One housekeeping note: My plan is to lock down the daily newsletter and I had intended to do it this past week so only regular subscribers get everything. By and large, that is what I’m doing. But I feel very strongly I should not be profiting off concern over the virus. As a result, I have decided that when the majority of the content is related to the present COVID-19 concerns, I should make that information available to everyone and provide additional, long-form content just to subscribers. I may change again on that, but I hope both that I’m not overwhelming everyone with emails and also that I am providing you valuable content since you are a subscriber. Likewise, please consider recommending this email to people or there’s an easy way to gift subscriptions. You just click this:
You are way too willing to give the president a pass on responding quickly and forcefully on the pandemic. He was not relying on the Democrats nor the papers to tell him about the existence, the threat, nor the potential of the virus. He has both the NSC (which Trumpists are trying to claim still has the needed capability to foresee and prepare for pandemics) and the Department of HHS to guide him. So, either they did and he was very slow to react. Or, they didn’t, in which case they weren’t acting as they should, for which the responsibility also falls on him.
In early January, or at the latest late January, the NSC and HHS should have been asking how bad could this be? What are the likely impediments to our response? How do we overcome them? Today (Today!), the administration is announcing eliminating elective surgeries to make masks and other PPE more available. Great. Should have been identified in January and been given as guidance much, much earlier. Mike DeWine (who has done a great job for his state) did that yesterday in Ohio. Why so late for the feds?
Because the president couldn’t face the reality until Tucker Carlson drove to Mar-a-Lago to tell him to do so? Because he worried about the impact of higher case numbers on his reelection chances? Because he can’t handle any news that doesn’t reflect well on him? Because those around him won’t tell him the truth because he might not like it?
I don’t know. But, it sure looks to me like he is the one responsible for the poor response. Whether he likes it or not, the buck does stop at his desk. At least until next January.
You're getting closer to the small biz dilemma in your comments here. I'm re-posting my comment here to save you the time of looking for it. Thanks for all you do!
The small biz plans I've been hearing are NO HELP to the small biz. I own 2 small businesses, with a total of 24 employees. One of the businesses has programming staff that works remotely, only, so no problem. The other business is a manufacturing company with 20 employees and tight margins. We primarily manufacture goods for construction projects where the ultimate project owner is the Army Corps of Engineers. Since our products are custom for each installation, we have no inventory. If our team isn't working, we aren't making any money, just like a restaurant. Loaning me money to pay employees while they aren't working isn't going to help one bit. Since we are in construction, we have regular layoffs, as any construction outfit does, depending primarily on weather and political decisions. When work stops, my workers stay afloat through the unemployment system. We offer a great benefit package for a small company with paid vacations, paid holiday's, health insurance plan, accident insurance plan, life insurance plan, and 401K plan. Keeping up with the benefit payments for the employees while they are on layoff is hard enough, but burdening my with also keeping up with payroll is just the type of assistance I cannot afford. Later when the workers are back on the job, and those loans come due, even at zero interest, the margins are not sufficient enough to double my labor overhead and remain afloat. Its just that simple. A more reasonable assistance to small biz would look something like: 1. Take care of the employees on layoff by propping up the unemployment systems of the states and not requiring affected workers to have a multi-week delay prior to receiving benefits
2. Assist the businesses with fixed overhead, NOT SURE what this would look like...still the Peter and Paul issue of borrowing from future proceeds. These fixed overhead issues would be enough to put small biz under in and of itself, so this is where the assistance is needed.
I'm sure there are other things that would be more reasonable than a loan.
I like the idea of a jubilee too. I have friends who are hurting because of this virus. The wife still works but her husband lost his job and everything is closed so no jobs available. He's also not young which makes it even harder since age dicrimination runs rampant in the job market. They are trying to figure out how to pay rent. I have helped them best I could but I'm tapped out too. All this is just not right and the panic and isolation is becoming more unhealthy than a virus most will recover from. And what about next year? I'm afraid that folks are going to continue to hoard, stop going places to gather, ignore and stay away from others, only engage with family when this is over because fear has taken over as the emotion of the time. It will be used to make all decisions in the future. That isn't healthy for any country. And the left are masters at perpetuating fear!
Your comment about a jubilee (a debt deferral) makes good sense. If most people stay at home, their major expense other than food and household goods would probably be monthly bills (mortgage, rent, insurance) as sporting events, vacation travel, restaurants, and movies, are largely being put on hold. If small businesses that are forbidden to open and don't have to pay employees and or buy supplies (like restaurants), then other than interest on loans, their biggest expense is probably the owners salary. If the government made zero-interest loans for basic essentials widely available during the economic shutdown, it would go a long way to providing basic needs for everybody - especially those who don't have the financial means to endure a few months without work.
You are way too willing to give the president a pass on responding quickly and forcefully on the pandemic. He was not relying on the Democrats nor the papers to tell him about the existence, the threat, nor the potential of the virus. He has both the NSC (which Trumpists are trying to claim still has the needed capability to foresee and prepare for pandemics) and the Department of HHS to guide him. So, either they did and he was very slow to react. Or, they didn’t, in which case they weren’t acting as they should, for which the responsibility also falls on him.
In early January, or at the latest late January, the NSC and HHS should have been asking how bad could this be? What are the likely impediments to our response? How do we overcome them? Today (Today!), the administration is announcing eliminating elective surgeries to make masks and other PPE more available. Great. Should have been identified in January and been given as guidance much, much earlier. Mike DeWine (who has done a great job for his state) did that yesterday in Ohio. Why so late for the feds?
Because the president couldn’t face the reality until Tucker Carlson drove to Mar-a-Lago to tell him to do so? Because he worried about the impact of higher case numbers on his reelection chances? Because he can’t handle any news that doesn’t reflect well on him? Because those around him won’t tell him the truth because he might not like it?
I don’t know. But, it sure looks to me like he is the one responsible for the poor response. Whether he likes it or not, the buck does stop at his desk. At least until next January.
Thanks for your info....I left a comment from the small biz perspective on your previous post, hopefully you read it: https://ewerickson.substack.com/p/your-covid-19-update
You're getting closer to the small biz dilemma in your comments here. I'm re-posting my comment here to save you the time of looking for it. Thanks for all you do!
The small biz plans I've been hearing are NO HELP to the small biz. I own 2 small businesses, with a total of 24 employees. One of the businesses has programming staff that works remotely, only, so no problem. The other business is a manufacturing company with 20 employees and tight margins. We primarily manufacture goods for construction projects where the ultimate project owner is the Army Corps of Engineers. Since our products are custom for each installation, we have no inventory. If our team isn't working, we aren't making any money, just like a restaurant. Loaning me money to pay employees while they aren't working isn't going to help one bit. Since we are in construction, we have regular layoffs, as any construction outfit does, depending primarily on weather and political decisions. When work stops, my workers stay afloat through the unemployment system. We offer a great benefit package for a small company with paid vacations, paid holiday's, health insurance plan, accident insurance plan, life insurance plan, and 401K plan. Keeping up with the benefit payments for the employees while they are on layoff is hard enough, but burdening my with also keeping up with payroll is just the type of assistance I cannot afford. Later when the workers are back on the job, and those loans come due, even at zero interest, the margins are not sufficient enough to double my labor overhead and remain afloat. Its just that simple. A more reasonable assistance to small biz would look something like: 1. Take care of the employees on layoff by propping up the unemployment systems of the states and not requiring affected workers to have a multi-week delay prior to receiving benefits
2. Assist the businesses with fixed overhead, NOT SURE what this would look like...still the Peter and Paul issue of borrowing from future proceeds. These fixed overhead issues would be enough to put small biz under in and of itself, so this is where the assistance is needed.
I'm sure there are other things that would be more reasonable than a loan.
I like the idea of a jubilee too. I have friends who are hurting because of this virus. The wife still works but her husband lost his job and everything is closed so no jobs available. He's also not young which makes it even harder since age dicrimination runs rampant in the job market. They are trying to figure out how to pay rent. I have helped them best I could but I'm tapped out too. All this is just not right and the panic and isolation is becoming more unhealthy than a virus most will recover from. And what about next year? I'm afraid that folks are going to continue to hoard, stop going places to gather, ignore and stay away from others, only engage with family when this is over because fear has taken over as the emotion of the time. It will be used to make all decisions in the future. That isn't healthy for any country. And the left are masters at perpetuating fear!
Your comment about a jubilee (a debt deferral) makes good sense. If most people stay at home, their major expense other than food and household goods would probably be monthly bills (mortgage, rent, insurance) as sporting events, vacation travel, restaurants, and movies, are largely being put on hold. If small businesses that are forbidden to open and don't have to pay employees and or buy supplies (like restaurants), then other than interest on loans, their biggest expense is probably the owners salary. If the government made zero-interest loans for basic essentials widely available during the economic shutdown, it would go a long way to providing basic needs for everybody - especially those who don't have the financial means to endure a few months without work.