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

331–340 of 367 posts

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

#331

Post by masonic »

undersuit wrote: post #237
ShroudedNight wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-American that's somewhat ignorant of the current states of the US legislative houses on this matter, could someone provide some context as to why the comment directly parent to $self is being maligned?

I downvoted because I disagree with the way they are arguing. The gp's(grandposter) comment uses the word companies. Which companies? Well we're talking about the US and health care so it has gotta be the health insurance companies? No, the bill Lamar disagreed with was to make employer's provide sick time to their employees. Also, pp(parentposter) is what I use. OP is reserved for poster of the content.

  No, the bill Lamar disagreed with was to make employer's provide sick time to their employees
... which Congress lacks the legal authority to do.

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

#332

Post by 34679 »

kamaal wrote: post #313
34679 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is at least one other way to look at it. These loans will primarily, if not exclusively, go to large financial institutions. Due to the wonders of fractional reserve lending, those institutions will get to loan out several multiples of the original $1.5T. Another way to look at it is that they've probably "printed" closer to $15T.

How does this work? Like any government can just print their way to prosperity? I mean you just magically put $15T into circulation? Won't this lead to inflation?

Yes it will absolutely lead to inflation. But for the well connected banks who are first to benefit, and coincidentally, I'm sure, the ones who run the Federal Reserve, the money will get to be spent/loaned before it causes much or any inflation. For the rest of us with value stored as US currency, we get fucked.

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

#334

Post by 6510 »

tropdrop wrote: post #299
Jommi wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Classic "the [solution] that exists isn't good enough, therefore we can't use it at all!" A pandemic is not the time to be picky - if anything, a high false positive rate helps . Would you rather 10 people quarantined, of whom only 2 are sick, or all 10 released into the wild because no test kit (of any sort) was available?

Even without a test you could quarantine people who get off flights. We've been doing it for years with pets traveling from specific countries.

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

#335

Post by infinite8s »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #232
qayxc wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a panic move at all. It's a required reassurance to investors and companies to prevent actual panic moves (i.e. complete market crash). I agree that the economy will shrink nonetheless, but there's a difference between a small recession and a full blown depression.

I would normally agree with you, but whatever the intentions were, the market pointedly shrugged it off. I might even suggest that this FED move along with last week cut is part of the reason for the panic..

The financial economy is much much bigger than just the equities market.

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

#336

Post by TheSoftwareGuy »

gen3 wrote: post #258
TheSoftwareGuy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The money is “Backed by the full faith and credit of the United States”. I'm pretty sure its treasury bonds that are "Backed by the full faith and credit of the United States". Dollars are backed essentially by what you can buy with them.

The US dollar was at one point backed by a gold and silver standard, meaning that you could always go redeem the cash for a specific amount of the metal. After the Great Depression the US moved away from the standard, backing the money with the faith in the US government. This is why each note has “Backed by the full faith and credit of the United States” printed on it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_…

>This is why each note has “Backed by the full faith and credit of the United States” printed on it.

No they don't. I just checked three different bills in my pocket (a $1, a $10 and a $100) and none of them say this. They say "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private" but there is absolutely no reference to "the full faith and credit of the united states"

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

#337

Post by ceejayoz »

chrisco255 wrote: post #314
ceejayoz wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A country 1/7 our size has done 25x the testing. If you don't think that affects how our numbers net out, I'm not sure we can have a rational discussion beyond here.

Source?

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/12/815097813/experts-credit-sout...

> In terms of per capita testing, Korea has run 3,600 tests per 1 million population. In contrast, U.S. has just run five tests per 1 million people.

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

#338

Post by Joker_vD »

ksec wrote: post #323
ChuckMcM wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is a bit more nuanced than that. My experience in large enterprises are that there are two kinds of "politics" that get played. In one form, the leadership makes moves or take actions that benefit themselves but also help the company. Often that is called out as "leadership." In the other form, the leadership makes moves or take actions that benefit themselves but hurts the company. That form is called "po…

So what is the term for leadership makes moves that benefits the company but not gain interest on their own or even hurt their own reputation / interest ?

It's called "fired from the mid-level manager position" because such people, generally, don't get promoted too far up in the ranks, for an obvious reason.

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

#339

Post by Joker_vD »

zaroth wrote: post #265
troyvit wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would say the answer to #1 is that spread is absolutely inevitable. The WHO disagrees: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-... > "Test everyone!" To what end? You don't need to test people in order to know if they need an ICU. The ICUs are not full - and you don't need more testing to tell you that. The main benefit to more testing would be that people who are self-quarantining due to pote…

Testing may reduce the number of cases, how does it reduce the severity of cases? This is an illness with no treatment, only symptoms are treated. Germany apparently has 10 people in serious condition. Availability of resources obviously isn’t a factor...

What do you mean, "no treatment"? Chinese used lopinavir+ ritonavir combination to a great effect, it's just that those drugs have quite a number of possible side effects, plus they're not officially blessed as COVID-19 treatment.

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

#340

Post by dragonwriter »

altec3 wrote: post #104
tw04 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But if there were ever a time for us not to be partisan and tribal, it's now. You say that like both parties are trying to deny testing and are refusing to provide the social safety net for workers to stay home when they're sick. This is very much not a "both sides" discussion. This is: the GOP needs to stop trying to pretend like nothing is wrong and actually DO SOMETHING to prevent this from becoming an even bigge…

I think what gdubs was trying to get across is that sure, there are problems, people to blame, etc. but now is not the time. We have to get our act together and handle the situation. We can't have petty fighting betweeen parties. Now is the time to unite and act. We can fight, argue and point fingers once this is all behind us.

> I think what gdubs was trying to get across is that sure, there are problems, people to blame, etc. but now is not the time.

Now is absolutely the time, because:

> We have to get our act together and handle the situation.

And identifying the problems in the approach to date is an essential element of course correction.

> Now is the time to unite and act.

No, now is the time to identify the problems in our actions to date and course correct to appropriate actions. “Unite and act” is pointless or counterproductive without that.

Post reply on HN