Recession: The Government's Obvious Mistake

[mu_enrico]

How can they make this obvious mistake and get away with it?

• Lockdowns disrupt the supply chain. Artificially closing and reopening the economy will make a high unemployment period followed by high training costs and a longer time to get the same level of productivity;
• Lockdowns obliterating small/home businesses;
• Print money to incentivize people not to work;
• Further restrict economy with "green" agenda;
• Increase taxes to bail out their over-expenses.

I don't think they are dumb, but maybe they followed the wrong principle. Or there's a big agenda to get people into poverty?

[1715009350]

1715009350

[jackg]

• Lockdowns disrupt the supply chain. Artificially closing and reopening the economy will make a high unemployment period followed by high training costs and a longer time to get the same level of productivity;

This was probably handled the best by governments imo. I didn't see any/much news on there being pharmaceuticals having to isolate on ships or at ports (these normally have the most internationally intensive operations - chips/semiconductors did take a big hit though).

• Lockdowns obliterating small/home businesses;

This is where the UK government went really slow (and probably a lot of other places too). Most people who weren't running a formally/publicly listed company had a longer wait to be included in furlough (this was fine for a lot of people but it probably incentivised some to break lockdown rules).

[Despairo]

I don't think those thing you mentioned are the mistake from the government, because the macro economy problem are very complex and not easy to solve it.

The main reason are started because of the two factors e.g. high birth rate and low human resources.

Government implemented a lockdown because they want to protect anyone of the Covid-19, but it some people doesn't have a lot money to survive without work. This because of high birth rate, if those people didn't have many children, they can still survive.

Printing money isn't only used for incentivize people which doesn't work, but it's mostly for government expenditure.

A green agenda is very important because global warning isn't a joke, if you don't care with the environmental, you will harm the earth in the long run.

Increasing tax is still reasonable as long as your country have a clear roadmap to built some facilitation to make your country way better.

[fiulpro]

Even in Lockdown the markets are flourishing online as well, it's not an absolute lockdown of economy, it has caused the IT sector to push all borders and people are might as well continuing their jobs online therefore the economy have not been completely obliterated during the lock down.
Their principles were more focused on containing the covid as well and now we are seeing monkey pox which the experts have stated that it might not be converted into a pandemic, that might can change any moment therefore loosing people would be way worse than loosing economic stability.
*The Green agenda* might be needed because pollution is all time high, they are not following the wrong principals but they are definately doing the wrong execution. We need well educated people in the government honestly!

[palle11]

As to the series of lockdown that you mentioned as government mistake, I don't agree with you that is to be called a mistake or an economical wrong decision. It is not, the government took the best decision if we are to talk about that on covid-19. During the covid-19, the government choose to lockdown the economy, choosing between the good devil and the bad , of extreme decision that it saving life first against economic growth. The economic growth is pushed by man power and if the government didn't close the economy and allow more people to die then the economy will find it more difficult to grow. I think is a right economic decision to lockdown the economy at such times.

[davis196]

Most of the small businesses, that got locked down during the pandemic received financial compensation and some other benefits like tax vacation or loan repayments being postponed for a while.
The supply chains are getting disrupted because of China's "zero tolerance" policy against COVID. A 10 million Chinese town was locked down because of several people getting COVID. China is the global factory and when the Chinese production gets disrupted, it creates shortages around the world, which leads to inflation.
Yes, the massive money printing and stimulus packs created the inflation we see right now, but they actually saved the economy from a bigger depression, mass defaults and gigantic unemployment rates.
Yes, the "green industries" have a big influence over the governments and political elites. The transition towards "green economy" is going to be painful and expensive, but we all want to save the environment and live in a cleaner world.

[NotATether]

The supply chains are getting disrupted because of China's "zero tolerance" policy against COVID. A 10 million Chinese town was locked down because of several people getting COVID. China is the global factory and when the Chinese production gets disrupted, it creates shortages around the world, which leads to inflation.

It's not the only global factory. There is also Vietnam and Mexico, whose manufacturing sector is growing at an explosive rate ever since Chinese manufacturing hit a peak level a couple of years ago.

[hugeblack]

When you talk about governments, you mean a general term and therefore conspiracy theory or that it is actions to push people to poverty will not be logical because it is rare for all countries to agree on a specific thing due to the conflict of interests.

Therefore, every country has gone through a state of Covid, which is something new for governments, and they may have applied the wrong policies, but in the end, inflation or stagnation are both economic problems that will end one day or chaos will come.

[crwth]

The problem is that they are looking at the short-term view instead of the longer one because if you decide to print money now and don't think about the consequence, they are looking at the now. There's nothing wrong with solving the issues at hand with the freshly printed money, but I think it would be best if they could've just gotten money somewhere else before pumping more money into the mix. It's a problem.

[pooya87]

I don't think they are dumb, but maybe they followed the wrong principle. Or there's a big agenda to get people into poverty?

I don't think there is any agenda it's just that they are too dumb to come up with a better solution, they just do what is easy which is to print money (which is the main reason for these days inflations and being on the verge of recession). Any other solution would be harder and could also come with some unknown risks. Most governments don't bother with it since their terms would come to an end soon before they can finish it!!!

[naira]

I don't think those thing you mentioned are the mistake from the government, because the macro economy problem are very complex and not easy to solve it.

The main reason are started because of the two factors e.g. high birth rate and low human resources.

Government implemented a lockdown because they want to protect anyone of the Covid-19, but it some people doesn't have a lot money to survive without work. This because of high birth rate, if those people didn't have many children, they can still survive.

Printing money isn't only used for incentivize people which doesn't work, but it's mostly for government expenditure.

This sounds as if we are going against the nature of grace for the presence of a baby. I know there are family planning programs, but is reducing the human population at the heart of the overall lockdown?
We were knocked down because of the Lockdown where the government was not ready with anticipation, the spread of Covid at that time was misused for buying and selling drugs but don't we see the mainstream media showing pros and contracts about lockdown? Let's say the lockdown is for those who are ready, but for those who can only last a day, they don't care about the lockdown just to survive and provide for their families, they are willing to oppose this one-sided policy.

Printing money isn't only used for incentivize people which doesn't work, but it's mostly for government expenditure.

Are the incentives during our lockdown getting an even distribution phenomenon? channeled into the hands of the needy? maybe not, because there is always someone who wants to take part.

A green agenda is very important because global warning isn't a joke, if you don't care with the environmental, you will harm the earth in the long run.

I agree with this agenda.

[ChiBitCTy]

I agree that the lockdowns certainly had a major effect on the economy, with the supply chain etc, and continue to have an effect, but I think people seem to overlook the fact that this was our first major pandemic in our lifetime and it wasn’t an easy thing to navigate.

Also there’s a major importantance for going green. Even if doing so has an effect on the economy, we have to push our world to stop destroying it regardless of the costs.

[Marykeller]

How will the Ukrainian government explain this? During the war between Ukrainian and Russia, there was a stampede of people entering the train and there were no necessary measures taken in place before entering the train.
The Ukrainian government didn't try to curtail the spread of covid-19 during that moment. Their government and the USA government didn't raise alarm about the negligence of Ukrainian citizens taken in respect of not following the precautions of covid-19. All there focused was on how to defend their land and defeat the Russians. The global body didn't question the spread of covid-19. They were all agitating for peace to reign between both nations.

As far as I can say, there is more to the lockdown that happened over the last 2years that we don't know

[BlackHatCoiner]

Or there's a big agenda to get people into poverty?

Um, clearly? I mean they've called it an agenda themselves: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Reset. Recession is a meat and drink for those in power currently. After the pandemic, there's unemployment, inflation - poverty in general, which creates the need for an organized and globalized state.

According to a May 15, 2020 WEF article, COVID-19 offers an opportunity to "reset and reshape" the world in a way that is more aligned with the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), as climate change, inequality and poverty gained even greater urgency during the pandemic.

I don't think there is any agenda it's just that they are too dumb to come up with a better solution

They're smart, because they've made you think that way (plural). It won't take long 'til they convince the overwhelming majority that an economic and social reset is vital.

[m2017]

How can they make this obvious mistake and get away with it?

• Lockdowns disrupt the supply chain. Artificially closing and reopening the economy will make a high unemployment period followed by high training costs and a longer time to get the same level of productivity;
• Lockdowns obliterating small/home businesses;
• Print money to incentivize people not to work;
• Further restrict economy with "green" agenda;
• Increase taxes to bail out their over-expenses.

I don't think they are dumb, but maybe they followed the wrong principle. Or there's a big agenda to get people into poverty?

I don't think they are dumb and don't know what they are doing. The situation may be much more complicated than we think. I am sure that no government needs recessions, market crashes, crises and any adverse events, and therefore they are trying in every possible way to avoid this. Of course, their actions do not always lead to immediate positive results, but still, they are trying in every possible way to delay the onset of a recession, if possible.

[SirLancelot]

As to the series of lockdown that you mentioned as government mistake, I don't agree with you that is to be called a mistake or an economical wrong decision. It is not, the government took the best decision if we are to talk about that on covid-19. During the covid-19, the government choose to lockdown the economy, choosing between the good devil and the bad , of extreme decision that it saving life first against economic growth. The economic growth is pushed by man power and if the government didn't close the economy and allow more people to die then the economy will find it more difficult to grow. I think is a right economic decision to lockdown the economy at such times.

Maybe he is like the other that does not believe on coivd? And for them it is like created to hide the real agenda of the government but for us that believes then we think that lock downs are a good thing because there is also proof that people are dying and cases are rising all over the world. Majority of the people are also scared during that peak so they just agree to this rule but even if they don't they will still be forced or else they will pay big for it.

Anyway, the effects of the pandemic are starting to get lowered and the economy is returning back to normal again. There are still other benefits of this lock down like people discovered great things online.

[el kaka22]

Recession was not something the government created or their mistake, inflation was their mistake, recession is their way of trying to save it the only way they know. The whole system is terrible and in this system there isn't much you could do.

If there weren't lockdowns then there would have been more death, and if there were more death then there would be other side that will banish them and not vote for them, people who hate lockdowns have a good reason and they say they won't vote for people who lock them down, but people who thought lockdowns needed are higher in numbers, plus they wanted people to not die, that's a lot more important than economy for sure, be unemployed but alive, not dead but high employment rate because of it.

[blockman]

I think there's the agenda as usual as a hidden cause. Other country's economy are booming high and they have to disrupt it. What they do isn't for the people but for the sake political ambitions that they should let the others win on that matter. And with lies through these agendas are the people suffering and resulting to the inflation rates increasing and I think they're intelligent enough to understand the consequences of each actions they do for the people.

[goaldigger]

I don't think they are dumb, but maybe they followed the wrong principle. Or there's a big agenda to get people into poverty?

Restrictions are imposed during the pandemic and whatever the reason is, I think its necessary since there’s a big health issue by that time and many people died, it can be more worst if the government didn’t make any restrictions. Printing a lot of money is a one of the contributor for the recession and honestly, I think we are really bound for this scenario. Recession is the result of a bad handling of the government, it’s their fault in the first place and look at the good country with a great government system, they are not into recession even if they suffer as well during the pandemic.

[Z-tight]

How will the Ukrainian government explain this? During the war between Ukrainian and Russia, there was a stampede of people entering the train and there were no necessary measures taken in place before entering the train.
The Ukrainian government didn't try to curtail the spread of covid-19 during that moment. Their government and the USA government didn't raise alarm about the negligence of Ukrainian citizens taken in respect of not following the precautions of covid-19. All there focused was on how to defend their land and defeat the Russians. The global body didn't question the spread of covid-19. They were all agitating for peace to reign between both nations.

Um..bruh i do not know if you are on another topic, but in case you are not, the topic here is not about the Ukrainian, American or any specific government, it is about every government, because all of them took similar actions to curtail the spread of covid, of which it is those actions that have resulted in inflation and other problems now.

It goes without saying that covid started long before the war in Ukraine, where is the connection? Are you somehow suggesting Ukraine shouldn't defend her territory but focus on covid. In my opinion, the threat to their territory is a much bigger problem to them than covid was or ever will be.

[Marykeller]

How will the Ukrainian government explain this? During the war between Ukrainian and Russia, there was a stampede of people entering the train and there were no necessary measures taken in place before entering the train.
The Ukrainian government didn't try to curtail the spread of covid-19 during that moment. Their government and the USA government didn't raise alarm about the negligence of Ukrainian citizens taken in respect of not following the precautions of covid-19. All there focused was on how to defend their land and defeat the Russians. The global body didn't question the spread of covid-19. They were all agitating for peace to reign between both nations.

Um..bruh i do not know if you are on another topic, but in case you are not, the topic here is not about the Ukrainian, American or any specific government, it is about every government, because all of them took similar actions to curtail the spread of covid, of which it is those actions that have resulted in inflation and other problems now.

It goes without saying that covid started long before the war in Ukraine, where is the connection? Are you somehow suggesting Ukraine shouldn't defend her territory but focus on covid. In my opinion, the threat to their territory is a much bigger problem to them than covid was or ever will be.

The essence of the lockdown was it not to stop the further spread of covid-19? Don't make it look as if the occurrence I pointed out is irrelevant to the post.

I understand the topic more than you can think. The lockdown affected so many businesses and jobs globally and I was affected by it also. There was a global economic meltdown during that time.

In case you forget so quickly, there were strict measures in some countries during the Ukraine war. Some countries were still taking the necessary measure for stopping the spread of Covid-19 that has killed thousands of their citizens.
Don't get my comment twisted

[Despairo]

This sounds as if we are going against the nature of grace for the presence of a baby. I know there are family planning programs, but is reducing the human population at the heart of the overall lockdown?
Let's say the lockdown is for those who are ready, but for those who can only last a day, they don't care about the lockdown just to survive and provide for their families, they are willing to oppose this one-sided policy.

Reducing human population do have indirect effect for the lockdown. As you said those who are ready will have a lot money and can survive even they're not working, this applies when human population isn't too big, there will increase the chance of people become rich since it will not wasting to grow a baby. You may think I'm rude by saying that, but it's what it's and that's the main problem.

Too much human population will increase poverty and low salary due to too much demand for working rather than good paying job. I'd say when there's no more poverty and anyone working at least at the minimum salary of the country, we wouldn't see people panic due to lockdown.

Are the incentives during our lockdown getting an even distribution phenomenon? channeled into the hands of the needy? maybe not, because there is always someone who wants to take part.

Of course, corruption always happen. Maybe if the government want to distribute around $1 Million to the poor people, only $100K were successful.

[naira]

Reducing human population do have indirect effect for the lockdown. As you said those who are ready will have a lot money and can survive even they're not working, this applies when human population isn't too big, there will increase the chance of people become rich since it will not wasting to grow a baby. You may think I'm rude by saying that, but it's what it's and that's the main problem.

Too much human population will increase poverty and low salary due to too much demand for working rather than good paying job. I'd say when there's no more poverty and anyone working at least at the minimum salary of the country, we wouldn't see people panic due to lockdown.

If we look at other countries, the lockdown has passed and people have returned to their respective activities. So the lockdown is no longer effective in supporting how few people are in boosting the economy. The reason is at this time we have entered the economic recovery some are slow and some are fast, depending on how the government anticipates it. I know in terms of population reduction it sounds like when a pandemic starts with a population reduction agenda, right? The deaths of millions of people in the world are labeled as a result of Covid when only related (cough, flu, heart disease, and the common cold are labeled as COVID and you must be vaccinated immediately). Anything can happen when it comes to media control but behind the locks, we'd really appreciate how important it is to save money.

[mu_enrico]

Maybe he is like the other that does not believe on coivd?

Whoa chill dude
The question is, why it requires belief if all about the disease is obvious? I don't have to believe that, let's say, HIV/AIDS exists, no question.
But it may not be suitable for this econ discussion and COVID discussion is outdated already.

for us that believes then we think that lock downs are a good thing because there is also proof that people are dying and cases are rising all over the world. Majority of the people are also scared during that peak so they just agree to this rule but even if they don't they will still be forced or else they will pay big for it.

If you believe COVID exists, it shouldn't automatically support the lockdowns. What's the proof that lockdown will slow down the spread, lowering the death rate? What if nothing change other than the economy (for the worse). What if the excess mortality isn't because of COVID, but because of lockdowns - no income?

It's evident that when rice is abundant, the rat population increase, conversely when there's shortage, the rat population decrease.

Anyway, the effects of the pandemic are starting to get lowered and the economy is returning back to normal again.

What if it doesn't have to be that way? There's no need to return to normal if we didn't deviate from the normality in the first place.

Um, clearly? I mean they've called it an agenda themselves: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Reset.

Yeah, I'm aware of the WEF thing, but I don't think this organization has so much influence.

I don't think there is any agenda it's just that they are too dumb to come up with a better solution, they just do what is easy which is to print money (which is the main reason for these days inflations and being on the verge of recession). Any other solution would be harder and could also come with some unknown risks. Most governments don't bother with it since their terms would come to an end soon before they can finish it!!!

Make sense! They just pick what's easy. I thought it's because of the myopic policy as well. They only think for the short term, but it doesn't match with the green agenda. They are trying to solve 100+ year problem now.

[Gyfts]

Most governments knew what they were doing when they elected to shutdown the entire global supply chain network, their own economies/businesses for the sake of a virus that has a 99.9 percent survival rate. I'm assuming, and this is giving them credit, that the damages as a result of the lockdown strategies were miscalculated and ended up being more severe than they thought it would be.

They knew the end result would be slow economic growth and high inflation, but perhaps they did not expect such a severe degree of stagflation.

I don't think they are dumb, but maybe they followed the wrong principle. Or there's a big agenda to get people into poverty?

They followed "the science," according to them, and not basic economics.