Monthly Archives: April 2020

Restrictions and Supply Chains

Posted on by
Reply

The People’s Republic of China has relatively newly emplaced—earlier this month—export restrictions on a variety of Wuhan Virus-related medical equipment that prevents their shipment to the US. These restrictions included signed deals for shipment—these are now blocked as well.

This is another example of the duplicity of PRC government officials and another example of the worthlessness of those officials’ promises.

Still, it’s not all bad. I don’t know why we’d want medical stuff that’s manufactured inside the PRC or by PRC-controlled manufacturers anywhere else, given the demonstrated shoddiness and outright uselessness of their manufactory.

This is just one more reason why we—and the rest of the world—need to excise the PRC from anywhere and everywhere in our supply chains.

[The PRC] is an almost irreplaceable supplier, making more than 40% of the world’s imports of masks, gloves, goggles, visors and medical garments, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

This is a dependency that must end. The PRC government as currently constituted is simply too unreliable, and the products it produces for export are too quality-lacking.

Employment Insurance

Posted on by
Reply

This is Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s latest brain…storm.

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee proposes getting all 50 states to adopt and dramatically scale up short-time compensation programs—also known as work sharing—in which businesses and companies in distress keep workers employed at reduced hours, with the federal government helping to make up the difference in workers’ wages.

That’s not going to do anything other than shift a part of a worker’s pay from the company employing him to us taxpayers.  With Uncle Sugar—that’s us—picking up part of the tab, companies would have no incentive to keep workers employed fulltime, much less pay them a full wage. They would have an incentive to claim this or that distress.

Such a move also would distort cost-signaling by masking the true cost of labor to a company. That would flow, in turn, to inaccurate price signaling in the market place, since the prices buyers would see would not be tied to the seller’s true costs.

This is just another example of Progressive-Democrats looking to expand their welfare cage and gild it with taxpayer money.

Too Polite to Say

Posted on by
Reply

In an interview on Monday night’s The Ingraham Angle and cited by Fox News, Congressman Jim Jordan (R, OH) had this about the House Progressive-Democrats’ obstructionism and abuse of the present Wuhan Virus situation to push their own progressivism:

[H]e has spoken off-the-record to some congressional Democrats who want to get back to work but are held in line by party leadership.

The Congressman is too courteous. If those Progressive-Democrats really are being held back, it’s not by Party leadership. It’s by their own cowardice.

Full stop.

Planning

Posted on by
Reply

Many nations are beginning to look at how to release the stay-at-home encouragement regimes and outright lockdown/quarantine requirements, including the United States (and several of the individual States and groups of States), the European Union sort of confederation of nations, Austria, among others.

A bit of second-guessing by me: these “looks at” should have been ongoing, with plans nearing readiness as plans to reduce or release restrictions draw nigh.

Any flag officer, knowing logistics, could tell you this.

Just as a sensible person is reluctant to enter a building before knowing where at least some exits are located, so a sensible government shouldn’t be entering widespread stay-at-home encouragements, much less lockdowns, without also having at least begun planning for easing/releasing the restrictions and for post ease/release recovery.

Export Incentives Coupled with Domestic Disincentives

Posted on by
Reply

The People’s Republic of China has moved to shut down the domestic marketing of wild animals on fears [wild animal traders’] goods sparked the coronavirus pandemic. This is a seeming response to growing international pressure on the PRC to cut that out for that reason.

[The People’s Republic of] China’s National People’s Congress on February 24 imposed a ban on the sale and consumption of wild animals in the country.

However.

Less than a month later, [The People’s Republic of] China’s Ministry of Finance and tax authority said on March 17 they would raise value-added tax rebates on nearly 1,500 Chinese products, including offering a 9% rebate on the export of animal products such as edible snakes and turtles, primate meat, beaver and civet musk, and rhino horns….

As the Congressional Research Service, cited in the article at the link, mentioned, the export move

could spread the risk to global markets[.]

You think?

The CRS’ report further noted,

Absent in [The People’s Republic of] China’s policy push are incentives to encourage the sale of pharmaceuticals, PPE, and other medical products overseas[.]

Hmm. Makes me wonder just what the PRC is up to, really.

 

The CRS’ report can be read here.