Steven Mnuchin: No one should give their lives to increase the GDP
-
Funny how this "obvious idea" that we don't and can't operate as if life is priceless, gets relentlessly denied at every level of our social discourse about Covid. Maybe obvious things aren't always obvious. Or maybe people will predictably use any and all rhetorical cudgels available to them in service of their own side of a debate, even when the only real "obvious idea" is how disingenuous the cudgel is.
Steven Mnuchin: No one should give their lives to increase the GDP
From CNN Business' David GoldmanIn a testy exchange between Ranking Member Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Brown asked why the Trump administration is so eager to send employees back to work during uncertain times.
"How many workers should give their lives to increase the GDP ... or the Dow by 1,000 points?" Brown, a Democrat, asked.
"No workers should give their lives to do that, Senator, and I think your characterization is unfair," Mnuchin said.
Mnuchin, however, said the US economy risks "permanent damage" if it does not reopen soon, and businesses must bring people back to work "in a safe way."
The debate about when to reopen the economy is central in US policy, and it's being laid bare in today's hearing.
-
The Golden Gate Bridge.
The bridge had more safety rules and features during the construction phase than any large American construction project before it. At the time it was built, the rule of thumb was a man a million, or one death per million dollars spent.
People were willing to accept that level of loss. Now things have gotten better, but nothing is without risk.
At this point in time, 30-40% of small business may be gone and it might take as long as 10 years to get back to pre-virus days.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
We have to reopen. I cannot imagine anyone thinking we can stay shut down indefinitely.
Where we go wrong, as usual, is in polarizing the issue instead of finding the balance that works best. People who are at fairly high risk, of which I am one, can maintain distancing, etc. Those at less risk can do otherwise.
But yeah, even starting now the economy will not take off like a rocket. This virus will still be a large financial damper until it is defeated or goes away of its own accord.
-
The Golden Gate Bridge.
The bridge had more safety rules and features during the construction phase than any large American construction project before it. At the time it was built, the rule of thumb was a man a million, or one death per million dollars spent.
People were willing to accept that level of loss. Now things have gotten better, but nothing is without risk.
At this point in time, 30-40% of small business may be gone and it might take as long as 10 years to get back to pre-virus days.
@Jolly: "At this point in time, 30-40% of small business may be gone and it might take as long as 10 years to get back to pre-virus days." I do not see how such a prediction is possible, especially this early on.
@Horace: I think you're overthinking this. IMO an observation like this is politicians' gold. It sounds noble as hell, and who's going to argue with it?
@Mik: "Where we go wrong, as usual, is in polarizing the issue instead of finding the balance that works best." Amen, amen.
Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka
-
@Horace: I think you're overthinking this. IMO an observation like this is politicians' gold. It sounds noble as hell, and who's going to argue with it?
You have this tendency to understand just enough of my posts to lead you to a conclusion which you think is yours, then claim that that conclusion contradicts what I said, when it is actually already included in what I said. This is at least the second time this has happened. And I've lost count of the number of times you've told me I've "overthought" something. Maybe you could not tell me that anymore? I've asked you not to in the past. We're here to think and share those thoughts.
-
@Horace: I think you're overthinking this. IMO an observation like this is politicians' gold. It sounds noble as hell, and who's going to argue with it?
You have this tendency to understand just enough of my posts to lead you to a conclusion which you think is yours, then claim that that conclusion contradicts what I said, when it is actually already included in what I said. This is at least the second time this has happened. And I've lost count of the number of times you've told me I've "overthought" something. Maybe you could not tell me that anymore? I've asked you not to in the past. We're here to think and share those thoughts.
-
I think you would very easily get perturbed if, in response to what you consider to be a basically reasonable point, someone who has already demonstrated they don't much care for you, says "you're overthinking things", effectively trying to shut down the point without so much as attempting to understand it.
-
I think you would very easily get perturbed if, in response to what you consider to be a basically reasonable point, someone who has already demonstrated they don't much care for you, says "you're overthinking things", effectively trying to shut down the point without so much as attempting to understand it.
-
@Horace: Okay, point taken.
I will say I have never expressed a dislike for you. I'm sorry if you think I do.
-
@Jolly: "At this point in time, 30-40% of small business may be gone and it might take as long as 10 years to get back to pre-virus days." I do not see how such a prediction is possible, especially this early on.
@Horace: I think you're overthinking this. IMO an observation like this is politicians' gold. It sounds noble as hell, and who's going to argue with it?
@Mik: "Where we go wrong, as usual, is in polarizing the issue instead of finding the balance that works best." Amen, amen.
@Catseye3 said in Steven Mnuchin: No one should give their lives to increase the GDP:
@Jolly: "At this point in time, 30-40% of small business may be gone and it might take as long as 10 years to get back to pre-virus days." I do not see how such a prediction is possible, especially this early on.
@Horace: I think you're overthinking this. IMO an observation like this is politicians' gold. It sounds noble as hell, and who's going to argue with it?
@Mik: "Where we go wrong, as usual, is in polarizing the issue instead of finding the balance that works best." Amen, amen.
There is some data floating around, not in the public doman. Not yet. It has to do with the technology sector, the communications sector and the banking sector.
The effect of the shutdown on small business ranges from bad to cataclysmic.
The 5-10 year figure is based mostly on that data.
-
Keep you powder dry for the bad times. I'm looking at you national debt.
Work out and clarify what the States' responsibilities vs. the Feds are ahead of time for a disaster.
Work out and clarify what emergency aid legislation looks like ahead of a crisis. It should be triggered, not crafted, under a crisis.
Beyond that - maybe a national stockpile of PPE, but there can be a lot of disasters that don't use the same mechanisms as this one.
I mean - this is literally a once-a-hundred-years event (not saying that's when the next one will be). So anything we do has the chances to be useless in our lifetimes.
EDIT: Don't elect entertainers, but that just may be my bias speaking.
-
Keep you powder dry for the bad times. I'm looking at you national debt.
Work out and clarify what the States' responsibilities vs. the Feds are ahead of time for a disaster.
Work out and clarify what emergency aid legislation looks like ahead of a crisis. It should be triggered, not crafted, under a crisis.
Beyond that - maybe a national stockpile of PPE, but there can be a lot of disasters that don't use the same mechanisms as this one.
I mean - this is literally a once-a-hundred-years event (not saying that's when the next one will be). So anything we do has the chances to be useless in our lifetimes.
EDIT: Don't elect entertainers, but that just may be my bias speaking.
@xenon said in Steven Mnuchin: No one should give their lives to increase the GDP:
Keep you powder dry for the bad times. I'm looking at you national debt.
Work out and clarify what the States' responsibilities vs. the Feds are ahead of time for a disaster.
Work out and clarify what emergency aid legislation looks like ahead of a crisis. It should be triggered, not crafted, under a crisis.
Beyond that - maybe a national stockpile of PPE, but there can be a lot of disasters that don't use the same mechanisms as this one.
I mean - this is literally a once-a-hundred-years event (not saying that's when the next one will be). So anything we do has the chances to be useless in our lifetimes.
EDIT: Don't elect entertainers, but that just may be my bias speaking.
Just had to go piss in your cornflakes, didn't you?
-
It's true though. People want leadership during a time like this. They want to know someone is being thoughtful and deliberate. Well, I know I do.
You don't necessarily have to do anything. Trump had a few examples of this - he got the retail CEOs to speak. I thought that was great.
But then he goes and pisses it all away by spewing verbal diarrhea on an almost daily basis. There's no adults in the room, or rather, the baby is in charge of the adults.
So yeah - next pandemic, I don't want a clown to be the face of this.
-
Jesus. Can you give that shit a break for one thread? This thread has not a thing to do with Trump.
@Mik said in Steven Mnuchin: No one should give their lives to increase the GDP:
Jesus. Can you give that shit a break for one thread? This thread has not a thing to do with Trump.
Your question: given what we have learned from this pandemic, what do we do for the next one?
My answer: don't have clowns in charge.
Pretty simple. Struck a nerve maybe because you know he's a moron.
I also said 7 other things. Jolly and you seem to want to respond to that
-
It's true though. People want leadership during a time like this. They want to know someone is being thoughtful and deliberate. Well, I know I do.
You don't necessarily have to do anything. Trump had a few examples of this - he got the retail CEOs to speak. I thought that was great.
But then he goes and pisses it all away by spewing verbal diarrhea on an almost daily basis. There's no adults in the room, or rather, the baby is in charge of the adults.
So yeah - next pandemic, I don't want a clown to be the face of this.
@xenon said in Steven Mnuchin: No one should give their lives to increase the GDP:
People want leadership during a time like this.
I dunno about that. I think it's more important that people feel like soldiers, not victims. Give 'em something important to do, and put them in charge of their own destinies. I think that's really what people want.
Please love yourself.
