https://www.wdsu.com/article/some-new-orleans-workers-quitting-their-jobs-after-receiving-stimulus-checks-employers-weigh-in/35942502

I agree with this view. This article mentioned an example of why the opposite of such would not be feasible. After receiving the stimulus check, many low income individuals simply decide to not work, thus a decrease in incentive and decrease in overall productivity of the society. This shows that some inequality can actually motivate individuals to work for their income and such benefit the society with their output.

This is a fascinating fact...the fact that wealth is the most unequally distributed isn't surprising, but the earnings and the disposable income part is actually quite interesting. Disposable income in terms of gini coefficient is actually significantly lower than the earning inequality before tax, which shows that wealth gap cannot be only measured through nominal wealth, but rather earning inequality and disposable income as well.

"The European Union (EU) says it will ban all imports of oil brought in by sea from Russia by the end of 2022 The US is banning all Russian oil and gas imports The UK will phase out Russian oil imports by the end of 2022 Germany has frozen plans for the opening of a major gas pipeline from Russia The EU said it will halt Russian coal imports by August" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60125659

As this BCC news article explained, harsher sanctions will be placed on Russia due to its military pressure on the Ukrainians. As a result, Russia's economy will continue to suffer with more future restrictions to come.

"Thus far, U.S. and EU measures against Russia have focused on the country’s financial sector while largely sparing its energy industry. Tough sanctions on oil and gas sales, by far Russia’s most valuable exports, will be politically difficult because markets are tight and the Biden administration worries about the impact on domestic gasoline prices and inflation."

This answers the main question of the impact of a non-free international trading market under the main scheme of "punishment" - especially this case towards Russia and its economy. By eliminating its main factor of export, the US and the EU can gain an edge on controlling Russia's economic prosperity. However, this also means that the countries have to accept higher import prices for oil and gas as a relative result of its sanction.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10479-020-03912-1

This research paper conducted by K. Katsaliaki synthesized existing information about the types of disruptions, their impact on supply chains, resilience methods in supply chain design and recovery strategies proposed by the studies supported by cost–benefit analysis. It also examines the most popular modeling approaches on the topic with indicative examples and the IT tools that enhance resilience and reduce disruption risks. This supports the idea that trade is crucial in human development, where without trade, human society will have a drastic decrease in standard of living.

I agree with Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nation claim; nations must be open to trade internationally in order to maximize consumption and thus maximize the living standards of citizens. By producing products which countries have comparative advantages in, all countries benefit.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/climate-change-game-theory-models/624253/

As we can see, many policy-implementation and international conflict can be mathematically modeled using game theory. This is an effective way to explain and explore potential solutions to a difficult problem.

Extremely interesting point: the conflict of interest does not only exist between races or business owner vs. environmentalist, but rather the different generations; for older generation, they have more incentive for asset gathering since they are not the ones who will experience the negative environmental effects. On the other hand, the younger generations have more incentive to encourage positive policies on environment since they will be the one experience the effect in the future.

Continuing the previous post, this published article https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aau9413 explained the positive economics effect that reform and opening has brought to China in the last four decades. For example, "Over the past 40 years, China’s GDP has expanded by an annual average of 9.6% to 74.35 trillion CNY (14), with an overall 30-fold increase".

I agree with the idea that changes in political dynamics can drastically change the growth of the economy - for the better or for the worse. The example author gave about China and its Reform and Open policy was a great example. Through the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, China was able to open up to the world through trades and foreign affairs while encourages entrepreneurship, fundamentally changed the country's economic dynamic to this day. This clearly demonstrates that political stances can drastically impact the outcome of economic growth in a region.

In this article on Maslow Triangle, it mentions the importance of fulfilling fundamental needs first before entering higher level of need requirements. The idea directly relates to the ideas mentioned in the article where when people focus on basic living needs, it is extremely difficult for them to put effort into their deliberate system.

Due to the cycle of poverty, people tends to think more automatically in terms of decisions making. Poverty makes people worry about the basic requirements of life such as food, water, and shelter instead of the decision making process. Automatic thinking then became the default because population in poverty does not have the prerequisite to perform higher level of thinking, creating an endless cycle in financial struggles.