OT: COVID-19 thread #2

[Dominator83]

Asking for a friend, should i feed my children or pay my bills this month?

Fed govt MIA when real world folks need them most. Wheres the talk on a 2nd stimulus so people can feed their families? I don’t really care whether the virus left a chinese lab or not, but I sure wish folks, especially the rich ones in congress and fed govt could start looking at more stimulus/UBI. I’d love to have more positivity that parents can feed their kids but unfortunately our discussion has turned to blame instead of solutions to help real world people.

I understand many on this board are well to do, and of course most of congress is many years from reality, but I have friends and neighbors that are really struggling and are desperate for discussions to get back to helping real world families

I was talking to my wife about this yesterday. I am surprised that this isn't more of a story. Not just here but globally. Many folks live pay check to paycheck, and many across the world live on even less than that and now the economy is shut down, here in the US, unemployment is high, all people got (if they were luck) was $1,200 which here in California probably wouldn't cover one month's rent for a family. But nobody is talking about this, nobody is rioting, crime is down. So what's the deal? Either people are patient and have a lot of faith the government will take care of them, or something is missing. The story should really be those suffering and putting pressure on the government to do something rather than some political points.

Whether this was created in a lab or not or released or whatever, that is a good topic to discuss for the sake of discussing it, it's a political point and honestly a policy question but the real thing is those suffering. If the government doesn't do much, crime will go up. And the people committing the crimes won't be by the "bad guys with no morals" it'll be that good guy who has to feed his family but has lost his job, his $1,200 already went to last months rent or mortgage, and unemployment only pays for like 20% of his salary. So what is he going to do? And can you blame him? Because while people are talking about bats and pangolins, Trump injecting lysol or whatever, and people not able to go to beaches, this guy who is struggling to keep his family afloat has to rob his neighbors to survive.

Amen, glad I’m not the only one thinking this.. Some of the unemployment benefits, stimulus, etc do help our communities and families greatly, I’m not saying they dont. But every single program has RESTRICTIONS.

From talking with people (at a distance), I see a lot of fear on faces with uncertainty. So we get a vaccine big whoop, are all these jobs coming back? What happens then? How about what happens the next 2 months? Is a 1-time 1,200 payment plus an extra $600 in unemployment insurance supposed to pay for rent, bills, food? Pay for their kids medicine which insurance doesnt fully cover in the first place, is something every parent would like to do, but we’ve got too many articles talking about trump, talking about a lab in wuhan, talking about everything except making sure families are stable. Great

Not to mention, what kind of taxes are we looking at when this is all over? You know our governments, especially local ones, are gonna be gunning to make up for all that lost income.

[Dresden]

They should rescind the last two tax cuts- the ones by Trump and the ones by Bush. Those mainly helped the rich anyway.

[Chi town]

As for the discussion of helping families in need...

We have lots of stuff happening here in the Bay Area that are truly helping on the front lines for those being hurt the most. Our undocumented population is hit by far the worst with so many losing their service jobs and not being qualified for unemployment. So many non profits are doing great work and local govt have stepped in to help in big ways via food banks etc.

Local Mayors have guaranteed there would be no eviction for residents or businesses. In this scenario you shouldn't pay rent at this time. Lots of mortgage lenders are allowing for 3 months of no payments and no additional interest but then adding 3 payments onto the end of the loan. This is not sustainable but it can help quite a bit in the short term.

I talked to a mentor today who a leading voice in the VC tech space and his prediction was twofold...
- if things continue to slowly progress over the next 6 weeks with no spikes and then into the fall when kids return to school without a hitch or shutdown during fall flu season... He expects a strong progression to the mean
- If the virus spreads with restrictions being lifted and spiikes again the fall then we are looking at a deeper darker rececession than 2008 and plan for 50% drop in everything

[The Box Office]

Otwok, thank you for standing up for real world families! Certainly not knocking any posters or any discussion points, but I sincerely respect your thoughts and comments in pushing for discussions to be focused on our families, it means a lot to me brother!

Now if we can just get the message on to congress at least for some short term benefit until we figure out how to formally reshape the country, which I think is both evident and much needed. I’m no genuis, i wish I had the answers, but programs like UBI and universal healthcare sure do seem like good ideas to me.

10000% agreed. The USA can easily print out infinite money, but "hyper inflation" "adds to the deficit" and "who's gonna pay for it?" Republican talking points come up. The Republicans say, "Hey we don't wanna give too much subsidies because you don't wanna go back to work. Think of the future generations. They're gonna have to pay for this."

My response? "Don't guilt me, GOP."

Their talking points do not work with me anymore. The Boomers, and plenty of Gen X, didn't care about Millennials. There's a good chance I'm dead within the next 3-5 years. So I don't care. Print that money. People need money now.

About 35 million people are gonna be unemployed soon. So how are we gonna earn money when 35 million people gonna be unemployed? No hazard pay as well? There are NO jobs available out here where I am. The only jobs available are super specific high level jobs with specific degrees and experience, or if I was locked into one before the pandemic.

The food and service industry are screwed. Big time. The film industry is f*cked, too.

I wouldn't go back to work just to serve people coffee, food, and give people hair cuts without a significant wage increase under these conditions. Businesses are not gonna give raises anyway. They're rushing to open up their business to line up their pockets first. Most of them will not think about the working class. If they do offer something, it's something small like $2 raises and 50 percent off Coca Cola products. LOL.

Trump and Republicans truly do not care when the working class dies. They don't wanna give UBI $1000 per month or whatever. They just want their money.

My answer: Hands off. Just let the economy rot. It's naturally rotting anyway. The FED is desperate printing out infinite Monopoly money to prop up the stock market built on deception and bull$hit. It's gonna collapse again. Because the Fed's cheat code GTA style infinite money printing looks bad right now. They say they'll do it infinite, but how is that sustainable? They're just making up money out of thin air.

Republicans don't wanna deal with the Covid19. They think it's gone and everything should open back up. Wow. They're beyond dumb and greedy now.

[dice]

[Nikola]

I feel for those that have lost their jobs. But if you don't want to go to work, you deserve to suffer economically. This country is in severe lack of bravery.

1) 2.9 million people die in this country a year.
2) 134,000 current estimated death toll.
3? Not all covid deaths are additional deaths, last time I checked about 1/3 of covid deaths were additional deaths year over year.

So you have less than a 2% higher chance of dying this year than last. Not worth mortgaging any kids futures or dragging us into a depression. I understood taking precautions so hospitals were not over run. But they never were and it has been clear for a while now that they won't be. It never made sense to not follow the centuries old pandemic protocol of quarantining the sick and at risk.

[dice]

I feel for those that have lost their jobs. But if you don't want to go to work, you deserve to suffer economically. This country is in severe lack of bravery.

the whole world is in the same boat, buddy. americans are no more fearful of going to work than anyone else (and less so, probably, because far too many do not take the virus seriously). but not recognizing the legitimacy of the fear that many have is sociopathic

2.9 million people die in this country a year.

the vast majority of which were not due to abject stupidity, which is what minimizing the dangers of COVID-19 requires

134,000 current estimated death toll.

due to stay at home orders. jaysus

Not all covid deaths are additional deaths, last time I checked about 1/3 of covid deaths were additional deaths year over year.

completely false. i don't know what junk you're reading, but additional deaths are up much more than the number of COVID-19 deaths, suggesting that we are SIGNIFICANTLY UNDER-COUNTING such deaths

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/04/20/covid-count
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/28/us/coronavirus-death-toll-total.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/17/fact-check-covid-19-death-toll-likely-undercounted-not-overcounted/2973481001/
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-deaths-likely-much-higher-than-official-tolls-ft-analysis-2020-4

So you have less than a 2% higher chance of dying this year than last.

not if you contract the easily transmittable COVID-19. and you're conveniently only factoring in a short period of heavy COVID deaths

Not worth mortgaging any kids futures or dragging us into a depression.

doing nothing be more likely to have severe long-term economic consequences. truly not a difficult concept. potentially millions of deaths and major disruptions to businesses

I understood taking precautions so hospitals were not over run. But they never were

they were in new york and they would be EVERYWHERE w/ no precautions taken. again, this should not be difficult to grasp

and cases are still on the rise nationwide (with stay at home orders!), so your suggestion that we are out of the woods in terms of hospital capacity is completely asinine

It never made sense to not follow the centuries old pandemic protocol of quarantining the sick and at risk.

public health officials disagree. i'll take their word for it, and so should you

[stl705]

Here’s a question to my philosophy scholars... assuming talks continue to NOT be about putting emergency $$ in families hands, and NOT looking into or pushing UBI currently, does anyone feel we could be close to a unique revolt by the poor and middle class? Could be a bit scary to think of, but IMO, many of the indicators of a potential societal revolt are present, and I feel it could be close.

Again I’m not trying to doom and gloom, just posing some outside the box questions which I think should be considered.

[jmajew]

Here’s a question to my philosophy scholars... assuming talks continue to NOT be about putting emergency $$ in families hands, and NOT looking into or pushing UBI currently, does anyone feel we could be close to a unique revolt by the poor and middle class? Could be a bit scary to think of, but IMO, many of the indicators of a potential societal revolt are present, and I feel it could be close.

Again I’m not trying to doom and gloom, just posing some outside the box questions which I think should be considered.

I'm not a UBI proponent personally. I think the whole UBI movement has been caused by globalization. America made a massive mistake by allowing global supply chains. Globalization allowed the US to keep inflation low artificially. The best way to keep inflation low is via productivity increases and innovation. What we did in the late 90s and 00s was to outsource our work to keep inflation low. These large companies then increased their profits without having to actually invest in their businesses. They then gave share buybacks with easy money and increased the wealth of the richest while globalization held down the wages of the lower to middle class.

Inflation is only high in industries that cannot be outsourced. Healthcare, housing, restaurants, defense, etc. What we need to do is stop the global supply chains. We need a new world order where we build regional supply chains. North America will pay North American prices, Asia will pay Asian prices, etc. This will increase inflation in this country, but it will also create more good paying jobs.

If we can get inflation up to 3% for a couple of years by doing this it will drastically help the countries fiscal situation. This will allow us to spend more on Universal Healthcare, Free childcare, etc. I'm a big believer in the economic policies of the current administration. I disagree with everything else. I believe what the administration is doing will in the long run help our financial situation which will allow us to do a lot of the things that the liberals wants.

Think of inflation like this. If we can get inflation to 3% for the next 10 years it will cover all the interest payments we have on our current debt. If we get 2% growth on top of that each year the government will get 5% more revenue without raising taxes. That is the way it used to be, but as soon as we started globalizing supply chains that stopped.

Not sure if I explained it all well.

[Dresden]

I feel for those that have lost their jobs. But if you don't want to go to work, you deserve to suffer economically. This country is in severe lack of bravery.

1) 2.9 million people die in this country a year.
2) 134,000 current estimated death toll.
3? Not all covid deaths are additional deaths, last time I checked about 1/3 of covid deaths were additional deaths year over year.

So you have less than a 2% higher chance of dying this year than last. Not worth mortgaging any kids futures or dragging us into a depression. I understood taking precautions so hospitals were not over run. But they never were and it has been clear for a while now that they won't be. It never made sense to not follow the centuries old pandemic protocol of quarantining the sick and at risk.

It doesn't have to be an either/or situation. Like either we stay inside and don't do anything for the next 6 months, OR we pretend the pandemic doesn't exist and just go back to living how we used to.

There's a smart way to re-engage the economy, which is what many areas are trying to do right now. Some are naturally going to go about it better than others. We'll see the results in 2-4 weeks. A lot depends on how smart and careful people are. We've seen a lot of examples of people not being very smart so far, and also a lot of examples of where people can go out again without getting sick. For the most part, what I see in grocery stores when I go is pretty encouraging. People are respecting the social distancing, and stores are putting rules in place to help with that.

If all businesses do that sort of thing, we can prevent the economy from totaling doing a nose dive, while still containing the spread of the disease. Hopefully. Of course, there are still going to be industries that suffer- like movie theaters, restaurants, airlines, vacation places, etc. That can't be helped, and the govt. should do something for those businesses. But at least it won't be the whole economy.

The worst will be places like these meat packing plants, or other big factories. They just aren't set up to allow workers to work safely under new rules. I feel for people who have to work in those places.

[wolffy]

My biggest worry is the rubber band effect of opening the country up too early. There will be a second wave of spread, probably worse than the 1st. What is the peoples reaction going to be at that point. What is the ecommerce impact going to be once its added to the damage already done? The bad part is, we get the second wave almost regardless of when we reopen.

[Stratmaster]

I feel for those that have lost their jobs. But if you don't want to go to work, you deserve to suffer economically. This country is in severe lack of bravery.

1) 2.9 million people die in this country a year.
2) 134,000 current estimated death toll.
3? Not all covid deaths are additional deaths, last time I checked about 1/3 of covid deaths were additional deaths year over year.

So you have less than a 2% higher chance of dying this year than last. Not worth mortgaging any kids futures or dragging us into a depression. I understood taking precautions so hospitals were not over run. But they never were and it has been clear for a while now that they won't be. It never made sense to not follow the centuries old pandemic protocol of quarantining the sick and at risk.

So, out of every 100 people, 2 will die. You find that insignificant? So, if 1000 different people are members of this board, 20 posters will die. That is fine with you?

you use an annual figure of 2.9 million deaths from all causes. over 60,000 people died from Covid in the last 30 days. That is a rate of 720,000 per year. That is a 25% higher death rate. Not 2%.

The new predictions are that the death toll will surpass 3,000 per day soon. So the death rate is going up. Not down. If they are correct, we will pass that 134,000 like a freight train passing a line of stopped cars.

Don't get me wrong. We need to reopen a lot of businesses in a lot of places. Chicago isn't one of those places yet. Montana? sure. Chicago. Not yet.

I am pretty much over all the whining, and the cretin protesters. I never, ever thought I would take this attitude about fellow human beings; however, If it weren't for the poor families of the cretins and the essential workers, I would tell them go for it. Go out and party. Ignore the warnings. Cull the herd and let natural selection rear it's head again. The world would likely be better off without them.

[musiqsoulchild]

I feel for those that have lost their jobs. But if you don't want to go to work, you deserve to suffer economically. This country is in severe lack of bravery.

1) 2.9 million people die in this country a year.
2) 134,000 current estimated death toll.
3? Not all covid deaths are additional deaths, last time I checked about 1/3 of covid deaths were additional deaths year over year.

So you have less than a 2% higher chance of dying this year than last. Not worth mortgaging any kids futures or dragging us into a depression. I understood taking precautions so hospitals were not over run. But they never were and it has been clear for a while now that they won't be. It never made sense to not follow the centuries old pandemic protocol of quarantining the sick and at risk.

I do not understand your viewpoint.

[Stratmaster]

My biggest worry is the rubber band effect of opening the country up too early. There will be a second wave of spread, probably worse than the 1st. What is the peoples reaction going to be at that point. What is the ecommerce impact going to be once its added to the damage already done? The bad part is, we get the second wave almost regardless of when we reopen.

And what happens if you build it, and no one comes?

Once businesses are authorized to open, the federal and state aid goes away. What happens when that small business reopens and no one shows up? When 60% of the people say... nah, I'll just hang at the house for another 30 days and see how it affects everyone else.

The business re-hired everyone and the expenses that go with that personnel. They bought supplies again. It is a recipe for putting small business out of business.

Then add that every time the idiots get together in groups in defiance, it probably adds a couple weeks of economic devastation by keeping the infection numbers up.

[Dresden]

If you think there is no difference between how republicans and democrats treat the working class and poor of this country, look which party is fighting to expand food stamp program so that it reaches more people and for a longer time, and which party is fighting that, and has been steadily reducing food stamp eligibility since Trump got elected:

"As Hunger Swells, Food Stamps Become a Partisan Flash Point"

from today's New York Times:

...
New research shows a rise in food insecurity without modern precedent. Among mothers with young children, nearly one-fifth say their children are not getting enough to eat, according to a survey by the Brookings Institution, a rate three times as high as in 2008, during the worst of the Great Recession.
...
Democrats want to raise food stamp benefits by 15 percent for the duration of the economic crisis, arguing that a similar move during the Great Recession reduced hunger and helped the economy. But Republicans have fought for years to shrink the program, saying that the earlier liberalization led to enduring caseload growth and a backdoor expansion of the welfare state.
...
“This program is the single most powerful anti-hunger tool that we have and one of the most important economic development tools,” said Kate Maehr, the head of the Chicago food bank. “Not to use it when we have so many people who are in such great need is heartbreaking. This is not a war that charity can win.”
...
But Mr. Trump has done all he can to shrink the program. He sought budget cuts of 30 percent. He tried to replace part of the benefit with “Harvest Boxes” of cheaper commodities. He tried to reduce eligibility and expand work rules to a much larger share of the caseload. When Congress balked, he pursued his goals through regulations. His chief of staff, Mark Meadows, called last year for using erroneous food stamp payments to fund the border wall.
...
Prospects for a congressional deal remain unclear and may depend on horse-trading in a larger coronavirus bill. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi is adamant that it should contain a broader food stamp expansion.
“First of all, it’s a moral thing to do,” she said in an interview with MSNBC. “Second of all, the people need it. And third of all, it’s a stimulus to the economy.”

[musiqsoulchild]

If you think there is no difference between how republicans and democrats treat the working class and poor of this country, look which party is fighting to expand food stamp program so that it reaches more people and for a longer time, and which party is fighting that, and has been steadily reducing food stamp eligibility since Trump got elected:

"As Hunger Swells, Food Stamps Become a Partisan Flash Point"

from today's New York Times:

...
New research shows a rise in food insecurity without modern precedent. Among mothers with young children, nearly one-fifth say their children are not getting enough to eat, according to a survey by the Brookings Institution, a rate three times as high as in 2008, during the worst of the Great Recession.
...
Democrats want to raise food stamp benefits by 15 percent for the duration of the economic crisis, arguing that a similar move during the Great Recession reduced hunger and helped the economy. But Republicans have fought for years to shrink the program, saying that the earlier liberalization led to enduring caseload growth and a backdoor expansion of the welfare state.
...
“This program is the single most powerful anti-hunger tool that we have and one of the most important economic development tools,” said Kate Maehr, the head of the Chicago food bank. “Not to use it when we have so many people who are in such great need is heartbreaking. This is not a war that charity can win.”
...
But Mr. Trump has done all he can to shrink the program. He sought budget cuts of 30 percent. He tried to replace part of the benefit with “Harvest Boxes” of cheaper commodities. He tried to reduce eligibility and expand work rules to a much larger share of the caseload. When Congress balked, he pursued his goals through regulations. His chief of staff, Mark Meadows, called last year for using erroneous food stamp payments to fund the border wall.
...
Prospects for a congressional deal remain unclear and may depend on horse-trading in a larger coronavirus bill. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi is adamant that it should contain a broader food stamp expansion.
“First of all, it’s a moral thing to do,” she said in an interview with MSNBC. “Second of all, the people need it. And third of all, it’s a stimulus to the economy.”

To add to your brilliant points:

People on food stamps actually end up spending all of that money ....there is only one way to use them...you have to spend it.

Contrast that to the "stimulus" checks which can go straight into say me buying stocks or making a car payment. Not very stimulating to the economy it it?

I almost think it makes more sense to have EVERYONE receive food stamps for a good year or so...with the caveat that you have to use them in the month or you lose them.

This will ensure money coming back to business, trips to grocery stores increasing and once foot traffic increases...normalcy will return slowly.

I was on food stamps once for a few months post divorce. I also make 6 figures. I have NO REGRET on being on WIC. It's a beautiful program...misused by some but vital to many.

[Dresden]

Yes, republicans are so worried that people will abuse food stamps, yet they have complete confidence that giving huge tax breaks to the rich will result in those upper 1% using that extra money to create more jobs! Or that pumping up the military budget will not result in waste (the $500 hammer) and fraud (the Bradley fighting vehicle).

[coldfish]

If you think there is no difference between how republicans and democrats treat the working class and poor of this country, look which party is fighting to expand food stamp program so that it reaches more people and for a longer time, and which party is fighting that, and has been steadily reducing food stamp eligibility since Trump got elected:

"As Hunger Swells, Food Stamps Become a Partisan Flash Point"

from today's New York Times:

...
New research shows a rise in food insecurity without modern precedent. Among mothers with young children, nearly one-fifth say their children are not getting enough to eat, according to a survey by the Brookings Institution, a rate three times as high as in 2008, during the worst of the Great Recession.
...
Democrats want to raise food stamp benefits by 15 percent for the duration of the economic crisis, arguing that a similar move during the Great Recession reduced hunger and helped the economy. But Republicans have fought for years to shrink the program, saying that the earlier liberalization led to enduring caseload growth and a backdoor expansion of the welfare state.
...
“This program is the single most powerful anti-hunger tool that we have and one of the most important economic development tools,” said Kate Maehr, the head of the Chicago food bank. “Not to use it when we have so many people who are in such great need is heartbreaking. This is not a war that charity can win.”
...
But Mr. Trump has done all he can to shrink the program. He sought budget cuts of 30 percent. He tried to replace part of the benefit with “Harvest Boxes” of cheaper commodities. He tried to reduce eligibility and expand work rules to a much larger share of the caseload. When Congress balked, he pursued his goals through regulations. His chief of staff, Mark Meadows, called last year for using erroneous food stamp payments to fund the border wall.
...
Prospects for a congressional deal remain unclear and may depend on horse-trading in a larger coronavirus bill. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi is adamant that it should contain a broader food stamp expansion.
“First of all, it’s a moral thing to do,” she said in an interview with MSNBC. “Second of all, the people need it. And third of all, it’s a stimulus to the economy.”

To add to your brilliant points:

People on food stamps actually end up spending all of that money ....there is only one way to use them...you have to spend it.

Contrast that to the "stimulus" checks which can go straight into say me buying stocks or making a car payment. Not very stimulating to the economy it it?

I almost think it makes more sense to have EVERYONE receive food stamps for a good year or so...with the caveat that you have to use them in the month or you lose them.

This will ensure money coming back to business, trips to grocery stores increasing and once foot traffic increases...normalcy will return slowly.

I was on food stamps once for a few months post divorce. I also make 6 figures. I have NO REGRET on being on WIC. It's a beautiful program...misused by some but vital to many.

This is a cold reality. People generally follow the stock market but what runs our economy is the bond market. So many businesses run by credit. We all benefit from super low interest rates because creditors strongly feel that they will get paid back.

When people start defaulting on rent payments, car payments, etc. there is a horrific domino effect exacerbated by fractional reserve banking. Now, when creditors feel they might not get paid back, they won't loan money. Companies then can no longer operate because they run their day to day on revolving credit. States can't borrow money. People can't buy cars and houses. A bad economic downturn becomes a self feeding death spiral.

In many deep recessions, a bank run or credit system lock up is involved. That happened in 2008. The fed actually acted late. Letting Lehman go triggered a panic. This phenomenon is a big part of what turned the great depression into what it was.

The government has done a great job firehosing the economy down with money and kept credit markets functional despite how bad this was economically. The good part of that is when the virus clears, we should be able to have a functional economy again instead of a 15 year depression.

It just kills me when people like AOC say "don't pay your rent". They just have no idea what that would do to the country if the debt/credit market stopped.

I have no issues with the government stepping in and helping people directly too, obviously.

[DuckIII]

My biggest worry is the rubber band effect of opening the country up too early. There will be a second wave of spread, probably worse than the 1st. What is the peoples reaction going to be at that point. What is the ecommerce impact going to be once its added to the damage already done? The bad part is, we get the second wave almost regardless of when we reopen.

This is where I’m at. I understand the desire to open up. People are hurting financially. And people are dying.

The ultimate reason I continue to support a very slow and deliberate easing of restrictions - basically what Pritzker is doing - is that I am very concerned a more rapid return will do more damage in both death/illness and economically.

To me it’s not just sacrificing one for the other that is in play here. It’s that we end up with the worst of both worlds.

[jc23]

Ive been all over the place in terms of how serious covid-19 is and how aggressive we should continue to handle the situation. With that said i do hope the actual reality is closer to the reality that Elon Musk seems to believe.