Ugh, those economics-for-dummies articles are stupid and wrong. Some of that money is going to the repo market, but hardly all of it. In fact, it's kinda hard to know where any of that money is going to go because transparency over who gets what is utter trash. Not to mention that the much made-of collateral that those articles play up are made up of a bunch of completely useless junk bonds.

In any case the point remains: multiple 9/11s are happening daily in the US and somehow, it's always banks and business for whom there is money, and never actual people. Fucking trash country.

I think the Chinese manufactured the virus to kill as many Americans as possible. That's why it targets fat people. — Benkei

Only 40% are obese, and they tend to be poor and rural rather than elite and in areas worst hit by the virus, so poor targeting. Whoever invented and mass-produced high fructose corn syrup should be given credit for effectively killing Americans. HFCS is cheaper than sugar and is a better preservative and that translates into increased profit. We don't need any help with killing ourselves, in other words.

I don't think they're serious. Interesting perspective, though. Specifically the last line.

The fed knows where that money went because the money has to be payed back. Companies are owned by, run by, and employ actual people the last time I checked. Either way the suggestion that we should fund Medicare for All or pay off student loans with short-term loans from the federal reserve is the stupidest thing I’ve heard in a while.

The suggestion is that you ought to have M4A and cancel student loans and stop coming up with shitty excuses to not do either.

As for stupidest things, simply tune into any one of Trump's appearances, anywhere, ever.

Right, let’s just forgive all loans. Free money for everyone. Just fucking brilliant.

Gosh you really know how to threaten everyone with a good time, don't you?

In any case, yeah, debt jubilee. Time for it to happen (again).

And of course a massive strengthening of social security nets - UBI perhaps, in conjunction with massive investment in public goods in general.

Let's see if I got this right.

(1) Treasury gives money to FED to make leveraged bets with.
(2) Fed buys currently untradeable crap from banks for cash. Expects buybacks with interest. Part of their deal is they get to keep what they bought if the bank fails to buy back, getting a pile of crap in a shitty conditional situation as their reassurance.
(2a everyone shorted the shit out of everything because they knew it was garbage and the underlying conditions that made them garbage investments haven't changed.)
(3) Banks do whatever they can to profit from the money.
(4) Companies who receive bank cash in exchange for whatever do whatever they can to profit from the money.

Seems to me; everyone leverages up while the real economy is still tanking. Pundits look at graphs upticking after the injection and broadcast the measures' amazing success at restoring the economy's functioning. The profits concentrate in the hands of the very wealthiest.

Looks a lot like the banker bailouts to me, only worse.

Holy shit, you mean vox got this wrong. :scream:

I think you’re right. Just another reason why governments should keep their hands away from the market.

I had no idea we could agree on things.

I'm sure he wasn't. I was just using his joke as a launching point for my little rant on human irrationality.

You’re speaking my language. Hopefully that doesn’t frighten you.

It doesn't. It just means you're slowly being colonised by CCP rhetoric by being here.

I hope that not all criticism of the federal reserve system is rooted in anti-Americanism and communism. I could be wrong.

Another symptom of coronavirus...falling out of windows?

“Three Russian doctors fall from hospital windows, raising questions amid coronavirus pandemic.”

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/europe/russia-medical-workers-windows-intl/index.html

"Lack of caution." :grimace:

Guess what? It worked. Just like we kept telling you it would. Early lockdown = less time needed on lockdown = less deaths + less economic disruption + shitloads more options to keep things as they are. Everybody wins.

We just won't call it a "great depression" as that is basically a historical term. Even the economic depression after the 2007-2008 financial crisis is called now "The Great Recession". — ssu

There were events called great depressions in the 19th century, but maybe the name is unusable now. What would they call it? Eco-Crisis-20?

Guess what? It worked. Just like we kept telling you it would. Early lockdown = less time needed on lockdown = less deaths + less economic disruption + shitloads more options to keep things as they are. — Baden

So the lesson is that if you're on an island off the coast of Nowhere, you can influence the effects of a global pandemic more easily.

Thanks.

No, the lesson is that if you lockdown early and lockdown hard, less people die. And you don't fuck up your economy as much.

No, the lesson is that if you lockdown early and lockdown hard, less people die. And you don't fuck up your economy as much. — Baden

That's ridiculous.

You still haven't read this right or you've just lost touch with reality?

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

"Summary of the article: Strong coronavirus measures today should only last a few weeks, there shouldn’t be a big peak of infections afterwards, and it can all be done for a reasonable cost to society."

The virus silently invaded Europe and the US two weeks before the first cases appeared in those locations. Locking down early enough to do a two week lockdown would have required a time machine.

New Zealand is further out.

I never specified a "two-week" lockdown and the article says a "few" weeks. New Zealand did five and did them early and there are no new cases today, so they can ease things off a bit. New York is on week 8 and had 3,500 new cases yesterday and has very little flexibility.

Here's what I said:

if you lockdown early and lockdown hard,less people die. And you don't fuck up your economy as much. — Baden

That's more or less obvious. What do you think the advantages of locking down later are?

The virus silently invaded Europe — frank

Did you expect it to show up at customs with a passport? It silently invaded everywhere. Europe knew it was coming as much as NZ did.

The virus silently invaded Europe and the US — frank

Silently? I would've thought it made an almighty ruckus...

the lesson is that if you lockdown early and lockdown hard, less people die. And you don't fuck up your economy as much. — Baden

For a start you've got two variables there with no indication of which one is responsible for the effect (early or hard, or both).

Secondly, no one's controlled for any of the other variables we know affect the course of epidemics - connectivity, isolation, average age, prevelence of health issues, testing regime, testing methods, case reporting methods. You yourself brought up some of these when talking about the differences between Ireland and Sweden.

Finally, the effects in the short term are not really in question. I don't think anyone serious thinks that doing nothing will have less of a short term impact than lockdowns. Those people who are concerned (and serious people are concerned), are concerned about the long term effects of various approaches to lockdown.

It's vitally important we get this right for next time, a sustainable, repeatable response. Analysing the situation critically and open-mindedly will get us there. Looking for early opportunities to say 'I told you so' will not.

if you lockdown early and lockdown hard,less people die. And you don't fuck up your economy as much.
— Baden — Baden

Sorry, I misread you. This would be true if locking down early means that you were able to contain the virus. Attempts were made to do that in NYC. The virus was already present, though. They were too late to contain it. At that point, locking down only saves lives in that it keeps the hospital system from being overloaded so that patients don't die of hypoxia, dehydration, DKA, etc. for lack of any care at all.

Same for the economy. If you're able to contain the virus, you could minimize the effect on the economy. Otherwise, you're at the mercy of the way the virus interacts with your particular population.

The virus silently invaded Europe and the US
— frank

Silently? I would've thought it made an almighty ruckus... — Professor Death

They're super tiny, so they don't make much noise.

Do note that the name of an event can change in history until a consensus view has been reached. And typically an event is later put into context of the whole Century, just like they didn't call it WW1 but the Great War after the conflict.