Patterico's Pontifications

5/13/2020

Failed Presidential Candidate Apparently Finds Incontestable Connection Between Spending Tax Dollars and Saving Lives

Filed under: General — JVW @ 2:19 pm



[guest post by JVW]

To the surprise of absolutely no one, the Senate’s worst demagogue (and that’s saying something!) let loose with another mindless utterance:

Sensible people have been discussing for the past several weeks how Congress can use its make-believe funds to provide economic relief to businesses and individuals who have seen their financial well-being undermined by the virus. Leave it to Lieawatha Liz to attempt to conflate minting more trillion dollar coins and making it rain [note: link moderately NSFW] in state capitals with actually saving the lives of vulnerable people who are afflicted with this virus. Very little if any of this so-called Phase Four stimulus (which would actually be the fifth such bill) goes directly to hospitals or equipment or testing kits — that was taken care of in previous stimulus bills — so now both parties seek to lard up the bill with their own spending priorities and Cocaine Mitch seems to be one of the few responsible Washington leaders who want to tap the brakes just a little bit as we careen downhill.

At long last I think we have determined the absolutely worst person in the United States Senate. Sorry Chuck, sorry Dick, sorry Kamala, sorry Bob and Chris and Kirsten and Sherrod and Cory and Mazie and the rest of you scoundrels. But none of you are as aggravatingly insipid as the Senior Senator from Massachusetts.

– JVW

57 Responses to “Failed Presidential Candidate Apparently Finds Incontestable Connection Between Spending Tax Dollars and Saving Lives”

  1. The first draft of this post from yesterday used more invective against Fauxcahontas, but I guess I’m in a better mood today so I toned it down a bit. I’ll have to start imposing a mandatory 24-hour cooling off period on myself whenever I mount my soapbox to lash out at a politician who disgusts me.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  2. Good Heavens, I absolutely cannot stand her.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  3. Fully reopening the economy will result in a larger death toll than will happen otherwise.

    Keeping people sheltered in place at home will result in widespread starvation because people can’t feed themselves without an income.

    An effective government relief bill would allow people to shelter at home while providing them the means to feed themselves.

    So yes, in this case there *is* a clear connection between government spending and saving lives.

    As a country we are *choosing* to send people back to work to die. Other choices are available.

    aphrael (7962af)

  4. The whole question Elizabeth Warren asks is a non sequitor.

    The purpose of the Democratic bills is not to do anything about the disease itself (or that’s only a minor part of their bills) it is to counter the economic effects of the lockdowns.

    And it does that very badly.

    Sammy Finkelman (1b38fa)

  5. Sammy, on the one hand, yes. On the other hand, because economic forces will compel business reopening and send vulnerable people back to work unless there are efforts to counter the economic effect, the argument is that the efforts to counter the economic effect are required to save the lives of the people who will die if they are compelled to go back to work.

    aphrael (7962af)

  6. Both Democrats and Republicans are underesitimating how long the disease will be prevalent.

    And there’s another thing:

    If Covid-19 disappeared like the 1918 flu pretty much did, and it did it even by September, and from a medical point of view things went back to the way they were before, the economy would not resume as it was.

    1. Spending would be at about 70% of what it was before because of the effect of the unpaid debt (both on those who owed and who were owed money and expected payments.)

    There would be a change in spending patterns.

    2. More money would be spent on stocking up on things that could run out.

    3. Less would be spent on non-essentials, like restaurant meals and trips.

    It would slowly revert but only to some degree.

    People’s tastes would also have changed. People would have learned to do things (like cook) or liked other things..

    Sammy Finkelman (1b38fa)

  7. Plus, I expect that a lot of people who have been scared by this will shift towards increased savings and decreased consumption, if they have the ability to do so.

    aphrael (7962af)

  8. So yes, in this case there *is* a clear connection between government spending and saving lives.

    No, I’m not at all convinced. The government can print and distribute money to their heart’s content, but we are getting well to the point where that is trying to cover a severed limb with a Band-Aid. And if you read the link to the article in The Hill, it’s very hard to see how this particular bill is anything other than just throwing money at a whole bunch of different problems in the belief that this crisis represents the best chance for various factions to promote their own hobby-horses. A good example is that Democrats want a 15% increase in SNAP aid, even though we saw increased spending of 20% on that very line-item in the last stimulus bill. Why the additional spending and why now, other than the idea that it is the easiest way to push it through. And with both parties going back yet again for the magic of “infrastructure spending” it’s hard to assume that these bills are being written in good faith and not being exploited for political or ideological reasons. I am not even going to get into Democrats obsession with mail-in voting being thrown into this equation.

    It’s quite clear as well that many states want federal money in order to paper over budget holes caused by their own bad decisions, and I think Sen. McConnell has a legitimate point in standing against that sort of nonsense. The incredible frivolity of people like Sen Warren in just throwing around money we don’t really have is obnoxious, and someone needs to tell her and her allies to knock it off.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  9. Good points, Sammy. Another tough reality is that taxes — federal, state, and local — will also likely rise at some point, and people will respond to that by spending less on non-essential items. So many localities, including where I live, have jacked up hotel taxes to such a degree that they really require a constant flow of tourists, yet that is one industry that will probably be hard-hit by the new economic reality and local governments will see the tax shortfall.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  10. Aphreal, a couple of questions:

    Would you give me an example of how economic “forces will compel business reopening?”

    “the people who will die if they are compelled to go back to work.” Please give me an example of someone “compelled to go back to work.”

    Is Congress working on a law to compel people to return to work?

    felipe (023cc9)

  11. >Would you give me an example of how economic “forces will compel business reopening?”

    business owners who can’t pay their bills will reopen their businesses regardless of the shutdown orders. this is already happening.

    > “the people who will die if they are compelled to go back to work.” Please give me an example of someone “compelled to go back to work.”

    people with no appreciable savings whose employers reopen will lose their unemployment benefits if they don’t go back to work. the federal government has instructed states that refusing to go back to work because of corona virus fears disqualifies someone from UI benefits.

    aphrael (7962af)

  12. Imagine how bad Team D has to be that Trump has 40% approval.

    We have already indebted our kids to a sickening degree, during a new quasi depression. Think of it what you will, but everyone should agree this is a real challenge. There is no rational reason to rush into spending huge sums on more.

    Warren will likely have a great post in the Biden administration that she will use in a fashion similar to Flynn, Barr, and Trump. We have to build a third way.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  13. Every bank account in the U.S., personal or business, would have added to it a line of credit, at low interest, backed by the federal government. How to figure out the amount is a problem

    The credit line could be the sum total of all deposits made to the account in January and February, or some multiple of that. This bases the credit line on the account holders’ pre-Covid-19 revenue streams, except it doesn’t take account of money taken from one account and put in another, or money put in a child’s account (you’d count double)

    That also doesn’t take account of people who lost their jobs or income before.

    Perhaps there could be a minimum, and a maximum. Perhaps a higher interest rate for some money/

    It shouldn’t get too complicated.

    The effect, if someone couldn’t pay it back soon, would be like a student loan. It could be paid back over 10 or 20 years. It maybe wouldn’t be discharged in bankruptcy before six or seven years.

    This would also apply to bank accounts of businesses.

    Struggling businesses or individuals would use however much of their credit line they or their families needed. Those that don’t need to likely wouldn’t use it so much. The federal government would be out only on out and out lost money.

    I am adapting this somewhat:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/less-stimulus-more-overdraft-protection-11585262468

    Far and away the best policy solution I’ve seen to the economic hardships created by our response to the Covid-19 pandemic is a proposal by economist Arnold Kling….

    Sammy Finkelman (1b38fa)

  14. >It’s quite clear as well that many states want federal money in order to paper over budget holes caused by their own bad decisions

    every state in the country is experiencing a fall off in tax revenue (sales and income tax revenue are down) combined with an increase in expenses. every state in the country will have to either raise taxes or cut spending, in the middle of a deep recession, which will result in further economic contraction in the short-to-medium term. this isn’t a problem unique to blue states or to poorly governed states, it’s an across the board problem.

    > And if you read the link to the article in The Hill, it’s very hard to see how this particular bill is anything other than just throwing money at a whole bunch of different problems in the belief that this crisis represents the best chance for various factions to promote their own hobby-horses

    let’s look at the specific provisions mentioned in the article in the hill:

    > is expected to include hundreds of billions more in state and local funds,

    see above about state budget collapses.

    > funding for the U.S. Postal Service

    the US postal service has said it will be bankrupt by mid summer without financial assistance. in a world where people are depending on the postal service for deliveries because they’re not supposed to go out and do things, that’s a crisis.

    > another round of direct assistance to Americans.

    precisely — American workers who cannot safely work and American businesses which cannot safely reopen need the direct assistance to prevent themselves from being bankrupted and destitute.

    is there pork in the bill? almost certainly, just as there was in the previous bills. are there components of the bill which are essential to preventing further economic collapse and/or the deaths of people who are forced back to unsafe working environments through the inability to feed themselves otherwise? absolutely.

    aphrael (7962af)

  15. “Thousands of people have lost their homes and businesses due to the government’s one-size fits all reaction to Covid-19. How many destroyed lives is enough for you Senator Warren?”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  16. “business owners who can’t pay their bills will reopen their businesses regardless of the shutdown orders. this is already happening.”

    I am unconvinced. If owners decide to re-open, then it is a decision freely made, which is not “compelling” as they can just as well decide to file for bankruptcy, or just not re-open. I would counter the opposite, that the lockdown compelled them to close, and the sonsequences of that lockdown compelled them to sustain and accumulate losses and debt.

    “people with no appreciable savings whose employers reopen will lose their unemployment benefits if they don’t go back to work. the federal government has instructed states that refusing to go back to work because of corona virus fears disqualifies someone from UI benefits.”

    That is not an example of being compelled either. They are free to decide to do otherwise. For example, turn to a life of crime.

    Now if you had said “spouses threatened them with divorce,” well, then you would have something.

    felipe (023cc9)

  17. Leave it to Lieawatha Liz to attempt to conflate minting more trillion dollar coins and making it rain

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1dnqKGuezo (audio NSFW)

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  18. Aphrael, I forgot to thank you for your prompt response: Thank you!

    felipe (023cc9)

  19. I am unconvinced. If owners decide to re-open, then it is a decision freely made, which is not “compelling” as they can just as well decide to file for bankruptcy, or just not re-open

    Because all those things are interchangeable, with similar results? To say they aren’t compelled mistakes the entire point of the gun to the head.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  20. Between this and Pelosi trying to load up the next “stimulus” with billions for illegal aliens, leftist lobbyists and forcing no voter id, I’m shocked that Trump still has a chance this November.

    NJRob (4ffc49)

  21. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 5/13/2020 @ 3:32 pm

    Who said anything about similar results? No most choices are not interchangeable that have trade-offs.

    felipe (023cc9)

  22. I don’t mind the use of hyperbole, Kevin, if any one has a “gun to their head” it is the one on lockdown.

    felipe (023cc9)

  23. If Mitch’s resistance forces Congress to jettison much of its pork and other harebrained schemes, then he’s a hero in my calculation.

    norcal (a5428a)

  24. NYTimes: Buried in N.Y. Budget: Legal Shield for Nursing Homes Rife With Virus

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/nyregion/nursing-homes-coronavirus-new-york.html#click=https://t.co/aD50IERn6K

    Lol
    _

    harkin (d9f415)

  25. “ Between this and Pelosi trying to load up the next “stimulus” with billions for illegal aliens, leftist lobbyists and forcing no voter id…..”

    She also trying to sneak in elimination of $10k state tax deduction cap.
    _

    harkin (d9f415)

  26. Harkin,

    That would get the support of a lot of people on this site even though its the nation subsidizing irresponsible spending by a state.

    NJRob (4ffc49)

  27. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 5/13/2020 @ 3:32 pm

    And bear in mind that a sole proprietor who goes for bankruptcy faces losing his house, all savings, and anything else he has, depending on which state he lives in. Plus ruin his personal credit.

    Kishnevi (7976e0)

  28. Kishnevi (7976e0) — 5/13/2020 @ 4:31 pm

    Is that true for a chapter 7 filing?

    felipe (023cc9)

  29. “depending on which state he lives in”

    Well, I must agree, after all, Kish.

    felipe (023cc9)

  30. Technically it wasn’t the virus that put people’s livelihoods at risk but the governments actions in response to the virus.
    We have enough data on the virus now that we can identify who the at risk segments of the population actually are, design isolation protocols to minimize the risk to those populations and let the other 80% of the population get on with their normal lives. That way we don’t have to destroy the nations economy in order to save it.

    DaveMac (4cc9b4)

  31. 30. Careful, Dave. That kind of speech around these parts is rather subversive.

    Gryph (08c844)

  32. felipe, would you consider the loss of a business you had worked 20 years building up to be “just a choice”? To me, that’s a gun to the head. As are the possibility of being homeless or having your mortgage company foreclose.

    While renters may think they can get by with not paying rent, the landlords are often depending on that money to cover their own living or loans. The state may force them to wait, but no one is forcing their creditors (who are all looking at the same abyss) to forbear.

    This isn’t about “choice”, it’s about rock versus hard place. And the government (whose workers still have their iron rice bowls) keeps prattling on about “safety.” As if people will care about that much longer.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  33. Question: How many full-time employees has the County of Los Angeles laid off or furloughed without pay? After telling everyone else to stay home for next 3 months, they really ought to share the pain. But won’t.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  34. Legal Shield for Nursing Homes Rife With Virus

    The state, which forced a number of people INTO those homes during this crisis, already has immunity.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  35. 33… absolutely insane.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  36. As are the possibility of being homeless or having your mortgage company foreclose.

    Those foreclosures are how Lieawatha Warren made a bundle…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  37. We have enough data on the virus now that we can identify who the at risk segments of the population actually are, design isolation protocols to minimize the risk to those populations and let the other 80% of the population get on with their normal lives. That way we don’t have to destroy the nations economy in order to save it.

    That’s super…!!! You need to get on TeeVee and the WH hotsline to assure everyone knows of your break-through!

    Of course, you also have a REALLY big job of selling to the American people that they can “get on with their normal lives”.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  38. 36. Not a close student of Princess Running Bare (anywhere near is too close), but I didn’t know she did a lot of mortgage foreclosure. I do understand she did her share of house-flipping.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  39. Many politicians and pundits underestimate how hard it is to start a business, or in this case, re-start one. It’s not like starting and re-starting a car.

    Hoi Polloi (dc4124)

  40. Meanwhile: Wisconsin’s Supreme Court blocks the governor from extending the state’s stay-at-home order.

    Wisconsin’s Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected the extension of a stay-at-home order by Gov. Tony Evers, siding with Republicans in one of most high-profile challenges of its kind to the emergency authority of a statewide official during the coronavirus pandemic.

    Mr. Evers, a Democrat, had extended the prohibition on most travel and operations of nonessential businesses until May 26.

    But in a 4-to-3 ruling, the conservative-leaning court said that measure had exceeded the authority given to Wisconsin’s top health official under state law.

    “An agency cannot confer on itself the power to dictate the lives of law-abiding individuals as comprehensively as the order does without reaching beyond the executive branch’s authority,” the justices wrote in the ruling.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/coronavirus-cases-deaths.html#link-727ecf92

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  41. There is a limit to a state of emergency. Usually at the point when the cattle stop stampeding.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  42. We do not conclude that Palm was without any power to act in the face of this pandemic. However, Palm must follow the law that is applicable to state-wide emergencies. We further conclude that Palm’s order confining all people to their homes, forbidding travel and closing businesses exceeded the statutory authority of Wis. Stat. § 252.02 upon which Palm claims to rely.

    So, the Wishconsin Supremes were ruling on the extent of an order, not it’s fundamental legality under statute.

    The ruling would also seem to leave Wishconsin in limbo. More to follow…

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  43. #37. If asked I certainly would. If you actually did some research on the data described you would see this. I have actually read severall papers on the subject out of medical journals and have studied the cdc data and the data on a number of states individual websites. Anyone could do the same if they were actually interested in what a real solution might look like.

    1DaveMac (4cc9b4)

  44. Like I said, you can’t this revelation to yourself! Got, thee to the mountain! Proclaim freedom throughout the land unto all the people. Hell, I’ll hold your coat…

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  45. Some of this is already happening to some degree in many states. The protocols for at risk groups are still being worked. I have already been in discussions with my state representatives on these issues.

    1DaveMac (4cc9b4)

  46. #44 somehow, I don’t think you are really interested in a productive discussion on this subject.

    1DaveMac (4cc9b4)

  47. Pick a single alias.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  48. I’ve been meaning to and forgetting:

    Thank you, Californians, for making 90% of the eggs produced in the country illegal in your state, leaving more for the rest of us during the panic buying! Thank you, very much!

    (Although I do buy the brown, free-range eggs myself, normally.)

    nk (1d9030)

  49. I have already been in discussions with my state representatives on these issues.

    I’m sure they were humbled.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  50. Lieawatha is the 2nd worst Masshole political hack. Govna “Charlie Parker” as sleepy Joe calls him, is a mass murderer just like Cuomo. Killing people in old folks homes while his son gets away with groping a women on a plane. While he wants to raise the gas tax to pay for more democrat bull schiff. And he is a fee raising turd. This dope republican is mittens on steroids. Lieawatha should head back to the hills of oklahoma taking Charlie Parker with her.

    mg (8cbc69)

  51. Thank you for your question, Kevin:

    felipe, would you consider the loss of a business you had worked 20 years building up to be “just a choice”? To me, that’s a gun to the head. As are the possibility of being homeless or having your mortgage company foreclose.

    First, you speak of “loss.” Loss is so inclusive that it encompasses both forced loss (say robbery or lockdown) and chosen loss (say throwing in the towel or recognition of negative cash flow), but the first is not like the second.

    Second, You say “just a choice” as though the matter at hand were like choosing which food on your plate you will first sample. This is absurd, of course, and I should be surprised if I were to take your question as having been asked in good faith. I have regard for you, so I do you a kindness by pointing out this absudity rather than ignoring, or dismissing you out of hand.

    You like the phrase “gun to the head.” But it really does not serve you well because there are actual instances of people who really had guns to their heads who were still able to freely choose their own path regardless of the consequences. So I say, what of it? Whether actual or metaphorical, a gun to the head does not preclude free will. If anything, a gun to the head mitigates the culpability that would, otherwise, attach. As in: You cannot blame her for her actions because they had a gun to her head.

    Finally, you say “As are the possibility of being homeless or having your mortgage company foreclose.” These things are always possibilities.

    For you have the poor with you always, and whenever you wish you may do them good; but Me you do not have always. Mark 14:7 KJV

    My internet brother, Kevin; Everything is about choice. What will you choose to do?

    felipe (023cc9)

  52. Be careful what you wish for conservatives. Phony hippo critical limousine liberal corporate establishment democrat stooges like nancy pelosi and liawatha warren keep the left dems like bernie and AOC at bey. Also their are radicals even further to the left who wait their chance to clear out the dead wood in the democratic party like biden, schemer and pelosi. If biden looses in 2020 the dnc and corporate donor class will lose what little influence they have left after the 2016 hillary debacle. For those of you who don’t understand democratic real politic. Both in 2016 and 2020 older minorities in 2016 and older blacks women in 2020 (latinx went for bernie) saved the dnc establishment’s hide because older black women vote for the white candidate they think white people will vote for. In 2008 blacks were for clinton until whites voted for obama in Iowa primary. Latest polls trump 44% groper joe 47% and most of that is california and n.y. In swing states trump leades. Cnn did poll of swing states and left out wisconsin and michigan to help groper joe out and trump still won swing states. If green party runs a charismatic celebrity instead of a non-entity ideologue watch out. Also in latest poll only 56% of democrats want be den while 44% want someone else even the clinton grifter had better favorables among democrats then that!

    asset (38c47a)

  53. I really hope Warren is the VP pick. Off all the bad candidates she worried me the most because i really dislike her policies but though she might have the right mix of leadership traits to get them done.

    Time123 (f5cf77)

  54. Came here to point out the distinction aphrael already made with characteristic eloquence. *raises glass*

    TR (9bed35)

  55. Amash was one of a handful of members of Congress who voted against the stimulus package. His reasoning was that the bill was poorly crafted and the majority of the funds went to corporations and special interest, not to individuals and small businesses who really needed it.

    Fauci said a rush to reopen would prolong the pandemic and lead to more suffering and death. He’s right. The current death toll is over 80,000 and increasing at a rate of about 2,000 a day, so it will reach over 100,000 in a few weeks. Trump called Fauci’s comments “unacceptable.” McConnell appears to concur.

    Republicans run the risk as coming across as being the party of corporate interests and having no compassion for the people, many of whom are really suffering right now. Suddenly they don’t want to pass another relief package because it will increase the deficit? Why, they’ve been passing deficit spending bills and adding to the national debt ever since Trump got elected, to the tune of trillions of dollars, and that when the economy was growing. But then they did nominate and elect the self-proclaimed King of Debt.

    As a libertarian, I am fundamentally opposed to deficit spending and mounting debt. However, during times like these, when more and more people are dying, businesses are closing, unemployment is rising, home values are plummeting, markets are crashing, and the economy is plunging into a Greater Depression, an argument can be made for the necessity of it.

    John Maynard Keynes, a much understood economist, infamously said deficit spending is a moral imperative of government, during times of economic crisis. He also famously said deficit spending should be cut, debt paid down, and money saved, during times of economic expansion, in order for the government to prepare the next downturn or crisis. In other words, he understood the business cycle. In good times, save, so that you have money to spend in bad times. That’s how businesses and people survive. No economy can grow forever, it’s just not possible. There will always be a downturn, a recession, or worse a depression. Keynes’s point is that you prepare for the bad times during the good times.

    Yet the Republicans, under Trump, did the exact opposite. When the economy was growing, they spent like drunken sailors. Trillion dollar deficits every year, wasteful spending, mounting debt–oh, and their tax plan benefited corporate interests and wealthy donors more than it benefited small businesses and private individuals–they increased deficits and debt in ways that Obama or Clinton couldn’t have imagined.

    Now that the economy is tanking, they don’t have any money to spend. They wasted it all, along with their credibility. They did not prepare for the bad times during the good times. And these are really bad times.

    Look at this administration’s response to this global pandemic. First, Trump disbanded the panel of health control experts Obama had set up in the NSC–epidemiologists, virologists, serologists, scientists who study infectious diseases and know how to counteract them. Second, Trump imposed tariffs and started trade wars, disrupting global supply chains, and taxing American consumers on imported goods. Third, when told of the potential for a coronavirus outbreak, Trump dismissed the experts, just as he is dismissing Fauci now, just yesterday.

    He will not listen to reason. This clown lives in denial. Everything is some deep state conspiracy against him. Blame Obama! Ask China! He stomps off in a huff at his press briefing, after a young female reporter of Chinese descent asks him a question about his failure to perform, coordinate governments, city, county, state, to address and deal with this pandemic. He doesn’t like to answer hard questions, with anything other than vindictive accusations and conspiratorial complaints.

    That is not leadership. That is not comforting the country. That is not helping people in need. That is Trump, upset, because he doesn’t like or cannot accept reporters asking him questions about his administration’s inept, incompetent, uneducated, and illiterate response to the outbreak from the beginning. He absolutely does not want appear to be weak. He must appear to be strong and resolute. But at every press briefing, he appears as a bumbling, stumbling, incoherent idiot, insulting everyone that does not promote his image as a tough, strong and intelligent leader, which he obviously is not.

    This is only going to get worse. The economy is in a tailspin. A lot of people are having a hard time paying their mortgage or rent. There is a temporary moratorium on foreclosures and evictions, but that won’t last long. At some time, dues are going have to be paid. And I’m expecting a lot of foreclosures and evictions in the coming months. People don’t have the money to pay their bills, because the economy is shut down.

    I understand the need to reopen. There are a lot of jobs, businesses and homes at stake. But we don’t want to rush, because the consequences could be more severe. Proceed with caution, that was Fauchi’s advice, which Trump dismissed.

    This pandemic has wreaked havoc on the global economy. It will by years before any recovery, or return to normalcy, begins. There will be economic wreckage in between–bankruptcies and foreclosures; business closings; bank failings; everything is on the verge of collapse.

    These are desperate times. We need to figure out how we’re going to navigate them; and we can’t look to the federal government. Not under Trump.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  56. The obvious solution would be to stop discretionary spending, bailouts of corporate funds and special interests, end favoritism to wealthy donors. Start focusing on sending money to the individuals and businesses who need it in this time of crisis. Our elected officials are incapable of doing that, which is why they should all be voted out of office.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  57. 55. Gawain’s Ghost (b25cd1) — 5/14/2020 @ 10:47 am

    He stomps off in a huff at his press briefing, after a young female reporter of Chinese descent asks him a question about his failure to perform, coordinate governments, city, county, state, to address and deal with this pandemic.

    It was after he said “ask China” – a non sequitor – and she asked him why did he say that to her, and he refused to take another question from her and the reporter he picked instead tried to give her turn to another reporter – something like that.

    Sammy Finkelman (20d02d)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4730 secs.