This is the most idiotic thing I’ve ever heard. If the gov. just keeps printing money and less people are working, more dollars will be competing for less goods & services. Too bad you can’t eat money or else this solution might actually work.
-
-
There's farmers literally plowing under whole fields of crops right now and the price of oil is now negative fifteen dollars a barrel but go off about that looming explosion in prices
3 replies 5 retweets 47 likes -
Oil producers are shutting off their wells and smaller companies will start going out of business. Once demand comes back there may not be the supply to fill it. And you’re helping me with my argument saying people need to be working for an economy to work.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Wow, almost like this is a problem you could solve by printing money to pay those producers to stay solvent (Same shit as ever, this is why people were outraged at FDR "paying farmers to plow their crop under")
2 replies 2 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DemocratsCongr2 and
We have two obvious problems 1) You can't go outside and keep working like normal without getting sick 2) People, at all levels of the economy, need to keep getting *paid* like normal or the system will break down and not be there after the plague is over
2 replies 3 retweets 30 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DemocratsCongr2 and
One side is saying you can short circuit this apparent dilemma by "paying people to do nothing", keep as much of the system going as possible *except* for the part where people actually do the jobs that get them exposed to the virus
1 reply 2 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DemocratsCongr2 and
Other people are so horrified by this solution that they'd prefer to just pretend problem 1) doesn't exist at all The only way to keep the farmers farming and so forth is to actually still have the restaurants open like normal, everyone getting infected, and bodies piling up
1 reply 2 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DemocratsCongr2 and
We'll see which one ends up working out, although I suspect once the second wave of deaths hits full swing you'll find persuading people to still go eat at those restaurants is harder than you expected
1 reply 2 retweets 28 likes -
I agree that it’s a complicated issue with no easy/clear answer, especially in the long term. But destroying the lives of 10s of millions of people is a tough sell. Especially when the ones making those decisions have their jobs well secured.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DemocratsCongr2 @arthur_affect and
Printing money doesn’t provide things we need to live. By saying that we expect “essential” workers to work while everyone else can stay home and still get paid doesn’t sit right with me. Essential workers are risking their lives so everyone else can sit on their ass.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The essential workers do not in any sense benefit from opening everything back up, the less social distancing you have the more risk you pile on essential/frontline workers with every interaction
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @DemocratsCongr2 and
If you feel bad about it, pay the essential workers more I doubt doctors and nurses will find being able to go out to bars much of a solace while the virus is still raging, much less workers at supermarkets still making minimum wage
3 replies 7 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DemocratsCongr2 and
I think the assumption here that the essential workers are driven by spite, and will be happier if everyone else is forced to risk their lives by the same amount (even when that amount is much greater)
0 replies 1 retweet 6 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.