March 23rd, 2020 at 11:04 AM ^
If there's one bright spot in all of this, it's that younger kids have been very resilient to this disease.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:59 AM ^
Hope I'm wrong, but it's too little too late. Nothing short of either complete, police enforced isolation or blanket testing is going to stop or even significantly slow things down. It'll help, don't get me wrong, but we (especially our elderly) are in for a rough time short of those measures which of course won't happen here. There's just too many exceptions, too little enforcement for a measure like this to knock back the spread significantly.
Social distancing works. We know this from 1918 and from the European countries that are now seeing their curves slow down. But it’s a gradual thing. If you’re expecting the number of new cases to instantly stop growing, that’s not realistic.
I'm 100% on board with social distancing. My point is actually we're not doing enough, early enough. Come this time tomorrow, there will still be lots people going out and congregating because there are a ton of exceptions to the order, and likely with no enforcement anyway.
This is after we waited weeks while it spread undetected because we didn't have adequate testing. So yes, I agree this will flatten out the curve but I don't think it will flatten it nearly enough.
Better find a way to get money to the people or there will be violence and people taking the money.
I’d venture a guess that a majority of the country aren’t so privileged to be able to work from home.
If anything this has shown how broken Capitalism is.
Your middle paragraph is spot-on.
The rest? Debatable or worse.
You were fine til the last line. Your opinion on capitalism is not required nor helpful.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:32 AM ^
...nor rooted in any kind of cogent thought.
<insert Billy Madison meme here>
No, if anything this has shown how capitalism and economic activity are literally the only way to reliably give everyone a living, and government stimulus checks are totally incapable of making up the difference.
It literally shows that "capitalism" as practiced right now does not in any way RELIABLY guarantee the safety and security, either physically or financially, of citizens living under it. When so many cannot afford a blip of a few weeks or months, something is not functioning close to optimally. And it does show that the government simply printing money and distributing it does not work, which is not really what anyone envisions as a long-term system anyway, simply a band-aid.
Many companies and industries asking for bailouts have had record profits over the past few years or more. Instead of funneling these profits into a fund to account for potential issues, much of the money goes into the pockets of ownership, or into investments by the company that they will not or cannot liquidate (stock buybacks, PPE, etc). See previous bailouts. This is business making a risk/reward calculation and coming up on the short end.
If a business can't withstand what's happened just this far, how healthy is the structure of "capitalism" as constituted? This doesn't mean capitalism is inherently bad, or even that it isn't the best known system, or that socialism or communism is better or good. What it really shows is that humans have not devised a particularly robust system of government and economics, despite how much we like to think of ourselves as in control of everything.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:07 AM ^
Reliable is relative. Capitalism goes hand in hand with democracy, about which Winston Churchill said it was the worst kind of government except for all the other ones that had ever been tried. Capitalism isn't perfect and the messy ways of human affairs will always find flaws that can be fixed. But it is still the only thing in the world that has ever lifted anyone out of poverty. After this virus crap is over, we're going to need a massive dose of it.
March 23rd, 2020 at 11:53 AM ^
Capitalism puts many more into poverty on a regular basis than it has or ever will pull out.
Bullshit. We have the richest poor people the world has ever seen. What did that, if not capitalism?
Would you rather be a poor person in the U.S. or a poor person in Denmark?
I’m not anti-capitalism but I am pro-safety net.
And I think you make his point. The real question is would you rather be a poor person in 2020 or a poor person in 1218 or 1647 or 1902, etc. I think he's saying that Denmark couldn't have a safety net AND a higher standard of living without capitalism having been the dominant economic force of the last couple centuries.
We also have the highest income inequality in 50 years right now and a top 10% that paid less in effective taxes than everybody else. There is a middle ground between our system is perfectly fine right now and we need to tear it all down and become communist, etc. I don't think WD's point was the latter. Our economy is at it's best when we have a strong middle class. I'm not sure why anybody thinks stagnating wages, a huge income inequality, the top not paying their fair share of taxes, rising student loan debt and medical costs is a good way to accomplish that.
The goal of capitalism is to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. It is evidenced by many graphs like this one that show how over the last 4-5 decades we've stripped away the social safety nets and cooed to capitalism and the wealth has all gone to one place.
Gotta agree with you here.
Worldwide, the standard of living has gone up incredibly...life expectancy, education, poverty, access to goods and services...all these things on a global basis have improved dramatically over the past few centuries. The invention of things like fractional reserve banking and the credit market, coupled with the concepts of capitalism/pooled wealth inarguably accelerated technology that makes these things a reality. That they also have very real negative impacts on some very real people and can and are used often to extend the gap between the richest and poorest, doesn't change any of that.
March 23rd, 2020 at 12:07 PM ^
Definition of terms is important, and the lack thereof underlies, in my experience, many of the pointless endless threads here and elsewhere. We need actual dialogue, not assertion, defense of positions, biases, etc.
So...what is your definition of reliable in the context of the discussion we're having?
Reliable in that economic activity is the only force by which anyone has ever made a living, and capitalism is the free application of economic activity. If you ask for anything to be 100% reliable for every person, everywhere, all the time, you're going to be disappointed. But if you want the best way for the people as a whole to prosper, you can rely on the fact that capitalism is the only answer.
As you say, definition of terms is important. "Broken" means it doesn't work. A broken clock doesn't run. Capitalism works, and is therefore not broken.
So...no, reliable to you does not mean a system that can handle a week or a month of a situation like this, then? You don't think a reliable system should?
Neither I, nor anyone else in the thread, expressed an expectation where it is "100% reliable for every person, everywhere, all the time" so I'm not sure who you are talking to there. Do some people, such as myself, think certain aspects can be fixed or improved to make the number closer to 100% than it currently is, yes. Do some feel strongly about this, you bet. Is that the same as saying capitalism sucks and should be done away with in favor of a planned economy? No.
Your definition of broken, as you use it, clearly differs from WD's, and that's obvious from his response to me of "Exactly" after I clarify what I believed to be his meaning. As in, not worthless to the point of needing to burn it down, but broken like a clock that's alarm doesn't work and is therefore not fully functional for people who need that aspect of it's purpose. People often say our government is broken. Congress is broken. Yet the government successfully administers thousands of programs every day. Congress successfully passes legislation and conducts oversight on many things that don't get covered in the press. That's the definition of broken being used here. Substituting a different meaning for the sake of setting up a straw man to argue against rather than understanding or clarifying what the guy is saying and arguing against that seems disingenuous to me.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:16 AM ^
I'm not saying that there isn't a better system out there or that capitalism can't be improved, but I would like to think that even the most humanistic person out there would know that we can't guarantee anything especially financial security. There's no system that will do that.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:37 AM ^
Better find a way to get money to the people or there will be violence and people taking the money.
Yeah… it's called a savings account...
… and living within one's means.
I get it. I've done a lot of work in the Bay Area and seen people making 6 figures living out of a RV. I understand people working hourly jobs can live pay check to pay check. There are opportunities for improvement out there.
But I've also read recent articles that says the average adult American owes between $30 and $70K between all their credit cards. <-- THAT's why we have no financial security in this country and morons like WD bash our financial system.
March 23rd, 2020 at 11:21 AM ^
People owe that much because middle class wages haven't gone up in 40 years, meanwhile we're now expected to finance our own retirement and pay insanely high health insurance costs.
Besides, the government puts everything on the national credit card, why shouldn't we?
March 23rd, 2020 at 11:45 AM ^
Besides, the government puts everything on the national credit card, why shouldn't we?
I demand more than that.
* No bailouts for companies that didn't have a rainy day fund.
* No bailouts for companies which use tax credits to buy back stock.
* Create incentives for companies which bring manufacturing back to the US. <-- that is where the tax credits should go; not across the board.
* Write your elected officials demanding as much (when do you think was the last time WD contacted a rep or senator), go to their town halls. Publicly call them out when they duck a town hall or previously scheduled meeting.
* Convict elected officials who use their position to influence their investment portfolio instead of what is best for the country.
* Stop voting for people who don't embrace those ideals.
March 23rd, 2020 at 12:23 PM ^
As long as human beings lose their moral compass our governments will continue to fleece its citizens. Worked in government for 3 decades and can tell you first hand there is corruption at every level. Higher you go worse it gets. Was the main reason I left. Follow protocal for flu / virus and shop sanely we will get through this. One benefit of this is people getting outdoors cuz they are stir crazy. Get back to nature.
I think that's the root of any of this. Human nature does not lend itself to any system that can function in a theoretical state of perfection or anything approaching it. It's possible that the human mind is ill-equipped due to evolution or design to handle things such as modernism, post-modernism, technology, etc. and is prone to make more poor decisions now than in the past. It's possible that people have been trained into that type of thinking. It's possible that the effects are no longer as isolated due to a global community. Could be all or other things...but the point that humans need to be better individually and collectively in order for government to be less corrupt is a point I agree with.
March 23rd, 2020 at 12:57 PM ^
I''m hoping that if one positive thing comes out of this whole saga its that we recognize the importance of keeping strategically important manufacturing at home. Antibiotics, electrical grid equipment, PPE, all that stuff. And I'd do more than tax credits as an incentive, I'd bring the fucking hammer down on any corporation that tried to move that stuff offshore (although that would have been more helpful 25 years ago).
Imagine we go to war with China again. Trade comes to a halt, half our plants idle due to lack of parts, and people start dying from strep throat. It's a completely unacceptable state of affairs as far as I'm concerned.
And this is one of the important criticisms of pure market-based economics. A global market causes the local fragilities you describe because the system does not have a way to address radical changes in demand for necessities quickly enough to preserve the system itself from collapse or at least massive socially-damaging disruption.
March 23rd, 2020 at 11:53 AM ^
Besides, the government puts everything on the national credit card, why shouldn't we?
All the more reason for the government not to.
Financing with debt is something that capitalists in the world do routinely. It's not the debt that's the issue, it's whether the debt is used to finance something that is ultimately productive or not, and the opportunity cost in doing so.
Yes it is, but I think it's quite clear that the similarities between capitalist businesses and the government end with your first sentence. Deficit spending is something businesses try ruthlessly to avoid because too much of it causes them to disappear.
They both spend money they don't have to improve current and future prospects. Done in a corrupt or unintelligent fashion, it's a snowballing disaster. Done appropriately, it triggers growth. I ran a company that used heavy debt leveraging to move from $500k revenue with heavy losses to $10M with excellent profitability that created dozens of new jobs in the span of 3 years. That's the similarity I was describing.
My response was to you indicating there were multiple reasons not to put things on the country's credit card. I think we both agree that unintelligent borrowing/deficit spending has occurred in both the public and private sectors.
March 23rd, 2020 at 11:50 AM ^
Can you link to such a study? This is what a quick google search uncovered for me (i skimmed to find something anywhere near as high as you cited)
https://www.valuepenguin.com/average-credit-card-debt
I know this is a losing battle, but when you make claims that people are likely to be skeptical of, you should at least actually cite a study/article. Who knows, when you look for a link, you might either learn something or save yourself the embarrassment of making a ludicrous statement.
I am not going to defend people who recklessly accrue debt on non essentials because there are people who are certainly guilty of that, but did you ever stop and think that maybe the reason most people are accruing more debt is because the current climate is forcing them to do that just to survive? Budgeting only goes so far when the numbers just don't add up no matter how much you try to live within your means. Wages have been stagnant, cost of education is soaring, medical costs are out of control even if you have insurance. All combined together create an environment where it is hard for middle class people to actually save and for lower income to rise to higher classes. Right now we are telling people they need an advanced degree to get the job they want in a lot of fields and those people are finding some of those jobs are not even paying enough to allow them to save. It is kind of con in a way at the moment. Saying everyone should have enough savings to withstand something like this is borderline arrogant elitism.
March 23rd, 2020 at 11:16 AM ^
Unfortunately, we are currently incentivizing large companies to change precisely nothing. They spend their large tax cuts, buy back stock, everyone gets rich, wee free money, etc. then crisis comes and they show up in Washington saying "money pweaseee :( " and they get it so they'll go right back to old habits again as soon as we're out of this. I think you either have to let companies fail (which the government won't let happen) or you gotta have a more regulated capitalism than what we're doing right now.
I don't know why America's money / taxpayer dollars should be spent bailing out companies with apparently no back up plan. Everyone else is expected to hold a personal 3-6 month emergency fund, but our largest corporations are running to the government for a bailout after a few weeks
Exactly, it is very bizarre to me that we have reached the point where some are holding lower and middle class people who are being crunched in multiple ways up to the standard of having an emergency fund, while not expecting companies to.
WD comin’ with the??? takes!
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:41 AM ^
The Michigan Difference!
He says posting from his iPhone/Android/Computer which were all designed thanks to capitalism.
And as a self-proclaimed hyperfanatic whose entire life revolves around a sport that can only take place in its current form in a capitalistic world.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:02 AM ^
He said it's broken, he didn't say burn it down (at least in this comment...who knows what's been said further down since I started typing). How about acknowledging its weaknesses and shoring them up so the next one of these doesn't hurt as badly?
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:16 AM ^
Exactly.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:08 AM ^
You really have no clue how much “socialism” was involved in making the iphone.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:34 AM ^
Designed by capitalism
Produced by slave labor
I'm so tired of everyone's stupid self righteous opinions.
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:51 AM ^
I gave no opinion. Just pointed out, with facts (if you peeped the link you would know), how faulty the logic is behind a statement like the one that was made. Who cares what you are sick of?
March 23rd, 2020 at 10:59 AM ^
I realize the layout of this website sucks, so I won’t insult you for thinking that I was responding to you when I wasn’t.
Try to follow along next time.
DOGS AND CATS LIVING TOGETHER.
MASS HYSTERIA!!!!!
OH THE HUMANITY!!
OH THE FELINITY!!!
OH THE CANINITY!!!!
Oh man, you may have well insulted these people’s religion or family WD. How dare you, even for one second, suggest that there may be any sort of downside to capitalism, even as socialism is being summoned to save the day once again. Of course, the failings of capitalism become easy to understand at times like these. Its not profitable enough to be prepared for stuff like global pandemics.