Aid package claimed to be neccessary jumps from 2 trillion to 6 trillion in one day

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: Grambler

If anything, this part seems like it needs more explanation:

$4 trillion will come in the form of liquidity from the Federal Reserve

is that liquidity from, or of the federal reserve?

Just to be clear, this part has been talked about since last week, so the package didn't actually grow from $2T to $6T. The actual aid is still $2T.

I have no idea what the # "$4T in liquidity" means, but it's not new, they've been talking about it the entire time they've been negotiating this bill.

I think it means it's money for future loans (for businesses).

originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: Grambler

There isn't a person in your threads that is for bailing out billionaires or suspending habeas corpus.

Everyone, except for you and a couple of others, wants this stimulus as temporary relief to the low income and middle income people who will be gravely affected by a loss of a few weeks or more income.

and you know it.

Thats not true at all.

I outlined my position clearly.

I said I could be on board with all of the shutdown and lock down stuff, and a stimulus, if the government was forced to asnwer basic questions before they did it.

I was told that was immoral, and there was no time for that because people would die.

I said that the government would take advantage if we didnt force them to answer basic questions before doing thiese things, and end up saying we needed to fund all sorts of irrelevant things in the name of fighting the emergency is we allowed them to get away with this, and this would become the new norm.

I was told I wanted sick people to die for even suggesting that.

And now here we are two days later.

I never said the government should never be allowed to send money to people. I said we should demand they answer all sort of basic questions before we let them send money like this, because if we dont they will be corrupt.

$2 trillion.

$6 trillion.

A Bazillion trillion!

It should be obvious that the amount, however enormous, really doesn’t matter; because whatever amount it ends up being, doesn’t represent any “real” value!

If the government can simply order $4 trillion to be printed up, exactly what does that $4 trillion represent, In Real Value?

Nothing!

And so, it doesn’t matter how much the final amount is, the real value will be $0.

I am sorry folks, as I have posted elsewhere, in other words, I think that this whole “stimulus package” that everyone in our government! is participating in, is just a sham, a “Potemkin Village” to hide from the public the real, nasty, truth about the US economy, and by extension, the world economy as well.

It’s like keeping a dead body on life support to give the soon to be grieving family, a chance to say their last “goodbyes” to the illusion of a still living loved one.

We have to learn how to move on.

This argument reminds me of the other stupid fake argument going around about the hydroxychlorine/azithromax treatment protocol.

It's not like the situation is urgent or anything, lets wait for the "clinical trials" that take years before we give people the treatment.

People just want something to bitch about.

eta: and people also just don't want anything good to happen that might help Trump get re elected.

originally posted by: toolgal462

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: Grambler

If anything, this part seems like it needs more explanation:

$4 trillion will come in the form of liquidity from the Federal Reserve

is that liquidity from, or of the federal reserve?

Just to be clear, this part has been talked about since last week, so the package didn't actually grow from $2T to $6T. The actual aid is still $2T.

I have no idea what the # "$4T in liquidity" means, but it's not new, they've been talking about it the entire time they've been negotiating this bill.

I think it means it's money for future loans (for businesses).

Whatever it is, it didn't just appear today. It's been talked about this entire time.

I dunno how anyone that's been following this issue would think it's new.

Here's a story from CNBC talking about it on Sunday

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: darkbake

By suggestion that extreme measures like those being taken may be warranted, but the government should have to answer basic questions first is clearly horrific.

Start that money printing press, give it all to whoever anyone in the government says, its the only moral thing to do!

Yeah, the government should be very careful here, I agree that extreme measures may be warranted and it doesn't hurt for the government to answer a few questions. I also agree that the government should be careful about going into so much debt. Although I never did figure out how they get away with massive debt in the first place. There must be some math or economics I'm missing.

Here's an article from Forbes on Sunday. The $4T in liquidity is not new.

Link

Aren't these things being debated among the Dems and R's in the senate?

Do you think that you are the first person to ask these things, OP?

lol

a reply to: darkbake

I am not someone claiming to have all of the answers.

I am not even as etreme of a libertarian as it may seem.

Im ok with sending aid to people.

I said from the get go, even more than i fear this virus, i fear people unquestioningly allowing the government, no matter what party they are in, to have a massive corrupt power grab without answering any questions.

I said even if there are well intended right now, it will only be a matter of time before they take advantage of it if we dont force them to asnwer basic questions every step of the way.

i was clear this was what i was saying.

And people from all side, on ats and else where, even the people who called themselves the biggest small government advocates, told me I was wrong and immoral to suggest that.

So here we are. And again, if it worked this time, and we see peopkle saying of course the government is right to suggest 6 trillion and bailing out carnival cruise lines and all the other crap, they will say its right if the number becomes 10 trillion, or 15 trillion.

And the government will know all they have to do to get any power they want from here on out is scare people enough, and they will beg to unquestingly accept anything the government says.

a reply to: face23785

For some reason I thought this was something new (like as of today with some political rehash to get the agreement voted on)

a reply to: Grambler

Forgive me, but if you were wrong about the bill ballooning from $2T to $6T in one day, doesn't it make you wonder what else you might be wrong about?

Maybe you should take a day off man. Take a step back, relax a bit, and come at this with a fresh mind. You're making silly mistakes that I never would've associated with you a few weeks ago.

You're usually one of the most well-informed members here and this makes you look like someone who just started following this issue today.

I think that even if this is a "hoax," and I mean all of it.. They might have chosen the one single thing that many people just dont screw around with.

I think its imperative to ask questions here, by the way. Honestly, I see a lot of people agreeing with that, certainly including myself. Weve been fighting against this whole "currency solves all our problems!" notion for a while, but its so appealing to so many for a variety of reasons. Throw in a virus, and it becomes even more appealing.

Maybe part of the problem is in how we are treating one another trying to get to the bottom of this? Thats been a problem for a long time now.. Its become very easy to be incredibly "abrasive," then justify it by others being "abrasive" back.

originally posted by: Grambler
The fact that even one dollar was considered for abortion clinic or these other garbage pork projects in both proposals, is a slap in the face of every American, even ones who are pro choice.

Is that a fact?
You said you don't know.

My questions is...

How many dollars were proposed for abortion in this aid package?

Is there an answer?

why do people not understand that this money is being spent to stop a recession, no one is trying to crash the economy on purpose, if we don't do this it will crash our economy when our biggest employers all go out of business and millions are suddenly unemployed.

why this obsession with hating the rich and trying to stop the government using money to save peoples jobs by saving the corporations, just letting corporations die is the quickest way to economic collapse and surrendering our financial power to foreign nations like china who keeps buying up everything ever since the stock market started dropping.

a reply to: BoscoMoney

Spend it on what??
Groceries, oh wait a minute, the shelves are bare.
The drug store is open I guess, but I have no idea how their inventory is doing.
Amazon, I do believe announced they would only be shipping necessities...
Not sure just what people are getting so excited t ok spend their little windfall on.
At the moment, at least for me, if it ain't a major bill gas to keep the car running to the next grocery store, or edible it's pretty low on my list of concerns.

a reply to: namehere

Brainwashing.

a reply to: namehere

Think it's the fact that last time they did very little to help anyone but their shareholders, CEOs, and upper managers.

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar

originally posted by: Grambler
The fact that even one dollar was considered for abortion clinic or these other garbage pork projects in both proposals, is a slap in the face of every American, even ones who are pro choice.

Is that a fact?
You said you don't know.

My questions is...

How many dollars were proposed for abortion in this aid package?


Is there an answer?

That was proposed early on in the negotiation process, pretty sure that was the first thing to go once the R's got a look at it.

a reply to: Grambler

As far as the money the fed has been throwing around, you know that was happening before this bill.. I know you do.
It really has no connection to this bill or weather or not it gets passed. The fed throwing money into the markets has been an ongoing thing all along.

a reply to: toolgal462

You sure it wasnt a proposal made by the republicans and it was one of the first things to go when the dems saw it??