The Market Just Triggered a 'Circuit Breaker' That Keeps Stocks From Falling Through the Floor (cnbc.com) 463
The S&P 500 fell more than 7% Monday, triggering circuit breakers that prevent a further plunge. From a report: The index hit "limit down" shortly after the open, halting trading below that level for 15 minutes. The market was set to resume trading at 9:49 am ET. In addition to the S&P, the most all-encompassing large-cap stock index, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 7.3% while the Nasdaq, which is concentrated in technology names, slid 6.9%. According to the New York Stock Exchange, a market trading halt may occur at "three circuit breaker thresholds" on the S&P 500 due to large declines and volatility. Under "circuit breaker" rules, stocks will resume trading 15 minutes after the halt. The halt on Monday morning was the first since the rules were implemented after the financial crisis. If there's a subsequent drop of 14% from the last trading close, there will be another 15-minute trading halt. If there's a 20% drop at any point, that would halt trading for the rest of the day.
Putin must be drowning in his own spaff (Score:5, Funny)
The past few years have gone according to plan for Putin, certainly!
Destroy the markets by leveraging your mates' oil businesses. Clever, and obvious, after the past few years.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Putin must be drowning in his own spaff (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Putin must be drowning in his own spaff (Score:5, Insightful)
^^THIS^^
This is about Russia increasing their influence in the middle east. They may even be able to undercut the Saudis on when delivery and refining products are considered. This will put the shale guys here in the states out of business though.
Its also true that Putin does not have to worry about anything even resembling an election again for several years. Bad economic times today will be forgotten by then; at least if good ones follow. Putin may be able to capture a lot of additional oil/gas market share this way so he can profit when demand recovers. In the mean time creating a supply glut into a softening of demand costs him less both financially and politically than many of the other players.
Re: Putin must be drowning in his own spaff (Score:4, Funny)
Dont forget Putin also just rewrote the Russian constitution making sure he and his cronies can stay in power for a while anyway. He plays the long game.
This is why I was always worried about Trump's one on ones with Putin. Putin is playing chess, while Trump isnt even playing checkers. He's playing tic tac toe
Re: (Score:3)
Russia isn't going to be able to stay in the gam
Fragile supply chains are crumbling (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Fragile supply chains are crumbling (Score:5, Informative)
No mention of today's big even then? The Saudi's dumping oil on the market to thwart Putin's "I'm going to keep pumping as much as I can" one finger salute to OPEC? This is not all about some virus, there are other things going on here.
The supply chain is strained, but NOT crumbling. There may be shortages of some things and higher prices because of the virus, as the supply chain adjusts, but make no mistake, it will adjust fairly quickly. That's how capitalism works you know.
The stock market is over reacting to a bunch of things right now... We just need some time for cooler heads to prevail.
Re:Fragile supply chains are crumbling (Score:4, Insightful)
No, what US companies are actually doing is making sure there is a second+ source, not necessarily on-shoring. For example, order 1/3 from China, 1/3 from Mexico, and 1/3 from South Africa. The chance of all 3 continents getting hit by the same problem is small. US labor rates are too high to see mass factories come back, except for maybe robots.
But we *have* to outsource to China! (Score:3)
The only companies bombing are the traitorous sellouts who were outsourcing to China and India.
As one pundit sarcastically said,
"All those executives who decided to move their factories to China? Come on, give 'em a break. They were thinking logical thoughts such as -- 'We have to move to China; where else can you get a fabulous bowl of bat soup?' "
Go around your house (Score:3)
There are more countries than China with dirt cheap labor and weak environmental protection laws. All Trump did was change the "Made in" label on your stuff to another country that oppresses it's working class.
Also, #PoesLaw. I honestly can't tell if you're joking.
Interesting Analogies (Score:5, Insightful)
What to make, then, of a measure called a "circuit breaker" that claims to prevent loss of value during what we sometimes might call a "correction" . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not in a day, that's the point.
Re: (Score:3)
Not in a day, that's the point.
You would have to sell it every day to find out. Houses just aren't liquid enough to have daily values like that.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The time frame you describe here still takes months or years.
Re: (Score:3)
but they still have a home. They still have shelter.
Re: Interesting Analogies (Score:2)
It's to save on the overtime and counseling costs for the people tasked to clean up Wall St (the road) after massive corrections. Takes a lot of scrubbing to get those stains out, both physically and mentally.
Should have let it fall (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Should have let it fall (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe people would learn that high frequency trading is a bad idea.
If we charged sales tax when stocks were sold, high frequency trading would vanish instantly.
Re: (Score:2)
Not likely because that tax would have to be restricted to only what was gained in profit. You would have a hard time justifying that you can tax on the amount that was processed because that money would already have been taxed and taxing it subsequently again on every transaction would be wrong for obvious reasons.
But hey, its not like you folks have any morals... fuck everyone, fuck'em all and let the rich politicians get everything. If you think big bad business is a problem... you have not been lookin
Re:Should have let it fall (Score:5, Interesting)
Almost all securities trading in the US would vanish instantly. Everyone would move their trading to London or Hong Kong or somewhere else, exactly like what happened when Sweden tried it [wikipedia.org].
It will never happen in the US. Politicians listen to wealthy campaign donors, not so much to random internet dudes talking about things they don't understand.
Politicians don't listen (Score:3)
It will never happen in the US. Politicians listen to wealthy campaign donors,
I believe that you should consider this a bug, not a feature.
Re: (Score:3)
I believe that you should consider this a bug, not a feature.
Can we start by considering it a reality, so we can understand what might or might not happen? What good is talk about what you might prefer if you don't even understand what you have and how it works?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
People who don't know anything about markets say stuff like this.
Extremely predictable. (Score:3)
When research realized in the 80s, that real-world worth doesn't go up and up like the imaginary stock valuations, forcing the disparity to become so big that every 30 years, it *has* to crash, to get the stock valuations back to axtual reality.
And when then, a law and system is created, to "prevent" that "bad" thing, allowing stocks to rise to insanely imaginary values, completely unrelated to reality.
Like putting a cork on a volcano and calling it "solved".
And it crashes anyway, but only worse.
And all they do, is put a *bigger* cork on it, allowing pressure to rise even more... (Genius!)
And then an idiotic panic pokes that volcano ....
How could there *possibly* be anything but the biggest crash ever!
I prepared. Got a farm, where I can get all the food and water and shelter I need, for helping out. It even has a bunker. And lots of tools and wood for building things. Money could completely devalue, and you didn't even have to notice.
So have fun with your cancerous market! So long, suckers!
Re:Extremely predictable. (Score:4, Interesting)
Snark aside, you have a point. So much of our public debt is tied up in private stocks now (public employee pensions, that sort of thing) that market volatility is now looked at differently than it used to be. Nobody cared much if a bunch of traders took the express elevator to the sidewalk when the market tanked back in the day, but now a down market means Fireman Jones loses his pension.
Our addiction to credit and leverage to keep our economy running at unsustainable rates will eventually come to a screeching halt. The downside to our globally connected economies means that any disaster will ripple out worldwide very quickly, but the upside is that any fix than can be implemented will also happen quickly. We just need to ensure going forward that our fixes are actual repairs and not just duct-tape and baling wire applied to fundamental problems. For example, the market's fetish for efficiency uber alles has come at the expense of robustness. It's really efficient to offshore all of your tech manufacturing to China, but as we now see, China isn't bulletproof.
Markets love to chase the latest, greatest thing, but that's not always the best way in the long term.
Ah (Score:5, Insightful)
So that's how "free market economy" is supposed to work? When you're ripping off the rest of the world then all is good but when you start loosing money then you have "circuit breakers".
What a novel concept!
Re:Ah (Score:4, Informative)
Also oil prices are subject to an oligopoly manipulating prices [wikipedia.org]. The lower price when they lose control like right now, is actually closer to the true market price. The chaos we're seeing is the result of people who were counting on that manipulation to continue, suddenly being thrown into uncertainty because the manipulation might be ending. Nothing to do with the free market (unless OPEC dissolves, which I consider unlikely).
Re:Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Insightful)
Politics played a part, because selloffs like these are driven by fear. That fear has been exacerbated by an administration concerned more about optics than reality, preventing the country from being properly prepared. Hell, Trump has publicly said he didnt want to repatriate affected/infected Americans because he didnt want the numbers (in America) to go up. So, he leaves people stranded on cruise ships, virtually ensuring they will get sick.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Politics played a part, because selloffs like these are driven by fear. That fear has been exacerbated by an administration concerned more about optics than reality, preventing the country from being properly prepared. Hell, Trump has publicly said he didnt want to repatriate affected/infected Americans because he didnt want the numbers (in America) to go up. So, he leaves people stranded on cruise ships, virtually ensuring they will get sick.
For Pete's sake... Which side is politicizing this now?
Virus is out in the world, bad things happen and each side of the isle is hell bent on blaming their opponents.
Also, Trump's reluctance to admit sick folks into the USA is exactly why we don't have tens of thousands sick already. It was his prompt actions, starting in mid January, of instituting travel bans and health screening at immigration points that has kept the numbers fairly low and given the USA additional precious weeks to prepare for th
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not wanting them in because they could spread the sickness, he doesnt want them in because he doesnt want those individuals added to the tally of sick in the US. Hell, Obama was able and willing to repatriate people sick with Ebola. Trump couldn't even make sure to send people properly equipped and trained to take in the people he finally allowed back.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Right, and that's exactly what he is doing for ships docking at US PORTS. Trump doesn't have much control what happens at foreign ports. He also doesn't have much responsibility of what happens on foreign flagged ships where he has zero control. Why is it you try to hold him responsible for this stuff?
The folks you are most aware of where docking at a port in Japan and it was the Japanese authorities which prevented them from coming ashore. The Trump administration worked to obtain their release and the ai
Re: (Score:3)
When Asked about this perspective of what Trump was saying HE SAID:
In response to a reporter's question about that statement, the president said he was not making coronavirus numbers — and the potential to minimize the size of the U.S. outbreak — a higher priority than treating the sick. "No," Trump said. "I'm saying whatever it is that takes precedence over the numbers." Trump then repeated that he liked the then-current figure, of 240 cases in the U.S.: "I would rather have the numbers stay where they are. But if they want to take them off, they'll take them off."
So, maybe you are taking him a bit out of context on a conversation he had off the cuff. You might want to cut him some slack... Or not... Because he's doing the right thing by these people and they will be allowed ashore once the authorities have made the necessary arrangements.
Re:Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Interesting)
While I would normally gladly blame the orange retard for anything and everything, in this question politics are really irrelevant, an epidemic is a national catastrophe that will impact economy regardless of any political actions or inactions.
Both good and bad economic conditions have little to do with the person in the White House. It is mostly just luck that allows one President to preside over 8% stock market gains and another President to preside over 15% gains. Trump has been riding the coat tails of the longest bull market in US history which had little to do with his policies, and now he is seeing a sharp market decline which again has little to do with his policies.
But each of these does have at least something to do with his policies. Trump boosted the stock market temporarily with his tax cuts for the wealthy, knowing those short term stock market gains would last past his reelection campaign. This boost also dulled the impact of his more damaging policies such as the Chinese trade war. None of these actions are going to have much if any effect on where the stock market will be in 20 years because there isn't anything meaningful in any of these policies, but they are impacting immediate prices.
Trump is also having an impact on the Coronavirus scare simply because even many conservatives understand the danger of an incompetent administration during an actual crisis. This is Trump's first real external crisis, and he is handling it as well as anyone who can barely read would. It is hard to determine just how Trump is making things worse (although there are some glaring examples), but in my opinion his biggest impact comes simply from a lack of confidence in his administration's capability. If a competent president was in the White House it would ease worries a bit and would probably have a positive impact on the stock market and economy in general.
Can't have it both ways (Score:3)
Why is it so many give him credit when things are up but blame external forces when things are down? External or uncontrollable (after the fact) forces have always been a big part of the economy. Cycles and global forces have always knocked it around and around.
If he takes credit when it's up, then he should similarly get slammed when it's down, since external forces are always at play.
A President can't do much about boom and bust cycles, at least not in the shorter term. How they manage or time stimuli an
Because we can end these cycles anytime we want (Score:3)
There's other more esoteric monetary and regulatory policies needed. Liz Warren literally wrote a book on the subject.
But this thing were we let compa
Re: (Score:3)
If anything, Trum
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just a lack of confidence in leadership. We happen to have the most incompetent, stupid and dishonest president in living memory right now. Any kind of "nothing to fear but fear itself" type of situation is going to be magnified. He doesn't even need to fuck anything up (though he already has fucked up in several ways) in order to undermine confidence.
The way to fix this is for Trump to stop opening his fucking mouth. He should never speak in the presence of adults, or to the American people. Because every time he says something over-the-top stupid (which for some reason happens to be every time someone is recording him), people are going to flinch, remembering he's the boss of everything from the CDC to the nuclear triad. Just shutting the fuck up will help a lot. And maybe, even if just for a few weeks, he should stop trying to find and fire everyone competent who is left. Wait until after the recession before firing the people who might be able to prevent it.
He just needs to take a break (not a full-time suspension) from attacking America for a while. Trump should pretend to be on the country's side, and stop screaming at everyone "I am stupid! I am trying to fuck things up for everyone! I am looking for more ways to steal money from all of you!" for a few weeks. People are stupid and they will forget we have a moron in the White House whenever they think about trade or viruses, if he can just shut the fuck up. Out of sight, out of mind.
Does that make sense? Can you see why people would blame him for his stupidity and malice constantly undermining all confidence? And do you see how, if only he had a 3-digit IQ, he would have already figured this out?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bad thing happens to economy: Oh, well it can't be his fault.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Slashdot, the home of poor trolls (Score:3)
One more thing.
The Slashdot trolls defending Trump are poor. If they had any money they would be too busy soiling themselves right now to be posting on Slashdot.
Re: (Score:3)
Trump speaks a lot of nonsense, don't tell me you believed the statement:
“The stock market is way up again today and we’re setting a record, literally all the time,...if Hillary Clinton had won the 2016 election, “the market would have gone down 50% from where it was.”
It was nonsense, then, and the statement that Trump is any significant way responsible for the Corona virus, or its impacts on the stock market now is also nonsense.
It just feels good to say, but pointless. Don't act like Trump and make up lies just to suit your argument.
You forgot the part about the Trump sycophants taking that statement at face value.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:3, Insightful)
The media has fear
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1. death rates have nothing to do with whether something is a pandemic or not. A pandemic simply means it has worldwide effect.
2. blaming the media for this administration's head-in-the-sand approach and outright lying about this disease is dishonest at best, and dangerous at worst. More people will be infected and more deaths will occur in the US because they were fucking the dog instead of getting out ahead of it with allowing private labs to do testing, passing emergency funding previous to last week,
Re: (Score:3)
You have so few "infected" because they have been withholding testing. There's a recent story about a nurse who was caring for infected, got sick herself, and wants to be tested. She apparently didn't meet the CDC criteria for testing.
Re: (Score:3)
Coronavirus looks to have a high mortality rate because of confirmation bias. Not everyone who has it has been tested, but everyone who dies from respiratory illness has been tested for coronavirus.
That doesn't really seem to be the case. While there are surely symptomatic cases that haven't been tested, and even a very small percentage of asymptomatic cases of people that even aren't aware that they *should* get tested,
1) the WHO estimates [who.int] that the asymptomatic cases are very few and far between, and most of them eventually turns symptomatic, and therefore presumably also more likely to get tested, and
2) a new analysis of samples taken for flu testing [twitter.com] suggests that we haven't really somehow missed a
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Insightful)
What have we not done that some other President could have done?
South Korea: within 1 week of the first case arriving, they'd performed 61k tests, established drive-through testing stations
UK: they'd performed 21k tests, established drive-through testing stations. The government chief medical officer told the nation "We expect 50% of all people who will get it, to get it by April. We expect 95% by July". The prime minister told the nation: "taking expert predictions into advice we forecast that at peak there might be 1/5 of the workforce away from work. Here's what our plans are, here's how overcrowded the hospitals will be at peak, and this is and how we're going to deal with it."
US: they'd performed 472 tests several weeks in, before the CDC stopped providing the public with the data. Advice from the chief medical officer must be filtered by the white house. We have no word from ANY official about what is the projected peak burden on the healthcare system is, and without knowing the numbers being tested it's hard to make those predictions. Maybe someone internal is gathering the data but they're not telling us citizens.
I think the US and the UK are roughly equivalent in terms of healthcare capacity, and if the UK government predicts that it will be overcrowded to the point of critical patients lying in hospital corridors, then I want to know what the US predictions are. I feel panicked. Not because I might get infected - that seems a minor risk to me personally. No, I'm panicked because the only ones who can give us statistical projections about the likely course of this disease through our nation's health system either haven't made those projections or are deliberately hiding them.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with your take and I worry that the rate of infection in the US might be a lot higher than publicized. It sounds like some businesses may make testing available to the public, bypassing the healthcare system entirely, so I guess there's at least that.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Insightful)
So you can't really point to some action Trump should have taken that another President would have.
Did you know that the FDA had a rule in place requiring approval before manufacturers could start making test kits? [fda.gov]
Guess who prompted that change?
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Informative)
So you can't really point to some action Trump should have taken that another President would have.
Stop watching Fox News.
Not contradict the experts.
Re: (Score:3)
So you can't really point to some action Trump should have taken that another President would have.
Other than the two he pointed out, presumably no.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do those goal posts that you like shifting around so much have wheels?
Re: (Score:3)
"Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Issues New Policy to Help Expedite Availability of Diagnostics" [fda.gov]
In case you are interested, that was a rule put into place during the last Administration. Trump ordered it revised.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:3)
3 years later and you Trumplodytes STILL can't resist saying "BUT...BUT...OBAMA! *WAAAAHHHH*"
Get the fuck over it, your guy "won", remember? Yeah the guy more concerned with people agreeing with him than literally ANYTHING else?
The guy who can't stop flat out lying, every chance he gets?
The guy who has an entire cadre of yes-people in important posts who know ability nothing about their positions?
THE GUY WHO PUT MIKE "SHOCK THE GAY AWAY" PENCE, the man who made an HIV outbreak FAR worse than it ever should
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Insightful)
So what exactly are you claiming the implication of that is? Why was this not done sooner? It's not like we had no clue we would need test kits a month ago.
This should not be a partisan issue, and the fact that Trump supporters are doubling down defending this asshole really speaks volumes.
Re: (Score:3)
What was done a month ago?
Sorry, February 29th might be last month but it is not "a month ago."
The press release you linked to is from February 29th, and says "Today, as part of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s ongoing and aggressive commitment to address the coronavirus outbreak, the agency issued a new policy for certain laboratories seeking to develop diagnostic tests for coronavirus in order to achieve more rapid testing capacity in the U.S."
So what exactly happened a month ago? The CDC st
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Insightful)
This kind of thing was bound to happen with Trump. One of his overriding characteristics is that he has to control things, and one of his go to tactics even before he got into politics was lie to control his own narrative and, when caught, double down. So now he has run into a crisis he cant control, and doubling down on his initial lies has made things worse. Ironically, if the reports are correct, the administration initially downplayed the virus due to concerns about economic and stock market effects. So, by obfuscating and denying as the reports got worse, people started worrying more and more that the government wasnt telling the truth or the whole story, most likely making the inevitable economic hit worse.
It was easy to see that people were panicking just by looking at the local runs on toilet paper and bottled water. Once those reports were coming out, the administration should have said "yes, this is a problem, but we are working on it and are taking it seriously." Instead, Trump and the administration has come across looking like Leslie Nielsen in The Naked Gun saying "nothing to see here" while standing in front of an exploding fireworks factory.
Re: (Score:2)
obfuscating and denying as the reports got worse
What has me more concerned if we were to be hit with a 1918 influenza, confidence in those in authority is not great. I guess for the rest of us, we're on our own. Best advice I have heard (and doesn't require me to spend tons of money) is drink plenty of water so viruses will go into stomach where acids will kill it. Getting dehyrated increases chance of virus entering lungs.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
obfuscating and denying as the reports got worse
What has me more concerned if we were to be hit with a 1918 influenza, confidence in those in authority is not great. I guess for the rest of us, we're on our own. Best advice I have heard (and doesn't require me to spend tons of money) is drink plenty of water so viruses will go into stomach where acids will kill it. Getting dehyrated increases chance of virus entering lungs.
There was one thing that skewed the 1918 epidemic - bacterial superinfections largely because of bad sanitation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Also, gargling is surprisingly effective at reducing respiratory infections. I guess the reason it's not more well-known is that you can't profit from pushing water. Most store-bought remedies have effectiveness that's below observable thresholds, but ... gargling 3 times a day cut infection rates by 40% in one of these studies:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Great investment opportunity (Score:2)
I would put all liquid cash into S&P right now. Pull it just before the uncertainty of election, say September/October.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Ah the TDS is strong in Nidi62. You are so quick to blame Trump for this you don't even both doing the 50seconds of research to discover the real cause of this is last weeks failed OPEC negotiations with Russia and Russia's desire to 1) undercut the Saudis and 2) put American shale producers out of business.
Of course this is exactly the one thing that could cost the Trump the election. Yet its Russia behind it. Now please go reconcile this with the last three and half years of the #resistance insistence Tr
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know that's true unless you ask the people who are selling. I don't believe that most people are selling because of OPEC negotiations. I think that most people are selling because COVID19 is spreading, and those same pe
Re: (Score:3)
They are selling because of Oil. Some of the oil sellers might be selling because of COVAD-19 related demand destruction. Most of them are selling because they see a massive supply glut coming.
They are panicking now, and rightly so because Russia's timing is opportunistic. They know with demaand softening they can drive prices prices down way below where the american shale wild caters can produce and that will certainly bankrupt them. Its not going to be a situation where they face a small gap in revenue
Re: (Score:3)
The simple fact is that US shale oil & gas production is not sustainable at today's prices, and were not profitable enough to sustain new wells even before the OPEC/Russia dispute.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:4, Insightful)
The International markets are doing much worse, especially in Europe. Belgian markets are beyond -15% as are others.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:3)
So you're saying the markets don't have confidence the President will bail out the big financial companies when their Ponzi scheme collapses again? That's pleasant news.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Informative)
Ah the TDS is strong in Nidi62. You are so quick to blame Trump for this you don't even both doing the 50seconds of research to discover the real cause of this is last weeks failed OPEC negotiations with Russia
Today is a continuation of the stock market rout that started 2 weeks back. The failed agreement on oil production cuts between OPEC and Russia is exacerbating things, but the market would have fallen even if an agreement had been reached because people are jumping into bonds. As bond prices have gone up and yields down, stock prices have gone down too.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:3)
An OPEC price war should hurt the energy sector but boost many others. Fuel is a major cost point for airlines so cheap oil means the aviation sector should go up. Cheap oil means cheap gas so people go out, travel more, and spend more so consumer spending should be up. Cheaper gas also means cheaper OTR and last mile shipping, so logistics and retail should see boosts as well.
But we are seeing aviation get crunched by covid-19. Tech stocks are getting killed because all their stuff is made in China or kor
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Informative)
So now he has run into a crisis he cant control, and doubling down on his initial lies has made things worse. Ironically, if the reports are correct, the administration initially downplayed the virus due to concerns about economic and stock market effects.
The downplaying was on full display last Friday when Trump, at the CDC, said he didn't want the sick and infected people to disembark from the cruise ship off the coast of California because it would cause the number of infected people in the U.S. to increase.
"Do I want to bring all those people off? People would like me to do it. I would rather have them stay on, personally. I like the numbers being where they are. I don't need to have the numbers double because of one ship that wasn't our fault. ”
Trump's mismanagement helped fuel coronavirus crisis [politico.com]
Trump's focus on coronavirus numbers could backfire, health experts say [reuters.com]
Per Trump is reportedly fixated on keeping the number of official US coronavirus cases as low as possible — despite indications the disease has spread wider than he wants [businessinsider.com], "Trump had handled the coronavirus outbreak by rewarding those who bore good news and spurning those with bad news."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The downplaying was on full display last Friday when Trump, at the CDC, said he didn't want the sick and infected people to disembark from the cruise ship off the coast of California because it would cause the number of infected people in the U.S. to increase.
"Do I want to bring all those people off? People would like me to do it. I would rather have them stay on, personally. I like the numbers being where they are. I don't need to have the numbers double because of one ship that wasn't our fault. ”
Um ... not bringing in a huge boatload of sick people during an epidemic is the right thing to do.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not letting a huge boatload of sick people mingle with the general population is the right thing to do. Not letting them disembark to a quarantine facility just means they'll all get sick and the potential for infection will just last longer as the illness gradually goes through the ship's population over days and weeks. And even if you'd prefer to keep people on the ship, the correct reason is to do it to minimize the chance of transmission to people on land. NOT to refuse to disembark them just because it will make the official numbers look worse. THAT is the kind of reasoning everyone is worrying about and that makes people suspect his administration will not be truthful about the actual extent of the outbreak.
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Interesting)
Um ... not bringing in a huge boatload of sick people during an epidemic is the right thing to do.
The fact that you think that makes you a horrible person even if you weren't in the country with the "best medical system in the world".
Only if you have nowhere better to put them (Score:3)
The compassionate and epidemiological thing to do is to take potentially infected people and put them someplace where:
* They can be cared for
* They can be isolated from each other
* They can be isolated from the rest of us
A cruise ship does not meet any of the above.
If the US can't come up with better facilities and move people to them, we're not nearly as rich as we claim to be.
Re: (Score:3)
Um ... not bringing in a huge boatload of sick people during an epidemic is the right thing to do.
Not getting the passengers and crew off the boat would make things worse because more people would end up getting infected. We only have to look to Japan and how they handled the outbreak aboard the Diamond Princess [nytimes.com].
It started with 1 infected person. In the end, over 700 people were infected [wikipedia.org]. But that number could have been 8 times lower [medicalnewstoday.com] if everyone had been evacuated in a timely manner.
Trump's concern with getting people off the boat isn't about the safety of those on land. It's about numbers and how an in
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Insightful)
If even China, with a state-run media that does precisely what it is told, couldn't keep a handle on the outbreak. If Trump ever imagined he could massage the messaging in his favor, then he's even a bigger idiot than I thought. He isn't just one of the stupidest presidents in history, he may very well be one of the stupidest people to have ever lived. The man is the living embodiment of arrogant ignorance.
Re: (Score:3)
Even more hilariously he's gone on record with his belief that he's at least the smartest man alive, or possibly even the smartest man who ever lived. It's a great example of the most extreme form of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It was Obama's economy that he stole, yep. But once you start pumping something, however strong, with bullshit, it will only take so much before it assplodes into a fountain of shit.
Have you forgotten the Clinton boom and the Bush/Greenspan fiasco?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This is claim is nonsense. Please what actions did Obama take to cause the recover?
Hank Pulson and Ben Bernanke - got the ball rolling on the general strategy of easy money, and massive stimulus (bailouts). If Obama did anything he continued it, and ham handly at best; he spent a lot of money that he was trying to target at working class and it all ended up in Wallstreets pocket's because 'shovel ready projects' just don't exist.
He delayed the implementation of his own signature healthcare law as long as p
Re: Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Insightful)
You blame Bush I for a downturn 7 years later? I bet you blame Bush II for the downturn 2 years after Clinton too, right? It's never your guy's fault, huh?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The economy is like a large ship. It has a lot of momentum and it takes a long time to turn. The markets got an extra hit of momentum from the election and the tax cuts because the rich saw they were going to get even richer, but everything since then has been dragging the economy down, especially the fall out from the trade wars.
How come it takes a Carter economy four years to kick in, but an Obama economy eight years? Funny how that works. I am sensing magical thinking on your part.
Re:Good job, Donald. (Score:5, Interesting)
I thought this was Obama's economy that Donald "stole" the credit for?? Make up your mind.
Here's the Standard and Poor by president:
https://www.macrotrends.net/2482/sp500-performance-by-president [macrotrends.net]
Trump inherited the moderate growth of the Obama years, but that growth dropped away.
Re: (Score:3)
No they're not. As I write this, the FTSE is down 7.19%. The DAX a similar amount.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Hey Millenials (Score:5, Insightful)
Millennials have nothing to lose. So we can go to another recession again and still hit the boomers harder then the Millennials, and they will still ask for Better environmental standards and to treat people nicely.
The problem with the current economy is that safety net policies have been skimmed back, and our energy policy isn't as diverse as it should be.
We lower the response ability for the CDC to handle outbreaks. We try to take funding away from health care, we make policies where diverse sets of workers are allowed to be reduced word. We poo-poo green energy and coalesce around fossil fuel. It all gives us a short term savings, but a long term loss.
Unlike real estate we cannot Flip the United States.
Re: (Score:3)
What I post is often my knee jerk opinion on something from a story I just read from one source. If you feel enlightened by it, I am happy. If not oh well. It is my opinion, I think I am right, but because it is my opinion I always think I am right, otherwise I wouldn't post my opinion.
Granted I haven't changed my Sig in years. It was during a time where internet trolling was harmless and expected. A time you can say the Earth was flat, you can build a wall around the largest open border, and no one would
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately Millions of years of evolution have seemed to be in conflict with the economics of the last hundred years.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
whoosh