KiigelHeart said:
Depends on life, really. It's not as simple as protect all lives at all costs. Effects of economic crisis will be serious, destroy lives and cause all kinds of problems in the long run. I'm much more concerned about it than corona deaths even though I agree it has been important to slow down this pandemic. |
It really is that simple. Life should come before money. More money can always be earned, you cannot replace a life lost... But I am a first responder. - Life should ALWAYS be the priority. Not even up for debate!
The effects of the economic crisis can be mitigated by smart government choices... I.E. Spending money.
The Australian Government started paying $750 per week for every worker who is employed by an employer but not currently working due to forced business closures.
They also paid a $750 payment to every single person who is on welfare in April with another payment being made in July.
They also increased the payment of the unemployed by an additional $275 per week.
You would think that would be it? But no. They increased the maximum draw of superannuation rates, made getting finance easier and cheaper (lower interest), $2,000 - $100,000 payments to small and medium businesses and charities based on the number of employees and more.
And the State Government has implemented it's own schemes... By providing a $550 once-off payment to the unemployed, reduced taxes and levies for businesses and home owners... And more. And that was just in the month of March!
The end result is... By sacrificing some "money" we managed to shut the nation down, completely stopped the corona virus, saved lives.
And because of such a rapid and successful response... Our economy will start to power up again before other countries.
That is how you do it right, do it expediently and where you save lives.
The American approach is just bullshit, people are placing money above life... And those people should absolutely be ashamed of themselves.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
Essay Pro