“High-frequency macroeconomic risk measures in the wake of the war in Ukraine”

In a VoxEU post by Laurent Ferrara, Matteo Mogliani, and Jean-Guillaume Sahuc today, applying a growth-at-risk (GaR) approach (Ferrara et al. 2022, ungated 2020 WP version) they estimate they downside risk to Euro area vs. US GDP q/q growth.

Using the Composite Indicator of Systemic Stress (CISS), developed by the ECB (Holló et al. 2012), they find:

We observe that within a few days, the probability density function of conditional euro area GDP growth for 2022q1 clearly shifted to the left. The value estimated on 28 March shows a thicker left tail, highlighting an increase in downward macro risks in the wake of the start of the war in Ukraine. As regards the value of the GaR at 10%, which can be considered as the 10% quantile of this estimated conditional distribution, it went from -0.02% on 01 February to -0.90% on 28 March.

This is shown in Figure 2 from Ferrara et al.

Source: Figure 2 from Ferrara et al (VoxEU, 2022).

For the US, the shift  is less marked than for the euro area: the GaR (10%) goes from 0.30% on 1 February to 0.03% —  hence the GaR (10%) lost only about 0.30 percentage points.

Source: Figure 3 from Ferrara et al (VoxEU 2022).



68 thoughts on ““High-frequency macroeconomic risk measures in the wake of the war in Ukraine”

    1. JohnH

      “ The U.S. military is not in a position to independently confirm Ukrainian accounts of atrocities by Russian forces against civilians in the town of Bucha, but has no reason to dispute the accounts either, a senior U.S. defense official said on Monday.”

      But pgl is somehow able to confirm the atrocities with absolute certainty while ensconced in an easy chair in Brooklyn, a position that gives him a clear, unobstructed view of the battlefield Bucha!

      He probably had a birdseye view of Saddam’s stockpile of WMDs in Iraq, too!

        1. JohnH

          Remember Judith Miller? Her sources were impeccable…and wrong.

          I would think you guys would be old enough by now to have internalized this ironic Walter Lippmann quote:
          “ We must remember that in time of war what is said on the enemy’s side of the front is always propaganda and what is said on our side of the front is truth and righteousness, the cause of humanity and a crusade for peace.”

          The only thing that can be said for certain is that there is a furious propaganda war being waged. What cannot be said with any certainty is what’s happening on the ground.

          But people will certainly continue to criticize me as a Putin supporter for not believing what is fed to me by the infotainment media.

          1. Noneconomist

            Hey, John! How about the Holocaust? Real or should we wait for more definitive proof?

          2. Noneconomist

            Hey, John, what are the odds:
            That hundreds (if not thousands) of media correspondents are all lying?
            That war atrocities are all staged just to embarrass Putin?
            That the Russians are really engaging in war simply to “denazify” Ukraine?
            That the Ukrainians are staging fake atrocities and have fooled all those media correspondents without proof?
            That, speaking of fools, any fool who believes any of the above, flatters only himself?

          3. AndrewG

            Yes, a furious propaganda war is being waged by all sides.

            But one side is way more honest than the other. Haven’t you noticed?

            Biden has been warning about a Russian invasion since, what, November? Did you think that was “propaganda?” What about after the “joint exercises” that just happened to be all along the Ukranian border turned into an invasion, just as the White House was warning?

            Is the footage coming from Mariupol all manipulated and made up? What about those from Kyiv suburbs? What about that rocket attack at a train station? Where did all the people go? How do you manage to get all foreign media in Ukraine singing the same tune?

      1. Barkley Rosser


        Your Putin botting is getting worse and worse. This is from April 4, and we have had a steady and accumulating stream since of more and more reports, including eyewitnesses, supporting that Russian troops did all this. And now it is coming from even more cities.

        As for this Pentagon report on the same day Reuters quoted Pentagon spokesman, John Kirby, as saying “I think it’s fairly obvious, not just to us but the rest of the world, Russian forces are responsible for the atrocities in Bucha.” The matter of the lack of independent confirmation by the Pentagon turns out to be a matter of being unable to pin down precisely which units did it and the Pentagon not having people on the ground there. But they agree it was the Russians, sure as heck not the Ukrainians like Russian propaganda keeps claiming.

        You are becoming increasingly outrageous. If you want to lie, see if you can get something that has not been so clearly completely shredded in the three days since your link.

        1. pgl

          April 8, 2022 at 12:30 pm
          Remember Judith Miller? Her sources were impeccable…and wrong.

          JohnH cannot address ANY of our replies or any of our questions. He just goes on and on hyping his defense of a horrific war criminal. It is like Putin has this disgusting troll on a strong like a puppet.

      2. pgl

        You posted this before not nothing it clearly said:

        “We’re seeing the same imagery that you are. We have no reason whatsoever to refute the Ukrainian claims about these atrocities — clearly, deeply, deeply troubling,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

        And of course this was from 4 days ago and new and rather convincing information has emerged. Not only are you a disgusting apologist for Putin’s war crimes but you are also spewing LIES already dubunked.

      3. baffling

        Johnh, exactly what would you require in order to confirm the massacres and murders that have been committed? obviously the dead bodies are not enough, especially with people bound and gagged with bullets in the head. do you require a video and signed affidavit? exactly what do you need to be convinced that russians have committed these atrocities? or, as expected, there will never be enough evidence to convince you of these atrocities? this is a serious question. what evidence do you require?

        1. pgl


          ‘Dozens have been killed and injured in a Russian missile strike on a train station used as an evacuation hub in the eastern Ukraine city of Kramatorsk, according to Ukrainian officials.’

          The missile had the Russian words “for the children”. What kind of sick military would hit a train station with innocent citizens off to work claiming this was for children?

          Of course JohnH will likely claim this is all NATO propaganda. A disgusting apologist for a disgusting group of war criminals.

        2. macroduck

          Johnny would require instructions from his masters.

          By the way, I know I have given others here a hard time for fluffing themselves in comments here. The whole “I’m a recognized authority” or ” tune in to my coments to Bannon-world” stuff. Well, it’s my turn for a victory lap. I’m pretty sure I was the first to identify Johnny as something worse than an annoying ignoramus. I pointed him out as very likely a fake progressive who was actually beholden to some non-progressive ideological pay-master. Now, it is more than obvious that I was right, so pat, pat, pat on my own back.

          I will henceforward require recognition as the world’s foremost authority on spotting bull-pucky.

          1. macroduck

            Now that my credentials are established, get a load of the wheelbarrow full of post-glasnost cow-pies from anonymous below.

            No wonder Russia’s military performs so poorly. Putin spends his budget on “influencers” like anonymous and Johnny.

          2. pgl

            “I’m pretty sure I was the first to identify Johnny as something worse than an annoying ignoramus.”

            You have been spot on for a long time but note I was saying similar things over at EconomistsView back in its day. Now you say it all much more clearly, which I appreciate. But Johnnny boy has been pulling this garbage for many years at other places.

          3. Barkley Rosser


            JohnH’s latest is so bad he does look like he is paid, although I am not sure even now he is. Tucker Clarlson is not diretly paid, and he has been spouting some stuff nearly as bad.

            OTOH, I think Anonymous is an outright Russian. It is pretty clear he really does not know much about the US, mostly stuff about the US oil industry that he gets from reading official EIA reports, which, quoting from, gave him some initial cred here. But more lately he has combined ignorance with stupidity. Putin definitely wasting his rubles on that one.

            I also note that you and pgl and others continue to insist that ltr is a Chinese agent. You may be right, but she still looks like anne of Economists View, just being a bit more solidly pro-PRC than she was back then.

            So, sorry, I am not ready to kudo you on this offhand, although I fully agree that JohnH has gone way over some line and behyond whatever pail there is. His cred, such as it was, has just gone completely through the toilet and beyond negative numbers to imaginary ones.

          4. Moses Herzog

            As regards “JohnH” in his early days here, I plead guilty to the charges of naive dolt. But in a last ditch effort to defend myself, I will submit to the court’s notice that I really like to give people the benefit of the doubt. He struck me as the sincere ignoramus in his initial days here.

          5. Barkley Rosser

            macroduck and others,

            None of us will know for sure whether JohnH is actually a paid agent or not. But I note there are others who I doubt are who seem to take this Russian propaganda seriously. The latest rather shocking example, who I am more certain is not a paid agent, is Post Keynesian economist Tom Palley, whom I think was linked to by Menzie here at one point. Tom is probably the most prominent PK economist to criticize the MMT, and if I am remembering accurately, it was a paper engaging in such criticism that Menzie linked to once.

            Tom, who I know pretty well, is also a coeditor of the Review of Keynesian Economics (ROKE). He has long posted his papers on various sites and has long gotten a lot of attention for his various papers. He has in the past also engaged in foreign policy discussions and has in the past written papers crtiticizing the emergence of a “China-centric globalization.”

            Anyway, a few days ago on an international Post Keynesian site he posted something that looks almost exactly like this bit by JohnH here, arguing that western media may be misrepresenting the situation and maybe it was the Ukrainians who did the killings in Bucha, not the Russians. His doing this has triggered a massive outbreak of outrage and arguing on the PKES site over this, with some demanding his post to be removed and him even banned, with others defending his right to say what he wants to.

            Of course, I suppose it is possible that Tom is being paid to have done this. But I doubt it. He has long been distinctively idiosyncratic in his views about many things, including foreign policy matters on his own.

      4. Steven Kopits

        I really don’t think the atrocities are in question. As I commented on Feb. 22, this is what was expected based on the historical behavior of Russian forces, although the reality is even worse than I would have imagined. John, if you’re looking for a line of attack here, you’re going down a dead-end. This is going to end in public trials, with defendants or in absentia, that will make Nurnberg look like a summary judgement by comparison.

        1. pgl

          “I really don’t think the atrocities are in question.” They are clearly real. I suspect JohnH even gets this by now but do not expect him to ever be honest about this topic.

          But wait – if you knew Putin was this evil, why on earth did you ever expect your “economic” solution to ever be accepted by this war criminal? I suggested when you wrote those posts – your “solution” would never fly. And yea – I was quite right on that score.

          1. Steven Kopits

            The solution I proposed would have been vastly preferable to both Ukraine and Russia compared to how events have turned out. It is not yet a given that Ukraine will end the war better than it started in terms of territory. Meanwhile, for the Russians, the whole venture is an epic disaster. So if you’re stating that the war is a better outcome for either side than the solution I proposed, I flatly disagree, at least based on the state of play today.

          2. pgl

            “Steven Kopits
            April 8, 2022 at 12:34 pm
            The solution I proposed would have been vastly preferable to both Ukraine and Russia compared to how events have turned out.”

            Well duh. My point was then and still is that Putin would never agree to what you suggested. I would hope by now you have finally figured this out.

          3. pgl

            “So if you’re stating that the war is a better outcome for either side than the solution I proposed, I flatly disagree, at least based on the state of play today.”

            Statements like this is why no one likes you Stevie. I NEVER advocated war and you should know that. So that sentence of yours is disgustingly dishonest.


        Stop making excuses John. Putin wants to exterminate all Germanic descented Ukrainians. When they are talking about denazification, they aren’t exactly lying.

        1. Barkley Rosser


          This has nothing to do with being “Germanic descended” much less actually Nazis. This has to do with anybody who does not simply immediately swear allegiance to Russia and Putin or claim any Ukrainian identity at all, nothing to with German descent, which is not a big lot of Ukrainians anyway. There are more of those in Russia than in Uktaine, altough in Western Ukraine you have some Austrian descended.

          1. GREGORY BOTT

            Nope, your wrong. Russia has long thought themselves as “Slavic” elites. It’s made up fantasies, but drives dialectics.

          2. Barkley Rosser


            You are exhibiting flaming ignorance here. The problem is that the Eurasianist line of Aleksandr Dugin as adopted by Putin simply denies the separate existence of the Ukrainians, not some inferiority or evil of them based on them having Germanic ancestry or links. If you want to maintain this idiotic and ignorant line, then do please provide a reference of link. You appear to have no idea what you are talking about.

            As it is, the Dugin-Putin version of this is amazingly not all that anti-German. This vision of the future Eurasia dominated by Russia has western Europe under the control of a joint condominium led by the Germans and the French, albeit with this essentially recognizing the supercontinental leadership by the expanded Russia and especially with no US role or presence.. But Ukraine and Belarus are simply folded into Russia to be part of it. This is because they are supposedly not different from Russians, not because they are somehow evil or inferior due to having some Germanic ancestry.

        2. pgl

          JohnH does not care. He is on his pro-Putin soap box just refusing to address all reality.

    2. Anonymous

      neocon pgl, pnac apologist

      ‘nato is fanning flames’ of war and should not be finding a warlike mission farther afield from its cold war roots.*

      *china’s response to nato chief’s propaganda, it should have included: ‘there would be no war w/o nato gifting weapons.’

      nato is maximizing civilian casualties. there are no battles, ukraine is not venturing away from civilian areas to confront the russian.

      yes, occupied ukraine is insurance there are ‘no more pearl harbors’, and the cost is born by ukraines and poor people in usa.

      it is empire vs empire, atlanticists like pgl try to hide this.

      i have had my cold war!

      1. Edward Charles Kokkelenberg

        You have touched a sensitive area. We like NATO; but we find its recent actions and statements provocative.

        The Congress shall have Power To …provide for the common Defense. Congress has the Constitutional authority “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” US Constitution

        Since last January, NATO Sec. Gen. Stoltenberg has aggressively called for a strong response to Russian threats to the Ukraine, possibly usurping Congresses’ role. Sec. Gen. Stoltenberg who refuses to eliminate Sweden and Finland from future consideration of membership saying that issue should be left to the Swedes and Finns. He told the Wash post

        “There’s a huge difference between discussing when Ukraine can be a member of NATO and to say that we should sign a legally binding treaty, excluding any enlargement of NATO, because that goes far beyond Ukraine. That includes, for instance, Finland and Sweden. …Finland and Sweden, countries which are now currently not applying for membership, … have called very clearly on NATO not to sign such a binding treaty. …(if) NATO signs a treaty that makes it impossible any time in the future, forever, for Sweden or Finland to join NATO would actually undermine their right to choose their own path. So, this is about a fundamental right for all allies, for all countries to …. That principle we’ll not compromise on.

        And to make sure that there is no room for miscalculation, misunderstanding about that, we have increased our presence, especially in the eastern part of the alliance. And we have done that over the last weeks and months.
        So for instance, with the U.S. announcement of high readiness of U.S. troops that can be put under NATO command, an aircraft carrier group is also placed under under NATO command, “
        The aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman and its strike group have teamed up with NATO for interoperability exercises in the Mediterranean that began last February and has been placed under NATO operational command.

        War Powers Act

        The War Powers Resolution of 1973, otherwise known as the War Powers Act, is a federal law passed at the height of the Vietnam War. It was intended to provide a framework for Congress’s check on presidential power to use military force without congressional consent. This constraint on Presidential over reach is a result of the Chief Executive’s neglect of the Constitution since Truman’s police action in Korea.

        The War Powers Act(s) are an attempt to modernize the country’s ability to respond in this day of almost instantaneous communication and hyper sonic attacks. The results are an assignment of the ability to declare defensive war to the President subject to some conditions and Congressional Review.

        We seemed to have missed this step and let NATO have free reign.

        1. Macroduck

          I think you’ve got your separation of Powers wrong..

          NATO is not engaged in armed conflict, and so cannot be usurping Congressional power under the War Powers Act(s). Nor would expansion of NATO conflict with the War Powers Act(s).

          NATO is a mutual defense organization, created by treaty. The U.S. Senate approved the treaty for ratification on July 21, 1949. By ratifying that treaty, the Senate approved Article 5, thereby committing the U.S. to defend any and all NATO members from attack. There’s no conflict with the War Powers Act(s) if the U.S. takes military action to defend NATO members. The U.S. has not taken military action in Ukraine, but could in Finland or Sweden if they were to become NATO members. Already approved by the Senate in 1949.

          Of tangential relevance to any claim that NATO is acting contrary to U.S. interests, the NATO treaty was largely drafted by John Hickerson, a U.S. diplomat. NATO is a U.S. creation. The U.S. has a voice in all NATO decisions. And in the case of Russia’s attack(s) on Ukraine, the U.S. has taken a very active role in the coordinated response of NATO and other allies.

          The U.S. is not being led around by the nose, and there is no conflict between NATO’s action with regard to Ukraine and the War Powers Act(s).

      2. baffling

        anonymous believes that ukraine has no right to defend itself. interesting.

        in the long run, i think you will see nato membership grow. it will be effective at deterring the aggression seen by russia. i was more concerned about extreme russian reaction a few weeks ago-think nukes. i am less inclined to believe they will take that action today. russia fears nato forces (including nukes) and used that as an excuse to invade ukraine. all the russians have done is increase the odds that more and stronger forces will be stationed closer to russian territory. Sweden and norway are next to join nato. Ukraine will either join nato, or effectively develop an informal protection from nato in the future. ukraine will be nato armed with weapons once russia is defeated. and the next incursion will have a nato provided no fly zone. nato is going to lose its apprehension about direct conflict with russia after this event. putin showed too much of his hand. he now knows, as does the world, that his military cannot win a conflict with nato. he will probably lose crimea after all is said and done.

        1. Barkley Rosser

          Norway already in and has been since beginning, with border on Russia at Russia’s northwest corner. Nation now seriously moving to join soon is Finland, with a much larger border with Russia.

          Ooooh!!!! There it goes again, that nasty agreessive NATO moving eastward yet again!!!! Obviously this justifies Putin massacring every living Ukrainian who does not sear personal fealty to him in the next ten seconds!!!!!!!

  1. Moses Herzog

    I’m not trying to be humorous here, this question is in earnest. I’m a little bit confused: Is GaR as Ferrara et al use it leaning more to being a predictive tool?? Or more like a “Nowcast”?? I’m guessing the answer may be “both”, to which I would go on to ask–which type of tool does it lean to be more??

    1. Vasja

      It is neither of the two. It is a measure of risk and not a conditional mean/point forecast (such as in forecasting and nowcasting, disclaimer: I am ignoring density forecasts).

      It focuses on the tail events. Tail events are outcomes that are not very likely, but sometimes do happen. This measure tries to enumerate the consequences of these bad outcomes. (Very) Loosely speaking, it answers the question “if tomorrow one of the 10% worst rGDP growths occurs, at least how negative do we expect rGDP growth to be?” Note that “..one of the 10% worst growths..” is not the most likely growth rate, we are not forecasting/nowcasting that this growth rate will happen. We are only saying that IF one of the 10% of the worst rGDP growths occurs, rGDP growth will be equal to or lower than X (-0.90% in the above example). Forecasts and nowcasts, on the other hand, try to predict the most likely outcome (I’m ignoring density forecasts again).

      1. Moses Herzog

        @ Vasja
        I don’t dispute any of your stated points, as they strike me as rather factual. But it also strikes me that the authors of the paper are at least suggesting the the GaR could be used to help predict (a kind of forecast?) possible recessions. Even if maybe it could be said to be a kind of “crude” “judgement” deduced from the GaR end result calculations. From the bottom of page 13 of the paper:
        “All in all, the results show that our daily GaR(10%) would have been able to correctly track in real- time this recession episode. However, and more interestingly, the GaR(10%) measure tends to rapidly fall a quarter ahead of the beginning of the recession, dropping from a value close to zero to about -1% in only a few months. This swift change in the GaR can be seen as a possible early signal of recession led by a deterioration in financial conditions.”

        It also strikes me (I leave open that I may be wrong) that the authors are suggesting it could be used to adjust monetary policy in an immediate fashion, again, which suggests to me they are proposing using the GaR number as a kind of “nowcast”. From a segment towards the end of page 15 of the paper:
        “This illustrates the fact that the daily GaR(10%) is an interesting indicator to carry out event studies, as it reveals important information about how economic activity is likely to react to monetary policy measures, through the channel of financial conditions. Consequently, we argue that this new high-frequency GaR measure can be useful for central banks in order to check the immediate effects of their policies on macroeconomic risk and to subsequently adjust adequately their monetary policy stance.”

        I am just saying in a friendly way, I think in fact the authors are suggesting the GaR numbers be used in part for forecasting and nowcasting, not just as a simple measure of tail risk. Isn’t that the whole point of the paper?? As the paper would not be terribly revelatory just taking VaR and switching it to GaR, as that was already done by Adrien et 2019, as the paper references..

        1. Vasja

          I admit I have not yet read the paper (I promise to do so next week)… I mostly agree with your reasoning. You provided footnotes in support of your statements. I cannot dispute them. And yes, GaR can be thought of as an early warning indicator. It seems to be a leading indicator. It leads recessions by 1Q. Therefore, it could help predict them. This is beyond doubt…

          What I wish to say is that GaR in itself is not a nowcast/forecast but an indicator of risk. Indicators of risk are just one of the inputs (predictors) to a forecast/nowcast model for predicting recessions/rGDP growth. One still requires a second model (the forecasting/nowcasting model). That model translates GaR into an actual forecast or nowcast. To sum up this paragraph, GaR can be a useful ingredient in a forecast/nowcast model but is in itself not a forecast/nowcast.

          What the authors are suggesting (to increase the value of their paper by showing its potential uses) is that GaR could be used as one of the ingredients in a nowcasting/forecasting model. Bottom line, you are right that GaR can be translated into a forecast/nowcast. Also, I might be too pedantic.

  2. Bruce Hall

    … highlighting an increase in downward macro risks in the wake of the start of the war in Ukraine.
    So, basically, disruption of imports from Ukraine and Russia is going to have a negative impact on European countries ability to keep their economies growing.

    This article sheds a little more light on the degree of vulnerability each European country may face if alternative supplies cannot be readily obtained and the prices of those supplies increases significantly. Not surprisingly, the exposure is greater in the eastern nations than the western nations.

    1. Anonymous

      all the propaganda fit to sell.

      the eu premier says ‘no more russian coal’.

      easy for her to say, it is the countries who pay the piper, and they are not seeing any help from the ecb!

      when blinken says nato is united he is talking of biden and johnson.

          1. pgl

            Your post was your usual worthless drivel. Excuse me for not getting into your utterly insane little brain – if that is what resides on top of your little shoulders.

  3. rsm

    Isn’t is blindingly obvious that this is all statistically insignificant noise? What are you all smoking?

  4. Ivan

    The heavy economic price of Chinas zero-tolerance Covid policy is becoming more and more evident.


    Yet the failure of this policy to produce the desired results should be obvious even to the blindest of the blind


    This outcome was obvious to anybody who had even rudimentary understanding of pandemics – or were able to identify and listen to pandemic experts. That is the problem with authoritarians, they demand “loyalty” above anything else – so nobody ever dare to tell them the inconvenient/unpleasant truth.

    1. AndrewG

      I’m with you about authoritarians, but this seems to me to be as much about economic nationalism, which democracies can also succumb to. China could have relied more on foreign, high-tech mRNA vaccines, but they didn’t. They chose to go it alone. And their vaccine is not good enough (no offense to Chinese scientists).

  5. pgl

    Can we all have pity for the enablers of multinational tax evasion? That is what Hong Kong has attracted for decades but the PRC may crack down on the life styles of well to do professionals in Hong Kong. Enter Singapore which is the up and coming center for multinationals who want low taxes. So Hong Kong professionals have decided to migrate to Singapore, which is driving up housing costs.


    This is not limited to Asia. Dubai is also attracting a lot of professionals who help multinationals this way as has Zug, Switzerland. And the cost of living in both places is sky high. But with all the enormous amount of tax reductions from the international tax games – these professionals draw insanely high salaries.

  6. pgl


    An accurate account of how most of the Republican Senators rudely walked out of the chamber when the 53-47 vote confirming Ketanji Jackson Brown to be the next Supreme Court Justice. A few of the disgusting attempts by these rude Senators to smear this lady are also noted.

    One troll here keeps objecting to my characterization of these rude Republicans as racist. OK – so what is the underlying reason for their disgusting behavior?

  7. ltr


    April 8, 2022

    Chinese mainland reports 1,576 new COVID-19 cases

    The Chinese mainland recorded 1,576 new confirmed COVID-19 cases on Thursday, with 1,540 linked to local transmissions and 36 from overseas, according to data from the National Health Commission on Friday.

    A total of 22,648 new asymptomatic cases were also recorded on Thursday, and 156,293 asymptomatic patients remain under medical observation.

    Confirmed cases on the Chinese mainland now total 161,692, with the death toll at 4,638.

    Chinese mainland new locally transmitted cases


    Chinese mainland new imported cases


    Chinese mainland new asymptomatic cases


  8. macroduck

    The FAO World Food Price Index for March is out. It ain’t pretty:


    Meat prices are so far the least frisky of the components, but that’s normal:


    As herds are reduced in response to feed prices, odds are there’ll be a further, prolonged rise in meat prices.

    Policy coordination against Russia’s aggression has been quite good. It’s time to prove allied governments can do two big things at once. Time for a coordinated food assistance policy effort. The U.S. is trying.

  9. pgl

    Putin wants Russians to believe only 500 of their soldiers have died but the correct figure may be approaching 10 thousand with over 16 thousand wounded already:


    So how does one cover up the massive number of death Russian soldiers?

    “Ukraine has previously accused Russia of refusing to take back its dead amid reports its military could use mobile crematoria to cover up the scale of their losses.”


    The is a special place in hell for Putin and his apologists.

    1. Barkley Rosser


      Old links.

      I think the Russians are now admitting that over 1300 have died, although mostly they have been vague on that number. Ukrainians are claiming it is now over 17,500 dead, with maybe as high as 40,000 wounded, probably an overestimate.

    1. pgl

      Someone asked if you were praying for a recession. After some delay you answered in the affirmative.

      1. rsm

        Lucille, don’t we all know recessions are psychological, and not due to the weird, shifty supply and demand curves economists handwave over?

      2. T. Shaw

        Is that how you will rationalize – “It Wasn’t Me!” – when the outlandish policies cause the mass of economic excretion to collide with the rotary oscillator?

        I love you, Man. It’s like talking to Princess Grace – my gorgeous granddaughter. Except, she’s three and she’s not cunning and deceitful.

    2. pgl

      “‘Inflation shock’ worsening, ‘rates shock’ just beginning, ‘recession shock’ coming”, BofA chief investment strategist Michael Hartnett wrote in a note to clients

      Does anyone know WTF Michael Hartnett even is. Bruce Hall clearly does not. But for those who actually try to write coherent factual posts (Bruce BTW that leaves you out of the picture here) does he have a forecasting track record worth writing home or not? Or maybe he is just Donald Luskin Jr.

  10. rsm

    “As herds are reduced in response to feed prices, odds are there’ll be a further, prolonged rise in meat prices.”

    How can I profit from this, Macroquack? What’s the ticker for a meat ETF future I can buy low and sell high?

Comments are closed.