An actual national and international crisis has a way of focusing the mind on what is truly important. Our recent coronavirus pandemic may or may not rise on its own to the level of bona fide “crisis” — more on that in a subsequent post — but certainly when you add in the response of governments at all levels, it’s hard to dispute that the current unpleasantness is a crisis for large numbers of Americans involuntarily thrown out of work, as well as for many businesses, and for the economy. And sure enough, the national conversation has turned almost exclusively to the virus and its consequences, to the exclusion of most everything else.

Do you even remember the issues that our thought leaders were all obsessing over in unison a short couple of months ago? I’m thinking of things like income inequality, or the oppression of women and minority group members on elite college campuses, or (my personal favorite) climate change. Now that we have something objectively important to think about, does any of that stuff even matter any more? Indeed, did any of it ever really matter?

Before the virus hit, our government and others in Europe and around the world were busy imposing vast new burdens on businesses in the name of things like social justice and “decarbonization.” Hey, the companies are rich and they can afford it. Now in the blink of an eye large numbers of the same companies are completely broke, laying off workers in droves, and potentially going out of business for keeps. Our federal government has just committed to spend well over $2 trillion to support individuals, businesses and state and local governments — suddenly multiplying the federal deficit by a factor of 3 or 4, from an already unsustainable $1 trillion or so per year, to something in the range of $3 - 4 trillion.

Maybe it’s time to recognize that we need to start setting priorities, that we have some limits, that all problems cannot be solved by government handouts — in short, that it’s time to get serious.

Or, maybe the lesson to be learned here is the opposite — that at last there are no longer any limits. Budgets are a thing of the past. Everything is now possible with government directives and with the infinite credit card. Let’s go completely crazy!

Here’s a roundup of recent links coming down on either side of that divide. You won’t have any trouble figuring out which side of this divide I prefer.

Time To Get Serious?

From Foreign Policy (Jason Bordoff), March 27: “Sorry, but the Virus Shows Why There Won’t Be Global Action on Climate Change. . . . COVID-19 itself may actually erode public support for stronger climate action, as the pace of climate ambition wanes during times of economic hardship.” Do you mean that after throwing several trillions at recovery from economic suppression, we don’t have more trillions left to fund mass hysterias?

From The Parliament (Europe), April 1: “Nearly 40 MEPs have asked that the European Green Deal, a Commission flagship policy, is dropped for the time being due to the coronavirus crisis. . . . The MEPs, mostly from the ECR group, say the Coronavirus crisis will have ‘deep and far-reaching’ economic and social consequences. The EU ‘must do its utmost’ for citizens, insist the members, and that includes ‘scaling back’ the Commission’s ‘pre-crisis ambitions.’” To be fair, this is a group of conservative MEPs, and a minority of the European Parliament.

At Watts Up With That, via EURACTIV, we learn that in light of the current unpleasantness the International Air Transport Association — trade association of the world’s major airlines — has requested the UN to keep 2019 as the baseline year for measuring progress of airlines toward zero carbon emissions, rather than replacing 2019 with the average of 2019 and 2020. Obviously the airlines have figured out that 2020 is going to be a big down year for emissions, which then would set an impossible baseline going forward. Zero carbon emissions from air travel? The whole idea likely has you laughing, but at the humorless UN, even the most ridiculous things are not laughing matters. Meanwhile, most to all of the world’s major airlines are likely to be in bankruptcy within the next month or two unless sufficiently bailed out by their respective home governments.

From Reuters, April 13: “Japanese Environment Minister Shinjiro Koizumi warned on Monday that the Paris climate accord could face death if steps to fight global warming were put on the backburner to facilitate the economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.” No kidding!

From Climate Change News, April 13: “China could delay submitting it climate plans at least until after the US presidential election in November as officials focus on reviving the economy from an unprecedented slowdown, experts have warned.” Obviously, the ChiComs know that this whole climate change thing is so much bunkum, to which they certainly will not sacrifice their economy. But they’ll hold off saying that out loud until after our election, in the hope that we will blow up a hand grenade in our face.

Let’s Go Completely Crazy!

You won’t be surprised to learn where the UN stands. From the UN’s website, March 31: Antonio Gutteres (Secretary General): “The recovery from the COVID-19 crisis must lead to a different economy. . . . [W]e must massively increase the resources available to the developing world. . . .” And you thought that U.S. taxpayers were only on the hook to insure recovery of the U.S. economy? Hah!

Let the IMF pile on. From the Washington Post, April 13: “[I]n the weeks since the novel coronavirus stormed out of China, an unprecedented 90-plus countries have petitioned the IMF for assistance. Emerging and developing countries require at least $2.5 trillion this year to cover their bills, according to the fund.” Yes, $2.5 trillion is “required” for transfer to third world countries “this year.” I recommend sending the bill to China.

Obviously the virus is the fault of capitalism. (Isn’t everything bad the fault of capitalism?). Therefore, the pandemic proves the need for the prompt replacement of capitalism with socialism. You can find dozens of pieces advocating this position. Here is one from the unhinged folks at Jacobin, March 20. Excerpt: “When on January 26, 2020 I first read of a coronavirus that was gaining ground in China, I immediately thought of the repercussions for the global dynamics of capital accumulation.” Aha, now we understand everything.

At this point it’s by no means clear where this is going to come out.