Coronavirus politics and news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrzubnyy

And this was my point...you brought it all out to see...

This stuff is for another day not during a crisis.

---

100%. Anyone who doesn't agree is dishonest. Pure and simple. There should be no pork in this bill and no idealogical wish lists on either side of the aisle. The goal is to help the country and its citizens during the crisis. T

Ads you so readily suggested, too many Democrats believe in an existential threat of climate change that they are paralyzed when faced with this serious threat. Some have vowed to not pass any piece of legislation, make any trade deal, etc., unless it contains greenhouse gases legislation. This is why all or nothing idealism doesn't work in a Democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrzubnyy

They want their agendas that have NOTHING to do with Coronvirus.

I’m all for all workers getting help. I’m against a bill that has BS crap that has nothing to do with Coronavirus. And that is what the Dems have in there.


Dr, how come you have not opposition to the Dems agendas in the bill?

You seem to ignore that.

---

How do you think the money should be distributed?

Personally, I think it should be given to individuals.

No agenda. What the plan should be.

1-Mortgage and rent freeze for anyone who's lost a job or can't be working right now. Banks can handle that It's a few months and they will get their money eventually.

2-Reduction in costs of utilities. Utility companies need to keep going and they need the money to pay employees.
Anyone who is affected gets a full or percentage reduction in their utility bills.

3- 400$ a month per individual. Add 200$ a month for every person in that household up to 1200$ a month.
A family of 4 gets 1000 bucks a month for groceries and incidentals. A family of 8 gets 1200.
This is offered through unemployment applications. Anyone behaving dishonestly will be given the harshest of punishment when this is over.

4-All necessary medical is covered.


Here's my math. In order to give 200 million people 400$ a month for 3 months, it would cost 240 billion
100 mil would be half that.
Save the other aspect of the incentive for after this and give that to SMALL businesses, first.

Let the CEOs off the giant companies, keep them afloat by surrendering their bonuses.
If you have a company with 1000 workers who make 50k a year and a couple guys who gets a 10 mil bonus?
Well give up bonuses to pay those people salaries for the first 4 months they are all out of work. Then they can ask for help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnyi

100%. Anyone who doesn't agree is dishonest. Pure and simple. There should be no pork in this bill and no idealogical wish lists on either side of the aisle. The goal is to help the country and its citizens during the crisis. T

Ads you so readily suggested, too many Democrats believe in an existential threat of climate change that they are paralyzed when faced with this serious threat. Some have vowed to not pass any piece of legislation, make any trade deal, etc., unless it contains greenhouse gases legislation. This is why all or nothing idealism doesn't work in a Democracy.

---

I love when people comment, as you once brought up,
100%. Anyone who doesn't agree is dishonest. Pure and simple., was an unfair analysis. (Actually you and I went back and forth on this after I made a similar claim, so interesting how much you dislike this type of comment but use it)

Lets be clear, many Rs won't pass bills unless the religious right has their desires met.
Let's also be clear, the Rs aren 't as worried about where this money goes. Big business, not big government.

Individuals need this more than Boeing. Or ford. Or Delta. The men who are in charge of those companies need to open their own damn wallets and cover their losses. They can do it and still have enough money for 10 lifetimes.

Stock buybacks are atrocious.

People need to eat.

I agree. There shouldn't be politics in this but there needs to be regulation and organization.
This shouldn't be going out right now. It's been a week.
If the President is so confident that this is going to go away in another week or that we have a cure, they should wait to watch the numbers drop, while people get better and we might not need it.

What do you think about that Johnny and Mush, should we listen to the president and believe this is going be better in another week or two? Because if you say no, you are saying he's lied.

If you say yes? No. You won't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinkotheclown

I love when people comment, as you once brought up,
100%. Anyone who doesn't agree is dishonest. Pure and simple., was an unfair analysis. (Actually you and I went back and forth on this after I made a similar claim, so interesting how much you dislike this type of comment but use it)

Lets be clear, many Rs won't pass bills unless the religious right has their desires met.
Let's also be clear, the Rs aren 't as worried about where this money goes. Big business, not big government.

Individuals need this more than Boeing. Or ford. Or Delta. The men who are in charge of those companies need to open their own damn wallets and cover their losses. They can do it and still have enough money for 10 lifetimes.

Stock buybacks are atrocious.

People need to eat.

I agree. There shouldn't be politics in this but there needs to be regulation and organization.
This shouldn't be going out right now. It's been a week.
If the President is so confident that this is going to go away in another week or that we have a cure, they should wait to watch the numbers drop, while people get better and we might not need it.

What do you think about that Johnny and Mush, should we listen to the president and believe this is going be better in another week or two? Because if you say no, you are saying he's lied.

If you say yes? No. You won't

---

:clap: In a nutshell!

Focus should be on individuals, families and the working families that need it most. Food and shelter (mortgage and rent relief) are more urgent than stock buybacks and corporate greed!

Cut the bonuses, dig into cash reserves (in the trillions collectively), cut off shore production and manufacturing bring it home....off the top of my head, let's start there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinkotheclown

How do you think the money should be distributed?

Personally, I think it should be given to individuals.

No agenda. What the plan should be.

1-Mortgage and rent freeze for anyone who's lost a job or can't be working right now. Banks can handle that It's a few months and they will get their money eventually.

2-Reduction in costs of utilities. Utility companies need to keep going and they need the money to pay employees.
Anyone who is affected gets a full or percentage reduction in their utility bills.

3- 400$ a month per individual. Add 200$ a month for every person in that household up to 1200$ a month.
A family of 4 gets 1000 bucks a month for groceries and incidentals. A family of 8 gets 1200.
This is offered through unemployment applications. Anyone behaving dishonestly will be given the harshest of punishment when this is over.

4-All necessary medical is covered.


Here's my math. In order to give 200 million people 400$ a month for 3 months, it would cost 240 billion
100 mil would be half that.
Save the other aspect of the incentive for after this and give that to SMALL businesses, first.

Let the CEOs off the giant companies, keep them afloat by surrendering their bonuses.
If you have a company with 1000 workers who make 50k a year and a couple guys who gets a 10 mil bonus?
Well give up bonuses to pay those people salaries for the first 4 months they are all out of work. Then they can ask for help.

---

Before we can get to your lists what about all of the garbage that has NOTHING TO DO WITH CORONVIRUS...

Why is this being ignored by some on here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drt1010

:clap: In a nutshell!

Focus should be on individuals, families and the working families that need it most. Food and shelter (mortgage and rent relief) are more urgent than stock buybacks and corporate greed!

Cut the bonuses, dig into cash reserves (in the trillions collectively), cut off shore production and manufacturing bring it home....off the top of my head, let's start there.

---

And yet you still ignore the BS that the Dems want in there? You turn a blind eye to that, why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrzubnyy

Dr, you still won’t comment on the things in the bill that the Dems want THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH CORONAVIRUS?

Why do you ignore that?

---

Nicky I have commented. Simply the D's are trying to prevent the R's from having a $500B blank check to dole out at their discretion to big business. They include the environmental and election protection as leverage, a bargaining tool against the R's blank check, NO oversight, proposal. I'm sure you realize and understand that's how political negotiating works. I don't think you can call environmental and election protection pork! I don't think you can question the D's focus on families and kids. D's want to ensure that any bailout for large companies will primarily benefit workers.

You didn't answer my question. If Obama had proposed a $500B slush fund, with NO oversight, intended as a big business bailout, would the R's approve?

An old approach being revisited. NY health officials will collect “convalescent” plasma (liquid part of blood) from recovered COVID19 patients & inject the antibody-rich plasma into sick coronavirus patients.

This approach was used during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic.

https://nbcnews.com/health/health-ca...r /> n1167136

MountSinai researchers have developed an antibody test to identify people who recovered from COVID19.

Recovered/immune patients can:
Donate coronavirus antibody-rich plasma to treat ill patients
Take on front-line jobs during the pandemic

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...virus-pandemic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrzubnyy

Before we can get to your lists what about all of the garbage that has NOTHING TO DO WITH CORONVIRUS...

Why is this being ignored by some on here?

---

Read my other post. I said, that iI agree that this is no time for politics but here needs to be regulations on all of this.
Corporate bailouts need to come from pockets of that mythical 1% who own those companies. They are not the ones who stand to lose anything asked from a tiny percentage of their absurd piles of money.
I am not saying they shouldn't keep their piles but they need to give some back from the world from which they took it and the people who helped them create it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrzubnyy

And yet you still ignore the BS that the Dems want in there? You turn a blind eye to that, why?

---

There should be a cohesive solution that solves this issue. Politics should not be involved. I agree.
It isn't difficult. There are people in this country that can easily afford to create monetary assistance for those who need it.
Big business should be the ones giving money, not the government. But since they are entitled greedy pricks, they won't but instead they will ask for money to keep their bonuses. What do you say to that Mush?

Fact is the Dems are holding up the deal and not many seem to care

Italy seems to be bending the arc and rounding the corner hopefully. For 2nd consecutive day, new COVID19 cases lower than day before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinkotheclown

I love when people comment, as you once brought up,
100%. Anyone who doesn't agree is dishonest. Pure and simple., was an unfair analysis. (Actually you and I went back and forth on this after I made a similar claim, so interesting how much you dislike this type of comment but use it)

Lets be clear, many Rs won't pass bills unless the religious right has their desires met.
Let's also be clear, the Rs aren 't as worried about where this money goes. Big business, not big government.

Individuals need this more than Boeing. Or ford. Or Delta. The men who are in charge of those companies need to open their own damn wallets and cover their losses. They can do it and still have enough money for 10 lifetimes.

Stock buybacks are atrocious.

People need to eat.

I agree. There shouldn't be politics in this but there needs to be regulation and organization.
This shouldn't be going out right now. It's been a week.
If the President is so confident that this is going to go away in another week or that we have a cure, they should wait to watch the numbers drop, while people get better and we might not need it.

What do you think about that Johnny and Mush, should we listen to the president and believe this is going be better in another week or two? Because if you say no, you are saying he's lied.

If you say yes? No. You won't

---

Don't know if you are trying to be disagreeable or not on the 100% comment, especially when you reiterate the point that there shouldn't be politics on it, which is what I said 100% about and also said that there is no place for pork on either side of the aisle and I further stand by my comment that anyone who thinks it is OK to pass a political agenda with this bill is being dishonest. You might not like my certitude about it, however, it is the same for either side of the aisle.

I have actually stayed out of this political commentary for the most part, but let's all be reasonable here. We should not interject climate change into a bill about sending out checks to prevent people from starving. Also, I agree with not including any goodies for the Religious right, but I don't know where your commentary is coming from, since I didn't see any pro-life / anti -pro-choice agenda in the bill. Democrats put a force the airlines to reduce greenhouse gases while to my knowledge, there was no force the doctors to reduce abortions.

As for the President's comments, the data is out there. The virus will probably (key word is probably) peak at some time and level off as it did in South Korea and China and for the first time had less new cases yesterday in Italy than the previous day. I do believe that he is trying to be encouraging and optimistic, but that he is too optimistic. We all know that there is a race to a cure / treatment and I thank Drt for his chart showing 12 clinical trials in US, alone. We also know that during a pandemic, any treatment that shows efficacy is likely to be shared early for sickest patients for humanitarian reasons. So, when the President says it will probably be less than 3-4 months and the head of the CDC says it will likely take more than 2-3 weeks, I have no problem interpreting that to mean that both could be correct or both could be incorrect. My guess, and let's be honest here because it is only a guess, is that it will take more than a month, but I do not believe that it will wipe out humanity, just be very disruptive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drt1010

Nicky I have commented. Simply the D's are trying to prevent the R's from having a $500B blank check to dole out at their discretion to big business. They include the environmental and election protection as leverage, a bargaining tool against the R's blank check, NO oversight, proposal. I'm sure you realize and understand that's how political negotiating works. I don't think you can call environmental and election protection pork! I don't think you can question the D's focus on families and kids. D's want to ensure that any bailout for large companies will primarily benefit workers.

You didn't answer my question. If Obama had proposed a $500B slush fund, with NO oversight, intended as a big business bailout, would the R's approve?

---

Well, at least this is some kind of an answer to his repeated questioning stream. Great job and great deflection. If this is truly their negotiating strategy, then float a scaled down bill that addresses the bare minimum ideas that everyone agrees with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnyi

Well, at least this is some kind of an answer to his repeated questioning stream. Great job and great deflection. If this is truly their negotiating strategy, then float a scaled down bill that addresses the bare minimum ideas that everyone agrees with.

---

Pelosi said the Republican bill before the Senate puts "corporations first, not workers and families."

The Democrats' latest bill, which is more than 1,400 pages long, would prevent corporations from using taxpayer money for stock buybacks, boost unemployment insurance, strengthen the child and earned income tax credits and inject nearly $40 billion into schools and universities to stabilize funding. It also directs billions of dollars in grant funding for states to carry out this year's election through the Election Assistance Commission.

Some elements of this proposal already exist in the bill that the Senate is negotiating.

Frankly I don't know what the D's strategy is, what I do know they are trying to protect workers and families. They clearly object to the R's attempt to push thru a bill that gives carte blanche to a $500B slush fund with NO oversight. Can you imagine?