Would the collapse of NATO have macroeconomic effects?

5 Likes

Of course the collapse of NATO will have major macroeconomic effects.

Given some recent comments in South Carolina, this may not be a hypothetical question. Where would you put your money, or would your money be the least of your concerns?

1 Like

I assume you mean TFG. Remember, TFG tried to dismantle NATO once already. He’ll do it again if we’re stupid enough to give him the chance.

Where would I put my money? All domestic, large caps.

6 Likes

What is more likely is Russia irritating all its neighbors:

Poking up through the snow drifts on the Finnish-Russian border lies a symbol of Moscow’s biggest provocation yet toward NATO’s newest member: a sprawling heap of broken bicycles.

The battered bikes are sold for hundreds of dollars on the Russian side to asylum seekers from as far away as Syria and Somalia. They are then encouraged — sometimes forced, according to Finnish guards — to cross the border. Finns say it is a hybrid warfare campaign against their country, using some of the world’s most desperate people, just as it is staking out a new position in a shifting world order.

Russia warned Finland of “countermeasures” for its accession, which the Finns suspect they are now seeing in the form of infrastructure sabotage and cyberattacks. But it is the arrival of some 1,300 “human weapons,” as Finnish politicians have described them, in the past few months that has stirred the most public attention and anxiety.

European officials have repeatedly raised alarm over migrants being encouraged to cross into their borders by Russia and its allies, with many concerned that the aim is to destabilize European governments and stoke discord in a bloc sharply divided over how to handle immigration.

In December, Finland closed all of its crossings with Russia. Now, it is preparing a law, that Finnish media has said may include provisions to allow Finland to force people back over the border — a practice known as “pushbacks,” which are illegal under European and international law. Finnish officials have so far declined to comment on such measures.

4 Likes

The presentation as it has been by at least one major person has been idiotic.

„… said he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies who pay too little“

Macro effects? Well, can‘t get much more macro than this.

4 Likes

To answer your question, no, because per our rules, if it hasn’t happened yet, it isn’t a risk.

Or so I have read.

2 Likes

Yes, one of the sillier rules I have heard.

“I am going to shoot you!”

“I’m sorry I can’t respond because it hasn’t happened yet.”

“I don’t understand.”

“No need, first shoot, then we can discuss.”

“OK.”
Bang.

In another part of the universe;

“We are going to outlaw capitalism.”

“I’m sorry I can’t discuss that, even though it is a risk to everything I hold dear, because it hasn’t happened yet.”

“I don’t understand.”

“Neither do I, but that’s the rule.”

“OK, go ahead and pass the law. Of course after that I won’t be able to do anything about it, but if that’s the rule…”

7 Likes

Perhaps METaR should change its name to Macro Economic Trends and Things That Have Happened That Will Cause Money to be Made or Lost (METaTTHHTWCMtbMoL).

That’s not the rule. The rule is no politics, especially no specific politics, and especially no US politics (only because we are mostly in the USA). So discussing whether or not collapse of NATO would have macro effects is perfectly fine. What isn’t fine is trying to bring in US politics with comments like “recent comments in South Carolina” which drives the conversation directly to US politics … which we don’t discuss here. There are plenty of other places to discuss politics if you so desire.

4 Likes

Nope. That violates the on-topic rule as we can only discuss it after the Executive has withdrawn or otherwise failed NATO.

Like it or not, politics is perhaps one of the largest Macro drivers we have right now. How do you honestly discuss a collapse of NATO, for example, without talking about how tRump wants to break it apart (and tried in his first term) and Biden wants to make it stronger (and has, during the first 3 years of his term)?

It’s like discussing global warming but saying talks about carbon dioxide are strictly off-limits.

7 Likes

Markets anticipate, Metar must not.

1 Like

If we can’t anticipate how do we make decisions about the future with regards to our investments? (or anything else for that matter) This forum is all about anticipation!

JimA

3 Likes

If you need to bring US candidates into the discussion then you discuss it elsewhere. Whatever portion of the discussion you can have without doing so, you can do here. It’s that simple.

And there’s a really good reason for this rule. I’ve been on discussion boards since the 80s, and politics ALWAYS destroys non-political discussion boards. Always.

6 Likes

Apologies,I forgot those scsm tags again.

2 Likes

I agree and so do all the Eastern European NATO countries:

Educated in the United States and deeply pro-American, Finland’s president-elect, Alexander Stubb, looked perfectly poised to lead his nation into a stronger trans-Atlantic partnership and redefine its role in the global order as a newly minted NATO member.

Instead, he will enter office next month at a time when U.S. politics has once again thrown the durability of that relationship — and the wisdom of European nations counting on it — into question.

For weeks, the two candidates in Finland’s runoff presidential elections, which Mr. Stubb won on Sunday, had played up their pro-NATO credentials and tough views on Russia. Then the former U.S. president Donald J. Trump threatened that, if re-elected, he would let Russia “do whatever the hell they want” against NATO allies that do not contribute sufficiently to collective defense.

That is hardly what this tiny Nordic nation of 5.6 million, after decades maintaining a policy of nonalignment, wants to hear, now that it holds NATO’s longest border with Russia — and as European leaders warn that the continent’s confrontation with Moscow may drag on for decades.

In 2002, MDW and I drove along the Highway 6 in Finland that runs along the border with Russia. We stopped in Lappeenranta, Imatra and many places along the way to Savolinna. At some places along Highway 6, the Russian border was only 1000 meters away. I walked toward one of the Russian border crossing points, but I did not get closer than 100 meters. It gave me the chills and brought back the memories of stories that my father and uncles told about their troubles with Russians during and after WWII. The border was mainly forest with only the border crossing area having fences and border control stations.

2 Likes

Central Europe from the Baltic states to France with Germany at its heart is going into Supply-Side economic hell. In other words a lot of lying and no economics.

The trade-off is to become a major military industrial complex. This includes AirBus being bigger than Boeing in the next few years. Unless Boeing does more with outer space. Our Demand-Side economic heaven means we have a lot of wealth for space projects.

The US elite and EU elite, might as well somehow say the dumb UK elite, see this coming. The EU public needs the crap scared out of them to spend on the military. That is the message.

That is why there is always a few grains of truth in the shinola.

The problem is the entire pie hole could be kept shut and all would come to pass anyway. The pie hole is dumb. As if half reading reports they all can see if they want to. There is military and economic planning that is endless.

Parroting half behindedly as if strong is so idiotic.

LOL! And I was almost starting to worry about you…

d fb

3 Likes