The day after tomorrow

[Viking]

kab60 - I agree.

 

Folks are scared today but also going stir crazy and missing family/friends. This is not a permanent fear such as after 9/11 and will subside very quickly followed by social gatherings

 

I don’t know about you, but I never had concerns after 9/11 to go out with friends. It might be different if you lived in NYC, but elsewhere; knowing how terrorism works, it’s not a compounding thing. You are quite safe after a terrorist attack, because they take a long time to plan out.

Epidemics are different - they are compounding and follow exponential growth laws at least early on. In addition, they affect the whole county, the entire air travel and not just a few locations. I don’t intend to downplay 9/11, and I remember this vividly, but to me, it seemed  like a piece of cake compared to this, unless one was in those doomed airplanes or twin towers of course.

 

The big question is now have we reached the peak and how long is this shoulder going to last until we can assume it is safe to open bits and pieces here and  there. I guess everything is progress but I don’t see normalcy for any month or to be specific early spring. by that time, we could have a nasty recession and a GDP that could still be down 5-10% from where we were at the 2/1/2020 run rate.

 

I think China has been very slow to get consumer spending going again. Many people are still afraid of contracting the virus. When the virus started there was much we did not know; most people way underestimated the health and economic impact the virus would have. My guess is we continue to underestimate the ongoing economic impact to global growth the virus is going to have moving forward. Lots we still do not understand.

[meiroy]

 

There's no way demand will come from China.  It has to be USA households, i.e. money --> households.  It could also come from Germany and it does seem they are indeed showering households with money.

[Spekulatius]

The EU is going to have some serious issues going forward. Italy economy has been weak and is hard hit by this crisis. the Northern nations don’t want to be on the hook for them, understandably, imo:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/eu-fails-agree-virus-response-073133148.html

 

Related to this somewhat is the interesting factoid that the median Italian is quite wealthy. I believe this is due to high homeownership and thriving grey economy. Perhaps the Italians should kick in before asking their neighbors to do so? At least that’s one view:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

[wabuffo]

The EU is going to have some serious issues going forward. Italy economy has been weak and is hard hit by this crisis. the Northern nations don’t want to be on the hook for them, understandably, imo:

 

Its because European nations have given up their own currencies and are now no more than provinces (or American states) - yet they still behave like they are sovereign nations.

 

The same issues are percolating in the US as well.  State tax revenues are in free fall while expenses are skyrocketing (unemployment payments, healthcare funding) and the Feds are reluctant to be on the hook for it.  The Cares Act did send $150B for help to the states (and local govts) but that isn't nearly enough to plug the holes.

 

The next act in this drama will be states issuing IOUs as payment (like Illinois did a few years ago and California did in 2009) - since like Italy, New York, New Jersey, etc do not control their own currency and will literally run out of cash.

 

wabuffo

[Castanza]

The EU is going to have some serious issues going forward. Italy economy has been weak and is hard hit by this crisis. the Northern nations don’t want to be on the hook for them, understandably, imo:

 

Its because European nations have given up their own currencies and are now no more than provinces (or American states) - yet they still behave like they are sovereign nations.

 

The same issues are percolating in the US as well.  State tax revenues are in free fall while expenses are skyrocketing (unemployment payments, healthcare funding) and the Feds are reluctant to be on the hook for it.  The Cares Act did send $150B for help to the states (and local govts) but that isn't nearly enough to plug the holes.

 

The next act in this drama will be states issuing IOUs as payment (like Illinois did a few years ago and California did in 2009) - since like Italy, New York, New Jersey, etc do not control their own currency and will literally run out of cash.

 

wabuffo

 

Thanks for sharing Wabuffo, would be curious you hear your thoughts as to why or what has caused the US to go down this path? I noticed you mentioned the gold standard earlier. Personally, I see more nationalization on the horizon both in Europe and elsewhere. I'm not saying globalization has failed, but the cracks and inefficiencies are showing to some extent.

[wabuffo]

would be curious you hear your thoughts as to why or what has caused the US to go down this path?

 

I'm not sure I understand your question, Castanza.  Can you please clarify what you mean by "go down this path?"  thanks.

 

wabuffo

[Castanza]

would be curious you hear your thoughts as to why or what has caused the US to go down this path?

 

I'm not sure I understand your question, Castanza?  Can your clarify what you mean by "go down this path?"  thanks.

 

wabuffo

 

Well during this crises I have seen many ideas flung around by a few economists.

 

- Going back to the gold standard and getting rid of the fed

- Implementing something along the lines of Bancor like Keynes suggested by Michael Pettis recently

 

I guess I was curious on your thoughts for either of these "solutions". Specifically as it relates to US monetary policy etc. Looking at it now, it's a rather vague and open ended question so feel free to disregard it  :P

[drzola]

An Actuary may just have a clue what's going on with the current Life Cycle metrics.

[drzola]

Good read on Life cycle Metrics ; Intelligent Paradigms for Healthcare Enterprises: Systems Thinking

edited by Barry G. Silverman, Lakhmi C. Jain, Ashlesha Jain, Ajita Ichalkaranje

 

 

 

[SharperDingaan]

would be curious you hear your thoughts as to why or what has caused the US to go down this path?

 

I'm not sure I understand your question, Castanza?  Can your clarify what you mean by "go down this path?"  thanks.

 

wabuffo

 

Well during this crises I have seen many ideas flung around by a few economists.

 

- Going back to the gold standard and getting rid of the fed

- Implementing something along the lines of Bancor like Keynes suggested by Michael Pettis recently

 

I guess I was curious on your thoughts for either of these "solutions". Specifically as it relates to US monetary policy etc. Looking at it now, it's a rather vague and open ended question so feel free to disregard it  :P

 

We already have precedent for the Bancor currency, it's the Special Drawing Right (SDR). To date, usage has been downplayed in favour of the dominant global trade partners currency (USD) as the global reserve currency. Yesterdays world.

 

Bitcoin, has modernised the concept and essentially made Bancor the CB-CB payment counterpart. Except, now for use by the entire global population, and clearing through the CB's, to displace Apple Pay, Google Pay, etc. The sticking points have been population insistence on cash bills, and privacy (every transaction, everywhere, now traceable). Post Covid-19, we will have passed the 'contactless' payment process (digital money) tipping point, and implementation will accelerate.

 

SD

 

 

[wabuffo]

Well during this crises I have seen many ideas flung around by a few economists.

 

- Going back to the gold standard and getting rid of the fed

- Implementing something along the lines of Bancor like Keynes suggested by Michael Pettis recently

 

I guess I was curious on your thoughts for either of these "solutions". Specifically as it relates to US monetary policy etc. Looking at it now, it's a rather vague and open ended question so feel free to disregard it

 

Oh ok - thanks for clarifying.  I didn't want to misinterpret your question and answer a question you weren't actually asking.

 

Bancor (ie, a global currency) is never happening.  The Euro exposes the fragility of this model where sovereign nations relinquish control of a fiat currency.  You could say a gold standard probably will never happen either for the same reason.  So my short answer is neither your option 1) or 2) is ever going to happen.  Though I would say that gold still retains some price signal informational value that should be paid attention to.

 

People make fun of MMT but I think that's because the left has embraced it and used it to push for its favorite programs like the Green New Deal and Federal Employment Guarantee programs.  That's too bad - because it is a big turn-off for most people who are more moderate in their views.  But MMT, IMHO, does a better job of explaining what happens in our current monetary system than some of the traditional economic models do ("deficits crowd out private borrowing", "banks lend reserves", "money multiplier," etc, should be relegated to the dustbin of macroeconomic history).

 

Its a crisis like this that causes us to slowly discover that what we thought were economic constraints might not be constraints (or become constraints at much higher levels than mainstream economics believes).  So I think we will run with much higher deficit-to-GDP ratios than we have in the past.  How we do that (% lower taxes, % higher spending) is going to be where the debate will be between left and right politics.

 

Its funny to find out that everything we thought we knew about the Fed and the US Treasurys' operations might be wrong. 

 

To use a baseball analogy, before Babe Ruth, baseball was played in a small-ball way (lots of slap hitting singles, sacrifice bunting, etc).  The HR leader for a season might only hit 9 HRs and lead the league.  Then came the Babe.  The force of his talent and personality changed the game.  In his first full season (1919) he led the league with 29 HRs while playing for the Red Sox.  In distant second place was "Home Run" Baker with just 10 HRs.  Then the Babe was traded to the Yankees and really got going.  1920 - 54 HRs, 1921 - 59 HRs.  Soon every baseball player was changing his swing and bashing homers.  Baseball never looked back.  (You could make a similar analogy to the NBA and the recent focus on shooting 3-pointers and eschewing 2-pointers outside the paint).

 

My point is that sometimes we are trapped in what we think are constraints (like the old-timey baseball players) until the environment shows us that those constraints are self-imposed and non-physical constraints.

 

This is neither good or bad - I'm completely agnostic about what larger structural deficits mean.  I just think we've been heading there since the GFC and this crisis will be like Babe Ruth blasting 54 HRs and showing us that deficits maybe don't matter as much as we thought and that the only constraint is at what point inflation kicks in (which can then be calibrated).  I think we will be conducting a real-world experiment in MMT from now on.  There's no going back.  Even so, a bit of gold might be a good hedge in case we overshoot.

 

wabuffo

 

 

[SharperDingaan]

would be curious you hear your thoughts as to why or what has caused the US to go down this path?

 

I'm not sure I understand your question, Castanza?  Can your clarify what you mean by "go down this path?"  thanks.

 

wabuffo

 

Well during this crises I have seen many ideas flung around by a few economists.

 

- Going back to the gold standard and getting rid of the fed

- Implementing something along the lines of Bancor like Keynes suggested by Michael Pettis recently

 

I guess I was curious on your thoughts for either of these "solutions". Specifically as it relates to US monetary policy etc. Looking at it now, it's a rather vague and open ended question so feel free to disregard it  :P

 

We already have precedent for the Bancor currency, it's the Special Drawing Right (SDR). To date, usage has been downplayed in favour of the dominant global trade partners currency (USD) as the global reserve currency. Yesterdays world.

 

Bitcoin, has modernised the concept and essentially made Bancor the CB-CB payment counterpart. Except, now for use by the entire global population, and clearing through the CB's, to displace Apple Pay, Google Pay, etc. The sticking points have been population insistence on cash bills, and privacy (every transaction, everywhere, now traceable). Post Covid-19, we will have passed the 'contactless' payment process (digital money) tipping point, and implementation will accelerate.

 

SD

 

Think of Bancor as being a crypto-currency, and every county having its own local currency. If you want to buy something from another country you exchange local currency into Bancor at a fixed FX rate, and pay in Bancor. Country trade deficits settled at the collective CB level by netting, and unlimited issue of Bancor. To Joe Citizen, it looks/feels much the same as today .....  but with modern plumbing that is entirely different. Not a bad thing.

 

SD

 

[thowed]

I just think we've been heading there since the GFC and this crisis will be like Babe Ruth blasting 54 HRs and showing us that deficits maybe don't matter as much as we thought and that the only constraint is at what point inflation kicks in (which can then be calibrated).  I think we will be conducting a real-world experiment in MMT from now on.  There's no going back.  Even so, a bit of gold might be a good hedge in case we overshoot.

 

 

I like the analogy!

 

I agree that we'll be conducting a real-world experiment in MMT from now on.

 

I believe that when this sort of thing happens, governments ALWAYS overshoot.

 

I'll admit I don't have the brainpower right now to give examples/reasoning, it's something baked in me from reading articles by people smarter than me.

 

[wabuffo]

Think of Bancor as being a crypto-currency, and every county having its own local currency. If you want to buy something from another country you exchange local currency into Bancor at a fixed FX rate, and pay in Bancor. Country trade deficits settled at the collective CB level by netting, and unlimited issue of Bancor. To Joe Citizen, it looks/feels much the same as today .....  but with modern plumbing that is entirely different. Not a bad thing.

 

Why would the US willingly relinquish its control of the US dollar's reserve currency status?  The vast majority of international cross-border transactions are settled in USD.  When a Norwegian shipping company buys an oil tanker from a South Korean shipbuilder, the contract is written to settle in USD (not won or krone).  The rest of the world wants dollars - especially at times of crisis since there also has been a rise in foreign debt denominated in USD.

 

Cryptcurrency has dropped the ball and will never become a replacement.  Its badly constructed and too volatile to hold any collateral value.  The concept was ok (limit the growth of crypto at a fixed rate - but the implementation has been problematic).

 

Hard to see anything changing in the current global monetary regime.

 

wabuffo

[Castanza]

Thanks for sharing wabuffo and SD.

[SharperDingaan]

Think of Bancor as being a crypto-currency, and every county having its own local currency. If you want to buy something from another country you exchange local currency into Bancor at a fixed FX rate, and pay in Bancor. Country trade deficits settled at the collective CB level by netting, and unlimited issue of Bancor. To Joe Citizen, it looks/feels much the same as today .....  but with modern plumbing that is entirely different. Not a bad thing.

 

Why would the US willingly relinquish its control of the US dollar's reserve currency status?  The vast majority of international cross-border transactions are settled in USD.  When a Norwegian shipping company buys an oil tanker from a South Korean shipbuilder, the contract is written to settle in USD (not won or krone).  The rest of the world wants dollars - especially at times of crisis since there also has been a rise in foreign debt denominated in USD.

 

Cryptcurrency has dropped the ball and will never become a replacement.  Its badly constructed and too volatile to hold any collateral value.  The concept was ok (limit the growth of crypto at a fixed rate - but the implementation has been problematic).

 

Hard to see anything changing in the current global monetary regime.

 

wabuffo

 

That's the problem. and why SDR's have not become the global reserve currency.

But the reality is that EVERY country eventually loses its reserve currency status, and the US is no exception. This time around there is just another alternative (crypto Bancor) that never existed before. Settle global trade in Bancor, denominate company books in Bancor, and you've made companies both directly comparable (same currency, same IFRS reporting), as well as eliminated the driver for most FX trading (no longer need to buy and sell the reserve currency [uSD] to settle trade). Reduces ability to manipulate, and much more cost effective, therefore it will eventually occur.

 

Maybe not today .... but its just a matter of time and circumstance.

 

SD

 

 

 

 

[Cigarbutt]

Variants of the MMT real-world experiments have been tried before and the progressive debasement of money in the latter periods of the Roman Empire is a striking example. Then copper substituted silver and now PhDs use more sophisticated models.

http://money.visualcapitalist.com/deaths-roman-emperors-vs-silver-coin-content/

 

With QE, money somehow came back on the Fed balance sheet but distributing money to the populace is clearly linked to velocity risk. MMT money is basically a zero maturity, zero interest, callable Treasury note backed by the full faith of future taxation. MMT has never been tried before however with the international reserve currency integrated into an incredibly well connected world. The USD is now the only game in town:

https://www.nbc.ca/content/dam/bnc/en/rates-and-analysis/economic-analysis/hot-charts-200406.pdf

 

Whichever way this is sliced, MMT means future consumption brought today squared. The US, as the guardian of faith, has immense goodwill and capacity for future taxation which makes timing difficult. However if we go the MMT route (unfortunately, i think this is now likely), all bets are open and it seems that TIPS may become valuable interim vehicles.

 

Your reference to baseball really resonated. I've played a lot of baseball (still do) and was able to be a pitcher and occupy the #4 slugger position on the roster list until coaches refused to let that happen. Babe Ruth was indeed a phenomenon. However, you forgot to mention that he got some help: 1-the coefficient of restitution of the baseball was increased in 1920, games were increased from 140 to 154 and the home field on which he played the most had only 295 feet along the right field line. Also, home runs rates have not changed that much, when you adjust for various variables and the number of players the size of Babe Ruth is now commonplace. Also, in the late 1990s, during a period of unusual creativity in stock market valuation parameters, home run records adopted again a this-time-is-different attitude and observers suggested that players had finally escaped the self-imposed constraints of human potential. As with any bubble, usually the end result includes televised congressional hearings. For baseball, the idea was to Restore Faith in America and it was discovered that players (Conseco, McGwire, Sosa and Bonds) had applied an MMT-type of strategy on steroids. Many people suggested that steroids did not have an effect but, with re-imposed constraints, players are no longer breaking records, quite the opposite.

 

Rumor has it that Babe Ruth once called his shot. As a possible bagholder, i will say the following: If MMT makes it to mainstream, this will be bad and that sucker could go down. :)

[wabuffo]

CB, one minor nit -- we are not about to 'try' MMT - as if this is similar to swapping out an operating system from Windows to Linux.  I would argue it is THE SYSTEM we have today.

 

1) the Fed is largely impotent because it confines itself to managing an inter-bank payment clearing system where it must supply settlement balances at its target interest rate in order for payments to settle.  Tinkering with short-term rates a few bps at a time, I would argue doesn't do much heavy lifting, IMHO.

2) The heavy lifting from a monetary system perspective comes from the new financial assets created by the US Treasury to the tune of ~$1B per year. 

 

To that I would add, we seem to have stronger economies (with no/low inflation) when we run higher deficits (4-6% of GDP) than when we run at low deficits.  Also the one time in our recent past when we tried "paying down the Federal debt" (ie, the surpluses of 98-01) - it led to disastrous consequences with a grinding deflationary recession of '00-02 and was the spark that led to the GFC as the private sector had to borrow to maintain its consumption levels.  There are exceptions like right after the GFC - but that was because the economy had suffered a near-death experience.

 

I also don't understand why macroeconomists cheer "stimulus" when it means extra deficit spending but boo/hiss when the same deficit level is achieved via tax cuts.  Seems to me the latter statistically leads to better outcomes in terms of GDP growth.  I like my deficits the Ronald Reagan way (and not the Bernie Sanders way).

 

But we are now heading off the charts in terms of deficit/GDP levels.  The game is changing (even though the rules and operating system aren't changing).  Are we about to find a better way (smashing HRs rather than slapping singles,  shooting 3s from downtown rather than mid-court 2-pt jumpers) or is it going lead, as you say, to tears and a losing season.  I'm not sure - I think we could safely run hotter - but how hot is too hot?

 

To use another baseball analogy - MMT is like Bill James coming onto the scene and describing how the on-base percentage is more important in terms of run creation than the batting average.  He pointed out quite rightly that there are only 27 outs per game and you don't want to waste ABs with excessive outs (i.e, taking a walk was better).  The rules of the game didn't change - but initially the few teams (Oakland A's) that tried the new approach found success (before everyone copied the strategy).

 

How about we just agree that MMT is not "new" - it was always there.  We're just discarding the old-school sportswriters for the Moneyball nerds to describe what really works in terms of winning.

 

wabuffo

 

(oh - and the short RF line in Yankee Stadium helped the Babe only slightly.  According to baseball-reference.com, Ruth still hit 25 HRs and 27 HRs on the road in 1920 and 1921 respectively - that's a half season so double those numbers to get 50 and 54 HRs in a "neutral ballpark".  Still amazing and all Babe's doing with no help - other than maybe a beer and hot dog before the game!)

[Cigarbutt]

It's always a pleasure to disagree with you. 8)

You are correct in saying that government deficit funding has started and the future may have more in store. It may even include infrastructure spending, public (even private?) pension funding of underfunding etc. In theory, there's no limit (the sky is the limit?) and some say that MMT is for magic money tree..

One of the well known proponents suggests that it doesn't have to be complcated; it would be like a kitchen sink:

https://www.marketplace.org/2019/01/24/economy/modern-monetary-theory-explained/

Personal note: Today i looked at all programs that my lawmakers have recently put forward and i (and my household) don't qualify for any although the fine print seems to indicate that personal finances may be affected by taxes eventually removed by lawmakers to drain the economy, even assuming that purchasing power won't be destroyed. So, maybe i need to figure this out backwards, hopefully before the day after tomorrow.

[Spekulatius]

Well, I don’t really understand MMT they well but I do know that managing the Fed, the banking and inflation is basically a confidence game. Coming from Germany, I have read about the inflationary periods after WW1 and We2 and more over the stories about the inflation after WW1 (my grandparents were small kids then but they remember People running to stores after they got their paycheck because was worth less the next day etc) They saw money becoming worthless twice. That’s why they would rather take  a recession than endure inflation. I think it transferred other to the next generation pretty well too.

 

My thinking is that when we discover the limits of all this, meaning that people lose the confidence in the currency, it will be all over and require a hard and painful reset. Not something I look forward too but I think I will see this day coming as each intervention seem to be multiples larger arger than the last one with not all that much of a long term effect.

 

[Cigarbutt]

^So the question is how hot is too hot?

The idea is to focus on individual names but things, at large, have been moving at an extremely rapid pace.

Yesterday, somebody wondered about what the market demanded and potential moral hazards:

https://qz.com/1833565/some-are-calling-for-a-junk-bond-leveraged-loan-bailout/

Today, the Fed urgently announces new measures, involving buying munis and junk (!) bonds and taking leveraged loans as collateral(!?).

https://www.nysscpa.org/news/publications/the-trusted-professional/article/federal-reserve-goes-even-further-will-buy-risky-debt-too-040920

This sounds like intravenous fentanyl but maybe i'm the one intoxicated just after having reviewed a series of articles by Grant's, giving a Grand Tour of Junk.

i used to wonder when the Fed would run out of ammunition and now worry that they may not.

i really want to shut up about these developments but it just happens that present markets are the most interesting, certainly from personal experience, and possibly, ever. :-\

[Spekulatius]

^So the question is how hot is too hot?

The idea is to focus on individual names but things, at large, have been moving at an extremely rapid pace.

Yesterday, somebody wondered about what the market demanded and potential moral hazards:

https://qz.com/1833565/some-are-calling-for-a-junk-bond-leveraged-loan-bailout/

Today, the Fed urgently announces new measures, involving buying munis and junk (!) bonds and taking leveraged loans as collateral(!?).

https://www.nysscpa.org/news/publications/the-trusted-professional/article/federal-reserve-goes-even-further-will-buy-risky-debt-too-040920

This sounds like intravenous fentanyl but maybe i'm the one intoxicated just after having reviewed a series of articles by Grant's, giving a Grand Tour of Junk.

i used to wonder when the Fed would run out of ammunition and now worry that they may not.

i really want to shut up about these developments but it just happens that present markets are the most interesting, certainly from personal experience, and possibly, ever. :-\

 

My thinking is that this will be pushed until it doesn’t work and then we get the Wile E Coyote moment. The bailouts in 2009 didn’t really work out too badly for the taxpayer, so it’s not surprise that actors now try to do more and go way deep into the mud (junk bonds). The next step is probably buying equity  ETF. That would be the ultimate Fed backstop.

[Viking]

Is Japan not a decade or two further along in this process (central bank intervention and zombie economy)? They seem to be able to keep kicking the can down the road; yes, their economy is not great but they do not have civil disorder.

 

I wonder what happens to Europe. Italy was in a tough position before the virus hit; now what happens? UK needs a divorce. What can we expect from Germany post Merkel? Euro banks are not in great shape. Little consensus on what needs to be done. I think this is the region to watch the next 6 months.

 

The Middle East will also be interesting. Roubini is saying Iran is highly motivated to ensure Trump is not reelected in Nov as the country cannot endure another 4 years of sanctions without regime change of some sort. so he thinks we may see a war between Iran and the US before Nov. Saudi Arabia has issues as well.

 

Emerging markets will be hit hard by the virus and the global recession and do not have the $ to soften the blow.

 

Geopolitically the world is more messed up than it has been in many decades with no traditional leadership from the US. The opposite in fact: isolationism and protectionism. Deglobalization looks to be a possible new trend that may pick up steam.

 

Income distribution in the US is about to get worse. Low income families will bear the brunt of the current economic recession. All the Fed actions will be good for holders of financial assets (stocks and bonds). Have to wonder when the poor in the US decide enough is enough. Populism on steroids? Will we see the pendulum shift more to labour in the coming years? The path to the Nov Presidential election will be bloody and brutal.

 

Oh. And we have this virus thing going on with every country on the globe doing their own thing. With the virus at different stages in different counties. No coordination, poor communication and limited cooperation. Lots of backstabbing in the race to secure medical supplies. Looks like law of the jungle right now with lots of mistrust. Not sure how this poisonous environment will be supportive of economic growth moving forward.

 

But the Fed and politicians are coming to everyone’s rescue, just like we knew they would. The money is flowing once again. So financial assets (stocks and bonds) are rallying again. Let the good times roll! What could possibly go wrong?

[Spekulatius]

^ I think it is pretty likely that we get a crisis in Euro land when this is over, with Italy and to a lesser degree Spain as a hotspot.Not sure hat is going to happen, but it’s probably not too pleasant.

 

It is also unclear how the Chinese US relationship develops. Probably not for the better especially if it turn out that China as the origin of this disaster comes out as a relative winner. Countries will internalize more things hey seem important for security. not sure what rabbit holes this leads u down to, but it doesn’t sound bullish for global trade.

 

As for the COVID-19 virus, once we develop a vaccine, the best thing we can do is to give it to anyone on earth, even enemies like North Korea and Iran. The reason is simple - the chances of it mutating into something that makes the vaccine inefficient is much higher if it survives in considerable quantity inhuman hosts. Less throws of a dice - less chances of a dangerous mutation.

 

Right now the threat or MERS, SARS and COVID-19 seems to come from bats that serve as a reservoir as it doesn’t make them sick and then it jumps species twice where the second jump is from some animal household animal to humans. This takes some chain of mutations, but appears to occur every couple of years, which is bad enough as is. If the virus keeps a human reservoir however, I think those mutations will probably happen every year or so with the consequence that we get super flu waves due to only partly effective vaccines that are multiples deadlier than the flu we get every year.  Maybe to much speculation on my part, it would be great to hear Bill Gates opinion on this topic as he clearly thinks about these issues.

[Spekulatius]

I am thinking that lower density areas that do well in this epidemic might do well in terms of housing because older folks (who tend to have money), might want to move there. Buy a cabin in the woods in upstate NY or Vermont or maybe around Flagstaff in AZ. Good hospital nearby a strong plus. People might look at COVID-19 maps rather than school districts  (which don’t matter since kids are out of the house). I know similar things have occurred after the two wildfire season in CA. Thoughts?