The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Category: Class Warfare Page 13 of 36

Economic Consequences of the Pandemic

Or, I should say, rather, of the Fed and Congress’s actions.

The Federal Reserve has spent one trillion a day for 30 days (when this is over, they’ll have spent more) to prop up markets and financial firms. They’re buying debt, and making non-recourse loans (non-recourse means there is no penalty for not paying the loan back).

Congress’s deal, includes $350 billion for small businesses, and $1,200 for individuals, +$500 per child, and some excellent provisions for laid off workers–but this is a one time payment, and if things go on, how many more be passed when business has their bailout? It also has some fairly stringent restrictions on stock buybacks and executive compensation.

But most of the bailing out, in this crisis (as in 2008), will be done through the Federal Reserve, whose operations dwarf those of Congress and the Treasury department.

Assuming this crisis goes on for months, in waves, which is what the science seems to say, predicting the end result is simple: A lot of small businesses will go out of business. A lot of people will lose their homes, and a lot of small landlords (not large ones) will lose their property.

Companies which are bailed out, and companies and individuals with strong cash positions going in, like private equity, will then do what they did after 2008: They’ll buy up distressed assets for dimes on the dollar and wind up owning more of the economy than they did going in. Industries will consolidate, as smaller firms go under, and the remaining companies will be even too-bigger-to-fail.

Must it be this way? No. Will it be this way? Assuming the policies continue as they are, yup. But there’s a lot of road to go, and when people start dying in droves the calculus may change if the politics change. In particular, if people truly can’t afford to eat or pay rent, in large numbers, things may get nasty. It’ll be interesting to see just how whipped Americans are: Are there circumstances under which they’ll actually revolt in a way that hurts elites?

A lot of this depends on how the pandemic plays out. If Trump and idiot governors can be convinced to stick out isolation, probably they’ll be able to slide by. If not, things will get ugly.

Much will also depend on whether Republicans want more bailouts through fiscal policy for corporations. If they don’t, they will resist sufficient money for ordinary people, which will make things worse (and cause people to break isolation).

It’s going to be an interesting few months.

But basically, nothing has changed in ruling lass ideology: Every crisis is to be used to increase the share of the economy, national wealth, and the income that the rich control.

So for this crisis is no exception.

(Update: Matt Stoller reports there’s trillions more dollars of giveaways:

So that’s the stuff that’s been reported. Here’s what hasn’t, and why the bill goes up in value to $6-10 trillion.

  • An additional $4 trillion from the Federal Reserve in lending power to be lent to big corporations and banks.
  • Authorization to bail out money market funds, multi-trillion dollar unregulated bank-like deposits for the superrich.
  • Authorization for the the government through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to guarantee trillions of dollars of risky bank debt.)

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

 

How to Save the Economy and Not Kill Millions

So, Trump and others, including New York Governor Cuomo and Thomas Friedman (possibly the most overrated public intellectual alive today), are musing about restarting the economy to “save” it.

The Lieutenant Governor of Texas put this more clearly, if inaccurately:

“No one reached out to me and said, ‘as a senior citizen, are you willing to take a chance on your survival in exchange for keeping the America that all America loves for your children and grandchildren?’” Patrick said. “And if that’s the exchange, I’m all in.”

First, people younger than 60 or so do die from the Coronavirus, especially if they have any health problems. Viral load also matters: The more of the virus you have the more likely you are to die, and this can kill people even in their twenties. The morbidity charts we have are based on China, where after some initial fumbling, they went hard into isolation.

If you send people back to work too soon in the US you will kill millions, and they will not all be old, not that Americans are necessarily willing to kill their parents and grandparents.

Second, as I noted yesterday, this misunderstands the economy.

The economy is the people in the economy, not the numbers in ledgers. It is people who make and consume every single service and product. Capital goods and real-estate are not killed by the coronavirus.

If you want to protect the economy what you do is protect the people. If the people are still there at the end of the pandemic you can have the economy back, if they aren’t, to that extent, you lose the parts of the economy which relied upon them as consumers and producers.

The ledger numbers are easy to manage. You simply freeze all normal payments: mortgages, loans, rent, interest, etc., until the end of the crisis. Give a UBI to people sufficient for them to pay non-payment expenses. The Federal Reserve or other central banks can keep other markets going as necessary, and a few targeted bailouts can be offered.

I want to talk a bit more about what is actually happening to the economy, and what it is going to mean in the future, but I’ll leave that for a later article, perhaps tomorrow.

For now: People, land, and capital goods (what we use to produce goods and services) ARE the economy. The coronavirus will not kill capital goods or land (mortages, leases, rent) unless we decide to let the ledgers run when we don’t have to. It will, however, kill people if we send them back to work in a misguided attempt to “save” an economy which will actually be killed by people dying.

This sort of category confusion is constant: Money is a fiction. We made it up. It’s a convenient fantasy used to keep track of the economic “game.” We can change how we use money any time we want to, in any way we want, for as long as we want. (Yeah, there are some consequences to the changes, but the fundamental precept remains true.)

Right now we should be halting a large chunk of the money game, then giving people the money they need so they can isolate and not get dead.

Money exists only to serve the needs and promote the welfare of humans. We already die for it far more than necessary, but sacrificing ourselves to a pandemic to “preserve” it is insanity. Money is a fiction, humans are real. Save the humans.

(I know this is in part a repeat of yesterday’s post and I apologize, but as this “save the economy by killing millions” idea gets traction I felt the fact it’s stupid and does the exact of opposite needs re-emphasis.)


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Lessons of the Virus: Who Creates Value and What the Good Life Is

So, we’re going into a recession, and will likely soon be in a depression. Why? Because the workers have to stay home. It seems that the workers, do, after all, create the value.

Marx giggles in his grave.

We notice also who actually matters, who is actually necessary in society. The people who grow food. The people who take care of sick people. The people who make medicine. The people who distribute food and goods. The grocery and drug store workers. The garbage men. The people who work in sewage, water, power, and keeping the telecom backbone up.

Everyone else? Might be nice to have, but they aren’t necessary, and that includes most of the bosses. Some coordination is needed, yes, but it’s not as rare a skill as bosses like to pretend.

Meanwhile, we have makers making ventilator valves, as firms threaten to sue them stop them. It turns out that a valve which can be made for $1, normally costs $11,000.

There’s your capitalism, children: Ghouls who vastly overprice goods so they can get rich off of other people’s death and suffering.

Nations are scrambling to give workers forced to stay home money, because if they don’t, the economy will slide off a cliff. It turns out, as we should have learned in the Depression (and did, but forgot) that it is people who buy things; the demand, that matters if you want a great economy.

Over in China, it has been calculated that seventy-seven thousand lives were saved by the decrease in pollution caused by all the factories shutting and taking the cars off the road. Coronavirus may have saved more lives than it killed.

Now, some of what those factories produce we need (ventilators, for one, but remember the price markups), but a lot of it we don’t. We could work half as much, not have stuff we don’t need, and spend time with our friends and families. Maybe even see our kids. Wouldn’t have to have school babysit them for most of the day, because parents are away.

Just do less, divide the money more equally, and do without shit we don’t actually need.

We’d be healthier, guaranteed, as the pollution dies down and stress drops through the floor. We’d be happier, and in their spare time a lot of people would make the cool stuff they always wanted to make, but couldn’t, because they were doing corporate drone jobs.

Coronavirus is going to suck more than anything most people still alive in the West can remember (though older gays will understand.) But there’s a lesson here, if we’re willing to take it.

This is going to be a hard lesson to take, because central banks and politicians are moving to bail out the rich (they did so first, and are still doing so), and so they will retain their money and power and try to use it to buy up assets on the cheap after smaller business go bankrupt, but focus on the problem. Everything the rich have they have not because they “earned it” or because they actually create more value than a janitor or nurse, but because the laws are written to allow and the politicians and central banks funnel them endless money, while picking them up every time they fall, wiping the boo-boos off and giving them trillions of dollars.

It’s all politics, in the end. It’s all power.

Now the politicians they own, in their incompetent handling of the coronavirus, are going to be responsible for the death of millions.

These are unnecessary deaths. Countries which acted promptly and competently did not and are not seeing large numbers of deaths.

This means the politicians are guilty, at best, of negligent homicide. Death from incompetence, by corrupt, venal politicians owned by billionaires and mega-corps.

A better way is possible. But not if these people stay in power. They must be removed.

If we don’t remove these politicians and business leaders more of us will die. Many, many more.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

The Justification for Great Wealth

Great wealth is great power. If you have money, many people will do what you want them to do. This should be uncontroversial: Most of us have spent our lives doing tasks we wouldn’t do unless someone was giving us money.

Well, that and being scared of losing everything and dying on the street.

Great wealth is a matter of law. Property rights beyond, “What I can carry” are not natural. They require force and a series of professional classes–from accountants to cops–to maintain. Property rights, then, are actually a drag on the economy; they come with a cost. They doubtless have some benefits, but whatever those may be, they are not pure benefit. Whether any particular set of property rights is a net benefit is unclear; it might be the economy would do better with less.

Property rights are justified because they are supposed to lead to better outcomes. So are wealth and income differentials. If someone is earning more, they supposedly do more good in the economy.

The Wall Street bankers who crashed the world economy say “Hi!” and remind you that if they don’t get bonuses bigger than the rest of the country’s raises, they may not keep working.

So, let’s simplify this.

If you have a lot of money, say $64 billion, the question is “Are you doing more good with that money than would be done by simply splitting it up and giving it to everyone else in society.”

Or, better yet, what if you took that income and equalized it among all citizens?

Seems like the cost of having an overclass is rather high, isn’t it? Are they producing enough human welfare (any net human welfare?) to justify all that income they are taking?

When, of course, they actually crashed the economy in 2008 and when economic performance has been inversely proportionate to the amount we’ve taxed them?

Anyway, is having this elite worth $50K a year to you?

Hope you’re getting your money’s worth.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

There Are No Good Billionaires (Bill Gates Edition)

So, Elizabeth Warren has a two percent wealth tax plan with three percent on people with more than a billion dollars. She’s suggested raising the over a billion percentage to six percent… And Bill Gates says….

I’m all for super-progressive tax systems,” he said. “I’ve paid over $10 billion in taxes. I’ve paid more than anyone in taxes. If I had to pay $20 billion, it’s fine.

“But when you say I should pay $100 billion, then I’m starting to do a little math about what I have left over,” he added. “You really want the incentive system to be there without threatening that.”

Mr. Gates is the second-richest person in the world, according to Forbes magazine, with a net worth of $106.2bn.

Well, of course, she didn’t say that, she said six percent. A little over six billion in the first year. Bill’s 64, and of course, the actual nominal amount will decrease each year unless he can grow his money faster than six percent, in which case, what’s the problem?

Elizabeth Warren

He’ll never, ever be anything less than a multi-billionaire, in other words. His bullshit about 100 billion is just that, fear-mongering bullshit.

And if he’s paid ten billion on 106 billion, well his tax rate was about ten percent. Most middle class families would love to have that low a tax rate. (Yes, I know it’s on income, not wealth, but the point is he obviously paid very low income taxes. Which, actually, is what the data shows–the middle and working classes pay a higher percentage than the rich.)

Bill, of course, is the “good” billionaire.” But he’s the guy who gave straight-up fascist Modi a reward. He’s the guy who spent millions to change the educational system in the US, then admitted that the model he successfully pushed doesn’t actually work. He’s the guy who used brutal, monopolistic practices to build Microsoft.

And he doesn’t want to pay a six percent wealth tax that will be used to provide universal healthcare.

Billionaires are bad, and, as an even more radical and willing-to-take-on-billionaires candidate, Bernie Sanders, said, they shouldn’t even exist.

As for Billy, he thinks he deserves to be one of the richest people in the world because he created the Wintel monopoly and crushed rivals with practices which were, under black-letter law, illegal.

But one can understand why he might prefer a Republican president. After all, it was George Bush, Jr. who withdrew the anti-trust suit which would have broken up Microsoft and left Bill worth a lot less than a 106 billion dollars.

Trump, of course, massively dropped tax rates on the rich.

Money comes first, ethics come second. Bill’s always understood that.

Republicans have been pretty good to Bill. Performative wokeism and his good image aren’t worth a six percent wealth tax. As for people without healthcare, welll, better they die than he pay taxes which would leave him a multi-billionaire for the rest of his life.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Is California a Third World State?

So, there are fires again in California and it turns out the largest fire was caused by a downed PG&E power wire–despite the fact that PG&E cut power from vast swathes of the state to try and make sure that didn’t happen.

What’s hilarious about this is that PG&E has, ummm, a record:

As early as 1990, years before worsening drought and higher temperatures began pushing wildfire season into apocalyptic overdrive, PG&E was facing criminal charges for failing to trim the trees growing alongside its power lines as required by state law. In 1997, the utility was convicted of no fewer than 739 counts of criminal negligence for a fire that burned 500 acres and leveled 12 homes in the High Sierra town of Rough and Ready. State regulators later charged PG&E with more than 500,000instances, between 1994 and 1998, of failing to trim trees near their electric lines. (my emphasis)

This is mind-boggling. The sheer fucking incompetence, venality, and stupidity of both the government and PG&E. Half a million times they were fined, so obviously the fines weren’t working; PG& simply viewed them as part of the cost of doing business. This was going on in the 90s and the government DID NOTHING.

You have two acceptable choices in this case: You either nationalize the utility, or you change the law from requiring the imposition of fines to require criminal sentences for executives and board members (and probably anyone earning more than X dollars, so they don’t try and silo people from criminal penalties).

As with bankers, where the fines for widespread fraud (including stealing people’s houses by falsely signing documents), were far less than the gain, PG&E had no reason to stop.

This was especially exacerbated by an ideological choice: The decision that the only responsibility corporations had was to their shareholders, and not to anyone else. (This choice also wound up enriching executives far more than shareholders.)

Corporations are bundles of vastly valuable rights, the most important of which is that shareholders and executives are largely insulated from both bankruptcy and the law. In every case, it should be necessary for a corporation to make clear what the public gets in return for granting these rights.

But in the case of PG&E, only a moron would think that the proper solution is anything other than nationalization. Utilities are, in fact, natural monopolies.

But more to the point, they are critical infrastructure. How can California, the home of Silicon Valley, be so fucking incompetent as to have power outs because they aren’t doing basic maintenance? This is third world shit. This is Nigeria. This is pathetic.

In any actually functional society, this shit would get sorted out ASAP and heads would roll, metaphorically or literally.

Instead, we have California governor Gavin Newsom whining about how he’d like Warren Buffet to buy PG&E. Pathetic doesn’t cut it. He’s the governor of a state with an economy larger than most countries. Take it over and sort it out.

Frankly, this is the sort of incompetence that ought to have him thrown out of office, if he isn’t lynched–along with PG&E’s executives. But Americans have become the sort of people who just take abuse by their “betters” lying down, so I’m sure everyone involved will stay rich and important and live in a house with backup generators.

Pathetic.

(Note that this is categorized under “class warfare.” And yes, I know some rich people are getting hit too. Maybe they should realize they aren’t /that/ rich.)


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Modern Meritocracy Isn’t Worth Having

Meritocracy is the simple argument that the best person for the job should do it and that our system tends to put the best person for a job in the position.

Some jobs are more important than others, and should be paid more as a result, both to get the best person to do it, and because the best person will contribute more.

The problem with these arguments is simple: It ain’t so.

The best paid people in our economy, generally speaking, are those in the financial industry: bankers, shadow bankers, brokers and so on.

They caused a world economic crisis with their venal and idiotic behaviour in the 2000s. They currently can’t find enough good things to do with all the money they control, so interest rates are moving negative.

They are manifestly incompetent at their jobs–if the job is to do anything but enrich themselves. They cannot be the best people for the job, because they would all be out of the job if governments hadn’t bailed them out, and indeed most of them would probably be in jail if the law had been enforced.

They are paid better than those who managed the financial industry in the 40s, 50s, and 60s, who manifestly created a better economy, including higher growth rates.

Paying them more, then, has been correlated with them doing a worse job at everything except making themselves richer, and they only even managed that by corrupting the government to bail them out of their mistakes, and with endless government support, with Greenspan, Bernanke, Yellen, and so on endlessly doing whatever was necessary to keep financial markets growing in size. (The Greenspan Put.)

Studies, meanwhile, have found that the higher a CEO’s pay, the worse their company performs.

It seems that perhaps the best paid people in the world aren’t the most meritorious, except by the rules of jungle. If one wants to argue that you “eat what you kill” as Wall Street does, then all merit constitutes is the ability get a lot of money.

Merit = money is the actually state of meritocracy in the world today. Oh, there are exceptions, you can say “surgeons” or something, but they aren’t the best paid people in the world, are they?

Meanwhile, as I like to point out, if the janitor doesn’t show up, people get really, really upset, while if the CEO takes a week off most people won’t notice or care.

Seems people really, really don’t like cleaning toilets, but doing so is really, really important, and we don’t pay, errr, shit for doing it.

But, you cry, “Ian, any idiot can clean a toilet.”

Well, I’m not so sure about that, but what is true is that most janitors are competent at their jobs and most banking executives are good only at making themselves rich. They are net drain on society, massively, while janitors provide real value and are able to do their jobs.

Teachers, nurses, garbage men, civil engineers, construction workers, etc, etc., all do things that matter. When they don’t do them or do them badly, we’re fucked.

Bankers do something that matters, too. The problem is that we clearly pick completely incompetent or corrupt bozos to do the job, who then pretend they are the best of the best, destroy the economy and the environment, and reward themselves with money that would make 19th century robber barons blush.

Meritocracy is a wonderful idea. We all want the best person for each job to be doing the job, or at least, someone who is competent at the job doing the job.

But that’s not what we have. What we have is a Kakistocracy: A society run by the worst, most corrupt people. Bush, Obama, and Trump weren’t the best at running society, they were just the people best at getting into office. The people running Wall Street aren’t the best at allocating money for social benefit, or even for creating the largest actual economy, they’re just the people who fought their way to top and then appropriated the largest share of money for themselves while shattering the world economy.

They are the best only at seizing positions of power, which give them access to money. That is all.

If meritocracy is just, “The more money you have, the more you deserve to have more money,” which it is at the moment, it’s nothing worth having.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

The Cruelty and Stupidity of Trumpian Homelessness Rhetoric

From a study by his officials:

In the report, “The State of Homelessness in America,” even shelters get some of the blame for increasing the number of people who are homeless. The argument: Some people would be able to find their own housing if they were turned away from shelters.

“While shelters play an extremely important role in bringing some people off the streets, it also brings in people who would otherwise be housed, thus increasing total homelessness,” the report states.

So tiresomely stupid. Shelters are shitholes, and unsafe, and most people hate them. Many homeless people refuse to sleep in them, and even die of exposure. They are simply too dangerous.

Or:

homelessness could be dramatically reduced by slashing restrictions on housing construction and being less tolerant of people sleeping on the streets.

In which case, more condos which poor people couldn’t afford would be built. Developers don’t want to build for poor people in “world cities,” it’s just that simple. It’s a market failure, and there are solutions; simply slashing regulations won’t do it as the current market preference is for expensive homes and apartments.

As for being less tolerant of people sleeping on the street: What? These fucktards think more than a tiny minority of the homeless want to sleep on the street? It’s a positive choice they make?

The sheer stupidity and blind ideological thinking is tiresome.

As study after study has shown there are two ways to get the homeless housed: Give them money or give them homes. For those with the most mental and physical problems, some social assistance is also needed. But if you want people housed, house them.

That requires housing which they can afford (or the government can afford) to pay for for them. That doesn’t mean luxury condos.

This isn’t rocket science. It’s been studied repeatedly. We know what works. The question, as always, is whether we care enough to bother.

I mean, rich people need more tax cuts and subsidies. You can have that or take care of poor people.

That’s the choice, and Trump is on the wrong side of it.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

 

 

 

Page 13 of 36

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén