idea seems to be to freeze existing contracts in time and keep payments flowing to avert a consumer debt crisis kicking off a broader financial crisis
-
Show this thread
-
also for small businesses which seems likely to mostly help restaurants I think
1 reply 0 retweets 22 likesShow this thread -
(I am not a macroeconomist and you should read my analysis in that light)
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
This seems likely to prevent a lot of the risks I've been worried about for this economic crisis. So, what are the potential risks it introduces?
3 replies 0 retweets 20 likesShow this thread -
Seems like a major one is inflation (mostly this would be bad for creditors with existing nominally-denominated debts, which . . . probably fine), although this seems a lesser evil than the alternative deflation
6 replies 0 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
Second one is more serious How long does this support--this enormous Intervention--last? How does it get rolled back? At all, and also in such a way that it doesn't provoke a new crisis? I am extremely uneasy about this component.

9 replies 1 retweet 46 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @PereGrimmer
Yeah fraud is gonna be through the roof possibly
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
I agree. Trying to insert the federal government as an intermediary in essentially every fixed payment contract with almost zero notice is absurd.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.