Oso planning to go pro
Maybe if we had a better safety net, "people's livelihoods" wouldn't be as urgent a concern.
The data I saw is they have had new cases decline for two straight days. While early and still digging out of the morass, this will likely take time. What info shows them not getting better?
Ding ding ding, we have a winnerHere's the thing, in a crisis, Uncle Sam is going to pony up for unemployment benefit increases, food stamps, $1000 checks, etc. anyway. Just like there are no atheists in foxholes, there are no libertarians in a pandemic.Problem is, none of it was budgeted so we will run a $3 trillion deficit this year. If we were smart, like every other country, we would just budget for the safety net at all times.
Fair. But we don't today, and we can't change that today. It can and should be addressed once this fire is out. We have lots of time for politicking over large-scale changes to things like safety nets after we get through this. I think we're all better served by finding a solution for the current issue and then using things learned from this situation to avoid repeat scenarios.
But livelihoods are important as well. I assume reasonable people can agree on that. The point is that we can't employ solutions that don't factor in multiple points of view. It's possible to have a comprehensive solution that addresses more than one priority. If we are going to take extreme measure to save as many lives as possible, we also need to think about ways to limit the negative consequences of those actions.
I have to assume jesmu84's comment about "experts" in the economic and business community was made in implied teal. If not...wow.
There was one jenius that tweeted this last night after watching a news show......
Yes, livelihoods are important. Nobody has suggested otherwise. Lots of other things are important as well. And sometimes you have to prioritize among things that are important. I'm saying we should prioritize lives more than we prioritize livelihoods. The loss of the former is permanent; the latter temporary.And we are thinking about ways to limit the negative consequences. Congress will soon pass a $2 trillion package to limit those negative consequences. That's 10% of the GDP. It won't prevent all the hardship, of course, but it's far from ignoring or de-prioritizing the negative consequences/.
Socialist heathen
I agree with you pak.But then you have people like my boss who told me today that the economic setback - already in the trillions - is far too great a cost for "a few thousand lives" (based on current data/fatality rates). "We don't spend that kinda money to prevent DUI deaths or smoking deaths or any other kind of death, so this time shouldn't be any different."I am POSITIVE he isn't the only one thinking/saying these kinds of things. And he's far from the most charged on being against more economic shutdown.Edit: I think there's a certain subset that won't believe this is any kind of a big deal until millions end up dead. And the whole point of steps so far is to prevent that from happening. So, it's a real catch-22.
This is the calculus that people have trouble wrapping their heads around....if this works the economic turmoil saved literally incalculable numbers of lives, but it'll look like a huge expense in comparison to the count of lives we didn't save.
By the way there is precedent for controlling the virus without completely shutting down the economy. We are very far from this path though and it may be to late without a shutdown first. South Korea https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/world/asia/coronavirus-south-korea-flatten-curve.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes
Theoretical plan of action, is it feasible?-National lock down for 4 weeks except for a rigid essential industry all of which have to apply for a national waiver to continue operations-Congress issues a 4 week "wage" that is means tested and tied to someone not working (ie essential works like healthcare wouldn't get the payment as they are being paid). Basically pay people to stay home.-shutter the stock market for 4 weeks....freeze valuations, etc until it reopens.-During 4 weeks all interest/payments are suspended or deferred to the following month.-during the 4 weeks, rapidly expand capacity in healthcare and advanced testing using Defense Procurement Act necessary.-After four weeks either begin a phased restart or extend another month depending on the extent of the outbreak and viability of testing program to enable national trackingWhat doesn't work? I'm sure there are lots of constitutional issues but if you get companies to cooperate either willfully or via government bullying you could put it in place.Thoughts?
I like the way you think....https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=59849.msg1223469#msg1223469Too bad we didn't do this a week ago.
Evers just shut down k-12 schools indefinitely. All bars and restaurants are closed except for takeout and delivery.
Probably would work, but it's hard to believe most (or any) of it happening here in 'Merica.FWIW ... South Carolina governor just signed executive order banning groups of more than 3 people from congregating outside the home. Police are supposed to enforce the mandate.So if you are a family with 3 kids, I guess it's against the law for the 5 of you to hang out in your driveway.
Speaking of leadership...holy Jesus...a school administrator? And he vetoed a bill a few weeks ago and didn’t know why? I’m sure someone else, I hope, is calling the shots...think muppets eyn’a?