4 ms·

if you're really bad at math, then yes, it can be those things.

thehappypm 4y ago
No, it’s not global lockdowns or millions of deaths or a war or sanctions on a major world energy producer. It’s interest rates going back to a level not seen since (gasp) the 2000s!
FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
If you're going to sling insults, you should explain what you actually mean. Here I assume "bad at math" means "does not accept an explanation that focuses on the size of the M2 money supply", or something. But is the original post really so wrong-headed? China is engaged in fairly destructive lockdowns, no? (If this is because they don't have a good vaccine, and this hurts the US economy, should the US simply supply them with MRNA vaccines? Or is some zero-sum game with China more important? Or will China not buy them?) Gas to Europe is definitely restricted. This definitely hurts European industry, particularly in Germany. This in turn could be expected to lead to shortages of whatever those industries make. More importantly, gas is made into fertilizer, so we can reasonably expect agricultural yields to drop, and/or for food to be more expensive. These are all the kinds of supply-side issues that OP seems to be talking about. These points don't seem dumb to me. Why are they? Is it just because he led with a complaint about lockdowns, which used to code affiliation with the political Right? I think we're past that now, since western countries no longer do lockdowns. Now it should refer more to China and to supply-side issues. And, a focus on supply-side issues is now more Leftish, in fact. So political tribalism isn't a very good guide here. Me, I happen to think that the supply side issues have a lot of weight to them. That is all, admittedly, based more on narrative than on numbers, though. So what "math", if any, does this leave out? If something is missing, I actually want to know.
- nyokodo 4y ago
  > China…should the US simply supply them with MRNA vaccines? They would have to ask for them and they’re not going to ask. They’ve spent years spreading propaganda that states the mRNA vaccines change your DNA, don’t work, that their domestic vaccines work amazingly, etc. It’s difficult to turn around from that and order a few billion doses.
- aksss 4y ago
  — past that now because in hindsight the criticisms were… right. Largely fair and too-often blindly dismissed. Lockdowns had a devastating impact relative to the benefit, and we’re still suffering the effects. Motivated by fear, often accelerated by the power-mad. I think it’s lunacy to look back on that mess and imagine the strategy worth repeating. Let’s not gloss over this just because it’s “in the past”. Coded affiliation with the right is not a rational defense against skepticism of government policy. It’s a rhetorical defense aided by very loud bullhorns and media budgets, but hardly a rational one.

No, it’s not global lockdowns or millions of deaths or a war or sanctions on a major world energy producer. It’s interest rates going back to a level not seen since (gasp) the 2000s!

FooBarBizBazz 4y ago

If you're going to sling insults, you should explain what you actually mean. Here I assume "bad at math" means "does not accept an explanation that focuses on the size of the M2 money supply", or something. But is the original post really so wrong-headed? China is engaged in fairly destructive lockdowns, no? (If this is because they don't have a good vaccine, and this hurts the US economy, should the US simply supply them with MRNA vaccines? Or is some zero-sum game with China more important? Or will China not buy them?) Gas to Europe is definitely restricted. This definitely hurts European industry, particularly in Germany. This in turn could be expected to lead to shortages of whatever those industries make. More importantly, gas is made into fertilizer, so we can reasonably expect agricultural yields to drop, and/or for food to be more expensive. These are all the kinds of supply-side issues that OP seems to be talking about. These points don't seem dumb to me. Why are they? Is it just because he led with a complaint about lockdowns, which used to code affiliation with the political Right? I think we're past that now, since western countries no longer do lockdowns. Now it should refer more to China and to supply-side issues. And, a focus on supply-side issues is now more Leftish, in fact. So political tribalism isn't a very good guide here. Me, I happen to think that the supply side issues have a lot of weight to them. That is all, admittedly, based more on narrative than on numbers, though. So what "math", if any, does this leave out? If something is missing, I actually want to know.

nyokodo 4y ago
> China…should the US simply supply them with MRNA vaccines? They would have to ask for them and they’re not going to ask. They’ve spent years spreading propaganda that states the mRNA vaccines change your DNA, don’t work, that their domestic vaccines work amazingly, etc. It’s difficult to turn around from that and order a few billion doses.
aksss 4y ago
— past that now because in hindsight the criticisms were… right. Largely fair and too-often blindly dismissed. Lockdowns had a devastating impact relative to the benefit, and we’re still suffering the effects. Motivated by fear, often accelerated by the power-mad. I think it’s lunacy to look back on that mess and imagine the strategy worth repeating. Let’s not gloss over this just because it’s “in the past”. Coded affiliation with the right is not a rational defense against skepticism of government policy. It’s a rhetorical defense aided by very loud bullhorns and media budgets, but hardly a rational one.