Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
There's all of the nagging little details regarding recovery, you know? Like how does a city such as San Francisco even transport anything close to the normal number of people to work? Usually the commute hours see our MUNI riders packed so tightly that there is barely room to even move a little. And masks are going to take care of that problem, right?
So then lots of people decide to drive instead. Except that there is no infrastructure available (sufficient traffic lanes, adequate parking) to support that either. Multiply SF x the number of other large cities dependent upon public transit. Good luck.
I suppose this answers my question as to what the pandemic might cost: “ the Congressional Budget Office anticipates that the American economy will generate $8 trillion less in economic activity over the next decade than it projected just a few months ago, and that a full recovery might not take hold until the 2030s.”
But the article also talks about the positives as well as opportunity to ameliorate the doomsday scenario. It was actually quite broad and balanced. But that does not generate clicks. So, the sensational title. And I subscribe the The Atlantic! The ads still embedded in every article. I counted eight. It's a challenge in today's hyper competitive media landscape. How to find balanced views ... apolitical, fact-based, without the hyperbola. Every moment of every day we are bombarded with sensational headlines and commentaries all screaming click on me.
"The Trump administration has repeatedly argued that there is a trade-off between the country’s economic health and its public health. But economists and physicians have repeatedly argued that that is untrue: Ending the pandemic would have been the single best thing the federal government could have done to preserve the country’s wealth, health, and economic functioning. The Trump administration, in its hubris, obstinacy, and incompetence, failed to do it."
Comments
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/second-great-depression/613360/
There's all of the nagging little details regarding recovery, you know? Like how does a city such as San Francisco even transport anything close to the normal number of people to work? Usually the commute hours see our MUNI riders packed so tightly that there is barely room to even move a little. And masks are going to take care of that problem, right?
So then lots of people decide to drive instead. Except that there is no infrastructure available (sufficient traffic lanes, adequate parking) to support that either. Multiply SF x the number of other large cities dependent upon public transit. Good luck.
and tomorrow, w the spreading news that the top admin knew of russky bounties on US soldiers 15 mos ago, not last spring, likewise
"The Trump administration has repeatedly argued that there is a trade-off between the country’s economic health and its public health. But economists and physicians have repeatedly argued that that is untrue: Ending the pandemic would have been the single best thing the federal government could have done to preserve the country’s wealth, health, and economic functioning. The Trump administration, in its hubris, obstinacy, and incompetence, failed to do it."
Can you say lack of leadership?
Most excellent article that covers the squares. Please note that this is Not the most dire prediction i have read. Alas and alack.
Someone was predicting the return of the Dark Ages.
In all likelihood, we'll muddle through although many will suffer and die.
Is it November yet?
Rono