The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Quick Takes: US Naval Decline, ASML’s Fall & More

Some topics deserve a mention but not a full article and that’s what quick takes are for.

***

This blog is for understanding the present, making educated guesses at the future, and telling truths, usually unpleasant ones. There aren’t a lot of places like this left on the Web. Every year I fundraise to keep it going. If you’d like to help, and can afford to, please Subscribe or Donate.

***

I’ve written about US ship building problems before, but it’s not just about that, the Navy is retiring ships faster than they are being built. (And yes, China is building them way faster than it is retiring them.)

***

Seems that the extra surveillance for the Paris Olympics will become permanent. Surveillance state, HO!

Offered without comment:

***

There’s a meme going around that when Norway increased taxes on the rich it lost tax income because so many rich people fled. Turns out that was not the case.

***

Add to, “what a mystery!” and “Who would have expected!”

The analysis revealed that the mortality rate of Americans ages 1 to 19 rose by 11% between 2019 and 2020 and an additional 8% between 2020 and 2021.

***

The new BYD Seagull EV costs $9,700 American, though that price is only really available to Chinese, they kick it up a lot even for countries without tariffs.

***

ASML, which creates advanced lithography machines, has 49% of its sales in China. Due to sanctions, it expects that number to drop to 20% of sales. Share prices crashed 16% in a single day.

ASML’s CEO previously indicated he expect China to learn how to make lithography machines and that ASML and the West would eventually lose essentially the entire market. What he didn’t say is that once China can make these machines, they’ll then take the entire non-Western market too. Truly sanctions stupidity.

Previous

Austerity, Demand and Reindustrialization

Next

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 27 2024

9 Comments

  1. Daniel Lynch

    Re: ships. the future of all surface navies is uncertain because they are big, slowing moving targets for missiles and drones. The bigger the ship, the easier the target. Why should we spend money building ships that will simply be sunk?

    Russia seems to be moving toward moderately sized ships that mainly serve to launch missiles, but those ships are still vulnerable, and missiles can be launched from anywhere, so I don’t see the point myself.

    If a “real” war ever breaks out, surface shipping will grind to a halt –(witness puny Yemen shutting down Western shipping in the Red Sea — and there will be huge supply problems. To me, that reinforces the desirability of an economy that does not depend on imports. It also reinforces the undesirability of war!

  2. StewartM

    The cartoon about the top-heavy ship is too true to be as funny as it should.

    As a colleague once griped, ‘we had a downsizing and a year or so later we have more new vice presidents than before’. The fact is that US companies can’t do because they’re chronically understaffed, especially when it comes to the ‘doers’ instead of the ‘paper shufflers’.

    But given what Wall Street thinks is important, why should this be a surprise, when they think the ‘movers and shakers’ in an economy are those who sit on their butts trading stocks all day?

    As for ships, it’s just a symptom of the corruption in our system. We can’t afford to built ships because a) we’ve laid off the doers at those companies for short-term profits and b) we’ve allowed companies to gouge the government for what they do build, and since we refuse to tax rich people any more the government must borrow money from them.

    In a similar vein, I was looking a table of medication, and government programs to make them free or affordable to ordinary people. But the issue is, the US government still pays the pharma company their asking price (almost $2000 a month) for a prescription, when everyone knows that the cost of the drug (including R&D and regulatory approval) is nothing close to that. I mean, the markup is likely in the hundreds if not thousands of percent, not anything even like 25 % or 50 %, let alone 5 or 10%. Yet it’s supposedly austerity-bent ‘small government’ types who allow this gouging to occur.

  3. mago

    Yeah, well, since this planet is 2/3rds water it makes sense that humans would sail it, flail it, pollute and fuck it up in general.
    Happened then. happening now and on and on and on.
    Water water everywhere and not a drop to drink
    Can there be no respite/can there be no peace.
    No end to speculation/to ignorance and all the rest of it.
    Paz y amor baby.

  4. Dan Kelly

    “Seems that the extra surveillance for the Paris Olympics will become permanent. Surveillance state, HO!”

    The default position everywhere, not just in France, is the fact that the surveillance systems are inaccurate for ‘people of color’ and they are bad for protesters.

    First, they are inaccurate for we ‘whiteys’ too. Perhaps in aggregate things are worse for ‘non-whites’ – perhaps – but how does that help the individual?

    The much more important point is that these inaccuracies can be overcome with better ‘training’ of the tech.

    So, absent a wholesale call by all sectors of society firmly stating “NO BIOMETRIC SURVEILLANCE, PERIOD” – sans that, this will continue without end.

    This is how they play all sides.

  5. bruce wilder

    If you tax the wealth and not the people and corporations who lay claim to owning that wealth, how mobile can the wealth be?

    Sources of wealth — whether minerals in the ground or the highly developed synergies of a society with strong institutions and well-educated populace is location-specific and geographically bound in ways that ought to make generating tax revenue quite feasible and defensive.

    A ‘race to the bottom’ that that disables fiscal capacity of government is the outcome of a political process, indeed the outcome of a policy design.

    Maybe there’s no theory of politics that can create a countervailing force to the corrupting power of great accumulations of money in a few hands, but we ought to think about it harder than we do.

  6. someofparts

    One of my reasons for an interest in the Ottomans was that they did do a good job of managing accumulations of wealth and power for a long time. If we do want to learn how to handle such things, maybe we could stop airbrushing Muslims out of history and instead begin learning what they can teach us about effective social organization.

  7. Mark Level

    Why would China take the US’s ASML market in whole?

    Well, gosh, I guess when the West builds exploding pagers that maim & kill the users for their god, “NatSec”, people in various countries who COULD at some point get on the US’s or Israel’s Kill Lists (basically every country in the world except US, Israel, Germany (white supremacist once again), UK and maybe France) is vulnerable.

    But hey, the Zionists sure got their shits n’ giggles in from killing kids, hospital staff, etc. & claiming they were all “Hezbollah.” What’s a little economic boycotting losses relative to the fun of that!

  8. Jan Wiklund

    The Mr Medlock who gives the numbers for Norwegian tax income doesn’t reveal his source. It would be good to have, for example to throw into the face of Macron’s voters. I don’t think they accept an anonymous Mr Medlock as a source. Perhaps one can see it at some Norwegian government website, but where….

  9. Purple Library Guy

    I had this idea for making sure actual ownership of (property, companies, etc) was clear:
    The tax service identifies an asset in its country. It follows normal procedures for finding out the owner of that asset. If there’s shell companies or whatever, there’s some mandated procedure and amount of effort it has to go to, to make a good faith effort to find out who actually finally owns whatever it is.

    If the tax service fails to identify the owner of the asset . . . then it belongs to the government. If someone’s not happy about that they can identify themselves and document their claim to it, within say three years, and get it back. After that, they’ve lost title. The government can use it, sell it, whatever.

    I think people would get a little less clever about hiding their ownership to dodge tax.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén