5 ms·

The issue is that the US government has refused to help people during a time when they should absolutely not be forced to work face to face jobs to pay the bill

The issue is that the US government has refused to help people during a time when they should absolutely not be forced to work face to face jobs to pay the bills. Instead Republicans have held aid hostage in exchange for legislation allowing businesses to force employees to work in unsafe environments with no recourse[1]. Even so far as a measure that would allow the US attorney general to penalized employees up to $50k for having the audacity to sue businesses for creating unsafe environments.[2] 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/15/disturbing-values-driving-gops-handling-covid-relief/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/15/disturbin... 2. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/12/covid-liability-shield-lawsuits-legislation https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/12/covid-liability-shield-la...

treeman79 6y ago
Load of crap. Republicans were willing to negotiate on a smaller package. It was held up by the speaker because it made Trump look bad.
- HenryKissinger 6y ago
  Republicans refused to remove a liability shield for companies from the bill. That's a good reason to refuse to pass the bill.
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    Is it? Why is that so important that it's worth not aiding millions of people who are dropping into poverty?
    - uoaei 6y ago
      I can't tell if this is a question posed in earnest, because I wouldn't expect a reaction like that to "corporations are designing and feeding Congress a liability shield so that they don't have to spend money protecting their workers." The "aid" is a red herring if you are setting up those same people for dangerous situations with zero accountability from the people who are forcing them to put themselves in hazard's way. It is myopic to think that a smaller stimulus bill (that would barely cover 1 month's expenses for the average American -- recall that it's been 8 months since the first stimulus) would be proposed for anything except to stave off the fervor of mass civil unrest for a short while longer.
      - Domenic_S 6y ago
        The standard is OSHA writing rules that govern workplace safety. What we have now is a bunch of soft "when feasible" and "if possible" recommendations and no rules save for what each state/county give on their own, which are usually also pretty squishy. Absent a written standard from the government body in charge of these things, it's a free-for-all of liability. So I open my restaurant following local standards and a customer gets COVID and sues me because I used disinfectant X when I should have used Y, or the staff was wearing mask A instead of mask B, or whatever. I don't think its unreasonable whatsoever to - again, absent the proper rules - ask for protection in this case. Folks like to characterize this as "protecting big corporations" but if you read the proposal it protects school, universities, hospitals, and so forth as well.
    - aaron-santos 6y ago
      It shifts the risk from business to employees without commiserate compensation. For an economy built around risk-reward, why should employees have to assume more risk while their reward remains the same?
- datenhorst 6y ago
  Source? I'd prefer a reputable one, if you please
  - nobody9999 6y ago
    > Source? I'd prefer a reputable one, if you please Here you go[0]. Although it says the opposite of what GP claimed. [0] https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-stimulus-negotiations-7d464d0e-924f-46f5-90d2-9e8097c9c8f7.html https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-stimulus-negotiation...
  - NortySpock 6y ago
    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC Nov 24 If you want to know why COVID relief is tied up in Congress, one key reason is that Republicans are demanding legal immunity for corporations so they can expose their workers to COVID without repercussions. Dems don’t want you to die for a check. That’s what we’re fighting over. https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1331322923534213120?lang=en https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1331322923534213120?lang=en
just-juan-post 6y ago
Wrong. A reminder that Nancy Pelosi turned down not one but two $1 trillion+ stimulus offer from the White House before the election. Trump makes $1.8 trillion economic relief offer, but deal with Pelosi remains elusive (Oct 09 2020) https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/10/09/trump-economic-stimulus-pelosi/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/10/09/trump-ec... Nancy Pelosi blasts the White House's $1.6 trillion stimulus plan, saying it's not even 'half a loaf' (Oct 01 2020) https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-blasts-white-house-stimulus-plan-coronavirus-relief-loaf-2020-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-blasts-white-ho...
- uoaei 6y ago
  I notice folks getting starry-eyed in the face of these big numbers. But if you look at how that money is allocated, it won't be very good for anyone except those who are milking this crisis for all they can. The bill needs to be much bigger to have any considerable impact. Remember -- the economy only works if people are spending money, and people are only spending money when they have money in their pockets. Trickle-up economics is real and it works.
  - WorkingDead 6y ago
    Dont move the goal post.
    - uoaei 6y ago
      Excuse me? The goal post has been moved so far already by the Republicans and you're tut-tutting this perspective?
- aweiland 6y ago
  Those bills were DOA in the Senate. This was all posturing on both sides.

treeman79 6y ago

Load of crap. Republicans were willing to negotiate on a smaller package. It was held up by the speaker because it made Trump look bad.

HenryKissinger 6y ago
Republicans refused to remove a liability shield for companies from the bill. That's a good reason to refuse to pass the bill.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  Is it? Why is that so important that it's worth not aiding millions of people who are dropping into poverty?
  - uoaei 6y ago
    I can't tell if this is a question posed in earnest, because I wouldn't expect a reaction like that to "corporations are designing and feeding Congress a liability shield so that they don't have to spend money protecting their workers." The "aid" is a red herring if you are setting up those same people for dangerous situations with zero accountability from the people who are forcing them to put themselves in hazard's way. It is myopic to think that a smaller stimulus bill (that would barely cover 1 month's expenses for the average American -- recall that it's been 8 months since the first stimulus) would be proposed for anything except to stave off the fervor of mass civil unrest for a short while longer.
    - Domenic_S 6y ago
      The standard is OSHA writing rules that govern workplace safety. What we have now is a bunch of soft "when feasible" and "if possible" recommendations and no rules save for what each state/county give on their own, which are usually also pretty squishy. Absent a written standard from the government body in charge of these things, it's a free-for-all of liability. So I open my restaurant following local standards and a customer gets COVID and sues me because I used disinfectant X when I should have used Y, or the staff was wearing mask A instead of mask B, or whatever. I don't think its unreasonable whatsoever to - again, absent the proper rules - ask for protection in this case. Folks like to characterize this as "protecting big corporations" but if you read the proposal it protects school, universities, hospitals, and so forth as well.
  - aaron-santos 6y ago
    It shifts the risk from business to employees without commiserate compensation. For an economy built around risk-reward, why should employees have to assume more risk while their reward remains the same?
datenhorst 6y ago
Source? I'd prefer a reputable one, if you please
- nobody9999 6y ago
  > Source? I'd prefer a reputable one, if you please Here you go[0]. Although it says the opposite of what GP claimed. [0] https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-stimulus-negotiations-7d464d0e-924f-46f5-90d2-9e8097c9c8f7.html https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-stimulus-negotiation...
- NortySpock 6y ago
  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC Nov 24 If you want to know why COVID relief is tied up in Congress, one key reason is that Republicans are demanding legal immunity for corporations so they can expose their workers to COVID without repercussions. Dems don’t want you to die for a check. That’s what we’re fighting over. https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1331322923534213120?lang=en https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1331322923534213120?lang=en

just-juan-post 6y ago

Wrong. A reminder that Nancy Pelosi turned down not one but two $1 trillion+ stimulus offer from the White House before the election. Trump makes $1.8 trillion economic relief offer, but deal with Pelosi remains elusive (Oct 09 2020) https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/10/09/trump-economic-stimulus-pelosi/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/10/09/trump-ec... Nancy Pelosi blasts the White House's $1.6 trillion stimulus plan, saying it's not even 'half a loaf' (Oct 01 2020) https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-blasts-white-house-stimulus-plan-coronavirus-relief-loaf-2020-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-blasts-white-ho...

uoaei 6y ago
I notice folks getting starry-eyed in the face of these big numbers. But if you look at how that money is allocated, it won't be very good for anyone except those who are milking this crisis for all they can. The bill needs to be much bigger to have any considerable impact. Remember -- the economy only works if people are spending money, and people are only spending money when they have money in their pockets. Trickle-up economics is real and it works.
- WorkingDead 6y ago
  Dont move the goal post.
  - uoaei 6y ago
    Excuse me? The goal post has been moved so far already by the Republicans and you're tut-tutting this perspective?
aweiland 6y ago
Those bills were DOA in the Senate. This was all posturing on both sides.