Quote (cambovenzi @ Mar 25 2020 03:12am)
Some do. Some don't.
You saw Amash was pushing for cash relief for people and he is one of the most libertarian congressmen. A similar themed article was published at reason mag by one of their crappier writers.
Giving people some cash relief makes some amount of sense when you are talking about it in response to government abruptly shutting down their jobs and people needing money in an emergency.
I understand that this is an extenuating circumstance but I also know there will be problems.
Its going to be a shitshow. Printing green paper or a digital equivalent doesn't produce goods and services.
There are already runs on many basic grocery store items and its looking like most businesses will continue to be shut down for weeks. They are ironically getting ready to crucify Trump for suggesting Easter as a target to reassess and reopen.
We are looking at trillions in corporate welfare and a one-time pittance to the average person. This is not a creation of wealth but rather a redistribution. The capital has to come from somewhere.
Many of the businesses were failing before this and others don't need the money.
Government propping up failed businesses is a problem.
Market adjustments and corrections are necessary for an allocation of resources and economy that best serves us on the other side of this.
Of course just about any deal is wildly popular as people expect the government to 'do something' while continuing to keep businesses closed because they don't understand any of the economic realities involved. The politicians understand this and there was immense pressure on them to sign whatever. Pelosi tried to leverage this into a laundry list of unrelated leftist crap but seemingly failed. Trillions for bankers and megacorps looks to still be in the plans. We'll know more tomorrow.
I recently read this article about the previous bailouts that was rather gloomy.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/secrets-and-lies-of-the-bailout-113270/Plenty in there about how banker executives etc exploitatively worked around executive bonus clauses to enrich themselves and their banks and didnt use the money for the intended purpose among a slew of other major problems. That seems to be a big issue they were worried about today and I have no confidence that was effectively handled. It also touched on some reasons why the 'they paid back the loans so its all good' talking point is wrong.
I appreciate Amash's ability to be ideological and still benefit the people who elected him.
I could see libertarian opposition to these things based on principle and based on theory of.... Or sometimes you just have to do wild things in a crisis that you normally would not do , And this flexibility and lack a rigidity is important to have in leaders.
It's one everybody at the table becomes rigid about personal values that nothing gets done. When we have this we just have different people at a table insisting that they're right it's thinking that they have the objective truth and that the other's truth are inferior to their's..... People lacking intellectual maturity imo.
Amash seems to be one grown up in the whole of Congress lol.
And like you hint Cam, bad (but rational in capitalism) behavior will be committed by the people who benefit the most from this sort of bailout...
...Thracymachus's argument to Socrates comes to mind
..yes the rich use the law to serve themselves.... But in capitalist America the poor serve the rich.... And those dumb plebs love that trickle down.
This post was edited by Skinned on Mar 25 2020 05:45am