5 ms·

> This will be blamed on COVID-19 Good. Because I don't buy for a moment that without COVID-19 the situation would be what it is now. Hindsight is 2020 and pre

> This will be blamed on COVID-19 Good. Because I don't buy for a moment that without COVID-19 the situation would be what it is now. Hindsight is 2020 and predictions of doom and stock market collapse is a dime a dozen.

76543210 7y ago
In 2013 I wouldn't be predicting a recession. In 2017 after Trump announced tariffs and it was ~10 years since the last recession. I was concerned. Maybe stock prices were fine, but multiple companies I've worked for became unprofitable and got rid of tens of thousands of contractors. Recession? Definitions are toxic to the real problem.
- ailideex 7y ago
  > Recession? Definitions are toxic to the real problem. Okay, then lets not use them. Is what we are seeing now primarily a consequence of of COVID-19 or not?
  - paulmd 7y ago
    > Is what we are seeing now primarily a consequence of of COVID-19 or not? "is the 2008 crisis primarily a consequence of mortgages or not?" In the grand scheme of things, no, it's a consequence of a bubbled economy that has been goosed with tax cuts, extremely low interest rates, and deregulation for too long and is overdue for a correction. The proximate cause is Covid but it just was the spark that lit the fire, there was lots of fuel building up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency This is why you don't cut tax rates and keep interest rates super low when the economy is already roaring. Now we're out of options for dealing with a real financial crisis. Trump of course understands none of this since he's a narcissistic con man who just understands "tax cuts = economy more better!". Insofar as he can be said to understand anything - he's not a man that can be described as intellectually curious.
    - magduf 7y ago
      >Insofar as he can be said to understand anything Well, while he doesn't seem to have much understanding of economics or how to run a government properly, let's give credit where credit is due: he certainly seemed to understand how to get people to vote for him a lot better than his political competitors did.
      - mnm1 7y ago
        That's why he got less votes than his opponent.
        magduf 7y ago
        Are you seriously bringing that up again? He won the election. The number of votes is irrelevant. Maybe that's why he won: he actually understands this simple fact about how the Constitution works, and people like you either don't, or simply refuse to.
        mnm1 7y ago
        > he certainly seemed to understand how to get people to vote for him a lot better than his political competitors did This is false. The fact that he won the election is completely irrelevant to this point. The election isn't won by the candidate who understands how to get people to vote for him. If it was, he'd have lost.
        magduf 7y ago
        Obviously, you are completely unwilling to accept the fact that Trump won the election, and somehow you're creating utterly insane logic to continue the fantasy in your head.
        mnm1 7y ago
        So you're saying that getting less votes in an election makes one better at getting the most votes? Fascinating the logic, or rather lack thereof, of Trump supporters. Then instead of admitting you are wrong, you double down on your illogical premise and accuse those who point it out of being illogical. I can see why you like the man so much. Illogical, nonsensical ideas must attract each other especially when coupled with fear of criticism and anger towards those that disagree with said ideas.
state_less 7y ago
Agreed, let's not discount COVID-19. You're going to get a steady drip of ugly news for months. There is reality to the COVID-19 news too. I'm expecting heavy hits to airlines, cruises, theme parks, sporting events, etc... Profits will decline. If you're not needing the money soon, you'll probably be fine with riding it out like you may have with the great recession. I'm pained by the stories of boomers and others who sold low during the great recession and didn't catch any of the gains when things started turning back around. This too shall pass.
westpfelia 7y ago
I mean personally I think the whole opec thing has a little bit more weight behind it then corona.
- jsight 7y ago
  Maybe, but it seems to me that increased production and lower oil prices are likely to create as many winners as losers.
  - westpfelia 7y ago
    Well... that might not be true. Were in a weird spot right now where banks handed out billions in loans to oil companies. And now it looks like a lot of these companies are going to be insolvent well before they can even start drilling. So were talking about big banks being hit hard with billions in loans not being paid.
    - dd36 7y ago
      They usually hedge out 18 months. It would take a sustained assault by SA and I really doubt they will have that much resolve.
- saati 7y ago
  The "OPEC thing" is a response to dwindling chinese demand, because of SARS-CoV-2.
hi5eyes 7y ago
markets knew about covid for a month before it started tanking
- Johnny555 7y ago
  They didn't (and still don't) know the true financial impact of the virus (even epidemiologists don't know what it's going to take to get it under control), so the true effect of the virus wasn't priced into the market, plus now many investors are trading on fear.
- ailideex 7y ago
  I also knew about it a month ago, I was more optimistic then. If no new information ever comes into play or if views and outlooks never changes then markets would be static. People knew about viruses for decades now also ... does not mean all possible consequences of viruses are already priced in.
- theseadroid 7y ago
  markets started to know the scale of U.S. government's incompetence in handling Covid 19 now.
- rchaud 7y ago
  The markets may have "priced in" the impact of COVID-19 based on a couple of scenarios. But they may also have priced in other factors, such as the plateauing impact of US corp tax cuts, share buybacks and cheap capital. It's likely however that those scenarios didn't attach a high weight to the probability like 20 million Italians living in a state of quarantine, or that 8,000 plus patients in China would die and industrial production levels would plummet.
- SilasX 7y ago
  There were lay investors that reported betting on a covid related drop and profiting significantly by buying options (eg Wei Dai on LessWrong, will find direct link when I get to desktop). [Usual caveat about reading too much into plays like this.] Edit: Here's the thread, and sincere apologies for the flaketastic LW interface now, they don't even have a parent button and it took several seconds for the thread to render after the page loaded: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jAixPHwn5bmSLXiMZ/open-and-welcome-thread-february-2020?commentId=v3QLBFYAnAv4KM9PM#wAHCXmnywzfhoQT9c https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jAixPHwn5bmSLXiMZ/open-and-w...
fredgrott 7y ago
no no,,, COVID-19 is not the trigger its just one of the steps leading to the trigger...you had to have the fed manipulation of money to account for the 2008 losses on mortgages combined with the firm's stock performance via profits etc.

76543210 7y ago

In 2013 I wouldn't be predicting a recession. In 2017 after Trump announced tariffs and it was ~10 years since the last recession. I was concerned. Maybe stock prices were fine, but multiple companies I've worked for became unprofitable and got rid of tens of thousands of contractors. Recession? Definitions are toxic to the real problem.

ailideex 7y ago
> Recession? Definitions are toxic to the real problem. Okay, then lets not use them. Is what we are seeing now primarily a consequence of of COVID-19 or not?
- paulmd 7y ago
  > Is what we are seeing now primarily a consequence of of COVID-19 or not? "is the 2008 crisis primarily a consequence of mortgages or not?" In the grand scheme of things, no, it's a consequence of a bubbled economy that has been goosed with tax cuts, extremely low interest rates, and deregulation for too long and is overdue for a correction. The proximate cause is Covid but it just was the spark that lit the fire, there was lots of fuel building up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency This is why you don't cut tax rates and keep interest rates super low when the economy is already roaring. Now we're out of options for dealing with a real financial crisis. Trump of course understands none of this since he's a narcissistic con man who just understands "tax cuts = economy more better!". Insofar as he can be said to understand anything - he's not a man that can be described as intellectually curious.
  - magduf 7y ago
    >Insofar as he can be said to understand anything Well, while he doesn't seem to have much understanding of economics or how to run a government properly, let's give credit where credit is due: he certainly seemed to understand how to get people to vote for him a lot better than his political competitors did.
    - mnm1 7y ago
      That's why he got less votes than his opponent.
      - magduf 7y ago
        Are you seriously bringing that up again? He won the election. The number of votes is irrelevant. Maybe that's why he won: he actually understands this simple fact about how the Constitution works, and people like you either don't, or simply refuse to.
        mnm1 7y ago
        > he certainly seemed to understand how to get people to vote for him a lot better than his political competitors did This is false. The fact that he won the election is completely irrelevant to this point. The election isn't won by the candidate who understands how to get people to vote for him. If it was, he'd have lost.
        magduf 7y ago
        Obviously, you are completely unwilling to accept the fact that Trump won the election, and somehow you're creating utterly insane logic to continue the fantasy in your head.
        mnm1 7y ago
        So you're saying that getting less votes in an election makes one better at getting the most votes? Fascinating the logic, or rather lack thereof, of Trump supporters. Then instead of admitting you are wrong, you double down on your illogical premise and accuse those who point it out of being illogical. I can see why you like the man so much. Illogical, nonsensical ideas must attract each other especially when coupled with fear of criticism and anger towards those that disagree with said ideas.

state_less 7y ago

Agreed, let's not discount COVID-19. You're going to get a steady drip of ugly news for months. There is reality to the COVID-19 news too. I'm expecting heavy hits to airlines, cruises, theme parks, sporting events, etc... Profits will decline. If you're not needing the money soon, you'll probably be fine with riding it out like you may have with the great recession. I'm pained by the stories of boomers and others who sold low during the great recession and didn't catch any of the gains when things started turning back around. This too shall pass.

westpfelia 7y ago

I mean personally I think the whole opec thing has a little bit more weight behind it then corona.

jsight 7y ago
Maybe, but it seems to me that increased production and lower oil prices are likely to create as many winners as losers.
- westpfelia 7y ago
  Well... that might not be true. Were in a weird spot right now where banks handed out billions in loans to oil companies. And now it looks like a lot of these companies are going to be insolvent well before they can even start drilling. So were talking about big banks being hit hard with billions in loans not being paid.
  - dd36 7y ago
    They usually hedge out 18 months. It would take a sustained assault by SA and I really doubt they will have that much resolve.
saati 7y ago
The "OPEC thing" is a response to dwindling chinese demand, because of SARS-CoV-2.

hi5eyes 7y ago

markets knew about covid for a month before it started tanking

Johnny555 7y ago
They didn't (and still don't) know the true financial impact of the virus (even epidemiologists don't know what it's going to take to get it under control), so the true effect of the virus wasn't priced into the market, plus now many investors are trading on fear.
ailideex 7y ago
I also knew about it a month ago, I was more optimistic then. If no new information ever comes into play or if views and outlooks never changes then markets would be static. People knew about viruses for decades now also ... does not mean all possible consequences of viruses are already priced in.
theseadroid 7y ago
markets started to know the scale of U.S. government's incompetence in handling Covid 19 now.
rchaud 7y ago
The markets may have "priced in" the impact of COVID-19 based on a couple of scenarios. But they may also have priced in other factors, such as the plateauing impact of US corp tax cuts, share buybacks and cheap capital. It's likely however that those scenarios didn't attach a high weight to the probability like 20 million Italians living in a state of quarantine, or that 8,000 plus patients in China would die and industrial production levels would plummet.
SilasX 7y ago
There were lay investors that reported betting on a covid related drop and profiting significantly by buying options (eg Wei Dai on LessWrong, will find direct link when I get to desktop). [Usual caveat about reading too much into plays like this.] Edit: Here's the thread, and sincere apologies for the flaketastic LW interface now, they don't even have a parent button and it took several seconds for the thread to render after the page loaded: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jAixPHwn5bmSLXiMZ/open-and-welcome-thread-february-2020?commentId=v3QLBFYAnAv4KM9PM#wAHCXmnywzfhoQT9c https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jAixPHwn5bmSLXiMZ/open-and-w...

fredgrott 7y ago

no no,,, COVID-19 is not the trigger its just one of the steps leading to the trigger...you had to have the fed manipulation of money to account for the 2008 losses on mortgages combined with the firm's stock performance via profits etc.