed to stir up xenophobic anger.
How China responds will be crucial. Its leadership can defuse the situation with a few
simple changes to its foreign policy, isolating America from her allies in the process. But
does a highly bureaucratic communist leadership have the imagination to do so?
Introduction
One thing is for sure: the world will be different when it emerges from the coronavirus
crisis. Doubtless, on pain of likely death those over seventy years of age must remain
prisoners in their own homes while the younger generations are tasked with the return to
normality. All this is meant to be under government guidance of course. Over the coming months
governments intend to save swathes of business sectors, such as banking, energy production,
utilities and the rest, first by lending the money to pay the bills, and then by rescuing the
failures, taking them into public ownership in many cases.
That is what the post-coronavirus environment can be expected to look like, if, as
governments hope, the recovery is V-shaped. If not, then greater interventions will be visited
on the population to protect it from itself.
While not necessarily intentioned, there has been and will continue to be a dramatic
transfer of freedom from individuals to the state, which the state is always reluctant to let
go when the crisis passes. The evocation of a war against the virus is to facilitate the
transfer of peoples' freedom to the state, because that is what is required to fight a war. But
when it's over, the bureaucrats' instincts are never to return freedoms.
In the vast majority of cases, win or lose, following a war it is usual for a nation to
retain the measures adopted, dropping none of them. It might be called a transitional economy,
kept in place with all the war-time restrictions until an exit path, inevitably to greater
socialism, can be devised. And for America there is a war still to be fought against China for
global domination, justifying yet more control.
Nanny meets fascist socialism
Welcome to the new post-coronavirus intensified socialism. As individuals we have given the
state enormous power over our lives, which will almost certainly be consolidated. The direction
of travel is clear. Not only can big brother censor us, but it can now track our movements more
effectively than the old KGB. If you leave your home, leave your smartphone behind. Wear a
wide-brimmed hat and change your gait, avoiding the cameras. Your money in the bank, or more
correctly in your about-to-be-nationalised bank's money credited to your account, can only be
disposed of for state-regulated products by means of traceable transactions instead of
old-fashioned cash.
Instead of the soviet, we have the nanny state. Nanny knows best. This is the real world of
the 2020s. It is unnatural and will therefore eventually fail. In previous articles I have
written about one aspect of its failure, and that is the impending collapse of unbacked state
currencies. I have pointed out that central banks, and especially the Fed responsible for the
world's reserve currency, are embarking on an exercise in inflation designed, above all, to
uphold the state by maintaining the values of its debt and therefore all other financial
assets. If they fail, and they will because the task is too great, the currencies will fail as
well, and remarkably quickly. Until then, free markets are a primal threat to the system and
must not prevail.
Doubtless, deep state operatives everywhere believe that the threats from their own people
can be contained. Taking that for granted, they are now moving on to contain threats from other
states that don't conform to the West's democratic model. There is now much more propaganda
coming out of America and the UK about the evil Chinese than the evil Chinese are disseminating
about America and Britain.
The story being managed is of a devious state, somehow stealing our souls by selling us
their technology. Mobile 5G puts China into our homes and controls our internet of everything.
It will allow the Chinese to control us . What is not explained is why it is in China's
interest to abuse its customers in this way. What is not explained is why we, as individuals,
will be better off not having Chinese goods and technology. And when Britain's GCHQ
intelligence and security division took Hua Wei's equipment apart, they couldn't find any
evidence of Chinese state spyware anyway.
The irony in all this is that our democratic model, the nanny state, is cover for the same
internal policies as those deployed by the Chinese, admittedly less vicious; but that is
changing. Rather than communist-socialist, both Chinese communism and Western democracies are,
properly defined, fascist-socialist. With communism, the state owns your cow and tells you what
to do with it. With fascism, you own the cow and the state tells you what to do with it. In
these simplistic, but not inaccurate terms, our governments increasingly follow the fascist
creed adopted by the Chinese Communist Party after Mao's death. Give it time and the intense
Chinese-style suppression of free speech could become the defining feature of nanny's
management style as well.
Here we must note a fundamental truth. Socialists of either extreme do not see free markets
as a rival, because they believe they are useful for progressing socialism towards desired
ends. The true rival to your socialism is someone else's socialism. Newly energised Western
state socialism is to be pitted against Chinese state socialism. The World is about to get more
dangerous.
US is upping the propaganda stakes
Last week, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said China caused an enormous amount of pain
and will pay a price for what they did with the coronavirus pandemic. On Tuesday, President
Trump threatened to seek reparations from China for infecting Americans. This follows a 57-page
memorandum, entitled Main Messages dated April 17, briefing Republican senators, which was
headed by the following bullet points:
China caused this pandemic by covering it up, lying, and hoarding the world's supply of
medical equipment.
China is an adversary that has stolen millions of American jobs, sent fentanyl to the
United States, and they send religious minorities to concentration camps.
My opponent is soft on China, fails to stand up to the Chinese Communist Party, and can't
be trusted to take them on.
I will stand up to China, bring our manufacturing jobs back home, and push for sanctions
on China for its role in spreading this pandemic.
Clearly, the propaganda war being waged by America against China is undergoing a new lease
of life. And it's not just America: anti-Chinese belligerence is being ramped up through other
national intelligence agencies. Even senior MPs in the UK's Conservative Party and "useful
idiots" in the media are now spouting renewed anti-Chinese propaganda.
On one level, American propaganda can be taken as a defense of President Trump, on the
simplistic basis of finding someone else to blame for his administration's increasingly
desperate economic plight. But the danger is that the White House train has left the station in
the direction of policy escalation with no means of stopping. In this election year someone
must be blamed. To improve his ratings and following an established political tradition of
diverting attention from the domestic scene, Trump must blame foreigners and China is the
easiest target. We are rapidly moving in the direction of unintended consequences.
Meanwhile, we have to hope that President Xi does not take the American bait and escalate
tensions from his side. Xi's equanimity has set the pattern so far. He has made mistakes, and
will almost certainly continue to do so, but his Sun Tzu strategy is making it difficult for
the Americans: "If [the enemy] is in superior strength, evade him".
Of one thing we can be reasonably certain, and that is in a new attack the Trump
administration will escalate trade protectionism against China. It is a policy which will
backfire on America. Assuming no change in the American people's savings habits, the budget
deficit leads almost directly to a trade deficit, the twin deficit syndrome. The trade deficit
is not caused by unfair foreign competition, but as a simple matter of national accounting it
is linked to inflationary funding of government spending. The temporary offset with respect to
the inflationary effect on prices is the expansion of foreign production which ends up as
imports at less inflated prices. Meanwhile, the US's budget deficit is now set to grow
substantially from its trillion-dollar baseline and in the light of recent economic
developments it could easily more than double.
If the trade deficit is to be contained, then measures must be introduced to prevent import
substitution. This is in accordance with enhanced nationalism, typified by Trump's Make America
Great Again slogan. Therefore, the likelihood of America extending trade protectionism beyond
China as the economic crisis progresses is greater than it may currently appear.
Without lower prices for imported goods and consumption generally restricted to domestic
production, inevitably prices for everything will rise at a faster pace. Therefore, at a time
when food prices will almost certainly be rising sharply and causing political difficulties for
Trump, price inflation for all aspects of consumer spending will be getting beyond the managed
control of government statisticians.
Domestically, the combination of an escalating budget deficit and rising consumer prices
will lead to higher interest rates and therefore increased US Treasury borrowing costs. The Fed
will then be unable to control financial asset prices, the dollar will slide, and it could turn
out to be electoral suicide. Trump may not realise it but in this election year he is
conflating two opposing objectives: a geopolitical one against China to improve his political
ratings and an economic one which can be expected to destroy them.
In the past, politicians in this position have responded by clamping down even further on
free markets and personal freedom, evoking Hayek's prophecy of the call for stronger leadership
in his The Road to Serfdom . And with respect to foreign policy, imperialistic motivation
intensifies, which we are already seeing.
Meanwhile, we must hope President Xi stays calm in the face of American self-harm.
Powell, Trump, Washington & Wall Street Recklessly Courted Disaster .
Their Desperate Money-Pumping, Spending & Speculation Inflated The Mother Of All
Financial Bubbles ..
Then Wanna Be Medical Dictators, Hysterical Media And Power Hungry Politicians Imposed
Lockdown Nation ..Sending The US Economy Into The Tank And Unemployment Soaring
Like Always, Main Street Has Been Left High & Dry, Ensnared In The Lies, Scams And
Self-Serving Mendacity Of The Washington-Wall Street Axis
... ... ...
Dear Reader,
The coronavirus is now exposing a far more deadly disease: Namely, the poisonous brew of
easy money, cheap debt, sweeping financialization and unbridled speculation that has been
injected into the American economy by the Fed and Washington politicians.
It has turned Wall Street into a dangerous gambling casino while leaving Main Street buried
under mountainous debts, faltering investment in growth and productivity and the hand-to-mouth
economics of spending more than you earn.
It has also left the American economy exceedingly vulnerable to external shocks like the
thundering blow of Lockdown Nation.
That's because 80% of households have no appreciable rainy-day funds and businesses have
hollowed out their balance sheets and artificially extended their supply chains to the four
corners of the earth in order to goose short-run profits and share prices.
However, this unprecedented fragility has become starkly evident after public health
authorities essentially shut down normal commerce and economic function. Workers have been
separated from their workplaces, consumers from the malls, diners from the restaurants,
travelers from the airlines, hotels and resorts -- with many more like and similar disruptions
to the supply-side of the economy.
In turn, these disruptions are causing production and incomes to fall abruptly. Shrunken
household incomes and business cash flows are literally pulling the legs out from under the
edifice of debt and speculation that has been piled atop the American economy.
So both a renewed financial and economic crisis and an abrupt change of course lie dead
ahead. The 30-year party of False Prosperity is over.
Accordingly, even if the Covid-19 hysteria eventually abates and Lockdown Nation is lifted,
the 2020s will be a decade when the chickens come home to roost.
It will be a time when the cans of delay and denial may no longer be kicked down the road to
tomorrow. Today's economic and political fantasies will be crushed by America's accumulated due
bills.
Bubbles will be burst. Speculators will get carried out on their shields. Easy money wealth
will evaporate.
"In a Pandemic, the Mob Is the Ultimate Enforcer" [John Authers,
Bloomberg ].
The business perspective: "what really matters to the world's financial movers and shakers
is the great mob of voters out there in the real world, and how they might respond to whatever
measures they take to deal with the pandemic and the economic crisis that has come in its wake.
That, in turn, might owe a lot to the Don
The optics are not good when headlines reveal that scarcely impoverished institutions such
as Harvard University and the Los Angeles Lakers have received public handouts while small
businesses have been unable to get their hands on any money before it runs out.
After the mistakes made in the wake of the last financial crisis, Powell rightly grasps that
it is very important to get it right this time -- or face what might be a dangerous populist
backlash. Or, in our Sopranos analogy, the Mob."
Yesterday when I linked to the event at Lansing, Michigan, I commented that those there
had no idea what they were doing as they were protesting the wrong thing at the wrong
place. Instead, they ought to be occupying the US Treasury building in DC and the NY Fed
Bank in NYC to stop the fraudulent dissemination of $$Trillions to Wall Street criminals
masked as bankers, hedge fund mangers and the like as those locations are where the MAJOR
crimes are occurring as I type this comment. Their behavior casts them as ignorant and
perhaps worse as they're being led into an assault on their own interests while doing
nothing to genuinely defend their wellbeing and that of their kin and progeny. Such
stupidity's been ongoing since 1980-81 when it arose during Reagan's campaign and
continued afterward. That it's being directed/channeled is clear, just as who was
financing the Tea Party rubes was clear--It's the same criminals doing the looting in DC
and NYC.
Given the state of politics within the Outlaw US Empire, such behavior is
unfortunately normal to a certain degree. If it was a gang of Occupy Wall Street
Protesters, the reaction by the forces of coercion would've been vastly different and
very violent. Such is the state of Machiavellianism within as it's worked for many
decades dividing and ruling. With such impediments, attaining the mass solidarity
required to affect the Sea-change required is made extremely difficult, which is why you
observe that nothing's been done for the masses while many things have been done to
further their exploitation.
The Feds, in panic mode to stave off the Depression, are unaware they have launched the
Great Reset that will include Healthcare as a priority and not an afterthought as the corona
crisis revealed.
Debt jubilee is on the menu as QE to Infinity for bailing the banks and billionaires takes
us to a very bad ending. Implosion of derivatives will be the tsunami. Derivatives as per
BIS: $640 Trillion, Global debt: $265 Trillion.
The second financial collapse began September 2019. Most were forecasting 2nd Quarter 2020
contraction would mirror 1930s. Few expected 1st Quarter2020 to be there.
A review of the DJ charts displays similarities 2008 and 2020. Two rhymes. In fact DJ 2020
chart mirrors its 2008 chart without adjustments . And again, its the banks; not a care for
mainstreet.
Roughly 41% of working-age adults say their families have experienced a job loss, a
decrease in work hours or other employment-related declines in income in recent weeks,
according to a new analysis by the Urban Institute.
Underscoring the jump in financial distress around the country: More than 4 in 10 of
Americans whose work was affected by the pandemic said they weren't able to pay the rent,
mortgage or utility bills; skipped medical care; or were at risk of going hungry.
31% of survey respondents reported their families cut spending on food.
28% were forced to use savings or take on credit card debt to pay their bills.
69% of those whose family incomes were below the poverty level were unable to pay for their
housing, were food insecure or were unable to seek needed medical care.
In pandemic blame distribution Fauci and the CDC top should get mayor shares.
In financial crash blame distribution the New York FED with its top 5 controller /
bail-out receiver banks have big parts. It still holds the world's other Central Banks
hostage through its reserves and trade in U$ dollars only meme.
In the intelligence area it is not very different: also that branch of the US Deep State
failed.
The jaw-dropping stupidity of the Trump administration regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is
truly mind numbing. There is an old dictum that states that there is no such thing as
'military intelligence.' To that I add there is no such thing as 'intelligence' in Washington
DC either, or the Trump White House for that matter. If you try to look for it, you will only
find hacks, flacks, quacks and certifiable jerks. You would do better to waste your time and
money looking for the Loch Ness Monster, Big Foot, or the Tooth Fairy. The prospect that
Trump could get anther four years as president is depressing indeed. All that would be left
is divine intervention, and I don't think that is any more likely than finding the
aforementioned mythical creatures.
"... Among the reported influenza deaths in the US, how many cases were infected with COVID-19? Did the US government cover up the spread of coronavirus with the flu? When will the US government make public the samples of the US influenza virus and its genetic sequence, or allow experts from the WHO or the United Nations to sample and analyze? ..."
1. Regarding the restarted avian influenza virus modification experiment last year, why
does the US release no more updates?
The Science reported in February 2019 that US authorities had quietly approved the avian
influenza virus modification experiment. The research, aiming to transform the H5N1 virus to
be more capable of infecting mammals, was controversial and considered extremely dangerous.
Some experts believe that the modification may increase the risk of human-to-human
transmission of the virus. The question is why the US government decided to unfreeze the
experiment 4 years after it was halted, and why there are no more updates regarding the
experiment.
2. The United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID)
was previously closed. What is the truth behind ?
The Global Biodefence reported in April that the USAMRIID, US Army's primary institution
and facility for biological research headquartered in Fort Detrick, Maryland, has resumed
full operation. The institution was once ordered to halt the study of biological select
agents and toxins (BSATs) last July. In March, there was a petition on the White House
website demanding the clarification of the shutdown of USAMRIID. Given that these issues have
become a primary public concern, what is the US government's response?
3. The US Department of Health and Human Services ran a scenario last year that was
similar to the COVID-19 outbreak. Is this just a coincidence?
In March, the New York Times quoted a draft report obtained from the US government saying
that from January to August 2019, the US Department of Health and Human Services ran a
scenario called "Crimson Contagion" that simulated the fictional outbreak involving a group
of tourists visiting China. They then became infected and flew to various countries,
including the US. Last October, a high-level pandemic exercise named Event 201 was hosted by
a couple of US organizations. The drill simulated a scenario that a fictional virus called
CAPS, which causes more severe symptoms than SARS and transmits via the respiratory route
like the common flu, had caused a pandemic. Like COVID-19, there is no vaccine for CAPS.
Given the fact that the simulated virus is so much like COVID-19, is this just a
coincidence? Another question is, why did it not take enough preventive measures at the early
stages of the coronavirus outbreak since the US has predicted a similar pandemic?
4. US intelligence officials warned of coronavirus crisis as early as last November. Why
the warning was ignored?
In April, according to the American Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), it was said that, as
early as late November 2019, US intelligence officials had warned the Defense Intelligence
Agency, the Pentagon, and the White House that an infectious disease was sweeping through
Wuhan, China.
Last November, the US National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI) issued a report
detailing the coronavirus pandemic, which was later identified as "COVID-19". Some analysts
believed that the outbreak in Wuhan might have evolved into a catastrophic event. According
to the Washington Post, in more than two months from January to February, Trump had received
intensive warnings from the US intelligence agencies about the coronavirus. Why did the US
government not declare a "National Emergency" until March 13?
5. Among the reported influenza deaths in the US, can the US clarify how many cases are
actually infected with COVID-19?
Japanese Asahi Television reported on February 21 that some of the 14,000 people
reportedly killed by influenza in the US might have died from coronavirus, which became a hot
topic soon after.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report at the end of
February, showing that there have been at least 32 million flu illnesses in the US that
winter.
On March 11, at the House of Representatives, Robert Redfield, the director of the US CDC,
admitted that some in the US who were previously thought to have been killed from the flu may
have been infected with coronavirus.
Among the reported influenza deaths in the US, how many cases were infected with
COVID-19? Did the US government cover up the spread of coronavirus with the flu? When will
the US government make public the samples of the US influenza virus and its genetic sequence,
or allow experts from the WHO or the United Nations to sample and analyze?
6. When did the novel coronavirus first appear in the US? Did community transmission of
the coronavirus start sooner than it was reported?
A report released in late April by local health authorities suggests that a 57-year-old
woman from Santa Clara County of California died from COVID-19 on February 6, some 20 days
earlier than the date the US announced its first death caused by the virus.
The Los Angeles Times quoted Santa Clara County health officer Sara Cody in a piece
saying, "we presume that each of them represents community transmission and that there was
some significant level of virus circulating in our community in early February."
County Executive Officer Jeffrey V. Smith said this is evidence that the coronavirus was
circulating in California as early as January or even earlier.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered all counties in the state to review autopsies of
suspected coronavirus deaths dating back to December.
When did the novel coronavirus first appear in the US? Did community transmission of the
coronavirus start sooner than it was reported?
7. How did the US get the virus strains so soon to start the first human testing of a
vaccine against COVID-19?
The Wall Street Journal on March 16 reported that the first human testing of Moderna
Inc.'s experimental vaccine against the COVID-19 had already begun. Experts immediately
raised questions about the speed of the vaccine development, saying that it would not be
possible unless the US had obtained the virus strains from very early on. So how did the US
start the first human testing of the vaccine so soon? When and how did they get the virus
strains?
8. Why did the US government keep downplaying the pandemic while its officials privately
dumped stocks?
According to the Washington Post, US Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr
and his wife sold up to 1.7 million in 33 different stocks just one week before the market
plunged. Why did these officials at the Committee act so quickly while the government was
continually understating the pandemic?
Why is the vital information kept confidential to the public while the government
officials were taking advantage to practice insider-trading?
9. Why are US experts not allowed to discuss COVID-19 in public?
The New York Times reported that the White House began tightening controls for all
coronavirus messaging from health officials on February 27 after Vice President Mike Pence
led the nation's epidemic prevention and control efforts.
Several scientists and government health officials, including the nation's leading
infectious disease expert Anthony S. Fauci, have been asked to make statements or make public
appearances about the COVID-19 only after consultation with the US vice president's
office.
Why does the United States, which claims free speech, not allow experts and scholars to
discuss the novel coronavirus in public? Does the US want to hide something or fear of
something?
10. What research is being done in the US overseas biological laboratories? Why does the
US keep tight-lipped about it?
Natalia Poklonskaya, deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs, has
proposed verifying the legitimacy of US biological laboratories around the world, according
to Sputnik news agency.
Not long ago, a spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry expressed concern about the
establishment of a biological laboratory in countries from the former Soviet Union.
Grigory Trofimchuk, a Russian expert in the field of internal affairs, foreign affairs,
and national defense, said the work of these biological laboratories was never disclosed to
the outside world, and that they had caused several problems, with widespread outbreaks of
dangerous infectious diseases such as measles at the laboratory site.
What research is being done in these biological laboratories? Why does the US keep
tight-lipped about the function, use, the safety of these biological laboratories?
Some 14 percent of US adults would forgo medical care for Covid-19 symptoms because they
couldn't pay for it, a new poll has found – yet oblivious health authorities act as if
the epidemic will be solved by drugs alone. One in seven American adults would avoid seeking
healthcare if they or a family member experienced symptoms of Covid-19, out of concern they
would be unable to afford treatment, according to a
Gallup poll published on Tuesday. Even if they specifically believed themselves to be infected
with the coronavirus, nine percent would forgo care for financial reasons, the poll found.
Their fears are well-founded – the average cost of coronavirus treatment in an intensive
care unit runs over $30,000,
according to a study released earlier this month by insurance industry group America's
Health Insurance Plans. Even for those who avoid the ICU, American healthcare is the most
expensive in the world, and stories of coronavirus patients being whacked with gargantuan
medical bills are a dime a dozen two months into the pandemic.
Making matters worse is the unemployment crisis, as about 55 percent of Americans receive
healthcare through their jobs. Upwards of 30 million have filed for unemployment in the last
five weeks, adding an unprecedented number of families to the ranks of the uninsured –
which were already estimated in December to include 27.5 million people, more than the
population of Australia. Even those lucky enough to have kept their jobs and insurance may face
steep co-pays or other surprise costs.
After a handful of highly-publicized cases in which Americans died of the virus after being
turned away by hospitals for lack of money, President Donald Trump ordered hospitals to pay for
the cost of Covid-19 treatment, and several large insurers promised at the beginning of the
month to waive all co-pays for coronavirus testing for 60 days. However, those coverage pledges
do not include other costs associated with hospitalization, like ambulance transportation;
outpatient treatment; or treatment for non-Covid-19 patients. Individuals seeking treatment
have been tested and received the good news that they don't have the virus – only to be
hit shortly thereafter with the bad news that they're on the hook for thousands of dollars in
costs. Low-income respondents were much more likely to report they would not seek care for
financial reasons. Perhaps more troublingly, respondents with annual income under $40,000 were
almost four times as likely as those with incomes over $100,000 to report that they or a family
member had been turned away from a hospital for reasons related to overcrowding or high patient
volume, the Gallup poll found.
In pandemic blame distribution Fauci and the CDC top should get mayor shares.
In financial crash blame distribution the New York FED with its top 5 controller /
bail-out receiver banks have big parts. It still holds the world's other Central Banks
hostage through its reserves and trade in U$ dollars only meme.
In the intelligence area it is not very different: also that branch of the US Deep State
failed.
Watch this RT interview with Robert Kennedy to see how corrupt the CDC is. We cannot trust
this corrupt organization with our health. The CDC has a large financial interest in pushing
untested vaccines on the public.
WHO is even more under the control of Big Pharma. The organization is corrupt beyond the
meaning of the word. "The WHO is a sock puppet for the pharmaceutical industry." -- Robert F.
Kennedy Jr.
The big question that we should be addressing, and which we lose sight of when playing
statistical trivia with idiots, is the question of capitalism. This crisis is a direct result
of living under capitalism. Every aspect of it from the way it spread like wildfire across
the world, to the fragility of food supply chains (I am surrounded by farmers growing corn
crops to be converted into ethanol!), to the failures to stockpile protective equipment and
ventilators, to the contracting of the business of fighting the virus to for profit
businesses, to the precarious existences lived by millions of people thrown out of work and
reduced to misery by the crisis- every aspect of this complex and massive socio-economic
crisis calls into question the fundamental nature of our class society.
That is what we should be talking about. Unless of course, like I suspect most of the
quibblers, we are so invested in the religion of Thatcherism and the mysteries of class
exploitation and oligarchy that anything is preferable to the dangerous blasphemy of
questioning cannibalism/capitalism.
Yes, the problem lies with Neoliberal Capitalism, which is a hocus-pocus form of Finance
Capitalism whose rise I've been trying to trace along with Hudson to a point between 1865 and
1885. Dr. Hudson's exposed most of it, but its roots lie outside the USA and connect to that
era's Outlaw Empire--the British. It's very easy to say Capitalism's the problem, but people
want specifics and also need to have their generations of indoctrination upended so they're
capable of clear thinking. IMO, Richard Wolff's thin primer Understanding Socialism is
perfect for that job, and he's been in great demand to talk about Capitalism's failure during
the pandemic. Here's a recent
essay he wrote for Raw Story .
But yeah, we need to get the discussion out into the open, into the public
mainstream--somehow.
I will start the discussion the subject of which was suggested by Bevin @ 214:
... For example there is no doubt that old peoples homes-call them what you will- have been
slaughterhouses in the past few weeks. There are all sorts of reasons-all non medical- why
this has happened and we would do well to discuss what they are. And insist that nothing
like it recur in future years ...
I would add that not only are significant COVID-19 outbreak clusters centring around
nursing homes and aged care facilities, they have also centred around passenger cruise ships.
In Australia there is currently a criminal investigation being undertaken into the actions of
Carnival Australia with regard to the decision made by NSW state health authorities to allow
passengers to disembark from the Ruby Princess in Sydney in late March even though the
results of the tests they had taken were not yet known.
We might ask what do aged care places and passenger cruise ships might have in common.
Apart from often being closed systems - residents in aged care places usually don't move
about much and may not have access to fresh air, and passengers on certain levels of a cruise
ship and many of the crew (especially kitchen staff, cleaners, technical people) may also
have limited access to fresh air - what else might favour the circulation of COVID-19 in
those environments? We ought to look at airconditioning systems, water supply systems, and
the conditions of the people working in nursing homes and cruise ships and how their
conditions influence their work and give rise to situations in which they may be transferring
viruses and bacteria from one patient or passenger to the next.
These environments are microcosms of capitalist society in action.
I trust history and events to come will show these things:
1. When the US economy crashed (which is still happening and yet to come with its full
force), it wasn't the "virus" that crashed it. It was the US economy that crashed the US
economy. As noted above, the economy couldn't take a health shock to its workers.
2. The people of the US did not enter into distancing and self-quarantining because they
were obeying the dictates of any of their governments - they were not cowed unto this, at
least not by government. They chose voluntarily to do this as a survival measure, knowing
that the governments were unable or unwilling to help them. And if, moving forward,
governments attempt to keep an unreasonable control over the people - as if they the
governments had actually been in control through this crisis - those unreasonable controls
will be flouted wholesale by the people.
3. As US society feels its way into a "reopening" - still without testing or affordable
treatment - there will be many nuances to explore and figure out. Society will need to learn
what's useful and what's pointless, which costs are important to bear and which are
disastrous beyond reason. At the first stage of the crisis, one universal hammer for one
universal nail was all that the people had. Now they have masks, at least. The people made
those masks, not the governments, and the people made them work. The people will make the
re-opening work, and do the exploration of how to adapt the culture to what works in an age
of bio-danger.
4. As everyone in the US can agree, what a shit-show it's been.
Lol. So now we talk about C to debunk claims. Take a look at the financial interests of
public health agencies like Fauci, FDA, CDC, etc, WHO, Big Pharma, Gates, etc
Do you know hospitals can charge medicare 15% more if they have a covid-19 diagnosis, and
CDC helps out by saying a test is not required?
Also, as for antibody tests indicating the level of Covid-19 exposure/immunity. Thats not
true. Only those who are exposed and can not clear the virus via their innate and cellular
immune cells go on to develop antibodies (it takes 7-10 days from infection/exposure to
antibody protection), and subsequently test seropositive in antibody test. These people are
naturally immune. They don't get sick. Most of those who cant fight it off without antibodies
don't get very sick. In other cases the antibodies worsen their condition since it activates
another complement pathway which increases inflammation and cytokines.
As the Bronx doctor said, many of the deaths are occurring there in people not because of
Covid-19 but because they aren't getting medical care due to suspension of services or fear
of going to hospital. They die at home or in ambulances. Some may die with covid-19 , not
because of it.
That the lock down is working is the same reasoning that I use with my anti-tiger statue on
my verandah. As I have seen no tigers, then the statue is working perfectly and it was
worth the $100,000 I paid for it!
It is estimated that half the world will lose their jobs by the time this lock down is
finished.
Boeing is buried ten metres deep, they just have not realised it yet. Airbus will soon
be filing for bankruptcy. Hertz is going over the abyss as we speak. AirBnb is toast! The
food chains will soon be breaking down as much of the food industry is geared for the fast
food, restaurant, and hotel business.
Lots of tourist places now have 70% unemployment.
The housing market will soon start to collapse as no-one can pay rents and
mortgages.
Then the manufacturing plants that supply the spare parts for the water treatment and
sewerage plants can no longer supply replacements.
The electric grid goes down as their no parts for the turbines, transformers, etc.
How you going now in your house with no food, water, and electricity? Still happy to sit
in the dark, thinking this is all worth it?
And this is covoid-19, wait for covid-20/21/22/23
How long before we say enough, let's approach this another way, for a pandemic which
does not even touch anyone under thirty!
Sweden is trying something different and seem to be no worse, probably better than the
UK approach.
And we haven't paid our recent 'restaurant bill' now owed to the bankers, payable in
about three years, when we are going to be drained of several pints of financial blood!
And in Australia, with about eighty deaths, the panic borders on the insane!
Great comment. My anecdotal observation is that there are excess deaths because people are
afraid to go to the hospital. In New York, deaths at home are much higher than before.
Yes, there are some wild conspiracy theories out there. But the fact that Covid is indeed
worse than the flu is not necessarily an argument that the cure is not worse than the
disease. The new depression is just getting going, as are pending food shortages. As
governments increasingly print money so the jobless can buy things, this will cause inflation
as there will be too much money chasing too few goods (especially food) being produced. This
will necessitate more printing, causing a vicious circle of increasing inflation.
The poor economy will cause many more problems and excess deaths, in ways we don't yet
understand.
"... First of all, because Stoics believe that our true good resides in our own character and actions, they would frequently remind themselves to distinguish between what's "up to us" and what isn't. Modern Stoics tend to call this "the dichotomy of control" and many people find this distinction alone helpful in alleviating stress. What happens to me is never directly under my control, never completely ..."
"... Marcus likes to ask himself, "What virtue has nature given me to deal with this situation?" That naturally leads to the question: "How do other people cope with similar challenges?" Stoics reflect on character strengths such as wisdom, patience and self-discipline, which potentially make them more resilient in the face of adversity. They try to exemplify these virtues and bring them to bear on the challenges they face in daily life, during a crisis like the pandemic. They learn from how other people cope. Even historical figures or fictional characters can serve as role models. ..."
"... fear does us more harm than the things of which we're afraid. ..."
"... Finally, during a pandemic, you may have to confront the risk, the possibility, of your own death. Since the day you were born, that's always been on the cards. Most of us find it easier to bury our heads in the sand. Avoidance is the No1 most popular coping strategy in the world. We live in denial of the self-evident fact that we all die eventually. ..."
"... "All that comes to pass", he tells himself, even illness and death, should be as "familiar as the rose in spring and the fruit in autumn". Marcus Aurelius, through decades of training in Stoicism, in other words, had taught himself to face death with the steady calm of someone who has done so countless times already in the past. ..."
T he Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was the last famous
Stoic philosopher of antiquity. During the last 14 years of his life he faced one of the worst
plagues in European history. The Antonine Plague, named after him, was probably caused by a
strain of the smallpox virus. It's estimated to have killed up to 5 million people, possibly
including Marcus himself.
="rich-link__link u-faux-block-link__overlay" aria-label="'What it means to be an American':
Abraham Lincoln and a nation divided"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/apr/11/abraham-lincoln-verge-book-ted-widmer-interview">
From AD166 to around AD180, repeated outbreaks occurred throughout the known world. Roman
historians describe the legions being devastated, and entire towns and villages being
depopulated and going to ruin. Rome itself was particularly badly affected, carts leaving the
city each day piled high with dead bodies.
In the middle of this plague, Marcus wrote a book, known as The Meditations, which records
the moral and psychological advice he gave himself at this time. He frequently applies Stoic
philosophy to the challenges of coping with pain, illness, anxiety and loss. It's no stretch of
the imagination to view The Meditations as a manual for developing precisely the mental
resilience skills required to cope with a pandemic.
First of all, because Stoics believe that our true good resides in our own character and
actions, they would frequently remind themselves to distinguish between what's "up to us" and
what isn't. Modern Stoics tend to call this "the dichotomy of control" and many people find
this distinction alone helpful in alleviating stress. What happens to me is never directly
under my control, never completely up to me, but my own thoughts and actions are
– at least the voluntary ones. The pandemic isn't really under my control but
the way I behave in response to it is.
Much, if not all, of our thinking is also up to us. Hence, "It's not events that upset us
but rather our opinions about them." More specifically, our judgment that something is really
bad, awful or even catastrophic, causes our distress.
This is one of the basic psychological principles of Stoicism. It's also the basic
premise of modern cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), the leading evidence-based form of
psychotherapy. The pioneers of CBT, Albert Ellis and Aaron T Beck, both describe Stoicism as
the philosophical inspiration for their approach. It's not the virus that makes us afraid but
rather our opinions about it. Nor is it the inconsiderate actions of others, those ignoring
social distancing recommendations, that make us angry so much as our opinions about them.
Many people are struck, on reading The Meditations, by the fact that it opens with a chapter
in which Marcus lists the qualities he most admires in other individuals, about 17 friends,
members of his family and teachers. This is an extended example of one of the central practices
of Stoicism.
Marcus likes to ask himself, "What virtue has nature given me to deal with this
situation?" That naturally leads to the question: "How do other people cope with similar
challenges?" Stoics reflect on character strengths such as wisdom, patience and
self-discipline, which potentially make them more resilient in the face of adversity. They try
to exemplify these virtues and bring them to bear on the challenges they face in daily life,
during a crisis like the pandemic. They learn from how other people cope. Even historical
figures or fictional characters can serve as role models.
With all of this in mind, it's easier to understand another common slogan of Stoicism:
fear does us more harm than the things of which we're afraid. This applies to
unhealthy emotions in general, which the Stoics term "passions" – from pathos ,
the source of our word "pathological". It's true, first of all, in a superficial sense. Even if
you have a 99% chance, or more, of surviving the pandemic, worry and anxiety may be ruining
your life and driving you crazy. In extreme cases some people may even take their own
lives.
In that respect, it's easy to see how fear can do us more harm than the things of which
we're afraid because it can impinge on our physical health and quality of life. However, this
saying also has a deeper meaning for Stoics. The virus can only harm your body – the
worst it can do is kill you. However, fear penetrates into the moral core of our being. It can
destroy your humanity if you let it. For the Stoics that's a fate worse than death.
Finally, during a pandemic, you may have to confront the risk, the possibility, of your
own death. Since the day you were born, that's always been on the cards. Most of us find it
easier to bury our heads in the sand. Avoidance is the No1 most popular coping strategy in the
world. We live in denial of the self-evident fact that we all die eventually. The
Stoics believed that when we're confronted with our own mortality, and grasp its implications,
that can change our perspective on life quite dramatically. Any one of us could die at any
moment. Life doesn't go on forever.
We're told this was what Marcus was thinking about on his deathbed. According to one
historian, his circle of friends were distraught. Marcus calmly asked why they were weeping for
him when, in fact, they should accept both sickness and death as inevitable, part of nature and
the common lot of mankind. He returns to this theme many times throughout The Meditations.
"All that comes to pass", he tells himself, even illness and death, should be as
"familiar as the rose in spring and the fruit in autumn". Marcus Aurelius, through decades of
training in Stoicism, in other words, had taught himself to face death with the steady calm of
someone who has done so countless times already in the past.
Donald Robertson is cognitive behavioural therapist and the author of several books on
philosophy and psychotherapy, including Stoicism and the Art of Happiness and How to Think Like
a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius
Indeed, the unfolding collapse now underway shouldn't be called either a recession or a
depression. These terms denote the macroeconomic contraction triggered by bursting credit or
other financial bubbles and they usually take many months to reach full intensity.
But this one literally arrived at warp speed and with orders of magnitude greater
contractionary force than normal business cycle downturns. It is therefore sui generis ;
it stemmed from panicked officialdom who ordered households and businesses alike to abruptly
"cease and desist" from their daily economic activity upon penalty of fine, jail and public
opprobrium.
The good folks at Moody's Analytics captured the breathtaking speed of the resulting plunge
in the chart below in which they tracked the number of U.S. counties falling under lockdown
orders (blue bars) with an estimate of the cumulative loss in daily GDP (ascending red
line).
Whether this is accurate to the percentage point is immaterial and will be adjudicated after
several years of jobs and GDP data revisions. But what can't be gainsaid is that in the short
span between March 16 and April 6th depicted in the graphic -- something like one-third of US
GDP ceased to happen.
When in the modern day world of nearly unfathomably complex economic linkages, incredibly
long supply chains and interactive feed-back loops you have one-third of economic activity go
dark in just 21 days, the damage is likely to be enormous, even if the interruption is
comparatively short-lived.
But in the present instance the US economy was so fragile and deeply impaired owing to
30-years of debt, speculation and malinvestment-fueled false prosperity that it resembled an
economic hemophiliac stumbling into a knife fight. The bleeding will be profuse and
long-lasting because the American body economic had no defenses.
We shall lay out chapter and verse on the cash flow vulnerability of the preponderant share
of US households and businesses in subsequent installments. But sometimes a picture is truly
worth a thousand words and this– cars lined-up at a San Diego food bank -- is one of
them.
Ordinary urban poor folk don't line up at the soup kitchen in their late vintage autos and
SUVs. This is the hand-to-mouth economy lined up for food in cars that will soon be nabbed by
the repo man.
So the question recurs. Why did Lockdown Nation strike the everyday American economy out of
the blue and who is responsible?
That is to say, Lockdown Nation itself is the product of a contagion of public policy
Hysteria, so who is Patient Zero?
We think there is little doubt that it is the Donald himself, as we chronicle below. It is
only his overweening, pugnacious, polarizing political persona that could have transformed a
moderate public health threat into a politicized death struggle that is literally suffocating
the American economy and the social life which depends upon it.
But for want of doubt let us remind that there was never any case for Lockdown Nation -- not
on March 16 when the Trump White House issued its stay-at-home guidelines nor subsequently --
based on the pubic health impact of the coronavirus.
That's because Covid-19 would be considered a despicable bully if it were an animate being.
It overwhelmingly brings serious illness and death upon the old, frail and already
disease-ridden, not the general population.
Even many of the rare deaths among younger people appear to be attributable to an unusual
genetic condition which causes the number one killer of the coronavirus -- the human immune
system -- to launch an unhinged counterattack called a "cytokine storm" that ends up maiming or
killing the patient, not the virus (fortunately, there are immune system suppressants that can
treat these if caught early enough).
Thus, as of April 25 when the CDC had scored 40,072 "confirmed or presumed" Covid19 deaths,
the breakdown by age was unassailably dispositive:
· Age 0-14: 5 deaths among 60.9 million or a mortality rate of 0.008 per 100,000;
· Age 15-34: 354 deaths among 88.7 million or a mortality rate of 0.39 per 100,000;
· Age 35-64: 7,907 deaths among 125.8 million or a mortality rate of 6.3 per
100,000;
· Age 65-84: 19,840 deaths among 45.9 million or a mortality rate of 43.2 per
100,000;
· Age 85 and older: 11,966 deaths among 6.54 million or a mortality rate of 182.9 per
100,000.
So the average mortality rate for the entire US population as of April 25, which was 12.2
deaths per 100,000, is completely meaningless from the perspective of remedial public health
policy. It is a reminder of the old adage that you can drown in a river with an average depth
of 3 feet if you end up in a deep, vicious eddy pool.
Likewise, you don't rationally shut down schools when the mortality rate for kids is a
rounding error; and keeping the kids out of school does nothing for their grandparents and
great-grandparents if they are self-isolated anyway, as the should be, when their mortality
risk is 22,800 times higher!
Indeed, among the cohorts of the working age population age 35-64, there is absolutely no
basis in the mortality rates for shutting down places of work. The normal, total mortality rate
for this 126 million-strong core of the work force, in fact, is nearly 500 per 100,000
annually.
So the Covid death count to date amounts to just 1.3% of the normal mortality rate. What
posse of fools advised the Donald, therefore, to monkey-hammer the working economy on account
of that?
Moreover, our eddy pool analogy could not be more spot on. A new analysis of elderly New
York hospital patients who died WITH Covid-19 showed that 94% suffered from at least one
life-threatening morbidity such as hypertension or respiratory illnesses, and 88% had at least
two.
That is to say, based one age alone, the Covid is a perfect case of the Pareto 20/80 rule.
In this case, the 65 years and older population (52.4 million) accounts for 16% of the US total
population (327.2 million) but 79% of the WITH Covid-19 deaths.
But when you overlay, the comorbidity incidence among those 16%, the real highly vulnerable
population turns out to be 5% or less.
So the fact that we got to Lockdown Nation with lightening speed given these facts is surely
a case of President Truman's famous sign on his Oval Office desk that read, "the buck stops
here".
The truth is, the Donald is lazy, weak, indecisive, notoriously ill-informed and an
atrocious chooser of advisors, and it is exactly those attributes that lead to the March 16
stay-at-home guidelines from the Oval Office.
Had the Donald not foolishly embraced the misbegotten project of the Infectious Disease
Lobby to stop the spread of the coronavirus through the US population cold, which is
self-evidently impossible with a ultra-contagious airborne virus, the Dem mayors and governors
would not have had the political hall pass to instantly pile on the lockdown wagon.
Ironically, the Dems were desperately searching for a way to discredit the Donald's phony
Greatest Economy Ever boast, and the Donald handed them what amounts to an economic bunker
buster bomb on a platter.
Indeed, choosing bad advisors and listening to them is the Donald signature failing. After
all, if the gravamen of your foreign policy is America First and you appoint as your top
national security advisor the most unhinged apostle of Empire First on the entire planet, John
Bolton, you are either stupid as hell or semi-comatose.
So the Donald is, in fact, the Patient Zero who spread the virus of Lockdown Nation because
he was either too lazy or too dumb ask the obvious question, as we will amplify in Part 2.
But in the meanwhile, WSJ columnist Holman Jenkins got it right:
We started off sensibly. 'This is not something [American families] generally need to worry
about,' said CDC's Dr. Nancy Messonnier in mid-January. 'It's a very, very low risk to the
United States,' said Dr. Anthony Fauci a week later.
Bill de Blasio, mayor of New York, urged residents to go about their business normally as
recently as March 11.
But then on March 16, the Donald entered the White House briefing room and
announced a sweeping plan to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
And it was based on the extremely bad advice of Dr. Fauci and the Scarf Lady (Deborah Birx),
both lifetime government bureaucrats who had absolutely no concept of the economic Mayhem that
Lockdown Nation would instantly foster.
So Patient Zero thereafter droned on night after night during this reality TV show in the
stupid belief that the US economy was so strong that it could handle a 15-day Spring
Vacation.
Never was a US President more misguided:
Stay home for 15 days, he told Americans. Avoid groups of more than 10 people. 'If everyone
makes this change, or these critical changes, and sacrifices now, we will rally together as
one nation and we will defeat the virus,' he said.
On Sunday, the night before Day 15, Trump told the country to stick with the plan for
another month, until April 30.
'The better you do, the faster this whole nightmare will end,' Trump said.
'We're getting rid of the virus,' he said. 'That's what we're doing. That's the best thing
we can do. By the way, for the markets. For everything. It's very simple. It's a very simple
solution. We want to get rid of it.'
Indeed, the Donald got so bamboozled in part because of his own massively
exaggerated view of his role. He came to view the absolutely catastrophic stay-at-home
guidelines as merely another case of closing things down which aren't his to close–like
the border with Mexico.
Trump described the decision to issue the guidelines as 'one of the most difficult decisions
I've ever made' and said he was skeptical when his medical experts came to him with the plan.
'I wasn't happy about it,' he said on Fox News last week. 'They came in -- experts -- and
they said, "We are going to have to close the country." I said, "We have never closed the
country before. This has never happened before." I said, "Are you serious about this?"
But without hardly a further moment of reflection, he promptly declared himself a
War President, and we were off the races to Lockdown Nation.
But on this matter, the great Randolph Bourne was more than clairvoyant fully one century
ago:
The moment war is declared, however, the mass of the people, through some spiritual alchemy,
become convinced that they have willed and executed the deed themselves.
They then, with the exception of a few malcontents, proceed to allow themselves to be
regimented, coerced, deranged in all the environments of their lives, and turned into a solid
manufactory of destruction toward whatever other people may have, in the appointed scheme of
things, come within the range of the Government's disapprobation.
The citizen throws off his contempt and indifference to Government, identifies himself
with its purposes, revives all his military memories and symbols, and the State once more
walks, an august presence, through the imaginations of men.
Even as Americans struggle to deal with a deadly and seemingly unprecedented pandemic, it
isn't too soon to wonder how the present crisis will shape our collective understanding about
the dangers that we face, and the best means for addressing them.
One thing, however, is obvious: the military and other tools of force and coercion that are
generally useful against traditional threats -- from invading foreign armies to swarms of
killer drones -- are essentially irrelevant against killer bugs. Indeed, as the plight of
the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt reminds us , military personnel might be more
vulnerable to infectious diseases than the general population.
... ... ...
Military-centric solutions, however, may be upended by COVID-19. Americans no longer feel
safe, even in their own homes. The threat posed by an invisible silent killer is even more
ominous than that of terrorists who were also mostly invisible ( or perhaps
non-existent ). In a time when the United States' physical security can no longer be taken
for granted, will Americans be as tolerant of a national security strategy aimed at protecting
others from invasion or coercion? And will they be willing to pay for a military geared to
fighting foreign enemies abroad, especially when more urgent threats are already here?
Opportunity costs
The need to balance between foreign and domestic priorities is ever-present. In his "
Chance for
Peace " speech of April 1953, President Dwight Eisenhower famously spelled out the
tradeoffs.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the
final sense," he said then, "a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold
and are not clothed."
He observed that a bomber cost the equivalent of 30 schools, "two fine, fully equipped
hospitals" or "50 miles of concrete highway."
Teachers would later point to that speech, invoking Eisenhower's name to justify cuts in
military spending to obtain increases for education. Others wished for the day when schools
would have all that they needed, while the Air Force would have to hold a bake sale to buy a
bomber. Doctors and nurses are now broaching similar issues with respect to intensive care
units and personal protective equipment.
To critics, such calls were always silly and short-sighted. The United States could have it
all, they told us. Good schools, good healthcare and a military capable of fighting many
battles simultaneously, including on behalf of others.
Zero-sum thinking, and fiscal conservativism generally, they said, unnecessarily forced the
United States to fight its adversaries with one arm tied behind its back. By unleashing
America's growth potential, fueled by government spending -- including spending on the military
-- we would create an economy that could pay for both guns and butter.
Those claims persist. When the United States was waging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus
hunting al-Qaida on at least four continents, defense spending advocates dismissed calls to
actually pay for such wars with higher taxes or major cuts in popular social programs.
Even after the 2008 financial crisis, they dismissed talk of offsets or spending caps as
reckless and unnecessary.
Plus, advocates for higher defense spending are always quick to add, don't forget about the
spin offs -- from the microwave to the Internet to GPS. Government investment into basic
research for the military made possible a range of consumer goods that wouldn't exist in the
absence of such activity.
To be sure, some military spending might be relevant in the current crisis. The lab at Fort
Detrick, in Frederick, Maryland – -- officially the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute
of Infectious Diseases -- is now
on the frontline of the search for a vaccine against COVID-19 .
The facility represents a tiny fraction of the entire Army budget, however, and has often
been a tempting target for those seeking funds for other more urgent priorities. Earlier this
year, the Trump administration proposed to cut $104 million from the lab's budget. Now, they're
looking to boost funding for the institute and other labs by $900 million. Is this an
early indication that our priorities have actually changed?
In the post COVID-19 era, who will call for cutting the budget of an agency that might have
stopped the outbreak in 2020? Who will argue that hospital beds or N-95 masks aren't needed,
but that the cost of maintaining U.S. troops in Europe is an expense that we simply must bear?
Who will say that more F-35s are vitally important for our security, but we don't need to
research how to defeat an invisible killer?
We may get a sense soon. A poll taken just before the current crisis found a healthy
plurality of Americans believing that U.S. military
spending was about right . But in the just-passed $2.2 trillion aid package, the Pentagon
came away with about $10 billion -- a mere 0.5 percent of the total, and a far cry from the
roughly 55 percent of discretionary spending that it receives in a typical year.
All of the above
Pentagon spending advocates are likely to argue that we cannot prioritize. To take our eyes
off foreign threats while addressing the one here among us, they will say, would expose the
entire planet to extreme peril.
Ever since the dawning of the nuclear age, we envisioned this grave danger as a
life-extinguishing mushroom cloud -- actually many mushroom clouds. In the last few weeks,
we've seen glimpses of a different danger; patients gasping for air as a microbe attacks their
lungs, and left in hallways, or in the streets, because there aren't enough ICU hospital beds
or ventilators. Can we care for all of these people, while also spending hundreds of billions
of dollars on a military that operates mostly far from our own shores?
The tradeoffs are rarely so stark. Soldiers and Marines proved commendably flexible after
9/11. Ships and planes can be moved. But the military instrument that was useful for dealing
with petty tyrants from Saddam Hussein to Muammar Gaddafi, and was even suitable for use
against terror group leaders, seems uniquely unsuited for defeating microscopic
pathogens.
Nevertheless, the safe bet is that inertia will prevail. Strategists and policymakers will
push to retain the fight-forward approach for most traditional threats, and then layer the
additional expenses required to deal with infectious diseases on top of all the rest.
But while the coronavirus won't change everything, it will change many things. The
response to it has already put enormous strain on the U.S. economy. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
called on U.S. policymakers to begin preparing now for the next pandemic. It seems
inevitable that measures taken to avoid a repeat of the current crisis will impose costs, much
as the post-9/11 response did for nearly every person and industry.
COVID-19's more lasting effects, however, could be seen in whether, and how, we restructure
our government, and what it means for civil liberties. A U.S. government strong enough to
mobilize all of society's resources against all threats would compel us to depart from our
founding traditions, and would ultimately threaten Americans' freedom and prosperity. We might
be getting a glimpse of that today, with stay-at-home orders, compulsory business closures, and
yet another massive increase in debt-funded government spending.
Sensing the danger of overreaction to crises, President Eisenhower sought "balance in and
among national programs," as he explained in his farewell address , "between
the private and the public economy" and "between action of the moment and the national welfare
of the future."
Finding that balance post-COVID-19 will require us to revisit all of the things that we say
we need to do to keep us safe. And it should entail finally shifting resources away from the
military, and dropping a militarized approach to global problems, in favor of the many other
instruments of American power and influence.
"Around 2008, we lost 8.7 million jobs and the whole thing. Right now, we're losing that
many jobs about every 10 days," Hassett said. "And so the economic lift for policymakers
is an extraordinary one."
NEW: White House senior adviser Kevin Hassett tells @gstephanopoulos that the
economic outlook is a "really grave situation.""We're going to be looking at an unemployment
rate that approaches rates that I think we saw during the Great Depression." https://t.co/vM8WcrQKg0
pic.twitter.com/ds7QtseNqe
Unemployment peaked during the Great Depression in 1933 when rates hit 25 percent. They have
only topped 10 percent twice since then, once in 1982 and again in 2009.
Over 26 million Americans have filed for unemployment benefits during the Covid-19 pandemic,
and it will likely top 27 million very soon once what could be millions of backlogged claims
can be processed. The Congressional budget office forecasts the unemployment rate rising from 3.8
percent to 14 percent in the second quarter of 2020 and then 16 percent in quarter three and
finally making its way down to 10.1 percent by the end of 2021.
karlof1 @ 100, thank you. Both your links were well worth reading, especially as no
interrupting ads or distracting obstructions made it possible to do so. I'll just highly
recommend the Crooke article for its historical references and suggestion of hopeful outcome.
I was much reminded of the Oedipus cycle which focuses on plague in Thebes as the pivotal
point of ultimate pressure - that last grain of sand, so to speak. History doesn't repeat,
fortunately, but it does rhyme! And knowledge is indeed power.
Thanks for your replies! There're plenty of happenings, writings and videos to keep a
person very busy if that's the desire--those expressing boredom are actually confessing
laziness. As April concludes, we'll soon be treated to the latest economic stats. Here's part
of what the owner of Shadowstats had to say today:
"PENDING PANDEMIC AND OIL-PRICE IMPACT: Initial Contraction in First-Quarter 2020 GDP
Likely Will Be Deeper Than the 3.5% (-3.5%) Consensus / ShadowStats Forecasts an Annualized
1q2020 GDP Drop of 7.1% (-7.1%), Deepest Since Great Recession Depths; Second-Quarter GDP
Likely the Deepest Drop Since the Great Depression, If Not Worse / Headline April 2020
Unemployment Should Soar to About 21%, Worst Since Great Depression."
A U6 unemployment of 21% would send actual unemployment as tracked by Shadowstats to close
to 40% and overall GDP shrinkage may go beyond 10% annualized. Real per capita GDP may fall
below that of 1970, which will cause a fiscal crisis in every state as they fall way short of
projected revenues. There's already a caustic debate happening between states and the
Treasury and State Departments about bailing them out instead of the Money Power. Talk of
Secession and Nullification are becoming louder rekindling arguments never really solved from
the 1820s&30s. Try as they might, Trump and Pompeo's campaign to blame it all on China
will fail as the economic problems have remained since 2008-9, statistical trickery
notwithstanding. One thing's already certain: This election year will be like no other.
@ 13 "Atlanticist" may not have a lot of meaning to most people out there, but that doesn't
mean it isn't a good word to describe the US and Western European power center. The first
time I heard it was from Kees van Der Pijl in his book "The Making of an Atlantic Ruling
Class." And the term Anglo Zionist is a very good description of the US / Western Europe /
Israeli power block. I don't understand your dislike for the Saker, but it doesn't matter to
me. I agree that Atlanticist and globalist are more or less interchangeable. I guess
globalist would include Japan, too. Would you rather use the term Tri-lateralist?
I am from the United States. I agree that my country has been a large purveyor of much
evil in the world. And a lot of it has been directed at its own subjects. There are many good
people in this country who are just trying to get by.
Neoliberalism was waged against the US populace as it was unleashed on the world at large.
It seems like it really began to gather steam when the dollar was taken off the gold
standard. That was the start of the second Cold War according to Kees van Der Pijl, at least
in my understanding of what he has written. I learned that in his book MH 17, Ukraine and the
New Cold War. The powers that be began to outsource US jobs. Then austerity and
privatization.
I don't know why I am commenting. I always regret doing it. Pregret is a word I have
coined for this sense. I know everyone here is a lot smarter than I am, and lately I have
noticed that the commenters have become a lot less civil.
I did feel that your dismissiveness of the term Atlanticist merited a response though. As
well as the hatred by a lot of people toward a the citizens of the US. The powers that be are
treat us like subjects here. There is not much any of can do about the situation in reality.
I'm sure most of you out there are aware we have a huge prison population. Filled with the
descendants of slaves. We did a real genocide against the native people. The majority of
people can't afford health care. I am one of them.
So for what it's worth, that's my take on the sad state of this country. Sorry for all the
hell we have created.
"... In truth is this is a familiar pattern over the past century where the economy is continually salvaged from ruin by the government at the expense of ordinary workers, small businesses and taxpayers. ..."
"... The system typically privatizes profit for an elite while socializing the losses for the mass of people. It has always been a version of "socialism for the rich". ..."
"... As Eric Zuesse commented in an-depth analysis published in our journal this week, the Covid-19 "top-down bailout" in the U.S. will result in even more social inequality and ultimately more dysfunction in the American economy going forward. ..."
"... Ironically, a virus is exposing the pathological system ..."
The Covid-19 pandemic is unleashing obscene bailouts of Western industries and companies, as
well as lifelines for billionaire business magnates.
It is grotesque that millions of workers are being laid off by corporations which are in
turn receiving taxpayer funds. Many of these corporations have stashed trillions of dollars
away in tax havens and have contributed zero to the public treasury. Yet they are being bailed
out due to shutdowns in the economy over the Covid-19 crisis.
Why aren't the banks and corporations being forced by governments to pay for their workers
on sick leave or in lockdown?
It's because the governments are bought and paid-for servants of the top one per cent. Some
political leaders are the embodiment of the one per cent, like Donald Trump and senior members
of the U.S. Congress.
The biggest orgy of funny money is seen in the U.S. where the Trump administration and
Congress have approved the printing of trillions of dollars to prop up corporations and banks.
Meanwhile crumbs are being thrown at millions of workers and their families.
In just five weeks, unemployment has hit a staggering 26.4 million people in the U.S.
– and that's the official figure. The real level is doubtless much higher. It is reported
that the job losses have wiped out all the employment gains made over the past decade since the
last financial crisis in 2008. As with the present crisis, the U.S. government arranged
trillion-dollar bailouts for banks and industries back in 2008-2009. It didn't last long until
the next binge.
In truth is this is a familiar pattern over the past century where the economy is
continually salvaged from ruin by the government at the expense of ordinary workers, small
businesses and taxpayers.
The recurring rescue is proof that the system of private capital and supposed free markets
is a myth.
The system typically privatizes profit for an elite while socializing the losses for the
mass of people. It has always been a version of "socialism for the rich".
In the distant past the salvaging of broken-down capitalism was at least conducted with a
certain degree of democratization and social progress. In the New Deal era of Roosevelt in the
1930s at least government intervention went a long way to restoring workers and their rights,
despite bitter opposition from capitalists. Over recent decades, however, the rescuing of
capitalism has seen an ever-increasing emphasis on plying money and loans to corporations and
investors while ordinary workers are neglected. This process of embezzlement reached new
heights in the 2008 crash. Now under Trump the larceny has become legendary. It should be
underscored though that the corruption has bipartisan endorsement from Republicans and
Democrats. They are really one party beholden to big business.
As Eric Zuesse commented in an-depth
analysis published in our journal this week, the Covid-19 "top-down bailout" in the U.S.
will result in even more social inequality and ultimately more dysfunction in the American
economy going forward.
"The outcome will therefore be economic collapse, and perhaps even revolution," notes
Zuesse.
It is indisputable that capitalism is a failed system both in the U.S. and Europe. The
Covid-19 pandemic and its disastrous social impact of sickness and deaths shows that such an
economy cannot organize societies based on satisfying human needs. Instead, it functions to
continually enrich the already wealthy while creating ever-greater numbers of impoverished and
deprived. This chronic polarization of wealth has been pointed out by many critics of
capitalism, including Karl Marx, and more contemporaneously by progressive economists like
Richard Wolff and Thomas Picketty.
It is fair to describe corporate capitalism (or socialism for the rich) as a pathology which
produces many other pathologies, including deprivation, crime, insecurity, ecological damage,
militarism, imperialism and ultimately war.
Ironically, a virus is exposing the pathological system. And it is, inevitably, forcing a
cure to arise.
It's time to abolish the parasitical system and implement something more civilized,
effective, sustainable and democratic. That is the task of people organized to fight for their
interests. The delusion of bailing out a failed and sick system must be shaken off once and for
all.
Going back to our thesis that "
The Market Is Now Just 5 Stocks ", Kostin next notes that because many of the recent
outperformers had also been market leaders prior to the coronacrisis, their recent gains have
led to a surge in already- elevated market concentration.
While coming into 2020, the five largest S&P 500 stocks accounted for 18% of index
market cap, matching the share at the peak of the Tech Bubble in March 2000, since then, those
stocks (MSFT, AAPL, AMZN, GOOGL, FB) have risen to account for 20% of market cap, representing
the highest concentration on record.
Which brings us to Goldman's ominous warning #1 : "We
opined in January that the earnings power and valuations of the top five stocks suggested they
could avoid the fate of the top stocks in 2000. However, the further market concentration
rises, the harder it will be for the S&P 500 index to keep rising without more broad-based
participation . " In other words, if the dispersion continues to soar, and if the entire upside
in the S&P500 is thanks to just five stocks, not even Goldman can see a happy ending.
If that wasn't enough, Goldman also has an ominous warning #2 , namely that sharp declines
in market breadth in the past, of the kind we see now, have often signaled large market
drawdowns. For example, in addition to the Tech Bubble, breadth narrowed ahead of the
recessions in 1990 and 2008 and the economic slowdowns of 2011 and 2016. This is also observed
empirically, as historically sharply narrowing breadth has signaled below-average 1-, 3-, and
6-month S&P 500 returns as well as larger-than-average prospective drawdowns.
That said, Goldman refuses to put a timeline to its dour outlook, and notes that periods of
narrow market breadth can last for extended periods. Since 1980, the breadth measure charted in
Exhibit 2 has indicated 14 episodes of breadth narrowing more than one standard deviation, as
it does today. The median episode persisted for three months, with the longest lasting 27
months from 1998-2000.
However, eventually, "narrow market breadth is always resolved the same way. Often, narrow
rallies lead to large drawdowns as the handful of market leaders ultimately fail to generate
enough fundamental earnings strength to justify elevated valuations and investor crowding. In
these cases, the market leaders "catch down" to weaker peers." This is the scenario laid out by
Nomura last
week in our post " Spectacular Momentum Crash" Imminent As Record Human Hedge Fund Selling
Meets Furious Robot CTAs Buying ." In other cases, an improving economic outlook and
strengthening investor sentiment help laggards "catch up" to the market leaders, which also
results in a violent drawdown as the leaders get repriced sharply lower .
The bottom line, however, is that in both cases, "on a relative basis the outperformance of
market leaders eventually gives way to underperformance."
What does this mean in practical terms? As Goldman concludes, since 1980, its long/short
Momentum factor has generated a median unconditional 12-month return of +400 bp "but a 12-month
return of -300 bp following periods of narrow market breadth like today." In short, while it
may not necessarily be "spectacular", Goldman agrees with Nomura that a momentum crash is dead
ahead. And with that pessimistic view, Goldman - which just two weeks ago called the "bottom"
in the S&P500, has
joined Morgan Stanley's "notorious bear-turned-bull" Michael Wilson in warning that stocks
are now overbought and that a "correction will begin soon."
This is a time to be "extremely careful," Icahn said in an interview Friday on Bloomberg
Television.
The 84-year-old's reasoning is simple - and terrifying for the average commission-raker and
asset-gatherer - having traded through every stock-market crash since the Great Depression, the
future is just too unpredictable for the S&P 500 to be trading at almost 20 times next 12m
earnings estimates ...
"You cannot really justify that multiple," Icahn said.
Watching a fight yesterday in Walmart between couple of fat American female sweathogs over
TP convinced me that Uncle Sam will be flushed down the toilet long before the EU.
Nonetheless, it's been suggested that a number of Silicon Valley elites have already escaped
the US and sought refuge in New Zealand. And unlike the rest of us, the super-rich aren't
hoarding food and fighting each other for toilet paper and hand sanitizer in the supermarket.
They're not posting up poorly constructed, badly edited renditions of 'Imagine', then patting
themselves on the back and saying, "I made a difference today." US businessman Mihai
Dinulescu and his wife are seeing out the pandemic on New Zealand's Waiheke Island, where he
quipped to the press that they planned to go "billionaire hunting." God forbid that they
might actually meet a poor or middle-class person during their attempt to escape the fate
destined for many of their fellow men, women and children.
Apparently, a refugee fleeing a catastrophe who doesn't feel safe enough to avail themselves
of the protection of their own country is acceptable in a Western nation as long as they are
uber-wealthy
If the new coronavirus pandemic has taught us one thing, it is that we need to rethink what
we need to do to keep America safe. That's why Secretary of Defense Mark Esper's recent
tweet calling modernization of U.S. nuclear forces a "top priority ... to protect the
American people and our allies" seemed so tone deaf.
COVID-19 has already
killed more Americans than
died in the
9/11 attacks and the Iraq and Afghan wars combined, with projections of many more to come.
The pandemic underscores the need for a systematic, sustainable, long-term investment in public
health resources,
from protective equipment , to ventilators and hospital beds, to research and planning
resources needed to deal with future outbreaks of disease.
As Kori Schake, the director of foreign and defense policy studies at the American
Enterprise Institute, has
noted : "We're going to see enormous downward pressure on defense spending because of other
urgent American national needs like health care." And that's as it should be, given the
relative dangers posed by outbreaks of disease and climate change relative to traditional
military challenges.
... ... ...
ICBMs are dangerous because of the short decision time a president would have to decide
whether to launch them in a crisis to avoid having them wiped out in a perceived first strike
-- a matter of
minutes . This reality greatly increases the prospect of an accidental nuclear war based on
a false warning of attack. This is a completely unnecessary risk given that the other two legs
of the nuclear triad -- ballistic missile submarines and nuclear-armed bombers -- are more than
sufficient to deter a nuclear attack, or to retaliate, should the unlikely scenario of a
nuclear attack on the United States occur.
... ... ...
Eliminating ICBMs and reducing the size of the U.S. arsenal will face strong opposition in
Washington, both from strategists who maintain that the nuclear triad should be sacrosanct, and
from special interests that benefit from excess spending on nuclear weapons. The Senate
ICBM Coalition , composed of senators from states with ICBM bases or substantial ICBM
development and maintenance work, has been particularly effective in fending any changes in
ICBM policy, from reducing the size of the force to merely studying alternatives, whether those
alternatives are implemented or not.
Shimizu Randall Personally I don't see why the Trident subs cannot be refurbished and have
a extended life. I think the Minuteman missiles need to be replace. But I don't understand why
the cost is exorbitant. Terry Auckland
OMG.....what a sensible idea..Other nuclear capable countries will fall into line if this is
adopted....peace could thrive and flourish ...sadly it could never happen..too much money at
state...too many careers truncated...and too many lobbyists and thinktank type's and loyalist
senators to cajole and appease..
A pipe dream I think. ..situation normal will continue to annhilation...
In a country with Gilded Age level of inequality implementing any meaningful social
distancing is next to impossible. Ghettos prevents that and became permanent hotspots.
See discussion of this problem at
IMHO the number of deaths from COVID-19 in the category "younger then 55" in a given
country correlated well with the level of obesity. In other words the virus hits already
deprive and weakened underclass -- the main consumer of junk food.
So what we see in the USA is far from surprising taking into account the level of
neoliberalization of the country and a large permanent uninsured underclass including
contractors and perma-temps.
Existence of nursing homes is another unsolvable problem. Like ships, they also
automatically became hotspots and medical personnel involved became inflected spreading
the infection in the vicinity.
Here is one interesting comment that I found:
The Grim Joker , says: Show Comment April 23, 2020 at 6:52 pm GMT
... ... ...
Yesterday's Action
My bank now has traffic pylons outside the door. They ask the following questions
if you want to enter:
Have you been out of the country? Answer; How am I going to be out of the
country when the airport is closed?
Do you have any symptoms? Answer: If I had I would be at the hospital
Have you associated with anyone who has the symptoms? Answer: If I thought they
did I would ask them to go to the hospital and so would I.
Sir! There is no need to be rude. Answer: Far from it. You are asking questions
parrot fashion. Questions that do not make any sense.
After getting MY money out of THEIR pockets I proceeded to the auto mechanic for
front brakes.
Joker: Am I allowed to come inside ?
70 Year old Mechanic Unmasked: Sure, you are the only customer today. You can
keep me company while I do the work. I cannot afford to lose customers.
As I've written in the past few weeks, the number of initial jobless claims correlates
roughly with the number of net new jobs added or subtracted in any given month. Normally
there is too much noise for it to be of much value, but with the huge spike in the past
month, the signal will come through much more strongly.
South Korea's GDP fell 1.4% (non annualized). That emergencial swap deal by the Fed saved
the day, but it can't last forever. The BoK is optimistic, and still thinks the South Korean
GDP will end 2020 growing. Blind hope.
NYTmes and Vox both have articles about tha anti-quarantine/pro-virus crowd. Mostly the
protests are being instigated by the usual anti-government oligarchs who are terrorized that
people might actually conclude that government has an important role to play in addressing
problems.
" Among those fighting the orders are FreedomWorks and Tea Party Patriots, which played
pivotal roles in the beginning of Tea Party protests starting more than a decade ago. Also
involved are a law firm led partly by former Trump White House officials, a network of
state-based conservative policy groups, and an ad hoc coalition of conservative leaders known
as Save Our Country that has advised the White House on strategies for a tiered reopening of
the economy." [found at Gale, not on NYT website!]
In an interview with Theda Skocpol: " For the elite conservative groups sponsoring this
stuff behind the scenes, I think it's driven by a firm belief that if Americans become used
to trusting government and relying on social benefits from government, then that's dangerous
to the victory they think they have almost won in destroying the New Deal and the Great
Society reforms in this country."
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/4/22/21227928/coronavirus-social-distancing-lockdown-trump-tea-party
And, of course, the oligarch-owned media just gobble it up, practically begging for an
apocalypse.
IMO we should just label them the pro-COVID crowd in any discussion of the matter.
The coronavirus pandemic has upended the global economic system, and just as importantly,
cast out 40 years of neoliberal orthodoxy that dominated the industrialized world.
Forget about the "
new world order ." Offshoring and global supply chains are out; regional and local
production is in. Market fundamentalism is passé; regulation is the norm. Public health
is now more valuable than just-in-time supply systems. Stockpiling and industrial capacity
suddenly make more sense, which may have future implications in
the recently revived antitrust debate in the U.S.
Biodata will drive the next phase of social management and surveillance, with near-term
consequences for the way countries handle immigration and customs. Health care and education
will become digitally integrated the way newspapers and television were 10 years ago. Health
care itself will increasingly be seen as a necessary public good, rather than a private right,
until now in the U.S. predicated on age, employment or income levels. Each of these will
produce political tensions within their constituencies and in the society generally as they
adapt to the new normal.
This political sea change doesn't represent a sudden conversion to full-on socialism, but
simply a case of minimizing our future risks of infection by providing full-on universal
coverage. Beyond that, as Professor Michael Sandel
has argued , one has to query the "moral logic" of providing "coronavirus treatment for the
uninsured," while leaving "health coverage in ordinary times to the market" (especially when
our concept of what constitutes "ordinary times" has been upended).
Internationally, there will be many positive and substantial international shifts to address
overdue global public health needs and accords on mitigating climate change. And it is finally
dawning on Western-allied economic planners that the military price tag that made so-called
cheap oil and cheap labor possible is vastly higher than investment in advanced research and
next-generation manufacturing.
This also means that the old North (developed world) versus South (emerging world) division
that
long preoccupied scholars and policymakers in the post–World War II period will
become increasingly stark again, particularly for those emerging economies that have hitherto
attracted investment largely on the grounds of being repositories of low-cost labor. They will
now find themselves picking sides as they seek assistance in an increasingly divided and
multipolar world.
The fault lines of the next economic era have already begun to surface, creating friction
with the previous international structure of banking and finance, trade and industry. There is
a force beyond elites and critical industries driving this: The proletariat has literally
become the "precariat."
In the U.S. and Europe, the staggering number of service economy workers are going to be
quickly politicized by the shortfalls: People have seen a collapse in income, and big failures
in education, and health care. Union-busting, pension fleecing, and austerity budgets and new
technologies that concentrate wealth away from labor have created a circumstance where
ownership and profit models must be revisited to sustain stability. The needs are too acute to
be distracted by the lies of Trump, or the inadequate responses in other parts of the
industrialized world. The current crisis will likely prompt geopolitical and economic shifts
and dislocations we haven't seen since World War II.
Death of Chimerica, the Rise of New
Production Blocs
One of the biggest casualties of the current order is the breakdown of "
Chimerica ," the decades-old nexus between the U.S. and Chinese economies, along with other
leading countries' partnerships with Chinese manufacturing. While the geopolitics of blame for
the origins of coronavirus continue to shake out, the process that saw a decrease in exports
from China to the U.S. from
$816 billion in 2018 to $757 billion in 2019 will accelerate and intensify over the next
decade.
While a decoupling is unlikely to lead to armed conflict, a Cold War style of competition
could emerge as a new global fault line. Much as the Cold War did not preclude some degree of
collaboration between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, so too today there may still be
areas of cooperation between Washington and Beijing from climate to public health, advanced
research to weapons proliferation.
Nor does this shift necessarily spell the sudden collapse of Chinese power or influence --
it has a colossal and still-growing domestic market and is on the international leaderboard for
a wide range of advanced indicators. But its status as the world's most desirable offshore
manufacturing hub is a thing of the past, along with the economic stability that steady inflows
of foreign capital brought with it. It does show a susceptibility to domestic stress, with the
Hong Kong protests last year providing a hint of what is in store as the party leadership can't
pivot to new realities that include slower economic growth and declining foreign
investment.
As investment flows turn inward back to industrialized countries, there will likely be
corresponding diminution of the global labor arbitrage emanating from the emerging world. In
general, that's a negative for the global South, but potentially a positive factor for workers
elsewhere, whose wages and living standards have stagnated for decades as they lost jobs to
competing overseas low-cost manufacturing centers (the increase in inequality
is principally a product of 40 years of sustained attacks on unions). The jobs won't be the
same, but to be sure, manufacturing incomes exceed those of the service industry.
As each country adopts a "
sauve-qui-peut " mentality, businesses and investors are drawing the necessary conclusions.
Coronavirus has been a wake-up call, as countries trying to import medical goods from existing
global supply chains face a
shortage of air and ocean freight options to ship goods back to home markets. Already, the
Japanese government has announced its plans "to spend over $2 billion to help its country's
firms move production out of China,"
according to the Spectator Index . The
EU leadership is publicly indicating a policy of subsidy and state investment in companies
to prevent Chinese buyouts or undercutting prices.
Two billion dollars is small potatoes compared to what is likely to be spent by the U.S. and
other countries going forward. And it can't simply be done via research and development tax
credits. The state can and must drive this redomiciling process in other ways: via
local content requirements (LCRs) , tariffs, quotas and/or government procurement local
sourcing requirements. And with a $750-billion-plus budget, the U.S. military will likely play
a role here, as it
ponders disruptions from overseas supply sources .
Of course, if the U.S. does this, other parts of the world -- China, the EU, Japan -- will
likely do the same, which will accelerate the regionalization trends in trade. This may mean
that some U.S. firms will have to operate in foreign markets through local subsidiaries with
local content preferences and local workforces (that is how it worked in the 1920s -- Ford UK
was a mostly local British company, different from the U.S. Ford Motor Company, but with shared
profits).
An examination of U.S. planning for the post-1945 world reveals the emphasis was on free
trade in raw materials mostly, not finished goods. (The U.S. only adopted one-way "free trade"
with its Asian and European allies later as a Cold War measure to accelerate their development
and keep them in the American orbit.)
Domestically within the U.S., as
Dalia Marin writes , the coming declines in interest rates will accelerate "robot adoption"
by 75.7 percent, with concentration "in the sectors that are most exposed to global value
chains. In Germany, that means autos and transport equipment, electronics, and textiles --
industries that import around 12 percent of their inputs from low-wage countries. Globally, the
industries where the most reshoring activity is taking place are chemicals, metal products, and
electrical products and electronics."
As the coronavirus pandemic is illustrating, a viable industrial ecosystem cannot work
effectively if it is dispersed to too many geographic extremities or there are insufficient
redundancies built into the transportation of goods back into the home market (rail, highway,
etc.). Proximity has become a significant competitive advantage for manufacturers, and a
strategic advantage for governments. But the U.S. government must play an expanded role in the
planning process. The U.S. is still a leader in many high-tech areas, but is suffering the
consequences of a generation-long effort to undermine the government's natural role as an
economic planner.
In the form of the regionalized blocs that are being sketched, in the Americas, Mexico is
likely to be one of the leading recipients of American foreign direct investment (FDI). It
already has a
$17 billion medical device industry and is sure to absorb much more capacity from China.
This has
already started to happen as a result of the U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA,
or new NAFTA) . Furthermore, the
Washington Post reports that "[a]s demand soars for medical devices and personal protective
equipment in the fight against the coronavirus, the United States has turned to the phalanx of
factories south of the border that are now the outfitters of many U.S. hospitals." This is in
addition to the
thousands of assembly plants already in place in Mexico since the establishment of NAFTA.
Indeed, if the jobs that had moved to China move to Mexico, Central America, and South America,
this likely addresses many long-standing social tensions in regard to immigration management,
currency imbalances and corresponding black market industries (ironically, it also likely means
the end of Trump's wall, as the industrial ecosystem of the Americas becomes more cohesive and
widespread).
Big Business Is Good Business
But this will also have significant impacts closer to home: Much as Franklin Delano
Roosevelt ultimately
prioritized domestic ramp-ups in wartime production over trust-busting , so too national
champions are likely to feature more prominently today, as domestic scale and balance sheet
strength are given precedence to accommodate the drive to revive employment quickly,
and work collaboratively to halt the spread of the coronavirus . The scale of companies
will not be regarded as a political problem if they can both deliver for consumers and show the
capacity of following political direction for what the public's needs are. Tech companies like
Apple and Google are stepping up to fill the void left by
massive federal government dysfunction . The "
break up Big Tech " voices are nowhere to be heard at the moment.
We still need a more robust form of regulation for these corporate behemoths, but via a
system of regulation that is "function-centric," rather than size-centric. As co-author
Marshall Auerback
has written before , this kind of regulation "restricts the range of corporate activities
(e.g., structural separation so as to prevent companies like Amazon and Google from owning both
the platform as well as participating as a seller on that platform), or the prices such
companies can charge (as regulators often do for utilities or railways). These considerations
would be 'size neutral': they would apply independently of corporate size per se."
Capitalism has always had its plutocrats, but scaling back America's overly financialized
model (by preventing stock buybacks, to cite one example) would represent a useful reform and
prevent a lot of economic waste. Instead of going to enrich executives and shareholders beyond
the dreams of
Croesus , that measure might help to ensure that the profits of these companies will be
directed to the workers' wages (which also means supporting increased unionization), or plowed
back into investment (e.g., increased robotics).
Biodata, Privacy, and an End to Pandemic
Profiteering
And there are fault lines in the business world. The pharmaceutical and medical research
industries face immense pressure from other businesses to end the pandemic so they can get back
to profitability. That means temporarily setting aside profits and pooling intellectual
property to encourage collaborative efforts on the part of biotech and pharmaceutical companies
to find proper treatments for COVID-19, and make them freely available, especially if
governments were to waive antitrust scrutiny in exchange for all of the data Big Pharma
companies collectively hold. As
the Guardian reports , "[t]here is a precedent. Last June, 10 of the world's largest
pharmaceutical companies -- including Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline --
announced they would pool data for an AI-based search for new antibiotics, which are
urgently needed as antibiotic-resistant bacteria have proliferated across the world,
threatening the growth of untreatable disease."
Privacy advocates are already expressing concerns about a growing and overweening medical
surveillance state. These surveillance concerns lack historical context: From the 19th century
on, serious health problems were met by hardline government policies to reduce them. Policies
ranging from quarantine to vaccine were not always mandatory, but there was an understanding
that personal concessions had to be made to manage a huge population and an advanced society;
the Constitution was not a suicide pact. We can further alleviate those concerns today by
ensuring that the information uncovered does not become a precondition or additional cost of
receiving insurance coverage. In light of coronavirus, cost savings of incorporating biodata
into immigration and customs are a no-brainer for governments, and are certain to cause
friction with individuals who may not want to give blood or saliva to get a visa or work
permit, and agribusiness leaders who know that safety measures cut into profitability. But the
scales have tipped in the other direction.
North Versus South
What about the other countries in the developing world that don't have close geographic
proximity to a home market, or abundant supplies of key commodities required for 21st-century
manufacturing needs, or even a well-developed manufacturing base (in other words, the countries
that have hitherto been large recipients of investment solely on the grounds of cheap labor)?
Many of them have faced immediate pressure with the collapse in global trade, unprecedented
capital flight that is sure to grow as the coronavirus spreads, all the while coping with
COVID-19 with highly inadequate health systems.
In the meantime,
the multi-trillion-dollar market for emerging market debt , both sovereign bonds and
commercial paper, has collapsed. Many of these countries, via their state pension funds and
sovereign wealth funds, have become the ultimate endpoint for many of the newer asset-backed
securities that finally revived years after the 2008 financial crisis. This has become the
potential new stress point in the $52 trillion "
shadow banking " market. The U.S. Federal Reserve has sought to ease the funding stresses
of much of the developing economies by offering central bank swap lines. It has also broadened
prime dealer collateral acceptance rules, and set up commercial paper swap facilities, all of
which have eased short-term funding pressures in these economies that have incurred substantial
dollar liabilities.
As the emerging world central banks then start to lend on those lines to their own banks, it
should start to alleviate the shortage of dollars in the offshore dollar funding markets. We
are starting to see some easing of stresses,
notably in Indonesia -- because it's an exporter of resources more than a cheap labor price
economy.
But whereas in previous emerging markets crises, China was able to buttress these economies
via initiatives such as the "
Belt and Road Initiative ," Beijing itself is likely to be buffeted by the twin shocks of
declining global trade and a reversal of foreign direct investment, which declined 8.6 percent
in the first
two months of this year .
Longer-term, many other countries face comparable challenges to China: Capital controls,
collapsing domestic currencies, and widespread debt defaults are likely to become the norm.
That's already
happened to serial defaulter Argentina again . South Africa has been
downgraded to junk status . Turkey remains vulnerable. The so-called "BRICS" economies --
Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa -- are all sinking like bricks. The problem is
exacerbated by the fact that coronavirus and likely future pandemics will create additional
stresses on developing economies that depend on their labor price advantage in the
international marketplace to survive.
By contrast, countries like South Korea and Taiwan have had a "good crisis." Both have
vibrant manufacturing sectors and created successful multiparty democracies.
Foreign investment in South Korea continued to grow in the first quarter of this year, as
it rapidly moved to contain the spread of COVID-19 through an extensive testing regime (while
keeping its economy open). Similarly in Taiwan, by activating a national emergency response
system launched in 2004 (following the SARS virus), that country has mounted
a thoroughly competent coronavirus intervention of unprecedented effectiveness . The
results speak for themselves: as of April 15, in
South Korea, a mere 225 deaths , while in
Taiwan, an astonishingly low total of six deaths in a country of 24 million people -- this
despite far more exposure to infected Chinese visitors than Italy, Spain or the U.S.
Of course, the very success of Taiwan's response revives another potential fault line,
namely the tension underlying the
"One China" policy. Before COVID-19, it is noteworthy that the WHO "even refused to
publicly report Taiwan's cases of SARS until public pressure prompted numbers to be published
under the label of 'Taiwan, province of China,'"
according to Dr. Anish Koka . At the very least, Taiwan's divergent approach and success at
fighting the pandemic will bolster its pro-independence factions.
The question of foreign nations upholding Taiwan's sovereignty with regard to China is
increasingly thorny, given Beijing's growing military capacities. This will present an ongoing
diplomatic challenge to Western parties who seek to increase engagement with Taipei without
heightening tensions in the region.
A Recalculation of 'Economic Value'
We have outlined many fault lines likely to be exposed or exacerbated as a consequence of
COVID-19. Happily, there is one fault line likely to be slammed shut: namely, the false
dichotomy that has long existed between economic growth and environmentalism. The
Global Assessment from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Services reports that "land degradation has reduced the productivity of 23
percent of the global land surface, up to US$577 billion in annual global crops are at risk
from pollinator loss and 100-300 million people are at increased risk of floods and hurricanes
because of loss of coastal habitats and protection." Likewise, the study cites the fact that as
of 2015, 33 percent of marine fish stocks "were being harvested at unsustainable levels," and
notes the rise of plastic pollution (which "has
increased tenfold since 1980 "), both of which play a key role in degrading ecosystems in a
manner that ultimately destroys economic growth.
Finally, repeated pandemics over the past few decades have shown these are not blips, but
recurrent features of today's world. Hence, there is an increasing public appetite for
regulation to deal with this ongoing problem. Some industries, such as agribusinesses, won't
like this, but the concerns are well-founded. According to
expert Josh Balk , 75 percent of new diseases start in domestic and wild-caught animals,
and 2.2 million people die each year from illnesses transferred from animals. The majority of
these are transferred from poorly regulated factory farm chickens, cows and pigs; still, the "
wet markets" of Asia and Africa, and the trade in potential "
transfer species ," such as pangolins, a major driver of the
$19 billion-a-year global trade in illegal wildlife, must also be addressed. Beijing has
suggested it will
ban trade in illegal wildlife and seek tighter regulation of the wet markets . The latter
in particular may be easier said than done, according to
Dr. Zhenzhong Si , a research associate at Canada's University of Waterloo who specializes
in Chinese food security, sustainability, and rural development. Dr. Si
argued that "[b]anning wet markets is not only going to be impossible, but will also be
destructive for urban food security in China as they play such a pivotal role in ensuring urban
residents' access to affordable and healthy food."
To be fair, this isn't the first time that the sacred tenets of the global economic
framework have dealt with a crisis that seemed to usher in a new era. The same thing happened
in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008. But that was largely seen as a financial
crisis, a product of faulty global financial plumbing that nobody truly understood, as opposed
to a widespread social collapse closely approximating the conditions of the Great Depression as
we have today.
Not only has the current lockdown put the entire global economy into deep freeze, but it
also came amidst a backdrop of widespread political and social upheaval, and a faux recovery
whose fruits were largely restricted to the top tier. A collateralized debt obligation is not
intuitively easy to grasp. By contrast, being forced to stay at home, deprived of vital income
and isolated from loved ones, while health care workers perish from overwork and lack of
protective gear, is a different order of magnitude.
Even as we re-integrate, it is hard to envisage a return to the "old normal." Trade patterns
will change. Self-sufficiency and geographic proximity will be prioritized over global
integration. There will be new winners and losers, but it is worth noting that the model of
capitalism we are describing -- one that does not feature obscenely overcompensated CEO pay
co-existing with serf labor and the widespread offshoring of manufacturing -- has existed in
different forms in the U.S. from 1945 into the 1980s, and still exists in parts of Europe
(Germany) and East Asia (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan) to this day.
Our everyday lives will be impacted as selective quarantines and some forms of social
distancing become the new normal (much as they were when we dealt with tuberculosis epidemics).
All of this has implications for a multitude of industries: restaurants, leisure, travel,
tourism, sporting events, entertainment, and media, as well as our evolving definition of
"essential" industries. Even our concept of personal privacy will likely have to be amended,
especially in regard to medical matters. Concerns about medical surveillance -- stigma (STDs,
alcoholism, mental illness) and denial of insurance -- can be alleviated if everyone is
guaranteed treatment regardless of ability to pay, which will mean greater government intrusion
into the lives of citizens and activities of businesses as the public sector seeks to socialize
costs.
Taken in aggregate, we are about to experience the most profound social, economic and
political changes since World War II.
"... The banks would be squeezed, but Trump says that although we can't save the people, we can save the banks. The Federal Reserve has enough money to keep all the banks afloat, even if they're not getting the mortgage payments, even if they're not able to collect on their loans ..."
"... The political consequences will be huge. A wide public demand for more social policies will come into conflict with a recalcitrant oligarchy. Can that conflict be solved within the current U.S. system? ..."
True, the USD is (and will) only get stronger as it is the universal fiat currency - but
that's only true for the USD as a financial asset.
The USA will never suffer from high inflation, but printing money indefinitely has concrete
consequences even for them: the USD will still get weaker in purchase power, thanks to the
Triffin Paradox ,
and it will still result in an equivalent in deindustrialization (as the fiat currencies of the
rest of the world get even weaker vis-a-vis the USD).
Eternal and infinite printing of USD is not unconsequential to the USA. Very far from
it.
During the last four weeks 22 million workers in the U.S. filed for unemployment
insurance. Some 10 to 15 million additional workers were not eligible but also lost their
jobs.
Ross: Ultimately, where does this end? Because if in 12 weeks time, people can't
afford to enter into the social norms, enter into the economy, live, put bread on the
table, where does that logically finish?
Michael Hudson: With the American economy looking pretty much like Greece. It'll
be austerity. There will be people who don't have jobs. They are going to be evicted from
their apartments. They will have run through their savings. They will not be able to pay
their credit card debt and other debts so arrears are going to rise.
The banks would be squeezed, but Trump says that although we can't save the people,
we can save the banks. The Federal Reserve has enough money to keep all the banks afloat,
even if they're not getting the mortgage payments, even if they're not able to collect on
their loans . The banks can now make up for the money they're not getting by having a
huge new market: lending money to private capital and to the large companies to buy out
these small businesses that are going under. It's a bonanza.
"U.S. stocks are pricing in a V-shaped economic recovery even more keenly than elsewhere in
the world, so are vulnerable in the case that exits from lockdowns globally and in the U.S.
prove more complicated," said Edmund Shing, head of global equity derivative strategy at
BNP Paribas SA.
The crisis will not be over before the fat lady sings. That lady has not even entered the
house. A recovery will not be V-shaped. The economy will not spring back into action as soon
as the lockdowns are over. It will be a long slog. The U.S. economy always depends on
consumer resilience. But with more than 30 million people out of jobs there will be a huge
fall of demand compared to before the pandemic.
It is also likely that there will be more than one wave of the pandemic. During summer the
case numbers will probably recede but they are likely to go up again during the fall. In
between the pandemic will slowly burn through more of the population but mostly out of view
because of
many asymptomatic cases . When it comes back it will be in a different way. During the
first wave the infections started first in place A then in place B then place C all depending
on traffic and contact pattern. But the second wave will likely come, as it did during the
Spanish flu, as one big wall that will hit all places at the same time. That will make it
more difficult to allocate resources.
Pandemics are, as Nassim Taleb and other have
pointed out , fat tail
events where normal statistics no longer
apply . They are not symmetric Gaussian distributions curves where the way down from high
case numbers has a similar shape as the way up had. The way down is actually much longer and
more of a very slow decline which might even include additional eruptions.
To expect a V-shaped return to a normal economy under these circumstance is foolish.
The political consequences will be huge. A wide public demand for more social policies
will come into conflict with a recalcitrant oligarchy. Can that conflict be solved within the
current U.S. system?
There are a few signs for hope. The first two vaccines developed in China are now in their
first phase of human testing and more are coming. Some of them may actually work. A mass
producible effective vaccine would mean that the fat lady has started to sing.
There is also the curiosity that most children not only do not fall ill with the covid-19
disease but do not get infected at all. Further research into the phenomenon could point to a
protection mechanism that might be exploitable for the protecting grown ups.
On the sad side the Economist has started to systematically cover 'excess death'
from the pandemic and finds that all official death
numbers are serious undercounts.
Posted by b on April 16, 2020 at 17:49 UTC | Permalink
Seems like the alternatives are a muddled rearrangement similar to the post-Soviet space
with consequent criminality and social collapse or a Bonapartist administrative adventure if
the US military doesn't resist demands for it to arbitrate the conflict between public and
oligarchs.
Treasury Sec Mnuchin said, in early March, that the economy is fundamentally sound.
He was wrong.
The US and other advanced economies (like Germany and Japan) were seriously slowing
down.
Yes, stock markets were high, inflation was low, housing was strong and unemployment was
low.
But rates of corporate profit were sinking, corporate debt was at record levels, real
business investment was negligible, wages were up but still at ridiculously low historical
levels, and inequality kept growing. World trade had also slowed considerably. Trump's tax
cuts for the rich were merely pocketed or used for stock buybacks. Low interest rates kept
things afloat, and the Fed had already reversed course on monetary tightening.
The US was on the verge of a recession, and the pandemic was merely an extreme
trigger.
Marxist economic theory says that a crisis is resolved when enough dead capital is purged,
labor devalued, and profit rates restored.
That will mean a further concentration of capital at the top, and further immisseration of
the working class.
The US state is so captured by capital that it won't manage the crisis equitably.
The pool of social misery will be a source of fascist and revolutionary socialist
politics.
This will create more instability.
Lastly, we can't ignore the working out of capitalist contradictions through
inter-imperialist rivalries.
In our era, that means rivalries between the US, Russia and China, with Germany and Japan
included in a second tier.
Expect Trump to escalate the trade war, further restrict exports to China, block Chinese
corporate requirements, and threathen China's debt holdings as some form of "reparations."
Expect military saber rattling to increase around Taiwan in addition to shows of strength
from Guam (B52 flights).
In other words, recall Bukharin's warning that trade wars are only "partial sorties." In
the end, they will be solved by "real force...the force of arms."
What we are witnessing is an unprecedented concentration of all contradictions of global
capitalism and imperialism.
As usual, I'll point readers to Shadowstats for its most recent reporting. An example:
"Week-Ended April 11th New Unemployment Claims Continued to Surge, Consistent With April
2020 U.3 Unemployment of Over 22%, Versus 4.4% in March (April 16th, Department of Labor -
DOL)."
Note those are the doctored Department of Labor stats, not those displayed by Shadowstats,
whose current graph doesn't yet include the latest figures. It reported unemployment at 22.9%
as of 3 April; so, we should expect real unemployment to be over 40% when its next graphic's
published.
I must emphasize the importance of following what's being reported by Max and Stacy on the
Keiser Report
and suggest starting with the March 26 episode or earlier if possible. The meat of the
program's delivered in the first 13-15 minute segment, the second half being an interview
with Max and that show's guest, most of which I skip when watching with the wife; the
program's synopses usually provide the guest's name. So, those 10 shows listed at the link
would take @150 minutes to watch--a very short amount of time given the amount of information
supplied.
The Hudson transcript b cites at the top comes from this
Renegade Inc program where he's teamed with Socialist Economist Richard Wolff that
I've linked to in several comments. It's under 30 minutes, too, and another excellent
investment of your time. Wolff has two new items at his website , his recent RT op/ed blasting Capitalism and the
video of his recent Crosstalk appearance. I also suggest following economist
Steven Keen's Twitter from
where you can get to his Patreon page and such for even more info.
Yes, it's close to a fulltime job just to keep abreast with current events let alone dig
into the past, which is why news media is so important as is their failure. Most people are
now at home and have the time to become informed. Let's all continue trying to help them and
ourselves.
The global elites have no one to blame but themselves for the economic catastrophe that is
currently unfolding as a result of the corona virus pandemic. There will also be no where to
hide and probably no where to stash their ill gotten wealth. After decades of advocating and
practicing discredited economic policies that can be best described as warmed-over late 19th
and early 20th century economics, (aka: austerity) the chickens, so to speak, are coming home
to roost. The same will apply to the political hacks, grafters and corporate greed heads who
also made this economic disaster possible. What the end result will be however, is unknown.
The future can go in many ways. But as the late Robert Heilbroner wrote in his book "The
Worldly Philosophers" some 70 years ago: "Economics is the only science that puts men on the
barricades."
During the last four weeks 22 million workers in the U.S. filed for unemployment insurance.
Some 10 to 15 million additional workers were not eligible but also lost their jobs.
Ross: Ultimately, where does this end? Because if in 12 weeks time, people can't afford to
enter into the social norms, enter into the economy, live, put bread on the table, where does
that logically finish?
Michael Hudson: With the American economy looking pretty much like Greece. It'll be
austerity. There will be people who don't have jobs. They are going to be evicted from their
apartments. They will have run through their savings. They will not be able to pay their
credit card debt and other debts so arrears are going to rise. The banks would be squeezed,
but Trump says that although we can't save the people, we can save the banks. The Federal
Reserve has enough money to keep all the banks afloat, even if they're not getting the
mortgage payments, even if they're not able to collect on their loans. The banks can now make
up for the money they're not getting by having a huge new market: lending money to private
capital and to the large companies to buy out these small businesses that are going under.
It's a bonanza.
"U.S. stocks are pricing in a V-shaped economic recovery even more keenly than elsewhere in
the world, so are vulnerable in the case that exits from lockdowns globally and in the U.S.
prove more complicated," said Edmund Shing, head of global equity derivative strategy at BNP
Paribas SA.
The crisis will not be over before the fat lady sings. That lady has not even entered the
house. A recovery will not be V-shaped. The economy will not spring back into action as soon as
the lockdowns are over. It will be a long slog. The U.S. economy always depends on consumer
resilience. But with more than 30 million people out of jobs there will be a huge fall of
demand compared to before the pandemic.
It is also likely that there will be more than one wave of the pandemic. During summer the
case numbers will probably recede but they are likely to go up again during the fall. In
between the pandemic will slowly burn through more of the population but mostly out of view
because of
many asymptomatic cases . When it comes back it will be in a different way. During the
first wave the infections started first in place A then in place B then place C all depending
on traffic and contact pattern. But the second wave will likely come, as it did during the
Spanish flu, as one big wall that will hit all places at the same time. That will make it more
difficult to allocate resources.
Pandemics are, as Nassim Taleb and other have
pointed out , fat tail
events where normal statistics no longer apply
. They are not symmetric Gaussian distributions curves where the way down from high case
numbers has a similar shape as the way up had. The way down is actually much longer and more of
a very slow decline which might even include additional eruptions.
To expect a V-shaped return to a normal economy under these circumstance is foolish.
The political consequences will be huge. A wide public demand for more social policies will
come into conflict with a recalcitrant oligarchy. Can that conflict be solved within the
current U.S. system?
There are a few signs for hope. The first two vaccines developed in China are now in their
first phase of human testing and more are coming. Some of them may actually work. A mass
producible effective vaccine would mean that the fat lady has started to sing.
There is also the curiosity that most children not only do not fall ill with the covid-19
disease but do not get infected at all. Further research into the phenomenon could point to a
protection mechanism that might be exploitable for the protecting grown ups.
On the sad side the Economist has started to systematically cover 'excess death' from
the pandemic and finds that all official death
numbers are serious undercounts.
Posted by b on April 16, 2020 at 17:49 UTC | Permalink
During the last four weeks 22 million workers in the U.S. filed for unemployment
insurance. Some 10 to 15 million additional workers were not eligible but also lost their
jobs.
Ross: Ultimately, where does this end? Because if in 12 weeks time, people can't afford to
enter into the social norms, enter into the economy, live, put bread on the table, where
does that logically finish?
Michael Hudson: With the American economy looking pretty much like Greece. It'll be
austerity. There will be people who don't have jobs. They are going to be evicted from
their apartments. They will have run through their savings. They will not be able to pay
their credit card debt and other debts so arrears are going to rise. The banks would be
squeezed, but Trump says that although we can't save the people, we can save the banks. The
Federal Reserve has enough money to keep all the banks afloat, even if they're not getting
the mortgage payments, even if they're not able to collect on their loans. The banks can
now make up for the money they're not getting by having a huge new market: lending money to
private capital and to the large companies to buy out these small businesses that are going
under. It's a bonanza.
"U.S. stocks are pricing in a V-shaped economic recovery even more keenly than elsewhere in
the world, so are vulnerable in the case that exits from lockdowns globally and in the U.S.
prove more complicated," said Edmund Shing, head of global equity derivative strategy at
BNP Paribas SA.
The crisis will not be over before the fat lady sings. That lady has not even entered the
house. A recovery will not be V-shaped. The economy will not spring back into action as soon
as the lockdowns are over. It will be a long slog. The U.S. economy always depends on
consumer resilience. But with more than 30 million people out of jobs there will be a huge
fall of demand compared to before the pandemic.
It is also likely that there will be more than one wave of the pandemic. During summer the
case numbers will probably recede but they are likely to go up again during the fall. In
between the pandemic will slowly burn through more of the population but mostly out of view
because of
many asymptomatic cases . When it comes back it will be in a different way. During the
first wave the infections started first in place A then in place B then place C all depending
on traffic and contact pattern. But the second wave will likely come, as it did during the
Spanish flu, as one big wall that will hit all places at the same time. That will make it
more difficult to allocate resources.
Pandemics are, as Nassim Taleb and other have
pointed out , fat tail
events where normal statistics no longer
apply . They are not symmetric Gaussian distributions curves where the way down from high
case numbers has a similar shape as the way up had. The way down is actually much longer and
more of a very slow decline which might even include additional eruptions.
To expect a V-shaped return to a normal economy under these circumstance is foolish.
The political consequences will be huge. A wide public demand for more social policies
will come into conflict with a recalcitrant oligarchy. Can that conflict be solved within the
current U.S. system?
There are a few signs for hope. The first two vaccines developed in China are now in their
first phase of human testing and more are coming. Some of them may actually work. A mass
producible effective vaccine would mean that the fat lady has started to sing.
There is also the curiosity that most children not only do not fall ill with the covid-19
disease but do not get infected at all. Further research into the phenomenon could point to a
protection mechanism that might be exploitable for the protecting grown ups.
On the sad side the Economist has started to systematically cover 'excess death'
from the pandemic and finds that all official death
numbers are serious undercounts.
Posted by b on April 16, 2020 at 17:49 UTC | Permalink
Seems like the alternatives are a muddled rearrangement similar to the post-Soviet space with
consequent criminality and social collapse or a Bonapartist administrative adventure if the
US military doesn't resist demands for it to arbitrate the conflict between public and
oligarchs.
It is good to see an article focusing on the effects on the economy and how that effects
people, because that is the real disaster from the actions of the governments.
Also good to see a reference to the Spanish flu, where 50-100 million people died world
wide. Today the number is 143 thousand, a number 3 orders of magnitudes smaller.
Canada has got UBI up and running already. Spain too https://www.citynews1130.com/2020/04/15/feds-expand-emergency-benefit-program/
Are you a grocery or delivery worker?
"As part of expanded relief measures, Trudeau said the federal government was working with
provinces to top up the pay of essential workers who earn less than $2,500 a month."
Those 1200 check that came in, my granda did not get one because my mom claims her as a
dependent, also my 20 year old cousin didnt get his because his mom claim him depended on her
taxes. Any excuse they can find to not give you that check they will find it, but mega corps
can get trillions no problem
Treasury Sec Mnuchin said, in early March, that the economy is fundamentally sound.
He was wrong.
The US and other advanced economies (like Germany and Japan) were seriously slowing
down.
Yes, stock markets were high, inflation was low, housing was strong and unemployment was
low.
But rates of corporate profit were sinking, corporate debt was at record levels, real
business investment was negligible, wages were up but still at ridiculously low historical
levels, and inequality kept growing. World trade had also slowed considerably. Trump's tax
cuts for the rich were merely pocketed or used for stock buybacks. Low interest rates kept
things afloat, and the Fed had already reversed course on monetary tightening.
The US was on the verge of a recession, and the pandemic was merely an extreme
trigger.
Marxist economic theory says that a crisis is resolved when enough dead capital is purged,
labor devalued, and profit rates restored.
That will mean a further concentration of capital at the top, and further immisseration of
the working class.
The US state is so captured by capital that it won't manage the crisis equitably.
The pool of social misery will be a source of fascist and revolutionary socialist
politics.
This will create more instability.
Lastly, we can't ignore the working out of capitalist contradictions through
inter-imperialist rivalries.
In our era, that means rivalries between the US, Russia and China, with Germany and Japan
included in a second tier.
Expect Trump to escalate the trade war, further restrict exports to China, block Chinese
corporate requirements, and threathen China's debt holdings as some form of "reparations."
Expect military saber rattling to increase around Taiwan in addition to shows of strength
from Guam (B52 flights).
In other words, recall Bukharin's warning that trade wars are only "partial sorties." In
the end, they will be solved by "real force...the force of arms."
What we are witnessing is an unprecedented concentration of all contradictions of global
capitalism and imperialism.
I refuse to look at this situation as anything more than an opportunity for the wide change
for the West that many here have advocated over the years.
There will always be the temptation to ask for mercy during this time and a return to
NWO-globalist-consumer-driven Nightmare where populations outright ignore the horrible
behavior around the globe that the elite spread and make victim-countries endure.
What y'all have been railing against for years is the terrible grip of the globalists and
the absolute hilarious excuse for global government in the U.N. and similar supranational
entities.
Why then, would you ask for relief, when what we will see in the next few years is the
truth stripped bare and their narrative fall away? In order for this to happen, the U.S. and
the West need to suffer. I don't see what is so hard to take from this notion.
Those who genuinely care for their neighbor will again rise to the front with the chance
to reaffirm what humanity needs to do to live in balance.
Of course people will die. But life is not worth living in darkness.
As usual, I'll point readers to Shadowstats for its most recent reporting. An example:
"Week-Ended April 11th New Unemployment Claims Continued to Surge, Consistent With April
2020 U.3 Unemployment of Over 22%, Versus 4.4% in March (April 16th, Department of Labor -
DOL)."
Note those are the doctored Department of Labor stats, not those displayed by Shadowstats,
whose current graph doesn't yet include the latest figures. It reported unemployment at 22.9%
as of 3 April; so, we should expect real unemployment to be over 40% when its next graphic's
published.
I must emphasize the importance of following what's being reported by Max and Stacy on the
Keiser Report
and suggest starting with the March 26 episode or earlier if possible. The meat of the
program's delivered in the first 13-15 minute segment, the second half being an interview
with Max and that show's guest, most of which I skip when watching with the wife; the
program's synopses usually provide the guest's name. So, those 10 shows listed at the link
would take @150 minutes to watch--a very short amount of time given the amount of information
supplied.
The Hudson transcript b cites at the top comes from this
Renegade Inc program where he's teamed with Socialist Economist Richard Wolff that
I've linked to in several comments. It's under 30 minutes, too, and another excellent
investment of your time. Wolff has two new items at his website , his recent RT op/ed blasting Capitalism and the
video of his recent Crosstalk appearance. I also suggest following economist
Steven Keen's Twitter from
where you can get to his Patreon page and such for even more info.
Yes, it's close to a fulltime job just to keep abreast with current events let alone dig
into the past, which is why news media is so important as is their failure. Most people are
now at home and have the time to become informed. Let's all continue trying to help them and
ourselves.
The global elites have no one to blame but themselves for the economic catastrophe that is
currently unfolding as a result of the corona virus pandemic. There will also be no where to
hide and probably no where to stash their ill gotten wealth. After decades of advocating and
practicing discredited economic policies that can be best described as warmed-over late 19th
and early 20th century economics, (aka: austerity) the chickens, so to speak, are coming home
to roost. The same will apply to the political hacks, grafters and corporate greed heads who
also made this economic disaster possible. What the end result will be however, is unknown.
The future can go in many ways. But as the late Robert Heilbroner wrote in his book "The
Worldly Philosophers" some 70 years ago: "Economics is the only science that puts men on the
barricades."
Of course people will die. But life is not worth living in darkness.
Stacy invokes Dicken's Tale of Two Cities in
this
Keiser Report episode that speaks to your above quote. The main point is things
will worsen much more before any improvement occurs. Stacy being an optimist sees something
better emerging from the wreckage, while Max remains cynical--mirroring the feelings of many
here. IMO, invoking Dickens was masterful. We should be as lucky as the French to emerge at
the end of the Napoleonic Era with a Republic; but, even that will take prodigious effort and
struggle.
You'll recall that Fed policy always consists of
the same three mistakes 1) Keeping interest rates too low for too long, resulting in too
much debt; 2) Raising interest rates to try to gently deflate the debt bubble; and 3) Cutting
rates in a panic when stocks fall and the economy goes into recession.
Well, here comes the Big Bang: Mistake #4 – rarely seen, but always
regretted.
Mistake #4 is what the feds do when their backs are to the wall when they've run out of
Mistakes 1 through 3.
It's a typical political trade-off. The future is sacrificed for the present. And the
welfare of the public is tossed aside to buy money, power, and influence for the
elite.
Every debt expansion ends in a debt contraction. Stocks crash. Jobs are lost. The
economy goes into reverse, correcting the mistakes of the previous boom.
Investors see their money entombed. Householders await foreclosures. The authorities
scream: Apocalypse Now!
I have few to add to Posted by: Prof K | Apr 16 2020 18:57 utc | 8.
Only like to complement his comment on two very important aspects to pay attention to from
now on:
1) This pandemic is different from 2008 for the fact that, while 2008 was a general crisis
of capitalism that was triggered from the American financial system, the COVID-19 crisis is a
general crisis of capitalism that was triggered from the "real economy", i.e. the producitive
process of capital. This makes the COVID-19 crisis a much more formidable obstacle to
capitalist reproduction than the 2008 Wall Street/European Union meltdown. And it's important
to highlight 2008 also wasn't really V-shaped: it evolved into a depression after the 2010
euphoria.
2) It's very unlikely the USA will collapse in a single historical event. As a
capitalist nation, the USA is much more decentralized, fragmented and anarchic (in production
and distribution of the wealth it produces and consumes) than the USSR. The USSR was a
centrally planned economy: when Gorbachev committed the mistake of demoralizing and
destroying the CPSU, he automatically destroyed the USSR. That will not be the case of
the USA: the fall of Washington D.C. - or even Wall Street - would not be the immediate end
of the USA. The most likely scenario for an end of the USA would be for a gradual and
constant degeneration of its social structure, with or without balkanization (probably with).
This balkanization would be very violent, because local capitalists would assemble private
armies and fight against each other for supremacy and the reunification of the USA (a la
Roman Empire). It would be a Mad Max cum Yugoslavia scenario. The problem with this
is: who would be in control of the American nuclear arsenal? Will the USAAF be capable of
stopping with the balkanization process and thus keep the country united? Will the USA
anihilate the rest of the world before it would disappear, in an act of nihilism? A lot of
known unknowns - let alone unknown unknowns.
"Dollar Demisers" will be disappointed, but then since tmany of tgem claim to know a lot of
theory but seem to have absolutely zero actual experience of the practice, disappointment is
something they should by used to by now.
It's not just the "petro-Dollar" you should be looking at, it's the "Debt-Dollar"
"Last November, in a then-boring but now-prescient 10-part series (I socialistically
re-interpreted ex-Wall Streeter Nomi Prins' book Collusion, which chronologically detailed
the QE-spreading collusion between G20 central banks since 2008), I wrote the following in
Part 3: QE paid for a foreign buying spree: developing countries hurt the most:
"Yet by
flooding the world with trillions of dollars via QE the US was able to, paradoxically,
maintain dollar dependence despite their crimes. The US dollar share of global reserves today
is 62%, almost exactly what it was in 2008. Combined with the other source of the crisis
– the euro – the two combine for 82% of global reserves. By comparison, the yuan
– which so many predict is about to dethrone the dollar – is at below 2%; I
wouldn't hold my breath."
But corona is different, right? Two percent and 62% will suddenly change places,
right?
No, more QE is more of the same thing, and this is a "thing" which has worked exactly as
designed; it is also a "thing" which is never broached in the Mainstream Media: "A way to
create debt traps which increase Western control over their neo-imperial subjects.
Neoliberal-capitalism financial policies must be viewed as a neo-imperial tool, of
course."
People are acting as if Western neoliberalism hasn't worked, LOL? It has worked
spectacularly well but only for their 1% and not for "the nation", exactly as designed.
Many fine semi-dissident commentators apparently do not follow high finance, nor can they
interpret their actions, even though high finance is the West's vanguard party (thus the
theme of my recent series – "bankocracy"); they often incorrectly focus on an
easier-to-grasp storyline of nationalist competition, which (like racism, sexism or
tribalism) simply cannot ultimately take precedence over class warfare.
I'm not being dogmatic – this simply provides the fullest explanation of economic
events. Reject what socialists could call the "conspiracy" of the 1% via class warfare? Then
you likely move on to absurd, unprovable "conspiracy theories" involving secret cults,
elaborate handshakes, ritual sacrifice, etc.
This is the bottom line which (whom I will call) "dollar-demisers" simply do not
understand: For better or for worse (certainly worse), the US and their greenback are still
the gold standard when it comes to 1%er perceptions of a safe harbour in a crisis.
This will hold true in 2020 just as it did in 2008.
Many semi-dissident analysts unwittingly take a rather Trotskyist view that capitalism
will eventually implode under the weight of its own contradictions. It won't – some
rats always find a way to survive a sinking ship, eh? Thus, open socialist combat is the only
way to defeat modern Western capitalism, and also to satisfyingly explain what is going on in
the Western Great Recession/Depression 2.
So maybe the yuan will become the dominant currency but not in two months, nor two years
– maybe two decades? That's a big "maybe". In my lifetime, I think.
Until then, please believe me: Western globalisation/neoliberalism has a LOT of ammo,
clout, clients, banks, real money, real gold, fake money and paper gold to keep their mighty
dollar on top. Socialism teaches us: it is NOT just Americans who will deploy these
weapons."
The recovery will NOT be, but Trump will distract all Americans by screaming against China
and how China is responsible for everything. Expect Americans to fall in line and the anti
Russia hysteria to now turn into super anti China hysteria. Expect attacks against Asians in
USA
And all because the Chinese were greedy bastards eager to make money and they quickly forgot
history and how the Ango Saxon treated them just merely 150 years ago.
As somebody who grew up in Communist Eastern Europe it the 70s, I vividly remember how we
were warned how the Americans will try to hurt us by spreading bio weapons. This was grilled
into us over and over. The Communists knew. China better gt prepared, the West will try to
rip them a brand new assholes. And they got nobody to blame but themselves!
30 million jobless claims is no big deal to the federal government or Wall Street.
Average income in the United States is $63,000.
+30 million new joblessness.
30 million X 63,000 = $1.89 trillion dollars
Let's round that up to $2 trillion dollars.
We already had $2 trillion+ Overnight REPO Operations since last September...for the banks
hoarding money.
We already had $2 trillion+ QE4 or whatever number it is in December or January.
The CARES Act is priced in at just over $2.4 trillion and probably more like $4.5-to-6
trillion dollars.
Face it because with that scale the Federal Government could have sent $60,000 to $100,000
to every household, prisoner and homeless person in America and I guarantee the economy would
still be humming. And most importantly, the rich people never would have been seen a decline
in their net worth because working people pay their bills on time
/div> "..Until then, please believe me: Western globalisation/neoliberalism
has a LOT of ammo, clout, clients, banks, real money, real gold, fake money and paper gold to
keep their mighty dollar on top. Socialism teaches us: it is NOT just Americans who will deploy
these weapons."
Realist@19
I won't believe you because you are wrong.
But I do recognise the depth of the sincerity behind your trust in the imperialists. It is
clear from all that you post that you cannot conceive of a future in the US is not hegemonic
and its oligarchy omnipotent. It is not surprising that you consider history, even pandemic
diseases, to be nothing less than the unfolding of the Imperial ruling class's Wish Lists.
"..Until then, please believe me: Western globalisation/neoliberalism has a LOT of ammo,
clout, clients, banks, real money, real gold, fake money and paper gold to keep their mighty
dollar on top. Socialism teaches us: it is NOT just Americans who will deploy these
weapons."
Realist@19
I won't believe you because you are wrong.
But I do recognise the depth of the sincerity behind your trust in the imperialists. It is
clear from all that you post that you cannot conceive of a future in the US is not hegemonic
and its oligarchy omnipotent. It is not surprising that you consider history, even pandemic
diseases, to be nothing less than the unfolding of the Imperial ruling class's Wish Lists.
The USA consists of states that are already asserting quite a few powers and prerogatives
in this situation. Some of them have set themselves against the fed. govt. and the states'
citizens are following their governors, not Trump. (Certainly the presidential election is
looking more and more like a sideshow of some kind.) I think all American states have a
strong state identity; in addition many have a strong regional identity (I can't speak for
other parts of the country, but this is the case in New England; [not surprising, as this is
the best part of the country (;-)]. Actually, being a small, somewhat isolated with small
states and high education levels is a lot better than being stuck in a "region" that is
surrounded by other US states, e.g., Tennessee has borders with I think eight states; the
whole NE region borders just one US state, New York).
I think there is a good chance that balkanization could be a gradual process whereby
states and regions see the emergence of politicians able to deal with the health and economic
challenges statewide and regionwide, create and protect local prerogatives and populations,
and are willing to stand up to DC. We have a tradition of states' rights, and this may come
to be interpreted in ndw ways. I think this is already happening, de facto.
US states already have their own administrative structures and full repertoire of
departments --- health, education, conservation, transportation, housing, revenue, etc.
I can imagine more clashes between states and DC than between states.
(Bloomberg) -- Legendary short-seller Jim Chanos said he's troubled that private equity is
seeking financial aid from the federal government due to the economic impact of the coronavirus
epidemic.
"'I'm a little bemused, puzzled and somewhat outraged, I guess, that private equity would be
pushing to the front of the line to try to get taxpayer assistance," he said in an interview
Thursday on Bloomberg Television.
The Federal Reserve's move Thursday to throw a lifeline to small and mid-sized businesses
and fund the purchases of some types of high-yield bonds has has been seen by some market
participants as helping the private equity firms who owns some of these companies. Those firms
earlier this week were dealt a setback in their attempt to gain access to billions of dollars
of loans that the U.S. government is doling out to help businesses hit hard by the pandemic,
Bloomberg reported.
Chanos said a look at the year-end letters for the four biggest publicly-traded private
equity firms showed they had more than $300 billion in dry powder to put to use.
"I think private equity is possibly at a crossroads similar to where hedge funds were post
the global financial crisis," said Chanos, who runs hedge fund Kynikos Associates. "People are
going to start to judge the high fees and the illiquidity and think: 'Am I really getting the
return commensurate for the risk?"
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com
Has anyone seen what is happening to US finances? US Federal Budget $5,571 billion. Budget
Deficit $2,130 billion.
Trump is borrowing 38 cents for every dollar he spends. This will get substantially worse
with the CV.
This is the prime mover for most of Trump's behaviour. Trying to solve his intractable
economic and financial problems at the expense of other countries. Sometimes this is outright
looting.
Finding assorted specious pretexts to steal the assets of foreign countries, Venezuela,
Iraq, Iran, anyone who has anything worth stealing.
The virus may be the next excuse to seize Chinese assets. People like Rubio and Cruz are
demanding that Chinese holdings of Treasury Bills be declared null and void, and $4 trillion
of Chinese assets confiscated. They may try to seize Saudi assets in a similar fashion, using
9/11 as a pretext.
Otherwise Trump is quite open about running a global protection racket. "They gotta pay
us! They gotta pay us!! They gotta pay us for their protection!!", croaking like a cheap
Mafia hood.
He demands that other countries buy their weapons, energy and agricultural products from
the US at inflated prices and give preferential access to their raw materials and
markets.
This is the rationale for the trade wars and sanctions, nou just against countries like
China and Iran, but even the most obsequious satellites, Canada, Mexico, Germany, the EU,
Japan and S, Korea.
This crude looting and extortion is extremely unlikely to be successful, even in the short
term.
It is said that one of the reasons the Roman Empire collapsed is simply that they ran out
of people to rob and enslave.
Trump's America is rapidly reaching that point.
All financial assistance for the average man is being offered on the basis of massive future
debt. Everything handed to us now will eventually need to be paid back, and if the sums become
high enough, and I believe they already have, that debt will remain for our children and
grandchildren.
The system is coming to the rescue of itself, even enriching itself, while posturing as
saving us. Post-coronavirus, we will once more emerge into the sunshine land of mass migration,
low wages, cheap foreign labor, and the meaningless gluttony of consumerism, only this time our
taxes will be higher, our children will be poorer, and our governments, staffed with hostile
elites, will have more powers of surveillance and coercion than at any time in history.
It is here, I think, in the dismal aftermath rather than in the eye of the coronavirus
storm, that resource competition will intensify. I hesitate to offer such a theory, for fear
that it might be construed as yet another instance of kicking the can of revolution down the
road, making of it an event of religious expectation always on the horizon but never coming to
fruition.
And yet I can't escape the feeling that no matter what rule changes are brought into the
game, when we once more emerge from our homes to resume play there will be less to lose and we
will be against an opponent that, if not staggered, will be weakened by having had to redraw
its game plan during half-time.
" Forget the politicians. The politicians are put there to give you the idea you have
freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own
everything . They own all the important land, they own and control the corporations
that've long since bought and paid for, the senate, the congress, the state houses, the city
halls, they got the judges in their back pocket, and they own all the big media companies so
they control just about all of the news and the information you get to hear. They got you by
the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying to get what they want. Well, we
know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else. But I'll tell
you what they don't want. They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical
thinking. They don't want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking.
They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them." ― George Carlin
"Americans need to use this time at home to call their Senators and Reps in Congress
and demand the separation of federally-insured, deposit-taking banks from the casinos on Wall
Street. We're talking about nothing less than the survival of this country and how the next
generation is going to view the character and courage of our generation."
"... The B&M Gates Foundation was likely originally set up with some good intentions (to combat malaria and other Third World diseases), but probably mainly as a legal vehicle to shield some of his mega-wealth. ..."
I tend to dismiss ALL of Bill Gates' recent pandemic related public actions, statements (eg.:
TED talks, Event 201 pro/con buzz, funding Covid vacccine factories (sheesh! There's been ~17
years of coronavirus vaccine r&d failures since cov-SARS popped up 2003 and cov-MERV in
2013) as just more PSYOPS distraction foisted upon the public by the "Intelligence
Community", for their own purposes.
The B&M Gates Foundation was likely originally set up with some good intentions (to
combat malaria and other Third World diseases), but probably mainly as a legal vehicle to
shield some of his mega-wealth.
But then, after Gates got snared, perhaps in
2011? at one or more of the Intel community's "Epstein pedo-trap" blackmail factories, he
became their bitch-tool for evermore.
That's just how they (whoever kept Epstein and his operations protected) roll.
And now Gates is their captive asset, and everything he says or does is according to the
Invisible Hand's plans.
The financial elites are pushing a narrative that asset prices, sales and profits
will all return to January 2020 levels as soon as the Covid-19 pandemic fades. Get real,
baby. Nothing is going back to January 2020 levels. Rather than the "V-shaped
recovery" expected by Goldman Sachs et al., the crash in asset prices will eventually
gather momentum.
Why? It's simple: for 20 years we've over-invested in speculative bubbles and
squandered borrowed money on consumption and under-invested in productivity-increasing
assets. To understand why the market value of assets will relentlessly reprice
lower--a process sure to be interrupted with manic rallies and false dawns of hope
that a return to speculative good times is just around the corner--let's start with the
basics: the only sustainable way to increase broad-based wealth is to boost
productivity across the entire economy.
That means producing more goods and services with less capital, less labor and fewer
inputs such as energy.
Rather than boost productivity, we've lowered productivity via mal-investment and
by propping up unproductive sectors with immense sums of borrowed money --money that
accrues interest.
The poster child for this dynamic is higher education : rather than being
pushed to innovate as costs skyrocketed, the higher education cartel passed its
inefficiencies and bloated cost structure onto students, who have paid for the bloat with
$1. 6 trillion in student loans few can afford. (See chart below.)
As for Corporate America squandering
$4.5 trillion on stock buybacks (Wolf Richter)-- the effective gains on
productivity from this stupendous sum is not just zero--it's negative, as the resulting
speculative bubble suckered in institutions and individuals who'd been stripped of safe
returns by the Federal Reserve's low-interest-rates-forever policy.
What could that $4.5 trillion have purchased in terms of increasing the
productivity of the entire economy? Considerably more than the zero productivity
generated by stock buybacks.
The net result of uneven gains in productivity and the asymmetric distribution of
whatever gains have been made is stagnant wages for the bottom 90% and rising costs for
everyone. Those of us who are self-employed or owners of small businesses know that
healthcare insurance costs have been ratcheting higher by 10% or more annually for
years.
Whatever gains in health that have been purchased with the additional trillions of
dollars poured into the healthcare cartels have been offset with declining life spans,
soaring addictions to opioids and numerous broad-based declines in overall health.
The widespread addiction to smartphones and social media have deranged and
distracted millions, crushing productivity while greatly increasing loneliness,
insecurity and a host of social ills.
Two dynamics define the economy in the 21st century:
1. We have substituted debt-driven speculation for productive
investment
2. We have substituted debt for earnings
This is why the repricing of speculative-bubble assets can't be stopped:debt-driven speculation is not a sustainable substitute for investing in
increasing productivity, and debt-fueled consumption masquerading as "investment" is not
a sustainable substitute for limiting consumption to what we earn and save.
All bubbles pop, period. Once Corporate America's credit lines are pulled and
its revenues and profits plummet, the financial manipulation of stock buybacks will
end. That spells the end of the 12-year bull market in stocks.
As the tide of speculative mania ebbs and confidence wanes, the world's housing
bubbles will all pop, and the $1.4 million bungalows will drift back down to their Bubble
#1 highs around $400,000, and perhaps even drop from there.
As for collectibles and other play-things of the super-wealthy: the bids will soon
vanish and yachts will be set adrift to avoid paying the dock fees.
Back in December, when the world was still confused about what
exactly happened before (and after) the September repocalypse - which has since exploded
thousand-fold resulting in the Fed now doing daily $1 T rillion repo operations - we said that
in addition to the implicit bailout of JPM (which we
described here first , and subsequently
others ), by restarting its repo operations the Fed was also bailing out dozens of hedge
funds engaging in highly levered trades involving a relative value compression trade in the
Treasury cash/swap basis ... almost identical to what LTCM was doing ahead of its 1998 bailout,
which is also why we titled the article "
The Fed Was Suddenly Facing Multiple LTCMs ."
In a nutshell, the article explained why and how the return of the Fed's repo ops was
nothing more than the Fed preemptively bailing out all those hedge funds that would have
imploded had basis trades gone haywire. Below is a key excerpt from that post:
One increasingly popular hedge fund strategy involves buying US Treasuries while selling
equivalent derivatives contracts, such as interest rate futures, and pocketing the arb, or
difference in price between the two. While on its own this trade is not very profitable,
given the close relationship in price between the two sides of the trade. But as LTCM knows
too well, that's what leverage is for. Lots and lots and lots of leverage.
We also said that "hedge funds such as Millennium, Citadel and Point 72 are not only active
in the repo market, they are also the most heavily leveraged multi-strat funds in the world,
taking something like $20-$30 billion in net AUM and levering it up to $200 billion. They
achieve said leverage using repo."
Needless to say, as always when this website presents something the mainstream press hasn't
even considered, our explanation of what really happen ahead and during the September
repocalypse was met with the traditional mockery and derision by the financial
"intelligentsia."
Until today, three months later, when
Bloomberg finally confirmed everything we said.
In an article discussing how and why the Fed unleashed its March 12 repo bazooka,
Bloomberg writes that "when coronavirus panic kicked off unprecedented turmoil in
Treasuries last week, hedge fund leverage was lurking" and goes on to "explain" something we
said back in December :
The [hedge funds] use borrowed money from the repurchase market for the popular basis
trade, which exploits price differences between cash Treasuries and futures. Though
individual firms' borrowing is a closely guarded metric, people familiar with the
transactions said some of them levered up as much as 50 times their own wagers. Leveraged
funds' exposure to the basis strategy could be as much as $650 billion, JPMorgan Chase &
Co. strategists said.
Does that sound like "the Fed suddenly facing multiple LTCMs"? Because to us it sure does.
And more importantly, what happened in the days ahead of last week's credit market debacle is
precisely what happened ahead of the September repo snafu, only with exponentially more
destructive power.
The catalyst for last week's re-repocalypse was the historic surge in Treasurys that saw the
10Y drop as low as 0.31%, and the 30Y drop below 1%. As investors scrambled into Treasurys,
"hedge funds got hammered" again, and the result was "a difficulty in completing trades" which
as Bloomberg correctly writes "was a contributing factor to the Federal Reserve's decision to
pledge $5 trillion to keep markets running smoothly."
High leverage amplifies profits and losses and can be responsible for forced liquidations
-- and market fluctuations. This week, a sell-off in Treasury futures tied to margin calls
pushed outstanding contracts to their lowest level since 2018. Many firms also get funding
from money markets, whose problems have prompted the Fed to provide emergency funding
And there it is - just as we said, the Fed's first priority in the bailout waterfall, long
before consumers and businesses were even considered, was the sanctity and stability of those
multibillion hedge funds that suddenly faced a spectacular implosion... just like in the case
of the original LTCM. Only it's even more poetic, because whereas with LTCM - which blew up
when an economic black swan (the Russian default and the Asian crisis of 1997) blew out the
LTCM basis trades, forcing the first Fed bailout in the modern era, what happened last week may
have been the very last bailout cascade in Fed history, only this time it will involve
everything, not just one solitary hedge fund run by idiot Nobel-prize winners.
"Too big to fail is back, and this time it's not the banks, it's levered financial
institutions," said Mark Yusko, the chief executive officer of Morgan Creek Capital. Yusko -
who apparently forget to the original Fed bailout was not of a bank but of a levered financial
institution (LTCM) said he supported the Fed's stepping in, but added that hedge fund firms
have gotten too big by borrowing too much. "It's a bailout," Yusko said,
repeating what we said in December.
And whereas Bloomberg failed to connect the dots last year, this time around it actually did
some original reporting and found some of the smaller funds that would have been devastated had
the Fed not stepped in with its trillion-dollar a day repos:
ExodusPoint Capital Management lost 4% this month through March 13, on pace for its worst
month ever, according to people familiar with the situation. It was unclear how much the
basis trade contributed to the loss.
An LMR Partners' fund fell 12.5% in the first two weeks of this month and spurred the
firm to raise new capital.
Capula Investment Management's Global Relative Value Fund dropped 5.2%, people said, and
Field Street Capital Management's fixed-income relative-value flagship fund, in which the
basis trade is substantial, sank 14.5% and had to reduce the size of its positions.
That said, that's just three macro hedge funds out of a universe of hundreds, and what is
important, is that the trade was so ubiquitous (thanks to those hedge fund idea dinners) that
everyone was doing it.
"We've had 10 years of a perfect paradise and so people have been picking up pennies
thinking there's no risk in holding strategies like the basis trade," said Kathryn Kaminski,
chief research strategist and portfolio manager at AlphaSimplex Group. "A lot of the
strategies, like the basis, that hedge funds tend to use don't work when markets aren't stable.
You'll see more of these types of blowouts."
Curiously, and contrary to totally unfounded recent rumors, some of the far bigger firms
fared better: as Bloomberg notes, the market unwind had a relatively small impact on
multi-strategy funds Citadel and Millennium Management, although as we reported yesterday
Millennium is closing several "trading pods" after weathering a modest 2.7% drop this month
through March 12, and was down 1.9% for the year. In light of the S&P's 30% drop, that may
seem like a stunning performance, but somehow Izzy Englander always manages to pull out a rabit
out of hat (someone may want to check into what the HFT guys on the 6th floor of 666 Fifth are
doing for the answer to that).
But whereas the mega-levered Millennium and Citadel, whose in house risk-management lackeys
are truly draconian in their position limits, managed to avert a debacle by unwinding the
positions quickly after sustaining small losses - courtesy of the Fed's massively expanded
$500BN repos - others were not so lucky, and many other firms focuses on the basis trade
suffered far steeper losses.
One among them was BlueCrest Capital Management, whose trader Raymond Wang was fired on
March 9, the day after that historic Sunday night when the 30Y traded bidless for hours as the
S&P crashed limit down, because he couldn't find a buyer for the investment firm's losing
positions in the basis trade. Other firms, who had less leverage on, survived until that
Thursday when the Fed launched the repo bazooka, allowing all those who had the basis trade on
to quietly exit stage left, bailed out by a deceiving Fed that told the world its mission was
to rescue main street when in reality it was just making sure the billionaires had someone to
dump their money-losing positions to.
"enlightened capitalists -- Bill Gates" People who say that just don't know this guy's
history. His "foundation" is simply a stock laundering mechanism. It was cited years ago by
the government for putting out so little of its funds that it barely qualified under US law.
It's a scam. You take the billions of dollars worth of stock you can't sell in large
quantities to convert to cash due to laws about that and you "donate" it to a foundation -
run by your father. Then the foundation sells the stock and uses it to buy control of
companies you want to invest in.
Posted by: gm | Apr 5 2020 17:35 utc | 29 The B&M Gates Foundation was likely originally
set up with some good intentions (to combat malaria and other Third World diseases), but
probably mainly as a legal vehicle to shield some of his mega-wealth.
Exactly. I read about that years ago as I indicated in my above post.
"But then, after Gates got snared, perhaps in 201? at one or more of the Intel community's
"Epstein pedo-trap" blackmail factories, he became their bitch-tool for evermore."
I don't know that Gates is a pedo. I don't think he needs to be to explain his behavior.
He's simply *always* been known as a greedy S.O.B. who spent his time in college taking money
from his friends in poker games. His father is a big time lawyer, so you can imagine where he
got his greed genes.
Not that greed per se bothers me - but I dislike greedy people who also produce crap
products like Windows.
In a recent candid interview, Bill Gates outlined that, despite the comparatively small
threat of Coronavirus, he and his colleagues "don't want a lot of recovered people" who have
acquired natural immunity. They instead are hoping we become reliant on vaccines and
anti-viral medication.
Shockingly, Gates also suggests people be made to have a digital ID showing their
vaccination status, and that people without this "digital immunity proof" would not be
allowed to travel. Such an approach would mean very big money for vaccine producers.
Despite what the stock market would have you believe, the United States is sinking further
into a depression. And the unemployed are now resorting to putting their rent on credit
cards.
It's a temporarily solution that may help tenants get through a month or two, but it's
ultimately driving an already broke consumer deeper into debt that will cripple them in the
long term. About 84% of tenants in the U.S. have paid full or partial rent through April 12,
the
WSJ reports , a number that has risen significantly since the first week of April.
But credit cards as a form of payment are also rising by 13%, compared to the first three
months of the year. The number of tenants paying with a credit card is up 30% when compared to
the same period in March.
While sometimes tenants pay rent with credit cards to boost their credit score or earn
rewards, this is increasingly looking like a desperation scenario, where credit cards could be
the last fallback before tenants start filing for bankruptcy and wind up out on the street.
In general, electronic payments have risen since the start of the pandemic. Building owners
will sometimes accept credit cards through apartment management software or third party apps.
Even with interest rates near 0%, the average interest rate on a credit card is still in the
double digits. It's even higher for those taking cash advances.
While some landlords and creditors have said they would make provisions for those who have
lost their jobs, the credit bureaus will be far more unforgiving. They will be offering no
special treatment, according to the WSJ, because a revision to the CARE act that would have
prevented them from reporting negative information due to the pandemic was left out at the last
minute.
Some landlords have offered to absorb the transaction costs related to using credit cards.
"Once we saw where things were going with this pandemic, a lot of our rules just kind of went
out the window," one landlord said.
But if unemployment doesn't start to arrive by the time many of these tenants have to pay
May rent, they could be faced with far more dire consequences.
Bruce McClary, spokesman for the National Foundation for Credit Counseling, said: "Your rent
payment isn't the only thing you owe, and chances are you have other financial commitments
you're having to keep on track as well."
Over 22 million people have applied for unemployment over the past fourweeks.
Let me cut through all this speculative noise with Occam's Razor.
The virus is natural. The CCP elites are using it in exactly the same way the USG and EU
elites are. Both financial systems and economies were clearly crashing beginning in early
September. Now the elites get to blame all the troubles on a virus (which isn't actually
killing anyone in interesting numbers). Absent the WuFlu they'd all risk getting strung up
pretty soon. Now instead of being called out for the decade+ of ineptitude that lead to a
collapsing global bubble economy, they get to be praised as heroes that saved everyone from
dying.
Now that I've cleared up all that nonsense about a bioweapon and grand scheme to kneecap
China, I have to say that the "China inevitably taking over" narrative is rather ridiculous,
flu or not. Japan re-ascendant and taking back Manchokou is more believable.
As the USA washes its hands of these messes overseas and pulls back homeward, China is in
the worst position.
All its neighbors hate it and will check it.
China has been the #1 beneficiary of Pax Americana this century. Well, Americans are
rapidly losing interest in that project.
Gates reiterates the dire consequences for the global economy later in the interview.
"We need a clear message about that," Gates said starting at 26:52 .
"It is really tragic that the economic effects of this are very dramatic. I mean, nothing
like this has ever happened to the economy in our lifetimes. But bringing the economy back and
doing [sic] money, that's more of a reversible thing than bringing people back to life. So
we're going to take the pain in the economic dimension, huge pain, in order to minimize the
pain in disease and death dimension."
However, this goes directly against the imperative to balance the benefits and costs of the
screening, testing and treatment measures for each ailment – as successfully promulgated
for years by, for example, the Choosing Wisely
campaign – to provide the maximum benefit to individual patients and society as a
whole.
Even more importantly, as noted in an
April 1 article in OffGuardian , there may be dramatically more deaths from the economic
breakdown than from COVID-19 itself.
Invisible Man ,
Some things I'd love to see a journalist bluntly ask Mr. Gates in the near future:
"Why are you, Mr. Gates, with no formal training in medicine or biology, no special
knowledge of virology or epidemiology, suddenly the foremost expert on Covid in the world?
What makes you the decider of policy? Is it just that we live in a world dominated by the
golden rule, where he who has the gold makes the rules?"
"Why do you ignore the statistical evidence that Covid19 has yet to impact Europe's
overall mortality rate?"
"Why do you wilfully ignore the two dozen or so experts who have come forward to
vehemently criticize and refute the narrative being pushed that we're in the midst of a
deadly pandemic? Their assertions are consistent with the statistical evidence. Yours are
not."
It's not even spring yet, and we already know it takes a virus to mercilessly shatter the
Goddess of the Market. Last Friday, Goldman Sachs told no fewer than 1,500 corporations that
there was no systemic risk. That was false.
New York banking sources told me the truth: systemic risk became way more severe in 2020
than in 1979, 1987 or 2008 because of the hugely heightened danger that the $1.5 quadrillion
derivative market would collapse.
As the sources put it, history had never before seen anything like the Fed's intervention
via its little understood elimination of commercial bank reserve requirements, unleashing a
potential unlimited expansion of credit to prevent a derivative implosion stemming from a total
commodity and stock market collapse of all stocks around the world.
Those bankers thought it would work, but as we know by now all the sound and fury signified
nothing. The ghost of a derivative implosion – in this case not caused by the previous
possibility, the shutting down of the Strait of Hormuz – remains.
We are still barely starting to understand the consequences of Covid-19 for the future of
neoliberal turbo-capitalism. What's certain is that the whole global economy has been hit by an
insidious, literally invisible circuit breaker. This may be just a "coincidence." Or this may
be, as some are boldly
arguing , part of a possible, massive psy-op creating the perfect geopolitlcal and social
engineering environment for full-spectrum dominance.
About the narrative that the pandemic is hyped to cover for robbery, that could be, if we
assume that the Lords of Capital are really stupid.
Well, OK, they are really stupid, but one would think they are in a position to realize
that they are just printing money and giving it to themselves. It is only among the simple
plebes (that's us) that a quantity of dollars has meaning. For the Lords of Capital it is all
about percentage of market share controlled. Playing this game will inflate away some of the
value of cash wealth we plebes have and put it in the capitalists' pockets, but not so huge
an amount that it looks like. More critically, this is cranking up the pressure in the debt
bubble while giving other countries more reason to unload their dollar reserves. I cannot see
how that will turn out well for the empire's capitalist elites.
Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 3 2020 19:09 utc | 335
These "Lords of Capital" have offloaded most of their bad debts onto the Fed, which means
onto the taxpayer. In turn, they've fully loaded their coffers with cash so that once
mortgages begin going into default they'll be well-positioned to be buying. And they'll be
the only ones with the "capital" to purchase these assets, including all of the businesses
both large and small which will go bankrupt during this contrived pandemic.
What if these "Lords of Capital" have decided that they already have enough wealth and now
they want to create a permanent class of serfs who can never own, must always rent, can never
retire, and who get no health care. What if we've got a dystopian future in store for us that
even George Orwell couldn't have imagined?
This is a heist, and money isn't the only thing that's being stolen. Power, control,
freedom, and futures are also being stolen right now while we debate IFC versus CFR and
collectively wonder if we're actually seeing an increase in deaths or an increase in deaths
attributed to "coronavirus".
If the presumption is correct and comes to pass, which, I believe, is in the making, the
game's a different one.
It is not about cash positions but about hard assets. Wealth is always only relative, if I
have 1000$ you've got 10000$, then you'll be 10x 'richer' than I, no matter what. In a
depression scenario with massive devaluation of assets like housing, with or without
inflation, many households, small businesses, farmers ... will fail to meet their financial
obligations. Then the funny money they've given to themselves will come in very very handy.
They're going to buy up pretty much everything, leaving the plebs with one option:
serfdom.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. borrowers seeking a reprieve from mortgage, auto or credit card
payments because of coronavirus hardships are not getting the help they expected from big
banks that promised assistance in recent weeks.
JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), Bank of America Corp (BAC.N), Wells Fargo & Co
(WFC.N) and Citigroup Inc (C.N) are among lenders that announced programs to help customers
whose income has suddenly dropped because of illness, layoffs or government-imposed
business closures stemming from the pandemic.
But fine print can prevent customers from getting assistance, borrowers and bank sources
said.
For instance, lenders offering 90-day forbearance on mortgage payments are limited in
how they can structure help for customers whose loans are owned by investors.
Mortgage-bond holders are still requiring monthly payments even if borrowers do not pay.
Banks have been willing to foot the bill for a few months, but will ultimately need
cooperation from investors.
Some customers are finding they are expected to write a big check as soon as the grace
period ends, rather than having missed payments tacked onto the end of the loan.[.]
Thousands of U.S. banks, including some of the country's largest lenders, have said they
may not participate in the federal government's small-business rescue program due to
concerns about taking on too much legal and financial risk, five people with direct
knowledge of industry discussions told Reuters.[.]
The small business owner has a mandatory "to Close order" - no cash flow and is expected
to (a) take on additional loans to stay afloat and (b) sign a document attesting to their
eligibility and other requirements, thereby relieving the industry of responsibility for
potential misconduct.
Anyone thinking the U.S. will have a quick recovery is delusional.
"👉Some say reaction to CV is worse than CV (Bc Econ damage)
"I get it, but remember, CV didn't force: 👇
"1. Mkt cap/gdp 150%+
"2. Corp debt all time high
"3. Consumer debt all time high
"4. Dependency on ZIRP/QE
"5. No savings
"6. Econ built on debt+asset bubbles
I posted earlier of USJ indefinite detention application UK is already rolling out a
version. How many coincidences does one need to validate a conspiracy - opps coincidence
theory?
Global depression? China appears to be getting back to work, Russia appears to be acting
normally, Japan appears to have streets full of shoppers, unlike here in my area. A couple of
months of reduced economic activity is going to freeze up the system?
The West appears to be falling apart. Much of this is from the massive market of counter
party risk and derivatives. Hedge funds were caught on the wrong side of the trade margined
up to the hilt. All cash was in the market. Now there is a "dollar shortage" as everyone
moves back to cash and is hoarding it.
In reality the market was falling apart before this happened. Behind the scenes and the
FED was pumping liquidity into the market prior to November 2019. Capitalism was leveraged to
the hilt and in no position to withstand a short term shock. They will get to socialize their
risk.
I feel for the small business owners who have their lives in a business. They are hurting.
Screw the hedge funds, let them die. Make the companies sell their stock back into the market
or use it as collateral for a loan from the lender of last resort if needed.
Things will get back to normal and the games will go on as the system's survival depends
on the rigged game.
Max Keiser: Workers who are getting sub living wages, in meatpacking or in delivery
services or gig economy, are now in a position to raise their wages. Are workers at a point
where they can start to bring back organized labour and bring back the power of collective
bargaining or are they going to blow it
Michael Hudson: They're certainly motivated to, simply over the issue of workplace safety
and the protection against the virus and the fact that they're being laid off at will by the
employers with really no backup. So you would think that the the whole health plan, the
points raised by Bernie Sanders, are certainly going to catalyze this and if they don't
organize it means that they're just going to surrender quietly and make the economy end up
looking like Greece. Where everybody gets poorer and poorer, they get unhappy, they commit
suicide or they emigrate, and their lifespans shorten. That's really the alternative.
Imagine what's going to happen in three months when all of a sudden, they haven't been
employed, all of the rent has been in abeyance is going to fall due. And the restaurants and
small businesses they work for can't afford to open because they can't afford to pay the
rent, which is their largest expense, for the last three months while they've been shut down
There's going to be a wholesale unemployment, homelessness will increase - if this doesn't
trigger people acting in their self-interest I don't think anything will.
What Trump ought to do is not just fire Powell, but every other Fed board member, disband the
Fed completely, and return its duties to the Treasury from where they were pirated in 1913,
which is one of the main sources of our current globalized problem--the privatization of
Central Banks.
That would be the financial equivalent of jailing the main heroin supplier of urban
ghettos and rolling up the entire racket. And there're plenty of prescriptions available as
what to do next. Again, this discussion
with Hudson and Ellen Brown has several which build on those Hudson makes in
this video interview I've linked before.
Again as b shows, it's the political protectors of the Creditors who won't allow any
change to occur. Recall the book touting Clinton's 1992 campaign-- Mandate for Change
--and Obama's mantra--Change you can Believe in. That the NY Times and Senator Cotton were
appalled is close to a Sea Change in sentiment. Most troublesome is the prognosis that this
won't just dieoff come the warm heat of summer. Chinese researchers have shown the virus can
survive a longtime at bodyheat temps:
"The length of time it lasts on the surface depends on factors such as temperature and the
type of surface, for example at around 37C (98F), it can survive for two to three days on
glass, fabric, metal, plastic or paper."
It's entirely possible that the elderly population will need to adopt a continual defense
mode of behavior when out in areas of high public concentrations & transit until a
confidence in resistance is attained or a vaccine becomes available.
One thing ought to becoming very clear to people everywhere: The people who got us into
this mess are not at all qualified to get us out--they either need to be jailed or
retired.
The so-called 'new global economy' (NGE) that has been been so loudly touted for the last 40
some years by some academics, economists, Wall Street con artists and other such riff-raff,
appears to be crumbling faster by each passing day because of the coronavirus pandemic.
These so-called very serious know-it-alls have shown themselves to be nothing more than a
bunch of 21st century snake oil salesmen, offering up what can be best described as warmed
over late 19th - early 20th century economics.
Lord John Maynard Keynes has been vindicated! However do not expect any of these to
publicly or privately admit they sold a load of manure to a gullible public. No siree!
The NGE is their cherished baby and they will follow the first rule of arrogant and stupid
management: Never admit you are wrong!
It's easy for the rich and the upper middle class to preach for the laissez-faire route: they
can stay in their second houses in isolation without losing a penny.
But they lose money if production stops (because mass quarantine has the same practical
effect of a general strike) - that's why they want the wheel to keep spinning.
But here's a surprise: poor people want to surivive too. So pardon the USD 80 billion loss
at Wall Street, I want to enhance my chances of survival.
Here's a look at some of the hardest hit sectors in the S&P 500, and how far they've
fallen in the past 30 days.
ENERGY (-47%)
The S&P energy sector has plunged more 47% in the past month. The price of oil continues
a steady decline toward $30 per barrel. Saudi Arabia on Wednesday directed its oil company
Aramco to increase its maximum production capacity as it squared off with Russia, even as
airlines cut flights, shippers dial back deliveries of goods and people are being told to stay
home. In its monthly report Wednesday, OPEC revised down its projections for global oil demand
growth this year, while raising projections for supply. That is a recipe for plunging energy
prices and layoffs in the oil patch. Shares in Exxon are down about 38% in the past 30 days.
Already, energy giants like Exxon and Occidental Petroleum have cut spending. The latter cut
its dividend by 86% Tuesday to save cash.
FINANCE AND BANKING (-33%)
Banks have been punished by falling interest rates. Interest payments on loans are a major
source of revenue. The Fed last week lowered its main borrowing rate by half a point to combat
the economic drag from the outbreak. Analysts suspect another cut may be coming soon. But there
is also the anticipation of slowing global economic growth, which was already underway before
the pandemic hit. That would mean slowing business, and fewer fees, for banks that employ
millions of people. On Thursday, the U.S. Federal Reserve injected $500 billion into short-term
lending markets to address disruptions in the Treasury market. It is also broadening its
ongoing purchases of Treasurys to include longer-term bonds. The action, being led by the New
York Fed, is intended to keep credit markets functioning and ensure that banks can continue to
provide loans to businesses and other borrowers across the economy.
INDUSTRY AND MANUFACTURING (-32%)
Manufacturers are also taking a hit as businesses pull back on orders for goods due to the
impact of the spreading coronavirus. Companies like Ingersoll Rand, which makes a wide range of
industrial products including many used by the oil and gas industry, has seen its shares lose a
third of their value in the past 30 days. Major manufactures like Caterpillar and Deere and
just beginning to stabilize from a trade war between the world's two largest economies, China
and the United States. Caterpillar on Thursday reported broad declines in retail sales for the
three-month rolling period ending in February, with worldwide sales slumping 11% following a 7%
decline from January.
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING (-27%)
The broad sector that covers everything from the sale of a Big Mac, a Barbie doll, Gap jeans
or a Disneyland vacation -- is taking a beating as people cancel trips, avoid the mall or shut
in. Airlines and cruise ships have been the most notable losers amid government travel bans,
infections on cruise ships and a sudden aversion to boarding a commercial aircraft. Shares in
airlines are down more than 40% in the past month and cruise ships stocks, which are grouped
with resorts and hotels, are down about 50%. Princess Cruises, which had one of its ships
quarantined off the coast of Japan last month, said Thursday that it would suspend global
operations through early May. Starbucks stores in the U.S. and Canada may become drive-thru
only while others could limit the number of people allowed inside, the company said Thursday.
Shares in the coffee chain plunged 7% Thursday to a 52-week low and are down almost 30% in the
past month. And more bad news for anyone thinking they would self-quarantine on the couch and
watch their favorite team: the NHL is following the NBA's lead and suspending its season amid
the coronavirus outbreak. Major League Baseball is delaying the start of its season by at least
two weeks. And the NCAA canceled the men's and women's Division I basketball tournaments. And
hold off on that Disneyland vacation: Disneyland Resort said it will close Disneyland Park and
Disney California Adventure Park through the end of the month, though there have been no
reported cases of the new virus. The announcement doesn't affect Disney World in Florida.
TECHNOLOGY (-26%)
Technology companies have not been immune to the Wall Street coronavirus sell-off during the
past 30 days. China manufactures a wide range of parts for U.S. tech companies, and when the
country shut down most of its factories last month, it disrupted the supply chain and left
companies without products to ship. Additionally, companies from every sector are likely
trimming non-essential spending until the pandemic passes. That means fewer tech upgrades or
overhauls, and individuals may pull back on spending as well for everything from iPhones to
Xboxes. Alphabet, which owns Google, has lost about one-quarter of its value in the past month.
Chipmaker Dell has seen its stock fall about 37% during the same stretch.
Apparently the West will now end up with both a much lower stock market and a large covid 19
crisis. At some levels the government is taking this very seriously, at others not so much.
People have to listen and become informed and the corporate media appears to be holding back
and not helping.
I am not so sure that Trump derangement syndrome is not playing out in the media coverage.
How does one stop a habit of three years of derangement in an instant? So much BS has been
spun off over the last three years I suspect that it is carrying over into this crisis.
There are a myriad of local, state, and federal bureaucracies assigned to the task and it
is impossible to create a perfect symphony of action across all levels.
The spread across the world seems to have come from tourists from China visiting various
countries. Now that the eyes are on the Western countries no one is reporting on business in
China; are the factories coming back online?
Wall Street blames the coronavirus for the current crash for the same
reason the Democratic Party blames Russia for losing in 2016: to avoid responsibility.
A month ago I
said :
"the stock market is massively overvalued . Right now
the stock market is a bubble in search of a pin."
"... To be sure, Trump has good reason to hate the intelligence and national security community, which utterly rejected his candidacy and plotted to destroy both his campaign and, even after he was elected, his presidency ..."
"... While it is not unusual for presidents to surround themselves with devoted yes-men, as Trump does with his spectacularly unqualified son-in-law Jared Kushner, his administration is nevertheless unusual in its tendency to apply an absolute loyalty litmus test to nearly everyone surrounding the president ..."
"... Most damaging to consumer interests, the rot has also affected the so-called regulatory agencies that are supposed to monitor the potentially illegal activities of corporations and industries to protect the public. As University of Chicago economist George Stigler several times predicted, under both Obama and Trump advocates of ostensibly "regulated" corporations have taken over every U.S. federal regulatory agency . The captured U.S. government regulators now represent the interests of the corporations, not the public. This is more like government by a criminal oligarchy rather than of, by and for The People. ..."
The 24/7 intensified media coverage of the coronavirus story has meant that other news has
either been ignored or relegated to the back pages, never to be seen again. The Middle East has
been on a boil but coverage of the Trump administration's latest
moves against Iran has been so insignificant as to be invisible. Meanwhile closer to home,
the declaration by the ubiquitous Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that current president of
Venezuela Nicolas Maduro is a drug trafficker did generate somewhat of a ripple, as did
dispatch of warships to the Caribbean to intercept the alleged drugs, but that story also
died.
Of more interest perhaps is the tale of the continued purge of government officials,
referred to as "draining the swamp," by President Donald Trump as it could conceivably have
long-term impact on how policy is shaped in Washington. Prior to the virus partial lockdown,
some of the impending shakeup within the
intelligence community (IC) and Pentagon were commented on in the media, but developments
since that time have been less reported, even when several inspectors-general were removed.
To be sure, Trump has good reason to hate the intelligence and national security community,
which utterly rejected his candidacy and plotted to destroy both his campaign and, even after
he was elected, his presidency. Whether one argues that what took place was due to a "Deep
state" or Establishment conspiracy or rather just based on personal ambition by key players,
the reality was that a number of top officials seem to have forgotten the oaths they swore to
the constitution when it came to Donald Trump.
Be that as it may, beyond the musical chairs that have characterized the senior level
appointments in the first three years of the Trump administration, there has been a concerted
effort to remove "disloyal" members of the intelligence community, with disloyal generally
being the label applied to holdovers from the Bush and Obama administrations. The February
appointment of U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard "Ric" Grenell as interim Director of National
Intelligence (DNI), a position that he will hold simultaneously with his ambassadorship, has
been criticized from all sides due to his inexperience, history of bad judgement and
partisanship. The White House is now claiming
that he will be replaced by Texas Congressman John Ratcliffe after the interim appointment
is completed.
Criticism of Grenell for his clearly evident deficiencies misses the point, however, as he
is not in place to do anything constructive. He has already initiated a purge of federal
employees in the White House and national security apparatus considered to be insufficiently
loyal, an effort which has been supported by National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien and
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Many career officers have been sent back to their home agencies
while the new appointees are being drawn from the pool of neoconservatives that proliferated in
the George W. Bush administration. Admittedly some prominent neocons like Bill Kristol have
disqualified themselves for service with the new regime due to their vitriolic criticism of
Trump the candidate, but many others have managed to remain politically viable by keeping their
mouths shut during the 2016 campaign. To no one's surprise, many of the new employees being
brought in are being carefully vetted to make sure that they are passionate supporters of
Israel.
While it is not unusual for presidents to surround themselves with devoted yes-men, as Trump
does with his spectacularly unqualified son-in-law Jared Kushner, his administration is
nevertheless unusual in its tendency to apply an absolute loyalty litmus test to nearly
everyone surrounding the president, even several layers down into the administration where
employees are frequently apolitical. As the Trump White House has not been renowned for its
adroit policies and forward thinking, the loss of expertise will be hardly noticeable, but
there will certainly be a reduction in challenges to group think while replacing officials in
the law enforcement and inspector general communities will mean that there will be no one in a
high enough position to impede or check presidential misbehavior. Instead, high officials will
be principally tasked with coming up with rationalizations to excuse what the White House
does.
... ... ...
Subsequent to the defenestration of Atkinson, Trump went after another inspector general
Glenn Fine, who was principal deputy IG at the Pentagon and had been charged with heading the
panel of inspectors that would have oversight responsibility to certify the proper
implementation of the $2.2 trillion dollar coronavirus relief package. As has been noted in the
media, there was particular concern regarding the lack of transparency regarding the $500
billion Exchange Stabilizing Fund (ESF) that had been set aside to make loans to corporations
and other large companies while the really urgently needed Small Business Loan allocation has
been failing to work at all except for Israeli
companies that have lined up for the loans. The risk that the ESF would become a slush fund
for companies favored by the White House was real, and several investigative reports observed
that Trump business interests might also directly benefit from the way it was drafted.
Four days after the firing of Atkinson, Fine also was let go to be replaced by the EPA
inspector general Sean O'Donnell, who is considered a Trump loyalist. On the previous day the
tweeter-in-chief came down on yet another IG, the woman responsible for Health and Human
Services Christi Grimm, who had issued a report stating that the her department had found "severe"
shortages of virus testing material at hospitals and "widespread" shortages of personal
protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers. Trump quipped to reporters "Where did he
come from, the inspector general. What's his name?"
On the following day, Trump unleashed the tweet machine, asking "Why didn't the I.G., who
spent 8 years with the Obama Administration (Did she Report on the failed H1N1 Swine Flu
debacle where 17,000 people died?), want to talk to the Admirals, Generals, V.P. & others
in charge, before doing her report. Another Fake Dossier!"
A comment about foxes taking over the hen house would not be amiss and one might also note
that the swamp is far from drained. A concerted effort is clearly underway to purge anyone from
the upper echelons of the U.S. government who in any way contradicts what is coming out of the
White House. Inspectors general who are tasked with looking into malfeasance are receiving the
message that if they want to stay employed, they have to toe the presidential line, even as it
seemingly whimsically changes day by day. And then there is the irony of the heads at major
agencies like Environmental Protection now being committed to not enforcing existing
environmental regulations at all.
Most damaging to consumer interests, the rot has also affected the so-called regulatory
agencies that are supposed to monitor the potentially illegal activities of corporations and
industries to protect the public. As University of Chicago economist George Stigler several
times predicted, under both Obama and Trump advocates of ostensibly "regulated" corporations
have taken over every U.S. federal regulatory agency . The captured U.S. government
regulators now represent the interests of the corporations, not the public. This is more like
government by a criminal oligarchy rather than of, by and for The People.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is [email protected] .
I yield to no one in my contempt for the fraud-failure of God Emperor Bush III but the author
has to be aware that talk of "impeachable" offenses is meaningless in American politics.
There has never been and never will be an impeachment effort that's not primarily
political rather than process-motivated. It's an up-or-down vote based on a partisan
head-counting and opportunism and public dissatisfaction. All the Article-this-and-that is
Magic Paper Talmudry.
Trump is a somewhat rogueish, somewhat rival Don and faction-head in the same criminal
(((Commission))) that's been running America for well over a century. He's Jon Gotti to their
Carlo Gambino, and his gauche nouveaux-elite style offends the sensibilities of the more
snobbish Davoise, but he's just angling for a seat at the table and a cut of the spoils, not
a return of power to the people.
Impeachment would serve no purpose but what we've seen so far with Russiagate, etc..
– a sideshow distraction from the real backroom, long-knife action going down, ala the
"settling scores" montage in Godfather III.
"To be sure, Trump has good reason to hate the intelligence and national security community,
which utterly rejected his candidacy and plotted to destroy both his campaign and, even after
he was elected, his presidency." -- Yes to this. This is OBVIOUS to all but the dullest rubes
or those who are in on it and trying to escape what they tried to do in attempting to over
throw the US Government. The rest?
Once you have this stated– that an actual Coup which was certainly plotted/sprung by
the last occupant of the Presidency along with Clinton, Brennan, Comey, and many other NWO
Globalists throughout the Government (FBI, CIA, DOJ ) and outside of it (the Globalist NWO
MEDIA) the rest is drivel -- they tried to take him out–JFK they used a bullet, here
not yet– so to say he shouldn't put in people he absolutely trusts at this time into
any position he can? Are you kidding or what? You can't be serious– I've actually had
someone try and kill me they were quite serious about it– my reaction after was not
anything like what I see you suggesting or mirrored in your "analysis". This is how the CIA
"counsels" in response to a murderous Coup -- an attempt to overthrow the duly elected
Government?
How do you overreact to a group of the most powerful people in the World getting together
to try to murder you? That's your argument basically– he's over reacting to that? He
shouldn't have "Loyalists". He needs to work with these other people -- the ones who want to
murder him -- keep some of those "non-Loyalists" on board who time after time have plotted
against him in every way possible during the last nearly 4 years?
You seem to be one strange dude from my life's vantage point any way, what a perspective
.Maybe you would actually deal with people of this magnitude trying to destroy you in the way
you state but no sane/fairly intelligent person would -- I can't get past you have that
sentence in there and then follow it with all the rest -- you seem to live in some alternate
reality where when someone tries to murder you the right reaction is to blow it off and work
with them– give them another few shots at you– say what? You learned this from
your years at the CIA– this is how they train/advise things like this should be dealt
with up at Langley? Or is it just wishful thinking on your part that they get another shot at
him?
While it is not unusual for presidents to surround themselves with devoted yes-men, as
Trump does with his spectacularly unqualified son-in-law Jared Kushner, his administration
is nevertheless unusual in its tendency to apply an absolute loyalty litmus test to nearly
everyone surrounding the president
True enough. Trump has also injected into Washington his own nest of swamp creatures and
Wall St. bigwigs. However it is also true that Trump has been under unrelenting attack since
the day he announced his candidacy. This is not fair. With the possible exception of Nixon,
I've never seen a more ruthless campaign by political insiders to demean a public figure.
But to whom must Trump show ceaseless and attentive loyalty to?–no matter what?
I can't get too worked up about the firing of the prison guards; I rather enjoy the
charade.
The real problem is that: 'It's the system, stupid!' and no amount of tinkering or puting
the 'right' people in these positions will ever do anything more than just changing the
illusion that something is being done.
It reminds me a little of that late Soviet Union film "Burned by the Sun" about Stalin's
purges of the criminals that had ridden his coat tails to power. Try as the movie makers did,
I could not and would not feel an ounce of sorrow for those (these) scumbags who had wielded
immoral, arbitrary, and disproportionate power over their subjects.
The government has been against the people for my entire lifetime (I'm an old man now). One
of the only glimmers of light in that time, JFK was snuffed out. After all, who did he think
he was, trying to stop the elites from having their war in Vietnam?
He (Trump) should have purged all of the Obama appointees on day one.
The Vindman twins are a perfect example of the Deep State.
While I can understand your loathing of Trump's middle East policies, I do also, what he has
blatantley done vis a vis the Zionist Entity is very little different than what slick Obama
did under the table, outside of the Iran deal.
And to tell you the truth, as much as I loathe Israel the Iran deal was definitely flawed and
should have been more advantageous to America and the West. Iran should have seen the
advantages of totally relinquishing nuclear weapons even with mad Zionists in their
neighborhood. They could have still kept their ballistic missiles, sans nuclear tips.
@Getaclue
The idea that Trump is fighting the Deep State is ludacris this is a charade if the Deep
State didn't want Trump to be President he wouldn't be. Trump is a Deep State minion. No
matter the existential threat to the US the 1% get richer and the 99% get poorer.
He (Trump) should have purged all of the Obama appointees on day one.
That supposes that Trump is not a Deep Stater as was Obama this is a poor supposition.
Iran should have seen the advantages of totally relinquishing nuclear weapons even with
mad Zionists in their neighborhood. They could have still kept their ballistic missiles,
sans nuclear tips.
Ballistic missiles, sans nuclear tips are useless. Did anybody care when North Korea had
ballistic missiles before they had something worthwhile to put on the tip? Hell no.
Trump has had two open coup attempts in three years, and a constant barrage of leaks etc. His
purges are clearly at least three years too late.
Also, to an outsider, it's strange how some right-wing American journalists write in a way
which indicates that they have faith in the due process, checks-and-balances etc afforded by
the American system. I don't understand how any American right-winger could maintain their
faith in the U.S. political system, it seems corrupt approaching the point that it is
beyond-repair.
Trump's MAGA For The People efforts, must take steps to undo the damage done by the
prior criminal admistration.
Here is an detailed explanation of how Barack Hussein intentionally undermined the rule of
law:(1)
Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it.
The DOJ is telling the court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application
still contains "sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause" to
approve the application. The DOJ is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still
valid.
However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found.
On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA
redactions:
DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA
authority. That's the motive.
In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were
fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a
result of its exploitation. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller's poisoned fruit.
If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there's a strong possibility some, perhaps
much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated and cases were pending. The
solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.
I am not sure why Giraldi is defending Barack Hussein and Hillary Clinton's behaviour
& staff choices. All rational human beings see the damage that Hillary created at the
State Department.
"... To make this process more equitable, why not permanently place those equities into a sovereign wealth fund, and use the annual dividend flow to improve programs that benefit the broader populace, like social security and M4A ? Other countries , like Norway , have such funds and use them in this way. Heck , so does Alaska , for that matter. ..."
So, now the FED is considering purchasing equities , so as to defend the portfolio values
of the already-wealthy , who own most of that equity. This will likely be a regular practice
in every crisis going forward ( see Japan ) , and we know that we are now a distinctly
crisis-prone country , and can expect at least one crisis per decade , and probably more.
To make this process more equitable, why not permanently place those equities into a
sovereign wealth fund, and use the annual dividend flow to improve programs that benefit the
broader populace, like social security and M4A ? Other countries , like Norway , have such
funds and use them in this way. Heck , so does Alaska , for that matter.
Why don't we do it ? Most of you already know why. If you don't , just watch some old
George Carlin clips on Youtube.
I agree Marko. Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I believe what you are proposing, or
something like it, has to be done for systemically important entities, such as banks,
telecoms, health, insurance, and national defense providers that own the largest share of
their markets. We must do as you say, if we are not to be held hostage to the absentee
landlords who currently own our nation for their sole benefit.
Dfnslblty , April 7, 2020 at 13:56
Socialization via nationalization is your excellent proposal.
Privatization in public areas – education, banking, medicine, oil and water- has robbed
Citizens and destroyed the environment.
We can elect officials to bring equality to governance, or we can continue to live as
serfs.
"... There is no reason why the collapse of the system should lead to something worse. Indeed it is hard to conceive of any worse system that could possibly survive. ..."
"... a collapse in global trade unlike anything we've seen since the 1930s. ..."
"... The Fed is already set to monetize double the total U.S. Treasury debt issuance. The global task would overwhelm it – in an avalanche of money-printing. ..."
"... "Does Mnuchin then, believe his and Trump's narrative, that the virus will soon pass, and the economy will rapidly bounce-back? If so, and it turns out that the virus does not rapidly disappear, then Mnuchin's stance portends a coming, tragic débacle. ..."
Alistair Crooke at Strategic Culture is worth looking at today.
He's predicting the collapse of the US dollar and the international trading system.
A New World Order indeed. But also a tabula rasa.
There is no reason why the collapse of the system should lead to something worse. Indeed
it is hard to conceive of any worse system that could possibly survive.
Instead of howling calamity and predicting a reality that is likely to be no worse than
that already in operation for the bulk of the world's population -- does anyone think that the
people scrabbling every hour to stay alive in the world's slums, care or ought to care
whether our internet traffic is pouring into a imperial database? Does anyone doubt that it
has been for years?
Instead of arguing how many corona virus corpses can be attributed to obesity and sugary
diets we could be discussing the possibilities that Disaster Socialism opens up.
After all the rational response to calamities and collapses is always socialist in the
sense that communities come together, help one another and rebuild themselves. If the world
trade system does collapse there will be an immediate necessity for rationing, social
distribution and the development-Cuban style- of food production. Tools will have to be
appropriated, land too and labour organised.
The whole substructure of capitalism-private property and commodity production- will have
to be pushed aside like rubble in an earthquake.
The current basis of petrochemical agriculture will have to be abandoned- and three cheers
for that!- and organic, labour intensive horticultural techniques used in their place.
There will be, at one and the same time, mass unemployment and an urgent need for
labour.
Out of such crises a new world can be born. There is no reason why it should be one
designed by the enemies of life who controlled the one currently failing.
Crooke explains what is about to happen
"...the crucial point is made by Professor Rogoff: "We're looking at a commodity-price
collapse – and a collapse in global trade unlike anything we've seen since the 1930s.
An avalanche of government-debt crises is sure to follow, he said, and "the system just can't
handle this many defaults and restructurings – at the same time".
"This simply is beyond the U.S. Fed, or the U.S. Treasury's capacities, by a long shot.
The Fed is already set to monetize double the total U.S. Treasury debt issuance. The global
task would overwhelm it – in an avalanche of money-printing.
"Does Mnuchin then, believe his and Trump's narrative, that the virus will soon pass, and
the economy will rapidly bounce-back? If so, and it turns out that the virus does not rapidly
disappear, then Mnuchin's stance portends a coming, tragic débacle. And with further
massive money issuance, a collapse in confidence in the dollar. (President Putin would have
been proved right, but he will not welcome, assuredly, being proved right in such a
destructive manner)..."
Sick. Unconscionable. There is a shortage of lamp posts and piano wire.
[.]in a press conference late on Thursday, Steven Mnuchin said that he will double the
interest rate on the SBA loan from 0.50% to 1.00% in order to appease banks seeking higher
interest rates to participate in the Treasury's bailout program and lend money to the same
taxpayers who bailed them out 12 years ago.
These are same banks, mind you, that just sold all $1.6 trillion in securities to the
Fed to expand their balance sheets capacity in the past three weeks, and which also just
benefited from the Fed's decision to remove Treasurys and deposits from the Fed's SLR test,
freeing up another $1.6 trillion in liquidity.
And yet, despite all this, these banks - which include JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America,
Wells Fargo Citigroup, Truist Bank and PNC - which were bailed out in 2008 and again bailed
out 3 weeks ago with the Fed's various alphabet soup programs, couldn't agree to give Main
Street a helping hand, and instead of offering loans at a modest 0.5%, demanded no less
than 1%, which is 75-100 bps above where they can borrow cash from the Fed. Because
charging America's middle class an 19.95% credit card APR is not enough, and anything less
than 1.0% on a loan that is explicitly backstopped by the Treasury would be
uneconomical.[.]
My harping question: Why would a small business owner, forced to close, and without a
cashflow take on more debt?
"... The old financial capitalism of always, refurbished by the new decrees on pandemic, whose hedge funds, already present in the Mediterranean countries applying usury interests to basic needs ( and rights ) of the population, like homes market, will fall like vulture on the so longed health and pension systems of now re-indebted countries who already were doing well before the pandemic started ( and even better than their Calvinist prepotent disloyal "partners" of the north, as the graphic on the situation of main banks in the EU i posted in the week review thread so clearly show ). ..."
Simply, some countries, in the twilight of their most profiteering industries and from
which they are known ( namely cars, aircrafts, fracking oil, and so on...), and the inability
of easily continue plundering developing countries without entering expensive and unending
wars, have thought of reconverting their "productive" fabric and thus keep profiting from
medical and pharma industries ( and for this they needed to create a new strong market
before...)
The old financial capitalism of always, refurbished by the new decrees on pandemic, whose
hedge funds, already present in the Mediterranean countries applying usury interests to basic
needs ( and rights ) of the population, like homes market, will fall like vulture on the so
longed health and pension systems of now re-indebted countries who already were doing well
before the pandemic started ( and even better than their Calvinist prepotent disloyal
"partners" of the north, as the graphic on the situation of main banks in the EU i posted in
the week review thread so clearly show ).
"... There has been a huge amount of planning for a pandemic. It seems likely that that planning has also included how a pandemic can be gamed to benefit TPTB. We are seeing plenty of CYA propaganda that excuses government failures and attempt to minimize the virus threat. But IMO they know that they're doing. ..."
"... Trump team failed to follow NSC's pandemic playbook ..."
"... In a subsequent section, the playbook details steps to take if there's evidence that the virus is spreading among humans, which the World Health Organization concluded by Jan. 22, or the U.S. government declared a public health emergency, which HHS Secretary Alex Azar did on Jan. 31. ..."
"... Under that timeline, the federal government by late January should have been taking a lead role in "coordination of workforce protection activities including [personal protective equipment] determination, procurement and deployment." Those efforts are only now getting underway, health workers and doctors say. ..."
"... The problem is that the measures that needed to be taken directly contradicted the capitalist insistence on immediate profits: building reserve capacity into the health system (or rather refraining from the temptation to slim down the system to the very minimum needed capacity) was just something that capitalist regimes, desperate to cut taxes and otherwise distribute public funds to the wealthy, could not bring themselves to do. ..."
"... A case in point-to which I gave a link to in the paywalled Toronto Star on an earlier thread -- was the revelation that, after the Sars outbreak the Province of Ontario, following the advice of a Judicial enquiry, stockpiled respirators and masks against just such an emergency as we face today. 55 million masks, in fact, were purchased and, after 2017, destroyed or sold. ..."
I see no evidence of an owngoal. I see an engineered recession depression. I see enforcement
of lockdown. I see laws banning large gatherings. I see complete inability of any section of
the population to physically protest without incurring the full wrath of law enforcement and
many of their fellow citizens. Hardly a word of protest has been uttered regarding the transfer
of massive debt liabilities onto the taxpayer
One problem with your hypothesis is that 2+ years ago, Greenspan came out and admitted to
the fact of an unsustainable, massive bubble in the Bond Market. I linked to this Keiser Report that noted his
admission/confession , plus there are a great many other reports and essays relating to the
falsity of the economic figures and what they're attempting to conceal. Furthermore as behavior
by TrumpCo, particularly Pompeo's, shows, they were ecstatic in January at China's declaration
of the COVID-19 attack and initially ignored what China said it would do in response--shutdown.
Indeed, it took about 6 weeks for the reality of what China said to reach the tiny brains of
TrumpCo and elsewhere within the West's financial matrix. As I wrote, it didn't matter if the
event was natural or premeditated; what mattered was the very unanticipated Chinese and then
South Korean responses--they weren't gamed whatsoever as proven by TrumpCo's response. It's as
plain as day.
Deflating the Wall Street Bubble, a 'bailout' for Boeing, and accelerating 'decoupling'
provide powerful reasons for creating or gaming the Covid-19 crisis.
The Western response has been slow and ineffective. The reason for this is largely
neoliberal-thinking that puts capital before people. Essentially, the response has been
gamed. Yet people are still reluctant to blame authorities.
TPTB allowed the virus to spread so that China could be blamed and Boeing and Wall
Street could be bailed out. But apparently that wasn't enough. 'Spring Break' celebrations
in USA were allowed to continue. Was that just an innocent failure? Did they really not
understand that the virus could be spread widely via such a large-scale event?
Go-along to get along is still the order of the day for elites and Stockholm
Syndrome is still strong in the middle-class. Until there is outrage and
accountability, the gaming will continue.
Every delay, every failure means more virus infection.. more deaths.. more economic
damage - and justifies more stringent measures later.
'Herd immunity' and happy talk of vaccine development justify delays and a lax response.
Most consider a virus to be 12 months or more away. Long before a virus we may see severe
economic and social dislocations and possible imposition of martial law in parts of the
West.
<> <> <> <> <>
There has been a huge amount of planning for a pandemic. It seems likely that that
planning has also included how a pandemic can be gamed to benefit TPTB. We are seeing
plenty of CYA propaganda that excuses government failures and attempt to minimize the virus
threat. But IMO they know that they're doing.
"The U.S. government will use all powers at its disposal to prevent, slow or
mitigate the spread of an emerging infectious disease threat," according to the
playbook's built-in "assumptions" about fighting future threats. "The American public
will look to the U.S. government for action when multi-state or other significant events
occur."
. . .
Trump has claimed that his administration could not have foreseen the coronavirus
pandemic, which has spread to all 50 states and more than 180 nations, sickening more
than 460,000 people around the world. "Nobody ever expected a thing like this," Trump
said in a Fox News interview on Tuesday.
. . .
In a subsequent section, the playbook details steps to take if there's evidence
that the virus is spreading among humans, which the World Health Organization concluded
by Jan. 22, or the U.S. government declared a public health emergency, which HHS
Secretary Alex Azar did on Jan. 31.
Under that timeline, the federal government by late January should have been
taking a lead role in "coordination of workforce protection activities including
[personal protective equipment] determination, procurement and deployment." Those efforts
are only now getting underway, health workers and doctors say.
"There has been a huge amount of planning for a pandemic.." Jackrabbit@19
There has been a lot of planning for a pandemic. That there would be one was never in
doubt. It was regarded as being inevitable.
The problem is that the measures that needed to be taken directly contradicted the
capitalist insistence on immediate profits: building reserve capacity into the health
system (or rather refraining from the temptation to slim down the system to the very
minimum needed capacity) was just something that capitalist regimes, desperate to cut taxes
and otherwise distribute public funds to the wealthy, could not bring themselves to
do.
A case in point-to which I gave a link to in the paywalled Toronto Star on an
earlier thread -- was the revelation that, after the Sars outbreak the Province of Ontario,
following the advice of a Judicial enquiry, stockpiled respirators and masks against just
such an emergency as we face today. 55 million masks, in fact, were purchased and, after
2017, destroyed or sold.
"..It seems likely that that planning has also included how a pandemic can be gamed
to benefit TPTB. We are seeing plenty of CYA propaganda that excuses government failures
and attempt to minimize the virus threat. But IMO they know that they're doing."
If by 'planning' you are referring to brainstorming by businesses, individuals and
political interest groups you are right. But it doesn't mean much: it is of the nature of
this society that there is a never ending fountain of ideas on how to make money out of
disasters of every kind. In that respect the virus is simply another Bear market.
Those who infer, from the fact that capitalists and political opportunists never miss an
opportunity to turn a profit, that the pandemic was deliberately shaped in order to impose
an authoritarian order beg the question as to why the ruling class would want to do so.
Looking back on the 1930s it would be interesting to see how many people put forward the
theory that the Wall St Crash was deliberately engineered in order to: (fill in this space
according to taste.)
That is how many people apart from the Nazis who "knew" that the Jews were behind it and
used it for their own nefarious purposes.
(For those with limited understanding of the language by "knew" I mean 'insisted without
evidence'.
Only complete idiots believe that The Crash was deliberately brought about. Just as
today only fascists and idiots believe that the pandemic was planned and implemented in
order to advance the agendas of TPTB.
Only complete idiots believe that The Crash was deliberately brought about. Just as today
only fascists and idiots believe that the pandemic was planned and implemented in order to
advance the agendas of TPTB.
Posted by: bevin | Mar 29 2020 21:05 utc | 59
Keep in mind, as you read the words of this idiot, that he spent months (if not years)
polluting the comment threads on this very website, screaming words and phrases like
"racist" and "useless conspiracist" at anyone correctly claiming that ISIS was a
US/Anglo-Zio proxy.
The man is an idiot, his ability to correctly analyse events in realtime is completely
non-existant
Adding all that to the fact that coronavirus genome
variations in Iran and Italy were sequenced and it was revealed they do not belong to the
variety that infected Wuhan, Chinese media are now openly asking questions and drawing a
connection with the shutting down in August last year of the "unsafe" military bioweapon
lab at Fort Detrick, the Military Games, and the Wuhan epidemic. Some of these questions
had been asked -- with no response -- inside the U.S. itself.
Extra questions linger about the opaque Event 201 in New York on October 18, 2019: a
rehearsal for a worldwide pandemic caused by a deadly virus -- which happened to be
coronavirus. This magnificent coincidence happened one month before the outbreak in
Wuhan.
Event 201 was sponsored by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Economic Forum
(WEF), the CIA, Bloomberg, John Hopkins Foundation and the UN. The World Military Games
opened in Wuhan on the exact same day.
Irrespective of its origin, which is still not conclusively established, as much as
Trump tweets about the "Chinese virus," COVID-19 already poses immensely serious questions
about biopolitics (where's Foucault when we need him?) and bio-terror.
The working hypothesis of coronavirus as a very powerful but not Armageddon-provoking
bio-weapon unveils it as a perfect vehicle for widespread social control -- on a global
scale.
I cannot speak for bevin, but I think that claiming that the pandemic -not
necessarily the original outbreak in China but the spreading of the virus to the US and
northern Europe- is part of the empire's plan does not make sense. Perhaps that is what
bevin is saying.
I don't know if virus is bioengineered (by US), time will tell. What I do believe that
there is very strong evidence virus originated in US in fall last year and they decided to
throw it at China using those military games to ruin it.
But US's glorious plan completely backfired, oh the horror, who could foresee that.
Except that literally every US plan, proxy, tool etc. in recent history backfired.
"What they needed was some method of absolving themselves of all blame." --Realist
@83
Could be, but if so it is still a massively incompetent own-goal. "They" may be
dodging personal blame, but "they" are shifting that blame to the very economic
paradigm that "they" depend upon for their power in society.
I don't think that will work out quite the way "they" hope, if indeed this is all
their plan.
But US's glorious plan completely backfired, oh the horror, who could foresee that.
Posted by: Abe | Mar 29 2020 23:46 utc | 87
What's your proof it backfired?
If the target was not limited, not local but global, then how has it "backfired"
A virus with a 4 to 14 day incubation period before infection became detectable, during
which the host would spread it liberally, was hardly, if engineered, intended to be
confined locally
Could be, but if so it is still a massively incompetent own-goal. "They" may be dodging
personal blame, but "they" are shifting that blame to the very economic paradigm that
"they" depend upon for their power in society.
I don't think that will work out quite the way "they" hope, if indeed this is all their
plan.
"... Bear in mind yet again that the TOTAL death count from two months of this virus in US still hasn't reached ONE DAY of deaths from ordinary flu. In fact the public health folks have been doing most things right in most places. The outbreak started in Seattle, which has been in rebellion against normal public health measures (border controls, vaccines) for a long time. ..."
Bear in mind yet again that the TOTAL death count from two months of this virus in US still
hasn't reached ONE DAY of deaths from ordinary flu. In fact the public health folks have been
doing most things right in most places. The outbreak started in Seattle, which has been in
rebellion against normal public health measures (border controls, vaccines) for a long time.
Last year, the CDC reports 45 million cases of Influenza in America (14% of population), with
21 million hospital visits, 810,000 hospitalizations, and 61,000 deaths. If America reaches
10,000 deaths with this virus, given the constant media exposure and policy driven towards
fear; the entire nation will go into dischord. Go outside, breath fresh air, smile, soak up
the sunlight, laugh, and exercise.
"... its all looking more and more like disaster capitalism in its purest, blood-stained form, a massive smash and grab raid on ordinary people... ..."
To me the coronavirus numbers increasingly DON'T justify the economically suicidal lock downs
- its all looking more and more like disaster capitalism in its purest, blood-stained form, a
massive smash and grab raid on ordinary people...
"... Kostin forecasts 2020 S&P 500 earnings will decline by 5 percent to $157 due to "supply-chain disruption, weak US and global consumption, and lower oil prices and interest rates." He thinks earnings will collapse in the second and third quarters before rebounding in the fourth quarter and for the full year. ..."
The COVID-19 outbreak has disrupted supply chains, eroded demand, curbed travel and prompted
employee furloughs, all resulting in a hit to corporate earnings.
Kostin forecasts 2020 S&P 500 earnings will decline by 5 percent to $157 due to
"supply-chain disruption, weak US and global consumption, and lower oil prices and interest
rates." He thinks earnings will collapse in the second and third quarters before rebounding in
the fourth quarter and for the full year.
His preferred valuation approach is to compare the S&P 500's earnings yield with the
yield on the 10-year note. Assuming an earnings yield of 7.2 percent and a 10-year yield of 0.5
percent, equating to a yield gap of 665 basis points, Kostin's base case is for the S&P 500
to bottom at 2,450.
However, in the event that the gap widens to 770 basis points, as it did during the global
financial crisis, the S&P 500 would fall to about 2,000, he said.
"... The US airline industry has spent a decade shoving itself into harm's way by strip-mining their balance sheets to fund share buybacks and goose top executive stock options. ..."
"... For crying out loud – the reckless irresponsibility of it is mind-boggling. That's because for decades upon decades this has been a highly cyclical industry – vulnerable to global dislocations caused by recessions, storms, wars, terror and more. Accordingly, airline companies absolutely need deep equity balance sheets and ample standby liquidity, even at the expense of short-term earnings. ..."
"... Needless to say, the Big Four US airlines – Delta, United, American, and Southwest – were having none of financial rationality, prudence and common sense. ..."
"... If the Big Four Airlines can't raise enough cash in the high cost long term debt markets or by issuing highly dilutive preferred stock or equity, there is only one solution – and that is chapter 11. Holy moly, that's why we have this legal protection procedure. ..."
"... Of course, the airlines are only the poster boy for this long overdue moment of truth. The problem is universal ..."
The nerve of it is a wonder to behold. The US airline industry has spent a decade shoving
itself into harm's way by strip-mining their balance sheets to fund share buybacks and goose
top executive stock options.
For crying out loud – the reckless irresponsibility of it is mind-boggling. That's
because for decades upon decades this has been a highly cyclical industry – vulnerable to
global dislocations caused by recessions, storms, wars, terror and more. Accordingly, airline
companies absolutely need deep equity balance sheets and ample standby liquidity, even at the
expense of short-term earnings.
Needless to say, the Big Four US airlines – Delta, United, American, and Southwest
– were having none of financial rationality, prudence and common sense. As Wolf Richter
properly pointed out:
"These stocks are now getting crushed because they may run out of cash in a few months,
yet they would be the primary recipients of that $50 billion bailout, well, after they
wasted, blew, and incinerated willfully and recklessly together $43.7 billion in cash on
share buybacks since 2012 for the sole purpose of enriching the very shareholders that will
now be bailed out by the taxpayer ."
We say nothing doing!
If the Big Four Airlines can't raise enough cash in the high cost long term debt markets or
by issuing highly dilutive preferred stock or equity, there is only one solution – and
that is chapter 11. Holy moly, that's why we have this legal protection procedure.
The airlines will have precious little business for the duration of the great COVID spring
break anyway. So let the court-appointed trustees operate with the same skeleton crews that the
airlines will be running even if they get the bailout. The level of customer service and
employment will be essentially the same in either case.
More importantly, let the gamblers and so-called investors who piled into these stocks get
their just deserts. That is, a 100% loss on their gambling stakes because that's all it ever
was when the Big Four's combined market cap hit $130 billion compared to just $43 billion
now.
Even more importantly, let these bankrupt shareholders file class action suits against the
idiots and clowns in the C-suites and on the boards of directors who made such foolish
decisions in the first place. Hopefully, these cats would be legally stalked and harassed to
the ends of the earth as an object lesson in the personal cost of imperiling corporate balance
sheets to feather their own stock options nest.
Of course, the airlines are only the poster boy for this long overdue moment of truth. The
problem is universal because today's rotten regime of Keynesian central banking has caused the
entire financial system and main street economy to become riddled with rank speculation and
reckless disregard for financial discipline and prudence.
And the crime starts right in the Eccles Building where over the last several decades an
inbred posse of PhDs and Washington apparatchiks have taken it upon themselves to destroy
honest price discovery in the money and capital markets in the name of levitating financial
asset prices and thereby fostering more growth, jobs, incomes and spending than the main street
economy would allegedly produce on its own.
Self-evidently, main street didn't need no stinkin' help from a wanna be 12-member monetary
politburo. They have created serial bubbles that have gotten more inflated with each cycle,
leaving the main street economy exposed to increasingly brutal episodes of correction when the
proverbial Black Swan, or Black Bat, as the case may be, makes its grim appearance.
Still, the very idea that agents of the state could have enough information and wisdom to
best the work of millions of traders, investors, speculators and dealers was ridiculous from
the start; and the further idea that financial assets prices falsified by the FOMC to the
second decimal point could cause main street to produce more output, jobs, efficiency and real
living standard gains than would be the case under market determined financial asset prices was
even more ludicrous.
Self-evidently, the only thing Keynesian central bankers have accomplished has been to fuel
egregious speculations in the canyons of Wall Street; drain main street businesses of real
productive investment; and leave businesses and households living hand-to-mouth and therefore
vulnerable to even short-run interruptions of cash flow.
So we will say it again: Hand-to-mouth economics is not the natural modality on the free
market; it is a malignant product of bad money and the debt-fueled speculative manias that are
the consequence of Keynesian central banking.
Left to their own devices on the free market, households save and provide for rainy days,
regardless of income level or social status.
Likewise, in a world not poisoned by cheap debt and falsified costs of capital, businesses
nurture their balance sheets and provide for cash flow interruptions either by buying insurance
or setting aside liquid reserves and equity capital based shock absorbers.
That's the real message of this – the second great financial heart attack of the last
decade. But rather than allowing the rot to be purged, the central bankers are now out pouring
kerosene on the fires.
That is, insisting upon even greater central bank intrusion in the financial markets and
even more egregious falsification of the prices of money, debt and every manner of risk assets.
In effect, they are advocating the complete euthanasia of market prices in the financial system
in favor of their own administered price folly.
At some point the very chutzpah of it gets downright maddening. We are referring to this
morning's missive in the FT from the Boobsie Twins, Ben Bernanke, and Janet Yellen, who were
major architects of the disaster now underway.
Yet they now want the Fed to have expanded powers to buy corporate debt and who knows what
else:
The Fed could ask Congress for the authority to buy limited amounts of investment-grade
corporate debt . Most central banks already have this power, and the European Central Bank
and the Bank of England regularly use it. The Fed's intervention could help restart that part
of the corporate debt market, which is under significant stress. Such a programme would have
to be carefully calibrated to minimise the credit risk taken by the Fed while still providing
needed liquidity to an essential market.
The bolded part is a risible lie. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the corporate debt
market that even a modicum of honest interest rates could not handle.
That's evident from the price chart of the largest corporate bond ETF shown below. It is
trading no lower than in previous risk-off periods including November-December 2018, January
2016, late 2013 and during the US debt ceiling crisis of August 2011.
Yes, it has plunged from the absurd levels reached during the stock markets blow-off top a
few weeks ago.
But so what? At the February extreme, the implied yield on corporate debt was hardly 2.6% ,
and even after the price plunge of recent days the implied yield is just 3.7% .
So what in the world are the Boobsie Twins talking about? Do they really think we are stupid
enough to believe that a 3.7% investment grade yield is an end of the world crisis that
requires the Fed to put its Big Fat Thumb on this sector of the rates market, too, after it has
already reduced sovereign debt to yield-free status?
Indeed, when you look at the real corporate debt yield after inflation it is downright
minuscule at 1.35% . So these Keynesian morons want the Fed to buy massive amounts of
investment grade corporate debt with fiat credits snatched from thin air because they think,
apparently, that the US economy will collapse at a real yield to just 1.35% after the current
running level of inflation.
So what we have here is a far more insidious reality. Namely, the reaction function of
Keynesian central bankers past and present has degenerated into an Atlas Syndrome.
These cats think they have the entire $85 trillion world economy on their shoulders and that
any time there is an abrupt re-pricing of the hideous financial bubbles they have inflated,
they propose to throw financial sanity to the winds lest the whole financial system and economy
splatter against the wall.
It won't, of course, because re-pricing of financial assets back to quasi-sane levels is
actually what is desperately needed to stop the violent boom and bust cycles that have been
gaining momentum under their tutelage for three decades now.
Stated differently, if Keynesian central banks fear a 3.7% investment grade bond yield, what
they actually fear is the price mechanism itself.
That's the heart of the matter: All of the emergency facilities and new legislative
authority proposals emanating from the central bankers and their Wall Street acolytes and
shills are designed to eviscerate and override the price mechanism in the financial
markets.
The very absurdity and danger of that idea, however, is dramatized in spades by the
juxtaposition of what happened yesterday. Presumably, the Boobsie Twins were emailing their
draft FT op ed back and forth during market daylight hours.
Alas, the corporate bond market was so badly "broken" as they penned up their SOS proposal
that, well, the largest amount of corporate debt deals of the year was brought to market!
That's right. About $28 billion of new deals were priced yesterday, of which $10 billion
were was 20+ years.
Duh. If that's "broken", we truly do not understand what financial planet these Keynesian
central bankers actually inhabit.
On the other hand, we know full well where drastic and sustained repression of bond yields
have already led.
To wit, to a massive scramble for yield among money managers, which in turn has fueled the
outbreak of epic-scale financial engineering in the C-suites. That's because they could sell
ultra-cheap debt for any cockamamie purpose that pleased Wall Street, including idiotic
empire-building through M&A and the depletion of corporate cash reserves and debt capacity
in order to fund massive stock buybacks and other balance sheet impairments.
Indeed, from the point of view of the central banker Atlas Syndrome, financial price
repression is the gift that keeps on giving. Having dissipated their balance sheet liquidity on
financial engineering, corporations now allegedly are facing a liquidity squeeze owing to the
COVID-19 supply-side shocks.
So without missing a beat, the Fed was out with a resurrection of the emergency commercial
paper funding facility that was used during the 2008 crisis to rescue con men like General
Electric's Jeff Immelt, who had loaded his $600 billion balance sheet with upwards of $200
million of cheap commercial paper.
As explained below, that particular facility ended up so malodorous even in the eyes of the
fools who populate Capitol Hill that they forbade the Fed from using it in the future without
the permission of the Secretary of the Treasury.
Little did they anticipate, of course, that during the next financial meltdown the office
would be occupied by the greatest flunky to ever hold the post, and that his real job as the
Donald's campaign finance chairman would be to tap the public till for whatever it would take
to insure his re-election.
So now that Secy Mnuchin has green-flagged this abomination, just recall briefly what
happened last time around.
Back then the alleged titan of corporate America didn't cotton to the idea of paying 5% or
7% or even 10% to rollover his short-term funding, least the hit to earnings would have
monkey-hammered his 2008 bonus and the value of his massive stock options.
So Immelt went running to his Goldman Sachs benefactor, Hank Paulson, who soon persuaded
Bernanke to open up a window at the Fed under its emergency section 13-3 authority.
That action guaranteed virtually unlimited commercial paper funding at the Fed window's
ultra-cheap rates so as not to disturb the year end bonuses of Immelt or hundreds of other CEOs
who had put their companies in harm's way be over-reliance on cheap short-term funding.
As it happened, the commercial paper bailout didn't help GE anyway, as perhaps indicated by
the shrinkage of its market cap from $500 billion at the peak to $55 billion a present.
But more importantly, there was absolutely no shortage of cash available to GE when Immelt
pulled his crony capitalist raid 12 years ago. What it needed to do was fill the approximate
$30 billion hole in its balance sheet by raising long-term debt, preferred stock or even common
stock.
Yet, the mere statement of the obvious underscores the entire scam behind the Fed's
intrusions into the money and capital markets with these so-called emergency facilities. To
wit, they have nothing to do with insuring the companies have the cash to meet their payrolls
or pay other bills as is so mendaciously claimed by Wall Street and the Eccles Building.
No, it's about keeping the cost of capital ultra low and minimizing the hit to earnings that
might result from tapping higher cost capital markets, which are still wide-open at a higher
yield per yesterday's massive pricing of new corporate debt issues.
In more unvarnished terms, the only real function of this massive new commercial paper
facility, which the Fed has stood up practically overnight, is protection of corporate
earnings, CEO bonuses and stock options and the remaining winnings of Wall Street gamblers.
The chart below highlights the massive lie behind this new facility. The ostensible reason
was that commercial paper yields spiked in the last few days from practically nothing to hardly
much more.
In the case of AA rated three-month nonfinancial commercial paper, the yield rose from 0.86%
on March 10 to 1.80% Friday afternoon.
But so f*cking what!
Back on February 27 when the stock market was just off its all-time highs, and when Powell
was claiming the US economy was in a "good place "and the Donald was ballyhooing the Greatest
Economy Ever the yield on this prime 90 day paper was actually higher at 1.56% !
Think about that one. In less than three weeks the Fed has panicked into resurrecting the
Jeff Immelt Memorial Scam with commercial paper rates so low as to make a mockery of the notion
of a shock or a malfunction in the plumbing.
[ZH: But it's the spread that counts.]
Still, the dutiful shills of the Wall Street Journal cut and pasted the Fed's press release
to this effect:
To ease escalating strains in credit markets. Turmoil escalated in commercial paper in
recent days, sending the cost of borrowing for companies sharply higher , in some cases above
the cost of selling 30-year bonds. Investors including money-market funds have sold
commercial paper, saddling dealers such as JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group
Inc. with more inventory at a time when they could least accommodate it .
Oh, pulease!
Here is the 20 year history of the AA rated three month nonfinancial commercial paper yield.
Self-evidently, a 1.34% interest rate is not going to break the American economy, nor would
2.00% or 4.00% or even 6.00%.
Indeed, if the market were allowed to clear at those levels the only "shock" which would
trouble Wall Street would be the plunging stock prices which might result from companies having
to pay a market rate of interest or issue dilutive amounts of common stock or long-term
debt.
"... Today's oncoming economic meltdown can only be prevented if the lessons of 1933 are taken seriously. It is time for a 21st Century Pecora Commission. ..."
Today's oncoming economic meltdown can only be prevented if the lessons of 1933 are taken
seriously. It is time for a 21st Century Pecora Commission.
Will we be lucky enough to have
another Ferdinand Pecora, another Smedley Butler, another FDR? Will the American Sheeple wake
up to demand justice from the powerful swamp dwellers?
"... "A global recession -- perhaps of record dimensions -- is a near certainty," he said. Guterres cited a report by the International Labor Organization that said workers around the world could lose $3.4 trillion in income by the end of this year. ..."
"... I have always looked at unemployment as a measure of recession. I hardly pay attention to GDP. Two charts I follow to know how the US economy is doing are related to new unemployment claims and to continuing unemployment claims. Based on the trend in the continuing unemployment claims, sometime between Thanksgiving and Christmas the started trending up and continued up to today. I've been assuming the US economy was in trouble starting at the end of last year ..."
"... As a casual observer of the economy, I though a recession was going to happen . The only question I had was when. The virus accelerated things. ..."
"... We were living on a phony boom facilitated by cheap credit. People and governments borrowed more than they would because of low interest rates. At 78 years old, I knew that it had to end. It was only a matter of time. ..."
"A global recession -- perhaps of record dimensions -- is a near certainty," he said.
Guterres cited a report by the International Labor Organization that said workers around the
world could lose $3.4 trillion in income by the end of this year.
So far, as of March 19, there have been more than 219,000 coronavirus infections and an
estimated 8,900 deaths.
Guterres said he would participate in an emergency
summit the following week, by teleconferencing, with the leaders of the Group of 20, major
economic powers, who intend to respond to the pandemic. He appealed to
them to have "a particular concern with African countries" and other countries in the
developing world. Saudi Arabia called the meeting.
A prime minister of Portugal from 1995 to 2002 and chief of the UN refugee agency from 2005
to 2015, Guterres said governments and central banks have to guarantee there is liquidity in
the financial system. Banks, he said, have to "support their customers" but "apply that same
logic to the most vulnerable countries" by alleviating their debt.
I have always looked at unemployment as a measure of recession. I hardly pay attention to
GDP. Two charts I follow to know how the US economy is doing are related to new unemployment
claims and to continuing unemployment claims. Based on the trend in the continuing
unemployment claims, sometime between Thanksgiving and Christmas the started trending up and
continued up to today. I've been assuming the US economy was in trouble starting at the end
of last year
If all the other states are as overwhelmed and behind in processing unemployment
applications as Washington State is where I live, the current spike in new applications is
likely VERY understated.
As a casual observer of the economy, I though a recession was going to happen . The only
question I had was when. The virus accelerated things.
We were living on a phony boom
facilitated by cheap credit. People and governments borrowed more than they would because of
low interest rates. At 78 years old, I knew that it had to end. It was only a matter of
time.
You only have to look around and see all of the expensive things people were spending
their borrowed money on to realize it had to end. All kind of consumer good including big
very expensive cars.
Cell phons costing over $1000 and expensive plans. I could go on and on
about excess unnecessary spending. All fueled by cheap money. It had to sometime end and that
time is now. I remember when an interest rate on anew car was considered good if it was 10%
or less. When I financed my home in 1974 the rate was 7.5%. You just can't create money out
of thin air and expect it to continue forever. There is always a time reckoning.
Yeah, all that is excessive ridiculous unnecessary spending, which is why I keep a $60
cell phone, but the real culprit eating young people out of their homes is mortgages, loans,
and insurance. In my city a 1 bedroom cheap apartment is $1000 and you can't rent a room for
under $600. Medical ins is $300 & car insurance is $150 on the cheap end. And it's the
5th in worst paid last time I checked. All that is fueled by excessive lending created by
mortgage backed securities and the ending of glass steagall which let the investment banks
back into the lending business. And the student loan mess also caused by excessive lending
because the govt eats the losses. And excessive lending cash available leads to rising
college prices.
All of it brought to citizens by the CORPORATIONS lobbying/buying your Congress
person.
Yeah, a recession would be a good outcome. I think we may have a depression with massive
unemployment. Not everyone can work from home and a lot of businesses are going to go under
and typically those who cannot work from home will be hurt the most.
It has been a bit galling seeing all of the pieces about working from home in the
mainstream press when much of the American working class doesn't have that option. As usual,
the top 10-20% might be able to weather the storm but the working class will get hit hard and
few people within our elite will care since they will be fine.
I will be bold and say that next month the global economy will begin a depression. In the
U.S. the unemployment rate will be 15%+. As the U.S. slows its trade the world will begin to
run short of USD causing the dollar to rise and emerging markets that borrowed in dollars
will be unable to repay their debts.
I have seen estimates that the fed will need to create 15 trillion to plug the upcoming
dollar shortage. In the meantime emerging markets will slow economic activity resulting in
shortages in the global supply chains.
So in the U.S. people won't have jobs causing them to burn through their savings (if they
have any) and those that have dollars will began to see a shortage of goods because the
global supply chain will be stressed.
In the near term the U.S. will have no choice but to implement a New Deal 2.0 to put money
into people's hands and help people survive. Longer term the buzzword will be regionalization
as the U.S. and the world attempts to restart their economies by bringing their supply chains
closer to home.
One caveat, if the depression gets too severe the population may push back and decide to
ring fence people who are at the most risk of covid-19 and restart the economy regardless of
the medical system.
I think that the US will also have to insource production of many things. It is all well
and good to depend upon an agile global supply chain but when all those chains go through
China it starts to look like a terrible idea. If Trump wanted to win he would push for that
not his damn wall.
"... There is no sign of sudden liquidation from popular exchange-traded funds that buy high yield debt, despite steep price declines ..."
"... The stock market's 15% fall from its February peak is painful, but not panicky. The coronavirus probably will cause a mild contraction of US economic activity during the second and third quarters, as travel and hospitality businesses shrink, consumers avoid shopping malls, and Americans, in general, save rather than spend as a precaution. ..."
"... Collapsing oil prices are a net negative for the economy, because a large part of the energy sector will suspend operations and cancel orders for capital equipment. ..."
Financial panics occur when investors sell what they can, not what they want to. And that happens when they can't
finance their positions. Credit remains freely available for sound borrowers, and the rise in the cost of credit has
been orderly – except for energy companies below investment grade.
There is no sign of sudden liquidation from popular exchange-traded funds that buy high yield debt, despite steep
price declines. Equity multiples shrank and probably will shrink further as the market prices in a mild recession
during 2020. But that's a far cry from 2008, when major banks levered $2 trillion worth of phony AAA-rated securities
sixty-to-one.
The stock market's 15% fall from its February peak is painful, but not panicky. The coronavirus probably will
cause a mild contraction of US economic activity during the second and third quarters, as travel and hospitality
businesses shrink, consumers avoid shopping malls, and Americans, in general, save rather than spend as a precaution.
Consumer spending was the only significant source of US growth during 2019, as investment and manufacturing shrank
in response to the incipient trade war. Strong economic data for the first two months of 2020, including an
exceptionally large increase in February employment, indicated that the US economy was improving after the conclusion
of a "Phase One" trade deal with China – before the coronavirus problem emerged.
Collapsing oil prices are a net negative for the economy, because a large part of the energy sector will suspend
operations and cancel orders for capital equipment. But they also put more money into consumers' pockets, so the
overall impact will be limited.
As the chart shows, the cost of high-yield credit has risen sharply, but it remains
within a longstanding historical range – except for energy, which blew up as the oil price collapsed. Companies with
less-than-investment-grade ratings can still borrow at an all-in cost of 4% to 6%, extremely low by historical
standards, given the extremely low overall level of interest rates.
The spread between LIBOR and investment-grade bonds jumped from around 0.4% to 1.2% during the past few days,
which means that the total cost of borrowing for investment-grade companies is below 2% (with the 10-year yield at
only 0.5%). That is still a record low for corporate borrowing costs. Investment-grade bonds are trading in a liquid
market, and their prices track the Treasury market.
The stock market priced in a perfect world, and now it is pricing a less-than-perfect world. In late February the
trailing price-earnings ratio of the S&P 500 Index was above 22. It now stands at around 19. The long-term average is
16.62. Given that the dividend yield of the S&P 500 of 1.8% now exceeds the yield on the 10-Year Treasury note by 1%,
and is roughly equal to the yield on 10-year investment-grade corporate bonds, equities are not particularly rich.
That suggest that once the smoke clears from the coronavirus problem, there will be good reason to buy equities.
There is even better reason to buy Chinese equities with strong businesses (especially in technology) that have
little debt and strong domestic markets.
A great deal can go wrong from here, to be sure. If the prospect of a mild recession increases the chance that
Sen. Bernie Sanders might win the presidency, there will be good reason to panic. But for the time being, the damage
is foreseeable and limited, and markets are pricing it rationally.
"What's complicated is that even if what everything we say about the society of surveillance
is scary and true, the state obtains this obedience in the name of its most undisputed
function, which is to protect the population from creeping death.
That's what plenty of serious studies define as 'biolegitimacy'."
And I would add, today, a biolegitimacy boosted by widespread voluntary servitude.
Neglected in the grocery store-restaurant food chain talk is the monopsy-likestranglehold
of a company like restaurant supplier Sysco and the mega-grocers.
Farmers who are locked into contracts with Sysco are locked out of contracts with Kroger
or Walmart or Trader Joe or Whole Foods.
And since much of the country has no independent wholesale grocery distribution (cuz there
are no independent grocery stores), farmers have few places to sell their formerly
restaurant-bound Sysco foodstuffs.
If I understand this point right, people might go hungry, or if things become really dire
face starvation, because food that is available will not be delivered, sold, and eaten
because of a now pointless contract?
In this interconnected world, and I assume most farmers have some intertubes access, where
is the app that lets people develop and operate their own informal networks for food
distribution? CSAs already do something like this in a very oval scale, I understand. What
are the impediments to making those connections?
Cargo capacity of a Dodge Caravan is over a ton. Cargo capacity of my Ford Ranger truck is
over a ton and a half. Not the same as the semi and box trailer carrying 20 tons of lettuce
from the Central Valley to Chicago or New York, but then there is likely foodstuffs within
range of even my Ranger. Just takes organizing, and masks and gloves, and a willingness to
tell Sysco to F off. Sysco has really sharp lawyers drafting their adhesion contracts, but
there must be force majeure or other clauses in them that would let people fearful of
retribution out of their corporation-supplied straitjackets.
That's why restaurants are in fact essential businesses: easier to keep the
commercial/institutional supply chain running as is than redirect it to household products
and packaging. In that light, a relatively generous coronavirus benefit makes sense as a
hands-off method to indirectly stimulate that distribution channel and take some pressure off
of supermarkets and that.
Citizen science, anecdata, call it what you will: My usual Mexican spot got humpin' busy a
couple of weeks ago, with typical 15 minute wait times at early dinner one day, closure "for
an hour or so" to catch up a 2hr wait time two days later. Today, early dinner is at 25-30
minutes. My usual Thai spot, which was usually nicely busy, has been closed until further
notice.
Food systems have been under the control of the oligarchs for a long time. Think Heinz and
go from there. The centralization of food is under examination. I know of a former Coca-Cola
marketing exec (think CIA) in Saco who, when not reading "The Red Book" on hs coffee table,
was doing research about food chains in Southern Maine. Anything that isn't homegrown up
there or fished out fo the sea has to come over that bridge in Portsmouth.
I wonder how maintenance and repair or replacement of those roads and bridges, and
dredging and marking of river and ocean channels, will be arranged MMT is only going to work
as long as there is a national "real economy" generating the real wealth that underwrites the
"full faith and credit "
"... It is logical that the failings of the left/right pardigm would be blamed on the voter wherever possible. A great philosopher once wrote: "Don't vote, it just encourages them". ..."
The successes of the Corona virus for the Banking, Corporate military industrial complex: The
lockdown causes the measured stressing and indebting, to the banks (which we are bailing out)
of thousands of small and medium size companies, bringing them to the verge of bankruptcy and
making them ripe for takeover at fire sale prices.
The transfer of trillions in loans and gifts to US corporations, (when they don't need the
money), to buy up the medium size companies that undermine their monopolies and cartels, this
will further entrench the power of the few oligarchs that own the USA. Amazon is allowed to
function and is massively extending it's market share, as it is in effect the only company
allowed by law to provide almost all 'none essential' goods.
The Virus is useful in creating a 'flight to safety' to the dollar, at a time when it's value
is being destroyed by a massive new QE money printing program, which was started to shore-up
the banking liquidity crisis (bank run) which began only weeks before the arrival of the
virus in the American banking system. The Fed is now allowed to provide infinite cash to
shore up the bank.
The military and their surveillance arms, get an extension of surveillance, unrestricted
tracking in cooperation with US tech, and in the case of the UK the removal of warranted
surveillance allowing MI5 and others to track and listen as they wish. For the military this
is also a full martial law dry run, making it a regular tool of the Empire.
Doctortrinate ,
to add Cold wisdom waiting on superfluous folly (w.s) – was never more important time
to keep it warm and on the go . .
Charlotte Russe.
" Groups with shared interests need to organize and mobilize.
agreed, enough with this blinkered cooperation – shared interest that can seek to
guarantee a future with Choice – "build it, and they will come"
jay ,
It is logical that the failings of the left/right pardigm would be blamed on the voter
wherever possible.
A great philosopher once wrote:
"Don't vote, it just encourages them".
"if voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal" Emma Goldman.
Haven't voted for nearly 21 years Jay.
I know this isn't a very popular thought here, but you can cast your vote for either Punch or
Judy, however, the system remains intact the very next day, and next year, and the following
year
and people are still basically wage slaves, large numbers are still homeless, grotesque
inequality everywhere, Trillions spent on weapons and the environment is still being raped
and pillaged by Corporations.
And then you can vote again at the next election. And then the one after that, and on and on.
And the system stays the same.
DunGroanin ,
I mean of their world not just Japan.
Jen ,
You might like to know that current Japanese PM Shinzo Abe is the grandson of a World War II
war criminal ( Nobusuke Kishi ) who after the war helped
to set up an electoral
system that guaranteed the domination of Japanese politics by the conservative Liberal
Democratic Party for nearly 40 years (1955 – 1993) and prevented left-wing parties from
achieving government either in their own right or as significant members of political
coalitions.
The LDP as the ruling party of Japan for nearly 40 years forged connections between
government, government bureaucracy and the country's business sector. If anything, the people
who founded the corporations that make up Japan's business sector are more of a motley and
diverse crew with histories of having been former samurai or landlord families that fell on
hard times and became impoverished, and then later worked their way back up to their current
level of power and influence.
Linh Dinh: "Diogenes, "I am a citizen of the world.""
Nobody knows exactly what he meant by this. He had previously been stripped of his
citizenship in Sinope, so it may have simply been a way a expressing that fact. Also, it's
worth pointing out that he was a contemporary of Alexander the Great, whose conquests up to
323 BC, the year both men died, included all of the known world. According to some, Alexander
once went to meet Diogenes, who was sunning himself on a nearby hill. Diogenes, unimpressed
with the conqueror, asked him to step out of the way, as he was blocking the sun. Departing,
Alexander is reputed to have said that if he hadn't been Alexander, then he would have liked
to have been Diogenes.
Linh Dinh: "The coronavirus crisis is a turning point in this escalating war
between globalists and us dumb hicks."
Not really a turning point, certainly not in the sense of a reversal. And there's no war,
because for a war you need two sides. The dumb hicks may rail against shadowy "globalists",
but are too stupid to realize that they themselves are globalists. The hicks want their cheap
computers, and the thousands of other things manufactured by slave labor in China, and the
globalists are happy to provide them. Yet the same dopes chanting USA! USA! (the forces of
nationalism, at least in America) don't understand that empire has downsides as well as
advantages. The coronavirus pandemic is an example of the cost of empire, the white man's
technological empire that has come to cover the whole world. In that way, it resembles
previous plagues, such as the plague of Justinian in the sixth century, and the Black Death
in the fourteenth, both of which are also thought to have originated in China and infected
the white world by means of global commerce.
Linh Dinh: "It will be a world of ubiquitous surveillance, universal snitching,
curtailed movement, suffocated speech and enforced, increasingly absurd dogmatism, with a
lockdown to be sprung on us at any time, since we already know the drill."
The hicks themselves will beg for it, because they're always for more law and order.
They're born badgelickers and just can't get enough of it. You can hear their excuses
already. "If it saves only one life it will be worth it." "If it prevents another 9/11, it
will be worth it." "If it allows countries and races to coexist in harmony, it will be worth
it." "I'm not doing anything wrong, so I have nothing to hide. Surveill me all you like."
Besides, what remains of privacy anyway? It's been abolished. Technological innovation has
made universal surveillance a fait accompli . The hicks themselves have voluntarily
installed listening devices and spy cameras in their own homes. Every street corner and
shopping mall is equipped with cameras. Drones and satellites oversee everything. Government
supercomputers collate the data; identify threats.
Linh Dinh: "To avoid this fate, we must assert our regional autonomy and resist
each diktat. This will take much clarity, composure and courage. We shouldn't worry about
what foreign hicks are up to, but simply band with neighboring hicks, to defend our
precious hickdom. We must liberate our home turf first."
People will never voluntarily abandon high technology and the empire to which it has given
rise. To do so would cost billions of lives and cause extreme hardship for any survivors. The
technological trap has snapped shut.
The coronavirus pandemic is an example of the cost of empire, the white man's
technological empire that has come to cover the whole world. In that way, it resembles
previous plagues, such as the plague of Justinian in the sixth century, and the Black Death
in the fourteenth, both of which are also thought to have originated in China and infected
the white world by means of global commerce.
We could push that logic a bit father and arrive at: occasional viral outbreaks are the
cost of civilization to begin with, so "lockdowns" are madness. No evolution without
biological exploitation.
Totally agree with your remarks. As rousing as this piece is, it isn't the reality. We
have existed on this arc since fire.
I was in Shenzhen China when the epidemic officially started.
I watched closely when Xi Jinping appeared publicly and assumed leadership
(ie put HIS neck on the line) for the outbreak.
Also reassuring was his declaration of open and factual reporting.
He periodically reappears on the hundreds of state controlled TV channels
calling on delegated officials to meet required standards. Fail in this and you are gone
Most of the official TV/Net information was mostly optimistic, and frequently
nationalistic.
By way of contrast, I was able to access via cellphone the banned western
The Economist, The Guardian. It was like two different worlds.
The western reporting was almost all negative,, ,disparaging, damming with faint praise
or making unsourced statements about draconian authoritarianism in China..
Worse still, Trump had slashed the CDC budget, appointed evangelical Mike Pence as point
man
for the battle against CoVid in the US and indicated at that point
"The markets will determine the cost of CV testing"
So it is worth following the US closely for details of how
Capitalism deals with a communal disease called COVID
WET MARKETS
I did a grid survey of our 50 Block hi-rise by walking around the apartments .
All had shops at the ground level - around 20 per building, and over a third of them were
eateries.
They require a hi-turnover and low-markup for survival . They were in part
supplied by open air markets, where meat is laid out on unrefrigerated wooden blocks
to be cut on demand throughout the day. Yes, the fish are fresh - from swimming
( in distinctly unhygienic water ) into plastic bags within 5 minutes.
Chopping block just given a quick wipe.. Hmm.. I thought this is pandemic country...
This March, as COVID-19's capacity to overwhelm the American
healthcare system was becoming obvious, experts marveled at the scenario unfolding before their
eyes. "We have Third World countries who are better equipped than we are now in Seattle,"
noted one healthcare professional, her words echoed just a few days later by a shocked
doctor in New York who described
"a third-world country type of scenario." Donald Trump could similarly only grasp what was
happening through the same comparison. "I have seen things that I've never seen before," he
said
. "I mean I've seen them, but I've seen them on television and faraway lands, never in my
country."
At the same time, regardless of the fact that "Third World" terminology is outdated and
confusing, Trump's inept handling of the pandemic has itself elicited more than one "banana republic"
analogy, reflecting already well-worn, bipartisan comparisons of Trump to a "
third world dictator " (never mind that dictators and authoritarians have never been
confined solely to lower income countries).
And yet, while such comparisons provoke predictably nativist outrage from the right, what is
absent from any of
these responses to the situation is a sense of reflection or humility about the "Third
World" comparison itself. The doctor in New York who finds himself caught in a "third world"
scenario and the political commentators outraged when Trump behaves "like a third world
dictator" uniformly express themselves in terms of incredulous wonderment. One never hears the
potential second half of this comparison: "I am now experiencing what it is like to live in a
country that resembles the kind of nation upon whom the United States regularly imposes broken
economies and corrupt leaders."
Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or
lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and
political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the
"Third World."
In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70 nations
–
more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases,
listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military
personnel working in approximately 160 countries. This is a globe-spanning military and
security apparatus organized into regional commands
that resemble the "proconsuls of the Roman empire and the governors-general of the
British." In other words, this apparatus is built not for deterrence, but for primacy.
The U.S.'s global primacy emerged from the wreckage of World War II when the United States
stepped into the shoes vacated by European empires. Throughout the Cold War, and in the name of
supporting "free peoples," the sprawling American security apparatus helped ensure that 300
years of imperial resource extraction and wealth distribution – from what was then called
the Third World to the First – remained undisturbed, despite decolonization.
Since then, the United States
has overthrown or attempted to overthrow the governments of approximately 50 countries,
many of which (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and Chile) had elected leaders willing to
nationalize their natural resources and industries. Often these interventions
took the form of covert operations. Less frequently, the United States went to war to
achieve these same ends (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq).
In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more
on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our
nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget
and over half of all
discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the
Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit.
Trump's claim that Obama had
"hollowed out" defense spending was not only grossly untrue, it masked the consistency of the
security budget's metastasizing growth since the Vietnam War, regardless of who sits in the
White House. At $738 billion dollars, Trump's security budget was passed in December with the
overwhelming support of House Democrats.
And yet, from the perspective of public discourse in this country, our globe-spanning,
resource-draining military and security apparatus exists in an entirely parallel universe to
the one most Americans experience on a daily level. Occasionally, we wake up to the idea of
this parallel universe but only when the United States is involved in visible military actions.
The rest of the time, Americans leave thinking about international politics – and the
deaths, for instance, of 2.5 million
Iraqis since 2003 – to the legions of policy analysts and Pentagon employees who
largely accept American military primacy as an "article of faith," as Professor of
International Security and Strategy at the University of Birmingham Patrick Porter has said
.
Foreign policy is routinely the last issue Americans consider when they vote for presidents
even though the president has more discretionary power over foreign policy than any other area
of American politics. Thus, despite its size, impact, and expense, the world's military hegemon
exists somewhere on the periphery of most Americans' self-understanding, as though, like the
sun, it can't be looked upon directly for fear of blindness.
Why is our avoidance of the U.S.'s weighty impact on the world a problem in the midst of the
coronavirus pandemic? Most obviously, the fact that our massive security budget has gone so
long without being widely questioned means that one of the soundest courses of action for the
U.S. during this crisis remains resolutely out of sight.
The shock of discovering that our healthcare system is so quickly overwhelmed should
automatically trigger broader conversations about spending priorities that entail deep and
sustained cuts in an engorged security budget whose sole purpose is the maintenance of primacy.
And yet, not only has this not happened, $10.5 billion of the coronavirus aid package has been
earmarked for the Pentagon, with $2.4 billion of that
channeled to the "defense industrial base." Of the $500 billion aimed at corporate America,
$17.5 billion is
set aside "for businesses critical to maintaining national security" such as aerospace.
To make matters worse, our blindness to this bloated security complex makes it frighteningly
easy for champions of American primacy to sound the alarm when they even suspect a dip in
funding might be forthcoming. Indeed, before most of us had even glanced at the details of the
coronavirus bill, foreign policy hawks were already
issuing dark prediction s about the impact of still-imaginary cuts in the security budget
on the U.S.'s "ability to strike any target on the planet in response to hostile actions by any
actor" – as if that ability already did not exist many times over.
On a more existential level, a country that is collectively engaged in unseeing its own
global power cannot help but fail to make connections between that power and domestic politics,
particularly when a little of the outside world seeps in. For instance, because most Americans
are unaware of their government's sponsorship of fundamentalist Islamic groups in the Middle
East throughout the Cold War, 9/11 can only ever appear to have come from nowhere, or because
Muslims hate our way of life.
This "how did we get here?" attitude replicates itself at every level of political life
making it profoundly difficult for Americans to see the impact of their nation on the rest of
the world, and the blowback from that impact on the United States itself. Right now, the
outsized influence of American foreign policy is already encouraging the spread of coronavirus
itself as U.S. imposed sanctions on Iran severely hamper that
country's ability to respond to the virus at home and virtually
guarantee its spread throughout the region.
Closer to home, our shock at the healthcare system's inept response to the pandemic masks
the relationship between the U.S.'s imposition
of free-market totalitarianism on countries throughout the
Global South and the impact of free-market totalitarianism on our own welfare state .
Likewise, it is more than karmic comeuppance that the President of the United States now
resembles the self-serving authoritarians the U.S. forced on so many formerly colonized
nations. The modes of militarized policing American security experts exported to those
authoritarian regimes also contributed , on a
policy level, to both the rise of militarized policing in American cities and the rise of mass
incarceration in the 1980s and 90s. Both of these phenomena played a significant role in
radicalizing Trump's white nationalist base and decreasing their tolerance for democracy.
Most importantly, because the U.S. is blind to its power abroad, it cannot help but turn
that blindness on itself. This means that even during a pandemic when America's exceptionalism
– our lack of national healthcare – has profoundly negative consequences on the
population, the idea of looking to the rest of the world for solutions remains unthinkable.
Senator Bernie Sanders' reasonable suggestion that the U.S., like Denmark, should
nationalize its healthcare system is dismissed as the fanciful pipe dream of an aging socialist
rather than an obvious solution to a human problem embraced by nearly every other nation in the
world. The Seattle healthcare professional who expressed shock that even "Third World
countries" are "better equipped" than we are to confront COVID-19 betrays a stunning ignorance
of the diversity of healthcare systems within developing countries. Cuba, for instance,
has responded
to this crisis with an efficiency and humanity that puts the U.S. to shame.
Indeed, the U.S. is only beginning to feel the full impact of COVID-19's explosive
confrontation with our exceptionalism: if the unemployment rate really does reach 32 percent,
as has been predicted,
millions of people will not only lose their jobs but their health insurance as well. In the
middle of a pandemic.
Over 150 years apart, political commentators Edmund Burke and Aimé Césaire
referred to this blindness as the byproduct of imperialism. Both used the exact same language
to describe it; as a "gangrene" that "poisons" the colonizing body politic. From their
different historical perspectives, Burke and Césaire observed how colonization
boomerangs back on colonial society itself, causing irreversible damage to nations that
consider themselves humane and enlightened, drawing them deeper into denial and
self-delusion.
Perhaps right now there is a chance that COVID-19 – an actual, not metaphorical
contagion – can have the opposite effect on the U.S. by opening our eyes to the things
that go unseen. Perhaps the shock of recognizing the U.S. itself is less developed than our
imagined "Third World" might prompt Americans to tear our eyes away from ourselves and look
toward the actual world outside our borders for examples of the kinds of political, economic,
and social solidarity necessary to fight the spread of Coronavirus. And perhaps moving beyond
shock and incredulity to genuine recognition and empathy with people whose economies and
democracies have been decimated by American hegemony might begin the process of reckoning with
the costs of that hegemony, not just in "faraway lands" but at home. In our country.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump on Thursday is expected to lay out a strategy
to phase out the month-long economic shutdown aimed at stanching the coronavirus pandemic,
despite concerns from health experts, state governors and business leaders about the
dangers of lifting restrictions without widespread testing in place.[.]
The state restrictions have strangled the U.S. economy to an extent not seen since the
Great Depression nearly a century ago. Another 5.2 million more Americans sought
unemployment benefits last week, the Labor Department reported on Thursday, lifting total
filings for claims over the past month to more than 20million.
The Republican president, who has staked his re-election in November on the strength of
the U.S. economy, is scheduled to hold a call with the nation's governors at 3 p.m. (1900
GMT) and said he would announce his plan at a news conference later on Thursday. The White
House coronavirus task force is scheduled to hold its daily public briefing at 5 p.m.
[.]
"The worst thing that could happen would be for us to throw everyone back into the economic
cycle and have to go back to having 97% of our people being told to stay home again,"
Trump's former White House chief economic adviser Gary Cohn told CBS News on
Thursday.[.]
Trump v. Biden. That's the choice and we are doomed.
Posted on April
16, 2020 by Yves Smith Yves here. It would be
better if I were wrong, but I have doubts about this scenario. It appears to assume some
orderliness in the responses to the coronavirus, both in terms of businesses and governments
cooperating. I don't see this as possible in the US. Not only is there an absence of public
spiritedness, government is not trusted. And that's not an uninformed view. The US in incapable
of mounting a New Deal or war mobilization level response. It lacks the operational capacity.
And too many people in power are in it for themselves. Things may be better in a lot of the
rest of the world in terms of social and political cohesiveness, but few countries are as close
to being an autarky as the US (Russia is probably the best candidate), and so the breakdown of
global supply chains is likely to hit them even harder.
Similarly, if concerns that getting Covid-19 confers only short-term immunity (say a year or
less), then investing in tracking who has contacted it for the purpose of deeming individuals
to be safe from a travel/visa standpoint is a waste of effort.
I suspect Grasmsci is the best seer:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be
born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.
By Marshall Auerback, a market analyst and commentator and Jan Ritch-Frel, the executive
director of the Independent
Media Institute . Produced by Economy for All , a project
of the Independent Media Institute
The coronavirus pandemic has upended the global economic system, and just as importantly,
cast out 40 years of neoliberal orthodoxy that dominated the industrialized world.
Forget about the " new
world order ." Offshoring and global supply chains are out; regional and local production
is in. Market fundamentalism is passé; regulation is the norm. Public health is now more
valuable than just-in-time supply systems. Stockpiling and industrial capacity suddenly make
more sense, which may have future implications in the recently revived
antitrust debate in the U.S.
Biodata will drive the next phase of social management and surveillance, with near-term
consequences for the way countries handle immigration and customs. Health care and education
will become digitally integrated the way newspapers and television were 10 years ago. Health
care itself will increasingly be seen as a necessary public good, rather than a private right,
until now in the U.S. predicated on age, employment or income levels. Each of these will
produce political tensions within their constituencies and in the society generally as they
adapt to the new normal.
This political sea change doesn't represent a sudden conversion to full-on socialism, but
simply a case of minimizing our future risks of infection by providing full-on universal
coverage. Beyond that, as Professor Michael Sandel has
argued , one has to query the "moral logic" of providing "coronavirus treatment for the
uninsured," while leaving "health coverage in ordinary times to the market" (especially when
our concept of what constitutes "ordinary times" has been upended).
Internationally, there will be many positive and substantial international shifts to address
overdue global public health needs and accords on mitigating climate change. And it is finally
dawning on Western-allied economic planners that the military price tag that made so-called
cheap oil and cheap labor possible is vastly higher than investment in advanced research and
next-generation manufacturing.
This also means that the old North (developed world) versus South (emerging world) division
that long preoccupied scholars and
policymakers in the post–World War II period will become increasingly stark again,
particularly for those emerging economies that have hitherto attracted investment largely on
the grounds of being repositories of low-cost labor. They will now find themselves picking
sides as they seek assistance in an increasingly divided and multipolar world.
The fault lines of the next economic era have already begun to surface, creating friction
with the previous international structure of banking and finance, trade and industry. There is
a force beyond elites and critical industries driving this: The proletariat has literally
become the "precariat."
In the U.S. and Europe, the staggering number of service economy workers are going to be
quickly politicized by the shortfalls: People have seen a collapse in income, and big failures
in education, and health care. Union-busting, pension fleecing, and austerity budgets and new
technologies that concentrate wealth away from labor have created a circumstance where
ownership and profit models must be revisited to sustain stability. The needs are too acute to
be distracted by the lies of Trump, or the inadequate responses in other parts of the
industrialized world. The current crisis will likely prompt geopolitical and economic shifts
and dislocations we haven't seen since World War II.
Death of Chimerica, the Rise of New Production Blocs
One of the biggest casualties of the current order is the breakdown of " Chimerica ,"
the decades-old nexus between the U.S. and Chinese economies, along with other leading
countries' partnerships with Chinese manufacturing. While the geopolitics of blame for the
origins of coronavirus continue to shake out, the process that saw a decrease in exports from
China to the U.S. from
$816 billion in 2018 to $757 billion in 2019 will accelerate and intensify over the next
decade.
While a decoupling is unlikely to lead to armed conflict, a Cold War style of competition
could emerge as a new global fault line. Much as the Cold War did not preclude some degree of
collaboration between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, so too today there may still be
areas of cooperation between Washington and Beijing from climate to public health, advanced
research to weapons proliferation.
Nor does this shift necessarily spell the sudden collapse of Chinese power or influence --
it has a colossal and still-growing domestic market and is on the international leaderboard for
a wide range of advanced indicators. But its status as the world's most desirable offshore
manufacturing hub is a thing of the past, along with the economic stability that steady inflows
of foreign capital brought with it. It does show a susceptibility to domestic stress, with the
Hong Kong protests last year providing a hint of what is in store as the party leadership can't
pivot to new realities that include slower economic growth and declining foreign
investment.
As investment flows turn inward back to industrialized countries, there will likely be
corresponding diminution of the global labor arbitrage emanating from the emerging world. In
general, that's a negative for the global South, but potentially a positive factor for workers
elsewhere, whose wages and living standards have stagnated for decades as they lost jobs to
competing overseas low-cost manufacturing centers (the increase in inequality is
principally a product of 40 years of sustained attacks on unions). The jobs won't be the
same, but to be sure, manufacturing incomes exceed those of the service industry.
As each country adopts a " sauve-qui-peut " mentality, businesses and
investors are drawing the necessary conclusions. Coronavirus has been a wake-up call, as
countries trying to import medical goods from existing global supply chains face a
shortage of air and ocean freight options to ship goods back to home markets. Already, the
Japanese government has announced its plans "to spend over $2 billion to help its country's
firms move production out of China," according to the Spectator
Index . The EU leadership is publicly
indicating a policy of subsidy and state investment in companies to prevent Chinese buyouts or
undercutting prices.
Two billion dollars is small potatoes compared to what is likely to be spent by the U.S. and
other countries going forward. And it can't simply be done via research and development tax
credits. The state can and must drive this redomiciling process in other ways: via local content
requirements (LCRs) , tariffs, quotas and/or government procurement local sourcing
requirements. And with a $750-billion-plus budget, the U.S. military will likely play a role
here, as it
ponders disruptions from overseas supply sources .
Of course, if the U.S. does this, other parts of the world -- China, the EU, Japan -- will
likely do the same, which will accelerate the regionalization trends in trade. This may mean
that some U.S. firms will have to operate in foreign markets through local subsidiaries with
local content preferences and local workforces (that is how it worked in the 1920s -- Ford UK
was a mostly local British company, different from the U.S. Ford Motor Company, but with shared
profits).
An examination of U.S. planning for the post-1945 world reveals the emphasis was on free
trade in raw materials mostly, not finished goods. (The U.S. only adopted one-way "free trade"
with its Asian and European allies later as a Cold War measure to accelerate their development
and keep them in the American orbit.)
Domestically within the U.S., as
Dalia Marin writes , the coming declines in interest rates will accelerate "robot adoption"
by 75.7 percent, with concentration "in the sectors that are most exposed to global value
chains. In Germany, that means autos and transport equipment, electronics, and textiles --
industries that import around 12 percent of their inputs from low-wage countries. Globally, the
industries where the most reshoring activity is taking place are chemicals, metal products, and
electrical products and electronics."
As the coronavirus pandemic is illustrating, a viable industrial ecosystem cannot work
effectively if it is dispersed to too many geographic extremities or there are insufficient
redundancies built into the transportation of goods back into the home market (rail, highway,
etc.). Proximity has become a significant competitive advantage for manufacturers, and a
strategic advantage for governments. But the U.S. government must play an expanded role in the
planning process. The U.S. is still a leader in many high-tech areas, but is suffering the
consequences of a generation-long effort to undermine the government's natural role as an
economic planner.
In the form of the regionalized blocs that are being sketched, in the Americas, Mexico is
likely to be one of the leading recipients of American foreign direct investment (FDI). It
already has a
$17 billion medical device industry and is sure to absorb much more capacity from China.
This has
already started to happen as a result of the U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA,
or new NAFTA) . Furthermore, the
Washington Post reports that "[a]s demand soars for medical devices and personal protective
equipment in the fight against the coronavirus, the United States has turned to the phalanx of
factories south of the border that are now the outfitters of many U.S. hospitals." This is in
addition to the
thousands of assembly plants already in place in Mexico since the establishment of NAFTA.
Indeed, if the jobs that had moved to China move to Mexico, Central America, and South America,
this likely addresses many long-standing social tensions in regard to immigration management,
currency imbalances and corresponding black market industries (ironically, it also likely means
the end of Trump's wall, as the industrial ecosystem of the Americas becomes more cohesive and
widespread).
Big Business Is Good Business
But this will also have significant impacts closer to home: Much as Franklin Delano
Roosevelt ultimately prioritized domestic
ramp-ups in wartime production over trust-busting , so too national champions are likely to
feature more prominently today, as domestic scale and balance sheet strength are given
precedence to accommodate the drive to revive employment quickly,
and work collaboratively to halt the spread of the coronavirus . The scale of companies
will not be regarded as a political problem if they can both deliver for consumers and show the
capacity of following political direction for what the public's needs are. Tech companies like
Apple and Google are stepping up to fill the void left by
massive federal government dysfunction . The " break up Big
Tech " voices are nowhere to be heard at the moment.
We still need a more robust form of regulation for these corporate behemoths, but via a
system of regulation that is "function-centric," rather than size-centric. As co-author
Marshall Auerback has written
before , this kind of regulation "restricts the range of corporate activities (e.g.,
structural separation so as to prevent companies like Amazon and Google from owning both the
platform as well as participating as a seller on that platform), or the prices such companies
can charge (as regulators often do for utilities or railways). These considerations would be
'size neutral': they would apply independently of corporate size per se."
Capitalism has always had its plutocrats, but scaling back America's overly financialized
model (by preventing stock buybacks, to cite one example) would represent a useful reform and
prevent a lot of economic waste. Instead of going to enrich executives and shareholders beyond
the dreams of Croesus ,
that measure might help to ensure that the profits of these companies will be directed to the
workers' wages (which also means supporting increased unionization), or plowed back into
investment (e.g., increased robotics).
Biodata, Privacy, and an End to Pandemic Profiteering
And there are fault lines in the business world. The pharmaceutical and medical research
industries face immense pressure from other businesses to end the pandemic so they can get back
to profitability. That means temporarily setting aside profits and pooling intellectual
property to encourage collaborative efforts on the part of biotech and pharmaceutical companies
to find proper treatments for COVID-19, and make them freely available, especially if
governments were to waive antitrust scrutiny in exchange for all of the data Big Pharma
companies collectively hold. As the
Guardian reports , "[t]here is a precedent. Last June, 10 of the world's largest
pharmaceutical companies -- including Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline --
announced they would pool data for an AI-based search for new antibiotics, which are
urgently needed as antibiotic-resistant bacteria have proliferated across the world,
threatening the growth of untreatable disease."
Privacy
advocates are already expressing concerns about a growing and overweening medical
surveillance state. These surveillance concerns lack historical context: From the 19th century
on, serious health problems were met by hardline government policies to reduce them. Policies
ranging from quarantine to vaccine were not always mandatory, but there was an understanding
that personal concessions had to be made to manage a huge population and an advanced society;
the Constitution was not a suicide pact. We can further alleviate those concerns today by
ensuring that the information uncovered does not become a precondition or additional cost of
receiving insurance coverage. In light of coronavirus, cost savings of incorporating biodata
into immigration and customs are a no-brainer for governments, and are certain to cause
friction with individuals who may not want to give blood or saliva to get a visa or work
permit, and agribusiness leaders who know that safety measures cut into profitability. But the
scales have tipped in the other direction.
North Versus South
What about the other countries in the developing world that don't have close geographic
proximity to a home market, or abundant supplies of key commodities required for 21st-century
manufacturing needs, or even a well-developed manufacturing base (in other words, the countries
that have hitherto been large recipients of investment solely on the grounds of cheap labor)?
Many of them have faced immediate pressure with the collapse in global trade, unprecedented
capital flight that is sure to grow as the coronavirus spreads, all the while coping with
COVID-19 with highly inadequate health systems.
In the meantime, the
multi-trillion-dollar market for emerging market debt , both sovereign bonds and commercial
paper, has collapsed. Many of these countries, via their state pension funds and sovereign
wealth funds, have become the ultimate endpoint for many of the newer asset-backed securities
that finally revived years after the 2008 financial crisis. This has become the potential new
stress point in the $52 trillion "
shadow banking " market. The U.S. Federal Reserve has sought to ease the funding stresses
of much of the developing economies by offering central bank swap lines. It has also broadened
prime dealer collateral acceptance rules, and set up commercial paper swap facilities, all of
which have eased short-term funding pressures in these economies that have incurred substantial
dollar liabilities.
As the emerging world central banks then start to lend on those lines to their own banks, it
should start to alleviate the shortage of dollars in the offshore dollar funding markets. We
are starting to see some easing of stresses, notably in
Indonesia -- because it's an exporter of resources more than a cheap labor price
economy.
But whereas in previous emerging markets crises, China was able to buttress these economies
via initiatives such as the " Belt and Road Initiative ,"
Beijing itself is likely to be buffeted by the twin shocks of declining global trade and a
reversal of foreign direct investment, which declined 8.6 percent in the first
two months of this year .
Longer-term, many other countries face comparable challenges to China: Capital controls,
collapsing domestic currencies, and widespread debt defaults are likely to become the norm.
That's already
happened to serial defaulter Argentina again . South Africa has been
downgraded to junk status . Turkey remains vulnerable. The so-called "BRICS" economies --
Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa -- are all sinking like bricks. The problem is
exacerbated by the fact that coronavirus and likely future pandemics will create additional
stresses on developing economies that depend on their labor price advantage in the
international marketplace to survive.
By contrast, countries like South Korea and Taiwan have had a "good crisis." Both have
vibrant manufacturing sectors and created successful multiparty democracies. Foreign investment in South Korea continued to grow in
the first quarter of this year, as it rapidly moved to contain the spread of COVID-19 through
an extensive testing regime (while keeping its economy open). Similarly in Taiwan, by
activating a national emergency response system launched in 2004 (following the SARS virus),
that country has mounted a thoroughly competent coronavirus
intervention of unprecedented effectiveness . The results speak for themselves: as of April
15, in South Korea, a mere 225
deaths , while in Taiwan, an astonishingly low total
of six deaths in a country of 24 million people -- this despite far more exposure to
infected Chinese visitors than Italy, Spain or the U.S.
Of course, the very success of Taiwan's response revives another potential fault line,
namely the tension underlying the "One China" policy. Before COVID-19, it is
noteworthy that the WHO "even refused to publicly report Taiwan's cases of SARS until public
pressure prompted numbers to be published under the label of 'Taiwan, province of China,'"
according to Dr.
Anish Koka . At the very least, Taiwan's divergent approach and success at fighting the
pandemic will bolster its pro-independence factions.
The question of foreign nations upholding Taiwan's sovereignty with regard to China is
increasingly thorny, given Beijing's growing military capacities. This will present an ongoing
diplomatic challenge to Western parties who seek to increase engagement with Taipei without
heightening tensions in the region.
A Recalculation of 'Economic Value'
We have outlined many fault lines likely to be exposed or exacerbated as a consequence of
COVID-19. Happily, there is one fault line likely to be slammed shut: namely, the false
dichotomy that has long existed between economic growth and environmentalism. The Global Assessment from
the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
reports that "land degradation has reduced the productivity of 23 percent of the global land
surface, up to US$577 billion in annual global crops are at risk from pollinator loss and
100-300 million people are at increased risk of floods and hurricanes because of loss of
coastal habitats and protection." Likewise, the study cites the fact that as of 2015, 33
percent of marine fish stocks "were being harvested at unsustainable levels," and notes the
rise of plastic pollution (which "has increased tenfold since 1980 "),
both of which play a key role in degrading ecosystems in a manner that ultimately destroys
economic growth.
Finally, repeated pandemics over the past few decades have shown these are not blips, but
recurrent features of today's world. Hence, there is an increasing public appetite for
regulation to deal with this ongoing problem. Some industries, such as agribusinesses, won't
like this, but the concerns are well-founded. According to
expert Josh Balk , 75 percent of new diseases start in domestic and wild-caught animals,
and 2.2 million people die each year from illnesses transferred from animals. The majority of
these are transferred from poorly regulated factory farm chickens, cows and pigs; still, the "
wet markets" of Asia and Africa, and the trade in potential " transfer species ," such as
pangolins, a major driver of the $19
billion-a-year global trade in illegal wildlife, must also be addressed. Beijing has
suggested it will
ban trade in illegal wildlife and seek tighter regulation of the wet markets . The latter
in particular may be easier said than done, according to Dr. Zhenzhong
Si , a research associate at Canada's University of Waterloo who specializes in Chinese
food security, sustainability, and rural development. Dr. Si
argued that "[b]anning wet markets is not only going to be impossible, but will also be
destructive for urban food security in China as they play such a pivotal role in ensuring urban
residents' access to affordable and healthy food."
To be fair, this isn't the first time that the sacred tenets of the global economic
framework have dealt with a crisis that seemed to usher in a new era. The same thing happened
in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008. But that was largely seen as a financial
crisis, a product of faulty global financial plumbing that nobody truly understood, as opposed
to a widespread social collapse closely approximating the conditions of the Great Depression as
we have today.
Not only has the current lockdown put the entire global economy into deep freeze, but it
also came amidst a backdrop of widespread political and social upheaval, and a faux recovery
whose fruits were largely restricted to the top tier. A collateralized debt obligation is not
intuitively easy to grasp. By contrast, being forced to stay at home, deprived of vital income
and isolated from loved ones, while health care workers perish from overwork and lack of
protective gear, is a different order of magnitude.
Even as we re-integrate, it is hard to envisage a return to the "old normal." Trade patterns
will change. Self-sufficiency and geographic proximity will be prioritized over global
integration. There will be new winners and losers, but it is worth noting that the model of
capitalism we are describing -- one that does not feature obscenely overcompensated CEO pay
co-existing with serf labor and the widespread offshoring of manufacturing -- has existed in
different forms in the U.S. from 1945 into the 1980s, and still exists in parts of Europe
(Germany) and East Asia (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan) to this day.
Our everyday lives will be impacted as selective quarantines and some forms of social
distancing become the new normal (much as they were when we dealt with tuberculosis
epidemics). All of this has implications for a multitude of industries: restaurants,
leisure, travel, tourism, sporting events, entertainment, and media, as well as our evolving
definition of "essential" industries. Even our concept of personal privacy will likely have to
be amended, especially in regard to medical matters. Concerns about medical surveillance --
stigma (STDs, alcoholism, mental illness) and denial of insurance -- can be alleviated if
everyone is guaranteed treatment regardless of ability to pay, which will mean greater
government intrusion into the lives of citizens and activities of businesses as the public
sector seeks to socialize costs.
Taken in aggregate, we are about to experience the most profound social, economic and
political changes since World War II.
The desperation with which the oligarchy seeks to preserve the neo-liberal dispensation, and
particularly on 'the left' which, historically, opposed its anti-egalitarianism, may be
explicable in very simple terms:
"A new Institute for Policy Studies Inequality briefing paper, authored by Bob Lord,
reveals that between 1980 and 2018, the taxes paid by America's billionaires, when measured
as a percentage of their wealth, decreased a staggering 79 percent.
"The only appropriate metric by which to measure the tax burden on billionaires, the
briefing paper explains, is the rate of tax they pay on their wealth. Unlike the rest of us,
the living expenses of billionaires do not constrain their accumulation of wealth. Nor do
they rely on their work to generate additional wealth. For billionaires, the accumulation of
wealth is driven forward almost exclusively by the growth of their existing wealth and
constrained almost exclusively by the tax they are required to pay. No matter how the taxes
imposed on billionaires are determined – by income, consumption, property ownership,
transfers by gift or bequest – they function only as a tax on wealth.
"By allowing the tax burden of billionaires, as a percentage of their wealth, to plummet
since 1980, policy makers have caused the nation's wealth to concentrate obscenely at the
very top. In the 12 years between 2006 and 2018, IPS reports, nearly 7 percent of America's
real increase in wealth, measured in 2018 dollars, went to the top 400 billionaires. If the
pattern of the past four decades does not change, an even greater share of the nation's newly
created wealth over the next 12 years will flow to the billionaire class..."
Background: During respiratory viral infection, face masks are thought to prevent
transmission (1). Whether face masks worn by patients with coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) prevent contamination of the environment is uncertain (2, 3). A previous study
reported that surgical masks and N95 masks were equally effective in preventing the
dissemination of influenza virus (4), so surgical masks might help prevent transmission of
severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV-2). However, the
SARS–CoV-2 pandemic has contributed to shortages of both N95 and surgical masks, and
cotton masks have gained interest as a substitute.
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in filtering
SARS–CoV-2.
...
Discussion: Neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS–CoV-2 during
coughs by infected patients. Prior evidence that surgical masks effectively filtered
influenza virus (1) informed recommendations that patients with confirmed or suspected
COVID-19 should wear face masks to prevent transmission (2). However, the size and
concentrations of SARS–CoV-2 in aerosols generated during coughing are unknown.
Oberg and Brousseau (3) demonstrated that surgical masks did not exhibit adequate filter
performance against aerosols measuring 0.9, 2.0, and 3.1 μm in diameter.
Lee and colleagues (4) showed that particles 0.04 to 0.2 μm can penetrate surgical
masks. The size of the SARS–CoV particle from the 2002–2004 outbreak was
estimated as 0.08 to 0.14 μm (5); assuming that SARS-CoV-2 has a similar size, surgical
masks are unlikely to effectively filter this virus.
Of note, we found greater contamination on the outer than the inner mask surfaces.
Although it is possible that virus particles may cross from the inner to the outer surface
because of the physical pressure of swabbing, we swabbed the outer surface before the inner
surface. The consistent finding of virus on the outer mask surface is unlikely to have been
caused by experimental error or artifact. The mask's aerodynamic features may explain this
finding. A turbulent jet due to air leakage around the mask edge could contaminate the
outer surface. Alternatively, the small aerosols of SARS–CoV-2 generated during a
high-velocity cough might penetrate the masks. However, this hypothesis may only be valid
if the coughing patients did not exhale any large-sized particles, which would be expected
to be deposited on the inner surface despite high velocity. These observations support
the importance of hand hygiene after touching the outer surface of masks.
This experiment did not include N95 masks and does not reflect the actual transmission
of infection from patients with COVID-19 wearing different types of masks. We do not know
whether masks shorten the travel distance of droplets during coughing. Further study is
needed to recommend whether face masks decrease transmission of virus from asymptomatic
individuals or those with suspected COVID-19 who are not coughing.
In conclusion, both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the
dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the
environment and external mask surface.
"When cuttlefish is in danger, it spits its ink to blacken the water and took the
opportunity to take flight. It is a well known tactic of some political elites and western
cultural. "They wanted to simply be attributed to China the responsibility for their own
inability to cope with the epidemic and the multiple tragedies that followed, and so," to
whiten completely. "
By the time I finished my text, I discovered a report on the Net. On 8 April, the
academic journal world-renowned, PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) has
published an article co-written by academics in British and German entitled network
Analysis the phylogenetic genomes of SARS-CoV-2.
The first author of the article is Dr. Peter Forster of the University of Cambridge.
According to the study, the researchers classified the new coronavirus in three types (A,
B, and C) according to their development.
The type A is the closest of the virus extracts of the bat and pangolin. It is the one
most frequently identified among hiv-infected patients in the United States and Australia.
That is, what researchers call " the root of the epidemic ".
The strains of type B are variants of the type A and are mainly present in China. Those
that are spreading on a large scale in Europe are those of the type C. Unfortunately, it
appears that the results of the research of Dr Peter Forster are not interested in the
western mainstream media.
The graphs show the normal mortality rates in the England and Wales and in New York City
and the current deviations from it. The flu does not create such graphs. Nor do the
lock-downs.
I've got a nice bridge for sale, B, 2000 miles long and entirely made of NYT articles and
twitter tweets.
The Twitter chart leaves the impression that the number of deaths suddenly soared up
almost vertically by around 5500 just in the last few days ...
Good panic porn stuff that. Also take note of what sort of people appear in that thread -
it is not a list of nobodies!
But wait - look more closely! That upturn is for week 14 - the week ending 3rd April,
already 12 days ago. You can see the release of the data by the Office for National
Statistics
here (there is no more recent data released by ONS)
As soon as you see the real data released by the ONS you will immediately see that the
cited twitter is blatant fake news!
That chart is specifically constructed to deceive. No actual cited figures, no actual
dates, no links to the real data - just pure panic porn. Why not cite the specific dates
covered? Because that would raise immediate suspicion with that sudden spurt, because it does
not correspond to previously available figures. Why not cite the specific figures in the
tweet? Because then it would be immediately obvious that this is fake news. Why not explain
the cause of the strange shape of the graph? Because that would give the whole game away.
So what do you see when you look at the real data released by ONS, instead of the
fake news in that twitter?
1) Total deaths registered in week 14 16387
2) Increase over week 13 5246
3) Increase over 5-year average for week 14 6082
*** BUT ***
4) Note that these figures are not the deaths which occurred in week 14, they are the deaths
which were registered in week 14, irrespective of when the deaths actually occurred
(registration is often delayed)
5) Note the warning given on that page: "Please note, where Easter falls in previous years
will have an impact on the five-year average used for comparison"
6) 3475 deaths in week 14 " mentioned novel coronavirus (COVID-19)" on the death
certificate - NOTE - this is not the cause of death specified on the death certificate!!!
7) 539 deaths in week 13 " mentioned novel coronavirus (COVID-19)" on the death
certificate
8) But wait - 3475 is only about half the alleged excess deaths, and these
are not even the deaths caused by covid-19 (see below) these are only the deaths where
covid-19 "happens" to have been tested positive (car accident, for example!)
Look further!
9) Look at the row "Deaths where the underlying cause was respiratory disease (ICD-10
J00-J99)" under official WHO standards, that is the broad category under which the covid-19
deaths are to be listed, if it is considered by the doctor to be the cause of death.
The row gives figures for each week of 2020 as follows (from weeks 1 to 14 in sequence):
2141 2477 2188 1893 1746 1572 1602 1619 1546 1581 1492 1515 1534 2106
VOILA!
This category - which is the actual recorded cause of death - includes covid-19
deaths, but it is a broad category of respiratory-related deaths which also includes many
deaths which have nothing whatsoever to do with covid-19. Those 2141, 2477 and 2188 deaths
registered in each of the first 3 weeks of 2020 were before there was even a single death
from covid-19 in the UK! The average of the first 13 weeks is 1762, and the value for week 14
(2106) is only 344 more than that!
Also note that the deaths which "mention" covid-19 are 1369 greater (including car
accidents, unrelated illness, etc) than the number of deaths caused by respiratory
illnesses (including Covid-19), which already includes another 1500 to 1700 deaths not
caused by covid-19!
This spurt of extra deaths registered in week 14 most certainly does not represent a
sudden spurt of genuine covid-19 deaths - that is conclusively proven by the row of figures
giving the underlying cause of death for each week's registrations.
If anything, the data may show a sudden spurt of deaths from other causes such as
stress caused by the lockdown, food shortages, money shortages, unexpected homelessness,
non-covid-19 illnesses not treated because the hospitals cancelled appointments and
operations, stress, fear etc.
Such causes probably underlie at least a few of the unaccounted for excess deaths
(conceaveably even most, perhaps), but it is also possible it is simply a statistical
aberration and/or related to delays in registering deaths, including the unspecified effect
of the Easter holidays on death registration. The aberration may also have been deliberate,
to cover up government mishandling of the crisis, or it may result from staff shortages, or
perhaps completely irrelevant reasons - we cannot know without detailed investigation of how
the data were prepared and the patterns of death registration.
What is absolutely certain is that that twitter chart is unmitigated fake news
deliberately designed to deceive .
The NYT is no better - completely non-sensical presentation of the data with no
explanation of the meaning of the non-sensical presentation, deliberately designed to
misrepresent.
Comments, B? Time to reconsider what you are doing?
I've been urging people to look more closely at what is happening, because the magicians
have been very successful with their acts, recently. Things are not as they seem on the
surface - you need to look more carefully at the small print.
That includes the details of lockdowns. Lockdowns kill, when they are done in the
irresponsible and brutal and dishonest way they have been done in the UK and the USA.
China did NOT rely on lockdowns - they relied on an integrated combination of
social distancing (including, where necessary, lockdowns, but mostly not , except in
Hubei Province), tracing, and isolation of those infected or at risk.
Lockdowns as imposed by the UK and the USA are just suicide pacts, as described by
Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, and are ineffective in dealing with covid-19.
"... But it's especially outdoor behavior which gives psychological insight on the pandemic of panic. Yesterday I saw people walking alone on the sidewalk, for example a woman alone walking her dog, wearing masks. Evidently such people have regressed from the germ theory of infection to the miasma theory. They think the very air itself is the source of the bug. ..."
Wearing masks indoors in close quarters seems prudent, even though there's so much
conflicting evidence and it's just as likely they're a stifling version of a rabbit's foot as
that they confer any real protection.
But it's especially outdoor behavior which gives psychological insight on the pandemic
of panic. Yesterday I saw people walking alone on the sidewalk, for example a woman alone
walking her dog, wearing masks. Evidently such people have regressed from the germ theory of
infection to the miasma theory. They think the very air itself is the source of the
bug.
But the guy who instantly became my favorite representative of the whole hysteria (I wish
I had a picture of him) was the idiot I saw perform an act of extremely dangerous jaywalking,
dashing across a busy road with fast oncoming traffic both ways - wearing a mask.
Everyone seems fixated on the virus and how to protect against it. I remind you all of the
famous proverb
"Le microbe c'est rien, le milieu c'est tout" = the microbe is nothing, the
environment is everything.
Environment means the local conditions in the affected body, a combination of immune
system and pre-existing illness.
We are facing a microbe that appears very dangerous in some places with case mortality
10..20% (heavily featured in the media and also in this blog), while in other places it does
no more than a seasonal flu with overall mortality < 0.5%. This leads to two equally
distorted biases: some people see the whole world as disaster area, some say there is no
problem at all. One could question whether it is really the exact same virus, but I'm not
going there.
Actually, with the proverb in mind we should be asking: what are the local conditions in
the hotspots, what has weakened people's immune system in these places, and what kind of
precondition exists there but does not exist in general. In simple words: why here and not
there?
Not asking this question and focusing only on an alleged "killer virus" means you see a
distorted picture and you would tend to roll out the same drastic protection lockdown
measures everywhere, which suffocates the economy and culture unnecessarily and creates
massive collateral. I'm in favor of a proportional response focusing on the hotspots, and
otherwise teach people how to strengthen their immune system and protect themselves
(voluntarily) if they see the need - of course they must have the means made available.
Known factors weakening the immune system and/or lungs:
1) Poor diet – the junk food (fast food, canned food, microwaved food) so typical of
US and GB city dwellers. Without the necessary high-quality nutrition the immune system can
only be weak. Natural vitamins and essential nutrients go very far in terms of virus
protection.
2) Air pollution – Lombardia (Bergamo in particular) and NYC for example both suffer
from high air pollution, and particularly in Manhattan the 9/11 event released a huge
cloud of finest
asbestos dust which caused a wave of lung cancer in the region and a lung precondition
for everyone who was exposed at the time.
3) Negative emotions – intense anger and fear can reduce immune activity by 50% for
several hours, as measured by IgA in the saliva. Likewise, positive emotions strengten it.
Media have been feeding us shock and awe and disaster 24/7 for weeks now, you think that has
no effect, think again. Check the amazing research done by HeartMath institute . Also, forced isolation and contact
deprevation is wreaking havoc with people who love company or have psychic preconditions.
4) Radiation – there are hundreds of scientific papers on the non-thermal effect of
low-energy microwave radiation on our physiology at cellular level, usually this medical
research is ignored. An extensive linked collection is available by
diagnose:funk (a German self-help society involving many M.D.s). Immune suppression is
one of the effects. Where the COVID19 death toll is very high you have a dense WiFi and 4G
coverage and yes, typically 5G pilot installations also exist. Most young people who died
from COVID19 were working in IT companies and thus had very high exposure.
5) Vaccination – a vaccine protects from one specific virus but is known to weaken
the immune system otherwise. North Italy is among the regions with the highest vaccination
rate on this globe.
"American collusion with kleptocracy comes at a terrible
cost for the rest of the world. All of the stolen money, all of those evaded tax dollars sunk
into Central Park penthouses and Nevada shell companies, might otherwise fund health care and
infrastructure. (A report from the anti-poverty group One has argued that 3.6 million deaths
each year can be attributed to this sort of resource siphoning.)
Thievery tramples the possibilities of workable markets and credible democracy. It fuels
suspicions that the whole idea of liberal capitalism is a hypocritical sham: While the world is
plundered, self-righteous Americans get rich off their complicity with the crooks.
The Founders were concerned that venality would become standard procedure, and it has. Long
before suspicion mounted about the loyalties of Donald Trump, large swaths of the American
elite -- lawyers, lobbyists, real-estate brokers, politicians in state capitals who enabled the
creation of shell companies -- had already proved themselves to be reliable servants of a
rapacious global plutocracy.
"Richard Palmer was right: The looting elites of the former Soviet Union were far from rogue
profiteers. They augured a kleptocratic habit that would soon become widespread.
One bitter truth about the Russia scandal is that by the time Vladimir Putin attempted to
influence the shape of our country, it was already bending in the direction of his."
Two coffee filters
Two to three feet of craft ribbon or string
Tape
Keep the coffee filters nested. Place them with the cup side down.
Fold the bottom edges of the mask up about an inch (approximately 2-3 cm). Fold the top edge
about a half inch (or about 1 cm).
Then fold the top over another half inch. This will make the top part of the mask slightly
stiffer so it will hold the bend over your nose better.
Place the ribbon in the top and bottom troughs formed by the folded edges of the coffee
filters. Tape the folded edges of the filters down to hold the ribbon in place.
Loop the ribbon over one ear and tie the free ends of the ribbon over the other ear to hold
the mask in place over your face. Use a vertical piece of tape on the mask over each cheek to
fit the mask to your face once you have put it on.
This mask will not stop lone viruses from getting through because the coffee filter is too
porous. It will tend to block large droplets from coughing or sneezing. Droplets can contain
huge numbers of viruses and be very infectious.
This mask is not nearly as good as a surgical mask, but better than nothing. It is much
easier to wear a mask like this than to walk around holding a tissue in front of your face.
I found that I am sensitive to the odor of cheap masking tape but the cellophane tape was OK
for me. Masks should be tested at home for comfort and allergens before trying to use them.
The coffee filters should be thrown away after the mask in used. Washing hands with soap and
warm water will destroy the virus, so it is important to wash your hands after handling used
masks. The roll of ribbon was 47 cents so this is not too expensive, but I plan on removing the
ribbons and washing them in hot, soapy water to use again.
These coffee filter masks are easy to make, fit fairly comfortably and do not require sewing
skills. Paper towels could probably be used to make masks but I do not use paper towels and am
not about to brave the stores to wrestle other customers for the last roll. This virus can be
destroyed by soap and water, acid and/or heat. It generally only survives a day or two on
paper. If you cannot get enough coffee filters, leaving the mask in a hot car for a day should
kill this virus. The hot-car treatment would not necessarily kill other germs that might be on
the mask though.
There's
a verbal tic particular to a certain kind of response to a certain kind of story about the
thinness and desperation of American society; about the person who died of preventable illness
or the Kickstarter campaign to help another who can't afford cancer treatment even with "good"
insurance; about the plight of the homeless or the lack of resources for the rural poor; about
underpaid teachers spending thousands of dollars of their own money for the most basic
classroom supplies; about train derailments, the ruination of the New York subway system and
the decrepit states of our airports and ports of entry.
"I can't believe in the richest country in the world. "
This is the expression of incredulity and dismay that precedes some story about the
fundamental impoverishment of American life, the fact that the lived, built geography of
existence here is so frequently wanting, that the most basic social amenities are at once
grossly overpriced and terribly underwhelming, that normal people (most especially the poor and
working class) must navigate labyrinths of bureaucracy for the simplest public services, about
our extraordinary social and political paralysis in the face of problems whose solutions seem
to any reasonable person self-evident and relatively straightforward.
It is true that, as measured by GDP, or by the size of the credit and equity markets, or
even just by the gaudy presence of our Googles, Amazons and Apples, the United States is the
greatest machine for the production of money in the modern history of the world.
But this wealth is largely an abstraction, a trick of the broad and largely meaningless
aggregations of numbers that makes up most of what the business pages call "economics." The
American commonwealth is shockingly impoverished. Ask anyone who's compared the nine-plus-hour
train ride from Pittsburgh to New York with the barely two-hour journey from Paris to Bordeaux,
an equidistant journey, or who's watched the orderly, accurate exit polls from a German
election and compared them with the
fizzling, overheating voting machines in Florida .
Now, it is true that bridges collapse in Europe , too, although
this past summer's tragedy was in Italy, whose famously ungovernable corruption may be the
closest continental analogue to our own United States. American liberals and leftists tend to
over-valorize the Western European model, but there is no doubt that the wealthy countries at
the core of the EU have far more successfully mitigated the most extreme social inequalities
and built systems for health and transportation that far outstrip anything in the U.S. Even in
their poor urban suburbs or, say, the disinvested industrial north of France, you will find
nothing like the squalor that we still permit -- that we accept as ordinary --
in the USA . Meanwhile, in our ever-declining adversary-of-convenience, the Moscow subway
runs on time.
The social wealth of a society is better measured by the quality of its common lived
environment than by a consolidated statistical approximation like GDP, or even an attempt at
weighted comparisons like so-called purchasing power parity . There
is a reason why our great American cities, for all of our supposed wealth, often feel and look
so shabby. The money goes elsewhere. Seville, a pretty, modest city of less than a million
people in the south of Spain, built 80 kilometers of bike lanes for $40 million in less than
two years, and eliminated a lot of ugly, on-street parking in the process. Imagine a
commensurate effort in New York City, a far wealthier place on paper. Well, its supposedly
liberal mayor is going to give Amazon $1.5 billion in tax breaks instead.
To be fair, New York City and state, mired in graft and corruption, cannot build a single
mile of subway for less than $2 billion.
Elsewhere, the con artists running America's military-industrial complex are worried that
the hundreds of billions we sink every year into planes that
cannot fly in the rain and
ships that cannot steer have left the United States virtually
unable to win any wars . The United States spends perhaps a trillion dollars every year on
its military and wars.
Poverty -- both individual and social -- is a policy, not an accident, and not some kind of
natural law. These are deliberate choices about the allocation of resources. They are eminently
undoable by modest exercises of political power, although if the state- and city-level
Democratic leaders of New York and northern Virginia are the national mold, then our nominally
left-wing party is utterly, hopelessly beholden to the upward transfer of social wealth to an
extremely narrow cadre of already extremely rich men and women.
I voted last week, an exercise that now feels like mouthing polite prayers at someone else's
church. The line snaked out the door of the tiny, hot basement room and into the cold rain.
There were only three voting machines. One was broken, and one seemed to be working only
intermittently. A young woman with a baby in a stroller was in line in front of me. After we'd
waited for 10 minutes without moving, she looked at me and rolled her eyes. "Can you believe
this is how we do this?" she said. "In 2018."
I smiled. I shrugged. I waved at her cute kid. I did not say, "Yes. I can believe it."
It is a sign of how bad things are when the editorial board of the Financial Times, the
world's leading business newspaper, carries an editorial calling for "radical reforms reversing
the prevailing policy direction of the last four decades." The FT editorial of April 3 has
advocated , among other
things, a more active role for governments in the economy, ways to make labor markets less
insecure, and wealth taxes. The FT's editorial board, increasingly concerned about saving
capitalism from itself, had
written about the need for "state planning" and a "worker-led economy" last year in August.
But the April 3 editorial has garnered much more attention since it comes amidst a massive
crisis.
By now it has become obvious that substantial state intervention in the economy -- frowned
upon by the apostles of neoliberal economics -- is back to the center stage across the
world.
The situation is such that the public sector, long maligned by neoliberal economists and
weakened by governments beholden to neoliberalism, is playing a major role in the fight against
coronavirus. Its role would have been much more effective and wide-ranging if it hadn't been
hit hard by decades of fund cuts and waves of privatization. Nevertheless, with the
ineffectiveness of private production with profit motive as its driving force to handle a
crisis becoming more evident, the public sector, production with state direction, and some
amount of planning are making a major comeback.
Public Health Care
The case of the sectors that are directly concerned with health care provision is the most
conspicuous, with the inadequacies of private health care during a crisis becoming evident to
even right-wing leaders.
We see Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the UK, repeatedly talking about the need to
protect the National Health Service (Britain's publicly funded health care system). He even
said , "there really is such a thing as society," contradicting Margaret Thatcher, his
conservative predecessor who batted for pure individualism in 1987 by saying "There is no such
thing as society."
Britain and many other countries in Western Europe have had relatively robust public health
care systems. In many of these countries, such as Italy , Spain and
the
UK , public health care systems have suffered in recent years because of fund cuts and
privatization of public facilities. Apart from the policy vision of the leaders of these
countries themselves, they also
came under pressure from the technocrats of the European Commission, who repeatedly
demanded spending cuts on health care. Along with the easy-going attitude displayed by many of
the Western governments in the early weeks of the coronavirus outbreak, such weakening of the
public health care systems have made their response to the coronavirus outbreak a more arduous
task. For now, the governments of
Spain and
Ireland have temporarily taken over their private hospitals to deal with the crisis.
The case of the United States, with its private, insurance-based health care system, is far
worse. Not only was a sufficient number of testing kits unavailable in the United States for
months, but the costs of testing and treatment remain prohibitive for a
large section of the population , particularly to the 30 million uninsured and 44 million
underinsured. This means that many people simply wouldn't be able to afford to get tested and
treated, endangering the health and lives of themselves and others.
The difference between the United States on the one hand, and China and South Korea on the
other, comes readily into the picture here. Testing and treatment for coronavirus is
free in China, which was crucial in the country's success in bringing the epidemic under
control. South Korea has done extensive testing , which
was made available for free. Treatment costs were covered by the government
and the insurance companies.
The Importance of the Public Sector, However, Goes Much Further
In times of crises such as the present one, which is comparable to war, the ability of
economies to produce (or at least source) and distribute things becomes critical. Two kinds of
things assume particular importance:
1) Essential things that are necessary for the immediate sustenance of the people.
These include food and medicines, and in turn, the things necessary to produce them. If there
are large gaps in the supply and distribution of these things, there would be a famine. If
the gap is smaller, there would still be many unnecessary deaths. Even leaders who are
otherwise callous about starvation deaths would be concerned about such an eventuality during
a crisis, because social tensions that could rise as a result of this would make it even more
difficult to tide over the crisis, whether it is a war or a pandemic. During the Second World
War, Britain resorted to rationing
to solve this problem. The people of India were
squeezed to finance the Allies' war in South Asia with Japan, and the result was the
Bengal Famine, which took the lives of 3 million people.
2) The kind of things that are necessary to tide over the crisis. During times of
war, armaments would be the most crucial among these. In the case of the coronavirus crisis,
the main things would be items like ventilators, masks, hand sanitizer, gloves and medicines
to treat the symptoms. Large gaps in the supply of these things would be disastrous. In the
case of a war, such gaps could lead to defeat in war. In the case of a lethal pandemic,
people would die in huge numbers, as we see right now. We could say this is an industrial
famine of sorts contributing to the casualties, with countries unable to make ICUs,
ventilators and masks fast enough in adequate quantities, and in many cases, to set up
hospitals and quarantine facilities quickly enough.
It is in this context that leaders of government who ideologically disagree with state
intervention in the economy are seen taking direct action in commandeering private companies to
produce necessary things.
Thus we see Donald Trump, who had initially resisted the pressure to use the Defense
Production Act -- a wartime law -- to mobilize private industry, finally using the law to
direct General Motors to produce ventilators.
The government of Italy directed its only producer of ventilators, Siare Engineering, to
ramp up the production of ventilators for the country, and sent engineers and other staff
members from the Ministry of Defense to help with production. The company canceled all its
orders from abroad to produce for the country.
Countries with a large public sector, robust industrial capacity, and the ability to
effectively intervene in the market would be at a considerable advantage here. That is the case
with
China , which put the state-owned China State Construction Engineering to work to construct
two emergency quarantine hospitals at breath-taking speed. The state ensured the flow of
products such as grain, meat and eggs into the Hubei province while it was under lockdown, and
coordinated the production and distribution of masks and other medical products. Once the
outbreak within the country was under control, it began supplying masks and ICU equipment to
other countries in need.
India, a large country with a poor health care system, does not have enough masks and
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for its health workers. The number of ICU beds and
ventilators available in the country is very low. For a population of 1.34 billion, it
only has 31,900 ICU beds available for COVID-19 patients, according to the country's Health
Ministry officials. To compare, Germany, with 82.8 million people, had 28,000 ICU beds as of
mid-March.
If the number of COVID-19 patients in India surges, hospitals and their critical care
facilities will be overwhelmed. The public sector Bharat Electronics Limited has been
asked to produce
30,000 ventilators to meet the urgent need. Hindustan
Lifecare (another public sector company) and the
Rail Coach Factory under the Indian Railways are going to manufacture ventilators. The
public sector Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), which the government has tried continuously to
weaken
in the recent years, is now producing masks, sanitizer and coveralls for Personal Protective
Equipment (PPE). It has also developed a ventilator prototype and is preparing for
production.
Within India, it is the state of
Kerala that has dealt with the pandemic in the most effective manner. In the Left-ruled
state, which has resisted the policy of privatization pushed by successive central governments,
public sector companies are manufacturing
hand sanitizer and
gloves , and have
raised the production of essential medicines . Kudumbashree, a massive government-backed
organization of women's collectives with 4.5 million members, is
making masks , which the public sector is helping distribute. Mass organizations of
youth and popular science activists are pitching in by making hand sanitizer. Volunteers
supported by a state-led initiative have
developed a respiratory apparatus that could free up ventilators.
It is not as if making masks, sanitizers and gloves requires advanced technology. But
industrial capacity is needed to churn them out in large numbers, or at least large mass
organizations, class organizations or collectives that can mobilize people to manufacture them.
The inability of the United States to even ensure the supply of such items stands out in this
regard. Four decades of neoliberalism seem to have led not only to the undermining of
industrial capacity useful for public purposes, but also to the hollowing out of collective
energies.
Need for Production Capabilities and Societal Control Over Them
In short, the lesson is that in times such as these, a society needs two things.
1) It needs production capabilities. During a time of crisis, if a country doesn't
have the necessary industrial capacity, it will be in trouble even if it has money to buy if
the other countries that do have the production capabilities block the export of the required
goods. This is what is happening right now to so many countries, such as Italy and Serbia. (In
the mad scramble for resources, there have even been reports of countries
offering higher amounts to buy masks ordered by other countries, and of some countries even
seizing shipments for themselves.) Not only is industrial capacity needed, but some excess
capacity is also required in some crucial areas. As the public health expert T. Sundararaman
pointed
out recently, the public health care system needs to have unused capacity, which will allow
it to expand and take on the extra load when there is an emergency. Excess industrial capacity
in China, which is often seen as a problem (including by sympathetic observers
), turned out to be useful, with the country being able to manufacture essential goods to not
just meet its own demands, but also that of other countries.
But relying on market forces doesn't give any guarantee of industrial capacity being built
up. The kind of production capabilities built without planning would be haphazard, and may not
cover the needs of an emergency when it presents itself. India, which adopted a strategy of
substantial economic planning during the first few decades after independence, only to abandon
it in the recent decades, is witnessing this to its peril right now.
2) The society, or the state as the representative of society, needs to be able to
control the production facilities. When a crisis hits a country with production
capabilities in the private sector, the state can invoke emergency powers to bring them under
control. But it would be a painful process, especially in countries where the private corporate
sector is not used to submit to discipline. Given the enormous influence that the corporates
have over the state itself, the state might try to prolong having to invoke such emergency
powers, as was seen in the United States, and that could have disastrous consequences. India
has the worst of all possible worlds -- cronyism is rampant, industrialization has not taken
off (whether it is because of cronyism or in spite of it need not detain us here), and the
public sector has been undermined.
Even when the state is trying to play a more active role, its efforts could be undermined by
private firms acting in their own self-interest of maximizing profits. This was seen in the
United States, where private companies were engaging in price gouging, by selling masks that
are normally sold for 85 cents for $7, leading to the New York state governor to call upon
the federal government to nationalize the acquisition of medical supplies. He said that the
U.S. government should order factories to produce masks, gowns and ventilators; otherwise the
situation would be impossible to manage. The state using private facilities can be costly as
well, as was seen in Britain, where the National Health Service is paying
2.4 million pounds per day as rent to private hospitals for 8,000 beds.
Does calling for more domestic production capabilities that the state can control mean that
every country should be left to fend for itself? Certainly not -- every country cannot produce
everything; smaller countries would find it particularly difficult. International trade would
be needed for countries to procure things that they cannot produce for themselves. But as the
developments of the recent months show, today's trade regime has nothing to do with solidarity,
and it provides no guarantee of countries being able to access goods during an emergency. This
is no accident. Lack of solidarity is embedded in the way capitalism has developed, with the
bulk of the world's wealth concentrated in the hands of a few countries, and within countries,
in the hands of the super-rich. This system has to be overhauled for a regime of solidarity to
emerge. Production and its fruits becoming less concentrated in some regions of the world and
in the hands of a minority would pave the way for power relations to be less unequal, which is
a precondition for real solidarity among people and societies.
Along with socialized health care, an immediate stop to privatization, and a stronger,
expanded public sector should become part of the transitional demands of the left as we search
for an exit from the pandemic crisis.
Covid-19 Research Updates: Chinese Study Reveals That Hypokalemia Present In Almost All
Covid-19 Patients Source: Covid-19 Research Mar 09, 2020 1 month ago Covid-19 Research : A new research study by researchers
from Wenzhou Medical University in Zhejiang province lead by Dr Don Chen revealed that almost
all Covid-19 patients exhibited hypokalemia and that supplementation with potassium ions was
one of the many factors that assisted in their recovery.
Hypokalemia is best described as low level of potassium (K+) ions in the blood serum. Mild
low potassium does not typically cause symptoms. Symptoms may include feeling tired, leg
cramps, weakness, and constipation. Low potassium also increases the risk of an abnormal heart
rhythm, which is often too slow and can cause cardiac arrest.
It was found that as the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus attacks human cells via the ACE2
(Angiotensin- converting enzyme-2) receptors, it also attacks the renin–angiotensin
system (RAS), causing low electrolyte levels in particularly potassium ions.
The study involving 175 patients in collaboration with Wenzhou Hospital found that almost
all patients exhibited hypokalemia and for those who already had hypokalemia, the situation
even drastically worsened as the disease progressed.
However, it was found from the study that patients responded well to potassium ion
supplements and had a better chance of recovery.
The researchers noted that the end of urine K+ loss indicates a good prognosis and may be a
reliable as a sensitive biomarker directly reflecting the end of adverse effect on RAS
system.
However, doctors at various hospitals in Wuhan, Shanghai and Guangdong have witnessed
similar occurrences and also found that potassium ion supplementation helped patients towards
recovery.
For the latest on Covid-19 research developments, keep checking at: Thailand Medical
News
DIY Isopod with Negative Pressure and Air Scrubber
4,917 views
•
Mar
25, 2020
93
0
SHARE
SAVE
HNMC Media
803 subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
How to make rooms negative pressure by using construction scrubbers with HEPA filters, and a DIY isopod using
materials available in a local hardware store. If you would like to see a sample of these isopods - We will have one
on display at Holy Name Medical Center in Teaneck, NJ 07666. Please email Steve Mosser to review [email protected]
SHOW MORE
The ruins of Mary McClellan Hospital stand on hill overlooking the village of Cambridge, New
York, in what was a "flyover" corner of the country until the planes stopped flying. The
hospital cornerstone was laid July 4 1917. The USA had entered the war against Germany a few
months earlier. The "Spanish" flu pandemic kicked off in January, 1918. The hospital opened in
January 1919. The flu burned out a year later. The hospital shut down for good in 2003.
I've lived around here for decades and never actually got a look at the place until I went
up there on a blustery spring Saturday before Easter to look around. I like to read landscapes
and the human imprint upon them. This one is a ghost story, not just of the bygone souls who
came and went here, but of an entire society, the nation that we used to be and stopped being
not so long ago.
This is the old main building today. It's astounding how quickly buildings begin to rot when
the human life within them is gone. The style was Beaux Arts Institutional, seen everywhere
across America in that period in schools, libraries, museums, and hospitals, an austere
neoclassicism that radiated decorum in a confident and well-run society – because
that is what we were then. Note especially, the entrance and the beautiful bronze marquee above
it. The message is this: You enter through a portal of beauty to a place of hope and trust.
This is Mary McClellan Hospital not long after it opened.
The site itself, on its hill, with views east across the state line to the Green Mountains,
speaks of authority and command.
The America of 1919 was a deeply hierarchical society. Today we regard hierarchy as a bane
and a curse. The truth is, it is absolutely required if you expect to live in a well-run
society, and proof of that is the disordered mess of bureaucratic irresponsibility we live in
today, with virtually every institution failing – well before the Covid-19 virus arrived
on the scene - and nobody called to account for anything anymore.
Hierarchy must be fit to scale to function successfully. In small institutions like this,
everybody knows who is responsible for what. That's what makes authority credible.
These are the ruins of the nursing school associated with the hospital (and also associated
with Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, 25 miles west).
The nurses lived here, in Florence Nightingale Hall.
In the early 20th century, the profession favored young, unmarried women whose allegiance
and attention to the patients would not be distracted by the needs of a family.
Was that exploitation? Or was it simply an intelligent way to organize a hospital
subculture? The nurses lived here very comfortably. The institution cared for them,
literally.
There's no record available of what exactly these buildings were for. The one in the
foreground has a cut stone sign that says "The Junior" on it. I infer that this may have been
where a couple of young, staff, resident physicians lived, young men probably, just out of
their internships, close at hand and on-call for emergencies. The building in the background is
a rather grand country cottage, possibly the residence of the chief surgeon or the hospital
director. The hospital was, after all, a community unto itself, and it was important that
authority have a visible presence there all the time. Both buildings display architectural
grace-notes that humanized and dignify that resident authority. We no longer believe in
grace-notes for the things we build, so is it surprising that we live in a graceless
society?
This is the power plant for the whole operation, on the premises, ensuring that the
electricity would stay on at all times. In the early 20th century, electric power was the new
sine qua non of advanced civilization. America's rural electrification program really didn't
get underway until the 1930s, so it's likely that many of the farms outside the village were
not hooked up to a grid. The hospital generators must have been driven by coal, or perhaps oil.
Somebody had to attend to all that machinery. The laundry – hospitals produce a lot
of that – was also on-premises, as was all the meal preparation. The hospital maintained
a large garden to furnish some of the food. All these tasks required crews of people working
purposefully and getting paid. The hospital was a complex organism, a world within a nation
within a world.
Things rise and self-organize beautifully into fully-formed systems and after while they run
down, even while they over-grow; authority starts working more and more for its own sake and
its own benefit; hierarchy breaks down into disrespect, lack of trust, fear; and then society
loses its vital institutions, which is exactly what happened at Mary McClellan Hospital in
little Cambridge, New York.
It dwindled and then quickly collapsed. The town lost a part of itself, the part that
welcomed people in a particular kind of trouble and cared for them, as it cared for those who
did the caring. By the way, in 1919, a private room was $7-a-day (a bed on a ward was $3).
Imagine that! The town also lost a vital component of its economy. And that was all of-a-piece
with its decline into the flyover place it became in our time.
American health care, as we call it today, and for all its high-tech miracles, has evolved
into one of the most atrocious rackets the world has ever seen. By racket, I mean an enterprise
organized explicitly to make money dishonestly. This is what we've become, and the fact that we
seem to be okay with that tells you more about what we have become. The advent of Covid-19,
along with the extreme economic disorders it has triggered, will probably be the beginning of
the end of that racket. We have no idea how medicine will re-organize itself, but I'd guess
that it will happen at a much more primitive scale – because that's usually what
happens when human societies overshoot badly. Alas, history is not exactly symmetrical.
But read these photos and meditate on what we were once capable of putting together in this
land, and maybe you will find some clues about what was truly admirable about the American
condition before we stopped caring.
"No matter how long I live, I don't think I will ever get over how the U.S., with all
its wealth and technological capability and academic prowess, sleepwalked into the disaster
that is unfolding," says Kai Kupferschmidt, a German science writer.
I am continuously amazed at how incompetence is always assumed so as to give elites a
pass.
It seems to me that the Trump Administration delayed a response to the virus so as to
ensure that they could declare an emergency which allowed them to 'play' the virus in a way
that benefited special interests and furthered imperial goals:
Beijing had shut down a branch of its closely watched global remdesivir that was studying
patients in 'severe' condition in Wuhan. After showing early promise, the study was allegedly
shuttered by the government because there weren't enough patients who qualified.
For the sickest patients,
infection with the new coronavirus
is proving to be a full-body assault, causing damage well
beyond the lungs. And
even after patients who become severely ill have recovered and
cleared the virus, physicians have begun seeing evidence of the infection's lingering effects
.
In a
study
posted this week, scientists in China examined the blood test results of 34 COVID-19
patients over the course of their hospitalization.
In those who survived mild and severe
disease alike, the researchers found that many of the biological measures had "failed to return
to normal."
-
Los
Angeles Times
One alarming observation have been test results indicating that
recovered patients
continue to have impaired liver function
after patients had been cleared for discharge.
Another concern from cardiologists
are the immediate effects of COVID-19 on the heart
,
raising questions over how long the damage may last. As the
Times
notes, "In an
early study
of COVID-19 patients in
China,
heart failure was seen in nearly 12% of those who survived, including in some who
had shown no signs of respiratory distress.
"
Heart damage can easily occur when the lungs cannot deliver sufficient oxygen to the body,
however
when this happens without respiratory distress, "doctors have to wonder whether
they have underestimated COVID-19's ability to wreak lasting havoc,"
according to the
report.
"COVID-19 is not just a respiratory disorder," according to Yale cardiologist Dr. Harlan
Krumholtz, who added "It can affect the heart, the liver, the kidneys, the brain, the endocrine
system and the blood system."
Of course,
there are no long-term survivors
of the disease - which was unknown
to mainstream science less than five months ago. Even its first victims in China are just over
three months removed from their ordeal, while physicians swamped with the ongoing pandemic have
been too busy treating critical patients to closely monitor the some 370,000 patients classified as
'recovered.'
Still,
doctors are worried that in its wake, some organs whose function has been
knocked off kilter will not recover quickly, or completely
. That could leave patients
more vulnerable for months or years to come.
"
I think there will be long-term
sequelae
," said Yale cardiologist
Dr.
Joseph Brennan
, using the medical term for a disease's downstream effects.
"I don't know that for real," he cautioned. "But
this disease is so overwhelming"
that some of the recovered are likely to face ongoing health concerns
, he said. -
Los
Angeles Times
Meanwhile,
questions have emerged over whether COVID-19 actually leaves the body
- possibly lying dormant for years only to re-emerge later in a different form.
Several viruses already do this such as chicken pox - which can come back as shingles, and
hepatitis B, which can cause liver cancer years after the primary infection clears up. Ebola is
another example - hiding in the vitreous fluid of victims' eyeballs in some cases, causing
blindness or impaired vision in 40% of survivors.
Of course, then there's
the lungs
- which the novel coronavirus tends to target
first. In another closely related coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS),
around 1/3 of recovered patients had impaired lung function after three years
- though
they largely resolved over the next 15 years. And, 1/3 of those who survived Middle East
Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) had permanent scarring of the lungs known as fibrosis.
According to a mid-March publication which tracked a dozen COVID-19 patients discharged from a
Hong Kong hospital, two or three reported having difficulties with activities they had no problem
performing in the past.
Dr. Owen Tsang Tak-yin, director of infectious diseases at Princess Margaret Hospital in Hong
Kong, told reporters that some patients
"might have around a drop of 20 to 30% in lung
function" after their recovery.
Citing the history of lasting lung damage in SARS and MERS patients, a team led by UCLA
radiologist Melina Hosseiny is recommending that
patients who have recovered from
COVID-19 get follow-up lung scans "to evaluate long-term or permanent lung damage including
fibrosis."
As doctors try to assess organ damage after COVID-19 recovery, there's a key complication:
Patients with disorders that affect the heart, liver, blood and lungs face a higher risk
of becoming very sick with COVID-19 in the first place
. That makes it difficult to
distinguish COVID-19 after-effects from the problems that made patients vulnerable to begin with
-- especially so early in the game. -
Los
Angeles Times
And while doctors and researchers are still discovering COVID-19's secrets, what they do know is
that when patients show signs of infection,
several organ systems are affected
-
and that when one begins to fail, others often follow. This is all wrapped in an inflammatory
response, which can pry "plaques and clots from the walls of blood vessels and causing strokes,
heart attacks and venous embolisms," according to the report.
Dr. Krumholtz, the cardiologist, says the infection can cause damage to the heart and the sac
which encases it, causing heart failure and arrhythmias in some patients during the acute phase.
This means that former COVID-19 patients can become
lifelong cardiology patients
after they 'recover' from the primary illness.
What's worse, blood abnormalities that can make clots more likely can persist as well.
In a
case report
published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine,
Chinese
doctors described a patient with severe COVID-19, clots evident in several parts of his body,
and immune proteins called
antiphospholipid antibodies
.
A hallmark of an autoimmune disease called
antiphospholipid syndrome
, these antibodies sometimes occur as a passing response to an
infection. But sometimes they linger, causing dangerous blood clots in the legs, kidneys, lungs
and brain. In pregnant women, antiphospholipid syndrome also can result in miscarriage and
stillbirth. -
Los
Angeles Times
Yale's Dr. Brennan says that at the end of the day, we just don't have enough data to make a
long term prognosis for coronavirus patients.
"... Authored by Joaquin Flores via The Strategic Culture Foundation, ..."
"... the declining rate of profit necessitated by automation, with the increasingly irrational policies, in all spheres, being pursued to salvage the ultimately unsalvageable. ..."
"... Because the present system is premised on a production-consumption and financial model, the solutions to crises are presented as population reduction and what even appears, at least in the case of Europe, as population replacement. As cliché as this may seem, this also appeared to be the policy of the Third Reich when capitalism faced its last major crises culminating in WWII. ..."
The coronavirus pandemic has shown that the twin processes of globalization and planned
obsolescence are deficient and moribund. Globalization was predicated on a number of
assumptions including the perpetuity of consumerism, and the withering away of national
boundaries as transnational corporations so required.
What we see instead is not a globalization process, but instead a process of rising
multipolarity and a rethinking of consumerism itself.
Normally a total market crash and unemployment crisis would usher in a period of militant
labor activity, strikes, walk-outs and community-labor campaigns. We've
seen some of this already . But the 'medical state of emergency' we are in, has effectively
worked like a 'lock-out' . The elites have effectively
flipped-the-script. Instead of workers now demanding a restoration of wages, hours, and
work-place rights, they are clamoring for any chance to work at all, under any conditions
handed down. Elites can 'afford' to do this because they've been given trillions of dollars to
do so. See how that works?
All our lives we've been misinformed over what a growing economy means, what it looks like,
how we identify it. All our lives we've been lied to about what technical improvement literally
means.
A growing economy in fact means that all goods and services become less expensive. That cuts
against inflation. Rather all prices should be deflating – less money ought to buy the
same (or the same money ought to buy more). Technical innovation means that goods should last
longer, not be planned for obsolescence with shorter lifespans.
Unemployment is good if it parallels price deflation. If both reached a zero-point, the
problems we believe we have would be solved.
In a revealing April 2nd article that featured on the BBC's website, Will coronavirus reverse globalisation?
it is proposed that the pandemic exposes the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of a global
supply-chain and manufacturing system, and that this in combination with the over-arching
US-China trade war would see a general tendency towards 're-shoring' of activities. These are
fair points.
But the article misses the point of the underlying problem facing economics in general:
the declining rate of profit necessitated by automation, with the increasingly irrational
policies, in all spheres, being pursued to salvage the ultimately unsalvageable.
The
Karmic Wheel of Production-Consumption
The shut-downs – which seem unnecessary in the numerous widely esteemed experts in
virology and epidemiology – appear to be aimed at stopping the production-consumption
cycle. When we look at the wanton creation of new 'money', to bailout the banks, we are told
that this will not cause inflation/debasement so long as the velocity of money is kept to a minimum.
In other words – so long as there is not a chain reaction of transactions, and the money
'stays still' – this won't cause inflation. It's a specious claim, but one which
justifies the quarantine/lock-down policy which today destroys thousands of small businesses
every day. In the U.S. alone, unemployment claims
will pass 30 million by mid April .
Likewise, this money appears real, it sits digitally as new liquidity on the computer
screens of tran-Atlantic banks – but it cannot be spent, or it tanks the system with
hyper-inflation. More to the point, the BBC piece erroneously continues to assume the necessity
of the production-consumption cycle, spinning wheat into gold forever.
The elites were not wrong to shut-down the cycle per se. The problem is that they cannot
offer the correct hardware in its place – for it puts an end to the very way that they
make money. It is this, which in turn is a major source for the maintenance of their dopamine
equilibrium and narcissist supply.
This is not an economic problem faced by 'the 1%' (the 0.03%) . It is an existential crisis
facing the meaning of their lives, where satisfaction can only be found in ever greater levels
of wealth and control, real or imagined – chasing that dragon, in search of that
ever-elusive high.
So naturally, their solutions are population reduction and other such quasi-genocidal
neo-Malthusian plans. Destruction of humanity – the number one productive-potential force
– resets the hands of time, back to a period where profit levels were higher. The
algorithmically favored coronavirus Instagram campaign of seeing city centers without people
and declaring these 'beautiful' and 'peaceful' is an example of this misanthropic principle at
play.
That the elites have chosen to shut-down the western economy is telling of an historic point
we have reached. And while we are told that production and consumption will return somewhat
'after quarantine', we also hear from the newly-emerged unelected tsars – Bill Gates et
al – that things will never
return to normal .
What we need to end is the entire theory and practice of globalization itself, including
UN
Agenda 21 and the dangerous role of 'book-talking' philanthropists like Gates and his
grossly unbalanced degree of power over policy formation in the Western sphere.
In place of waning globalization, we are seeing the reality of rising multipolarity and
inter-nationalism. With this, the end of the production-consumption cycle, based upon off-shore
production and international assembly, and at the root of it all: planned obsolescence towards
long-term profitability.
The Problem of Globalization Theory
Without a doubt, globalization theory satisfied aspects of descriptive power. But as time
marched forward, its predictive power weakened. Alternate theories began to emerge –
chief among these, multipolarity theory.
The promotion of globalization theory also raises ethical problems. Like a criminologist
'describing' a crime-wave while being invested in new prison construction, globalization theory
was as much theory as it was a policy forced upon the world by the same institutions behind its
popularization in academia and in policy formation. Therefore we should not be surprised with
the rise of solutions like those of Gates. These involve patentable 'vaccines' by for-profit
firms at the expense of buttressing natural human immunities, or using drugs which other
countries are using with effectiveness.
The truth? Globalization is really just a rebrand of the Washington Consensus
– neo-liberal think-tanks and the presumed eternal dominance of institutions like the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which in turn are thinly disguised
conglomerates of the largest trans-Atlantic banking institutions.
So while globalization was often given a humanist veneer that promised global development,
modernization, the end of 'nation-states' which presumably are the source of war; in reality
globalization was premised on continuing and increasing concentration of capital towards the
19th century zones – New York, London, Berlin, and Paris.
'Internationalism' was once rooted in the existence of nations which in turn are only
possible with the existence of culture and peoples, but was hi-jacked by the trans-Atlanticist
project. Before long, the new-left 'internationalists' became champions of the very same
process of imperialism that their forbearers had vehemently opposed. Call it 'globalization'
and show how it's destroying 'toxic nationalism' and creating 'microfinance solutions for women
and girls' –
trot out Malala – and it was bought; hook, line and sinker.
This was not the new era of 'globalization', but rather the usual suspects going back to the
19th century; a 'feel-good' rebranding of the very same 19th century imperialism as described
in J.A Hobson's seminal work from 1902, Imperialism. Its touted 'inevitability' rested not on
the impossibility of alternate models, but on the authority that flows forth from gunboat
diplomacy. But sea power has given way to land power.
In many ways it aligned with the era of de-colonialization and post-colonialism. New nations
could wave their own flags and make their own laws, so long as the traditionally imperialist
western banking institutions controlled the money supply.
But what is emerging is not Washington Consensus 'globalization', but a multipolar model
based in civilizational sovereignty and difference, building products to last – for their
usefulness and not their repeatable retail potential. This cuts against the claims that global
homogenization in all spheres (moral, cultural, economic, political, etc.) was inevitable, as a
consequence of mercantile specialization.
Therefore, inter-nationalism hyphenated as such, reminds us that nations –
civilizations, sovereignty, and their differences – make us stronger as a human species.
Like against viruses, some have stronger natural immunity than others. If people were
identical, one virus could wipe-out all of humanity.
Likewise, an overly-integrated global economy leads to global melt-down and depression when
one node collapses. Rather than independent pillars that could aid each other, the
interdependence is its greatest weakness.
Multipolarity is Reality
This new reality – multipolarity – involves processes which aspects of
globalization theory also suggest and predict for, so there are some honest reasons why experts
could misdiagnose multipolarity as globalization. Overlooked was that the concentration of
capital nodes in various and globally diverse regions by continent, were not exclusively
trans-Atlantic regions as in the standard globalization model of Alpha ++ or Alpha+ cities.
This capital concentration along continental lines was occurring alongside regional economic
development and rising living standards which tended to promote the efficiency of local
transportation as opposed to ocean-travel in the production process. As regional nodes by
continent had increasingly diversified their own domestic production, a general tendency for
transportation costs to increase as individual per capita usage increased, worked against the
viability of an over-reliance on global transit lines.
But among many problems in globalization theory was that the US would always be the primary
consumer of the world's goods, and with it, the trans-Atlantic financial sector. It was also
contingent on the idea that mercantilist conceptions of specialization (by nation or by region)
would always trump autarkic models and ISI (income substitution industrialization). Again, if
middle-class consumer bases are rising in all the world's inhabited continents as multipolarity
explains and predicts, then a global production regimen rationalized towards a trans-Atlantic
consumer base as globalization theory predicts isn't quite as apt.
Because the present system is premised on a production-consumption and financial model,
the solutions to crises are presented as population reduction and what even appears, at least
in the case of Europe, as population replacement. As cliché as this may seem, this also
appeared to be the policy of the Third Reich when capitalism faced its last major crises
culminating in WWII.
Breaking the Wheel
The shutdown reveals the karmic wheel of production-consumption is in truth already broken.
We have already passed the zenith point of what the old paradigm had to offer, and it has long
since entered into a period of decay, economic and moral destruction.
Like the Christ who brings forth a new covenant or the Buddha who emerges to break the wheel
of karma, the new world to be built on the ruins of modernity is a world that liberates the
productive forces, realizing their full potential, and with it the liberation of man from the
machine of the production-consumption cycle.
Planned obsolescence and consumerism (marketing) are the twin evils that have worked towards
the simultaneous
time-wasting enslavement of 'living to work' , and have built globalization based on global
assembly and global mono-culture.
What is important for people and their quality of life is the time to live life, not be
stuck in the grind. We hear politicians and economists talking about 'everyone having a job',
as if what people want is to be away from their families, friends, passions, or hobbies. What's
more – people cannot invent, innovate, or address the greater questions of life and death
– if their nose is to the grindstone.
Now that we are living under an overt system of control, a 'medical state of emergency' with
a frozen economy, we can see that another world is possible. The truth is that most things
which are produced are intentionally made to break at a specific time, so that a re-purchase is
predictable and profits are guaranteed. This compels global supply chains and justifies
artificially induced crashes aimed at upward redistribution and mass expropriations.
Instead of allowing Bill Gates to tour the world to tout a police-state cum population
reduction scheme right after a global virus pandemic struck, one which many believe
he owns the patent for , we can instead address the issues of multipolarity, civilizational
sovereignty, and ending planned obsolescence and the global supply chain, as well as the
off-shoring it necessitates – which the BBC rightly notes, is in question anyhow.
The text message from Ai Fen (艾芬), the director of the emergency department of
Wuhan Central Hospital, agreeing to be interviewed, was sent at 5 am on March 1. About half an
hour later, at 5.32 am on March 1, her colleague and director of thyroid and breast surgery
Jiang Xueqing, who was infected with new coronavirus pneumonia, died. Two days later, Mei
Zhongming, deputy director of ophthalmology at the hospital, died. He and Li Wenliang were in
the same department.
As of March 9, 2020, 4 members of the medical staff of Wuhan Central Hospital have died of
new coronavirus pneumonia infection. Since the outbreak, this hospital, located just a few
kilometers away from the Huanan Seafood Market, has become one of the hospitals in Wuhan with
the largest number of employees that are infected. According to media reports, more than 200
employees in the hospital were infected, including three deputy deans and multiple working
department directors. Multiple department directors are currently being maintained with ECMO
[extracorporeal membrane oxygenation].
The shadow of death hangs over this, Wuhan's largest tertiary hospital. A doctor told People
[a news site – EB] that in the social media group of hospital staff, almost no one spoke
publicly; they mourned and discussed in private.
This tragedy could have been prevented. On December 30, 2019, Ai Fen received a virus test
report for a patient with an unknown pneumonia. She circled the word "SARS coronavirus" in red.
When asked by a college classmate who is also a doctor, she took a picture of the report and
circulated it. That night, the report spread in doctor circles in Wuhan, and those who
forwarded the report included the eight doctors who were disciplined by the police.
This caused trouble for Ai Fen. As the original source of the information, she was
interviewed by the hospital disciplinary committee and suffered an "unprecedented and severe
reprimand"; it was said that she was acting unprofessionally by creating false rumors
(谣).
In the afternoon of March 2nd, Ai Fen did an interview with People in the Nanjing Road
location of Wuhan Central Hospital. She was sitting alone in the emergency room office. The
emergency department, which had been admitting more than 1,500 patients a day, had returned to
quiet. There was only one tramp lying in the emergency hall.
Some previous reports called Ai Fen "another severely reprimanded female doctor who has
emerged" and some people called her a "whistleblower". Ai Fen corrected this; she said she was
not a whistleblower, but the one who distributed the "whistles".
During the interview, Ai Fen mentioned the word "regret" several times, and said she deeply
regretted that she hadn't continued to whistle resoundingly after she was reprimanded at a
disciplinary review meeting. She has especial regrets when it comes to her deceased coworkers.
"If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't care about the pressure (from my leader), and I
would [expletive] speak everywhere, all right?"
What have Wuhan Central Hospital and Ai Fen experienced in the past two months or so? The
following is what Ai Fen told us:
An unprecedented reprimand
On December 16, last year, we received a patient at the Nanjing Road emergency department.
They had an inexplicably high fever, and they weren't responding to standard medications, their
body temperature wasn't going down at all. On the 22nd, the patient was transferred to the
respiratory department, a bronchoscopy was done, and bronchoalveolar fluid taken and sent out
for high-throughput genetic sequencing. Afterwards, the coronavirus result was relayed
verbally. At that time, the colleague who was responsible for the patient told me clearly:
"Director [主任] Ai, that person's diagnosis is coronavirus". Later we learned that
the patient worked in the Huanan Seafood Market.
Immediately afterwards, December 27th, another patient arrived at Nanjing Road. He was the
nephew of a doctor in our department. He was in his 40s, without any preexisting conditions.
His lungs were in a terrible state, and his blood oxygen saturation was only 90%. He was under
hospital care for almost 10 days without any improvement, and was admitted to the respiratory
department. A flexible bronchoscopy was also done, and the alveolar lavage fluid sent for
testing.
At noon on December 30th, an old classmate at Tongji (同济) Hospital sent me a
screenshot of a WeChat conversation, which said: "You don't want to go to Huanan [Market] just
now, there are lots of people with high fever " He asked if it was true. At the time, I was
watching a CT [scan] of a typical patient with pulmonary infection on the computer. I sent him
a 11-second video of the CT and told him it was a patient who had come to our emergency
department in the morning, a Huanan Seafood Market case.
Just after 4 pm that day, a colleague showed me a diagnostic report that said: "SARS
coronavirus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 46 strains of bacteria [菌, bacteria and/or fungi]
which colonize the oral cavity and/or respiratory tract". I read the report very carefully many
times, and the supplementary information read: "SARS coronavirus is a single-stranded
positive-strand RNA virus. The main mode of transmission of the virus is close-range droplet
transmission or contact with respiratory secretions of patients, which can cause an unusual
pneumonia that is highly contagious and can affect multiple organ systems, also known as
atypical pneumonia."
At the time, the diagnostic report scared me, I broke into a cold sweat, this was a
terrifying thing. The patient was admitted to the respiratory department, the situation needed
to be reported to the respiratory department, but to ensure attention, I immediately phoned and
reported it to the hospital's public health division and infectious disease [?院感]
division. At that moment, the director of the respiratory department of our hospital happened
to be passing my office door, someone who had been involved with SARS. I grabbed the director
and said, "We found this in one of the patients in your department." The director took one look
and said it was worrying. I knew the matter was worrying.
After calling the hospital, I also circulated this report to my fellow-learners
(同学[; student or former classmate]). I purposely drew a red circle around the
words "SARS coronavirus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 46 strains of bacteria [菌, bacteria
and/or fungi] which colonize the oral cavity and/or respiratory tract" to bring the warning to
their attention. I also sent the report to the doctors in the department to warn everyone to
take precautions.
That evening, the message was spread widely; the screenshots of the transmission show the
photos of the report I'd marked with a red circle, including the ones that I later learned that
Li Wenliang passed on to the [chat] group. At the time, I was thinking it might be bad. At
10:20, the hospital passed on a message [reportedly on the Central Hospital WeChat group]. It
was a relayed notification from the city Health Protection Committee
(市卫健委). Their main point was that information on the pneumonia of
unknown cause should not be arbitrarily released, to avoid causing panic among the public; if
panic was caused by information leakage, there would be a thorough investigation
(要追责).
I was very scared at the time and immediately passed this information on to my
fellow-learners. About an hour later, the hospital sent another notice, again stressing that
information the group had on this subject could not be leaked. One day later, at 11:46 pm on
January 1st, the head of the hospital's disciplinary inspection committee sent me a message to
come [for an employee review] the next morning.
I didn't fall asleep that night, I was worried and thought things through over and over
again, but I felt that there are always two sides to everything; even if it had caused adverse
effects, it was not necessarily a bad thing to remind medical staff in Wuhan to take
precautions. At 8 o'clock the next morning, before I finished the shift, I was called in for
the disciplinary review.
In that disciplinary review, I suffered an unprecedented and very severe reprimand.
At that time, the leader of the discussion said, "We can't afford to raise our heads when we
go out for a meeting. The director of XX criticizes our hospital. As the director of the
emergency department of Wuhan Central Hospital, you are a professional, how can there be this
lack of principle, this lack of organizational discipline, this creating and spreading of false
rumours (谣)?" This is the original sentence. So I should go back to the 200-odd people
in the department to convey the news to them verbally, one by one; we can't send information by
WeChat or SMS, we can only talk face-to-face or call, we can't say anything about this
pneumonia, "you can't even tell your own husband", they said
I was utterly stunned. I hadn't been criticized for not working hard, but made to feel that
what I'd done had ruined Wuhan's prospects and its future. I felt strong depair. I am a serious
and hard-working person. I felt that everything I had done was in accordance with the rules and
well-founded. What did I do wrong? After I read the lab result, I had also reported it to the
hospital. My students and my colleagues had communicated among ourselves about how to handle
the condition of a patient, we hadn't given out any of the patient's personal information; this
is equivalent to discussing a medical case among medical students. As a clinical doctor, I
already knew that a very important virus had been found in patients. When other doctors asked,
how could you not say so? This is your instinct as a doctor, right? What did I do wrong? I have
done what a doctor and a person should normally do. I think anyone would do the same.
I was very emotional at the time, saying that I had done this, and it had nothing to do with
the rest of the people; you can just arrest me and jail me. I said that I was not suitable to
continue to work in this position, and I wanted to take a break. The leader did not agree,
saying that this was the time to test me.
I went home that night, I remember it quite clearly, I told my husband just after I walked
in the door, if something goes wrong, you must care for and raise the child -- because my
second treasure is still very young, only just over 1 year old. At the time, my husband was
perplexed by this. I didn't explain.
On January 20th, after Zhong Nanshan [prominent Chinese epidemiologist] told people [about
the epidemic], I told my husband what had happened that day. In the interim, I just warned my
family not to go to crowded places, and to wear surgical face masks when going out.
Peripheral departments
Many people worried that I was among the eight people who were admonished [by police]. In
fact, I wasn't warned by the Public Security Bureau. Later, a good friend asked me, are you a
whistleblower? I said that I am not a whistleblower, I am the one who sent the whistle.
But that disciplinary review hit me hard, it affected me very severely. When I came back, I
could see that everyone's morale had collapsed. We had been working with such drive and
dedication, and doing our jobs conscientiously. Everyone kept asking me questions, and I
couldn't answer.
All I could do was get the emergency department to focus on protection. We have over 200
people in the emergency department. From January 1st, I asked everyone to strengthen their
protection. Everyone must wear masks, hats, and use gloves (用手快消).
I remember one day, there was a nurse who did not wear a mask during the shift; I scolded him
then and there, saying "Don't come to work without a mask in the future".
On January 9th, while off-shift, I saw a patient coughing on the pre-examination table. From
that day on, I asked everyone to put a mask on both the patient and on anyone seeing the
patient, one for each person; I said, don't try to save money at this time. At the time, they
were still telling us that there was no human-to-human transmission, and I want to emphasize
here that wearing a mask to strengthen protection was a big issue.
That time was really depressing and very painful. Some doctors proposed wearing and out
layer of isolation clothing. The hospital's internal operations committee
(医院里开会) said they wouldn't allow it; they said that wearing
isolation clothing would cause panic. I asked the people in the department to wear an isolation
gown inside a white coat. This was out-of-specification and ridiculous.
We watched more and more patients arrive, as the radius of the infection area became larger
and larger. At first, they might be connected to the Huanan Seafood Market; then it spread, and
the radius became larger and larger. Many of the cases were family-transmitted. Among the first
seven people, there was a case of infection in which the mother had given the son food. The
clinic [dispensary? 诊所] boss got sick, infected by the patients who came for
injections. It was very serious, whether they got infected or not. I knew there must be
human-to-human transmission. If there was no human-to-human transmission, well, the Huanan
Seafood Market had been closed on January 1, so why were there more and more patients?
I often thought, if only they hadn't reprimanded me like that, if they'd asked for details
calmly, and then asked other respiratory experts to communicate with them, maybe the situation
would be better, and I could at least communicate a bit more in the hospital. If everyone had
been as alert on January 1, there would not be so many tragedies.
On the afternoon of January 3, in the Nanjing Road Hospital, doctors of urology gathered to
review the work of the senior director, 43-year-old Dr. Hu Weifeng (胡卫峰),
who is now in emergency care; on the afternoon of January 8, the Nanjing Road Hospital Director
[of thyroid and breast surgery] Jiang Xueqing (江学庆) also organized the
first Wuhan City breast disease patient recovery get-together
(武汉市甲乳患者康复联欢会),
on the 22nd floor. On the morning of January 11, the department reported to me that Hu Ziwei
(胡紫薇), a nurse in the emergency room of the emergency department, was
infected. She'd be the first infected nurse in the central hospital. First-off, I called the
Chief of the Medical Department to report it, and then the hospital held an emergency meeting.
At the meeting we were instructed to change the report of "double lung infection, viral
pneumonia?" to "scattered infection of both lungs"
("两下肺感染，病毒性肺炎？"
to "两肺散在感染"). At the weekly meeting of January 16th,
a deputy dean was still saying, "Everyone must have a little medical common sense, and certain
senior doctors should not go about scaring people." Another leader spoke, and continued,
"Human-to-human transmission is not possible; it can be prevented, treated and controlled." One
day later, on January 17, Jiang Xueqing was hospitalized, and 10 days later he was intubated
and put on ECMO.
The toll at the central hospital is so large, and it's connected to the lack of transparency
for our medical staff. If you look at the people who fell ill, the emergency department and the
respiratory department suffered less heavily, because we had a sense of the need for
protection, and we knew we should quickly rest and get treatment as soon as we got sick. The
worst cases are in the peripheral departments; Li Wenliang was an ophthalmologist, and Jiang
Xueqing is a nail specialist.
Jiang Xueqing was really a very good person, with excellent medical skills. He held one of
the two Chinese Physician Awards in the hospital. And yet we were neighbors, we were a unit;
I'm located on the 40th floor, he was on the 30th floor, our working relationship was very
good, but because I am too busy at work, I only met him during meetings and hospital
activities. He was a workaholic, always either in the operating room or at the clinic. No one
would go to tell him specifically, "Director Jiang, you have to pay attention and wear a mask".
He didn't have the time and energy to inquire about these things, and he must have brushed it
off with: "What's the matter? It's pneumonia." This was what people in that department told
me.
If these doctors had been warned in time, perhaps this day wouldn't have come. So that's
why, as one closely involved, I regret what I did. If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't
have cared about the reprimand, I would have [expletive] spoken of it everywhere, to everyone,
wouldn't I?
Although I worked in the same hospital as Li Wenliang (李文亮) did before
he died, I didn't know him, because the hospital had over 4,000 people on staff and was usually
busy. The night before his death, the director of the ICU called me to borrow a cardiac press
(心脏按压器; CPR device?) from the emergency department, and said
it was Li Wenliang who was going to be resuscitated. The news shocked me. I do not understand
everything that happened to Li Wenliang, but could his condition have been affected by his
emotional state after being reprimanded? I have to ask, with my experience; I felt it
myself.
Later, when things got to this point, it proved that Li Wenliang was right. I can understand
his state of mind very easily. It could be my own. I don't feel excitement or happiness, but
regret. Regret that I didn't continue to shout out loudly at the beginning, when people
intervened and scolded us. I often find myself thinking, if only we could turn back time, and
do it right.
Just surviving is good
On the night before the city was shut down on January 23, a friend from the relevant
department called to ask me about the true situation of emergency patients in Wuhan. I said,
are you asking in a private or public capacity? He said, private. [I said,] I will tell you the
truth when I speak on my behalf: On January 21, our emergency department saw 1,523 patients,
three times as many as usual, of which 655 had fever.
The situation in the emergency department during that time will never be forgotten by those
who experienced it, it completely changes your outlook on life.
If this is a war, the emergency department is the front line. But at the time, the inpatient
wards were saturated, and basically none of the patients were accepted, and the ICU was
resolutely refused to accept them. They said that there were uninfected patients in them, and
they became contaminated as soon as they entered. More patients kept rushing in to the
emergency department, and the inpatient beds were not open, so they all piled up in the
emergency department. Patients queued for a few hours to see a doctor. We couldn't take any
time off work at all. There was no distinction between the fever clinic and the emergency
department. The hall was full of patients. The emergency room, the IV room, everywhere was
filled with patients.
Another patient's family came in, wanting a bed for their dad, who couldn't make it in from
the car, because the underground garage was closed at the time, and the car couldn't get in. I
couldn't do anything about that, but I ran to the car with people and equipment. I saw
immediately that he was already dead. What can you say, it's very difficult to bear. The man
died in the car, he didn't even get out of the car.
There was also an old man, his wife had just died at Jinyintan Hospital, her son and
daughter were infected, and she was given an IV, her son-in-law was caring for her. As soon as
I saw that she was very ill, I contacted the respiratory department to admit her to the
hospital. Her son-in-law was obviously a cultured person. He came over and wished to thank the
doctor and so on. As a result, she died. It only took a few seconds, but it was a delay of a
few seconds. That quick "thank you" weighs heavily on me.
And yet there were many people who sent their families to the ward
(监护室[; guardianship room]? in the sense of trustee), and that's the last
time you'l see them, you'll never see them again.
I remember when I came to work on the morning of the Chinese New Year [Friday, January 24,
2020]. I said that we'd take a picture to commemorate the New Year. I also sent it to a circle
of friends. No one wished anyone a happy new year that day. At the time, just surviving was
good.
In the past, if you made a small mistake, for example, if you didn't give an injection in
time, the patient might still be in trouble. Now there's no one, no one is to raise it with
you, no-one is going to take issue with it. Everyone's overwhelmed by the sudden onslaught, we
work blindly.
The patients died, and it was rare to see family members weeping and grieving, because there
were too many, too many. Some family members didn't say "Doctor, please save my family", but
said to the doctor, "Right, let's do this quickly"; it came to that. Everyone was afraid of
being infected.
The queue at the fever clinic was 5 hours long, every day. A woman waiting in line
collapsed, a woman in a leather coat, with a purse and high heels, very carefully dressed. A
middle-aged woman; no one dared to step forward to help her, and she lay on the ground for a
long time. I had to call the nurse and doctor to help her.
On the morning of January 30, I came to work. The son of a white-haired old man had died at
the age of 32. He stared blankly at the doctor giving him the death certificate. There are no
tears at all, how can one cry? There's no way to cry. From the style of his clothing, the old
man might be a rural migrant worker, there's no way to be sure. Without a diagnosis, his son
became a death certificate.
This is what I want to call for. The patients who died in the emergency department were all
undiagnosed, and their causes of death could not be confirmed. After this epidemic has passed,
I hope to give an explanation and give their families some comfort. Our patients wake
compassion, a great deal of compassion.
"Lucky"
Having been a doctor for so many years, I always felt that no difficulty could overwhelm me,
not with my experience and personality.
When I was nine, my father died of gastric cancer. At that time, I thought of growing up to
be a doctor, to save the lives of others. Later, when I did my the college entrance
examination, all my preferences were in medicine, and I finally got to go to Tongji Medical
College. After graduating from medical college in 1997, I went to the Central Hospital. I
previously worked in cardiovascular medicine, and I became the director of the emergency
department in 2010.
I feel the emergency department is one of my children. I built it up, I nurtured a
tight-knit group, which really doesn't make this situation easier, but it's what makes this
group such a treasure; I really cherish this team.
A few days ago, one of my nurses sent a message to a friends group saying "I really miss the
old big busy emergency department"; that kind of busy and this kind of busy are totally
different concepts.
Before this epidemic hit, our emergency department dealt with myocardial infarctions,
cerebral infarctions, gastrointestinal bleeding, trauma and so on. That kind of busy gives a
sense of accomplishment, it has a clear purpose, there's a smooth flow of procedures for all
the various types of patients. There are very mature procedures, there's not a single wasted
step, what to do next is not a problem. But in this time there were so many critically ill
patients whom we had no way to deal with and who couldn't be admitted to hospital, and our
medical staff was still at risk. This kind of busyness is desperate, it's deeply
distressing.
One day at 8 in the morning, a young doctor in our department sent me a WeChat, and it was
quite personal, saying they wouldn't come to work that day, not well. Since what we do here, if
someone is not well, they need to tell me about it in advance; if they tell me at 8 o'clock,
where do I go to find someone? The doctor lost their temper with me in WeChat, and said that a
large number of highly suspect cases were put back into the community by the emergency
department I led. We understand that this is sin! I understand this person, because this is a
doctor's professional ethics, but I was also anxious, and I said you can denounce me, but tell
me, what would you do if you were the director of the emergency department?
Later, the doctor came back to work after a few days of rest. The doctor didn't say that
they feared death or feared harm; no, they were affected the conditions; suddenly having to
deal with so many patients at once, they felt utterly overwhelmed.
And the work of the medics, especially for the many medics who came to support us, it was
psychologically unbearable. There were doctors and nurses in tears. Some were crying for
others, others were crying for themselves, because no-one knows when it will be their turn to
become infected.
Around mid-to-late January, the hospital's leaders also became ill, one after another,
including our director of the office and three vice-presidents. The daughter of the Chief of
Medical Services was also ill and resting at home. So basically there was no administration or
management; you just had to fight there, that was the feeling.
The people around me also started to come down with it one by one. On January 18, at 8:30 in
the morning, our first doctor collapsed, saying "I caught it just like the director did", no
fever, did a CT first off, and the lungs had a lump of ground-glass opacification
(坨磨玻璃). Not long after, the duty nurse in charge of the isolation
ward told me they'd fallen ill. That night, our head nurse fell ill. My very real first feeling
at that time was -- good luck, because falling ill early, you could get off the battlefield for
a little bit.
I've been in close contact with these three people. I just work every day with the belief
that I must fall ill. Everyone in the hospital thought I was a miracle. I've thought about it
myself, perhaps it's because I have asthma and I'm using some inhaled hormones, perhaps it
inhibits the deposition of these viruses in the lungs.
I've always felt that the people who work in the emergency department have feelings, too. In
Chinese hospitals, the status of the emergency department is relatively low among the
departments, because everyone thinks that the emergency department is nothing more than a route
into the hospital, it just needs to admit patients. During this epidemic, this sort of neglect
has always been present.
In the early days, they're weren't enough supplies. Sometimes the quality of the protective
clothing assigned to the emergency department was very poor. I was angry when I saw that our
nurses wore such clothes to work and spoke up about it in Zhouhui Qun [a WeChat group for MDs
in that hospital]. After that, many directors gave me all the protective clothing they kept in
their departments.
There were also problems with food. When there are many patients, the management gets
confused. They simply can't think that the emergency department still has to have something to
eat. Many departments had food and drink after shift changeover, they had a big spread, and
here, we had nothing. In the fever clinic's WeChat group, doctors complained: "Our emergency
department has only disposable diapers " We were the front-line response, and we had to deal
with that sort of thing, sometimes it made me really angry.
Our team is really good. Everyone held the line, they were only off work when they were
sick. More than 40 people in our emergency department were infected. I built a group of all the
sick people, originally called the "Emergency Department Sick
Group"(急诊生病群); the head nurse said that was unlucky, and
changed it to "Emergency Department Re-energizing Group"
(急诊加油群). Even the people who are sick weren't thinking in
terms of despair or blame. They were all very positive, that is, everyone had the attitude that
we needed to help one another to get thorough the crisis together.
These kids, these young people are very good, it's just that they, like me, have to live
with feeling slighted. I hope that after this epidemic, the country will also increase its
investment in emergency departments. In many countries' medical systems, the emergency
department is highly valued.
Unattainable happiness
On February 17th, I received a WeChat message from the old classmate at Tongji Hospital. He
said "Sorry" to me. I said: it's fortunate that you passed the message on and warned some
people in time. If he hadn't passed it on, they might not have Li Wenliang and the eight
others, but people would probably know less.
This time, we had the entire families of three female doctors get infected. Two female
doctors had their father-in-law and mother-in-law infected, and their husbands, and another had
her father, mother, sister, and husband infected, and five close relatives. Everyone thinks
that the virus was discovered so early on, and yet this is the result, it caused us such great
loss, took such a terrible toll.
It took this toll in many different ways, too. In addition to those who died, those who were
sick also suffered.
In our "Emergency Department Re-energizing group", people often exchange physical
conditions. Some people ask: a heart rate that's always 120 beats per minute, does it matter?
Surely it matters, they panic as soon as they move. This will affect them for life, and is
heart failure likely? It's hard to say. In the future, others will be able to go hiking and
traveling, and they might not be able to, all that is possible.
And Wuhan. You said that our Wuhan is a lively place; now it's very, very quiet on the
streets. Many things can't be bought and we have to support the whole country. A few days ago,
a nurse of a medical team in Guangxi suddenly fell into a coma while at work, and was
resucitated. Her heart restarted, but she is still in a coma. If she hadn't come to work, she
could have had a good time at home, and this kind of thing wouldn't have happened. So, I think
we owe everyone, really.
Having been through this epidemic, many people in the hospital have been hit hard. Several
medical staff below me have thoughts of resignation, including some backbones of the
department. Everyone's previous ideas, all the things everyone knows about this profession,
they're are inevitably a little shaken -- it's that you work so hard, isn't it? Just like Jiang
Xueqing, he worked too hard, he was too good to the patients, he was doing surgery every year
during [Chinese] New Year. Today, someone sent a WeChat written by Jiang Xueqing's daughter,
saying that her father's time was all given to his patients.
Myself, I've had countless thoughts of going back home to be a housewife. After the epidemic
began, I basically didn't go home, I lived separately from my husband. My sister helped take
care of my children at home. My second treasure didn't recognize me, didn't react to me when he
saw me on video. I felt very lost. It wasn't easy for me to give birth to this second child. He
was 10 kg at birth. I had to wean him abruptly -- when I made that decision, that was hard for
me to do. My husband told me that these things happen in life, and you're not only a
participant, you're also choosing to lead the team to fight this epidemic; that's also a very
meaningful act, and when everything returns to normal for everyone, then you'll remember; it's
a valuable experience to have had.
The leader (领导) talked to me on the morning of February 21st. Actually, I
would have liked to ask a few questions, such as, do you think that that criticism was wrong
that day? I hoped to be given an apology. But I dared not ask. No one said sorry to me on any
occasion. I still feel that these events are an even clearer demonstation of why each person
should stick to their own independent ideas, regardless, because if someone wants to stand up
and tell the truth, there must be someone, and the world must hear a dissenting voice,
right?
I'm Wuhanese, who doesn't love their own city? Now we remember what extravagant happiness we
enjoyed in the most ordinary life. I now feel that holding the baby, going out to play with him
on a slide, or going out to watch a movie with my husband, even things we never did all that
often in the past, they are now all a kind of happiness, an unattainable happiness.
Complete disinfecting protocol includes four steps: Pre-cleaning, disinfecting (dwell time),
wiping clean and rinsing with water. "But we're lucky if we get two," meaning dwell time and
wipe-up, said Mark Warner, education manager at the Cleaning Management Institute, a provider
of training and certification for professional cleaning services. Pre-cleaning is most
important on heavily soiled surfaces, because dirt can shield pathogens underneath; it's fine
to use soap and water or a household cleaner. Disinfecting for the proper dwell time, of
course, is nonnegotiable. Wiping afterward is essential because disinfectants can leave a
sticky residue where pathogens can quickly resettle. And rinsing finishes the process.
.... ... ...
Multiple sources give different bleach-to-water ratios for use with regular bleach. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that "unexpired bleach will be effective
against coronaviruses" in a 1:48 solution (⅓ cup of bleach per gallon of water, or 4
teaspoons per quart).
Clorox recommends a slightly stronger 1:32 ratio (½ cup per gallon or 2 tablespoons
per quart). Mark Warner recommends a much stronger 1:10 ratio (about 1½ cups per gallon
of water, or about ⅓ cup per quart). Some medical disinfectants are basically the same
solution.
Whichever ratio you use, let it sit on the surface for 10 minutes: Warner told us that this
is the Environmental Protection Agency's guideline for any new or unknown pathogen, and it is
also the dwell time listed for the regular household bleaches on the E.P.A.'s
List N, which means it is approved to eliminate the coronavirus when properly used.
Don't mix up more than you will use within a day or two. Bleach degrades fairly rapidly once
taken from its original storage container, becoming less effective each day
via Gates Expert jacob levitch's twit account:
April 09, 2020 , Gates' Globalist Vaccine Agenda: A Win-Win for Pharma and Mandatory
Vaccination , RFK, Jr, Chairman, Children's Health Defense
[hope you won't mind if i paste it all in, CB.]
'Vaccines, for Bill Gates, are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many
vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft's ambition to control a global vaccination
ID enterprise) and give him dictatorial control of global health policy.
Gates' obsession with vaccines seems to be fueled by a conviction to save the world with
technology.
Promising his share of $450 million of $1.2 billion to eradicate Polio, Gates took
control of India's National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) which mandated
up to 50 doses (Table 1) of polio vaccines through overlapping immunization programs to
children before the age of five. Indian doctors blame the Gates campaign for a devastating
non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children beyond
expected rates between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government dialed back Gates'
vaccine regimen and asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India. NPAFP rates
dropped precipitously.
In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) reluctantly admitted that the global
explosion in polio is predominantly vaccine strain. [?] The most frightening epidemics in
Congo, Afghanistan, and the Philippines, are all linked to vaccines. In fact, by 2018, 70%
of global polio cases were vaccine strain.
In 2014, the Gates Foundation funded tests of experimental HPV vaccines, developed by
Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) and Merck, on 23,000 young girls in remote Indian provinces.
Approximately 1,200 suffered severe side effects, including autoimmune and fertility
disorders. Seven died. Indian government investigations charged that Gates-funded
researchers committed pervasive ethical violations: pressuring vulnerable village girls
into the trial, bullying parents, forging consent forms, and refusing medical care to the
injured girls. The case is now in the country's Supreme Court.
In 2010, the Gates Foundation funded a phase 3 trial of GSK's experimental malaria
vaccine, killing 151 African infants and causing serious adverse effects including
paralysis, seizure, and febrile convulsions to 1,048 of the 5,949 children.
During Gates' 2002 MenAfriVac campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa, Gates' operatives forcibly
vaccinated thousands of African children against meningitis. Approximately 50 of the 500
children vaccinated developed paralysis. South African newspapers complained, "We are
guinea pigs for the drug makers." Nelson Mandela's former Senior Economist, Professor
Patrick Bond, describes Gates' philanthropic practices as "ruthless and immoral."
... ... ...
In addition to using his philanthropy to control WHO, UNICEF, GAVI, and PATH, Gates
funds a private pharmaceutical company that manufactures vaccines, and additionally is
donating $50 million to 12 pharmaceutical companies to speed up development of a
coronavirus vaccine. In his recent media appearances, Gates appears confident that the
Covid-19 crisis will now give him the opportunity to force his dictatorial vaccine programs
on American children.'
There's no doubt that the Coronavirus is a serious infection that can lead to severe illness
or death. There's also no doubt that 'virus hysteria' has been used for other purposes. Wall
Street, for example, has used virus-panic to advance its own agenda and get another round of
trillion dollar bailouts. In fact, it took less than a week to get the pushover congress to ram
through a massive $2.2 trillion boondoggle without even one lousy congressman offering a peep
of protest. That's got to be some kind of record.
In 2008, at the peak of the financial crisis, Congress voted "No" to the $700 billion TARP
bill. Some readers might recall how a number of GOP congressmen bravely banded together and
flipped Wall Street "the bird". That didn't happen this time around. Even though the bill is
three times bigger than the TARP ( $2.2 trillion), no one lifted a finger to stop it. Why?
Fear, that's why. Everyone in congress was scared to death that if they didn't rush this
debt-turd through the House pronto, the economy would collapse while tens of thousands of
corpses would be stacking up in cities across the country. Of course the reason they believed
this nonsense was because the goofy infectious disease experts confidently assured everyone
that the body-count would be "in the hundreds of thousands if not millions." Remember that
fiction? The most recent estimate is somewhere in the neighborhood of 60,000 total. I don't
need to tell you that the difference between 60,000 and "millions" is a little more than a
rounding-error.
So we've had the wool pulled over our eyes, right? Not as bad as congress, but, all the
same, we've been hoodwinked and we've been fleeced. And the people who have axes to grind have
been very successful in taking advantage of the hysteria and promoting their own agendas. Maybe
you've noticed the reemergence of creepy Bill Gates and the Vaccine Gestapo or NWO Henry
Kissinger warning us that, "the world will never be the same after the coronavirus".
What do these people know that we don't know? Doesn't it all make you a bit suspicious? And
when you see nonstop commercials on TV telling you to "wash your hands"or "keep your distance"
or "stay inside" and, oh yeah, "We're all in this together", doesn't it leave you scratching
your head and wondering who the hell is orchestrating this virus-charade and what do they
really have in mind for us unwashed masses??
At least in the case of Wall Street, we know what they want. They want money and lots of
it.
Have you looked over the $2.2 trillion CARES bill that Trump just signed into law a couple
weeks ago? It's pretty grim reading, so I'll save you the effort. Here's a rough breakdown:
$250 billion will go for the $1,200 checks that most of us will receive in a couple weeks.
And $250 billion will be provided for extended unemployment insurance benefits.
That's $500 billion.
Working people will get $500 billion while Wall Street and Corporate America will get 3
times that amount. ($1.7 trillion) And even that's a mere fraction of the total sum
because– hidden in the small print– is a section that allows the Fed to lever-up
the base-capital by 10-to-1 ($450 billion to $4.5 trillion) which means the Fed can buy as many
"toxic" bonds and garbage assets as it chooses. The Fed is turning itself into a hedge fund in
order to buy the sludge that has accumulated on the balance sheets of corporations and
financial institutions for the last decade. It's another gigantic ripoff that's being cleverly
concealed behind the ridiculous coronavirus hype. It's infuriating.
So here's the question: Do you think Congress knew that working people would only get a
pittance while the bulk of the dough would go to Wall Street?
It's hard to say, but they certainly knew that the economy was cratering and that $500
billion wasn't going to put much of a dent in a $20 trillion economy. In other words, even if
everyone goes out and blows their measly $1,200 checks on Day 1, we're still going to
experience the sharpest economic contraction on record, a second Great Depression.
Maybe they should have talked about that in congress before they voted for this
trillion-dollar turkey? Maybe they should have thought a little more about how the money should
be distributed: Should it go to the people who actually buy things, generate activity and
produce growth, or to the parasite class that blows up the system every decade and drags the
economy down a black hole? That seems like something you might want to know before you pass a
multi-trillion dollar bill that's supposed to fix the economy.
It's also worth noting that the $5.8 trillion is not nearly the total amount that Wall
Street will eventually get. The Fed has already spent $2 trillion via its QE program (to shore
up the dysfunctional repo market) and Fed chair Jay Powell announced on Thursday that another
$2.3 trillion in loans and purchases would be used to buy municipal bonds, corporate bonds and
loans to small businesses. The allocation for small businesses, which falls under the, Main
Street Lending Program, has been widely touted as a sign of how much the Fed really cares about
struggling Mom and Pop businesses that employ the majority of working Americans. But, once
again, it's a sham and a boondoggle. The program is on-track to get $600 billion funding of
which the US Treasury will provide the base-capital of $75 billion. The rest will be levered-up
by 9-to-1 by the Fed, which means it's just more smoke and mirrors.
What readers need to realize is that the Treasury has accepted the credit risk for all of
the loans that default . In other words, the American people are now on the hook for
100% of all of the loans that go south, and there's going to be alot of them because the
banks have no reason to find creditworthy borrowers. They get a 5% cut off-the-top whether the
loans blow up or not. And, that, my friend, is how you incentivize fraud which, as Bernie
Sanders noted, "is Wall Street's business model."
It also helps to explain why Trump has repeatedly rejected congressional oversight of the
various bailout programs. He's smart enough to know a good swindle when he sees one, and this
one is a corker. The government is essentially waving trillions of dollars right under the
noses of the world's most ravenous hyenas expecting them not to act in character. But of course
they will act in character and hundreds of billions of dollars will be siphoned off by scheming
sharpies who figure out how game the system and turn the whole fiasco into another Wall Street
looting operation. You can bet on it.
So, what is the final tally?
Well, according to Trump's chief economic advisor, Larry Kudlow, the first bailout
installment is $6.2 trillion (after the Fed ramps up the Treasury's contribution of $450
billion.). Then there's the $2.3 trillion in additional programs the Fed announced on Thursday.
Finally, the Fed's QE program adds another $2 trillion in bond purchases since September 17,
when the repo market went haywire.
Altogether, the total sum amounts to $10.5 trillion.
You know what they say, "A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon you're talking real
money."
Of course, no one on Capitol Hill worries about trivialities like money because, "We're the
United States of America, and our dollar will always be King." But there's a fundamental flaw
to this type of thinking. Yes, the dollar is the world's reserve currency, but that's a
privilege that the US has greatly abused over the years, and it's certainly not going to
survive this latest wacky helicopter drop. No, I am not suggesting the US would ever default on
its debt, that's not going to happen. But, yes, I am suggesting that the US will have to repay
its debts in a currency that has lost a significant amount of its value. You don't have to be
Einstein to figure out that you can't willy-nilly print-up $10 or $20 trillion dollars without
eroding the value of the currency. That's a no-brainer. Central bankers around the world are
now looking at their piles of USDs thinking, "Hmmm, maybe it's time I traded some of these
greenbacks in for a few yen, euros or even Swiss francs?"
So how does this end? Can the Fed continue to write trillion dollar checks on an account
that is already $23 trillion overdrawn? Will Central banks around the world continue to
stockpile dollars when the Fed is printing them up faster than anyone can count? And what about
China? How long before China realizes that US Treasuries are grossly overvalued, that US
equities markets are unreformable, that the dollar is backed by nothing but red ink, and that
Wall Street is the biggest and most corrupt cesspit on earth?
Not long, I'd wager. So, how does this end? It ends in a flash of monetary debasement
preceded by a violent and destabilizing currency crisis. It's plain as the nose on your face.
The Fed knows that when a nation's sovereign debt exceeds 100% of GDP, "there's almost no
mathematical way to service that debt in real terms." Well, the US passed that milestone
way-back in 2019 before this latest drunken spending-spree even began. It's safe to say, we've
now entered the financial Twilight Zone, the Land of No Return. If we add the Fed's bulging
balance sheet to the final estimate, (after all, it's just another shady Enron-type Special
Purpose Vehicle) the national debt will be somewhere north of $33 trillion by year-end,
which means that Uncle Sam will be the greatest credit risk on Planet Earth. Imagine how
jaws will drop on the day that Moodys and Fitch slash the ratings on US Treasuries to Triple B
"junk" status . That should turn a few heads.
So what can we expect in the months to come?
First, the economy is going to slip into a deflationary period as people get back to work
and slowly resume their spending. But once demand picks up and the Fed's liquidity starts to
kick in, the economy will rebound sharply followed by steadily rising prices. That's the red
flag that will signal a weakening dollar. Similar to 1933, when Roosevelt took the U.S. off the
gold standard and printed money like crazy, economic activity picked up but the value of the
dollar dropped by 40%. A similar scenario seems likely here as well. Economist Lyn Alden
Schwartzer summed it up like this in an article at
Seeking Alpha:
"One of the common debates is whether all of this debt, counteracted by a tremendous
monetary expansion by the Federal Reserve in response, will cause a deflationary bust or an
inflationary problem .. Fundamentally, evidence points to a period of deflation due to
this global shutdown and demand destruction shock, likely followed in the coming years by
rising inflation .
In the coming years, the United States will be effectively printing money to fund large
fiscal deficits , while also having a large current account deficit and negative net
international investment position. This is one of the main variables for my view that the
dollar will likely decrease in value relative to a basket of foreign currencies in the coming
years ." ( "Why This Is
Unlike The Great Depression" , Seeking Alpha)
So, after decades of lethal low interest rates, relentless meddling and gross regulatory
malpractice, the Fed has led us to this final, fatal crossroads: Inflate or default. From the
looks of things, the choice has already been made. Wiemar America, here we come!
"If, then, I were asked for the most important advice I could give, that which I considered
to be the most useful to the men of our century, I should simply say: in the name of God,
stop a moment, cease your work, look around you." Leo Tolstoy
Mike Davis on the pandemic. It is very very good.
This is a small sample from the interview:
".....MM: Is capitalist globalization biologically sustainable?
"...MD: Only by accepting a permanent triage of humanity and dooming part of the human
race to eventual extinction.
"Economic globalization -- that is to say, the accelerated free movement of finance and
investment within a single world market where labor is relatively immobile and deprived of
traditional bargaining power -- is different from economic interdependence regulated by the
universal protection of the rights of labor and small producers. Instead, we see a world
system of accumulation that is everywhere breaking down traditional boundaries between animal
diseases and humans, increasing the power of drug monopolies, proliferating carcinogenic
waste, subsidizing oligarchy and undermining progressive governments committed to public
health, destroying traditional communities (both industrial and preindustrial) and turning
the oceans into sewers. Market solutions leave in place Dickensian social conditions and
perpetuate the global shame of income-limited access to clean water and sanitation.
"The present crisis does force capital, large and small, to confront the possible
breakdown of its global production chains and the ability to constantly re-source cheaper
supplies of overseas labor. At the same time, it points to important new or expanding markets
for vaccines, sterilization systems, surveillance technology, home grocery delivery and so
on. The combined dangers and opportunities will lead to a partial fix: new products and
procedures that reduce the health risks of constant disease emergence while simultaneously
spurring the further development of surveillance capitalism. But these protections will
almost certainly be limited -- if left up to markets and authoritarian nationalist regimes --
to rich countries and rich classes. They will reinforce walls, not pull them down, and deepen
the divide between two humanities: one with resources to mitigate climate change and new
pandemics and the other without...."
That's the message in a blistering April 11 letter sent by the New York State
Nurses Association's director to Howard Zucker, the state health commissioner, obtained by The Post.
The letter contradicts comments made by Melissa de Rosa, secretary to Gov. Cuomo, at a press briefing
last week, in which she said that hospitals were receiving
stockpiled PPE equipment
and that no health care facilities in the state would have to resort to
"crisis conservation."
That means the reusing of masks, hospital gowns and other equipment meant to guard against the spread
of COVID-19.
"At this point most hospitals and nursing homes in the New York City metropolitan area, which is the
national epicenter of the pandemic, continue to operate under 'crisis conservation' standards because
they do not have enough PPE to distribute to our desperate staff," wrote Patricia Kane, the executive
director of the Nurses Association, the union which represents 42,000 frontline nurses in the state.
Enlarge Image
Nurses
at Mount Sinai West wearing garbage bags as PPEs.
Criselle Cruz Bermas
In the letter, Kane went on to describe "widespread" crisis protocols for re-using scarce protective
equipment.
She described how N95 masks are only being used by nurses and other staff in ICUs and the masks,
designed for one-time use, must be recycled for up to five days before being discarded.
She described how the delay of delivery of PPEs to many hospitals have forced health care workers to
collect and re-sterilize used PPE equipment which would be discarded under normal circumstances.
"If the state is in possession of stockpiles of PPE, they should be immediately distributed to our
facilities so that our nurses and other staff can provide can provide care for patients under safe
conditions," Kane said.
"We urge you to treat this matter with the urgency that the situation warrants and act to protect the
safety and lives of the nurses and other direct care workers on the front lines of this fight.
"Our nurses do not need expressions of appreciation and promises. They need to see ample supplies of
PPE on their units."
Question: Why the hell do all of you in the comments assume this guy is right, and
literally every SINGLE other doctor and physician is wrong? Just because he's contradicting
the consensus? He hasn't presented a shred of evidence apart from his "theories". How likely
is it that literally nobody else agrees with him? Essentially zero. Why are you all jumping
on this? Cause of some insane conspiracy that every physician in the world is part of some
conspiracy to lie to you?
="article"> RT here. I'd consider using an esophageal balloon catheter and adjusting
vent settings according to transpulmonary pressures. A lot of places are using ARDSnet
protocol and this is a great start, but transpulmonary pressure monitoring is really the next
step up to achieving optimal and safe ventilator settings. I have a high suspicion that if
you place a balloon in a patient on ARDSnet setting, their PEEP would be suboptimal and their
transpulmonary pressure will be negative, suggesting alveolar collapse with every breath,
leading to atelectrauma and lung injury. I've had patients in APRV, placed a balloon and
switched back to conventional ventilation with balloon guided settings, and have drastic
improvements in both oxygenation and ventilation. Increasing PEEP to achieve PtpExp 0-5 to
avoid alveolar collapse and adjusting tidal volumes/inspiratory pressures to maintain
PtpInsp(Driving Pressure) <15 to avoid overdistention.
div>I tentatively suggest it may be worth researching Viagra as a possible treatment -
Viagra causes the blood to flow more freely and more oxygen flow in the body - Viagra is
commonly used by high altitude climbers to help them combat the severe lack of oxygen at high
altitude - see my previous comments. Maybe Viagra could help get desperately needed oxygen in
to the blood of Covid 19 patients and help save lives. It's definitely worth considering - as
it is an existing approved drug that could easily be re-appropriated without lengthy clinical
trials. At this point we have nothing to loose - if Viagra could possibly help, then it is
tentatively worth looking in to. (Possibly Coca leaves too - as they are also used to help
the body uptake oxygen at high altitude where there is very little oxygen - but I suppose
Coca leaves would never get official approval) I would be very interested to hear peoples
thoughts. Please read my previous comment for more info. Thank you for taking the time to
read this.
iv>Looks like the Covid19 has at least 3 stages of progression: Stage 1: fever, cough,
diarrhea, headache, within 7-10 days of infection Stage 2: as disease gets deeper into the
lungs, shortness of breath, low levels of oxygen by approximately day 11-15 days. At this
point the Respirators helps patients Stage 3: at about 3 weeks. The patients are very sick,
acute respiratory distress, shock, cardiac failure and death. Most probable, they are
experiencing the effects of the 'Cytokine storm' due to the viral overload, and a massive
release of cytokines, causing serious damage to the lungs, loss of lung function and fatal
outcome.
renderer-text-content expanded">Thank you, doctor. I'm a recently retired PhD veteran
of respiratory research out of pharma & biotech. I'm so relieved someone with credibility
has finally called it correctly. I have friends in Italy I've known for decades through the
medical/ research community. They've told me EXACTLY what you've found. Further, in some
Italian case series, 97% died on ventilators. A similar case series given high oxygen CPAP
often survived. Now imagine hundreds of elderly people, ill & having a positive covid19
PCR test, being put on transport ventilators attended by physicians inexperienced in ITU. I
would not expect many to survive, but this is our "surge capacity" we've set up in UK.
omment-renderer-text-content expanded">This is exactly what I have been suspecting.
This was recently published in Nature. "The results showed the ORF8 and surface glycoprotein
could bind to the porphyrin, respectively. At the same time, orf1ab, ORF10, and ORF3a
proteins could coordinate attack the heme on the 1-beta chain of hemoglobin to dissociate the
iron to form the porphyrin. The attack will cause less and less hemoglobin that can carry
oxygen and carbon dioxide. The lung cells have extremely intense poisoning and inflammatory
due to the inability to exchange carbon dioxide and oxygen frequently, which eventually
results in ground-glass-like lung images." 1. The virus attaches to the hemoglobin via ORF8
(a protein) and glycoprotein. Hemoglobin is an iron rich protein that that allows red blood
cells to carry oxygen from the lungs to the rest of the body. 2. This allows it to cut off
the iron 3. This reduces the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide available to the lung cells.
(it is well known that anemia causes shortness of breathe, for example, because your body
does not get enough oxygen rich blood). 4. This results in intense poisoning and
inflammation, which results in lung damage, the ground glass like lung images, and sometimes
death. Sickle cell disease is caused by a mutation in the hemoglobin-Beta gene found on
chromosome 11. Hemoglobin transports oxygen from the lungs to other parts of the body. Red
blood cells with normal hemoglobin (hemoglobin-A) are smooth and round and glide through
blood vessels. This may be why an anti-malaria drug like Plaquenil might be effective against
this virus. Sickle cell anemia mutates the hemoglobin-Beta gene, which then provides
protection from malaria. COVID-19 attacks the beta-hemoglobin. Doctor, I came to the same
conclusion myself. Please pass this along to your colleagues.
https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surface_Glycoprotein_Inhibit_Heme_Metabolism_by_Binding_to_Porphyrin/11938173/5?fbclid=IwAR1K50u0wRWhOCv0_rxS2_bYk7p3mT-OWX08GXaa0Tm13bzT8Wl8MYfTAI8
There seems to be some evidence that hemoglobin is being disrupted and Iron ions are being
released and the Free iron ions are poisoning the lung cell. this needs to be researched.
Mitigated by providing O2 may be needed.
In Italy some (few) hospitals started using ozone therapy and the very first experiences
are rather promising. I really hope that they can find an effective treatment of
Covid-19.
iv> TY-I posted this on my FB and am sharing with all the pulmonologists I know. You
are spot on. Many of us nurses have had similar questions. Why is Vent to death rate nearly
2x faster with this than pneumonia? This is what I posted on my FB w your video. Please
please keep talking - everyone please keep talking and being public. Doctors and nurses are
the ones who will raise public awareness and create change and save lives. Nobody else.
Seriously we are on our own. Our union nurses have been making the news daily. We need to
continue to take over Social media and the news and use the public trust to advance care of
our patients and protection for us (need PPE) and our families. "This is NOT pneumonia. I
100% agree with him. There's no other answer to the poor response and rapid decline with
"traditional" treatment regimens. Please get this video out to all providers-especially
ICU-Critical Care Providers-Pulmonologists- Infection Disease doctors. There has to be a
different paradigm. Steroid use must be questioned. Suppression of febrile state must be
questioned? Why not allow the immune response to run its course up to 40C? Pay attention to
ACE2 receptor and microbiology of it's actions and role. Check out Med Cram or John Campbell
on Youtube as well. They speak to the same questions. We are all learning and this is
something totally new."
Malaria is also linked to hypoxia because the malaria parasite uses hemoglobin as a
nutrient source. HCQ is effective in protecting the hemoglobin in the blood which is why it
is showing success against COVID-19 as well.
" role="article"> There are four types of hypoxia: hypoxic, stagnant, anaemic and
cytotoxic - as I am sure you know. If your theory is correct this would equate to anaemic
hypoxia, but instead of lack of haemoglobin it would be dysfunctional. Similar, in a way, to
CO poisoning: HB doesn't unload oxygen, so there is a tissue hypoxia without cyanosis. What
you would see is normal or high pa02 (partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood) and
discordantly low arterial haemoglobin saturation. On the other hand, if pa02 is low it
indicates that the primary problem is pulmonary, that is oxygen does not diffuse across the
alveolar membrane. If haemoglobin is the primary problem then blood transfusion would indeed
improve the outcome. What is the typical blood gas like in these patients? I am in Australia,
and we don't have many severe cases, luckily. From what get to the Internet I gather these
patients are also hypercarbic. Which is the opposite of the altitude sickness, where a
patients hyperventilates, causing hypocarbia and respiratory alkalosis, with consequent
symptoms. Hence acetazolamide treatment. So, what's the typical arterial blood gas like in
COVID patients? High pa02 and low Sa02? Both low? What's paCO2 like?
Thank you for covering this doctor. I am sharing. I noticed that they have not rushed to
put Boris Johnson on a ventilator and Dr. Oz brought up the ventilator issues on a recent
broadcast. There are not enough qualified personnel running these machines throughout the
States and that is a cause for concern because as you have noted they need to be monitored
and adjusted accordingly. Stay safe. We have your back.
="article"> Video: Ari Whitten speaks with Scott Antoine, MD -- a board-certified
emergency physician and a functional and integrative medicine doctor about the latest
findings on COVID-19: A potential breakthrough on COVID-19 treatment." Show Notes: The
difference between ARDS and COVID-19 ( 0:59 ) The danger of the cytokine
storm ( 8:28 ) How COVID-19 may not be a
respiratory condition ( 16:20 ) The pros and cons of
ventilators ( 25:13 ) Why Methylene blue
shows promise for treating COVID-19 ( 31:00 ) Other potential factors
that could help COVID-19 treatment ( 47:33 ) How Vitamin C works in
COVID-19 treatment ( 55:09 )
https://www.theenergyblueprint.com/blue/?inf_contact_key=7c7cb8a0e1a3404449b49e79b5046d61d18a532c4142cb79caf2b269de1401fa
rticle"> Fantastic analysis, backed by a prospective explanation. I'm a physician in
upstate NY and confirm Dr. Kyle-Sidell's observations. HFNC (high-flow nasal cannula) appears
to be a good intermediary between typical face-mask O2 and traditional ventilators .. but
these machines are not in widespread use. Optiflow by Fisher & Paykal
https://www.fphcare.com/us/hospital/adult-respiratory/optiflow/ and Hi-VNI Precision Flow
by Vapotherm
https://vapotherm.com/hi-vni-technology/ are two companies that make these units. I have
no financial interests in either of these companies.
"article"> The symptoms of individuals presenting with suspected "CoVid 19" are similar
to individuals with radiation sickness. What is your experience with treating radiation
sickness? Have you attempted to utilize radiation sickness treatment protocol to address the
symptoms you are witnessing in individuals presenting with suspected "CoVid 19"? You feedback
is appreciated, thank you in advance.
https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/radiation-sickness
lass="comment-renderer-text-content expanded"> You are right. My hospital has a 0%
success rate using ventilators on covid patients. These patients can be sitting comfortably
talking to you on a non-rebreather with no use of accessory muscles and have a pulse ox of
75%. They appear to have no issue moving air into and out of the lungs like you would see if
it were ARDS. They all have horribly high ferritin levels and go into kidney failure long
before their respiratory system crashes.
This virus destroys the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood through the iron binding
sites of the red blood cells. So what then is the solution?
iv> This is from CDC web site (description of malaria): Severe malaria occurs when
infections are complicated by serious organ failures or abnormalities in the patient's blood
or metabolism. The manifestations of severe malaria include the following: Cerebral malaria,
with abnormal behavior, impairment of consciousness, seizures, coma, or other neurologic
abnormalities Severe anemia due to hemolysis (destruction of the red blood cells)
Hemoglobinuria (hemoglobin in the urine) due to hemolysis Acute respiratory distress syndrome
(ARDS), an inflammatory reaction in the lungs that inhibits oxygen exchange, which may occur
even after the parasite counts have decreased in response to treatment Abnormalities in blood
coagulation Low blood pressure caused by cardiovascular collapse Acute kidney injury
Hyperparasitemia, where more than 5% of the red blood cells are infected by malaria parasites
Metabolic acidosis (excessive acidity in the blood and tissue fluids), often in association
with hypoglycemia Hypoglycemia (low blood glucose). Hypoglycemia may also occur in pregnant
women with uncomplicated malaria, or after treatment with quinine. Severe malaria is a
medical emergency and should be treated urgently and aggressively. Now, what we have at hand
is viral malaria type disease. Same symptoms. Now, BIll Gates was working on the cure for
malaria, right? Maybe he found something else. Malaria and COVID 19 both respond well to HCQ.
You guys make your own conclusions.
Did you ever wonder if the disease itself gets a foothold because of the oxygen saturation
level of the patients involved? Could it be that the most severely compromised already have
lowered oxygen levels? Certainly exacerbated by COVID-19 but perhaps initiated by initial
lowered oxygen levels?
Dr Bill Deagle of Nutrimedical Report recently said in his broadcast that COVID-19 is like
a high altitude sickness - just as you've concluded Dr Kyle-Sidell. Dr. Bill Deagle (a bit
rough around the edges yet brilliant) claims to have treatment solutions that are effective.
Perhaps you should contact him immediately and have a conversation. It may steer the course
to brighter outcomes for us all. God speed! 🇺🇸
Good, but so few doctors have the nuts to speak out as this physician did. Treating Lungs,
when the lungs ARE WORKING FINE and only get damaged by the ventilator. It's blood disease,
where hemoglobin is destroyed and cannot deliver oxygen to the organs. We need
Hydroxychloroquine widely distributed as a preventative AND CURE, and open up our society
again!! FIRE FAUCI!
e"> You must clear out the phlegm in both lungs first. This virus consumes & breaks
down lung cells to replicate itself. As more cells are consumed more pinkish phlegm will
continue to form inside both lungs and blocking the air. Eventually the lungs will be
liquefied. Put down that American pride and start working with the Chinese experts to SAVE
LIVES. Enough time has been wasted on playing the blame game
https://covid-19.alibabacloud.com/
le"> ARDS, oxidative stress, PAP.( Pulmonary Alveolar Proteinosis), " It has been
proposed that lower iron saturation of Tf decreases iron-mediated oxidative stress and
rescues respiratory failure [89,90]. Secondary PAP can accompany infection, particle exposure
and malignancies [38], most of which are associated with altered iron homeostasis. Together,
a remarkable relationship between PAP and iron metabolism exists" " it has been proposed that
the presence of pro-oxidant iron in lung epithelial fluid may contribute to susceptibility to
oxidative damage [28]. Lavage fluid of ARDS patients has elevated levels of total and nonheme
iron as well as cellular content of Tf, ferritin and Lf [86]. This indicates impaired
pulmonary homeostasis of iron in ARDS, although it is unclear whether this is due to general
increase in membrane permeability or altered iron metabolism." ARDSAcute Respiratory Distress
SyndromeBALBronchoalveolar LavageDcytbDuodenal cytochrome bDMT1Divalent Metal Transporter
1FPNFerroportinLfLactoferrinLfRLactoferrin ReceptorNramp1Natural Resistance-associated
Macrophage Protein 1PAPPulmonary Alveolar ProteinosisRBCRed Blood
CellsTfTransferrinTfRTransferrin Receptor I copied and pasted exerpts from the study.
Interesting Read between correlation of Iron Homeostasis / Regulation and ARDS, Lung
Inflammation etc
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5718378/
> Cameron - I'm a retired scientist and former climber who got this disease back in
January (classic symptoms, including shortness of breath - now permanent), and what you are
describing is EXACTLY what I thought. I have been telling people that "I'm permanently stuck
at 7000 feet in the Colorado Rockies". I sleep worse just like when I was in the mountains.
Very lucky I'm not at 11,000 feet - that would not have been long-term survivable for me. I
can likely live 10-20 more years with this, if it doesn't progress, but I have a feeling that
it DOES PROGRESS. I don't think the virus is gone. It seems like it's still there. Quinine
and zinc helped me AFTER recovery, but the side effects of quinine are nasty, so I'm taking a
break. I had to get MacGyver and self-treat because I'm supposedly cured and can't get
HCQ/AZM/Zn and my doc is not a specialist, etc. Nobody knows how to deal with this, so my
fellow online researchers are working constantly on understanding (wqth.wordpress.com). We
think a lot of us got it - two of us had intermediate cases like mine (no hospitals). Would
love to get into a study.
You are the first colleague that also seems to have discovered that COVID-19 is not an
ordinary viral pneumonia. I think I may know how to prevent respiatoy failure in an early
phase and therefore no need for mechanical ventilation.
"article"> Hi Doctor. My experience of COVID-19 over the last 4 weeks precisely as you
are describing. I instinctively felt when I got it that it was not what the experts
described. I could feel through my knowledge with my body that the problem with my system as
it started to breakdown was in the drop in the oxygen levels being the main source of my
distress. The way I got COVID-19 the symptoms of fever, dry cough, aches and pains were such
that they did not distract from the main problem itself which was my system not taking in
oxygen, I have been trying to puzzle this out during my recovery and I definitely think that
as your explain it here it is the case with how the COVID-19 virus takes down the individual.
You must forge ahead with this. Let me offer an example in my own treatment of this ... I
deliberately removed certain remedies I was using like Vit C for a period of time to see what
the effect would be then I returned to a regime of taking it and the oxygen in-take into my
system returned and my system improved with the simple increase of Vit C I felt my oxygen
intake improve and I felt immediately less stressed. Also, a constriction in the back of my
throat alongside my swallowing action indicated to me when my system was struggling with
oxygen intake levels moving up and down. I definitely do agree with your findings here from
my experience of being a victim of this Virus in a significant way.
cle"> Email from another doctor in New York City to a colleague: "We have zero success
story for patients who were intubated. Our thinking is changing to postpone intubation to as
long as possible, to prevent mechanical injury from the vent. "Those patients tolerate
arterial hypoxia surprisingly well. Natural course seems to be the best. Yesterday did not
intubate patient with 86% [blood oxygen saturation percentage] on non re breather ( gave the
best sat, desated on CPAP). Today he is sating 96%. If he would have been intubated, he will
be dead in three days."
le"> Doctor Ming Lin an emergency room doctor with 17 years of experience was fired for
going public about poor hospital room safety and shortage of medical supplies and PPE. He was
employed by a physician staffing firm at Joseph Medical Center in Bellingham,Washington. A
third of hospital emergency rooms are staffed by 2 physician staffing companies TeamHealth
and Envision Healthcare, owned by Wall Street investment firms. Patients and insurance
companies then can be overcharged for needed emergency care. Blackstone's owner of Teamhealth
CEO, Stephan Schwarzman a part of the president's circle would not want an employee to
express information contrary to the political rhetoric of the current administration. The
navy relieved Captain Brett Cozier for also sounding the alarm about lack of medical supplies
and supplies. Do not be naive enough to believe money and power trumps the wellbeing of the
citizens of this country.
Could it not be an IHA reaction, also associated with the vulnerabilities to Covid?
Suppress that response and allow more time to overcome viral replication.
Tracey Continelli1 day ago This is exactly what I have been suspecting. This was recently
published in Nature. "The results showed the ORF8 and surface glycoprotein could bind to the
porphyrin, respectively. At the same time, orf1ab, ORF10, and ORF3a proteins could coordinate
attack the heme on the 1-beta chain of hemoglobin to dissociate the iron to form the
porphyrin. The attack will cause less and less hemoglobin that can carry oxygen and carbon
dioxide. The lung cells have extremely intense poisoning and inflammatory due to the
inability to exchange carbon dioxide and oxygen frequently, which eventually results in
ground-glass-like lung images." 1. The virus attaches to the hemoglobin via ORF8 (a protein)
and glycoprotein. Hemoglobin is an iron rich protein that that allows red blood cells to
carry oxygen from the lungs to the rest of the body. 2. This allows it to cut off the iron 3.
This reduces the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide available to the lung cells. (it is well
known that anemia causes shortness of breathe, for example, because your body does not get
enough oxygen rich blood). 4. This results in intense poisoning and inflammation, which
results in lung damage, the ground glass like lung images, and sometimes death. Sickle cell
disease is caused by a mutation in the hemoglobin-Beta gene found on chromosome 11.
Hemoglobin transports oxygen from the lungs to other parts of the body. Red blood cells with
normal hemoglobin (hemoglobin-A) are smooth and round and glide through blood vessels. This
may be why an anti-malaria drug like Plaquenil might be effective against this virus. Sickle
cell anemia mutates the hemoglobin-Beta gene, which then provides protection from malaria.
COVID-19 attacks the beta-hemoglobin. Doctor, I came to the same conclusion myself. Please
pass this along to your colleagues.
https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surface_Glycoprotein_Inhibit_Heme_Metabolism_by_Binding_to_Porphyrin/11938173/5?fbclid=IwAR1K50u0wRWhOCv0_rxS2_bYk7p3mT-OWX08GXaa0Tm13bzT8Wl8MYfTAI8
Bob Sapp20 hours ago Tracey Continelli I'm trying to understand why the anti-malaria drug
would work. Are you saying the drug will mutate our hemoglobin and then the virus wouldn't be
able to attach itself to our red blood cell? Tracey Continelli11 hours ago (edited) @Bob Sapp
YES. Before the Nature article came out, multiple studies have been done showing that the
anti-malaria drug Plaquenil alters the intracellular structure. One article I found stated
that it had the ability to alter the protein structure. If this is true - and based on the
article in Nature, the virus attaches itself to the PROTEIN on the outside of the red blood
cells - then it is effectively PREVENTING the virus from attaching itself to the proteins and
glycoproteins on the red blood cells, where it then "kicks out" the iron ion, which then
prevents the lung cells from getting the necessary oxygen, which then causes the respiratory
distress and damaged lungs that clinicians are seeing. Tracey Continelli10 hours ago (edited)
I'm a health researcher and college professor. Hydroxychloroquine is hypothesized to be
exerting a multi-pronged effect on this virus. One, by altering the cellular structure, it
can make it difficult to replicate and reproduce itself. Two, it can make it difficult to
attach to the red blood cell wall and kicking out the iron ion, causing the deprivation of
oxygen to the lungs and patients becoming hypoxemic. Three, as someone noted, because it
dampens down the immune system (it is given to patients with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis,
both of whom have hyperactive immune system) it should lower the risk of a cytokine storm.
Sermo just conducted a study of over 6000 physicians around the world, asking them what
treatments for COVID-19 they had used, and which they considered to be the most promising.
Sermo regularly surveys physicians around the world, it is an established organization. As a
professor/researcher I was able to access the data myself and ran the numbers. Excluding
already approved treatments, such as Tylenol, antibiotics, etc, I isolated ONLY the four
experimental treatments and computed the percentages. Here they are: Hydroxychloroquine - 49%
Anti-HIV retrivirals - 30% Plasma - 8% Remdesivir - 13% Sermo computed the percentages
differently by including other drug treatments, but still found that hydroxychloroquine was
rated as most effective.
https://www.sermo.com/press-releases/largest-statistically-significant-study-by-6200-multi-country-physicians-on-covid-19-uncovers-treatment-patterns-and-puts-pandemic-in-context/?fbclid=IwAR36GA79oiUF5cuCjuweV2pqys0Eneu6AAbqoOfikK1PgYepVvLP1tKC5cc
e"> Thoughts on COVID-19 Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Intervention Posted on Quora
on 5/10 in response to the video. Quora: Does Covid-19 really cause ARDS? Dr. Cameron
Kyle-Sidell questions treating COVID-19 with the present medical paradigm of ARDS. ........
"We should consider that part of the pathophysiological mechanism of COVID-19 is resulting
from an acquired hemoglobinopathy or dyshemoglobinemia" .
I think this may answer some of your questions about oxygenation vs ventilation.
https://archive.is/ONUmi#selection-183.0-183.75 Says that CV causes the iron to
dissociate from the heme groups, causing dysfunctional hemoglobin. And the Fe+++ causes
massive oxidative damage. That is why intravenous Vitamin C has been so effective at avoiding
the cytokine storm. Even explains chloroquine effect. Highly recommended.
"... JPMorgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo & Co, Bank of America Corp and Citigroup Inc are each in the process of setting up independent companies to own oil and gas assets, said three people who were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. The banks are also looking to hire executives with relevant expertise to manage them, the sources said. ..."
"... U.S. oil and gas producers have increasingly relied on banks for cash over the past year, as debt or equity options dried up. Lenders have been conservative in valuing hydrocarbons used as collateral, but recent restructurings have left them spooked. ..."
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Major U.S. lenders are preparing to become operators of oil and gas
fields across the country for the first time in a generation to avoid losses on loans to energy
companies that may go bankrupt, sources aware of the plans told Reuters.
JPMorgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo & Co, Bank of America Corp and Citigroup Inc
are each in the process of setting up independent companies to own oil and gas assets, said
three people who were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. The banks are also looking
to hire executives with relevant expertise to manage them, the sources said.
The banks did not provide comment in time for publication.
Energy companies are suffering through a plunge in oil prices caused by the coronavirus
pandemic and a supply glut, with crude prices down more than 60% this year.
Although oil prices may gain support from a potential agreement Thursday between Saudi
Arabia and Russia to cut production, few believe the curtailment can offset a 30% drop in
global fuel demand, as the coronavirus has grounded aircraft, reduced vehicle use and curbed
economic activity more broadly.
Oil and gas companies working in shale basins from Texas to Wyoming are saddled with
debt.
The industry is estimated to owe more than $200 billion to lenders through loans backed by
oil and gas reserves. As revenue has plummeted and assets have declined in value, some
companies are saying they may be unable to repay.
Whiting Petroleum Corp became the first producer to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on April
1. Others, including Chesapeake Energy Corp, Denbury Resources Inc and Callon Petroleum Co,
have also hired debt advisers.
If banks do not retain bankrupt assets, they might be forced to sell them for pennies on the
dollar at current prices. The companies they are setting up could manage oil and gas assets
until conditions improve enough to sell at a meaningful value.
Big banks will need to get regulatory waivers to execute their plans, because of limitations
on their involvement with physical commodities, sources said.
Banks are hoping their planned ownership time frame of a year or so will pass a Federal
Reserve requirement that they do not plan to hold assets for a long time. Because lenders would
be stepping in to support part of the economy that is important to any potential rebound, and
which has not gotten direct bailouts from the federal government, that might help applications,
too.
For now, the banks are establishing holding companies that can sit above limited liability
companies (LLCs) containing seized assets. The LLCs would be owned proportionally by banks
participating in the original secured loan.
To run the oil-and-gas operations, banks might hire former industry executives or specialty
firms that have done so for private equity, sources said. Houston-based EnerVest Operating LLC
would be among the most likely operators, sources said.
"We regularly look for opportunities to operate on behalf of other entities, that is no
different in this market," said EnerVest Operating's chief executive, Alex Zazzi.
GETTING ASSERTIVE
U.S. banks have not done anything like this since the late-1980s, when another oil-price
rout bankrupted a bunch of energy companies. More recently, they have relied on restructuring
processes that prioritize them as secured creditors and leave bondholders to seek control in
lieu of payment.
But banks are becoming more assertive because of the coronavirus recession and balance sheet
vulnerabilities that have developed in recent years.
U.S. oil and gas producers have increasingly relied on banks for cash over the past
year, as debt or equity options dried up. Lenders have been conservative in valuing
hydrocarbons used as collateral, but recent restructurings have left them spooked.
Alta Mesa Resources' bankruptcy will likely provide banks with less than two-thirds of their
money, while Sanchez Energy's could leave them with nothing.
The structures banks are setting up will take a few months to establish, sources said. That
gives producers until the fall - the next time banks will evaluate the collateral behind energy
loans - to get their houses in order.
After several years of on-and-off issues with energy borrowers, lenders have little choice
but to take more dramatic steps, said Buddy Clark, a restructuring partner at law firm Haynes
and Boone.
"Banks can now believably wield the threat that they will foreclose on the company and its
properties if they don't pay their loan back," he said.
(Reporting by David French and Imani Moise in New York; Additional Reporting by Elizabeth
Dilts Marshall; Editing by Leslie Adler; Editing by Lauren Tara LaCapra)
Ventilator-associated lung
injury - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org
/wiki/Ventilator-associated_lung_injury Ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) is an acute lung injury that develops
during mechanical ventilation and is termed ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) if it can be proven that the mechanical
ventilation caused the acute lung injury. In contrast, ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) exists if the cause
cannot be proven.
"...Today, quite a number of alternative media commentators are ready to believe in the
absolute power not of God but of Mammon, of the powers of Wall Street and its partners in
politics, the media and the military. In this view, nothing major happens that hasn't been
planned by earthly powers for their own selfish interest.
"Mammon is wrecking the economy so a few oligarchs will own everything. Or else Mammon
created the hoax Coronavirus 19 in order to lock us all up and deprive us of what little is
left of our freedom. Or finally Mammon is using a virus in order to have a pretext to
vaccinate us all with secret substances and turn us all into zombies.
"Is this credible? In one sense, it is. We know that Mammon is unscrupulous, morally
capable of all crimes. But things do happen that Mammon did not plan, such as earthquakes,
floods and plagues. Dislike of our ruling class combined with dislike of being locked up
leads to the equation: They are simply using this (fake) crisis in order to lock us up!
"But what for? To whom is there any advantage in locking down the population? For the
pleasure of telling themselves, "Aha, we've got them where we want them, all stuck at home!"
Is this intended to suppress popular revolt? What popular revolt? Why repress people who
aren't doing anything that needs to be repressed?...
"What is the use of locking up a population – and I think especially of the United
States – that is disunited, disorganized, profoundly confused by generations of
ideological indoctrination telling them that their country is "the best" in every way, and
thus unable to formulate coherent demands on a system that exploits them ruthlessly? Do you
need to lock up your faithful Labrador so he won't bite you?...
"....Mammon is blinded by its own hubris, often stupid, incompetent, dumbed down by
getting away with so much so easily. Take a look at Mike Pompeo or Mike Pence – are
these all-powerful geniuses? No, they are semi-morons who have been able to crawl up a
corrupt system contemptuous of truth, virtue or intelligence – like the rest of the
gangsters in power in a system devoid of any ethical or intellectual standards.
"The power of creatures like that is merely the reflection of the abdication of social
responsibility by whole populations whose disinterest in politics has allowed the scum to
rise to the top.
The lockdown decreed by our Western governments reveals helplessness rather than power.
They did not rush to lock us down. The lockdown is disastrous for the economy which is their
prime concern. They hesitated and did so only when they had to do something and were
ill-equipped to do anything else. They saw that China had done so with good results. But
smart Asian governments did even more, deploying masks, tests and treatments Western
governments did not possess..."
From toilet paper shortages to computer chips, the novel
coronavirus pandemic
has exposed many weak links in the highly globalized supply chains that enable goods to move around the
world.
Now, many companies are taking a long, hard look at their models to see if the status quo still works. If the coronavirus broke the
supply chain, how do you fix it? What should be changed, and what should not be changed?
There are three parts of the supply chain that have been thrown into question: offshoring, just-in-time inventory, and
diversification -- and every company reliant on manufacturing is likely examining these factors.
What the coronavirus won't change: offshoring
From clothing to electronics and much more, things in the United States usually come from really far away, often from China, where
the new coronavirus originated. For many companies, this is often unavoidable, because many goods would be prohibitively expensive
if made in regions where labor costs are high. Offshoring and outsourcing exploded after 1979, when China adopted its Open Door
Policy, allowing foreign companies to access its vast and inexpensive labor market, enabling far cheaper goods than before.
Taiwan-based Foxconn is best known as the assembler of the iPhone, with many factories in China like this one in Shenzhen. But
going forward, companies will have to diversify their supply chains to ensure that they can still function if one country goes
offline. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung, File)
"Anything that was labor intensive -- footwear, apparel, assembly of electronics -- moved to China," said
Marshall Fisher
, a
professor of operations, information, and decisions at Wharton. "In 1960, 5% of the world's physical products crossed boundaries.
That's grown to about 50%."
The trade-off from offshoring is lead time. A widget produced in China takes a long time to sail to the West, unless you put it on a
plane, which eats up much of the cost savings. For many companies, that means nailing predictions to make sure they don't make too
much product or too little, which isn't easy.
The key aspect with international trade, during the pandemic, is politics. It can be good and bad for business.
Rob Siegel, a Stanford professor who studies supply chains and has created them for businesses, recalled as a business school
student in the fall 1993 when former Intel (
INTC
) CEO Andy Grove told his class
that there will never be war with China because "you will never invade the country that has the factories that make all your
things."
Unfortunately, when it comes to pandemics, politics don't help. Taiwan, a manufacturing powerhouse, banned mask exports in late
January as the coronavirus surged. (Taiwan later
lifted the ban
and donated many masks to other countries.) Dozens of countries -- including much of Europe, the U.S., and Brazil
-- followed, either banning or restricting exports due to coronavirus.
This, perhaps greater than anything else, has prompted the question: Do you really want to rely on X country during an emergency?
However, this is more of a question for governments than businesses, which are more focused on making money than national security.
For many companies, making stuff abroad is the only viable option, but they do need to continue functioning if something bad
happens. That's why Fisher thinks the question companies will be asking isn't "is our supply chain too long?," but rather "should we
be investing in resilience of the [complex, international] supply chain?"
The 'just-in-time' model cracks
Companies don't just buy stuff from far away, but they have been buying the least amount of stuff possible -- running lean inventory
and only buying when they need to.
That's called the "just-in-time" inventory model, and like predicting months in advance when buying from afar, companies have gotten
really good at creating models that allow them to run extremely efficiently. The downside of this model is it's fragile: If
something goes wrong, companies will be in a bind.
So, when the coronavirus hit, some companies and consumers experienced supply issues.
But what should a company do if they operate under this model?
"Largely speaking [just-in-time] isn't going to be redesigned for a 100-year crisis," said Siegel. "It's almost impossible to plan
for something that happens every 100 years."
This may sound like a gamble, but for many companies, changing the entire model just doesn't make sense. As Yossi Sheffi, director
of the MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics, told Yahoo Finance, there are just too many advantages of "just-in-time" that go
beyond cost. There's more speed and agility, but also more quality.
When an auto production line experiences a problem with a part, for example, you have a pile of parts and swap a new one in. But
with just-in-time, "you stop the line, find out what's wrong, and fix it," Sheffi said. "Low inventory helps people find out what's
wrong."
For some stuff, however, we may see significant changes in inventory management. The pandemic has shown that the critical strategic
reserves of products like ventilators and personal protective equipment are simply not adequate during a global emergency. The U.S.,
unable to import ventilators quickly due to other countries' export laws, resorted to
deputizing General Motors
(
GM
) to make ventilators.
For many, that wasn't quick enough, and shifting the permanent production domestically may not be feasible either in the future. But
what might be more practical is planning for more inventory.
"If you have 100,000 ventilators that you could pull out at a moment's notice, that'd be easier [than it would be] to nationalize GM
via the Defense Protection Act," said Siegel.
Going forward, the government may choose to mandate that certain companies run with more inventory for critical items like
ventilators, just in case, and keep their own warehouses better stocked.
What will change: diversification
For the most part, however, just-in-time inventory is here to stay, and low-cost offshoring isn't going anywhere. But what Yossi,
Siegel, and Fisher agree will change is diversification.
"The first line of defense is to make your components in multiple places," said Fisher. "The idea is at least two companies making
it in two geographic locations."
"I expect companies to have at least a secondary supplier," said Sheffi. "Not 50%, maybe 20-30%."
Rising wages in China have forced some companies to move their manufacturing away from the country, said Fisher, but many companies
are still exposed.
Fisher noted that the 2011 Tsunami in Japan taught many companies, like Apple, the lesson to be more robust in the face of
disruption, but that as the disaster faded into memory, so did the calls to diversify.
"Apple [has] foregone the few millions of costs to make the supply chain more robust and lost $100 billion in market cap," he said.
"The needle has tipped too much to efficiency from robustness."
Since then, the volleys of tariffs and uncertainty during the trade war with China caused companies to realize that relying solely
on that country for manufacturing exposed them to big risks. Many companies, including Apple (
AAPL
),
decided it would be a good idea to get
more baskets to put their eggs in
. Inadvertently, the U.S.-China trade war prepared some companies for the coronavirus pandemic.
But few had made any big moves by the time the coronavirus hit.
This, Fisher said, is a wakeup call.
"What companies will do is map their supply chain, look at everything that goes in," said Fisher. "And those supply chains can be 10
layers deep. Foxconn gets things from other suppliers, which get them from another."
What you get from this is a figure called "revenue at risk," which helps underscore the amount of money that is at stake should one
link break in the chain. By adding other suppliers, that number can be brought down, avoiding a catastrophic stoppage for a
business.
But given that this is somewhat of a 100-year storm -- literally, the last major pandemic was in 1918 -- the question remains: how
many companies will simply roll the dice instead?
--
Ethan Wolff-Mann
is a writer at Yahoo
Finance focusing on consumer issues, personal finance, retail, airlines, and more. Follow him on Twitter
@ewolffmann
.
"... Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the "Third World." ..."
"... In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70 nations – more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases, listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military personnel working in approximately 160 countries. ..."
"... Since then, the United States has overthrown or attempted to overthrow the governments of approximately 50 countries, many of which (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and Chile) had elected leaders willing to nationalize their natural resources and industries. Often these interventions took the form of covert operations. Less frequently, the United States went to war to achieve these same ends (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq). ..."
"... In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget and over half of all discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit. ..."
This March, as COVID-19's capacity to overwhelm the American healthcare system was becoming
obvious, experts marveled at the scenario unfolding before their eyes. "We have Third World
countries who are better equipped than we are now in Seattle,"
noted one healthcare professional, her words echoed just a few days later by a shocked
doctor in New York who described
"a third-world country type of scenario." Donald Trump could similarly only grasp what was
happening through the same comparison. "I have seen things that I've never seen before," he
said
. "I mean I've seen them, but I've seen them on television and faraway lands, never in my
country."
At the same time, regardless of the fact that "Third World" terminology is outdated and
confusing, Trump's inept handling of the pandemic has itself elicited more than one "banana republic"
analogy, reflecting already well-worn, bipartisan comparisons of Trump to a "
third world dictator " (never mind that dictators and authoritarians have never been
confined solely to lower income countries).
And yet, while such comparisons provoke predictably nativist outrage from the right, what is
absent from any of
these responses to the situation is a sense of reflection or humility about the "Third
World" comparison itself. The doctor in New York who finds himself caught in a "third world"
scenario and the political commentators outraged when Trump behaves "like a third world
dictator" uniformly express themselves in terms of incredulous wonderment. One never hears the
potential second half of this comparison: "I am now experiencing what it is like to live in a
country that resembles the kind of nation upon whom the United States regularly imposes broken
economies and corrupt leaders."
Because behind today's coronavirus-inspired astonishment at conditions in developing or
lower income countries, and Trump's authoritarian-like thuggery, lies an actual military and
political hegemon with an actual impact on the world; particularly on what was once called the
"Third World."
In physical terms, the U.S.'s military hegemony is comprised of 800 bases in over 70
nations –
more bases than any other nation or empire in history. The U.S. maintains drone bases,
listening posts, "black sites," aircraft carriers, a massive nuclear stockpile, and military
personnel working in approximately 160 countries. This is a globe-spanning military and
security apparatus organized into regional commands
that resemble the "proconsuls of the Roman empire and the governors-general of the
British." In other words, this apparatus is built not for deterrence, but for primacy.
The U.S.'s global primacy emerged from the wreckage of World War II when the United States
stepped into the shoes vacated by European empires. Throughout the Cold War, and in the name of
supporting "free peoples," the sprawling American security apparatus helped ensure that 300
years of imperial resource extraction and wealth distribution – from what was then called
the Third World to the First – remained undisturbed, despite decolonization.
Since then, the United States
has overthrown or attempted to overthrow the governments of approximately 50 countries,
many of which (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, and Chile) had elected leaders willing to
nationalize their natural resources and industries. Often these interventions
took the form of covert operations. Less frequently, the United States went to war to
achieve these same ends (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq).
In fiscal terms, maintaining American hegemony requires spending more
on "defense" than the next seven largest countries combined. Our
nearly $1 trillion security budget now amounts to about 15 percent of the federal budget
and over half of all
discretionary spending. Moreover, the U.S. security budget continues to increase despite the
Pentagon's inability to pass a fiscal audit.
Trump's claim that Obama had
"hollowed out" defense spending was not only grossly untrue, it masked the consistency of the
security budget's metastasizing growth since the Vietnam War, regardless of who sits in the
White House. At $738 billion dollars, Trump's security budget was passed in December with the
overwhelming support of House Democrats.
And yet, from the perspective of public discourse in this country, our globe-spanning,
resource-draining military and security apparatus exists in an entirely parallel universe to
the one most Americans experience on a daily level. Occasionally, we wake up to the idea of
this parallel universe but only when the United States is involved in visible military actions.
The rest of the time, Americans leave thinking about international politics – and the
deaths, for instance, of 2.5 million
Iraqis since 2003 – to the legions of policy analysts and Pentagon employees who
largely accept American military primacy as an "article of faith," as Professor of
International Security and Strategy at the University of Birmingham Patrick Porter has said
.
Foreign policy is routinely the last issue Americans consider when they vote for presidents
even though the president has more discretionary power over foreign policy than any other area
of American politics. Thus, despite its size, impact, and expense, the world's military hegemon
exists somewhere on the periphery of most Americans' self-understanding, as though, like the
sun, it can't be looked upon directly for fear of blindness.
Why is our avoidance of the U.S.'s weighty impact on the world a problem in the midst of the
coronavirus pandemic? Most obviously, the fact that our massive security budget has gone so
long without being widely questioned means that one of the soundest courses of action for the
U.S. during this crisis remains resolutely out of sight.
The shock of discovering that our healthcare system is so quickly overwhelmed should
automatically trigger broader conversations about spending priorities that entail deep and
sustained cuts in an engorged security budget whose sole purpose is the maintenance of primacy.
And yet, not only has this not happened, $10.5 billion of the coronavirus aid package has been
earmarked for the Pentagon, with $2.4 billion of that
channeled to the "defense industrial base." Of the $500 billion aimed at corporate America,
$17.5 billion is
set aside "for businesses critical to maintaining national security" such as aerospace.
To make matters worse, our blindness to this bloated security complex makes it frighteningly
easy for champions of American primacy to sound the alarm when they even suspect a dip in
funding might be forthcoming. Indeed, before most of us had even glanced at the details of the
coronavirus bill, foreign policy hawks were already
issuing dark prediction s about the impact of still-imaginary cuts in the security budget
on the U.S.'s "ability to strike any target on the planet in response to hostile actions by any
actor" – as if that ability already did not exist many times over.
On a more existential level, a country that is collectively engaged in unseeing its own
global power cannot help but fail to make connections between that power and domestic politics,
particularly when a little of the outside world seeps in. For instance, because most Americans
are unaware of their government's sponsorship of fundamentalist Islamic groups in the Middle
East throughout the Cold War, 9/11 can only ever appear to have come from nowhere, or because
Muslims hate our way of life.
This "how did we get here?" attitude replicates itself at every level of political life
making it profoundly difficult for Americans to see the impact of their nation on the rest of
the world, and the blowback from that impact on the United States itself. Right now, the
outsized influence of American foreign policy is already encouraging the spread of coronavirus
itself as U.S. imposed sanctions on Iran severely hamper that
country's ability to respond to the virus at home and virtually
guarantee its spread throughout the region.
Closer to home, our shock at the healthcare system's inept response to the pandemic masks
the relationship between the U.S.'s imposition
of free-market totalitarianism on countries throughout the
Global South and the impact of free-market totalitarianism on our own welfare state .
Likewise, it is more than karmic comeuppance that the President of the United States now
resembles the self-serving authoritarians the U.S. forced on so many formerly colonized
nations. The modes of militarized policing American security experts exported to those
authoritarian regimes also contributed , on a
policy level, to both the rise of militarized policing in American cities and the rise of mass
incarceration in the 1980s and 90s. Both of these phenomena played a significant role in
radicalizing Trump's white nationalist base and decreasing their tolerance for democracy.
Most importantly, because the U.S. is blind to its power abroad, it cannot help but turn
that blindness on itself. This means that even during a pandemic when America's exceptionalism
– our lack of national healthcare – has profoundly negative consequences on the
population, the idea of looking to the rest of the world for solutions remains unthinkable.
Senator Bernie Sanders' reasonable suggestion that the U.S., like Denmark, should
nationalize its healthcare system is dismissed as the fanciful pipe dream of an aging socialist
rather than an obvious solution to a human problem embraced by nearly every other nation in the
world. The Seattle healthcare professional who expressed shock that even "Third World
countries" are "better equipped" than we are to confront COVID-19 betrays a stunning ignorance
of the diversity of healthcare systems within developing countries. Cuba, for instance,
has responded
to this crisis with an efficiency and humanity that puts the U.S. to shame.
Indeed, the U.S. is only beginning to feel the full impact of COVID-19's explosive
confrontation with our exceptionalism: if the unemployment rate really does reach 32 percent,
as has been predicted,
millions of people will not only lose their jobs but their health insurance as well. In the
middle of a pandemic.
Over 150 years apart, political commentators Edmund Burke and Aimé Césaire
referred to this blindness as the byproduct of imperialism. Both used the exact same language
to describe it; as a "gangrene" that "poisons" the colonizing body politic. From their
different historical perspectives, Burke and Césaire observed how colonization
boomerangs back on colonial society itself, causing irreversible damage to nations that
consider themselves humane and enlightened, drawing them deeper into denial and
self-delusion.
Perhaps right now there is a chance that COVID-19 – an actual, not metaphorical
contagion – can have the opposite effect on the U.S. by opening our eyes to the things
that go unseen. Perhaps the shock of recognizing the U.S. itself is less developed than our
imagined "Third World" might prompt Americans to tear our eyes away from ourselves and look
toward the actual world outside our borders for examples of the kinds of political, economic,
and social solidarity necessary to fight the spread of Coronavirus. And perhaps moving beyond
shock and incredulity to genuine recognition and empathy with people whose economies and
democracies have been decimated by American hegemony might begin the process of reckoning with
the costs of that hegemony, not just in "faraway lands" but at home. In our country.
"... New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has launched a fund to support sick healthcare workers and their families, but some blame him for the dire working conditions facing the state's caregivers after nine years of hospital budget cuts. Cuomo announced the state is working on a "Covid-19 Heroes Compensation Fund" to support healthcare workers and their families who have been diagnosed with the coronavirus during his daily briefing on Friday. It was heralded by his growing Democratic fan club as a generous, thoughtful move from a politician who cares about the "frontline workers." ..."
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has launched a fund to support sick healthcare workers
and their families, but some blame him for the dire working conditions facing the state's
caregivers after nine years of hospital budget cuts. Cuomo announced the state is working on a
"Covid-19 Heroes Compensation Fund" to support healthcare workers and their families who
have been diagnosed with the coronavirus during his daily briefing on Friday. It was heralded
by his growing Democratic fan club as a generous, thoughtful move from a politician who cares
about the "frontline workers."
Absent from the lovefest was any mention of how the governor had - just the previous day -
deferred 2 percent pay raises to some 80,000 state workers for 90 days, and potentially for
longer. Many of those affected are healthcare workers in the state's prisons and mental health
facilities.
Union leaders were outraged. "It's inexcusable to require our workers to literally face
death to ensure the state keeps running and then turn around and deny those very workers their
much-deserved raise in this time of crisis, " Civil Service Employees Association president
Mary Sullivan told the Times Union, while NY Correctional Officers and Police Benevolent
Association chief Michael Powers called the postponement a "slap in the face" to workers
facing "some of the most dangerous conditions in the state."
While Cuomo is being praised for his leadership amid the coronavirus outbreak, the problems
he is scrambling to solve are largely of his own making. Although aware of a 2015 report
highlighting the desperately-depleted state stockpile of ventilators, he didn't take any
actions on it, and has spent his tenure shuttering and downsizing hospitals across the state,
mostly those serving low-income clients. The state has eliminated 20,000 hospital beds in the
last two decades, at least half under his leadership.
The New York state budget passed at the beginning of the month included deep cuts to
Medicaid and may have rendered the state ineligible for $6 billion in federal aid, infuriating
liberal lawmakers who were less enchanted with the new #Resistance hero. State Senator Gustavo
Rivera (D-Bronx) told the New York Daily News that Cuomo's latest budget "only offered harsh
austerity for the poorest and most vulnerable" New Yorkers.
The state's Democrat-controlled senate called on Cuomo to tax the wealthy - New York has the
highest economic inequality in the country, and a tax on the richest .01 percent has upwards of
90 percent approval among voters - only to be turned down by the politician who has earned the
nickname "Governor One Percent."
The latest cost-cutting moves resulted in New York City deprived on $200 million in sales
tax revenue when the big apple is at the epicenter of the US coronavirus outbreak.
The pandemic has hospitals so understaffed that NYC Health and Hospitals Corporation has
apparently been reduced to contracting dodgy medical-temp agencies - one, Kansas-based
disaster-staffing group Krucial Staffing, was sued earlier this week for luring out-of-state
medical professionals to work in city hospitals under false pretenses, promising them cushy
posts with ample protective equipment and no Covid-19 exposure - to fill vacancies. The suit
alleges Krucial's misrepresentation of working conditions placed healthcare workers' medical
licenses and lives in danger.
It's unclear how many medical workers have contracted and died of the disease in the state,
as New York, along with several other states, does not tract infections among medical staff.
According to a BuzzFeed News review of the reports by 12 states, which made their data public,
at least 5,400 nurses and doctors tested positive nationwide, while dozens have succumbed to
the lethal illness. Among them, Kious Kelly, an assistant nurse manager at Mount Sinai West,
whose death from the coronavirus on March 24 sparked protests among the personnel and led to
the hospital eventually allowing workers to receive tests – but only those already
showing symptoms.
Some 7,887 New Yorkers have died with coronavirus since the beginning of the outbreak, the
majority of them - 5,820 - in New York City.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
In Italy, two similar regions, Lombardy and Veneto, took different approaches to the
community spread of the epidemic. Both mandated social distancing, but only Veneto
undertook massive contact tracing and testing early on. Despite starting from very similar
points, Lombardy is now tragically overrun with the disease, having experienced roughly
7,000 deaths and counting, while Veneto has managed to mostly contain the epidemic to a few
hundred fatalities.
"Wet markets really are just farmers' markets that also happen to sell fresh fish (thus
the "wet" part of their label) and poultry and sometimes beef and pork."
"Readers can display how susceptible they are to mass media driven hysteria and jingoism
and perhaps also reveal unacknowledged racism by insisting that there is something
fundamentally different about Asian farmers markets from the local ones they themselves shop
at for the freshest foods. "
I would respond that the fact that our local farmers markets don't generally sell the
"wet" stuff is in and of itself a "fundamental difference." If there are disease-vector
issues with wetmarkets, the issue will likely have originated in the "wet" part of the
market.
PS re the wet market bs. Let's all grow up. Nearly every coastal town I've ever visited on
four continents has a "wet market" i.e. tanks full of shell fish or crayfish or lobsters.
There are plenty of places you can buy a live chicken and have it cut up. In souther murka
they do love their trotters - i.e. pig's feet (gross in my opinion.) sea urchins any one? How
about sea slugs? There's a tasty meal. I know, let's just call it a "fresh food" market.
Hmmm?
With the deepest respect for your inner beauty. Cheers.
...The quality and sheer size of the AngloZionist propaganda machine was very successful in
keeping most of the people in the West in total ignorance of these realities. The faster the
Empire was collapsing, the more Obama or Trump peppered their patriotic flag-waving ceremonies
(aka "press conferences") with references to an "indispensable nation" providing "vital
leadership" thanks to its "the best economy in history", the "best military in history" and
even "unbelievable CEOs", "incredible politicians" and even "incredible conversations". The
message was simple: we are the best, better than all the rest and we are invincible.
Then COVID19 happened.
... ... ...
First , the imperial propaganda machine is simply unable to conceal the magnitude of the
disaster, even in countries like the US or the UK. Oh sure, initially doctors and even USN ship
commanders were summarily fired for speaking the truth, but even those cases proved impossible
to conceal and public opinion got even more suspicious of official assurances and statements.
The truth is that most of the entire planet already realized that this is a huge crisis and
that countries like Russia or China responded better than the US. The planet also knows that
the US "health not care" system is broke, corrupt, and mostly dysfunctional and that
Trump's initial optimism was based on nothing. BTW – Trump haters have immediately
instrumentalized the crisis to bash Trump. The sad thing is that while they are no better (and
most definitely not the braindead Uncle Joe), they are right about Trump being completely out
of touch with reality. In the age of the Internet this is a reality which even the US
propaganda machine is unable to conceal from the US public forever.
Second , and that is now quite obvious, it is becoming clear that the capitalist ideology of
free markets, globalism, consumerism, extreme individualism and, above all, greed, is totally
unable to cope with the crisis. Even more offensively to those who still believed in an
ideology based on the assumption that the sum of our greeds will create an optimal society,
countries with stronger collectivist traditions of solidarity (whether "enhanced" by Marxist or
Socialist ideas or not) did much better. China for starters, but also Cuba and even Russia
(which is neither Marxist nor Socialist, but which has very strong collectivist traditions) or
South Korea or Singapore (both non-Marxists with strong collectivist traditions). Even tiny
Venezuela, embattled and under siege by the Empire, managed to do much better than the US or the UK .
Not only did these countries all fare much better than much richer, and putatively much
"freer", countries, they did so while under US sanctions. And, finally, just to add insult to
injury, these supposedly "bad" countries proved much more generous than those incorporated into
the Empire: they sent many tons of vitally needed equipment and hundred of specialized
scientists and even military personnel to help those countries most in need (Italy, Spain,
Serbia, etc.).
... ... ...
Third , then we all saw the ugly sight of various western "democracies" literally stealing
vital medical gear from each other, over and over again. In fact, under a purely capitalistic
logic, this kind of "competition" was both inevitable (true) and even desirable (false): major
Med & Pharma companies all have used this financial windfall to maximize their profits
(which is, after all, what all corporations have to do in a capitalist system: get as much
money as possible for their shareholders).
... ... ...
Fourth , we also witness the raw nastiness of the imperial propaganda machine in articles
about how "Russia sent useless gear to Italy", that "Chinese equipment did not work" or about
how all the countries which responded better and sooner were all lying about the real numbers
(which is utter nonsense, the Chinese have been very open, as have the Russians: the truth is
that in the early phases of a pandemic it is impossible to get real numbers, that can only be
done much later). This is as false as the "Iraqi incubators", "genocidal Serbs" or "Gaddafi's
Viagra" and time will prove it.
Fifth , then there is the issue of poverty. We see the first signs that this pandemic (like
all pandemics) is affecting the poor much harder than the rich. Hardly a surprise For example,
in the US cities like New York, Chicago, Detroit, Miami or New Orleans have a lot of poor
neighborhoods and that people there are getting hit very hard.
... ... ...
Sixth , just like the Empire itself, NATO and the EU are also in free fall, both clueless as
to what to do and in a panic about doing anything proactive. Besides the flag-waving
Idiot-in-Chief, I also took the time to listen to both Macron and Merkel. They are both in a
full-freak-out mode, Macron speaks over and over about a "war" while Merkel declared that the
pandemic is the most serious challenge facing Germany since WWII!
... ... ...
Seven , in the US, the contrast between the Federal government and the state authorities is
quite startling. As much as the Federal government is terminally dysfunctional, state governors
have often had to use a lot of out of the box thinking to get supplies and specialists
I can only wish good luck to trump on this examination of WHO-it is riddled with fraud,
corruption, massive conflicts of interest. The same applies to CDC, which is a revolving door
for Big Pharma.
The U.S. surgeon general on Sunday trumpeted the administration's new recommendation that
all Americans wear cloth masks in public, a reversal of its previous advice as the country
braces for a dramatic surge in COVID-19 cases and potential fatalities this week.
"The next week is going to be our Pearl Harbor moment. It's going to be our 9/11 moment.
It's going to be the hardest moment for many Americans in their entire lives," Vice Admiral
Jerome Adams warned on NBC's "Meet the Press," as he made rounds of political talk shows.
The push to wear masks follows updated guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. It is not mandatory but masks offer added protection against spreading the
coronavirus, especially when people cannot practice 6-foot social distancing.
Re: Effective home-made mask insert/liner material: Two brands of cheap widely available blue
shop towels are found to work great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNDE12HymYc
(starts at minute 31:20).
Re: bubonic plague in Mongolia. Sporadic human Yersinia pestis infections have been
endemic in American Southwest for many years.
Being "connected" is a huge part of the cause of this mess, before internet propaganda was
limited to newspapers and magazines, it was much slower and manageable.
I do find it funny how wealthy folks spread the "don't worry WE will all be fine" garbage.
WE....no, tell that to someone who has lost their business and has dependents.
I hate the "We're going to be ok. We're all in this together" ads. All of them
celebrities, pro athletes, and actors. Not one has to worry about whether they'll be able to
buy food next week. Elites telling the little people everything's ok.
It's really sad when Tucker Carlson is the only person who ever admitted he was wrong on
Fox News. Hannity still claims he never called the virus a hoax even though he did it on
TV.
Hydroxchloroquinine is toxic if combined with metformin. Diabetics who take it beware.
source
Note the link above also lists all of the known drug interactions of HCH with other drugs -
there are 332 total of which 59 are considered "major".
Fauci had previously supported the use of Hydroquinone for similar virus. What changed?
However, to the matter of Israel and the virus:
I thought they were having strangely little impact from virus.
Anyway, this is all very revealing.
You know how people always question:
Why did that woman remain in that abusive relationship?
@jared #26
I don't consider anything coming out of ZH to be credible until verified.
Fauci has been very consistent: he is cautious about whether hydroxychloroquinine is a
efficacious treatment for nCOV/COVID-19.
Note there are multiple levels of potential use:
1) The drug doesn't hurt/kill you. At normal levels, HCH passes this test but the levels it
has been used at to treat nCOV - they're much higher than existing anti-malaria/malaria
preventative/rheumatoid arthritis use.
At these higher levels, it isn't clear how safe HCH is - particularly for really old people
who are the primary nCOV at risk group.
2) Does the drug decrease negative outcomes? i.e. maybe it doesn't cure (which it shouldn't)
but it makes it less likely that nCOV infected get pneumonia or worse. This would be
fantastic but it is 100% unproven.
3) Does the drug cure? By itself or with other things like the antibiotic azithromycin? There
have been studies saying yes - but I look at a couple - and they're frankly poor studies. To
me, it is very unclear.
Hydroxychloroquinine/chloroquinine phosphate shows promise as a way to treat nCOV in its
early stages, but this is so far completely unverified. Nor do we know what the optimal
dosage might be to balance between known risks and side effects induced by HCH use vs.
optimal nCOV impact.
I've gotten a prescription sufficient for a couple of courses, but am not taking it as a
preventative (nor is there any proof it actually works this way).
Lots of people taking HCH as a preventative when it doesn't work or as treatment when
dosages/outcomes aren't known *will* increase the likelihood that nCOV will evolve resistance
against it, so it isn't like side effects are the only bad outcome to uninformed use.
The Trump regime's goal is only ever to enrich themselves through the Presidency. Reportedly,
Kushner's National Stockpile has been, uh, stockpiling Hydroxychloroquine as the President
has been snake-oiling it. As the USA is become completely privatized it is not hard to
arrange government contracts to middle-man the stockpile to its needy 'customers.'
And I can't believe all the raging antisemites here. Surely the Israelis have procured all
those masks to help out those poor Palestinians for whom they care so deeply.
Finally; can we see the endgame? Whip up a worse-case scenario of fear mongering that our
leaders miraculously save us from, yet institute a 'new normal' ripped from the pages of
Orwell to protect us from the 'next time' which they promise is a matter of when not if.
@38 - Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine are not sufficient by themselves for treating
COVID-19. CQ and HCQ create a pathway for zinc ions to get inside the cells to disrupt the
coronavirus replication. It's the zinc that actually is the medicine. See this study for
details - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21079686/
Even as hospitals and governors raise the alarm about a shortage of ventilators, some
critical care physicians are questioning the widespread use of the breathing machines for
Covid-19 patients, saying that large numbers of patients could instead be treated with less
intensive respiratory support.
If the iconoclasts are right, putting coronavirus patients on ventilators could be of
little benefit to many and even harmful to some.
What's driving this reassessment is a baffling observation about Covid-19: Many patients
have blood oxygen levels so low they should be dead. But they're not gasping for air, their
hearts aren't racing, and their brains show no signs of blinking off from lack of
oxygen.
The more I read about ventilators, the more sure I am that I do not want one if I get sick
from the evil virus.
My understanding is that currently the UK has a 50% mortality rate of Covid sufferers
who've been put on ventilators. They started using CPAP masks several weeks ago according to
Dr. John D. Campbell UK. Much less invasive.
Interesting link you share -- it mentions acute symptoms are more like altitude sickness,
with low 02 but CO2 still being cleared
"... This pandemic we are facing represents the greatest challenge our country has faced in generations. It will take every ounce of energy and focus we have to navigate these troubled waters. We must wisely use our limited resources to support our domestic needs–and end our addiction to fighting unnecessary forever-wars. ..."
"... After all, American lawmakers are owned and operated by the corporate sector, led by the petrochemical industry. ..."
For the better part of the past two decades, the United States has indulgently and
counterproductively wasted
over $6 trillion and thousands of lives on unnecessary wars abroad. The
towering costs imposed on our country by coronavirus now exposes how Washington's skewed
priorities left the nation fragile internally and vulnerable to a crisis. For our own security,
it is time to end these pointless drains on our resources and prioritize strengthening
America.
The most egregious examples of our expensive and unnecessary military deployments abroad are
the combat operations in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Africa. The Department of Defense will
receive $165 billion in overseas contingency operations funding for Fiscal Year 2020 alone.
These operations will include a total of
over 93,000 troops (including regional support troops). Those are staggering numbers.
They are also wholly unnecessary. There are no security threats to America in Iraq, Syria,
Afghanistan or Africa that in any way justify such expenses. Up until now, these costs have had
virtually no impact on the population at large. With the mounting costs as a result of
coronavirus, however, it is clear we can no longer afford the luxury of burning money on
peripheral military missions.
Even after Congress
passed an unprecedented $2 trillion stimulus package in response to COVID-19, the hit to
our economy will not be quickly repaired.
This stimulus package barely addresses the huge and expanding problem of a health
care system struggling to cope with the exploding costs of providing care for so many
seriously ill people. There are shortages of personal protective
equipment necessary for medical professionals, large-scale
testing remains a challenge, and in some locations finding
enough hospital beds for ICU patients is almost at the breaking point.Despite the clear and
present danger coronavirus poses to millions of our citizens, there are some in Washington who
want to continue pushing the thoroughly discredited "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran,
unnecessarily inflaming tensions with a country that poses a minimal threat to America. This
situation is even worse than the possibility of wasting resources desperately needed at home,
it puts American servicemen and women in Iraq and Syria at almost daily risk of their
lives–and the potential to get us dragged into a new war.
The architects of the maximum pressure campaign against Tehran have long promised that it
would moderate Iran's behavior, that it would compel them to restrain their malevolent
behavior, and that it would increase the chances of crafting a new, better deal. The result has
been precisely and dramatically the opposite.
Despite the crippling sanctions and the devastation caused to their economy, Iran is now
openly ramping up its nuclear development activities, is engaging in risky behavior in the
region, and is presently unwilling even to consider diplomacy until we relieve sanctions. The
more we push, the further from a resolution we get and the higher the chances that a
miscalculation on someone's part inadvertently drags America into a war it neither needs nor
wants.
The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been exceedingly expensive, but a conflict with Iran
would be considerably worse and require our country–when it could least afford
it–to divert enormous resources and manpower to fighting a wholly unnecessary conflict
that would likely drag on many years. Such a war–in the current economic
straits–could
plunge our country into a depression .
Flatly stated, Iran is no more than a middling power in the region that is more than
balanced by its neighbors. Our conventional military and nuclear deterrent could overpower any
unprovoked attack Iran may ever consider. There is no justification, therefore, in maintaining
this pointless pressure campaign and risking a war we don't need.
This pandemic we are facing represents the greatest challenge our country has faced in
generations. It will take every ounce of energy and focus we have to navigate these troubled
waters. We must wisely use our limited resources to support our domestic needs–and end
our addiction to fighting unnecessary forever-wars.
Daniel L. Davis is a Senior
Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who retired in 2015 after
21 years, including four combat deployments. Follow him @DanielLDavis1 .
Is the fact that we are insolvent stopping the Pentagon from requesting increased
military spending? Is the fact that we are broke stopping the neo-cons for war
preparations with Iran and Venezuela? I'm convinced that the only thing that will put an
end to our insane foreign policy is when some other country finally says enough, and
gives us a taste of our own medicine.
...After all, American
lawmakers are owned and operated by the corporate sector, led by the petrochemical
industry.
The "expert" quoted at the top of this essay is quite right: war is an American
addiction. Whether they are regime-changing, or wagging the dog, or going abroad to slay
dragons, Washington will never get this monkey off its back---unless it's forced to go
cold turkey. Only a deep economic depression can do that---and that looks to me as if
it's on the horizon. It will be one that takes the whole of the North Atlantic world with
it.
Well, mammy's basement aren't so bad these days. And what's so cowardly about pulling
out due to Iranian/ PMU pressure? justifying it on the pandemic? You know you're time's
up in Iraq. Any excuse will do.
My daughter who is a hospital worker showed me her mask, made by her sister. And b has posted
previously directions for making masks.
While homemade or even professional surgical mask do not protect the wearer from all
particles they do protect one much better from them than when one wears no mask at all.
A person rarely gets infected by just one virus particle. They come in millions attached
to tiny droplets. We do not know yet how the dose of the novel coronavirus that infects a
person affects the intensity of the disease. But we do know from other viruses that the
dose matters. People who catch a higher dose of viruses will usually have a more intense
disease. A mask can lower the virus load the wearer may receive.
One can
improvise a mask from simple household objects. One can sew a mask like a surgeon
does in this video .
This is my preferred model which is officially recommended by German fire departments.
(The pdf is in German but the pictures tell the story). This is the mask I made by
following those instructions.
It is made of a folded sheet cut from a triangular arm-sling out of an old first-aid
kit. A HEPA microfilter (as used in a vacuum cleaners) is in between the folded sheet. A
piece cut from a clean bag for vacuum cleaners will do as well. Do not use a sheet or
insert that is too tight to breathe through. If one does that the air will come in from the
sides of the mask and the total protection effect will be less. It can be arduous to
breathe through such a mask. If you have breathing problems leave the insert out. The
sheets alone are already good protection. There is a piece of wire from a big paper clip
fixed inside the middle of the upper seam to fit the mask tightly around the upper nose.
The lower part goes under the chin. I shaved my beard to make it a tighter fit. As I had no
sewing equipment I used a stapler to fix the seams and the ribbons.
The HEPA filter catches
particles down to 0.3 micrometer. Viruses are some 125 nanometer in diameter so they are
smaller and could slip through. But the viruses are attached to some droplet that are
bigger. HEPA filter are essentially labyrinths of small fiber and the viruses would have to
bounce multiple times to get through. Finally the dose also matters.
To clean the mask of potential viruses I put it into the oven for 30 minutes at 70C
(158F).
The science says that masks work. Everyone should use one. #MaskUp!
The advantage is you can throw them in the washing machine to clean, or even hand wash as
they are small items.
The masks in question here, surgical ones, being only meant to protect the patient from
the practitioner, seem somewhat flawed in any case.
Better to make better ones; let the Israelis have those not so good ones. A great gift
from a family member to their hardworking sibling.
There ought to be an industrial production plant producing the cloth masks with disposable
inserts - how about taking over a diaper factory - a lot of folk still use the cloth ones -
have such been totally outsourced? (I'd make 'em deluxe, organic cotton only! But for us home
bodies, an old sheet well washed, suitably patterned is better than nothing at all.)
Dr Beckmann spokeswoman Susan Fermor revealed a wash at 60C is enough.
She said: "There's a common misconception that people should wash clothes on the hottest
possible setting to kill bacteria, but it's unnecessary.
"Tests have proven that washing your clothes at 60C, with a good detergent, is perfectly
adequate to kill bacteria.
"Just make sure that you check all garments are suitable to be washed at this temperature
before putting them in the washing machine and take care not to ruin your clothes by boil
washing."
... ... ...
The NHS said people should keep these items separately from those bearing the
virus.
They released the following advice:
Keep and wash heavily soiled clothes separately from other items
"... Read more about what evidence exists for the idea that spices can affect your health , and how hot drinks will not protect you from Covid-19 ). ..."
"... Unfortunately, the idea that pills, trendy superfoods or wellness habits can provide a shortcut to a healthy immune system is a myth. In fact, the concept of "boosting" your immune system doesn't hold any scientific meaning whatsoever. ..."
"... In this case, the mucus helps to flush out the pathogen, the fever helps to make your body an uncomfortably hot environment in which it's harder for it to replicate, and the aches and general malaise are by-products of the inflammatory chemicals that course through your veins, telling immune cells what to do and where to go. (These symptoms also help signal to your brain that it's time to slow down and let your body recover). ..."
"... There is no evidence that vitamin supplements will protect you from infections, unless you are deficient (Credit: Reuters) Making the other aspect of immunity – the adaptive immune system – generally more active could also be extremely unpleasant. For example, allergies occur when overzealous immune cells learn to treat innocuous foreign bodies, such as pollen, as though they are harmful. Each time they find the offending substance, they switch on the innate immune response too – cue lots of sneezing, itchy eyes and general fatigue. Again, this is probably not what the people championing these remedies have in mind. ..."
"... If you're healthy, forget supplements – except vitamin D ..."
"... Many multivitamins claim to provide "immune support" or to help "maintain healthy immune function". But as BBC Future reported in 2016, vitamin supplements generally don't work in already healthy people – and some may even be harmful. ..."
"... there is little evidence to support vitamin C's mighty reputation for helping us to fight off colds and other respiratory infections. A 2013 review by Cochrane – an organisation renowned for its unbiased research – found that in adults "trials of high doses of vitamin C administered therapeutically, starting after the onset of symptoms, showed no consistent effect on the duration or severity of common cold symptoms". ..."
"... high doses of this vitamin can lead to kidney stones . ..."
"... Brightly coloured fruits and vegetables tend to contain the most antioxidants, because the compounds are often pigmented (Credit: Getty Images) In the developed world, most people get enough vitamins from their diets (unless they are restricted – vegans, for example, are more likely to have certain deficiencies ). However, there is one exception – vitamin D. Iwasaki explains that taking this supplement wouldn't be a bad idea. ..."
"... In fact, many immune cells can actively recognise vitamin D, and it's thought to play an important role in both the innate and acquired immune response – though exactly how remains a mystery. ..."
"... (Read more about who needs to take vitamin D and why ). ..."
"... And we get some of our reserves of these compounds from our diets. Brightly coloured fruits, vegetables and spices tend to contain the most, because antioxidants are often pigmented: they give carrots, blueberries, aubergines, red kale, turmeric, and strawberries their hues. ..."
"... Wellness products aside, there are some approaches you can ..."
Forget kombucha and trendy vitamin supplements – they are nothing more than magic
potions for the modern age. "Spanish Influenza – what it is and how it should be
treated," read the reassuringly factual headline to an advert for Vick's VapoRub
back in 1918 . The text beneath included nuggets of wisdom such as "stay quiet" and "take a
laxative". Oh, and to apply their ointment liberally, of course.
The 1918 flu pandemic was the
most lethal in recorded history , infecting up to 500 million people (a quarter of the
world's population at the time) and killing tens of millions worldwide.
But with crisis comes opportunity, and the – sometimes literal – snake oil
salesmen were out in force. Vick's VapoRub had stiff competition from a panoply of crackpot
remedies, including Miller's Antiseptic Snake Oil , Dr Bell's
Pine Tar Honey, Schenck's Mandrake Pills, Dr Jones's Liniment, Hill's Cascara Quinine
Bromide , and A. Wulfing & Co's famous mint lozenges. Their adverts made regular
appearances in the newspapers, where they starred alongside increasingly alarming
headlines.
Fast-forward to 2020, and not much has changed. Though the Covid-19 pandemic is separated
from the Spanish flu by over a century of scientific discoveries, there are still plenty of
questionable medicinal concoctions and folk remedies floating around. This time, the theme is
"boosting" the immune system.
Of the rumours currently circulating on social media, one of the more bizarre is the idea
that you can raise your white blood cell count by masturbating more. And as always, nutritional
advice abounds. This time, we're being encouraged to seek out foods rich in antioxidants and
vitamin C (back in 1918, the public were told to eat more onions), while pseudoscientists are
peddling trendy products such as
kombucha and probiotics
.
Unfortunately, the idea that pills, trendy superfoods or wellness habits can provide a
shortcut to a healthy immune system is a myth. In fact, the concept of "boosting" your immune
system doesn't hold any scientific meaning whatsoever.
"There are three different components to immunity," says Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at
Yale University. "There's things like skin, the airways and the mucus membranes that are there
to begin with, and they provide a barrier to infection. But once the virus gets past these
defences, then you have to induce the 'innate' immune response." This consists of chemicals and
cells which can rapidly raise the alert and begin fighting off any intruder.
The 1918 flu pandemic was an opportunity for snake oil salesmen to market their useless -
and sometimes harmful - products (Credit: Getty Images)
"When that is not enough, then we kick
in the adaptive immune system," she says. This involves cells and proteins – antibodies
– which take a few days or weeks to emerge. Importantly, the adaptive immune system can
only target particular pathogens. "So, for example, a T-cell specific to Covid-19 will not
respond to influenza or bacterial pathogens."
Most infections will trigger adaptive immunity eventually. But there's another way to get it
going, and that's vaccination: exposing the body to live or dead microbes, or parts of them,
can help the body to identify the real deal when it comes along.
The concept of "boosting" a person's immune system would, presumably, involve making these
responses more active, or stronger.
In actuality, you wouldn't want to do this.
Take the symptoms of a cold – body aches, a fever, brain fog, copious amounts of snot
and phlegm. Most of these problems aren't actually caused by the virus itself. Instead, they're
triggered by your own body, on purpose: they're part of the innate immune response.
Many "immunity-boosting" products claim to reduce inflammation
In this case, the mucus helps to flush out the pathogen, the fever helps to make
your body an uncomfortably hot environment in which it's harder for it to replicate, and the
aches and general
malaise are by-products of the inflammatory chemicals that course through your veins,
telling immune cells what to do and where to go. (These symptoms also help signal to your brain
that it's time to slow down and let your body recover).
The mucus and chemical signals are part of inflammation, which is the bedrock of a healthy immune
response . But the process is exhausting, so you wouldn't want to have it turned up to 11
all the time. And most viruses, including Covid-19, will trigger it anyway. If kombucha, green
tea or any of the various "immune-boosting" concoctions on the market really had any impact,
they wouldn't give you a healthful glow: they'd give you a runny nose.
Ironically, many "immunity-boosting" products claim to reduce inflammation.
There is no evidence that vitamin supplements will protect you from infections, unless you
are deficient (Credit: Reuters) Making the other aspect of immunity – the adaptive immune
system – generally more active could also be extremely unpleasant. For example, allergies
occur when overzealous immune cells learn to treat innocuous foreign bodies, such as pollen, as
though they are harmful. Each time they find the offending substance, they switch on the innate
immune response too – cue lots of sneezing, itchy eyes and general fatigue. Again, this
is probably not what the people championing these remedies have in mind.
But let's give those saying you can "boost" your immune system the benefit of the doubt and
assume they mean that certain products can improve the immune response in a useful way –
rather than literally "boost" it.
"The problem is that many of these claims have no grounding in evidence," Iwasaki says. So
what are they based on – and is there anything that can help?
If you're healthy, forget supplements – except vitamin D
Many multivitamins claim to provide "immune support" or to help "maintain healthy immune
function". But as BBC Future reported in 2016, vitamin
supplements generally don't work in already healthy people – and some may even be
harmful.
Take vitamin C. The health effects of this antioxidant have been steeped in mythology ever
since the two-time Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling became obsessed with its ability to fight
the common cold. After studying the vitamin for years, eventually he started taking 18,000 mg
per day – around 300 times the current recommended daily amount.
Vitamin supplements aren't beneficial to your immune system unless you are deficient
However, there is little evidence to support vitamin C's mighty reputation for
helping us to fight off colds and other respiratory infections. A 2013
review by Cochrane – an organisation renowned for its unbiased research – found
that in adults "trials of high doses of vitamin C administered therapeutically, starting after
the onset of symptoms, showed no consistent effect on the duration or severity of common cold
symptoms".
In fact, many experts consider the vitamin C market to be a bit of a racket , as
most people in the developed world get enough from their diets already. Though scurvy is
thought to have killed two million sailors and pirates between the 15th and 18th Centuries, the
numbers now are far lower. For example, just 128
people in England were hospitalised with the disease between 2016 and 2017. On the other
hand, high doses of this vitamin can lead to kidney
stones .
"Vitamin supplements aren't beneficial to your immune system unless you are deficient," says
Iwasaki.
Brightly coloured fruits and vegetables tend to contain the most antioxidants, because the
compounds are often pigmented (Credit: Getty Images) In the developed world, most people get
enough vitamins from their diets (unless they are restricted – vegans,
for example, are more likely to have certain deficiencies ). However, there is one
exception – vitamin D. Iwasaki explains that taking this supplement wouldn't be a bad
idea.
But crucially – and unusually – vitamin D deficiencies are endemic in many
countries, even wealthy ones. As of 2012, it was estimated that about a billion people worldwide weren't
getting enough. And with more and more people urged to stay indoors, it's easy to see how even
less sunlight exposure could lead to more deficiencies. (Read more about who needs to
take vitamin D and why ).
No, masturbation won't help either
Historically, this form of sexual activity was held in deep suspicion by Western medicine.
After an 18th Century doctor claimed that the loss of one ounce of semen (28 millilitres) had
the same effect on the body as losing 40 ounces (1.18 litres) of blood, masturbation was blamed
for all kinds of health problems for hundreds of years, from blindness to neurosis.
Now the tables have turned, and recent research has shown that it can come with some
surprising health benefits. In men, for example, it's thought to help keep sperm healthy and
may reduce a person's risk
of developing prostate cancer .
The question of whether antioxidants can help is slightly more complicated
Alas, any claims that masturbation can improve your immunity or protect you from
Covid-19 are overblown. It's true that one study found that men had higher white blood cell counts when
they were sexually aroused, and during orgasm. However, there is no evidence that this
translates into protection from infections.
There is one way that the practice might protect you – by keeping away from other
people. On Twitter, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene recently reminded
their followers that, in the age of Covid-19, "
you are your safest sex partner ".
There's no need to stock up on antioxidant pills
The question of whether antioxidants can help is slightly more complicated.
As part of the inflammatory response, white blood cells release toxic oxygen compounds.
These are something of a double-edged sword. On the one hand, they can kill bacteria and
viruses and stop them from being able to make more copies of themselves. On the other, they can
damage healthy cells, leading to cancer and ageing – and wearing out the immune
system.
To stop this from happening, the body relies on antioxidants. These help to control those
unruly oxygen compounds and keep our cells safe.
And we get some of our reserves of these compounds from our diets. Brightly coloured fruits,
vegetables and spices tend to contain the most, because antioxidants are often pigmented: they
give carrots, blueberries, aubergines, red kale, turmeric, and strawberries their hues.
Wellness experts like to promote kombucha as more than just a drink - but there's no
evidence that it can treat or prevent any illnesses, including Covid-19 (Credit: Getty Images)
There's currently a trial in the works to test if giving people with Covid-19 antioxidant
supplements might help their recovery.
However, the trial is just one of hundreds looking into potential treatments for Covid-19.
And despite decades of research, not a single placebo-controlled, peer-reviewed study on humans
has ever shown that high doses of antioxidants can "boost" the immune system, or treat or
prevent viral infections in humans.
Probiotics may help or they may not
If you believe the wellness experts and homeopaths, kombucha is much more than a sweet,
fizzy drink made from fermented tea. The internet is teeming with outrageous claims about the
product, including that it can
treat cancer and even Aids (it can't).
Like probiotics, kombucha contains live microorganisms. However, no studies have ever
confirmed whether the drink has these in high enough concentrations to be considered one
– and there is currently no evidence that kombucha specifically can treat or prevent any
illnesses whatsoever.
The picture is less clear for probiotics in general.
There is currently no evidence that any kind of probiotic can protect you from
Covid-19
One 2015 review found that probiotics – beneficial microorganisms which are
concentrated in foods, drinks, or pills – significantly reduced the
number of upper respiratory tract infections that people got and made them less severe.
They also slightly reduced the use of antibiotics and led to fewer school absences. The authors
concluded that they might be better than placebo treatments, but pointed out that the quality
of the available evidence was low.
(You can find out more about what we
do and don't know about gut health , as well as how to eat
your way to a healthy gut by checking out BBC Future's series on gut bacteria from last
year. We found that it's true that gut bacteria are important – but that taking
probiotics is unlikely to help you much, and that the best way forward is to simply eat a
varied diet.)
Importantly, there is currently no evidence that any kind of probiotic can protect you from
Covid-19.
So what has been proven to work?
Iwasaki says most of these myths are relatively innocuous – but the danger is that
falling for them will give you a false sense of security. "One thing I do warn against is when
people feel like they're protected. They shouldn't feel empowered to go out there and, you
know, start having parties," she says.
Wellness products aside, there are some approaches you can take to help support
your immune system. They aren't especially sexy, and you won't see many wellness influencers
selling them in a bottle. They are, however, proven to work – and they don't require
shelling out your hard-earned cash: get enough sleep, exercise, eat a balanced diet, and try
not to be stressed.
Failing that, there is one sure-fire way to improve your immunity to certain pathogens:
vaccination.
Growing numbers of fake medicines linked to coronavirus are on sale in developing countries,
the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned.
A BBC News investigation found fake drugs for sale in Africa, with counterfeiters exploiting
growing gaps in the market.
The WHO said taking these drugs could have "serious side effects".
One expert warned of "a parallel pandemic, of substandard and falsified products".
Around the world, people are stockpiling basic medicines. However, with the world's two
largest producers of medical supplies - China and India - in lockdown, demand now outstrips the
supply and the circulation of dangerous counterfeit drugs is soaring.
In the same week the World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus a pandemic last
month, Operation Pangea, Interpol's global pharmaceutical crime fighting unit, made 121 arrests
across 90 countries in just seven days, resulting in the seizure of dangerous pharmaceuticals
worth over $14m (£11m).
From Malaysia to Mozambique, police officers confiscated tens of thousands of counterfeit
face masks and fake medicines, many of which claimed to be able to cure coronavirus. "The
illicit trade in such counterfeit medical items during a public health crisis, shows a total
disregard for people's lives," said Interpol's Secretary General Jurgen Stock.
According to the WHO, the broader falsified medicines trade, which includes medicines which
may be contaminated, contain the wrong or no active ingredient, or may be out-of-date, is worth
more than $30bn in low and middle-income countries.
"Best case scenario they [fake medicines] probably won't treat the disease for which they
were intended", said Pernette Bourdillion Esteve, from the WHO team dealing with falsified
medical products.
"But worst-case scenario they'll actively cause harm, because they might be contaminated
with something toxic."
The supply chain
The global pharmaceutical industry is worth more than $1 trillion. Vast supply chains
stretch all the way from key manufacturers in places such as China and India, to packaging
warehouses in Europe, South America or Asia, to distributors sending medicines to every country
in the world.
There is "probably nothing more globalised than medicine" said Esteve. However, as the world
goes into lockdown, the supply chain has already begun to uncouple.
Several pharmaceutical companies in India told the BBC they are now operating at 50-60% of
their normal capacity. As Indian companies supply 20% of all basic medicines to Africa, nations
there are being disproportionately affected. Fake medicine
Speaking to pharmacists and drug companies around the world, the global supply of
antimalarials is now under threat.
Ever since US President Donald Trump began referring to the potential of chloroquine and a
related derivative, hydroxychloroquine, in White House briefings, there has been a global surge
in the demand for these drugs, which are normally used to tackle malaria.
The WHO has repeatedly said there is no definitive evidence that chloroquine or
hydroxychloroquine can be used against the virus that causes Covid-19. However, at a recent
news conference, whilst referring to these antimalarials, President Trump said: "What do you
have to lose? Take it."
As the demand has soared, the BBC has discovered large quantities of fake chloroquine in
circulation in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Cameroon. The WHO has also found the fake
medicines for sale in Niger.
The antimalarial chloroquine is normally sold for about $40 for a pot of 1,000 tablets. But
pharmacists in the DRC were found to be selling them for up to $250.
The medicine being sold was allegedly manufactured in Belgium, by "Brown and Burk
Pharmaceutical limited". However, Brown and Burk, a pharmaceutical company registered in the
UK, said they had "nothing to do with this medicine. We don't manufacture this drug, it's
fake." As the coronavirus pandemic continues, Professor Paul Newton, an expert in fake
medicines at the University of Oxford, warned the circulation of fake and dangerous medicines
would only increase unless governments around the world present a united front.
"We risk a parallel pandemic, of substandard and falsified products unless we all ensure
that there is a global co-ordinated plan for co-ordinated production, equitable distribution
and the surveillance of the quality of the tests, medicines and vaccines. Otherwise the
benefits of modern medicine... will be lost."
"The rich are different from us," F. Scott Fitzgerald is said to have remarked to Ernest
Hemingway, to which Hemingway allegedly replied, "Yes, they have more money."
The exchange, although it never actually took place, sums up a wisdom Fitzgerald had that
eluded Hemingway. The rich are different. The cocoon of wealth and privilege permits the rich
to turn those around them into compliant workers, hangers-on, servants, flatterers and
sycophants. Wealth breeds, as Fitzgerald illustrated in "The Great Gatsby" and his short story
"The Rich Boy," a class of people for whom human beings are disposable commodities. Colleagues,
associates, employees, kitchen staff, servants, gardeners, tutors, personal trainers, even
friends and family, bend to the whims of the wealthy or disappear. Once oligarchs achieve
unchecked economic and political power, as they have in the United States, the citizens too
become disposable.
The public face of the oligarchic class bears little resemblance to the private face. I,
like Fitzgerald, was thrown into the embrace of the upper crust when young. I was shipped off
as a scholarship student at the age of 10 to an exclusive New England boarding school. I had
classmates whose fathers -- fathers they rarely saw -- arrived at the school in their
limousines accompanied by personal photographers (and at times their mistresses), so the press
could be fed images of rich and famous men playing the role of good fathers. I spent time in
the homes of the ultra-rich and powerful, watching my classmates, who were children, callously
order around men and women who worked as their chauffeurs, cooks, nannies and servants. When
the sons and daughters of the rich get into serious trouble there are always lawyers,
publicists and political personages to protect them -- George W. Bush's life is a case study in
the insidious affirmative action for the rich. The rich have a snobbish disdain for the poor --
despite well-publicized acts of philanthropy -- and the middle class. These lower classes are
viewed as uncouth parasites, annoyances that have to be endured, at times placated and always
controlled in the quest to amass more power and money. My hatred of authority, along with my
loathing for the pretensions, heartlessness and sense of entitlement of the rich, comes from
living among the privileged. It was a deeply unpleasant experience. But it exposed me to their
insatiable selfishness and hedonism. I learned, as a boy, who were my enemies.
The inability to grasp the pathology of our oligarchic rulers is one of our gravest faults.
We have been blinded to the depravity of our ruling elite by the relentless propaganda of
public relations firms that work on behalf of corporations and the rich. Compliant politicians,
clueless entertainers and our vapid, corporate-funded popular culture, which holds up the rich
as leaders to emulate and assures us that through diligence and hard work we can join them,
keep us from seeing the truth.
"They were careless people, Tom and Daisy," Fitzgerald wrote of the wealthy couple at the
center of Gatsby's life. "They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into
their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let
other people clean up the mess they had made."
Aristotle, Niccolò Machiavelli, Alexis de Tocqueville, Adam Smith and Karl Marx all
began from the premise there is a natural antagonism between the rich and the masses. "Those
who have too much of the goods of fortune, strength, wealth, friends, and the like, are neither
willing nor able to submit to authority," Aristotle wrote in "Politics." "The evil begins at
home; for when they are boys, by reason of the luxury in which they are brought up, they never
learn, even at school, the habit of obedience." Oligarchs, these philosophers knew, are
schooled in the mechanisms of manipulation, subtle and overt repression and exploitation to
protect their wealth and power at our expense. Foremost among their mechanisms of control is
the control of ideas. Ruling elites ensure that the established intellectual class is
subservient to an ideology -- in this case free market capitalism and globalization -- that
justifies their greed. "The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the
dominant material relationships," Marx wrote, "the dominant material relationships grasped as
ideas."
The blanket dissemination of the ideology of free market capitalism through the media and
the purging, especially in academia, of critical voices have permitted our oligarchs to
orchestrate the largest income inequality gap in the industrialized world. The top 1 percent in
the United States own 40 percent of the nation's wealth while the bottom 80 percent own only 7
percent, as Joseph E. Stiglitz wrote in "The Price of Inequality." For every dollar that the
wealthiest 0.1 percent amassed in 1980 they had an additional $3 in yearly income in 2008,
David Cay Johnston explained in
the article "9 Things the Rich Don't Want You to Know About Taxes." The bottom 90 percent,
Johnson said, in the same period added only one cent. Half of the country is now classified as
poor or low-income. The real value of the minimum wage has fallen by $2.77 since 1968.
Oligarchs do not believe in self-sacrifice for the common good. They never have. They never
will. They are the cancer of democracy."We Americans are not usually thought to be a submissive
people, but of course we are," Wendell
Berry writes. "Why else would we allow our country to be destroyed? Why else would we be
rewarding its destroyers? Why else would we all -- by proxies we have given to greedy
corporations and corrupt politicians -- be participating in its destruction? Most of us are
still too sane to piss in our own cistern, but we allow others to do so and we reward them for
it. We reward them so well, in fact, that those who piss in our cistern are wealthier than the
rest of us. How do we submit? By not being radical enough. Or by not being thorough enough,
which is the same thing."
The rise of an oligarchic state offers a nation two routes, according to Aristotle. The
impoverished masses either revolt to rectify the imbalance of wealth and power or the oligarchs
establish a brutal tyranny to keep the masses forcibly enslaved. We have chosen the second of
Aristotle's options. The slow advances we made in the early 20th century through unions,
government regulation, the New Deal, the courts, an alternative press and mass movements have
been reversed. The oligarchs are turning us -- as they did in the 19th century steel and
textile factories -- into disposable human beings. They are building the most pervasive
security and surveillance apparatus in human history to keep us submissive.
This imbalance would not have disturbed most of our Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers,
largely wealthy slaveholders, feared direct democracy. They rigged our political process to
thwart popular rule and protect the property rights of the native aristocracy. The masses were
to be kept at bay. The Electoral College, the original power of the states to appoint senators,
the disenfranchisement of women, Native Americans, African-Americans and men without property
locked most people out of the democratic process at the beginning of the republic. We had to
fight for our voice. Hundreds of workers were killed and thousands were wounded in our labor
wars. The violence dwarfed the labor battles in any other industrialized nation. The democratic
openings we achieved were fought for and paid for with the blood of abolitionists,
African-Americans, suffragists, workers and those in the anti-war and civil rights movements.
Our radical movements, repressed and ruthlessly dismantled in the name of anti-communism, were
the real engines of equality and social justice. The squalor and suffering inflicted on workers
by the oligarchic class in the 19th century is mirrored in the present, now that we have been
stripped of protection. Dissent is once again a criminal act. The Mellons, Rockefellers and
Carnegies at the turn of the last century sought to create a nation of masters and serfs. The
modern corporate incarnation of this 19th century oligarchic elite has created a worldwide
neofeudalism, where workers across the planet toil in misery while corporate oligarchs amass
hundreds of millions in personal wealth.
Class struggle defines most of human history. Marx got this right. The sooner we realize
that we are locked in deadly warfare with our ruling, corporate elite, the sooner we will
realize that these elites must be overthrown. The corporate oligarchs have now seized all
institutional systems of power in the United States. Electoral politics, internal security, the
judiciary, our universities, the arts and finance, along with nearly all forms of
communication, are in corporate hands. Our democracy, with faux debates between two corporate
parties, is meaningless political theater. There is no way within the system to defy the
demands of Wall Street, the fossil fuel industry or war profiteers. The only route left to us,
as Aristotle knew, is revolt.
It is not a new story. The rich, throughout history, have found ways to subjugate and
re-subjugate the masses. And the masses, throughout history, have cyclically awoken to throw
off their chains. The ceaseless fight in human societies between the despotic power of the rich
and the struggle for justice and equality lies at the heart of Fitzgerald's novel, which uses
the story of Gatsby to carry out a fierce indictment of capitalism. Fitzgerald was reading
Oswald Spengler's "The Decline of the West" as he was writing "The Great Gatsby." Spengler
predicted that, as Western democracies calcified and died, a class of "monied thugs" would
replace the traditional political elites. Spengler was right about that.
"There are only two or three human stories," Willa Cather wrote, "and they
go on repeating themselves as fiercely as if they had never happened before."
The seesaw of history has thrust the oligarchs once again into the sky. We sit humiliated
and broken on the ground. It is an old battle. It has been fought over and over in human
history. We never seem to learn. It is time to grab our pitchforks.
Instead of a public health system, we have a private for-profit system for individuals lucky
enough to afford it and a rickety social insurance system for people fortunate enough to have a
full-time job.
At their best, both systems respond to the needs of individuals rather than the needs of the
public as a whole. In America, the word "public" – as in public health, public education
or public welfare – means a sum total of individual needs, not the common good.
Contrast this with America's financial system. The Federal Reserve concerns itself with the
health of financial markets as a whole. Late last week the Fed made $1.5 trillion available to
banks at the slightest hint of difficulties making trades. No one batted an eye.
When it comes to the health of the nation as a whole, money like this isn't available. And
there are no institutions analogous to the Fed with responsibility for overseeing and managing
the public's health – able to whip out a giant checkbook at a moment's notice to prevent
human, rather than financial, devastation.
Even if a test for the Covid-19 virus had been developed and approved in time, no
institutions are in place to administer it to tens of millions of Americans free of charge.
Local and state health departments are already barebones, having lost nearly a quarter of their
workforce since 2008, according to the National Association of County and City Health
Officials.
Healthcare in America is delivered mainly by private for-profit corporations which, unlike
financial institutions, are not required to maintain reserve capacity. As a result, the
nation's supply of ventilators isn't nearly large enough to care for projected numbers of
critically ill coronavirus victims unable to breathe for themselves. Its 45,000 intensive care
unit beds fall woefully short of the
2.9 million that are likely to be needed.
The Fed can close banks to quarantine financial crises but the US can't close workplaces
because the nation's social insurance system depends on people going to work.
Almost 30% of American workers have no paid sick leave from their employers, including 70%
of low-income workers earning less than $10.49 an hour. Vast numbers of self-employed workers
cannot afford sick leave. Friday's deal between House Democrats and the White House won't have
much effect because it exempts large employers and offers waivers to smaller ones.
Most jobless Americans don't qualify for unemployment insurance because they haven't worked
long enough in a steady job, and the ad-hoc deal doesn't alter this. Meanwhile, more than 30
million Americans have no health insurance. Eligibility for Medicaid, food stamps and other
public assistance is now linked to having or actively looking for work.
It's hard to close public schools because most working parents cannot afford childcare. Many
poor children rely on school lunches for their only square meal a day. In Los Angeles, about
80% of students qualify for free or reduced lunches and just under 20,000 are homeless at some
point during the school year.
There is no public health system in the US, in short, because the richest nation in the
world has no capacity to protect the public as a whole, apart from national defense. Ad-hoc
remedies such as House Democrats and the White House fashioned on Friday are better than
nothing, but they don't come close to filling this void.
The requirement will commence midnight as Thursday turns to Friday. Starting then, all
customers entering the necessary businesses that have been allowed to stay open despite the
quarantine must be wearing some kind of cloth mask. These businesses include grocery stores,
pharmacies, hotels, and any kind of taxi or ride-sharing service. These locations are permitted
to refuse service to anyone not covering their mouth and nose.
All employees of these businesses must wear masks as well, and employers must reimburse the
cost of such items. Included in the new rule are regulations on essential businesses mandating
that they ensure every worker has access to a clean restroom and has an opportunity to wash
their hands at a minimum of thirty-minute intervals. While Los Angeles public health officials
have recommended implementing the use of plexiglass doors between employees and customers where
possible, this was not included in the order
"America's major medical society specializing in the treatment of respiratory diseases has
endorsed using hydroxychloroquine for seriously ill hospitalized coronavirus patients.
The American Thoracic Society issued guidelines Monday that suggest COVID-19 patients with
pneumonia get doses of the anti-malaria drug.
"To prescribe hydroxychloroquine (or chloroquine) to hospitalized patients with COVID-19
pneumonia if all of the following apply: a) shared decision-making is possible, b) data can be
collected for interim comparisons of patients who received hydroxychloroquine (or chloroquine)
versus those who did not, c) the illness is sufficiently severe to warrant investigational
therapy, and d) the drug is not in short supply," the Thoracic Society said." NY Post
--------------
So, the Thoracic Society says 1- Hydrochloroquin is only rarely dangerous 2. It is widely
available and 3 - Why not give it a shot if the patient is in bad shape.
I could have bought some of this an Z-pac before the madness started. Like a lot of old SF
men I had quite a lot of medical instruction in training and assisted my team medical sergeants
in the their work among the unfortunate. IOW I self treat a lot and have a stash of
antibiotics, etc.
Fauci says we should never shake hands again and should expect the economy to be shut down
for 18 months. IMO if we accept the 18 month thing that cat won't bounce. pl
In the previous post about the use of chloroquine for treating Covid-19 I posted a link to a
research paper which concluded that there was no clinical benefit to its use for those
severely ill. As far as i know this was the first actual research performed on this subset of
the issue.
Below is another one I found this morning from the Pasteur Hospital in Nice. In this
instance they are using the hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin drug suggestion on more mildy ill
patients. This is the drug combination which so many have placed their hopes in a miracle on.
The result is that it has turned out to be so toxic that it had to be discontinued. This is
not the final answer as there are more variations to check out - but don't get your hopes too
high.
Thus we have no seen so far that this drug idea has either no effect or is too toxic.
Anecdotally, I and the teams I worked with when I was younger had to take choloroquine for
long periods of time. The frequency and unpleasantness of side effects were such that many
eventually refused to take the drug and took their chances with getting malaria - and we were
seeing malaria all the time so this was not an uniformed choice. I have questioned this idea
from the get go - but that is, of course, just a gut reaction and not valid or
scientific.
I think it fair to say the stress of the situation is driving us to grasp at straws and
hope for miracles. No one wants to wait the time it normally takes to work our way to a
scientific solution. But that is almost certainly what we are going to end up doing anyway as
the alternative has only worked on the rarest of occasions. A very interesting discussion can
also take place regarding the likelihood of developing a successful vaccine as after near 20
years of working on SARS and MERS there are still no vaccines for them approved.
Here as long thread of U.S.
hospitals firing people because their usual business no longer makes money:
U.S. healthcare system is so overwhelmed by COVID-19 that hospitals are laying off staff.
Yes, you read that right. Due to coronavirus lockdown and fears, no one's going except
in absolute emergencies. Hospitals are getting slammed--by lack of business.
...
No, we can't blame Trump for the entire privatized US healthcare system. However, he owns
part of this, as recently published information clearly shows. Having said that, his
shamelessness has, along with the Fed, and Congress, and the Supreme Court, and state
governments all over the country, have also clarified the state of play very well indeed.
This is a shithole kleptocracy merged with a kakistocracy. Voting has lost all of its
meaning. The only thing left to us is an active boycott in November, assuming the farce isn't
called off by a presidential decree. The ruling of the Supreme Court on the Wisconsin
election on Monday would seem to make the Court's approval of such a thing unlikely. However,
it's not exactly the same question, and the Federalists are nothing if not both inventive and
supine when it comes to the exercise of corporate-backed executive power. My guess is that it
won't happen, if only because Trump will be crushing the Dems in the polls.
AnneR , April 7, 2020 at 07:32
Indeed, Mr Cook, indeed.
The US (its ruling, plutocratic elites and their fellow traveling political hench-folks)
has never wanted to expend taxpayer (i.e. the hoi polloi's taxes, the rich-ultra rich not
paying any or very little of their "earnings" to the IRS) monies (however much cheaper, in
reality, such a medical system would have been and be) on a single payer,
free-at-point-of-service medical care system for all of its citizens. Such a system is
"communist," "socialist." The fact that the remainder of the western world has some such
construct without apparently being communist or even truly socialist escapes the US ruling
elite consciousness. Deliberately.
Indeed, the attitude among many of those elite 20%ers would seem to be along the lines of
an Arizonan politico who expressed this worldview on Obamacare (hardly single payer, not free
at point of service or anything close to, nor does it cover every American – the
poorest are beyond its scope): in answer to some question about the ACA, this politico
(doubtless with medical coverage paid for by taxpayers) said that some people could afford
Mercs, others Fords, some could only afford umpteenth-hand vehicles and then there were those
who couldn't afford any vehicle. Access to medical care falls along the same lines –
and that's the way things naturally are.
She was a Reprat – but Mr Biden thinks along the same lines, it would seem.
Yes, the US populace – the hoi polloi, vox populi, the bewildered herd, us –
want M4A and as a single payer non-profiteering system. Or most do. But the profiteering
companies – pharma, hospitals, clinics, med insurance companies, doctors, medical
staffing (for Emergency Depts etc.,) companies – do NOT want anything to do with such a
system. And they are among the election funders of those DC politicos (many themselves among
the rich) who balk at the very notion of M4A. The medical and the political system here is
corrupt. Not only does Power corrupt, but profiteering also corrupts and does so as
absolutely as absolute power.
And this system, this political, medical system isn't likely to change without some
drastic overhaul – and is that likely?
Other changes – increasing surveillance e.g. – may well take place. But profit
before life? One only has to consider the eagerness with which the US Congress – both
sides of the Janus party – signed onto the Strumpet's obscenely enormous MIC funding
last year, continuing the Profit before People (at home and in the countries devastated by
us) construct that is DC.
New new study found the reason for the effectiveness of chloroquine:
https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surface_Glycoprotein_Inhibit_Heme_Metabolism_by_Binding_to_Porphyrin/11938173
In short, the SARS-CoV-2 virus has three protein configurations on its outside which attack
hemoglobine, dissolving the iron ion from the molecule. The hemoglobin looses the ability to
bind oxygen and CO2 without the iron, thus cannot transport it anymore (the effect of
hydocyanic acid or carbonmonoxide, but both block the binding location, they do not destroy
it).
As a consequence, the O2 load in the blood decreases dangerously even if the lungs still
are working. Chloroquine seems to cover the hemoglobine binding location, so the virus cannot
attack it anymore. Against the malaria parasite, the coverage by chloroquine seems to block
the parasite from consuming proteins from the blood cells which it needs for
reproduction.
Strange collection of features: The unique furine cleavage site (known from other,
completely different highly contagious flu viruses), the CD147 docking site (known only from
the dangerous Coxsakie virus and expressed strongly by cancer cells), the GRP78 docking site
(expressed by cells under stress) and the attack on hemoglobine, five distinctive pathways to
attack cells and cause damage. All not found in any other corona virus genome...
I note that the link posted by CK is not actual results of research into whether chloroquine
is effective regarding its use against covid-19 but rather an analysis of physical functions
which 'suggests' that it might be. Actual research is required to prove the point.
Conversely there is a new research report on the effectiveness of chloroquine on treating
those with severe symptoms from covid-19 just published and the conclusion for that set of
patients is that it has 'No Evidence of Rapid Antiviral Clearance or Clinical Benefit
..."
I have read articles from Dr's and PhD experts who postulate both ways on this issue.
Actual testing will be required to answer this and this first result is not optimistic at
least in the case of severe symptoms.
Turkey has ordered all citizens to wear masks when shopping or visiting crowded public
places and announced it will start to deliver masks to every family, free of charge, as
infections sharply increase in the country of 80 million.
Turkey has over 30,000 confirmed cases of the virus and has registered 649 deaths. More than
1,300 patients are in intensive care units and at least 600 medical workers have been infected,
according to figures released by the Health Ministry.
The number of cases places Turkey among the top 10 worst
affected countries , a sharp rise since its first confirmed death from the disease on March
17.
Health Minister Fahrettin Koca, however, said on Monday that the increase in confirmed cases
was low when compared with the increase in testing, which has been ramped up to more than
20,000 per day.
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has introduced measures to contain the spread of the virus,
asking people to stay at home and imposing a curfew on those over 65 and under 20, but
resisting a nationwide lockdown.
New York has lost a staggering 20,000 hospital beds over the last two decades to budget cuts
and insurance overhauls, complicating local and state efforts to battle the coronavirus,
according to records and experts.
The Empire State had 73,931 licensed hospital beds in 2000 before years of cuts and closures
shrank the number to just 53,000 in 2020, according to records obtained by the New York State
Nurses Association from the state Health Department and stats provided by officials.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday the health officials believe they will need anywhere from
55,000 to 110,000 hospital beds to treat the expected wave of coronavirus victims.
"New York has closed too many beds. They went too far," said Judy Wessler, former head of
the NY Commission on the Public's Health System, about the 28 percent drop in beds.
Those cutbacks mean the state is in a significantly deeper deficit as it searches for ways
to expand its capacity to treat COVID-19 victims.
"This is going to crash the health care system," Cuomo warned, as he again reiterated his
request to President Trump that the
Army Corps of Engineers be dispatched to help New York state build emergency hospital
capacity.
But now, after evidence that asymptomatic people can spread the disease, the CDC is
recommending that all Americans wear masks when out in public to help prevent the spread of the
coronavirus. And while the CDC now recommends Americans wear masks, they recommend only cloth
coverings, or homemade masks, and ask that medical-grade masks still be reserved for health
care professionals.
The move is a win for those who have been publicly questioning the government's guidance and
edges the U.S. closer to the practices of East Asian countries where masks are commonplace.
But the U.S. is not alone in its reluctance to recommend the widespread use of masks. The
WHO is standing its ground in saying that masks won't help prevent the spread of disease.
Though, notably, it said that countries where cleaning and physical distancing are difficult
could consider widespread mask wearing.
The science of infection hasn't changed, but experts point to a better understanding of how
the coronavirus spreads as the reason for the shift. Since some people are asymptomatic and
could still be infecting others without knowing they have the disease, experts say it is
prudent for everyone to wear a mask.
Jamie Dimon said the coronavirus pandemic will lead to a major economic downturn and stress
mirroring the meltdown that nearly brought down the U.S. financial system in 2008.
"At a minimum, we assume that it will include a bad recession combined with some kind of
financial stress similar to the global financial crisis of 2008," the chief executive officer
of JPMorgan Chase & Co. said Monday in his annual letter to shareholders. "Our bank cannot
be immune to the effects of this kind of stress."
The 23-page letter, his shortest since 2008, came less than a week after Dimon told staff
he'd returned to work after undergoing emergency heart surgery. It was his first public
commentary about the coronavirus since the bank's investor day on Feb. 25. At the time, the
outbreak still seemed a distant threat, with fewer than 60 cases in the U.S. and none in New
York.
Dimon, the only current CEO who steered a major U.S. bank through the financial crisis, said
JPMorgan's earnings will be "down meaningfully" this year, though the bank is "unlikely" to cut
its dividend. Such a move would only result from "extreme prudence," he said, adding that
JPMorgan will give more details on the impact when it reports first-quarter earnings later this
month.
The 64-year-old CEO outlined initiatives his bank is taking to support employees, businesses
and the community, but refrained from offering long opinions about public policy that marked
previous missives.
Read more: What to Know About Recessions as World Heads Into One: QuickTake
He said 180,000, or about 70%, of the firm's employees are working from home, and the bank
is giving payments of $1,000 to those whose jobs don't allow them to work remotely.
JPMorgan has been waiving fees for some loans, allowing customers to defer payments on
mortgages and auto loans, and removing minimum payment requirements on credit cards. It's also
extended $950 million in new loans to small businesses over the past 60 days, and is planning
to lend an additional $150 billion to clients across the world.
Regulatory Review
After the crisis, "we should use the opportunity to closely review the economic response and
determine whether any additional regulatory changes are warranted to improve our financial and
economic system," Dimon wrote. "There will be a time and place for that -- but not now."
Dimon has become a spokesman for Wall Street thanks to his frequent public appearances,
outspoken nature and nearly 15-year tenure at the biggest and most profitable bank in America.
His absence while he recovered from surgery was felt across the industry as policy makers
grappled with dire warnings about the economic effects of the pandemic and governments stepped
up efforts to keep millions of people at home to stem the spread of the highly contagious
virus.
Dimon was more pessimistic about prospects for the economy than some industry figures were
when the scale of the crisis was first becoming clear. A month ago, as stock markets were
sliding, former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein said in a tweet to "expect quick
recovery when health threat recedes." He said the economy "will avoid systemic damage" that
takes years to work through.
For the central attribute is symmetry: the balancing of incentives and disincentives,
people should also penalized if something for which they are responsible goes wrong and hurts
others: he or she who wants a share of the benefits needs to also share some of the
risks.
. . .
And in the absence of the filtering of skin in the game, the mechanisms of evolution fail:
if someone else dies in your stead, the built up of asymmetric risks and misfitness will
cause the system to eventually blow-up.
I read your use of feedback as >reference to external stimuli (the real world).
With Taleb, I'm reading disincentives as penalties, and that lack of penalty/punishment
warps the selection process of evolution. With respect to the post, that has created a lack
of respect for risk by those who make decisions.
It can be taken a step farther, that the selection process has created perverse
incentives. For example, the bailouts from 2008 made the FIRE sector qliphotically
antifragile. In that scenario, risk becomes rewarding.
I want to be careful here about using the word feedback, its ambiguities could be
confusing. Given that, I'm interested in knowing what you mean about ignoring the
disincentives skin-in-the-game creates. Could you please expand on that?
My problem with Taleb's skin in the game is that, as he well knows, it's hard to
distinguish luck (good or bad) and skill. How can we punish for luck though?
Think of a judge, who gets, through his skill, 99 out of 100 cases right. But the 100th
– which, by pure luck, could be really large case – he gets wrong.
Or, even simpler. Technically, if you do one decision a day, and have 99% success rate,
every three months you get somethign wrong (1-0.99^60 = 0.54) more likely than not. Should
you be punished for this? If we yes, then people will start takin decisions where alternate
history is hard to prove, i.e. you create a selection bias towards "do nothing". You can then
be punished for "doing nothing" but most of the time "do nothing" is a safe choice. (it's a
specific case of "go with the crowd")
Also, in decision making, context is extremely important (which is why courts go to super
lenghts to establish it in judical cases). Taleb should know it, and he should also know that
unless context is taken into account _in_full_ then the skin-in-the-game will not be seen as
fair. But the problem is, the context can never be fully established, and rarely w/o the
participation of the major decision maker. Who will have no incentive to participate. Which
will hamper learning from it.
Skin in the game makes sense when you can clearly separate luck and skill, and clearly
establish context. Even one of those is rare occasion, both is extremely so.
That said, you can often establish post fact when someone blew up (this is what the
various enuiries do). And then you'd treat accordingly. But that's not skin-in-the-game,
because again, the enquiry can establish that you acted in good faith, as most people would
act at the time – and so assign no blame. So you may "fail honourably".
Skin in the game does not let you fail honourably – because it's not skin in the
game anymore (because it can let you game the system again, via doing just enough to pass any
future enquiry as "more could have been done, but there's no clear knowing dereliction of
duty).
TLDR; skin-in-the-game is an attempt at simplictic solution to a complex problem. Taleb
should know better.
If only it was as simple as saying that services operated by the state were fine, it's
private capital where the problem lies.
It's not. This is a societal and cultural problem.
There are employer "pushes" towards the deskilling and degrading of levels of operational
competence. One is employers ( both public sector and private sector) do not want to pay for
training and to retain a body of experienced employees because both of these cost money
up-front with a payoff (in the form of competent, knowledgeable staff) that comes only
slowly, later. And a churn of staff is seen as the sign, wrongly, but this is what the MBAs
sell as snake oil, of a dynamic, healthy organization which is bringing in (through a process
which never seems to be adequately explained) new talent.
Plus, of course, most obviously, younger and newer employees are cheaper so your average
headcount cost is lower which is usually a management metric -- often one which is
incentive-ised through reward.
There are also employee "pulls" -- and again, these are not just observed in the private
sector. You see them in medicine, academia and even, most bizarrely, the arts. An example of
these employee-instigated causes of a reduction in capability is that it becomes
in-cultural-ated that if you spend too long in the same place, you're only doing so out of
necessity because you're so useless, no-one else will employ you. So even if don't really
want to move onto a different organization or a different field of work outside your
skillset, you feel you have to, in order to avoid looking "stale", "resistant to change",
"stuck in your comfort zone" or any other of the myriad of thought-crimes which you don't
want, in today's job market, to be seen to having evidence of committing. And also, as
collective union bargaining has gone the way of the dinosaur, more often than not, if you
want a raise you have to threaten to quit to get one. But again, more often than not, your
current employer will call your bluff and let you leave. So you have to have another job
lined up to to go to, if you're not to fall into a trap of flouncing off in a huff but having
no other work to walk straight into. While your current employer might not, if they were
honest, want to lose you, the dynamics of the workplace being what they are, neither side can
then climb down from the ultimatums they've just served.
Yes, there are some notable poster-children of how private enterprise has committed
suicide through the wanton bloodletting of its skilled employees (Boeing being a recent
case-in-point). But even if you cast your gaze in the direction of public employers, this
same phenomena can be found in universities, colleges and K-12 schools (where faculties are
no longer bolstered by a strong bench of tenured staff, contract and non-tenured
hire-and-fire disposable staff are now the norm, I won't even go there on the effect of
charter schools) healthcare (even in the UK's entirely public sector NHS, there is huge
reliance on contract and agency staff which the COVID-19 crisis has highlighted and the
government is trying, belatedly and without any clear indication it can do so in the short
term
to redress this and avoid being price-gouged). Or federal and state
regulators which now simply do not understand the businesses they are supposed to be
regulating and have to buy-in external "expertise" (and merely exacerbate the revolving
door problem).
In summary, I wish it were so simple to merely say "private sector bad, government good".
But the rot has set in from top to bottom across all aspects of how we manage our shared
organizational maturity (or, should I say, now, fix our shared organizational immaturity) and
whether or not it started in the private sector, it has well and truly spread to infect the
public sector, too. This was the unmistakable point of the post, so it bears re-reading it
again with a particular emphasis on understanding why this is the case.
Another angle in your post is the interesting role of "enlightened" capitalists -- the
Krafts, Bill Gates, and soon to be others.
They are trying to fill the chasm in infrastructure, supplies and social cohesion created
by the capitalist state and private capital.
Some of their efforts might pan out and be useful.
But they represent the wrong politics.
The crisis is not just about a virus and the lack of a medical cure; it is systemic: the
social, political and economic order of America is institutionally and culturally unable to
mobilize for virus prevention and suppression.
It literally takes a peoples' war. China wasn't lying.
And the billionaire philanthropists actually don't want us to think and act that way.
Don't praise them. They want us to return to the old normal of grotesque neoliberal
capitalism that made them rich beyond words.
Living in a quiet Boston suburb, I can see this clearly. The poor are still going out to
work, dying, or suffering at home. The rich are off to the Cape, having food deliveries from
uninsured, precarious workers, and have no concept of a collective effort as they continue to
work for themselves from home.
White House economic adviser got into a massive argument with the
coronavirus task force's Anthony Fauci over the doctor's ongoing resistance to the use of
hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, despite reports of the drug's widespread efficacy.
Numerous government officials were at the table, including Fauci, coronavirus response
coordinator Deborah Birx, Jared Kushner, acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf, and
Commissioner of Food and Drugs Stephen Hahn.
Behind them sat staff, including Peter Navarro, tapped by Trump to compel private
companies to meet the government's coronavirus needs under the Defense Production Act.
According to the report, towards the end of the meeting Hahn began a discussion of the
commonly used malaria drug hydroxychloroquine - which was recently rated the '
most effective therapy ' for coronavirus according to a global survey of more than 6,000
doctors .
After Hahn gave an update on various trials and real-world use of the drug, Navarro got up
and dropped a stack of folders on the table to pass around .
According to Axios 's source, " the first words out of his [Navarro's] mouth are
that the studies that he's seen, I believe they're mostly overseas, show 'clear therapeutic
efficacy,' " adding "Those are the exact words out of his mouth.
Fauci - who's not got his own Twitter hashtag, #FireFauci - began pushing back against
Navarro, repeating his oft-repeated contention that 'there's only anecdotal evidence' that the
drug works against COVID-19.
Navarro exploded - after Fauci's mention of anecdotal evidence "just set Peter off." The
economic adviser shot back "That's the science, not anecdote," while pointing to the stack of
folders on the desk, which included the results of studies from around the world showing its
efficacy.
Here's what unfolded next, via Axios :
Navarro started raising his voice, and at one point accused Fauci of objecting to Trump's
travel restrictions, saying, "You were the one who early on objected to the travel
restrictions with China," saying that travel restrictions don't work. (Navarro was one of the
earliest to push the China travel ban.)
Fauci looked confused, according to a source in the room. After Trump imposed the
travel restrictions, Fauci has publicly praised the president's restriction on travel from
China.
Pence was trying to moderate the heated discussion. "It was pretty clear that everyone
was just trying to get Peter to sit down and stop being so confrontational," said one of
the sources.
Eventually, Kushner turned to Navarro and said, "Peter, take yes for an answer,"
because most everyone agreed, by that time, it was important to surge the supply of the
drug to hot zones.
The principals agreed that the administration's public stance should be that the
decision to use the drug is between doctors and patients.
Trump ended up announcing at his press conference that he had 29 million doses of
hydroxychloroquine in the Strategic National Stockpile.
According to a source familiar with the coronavirus task force, "There has never been a
confrontation in the task force meetings like the one yesterday," adding "People speak up and
there's robust debate, but there's never been a confrontation. Yesterday was the first
confrontation."
Meanwhile, 37% of 6,227 doctors across 30 countries felt the drug was the "most effective
therapy" out of 15 options in treating coronavirus,
according to a poll reported by the Washington Times .
The drug has been prescribed in 72% of cases in Spain, 49% in Italy, 41% in Brazil, 39% in
Mexico, 28% in France, and 23% in the USA . Overall, 19% of physicians have prescribed the drug
for high-risk patients, and 8% for low-risk patients.
More from the Sermo poll (via the Washington Times )
***
Sermo CEO Peter Kirk called the polling results a "treasure trove of global insights for
policy makers."
"Physicians should have more of a voice in how we deal with this pandemic and be able to
quickly share information with one another and the world," he said. "With censorship of the
media and the medical community in some countries, along with biased and poorly designed
studies, solutions to the pandemic are being delayed."
The survey also found that 63% of U.S. physicians believe restrictions should be lifted in
six weeks or more, and that the epidemic's peak is at least 3-4 weeks away.
The survey also found that 83% of global physicians anticipate a second global outbreak,
including 90% of U.S. doctors but only 50% of physicians in China.
On average, U.S. coronavirus testing takes 4-5 days, while 10% of cases take longer than
seven days. In China, 73% of doctors reported getting rest results back in 24 hours.
In cases of ventilator shortages, all countries but China said the top criteria should be
patients with the best chance of recovery (47%), followed by patients with the highest risk of
death (21%), and then first responders (15%) .
@Philip Owen
The most important thing is to have a cheap way to lower the R0.
Herd immunity is one, but it is expensive to get there.
Masks, widespread use of masks, is another, and it is relatively cheap. The virus lives
mainly in lungs, after all. Accidental touching of mask's dirty side etc. can be a problem,
but the virus would have to cross one mask to reach out, then go into air to touch another
surface, then wait for some accidents to happen to go through your mask to reach your
lungs.
Social distancing, widespread use of masks, and contact tracing, and 14 days wait period
for people suspected of infection. The pandemic can be controlled, and normal life can
largely resume when we wait for vaccine and cure.
It says there, black on white – " Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the
presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical
symptoms. "
It make sense to wear mask only for a limited time (no more then 2 hours for a single mask)
and only in public places. Should always be combined with strict hand hygiene. Without hand
hygiene wearing of masks can be counterproductive.
Notable quotes:
"... Given the potential loss of effectiveness with incorrect usage, general advice should be to only use masks/ respirators under very particular, specified circumstances, and in combination with other personal protective practices. ..."
Conclusions: Despite a further review of all the available evidence up to 30 November
2012 there is still limited evidence to suggest that use of face masks and/or respirators in
health care setting can provide significant protection against infection with influenza when in
close contact with infected patients. Some evidence suggests that mask use is best undertaken
as part of a package or 'bundle' of personal protection especially including hand hygiene, the
new evidence provides some support to this argument particularly within the community or
household setting. Early initiation and regular wearing of masks/respirators may improve their
effectiveness in healthcare and household settings, again an argument marginally strengthened
by the updated evidence.
The effectiveness of masks and respirators is likely to be linked to consistent, correct
usage and compliance; this remains a major challenge – both in the context of a formal
study and in everyday practice.
Given the potential loss of effectiveness with incorrect usage, general advice should be
to only use masks/ respirators under very particular, specified circumstances, and in
combination with other personal protective practices.
... ... ...
None of the trials found, in the main analyses, a significant difference between
non-intervention and mask-only arms (surgical masks or N95/P2 respirators) in either clinically
diagnosed (influenza-like-illness/ILI) or laboratory-confirmed influenza. However in four of
the household trials, sub-analyses of the datasets revealed some evidence of protection.
One trial observed that household contacts who wore a P2 respirator 'all/most' of the time
were less likely to develop an influenza-like illness compared to less frequent users.
A second trial found a significant reduction in laboratory-confirmed influenza among
household contacts that began hand hygiene or hand hygiene plus a face mask within 36 hours of
the index case's illness.
... ... ...
One of these studies found that there was a significantly lower frequency of H1N1 pdm09
infection in healthcare workers wearing a mask when compared to those not wearing a mask.
Furthermore, a sub-analysis of nurses and nurse assistants in a seroprevalence study identified
an increased risk of acquiring H1N1 pdm09 infection when not wearing a mask, however while the
authors described this result as significant (p-value significant), the confidence interval was
not significant
... ... ...
There is some weak evidence to suggest that facemasks may be protective when they are used
early (after recognition of an index case in a household setting); if better compliance (using
the masks for longer periods of time) is achieved, and when combined with hand-washing
practicing.
Background
Minimising transmission of influenza requires a range of personal and public health measures
taken by individuals and communities such as respiratory etiquette and hand hygiene and
possibly proactive school closures (and other measures sometimes called social distancing). Use
of personal protective equipment is generally advised according to the risk of exposure to the
influenza virus and the degree of infectivity and human pathogenicity of the virus. A
particularly vexing issue for policy makers has been the paucity of scientific evidence upon
which to base guidance for use of masks and respirators in healthcare and community settings to
prevent transmission of seasonal, pandemic and animal influenzas.
... ... ...
Participants were allocated to wear either a fit-tested N95 or a surgical face mask when
providing care (including aerosol generating procedures) to patients with a febrile respiratory
illness during the influenza season. No difference in influenza infection was detected in the
two groups. The final hospital based study stratified 1441 health care workers across 15
Beijing hospitals to analyse the effectiveness of surgical masks compared to both fit-tested
and non-fit tested N95 respirators (6). The wearers of N95 respirators had lower, but
non-significant attack rates, compared to those wearing surgical masks. However the intention
to treat analysis (when adjusting for clustering of hospitals) identified that non-fit-tested
N95s had a statistically significant protective effect against clinical respiratory illness
when compared to surgical masks in healthcare workers. Additionally a multivariate analysis (
post hoc ) found that wearing any N95 mask type protected against clinical respiratory
illness
... ... ...
A cluster randomized controlled trial in Australia compared household contacts of paediatric
index cases (0-15 years) with a febrile respiratory illness that were randomised to control,
surgical mask or non-fit-tested P2 respirator intervention groups (9). No differences in rates
of influenza-like infection or rates of respiratory virus isolation were observed in an
intention-to-treat analysis. In a survival analysis that evaluated risk factors for
influenza-like illness, use of P2 respirators or surgical masks grouped together was found to
significantly reduce the risk for illness in those household contacts who reported wearing the
device 'all' or 'most' of the time for the first five days; however, the study was underpowered
to detect a difference in efficacy between P2 and surgical masks.
... ... ...
A study in Berlin, conducted across two influenza seasons (2009/10 and 2010/11), randomised
households to three groups; control, face mask or face mask and hand-hygiene with the analyses
stratified by influenza type (seasonal or pandemic cases), season, and early implementation of
interventions (12). This was the only example of a trail that analyzed specific H1N1 pdm09
secondary household attack rates. In the intention-to-treat multivariable analysis, pooling of
both intervention groups resulted in a significant reduction in lab-confirmed influenza when
stratified for either early intervention or pandemic-only cases; however there was no
statistically significant effect of intervention groups on secondary household attack rates.
When a per-protocol analysis was applied the odds ratios in both the mask-only and
mask/hand-hygiene 24 groups were between 0.2 and 0.3 suggesting a strong protective effect.
Although a statistically significant reduction was found in the mask-only groups.
... ... ...
Larson and colleagues examined hand-sanitiser and hand-sanitiser/mask use (both with
education) effectiveness amongst crowded households in upper Manhattan (15). In this study,
both household caretakers and symptomatic individuals were asked to wear masks. The study found
that mask wearing coupled with hand-sanitiser use significantly reduced secondary transmission
of aggregated upper respiratory infection/ ILI and lab-confirmed influenza outcome compared
with control households (education but no intervention) in the final logistic regression model.
Unfortunately there was not a mask-only group, but the observation that hand sanitizer alone
resulted in no reduction in the aggregated outcome suggests that mask use, in combination with
hand-sanitiser had an impact on transmission. There was also limited power to detect
differences amongst the three groups and there was also observed cross-contamination with use
of hand-sanitizer in the control group
... ... ...
It was observed that there was a statistically significant difference in H1N1 pdm09
infection between individuals wearing masks at any point and those not wearing masks (0%
seropositive individuals when using either surgical masks or N95 respirators in comparison to
14% individuals in the no mask/respirator group). The study however lacked power to detect
significant differences between those wearing N95 respirators against those wearing surgical
masks. In addition to this the study suffered for a large number of other limitations such as
potential measurement and recall bias.
most people who dies form Spanish flue also have lungs full of liquid
BM @ 10
Interesting, I had a Chinese coworker show me some videos of autopsies from China on Covid
patients. The lungs were full of mucus. He translated for me and they were saying that
drinking very hot liquids helps to keep things in check if you are sick. Coffee, tea and the
like.
What we would call anecdotal reports from experts.
Eye-watering read. Who could have guessed; the great exceptional U.S.A with over 80% under
lockdown, out of the unemployed gate, 10 million stuck at home and jobless.
Reuters presents this grim read. Is this article on a country in equatorial Africa? A
sobering No.
The White House task force on the pandemic estimates the pandemic could kill 100,000 to
240,000 people even if lockdown orders remain in place and Americans abide by
them.[.]
The number of Americans who filed for unemployment benefits last week shattered the
previous high reached just a week earlier, the U.S. government said, as urgent measures to
contain the pandemic slammed the brakes on the economy.
"It takes your breath away," said Justin Hoogendoorn, head of fixed income strategy and
analytics at Piper Sandler in Chicago. "Obviously the immediate reaction to something like
that is going to be fear."
Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and Nevada told people to stay home on Wednesday, raising
to 39 the number of states with such orders. Public health experts call the measures an
urgent necessity but economists say they could lead to economic contraction of 30 percent
or more in the second quarter.[.]
New York City crematories are extending their hours and burning bodies into the night,
with corpses piling up so quickly that city officials are surveying cemeteries elsewhere in
the state for temporary interment sites.
Funeral homes and cemetery directors describe a surge in demand unseen in decades as
COVID-19 cases, the respiratory ailment caused by the novel coronavirus, surpassed 40,000
infections in the city, killing more than 1,000.
"We've been preparing for a worst-case scenario, which is in a lot of ways starting to
materialize," said Mike Lanotte, executive director of the New York State Funeral Directors
Association.[.]
The $42 T rillion question. How will the Fed inflate the busted
bubble balloon..illusion of prosperity? This time it's different.
In short, capitalism had built up vulnerabilities to another crash that any number of
possible triggers could unleash. The trigger this time was not the dot.com meltdown of 2000 or
the sub-prime meltdown of 2008/9; it was a virus. And of course, mainstream ideology requires
focusing on the trigger, not the vulnerability. Thus mainstream policies aim to reestablish
pre-virus capitalism. Even if they succeed, that will return us to a capitalist system whose
accumulated vulnerabilities will soon again collapse from yet another trigger.
In the light of the coronavirus pandemic, I focus criticism on capitalism and the
vulnerabilities it has accumulated for several reasons. Viruses are part of nature. They have
attacked human beings -- sometimes dangerously -- in both distant and recent history. In 1918,
the Spanish Flu killed nearly 700,000 in the United States and millions elsewhere. Recent
viruses include SARS, MERS andEbola. What matters to public health is each society's
preparedness: stockpiled tests, masks, ventilators, hospital beds, trained personnel, etc., to
manage dangerous viruses. In the U.S., such objects are produced by private capitalist
enterprises whose goal is profit. It was not profitable to produce and stockpile such products,
that was not and still is not being done.
Nor did the U.S. government produce or stockpile those medical products. Top U.S. government
personnel privilege private capitalism; it is their primary objective to protect and
strengthen. The result is that neither private capitalism nor the U.S. government performed the
most basic duty of any economic system: to protect and maintain public health and safety. U.S.
capitalism's response to the coronavirus pandemic continues to be what it has been since
December 2019: too little, too late. It failed. It is the problem.
The second reason I focus on capitalism is that the responses to today's economic collapse
by Trump, the GOP and most Democrats carefully avoid any criticism of capitalism. They all
debate the virus, China, foreigners, other politicians, but never the system they all serve.
When Trump and others press people to return to churches and jobs -- despite risking their and
others' lives -- they place reviving a collapsed capitalism ahead of public health.
The third reason capitalism gets blame here is that alternative systems -- those not driven
by a profit-first logic -- could manage viruses better. While not profitable to produce and
stockpile everything needed for a viral pandemic, it is efficient. The wealth already lost in
this pandemic far exceeds the cost to have produced and stockpiled the tests and ventilators,
the lack of which is contributing so much to today's disaster. Capitalism often pursues
profit at the expense of more urgent social needs and values. In this, capitalism is grossly
inefficient. This pandemic is now bringing that truth home to people.
A worker-coop based economy -- where workers democratically run enterprises, deciding what,
how and where to produce, and what to do with any profits -- could, and likely would, put
social needs and goals (like proper preparation for pandemics) ahead of profits. Workers are
the majority in all capitalist societies; their interests are those of the majority. Employers
are always a small minority; theirs are the "special interests" of that minority. Capitalism
gives that minority the position, profits and power to determine how the society as a whole
lives or dies. That's why all employees now wonder and worry about how long our jobs, incomes,
homes and bank accounts will last -- if we still have them. A minority (employers) decides all
those questions and excludes the majority (employees) from making those decisions, even though
that majority must live with their results.
Of course, the top priority now is to put public health and safety first. To that end,
employees across the country are now thinking about refusing to obey orders to work in unsafe
job conditions. U.S. capitalism has thus placed a general strike on today's social agenda. A
close second priority is to learn from capitalism's failure in the face of the pandemic. We
must not suffer such a dangerous and unnecessary social breakdown again. Thus system change is
now also moving onto today's social agenda.
Capitalism requires continual growth. That isn't possible on a world of finite resources.
No government operating under a capitalist dogma can solve this inherent predicament.
You can blame the leaders all you like, but they are constrained by the system that can't
see beyond the next quarterly profit projection.
The word "capitalism" is a euphemism for "totally corrupt system".
The totally corrupt system has failed.
For example, were this an honest system, Goldman 666 would have been wiped out in the GFC
and Blankfein would be living in a cardboard box under a freeway overpass instead of bragging
and gloating about doing gawd's work while soaking in his looted billion dollars.
Even if
they aren't exactly certain how the business model works,
Twitter blue checks and the rest of the mainstream media - having been whipped into an
anti-banker fervor by Bernie Sanders and the last glowing embers of Occupy - never pass up an
opportunity to kick private equity in the nuts.
And if there's one industry where private equity has done the most to directly harm American
public, it's health care.
Envision's Colorado headquarters
During the latter part of the Democratic primary campaign, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth
Warren primed the pump by extolling the evils of private equity to the public every chance they
got, helping impress the term into the memory banks of legions of twentysomethings how the
industry had contributed to America's health-care crisis, along with a multitude of other
societal ills. Now, with the world in the grip of an unprecedented crisis, the industry is
about to get pilloried once again - but this, much, much bigger than before, we suspect - as
private equity-backed health-care companies, loaded down from their LBO debt binges, are forced
to make cutbacks including slashing pay for doctors and nurses in the middle of a pandemic that
has already killed nearly 9,500 Americans.
And now the KKR-backed Envision Healthcare Corp., one of the biggest medical providers
backed by private equity, is poised to become the poster-child for Wall Street greed as it
informs hundreds of doctors in its employ will not be receiving the bonus checks they had been
expecting in April. Though we suspect this isn't a complete surprise, the cuts will deprive
hundreds of doctors of roughly one-third of their total comp during an already extremely
difficult time for them and their families. The company has promised to repay them at a later
date once their financial situation has improved.
The move risks igniting a blowback that could make KKR one of "the most hated companies in
the world. Just ask Martin Shkreli.
But the reason the company's financial position is so poor in the first place is because
Envision carries more than $7 billion of debt. This debt was amassed during what was, according
to data compiled by
Bloomberg , the third-largest health-care LBO ever.
In a statement, Envision said it's "100% focused" on saving lives during this crisis, even
though its business (ambulatory surgical centers and medical staffing) shrank more than 75% in
two weeks, Bloomberg said. With so many Americans hiding at home and fearful of entering
hospitals and doctor's offices, people are delaying elective and non-emergency care at
unprecedented rates.
"We are on the front lines caring for patients during this unprecedented public health and
economic crisis," the Nashville, Tennessee-based company said. "Envision Healthcare is 100
percent focused on saving lives and sustaining the nation's fragile health-care system. The
safety net we provide for millions of patients must remain fully intact for when we get to
the other side of this national crisis."
Like many companies, Envision completely drew down its two credit lines to provide financial
flexibility in recent weeks (apparently it didn't listen to Larry Kudlow and Mnuchin). The
company spends about $1.5 billion on compensation for physicians quarterly, an insider
reportedly told BBG. The company has about $140 million to $150 million in debt payments due in
the next two weeks, according to Mike Holland of Bloomberg Intelligence, and has $650 million
of cash on its balance sheet. It has warned investors that it might need to raise more
financing if circumstances continue to deteriorate.
The biggest problem for KKR, is that some of the physician groups are planning to sue the
company; litigation could draw unwanted attention to KKR at a time when public anger is
dangerously high.
But as the 'cockroach' theory suggests, Envision isn't alone: The boom in LBOs (part of the
binge on corporate debt that also fueled the surge in buybacks) left many companies, especially
in the health-care space, where many companies were built via a series of costly mergers and
acquisitions.
A comment on Peter Hitchens' article in today's Mail on Sunday (5th April) provided a link
to an interview with Italian nano-pathologist Dr Stefano Montanari. Since he doesn't appear in
OffG among the first twelve or subsequent ten scientists questioning the official Covid-19
narrative I am providing the link here in case anyone is interested. The site itself seems to
have a save white identity bias, but in these strange times, politics makes strange bedfellows.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2020/04/04/the-coronavirus-and-galileo-an-interview-with-a-italian-nano-pathologist-dr-stefano-montanari/
2 0 Reply Apr 5, 2020 1:38 PM
George Mc ,
Interesting interview. This bit especially:
There is one point we did not touch -- the economic, which is not part of my competence.
We are now blocking the world and, as for Italy, the economy was already at a low point.
What do they do? They freeze all activities but keep the stock exchange open. Stocks reach
a low bottom. What does it mean? The ultra billionaire can easily purchase companies that
are now worth pennies.
When eventually it will be decided that the (coronavirus) farce is ended -- and nothing
will end because this virus will continue undaunted to do what it's doing now (or its
evolving strains will do), the ultra-billionaires will own everything. The rich (a degree
below the billionaires) will have bought, say, 3–4 restaurants and/or 10 stores that
had to close.
In summary, all who were rich will be infinitely richer, But we will also have a
flood-tide of people who will always be poorer. This will be another consequence of this
fake epidemic, perhaps, who knows, created on purpose.
"... John Allen , Nicholas Burns , Laurie Garrett , Richard N. Haass , G. John Ikenberry , Kishore Mahbubani , Shivshankar Menon , Robin Niblett , Joseph S. Nye Jr. , Shannon K. O'Neil , Kori Schake , Stephen M. Walt ..."
No matter how the federal government responded, the United States was never going to escape
COVID-19 entirely. Even Singapore, whose response to the virus seems to be the gold standard
thus far,
has several hundred confirmed cases . Nonetheless, U.S. President Donald Trump's
administration's belated, self-centered, haphazard, and tone-deaf response will end up costing
Americans trillions of dollars and thousands of otherwise preventable deaths. Even if the view
that
the dangers may have been exaggerated due to a lack of accurate data turns out to be
correct, Trump's entire approach to governing and the administration's erratic response
squandered public confidence and made a more measured reaction untenable. Despite his denials,
he is still responsible for where the country is today.
But that's not the only damage the United States will suffer. Far from making "America great
again," this epic policy failure will further tarnish the United States' reputation as a
country that knows how to do things effectively.
For over a century, the United States' outsized influence around the world rested on three
pillars. The first was the its awesome combination of economic and military strength. The
United States had the world's largest and most sophisticated economy, the world's best
universities and research centers, and a territory blessed with bountiful natural resources.
These features eventually enabled the United States to create and maintain military forces that
none of its rivals could match. Taken together, these combined assets gave the United States
the loudest voice on the planet.
The second pillar was support from an array of allies. No country every agreed with
everything Washington wanted to do, and some states opposed almost everything the United States
sought or stood for, but many countries understood that they benefited from U.S. leadership and
were usually willing to go along with it. Although the United States was almost always acting
in its own self-interest, the fact that others had similar interests made it easier to persuade
them to go along.
A third pillar, however, is broad confidence in U.S. competence. When other countries
recognize the United States' strength, support its aims and believe U.S. officials know what
they are doing, they are more likely to follow the United States' lead. If they doubt its
power, its wisdom, or its ability to act effectively, U.S. global influence inevitably erodes.
This reaction is entirely understandable: If the United States' leaders reveal themselves to be
incompetent bunglers, why should foreign powers listen to their advice? Having a reputation for
competence, in short, can be a critical force multiplier.
The glowing reputation that Americans used to enjoy was built up over many decades. It was
partly a reflection of the United States' industrial might and world-class infrastructure: the
network of highways, roads, railways, bridges, skyscrapers, dams, harbors, and airports that
used to dazzle foreign visitors upon their arrival. Victory in World War II, the creation of
the Bretton Woods economic institutions, innovative acts such as the Marshall Plan, and the
successful moon landing all reinforced an image of the United States as a place where people
knew how to set ambitious goals and bring them successfully to fruition.
Even blunders such as the Vietnam War did not fully tarnish the aura of competence that
surrounded the United States. Indeed, the peaceful and victorious end of the Cold War and the
smashing U.S. victory in the 1990-1991 Gulf War exorcized the ghosts of Vietnam and made the
United States' model of liberal democratic capitalism seem like the obvious model for others to
emulate. Add to that a continued stream of technological innovations -- the personal computer,
the smartphone, and all those fancy weapons -- and one can understand why people around the
world still looked upon the United States as a meritocratic, accomplished, and above all,
competent country. Small wonder pundits such as Tom Friedman began to portray the United
States as
the only viable model for an increasingly globalized world , telling aspiring
countries that if they wanted to succeed, they had to don the "Golden Straitjacket" and become
more like the United States.
Over the past 25 years, however, the United States has done a remarkable job of squandering
that invaluable reputation for responsible leadership and basic competence. The list of
transgressions is long: there is former President Bill Clinton's irresponsible dalliance with a
White House intern, former President George W. Bush's administration's failure to heed warnings
of a terrorist attack before 9/11, the Enron and Madoff scandals, the bungled responses to
Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and Hurricane Maria in 2017, the inability to either win or end the
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the ill-advised interventions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, and
elsewhere, the Wall Street meltdown of 2008, the Boeing 737 Max debacle, the Republican-led
gridlock in Washington, and so on. Nor should we forget the long-concealed criminal misdeeds of
Harvey Weinstein (and many others) and the sordid tale of the very well-connected Jeffrey
Epstein, whose conveniently timed demise in a New York jail may prevent us from ever knowing
the full extent of his -- and others' -- misconduct.
And all the while the United States told itself it was the greatest country in the world,
with the ablest officials, the best-run businesses, the most sophisticated financial firms, and
the most virtuous leaders. Instead, former Soviet Premier Nikolai Ryzhkov's description of life
in the Soviet Union may be a more accurate description of American life than Americans would
like to admit: "[We] stole from ourselves, took and gave bribes, lied in the reports, in
newspapers, from high podiums, wallowed in our lies, hung medals on one another. And all of
this -- from top to bottom and from bottom to top."
Then came COVID-19. Trump's handling of the crisis has been an embarrassing debacle from the
start -- despite
repeated warnings -- but it was also utterly predictable. His long business career has
shown that he was more of a showman than a leader, better at conning people out of money and
evading responsibility than at managing complex business operations. His tawdry personal life
offered equally clear warnings. Since taking office, Trump has perfected the art of the lie,
while gradually purging his administration of people with genuine expertise and relying instead
on B-list hacks, sycophants, and his unqualified son-in-law. When suddenly faced with a
complicated problem requiring grown-up leadership, it was inevitable that Trump would mishandle
it and then deny
responsibility . It is a failure
of character unparalleled in U.S. history, and it could not have come at a worse
time . The amazing thing is that anyone is even remotely surprised.
How did the United States get here? How did it squander its reputation for knowing what it
is doing, and for being able to get the right things done as well or better than anyone else?
I'm not sure, but let me venture a few guesses.
Part of the problem is the hubris that comes from the United States' remarkably favorable
history. It has been by far the luckiest country in the modern world, and Americans started to
assume that success was their birthright instead of something that needed to be earned,
nurtured, and protected. And with that complacency came a willingness to gamble on utterly
untried leadership, despite all of the warning signs described above.
A related problem, I'm inclined to think, has been a broader relaxing of standards and a
refusal to hold people accountable. One can see this at many universities, where grade
inflation is well entrenched, faculty have few incentives to judge poor work harshly, and more
attention is paid to sports teams than to genuine academic achievement. The recent college
recruiting scandal exposed the lengths to which well-heeled parents would go to get their kids
into colleges for which they weren't qualified, but universities have acted similarly when they
reserved slots of alumni children ("legacies") or for the offspring of major donors.
I've focused on higher education because that's the business I know best, but this problem
is hardly confined there. In the contemporary United States, CEOs mismanage a company
such as Boeing
and then depart with multimillion-dollar golden
parachutes . Top officials in the George W. Bush administration and a chorus of outside
cheerleaders deceive themselves and the country into a foolish war in the Middle East, yet
hardly any of them suffer adverse professional or personal consequences. Wall Street firms can
crater the economy through a combination of greed, indifference, and fraud, and no one gets
investigated, let alone prosecuted. Highly decorated generals favor "staying the course" in
distant battles, fail to achieve victory, and then retire to corporate boards and influential
positions as respected pundits. Meanwhile, whistleblowers and dedicated public servants strive
to fulfill their oaths of office, only to be vilified , fired, or worse. When integrity and
dedication go unrewarded and failure carries no penalty, competence is bound to suffer.
To speculate further, I suspect a broader cultural current of selfishness is at work here as
well. Former President John Kennedy was no saint, but he did devote his adult life to public
service and told Americans to "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do
for your country." By the time Ronald Reagan became president, however, Americans were being
told that government was the enemy and (to quote the film Wall Street ) that "greed is good." The market was
everything, public service was devalued, and taxes were for suckers. Having spent decades
hollowing out many of their public institutions, Americans suddenly find themselves unprepared
for a real public crisis. The apotheosis of this trend is Trump himself: How could a serious
country possibly choose as its leader a narcissistic, manifestly unqualified self-promoter with
a long track record of failure and deceit?
Am I overstating the case? Perhaps. There are plenty of American firms that still do
terrific and innovative work; there are tens of thousands of scientists and scholars who remain
more committed to searching for truth than to making a fast buck, and there are politicians and
public servants at the local, state, and federal levels who are more interested in doing good
than in getting reelected
or feathering their own nests . There are dedicated teachers and hard-working students at
every level of the U.S. educational system. But the rot is still widespread.
Absent a reversal of this trend, the United States' global influence will continue to
recede. Not because the country has embraced "America First" and deliberately chosen to
disengage, but because people around the world will not take its ideas or advice as seriously
as they once did. They'll listen, perhaps, and they may agree with it from time to time, but
the deference U.S. leaders used to be able to count on will fade. Once COVID-19 is over,
Americans are likely to discover to their chagrin that other voices (
Beijing, anyone?) are receiving more respectful attention. That's not an omen of imminent
disaster, but it will be a different world than the one Americans have been accustomed to
inhabiting. At the margin, the broad contours of world politics and some important aspects of
the world economy will no longer slant so heavily in the United States' favor.
Can this situation be fixed? I don't know. Cultural rot cannot be fixed by legislation,
executive orders, or even jeremiads like this one. One may hope that the present crisis will
remind enough Americans that having competent and reliable people in key leadership positions
really matters, and that holding people more accountable for corruption, cronyism, or sheer
incompetence is essential to effective public policies. Whether you favor a big welfare state
or a small libertarian one, you should above all want it to be competently led and staffed with
knowledgeable and dedicated experts. Whoever the next president is, he needs to staff his
administration with people who have demonstrated qualifications for the jobs they are assigned,
instead of being chosen for their personal loyalty or their talents as sycophants.
Americans will need to rethink a political system that recruits and rewards those who are
most adept at selling themselves to the highest bidder. And there has to be something seriously
wrong with a political system that has devoted many months and spent billions of dollars
preparing for the 2020 election and ends up giving the country a choice between three old white
guys. For that matter, Americans ought to rethink whether spending
a full year electing someone to a four year term makes any sense at all . No other advanced
democracy does it this way. And while we're at it, let's scrap the absurd Electoral College, an
indefensible relic that systematically disempowers voters in most of the country.
Looking forward, the possibility of fundamental political change is the only silver lining I
can see right now. America hasn't faced a crisis like this since the 1930s and 1940s, and it
was in a better position to meet those challenges then than it is today. But a previous
generation of Americans eventually rose to the occasion, and showed themselves and the world
what their country could do. It is upon Americans now to remember that experience, put the past
few decades of hubris, division, and indulgence aside, and prove that their country is still
competent enough to figure out what it needs to do. And then they need to do it.
French caregivers battling Covid-19 are appallingly underequipped and overloaded with fresh
cases, a local nurse said, explaining a recent action which saw medics posing naked to show
their vulnerability to the deadly contagion. The unorthodox demonstration kicked off earlier
this week, with dozens of nurses undressing in a silent protest against the government
"sending us naked to face this pandemic," as Melina Dufraigne-Laflechelle, one of the
nurses behind the flashmob, put it on RT France.
Using the hashtag #apoilcontrelecovid (naked against the Covid), the silent protest featured
medics of all ages posing with small signs concealing their private parts.
"As you all know, to be able to treat patients with dignity and not take risks for
ourselves and our patients, we need a set of equipment which we don't have," said
Dufraigne-Laflechelle.
Old-fashioned masks are the only protective gear local medical staff have received from the
government, she claimed.
...37% of 6,227 doctors across 30 countries felt the drug was the "most effective therapy"
out of 15 options in treating coronavirus,
according to a poll reported by the
Washington Times .
The drug has been prescribed in 72% of cases in Spain, 49% in Italy, 41% in Brazil, 39% in
Mexico, 28% in France, and 23% in the USA. Overall, 19% of physicians have prescribed the drug
for high-risk patients, and 8% for low-risk patients.
Overall
(2171)
US (580)
NY (112)
Europe (827)
Italy & Spain
(671)
China (109)
Rest of world
(543)
Hydroxychloroquine or
Chloroquine
37%
23%
25%
37%
62%
44%
55%
Azithromycin or similar
antibiotics
32%
18%
25%
32%
45%
33%
48%
Nothing
32%
51%
42%
29%
16%
4%
18%
Analgesics (e.g.,
Paracetamol/Acetaminophen)
31%
21%
29%
34%
37%
20%
39%
Anti-HIV drugs (e.g.
Lopinavir plus Ritonavir)
16%
5%
6%
15%
28%
42%
25%
Cough medications
13%
13%
15%
12%
8%
22%
11%
Compassionate use of
experimental drugs
13%
10%
8%
12%
20%
35%
14%
(e.g. Remdisivir)
Drugs used to treat flu (e.g.,
Oseltamivir)
12%
4%
11%
9%
10%
39%
19%
Expectorants (e.g.,
Mucinex
10%
10%
9%
8%
8%
28%
10%
Interferon-beta
7%
1%
3%
3%
11%
41%
15%
Antihistamines/Decongestants
7%
7%
6%
5%
5%
17%
8%
Plasma from patients who have
recovered from COVID-19
Enough OK. How healthy and strong your respiratory system has a lot to do with fending off
the scourge of viruses. Governments generally do very poor record in tackling Pollution(s).
There is a ' Great ' gift from the US to countries around the world: Please welcome
Petroleum Coke, or ' petcoke '. This is the bottom-of-the-barrel leftover from refining .. tar
sands crude and other heavy oils, is cheaper and burns hotter than coal. But it also contains
.. far more heart- and lung-damaging sulfur."
American companies don't like to use it, and "are sending it around the world. Laboratory tests
on imported petcoke used near New Delhi found it contained 17 times more sulfur than the limit
set for coal, and a staggering 1,380 times more than for diesel."
Big Corporations are literally pooping all over the planet, and virtually pooping inside
our lungs , with impunity; we have to live in such conditions. Can this situation be
stopped and reveresed?
Science has tried to interview George Gao, director-general of the Chinese
Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), for 2 months. Last week he responded.
Q : What mistakes are other countries making?
A: The big mistake in the U.S. and Europe, in my opinion, is that people aren't wearing
masks. This virus is transmitted by droplets and close contact. Droplets play a very important
role -- you've got to wear a mask, because when you speak, there are always droplets coming out
of your mouth. Many people have asymptomatic or presymptomatic infections. If they are wearing
face masks, it can prevent droplets that carry the virus from escaping and infecting others. Q:
People who tested positive in Wuhan but only had mild disease were sent into isolation in large
facilities and were not allowed to have visits from family. Is this something other countries
should consider?
A: Infected people must be isolated. That should happen everywhere. You can only control
COVID-19 if you can remove the source of the infection. This is why we built module hospitals
and transformed stadiums into hospitals.
You wrote, " The difference between this virus and most previous viruses is that they
required one to have a fever, i.e., symptoms, before being contagious. This one does not for
at least one to two days before symptoms appear. So we know it's possible to be asymptomatic
for at least one to two days and still be contagious."
Asymptomatic means no symptoms i.e., no sneezing, coughing or postnasal drip.
As far as transmission by sputum (spitting) or other secretions, I think that is a such a
rare occurrence that it is too infinitesimal to statistically count. I mean come on, how many
times have you touched someone's spit? Kissing is not known to spread the disease from an
asymptomatic carrier either.
The other observations that suggest presymptomatic transmission of infection (meaning no
symptoms) cannot be confirmed because it is unknown if the disease was present and active on
surfaces before the subjects came in contact with it and with each other.
The disease is spread by sending a plume into the air as a result of a cough, sneeze or
postnasal drip. A person comes in contact with the virus by being in the vicinity of the
plume or when the virus falls on a surface and a person touches it and then somewhere on
their body that allows entry (eyes, nasal passages or mouth.)
Please provide a reference that says an asymptomatic person is contagious. If you are
referring to the article published in the NEJM (New England Journal of Medicine), that
turned out to be flawed as the women did display symptoms when she returned to Germany.
Congressional Budget Office forecasting 7% decline in 2nd quarter in US GDP (that's -28%
annualized).
source
Clearly even my first pass estimates for the economic damage of lockdowns was extremely
optimistic.
There were more than 3.3 million new unemployment claims reported on March 26. The Q2
unemployment rate "is expected to exceed 10 percent during the second quarter, in part
reflecting the claims reported on March 26 and the 6.6 million new claims reported this
morning [Thursday, April 2]."
The CBO indicated that new claims filed April 2 were 10 times higher than in any single
week from 2007-09, during the financial crisis and recession. And unemployment is likely to
exceed 10%
...
Of course, mortgage delinquencies will explode to near 30%.
That was one of the worst decisions Trump administration made. Now they change their stance. Better later then never...
Notable quotes:
"... Part of the reason was to preserve medical-grade masks for health care workers who desperately need them at a time when they are in continuously short supply. ..."
Until now, the C.D.C., like the W.H.O., has advised that ordinary people don't need to wear
masks unless they are sick and coughing.
Part of the reason was to preserve medical-grade masks
for health care workers who desperately need them at a time when they are in continuously short
supply.
Masks don't replace hand washing and social distancing.
There is still confusion between what is a mask & what is a respirator -basically a mask
will protect others from your sputum & a respirator protects yourself from others.
I discovered a site N95 vs
FFP3 & FFP2 masks – what's the difference? which explains the different masks
& respirators and most importantly what the standards are. eg n95 amerika = KN95 China.
As well as explaining the problems of valved devices versus unvalved etc.
It is clear layman style stuff free of dense bullshit, read it if you want to understand this
stuff.
I haven't seen this specifically mentioned so I'll offer it. My local newspaper of all
things, published an editorial today calling for more people in our community to "mask up".
It included this wonderful phrase that captures the true social dynamic and the logic of the
situation:
"I'll wear a mask to protect you, and you wear a mask to protect me."
What's nice about this social compact is that it costs almost nothing, is in plentiful,
makeshift supply (we're including bandanas and scarves - anything), and surely must do more
good than harm, no matter how real or unreal the danger is, nor how prone to mishap or not
the wearing of a mask is.
Such a compact surely must be a social good. If only there had been masks in the US - or
leadership willing to plunge humble and naked into the realities of the situation and learn
from Asia so we could all start making our own masks - then perhaps the US would not have had
to do the most stupid thing possible to its lean productive economy, namely, shutting down
the entire entrepreneur class of the country and throwing their employees into hazard and
poverty.
Given that there was no safety net, and never was going to be despite the talk of the
first few days, it could have saved countless deaths from poverty if the people if the US had
learned the new social rules, including mask and physical distance etiquette immediately, and
kept many of the businesses open instead of driving them to bankruptcy.
So the US is very late to the party, and will pay the price, but now the people who
survive must learn how to live in the new normal. Masking-up in public seems the least
impactful of all responses.
re b's comment : "The HEPA filter catches particles down to 0.3 micrometer. Viruses are
some 125 nanometer in diameter so they are smaller and could slip through. " .
That isn't strictly correct, there is a solid reason for the 0.3 micrometer limit related to
Brownian motion,as I learned after reading a piece from the link I posted above - to wit:
The reason for the focus on 0.3 microns is because it is the "most penetrating particle
size" (MPPS). Particles above this size move in ways we might anticipate, and will get
trapped in a filter with gaps smaller than the particle size. Particles smaller than 0.3
microns exhibit what's called brownian motion – which makes them easier to filter.
Brownian motion refers to a phenomenon whereby the particle's mass is small enough that it
no longer travels unimpeded through the air. Instead it interacts with the molecules in the
air (nitrogen, oxygen, etc), causing it to pinball between them, moving in an erratic
pattern.
According to researchers this point between "normal" motion and brownian motion is the
hardest particle size for filters to capture.
What we can take away from this, is that high filter efficiency at 0.3 micron size will
generally translate to high filter efficiency below this size also.
Immunity can also be obtained naturally rather than by "vaccine".
You can ask your doctor for a strong Vitamin D supplement and probably buy them elswhere. The
simplest is to go out in the same beautiful sunshine as we are now having in Europe.
vitamin D deficiency is common in the winter, and activated vitamin D, a steroid
hormone, has profound effects on human immunity. D acts as an immune system modulator,
preventing excessive expression of inflammatory cytokines and increasing the
'oxidative burst' potential of macrophages. Perhaps most importantly, it dramatically
stimulates the expression of potent anti-microbial peptides, which exist in neutrophils,
monocytes, natural killer cells, and in epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract where
they play a major role in protecting the lung from infection.
For information; one group that suffered from Vitamin D deficiency was Saudi Arabian
women. Their Abbayas (full head covering with no eyes visible, right down to the toes. Maybe
not the correct spelling of abbaya) did not let in the sun. So .....
Even face "masks" were not very efficient at "letting the sun shine in". However, the abbayas
had one advantage; that was women suffered less from trachoma, an illness that is provoked by
rubbing the eyes regularly (irritated because of the sand). The eye flips inward permanently,
leaving only the white of the eye showing. ie. Blindness.
Personally my doctor prescribes a 200'000 UI D dose (drinkable) to be taken twice a year
in November/December and February. Which I naturally took just before the Coronavirus hit
around here.
Surgical masks are pretty good at stopping bacteria and larger droplets, but not aerosols
(small particles). They also have lower quality fit, just like ordinary masks too.
Surgical masks are very good for blocking you own droplet emissions.
Simply use N99 respitator or FFP 3 respirator (EU standard).
Blocks 99 % of small particles, including virus transporting ones. It is used by medical
personnel who handle corona and other viruses.
Use 30 minutes at 70 C in oven with the respirator put in a paper bag over put over
something wooden in the oven. This method can be used for up to 20 times with minimal damage
to the respirator filtration capacity, according to several studies. Another good method is
putting it in commercial steam bag used for sterilisation of baby items for 3 minutes in a
microwave oven, metal presence should not be a problem according to the study because the
metal gets coated by the steam. This method can be used up to 10 times with minimal loss to
the quality of the respirator. It is good for surgical masks too. Also use eye protection and
gloves. These simple methods are good and some hospitals started using them.
Another way is 7 to 10 days keeping the mask in dry bag with acces to air, that
significantly decreases viral load for most viruses. During this time use another
respirator.
For homemade masks these methods should be good too.
Methods that decrease respirator quality are spirt based solutions, bleach based
solutions, and longer exposure to steam. UVGI light and Hydrogen peroxide bath are also are
relatively good methods for disinfection of masks.
Importantly do not touch the respirator's main surface with your fingers, secure a good
fit, and always clean hands before and after handling the respirator.
Combine respirator mask with eye protection, raincoat and gloves. Put the raincoat and any
new item you bring into the home for 3 days quarantine in some special room.
Stay away from people at minimum 7 meters, especially from those who don't have masks.
Use ethanol to clean your gloves before and after you visited a store.
For disinfection purposes ethanol is good, it kills 100 % of viruses and bacteria. Ethanol
is used by russian Covid 19 disinfection teams in Italy for surface disinfection.
Simply use N99 respitator or FFP 3 respirator (EU standard).
Blocks 99 % of small particles, including virus transporting ones. It is used by medical
personnel who handle corona and other viruses.
1. None of such mask are currently available.
2. Even for hospital staff N95 aka FFP2 is sufficient to protect against SARS-CoV-19.
3. It is already very hard to wear and breathe through a N95 mask for a longer time. N99
masks are even worse!
4. The N99 masks have exhalatation valves which let the air from the person who wears it flow
out freely. That defeats the current purpose of #MaskUp which is to protect from unknown
spreaders.
I have trained for chemical warfare in the military. Wearing a tight mask with a filter
(FFP3) system while moving around is physically very tiring after even an hour or so. You
don't select a mask that is more difficult to breathe with than actually required.
"... Infections from asymptomatic cases have an R 0 of 0.1 or 4% of all new infections. ..."
"... More new infections are created during the three pre-symptomatic days the virus carrier runs around then during the symptomatic one. ..."
"... Washing ones hands helps but environmental infections happen only in 10% of all new infections. The pre-symptomatic carriers are, without knowing it, the biggest spreader of the disease. Millions of the many billions of viruses that get created in their throat can attach to tiny water droplets or aerosols while a person breathes, speaks or coughs. ..."
The virus starts to
replicate in significant numbers (billions per mililiter) on day 2 after the infection. The
virus first replicates in the upper throat and the infected person starts to spread it to
others simply by breathing, talking or coughing. Only on day 5 the infected person starts to
develop first symptoms. The virus migrates into the lower lung and replicates there. The
virus load in the upper throat will then start to decline. The immune system intervenes and
defeats the virus but also causes additional lung damage which can kill people who have
already other preexisting conditions .
(Interestingly smokers seem not to develop a cytokine storms during a Covid
infection and are thereby less prone to end up in the ICU.) On day 10 only few viruses will
be found in the upper throat and the person will generally no longer be infectious.
The typical hospitalization point in China was only on day 9 to 12 after the onset of
symptoms. At that point a test by swabs is nearly useless as the infected person will
normally no longer have significant numbers of the virus in the upper throat. Reports of
"defective tests from China" were likely caused by a lack of knowledge about this phenomenon.
The diagnose in these later cases should be done by a CT scan which will show the lung
damage.
We do know
since late January that people can transmit the virus even when they have not yet
developed symptoms. An open question was how many of new infections happen during this
phase.
The new Science study investigated how many infections were created by each of four
infection phases or types:
pre-symptomatic - new infections come from an infected person who has not yet developed
symptoms but will do so later
symptomatic - new infections come from an infected person who has already developed
symptoms
environmental - new infections comes from some environmental contact with the
virus
asymptomatic - new infections come from a person that will never develop any
symptoms.
The study says that R 0 for pre-symptomatic infections is 0.9 or 46% of all new
infections. Infections from a symptomatic persons happen with an R 0 of 0.8 which
is equal to 40% of all new infections. Environmental infections have an R 0 of 0.2
or 10% of all new infections. Infections from asymptomatic cases have an R 0
of 0.1 or 4% of all new infections.
More new infections are created during the three pre-symptomatic days the virus
carrier runs around then during the symptomatic one.
Washing ones hands helps but environmental infections happen only in 10% of all new
infections. The pre-symptomatic carriers are, without knowing it, the biggest spreader of the
disease. Millions of the many billions of viruses that get created in their throat can attach
to tiny water droplets or aerosols while a person breathes, speaks or coughs.
Such spreading can be prevented when everyone wears a mask. A different new study shows
that masks are very effective. Published in Nature the study is titled:
If the carrier of a virus wears a mask the spreading of viruses due to speaking, coughing
or even breathing goes basically down to zero.
But a mask does not only protect the carrier of the viruses. While homemade or even
professional surgical mask do not protect the wearer from all particles they do protect one
much better from them than when one wears no mask at all.
A person rarely gets infected by just one virus particle. They come in millions attached
to tiny droplets. We do not know yet how the dose of the novel coronavirus that infects a
person affects the intensity of the disease. But we do know from other viruses that the dose
matters. People who catch a higher dose of viruses will usually have a more intense disease.
A mask can lower the virus load the wearer may receive.
One can
improvise a mask from simple household objects. One can sew a mask like a surgeon
does in this video .
This is my preferred model which is officially recommended by German fire departments.
(The pdf is in German but the pictures tell the story). This is the mask I made by following
those instructions.
It is made of a folded sheet cut from a triangular arm-sling out of an old first-aid kit.
A HEPA microfilter (as used in a vacuum cleaners) is in between the folded sheet. A piece cut
from a clean bag for vacuum cleaners will do as well. Do not use a sheet or insert that is
too tight to breathe through. If one does that the air will come in from the sides of the
mask and the total protection effect will be less. It can be arduous to breathe through such
a mask. If you have breathing problems leave the insert out. The sheets alone are already
good protection. There is a piece of wire from a big paper clip fixed inside the middle of
the upper seam to fit the mask tightly around the upper nose. The lower part goes under the
chin. I shaved my beard to make it a tighter fit. As I had no sewing equipment I used a
stapler to fix the seams and the ribbons.
The HEPA filter catches
particles down to 0.3 micrometer. Viruses are some 125 nanometer in diameter so they are
smaller and could slip through. But the viruses are attached to some droplet that are bigger.
HEPA filter are essentially labyrinths of small fiber and the viruses would have to bounce
multiple times to get through. Finally the dose also matters.
To clean the mask of potential viruses I put it into the oven for 30 minutes at 70C
(158F).
The science says that masks work. Everyone should use one. #MaskUp!
---
Here some additional links which might be of interest.
So far, to the frustration of both the White House and the intelligence community, the
agencies have been unable to glean more accurate numbers through their collection efforts.
Since none of us is an expert or eminently knowledgeable on
this topic, for the sake of sharing information to develop our views here is data that
suggests otherwise...
Emerging Infectious Diseases journal, Volume 26, Number 6—June 2020
Research Letter : Serial Interval of COVID-19 among Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases
Abstract. We estimate the distribution of serial intervals for 468 confirmed cases of 2019
novel coronavirus disease reported in China as of February 8, 2020. The mean interval was
3.96 days (95% CI 3.53–4.39 days), SD 4.75 days (95% CI 4.46–5.07 days);
12.6% of case reports indicated presymptomatic transmission .
There was another study suggesting that many infection do not go beyond mild common cold,
with a conjecture that with small initial number of viruses the organism, T-cells in the mouth
and throat etc. learn to eliminate viruses in time to prevent severe lung infection. Thus gives
value to masks that are not 100% effective.
You can will mark my mask for each day of the week and rely on the fact that after paper or
fabric is completely dry ythe virus fdies in 72 hours.
The World Health Organization released a study on how China responded to COVID-19. Currently,
this study is one of the most exhaustive pieces published on how the virus spreads.
The results of their research show that COVID-19 doesn't spread as easily as first
thought.
The majority of viral infections come from prolonged exposures in confined spaces with
other infected individuals. Person-to-person and surface contact is by far the most common
cause. From the WHO report, "When a cluster of several infected people occurred in China, it
was most often (78-85%) caused by an infection within the family by droplets and other
carriers of infection in close contact with an infected person.
Routes of transmission
COVID-19 is transmitted via droplets and fomites during close unprotected contact
between an infector and infectee. Airborne spread has not been reported for COVID-19 and it
is not believed to be a major driver of transmission based on available evidence; however, it
can be envisaged if certain aerosol-generating procedures are conducted in health care
facilities.
Household transmission
In China, human-to-human transmission of the COVID-19 virus is largely occurring in
families. The Joint Mission received detailed information from the investigation of clusters
and some household transmission studies, which are ongoing in a number of Provinces. Among
344 clusters involving 1308 cases (out of a total 1836 cases reported) in Guangdong Province
and Sichuan Province, most clusters (78%-85%) have occurred in families. Household
transmission studies are currently underway, but preliminary studies ongoing in Guangdong
estimate the secondary attack rate in households ranges from 3-10%.
The coefficient from the simulation are selected to match observed infections and they are
not "facts" but useful guidelines. The bottom line is that the infection happen in some
proportion, a large part from asymptomatic people. There was another study suggesting that
many infection do not go beyond mild common cold, with a conjecture that with small initial
number of viruses the organism, T-cells in the mouth and throat etc. learn to eliminate
viruses in time to prevent severe lung infection. Thus gives value to masks that are not 100%
effective.
Surely, the actual infection rate depends on the customs in a particular area. Oriental
people are not in habit of kissing, embracing, clasping hands etc., plus they are quick to
wear masks. Mediterranean people, which may include Iran, embrace, clasp hands and even kiss
(I assume that Muslim would greet only people of the same gender in that way). Masks are not
a habit. Crowded subway, buses etc. involve a lot of very close contacts, which may be OK if
EVERYONE has a decent mask.
I guess I will mark my mask for each day of the week and rely on the fact that after paper
or fabric is completely dry, viruses die (cease to become viable) within hours, so one does
not have to rush the drying process by special heating. On the other hand, one could try to
gently dry in the cloth drier in a bag for female underwear. We do not damage viruses by heat
but by the lack of moisture. Masks seems to be limited.
These are the reuse recommendations I'll be following, from Dr. Peter Tsai, the inventor
of the filtration fabric in the N95 mask:
N95 Re-Use Instructions (Updated as of April 3, 2020) https://www.sages.org/n-95-re-use-instructions/
I intend to follow the advice of rotating masks - once I have masks. It's likely that four
days would be sufficient to dry out any droplets or aerosols and inactivate any virus.
However, longer obviously would be better.
I'm going to order some masks from China today, if I can. Also perhaps some impermeable
food surface plastic gloves to deal with contact infections.
As the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases continues to skyrocket, healthcare researchers
around the world are working tirelessly to discover new life-saving medical innovations.
Diagnostics: Quickly and effectively detecting the disease in the first place
Treatments: Alleviating symptoms so people who have disease experience milder symptoms,
and lowering the overall mortality rate
Vaccines: Preventing transmission by making the population immune to COVID-19
Today's graphics provide an in-depth look at who's in the innovation race to defeat the
virus, and they come to us courtesy of Artis
Ventures , a venture capital firm focused on life sciences and tech investments.
Editor's note: R&D is moving fast on COVID-19, and the situation is quite fluid. While
today's post is believed to be an accurate snapshot of all innovations and developments listed
by WHO and FDA as of March 30, 2020, it is possible that more data will become
available.
Knowledge is Power
Testing rates during this pandemic have been a point of contention. Without widespread
testing, it has been tough to accurately track the spread of the virus, as well as pin down
important metrics such as infectiousness and mortality
rates . Inexpensive test kits that offer quick results will be key to curbing the
outbreak.
Here are the companies and institutions developing new tests for COVID-19:
The ultimate aim of companies like Abbott and BioFire Defense is to create a test that can
produce accurate results in as little as a few minutes.
In the Trenches With
Coronavirus
While the majority of people infected with COVID-19 only experience minor symptoms, the
disease can cause severe issues in some cases – even resulting in death. Most of the
forms of treatment being pursued fall into one of two categories:
Treating respiratory symptoms – especially the inflammation that occurs in severe
cases
Antiviral growth – essentially stopping viruses from multiplying inside the human
body
Here are the companies and institutions developing new treatment options for COVID-19:
A wide range of players are in the race to develop treatments related to COVID-19. Pharma
and healthcare companies are in the mix, as well as universities and institutes.
One surprising name on the list is Fujifilm . The Japanese company's stock recently shot up
on the news that Avigan, a decades-old flu drug developed through Fujifilm's healthcare
subsidiary, might be effective at helping coronavirus patients recover. The Japanese
government's stockpile of the drug is
reportedly enough to treat two million people.
Vaccine
The progress that is perhaps being watched the closest by the general public is the
development of a COVID-19 vaccine.
Creating a safe vaccine for a new illness is no easy feat. Thankfully, rapid progress is
being made for a variety of reasons, including China's efforts to sequence the genetic material
of Sars-CoV-2 and to share that information with research groups around the world.
Another factor contributing to the unprecedented speed of development is the fact that
coronaviruses were already on the radar of health science researchers. Both SARS and MERS were
caused by coronaviruses, and even though vaccines were shelved once those outbreaks were
contained, learnings can still be applied to defeating COVID-19.
One of the most promising leads on a COVID-19 vaccine is mRNA-1273. This vaccine, developed
by Moderna Therapeutics , is being developed with extreme urgency, skipping straight into human
trials before it was even tested in animals. If all goes well with the trials currently
underway in Washington State, the company hopes to have an early version of the vaccine ready
by fall 2020. The earliest versions of the vaccine would be made available to at-risk groups
such as healthcare workers.
Further down the pipeline are 15 types of subunit vaccines. This method of vaccination uses
a fragment of a pathogen, typically a surface protein, to trigger an immune response, teaching
the body's immune system how to fight off the disease without actually introducing live
pathogens.
No Clear Finish Line
Unfortunately, there is no silver bullet for solving this pandemic.
A likely scenario is that teams of researchers around the world will come up with solutions
that will incrementally help stop the spread of the virus, mitigate symptoms for those
infected, and help lower the overall death toll. As well, early solutions rushed to market will
need to be refined over the coming months.
We can only hope that the hard lessons learned from fighting COVID-19 will help stop a
future outbreak in its tracks before it becomes a pandemic. For now, those of us on the
sideline can only do our best to flatten
the curve .
"... The number of advertisements for short-time work has skyrocketed to an unprecedented level, and the number of unemployed is also increasing: The Federal Employment Agency expects an increase of up to 200,000 unemployed in April. ..."
"... The virologists had not succeeded in breeding Sars-Cov-2 in initial tests after swabbing various objects in apartments of highly infectious residents, sinks, doorknobs, but also pets such as cats. "For me it looks like the first results that a door handle can only be infectious if someone has coughed in the hand beforehand and then grabs the handle immediately." This suggests that there is no smear infection. Keeping a distance and washing hands is therefore a very effective tool. ..."
"... "We talk a lot about speculation and model calculations. With these, however, only one factor has to be wrong and the whole thing collapses like a house of cards. "That is why facts are so important to make effective decisions. He was therefore surprised that the Robert Koch Institute, as the highest federal authority for infectious diseases, had not previously carried out such an investigation. He sees such tests as a duty for virologists "to find answers for the citizens." ..."
The Corona crisis hits the global economy with great violence: In Germany, too,
restaurants and companies have to pause for weeks, tourism stands still, nothing works in
public life anymore.
The number of advertisements for short-time work has skyrocketed to an unprecedented
level, and the number of unemployed is also increasing: The Federal Employment Agency expects
an increase of up to 200,000 unemployed in April.
And despite the government's aid measures, one thing is certain: the German economy will
not be the same for the foreseeable future once the crisis is over. The existence of many
citizens is under threat.
Hardly anyone had questioned these tough government measures, as it is about saving lives.
But on Tuesday evening a well-known virologist for the first time openly raised doubts about
the need for the shutdown at "Markus Lanz" (ZDF). Did our entrepreneurs have to shut down
unnecessarily?
The virologist Hendrik Streeck from the University Hospital Bonn is currently carrying out
a unique examination in the district of Heinsberg - the epicenter of the coronavirus. There,
the expert collects both the number of infected people and the infection routes in a
representative sample. The study is intended to provide answers to questions such as where
the greatest sources of danger are. How exactly the virus is transmitted. How high the
unreported number of infected people is. The research group around Streeck wants to publish
the first results as early as next week.
The virologists had not succeeded in breeding Sars-Cov-2 in initial tests after swabbing
various objects in apartments of highly infectious residents, sinks, doorknobs, but also pets
such as cats. "For me it looks like the first results that a door handle can only be
infectious if someone has coughed in the hand beforehand and then grabs the handle
immediately." This suggests that there is no smear infection. Keeping a distance and washing
hands is therefore a very effective tool.
However, the risk of infecting someone else while shopping is considered to be low. "We
see how the infections took place. That was not in the supermarket or in the restaurant or at
the butcher's. That was at the parties at the après ski in Ischgl, in the Berlin club,
trumpet ', at the carnival in Gangelt and at the exuberant football games in Bergamo.
In the current discussion about the "shutdown" and the "exit" strategies, which lead again
from a standstill, such reliable facts are important. So that public life doesn't stand still
for too long.
"We talk a lot about speculation and model calculations. With these, however, only one
factor has to be wrong and the whole thing collapses like a house of cards. "That is why
facts are so important to make effective decisions. He was therefore surprised that the
Robert Koch Institute, as the highest federal authority for infectious diseases, had not
previously carried out such an investigation. He sees such tests as a duty for virologists
"to find answers for the citizens."
Did the shutdown come too quickly?
Streeck looks back at the various measures taken by the federal government, which have
gradually restricted life: Larger events have been canceled, schools have been closed down to
exit restrictions. "But I had already said in advance: We want to wait and see what happens.
The virus doesn't obey any politician. "
Measures that are now decided would only be visible in the statistics in two weeks at the
earliest. "You have to give this virus time so that we can see and classify the results of
the measures in the long term."
He had never heard of infections in hairdressing salons, said Streeck. But now they are
closed. It is the same with supermarkets or the like. "We just don't know that infections
have taken place there. I think it's important that we focus on what we really know - and
what we don't. "You have to find the nuances of when exactly an infection occurs. And this
must also be the guideline for reducing certain measures.
A very good way to contain the virus effectively: do a lot of tests like South Korea did.
"If they tested people positively and found a cluster, then they contained the area there,"
says Streeck. A nationwide curfew was not necessary there. "In my eyes, this is a very good
strategy and also a strategy that is feasible in Germany. Because we have the options. "
The virus is really dangerous for the risk groups, so "when it comes to the hospital,
nursing home and old people's home," said the doctor. It is therefore very important to
effectively protect particularly vulnerable people, with weekly corona tests for medical and
nursing staff, for example. Such pool procedures are already used in transfusion medicine to
test blood. So you are not new.
"It is therefore important to develop exactly such ideas. However, many experts are
involved in this development, and not just individual ones. "It is a shame that the
government approached the crisis" rather monothematically ". Unfortunately, there is no round
table with a large number of virologists, in which China is also involved.
Streeck criticizes the lack of objectives in the fight against Corona
"I see what such a curfew does to people," explains the virologist. He himself has friends
who wonder if they still have a job after the crisis. "In relation to other epidemics and
viruses, I find these restrictions to be very drastic." Before taking such measures, Streeck
would have liked to think carefully: "Where do we actually want to go?" He would lack the
precise definition of the objective.
"Our limit is the capacity of the hospitals. Not the number of people infected. But we
never heard where our guideline was. What is our goal? Are 1000 infections a day too much? Or
100? We have to listen to the intensive care physicians who tell us where their limits are.
"They could best assess which measures are the right ones.
Marcel Fratzscher: "A good health system needs a functioning economy"
Streeck therefore supports the fastest possible discussion about an exit strategy. Marcel
Fratzscher, President of the German Institute for Economic Research, explains how great the
danger for the economy is at "Lanz". He speaks of a "catastrophe" with a "rat tail of
problems". Small businesses and the self-employed could only last a few weeks despite
government aid.
Anyone who receives a salary of 60 or 70 percent in short-time work can hardly stay afloat
in the long term. At the same time, the economist feels uncomfortable weighing human lives
against the financial damage - as many in the discussion about an exit strategy do. "Because
a good health system also needs a functioning economy."
One should not play both sides against each other, but rather find a solution that is
acceptable to everyone. After six to eight weeks, the loss caused by the shutdown would
become critical. And that must be avoided.
1. does it stop you from catching the bug 100%? No, including N95, P100, whatever. there's
leakage and also many other infection vectors.
2. do most people know how to don, adjust and handle used masks properly? No
3. does it help? yes, every little bit is better than nothing
4. dirty little secret - for most of Asia with exception of probably Japan, people wear
mask not because they are trying to protect others if they are asymptomatic carriers. They do
it out of good old self preservation. it DOES, however, have the useful side effect that the
end result is the same - asymptomatic carriers are also covered.
Shelves all over the world are empty, there's slim pickings online and the few suppliers that are selling are pricing at way over
the odds. We're being told to wash our hands and use hand sanitiser - but a lot of people are struggling to find any.
If everyone in the world had one small bottle of sanitiser we would need 385 million litres of the stuff.
Before coronavirus, the world produced less than a thousandth of that per year, about 300,000 litres, according market analysts
Arizton Advisory and Intelligence.
That perhaps explains why there is now, as the pandemic sweeps the world, a problem getting hold of it.
On Amazon, if you try getting alcohol-based sanitiser - the type recommended by the World Health Organization - you'll find all
of the usual brands are sold out.
Here in the UK, just a few days ago only one seller seemed to have any in stock. A 500ml bottle was priced at £30 ($35) - at least
10 times what it would have been in February. It's since been reduced to £20, but that is still about seven times pre-pandemic prices.
It's easy to accuse sellers like these of price-gouging and many reviews underneath the listing did just that. But the company
selling it, Herts Tools, says it's not that simple.
"We've been getting an unfair bashing really," said the friendly man who answered the phone, Paul Stephenson.
"There are people out there saying we're taking the mickey but I can assure you we're not.
"We're in a position where we're making enough profit margin on the hand sanitiser just to keep ourselves afloat."
The company usually sells and rents tools to the construction industry and it only started selling sanitiser because customers
were requesting it.
But it has struggled to get hold of supplies and the cost is rising every day. "I can't even guarantee what I paid today I'm going
to pay tomorrow," says Stephenson.
And that's because the price of the key ingredient - alcohol - has increased dramatically.
The sanitiser Herts Tools has been selling is made by a UK-based skincare products company called Zidac Laboratories. Its director,
Jurica Weissbarth, has been fielding a lot of calls lately.
Zidac can make 150,000 bottles of hand sanitiser a day, but for the past two weeks the production line has been down. It hasn't
been able to get ethanol, the alcohol it puts in its sanitiser, and which has to make up at least 60% for it to kill viruses (and
bacteria) effectively.
Weissbarth used to pay around £700 ($800) for a tonne of ethanol - enough for 32,000 bottles of hand gel.
Last week a new supplier offered him a tonne for £10,000 - more than 10 times the ordinary price. He politely declined. But this
week he was in celebratory mood after buying a batch on Tuesday for only three or four times more than usual.
The BBC called several distributors of industrial alcohol. One woman who answered the phone was close to tears; the company she
worked for was closing down due to lack of stock.
Others were so busy that staff were overwhelmed and couldn't talk. One website said requests for orders had gone from 300 a day
to more than 6,000. None were taking new orders.
If sanitisers aren't made from ethanol, they're made from isopropyl alcohol, also called IPA. There are a limited number of companies
that produce these types of alcohol on an industrial scale. The biggest producers are in China, France, Germany, the Netherlands,
the UK and the US.
In France the government has ordered all IPA made in the country to stay there. Other countries could easily follow suit.
Putin, like western leaders, often discusses national problems during his appearances. But
afterwards, he'll query responsible ministers about questionable policies, and will make sure
that an effective solution will be put in place. He'll also mention problems during his
speeches, and will then follow the discussion, usually in some detail, with how progress is
being made to fix them.
Western leaders, on the other hand, engage in hand-wringing about how difficult the
problems are, and that we'll have to learn to helplessly adapt ("It's a new economy", "These
jobs aren't coming back."), or fob off their responsibility with dysfunctional suggestions
("Learn to code," as if that were a solution, or impose an economic package on Greece that
will take until 2040 just to find out whether it might be working), or just pride themselves
on realizing there's a problem (like the EU, who considers it an accomplishment to "identify
challenges", and who adopted a policy of wait and see for COVID-19).
There's such a palpable difference between actual leadership and play-acting.
Trump, Sanders and Tulsi all share 3 things: 1) proposals for policies to improve
circumstances that involve making real changes to the status quo 2) strong grassroots based
on disgust with elite policies 3) accusations that they are agents of Putin.
I dunno, if the elites kep attempting to thwart competent domestic leadership, maybe we
should shoot for an amendment that puts Putin directly on the ballot. At least he would know
how to get elected. Then, we cut through the innuendo and make it clear that what voters want
is actual leadership. What have we got to lose?
New York is paying inflated rates as high as 15 times the regular price to get crucial
medical equipment such as masks, as the state struggles to contain the coronavirus,
ProPublica
The state with almost 40 percent of the confirmed COVID-19 cases in the country is paying 20
cents for gloves that typically cost three times less and $7.50 for masks, which is 15 times
the regular price, according to an analysis of payment data by ProPublica.
New York also has paid more than twice the typical cost for infusion pumps. A portable X-ray
machine cost the state $248,841, when it should be between $30,000 and $80,000.
States across the country have complained to the federal government about severe shortages
of equipment. They say they've been forced to compete with other states or countries for
precious materials.
New York Gov. Andrew
Cuomo has compared the situation to "being on eBay with 50 other states" and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
New York expects to lose $15 billion in costs and lost revenue from the pandemic.
"We know that New York and other states are in the market at the same time, along with the
rest of the world, bidding on these same items, which is clearly driving the fluctuation in
costs," budget office spokesman Freeman Klopott said in an email to ProPublica.
Did Johns Hopkins issue the following guidelines (I don't think they did)?
1. The virus is not a living organism, but a protein molecule (DNA) covered by a
protective layer of lipid (fat), which, when absorbed by the cells of the ocular, nasal or
buccal mucosa, changes their genetic code. (mutation) and convert them into aggressor and
multiplier cells.
2. Since the virus is not a living organism but a protein molecule, it is not killed, but
decays on its own. The disintegration time depends on the temperature, humidity and type of
material where it lies.
3. The virus is very fragile; the only thing that protects it is a thin outer layer of
fat. That is why any soap or detergent is the best remedy, because the foam CUTS the FAT
(that is why you have to rub so much: for 20 seconds or more, to make a lot of foam). By
dissolving the fat layer, the protein molecule disperses and breaks down on its own.
4. HEAT melts fat; this is why it is so good to use water above 25 degrees Celsius for
washing hands, clothes and everything. In addition, hot water makes more foam and that makes
it even more useful.
5. Alcohol or any mixture with alcohol over 65% DISSOLVES ANY FAT, especially the external
lipid layer of the virus.
6. Any mix with 1 part bleach and 5 parts water directly dissolves the protein, breaks it
down from the inside.
7. Oxygenated water helps long after soap, alcohol and chlorine, because peroxide
dissolves the virus protein, but you have to use it pure and it hurts your skin.
8. NO BACTERICIDE SERVES. The virus is not a living organism like bacteria; they cannot
kill what is not alive with anthobiotics, but quickly disintegrate its structure with
everything said.
9. NEVER shake used or unused clothing, sheets or cloth. While it is glued to a porous
surface, it is very inert and disintegrates only between 3 hours (fabric and porous), 4 hours
(copper, because it is naturally antiseptic; and wood, because it removes all the moisture
and does not let it peel off and disintegrates). ), 24 hours (cardboard), 42 hours (metal)
and 72 hours (plastic). But if you shake it or use a feather duster, the virus molecules
float in the air for up to 3 hours, and can lodge in your nose.
10. The virus molecules remain very stable in external cold, or artificial as air
conditioners in houses and cars. They also need moisture to stay stable, and especially
darkness. Therefore, dehumidified, dry, warm and bright environments will degrade it
faster.
11. UV LIGHT on any object that may contain it breaks down the virus protein. For example,
to disinfect and reuse a mask is perfect. Be careful, it also breaks down collagen (which is
protein) in the skin, eventually causing wrinkles and skin cancer.
12. The virus CANNOT go through healthy skin.
13. Vinegar is NOT useful because it does not break down the protective layer of fat.
14. NO SPIRITS, NOR VODKA, serve. The strongest vodka is 40% alcohol, and you need
65%.
15. LISTERINE IF IT SERVES! It is 65% alcohol.
16. The more confined the space, the more concentration of the virus there can be. The
more open or naturally ventilated, the less.
17. This is super said, but you have to wash your hands before and after touching mucosa,
food, locks, knobs, switches, remote control, cell phone, watches, computers, desks, TV, etc.
And when using the bathroom.
18. You have to HUMIDIFY HANDS DRY from so much washing them, because the molecules can
hide in the micro cracks. The thicker the moisturizer, the better.
19. Also keep your NAILS SHORT so that the virus does not hide there.
IMHO only 20% of the note shows some imprecise or wrongly interpreted examples (like f i
Listerine) , but when 80% looks correct, we ABSOLUTELY need to find the source and
disseminate it in order to help people understand and , why not, start thinking on why and
how apply the recommendations AFTER having understood the logic behind the detailed and
practical recommendations which do make sense but which we need to justify and assess before
we carry them further as full "truth"
On March 14, French health minister Olivier Véran made a blunt statement on Twitter
– warning that people should stay away from using ibuprofen to treat coronavirus
symptoms. Some patients in France had experienced adverse affects using non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs to treat the disease. The tweet has sparked rampant disinformation on
WhatsApp and social media, but there is currently no strong evidence that ibuprofen can make
coronavirus worse. Even so, the NHS is still advising that – until we have further
evidence – people should avoid using ibuprofen to treat coronavirus symptoms and take
paracetamol instead. If you can't take paracetamol, or are taking ibuprofen on the advice of a
doctor, make sure you check with a doctor before you make any changes to your medication.
Updated 04.03.20, 11:05 GMT: The article has been updated to clarify that some alcohol
gels are effective against norovirus.
Matt Reynolds is WIRED's science editor. He tweets from
We need to look into why the most active countries that do not practice self isolation,
while wearing face masks, have very lowest death rates compared to case numbers. I.e.,
Singapore, South Korea, Russia, Japan, etc...
There is difference among people born and raised in different countries with different
vaccinations given at birth and afterwards. There is also difference of many local diseases
very common; like malaria and others in Asian courtiers, which are almost non-existent here
in USA. It gives us some directions to fight Covid-19 employing mass spectrometry and many
other tools.
I am over 70 and last year in the UK I had a vaccine for pneumonia, which I understand is
of one of the stages in the desease's cycle. Might it be possible that a pneumonia vaccine
would provide some kind of immunity for Covid-19?
The vaccine for pneumonia may have a limited scope compared to Covid-19 attack on immune
system, but studies of the blood samples looking for anti-bodies after vaccine for pneumonia
may provide us further insight. The best practice would be to try staying away from Covid-19
exposure and try to boost our immune system.
I would like to share some information I happen to find coming out from Chinese Social
Media South China Morning Post: "People with blood type A may be more vulnerable to
coronavirus, China study finds".
A claim from scientists from Chinese study at Zhognan University Hospital in Wuhan and
Shenzhen city. They screen 2000 medical record of patients infected with the SARS CAVID19 to
find a higher proportion of patients belonging to the Blood group A, as well as greater
proportion of them suffering from more severe disease. As we know most scientific papers from
China are written in Chinese language and their scientific perspective may not be as ours, we
cannot confirm that is a reflecting a true fact. Nevertheless, it wouldn't be so difficult
nor expensive to have a look into the matter. If it turns out to reflect a confirmed fact, it
will change our perception about the susceptibility to this germ. We already know that there
is a very wide spectrum of severity of symptoms in our population and in part that might be
due to factors as those mentioned above. My only recommendation is please take it easy we do
not want another problem as we did with toilet paper or Chloroquine.
Be safe, keep yourself at home.
Per the CDC, hand sanitizer needs to contain at least 60% alcohol. Tito's Handmade Vodka is
40% alcohol, and therefore does not meet the current recommendation of the CDC. Please see attached for more
information.
pic.twitter.com/plYf54HPLn
You can certainly bet on that the virus can spread in hot seasons. In these days, in
Argentina, we have temperatures about 35 Celsius (almost 100 Fahrenheit), and the virus still
gained momentum in such environments. The strict social isolation has been proven to be our
best option so far. In economics terms, and even in social mood, it seems to be a very high
price to pay. But relaxing or terminating this forced quarantine may led us to the worst case
scenario.
Here in Brazil we have high temperatures right now. And the daily contagion rate is much
lower than in countries or places where the climate is much colder. I believe that the virus
will not spread as well in hot climates.
I'm currently in mid-Florida there it has been in the upper 80's to mid 90's every day for
the last several weeks. The infection is increasing here as far as in Michigan. Also, it's
hotter down towards Miami and the infection levels are even higher down there. I wouldn't put
any faith and hot days killing it
"those countries are poor and have no testing" - but what about their death rate then? As
of right now, the ENTIRE CONTINENT of Africa has just a few dozen deaths TOTAL..
Extreme heat/cold are known to be formidable environments to most viruses. Odds are that
this one is too, but only time will tell I guess.
Australia is not poor and absolutely does have testing!!! We have over 3000 infected (that
has been identified) and 13 deaths. Do not count on weather conditions offering some form of
protection.
Temperature isn't the only parameter, air-conditioning and the related irritation of
mucous membranes are favouring coughs and sneezing and by consequence the spread of
viruses.
Could the stalled economy we've inflicted on ourselves in our frantic efforts to battle the
COVID-19 pandemic lead to civil disorder? History suggests that's a real danger.
Around the world, high unemployment and stagnant economic activity tend to lead to social
unrest, including demonstrations, strikes, and other forms of potentially violent disruptions.
That's a huge concern as forecasters expect the U.S. unemployment rate in the months to come to
surpass that seen during the depths of the Great Depression.
"We're putting this initial number at 30 percent; that's a 30 percent unemployment rate"
in the second quarter of this year as a result of the planned economic shutdowns, Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard
told Bloomberg News on March 22. Gross Domestic Product, he adds, is expected to drop by
50 percent.
Unlike most bouts of economic malaise, this is a self-inflicted wound meant to counter a
serious public health crisis. But, whatever the reasons, it means businesses shuttered and
people without jobs and incomes. That's risky.
"Results from the empirical analysis indicate that economic growth and the unemployment
rate are the two most important determinants of social unrest,"
notes the International Labour Organisation (ILO), a United Nations agency that maintains
a Social Unrest Index in an attempt to predict civil disorder based, in part, on economic
trends. "For example, a one standard deviation increase in unemployment raises social unrest
by 0.39 standard deviations, while a one standard deviation increase in GDP growth reduces
social unrest by 0.19 standard deviations."
Why would economic shutdowns lead to social unrest? Because, contrary to the airy dismissals
of some members of the political class and many ivory-tower types, commerce isn't a grubby
embarrassment to be tolerated and avoided -- it's the life's blood of a society. Jobs and
businesses keep people alive. They represent the activities that meet demand for food,
clothing, shelter -- and that develop and distribute the medicine and medical supplies we need
to battle COVID-19.
President Donald Trump may be overly optimistic when he hopes to have the country, including
areas hard-hit by the virus, " opened up
and just raring to go by Easter ," but he's not wrong to include the economy in his
calculations.
By contrast, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's insistence that "if it's public
health versus the economy, the only choice is public health," sounds fine and noble. But it
reflects an unrealistic and semi-aristocratic disdain for the activities that make fighting the
pandemic possible at all -- and that keep social unrest at bay.
While the ILO has tried to quantify the causes of social unrest, its researchers certainly
aren't the first to make the connection between angry, unemployed people and trouble in the
streets.
At the height of the Great Depression, when U.S. unemployment hit a peak of 24.9 percent , Franklin Delano
Roosevelt's administration saw make-work programs such as the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)
as a means of getting the jobless -- especially young men -- safely into "quasi-military camps
often far from home in the nation's publicly owned forests and parks," Joseph M. Speakman
wrote for the Fall 2006
issue of Prologue Magazine , a publication of the U.S. National Archives and Records
Administration.
"Bringing an army of the unemployed into 'healthful surroundings,' Roosevelt argued, would
help to eliminate the threats to social stability that enforced idleness had created,"
Speakman added.
In fact, the connection between unemployment, stagnant economies, and social unrest is so
clear that an important indicator for a large underground economy is relative peace prevailing
alongside a chronically high unemployment rate.
If 21 percent of the workforce "were jobless, Spain would not be as peaceful as, barring a
few demonstrations, it has so far been, say economists and business leaders," the Financial
Times noted in 2011. Sure enough,
researchers found that off-the-books businesses and jobs thrived in Spain --
accounting for the equivalent of a quarter of GDP at one point -- keeping people employed and
defusing tensions.
Bullard of the Fed doesn't propose shipping the jobless off to the wilderness -- at least,
not yet -- and he doesn't seem inclined to rely on the black market to keep people fed, warm,
and healthy. Instead, to defuse the impact of the social-distancing shutdowns of normal
economic activity, he calls for lost income to be replaced by unemployment insurance and other
payments that would make displaced workers and business owners whole.
He better be right that government checks -- drawing on money from the thin air and not
generated by an economy that has largely halted, I'll note -- can offset the pain of lost jobs
and businesses, because the first wave of the unemployment he predicts is already here.
"In the week ending March 21, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims
was 3,283,000, an increase of 3,001,000 from the previous week's revised level," the United
States Department of Labor announced
on Thursday, March 26.
"This marks the highest level of seasonally adjusted initial claims in the history of the
seasonally adjusted series."
Those disturbed by such economic collapse include public health professionals who take
COVID-19 very seriously.
"I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this
near total meltdown of normal life -- schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned --
will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus
itself," wrote
David L. Katz, former director of Yale University's Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center,
in The New York Times last week.
"The stock market will bounce back in time, but many businesses never will. The
unemployment, impoverishment and despair likely to result will be public health scourges of
the first order."
Unemployment, impoverishment, and despair are frightening outcomes in themselves. They're
also a recipe for social unrest that will afflict even those of us who weather both the
pandemic and the accompanying economic storm.
The early days of the outbreak have been reminiscent of SARS and MERS, and indeed, the
discovery that the causative agent was a closely-related, never-before-described coronavirus
predicted potential for nosocomial transmission and so-called "super-spreader" events (
8 ). Unfortunately, 2019-nCoV did
indeed infect health workers in China via nosocomial transmission. Here we offer a first
description of the 1,716 confirmed cases among health workers.
Overall, they also display a likely mixed outbreak pattern -- perhaps the data are
characterized by a point source curve beginning in late December 2019, which was eclipsed by a
higher magnitude continuous source curve beginning on January 20, 2020. To date, there is no
evidence of a super-spreader event occurring in any of the Chinese health facilities serving
COVID-19 patients. However, we do not know whether this is due to the nature of the virus
itself or whether these events have been successfully prevented.
You misunderstood something about Chinese measures to fight this virus.
We did not just simply lock down cities and everybody stay home to wait for the good
ending.
It's far from enough.
We check check and check.
Find out those infected, took them into hospitals. Find them as much as we can. DO NOT leave
them goof around/stay home to infect the whole family.
Find out those who are close to the infected, took them into isolation to observe if they
will catch the virus. Find them as much as we can.
Track those who were close to the infected, check out the asymptomatic one who is out of the
radar and secretly give the virus to the infected. Isolate this asymptomatic person who may
continue to spread the virus to others. Yes, you need to find out who infected whom, and how.
You need to build the detective teams on infection. You find them out, learn from it, publish
it, avoid it.
It's a mission impossible, but still, you do it, with enough endeavor, it's mission
possible.
check, check, check track, track, track isolate, isolate, isolate
In the same time, you do all you capacity to guarantee the medic, the logistic, the supply,
it's a whole system. Not simply lock down, not just stay at home.
China has more than 70% family cases because social cases are effectively avoided by lock
down and stay at home, while those family cases at early stage in Wuhan especially can not be
avoided since we don't have this system at the time. Things happened in Wuhan too fast!
You need to react fast! You need to do lot of things at the same time. You need to find them,
all of them, really fast. Take them into hospital, into isolation, into observation, under
your radar.
Lock down and stay at home works! But that's not all about it. That's just a start of
it.
There are cases that people go out for grocery, without masks, get infected by another buyer,
within seconds!
If you guys don't wear mask, don't follow stay at home and social distance strictly,
whatever your government doing is in waste.
But if your government don't respond fast and find out all of them for treatment and
isolations, still the same: this virus thing will just goes on and on and on and on and
on
At the end of the day, you may reach herd immunity (if this virus is that friendly: once
cured, never infected again, we are not sure about that since somebody already has two
strains of this virus in the body at the same time, which suggest something quite
different)
In that case, there will be herd immunity gap between you strong survival guys who passed the
virus test and we the untested weaker ones who avoided the test by all means.
Who knows, you might win by lost the burden of the old the sick the weak the poor the
idiot.
We may also win by guard our value and our people as an unity.
Win-Win
As for fundamental changes of life style and governing method. We didn't think much about
it before as we sincerely believed this would be a short term thing. We believed in ourselves
and expected everything back to normal in Apr. until you guys join this virus thing.
Now everything changed. Things become really complicated.
Furthermore, I tried to communicate the importance of recycling FFP2 masks, without any
success. It is a matter of life and death. These masks are considered for single use and staffs
throw them away too quickly. This is not the place to be technical, but I have proposed four
methods to recycle them and they must be implemented according to the sterilization equipment
available in hospitals, information that I have still not been able to obtain. We must educate
medical staff on how to extend the life of these masks and recycle them, today, the urgency is
immense.
The army, firefighters and probably the police have gas masks, which should not be left in
the barracks, they are even more effective than the FFP2. We do not care if it looks crazy to
see doctors with gas masks, I prefer to see them stay alive and able to care for patients, and
also it would prevent them from becoming vectors of spread themselves. How many gas masks,
which are cleanable and reusable, are available?
FFP2 masks for the population, a simple solution for returning to work.
To finish with the masks, let us understand that what will get us out of confinement,
lockdown, and will allow the population to resume almost normal work, is the massive production
of FFP2 masks for the entire population, small (children) and adults (adults). The faster the
necessary production tools are put in place, the faster Belgium can get back to work, it's
really that simple.
During the minimum 4 weeks of lockdown, massive screening is needed, and the establishment
of the task force is a step in the right direction. We cannot lift the lockdown until our
ability to track down infected individuals has been greatly increased.
At Vo'Euganeo in Italy, all the confined residents (3,300) were tested a month ago. Result:
out of 89 positive cases, there are only handful contaminations, reports La Voix du Nord. The
approach I propose works when you can combine lockdown and massive screening.
It was true yesterday, it is true today, it is enough to see how Taiwan, Hong Kong, and
Singapore handled the crisis from the start, and how China and South Korea recovered.
CountLess life could have been saved if white people just didn't have an illogical
aversion to masks.
Everyone wear masks in asia. Ironically, It is not the Chinese who is spreading it In
Asia. The people who are spreading the disease where I live are the white people returning
from overseas and refuse to wear masks. They should go back to wherever they come from.
these people should be physically assaulted for NOT wearing a mask in Asia like Asians are
assaulted in the West for wearing one.
The US government was caught without pants. No supply of masks. Can you imagine that for a country with trillion military budget.
Notable quotes:
"... Take a look around: Unemployment may reach 30%. The poor are starting to protest–actually strike! GM, Amazon, Chicago Teacher's
Union, GE, Instacart ..."
"... As jobs were outsourced to slave labor camps in China and elsewhere, the rich and privileged smiled as their portfolios grew,
as CEO raked in the cash and then buried it in off-shore accounts. ..."
"... When the working class complained about jobs being lost, factories being closed, it was told to get a better education, to
make itself valuable to the bosses. What a joke! ..."
"... The DNC always plays footsie with the rich as does the GOP–equal plunderers. Universal Health Care is just too expensive! Their
all monsters, crafty grifters. ..."
"... The mass media, now firmly serve the DNC and the GOP, studiously ignore this rot. A rotten building will fall. Times up. Game
is Over. ..."
The Covid-19 pandemic is the physical manifestation of a deeper disease plaguing the West: Class Warfare. The veil has been lifted.
Social distancing, a legitimate response to Covid-19, predominately affects the working class.
Fortunately, Covid-19 is an equal opportunity plague: As the rich and powerful congratulated each other, as they moved among the
rightfully adoring crowds oops, I think I caught something! Just hazards of the games they play. Certainly, it was never contracted
on the factory floor.
Suddenly the rich and privileged claim they are in the same boat. Really? Mega-yachts are handy get-aways, as are well-protected
island boltholes.
And who is supposed to do the nasty work, who has little opportunity to run and hide, who must do the the work that makes actual
existence possible? Not the rich.
Who can work from home and not lose his or her job?
Rich and powerful women now have to cut their own nails! Oh, the shame of it. They have to dye their own hair–coif themselves!
What no colorist?
The rich and powerful want the poor to go back to work. Who else will make them money? Who else will save the Stock Market? Meanwhile,
the poor are losing their jobs; they do not have fall-back pensions or able to take advantage of Capital Gains. How will they pay
their rent? Their bills? Their healthcare? Their debts?
Take a look around: Unemployment may reach 30%. The poor are starting to protest–actually strike! GM, Amazon, Chicago Teacher's
Union, GE, Instacart
As jobs were outsourced to slave labor camps in China and elsewhere, the rich and privileged smiled as their portfolios grew,
as CEO raked in the cash and then buried it in off-shore accounts.
When the working class complained about jobs being lost, factories being closed, it was told to get a better education, to
make itself valuable to the bosses. What a joke!
When many tried to get an education, they were faced with absurd college costs, incredible debt, and thanks to those in control
an inability to declare bankruptcy! Thanks, Joe.
And now, ever thoughtful Nancy Pelosi wants to reward the rich and privileged with ta ta!.., a lifting of the Salt Cap.
The DNC always plays footsie with the rich as does the GOP–equal plunderers. Universal Health Care is just too expensive!
Their all monsters, crafty grifters.
Meanwhile, economists sang the praises of Free Trade. The GOP loved it; the DNC loved it. Neo-liberalism: the goose that always
lays the golden eggs.
The mass media, now firmly serve the DNC and the GOP, studiously ignore this rot. A rotten building will fall. Times up. Game
is Over.
likbez , March 31, 2020 9:27 pm
Thank you Stormy,
A very good analysis. A lot of emotions too ;-)
When the working class complained about jobs being lost, factories being closed, it was told to get a better education,
to make itself valuable to the bosses. What a joke!
Neoliberalism is an ideology make on a set of myths. In other words this is a secular religion.
The DNC always plays footsie with the rich as does the GOP–equal plunderers. Universal Health Care is just too expensive!
Their all monsters, crafty grifters.
No question they are. That's by design. The key role of DNC is to squash political forces to the left of Clinton faction, and
to neutralize/coopt politicians which do not support the neoliberal/neocon consensus.
Meanwhile, economists sang the praises of Free Trade. The GOP loved it; the DNC loved it. Neo-liberalism: the goose that
always lays the golden eggs.
Neoliberal revolution which culminated in the election of Reagan (which started under Carter) was a coup d'état by financial
oligarchy. It signified that the New Deal consensus was broken and countervailing forces were weakened enough to ensure the success
of the coup.
One thing with which I respectfully disagree:
The mass media, now firmly serve the DNC and the GOP, studiously ignore this rot. A rotten building will fall. Times up.
Game is Over.
Not sure the game is over. I do not see powerful enough social forces that can oppose financial oligarchy. The anger does built
up, but it is powerless. And their control of the state is absolute (which also means the control of intelligence agencies).
The population is brainwashed and disunited via identity politics.
In modern USA society that means that any attempt to build such a coalition with be squashed by the national security state.
"... Ming Lin, an emergency room physician in Washington state, lost his job last week after he spoke to a local media outlet about the lack of protective gear for staff at Puget Sound area hospitals. ..."
US Health care systems have warned emergency room doctors and nurses that if they speak out about working conditions inside a
hospital, they will be fired, reported
Bloomberg .
Ming Lin, an emergency room physician in Washington state, lost his job last week after he spoke to a local media outlet about
the lack of protective gear for staff at Puget Sound area hospitals.
Hospital staff at the NYU Langone Health system were recently warned that if they spoke to the media without authorization, they
would be terminated.
"Hospitals are muzzling nurses and other health-care workers in an attempt to preserve their image," said Ruth Schubert, a spokeswoman
for the Washington State Nurses Association. "It is outrageous."
Doctors and nurses "must have the ability to tell the public what is really going on inside the facilities where they are caring
for Covid-19 patients," Schubert said.
As we noted in January, a hospital doctor in Wuhan, China, the epicenter of COVID-19,
tried to inform the world about a fast-spreading disease. However, he was quickly silenced by the Chinese government, and since,
more than 800,000 people around the globe have been infected, with 39,000 deaths.
One reason that nurses and doctors must be informative about evolving conditions inside hospitals is that public donations of
medical equipment or gear could help out a local facility.
"It is good and appropriate for health-care workers to be able to express their own fears and concerns, especially when expressing
that might get them better protection," said Glenn Cohen, faculty director of Harvard Law School's bioethics center. Hospitals
are likely trying to limit reputational damage because "when health-care workers say they are not being protected, the public
gets very upset at the hospital system."
NYU Langone Health employees received notification last week that if they spoke with media, they would be "subject to disciplinary
action, including termination."
New York's Montefiore Health System requires doctors and nurses to get permission from superiors before speaking to the media.
"Associates are not authorized to interact with reporters or speak on behalf of the institution in any capacity, without pre-approval,"
according to the policy, which was seen by Bloomberg News.
Lauri Mazurkiewicz, a Chicago nurse at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, was fired after she told the hospital staff to wear more
protective equipment:
"A lot of hospitals are lying to their workers and saying that simple masks are sufficient and nurses are getting sick and
they are dying," Mazurkiewicz said.
Doctors and nurses have also tweeted their frustrations with hospital systems – this has also led to some systems tightening the
noose on what employees can and cannot say on social media:
My babies are too young to read this now. And they'd barely recognize me in my gear. But if they lose me to COVID I want them
to know Mommy tried really hard to do her job.
#GetMePPE #NYC pic.twitter.com/OMew5G7mjK
Nisha Mehta, a radiologist from Charlotte, North Carolina, runs several Facebook groups for physicians. She says members in her
groups have reached out to her and want their stories told about working conditions:
"I'm hearing widespread stories from physicians across the country and they are all saying: 'We have these stories that we
think are important to get out, but we are being told by our hospital systems that we are not allowed to speak to the press, and
if we do so there will be extreme consequences," Mehta said.
America's hospital system could be cracking , like what happened in China and Italy. If everything were fine, doctors and nurses
wouldn't be flooding media outlets and social media platforms, warning the public about hospital conditions and or about how deadly
the virus is.
"... Given that the costs of financialization are already borne by the general public, not by the plutocracy, what's the point exactly of destroying the real economy just to open the door to new bail-outs? ..."
The Western populations (especially the American) were already bearing the costs of
financialization in the form of stagnant industrial output, unemployment, decaying
infrastructure, unavailability and/or declining quality of essential services like health
care, rapidly rising cost of living etc. before this and arguably even before the Global
Financial Crisis in 2008. The costs are no more socialized now just because the worthless
assets have been moved to the Federal Reserve's balance sheet.
What the bail-outs after the GFC did accomplish was enabling the financial sector, by
relieving it of the burden of toxic assets, to continue its parasitism on the real economy
through extending new loans to raid companies and to extract wealth from home-owners and
consumers.
Given that the costs of financialization are already borne by the general public, not by
the plutocracy, what's the point exactly of destroying the real economy just to open the door
to new bail-outs? Unlike in 2008, there was, from the perspective of the financial sector, no
need for any bail-outs because the financial system was still operating, up until the
economic crisis that arrived with this pandemic and the resulting shutdowns of the industrial
and service sectors. There is not in reality any debt erased or moved to the general public
(the plutocracy are in fact *not* the ones in debt, they are the ones issuing debt to
industrial companies being hollowed out, to home-owners, students, consumers etc.), but the
pandemic risks the collapse (at the very least the end of its legitimacy) of the entire
current financial system and with it the continuation of the parasitic process of wealth
extraction.
Given that the costs of financialization are already borne by the general public, not
by the plutocracy, what's the point exactly of destroying the real economy just to open the
door to new bail-outs?
'The point' is deflating the bubble, an extraordinary bailout of Boeing and maybe other
corps., and accelerating 'decoupling'. These things would be difficult to accomplish without
a CRISIS! that rises to the level of a 'national emergency'.
US and its system were heading for collapse. Trump and his backers could see that. At the
moment, this is starting to look like the great coronovirus reset. Bailouts coupled to big
changes.
Posted by: Peter AU1 | Mar 30 2020 0:30 utc | 100
++++
Precisely. By socialising the debt liability now the problem is shifted from being the
fault of finance to being the fault of the virus.
Guillotine dodged for now, the can is kicked further down the road. More austerity.
Resultant mass unemployment blamed on the virus and not on the behaviour of the parasitic
finance industry.
The continual inflating of asset prices by the Fed was also seen as a desperate ploy to ward
off deflation
++++++
No, the continual inflating of asset prices was in order to milk the rubes for as long as
feasibly possible. But the game was up in late 2019 when word got out that at least one of
the large banks (imo Deutsche Bank) were having trouble meeting their overnight obligations.
JPM said "we ain't helping" so The Fed went into Repo overdrive to shore the sustem up in the
shortterm
The point is, why would they want to (actively intervene to) deflate the bubble? The
transfer of wealth from the real economy is a continuous process. The longer you can keep a
company like Boeing going, the more of its assets (be it savings in pension funds, machinery,
residual goodwill etc.) you can liquidate and pay out to yourself in the form of interest on
loans (that the company owes to you or your friends), stock buybacks or bonuses.
Same thing with mortgages: The longer you can keep the real estate market in a bubble and
the home owners at least treading water, the longer they can pay you exorbitant interest
rates, and the more of their labor and savings you can siphon off.
In the event of a crash like in 2008, or now due to the coronavirus epidemic, bail-outs
are a necessary intervention to stitch up the balance sheets of the banks, private equity
funds etc. so that this parasitic process can be started up again. That doesn't mean that the
crashes are desired - in fact, the exact opposite. It's not through the bail-outs that the
actual wealth transfer happens, but rather between them.
The point is, why would they want to (actively intervene to) deflate the bubble? The
transfer of wealth from the real economy is a continuous process... It's not through the
bail-outs that the actual wealth transfer happens, but rather between them.
The markets are complex systems and they can get stressed. The expansion was well beyond its
sell-by date and required life-support for much of the duration (QE x , tax cuts,
etc.). A soft landing for Wall Street and recession that can be blamed on
coronavirus/China are less risky than letting the markets crash on their own. There will be
no big 'reset' that some have been hoping for (at least not anytime soon).
And a focus on deflating the bubble is misleading. They had multiple ways to game this
CRISIS!. And protecting favored interests (like Boeing) as well as the system itself is one
just icing on the cake.
Buyback Boom Companies are spending billions buying back their own shares. For the first
three quarters, this year's buybacks have surpassed last year's as the most since the 2008
financial crisis.
Companies spending the most on buybacks through Sept. 30
BUYBACKS, IN BILLIONS
CHANGE IN SHARES CHANGE IN
OUTSTANDING SHARE PRICE $600 billion
Buybacks by all U. S. companies, through Sept. 30 of each year
Apple $30.2
Microsoft 14.2
Qualcomm 9.6
American International Group 7.5
Gilead Sciences 7.0
Oracle 6.8
Wells Fargo 6.7
AbbVie 6.3
Pfizer 6.2
Boeing 6.0
" Faced with this Trump of all people may be forced to adopt some major socialist
principles.
On point, the US will be forced to reverse a percentage of the Trillions [aka the
socialism for Wall Street and big corporations] - the current focus - to a single payer
healthcare system.
Consequences of the CoronaCrisis will roar in 6 months. The grim reality - a great
depression and debt jubilee. Debt and derivative instruments are unsustainable. As noted, the
Credit crisis (Repo market) began in September 2019.
[.] When the Federal Reserve needs to create a hodgepodge of secretive Special Purpose
Vehicles (SPVs) and run bailouts of $4 trillion; and the Fed gets language in the newly
passed stimulus bill that it can hold its meetings in secret with no minutes
provided to the public; and the President of the United States signs the stimulus bill
with a signing statement announcing only he will determine what Congress gets to
know about where the bailout funds go, you know that something is happening under the
surface on Wall Street that is just too repugnant to be reported to the American people.[.]
And when you see three firms like JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank and AIG trading as
outliers to their peers, only a fool wouldn't see them as a potential connection to this
need for super secrecy. [.] (emphasis shown are links)
Btw, Fed balance sheet will likely blow to over $10 Trillion in short order.
JPMorgan Chase has exposure to $1.2 trillion in Credit Default Swaps while Citibank has
exposure to $1.76 trillion for a combined total of $2.96 trillion as of September 30,
2019.
In the same report, the total exposure to Credit Default Swaps (CDS) among all national
banks in the U.S. is $3.7 trillion – meaning that just these two banks are responsible
for 80 percent of that exposure.
LINK
Yes, those CDS that collapsed during 2008 financial crisis are still around. The illusion
of fancy financial instruments.
Austria says anyone shopping will
have to wear face masks, bringing it in line with the neighbouring Czech Republic which, on March
18, ordered face masks be worn in public.
Masks will be supplied to supermarket retail chains
which will distribute them to shoppers as they enter stores.
The government cautioned that the masks do not protect wearers but are meant to prevent them
from spreading infectious cough droplets.
If allowed to happen, and without the appearance of a significant medical therapy tool
across the USA - the fallout of foreseeable foreclosures will make it a nuclear weapon. Given
bank turnaround timescales this will be just in time for next winter/elections... Faced with
this Trump of all people may be forced to adopt some major socialist principles.
So there are a lot of wacky theories out there. Here's mine and warning: I'm pissed at what
I'm witnessing.
1. The way health industry workers including maintenance support personnel are carrying
the load on the front lines of this pandemic is UNSUSTAINABLE and inhumane both for staff and
patients. This story must be EXPOSED in every global hot spot.
2. This pandemic is a WAR, so let's attack it and behave like we are in the midst of a
World War.
3. All gloved hands must be on deck for this. Healthcare workers should not be burdened
and risking everything in the manner that we are starting to become aware of now in the West.
Why should they be subjected to such stress and burden and all the risk while millions of
ABLE-BODIED PEOPLE languish at home collecting a check for doing nothing. Where is the
government on balancing this chaotic, unjust situation?
4. There are many, many service jobs associated with healthcare and needs brought out by
this pandemic that don't involve close contact. The need is great.
5. Governments think the military can help in this crisis? Use it! Better to use them for
healing than killing.
6. Need more help? Then recruit college and university students without underlying health
conditions between the ages of 17 to 35. Hell, recruit from all healthy, able people under 50
collecting UI.
7. No one should be languishing at home collecting free money while everyone working in
the healthcare service industry, and senior residences suffer 24/7 with crazy shifts getting
sick!
I know what I'm bitching about. Both my parents were afflicted with cancer a few years
apart. I practically lived my life in the hospital and witnessed need wherever I turned in
normal times and helped in whatever way I could through the entire ordeal. There is an aging
population crisis happening around us and everyone's acting like this is la-la land and who
cares!
8. This pandemic is emphasizing deficiencies everywhere in the system, especially moral
deficiencies.
9. This pandemic is war, and many are needed on deck to end it! If able bodies want a free
ride, to collect a check and languish while others suffer...damn it...draft them or cut off
the funds!
10. It's time to go above and beyond the clapping, already! Everyone should be
shouldering the need wherever they can.
It's time to organize and share in the work and responsibility involved.
Yes, the only solution is deglobalization, starting with the MbSing of the corporate and
financial oligarchs. They have been MbSing the rest of us for far too long through their
"bailouts", and systematic destruction of of our nations and societies.
Any private corporation or institution that is to big to fail, is to big to be in private
hands and needs to be nationalized and localized. The people through their governments
(national, regional and local) should be in control of health care (including big pharma),
education, energy, banking, and all other entities formerly known as public utilities. Most
of these should produce products and services at cost, or even at a loss for the benefit of
society.
In addition their needs to be a free transfer of technology among societies. Patent
regimes need to be revised. Patents on life forms need to be banned as was the case up until
35 years ago. They should also be severely restricted in terms of time. Corporate control of
university research needs to be ended, It is purely profit based for the benefit of those
corporations and not for society. Any research that might threaten their profits is censored,
and researchers required to sign non-disclosure agreements.
The world needs to change its approach, but the way Davos or the G-20 "leaders" would like
it to change. They are really interested in more of the same, turbocharging austerity for and
surveillance on the rest of us. This has to end.
@karlof1 | Mar 28 2020 17:26 utc | 29, I agree in general with your hypotheses.
May I suggest a scenario for how these events might unfold.
The unlimited printing of money by the Fed (the initial $4+ Trillion resulting from the
bail-out bill is only the beginning) will destabilize the dollar and cause it to be replaced
as the world's reserve currency. The replacement will likely be the IMF Special Drawing
Rights (SDR) but could also be some form of gold.
Having lost its role as a reserve currency, the US$ will collapse in value. It will go
from being a massively over-valued currency to an under-valued currency.
Inflation in the U.S., particularly related to resources and imported goods, will cause
the price of goods to skyrocket. The U.S. will become materially poorer. It will no longer be
able to afford imported goods, nor will it be able to afford its bloated military and foreign
adventures.
The U.S. will need to redevelop its goods producing sectors in order to produce for
itself what it can no longer import (with over-valued dollars). With an under-valued
currency, it will eventually become an net exporter.
The U.S. government will continue to run massive deficits in order to fund the
transformation of the economy from a military/security economy with overpriced services (that
are for the most part not exportable) to a goods producing export economy. Only when this transformation is substantially complete will the U.S. be able to run
either fiscal or balance of payment surpluses.
In the end the U.S.' massive debts will be inflated away. Likewise the wealthy elites,
whose wealth is largely in U.S. dollar based financial assets, will also see their wealth
inflated away.
The decimating of the financial assets, through inflation, combined with the
re-employment of U.S. workers in goods producing industries will begin to reverse the income
inequality that has taken place over the last 40 years. With the loss of wealth and the
reversal of income inequality, the ability of the elites to control the political system will
be greatly diminished. The voice of the people will gradually be restored.
The above scenarios will take many decades to complete. However, the first two steps are
likely to happen quite quickly, catalyzed by the current crises.
Any pretensions that the
U.S. has to being the Unilateral Super-power or the Indispensable Nation will collapse
alongside the dollar.
@ 55 dh-mtl... quote -" The replacement will likely be the IMF Special Drawing Rights (SDR)
but could also be some form of gold." the problem with this is that the IMF is a big part of
the problem and subject to the same malevolent forces that have brought us to where we are
today... anyone who looks into the imf - world bank and etc. etc. see how they too are a part
of this mafia ponzi scheme.. i wish it was different.. some other path will need to be taken
and it will include a dismantling or a complete redefinition of what these institutions were
supposed to be for... they have been manipulated badly by the west..
i guess i have to say although much of the financial dynamic seems centered around the
us$, it is really not just the us$ that is the problem... let me give you an analogy that you
can relate to... notice the usa imposing sanctions and how the west generally always
complies?? it is the same arrangement on the financial platform too... they all conform to a
particular hierarchy that is corrupt and about maintaining power at fear of losing position
and power themselves... so, it is a hard nut to crack and it will impact not only the usa,
but the whole world when it does start to crack... sort of like what this covid-19 is doing,
but on a larger scale...
Salaried employees pay will be cut 20%; the pay is "deferred" until sometime in the
future, probably the next set of GM bankruptcy proceedings. Some kind of gradual
transformation will not happen without massive debt write-downs, and that is just not going
to happen. So it will be gradually worsening deflation followed by a massive
hyperinflationary event as endless dollars are poured into a shrinking supply of goods and
services.
As for services in the US, they are completely unaffordable for working people. Car
dealers charge $80 an hour for a technician. Lawyers are charging $200 an hour? More? Who can
afford that! College education is a service that charges $40,000 and up for a piece of paper,
permission to have a job. Meanwhile the federal minimum wage is still $7.25 an hour.
There will be a debt jubilee when the dollar utterly collapses; I don't think we will much
like the way it will unfold.
I am of the firm conviction that the Nov 2020 US election is all about deciding who will
be a late-stage soviet leader and the subsequent path is unclear. But if we apply Orlov's
framework for collapse.....
Stage 1: Financial collapse. Faith in "business as usual" is lost
Stage 2: Commercial collapse. Faith that "the market shall provide" is lost
Stage 3: Political collapse. Faith that "the government will take care of you" is lost
Stage 4: Social collapse. Faith that "your people will take care of you" is lost
Stage 5: Cultural collapse. Faith in "the goodness of humanity" is lost
....then the virus has already sped the country through stage 1 and stage 2 is upon it
with the lack of PPE and other essentials. Game is on after the govt stimulus package fails
to have anything more than a short-term effect and the bail-out induced inflation appears.
The vast military structure is as incompetent as the domestic response to the virus, a failed
invasion of some sort will make that clear, and the legionnaires will all be going home as
the dollar collapses.
On April 21, 2011, the region of Amazon Web Services covering eastern North America crashed.
The crash brought down the sites of large customers such as Quora, Foursquare, and Reddit. It
took Amazon over a week to bring its system fully back online, and some customer data was lost
permanently.
But one company whose site did not crash was Netflix. It turns out that Netflix had made
themselves "antifragile" by employing software they called "Chaos Monkey," which regularly and
randomly brought down Netflix servers. By continually crashing their own servers, Netflix
learned how to nevertheless keep other portions of their network running. And so when Amazon
US-East crashed, Netflix ran on, unfazed.
This phenomenon is discussed by Nassim Taleb in his book Antifragile : a system that
depends on the absence of change is fragile. The companies that focused on keeping all of their
servers up and running all the time went completely offline when Amazon crashed from under
them. But the company that had exposed itself to lots of little crashes could handle the big
crash. That is because the minor, "undesirable" changes stress the system in a way that can
make it stronger.
The idea of antifragility does not apply only to computer networks. For instance, by trying
to eliminate minor downturns in the economy, central bank policy can make that economy
extremely vulnerable to a major recession. Running only on treadmills or tracks makes the
joints extremely vulnerable when, say, one steps in a pothole in the sidewalk.
What does this have to do with trade policy? For many reasons, such as the recent
coronavirus outbreak, flows of goods are subject to unexpected shocks.
Both a regime of "unfettered" free trade, and its opposite, that of complete autarchy, are
fragile in the face of such shocks. A trade policy aimed not at complete free trade or
protectionism, but at making an economy better at absorbing and adapting to rapid change, is
more sane and salutary than either extreme. Furthermore, we suggest practicing for shocks can
help make an economy antifragile.
Amongst academic economists, the pure free-trade position is more popular. The case for
international trade, absent the artificial interference of government trade policy, is
generally based upon the "principle of comparative advantage," first formulated by the English
economist David Ricardo in the early 19th century. Ricardo pointed out, quite correctly, that
even if, among two potential trading partners looking to trade a pair of goods, one of them is
better at producing both of them, there still exist potential gains from trade -- so long as
one of them is relatively better at producing one of the goods, and the other (as a
consequence of this condition) relatively better at producing the other. For example,
Lebron James may be better than his local house painter at playing basketball, and at
painting houses, given his extreme athleticism and long reach. But he is so much more "better"
at basketball that it can still make sense for him to concentrate on basketball and pay the
painter to paint his house.
And so, per Ricardo, it is among nations: even if, say, Sweden can produce both cars and
wool sweaters more efficiently than Scotland, if Scotland is relatively less bad at
producing sweaters than cars, it still makes sense for Scotland to produce only wool sweaters,
and trade with Sweden for the cars it needs.
When we take comparative advantage to its logical conclusion at the global scale, it
suggests that each agent (say, nation) should focus on one major industry domestically and that
no two agents should specialize in the same industry. To do so would be to sacrifice the
supposed advantage of sourcing from the agent who is best positioned to produce a particular
good, with no gain for anyone.
Good so far, but Ricardo's case contains two critical hidden assumptions: first, that the
prices of the goods in question will remain more or less stable in the global marketplace, and
second that the availability of imported goods from specialized producers will remain
uninterrupted, such that sacrificing local capabilities for cheaper foreign alternatives.
So what happens in Scotland if the Swedes suddenly go crazy for yak hair sweaters (produced
in Tibet) and are no longer interested in Scottish sweaters at all? The price of those sweaters
crashes, and Scotland now finds itself with most of its productive capacity specialized in
making a product that can only be sold at a loss.
Or what transpires if Scotland is no longer able, for whatever reason, to produce sweaters,
but the Swedes need sweaters to keep warm? Swedes were perhaps once able to make their own
sweaters, but have since funneled all their resources into making cars, and have even lost the
knowledge of sweater-making. Now to keep warm, the Swedes have to rapidly build the
infrastructure and workforce needed to make sweaters, and regain the knowledge of how to do so,
as the Scots had not only been their sweater supplier, but the only global sweater
supplier.
So we see that the case for extreme specialization, based on a first-order understanding of
comparative advantage, collapses when faced with a second-order effect of a dramatic change in
relative prices or conditions of supply.
That all may sound very theoretical, but collapses due to over-specialization, prompted by
international agencies advising developing economies based on naive comparative-advantage
analysis, have happened all too often. For instance, a number of African economies, persuaded
to base their entire economy on a single good in which they had a comparative advantage (e.g,
gold, cocoa, oil, or bauxite), saw their economies crash when the price of that commodity fell.
People who had formerly been largely self-sufficient found themselves wage laborers for
multinationals in good times, and dependents on foreign charity during bad times.
While the case for extreme specialization in production collapses merely by letting prices
vary, it gets even worse for the "just specialize in the single thing you do best" folks once
we add in considerations of pandemics, wars, extreme climate change, and other such shocks. We
have just witnessed how relying on China for such a high percentage of our medical supplies and
manufacturing has proven unwise when faced with an epidemic originating in China.
On a smaller scale, the great urban theorist Jane Jacobs stressed the need for economic
diversity in a city if it is to flourish. Detroit's over-reliance on the automobile industry,
and its subsequent collapse when that industry largely deserted it, is a prominent example of
Jacobs' point. And while Detroit is perhaps the most famous example of a city collapsing due to
over-specialization, it is far from
the only one .
All of this suggests that trade policy, at any level, should have, as its primary goal, the
encouragement of diversity in that level's economic activity. To embrace the extremes of "pure
free trade" or "total self-sufficiency" is to become more susceptible to catastrophe from
changing conditions. A region that can produce only a few goods is fragile in the face of an
event, like the coronavirus, that disrupts the flow of outside goods. On the other hand,
turning completely inward, and cutting the region off from the outside, leaves it without
outside help when confronting a local disaster, like an extreme drought.
To be resilient as a social entity, whether a nation, region, city, or family, will have a
diverse mix of internal and external resources it can draw upon for sustenance. Even for an
individual, total specialization and complete autarchy are both bad bets. If your only skill is
repairing Sony Walkmen, you were probably pretty busy in 2000, but by today you likely don't
have much work. Complete individual autarchy isn't ever really even attempted: if you watch
YouTube videos of supposedly "self-reliant" people in the wilderness, you will find them using
axes, radios, saws, solar panels, pots and pans, shirts, shoes, tents, and many more goods
produced by others.
In the technical literature, having such diversity at multiple scales is referred to as
"multiscale variety." In a system that displays multiscale variety, no single scale accounts
for all of the diversity of behavior in the system. The practical importance of this is related
to the fact that shocks themselves come at different scales. Some shocks might be limited to a
town or a region, for instance local weather events, while others can be much more widespread,
such as the coronavirus pandemic we are currently facing.
A system with multiscale variety is able to respond to shocks at the scale at which they
occur: if one region experiences a drought while a neighboring region does not, agricultural
supplementation from the currently abundant region can be leveraged. At a smaller scale, if one
field of potatoes becomes infested with a pest, while the adjacent cows in pasture are spared,
the family who owns the farm will still be able to feed themselves and supply products to the
market.
Understanding this, the question becomes how can trade policy, conceived broadly, promote
the necessary variety and resiliency to mitigate and thrive in the face of the unexpected?
Crucially, we should learn from the tech companies: practice disconnecting, and do it randomly.
In our view there are two important components to the intentional disruption: (1) it is regular
enough to generate "muscle memory" type responses; and (2) it is random enough that responses
are not "overfit" to particular scenarios.
For an individual or family, implementing such a policy might create some hardships, but
there are few institutional barriers to doing so. One week, simply declare, "Let's pretend all
of the grocery stores are empty, and try getting by only on what we can produce in the yard or
have stockpiled in our house!" On another occasion, perhaps, see if you can keep your house
warm for a few days without input from utility companies.
Businesses are also largely free of institutional barriers to practicing disconnecting. A
company can simply say, "We are awfully dependent on supplier X: this week, we are not going to
order from them, and let's see what we can do instead!" A business can also seek out external
alternatives to over-reliance on crucial internal resources: for instance, if your top tech guy
can hold your business hostage, it is a good idea to find an outside consulting firm that could
potentially fill his role.
When we get up to the scale of the nation, things become (at least institutionally)
trickier. If Freedonia suddenly bans the import of goods from Ruritania, even for a week,
Ruritania is likely to regard this as a "trade war," and may very well go to the WTO and seek
relief. However, the point of this reorientation of trade policy is not to promote hostility to
other countries, but to make one's own country more resilient. A possible solution to this
problem is that a national government could periodically, at random times, buy all of the
imports of some good from some other country, and stockpile them. Then the foreign supplier
would have no cause for complaint: its goods are still being purchased! But domestic
manufacturers would have to learn to adjust to a disappearance of the supply of palm oil from
Indonesia, or tin from China, or oil from Norway.
Critics will complain that such government management of trade flows, even with the noble
aim of rendering an economy antifragile, will inevitably be turned to less pure purposes, like
protecting politically powerful industrialists. But so what? It is not as though the pursuit of
free trade hasn't itself yielded perverse outcomes, such as the NAFTA trade agreement that ran
to over one thousand pages. Any good aim is likely to suffer diversion as it passes
through the rough-and-tumble of political reality. Thus, we might as well set our sites on an
ideal policy, even though it won't be perfectly realized.
We must learn to deal with disruptions when success is not critical to survival. The better
we become at responding to unexpected shocks, the lower the cost will be each time we face an
event beyond our control that demands an adaptive response. To wait until adaptation is
necessary makes us fragile when a real crisis appears. We should begin to develop an
antifragile economy today, by causing our own disruptions and learning to overcome them.
Deliberately disrupting our own economy may sound crazy. But then, so did deliberately crashing
one's own servers, until Chaos Monkey proved that it works.
Gene Callahan teaches at the Tandon School of Engineering at New York University. Joe
Norman is a data scientist and researcher at the New England Complex Systems Institute.
Most disruptive force is own demographic change of which govts have known for decades.
Caronovirus challenge is nothing compared to what will happen because US ed system
discriminated against the poor who will be the majority!
What Winston Churchill once said about the Americans is in fact true of all humans: "Americans
always end up doing
the right thing once they have exhausted all other options". That's just as true of the French
(I write from France) since our government stopped stocking a strategic reserve of a billion
breathing-masks in 2013 because "we could buy them in Chine for a lower costs". Now we can't
produce enough masks even for our hospitals.
By Marshall Auerback, a market analyst and commentator. Produced by Economy for All , a project
of the Independent Media Institute
When historians look back on our current government's response to a public health emergency
and resultant economic depression, there won't be many paeans to profiles in courage. It may
seem impressive that Congress has approved legislation
worth $2 trillion to help sustain the American economy, but it's no New Deal. Rather it's a
massive economic slush fund that does its utmost to preserve the old ways of doing things under
the guise of masquerading as a response to a public health emergency. In reality, the relief
provisions are barely adequate.
Had this been another financial crisis like 2008, it is doubtful that America's oligarch
class would be able to secure such huge provision for themselves again. Under the guise of a
public health emergency, though, serial corporate predators are being given dollops from this
massive public trough with no means of engendering the kind of economic reconstruction that is
truly needed right now, or even preventing a sufficiently robust response if this virus comes
back in a second or third wave.
As one might expect in a massive bill (representing around 10 percent of U.S. GDP), there
are some decent scraps in this dog's breakfast, but overall the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security Act represents yet another sad indictment of the American polity, even as it
provides an excellent civics lesson in teaching us where power truly lies. There's $150 billion
allocated to hospitals, many of which are already stretched to capacity, but that's nothing
compared to the trillions directed to corporations with minimal disclosure on how those sums
are to be allocated, or any conditionality attached. In fact, we appear not to have learned
some lessons from 2008, when at least some members of Congress made efforts to scrutinize how
we were spending the money. Pam and Russ Martens's superbly informative digging into the more
than 800-page-long bill
reveals that :
a) The Fed will leverage the bill's $454 million bailout slush fund into $4.5 trillion,
and will hand it out through the New York Fed.
b) To ensure that they don't have to answer embarrassing questions about which of their
cronies got the money, the bill suspends the Freedom of Information Act for the Fed.
Bloomberg
has also confirmed that the NY Fed has outsourced picking the lucky recipients for this
slushy cornucopia to a private contractor, BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager
(Goldman Sachs apparently has done enough of "
God's work " this time). The more things change in Washington, the more they stay the
same.
By contrast, the relief
provisions are barely adequate. They expand unemployment insurance (an additional $600 per
week for up to four months), feature one-time direct payments to Americans of $1,200 per adult
making up to $75,000 a year, and $2,400 to a married couple making up to $150,000, with $500
payments per child. However, the bill neither addresses the chronic inequality that now
characterizes the U.S. economy, nor is there provision for the self-employed or the millions of
independent contractor workers who have no employee benefits.
A better template would have been something along the lines of what was legislated in
Norway, although it is unrealistic to expect a U.S. Senate dominated by hardline Republicans to
acquiesce to something proposed by a Scandinavian social democracy. But
highlighting the contrast, Norwegian journalist Ellen Engelstad writes : "Workers put on
leave will now get full pay for twenty days (an improvement even on the pre-coronavirus
situation), but employers will only cover the first two days, while the rest will be paid by
the state. After that period, a worker on leave will receive 80 percent of their previous
salary, up to [about $29,000] a year, and 62.4 percent of everything they received on top of
that."
So long as we continue to embrace a lockdown strategy, generous relief is key to securing
widespread support for its maintenance. It will become politically impossible to sustain a
government-mandated lockdown where workers are forced to stay at home, absent some income
support to facilitate compliance with that order. So it is good that the government has also
recognized that this relief had to take the form of grants, not loans, because additional
private debt assumption would exacerbate long-term economic distress. The provision of $350
billion in "forgivable loans" to businesses are in reality grants, as these "loans" will be
forgiven if the businesses targeted maintain payroll. That's precisely the kind of
conditionality that should be attached to the relief provisions.
There will undoubtedly be other measures required once the scale of the economic fallout
becomes clearer. But when we get past relief packages and move toward taking the economy out of
its current cryogenically frozen state, the U.S. government must engage in a broader effort of
reconstruction so as to finally make this an economy that works for all. Policy should not
simply be about getting people back into resorts, malls or restaurants, or exhorting mass
consumption as a patriotic duty ( as George W.
Bush suggested after 9/11 ). Rather, we should be focused on ramping up mass-production
essential goods such as food, as well support for the health care systems via expansion of
testing kits, surgical masks, ventilators and palliative care, not only for this crisis, but
also to ensure that the system is not overwhelmed in the event of future pandemics (or a
possible recurrence of this one as we return to work and reintegrate with one another). It also
goes without saying that we should also expend vast sums on research and development to find
treatments and a vaccine, as well as rapid training of new medical workers. Substantial
increases in funding to the National Institutes of Health would be a good place to start.
As for conditionality, a case has been made that a force majeure "Act of God"
is not the time to play a "game of chicken" and impose major conditions for aid ,
especially as it is government policy itself that has precipitated the crisis. On the other
hand, political realities and historic precedent suggest that crisis conditions are the only
time one gets dramatic reforms; otherwise the elites regain their balance and suppress them (as
occurred after 2008). Plus, there are corporate bailout recipients in this bill, such as
Boeing, that were
heading toward a death spiral , even before the epidemic.
Let's also make clear distinctions here: An "Act of God" argument was
invoked in 2008 . That financial crisis was described as a "once in a 50-year event,"
something that couldn't have been planned for or insured against, etc. This was a lie. The
banks were not blameless, and there was causation between the crash and their behavior. But
Wall Street's bad actors weren't punished. There were, however, a lot of blameless victims who
were and are still paying a price. They didn't receive compensation and received pain and
punishment as if they were responsible, when they were in fact collateral damage.
In many respects, this crisis is even worse. We may not have a financial contagion, but we
have a physical contagion that is literally exposing us to
conditions comparable to the 1930s . But unlike the 1930s or, indeed, the 2008 global
financial contagion, policymakers have a twin task with seemingly incompatible goals: stopping
the spread of the virus in many ways exists in tension with the need to arrest the indirect
economic fallout from the pandemic. The longer the economic restrictions apply to eliminate the
health risk, the greater the economic fallout, which is precisely the dilemma President Trump
exposed (in his typically inelegant way), when he signaled
his desire to restart the U.S. economy by mid-April .
Trump's public musings were rightly denounced. His moral calculus is skewed; this president
is transparently consumed by the desire to safeguard his narrow economic interests and the
presidency (along with the fact that he stripped public health
agencies of the staffing, resources, and authority they needed to function ). A serious
president would send teams of epidemiologists to study other countries' success models, and
adopt them. Instead, Trump is literally gambling with the lives of potentially millions of
people as he tries to place this bet on an Easter miracle. Unlike Jesus, those lives lost won't
be resurrected, even if the economy ultimately revives.
Beyond that is the question of how best to assist businesses paralyzed for the sake of
public health. This is perhaps the most politically loaded part of the process when it comes to
assessing how far we go in terms of changing the behavior of our corporate sector versus the
notion of simply compensating businesses for losses sustained by an action deemed to be a
public health emergency.
Oren Cass, executive director of the soon-to-be-launched think tank American Compass , has made the case for compensating
businesses on the basis of
the takings clause of the U.S. Constitution , which states that "private property [shall
not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." Establishing "just compensation" is
often in the eye of the beholder, and Cass suggests that a just principle is compensating
businesses for the fixed costs they would normally incur in the event that they were
able to function as normal operating concerns (as opposed to making estimates of likely
profitability and compensating on that basis). The goal is clearly to avoid providing unfair
windfalls but to keep businesses solvent until they reopen.
On the other hand, one of the principal complaints directed against the bailouts granted
(especially to the banks) in 2008 is that bad corporate actors who were responsible for
creating the crisis were given money with no strings attached. In that regard, the bailouts not
only allowed them to revive profitability quickly (as the status quo ante was restored), but
also actively lobbied against any kind of regulation to prevent a recurrence of the activities
that created the crash in the first place.
The lessons many drew from the experience was that the only time to extract concessions and
induce changes in behavior from bad corporate actors is at a time when they are economically
vulnerable, even if the precipitating cause of that vulnerability was the government-mandated
shutdown of the economy. It is impossible to remake an economy if, for example, corporate
bailouts are used to perpetuate behavior that undermines economic prosperity. While the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act does introduce some restrictions on buybacks
and limiting stock dividends, it "avoids the more restrictive language that was included in the
House version of the legislation,"
according to Defense News .
Many are trying to distinguish this bailout from 2008 (i.e., this time is a non-economic
shock, something that couldn't have been planned for or insured against; businesses that are
failing right now are doing so through no fault of their own and they're still good/healthy
businesses), because saying "this is just how creative destruction works" is clearly untenable
right now. In reality, the collapse in aggregate demand caused by the 2008 financial crisis
arguably was just as exogenous to the consumer economy. Fatuous distinctions to justify further
corporate predation simply provide another illustration that what we had before the coronavirus
pandemic clearly was not working for most people. The truth is that for decades we've had a
hollowing out of democracy, and a massive expansion of wealth inequality accompanied by
Mussolini-style crony capitalism.
During the Great Depression, legislation was implemented to prevent a recurrence of the
1920s bubble. Roosevelt's New Deal did not legislate to restore the status quo ante but rather
to create a very different sort of economy.
Under the cover of a public health emergency, however, the so-called "new normal" is looking
a lot like the old normal. This bill gives the pigs yet another big feed at the public trough,
and Congress is happily ladling out the goodies. Much like the 1930s, then, the very legitimacy
of liberal capitalist democracy is at stake. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be an FDR
ready to lead us in this acute moment of need.
Last week I was unable to apply for unemployment in my state, Hawaii, because I am self
employed. I get kicked out of the application process after the first few qualifying
questions in the online application process. Today, it went straight through. You make
yourself your own ex employer and that's it. I'm assuming this has to do with this federal
package. On a side note I am one of many self employed registered legal tour guide operators
in the state that rely heavily on visitors and all of us are up in arms that somehow this
bill is also going to give money to Uber and Lyft drivers who are not even legal in the
state. Only partially in the county of Oahu.
I did something similar during the GFC.
I have a C Corp in Calif with myself as the only employee.
I applied for UI and received it for about a year.
However, my contribution rate ramped up and my rating declined to F. Still worth it.
Calif also borrowed a lot of money from the Feds last time and had to pay it back.
Employers were assessed a portion each year. Finally repaid after 5 or so years.
Rep Thomas Massey did some math. $2T from congress, and $4T from Feds so far = $68,000 per
family of new Nat'l debt and dollar devaluation. Yet each household is likely to see only
about $3000 of that $68000. Massey may have a point, perhaps there is just a tinge of
maldistribution afoot here. And isn't that always the case in Crisis Capitalism, to never let
a good crisis go to waste? Just maybe they could be doing a better job in the distribution of
this package?
While many things were discussed about Covid and the Covid Recovery plan on Friday, what
struck me was a reference to this stimulus bill that this is our Marshall Plan. While that
sounds good, is it really? And another thing that struck me was how many striking
similarities there are.
The final striking observation was Pelosi et al reminding us, that this is not the last
stimulus bill that will be related to stimulating an economic recovery. In short, what
Pelosi's telling us this is the prefatory Helicopter monies from our new "Helicopter Avenging
Angels." Economist Murray Rothbard told a story about an angel looking down at the woes of
mankind and decided that everyone would feel better if they all had an extra $1000. So, that
is what the angel did, deposited $1000 into everyones bank account one night. Next morning,
everyone woke up to an extra $1000. Those that spent it first on goods benefited most. Those
that waited to spend it, got less bang for their buck bc the cost of goods rose.
So, it is with this stimulus story littered with maldistribution. Velocity of money in an
economy increases most and therefore GDP or gross output if it is in the hands of households
and consumers.
Over the past 12 yrs or so, fiscal and monetary stimulus packages have been referred to as
bazookas. Today, they have mushroomed into "Nukes." And the Nukes, themselves, are
mushrooming.
If Pelosi is right, this will not be the last stimulus bill relating to coronavirus, then
this is not far from what happened with the Marshall Plan. The 1947-48 Marshall Plan was
replaced by the Mutual Security Plan in 19951. The MSP plan was extended from 1951-1961. The
MSP plan gave away about $7.5 billion annually until 1961 when it was replaced by yet another
program – he United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The USAID is
now one of the largest official aid agencies in the world, and accounts for more than half of
all U.S. foreign assistance -- the highest in the world in absolute dollar terms.
In short, the Marshall Plan kept transmuting itself into something new. Until it became a
"perpetual entity."
And it is not so different than the Federal Reserve's QE programs or other so-called
"temporary" facilities that somehow are resurrected, transmuted or whatever. But somehow,
these programs mange to live on like zombies.
Zombie, Zombie, Zombie. They are fighting, With their tanks and their bombs, And their
bombs and their guns.
It's the same old theme since the 1947 Marshall Plan
In your head, in your head, Their still fighting,
With their tanks and their bombs And their bombs and their guns
But I digress.
The question then becomes, how well did the Marshall Plan work to generate economic
growth. According to Marshall Plan's own accounting, the MP only accounted for an increase of
less than ½% of GDP growth a year. That ain't much folks! So be prepared to be
underwhelmed! Very underwhelmed.
And this is precisely why our policymakers will be back with more and more stimulus
..mushrooming their bazookas into Nukes, and Nukes into what? Death Stars next?
The cost of the Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) resulted in
the United States transference of over $12 billion (equivalent to over $128 billion as of
2020)[1] in economic recovery programs to Western European economies after the end of World
War II. During the four years the plan was in effect, the United States donated $17 billion
(equivalent to $202.18 billion in 2019)
Despite the billions of dollars each year thrown at the EU recovery the Marshall Plan
which transmuted into the Mutual Security Plan, these plans have apparently contributed
little to the EU economic recovery.
Over the past 12 years, central banks and gov'ts have thrown trillions of dollars at the
fiscal system, and yet our financial and monetary system still doesn't function properly.
Their solution: throw trillions more at the most recent crisis du jour. TINA baby! Surely
with their Nuclear-sized Stimulus Package, this will solve and repair everything.
But perhaps, under a crisis capitalism, the aim is to ensure a crisis never goes to waste.
So perhaps, the aim of these stimulus programs is never to fix the broken window. Only to
give the appearance the window is being fixed. If you actually fixed the broken window, then
there would be no need to perpetually repeat these stimulus programs that can be so damn
self-serving to those closest to the monies. Then where would Nancy and her Cohorts be?
The Covid Bill our Marshall Plan are fiscal responses to disasters. To this extent, they
both that into the context of French Economist Frederic Bastiat's Parable of the Broken
Window.
"Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas" ("That Which We See and That Which We Do Not See")
to illustrate why destruction, and the money spent to recover from destruction, is not
actually a net benefit to society.The parable seeks to show how opportunity costs, as well as
the law of unintended consequences, affect economic activity in ways that are unseen or
ignored. The belief that destruction is good for the economy is consequently known as the
broken window fallacy or glazier's fallacy. And yet, destruction of the economy can be quite
beneficial to the "first financial responders" to the destruction of the economy.
My apologies Yves, I should have forwarded this to you as a separate post. Feel free to
post if you like
Thanks for the informative comment. I'm not surprised to know that the Marshall Plan
resulted in an increase of less than 1/2 % of GDP growth. I assume that you're referring to
the GDP of Europe.
I contend that the billions doled out via the Marshall Plan helped the FInancial institutions
and later, since we had destroyed all of the manufacturing facilities in Europe, it helped
all large US corporations who had a ready made market in Europe.
What an interesting comment. From my perspective – long time observer of things
never working properly – I think the Covid Crisis is just another example of the
pointless but dedicated pursuit of profits – unless of course there is a "Treasury"
willing to provide any and all shortfall to each and every private profiteer. Then it works
in a very wasteful and illogical manner. It requires also bailing out the hapless consumers
occasionally. Somehow I think we could do better.
I don't see the powers that be as anxious to fix the broken windows. They want the broken
windows to remain broken so they can continue to throw bazookas and nukes through them.
And I wonder,. and I think you too need to wonder why the Marshall Plan became the Mutual
Security Plan after 1951. Presumably, the rapid EU economic recovery no longer necessitated
the Marshall Plan. Facing an existential crisis as such, the Marshall Plan had to morph into
some other purpose, such as "Mutual Security" to keep access to those slush funds alive and
well.
I'd say off the top it is because neoliberal capitalism cannot withstand competition from
democracy – good social democracy. So we morphed into the policeman of the world and
pretended like we were critical to the cause of a failing economic ideology. It has never
worked and it has gradually become nonsense because we are continuously forced to save
society. No matter that we never to a good job of it – we still do it to insure
profits. I'd be more upset about it except for the fact that it is so transparently absurd
and I like to think it proves it own uselessness. What more do we need?
I'm no expert on the Marshall plan but as a European I get the impression it was much
appreciated. From the US' point of view though it had a geopolitical purpose. By getting
Europe on its economic feet again it fended off the threat of Communism and created a
customer for US exports. The Plan's successors are also primarily aimed at maintaining and
extending US hegemony, they are merely dressed up as charity.
I think the primary problem over the past decade is the assumption that the wealthy need
to be returned/maintained to their wealthy to trickle the wealth down. That clearly has not
been working efficiently.
So I am a fan of saving companies that are stable in the absence of major crisis, but
require large-scale management changes, and dramatically scale back executive compensation
for several years. If the executives can find a better job with better pay in an un-bailed
out company, they should take it. If the company would clearly have gone under due to massive
debt-loads, then a pre-package bankruptcy like GM with the government holding equity in the
final company should be the route.
The financial cries are simply creating bigger and bigger TBTF companies that can build up
debt again to fund shareholder buybacks until they get bailed out by the Fed and Treasury.
That cycle needs to stop. The country worked fine when there were many companies competing
with each other.
This coronavirus relief act expands TBTF. It's not just the big banks and other
finance/insurance/real estate corporations anymore. It seems to be about protecting financial
wealth wherever it resides. It's moral hazard writ large. Why behave prudently if the Fed has
your back?
I agree with "saving companies that are stable in the absence of major crisis, but require
large-scale management changes, and dramatically scale back executive compensation for
several years", and "if the company would clearly have gone under due to massive debt-loads,
then a pre-package bankruptcy like GM with the government holding equity in the final company
should be the route."
The government could enact an automatic stabilizer program to cover furloughed worker
wages during economic crises while employers continued to cover fixed costs and worker
benefits such as health insurance. Large corporations could be managed to cover theses things
if required to.
Even better, pass M4A and take employee health insurance off their books.
Why does the Uber/Lyft bailout have to be funded by workers who have put money into
unemployment insurance?
If they want to bail out the gig economy they should have said straight up we are bailing
them out.
The States have to come up with the funding for the unemployed. So you can bet there will
be a shortfall.
Why does the gig economy always takes but never give?
The biggest problem is laid off employees getting thru to the unemployment agencies.Then
they throw millions of Uber/Lyft drivers to clog up the Queue.
I'm wondering what AOC did or didn't do re this package? A lot has been said about
Sanders, but I'm fuzzy on AOC. I can't imagine she liked the thing. Did she have any way of
throwing a stick in in it?
that would "explain" her previous incumbent, a most malignant connected big money DNC
machine pol, "stepping aside" for her. Watch out. Likely future Manchurian afoot. (Like
showbama).
"A vote in which the presiding officer states the question, then asks those in favor and
against to say "Yea" or "Nay," respectively, and announces the result according to his or her
judgment. The names or numbers of senators voting on each side are not recorded."
If this bill was so G*d d**n important and potentially costly for the country it would
seem that courageous politicians would have WANTED their wise and considered yea/nay votes
known to their constituents.
I can see a voice vote for something trivial like a Proclamation of National Highway
Appreciation Day, but not something this consequential.
Preserving the option of telling constituents in the future "I (voice) voted against this
package" is hardly a profile in courage.
"What did the Senate majority fight for?!" Ocasio-Cortez asked. "One of the largest
corporate bailouts with as few strings as possible in American history. Shameful! The greed
of that fight is wrong for crumbs for our families."
Pelosi dallies on instituting remote voting, thereby strengthening her own powers and that
of the House leadership. AOC, like everyone else in the House, had to participate in a "voice
vote".
I simply can not understand where $4T is going to go! As we here know, inanimate objects
do not have agency. I demand to know whose pockets are about to be lined.
Another observation: As each "crisis" becomes more expensive, there appear to be
additional lined pockets.
first and foremost they saved the bond market i think . Powell has already used 4 trillion
for "liquidity" whatever that means I have no working knowledge of economics so I don't begin
to understand what any of it means except that we got family-blogged again.
The flu kills between 12,000 to 30,000 a year in the U S. Every year. In 30 some years of
adulthood, I know 1 person that died of pneumonia in their 60s. When the confinement is over
and people look around and ask around and can't name anybody they personally know who was
affected with anything more than a cold????
I hope this whole thing isn't just hysterics because that would not be a positive sign of
anything.
Knowing our politicians it's probably a lot of hysterics. The DimRats have been fooling
their diehards with Russia! Russia! Russia! Now it's time to use CV to pay back their
corporate supporters while throwing a few crumbs to their loyal followers with the chant
Econmy! Economy! Economy!
What are you talking about? Have you not been reading all the experts' reports on exactly
how dangerous this disease is? Have you not seen the pictures and stories coming from Spain
and Italy with morgues and trucks full of bodies? Have you not read the stories of medical
personnel and hospitals being overwhelmed by this pandemic? How many have to die for this to
matter to you? Sorry to be blunt but you lack of concern is frankly shocking. (P.S. I have a
kid on the front line of this disaster and we are very very worried for him)
I keep hearing, mostly from people I know, how the CV is not much more than a way
over-publicized version of the common cold or flu. I would counter that the common cold or
even the annual flu pandemic does not threaten to entirely overwhelm the health care system
of the countries and regions it infects. See Lombardy and New York, for example. Clearly, in
terms of the seriousness of its symptoms anyway, the CV is pretty far beyond the flu.
When do you think we should have taken these measures to slow the virus? When it hit 1000?
5000? 30,000? Tell me a number that you will be ok with so that we can hit that, then we can
hit the emergency button.
The problem with this virus is that it hits the healthcare system all at once, and they
have to choose who lives and dies Would you like to be chosen to live or die based upon an
algorithm?
I don't think it's hysterics, but "was it planned" is a good question: operation
covfefe.
"They" are not done with it yet, a mass fear op like this is too good to leave without
milking further. THIS will be "THE" anchor event for the NEXT 20+ years of "policy". Mark my
word. The top can not leave this gold.
Could we ask for better proof that neoliberal capitalism not only doesn't work, it's a
catastrophe all by itself. And nobody is saying a word about it. That will come later in
disguised language just as the money is going out now in disguised give-aways.
The population of Italy is (or was) 60.8 million. As of this morning, 9,134 Italians have
died – and the disease hasn't crested yet. The population of the United States is 327.2
million. If our experience is similar to theirs (and with the 'leadership' exhibited by Trump
and the US Congress it looks like it might be worse), we can anticipate 49,155
deaths.
That sure doesn't sound like "just hysterics" to me.
Please spit out the kool-aid. You're ignoring the magnitudes faster pace of this pandemic,
as well as the fact that it falls on top of our regular flu season, not to mention other
medical emergencies. If you have time to spread misleading information, please consider doing
your homework and helping share helpful facts.
hermeneut: Thank you. Naked Capitalism has had an informal policy against agnotology,
which is culturally induced ignorance or doubt.
I see it often on the larger WWW, where facts regularly are gummed to death by the
self-ignorant among us.
The coronavirus is producing death rates that are orders of magnitude above the flu's
death rate estimated at 0.01 percent. Coronavirus is wildly contagious compared to the flu.
Further, we don't know its long-term effects on anyone. People think that children may not be
affected–until we have a spate of lung disease ten years from now.
Upthread, there are a couple of agnotologists discussing how they don't know anyone who
has died of the flu or pneumonia. They must not get out much. Pneumonia is a co-factor in
many deaths, so much so that doctors call it the old man's friend, old person's friend.
Pneumonia means falling asleep and not waking up in the morning.
I was responding to stevens' 49K calculation. Please take issue with his comment. I fully
expect the mortality rate to increase beyond seasonal averages due to additional and more
severe complications.
Ah, someone who wasn't paying attention to their lessons. Unlike flu there is no vaccine
and the population is essentially a virgin host. Some people may be able to slough it off,
but it'll be by happenstance, and they'll still be carriers.
Hence, the progress of the disease will be exponential, less the temporary suppression and
mitigation you can see in countries like China and South Korea. The economic cost of these
measures will eventually be too much, they'll have to ease off, and the disease will take off
again. If you want to track the various countries "score" as this inevitability unfolds, go
to http://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/
As to your "calculations", this disease will have its way and will need to run its course.
It will increase exponentially and circle back in successive waves until the available supply
of hosts has been exhausted or developed immunity. In the aggregate, the US will meet its
wave in < a week, but every community will be hit at a different time depending on all
sort so things; Italy has only really taken a significant hits in a few provinces and the fun
for them is yet to come. The infection is just now gaining traction in the rest of Italy due
to effective mitigation and the WAVE of casualties is yet to come, as soon as they raise
their guard.
All this money being spent is just buying time and lining pockets. This is not a two hour
movie, where Brad Pitt has a blaze of insight and cooks up a cure for the zombie apocalypse
in a busy afternoon.
On further reflection (I have a comment on this post that is either in moderation or
disappeared) it seems that the pittance to workers with the right paperwork is to give the
appearance of doing something but ultimately it is to starve people into submission, so that
getting back to making money for the billionaires becomes the only alternative.
It taking off again is what I fear when I imagine what's likely to occur down the road.
Trump is right at least when he points out that eventually we'll all have to return to work.
Otherwise the economy will collapse completely, leaving us in some kind of Mad Max chaos.
Eventually. So, what happens when the voluntary lock-down is lifted, whether that be Easter
or a month or 2 or 3 later? If this thing is not completely eliminated by then will it not
just roar right back and we'll be in the same situation we find ourselves in currently, only
most of us even more precarious, financially? I can't seem to puzzle our current strategy out
in my mind without finding a horribly disastrous outcome at the end.
It seems, then, like fairly severe social distancing is mandated by circumstance way into
the future. If that's the case, then our previous ways of living, I mean a great deal of it,
all or the casual gathering and traveling around we've been accustomed to is dead, whether we
realize it now, or not. What the heck does this mean? What do we do with a good part of our
work-force and many if not most of our small business owners? I ask these questions without
any reasonable or acceptable answers in mind.
We are collectively going to have to take our licks here, painful though it will be,
sooner or later. Countries which have managed to keep things tamped down, for the moment
only, need to use that time to refine their hospital procedures and re-supply to save as many
as they can when the lid has to be taken off. That means having triage protocols in place for
COVID-19, as well as everyone else who comes in the door. Refer to the graphic in appendix B
of the Imperial College forecast for the US. Hospitals are going to be overwhelmed in any of
their scenarios, although every locality will have its encounter at at different time and the
precise circumstances will vary.
The initial UK strategy of angling for "herd immunity' was roundly ridiculed and
sheepishly withdrawn, but it was and is the only logical course. The disease simply doesn't
give a whit about the "But, but, but, but every life is priceless whinning" of those who
cannot face the reality. There is a BIG culling on the way, and all those Red State
denialisms, and sanctimonious bigots at Liberty University are going to get a big dose of
this, along with everyone else. This wave is coming, and all that can really be done is to
delay it, which may reduce the pain in a given locality, depending on their unique
circumstances and if the local authorities do their job right. This will be a battle fought
on a thousand hills (a thousand public health settings), and some will do better or worse
than others, even as the timing of the wave will vary for each: take notes on what is only
now beginning to happen in NYC, and how events unfold over the next month or two there. This
story will not be over by the eleven o'clock news or even next weekend.
Taking it up-front DOES help preserve the economy, allowing for recovery afterwards, and
that's key. Otherwise, we start drifting toward the Mad Max scenario alluded to above. Even
now, how are all the bodies going to be taken care of? Healthcare staff is already dying, and
staffs can be expected to desert as events unfold in NYC and elsewhere. All the support
people who make things work with their marginal salaries are noble, but stupid, if they stick
around those places, which are nothing but huge disease vectors. Then there's the food supply
chain, etc, etc, etc
Anyway we go this movie is not going to end well, and it won't end next week or even next
month. The disease will keep on coming back around until there is nobody left for it grab
hold of: meaning either there is a vaccine or herd immunity (usually thought of as 60-70% of
the population having had its brush with the thing).
As a Californian, "Red State denialisms, and sanctimonious bigots at Liberty University"
is an extremely unfair appellation given that I can see the same here in the Uber-Blue San
Francisco Bay Area.
While the improved efficiencies of the medical services are not quite as deep as in
the Red areas of California and in other states, the bigotry is just as strong. Only the
targets are changed. The deplorables, the poor, conservatives, and, of course, the homeless
tend to be fair game.
An infectious disease like COVID19 doesn't care about anything except reproduction and is
taking advantage of our situation; both political parties have been quite happy hollowing out
our nation-state condemning our nation to needless mass deaths and country's government to
possible collapse in fealty to the wealthy and in increasing the size of their personal bank
accounts.
Here is a
link to a paper just made public by the University of Washington, Institute for Health
Metrics and Evaluation. It's predicting Washington's peak at around April 14th. Also, they
evaluate each state, calculate its peak, and list the its available hospital beds and ICU
beds and note the estimated shortfalls (as well as shortfalls in ventilators) at peak.
Looking at their projections for New York State, one can understand Governor Cuomo's
urgency.
The simulator here has
adjustable parameters for the pandemic and resolution down to county level in many states of
the US. Of course we can expect patient transport between at least counties if not states
until ICUs are saturated. Very sobering to see how long this may play out. Cases and outcomes
are plotted too.
I ran a regression with Governor Cuomo's numbers (for NY State); Between March 3rd to
March 23rd was the confirmed raw data, before extrapolating; a social isolation program was
begun on the March 20th, so the data is pure "natural" "do nothing" dynamics; I fit the curve
to the data, and it showed 100% of NY State population affected by April 12th. The data
showed a slope co-efficient of 1.46 every day (46% increase in new cases every day).
R-squared for the fit: 96% (yes, rather high, which tells me this virus rolls out like
clockwork). However, we learn, even in Wuhan, a hard lockdown took two-three weeks to "begin
to bend the curve". We are in for the herd situation no question. It's been too little too
late by far. (but even one day saved from the 100% terminus is still quite a large
population: we are talking exponential time, not linear.).
When "early" (really drastically "late": being in first weeks of March) estimates from
Fauci, and other talking heads said US would likely see ~70% of population infected, that
translates to ONLY being able to shave ONE DAY off 100% herd exposure given my regression
showing just how contagious this is.
(It's my belief they lied to us, it's not just "droplets" but it is very nicely
aerosolized: breathing and exhaling in the wrong quarters is enought to do it; but thats'
just me, however do note, the Covid briefings at the top were state secret, not open to
journalists. We only get the vaudeville versions of everything, highly politicized to
boot).
The Corona flu [I like Corona because it sounds better -- more like cholera -- as in Love
in the time of Corona] is not the pandemic we need to worry about. That pandemic is still
coming. The Corona flu is bad but it is only a 'test' of our healthcare systems and
government, our knowledge, and our Media -- a live exercise. The U.S. is failing miserably in
all these areas. The CARES package -- I can't think of a more catchy name for this bill and
it really deserves a catchy name -- will do nothing to remedy the failings of our healthcare
systems and government, our knowledge, and our Media but it reveals how unprepared we are for
when the 'real' pandemic arrives.
Wed 25 Mar 2020 14.13 EDT Last modified on Wed 25 Mar 2020 17.50 EDT
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email 'if, as the
scientists predict, the result of loosening the restrictions was an acceleration in infections,
then pretty soon many firms would simply stop functioning, as workers became sick.' Photograph:
Dan Kitwood/Getty Images I s the cure worse than the disease? The Times
claimed today: "If the coronavirus lockdown leads to a fall in GDP of more than 6.4% more
years of life will be lost due to recession than will be gained through beating the virus."
It's hard to know where to start with this nonsense. It's based on a paper currently under
review at a journal entitled Nanotechnology Perceptions, which simply assumes that a fall in
GDP translates mechanically and directly into a fall in life expectancy.
It's this sort of reasoning that appears to be leading President Trump to call
for an early end to restrictions in the US, claiming that far more people would die of
suicide from a "terrible economy" than from the virus.
But the premise is simply wrong. A recession -- a short-term, temporary fall in GDP -- need
not, and indeed normally does not, reduce life expectancy. Indeed, counterintuitively, the
weight of the evidence is that
recessions actually lead to people living longer. Suicides do indeed go up, but other causes of
death, such as road accidents and alcohol-related disease, fall.
So at the most basic level, this argument ignores what the evidence says. But perhaps more
importantly, the idea that the way to minimise the economic damage is to remove the
restrictions before they've done their job -- definitively suppressing the spread of the virus
-- is a terrible one.
Does anyone believe that, whatever the government said, we could get back to "normal", or
something close to it, any time soon? If we were all allowed to return to work, many or most of
us would, quite rationally, choose not to, for fear of catching the virus. And if, as the
scientists predict, the result of loosening the restrictions was an acceleration in infections,
then pretty soon many firms would simply stop functioning, as workers became sick, or had to
stay at home to look after family members.
More broadly, restoring the economy to normal requires, above all, confidence. Amid
continuing uncertainty both about their own finances and the wider economy, households won't
spend and businesses won't invest. And that simply isn't going to happen until the spread of
the diseases has been contained.
So there is no tradeoff here. Health and economic considerations point in
exactly the same direction in the short term. Do whatever it takes -- and whatever it costs --
and do it now, in the interests both of our health and our collective wealth.
But what comes next? It is entirely reasonable to point out that serious damage to the
economy, if it persists over the longer term, will
reduce our welfare and maybe even -- as austerity and its aftermath have done -- life
expectancy. The last 10 days have seen universal credit
claims rise more than five-fold , to half a million, while YouGov data suggests that 2
million people may have lost their job. The recession is already here.
But this need not, and should not, be permanent. The risk here is that we allow the
inevitable fall in GDP that results from shutting down the economy to drive firms out of
business and workers into long-term unemployment. And there is nothing inevitable at all about
this.
After all, many European countries, such as France or Italy, probably, see their GDP fall by
10% or 20% or so in absolute terms every August when workers take their summer holidays. No one
notices -- the numbers are "seasonally adjusted" to take account of holidays, which means it
doesn't show up in the published data -- nor does it do any damage. Workers continue to be
paid, and businesses don't go bust just because they're not making any money. Come September,
everyone gets back to work as normal.
Of course this is very different -- that won't happen automatically with Covid-19. The
impacts are more widespread and long-lasting -- and we don't know how long -- than an enforced
extra holiday. But rapid and appropriate action by government can go a long way. Keeping
workers in jobs and
firms in business needs to be the priority. In the circumstances, the government's made a
good start, although there's
lots more to do .
So what we should be worried about -- both from an economic and a health perspective -- is
not how much GDP falls. It's going to fall by a lot, and that's a good thing. If it didn't --
if people were still going to work despite being told not to -- then the lockdown wouldn't be
working and we'd still see economic consequences further down the line. It's what happens to
GDP in a year or 18 months that matters.
And the long-term consequences? It wasn't the sharp fall in GDP in 2008-9 that reduced, over
the course of the next decade,
life expectancy for the poorest in our society . It was how the government chose to address
the economic fallout of the global financial crisis -- by underfunding and understaffing the
NHS and social care, and by eroding the basic welfare safety net that people depend on when
times are hard. As we are now discovering, these were false economies that left us less, not
more, prepared for this crisis.
Similarly, if we allow Covid-19 to permanently damage our economic and social fabric, it
will be our own fault, not that of the virus. This time we can, and must, do better.
• Jonathan Portes is professor of economics and public policy at King's College London
and a former senior civil servant
Compulsory procurement of half a dozen luxury yachts would go a long way with funding, as
would the uber wealthy PAYING THEIR CORPORATE TAX.
These extreme right-wing leaders in this world are evil. They all claim to be practicing
Christians, unbelievably. Anti-Christ more like. I'm not religious, but blind Freddy would
tell you if Jesus had existed, then these guys are the Romans that killed him. They simply
don't give a shit; swathes of people are expendable.
Didn't a corrupted prime minister get eaten by his people one time? Just sayin'.
We have been weaning people off tobacco for a long time and this virus seems to love
compromised lungs - tragically, young and fit Americans may succumb due to unregulated vaping
products and decriminalised cannabis products - particularly if one survives but with
severely damaged lungs.
I’m sorry but recessions do cause a spike in suicide, mental health issues and stress
related cancer deaths. The most vulnerable in society, on the breadline, will as usual be the
people who struggle the most. To suggest life expectancy goes up in a recession is a fallacy.
The latest US Trump policy (US open for business, do the right thing weaklings and die for
the sake of the nation's financial interests) is basically identical with the original UK
Cummings policy. Over the next few weeks are we going to see this policy re-asserted in the
UK - probably. Why - because the alternative would be to attempt containment of Covis 19 -
which would require a South Korean style program of testing and quarantine. And there is
absolutely indication of any political appetite for doing so in the UK whatsoever.
The risk here is a replay of austerity that we saw after the 2008 financial crisis, with many
people left aside. Economically, this was to rebalance the books after the government
injected cash to support the banks. Socially it was damaging.
If we repeat the same pay back and austerity model (on steroids this time) the social and
political fallout could be horrendous.
But what are the alternatives?
it really does strike me as unfair that their plan was "to do nothing" - I think it
seems to be a bit nuanced than that; and terribly communicated
Yes, the plan was not 'do nothing', it was 'get at risk groups to isolate
themselves and assume that the NHS could deal with the small proportion of low risk groups
needing hospitalisation'. This is essentially what Sweden and NL are doing, with (like us
last week) the addition of social distancing to slow down transmission.
This is a better idea than trying to avoid everyone getting it ('containment'), because as
soon as you lift containment, you still have no immunity so you're basically at day 0 again.
Unless the plan is to be under lockdown forever, the containment approach is a panic, not a
strategy.
If you're going for herd immunity you do need to slow the infections down enough that the
serious cases don't overwhelm your health service. That's what the social distancing and WFH
guidelines are about, and outside the cities and a few visitor spots it was working well last
week.
What made European economies grow in 1948? Confidence, investment, a social security
network, education for all, and building, building, building homes badly needed in destroyed
cities and for the homecoming of millions of veterans and the ensuing baby boom.
The post-war recession feared by economists did not occur. Instead there was a quarter
century of prosperity. Never had there been there so many people, and never before had they
had it so good. Until the arrival of the family butchers. Who sold the family silver and
sacrificed welfare on the altar of m-m-m-monetarism. Said Ssupermac in his maiden speech in
the Lords.
Money quote " There is this sense that experts are untrustworthy, and have agendas that
aren't aligned with the people"
That was always true about neoliberal economists. So it might well be true about mecuacl
bureaucrats like Fauci. Did he disclose his stock holdingd and financial interests? Is he a part
of neoliberal "medical-industrial complex" which wants to rake profits at the expense of people
health?
His email to Hillary suggest that he is medical professional but a politician.
Actually any top medical honcho in Washing is compromised as they did nothing to stop
"balance billing" fraud and too over of ambulance business by private equity sharks.
Notable quotes:
"... There is this sense that experts are untrustworthy, and have agendas that aren't aligned with the people ..."
"... In the email, Dr. Fauci praised Mrs. Clinton for her stamina during the 2013 Benghazi hearings. The American Thinker falsely claimed that the email was evidence that he was part of a secret group who opposed Mr. Trump. ..."
Adding that Dr. Fauci is bearing the brunt of the attacks, Mr. Bergstrom said: " There
is this sense that experts are untrustworthy, and have agendas that aren't aligned with the
people . It's very concerning because the experts in this are being discounted out of
hand."
... ... ...
Anti-Fauci posts spiked, according to Zignal Labs. Much of the increase was prompted by a
March 21 article in The American Thinker, a conservative blog, which published the
seven-year-old email that Dr. Fauci had written to an aide of Mrs. Clinton.
In the email, Dr. Fauci praised Mrs. Clinton for her stamina during the 2013 Benghazi
hearings. The American Thinker falsely claimed that the email was evidence that he was part of
a secret group who opposed Mr. Trump.
... ... ...
In an interview, Mr. Fitton said, "Dr. Fauci is doing a great job." He added that Dr. Fauci
"wrote very political statements to Hillary Clinton that were odd for an appointee of his
nature to send."
...One anti-Fauci tweet last Sunday read: "Dr. Fauci is in love w/ crooked @HillaryClinton.
More reasons not to trust him."
"... The coronavirus emergency has exposed the failures and flaws of the European Union, while underscoring the importance of nation-states. In Europe, we've observed a series of events that have demonstrated the collapse of the supra-national model. First, the borders shut down -- Austria and Slovenia acted unilaterally, without asking approval from Italy's government. The move was also symbolic: Italy was not only isolated, it was abandoned to its own devices. ..."
"... Globalization may have its efficiencies, but an overwhelmed health care system suffers in the absence of internal production of the necessary materials -- life-saving ventilators, infection-preventing hazmat vests, face masks. The global evolution of supply chains exported manufacturing and relied heavily on the cheap imports of essential products from abroad. But with the spread of the coronavirus, many states are now forbidding the export of medical equipment. A good example is Turkey, a country that readily accepts EU funds and that many liberals would like to bring into the Union. Ankara blocked a shipment of 200,000 face masks already purchased by Italy for the hard-hit northern regions of Marche and Emilia Romagna. ..."
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a greater toll on Italy than any other nation. The
Italians are facing their most severe crisis since the Second World War, with Lombardy in the
industrial north particularly hard hit. Yet for all its rhetoric about global citizenship and
solidarity, the European Union has all but abandoned them. That's even though communist China,
arguably globalization's greatest and shrewdest state beneficiary, is ready to fill the void
and help Italy put out the fire its own virus started.
The coronavirus first appeared in Italy on January 31 when two Chinese tourists from the
Hubei province tested positive in Rome, eight days after they'd landed at the Milan airport in
Lombardy. The two were immediately isolated and quarantined in the Roman Spallanzani hospital,
and the situation seemed under control -- until February 21. That day, Italy confirmed 16 new
coronavirus cases, 14 in Lombardy and two in Veneto. A 38-year-old Italian from Codogno near
Milan with acute respiratory symptoms was identified as patient zero. Despite Italy's attempts
to contain the virus by locking down the city of Codogno, coronavirus infections spread.
In just a few days, Italy had the highest number of infections in Europe, with Lombardy as
the pandemic's epicenter. To avoid the spread of infections to the rest of Italy, the
government locked down the entire region of Lombardy and other areas in northern Italy,
effectively quarantining 17 million people. A few days later, as the situation deteriorated,
the whole of Italy was declared an "orange zone" -- all "non-essential" commercial activities
were shut down and the free movement of citizens was limited to grocery and pharmaceutical
shopping and work obligations deemed by the state as of "prime importance."
The economic repercussions of a complete shutdown loomed large. Consequently, Italy asked
the EU for more flexibility on its accounts and requested that emergency measures be deployed
to support Italian citizens and businesses. At the time, the crisis was hardly felt in the
European powerhouses, France or Germany. The EU's response was slow and inefficient, and
Italians started to feel abandoned by European institutions. As the original signer of the
Treaty of Rome, Italy is a founding member of the EU and the third largest economy in the
eurozone.
On March 12, the president of the European Central Bank (ECB), Christine Lagarde, marked a
point of no return -- she gave a highly anticipated speech outlining the measures the bank
would introduce to combat the effects of the coronavirus. Lagarde decided not to cut interest
rates, arguing against the policy of "whatever it takes," as had been outlined by former ECB
president Mario Draghi. To Italians, the EU's indifference was a betrayal. The consequences of
her words were immediate -- and disastrous for Italian stocks. Even the pro-EU president of the
Italian Republic, Sergio Mattarella, released a harsh statement asking the EU to correct its
ways in the "common interest" of Europe.
The EU did change its position on the COVID-19 response, but not until the health care
crisis had spread to France and Germany, making it their problem, too. By then, the damage done
to the Italians' trust in European institutions was already beyond repair. With few viable
options left, Italy's government is now considering the European "Save the State Funds," asking
the EU to implement the €500 billion emergency bailout program from the European Stability
Mechanism designed for EU member states -- a risky move that may saddle Italy with long-term
debt on a scale similar to Greece.
The coronavirus emergency has exposed the failures and flaws of the European Union, while
underscoring the importance of nation-states. In Europe, we've observed a series of events that
have demonstrated the collapse of the supra-national model. First, the borders shut down --
Austria and Slovenia acted unilaterally, without asking approval from Italy's government. The
move was also symbolic: Italy was not only isolated, it was abandoned to its own devices.
Globalization may have its efficiencies, but an overwhelmed health care system suffers in
the absence of internal production of the necessary materials -- life-saving ventilators,
infection-preventing hazmat vests, face masks. The global evolution of supply chains exported
manufacturing and relied heavily on the cheap imports of essential products from abroad. But
with the spread of the coronavirus, many states are now forbidding the export of medical
equipment. A good example is Turkey, a country that readily accepts EU funds and that many
liberals would like to bring into the Union. Ankara blocked a shipment of 200,000 face masks
already purchased by Italy for the hard-hit northern regions of Marche and Emilia Romagna.
The Italians are coming together to fight the pandemic. Many Italian companies have
converted production at home: those working in the textile industry have started producing face
masks. Italy's only manufacturer of respiratory equipment, in the province of Bologna, is not
able to meet the current needs and relieve the national shortage of ventilators. Army
technicians are now helping to increase production capacity.
What has the coronavirus in Italy taught us so far? A great nation is doing what it can to
become self-sufficient as the crisis proves daily that the propaganda of the prophets of
globalization is false. We see that there are strategic sectors, such as health care,
transport, energy, defense, and telecommunications, that have to be considered from the
perspective of national security and not strictly business.
This is a new, unspoken understanding that unites Italy today. We have witnessed a return of
patriotism: flags are hanging from windows and Italians are singing the national anthem. But
there is something else to consider: our freedom. Some politicians, including former prime
minister Matteo Renzi, are proposing to monitor the movements of individuals using their phones
and data from telecommunication companies to police compliance with the lockdown rules and
assess penalties for violations. This smacks of the Big Brother surveillance state. The
collection of metadata for statistical ends, as practiced in Lombardy, should be separated from
the indiscriminate control of individual citizens. Otherwise an Orwellian precedent will be
set. Such an anti-democratic attitude seems to be one of the collateral ideological effects of
what President Trump refers to as a "Chinese virus."
... ... ...
Francesco Giubilei is an entrepreneur, author, and independent journalist based in Rome,
Italy. He is founder and president of the Nazione Futura magazine and
foundation.
"... Those who have regrets after realizing that COVID-19 isn't a 'pooping disease' were met with signs at various Costco locations informing them that they won't be able to return all that toilet paper, paper towels, sanitizing wipes, water, rice and lysol they bought in anticipation of a societal collapse, ..."
Those who have regrets after realizing that COVID-19 isn't a 'pooping disease' were met with
signs at various Costco locations informing them that they won't be able to return all that
toilet paper, paper towels, sanitizing wipes, water, rice and lysol they bought in anticipation
of a societal collapse, according to brobible
.
lmao Costco basically saying y'all wanted to be extra, y'all gonna deal with your millions
of toilet paper all over your house #sorrytammy
pic.twitter.com/eCFhoiDp33
Enjoy your lifetime supply of toilet paper and wipes you crazy #hoarders !
#Costco is not
taking any more returns. Better start figuring out what you are gonna do with 10 bags of rice
you bought! pic.twitter.com/z2U7tN7ru3
Costco, meanwhile, may have over-bought in anticipation of sustained demand which has
petered out. It looks like "the whole toilet-paper craze has calmed down," tweeted one shopper.
john@39
This article might interest you. The author makes the point that neo-liberalism is begging to
be replaced.
"...Crises like these call for an interventionist state to keep the system together, or
for mutual aid and solidarity, especially among people abandoned or targeted by the state. In
some countries, the legitimacy of state administration and planning will grow, in others
political legitimacy will fall precipitously, leading not just to mutual aid networks, but to
attempts to build dual power.
"What economic paradigm – if any – may become dominant isn't clear. The
prestige of Chinese-style state capitalism is growing. Keynesian and Modern Monetary Theory
economists will find jobs in high places, and market socialism-with-nationalisations will
continue to strengthen its position as the dominant economic doctrine on the left.
"However, the economic and ecological unsustainability of growth will raise hard questions
of how to distribute or redistribute the losses in a non-growth world. Fascism and populist
welfare chauvinism will offer the false security of disaster nationalism, national hoarding
and resource wars.
Degrowth's offer of a planned and willed exit from growth will continue to gain followers,
and communist strategies will grow in importance, as the surpluses that can be divided
between contending classes shrink. Ecological breakdown and an absence of growth will pose
questions that are already imposing themselves in the intense isolation of the lockdown: what
are the joys of deceleration, what to do with an abundance of time and interdependence? And,
more forcefully, it will radically narrow the space for social and political compromise.
"Struggle is unavoidable. The question is who will organise it and how."
"... Decades of this modern religion have resulted in an incredibly tragic situation: a disproportionate wealth distribution in the hands of the 0.1%, an over-bloated services/consumer driven economy, increased rates of poverty and despair internationally as well as a dismal loss of vital skills, and productive capacity once enjoyed by advanced industrial nations just four decades ago. Vital infrastructure built up during the 1930s-1960s has been permitted to decay through simple neglect while un-payable debts have reached record highs. ..."
"... Banks in Spain have been nationalized (albeit only "temporarily") to force finance to act in accordance with the needs of society. ..."
"... This renewal of national sovereign powers breaks all of the monetary "laws of the neoliberal order" and with that defiance of globalization, a genuine positive potential for a paradigm shift is visible... ..."
Western society has long been gripped by a deep seeded belief in money. Trillions of dollars
of bank notes tied to ever-growing mountains of un-payable national debts has taken on a life
of its own over the years. As the post-1971 years rolled by, society increasingly lost a sense
that this human invention called "money" was created to serve humanity rather than rule it, and
with that lost sense, money became an idol of worship.
Decades of this modern religion have resulted in an incredibly tragic situation: a
disproportionate wealth distribution in the hands of the 0.1%, an over-bloated
services/consumer driven economy, increased rates of poverty and despair internationally as
well as a dismal loss of vital skills, and productive capacity once enjoyed by advanced
industrial nations just four decades ago. Vital infrastructure built up during the 1930s-1960s
has been permitted to decay through simple neglect while un-payable debts have reached record
highs.
Then like a thief in the night, the illusion was ripped away.
The Confused Response to
the Crisis
This ripping away took the form of an international pandemic which has resulted in western
nations' economies grinding to a halt with a new $2 Trillion government emergency spending bill
unveiled on March 24. The Washington
Post reports that this bill will authorize "hundreds of billions of dollars sent to
Americans in the form of checks as a way to flood the country with money in an effort to blunt
the dramatic pullback of spending that has resulted from the coronavirus outbreak."
Governments across the Trans-Atlantic have also announced national interventions into banks
and private industry in order to force production quotas of vital equipment like ventilators,
masks and other medical necessities to meet the increased demand. Banks in Spain have been
nationalized (albeit only "temporarily") to force finance to act in accordance with the needs
of society. In America, the Defense Authorization Act and broader War Powers Act passed by
President Trump gives the executive broad powers to take over vital industries if needed in
order to mobilize the nation to respond to the crisis.
This renewal of national sovereign powers breaks all of the monetary "laws of the neoliberal
order" and with that defiance of globalization, a genuine positive potential for a paradigm
shift is visible...
... but something vital is still missing.
This "missing something" is clearly demonstrated by the continued obsession with money as
new bailouts of the collapsing speculative banks have now risen to a
$1 trillion/day overnight repo loan to collapsing banks which is added to the $1 Trillion
14 week loans offered every week that will dramatically increase the
$9 trillion already emitted since helicopter money began in earnest in September 2019. With
the mass panic and economic shutdown instigated by COVID-19, markets have lost over 30% of
their value and fears of a new great depression have spread far and wide.
Rather than impose
serious bank regulation like Glass-Steagall to break up the commercial from speculative banks
as was done in 1933, the American government has merely unleashed unlimited money printing.
This bipolar response is akin to trying to stop a raging fire with a combination of water and
gasoline.
We thus find that the greatest crisis facing humanity is not caused by the market crisis, or
even the coronavirus per se, but rather society's profound inability to understand the source
of real from fictitious value.
What is REAL Value? Lincoln and FDR Revisited
"The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of
Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of
these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers
will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public
enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of
the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be
furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master
and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power."
These words were uttered by none other than America's 16th president Abraham Lincoln as he
fought to take federal control of credit vis a vis the "greenbacks" that not only allowed him
to win the war of secession but also construct the greatest infrastructure and
industrialization programs of history driven by the trans continental railway . The dramatic
success of Lincoln's "American System" not only saved the union, but spread successfully across
the world from Japan's Meiji restoration, Russia's trans Siberian rail development, Bismarck's
Zollverein in Germany and Sadi Carnot's France. This powerful spread of what German economist
Friedrich List called "the
American System of Political Economy" nearly annihilated the money-worshipping system of
Adam Smith's Free Trade doctrine from the earth and only failed in this task via a plenitude of
London-directed assassinations, and a couple of imperially-orchestrated wars and revolutions
along the way.
Amidst this dark period, Franklin Roosevelt called for the Democrats to claim the legacy of
Lincoln from the corrupt republican party and faced a
Wall Street-backed coup d'etat , survived a freemasonic assassination
attempt and subverted a
City of London-orchestrated bankers' dictatorship all in his first year in office. During
his March 4, 1933 inaugural address, the president rallied the American people saying:
"I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken
nation in the midst of a stricken world may require. These measures, or such other measures
as the Congress may build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall seek, within my
constitutional authority, to bring to speedy adoption."
As I have outlined in my recent paper
How to Crush a Bankers' Dictatorship , FDR took control of credit in a similar manner as
Lincoln by forcing the Federal Reserve to obey a national mandate for the first time since the
private bank was set up in 1913. He did so by imposing his ally Mariner Eccles into the
position of Chairman who understood that money had to create infrastructure and industrial
growth in order to acquire any claim to having actual "value". This was a stark break from the
"hands off/laissez-faire" policy of President Hoover and his JP Morgan-run cabinet. FDR also
emitted Lincoln-styled productive credit through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC)
to fuel the New Deal. The RFC issued over $33 billion in low-interest loans by the end of the
war (more than all private banks combined).
Describing his moral philosophy of political economy, FDR stated:
"We seek not merely to make government a mechanical implement, but to give it the vibrant
personal character that is the very embodiment of human charity. We are poor indeed if this
nation cannot afford to lift from every recess of American life the dread fear of the
unemployed that they are not needed in the world. We cannot afford to accumulate a deficit in
the books of human fortitude."
What is missing today
Today's America is confronting an existential crisis similar to that which both Lincoln and
Franklin Roosevelt battled in their time. Just as the proto-deep state of 1865 ran Lincoln's
assassination from Montreal Canada, and took over the White House minutes after FDR's untimely
death in 1945, today's deep state has attempted in vain to overthrow President Trump while
successfully undermining the political viability of other "outsiders" like Bernie Sanders and
Tulsi Gabbard.
The difference is that today's crisis combines elements of all previous crises of 1861-1865,
1929-1933 and 1938-1945: the very real new threat of chaos and civil war within, NATO-led wars
with China and Russia without and economic collapse across the entire trans-Atlantic bubble
economy. The other difference is located in the current presidency's inability to FOCUS with a
clear mind on principled solutions to this multi-faceted crisis while instead finding itself
trapped within contradictory impulses.
While FDR and Lincoln understood that VALUE was located the physically productive forces of
labor which sustained and improved the lives of people and gave the constitution's pre-amble a
real living character, today's American leadership has displayed a far greater ignorance to
this basic fact of life. The vital difference between "need" vs "want" which has been obscured
by decades of free market ideology has resulted in a loss of moral judgment necessary to
properly put out the fires threatening to unleashing civil war, chaos and fascist global
government "solutions" across the Trans Atlantic today.
The new multipolar alliance led by Russia and China have demonstrated what modern day New
Deal policies can do. The Belt and Road Initiative as well as the Strategic Eurasian
Partnership, Polar Silk Road and bold space exploration projects all reflect the type of
principles of win-win cooperation and long term planning that characterized both FDR and
Lincoln earlier. The Health Silk Road announced
earlier this week by President Xi Jinping provides a brilliant maneuver to tackle the COVID-19
pandemic under a non-Malthusian worldview. This Multipolar Alliance exists as a form of a life
raft for anyone wishing to escape the fate of the Titanic and embark on a new epoch of growth
and cooperation.
The question is: Do western powers have the ability to act according to a scientific (and
moral) standard of value by aligning with this multipolar alliance or will they choose to
remain in Orwell's dystopic cage and succumb to a fate which Lincoln, FDR and other great
leaders gave their lives to prevent?
To clarify: chloroquine and like agents are antimalarials which also have immunosuppressive
properties. They are used in COVID19 to dampen the acute respiratory distress syndrome
[ARDS], the pathologic exaggerated immune response which is the cause of most COVID19
fatalities.
It is not without significant side effects (eg retinopathy).
Nevertheless, any suspicions about big pharma's motives in this context are warranted.
It has been suggested that a profitable class of antihypertensives (ACE inhibitors) is linked
with worse COVID19 outcomes.
I was a partner in a law firm where I was ultimately responsible for all civil litigation
we handled. I was continually shocked and disgusted by what I saw. It was incredible.
People's lives have absolutely zero value to these monsters at the top, who have gotten where
they are because they are so ruthless and selfish.
We, as a society, carefully select for these psychopathic types in all high-level
competitive endeavors where large sums are hanging in the balance. Their only loyalty is 1.)
to themselves; 2.) to the shareholders/partners, firmly in that order, and they are VERY
highly rewarded for it. That the commoner's well being holds no value to them aside from how
it can be exploited to their businesses' advantage, is a truism revealed and reinforced
daily. The Ford Pinto, Dalkon Shield and other horrifying high profile cases (from the era
when I practiced) come immediately to mind.
Pig Pharma is by no means alone in their utter disregard for the everyday man and woman,
it's just that we intuitively expect people in the medical field to want to heal the sick,
not prolong it. But as the Wall Street analysts remind the heads of Pig Pharma on a daily
basis: curing disease is a bad business model. Prolonging and worsening illness, just short
of death, is optimal. Just ask the lovely Sackler family.
Very sad to learn it's as bad or worse across the pond, but I guess that's to be
expected.
I suspect the worst of it exists in the military environment, where service men and women
are apparently routinely used as guinea pigs, and often completely unknowingly. But at least
they know when they sign up that they are 100% expendable ..
This note presents broad brush
illustrations from a simple accounting model of the impacts of the coronavirus epidemic on macroeconomic
balance, with emphasis on fiscal interventions. The premise is that supporting effective demand is essential
for sustaining economic activity. The covid-19 epidemic created mass unemployment by shutting activity down.
The resulting income loss undoubtedly reduced household consumption which makes up two-thirds of GDP. The
only way to restore consumption is for the government acting as the "borrower of last resort" to raise its
deficit and transfer the proceeds to households. A numerical example presented below suggests that an
increase of ten percentage points in the ratio of government net borrowing (spending on goods and services
plus transfers to households minus tax revenues) to GDP would do the trick.
The stimulus legislation now before Congress does not go far enough. Its size -- $2.2 trillion or ten
percent of GDP – is the right order of magnitude but the breakdown of spending is biased away from
households and toward business,
viz.
, payments that may flow more or less directly to households –
checks in the mail, more unemployment insurance, small business support, state and local government support,
and less than $100 billion to food stamps and disaster relief – come to $1.2 trillion or 5.7% of GDP.
Big business support in the form of loans and a range of other payments amounts to $800 billion or 3.8%
of GDP. No doubt, politics aside, some of this money will be usefully spent, but its contribution to
aggregate demand will be slow and indirect.
Before getting into the details of demand management, a few background observations are needed.
One is that both government and business have substantial debt overhangs. The simulations suggest that an
increase of about $3 trillion in the deficit of the government sector (close to the total built into the
various packages now in place or being enacted) is needed to offset the macro shock that the epidemic
creates. Outstanding Federal debt is $22 trillion. New issues of three trillion may be difficult for markets
to absorb.
Even worse, the corporate sector's outstanding debt is $10 trillion, five times total profits before
depreciation, interest, and taxes. Share buybacks, largely financed by borrowing and ranging in the upper
hundreds of billions per year, have been an important driver of growth of debt. The production side of once
dominant firms – think of General Electric and Boeing – has been hollowed out by financial engineering.
Politics will continue to be influenced by pressures to solve financial problems for firms created by their
past mistakes.
On the real side of the economy, over the last two or three decades the share of employment in sectors
with low real wages, productivity, and profits increased by around twenty percent. The share of profits in
national income grew at around 0.4% per year for five decades, mostly flowing through various channels to
households in the top one percent of the size distribution of income. Households at the bottom of the
distribution became especially vulnerable.
The major impact on economic activity will come from falling consumption of goods and services due to
income losses caused by businesses shutting down. Starting from an initial income level, household saving or
the difference between income and spending will shoot up with further multiplier effects on output. High
profit activities such as real estate rental and leasing, finance, and information will be protected.
Sectors with high employment and low wages and productivity such as retail, accommodation and food, and
other services will be hard hit (education and health will be the main exception). To offset the impacts,
fiscal demand creation by the government will be essential, with the required outlays depending on the size
of the consumption drop and other shocks such as lower private investment and exports.
We begin with details about differences across sectors, and go on to the macroeconomic effects of the
coronavirus epidemic on incomes and output.
Dual Economy
The shifts in the structure of production just mentioned created an American dual economy with prosperity
at the top and near subsistence living at the bottom. Table 1 presents details for sixteen sectors, ordered
from the higher to lower rows by decreasing estimates of payments per hour to labor (including "supplements"
or contributions for pensions and insurance).
Real wages and productivity vary over wide ranges. The same is true of sectoral profits. Real estate
takes the lion's share, followed by manufacturing, finance, business services, and information. Profits are
meager from retail on down the rows, while output and especially employment shares are relatively high. The
three sectors mentioned above -- retail, accommodation and food, and other services – provide around 46
million jobs, more than one-quarter of the 162 million total. Their labor payments amount to $263 billion,
about one percent of GDP of $21 trillion. This number can be contrasted with $600 billion of profits in real
estate. Incomes of low-wage workers do not matter
greatly in the grand macroeconomic scheme of things, but for them even a ten percent income loss would be
devastating.
Table 1: Structure of production in 2016
Wages and output used to
calculate wage rate per hour and productivity per hour are deflated by the GDP deflator (2019=100).
Shares of real output are deflated based on each sector's own industry price index (2009=100).
Macroeconomic Balance
Before turning to the impacts of covid-19, it makes sense to review previous macroeconomic shocks such as
the great recession and the smaller Trump tax reduction of 2018. A simple accounting scheme can be built
around "net borrowing" (NB) levels of four institutional sectors – households (HH), corporate business,
government at all levels, and the rest of the world.
For households and business, NB is equal to gross fixed capital formation plus changes in inventories
("investment") minus saving. For government, it is current spending on goods and services plus investment
minus the excess of tax receipts over fiscal transfers to households. Broadly speaking, foreign NB is the
current account surplus or exports minus imports. It is negative for the USA. In the jargon, investment,
government spending, and exports are demand "injections." HH and business saving, taxes minus fiscal
transfers, and imports are "leakages." Overall macroeconomic balance requires that the sum of NB levels
across sectors should equal zero (subject to a "statistical discrepancy" between estimates of spending and
incomes in the national accounts). Table 2 summarizes data for selected years. The "rates" are calculated
with respect to the relevant year's real GDP.
Table 2: Net borrowing behavior in the USA for selected years (levels in trillions of dollars at prices
of 2019, rates are relative to GDP)
Each year's "multiplier" is the inverse of the sum of the four leakage rates. The multiplier times the
sum of injections equals output.
In a further illustration, Figure 1 shows annual net borrowing rates in the form of a bar chart. High net
borrowing by the government in response to the financial crisis stands out. Even more striking at the far
right of the diagram is the fiscal response to the consumption loss due to the coronavirus as estimated in
Table 3 below.
Figure 1: Annual sectoral net borrowing (in the past and estimated for 2020)
The diagram and table show that business retained earnings usually provide the main source of saving,
with resources also coming from households and negative net borrowing by the rest of the world (positive net
lending to the US economy). The government is the principal net borrower, as underlined by its role in
recent macroeconomic events and especially now.
Recession and the Trump Tax Cut
The 2007-09 recession was precipitated by private sector retrenchment in wake of the financial crisis.
Household consumption was flat, while private investment fell by 30%. Household saving and business retained
earnings went up, meaning that the overall private saving rate rose from 19% to 22%. Output rose between
2007 and 2009. It would have dropped dramatically if the net government tax-minus-transfer rate had been
stable. But in fact it fell from 15% to 6% due to automatic stabilizers and the Obama stimulus package of
around 5% of GDP. The overall impact was that private net borrowing fell by 10.2% of output while government
borrowing went up by 8.6%. Reduction of the external deficit by 1.7% made up the difference.
In sum, the recession was not a disaster because of fiscal realignment. Causality ran from a private
sector shock to automatic and discretionary government responses. It went the other way for the more modest
Trump tax cut. The tax-minus-transfer rate fell from 11.6% to 10.7%, or about $185 billion. Output did go up
by 2.9%, but the increase would have been greater if there had been a strong business investment boom
instead of only a $320 billion increase. Lower business taxes were in large part distributed via dividends
and share buybacks to households at the top of the income ladder with high saving rates.
Both episodes show that changing government net borrowing plays a key role in macroeconomic adjustment.
More government spending on goods and services (unimportant in 2007-09) will also have to help absorb the
covid-19 shock
Coronavirus and Consumption
The biggest immediate impact of the epidemic is loss of economic activity as businesses shut down in a
"supply" shock. Unless they reopen rapidly, both payments to labor and profits will fall. Household
consumption makes up almost 70% of GDP and will drop accordingly.
As an illustration, we can consider a consumption decrease over 2020 of $1.5 trillion from a 2019 level
of $14.6 trillion, or 10% (a high but not unreasonable estimate). That amounts to seven percent of GDP.
Because they have low or negative saving rates, households hit by loss of low-wage jobs at the bottom of the
Table 1 ladder would be major contributors.
For households, saving basically equals income minus spending for consumption, (mostly) residential
investment, and taxes. A decrease in consumption translates into higher saving, or in Table 3 a jump of the
HH saving rate from 0.086 to 0.156. More saving means less demand creation so that output falls from 21.06
to 18.34 trillion dollars.
Table 3: Possible effects of the coronavirus shock
In a quirk of national accounting, HH net borrowing falls from -0.045 to -0.108, or net lending to the
rest of the economy rises to close to 11% of GDP. Presumably the higher "lending" would take the form of
paying off debt. In practice, that will not happen. The proper policy response would be a decrease in the
government's tax-minus-transfer rate from 0.101 to 0.031, taking the form of a $1.5 trillion transfer to
households, which could hold consumption spending and output stable over the year. Government borrowing
would rise by 7% of GDP, or from $1.56 to $3.03 trillion (compare the two rightmost bars of Figure 1). This
hypothetical percentage increase exceeds the actual change between 2007 and 2009 recorded in Table 2.
In other words,
the only way to maintain economic activity is for the government to borrow to
transfer money to households to support consumption.
Ideally, a few hundred billion could be targeted
specifically at the poorly paid quarter of the work force in the sectors in the lower part of Table 1, along
with poor households who don't receive labor income.
There are more potential complications. Table 2 shows that private investment fell by around 30% between
2007 and 2009. Lower capital formation along with stable profits drove up retained earnings so that business
net borrowing fell. Broadly similar shifts could be expected during the epidemic. Exports could decrease as
well. On the other hand, increased government spending on goods and services would raise aggregate demand.
In the rightmost column of Table 3, a plausible outcome would be a visible recession, despite government
borrowing of 17% of GDP, or $3.4 trillion.
Reality check
The initial impact of covid-19 has been to annihilate labor income through the loss of employment. The
challenge is to create demand to offset lost wages and consumer spending. The calculations herein are
illustrative at best, although government net borrowing in Table 3 is close to the total outlay of stimulus
packages approved by Congress. But there are further complications.
` As noted at the outset, more than three trillion dollars of new government debt is a non-trivial
increase over the $22 trillion outstanding. Advocates of Modern Monetary Theory suggest that the Federal
Reserve could absorb the new issues, adding to the 15% of government paper that it already holds. In the USA
such an experiment is yet to be run.
The Fed has offered to intervene massively to buy up corporate debt, which would also run up its balance
sheet. Nevertheless, bailouts for business will remain in political competition with transfers to households
in bottom tiers of the income distribution which really need the money. The Obama stimulus directed less
than half its outlays toward households. There could be better targeting under present circumstances.
Table 1 suggests that profits in some sectors could be taxed to help offset transfers. Real estate,
finance, and information jump to attention.
Timing matters. GDP over one year is the reference frame for Table 3. If, as is likely, job losses and
demand decreases are not offset over a shorter period, the effects on economic activity could be
devastating.
Finally, immediate direct action is needed to overcome supply shortfalls for vast amounts of new medical
and caretaker services, not to mention production of personal protective gear for caregivers.
Support from INET and help from Özlem Ömer are gratefully acknowledged.
One issue I take with this article is that it often classifies money as going to either labor or profits.
There is a third category – suppliers. In my experience payments to suppliers has dried up since the beginning
of the coronavirus shutdown. Whether because AP and AR aren't considered essential functions, because
businesses, even essential businesses, don't have enough cash to pay employees and suppliers, or because they
simply don't want to pay supplier. This is creating a cash crunch for businesses, who are cutting down on
discretionary activities like advertising and even turning away new sales out of fears new customers won't pay.
I have not seen any analysis on the impact of the loss of trade credit.
The importance of trade-credit has been ignored for decades. I had hopes that one positive effect of the
ultra-low interest-rates would have been that large customers would stop paying their suppliers so late. It
hasn't happened, banks love it as they force the small suppliers to go to the bank and borrow money at
high(er) interest-rate and the money lent out by banks would be the low(er) interest-rate provided by the
customer.
There is a risk now that the supply-chains freeze completely due to suppliers not being paid and suppliers
then stopping supply – either voluntaritly or due to going under. It might be necessary to legislate
and enforce
maximum payment terms.
What might possibly be happening is more and better automation of the AP/AR-functions. The current
automation is often so bad that it increases employment instead of what might be the intended reduction of
employment, the next automation (done by skilled professionals, not like now by when it is often done
talkers) might (in my opinion very likely) permanently reduce employment.
Hydroxyxhloroquine is antimalarial,works on the DNA , and accumulates in white blood cells .
Corona virus is RNA. Possible other mechanism includes suppression of T lymphocytes ,
decreased white blood cell migration to the injured area ,stabilization of lysosomal enzymes
which means the enzymes that can attack pathogen and also human normal cells are being
prevented from release from inside the immune cells and suppression of DNA and RNA synthesis.
I am not aware that has ever been to be effective against any virus in the past. It
doesn't work on the Angiotensin receptor or signal transduction down stream .
Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquione are used for Rheumatoid arthritis but they don't alter
the bone damages They are not very effective DMARDs ( disease modifying anti rheumatic drugs
) .It is also used against Graft versus Host rejection . Not effective enough.
Any antiviral medicine has to work on one of these sites or on combination of these
sites- attachment of virus to cells, f penetration ( nucleus) , uncoating, protien synthesis
, nucleic acid synthesis, packaging , and assembly of new virus , then the last part -viral
release from cell to attack new cells. Hydroxychloroquine is not known to attack any of these
processes .
Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine are known to work differently in rheumatoid and graft
vs host disease or in some patients with SLE.
I am not sure if these 2 can be considered as an orphan drug and approved by FDA
I am not sure how French jumped to the idea that this medication would work ( usually a
possible mechanism of action or anecdotal data have to be furnished before trying or have two
have animal data )
So let's not celebrate French microbiologist or IHU and jump to some theories on the
behaviors of French ministers or pharmaceuticals.
Since March 17th the pin on my twitter profile promotes the preventive use of chloroquine to
treat the Novel Coronovirus. I've been following the debate about this anti-malarial (polio
and yellow fever) drug closely. I like Escobar's article, but there are several problems with
it, that even I, as a proponent of chloroquine cannot ignore.
First, the claim that Agnes Buzyn (mispelled twice in the article as "Buzy"), classified
the drug as a poison, thus requiring prescription.
this is false. Chloroquine, in its market French form known as Nivaquine, was never over
the counter. Never. In fact very few Western countries ever sold it over the counter. In most
US states, it was prescription based. It is lethal when used inappropriately.
Second, with all due respect to Dr. Raoult, he is absolutely wrong about viral load in
terminal stages of Covid-19. Corona virus is anything but low or nearly absent. In fact, its
viral load is extremely high and a good measure of patient outcome at admission, and no
amount of antiviral treatment can reduce it on its own at this point. Raoult was either
trying to say that corona is not the cause of mortality, which is technically true, or like
99% of doctors fighting Corona, has no grasp of what the virus actually does.
The gist of the Escobar article is problematic. Nothing concrete about how Sanofi or Big
Pharma is planning on cashing in by delaying chloroquine production. Last week Sanofi donated
300,000 "dosses" of chloroquine to the United States. The drug has been around for 60 years
and is listed by the WHO as a required drug in all medical systems with required
possibilities of local production. The criteria of which are known only to experts.
As for the theory that chloroquine supplies have been pilfered my French sources told me
supplies had been seized. Macron may be pursuing a policy of herd immunity, but
doesn't have the political luxury of being public about it, and a little less literalism is a
helpful corrective for wild speculation. Herd immunity strategies cannot be pursued openly,
being political (reelection) liabilities.
Far far more important to the coronovirus debate is how one is supposed to cure with
vaccines, if the jury is still out on acquired immunity. One cannot work without the other,
suggesting that the MSM acceptance of possible vaccine treatment ipso facto means
acquired immunity is a given, but that's not the way the MSM and governments are presenting
this, suggesting that either vaccines cannot possibly work, or that immunity is being aquired
as we speak, while the facade of a fight is kept up.
Since this decree, the hydroxychloroquine molecule marketed under the name of Plaquenil
is therefore no longer available over the counter. A prescription from a doctor is now
mandatory. But this new classification, which came into effect in January, contrary to what
some conspiratorial publications suggest, predates the appearance of the new coronavirus.
Its cousin, chloroquine, appears on this list "in injectable and oral form", since a decree
taken in 1999.
As LCI explains, the National Health Security Agency (ANSES) had been asked for an
opinion on a proposal for an order to include hydroxychloroquine in List II of poisonous
substances in October 2019, "in order to ensure appropriate patient care ". Two months
before the appearance of the new coronavirus in China.
ANSES had given the green light on November 12, 2019. It is therefore false and dishonest
to claim that the former Minister of Health, Ms. Buzyn, would have made this decision
herself during the Covid-19 epidemic.
@onebornfree The Quinism Foundation is a nonprofit charitable organization established to
support education and research on chronic quinoline encephalopathy and other medical
conditions caused by poisoning, or intoxication, by mefloquine, tafenoquine, chloroquine, and
related quinoline drugs.
Executive Director Dr. Remington Dr. Nevin noted his concern that members of the public
may even attempt to obtain therapeutic quantities of quinine through questionable channels.
"Tonic water, whose bitter taste is produced by the addition of quinine or related
naturally-occurring quinolines, is limited by U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations
to 83 mg per liter of quinine and related cinchona alkaloids," said Dr. Nevin. "However,
drinking several bottles of tonic water will result in consuming pharmaceutical quantities,
and therefore potentially harmful, amounts of these drugs", said Dr. Nevin. "Tonic water is a
prescription medication masquerading as a cocktail mixer."
A single, non-randomized observational trial is close to the bottom of the list in terms of
meaningful medical research, down there with anecdotal reports, particularly in a novel viral
disease with highly variable clinical manifestations and outcomes.
There are also significant potential cardiac risks caused by the Q-T lengthening on one's
EKG caused by both azithromycin and chloroquine. Don't grasp at straws.
@KA You seem quite a knowledge so I hope to obtain your insights, I am not medical.
I heard that the likelihood of ARDS (cytokine storm?) can be detected by a Serum Ferritin
test. If it levels are high, the patient should be given Anakinra, the rheumatoid arthritis
medication, which will prevent ARDS. Neither the test, nor the treatment are being given
because the average Doc who does not specialize in this field, does not know to test for
this.
I understand that Hydroxychloroquin will reduce virulent symptoms in high risk patients
but should be given cautiously.
KA,
I am commenting here first time but have been reading the site for years.
I have two decades of biotech research experience.
I just finished a literature survey about effects of these active pharmaceutical ingredients
or APIs (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, hydroxychloroquine phosphate).
The APIs have been in human application for very long time and their side effect profile
might be broad but it is not widespread. The most serious problems arise from eventual eye
degenerative effects but those are very-very rare.
These APIs do act on several steps of what you mentioned, starting with receptor binding
interference (ACE2 glycosylation changes), viral entry (impairment of endosome formation),
then viral DNA offloading (interference with virus-containing endosomes fusing with
lysosomes), through viral "work" (impairment of protein synthesis and virion assembly through
stopping of Golgi- and endoplasmatic reticular budding and traffic).
The most interesting part of their actions might however be the inhibition of the viral
RNA-dependent RNA polymerase enzyme. This is done through increasing Zn++ concentration in
the cytoplasm because all of these APIs are ionophores and bring Zn++ ions into the cytosol
through the lipid membrane. High Zn++ "levels" inside the cell block the "xerox machine"of
the viral RNA. So indeed these have at least theoretical effects and in vitro proof is
abundant.
On the contrary, if one looks at the now not too worthwile treatment compilation from
Alipay and Zhezhiang University the use of different antiviral drugs is quite dangerous to
the liver. Many patients on anti-retrovirals developed liver problems. I think the Shanghai
Protocol is much more adequate but to each his own.
With regards to the origins of the virus someone earlier wrote about haplotypes. There are
58 haplotypes (called as such in peer-reviewed publications) and 5 haplogroups of the virus
in two clades (L and S). According to a non peer-reviewed publication at ChinaXiv, 5
haplogroups have only been reported from the US so far. Mainland Chinese enjoyed the society
of only 4 haplogroups while the fifth could be found in Taiwan.
Here is one published Abstract, specific to COVID-19 warns of the toxicity.
Department of Forensic Medicine, Tongji Medical College, Huanzhong University of Science
and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China. LINK
The Trial of Chloroquine in the Treatment of Corona Virus Disease 2019
（COVID-19） and Its Research Progress in Forensic Toxicology.
[.]Since December 2019, COVID-19 （corona virus disease 2019） outbreaks caused
by SARS-CoV-2 （severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2） has occurred
in China and many countries around the world. Due to the lack of drugs against COVID-19,
the disease spreads rapidly and the mortality rate is relatively high. Therefore, specific
drugs against SARS-CoV-2 need to be quickly screened. The antimalarial drug Chloroquine
phosphate which has already been approved is confirmed to have an anti-SARS-CoV-2 effect
and has been included in diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines. However, awareness of the
risk of chloroquine phosphate causing acute poisoning or even death should be strengthened.
The dosage used according to current clinical recommended dosage and course of treatment
are larger than that of previous treatment of malaria. Many provinces have required
close clinical monitoring of adverse reactions. This paper reviews the pharmacological
effects, poisoning;[.]
This is the antiviral treatment recommended in the hand I linked above.
Antiviral Treatment
At FAHZU, lopinavir/ritonavir (2 capsules, po q12h) combined with arbidol (200 mg po q12h)
were applied as the basic regimen. From the treatment experience of 49 patients in our
hospital, the average time to achieve negative viral nucleic acid test for the first time
was 12 days (95% CI: 8-15 days). The duration of negative nucleic acid test result
(negative for more than 2 times consecutively with interval ≥ 24h) was 13.5 days (95%
CI: 9.5 - 17.5 days).If the basic regimen is not effective, chloroquine phosphate can be
used on adults between 18-65 years old (weight ≥ 50 kg: 500 mg bid; weight ≤50 kg:
500 mg bid for first two days, 500 mg qd for following five days).Interferon nebulization
is recommended in Protocols for Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19. We recommend that it
should be performed in negative-pressure wards rather than general wards due to the
possibility of aerosol transmission.Darunavir/cobicistat has some degree of antiviral
activity in viral suppression test in vitro, based on the treatment experience of AIDS
patients, and the adverse events are relatively mild. For patients who are intolerant to
lopinavir/ritonavir, darunavir/ cobici-stat (1 tablet qd) or favipiravir (starting dose of
1600 mg followed by 600 mg tid) is an alternative option after the ethical review.
Simultaneous use of three or more antiviral drugs is not recommended.
Course of Treatment
The treatment course of chloroquine phosphate should be no more than 7 days. The treatment
course of other regimens has not been determined and are usually around 2 weeks. Antiviral
drugs should be stopped if nucleic acid test results from sputum specimens remain negative
for more than 3 times
"... Put together, they reveal how big a share of the American markets for drugs, medical devices, and protective gear is controlled by goods made overseas. The big takeaway is that the nation could be in big enough trouble if supply disruptions were to occur in normal times (say, due to natural disasters in manufacturing centers abroad). During a high-mortality pandemic like the CCP Virus, these levels of foreign dependency are high enough to guarantee significant numbers of needless deaths. ..."
"... And in fact, the import penetration trends for these products exemplify the nation's health care security weaknesses. In 2002 -- a good baseline, since that's the first year China was a member of the World Trade Organization -- imports overall accounted for 16.7 percent of all surgical appliances and supplies used in the United States (measured by value, not numbers of masks or pairs of gloves). During the first full year of the Great Recession, 2008, this share totaled 28.08 percent. ..."
"... Keeping this qualification in mind, overall, 32.41 percent of surgical appliances and supplies were imported from other countries by 2011, according to these figures. In 2016, that number reached 41.81 percent of a $33.71 billion U.S. market. It may well be higher these days, as between then and last year, U.S. overseas purchases jumped by more than 29 percent. (Interestingly, in light of domestic shortages, U.S. exports in appliances and supplies actually rose by more than 13 percent during this period!) ..."
"... Ventilators, sadly, have been in the news, too; they and related products like oxygen tents and bronchoscopes and inhalators and suction equipment are found in a big goods category called surgical and medical instruments. In 2002, imports from all corners of the world represented 22.04 percent of American consumption. By 2016, this figure stood at 35.91 percent of a $37.5 billion national market, and over the next three years, imports grew nearly 31 percent. (Exports expanded at a relatively slow 11.84 percent.) ..."
"... exclusive U.S. reliance on China for the chemical ingredients of numerous medicines has now become a major federal government concern. ..."
"... The main foreign suppliers to the American pharmaceuticals market as of last year look encouragingly diversified and encouragingly friendly. For example, Ireland was number one, with 22.15 percent of such shipments, followed by Switzerland with 14.05 percent. But third and fourth, with 8.87 percent and 8.39 percent of imports, were Germany and India, respectively, both of which have limited or embargoed their medical exports this year. And number five, at 7.38 percent, was Italy -- whose current CCP Virus devastation could easily bring about export restrictions. ..."
"... Last year, America's leading foreign supplier of surgical and medical instruments (the ventilators category) was Mexico, which sold U.S. customers 28.58 percent of the $17.62 billion of total imports. But export-curber Germany was number three, at 9.43 percent, and China was sixth, at 6.93 percent. ..."
"... Purely domestic policy steps, like mandating more stockpiling or new recycling and re-use strategies, undoubtedly can add to national medical products supplies. But even these general import penetration figures, along with the shortage reports that keep pouring in, make clear that enduring national health care security can't be restored without a major ramping up of domestic output. And since export-heavy economies like China's and Germany's will undoubtedly work overtime to keep their American health care customers -- including with all manner of predatory economic practices -- it's similarly clear that big, lasting U.S. departures from standard free trade policies will be unavoidable. ..."
Not Just China: U.S. Reliance on Foreign Medical Supplies is Staggering
The government's own numbers tell a frightening tale of how this happened, and when.
Virus pandemic having exposed scary domestic shortages of critical medical
goods ranging from safety masks to ventilators, along with potential shortages of
pharmaceuticals, political leaders across the spectrum are finally regretting having allowed so
much output of these products to migrate offshore.
China's role in global supply chains has understandably sparked much of the alarm, since its
government has all but threatened to withhold supplies of medicines whenever it wishes. But all
told, at least 38 countries (including the 27-member European Union) have curbed exports of
anti-pandemic products at some point since the CCP Virus began dominating headlines.
So
potential foreign chokeholds in the nation's health care-related supply chains appear global in
scope. The federal government's best data make clear just how widespread the problem has
become, and how steadily it's been growing.
The figures come from the government's statistics on industry-by-industry manufacturing
output and on exports and imports. (The output data can be accessed through databases created
by the Census Bureau for its Annual Survey of Manufactures that are located at this link . The
trade numbers can be retrieved at an interactive database maintained by the U.S. International
Trade Commission that's located at this link .)
Put together, they reveal how big a share of the American markets for drugs, medical
devices, and protective gear is controlled by goods made overseas. The big takeaway is that the
nation could be in big enough trouble if supply disruptions were to occur in normal times (say,
due to natural disasters in manufacturing centers abroad). During a high-mortality pandemic
like the CCP Virus, these levels of foreign dependency are high enough to guarantee significant
numbers of needless deaths.
These statistics aren't problem-free. Principally, because the manufacturing output figures
are so granular, and therefore take so long to compile, import penetration rates for these (and
other manufactures) can be calculated only through 2016. Yet the more timely import numbers can
provide a reasonable indication of whether vulnerabilities are worsening or shrinking. At the
same time, the government's main trade data aren't nearly as detailed as the production
numbers. As a result, it's not possible to know the percentage of, say, safety masks used in
the United States that are produced abroad. But it's easy to come up with this number for the
category in which masks (and other protective gear) are grouped -- surgical appliances and
supplies.
And in fact, the import penetration trends for these products exemplify the nation's health
care security weaknesses. In 2002 -- a good baseline, since that's the first year China was a
member of the World Trade Organization -- imports overall accounted for 16.7 percent of all
surgical appliances and supplies used in the United States (measured by value, not numbers of
masks or pairs of gloves). During the first full year of the Great Recession, 2008, this share
totaled 28.08 percent.
Notably, these imports from China were a tiny 1.5 percent in 2002, and had actually dropped
to 0.49 percent by 2008. By 2016, they accounted for a seemingly modest 6.54 percent of
American consumption. But here's where another weakness in the data emerges: they say nothing
about the origin of the materials, parts, and components of the final goods.
Keeping this qualification in mind, overall, 32.41 percent of surgical appliances and
supplies were imported from other countries by 2011, according to these figures. In 2016, that
number reached 41.81 percent of a $33.71 billion U.S. market. It may well be higher these days,
as between then and last year, U.S. overseas purchases jumped by more than 29 percent.
(Interestingly, in light of domestic shortages, U.S. exports in appliances and supplies
actually rose by more than 13 percent during this period!)
Ventilators, sadly, have been in the news, too; they and related products like oxygen tents
and bronchoscopes and inhalators and suction equipment are found in a big goods category called
surgical and medical instruments. In 2002, imports from all corners of the world represented
22.04 percent of American consumption. By 2016, this figure stood at 35.91 percent of a $37.5
billion national market, and over the next three years, imports grew nearly 31 percent.
(Exports expanded at a relatively slow 11.84 percent.)
Again, the China figures are small beans -- the import penetration rate for 2016 was a mere
2.35 percent. But these products often contain lots of electronics parts, and half the world's
printed circuit boards, for example, are made in the People's Republic. In other words, lots of
existing global surge capacity throughout the sector is ultimately controlled by Beijing.
Thanks to the work of researchers like the Hastings Center's Rosemary Gibson and independent
journalist Katherine Eban, heavy and sometimes exclusive U.S. reliance on China for the
chemical ingredients of numerous medicines has now become a major federal government concern.
Indeed, the Food and Drug Administration is keeping an especially close eye on the availability
of no fewer than 20 pharmaceutical products that use Chinese raw materials. (Unfortunately, the
FDA won't say what they are, which calls for some Freedom of Information Act requests,
pronto.)
But the import penetration figures make clear that supply disruptions could also originate
elsewhere. Between 2002 and 2016, drugs produced overseas more than doubled their share of
America's consumption (which stood at nearly $200 billion three years ago), from 17.23 percent
to 38.51 percent. As of 2019, moreover, U.S. drugs imports were 20.34 percent higher than in
2016.
The main foreign suppliers to the American pharmaceuticals market as of last year look
encouragingly diversified and encouragingly friendly. For example, Ireland was number one, with
22.15 percent of such shipments, followed by Switzerland with 14.05 percent. But third and
fourth, with 8.87 percent and 8.39 percent of imports, were Germany and India, respectively,
both of which have limited or embargoed their medical exports this year. And number five, at
7.38 percent, was Italy -- whose current CCP Virus devastation could easily bring about export
restrictions.
Nor is this pattern restricted to pharmaceuticals. Last year, America's leading foreign
supplier of surgical and medical instruments (the ventilators category) was Mexico, which sold
U.S. customers 28.58 percent of the $17.62 billion of total imports. But export-curber Germany
was number three, at 9.43 percent, and China was sixth, at 6.93 percent.
For surgical appliances and supplies (the masks and protective gear category), Ireland
topped the 2019 foreign supplier list, selling the United States 24.09 percent of its $18.21
billion of total imports. But China was second, at 15.29 percent, and in third place, at 9.68
percent, stood Malaysia, which banned mask exports on March 20.
Purely domestic policy steps, like mandating more stockpiling or new recycling and re-use
strategies, undoubtedly can add to national medical products supplies. But even these general
import penetration figures, along with the shortage reports that keep pouring in, make clear
that enduring national health care security can't be restored without a major ramping up of
domestic output. And since export-heavy economies like China's and Germany's will undoubtedly
work overtime to keep their American health care customers -- including with all manner of
predatory economic practices -- it's similarly clear that big, lasting U.S. departures from
standard free trade policies will be unavoidable.
Alan Tonelson is the founder of RealityChek, a public policy blog focusing on economics
and national security, and the author of The Race to the Bottom .
We know how the USofA has been over last months now harassing, blackmailing an' threatening
other countries NOT to adopt the chinese HUawei 5G technologies.
Many nations were threatened, UK, Berlin, Brazil etc
Now Germany the first vassal of the Empire, 'primus inter pares' has seemingly prohibited
the exportation of breathers to other countries - who of course need them most.
So what is globalism after all.
A nice idea the rich sell the morons, and tamed nations of the world. But which gets
zeroed as soon as their main interests are menaced.
there are shortages of masks and gloves for the frontline so joe and jane may not be allowed.
Governments are partnering with manufacturing companies. How bad is it?
"Physicians are being warned not to speak or post publicly about their COVID-19
experiences, including PPE shortages, case specifics, and the percentage of full hospital
beds,[.]
Hospitals on the front lines of the pandemic are engaged in a heated private debate over a
calculation few have encountered in their lifetimes - how to weigh the "save at all costs"
approach to resuscitating a dying patient against the real danger of exposing doctors and
nurses to the contagion of coronavirus.
The conversations are driven by the realization that the risk to staff amid dwindling
stores of protective equipment - such as masks, gowns and gloves - may be too great to
justify the conventional response when a patient "codes," and their heart or breathing
stops.
Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago has been discussing a universal
do-not-resuscitate policy for infected patients, regardless of the wishes of the patient or
their family members - a wrenching decision to prioritize the lives of the many over the
one.[.]
Canada and U.S. were in discussions? U.S. considers putting troops at Canadian border.
The masks are useful even if they aren't 100% useful in blocking water droplets, insofar as
wearing a mask makes it much less likely that you will touch your mouth with your hands or
stick your finger in your nose.
If you also get into the habit of vigorously washing your hands before and after eating,
well, you have done most of the hard yards in avoiding infection.
Some important details on the France ibuprofen yes or no debate: Source
The trouble over ibuprofen began March 11, when researchers at University Hospital Basel,
in Switzerland, and Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, in Greece, published a letter in
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. The letter reviewed three early sets of case reports from
China, covering almost 1,300 patients gravely ill with Covid-19. The letter's authors
observed that significant numbers of those patients had high blood pressure and diabetes,
from 12 percent to 30 percent depending on the study, and theorized that higher rates of
expression of a particular enzyme, known for short as ACE2, might be raising the risk of
coronavirus infection.
ACE2 provides a place on cell surfaces for the coronavirus to attach and enter in order
to replicate. High blood pressure and diabetes are treated with drugs that suppress
inflammation, called ACE inhibitors; the inhibitors, paradoxically, cause ACE2 to rise.
That interaction is where the authors spotted a possible connection between patients
experiencing chronic diseases and then becoming infected with Covid-19.
And that's where ibuprofen entered the unfolding story, too. The over-the-counter drug
doesn't only knock down fever. It also reduces inflammation (the class of drugs it belongs
to are known as NSAIDs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs). That effect, as with the
anti-inflammatory drugs given to chronic disease patients, can cause ACE2 to rise.
So any anti-inflammatory - whether ibuprofen or actual anti-inflammatory drugs - *can*
(not will) cause ACE2 to rise. And ACE2 is what nCOV latches on to.
So the acetominophen/paracetamol vs. ibuprofen has nothing to do with the fever reduction
side but the potential increase of ACE2, which *might* increase susceptibility to
nCOV.
On the protection issue, use FFP 3 respirator masks (EU), or N99 (US) or KN 99 (China) and
scarf over it. These masks filter 98 % of micro particles, including viruses. In case of mask
shortages steam can be used to decontaminate masks. Also use gloves, eye protection and
raincoat when in risky areas. Everything new taken in your home must be under 3 - 4 days
quarantine in separate room. The raincoat too. After this quarantine items can be further
cleaned with steam, ethanol, bleach + water, and groceries via soap and water.
Virus can stay for 3 hours in mid air (room) and 3 days on some surfaces. And it is
possible that can even survive for up to 17 days on some surfaces, which would be pretty bad
news. At least 5 meters distance between people outside is needed.
1. do not steam your masks. they are made of polyester and will shrink into a blob. people
have tried and failed. you can wash with soap and dry or low temp bake as B suggested. they
will eventually fail from delaminating or the elastic band snapping.
2. stop behaving like you don't want to catch it, behave like you have it and you don't
want others to catch it. we'll all be better off.
3. going on 2 - wearing masks with exhaust valves will just spray virus straight out of
you're infected. if you're not sure you're infected (and you don't) wearing a valves N95 is
just a dick act.
4. when PPE were in short supply in China, what they did was to wear N95 with surgical
mask over the top. it's definitely off-label use but at least you can then reuse your
precious N95 as it's shielded from external pathogens, at the same time your own exhaust
valve (see 3) is also shielded from others.
Malaria is a single cell bug called a protozoa. My understanding that is a class of bugs like
bacteria and viruses are classes of bugs.
Mosquitoes carry or host the bug and pass it onto people. The quinine type drugs block the
bug and prevent it from attaching or entering cells. That is how the drug also works against
the corona viruses. Various strains of the malaria bug have developed resistance to various
drugs.
Because SARS-CoV-2 is a new bug, it should not have developed a resistance to any
drug.
Human immunity is directed at pathogens and seems very specific even to strains as can be
seen with influenza vaccines, and the malaria protozoa is a very different animal to the
SARS-CoV-2 virus.
That's the basics as I know it. Others here may be able to explain it a little
better.
Exactly, a containment strategy with universal testing and quarantine of the infected (ill
and asymptomatic) at home or safe facilities is required keep western society from collapsing
from this and future waves of the novel coronavirus until a treatment or vaccine is
developed.
The problem in the USA is that this will require the reconstruction of the government and
a national public health system to run the monitoring and quarantine system. Instead, the
corrupt oligarchy will use government money to rescue themselves rather than saving the lives
of Americans.
The neoliberal wrecking of our hospital system has been widely cited as a cause of the
crisis. Among other things, hospitals reduced the number of beds, sold ventilators, and ran
down supplies of masks and protective clothing in order to increase profitability.
On the way to this crisis, the private hospital industry gave the American public the
actions and the rhetoric of the Milo Minderbinder character from Catch-22:
What's good for M & M Enterprises will be good for the country.
Milo stripped out and sold all kinds of life-saving kit: morphine vials, parachutes, CO2
inflator cartridges for life vests. Milo epitomizes the neoliberal short-term, bottom-line,
zero-redundancy world view that has looted America and corrupted its democracy over the last
40 years.
Just like the hapless flightcrew in Catch-22, Americans are discovering the true meaning
behind the private hospitals' claim that what was good for their corporations was good for
the "crew" as they survey the looted and privatized corpse of their healthcare system.
What was satire 50 years ago, is reality today. We had a preview of this when Rumsfeld ran
the DoD.
Was Donald Rumsfeld channeling Milo (and laughing up his sleeve) when he said:
It is clearly cost-effective to have contractors for a variety of things that military
people need not do, and that, for whatever reason, other civilians, government people,
cannot be deployed to do...
But I personally am of the view that there are a lot of things that can be done on a
short-time basis by contractors that advantage the United States and advantage other
countries who also hire contractors. And that any idea that we shouldn't have them, I
think, would be unwise.
- D. Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld's Speech on the Future of Iraq (2005)
This is an hour with experts who ran the Singapore response. It answers many of our questions
and also those which cannot yet be answered. I resisted listening because it's an hour, but
it was worthwhile. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3w8gu9S3lo
Tests and care for Covid-19 must be for free. We need hospitals to care for only the
critical cases. We need quarantine centers to isolate the milder cases from the wider
population. Many hotels, sport arenas and exhibition halls are currently empty. They can be
converted into quarantine stations within a day or two. People will have to stay for only two
weeks. They would be fed and would have medical attention. That is a small restriction of the
freedom of a few for a large benefit for our societies.
A number of studies have reported that a significant portion of people are even spreading the
virus while presymptomatic -- in the day or two before they start to feel ill. Presymptomatic
spreaders are, well, gonna spread. It's not their fault.
How much this type of transmission is driving the pandemic is unclear but it could be
significant. Gabriel Leung, dean of medicine at the University of Hong Kong, has estimated
about 40% of cases transmit before symptoms develop. A recent preprint -- a study that has
not yet been peer-reviewed -- from China pooled data from seven countries and estimated a
very similar 43%.
The novel coronavirus is spread to a large part by people who stay asymptomatic and by
people who do not yet feel sick but will later show symptoms. When they talk, sneeze or cough
they release small droplets that carry viruses. The droplets can stay in the air for some time.
If a person coming along inhales those droplets the viruses will likely infect that person.
Those who have have the virus or might spread it should wear a mask because it prevents
their droplets from flying out. Those who do not have the virus should wear a mask to prevent
droplets from entering their body.
We were told that 'masks don't work' because they are not a 100% protection. The very tiny
viruses can pass behind the mask at its sides or they can slip through its webbing. But the
virus is not traveling alone but as part of a droplet. Even a relatively wide webbing may hold
it up. If it is doubled with a sheet of cosmetic paper towel in between the protection will be
even better. Microfilter bags for vacuum cleaners and so called HEPA filters are also effective materials that are
readily available and easy to turn into masks.
The development of the epidemic will depend on how many people will start to regularly wear
masks when they are not at home. Even if the protection masks prevent only 50% of new
infections the speed with which the epidemic will unfold will be significantly lower.
Consider that the societies in the blue circle are all ones where people regularly wear
masks while the other countries (except China which was surprised by the outbreak) are
societies were wearing a mask is seen as unusual. These 'blue' countries, which also gained
experience during the SARS and MERS epidemics, show significant flatter trajectories.
Graphs similar to the above for all U.S. states and territories can be found here .
Meanwhile U.S. media continue to spread anti-China propaganda:
Medical personnel in Spain and the Czech Republic have reported that the coronavirus rapid
tests their respective countries have received from China are faulty and have a high error
rate.
Several labs in Spanish hospitals have reported that the test kits they purchased,
manufactured by Chinese company Bioeasy and based in Shenzhen, have a sensitivity of 30% when
the sensitivity should be above 80%, Spanish newspaper El País reported Thursday. Due
to the test's lack of reliability, medical personnel in Spain have switched back to the PCR
test, which takes up to four hours for a diagnosis, while rapid tests take between 10 to 15
minutes
The Spanish government purchased 340,000 tests from the Chinese company, a similar
quantity to the tests ordered by the Czech Republic, where medical personnel also report an
80% failure rate.
When one checks the original reports
from Spain and from the
Czech Republic one learns that these countries bought anti-body tests which only react when
a person has had the virus for some time and developed anti-bodies against it. These tests can
obviously not be used to find persons who are infected but have not yet developed
anti-bodies.
China's ambassador in Spain also pointed out that these tests
have yet to be verified by the regulator and were imported without the help or knowledge of the
Chinese government.
The anti-body tests are valuable to identify people who have developed current immunity
against the virus. These people can then care for those who are most endangered by the disease.
Anti-body tests are quick. They can be used anywhere.
The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests which are currently necessary to find if someone
has the virus take at least four hours and specialized laboratories to process them. We will
need a much quicker reliable test if we want to put our economies back to work. Luckily several
companies and academic groups are already working on these and a 45 minute test is now
ready to be marketed .
When we have a quick test for the virus and a quick test for anti-bodies available in mass
we can restart the economy by 'filtering' through the population on a large scale. Movement
restrictions would then only be needed for those who show virus-positive and anti-body negative
results. All others could go back to work.
There would certainly still be outbreaks from people who escaped the 'filtering' process but
with easy testing and care in place those clusters can be locally contained.
It may take another two month or so to get to that point. Until then there is little we can
do but to stay apart as much as possible and to wear our masks.
Have seen no data on how many viral particles it takes to cause a serious effect. Likely,
such data would be in terms of probability at X [number of viral particles]. Such is known
for many infective agents in surface and aerosol form, but CV19 may be very different.
Can CV19 vapor aerosol from mouth/breath in still air, exclusive of explosive discharge
via cough/sneeze, cause full-blown case beyond 6 feet? I'd like to know.
Also, have not seen any data re time duration of infective after it enters throat passage
on journey to lungs. I posit that there are anti-viral liquids that might be effective if
small amount were trickled down throat 2x per day; surely just before bedtime to discourage
the next 7-hs of undisturbed incubation. I do take something that I am guessing may be
effective. [E.g., I also
"heard" OliveOilExtract as anti-viral but I have no experience with it.]
Another thought: Re different strains of CV19 having very different outcomes...Anyone
suggestion that US forms collectively having, say, milder outcomes relative to
China/Iran/LombardyItaly, etc? Seems to be an aversion to testing the general population, or
even publishing all results of the small amount of tests with time+place data. Where are the
lists of 1st observations of "unusual flu" in US? that would NORMALLY, provoke tracking +
names/places of sequential contacts?
Routine discovery and mapping of communication lines is very likely to uncover a lot of
truth. That is what rational folks desire.
"... Today supermarkets are playing a ground-zero role in our struggle to adapt to restrictions imposed by COVID-19. And grocery workers are bearing much of the the brunt of our anxiety and frustration, as we [who?] descend on depleted stores. ..."
"They were
careless people, Tom and Daisy- they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back
into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let
other people clean up the mess they had made. -- F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great
Gatsby
In the United States, #COVID-19 began with globalization and globalizers. One thing we can
be of is that grovery workers -- to whom the virus will "trickle down" soon enough -- didn't
create the conditions for it, or introduce it. Let's take a look at the grocery workers before
dollying back to the global. From the Los Angeles Times, "
Column: How coronavirus turned supermarket workers into heroes ":
Today supermarkets are playing a ground-zero role in our struggle to adapt to restrictions
imposed by COVID-19. And grocery workers are bearing much of the the brunt of our anxiety and
frustration, as we [who?] descend on depleted stores.
Without masks or barriers, employees are working long hours, risking infection and
battling exhaustion to do their jobs. They connect us to material essentials, like bread and
toilet paper. But they're also part of the social fabric that holds us together in unsettling
times.
That friendly chat with the guy restocking the egg case this morning might be my only
social interaction on this shelter-at-home day. And I feel better whenever I see my favorite
cashier at her register. There's something reassuring about the familiar in a world where
everything has changed.
Markets are about the only place we're still allowed to gather en masse. And their
employees -- pressed into service in ways they never expected -- are our new first
responders. They're apt to see us at our worst, and they aim to ease our strain.
"They're dealing with a public that's fearful, apprehensive and frustrated, and it gets
hostile," [said John Grant, a former meatpacker who is president of the union that represents
grocery employees in Southern California]. "This wasn't what they signed up for, but they
realize it's their responsibility. They've cursed how vulnerable they are, and yet they keep
going out of their profound dedication to their communities."
Funny thing. The people who "connect us to material essentials" are suddenly more important
than Senators and Represenatives (who can fly home), or all the MBAs in the head office, or the
CEOs. Heaven forfend they collectively decided to withdraw their labor!
"Vulnerable" as the grocery workers are, they didn't bring #COVID19 on themselves or us.
First, I'll look at how globalization made the "material essentials" to deal with #COVID19 so
hard to obtain. Then, I'll look at how globalizers were vectors for the diseases spread.
Globalization
The story of how the United States 1% deindustrialized American by moving our manufacturing
base offshore (mostly to China) is well known and I will not rehearse it here. From the New
York Times, " How the World's Richest
Country Ran Out of a 75-Cent Face Mask ":
The answer to why we're running out of protective gear involves a very American set of
capitalist pathologies -- the rise and inevitable lure of low-cost overseas manufacturing,
and a strategic failure, at the national level and in the health care industry, to consider
seriously the cascading vulnerabilities that flowed from the incentives to reduce costs.
(By "reduce costs," of course, we mean "increase profits.") The shortage of masks has been
the dominant narrative, but we don't make anything . If masks had not been "the long
pole in the tent," as project managers say, something else would have been or will be:
ventilators ,
gloves ,
nasal swabs for testing, extraction
kits and pipettes , reagents
, whatever. The real issue is not a shortage of this or that material essential, but a
forty-year policy of globalization, supported by the ruling class as a whole, that has led to a
shortage of all material essentials (and that's not even taking austerity and the
general gutting of public services into account). I have altered
the famous "flattening the curve" chart (here with "dotted line to show capacity") to show
the effect"
Lack of "material essentials" reduces our capacity ("How many very sick people hospitals can
treat"); it pushes the dotted line down. So we either have to flatten the curve further than we
would otherwise have to do, or we don't, and lose lives. Thank you, globalization! And with
that, let's turn to the globalizers.
Globalizers
By globalizers, I mean the 1% on down, plus the PMC (Professional Manager Class) who own and
manage our globalized system. One effect of globalization has been the vast expansion of air
transport and international travel, so that globalizers can do their jobs. And tha
t's how SARS-COV-2 was brought to the United States :
The man who would become Patient Zero for the new coronavirus outbreak in the U.S.
appeared to do everything right. He arrived Jan. 19 at an urgent-care clinic in a suburb
north of Seattle with a slightly elevated temperature and a cough he'd developed soon after
returning four days earlier from a visit with family in Wuhan, China.
(I'm not blaming any individual; I travel internationally myself, and there are many good
reasons to do it. But international air travel was the vector that brought the virus to the
United States. That is the system. I'm assuming Patient Zero travelled for professional
reasons, since Wuhan is an unlikely tourist destination.)
We can make a highly suggestive correlation between globalizers and COVID-19 if we look at
two simple maps. First, as
is well known , one of the main distinctions between the places that are " optimistic,
diverse, dynamic, moving forward " (i.e., globalizers) and the dull provincials in flyover
is the possession of passports. (A passport is a likely marker for the sort of person who asks
"Why don't they just leave?"; "front-row kids," in Chris Arnade's parlance, as distinguished
from, say, grocery workers, who he calls "back-row" kids.) Here is a map of passport ownership
by state:
The correlation is rather neat, don't you think? It makes sense that the first case was in a
globalist, passport-owning city like Seattle on the West Coast; and it makes sense that the
world capital of globalization, passport-owning New York City, now has a major outbreak.
If one hypothesizes, as I am doing, that COVID-19 will trickle from globalizers downward, we
might ask ourselves how that will happen. One answer, of course, is social interaction between
the globalizers themselves. The New York Times describes " Party
Zero: How a Soirée in Connecticut Became a 'Super Spreader ':"
About 50 guests gathered on March 5 at a home in the stately suburb of Westport, Conn., to
toast the hostess on her 40th birthday and greet old friends, including one visiting from
South Africa. They shared reminiscences, a lavish buffet and, unknown to anyone, the
coronavirus.
Then they scattered.
The Westport soirée -- Party Zero in southwestern Connecticut and beyond -- is a
story of how, in the Gilded Age of money, social connectedness and air travel, a pandemic has
spread at lightning speed. The partygoers -- more than half of whom are now infected -- left
that evening for Johannesburg, New York City and other parts of Connecticut and the United
States, all seeding infections on the way.
Westport, a town of 28,000 on the Long Island Sound, did not have a single known case of
the coronavirus on the day of the party. It had 85 on Monday, up more than 40-fold in 11
days.
It is the globalizers' ability to "scatter," in other words -- both internationally and
domestically -- that made them such effective vectors. The Westport hot-spot was innocent,
since nobody knew enough about COVID-19. Other examples are not innocent at all, where
globalizers infect all those around them by trying to escape the disease. The Hamptons example
is famous. From the New York Post, "
'We should blow up the bridges' -- coronavirus leads to class warfare in Hamptons ":
Every aspect of life, most crucially medical care, is under strain from the sudden influx
of rich Manhattanites panic-fleeing, bringing along their disdain and disregard for the
little people -- and in some cases, knowingly bringing coronavirus.
The Springs resident says her friend, a nurse out here, reported that a wealthy Manhattan
woman who tested positive called tiny Southampton Hospital to say she was on her way and
needed treatment.
The woman was told to stay in Manhattan.
Instead, she allegedly got on public transportation, telling no one of her condition. Then
she showed up at Southampton Hospital, demanding admittance.
"Someone else took a private jet to East Hampton and did not tell anybody 'til he landed,"
the resident says. "That's the most horrendous aspect. The virus is already here, and we
don't have any medical resources."
The frantic effort to find the ski trip participants has highlighted an uncomfortable
fact: It is people wealthy enough to travel outside the country who have brought the
coronavirus back to mostly poor Mexico. Yet if the disease spreads, it is those with the
least who will probably suffer the most.
"The virus is imported by people with the economic capacity to travel," wrote actor Tenoch
Huerta on Twitter. "Those who ask that everything be closed and all economic activity stop,
hurting the people who live day-to-day, why didn't they voluntarily isolate for three weeks
so as not to spread it? Or should only the poor be responsible?"
Idaho has 123 confirmed cases of COVID-19, according to the state's coronavirus website.
That includes 37 in Ada County and eight in Canyon County. Blaine County, where Sun Valley is
located, has the most confirmed cases at 52. Idaho's first case was reported 12 days ago, in
Ada County. The number of people tested in the state is now up to 2,188.
(Many of the cases around the state came from travel to Blaine County.)
Finally, Berkshire County, MA:
In my home area of Berkshire County, MA, the superrich from the city who own second
homes have come up en masse, buying up all the food and refusing to quarantine. The latter
means they will overwhelm an already insufficient healthcare system.
Of course, this rough-and-ready, anecdotal analysis is no substitute for formal, scientific
contact tracing. But I don't think, at this point, we will ever be able trace the original
outbreaks. And I didn't see anybody else making this argument, so I thought I'd throw it
against the wall and see if it sticks. All I can say is that when I think of the grocery
workers -- and all the workers -- in the Hamptons, Mexico, Idaho, and Massachusetts having
COVID-19 brought to them, I become very ticked off. For pity's sake, at least can we
practice social distancing by traveling only when it's essential?
@37
Yesterday I went to Home Depot to buy some water tubing for my ice-maker.
I noticed all doors were blocked with a tape, except one with at least 25 people waiting
to get in and a female employee holding a sign "the line starts here".
I ask the lady what was all about and she said because of the virus etc.
I said to her "You must be kidding" and I start going back to my car.
Some old lady from the line waiting to get in she scream to me something about "we protect
ourselves" and similar nonsense.
I turn around and I said to her: Quit watching TV you idiot. They rob your money on broad
daylight and send your kids to die fighting israels enemies.
The overreaction to the virus makes no sense. Is something being hidden from us? The freak
out over this virus – to the tune of $trillions – is all out of proportion.
2.8 million Americans die every year. Why the obsession with this one virus which may kill
in the thousands?
Something is off. But Trump should have known early if there was some other hidden danger.
If there is some hidden suspicion by the people obsessing over this, please share it!
You are right. While corona in my view is absolutely bonkers, and as my conviction mounts
with every half witted calculation that I come across, it gains its own dimension in reality.
The cause is non-existent but the consequences are real:
People die in overwhelmed hospitals in run down health systems. The world economy is breaking
down, as it was going to anyhow. The convenient scapegoat has been found and the interest for
the PTB to allow the truth to come out is zero.
Will we get laws that make Corona-denial illegal? Because it dishonors the dead and
traumatizes their families?
I am praying to Saint Ron to fearlessly tell the truth, but he goes corona full steam.
I have written this before. My Damaskus moment was Kiew in february 2014. Since then I
have known that the same people who were behind that thing would set my country and the world
on fire in time.
I marvel at their inventiveness.
Similarly, once government lockdowns or other similar measures are taken, the
doubling-period of the infection becomes much longer.
I'm pretty certain that there's no doubling once a country, (province, city, whatever)
enacts a relatively comprehensive lockdown and people themselves take it seriously. I'm in
one of those countries and if I look around it's clear that the R0 ratio is way below 1.
Probably less than 0.1 to be honest.
If I remember correctly, COVID-19 R0 ratio in China was somewhere around 3.5 when the
country was still figuring it out. That's a horrible number but it's easy to see how it can
be brought down to a tiny fraction when 95% of risky contacts get removed and the remaining
5% approached with protective gear and caution. The virus doesn't stand a chance in that kind
of environment.
So, the numbers in my neck of the woods will almost certainly start decreasing rapidly in
the coming weeks but the problem of international travel will remain for many months
(years?).
I also remember some of early estimates of Mad Cow disease in humans in UK and they
turned out to be very exaggerated.
When the political class was trying to de-gay HIV/AIDS in 1987, they had Oprah tell
everyone that 20% of heterosexual people would be dead before 1990.
The first I learned of Oprah's jaw-droppingly sensationalist remarks, was in a piece a
couple of days ago on AmericanThinker (which sounds like a rare bird indeed, if not an
outright oxymoron – but it has good stuff from time to time).
Anyhow, it was an interesting piece – entitled
" Reflections on a Century of Junk Science " by the author of " Hoodwinked: How
Intellectual Hucksters Have Hijacked American Culture ", which I will acquire today. (The
book's 11 years old, but sounds like it will be along the same lines as Kendrick's "
Doctoring Data: How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense ", which was
excellent).
@UncommonGround ,,,As of March 19th there were 93 Corona deaths in Bergamo and counting.
As of March 19th five Italian doctors and 13 medics have lost their lives with 2,629 health
workers infected, or 8,3 per cent.
I will keep this comment as brief as possible.
I welcome refutation of these theses, which I believe are crucial to any analysis of the
response to the pandemic:
1. Current screening tests for COVID19 (a PCR test, not an antibody test) have a high rate of
false positives (see excellent contributions on this topic from Kratoklastes).
2. Draconian public health responses are allegedly aimed at minimizing serious COVID19
disease (severe respiratory distress, up to and including ARDS). "Positive" testing
individuals overwhelming do not fall into this category.
3. At this juncture, our best single metric is death from COVID19. Unfortunately the
definition of a COVID19 fatality varies between jurisdictions. To be counted as such a
fatality, the current best definition would be: novel coronovirus IgM (+/- IgG) positive
(proof of recent infection) plus ARDS (radiologically, if not pathologically, confirmed).
4. Alleged COVID19 fatalities are overwhelming patients >70 having 3 or more serious
comorbidities.
5. There is an association between ACE-inhibitor or AT-receptor antagonist use and likelihood
of death from infection by novel coronavirus.
To the last point: nearly 40% of the Italian fatalities were using ACE inhibitors (and
this may be an underestimate as pre-admission medication charts were lacking). The virus
binds to the pulmonary ACE2 receptor.
Conceivably the use of ACE-inhibitors (or the related AT-receptor antagonists) induces
upregulation of this receptor, but this is purely conjecture on my part.
Anecdotally, use of this medication class is lower in Germany, which has been proffered among
reasons for its lower fatality rates.
@Realist I have two family members in UK who have already recovered after testing
positive and I, myself, suffered ten days with an unpleasant dry cough, malaise and low grade
fever late in February – which has since cleared uneventfully. I was never tested and,
following my GP, discounted being infected with COVID-19 at that time.
An antibody test for COVID-19 virus exposure is near to becoming commercially available
and this is likely to be widely used in order to identify people who can safely volunteer to
help with the pandemic – it may provide some interesting statistics and a different
management perspective.
when one deals with deep uncertainty, both governance and precaution require us to hedge
for the worst. While risk-taking is a business that is left to individuals, collective
safety and systemic risk are the business of the state. Failing that mandate of prudence by
gambling with the lives of citizens is a professional wrongdoing that extends beyond
academic mistake; it is a violation of the ethics of governing.
The obvious policy left now is a lockdown, with overactive testing and contact tracing:
follow the evidence from China and South Korea rather than thousands of error-prone
computer codes. So we have wasted weeks, and ones that matter with a multiplicative
threat.
Some here have said that the economic cost of a lockdown or other measures that severely
impact the economy exceeds the value of the lives saved. But what is that economic cost, in
reality? People putting off buying a house or a car by six months or a year, resulting in an
unrecoverable loss of GDP? But so what? What important difference does that make?
The WHO declared a pandemic 50 days later on March 11th.
Rumour in the markets has it WHO held out as long as possible to avoid triggering the
provisions of World Bank Pandemic Bonds, for which investors enjoyed relatively high coupon
rates in the current low interest-rate environment in exchange for running the risk of losing
their principal investment if a pandemic was declared in the window period.
"So far we know:
-tests have large error margin
-positive tests only associated with small chance of being sick
-vast majority of COVID-19 cases have other serious diseases
-We have 80x more pneumonia cases than COVID-19
Are these good reasons to suspend the lives of billions?"
the Coronavirus death statistics are certainly far more solid and reliable
But still quite unreliable. Nobody knows what tests are being performed or how accurate
those tests are. For all we know they are calling flu/pneumonia deaths as COVID-19 deaths,
whether deliberately/recklessly (pressured) or because the tests are simply faulty.
If we assume a mortality rate of 1%
Based on what? As noted, the best case of a general population exposure is the Diamond
Princess – where all passengers were exposed fully for 2 weeks and then under terrible
quarantine conditions for 4 weeks. Of the 3,177 passengers and crew, some 677 (20%) took ill,
and 7 (0.2% of the population, and 1% of the ill) died, all of them in their 70s and older
(and indeed the data released by the Japanese health ministry indicates the ship had twice
the number of people in each age category 60-79, 70-79, and 80+ than does the US).
Conveniently, everyone repeating the hysteria line completely omits to look at the best
data available.
Number of infected = Number of Deaths / Mortality_Rate *
2^(Mortality_Period/Doubling_Period)
Nothing in nature is exponential as everything runs up against some barrier, usually
sooner than later. I can make the argument about rabbit reproduction: each female rabbit can
produce 60 rabbits per year in three litters. This would indicate that each male/female pair
increases 10-fold every 3 months – a far faster growth rate than your virus. And under
certain conditions, they can, for a time, accomplish that before they hit the proverbial
brick wall.
Let's look at Italy. The first recorded death (FWIW) was Feb. 21. Now using your
assumptions, there had been 100 new infections three weeks earlier (on Jan. 31). Next, as you
assume a doubling-period of 6 days, those 100 infections would have increased to 100 x
2^(37/6) = 7,183 infections by the time of March 8, when the emergency orders went into
effect. However, on March 8 there had already been 366 deaths. Since the disease, according
to your model, takes 3 weeks to kill, this means we need to look at the number of infections
on Feb. 21, which, in your model, equals 100 x 2^(21/6) = 1,131.
In other words, on Feb. 21 there were 1,131 persons infected, and of those, 366 had died
by March 8. For a mortality rate of 32.3%.
But let's work backwards from another date. By Mar. 24, there had been 6,820 deaths. To
arrive at that, using your assumed death rate, that means by Mar. 3, 682,000 people had to be
infected (since 1% of them would die within 3 weeks). Which means, according to your model,
that 341,000 were infected on Feb. 26, 170,500 on Feb. 20. But your model already showed that
only 1,131 were infected on Feb. 21.
In other words, this "model" is utter bunk.
What we do know is as follows: the death rate on the Diamond Princess, under terrible
conditions, was 0.2%, all over 70.
The global death rate is about 18,000 dead out of 7 billion. The annual tuberculosis death
number is between 1 and 2 million.
That people who are very old (and thus have compromised immune systems) or people who have
various chronic diseases are the ones who die from this disease. This is because the virus
can attack numerous receptors, including those in the kidney, liver, heart, white blood
cells, and pancreas (a sort of "frankenstein" bio-engineered virus). Thus anyone with a weak
pancreas (diabetes), kidney, liver, heart (hypertension, etc.), or lungs (smokers, etc.) are
susceptible to having an organ fail.
The death rate will grow only among this segment of the population. It is enough to
isolate them (or, better yet, have them self-isolate).
The reason younger Americans are dying is because Americans are extremely unhealthy. I
wager all the very sick younger Americans are obese, probably with diabetes, don't exercise,
and eat unhealthy foods, leading to heart and other weaknesses.
All of this apart from the issue, of how long this virus has been in the wild. It seems my
mother caught this disease in early February, in a small Midwestern isolated community
– she had what are given at the symptoms, but nobody was looking for it at the time, so
there is no diagnosis of her illness.
Isn't the real issue this (numerically and culturally): we have a health care system,
which is obviously not made to provide services to every single American whenever they
need it, all at the same time , and this pandemic is likely to kill say, a million old
people (given how large our overall population is), and since no one "gets" to just die (ala
Soylent Green) but instead gets sick at 70, 80, etc and has to be preserved forever so
anything that "burns" through what would be an otherwise healthy population, as with all
animals (including humans) historically, instead becomes such a serious risk (if not somewhat
random) to the old or infirm, that we shut everything down, potentially causing all sorts of
other human catastrophes so that some old folks get to choose another death (maybe the flu?)
over a Covid-19 death?
Long run on sentence, but isn't that really what this is all about now ?
Bmac
says: Show Comment March
25, 2020 at 12:28 pm GMT 100 Words Neill Ferguson of Imperial College London argues that
every fatality represents an infected population one thousand strong.
Americans have been conditioned to never go to the hospital. Even being hospitalized can
destroy one's finances, let alone for an extended period and actually receiving
treatment.
Lack of testing and diagnostics means that it is impossible for people to know their own
condition and the severity of it. We have multiple reports of people just dropping dead in
the US.
Finally, we are just slightly behind on the timeline. NYC will be in Italy/Spain's
position very shortly, followed by states like Texas which are doing even less to contain it.
Expect it to be worse here when it is all said and done.
" If indeed they did" . . . is a very crucial phrase. With these digifraudulent
Democratic Primary/Caucus elections, we will never know.
As for those who really did vote for Biden, decades of 24/7 psyops and infops against a
mainstream population without the knowledge or energy to extract information from beyond the
Media Plantation will create that kind of voting pattern.
You need to get a lawyer, anyone on Medicare so admitted would be covered, they'd be some
co-pays, per the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare. If the hospital accepts Medicare you
were covered and should (sadly less) owe less than 1k. No way a hospital lets you in for that
procedure without knowing it's getting paid. By law all they have to do is stabilize your
vitals and throw you out the back door. Very sorry and upset to hear of this.
Six million protection masks for Germany disappeared at the Kenya airport. They were valued
at a million dollars. Theft is suspected or that the manufacturer (Belgium) decided to
destroy them. Nothing is accidental in disaster capitalism.
I wonder whether those who seak war at all costs, are now trying to get us fighting for
masks and ventilators....
Seeing the comments at SST on the necessities of NYC major, it seesm to me that the same
people who seeks always confrontation is always ready to start a fight with its nationals for
whatever reason....
In Spain, as I am seeing, even counting with the inability and greed of those at the
helms, it seems to me that a "USSR 1990" effect on dissapearing health care items from the
market to then make them appear at multiple times their price could be happening right
now...
By blockading health care products, most proably the same people who have caused all this,
may seek that public health care collapsing gives a bad impression so as to get them
privatized once the country in depression.
Jen, yes, I am very familiar with the program as I have an acquaintance who helps usher in
very wealthy Chinese into Canada for a hefty fee.
That doesn't change the fact the Chinese are hated everywhere they go. This is very well
documented in the book entitled World on Fire, by a Chinese American author Amy Chua who also
wrote the book Hymn of the Dragon Mother.
She brags about how she pushes her children to achieve more in the second book.
In the first, she explains how her Chinese aunt was murdered by their Filipino servants
because the servants were badly treated. Now, you can tell me if the two have any relation to
each other.
Apart from TCM which the Chinese got from the Indians and developed, the entire Chinese
civilization needs to be scrapped and started over.
The Chinese "scrapped" their civilisation starting in the 1950s. By then it was on its
last legs anyway, after over 100 years of degradation from mass opium addiction brought by
the British, followed by decades of foreign interference and the consequences of that
interference: a messianic cult culminating in the Taiping rebellion in the 1860s and then the
Boxer Rebellion at the turn of the 20th century, among other things.
Amy Chua is just one person whose mother's family came from Fujian province in SE China
and settled in the Philippines, along with several other families from that part of China.
(Former Philippines President Corazon Aquino also had family from Fujian.) People living in
Fujian and Guangdong (the old Canton province) were exposed to more Western / European
influences than other parts of China. Fujian and Guangdong are also the areas where most
overseas Chinese communities living in SE Asia and the West, up to the 1980s, hailed
from.
So if you are talking about people in SE Asia and the West hating Chinese for their
behaviour, exemplified by the behaviour of Amy Chua to her own daughters and of her family to
its Filipino servants, and the behaviour of people in Hong Kong and Singapore with their
status-seeking and selfish materialist values, and their adherence to extreme Protestant
Christian beliefs, bear in mind where they learned their lessons.
@Anon
As for people with jobs supposedly not needing the relief checks, speak for yourself.
Completely out of touch with how much tens of millions of working Americans are living and
struggling, and not just the poor or minimum-wage workers by any means.
Middle-income and upper-middle-income people in many places are struggling with housing
costs and medical costs above all, and their situation generally is not improving in recent
years.
As a factual correction, the proposals on both sides are not for $1,000 per family; they
are for $1,000 or $1,200 or more to each adult, plus $500 for each child, and I'm glad they
are.
This would be a better use of taxpayer money -- or money conjured out of thin air by the
federal reserve -- than most of what the fed gov has been doing. That includes the vast sums
we have spent on unnecessary wars and occupations that are neither defensive nor
retaliatory.
Senator Rand Paul wisely proposed cutting war spending to help pay for the relief package.
We should go much, much farther than he proposed and slash hundreds of billions of dollars in
annual military spending and instead give it directly to US Citizens here at home.
We should also consider placing a permanent floor under Americans, not just a fleeting
relief package that ends when this virus quiets down. Very large cuts to the warfare state
and the welfare-state bureaucracy alike can provide funding for a substantial monthly
universal basic income for all US Citizens age 21 and over -- with less government borrowing
than we have now.
Public ownership of our God-given natural resources could provide another large source of
funding for the UBI -- without any government borrowing at all.
Of course, these ideas are too responsible for either Dems or Republicans to even debate.
Instead, they'll do a sensible and just thing, directly helping Americans rather than big
connected corporations and banks, but they'll recklessly borrow to do so.
There is a middle way and we should be negotiating it.
3/ Isn't chloroquine just a new name for Jesuit's (Peruvian) bark? Or quinine. The tonic
in gin and tonic?
4/ Tom Paine's 1796 pamphlet 'The English System of Finance' and Cobbett's 'Paper against
Gold' are coming into their own. What Disraeli called the Dutch system of finance is what is
collapsing, almost 500 years after it began. That was the contradiction in globalisation, one
that Rosa Luxemburg had pointed out more than a century ago: we have reached the limits of
constant expansion. And not just in environmental terms.
"... The state governments prefer that all schools be closed while Canberra is receiving advice from Dr Brendan Murphy, Chief Health Officer of Australia, that schools not be closed because children would be at more risk of picking up COVID-19 from adults at home, and from congregating in areas where they are not being supervised by adults if they decide not to stay at home for various reasons (because among other things they would also be at risk from domestic violence). ..."
"... Please don't feel brainwashed into taking totally unnecessary extra precautions beyond normal levels of hygiene in order to protect yourself from a common coronavirus. ..."
"... The behavior of elites across the globe suggest a level of collective anxiety not seen in before in my lifetime. Certainly endless decades of oligarchic control maintained through keeping Western populations mystified by means of coordinated mass propaganda – has seen rather significant cracks develop through the emergence of progressive independent journalism shared across the world via the web. One would think those ever widening cracks in the indoctrination system have perhaps clarified for our betters that their fairy tales are falling upon ever greater numbers of deaf ears around the globe. ..."
"... Given currently unfolding events one is tempted to think that elites – perhaps rather than being left to respond to events completely out of their control – like a system-crashing spontaneous economic collapse – are collectively choosing to instead to – "control what they can" – through this supposed 'pandemic' response operation. ..."
"... That this over the top elite led pandemic response appears an effort to lead the credulous masses into whatever straightjacket has been prepared for us is simply impossible to ignore. ..."
Below is our list of twelve medical experts whose opinions on the Coronavirus outbreak contradict the official
narratives of the MSM, and the memes so prevalent on social media.
* * *
Dr
Sucharit Bhakdi
is a specialist in microbiology. He was a professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University
in Mainz and head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene and one of the most cited research scientists
in German history.
What he says:
We are afraid that 1 million infections with the new virus will lead to 30 deaths per day over the next 100 days.
But we do not realise that 20, 30, 40 or 100 patients positive for normal coronaviruses are already dying every
day.
[The government's anti-COVID19 measures] are grotesque, absurd and very dangerous [ ] The life expectancy
of millions is being shortened. The horrifying impact on the world economy threatens the existence of countless
people. The consequences on medical care are profound. Already services to patients in need are reduced,
operations cancelled, practices empty, hospital personnel dwindling. All this will impact profoundly on our whole
society.
All these measures are leading to self-destruction and collective suicide based on nothing but a spook.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/JBB9bA-gXL4
*
Dr
Wolfgang Wodarg
is a German physician specialising in Pulmonology, politician and former chairman of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. In 2009 he called for an inquiry into alleged conflicts of interest
surrounding the EU response to the Swine Flu pandemic.
What he says:
Politicians are being courted by scientists scientists who want to be important to get money for their
institutions. Scientists who just swim along in the mainstream and want their part of it [ ] And what is missing
right now is a rational way of looking at things.
We should be asking questions like "How did you find out this
virus was dangerous?", "How was it before?", "Didn't we have the same thing last year?", "Is it even something
new?"
That's missing.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/p_AyuhbnPOI
*
Dr Joel Kettner
s professor of Community Health Sciences and Surgery at Manitoba University, former
Chief Public Health Officer for Manitoba province and Medical Director of the International Centre for Infectious
Diseases.
I have never seen anything like this, anything anywhere near like this. I'm not talking about the pandemic,
because I've seen 30 of them, one every year. It is called influenza. And other respiratory illness viruses, we
don't always know what they are. But I've never seen this reaction, and I'm trying to understand why.
[ ]
I worry about the message to the public, about the fear of coming into contact with people, being in the same
space as people, shaking their hands, having meetings with people. I worry about many, many consequences related
to that.
[ ]
In Hubei, in the province of Hubei, where there has been the most cases and deaths by far, the actual number of
cases reported is 1 per 1000 people and the actual rate of deaths reported is 1 per 20,000. So maybe that would
help to put things into perspective.
Dr John
Ioannidis
Professor of Medicine, of Health Research and Policy and of Biomedical Data Science, at
Stanford University School of Medicine and a Professor of Statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and
Sciences. He is director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation
Center at Stanford (METRICS).
He is also the editor-in-chief of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation. He was chairman at the
Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine as well as adjunct professor at
Tufts University School of Medicine.
As a physician, scientist and author he has made contributions to evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, data
science and clinical research. In addition, he pioneered the field of meta-research. He has shown that much of the
published research does not meet good scientific standards of evidence.
Patients who have been tested for SARS-CoV-2 are disproportionately those with severe symptoms and bad outcomes.
As most health systems have limited testing capacity, selection bias may even worsen in the near future.
The one
situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine
passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death
rate from Covid-19 is much higher.
[ ]
Could the Covid-19 case fatality rate be that low? No, some say, pointing to the high rate in elderly people.
However, even some so-called mild or common-cold-type coronaviruses that have been known for decades can have case
fatality rates as high as 8% when they infect elderly people in nursing homes.
[ ]
If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR tests, the number of
total deaths due to "influenza-like illness" would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually
noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average.
– "A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without
reliable data",
Stat News
, 17th March 2020
*
Dr Yoram Lass
is an Israeli physician,
politician and former Director General of the Health Ministry. He also worked as Associate Dean of the Tel Aviv
University Medical School and during the 1980s presented the science-based television show Tatzpit.
Italy is known for its enormous morbidity in respiratory problems, more than three times any other European
country. In the US about 40,000 people die in a regular flu season and so far 40-50 people have died of the
coronavirus, most of them in a nursing home in Kirkland, Washington.
[ ]
In every country, more people die from regular flu compared with those who die from the coronavirus.
[ ]
there is a very good example that we all forget: the swine flu in 2009. That was a virus that reached the
world from Mexico and until today there is no vaccination against it. But what? At that time there was no Facebook
or there maybe was but it was still in its infancy. The coronavirus, in contrast, is a virus with public
relations.
Whoever thinks that governments end viruses is wrong.
– Interview in
Globes
, March 22nd 2020
*
Dr Pietro
Vernazza
is a Swiss physician specialising Infectious Diseases at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen and
Professor of Health Policy.
What he says:
We have reliable figures from Italy and a work by epidemiologists, which has been published in the renowned
science journal ‹Science›, which examined the spread in China. This makes it clear that around 85 percent of all
infections have occurred without anyone noticing the infection. 90 percent of the deceased patients are verifiably
over 70 years old, 50 percent over 80 years.
[ ]
In Italy, one in ten people diagnosed die, according to the findings of the
Science
publication, that
is statistically one of every 1,000 people infected. Each individual case is tragic, but often – similar to the
flu season – it affects people who are at the end of their lives.
[ ]
If we close the schools, we will prevent the children from quickly becoming immune.
[ ]
We should better integrate the scientific facts into the political decisions.
– Interview in
St. Galler Tagblatt
, 22nd March 2020
*
Frank Ulrich Montgomery
is German radiologist,
former President of the German Medical Association and Deputy Chairman of the World Medical Association.
I'm not a fan of lockdown. Anyone who imposes something like this must also say when and how to pick it up again.
Since we have to assume that the virus will be with us for a long time, I wonder when we will return to normal?
You can't keep schools and daycare centers closed until the end of the year. Because it will take at least that
long until we have a vaccine. Italy has imposed a lockdown and has the opposite effect. They quickly reached their
capacity limits, but did not slow down the virus spread within the lockdown.
– Interview in
General
Anzeiger
, 18th March 2020
*
Prof.
Hendrik Streeck
is a German HIV researcher, epidemiologist and clinical trialist. He is professor of
virology, and the director of the Institute of Virology and HIV Research, at Bonn University.
The new pathogen is not that dangerous, it is even less dangerous than Sars-1. The special thing is that
Sars-CoV-2 replicates in the upper throat area and is therefore much more infectious because the virus jumps from
throat to throat, so to speak. But that is also an advantage: Because Sars-1 replicates in the deep lungs, it is
not so infectious, but it definitely gets on the lungs, which makes it more dangerous.
[ ]
You also have to take into account that the Sars-CoV-2 deaths in Germany were exclusively old people. In
Heinsberg, for example, a 78-year-old man with previous illnesses died of heart failure, and that without Sars-2
lung involvement. Since he was infected, he naturally appears in the Covid 19 statistics. But the question is
whether he would not have died anyway, even without Sars-2.
– Interview in
Frankfurter Allgemeine
, 16th March 2020
*
Dr Yanis Roussel
et. al.
– A team of researchers from the Institut Hospitalo-universitaire Méditerranée Infection, Marseille
and the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, conducting a
peer-reviewed study on Coronavirus mortality for the government of France under the 'Investments for the Future'
programme.
The problem of SARS-CoV-2 is probably overestimated, as 2.6 million people die of respiratory infections each year
compared with less than 4000 deaths for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of writing.
[ ]
This study compared the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 in OECD countries (1.3%) with the mortality rate of common
coronaviruses identified in AP-HM patients (0.8%) from 1 January 2013 to 2 March 2020. Chi-squared test was
performed, and the P-value was 0.11 (not significant).
[ ]
it should be noted that systematic studies of other coronaviruses (but not yet for SARS-CoV-2) have found that
the percentage of asymptomatic carriers is equal to or even higher than the percentage of symptomatic patients.
The same data for SARS-CoV-2 may soon be available, which will further reduce the relative risk associated with
this specific pathology.
– "SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data",
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
, 19th March 2020
*
Dr. David
Katz
is an American physician and founding director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center
I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near-total meltdown of
normal life -- schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned -- will be long-lasting and calamitous, possibly
graver than the direct toll of the virus itself. The stock market will bounce back in time, but many businesses
never will. The unemployment, impoverishment and despair likely to result will be public health scourges of the
first order.
– "Is Our Fight Against Coronavirus Worse Than the Disease?",
New York Times
20th
March 2020
*
Michael T. Osterholm
is regents professor and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and
Policy at the University of Minnesota.
Consider the effect of shutting down offices, schools, transportation systems, restaurants, hotels, stores,
theaters, concert halls, sporting events and other venues indefinitely and leaving all of their workers unemployed
and on the public dole. The likely result would be not just a depression but a complete economic breakdown, with
countless permanently lost jobs, long before a vaccine is ready or natural immunity takes hold.
[ ]
[T]he best alternative will probably entail letting those at low risk for serious disease continue to work,
keep business and manufacturing operating, and "run" society, while at the same time advising higher-risk
individuals to protect themselves through physical distancing and ramping up our health-care capacity as
aggressively as possible. With this battle plan, we could gradually build up immunity without destroying the
financial structure on which our lives are based.
– "Facing covid-19 reality: A national lockdown is no cure",
Washington Post
21st March 2020
*
Dr
Peter Goetzsche
is Professor of Clinical Research Design and Analysis at the University of Copenhagen
and founder of the Cochrane Medical Collaboration. He has written several books on corruption in the field of
medicine and the power of big pharmaceutical companies.
Our main problem is that no one will ever get in trouble for measures that are too draconian. They will only get
in trouble if they do too little. So, our politicians and those working with public health do much more than they
should do.
No such draconian measures were applied during the 2009 influenza pandemic, and they obviously cannot
be applied every winter, which is all year round, as it is always winter somewhere. We cannot close down the whole
world permanently.
Should it turn out that the epidemic wanes before long, there will be a queue of people wanting to take credit
for this. And we can be damned sure draconian measures will be applied again next time. But remember the joke
about tigers. "Why do you blow the horn?" "To keep the tigers away." "But there are no tigers here." "There you
see!"
– "Corona: an epidemic of mass panic", blog post on
Deadly Medicines
21st March 2020
Gary Wilson
,
What happened in Wuhan will eventually happen everywhere. Any new pathogen will rapidly spread in the
susceptible population (those with some degree of a compromised immune system). After a period there
will be no more susceptible people left to infect and the disease will disappear. Government
regulations to prevent the spread is of no use if someone infected with the pathogen can infect others
before they get the symptoms that they have the disease. Lots of money is spent fighting the virus
(there is money to be made!) while no money is spent to improve the immune system of those people with
weakened immune systems.
fred
,
Btw, the only major sporting event still going on right now is the
Chess Candidates Tournament
(which is a qualification for the World Championship) taking place in
Yekaterinburg, Russia. (Which has freezing temperatures right now and is covered in snow.)
Players get
a health check up twice daily, but are not tested for the coronavirus specifically. This means that if
any one of the players gets a cold or mild temperature: coronavirus!
Therefore I expect the tournament
to be halted mid-way any day now. (Also if one of the players feels like the tournament is not going
well, or that his preparation is not working, they might pretend to be sick to get the tournament
postponed.)
You may be well aware that the Australian Federal government is at loggerheads
with New South Wales and Victorian state governments over the issue of closing all schools.
The state
governments prefer that all schools be closed while Canberra is receiving advice from Dr Brendan
Murphy, Chief Health Officer of Australia, that schools not be closed because children would be at
more risk of picking up COVID-19 from adults at home, and from congregating in areas where they are
not being supervised by adults if they decide not to stay at home for various reasons (because among
other things they would also be at risk from domestic violence).
Please find at this link
an article which among other things gives the opinions of various medical
and health experts who oppose the closure of schools during the current lock-downs here in Australia.
An example of such advice from the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee:
The AHPPC met on Tuesday 17 March to consider the issue of school closures in relation to the
community transmission of COVID‑19. The Committee's advice is that pre-emptive closures are not
proportionate or effective as a public health intervention to prevent community transmission of
COVID-19 at this time Previous studies suggest that the potential reduction in community
transmission from pre‑emptive school closures may be offset by the care arrangements that are in
place for children who are not at school. Children may require care from older carers who are more
vulnerable to severe disease, or may continue to associate (and transmit infection) outside of
school settings. Broadly, the health evidence on school closures from previous respiratory
epidemics shows the costs are often underestimated and the benefits are overestimated. This may be
even more so in relation to COVID-19 as, unlike influenza, the impact on otherwise healthy children
has been minimal to date. School closure is associated with considerable costs. Studies have
estimated that around 15% of the total workforce and 30% of the healthcare workforce may need to
take time off work to care for children. This burden will be significant and will fall
disproportionately on those in casual or tenuous work circumstances. At this stage, the spread of
COVID-19 in the community is at quite low levels. It may be many months before the level of
Australian community infection is again as low as it is at the moment
More than 70 countries around the world have implemented either
nationwide or localised school closures, at different times in the evolution of the local COVID-19
epidemic, however it should be noted the majority of these have not been successful in controlling
the outbreak.
Some of these countries are now considering their position in relation to
re-opening schools. Singapore has had success in limiting the transmission of COVID-19 in the
community without closing schools" [however the successful period in Singapore coincided with
school holidays and when students returned they were temperature-tested ]
Antonym
,
This
cure is worse than the disease, true.
Governments made lock downs in haste, erring on the heavy handed side just to be "sure". Who can
prove them wrong afterwards? The voters.
Airplanes have been the worse spreaders.
Some religious preachers have shown to be immune to public self isolate calls in Asia.
Maybe a good Global practice run for when a
really
deadly
virus breaks loose?
Let East Asian and central African wildlife wet markets be forbidden and enforced with long jail
and financial sentences.
Virus Guy
,
Nonsense. It was not in haste or error. No government is going to hastily shut down its economy out
of too much tender concern for its citizens, and we have teams of analysts and advisors on
infectious disease working for governments who would never have advised this insane level of
'precautions ' for a moderate coronavirus showing no evidence of extreme infectivity or fatality.
As in China the reaction has anticipated a non-existent problem and then gone beyond any
accepted protocol to 'respond.' This has all the hallmarks of an entirely manufactured crisis.
Virus Guy
,
Please don't feel brainwashed into taking totally unnecessary extra precautions beyond normal
levels of hygiene in order to protect yourself from a common coronavirus.
Results: When the infection rate of the close contacts and the sensitivity and specificity of reported
results were taken as the point estimates, the positive predictive value of the active screening was
only 19.67%, in contrast, the false-positive rate of positive results was 80.33%. The
multivariate-probabilistic sensitivity analysis results supported the base-case findings, with a 75%
probability for the false-positive rate of positive results over 47%. Conclusions: In the close
contacts of COVID-19 patients, nearly half or even more of the 'asymptomatic infected individuals'
reported in the active nucleic acid test screening might be false positives.
Gary Weglarz
,
The behavior of elites across the globe suggest a level of collective anxiety not seen in before in my
lifetime. Certainly endless decades of oligarchic control maintained through keeping Western
populations mystified by means of coordinated mass propaganda – has seen rather significant cracks
develop through the emergence of progressive independent journalism shared across the world via the
web. One would think those ever widening cracks in the indoctrination system have perhaps clarified
for our betters that their fairy tales are falling upon ever greater numbers of deaf ears around the
globe.
Given currently unfolding events one is tempted to think that elites – perhaps rather than being
left to respond to events completely out of their control – like a system-crashing spontaneous
economic collapse – are collectively choosing to instead to – "control what they can" – through this
supposed 'pandemic' response operation.
That is to initiate a prefabricated "response" – proactively
to a projected impending system catastrophe that is only a matter of time. Or perhaps this is simply a
"testing operation," a "dry run" so to speak for when the uncontrollable event that crashes the system
does take place. A chance to gauge public reactions and further fine tune future response options?
That this over the top elite led pandemic response appears an effort to lead the credulous masses
into whatever straightjacket has been prepared for us is simply impossible to ignore.
Gary Weglarz
,
On the breathtaking clairvoyance of our wealthiest elites:
Slight uptick in overall registered deaths although still below average for this time of year.
But they've omitted the figures for deaths where the underlying cause was respiratory illness.
I can think of no legitimate reason why they would do so.
These are registered deaths, everybody knows they don't represent the true current number of
deaths.
There is no legitimate rationale for 'waiting for more accurate data' or any such excuse. Even if
the data is incomplete it's published. It's a registry of deaths not an adjusted death rate.
I really can't keep a sense of humour about this.
Or take any satisfaction from 'knowing better' or 'I told you so'. I thought what was happening now would be a process of years.
I don't expect sites like this will survive very long, regardless of how fringe or maligned they
are.
I'd like to say invest in printing presses.
But it's probably too late for that now.
The cat is slowly being let out of the bag Recently leaked (or unofficially released) Norwegian
government papers says the Corona measures are expected to be in place for 12 to 18 months, not just
for a few weeks. Presumably it will be the same in as good as every (NATO)-country.
The emergency
laws introduced in Norway are conspicuously similar to a highly unusual law proposal for increased
government powers in case of a civil emergency from September 2019, now they have been rushed through
parliament.
paul
,
Don't worry, folks, pandemics are profitable.
Bezos dumped $3 billion of stock just before the crash.
Makes Feinstein's paltry $6 million look like chump change.
Boeing want $60 billion, the airlines
want $50 billion (for starters), $150 billion for hotels, a trillion or so for shopping malls. A few
billion here, a few billion there, and pretty soon you're talking serious oney.
$3 trillion to date, but have patience, it's early days yet.
We can all rest easy.
The billionaires will emerge with their wealth more than doubled, just like last time.
Certainly puts my mind at rest.
Savorywill
,
We can rest easy because the government will just print more money. Plenty to go around! Every one
gets $3000 plus insurance covers their absent paychecks, so everything is back to normal, money
wise, and no one has to do anything. This can probably go on forever, until trucking companies also
go out of business, so no food or supplies can be transported into NYC, and then the shit will well
and truly hit the fan. I don't think AOC's green new deal will be of much use in such a situation
But, hopefully, it won't come to that.
xdream
,
Somewhere further down this thread somebody used the word:
Plandemic.
Could I suggest another variant on this theme a mutant perhaps:
AaronInMVD says: Website Show Comment March
24, 2020 at 12:01 am GMT 100 Words @Anon
For reasons of math and historic examples of how viral pandemics work in mammals, the fastest
way out would be to do nothing and ignore the virus so that it burns through quickly. This
happens with surprising frequency when the folks picking strain for the year's flu vaccine
guess wrong. And, no business is non-essential to the people depending on it for their
livelihood. So far Most people getting sick with the COVID-19 get unpleasantly sick or don't
realize they were sick. 99% of the fatalities are in the morbidly old or morbidly ill.
Now that the panic's been hyped up, there's no way out. For reasons of how democracy works,
the panic will be appeased. Expensively. Very Expensively.
More will suffer and experience pre-mature mortality due to the economic consequences of the
panic than than virus itself, because the economic damage here is going to last far longer.
At a time when shortages of
protective gear are putting health-care workers at risk, more than 750,000 medical-grade
masks went up for online auction in Texas.
Bottles of Purell sold for over $40 . A box of 16 masks went for $170 . They could be had
retail for $3 each before the coronavirus.
The week-long bidding that ended Tuesday was hosted by the website Auctions Unlimited. The
health-related products pulled in $154,000 in sales, according to Houston-based website owner
Tim Worstell. He estimated that he personally made as much as $40,000 on the sales.
Worstell would not publicly divulge the names of the buyers, and he identified the sellers
only as "large companies." He said the companies commissioned his website to sell masks,
disinfectant wipes, cleaning solutions and hand sanitizer, all items in high demand as
coronavirus spreads. Because the Texas attorney general issued a cease-and-desist order on
March 20 to block the sales during a state of emergency, which was declared March 16 by
Governor Greg Abbott, Worstell said the transactions couldn't be completed without approval
from law enforcement.
If permission is withheld, Worstell said he'll re-auction the items starting at $1 as soon
as the state of emergency is lifted. He said he'd already turned over the names of the sellers
to Houston law enforcement and the state Attorney General.
I was reading an article in a specialist medical newspaper at the doctor's surgery this
morning while waiting to pick up my blood test results. The article was written by a doctor
who was part of an Australian medical delegation visiting China recently. Among other things
the doctor mentioned was that government services personnel had been redeployed into other
areas away from their usual ranges of expertise. He saw a woman giving instructions to
medical personnel on how to wear medical gowns. He assumed she herself was a doctor; she
turned out to be a receptionist.
" The second thing that's good about it is the sun. Ultraviolet light kills viruses."
The disease is spreading in the southern hemisphere which is in summer with much higher UV
just as rapidly as the northern hemisphere which is in winter with much less UV. So the data
at least in this case says no. BTW she retired in 2008, and she seems to have done some
impressive work in the past, though as they say in the small print of adverts for
investments, past performance is no predictor of future performance.
The financial system is not the economy even though many people do not recognize the
distinction. This means the gigantic efforts by the world's central banks and governments to
essentially "bail-out" both will prove somewhat ineffective. Covid-19 has become the catalyst
for a major reset of both the financial sector and the Main Street economy, this article will
attempt to give some clarity as to what we might find still standing on the other side of this
crisis. Note the use of the word crisis, anyone who does not view the covid-19 now as a
watershed event is oblivious to the world around them
Originally the title to this piece was "Mind The Lag-Time Gap - The Worst Is Yet To Come."
You may call me Captain Obvious if you hone in on the later part of this title but the first
portion is the most important part. We should make a real effort to remember to mind the gap
between events appearing on the radar and when they actually impact day to day life. There is
such a thing as lag-time, everything is not immediate in our fast-moving world, some events
take time to play out. The covid-19 crisis is greatly complicated because we have no real idea
of how long it will persist. Hints have been made, possibly to ready the population, that this
could or will likely continue for months.
The Sell-off Has Been Dramatic
The scale, scope, and speed at which world markets have sold off and lost value as investors
try to get in front of this thing has been dramatic. Global stock and bond markets have seen an
estimated $25 trillion of 'paper' wealth erased in the last month. This has erased all the
gains from the December 2018 crash lows with more of the impact focused on stocks than bonds.
In its wake, the sell-off has stripped many people of their savings and jeopardized the future
existence of many businesses and financial institutions.
On the flip-side of the carnage is the ramping up of promises that a flood of money and aid
is forthcoming. All options are on the table to get money into the hands that need it, some of
it in the way of adding liquidity, some of it as a gift to anyone with their hand out. The
specifics are spotty at best but one thing we can be sure of is that those lobbying hardest
will get the most. The questions that remain to be answered are, how well this will work and
will this infusion of cash be enough?
This Has Become A giant Game Of Jenga
As the world faces the biggest financial bailout in history it is now being reported in the
news the US, in conjunction with the Federal Reserve, will now lend up to $4 trillion to
businesses affected by the coronavirus pandemic. "Working with the Federal Reserve - we'll have
up to $4 trillion of liquidity that we can use to support the economy," Treasury Secretary
Steven Mnuchin. told Fox News on Sunday. What Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs executive, did
not talk about is how dangerous these volatile markets are for the average investor.
Unfortunately, as with most programs unleashed by the "Financial-Political
Complex," we can expect much of the money to rapidly flow to enriching those atop the
wealth pyramid. Another certainty is that when all is said and done those in charge will
rapidly claim things would have been far worse if they had not taken such draconian actions.
People have shown they have a very short memory when it comes to the truth. Many Americans also
have a difficult time understanding a large reason for the rapid growth of inequality is
because the wealthy one-tenth of one percent of the population controls and shapes the nation's
policy to their advantage.
So far covid-19 is a new entry on to the scene. The reality of how it will affect the
economy has yet to be realized and will trickle down to society. What I deem the
Financial-Political Complex will protect its own with a massive bailout under the guise of "the
greater good." This extension of crony capitalism will throw just enough to the masses to
silence their outrage. Large businesses will be the winners while the big losers again will be
the middle-class, small businesses, and social mobility.
A few of the things that may change society are detailed below. Many people think the impact
on labor force participation will remain mild with workers viewing all this as transitory. As
the impact of COVID-19 take root and if activity fails to rapidly normalize, it is possible
more workers may reevaluate their life and decide to exit the labor force altogether. The same
will happen with many small business owners that come to the conclusion this is a sign to close
their doors and retire. Covid-19 has fed fear and insecurity, these are not feelings that
increase investors' desire or take on new risks.
While you hear about the massive aid package the Financial-Political Complex is concocting
to prop up this mess we should not forget they are responsible for much of the damage flowing
from this crisis. For years they ignored the growing weakness on Main Street and focused on
rising GDP numbers that were driven by government deficit spending. Addressing this now is like
trying to turn a battleship around in a lake the size of a bathtub, nearly impossible. If it
can be done it will take a long time. No matter how much money they throw at this the economy
will not turn around on a dime or spring back. Regardless of how the financial sector fares the
economy is destined to feel a great deal of pain.
We are in the second inning of a long game. It is only as this lingers that we begin to feel
the full power of the lag-time effect. Anyone that thinks next month will be a return to
business as usual and fails to mind the gap between expectations and reality is primed for
disappointment. Too big to fail has become deeply embedded in our crony capitalist society and
a key part of the Financial-Political Complex now running the show. If you are not part of this
group I suggest you prepare to be thrown under the bus for "the greater good."
"We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself," tweeted the president on Sunday
night, adding that, after the current 15-day shutdown, "we will make a decision as to which way
we want to go."
President Trump is said to be privately expressing a deepening concern at the damage the
coronavirus shutdown is doing to the U.S. economy and debating whether it can be safely
reopened.
Though castigated for his remark, Trump has a point.
The U.S. is rightly using extreme measures to meet the threat and control the virus that
threatens the lives of millions of Americans, with the elderly sick foremost among them. And we
need to do so without killing the economy upon which scores of millions of other Americans
depend.
Clearly, America was unprepared for this pandemic.
And there will be time enough to assess responsibility for the lack of surgical masks,
medical gowns, rubber gloves, respirators, ventilators and hospital beds.
The immediate imperative is to produce those beds and that equipment and get it delivered to
doctors, nurses and hospital staff, the front-line troops in the battle to control the
virus.
However, during this shutdown, all "nonessential businesses" are being closed and their
workers sent home to shelter in place and to keep "social distance" from friends and neighbors
to minimize the risk of spreading this easily transmissible virus.
Unfortunately, what is "nonessential" to some -- bars, restaurants, hotels, stores, cruise
ships, tourist sites, shops, malls -- are places of employment and indispensable sources of
income for millions of other Americans.
Close the businesses where these Americans work and you terminate the paychecks on which
they depend to pay the rent and buy the food and medicines they and their families need to
shelter and live. And if the salaries and wages on which workers depend are cut off, how are
these millions of newly unemployed supposed to live?
How do those who follow the instructions of the president and governors to remain in their
homes get their prescriptions filled and buy the food to feed their families?
How long can the shutdown be sustained if the necessities of life for the unemployed and
unpaid begin to run out? Is it necessary to create an economic and social crisis to solve the
medical crisis?
"We had to destroy the village in order to save it," was a remark attributed to a U.S. Army
officer in the Vietnam War. Must we cripple or destroy the economy to rescue the American
nation from the coronavirus crisis of 2020?
Then there is the matter of time. Many Americans can survive on what they have on hand for
two or four weeks. Far fewer can survive without income for two or four months.
... ... ...
If the medical crisis is allowed to induce an economic crisis that leads to a social crisis,
the American political system, our democratic system, may itself be severely tested.
Yet there is another solution. If you can test everybody who needs it, you can quarantine
everyone who is infected, and let the rest lead their normal lives. This worked in Singapore
and even in one town in Italy.
Moreover, if you can cure or abate the disease before people are critically ill, they won't
need intensive care. So if we keep ramping up the supply of test kits, while rolling out
anti-viral drugs, we can eradicate the virus without a disaster.
Read the entire article here: http://www.progressivepress.com/dox/Common-Sense-vs-the-Coronavirus.doc
Pharmacists told ProPublica that they are seeing unusual and fraudulent prescribing activity
as doctors stockpile unproven coronavirus drugs endorsed by President Donald Trump.
A nationwide shortage of two drugs touted as possible treatments for the coronavirus is
being driven in part by doctors inappropriately prescribing the medicines for family, friends
and themselves, according to pharmacists and state regulators.
"It's disgraceful, is what it is," said Garth Reynolds, executive director of the Illinois
Pharmacists Association, which started getting calls and emails Saturday from members saying
they were receiving questionable prescriptions. "And completely selfish."
Demand for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine surged over the past several days as
President Donald Trump promoted them as possible treatments for the coronavirus and online
forums buzzed with excitement over a small study suggesting the combination of
hydroxychloroquine and a commonly used antibiotic could be effective in treating
COVID-19.
@AaronInMVDYes, being sick sucks. Just would many of these people who are sick and suffering have
gone to the hospital if it wasn't for the damned panic.
In Italy the hospitals are completely overwhelmed and it has nothing to do with panic.
They are doing military triaging and medical workers are about to collapse. They have more
hospital beds per capita than the US so we definitely don't want to end up like them.
In the US there are probably people showing up at hospitals for tests but that is the
fault of the government (including Democrats) for not getting enough tests ready. Even today
there aren't enough tests and it is unlikely they will meet demand within weeks if not
months.
Democrats are blaming Trump but they were the ones calling travel bans racist and they
didn't have anything to say about tests when it was starting to spread two months ago. They
were focused on the primary and getting rid of Bernie.
'' want it or not the rest of the population is gonna get the Coronavirus''...wow !!! you
are are sooo sure about it ...i bet you know thinks that we don't , probably you knew this
since last year
Very informative .. Thank you and I agree almost totally.. only thing that I find is an
error is immunity to virus. Immunity will be there with young and active people. The virus
can still be transmitted. Older generation will continue to be susceptible to the virus
unless we have a medicine for corona virus.
More than 250,000 people are hospitalized for pneumonia annually in the US. The mortality
rate for pneumonia in the US population (all ages) is 15.1 deaths per 100,000.
An estimated 50,000 Americans die of pneumonia annually (137/DAY). 7500 Americans per day die
of all causes.
In Lombardy, the precrisis total ICU capacity was approximately 720 beds (2.9% of total
hospital beds at a total of 74 hospitals); these ICUs usually have 85% to 90% occupancy
during the winter months. The number of intensive care units has dropped by half over the
last 20 years, dropping from the highest to the lowest number of beds per capita in Europe to
around 230 per 100,000 inhabitants (23 , 000 beds in lombardi -700 icu beds) with population
of 10 million
The US has 15% ICU based on total hospital beds and runs at 60-77% capacity depending on
hospital size (higher in winter months)
The United States has 25 ICU beds per 100 000 people (75,000), as compared with 5
-7 per 100 000 in the United Kingdom and Italy
U.S. ventilator capacity exceeds its number of ICU beds, according to data from the
Society of Critical Care Medicine
Tests being used to detect COVID 19 are self validated by the manufacturer. FDA states
they have not review the validation data. There is no reported specificity. A chinese study
showed expanded testing of those with mild symptoms or asymptomatic were false positives.
More testing yields more cases and deaths. Even with influenza only 1% of those who get it
are laboratory tested.
Populations unable to think can not maintain a Democracy and Freedom, and will be doomed
to serfdom. Lock Step will pave the way for the transition.
A User
Six months down the track, duopoly voting majority may perhaps be looking to do more than
vote for the duopoly, but that's only a maybe. It will take a lot of hardship to pull them
away from reality tv...meantime, your comment fits in here like another brick in the wall.
Another pissed off human having a winge.
Doing something... seems to me a group with structure, a plan and an endgoal is required
and this got out to the wider public. End goal needs to be something that would be accepted
by the reality tv watching public and step by step plan to get there...
We havn't hit bottom yet, still a long way from it. Any plan will have to match the situation
at the bottom and the way back. But first you gotta get two people to agree on a plan.
We are headed into the unknown. Like the first stages of the collapse of the soviet
union.
Putin when asked about Gorbochov and Yeltsin he just says "everyone knew we had to change
but nobody knew how to go about it."
Here is somewhat different because in the mainstream types, nobody knows we have to
change.
We are likely to go through something akin to the soviet nineties and only then will the
population know we need to change because the old ways failed.
Best to play it by ear until that point. Nothing can be done untill the wider population
realise that all they have known has failed and a different start must be made. I doubt too
many of our countries will have a Putin that can pull us out of the shit. And by a Putin, I
mean somebody that has a vision acceptable to the majority and comes to be trusted by the
majority and also has the nous and ability required.
I got the "flu" in November 2019 and I had the same symptoms as Coronavirus - I thought it
was going to kill me - and while I missed some work - work demanded me back - and so I worked
through some terrible times. Everyone at work was sick with different levels of symptoms. To
this day I have still not 100% recovered - but I am poor and have no health insurance - and,
well, everybody has been exposed for months so it doesn't even matter anymore. No one has
died - but everyone has a low level persistent respiratory illness.
Again: if nCOV was really already in the US in November - where was the surge in
hospitalizations? Regardless of age, ~20% of those who get it, get pneumonia or worse and
need hospital care.
We don't even have that right now despite a huge number of cases. Maybe the US and Germany
are different - we'll see in about 2 weeks.
FFS can we stop with the endless debate about who did what to whom in the early days of this
virus' existence?
Not only are such debates entirely pointless because it is out among us now, it is pointless
because whether they want it or not a full investigation including non-fiction backtrace is
inevitable if we the people who look past the lies, play our cards right.
It has been said that like 911 the coronavirus pandemic will be a game-changer, that is
the world will be different after the lockdowns, lies and beat ups than it was before.
There is however one major difference. Most humans were busy working and looking to keep
their families going to do more than lap up what network TV & the fishwraps told them
about 911. The far from reality attitudes too many still hold, date from that intensive
tabloid indoctrination.
This time is pretty much opposite, people are stuck at home with too much time to think,
but not enough they believe they can do.
If ever there was a time when it was possible to assist our fellow humans to see the world
as it is rather than how the media tells them it is, that time is right now.
Many humans are already pissed about this; plans they had made for their 2020 are
kyboshed, no one really trusts politicians anymore so everyone is asking themselves if
this enforced income cut is really as essential as the pols claim it is(sure some nations
have trickled a little down for the durationbut even there no one is gonna be better off,
everyone normal is going to be copping an income cut).
That means most people are going to be somewhat resistant to the usual bland pol
platitudes.
Have no fear the neolibs see the danger and will be pumping out the bulldust 24/7, the
difference this time is Jo/Joe Blow finally has the time to consider other points of view,
especially those which are expressed entertainingly rather than didactically, so WTF are
people wasting time and energy arguing the toss about matters of interest to so few other
humans?
I'm germinating a notion of what I am going to try to combat the tosh being pumped out by
the elite it would be great if other humans considered the same as I'm certain most will come
up with far better means to help others see than what I dream up.
Allen , Mar 24 2020 1:29 utc | 127
(Coronavirus is a fake emergency))
I've also pondered the question of whether the 'cure' is worse than the 'disease' in
net/overall effect. However, it's important to remember that the reason the pandemic has been
declared an emergency IN EVERY COUNTRY, whether Commie or Fake Democracy, is that it's making
people sick enough to require hospital treatment. And these patients are ADDITIONAL patients
which the health system hadn't planned for. When the flood of COVID-19 patients eases, then
hospitals will return to normal levels of bed vacancy - nationwide.
For your preferred theory to be true, it would be necessary to prove that many, or most, of
these extra patients are faking the seriousness of their illness AND the medics are too
uneducated/inexperienced to tell the difference. You'd probably also have to prove that there
are lots of people would rather be in hospital, pretending to be sick, than anywhere but
hospital...
Italy had an excess number of deaths attributed to influenza of 25,000 in the
2016/17 season, the last year numbers are available, what we are seeing at present is not an
aberration from recent years as that 16/17 season was representative of recent trends. This
is directly as a result of the severely degraded environment in which they live. As
others have pointed out both the air and water quality in that region is horrendous- as it
has become in recent years in Wuhan, Madrid and Tehran. One has to be beyond obstinate not to
understand this and connect the dots.
At present there is great uncertainty as to deaths from Covid versus deaths
with Covid. In some reporting Covid deaths were identified using a case definition
that included pulmonary disease e.g
This distinction is crucial as it points to causal factors that allowed the virus to
replicate, to flourish- and disputes the narrative that the corona virus (which BTW is
decidedly not novel only this mutation is which brings us to another discussion) is the
causal factor. The causal factors are the specific modes of production that created
horrendous living conditions in these areas to begin with (most of the planet by now) which
have destroyed people's abilities (immune system e.g.) to ward off disease.
By focusing solely on the corona virus and considering it to be the causal factor this
allows the capitalist class off the hook for being the very ones who have created the
conditions for all sorts of diseases to proliferate. Further by keeping the focus solely on
corona history tells us that the capitalists will not only use this for any draconian
measures they deem "essential" but also a means to explore all manner of profiteering- the
"next magic cure" (for the disease they created) being the most obvious pot of gold.
If you want to pursue a more analytical line of inquiry start by examining the severely
degraded air quality in Madrid, Wuhan, Tehran and the Po River Valley and the accompanying
health problems in those areas and start connecting some dots.
In the flu season 2015/2016, Italy reported 20,259 deaths attributable to influenza (just as
now, these were almost all in the 65+ age group). (Source: Journal of Infectious
Diseases)...and nobody proposed shutting down the world then. If it's now being suggested the
virus has been around since November then the numbers don't add up even more (i.e. Italy's
Covid-19 deaths so far are around the 6,000 mark which would make the virus far less deadly
than the 2015/16 flu).
Is there not an argument to be made (as says John P.A. Ioannidis -- professor of medicine
and professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford University) that we are
destroying economies and lives (and possibly killing far more people than Covid-19) in an
hysterical over-reaction based on flawed modelling and sparse and unreliable data?...
"The number of idiots everywhere on the Internet proclaiming the following:
1) The virus won't prove to be any more dangerous than ordinary flu..."
Yeah sure, we should have just shut up and believed...
Russia interfered in the election
Russia invaded Crimea
Russia invaded Georgia
Iran is making nuclear bombs
The Skripals were poisoned by Russian agents
Assad is using chemical weapons
Saddam has weapons of mass destruction
"etc, etc., ad nauseum.
I could go on and on. The number of people who just *have to have an opinion* is staggering.
And they'll argue that they're right until the cows come home."
@99 Michael Weddington
"The virus deniers here remind me of the global warming deniers."
Why not holocaust deniers? In fact, since you didn't say holocaust deniers you must be an
antisemite holocaust denier nazi, right? It's not like you two are at CNN's website, you're
in the alternative media, where we actually questions things instead of just having blind
faith.
Talking to my daughter this morning. Husband and wife returns from overseas. No testing an
quarantine for people coming . They go home do whatever, husband feels a bit crook, tests
positive for coronavirus. Hospitalized, on a ventilated and will soon die. She is at a
private hospital and this is at the public hospital. no medical staff working with this
patient wore protective gear.
I had thought we where following China closely on dealing with this but man was I wrong.
Total fuckwits collecting seashells on the seashore as the tsunami approaches.
Sent my daughter links to the pdf handbook put out by the Chinese doctors who worked on the
frontlines. Covers PPE and much else. She is now passing it around to the other nurses.
Doctors in Australia had started using chloroquine if they could not obtain other antivirals.
Apparently the government has now stopped them from doing this.
"... Instead the French authorities are now trying to prepare people for work by saying that people should not go out at all because when they do they touch the left button, the doors etc. ..."
"... They can just wear gloves and clean up whatever they touch with alcohol, no? Why aren't such cheap things not distributed widely, household by household? ..."
Another interesting feature of the shock strategy currently applied is that until planes and
trains and stadiums were not plugged off, one can imagine that the virus was spreading on a
much bigger scale than without these going on as usual.
So why should people who already see a max of 5 persons a week (close enough) be under
house arrest? masks are evidently a solution.
Instead the French authorities are now trying to prepare people for work by saying that
people should not go out at all because when they do they touch the left button, the doors
etc.
But what of asking people for responsibility?
They can just wear gloves and clean up
whatever they touch with alcohol, no? Why aren't such cheap things not distributed widely,
household by household?
The French are doing worse because they have no community planning, unlike Belgium, the
Netherlands, the UK and other northern countries. I haven't heard anyone on French media say
that the municipalities or district social centres could play a role in better mapping the
needs.
It seems to be entirely on the shoulders of our super-centralized gov and the
hospitals! With the results we see (and we are actually doing not so bad: 5 % of the positive
seem to die, vs 10% in Spain and Italy -using the figures given here
There's growing concern among health officials about so called silent spreaders, people who
are infected with the coronavirus, but aren't sick. Now some UK doctors say there may be a clue
to who's carrying it and they want the loss of smell and taste added to the list of
symptoms.
A mother who was infected with the coronavirus couldn't smell her baby's full diaper.
Cooks who can usually name every spice in a restaurant dish can't smell curry or garlic, and
food tastes bland. Others say they can't pick up the sweet scent of shampoo or the foul odor
of kitty litter.
Anosmia, the loss of sense of smell, and ageusia, an accompanying diminished sense of
taste, have emerged as peculiar telltale signs of Covid-19, the disease caused by the
coronavirus, and possible markers of infection.
On Friday, British ear, nose and throat doctors, citing reports from colleagues around the
world, called on adults who lose their senses of smell to isolate themselves for seven days,
even if they have no other symptoms, to slow the disease's spread. The published data is
limited, but doctors are concerned enough to raise warnings.
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"... This is specifically about coronavirus testing. In fact, CDC very much screwed up -- its test had a contaminated assay, the negative control, which made it unusable. ..."
By CNN's count, at least 13 states and 13 municipalities in the US have ordered 144,522,931
people to stay home as a result of the pandemic, according to data compiled by CNN using US
Census population estimates.
Update (1324ET): President Trump on Tuesday once again tried to
deny that his administration dropped the ball on the coronavirus response, while saying he
would like to see the country re-open by Easter.
Of course, the CDC's botched handling of the tests has been well-documented, and the fact
that nobody in the administration acting to overule the CDC and start stockpiling tests from
elsewhere might be remembered as one of the administration's biggest screwups in handling the
crisis.
Trump: "We did not screw up."
This is specifically about coronavirus testing. In fact, CDC very much screwed up --
its test had a contaminated assay, the negative control, which made it unusable.
World Health Organization offered us test it had been using in China.
US President Donald Trump has finally given a date for when he would like America to at
least partially reopen after the Covid-19 shutdown: April 12. Otherwise, he argued, the
depression would cause far more deaths than the virus. "I would love to have the country
opened up and just raring to go by Easter," Trump said on Tuesday during a Fox News virtual
town hall.
We have to get our country back to work. Our country wants to go back to work.
This follows his remarks on Monday night at the White House press briefing, when he would
not name a date, but said he was debating loosening the restrictions in the coming weeks in
order to prevent a complete economic collapse of the US.
Anxiety and depression from the economic crisis would cause deaths "in far
greater numbers than we're talking about with regard to the virus," Trump argued.
The US is currently on Day 8 of the government's "15 days to stop the spread "
program, with tens of millions of Americans either working from home or furloughed – some
without pay – to encourage " social distancing."
A $2 trillion financial relief package was proposed by the Senate with the intention of
sending cash payments to Americans to make up for income lost due to the shutdown. It was
blocked by Senate Democrats on Sunday and again on Monday, however, as the House Democrats
sought to push their own proposal, which included a laundry list of policy priorities unrelated
to the pandemic.
One thing I think played a role that is not mentioned is Trumps business that he owns. He
owns hotels and casinos which will be devastated. Trump wont rule out government assistance
for himself.
For Trump to shut down the economy and produce an effective containment, he would have had
to do this knowing that his own business would be devastated.
@Anatoly
Karlin There is apparently a large colony (100.000) of Chinese workers in Lombardy, with
direct flights between Lombardy and Wuhan, so this Italian outbreak is not a coincidence.
Many Italians in Northern Italy sold their leather goods and textiles companies to
China. Italy then allowed 100,000 Chinese from Wuhan/Wenzhou to move to Italy to work in
these factories, with direct Wuhan flights. Result: Northern Italy is Europe's hotspot for
Wuhan Coronavirus
UK had a "herd immunity" strategy from the beginning. They made no real effort at
containment. British government allowed their people to become infected, and only
began to change course after public outrage.
@Felix
Keverich The large Chinese population in Italy has been completely ignored by the media,
in fact China itself seems to have been let completely off the hook. The focus is now on how
terrible Britain and the native British people are.
Someone even posted a Tweet above by a Vietnamese person trying to claim that BRITAIN of
all countries is responsible for the outbreak in Vietnam, I mean what kind of ridiculous
logic is that? Vietnam bloody BORDERS China, the origin and epicentre of the Coronavirus
outbreak, and the Vietnamese are trying to say Britain is the cause? It beggars belief.
less globalization outside North America/Europe/Japan/Australia
You are missing the point of globalization: manufacturing in cheap Third World countries
and rewarding the local compradors with a permission to migrate to the West. That's the deal,
that's what globalization is.
With NA-Europe-Japan all you get is tourism and travel. I would be surprised if we can at
this point convince Chinese and the other cheap labor countries to do the work and forgo the
hope of migration. It was a Faustian deal and those as we know end in hell.
@AP
Calm down, man and stop the stupid blaming game. It seems that your Banderite spin also
includes bashing Chinese which, on the second thought, should not be surprising as there is
only one paymaster. Perhaps you should specialize in Ukraine only and leave China to more
competent haters.
Compare Canada and Italy on Chinese residents: Canada has 5 times more Chinese than Italy
but 62 times less infection cases and 539 times less fatalities than Italy (as of March 16).
Furthermore France and UK have more Chinese than Italy.
What about tourists: In Canada 0.75 mil Chinese tourist but in Italy 3.5 mil Chinese
tourists. So it must be the tourists, right?
So compare Japan with Italy on Chinese tourists: 8.4 mil Chinese tourist in Japan vs. 3.5
mil Chinese tourists in Italy. How many cases in Japan?
So what I am trying to convey is that the expression of the epidemic in different
countries is not congruent with the number of Chinese residents or Chinese tourist.
We will never know where the patients zero (yes plural, there are many patients zero)
really came from. For various political reasons we will not be told and what we will be told
we must be skeptical about. I found interesting data about the first infected in British
Columbia that has huge rather affluent Chinese population. There were as many Iranians as
non-Iranians on the list.
In British Columbia cases 1 to 5 were from China though it does not appear they infected
others while cases 6, 7, , 12 and 14, 15, 19 were traced to Iran. Then the case 22 was from
Iran and also case 31. Case 32 was from Italy, case 35 was from Egypt and case 37 was from
Germany. So out of first 37 cases over 50% were people came form Iran, Egypt, Germany and
Italy. My point is that while Canada has huge Chinese population (1.7 mil) and gets 700,000
Chinese visitors per year it does not look like China was the main vector. In BC it is Iran
and Europe.
One should consider a possibility whether virus introduction to Iran and the Middle East
did precede its introduction in China.
Now let's return to Italy. Most Chinese tourists go to Rome, Florence and Venice. These
cities were not affected as much as Lombardy where there is not that many tourists. So we are
told that Chinese workers could carry the virus. So look at Prato (in Tuscany near Florence)
which has the highest density of Chinese population in Italy. Wiki lists 11,882 (6.32%) for
Prato while the highest absolute number is Milan 18,918 (1.43%). The numbers are probably
outdated as most likely they do not include illegal residents.
"In a single day the positive cases of coronavirus in the province of Prato have
tripled: from 7 to 21 . It is the darkest day since the outbreak began. According to
what was announced in the afternoon of today, March 11, by the bulletin of the regional
council "
"Therefore, 314 patients are currently positive in Tuscany. This is the subdivision by
signaling areas: 71 Florence, 32 Pistoia, 21 Prato (total Asl center: 124), 43 Lucca, 40
Massa Carrara, 34 Pisa, 16 Livorno (total North West Asl: 133), 12 Grosseto, 37 Siena , 14
Arezzo (total Asl southeast: 63)."
So clearly the 2nd largest Chinese community in Italy (and first in density) with 21 cases
(out of 12,246 cases in Italy) did not contribute a lot to the corona virus outbreak in
Italy.
@AP
Calm down, man and stop the stupid blaming game. It seems that your Banderite spin also
includes bashing Chinese which, on the second thought, should not be surprising as there is
only one paymaster. Perhaps you should specialize in Ukraine only and leave China to more
competent haters.
Compare Canada and Italy on Chinese residents: Canada has 5 times more Chinese than Italy
but 62 times less infection cases and 539 times less fatalities than Italy (as of March 16).
Furthermore France and UK have more Chinese than Italy.
What about tourists: In Canada 0.75 mil Chinese tourist but in Italy 3.5 mil Chinese
tourists. So it must be the tourists, right?
So compare Japan with Italy on Chinese tourists: 8.4 mil Chinese tourist in Japan vs. 3.5
mil Chinese tourists in Italy. How many cases in Japan?
So what I am trying to convey is that the expression of the epidemic in different
countries is not congruent with the number of Chinese residents or Chinese tourist.
We will never know where the patients zero (yes plural, there are many patients zero)
really came from. For various political reasons we will not be told and what we will be told
we must be skeptical about. I found interesting data about the first infected in British
Columbia that has huge rather affluent Chinese population. There were as many Iranians as
non-Iranians on the list.
In British Columbia cases 1 to 5 were from China though it does not appear they infected
others while cases 6, 7, , 12 and 14, 15, 19 were traced to Iran. Then the case 22 was from
Iran and also case 31. Case 32 was from Italy, case 35 was from Egypt and case 37 was from
Germany. So out of first 37 cases over 50% were people came form Iran, Egypt, Germany and
Italy. My point is that while Canada has huge Chinese population (1.7 mil) and gets 700,000
Chinese visitors per year it does not look like China was the main vector. In BC it is Iran
and Europe.
One should consider a possibility whether virus introduction to Iran and the Middle East
did precede its introduction in China.
Now let's return to Italy. Most Chinese tourists go to Rome, Florence and Venice. These
cities were not affected as much as Lombardy where there is not that many tourists. So we are
told that Chinese workers could carry the virus. So look at Prato (in Tuscany near Florence)
which has the highest density of Chinese population in Italy. Wiki lists 11,882 (6.32%) for
Prato while the highest absolute number is Milan 18,918 (1.43%). The numbers are probably
outdated as most likely they do not include illegal residents.
"In a single day the positive cases of coronavirus in the province of Prato have
tripled: from 7 to 21 . It is the darkest day since the outbreak began. According to
what was announced in the afternoon of today, March 11, by the bulletin of the regional
council "
"Therefore, 314 patients are currently positive in Tuscany. This is the subdivision by
signaling areas: 71 Florence, 32 Pistoia, 21 Prato (total Asl center: 124), 43 Lucca, 40
Massa Carrara, 34 Pisa, 16 Livorno (total North West Asl: 133), 12 Grosseto, 37 Siena , 14
Arezzo (total Asl southeast: 63)."
So clearly the 2nd largest Chinese community in Italy (and first in density) with 21 cases
(out of 12,246 cases in Italy) did not contribute a lot to the corona virus outbreak in
Italy.
If this started in the USA and spread elsewhere the world would have good cause to
condemn the USA and to judge any subsequent efforts by Americans to help others as "the
least they could do."
Chinese shipments of medical goods are actually to the risk of the own population, where
hospitals are still recovering. While in some ways it is a blatant PR play, its quite a
significant cost amd self-risk that goes beyond "the least they could do."
"... "We showed that it was precisely the patients with the most acute symptoms who are the most infectious, both because of the high viral load [meaning, the amount of a virus in one's body] and also because of the increase in the number of encounters between people: The acute patients were dying, so everyone came to take their leave from them," Yamin says. "I was pleased that Liberia adopted our recommendations and isolated those who were seriously ill. In retrospect, we know that that new policy helped curb the epidemic." ..."
"... the coronavirus can be expected to disappear from this region with the same dizzying speed with which it entered our lives ..."
"... But in practice, the most rapid mutations occur in animals, and they only infect us then, and obviously it's less probable that we will be infected again by a bat in the near future. ..."
"... "The actual number of people who are sick with the virus in South Korea is at least double what's being reported, so the chance of dying is at least twice as low, standing at about 0.45 percent – very far from the World Health Organization's [global mortality] figure of 3.4 percent. And that's already a reason for cautious optimism." ..."
"... "And Netanyahu talked about a mortality rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent. And do you know what's most absurd? That in the final analysis [U.S. President Donald] Trump was right . Not that the coronavirus is just plain flu – it absolutely isn't – but as he put it: 'This is just my hunch – way under 1 percent' [will die].' ..."
"... At some stage, we will have to resume a regular routine, and then the R0 will stabilize at 2 again. Effectively, we are delaying the inevitable. I have no criticism of the decisions made until now. On the contrary: With such a large area of uncertainty, Israel's decision makers are considering not only a reasonable scenario but also a margin of safety. ..."
"... "It's not only a function of hygiene, it's mainly a function of contact between people. Picture the average old person. How many different people does he encounter in a day? And what is the nature of those encounters? The older we get, the less we caress and kiss others. Also, children constitute the only age group that comes into contact with all other age groups – not just theirs. That's why it is the key population in spreading respiratory diseases." ..."
Dr. Yamin is an engineer, not a physician. But in 2008, when he was a graduate student at Ben-Gurion University in Be'er Sheva,
a certain research study caught his eye.
"It was an analysis of a dynamic model for the spread of smallpox," Yamin, 38, says. "The researchers used tools from game theory.
It was so interesting that I decided to conduct a similar study on influenza – which turned into a doctoral thesis on disease-spread
models.
"If, 40 or 50 years ago, epidemiology researchers came exclusively from the field of medicine, today we understand that in order
to predict the spread of diseases, it's also necessary to understand how humans behave as a collective, to be able to analyze big
data and to have the ability to create models and perform mathematical simulations – and for that you need engineers."
Yamin encountered his first real epidemiological crisis while doing postdoctoral work at the the Center of Infectious Disease
Modeling and Analysis at Yale University's school of public health.
"At Yale we worked for three weeks, with almost no sleep, to create models based on engineering tools for the spread of Ebola.
The dilemma of the Liberian health ministry regarded whom to prioritize, given a serious shortage of isolation facilities. The Liberians
assumed that it would make more sense to quarantine those who were ill with less serious symptoms, because the others could not be
saved in any case.
"We showed that it was precisely the patients with the most acute symptoms who are the most infectious, both because of the high
viral load [meaning, the amount of a virus in one's body] and also because of the increase in the number of encounters between people:
The acute patients were dying, so everyone came to take their leave from them," Yamin says. "I was pleased that Liberia adopted our
recommendations and isolated those who were seriously ill. In retrospect, we know that that new policy helped curb the epidemic."
Yamin currently heads the Laboratory for Epidemic Modeling and Analysis in TAU's engineering faculty. His primary field of work
is development of models for the spread of infectious diseases, with an emphasis on viruses responsible for respiratory ailments,
such as flu and RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), which causes bronchitis. He is actually somewhat optimistic about the models he
has developed for the
spread of the coronavirus , which is also a respiratory disease.
"The big, open question is what the chance is of dying from the virus," Yamin explains.
"When you ask epidemiologists what the most important datum is concerning a virus, they will say it's the rate of the basic reproductive
ratio, or R0 [often called "R nought"] – the average number of people a sick person will infect. That's an interesting question,
but a theoretical one.
"The R0 of measles is 12, meaning that each person who is ill with measles infects 12 people on average. However, only 5 percent
of the population can actually be infected, because most of us have been immunized or had measles in the past. So that is the upper
limit of its spread."
But we know that the R0 of the coronavirus is 2, and we still don't know whether anyone is naturally immune to the disease.
Yamin: "The overwhelming majority of people are apparently not immune, because it's not a common disease. After all, there is
no precedent for such an infectious and violent type of virus from the corona family, so it's safe to assume that the majority has
not been exposed to the virus before this and that they can be infected. However, that's not to say that the majority of the population
will actually contract the disease.
"The basic principle is that a virus with an R0 of 2 in a non-immune population can be expected to infect 50 percent of the population.
After that the R0 will reach a value of 1 or less, and the disease will be contained. By the way, it will recede in a converging
exponential; in other words, the coronavirus can be expected to disappear from this region with the same dizzying speed with which
it entered our lives."
But we don't know for certain whether a person can be infected twice.
"No, but with the majority of viruses, if you're infected and you have recovered, you won't be re-infected, because of immunological
memory. And if you are infected again, the symptoms will be less acute the second time. The exception to the rule is influenza: Its
mutation frequency is so high that you can be infected by it year after year. Last year alone, the flu underwent 17 mutations. Whereas
the last time we heard about corona was 17 years ago, with SARS. In other words, the coronavirus did not undergo mutations at the
same frequency as the flu. Of course, the mutations themselves are a function of the number of infections: The more infections there
are, the greater the likelihood that mutations will occur. But in practice, the most rapid mutations occur in animals, and they only
infect us then, and obviously it's less probable that we will be infected again by a bat in the near future.
"By the way, viral mutations are more frequent in bats, whose immune system is astonishingly weak, while their social network
is extensive and characterized by a lot of interaction."
So we're talking about maximum rate of infection – that is, of becoming a carrier – of 50 percent. That's still a lot of patients,
a lot of hospitalizations and mainly a lot of deaths.
"Again, the most interesting issue for decision makers is the mortality rate. When we look at the dry data, we see a very high
mortality rate, of 4 to 7 percent, in countries like
Italy
and Spain, alongside far lower numbers in countries like Germany and South Korea.
"And then there's China, though it's very difficult to believe the numbers coming out of there – and in any event no country in
the West can allow itself to adopt the measures that China adopted to contain the spread. Now ask yourself: How do you check the
mortality rate in all those countries? You take the total number of deaths and divide it by the total of reported patients."
So the research is biased.
"Very biased. If I can only carry out few tests, I will test those who have the highest chance of becoming ill, and then, when
I check the mortality rate among them, I will get very high numbers. But there is one country we can learn from: South Korea. South
Korea has been coping with corona for a long time, more than most Western countries, and they lead in the number of tests per capita.
Therefore, the official mortality rate there is 0.9 percent. But even in South Korea, not all the infected were tested – most have
very mild symptoms.
"The actual number of people who are sick with the virus in South Korea is at least double what's being reported, so the chance
of dying is at least twice as low, standing at about 0.45 percent – very far from the World Health Organization's [global mortality]
figure of 3.4 percent. And that's already a reason for cautious optimism."
'Worst-case scenario'
Let's move from percents to people.
"Just a minute. Although we're both Westernized countries, we are absolutely not South Korea. South Korea has one of the highest
proportions of elderly people in the world, whereas Israel tops the graph in fertility, and we have a very young population. So,
if we use the upper limit [of mortality] of South Korea and normalize the mortality rate for the population in Israel, we are talking
about the probability of a mortality rate of 0.3 percent among those who have been infected.
"Now we'll go to a severe scenario in which no one is immune and every second person is sick, so that the disease is incapable
of spreading further – namely, a situation where there's a maximum infection rate of 50 percent.
"We are a country of nine million citizens. So in the worst-case scenario, we are talking about 4.5 million Israelis who will
become ill with the coronavirus. Multiply 4.5 million by 0.3 percent and you get 13,500 Israelis who are liable to die from the disease.
By comparison, 700 to 2,500 Israelis die every year of complications from other respiratory ailments."
But German Chancellor Angela Merkel talked about a rate of infection of 70 percent in Germany.
"And Netanyahu talked about a mortality rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent. And do you know what's most absurd? That in the
final analysis [U.S. President Donald]
Trump was right . Not that the coronavirus is just plain flu – it absolutely isn't – but as he put it: 'This is just my hunch
– way under 1 percent' [will die].'
"We must be cautious, of course, but at the moment a high probability is emerging that the risks are far lower than what the World
Health Organization presented. Under two assumptions – that the health system doesn't collapse and that life continues as usual –
we are not likely to see more than 13,500 victims of the coronavirus in Israel." (About 45,000 people die in Israel in a normal year,
which would make for a rise of approximately one-third.)
But, social distancing should lead to fewer cases of infection and death, no?
"No, because we won't be able to isolate ourselves completely or forever. At some stage, we will have to resume a regular routine,
and then the R0 will stabilize at 2 again. Effectively, we are delaying the inevitable. I have no criticism of the decisions made
until now. On the contrary: With such a large area of uncertainty, Israel's decision makers are considering not only a reasonable
scenario but also a margin of safety.
"In my opinion, the Health Ministry deserves tremendous credit for being ahead of the world by having instituted so few measures.
In the same breath, the public needs to understand that these measures of social distancing mean that we will find ourselves with
corona for a longer period, even to 2023."
A quarantine ward being set up at Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan. Tomer Appelbaum
That long?
"Take the swine flu, from 2009. Reliable models show clearly that it was contained in Israel because its appearance coincided
with the Jewish holidays in the fall [when people weren't out much in public]. From the virus' point of view, the timing wasn't good
for it in Israel. By contrast, in the United States there was significant infection in 2009-2010. But in the end, it balances out.
So we saw swine flu in Israel both in 2009-10 and in 2010-11, whereas in the United States it just came and went. The American population
as a whole was exposed to the virus at high rates, so those who fell ill and recovered served as a 'human shield' for those who did
not get sick."
So what you're saying is to tear the bandage off in one fell swoop, and explose everyone at once, the way they tried to do
in Britain.
"We need to make decisions based on the most precise models possible. What should be done? Of course, we must significantly increase
testing, using the rapid PCR test, and that is what is actually being done. In parallel, serologic tests should be conducted. These
differ from regular tests in that they examines an individual's immunological reaction to exposure. That's the only way we will be
able to get an accurate picture of the distribution of the virus in Israel, and thereby also of the mortality rates."
What will that test be able to tell us?
"It will solve the riddle of the young people: It's still not clear whether young people are infected by the coronavirus but don't
develop symptoms, or are simply immune and thus don't become infected. This is different from most respiratory ailments. With those
illnesses, like RSV or flu, this is a key population: The 5-to-19 age group is not at risk but they are responsible for infecting
others."
Because children don't wash their hands, and they drool on themselves?
"It's not only a function of hygiene, it's mainly a function of contact between people. Picture the average old person. How many
different people does he encounter in a day? And what is the nature of those encounters? The older we get, the less we caress and
kiss others. Also, children constitute the only age group that comes into contact with all other age groups – not just theirs. That's
why it is the key population in spreading respiratory diseases."
"... A drug like chloroquine doesn't have to be extremely effective in order to have a huge benefit on our ICU density. A small effect could have a big impact. And if chloroquine turns out not to work, there are other promising drugs such as Remdesivir, though chloroquine has the advantage of being cheap and easy to produce. ..."
Rod, I was one of those screaming at our public officials to shut stuff down. I was
extremely frustrated by President Trump's brushing off of our problem for a long time. I
asked my Facebook friends if anyone wanted to help with a recall petition of Governor
Edwards, after he took very mild steps against COVID-19 instead of the necessary firmer ones.
I bristled with a mixture of horror and astonishment as New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell
allowed bars to pack people in last weekend to celebrate St. Patrick's Day. I argued with
friends on Facebook who insisted to me that "this is just a cold" and told me that I was
irrational and needlessly spreading fear and panic.
So I have consistently supported strong steps to contain this virus, but I have now become
very optimistic that the tide is about to turn, and I want to share why.
Testing is about to expand exponentially.
We've been steadily growing
our testing ability since the outbreak began. America tested 44,176 people today, and
every day sees a big increase. Yesterday, we tested 34,654 and it was 27,372 the day before
that. A week ago, it was 4,124.
But these increases are small compared to what's in the pipeline. This week we saw FDA
approval of new testing systems from
Roche and from
Abbott labs that run tests ten times faster than current methods. To give you an idea of
what this means, Roche brags that their Cobas 8800 machine can process over 3000 tests per
day. Until today, Louisiana hadn't had a total of 3000 people tested. Roche is now making and
shipping 400,000 test kits per week in the US, while Abbott is making a million of their test
kits each week. Those systems will be coming online this coming week.
Today, we got even more good news, with
Cepheid getting FDA approval for their new test, which will detect the virus in 45
minutes and can be used in over 5000 Cepheid machines already in US hospitals. This will
allow hospitals to test all their staff and every incoming patient on a consistent basis, so
that we can keep our doctors and nurses safe and our hospitals don't spread the disease.
Those testing kits are getting shipped out this coming week.
And there are more companies in the process of getting approval. In two weeks, we should
be able to test 150,000 – 200,000 Americans daily, and that means that we don't all
need to stay home anymore.
Let me explain how this works.
Suppose that Boudreaux, who works for the state of Louisiana, wakes up and has a fever.
Right now, it's not easy for him to get tested – and if he could get tested, he
wouldn't get his results for days. Let's say that Boudreaux is a good citizen and stays home
at this point. That's great, except that Boudreaux went to work yesterday and exposed his
coworker Pierre, and he also got his hair cut and exposed his barber, T-Boy. His wife Marie
doesn't isolate from him, because she thinks that Boudreaux is just lazy and doesn't want to
work, so she is also exposed. Unless Boudreaux gets sick enough that he needs to go to the
hospital, he's not going to be tested, and Pierre, T-Boy, and Marie might all get the virus
and – and this is key – then spread it themselves.
That's been our situation, and the only solution that we've had was to keep Boudreaux at
home in the first place. That's why the state is keeping non-essential workers at home.
That's why many places are forcing barbershops to close. So, now, our governmental
restrictions keep T-Boy and Pierre from getting infected, though Marie is still at risk.
Now, imagine our original situation with easy, high-speed testing. Boudreaux wakes up with
a fever, he goes to the drive-thru testing site and is notified about four hours later that
he is positive. Now, everyone in his family and workplace immediately gets tested, as does
T-Boy – and the virus does not spread beyond them.
The ability to test everyone who needs to be tested is how South Korea and Singapore have
been able to control their outbreaks without significant societal restrictions. Their
schools, restaurants, etc. are all open. And their economies are not wrecked. Again, we'll be
at that point in less than two weeks.
Evidence strongly suggests that COVID-19 is seasonal.
A recent Chinese study
compared transmission rates for all 100 Chinese cities outside of Wuhan that had at least 40
cases before their national lockdown, to see if the virus spread more slowly in warmer, more
humid parts of China. Their conclusion:
"High temperature and high relative humidity significantly reduce the transmission of
COVID-19, respectively, even after controlling for population density and GDP per capita of
cities This result is consistent with the fact that the high temperature and high humidity
significantly reduce the transmission of influenza. It indicates that the arrival of summer
and rainy season in the northern hemisphere can effectively reduce the transmission of the
COVID-19."
That study, as an example, predicted a R value of 1.3 in Tokyo for the Olympics -- with
zero intervention! (For those of you who don't know what that means, it means that instead of
spreading the disease to about 2.6 people, which is what happens now, the average person
would only infect half as many people.) If this study were correct, it would mean that, with
some control measures, it would be easy to keep COVID-19 from spreading during the
Olympics.
Besides this study, we have the basic observation that the world's serious outbreaks have
occurred in cold, dry weather. Jakarta and Milan both had nonstop flights to Wuhan during
Wuhan's outbreak, but Italy has suffered a horrific crisis and Indonesia has not. Scientists
believe that this is because COVID-19 is mainly
transmitted by coughing , and the microdroplets emitted when someone coughs travel about
twice as far in cold, dry air. Additionally, the water vapor present in humid air interacts
with those microdroplets to stop them.
If COVID-19 is indeed a seasonal disease, then we should be able to almost eliminate it
this summer, to the point that there will be zero restrictions on ordinary life. Sports
leagues can fill stadiums with fans and political conventions can meet, and we won't have to
worry that we're fanning a new outbreak.
Improved treatment will improve COVID-19 patient outcomes.
If you have watched President Trump on TV or follow him on twitter, then you know that
he
is hopeful about the promise of chloroquine (and its close relative
hydroxychloroquine).
President Trump has perhaps overpromised what chloroquine can do, as the evidence of its
benefit is still rather thin. But, if it has any benefit at all, it's a game-changer in terms
of our ICUs. If chloroquine works, it works by lowering the amount of virus in the body. When
you combine this with earlier testing, there's a tremendous advantage. The people who end up
in the ICU don't get there until they've been sick for a week or so, as the virus grows in
their body and then inflames the alveoli in the lungs, leading to shortness of breath. If
chloroquine works, an at-risk patient would be given it right after testing positive, and
hopefully, the viral load in their body never gets high enough for the patient to develop
severe shortness of breath, and he stays out of the ICU.
A drug like chloroquine doesn't have to be extremely effective in order to have a huge
benefit on our ICU density. A small effect could have a big impact. And if chloroquine turns
out not to work, there are other promising drugs such as Remdesivir, though chloroquine has
the advantage of being cheap and easy to produce.
Is the situation going to get worse in the US? Yes. Is the end in sight? I believe that it
is. I write this to encourage each of you to hold on. If we can stay and home, enduring the
claustrophobia, the family bickering, and the often severe economic consequences, we can beat
this virus.
I miss my church. A streamed service tomorrow is not a true substitute for the
togetherness in Christ that I need more than ever at this time. And my business is suffering.
I think that I can make it another month, but I don't know about longer than that. I expect
that our nation's psychiatrists and therapists are swamped right now, as stress and
depression skyrocket.
I think b has not been very good with this corona virus reporting. He thinks he was wrong on
his initial reporting and changed as new facts emerged. however he basically repeats the
mainstream line. I certainly am no expert, But then again it seems thee is a wide divergence
of views from the "experts" but there is a mainstream conclusion which b agrees with. And the
mainstream media is pushing the fear full stop.
I still think this is not a specially dangerous virus. almost entirely it is old people
dying. almost entirely most of them have pre-existing conditions. My initial take was people
who would die fairly soon or might die if they got a bad flu are dying but sooner. I know my
wife went to the hospital and acquired a very bad pneumonia. She was on a respirator for over
a week and afterwards was diagnosed with COPD. How many of these deaths are people who are
sick with corona virus and go to the hospital and get a hospital acquired infection but are
counted as dying from COV-18? Virologist have been heavily researching corona viruses since
the SARS and MERS outbreaks that didn't kill very many people
I do agree that this virus seems exceptionally communicable. That nature article b cited
seemed as if it was written to dismiss the idea that the virus was made in some biolab. I
have read an article debunking this Nature article - the writer was trying to make a case
that it came from a Chinese lab He agreed it wasn't manufactured by gene editing but was
created by passing a corona virus through ferrets who do have the same ACE receptor that
humans have and COV-19 uses to infect cells.
Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research ...
the announcement by Ralph Baric and co-workers at the University of North Carolina that
they had created a chimeric SARS-like virus, which expresses the spike (attachment protein)
of a bat coronavirus in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone (4). As in the cases of the
genetically modified H5N1 avian influenza viruses, the newly generated SARS-like virus is
potentially an extremely dangerous, possibly pandemic pathogen... That was 5 years ago.
I agree with the uselessness of bioweapons as a military operation. The economic blowback
we are now seeing is proof
But But what if this global crisis is exactly what those who want to totally control us
would want to happen. It is precipitating the roll out of medical martial law.
There are laws on the books that give extraordinary powers in the event of a global
epidemic or even a pandemic.
Not to mention in the US the Continuity of Government provisions strengthened massively
after 9/11. Every year the state of emergency triggered by 9/11 has been renewed. Mandatory
vaccinations for everyone. Quarantine powers granted The initiation of martial law. Now you
don't have to be a terrorist but just said to be infected and away you go.
I don't think COV-19 is the one to justify the full implementation but it is another giant
step for setting up the population for the full implementation.
US authorities are working to combat the spread of misinformation that has blossomed since the start of the coronavirus
pandemic
The US
Department of Justice announced Sunday it had shut down a website claiming to sell a
coronavirus vaccine, in its first act of federal enforcement against fraud in connection with
the pandemic.
Lawsuits had been filed against the site coronavirusmedicalkit.com, which claimed to sell
vaccines for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, when in fact there is no
such vaccine, the Justice Department said in a statement.
A Texas federal judge on Saturday ordered the site to shut down, according to the statement.
Its homepage, however, was still accessible as of Sunday evening.
"Due to the recent outbreak for the Coronavirus (COVID-19) the World Health Organization is
giving away vaccine kits. Just pay $4.95 for shipping," read a statement on the homepage.
It was followed by a place to leave bank account information to pay shipping fees.
The Justice Department did not specify how many people fell victim to the scam, but the
investigation is ongoing to identify who is behind the fraud and how much money was stolen.
The intervention by the federal judiciary system is part of ongoing efforts by US
authorities to combat the spread of misinformation that has blossomed since the start of the
pandemic.
Attorney General Bill Barr last week urged federal prosecutors to make stopping
misinformation a priority and called US civilians to report all such abuses to the National
Center for Disaster Fraud.
He also warned citizens against a variety of scams including selling fake treatments online,
imitating emails from the WHO or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) intended
to collect personal data, and asking for donations for imaginary organizations.
Simultaneously, the US judicial system is on the warpath to combat price gouging of products
such as hand sanitizer or hygienic masks.
More than 33,000 people have been infected by the coronavirus in the US, and 416 have died,
according to a tracker managed by Johns Hopkins University.
@prime
noticer What if–as seems to be happening in Italy–the journalists simply
pretend that bodies are piling up, perhaps by attributing other deaths to Corona?
Beware: whenever these people decide on a narrative, they are loath to back down once they
are proven wrong. They don't want to lose face.
Actual morality reinforces social solidarity, which is why our overlords have been attempting
to destroy it for so long. Social solidarity is the key to overcoming crises in general and
not just the present Covid 19 pandemic.
There is a bit more encouraging news tonight. the numbers for Italy have come down just a
little bit more. Restrictions on the other hand have got even tighter, now only people who do
essential work are allowed out of their homes.
As I mentioned yesterday in a post that got swallowed by the ether, Italy is going through
some hard times financially.
Some self inflicted by governments spending more than the took in to stay in power and
some because the banks refused to take a haircut.
Many small businesses are just barely survive and a couple of months without income is
going to really hurt.
Michael Osterholm -
Wikipedia (born March 10, 1953) is an American infectious disease epidemiologist, regents
professor, and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the
University of Minnesota.
Scientific establishment want money, want importance, wants political influence. That create
difficult dilemma and force some people play the role of fear mongers.
BUMP 00:10 Intro 0:40 How bad is Coronavirus
4:00 Is
the virus an "old persons" disease 5:18 Incubation period
7:50
What can be done to prevent infection 13:45 Drug shortages 15:20 Sauna use
effect on infections 18:00 Was Coronavirus man-made
22:00
American Wild Deer diseases and Prions 32:00 Is Corona seasonal
35:00
Corona could be 10 times worse than the flu 35:25 Corona will stay around
for months 36:10 Coronavirus vs Spanish
flu 38:30 How can we prepare our
immune system 43:20 Do hand sanitizers and
masks work 50:00 We stockpile weapons more
than medical goods 54:30 Will people panic if they
are told the truth 56:00 Vaccines 1:02:00 Why a
virus would originate from China 1:11:30 What to do if you get
the flu 1:15:45 Lime disease and ticks
1:23:00
Effects of fire suppression on ecosystem 1:30:00 Vaccine for
Coronavirus
Sick nurses working, I have experienced that in every nursing home I have worked in in the
US. In California and NV. Luckily, I found the trick, If I have a headache that won't be
resolved with hydration, I figure it's a flu, I take 4 grams of C and 20,000 IU of D, and
usually that takes care of it, no more symptoms. In the case that it persists, I keep taking
4 grams of C ever few hours and high dose D until the symptoms subside. Usually doesn't take
too long, and ( a few hours) symptoms don't get bad.
Beware of any expert that promotes fearfulness and helplessness and tells us to just wait
for a "miracle" vaccine. Why didn't he tell us the truth about the success of vitamin C
therapy? Why didn't he tell us that some common medications like ibuprofen and heart
medications can impede healing of the virus.
div> It´s funny and very predictable how programmed into fear people have become
when it´s never the virus that kills you, but a weak immune system´s panick
reaction. If you believe the MSM is not aligned with certain agendas, the WHO is not
inherently corrupt, the pharmaceutical vaccine pushing industries have your best interests at
heart and doctors really know what they are talking about when they always look at the parts
as seperated and never the whole living system, then you will be shocked to learn the truth.
https://www.youtube.com/user/drvashiva/videos
I really look forward to a time, probably thanks to this crisis it will be in the not so
distant future, where people will begin to wake up, see through the BS we are being bombarded
with from the parasitical class of "rulers" or "elites". Then a paradigm shift in so many
ways will begin to take place... Greetings from a tireless truth seeker!
lass="comment-renderer-text-content expanded"> the difference between COVID 19 and the
spanish flu and the fear rampant about this comparison is that our health care system is a
little more advanced than what was available back in 1919 AND we are also so much more
informed regarding hygiene practices.........not discounting the seriousness of this
unprecendented occurrence.........but still great to focus on the "little" advantages we can
monopolise on. in order to tackle this global crisis head on and rationally
> @PowerfulJRE - Joe PLEASE have Michael Osterholm back on asap and please ask Michael
the following questions...
1) Are highly infectious airborne cold viruses killed by ozone from ozone/ion
generators(?) and
2) Why do medical facilities and schools no longer install or utilize UV disinfection
lighting like they use to utilize/install in entranceways, hallways, and rooms of hospitals
and school classrooms like they use to do 50-75 years ago(?)
N95 masks....remember kids its a one way valve on the front of those things....breath in,
and it filters the air....breath out, valve opens and the air goes out, " unfiltered". If
you're sick, these masks will not prevent you from spreading it around.
> Osterholm is a catalog of infectious disease info that is beyond valuable . . he's in
his 60s . . maybe the planet has others who could fill his shoes in my home state of
Minnesota; of course, I hope so! He also has a good sense of humor, managing a little chuckle
when Joe suggested if any president could get around the informed consent issue of testing
vaccines on prisoners, such as nasty rapists, it would be Trump. I'm glad to receive all the
helpful info without a steady dose of politics and conspiracy chitchat. Now I know that my
prebiotic and probiotic pills are only good for temporary relief and that my natural flora
and fauna in the gut will take over...
51:46 "We spend about 0.001% on
public health compared to our defense department and yet look how vulnerable...it's the
bugs...it's not a war...it's not a missile...is bringing the world economy down right
now....it's a darn virus."
Can you imagine if even half the US defence budget was redirected into health care and
research!! We (the world) spend trillions on arms and now we are fighting an enemy that
bullets can't kill!! Infuriating!! 😡😡😠😠
> How do you draw the conclusion that such viruses would always come from China? MERS
was first discovered in the middle east, the 2009 flu originated in mexico, the Spanish flu
originated in Kansas. I mean like if you search China on the pandemic wikipedia page there's
only SARS and several flu outbreaks.
Also Wild life is not part of the cuisine in most of China, and it's really more of a
status symbol for rich people to be able to find exotic food
"article"> There is another nasty virus going around here in Victoria BC Canada that is
a bit like CORVID-19.. I got it in mid-December and I am just getting over it. My friends
recovered in two to three weeks. The symptoms include a cough that goes on and on leaving you
breathless, extremely sore throat, runny nose, extreme weakness. Even the emergency room
doctor said she had it. Have you heard of it? I think I got it travelling in a Handi-dart van
with some elderly, sneezing Chinese speaking males.
51:40 Good reminder of war
against missiles vs virus. Budgets... 53:00 his talk to
banking/finance people. Scary. Like children, whereas Michael is more analytical, like
engineers/scientists, see it all as problem-solution.
Unfortunately, we in the US are way behind the curve in finding and locking down clusters.
In fact super-spreaders - mostly young fools ignoring social distancing on beaches, in parks,
restaurants etc - are now popping up, most recently returning from Florida spring break to
Utah. Testing rates remain abysmal.
Idaho cases just went exponential, doubling about every 3 days. Republic Governor there is
pretty much a copy of Trump, as in a dangerous idiot, giving press conferences with multiple
staff hovering around, downplaying the risks, lying about test availability, talking about
protecting businesses, etc.
1) The West was exposed, not only for not being able to handle a pandemic, but also for
having a ponzi scheme economy.
Having its citizens and its companies leveraged up to a point where America can collapse
with any amount of hardship badly exposes America as being exceptionally weak.
2) Decoupling of Asia from America. For the West to try and target the Chinese, there will
be fallout. It's not like white people bother to distinguish Chinese from Korean or Japanese
when they harass Asians they see.
This will have consequences in Asia as Asian countries will just focus on trading with
each other than have to deal with a hostile west.
3) America cannot exist in a multipolar world, it can only exist in a unipolar world that
it controls. So it will not just be a decoupling of China and America, it will be escalation
between America and China till one is left standing.
You can expect to see color revolutions in HK and Taiwan. Meanwhile China will have no
reason to show any restraint in fighting back. China could target the west in Iran,
Venezuela, or even in the US by tormenting color revolutions of it's own.
4) it is easy to say that America will just trade more with Europe, but how does that
work? Drug prices are already too high in America, so now America will pay even higher
prices?
Trading more with Latin America makes more sense to me, but I also don't think Latin
America is up to it.
5) I honestly don't think America will be the same country after the outbreak is over.
Things are already cracking early on, how will Americans pull together 3 months in?
How will America pull together if Trump pulls war time authority?
As stated in my
review of Don DeLillo's White Noise (1985), we live in a decaying society that is in
terror of death, and pathologically so. This pathology is rooted in mistaken beliefs that our
civilization is dying from, or could imminently die from, disease epidemics, climate
catastrophes etc., in the midst of willful and ignorant abdication of a future (via self-hate
and industrialized abortion) in favor of mass immigration, consumerism, and instant
gratification. Just as one has to confront death in order to truly live (or to become
"authentic" in Heidegger's philosophy), our society is in constant flight from death and thus
inevitably collapses into inauthentic decay. COVID-19, while not as lethal as media coverage
would suggest, is a reminder of our mortality and human fragility and will necessarily have a
jarring effect on a Western liberalism that has become increasingly distant from the
confrontation with death.
Life under liberal finance capitalism is largely one of illusion, in which the prospect of
real death is pushed far into the distance, both psychologically and culturally. Postmodern
Western liberal culture is largely one of perpetual adolescence, in which the primary virtues
are acting according to one's individual will, identifying oneself in a hyper-individualistic
manner, and expressing these identities via conspicuous consumption and behavior. We do not
"live towards" Death, with a sense of purpose and a feeling that we are part of a much grander
civilizational trajectory. We do not understand that Death has shaped our historical path, and
that it hangs over us in ways that should direct our actions in the present.
COVID-19, regardless of current confusion over its true mortality rate, is a corrective to
illusions that "progressive" Man has overcome Nature and can shape the world according to the
human image, and without consequences. Certainly throughout my own lifetime, I've grown
accustomed to assertions that life expectancy will continue to increase, and that there will be
an endless supply of innovations and social projects that will make the mechanics of life
easier and more productive.
One increasingly expects that one will live a long life, mostly in very good health. Such a
sense of security can breed all kinds of arrogance and fantasies, including the recent perverse
luxury of the delusion that one can simply decide to be this or that gender. This new virus,
however, presents the possibility, both in itself and its inevitable heirs, that Death is much
closer than we ever thought, and that for all our technological advancement and
self-congratulation, Nature need only tweak one molecule, so small our naked eyes could never
perceive it, and the grave opens before us. The Age of Fantasy is confronted with the ultimate
reality.
How the West responds to this realization will be a further cultural challenge. We have
grown equally accustomed to the idea that we have "advanced" morally as a society, and that we
have overcome some of the more "brutish" aspects of human existence that we perceive in the
past. But in a world of apparently increasing plenty, such notions can be hard to test. It's
always easy for a man with a full stomach to condemn the actions of the starving. The conceit
of the full-bellied West that it has overcome and surpassed itself and its past will now be
tested. I, of course, arise from a political and philosophical tradition that insists there is
no shame in the past. I see little or no place for morality in the struggle for survival. And I
also see the cracks already forming in the Western conceit. This society that is against "hate"
and prides itself on "coming together" is already struggling to stop people rioting
over toilet paper and bottled water. If civil order breaks down, will the proud feminists be
seeking their own resources, or hoping for a strong man to protect them? If the death toll does
rise dramatically, and if curfews and lockdowns are imposed and intensified, I ask: How well
will your beloved multicultural societies respond? If resources become scarce and tensions
rise, who will you trust? These tests are coming.
Economic and Political Fallout
Just days ago, JPMorgan
projected that a recession will hit the US and European economies by July, with US GDP to
shrink by 2% in the first quarter and 3% in the second, and Eurozone GDP to contract by 1.8%
and 3.3% over the same periods. Sudden cessation of economic activity through quarantines,
event cancellations, social distancing, and the almost complete shutdown of the tourist
industry will have both immediate and longer term consequences for national economies and
broader trade patterns. The mass closing of schools will expose pre-existing weaknesses in a
modern system that sees women funneled en masse into the work place while their children are
left in day cares or schools. According to numbers
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than 70 percent of American mothers with children
under 18 work. Through the closing of schools alone, the impact of COVID-19 will almost
certainly have the greatest impact on the role of women in the workplace since World War Two,
with many forced to leave work and return to the home for an as yet undetermined amount of
time. How this will impact the businesses or public entities employing these women remains to
be seen, but it will undoubtedly cause significant difficulties and necessitate some level of
infrastructural change.
The outbreak of COVID-19 is also projected to test Western healthcare provision to the
limit. It's been particularly interesting that the outbreak in Italy effectively broke
the health system in Lombardy, widely regarded as one of the best in the world. Before the
outbreak, it was
remarked that:
The Lombardy healthcare system, characterised by quality and efficiency, is a model of
reference both in Italy and worldwide. With the benefit of private partnerships in fact, it
ensures its citizens and those who live in other regions or abroad have access to prime level
health care with all the advantages of a public system. Lombardy has 56 University
Departments of Medicine, 19 IRCCS (IRCCS means an institution devoted to excellence in
clinical care and research) which represent 42% of the national total, 47 Institutes and 32
Research Centres. As a result, Lombardy and in particular Milan have always attracted the
most renowned physicians in every field of expertise.
It took COVID-19 just four weeks to exhaust every hospital bed in Lombardy, force doctors
out of retirement and medical students to graduate early, and provoke the creation of 500
triage tents outside hospitals nationwide. The different, and ever-politicized, healthcare
systems of the United States and Great Britain are about to experience the most intensive test
in their respective histories.
One of the most outspoken figures from the medical profession on social media in recent days
is Eugene Gu , who has made
a point of attacking the profit-seeking nature of much of the American medical establishment.
Gu has argued that American medicine is essentially a pyramid scheme that profits those at the
top by artificially restricting the number of doctors produced by the system:
The medical school and residency system in the United States is completely broken compared
to other countries. Now that we are in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic, we need to
reflect upon an abusive system that hurts patients and seeks to make a few specialists filthy
rich. Even before the coronavirus, we created a huge physician shortage by limiting spots in
medical schools to inflate doctors' salaries the same way De Beers fixes the diamond market.
And we gutted primary care so that specialists like plastic surgeons and dermatologists can
get rich. I took an oath to "first, do no harm." I cannot just stand by and watch as the
corrupt cesspool we call our American medical system fails our patients while a few doctors,
insurance executives, and Big Pharma get filthy rich. Medicine should not be a for-profit
industry.
Whether or not one agrees with Dr Gu's perspective, the coming weeks and months will test
both American for-profit medicine and Britain's nationalized health system, and perhaps leave
long term political legacies for both.
Political consequences will also inevitably result from the approaches of individual leaders
to the crisis. Boris Johnson is risking his political future on a " herd immunity " strategy
that is radically different from the course of action pursued by other leaders. It's been
criticized as involving the sacrifice of the older generation for a slightly prolonged period
of economic normalcy and an entirely assumed future immunity among the young.
Donald Trump, meanwhile, is quickly trying to move on from a
highly dismissive initial response to the outbreak. In both cases, and throughout the West,
moderately "conservative" populism based on the celebration of finance capitalism and token
gestures on borders will be tested to the limit by increasing strains on all aspects of social,
political, and economic life. Trump, in particular, has managed to squeeze a lot of political
mileage out of the performance of the stock market. With stocks tumbling, and the American
healthcare system pushed to the limit, it remains to be seen whether Trump's drive to
make gay sex legal in Africa will be enough to keep his voters happy.
In another return of the Real, of course, COVID-19 is doing more to close borders than any
expression of political populism ever has. It was all well and good that "the world is a
village" when this involved cheap and cheerful vacations, but all it took was a few houses in
the throes of sickness for the rest of the villagers to wish there was somewhere they could
escape to. The global village is in shutdown. All humans might be equally susceptible to this
virus, but national borders, so often scorned until recently, now reveal they might have some
uses after all – just one of them being the invaluable opportunity to seal and control a
limited territory. How people grow accustomed to this renewed emphasis on border control may
leave a lasting political legacy for the West also. In any case, we can only hope it will.
A very interesting discussion by Dr.
Wolfgang Wodarg. He compare this epidemic hype with famous Andersen tale about the Naked King.
He points out on the fact that test for the virus was developed in a hurry and it is unclear how many false
positive it allow.
All-in-all a very interesting, educational discussion by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg even you do not agree with him.
Two issues continue to be misrepresented which systematicly allow "corona" to take on the spectre of the Zombie Apocalypse:
1. Social distancing keeps people out of the sneeze-cough zone for droplet contamination by air. Yet social shunning of those
who continue to cough and sneeze in public in fact is what needs to be made the primary line of defense. Not the crowds of people
stocking up on toilet paper but virtuously standing 6 feet apart, clueless about their own role fostering the Zombie Apocalypse
imagery.
2. Self-inoculation is the second source of infection, and way under-emphasizied while again disguised by virtuous but meaningless
ritual behavior.
All the talk is about hand washing, surface decontamination and hand sanitizers which ultimately are a fools errand since this
additional new, and critical ritual behavior often fails to emphasize the absolutely important disease connection that comes from
sticking your very own (presumed) dirty fingers into one's own nose, mouth and/or eyes.
Few are 100% observant about how many surfaces they actually touch before the stick their "washed or sanitized hands" back
into their own mouth, nose or eyes.
Washing your hands remains #1 in importance, but so does WATCHING your hands.
"Don't touch your face" misses the point too - another message fail - one must vividly make the connection between their own
fingers and their own body orifices leading to the upper respiratory tract. And continue to be aware of this connection 24/7 -
no exceptions.
Organic homemake hand sanitizers are as good as the last thing you touched or the next person who cough next to your clorox-wiped
surfaces.
The media goes out of its way to instill the Zombie Apocalypse vision of this "flu" - it is everywhere, you must fear everything
and nothing can protect you. If you touch it, you will die. If it is in the air, you will die. You never know who has it. You
are a victim. And it is someone else's fault.
So one can pretend to do useless and ritual activities but ignore one's own role and one's own personal responsibility for
its contact and spread.
1. Socially shun anyone who fails to protect their coughs or sneezes, until they learn new habits - how does staying 6 feet
away from everyone teach the offenders new habits?
2. Wash your hands and watch what you touch. 100% of the time.
TSA is now with us 100% of the time after 911- regardless of the numerical threat. Proper self-hygiene needs to be with us
100% of the time too - and never should have left us.
Here in the UK either our management are incompetent of they know something we don't is my take.
Apart from summary figures broken down by Health district for 'got it' or 'dead from it' there is nothing. Testing apart from
in hospitals is unknown unless you are famous so no-one has any idea what the viruses progress is in the community. What is happening
at individual hospitals is probably a state secret now.
Even though, between themselves, they knew it was coming at the latest in mid January, they did nothing. No extra orders for
masks, ventilators etc.
Yet they are allowing fear and panic to rip through the community and huge economic damage.
I haven't yet properly worked out cui bono but I have my suspicions. But they are passing some draconian laws.
The actual mortality rate may be closer to 1% or less with most of it concentrated in the over 70s. The reasonable thing to do
would have been to protect seniors while letting everyone else go about their business. Nuking the economy with lockdowns is the
politicians' way of competing with each other to show they're "doing something." It's craven behavior not leadership.
Thank you Larry for the sobering analysis of Corvid-19.
I only disagree with your emphasis that the social distancing is the main cause of economic collapse.
Methinks that the everything bubble in coordination of unrepayable debt fiasco has arrived, and the ELITES/media are distracting
from refinancing the Wall Street gamblers, Share-buyback artists, Private equity leveraged asset strippers and the offshore artist
looser.
We are replaying the 2008 modus operandi get the elites saved financially and let the poor people try to survive on their own
as they assume all the obligation of the
elite rescue
Larry Johnson - I'm afraid I'm rather more of JJ Jackson's view as to the potential seriousness of this disease.
But the economic effects are already pretty devastating. 10% of world trade is tourism and related. Entertainment is a big
industry. Both hard hit and other sectors too. Pensioners spend a fair bit and many are no longer doing so.
So whether we panic or not that's the reality. A reality superimposed on a weak and vulnerable economy. Also on a financial
system already on life support.
That's more the case in my country than yours, by quite a long chalk. Even so, though I believe the US is in a better position
to recover, the hit's coming our way wherever we live. You can't take that amount of economic activity out and expect there to
be only a few bumps in the road.
Theoretically the best approach is yours. Business as usual, tuck the vulnerable away, take such casualties as come along among
the less vulnerable. Could even be an opportunity for economic regeneration along Trump 2016 lines.
This hasn't happened and I doubt it would have even had the strategy been agreed on and adopted early on. And there's too much
disconnect between the rulers and ruled for anything constructive much to happen now, certainly in UK politics though it would
be presumptuous in me to venture an opinion here about yours. This is already a big deal and should be treated as such.
I've been following your analyses on Russiagate and they're on the money every time. I hope the pandemic isn't used as an opportunity
to bury that disgraceful affair. But there'll be plenty hoping it's just that.
@Dd I
don't know, but I have a lot of questions about things I have been reading, from the data,
demonstrating the weakness of the virus, and non-lethality, to a New York Times opinion
piece, authored by a "writer, producer and yoga teacher" who apparently contracted the virus,
and had to be hospitalized noting that it did not keep her (Fiona Lowenstein) from taking a
"selfie", apparently with a non-sterile, yet-somehow-permitted-in-the-hospital room cell
phone? You normally have all that stuff bagged up. I dunno. Check out the article and her
pic, judge for yourself.
It isn't that I don't think it is possible, or true, about this or other similar stories,
or that the data is fake or false .there's just so much to digest and some of it seems
incredulous and/or contradictory.
Just a status report from my corner of the world, Evanston immediately north of Chicago.
Testing remains absolutely unavailable. Nursing homes are flatly denied testing. Nursing
homes where outbreak is identified because residents have had healthcare elsewhere are flatly
denied testing. Testing is for celebrities and those sick enough to be admitted to
hospital.
Masks are completely unavailable. Not talking about N95. Any type of mask at all cannot be
had. Basic dust masks are way better than nothing. Hardware store told me they won't order
any more because either the employees steal them or they are stolen first while in transit.
And yet no masks at all are seen on the street. Hoarders have all of them.
Lots of people seen doing something Americans never do. Walking. With all entertainment
venues closed nothing left to do but walk. Pretty clear that many do not know how, they are
re-learning as if children. Everyone maintains the six foot distance when passing other
pedestrians. Wear a mask (simple homemade) and people cross the street to avoid you. Catcalls
telling the mask-wearer to stay home.
From comments: "They had three months to prepare. Their attitude: "They need us more than we
need them. Get ready for brexit." That is all they care about. Their criminal neglect and insane
obsession has consigned tens of thousands to death. "
Notable quotes:
"... nearly 4,000 NHS workers appealed to the prime minister to "protect the lives of the life-savers" and resolve the "unacceptable" shortage of protective equipment. ..."
"... Dr Parmar told the BBC's Andrew Marr Show: "We have had doctors tell us they feel like lambs to the slaughter, that they feel like cannon fodder. GPs tell us that they feel absolutely abandoned. ..."
"... In an open letter to The Sunday Times, some 3,963 doctors said staff were "putting their lives on the line every day" by treating coronavirus patients without appropriate protection. ..."
"... The letter said: "Frontline doctors have been telling us for weeks that they do not feel safe at work. ..."
Coronavirus: NHS doctors feel like 'lambs to slaughter' without protective kit, warns senior
medic. 'We must really stress to the prime minister that we need to protect the front line
here'
Doctors battling the coronavirus outbreak feel like "lambs to the slaughter" without
adequate protection equipment, a senior medic has said.
Dr Rinesh Parmar, chair of the Doctors' Association, said frontline NHS staff were being
treated as "cannon fodder" as he launched a desperate appeal to Boris Johnson for more
resources to keep medics safe.
Dr Parmar, a consultant anaesthetist who is working on a Covid-19 intensive care ward, said
it was the "calm before the storm" and NHS staff were braced for a surge in cases.
His warning came as nearly 4,000 NHS workers appealed to the prime minister to "protect
the lives of the life-savers" and resolve the "unacceptable" shortage of protective
equipment.
Dr Parmar told the BBC's Andrew Marr Show: "We have had doctors tell us they feel like
lambs to the slaughter, that they feel like cannon fodder. GPs tell us that they feel
absolutely abandoned.
... ... ...
In an open letter to The Sunday Times, some 3,963 doctors said staff were "putting their
lives on the line every day" by treating coronavirus patients without appropriate
protection.
The letter said: "Frontline doctors have been telling us for weeks that they do not feel
safe at work.
"Intensive care doctors and anaesthetists have told us they have been carrying out the
highest-risk procedure, putting a patient on a ventilator, with masks that expired in
2015."
Microware can be used for cleaning if you make the mask slightly wet. In this case they will
heat to over 60 0 C. Other then using alcohol this is probably the fastest method of
disinfection
"- USA classified all discussion related to preparation for the virus;
"- suppression of testing;
"- failure to prepare despite urgent warnings;
"- blaming China for US/West lack of preparation (they have sufficient info);
"- failure to acknowledge and implement treatment;
"- rush of aid to Wall Street and corporations while slow-walking money to ordinary people
(will we ever see that money?).!!"
Jackrabbit@15
It is not clear what you are trying to communicate. But I assume that you are arguing that
"the Crisis is fake."
The 'reasons' that you give are not reasons at all- far from proving that the crisis is fake
they are simply features of the crisis itself.
Far from being fake the crisis is as plain as day. While there may be debate over whether
or not the disease is exaggerated, even falsified and nothing more than another seasonal
virus, the crisis, internationally and locally is obviously real.
And the proof of this is that millions of people are not working or working from home, the
streets are empty in the cities, the healthcare systems are dangerously overstrained, there
is an obvious need to devise food distribution networks and to substitute alternatives for
reliance on the marketplace to make decisions and the invisible hand to govern. And thousands
are dying-which is very real.
All these things are real. Much more real than your irresponsible claim (@33) that
'inexpensive Chloroquine' will treat the problem. You don't know that, just as I don't know
that it won't-though the weight of opinion is against what you advise which might well, in
the unlikely event that anyone takes you seriously, prove to be fatal.
Why is it that I feel like all leaders at Municipal, State, Provincial, Regional, and Federal
levels in whatever country should watch Governor Andrew Cuomo's daily briefings? Why
do I feel it's required viewing for the length of the pandemic? Why is it I feel like all
leaders should cover the pandemic as thoroughly and efficiently as he's covering it? And I'm
not even a big fan of the Cuomos! Only the truth matters to me, not personalities. If he's
doing it right; I don't care who it is!
You probably missed that ALL NYS residents (over 19 million people) have been ordered to
stay home. An unnecessary measure when the virus can be treated effectively.
And if you're sick, you're told to stay home until/unless it worsens, which allows the
virus to progress to the point where treatment with inexpensive Chloroquine is less
effective.
The idea advanced on the last thread [by Vk and here @7 and 39 I think] that governments
should be organized around something different than economics is sound and worthy of
everyone's input, ideas and objections; discussion is needed and welcome.
International human to human discussion should take place. Human experience with nation
state globalism has shown just how vulnerable humanity is to organized and institutionalized
corruption; the actions of the leaders of individual nations have shown the nation state
system cannot be trusted.
The Covid 19 pandemic has reminded us all that we as humans <= have a right to a
government that is of our collective liking, we have learned that governments must serve the
best interest of the most persons, not special interest of a few. Governments which fail to
serve equal right, open access and equal chance to those it governs are prima facia
legitimates. Covid 19 brought the meaning of the principle of self-determination to the
forefront. Everyone's life is challenged by submicroscopic beast. It takes the cooperation of
all of us, to save most of us, and it takes the corruption of a few, to ruin it all, for most
of us.
Human rights come first, long before economics . No economic rationale can support
the delay or justify the cost of failure for those entrusted with the power to act, should
they fail to timely act with diligence on threat that human lives are in danger. Experience
suggest it is not possible to leave the power, function, and direction of government to those
whose responsibility it is to operate it <= something very different is needed.
Covid 19 was a wake up call , that makes real the unfulfilled and failed campaign
promises in a never ending trail of campaigns. Its time for everyone to insist on truth,
truth in media, truth in political campaigns, open book truth from those appointed to
government, and to bring everyone's troops home. Its time for nation states to stop
supporting the private oil and gas bandits, the MSM, or any other special interest, its time
to make a single global currency that bears no interest and that does not require repayment
of principal, its time for governments to stop arming belligerents, their own or those of
anyone else (gun control should be transformed into between governments, weapons control and
the persons of all humans everywhere should be equally armed), its time to stop one nation
instigating or supporting regime change in another, and its time to deny government leaders
from using the governments they lead, to enable private or corrupt profits. Every human has a
right to life, liberty and to pursuit of happiness: <=governments were instituted to
secure to mankind the enjoyment of the privilege of those rights; but it seems mankind has
been lax in making these governments conform to their privilege of existence.
A $0 military budget, and no interest, no repay currency could bring the credit
needed to create multi many places of employment, AWA fix ailing infra structures, improve
access to, even make access globally universal. It could improve the quality of education and
open to everyone<= fair play, access to capital (instead of venture capital expecting
reward of profit, how about advances of capital in search of human progress). which could
enable real progress on earth for mankind.
Its time to eliminate the dependency on, or even the existence of those monopolies
nation states like to create out of thin air by using their power to invent by rule of law,
powers that restrain true competition (license, privatized government ownership, special
authority, patents, copyrights, and the private property ownership).
It time to stop over hyped , Wall Street multi global type greed which only exist
because currency is used as control devise, instead of a facilitator. Nation states should
facilitate humans to interact, in ways transparent to the nation state boundaries (Its
economics, that encourages non sharing attitudes, that cause competitors to seek ways to use
governments to restrain human inter action). Humans should try to replace foreign products
with locally made goods and the foreign goods producers should be encouraged to make goods in
places where the goods have a demand because demand produces jobs and provides opportunity,
globalism organized to produce economic gains, often attempt to steal from locals the
benefits of demand created by the locals. The local province rule should apply: that is if
locals want to make it, multinationals should be denied. The billions saved to the global
economy in unexpended energy consumption (no transport cost), could bring prices of goods and
services to comparative advantage adjusted market price levels. I predict, the poor would
prosper because they would have an opportunity to contribute to our global human society, and
government would be re instituted to encourage and enforce equality for all to those it
governs. Governments should restrain and deny wealth, but they should encourage and
facilitate local competition. At one time people elected their representatives based on
performance in accord to those ideals. Currency that carries no interest and that never needs
to be repaid, challenges economic induced greed and redirects the efforts of mankind to
providing that which is needed.
In 1949 the income tax in USA governed America was layered into tiers (where different tax
rates were applied); the USA taxed those who made big bucks at 90% in its highest tier ..
Seem to recall Briton had something similar [100% of everything over $150,000 pounds of
taxable Income?]. From here => http://www.milefoot.com/math/businessmath/taxes/fit.htm
<=i made a table
year rate@personal taxable income level
1941 81% @$5,000,000
1942-1943 88% @$200,000
1944-1945 94% @$200,000 The tax limited to a 90% effective rate.
1946-1947 91% @$200,000 The tax limited to a 90% effective rate (85.5% >credits).
1948-1951 91% @$400,000 The tax limited to a 77% effective rate in 1948-1949, .
1952-1953 92% @$400,000 The tax was limited to an 88% effective rate.
corporate rate from http://www.milefoot.com/math/businessmath/taxes/fit.htm
I made a small table.
1942- 1945 40% > $50,000
1946- 1949 38% > $50,000
1950 42% > $25,000
1951 50.75% > $25,000
1952- 1963 52% > $25,000
1964 52% > $25,000
1965- 1967 48% > $25,000
1968- 1969 52.8% > $25,000
These numbers suggest a long winded story of useless corruption.
Chronology of the death of a French doctor today. Came back from a trip to Madagascar a month
ago in good shape. Was working at Compiegnes, which because a cluster in mid-February when it
received a taxi driver who was positive and treated him without special precautions. Got sick
and was quarantined 3 weeks ago, i.e. early March, two weeks after exposition.
Died today. That is to say that most of the dead we see now might have been affected since
mid-Feb.
Dr. Dan Lee Dinke: All Corona-viruses have a common weakness:heat kills them. Specifically
relative short exposure to 56°C. Breathing hot air in a sauna for 20 minutes will mostly
clean the upper respiratory tract of corona-viruses, but a hair dryer can also help if no
sauna available.
The video is worth to watch and could save lives through such a simple method.
@LP #52
Wrong. The lower respiratory tract - the temperature is stable via mixing outside air with
inside. Otherwise people could not survive in extreme cold or extreme heat situations.
The hot air might kill the virus outside; it won't kill the virus in the lower respiratory
tract.
I would point out that China is doing both lockdowns and extreme tracking.
South Korea is doing extreme tracking/testing with no lockdowns.
The US is doing lockdowns with no tracking and "voluntary" testing - it seems most of
the West is also doing lockdowns but without the China/South Korea extreme tracking.
Russia has been very aggressive from the start with extreme tracking but hasn't had any
lockdowns yet.
The economic consequences of lockdowns in the US - I've noted before - are going to be
extreme in the US because of its high cost of living and highly complex, interdependent
economic value chains.
Secondly, China has both high savings rates (albeit skewed by income inequality) as well
as much lower cost of living. Some interesting details TAMU study - including that
Chinese households had more assets in total than US households... in 2010!
In Wuhan, ground zero for the virus, four healthcare workers -- including doctors -- have
told CNN of the difficulties facing medical crews on the ground. They have asked to remain
anonymous to avoid repercussions.
Through telephone conversations with CNN and posts on Chinese social media, they told of low
hospital resources. In private groups online, those identified as hospital staff are
coordinating with members of the public to import protective equipment as they treat an
increasing number of infected patients.
"In terms of resources, the whole of Wuhan is lacking," one Wuhan-based healthcare worker
told CNN by phone. This person said they were looking for more protective clothing,
protective goggles and masks.
"It's really like we're going into battle stripped to the waist," one healthcare worker
added, using a Chinese idiom that equates to "going into battle without armor".
One hospital staff member claims healthcare workers have resorted to wearing diapers to work
so as to avoid having to remove their HAZMAT suits, which they say are in short supply. A
doctor on her Chinese social media Weibo page described similar accounts at another Wuhan
hospital.
"My family members are definitely worried about me, but I still have to work," another
doctor told. But she said that she is hopeful they will ultimately get the gear they need. "Our
bosses, our hospital suppliers will definitely find a way to get these stocks to us," she
added.
It's not clear if these accounts are anecdotal or whether there are widespread shortages
across Wuhan.
Chinese state media has also shared posts from multiple Wuhan hospitals in which they ask
for public donations of medical supplies. They report that one hospital staff member said the
current supplies "are only able to sustain three or four days".
The Wuhan Health Commission has requisitioned over 10,000 beds from 24 hospitals to be used
in the treatment of confirmed and suspected cases.
On Friday, Wuhan officials acknowledged that local hospitals were struggling to accommodate
people seeking medical attention and said measures were being put into place to alleviate the
situation.
State media also reported that the city aims to build a 25,000 square meter (269,100 square
foot) new facility within a week, increasing hospital capacity by 1,000 beds, and that several
medical centers in Hubei province are asking for medical gear donations.
I read of the new tool scanning online messages. Checking in: late afternoon my two comments,
in reply, failed to appear in the "Western Governments failures" thread.
[.] Gates Foundation monies via CEPI are financing development of a radical new vaccine
method known as messengerRNA or mRNA.
They are co-funding the Cambridge, Massachusetts biotech company, Moderna Inc., to
develop a vaccine against the Wuhan novel coronavirus, now called SARS-CoV-2. Moderna's
other partner is the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a
part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Head of NIAID is Dr Anthony Fauci, the
person at the center of the Trump Administration virus emergency response. Notable about
the Fauci-Gates Moderna coronavirus vaccine, mRNA-1273, is that it has been rolled out in a
matter of weeks, not years, and on February 24 went directly to Fauci's NIH for tests on
human guinea pigs, not on mice as normal. Moderna's chief medical adviser, Tal Zaks,
argued, "I don't think proving this in an animal model is on the critical path to getting
this to a clinical trial."
Another notable admission by Moderna on its website is the legal disclaimer, "Special
Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements: These risks, uncertainties, and other factors
include, among others: the fact that there has never been a commercial product utilizing
mRNA technology approved for use." In other words, completely unproven for human health and
safety.
Another biotech company working with unproven mRNA technology to develop a vaccine for
the COVID-19 is a German company, CureVac. Since 2015 CureVac has received money from the
Gates Foundation to develop its own mRNA technology. In January the Gates-backed CEPI
granted more than $8 million to develop a mRNA vaccine for the novel coronavirus.[.]
======
early fall the CDC planning and forgot to order test kits and ventilators:---{hapstance}
---the recruitment of
Public Health Advisors (Quarantine Program) country wide major cities, every state
Open Period:2019-11-15 to 2020-05-15 Salary $511440. to $93077.
Job summary: - responsible for preventing the importation and spread of communicable diseases
from abroad and spread of these diseases domestically.[.]
Duties:
[Provide technical assistance, consultation and guidance to national, state and / or local
agencies; health organizations; federal, state and local law enforcement agencies [.] and
quarantine activities [.] ]
"... Financialisation operates through three different conduits: changes in the structure and operation of financial markets, changes in the behaviour of nonfinancial corporations, and changes in economic policy. ..."
"... Yes, the contrived-virus (convid19) is most certainly a smoke screen for global financial collapse ..."
"... The media and the Government are in lockstep. They are quarantining areas and locking down, not to contain the virus but to contain the ensuing violence when people finally and hopefully figure out that they are getting royally screwed. ..."
"... The oil markets are playing a role in the market turmoil. And its not the Corona virus, but the radical state overreaction aided by the cynical shameless hype mongering media that has crashed the markets. ..."
"... Corona as an economic instrument ? Can't argue that medical claims are just as inflated as the amount of money that has been printed. As a companion piece to Frank's excellent article take a look at Renegade Inc's film explaining why a Fiat economy is bound to end in tears. ..."
The years since the 1970s are unprecedented in terms of their volatility in the price of commodities, currencies, real estate
and stocks. There have been 4 waves of financial crises: a large number of banks in three, four or more countries collapsed at
about the same time. Each wave was followed by a recession, and the economic slowdown which began in 2008 was the most severe
and most global since the great depression of the 1930s."
Manias, Crashes and Panics – Kindelberger and Aliber
Interestingly enough 1971 was the year when Nixon took the world off the gold standard, which had been in effect since 1944. Fiat-bugs
please note.
More to the point, however. Booms and busts have always been normal in a capitalist economy. But in recent years this has been
a feature which has been exacerbated by and involves that part of the economy indicated by the acronym FIRE (Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate) and its growing importance in the economy in both qualitative and quantitative terms.
Financialisation is a process whereby financial markets, financial institutions, and financial elites gain greater influence over
economic policy and economic outcomes. Financialisation transforms the functioning of economic systems at both the macro and micro
levels. Its principal impacts are to:
elevate the significance of the financial rent-seeking sector relative to the real value-producing sector
transfer income from the
real value-producing sector to the financial sector
increase income inequality and contribute to wage stagnation
Since 1970 this part of the economy has grown from almost nothing to 8% of US Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This means that one
dollar in every ten is associated with finance. In terms of corporate profits finance's contribution now represents around 40% of
all corporate profits in the US. This is a significant figure and, moreover it does not include those overseas earnings of companies
whose profits are repatriated to their countries of origin.
Thus, the increasing presence and role of finance in overall economic activity and the increase of profits channelled to the financial
sector represent the salient indicators as to what has been termed financialization. It is argued by some that financialization may
put the economy at risk of debt deflation and prolonged recession.
Financialisation operates through three different conduits: changes in the structure and operation of financial markets, changes
in the behaviour of nonfinancial corporations, and changes in economic policy. Countering financialisation calls for a multifaceted
agenda that:
restores policy control over financial markets
challenges the neoliberal economic policy paradigm encouraged by financialisation
makes corporations responsive to interests of stakeholders other than just financial markets
reforms the political process so as
to diminish the influence of corporations and wealthy elites
The rent-seeking nature of finance is common to all forms of insurance, banking, monopolistic pricing, and property. This has
not always been the case, or at least wasn't as pronounced as it is at present. There was a time when the banking system was junior
partner in the relationship between banks and industry. Banks provided industry with loans for investment with a view to maximising
profit for both. This is patently not the case today.
Generally speaking, banks will lend for property purchases, stock buy-backs, and perhaps loans for dubious mergers and acquisitions.
Moreover, when we speak of 'profits' this has now assumed a rather obscure meaning. Profits were generally understood as a realization
of surplus value.
Firms made stuff – goods and services – which had a value, which was then sold on the market at a profit. Given the competitive
nature of the system, firms invested in increased capital formation and output which increased productivity, surplus value and ultimately
profit.
With regard to Investment banks like Goldman Sachs and the commercial banks they do not create value; they are purely rent-extractive.
For example, commercial banks make a loan out of thin air, debit this loan to the would-be mortgagee who then becomes a source of
permanent income flow to the bank for the next 25 years.
Goldman Sachs makes year-on-year 'profits' by doing – what exactly? Nothing particularly useful. But then Goldman Sachs is part
of the cabal of central banks and Treasury departments around the world. It is not unusual to see the interchange of the movers and
shakers of the financial world who oscillate between these institutions. Hank Paulson, Mario Draghi, Steve Mnuchin, Robert Rubin
on and on it goes.
This financialised system now moves in ever-increasing levels of instability. But what did we expect when the whole institutional
structure – its rules, regulations and practises – were deregulated and finance was let off the leash.
Thatcher, Reagan, the 'Big Bang' had set the scene and there was no going back: neoliberalism and globalization had become the
norm. From this point on, however, there followed a litany of crises mostly in the developing world but these disturbances were in
due course to move into the developed world. Serial bubbles began to appear.
US stock prices [which of course would only ever go up] began to decline in the Spring of 2000, and fell by 40% in the next
three years. Whilst the prices of NASDAQ stocks decline by 80%."
Manias, Panics and Crashe s – Kindleberger and Aliber
Chastened monies moved out of this market and into property speculation. It is common knowledge what happened next. The run-up
to 2008 was floated on a sea of cheap credit. The price of stocks pushed property prices to vertiginous heights until – pop, went
the weasel.
The reason was quite simple. Any boom and bust has an inflexion point where boom turns to bust. This is when buyers incomes, and
borrowers inability to extend their loans could no longer support the rise in the price level. Euphoria turned to panic as borrowers
who once clamoured to buy were now desperate to sell. 2008 had arrived.
The strange thing, however, regarding the property price boom-and-bust was that it was based upon pure speculation. Prices went
up, prices went down. Some – a few – made money, quite a few lost money. Investors were wondering what had happened to their gains
which they had made during the up phase. Where had all that money gone?
The short answer is – nowhere. It was never there in the first place. It was fictitious capital. Gains which had appeared and
then disappeared like a will 'o' the wisp. As opposed to physical capital – machinery, labour and raw materials, and money capital
which enabled through purchase the production of value to take place, we have fictitious capital which is a claim on future production.
If my house goes up by 10% that is a capital gain, if everybody's house goes up by 10% that is asset-price inflation
Fictitious capital is a by-product of capitalist accumulation. It is a concept used by Karl Marx in his critique of political
economy. It is introduced in chapter 25 of the third volume of Capital. Fictitious capital contrasts with what Marx calls "real capital",
which is capital actually invested in physical means of production and workers, and "money capital", which is actual funds being
held.
The market value of fictitious capital assets (such as stocks and securities) varies according to the expected return or yield
of those assets in the future, which Marx felt was only indirectly related to the growth of real production. Effectively, fictitious
capital represents "accumulated claims, legal titles, to future production'' and more specifically claims to the income generated
by that production.
The moral of the story is that it is not possible to print wealth or value. Money in its paper representation of the real thing,
e.g., gold, is not wealth it is a claim on wealth.
Of course, this would be lost on establishment economists, bankers, and financial journalists, whose view is that the policy should
be QE, liquidity injections, and so forth. A one-trick pony.
And what has all of this to do with Coronavirus? Well, everything actually.
I take it that we all knew that the grotesquely overleveraged world economy was heading for a 'correction' but that's a rather
a soothing description. "Massive correction" would be a better description. That is the nature of the beast. The world was a bubble
of paper money looking for a pin. It found one.
Have a nice day all.
John ,
The "gold" backed currency is just another myth of stability, gold is controlled by central banks and hoarded by the owners of
such, the syndicate in pc terms for delicate ears. Meaning the syndicate can adjust it as they please and decide what gold is
worth as they've done in the past on a weekly basis. Inflation and deflation are used to rob the vast majority of people and expect
there to be deflation coming up as that is the worst of the two. Price stability is much more desirable across the staples that
people actually need, not what backs the man made tool called currency. The goal of responsible civil government should be full
employment of its citizens (and price stability of essential for living), especially in productive industries, not useless luxury
industries which do not benefit in any way. Now QE is just another form of inflation on a massive scale, good if you have say
a house that will go up, but the more currency you have the less it's worth and the central banksters are using it.
Prices rise
but wages and salaries do not rise anywhere near inflation, it's a slow sinking into poverty and vassalage of which mortgages
are just a form of debt slavery. You can own nothing, you're just a renter of all things to be molded and caged if necessary by
the syndicate owners and their God-State.
At some point no one will be able to afford houses and the crash will come. They DO
NOT CARE if you payoff the debt, what's important is that you pay to service the debt thus keeping you in line. If you go out
of line they can just demand the money now, thus putting you in the streets. When the time comes the God-State will take possession
of all housing, all industry etc and the slavery will be complete. Just like the Soviet Union there will be an elite that are
immune "gods" to all this, there is actually already this today, the "olympians" kingpins etc whatever you want to call them.
Biff ,
Yes, the contrived-virus (convid19) is most certainly a smoke screen for global financial collapse. Another day down
under and another super tanker full of media hype and horseshit arrives. But then it struck me. Most of us know that Convid19
is about as deadly as the common cold.
In fact the Government even tells you this if you listen carefully to press conferences. This to me can only mean one obvious
thing.
The media and the Government are in lockstep. They are quarantining areas and locking down, not to contain the virus but
to contain the ensuing violence when people finally and hopefully figure out that they are getting royally screwed. The warning
flag will be shutdown of social media services or the internet in your area. Then watch out. They have created a world where our
only means of communication is the internet. You can't even make a phone call in Aus without the internet. Imagine it's not there.
Robbobbobin ,
"Yes, the contrived-virus (convid19) is most certainly a smoke screen for global financial collapse."
Are you saying that if COVID-19 were not contrived but a genuine public health problem then it could (so would) not
be used as a smokescreen, i.e. that the contrivance of a virus of some sort (in this case COVID-19) is an essential aspect
of your narrative; that if there were no pathogen engendering a pandemic problem then a serviceable smokescreen could (so would)
not be contrived based on some factor other than a biological one, or are you saying something else altogether?
simply put ,
Money exists to facilitate trade.
So if the economy grows you need to put more money into circulation, if it shrinks you need to take money out of circulation.
That's why a gold standard does not work very well in a modern world, it cannot adapt to the changing environment, you cannot
increase or decrease the amount of gold in the world (not as needed anyway) so you end up with not enough "money" available (or
too much), both disastrous for the economy.
The banking system is corrupt, but not because of fiat money.
Ken Kenn ,
Lenin talked about making Statues out of Gold post a Communist Society so its' inherent worth is in the eye of the shareholder
in its price or it's perceived future price.
Money ( fiat or otherwise ) is only an agreed exchange of labour to price of goods between a group of swindler Capitalists
who ideally would wish that all the other Capitalists to pay their workers more so that they can buy the other Capitalists goods
who don't pay their workers more.
The state of play at the moment is a bit Rooseveltian.
Is it better to be a poorer capitalist temporarily than not a future capitalist at all?
the UK Neo – Liberal position says yes only because there is a tiny chance that the masses will twig what's going on and why
it's going on in this way.
80% of wages is better than 0% of wages/income.
This is predicted to last just 3 months.
If it lasts a year watch it all change.
Fact is- in the end the Middle Classes and down will pick up the tab.
And if the 'We ' are picking up the tab anyway ' We ' may as well demand and get 100% of wages/income.
As Thatcher said – It's our money – not the State's.
Theoretically of course in a democracy.
Toby Russell ,
I don't believe this or that form of money can ever be the be-all-and-end-all form. Fiat has its place, a gold standard
has its place, shells have their place, gift exchanges, IOUs, etc. There are reasonable arguments to be made for each, but each
reasonable argument, to be reasonable, would have to include historical context / societal conditions as a very large part of
its logic.
Far more important than 'money as wealth' is how we culturally understand the nature of wealth that money can only ever
be a claim on (an important function, an important component of wealth). As Rhys points out below, wealth is a slippery thing
– it's subjective to a considerable degree after all – but if one thing unites all 'instances' of it, that would be its networked
nature. There is no wealth at all without some sort of complex, living and healthy ecosystem to generate it, continually,
dynamically. So another feature of wealth would be its dynamic and ever evolving nature. Another would be that there is thus no
final guarantee of Always Having So Much Wealth I Never Have To Work Again. (Whatever work is.
Bullshit jobs, anyone ?)
And as for productivity, well, what's that? Is productivity only productive when wealth is produced? On what definition of
wealth? Good sleep produces health, assuming good exercise, good diet, healthy soil, richly biodiverse ecosystems, etc. The same
is true of friendships, community, trust, fun All things that cannot be manufactured. Not that there's anything wrong with manufacture,
which etymologically comes from manual , the hand, thus skill, craftsmanship, etc. All that good stuff.
So it's slippery, nuanced, open to discussion. What kills wealth, on the other hand – and is killing wealth right in front
of our eyes – is narrow, dogmatic assertions about what it is. One's thing's for sure: it's not money (he asserts dogmatically).
Money needs a thorough demotion, in my view, and things like sleep, community and trust need a great big cultural promotion.
Yet again, we are at a strange and mighty inflection point historically. They're popping up now with alarming regularity! Something
is obviously in the offing.
Will our imaginations and courage fail us this time around?
Here in France last weekend was Acte 70, with a huge number of gilets jaunes out on the streets for the 70th consecutive
week, protesting against 'austerity' and neoliberalism. This weekend, Acte 71, thus far there's been no street protests. I guess
the gilets jaunes will know that it will bring bad publicity for them at the moment. What they are doing instead is issuing
a massive call for everyone to open windows on their home this evening at 9pm, and bash pots and pans as loudly as possible. It'll
be interesting to see how many people will do this.
No singing on balconys baloney here.
Alan Tench ,
Please speculate: why is the number of deaths compared to infections very much lower in all the Scandinavian countries than elsewhere
in Europe? Let's just assume the figures might be reasonably accurate for this one. Also, looking at all the figures (sorry, I
used Wikipedia for this), am I right in suspecting that the number of recoveries is being blatantly unreported in just about every
country?
Ted ,
The oil markets are playing a role in the market turmoil. And its not the Corona virus, but the radical state overreaction
aided by the cynical shameless hype mongering media that has crashed the markets. As the evidence rolls in, the actual Corona
virus, and not whatever it is that is going on in Italy (a radical statistical outlier among all world nations), is rather boring.
Much more boring than the normal flu virus. And let's not forget the possibility of an epidemic of false positives in a radical
increase in PCR testing for Corona virus. Here in the West of the US, only 7% or so of tests yield positive results what if 100%
of those are false positives during the normal tail end of flu season? see for example:
'I have a five pound note, issued by the Bank of England. It clearly states: "I promise to pay the bearer the sum of five
pounds on demand." It is signed by the Chief Cashier on behalf of the Governor of the Bank of England. However, if I were to
take this bank note to the Bank of England and demand my five pounds, I would be swiftly escorted from the building.'
Unlikely. If they could not oblige you there they would certainly refer you to a nearby commercial bank who would be happy
to pay you five one-pound coins, or the equivalent in any lesser denomination, on their behalf, as promised. Of course, that would
not counter your point, but it would keep their promise.
Seamus Padraig ,
OT: If anyone here wants a good laugh, read the comments on this ridiculous tweet.
Very amusing Seamus (but not funny for the victims) however, having read through all the tweets I didn't see one advocating "Spend
many happy hours building your own Lego model of Netanyahu's bulldozers"
Jen ,
CIA must be desperate to recruit kiddies to spy on their parents through online games.
Mike Ellwood ,
Quite. As Minsky said, anyone can create money. The trick is to get it accepted.
Governments who issue currency give it value simply by insisting that their citizens pay them tax in it. And how do the citizens
get the currency in the first place? Governments spend it into the economy.
If you had a closed, autarkic (no imports or exports) economy, government could control the value of its currency pretty closely
if it chose to. It gets more complicated in the real world, where you need to import real resources, and your currency is being
traded in the Foreign Exchange market. It helps if you have something that other countries want, that you can export.
At the end of the day, what matters are real resources (people, as well as things). As we see with the toilet roll panic (and
other, more serious shortages).
Toby Russell ,
Your comment gets my vote, though I would argue that this discussion, and the point you make, needs much more airing. As such,
the argument is not academic, but vital. And this new Bizzaro World we just burst into is the right place for it. And loudly.
Seamus Padraig ,
By the way, Ben Swann did a great show the other night analyzing the media hype surrounding Corona Virus data. Enjoy
The Japan numbers have puzzled me for a while, since they are no slouches when it comes to managing epidemics. Where are the
exploding numbers for this modern plague in Japan?
At some point, folks gotta say that the WHO needs to be reformed or closed down.
John Pretty ,
Ted, there has been no coronavirus epidemic in Japan and no panic:
Japan may have a healthier elderly population compared to the same age demographic in China and other parts of the world due to
diet (less Western junk food consumption over past decades) and rates of smoking probably lower as well. Air pollution levels
in Japan probably much lower due to greater use of public transport and Shinkansen bullet trains in particular since 1960s. No
wonder Japan still wants to go ahead with Tokyo Olympics.
Seamus Padraig ,
Another ringer from Frank Lee!
But then Goldman Sachs is part of the cabal of central banks and Treasury departments around the world. It is not unusual
to see the interchange of the movers and shakers of the financial world who oscillate between these institutions. Hank Paulson,
Mario Draghi, Steve Mnuchin, Robert Rubin
They don't call it Government Sachs for nothing.
#CoronaHoax
DunGroanin ,
Let's play them at their own game.
I want to see McDonnell put out a clear simple response of what measures are actually needed – i listed them a few posts ago
in haste but they still hold:
1. All self employed / free lancers etc ought to be paid at least 60% of their last years submitted accounts on a monthly basis
directly by HMRC – they have their bank details and these figures at hand a simple database query can be constructed and tested
within hours – There can be a max limit to that based on numbers of children.
2. All others without such records ought to be allowed the full and increased benefit amount.
3. The 80% for employees is smoke and mirrors – that also should be 60% and no charges or NI / pensions/ student loans etc
to complicate matters.
4. All rent private and social to be suspended. All interest on mortgages, creditcards, loans and overdrafts to be cancelled
permanently until normal service is resumed (not accumulated aa debt).
5. All capital payments to be suspended.
6. All council tax collections suspended.
7. BBC licence fee cancelled and direct funding by the HMRC introduced to provide pybluc service broadcasting only.
8. All credit ratings and any such nonsense to be suspended on individuals records – nothing should be added for failing to
keep up payments since beginning of March.
9. Any government funds into banks, corporations, pfi's to be accompanied by equity stakes in these and retained until all
such balance sheet investment has been returned.
BigB ,
I see your bubble has yet to pop, DG?
The "massive correction" – that is value destruction – has to happen before any return to "real, productive" values can occur.
Financialisation distorted productive values so much that any "normalisation" would destroy the value of money. Normal service
cannot just be resumed.
Put simply: there is more money than productive goods and services that can be claimed on now, and in the future. A lot more
a lot, lot more. At least 75 times more.
As I've said time after time: the economy has to expand exponentially or it collapses. As it stands: there is no pause or reset
button without massive value destruction. Which could be done responsibly – a la the heterodox economists "jubilee" – or irresponsibly
by keep blowing the everything bubbles with QE 5.
If you understand which mechanism is being employed: you will understand home isolation and draconian lockdowns. If debt deflation
becomes hyperinflation you might wake up in Rhodesia or the Weimar Republic and you know what came next? 🙁
DunGroanin ,
Have you missed the 40% drop in stocks BB?
And the wiping out of business Goodwill value of many a small business?
Its a major scalping. Which we are letting happen as they say 'hide' from each other. The banks are laughing all the way to
the bank.
BigB ,
No: collapse of financial assets is just the prelude. The real contagion is corporate bond market: full of over-leveraged Zombie
corporations. Particularly stressed are BBB bond junkies of the shale market but the whole market is junked out on a decade of
cheap money. When they cannot pay their way – that is, service their debt – then the defaults, layoffs, and delinquencies start
probably in the second quarter.
In other words: it hasn't even started yet. Problem: excessive debt. Solution: create more debt (and buy up the most toxic
bonds). Any rebound makes matters worse in the longer term.
One scenario to watch is when Saudi oil hits the market in April. That will put deflationary pressure on oil which is already
at $23. That could cause things to cascade (all asset classes are proxies for each other – Dr Jack Rasmus check out his blog for
explainers).
The thing is DG: this has sweet FA to do with any virus. The knock-on effect of which would have been containable I guess.
But to start an oil price war? MbS was either recklessly irresponsible, or quite deliberate. My feeling is the latter. It was
coming anyway. What better than to blame *force majeure* of a virus? And have populations on lockdown as the effects wind through
to Main St.
DunGroanin ,
I agree on the whole BB.
The thing about debt is that it can be cancelled! If that means these 'investments' will also be wiped out.
BigB ,
As Michael Hudson says "debts that cannot be paid, will not be paid". We cancel the debts, or we cancel the future. No choice
to be made really, is there?
Mike Ellwood ,
Not sure if this what you meant above, but in case not, NIC should be suspended indefinitely, both for employers and employed,
and self-employed.
Harry Stotle ,
Corona as an economic instrument ?
Can't argue that medical claims are just as inflated as the amount of money that has been printed. As a companion piece to Frank's excellent article take a look at Renegade Inc's film explaining why a Fiat economy is bound
to end in tears.
Welcome to corona capitalism or the corona casino! 😀
nottheonly1 ,
Roughly translated:
The masses owe, what the billionaires own.
What the masses still own, is now taken away.
Those who understand, see that a most generous unconditional guaranteed basic income/compensation for damages suffered on life
and property by those who run the present system, will not suffice.
A system that is sold to the masses as the gold standard of governance and distribution, has driven the collective of the species
closer to extinction. Maybe extinction is the goal after all? If that is not the case, then the UBI accounts to be like a glimpse
into a world without money in any form. A world in which everything is indeed free. Mother Earth has never been compensated for
the damages and destruction done to her and her more connected life forms.
For various reasons, corona-whatever has the potential – and it was created to do/utilize that potential – to virtually/spiritually
grow a mushroom out of homo sapiens' head. Due to the constant absorption of aerosolized air, having glyphosate in the bloodstream
down into the bone marrow, being exposed to wireless **radiation** constantly and occupied with social media 24/7 has rendered
the human immune system a sick joke compared to what it was before the commodification of everything and everything that will
come.
The bucket must stop here. And I am more than willing to go. Just don't make Soylent Green from me. But to allow a human being
to leave, when they decide to be "I'm good! I'm ready!" would also mean to allow fellow humans to leave at their choosing. Before
they are forcefully removed from the pension/social security/Renten system.
Now is the time to end social networking. No more facebook, twitter, or whatever. The addiction of the masses to panic is wholly
abused right now. And the u.s. has a president who thought he could weather it all out alone. And so did many more – doing everything
they can to maintain their grip on power and wealth.
But the gallows are coming. For all of them. And that is not the result of the rulings of corrupt courts. They will join the
only waiting line the rich ever have to experience. The call for the closure of all u.s./il/nato biological weapons laboratories
has echoed yesterday. It will be followed by the end of militarism and killing for profit. Religions are failing human beings,
because they, themselves are untruthful. And Julian Assange? Will he be given a corona?
As it goes with self-dynamical events, this one too, has long taken on a life of its own. The Universe allows for all crimes
to happen, but it does not promote them. It does not judge them. Karma means 'action' and nobody cannot not act. Things need to
be done constantly – if not to barely survive, then surely for the sake of the addiction to the virtual glass pearl that shine
so bright.
And yes, by all means. Remember that traditional Chinese medicine offers a variety of herbal mixtures against practically everything.
People need to boost their immune systems. All wifi must go. Towers must all be dismantled immediately and replaced with fiber
optics. Planned obsolescence must be prohibited. It must all start here, now.
In Argentina, they were sounding the sirens yesterday – because corona is coming. It oddly reminded me of "Incoming ballistic
millie alert! Not a Drill!". I know it's the people in the cities who are hit the hardest. Out on the countryside, one can at
least be outdoors with plants and animals. Animals also suffer from this artificially induced madness. But it would have come
anyway. Now getting back to what's really important.
BigB ,
If the economy really tanks – and it must, but not necessarily this time – they will have to totally restructure society without
work or not enough of it. There is a deeply sinister side to what they are doing. Which is establishing a precedent for further
doings. Imagine what they would do if there was a real economic crisis?
It is going to take a massive and concerted shift in the social conscience to turn it around now. It is the People's own alienated
creative cultural powers that are being enacted by the market state system against the People. It is only the People who can enact
a different system if they get another chance.
nottheonly1 ,
Exactly. Moving forward at this point means also to evolve. One time I was wondering what would happen if everyone would be told
"Don't worry about it. It has already been taken care of."
When society acknowledges its nature to be more organic than bureaucratic. For Life to be much more alive, than following the
needs of the very few.
There is a Mel Brooks classic worth watching: "Life Stinks". It applies as much to the owner class, as does 'Trading Places'
– whereas I am afraid that the owner class was making fun of the working class/poor part of society.
Organic Food security has to be our priority. Ridding ourselves from what is making us really sick to be profited from by the
owner class. Instead of giving ownership of corporations that are bailed out to the 'government' responsible for this mess, ownership
must be transferred to the workers that run the business.
Famed economist Nouriel Roubini predicted that a recession from the worldwide coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak will be "more severe"
than the global financial crisis, but
fiscal pump-priming is critical to mitigating the impact.
With governments around the world resorting to extreme measures to keep citizens indoors and away from large gatherings, many
on Wall Street are now
expecting a global recession . Known as "Dr. Doom" for his gloomy economic predictions, Roubini added to those voices by telling
Yahoo Finance on Tuesday that markets have reasons to be downbeat.
"For now, there is not much to be optimistic [about], and what we can hope is if there's going to be the right stimulus -- and
it has to be something of at least 3% of GDP -- this is going to be a very severe, but short recession," Roubini told "On The Move"
in an interview.
In order to counteract the widening effects of social distancing, President Donald Trump and his top advisors are
currently debating
a massive stimulus -- including cutting every American a check.
Roubini agreed, suggesting that Congress give $1,000 to "every single U.S. resident" before it's too late.
"It doesn't matter if you're young, old, employed, unemployed, student, formerly employed, partially employed, hourly worker,
contractor, gig, or small business," the New York University economist said.
"Everybody needs at $1,000 or otherwise we'll end up in the Great Depression at this point." Reality will bite soon
Retail and manufacturing data this week offered investors a small hint of the ugliness the pandemic has in store for the economy
-- and neither figure was pretty.
With that in mind, Roubini expects the recession will start during the current quarter, as the pandemic spurs mass closures of
businesses and lost wages for many hourly and service sector workers. He forecasted a contraction in economic growth through the
second quarter, and "most likely" in Q3.
"But if we have the monetary easing we have right now, if we control the pandemics by doing systematic quarantines, maybe by June-July
the pandemic is stopped, and maybe by the fourth quarter of this year we are going to have an economic recovery," he said.
The economist added that the U.S. needs "fiscal stimulus," since the Federal Reserve has done "everything under the sun." Within
the space of a week, the Fed has cut rates to zero, and thrown
trillions at the market in an effort to backstop financial institutions, non-bank corporations and lending markets overall.
Yet Roubini pointed out that what the economy actually needs is fiscal stimulus to backstop falling private demand -- especially
as exports, consumption, residential investment, and capital expenditures collapse.
Countries can't simply lock down their societies to defeat coronavirus, the World Health
Organization's top emergency expert said on Sunday, adding that public health measures are
needed to avoid a resurgence of the virus later on.
"What we really need to focus on is finding those who are sick, those who have the virus,
and isolate them, find their contacts and isolate them," Mike Ryan said in an interview on the
BBC's Andrew Marr Show.
"The danger right now with the lockdowns ... if we don't put in place the strong public
health measures now, when those movement restrictions and lockdowns are lifted, the danger is
the disease will jump back up."
Much of Europe and the United States have followed China and other Asian countries and
introduced drastic restrictions to fight the new coronavirus, with most workers told to work
from home and schools, bars, pubs and restaurants being closed.
In one extreme, we have Spain and France. This is the timeline of measures for Spain:
On Thursday, 3/12, the President dismissed suggestions that the Spanish authorities had been
underestimating the health threat.
On Friday, they declared the State of Emergency.
On Saturday, measures were taken:
People can't leave home except for key reasons: groceries, work, pharmacy, hospital, bank
or insurance company (extreme justification)
Specific ban on taking kids out for a walk or seeing friends or family (except to take
care of people who need help, but with hygiene and physical distance measures)
All bars and restaurants closed. Only take-home acceptable.
All entertainment closed: sports, movies, museums, municipal celebrations
Weddings can't have guests. Funerals can't have more than a handful of people.
Mass transit remains open
On Monday, land borders were shut.
Some people see this as a great list of measures. Others put their hands up in the air and
cry of despair. This difference is what this article will try to reconcile.
France's timeline of measures is similar, except they took more time to apply them, and they
are more aggressive now. For example, rent, taxes and utilities are suspended for small
businesses.
Those disbursements to wage earners are vital for the social cohesion to remain in place.
I thought Tulsi Gabbard championing that minimum basic income strategy was essential as
well.
I empathies totally with USians that are trapped in the vulgar exploitative nightmare
of the usury in that country . Debt Jubilee for all under $100,000 income would be a
start. But that might create a vulgar backlash as well.
The naked ferocity of capitalism in the USA is truly a fearsome thing.
"... By mid-February, it was clear that certain drugs and anti-virals were effective. It was important to have widespread tests so that these drugs could be administered early, especially to vulnerable populations. Yet weeks later, the West (especially USA) was still unprepared to test. ..."
The real danger was always in the possibility that the healthcare system is overwhelmed.
Then you get large numbers of unnecessary deaths.
So a country needs to flatten the curve. The best way to do that is to close the
schools as soon as community spread is detected. In the West, this should've been done in
early February - it wasn't.
By mid-February, it was clear that certain drugs and anti-virals were effective. It
was important to have widespread tests so that these drugs could be administered early,
especially to vulnerable populations. Yet weeks later, the West (especially USA) was still
unprepared to test.
There didn't need to be a crisis or a panic. But a CRISIS! is something that is
politically useful: to direct hate against China; to provide extraordinary support to
favored interests like Banks and Wall Street and Boeing.
In addition, it seems that USA/Trump was hoping that remdesivir, developed by Gilead
Sciences, would be the (expensive) drug of choice to treat Covid-19.
There is a saying the you fight the war with the army you have, not with the army you want.
Notable quotes:
"... Ok. Let me start by stating that I am not a "staunch" Trump supporter. However, I just really despise the constant visceral negative, hatred towards our Country's President. ..."
"... As I am sure you are aware, it is a tremendously difficult job, especially in today's crisis. I would think it would be better serve of your time and efforts to be constructive and optimistic, and hopeful. Rather than pinpointed every single steps and missteps he makes. He is certainly no perfect - but his goal is the same as all of ours: to defeat this virus in the best manner possible with the resources available. ..."
"... For the entire Trump Presidency it was all about the stock market. So, here we are. ..."
20 hours ago Here is a 1 minute 22 second video timeline of Trump's amazing handling of the coronavirus.
Please play this.
It will take less than two minutes of your time.
One missing key quote is a statement Trump made bragging about having natural talent coupled with a proclamation that he could
have been a scientist instead of president.
More Questions:
And where are the tests? The ventilators?
Who at the CDC or in the administration insisted the US needs to develop its own test instead of using an accurate test the rest
of the world was already using?
What about Trump increasing sanction pressure on Iran in the midst of the biggest global humanitarian crisis since world war II?
And what about Trump's rating his administration's handling of this as "excellent".
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
njbr 20 hrs
The dumb-asses in DC still don't get it. "Top" leaders crowding around a single microphone in a stage no larger than a public
restroom. Working toward a 1 time $1200 check that probably wont be issued/delivered for another couple weeks. What about the weeks
after that--are they going to spend the next couple weeks going around about the next check?? Has the production of ventilators actually
been accelerated-who could tell from what has been said? Why are nurses and doctors in my area asking the public for donations of
PPE at the very beginning of the serious phase? What happens when the doctors and nurses start tipping over? Two partially ready
hospital ships may help in one spot each on the coast, but what about everywhere else? Has anyone even checked on the production
capacity for the maybe helpful malaria medicine--has anyone been directed to begin proactive super-production of this product? On
and on.
DeeDee3
20 hrs
hard to prove deliberate neglect when you eliminate all of the evidence. No testing means "no virus" and sadly supported the hoax
theory.
Another doc died in the city today. ER's are unprotected. what conclusion can we draw from all of this?
Zardoz
20 hrs
Thousands will die because of his incompetence... and his followers will blame the Chinese
egilkinc
20 hrs
There should be a tracker of the number of cases [among medical personnle] in the US along with this
Sechel
20 hrs
Oh my g-d. This is excellent! I think Trump has learned some bad lessons from Goebbels. Repeat the lie and repeat it often and
people will take your version of events. This really serves to correct the record! Good work!
PecuniaNonOlet
20 hrs
And yet there will be an avalanche of Trump supporters defending the idiot. It is truly beyond me.
michiganmoon
20 hrs
Actually, Trump should resign and give the GOP a chance this November.
Had Trump not downplayed this and had tests ready, he could have played on a loop Biden on January 31st saying travel restrictions
from Wuhan were racist and xenophobic.
thesaint0013
20 hrs
Ok. Let me start by stating that I am not a "staunch" Trump supporter. However, I just really despise the constant visceral negative,
hatred towards our Country's President.
As I am sure you are aware, it is a tremendously difficult job, especially in today's crisis.
I would think it would be better serve of your time and efforts to be constructive and optimistic, and hopeful. Rather than pinpointed
every single steps and missteps he makes. He is certainly no perfect - but his goal is the same as all of ours: to defeat this virus
in the best manner possible with the resources available.
To criticize previous tweets, interviews, and depict his flaws and errors
does not help the common goal. The nature of some of the questions posed to him during the press conferences should be a bit more
respectful and again, it doesn't serve any positive outcome to try and "catch" him in a lie, and how he may have said something that
was not factual or false.
Again, he's not perfect and neither are anyone of us. However he is our President and we should support
his and all of our common goal to defeat this virus.
Russell
J 20 hrs
Not making excuses for Trump at all but he/we have people who are specialists and are responsible for being ready at all times
for something like this and are responsible for being on the look out for this. Somebody should have came forward, even as a whistleblower.
I've been aware for about 2 months now.
Thank you WWW.PEAKPROSPERITY.COM, MISH and WWW.ZEROHEDGE.COM
This was an epic failure of Trump, his administration and America in general.
ghoffa
20 hrs
Hi, @MishTalk @Mish
I wanted to sincerely thank you MISH from my whole extended family. I have been reading you since 2007 when Ron Paul removed the
scales from my eyes on the Fed and govt., Jekyll Island book, the "financial markets" (all modern day money changers). Every picture
I see of Fed chairpersons, their eyes look dead black sharks eyes (to quote a famous book which I subscribe, the eyes are the windows
to the soul).
In addition our mob style duolopoly govt and for the most part complicit MSM (all with significant influencing billionaire ownership
to control the news - easily searched). I've learned so much from this blog and the many commentors in this space ( a personal fav
is @Stuki ) . Nothing short of brilliant and reminds me of my fav news source Zerohedge and it's articles and commentors.
A special thanks for pointing us to Chris Martenson (peakprosperity.com) as my wife and I have watched every day his free daily
videos since JAN @24th and our extended family is as prepared as we can be. God help us all with what's coming.
For those who haven't watched it, Dr. Martenson has a great 3 min video on exponential growth on YTube. Search his name and exponential.
It will help you prepare for what our govt knows is coming in enourmous exponential growth in fatalities. Even knowing, it will be
an emotional thing to prepare for. Prepping home supplies is one thing, prepping emotionally is also important per Dr. Martenson.
HCWs be damned.
As this impacts people personally, I expect insider leaks to come from many fronts. We're working with neighbors to get prepared
as we're all on our own now as the money changers (evil) bail out the money changers (evil) amidst a system that is so debt leveraged
it can't likely be bailed out. "everything's a nail and the Fed has a hammer".
Lastly this brings a famous quote to mind as the people rise up against corrupt govt, corp bailouts after stock buy backs, etc.
Let alone the monsters upon monsters creating lab viruses (regardless of the source of this virus), and unregulated GMOs changing
the fabric of life.....
"All it takes for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing". Margaret Mead
G
QE2Infinity
20 hrs
Come on! First off, anyone can be made to look bad by taking snippets out of context and stringing them together. That said, Trump
does tend towards braggadocio. If that is off putting to you, he can be annoying. I much prefer a transparent fool to the more sly
variety that plays the part well while sticking a knife in your back.
But let's be honest here. The president can do very little. The bureaucracy of the government is a jobs program for the less ambitious
and politically inclined. It's staffed with incompetent bureaucrats that show up, surf the web and may get around to an hour or two
of honest work. Public unions guarantee they can't be fired.
Obama converted the CDC into a PC jobs program for lefties, just like he converted NASA into a Muslim outreach program.
May one ask: why is a self proclaimed libertarian screaming for more government action? Wouldn't it be great if one of the outcomes
of this crisis is that local communities became more self reliant and more self sufficient!
Sechel
20 hrs
that's from a website called therecount.com looks interesting.
Greggg
20 hrs
For the entire Trump Presidency it was all about the stock market. So, here we are.
The graphic at the end of the video already looks out of date and shows how rapid the spread has been. For March 2020 it shows
5,002 cases in the US (and counting) but right now I'm seeing 24,137 cases.
So much for "in a couple of days the 15 is going to be down close to zero".
njbr
20 hrs
What can the President do?
Force and organize the production of necessary goods.
Act as impartial hub for the distribution of new and stocked items.
Force/fund the emergency super-production of even possibly helpful items such as the malarial drug.
Turn every possible research dollar onto the research into the disease, it's treatments and vaccines.
Fund and distribute tests. Make a way to track the progress of the disease, as opposed to waiting for regional medical systems
collapse under load.
Activate whatever resources are possible to pre-position and set-up field hospitals now.
Develop uniform best-practices for quarantine and treatment.
Prepare the population for the realistic probability of multiple months of the crisis.
Mish Editor
19 hrs
May one ask: why is a self proclaimed libertarian screaming for more government action? Wouldn't it be great if one of the outcomes
of this crisis is that local communities became more self reliant and more self sufficient!
I said what I would do
I would remove tariffs. I would not have had them in the first place.
I would expect our president to act to increase supplies not insist on Made in America.
I would expect our president to behave like an emphatic human being, not a total moron
Mish
Editor
19 hrs
Trump did not Drain the Swamp. He IS the swamp
Mish Editor
19 hrs
Anyone who still supports this President's actions is a TDS-inflicted fool.
Jim
Bob 19 hrs
I've followed Mish for ~ 12 years online and on the radio for brilliant economic analysis. Lately his work has been undermined
by irrational political opinion. Mish has turned into Krugman. I won't be back.
abend237-04
19 hrs
The Donald is obviously afflicted with the same narcissistic megalomania prerequisite for a successful run at any elective office
above County Coroner, anywhere in this country.
That said, he can apparently read a graph, and he's right: The two drug combination of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin are working
to treat this damn thing, BUT:
It is, indeed, not a Covid-19 preventative.
If you get it, and you dink around at home too long waiting for improvement, arriving at ICU needing ventilation leaves you with
roughly the odds of Russian roulette of surviving, especially if you're older.
Lacking testing, the only remaining means available to knock the transmission rate down quickly is social distancing/lockdown. But,
enough of that prevention can leave us wishing we were dead anyway.
Unfortunately, all the college kids jamming the bars and beaches is setting the stage for continued exponential growth by hordes
of asymptomatic spreaders.
The march of folly continues.
I like what I'm seeing of Cuomo. He'd be a good guy to have in the room in a serious fight; This qualifies.
DBG8489
19 hrs
As someone who hates all politicians, there is zero love lost between Trump and myself. I had hopes when he was elected that he
would make a difference but it was clear based on how he looked after his private meeting with Obama on inauguration day that he
was in over his head.
Having said that, I will say this:
From at least the "major" state level up, it would appear that not one single elected official or the top advisors and bureaucrats
who work for them have shown anything but complete and utter failure in their handling of this emergency.
You have senators selling off piles of stock while either saying nothing or telling the rest of us that it was bullshit. And trust
me - they were not the only ones. If anyone cares to investigate, they will likely find this problem rampant. Elected officials should
not even be allowed to trade stocks when they control the entire economy - not even through alleged "blind trusts" - it's bullshit.
But that's a conversation for another time.
You have congressional reps and senators blaming each other and/or the other party and passing laws and bailouts without even
reading the bills they are passing.
You have the Treasury and the Fed printing money and throwing it at every hole that opens up without the slightest regard for
what the unintended consequences of those actions may entail.
You have governments of the "major" states (CA, NY, NJ...etc) who know they can't simply print money being exposed using any extra
money they had (along with taxes based on tourism that have now disappeared) to fund God knows what now demanding that everyone else
pony up to pay for their failure to plan...
The lack of leadership in the major states and at the Federal level is abysmal ACROSS THE BOARD.
And that includes members of BOTH parties and nearly every single bureaucratic agency involved.
You can single Trump out if you want, but he's not alone. He's just an easy target because 49% of the population hated him before
this started.
njbr
18 hrs
....Top health officials first learned of the virus's spread in China on January 3, US Health and Human Services Secretary Alex
Azar said Friday. Throughout January and February, intelligence officials' warnings became more and more urgent, according to the
Post -- and by early February, much of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA's intelligence reports were
dedicated to warnings about Covid-19.
All the while, Trump downplayed the virus publicly, telling the public the coronavirus "is very well under control in our country,"
and suggesting warm weather would neutralize the threat the virus poses....
...The administration did begin taking some limited action about a month after Azar says the administration first began receiving
warnings, blocking non-citizens who had been to China in the last two weeks from entering the country on February 3 -- a move public
experts have argued at best bought the US time to ramp up its testing capabilities, which it did not use, and at worst had no beneficial
effects at all.
Trump finally assembled a task force to address the virus, putting Vice President Mike Pence in charge of the effort on February
26, and declared a national emergency on March 13. And, just this week -- nearly three months after first receiving warnings from
his intelligence officials -- the president's public tone about the crisis shifted: "I've always known this is a real -- this is
a pandemic," he said Tuesday as he admitted, "[the virus is] not under control for any place in the world."....
Realist
18 hrs
I have been watching political leaders in my own country get on television daily. They have all done a great job of informing
the public about the dangers of this virus. They have all relied on the experts to relay information to the public about what the
government is doing, and what individuals should be doing. This is true at the national, regional, and local levels.
In addition businesses have been sending out emails, radio announcements and tv messages explaining what they are doing in regard
to this pandemic.
In fact, I am amazed at what a good job everyone is doing.
I am also watching what is happening in the US. Every US state governor and city mayor I have seen on tv has done a wonderful
job of presenting the facts to the public and provided instructions as to what they are doing and what the public should be doing.
Then there is the gong show that is Trump. I could not imagine that anyone could be as bad as he is; months of lies, denials,
suppression of the truth, and a complete and utter lack of preparation for something he was warned about many times. Denying one
day that the virus was a pandemic; only to claim the very next day that he had known it was a pandemic for months; and then the very
next day say that no one could have seen this coming; and finally saying that his response to the virus rates a 10 out of 10.
Worst President ever. Sadly, many, many Americans are going to suffer and die because America had this moron in charge.
Mish keeps referring to worldometer to get stats from. Their numbers seem to match up with numbers I see in my own country and
in the US.
Disturbingly, today, the mortality rate for closed cases ticked up 1% to 12%. 12978 deaths and 94674 recovered. That is not the
direction I expected it to go.
daveyp
17 hrs
You get what you vote for. To have such a malignant narcissist of such profoundly limited intellectual honesty and capacity "leading"
your nation through this is truly tragic for your country. Even the hideously vile ultimate Washington insider Hilary would have
done a better job.
truthseeker
17 hrs
Mish I agree with much of the criticism of Trump, yet had he done everything you and others suggest, there is this implied assumption
that everything would have worked out perfectly. You know I am impressed the way the country seems to be uniting to such a great
degree, that I think there is at least some hope for our country's future though there are huge challenges that lay ahead absolutely!
abend237-04
17 hrs
I will now proceed, once again, to bitch about the root cause of our current pandemic, which is causing many to experience cosmic
scale frustration with The Donald, which I share:
Civilization has now been hit squarely in the head with three killer coronavirus outbreaks in 18 years, yet still has no unified
global new viral antigen detection system. We could have if our world "leaders" would make it happen.
Local supercomputers, however massive, will never crack this nut, but the billions of powerful, web-accessible smartphones could
if linked and used by a parallelized, intelligent scheduler to raise the alarm when a new antibody/pathogen is discovered in human
blood anywhere.
Such a system could have lifted the burden from a lonely doctor struggling to raise the alarm in Wuhan, before Covid-19 killed
him, and placed it squarely in front of disease control experts, worldwide. It can be done; We must do it.
Sars cov-3/4/5/6/7/8/9/n could kill us all if we don't.
"These officials "failed us" in the same way that our media "fails us": they serve the
interests of the EMPIRE-FIRST Deep State."
Yuppp. Our error is to assume all 17 intelligence agencies; the presstitudes; and US
"leadership" exist to serve the American people. And so, yes, they "fail" the people. But, from the point of view of the controllers of those agencies and of those "leaders",
they hardly ever fail !!!
While the people argue over virulent minutae, they are once again helping themselves to
the US Treasury.... Trillions of USDs.... LOL
".... was then told to STOP TESTING...... A medical person would not try to suppress testing.
That would be a "management decision" and its the Nation Security Council that was running
the show (and which had classified all discussions related to virus preparations)...."
Thanks for reminding us of Dr Chu's story. What if the US leadership:
Knew the coronavirus was already out in the wild in the US by Sep 2019;
Decided to set up China to be the "origin" to be blamed;
Realized that a "pandemic" can be the cover for kicking the table over to do the Great
Financial Reset;
Another reason for the curves in chaotic Fr/It/Sp is a point underlined by Campbell on 19/3
about
the fact the soccer team Manchester United has opened up its hotel free of charge for
medical
staff, so that they can return from work to a neutral place rather than to their families and
spread
the bug further. Such measures have been applied in Asia and they should have been on the
mind of
the EU gov, but apparently they were too busy thinking about their luxury holidays or their
shares
in the stocks.
Huge
jumps in
COVID-19 deaths and cases have been reported in the UK, Germany, Spain, Italy, and France
this weekend. Hospital systems in many of these countries are running out of supplies, staff,
hospital beds, and ICU-level treatments.
The shortage of protective gear for medical staff at many European hospitals has forced some
to tape trash bags to their bodies as makeshift biohazard suits.
Bloomberg interviewed Samantha Gonzalez,52, who works at the Txagorritxu hospital in
Vitoria-Gasteiz, Alava, Spain. She warned: "This is not the first world anymore -- it's a war"
amid surging virus cases in the country.
Across Europe on Saturday, deaths accorded to the fast-spreading virus soared, with Italy
reporting a record 793 deaths on Friday, and Spain reporting another 300 cases, bringing their
totals to 4,825 and 1,326.
The UK also reported another string of deaths, as millions await a
lockdown order on London , while hospitals and intensive care units in Italy and Spain are
struggling to cope, despite some Madrid hotels being temporarily converted and of the Fair of
Madrid, the capital's main exhibition space.
One of the leading hospitals in Bergamo, northern Italy, the current epicenter of the virus
outbreak in Europe, has run out of hospital beds, and ICU-level treatment, as an influx in
patients, has
overwhelmed the facility . The sick are being transferred to offsite locations, equipped
with oxygen machines.
From Italy to Spain to other regions in Europe, hospital systems are at full capacity,
canceling non-urgent surgeries, and appointments to handle the influx of virus patients. In a
couple of weeks, countrywide shutdowns like what's happening in Italy could be the norm across
many European countries.
Giovanni Rezza, head of the infectious diseases department at Rome's Superior Health
Institute, said, "Italy wasn't completely prepared for the coronavirus:"
"It's only in some two weeks that Italy will find out whether the government's nationwide
lockdown and social distancing rules have had an impact," said Rezza.
"The lockdown is only delaying the spread of the epidemic, we expect that there will be
new outbreaks in future. But in the meantime we have to equip hospitals with more intensive
care beds, even in Lombardy which is one of the best-equipped regions in Europe."
The biggest challenge for European hospital systems is having enough protective gear for
medical staff.
In Spain, 3,500 Spanish doctors have contracted the virus, which is 12% of the total number
of cases detected. With the lack of gear, doctors and nurses are more susceptible to
contracting the virus, which could cause medical staff shortages that would undoubtedly lead to
high mortality rates.
"Just in the nephrology department, three out of 13 colleagues have fallen ill, one of them
seriously," said Giuseppe Remuzzi, a former head of the department of medicine at the Papa
Giovanni XXIII hospital in Bergamo, Italy, who has joined efforts to contain the pandemic.
"This is a scary, terrible situation."
Medical staff have been instructed to swap out old protective gear every four hours, which
includes changing face masks, splash guard googles, and biohazard suits. Since supplies are
limited, doctors and nurses are making their own bio hazmat suits with taping garbage bags on
their body.
"This thing blew up on us," said Pelayo Pedrero, the head of labor risk prevention at
doctors' union AMYTS in Madrid, Spain. "No one was ready for this. They didn't buy the
supplies, they didn't prepare the hospitals to receive and treat all these patients. Not just
in Madrid or Spain, but all over Europe."
To sum up, the evolution of the virus crisis is that medical gear shortages could lead to
labor shortages at hospitals across Europe because medical staff aren't adequately protected
against the virus. Europe has become the new China. And in the weeks ahead, parts of the
US could transform into Italy .
Surgical masks are currently in short supply in China and elsewhere. They were worn 100
years ago, during the great pandemic, to try and stop the influenza virus spreading. While
surgical masks may offer some protection from infection they do not seal around the face. So
they don't filter out small airborne particles. In 1918, anyone at the emergency hospital in
Boston who had contact with patients had to wear an improvised face mask. This comprised five
layers of gauze fitted to a wire frame which covered the nose and mouth. The frame was shaped
to fit the face of the wearer and prevent the gauze filter touching the mouth and nostrils. The
masks were replaced every two hours; properly sterilized and with fresh gauze put on. They were
a forerunner of the N95 respirators in use in hospitals today to protect medical staff against
airborne infection.
... ... ...
Putting infected patients out in the sun may have helped because it inactivates the
influenza virus.[7] It also kills bacteria that cause lung and other infections in
hospitals.[8] During the First World War, military surgeons routinely used sunlight to heal
infected wounds.[9] They knew it was a disinfectant. What they didn't know is that one
advantage of placing patients outside in the sun is they can synthesise vitamin D in their skin
if sunlight is strong enough. This was not discovered until the 1920s. Low vitamin D levels are
now linked to respiratory infections and may increase susceptibility to influenza.[10] Also,
our body's biological rhythms appear to influence how we resist infections.[11] New research
suggests they can alter our inflammatory response to the flu virus.[12] As with vitamin D, at
the time of the 1918 pandemic, the important part played by sunlight in synchronizing these
rhythms was not known.
"... The masks were replaced every two hours; properly sterilized and with fresh gauze put on. They were a forerunner of the N95 respirators in use in hospitals today to protect medical staff against airborne infection. ..."
Fresh air, sunlight and improvised face
masks seemed to work a century ago; and they might help us now.
by
Richard Hobday
When new, virulent diseases emerge, such
SARS and Covid-19, the race begins to find new vaccines and treatments for those affected. As the current crisis
unfolds, governments are enforcing quarantine and isolation, and public gatherings are being discouraged. Health
officials took the same approach 100 years ago, when influenza was spreading around the world. The results were
mixed. But records from the 1918 pandemic suggest one technique for dealing with influenza -- little-known today --
was effective. Some hard-won experience from the greatest pandemic in recorded history could help us in the weeks
and months ahead.
<img src="https://miro.medium.com/max/2400/1*7pNa3EQCs1VsWXRWL8_Uig.jpeg" width="1200" height="892" role="presentation"/>
Influenza patients getting sunlight at the Camp Brooks
emergency open-air hospital in Boston. Medical staff were not supposed to remove their masks. (National Archives)
Put simply, medics found that severely ill flu patients nursed outdoors recovered better than those treated
indoors. A combination of fresh air and sunlight seems to have prevented deaths among patients; and infections
among medical staff.[1] There is scientific support for this. Research shows that outdoor air is a natural
disinfectant. Fresh air can kill the flu virus and other harmful germs. Equally, sunlight is germicidal and there
is now evidence it can kill the flu virus.
`Open-Air'
Treatment in 1918
During the great pandemic, two of the
worst places to be were military barracks and troop-ships. Overcrowding and bad ventilation put soldiers and
sailors at high risk of catching influenza and the other infections that often followed it.[2,3] As with the
current Covid-19 outbreak, most of the victims of so-called `Spanish flu' did not die from influenza: they died of
pneumonia and other complications.
When the influenza pandemic reached the
East coast of the United States in 1918, the city of Boston was particularly badly hit. So the State Guard set up
an emergency hospital. They took in the worst cases among sailors on ships in Boston harbour. The hospital's
medical officer had noticed the most seriously ill sailors had been in badly-ventilated spaces. So he gave them as
much fresh air as possible by putting them in tents. And in good weather they were taken out of their tents and
put in the sun. At this time, it was common practice to put sick soldiers outdoors. Open-air therapy, as it was
known, was widely used on casualties from the Western Front. And it became the treatment of choice for another
common and often deadly respiratory infection of the time; tuberculosis. Patients were put outside in their beds
to breathe fresh outdoor air. Or they were nursed in cross-ventilated wards with the windows open day and night.
The open-air regimen remained popular until antibiotics replaced it in the 1950s.
Doctors who had first-hand experience of
open-air therapy at the hospital in Boston were convinced the regimen was effective. It was adopted elsewhere. If
one report is correct, it reduced deaths among hospital patients from 40 per cent to about 13 per cent.[4]
According to the Surgeon General of the Massachusetts State Guard:
`The efficacy of open air
treatment has been absolutely proven, and one has only to try it to discover its value.'
Fresh Air is a
Disinfectant
Patients treated outdoors were less
likely to be exposed to the infectious germs that are often present in conventional hospital wards. They were
breathing clean air in what must have been a largely sterile environment. We know this because, in the 1960s,
Ministry of Defence scientists proved that fresh air is a natural disinfectant.[5] Something in it, which they
called the Open Air Factor, is far more harmful to airborne bacteria -- and the influenza virus -- than indoor air.
They couldn't identify exactly what the Open Air Factor is. But they found it was effective both at night and
during the daytime.
Their research also revealed that the
Open Air Factor's disinfecting powers can be preserved in enclosures -- if ventilation rates are kept high enough.
Significantly, the rates they identified are the same ones that cross-ventilated hospital wards, with high
ceilings and big windows, were designed for.[6] But by the time the scientists made their discoveries, antibiotic
therapy had replaced open-air treatment. Since then the germicidal effects of fresh air have not featured in
infection control, or hospital design. Yet harmful bacteria have become increasingly resistant to antibiotics.
Sunlight and
Influenza Infection
Putting infected patients out in the sun
may have helped because it inactivates the influenza virus.[7] It also kills bacteria that cause lung and other
infections in hospitals.[8] During the First World War, military surgeons routinely used sunlight to heal infected
wounds.[9] They knew it was a disinfectant. What they didn't know is that one advantage of placing patients
outside in the sun is they can synthesise vitamin D in their skin if sunlight is strong enough. This was not
discovered until the 1920s. Low vitamin D levels are now linked to respiratory infections and may increase
susceptibility to influenza.[10] Also, our body's biological rhythms appear to influence how we resist
infections.[11] New research suggests they can alter our inflammatory response to the flu virus.[12] As with
vitamin D, at the time of the 1918 pandemic, the important part played by sunlight in synchronizing these rhythms
was not known.
Face Masks
Coronavirus and Flu
Surgical masks are currently in short
supply in China and elsewhere. They were worn 100 years ago, during the great pandemic, to try and stop the
influenza virus spreading.
While surgical masks may offer some protection from
infection they do not seal around the face. So they don't filter out small airborne particles.
In 1918, anyone at
the emergency hospital in Boston who had contact with patients had to wear an improvised face mask. This comprised
five layers of gauze fitted to a wire frame which covered the nose and mouth. The frame was shaped to fit the face
of the wearer and prevent the gauze filter touching the mouth and nostrils.
The masks were replaced every two
hours; properly sterilized and with fresh gauze put on. They were a forerunner of the N95 respirators in use in
hospitals today to protect medical staff against airborne infection.
Temporary
Hospitals
Staff at the hospital kept up high
standards of personal and environmental hygiene. No doubt this played a big part in the relatively low rates of
infection and deaths reported there. The speed with which their hospital and other temporary open-air facilities
were erected to cope with the surge in pneumonia patients was another factor. Today, many countries are not
prepared for a severe influenza pandemic.[13] Their health services will be overwhelmed if there is one. Vaccines
and antiviral drugs might help. Antibiotics may be effective for pneumonia and other complications. But much of
the world's population will not have access to them. If another 1918 comes, or the Covid-19 crisis gets worse,
history suggests it might be prudent to have tents and pre-fabricated wards ready to deal with large numbers of
seriously ill cases. Plenty of fresh air and a little sunlight might help too.
Dr. Richard Hobday is an independent
researcher working in the fields of infection control, public health and building design. He is the author of `The
Healing Sun'.
References
Hobday RA and Cason JW. The
open-air treatment of pandemic influenza. Am J Public Health 2009;99 Suppl 2:S236–42.
doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.134627.
Aligne CA. Overcrowding and
mortality during the influenza pandemic of 1918. Am J Public Health 2016 Apr;106(4):642–4.
doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.303018.
Summers JA, Wilson N, Baker
MG, Shanks GD. Mortality risk factors for pandemic influenza on New Zealand troop ship, 1918. Emerg Infect Dis
2010 Dec;16(12):1931–7. doi:10.3201/eid1612.100429.
Anon. Weapons against
influenza. Am J Public Health 1918 Oct;8(10):787–8. doi: 10.2105/ajph.8.10.787.
May KP, Druett HA. A
micro-thread technique for studying the viability of microbes in a simulated airborne state. J Gen Micro-biol
1968;51:353e66. Doi: 10.1099/00221287–51–3–353.
Hobday RA. The open-air factor
and infection control. J Hosp Infect 2019;103:e23-e24 doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2019.04.003.
Schuit M, Gardner S, Wood S et
al. The influence of simulated sunlight on the inactivation of influenza virus in aerosols. J Infect Dis 2020
Jan 14;221(3):372–378. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiz582.
Hobday RA, Dancer SJ. Roles of
sunlight and natural ventilation for controlling infection: historical and current perspectives. J Hosp Infect
2013;84:271–282. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2013.04.011.
Hobday RA. Sunlight therapy
and solar architecture. Med Hist 1997 Oct;41(4):455–72. doi:10.1017/s0025727300063043.
Gruber-Bzura BM. Vitamin D and
influenza-prevention or therapy? Int J Mol Sci 2018 Aug 16;19(8). pii: E2419. doi: 10.3390/ijms19082419.
Costantini C, Renga G,
Sellitto F, et al. Microbes in the era of circadian medicine. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020 Feb 5;10:30.
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00030.
Sengupta S, Tang SY, Devine JC
et al. Circadian control of lung inflammation in influenza infection. Nat Commun 2019 Sep 11;10(1):4107. doi:
10.1038/s41467–019–11400–9.
Jester BJ, Uyeki TM, Patel A,
Koonin L, Jernigan DB. 100 Years of medical countermeasures and pandemic influenza preparedness. Am J Public
Health. 2018 Nov;108(11):1469–1472. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304586.
7.9K
7.9K
claps
Dr. Richard Hobday is an internationally recognized authority on health
in the built environment.
I see nothing wrong with testing Hyrodroxychloroquine together with azithromycin as long as
its done safely and ethically to gain additional data. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work.
A lot of people are going to reject it just because it came from Trump's mouth. Drug
companies will fight against it because they'd rather sell more expensive drugs.
Anti malaria drugs are part of the primary or secondary treatment recommendations in China
and Korea. I'm pretty sure they were used in Japan as well so the first half of it
(hydroxychloroquine) seems pretty legit though maybe not effective enough. Lets see what
happens. I'd agree we lack sufficient data to make an adequate evaluation. Hydroxychloroquine
is also being used with other things in trials. We'll see what happens there too.
** A dutch professor has announced an aerosol version of i believe hydroxycholoquine but
it might just be chloroquine that is able to penetrate the lungs they claim. They also claim
it can be manufactured immediately.
We should all certainly be skeptical of such a small study (HCQ and azithromycin) but do keep
in mind that you really can't trust industry and their legion of paid doctors and experts
either.
For example:
The CEO of Ericsson once said "CDMA will never work." Maybe that was because Ericsson
didn't have it working for cellular systems at the time. I worked in the cell phone industry
as an analyst for some time. People say anything to sell their stuff. I'm sure pharma is
equally bad.
ted01 "No money for big pharma therefore no interest. They would rather let people die."
That is about it. A dirt cheap generic drug can't possibly be any good. A pity so many
here prefer to believe big pharma rather than the frontline doctors using it.
Chinese doctors Chloroquine or Chloroquine Phosphate - Formula C18H26ClN3
Trump Hydroxychloroquine - Formula C18H26ClN3O
Two different chemicals but I take it their mode of action is similar.
Hydroxychloroquine
"The wholesale cost in the developing world is about US$4.65 per month as of 2015, when
used for rheumatoid arthritis or lupus.[7] In the United States the wholesale cost of a month
of treatment is about US$25 as of 2020" (wikipedia)
Chloroquine Phosphate
"The wholesale cost in the developing world is about US$0.04.[9] In the United States, it
costs about US$5.30 per dose." (wikipedia)
Easy to see why Trump and big phama don't like Chloroquine.
This from link @ Richard Steven Hack | Mar 22 2020 8:55 utc | 114
"chloroquine was highly effective in reducing viral replication, with an Effective
Concentration (EC)90 of 6.90 μM that can be easily achievable with standard dosing,
due to its favourable penetration in tissues, including in the lung"
>>>
Brasco_Aad
@Brasco_Aad
Israeli Pharmaceutical Company Teva to send 10 million doses of hydroxychloroquine to the
United states, free of charge. | The Times of Israel
Quote Tweet
Brasco_Aad
@Brasco_Aad
· Mar 20
-significant-
Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis to donate 130 million doses of hydroxychloroquine
to the United States.
50 million doses now and another 80 million doses by the end of may.
Chloroquine I have noticed is also called chloroquine phosphate. Phosphate I believe is the
binder that holds the chloroquine powder in tablet form. According to the paper linked by RSH
@114 there is 300mg of chloroquine in a 500mg chloroquine phosphate tablet.
Here's a pretty good overview on the major avenues to attack nCOV/COVID-19 from a treatment
perspective: Ars
Technica overview
In particular, this article talks about targeting different aspects of the nCOV life cycle
and how these are targeted by treatments to attack nCOV:
1) Reproduction: remdesivir and others
2) [viral] protein processing: protease inhibitors such as HIV drugs
3) [viral] packaging: attack the final protein packaging of the virus such as a Hep B
treatment - but very few such examples exist, of any kind
4) viral shell: plasma distilled from existing recovered victims used to prime immune system
of ongoing infected. Vaccines will eventually enable this via manufacturing processes.
5) new infection capability: chloroquines. In particular
One of these targets is the drop in pH. This is the step that's targeted by chloroquine,
the antimalarial drug. Chloroquine can cross membranes and so can enter the sac containing
the virus. Once there, it can neutralize the pH.
That's significant, because many proteases are only active at lower pH. If the pH inside
the sac doesn't change, it's possible that the coronavirus spike protein won't be cut and
thus won't be activated. This appears to be the case in cultured cells infected by the
virus, and there are anecdotal case reports of chloroquine helping COVID-19 patients.
It is also clear - from this description - why evolutionary pressures could create defenses
against this type of attack (chloroquine pH change)
Again, a theoretical operation, even the clinical test tube trials, doesn't equate to
effective therapy.
However, IMO, the cost and risk factor for chloroquines makes for a far better gambit than
anything else at this moment in time. And note that because of the way chloroquines are
supposed to affect nCOV - if chloroquines work, they have to be taken when symptoms
first appear or potentially even as a preventative.
I would discourage the preventative use though - that will likely accelerate the nCOV
evolution around the chloroquine pH attack.
Another reason: it appears the US only has 160,000 ventilators available
Johns Hopkins estimate
of which a bit under 30K are being used for neonatal/pediatric care.
Yow.
hydroxycloroquine overdose, the boffins say, can destroy the retina of the eyes.
Not a trivial side effect. Nothing to play with. Fer what it worth, better read up on the
drug and pay attention. Eyes are nice to have.
Overdose of Q is Bad.
Wally read 60 years ago in Rome newspaper story that British air-line pilots, who drank
their Gin an' Tonics, had been discovered to have very poor glare recovery. That, they said,
was from the quinine in the tonic water. Henceforth, they were forbidden the tonic water,
alas!
But Wally never drives at night and his airplane days ended back in the mists...
But she sees this China-bashing as mostly a political reaction:
In reality these people are rallying behind the campaign to blame China for the health
crisis they're now facing because they understand that otherwise the blame will land
squarely on the shoulders of their president, who's running for re-election this year.
instead of a deliberate Deep-State strategy (which is my view).
We can argue who created the virus (I'm still looking for any rebuttal to the Chinese
claim that USA must be the source because it has all five strains of the virus), but the
Empire's gaming of the virus outbreak seems very clear to me.
U.S. intelligence agencies were issuing ominous, classified warnings in January and
February about the global danger posed by the coronavirus while President Trump and
lawmakers played down the threat and failed to take action that might have slowed the
spread of the pathogen, according to U.S. officials familiar with spy agency reporting.
The intelligence reports didn't predict when the virus might land on U.S. shores or
recommend particular steps that public health officials should take, issues outside the
purview of the intelligence agencies. But they did track the spread of the virus in China,
and later in other countries, and warned that Chinese officials appeared to be minimizing
the severity of the outbreak.
If the spy services were really concerned about the issue why did they not warn the
public? Instead of leaking new idiotic fairytales they could have leaked a warning about the
pandemic. Instead we were given this:
If the intelligence services had taken the pandemic seriously they could have warned the
public via their countless stenographers in the media. Instead they kept the media filled
with false anti-Russian stories and told Trump that the Chinese are lying which they were in
fact not.
Trump of course would have not have believed the intelligence reports anyway. Why would
he? The FBI and CIA have for three years tried to get him impeached. They created Russiagate
based on a fake dossier. They lied to get FISA warrants to spy on his campaign. When
Russiagate finally fell apart the CIA sent a fake 'whistleblower' to launch Ukrainegate. In
Trump's place there is no reason to believe a word of whatever any of the 'intelligence
officials' say.
The intelligence services failed to issue effective warnings. But they were not the only
ones. All institution in 'western' countries and their leaders have lacked in their
preparation for a larger outbreak.
China warned us early on. The WHO was informed in late December. On January 3 the director
of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was informed by his Chinese
colleagues. After China recognized that the new SARS-CoV-2 virus indeed jumped from person to
person it took radical measures to get a grip on the epidemic and those measures have worked
well. China has only 3,255 death in a nation of 1.4 billion people. Today all checkpoints
were removed from Wuhan city and life there is slowly turning back to normal.
Since when did the CIA, the NSA, the DIA and the rest of the much vaunted 17 alphabet-named
intel agencies in the US ever provide much in the way of "intelligence"?
The CIA famously failed to foresee the revolution that felled Iranian shah Mohammed Reza
Pahlavi and the role Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini played in it, in 1979. The CIA also failed
to foresee the downfall of Communist govts in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in 1989
and 1991. Instead the CIA spends US taxpayer millions on brainwashing and torture programs
like MK ULTRA and their like in universities and institutions in the US and Canada (McGill
University) from the 1950s onwards.
The current activities of the CIA and FBI in promoting anti-Russia / anti-China
propaganda and propaganda aimed at destabilising these and other nations that don't bow to
the US are equivalent to a global witch-hunt hysteria. The CIA's patron saint should be
17th-century English self-proclaimed Witchfinder General Matthee Hopkins. Senator Eugene
McCarthy probably wouldn't come close to this fanatic.
I thought it was well known that U.S. intelligence services don't exist to warn the public
about possible dangers from abroad. They exist to create dangers abroad and at home.
"The U.S. intelligence services fear to come under questioning for not raising enough
warning about the novel coronavirus pandemic."
Fear being questioned? U.S. intelligence agencies don't fear being questioned--I thought
this was well-known too. It's going to be harder and harder to write articles from the
perspective of being in favor of the U.S. regime using martial law on us without completely
forgetting what the U.S. regime stands for in the first place.
The Corbett Report released a video today about martial law. In it, he shows us a German
document from 2013, entitled:
"Information from the German government – Report on risk analysis in civil protection
2012"
"In it, frightening similarities with what is currently happening can be seen – in
particular by explicitly mentioning the "SARS coronavirus (CoV)". The scenario presented,
in which the spread, course, duration, mortality etc. are described, goes as far as to make
a drastic restriction of fundamental rights necessary.
The scenario states in this respect:"
"The competent authorities, first of all the public health authorities and primarily the
public health officers, must take measures to prevent communicable diseases. The IfSG
[Infektionsschutzgesetz] allows, among other things, restrictions of basic rights, such as
the right to inviolability of the home. Within the framework of necessary protective
measures, the fundamental right of personal freedom and the freedom of assembly can also be
restricted. In addition to these measures to be ordered directly by the public health
officer, the Federal Ministry of Health can order by statutory order that threatened
sections of the population have to take part in protective vaccinations or other measures
of specific prophylaxis, whereby the right to physical integrity can be restricted".
https://www.globalresearch.ca/coronavirus-new-world-order-something-rotten-state-denmark/5706464
Knowing that b is German, I thought this could be of interest to him;)
"The U.S. intelligence services fear to come under questioning for not raising
enough warning about the novel coronavirus pandemic.
IMO, this is a misreading.
I think a better interpretation is that US media is providing cover for Deep State
officials (including high-level intelligence officials) that gamed the virus response. In
that regard, this is the key phrase:
The intelligence reports didn't predict when the virus might land on U.S. shores or
recommend particular steps that public health officials should take ...
= The intelligence services failed to issue effective warnings."
But we know that they were providing very effective warnings: Senator Richard Burr, who is
Chair of Intel Cmte, WAS getting appropriately dire warnings and acting upon those warnings:
trading stock and telling his closest friends and supporters about the looming pandemic and
the terrible effects it would have.
= "But they were not the only ones. All institution in 'western' countries and their
leaders have lacked in their preparation for a larger outbreak."
Well, we shouldn't over look the fact that the top US health officials are all currently
or formerly military officers:
Head of CDC - Colonel, US Army 1977–1996;
Undersecretary for Health - Admiral, Public Health Service Commissioned Corps;
Surgeon General - Vice Admiral, Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.
I expect that top health officials in other Western countries are also be connected to the
military. These officials "failed us" in the same way that our media "fails
us": they serve the interests of the EMPIRE-FIRST Deep State.
Last night watched CGTN TV with Huawei Honor smartphone.
"....team from SW China's Sichuan Province leaves Wuhan today...brings you this
bittersweet goodbye."
- Worked 8-12hrs shift.... 100 plus medical workers, 57 days ago leaving spouse, children and
parents behinds
- Initially none or limited N95 masks - wore double for protection..
- In capitalist USA.... Fxxk the company or country, Strike, protests...
- 16 makeshift hospitals disbanded but two 16,000 beds still in operations.
Equivalent respirator standards by country
. N95 (United States NIOSH-42CFR84)
• FFP2 (Europe EN 149-2001)
• KN95 (China GB2626-2006)
• P2 (Australia/New Zealand AS/NZA 1716:2012)
• Korea 1st class (Korea KMOEL - 2017-64)
• DS (Japan JMHLW-Notification 214, 2018)
I just received an email from a contact in China offering to help get FFP2 respirators if
I needed or wanted any. She said KN95 were virtually non existent in China but there are
limited supplies of the FFP2 respirators.
If you or anyone else is interested in masks / respirators I would recommend watching the
videos by weaponsandstuff93 on YouTube. I am no expert on the subject but on his
recommendation I got myself a mask that takes 40mm NATO filters ( the mask is a Belgium BEM4
) and some P3 level filters ( mine are Scott Pros ) this is different to 40MM GOST filters
which were the Soviet standard.
Make your own face masks? Pfff...it appears the Japanese found a better idea from the
Philippines government...
panties . OR, you could order a custom one from Pantsu Mask . ROFL
Returning to the Covid-19 epidemic and the way governments are reacting to it, Thierry
Meyssan stresses that the authoritarian decisions of Italy and France have no medical
justification. They contradict the observations of the best infectiologists and the instructions
of the World Health Organization.
In all of its messages, the WHO stressed : the low demographic impact of the epidemic; the
futility of border closures; the ineffectiveness of wearing gloves, masks (except for health
care workers) and certain "barrier measures" (for example, the distance of one metre only makes
sense with infected people, but not with healthy people); the need to raise the level of
hygiene, including hand washing, water disinfection and increased ventilation of confined
spaces. Finally, use disposable tissues or, failing that, sneeze into your elbow.
However, the WHO is not a medical organization, but a United Nations agency dealing with
health issues. Its officials, even if they are doctors, are also and above all politicians. It
cannot therefore denounce the abuses of certain states. Furthermore, since the controversy over
the H1N1 epidemic, the WHO must publicly justify all its recommendations. In 2009, it was
accused of having let itself be swayed by the interests of big pharmaceutical companies and of
having hastily sounded the alarm in a disproportionate manner [ 4 ]. This time it used the word
"pandemic" only as a last resort, on March 12th, four months later.
"... the Iranian population is the world's most lung-weakest. Almost all men over the age of sixty suffer from the after-effects of the US combat gases used by the Iraqi army during the First Gulf War (1980-88), as did the Germans and the French after the First World War. Any traveller to Iran has been struck by the number of serious lung ailments. ..."
"... The Diamond Princess is an Israeli-American ship, owned by Micky Arison, brother of Shari Arison, the richest woman in Israel. The Arisons are turning this incident into a public relations operation. The Trump administration and several other countries airlifted their nationals to be quarantined at home. The international press devoted its headlines to this story. Referring to the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-1919, it asserts that the epidemic could spread throughout the world and potentially threaten the human species with extinction [ 2 ]. This apocalyptic hypothesis, not based on any facts, will nevertheless become the word of the Gospel. ..."
"... It is not known at this time whether tycoons deliberately spread panic about Covid-19, making this vulgar epidemic seem like the "end of the world". However, one distortion after another, governments have become involved. Of course, it is no longer a question of selling advertising screens by frightening people, but of dominating populations by exploiting this fear. ..."
"... Let us remember that never in history has the confinement of a healthy population been used to fight a disease. Above all, let us remember that this epidemic will have no significant consequences in terms of mortality. ..."
"... The two governments panic their populations by distributing unnecessary instructions disavowed by infectious diseases doctors: they encourage people to wear gloves and masks in all circumstances and to keep at least one metre away from any other human being. ..."
"... It is too early to say what real goal the Conte and Macron governments are pursuing. The only thing that is certain is that it is not a question of fighting Covid-19. ..."
Returning to the Covid-19 epidemic and the way governments are reacting to it, Thierry
Meyssan stresses that the authoritarian decisions of Italy and France have no medical
justification. They contradict the observations of the best infectiologists and the
instructions of the World Health Organization.
The Chinese Prime Minister, Li Keqiang, came to lead the operations in Wuhan and restore
the "celestial mandate" on January 27, 2020.
On November 17, 2019, the first case of a person infected with Covid-19 was diagnosed in
Hubei Province, China. Initially, doctors tried to communicate the seriousness of the disease,
but clashed with regional authorities. It was only when the number of cases increased and the
population saw the seriousness of the disease that the central government intervened.
This epidemic is not statistically significant. It kills very few people, although those it
does kill experience terrible respiratory distress.
Since ancient times, in Chinese culture, Heaven has given a mandate to the Emperor to govern
his subjects [ 1 ]. When he withdraws it, a disaster
strikes the country: epidemic, earthquake, etc. Although we are in modern times, President XI
felt threatened by the mismanagement of the Hubei regional government. The Council of State
therefore took matters into its own hands. It forced the population of Hubei's capital, Wuhan,
to remain confined to their homes. Within days, it built hospitals; sent teams to each house to
take the temperature of each inhabitant; took all potentially infected people to hospitals for
testing; treated those infected with chloroquine phosphate and sent others home; and treated
the critically ill with recombinant interferon Alfa 2B (IFNrec) for resuscitation. This vast
operation had no public health necessity, other than to prove that the Communist Party still
has the heavenly mandate.
During a press conference on Covid-19, the Iranian Deputy Minister of Health, Iraj
Harirchi, appeared contaminated.
Propagation in Iran
The epidemic spreads from China to Iran in mid-February 2020. These two countries have been
closely linked since ancient times. They share many common cultural elements. However, the
Iranian population is the world's most lung-weakest. Almost all men over the age of sixty
suffer from the after-effects of the US combat gases used by the Iraqi army during the First
Gulf War (1980-88), as did the Germans and the French after the First World War. Any traveller
to Iran has been struck by the number of serious lung ailments.
When air pollution in Tehran increased beyond what they could bear, schools and government
offices were closed and half of the families moved to the countryside with their grandparents.
This has been happening several times a year for thirty-five years and seems normal.
The government and parliament are almost exclusively composed of veterans of the Iraq-Iran
war, that is, people who are extremely fragile in relation to Covid-19. So when these groups
were infected, many personalities developed the disease.
In view of the US sanctions, no Western bank covers the transport of medicines. Iran found
itself unable to treat the infected and care for the sick until the UAE broke the embargo and
sent two planes of medical equipment.
People who would not suffer in the other country died from the first coughs due to the
wounds in their lungs. As usual, the government closed schools. In addition, it deprogrammed
several cultural and sporting events, but did not ban pilgrimages. Some areas have closed
hotels to prevent the movement of sick people who can no longer find hospitals close to their
homes.
Quarantine in Japan
On February 4, 2020, a passenger on the US cruise ship Diamond Princess was diagnosed ill
from the Covid-19 and ten passengers were infected. The Japanese Minister of Health, Katsunobu
Kato, then imposed a two-week quarantine on the ship in Yokohama in order to prevent the
contagion from spreading to his country. In the end, out of the 3,711 people on board, the vast
majority of whom are over 70 years old, there would be 7 deaths.
The Diamond Princess is an Israeli-American ship, owned by Micky Arison, brother of Shari
Arison, the richest woman in Israel. The Arisons are turning this incident into a public
relations operation. The Trump administration and several other countries airlifted their
nationals to be quarantined at home. The international press devoted its headlines to this
story. Referring to the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-1919, it asserts that the epidemic could
spread throughout the world and potentially threaten the human species with extinction [
2 ]. This
apocalyptic hypothesis, not based on any facts, will nevertheless become the word of the
Gospel.
We remember that in 1898, William Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, in order to increase the sales
of their daily newspapers, published false information in order to deliberately provoke a war
between the United States and the Spanish colony of Cuba. This was the beginning of "yellow
journalism" (publishing anything to make money). Today it is called "fake news".
It is not known at this time whether tycoons deliberately spread panic about Covid-19,
making this vulgar epidemic seem like the "end of the world". However, one distortion after
another, governments have become involved. Of course, it is no longer a question of selling
advertising screens by frightening people, but of dominating populations by exploiting this
fear.
For the WHO Director, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, China and South Korea have set an
example by generalising screening tests; a way of saying that the Italian and French methods
are medical nonsense.
WHO intervention
The World Health Organization (WHO), which monitored the entire operation, noted the spread
of the disease outside China. On February 11th and 12th, it organized a global forum on
research and innovation on the epidemic in Geneva. At the forum, WHO Director-General Dr Tedros
Adhanom Ghebreyesus called in very measured terms for global collaboration [ 3 ].
In all of its messages, the WHO stressed : the low demographic impact of the epidemic; the
futility of border closures; the ineffectiveness of wearing gloves, masks (except for health
care workers) and certain "barrier measures" (for example, the distance of one metre only makes
sense with infected people, but not with healthy people); the need to raise the level of
hygiene, including hand washing, water disinfection and increased ventilation of confined
spaces. Finally, use disposable tissues or, failing that, sneeze into your elbow.
However, the WHO is not a medical organization, but a United Nations agency dealing with
health issues. Its officials, even if they are doctors, are also and above all politicians. It
cannot therefore denounce the abuses of certain states. Furthermore, since the controversy over
the H1N1 epidemic, the WHO must publicly justify all its recommendations. In 2009, it was
accused of having let itself be swayed by the interests of big pharmaceutical companies and of
having hastily sounded the alarm in a disproportionate manner [ 4 ]. This time it used the word
"pandemic" only as a last resort, on March 12th, four months later.
At the Franco-Italian summit in Naples on February 27, the French and Italian presidents,
Giuseppe Conte and Emmanuel Macron, announced that they would react together to the
pandemic.
Instrumentation in Italy and France
Modern propaganda should not be limited to the publication of false news as the United
Kingdom did to convince its people to enter the First World War, but should also be used in the
same way as Germany did to convince its people to fight in the Second World War. The recipe is
always the same: to exert psychological pressure to induce subjects to voluntarily practice
acts that they know are useless, but which will lead them to lie [ 5 ]. For example, in 2001, it was
common knowledge that those accused of hijacking planes on 9/11 were not on the passenger
boarding lists. Yet, in shock, most accepted without question the inane accusations made by FBI
Director Robert Muller against "19 hijackers". Or, as is well known, President Hussein's Iraq
had only old Soviet Scud launchers with a range of up to 700 kilometers, but many Americans
caulked the windows and doors of their homes to protect themselves from the deadly gases with
which the evil dictator was going to attack America. This time, in the case of the Covid-19, it
is the voluntary confinement in the home that forces the person who accepts it to convince
himself of the veracity of the threat.
Let us remember that never in history has the confinement of a healthy population been
used to fight a disease. Above all, let us remember that this epidemic will have no significant
consequences in terms of mortality.
In Italy, the first step was to isolate the contaminated regions according to the principle
of quarantine, and then to isolate all citizens from each other, which follows a different
logic.
According to the President of the Italian Council, Giuseppe Conte, and the French President,
Emmanuel Macron, the aim of confining the entire population at home is not to overcome the
epidemic, but to spread it out over time so that the sick do not arrive at the same time in
hospitals and saturate them. In other words, it is not a medical measure, but an exclusively
administrative one. It will not reduce the number of infected people, but will postpone it in
time.
In order to convince the Italians and the French of the merits of their decision, Presidents
Conte and Macron first enlisted the support of committees of scientific experts. While these
committees had no objection to people staying at home, they had no objection to people going
about their business. Then Chairs Conte and Macron made it mandatory to have an official form
to go for a walk. This document on the letterheads of the respective ministries of the interior
is drawn up on honour and is not subject to any checks or sanctions.
The two governments panic their populations by distributing unnecessary instructions
disavowed by infectious diseases doctors: they encourage people to wear gloves and masks in all
circumstances and to keep at least one metre away from any other human being.
The French "reference daily" (sic) Le Monde, Facebook France and the French Ministry of
Health undertook to censor a video of Professor Didier Raoult, one of the world's most renowned
infectiologists, because by announcing the existence of a proven drug in China against
Covid-19, he highlighted the lack of a medical basis for the measures taken by President Macron
[ 6 ].
It is too early to say what real goal the Conte and Macron governments are pursuing. The
only thing that is certain is that it is not a question of fighting
Covid-19.
I would say that Germany's testing is far superior
@Marie
to the US. They test a far larger number of people and don't have the restriction of having to
show symptoms before one can get tested. This gives them a larger base of infected so it shows
a lower ratio for deaths/confirmed. Earlier detection will also greatly improve outcomes. The
slope of their new infections is also starting to flatten - unlike the US where it is getting
steeper with each passing day.
These factors are actually a really, really bad warning sign for the evolution of the virus
outbreak within the US. The US, as a fist world country should not have outcomes like a second
world country.
#7.1
COVID-19 infections, but an incredibly low number of deaths and patients in serious
condition. The numbers may be valid but if so, there's an element of luck in Germany's
favor.
@CB
The only country I've seen that has been releasing daily figures on testing is South Korea
and they've been doing it since their first case on 20 Jan 2020. Update 21
Jan 2021 . First confirmed case in Germany was on 28 Jan.
As of 21 Mar:
Germany: confirmed cases 21,854. (population 83 million)
South Korea: confirmed cases 8,799. (population 51 million) Total tests administered
327,599.
So, SK has better contained the internal spread than Germany and has released more
complete information on the imported cases.
At this time, I'm not going to speculate as to why SK's deaths are so much higher than
Germany's. But do note that if Germany's health care for a virus with no cure is so far
superior to SK's, why are there also so few recoveries in Germany - 180 compared to SK's
2,612.
#7.1.2
to the US. They test a far larger number of people and don't have the restriction of
having to show symptoms before one can get tested. This gives them a larger base of
infected so it shows a lower ratio for deaths/confirmed. Earlier detection will also
greatly improve outcomes. The slope of their new infections is also starting to flatten -
unlike the US where it is getting steeper with each passing day.
These factors are actually a really, really bad warning sign for the evolution of the
virus outbreak within the US. The US, as a fist world country should not have outcomes
like a second world country.
"US has 55 million masks" "we should sanitize and reuse them"
China makes N35 masks at the rate of tens of millions per day. They are shipping millions
to other countries around the world. Sinopec even constructed a brand new factory with 12
production lines from scratch in 10 days to manufacture the PP material over a month ago.
Trump bragging about how prescient he was in handling this pandemic.
Lying about China not telling world what was happening for two to three months
despite WHO reports from early January.
He keeps repeating how he acted very early.
Scapegoating China again. What a fucking lying fuckwit.
Still don't know how many or when test kits will come out.
Blaming all problems on previous administration - inherited the deficiencies.
One reporter catches him out on when he knew about China from his public statement on Jan
24.
Watch the following video. Trump knew about the virus at least by Jan 3 (the day it's
genome was published)
out of the reagents to run the tests. So samples can be collected, but may not be
processed. There will be more cover-ups when this becomes generally known. Attention! Forward
fail!
Here's a video of how China ramped up mask production within days of learning about the
COVID-19 infection.
Someone should have the Trumpeter watch this video. He might discover why masks can't be
cleaned and reused.
I urge everyone to read the first article that is linked. What is happening this year is
decidedly NOT a unique phenomenon for Italy or elsewhere that has been cited below. You might
call it an acceleration or culmination or "perfect storm" but this is not a unique situation.
I wish to stress the following:
Estimated excess deaths of 7,027, 20,259, 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza
epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17 seasons in Italy.
Anyone remember a global outcry about these excess deaths during any of these years?
Pollution; The Po river contains some of the worst waste from industrial pig farms
upriver. The air quality in the Po River Valley is some of the worst only behind an area in
Poland where they still use coal fired power plants in overall poor quality.
The people in N Italy have been subjected to constant bombardment of this pollution which
destroys their respiratory functions and weakens their immune systems- a perfect milieu for
viruses to proliferate. The same is true for those in N China and Tehran. Tehran's air
quality has deteriorated dramatically since the US sanctions as they have gone to using a
cheaper gas, laced with sulfur, to provide fuel for their people.
Northern Italy has one of the oldest populations and the worst air quality in Europe,
which has already led to an increased number of respiratory diseases and deaths in the past
and is likely an additional risk factor in the current epidemic.
According to the latest data of the Italian National Health Institute ISS, the average age
of the positively-tested deceased in Italy is currently about 81 years. 10% of the deceased
are over 90 years old. 90% of the deceased are over 70 years old.
The Italian Institute of Health moreover distinguishes between those who died from the
coronavirus and those who died with the coronavirus. In many cases it is not yet clear
whether the persons died from the virus or from their pre-existing chronic diseases or from a
combination of both.
This is not a coincidence that these environmental factors have created a milieu in which
all sorts of diseases can proliferate. Now capitalism will come up with the magic bullet like
a vaccine or a pill to "fix" the problem- rinse and repeat if the current social order/forms
of production aren't radically changed.
A virus which impacts upper respiratory functions attacking those who are vulnerable due
to years of having their upper respiratory systems assaulted non-stop by heavy doses of
pollutants of all varieties- that's what we are seeing. None of this is new except to the
degree. In all the areas listed below, N Italy, N China, Madrid, Tehran they have been
experiencing a dramatic increase in upper respiratory disease for years now.
And please don't tell me the solution is some vaccination or some great new cure that will
be discovered (and profited from) by the miraculous men of modern medicine. The solution is
to clean up the environment so that we are not vulnerable in the first place. Without that
prepare for COVID-20 the sequel or whatever name the thoroughly bought off WHO and CDC
and...wish to place upon this next "pandemic."
Investigating the impact of influenza on excess mortality in all ages in Italy during
recent seasons (2013/14–2016/17 seasons)
In recent years, Italy has been registering peaks in death rates, particularly among the
elderly during the winter season. Influenza epidemics have been indicated as one of the
potential determinants of such an excess.
We estimated excess deaths of 7,027, 20,259, 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza
epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17, respectively, using the Goldstein
index. The average annual mortality excess rate per 100,000 ranged from 11.6 to 41.2 with
most of the influenza-associated deaths per year registered among the elderly.
The new study argues that smogs in China contain more ingredients than those found either
in the legendary "pea-soupers" of 19th- and 20th-century Europe and North America or in
modern rich-world, vehicle-generated smogs. Something new is happening: The unprecedented
speed of industrialization and urbanization has combined two eras of pollution.
Investigating air quality status and air pollutant trends over the Metropolitan Area of
Tehran, Iran over the past decade between 2005 and 2014
Overall, trends have been progressed to worsening, the number of healthy days has been
declined and the number of unhealthy days has been increased in recent years.
Tehran is rated as one of the world's most polluted cities. Parts of the city are often
covered by smog, making breathing difficult and causing widespread pulmonary illnesses. ...
According to local officials, 3,600 people died in a single month due to the hazardous air
quality.
Air Pollution, a Silent Form of Death for Tehran Citizens
You don't have to step into the street for Madrid's roads to pose a hazard to your health:
air pollution from cars in the city might just knock you over. Scientists are finding links
between the gases and disease.
......
According to studies by Julio Diaz, a researcher at the Carlos III Health Institute in
Madrid, even small increases in air pollution can cause the number of people admitted to
hospitals with circulatory and respiratory illnesses to rise.
There's much attention being given to how China and South Korea have reacted to the virus,
but amazingly little to the response in Vietnam. The first cases in Vietnam arrived with the
new lunar year, via Wuhan; quite quickly the number of cases rose to sixteen, and for several
weeks stayed at that number. The Vietnamese government acted quickly, strongly and
effectively, until all sixteen recovered (and the district near Hanoi which had been
placed under lockdown had completed their isolation.
On March 2nd a flight from London, carrying a woman who was returning from the Milan fashion
week:
"The country's 17th case, imported on a flight from London, kicked off a new wave of cases,
[now nearing 100].
Even with a new wave of cases, the numbers are far from those witnessed in the western
world. The issue has been taken seriously, with all suffering symptoms put in quarantine and
tested, while their places of residence are locked down and sanitised. Việt Nam was one
of the first nations to declare an epidemic and has been quick in its response, both in
handling current cases and ensuring the spread of the virus is as limited as possible. "
- taken from
https://vietnamnews.vn/life-style/expat-corner/653815/keeping-calm-and-carrying-on-viet-nam-sets-a-coronavirus-example.html
It is notable that almost all cases of infection have been brought into the country, or at
one-person distance from the person bringing it into the country.
Today there has been the announcement of the seventeenth reported recovery in Vietnam. So
far there has been not one death.
Points in the reaction:
Public gatherings were stopped right away - even local community Women's Day lunches.
All citizens and all foreigners are now required to report on health, on recent travel,
etc.
Everyone is now required to wear masks in public places.
who make profits as well. I cannot remember exactly when insider trading for
them became legal but it should be no surprise to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention
that they're ALL doing it. That is one reason, at least in my semi-educated opinion, they did
not go after Trump for emoluments during Shampeachment, because THEY ALL DO IT.
That goes all the way to the White House, no doubt.
...Across the United States, the number of reported cases of coronavirus at nursing homes,
assisted living centers and other elder care centers spiked in recent days, with at least 73
facilities in 22 states now reporting infections, according to a review by The Washington Post
of reports from states, local media reports and nursing home announcements.
As of Friday evening, at least 55 coronavirus deaths occurred among people living in
elder care facilities, though the number is probably higher because official counts often omit
a description of the person's last place of residence . That figure represented more than a
quarter of U.S. deaths then attributed to the pandemic, even though fewer than 1 percent of
Americans live in such facilities.
Qantas Airways: the flag carrier of Australia Qantas Airways Limited is the flag carrier
of Australia and its largest airline by fleet size, international flights and international
destinations
The crisis hit and Qantas sends home 20,000 workers or two thirds of its workforce of
30,000. Go home with no pay . The company management is proud of implementing such
measures to save the Australian icon.
Qantas, once a government owned entity, is a civilisational symbol of strength and prestige.
But with such behaviour, shouldn't we ask the question: what are these Strength and Prestige
built upon?
Covid-19! H1N1! Names of guns on Call of Duty! Scary! I call it a Cold. The Flu killed many
more than this will 2 years ago. I propose to change the name of the Flu to "Putin Plague".
That will do it.
Russia has 1 death, few cases, a massive border with China, huge numbers of Chinese
tourists, officials, students, etc. India has 4 deaths, a border with China, and many
Chinese. How are any of you buying that?
If this was the end of the world would Putin be almost disinterested in his demeanor?
Would Kadyrov laugh it off on national tv? Are the Russians that stupid or do they know
something?
If this was big, Kadyrov would be in full-action. Special Corona uniform, big guns, lots
of hitting the pads, plenty of screams of Akhmat Sila! Instead, he is complaining that he is
bored because there are no fights to watch.
Let me tell you something that is not being discussed. Millions, yes millions, died from
the Flu a few seasons back. It was horrible. Hospitals could not handle it. Yet, the media
was dead silent. Zero concerns. No mention. It was just a bad Flu season and life went on for
you. Maybe you buried Grandma. Maybe you were dog sick (I was and I had a Flu shot!). What
you did not have was 24/7 hysteria. Hysteria is NEVER good. NEVER.
At the beginning of this year, I suddenly started getting these horrible videos from China
of healthy-looking men falling face down on the street. What the ? Healthy men walking down
the street and then – BAM! Straight down. They went viral. Freaked the Western world
out. Millions and millions of views. We now know that IS NOT the virus. Whoever created those
videos knows more than we do.
–Steps Russia Seems To Be Taking–
If a patient dies make sure to list the cause of death as whatever they were suffering
from (healthy people RARELY die from this) prior to the illness.
Use regional heads (Ramzan!) to dampen any hysteria. Chechens have been told that they
will die eventually why worry about a cold. Go drink some tea. Don't be a wimp. This kind of
talk is dangerous to soft Europeans/Americans, but is part of the Caucasian spirit.
Get the FSB to run EVERYTHING. Rumor is it that the guy in charge of tests has been in
charge of security for Putin. I promise you that the FSB is in total control of all results.
If the numbers look bad – Lie. Slowly add a death here and there. Make sure that it
appears that you did not let anyone die from this because of lack of equipment. This is not a
health issue. This is an actual war. Yes, war. You do what you can medically, you just don't
create mass hysteria. Make sense? Many countries are doing this and will be better off for
this. More lives will be saved because healthy people will not be taking up space that
belongs to the very sick. Hysteria is the last thing you want.
*NOTE* Have you noticed how Russians are furious with Italy while the West cries for them?
The West is furious with China while Russia is happy for them. Topsy turvy world.
There is NO REASON to destroy your country because of this. NONE. Something else is in
play. I can promise you that millions of Americans have it or have had it. The CDC has said
this! There were no testing kits. If there are no testing kits you cannot officially die from
a Call of Duty weapon.
FWIW, Dr. Fauci pretty much threw cold water on the Chloroquine option at today's Trump press
conference, saying that no clinical trials have been conducted and leaving the impression
that he was highly dubious. Again, FWIW.
P.S. I wonder how long Fauci will be welcomed onto that podium.
The Great Panic of 2020 is already one for the history books. Yet the damage has only just
begun. We suspect the stock market crash, economic destruction, and forfeiture of freedoms will
persist long after the coronavirus hobgoblin has been put to bed.
With respect to the stock market, the modus operandi of the last 11 years is being stood on
its head. Rather than 'buy the dip.' The new divine mantra is 'sell the rip.' Here's why
If you recall, the U.S. stock market commenced a multi-year swan dive in autumn of 1929.
About that time, the economy also commenced a decade long Great Depression. Given the rapid and
relentless stock market carnage over the last month, and the prospect of a lengthy depression,
a closer look is in order.
From September 3, 1929 to November 13, 1929, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) lost
48.9 percent. Then, as rarely noted, it rallied 48.1 percent through April 17, 1930. This had
the adverse effect of luring the buy the dip crowd back into the stock market just in time for
the next massacre.
The 1929 through 1932 bear market, as noted by Pater Tenebrarum , was like a rubber ball bouncing down
stairs. With each bounce, even the most savvy of investors were given another chance to lose
their money. Taken in sequence, the repeated bounces provided many opportunities to lose money
over and over again.
In the end, the bounce up between November 13, 1929 and April 30, 1930, turned out to be the
ultimate sucker's rally. The DJIA subsequently crashed 89.2 percent from its initial peak,
along with the hopes, dreams, and aspirations of an entire generation.
Such a colossal collapse could never, ever happen again, right?
Well, if it happened before, by definition, it could happen again. Hence, if an interim
bottom is put in over the next several weeks, and the DJIA attempts to retrace towards its
February 12 all-time closing high, take this as a gift. An opportunity to sell the
rip.
Bend the Curve
The economy's being fundamentally pummeled by coronavirus containment. Long term damage will
be sustained. The type of damage that takes a decade – or more – to recover from.
Fake money won't fix it. But, nonetheless, there's no shortage of solutions being offered to
save us from ourselves.
Coronavirus, according to scientific prophecy, spreads exponentially. The only way to
contain it is to "flatten the curve" through "social distancing." The world must "hunker down"
in unison; if not voluntarily, by government decree.
Bars, restaurants, gyms, schools, and many employers are shutting down. San Francisco has
ordered all residents to "shelter in place." The Maltese Falcon can only screech to itself from
within a vacant John's Grill.
The former Mayor of San Francisco, and now California Governor, Gavin Newsom, has ordered all residents to stay at
home until further notice. According to
Newsom , "We need to bend the curve in the state of California."
Perhaps these solutions have merit. But they're disastrous for the economy. Cash flows are
running dry. Credit markets are freezing up. People are losing their jobs. Full mobilization is
needed, we're told, in the war on coronavirus.
For example, Fed Chairman Jay Powell's pulling out all the monetary stops – zero
interest rate policies, quantitative easing, repo madness – to pump liquidity into credit
markets. But that's not all
The Fed's now accepting
stocks as collateral in exchange for liquidity. The Fed also established a Money Market
Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility ( MMLF ). The
sole intent of the MMLF is to keep short-term credit markets from frosting over like the
Alaskan tundra, and breaking the buck.
On the fiscal side, the Treasury Department's angling with Congress to send out $1,000
checks – possibly, two of them – to struggling Americans. Mitt Romney, a man of
discretion, is onboard with $1,000 checks. Chuck Schumer says it won't be enough. Cory Booker
wants to send out
$4,500 checks .
But why stop there? Why not send out $45,000 checks? If a little helicopter money's good,
isn't more always better?
Is the Panic Worse than the Virus?
If only the world was as simple as potato brains Booker believes. Remember, when the U.S.
Treasury borrows money created out of thin air from the Fed to send out checks, it's executing
a program of mass currency debasement.
A check may arrive in your mailbox. But its face value constitutes a fraud. Moreover, this
fraud constitutes a down payment on tomorrow's disorder.
Yet, by the doom being proffered on the matter, mass currency debasement and systematic
hunkering is needed to win the war on coronavirus and save the economy. Or is it?
For perspective, we'll draw from words first scribbled in 1841 by Charles MacKay. Here's a
brief excerpt from MacKay's timeless classic, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness
of Crowds
"During seasons of great pestilence men have often believed the prophecies of crazed
fanatics, that the end of the world was come. Credulity is always greatest in times of
calamity. Prophecies of all sorts are rife on such occasions, and are readily believed,
whether for good or evil.
"During the great plague, which ravaged all Europe, between the years 1345 and 1350, it
was generally considered that the end of the world was at hand. Pretended prophets were to be
found in all the principal cities of Germany, France, and Italy, predicting that within ten
years the trump of the Archangel would sound, and the Saviour appear in the clouds to call
the earth to judgment."
As far as we can tell, the coronavirus has attracted prophets of all stripes like bees to a
honey pot. Mass coronavirus hysteria has led to public and pretend prophetic histrionics.
Maybe so. Or maybe the mass panic has been slightly overblown. By this, is the panic worse
than the virus? Who knows?
What we do know, is the spring equinox has arrived marking the earliest coming of spring in
124 years. After the last several weeks of winter, we'll take it.
Bernhard when will Chump and his neo-confederates drain the swamp ? "ProPublica reported on
Thursday that republican Senator Burr sold off up to $1.56 million in stock on February 13th,
as he was reassuring the public about coronavirus preparedness. At the time, Burr and the
Intelligence Committee were receiving daily briefings about COVID-19.
Three weeks ago, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee privately
warned dozens of donors about the harrowing impact the coronavirus would have on the United
States, while keeping the general public in the dark.
In a secret recording obtained by NPR, North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr is heard giving
attendees of a club luncheon a much different message than most federal government officials,
especially President Trump, were giving the public at the time.
"There's one thing that I can tell you about this," Burr said, "It is much more aggressive
in its transmission than anything that we have seen in recent history." He added, "It is
probably more akin to the 1918 pandemic."
That pandemic claimed more than 600,000 American lives...
Whether this virus jumped species or was made in a bath tub, I can't say. What I can do is
count. in 2019 there were 30,000 deaths in the USA attributed to the Flu. Now, here we are in
2020 with the first quarter of the year nearing coming on, and there are less than 75 deaths
traced to ncov19. So, in my estimation maybe we may record 2,000 dead this year.
Is it rational that we're watching our hard earned 401k's tank, self quarantining,
suffering food shortages, told to distance, avoid our neighbors, and panic over what is
little more than the common cold?
Why must the President address the nation every morning with the Dow Jones numbers
flashing in sync? Why are people in hazmat suits poking around our cities spreading fear, and
asking inane questions such as: do you have a cough, have you recently been to Iran, China,
N. Korea or Iran? I was screened at my local VA hospital on the March 13th, and those were
the questions asked of me. After saying negative a purple wrist ban was put on me and I was
allowed access.
This all reminds me of the movie 'Citizen Kane'. For those old enough to remember it Orson
Welles played the owner of a major newspaper. One day his headline read "WAR DECLARED IN
(some fictitious country)" Consequently, the President of said fictitious country called the
editor by phone, and complained that the paper had it wrong, and there wasn't any war going
on in his country, and how could he. However, Orson responded quite cavalierly with something
on the order of; "Why of course there is a war, because I said there is"
This theatre has gone far enough.
1918 Spanish Flu. WWI ongoing. 675 , 000 deaths in US (300K excess deaths based on
mortality stats published at the time) , 15 million estimated worldwide deaths in 7 months.
No significant impact on GDP due to war
1950-1952 Polio peak panic-Korean War. No significant economic impact. 16,000 paralysis
cases, 3000 deaths annually (mostly children)
1957 -58 influenza pandemic- over 100 K deaths in half the population. Significant
recession in 1958 following Eisenhower's cutting DOD spending. Cold War ramped up to boost
spending. Business as usual for most people during the pandemic
1968 influenza pandemic, over 100k dead, peak Vietnam War, no significant economic
impact
1976 Swine Flu- minimal deaths (dozens) Public health induced hype led to 45 million
rushed to market vaccines. 450 people got Guillain-Barré syndrome from vaccines
causing paralysis . No serious economic impact, business as usual except for vaccination
2003 SARS outbreak. Panic in China/Asia, 800 deaths. Significant economic disruption to
Greater China region due to travel bans and quarantine measures. Iraq war began at same time.
No economic impact in US
2009 H1N1 Pandemic. 12,000 estimated deaths in US. CDC recommended against testing in
July. Not much panic. Country already in recession due to subprime crash. Obamacare passed in
December. Arab spring followed. US government bought 229 million doses of vaccine mostly
unused. Former CDC director hired by Merck probably got a nice bonus. Total cost 4 billion.
About 2 billion went for vaccines,
2019- virus starts to spread in China starting from November 17. A month after Event 201 .
This was attended by Dr Gao of China CDC. China covers up initially then began limited
testing reporting few cases until January 18 when they expanded testing and cases spiked. .
Did not quarantine Wuhan until Jan 23 allowing millions to leave city for other locations due
to up upcoming Lunar New Year Holidays when everything shuts down fir 1-2 weeks anyways.
Significant economic disruption and depression follow as West inflates panic among citizens
with the help of MSM and altmedia to gain support for adopting Chinas draconian measures and
curtailment of freedoms, with censorship sure to follow. Can another war to lift the West out
of depression be far behind, or will that war be fought against the bottom 90% after
lightbulbs go off and they realize they got played.
Experimental DNA changing vaccines being rushed to market. Total cost for everything will
be tens of trillions. Thats a lot of pork. Helicopter money coming soon. Freedom and
Democracy will be a pipe dream. That was Trumps role all along, to put the finishing touches
on a 120 year program to destroy Democracy and replace it with an Elitist Dictatorship ruled
by Philosopher Kings and Corporate Technocrats and enforced by the Military.
... that USA and the West were unprepared because China withheld information about the
virus.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 19 2020 18:20 utc | 106
The "Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on COVID-19" states that China transparently
reported the identification of virus to the WHO and the international community on January
3rd, and a WHO investigative team was invited to Wuhan a week after that.
From January 3rd, 2020, information on COVID-19 cases has been reported to WHO daily.
On January 7th, full genome sequences of the new virus were shared with WHO and the
international community immediately after the pathogen was identified.
On January 10th, an expert group involving Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese technical
experts and a World Health Organization team was invited to visit Wuhan.
To make a just evaluation of the health danger of Covid-19 it could be useful to make a
computerized simulation model based on the data from an influenza virus seasonal outbreak
some years ago,but with the actual medical extended reaction to it like testing on a bigger
scale then normally.(I don't even know how it is ,in normal wintertime flu.
I guess the numbers tested equal those who seek medical help,or maybe they test all
citizens taking part in the free government proposed vaccination,that pretty soon follows the
outbreak(how do they find the vaccin so quickly?)) improvising hospitals and other medical
stuff.And also take in account the appreciation of the illness by the general public.The high
number of medical staff that went ill after weeks of treating patients with it seems not to
be an annual affair.The outcome should make clear the real danger ratio of Covid-19.
Still pondering over those Italian deaths. Average said to be 81 years.10% over 90 years
old.90 % over 70 years old.Nobody died from it under seventy years old?
The governments's reactions to CV are another chapter.
Nowadays governments are mainly made up of incompetent empire-compatibles. In the same way
the empire gets away with bombing away poor people, those incompetents get away with every
single stupidity they commit. They rarely step down. When they do they are sure to find an
even better con-job;(Cf.Christine Lagarde,van der Leyen and so many others)
The general public accepts incompetence, so the politicians know they can do anything
their overlord wants them to. They are shouted at some times, made fun of in accomplice
media, ridiculized by the workers, they don't care.
In the evening they have their ration of high quality cocaine and they are feeling very
special when they look down upon you common plebs next morning. Incompetence is the excuse of
the century, but not a reason to loose the job.
A third question that I want to raise.
So it was in Wuhan in September 2019 that the World Military Games were held. I never
heard of before, but yeah its just a sportive meeting between army personal from all over the
world, in an olympic spirit I wager.
Then it seems there was on the same day the opening of something called Event 201 said to
be a simulation (Real time?computer game,Viral!?) of a virus outbreak.OK. So what?
I don't want to look myself into this, because I've never liked Bill Gates, who did this,
but I like to know from more inquisitive barflies ,if such a thing has really taken place.
How long did it last? What was the outcome? And has this study been taken in account by
government officials, be it in the USA or abroad?
Because what if there was really nothing, just the announcement?
I vaguely recall the polio era. There was a fair amount of panic. I remember lining up in the
school gymnasium with everyone else in town to get a dose of oral vaccine. My father had a
friend with a leg damaged by polio. He played slide guitar in a Country & Western band.
I don't remember lockdowns or anything like that. Other than polio and tuberculosis, maybe
epidemics were more accepted 60 years ago? Everyone got measles, mumps, chicken pox. That's
just the way it was. I don't think most people thought about it much; too busy trying to make
a living, just like nowadays.
Here's a
report on the current war against the unseen enemy . The question about polio is relevant
IMO, but for a vastly different reason than what the OP likely had in mind. At the time, the
ongoing war against the unseen enemy was taken very seriously as it affected all
classes and especially city dwellers.
Recall for centuries the Miasma Theory of Disease and related piety and fear of god were
the primary explanations for the unexplainable. That dogma was challenged by a Persian
scholar in the mid 1000s when the Arab world was where genuine science was being pursued
while the West went looking for Devils, witches and heretics, but even the Arab world
couldn't accept what we now know to be the truth of the matter.
We needed to await the arrival of microscopes and Bacteriology to establish the Germ
Theory of Disease in 1870. Death was everywhere and quite powerful.
I recall the average life expectancy for Philadelphia in 1740 to be 20--lots of early
childhood and child bearing deaths--with little differentiation between the slowly growing
urban regions within the Colonies.
Charlestown was the worst with its residents abandoning the city during Summer.
FDR was the first genuinely handicapped POTUS, but he tried his best to conceal his
disability. My Maternal Grandfather was kept stateside in 1918 thanks to the flu epidemic,
while his cousin wasn't so lucky and died in the trenches, his mother never forgave my
Maternal Grandmother for Fate's result.
While dated (2010)
this graphic illustrates the top 15 Communicable Diseases. Some will find this essay on the use
of quarantine helpful by providing some historical context to the ongoing war against the
unseen world.
There was no quarantine. They closed beaches. Told people to no go into the water. That
was for a summer or two at most.
I don't recall anything else. A kid up the street got it. He was a hell of an athlete but
wound up with a brace on one leg. He was away fro some time and his return was the only sign
that polio was really bad.
People were deathly afraid of the first vaccine, injected. Dr. Salk invented that first
vaccine.
The Oral Vaccine really changed everything. Dr. Sabin changed the paradigm and saved several
generations.
@FB I, too, have been disappointed in Tucker Carlson's China bashing. I have thought that
he was the best on FOX News, but now he is getting to be as bad as Sean Hannity.
We may never know the origin of the coronavirus. It is foolish to try and assign blame at
this point.
@follyofwar Well, as the Cheyenne used to say, "It's a good day to die". If the ones who
think they can rule over others push it too far," then the the sun will shine upon a good day
to die". I remember that line from the novel "Little Big Man".
It used to be part of the American ethos, the idea that it's better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees. Levon Helm wrote a line in a song in the '80s: "You give your
life to live your life". Some of us still see it that way.
There are so many scenarios. I haven't read all of the comments, so what I'm about to say
may already have been touched on.
1. The virus happened naturall y, transferred from a bat and eventually to
humans.
2. The virus accidentally escaped the Wuhan lab.
3. The globalists did it. The globalists (the Chinese elite in concert with the
U.S. multinational corporate elite) don't want things to change as both groups of elites are
getting filthy rich off of the offshoring of jobs to China.
Trump is a nationalist. He is upsetting their apple cart as he's placing tariffs on the
goods manufactured in China by the U.S. multinational corporations, trying to force the U.S.
multinationals to come back home. They don't want to, so they manufactured the virus thinking
it would bring down the economy/stock market, thereby bringing down Trump.
China plays along, feigns ignorance, and accuses the U.S. of trying to infect their
citizens, Xi wears a mask. A few thousand old people dying is a small price to pay, in their
minds.
4. The U.S. multinational corporate elite did it alone, without China's knowledge ,
for the same reasons as stated in #3, to throw a wrench in the works, purposely sink the
economy. With Trump gone, globalism could continue.
5. The U.S. did it alone, without China's knowledge. The U.S. globalists realize
globalism is ending and they have acquiesced to the U.S. nationalists. They are angry that
China has not followed through with their part of the original deal, which is that China gets
the offshored jobs, their elite get rich, and they get money to modernize, but she must open
up more to the U.S. corporations and financial firms, which she has been reluctant to do.
6. The nationalists did it in order to bring down globalism, put an end to it once and
for all . Once people realize that supply lines (especially pharmaceuticals) thousands of
miles away is a recipe for disaster, they'll scream for things to be changed. Trump has said
he likes President Xi and the Chinese people, this is nothing personal, but he wants the jobs
to return.
7. China did it alone . The Chinese elite realize that globalism is ending, and
they know the Chinese citizens will blame them for the loss of their jobs. The Chinese elite
worry that the citizens will wonder why they've become filthy rich and they haven't. The
Chinese elite plant the virus, but blame it on the U.S.
8. The world elites, in collusion with the central banks, have blown massive financial
bubbles. They realize they can't continue blowing the bubbles any bigger, but they don't see
any way out without being blamed. They plant the virus in order to bring down the world
economy, deflate the bubble. The virus takes the blame, not them. China blames the U.S.,
the U.S. blames China, some old people are sacrificed, and they raise a glass to the
devil.
... I don't know whether you realise how the rest of the world is feeling at the moment:
people are stunned as if the Apocalypse has come. They are worried about their very survival,
and things are only going to get worse because the containment, lockdown, military special
powers will likely extend for weeks and months ahead, as it will take months to gain control
over the epidemic.
The Chinese have officially accused the US to have, at a minimum, covered up early
Covid-19 infections that took place in America several weeks before the epidemic broke out in
Wuhan.
Separate Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists have previously determined that only
the US had the five strains of Coronavirus that could have generated the Covid-19:
@Ron Unz Too many Americans are stuck on Pax Americana la la land and will never admit
something so grave to American status. We saw exactly this during 9/11.
Well, I think there's a certain amount of circumstantial evidence suggesting that the
Coronavirus outbreak may have been an American bioweapon attack against China (and Iran).
But if so, I'm *extremely* skeptical that the perpetrators ever intended or imagined that
it would leak back into the US and inflict the horrific economic and social damage that now
seems unavoidable. How to explain this lack lack of foresight?
The most obvious answer is that they were stupid and incompetent, but here's another
point to consider
In late 2002 there was the outbreak of SARS in China, a related virus but that was far
more deadly and somewhat different in other characteristics. The virus killed hundreds of
Chinese and spread into a few other countries before it was controlled and stamped out. The
impact on the US and Europe was negligible, with just a small scattering of cases and only
a death or two.
So if American biowarfare analysts were considering a Coronavirus attack against China,
isn't it quite possible they would have said to themselves that since SARS never
significantly leaked back into the US or Europe, we'd similarly remain insulated from the
Coronavirus?
Obviously, such an analysis was foolish and mistaken, but would it have seemed so
implausible at the time?
Well, I have only recently heard of a guy named Francis Boyle,a law professor out of the
Univ. Of Illinois. He is apparently an expert on bio-warfare treaties. He claims covid-19 is
manmade,period.
That is a very scary notion,from which most people will flee.
As I have accepted that 9/11 was "the usual suspects," I guess it is definitely possible.
@Ron Unz Maybe, but my take is an engineered market crash. This looks to me like a Nathan
Rothschild sort of trick (according to legend) – propagating fake news about Napoleon's
victory at Waterloo, crashing the markets, then snapping up the whole LSE for a penny to the
pound. If so, you have to admire it, the sheer genius, the psychopathic beauty of it all.
As a bonus, the Reichstag Fire also is an extremely efficient delivery system for the
eugenics payload – a very virulent strain that almost exclusively targets the social
burden (pensioners and already ill) while leaving alone the tax-farm base! Never in the
history of tax-farming have the sheeple been stampeded and fleeced so thoroughly! Bravo!
The US is the customer, with the enormous trade deficit. Trump has been hugely effective
with his tariff's policy in rehoming manufacturing to the US – a process that will
vastly accelerate thanks to the Corona virus outbreak.
I agree that 9-11 stink to high heaven and that PNAC are unmitigated bastards, but this
capitulation to China is balls.
@Ron Unz Stupidity is certainly an American Military essential behavior for promotion and
success in the current US Armed Forces.
But you can't have someone clever enough to create a Recombinant Designer Pathogen and be
in the US Military.
However, the psyops fucks would likely be ready to game the system should a natural
outbreak occur which would be called a Pandemic even when its not and make everyone of our
low quality leaders $hit their pants and go totally crazy. A mild fart with the claim its
poison gas would make the Stock Markets Collapse.
But if so, I'm *extremely* skeptical that the perpetrators ever intended or imagined
that it would leak back into the US and inflict the horrific economic and social damage
that now seems unavoidable. How to explain this lack lack of foresight?
This is the same issue with cyberwar viruses. One can infect computers in Iran, but with
the internet they may be passed onto the entire world, just like rap music.
But if so, I'm *extremely* skeptical that the perpetrators ever intended or imagined
that it would leak back into the US and inflict the horrific economic and social damage
that now seems unavoidable. How to explain this lack lack of foresight?
One word: Trump. Because he could very well lose his reelection bid if the pandemic causes
an economic recession which now seems highly likely given the stock market collapse.
Cui Bono ? The people OPPOSED to Trump, variously referred to as the "Deep State"
or the "National Security State" as described by Gore Vidal in his book which by the way
Julian Assange was holding while being hauled away from the Ecuadorian Embassy.
After Russiagate and Ukrainegate, THEY finally hit the bullseye with Coronagate.
This is a pretty good article. I'll probably link to it.
Some people think this is coming from City of London types. The US pursued a "strategy of
tension" with China that may have allowed third party actors to intervene and get them
fighting each other.
There has been some Bad Blood between British elites and China for awhile now. It's
not clear why.
In this scheme, the US is the patsy, the Oswald to take the blame.
The real gem in the whole article are the observations made by Yang himself:
YANG: That's what freaks me out about the whole thing. What we're doing is saying things
like, "Keep your social distance," and trying to stop the spread that way, which is fine.
But we have shit for data. Like, we don't know what the infection rate is. And so,
there's no reason we would ever be able to give the 'all-clear.' If you don't have any
data, this whole thing is a nightmare that doesn't end. When you close schools, what gives
you the all-clear to say, "OK, open them again"? Nothing. There's no data to compare it to.
This whole thing is a fear-based approach with no end in sight. There's no catalyst to ever
sound the all-clear. This whole thing is so fucked up.
YANG: I think the nature of that guidance has to be different, personally. I think they
need to be transparent about what kind of data we're relying on, to give people a sense of
the timeline. Right now, our sense of the future is so cloudy. And you get the sense the
president went from not taking this seriously to suddenly realizing its seriousness, and now
we're reacting in various ways to slow the spread of the virus. But then what? I would be
clearer as to what the timeline looks like, what data we're going to rely upon, how we're
going to get that data, what steps we're taking to increase testing capacity and just give
people a sense of the future.
We need to know now what the future can look like under different scenarios and then be
presented with what scenario we're in when that time comes. We've been on lockdown
for half a week. Right now, the American people don't have any visibility into whether it's
going to be four more weeks or four more months, and we don't know how those judgments are
going to determined. As president, I would say, "Look, here's the information, here's the
dashboard, here's what we're lining up, here's what we're hoping for, here's how
circumstances could change, and thank you for doing your part -- if you proceed with like
the rest of the country in flattening the curve and keeping things under this level, then
we can look forward to this. " You know, so we could actually have a sense of
accomplishment and purpose.
So here we have it, replicated throughout the whole of the Western world. An open-ended
clamp-down based on fear, with no timeline or road map, and no conditions set on when (or IF)
things will get back to normal.
For now, smells really fishy. Even if DS (Deep State) did not intentionally engineer this
circumstance, they are decisively and very swiftly exploiting it to exert extreme control
over everything .
@antibeast On the contrary, for the deep state Trump is the ideal puppet. Those
who are against Trump belong to the surface state , i.e. Democrats, Leftists in
general and the equally Leftist main stream media. Real policy in the US is only made by the
deep state .
"The East Asian populations have much higher AFs in the eQTL variants associated with
higher ACE2 expression in tissues (Fig. 1c), which may suggest different susceptibility or
response to 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 from different populations under the similar
conditions."
This is a "we do not know yet", not a "we can exclude".
No lab-generated strain?
The Furin docking cleavage site has not been found yet in any other beta-CoV strain, it is
only known from other completely different viruses and seem to be related there with being
highly contagious. In adition, a recent study found a third docking option via GRP78
expressions on the cell surface (usually by cells experiencing stress), https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-15157/v1
. This is already two strange features more compared to SARS and MERS.
There is only a "there is no proof, neither a direct hint found yet", not a "we can
exclude", but a mere belief.
Most irritating is that there is are not intermediate or other similar strains found yet,
and that there is a strange pattern of first occurences in the early phase in Wuhan (and
probably also in the US). We still have no sound explanation how it came into existence, not
even some plausible facts suggesting a pathway. Given the technical capabilities since 15
years, the multitude of stakeholders working on gene editing, for vaccine research also on
dangerous stains, and some irritating cui bono issues, it is too early to discard some
suspicions already. The scope of potential perpetrators (by accident or intentionally with a
not expected outcome) is broad and - given the very intransparent transnational companies -
quite opaque. In issues of global security and extreme relevance for humanity, transparency
should be enforced and secrecy for corporate interests should not be tolerated in such
cases.
Anyway, most important now is to mitigate the ongoing desaster, we should only not forget
some issues for later investigation.
The argument that cov19 isn't engineered because biowar researchers & the empire that
incubates them are 1. Sane and 2. Indequately funded
Nope, not buying it on either count.
The hegemony has military labs all around the globe (though the Fort Detrick closure is
suspicious).
Even if it weren't engineered, a virus doesn't need to be vat-grown to be politically
useful - anthrax, smallpox and bubonic plague - all natural & deadly pathogens - exist
within bioweapon labs, for research purposes of course.
I am a little doubtful about the wuhan games being the vector - think of the timing, right
before CNY.
Surely a "Diplomat" with a diplomatic bag could have a far wider range of opportunities (via
proxies) for more precise delivery.
An interesting story at Common Dreams
"A look at financial records reveal that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Richard
Burr last month -- just as he was big-dollar donors, but not the general public about the
looming threat of the coronavirus -- personal stock holdings worth hundreds of thousands of
dollars, many of them in industries now seriously impacted by the outbreak..."
".....In an audio recording obtained by NPR, the North Carolina Republican was heard
telling donors at a luncheon on Feb. 27 that the coronavirus, officially called COVID-19,
would likely spread through the population aggressively -- and suggested it could kill
hundreds of thousands of people.
"It is much more aggressive in its transmission than anything that we have seen in recent
history," Burr said.
"It is probably more akin to the 1918 pandemic," he added, referring to the flu pandemic
which killed more than 600,000 Americans...."
There is audio here
Really, it is hard stop thinking this was a preplanned event...
Wall Street is pressuring key healthcare firms to hike prices over the coronavirus crisis.
Audio here of bankers asking drug companies, firms supplying N95 masks & ventilators, to
figure out how to profit from the Covid-19 emergency.
Today's Keiser Report declares petrodollar and fiat dollar dead and announces the
world will need to have a confab to arrange a new commercial currency or currency basket.
Other interesting food for thought's discussed. The 2nd half interview is with a metals
broker who says we must demand physical delivery instead of paper because the derivatives
aren't properly reflecting physical price. An item from Shadowstats's Daily Update, "the
February 2020 Cass Freight Index® Continued in Annual Decline for the 15th Straight
Month, Down by 7.5% (-7.5%)," further ongoing confirmation that we've actually been in a
recession for at least that long.
In the wake of the coronavirus outbreak, investors who bought "pandemic bonds" from the World
Bank in 2017 are set to lose hundreds of millions of dollars.
It seems people here don't understand the concept of "burden of proof".
Burden of proof arives from a logical necessity. If you treat every hypothesis existent in
the universe for which there are no scientific evidence as a priori true, the it would mean
they are all true at the same time. The same if you treat them as all false.
That, of course, would be a logical fallacy, since contradictory hypotheses would be true
or false at the same time.
That's why the absence of evidence the SARS CoV-2 isn't a bioweapon doesn't make it a
bioweapon. Since we don't know that, that would make, by the same logic, it a bioweapon and a
not-bioweapon at the same time. It is the same fallacy of religion: you can't prove God
doesn't exist (and you really can't, since God is a metaphysical concept, not a physical
one), therefore it must exist in the eyes of the religious.
Except that, in the case here, there is strong evidence the SARS CoV-2 is fruit of
evolution, so I don't even know why people are bringing the opposite hypothesis here without
even a hint of evidence.
"Some Indian researchers found four genome sequences in the novel coronavirus that can also
be found in the HIV virus. They self published their findings in a paper that was not peer
reviewed. We discussed that paper in detail on February 1 in our second post on the virus and
we strongly expressed our doubt about its veracity. A few days later the paper was retracted
by its authors after other scientists had pointed out that the lengths of each of the four
sequences they had compared were way too small to be of statistical significance."
The authors retracted the study temporarily to allow it to be peer reviewed. They did not
concede their results were insignificant. The stated reason for retracting the study from one
of the authors is because the study was being used to promote conspiracy theories that the
virus was intentionally released as weapon since they made no such contention
"Asian people are not more genetically receptive for the novel coronavirus."
Yet the study you linked to states "The East Asian populations have much higher AFs in the
eQTL variants associated with higher ACE2 expression in tissues (Fig. 1c), which may suggest
different susceptibility or response to 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 from different populations under
the similar conditions."
There is zero evidence that the virus is from a Chinese or U.S. or other (weapon) laboratory
and the claim actually makes no sense. The genome of the virus consists of more then 23,000
'letters'. It is significantly different than the genome of other known viruses."
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Actually, its pretty similar to the bat
virus found in 2013 as reported by Shi Zheng Li in January , 2020. And the key word is
"known". How stupid would you have you have to be to publish the sequence data in public
papers of the exact virus that will be used as a weapon before unleashing the virus. Shi
Zhengli was involved in gain of function research for over a decade working with Ralph Baric
at UNC on some research.
If you look at the research thats been done on corona viruses gain of function and corona
virus/ebola/zika virus vaccines you run into the same names a lot, Chinese scientists like
Shi Zhengli, American scientists like Ralph Baric of UNC, Wuhan institute of Virology/BSL-4
lab, ,Duke University and USAMRIID, both of which has ties with Wuhan University-Institute of
Medical Virology all funded by USAMRIID, DARPA, NIAD, BARDA, NIH , chinese military, chinese
CDC, Bill Gates (WHO, Event 201, AMC, CEPI) , and various vaccine makers such as Innovio,
Moderna, NanoViricides, etc, often in collaboration with each other. George Gao of China CDC
attended Event 201.
Look close at Project Bioshield-The Department of Homeland Security uses intelligence
reports to decide which diseases and biological threats are considered "material," or
realistic threats to US security. It then refers these findings to Health and Human Services
(HHS), which determines whether it's necessary for the government to order new drugs from
pharmaceutical companies to combat the threats.
A funding agency within HHS called the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development
Authority (BARDA) hands out lucrative contracts for research, parts of which can be paid up
front.
The parent agency (HHS) in charge of funding drugs and vaccines for the national
stockpile, is also the one that is separately funding research into new diseases that could
result in a bioterror or accidental infection, which would in turn demand a response from the
national stockpile. Sounds like a racket
More on Ralph Baric- also known as the Godfather of Corona Virus due in part to a corona
virus vaccine patent in 2002 as well as his subsequent research. But Dr. Ralph Baric's
lab
is designed to develop drugs against new emerging pathogens focuses on coronaviruses. Baric
and his 30-person team partnered with Gilead Sciences, Inc. six years ago to test antiviral
drugs such as Remdesivir to curb emerging viral diseases that were then largely overlooked by
big pharmaceutical companies.
Gilead Science as you recall struck gold with Tamiflu thanks to Bird Flu scares that
followed after SARS. Also known for its association with Donald Rumsfeld.
Also there is no proof that COVID-19 is "more contagious" either by laboratory analysis or
in fielded studies than influenza. If you know of such a paper, I would appreciate a link
so that I can examine it for myself.
There have been articles posted online about high levels of air pollution in Italy's Po
River valley region, where Lombardia province is located. Do a search on Google or DuckDuckGo
and they appear.
Much of that pollution probably occurs at particular times of the year. Milan is said to
be notorious for temperature inversions, as is Tehran in Iran. These occur in winter-time in
Tehran nearly every year. Cold air sinks under warm air in river valleys or inter-mountain
valleys and plateaux so air is trapped and cannot circulate, trapping pollutants. Milan,
Tehran and probably Wuhan beside the Jiangzi River sit in these kinds of physical
environments.
Italy does seem to have a history of industrial accidents. I have a double CD set of urban
folk by Alessandro Monti, "Unfolk + Live Book", which is partly inspired by an industrial
poisoning incident that occurred somewhere in northern Italy in the 1970s. Can't remember any
details and can't look up now, being on smartphone, but it was a major incident, large
numbers in the vicinity were poisoned, many died and others still struggling with long-term
effects. May have been some form of dioxide poisoning.
Police stopped and checked 700,000 citizens between 11 and 17 March, 43,000 of whom were
found to have violated the decree, which also ordered the closing of shops, bars,
restaurants, gyms and swimming pools.
One of the most serious cases happened in Sciacca, Sicily, when a man who had tested
positive for Covid-19 was discovered by police while out shopping, despite the strict order
to self-isolate at home. Prosecutors opened an investigation and accused the man of "aiding
the epidemic". If convicted, he could face up to 12 years in prison.
On 10 March a 30-year-old man was stopped by the police in Turin at 2.30am while
soliciting a sex worker.
Police near Venice pressed charges against a priest because he was officiating at a
funeral. Another priest was reported for the same reason in Torre Annunziata in Campania,
together with relatives of the deceased. Funeral services are banned under the decree.
The prosecutor's office in Aosta, in north-west Italy, opened an investigation against a
man for "aggravated attempt to spread the epidemic" because he had not informed his doctors
of suspected coronavirus symptoms before undergoing plastic surgery on his nose. The man
subsequently tested positive for Covid-19.
To put this in perspective: Italy has a population of 60M - so police stopped more than 1 in
100 people in the whole country!
This is not even at China level lockdown.
What will the US do?
Figures refer to specimens tested. Data is updated at noon Mondays through Fridays. The
current report, published on 16 March 2020, includes only consolidated estimates up until
11 March 2020.
There is a common idea behind all the various theories that attribute the pandemic to
government action, ruling class planning or financial manipulators.
And that is the idea that the ruling class/establishment/tptb,1%-call them what you will-
are all powerful, wise, though evil, and capable of defeating any popular resistance.
The people claiming now that the virus was unloosed to enable an attack on Iran, those who
claim that it was produced as a smokescreen to obscure the collapse of the financial system,
those who see it as a means to steal away our last liberties and to knock a dying democracy
on the head, even those who see it as an out of control experiment , if you look at their
posts in the past, are generally going to be found to be the same people who thought that the
US military could not be defeated, that Syria was bound to fall, that Venezuela and Cuba were
toast. And that Hezbollah and Ansarullah stood no chance against the vast forces arrayed
against them.
The idea is always the same: the Empire is indefatigable, the greedy mediocrities who run
it (many of them public figures whose characters are daily open to examination) have foreseen
all possibilities. Resistance is useless. We are all doomed.
In fact, as people who don't have the leisure to indulge themselves in these gloomy
excuses for inaction and apathy are always demonstrating, the imperial regime is not only
brittle and riven through with corruption but run by talents selected in an anti-meritocratic
way. The reason that Petraeus, for example, rose to the top of the US military machine was
that he was a slimy careerist of the sort we have all come across, and, if we have been doing
our duty, trod on, in our lives: as a General he was clueless, unoriginal and, because he was
immoral and cynical, quite unable to understand how Iraqis would react to his crude terrorist
methods. Unfortunately he was caught out by his lust; had he maintained a respectable image
he would probably, by now, be into his second term as President and making Trump look
competent.
And what is true of the Pentagon is equally true of those running the US economy, Wall St
and the banking system: they are utterly witless. Look around you for the fruits of their
wisdom.
In fact the entire political class of the US, ably assisted by its clownish puppets
elsewhere, has brought the system that they worship to the brink of dissolution. Class rule
teeters on the edge of massive uprisings.
And this is not-I have already taken up too much space and time- because the pandemic was
planned but because despite its predictability, the near certainty that the seven good years
would be followed by plagues and famines, they could not restrain themselves from dismantling
the safety nets-from flood controls to food reserves to healthcare services designed to be
able to expand when needed to deal with emergencies.
(In the Canadian county in which I live the Public Health Unit founded in the aftermath of
the First World War and the 'flu epidemics, was shut down, to save money, last year. Most of
its functions were left to chance and the marketplace to fulfil. And now we have a
pandemic.)
Instead the entire system is riddled with the weaknesses that usurious practises impose:
there are empty hospitals in the Pennines because local health authorities cannot both pay
interest on PPP loans and meet the payrolls of medical staff. So, following the logic of
capitalism-first pay interest- local taxes, designed to maintain public health, are diverted
to the money lenders. And then there is the cost of monopolised drug purchases.
And that is symptomatic of the entire system, in all its aspects: education, including the
work needed to provide scientific and medical personnel, is crippled in the same way, by high
fees, by capital costs swollen by interest payments, by professions designed to hoard rather
than spread knowledge.
The entire system is corrupt and collapsing. And that is why,particularly in the "West"
where mass indoctrination has long been part of the culture, it is necessary to recognise
that it is not going to take much in the way of mass energy to bring the whole thing down.
And to replace it with real democracy.
The virus may not have been created in a laboratory but as a minimum it should be studied to
learn more about its origin and spread. At the present time we only hace circumstantial
evidence but it point in one direction. Certain facts are worth considering:
2)The Wuhan wet-market is not the first source of the coronavirus;
2) SARS-CoV virus was being studied and experimented on at a US Bioweapons lab at Fort
Detrick. In August 2019, it was cited for unsafe conditions that may have led to
contamination of wastewater;
3) The US sent over 300 military personnel to the World Military Games in Wuhan in late
October 2019;
4) Four foreign military participants came down with an unknown respiratory illness during
the games;
5) Genetic studies conducted in Taiwan and Japan indicate that the ancestral form of
SARS-CoV-2, the COVID-19 coronavirus does not occur in China but is found in the US and
elsewhere.
African swine fever is also spread by man-made means even if it is not in itself man-made.
Criminal elements spread it with
drones The longer it takes to track down the origin even if the Chinese reportedly
monitor everything, the more suspicious it becomes.
The world has changed many times, and it is changing again. All of us will have to
adapt to a new way of living, working, and forging relationships. But as with all change,
there will be some who lose more than most, and they will be the ones who have lost far too
much already. The best we can hope for is that the depth of this crisis will finally force
countries -- the US, in particular -- to fix the yawning social inequities that make large
swaths of their populations so intensely vulnerable.
The fixation on bats distracts from the important fact, which is that China primarily has one
haplotype (with instances of three others in small counts, including those brought in from
from abroad). The China haplotype is distinct from the Iran one, and the Italy one. Therefore
none of these locations can be the origin, because where the 'parent' of the virus comes from
would also be a place that would have multiple 'children' or haplotypes of the virus. The
only place place that has all five haplotypes is the US. You can talk all day about bats but
that is to ignore the scientific data about haplotypes and the parent-child relationship it
implies.
On the ideological level, I see many comments saying its not racist to talk about Asians
and weird foods. Let me point out that racism is not just discrimination, but discrimination
from a position of power. A black slave cannot be racist against his plantation master no
matter how much he hates him, because his individual 'prejudice' against the master does not
alter the world and its system of prejudice. Racism issues from power, so viruses that
originate from the US or western countries are NOT stigmatized as linked to white people or
white culture, but viruses that originate from Africa or Asia are racially stigmatized. In
any place, there are some people who eat 'weird' food, whether it be gator meat in Florida or
bats in Palau. But only non-white countries get branded as places of 'disease'. That's
because racism is the perpetuation of structures of power.
Black slaves were prized in southern plantations because they were resistant to diseases
like malaria. That is a fact, but it is also a historical reality that how people talk about
diseases is part of racial and racist discourse.
"... ...The notion of panic is best studied in the context of war. Subjected to fire, explosion etc. a military unit can be reduced to an unthinking mass, fleeing, dropping weapons and massacred by the advancing opponent. This is called panic, and it is never advisable, unlike a retreat performed in a controlled manner, minimizing the losses of the material, life and territory. ..."
...The notion of panic is best studied in the context of war. Subjected to fire, explosion
etc. a military unit can be reduced to an unthinking mass, fleeing, dropping weapons and
massacred by the advancing opponent. This is called panic, and it is never advisable,
unlike a retreat performed in a controlled manner, minimizing the losses of the material,
life and territory.
On personal level, I think I witnessed a trace of panic when I visited supermarket
today. There is a wide aisle with paper goods on one side and frozen goods on the
other. Toilet paper seems 95% gone, and so are frozen vegetables on the other side. Frozen
stuff from other aisles seem untouched. Personally, I had to substitute canned peas for
frozen peas I planned to buy. In any case, few reasons to expect major shortages.
On a larger level, a number of governments in Europe reacts with panic, doing things
that can seriously make things worse. When small countries close borders, there can be
serious havoc. Tens of thousands of people, thousands of trucks are stuck.
At least in USA, states have no authority to close borders. A smallish country like
Slovakia can have severe shortages if hysterical neighbors (Poland and Hungary, I am not
sure about Czechia) close borders. As supply chains cross borders to a large degree in EU,
interrupting the border traffic can create unpredictable shortages.
Additionally, creating big crowds (of stranded people) is very, very stupid under the
circumstances.
Rational policies would be to create the balance of needs and resources, take
measures to increase critical supplies including test kits, medical equipment and
medicines, find ways of humane and rational handling of travelers and so on.
The situation in Wall Street is so dire right now that the NYT is reporting China's first
zero-case day in a positive light in its home page. Gotta prop the markets up, no matter the
PR cost.
Propublica has published a model showing hospital bed availability vs. nCOV infection rates,
nationwide: bed vs. infection rate
It actually isn't bad: there are spots where 20% infection in 12 months is bad, but overall
the US seems in decent shape. 20% in 6 months - significant red coverage.
But interestingly - my Eyeball Mark I shows the negative effects mostly in the liberal
zones = cities.
Chloroquine/hydrochloroquinine was determined to be effective for the treatment of the
coronavirus by Chinese clinicians early in February, and the Chinese government announced
this on February 17 this year. Today (March 19) Trump and his staff amazingly announced that
medical personnel in American health agencies have discovered, developed and were testing
these drugs without any mention of the considerable Chinese, as well as Korean, published
experience and success using these closely-related and relatively safe malarial drugs.
Shameful and highly deceitful, to say the least. This deceit should be revealed again and
again without letup.
"... Now moving on to the COVID-19 virus and the reactions. At present it is without question, based on the statistical evidence, an overreaction of historical proportions. ..."
"... The three areas, so far, where the virus has been the worst, N Italy, N China and Iran each have one thing in common - some of the worst air pollution on the planet which has been widely cited and as much as a decade ago it was noted that the results would be compromised immune systems, diminished lung functions and outbreaks of related health issues. So what we have essentially is an environment which was ripe for such viruses to proliferate and population that is vulnerable to such things. ..."
"... BTW Russ is correct on his note about bio-weapons and the funding for such things is always there even as the accounting methods serve to hide where these funds go. ..."
People have completely lost their minds here and that is due to decades of social engineering
which has created a culture devoid of critical thinking skills and a frighteningly docile
populace. Accepting the narrative of so-called (and ideologically and often financially)
experts is demanded of everyone lest you be cited as a "conspiracy monger." We could cite
literally all day the number of "whacked out" conspiracies that ended up being factual but
that's for another time.
Having said that it is the case that at present all of what b is saying in this
post is almost certainly the case- excepting the bio weapons narrative which is virtually
impossible to prove and if this is the case it was a very poor job of utilizing those
bio-weapons. And there is most definitely a racist element to this amongst the right-wingers
which will be played up.
Now moving on to the COVID-19 virus and the reactions. At present it is without
question, based on the statistical evidence, an overreaction of historical proportions.
The only option that changes this is if there is something further that we do not know and
for this we are to place our faith in governments and institutions that have consistently
lied to us and manipulated the public for decades. Someone tell me that we are actually
suppose to hold our noses and this time believe the "official narrative." It would
actually go against the proven evidence, that these entities are proven liars, for us to do
so.
The virus itself is just that - a virus even if it is particularly virulent which is still
up for debate. The notions of how to address this, at least the ones peddled to us, are
simply wrongheaded and fit a certain model of the medical establishment that BTW is part and
parcel of the same system that has brought us to the point of massive ecological collapse.
Let's not separate that out.
The three areas, so far, where the virus has been the worst, N Italy, N China and Iran
each have one thing in common - some of the worst air pollution on the planet which has been
widely cited and as much as a decade ago it was noted that the results would be compromised
immune systems, diminished lung functions and outbreaks of related health issues. So what we
have essentially is an environment which was ripe for such viruses to proliferate and
population that is vulnerable to such things.
Keep in mind that viruses constantly mutate and there are myriad viruses that are unknown
and never to be known until something like this occurs. So all talk of some "silver bullet"-
be it vaccine or other medical discovery- is at best short-term if not a Trojan Horse.
The solution is to have an economic social order that creates environments where the
external environment is such that the inhabitants are less likely to be impacted by such
contagions. Right now we have the exact opposite. So say what you want about COVID and
pretend that you can find a "fix" but once this passes if we are forced to return to the same
omnicidal economic system we will be right back here a few years from now.
BTW Russ is correct on his note about bio-weapons and the funding for such things is
always there even as the accounting methods serve to hide where these funds go.
I will unfortunately have to go against the grain here and say that I still fail to see the
immense danger of the virus.
The argument this article makes - particularly in its third paragraph - that drastic
measures taken by governments and private institutions means that the virus is a huge threat
doesn't logically follow. No matter how drastic the measures, how large the public's panic or
how rabid the panic buying, my chance of dying from the virus even if contracting it is, as a
sub-60 year old, healthy person still at roughly 1%, not much higher than viruses that gain
little to no media or political attention.
The fact that it affects old people, but unlike many other viruses not babies is another
factor that should lessen fear, rather than increase it.
This article summarizes the poll but mentions no reasons why those who do not believe the
mainstream narrative should change their opinions other than empty polemic statements (such
as "It would require deliberately ignoring these developments or accepting a completely false
narrative about them to conclude that the threat has been overblown at this point.")
In lieu of proper counter-arguments, it is false to assume that only those willfully
ignorant or believing in false narratives would not be as concerned about this virus as those
in the media and others blowing it out proportion.
A thought. I have often heard the regime in Beijing described as evil, but not stupid. Why on
earth would they have shut down an entire province and partially shut down their whole
country with all the attendant societal disruption and economic devastation if they didn't
think COV is a lot more than flu? Remember, the Chinese are famously fatalistic about life
and death (that is a polite way of saying that they care less about individual human lives
than we do). And what about the Italians. Were they just nervous nellies who had an
irrational panic attack over nothing? OBVIOUSLY they, and many other countries, think this is
a lot more serious than influenza.
stevenjohnson 
Pasionaria 
OPEC in trouble as oil outlook worsens
