12 votes

White House pushes for quick, direct payments to Americans in response to coronavirus

22 comments

  1. [3]
    reese
    (edited )
    Link
    Cool, we could use such a nation-wide experiment to determine if these payments should be indefinite. Maybe we could also reconsider the whole health insurance thing too, since many people will be...

    Cool, we could use such a nation-wide experiment to determine if these payments should be indefinite. Maybe we could also reconsider the whole health insurance thing too, since many people will be layed off. Perhaps Trump can think about having just one payer that could dictate cost of care and pharmaceuticals, rather than trying to wrangle all these C-suite executives and convince them to feign empathy.

    Edit: I should mention that I'm being sardonic here, but I do believe that long-term policy doors are absolutely opening due to the situation.

    9 votes
    1. post_below
      Link Parent
      I think this election cycle, followed by this crises, has definitely changed the conversation, so anything is possible. But meanwhile in the present, trillions are being funneled to the rich and...

      I think this election cycle, followed by this crises, has definitely changed the conversation, so anything is possible.

      But meanwhile in the present, trillions are being funneled to the rich and their influence on government is no weaker than before.

      We're still a long way from sanity.

      4 votes
    2. acdw
      Link Parent
      I really hope so, but I'm not holding my breath either. If it does happen, though, I'll take the W.

      I do believe that long-term policy doors are absolutely opening due to the situation.

      I really hope so, but I'm not holding my breath either. If it does happen, though, I'll take the W.

      2 votes
  2. [2]
    SantalBlush
    Link
    Placing cash in the hands of Americans is a good start. If they want to mitigate the damage from this, they'll keep a UBI going for as long as it takes (longer would be nice) to incentivize people...

    Placing cash in the hands of Americans is a good start. If they want to mitigate the damage from this, they'll keep a UBI going for as long as it takes (longer would be nice) to incentivize people to stay home and cover their basic needs. I wonder if a good long-term plan would be something like:

    -After this initial quarantine period, encourage low risk individuals to return to work.
    -Press businesses to implement social distancing protocols in the workplace until further notice.
    -Expand Social Security to cover the high risk population. Not just the elderly, but people with other comorbidities. Encourage them to remain isolated while business operations begin returning to normal. Implement delivery services to these households.
    -Ramp up testing.
    -Continue to advise against large gatherings.

    The fundamental problem here is that the worldwide unemployment rate has shot up overnight, and fiscal maneuvering will only do so much. Until people get back to work, liquidity will continue to dry up. The bug is already everywhere, and there seems to be (from what I've read) a substantial lag between infection and showing symptoms, so we won't see peak infection rates for a while in spite of being locked down. Many people don't show any symptoms at all, and if the low risk population can return to work they will have an opportunity to get ahead with wages + UBI while assuaging the downturn. Just my thoughts.

    7 votes
    1. acdw
      Link Parent
      Yeah, I don't think anybody knows what's going on/what they're doing/what they should do. At our library, they've closed to the public, but we're still all here, even though the governor outlawed...

      Yeah, I don't think anybody knows what's going on/what they're doing/what they should do. At our library, they've closed to the public, but we're still all here, even though the governor outlawed (is that even Constitutional?) gatherings of 10+ people. So I don't know. No one seems to know.

      3 votes
  3. [3]
    drannex
    Link
    We are seeing massive ideological changes right before our eyes. This is... interesting.

    We are seeing massive ideological changes right before our eyes. This is... interesting.

    7 votes
    1. [2]
      krg
      Link Parent
      And, most likely, very temporary.

      And, most likely, very temporary.

      6 votes
      1. drannex
        Link Parent
        Once you get the ball rolling, it's easier to keep it going than that initial start or the ending of. Imagine trying to convince the public to cancel all of social security. Once you open...

        Once you get the ball rolling, it's easier to keep it going than that initial start or the ending of.

        Imagine trying to convince the public to cancel all of social security. Once you open Pandora's box, it's a bit hard to close.

        7 votes
  4. [8]
    acdw
    Link
    Looks like this proposal is gaining some real steam.... will it happen? I don't know. I don't trust anything anymore.

    Looks like this proposal is gaining some real steam.... will it happen? I don't know. I don't trust anything anymore.

    4 votes
    1. [7]
      Diet_Coke
      Link Parent
      I'm just waiting to see how they fuck it up and only benefit the rich, personally.

      I'm just waiting to see how they fuck it up and only benefit the rich, personally.

      7 votes
      1. [5]
        Loire
        Link Parent
        I imagine Trump understands just how bad this 1-2 punch is for his re-election hopes. He's probably hoping he can buy the election at this point.

        I imagine Trump understands just how bad this 1-2 punch is for his re-election hopes. He's probably hoping he can buy the election at this point.

        3 votes
        1. [4]
          The_Fad
          Link Parent
          It seems unlikely to me that after 3.5 years anyone is still "on the fence" about whether they'll vote again for Trump. I see no reason this, as opposed to any of the rest of his mountain of...

          It seems unlikely to me that after 3.5 years anyone is still "on the fence" about whether they'll vote again for Trump. I see no reason this, as opposed to any of the rest of his mountain of errors, would be the one that suddenly convinces people he'd be a bad choice. Plus his approval numbers haven't been affected by any of this in a significant way.

          6 votes
          1. [3]
            JackA
            Link Parent
            I think you'd be surprised by the amount of voters who vote purely based on "is my life going good right now" despite whatever party they mostly align to between elections. America is only now in...

            I think you'd be surprised by the amount of voters who vote purely based on "is my life going good right now" despite whatever party they mostly align to between elections.

            America is only now in the past few days starting to experience much extensive quarantining, we'll have to watch those approval numbers over the next couple weeks as the economic ramifications of all these measures take hold.

            7 votes
            1. [2]
              The_Fad
              Link Parent
              I see your point. Still, I'm not holding my breath.

              I see your point. Still, I'm not holding my breath.

              4 votes
              1. Parliament
                Link Parent
                It won't sway everyone, not even close, but a bad economy in an election year on its own is often enough to win. I can only imagine what a botched pandemic response leading to a million deaths and...

                It won't sway everyone, not even close, but a bad economy in an election year on its own is often enough to win. I can only imagine what a botched pandemic response leading to a million deaths and a historic economic depression would do in an election year. Personally, I'm more concerned that a) Republicans have successfully suppressed voters to such an extent Democrats can never make a comeback without an extremely convincing win, or b) some internal force (Trump) or external force (Russia) will do something to undermine the result.

                5 votes
      2. acdw
        Link Parent
        Oh, you can take that to the bank. Maybe it'll be multiplied by "job creation ability," or something -- and since the rich can create SO MANY more jobs, they'll get more.

        Oh, you can take that to the bank. Maybe it'll be multiplied by "job creation ability," or something -- and since the rich can create SO MANY more jobs, they'll get more.

        1 vote
  5. [2]
    Deimos
    Link
    Some more related discussion in this thread: https://tild.es/mtl

    Some more related discussion in this thread: https://tild.es/mtl

    4 votes
    1. acdw
      Link Parent
      Thanks! I was torn b/w commenting there and starting my own topic.

      Thanks! I was torn b/w commenting there and starting my own topic.

      3 votes
  6. [4]
    babypuncher
    (edited )
    Link
    I'm not sure how a check from the federal government is going to make it so I can go out to restaurants or movie theaters again. You know, the industries that are going to go bankrupt overnight...

    I'm not sure how a check from the federal government is going to make it so I can go out to restaurants or movie theaters again. You know, the industries that are going to go bankrupt overnight because of this.

    3 votes
    1. [2]
      Diet_Coke
      Link Parent
      If you work at one of those places, it might be enough to almost make ends meet when rent and utilities are due, maybe even feed yourself.

      If you work at one of those places, it might be enough to almost make ends meet when rent and utilities are due, maybe even feed yourself.

      8 votes
      1. babypuncher
        Link Parent
        This is true. My problem is that we should be sending this money to the people who actually need it. My income isn't going anywhere during all this, so sending me $1,000 "to help the economy" is...

        This is true. My problem is that we should be sending this money to the people who actually need it. My income isn't going anywhere during all this, so sending me $1,000 "to help the economy" is pointless since I can't go spend it on the luxury things that normally drive the economy.

        1 vote
    2. acdw
      Link Parent
      This is very true -- and I know I'd spend that 1K directly to pay down debt, not to create value in the economy.

      This is very true -- and I know I'd spend that 1K directly to pay down debt, not to create value in the economy.

      5 votes