4 ms·
What do you think motivates states to want stricter and longer lock-downs?
by mrow84 6y ago
What do you think motivates states to want stricter and longer lock-downs?
- kukx 6y agoI guess some vocal voters may actually prefer free money, than going to a tedious work and politicians pander to them.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ianleeclark 6y agoCrazy to think someone would prefer unemployment to being coughed on by a jet ski salesman while waiting tables at a cheesecake factory.
- kukx 6y agoI am not sure, if it is agreement or disagreement with my observation. And while I assume some people may genuinely be scared of the infection... It is hard not to notice that while the lockdown started the beaches were flooded with people. And I will not blame someone flipping burgers for preferring free money to their job. Having a low paid, boring job I would definitively prefer the free money and the free time. And I would probably even actively support the status quo. But it is nonetheless in the long term very harmful to the society and to the economic perspectives of normal people. The free money will be paid for in the years to come and it will be a long lasting burden. Maybe there will be some technological revolution, a great advancement in productivity that will help us mitigate this cost. But if not, the future looks painful.
- ianleeclark 6y ago> But it is nonetheless in the long term very harmful to the society and to the economic perspectives of normal people. Why is it harmful to the economic prospects of people? Our economy literally relies on consumption. High rates of consumption. > The free money will be paid for in the years to come and it will be a long lasting burden. First thing: I reject the notion of "free money." It is money that is borrowed by people at time of crisis. Government works for the people, in theory, so it is the people borrowing the money from their descendants in order to weather a storm today without having a complete collapse. Secondly literally everything in our economy runs on debt. The idea is you outgrow your debt. If you want to have the whole "abolishing capitalism" conversation, that's a big suggestion to say the least, but the two ideas you're suggesting are either criminal or history defining: 1.) Just let all the poors die 2.) We have nothing to lose but our chains > But if not, the future looks painful. Were a sovereign nation we can literally just write it off.
- kukx 6y agoWell exactly, it is a borrowed money and everyone will have to pay it back in some way, for example through taxation or more likely via inflation (things will get more expensive, so people will be able to afford less). The weakest, poorest will experience the problem the most, but it will affect everyone. As I mentioned, maybe there will be some great advancement in productivity and it will not be as severe. But it is a gamble and not a wise strategy for the nation. The debt can be written off. But it will have consequences. It means no more living on debt, because no lender will be willing to lend anymore. It will be very bad for the economy, at least in the short term (who knows how many years). However, it may lead to a more sound economy in the long term, assuming the capitalism survives.
- Nasrudith 6y agoWanting the damn virus to die out and accepting that getting it spreading again will cause a longer pandemic. They expect patience to be rewarded by it staying gone like countries who did it right and are opening up borders selectively.