4 ms·

This backpedaling looks familiar. Who would have thought that a couple thousand dollars of "stimulus" monies, your dollar being worth 20% less than it was a fe

This backpedaling looks familiar. Who would have thought that a couple thousand dollars of "stimulus" monies, your dollar being worth 20% less than it was a few years ago, record credit card debt, record wealth inequality between the have's and have-nots, and a completely screwed up housing market would lead to Americans saving "less than previously thought"... Remember, the people making fiscal policy have been citing "savings accrued during covid" every chance they can. The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians that insist the economy is doing better than ever. The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians, who redefined the meaning of "recession" when it was inconvenient to their policy goals. The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians, who were gleefully calling for people to lose their jobs if they didn't get the latest iteration of a vaccine with questionable and overstated results.

Dylan16807 3y ago
> Remember, the people making fiscal policy have been citing "savings accrued during covid" every chance they can. That sounds pretty suspicious, except that this correction goes back well before covid, and the spike in 2020 and 2021 is just as huge with the new data. > The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians, who redefined the meaning of "recession" when it was inconvenient to their policy goals. Look, "two quarters of shrinking GDP" is a really easy rule to apply, but it's so dependent on timing and ignores everything around it. Specifically, we had a single quarter with 7% growth, then two quarters that combined to 2.6% shrink, then a single quarter with 2.7% growth. I think it's fair to say that was not a recession, and the weird result in 2020 with -28.0% immediately followed by +34.8% is important to mention but also not a recession, so 2008 was the last actual recession in the US. > The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians, who were gleefully calling for people to lose their jobs if they didn't get the latest iteration of a vaccine with questionable and overstated results. What did you find questionable that was in addition to any overstatement of results? And nobody wanted job losses, they just wanted people to try to fight the spread. Eventually enough spite built up, mostly against the people acting bad on purpose, but between a "make them lose their job" button and a "make them try (retroactively)" button I bet basically everyone you describe would have smacked the latter.
- lp0_on_fire 3y ago
  > What did you find questionable that was in addition to any overstatement of results? Not one single thing, but many straws that finally broke the camels back, as it were. The speed at which it was developed and made "mandatory", for one. The release from liability granted to all the produces of said vaccine, for two (which I would be more sympathetic if not for #1). The laughable "100% effectiveness rate" that was touted and walked back rather sheepishly. The equally laughable assertion that the common flu just "took a year off" in 2020 and every cough and sniffle was COVID. The outright hostility to _reasonable_ skepticism (i.e. "this technology is relatively new and could have unintended side effects so we should study it more", not "Bill Gates is putting microchips into the syringes to track your children"). Hospitals and media / government types deliberately conflating deaths _from_ covid and deaths _with_ covid. (It's this specific example that makes me suspect the redefinition of "recession" as a political exercise). The outright lies surrounding how vulnerable children were/are vs the elderly, the latter being FAR more vulnerable. The idea that the virus was created and escaped from a lab in Wuhan that was a conspiracy theory, until it wasn't. Politicians and elites clearly not practicing what they preach, be it the governor of a state going out to a fancy restaurant with their buddies, unmasked, during the height of the crisis or those who enriched themselves and their businesses on relief funds. There are more but it's actually pretty depressing to list. > And nobody wanted job losses, they just wanted people to try to fight the spread. Eventually enough spite built up, mostly against the people acting bad on purpose, but between a "make them lose their job" button and a "make them try (retroactively)" button I bet basically everyone you describe would have smacked the latter. Could have fooled me based on public statements made by pro-lockdown politicians at the time. "Fight the spread" was repeated ad-nauseam by those pushing questionable methods that many people knew were suspect to be begin with, yet were castigated as "killing grandma", "anti-science", "rubes" and every other name in the book rather than taking their concerns seriously.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    > many straws Oh I thought you were talking about the vaccine itself, not the politics. > the redefinition of "recession" as a political exercise Hasn't the NBER been in charge of it for a very long time? Has the definition actually changed recently? > rather than taking their concerns seriously. Weird, I remember a ton of time devoted to taking the concerns seriously. But "seriously" doesn't mean that if the same concerns get repeated over and over they become more correct. Some concerns were correct but most weren't. And if someone keeps talking about "shedding" or masks trapping CO2, even after multiple corrections, they deserve to be insulted.

Dylan16807 3y ago

> Remember, the people making fiscal policy have been citing "savings accrued during covid" every chance they can. That sounds pretty suspicious, except that this correction goes back well before covid, and the spike in 2020 and 2021 is just as huge with the new data. > The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians, who redefined the meaning of "recession" when it was inconvenient to their policy goals. Look, "two quarters of shrinking GDP" is a really easy rule to apply, but it's so dependent on timing and ignores everything around it. Specifically, we had a single quarter with 7% growth, then two quarters that combined to 2.6% shrink, then a single quarter with 2.7% growth. I think it's fair to say that was not a recession, and the weird result in 2020 with -28.0% immediately followed by +34.8% is important to mention but also not a recession, so 2008 was the last actual recession in the US. > The same chattering donor class, bureaucrats, and politicians, who were gleefully calling for people to lose their jobs if they didn't get the latest iteration of a vaccine with questionable and overstated results. What did you find questionable that was in addition to any overstatement of results? And nobody wanted job losses, they just wanted people to try to fight the spread. Eventually enough spite built up, mostly against the people acting bad on purpose, but between a "make them lose their job" button and a "make them try (retroactively)" button I bet basically everyone you describe would have smacked the latter.

lp0_on_fire 3y ago
> What did you find questionable that was in addition to any overstatement of results? Not one single thing, but many straws that finally broke the camels back, as it were. The speed at which it was developed and made "mandatory", for one. The release from liability granted to all the produces of said vaccine, for two (which I would be more sympathetic if not for #1). The laughable "100% effectiveness rate" that was touted and walked back rather sheepishly. The equally laughable assertion that the common flu just "took a year off" in 2020 and every cough and sniffle was COVID. The outright hostility to _reasonable_ skepticism (i.e. "this technology is relatively new and could have unintended side effects so we should study it more", not "Bill Gates is putting microchips into the syringes to track your children"). Hospitals and media / government types deliberately conflating deaths _from_ covid and deaths _with_ covid. (It's this specific example that makes me suspect the redefinition of "recession" as a political exercise). The outright lies surrounding how vulnerable children were/are vs the elderly, the latter being FAR more vulnerable. The idea that the virus was created and escaped from a lab in Wuhan that was a conspiracy theory, until it wasn't. Politicians and elites clearly not practicing what they preach, be it the governor of a state going out to a fancy restaurant with their buddies, unmasked, during the height of the crisis or those who enriched themselves and their businesses on relief funds. There are more but it's actually pretty depressing to list. > And nobody wanted job losses, they just wanted people to try to fight the spread. Eventually enough spite built up, mostly against the people acting bad on purpose, but between a "make them lose their job" button and a "make them try (retroactively)" button I bet basically everyone you describe would have smacked the latter. Could have fooled me based on public statements made by pro-lockdown politicians at the time. "Fight the spread" was repeated ad-nauseam by those pushing questionable methods that many people knew were suspect to be begin with, yet were castigated as "killing grandma", "anti-science", "rubes" and every other name in the book rather than taking their concerns seriously.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  > many straws Oh I thought you were talking about the vaccine itself, not the politics. > the redefinition of "recession" as a political exercise Hasn't the NBER been in charge of it for a very long time? Has the definition actually changed recently? > rather than taking their concerns seriously. Weird, I remember a ton of time devoted to taking the concerns seriously. But "seriously" doesn't mean that if the same concerns get repeated over and over they become more correct. Some concerns were correct but most weren't. And if someone keeps talking about "shedding" or masks trapping CO2, even after multiple corrections, they deserve to be insulted.