Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[kaelleria]

Remember how I said trump talking about chloroquine was dangerous? And that Trump was being irresponsible?

https://twitter.com/charlesornstein/...75861211779075

JEEZ. A man has died and his wife is under critical care after the couple, both in their 60s, ingested chloroquine phosphate, an additive commonly used at aquariums to clean fish tanks. Don't do this! Don't self medicate!

[Orbitus]

Corporations don't employ people who need help???

They should take the hit, we shouldn't subsidize their fucking profits. Fuck them. Any and all bills should go to the consumers first before ANY corporate relief happens.

[Edge-]

Corporations don't employ people who need help???

They spend their money on their corporations to boost stock values, not on their employees.

https://www.marketplace.org/2020/03/...uyback-debate/

Unless there are strict rules in place, we'll see corporations again spending billions in aide on stock buybacks to raise their stock values, make rich shareholders richer, and do fuckall for the economy.

So until corporations remember that they employee thousands of real human beings that have bills to pay and are more important than their fucking stock value, I'm all for not giving them shit without extremely clear restrictions on how that money can be used.

And that includes not giving the Trump administration a $500B blank check for whatever they fuck they want.

[Bdatik]

Corporations don't employ people who need help???

Money trickles up, not down.

[Machismo]

Swine flu originated in the US. https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/informat...1_virus_qa.htm

Except, the wiki shows it as originating in Veracruz, Mexico:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_flu_pandemic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_f...demic_timeline

[Sorshen]

Corporations don't employ people who need help???

Corps decided to do buybacks and cut costs when Trump handed them billions with the tax bill. They can fuck off.

[Edge-]

Remember how I said trump talking about chloroquine was dangerous? And that Trump was being irresponsible?

https://twitter.com/charlesornstein/...75861211779075

Perfect example of how Trump is a danger to everyday Americans.

We can now literally draw a direct line between his "suggestions" and actions taken by a couple based off those suggestions.

[cubby]

They should take the hit, we shouldn't subsidize their fucking profits. Fuck them. Any and all bills should go to the consumers first before ANY corporate relief happens.

Lil Concerny doesn't get it whatsoever. We need money to go to people, those stuck at home. Business are secondary. Everyone is getting sent home.

[Acidbaron]

Actually both businesses and people need it, but small businesses that don't have reserves.

[Edge-]

Actually both businesses and people need it, but small businesses that don't have reserves.

Nobody is saying it shouldn't go to small businesses. I think most agree they could very much use it to stay afloat and keep paying employees/not lay them off.

It's that folks aren't happy with corporations getting huge bailouts without very strict limitations on what they can spend the money on. We've already seen them blow it on stock buybacks before, which does fuckall for the economy, and don't want to see that repeated.

[Machismo]

At some point, a lot of people are going to lose their homes. It will be 2009 all over again, because people continue to treat their primary residence as an investment, as well as a means of getting quick cash via equity.

[Zan15]

Significant relief bill? It isn't a relief bill for anyone but fucking corporations. Fuck them. And no, this isn't a nail in the coffin for anyone but Republicans.

well that's not true at all.

its miles above the last bail out and is approaching 2 trillion dollars in direct payments to individuals, extension of unemployment and food stamps and other indirect benefits.

and all of that does not need to be repaid back.

the trillions corporations would be getting mostly appear to require repayment. it will save them money in the end but it won't cost taxpayers all that much.

[DisposableHero]

Actually both businesses and people need it, but small businesses that don't have reserves.

People first.

[Poopymonster]

Remember how I said trump talking about chloroquine was dangerous? And that Trump was being irresponsible?

https://twitter.com/charlesornstein/...75861211779075

The prick in me says "Elections have consequences"
The pragmatist in me says "The 30% diehard Trumpsters maybe 20% or lower by Election day."
I'm not wishing death on anyone.

[Zan15]

Corps decided to do buybacks and cut costs when Trump handed them billions with the tax bill. They can fuck off.

ya fuck them.
I am sure those millions of employees can just find other jobs...umm...somewhere!!!

[Acidbaron]

Nobody is saying it shouldn't go to small businesses. I think most agree they could very much use it to stay afloat and keep paying employees/not lay them off.

It's that folks aren't happy with corporations getting huge bailouts without very strict limitations on what they can spend the money on. We've already seen them blow it on stock buybacks before, which does fuckall for the economy, and don't want to see that repeated.

Even big businesses do need something to carry them over in this period, in the EU banks will be helping out but in the EU since the last crisis they were forced to build reserves this is most likely not the case for the US. Bigger business needs aid in for example delaying their tax payments or others if they pay any taxes at all to begin with.

Also in case it wasn't obvious not in agreement with the trumpster

[Zan15]

They spend their money on their corporations to boost stock values, not on their employees.

https://www.marketplace.org/2020/03/...uyback-debate/

Unless there are strict rules in place, we'll see corporations again spending billions in aide on stock buybacks to raise their stock values, make rich shareholders richer, and do fuckall for the economy.

So until corporations remember that they employee thousands of real human beings that have bills to pay and are more important than their fucking stock value, I'm all for not giving them shit without extremely clear restrictions on how that money can be used.

And that includes not giving the Trump administration a $500B blank check for whatever they fuck they want.

They did not spend the trillions last time on stock buybacks, the vast majority of them used it to stay in business. Most paid it back with interest.

Why are people comparing tax breaks to "bailouts"?

I don't see any evidence any of the proposals would be anything not requiring payback, do you?

[cubby]

ya fuck them.
I am sure those millions of employees can just find other jobs...umm...somewhere!!!

But you understand that we are giving corporations money that don't seem to be giving back. No wage growth. No investment. Just stock buyback, across the board. That is where this is coming from.

[Zan15]

Something something Fallout 76.

More usefully, WV had one of two things:

1) Undiagnosed cases, or
2) The luxury of watching other governors lock down and said "Yeah, that seems smart to us, too".

Either way, not going to blame them. They're in good company.

by the time they had their first case it was because their testing numbers I believe were sub 200 people.

that's what you get for a state with the lowest healthcare access in the country I guess

- - - Updated - - -

But you understand that we are giving corporations money that don't seem to be giving back. No wage growth. No investment. Just stock buyback, across the board. That is where this is coming from.

That's was not the case last time. They gave back all the money and the treasury turned a hefty profit.
That is not also the case with all the proposals on the table.

Where do you see that they used bailout money for stock buybacks?

[Thekri]

At some point, a lot of people are going to lose their homes. It will be 2009 all over again, because people continue to treat their primary residence as an investment, as well as a means of getting quick cash via equity.

Well the good news is that isn't particularly likely, at least in the short term. Mostly thanks to Obama, with a little bit of help from Trump trying to undue what Obama did.

Thanks to the bailout, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which back everyone's mortgages, haven't been able to keep a penny of the money they make since 2008. They have to use all their profits on dividends for holders of their preferred (Not common) stock. The only holder of their preferred stock is the US Government, so we just take all their money every year. They can't even pay down their debt to the government.

Well Trump wanted to undo that, and give these two giant companies back to the holders of the common stock, rather then the preferred stock (Presumably there is some sort of scheme to enrich cronies by a quarter trillion dollars somewhere here). But the companies can't stand on their own without cash reserves. So the Trump administration started allowing them to use a portion of their profits to build up cash reserves, rather then shoveling it straight into the Treasury.

What this means for us now, is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have a fat pile of cash just sitting around doing nothing, and since they still aren't responsible to any shareholders except the Federal Government, the Treasury department can direct them just to defer all mortgage payments those reserves can handle. So a repeat of the housing crisis isn't likely, and the government doesn't have to spend any more money propping up Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. Sort of a rare situation where we wound up in a good position while trying to do the wrong thing.

Now renters on the other hand... they are pretty screwed. Most landlords can't or won't be able to defer rent payments during this downturn, and most of the truly vulnerable don't have a mortgage in the first place. So it is renters becoming homeless that is the big concern.