Federal Reserve pledges asset purchases with no limit to support markets

Re:Federal Reserve pledges asset purchases with no limit to ... by perl4ever on Monday March 23, 2020 @09:53PM (#22671020)

If someone has an acute problem with low blood sugar, do you let them die right now because increasing their blood sugar won't cure diabetes? This is how insane people sound to me right now.

And from what I've read, this is how the great depression was created - people said "oh, the banks that are failing are weak, so they should fail".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Federal Reserve pledges asset purchases with no limit to ... by SilasX on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @12:17AM (#22671870)

Except the patient we're trying to save is the market, not any one business, and malignant businesses are like cancer. It's important for the cancer to die so the patient can live.

I mean, if you want to debate this thing entirely in analogies.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Federal Reserve pledges asset purchases with no limit to ... by perl4ever on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @07:52PM (#22680359)

I think the average person, or at least the average internet commenter, is too ready to consider large sectors of the economy "malignant" even in the best of times.

But without debating which analogy is right, it does matter whether it's cancer or not. And if aggressive treatment of advanced cancer involves cutting out major organs and the patient will only survive a month longer at best, it makes more sense to assume it's not terminal cancer and act accordingly even if there's a chance.

If someone appears to have a seizure and/or falls down and passes out, it could be a stroke, they could have cancer that's metastasized everywhere, but you don't make that assumption when there are many easily treatable possibilities.

[ Parent | on HN ]