That's only true for countries with small economies. If the US, China, Japan or the Eurozone collapsed, that would plunge the whole world into a depression.
Well a lot of those countries don't have money. Lebanon is pretty much bankrupt for example. Iran is close to that. Iraq, Syria, Lybia, Sudan, many many super fragile countries. It's not that the problem isn't technically solvable, it is, but many of these countries are on the verge of social and economic collapse.
They also haven't shut down their economies, which was the point I was making. The actions you describe are not mutually exclusive to a more nuanced approach to reduced economic activity. That is, something other than economic suicide.
Economies do not usually collapse to that extent. You are implying that somehow Egypt will turn into Somalia-style failed state (evrn Venezuela is able to guard its borders), which will almost certainly not happen.
Economy collapses are more like a reality check when a country has to cease the unhealthy practices it was engaged in, and eat a humble pie. They are not like statehood collapse.
I mean economic crashes rarely cause a country to "die", but it will have a major setback in its economy and the individual people will suffer, if they aren't already. I mean I know lots of people are suffering in the west as well, despite there being plenty of jobs available and the economy being very good.
There are countries right now failing after seizing wealth from their citizens
All of those countries failed for different reasons and never solely because of "seizing wealth from their citizens", although that was always a component.
You seem to be dealing in absurd hypotheticals here. In most countries in the world, having your nation state fail on you is a very real risk. It doesn't fail all at once, so it's something you can plan for. Having wealth outside of the banking and financial sectors that's not also in physical form is something that's very valuable for this purpose.
reply