I worked with a technician at Tektronix. Well, his job got moved from day shift to swing shift. He would come in on payday an hour or more before the checks came out just so he could get his and rush it to the bank before the bank closed because otherwise he would bounce checks. There are marginal people out there who really should not have qualified for high school graduation who live on the edge.
I get it man, but this needs to be a citizen stimulus. Easy peasy, money to people. No need to fill it full of cronyism.
Whoosh, you missed that I did get the joke in Minstrel’s post, hence the apology for the disturbing “getting lucky” image. I just wanted to also point out that finding a treatment for the virus should supersede whatever political feelings we may have.
There are two issues to your last statement: 1. Finding a solution to your virus problem should be a top consideration; 2. Finding out who screwed us up royally will tell us who to get rid of so we can work toward the virus issue. I'd like to start with fully funding the CDC, NIH and Dr. Fauci. And why aren't we elevating the need for more medical equipment and hospital bed space?
Lanny, you’re again missing the point of my post. I was talking about the combination of a malaria drug and an antibiotic that Trump was saying, without much in the way of data to back it up, could be a game changer. Even though he was making a bigger deal out of it than current information would warrant, we should hope that it turns out that he’s right since we would all benefit. As far as the blame game goes, funding wasn’t an issue in the delay of testing and supplies. Trump did propose a reduction to the CDC budget, but Congress passed a budget that was about the same as in prior years. As far as I have read, the CDC developed their own test and found out late that one of the chemicals didn’t work right. They had to backtrack and start over. I’m sure the decisions they made will be investigated, but right now that’s not helpful and it may simply fall under the category of shit happens.
I am missing nothing unless you intended something that your words belied. "I just wanted to also point out that finding a treatment for the virus should supersede whatever political feelings we may have." I responded to this throwing in the part about determining blame so we could make sure such mistakes did not happen again, which is also an important consideration. In business projects, it's known as a postmortem. You do postmortems on both unsuccessful as well as successful projects. What was done right and what was done wrong. You can learn from mistakes as well as successes.
So you are saying that a bad solution that will cause a lot of harm in the long run is more important than a short-term solution that will be questionable in it's ability to help? This is a very bad bill and luckily - there are enough Sentaors from both parties that realize that.
What’s so bad about it? It’s better than nothing, which is exactly what the Democrats are offering. They didn’t even show up on the senate floor today to discuss a plan! There’s a fucking crisis like we haven’t seen in years and they don’t even show up to work!! I know some people who wish they could be at work today.
I really have to wonder where you are getting your 'news'. Because what you are saying here just isn't true. barfo
How about this - "It’s better than nothing, which is exactly what the Democrats are offering. They didn’t even show up on the senate floor today to discuss a plan! There’s a fucking crisis like we haven’t seen in years and they don’t even show up to work!!"
Yeah, I do. I mean, they had a vote today, and it was 49-46. That means that only 5 senators were missing, and we know those are the 5 republicans in quarantine. So, in direct contradiction to what you said, every single democrat was on the floor today. So yes, you are absurdly ill-informed on this topic. barfo
What is so bad about it? No funding for hospitals. No protection for workers right. No oversight. Secret slush fund to be used by crooked politicians as they wish. It is plain bad. You are basically giving a blank check to some people to do whatever they wish with - without promising that the money goes to people that actually need it. It's really not hard to understand if you read the details. A large portion of this bill could very easily end in the pockets of CEOs and large investors. It's a bad bill. I do not think it is worth spending up to $1T dollars to pad the pockets of these people so some people could get $2000 now and be fired immediately by the corporations that are bailed out but are not required to use this money for the workers.
They voted early and then most of them left, they didn’t stick around to discuss a plan or hear the other side. The Republican speakers kept referencing how there were barely any democrats left in their seating area. So yes, you are absurdly ill informed on this topic.
The “slush fund” is just a dirty word the media is spreading ( they all have jobs right now by the way). The aid for businesses. You know, that employ people? Hence the term unemployment. I think a lot of these layed off workers might want a job to go back to after this big scare is over, rather than the empty building their now-bankrupt employer once occupied.
Yes, but they are free to use it as they wish. One of the issues is that it is not required that they use this for employee paychecks. That's why the details are important. It is also not clear what industries will be helped and how much - because the slush fund is going to be secret for a while. It could be routed to some hotel chain or casino operator instead of hospitals or food manufacturers for example - because the people the pull the strings are invested in these operations. This bill is a massive problem if it is not transparent. That's the problem.
