3 ms·

Do you think subsidizing the poor enough so our economy doesn't have to choose between immediately collapsing and killing the poor wouldn't save us an enormous

by hobs 6y ago

Do you think subsidizing the poor enough so our economy doesn't have to choose between immediately collapsing and killing the poor wouldn't save us an enormous set of costs?

bradstewart 6y ago
I absolutely think we should do that. The problem is it's extremely hard to quantify that cost/gain, while its extremely easy to quantity the cost/gain of low-interest loans. Not to say its impossible, or that we shouldn't try--we should. But when you have a bunch of senators arguing, it's easier to point to the easy numbers.
- dlp211 6y ago
  Why do we need to quantify it?
  - panzagl 6y ago
    Because we shouldn't spend tax money on solutions that show no gain or make things worse for the country as a whole.
    - pphysch 6y ago
      Last 75 years of foreign & drug wars: https://i.redd.it/b4rgt6ovw7k31.jpg https://i.redd.it/b4rgt6ovw7k31.jpg
    - quickthrowman 6y ago
      We spend tax money to make the nation worse all the time already, why does it matter now when it’s for helping out poor people?
- adamsea 6y ago
  Is it really that difficult to quantify or is it that the government doesnt want to do the work of quantifying it? I think you said it yourself with your comment about senators arguing. The root cause is an overall lack of political will, not any technical or logistical impediments in modelling impact.
  - thrill 6y ago
    It's less political will than not having simple competence in any arena other than the political that got them there. Throwing gobs at cash at a broken system is what keeps Congress employed. If we had an unemployment system that didn't try to use "one size fits all" numbers, required two minutes on your phone to get enrolled, and two minutes on the employers' part to verify your application, then we wouldn't have have need of a significant number of government employees, and Congress's role wouldn't exist to posture about caring, but instead to simply fund a functioning system simply needed cash.
    - adamsea 6y ago
      > It's less political will than not having simple competence in any arena other than the political that got them there. The U.S. Census, GAO, and various other bureaucratic organizations (USDR, EPA, etc), all seem to be quite competent when it comes to performing studies and gathering data. So is the IRS, Department of Defense, etc. Of course there are lots of problems, but the U.S. Federal Government has plenty of agencies able to competently perform some sort of study.
packetlost 6y ago
It probably would. But solving that problem is significantly harder than putting out loans to large companies that employ thousands of people. If the airline industry collapsed, many other things would've followed. Certain industries are absolutely essential infrastructure to the economy and cataclysmic events can have massive ripple effects.
- mitchdoogle 6y ago
  The loss of jobs and income is going to have cataclysmic cascading effects, worse than if a few large companies had gone under. It hasn't even started yet.
  - pphysch 6y ago
    Can you elaborate/link?
    - freehunter 6y ago
      What's there to link or elaborate? Look at the number of people applying for unemployment (I looked it up for you [1]). With a record number of people on unemployment and no real end in sight to the pandemic, something has to break. Basically, it doesn't matter how quickly we re-open if people don't have any money to spend, don't feel comfortable spending, and aren't leaving their homes. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate
- dfxm12 6y ago
  Whatever happened to doing worthwhile things because they're hard? Do you know how hard it is to have to quarantine yourself from your family because you've been deemed an essential worker, while getting seemingly nothing in return? Do you know how hard it is to live with the guilt of even possibly infecting others with COVID? Clearly, the current administration puts corporate profits over the lives of Americans. Clearly, the current administration is allergic to hard work. Hopefully, Americans can send the message in November that there's no room in our government for people like that.

by hobs 6y ago

Do you think subsidizing the poor enough so our economy doesn't have to choose between immediately collapsing and killing the poor wouldn't save us an enormous set of costs?

bradstewart 6y ago

I absolutely think we should do that. The problem is it's extremely hard to quantify that cost/gain, while its extremely easy to quantity the cost/gain of low-interest loans. Not to say its impossible, or that we shouldn't try--we should. But when you have a bunch of senators arguing, it's easier to point to the easy numbers.

dlp211 6y ago
Why do we need to quantify it?
- panzagl 6y ago
  Because we shouldn't spend tax money on solutions that show no gain or make things worse for the country as a whole.
  - pphysch 6y ago
    Last 75 years of foreign & drug wars: https://i.redd.it/b4rgt6ovw7k31.jpg https://i.redd.it/b4rgt6ovw7k31.jpg
  - quickthrowman 6y ago
    We spend tax money to make the nation worse all the time already, why does it matter now when it’s for helping out poor people?
adamsea 6y ago
Is it really that difficult to quantify or is it that the government doesnt want to do the work of quantifying it? I think you said it yourself with your comment about senators arguing. The root cause is an overall lack of political will, not any technical or logistical impediments in modelling impact.
- thrill 6y ago
  It's less political will than not having simple competence in any arena other than the political that got them there. Throwing gobs at cash at a broken system is what keeps Congress employed. If we had an unemployment system that didn't try to use "one size fits all" numbers, required two minutes on your phone to get enrolled, and two minutes on the employers' part to verify your application, then we wouldn't have have need of a significant number of government employees, and Congress's role wouldn't exist to posture about caring, but instead to simply fund a functioning system simply needed cash.
  - adamsea 6y ago
    > It's less political will than not having simple competence in any arena other than the political that got them there. The U.S. Census, GAO, and various other bureaucratic organizations (USDR, EPA, etc), all seem to be quite competent when it comes to performing studies and gathering data. So is the IRS, Department of Defense, etc. Of course there are lots of problems, but the U.S. Federal Government has plenty of agencies able to competently perform some sort of study.

packetlost 6y ago

It probably would. But solving that problem is significantly harder than putting out loans to large companies that employ thousands of people. If the airline industry collapsed, many other things would've followed. Certain industries are absolutely essential infrastructure to the economy and cataclysmic events can have massive ripple effects.

mitchdoogle 6y ago
The loss of jobs and income is going to have cataclysmic cascading effects, worse than if a few large companies had gone under. It hasn't even started yet.
- pphysch 6y ago
  Can you elaborate/link?
  - freehunter 6y ago
    What's there to link or elaborate? Look at the number of people applying for unemployment (I looked it up for you [1]). With a record number of people on unemployment and no real end in sight to the pandemic, something has to break. Basically, it doesn't matter how quickly we re-open if people don't have any money to spend, don't feel comfortable spending, and aren't leaving their homes. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate
dfxm12 6y ago
Whatever happened to doing worthwhile things because they're hard? Do you know how hard it is to have to quarantine yourself from your family because you've been deemed an essential worker, while getting seemingly nothing in return? Do you know how hard it is to live with the guilt of even possibly infecting others with COVID? Clearly, the current administration puts corporate profits over the lives of Americans. Clearly, the current administration is allergic to hard work. Hopefully, Americans can send the message in November that there's no room in our government for people like that.