• Birthdays

Coronavirus Superthread

User avatar
mikeyosef
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 7:49 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 108 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by mikeyosef » Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:51 pm

/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:44 am
Suddenly...All the supply siders have turned into Keynesians.
That's an astute observation you made there.



User avatar
McLeansvilleAppFan
Posts: 6829
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Location: Greensboro (McLeansville) NC
Has thanked: 1703 times
Been thanked: 937 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by McLeansvilleAppFan » Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:20 pm

Stonewall wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:42 pm
“Those of us who are 70 plus, we’ll take care of ourselves. But don’t sacrifice the country,” Lt Gov Patrick , Texas - Doesn't read like "seniors should risk dying for the economy".
You left out this part.

‘As a senior citizen, are you willing to take a chance on your survival in exchange for keeping the America that all America loves for your children and grandchildren?’” But if they had? “If that is the exchange, I’m all in,” Patrick said.

Does read like "seniors should risk dying for the economy."


This is my very generic signature added to each post.

User avatar
McLeansvilleAppFan
Posts: 6829
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Location: Greensboro (McLeansville) NC
Has thanked: 1703 times
Been thanked: 937 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by McLeansvilleAppFan » Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:24 pm

Stonewall wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:42 pm
“Those of us who are 70 plus, we’ll take care of ourselves. But don’t sacrifice the country,” Lt Gov Patrick , Texas - Doesn't read like "seniors should risk dying for the economy".
And later there was this exchange

At this point, Tucker Carlson, who, alarmingly, could be our only hope, asked, “So you’re basically saying that this disease could take your life but that’s not the scariest thing to you, there’s something that could be worse than dying?” Put in those terms, Patrick appeared momentarily taken aback but responded, “Yeah.”

Let me boldface the reply “Yeah.”

Here is my source but I have seen the same statements in a few other places. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03 ... andparents


This is my very generic signature added to each post.

Stonewall
Posts: 1991
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 12:26 pm
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 1159 times
Been thanked: 818 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by Stonewall » Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:52 pm

I read it as the future of the country.The economy is certainly part of that , but not all. The crux of the article seems to be his concern for future generations. The headline is a purely political hatchet job on the man that I don’t believe he deserves. You may and that’s your opinion , fair enough.



User avatar
/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09
Posts: 2133
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 2:05 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: Stephens City, VA
Has thanked: 427 times
Been thanked: 873 times
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by /\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09 » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:23 pm

Stonewall wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:42 pm
“Those of us who are 70 plus, we’ll take care of ourselves. But don’t sacrifice the country,” Lt Gov Patrick , Texas - Doesn't read like "seniors should risk dying for the economy".
It's easy to say those of us 70 plus will take care of ourselves when many are retired. Don't know too many 70 year olds working jobs that have a large interaction with the public. Remember, this can be passed without known symptoms from the carrier. I would also be curious to know how many of these YOLO seniors were bashing the spring break kids for being selfish and wanting to go on with their lives. Look around the globe at what's worked to flatten the curve.



HeffnerIV
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 12:44 pm
Has thanked: 96 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by HeffnerIV » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 pm

mikeyosef wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:51 pm
/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:44 am
Suddenly...All the supply siders have turned into Keynesians.
That's an astute observation you made there.
The thesis of supply-side econ is the idea that lowering taxes and limiting regulations is the basis of best practices. The government is inflicting the ultimate regulation. Based on your argument, the only way to make Keynesian palatable is to eliminate the competition. Well done



mountaineerman
Posts: 1013
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:05 pm
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by mountaineerman » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:59 pm

There are no economies I know of that you can sit home and not work. None are meant for what we are seeing.



mike87
Posts: 219
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 8:55 pm
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 138 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by mike87 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:01 am

The attacks on the Lt Gov are the same old tired 'republican wants to kill old people'. Nobody wants old people to die but there are realities that need to be faced without criticism. That's all i was pointing out.

The senate bill is encouraging though. i'm continuing salaries and i can tell you, Yosef will appreciate it if the house approves it. It's a strain, personally. i have customers in hospitality who are not and i can understand their position. The increase unemployment benefit helps there. I'm not a big government fan but this is the safety net type stuff i think they should do.



Yosef84
Posts: 2365
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:27 am
Has thanked: 308 times
Been thanked: 1074 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by Yosef84 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am

HeffnerIV wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 pm
mikeyosef wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:51 pm
/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:44 am
Suddenly...All the supply siders have turned into Keynesians.
That's an astute observation you made there.
The thesis of supply-side econ is the idea that lowering taxes and limiting regulations is the basis of best practices. The government is inflicting the ultimate regulation. Based on your argument, the only way to make Keynesian palatable is to eliminate the competition. Well done
"Supply side" economics was specifically based on some assumptions that reducing those factors (regulation and tax burden, specifically on upper class and businesses) would result in an increased revenue because of increased compliance and growth in the economy (job creation). This type of trickle down thinking was basically disproved in the real world with the "Tax Simplification Act of 1986" which then had to be re-named the "Tax Reform Act of 1986). The original tax cuts given had to be taken back because the underlying assumptions weren't working. Attempts under Reagan to implement Supply-side theory were a bust.

Also...the significant reductions in regulation of the mortgage industry were the primary driver for the mortgage crises about 12 years ago. Under George W. there was a push based on the idea that "All Americans have a right to own a home." That's a nice sentiment but it's false. Underwriting requirements were loosened and pressure applied to Freddie Mac and FNMA to purchase loan portfolios. The result was a huge number of bad loans being originated, many of which were worthless.

I'm not in favor of big government but government does have a role. The key is finding the balance (as someone mentioned above). Unfortunately, we are too locked in on one extreme vs. the other to consider the fact that the answer is probably in the middle.



User avatar
McLeansvilleAppFan
Posts: 6829
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Location: Greensboro (McLeansville) NC
Has thanked: 1703 times
Been thanked: 937 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by McLeansvilleAppFan » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:21 am

Yosef84 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am
HeffnerIV wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 pm
mikeyosef wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:51 pm
/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:44 am
Suddenly...All the supply siders have turned into Keynesians.
That's an astute observation you made there.
The thesis of supply-side econ is the idea that lowering taxes and limiting regulations is the basis of best practices. The government is inflicting the ultimate regulation. Based on your argument, the only way to make Keynesian palatable is to eliminate the competition. Well done
"Supply side" economics was specifically based on some assumptions that reducing those factors (regulation and tax burden, specifically on upper class and businesses) would result in an increased revenue because of increased compliance and growth in the economy (job creation). This type of trickle down thinking was basically disproved in the real world with the "Tax Simplification Act of 1986" which then had to be re-named the "Tax Reform Act of 1986). The original tax cuts given had to be taken back because the underlying assumptions weren't working. Attempts under Reagan to implement Supply-side theory were a bust.

Also...the significant reductions in regulation of the mortgage industry were the primary driver for the mortgage crises about 12 years ago. Under George W. there was a push based on the idea that "All Americans have a right to own a home." That's a nice sentiment but it's false. Underwriting requirements were loosened and pressure applied to Freddie Mac and FNMA to purchase loan portfolios. The result was a huge number of bad loans being originated, many of which were worthless.

I'm not in favor of big government but government does have a role. The key is finding the balance (as someone mentioned above). Unfortunately, we are too locked in on one extreme vs. the other to consider the fact that the answer is probably in the middle.
I have said it repeatedly, 24-hours "News" that is mostly 20+ hours of ad-driven for $ opinion is one of the big problems. I do think we need a wider political conversation but not around the clock where it becomes akin to propaganda. I am not calling for gov't restrictions, but having the consumers just turn the crap off and get their news from a few sources. There would still be plenty of disagreements, and that is OK.


This is my very generic signature added to each post.

Yosef84
Posts: 2365
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:27 am
Has thanked: 308 times
Been thanked: 1074 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by Yosef84 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:41 am

McLeansvilleAppFan wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:21 am
Yosef84 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am
HeffnerIV wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 pm
mikeyosef wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:51 pm
/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:44 am
Suddenly...All the supply siders have turned into Keynesians.
That's an astute observation you made there.
The thesis of supply-side econ is the idea that lowering taxes and limiting regulations is the basis of best practices. The government is inflicting the ultimate regulation. Based on your argument, the only way to make Keynesian palatable is to eliminate the competition. Well done
"Supply side" economics was specifically based on some assumptions that reducing those factors (regulation and tax burden, specifically on upper class and businesses) would result in an increased revenue because of increased compliance and growth in the economy (job creation). This type of trickle down thinking was basically disproved in the real world with the "Tax Simplification Act of 1986" which then had to be re-named the "Tax Reform Act of 1986). The original tax cuts given had to be taken back because the underlying assumptions weren't working. Attempts under Reagan to implement Supply-side theory were a bust.

Also...the significant reductions in regulation of the mortgage industry were the primary driver for the mortgage crises about 12 years ago. Under George W. there was a push based on the idea that "All Americans have a right to own a home." That's a nice sentiment but it's false. Underwriting requirements were loosened and pressure applied to Freddie Mac and FNMA to purchase loan portfolios. The result was a huge number of bad loans being originated, many of which were worthless.

I'm not in favor of big government but government does have a role. The key is finding the balance (as someone mentioned above). Unfortunately, we are too locked in on one extreme vs. the other to consider the fact that the answer is probably in the middle.
I have said it repeatedly, 24-hours "News" that is mostly 20+ hours of ad-driven for $ opinion is one of the big problems. I do think we need a wider political conversation but not around the clock where it becomes akin to propaganda. I am not calling for gov't restrictions, but having the consumers just turn the crap off and get their news from a few sources. There would still be plenty of disagreements, and that is OK.
It is fundamentally hard to accept that "too much information" is a root issue in our culture, but based on my personal observations I would (anecdotally) have to say that it's hard to argue that point. The internet in particular perpetuates unfiltered "information" which is largely pure propaganda. Other media to a lesser extent but still a valid information. As we expand our programming to fill the available space, there is precious little quality control taking place.



User avatar
McLeansvilleAppFan
Posts: 6829
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Location: Greensboro (McLeansville) NC
Has thanked: 1703 times
Been thanked: 937 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by McLeansvilleAppFan » Thu Mar 26, 2020 12:57 pm

Yosef84 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:41 am
McLeansvilleAppFan wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:21 am
Yosef84 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am
HeffnerIV wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 pm
mikeyosef wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:51 pm

That's an astute observation you made there.
The thesis of supply-side econ is the idea that lowering taxes and limiting regulations is the basis of best practices. The government is inflicting the ultimate regulation. Based on your argument, the only way to make Keynesian palatable is to eliminate the competition. Well done
"Supply side" economics was specifically based on some assumptions that reducing those factors (regulation and tax burden, specifically on upper class and businesses) would result in an increased revenue because of increased compliance and growth in the economy (job creation). This type of trickle down thinking was basically disproved in the real world with the "Tax Simplification Act of 1986" which then had to be re-named the "Tax Reform Act of 1986). The original tax cuts given had to be taken back because the underlying assumptions weren't working. Attempts under Reagan to implement Supply-side theory were a bust.

Also...the significant reductions in regulation of the mortgage industry were the primary driver for the mortgage crises about 12 years ago. Under George W. there was a push based on the idea that "All Americans have a right to own a home." That's a nice sentiment but it's false. Underwriting requirements were loosened and pressure applied to Freddie Mac and FNMA to purchase loan portfolios. The result was a huge number of bad loans being originated, many of which were worthless.

I'm not in favor of big government but government does have a role. The key is finding the balance (as someone mentioned above). Unfortunately, we are too locked in on one extreme vs. the other to consider the fact that the answer is probably in the middle.
I have said it repeatedly, 24-hours "News" that is mostly 20+ hours of ad-driven for $ opinion is one of the big problems. I do think we need a wider political conversation but not around the clock where it becomes akin to propaganda. I am not calling for gov't restrictions, but having the consumers just turn the crap off and get their news from a few sources. There would still be plenty of disagreements, and that is OK.
It is fundamentally hard to accept that "too much information" is a root issue in our culture, but based on my personal observations I would (anecdotally) have to say that it's hard to argue that point. The internet in particular perpetuates unfiltered "information" which is largely pure propaganda. Other media to a lesser extent but still a valid information. As we expand our programming to fill the available space, there is precious little quality control taking place.
I know what you are getting out and hard to argue your point. It almost sounds like I am advocating less information, and I am trying to not come across that way, though it may sound like I am. I am not sure I would call some of the 24-news stations "information." The reality is there is not THAT much to say and after a while they are just changing faces with the same talking points to fill air time. It is not really adding anything of substance, though it is airing ads, which is the REAL business of cable news. The days of Murrow and Cronkite and news departments serving a public good are by and large long gone and news dept are about the $ as much as any other media run by corporate America. I am not sure what the answer is as I am not advocating censorship, but I do think if many folks tuned-out the tone and such of these opinion programs would change some, again if only to make sure the viewers tuned in so they could sell the ad for $.

Part of the problem is content and part of the problem is tone. If the TV talking heads are yelling then I can yell as well has become the norm. One of many problems we could discuss.


This is my very generic signature added to each post.

Yosef84
Posts: 2365
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:27 am
Has thanked: 308 times
Been thanked: 1074 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by Yosef84 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:13 pm

McLeansvilleAppFan wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 12:57 pm
Yosef84 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:41 am
McLeansvilleAppFan wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:21 am
Yosef84 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am
HeffnerIV wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 pm


The thesis of supply-side econ is the idea that lowering taxes and limiting regulations is the basis of best practices. The government is inflicting the ultimate regulation. Based on your argument, the only way to make Keynesian palatable is to eliminate the competition. Well done
"Supply side" economics was specifically based on some assumptions that reducing those factors (regulation and tax burden, specifically on upper class and businesses) would result in an increased revenue because of increased compliance and growth in the economy (job creation). This type of trickle down thinking was basically disproved in the real world with the "Tax Simplification Act of 1986" which then had to be re-named the "Tax Reform Act of 1986). The original tax cuts given had to be taken back because the underlying assumptions weren't working. Attempts under Reagan to implement Supply-side theory were a bust.

Also...the significant reductions in regulation of the mortgage industry were the primary driver for the mortgage crises about 12 years ago. Under George W. there was a push based on the idea that "All Americans have a right to own a home." That's a nice sentiment but it's false. Underwriting requirements were loosened and pressure applied to Freddie Mac and FNMA to purchase loan portfolios. The result was a huge number of bad loans being originated, many of which were worthless.

I'm not in favor of big government but government does have a role. The key is finding the balance (as someone mentioned above). Unfortunately, we are too locked in on one extreme vs. the other to consider the fact that the answer is probably in the middle.
I have said it repeatedly, 24-hours "News" that is mostly 20+ hours of ad-driven for $ opinion is one of the big problems. I do think we need a wider political conversation but not around the clock where it becomes akin to propaganda. I am not calling for gov't restrictions, but having the consumers just turn the crap off and get their news from a few sources. There would still be plenty of disagreements, and that is OK.
It is fundamentally hard to accept that "too much information" is a root issue in our culture, but based on my personal observations I would (anecdotally) have to say that it's hard to argue that point. The internet in particular perpetuates unfiltered "information" which is largely pure propaganda. Other media to a lesser extent but still a valid information. As we expand our programming to fill the available space, there is precious little quality control taking place.
I know what you are getting out and hard to argue your point. It almost sounds like I am advocating less information, and I am trying to not come across that way, though it may sound like I am. I am not sure I would call some of the 24-news stations "information." The reality is there is not THAT much to say and after a while they are just changing faces with the same talking points to fill air time. It is not really adding anything of substance, though it is airing ads, which is the REAL business of cable news. The days of Murrow and Cronkite and news departments serving a public good are by and large long gone and news dept are about the $ as much as any other media run by corporate America. I am not sure what the answer is as I am not advocating censorship, but I do think if many folks tuned-out the tone and such of these opinion programs would change some, again if only to make sure the viewers tuned in so they could sell the ad for $.

Part of the problem is content and part of the problem is tone. If the TV talking heads are yelling then I can yell as well has become the norm. One of many problems we could discuss.
I think we are very much on the same page. The problem is too much MIS-information because so much is unfiltered and unvetted.



t4pizza
Posts: 3088
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:00 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 388 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by t4pizza » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:15 pm

The problem is that most of the 24 hours of programming on the 24 hour news channels is editorials and not news. The entire country suffered a great loss when media outlets started relying on the news as a profit center. In the good old days (before my time mind you) news was not produced for profit but rather to inform the masses. That isn't to say that there wasn't biases in the way the news was given, but it was easier to cull through all the editorials and find the actual news and be informed as to what is really happening. Now, too many people accept the talking head's editorials as pure news and it isn't. For profit televised news is hardly news these days.



User avatar
WVAPPeer
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:14 am
School: Appalachian State
Location: Born: Almost Heaven Resides: Lollipop Guild Land
Has thanked: 2223 times
Been thanked: 1073 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by WVAPPeer » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:15 pm

82,000+ cases - the most of any country in the world


"Montani Semper Liberi"

The Dude Abides!!!

User avatar
McLeansvilleAppFan
Posts: 6829
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Location: Greensboro (McLeansville) NC
Has thanked: 1703 times
Been thanked: 937 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by McLeansvilleAppFan » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:22 pm

If you were slightly over 50 and diabetic would you donate plasma at the American Red Cross right now? Asking for friend.


This is my very generic signature added to each post.

User avatar
appstatealum
Posts: 2470
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 1:45 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: Charlotte/Gastonia
Has thanked: 2304 times
Been thanked: 1098 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by appstatealum » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:50 pm

WVAPPeer wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:15 pm
82,000+ cases - the most of any country in the world
We are also getting more efficient testing done and better data reported. 50% of cases are in NY State and many experts are now coming out and suggesting that many more people than we will ever know have actually had this virus and recovered with little to no symptoms.

The best way to get your news is watch a few different channels with differing perspectives (not many of those) and then go and read multiple sources on the specific story you are curious about. Then, read between the lines, because the truth is somewhere in the middle. It is also very helpful to have a solid knowledge of early civ or American history because history and human nature repeats itself over and over again. I continue to be baffled by the “Armageddon” approach to reporting this.....unless the facts drastically change (which I hope they don’t), this may be the greatest embarrassment in human history. The ripple effect will be permanent changes to our way of life, similar to 9-11, and a lot of self reflection on why we were so unprepared and overreacted. I am truly fascinated by this and still somewhat concerned that there may be merit to it (although all signs are pointing to this not being as deadly as we thought).


The Appalachian State

Saint3333
Posts: 10267
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2000 8:42 am
Has thanked: 1229 times
Been thanked: 1629 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by Saint3333 » Fri Mar 27, 2020 7:39 am




User avatar
App91
Posts: 3460
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:28 pm
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 340 times
Been thanked: 258 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by App91 » Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:43 am

WVAPPeer wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:15 pm
82,000+ cases - the most of any country in the world
Are you putting stock in that China number?



User avatar
App91
Posts: 3460
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:28 pm
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 340 times
Been thanked: 258 times

Re: Coronavirus Superthread

Unread post by App91 » Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:47 am

McLeansvilleAppFan wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:24 pm
Stonewall wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:42 pm
“Those of us who are 70 plus, we’ll take care of ourselves. But don’t sacrifice the country,” Lt Gov Patrick , Texas - Doesn't read like "seniors should risk dying for the economy".
And later there was this exchange

At this point, Tucker Carlson, who, alarmingly, could be our only hope, asked, “So you’re basically saying that this disease could take your life but that’s not the scariest thing to you, there’s something that could be worse than dying?” Put in those terms, Patrick appeared momentarily taken aback but responded, “Yeah.”

Let me boldface the reply “Yeah.”

Here is my source but I have seen the same statements in a few other places. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03 ... andparents
You have consider the slant of the source. Reads like a straight news article :roll:



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Non-Appalachian General Discussion”

  • Who is online
  • In total there are 28 users online :: 1 registered, 1 hidden and 26 guests

    Most users ever online was 1927 on Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:27 am

    Users browsing this forum: Rekdiver and 26 guests