1. #2261
    Quote Originally Posted by Low Hanging Fruit View Post
    That seems obvious to me as well. He should just accept he made a blind politically motivated comment like he usually does and move on. But we all know he is below that pretty easy thing to do.. so.. we will just have to hear the defenders chant about it.
    well the cult has no ground to defend him on anything else so this is what they choose to argue about.

  2. #2262
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    5 min ago

    Treasury Secretary warns US could see 20% unemployment rate due to coronavirus, source says

    From CNN's Jeremy Diamond

    Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned Republican senators Tuesday that the coronavirus pandemic could drive up US unemployment to 20%, a Republican Senate source told CNN.
    Mnuchin's comments came as he urged Republican senators to act on economic stimulus measures totaling $1 trillion designed to avert that kind of worst case scenario.
    In the same meeting, Mnuchin also said he is concerned the economic ramifications of the coronavirus pandemic could be worse than the 2008 financial crisis, the source said.
    Mnuchin's comments, which were first reported by Bloomberg News, come amid a rising sense of urgency at the White House and on Capitol Hill to confront the increasingly serious threat of the coronavirus pandemic — on both the public health and economic fronts.



    Guess those records trump spoke about might not end just yet....unfortunately as its been happening now for 3 weeks they would be "bad" records
    Sheesh. He went from "No big deal" & "Good time to buy" to Mr. Doom and Gloom. The nation did not break 10% unemployment during the 2008 recession. Although California did go up into the high teens.

  3. #2263
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    Sheesh. He went from "No big deal" & "Good time to buy" to Mr. Doom and Gloom. The nation did not break 10% unemployment during the 2008 recession. Although California did go up into the high teens.
    Ya it did. it didn't break 10.1%

    https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

    2009
    7.8
    8.3
    8.7
    9.0
    9.4
    9.5
    9.5
    9.6
    9.8
    10.0
    9.9
    9.9
    Buh Byeeeeeeeeeeee !!

  4. #2264
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    Sheesh. He went from "No big deal" & "Good time to buy" to Mr. Doom and Gloom. The nation did not break 10% unemployment during the 2008 recession. Although California did go up into the high teens.
    Apparently a UK team modeled likely effects of the virus in UK and US.


    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...es/ar-BB11jVNP

    Title: A chilling scientific paper helped upend U.S. and U.K. coronavirus strategies

    That session presented jaw-dropping numbers from some of Britain’s top modelers of infectious disease, who predicted the deadly course of coronavirus could quickly kill hundreds of thousands in both the United Kingdom and the United States, as surges of sick and dying patients overwhelmed hospitals and critical care units.

    The new forecasts, by Neil Ferguson and his colleagues at the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, were quickly embraced by Johnson’s government to design new and more-extreme measures to suppress the spread of the virus.
    The Imperial College group reported that if nothing was done by governments and individuals and the pandemic remained uncontrolled, then 510,000 would die in Britain and 2.2 million in the United States over the course of the outbreak.
    Apparently enough senior people in the Trump administration believe the report, and are reacting accordingly.

    The article goes on to say that Boris Johnson already started taking agressive action, well last night (Monday), and it seems that his actions prompted the Trump administration to do the same.
    Last edited by Omega10; 2020-03-18 at 12:00 AM.

  5. #2265

  6. #2266
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    That shouldn't be a problem then since Trump stated the real unemployment rate was 45% when he was running for president.

  7. #2267
    The article goes on to say that Boris Johnson already started taking agressive action, well last night (Monday), and it seems that his actions prompted the Trump administration to do the same.
    Johnson is doing fuck all except talk endlessly.

  8. #2268
    Today:

    DOW: +5.2% (over 1000 points)
    Boeing: -4.2% down to 124

    Now it's clear why:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...ry/ar-BB11khbR

    Title: Boeing calls for $60 billion lifeline for US aerospace industry

    Boeing spokesman Gordon Johndroe subsequently said the company "supports a minimum of $60 billion in access to public and private liquidity, including loan guarantees, for the aerospace manufacturing industry."

    Boeing declined to say how much of that would be for the planemaker versus loan guarantees for its suppliers; it was also unclear if U.S. banks would loan any of the more than $60 billion without government backing.

    The U.S. planemaker has told lawmakers it needs significant government support to meet liquidity needs and it cannot raise that in current market conditions, the people said.

    Boeing confirmed Monday it was in talks with the administration about short-term support, while U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday the U.S. government would provide support. Boeing has noted that typically 70% of its revenue flows to its 17,000 suppliers and has told lawmakers that without significant assistance the entire U.S. aviation manufacturing sector could collapse.
    The economic experts can translate better than me, but it sounds to me like Boeing is basically bankrupt, and requires a minimum of $60 billion to stay solvent. It also sounds like Boeing's numbers are so bad that banks refuse to loan them the money.

    Please tell me why this is incorrect.

  9. #2269
    The Insane Masark's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    17,971
    Quote Originally Posted by Omega10 View Post
    The economic experts can translate better than me, but it sounds to me like Boeing is basically bankrupt, and requires a minimum of $60 billion to stay solvent. It also sounds like Boeing's numbers are so bad that banks refuse to loan them the money.

    Please tell me why this is incorrect.
    They probably need less than $60B themselves, as some of that would go to Lockheed, Northrop, GE, and other lesser players. Probably all the way down the sector. The current situation can't be doing the GA market any favours.
    Last edited by Masark; 2020-03-18 at 02:33 AM.

    Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
    What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mind
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Tayler
    Political conservatism is just atavism with extra syllables and a necktie.
    Me on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW characters

  10. #2270
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Omega10 View Post
    it sounds to me like Boeing is basically bankrupt
    I'm not an expert, but yes, they are.

    Boeing has a similar problem to the US, in that a problem they should have seen coming but didn't jumped out of nowhere and bit them right in the wallet. They lost a lot of public faith and therefore sales. They got some military contracts, true, but losing contracts because of Trump's unilateral breaking of the Iran Nuclear Deal hurt in the tens of billions, while the aluminium/steel tariffs couldn't possibly have helped.

    Then the 737 crashed.

    And then the coronavirus hit -- and it's a bad time to expand air travel.

    Boeing had a $11 to $13 billion loan already signed for, which they just recently completed (they were "pre-approved" basically), so you're probably right that they're not getting more. Do they need $60 billion? Maybe. Boeing was supposedly worth $200 billion in 2017. Was. But I think the $60 billion is for the entire industry, which admittedly they're a big part of, but not the entire thing.

  11. #2271
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    I'm not an expert, but yes, they are.

    Boeing has a similar problem to the US, in that a problem they should have seen coming but didn't jumped out of nowhere and bit them right in the wallet. They lost a lot of public faith and therefore sales. They got some military contracts, true, but losing contracts because of Trump's unilateral breaking of the Iran Nuclear Deal hurt in the tens of billions, while the aluminium/steel tariffs couldn't possibly have helped.

    Then the 737 crashed.

    And then the coronavirus hit -- and it's a bad time to expand air travel.

    Boeing had a $11 to $13 billion loan already signed for, which they just recently completed (they were "pre-approved" basically), so you're probably right that they're not getting more. Do they need $60 billion? Maybe. Boeing was supposedly worth $200 billion in 2017. Was. But I think the $60 billion is for the entire industry, which admittedly they're a big part of, but not the entire thing.
    I really worry about the future of American aerospace given Boeing's problems. Airbus has been the big winner out of this and will continue to be very well off in the aviation wars. We are not very optimistic with Boeing going forward unless some form of massive and i mean massive handout not only saves them but lasts long enough for them to regain more market share which arguably will be hard as shit to get back.

    I have been looking at the silver lining of sorts given this horrific situation which could mean that production facilities could escape Asia and move either back to their home nations or in our teams expectations is a building of Africa that is not tied to the belt / road.

  12. #2272
    Quote Originally Posted by jeezusisacasual View Post
    I really worry about the future of American aerospace given Boeing's problems. Airbus has been the big winner out of this and will continue to be very well off in the aviation wars. We are not very optimistic with Boeing going forward unless some form of massive and i mean massive handout not only saves them but lasts long enough for them to regain more market share which arguably will be hard as shit to get back.

    I have been looking at the silver lining of sorts given this horrific situation which could mean that production facilities could escape Asia and move either back to their home nations or in our teams expectations is a building of Africa that is not tied to the belt / road.
    So the plan is: "give them a massive and I mean massive handout" ... and hope they spend it wisely and also hope that their next planes (whether they be modified 737s or something new) do not fall out of the sky?

  13. #2273
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    Ya it did. it didn't break 10.1%

    https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

    2009
    7.8
    8.3
    8.7
    9.0
    9.4
    9.5
    9.5
    9.6
    9.8
    10.0
    9.9
    9.9
    I stand corrected.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Omega10 View Post
    So the plan is: "give them a massive and I mean massive handout" ... and hope they spend it wisely and also hope that their next planes (whether they be modified 737s or something new) do not fall out of the sky?
    As much as I loathe corporate handout, I don't think we want to lose Boeing. I have mentioned it before, when it comes to large commercial aircraft, there are two options - Boeing or Airbus. Losing Boeing meant that the US had just ceded the global commercial aircraft market to EU.

  14. #2274
    Quote Originally Posted by Omega10 View Post
    So the plan is: "give them a massive and I mean massive handout" ... and hope they spend it wisely and also hope that their next planes (whether they be modified 737s or something new) do not fall out of the sky?
    They are asking for 60 Billion when they have spent 45 Billion on stock buybacks ( a practice i have said before is terrible and needs to go back to its 1933 standard ).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    I stand corrected.

    - - - Updated - - -



    As much as I loathe corporate handout, I don't think we want to lose Boeing. I have mentioned it before, when it comes to large commercial aircraft, there are two options - Boeing or Airbus. Losing Boeing meant that the US had just ceded the global commercial aircraft market to EU.
    If you do not allow them to fail it only encourages more horrific behavior is the problem and that would only be a problem if we as a nation failed to be diplomatic with our allies. I would rather that they come under the purview of the US Government which is a fine middle ground.

  15. #2275
    Quote Originally Posted by jeezusisacasual View Post
    They are asking for 60 Billion when they have spent 45 Billion on stock buybacks ( a practice i have said before is terrible and needs to go back to its 1933 standard ).

    - - - Updated - - -
    Ooops my bad. I was thinking by massive amount that you meant that $60 billion would be the first installment, with more money needed later in the year or next year.

  16. #2276
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by alexw View Post
    That's just the start. This will be far worse than 2008.

    2008 was a monetary phenomenon which could be mitigated by federal action.

    If an airline cannot transport passangers for the next six months due to covid-19, no matter what action the government takes that airline still isn't going to be transporting passangers.

    Ditto for taxi cab firms, gyms, hotels, and oh so much else in our service orientated economies.
    It's not just the services, it's also anything that supplies services.

    Closed restaurants means no need for food deliveries.
    Closed hotels means no need for toiletries.
    Etc. Etc.

    This will be far wider reaching than most can imagine. Places reading "closed" is the tip of the iceberg.

  17. #2277
    Quote Originally Posted by Omega10 View Post
    So the plan is: "give them a massive and I mean massive handout" ... and hope they spend it wisely and also hope that their next planes (whether they be modified 737s or something new) do not fall out of the sky?
    Nah it will be in the form of a loan or grant where we will get most of our money back.

    They will save billions on interest and fees
    Buh Byeeeeeeeeeeee !!

  18. #2278
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    Sheesh. He went from "No big deal" & "Good time to buy" to Mr. Doom and Gloom. The nation did not break 10% unemployment during the 2008 recession. Although California did go up into the high teens.
    In 2008 you did not have local government ordering entire major metropolitan areas to basically close shop for a month. A lot of small businesses barring some massive govt bailouts are just going to fail because they don't have the cash reserves to stay solvent. A lot of stuff is going to fail and its not going to come back right away even once this problem passes.

  19. #2279
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,911
    Quote Originally Posted by kaid View Post
    A lot of small businesses barring some massive govt bailouts are just going to fail because they don't have the cash reserves to stay solvent. A lot of stuff is going to fail and its not going to come back right away even once this problem passes.
    This is true, but my question is, what part of the stock market does that specifically impact? Small businesses wouldn't buy airplanes, but they might buy tractors and computers, right? Like, which part of the DOW, S&P, and NASDAQ are more small-business oriented?

  20. #2280
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    This is true, but my question is, what part of the stock market does that specifically impact? Small businesses wouldn't buy airplanes, but they might buy tractors and computers, right? Like, which part of the DOW, S&P, and NASDAQ are more small-business oriented?
    When you get wide spread unemployment it wrecks confidence and consumer spending. Consumers don't spend that ripples out through everything. Worst case it moves into the land of a depression then you get people sitting on the money they do have and not spending figuring if they wait another week or month they can get the same thing cheaper. But if that drags on long enough larger businesses start failing and the ripples get bigger. I don't think we have any modern historical examples of simply shutting down huge areas to not only can't work but not allowed to travel elsewhere to find work. Its like a war with no bombs going off all the stuff is still there but you can't use it. If this lasts 2 or 3 months or god help us into the fall?

    We may wind up like china where they are starting to reopen factories regardless that there are still new cases appearing because the alternative is don't start them and your society starts to crumble as whatever savings people did have get exhausted.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •