Home » Posts tagged 'creative destruction'

Tag Archives: creative destruction

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

Survival of the Biggest

Survival of the Biggest

Survival of the Biggest


The essential point to grasp is that in dealing with capitalism we are dealing with an evolutionary process… At the heart of capitalism is creative destruction.

…Situations emerge in the process of creative destruction in which many firms may have to perish that nevertheless would be able to live on vigorously and usefully if they could weather a particular storm.

—Joseph A. Schumpeter

The most important feature of an information economy, in which information is defined as surprise, is the overthrow, not the attainment, of equilibrium. The science that we have come to know as information theory establishes the supremacy of the entrepreneur because it appreciates the powerful connection between destruction and what Schumpeter described as “creative destruction,” between chaos and creativity.

—George Gilder

In its purest form, capitalism is an evolutionary process. Businesses that best adapt to changing conditions survive and grow. Typically, that means offering a product or service superior to current ones, or giving consumers more choices. Weaker or poorly managed businesses that don’t adapt to the new situation wither and eventually die. That’s not always pleasant but it’s how nature works. Joseph Schumpeter coined the term “creative destruction” to describe the process. It is not pleasant when you are on the destruction end, but the creative side can bring innumerable joys and sometimes even wealth.

The difference, however, is we don’t have capitalism in its purest form, or anywhere close. It has been tweaked, modified, corrupted and/or regulated into something else, the particulars of which vary. The common thread is that survival depends not only on impersonal nature, but on other non-random forces that can be manipulated. Governments can and often do create barriers to entry, protecting favored constituencies and groups from competition.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

“Creative Destruction” or Just “Destruction?”

“Creative Destruction” or Just “Destruction?”

Under the effects of the Pandemic, consumers and businesses grapple with their own “Reset.”

This is the transcript of my podcast last Sunday, THE WOLF STREET REPORT.

We’ve got the weirdest economy ever. A disputed number of people lost their jobs early on in the Pandemic, with figures ranging from 22 million to 33 million people who lost their jobs, depending on whether we looked at the monthly jobs report or the number of people having filed for unemployment.

Since then, millions of people have been hired back by restaurants, gyms, hotels, and other enterprises that had shut down. This was followed – and that’s the phase we’re in now – by more layoffs but further up the corporate chain, with higher-paying jobs now getting axed. Initial unemployment claims of newly laid-off workers have remained horribly high, at over 800,000 a week, and have risen recently.

But wait… at the same time that this jobs fiasco is playing out, retail sales – so that’s goods bought online and in stores – after plunging in March and April have spiked to record highs.

This does not include services such as insurance, airline tickets, hotel bookings, rent, healthcare, etc.  And we know that airline passenger revenue at Delta, for example, has collapsed by 83% from a year ago in the third quarter, according to Delta’s quarterly earnings report. Many hotels remain closed.

In August, spending by Americans on services was still 7.4% below a year ago. And spending on services is the largest part of consumer spending.

But they plowed record amounts of money into buying goods, such as electronics, appliances, cars, bicycles, exercise equipment, and the like. According to government data, the amount that Americans spent on durable goods in August spiked by 12% from February, just before the Pandemic.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Apex Predator That Will Take Down Wall Street (And K Street)

The Apex Predator That Will Take Down Wall Street (And K Street)

Grant Williams grabbed our vote for the top Alt-Finance presentation of 2017 for A World of Pure Imagination , which highlighted global stock, bond and real estate bubbles that are now showing signs of imploding.

The co-founder of RealVision TV excelled again during 2018 for Cry Wolf, an encomium for a gold-backed currency, which Williams argues would act as an “apex predator” to check government policies that have enticed Americans to borrow themselves into near-bankruptcy.

“In gold’s absence, bankers have multiplied precipitously, creating new variations on the same theme: credit,” says Williams, who likens the process to the proliferation of deer in Yellowstone National Park following extermination of wolves in the 1930s. “They have grazed the financial landscape to virtually nothing.”

Williams’ arguments are well-understood in the precious metals community, where he has taken on a growing role as a Yoda of sorts—a lonely voice arguing cogently for financial sanity.

However, Williams’ ideas are essentially unknown to ordinary investors and the general public, in part because (ironically, for what many describe as a capitalist economy) free market thinkers are essentially banned from governments, universities, and the mainstream media.

Hence the importance of Cry Wolf, which dramatically illustrates the role of what Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction,” whose effects Williams likens to the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone in 1995.

Destructive preservation: rewarding the inefficient

Right now, the U.S. economy is (in many ways) the opposite of a free market.

Much of this is directly tied to the gradual banning of gold-backed currencies, which has enabled governments to print money and distribute it to favored interest groups, often in secret, without taxpayer approval.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Ecocide as Creative Destruction

Ecocide as Creative Destruction

According to the WWF (World Wildlife Fund), since 1970 60% of the mammals, birds, fish and reptiles on the planet have been driven to extinction. To the extent that the WWF has it right, climate change accounts for less than 10% of these losses (graph below). As important and logistically complex as resolving climate change is, it is but one of a host of environmental ills in equal or greater need of resolution.

Habitat degradation and loss and animal exploitation (e.g. trawl-net fishing) explain most of this animal extinction. Habitat loss is primarily due to deforestation to feed factory farm animalsAccording to the Guardian, these animal losses would require 5 – 7 million years to recover from. But as of today, the causes of extinction continue unabated with no plausible plans being put forward by national governments to address it.

Graph: Of the mass extinction of animals that the WWF is reporting, most comes from habitat loss and degradation. Climate change explains less than 10% of the losses. The point isn’t to downplay climate change, but to express the breadth of the environmental crisis that the world now faces. While the role of global warming will increase in time, mass extinction is at present a related but separate crisis in need of resolution. Source: wwf.org.uk.

As reported hereand here, the animal extinction isn’t anomalous. Over approximately the same time frame, 60% – 80% of insects have also been made extinct. The precise balance of causes is debatable, but putting climate change forwardas the primary cause reframes the concept of a ‘carbon budget’ in wildly alarming terms. If the one-degreeCelsius warming experienced to date explains the insect extinction, where does that leave the IPCC’s1.5 degree warming ‘budget?’

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

All Bad at 0%

All Bad at 0%

We call on central banks to abolish their zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) framework before more harm is done. In our assessment, ZIRP is bad for all stakeholders and may even lead to war.

ZIRP: Bad for Business?
At first blush, it may appear great for business to have access to cheap financing. But what may be good for any one business is not necessarily good for the economy. When interest rates are artificially depressed, it can subsidize struggling enterprises that might otherwise be driven out of business. As a result, productive capital can be locked into zombie enterprises. If ailing businesses were allowed to fail, those laid off would need to look for new jobs at firms that have a better chance of succeeding. As such, the core tenant of capitalism: creative destruction, may be undermined through ZIRP. In our assessment, the result is that an economy grows at substantially below its potential.

ZIRP: Bad for Investors?
Investors may have enjoyed the rush of rising asset prices as a result of ZIRP. However, this may well have been a Faustian bargain as the Federal Reserve (Fed) and other central banks have masked, but not eliminated, the risks that come with investing. Complacency has been rampant, as asset prices rose on the backdrop of low volatility. When volatility is low (more broadly speaking, we refer to “compressed risk premia”), rational investors tend to allocate more money to historically risky assets. While that may be exactly what central banks want – at least for the real economy – investors may bail out when volatility spikes, as they realize they didn’t sign up for this (“I didn’t know the markets were risky!”).

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Does “Creative Destruction” Include the State?

Does “Creative Destruction” Include the State?

When do we get to exercise democracy and fire every factotum, apparatchik, toady and lackey in the state who has abused his/her authority?

Everyone lauds “creative destruction” when it shreds monopolies and disrupts private enterprise “business as usual.” If thousands lose their middle-class livelihoods– hey, that’s the price of progress.

Improvements in productivity and efficiency can’t be stopped, and those employed making buggy whips and collecting horse manure from fetid streets will have to move on to other employment.

This raises an obvious question few dare ask: does this inevitable process of creative destruction include the state? If not, why not? Aren’t the state and the central bank the ultimate monopolies begging to be disrupted for the benefit of all? If government is inefficient and unproductive, shouldn’t it be “creatively destroyed” in the same fashion as private enterprise?

The obvious answer is yes. Why should a monopoly (government) remain untouched by new knowledge and competition as it skims the cream from society to fund its own monopolies and grants one monopoly/cartel privilege after another to its private-sector cronies?

Under the tender care of the state, we now have uncompetitive, inefficient parastic cartels dominating higher education, national defense, healthcare insurance, pharmaceuticals and hospitals– to name but a few of the major industries that are now state-enforced cartels thanks to the heavy hand of the state (i.e. regulatory capture).

Under the tender mercies of the state, prosecutors have a 90% conviction rate thanks to rigged forensic evidence, threats of life imprisonment (better to plea-bargain than risk years in America’s gulag) and other strong-arm tactics that presume guilt, not innocence. We have the best judicial system that money can buy, meaning you’re jail-bait if you can’t put your hands on a couple hundred thousand for legal defense and the all-important media campaign.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

 

 

How Venture Capitalists Came to Rule the World

How Venture Capitalists Came to Rule the World

Jobless Growth and the Lottery Economy
Before the gale-force hurricane of Reaganomics swept through the United States in the 1980s, America very briefly entertained the adoption of a deliberate industrial policy. As in South Korea and certain European nations, the U.S. government would pick economic winners and losers and direct funds accordingly.

This was no utopian idea. After World War II, a number of European governments invested heavily in key sectors — electricity, steel — toclose the technology gap with the United States. Similarly, the South Korean government built up a shipbuilding industry in the 1970s from nothing into the largest and more successful in the world. To a certain extent, the Pentagon accomplished something similar with the Internet (though no American would dare call such a thing “socialism”).

Industrial policy has never really gone away. Many governments, including China and the United States, have focused funds on the clean energy sector (wind turbines, solar cells). But the prevailing economic orthodoxy since the creative destruction unleashed by Reaganomics has been that the invisible hand of the market, not the state, should determine winners and losers.

It turns out, however, that the market’s hand is very often not invisible at all. Actual people, with very visible hands, are picking the winners and losers in the marketplace. Consider the impact of venture capitalists.

Although they’re responsible for only 0.3 percent of U.S. GDP, the influence of these elite investors is disproportionate. Their decisions determine how you communicate, how you shop, how you organize your life. Venture capital has been instrumental in launching companies that today make up over 20 percent of America’s GDP.

 

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress