by New information is trickling in quite slowly, and I doubt that we will have much in the way of clarity with respect to the economic outlook for awhile. The pandemic is a sort of exogenous shock economically, but not systemically. The high likelihood of a pandemic in the near future was already in the knowledge base. Unfortunately, a globalized world had not thought this through and prepared for the eventuality. As a result, uncertainty now prevails and there is a cacophony of voices all expressing different and often opposing views.To certain extent, "capitalism" can be held accountable since there was no market incentive, and, in fact, past behavior suggested moral hazard. In neoliberal age in which nation states are regarded as similar to business, existing to profit their
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Matias Vernengo writes Elon Musk (& Vivek Ramaswamy) on hardship, because he knows so much about it
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Klas Eklunds ‘Vår ekonomi’ — lärobok med stora brister
New Economics Foundation writes We need more than a tax on the super rich to deliver climate and economic justice
Robert Vienneau writes Profits Not Explained By Merit, Increased Risk, Increased Ability To Compete, Etc.
New information is trickling in quite slowly, and I doubt that we will have much in the way of clarity with respect to the economic outlook for awhile.The pandemic is a sort of exogenous shock economically, but not systemically. The high likelihood of a pandemic in the near future was already in the knowledge base. Unfortunately, a globalized world had not thought this through and prepared for the eventuality. As a result, uncertainty now prevails and there is a cacophony of voices all expressing different and often opposing views.
To certain extent, "capitalism" can be held accountable since there was no market incentive, and, in fact, past behavior suggested moral hazard. In neoliberal age in which nation states are regarded as similar to business, existing to profit their "stakeholders," chiefly the owners of capital as the driving force of growth; governments are regarded as administrative personnel, and citizens are treated as employees, if the chief stakeholders don't see a stake in it for them, it doesn't happen.
In this arrangement, workers become similar to soldiers as "cannon fodder."
Why was this an "exogenous shock"? That's the way the system is set up.
But what about China? One views it that China is capitalist now. I disagree with this view. Actually, once the situation became clear, the government got right on it, took charge and was assisted by the largest firms. In addition, Chinese culture features social responsibility and civic duty, which are in short supply in contemporary liberal societies that are focused on "freedom" but ignore that freedom and responsibility go hand in hand.
Bond Economics
New Information Trickling In Slowly
Brian Romanchuk