Breakfast briefing: Surging US pandemic at frightening levels

US payroll growth weak; US Congress eyes large new stimulus; Canadians to tax vacant homes; Aussies expect China wheat ban; pandemic deaths leap in US; UST 10y at 0.97%; oil and gold firm; NZ$1 = 70.5 USc; TWI-5 = 72.6

7th Dec 20, 7:19am by David Chaston

Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand, with news the pandemic surge in the US is reaching frightening levels.

But first, their November non-farm payrolls data disappointed. A rise of just +469,000 was expected after the October +610,000 gain with the November expectations undermined by the weak ADP data. But the actual result undershot all those estimates, coming in up just +245,000. It is a significant loss of momentum. Their participation rate slipped to a low 61.5% although that is not as low as it has gotten earlier in the year. Weekly earnings growth held at +4.4% pa.

This means there are now -9.7 mln fewer people employed in November 2020 in the US than were employed in November 2019 even though their working aged population grew by +1.1 people over the same time.

New factory orders fell -3.7% in October from the same month a year ago, and they slipped from the prior month as well (although on a seasonally adjusted basis, they are being reported as being +1% up on a monthly basis). Non-defense capital goods orders brought marginally better news rising +0.4% year-on-year even if they too slipped from September. None of this data represents a recovering economy.

On the trade front, their October trade deficit for both goods and services came in at -US$63 bln, its second largest ever and only beaten by the awful August result. Their October goods deficit was 21% higher than a year ago, their services surplus was -24% lower. The politically sensitive deficit with China came in at -$30 bln for goods alone and little changed from the same month in 2019.

This poor data has re-energised Congress. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are currently negotiating details of a roughly US$900 bln plan to support various at-risk sectors of their economy. The stumbling block are the Republicans who have "suddenly" rediscovered their aversion to deficit spending.

The bricks-and-mortar retail industry is in substantial trouble. A list of 17 recently bankrupt key retail chain names have closed more than 11,000 locations, with sales of more than US$41 bln. Clearly those purchases will happen elsewhere and probably online, but that is still a major hollowing-out.

North of their border, the Canadians reported labour market data for November as well. They added +62,000 jobs in the month and that was much better than the +20,000 expected. And that is also better than it appears because full time work grew by +99,000. But despite the better-than-expected result, it was all less than for October.

In Toronto, they are pushing to get approval for a tax on vacant homes to increase the housing supply by encouraging homeowners to sell or rent their unoccupied home. If they choose to continue to keep the home vacant, it will be taxed and this revenue used to fund affordable housing projects. And in New York, they are pushing ahead with a tax on second homes. It too seems likely to pass.

Canada is moving to impose higher taxes, in a similar way to New Zealand's push.

And in Argentina, they have passed the 'millionaire's tax', supposedly a one-time impost on about 12,000 people to raise US$3.2 bln which will be allocated to buying supplies to fight the pandemic.

In Singapore, they may be turning a corner with retail sales rising in October from September (even if only modestly) and the year-on-year decline reduced to -8.6%. It was -10.7% in September on the same basis.

In Australia, they see a new ban coming from China, this one for wheat' (pg28). Fortunately for them, Chinese demand is high and the Aussies sell relatively little to China, so their opportunity in in markets where wheat to China is diverted from. The Aussie rural sector is expecting its second-biggest ever grain crop this year and and is enjoying high livestock prices.

The latest global compilation of COVID-19 data is here. The global tally is 66,774,000 and a +1,221,000 rise over the weekend. It is very grim in Russia, the UK, Brazil, Turkey and Indonesia. It does seem to be easing further in Europe generally. Global deaths reported now exceed 1,533,000 and up a very sobering +36,000 in two days as death rates spike everywhere.

But the largest number of reported cases globally are still in the US, which rose +410,000 over the weekend to 15,012,000 and an exploding increase. The US remains the global epicenter of the virus. The number of active cases is surging and now at 5,933,000 and that level is up +196,000 in just two days, so many more new cases more than recoveries. The rise in 'active cases' by more than +100,000 in one day is being normalised. Hospitalisations are becoming a very major concern, as are reinfection rates. Their death total now exceeds 288,000, up +4000 in two days and its pace is rising quickly again. The US now has a COVID death rate of 868/mln, similar to Argentina.

In Australia, they are not getting any resurgence. There have now been 27,965 COVID-19 cases reported, and that is just +16 more cases yesterday. Now 44 of their cases are 'active' (-1). Reported deaths are unchanged at 908.

The UST 10yr yield will start today higher at 0.97% and holding over the weekend. Their 2-10 rate curve is marginally steeper at +82 bps, their 1-5 curve is also steeper at +32 bps, with their 3m-10 year curve is marginally steeper too at +90 bps. The Australian Govt 10 year yield will start the week at 1.06%. The China Govt 10 year yield will start at 3.32%, while the New Zealand Govt 10 year yield is up at 0.91%.

The price of gold is up another +US$3 to US$1838/oz.

Oil prices are holding at Saturday's level, and now just over US$46/bbl in the US, while the international price is now just over US$49/bbl. We are getting back to levels that were around in early 2020 and prior to the onset of the pandemic.

And the Kiwi dollar has firmed marginally to 70.5 USc and off its recent highs but at a similar level to a week ago. Against the Australian dollar we have firmed slightly as well, back to 95 AUc. Against the euro we up marginally to 58.2 euro cents. That means our TWI-5 is up to 72.6 and slightly below last week's level.

The bitcoin price has changed little over the weekend, now at US$19,116 and a +0.6% rise since this time Saturday. The bitcoin rate is charted in the exchange rate set below.

The easiest place to stay up with event risk today is by following our Economic Calendar here ».

Daily exchange rates

Select chart tabs

Source: RBNZ

Source: CoinDesk

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

45 Comments

by Uninterested | 7th Dec 20, 7:37am 1607279878

In the following article it points out that the main banks will get a big advantage over building societies by not allowing building societies access to the funding for lending, cheap $.
Towards the end:
Bascand acknowledged the “perceived inequities” in his letter but forecast non-bank lenders would benefit from a trickle-on effect as a drop in bank term deposit rates from Funding for Lending allowed them to reduce their own interest rates to savers.
How bad is that!
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/123591089/communities-will-suffer-as-2…

by Uninterested | 7th Dec 20, 7:36am 1607279807

On that reasoning mortgage rates will have to be competitive too, ie drop as well. The same margin compression = bad for these non bank lenders.
And if deposit insurance comes in, lower deposit rates again. The only good thing about that is, how much lower than 0.9 can they go???
Well 0.2 according to Kiwi bonds. But Kiwi bonds are different. They are secure and are better overall in my view.

by blobbles | 7th Dec 20, 7:50am 1607280642

Reserve Bank is out of control, the current model does not work anymore. They are a rogue agency now probably doing more harm than good. Its time the RB act was scrapped and/or heavily modified to stop their rogue practices which are highly destructive to NZs future and increasingly current economic outlook. We no longer have proper market economies with the current settings and idiots in charge.

by Independent_Observer | 7th Dec 20, 9:10am 1607285434

Have you watched/read ‘Princes of then Yen’?

by Hamish | 7th Dec 20, 8:02am 1607281351

The RBOSBONZ
The Reserve Bank of some banks of NZ.

by Audaxes | 7th Dec 20, 9:12am 1607285557

But Reserve Bank deputy governor Geoff Bascand told non-bank lenders last month they generally didn’t qualify for the loans because they didn’t have the collateral it deemed eligible.

Funding for Lending Programme (FLP) has been declared a repo transaction available to existing RBNZ counterparties.
Outstanding bank funding arrangements for eligible collateral securities are forecast to be replaced by RBNZ OCR priced funding under this arrangement.

Banks will retain an economic interest in the securities posted as loan collateral, unlike the debt securities sold, in QE transactions, to the RBNZ.

by Andrewj | 7th Dec 20, 7:46am 1607280412

Well, no good news in the market this weekend, Belle did the right thing I'm still chipping away at things.

This article on China is interesting and could be behind some of the other news we are getting.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-12-04/chinese-commun…

News like this

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/head-worlds-largest-sovereign-wealth-…

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 8:26am 1607282792

Yes as a liberal democracy we need to fear China. But not just that, we need to be very concerned about any government that seeks to entrench and enhance it's own power. We need to understand that those in power seek to preserve and protect that power, privilege and prosperity, mostly at the expense of others. Too many people fail to understand this, are ideologically blinded and are afraid to stand up for what is right.

by b21 | 7th Dec 20, 8:35am 1607283330

Excuse me? We are not more a liberal democracy than a communist one, it is just enough with liberals taking credit of what it is not theirs, this has been a misuse of the liberal word for quite some time.

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 9:28am 1607286517

B21 why do you think NZ is not a liberal democracy?

by scarfie | 7th Dec 20, 8:42am 1607283776

That comment is totally at odds with your opinion about lockdown, and the loss of civil rights. I'd hoped reading Dalio, who describes the loss of rights and use of Police Forces in the fight for power, might put you on track. Standing up for civil rights is standing up for what is right, many here have failed the test.

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 9:12am 1607285569

No it is not Scarfie, the Lock Down was an event outside of the norm, that threatened the health of everyone, with no knowledge of how to treat it and within the scope of the purpose of Government I suggest that the lock-down was an appropriate measure. And so far the analysis is backing that up.

The article by Cai Xia on the other hand describes the entrenching of power and the imposition of a very restrictive rule for the day to day business of a nation. China's actions in this area are not justified by an extraordinary events that threaten the health and welfare of the population, but a merely moves to strengthen the CCP's power and control over the country.

Make no mistake though, I do think our Government's actions in some areas, particularly firearms control went too far and we are now seeing some consequences of that. The shooters actions were singularly enabled by the Police's failure to apply it's own responsibilities properly, which enable him to legally purchase firearms. The Government's sole significant action to date has been to effectively punish every law abiding, sensible gun owner.

by scarfie | 7th Dec 20, 10:39am 1607290756

The problem here is inconsistency in thinking. All excuses are equal. But I guess some excuses are more equal than others. I feel a reference to George Orwell is completely within context here.

You realise that consequetialism (for the greater good) has no place in science right? It is subjective, anyone using it or referencing it isn't doing science, in fact they have turned their back on science.

What do you think the process of losing your rights looks like? Do you think it is going to come out and punch you in the face? Most often it won't, it is going to be an insidious slow creep. The fact you have been suckered but anti science rhetoric shows how easy the process can happen. There are no buts on this mate, you either have civil rights or you don't.

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 11:26am 1607293568

I do agree that the process of losing rights is generally an insidious process. Which is why I advocate for strong challenging of our pollies. But that does not mean that the Government was wrong to go to lockdown. What you are advocating is essentially anarchy, the rights of the individual over the rights of the group. But when those individual rights when they are ranked over the rights of the group, start impacting on other individuals within the group, what then? What you are arguing is that the Government should not have been able to lock down, and that people should have been able to circulate as normal. Take the world evidence that is now in front of us - people will circulate, spread the virus and then give it to others who didn't want it, didn't volunteer for it, and did nothing wrong. Who is accountable here? Do you believe in herd immunity? The evidence coming out of the US is that the re-infection rate is increasing, so with COVID is herd immunity even possible? How many must die before we figure that one out? And who chooses, you? what gives you that right?

by scarfie | 7th Dec 20, 3:40pm 1607308807

You just did it again, got confused about science. Herd immunity is consequentialist. There is no room in science for consequentilism. You raise other issues, but it is a waste of time discussing those with you until you have the foundation right. Clear your head! In engineering there is a saying about going back to first principles.

Principles fall under deontological ethics, the opposite to consequentialist. They are principles because they are rigidly adhered to, the moment you don't they are no longer a principle. Let me put it another way, you don't compromise a principle, it either is, or it isn't. If you want to do away with a principle, then do away with and stop pretending you are clever enough, or human governance is clever enough, to reinterpret it for every situation.

How would you like it if we did away with the presumption of innocence in our justice system? Same deal. Imagine your neighbour suing you for something, some minor perceived annoyance, and that resulted in your losing your home in a legal battle. You lose the principle and you lose property rights, the right to do business, all sorts of things. That is the level of seriousness of this, and you are messing with it.

by PocketAces | 7th Dec 20, 8:28am 1607282903

Even in 2010, as we were cranking up to sell NZ to the Chinese, and those of us warning against it were labeled xenophobic, I thought the freeing up in China would not be permanent, it would only last until they had made the world reliant on them, then they would turn back to authoritarianism, and they have.

by Independent_Observer | 7th Dec 20, 8:52am 1607284360

Yes that really was terrible at the time - especially John Key pushing that narrative for political gain.

by ham n eggs | 7th Dec 20, 8:57am 1607284665

In a world of resource pressure, holding hands and singing kum by ya will inevitably fall away in favour of in-groups
... so to be economically beholden is a big mistake

by Audaxes | 7th Dec 20, 1:11pm 1607299911

We traded our jobs for debt, that's what free trade was about. China got the jobs, we got the debt.

Thus, we sell our exports and family silver in return because we can no longer sustain import substitution industries capable of offsetting a virtually perpetual current account deficit, despite China's best efforts to feed its working population from the endeavours of our remaining agriculture sector.

by sit23 | 7th Dec 20, 8:32am 1607283126

Running the two articles together, one can understand completely why the Norwegian government acted that way.

by loveyourwork | 7th Dec 20, 8:50am 1607284235

Interesting to see members with the ability to think critically and think for themselves. One wonders what would happen if more citizens could do the same... @xing

by Audaxes | 7th Dec 20, 9:07am 1607285220

The mission statement found in Foreign Affairs magazine asserts that it will “tolerate wide differences of opinion,” and that its articles “will not represent any consensus of belief.”

On the contrary, one can read Foreign Affairs on a regular basis and never see any articles expressing concern about the negative effects of open borders and multilateral trade agreements upon our national sovereignty. In fact, what one gets from the magazine is a steady diet of globalism — and in the last two years, a drumbeat of anti-Trump rhetoric. Link

by Audaxes | 7th Dec 20, 8:37am 1607283426

This means there are now -9.7 mln fewer people employed in November 2020 in the US than were employed in November 2019 even though their working aged population grew by +1.1 people over the same time.
No Doubt, There Really Will Be Two “L’s” In Payrolls

By November, assuming the same rather lackluster job growth average (private payrolls) as had been estimated from the 18 months prior to February 2020 (during the globally synchronized slowdown of Euro$ #4), there would’ve been something like 1.5 million new private payrolls added after February up through November. Bare minimum to keep with even slowed population growth.

However, at these reduced monthly rates, the labor market, while still improving, is barely matching what “normally” would be happening and thus not even catching up to the cumulative total deficit any longer – and stalling here at, again, greater than the Great “Recession’s” worst case.

And in that case, it was only for a temporary period; the economy fell off sharply late 2008 and early 2009, and though it never fully recovered it didn’t stick around near the bottom month after month, year after year. What we find here is just such a frightening prospect: an economy that experienced 2009-levels of job losses that appear to be permanent, at the very least more than short run (just ask the OECD).

Yet, this is being priced as inflationary good news? No. Risk markets, even bonds (the leveraged short specs), to a small degree, are betting that none of this will matter once the vaccine begins working its way (slowly) through the economy. On top, these awful labor numbers are expected to further stiffen the resolve of politicians who will come riding to the rescue with a fiscal deluge.

All the Economists say so.

It’s a more comforting scenario and pleasing to the default setting of human evolution (this kind of huge negative can never happen, and then when it does we immediately believe this kind of thing could never happen again) than the alternative; that the economy actually has been permanently impaired now twice (economic factors we’ve been warning about this whole time). In that case, what good is a vaccine? How do more subsidies replace businesses that are never coming back? Like 2008, what happens afterward when – permanent shock – an economy just shrinks?

We were still dealing with the fallout from the first time this had happened to the global economy, and now, as all the data points, it repeats this time even more than that first “L.”

That’s how you get share price valuations which make those of the dot-com era seem cute.

by scarfie | 7th Dec 20, 8:48am 1607284109

https://cairnsnews.org/2020/11/02/police-blow-whistle-on-coronavirus-de…

Compare that to my article here earlier in the year.

https://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/104830/jason-stewart-worried-we-have…

by ham n eggs | 7th Dec 20, 8:48am 1607284102

A good piece from Bernard Hickey ... cue moral outrage in the comments from the Boomers

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/300175287/how-past-ge…

"A generation of leaders and taxpayers through the late 1940s, 1950s, 1960s and 1970s saw it as their role to ‘pay it forward’ by subsidising the cost of housing and new infrastructure. The social contract was about building for the future and paying for the future now. ...
Then the generations of voters and taxpayers after 1984 decided to change that social contract. They thought and voted and changed the laws in a way that meant they ‘pulled it back’, rather than ‘paid it forward.’ They argued (and still do) that it wasn’t fair on them to ‘overpay’ for tomorrow’s infrastructure with high taxes."

"The creation of vast wealth for home owners wasn’t deliberate, but now it’s happened, it is politically and financially impossible for that ‘pulled it back’ generation to give it up. It happened ‘accidentally on purpose’, but its retention is anything but an accident"

by Independent_Observer | 7th Dec 20, 9:18am 1607285901

Anyone tried having this conversation with a boomer.....I have. If you think they'll take responsibility for this shambles...for the most part, think again. (about 90% I've talked to play the 'victim', 5% are in denial there is even a problem, and 5% are quite reasonable about it and say its broken and should be fixed, acknowledging how good they've had it).

by ham n eggs | 7th Dec 20, 2:54pm 1607306097

agree with this
a small portion acknowledge its broken and the rest begin on "i worked and didnt have a latte ....

by iconoclast | 7th Dec 20, 4:03pm 1607310232

It wasn't easy
That's why NZ was more egalitarian than it is today
Prior to PAYE in NZ a Surtax was charged on high incomes, and Husband and Wife incomes were aggregated together to arrive at a higher tax rate than they would pay as individuals. Ordinary Income tax 66% plus Social Security tax 7.5 %, plus aggregation Tax, plus Surtax - try that on for size

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 9:25am 1607286343

What you've quoted here H&E, and possibly is Bernard's view too is what I saw as a uniquely Auckland view. I lived and worked in Auckland from 1984 to 1988 and was astounded with the political battles over infrastructure. Indeed Sir Dove-Myer Robinson (Robbie) was basically forced out of his Mayoral position as he saw and knew that AK had to spend a lot more money on infrastructure, but the AK rate payers wouldn't have a bar of it, saying rates were already too expensive. Whanganui by comparison had none of the same political battles, with some of the highest rates bills in the country (and they still are).

The consequences for AK are decades of neglect as the pollies pandered to public pressure and their own personal agendas, and now have to go to the national Government to ask the country to pay for AKs failures, wrapping the plea up with some pretty BS that so many are happy to swallow.

by ham n eggs | 7th Dec 20, 8:50am 1607284200

And this is part the Boomers dont get ...

Under employment

You need OPPORTUNITY passed on
Not "wealth" in the form of debt

www.msn.com/en-nz/money/markets/one-in-three-young-australians-are-unem…

by blobbles | 7th Dec 20, 9:47am 1607287640

I know a number of boomers now that trip around the country in their fully kitted out campervans leaving their 3-5 bedroom houses on big chunks of land empty for a quarter to half a year. They either have reverse mortgaged their homes (and with prices booming who would blame them) and/or have a latent business that they pay young people a pittance to operate. Oh yes, they all still get super. Even within this group though it's not spread evenly, other boomers I know barely survive on super, still paying rent without any other source of "income" (read "asset booming in price despite all fundamentals"). This is partly my reason for the above comment - the RB in this country is totally out of control and picking winners. Those winners are the already rich.

by youngdumbandbroke | 7th Dec 20, 9:26am 1607286406

They're too arrogant to even pull over when they're holding up traffic

by Independent_Observer | 7th Dec 20, 9:46am 1607287573

I thought the roads would be better without the foreigners on our roads in camper vans, but as I recently found it, its just as bad with the boomers cruising around!

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 9:47am 1607287621

Now you get it H&E. I've been arguing that for quite a while now. The 'free market' is screwing us, all of us. It is a minority who are profiting. But continual blaming of the boomers is a stupid, shallow, self pitying argument. Every election after 1984 has offered the opportunity for later generations to change things. That's 35 years, or 12 successive Government. So how is that going for you? When are you going to change things?

by Independent_Observer | 7th Dec 20, 10:35am 1607290555

So you would have needed to be 18 to vote in 1984, meaning a birthday in the mid 1960's, i.e. more or less a boomer.

The divide is happening now murray because enough of society can see how policies that benefit boomers don't benefit them - those 40+ have had a good ride following the babyboomer self licking ice cream cone (hence a large part of our demographic), but now those 35 and below realise they're getting screwed and will likely push for change - and the numbers 35 and below are growing. And babyboomers are getting old and dying.

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 10:55am 1607291705

I excluded the 1984 election because the Boomer age stopped in 1964 so only counted the ones later. And no the divide isn't happening now, it started at least 15 years ago in housing, and before that when the Lange Labour Government introduce a partial free market economy leaving the economy very unbalanced. Like most governments they did the easy part, the low hanging fruit, but stopped for a cup of tea. And the the next Government, a National one, let Ruth Richardson loose and embedded more. But none of them stopped long enough to understand the consequences. And the general public most certainly didn't understand. I doubt that consequential effects were even taught to economic students in the universities, let alone the confluence between economic policies and human psychology. So again blaming boomers is just stupid, mindless, self pitying excuses.

You mention those 35 years and younger, well that is seven elections they've had the opportunity to vote in from 2002 onwards, about the time the housing market went stupid. What happened to the calls to the Government to fix it from them? I know that in 2004 I wrote to the Government expressing my concerns about the housing market. Do you know what the response was? "Thank you for your letter"

Some advice - stop blaming prior generations, they are no more guilty of failure than you are for failing to change it when you could. Start demanding of your MP, your Government for some hard answers and actions. Don't allow them to flannel you, keep annoying them until they do something. If you are seriously concerned enough, run for Government yourself and DO something about it!

by Independent_Observer | 7th Dec 20, 11:34am 1607294072

Perhaps TOP had the only answers on how to resolve our economic problems, yet they get a fraction of the vote. Therefore there is no point running for government because our voters are stupid and self interested ('the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter'). Trying to undo decades of stupidity in 3 years isn't a possibility nor worthy destroying ones health over.

by ham n eggs | 7th Dec 20, 10:42am 1607290969

as Bernard Hickey's article summarises the "young" have essentially given up trying to change things - its now a hopeless cause
The debt is loaded and in place and you can't undo leverage - maybe you dont get that?
The wealth = debt = jobs (temporarily)
Crash the prices and you now crash the economy (sooner)
Jacinta gets it ... thats why she suddenly is doing NOTHING
More articles on her plans for the summer please ... less about the economy

"But continual blaming of the boomers is a stupid, shallow, self pitying argument."

Unfortunately the boomers set the rules, burnt the good stuff, ignored infrastructure while loading up on immigration and pulled up the ladder to protect their interests ... its all about passive incomes streams and golfing retirements - remember?

by murray86 | 7th Dec 20, 11:02am 1607292122

"Unfortunately the boomers set the rules" No we didn't. You are blaming a whole generation for the sins of a few. You're doing what Trump and Hitler (did) does, blaming others unfairly and unreasonably. And yes I do get the debt loading, but I chose not to load myself with debt, or extend what debt I had when I didn't need to. There does need to be a bit of personal responsibility in all this.

Try studying history a bit more. But more than that if you don't like what is happening run for office yourself. But blaming Boomers is stupid, shallow, self pitying arguments.

by ham n eggs | 7th Dec 20, 2:52pm 1607305978

LOL - run for office?
You do realise RESOURCES cant be voted into office
There is no VOTING that can fix this
Its called overshoot which has been supercharged by a 30 year DEBT binge (that cant be undone) - i really think you dont get this... Everyone is reliant on this DEBT system (unless you are not using money in any form?) ... its what gets you your cornflakes
Debt avoidance as you refer to it means MONEY avoidance - only then would you be taking "personal responsibility"

by Audaxes | 7th Dec 20, 9:24am 1607286251

Reward for a job well done? Soros appoints Lord Malloch-Brown, former chairman of Smartmatic, to lead Open Society Foundation

by scarfie | 7th Dec 20, 9:43am 1607287439

A good article about the state of the USA. Goes hand in hand with the word of Dalio really.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/covid-19-end…

Only half of Americans report having meaningful, face-to-face social interactions on a daily basis. The nation consumes two-thirds of the world’s production of antidepressant drugs. The collapse of the working-class family has been responsible in part for an opioid crisis that has displaced car accidents as the leading cause of death for Americans under 50.

Think back to the four keys to longevity I posted in regard to Covid earlier this year. Nutrition, exercise, spirituality, meditation. Seems their spirituality is bitching about Trump, or voting for him. Meditation is watching mindless TV shows. Fast food and no exercise = the slow way to live and die badly. A hollow society, no wonder they are dying. But then in my background a turn around in the average life span was predicted 50 years ago. They knew this because of the rise of western diseases in Japan as they took on the American diet after WWII.

by Audaxes | 7th Dec 20, 10:47am 1607291279

82% Of Americans Say They Couldn't Afford $500 Emergency Thanks To COVID-19

But perhaps the most alarming number from the entire survey: a whopping 82% of respondents said they wouldn't be able to cover an emergency $500 expense without borrowing money.For context, prior to the pandemic, surveys showed that roughly half of Americans couldn't afford a $500 emergency expense, which means the number of people who say they couldn't cover a small emergency has risen by 60%.

by Alter Ego | 7th Dec 20, 9:46am 1607287561

Spitting tacks, does not a Country make.....nor produce a Confidence Trickster worth betting on, ever again.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/politics/trump-s-final-days-of-rage-and-…

by scarfie | 7th Dec 20, 10:45am 1607291157

I like Iconoclasts principle, listen to the chatter. I have to say the vote fraud chatter has gone quiet the last 4-5 days.