Earl (04-05-2020)
David Brooks lays it out:
"Well, here, there's a lot of blame to go along.
I would say that, when we look at the bill that was passed by Congress a couple weeks ago, this stimulus bill, we will regard it as one of the worst economic packages maybe in American history, certainly in a time of crisis.
What they're doing in Europe is, they're preserving the businesses. They're keeping people employed. They're just paying businesses to say, we're going to give you some money, and — but you're going to keep your payroll. So people don't have the threat of unemployment, they don't have the insecurity of unemployment, they don't have the possibility that they will never get a job again or they won't get a job for a long time.
They just sort of freeze the economy. And we didn't do that. We took a more individualistic approach, we will just give you $1,200. We had a backstop measure, which is $350 billion for businesses. We should increase that to $600 billion, $700 billion, so businesses can keep their payroll.
And there's a lot of blame to go around. The Democrats took this option because they didn't want to be seen to be bailing out business. The Republicans, I'm not sure they had a coherent thought in their heads.
And so this is, I think, a catastrophic error, which we should just be fixing very quickly."
That makes so much sense!
Why didn't we think of that?
Maybe our leadership is so polarized by insults and blaming they never thought of it.
Too bad. Now, our economy is going to be really screwed.
PBS Newshour Shields and Brooks.
"it's better to have the not unemployed.
I mean, there are going to be some people who are unemployed. And for them, certainly, the unemployment insurance is there. But if you could sit at home knowing that you had a job, and knowing that you were getting paid for that job, even though you were sitting at home, and that you were probably going to go back to that job, that seems to me the right way to do this.
And I — I understand, culturally, why we didn't do it. I understand, politically, why bailing out business seem to be a bad thing. But it's fixable. And when Chuck Schumer said earlier in the program that he wants something else, I would hope this would be the something else we would do before the end of April."
We need a new Bill that tells the businesses to hire those people back and the government will pay for it. And the workers who just lost health insurance would then get it right back. This is insane to let those jobs go away and those businesses fail. If that happens we won't be able to quickly put it back together again. And that's just going to hurt our economy for a long time.
I know a trashed economy would hurt DT's chances of reelection, but this is too much of a price to pay for that. All these lost jobs. That's people on the edge, slipping over. We can't allow that. If it was just the stock market that would be a fair trade-off. That's rich people getting less rich. That doesn't undermine the foundation of our economy, consumerism. But all this unemployment is too much. The people being affected by this don't have any safety cushion, and while they are worried about their income, they also have to deal with coronavirus. Brooks is right.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Earl (04-05-2020)
Cypress (04-04-2020), Micawber (04-04-2020), ThatOwlWoman (04-05-2020)
Earl (04-05-2020)
Cypress (04-04-2020), PoliTalker (04-04-2020), ThatOwlWoman (04-05-2020)
Yes, but at what expense to the debt?
If I had to wager why, I'd say they felt getting money directly to people was easier and quicker logistically than going thru an employer. Europe already has a social service infrastructure in place, so the task could be attained much easier with efficiency, but in the US, using the employer as a middle man probably made less sense
They are already having difficulties with rolling out the small business loan package which the banks have stalled on because they themselves are unsure on now it is suppose to function, imagine the problems if they added another layer
PoliTalker (04-04-2020), Trumpet (04-04-2020)
dukkha (04-05-2020), Phantasmal (04-04-2020), PoliTalker (04-04-2020), ThatOwlWoman (04-05-2020), Trumpet (04-04-2020)
WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
cancel2 2022 (04-04-2020), canceled.2021.2 (04-04-2020), Earl (04-05-2020), PostmodernProphet (04-16-2020), Truth Detector (04-16-2020)
cancel2 2022 (04-04-2020)
ThatOwlWoman (04-05-2020)
Hello Phantasmal,
I can't disagree, but where was the proposal for this by Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders, etc?
Brooks nailed it. Lotta blame to go around.
But there is still time to fix it if we act pronto.
And of course DT is no help, not pushing for this. Didn't invite the Democrats to the bill signing fir the stimulus, surrounded by only Republicans. What hooie. It was bipartisan. 96-0 in the Senate. How disingenuous can he get? That was shameful.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
I think the Democrats fought that the money for businesses be used for payroll. It didn’t go far enough but that is because of the Republicans. There are to be several more phases of the relief package, maybe they will follow EU’s example, but each party has their agendas and it takes a lot of compromise, sadly.
cancel2 2022 (04-04-2020)
Hello and welcome WitoldPilecki,
I hear ya, but what will the expense be if we don't do it? Not putting the jobs back, the unemployment figure back, is going to have ripple effects that will end up costing us more in the long run with lower GDP, lower revenues.
Letting those laid off workers go without health insurance, helping them directly with government bail outs is the way we have chosen. They are not working and they have no job. Business owners have no income, maybe some money from the government, but that won't fix them all. A number are going under. That's businesses going away and taking those jobs with them for good until somebody builds a new business.
Businesses being formed, building new jobs, meeting rising demand, happens slowly. Meanwhile, we have millions of people on extended unemployment, not producing, not paying taxes, not consuming, not contributing to the economy but representing a detriment to the economy... We can't 'bounce right back strong' with that going on. That just sounds like a long term slow disaster.
So what if this costs $3-4-5 Trillion up front, but it allows the economy we had to be paused, or frozen, sort of, and it gives us the ability to turn it back on at will? That is the best plan for being able to 'bounce right back strong.' We can just raise taxes on the rich later to pay that back down, but we can only do that if we have a good economy. That's why we have to save it, pause it, freeze it. So we can turn it back on.
I think if we try to be penny wise now, we will see it is pound foolish later.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Hello Phantasmal,
The absurd thing is that if allowed to do it the current way, it will destroy the economy, and with it, any chance for a re-election. But if they listen to reason and quickly hit the rewind button, back up, and take the correct path here, it would enable the economy to bounce back better, and actually improve chances of re-election. We have to do it, not consider politics, whether we approve of the president or not, because so many people need our government to do the right thing this time.
If they don't act quickly it will all fall apart.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Bookmarks