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

Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 319 posts

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#211

Post by Supermancho »

llampx wrote: post #168
Supermancho wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also 3000 confirmed cases does not mean 3000 actual infections. That's exactly what it means. 3000 cases of positively identified infections in individuals, if you want to get more wordy. Some of those have recovered, some have died. Still the number is over that today.

Technically it means minimum 3000 cases, probably more .

Cases are recorded. If it's not in a medical record, it's not a case. Technically, the reference was to ~3000 but someone then wanted to dispute that cases was not the same as infections. The number is irrelevant. If it's not known for sure, it's not a case and it's not a known infection, medically. I don't understand how factual correction gets downvoted, but here we are.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#212

Post by ummonk »

jfoutz wrote: post #145
inferiorhuman wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Fed loses this fight, game over. This isn't the Fed's fight. Monetary policy won't fix this.

I'm sort of surprised they didn't try to push the issue from the bottom. give every tax filer some amount of money say, $200. A bonus for each dependent, say, $100. pulled numbers absolutely out of thin air. I thought the issue was money sloshing around at the bottom, a couple hundred bucks can be a big deal when you're out of work. Ah well, I'm sure the experts have it well in hand.

Temporary UBI has been proposed by legislators. Doesn't seem to be catching on with the mainstream republican or democratic wings though:

https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-alexandria-ocasio-cor...

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#213

Post by matt_the_bass »

kshacker wrote: post #188
matt_the_bass wrote: post #162

I think the issue is cash-flow. So the govt should do things to mitigate cash-flow. Such as pause rent/mortgage payments for 2 months for anyone that is out of work due to this.

It maybe works for mortgage as government deals with banks regularly. But what if you rented from an individual owner who needs your rent? Liberalized (without proving that you are looking for a job for let us say next 3 months) unemployment insurance may be a better solution that keeps the economy churning.

I agree it’s not as simple as only mortgage freeze. But if the land lord needs the rent, probably that’s for their mortgage. But yes, I agree better unemployment insurance is a good idea.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#214

Post by MuffinFlavored »

sershe wrote: post #181

At this point, I'm actually starting to wonder. If we literally do nothing about the virus, or do the bare minimum, the worst case scenario based on the numbers I hear is 7.7b * 0.6 (total infections) * 0.02-0.03 (presumed mortality rate after the healthcare system collapses MINUS the rate if it doesn't), ~115m people are going to die worldwide. This appears to me to be the absolute worst case scenario given current…

The US will go under extreme lockdown at 100k cases. No way we will see 327m * 0.6 cases.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#215

Post by war1025 »

josiahtu wrote: post #26

Imagine if Trump had tried as hard to contain coronavirus as he’s trying to pump markets rn

You mean like shutting down travel from contaminated countries, which was widely viewed as a terrible choice just a week ago?

There was only one way for the virus to get here, and that was through travel.

CDC fucked up the testing after that failed, which got us to where we are now. Testing is supposed to be fixed this week.

CDC just recommended people not gather in groups of more than 50. Things are starting to tighten down significantly.

At this moment, I feel like we have a very real chance of getting a handle on things within the next two weeks. From there, we live through another month or two of lockdown and slow burn our way into summer.

It's going to be hard, but I don't think we're dead in the water yet.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#216

Post by virmundi »

mike_d wrote: post #206
isignal wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a billion people in India and so far the mortality and spread rates there aren't similar to other countries. There is a theory that humid and warm places will not have these mortality rates (as validated by our common sense that summer time flu is less common). I don't think we have enough information about the virus to generalize to the whole world yet.

> There's a billion people in India and so far the mortality and spread rates there aren't similar to other countries That is a lack of testing, same as what keeps US numbers depressed. India is severely lacking in cohesive response to viral outbreaks, to the point they are still dealing with a Swine Flu epidemic from 2009 ( https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/9-swine-flu-deaths-utt... ) > There is a theory that hu…

The theory is more the humidity. The virus gets trapped in vapor and pulled harmlessly to the ground. The counter to the theory is that at least in developed countries people flee the humidity by living in low humidity air conditioning.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#217

Post by rogerthis »

sershe wrote: post #181

At this point, I'm actually starting to wonder. If we literally do nothing about the virus, or do the bare minimum, the worst case scenario based on the numbers I hear is 7.7b * 0.6 (total infections) * 0.02-0.03 (presumed mortality rate after the healthcare system collapses MINUS the rate if it doesn't), ~115m people are going to die worldwide. This appears to me to be the absolute worst case scenario given current…

Poster probably not human.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#218

Post by igonvalue »

BenoitEssiambre wrote: post #126
Anon84 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does game over mean in this context?

Game over happens when, fiat money seems to have, on a risk adjusted, liquidity adjusted basis, a better return and better appeal than holding existing real private assets, therefore a process starts where people, businesses and banks try to hoard government paper all at the same time instead of holding private assets. Demand shifts so far towards government paper and away from private assets that the supply of the l…

Is there a specific name for this general phenomenon?

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#219

Post by spir »

miohtama wrote: post #151
jfoutz wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sort of surprised they didn't try to push the issue from the bottom. give every tax filer some amount of money say, $200. A bonus for each dependent, say, $100. pulled numbers absolutely out of thin air. I thought the issue was money sloshing around at the bottom, a couple hundred bucks can be a big deal when you're out of work. Ah well, I'm sure the experts have it well in hand.

It's called helicopter money. Australia and Hong Kong already announced going down this route. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_money It is very last measure as in that point you are basically admitting that capitalism has failed.

Citizens that are given Helicopter Money or UBI will then spend it at their discretion. This kind of free money is a complement to, not a failure of, capitalism.

Re: Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero

#220

Post by dingo_bat »

sarah180 wrote: post #118
spodek wrote: post #53

In the context of Covid, wouldn't lowering economic activity help keep people home? It seems more than "just" saving lives. Purely economically, wouldn't a crashed health care system hurt the economy for a longer term?

A depression can kill a lot more people than COVID-19. This is why the state of California just told young, healthy people to continue to visit restaurants for now as long as tables are six feet apart. This is not just an idea from thin air: they're doing lots of projections on models of what is actually going to do more harm. Think of it this way: if the economy shrinks by 30%, that means we have to spend 30% less o…

> if the economy shrinks by 30%, that means we have to spend 30% less on everything

Doesn't ring true. If my salary drops by 30%, my expenses would not all drop by that percentage. Things like food and medicine would drop a little, not close to 30%. Things like vacation spending may drop by 100%.

Post reply on HN