3 ms·

Sure, the general problem I'm bemoaning is that the "first things that come to mind" always seem to be the tangible actions aimed at mitigating the distributed

Sure, the general problem I'm bemoaning is that the "first things that come to mind" always seem to be the tangible actions aimed at mitigating the distributed fallout from economic central planning, rather than ever putting the brakes on the overwhelming corporate welfare causing most of the damage to begin with. The Fed engaged in additional QE as a direct response to Covid. Fraudulent PPP "loans", while despicable, are much closer to the little guy than QE, artifically low interest rates, and even open pondering of the central bank buying stocks. As for bad faith - the dynamic is like saying one wants small government, and then attacking the Postal Service or the National Parks. Invoking the general argument to draw ire, and then directing that attention at things besides the overwhelming systemic problems burns up the energy of the original critique and is at the very least echoing people who are arguing in bad faith.

scythe 4y ago
>Invoking the general argument to draw ire, I did not invoke the general argument. What I was intending to do was to point out that the stimulus checks were only a small fraction of expansionary monetary policy during COVID. >and then directing that attention at things besides the overwhelming systemic problems The examples I gave were intended to demonstrate the general point referenced above, and not to be exhaustive. >very least echoing people who are arguing in bad faith. I was refuting a bad-faith argument from the people you are complaining about. The conventional line is that the stimulus checks were a primary driver of inflation. I explained why that is not true. You accuse me of "echoing" that argument. This is ridiculous. >Fraudulent PPP "loans", while despicable, are much closer to the little guy than QE If I'm going to entertain this line of reasoning, shouldn't we at least consider that the Fed bought distressed loans at the same time that many landlords may have been pushed towards default, and foreclosure sales prevented, due to the eviction moratorium? That may be closer to the little guy than it seems at first.

scythe 4y ago

>Invoking the general argument to draw ire, I did not invoke the general argument. What I was intending to do was to point out that the stimulus checks were only a small fraction of expansionary monetary policy during COVID. >and then directing that attention at things besides the overwhelming systemic problems The examples I gave were intended to demonstrate the general point referenced above, and not to be exhaustive. >very least echoing people who are arguing in bad faith. I was refuting a bad-faith argument from the people you are complaining about. The conventional line is that the stimulus checks were a primary driver of inflation. I explained why that is not true. You accuse me of "echoing" that argument. This is ridiculous. >Fraudulent PPP "loans", while despicable, are much closer to the little guy than QE If I'm going to entertain this line of reasoning, shouldn't we at least consider that the Fed bought distressed loans at the same time that many landlords may have been pushed towards default, and foreclosure sales prevented, due to the eviction moratorium? That may be closer to the little guy than it seems at first.