Bad Economic Predictions
Bad Economic Predictions
Goldman is predicting a 24% decline in GDP next quarter, averaging out to -3.8% this year.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
They can go fuck themselves.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
Latest coronavirus stimulus fails to get votes, market futures hit limit down of 5% (again).
I'm sure the bill will get passed eventually, but not a good look. As for the markets, I have no idea how they find a bottom until we get some better medicine.
I'm sure the bill will get passed eventually, but not a good look. As for the markets, I have no idea how they find a bottom until we get some better medicine.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
The Fed just announced it will buy an unlimited amount of treasuries and mortgage backed securities
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
Seemed more appropriate to move this discussion here as it's more about the economy than the coronavirus...
So Ds claim to always pass legislation for the people, but their strongholds are shitshows and their core voters still maintain the same position in the economy. Rs clearly favor passing legislation to help corporations, which I guess they believe will then save the people. It's harder to see if that's been effective or not, but I'm guessing no. If fact, based upon the clear corporate greed we see daily, I'm going to say fuck no.
Is there a right answer?
Is it possible to limit capitalism enough so that employing people becomes more profitable than not? This is what I was getting at with this statement:
Is it even possible? Basically, how do we stop the trend of constant layoffs to boost stocks, running on skeleton crews to boost bottom lines, etc?
Is there a sweet spot to still let the market be the market, yet limiting executives' ability to act in their own self interest, while also providing incentive to maintain a large workforce with good benefits? I know...utopia...
I was thinking and reading more about this, and to be fair to the Rs, they rubber stamped the House's bill earlier in the week despite it containing stuff they didn't agree with. The Ds were apparently not willing to do the same. (Just going on this information alone, it does seem like the Ds are playing politics. Being honest, it would absolutely benefit them if this crisis caused the economy to tank and people to suffer. I mean, it is an election year and an R sits at the top of the tower.)
So Ds claim to always pass legislation for the people, but their strongholds are shitshows and their core voters still maintain the same position in the economy. Rs clearly favor passing legislation to help corporations, which I guess they believe will then save the people. It's harder to see if that's been effective or not, but I'm guessing no. If fact, based upon the clear corporate greed we see daily, I'm going to say fuck no.
Is there a right answer?
Is it possible to limit capitalism enough so that employing people becomes more profitable than not? This is what I was getting at with this statement:
I fully understand payroll taxes, but how can we make it so it's more profitable to employ people than not? Without going so far that companies employ too many people...Leisher wrote: I was pondering a new tax idea. Could a tax cut for businesses be possible based upon how many people they employ. The key here being it would save the government all of most of the cost of that person being unemployed, while also being cost effective for businesses so it actually encourages hiring.
The point would be to encourage hiring instead of companies trying to run on skeleton crews. Make it so laying people off isn't necessarily a "go to" method of boosting quarterly/annual performance for stock gains.
Is it even possible? Basically, how do we stop the trend of constant layoffs to boost stocks, running on skeleton crews to boost bottom lines, etc?Is there a sweet spot to still let the market be the market, yet limiting executives' ability to act in their own self interest, while also providing incentive to maintain a large workforce with good benefits? I know...utopia...
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
No.
No.Leisher wrote: I fully understand payroll taxes, but how can we make it so it's more profitable to employ people than not? Without going so far that companies employ too many people... Is it even possible? Basically, how do we stop the trend of constant layoffs to boost stocks, running on skeleton crews to boost bottom lines, etc?
The UK took the approach of increasing unemployment to 80%. That saves the workers who are let go, but doesn't help the companies.
Any approach is going to have abusers, winners/losers, and other issues.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
Like I said, utopia.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
I am highly skeptical of an April exit. Especially an early April one.Finally, it's essential that we plan now for how to get America back to work. Whether it's early April or early May, or checkpoints along the way, we should have a clear date to shoot for, with clear benchmarks for what needs to be in place to reopen America. It may be phased, and should be regionally sensitive, but, clearly, we need a concrete set of objectives developed and adopted now.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
As stated in the Trump thread, he's planning to pretend life can go back to normal after his 15 day plan is up.
He's genuinely going to get people killed.
Exciting times.
He's genuinely going to get people killed.
Exciting times.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
Then I think my plan will be to hunker the fuck down and let the other people die, and hopefully there's enough herd immunity around that it stops eventually, I guess?
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
I just did the most an American citizen can do under President Trump:
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
Worst case scenario: This becomes Great Depression 2. A hundred million people out of work and hungry.
And armed to the teeth.
Things could get very, very bad if we tank the economy. Much worse than flooding the hospitals for 3 months, in my completely wrong and evil opinion.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Bad Economic Predictions
Good luck, person who probably entered our country illegally based on that last name.
I don't know quite how to balance this virus against economics. We have X Capacity to care for people. Do we just try to hit X? Obviously, we want to increase X, but that's not easy. Any decision made will be terrible. Either we clamp down too hard, or we don't clamp down hard enough. There will be no perfect balance.
c'mon medicine...
I don't know quite how to balance this virus against economics. We have X Capacity to care for people. Do we just try to hit X? Obviously, we want to increase X, but that's not easy. Any decision made will be terrible. Either we clamp down too hard, or we don't clamp down hard enough. There will be no perfect balance.
c'mon medicine...
It's not me, it's someone else.
Bad Economic Predictions
Per Governor Cuomo it sounds like the plan is going to be to isolate the most vulnerable after a few weeks, return to our lives, and let the healthy fight this until we get herd immunity.
Bad Economic Predictions
?
How good do you think the economy is going to do if 7.7 million people die because we didn't bother locking down and stopping the spread of the virus?
Right? Imagine if this was a deadlier virus or if it mutates...
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Bad Economic Predictions
Better than if we tank the economy and put 100 million armed people out of work.Leisher wrote:How good do you think the economy is going to do if 7.7 million people die because we didn't bother locking down and stopping the spread of the virus? .
The great majority of the 7.7 million, in your example, that would die would already be retired pensioners.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Bad Economic Predictions
Had we locked down 4 weeks ago, this would already be over. Unfortunately too many people in charge worship money.
Glad to hear you agree with Hitler that certain folks need to be culled.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”