Our Economy Can't Take This, Get it Over With

[ninja007]

---When stores and stadiums are empty and our cities look like ghost towns, consumer spending—the lifeblood of the economy—will lessen by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. The implosion in spending will lead to millions of fewer jobs, to even less spending—a downward spiral with no obvious end in sight.---

Just do what our moms did when one kid had chicken pox, expose it to everyone and get it over with. We can't afford to let Democrats ruin our economy.

We need a massive economic response to counter the threat of the coronavirus

For the sake of our country, let us work together to quickly craft an economic response equal to the massive economic threat before us.

thehill.com

How many lives are you personally willing to sacrifice for Trump? Give us a hard number. Which of your relatives or loved ones will you give over to appease your god?

how many babies are you willing to kill, lib?

 

[zaangalewa]

Does Social Distancing Matter?
This paper develops and implements a method to monetize the impact of moderate social distancing on deaths from COVID-19. Using the Ferguson et al. (2020) simulation model of COVID-19’s spread and mortality impacts in the United States, we project that 3-4 months of moderate distancing beginning in late March 2020 would save 1.7 million lives by October 1. Of the lives saved, 630,000 are due to avoided overwhelming of hospital intensive care units. Using the projected age-specific reductions in death and age-varying estimates of the United States Government’s value of a statistical life, we find that the mortality benefits of social distancing are about $8 trillion or $60,000 per US household. Roughly 90% of the monetized benefits are projected to accrue to people age 50 or older. Overall, the analysis suggests that social distancing initiatives and policies in response to the COVID-19 epidemic have substantial economic benefits.

Does Social Distancing Matter?

This paper develops and implements a method to monetize the impact of moderate social distancing on deaths from COVID-19. Using the Ferguson et al. (2020) simul

papers.ssrn.com

People have known for centuries that staying away from sick people in an epidemic prevents the spread of disease. Since there is no way of knowing whose sick, social distancing is all we got.

I could agree with social distancing. I don't agree with forcing people into their homes.

History teaches us that an epidemic has never been overcome by quarantines, but only by hygienic measures. Quarantines do not protect populations in which the disease is already present, they can only save a little time, but it cannot defeat the disease itself.

Stay-at-home has been sold to the public on the basis of protecting us. After all, our leaders care about us. They have only our best interests at heart. Right? And what is more terrifying to anyone than the state of their health? None of us want to put our loved ones lives in danger. And so we become even more compliant than normal.

I think Franklin said something like, “Those who would give up liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Considering the continuous fear coming from our leaders and especially media, I don't know if any of us could feel safe. And government totalitarian response to an invisible enemy should make all of us feel demonstrably less free.

View attachment 320137

When you have no vaccine or medical treatment to stop a virus which transmits by droplets in the air from coughing, sneezing, and talking, the only action left to stop the transmission is the separation of people. Whether it works or not depends on the people or governments success at enforcing the separation.

If a society does nothing, enough people will be sicken or die thus denying the virus enough hosts to spread. This approach is dependents on the value society puts on human life.

So people who are working today, in grocery stores, post offices, gas stations, pizza places, including police, firefighters are not potential transmitters? The values of their lives are lower than of those who stay home? Why they should work and pit their health or lives on line, and others should not? What value society put on their lives? They're human too, right?

Someone has to make food, medical services, law enforcement, and fire protection, and other essential services available to the public. In any national emergency, there will always be those that will be called on to render essential services. The value of their lives is even greater than those that sit at home because the lives of others depend on them.

So why are those whose lives are not valuable as much, locked at home?

The problem in this context: Everyone is part of the critical mass of the explosion of this virus. When an infected person infects in average less than one other person the situation is somehow "under control" => the capacities of an health care system should be able to live with such a burden and everyone should be able to get professional medical help.

I know times here with a growth of 1+1/3 every day for example. Extremely dangerous situation - but the people here were realtively careless the same time. This needed stricter rules here. They came very fast, because to wait under such conditions is just simple wrong - what we know, because of the pandemics of the past.

How to explain what happens? It's like a game. You are on your own a kind of deactivated anti-personell-mine. When you will meet an activated anti-personell-mine then you will be activated too. And when you meet afterwards other not activated personell mines then you will activate them - and some times later mines will explode and people will die.

The less mines are activated the better is the possibility to help the wounded people. The problem is we need a way to block the virus - but this virus is a new "life-form" - and no one knows what concrete will happen, when he gets infected. No one is biologically ready to fight with this virus and to be sure to win. Take the artist "Pink" as an example. She and her little son suffered very heavy under a long covid-19 attack. They survived. Her husband and their little daughter had nearly no problem. Good luck. No one knows what happens concrete, before it happens. It's a game of statistical probabilities. But you should know what are exponential functions doing and what are probabilities - or is to be a good salesman not any longer an US-American dream?

And I do not think it is a great job now to be a doctor - or a nurse - or a policeman - or a parcel carrier and so and so on. And yes - this people have a higher value than a millionaire, who likes to play golf in his club, because he is frustrated. They are active fighters against this virus for the life of everyone. It's a good idea to respect this true heroes of the daily life.

 

[Seawytch]

---When stores and stadiums are empty and our cities look like ghost towns, consumer spending—the lifeblood of the economy—will lessen by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. The implosion in spending will lead to millions of fewer jobs, to even less spending—a downward spiral with no obvious end in sight.---

Just do what our moms did when one kid had chicken pox, expose it to everyone and get it over with. We can't afford to let Democrats ruin our economy.

We need a massive economic response to counter the threat of the coronavirus

For the sake of our country, let us work together to quickly craft an economic response equal to the massive economic threat before us.

thehill.com

How many lives are you personally willing to sacrifice for Trump? Give us a hard number. Which of your relatives or loved ones will you give over to appease your god?

how many babies are you willing to kill, lib?

Gosh, it just depends on how hungry I am at any given moment.

 

[Redfish]

---When stores and stadiums are empty and our cities look like ghost towns, consumer spending—the lifeblood of the economy—will lessen by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. The implosion in spending will lead to millions of fewer jobs, to even less spending—a downward spiral with no obvious end in sight.---

Just do what our moms did when one kid had chicken pox, expose it to everyone and get it over with. We can't afford to let Democrats ruin our economy.

We need a massive economic response to counter the threat of the coronavirus

For the sake of our country, let us work together to quickly craft an economic response equal to the massive economic threat before us.

thehill.com

How many lives are you personally willing to sacrifice for Trump? Give us a hard number. Which of your relatives or loved ones will you give over to appease your god?

how many babies are you willing to kill, lib?

Gosh, it just depends on how hungry I am at any given moment.

typical, make a joke about the murder of millions of innocents. You are a sick excuse for a human being.

 

[Seawytch]

---When stores and stadiums are empty and our cities look like ghost towns, consumer spending—the lifeblood of the economy—will lessen by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. The implosion in spending will lead to millions of fewer jobs, to even less spending—a downward spiral with no obvious end in sight.---

Just do what our moms did when one kid had chicken pox, expose it to everyone and get it over with. We can't afford to let Democrats ruin our economy.

We need a massive economic response to counter the threat of the coronavirus

For the sake of our country, let us work together to quickly craft an economic response equal to the massive economic threat before us.

thehill.com

How many lives are you personally willing to sacrifice for Trump? Give us a hard number. Which of your relatives or loved ones will you give over to appease your god?

how many babies are you willing to kill, lib?

Gosh, it just depends on how hungry I am at any given moment.

typical, make a joke about the murder of millions of innocents. You are a sick excuse for a human being.

No, I was making a joke of the douchenozzle I responded to.

 

[lennypartiv]

So why are those whose lives are not valuable as much, locked at home?

Because Dems don't value freedom.

 

[Flopper]

The primary problem is not government bureaucracy but a lack of information as to where to send the checks coupled with the time to print and delivery checks. Anyone who has filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return or receives Social Security payments automatically deposited should have money in their bank account in April. Paper checks from the government will be delayed several weeks just like tax refunds by checks because of the time required to print checks and delivery them. Those that have not filed a tax return for 2018 or 2019 and do not receive social security are the ones that will not receive the money for months because they will have to file a claim.

All you wrote is correct. But I do have a question. Why should postal employees be forced to deliver checks to mailboxes?

Because it is considered an essential service.

By whom?

Oh, so it's OK that someone get infected and possibly die, because they're essential service?

What's next, is government going to decide what items you are allowed to buy based on is item essential or not? Oh shit, they're already doing that.

The same people that declare that police, fire, medical services, food production. and distribution are essential service also declare the mail is also. If folks don't get their s.s. checks, retirement, other funds through the mail, they will have no money to buy groceries and pay for medical services. In a national emergency, someone has to make the decision on what services are essential and by default it's the government.

We make a difference between system-relevant and system-irrelevant jobs. Nearly everyone agrees what this is and what not. By the way: We found out system relevant jobs are often not payed very well. Tourism for example is system irrelevant at all - even dangerous. A tragedy sometimes - but we will see. For sure some companies will go down in spite of economical help programs. Most are hopefully able to hibernate some weeks, months or this year - in worst case two years.

I think in most cases it's pretty clear what functions are essential and what are not. However, there has to be a fair number that are on line. A recession will always shake out those companies that are distant to fail eventually. Most businesses that are well managed with good products and adequate capital will make it and probably become stronger for it.

 

[Dragonlady]

---When stores and stadiums are empty and our cities look like ghost towns, consumer spending—the lifeblood of the economy—will lessen by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. The implosion in spending will lead to millions of fewer jobs, to even less spending—a downward spiral with no obvious end in sight.---

Just do what our moms did when one kid had chicken pox, expose it to everyone and get it over with. We can't afford to let Democrats ruin our economy.

We need a massive economic response to counter the threat of the coronavirus

For the sake of our country, let us work together to quickly craft an economic response equal to the massive economic threat before us.

thehill.com

How many lives are you personally willing to sacrifice for Trump? Give us a hard number. Which of your relatives or loved ones will you give over to appease your god?

how many babies are you willing to kill, lib?

Gosh, it just depends on how hungry I am at any given moment.

typical, make a joke about the murder of millions of innocents. You are a sick excuse for a human being.

They aren't "innocents". They're not people. I wish to hell you fools would give a rat's ass for living children, but since you don't, you don't get to pretend to care about the unborn because you will trample each and every one of them underfoot the moment they take their first breath.

 

[Ame®icano]

So why are those whose lives are not valuable as much, locked at home?

Because Dems don't value freedom.

Well, they kinda do. But only their freedom. Yours is not important.

 

[Ame®icano]

The primary problem is not government bureaucracy but a lack of information as to where to send the checks coupled with the time to print and delivery checks. Anyone who has filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return or receives Social Security payments automatically deposited should have money in their bank account in April. Paper checks from the government will be delayed several weeks just like tax refunds by checks because of the time required to print checks and delivery them. Those that have not filed a tax return for 2018 or 2019 and do not receive social security are the ones that will not receive the money for months because they will have to file a claim.

All you wrote is correct. But I do have a question. Why should postal employees be forced to deliver checks to mailboxes?

Because it is considered an essential service.

By whom?

Oh, so it's OK that someone get infected and possibly die, because they're essential service?

What's next, is government going to decide what items you are allowed to buy based on is item essential or not? Oh shit, they're already doing that.

The same people that declare that police, fire, medical services, food production. and distribution are essential service also declare the mail is also. If folks don't get their s.s. checks, retirement, other funds through the mail, they will have no money to buy groceries and pay for medical services. In a national emergency, someone has to make the decision on what services are essential and by default it's the government.

We make a difference between system-relevant and system-irrelevant jobs. Nearly everyone agrees what this is and what not. By the way: We found out system relevant jobs are often not payed very well. Tourism for example is system irrelevant at all - even dangerous. A tragedy sometimes - but we will see. For sure some companies will go down in spite of economical help programs. Most are hopefully able to hibernate some weeks, months or this year - in worst case two years.

I think in most cases it's pretty clear what functions are essential and what are not. However, there has to be a fair number that are on line. A recession will always shake out those companies that are distant to fail eventually. Most businesses that are well managed with good products and adequate capital will make it and probably become stronger for it.

I wrote this before in another thread, and C/P here.

Why do airlines even getting stimulus? They spent a decade shoving itself into harm’s way by strip mining their balance sheets to fund share buybacks and goose top executive stock options. Giving them stimulus is irresponsible and mind boggling. That’s because for decades upon decades this has been a highly cyclical industry vulnerable to global dislocations caused by recessions, storms, wars, terror and more. Accordingly, airline companies absolutely need deep equity balance sheets and ample standby liquidity, even at the expense of short term earnings. If banks are required to hold minimum to survive certain stress, so should airline companies.

Just to remind, instead of accumulating cash reserves for rainy days, big four companies (Delta, American, Southwest and United) wasted and recklessly spent more than 40 billion in cash on share buyback in past ten years, for the sole purpose of enriching the very shareholders that will now be bailed out by taxpayers.

If they can't raise enough cash in the high cost long term debt markets or by issuing preferred stock or equity, there is only one solution... chapter 11. Holy Moly, that’s why we have this legal protection procedure. And if they file it, they would still be running, just under different management, court appointed. Why not to let the gamblers and so called investors who piled into these stocks get their just deserts. That is, a 100% loss on their gambling stakes because that’s all it ever was when the big four’s combined market cap hit $130 billion compared to just $43 billion now.

And when those gamblers and investors lose their money and bankrupt, let them file class action suits against the idiots and clowns on the boards of directors who made such foolish decisions in the first place. Hopefully, these assholes would be legally stalked and harassed to the ends of the earth as an object lesson in the personal cost of imperiling corporate balance sheets to feather their own stock options nest.

Let them go bankrupt, no bailout.

 

[Dragonlady]

The primary problem is not government bureaucracy but a lack of information as to where to send the checks coupled with the time to print and delivery checks. Anyone who has filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return or receives Social Security payments automatically deposited should have money in their bank account in April. Paper checks from the government will be delayed several weeks just like tax refunds by checks because of the time required to print checks and delivery them. Those that have not filed a tax return for 2018 or 2019 and do not receive social security are the ones that will not receive the money for months because they will have to file a claim.

All you wrote is correct. But I do have a question. Why should postal employees be forced to deliver checks to mailboxes?

Because it is considered an essential service.

By whom?

Oh, so it's OK that someone get infected and possibly die, because they're essential service?

What's next, is government going to decide what items you are allowed to buy based on is item essential or not? Oh shit, they're already doing that.

The same people that declare that police, fire, medical services, food production. and distribution are essential service also declare the mail is also. If folks don't get their s.s. checks, retirement, other funds through the mail, they will have no money to buy groceries and pay for medical services. In a national emergency, someone has to make the decision on what services are essential and by default it's the government.

We make a difference between system-relevant and system-irrelevant jobs. Nearly everyone agrees what this is and what not. By the way: We found out system relevant jobs are often not payed very well. Tourism for example is system irrelevant at all - even dangerous. A tragedy sometimes - but we will see. For sure some companies will go down in spite of economical help programs. Most are hopefully able to hibernate some weeks, months or this year - in worst case two years.

I think in most cases it's pretty clear what functions are essential and what are not. However, there has to be a fair number that are on line. A recession will always shake out those companies that are distant to fail eventually. Most businesses that are well managed with good products and adequate capital will make it and probably become stronger for it.

I wrote this before in another thread, and C/P here.

Why do airlines even getting stimulus? They spent a decade shoving itself into harm’s way by strip mining their balance sheets to fund share buybacks and goose top executive stock options. Giving them stimulus is irresponsible and mind boggling. That’s because for decades upon decades this has been a highly cyclical industry vulnerable to global dislocations caused by recessions, storms, wars, terror and more. Accordingly, airline companies absolutely need deep equity balance sheets and ample standby liquidity, even at the expense of short term earnings. If banks are required to hold minimum to survive certain stress, so should airline companies.

Just to remind, instead of accumulating cash reserves for rainy days, big four companies (Delta, American, Southwest and United) wasted and recklessly spent more than 40 billion in cash on share buyback in past ten years, for the sole purpose of enriching the very shareholders that will now be bailed out by taxpayers.

If they can't raise enough cash in the high cost long term debt markets or by issuing preferred stock or equity, there is only one solution... chapter 11. Holy Moly, that’s why we have this legal protection procedure. And if they file it, they would still be running, just under different management, court appointed. Why not to let the gamblers and so called investors who piled into these stocks get their just deserts. That is, a 100% loss on their gambling stakes because that’s all it ever was when the big four’s combined market cap hit $130 billion compared to just $43 billion now.

And when those gamblers and investors lose their money and bankrupt, let them file class action suits against the idiots and clowns on the boards of directors who made such foolish decisions in the first place. Hopefully, these assholes would be legally stalked and harassed to the ends of the earth as an object lesson in the personal cost of imperiling corporate balance sheets to feather their own stock options nest.

Let them go bankrupt, no bailout.

Ditto the big clothing companies who off-shored production, lowering the quality of their clothing, but not their prices.

 

[zaangalewa]

The primary problem is not government bureaucracy but a lack of information as to where to send the checks coupled with the time to print and delivery checks. Anyone who has filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return or receives Social Security payments automatically deposited should have money in their bank account in April. Paper checks from the government will be delayed several weeks just like tax refunds by checks because of the time required to print checks and delivery them. Those that have not filed a tax return for 2018 or 2019 and do not receive social security are the ones that will not receive the money for months because they will have to file a claim.

All you wrote is correct. But I do have a question. Why should postal employees be forced to deliver checks to mailboxes?

Because it is considered an essential service.

By whom?

Oh, so it's OK that someone get infected and possibly die, because they're essential service?

What's next, is government going to decide what items you are allowed to buy based on is item essential or not? Oh shit, they're already doing that.

The same people that declare that police, fire, medical services, food production. and distribution are essential service also declare the mail is also. If folks don't get their s.s. checks, retirement, other funds through the mail, they will have no money to buy groceries and pay for medical services. In a national emergency, someone has to make the decision on what services are essential and by default it's the government.

We make a difference between system-relevant and system-irrelevant jobs. Nearly everyone agrees what this is and what not. By the way: We found out system relevant jobs are often not payed very well. Tourism for example is system irrelevant at all - even dangerous. A tragedy sometimes - but we will see. For sure some companies will go down in spite of economical help programs. Most are hopefully able to hibernate some weeks, months or this year - in worst case two years.

I think in most cases it's pretty clear what functions are essential and what are not. However, there has to be a fair number that are on line. A recession will always shake out those companies that are distant to fail eventually. Most businesses that are well managed with good products and adequate capital will make it and probably become stronger for it.

Be happy that you don't know what I think about the irrealism and fanatisms of the economy class. And be happy that you don't know, what I think about the species "men" in general, specially about the so called "alpha-wolves", who we better could call "alpha-idiots", because a real alpha-wolve is able to give his life for the "sheep" of his pack.

 

[Redfish]

---When stores and stadiums are empty and our cities look like ghost towns, consumer spending—the lifeblood of the economy—will lessen by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. The implosion in spending will lead to millions of fewer jobs, to even less spending—a downward spiral with no obvious end in sight.---

Just do what our moms did when one kid had chicken pox, expose it to everyone and get it over with. We can't afford to let Democrats ruin our economy.

We need a massive economic response to counter the threat of the coronavirus

For the sake of our country, let us work together to quickly craft an economic response equal to the massive economic threat before us.

thehill.com

How many lives are you personally willing to sacrifice for Trump? Give us a hard number. Which of your relatives or loved ones will you give over to appease your god?

how many babies are you willing to kill, lib?

Gosh, it just depends on how hungry I am at any given moment.

typical, make a joke about the murder of millions of innocents. You are a sick excuse for a human being.

They aren't "innocents". They're not people. I wish to hell you fools would give a rat's ass for living children, but since you don't, you don't get to pretend to care about the unborn because you will trample each and every one of them underfoot the moment they take their first breath.

not people???? so when a premie is born at 6 months its not a person??? you are sick. What have the dems done for the poor black kids in our big cities? They all have democrat mayors, WTF have they done except make everything worse? The vast majority of "not a persons" killed by abortions are minorities, from the party of diversity. You have no morals, ethics, reason, or common sense. You assholes care about nothing but power. Screw you and the horse you rode in on. I am fed up with reading your bullshit.

 

[zaangalewa]

... They aren't "innocents". They're not people. I wish to hell you fools would give a rat's ass for living children, ...

Without any doubt begins a human being to live in the body of the own mother. And such a human being will be often aborted (= executed) although it is totally innocent. And if you know now a mother, who don't like to abort her baby, but has the feeling she has to do so, then let me speak with her. I will try to find parents for her baby - and I'm very sure I will find here in Germany parents for her child , who will love this child with all their power.

 

[Dragonlady]

... They aren't "innocents". They're not people. I wish to hell you fools would give a rat's ass for living children, ...

Without any doubt begins a human being to live in the body of the own mother. And such a human being will be often aborted (= executed) although it is totally innocent. And if you know now a mother, who don't like to abort her baby, but has the feeling she has to do so, then let me speak with her. I will try to find parents for her baby - and I'm very sure I will find here in Germany parents for her child , who will love this child with all their power.

Have your families adopts some of the 100,000 children who become wards of the state and placed into state care permanently every single year. You're not adopting all of the babies who need homes, so don't tell me you have homes for all of the children who are being aborted, when you don't have homes for all of the children being born.

Finding parents for her baby is not going to help her. She can't afford to carry the child to term with no job security and no health care. Vote for programs to help women keep their babies. Vote for maternity leave, job security, universal health care, subsidized day care - all the the things that the rest of the first world provides to pregnant women.

Women don't want to abort their babies and they sure as hell don't want to give them away.

 

[lennypartiv]

Well, they kinda do. But only their freedom. Yours is not important.

Yep, Democrats don't care about American values. They don't care about our economy. Dems are clueless about how the world works.

 

[dudmuck]

“If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism, they will reject democracy” ~ David Frum

 

[Ame®icano]

“If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism, they will reject democracy” ~ David Frum

Define "wining democratically".

You mean something like ballot harvesting, or early voting?

 

[Flopper]

The primary problem is not government bureaucracy but a lack of information as to where to send the checks coupled with the time to print and delivery checks. Anyone who has filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return or receives Social Security payments automatically deposited should have money in their bank account in April. Paper checks from the government will be delayed several weeks just like tax refunds by checks because of the time required to print checks and delivery them. Those that have not filed a tax return for 2018 or 2019 and do not receive social security are the ones that will not receive the money for months because they will have to file a claim.

All you wrote is correct. But I do have a question. Why should postal employees be forced to deliver checks to mailboxes?

Because it is considered an essential service.

By whom?

Oh, so it's OK that someone get infected and possibly die, because they're essential service?

What's next, is government going to decide what items you are allowed to buy based on is item essential or not? Oh shit, they're already doing that.

The same people that declare that police, fire, medical services, food production. and distribution are essential service also declare the mail is also. If folks don't get their s.s. checks, retirement, other funds through the mail, they will have no money to buy groceries and pay for medical services. In a national emergency, someone has to make the decision on what services are essential and by default it's the government.

We make a difference between system-relevant and system-irrelevant jobs. Nearly everyone agrees what this is and what not. By the way: We found out system relevant jobs are often not payed very well. Tourism for example is system irrelevant at all - even dangerous. A tragedy sometimes - but we will see. For sure some companies will go down in spite of economical help programs. Most are hopefully able to hibernate some weeks, months or this year - in worst case two years.

I think in most cases it's pretty clear what functions are essential and what are not. However, there has to be a fair number that are on line. A recession will always shake out those companies that are distant to fail eventually. Most businesses that are well managed with good products and adequate capital will make it and probably become stronger for it.

I wrote this before in another thread, and C/P here.

Why do airlines even getting stimulus? They spent a decade shoving itself into harm’s way by strip mining their balance sheets to fund share buybacks and goose top executive stock options. Giving them stimulus is irresponsible and mind boggling. That’s because for decades upon decades this has been a highly cyclical industry vulnerable to global dislocations caused by recessions, storms, wars, terror and more. Accordingly, airline companies absolutely need deep equity balance sheets and ample standby liquidity, even at the expense of short term earnings. If banks are required to hold minimum to survive certain stress, so should airline companies.

Just to remind, instead of accumulating cash reserves for rainy days, big four companies (Delta, American, Southwest and United) wasted and recklessly spent more than 40 billion in cash on share buyback in past ten years, for the sole purpose of enriching the very shareholders that will now be bailed out by taxpayers.

If they can't raise enough cash in the high cost long term debt markets or by issuing preferred stock or equity, there is only one solution... chapter 11. Holy Moly, that’s why we have this legal protection procedure. And if they file it, they would still be running, just under different management, court appointed. Why not to let the gamblers and so called investors who piled into these stocks get their just deserts. That is, a 100% loss on their gambling stakes because that’s all it ever was when the big four’s combined market cap hit $130 billion compared to just $43 billion now.

And when those gamblers and investors lose their money and bankrupt, let them file class action suits against the idiots and clowns on the boards of directors who made such foolish decisions in the first place. Hopefully, these assholes would be legally stalked and harassed to the ends of the earth as an object lesson in the personal cost of imperiling corporate balance sheets to feather their own stock options nest.

Let them go bankrupt, no bailout.

Although I agree with several of the points in your post, I do not agree that government should allow the airlines to go into bankruptcy. We do need them as well as their 10 million employees plus the millions of people that work in industries that depend on the airlines for survival from the huge air frame manufactures, hotels, travel agents, to the small businesses in airports.

If the airlines when into bankruptcy, there would reorganizations, changes in management and ownership. The large airlines would continue to fly and smaller ones would disappear giving major carriers less competition. The same unethical or illegal practices would continue. The way you fix the problem is not to let them go into bankruptcy but to change the laws and regulation to eliminate unethical, unfair, and illegal practices.

 

[Ame®icano]

The primary problem is not government bureaucracy but a lack of information as to where to send the checks coupled with the time to print and delivery checks. Anyone who has filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return or receives Social Security payments automatically deposited should have money in their bank account in April. Paper checks from the government will be delayed several weeks just like tax refunds by checks because of the time required to print checks and delivery them. Those that have not filed a tax return for 2018 or 2019 and do not receive social security are the ones that will not receive the money for months because they will have to file a claim.

All you wrote is correct. But I do have a question. Why should postal employees be forced to deliver checks to mailboxes?

Because it is considered an essential service.

By whom?

Oh, so it's OK that someone get infected and possibly die, because they're essential service?

What's next, is government going to decide what items you are allowed to buy based on is item essential or not? Oh shit, they're already doing that.

The same people that declare that police, fire, medical services, food production. and distribution are essential service also declare the mail is also. If folks don't get their s.s. checks, retirement, other funds through the mail, they will have no money to buy groceries and pay for medical services. In a national emergency, someone has to make the decision on what services are essential and by default it's the government.

We make a difference between system-relevant and system-irrelevant jobs. Nearly everyone agrees what this is and what not. By the way: We found out system relevant jobs are often not payed very well. Tourism for example is system irrelevant at all - even dangerous. A tragedy sometimes - but we will see. For sure some companies will go down in spite of economical help programs. Most are hopefully able to hibernate some weeks, months or this year - in worst case two years.

I think in most cases it's pretty clear what functions are essential and what are not. However, there has to be a fair number that are on line. A recession will always shake out those companies that are distant to fail eventually. Most businesses that are well managed with good products and adequate capital will make it and probably become stronger for it.

I wrote this before in another thread, and C/P here.

Why do airlines even getting stimulus? They spent a decade shoving itself into harm’s way by strip mining their balance sheets to fund share buybacks and goose top executive stock options. Giving them stimulus is irresponsible and mind boggling. That’s because for decades upon decades this has been a highly cyclical industry vulnerable to global dislocations caused by recessions, storms, wars, terror and more. Accordingly, airline companies absolutely need deep equity balance sheets and ample standby liquidity, even at the expense of short term earnings. If banks are required to hold minimum to survive certain stress, so should airline companies.

Just to remind, instead of accumulating cash reserves for rainy days, big four companies (Delta, American, Southwest and United) wasted and recklessly spent more than 40 billion in cash on share buyback in past ten years, for the sole purpose of enriching the very shareholders that will now be bailed out by taxpayers.

If they can't raise enough cash in the high cost long term debt markets or by issuing preferred stock or equity, there is only one solution... chapter 11. Holy Moly, that’s why we have this legal protection procedure. And if they file it, they would still be running, just under different management, court appointed. Why not to let the gamblers and so called investors who piled into these stocks get their just deserts. That is, a 100% loss on their gambling stakes because that’s all it ever was when the big four’s combined market cap hit $130 billion compared to just $43 billion now.

And when those gamblers and investors lose their money and bankrupt, let them file class action suits against the idiots and clowns on the boards of directors who made such foolish decisions in the first place. Hopefully, these assholes would be legally stalked and harassed to the ends of the earth as an object lesson in the personal cost of imperiling corporate balance sheets to feather their own stock options nest.

Let them go bankrupt, no bailout.

Although I agree with several of the points in your post, I do not agree that government should allow the airlines to go into bankruptcy. We do need them as well as their 10 million employees plus the millions of people that work in industries that depend on the airlines for survival from the huge air frame manufactures, hotels, travel agents, to the small businesses in airports.

If the airlines when into bankruptcy, there would reorganizations, changes in management and ownership. The large airlines would continue to fly and smaller ones would disappear giving major carriers less competition. The same unethical or illegal practices would continue. The way you fix the problem is not to let them go into bankruptcy but to change the laws and regulation to eliminate unethical, unfair, and illegal practices.

Your first part is in conflict with second one. Bankruptcy doesn't mean they're going to cease to exist. Not all would go bankrupt. Smaller carrier would most likely be in better shape than large ones whose stock prices were driven high by share buybacks and Wall Street. That the risk they're taking by investing, and if they lose, that's their problem, they should've know better. The same should've happened with banks in recent financial crisis, bankruptcy should clean the garbage out of those companies. But government then, just as now, decided to use bailout, which is typical socialist solution for every problem.