RE: SP21 Feb 2022 13:10
Pre pandemic it was obvious looking back that there was a big problem on the way. But somehow the markets didnāt react enough beforehand. Right now it seems pretty clear there will be an invasion- yet again the markets have only mildly reacted.
An interesting article in the Telegraph:
āIn the Great Illusion, a hugely influential book in the run-up to the First World War, the British journalist Norman Angell argued that the economic costs of war in Europe were so great that nobody could possibly hope to gain by starting one, and therefore wouldnāt. He was both right and catastrophically wrong at the same time. The irrational has always played a major role in history. Ignore it at your peril.ā
āEven after the Archdukeās assassination, stock markets sailed blithely on as if nothing of significance had happened. It wasnāt until the troops were actually mobilised that the panic set in.ā
The New York Times;
ā But the experts have been wrong before. In 2014, Mr. Putin seized Crimea, even as few Moscow analysts were predicting a military intervention. And skeptics of the view that Mr. Putin is bluffing point out that during the pandemic, he has already taken actions that earlier seemed unlikely. His harsh crackdown against the network of Aleksei A. Navalny, for example, has contradicted what had been a widely held view that Mr. Putin was happy to allow some domestic dissent as an escape valve to manage discontent.
āPutin, in the last year, has crossed a lot of Rubicons,ā Michael Kofman, the director of Russia studies at CNA, a research institute based in Arlington, Va., said last week. āFolks who believe that something this dramatic is unlikely or improbable may not have observed that qualitative shift in the last two years.ā
Sign In
Follow the stocks
