Stay at home orders are a joke, here's why

Only one system protects that right to choose, Capitalism.

 

The problem being that those who make that choice are more likely to put the lives of others, who didn't make that choice, at risk than they are to put their own lives at risk.

 

If you were as much a fan of private property as you claim to be, you wouldn't complain about the rules you agreed to when joining this privately owned forum.

 

You are very correct; however subject to limiting their rights under the US Constitution, it would be next to impossible to do.

 

That would depend on unenumerated rights. As far as enumerated rights go, aside from the right to peaceful assembly, it wouldn't require a limitation of Constitutional rights to quarantine, and even with the right to peaceful assembly there have generally been limitations for public safety. I still have the right to free speech, to bear arms, etc. even under quarantine or any other shelter-at-home order.

 

I suspect you are very correct on this.

 

sure they don't, no greedy rich person ever underpays people for their work.. right?

 

corporatism takes that right away - thus why America does not have that system

 

Some Govts are already considering that. It's a good idea, apart from the accommodation aspect. That would be logistically impossible, and is going too far in any case.

 

Only if the 'underpaid' agrees to it. Pretty crucial piece of information, that.

 

Try far 'more likely'. And yes, that's the problem. The deniers are the risk takers and risk spreaders.

 

It's not the time for griping over the minutia of any given nation's internal workings. It needs to be a worldwide unified front against a common enemy, if we hope to ever be able to leave our own shores again - or welcome those from other shores.

 

Good points. Let's hope your country wises up to this soon.

 

Simple solution: Ban government from running the economy, i.e., fight for capitalism not another form of statism.

 

Correct. No matter how greedy or how rich or how selfish your employer is, you are never underpaid if you freely accept the market wage and have the freedom to go elsewhere. That's capitalism.

 

I meant the accommodation arrangements as they stood before the pandemic.
I assume we want to avoid mass eviction and homelessness for workers without an income.
There is a problem; government can pay for rent of unemployed workers, and might be required to pay mortgages as well. People with free-hold houses might only need government assistance to pay for food; do we need means tests for government assistance?

All very complicated; as you say, logistically impossible, though Trump's rescue package ($3 trillion and counting) achieves much of the above).

The simplest solution is offered by MMT, which proposes the state, using its currency issuing capacity, should take over the entire economy for the period of the pandemic.

2. This government spending to support unemployed workers will NOT cause inflation, because the spending will not create any excess demand on the nation's present (sufficient) supply of available food and accommodation.

(and spending on non-essentials is naturally curtailed during this period.

3. Which is to say: an increase in the money supply will not mean a decrease in its value, provided
the money is spent on available resources, as outlined above.

(...with apologies to Starjet, who thinks the government should not intervene in the economy at this time. Mass homelessness, and mass starvation not withstanding...)

 

Suggesting we've taken enough action isn't supported by data. Our hospitals are still being overrun and new case counts are still increasing exponentially.

There are still 9 states that have no state wide stay in place policy.

And, the focus on "at risk" isn't good enough. We have no way of isolating them and a significant percent of the hospitalizations are people without those "at risk" characteristics.

 

Your link shares a story of another brave individual who isn't afraid to be a coward. But its important to do this sort of stuff, and stay undercover about it. No media interviews, do it when no one is suspecting you're doing it, reminds me of the prohibition days when people went underground with their speakeasies to avoid being arrested. We need to be dong the same thing now. Our country will not be judged favorably by history when yes, this too shall pass. We will look back at this moment when we all reduced ourselves to cowards, made embarrassing statements like trying to equate this to Pearl Harbor or 9/11, how we overreacted to a virus not worth overreacting to. Terrible time to be an American, with such poor lapses in judgment.

 

Makes sense. Isolate the most at risk. Only the immune compromised and the elderly.

Our own idiocy killed our economy

 

You just wait. These things take time. Businesses close down, it takes a while for employees to go bankrupt then they stop spending and more people lose their jobs.

The acute shutdown of non-essential businesses is bad but it is just the beginning. Soon there won't be enough cash around to keep essential businesses afloat.

Or we could print money like crazy, thereby pushing all this off for someone else to think about in a decade's time. Not the best option either, but the more likely one.

Politicians will have to distance the collapse of the global economy from their actions here, so expect the latter.

 

In my country, there has been a moratorium placed on evictions (both residential and commercial tenancies). They've given tenants 6 months grace. So no one will be evicted.

Also, our Govt has provided a relief package for anyone who lost their job. They'll receive $750 a week until they return to work. We also have free healthcare and education, so that money will be more than adequate.

 

Still not seeing how or why this matters in the face of a pandemic. All we're talking about is having to adjust our lifestyles, just as other generations have had to do during and after previous calamities.

 

...at a cost of $130 billion for yesterday's package alone; and now people are already complaining about that debt burden, and how the burden should be apportioned ("public servants should take a pay cut, that casual employee gets more than me and it's more than he used to earn, it's not fair, the banks are still charging interest on mortgages, even if delaying paymnent", etc etc).

We are being told the government must borrow the money and go into debt which will need to be paid back over the coming decade, which will mean further restrictions on government spending after the pandemic has passed.

Borrow from whom? People WITH money to lend, obviously.

So the mass of ordinary people who don't have money, will be forced to pay interest on government debt to people who do have money.

Just thought I'd let know the implications of our present neoliberal monetarist system.

Truth is: currency issuing governments can issue their own money and do not need to borrow from people with money. (You have seen enough of my posts to know this by now)

That's the truth that financiers and central bankers don't want us to know, because their power in society would be considerably reduced if power was returned to the elected government where it should reside.

 

You should be aware of MMT (Modern Monetary Theory); otherwise indeed global debt will exceed global GDP if this pandemic persists, even while inflation is dead in the water.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/mmt-overcoming-the-political-divide.569365/page-9

Basics:
1. money is merely 'points' used to measure real resources and services
2. money can be issued by currency issuing governments, who therefore do not need to borrow it.
3. the limit for government is not money but resources on which to spend it; ie, as long as the resources and productive capacity exist, inflation will not result from adding more 'points' into the economy.

MMT is a great journey to traverse, it's like an awakening from the nightmare of ever-increasing debt.

 

I have no problem with enacting temporary authoritarianism during emergency situations, so long as:

1. We the people make it abundantly clear that we will not tolerate any of it becoming permanent.

2. The measures taken significantly achieve their goals.

3. The cure is not worse than the disease.

_________________________

On 1 I think we're going to fail spectacularly, 2 and 3 depend entirely on the unknown of when we develop a vaccine.

If we are unable to produce a vaccine for 24 months we are in a serious pickle.

The economy matters for public health. This is why the left has been neurotically pushing redistribution for the past century plus.