I like COVID 19

[watisthis]

I think you mean you are willing to accept lack of freedom - and not only accept it but also feel nice and happy locked up in your house unable to leave. I agree with reasonable steps to slow the spread, but not destroying the world economy and many, many lives in order to prevent 0.03% of deaths. And this has to end soon. Very soon. To be clear, it's the principle - not that I personally can't handle it. There are many, many people unemployed and suffering right now. Those people have to be a high priority.

Wait, the people needing help are no longer greedy and envious? You mean to tell me the economy is doing poorly because those greedy, envious, lower and middle-class workers are unemployed and now we need them to get back to work? That sounds awfully greedy. Why are we letting these welfare queens have a stimulus check in the first place? Should they not pull themselves up by their bootstraps? I mean surely these people should have had 6 months worth of money saved up for times like these. We need to bail out business, but people too? That sounds like 'socialism' and America should never give these ungrateful, greedy, envious, workers nothing! If these peons won't work then the billionaire wealth distributors and job creators will have to fix America!

Ah, yes, lack of freedom. Like the freedom to die while at work to save the economy when the gov't should have had systems and social programs in place. The freedom for the Republican-held gov't to let down middle and lower-class Americans time and time again. What is this recession number 4 for them? Boy, do I love it when you preach to us about your lack of economic and political knowledge.

Sponsored

 

[Docscurlock]

That's how wars start when armed mobs rule the street. Not my idea of freedom. No need for guns here - we can protest without having to threaten and intimidate.

I wouldn't be intimidated by them

 

[rick81721]

What is this recession number 4 for them? Boy, do I love it when you preach to us about your lack of economic and political knowledge.

Blaming Republicans for recessions? That alone tells me all I need to know about your lack of economic and political knowledge!

 

[watisthis]

Blaming Republicans for recessions? That alone tells me all I need to know about your lack of economic and political knowledge!

Yeah, Hoover the man who didn't declare trading stop got margin called over some tulips, lmao. Happens four times more frequently under Republicans, but I'm only being just as disingenuous as the Trump supporters here.

It is almost irrelevant as economies carry over from administration to administration (don't tell that to Trump supporters.) However, I can easily point blame to laissez-faire economics aka Republicans for making the economy much worse than it should have been.

 

[rick81721]

Yeah, Hoover the man who didn't declare trading stop got margin called over some tulips, lmao. Happens four times more frequently under Republicans, but I'm only being just as disingenuous as the Trump supporters here.

It is almost irrelevant as economies carry over from administration to administration (don't tell that to Trump supporters.) However, I can easily point blame to laissez-faire economics aka Republicans for making the economy much worse than it should have been.

The business cycle doesn't care who happens to be president - you learn this in business school. Anyway, since the great depression, there have been 13 recessions - 4 started during D presidents, 9 during Repubs. And the 2001 "dot.com" recession is still debatable, some economists think it started at the end of Clinton's term. Even if not, kind of hard to blame a recession on a president who was in office for 5 weeks.

 

[Gregs24]

I wouldn't be intimidated by them

Good for you.

 

[watisthis]

The business cycle doesn't care who happens to be president - you learn this in business school.

Is that so? I don't remember learning that in macroeconomics, in relation to, predicting that there are no outside sources that have a hand in how the fed works. Weird that if economic recessions happened at intervals you'd think agents would be fully aware of that and would act upon this information appropriately. Weird how we don't do this and leave no room for gains, thus being impossible that the economy has regular cycles. Actually, some presidents have done this, just no Republicans since Eisenhower. Perhaps the Republican idea of trickle-down and laissez-faire does not work the way they tell it to the working middle and lower class.

 

[Bikeman315]

I wouldn't be intimidated by them

I just got this and who do you think I thought of first?

 

[Bikeman315]

Can someone, anyone, please get this man to shut the f-ck up.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump...iefing-by-taking-shots-at-republican-governor

 

[Bikeman315]

Can someone, anyone, please get this woman to shut the f-ck up.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...et-back-the-green-energy-movement-by-a-decade

 

[rick81721]

Is that so? I don't remember learning that in macroeconomics, in relation to, predicting that there are no outside sources that have a hand in how the fed works. Weird that if economic recessions happened at intervals you'd think agents would be fully aware of that and would act upon this information appropriately. Weird how we don't do this and leave no room for gains, thus being impossible that the economy has regular cycles. Actually, some presidents have done this, just no Republicans since Eisenhower. Perhaps the Republican idea of trickle-down and laissez-faire does not work the way they tell it to the working middle and lower class.

Haha you must have failed your undergrad course. But please, keep using the term "laissez-faire" to pretend you know what you're talking about - hilarious!

 

[Gregs24]

I wouldn't be intimidated by them

That is how to protest ! No guns, no aggression. One day the guy shouting at him may need him to save his life, which he will do.

 

[watisthis]

Haha you must have failed your undergrad course. But please, keep using the term "laissez-faire" to pretend you know what you're talking about - hilarious!

Wow, you sure showed me how wrong I am. If only there were a handful of incidents that required a glaring necessity for government regulation and to hold financial institutions accountable for their selfish and greedy actions. But none of that would be because of Republican's cozy laissez-faire attitude towards big business.

Your invaluable feedback clearly shows me you don't understand the structural problems middle and lower class people face in the Republican monetary system. Now I'm not saying Democrats are economic geniuses, but a lot can be said for the party with a long term strategy vs the other who wants instant gratification with various economic tools. Now, markets are inherently inefficient. In economics we're taught they're theoretically efficient. However, with every economic failure, you notice how these inefficiencies had horribly negative effects on the consumer class in particular. The role of government is to reduce inefficiencies when markets fail. Governments are better at allocating resources for some things, while markets are better at others. The political debate is where along the spectrum those should meet not that that they have no correlation.

 

[Gregs24]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51665497

Nice summary of where we are currently with vaccination development and why some form of social distancing is going to be required for a while

 

[rick81721]

Wow, you sure showed me how wrong I am. If only there were a handful of incidents that required a glaring necessity for government regulation and to hold financial institutions accountable for their selfish and greedy actions. But none of that would be because of Republican's cozy laissez-faire attitude towards big business.

Your invaluable feedback clearly shows me you don't understand the structural problems middle and lower class people face in the Republican monetary system. Now I'm not saying Democrats are economic geniuses, but a lot can be said for the party with a long term strategy vs the other who wants instant gratification with various economic tools. Now, markets are inherently inefficient. In economics we're taught they're theoretically efficient. However, with every economic failure, you notice how these inefficiencies had horribly negative effects on the consumer class in particular. The role of government is to reduce inefficiencies when markets fail. Governments are better at allocating resources for some things, while markets are better at others. The political debate is where along the spectrum those should meet not that that they have no correlation.

Laissez-faire again - yes!!

Sponsored