kurtster wrote:
 

at less than 1%...but it will be ok, the fed will step in and buy all you can print.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
The US Treasury is set to borrow about $3 trillion dollars between now and July.

We'll have to see how much China, and anyone else for that matter, is willing to pony up towards that.

black321 wrote:

In the past we were able to borrow the money we squandered, then borrow more to pay it back. Mostly from China.

But China's got problems of its own right now. Uncle Sugar is on his own.

 westslope wrote:
 

for what it's worth, my sociology prof argued the reverse. Get people into a secure economic situation and they will limit their reproduction. I think you need access to birth control, abortion, health care, and aged care along with economic security. If the one child program was an aspirational policy, not a rule, it would be ok.

Overall, I believe there is less misrepresentation of the crisis in China than there is in the USA.

 black321 wrote:
 

The one-child program was indeed draconian but it helped bring millions of Chinese out of poverty.  

Throughout the developing world including Mexico and the Central American republics, any countries and entire regions are in the midst of a Neo-Malthusian crisis where fast demographic rates have contributed to a situation where folks have eaten themselves out of house and home.    That explains in part the violence, the lack of development and the migration north.  

Perhaps El Salvador could benefit from a one-child policy?  

 black321 wrote:
 
yeah, I know. we just disagree on this one

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
 
Yeah, that's my worry because my investments are heavily skewed towards my mattress. We can only hope that the central banks have learned from the past. Oh yeah, the US republicans want to do away with the fed...

I find  encouraging

 black321 wrote:
 
As much as you might hate it, they are helping, and the Trump Regime recognizes it...

Pompeo also announced Tuesday that the U.S. is committing an additional $225 million to overseas aid for countries affected by the virus, but that the assistance would not include personal protective equipment (PPE) because the U.S. itself is short on such critical medical gear.

The new funds come on top of an earlier $274 million committed by the U.S. for overseas aid due to the virus. The announcement also comes as China has touted its own international giving in response to the pandemic, casting itself as a global savior. The Chinese government, for example, is helping to facilitate the transfer of 1,000 ventilators to New York, one of the hardest hit states.

Some analysts have lamented that dynamic as a “propaganda coup” for China in the face of criticism over its own internal handling of the virus. But with the U.S. in dire need of critical medical equipment from China, White House officials may feel limited in what they can say.

No more "China virus" from Pompeo's (and Trump's) mouth and some competition on the 'global savior' front...

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
 

yes, in 2Q...but then a normalized recession levels in second half. Whats the recovery a quick V, U or L? 
Given the way the global economy has been shut/closed by at least 1/3, one silver lining is how the markets are taking this. Or are they being irrational?

 black321 wrote: 
Some stories you hear are kind of scary.. developed economies GDP to fall 30% on an annualised basis in the second quarter. That's bigger than the great depression apparently.
(hearsay, not researched) 

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
 

they said that in 2008, but this time they may be right? I think it has less to do with central bank actions, and more with structural changes to economies  that will add costs, that must be passed on to the consumer- less globalization, more domestic production of essential inventories, less focus on efficiencies (just-in-time inventory), permanent increases in labor costs...

 islander wrote: 

get ready for the return of hyperinflation

 black321 wrote:
 

Coming soon: new 2 child policy, because one can't afford the debt we are putting on them.

Fed unveils $2.3 trillion coronavirus lending program

The Fed program will include a new fund to buy debt from banks issued to small and medium sized U.S. businesses with up to 10,000 employees and another to buy short-term notes issued by U.S. states and municipalities.

Plenty of $ getting thrown around...get in line and get some. Don't worry, we're good for it (we'll figure out how to pay for it....later on).

 westslope wrote:
 
You mean to say a communist/socialist state, with a history of restricting access to free press, assembly, religion, reproduction rights...was effectively able to round up its citizens, while continuing to misrepresent the extent of the disease?  Then yes, I agree.  

I'm not some idiot conservative talking head calling this the China virus....but please, enough with the praise for how China helped the rest of the world.  

I see some are/were merely relaying hawkish GOP talking points fantasizing about being the world's judge:

“It’s like a bad movie. It’s like the sinister person goes out and causes a problem and then only they can solve the problem — but it’s going to cost you money,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who has proposed aggressive measures to punish China, said in an interview. “That’s exactly what this is. They caused this problem.”

Scott has secured a commitment from Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) to investigate the World Health Organization’s handling of the pandemic. The WHO is under fire for allegedly not taking a harder stance against Beijing even as it downplayed the crisis; the U.N. body is also accused of poor judgment for publicizing a preliminary Chinese finding suggesting that Covid-19 could not be transmitted from human to human. Since that assessment, the virus has spread across the globe, killing tens of thousands of people and bringing many economies to a near halt.

The Florida Republican isn’t the only senator looking to whack Beijing. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch (R-Idaho) joined calls for a WHO probe on Tuesday, including an examination of whether U.S. funding of the group should be revoked. Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) recently called on the State Department to conduct its own investigation into China’s role, while Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) wants Beijing to forgive U.S. debt and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is looking to sanction Chinese officials.

And not unexpected: Coronavirus Alarm Blends Yellow Peril and Red Scare (March 6)

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
 
Once China got serious, it took draconian measures that are beyond the reach of the USA.  

To be blunt, I don't think this Chinese bashing is either warranted nor does it look very pretty.  It hints at the notion that country with a per capita  income 1/4th of the US per capita income is more capable of mustering and coordinating a better response than the USA.  

Besides, if you want to worry, look at the poor, developing countries whose public health systems are but a fraction of what the Chinese enjoy.   Then look at the horrific health outcomes in the USA that make American citizens all the more vulnerable to the worst consequences of COVID-19.

 R_P wrote:
 

Deaton is an amazing economist.  He and his wife's work in this area are very thought provoking.  That said.

Faster economic growth will paper over deep, structural problems to some extent better than slower growth.  That does not mean that slow growth is leading to a  "terrible consequence".    Advanced, rich countries do grow slower.    If anything slow, stable economic growth should be viewed as favourable for a long list of reasons.  

The USA is hardly unique in this regard.  It has some deep regional problems of a structural nature that are tenacious and challenging to make go away.  Faster economic growth could very well deepen these structural issues by increasing the likelihood and severity of economic recession.  

When economies are forced to drop perform enhancing pills, there is almost always a high price to pay at a later date.  

 steeler wrote: 
Can't think of any. 

Doesn't mean that it cannot or won't or shouldn't happen. 

China, imo, bears the bulk of responsibility for the widespread outbreak of this virus based upon what we are learning about their early actions of minimizing the actuality of this virus.

Do you believe that China should get a pass on their behaviour regarding their handling of the virus and deliberately misleading the world about it ?