He just signed off on the biggest friggin' government handout bonanza in world history. With more government handouts to come. His stuff will be fine.
He just signed off on the biggest friggin' government handout bonanza in world history. With more government handouts to come. His stuff will be fine.
pick one wrote:
Which close family member (mom, dad, sibling, child) would you be willing to let die to get everyone back to work?
James Bullard
pick one wrote:
Which close family member (mom, dad, sibling, child) would you be willing to let die to get everyone back to work?
I would sacrifice my parents and siblings in a heartbeat to save the economy. I would fight to keep my wife and kids alive even if it meant everyone else on the planet died.
I'm not sure Michael Burry - who, according to Wikipedia, is a professional investor - is someone who has an unbiased view on ending the shutdown. But putting the messenger aside, why are folks demanding an end to the shutdown for economic reasons so confident the economy will rebound to its former levels if we end the shutdown? Y'all are assuming that consumer confidence is high and that the only thing holding the economy back right now is the shutdown.
Do you honestly think everyone will suddenly start eating at restaurants again, flying, spending money, etc. when (1) the pandemic is nearing its peak, (2) there's no vaccine as there is for current strains of flu, and (3) if (more likely when) there is a massive spike in COVID-19 cases and deaths resulting from the premature end of the shutdown? I'm skeptical that tens of millions of Americans getting COVID-19 is going to result in an economic boom, but that's perhaps where you and I disagree. The only way the economy recovers is if people feel safe to return to the old normal.
No one, especially myself, wants this shutdown to continue for a minute longer than absolutely necessary. We can all agree it has been devastating, but the government can and has taken some first steps toward softening the blow of the shutdown while it remains in effect. You mention the purely speculative risk of increased suicide and drug use, but I'm more concerned about the thousands of additional deaths almost certain to result from ending the shutdown prematurely.
Finally, let me ask this - if ending the shutdown resulted in the death of your spouse, your kids, your parents, your siblings, your relatives, and your best friend - would it still be worth it to you? Because if you end the shutdown prematurely, someone else's spouse, kids, parents, siblings, relatives, and friends will die and that shouldn't make it less important to you.
trumpeter wrote:
How wrong you are. People who commit suicide have mental illness. Do you scold the person who dies if leukemia? That is a disease also. Actually, most of the Corona deaths have pre-existing conditions caused from years of smoking or overeating or lack of exercise.
With each post you become dumber. According to your argument that would be a pre-existing medical condition so they shouldn't count.
dunes runner wrote:
pick one wrote:
Which close family member (mom, dad, sibling, child) would you be willing to let die to get everyone back to work?
Antonio Fauci.
nunes runner is a despicable human being.
joedirt wrote:
Here is a good analysis from Michael Burry. Right now, we have the economy shut down to preserve the lives of a few at the expense of the many (and yes, economic damage results in deaths as well, likely more deaths than the virus itself).
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/big-short-investor-who-made-a-killing-during-the-financial-crisis-the-economic-shutdown-is-worse-than-the-coronavirus-2020-04-07?mod=home-page
Who TF is Michael Burry and why should we care what he thinks? Is he an epidemiologist?
pick one wrote:
two can play that game wrote:
How many economically influenced drug addictions and suicides will you trade to keep your 90-year-old grandmother alive for an extra 6 months?
My dad was a doctor and we can't have a funeral for him. He picked saving lives over his own. I get you are too stupid to understand my point and so are unable to see the fallacy of trying to equate your example to mine. However, your believe that only 90 year old grandmothers with 6 months to live will die is exactly why I made my point. That's not only who will die.
Neither my parents, siblings, or child will die. I am willing to accept a teeny tiny risk that they could die just like I allow them to drive in cars and ride bikes and do other things that carry a teeny tiny risk of death.
Allen53 wrote:
The other smaller but very loud group are the “#StayHomeSaveLives” who now have a platform to perform in, it's their newly minted melodrama where they get to play some kind of "hero of humanity" and gain meaning from participating in this "movement."
I think there is something to this. There seem to be people trying to see who can stay home the hardest. They're well intentioned, but their need for their staying at home to have meaning beyond they wont spread the virus and they are nonessential employees unfortunately can't be met and will just lead to mental anguish. The rest I don't agree with.
2 can play that game wrote:
pick one wrote:
My dad was a doctor and we can't have a funeral for him. He picked saving lives over his own. I get you are too stupid to understand my point and so are unable to see the fallacy of trying to equate your example to mine. However, your believe that only 90 year old grandmothers with 6 months to live will die is exactly why I made my point. That's not only who will die.
Neither my parents, siblings, or child will die. I am willing to accept a teeny tiny risk that they could die just like I allow them to drive in cars and ride bikes and do other things that carry a teeny tiny risk of death.
That’s his point, idiot. You people are ok letting people you don’t know or care about die. You think you’re family isn’t at risk so you don’t care. If they lifted all the restrictions and your child died pieces of shlt like you would be the first to complain that the government didn’t protect them. Idiot.
Which 3 young healthy ones are you willing to lose to keep it shut down?
Or just say that you are a liberal and save your breathe.
I think of all those - look at me, don't forget me, hopes and prayers, I am really doing something, staying home, no I mean it really, we are all in this together, it's our war. War? really, everyone's a public health expert now. How hard are you fighting the virus? Let us decide.......
two can play that game wrote:
pick one wrote:
Which close family member (mom, dad, sibling, child) would you be willing to let die to get everyone back to work?
How many economically influenced drug addictions and suicides will you trade to keep your 90-year-old grandmother alive for an extra 6 months?
You are both an idiot and an a$$hole.
Those on soap boxes are non essential, like you. Allah be with you.
My soapbox is only so big, thanks.
Who TF is Michael Burry? wrote:
Who TF is Michael Burry and why should we care what he thinks? Is he an epidemiologist?
Well. Since you asked, he is an MD. But he also has one of the greatest mathematical minds on the planet. Instead of following the medical path laid before him, he decided to go full time into investing. He is borderline Aspergers, a high functioning form of autism, that helps him to invest logically without emotion (imagine a better version of Rain Man). He is probably one of the smartest people on the planet. He is as close as you can find to an impartial observer. He was the first to really identify and create the financial instrument to short the housing bubble.
An epidemiologist like Fauci only cares about not over burdening the health system. They care nothing about the economy and the impact a tanking economy would have on People’s lives (40,000 people die for every 1% rise in unemployment through suicide, poor health, crime, alcoholism, drug abuse, etc.). So the choice is do we continue to strangle the economy for six months until a vaccine is available to save primarily 70 + year old people with 2 or so pre-existing conditions (that’s what the data tells us) and watch as the economy crumbles around us and people lose homes, take lives, etc. or do we restart the economy and just quarantine those at greatest risk while the young and healthy deal with the infection and gain immunity and save lives and livelihoods.
trumpeter wrote:
Trump fought the Governors to keep the country open. They each made decisions for their individual states.
He caved like a weakling.
None of you has any clue. Neither do I. Yes, elected officials and experts can make judgement errors, but we have to trust in something. The country is so divided with every one shouting down at one another. This isn't a partisan issue. This is a government functioning as it sees best when faced with a perceived global emergency.
For what it's worth (nothing), I imagine the potential damage from this virus is probably overblown. By how much? I have no idea.
I also know the media has an agenda (to capture viewers and sell advertisements). For at least the past three decades, it's been clear that fear, panic, and sensationalism draw in more viewers than anything else. The current coverage isn't helping the national mood.
On the other side, posters here are throwing out ridiculous arguments (with serial movement of the goalposts). Allen, you keep posting about dying "of" and dying "with" coronavirus. Do you actually think hospitals are just swabbing people at random if they are not admitted with (or develop while admitted) respiratory illness? People also talk about "pre-existing conditions" like they denote some sort of failing on the individual. By the seventh decade, the AVERAGE person has just under one pre-morbid condition. It's incredibly common and part of aging.
We should all sit down and agree that each of us individually has no clue. We read reports and others opinions and form firm opinions of our own which favor our own biases. We forget that we don't have a deeper understanding.
joedirty wrote:
Who TF is Michael Burry? wrote:
Who TF is Michael Burry and why should we care what he thinks? Is he an epidemiologist?
Well. Since you asked, he is an MD. But he also has one of the greatest mathematical minds on the planet. Instead of following the medical path laid before him, he decided to go full time into investing. He is borderline Aspergers, a high functioning form of autism, that helps him to invest logically without emotion (imagine a better version of Rain Man). He is probably one of the smartest people on the planet. He is as close as you can find to an impartial observer. He was the first to really identify and create the financial instrument to short the housing bubble.
An epidemiologist like Fauci only cares about not over burdening the health system. They care nothing about the economy and the impact a tanking economy would have on People’s lives (40,000 people die for every 1% rise in unemployment through suicide, poor health, crime, alcoholism, drug abuse, etc.). So the choice is do we continue to strangle the economy for six months until a vaccine is available to save primarily 70 + year old people with 2 or so pre-existing conditions (that’s what the data tells us) and watch as the economy crumbles around us and people lose homes, take lives, etc. or do we restart the economy and just quarantine those at greatest risk while the young and healthy deal with the infection and gain immunity and save lives and livelihoods.
This.