US Politics: Testing, Testing, T... Te.. Testing

[Maithanet]

Not to mention "I take no responsibility". If Democrats don't have that playing on every commercial break in every swing state through November, they are fools.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Not to mention "I take no responsibility". If Democrats don't have that playing on every commercial break in every swing state through November, they are fools.

They'll sync it with reports of him directly cutting programs meant to combat the current situation prior to the outbreak. 

[DMC]

57 minutes ago, Triskele said:

what extent Fox and its clones do or do not stick to the pro-Trump line.  No idea how it plays out.

Oh I'm sure they'll stick to the Trump line if and until his approval starts tanking on its own.  Carlson, I suppose, was an apt replacement for O'Reilly's timeslot because they both "show their independence" by strongly criticizing the GOP every once in awhile.  I don't think that necessarily means anything.

[mcbigski]

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

Republicans Found a Way to Mail Checks and Still Screw People Over

https://slate.com/business/2020/03/the-republican-plan-to-mail-checks-to-everyone-still-found-a-way-to-screw-the-poor.html

 

So people with low to no taxable earned income already are going to be hardest hit by an economic slowdown?  Is coronavirus endangering anyone's welfare, housing subsidies, or food stamps? (is SNAP the right acronym now? or is that just in my state?)  The working poor and middle class are going to be hardest hit by a long term economic slow down.  Makes sense to prioritize them.

I find it amusing that most of the same people who go on and on about sustainability in an economic/environmental context also tend to want unlimited free candy.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

1 hour ago, ants said:

I find that all reasonably believable, unfortunately.  That said, Biden is moving with respect of bankruptcy to closer to Warren, so there may be areas he's willing to move to with Bernie in exchange for Bernie dropping out and endorsing.  I really hope the two of them are working something out, which can make Bernie's supporters happy, but keep the middle happy, and lead to a big win.

I do honestly believe if Dems win big, that the more progressive elements in congress can push a more liberal agenda.  But I really believe Dems need a big win to get through anything.  Even just getting to 50 Senate seats and the presidency would allow some good things to be done via reconciliation.  

And Biden is the better choice for our long-term survival. It's just...moving closer to Warren's bankruptcy? That seems like something that's a piece of your philosophy for helping Americans (like it is for Warren). No one wants to declare bankruptcy (though it's truly a good thing to fix the laws as they are), and Biden lists this on his website as a central piece of his platform for helping relieve things like student debt. Believe me, I will declare tomorrow if it becomes available. But there's just not a lot of hope there. And Trump, if he pulls it off, puts money in people's mailboxes. Americans seem short-sighted in this regard. 

As to your second point, I worry about the Dems pushing through a progressive agenda. Pelosi is out there fighting against basic help Trump claims he wants to provide. I'm more worried than ever. 

[S John]

37 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

And Biden is the better choice for our long-term survival. It's just...moving closer to Warren's bankruptcy? That seems like something that's a piece of your philosophy for helping Americans (like it is for Warren). No one wants to declare bankruptcy (though it's truly a good thing to fix the laws as they are), and Biden lists this on his website as a central piece of his platform for helping relieve things like student debt. Believe me, I will declare tomorrow if it becomes available. But there's just not a lot of hope there. And Trump, if he pulls it off, puts money in people's mailboxes. Americans seem short-sighted in this regard. 

As to your second point, I worry about the Dems pushing through a progressive agenda. Pelosi is out there fighting against basic help Trump claims he wants to provide. I'm more worried than ever. 

It worries me too.  Trump’s instinct is to survive and the economy is the main thing he’s hung his hat on for the past three years.  I can totally see him putting cash in peoples pockets in the short term and having this pass in a couple months to a quickly recovering economy around election time.  It’s only been a week and people are already stir crazy.  If the government can keep people afloat in the meantime, and Trump will be able to reasonably claim to have led that effort, I think a mini-boom on the other side of this is totally reasonable to expect.  I know I’ll be stoked to go out and have a drink and a steak when this is over.  I’m still not going to vote for Trump, but I do see this crisis as something that might swing either way for him.

[Martell Spy]

1 hour ago, mcbigski said:

So people with low to no taxable earned income already are going to be hardest hit by an economic slowdown?  Is coronavirus endangering anyone's welfare, housing subsidies, or food stamps? (is SNAP the right acronym now? or is that just in my state?)  The working poor and middle class are going to be hardest hit by a long term economic slow down.  Makes sense to prioritize them.

I find it amusing that most of the same people who go on and on about sustainability in an economic/environmental context also tend to want unlimited free candy.

The working poor and middle class aren't being prioritized. What would that look like, making those groups the priority? Not bailing out the airlines perhaps and instead sending the money to those groups. Or, cutting the low earners out of the bailout and then sending that money saved to those 2 groups. If those are the types of things you want done, then state so, but please stop pretending these things already happened.

The upper rungs will benefit from the business bailouts. The lowest rungs are getting a big fuck you. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

5 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Republicans Found a Way to Mail Checks and Still Screw People Over

https://slate.com/business/2020/03/the-republican-plan-to-mail-checks-to-everyone-still-found-a-way-to-screw-the-poor.html

 

Hell, this is trash, and about what I was anticipating.  

 

[OnionAhaiReborn]

6 hours ago, mcbigski said:

So people with low to no taxable earned income already are going to be hardest hit by an economic slowdown?  Is coronavirus endangering anyone's welfare, housing subsidies, or food stamps? (is SNAP the right acronym now? or is that just in my state?)  The working poor and middle class are going to be hardest hit by a long term economic slow down.  Makes sense to prioritize them.

I find it amusing that most of the same people who go on and on about sustainability in an economic/environmental context also tend to want unlimited free candy.

Probably the poorest and most vulnerable will be the hardest hit by an economic slowdown. They could easily lose all of their meager income. But that's also somewhat beside the point, which is that sending people money is meant to be economically stimulative. In that sense it's not about who is hardest hit but about putting money in the hands of people who will spend it, which the poorest most certainly will. 

Sustainability simply has different meanings in different contexts. The fiscal sustainability of a ~trillion dollar stimulus for the US federal government is not seriously in question. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

7 hours ago, mcbigski said:

So people with low to no taxable earned income already are going to be hardest hit by an economic slowdown?  Is coronavirus endangering anyone's welfare, housing subsidies, or food stamps? (is SNAP the right acronym now? or is that just in my state?)  The working poor and middle class are going to be hardest hit by a long term economic slow down.  Makes sense to prioritize them.

I find it amusing that most of the same people who go on and on about sustainability in an economic/environmental context also tend to want unlimited free candy.

Nobody gets more free candy than large corporations. They get huge sums of money from the government, make gigantic profits, and pay little to nothing in taxes. Some even get hundreds of millions of dollars in tax kickbacks. 

But you knew all of that already. You just wanted to point at the lower classes and say they deserve their station in life.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Is there any known timeline on how quickly the money will go out? IIRC, a lot of the stimulus money from 08 took several months to get into the hands of the people who desperately needed it. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

35 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Is there any known timeline on how quickly the money will go out? IIRC, a lot of the stimulus money from 08 took several months to get into the hands of the people who desperately needed it. 

I heard half on April 8th, half a couple weeks later, but can't send to find it right now.  Although if you're a wealthy member of congress, apparently you got yours a month ago when you sold a bunch for stocks before the market tanked.   

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

I heard half on April 8th, half a couple weeks later, but can't send to find it right now.  Although if you're a wealthy member of congress, apparently you got yours a month ago when you sold a bunch for stocks before the market tanked.   

 

[Fragile Bird]

Another looming problem being discussed on CNBC this morning was the fact the the package just passed by the Senate does not include money for states. Since so many states have balanced budget laws this means that there will be waves of layoffs in the public sector.

[Fez]

9 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Another looming problem being discussed on CNBC this morning was the fact the the package just passed by the Senate does not include money for states. Since so many states have balanced budget laws this means that there will be waves of layoffs in the public sector.

This won't be the last stimulus package passed by Congress (also, we don't know what will happen in the discussions today with Democrats). Plus, the smart states will get creative about their budget laws, just like did during the recession. A lot of states have a lot of leeway and loopholes they can use, if they want.

 

And speaking of states, its been kinda amazing to watch Andrew Cuomo slowly become shadow president of the mid-Atlantic in real time; filling in the leadership gap from the White House.

 

[IheartIheartTesla]

In the meantime, Trump's approval rating steadily crept up a bit (to be fair, it was maybe driven by some YouGov polls, which are B-). I do think we aren't at peak disruption yet, so he may yet be held to account at some point.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Really surprised NY, CT, MA, CT and NJ haven't ordered a lockdown/shelter in place order.  Without the resources to do the South Korea style screening and testing, a lockdown seems like the only way to slow this enough for hospitals to keep up. 

 

[sologdin]

Quote

Nobody gets more free candy than large corporations. They get huge sums of money from the government, make gigantic profits, and pay little to nothing in taxes. Some even get hundreds of millions of dollars in tax kickbacks. 

But you knew all of that already. You just wanted to point at the lower classes and say they deserve their station in life.

there's a bataillean point to be made that an aggregate surplus needs to be spent somewhere. i'm fairly sure that the fiscal conservative sorts have no answer to that, either. they can perhaps join their fascist cousins and burn things that remain unsold for want of buyers with income.

[Mudguard]

19 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Really surprised NY, CT, MA, CT and NJ haven't ordered a lockdown/shelter in place order.  Without the resources to do the South Korea style screening and testing, a lockdown seems like the only way to slow this enough for hospitals to keep up. 

 

Many states need to grow a backbone and issue lockdown orders now, if it's a possibility that is under consideration.  There is no point in waiting until you have tens of thousands infected in your state, and then issuing the lockdown. 

I get the sense that Cuomo and the other governors think that their gradual approach to social distancing is going to be sufficient.  They are just wasting precious time.  If the subway system in NYC is still crowded and most people aren't wearing some sort of covering over their noses and mouths, then it's going to be a disaster if they don't shut it down soon.  Same thing for grocery stores, which were crowded Iast weekend.  We can't continue to half ass our mitigation strategy.  

The number of infected is doubling every two to three days and we are around 15k confirmed infected, so each day of delay in acting now will result in thousands to tens of thousands of additional infected that could have been avoided.  If we wait another week or two, it will be tens or hundreds of thousands additional infected.

[Fez]

To some extent I think they are trying to avoid a panic. When Italy locked down Lombardy, a whole lot of people fled the area that night before the restrictions went into place; and probably helped further spread the virus throughout the country.