Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 367 posts

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#271

Post by Jommi »

llampx wrote: post #263
ghufran_syed wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how many people think "they were too slow with testing" - do any of these commentators have any idea how long it takes to develop a reliable, sensitive and hopefully specific test for a virus that probably didn't exist in its current form until around 3 months ago . Oh, and then also to be able to make a production line capable of producing millions of them while maintaining quality - why not criticize them for…

The WHO already had the test.

Which test? What kind of distribution did that test have? What kind of distribution capacity did that test have? What kind of false positive rate?

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#272

Post by zaptheimpaler »

spaced-out wrote: post #255
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slight tangent, but the excessive focus on tests is misguided. The tests give us more data but make little difference unless they are used to rapidly trace outbreaks and quarantine entire areas, which just has not happened. And with something this viral, its only a matter of time before it spreads everywhere. The focus needs to be on slowing the spread and treatment. The treatment is about supporting the body while i…

>Slight tangent, but the excessive focus on tests is misguided. The issue with our lack of testing is that we have no idea what we're dealing with, which is a big part of why the market's freaking out. If we had been ramping up testing months ago, when it was already a massive disruption in China and should have been clear that it was only a matter of time before it got to the US, then we would have a lot more inform…

I saw the writing on the wall in January. We didn't need tests, all we had to do was look at the urgency & scale of China's response and the R0 of the virus. It is literally exponential growth, and even a few people spreading the virus with a 2 week delay in symptoms all but guarantees the majority of the world is going to get it. There is no doubt about what we're dealing with, hasn't been any for 2 months.

We needed information 2 months ago, we needed early action like quarantines, travel bans a month ago. Testing is the response to an old problem at this point.

Large democratic, decentralized institutions are uniquely bad at the kind of fast response needed here and the government continues to act 1 months behind, so I have little faith that much will change. Most of the world will get it, but medical systems are mobilizing and hopefully most people will make it out ok.

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#273

Post by dntbnmpls »

gdubs wrote: post #13

As the joke goes, a trillion here a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about some real money! But in seriousness, the next week is a critical time in the world. I remember sitting in an airport when news of Lehman Brothers collapse was flashing on the TV screens. I'm reminded of that time. We learned later about how Hank Paulson got down on one knee and begged Nancy Pelosi to go along with is plan to save…

> it's clear that the world's top economists felt we were perilously close to a full-blown disaster – trucks not bringing goods into cities, things grinding to a halt, etc.

The same top economists who didn't see the financial crisis coming? More like the top economists hired/backed by bankers felt that bankers would lose a lot of money and made the excuse of bread lines to dupe congress.

> But if there were ever a time for us not to be partisan and tribal, it's now.

No. I prefer the partisanship. It's when the government is united that you know bad things is going to happen. Everytime there is an illegal war, the government unites. Everytime the american people gets screwed over, it's always the united government. And the same messaging is used "if there were ever a time for us not to be partisan and tribal, it's now."

But then again, the partisanship is just for show anyways. They all work for the same masters.

> We need to act boldly, now.

Like what? Give more money to bankers and wall street? Like last time?

Every time there is a fear mongering event - 9/11, Financial Crisis, Red Scare, etc, it's the american public that loses more rights/privileges and the elites/government/state that gets more control.

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#274

Post by bscphil »

sg47 wrote: post #252
tomp wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you forgive student loans? That way you reward incompetence. Instead, you should give each young person $300k - some would repay their student loans, others (who were more prudent with their choice of education) would have down-payment for a house or something... Forgiving just the student loans would create massive perverse incentives.

Just like the bank bailout?

Not taking a stance here either way, but surely it's possible to oppose both the bank bailout and forgiving student loans on the grounds that they both create perverse incentives?

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#275

Post by bscphil »

munk-a wrote: post #86
bwooceli wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a very disingenuous read of that interview.

Just to note, the full interview transcript is here[1] and the reply to > It comes to your desk. Do you veto it? he replied with > I would veto anything that delays providing the security and the certainty of healthcare being available now. If they got that through in by some miracle or there`s an epiphany that occurred and some miracle occurred that said, OK, it`s passed. Then you got to look at the cost. Unlike on…

Thanks for providing the context. I agree that it's very difficult to read this as anything other than a carefully worded statement that he would at the very least consider a veto. His statements elsewhere suggest that he thinks the cost is in fact prohibitive.

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#276

Post by spopejoy »

tomp wrote: post #242
munk-a wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, dollars put into student loan forgiveness actually pay themselves off many times over due to the high velocity of cash in the hands in young people - money injected into the market has a comparatively low velocity and tends to just get exported overseas.

Why would you forgive student loans? That way you reward incompetence. Instead, you should give each young person $300k - some would repay their student loans, others (who were more prudent with their choice of education) would have down-payment for a house or something... Forgiving just the student loans would create massive perverse incentives.

> Why would you forgive student loans? That way you reward incompetence

It's the opposite: it's a step toward removing the moral hazard that allowed predatory loans to be offered to students in the first place. The logical end-point is to get back to free or affordable tuition.

> Instead, you should give each young person $300k

Admirable suggestion, but how does that _not_ create perverse incentives to e.g. blow it all speculating on Hearthstone cards?

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#277

Post by solveit »

ghufran_syed wrote: post #259
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slight tangent, but the excessive focus on tests is misguided. The tests give us more data but make little difference unless they are used to rapidly trace outbreaks and quarantine entire areas, which just has not happened. And with something this viral, its only a matter of time before it spreads everywhere. The focus needs to be on slowing the spread and treatment. The treatment is about supporting the body while i…

Funny how many people think "they were too slow with testing" - do any of these commentators have any idea how long it takes to develop a reliable, sensitive and hopefully specific test for a virus that probably didn't exist in its current form until around 3 months ago . Oh, and then also to be able to make a production line capable of producing millions of them while maintaining quality - why not criticize them for…

The US had tested 23 out of every million people as of 11th March, while South Korea had done 3692/million as of 8th March.

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#278

Post by missedthecue »

sg47 wrote: post #251
oxymoran wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t a bailout for wall street, it’s an attempt to bailout the economy as a whole because there isn’t enough money in the banking system to cover the institutional sell off. In other words, they had to do this to prevent a run on the banks which would royally fuck everyone.

Yes, because banks are over-leveraged. Regulations that kept leverage in check have been overturned by the GOP.

Completely and utterly false. Banks are at their lowest leverage of the last 40 years. This is verifiable hard data.

Re: Fed to inject $1.5T to prevent ‘unusual disruptions’ in markets

#280

Post by missedthecue »

anthony_doan wrote: post #210

We could prevent this by actually have universal healthcare, better funding to CDC, and better sick leave. Yes, unfortunately, it have to be political. There is no escaping it, when it comes to healthcare. It is much more urgent when country keeps on creating new viruses and we become more globally connected.

Better sick leave and CDC funding would not do anything to alleviate volatility in the repurchase operations markets.

This is providing loans to banks so they can more easily capitalize themselves during this period of severe volatility. It is the specific purpose of the reserve banking system. It's not about stopping the virus.

Post reply on HN