You didn't ask a question. You made a statement. "I'd rather see the lists of how trillions were spent by banks and Mnuchin that was future taxpayer money if you don't mind." You'd rather see lists about trillions of dollars than think about millions of unborn children being killed.

Well, I keep forgetting. It's that literal thing again. I'll just view your statement as you saying you will send me a hundred bucks ASAP.

Quote:

---

Fiscal responsibility, and accountability goes to helping more people faster don't you thing? What we can't talk about people and money at the same time or what?

---

I agree with that. The problem is that when I make that same point concerning the economy, you go ballistic and accuse me of valuing money over lives. It seems to be another one of those things that's OK when you do it, but not OK for conservatives to do.

1. We differ on the children thing, and I have asked you if your abortion objection extends to the females who have resources and make regular visits to the obygn office to make sure they don't carry possible pregnancies to term. However that aside as a guy that seems to be beyond my control and yours too, save for the poorest or less resourced females without insurance or even a doctor that go to public clinics like PP where to stop abortions you also stop the millions of others they serve with health care. You should also consider I might have more pressing stuff in my life that doesn't leave much time to even consider your life crusade against abortions which we've been dealing with for eons now.

2. Yes we have discussed it, but I've never gone ballistic even when you get snarky about it over a disagreement in terms and tactics. I can be the same way, but I can assure you going ballistic is a mischaracterization by you of my responses. In our discussions we should be open to data and details by which we can formulate a plan of action. I don't think I have personally ever jumped on you and accused you of many things, more you taking it that way in my opinion, but I could be wrong given my ability to be aggressive at times.

Quote:

---

if your abortion objection extends to the females who have resources and make regular visits to the obygn office to make sure they don't carry possible pregnancies to term.

---

Otherwise known as AN ABORTION! So yes, I would oppose that as I've told you repeatedly.

That's what I though, so you don't have to assume you are on your own in that regard. You are.

I would ten thousand times rather be "alone" on that issue than to simply be willing to throw human lives away.

Seems we have different things we worry about. Right now I hope my peeps and everybody else don't get sick and die. Probably why I have been calling them so much and they keep calling me.

Quote:

---

Seems we have different things we worry about.

---

Exactly.

Good luck with what's worry you.

https://imgur.com/gallery/S4IjCQB?fbclid

That was pretty good Ben, considering the WH has just experienced it's second case of infection, and the top doc is in quarantine.

I guess the new strategy is business as usual despite rising infections and deaths.

Is it possible to agree that one can want to protect the vulnerable and also open the economy? Why does that seem so difficult for people?

I can agree, but is a SAFE reopening possible? Like BBQing in the back yard during a tornado is a great idea? I get being scared of having no money and losing everything you worked for, disruptions can really be terrifying, but a healthy country can rebuild faster and better than an unhealthy one.

Quote:

---

Is it possible to agree that one can want to protect the vulnerable and also open the economy? Why does that seem so difficult for people?

---

Because the same people who think it's OK to be 25 tril in debt are the ones trying to understand how to reopen the economy.

There is no such thing as a safe reopening, just like there is no such thing as a safe drive to work, a safe marriage, a safe childbirth, or a safe day at work. We can lessen risk, but we can't eliminate it. We cannot just go on week after week and allow this economy to fall apart. The suffering that would bring on would be enormous, so we have to do as Tom suggested and reopen in a manner that is as safe as we can come up with.

you are completely disregarding the health impact that a poor economy will bring and the non-covi19 health concerns that are being ignored or put off because of this single focus on preventing infection (which I'm not so sure is possible . All we are really doing is delaying the inevidible on the hope that a vaccine or treatment can be achieved ) .

Thousands of procedures have been delayed . I know someone who has had to go to the emergency room twice because a procedure he was scheduled to have done in April was cancelled . He now has a 'tentative ' date some time in June ... and that only happened because his doctor had to make a special appeal on his behalf. How many diagnostic procedures have been cancelled ? We are not talking about liposuction . We are talking about serious issues.

Hospitals are shutting down ;private practices going out of business. I know someone who depends on routine visits to his doctor who is now scrambling to find another doctor who specializes in the areas he needs .

And this is just one small part of the economy. Many small business will not recover . What happens to the former employees who no longer have health coverage ? The states can't even manage to get the unemployment checks out ,let alone cover the medical needs of the unemployed .

SAFE ? Well lets see . There are fewer auto accidents because the economy is shut down. So why not just dictate that people can't drive ? That would insure safety on the roads . Humans were not meant to live in a bubble . Humans have lived with the threat of pandemic since we became a species .

H2N2 killed 2 million worldwide in 1958 , The world economy was not shut down. The 1968 flu killed 1 million . The world economy did not shut down. HIV has killed over 36 million .

Currently there are between 31 and 35 million people living with HIV, the vast majority of those are in Sub-Saharan Africa, where 5% of the population is infected.

Before there were treatments to contain it ,and before it was discovered how it is transmitted ,the world did not shut down it's economy .
The logic of the shutdown was to prevent the overwhelming of the hospital system. The goal was to 'flatten the curve'. That has been achieved . Timeget people back to work . You would think that the libs would want that too. How else is all those freebies supposed to be paid for ?

Very good post, Tom. Risk can be mitigated, but generally cannot be eliminated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Because the same people who think it's OK to be 25 tril in debt are the ones trying to understand how to reopen the economy.

There is no such thing as a safe reopening, just like there is no such thing as a safe drive to work, a safe marriage, a safe childbirth, or a safe day at work. We can lessen risk, but we can't eliminate it. We cannot just go on week after week and allow this economy to fall apart. The suffering that would bring on would be enormous, so we have to do as Tom suggested and reopen in a manner that is as safe as we can come up with.

---

Ignoring the virus is no solution, and consider that workers go home after a shift.

Yes. It would be much better for those worker to have no home to go to since they could not pay their bills. No car. No food. No hope. Now that's a really good, panicky plan.

Good news for free speech. Police officer reprimanded for supporting Trump elected president of Chicago police union.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/news...on/vi-BB13RHzZ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

you are completely disregarding the health impact that a poor economy will bring and the non-covi19 health concerns that are being ignored or put off because of this single focus on preventing infection (which I'm not so sure is possible . All we are really doing is delaying the inevidible on the hope that a vaccine or treatment can be achieved ) .

Thousands of procedures have been delayed . I know someone who has had to go to the emergency room twice because a procedure he was scheduled to have done in April was cancelled . He now has a 'tentative ' date some time in June ... and that only happened because his doctor had to make a special appeal on his behalf. How many diagnostic procedures have been cancelled ? We are not talking about liposuction . We are talking about serious issues.

Hospitals are shutting down ;private practices going out of business. I know someone who depends on routine visits to his doctor who is now scrambling to find another doctor who specializes in the areas he needs .

And this is just one small part of the economy. Many small business will not recover . What happens to the former employees who no longer have health coverage ? The states can't even manage to get the unemployment checks out ,let alone cover the medical needs of the unemployed .

SAFE ? Well lets see . There are fewer auto accidents because the economy is shut down. So why not just dictate that people can't drive ? That would insure safety on the roads . Humans were not meant to live in a bubble . Humans have lived with the threat of pandemic since we became a species .

H2N2 killed 2 million worldwide in 1958 , The world economy was not shut down. The 1968 flu killed 1 million . The world economy did not shut down. HIV has killed over 36 million .

Currently there are between 31 and 35 million people living with HIV, the vast majority of those are in Sub-Saharan Africa, where 5% of the population is infected.

Before there were treatments to contain it ,and before it was discovered how it is transmitted ,the world did not shut down it's economy .
The logic of the shutdown was to prevent the overwhelming of the hospital system. The goal was to 'flatten the curve'. That has been achieved . Timeget people back to work . You would think that the libs would want that too. How else is all those freebies supposed to be paid for ?

---

Forget those freebies, irrelevant spin. Let's go with NEED to weather the storm. At this time I won't get into personal stories, but as a collective we have been exposed for many structural shortcomings that should have been addressed long ago.

In all of this discussion, it does not escape me that, due to being 67, I am in the high risk group. I am otherwise in good health. Still, I understand that we cannot just let weeds start growing in the highways. We have to get the economy back up to full speed.

Hey Tal. Guess who else is in the high risk group? 8D

Poor people of color, especially those who get the "essentials" label, and secret service agents? Oh you mean me, and the wife?

Quote:

---

Hey Tal. Guess who else is in the high risk group? 8D,not

---

I went on a supplement regimin when I got the virus that included vit c 2,000 mg Vitamin D 5,000 IU (going to cut back on the d now that I can soak in the sun ) zinc 50 mg and L Glutathione 500 mg although I hear intervenious pushes are more effective . I also got extract of cinchona which has naturally occuring quinine . I mixed that with fresh squeezed lemons and added it to fresh brewed herbal tea that includes licorice root ,fennel ,peppermint ,and ginger . Drank it both as a hot and cold tea . (this is not official medical advice) .

Quote:

---

especially those who get the "essentials" label

---

I consider most work essential and even knowing the risk ,was happy to report to work ,and am happy to be back . I feel bad for those who were sold a bill of goods with the promise of an enhanced unemployment check and in many cases have not received it yet.

Quote:

---

I feel bad for those who were sold a bill of goods with the promise of an enhanced unemployment check and in many cases have not received it yet.

---

And even at that, it was all based on borrowed money. That is going to come back and seriously bite us at some point in the future.

Everything in America is based on borrowed money. No matter what we do somebody is going to have to borrow money. That's how things are financed in America. Folks will eventually get those enhanced checks once states get them processed with their antiquated systems. Imagine not updating your software since you bought your device. Ever wonder how Wall Street can process many millions of transactions almost instantly and accurately? Or your credit card company? Or banks?

Quote:

---

Everything in America is based on borrowed money. No matter what we do somebody is going to have to borrow money.

---

First of all, that is not true. Secondly, in the private sector, if money is borrowed it is with the understanding that it will be repaid, so it is borrowed with care. With the feds, we have become such a stupid country that our pols borrow money with no intention of ever paying it back, so indebtedness just grows ever larger.

Can't express it much better than this. https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...2e&oe=5EDDBF0C

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

First of all, that is not true. Secondly, in the private sector, if money is borrowed it is with the understanding that it will be repaid, so it is borrowed with care. With the feds, we have become such a stupid country that our pols borrow money with no intention of ever paying it back, so indebtedness just grows ever larger.

---

Government and the private sector have different tools and financing options and the problem with you wingers is you don't know that. The private sector NEVER finances projects with it's own money. They always borrow from investors or banks or markets by being able to show a profit.

This stupid country of yours never needs to show a profit, just the ability to pay. If the best economy in the history of mankind can't manage it's finances during this health crisis then we are all in trouble. Was this just lip service or what?

Pretty obvious your caged bird has no clue what he is talking about.

What different tools and options are you referring to?

The private sector frequently finances projects from that company's own reserves, so your statement is absolutely incorrect. They sometimes borrow money, and at other times they sell shares in the company to raise funds, but it's always with the idea in mind of paying any borrowed money back. Local governments sometimes do the same thing by selling bonds. What the feds do is different and greatly more dangerous. They have figured out that they can just spend and spend and spend, and simply borrow the money. So we get our goodies without the burden of having to pay for them, and people like you eat it up without so much as a thought about it. They borrow money with no intention whatsoever of ever paying it back, so the indebtedness just grows and grows. We are surviving now because interest rates are low, but the day is coming when that will not be the case, and then your theory is going to be shown to be a liberal mirage.

Do one thing for me. Look at the chart here. Look at the column "Debt to GDP Ratio". Look at what happened during WW2 (a legit national emergency if there ever was one) and then for the ten or fifteen years afterward, and then begin in 2008 and look up to the present. Tell me if it doesn't cause a sizable lump to come up in your throat.

This is not a conservative/liberal debate, or a repub/dem issue. It's a question of whether or not the laws of common sense have been rescinded for the federal government.

https://www.thebalance.com/national-...events-3306287

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

What different tools and options are you referring to?

The private sector frequently finances projects from that company's own reserves, so your statement is absolutely incorrect. They sometimes borrow money, and at other times they sell shares in the company to raise funds, but it's always with the idea in mind of paying any borrowed money back. Local governments sometimes do the same thing by selling bonds. What the feds do is different and greatly more dangerous. They have figured out that they can just spend and spend and spend, and simply borrow the money. So we get our goodies without the burden of having to pay for them, and people like you eat it up without so much as a thought about it. They borrow money with no intention whatsoever of ever paying it back, so the indebtedness just grows and grows. We are surviving now because interest rates are low, but the day is coming when that will not be the case, and then your theory is going to be shown to be a liberal mirage.

---

Google is your friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Do one thing for me. Look at the chart here. Look at the column "Debt to GDP Ratio". Look at what happened during WW2 (a legit national emergency if there ever was one) and then for the ten or fifteen years afterward, and then begin in 2008 and look up to the present. Tell me if it doesn't cause a sizable lump to come up in your throat.

This is not a conservative/liberal debate, or a repub/dem issue. It's a question of whether or not the laws of common sense have been rescinded for the federal government.

https://www.thebalance.com/national-...events-3306287

---

Great site with enough embedded links that answer all your questions.

That would be good since you plainly have no answers at all. Thus your "Google is your friend" silliness. I have never understood why you make statements for which you have no knowledge and no support whatsoever.

How would you know that unless you did your own homework fact finding? You really should try it my way before you question my knowledge and support for my stated positions.

Dismissing them out of hand is NOT your friend. You do better explaining why having a sick population benefits the economy, in both the short term and long term.

Facts over feelings only please.

Try it your way? OK. Here we go. "Hey everyone. I'm going to make wild claims, but don't ask me to support them. You look up this stuff for yourself." There you go.

I haven't dismissed any of your contentions. I've just asked you to clarify.

Quote:

---

You do better explaining why having a sick population benefits the economy, in both the short term and long term.

---

If I had ever made such a dumb comment, I would explain it. Since I never have, I won't.

"Facts over feelings?" How about facts over old cliches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Try it your way? OK. Here we go. "Hey everyone. I'm going to make wild claims, but don't ask me to support them. You look up this stuff for yourself." There you go.

I haven't dismissed any of your contentions. I've just asked you to clarify.

If I had ever made such a dumb comment, I would explain it. Since I never have, I won't.

"Facts over feelings?" How about facts over old cliches.

---

It's okay if you rather play smart mouth instead of serious discussion, but I challenged you to explore your own provided link, one that I keep in favorites by the way, and then dispute my wild claims.

"You do better explaining why having a sick population benefits the economy, in both the short term and long term.".

Also how in the world can you reopen an economy and sustain it to growth with rising sickness and death? Even Korea and Germany are facing this situation after bending their infection curve DOWN. Even China is may be coming on a second wave of infections as corona19 related illness in kids is being found.

May I remind you my response was to your own posts? Your facts and data? I made no wild allegations. Just simple suggestions.

Quote:

---

It's okay if you rather play smart mouth instead of serious discussion, but I challenged you to explore your own provided link, one that I keep in favorites by the way, and then dispute my wild claims.

---

This was your claim. "Government and the private sector have different tools and financing options and the problem with you wingers is you don't know that." I asked a simple question for the smart liberal to explain what those options were. Plainly you have no idea what you're talking about since you could not offer a single syllable of explanation.

That is so funny. You challenged me to explore my own link? The one you could not comment on?

Quote:

---

"You do better explaining why having a sick population benefits the economy, in both the short term and long term.".

---

Who said that?

Quote:

---

Also how in the world can you reopen an economy and sustain it to growth with rising sickness and death? Even Korea and Germany are facing this situation after bending their infection curve DOWN. Even China is may be coming on a second wave of infections as corona19 related illness in kids is being found.

---

Ask Sweden how it's done.

Quote:

---

May I remind you my response was to your own posts? Your facts and data? I made no wild allegations. Just simple suggestions.

---

Right.

1. When I went to the link YOU provided there was so much embedded data, some I had read before that made copy/paste unnecessary, since all you had to do was click through it like I did. Maybe you draw a different conclusion but we both had the same information. IT WAS YOUR LINK!

Okay I just didn't feel like copy and pasting for you today! Happy now?

2. It was another challenge for your right wing conservative mind.

3. I did examine Sweden and their curve is edging upward.

Quote:

---

Okay I just didn't feel like copy and pasting for you today! Happy now?

---

Well, you could have simply explained it in your own words, especially since you claim to know what conservatives don't know. For that matter, you still can.

I did and ask you to google and explore your own links. That throws you into a snit. To your debt question,

https://seekingalpha.com/article/434...t-rate-markets

Quote:

---

The U.S. Department of the Treasury will issue significantly more debt than the market had expected in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis, including some $54 billion over the next three months in the form of 20-year bonds, according to an official announcement on May 6.

The Treasury believes that there will be strong demand from investors for the 20-year bonds, which will allow the Treasury to finance its longer-term obligations at today's very low interest rates.

---

And

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/12/fed-...purchases.html

I guess you providing links will have to suffice for an explanation in your own words. But since you have this down, why don't you explain this paragraph?

“We continue to emphasize that this Fed will act aggressively and in particular that central banks are focused on safeguarding market functioning at this point, and will continue to provide liquidity in scale,” Ebrahim Rahbari, director of global economics at Citi Research. “However, despite the sharp initial risk rally, we think these measures will still not be sufficiently to durably stabilize market sentiment yet in light of credit concerns and escalating health concerns.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I guess you providing links will have to suffice for an explanation in your own words. But since you have this down, why don't you explain this paragraph?

“We continue to emphasize that this Fed will act aggressively and in particular that central banks are focused on safeguarding market functioning at this point, and will continue to provide liquidity in scale,” Ebrahim Rahbari, director of global economics at Citi Research. “However, despite the sharp initial risk rally, we think these measures will still not be sufficiently to durably stabilize market sentiment yet in light of credit concerns and escalating health concerns.”

---

The fed will do what it can, but we have a long way to go before things get better.

That's your explanation? Hmmm.