I just stream popular shows from totally legal websites.

May Day 2020 :point:

U.S. SARS-2 (Covid-19) casualities aka "tRump Pandemic-Depression" update:

U.S.Capitol physician reports to Senate leadership that there are not enough tests currently available to test all ONE HUNDRED senators for Covid-19 infections. :yikes:

• as of April 30, about 6.2 million tests given, or ONLY c1.89% of the total U.S. population (+328 millon men, women & children)

• over 1,100,000 confirmed cases

• over 65,000 dead :death:

• currently averaging over 30,000 new confirmed cases/day

• currently averaging 2,000 deaths/day :death:

• over 30,000,000 unemployed (since mid-March - 6 weeks!)

• 1Q GDP = -4.8%; 2Q GDP contraction projected to be much more severe

:mask:

currently averaging over 30,000 new confirmed cases/day — 180 Proof

Jfc.

On the positive side, in Georgia you can now get a haircut and spread a potentially lethal disease to your neighbor at the same time. Pandemic multi-tasking the American way.

:up: :fear:

On the positive side. The depression in the US might be less severe than in other countries because you'll have herd immunity sooner and can ease lock down earlier.

To be honest, I'm starting to worry about the deaths resulting from reduced wealth in the long run. Lower income, joblessness, stress, less money for welfare programs in the long run may all contribute to deaths for years to come. In that sense the current answer to covid-19 needs to be carefully weighed against those effects that cause future deaths.

Edit: I don't have the sense anyone is doing that yet. The Netherlands just announced borrowing 93 billion extra. That's about 25% of existing debt and about 3 times as much as we borrowed extra in 2008. What does that mean for society as a whole in the long run?

Daily reminder that any long-term financial effects of COVID will be entirely man-made and preventable, largely because of one of the largest upwards transfers of wealth ever.


*

*Figures do not include asset seizures due to foreclosures.

Since when?

As in, when was the last upward transfer of public wealth on a scale like this?

I'm missing a time scale for that 6 trillion so it's difficult to understand the perspective.

Ah. I think it includes all the stimulus packages (all 3.5 of them) passed and in the works so far:

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/coronavirus-relief-white-house-adviser-larry-kudlow-projects-aid-package-to-reach-roughly-6-trillion/

EDIT: Some additional analysis of some of the provisions in the cumulative bills:

• An additional $4 trillion from the Federal Reserve in lending power to be lent to big corporations and banks.
  
• Authorization to bail out money market funds, multi-trillion dollar unregulated bank-like deposits for the superrich.
  
• Authorization for the the government through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to guarantee trillions of dollars of risky bank debt.

...

"The reality is that neither our government nor our banks have the operational competence to write and direct checks quickly enough to avoid distress. ... The cash freeze to small business is already causing a crisis. FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra made these points on Tucker Carlson last night. First, he noted, small business loan sharks are “crippling cash-strapped companies” with onerous contracts. Second, powerful corporations are using their position to cut off small businesses from supply chains. And third, corporate raiders are planning to buy up these businesses cheap. “Corporate raiders and PE firms are already sharpening their knives,” said one Goldman Sachs associate".

https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/stop-the-6-trillion-coronavirus-corporate

I'm not President Trump's biggest fan, but credit where credit is due, he's the only world leader standing up to the CCP (other than the Australians) .

Not his biggest fan but still a fan? And credit where credit is due, but Hitler was nice to dogs.

I think you're a bit unbalanced mate. Comparing Trump to Hitler is a thing some lefty brainwashed school kid would do...grow up.

I didn't compare Trump to Hitler. I used your reasoning in a more extreme scenario illustrating it results in ridiculous conclusions. It's a form of a reductio as absurdum.

Also, I'm not your mate, buddy.

I'm not your buddy, mate.

In the UK working class people call everyone mate, even if they think they're dicks.

the correct reply was: "I'm not your buddy, friend". Know your classics!

To be honest, I am starting to worry about the deaths resulting from reduced wealth in the long run. Lower income, joblessness, stress, less money for welfare programs in the long run may all contribute to deaths for years to come. In that sense the current answer to covid-19 needs to be carefully weighed against those effects that cause future deaths. — Benkei

That would be comparing efforts to save COVID 19 patients to the efforts that are going to be needed to heal the damage to our society long after a Vaccine and treatment are common place.

edit: I don't have the sense anyone is doing that yet. The Netherlands just announced borrowing 93 billion extra. That's about 25% of existing debt and about 3 times as much as we borrowed extra in 2008. What does that mean for society as a whole in the long run? — Benkei

Every small business has been doing that since the shut down. What it means in the financial forecast is that the money borrowed is paid back down stream. Our kids and grandkids are going to be paying it.
The damages to any society that are emotion based are much harder to heal from than any problem money can solve.

That would be comparing efforts to save COVID 19 patients to the efforts that are going to be needed to heal the damage to our society long after a Vaccine and treatment are common place. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

I am very specifically talking about deaths though. I'm not sure what damage you're talking about.

What it means in the financial forecast is that the money borrowed is paid back down stream. Our kids and grandkids are going to be paying it.
The damages to any society that are emotion based are much harder to heal from than any problem money can solve. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Of course, there is the option of a) inflation, b) default.

How about a debt jubilee?

Or is it going to be again a bailout of the extremely rich and with more people falling to the "barely surviving" category?

From @Frank Apisa, sorting out the thing merge does.

Yesterday, our governor signed an EO opening our parks and golf courses here in New Jersey. The day before, he had a meeting with Trump…and came out of the meeting saying good things about him. (I think Gov. Murphy had a sardonic smile on his face while making the comments, but that may just be me.)

Keep in mind that Trump does most of his summer golfing right here in New Jersey at the golf course he owns just a long drive and a three wood away from where I live. I am sure Trump is VERY happy that golf courses are now open in New Jersey.

The philosophy part of this issue involves the question: Does it make sense to butter-up (or ass-kiss) a guy like Trump in order to get a bit more consideration and flex for our state?

Ass-kissing, has always seemed to me to be rather questionable ethical conduct, but with the current situation, I seem to be back tracking on that.

My current rationalization goes: A kiss is just a little thing…and the ass being kissed is enormous.

Two questions arise: One…am I compromising my own ethics by taking that attitude?...

…and…Is ass-kissing on the part of our governor under these circumstances reasonably ethical? — Frank Apisa

How about a debt jubilee?

That would be my choice. Why should all nations suffer in debt together, just let each other off the hook.

It will also evaporate most pensions so you need to think of something there.

If all the countries stand in line with their debt written down and all agree to cross off an agreed number of noughts, what's so wrong with that. It's not as though we're going to start doing it all the time?

It will also evaporate most pensions so you need to think of something there. — Benkei

Benkei...you really care for rich people? Besides, the system is fractional reserve banking. It's not like it's just your savings that the bank lends forward.

Simply have the debt jubilee with a default on the debt. Or make it a one off wealth tax: Below 100 000$ you get one to the dollar, below 1 000 000$ you get 0,90c to the dollar and over million you get 0,5c to the dollar. How many people have for example US Treasuries to the tune of over 1 million USD?

Or do it like the Germans. They had their "debt jubilee" after WW2 with their 1948 with their currency reform when they replaced the Reichsmark with the Deutsche Mark. I think you remember how good and stable the DM was, which made the backbone of the Euro (or so we thought). 90% of German government and private debt was wiped out! And then they had the "Economic Miracle" afterwards in West Germany. So yes, debt jubilees do work! Just ask yourself, Benkei, are you on the side of the bankers or of the people?

How Ludwig Erhard did it:

The old Reichsmark and Rentenmark were exchanged for the new currency at a rate of DM 1 = RM 1 for the essential currency such as wages, payment of rents etc., and DM 1 = RM 10 for the remainder in private non-bank credit balances, with half frozen. Large amounts were exchanged for RM 10 to 65 Pfennig. In addition, each person received a per capita allowance of DM 60 in two parts, the first being DM 40 and the second DM 20,

This man shows the way:


Let's have those midget banks in Wall Street with little or no assets. After all, once the US would do a similar default like Germany in 1948, all those banksters would still come to lend it. Who else would they lend to? And who would argue with the US? Would China want to start a war with the US? Nope, US still has a good nuclear deterrence and the largest armed forces anywhere.

(I've tried to look for a clear explanatory lecture, seminar or article about the issue, but usually it's just a promo on helping the Third World or something. If anyone finds a clear and in-depth article etc. about the issue, I would be interested.)

I'm not saying not to do it. I'm saying you need to solve this problem. Large PSAs and banks are large holders of government bonds that they hold on behalf of pensions for everybody. Especially low paying jobs that don't naturally manage to save money will be hit hardest if their pensions are wiped out. So what's your solution to this?

There's one pretty obvious but let's see if there are more roads to Rome for this problem.

That's quite a reefer he's smoking.

I can't pretend to know about finance, I don't. But it seems to me that you can bend the rules provided everyone agrees to it. Getting everyone, whoever that is, to agree might not be possible, but there might be a role for the IMF.