3 ms·
I'll ignore the suggested ad hominem (which was pretty off the mark.) 1. You've got it flipped. I'm totally for everyone slowing down, some more than others, i
by lmeyerov 7y ago
I'll ignore the suggested ad hominem (which was pretty off the mark.)
1. You've got it flipped. I'm totally for everyone slowing down, some more than others, in exchange for saving lives. Most of the jobs going away will be back soon after - people will eat out again etc - so that is not much in the longview compared to family members needlessly dying. There are fragile companies going bust -- for example, in the bay area, restaurants need to perform well to survive, so this accelerated the death of a few already. For most small businesses, a slow downs for a few weeks isn't that bad or uncoverable by emergency loans... unless you were already doomed. There'll be all sorts of other effects, like many VC-fueled co's not being able to use the sales/marketing $ injection to artificially increase q2 growth as much, but no tears here.
2. Fed gov can & should be doing more than giving money to oil companies to temper indiv + SMB effects of the freeze. The continued shitty federal gov response here has meant random rushed local county decisions. In contrast, other nations have mandated things like rent pauses as part of their enforcement. I've worked where a lot of business is effectively barter - there's surprising slack in the US business world with landlords and other obligations in practice. That's not guaranteed, and megacorps, banks, and some individuals (I'm guessing like those on this thread advocating breaking the community isolation) can be inhumane, so important for strong govs to address. Not too late, and you'd be surprised.