[USA] SJEDINJENE AMERIČKE DRŽAVE - unutrašnja politika i uticaj na svetska kretanja

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

1 minute ago, Squabbit said:

 

Istina.
Sada odem da nametim 4 svetla uzmem vishe no za ceo dan na regulare poslu.
Drugar ugradjuje el. punjace za kola, 400-600 svaki. od lokacije zavisi je l' 2-5h posla. 🙂 

Ne sekiram se ja mnogo, ovako generalno

 

Zanat se uvek isplati. Ovde zanatlije ako rade dobro i procuju se, mogu da naprave ekstra zaradu. 

Gledam ovde kod mene, cena rada nekog zanatilje je pa od 90 - 200 dolara na sat (automehanicari mislim oko 60-70), zavisi sta radi. Onda se mislim ljudi bace na fakultete stotine hiljada, vracaju kredite ceo zivot i rade za 70 - 90k godisnje. Ovi vecinom ni jezik ne znaju... 

[mrd]

U US je veština najvažnija. Kako[mention=367]Baby[/mention] reče, ove budale što završavaju škole imaju ceo život, što bi u nekim slučajevima bilo 2 godine da vraćaju kredite, ali veština je najbitnija.

 

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

[...]

Eto.

 

 

[Odjosh]

Ne znam dal je bila ova legendarna fotka iz walking dead-a

They are crowded like flies in front of the closed doors of an Ohio federal building to protest the containment ordered by Governor Mike DeWine. The photographer's name is Joshua Bickel

Edited April 23, 2020 by Kido from Junkovac

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

1 hour ago, Honey Badger said:

Eto.

 

 

 

Ova nije normalna, prvo kaze mi nudimo, pa onda kaze, ne ko je rekao da mi nudimo, pa placebo... Svi lupetaju neke gluposti da skinu odgovornost sa sebe. Posle kada im kazu "rekli ste" oni kazu "mi, nismo, to vam se ucinilo, jer smo rekli suprotno" 

Hocete biti u kazinima na liniji udara?

Pa ne bas, imam porodicu...

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

 

 

 

Quote

Dr. Rick Bright has been lauded as one of the best and brightest in the world of vaccine development. On Tuesday, healthcare news website Stat News reported Dr. Bright had left his post as the director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority. That agency is the part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and it is responsible for overseeing the development of vaccines for deadly viruses like COVID-19 and a whole host of other just as potential deadly public health issues like chemical, biological, and nuclear threats. 

Dr. Bright’s departure right in the midst of a global health crisis certainly raised eyebrows. His entire career has been spent in vaccine development. Stat News said his departure “couldn’t have come at a more inopportune time.”

Turns out, Dr. Bright was dismissed from his job at the time he was needed the most. All because he pushed for far more rigorous testing of the drug Trump and Fox News were pushing. Dr. Bright’s comments are nothing short of alarming

 

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/4/22/1939520/-Doctor-in-charge-of-U-S-COVID-19-vaccine-says-he-was-fired-for-questioning-Trump-s-favorite-drug

[Yoyogi]

11 hours ago, bohumilo said:

QE takodje potpada pod jedan od nacina koje sam nabrojao na koje drzava dolazi do sredstava - ovaj treci, stampanje para (tj. elektronsko prebacivanje, stvarni papir i presa nisu ukljuceni u QE)! Tu se radi o nacinu na koji centralne banke upumpavaju novac u ekonomiju tj. podizu temperaturu, podsticu banke da pozajmljuju, ljude da trose i investiraju i td - u trenutku kada su kamatne stope vec niske. Pojednostavljeno receno, to funkcionise tako sto centralna banka prosiri svoj balans kupovinom razlicitih finansijskih iznstrumenata na trzistu (najcesce drzavnih bondova (kao sigurnijih instrumenata) ili MBS-ova posle krize 2008) - novostvorenim novcem - kojima (bondovima i ostalim instrumentima koje kupuje) onda raste cena a opada prinos, te ljudi beze npr. iz bondova u stock-ove, bankama postaje isplativije da pozajmljuju novac i slicno. Neki je plan da kada ekonomija krene napred centralna banka proda ove instrumente i tako isisa novac iz sistema (mada eno na FED-ovom bilansu MBS*-ovi i dalje zauzimaju oko 40% kad sam poslednji put proveravao). I da, ne radi to samo FED, to je bilo i u Japanu i u Engleskoj i u raznim zemljama...

 

Za dlaku to nije pomerilo inflaciju a to je bio cilj Centralne banke Japana. Naštampali su pare da otkupe obveznice od firmi koje sede na njima.

 

Čuveni državni dug Japana koji neobrazovani novinari razvlače po tekstovima (kažu tačno da je 2.5 puta nacionalni dohodak) je iluzoran: firme (kao NEC, Hitachi, Fujitsu, Toyota...) jednostavno sede na tim obveznicama bez namere da njima trguju. Koliko god da je kamata niska ili nulta, bolje nego negativna koju bi plaćali za ležanje čistog novca po bankama. 95% japanskih obveznica je u domaćem vlasništvu, ništa kao Grčka gde je toliko bilo u stranom vlasništvu, pa kad su počeli da ih prodaju slomiše Grčkoj kičmu. A Grčka, u EUR zoni, nije imala pravo da štampa pare da ih otkupi. Japan i Amerika nemaju to ograničenje.

 

FED US može tim novoštampanim parama da plaća kamate na svoje obveznice i da ih otkupljuje od stranih vlasnika (u Srbiji se te obveznice zovu "devizne rezerve") i to Amerika neće ni da primeti niti to prouzrokuje ikakvu inflaciju.

 

U naletima štampanja, mogu na deviznom tržištu yen i dolar kratkotrajno da padnu ali po ponudi i potražnji se vrlo brzo (u danima ako ne i u satima) vrati gde je bilo.

[bohumilo]

4 hours ago, Yoyogi said:

 

Za dlaku to nije pomerilo inflaciju a to je bio cilj Centralne banke Japana.

 

Sasvim tacno, cilj QE-a je da zadrzi ciljani nivo inflacije upumpavanjem novca u sistem, ali to po definiciji znaci da bi bez QE inflacija bila manja. A ova razlika izmedju nivoa inflacije postignutog QE-om i onog nivoa koji bi se manifestovao bez QE-a je upravo TO mesto na kojem na kojem se uzimaju pare od gradjana.

 

Ili, da  - u svetlu gornje primedbe -  dopunim moj prethodni primer sa sistemom od 2 dinara, 2 coveka i 2 hleba (koji kostaju po 1 dinar): situacija je takva da je najednom 1 dinar nestao iz sistema (u realnosti tako sto trzisni akteri sede na dugorocnim obveznicama, banke ne pozajmljuju pare (a kreditna ekspanzija bankarskog sektora je spiritus movens inflacije) itd), pa sada unutra imamo 2 hleba a samo 1 dinar (svako od nas po 1/2 dinara), te hoce da se desi da cena hleba opadne na 1/2 dinara. Medjutim, drzava brze-bolje, da bi sacuvala cenu hleba, dostampa jos jedan dinar, ali ga ne podeli na ravne casti nego ga kroz QE dodeli meni. Sada je cena hleba i dalje 1 dinar, nije se desila inflacija, ali ja sada mogu da kupim 3/2 hleba a ti samo 1/2, tj. QE je finansiran tako sto je od tebe kroz ovu vrstu "inflacije" (tj. sprecavanja deflacije) uzeto pola hleba...

[Yoyogi]

4 minutes ago, bohumilo said:

 

Sasvim tacno, cilj QE-a je da zadrzi ciljani nivo inflacije upumpavanjem novca u sistem, ali to po definiciji znaci da bi bez QE inflacija bila manja.

 

Ne radi to u Japanu. Ubiše se bankari (Bank of Japan = FED), nema šta nisu probali, ne  mogu da ubiju deflaciju još od 1990. Celih 30 godina. Eto, max što su uspeli je da deflaciju dovedu do 0% inflacije a cilj im je bio i jeste inflacija 2%. Izgiboše a nikako da izazovu inflaciju, ne znam koliko para da upumpaju u promet. Sada će trilione dolara da upumpaju oko spašavanja od posledica korone. Do 15. maja svaki stanovnik (uključujući i nas troje) će dobiti 1,000 dolara,  samo to će biti 1.2 triliona dolara novih para.

 

 

Monthly inflation rate in Japan was 0.00% in December 2019. That is 0.10 less than it was in November 2019 and 0.29 more than in December 2018. At the same time, 2019 year to date inflation rate is 0.79% and year over year inflation rate is 0.79%.

 

Tu inflaciju mogu da detektuju samo precizni statistički merni instrumenti, cene ničega se nisu promenile od 2003 (osim benzina koji je danas jeftiniji nego što sam ikada video). Čak i to: kada je godinama bio 1.60$ to nije prouzokovalo inflaciju mada svi to ugrađuju u cene svojih proizvoda. Sada će tek deflacija da se vrati kada je 1.10$, jedino helikopterski novac može da je spreči.

[Don Juan]

14 hours ago, Baby said:

Da li se gradi manje nego osamdesetih? Ne, mozda cak i vise. 

Ovakvih zanimanja imas koliko hoces. U krajnjem slucaju i ako imaju rast zarade, to ne moze da prati skok cena, pa tako da ti radnici ne mogu da trose kao sto su nekada trosili. Danas za dolar ne mozes ni zvake da kupis, a nekada si za dolar mogao da kupim i hleb i mleko, ili galon benzina pa jos i kusur imas. 

Kod ovih poslova treba imati u vidu i strukturu zaposlenih ljudi na tim poslovima. Pretpostavljam da na ovim poslovima raste broj ljudi koji su migrirali iz drugih država, pre svega Meksika i Latinske Amerike, pa i to može biti jedan od razloga lošijih prosečnih primanja,

Edited April 23, 2020 by Don Laki Juan

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

8 hours ago, Don Laki Juan said:

Kod ovih poslova treba imati u vidu i strukturu zaposlenih ljudi na tim poslovima. Pretpostavljam da na ovim poslovima raste broj ljudi koji su migrirali iz drugih država, pre svega Meksika i Latinske Amerike, pa i to može biti jedan od razloga lošijih prosečnih primanja,

 

Naravno. Mnogo faktora utice na plate, izmedjuostalog i ponuda i potraznja. 

Evo lista nekih poslova gde je cena rada opala u poslednjih 10 godina:

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/jobs-where-people-make-far-less-now-than-they-would-have-ten-years-ago-2016-7

 

Neki od ovih poslova su gotovo nepotrebni vise, neki su jos uvek potrebni ali i dalje im cena rada pada. Utice i to sto gazde nekih biznisa su videle da mogu da plate manje jer jos uvek ima zainteresovanih da rade. Uglavnom se desava posle nekih ekonomskih kriza da cena rada opadne u odnosu na prethodni period. Kriza prodje, cena rada ne skace... 

Ja to nekako poredim sa robom, uzmem npr. neku marku koja je postojala pre 40 godina... Adidas, Levis... gde je postojala i manja konkurencija tim proizvodima. Medjutim, cena te robe nije opala, nego skocila vremenom iako se u medjuvremenu pojavilo stotine i mozda hiljade jednako kvalitatnih proizvoda istog tipa. Pritom sada ima 7.8, a osamdesetih je bilo 4.5 milijardi ljudi (vise potrosaca). Ustvari je zarada samo prebacila teziste, sa radnika, na vlasnika. Osamdesetih je bilo koliko milijardera, koliko ih ima sada... 

Edited April 23, 2020 by Baby

[melankolic]

[emoji1]

[zoran59]

We Are Living in a Failed State

The coronavirus didn’t break America. It revealed what was already broken.

When the virus came here, it found a country with serious underlying conditions, and it exploited them ruthlessly. Chronic ills—a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy, a divided and distracted public—had gone untreated for years. We had learned to live, uncomfortably, with the symptoms. It took the scale and intimacy of a pandemic to expose their severity—to shock Americans with the recognition that we are in the high-risk category.

The crisis demanded a response that was swift, rational, and collective. The United States reacted instead like Pakistan or Belarus—like a country with shoddy infrastructure and a dysfunctional government whose leaders were too corrupt or stupid to head off mass suffering. The administration squandered two irretrievable months to prepare. From the president came willful blindness, scapegoating, boasts, and lies. From his mouthpieces, conspiracy theories and miracle cures. A few senators and corporate executives acted quickly—not to prevent the coming disaster, but to profit from it. When a government doctor tried to warn the public of the danger, the White House took the mic and politicized the message.

Every morning in the endless month of March, Americans woke up to find themselves citizens of a failed state. With no national plan—no coherent instructions at all—families, schools, and offices were left to decide on their own whether to shut down and take shelter. When test kits, masks, gowns, and ventilators were found to be in desperately short supply, governors pleaded for them from the White House, which stalled, then called on private enterprise, which couldn’t deliver. States and cities were forced into bidding wars that left them prey to price gouging and corporate profiteering. Civilians took out their sewing machines to try to keep ill-equipped hospital workers healthy and their patients alive. Russia, Taiwan, and the United Nations sent humanitarian aid to the world’s richest power—a beggar nation in utter chaos.

Donald Trump saw the crisis almost entirely in personal and political terms. Fearing for his reelection, he declared the coronavirus pandemic a war, and himself a wartime president. But the leader he brings to mind is Marshal Philippe Pétain, the French general who, in 1940, signed an armistice with Germany after its rout of French defenses, then formed the pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Like Pétain, Trump collaborated with the invader and abandoned his country to a prolonged disaster. And, like France in 1940, America in 2020 has stunned itself with a collapse that’s larger and deeper than one miserable leader. Some future autopsy of the pandemic might be called Strange Defeat, after the historian and Resistance fighter Marc Bloch’s contemporaneous study of the fall of France. Despite countless examples around the U.S. of individual courage and sacrifice, the failure is national. And it should force a question that most Americans have never had to ask: Do we trust our leaders and one another enough to summon a collective response to a mortal threat? Are we still capable of self-government?

This is the third major crisis of the short 21st century. The first, on September 11, 2001, came when Americans were still living mentally in the previous century, and the memory of depression, world war, and cold war remained strong. On that day, people in the rural heartland did not see New York as an alien stew of immigrants and liberals that deserved its fate, but as a great American city that had taken a hit for the whole country. Firefighters from Indiana drove 800 miles to help the rescue effort at Ground Zero. Our civic reflex was to mourn and mobilize together.

Partisan politics and terrible policies, especially the Iraq War, erased the sense of national unity and fed a bitterness toward the political class that never really faded. The second crisis, in 2008, intensified it. At the top, the financial crash could almost be considered a success. Congress passed a bipartisan bailout bill that saved the financial system. Outgoing Bush-administration officials cooperated with incoming Obama administration officials. The experts at the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department used monetary and fiscal policy to prevent a second Great Depression. Leading bankers were shamed but not prosecuted; most of them kept their fortunes and some their jobs. Before long they were back in business. A Wall Street trader told me that the financial crisis had been a “speed bump.”

All of the lasting pain was felt in the middle and at the bottom, by Americans who had taken on debt and lost their jobs, homes, and retirement savings. Many of them never recovered, and young people who came of age in the Great Recession are doomed to be poorer than their parents. Inequality—the fundamental, relentless force in American life since the late 1970s—grew worse.

This second crisis drove a profound wedge between Americans: between the upper and lower classes, Republicans and Democrats, metropolitan and rural people, the native-born and immigrants, ordinary Americans and their leaders. Social bonds had been under growing strain for several decades, and now they began to tear. The reforms of the Obama years, important as they were—in health care, financial regulation, green energy—had only palliative effects. The long recovery over the past decade enriched corporations and investors, lulled professionals, and left the working class further behind. The lasting effect of the slump was to increase polarization and to discredit authority, especially government’s.

Both parties were slow to grasp how much credibility they’d lost. The coming politics was populist. Its harbinger wasn’t Barack Obama but Sarah Palin, the absurdly unready vice-presidential candidate who scorned expertise and reveled in celebrity. She was Donald Trump’s John the Baptist.

Trump came to power as the repudiation of the Republican establishment. But the conservative political class and the new leader soon reached an understanding. Whatever their differences on issues like trade and immigration, they shared a basic goal: to strip-mine public assets for the benefit of private interests. Republican politicians and donors who wanted government to do as little as possible for the common good could live happily with a regime that barely knew how to govern at all, and they made themselves Trump’s footmen.

Like a wanton boy throwing matches in a parched field, Trump began to immolate what was left of national civic life. He never even pretended to be president of the whole country, but pitted us against one another along lines of race, sex, religion, citizenship, education, region, and—every day of his presidency—political party. His main tool of governance was to lie. A third of the country locked itself in a hall of mirrors that it believed to be reality; a third drove itself mad with the effort to hold on to the idea of knowable truth; and a third gave up even trying.

Trump acquired a federal government crippled by years of right-wing ideological assault, politicization by both parties, and steady defunding. He set about finishing off the job and destroying the professional civil service. He drove out some of the most talented and experienced career officials, left essential positions unfilled, and installed loyalists as commissars over the cowed survivors, with one purpose: to serve his own interests. His major legislative accomplishment, one of the largest tax cuts in history, sent hundreds of billions of dollars to corporations and the rich. The beneficiaries flocked to patronize his resorts and line his reelection pockets. If lying was his means for using power, corruption was his end.

This was the American landscape that lay open to the virus: in prosperous cities, a class of globally connected desk workers dependent on a class of precarious and invisible service workers; in the countryside, decaying communities in revolt against the modern world; on social media, mutual hatred and endless vituperation among different camps; in the economy, even with full employment, a large and growing gap between triumphant capital and beleaguered labor; in Washington, an empty government led by a con man and his intellectually bankrupt party; around the country, a mood of cynical exhaustion, with no vision of a shared identity or future.

If the pandemic really is a kind of war, it’s the first to be fought on this soil in a century and a half. Invasion and occupation expose a society’s fault lines, exaggerating what goes unnoticed or accepted in peacetime, clarifying essential truths, raising the smell of buried rot.

The virus should have united Americans against a common threat. With different leadership, it might have. Instead, even as it spread from blue to red areas, attitudes broke down along familiar partisan lines. The virus also should have been a great leveler. You don’t have to be in the military or in debt to be a target—you just have to be human. But from the start, its effects have been skewed by the inequality that we’ve tolerated for so long. When tests for the virus were almost impossible to find, the wealthy and connected—the model and reality-TV host Heidi Klum, the entire roster of the Brooklyn Nets, the president’s conservative allies—were somehow able to get tested, despite many showing no symptoms. The smattering of individual results did nothing to protect public health. Meanwhile, ordinary people with fevers and chills had to wait in long and possibly infectious lines, only to be turned away because they weren’t actually suffocating. An internet joke proposed that the only way to find out whether you had the virus was to sneeze in a rich person’s face.

When Trump was asked about this blatant unfairness, he expressed disapproval but added, “Perhaps that’s been the story of life.” Most Americans hardly register this kind of special privilege in normal times. But in the first weeks of the pandemic it sparked outrage, as if, during a general mobilization, the rich had been allowed to buy their way out of military service and hoard gas masks. As the contagion has spread, its victims have been likely to be poor, black, and brown people. The gross inequality of our health-care system is evident in the sight of refrigerated trucks lined up outside public hospitals.

We now have two categories of work: essential and nonessential. Who have the essential workers turned out to be? Mostly people in low-paying jobs that require their physical presence and put their health directly at risk: warehouse workers, shelf-stockers, Instacart shoppers, delivery drivers, municipal employees, hospital staffers, home health aides, long-haul truckers. Doctors and nurses are the pandemic’s combat heroes, but the supermarket cashier with her bottle of sanitizer and the UPS driver with his latex gloves are the supply and logistics troops who keep the frontline forces intact. In a smartphone economy that hides whole classes of human beings, we’re learning where our food and goods come from, who keeps us alive. An order of organic baby arugula on AmazonFresh is cheap and arrives overnight in part because the people who grow it, sort it, pack it, and deliver it have to keep working while sick. For most service workers, sick leave turns out to be an impossible luxury. It’s worth asking if we would accept a higher price and slower delivery so that they could stay home.

The pandemic has also clarified the meaning of nonessential workers. One example is Kelly Loeffler, the Republican junior senator from Georgia, whose sole qualification for the empty seat that she was given in January is her immense wealth. Less than three weeks into the job, after a dire private briefing about the virus, she got even richer from the selling-off of stocks, then she accused Democrats of exaggerating the danger and gave her constituents false assurances that may well have gotten them killed. Loeffler’s impulses in public service are those of a dangerous parasite. A body politic that would place someone like this in high office is well advanced in decay.

The purest embodiment of political nihilism is not Trump himself but his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner. In his short lifetime, Kushner has been fraudulently promoted as both a meritocrat and a populist. He was born into a moneyed real-estate family the month Ronald Reagan entered the Oval Office, in 1981—a princeling of the second Gilded Age. Despite Jared’s mediocre academic record, he was admitted to Harvard after his father, Charles, pledged a $2.5 million donation to the university. Father helped son with $10 million in loans for a start in the family business, then Jared continued his elite education at the law and business schools of NYU, where his father had contributed $3 million. Jared repaid his father’s support with fierce loyalty when Charles was sentenced to two years in federal prison in 2005 for trying to resolve a family legal quarrel by entrapping his sister’s husband with a prostitute and videotaping the encounter.

Jared Kushner failed as a skyscraper owner and a newspaper publisher, but he always found someone to rescue him, and his self-confidence only grew. In American Oligarchs, Andrea Bernstein describes how he adopted the outlook of a risk-taking entrepreneur, a “disruptor” of the new economy. Under the influence of his mentor Rupert Murdoch, he found ways to fuse his financial, political, and journalistic pursuits. He made conflicts of interest his business model.

So when his father-in-law became president, Kushner quickly gained power in an administration that raised amateurism, nepotism, and corruption to governing principles. As long as he busied himself with Middle East peace, his feckless meddling didn’t matter to most Americans. But since he became an influential adviser to Trump on the coronavirus pandemic, the result has been mass death.

In his first week on the job, in mid-March, Kushner co-authored the worst Oval Office speech in memory, interrupted the vital work of other officials, may have compromised security protocols, flirted with conflicts of interest and violations of federal law, and made fatuous promises that quickly turned to dust. “The federal government is not designed to solve all our problems,” he said, explaining how he would tap his corporate connections to create drive-through testing sites. They never materialized. He was convinced by corporate leaders that Trump should not use presidential authority to compel industries to manufacture ventilators—then Kushner’s own attempt to negotiate a deal with General Motors fell through. With no loss of faith in himself, he blamed shortages of necessary equipment and gear on incompetent state governors.

To watch this pale, slim-suited dilettante breeze into the middle of a deadly crisis, dispensing business-school jargon to cloud the massive failure of his father-in-law’s administration, is to see the collapse of a whole approach to governing. It turns out that scientific experts and other civil servants are not traitorous members of a “deep state”—they’re essential workers, and marginalizing them in favor of ideologues and sycophants is a threat to the nation’s health. It turns out that “nimble” companies can’t prepare for a catastrophe or distribute lifesaving goods—only a competent federal government can do that. It turns out that everything has a cost, and years of attacking government, squeezing it dry and draining its morale, inflict a heavy cost that the public has to pay in lives. All the programs defunded, stockpiles depleted, and plans scrapped meant that we had become a second-rate nation. Then came the virus and this strange defeat.

The fight to overcome the pandemic must also be a fight to recover the health of our country, and build it anew, or the hardship and grief we’re now enduring will never be redeemed. Under our current leadership, nothing will change. If 9/11 and 2008 wore out trust in the old political establishment, 2020 should kill off the idea that anti-politics is our salvation. But putting an end to this regime, so necessary and deserved, is only the beginning.

We’re faced with a choice that the crisis makes inescapably clear. We can stay hunkered down in self-isolation, fearing and shunning one another, letting our common bond wear away to nothing. Or we can use this pause in our normal lives to pay attention to the hospital workers holding up cellphones so their patients can say goodbye to loved ones; the planeload of medical workers flying from Atlanta to help in New York; the aerospace workers in Massachusetts demanding that their factory be converted to ventilator production; the Floridians standing in long lines because they couldn’t get through by phone to the skeletal unemployment office; the residents of Milwaukee braving endless waits, hail, and contagion to vote in an election forced on them by partisan justices. We can learn from these dreadful days that stupidity and injustice are lethal; that, in a democracy, being a citizen is essential work; that the alternative to solidarity is death. After we’ve come out of hiding and taken off our masks, we should not forget what it was like to be alone.

 

izvor: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/06/underlying-conditions/610261/

 

 

[bohumilo]

12 hours ago, Yoyogi said:

 

Ne radi to u Japanu. Ubiše se bankari (Bank of Japan = FED), nema šta nisu probali, ne  mogu da ubiju deflaciju još od 1990. Celih 30 godina. Eto, max što su uspeli je da deflaciju dovedu do 0% inflacije a cilj im je bio i jeste inflacija 2%. Izgiboše a nikako da izazovu inflaciju, ne znam koliko para da upumpaju u promet. Sada će trilione dolara da upumpaju oko spašavanja od posledica korone. Do 15. maja svaki stanovnik (uključujući i nas troje) će dobiti 1,000 dolara,  samo to će biti 1.2 triliona dolara novih para.

 

 

Monthly inflation rate in Japan was 0.00% in December 2019. That is 0.10 less than it was in November 2019 and 0.29 more than in December 2018. At the same time, 2019 year to date inflation rate is 0.79% and year over year inflation rate is 0.79%.

 

Tu inflaciju mogu da detektuju samo precizni statistički merni instrumenti, cene ničega se nisu promenile od 2003 (osim benzina koji je danas jeftiniji nego što sam ikada video). Čak i to: kada je godinama bio 1.60$ to nije prouzokovalo inflaciju mada svi to ugrađuju u cene svojih proizvoda. Sada će tek deflacija da se vrati kada je 1.10$, jedino helikopterski novac može da je spreči.

Opet cu reci kao i gore, radi i u Japanu, samo sto bi bez silnih QE-ova deflacija bila mnogo veca, a ovako je dovedena oko 0% ili do blage inflacije, tj. stvari za stanovnistvo su skuplje nego sto bi bile bez mere, i tom razlikom u ceni je finansiran QE.

 

Eh sada, ovo sto sam napisao jeste samo donekle i samo ugrubo tacno, u meri koja zavisi od uslova u konkretnom drustvu i ekonomiji, i u Japanu je manje tacno nego u SAD ili Britaniji. Osnovni razlog tome je sto centralna banka ne kontrolise ponasanje ljudi na trzistu, koliku god likvidnost da stvori ne moze da naredi ljudima sta sa njom da rade, oni mogu na njoj da sede kao i na drzavnim bondovima. Jedan od glavnih razloga sto "riba ne grize" ove QE-ove je kultura stednje, duboko ukorenjena u japanskom drustvu - prosecno japansko domacinstvo je duplo manje zaduzeno nego americko, ankete pokazuju da je najpopularniji nacin na koji mali Japanci /deca/ "trose" novac iz tradicionalnih novogodisnjih poklon-koverti koje im familija poklanja zapravo stednja - a ako se neko iz principa ne zaduzuje nego prvo prikupi pare pa onda trosi tada nema veze koliko mu nisku kamatu nudis, Japanci nerado idu u kredit i kad je kamata negativna, veliki broj ljudi koristi kreditne kartice kao debitne itd...

 

Kultura stednje je omogucila da se drzava zaduzi kod gradjana (sto je velika steta i jedan od glavnih razloga stagnacije Japana***, jer bi ta sredstva bila mnogo kvalitetnije investirana u privatnom sektoru) na relativno bezbolan nacin, a takodje je omogucila da Japan bude vodeci svetski kreditor - i TU drzava, kroz devalvaciju valute (u onom delu gde su strane investicije finansirane novostvorenom likvidnoscu), otima od gradjana jedan deo sredstava za finansiranje QE-a. Medjutim, kada se malo bolje pogleda u strukturu stranih investicija i zajmova po zemljama uocava se jako zanimljiv fenomen. Na prvom mestu su naravno SAD, ali tik iza njih, na drugom mestu - Kajmanska ostrva! E pa, ako CB nastampa pare i da nekome i taj ih odmah strpa u neku rupu da leze naravno da se one nece iskazati kroz inflaciju, to je za sada "pojeo vuk magarca", ali nece biti tako kada taj izvuce pare i odluci da za njih dobije neka realna dobra i islugu, negde investira u realnu ekonomiju - TADA ce se one iskazati u inflaciji i TADA ce drzava kroz nju uzeti sredstva od gradjana.

***Japan vec dugo vremena belezi relativnu stagnaciju (Japan ima isti GDP koliki je imao npr 1994., dok su, recimo, SAD od tada porasle skoro 3 puta - naravno, to bi trebalo skalirati relativnim demografskim promenama), broj stanovnika opada, puno je penzionera, a ovaj monetarni egzibicionizam ocigledno ne radi. Za moja 2 grosa: pustiti da cene padnu i na TAJ nacin podstaci gradjane da kupuju vise i da vise investiraju u svoju zemlju, pustiti da ljudska genijalnost kroz dobrovoljne interakcije pokrene proizvodnju, kreira priliku za investiranje u realnu ekonomiju, u povecanje produktivnosti, u povecanje profitabilnosti na domacem trzistu; stedljivost ljudi je vrlina i prednost na slobodnom trzistu, najkvalitetnije investicije dolaze iz realne stenje, a ovaj monetarni mizanscen samo odvlaci sredstva iz realnog sektroa i od produktivnih ljudi.

[Angelia]

Interesantan text, iznenadjujuce balansiran za NY Times.

Rasprava se konstatno vodi kao da oni koji su za popustanje mera, i otvaranja ekonomije, u stvari za organizovanje koncerta i Olimpijade sutra, a da su oni koji zastupaju duze mere za spasavanje zivota. Istina je u stvari negde u sredini, retko ko propagira kompletno otvaranje bez brige sta ce to znaciti.

Zato je predlog bio da se to desava u fazama i uz stalnu preporuku, da zivot dok nema vakcine i leka, nece biti sutra utakmica, restoran, kafici....Nego da ce dosta odgovornosti biti i na ljudima da prihvate da ce neke mere potrajati.

Medjutim, ekonomija ovako ne moze da potraje.

 

Za one koji mrze da otvore link:

 

The United States has always tolerated a certain amount of preventable death. To use Rahm Emanuel’s example, Americans reduce traffic fatalities by requiring seat belts and air bags, imposing speed limits and employing police. But until better technology is perfected, the only way to actually stop all car crashes — banning cars — is untenable, so some deaths are countenanced, a total of 38,800 in 2019.

Auto accidents are not communicable so not an apples-to-apples comparison to the coronavirus. But the ordinary flu still claims thousands of lives a year — anywhere from 12,000 in the 2011-12 season up to an estimated 61,000 in 2017-18 — which society accepts without stay-at-home orders. Those seasonal deaths, however, are spread over many months, while the coronavirus hit with catastrophic fury in a matter of weeks and would have caused even more devastation without the quarantines.

Government makes money-versus-lives trade-offs all the time. When a regulatory agency weighs a new safety rule, it measures the cost to industry or consumers against the gain by assigning a dollar value to each life that might be saved. If a new rule costs billions of dollars but would only prevent a few dozen deaths, it likely would not be adopted — even though someone would die as a result.

The idea that the government translates life to dollars and cents may sound bloodless but it is not unusual. A White House report from 2017, for instance, estimated the cost of 41,000 deaths attributed to opioid overdoses in 2015 at $431.7 billion, an average of $10.5 million per person.

By that calculation, the 60,000 deaths projected from the coronavirus would be valued at $631.8 billion — while the roughly 2 million lives theoretically saved by lockdowns would be worth about $21 trillion, or nearly eight times the $2.7 trillion in relief spending brokered by Congress and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

But James Stock, a Harvard economist who served on President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, said this crisis goes beyond such ordinary calculations because a shuttered economy represents an almost existential threat to the very idea of America.

“We really have to be talking not just about our reduction in consumption in the short run but what this is going to be doing to the economy and the republic in the long run,” he said. “It’s those big issues that we’ve been afraid to talk about. A year of this and we would just see an unrecognizable transformation of what America would look like coming out of it.”

Stephen Moore, a conservative economist who serves on Trump’s reopening committee, said those advocating restarting the economy are caricatured as putting profits over lives.

“I reject this idea that the people who are for keeping the economy shut down are the angels because they’re the ones who care about human life,” said Moore, who has coordinated with lockdown protesters. “What about the poverty? What about the suicides? What about the child abuse cases and the alcoholism and the drug overdoses and the depression and all of the negative effects to health and well-being that are associated with an economy in recession?”

 

https://news.yahoo.com/cold-calculations-americas-leaders-reopening-122102505.html

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

Quote

“I reject this idea that the people who are for keeping the economy shut down are the angels because they’re the ones who care about human life,” said Moore, who has coordinated with lockdown protesters. “What about the poverty? What about the suicides? What about the child abuse cases and the alcoholism and the drug overdoses and the depression and all of the negative effects to health and well-being that are associated with an economy in recession?”

 

Nije nista, hvala na pitanju, dobro su kao sto su bili i pre korone, samo se niko nije interesovao. 

[Angelia]

26 minutes ago, Baby said:

 

Nije nista, hvala na pitanju, dobro su kao sto su bili i pre korone, samo se niko nije interesovao. 

Ako si procitala ceo text primetila bi da on govori u slucaju recesije, sve te stvari stoje mnogo gore.

I to je dokazano.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

19 minutes ago, Angelia said:

Ako si procitala ceo text primetila bi da on govori u slucaju recesije, sve te stvari stoje mnogo gore.

I to je dokazano.

 

Malo se zezam, procitala sam tekst. 

 

Nego sta mi je jos interesantno, gde su otisli (tj. gde je plan da odu, pitanje gde su otisli do sada) ona 2 triliona (kazu i 3)...

 

 

Pa se pitam, deceniju i vise decenija korporacije, ove kojima je otislo skoro najvece parce kolaca, akumuliraju botatsvo i onda sve stane na mesec dana, a niko od njih nema plan ili akumulirani novac da moze sam da se spase. Vlasnici tih kompanija imaju vise bilionske racune, a onda treba drzava da im dotira. 

Pre neki dan kada je pala cena nafte, pa nastao haos u Teksasu, vec su skocili da gledaju da spasavaju uduvavanjem para, samo jedan dan je bio problem... 

Hocu reci, mene to navodi na zakljucak da, ako ne postoji infrastruktura i struktura nekih kompanija koje ne mogu da opstanu mesec dana bez prinosa, pritom akcije jesu pale, u medjuvremenu kompanije jel ne rade, kao sto videsmo treba im spasavanje, a akcije ponovo skacu... Da li je iko voljan da investira u kompaniju koja vestacki drzi cenu akcija mnogo vise od same vrednosti kompanije? Kako ce se to odraziti na buducnost kada se ovo sve zavrsi? 

 

 

 

 

[Don Juan]

On 4/23/2020 at 2:03 AM, Baby said:

 

Ova nije normalna, prvo kaze mi nudimo, pa onda kaze, ne ko je rekao da mi nudimo, pa placebo... Svi lupetaju neke gluposti da skinu odgovornost sa sebe. Posle kada im kazu "rekli ste" oni kazu "mi, nismo, to vam se ucinilo, jer smo rekli suprotno" 

Hocete biti u kazinima na liniji udara?

Pa ne bas, imam porodicu...

Najgore u svoj ovoj priči je da se ovo u svetu dešava upravo zbog ovakvih ljudi i ovakvog razmišljanja. Sve odluke koje su donete u januaru i februaru su bile katastrofalne i uzrokovale su pandemiju i širenje virusa u gotovo sve države. Kina nije izolovana u januaru, zato što je trebalo sačuvati ekonomiju. Države poput Australije, koje su među prvima zabranile dolaske iz Kine su ismejane. Posle toga je dozvoljeno da se situacija u Italiji iskomplikuje i dozvoljeno je da se virus prelije u ostale države, gotovo po istom scenariju i po istoj priči. Sada se opet sprema ista greška, i opet ćemo imati skok zaraženih najkasnije u junu, ako se krene sa otvaranjem i plašim se da će taj novi talas, ako do njega dođe biti još žešći nego ovaj koji imamo sada.

[Yoyogi]

11 hours ago, bohumilo said:

Opet cu reci kao i gore, radi i u Japanu, samo sto bi bez silnih QE-ova deflacija bila mnogo veca, a ovako je dovedena oko 0% ili do blage inflacije, tj. stvari za stanovnistvo su skuplje nego sto bi bile bez mere, i tom razlikom u ceni je finansiran QE.

 

Eh sada, ovo sto sam napisao jeste samo donekle i samo ugrubo tacno, u meri koja zavisi od uslova u konkretnom drustvu i ekonomiji, i u Japanu je manje tacno nego u SAD ili Britaniji. Osnovni razlog tome je sto centralna banka ne kontrolise ponasanje ljudi na trzistu, koliku god likvidnost da stvori ne moze da naredi ljudima sta sa njom da rade, oni mogu na njoj da sede kao i na drzavnim bondovima. Jedan od glavnih razloga sto "riba ne grize" ove QE-ove je kultura stednje, duboko ukorenjena u japanskom drustvu - prosecno japansko domacinstvo je duplo manje zaduzeno nego americko...

 

                  stanovnika (mil)    Ukupan dug  Ukupna lična štednja

Amerika:     330                            14T $                    1.3T
Japan:         125                              3T                      17  T

 

U obe zemlje dobar ako ne i večinski deo duga je home loan. Amerika ima na to još 1.3 T studentskog duga.

 

Sklonost (a i mogućnost) štednji varira i po prefekturama u Japanu. Najmanja je u tropskoj Okinawi (60,000US$ po domaćinstvu) a najveća u Nari 220,000US$ po domaćinstvu. Ima tu još puno paramatera od čega zavis štednja, ovo je pojednostavljeno. Prosto uprosečeni, svako domaćinstvo ima 160,000$ ušteđeno u kešu.

 

Najveća banka na planeti, Japan Post, ima 1.7T dolara samo u keš depozitima građana. Omiljena je jer je svugde, 24,000 Pošta (dok sveprisutni 7-11 ima 21,000 radnji pa i na sva 4 ćoška iste raskrsnice u velikim gradovima a ništa po ruralnim krajevima) i jer je  državna i država garantuje za ulog.

Još, na pobunu komercijalnih banaka, morali su da ograniče jemstvo države na 110,000$ po računu inače niko ne bi išao u banke. I to su probali da smuvaju, jedna suma na "savings" druga na "cheque" pa da se duplira.

[melankolic]

Posle antimalaričnog leka, dr Trump propisuje injiciranje izopropil alkohola obolelima od COVID- 19. Za 30 sekundi ima da ubije koronu. Ko preživi, pričaće.


https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/trump-suggests-injecting-disinfectant-into-the-body-to-treat-coronavirus-82470981752?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma

[Don Juan]

44 minutes ago, melankolic said:

Posle antimalaričnog leka, dr Trump propisuje injiciranje izopropil alkohola obolelima od COVID- 19. Za 30 sekundi ima da ubije koronu. Ko preživi, pričaće.


https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/trump-suggests-injecting-disinfectant-into-the-body-to-treat-coronavirus-82470981752?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma

Pa realno smanjiće broj preminulih od korone, i povećati broj onih koji su preminuli od trovanja alkoholom, ali to i onako niko ne prati.

Možda je genijalna ideja da se zaraženi sa covidom, zaraze sa HIV-om, pa da vidimo dva virusa kako se bore, i uz malo sreće možda ubiju jedan drugog.

[DJ_Vasa]

25 minutes ago, Don Laki Juan said:

Pa realno smanjiće broj preminulih od korone, i povećati broj onih koji su preminuli od trovanja alkoholom, ali to i onako niko ne prati.

Možda je genijalna ideja da se zaraženi sa covidom, zaraze sa HIV-om, pa da vidimo dva virusa kako se bore, i uz malo sreće možda ubiju jedan drugog.

 

Hoće li da proba na sebi?

[...]

37 minutes ago, DJ_Vasa said:

 

Hoće li da proba na sebi?

 

Ne vjerujem ali covjek moze da se nada.

[Yoyogi]

"Incompetence" epskih razmera od strane Amerike i njihovog lidera.

 

Baš me zanima, koliko se Amerikanaca seća šta je bio onaj poriv da ga se impičuje. Ovo je prilika, samo ko sme da se upusti u to i da iz tiganja iskoči u vatru?