| John2290 said: You're drastically underestimating how many people are on this planet right now and are here, alive and healthy because of that standard of living. You strip away the economy that allowed them to be fucked into existence and you pull away their life support. You're also severely over estimating the governments ability, competence and stability, they can't save us from a depression anymore than they can save us fron the virus. |
Not once did I assert that the Government is going to save us or anyone from a depression.
Recessions and Depressions are a fact of life, with economic growth, there will be economic contractions at some point, that's literally a fact of life, it's a correction of the markets and financial systems, it's going to happen, it's a matter of when not if.
And there needs to be safety nets and systems to protect the vulnerable for when such occurrences do happen.
In-fact the United States does have a couple of systems in place for such an instance, things they learned from the last great depression, such as the unemployment insurance, it's definitely not as comprehensive as what other European countries have done due to the silly aversion of "socialist" ideas in the USA, but it's one example.
https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/social-security/social-security-unemployment-insurance/
| John2290 said: Yes, Life is more important but I'm saying food is important to life. Work is important to money. Money is important to buy food and so it goes around in a circle. |
If the appropriate safety nets in place, food will still be placed on the table, rents will be covered, bills will be covered.
That's what I am getting at.
For example... During this crisis Australia implemented a scheme where it paid employers $1,500 per worker who then continued to employ and pay their workers, which means those individuals still had a job to go to when businesses re-open and could thus still put food on the table.
The Unemployment benefits got increased to $1,100 per fortnight, with a $750 lump sum, the state government gave $550 to every unemployed individual.
Government mandated it was illegal to kick anyone out of their home if they couldn't cover rents, they made gaining finance far easier with a plethora of securities... And so much more.
This is what a safety net looks like when you put an economy into Hibernation, everyone is protected.
People can still buy food. Lives are saved.
And now we are opening up our economy and there is minimal/no risk of the virus, so even with hindsight we can see it was the right decision, our lockdown was short, the economic hit rather moderate compared to other nations who are still dealing with this issue. (I.E. USA.)
| John2290 said:
Are you suggesting that the governments cease the means of production and then take a whip, make people produce food and then distribute it to everyone for the next decade? Great idea, we'll see how long it takes for a new system to be put in place after the current is torn to pieces and we loose a great deal of lives in the process. |
All unnecessary means of production, yes. But nice try with the hyperbole.
Who said it needed to be for a decade?
It was only a couple months in Australia, we halted the spread and defeated the virus quickly and are returning to normal as we speak with no new cases, no one in hospital.
There isn't a lockdown here anymore.
We literally have the example and the evidence that halting the economy, going into lockdown temporarily, defeating the virus and getting back to normal is a perfectly sound strategy that has worked for a ton of countries and actually results in a smaller economic hit overall.
- "Maximum amount of lives saved in a minimal amount of time"
| John2290 said: @Pemalite Lets say you're laid off because the Government can't pay you and you're forced to find another job that takes up your time or to find other means of feeding yourself, How many people can you save then? How many people will die in a bush fire cause you weren't there to help divert the burn or help evacuate? It's already happening to firefighters in western nations, same with nurses and doctors. |
I am a firefighter, I am an essential service. I still respond to any and all rescues.
However. My pay did decrease significantly during the lockdown, everyone was staying at home, I wasn't attending road crash rescues, I wasn't scaling down a cliff doing vertical rescues, I wasn't traveling out to sea to do a marine rescue, I wasn't going down into tunnels doing a confined space rescue.
None of that happened. - And I get paid on a per-job basis... The only job I had during that time was at the airport when a planes front wheel failed to engage and lower to allow for a landing. So that was about 3 hours worth of work in a few months.
How did I feed myself? Australia has a multitude of "safety nets" (Some of which I elaborated upon prior) that ensures financial stability for it's citizens, I personally relied on my Superannuation as the Government allowed increased access to it, basically every time I get paid, my employer takes a % and puts it into a special fund, controlled by the government, and over the decades does accumulate a rather hefty amount as you can imagine.
I was also getting a $1,500 payment every 2 weeks to cover arrears on top of it.
Again, not all work is stopped in Australia, only non-essential work. Your hyperbole isn't working, fact is, we succeeded in putting our economy into hibernation, defeating the virus and resuming our economic activity, the USA? Still dealing with an increasing death toll from the virus, the entire situation was incompetently handled over there.
And the evidence certainly speaks for itself.
| sethnintendo said: Unless government "prints" so much money that the money becomes worthless then we can be like Germany pre WW2. Not going to happen anytime soon but debt is accelerating at an alarming pace. We had annual deficits around half a trillion when Obama left then that deficit blew up with tax cuts to rich and corporations and increased military spending. Now we are pushing 1 trillion annual not including all the recent legislation for corona virus. I believe this year USA will be at 4-5 trillion added debt in just one year. |
You don't have to print more money.
But if the USA didn't have such a horrific debt to GDP ratio, they could have had the ability to maneuver their economy to protect the vulnerable during "rainy days" such as the Coronavirus, that's a failure on Republican and Democratic governments to plan appropriately for the long term.
Is what it is, but Trump needed to pay debt down, not blow it out.
However, one thing we need to keep in mind is that the United States, Like Australia is a sovereign nation with complete control over their currency, they can pay down large swathes of that debt by printing money, playing with inflation, buying bonds and so forth, generally that's not seen as ideal though as it has economic ramifications.
The ideal position is for economic growth to outstrip debt, so that you can pay it down organically.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
