4 ms·

The coronavirus is outlasting the stimulus

vmchale 6y ago
> Republican leadership has said it doesn’t plan to continue passing stopgap measures to replenish immediate aid. Instead, it wants the next bill to be more focused on ... reopening America. So contingent on something completely impossible and foolhardy, all to appease the ego of the worst man in the country?
- root_axis 6y ago
  IMO, Trump is a horrifyingly terrible president but the desire to open things up again is a serious concern for a lot of people who are out of work and have bills piling up, it isn't just a Trump thing. What are they supposed to do? If you have a mortgage and are out of work the stimulus checks are next to worthless (in the sense that they just delay the inevitable by a couple weeks). There is a point of desperation where the risk of getting sick feels much more remote than the feeling of the walls closing in financially.
  - 010101010101 6y ago
    The idea that simply opening things back up means economic activity returns to normal is, in my opinion, ridiculous. People are going to continue to stay at home. People are going to continue to get sick. Acting like there's an off-switch for this that magically sets us back to a time where we're BaU that we can flip solves nothing - without actual policy makers making new policy, those people most affected will continue to be impacted in a huge way, but political leadership has no interest, especially in the White House. We're on a long, trying road, and the poor leadership is the _main_ reason.
    - icedchai 6y ago
      I think this is going to go on for years, with short periods of stops and starts. There is no other alternative once the curve has been flattened, without a vaccine, or at least an antiviral you can get at your pharmacy. Normality will not return for a very, very long time. It would be sobering for our leaders to admit this is a possible outcome.
    - defnotashton2 6y ago
      This, I think the gov should allow some businesses to attempt to operate but sad truth is a lot of people won't return to public spaces initially especially when we are still peeking cases. I'm not going to pay to go to a movie theater or gym for a while.. I really don't want to fly, can you imagine traveling to another country and getting stranded or having to be sick and having to navigate the local medical system. - I think these things are going to have long lasting effects. Furthermore it's going to be a seasonal thing with ebs and flows forever. Which means that no matter what it's hard to solve.
    - root_axis 6y ago
      > Acting like there's an off-switch for this that magically sets us back to a time where we're BaU that we can flip solves nothings This is kind of a strawman argument though. I say "kind of" because yeah, there are some crazies out there saying that the virus is a plot by the government to crash the economy or some other insanity about 5g and bill gates mind-control vaccines, however, this isn't what most leaders are saying, not even Trump. > without actual policy makers making new policy Right... "a bill focused on reopening America" is literally "policy makers making new policy". Whether or not those policies will effectively address the issues at hand is another question entirely, but I don't think there is anything unreasonable about ostensibly looking towards policies that could start opening some things up. > We're on a long, trying road, and the poor leadership is the _main_ reason. I'm in total agreement with you here and I think things are only going to get worse once the elections are over and Trump doesn't feel any more re-election pressure (yes, I'm assuming he'll win), but that's a separate issue from the stated goal of trying to get people working again.
      - dariusj18 6y ago
        I'm not sure what incentives congress has for passing policies for the executive to follow, when the executive has shown it has no problem ignoring the law and using funding passed in alternative ways.
        root_axis 6y ago
        I agree, but bucking up against an uncooperative executive is preferable to doing nothing and blaming it on the executive, that just plays right into their narrative.
buboard 6y ago
.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  Now imagine if they aren't so utterly incompetent as it may appear (well apart from the top guy, he is truly hopeless through and through). What kind of discussions/meetings/decisions could be happening behind the closed doors? Interesting mind exercise, although we won't know the truth. It seems to me a lot of folks are rather looking for a way to milk the system and the common population at any cost, anytime. Fuck tomorrow. Fuck our kids and their future. I sure hope my perception isn't correct.
newhotelowner 6y ago
The whole thing is fucked up. I have to bring back every single employee to convert my PPP loan to grant and also, use it within 8 weeks. None of them want to come back, and if they don't come back they will be out of a job and they won't get unemployment. But the business is dead. So as soon as 8 weeks are up, I will have to layoff again. Only 4 out of 10 employees that I laid off received unemployment. 3 were denied. 3 didn't qualify. They shouldn't have given an additional $600 to unemployed people. They should have given $1200 per month for 2-3 months to everyone. That way everyone who is employed is happy, and everyone is who is out of a job can survive. Anyone who wants to quit their job and stay home should have an option. I am not going to bring back 2 of my employees who are above 50. I don't want them to risk their life for my business.
- xtiansimon 6y ago
  > "I have to bring back every single employee to convert my PPP loan to grant and also, use it within 8 weeks. None of them want to come back [...] But the business is dead." There's no business, which means employees are paid to do nothing. And in return, business owners get up to 25% of the grant for approved expenses. That's the deal, and it's not a bad one. I keep hearing phrase 'come back' in this context from business owners, and it confuses me. No one has to physically return to the workplace to be paid from this grant money. Now, I have heard the stories about employees who 'receive more money on unemployment' than when they were working, because of the additional $600/week Cares Act benefit. With the PPP employees are paid the average of their weekly pay (PPP stipulation), or more. These individuals may certainly not wish to 'come back'. There is also the potential awkward situation for the employer, where they have a reduced staff expected to perform some job each day. The PPP requires you to return to 2019 levels of full-time employment. Now, you re-hire furloughed employees, but they have no job to perform (because they can't do it from home or something else). How is that fair? I get it. There are some difficult issues here, but saying simply that employees are just not wanting to come back is confusing the issues.
taylodl 6y ago
The coronavirus is outlasting our willingness to deal with it. It's not going away - though it would be wonderful if it did. There are things we can do to slow the spread of the virus even as we slowly open things back up but there are a contingent of people absolutely refusing to wear face masks and when asked to by the establishment they're visiting they've shot and killed the agent asking. It doesn't help that our leaders aren't setting a good example for others to follow. There are reasons the United States has endured 1/3 of the worldwide coronavirus deaths while only having 1/20 of the worldwide population. Is our national attention span really that short?

> Republican leadership has said it doesn’t plan to continue passing stopgap measures to replenish immediate aid. Instead, it wants the next bill to be more focused on ... reopening America. So contingent on something completely impossible and foolhardy, all to appease the ego of the worst man in the country?

root_axis 6y ago
IMO, Trump is a horrifyingly terrible president but the desire to open things up again is a serious concern for a lot of people who are out of work and have bills piling up, it isn't just a Trump thing. What are they supposed to do? If you have a mortgage and are out of work the stimulus checks are next to worthless (in the sense that they just delay the inevitable by a couple weeks). There is a point of desperation where the risk of getting sick feels much more remote than the feeling of the walls closing in financially.
- 010101010101 6y ago
  The idea that simply opening things back up means economic activity returns to normal is, in my opinion, ridiculous. People are going to continue to stay at home. People are going to continue to get sick. Acting like there's an off-switch for this that magically sets us back to a time where we're BaU that we can flip solves nothing - without actual policy makers making new policy, those people most affected will continue to be impacted in a huge way, but political leadership has no interest, especially in the White House. We're on a long, trying road, and the poor leadership is the _main_ reason.
  - icedchai 6y ago
    I think this is going to go on for years, with short periods of stops and starts. There is no other alternative once the curve has been flattened, without a vaccine, or at least an antiviral you can get at your pharmacy. Normality will not return for a very, very long time. It would be sobering for our leaders to admit this is a possible outcome.
  - defnotashton2 6y ago
    This, I think the gov should allow some businesses to attempt to operate but sad truth is a lot of people won't return to public spaces initially especially when we are still peeking cases. I'm not going to pay to go to a movie theater or gym for a while.. I really don't want to fly, can you imagine traveling to another country and getting stranded or having to be sick and having to navigate the local medical system. - I think these things are going to have long lasting effects. Furthermore it's going to be a seasonal thing with ebs and flows forever. Which means that no matter what it's hard to solve.
  - root_axis 6y ago
    > Acting like there's an off-switch for this that magically sets us back to a time where we're BaU that we can flip solves nothings This is kind of a strawman argument though. I say "kind of" because yeah, there are some crazies out there saying that the virus is a plot by the government to crash the economy or some other insanity about 5g and bill gates mind-control vaccines, however, this isn't what most leaders are saying, not even Trump. > without actual policy makers making new policy Right... "a bill focused on reopening America" is literally "policy makers making new policy". Whether or not those policies will effectively address the issues at hand is another question entirely, but I don't think there is anything unreasonable about ostensibly looking towards policies that could start opening some things up. > We're on a long, trying road, and the poor leadership is the _main_ reason. I'm in total agreement with you here and I think things are only going to get worse once the elections are over and Trump doesn't feel any more re-election pressure (yes, I'm assuming he'll win), but that's a separate issue from the stated goal of trying to get people working again.
    - dariusj18 6y ago
      I'm not sure what incentives congress has for passing policies for the executive to follow, when the executive has shown it has no problem ignoring the law and using funding passed in alternative ways.
      - root_axis 6y ago
        I agree, but bucking up against an uncooperative executive is preferable to doing nothing and blaming it on the executive, that just plays right into their narrative.

buboard 6y ago

saiya-jin 6y ago
Now imagine if they aren't so utterly incompetent as it may appear (well apart from the top guy, he is truly hopeless through and through). What kind of discussions/meetings/decisions could be happening behind the closed doors? Interesting mind exercise, although we won't know the truth. It seems to me a lot of folks are rather looking for a way to milk the system and the common population at any cost, anytime. Fuck tomorrow. Fuck our kids and their future. I sure hope my perception isn't correct.

newhotelowner 6y ago

The whole thing is fucked up. I have to bring back every single employee to convert my PPP loan to grant and also, use it within 8 weeks. None of them want to come back, and if they don't come back they will be out of a job and they won't get unemployment. But the business is dead. So as soon as 8 weeks are up, I will have to layoff again. Only 4 out of 10 employees that I laid off received unemployment. 3 were denied. 3 didn't qualify. They shouldn't have given an additional $600 to unemployed people. They should have given $1200 per month for 2-3 months to everyone. That way everyone who is employed is happy, and everyone is who is out of a job can survive. Anyone who wants to quit their job and stay home should have an option. I am not going to bring back 2 of my employees who are above 50. I don't want them to risk their life for my business.

xtiansimon 6y ago
> "I have to bring back every single employee to convert my PPP loan to grant and also, use it within 8 weeks. None of them want to come back [...] But the business is dead." There's no business, which means employees are paid to do nothing. And in return, business owners get up to 25% of the grant for approved expenses. That's the deal, and it's not a bad one. I keep hearing phrase 'come back' in this context from business owners, and it confuses me. No one has to physically return to the workplace to be paid from this grant money. Now, I have heard the stories about employees who 'receive more money on unemployment' than when they were working, because of the additional $600/week Cares Act benefit. With the PPP employees are paid the average of their weekly pay (PPP stipulation), or more. These individuals may certainly not wish to 'come back'. There is also the potential awkward situation for the employer, where they have a reduced staff expected to perform some job each day. The PPP requires you to return to 2019 levels of full-time employment. Now, you re-hire furloughed employees, but they have no job to perform (because they can't do it from home or something else). How is that fair? I get it. There are some difficult issues here, but saying simply that employees are just not wanting to come back is confusing the issues.

taylodl 6y ago

The coronavirus is outlasting our willingness to deal with it. It's not going away - though it would be wonderful if it did. There are things we can do to slow the spread of the virus even as we slowly open things back up but there are a contingent of people absolutely refusing to wear face masks and when asked to by the establishment they're visiting they've shot and killed the agent asking. It doesn't help that our leaders aren't setting a good example for others to follow. There are reasons the United States has endured 1/3 of the worldwide coronavirus deaths while only having 1/20 of the worldwide population. Is our national attention span really that short?