Bidenomics
-
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
I don't think either Trump or Biden was up to the task of dealing with the pandemic.
Biden would have been a disaster, too, but Lame Donald was.
I think Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Mitt Romney would have managed the pandemic rather well.
I expect Biden and even Jeb Bush would have done a reasonable job dealing with the pandemic.None of them would have led January 6 devolved to what it was.
You also think Walmart ties are appropriate work attire, so,…
Me/rry/Christmas
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Bidenomics:
You also think Walmart ties are appropriate work attire, so,…
And that’s proven true in the real world judging by compliments received from clients, colleagues, and business associates on Walmart ties.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Bidenomics:
@Jolly said in Bidenomics:
Revise history much?
Unless you were living in a cave, a few facts (context is important)...
- COVID wasn't MERS, but it was responsible for quite a few deaths across the world. It was scary.
Irrelevant
- We weren't sure whether the disease was contact or airborne. We treated it as contact. Turns out, it wasn't.
Irrelevant
- Public Health policy dictates isolation when faced with a highly contagious disease that has a high mortality rate. Biden, Trump, doesn't matter, people were going to be told to stay home.
Public Health Policy is one policy group and decision that needs to be weighed against others. That’s where leadership comes in. Making difficult decisions. Beyond that, there were public health officials and experts that realized the shutdowns weren’t going to work. Florida started off going down a bad road but quickly rectified their mistakes. In addition to Florida’s Surgeon General and Public Health group, there were many others in and out of Government against the lockdown. Jay Bhattacharya, Scott Atlas, Martin Kulldorf, Sumatra Gupta, and more tried to warn the administration against these steps. These weren’t crackpots, but the lead Epidemiologists and Public Health experts at Harvard, Stanford, Oxford, and more. When the head disease experts want a meeting with you in the beginning of an epidemic, you take the fucking meeting.
- In an economy where most people don't have 90 days of expenses in the bank, what would you have the government do? Evict people? Starve them? Or maybe do like China, weld them up in their apartment buildings and let nature take its course?
More often than not, that’s the best course to take… BUT… You want to pass extra unemployment payments? Great. Do so. But there was no need for that to be extended past the first 6 months. By the middle of summer there was already a good handle on the fact that most people were able to continue working from home, that many businesses were still thriving, and that suitable social distancing measures could be implemented. Beyond that, it would have been very simple to tag onto the Payroll Protection Act that the loans would be paid back interest free if audits found that revenue did not decrease year or year… An interest free loan would still have been astounding for these companies. Beyond that, sending extra money to people that were still working? Come on…
When faced with a novel threat, one of societal altering proportions, governments can and will make mistakes. We didn't need all the respirators. We were uncertain about treatments and slow to back those that worked, like monoclonal antibodies. We let people die in isolation, being visited by nurses twice a shift and by their families none at all. We couldn't ramp up testing fast enough, because we don't control our own production.
Yeah, no problem with that.
I know, I was walking in those rooms when I absolutely had to. And for all those spineless professionals who walked away from their healthcare jobs during that first year, I hope you never, ever work in a hospital again, because you're only there for the money and not worthy of wearing white.
That's what Trump was working with. A huge unknown pandemic, a cacophony of advice, lies from Federal health officials and a public on the verge of panic. Along with a screaming need for a vaccine or some kind of magic bullet.
Irrelevant. Civil rights aren’t something that can be suspended, period. If they are, then they aren’t rights. In the middle of an emergency like that is when you most have to be respectful of people’s rights.
And you're worried about the first spending bill, equating it with Biden's? Shucks, I'll even cut Biden a little slack for his first big bill, but I do agree the third was political theater and vote buying, as COVID had virused into a less lethal dominate strain and many people had some form of vaccine-induced or natural immunity against the initial strains.
History can be revised by the application of 20-20 hindsight, but to just hand-wave the effect of COVID in the early days is coke bottle astigmatism.
That’s your opinion. Mine is that you don’t want to accept the fact that your guy was abysmal when we needed him to be great. That he tried to illegally usurp control from the Governors, and when he got smacked down, then he refused to use the influence that he did have in trying to get schools open. Lame Donald was a disaster. Biden would have been a disaster, too, but Lame Donald was.
Pardon me, but I forgot when you acquired your M.D. and did your residency in infectious disease.
Fie!, sir, on your biased observations.
You're asking a non-medical person to make medical and economic decisions based on incomplete information and at times, outright lies. While using a standard of perfection in a global pandemic.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in Bidenomics:
@LuFins-Dad said in Bidenomics:
@Jolly said in Bidenomics:
Revise history much?
Unless you were living in a cave, a few facts (context is important)...
- COVID wasn't MERS, but it was responsible for quite a few deaths across the world. It was scary.
Irrelevant
- We weren't sure whether the disease was contact or airborne. We treated it as contact. Turns out, it wasn't.
Irrelevant
- Public Health policy dictates isolation when faced with a highly contagious disease that has a high mortality rate. Biden, Trump, doesn't matter, people were going to be told to stay home.
Public Health Policy is one policy group and decision that needs to be weighed against others. That’s where leadership comes in. Making difficult decisions. Beyond that, there were public health officials and experts that realized the shutdowns weren’t going to work. Florida started off going down a bad road but quickly rectified their mistakes. In addition to Florida’s Surgeon General and Public Health group, there were many others in and out of Government against the lockdown. Jay Bhattacharya, Scott Atlas, Martin Kulldorf, Sumatra Gupta, and more tried to warn the administration against these steps. These weren’t crackpots, but the lead Epidemiologists and Public Health experts at Harvard, Stanford, Oxford, and more. When the head disease experts want a meeting with you in the beginning of an epidemic, you take the fucking meeting.
- In an economy where most people don't have 90 days of expenses in the bank, what would you have the government do? Evict people? Starve them? Or maybe do like China, weld them up in their apartment buildings and let nature take its course?
More often than not, that’s the best course to take… BUT… You want to pass extra unemployment payments? Great. Do so. But there was no need for that to be extended past the first 6 months. By the middle of summer there was already a good handle on the fact that most people were able to continue working from home, that many businesses were still thriving, and that suitable social distancing measures could be implemented. Beyond that, it would have been very simple to tag onto the Payroll Protection Act that the loans would be paid back interest free if audits found that revenue did not decrease year or year… An interest free loan would still have been astounding for these companies. Beyond that, sending extra money to people that were still working? Come on…
When faced with a novel threat, one of societal altering proportions, governments can and will make mistakes. We didn't need all the respirators. We were uncertain about treatments and slow to back those that worked, like monoclonal antibodies. We let people die in isolation, being visited by nurses twice a shift and by their families none at all. We couldn't ramp up testing fast enough, because we don't control our own production.
Yeah, no problem with that.
I know, I was walking in those rooms when I absolutely had to. And for all those spineless professionals who walked away from their healthcare jobs during that first year, I hope you never, ever work in a hospital again, because you're only there for the money and not worthy of wearing white.
That's what Trump was working with. A huge unknown pandemic, a cacophony of advice, lies from Federal health officials and a public on the verge of panic. Along with a screaming need for a vaccine or some kind of magic bullet.
Irrelevant. Civil rights aren’t something that can be suspended, period. If they are, then they aren’t rights. In the middle of an emergency like that is when you most have to be respectful of people’s rights.
And you're worried about the first spending bill, equating it with Biden's? Shucks, I'll even cut Biden a little slack for his first big bill, but I do agree the third was political theater and vote buying, as COVID had virused into a less lethal dominate strain and many people had some form of vaccine-induced or natural immunity against the initial strains.
History can be revised by the application of 20-20 hindsight, but to just hand-wave the effect of COVID in the early days is coke bottle astigmatism.
That’s your opinion. Mine is that you don’t want to accept the fact that your guy was abysmal when we needed him to be great. That he tried to illegally usurp control from the Governors, and when he got smacked down, then he refused to use the influence that he did have in trying to get schools open. Lame Donald was a disaster. Biden would have been a disaster, too, but Lame Donald was.
Pardon me, but I forgot when you acquired your M.D. and did your residency in infectious disease.
Fie!, sir, on your biased observations.
You're asking a non-medical person to make medical and economic decisions based on incomplete information and at times, outright lies. While using a standard of perfection in a global pandemic.
Medical degrees have nothing to do with it. An actual fundamental belief in certain principles such as the government may not infringe on your rights and the needs of the many don’t outweigh an individual’s rights. When you cross those lines, everything falls apart.
-
Do you know the power of the public health laws, should the government actually bring the full hammer down?
Think the power of marshal law.
-
In public health, the needs of the many certainly outweigh the needs of the few.
-
Why parents with young children are reporting a dramatic drop-off in their financial well-being
The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking found a decline in the percentage of parents living with children under age 18 who felt financially secure, dropping from 69% in 2022 to 64% in 2023. That was also down from a record high of 75% in 2021.
So … @89th , @Aqua-Letifer , how are you feeling?
-
https://www.vox.com/money/352116/whats-really-happening-to-grocery-prices-right-now
Vox: What’s really happening to grocery prices right now
Target and Walmart are talking about their price cuts. How big of a deal is it?Vox’s discussion on what they think is going on with major retailers (e.g., Target, Walmart) announcing price cuts on groceries and commonly used household items.
-
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
Why parents with young children are reporting a dramatic drop-off in their financial well-being
The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking found a decline in the percentage of parents living with children under age 18 who felt financially secure, dropping from 69% in 2022 to 64% in 2023. That was also down from a record high of 75% in 2021.
So … @89th , @Aqua-Letifer , how are you feeling?
We are part of the majority (64%). We worked hard, and saved hard, and tried to make smart decisions (having 3 kids is a financially risky decision these days!). but still... we are fortunate to not feel the financial pressures that 36% of the country feels.
Also, I'm not surprised. Child care costs is a massive burden these days, plus housing, plus college... all 3 of those cost buckets have vastly outpaced the average income. And don't even get me started about McDonald's!
-
@89th said in Bidenomics:
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
Why parents with young children are reporting a dramatic drop-off in their financial well-being
The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking found a decline in the percentage of parents living with children under age 18 who felt financially secure, dropping from 69% in 2022 to 64% in 2023. That was also down from a record high of 75% in 2021.
So … @89th , @Aqua-Letifer , how are you feeling?
We are part of the majority (64%). We worked hard, and saved hard, and tried to make smart decisions (having 3 kids is a financially risky decision these days!). but still... we are fortunate to not feel the financial pressures that 36% of the country feels.
Also, I'm not surprised. Child care costs is a massive burden these days, plus housing, plus college... all 3 of those cost buckets have vastly outpaced the average income. And don't even get me started about McDonald's!
Vote Biden and enjoy!
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in Bidenomics:
@89th said in Bidenomics:
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
Why parents with young children are reporting a dramatic drop-off in their financial well-being
The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking found a decline in the percentage of parents living with children under age 18 who felt financially secure, dropping from 69% in 2022 to 64% in 2023. That was also down from a record high of 75% in 2021.
So … @89th , @Aqua-Letifer , how are you feeling?
We are part of the majority (64%). We worked hard, and saved hard, and tried to make smart decisions (having 3 kids is a financially risky decision these days!). but still... we are fortunate to not feel the financial pressures that 36% of the country feels.
Also, I'm not surprised. Child care costs is a massive burden these days, plus housing, plus college... all 3 of those cost buckets have vastly outpaced the average income. And don't even get me started about McDonald's!
Vote Biden and enjoy!
I mean…costs were already exploding during the bush and Obama years, and really took off at the end of Trump, so one could say Biden had stopped the bleeding?
-
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
@LuFins-Dad said in Bidenomics:
You also think Walmart ties are appropriate work attire, so,…
And that’s proven true in the real world judging by compliments received from clients, colleagues, and business associates on Walmart ties.
It's cute you thought they were serious.
-
@89th said in Bidenomics:
@Jolly said in Bidenomics:
@89th said in Bidenomics:
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
Why parents with young children are reporting a dramatic drop-off in their financial well-being
The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking found a decline in the percentage of parents living with children under age 18 who felt financially secure, dropping from 69% in 2022 to 64% in 2023. That was also down from a record high of 75% in 2021.
So … @89th , @Aqua-Letifer , how are you feeling?
We are part of the majority (64%). We worked hard, and saved hard, and tried to make smart decisions (having 3 kids is a financially risky decision these days!). but still... we are fortunate to not feel the financial pressures that 36% of the country feels.
Also, I'm not surprised. Child care costs is a massive burden these days, plus housing, plus college... all 3 of those cost buckets have vastly outpaced the average income. And don't even get me started about McDonald's!
Vote Biden and enjoy!
I mean…costs were already exploding during the bush and Obama years, and really took off at the end of Trump, so one could say Biden had stopped the bleeding?
Don't know what your smoking, but it's powerful stuff.
You forget, during those years I wasn't some craven, nerditic college student, jerking off in the bathroom after getting turned down on Saturday night. I was a working man, paying bills and putting my kids through college.
I don't have a plethora of horseshit graphs and junk data, but I knew what cars, groceries, clothes and utilities cost.
-
@89th said in Bidenomics:
costs were already exploding during the bush and Obama years, and really took off at the end of Trump
Not defending Trump's dumping money into the economy, but the inflation rate when Biden took office was 1.9%.
-
@Axtremus said in Bidenomics:
Why parents with young children are reporting a dramatic drop-off in their financial well-being
The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking found a decline in the percentage of parents living with children under age 18 who felt financially secure, dropping from 69% in 2022 to 64% in 2023. That was also down from a record high of 75% in 2021.
So … @89th , @Aqua-Letifer , how are you feeling?
Oh, I wake up with my balls about an inch away from the bandsaw every morning, so inflation's just a nice extra.
-
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
DON’T let them eat cake.
- RFK Jr -
@jon-nyc said in Bidenomics:
Which is it, RNC, median? Or average?
https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/how-much-you-need-to-earn-in-every-state-to-buy-a-home/
Homebuyers in nearly half of the country need to earn at least six figures to be able to purchase a home.
Nationally, the typical household would need to earn $99,000 to buy a median-priced home of $415,500 in February, according to the most recent Realtor.com
data. This also accounts for property taxes and insurance costs, and assumes a 10% down payment.
