This is true, but it's also becoming even more powerful. Digitalization and the advancement of AI technology is causing not only routine, mundane jobs like mail sorters or machines to be taken over by robots, but also far more advanced and difficult tasks, like writing or coding, as seen by ChatGPT. As Rick Blaidsell explains on his blog, technology like these chatbots have started doing tasks like data entry and could very soon be doing more in these fields.

https://rickscloud.com/can-chatgpt-replace-human-work-chatgpt-vs-humans/#:~:text=AI%2C%20including%20chatbot%20technology%20like,to%20augment%20and%20assist%20it.

I found this really interesting as we would assume there is a midline of wealth around the world, meaning while there is some wealth inequality, the number would be far from 1, as most people have around the mean amount of money. However, this means the standard deviation of wealth globally is actually very high, and we see the wealth being distributed into the hands of very few people, leaving many people with very little. This is supported by the Pew Research Center:

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-in-income-and-wealth-inequality/

"Sweeping sanctions on the Russian banking sector should therefore precede a SWIFT ban."

Supporters of this claim argue that targeting the Russian banking sector with sanctions could have a significant impact on the country's economy and its ability to conduct international transactions. For example, a 2019 article by Anastasia Likhacheva and Anastasia Nesvetailova, titled "The Geopolitics of Financial Sanctions: Economic Statecraft and Imperialism," argues that financial sanctions on Russia have had a significant impact on the country's economy, particularly in the areas of foreign investment and access to financial markets. The authors suggest that further financial sanctions could be an effective tool for pressuring Russia to change its behavior (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0265691419849192).

However, critics of this claim argue that a SWIFT ban could be a more effective tool for pressuring Russia, as it would cut off the country's ability to conduct international transactions. A 2019 article by Richard Nephew, titled "Evaluating the Efficacy and Impact of US Sanctions on Russia," suggests that a SWIFT ban could be an effective tool for pressuring Russia, but also notes that such a ban would have significant impacts on the global financial system and could harm the interests of US allies (https://www.brookings.edu/research/evaluating-the-efficacy-and-impact-of-u-s-sanctions-on-russia/).

Overall, there is no clear consensus on whether sweeping sanctions on the Russian banking sector should precede a SWIFT ban. Both approaches have potential advantages and disadvantages, and their effectiveness depends on a variety of factors, including the specific goals of the sanctions, the behavior of the targeted country, and the potential impact on the global financial system.

"By contrast, all major Iranian banks, including the Central Bank of Iran, are fully blacklisted. All major Iranian state-owned enterprises, including the National Iranian Oil Company, are also under full blocking sanctions."

The sanctions placed on Iran by the U.S. has caused major economic turmoil in the country. According to a report published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the combination of sanctions and reduced oil prices caused Iran's real gross domestic product (GDP) to contract by 6.8% in 2019 and 4.6% in 2020, and the inflation rate to rise to over 40%. The sanctions have also restricted Iran's ability to access the international financial system, which has made it difficult for the country to finance imports and access foreign currency. This has resulted in shortages of essential goods and medicines, which has affected the well-being of the Iranian population. Thus, even though the restrictions on Russian economies are far smaller than Iran, they will still hold major effects on the well-being and economy in Russia.

(https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2019/07/19/Islamic-Republic-of-Iran-2019-Article-IV-Consultation-Press-Release-Staff-Report-and-Statement-47485)

The study "The impact of COVID-19 on international trade: Evidence from the first shock”(2021) by Kazunobu Hayakawaa and Hiroshi Mukunokib ( professors of economics in Japan) compared the gravity equation with the impact of COVID-19 on international trade. They state that exporters struggled as their workforce could not go to work under lockdowns while importer markets struggled due to reduced demand as many people were out of jobs. However, the other conclusions are a bit counterintuitive. They mentioned that most countries have got past the covid impact on trade in the second half of 2021 as they put the control measures like social distancing, masks, work from home as well as vaccination.

COVID exploited how fragile the globalized economy can be in cases of market shutdowns. This article illustrates these risks of interdependence:

https://globaleurope.eu/globalization/7-risks-for-the-global-economy/

While most people believe that being environmentally friendly is quite expensive, there are cases such as these where environmental regulation can actually boost innovation and incentive. This method of having high costs of regulation and taxing nonrenewable sources is important for both the environment and innovation, as companies will look for new, alternative energy sources and methods to fuel themselves.

Over the past decade, as we have continued to see rising temperatures and sea levels, the debate over climate change being real has finally started to secede - however, this is a scary awakening to the fact that our environment is rapidly changing. As we see here, just 8 years ago, only 64% of democrats and 23% of republicans believed climate change was real and caused by human activities, whereas those numbers are closer to 72% across the U.S. now. Regardless of whether people believe it's real or not, environmentalists and economists should put greater emphasis on conserving the environment through their policies.

(https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us/)

https://direct.mit.edu/jinh/article/48/4/523/49460/The-Effect-of-Geography-and-Institutions-on

This article dives deeper into the debate between geographical factors and institutional factors as causes for economic development (or lack thereof). It highlights the Polish city of Lodz as an example, as the small settlement had many environmental benefits such as trees for lumber to prosper it's economy, but also had strong institutions in place. They conclude that there is no singular cause for economic prosperity in Lodz, it is an equal balance of the institutions and geography.

The geography theory is a common explanation of poverty and economic development. One of the first explanations of the geography theory was given by Montesquieu in the 18th century, which argued that people in tropical, hot climates were poorer because of laziness, bad agriculture, and diseases, whereas people in temperate climates were richer. However, this argument is heavily flawed because of historical examples such as East and West Germany, the Middle East, North America, etc., as well as more recent examples like Singapore and Botswana. These are all cases where despite a tropical climate, the country has done very well economically, or where a similar climate led to two very different outcomes. Thus, we can assume that geography has minimal impact on economic development.