Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Zaydin]

Sooooo... They did exactly what Trump did, and say that Covid-19 is a super serious pandemic, totally, when they not long ago said that there is no problem because the common cold is more deadly.

If Republicans didn't have double standards they wouldn't have any standards at all.

[alexw]

Nationalizing industries is very hard in the US but here is a record against it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_steel_strike

There isn't going to be much choice.

If everything is going into lock down to halt the spread of this virus then that lockdown is going to have to remain until viable treatment / vaccines are available.

That means a duration of months at least and potentially a year or longer.

That in turn will result in a complete collapse of sectors of the economy unless the government socializes them (it can pretend it hasn't and try and fudge how it does it but the end result is still the same) for the duration of the shutdown.

[Breccia]

Democrats sour on the idea of a gas/oil bailout, warning that

A bailout tells the American public that fossil fuel investors can rely on U.S. taxpayers to cover their bills when the industry’s corporate executives’ risky investments don’t pan out

This is a warning. Trump/McConnell are still discussing this barely-under-a-trillion bailout, and the House is telling them what won't make it through.

[Draco-Onis]

That won't work. The election isn't until November.

By that time whole industries will have been shut down for months on end. Tens of millions of people will have had their income zeroed.

A $1000 bribe isn't going to cut it. Those affected are going to need a continual income stream for at least a couple months and potentially for a year or long until the closed down industries can safely reopen.

The government will in effect have to nationalize large parts of if not most of the economy (because they all feed into each other). If it doesn't and it leaves the proles to burn it will get the 1932 great depression treatment and be wiped out.

I think we should all be very weary of this congress and especially this administration handling this crisis for the following reason.

The Trump administration is still trying to kick 700K people from food stamps, a judge's order saying that it is cruel considering the virus is the only thing that stopped it.

The public charge rule that prevents legal immigrants from using any government aid is still in effect.

There is zero reason to believe that this will be nothing but a cynical ploy to get people to vote for Trump and the GOP basically we should read the fine print of this bill.

[jeezusisacasual]

There isn't going to be much choice.

If everything is going into lock down to halt the spread of this virus then that lockdown is going to have to remain until viable treatment / vaccines are available.

That means a duration of months at least and potentially a year or longer.

That in turn will result in a complete collapse of sectors of the economy unless the government socializes them (it can pretend it hasn't and try and fudge how it does it but the end result is still the same) for the duration of the shutdown.

Oh i agree and most nations are able to do so but given Americans make up with how money literally runs the show i doubt it. Its the absolute worst way possible but i wont hold my breath on the US doing the right thing given the track record.

[alexw]

I think we should all be very weary of this congress and especially this administration handling this crisis for the following reason.

The Trump administration is still trying to kick 700K people from food stamps, a judge's order saying that it is cruel considering the virus is the only thing that stopped it.

The public charge rule that prevents legal immigrants from using any government aid is still in effect.

There is zero reason to believe that this will be nothing but a cynical ploy to get people to vote for Trump and the GOP basically we should read the fine print of this bill.

They might try that route but if they do they will get wiped out in Nov. I don't think the republicans have realized what is coming yet though. They are still just trying to help out their donors and friends. The crunch point will be when the reality of what they facing dawns on them. Then they will either have to put the citizenry first or face a Rooservelt style wipeout.

[Rasulis]

Democrats sour on the idea of a gas/oil bailout, warning that



This is a warning. Trump/McConnell are still discussing this barely-under-a-trillion bailout, and the House is telling them what won't make it through.

The irony of the US government bailing out the most heavily subsidized sector of the American economy.

BTW, neither Exxon, nor Chevron want the government to bail out for the oil sector. If you wonder why, it makes some sense when you recall that in 2019, Chevron tried to buy Anadarko for 33B in cash. Occidental board members are probably cutting their wrists right now for outbidding Chevron.

[Zan15]

Nationalizing industries is very hard in the US but here is a record against it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_steel_strike

Would not be hard to nationalize them without nationalizing them....

bad press = deadly for a company = wink wink, don't make us trash you at every govt presser.....wink wink....

- - - Updated - - -

The irony of the US government bailing out the most heavily subsidized sector of the American economy.

BTW, neither Exxon, nor Chevron want the government to bail out for the oil sector. If you wonder why, it makes some sense when you recall that in 2019, Chevron tried to buy Anadarko for 33B in cash. Occidental board members are probably cutting their wrists right now for outbidding Chevron.

Because they have tremendous cash flow and tremendous ability to raise capital.

They also own huge refinery businesses which will not be as impacted as much as straight oil companies. Their refineries right now are getting record margins because of how fast oil dropped.

[Draco-Onis]

They might try that route but if they do they will get wiped out in Nov. I don't think the republicans have realized what is coming yet though. They are still just trying to help out their donors and friends. The crunch point will be when the reality of what they facing dawns on them. Then they will either have to put the citizenry first or face a Rooservelt style wipeout.

I agree because the worse is yet to come so this first bill is going to be mostly worthless.

[Thekri]

The irony of the US government bailing out the most heavily subsidized sector of the American economy.

BTW, neither Exxon, nor Chevron want the government to bail out for the oil sector. Wonder why. It makes some sense when you recall that in 2019, Chevron tried to buy Anadarko for 33B in cash.

Probably because if the bailout is structured anything like the financial bailouts in 2008 was, the government would end up owning them. The US Government still owns Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac (More specifically, they own all its revenues, not the institution itself), and they don't share any of the profits with shareholders. That was an extremely profitable acquisition for the government, we got our money back several times over. The Oil Companies REALLY don't want a federal government lien on their profits for the next dozen decades.

Fossil fuels are the last industry we should bail out anyway. They have healthy cash positions (Mostly), solid margins, and reasonable fixed costs. They should be able to survive without a bailout. It will be hard, sure, and the weaker ones will die off, but there will be plenty left in that space. And economic hard times are supposed to thin the herd, you can't have every shitty run business surviving when times get hard, those are supposed to fail.

Now there are industries that we might have to bail out. Transportation and some manufacturing come to mind. Most run on narrow margins, and have comparatively weak cash positions. They also have huge fixed costs, and sitting idle for months is going to murder them. Some food services companies could have similar issues for similar reasons, as might physical retailers (Might need to have a discussion about saving the later though, it might be their time to go).

Another big one we might need to deal with is General Electric, which has had a rough few decades, and has a week cash position. As tempting as it is to let them fail (As per the "Shitty managed companies should fail in hard times" rule), we really can't let them do so. They currently keep the US energy grid running almost singlehandedly, without GE field repair teams, the entire nation will be dealing with rolling blackouts in weeks. The utility companies maintain the lines and small stuff, but they can't deal with the things that go wrong in the power plants. Furthermore, we need their aviation segment if we want commercial and military aviation to stay in this country, and we need their healthcare system to make things like respirators... which we kind of need a lot of right now. A GE Bailout could be VERY expensive, but it likely to end with the federal government owning most of that, and splitting that conglomerate apart into useful pieces. The government would probably make a profit over a few decades, like with Fannie Mae. However, this is the sort of bailout that can go very good or very bad for the government, depending on how competently they handle it. And considering this administration fixes things like a Cocaine Fueled Chimpanzee with a Jackhammer, that could be extremely bad for everyone if they try to bail out GE. Hopefully they won't need it.

[Zan15]

Probably because if the bailout is structured anything like the financial bailouts in 2008 was, the government would end up owning them. The US Government still owns Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac (More specifically, they own all its revenues, not the institution itself), and they don't share any of the profits with shareholders. That was an extremely profitable acquisition for the government, we got our money back several times over. The Oil Companies REALLY don't want a federal government lien on their profits for the next dozen decades.

Not true they get to keep their profits now

Mortgage-finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will start keeping earnings as part of a Trump administration process aimed at moving the companies out of conservatorship and back into the private sector.

https://www.curbed.com/2019/9/30/208...ailout-profits
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fannie-...gs-11569851912


Of course the still have the right to reverse this...and the govt might do it since they will need the $$$$

[Rasulis]

Would not be hard to nationalize them without nationalizing them....

bad press = deadly for a company = wink wink, don't make us trash you at every govt presser.....wink wink....

- - - Updated - - -



Because they have tremendous cash flow and tremendous ability to raise capital.

They also own huge refinery businesses which will not be as impacted as much as straight oil companies. Their refineries right now are getting record margins because of how fast oil dropped.

I do remember a fairly recent Bloomberg article where Exxon claimed that they can reduce the cost of pumping oil in the Permian to about $15 per barrel. It would require deploying 55 rigs, increasing it’s output to 1 million bpd, and building its own takeaway infrastructure from separation tanks to pipeline to refining.

[Thekri]

Not true they get to keep their profits now

Mortgage-finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will start keeping earnings as part of a Trump administration process aimed at moving the companies out of conservatorship and back into the private sector.

https://www.curbed.com/2019/9/30/208...ailout-profits
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fannie-...gs-11569851912


Of course the still have the right to reverse this...and the govt might do it since they will need the $$$$

Not yet. It is a tentative deal to allow them to maybe keep part of their money next year. Which I think is actually a terrible idea, I am totally fine with the government owning them, and the government makes about 40 billion a year from the deal. Granted, the Trump administration wants to privatize it (Willing to bet their cronies bought a ton of FMA stock before they announced this), but it isn't a done deal.

At any rate, even if it privatized today, the Federal Government made out like bandits on this deal. We paid $191 billion to bail them out in 2008, a fact which republicans love pointing out. What they don't point out is they have now paid back $312 billion, and are still paying us 100% of their profits until Trump says they can stop. In fact, that whole massive TARP bailout is now solidly profitable for the government according to Pro-Publica We paid out $633 billion to all financial institutions (Including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), and as of January 31, we have gotten $754.8 billion back.

So they saved the worlds financial system, and got all the taxpayers money back, and made a profit. Thanks Obama.

[Zan15]

Not yet. It is a tentative deal to allow them to maybe keep part of their money next year. Which I think is actually a terrible idea, I am totally fine with the government owning them, and the government makes about 40 billion a year from the deal. Granted, the Trump administration wants to privatize it (Willing to bet their cronies bought a ton of FMA stock before they announced this), but it isn't a done deal.

At any rate, even if it privatized today, the Federal Government made out like bandits on this deal. We paid $191 billion to bail them out in 2008, a fact which republicans love pointing out. What they don't point out is they have now paid back $312 billion, and are still paying us 100% of their profits until Trump says they can stop. In fact, that whole massive TARP bailout is now solidly profitable for the government according to Pro-Publica We paid out $633 billion to all financial institutions (Including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), and as of January 31, we have gotten $754.8 billion back.

So they saved the worlds financial system, and got all the taxpayers money back, and made a profit. Thanks Obama.

Yes yet.


Announced by the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the modifications to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements will permit Fannie May to maintain capital reserves of $25 billion and Freddie Mac to keep $20 billion, substantially more than the $3 billion in profits they were previously allowed to retain

This was sept 2019, approved and agreed.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm786

It should amount to most of the profits each year and allow them to eventually go public

[Thekri]

Yes yet.


Announced by the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the modifications to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements will permit Fannie May to maintain capital reserves of $25 billion and Freddie Mac to keep $20 billion, substantially more than the $3 billion in profits they were previously allowed to retain

This was sept 2019, approved and agreed.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm786

It should amount to most of the profits each year and allow them to eventually go public

Not really, read what you posted. They raised the limits on capital reserves they can keep from 3 billion to 25 billion (20 billion for Freddie), and they can reach that reserve by using their excess profits. It does NOT allow them to continue adding to their capital reserves past 25 billion, nor does it allow them to dispose of any of their earnings through dividends (To non-government sources) or stock buybacks.

So if Fannie Mae had 3 billion in reserves in January, they have to still pay their obligated loan to the government, and any excess after that can go into raising those reserves to 25 billion. Whenever they reach 25 billion, that is it, and the government takes all the rest of their money again. It isn't 25 billion a year, it is 25 billion period, and they can't do anything with it, they can just keep it as reserves in case something terrible like a pandemic happens.

This is a step toward privatization, yes. But right now no non-government source is seeing a penny of profit from either company, the government is still keeping all of it. The only thing that changed is how much reserve they can keep.

Edit: Also, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have not been allowed to pay down a single penny of their principal. Which means they still owe the government $191 billion dollars. We have been taking all their profits, but it hasn't been going toward their debts. We have just been pocketing it.

Edit 2: It gets even better, I just reread that article, and the federal government is increasing its liquidation preferred stock by the amount that they are allowed to add to their reserves. So Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are essentially giving the government $1 in stock for each dollar the government graciously allows them to "Keep". So the government is still getting that next 22 Billion in Fannie Mae stock (And 17 billion in Freddie Stock) we are just getting it as stock.

[Breccia]

US deaths pass 100.

Two things:

1) I'm fairly sure it was 85 this morning.

2) "It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine."
2a) That was a trillion dollars ago.

[kaelleria]

Mnuchin is predicting 20% unemployment...
This is Trump's own guy.

[jeezusisacasual]

Mnuchin is predicting 20% unemployment...
This is Trump's own guy.

Considering that unemployment reached 24.9% during the great depression it builds you will all kinds of confidence doesnt it?

[Omega10]

Considering that unemployment reached 24.9% during the great depression it builds you will all kinds of confidence doesnt it?

Well we know what we are potentially up against. It could very well be not pretty.

[Breccia]

I found Breccia's post

Well, you don't need it. I will now quote this post in its entirety because I don't want anyone missing this.

2020 Time Capsule #4: Trump Is Lying, Blatantly

During press questioning at the White House today, Donald Trump was asked whether his tone about the coronavirus challenge had suddenly changed. For weeks, he’d been mocking the virus threat—at rallies, in tweets, and in press remarks. But both yesterday and today, he’d suddenly shifted to warning that the public-health and economic problems were real, and would remain so for a long time.

What changed?

Trump denied there had been any shift in tone, and said

“I have always known. This is a real pandemic. I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic....

“I’ve always viewed it as very serious.”

This is a flat-out lie.

Setting the lead for many Republican politicians and for most coverage on Fox News, Trump had for many weeks pooh-poohed the idea that the virus should be taken seriously.

• He has said it was “contained” and “under control”
• He has said “It’s going to disappear” and, “We have very little problem in this country”
• He said three weeks ago that the U.S. had “15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done.”
• He tweeted just eight days ago that “The Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, is doing everything within its semi-considerable power (it used to be greater!) to inflame the CoronaVirus situation”

[EDITOR: All of the above are cited]

From growing global awareness of the disease in January, until his press conference yesterday, March 16, Trump had consistently minimized the medical and economic danger. He frequently likened the virus to the seasonal flu, and at a rally said that criticism of his administration’s virus responses was “a hoax”—indeed, a continuation of the impeachment “hoax” by other means.

That Trump has shifted his tone so dramatically says something about the scale of the disease and its impacts. I hope it says something positive about the upcoming federal commitments to join the effort against it, so far led by governors and mayors.

But that he believes he can baldly zap away all memory of his words and deeds and reinvent himself as the man saving his country from pandemic—another Anthony Fauci, but with executive powers—reveals something about Trump’s mind and character, and something about his assessment of public life.

• About his mind it suggests: He lives in the moment, and whatever he wants to be true at this instant, is “true” for him, at least while he’s saying it.
• About his assessment of others it indicates: He is betting he can get away with it. At some level he must know that half the press is weary of writing the 900th story pointing out his falsehoods. The other half is hungry for some way to show its “balance,” and to avoid using the plain word “lie.” And meanwhile the constituency Trump said would stay with him if he “shot someone on Fifth Avenue” may still be aboard.

An assessment on CNN just after the press conference indicated the kind of response Trump might be betting on. The estimable Dana Bash said of Trump’s comments, “He is being the kind of leader that people need, at least in tone, today and yesterday.” We’ll see what the online stories tonight and the print headlines tomorrow morning say about Trump’s shift.

Will “today and yesterday”—the subdued tone yesterday, the “I have always viewed it as very serious” Orwellian big-lie today—enter public consciousness as the time when Trump “got serious” and “became a leader”? Or as the time when he finally went too far with a blatant lie?

As I write this, in real time, we can’t be sure. I have my own guess, which I hope proves wrong.