[HN Gopher] How we broke the supply chain
___________________________________________________________________
How we broke the supply chain
Author : smollett
Score : 40 points
Date : 2022-02-03 20:19 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (prospect.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (prospect.org)
| hahahahahahff wrote:
| egberts1 wrote:
| longwick wrote:
| Your comment does nothing to talk of the substance of the
| article.
| kurthr wrote:
| roenxi wrote:
| > Only deviating from free-market fundamentalism--giving everyone
| health care, for example--could lead to shortages
|
| This is true, the symptoms the article is looking at are strong
| signals of non-free-market policies. Under capitalism, the
| failure mode is going to be very high prices. If the failure mode
| isn't high prices then the market probably isn't being run as a
| free market.
|
| Like when there is a crisis and the government steps in to ration
| or fix prices and a breadline forms - that breadline isn't a
| capitalist problem! Capitalism was suspended because the
| government didn't like what would happen under capitalism (which,
| I think we all agree, would have been high prices to the point
| where there was still bread on the shelf that people could buy).
| The capitalist outcome isn't a utopia, and isn't even pleasant,
| but it also isn't a breadline.
| royaltheartist wrote:
| Ahh ha, this is like when I say a Scotsman was rude to me and
| someone else informs me that it must not have been a true
| Scotsman, then
| avs733 wrote:
| Exactly
|
| When capitalism fails and something else steps in to fix it,
| the fact that the fix is happening at the same time as
| something bad means it must be responsible.
| kibwen wrote:
| I suggest that we stop looking at "the government" as some
| entity that is separate from capitalism and/or markets.
| Unregulated capitalism/free markets are unstable systems that
| eventually _produce_ regulators one way or another; a
| democratic government is just one form that this takes, but it
| could just as easily result in a cyberpunk megacorp or a
| military junta making all the rules. Markets _always_ trend
| towards the consolidation of power, as a result of economies of
| scale; any "free" market will result in a winner who
| eventually uses their power to set the rules to make sure they
| stay on top.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| Inflation (money printing) is the cause of increased demand in
| goods, not the result of supply problems. If the government sends
| checks of money to people, they will compete for the same amount
| of produced goods, and realize that they have to spend the money
| faster if they want it to preserve its value better.
| standardUser wrote:
| During the Great Recession, a vast increase in the money supply
| had no apparent impact in inflation. The idea that printing
| money is a primary driver of inflation may be outdated. I also
| think you're ignoring the dramatic and unexpected changes in
| demand (and some constraint in supply) caused by the pandemic.
| sayhar wrote:
| This is a great article.
|
| Rabbitholed a tiny bit on this part:
|
| > Big companies got the law changed to enable ocean carriers to
| offer secret discounts in exchange for volume guarantees.
|
| To an article linked in the first article:
| https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2018/12/congr...
|
| > The last amendment to the Shipping Act occurred in 1998 as the
| Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998, following a five-year study of
| the effect of the Shipping Act on maritime trade and commerce.
| The 1998 amendment allowed carriers and shippers to enter
| confidential rate agreements providing discounted rates in
| exchange for cargo volume commitments. In 2005, the FMC issued a
| regulatory ruling extending authority to non-vessel operating
| common carriers (NVOCCs) to enter such confidential rate
| agreements with shippers.
|
| > After the 1998 amendment, the maritime industry experienced
| significant and widespread consolidation. In addition to carrier
| mergers and acquisitions concentrating the bulk of containership
| capacity in U.S. trades to fewer than a dozen large carriers, the
| formation of vessel carrier alliances caused further substantial
| consolidation. Currently, there are three major carrier alliances
| representing 80 percent of all container trade. Within the
| alliances, there has been further consolidation, e.g., the
| creation of Ocean Network Express (ONE) by the merger of Japanese
| carriers.
|
| Damn.
| [deleted]
| metacritic12 wrote:
| When I first opened the site, I wondered if it was a more
| technical/wonkish dive, or whether it was a political take.
|
| Looking at the root site prospect.org made it clear it's the
| latter.
|
| Don't get me wrong, their thesis can still be right and their
| fact presented are still valuable, but this is like reading about
| "is free trade good" in the Economist. I would take away the
| facts, not the conclusion.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-02-03 23:00 UTC)