RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://swtotd.blogspot.com/

What impact Covid-19 will have on the global economy no one now knows, but at least two things seem clear and will have consequences, both of which have been instrumental in keeping inflation at bay. First, the benefits of globalization and, second, the process of “just-in-time” inventory. Both bear risks.

The concept of free trade is a search for an ideal, not unlike King Arthur’s Knights’ quest for the Holy Grail. However, the reality of free trade can never be. Yet the closer we get the better all are served. Free trade is based on the concept of division of labor, popularized by Adam Smith, of labor costs, and by the availability of natural resources and of the means of shipping resources and finished goods. Theoretically, each nation should manufacture for consumption and export that which it can produce most cost-efficiently – whether the product is soybeans, oil or electronics – and import what it needs.

Easier said than done. Every country has arable land. Every country has workers skilled in multiple areas, not just in those for which they are best known. No country wants to be totally dependent on another. Exploitation and subservience are, though, unfortunately, natural conditions of man. As well, intellectual property is protected in some countries, but not in others. Rule of law does not apply evenly. Nevertheless, the goal of global trade is worthy. For one, it takes advantage of efficiencies, resources availability and labor costs. But, most important, trade requires that countries communicate and come together, and gathering is better than isolating.

Trade has reduced inflationary pressures on the price of consumables, by outsourcing manufacturing and assembly to countries with low labor costs. Medicines produced by American companies in India or China would have been more expensive if produced in New Jersey or Illinois. The same could be said of automotive parts and consumer electronic gadgets. While low prices for finished products have benefitted consumers, the losers include factory workers and lab technicians – and perhaps consumers if and when supply disruptions come. In July 2019, the U.S.–China Economic Security Review Commission invoked a Department of Commerce study that found that 97% of all antibiotics come from China. The Corona Virus, originating in Wuhan, has highlighted the disadvantage of dependency on China for something as vital as antibiotics.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/coronavirus-scary-enough-without-scaremongering/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

Like the reporters and pundits who seek out the most bloodcurdling predictions regarding coronavirus, I have no expertise on infectious diseases. But I’m far more skeptical about what certain experts say — not the scientists and doctors making amazing and tangible strides in combating the disease, but the model-making policymaking experts who often dominate news stories.

Former CDC director Tom Frieden, reports the Washington Post, says the U.S. death toll for coronavirus could range anywhere from 327 (best-case scenario) to 1.6 million (worst case). As I noted, I’m not an epidemiologist. That sounds like an extraordinarily wide-ranging set of predictions which are probably contingent on thousands of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Any one of you could comfortably predict a death toll somewhere between 327–1.7 million. These numbers need context.

Because partisans such as Andy Slavitt, an Obama-era bureaucrat, are out there telling followers and reporters that “experts expect over 1 million deaths in the U.S. since the virus was not contained & we cannot even test for it.”

First of all, the virus couldn’t be “contained” because we don’t live in a tyranny where we can send in the army and force citizens to shut down society. We live a sprawling and massive country. Yet there are some — Sen. Chris Murphy and news analysts at the New York Times, for instance — who lament the fact that Donald Trump hasn’t taken dictatorial federal powers to stop coronavirus. That’s not how it works, and the president is reportedly invoking emergency powers now.

As for the million expected deaths, the New York Times reported that one of CDC’s modeled scenarios found that between 200,000-1.7 million might die during the epidemic, with 2.4 million to 21 million people requiring hospitalization. A million deaths falls into the worst-case scenario category — not the “expected” number.

To put it in some perspective, China has reported around 80,000 cases of coronavirus in a country of 1.3 billion, and the number of new cases has been dropping and the death rate plunging over the past week. Of course China can’t be trusted with numbers, and the United States can’t take authoritarian measures to contain millions of human beings as China did. But, as I write this, there have been 5,056 reported deaths in the entire world. That number is sure to spike, but as the virus moves we learn more about how to mitigate its effects. We produce vaccines. We manufacture more — and more accurate and faster — tests. The FDA just approved a new coronavirus test that is ten times faster than the one used right now. We self-quarantine: South Korea now sees more recoveries than new cases.