COVID-19

[wink]

One could argue that if someone is making $20 million a year, do they really need $23 million a year?

And who decides that? Maybe that MD shouldn't make an extra $50K.

I suspect the guy that makes $23M gives more to charity and sits on more nonprofit boards than the guy that makes $80K, or even $200K. It is a pointless discussion in this country, well, hopefully.

People on this thread are all about telling low income people to live within their means, but no one has a problem with millionaire/billionaire living in excess.

I should think that I could live within a $2M dollar income and you would consider it a lifestyle in excess. Many middle class Americans have a vacation home of some sort. Who needs two homes? Isn't that in excess? There is a big differance between piling up debt and afforded luxury. Doesn't make any difference how much you make. And luxury both employs and motivates a workforce.

 

[Gonzo08]

I should think that I could live within a $2M dollar income and you would consider it a lifestyle in excess. Many middle class Americans have a vacation home of some sort. Who needs two homes? Isn't that in excess? There is a big differance between piling up debt and afforded luxury. Doesn't make any difference how much you make. And luxury both employs and motivates a workforce.

I have less of a problem with your examples than the billionaire who's buying their third pleasure yacht or private jet.

 

[SlickAg]

Half of the deaths in Europe came from nursing homes, malaria deaths in Sub-Saharan Africa could double this year due to supply chain disruption, and now 15% of the American work force is unemployed. “It's a staggering statistic - and there's a human story behind each of the numbers too. Many Americans were in jobs that are normally considered secure - or lost jobs they had had for more than a decade.”

And for all you media truthers, it’s from the BBC, so it HAS to be true.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52391597

 

[SlickAg]

I have less of a problem with your examples than the billionaire who's buying their third pleasure yacht or private jet.

It’s all relative.

What do you you think the E-2s in your squadron have to say about your lifestyle compared to theirs? Is it fair that you make (I’m guessing) three times as much as they do? That you have fewer restrictions on your lifestyle than they do? The list could go on.

 

[ABMD]

I have less of a problem with your examples than the billionaire who's buying their third pleasure yacht or private jet.

But isn't it the same thing just on a bigger scale?

 

[SlickAg]

Indoor transmission at home was the number one spreader of covid, followed by public transportation. Only one of the 318 outbreaks cited in this study occurred outdoors.

But we should still totally keep people locked up inside their homes.

“All identified outbreaks of three or more cases occurred in an indoor environment, which confirms that sharing indoor space is a major SARS-CoV-2 infection risk.”

Indoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2

Background By early April 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic had infected nearly one million people and had spread to nearly all countries worldwide. It is essential to understand where and how SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted. Methods Case reports were extracted from the local Municipal Health Commissions...

www.medrxiv.org

 

[SlickAg]

“It’s kind of creepy, actually,” said Andra Blomkalns, chair of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Stanford, “particularly when we spent so much time really gearing up for this surge and all this flurry of activity and mental activity and supplies and things — and now it’s sort of like, ‘OK, what do we do now?’ ”

Coronavirus: Bay Area ERs are eerily empty and worried you're too afraid to visit — The Mercury News

The surreal lulls in Bay Area ERs are even more stunning when contrasted with the tragic images of chaotic hospital wards overcrowded with gurneys as doctors and nurses scramble to keep up with a torrent of COVID-19 patients in New York and New Jersey.

apple.news

 

[HAL Pilot]

One could argue that if someone is making $20 million a year, do they really need $23 million a year?

That’s for them to decide, not you or anyone else. Their success doesn’t give the government or society the right to just say “too much, give me $3 million more of your money.”

People on this thread are all about telling low income people to live within their means, but no one has a problem with millionaire/billionaire CEOs living in excess.
[/QUOTE]
No problem at all. Choose your rate, choose your fate. If the market wants to pay them huge amounts of money, good for them. They worked for their success and they should be able to enjoy it any legal way they choose.

 

[Pags]

But you're missing a critical part of that cycle...People need to produce something (service, product, sky penis, whatever) in order to get paid. I think it would be great if we could have a society in which money isn't required and we all chipped in to better society. I guess that's what Star Trek is supposed to be like, though to my knowledge I don't think they explore that concept in depth. Unfortunately, a lot of humans need an incentive to pitch in (aka money paid for services rendered).

But I also see the trap that money is. Why the fuck does it take me 30 years to buy a house? Really? How does that make sense? My girlfriend pays $150/month for a nice little two bedroom duplex that overlooks the beach in Baja. How is it that my 3br/2ba costs 15 times that? Sure, location and security has something to do with it, but it doesn't pass the sanity check.


Wait a second....The iPhone became ubiquitous because they were the only people who had anything like it. It was not cheap. $500 in 2007 is $622 today. That's four months of beach house rent!

Yeah, I wasn't saying people get money for nothing (or checks for free). By saying that companies were making something I was implying that people were making that product. If people making Fords can afford to buy Fords then that's good for everyone.

And I didn't say the iPhone was cheap. I said it was affordable. Meaning that many people could afford to buy it within their current means. If the iPhone has cost some amount more then it wouldn't have been as ubiquitous. But I'm sure the smart folks at Apple did their homework and priced it where they did to ensure that it was widely purchased.

At some point this is all a jobs program. Capitalism doesn't work if people don't have the ability to buy stuff. Companies need employees to make stuff. But companies need people to have enough money to be able to buy their stuff. If not enough people buy stuff then the company doesn't make any money. If the company doesn't make any profit then there's no cash flow. Which means no money to banks to lend to people. Which means no loans to buy houses. The whole thing is a huge house of cards. And companies want it to be as widenopen as possible. And the government wants a successful economy. But, I'd offer that the government and us as citizens has a vested interest in adding some rigor to the system to keep the house of cards from falling over. And I'm not saying full fledged communism or some nonsense, just some guide rails to protect the economy from the risk of unbridled capitalism. Because we all depend on it.

 

[Pags]

“It’s kind of creepy, actually,” said Andra Blomkalns, chair of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Stanford, “particularly when we spent so much time really gearing up for this surge and all this flurry of activity and mental activity and supplies and things — and now it’s sort of like, ‘OK, what do we do now?’ ”

Coronavirus: Bay Area ERs are eerily empty and worried you're too afraid to visit — The Mercury News

The surreal lulls in Bay Area ERs are even more stunning when contrasted with the tragic images of chaotic hospital wards overcrowded with gurneys as doctors and nurses scramble to keep up with a torrent of COVID-19 patients in New York and New Jersey.

apple.news

So, it worked?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

So, it worked?

Yes. We avoided overrunning the hospitals, and it’s becoming clear that for the vast majority of the country that was never a realistic threat. It’s time to start getting back to normal.

 

[cfam]

Europe's Economy Was Hit Hard Too, But Jobs Didn't Disappear Like In The U.S.

Many governments, especially in European countries, are handling unemployment differently, paying companies to keep their workers on the payroll until the pandemic is over.

www.npr.org

Decent article that discussed the differences between how the US and other countries deal with unemployment. Under this current situation some of the Euro models certainly seem to have some benefits to both companies and employees. Having a way to maintain your workforce instead of cutting them seems like it will be huge for industry to get running again because they know their same folks will be coming back. Not as good for profits in the short term of course but seems like it would help in the long term.

Will be interesting to see how this unemployment wave changes America. Personally I feel that a resurgence of a labor movement with a gig economy spin on it is coming. Labor movements have been quiet in the past 60yrs because the economy has been good but im curious as to how far companies can go.

The German system of Kurzarbeit (mentioned in the article), makes a lot of sense to me. Using my brewery as an example, the owner is able to avoid firing the brewer because of Kurzarbeit. The point of the system is to help companies get through temporary crises, and prevent the state from becoming responsible for paying the unemployed full unemployment.

Under Kurzarbeit, the owner contributes what he can afford to pay his employees (the amount is recalculated monthly). The state takes the difference between that amount and the normal monthly salary, and pays 60% or 67% (if the worker has kids) of it. The state also makes the required contributions to the healthcare and retirement systems.

The worker’s allowable hours are determined based on how much the owner can pay. For example, if the owner can’t afford to pay anything, the worker isn’t allowed to work.

Owners must apply for their workers, and they must have a good reason for using the system (natural disaster, major contract falling through, economic crisis etc). You can’t apply if business was bad for instance. The state will only pay out a maximum of a year, but the duration is determined by the owner when they apply.

It wouldn’t work under our system, but it’s been really interesting to watch it function firsthand.

 

[Pags]

Yes. We avoided overrunning the hospitals, and it’s becoming clear that for the vast majority of the country that was never a realistic threat. It’s time to start getting back to normal.

Will be interesting to see what happens in GA, TN, SC in a few weeks. Hopefully you're right.

 

[taxi1]

Yes. We avoided overrunning the hospitals, and it’s becoming clear that for the vast majority of the country that was never a realistic threat.

Uhhh, no.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Uhhh, no.

I don’t live in NYC. Most of the country isn’t NYC. That was the worst case scenario. How’s South Dakota doing?