네이처 "코로나19 집단면역 형성 어려워지고 있다" 집단면역 어려운 5가지 이유 제시...독감 같은 풍토병으로 남을 가능성 경고/ 동아 사이언스 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 국민일보 검찰, ‘100억대 주택 부실 매입’ SH공사 압수수색 pump... 유치권 여부를 등기만 보고 확인하는 멍청한 짓은 부동산 생초보도 안하는 실수입니다. 백프로 이권 개입됐다고 봐야죠. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- jtbc 시진핑 주인공 드라마 방영 예정...'아침이 밝아올때까지' 아싸assa http://www.ilbe.com/view/11333468547 쯔진천의 소설 <동트기 힘든 긴 밤(원제: 장야난명)> 판권 구입해서 시진핑이 정적을 제거하는 과정을 부패 척결로 미화한 소설. 중국 공산당에서 소설과 드라마를 흥보하고 장려 소설 원작자는 홍콩 민주화 운동가들을 '제대로 된 직업이 없고 게으르고 또 빈둥거리다가 어느날 갑자기 자신이 혁명가가 되겠다고 말하는 사람들'이라고 조롱 및 비하. jtbc 제작사는 내용을 각색했다고는 하나... 어째든 중국 공산당에서 시진핑 흥보하는 소설 판권을 사와서 만드는거.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선일보 “투쟁 말만 봐도 토 나와” 노조 갑질 반기든 현대차 MZ 세대 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 김소월의 초혼 라인강09 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11333512725 오늘은 부활절 휴가가 시작하는 휴일이기도 하니 미친척 하고 시도 한편 올려 본다. 민주화 주어도 달게 받겠다 !! 김소월의 초혼 김소월의 첫 여인 첫사랑이자 한동네 소녀인 오순 소월은 같은 반이었던 오순과 친해져 옥녀봉 냉천터에서 자주 만나곤 했다 함께 피리를 불거나 노래를 부르며 산책하기도 했다 그때의 추억으로 빚은 시가 " 풀따기" "자나깨나 앉으나 서나" 등이다 둘의 인연은 오순이 19세에 시집을 가면서 끊어졌다 오순은 의처증이 심했던 남편의 학대를 견디지 못하고 22세로 죽고 말았다 오순의 장례식에 갔다가 돌아온 소월은 오열하면서 시 한 편을 썼다. 그렇게 탄생한 시가 '산산이 부서진 이름이여! 허공중에 헤어진 이름이여!' 로 시작하는 '초혼'이다 초혼(招魂) 산산이 부서진 이름이여! 허공 중(虛空中)에 헤어진 이름이여! 불러도 주인(主人) 없는 이름이여! 부르다가 내가 죽을 이름이여! 심중(心中)에 남아 있는 말 한 마디는 끝끝내 마저 하지 못하였구나. 사랑하던 그 사람이여! 사랑하던 그 사람이여! 붉은 해는 서산(西山) 마루에 걸리었다. 사슴의 무리도 슬피 운다. 떨어져 나가 앉은 산(山) 위에서 나는 그대의 이름을 부르노라. 설움에 겹도록 부르노라. 설움에 겹도록 부르노라. 부르는 소리는 비껴 가지만 하늘과 땅 사이가 너무 넓구나. 선 채로 이 자리에 돌이 되어도 부르다가 내가 죽을 이름이여! 사랑하던 그 사람이여! 사랑하던 그 사람이여! ---->단테의 첫사랑이 없었다면 신곡이 탄생할 수 없었다. 김소월의 가슴을 울리는 시의 뒤에는 그의 첫사랑 오순이라는 여인이 있었다! 한국의 시인 중에 김소월을 빼면 읽을 만한 시가 별로 없다. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 패배자들의 특징은 인간의 약점, 편견, 모순, 불합리성 등을 풍자하고 거기에서 이익을 취하기 보다, 그것을 하소연한다는 것이다. Porkchop Express “The characteristic feature of the loser is to bemoan, in general terms, mankind's flaws, biases, contradictions, and irrationality - without exploiting them for fun and profit.” One of my favorite aphorisms in @nntaleb “The Bed of Procrustes”) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 중앙은행에 의해 자본에 기반한 사회 질서가 파괴되고 있다. 1차대전 이후로 미국에서는 경성(硬性)의 상품에 대한 소유권이 연성의 유동적인 주식과 같은 자산의 소유권으로 변화했다. 슘페터는 그의 책 <자본주의, 사회주의, 민주주의>에서 이런 현상을 확인하고 설명했다. 기업은 경영자들, 대주주, 소주주 등으로 구성되는데, 이들 중 누구도 기존의 소유 관념으로 기업을 바라보지 않으며, 소주주들은 기업에 대해 적대적으로 변하고 나아가 자본주의 질서에 대해서도 그렇게 된다고 분석했다. 함부로 찍어내는 돈은 도덕을 문란하게 하고, 나아가 인간들까지도 도덕 관념이 사라지게 만든다. 사람들은 돈의 구매력이 그들 눈 앞에서 사라지는 것을 보지 않으려면, 어쩔 수 없이 금융시장에 그들의 돈을 투자해야 한다. 브루스 스프링스틴이 경제학 지식이 있었다면, 그는 버니 샌더스가 아닌 론 폴의 집회에서 노래를 불렀을 것이다. 제2의 스프링스틴이 있다면 그는 자본주의를 비난하지 말고 연방준비위원회를 규탄해야 한다. The Property-Based Social Order Is Being Destroyed by Central Banks Zachary Yost Readers of the Mises Wire are no doubt familiar with the negative consequences of central banking and the inflationary capacity of fiat currency and how such a system drives malinvestment and leads to boom-bust cycles. Not only does the business cycle lead to the misallocation of resources from their natural ends of the structure of production, but it also drives resources into financialization, rather than the “real” economy. This financialization, which has been taking place since at least the First World War, has served, over time, to structurally undermine the morality of property in the eyes of the general public. As the increased popularity of socialism, at least in rhetorical terms, among the youth indicates this “evaporation” of property may reach a critical mass within the not-too-distant future. The Social Effects of Financialization In his book The Present Age, sociologist Robert Nisbet traces the origin of financialization to the First World War and the decision to finance the war via credit, rather than taxation. He argues that the other negative social effects of the war, combined with the flush of cash and credit into the system drastically altered American’s traditional propensity to save and instead to spend. These changed habits led to the “roaring twenties” where instead of acquiring wealth through hard work and thrift and a focus on producing goods and services, Americans turned to financial means of acquiring wealth. This began what Nisbet calls the “evaporation of property” where ownership of hard tangible goods has evolved into the “soft” ownership of highly liquid and mobile forms of property such as stocks. This concept of evaporating property originated in the work of Joseph Schumpeter, an economist and contemporary of Mises in Austria (though not a member of the Austrian school) who identified and explained this phenomenon in his classic work Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Schumpeter criticizes the shareholder mechanism of ownership for separating legal ownership from those responsibilities and actions that are traditionally associated with it. He argues that the owners of publicly traded firms are comprised of three groups of people: the salaried executives and managers, the large shareholders, and the small shareholders, and that “no element of those three groups … takes the attitude” that is generally meant by the word property. The employees, he states, often do not identify with the shareholding interests, and the large shareholders, even if they behave how financial theory predicts, are “at one remove from both the functions and attitudes of an owner.” Schumpeter considers small shareholders to be the least tied to ownership, saying that they often care little and if anything are mobilized by others for “their nuisance value.” He goes on to say that in the end, small shareholders end up feeling ill used and “almost regularly drift into an attitude hostile to ‘their’ corporations, to big business in general and, particularly when things look bad, to the capitalist order as such.” [Read More: "Financialization: Why the Financial Sector Now Rules the Global Economy" by Ryan McMaken] For Schumpeter, the heart of the problem is that “the capitalist process, by substituting a mere parcel of shares for the walls and machines of a factory, takes the life out of the idea of property” and that “this evaporation of what we may term the material substance of property—affects not only the attitude of the holders but also that of the workmen and the public in general. Dematerialized, defunctionalized and absentee ownership does not impress and call forth the moral allegiance as the vital form of property did.” Easy Money vs. Private Property Nisbet laments that this highly liquid form of property leads to economic perversity where “more and more capitalism tends to ‘exalt the monetary unit’ over the type of property that theoretically alone gives the monetary unit its value.” Nisbet takes especial issue with slick operators who seem to believe “that by raiding a decently run corporation, artificially jacking up its price on the stock market through the use of high-yield credit, including junk bonds, they are in consequence improving the management of the corporation.” The sad fate of the once iconic Toys “R” Us is one such example. When Toys “R” Us filed for bankruptcy several years ago, some thirty thousand people lost their jobs. The surface argument is that the brick-and-mortar retailer simply couldn’t keep up with the new online world and was losing out to the Amazons and the Walmarts. However, when examined closer, the case can be made that the company’s doom was sealed when it was purchased by a consortium of private equity firms in the mid-2000s. Thanks to the abundance of credit facilitated by the Fed’s loose monetary policy the firms actually only fronted 20 percent of the buyout, with the rest being borrowed. After the acquisition, the firms then saddled Toys “R” Us with the debt used to purchase them in the first place, adding over $5 billion in debt to the $1.86 billion the company held before the deal. By 2007, 97 percent of the company’s operating profits were being consumed to pay interest expenses. The firms also charged the company hundreds of millions of dollars in fees and The Atlantic reports that “according to one estimate, the money KKR and Bain partners earned from those fees more than covered the firms’ losses in the deal.” Who knows how Toys “R” Us would have fared without being saddled with $5 billion in debt. Perhaps it would have had the flexibility to innovate, or perhaps it would have failed, but in the end it didn’t have a chance to find out. Were Nisbet alive, he would not have been surprised by such an event in the slightest. Loose money leads to loose morals and loose people who see no problem in such a scheme that demonstrates very little actual economic value being produced. Rather than exercising the responsibilities typically associated with property and ownership, these private equity firms treated Toys “R” Us worse than a rented mule and in doing so created loads of anticapitalist sentiment. One can’t help but think of Bruce Springstein’s 2012 song “Death to My Hometown,” in which he attacks such firms by lamenting that even though no “shells ripped the evening sky” or “blood soaked the ground” and “no armies stormed the shores for which we'd die” “marauders raided in the night” and “just as sure as the hand of God they brought death to my hometown.” Springstein concludes with a warning to “be ready for when they come for they'll be returning sure as the rising sun.” A people that comes to view the capitalist class as rampaging Huns in suits who “ate the flesh of everything they've found” is not a people that will be living under a market system for much longer. And when one looks at what happened to Toys “R” Us and similar firms, how the stock market was booming in the midst of the covid lockdown disaster, or how, as Ryan McMaken recently pointed out, GDP is expected to go through the roof even though the true unemployment rate is dismal, it is not hard to understand why people have such hostile opinions of capitalism. Similarly, all this financialization has made it much more difficult for people to preserve their wealth against inflation and to save and invest in the traditional manners. Instead, people are driven into the stock market. As Jörg Guido Hülsmann notes in his book The Ethics of Money Production, people “must invest their money into the financial markets, lest its purchasing power evaporate under their noses.” He goes on to note that while such a thing may be good for financial brokers, it is not good for the average citizen who is incentivized into debt due to chronic inflation, pushed into a state of financial dependency, and now at the mercy of the financial winds. The GameStop saga is example of this idea in action. Flush with cash from government “stimulus,” numerous average joes have taken up day trading and pumped the price of a stock into the stratosphere that is in no way connected to reality. The first wave of “meme investors” soon learned that the financial system is not exactly friendly to their method, as the actions of brokers like Robinhood quickly demonstrated. In the long run the reality is that most day traders will lose money and when that happens there is little doubt that their small foray into “financial capitalism” will leave these small investors with the attitude that Schumpeter predicted: hostile to the company they supposedly own and to the capitalist system in general. Misplaced Hostility Toward the Marketplace Hostility towards capitalism seems to be growing everywhere one looks. It is not surprising that envy fueled leftists despise capitalism, but on the political right more and more populists have taken to bashing capitalism and the “market fundamentalists” who are supposedly running the GOP. Yet, populist conservatives have so far seemingly failed to notice the way in which the Federal Reserve and our inflationary fiat currency have contributed to all of the social problems and ills that they are greatly concerned with. Perhaps such populists can be given a pass for not being familiar with Hülsmann’s work on the cultural consequences of fiat money, but what is perplexing is that midcentury authors who conservative populists are more familiar with, such as Robert Nisbet and Wilhelm Röpke, wrote at length about the scourge of inflation and its negative social consequences and yet the issue still raises nary a peep out of the likes of Tucker Carlson and Sohrab Ahmari. While such a situation is distressing, those within the Austrian tradition should see an opportunity here to harness the populist energies that seem to be growing larger by the day and to reveal to the aggrieved masses that the true target of their wrath should be the state and central banking system. Had Bruce Springsteen had access to a sound economic education he would have been singing at Ron Paul rallies, rather than at those of Bernie Sanders. The task of ensuring the next Springstein is lambasting the Federal Reserve and not capitalism itself begins now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------