4 ms·
Controlled burns are part of modern forestry, for exactly the reasons you describe. As recent years show, the central banks are willing to cause ecenomic downt
by gizmo686 4y ago
Controlled burns are part of modern forestry, for exactly the reasons you describe.
As recent years show, the central banks are willing to cause ecenomic downturns to promote long term health. See most central banks increasing rates in response to inflation. It is worth noting that, in (oversimplified) MMT, inflation is the downside of over supporting the economy, and the signal to pull back. This past cycle has been weird because inflation has stayed stubbornly low despite massive ammounts of fiscal stimulus, which was then taken as a sign that it was not yet time for a controlled burn.
There us definantly a problem here, but it is a more subtle issue of ouf understanding the economy. Even that flawed understanding knows the importance of the business cycle.
- revolvingocelot 4y agoWell, no. Controlled burns were suppressed for decades on end [0]. It's one of the reasons for the absolutely unforgettable fires (cf. "gigafire"[1]) various places on Earth have been experiencing for the past few years straight. "Modern forestry" is getting its act together, slowly, but I don't think it's particularly controversial to suggest that the historical prevent-fires-at-all-costs thing is because of a reflexive, unexamined "fire bad" -- nor to notice that the historical thing was prevent-fires-at-all-costs. Maybe I'm an economic illiterate, but I think saying that "most central banks [have been] increasing rates in response to inflation" is something similar. It seems to me that, if the actual intent was to combat inflation, the rates' rise would have to be a little more aggressive than it's been. If one understands "modern forestry" to have been mostly about a reflexive, individualistic "fire bad", then the seemingly-irrational departure from the thoughtful Native controlled-burn-style management makes sense. If one understands "MMT", or maybe just "neoliberalism", as a fig-leaf to cover whatever economic activity and behaviour and model-making is most profitable to the players of the modern Great Game, then the ways and means of "governmental" "macroeconomic" activity make sense, too. Put another way, from the perspective of an adherent of steady-state economics, the "business cycle" looks like the wobble of a wheel spinning out of true. What is a wheel for? [0] https://www.propublica.org/article/they-know-how-to-prevent-megafires-why-wont-anybody-listen https://www.propublica.org/article/they-know-how-to-prevent-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Complex_fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Complex_fire