XPost: sac.politics, alt.california, ca.politics   
   XPost: ny.politics, nyc.politics   
   From: Intelligent@savetheworldmsn.com   
      
   On 6/5/2020 2:35 PM, Intelligent Party wrote:   
   > COVID may last 4 months to over 12 months if we don't do things right.  All   
   this   
   > equity should not be destroyed as people continue to earn passive incomes on   
   debt   
   > and rent, while no active revenues are being produced by many companies.   
   >   
   > It will not harm the economy any worse to stop all debt and rent payments   
   until   
   > COVID passes, will it?  How?   
   >   
   > The Republican borrowing and lending to corporations who pay their debts to   
   > passive income holders, and could just have a stay, is a curious way to   
   spend the   
   > taxpayer's trillions.  Though to the extent those sometimes risky trillions   
   are   
   > coming back, that lending won't increase the National Debt.  Easy credit   
   isn't   
   > spending as much as pure spending, but if that's how it is, it sure makes it   
   sound   
   > like a lot more than it is. - Yet why aren't JC Penny and Neiman Marcus   
   borrowing   
   > from the government's $3 trillion credit package?   
   >   
   > Yet new borrowing should not be subject to such a stay.   
   >   
   > It should be clear, the fact that clothing or any companies were weak before   
   COVID   
   > is not an excuse to let COVID push them over the brink!   
   >   
   >   
   > Why should people pay their savings, to the rent on their apartments or to   
   their   
   > mortgages, during COVID?   
   >   
   >   
   > At the least forbearance on some industries like clothing companies - which   
   have   
   > failed and are failing, and Airlines, which are no doubt the brink of   
   bankruptcy.   
   >   
   > Medical companies and essential companies may benefit from COVID.  Might   
   health   
   > insurance companies fail?   
   >   
   > Are there essential industries, that yet aren't being used during COVID, that   
   > merit the most protection?   
   >   
   >   
   > And there is the rent of consuming food without pay, spending down your   
   savings.   
   >   
   >   
   > It should all be on the government.  Not on the economy.  The economy crashes   
   > because the National Debt is defaulted upon, is not what's going to happen.    
   The   
   > National Debt will not be defaulted upon at $40 Trillion.  How high above   
   this it   
   > could go, deserves analysis.  You just pay the debt by issuing more debt,   
   that's   
   > the way funny money works.  And fiat money is what our basis is.   
   >   
   > [Greece doesn't have its own central bank, and is like a State, like if   
   California   
   > kept issuing bonds.  Before default became impossible for Congress the   
   inflation   
   > and rates would have gone up, and the Fed and Congress are fully in control   
   of   
   > adjusting the National Debt in any which way they want in such a crisis,   
   such as   
   > moving rates to 0% just on that debt, while rates on everything else may be   
   high   
   > possibly.  This is a time of National Security.  Of course, if it wasn't a   
   debt   
   > driven society, how would the Fed stop inflation?  Like if the Fed has no   
   bonds to   
   > sell, how would the corporate bond rates be higher?  Can the Fed create   
   bonds, and   
   > sell them at a high rate, just as it creates money and buys Congress's bonds   
   at a   
   > low rate.  Probably theoretically, just like it creates money.  However the   
   issue   
   > is what we do today, and default however theoretical, isn't going to happen   
   on $40   
   > Trillion.  Okay, so the Fed buys Congress' bonds at a low rate, and high   
   price,   
   > and then raises rates, and sells them at a high rate and a low price.  No   
   > theoretical crisis possible.  The Fed appears all powerful. Anyway, a   
   default if   
   > possible would at worst be something we have to accept to save ourselves from   
   > COVID.  But, yeah, it's good to know if it is possible.].   
   >   
   > Again, a default on the National Debt would be an acceptable way to save   
   ourselves   
   > / our country, from COVID, but 1) The Response to the Greek Example above,   
   just   
   > proved it's not possible, and 2) we do still want to know it is a   
   possibility if   
   > it is, before going through with it anyway, we should make all decisions   
   knowing   
   > their implications and assessing how likely given the value of them.  But,   
   we're   
   > not going anywhere near a default possibility so far, if it was possible,   
   which it   
   > doesn't seem it is.   
   >   
   > So inflation would be the issue, but is not the issue here.  After COVID,   
   after   
   > the stay is lifted, there may be higher inflation, and resultingly higher   
   rates at   
   > the same Stock Market valuation.  This means the economy won't be able to   
   *grow*   
   > as fast in the future.  IF we don't want more inflation, we won't be able to   
   issue   
   > as much debt as a society as a whole, after COVID, to spend on purchase of   
   capital   
   > and labor, because we already issued the debt to spend on consumption = sales   
   > revenues, during COVID, yet we are concerned with the economy not   
   *shrinking*, and   
   > not having a *meltdown*, and a Great Depression (incidentally, requiring   
   SPENDING   
   > on WAR to get us out of it) right now.  It's National Security already.   
   >   
   >   
   > Tax revenues aren't necessarily going to be very high this year either.   
   >   
   >   
   > And JC Penny can fail 12 months after COVID-19 is over, and not now.   
   >   
   > Evictions stayed for one year after COVID is over, is demanded and   
   imperative.   
   >   
   > Except on new borrowing and new lending and new renting.   
   >   
   > Allowing businesses to fail, isn't going to help the economy to grow.  That   
   is not   
   > free market capitalism.  That is madness.   
   >   
   >   
   > If they're really such poor businesses, they can fail 1 year after COVID-19   
   is   
   > over I guess.  ["I guess," cause don't you think it's better to protect all   
   > businesses, than to let potentially productive businesses fail.  There could   
   be   
   > another side to this, like ongoing languishing businesses, but if there is   
   > productive opportunity, wouldn't they switch into that, rather than letting   
   them   
   > fail beforehand.  So that would be like all bonds are unsecured, thus could   
   only   
   > sue for liens, and any new debt issue or sale would have to pay the liens   
   before   
   > the company or owners could receive it, yet bankruptcies generally wouldn't   
   be,   
   > and the company could keep trying. This is just a general contemplation   
   though,   
   > not pertinent to COVID.  What other sorts of business debt protection could   
   their   
   > be?].   
   >   
   > The economy is not suddenly going to be at full steam, the day business   
   doors open   
   > once again, that they will have any money to pay their rents or their debts.   
   >   
   >   
   > Then Congress or someone should protect credit reports from bad marks for   
   > non-payment.  Renters can not just stop paying otherwise, or they will be   
   100%   
   > unable to get a lease in the future for their bad credit reports.  The point   
   of   
   > credit reports all goes to housing, and missed housing payments affect   
   ability to   
   > attain housing the most.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)