Well because it's Essential:
That’s was good...
Trying to do it County by county would be idiotic. How exactly are they going to stop someone from spreading it out of the county? Road blocks at every exit point Big and small with people Taking temperatures before you can leave?MWmetalhead wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 7:37 amIn Trump's defense, he didn't guarantee the lifting of any travel or social distancing restrictions by Easter. He said no decisions are going to be made yet, and that it's something "we'll look at" as the date draws nearer. He also discussed the possibility of differing restrictions by geography.
I don't find his comments on this particular point to be unreasonable at all.
So now we shut down counties that don't need to be shut down as a buffer? The problem with this is that it relies on voluntary cooperation with it. Can that really ever work if half the people say "can't happen to me" and go about their day?km1125 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 2:48 pmCounty by county wouldn't be much different than what we have with state-by-state. It's pretty much voluntary now, except for the businesses that are forced to close. You could build a buffer of counties around those critical counties. If Macomb, Oakland and Wayne were "red" counties you could designate all the adjoining counties as "red" too, even though they might not qualify just by their own stats.
The country is in debt. Printing money means there’s more of it, meaning it’s worth less. That’s fiat money in a nutshell.
Printing more money does not make existing money "worthless." It merely dilutes the value of existing money. In this case, we are talking a small fraction of existing currency in circulation.The country is in debt. Printing money means there’s more of it, meaning it’s worth less. That’s fiat money in a nutshell.
Yeah. We'd just have much larger casualty counts instead and hospitals incapable of serving the ill, regardless of illness. Much better, right?If these governors hadn’t shut down large portions of the economy, this wouldn’t have even been considered.
It "goes on" until the economy returns to normal and COVID-19 infections subside.How long does this “free money” go on? You know when it does expire, some people will complain that it should be extended.
This isn't an entitlement program in the traditional sense. It is finite. The appropriation is the appropriation for this legislation. Once the money is spent, it's gone. Our legislators will then need to determine if a supplemental spending measure is appropriate.Not to mention, any projected cost of any government program always seems to be lowballed. There’s also the enormous amount of pork spending found in this bill just like so many others over the years.
Noted, and I stand corrected.Reread the first part of my post. I said worth less, not worthless, which you agreed with. Look at what a dollar was worth 100 years ago compared to now.
We're not Zimbabwe. Our Gross Domestic Product is far, far stronger. What a terrible comparison (sorry, but I had to say it).Hell, look at a dollar from 1970 compared to now. Zimbabwe printed money like crazy too, even had a 100 trillion dollar bill. It was pretty much worthless (and now officially is).
No, it doesn't need to be zero. It needs to be a number small enough for health professionals and hospitals to be able to manage on a normal course basis.What do you consider subsiding? From previous posts, it sounds like that number has to be zero. What are the odds of that? Even polio and TB still exist.
How the heck do you know the recovery "would have been better and stronger." Provide an empirical example! Otherwise, you're just offering empty rhetoric.I disagree. The crash would have been harder, but the recovery would have been better and stronger.
Ford didn't require bailout money.You are assuming GM, Ford, and Chrysler would have gone away otherwise. They could have just filed chapter 11 and keep the good parts. Chrysler was bailed out in the past, and failed again. The bond holders got screwed because the government picked winners and losers. They created another bubble.
Appropriations require legislative approval in both houses and signature by the President. You think a GOP controlled Senate is going to approve an endless money pit? I do not.You really think there wouldn’t be pressure by some to renew this entitlement?
You are not posting "examples," you are posting ideological talking points that are not substantiated by data. If you have data - great. Share it please. You've failed to do so. Confusing "examples" with beliefs isn't a "bad" thing ("bad" implies malicious intent), it just means your arguments are flimsy.You really think there wouldn’t be pressure by some to renew this entitlement? Come on MW, I have always pegged you as a smart and reasonable person, but lately you haven’t been even listening to any point of view other than your own. I am- I just don’t agree with them, and I post examples why.
Might be the only check with Trump*'s name on it that didn't stand a good chance of bouncing...
Good point... and that’s if he even paid his vendors at all...Lester The Nightfly wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 4:05 pmMight be the only check with Trump*'s name on it that didn't stand a good chance of bouncing...