|
pseudanonymous posted:https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=koch+brothers+research+shows+medicare+for+all+savings The top result is this article which links to this cost estimate from the article: quote:The study did conclude, however, that Medicare for All would result in significant savings for the government because of lower prescription drug costs, saving $846 billion over the next decade. Streamlined administrative costs under the plan would save another $1.6 trillion, the researchers at the Mercatus Center found. I assume these are the savings you're referring to. unfortunately that's simply not what the estimate says: quote:The leading current bill to establish single-payer health insurance, Senator Bernie Sanders’s (I-VT) Medicare for All Act (M4A), would under conservative estimates increase federal budget commitments by approximately $32.6 trillion during its first 10 years of full implementation (2022–2031), assuming enactment in 2018.1 Did you intend for me to follow a different link from lmgtfy? because the research in question doesn't show federal government savings at all
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:00 |
|
|
Is there any correlation between the biggest users of Medicare and the increased covid morality rate of people with two or more underlying conditions That cost graph levels off before covid, but I can't help but wonder if covid isn't a reason why it's stayed flat
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 19:40
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Is there any correlation between the biggest users of Medicare and the increased covid morality rate of people with two or more underlying conditions probably too early to say, i would not be surprised to see a measurable cost savings in ten years though
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:Here's an article which is relevant to any discussion of future budget deficit projections. TLDR: medicare costs diverged from projections around 2010, going from the projected exponential growth path to being basically flat. This resulted in a savings of trillions of dollars, far larger than any proposed deficit reduction program. Level of healthcare spending without quality metrics attached is always dubious though. As a gross oversimplification: very healthy patients spend little on healthcare, less healthy patients some, very sick patients spend a lot, patients on death's door generate enormous bills, dead patients spend zero. A drop in expenditures could indicate movement in either direction or maybe both directions in different subgroups.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:There’s an ocean between 2% annual inflation and 50% monthly hyperinflation. Plenty of functioning states run 10% or 20% annual inflation and nothing collapses Are there? What are some examples? I think Argentina would be the historical go-to but their inflation issue is now running away from them. Looking up the list of countries that run 10%+ inflation, it's not exactly a whose-who of economic prosperity. quote:Venezuela 9586% 14291% 12/19 Hypnophant posted:sure, the dollar would probably lose its status as the global reserve It is kind of mind boggling that you hand wave this away as if it's NBD. This would be an extraordinarily inflationary event. Most of the other counter arguments ITT are essentially "you just want to cut services" but unfortunately that doesn't really address the point. I will watch the "austerity myth" vid. hobbez fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Nov 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 02:40
|
|
|
My apologies if I'm barging into a conversation, but something has been on my mind for years. I am just re-reading Yuval Noah Harari and he is hardly the only one sounding the alarm that all jobs including artists and architects and game designers and sex workers and politicians might be out of jobs within a generation. And that "robot technician" will not replace even some of these jobs as is oddly suggested by some (why would they??). What I am unsure about is if that would leave humanity to just depend on handouts from the owners of capital or starve. Could not a separate society exist in parallel with future luxury spacefaring libertarianism for the rich? If humans cannot compete with robot doctors for these folks, why would not human nurses continue to treat the patients who cannot afford the androids? If no human-run farm could compete with a future conglomerate that doesn't need any humans to operate, could not people still eke out a subsistence living? I'm not asking if the world population could be sustained this way because I'm guessing it couldn't. And I'm not certainly not suggesting it would be some laconic utopia. But is there an alternative possibility than the separation of people into have-everythings and have-nothings? This is all presuming that the elites wouldn't buy up all possible land and natural resources including the entire water supply, and that they wouldn't decide the slight chance of an uprising being successful is too much and want everyone else murdered, or that the use of resources by the scum takes away from the future resources of their childrens' children. Which are of course plausible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 15:48
|
|
|
Capital only exists if you have a market, and a market needs lower classes to operate. There are articles that steam engines would create the society you describe that were written 200 years ago. Then it was electricity. I remember when people said the Internet would cause massive unemployment. Free trade would destroy everything. Generally speaking, over a long enough time period, efficiencies in manufacturing and resource extraction increase everyone's quality of life. Not equally, but generally. As much as we lament housing prices compared to the 60s, your quality of life then would have been worse. Worse healthcare, worse travel opportunities, no Internet, etc. To say nothing of your quality of life if you weren't white. If healthcare becomes a solved thing that doesn't need doctors, then you have a whole class of intelligent person who will absolutely go do something else. Manufacturing decline in the US has not correlated with higher unemployment, it's just the jobs moved. That's not to say it won't create other problems but generally the society described would occur if services became scarce. Not abundant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 16:20
|
|
|
hobbez posted:Are there? What are some examples? I think Argentina would be the historical go-to but their inflation issue is now running away from them. The actual example I has in mind was the US, which bounced around 10% inflation from roughly the mid-60s to the mid-80s. The list of countries which are undergoing very high inflation right now isn’t necessarily the best sample, but even on that list plenty have survived bouts of high inflation and even hyperinflation - Turkey remains a middle-income country, for example, and even Argentina maintains a higher standard of living than much of South America. I’m not arguing this is the policy we should set but it’s not the catastrophe everyone fears. De-dollarization would be an enormous crisis and would probably end up in an energy crisis, mass famine, and at least a few wars, but the US is ironically much better positioned to weather it than the rest of world. We trade less than other countries, we’re self-sufficient in energy and food, and our neighbors are small and dependent. What I’m really saying is, as bad as dedollarization could be for us, it’d be worse for everyone else. Greece in the eurozone crisis is the prime example of how austerity fails and you can’t cut your way to growth, but it’s been a bad deal for Germany and Britain too, and I expect more data over the next decade on exactly how it fails to deliver. Corporate investment simply doesn’t replace government spending in the way tax hawks promise, and whatever economic activity is cut in an austerity program is simply lost in most cases.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
People have been saying that robots will automate all possible work (resulting in either a utopia or a dystopia) since at least the 1950s. It is always (and I mean absolutely always) sci-fi speculative bullshit. First of all, it ignores the AM/FM divide: that Actual Machines are not loving Magic, and inevitably do not work without flaw or entropy. Anyone who tells you that some upcoming perfect technology is coming that can completely replace humans, they are either deluded or they are lying to you. Second, it ignores the hedonic treadmill. If you look back at the work that was done in the 1950s, a huge amount of it is in fact actually automated now. But that doesn't mean that there isn't any more work to be done. When people have their needs met, they discover new needs. And those new needs that arise will become new jobs that people will perform. A common example used here is massage therapists. There were maybe a few hundred people in that field in the middle of the 20th century. There are over 300,000 people working in that profession now. If you genuinely believe that machines will eliminate all need for human labor, you have to believe that humans will somehow become incapable of invention and able to reach a point of perpetual satiation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
Bright Bart posted:My apologies if I'm barging into a conversation, but something has been on my mind for years. I am just re-reading Yuval Noah Harari and he is hardly the only one sounding the alarm that all jobs including artists and architects and game designers and sex workers and politicians might be out of jobs within a generation. And that "robot technician" will not replace even some of these jobs as is oddly suggested by some (why would they??). electricity and industrialization definitely actually beggared hundreds of millions of people and the economic-political fallout from it was a major factor in the first two world wars. If computerization beggars billions more, then we have another world war, and either the rich eat their caviar on top of a pile of literally billions of skulls (which is, to be frank, completely an option), or they die and things get redistributed, which was what happened after ww2, basically that walter scheidel guy was pretty grindingly pessimistic about this, but he makes a pretty solid case https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691183251/the-great-leveler bob dobbs is dead fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Nov 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 16:32
|
|
|
there's basically a gigantic decrease in labor supply locked in by peeps not having babies everywhere except africa, basically, tho, so even if there's decrease in hundreds of millions of jobs, well there's gonna be hundreds of millions fewer peeps anyways. that was definitely not a factor preceding the world wars
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
Bright Bart posted:My apologies if I'm barging into a conversation, but something has been on my mind for years. I am just re-reading Yuval Noah Harari and he is hardly the only one sounding the alarm that all jobs including artists and architects and game designers and sex workers and politicians might be out of jobs within a generation. And that "robot technician" will not replace even some of these jobs as is oddly suggested by some (why would they??). Well I guess it's worth noting a sci-fi short story that gets into the exactly the dilemma you foresee, Manna. It's twenty years old and not wonderfully written but I found it thought-provoking at the time. But really, there isn't and probably never will be a shortage of poo poo that needs to get done in this country, whether that's building things or performing services or whatever. You may not get to pick and choose your ideal job, but most people can't do that already. If technological revolution results in massive involuntary unemployment, that's a failure of politics, not technology.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Agronox posted:But really, there isn't and probably never will be a shortage of poo poo that needs to get done in this country, whether that's building things or performing services or whatever. You may not get to pick and choose your ideal job, but most people can't do that already. If technological revolution results in massive involuntary unemployment, that's a failure of politics, not technology. I was thinking what if there is? Like, we can debate how likely it is but it's certainly plausible that the one day the owners of capital become a closed economic system that doesn't need any of us plebians (even doctors and lawyers and CEOs) to run their affairs. Apple shareholders can design, produce, and sell iPhones all with hardly a human even in their corporate offices let alone their factories, and even gathering the lithium and cobalt doesn't require humans. Elon Musk's clone can make and sell Tesla cars to his rich friends with few or no employees and he doesn't need a mass market to sell to because he can easily just make like 5 custom models; AI designs the cars and sets up the assembly line so there is almost no upfront investment. You could argue that especially in clone Elon's case he'd rather sell more cars to average-ish people and be even richer but A) he doesn't need human employees for this, he needs people to have jobs that pay them enough they can buy his cars and he has no control over this unless he and every other rich person decides to use humans somehow escaping the prisoner's dilemma B) whatever passes for average people currency in this scenario is probably useless; nothing they make and no service they can render is useful to the super rich so why would they ever accept it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 02:31
|
|
|
Bright Bart posted:I was thinking what if there is? Like, we can debate how likely it is but it's certainly plausible that the one day the owners of capital become a closed economic system that doesn't need any of us plebians (even doctors and lawyers and CEOs) to run their affairs. Apple shareholders can design, produce, and sell iPhones all with hardly a human even in their corporate offices let alone their factories, and even gathering the lithium and cobalt doesn't require humans. Elon Musk's clone can make and sell Tesla cars to his rich friends with few or no employees and he doesn't need a mass market to sell to because he can easily just make like 5 custom models; AI designs the cars and sets up the assembly line so there is almost no upfront investment. You could argue that especially in clone Elon's case he'd rather sell more cars to average-ish people and be even richer but A) he doesn't need human employees for this, he needs people to have jobs that pay them enough they can buy his cars and he has no control over this unless he and every other rich person decides to use humans somehow escaping the prisoner's dilemma B) whatever passes for average people currency in this scenario is probably useless; nothing they make and no service they can render is useful to the super rich so why would they ever accept it? I mean, what you are describing is as likely as the Rapture and the return of Jesus Christ in flame to judge the quick and the dead. It’s effectively a fantasy and a complete misunderstanding of what technology is and how it actually works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 02:51
|
|
|
Basically every technology that replaces labor also required a new supply chain of labor to sustain it. Factory robots are full of parts that have to be designed, fed by supply chains requiring vast transportation networks that have to be operated, and by making vehicles and other complicated things cheaper, they lead to infrastructure that empowers people to create new industries. If you want to point at all the jobs lost by, say, "electricity" you can, but you're ignoring the other half of the equation of all the jobs electricity created, and that half was larger. The whale oil industry collapsed virtually overnight (and thank god for that) but the new job of "electrician" was invented and ten million new electrical devices followed along that needed to be designed and made and advertised and sold and so on. If you want to talk about how the "consumption economy" is unsustainable, that's fine too, but we don't only consume things, we consume services, and yeah we don't have robots that can safely drive cars yet, nevermind cut hair, suture a wound, or even poo poo that robots definitely ought to be able to do by now like do your taxes or provide actually functional technical support for your computer. Even if we someday have robots that can style your hair just how you like it and provide scintillating conversation while they do it, we'll still need people to design and maintain and operate not just the robots themselves, but the whole industrial complex and supply chain required to make them, advertise them, deliver them, maintain them, and retire them. If you're speculating about a future in which robots are so smart and capable that they can not only reproduce but meet new desires and needs by designing new robots that perfectly accomplish anything humanity wants, well, that sure sounds like wild utopian speculation that has little basis in the realities we know we're currently restricted by. Anyway I dunno how the economics and current events thread can even address questions this speculative. It's not current events and it's post-economic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 03:51
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Even if we someday have robots that can style your hair just how you like it and provide scintillating conversation while they do it, we'll still need people to design and maintain and operate not just the robots themselves, but the whole industrial complex and supply chain required to make them, advertise them, deliver them, maintain them, and retire them. Why, though? Why can't AI design the product, self-driving vehicles deliver them to market, fully-automated stores (which already exist here in my city; there is not one human employee) sell them, a lawyer chatbot file the patents, a fully automated repair centre on the high street cover the warrantee, chatbots cover customer support, AI figure out how to price it, AI come up with ad campaigns, and almost everything else? Even finding the ideal place to situate the factory, run all the repairs therein, and deal with shareholders? You can point to problems with Tesla and ChatGPT to suggest they won't do this within our lifetime. But given how we have far more examples of technology doing what we don't think will be done anytime soon I don't see how it is not worth talking about. Speaking of talking about it, you'd have to claim an entire large village of philosophers, economists, and tech folk (who, in reference to a comment above suggesting my question is based on a total misunderstanding of technology, probably do know a thing or two about it) are being hysterical. And even if they are, their credentials and numbers and influence means we need a reasonably well-argued way to say they're wrong. In any case that's exactly what I'm trying to see if can be done. Even if the current elites leave the system entirely, along with all their capital, couldn't everyone left out in the cold start their own fire? Bright Bart fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Nov 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 04:49
|
|
|
Bright Bart posted:fully-automated stores (which already exist here in my city; there is not one human employee) sell them, This is just blatantly not the case. Those stores may not have a cashier up front or even a manager in the back for most of the day, but there are still humans involved deciding how to stock the shelves, rearranging displays, repairs, maintenance, taxes and admin, etc not to mention all the hardware and software engineers since this isn't an off the shelf product yet. There is an enormous amount of human work that goes into all this. As to why robots can't take over all the work: because currently extant AI tech is a fancy statistical model. It isn't capable of making decisions, nor is it able to tell when its output is inappropriate or outright contradicts external reality, and no amount of development is going to change that because a mind is not a statistical process and a statistical process cannot become a mind. A mind can't operate without desires and motivations, and we are not on the verge of knowing how to give those to a robot. e: you cannot take Sam Altman or Elon musk at face value when they talk about what tech will be able to do in the future. They are hype men who are paid outrageous sums of money to tell the most outrageous lies about what capabilities their product will offer. In a sense they are not even selling to the users of their products; the real money comes from bilking the investor class. hypnophant fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Nov 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 05:09
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:e: you cannot take Sam Altman or Elon musk at face value when they talk about what tech will be able to do in the future. They are hype men who are paid outrageous sums of money to tell the most outrageous lies about what capabilities their product will offer. In a sense they are not even selling to the users of their products; the real money comes from bilking the investor class. Sam Altman's job right now seems to be to hype public perception of the threat of AI so that he can build a regulatory moat to protect his company and investments from a swarm of open source start ups. Edit: Something to keep in mind is that people when left alone tend to do stuff. Maybe videogames and the metaverse have gotten so good humanity would descend into a hedonistic fugue state but it's more likely that people will continue to produce and consume things creating new markets no matter how much AI can produce. That's just how people are. The junk collector fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Nov 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 06:07
|
|
|
Bright Bart posted:You can point to problems with Tesla and ChatGPT to suggest they won't do this within our lifetime. But given how we have far more examples of technology doing what we don't think will be done anytime soon I don't see how it is not worth talking about. In the context of the global economics thread it's not worth talking about because AI overlords taking all jobs is not happening within anyone here's lifetimes, and will probably never happen. Transistor density has been slowing for a long time and we're going to hit a hard wall in the physical size of a transistor in the relatively near future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 06:36
|
|
|
Simply put, if automation creates unemployment, why do we have the lowest unemployment during the highest amount of automation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 06:37
|
|
|
Right. It's basically claiming this thing that has never happened before, and for which there is absolutely no sign of a trend, will start happen in the future: you can make an infinite number of unprovable claims like that, so worrying about any single specific scenario is pointless. Of course, lots of things that have never happened before will happen in the future. And there are plenty of actual trends that we can look at today to be worried about. Automation causing a loss of anything for people to do and therefore economic collapse isn't one of them. Hell. Let's just assume that the robots that can do everything, will also take care of all the unemployed people. Utopia. Yay
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 06:47
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Anyway I dunno how the economics and current events thread can even address questions this speculative. It's not current events and it's post-economic. Agree with this, we're headed off track here. I am the OP and benevolent dictator for life of this thread. This is an economics thread and a current events thread, this is discussed both at length in the charter in the OP, and highlighted in the title explicitly. I'm going to casually set the horizon/definition for "current" as 5 years, or one major (presidential, PM, etc) electoral cycle + 1 year for the county in question, whichever is longer If you can present an article about how robots will replace fast food workers, or specific factory workers (e.g. Tesla has been on a warpath to automate their manufacturing) in the next five years, I'll allow it. If you can post a link to a credible source about the unwinding of US monetary policy (silicon valley Bank + first Republic Bank are good examples) in the current context I'll allow it. There's a lot being written about copyright law in regards to AI that's definitely relevant as the copyright office actively has an open comment period open on the topic. Periodic discussion of future events is fine but it shouldn't go on for pages at a time The content of this post is subject to change
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 07:14
|
|
|
Eating Disorder Helpline Fires Staff, Transitions to Chatbot After Unionization A Wellness Chatbot Is Offline After Its ‘Harmful’ Focus on Weight Loss I work in AI and this is the sort of thing that worries me a lot more than vague future risks. The robots aren't coming for your job; your bosses want to give your job to a robot, and they're not going to do any kind of serious assessment of whether the robot can actually do your job before they pull the trigger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 15:34
|
|
|
A general purpose AI, not a mere statistical model writ large is probably far more likely to emerge and replace many white collar jobs rather than blue collar, since touching computers and editing spreadsheets doesn’t require interacting with the physical world. But even that is probably not likely to happen in the next 20 or so years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
Automation is virtuous for “dirty dangerous dull” jobs and spreadsheet number management is absolutely on the dull side. I welcome that future wholeheartedly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
“computer” used to be a job description, not a machine
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:you cannot take Sam Altman or Elon musk at face value when they talk about what tech will be able to do in the future. They are hype men who are paid outrageous sums of money to tell the most outrageous lies about what capabilities their product will offer. In a sense they are not even selling to the users of their products; the real money comes from bilking the investor class. Trying to remember where I saw it, but a few years back Musk did a Q&A... in China...? where someone asked how a major city could possibly go green. Musk made a face like he was running the numbers in his head and said something like, "You can build a giant solar farm and use these special cables to connect it to the city and bam, everything is powered by xx gigawatts of green energy," and the whole place broke into applause over him lending his genius insight of "just do it" to their desperate plight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:“computer” used to be a job description, not a machine True, and today we don’t have a bunch of people who are now permanently unemployed because they were professional computers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 19:33
|
|
|
a current event from last week that somehow managed to fly under my radar, china's largest lender was a victim of a massive ransomware attackquote:China's biggest lender, the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, paid a ransom after it was hacked last week, a Lockbit ransomware gang representative said on Monday in a statement which Reuters was unable to independently verify. some are speculating that part of the soft demand for last week's treasury offering was due to a major market maker being almost completely paralyzed. reportedly ibc was keeping vital trades moving via couriers moving around physical drives between counter parties between this and the recent ach snafu it is a reminder that the infrastructure underlying our markets is not foolproof
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
Inflation coming in pretty cool: Headline CPI up 0.0% Core up 0.2%
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 15:10
|
|
|
Agronox posted:Inflation coming in pretty cool: Eating more crow all the time. A year ago I thought the soft landing was impossible. Looking more and more likely all the time
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 16:44
|
|
|
its a soft landing for america and an eat poo poo landing for the (other) major world manufacturers
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
lending credence to that theory, the japanese government is reporting some real bad gdp numbers for the quarter that stand in stark contrast to american performance gdp fell 2.1% in the third quarter after falling 0.5% in the second, with us clocking gains of 4.9% and 2.1% respectively. notably this is much worse than analysts expectations of 0.6% to top it off, the bank of japan has been one of the lone central banks keeping rates low in an effort to stimulate the economy. japan's inflation is also dealing with roughly 3% inflation, which is low compared to the spikes in other developed economies, but significantly higher than the average rate in japan for the last 30 years whether by luck, policy, or some unknown market factor, the last few years of us economic performance seems charmed
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 01:12
|
|
|
I think it’s premature to call this a soft landing — we touched ground, but maybe we’re just gonna crater into the tarmac.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
It'll be quite the experiment in Argentina. I don't know how likely/how able all the changes Milei wants to make will happen, but it's something. I think standardizing to the dollar might help short term to stabilize things but will be a real problem long term and likely just setup a fight to re-peso everything. Maybe that's the right thing to do. But it also looks a lot like the clowns running the circus which means even reasonable ideas will have an uphill fight to get actually implemented correctly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 16:27
|
|
|
it's an experiment in the vein of santayana. argentina already pegged the peso to the dollar back in the early 90's, it worked for about a decade until it became clear that argentina couldn't service their debts in a currency they had no control over and they went bankrupt the other currency crises of the 90's (mexico in particular) demonstrate the dangers of pegging to the dollar when the underlying value of a currency is particularly weak. it encourages capital to move to the dollar while the pegged currency is overvalued, which forces the central bank to buy up the local currency with dollars to maintain the peg, which causes a debt spiral considering that the guy is a self billed anarcho-capitalist who doesn't like the idea of central banks, i have no confidence that he has the basic knowledge to avoid the mistakes that happened within his own life time edit: argentina is a case study i've been meaning to read more about. during the mid-20th century it was a robust economy that often came close to top 10 largest gdp's in the world. then in the 80's, without being directly occupied by a foreign power, it's economy started having crises after crises and has had a much more volatile time, falling behind a dozen other emerging economies GhostofJohnMuir fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:16
|
|
|
i don't understand where argentina is supposed to get that many dollars. if it had enough reserves to operationalize this plan, it wouldn't be experiencing the current inflation. if it had enough of a trade surplus to maintain it, it wouldn't be in the debt position it is. selected quotes:Stratfor posted:However, less than 10% of Argentine exports go to the United States. Thus, if Argentina dollarizes and the dollar appreciates by a significant percentage against all other currencies, Argentina's exports will become less competitive. Moreover, the prices of most of Argentina's exports (such as agricultural products, energy and metals) tend to fluctuate more frequently and more widely than those of manufactured goods. This makes Argentina even more vulnerable to real exchange rate misalignment and large commodity shocks resulting from decreased export revenue. ibid posted:Operationally, Argentina would need to acquire sufficient dollars to dollarize its economy. However, the government is a net foreign currency debtor, as well as a net international debtor, meaning it does not have enough dollar assets to finance a major dollar purchase. In fact, the government just repaid the International Monetary Fund in yuan rather than dollars. Even the Central Bank, typically a net foreign currency creditor, sits on a negative net dollar position. Argentina may be on the verge of yet another default, which would make it even more unrealistic to borrow the dollars required to replace the peso. Finally, a recent ruling by a New York court that awarded $16 billion worth of damages to a plaintiff to compensate it for financial losses incurred in the context of Argentina's expropriation of state-run energy company YPF a decade ago will further complicate Argentina's attempt to raise dollars, whether it defaults or not in the coming months. loving hilarious that someone could propose financing this shitshow of a libertarian's wet dream by nationalizing billions of dollars of private assets Bloomberg Linea posted:The monetary base — 6.4 trillion pesos, according to the central bank — would be fixed at an "equilibrium exchange rate" close to where the peso is trading on unofficial, parallel markets that Argentines use to skirt controls. It would then be frozen there, with the central bank barred from printing money and the financial system holdings dollarized. A dollar currently buys about 780 pesos on that market, and the total monetary base at that level would be about $9.3 billion. https://www.bloomberglinea.com/english/this-is-how-argentinas-javier-milei-plans-to-dollarize/ https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/considering-dollarization-argentina-part-2 obviously right-wing populist politicians don't let themselves get bogged down with numbers or objective reality, but this one seems even more batshit insane than the usual drivel e: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_trinity ee: Also Linea posted:Under Ocampo's plan, the central bank would no longer be the custodian of reserves. A special purpose vehicle called Monetary Stabilization Fund would be created abroad — based in a foreign jurisdiction such as Switzerland, Ireland or Luxembourg and will have a statutory mandate, Ocampo said. That fund would issue asset-backed commercial paper to pay down the $26 billion in debt instruments held by commercial banks. Its main assets would be the debt currently owed by the government to the central bank and pension funds from Anses. as far as i can tell from this word salad, the plan is to take the peso-denominated debt the government currently owes itself, move it abroad, and try to take out foreign loans on it. this will fix argentina's financial problems because "at least [the treasury bonds] have a market value" hypnophant fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
harperdc posted:A fun little side effect of the IRA’s investments and incentives for EV components, and the current hate-boner for Chinese components. I would imagine Ford is not the only OEM looking at this setup. A while (over a year) back I posted about how many industrial batteries I was seeing imported. That was all CATL. CATL is like 80-90 percent of all industrial battery imports to the US in recent years. Basically all manufacturing that is adding battery and hybridizing their systems or adding the capability to store power from n cheaper times of the day, or to not lose the plant when brownouts happen, all of that is basically all CATL. Edit: I thought I was in another thread… oops. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 03:13 on Nov 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2023 06:19
|
|
|
FT Alphaville (snarky british writing, free by just making an account) launched a merch shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/FTAlphaville/shop the credit suisse shirt and facepalm bank of england bag are pretty funny: https://www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/Credit-Suisse-CoCo-Pops-by-FTAlphaville/142749193.NL9AC.XYZ?ref_list_id=srp_results&ref_list_index=0 https://www.redbubble.com/i/tote-bag/Bank-of-England-Facepalm-by-FTAlphaville/133794886.P1QBH?ref_list_id=srp_results&ref_list_index=1 that bag is so british. european interest rate discussion, so hot right now
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:00 |
|
|
'still right. still poor.' is the most goons.txt i've seen lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2023 20:05
|
|
