The Coronavirus Killed the Progressive Left – Marginal REVOLUTION marginalrevolution.com https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/03/the-coronavirus-killed-the-progressive-left.html — The EGALITARIANISM of the progressive left also will seem like a faint memory. Elites are most likely to support wealth redistribution when they feel comfortable themselves, and indeed well-off coastal elites in California and the Northeast are a backbone of the progressive movement. But when these people feel threatened in their lives or occupations, or when the futures of their children suddenly seem less secure, redistribution will not be such a compelling ideal… — The case for MASS TRANSIT also will seem weaker, because subways and buses will be associated with the fear of Covid-19 transmission. In a similar fashion, the forces of NIMBY WILL BECOME STRONGER, relative to those of YIMBY, because people secure in their isolated suburban homes will feel less stressed than those in densely packed urban apartment buildings. — There is likely to be much MORE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION in some parts of the health-care sector, but it will focus on scarce hospital beds and ventilators, and enforce nasty triage, rather than being a benevolent move toward universal coverage. If anything, it will drive home the message that SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS ARE BINDING AND AMERICA CAN’T HAVE EVERYTHING — hardly the traditional progressive message. — — The CLIMATE CHANGE MOVEMENT is likely to be another victim. How much have you heard about Greta Thunberg lately? Concern over the climate will seem like another luxury from safer and more normal times. In addition, the course of anti-Covid-19 efforts may not prove propitious for the climate change movement. If the fight against Covid-19 suddenly improves (perhaps a vaccine working very quickly?), Americans may come to expect the same in the fight against climate change.
Theme: Crisis
-
Tyler Cowen Says the Progressive Left Is Over
The Coronavirus Killed the Progressive Left – Marginal REVOLUTION marginalrevolution.com https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/03/the-coronavirus-killed-the-progressive-left.html — The EGALITARIANISM of the progressive left also will seem like a faint memory. Elites are most likely to support wealth redistribution when they feel comfortable themselves, and indeed well-off coastal elites in California and the Northeast are a backbone of the progressive movement. But when these people feel threatened in their lives or occupations, or when the futures of their children suddenly seem less secure, redistribution will not be such a compelling ideal… — The case for MASS TRANSIT also will seem weaker, because subways and buses will be associated with the fear of Covid-19 transmission. In a similar fashion, the forces of NIMBY WILL BECOME STRONGER, relative to those of YIMBY, because people secure in their isolated suburban homes will feel less stressed than those in densely packed urban apartment buildings. — There is likely to be much MORE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION in some parts of the health-care sector, but it will focus on scarce hospital beds and ventilators, and enforce nasty triage, rather than being a benevolent move toward universal coverage. If anything, it will drive home the message that SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS ARE BINDING AND AMERICA CAN’T HAVE EVERYTHING — hardly the traditional progressive message. — — The CLIMATE CHANGE MOVEMENT is likely to be another victim. How much have you heard about Greta Thunberg lately? Concern over the climate will seem like another luxury from safer and more normal times. In addition, the course of anti-Covid-19 efforts may not prove propitious for the climate change movement. If the fight against Covid-19 suddenly improves (perhaps a vaccine working very quickly?), Americans may come to expect the same in the fight against climate change.
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/the-militarys-job-in-a-crisis-is-to-preserve-the-government/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:19:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266101824416878592
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
Mar 22, 2020, 1:26 PM You see, the military’s job in a crisis is to preserve the government, in an effort to preserve order. Defense is harder than offense. It requires concentration of forces. The military is small in number. The country is vast. So if you aren’t trying to take over the government by force but to demand the use of the crisis as an opportunity for change, and you’re asking the military to step up and make sure it happens or conditions will degrade….
-
The Military’s Job in A Crisis Is to Preserve the Government
Mar 22, 2020, 1:26 PM You see, the military’s job in a crisis is to preserve the government, in an effort to preserve order. Defense is harder than offense. It requires concentration of forces. The military is small in number. The country is vast. So if you aren’t trying to take over the government by force but to demand the use of the crisis as an opportunity for change, and you’re asking the military to step up and make sure it happens or conditions will degrade….
-
“Economic Crisis: Curt, What About Strategic Industries Like Boeing Going Under?
“Economic Crisis: Curt, What About Strategic Industries Like Boeing Going Under? https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/economic-crisis-curt-what-about-strategic-industries-like-boeing-going-under/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 19:10:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266084520224309250
-
“Economic Crisis: Curt, What About Strategic Industries Like Boeing Going Under?
Mar 23, 2020, 2:40 PM
—“I hope you are well Curt. Can I ask, where does P stand on redistributing or Nationalizing corps like Boeing? Obviously it’s a question of Nation Security to have warplanes and such. I don’t like the propping up where the corps have no fear of loss though. Can’t we take it over, keep the jobs, keep it producing as-is, but extract all the old profits from the Losers? I’m sure you have an answer, so I’m not trying to start any shit here. I’m interested.”— Twitter
EASY ANSWER
- Management and investors must pay for their folly not force the people to pay for their folly.
If the management and investors fail to manage the company and it can survive by taking a loan, that’s the answer.
If management and investors fail to manage the company so that it can survive shocks, and it must be bought back by the state (nationalized) and the investors wiped out, then resold once recovered, at a profit, then that’s the answer.
If it is a strategic industry then the state should be an inactive majority investor, and sell off only a minority interest to investors. Why? Private companies make FAR better use of capital.
Why state interest? If you look at how the russians and chinese produce military technology it is an industry better managed. American advantage is only in that we spend more on training and on practicing individual initiative and manoeuvre in combat, are more empirical in our training, and we are more loyal to each other than other peoples. I hav not studied the russian procurement process but I know it is far better than ours. They don’t appeal to congress. Our congress interferes all the time. We have many hands in the pie during every stage. we have too many people involved and not enough soldiers testing iterations of the equipment. The russians give one man responsibility for a program. That is probably enough a set of changes to fix most of it. My great-x uncle jimmy doolittle did a postwar evaluation of the pentagon for the president and was not terribly critical. I do not know what I would find if I did the same. The clinton military change and the obama undermining of the military did severe damage to the trustworthiness of the officer classes – but that is still repairable.
-
“Economic Crisis: Curt, What About Strategic Industries Like Boeing Going Under?
Mar 23, 2020, 2:40 PM
—“I hope you are well Curt. Can I ask, where does P stand on redistributing or Nationalizing corps like Boeing? Obviously it’s a question of Nation Security to have warplanes and such. I don’t like the propping up where the corps have no fear of loss though. Can’t we take it over, keep the jobs, keep it producing as-is, but extract all the old profits from the Losers? I’m sure you have an answer, so I’m not trying to start any shit here. I’m interested.”— Twitter
EASY ANSWER
- Management and investors must pay for their folly not force the people to pay for their folly.
If the management and investors fail to manage the company and it can survive by taking a loan, that’s the answer.
If management and investors fail to manage the company so that it can survive shocks, and it must be bought back by the state (nationalized) and the investors wiped out, then resold once recovered, at a profit, then that’s the answer.
If it is a strategic industry then the state should be an inactive majority investor, and sell off only a minority interest to investors. Why? Private companies make FAR better use of capital.
Why state interest? If you look at how the russians and chinese produce military technology it is an industry better managed. American advantage is only in that we spend more on training and on practicing individual initiative and manoeuvre in combat, are more empirical in our training, and we are more loyal to each other than other peoples. I hav not studied the russian procurement process but I know it is far better than ours. They don’t appeal to congress. Our congress interferes all the time. We have many hands in the pie during every stage. we have too many people involved and not enough soldiers testing iterations of the equipment. The russians give one man responsibility for a program. That is probably enough a set of changes to fix most of it. My great-x uncle jimmy doolittle did a postwar evaluation of the pentagon for the president and was not terribly critical. I do not know what I would find if I did the same. The clinton military change and the obama undermining of the military did severe damage to the trustworthiness of the officer classes – but that is still repairable.
-
No. We Tried to Defend from The Leftists by Surviving Their Failures
No. We Tried to Defend from The Leftists by Surviving Their Failures https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/no-we-tried-to-defend-from-the-leftists-by-surviving-their-failures/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 19:02:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266082537220255749
-
No. We Tried to Defend from The Leftists by Surviving Their Failures
Mar 23, 2020, 11:16 PM
—“Yes. Anglo-American free market conservatives have destroyed America and the UK”—Lord Keynes
Can you explain that to me because america was clearly destroyed by the postwar undermining of our civilization from within, financialization of the economy to defeat the soviets, export of industry to defeat the unions, attempt at expanding housing, to defeat the leftists. We have falsified the entire postwar anti-darwinian leftist program of marxism, socialism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and science denialism, and would have no civil conflict if not for immigration, nor resistance to automation. We could follow the japanese strategy of a homogenous polity gracefully automating our lack of need of labor. I don’t see anglos to blame here. I see only one mistake: conservative decision in the 80’s to let leftist programs fail was fine, but our failure to anticipate the immigrant hordes and their voting for a party of failed pseudoscience, sophistry, and undermining. In the end evidence won,but didn’t matter: hordes. Now there is only one question – whether we divorce, separate, and the conservatives return to our natural market eugenics and automation while we let the left fail, or we have a bloody civil war to defeat the failed left pseudoscience and sophism, despite the hordes. The Free Market Ideology (libertarianism) is another Jewish, not anglo, movement: Boas, Freud pseudoscience, Marx economic pseudoscience, cantor-bohr-keynes pseudomath, Adorno-Fromm Neo-Marxism, Derrida-postmodernism, Rand-Rothbard Libertarian, Trotsky-strauss-kristol neocon The Hayekian movement recommended empirical RULE OF LAW, and the prevention of the expansion of socialism arbitrary rule. The problem was the right lacked the science (evidence) to defeat the left false promise baiting into hazard. We have the science. The left was wrong. Period. This is the greatest pseudo scientific movement in history with a strategic and tactical repetition of the means by which rome was undermined by theological false promise just as the 20th was undermined by pseudoscientific false promise. The right could only wait for evidence. I know, because I was there, and this is how we discussed the problem of the age: Marxism had failed, the Great Society had failed, the oil crisis failure, and the failure in iran. We made a decision. Except for immigration we would have won. The left didn’t win by ideas.