Coronavirus Thread: Worldwide Pandemic

[the cac mamba]

You weren't ok with 20+ million unemployed people getting an extra $600 for a few months

So the extra disingenuous just make you look even sillier.

i thought it was stupid to give people a raise for staying home, while people get nothing extra for working in grocery stores.

you realize it was literally a mistake and an oversight in the bill, right? that they didnt originally make that part of the package?

 

[Hood Critic]

The worst-case outcome leaves the economy mired in “an extended period of low productivity growth and stagnant incomes ... Additional fiscal support could be costly but worth it if it helps avoid long-term economic damage and leaves us with a stronger recovery,” Powell said in what amounted to a direct call for Congress to ramp up its aid during the crisis.

From the guy who spent the vast majority of his career as a deficit hawk.

But we worried about future inflation brehs...

 

[King Static X]

FREEDOM!

WE IMMUNE TO THE 'RONA!

 

[ill]

Its virtually impossible for you to derive any of that from that post.

If I was a business owner, I'd stay closed until at least after I see the results of a potential second wave and attempt to get my profit and losses subsidized by the government as much as possible. I'm going to lose more than I profit but the idea is to actually still have a business of some sorts when we get to the other side of this.

You really fukking think a small business owner is going to stay closed until the second wave comes through?

You are out of your fukking mind. The govt isn't subsidizing your small business for all its losses for months on end. Never mind the fact it's not covering losses in full for most small biz as is.

Most of these companies are going under if they don't open back up. No successful business owner would ever have your mentality unless they were already caked up.

Imagine telling people who risked it all to open their own business and whom rely on its income to survive that its a good idea for them to stay closed through the second wave while they take on financial losses and most likely the closure of their business at the end of the crisis.

 

[Jigganaut]

You really fukking think a small business owner is going to stay closed until the second wave comes through?

You are out of your fukking mind. The govt isn't subsidizing your small business for all its losses for months on end. Never mind the fact it's not covering losses in full for most small biz as is.

Most of these companies are going under if they don't open back up. No successful business owner would ever have your mentality unless they were already caked up.

Imagine telling people who risked it all to open their own business and whom rely on its income to survive that its a good idea for them to stay closed through the second wave while they take on financial losses and most likely the closure of their business at the end of the crisis.

 

[Hood Critic]

i thought it was stupid to give people a raise for staying home, while people get nothing extra for working in grocery stores.

you realize it was literally a mistake and an oversight in the bill, right? that they didnt originally make that part of the package?

If you're asking me do I agree that it was a massive failure on everyone involved's part to not take care of the people we deem essential to our everyday life as we ride this out from the safety of our homes? Absolutely 100%.

But I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this concept of people getting a raise to stay at home. Because as others and myself have proven to you, everyone who gets unemployment is not getting 100% of their wages. So some people got more, some got less and some got almost just right. But I would hope you would agree that instead of haggling over targeting those groups, the better solution was to pick a number and approve a blanket measure for all in the spirit of timing.

 

[null]

so why not give everyone a million dollars so we can stay inside for 5 more years? i'm down for that

The entire financial side of economics is just a bunch of laws. Those laws could be re-written at the stroke of a pen.

In 2008, since 2008 and now again we see that traditional markets rules have been upended in ways which were considered out of the question before.

Central Banks have colluded with governments to re-fashion laws to maintain the status quo.

State sponsorships of companies in the EU was a no-no prior to 2008. The crisis hit and the illegal was made legal.

These rules could be re-written as long as the core societal economic activities remain in place. No easy endeavor but it is possible.

Should they be changed? Not on a whim IMO but it is a distinct possibility.

"In autumn 2008 a series of summits between European leaders took place. The first national bank support schemes were devised, mostly providing state-backed guarantees to the financial sector.(6) A number of banks that were relatively unaffected by the crisis opted not to benefit from these schemes – including the Santander group, Barclays and Deut-sche Bank.In order to assist Member States to take urgent and effective measures to preserve financial stability and to provide legal certainty, the Commission adopted four Communications between October 2008 and July 2009, setting out how we would apply State aid rules to government measures to support the banking sector in the context of the economic crisis."
https://ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/cpn/2009_2_1.pdf

Then you have the unfair competition support of Investment Banks / The Shadow Banking System in the USA and the EU which has been going on in one form or another for most of the time since 2008. "Too big to fail" is the mantra to justify the re-writing of laws, dogma, convention and morality.

A measure which would have been considered unthinkable up until 2008.

Do not prematurely take options off the table. Framing the discussion as money supply side solutions being limited to "writing checks" is ignoring what economics actually is and how much the rules could actually be changed.

The physical money in your pocket is just a piece of paper that carries values and financial properties due to the societal rules and activity underpinning it. Same for non-cash money.

For a more limited analogue see bitcoin (as a monetary system) where ownership can be (and has been) changed by majority consensus.

 

[ill]

The government has been printing monopoly money every year since 2001 since that was the last time we had a surplus. So what rock you been living under while the "monopoly" money was being used to cover the deficit?

You know the national debt is $25 Trillion right? It was above $20 Trillion before Rona.
.

Monopoly money has been printing far longer than that but the consequences of it are that countries like China, who buy up massive amounts of our debt, now gain leverage over us. You can see it right now in the trade wars. Thats the result of Bush' stimulus bill and an open printing press. The loss of America's standing in the world markets over the last 20 years is partially a result of printing monopoly money. We shouldn't cheer for more of that.

 

[Hood Critic]

You really fukking think a small business owner is going to stay closed until the second wave comes through?

You are out of your fukking mind. The govt isn't subsidizing your small business for all its losses for months on end. Never mind the fact it's not covering losses in full for most small biz as is.

Most of these companies are going under if they don't open back up. No successful business owner would ever have your mentality unless they were already caked up.

Imagine telling people who risked it all to open their own business and whom rely on its income to survive that its a good idea for them to stay closed through the second wave while they take on financial losses and most likely the closure of their business at the end of the crisis.

1. Quite a few of them aren't going to have a choice if they can only operate at a fraction of their normal capacity. At that point it would cost them more to be open than closed.
2. Again, who said anything abut cover ALL of the losses? The small business stimulus was mainly to cover the cost of keeping employees on the payroll. A pretty significant expense right?
3. Most of these company's are going under anyway because more people favor staying home than risking getting sick.
4. You keep acting like there is a choice, no one can opt-out of the current climate.

 

[the cac mamba]

If you're asking me do I agree that it was a massive failure on everyone involved's part to not take care of the people we deem essential to our everyday life as we ride this out from the safety of our homes? Absolutely 100%.

But I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this concept of people getting a raise to stay at home. Because as others and myself have proven to you, everyone who gets unemployment is not getting 100% of their wages. So some people got more, some got less and some got almost just right. But I would hope you would agree that instead of haggling over targeting those groups, the better solution was to pick a number and approve a blanket measure for all in the spirit of timing.

i do agree with it at the end of the day they should have gotten the money. they'll need it

 

[Hood Critic]

Monopoly money has been printing far longer than that...

Just quoting this for emphasis to the original point that was being made by several other people as well as myself.

It might not be ideal but it may very well be necessary so that we can actually have an economy down the road.

 

[ill]

1. Quite a few of them aren't going to have a choice if they can only operate at a fraction of their normal capacity. At that point it would cost them more to be open than closed.
2. Again, who said anything abut coverall ALL of the losses? The small business stimulus was mainly to cover the cost of keeping employees on the payroll. A pretty significant expense right?
3. Most of these company's are going under anyway because more people favor staying home than risking getting sick.
4. You keep acting like there is a choice, no one can opt-out of the current climate.

I'm not sure why you think you're in prison right now but the world is opening back up and I believe your assumptions are grossly wrong. Those that feel threatened by the virus still have the option to stay home and/or wear masks and other safety precautions. Those that don't feel threatened or fall into a low risk category should have the option to do as they please.

1. For those that can only operate at a fraction of their capacity, it will be their decision if its profitable or viable for them to operate. That scenario doesnt apply to a vast majority of businesses. Most businesses can operate just fine, even adhering to social distancing rules if needed.

2. You admit that these businesses are going to be taking losses that the government isn't covering. Well if you run a business, you can only take so much loss before you have to hang it up. I'm not sure why you're not comprehending that simple fact. Most businesses aren't Apple with $200 bill in cash in the bank. Most businesses are just like people and they live almost month to month. Downtime literally means it could kill their business. If the government isn't covering ALL of the losses, then those businesses will fail and the owner and the people they employed will be SOL.

3. I disagree. I think theres a majority of people that are going to be going out in public. I think society has done a pretty good job adhering to quarantine for the past two months but i feel we've turned the tide and people are learning to live with it. Again, those that feel threatened or at risk can still stay home if they're so worried.

4. There is 100% a choice. This isn't the plague. When we all thought it MIGHT be, society did the right thing in quarantine. Now that we know better, we most certainly have a choice in how we go about this.

 

[choc_cardigan]

BTW you are arguing with 2 posters who allegedly live in the NE part of country, allegedly rich or well off and allegedly white males spreading right wing and alt lite talking points, on hip hop message board with black people





Carry on...

 

[ill]

Just quoting this for emphasis to the original point that was being made by several other people as well as myself.

It might not be ideal but it may very well be necessary so that we can actually have an economy down the road.

I hope you understand its not just the fact they're printing monopoly money. Its the amount they are printing, the time frame they are doing it in, and which country bought the debt we created.

 

[Hood Critic]

BTW you are arguing with 2 posters who allegedly live in the NE part of country, allegedly rich or well off and allegedly white males spreading right wing and alt lite talking points, on hip hop message board with black people





Carry on...

Killing time between conference calls...believe me, I know exactly who I'm dealing with.