4 ms·
While you're being downvoted, I agree with you. The artificially low interest rates are a huge burden to society, so while I'm optimistic about the vaccine, I b
by xiphias2 6y ago
While you're being downvoted, I agree with you. The artificially low interest rates are a huge burden to society, so while I'm optimistic about the vaccine, I believe that getting back to a society based on savings instead of debt will be extremely painful.
- suprfnk 6y agoI'd happily trade wealth for being able to meet friends and family freely again.
- CrazyPyroLinux 6y agoThis is a false dichotomy that you shouldn't be forced to choose.
- jojo2333 6y agoI've been enjoying both.
- tgarv 6y agoWow, how are you pulling that off (the freely seeing friends and family part)?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- xiphias2 6y agoI'm talking about the next 10 years, people are so focused on 2020 that they don't see the big picture, that the economy is getting worse every year, and it effects everybody, even people who have wealth...we're all connected.
- cm2187 6y agoAnd even on the healthcare side, we will have to deal with the consequences of the lockdown. Massive backlog in hospitals, cancer screening and vaccination campaigns not happening, obesity up, psychological consequences, and also the knockdown effect of disruptions and economic crisis on treatment and vaccination campaigns in developing countries.
- maxerickson 6y agoThe consequences of the pandemic. The government orders have been a small piece of it.
- ls612 6y agoThe government orders are a huge part of it! Case in point, look at the employment numbers and other economic indicators from early April vs today. It was so, so much worse in April, yet the pandemic is mostly the same. But today we don’t have nearly as strict lockdowns.
- bildung 6y agoThese are only results of the US-specific lack of welfare protection mechanisms, not a lockdown per se - especially unememployment and to a lesser degree also the negative growth are significantly less accentuated in the other OECD countries.
- maxerickson 6y agoThe high unemployment was because of how the US structured the spring legislative response. Businesses were ordered to close, and that made employees eligible to collect unemployment insurance. A federal program paid those unemployed people $2400 a month (in addition to their unemployment insurance). The US poverty rate went down during the period. So it wasn't a lack of welfare protection, it was just a (likely bad) implementation choice, paying individuals instead of paying businesses to keep them on payroll. The lack of response since that expired in July fits your description though.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]