• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Veelk

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,691
Correct. Biden is effectively the nominee. Bernie is still in it, but it is impossible for him to overtake.
*sigh* You know, the timing of this couldn't have been worse.

Imagine this virus breaking out 2 months before and Bernie in the spotlight saying "Hey...the billionaires have money. They have LOTS of money. Enough to get you through this crisis. "

Socialism is apparently the hardest sell imaginable in politics and maybe I'm being optimistic, but "you will die if you do not get funding" is probably the best possible pitch for the concept Bernie could have had. Just....two months, and we'd have been so much better off...
 

OmniOne

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,063
The Morning News, both local and national really seems to be painting Democrats as the problem with this bill fight.

This is a losing political issue. (which democrats will also have to fix in the future when in control)

Corporations will get their slush funds.

I also don't understand how this bill is not being started in the House?
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
*sigh* You know, the timing of this couldn't have been worse.

Imagine this virus breaking out 2 months before and Bernie in the spotlight saying "Hey...the billionaires have money. They have LOTS of money. Enough to get you through this crisis. "

Socialism is apparently the hardest sell imaginable in politics and maybe I'm being optimistic, but "you will die if you do not get funding" is probably the best possible pitch for the concept Bernie could have had. Just....two months, and we'd have been so much better off...
If you're talking about Social Democracy, calling it Socialism is part of the problem.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,716
The Morning News, both local and national really seems to be painting Democrats as the problem with this bill fight.

This is a losing political issue. (which democrats will also have to fix in the future when in control)

Corporations will get their slush funds.

I also don't understand how this bill is not being started in the House?

Both chambers are working on a bill. Then they will reconcile them.
 

Deleted member 28564

User-requested account closure
Banned
Oct 31, 2017
3,604
*sigh* You know, the timing of this couldn't have been worse.

Imagine this virus breaking out 2 months before and Bernie in the spotlight saying "Hey...the billionaires have money. They have LOTS of money. Enough to get you through this crisis. "

Socialism is apparently the hardest sell imaginable in politics and maybe I'm being optimistic, but "you will die if you do not get funding" is probably the best possible pitch for the concept Bernie could have had. Just....two months, and we'd have been so much better off...
I don't think anything could have saved Bernie's campaign after Super Tuesday. The public was arguably already in the process of planning his funeral after South Carolina. The general public never wanted a major shaking in 2020. You could say they wanted a strong, stable daddy to whisper in their ears that it'll be alright. And in Biden's case, he might do this literally.
 

Plinko

Member
Oct 28, 2017
18,545
I think it is pretty evident that in a few weeks there's going to be a public clash between Trump and Dr. Fauci. Dr. Fauci already said this would be much more than 2-3 weeks.
 

gcubed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,785
I think it is pretty evident that in a few weeks there's going to be a public clash between Trump and Dr. Fauci. Dr. Fauci already said this would be much more than 2-3 weeks.

there is a difference between how long this is and how long "this" is. The quarantine will be over by May at the absolute latest just because the current administration can't handle the economic destruction. Rightly or wrongly the US has no social safety net for an extended shut down, so they aren't going to be shut down all summer and thinking so is setting yourself up for disappointment.

You'll see rolling quarantines and hot spots but this country will turn on again before they "should".

you kill people from the virus or from starvation and mental issues. 100% UI is great for 3 months but businesses won't exist to just "turn back on" in a few months because we have a government that can't and won't actually take care of the problem correctly by ensuring they can.
 

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
*sigh* You know, the timing of this couldn't have been worse.

Imagine this virus breaking out 2 months before and Bernie in the spotlight saying "Hey...the billionaires have money. They have LOTS of money. Enough to get you through this crisis. "

Socialism is apparently the hardest sell imaginable in politics and maybe I'm being optimistic, but "you will die if you do not get funding" is probably the best possible pitch for the concept Bernie could have had. Just....two months, and we'd have been so much better off...
Socialist ideas and structures are easy to sell.

Revolution and ending all of capitalism are not.
 

gcubed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,785
I take the other approach. I'm so glad this didn't happen while Bernie was leading. We dodged a bullet on that one
 

Vixdean

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,855
Why not pass a clean UI bill while you squabble over how much money Boeing gets? This is so fucking stupid.
 
Oct 27, 2017
17,973
*sigh* You know, the timing of this couldn't have been worse.

Imagine this virus breaking out 2 months before and Bernie in the spotlight saying "Hey...the billionaires have money. They have LOTS of money. Enough to get you through this crisis. "

Socialism is apparently the hardest sell imaginable in politics and maybe I'm being optimistic, but "you will die if you do not get funding" is probably the best possible pitch for the concept Bernie could have had. Just....two months, and we'd have been so much better off...
The virus had broken out two months before. People were dying even then, no one dodged a bullet or got lucky or anything like that. Pitches could have been made, and made better in that time.
 

plagiarize

Eating crackers
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,501
Cape Cod, MA
there is a difference between how long this is and how long "this" is. The quarantine will be over by May at the absolute latest just because the current administration can't handle the economic destruction. Rightly or wrongly the US has no social safety net for an extended shut down, so they aren't going to be shut down all summer and thinking so is setting yourself up for disappointment.

You'll see rolling quarantines and hot spots but this country will turn on again before they "should".

you kill people from the virus or from starvation and mental issues. 100% UI is great for 3 months but businesses won't exist to just "turn back on" in a few months because we have a government that can't and won't actually take care of the problem correctly by ensuring they can.
People aren't going to start running out to restaurants if things reopen. And if they do, deaths will spike again and everyone will panic.

There is no path that avoids significant harm to the economy. Countless people will get sick stomping down the number of workers. On top of that, consumer spending isn't going to recover. The pain isn't going away.

I'm sure that's what Fauci is yelling at Trump every time they're away from cameras. Thing is, Governors aren't going to just reopen or lift states of emergency cause Trump said so.

What I'm hearing is this is looking like a two peak scenario, at least. It should slow way down in the summer. Things should be able to reopen when it gets hot and humid, and hopefully we can get testing where it needs to be and greatly scale up our available respirators etc, so that when the virus becomes more and more of a problem as things get colder and drier again, we will have the opportunity to stay on top of it, and a better ability to treat people effected, helping ensure we don't reach widespread stay at home orders a second time.

That's what we should be striving for, anyway. If we can get it back under control, the summer will help us stay on top of it and prepare for the next peak. If we're smart, there's no reason why we'd need to stay locked down for more than a couple more months right now. If we stop now (or in two weeks), there will be a huge surge in deaths as we do not have the ability to control it.

But we certainly don't need to stay locked down for a year or more until we develop a vaccine for it.

Politically, Trump would fail to save the economy, and would be more fucked than ever as far as his reelection chances. The economy isn't going to magically jump back up to where it was with all these job losses. That would be a slow recovery even without a pandemic going on and there's no way around it.
 

kalindana

Member
Oct 28, 2018
3,121

The House Democrats' own stimulus bill could be unveiled as early as today, a Democratic aide confirms.
 
Oct 27, 2017
17,973
Don't think Trump has the balls to do that. I won't, however, be surprised if Trump keeps him off camera soon so that he doesn't continue to embarrass and contradict him in front of the entire country.
They tried that once before, they made it through two days before being hounded with "Where's Dr. Fauci?" Between that question and "Where are the supplies you promised?" from states, there's no escape for them, and no way for Pence to paper over things on a daily basis.

Pence is finally in the position that Spicer, Sanders, Mulvaney, etc. have been and ultimately departed from - futile public spokesperson. How Pence is getting away with impressing anyone right now, especially after his own health performance in Indiana, is unclear to me.
 

IggyChooChoo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,230
What I'm hearing is this is looking like a two peak scenario, at least. It should slow way down in the summer. Things should be able to reopen when it gets hot and humid, and hopefully we can get testing where it needs to be and greatly scale up our available respirators etc, so that when the virus becomes more and more of a problem as things get colder and drier again, we will have the opportunity to stay on top of it, and a better ability to treat people effected, helping ensure we don't reach widespread stay at home orders a second time.

That's what we should be striving for, anyway. If we can get it back under control, the summer will help us stay on top of it and prepare for the next peak. If we're smart, there's no reason why we'd need to stay locked down for more than a couple more months right now. If we stop now (or in two weeks), there will be a huge surge in deaths as we do not have the ability to control it.

But we certainly don't need to stay locked down for a year or more until we develop a vaccine for it.
I've seen this "hammer and dance" graph bandied about a lot that describes that scenario.
1*a9Lcz2g8DkKdnW0o_vk3ow.png
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,595
I don't understand economics at all, so my opinion on this is amateurish and ignorant, but I really don't understand Powell unleashing one Fed maneuver after another to save the economy...this isn't a fundamental economic problem, the economic problem is rooted in the public health problem. As long as there is a fucking pandemic on the streets that is closing businesses and forcing people to stay home, the economy is going to respond in kind. And once the virus becomes manageable, treatments become available, etc. then the economy will respond to that too. But all these "the Fed is doing XYZ" announcements seem to me like throwing the kitchen sink at a problem that is immune to kitchen sinks.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,885
House starts talking about their own bill, and now the Senate bill gets pushed to noon.

Turtle-Dick Mitch only had one lever, threaten bad PR and to let his caucus fiddle while the world burns. Neither of those matter now as the market has daily moments of shit the bed and people are pissed that corporations are being prioritized while their local hospitals are sewing their own PPE.

If Sanders is waiting for a Revolution, here it is dog, and he's perfectly positioned in the Senate to get positive policy that will outlast the pandemic
 

GoldenEye 007

Roll Tide, Y'all!
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,833
Texas
It's bad because if a business runs out of money , it ceases to exist.

The same is not true of a person.
All the more reason to have a 3-6 month emergency fund, no?

Obviously a business isn't a household. But I love using simply to slap back at conservatives who compare household finances to the federal government budget. Logic dictates they think businesses should be run like households too.
 

SpitztheGreat

Member
May 16, 2019
2,877
I don't understand economics at all, so my opinion on this is amateurish and ignorant, but I really don't understand Powell unleashing one Fed maneuver after another to save the economy...this isn't a fundamental economic problem, the economic problem is rooted in the public health problem. As long as there is a fucking pandemic on the streets that is closing businesses and forcing people to stay home, the economy is going to respond in kind. And once the virus becomes manageable, treatments become available, etc. then the economy will respond to that too. But all these "the Fed is doing XYZ" announcements seem to me like throwing the kitchen sink at a problem that is immune to kitchen sinks.
I look at the day to day volatility in the market as a scam. I think you hold a reasonable fundamental understanding of economics. By contrast the "experts" make a lot of shit up on the fly that has specious reasoning. The Fed's move today does nothing to solve the explosion in unemployment or the shuttering of business, and yet someone is buying and that makes me suspicious. That tells me that someone sees an avenue to make a lot of money, not that they have confidence in the market necessarily.
 

Y2Kev

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,834
I don't understand economics at all, so my opinion on this is amateurish and ignorant, but I really don't understand Powell unleashing one Fed maneuver after another to save the economy...this isn't a fundamental economic problem, the economic problem is rooted in the public health problem. As long as there is a fucking pandemic on the streets that is closing businesses and forcing people to stay home, the economy is going to respond in kind. And once the virus becomes manageable, treatments become available, etc. then the economy will respond to that too. But all these "the Fed is doing XYZ" announcements seem to me like throwing the kitchen sink at a problem that is immune to kitchen sinks.
The Fed is making it possible for large corporates (and small and medium corporates) to get financing when the capital markets are disrupted. If they can't finance themselves, they'll go bankrupt and then everyone will be out of work. The Fed is, as usual, a highly technical and capable organization that is trying everything it can while our policymakers shit themselves.
 

SmokeMaxX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,336
Well it's probably a combination of the fact that any positive news causes a bump in the stock market and people thinking that we're somehow close to the bottom, so they're buying up stocks "on the cheap." I can't imagine there's any way to artificially prop up the stock market in these conditions though. Unemployment is only getting higher. Death toll is only getting higher. Bankruptcy rate for businesses is only getting higher.
 

B-Dubs

That's some catch, that catch-22
General Manager
Oct 25, 2017
32,714
I look at the day to day volatility in the market as a scam. I think you hold a reasonable fundamental understanding of economics. By contrast the "experts" make a lot of shit up on the fly that has specious reasoning. The Fed's move today does nothing to solve the explosion in unemployment or the shuttering of business, and yet someone is buying and that makes me suspicious. That tells me that someone sees an avenue to make a lot of money, not that they have confidence in the market necessarily.
It's not really about solving the economic issue, it's about trying to stabilize it until a solution can be found. It's the same logic as the 2000-ish dollar payments a month for the duration the House has been talking about. It won't fix things, but it'll keep it from getting worse.

Right now, unless you're a researcher trying to find a cure/treatment/vaccine for corona, all you can do is play prevent defense and try to keep everything from totally collapsing. That's how bad this situation is: everything we're talking about right now is just an attempt to prevent a massive collapse and not to fix the underlying problem. At the end of the day we're waiting on a team of scientists to save us from this thing and all we can do is hang on as much as we can.
 

LegendofJoe

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,069
Arkansas, USA
Our public health agencies should be absorbed by the Department of Defense when this is all over. Putting them under the umbrella of the military might finally impart the truth to dumb ass conservatives that in the 21st century war will largely not be fought with guns and missiles. They might actually get the funding and respect they deserve then.
 

Plinko

Member
Oct 28, 2017
18,545
Turtle-Dick Mitch only had one lever, threaten bad PR and to let his caucus fiddle while the world burns. Neither of those matter now as the market has daily moments of shit the bed and people are pissed that corporations are being prioritized while their local hospitals are sewing their own PPE.

If Sanders is waiting for a Revolution, here it is dog, and he's perfectly positioned in the Senate to get positive policy that will outlast the pandemic

Hard for Bernie to do that when he's at home in Vermont.
 

gcubed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,785
People aren't going to start running out to restaurants if things reopen. And if they do, deaths will spike again and everyone will panic.

There is no path that avoids significant harm to the economy. Countless people will get sick stomping down the number of workers. On top of that, consumer spending isn't going to recover. The pain isn't going away.

I'm sure that's what Fauci is yelling at Trump every time they're away from cameras. Thing is, Governors aren't going to just reopen or lift states of emergency cause Trump said so.

What I'm hearing is this is looking like a two peak scenario, at least. It should slow way down in the summer. Things should be able to reopen when it gets hot and humid, and hopefully we can get testing where it needs to be and greatly scale up our available respirators etc, so that when the virus becomes more and more of a problem as things get colder and drier again, we will have the opportunity to stay on top of it, and a better ability to treat people effected, helping ensure we don't reach widespread stay at home orders a second time.

That's what we should be striving for, anyway. If we can get it back under control, the summer will help us stay on top of it and prepare for the next peak. If we're smart, there's no reason why we'd need to stay locked down for more than a couple more months right now. If we stop now (or in two weeks), there will be a huge surge in deaths as we do not have the ability to control it.

But we certainly don't need to stay locked down for a year or more until we develop a vaccine for it.

Politically, Trump would fail to save the economy, and would be more fucked than ever as far as his reelection chances. The economy isn't going to magically jump back up to where it was with all these job losses. That would be a slow recovery even without a pandemic going on and there's no way around it.

Like I said, you will still have quarentine spots and shut downs as things heat up / cool down in different areas until a vaccine is available. Its much easier to contain in the middle of nowhere vs New York City, so you will see different rules for different places as dictated by the local government. I mean, i have no ambition to get on a plane anytime in 2020, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Sports are probably done for 2020 or at least playing in front of fans is done for the forseeable future. School only has a month left if some areas "come back" in May... it should just be cancelled. I'm not advocating for turning this on, i think densely populated cities are going to be a mess for a while, but they should be working on expanding hospital capacity, getting much needed supplies and testing everyone over the next 3-5 weeks.

I'm not going to Florida either anytime soon, and I'm waiting for the shit to hit the fan in that state as the inept government tries to use hair dryers to keep everyone healthy. Travel is going to be crushed all year. People will be staying local and staying home, but will be going back out. This country has the brain of an ant and no societal care of thought. They look at NYC and shrug, not me.

Anyway, passing a bill that gives you 100% unemployment payouts (and not making it 6 weeks to actually get), pauses all mortgages, rents, loan repayments would go a long way to calming people. A $1000 check is garbage pandering and is well on the bottom of priorities if you are allowed to suspend all liabilities and cover a full paycheck for all

maybe we as a society will start valuing cleanliness again. I know i've thought to myself how disgusting I was before this all started. Eating things with my fingers randomly during the day without always washing my hands. Eating fruit without washing all the time. I'm not sure i'll be able to walk into a store, buy a bag of chips and just eat them on the way out again, just seems disgusting now.
 
Last edited:

SpitztheGreat

Member
May 16, 2019
2,877
It's not really about solving the economic issue, it's about trying to stabilize it until a solution can be found. It's the same logic as the 2000-ish dollar payments a month for the duration the House has been talking about. It won't fix things, but it'll keep it from getting worse.

Right now, unless you're a researcher trying to find a cure/treatment/vaccine for corona, all you can do is play prevent defense and try to keep everything from totally collapsing. That's how bad this situation is: everything we're talking about right now is just an attempt to prevent a massive collapse and not to fix the underlying problem. At the end of the day we're waiting on a team of scientists to save us from this thing and all we can do is hang on as much as we can.
No, that I get. A basic income makes total sense because it keeps people spending/paying the bills. It isn't a permanent fix but it helps right now.

But moves like what the Fed is pulling don't seem rooted in anything tangible. In 2008 I could understand the logic behind shoring up the financial markets, but buying bonds right now doesn't seem like an effective tool. It reminds me of the adage "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

But then the IMMEDIATE positive response from the market to swing by almost 1,000 points back into the positive is the really suspicious aspect. No one knows if a move like this will do anything, and yet people start buying. No one says "hey, let's wait and see how this works." No, overnight, late when most people are sleeping, moves are made that completely change the course of the market on a strategy that NO ONE can fully explain. That's what makes it bullshit.

After 2008 I don't have any faith that the experts are really that smart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.