6 ms·

Canada, Australia & New Zealand (and I'm sure many other countries) have done an excellent job providing money to people who are stuck at home because they can'

by grecy 6y ago

Canada, Australia & New Zealand (and I'm sure many other countries) have done an excellent job providing money to people who are stuck at home because they can't go to work. Here in Canada it was $500/week for 28 weeks, then you moved onto a different scheme if you still needed support. Everyone who needed it go it. We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. Be careful not to generalize that all democracies have done a poor job just because some have.

skeeter2020 6y ago
>> We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. No, we've been desperately waiting for vacinnes after being repeatedly promised there will be plently for everyone ("look at all these contracts we've signed!") while they pay you off with massive borrowing that someone is going to be responsible for when the music stops. Meanwhile Texas, the poster-child for bad behaviour, is headed back to normal.
- supernovae 6y ago
  Texas is not normal :) Most of us are staying home still, in the major cities we collectively wear masks regardless of our goofy gov. Large places of employment still aren't opening offices and many that are talking about opening are doing so with the realization it won't be like it used to be...
  - chrismat 6y ago
    Not sure where you live - but I travel full time in an RV and have stayed and traveled through El Paso, Austin, Houston, San Antonio and everywhere in between in the last 3 months. Maybe some are still hiding at home, but from my experience the overwhelming majority of Texans seem to be out enjoying the sunshine and open businesses.
    - burlesona 6y ago
      Living in Austin I would say it’s a mix, but the main thing is that you now have about a third of people (including most of the high risk) who are vaccinated (at least the first dose) and joining the ... 1/5? Or so? ... who “don’t believe in COVID.” Combined that’s a decent chunk of the population getting back out. I think it’s still quiet compared to normal, but it sure seems like one giant party compared to the last year. It’s really hard to subjectively judge these things.
      - efa 6y ago
        Yeah, the traffic is starting to suck again!
    - efa 6y ago
      Agree. White collar workers are mostly working from home. But everyone is out and about (mostly wearing masks). Most fast food restaurants have their dining rooms closed, but plenty of sit down places.
- grecy 6y ago
  > Meanwhile Texas, the poster-child for bad behaviour, is headed back to normal. Fifty THOUSAND people died in Texas. I'm not sure how anyone can hold it up as a *good" comparison.
  - chrismat 6y ago
    The population of Texas is 29,000,000 - so even (incorrectly) assuming that these 50,000 people died exclusively from Covid and not compounded by several co-morbities... that's 0.17% of the state's population. And even as a factor of the number of cases in TX (2.84mil, last check), that comes to 1.7%.
    - grecy 6y ago
      At 1,721 deaths per million of population, if Texas were a country it would be the 16th worst on the planet. Ranking 16th worst out of 198 is not an enviable or "good" place to be. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/?new https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/?new https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/
      - makomk 6y ago
        It's a fairly typical place for a western country to be at this stage of the pandemic. Because of the way the disease spread via inter-country travel from, mostly, Italy and surrounding countries, the developed western world was hit first - and because people have to be tested in order for their deaths to be recorded as Covid-19 related, only countries with a reasonably well-developed healthcare system and economy actually report meaningful death counts. (The US in particular had really widespread testing compared to almost everyone else during the whole time period where it had a widespread Covid-19 outbreak - though the mainstream media gave the opposite impression for partisan political reasons.)
        selimthegrim 6y ago
        The CDC failures at the beginning were a stitchup by the Democrats? Quick, write your article in time for the Pulitzer!
MiSeRyDeee 6y ago
You realize that the stimulus check comes with a cost right? You almost sound like government can just give arbitrary money to citizens but isn't willing to do so.
- cryptoz 6y ago
  The cost of not doing stimulus is much much higher than the cost of doing it, though.
- supernovae 6y ago
  You can absolutely give money to citizens. The government is FOR and BY the citizens. If the citizens agree to shutdown, they can agree to provide a means to continue society through the shutdown. The notion that we can't do this, is the one i have problems with because its absurd.
  - CivBase 6y ago
    You can do this, but it has consequences. Money is not inherently valuable. It's a medium we use to store and exchange value inherent to scarce goods and services which people demand. To be a stable representation of value, money must also be scarce. This is a fundamental concept of economy, not something decided on and enforced by government. The money a government gives to citizens must come from somewhere. They could liquidate assets owned by the government, borrow it from another government, take it from entities who are subject to the government's authority (taxes), or - what I assume you're getting at - just make more of it. That last one isn't as simple as it sounds because it doesn't increase the cumulative value of the currency. Printing dollars is like dividing a pizza into more and more slices. It doesn't increase the amount of pizza. Inflation is a very real problem that has annihilated economies.
    - jgeada 6y ago
      Funny how none of that ever comes up when we're discussing bailing out corporations. Quantitative easing by itself was several trillions of dollars arbitrarily invented, let alone the various bank and corporate bailouts over the past decade. And don't forget that we literally allow banks and such to print money and stocks on demand (aka leverage) to allow them to make money. In any case, value fiat money is not a product of rarity, it is a statement of the value of future tax receipts. Money encodes/is an exchange marker for work done or promises of work to be done.
maxerickson 6y ago
The US paid a lot more than the $1200, in the form of unemployment supplements. $600 a week at the beginning of the pandemic through July and then $300 a week this year, in addition to a second $2000 payment that went out to more than furloughed or unemployed people.
- nielsbot 6y ago
  How does it compare to France, Denmark and the UK though?
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    I dunno, I just updated the first paragraph to make it more clear that I was responding to the $1200 (I replaced "that" with "the $1200").
  - makomk 6y ago
    Pretty sure it's much more generous than the UK for everyone except the well-off. In many cases the US managed to pay more than 100% of people's previous salaries in unemployment, structured to be most generous compared to their previous job for those with the least pay before, whereas furlough for those lucky enough to get it was capped at 75% and unemployment for those unlucky enough to lose their jobs entirely was barely boosted over the stingy standard payments. Unfortunately, trusted US publications like the New York Times mislead their readers about this for nakedly partisan reasons, just like they did with every other part of the US pandemic response and how it compared to the rest of the world.
- supernovae 6y ago
  These numbers don't mean much on their own. Sure, if you live with mom and pop and you got laid off from a job and had a place to fall back onto, yippee If you live in pretty much any major city and you're the breadwinner then it doesn't cover rent/mortgage. We froze foreclosures, so there are estimated millions pending. Unemployment is still in pre-pandemic numbers - all though improving. I think our reliance on "job" to live is problematic when a virus doesn't care about the societal ramifications of a job. I think we should talk more broader UBI programs and talk about what countries did that worked... do a huge retrospective and make things better for the future.

by grecy 6y ago

skeeter2020 6y ago

>> We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. No, we've been desperately waiting for vacinnes after being repeatedly promised there will be plently for everyone ("look at all these contracts we've signed!") while they pay you off with massive borrowing that someone is going to be responsible for when the music stops. Meanwhile Texas, the poster-child for bad behaviour, is headed back to normal.

supernovae 6y ago
Texas is not normal :) Most of us are staying home still, in the major cities we collectively wear masks regardless of our goofy gov. Large places of employment still aren't opening offices and many that are talking about opening are doing so with the realization it won't be like it used to be...
- chrismat 6y ago
  Not sure where you live - but I travel full time in an RV and have stayed and traveled through El Paso, Austin, Houston, San Antonio and everywhere in between in the last 3 months. Maybe some are still hiding at home, but from my experience the overwhelming majority of Texans seem to be out enjoying the sunshine and open businesses.
  - burlesona 6y ago
    Living in Austin I would say it’s a mix, but the main thing is that you now have about a third of people (including most of the high risk) who are vaccinated (at least the first dose) and joining the ... 1/5? Or so? ... who “don’t believe in COVID.” Combined that’s a decent chunk of the population getting back out. I think it’s still quiet compared to normal, but it sure seems like one giant party compared to the last year. It’s really hard to subjectively judge these things.
    - efa 6y ago
      Yeah, the traffic is starting to suck again!
  - efa 6y ago
    Agree. White collar workers are mostly working from home. But everyone is out and about (mostly wearing masks). Most fast food restaurants have their dining rooms closed, but plenty of sit down places.
grecy 6y ago
> Meanwhile Texas, the poster-child for bad behaviour, is headed back to normal. Fifty THOUSAND people died in Texas. I'm not sure how anyone can hold it up as a *good" comparison.
- chrismat 6y ago
  The population of Texas is 29,000,000 - so even (incorrectly) assuming that these 50,000 people died exclusively from Covid and not compounded by several co-morbities... that's 0.17% of the state's population. And even as a factor of the number of cases in TX (2.84mil, last check), that comes to 1.7%.
  - grecy 6y ago
    At 1,721 deaths per million of population, if Texas were a country it would be the 16th worst on the planet. Ranking 16th worst out of 198 is not an enviable or "good" place to be. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/?new https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/?new https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/
    - makomk 6y ago
      It's a fairly typical place for a western country to be at this stage of the pandemic. Because of the way the disease spread via inter-country travel from, mostly, Italy and surrounding countries, the developed western world was hit first - and because people have to be tested in order for their deaths to be recorded as Covid-19 related, only countries with a reasonably well-developed healthcare system and economy actually report meaningful death counts. (The US in particular had really widespread testing compared to almost everyone else during the whole time period where it had a widespread Covid-19 outbreak - though the mainstream media gave the opposite impression for partisan political reasons.)
      - selimthegrim 6y ago
        The CDC failures at the beginning were a stitchup by the Democrats? Quick, write your article in time for the Pulitzer!

MiSeRyDeee 6y ago

You realize that the stimulus check comes with a cost right? You almost sound like government can just give arbitrary money to citizens but isn't willing to do so.

cryptoz 6y ago
The cost of not doing stimulus is much much higher than the cost of doing it, though.
supernovae 6y ago
You can absolutely give money to citizens. The government is FOR and BY the citizens. If the citizens agree to shutdown, they can agree to provide a means to continue society through the shutdown. The notion that we can't do this, is the one i have problems with because its absurd.
- CivBase 6y ago
  You can do this, but it has consequences. Money is not inherently valuable. It's a medium we use to store and exchange value inherent to scarce goods and services which people demand. To be a stable representation of value, money must also be scarce. This is a fundamental concept of economy, not something decided on and enforced by government. The money a government gives to citizens must come from somewhere. They could liquidate assets owned by the government, borrow it from another government, take it from entities who are subject to the government's authority (taxes), or - what I assume you're getting at - just make more of it. That last one isn't as simple as it sounds because it doesn't increase the cumulative value of the currency. Printing dollars is like dividing a pizza into more and more slices. It doesn't increase the amount of pizza. Inflation is a very real problem that has annihilated economies.
  - jgeada 6y ago
    Funny how none of that ever comes up when we're discussing bailing out corporations. Quantitative easing by itself was several trillions of dollars arbitrarily invented, let alone the various bank and corporate bailouts over the past decade. And don't forget that we literally allow banks and such to print money and stocks on demand (aka leverage) to allow them to make money. In any case, value fiat money is not a product of rarity, it is a statement of the value of future tax receipts. Money encodes/is an exchange marker for work done or promises of work to be done.

maxerickson 6y ago

The US paid a lot more than the $1200, in the form of unemployment supplements. $600 a week at the beginning of the pandemic through July and then $300 a week this year, in addition to a second $2000 payment that went out to more than furloughed or unemployed people.

nielsbot 6y ago
How does it compare to France, Denmark and the UK though?
- maxerickson 6y ago
  I dunno, I just updated the first paragraph to make it more clear that I was responding to the $1200 (I replaced "that" with "the $1200").
- makomk 6y ago
  Pretty sure it's much more generous than the UK for everyone except the well-off. In many cases the US managed to pay more than 100% of people's previous salaries in unemployment, structured to be most generous compared to their previous job for those with the least pay before, whereas furlough for those lucky enough to get it was capped at 75% and unemployment for those unlucky enough to lose their jobs entirely was barely boosted over the stingy standard payments. Unfortunately, trusted US publications like the New York Times mislead their readers about this for nakedly partisan reasons, just like they did with every other part of the US pandemic response and how it compared to the rest of the world.
supernovae 6y ago
These numbers don't mean much on their own. Sure, if you live with mom and pop and you got laid off from a job and had a place to fall back onto, yippee If you live in pretty much any major city and you're the breadwinner then it doesn't cover rent/mortgage. We froze foreclosures, so there are estimated millions pending. Unemployment is still in pre-pandemic numbers - all though improving. I think our reliance on "job" to live is problematic when a virus doesn't care about the societal ramifications of a job. I think we should talk more broader UBI programs and talk about what countries did that worked... do a huge retrospective and make things better for the future.