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

America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 433 posts

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#51

Post by ineedasername »

e4e78a06 wrote: post #10
lijogdfljk wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, it also seems to be how capitalist designs work. I ask: What designs actually help the working class?

None, because you can't get around markets even if you try to regulate them out of existence. As seen in the article countries with good unemployment benefits also have higher rates of unemployment during normal times. And don't forget every job being outsourced to China/Vietnam/Africa. If you confiscated all of Jeff Bezos' net worth you'd get something like $1000 for each American, once. The way to help the working…

A rising tide may lift boats that were sound and seaworthy to begin with.

If your economic boat has holes in it then a rising tide will drown you.

There are always people left behind by the rising tide. Sometimes you have to focus on fixing the boat instead of waiting for the tide.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#52

Post by lotsofpulp »

asdff wrote: post #17
ericmcer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Direct cash still has this effect. $1500 to subsidize rent that is $1500 to property owners.

Only if you have no rent control and allow property owners to take as much as they are able to off the table short of starving their tenants.

Or only if you prevent supply from meeting demand.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#53

Post by jdminhbg »

wnevets wrote: post #45

And no one was worried about "socialism" when the tax payers gave tons of cash to the rich. Certain people only seem to worry about "socialism" when it helps regular people.

> no one

This is an article in the Economist decrying it, so I don't think you can claim that no one is worried.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#54

Post by nsxwolf »

asdff wrote: post #17
ericmcer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Direct cash still has this effect. $1500 to subsidize rent that is $1500 to property owners.

Only if you have no rent control and allow property owners to take as much as they are able to off the table short of starving their tenants.

When I was a landlord I found it very difficult to even cover the mortgage, let alone cover association dues and maintenance. I would try to raise the rent a little in between tenants, and it would greatly reduce interest in the listing.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#55

Post by SantalBlush »

ericmcer wrote: post #13
anonporridge wrote: post #6

Anything other than direct cash transfers to individual humans is likely to have this effect. Institutions are simply always going to be able to navigate and take advantage of complex government programs better than real human beings. UBI or stfu. Time to try some trickle up economics. Also, for the love of god, let's stop prioritizing saving "jobs" that may or may not be necessary for civilization and start prioriti…

Direct cash still has this effect. $1500 to subsidize rent that is $1500 to property owners.

This ignores competition between landlords though. If I get a UBI to supplement my income, maybe I can take that job in the smaller town instead of working in the big city. That spreads real estate demand over a much larger area.

I'm still not sure whether or not UBI will be a success, but there are some reasonable arguments in its favor.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#56

Post by burkaman »

westurner wrote: post #47

Would a [premined, escrowed] stablecoin token make it easier to answer these kinds of Transparency and Accountability questions in regards to government spending and government stimulus funding beyond intra-governmental transfers of real value? Said stablecoin token would be hosted on more or more resilient Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLTs; 'blockchains') with a - indeed more auditable - transaction record speci…

The issue here is not transparency, it's who the money was directed to. This is a policy question, and what type of currency you use is totally irrelevant. It's already very easy to see who received money (https://projects.propublica.org/coronavirus/bailouts/), what we're discussing is whether it should have been given to different people.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#57

Post by davidw »

woah wrote: post #43
anonporridge wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a delicate balance of property owners using their power to prevent new construction and densification in an attempt to keep their property values high by preventing competition and going too far where you destroy your local economy because the people who actually do the work can't afford to live there.

Huh?

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/585765/golden-gates... is a pretty good look at what's going on.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#59

Post by ineedasername »

commandlinefan wrote: post #36
JohnWhigham wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please enlighten us what proud plan that is brazenly American would you have enacted to keep the country from collapsing when everything was closing?

Well, the best option at the time would have been to not lock down at all and just carry on as usual: lockdowns appear to have had almost no effect on Covid deaths ( https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature... )

Even if that is an accurate assessment, the l goal if lockdown s was not only to stop people from getting sick, but to them from getting sick all at once & overloading the healthcare system in ways that would have caused more deaths. Getting the same number if people infected over a longer period of time is a useful tactic.

Re: America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

#60

Post by rory »

I know a few upper-middle class small business owners (all non-retail sectors) whose businesses weren't substantially affected by the pandemic, but who basically got a free handout as part of the program.

Two mentioned how they were initially hesitant to apply for money, but then worried that if they didn't, their business could take a downturn after it was too late. Then as long as they spent the money on payroll (which they had to pay for anyway), they didn't have to pay it back, even if their business didn't show any losses. I shudder to think of how much the bigger players yanked out of it.

Post reply on HN