News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @08:48PM (#22873224)
It’s not “forbidden” for y’all freethinkers or autodidacts or whatever the term today is to debate such things and to make the claim is dishonest.

You’d have to find somebody to debate with, however, and most people are not particularly interested in “hang your Grandma for my stocks”. That is not a restriction of debate, it’s the social dumpstering of people beyond either statistics or empathy and that’s a feature and not a bug.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by kinkrtyavimoodh on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @08:56PM (#22873286)
You seem to believe that 'stocks' are some abstract entity and are relevant only to the lives of people without grandmas to hang.

We don't live in a vacuum. Economic activity is not some cute thing people do in their free time. Recession also costs lives, including those of some grandmas.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by majormajor on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:01PM (#22873327)
Yes, and one of the interesting questions would be *why is our government so much more effective at propping up "the stocks" while everyone loses their job? There's miles of room for argument over the economic policy response.

But instead what we get is "the economic effects aren't worth it" where none of the assumptions are quantified.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nate_meurer on Wednesday April 15, 2020 @01:27AM (#22874819)
Our economy has fallen off a cliff, and we have no view of bottom yet. What exactly do you expect anyone to be able to quantify at this early stage?
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by volak on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @08:53PM (#22873259)
Framing the debate as "your grandma or your 401k" is precisely the gas lighting that prevents rational discussion on this topic
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @08:57PM (#22873294)
I submit that you don't know what gaslighting is. Further, I submit that you're attempting to coopt the language of marginalized groups to buttress a weak and selfish viewpoint.

I shall not buy what you are selling.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nate_meurer on Wednesday April 15, 2020 @01:21AM (#22874789)
Right, it's not exactly gaslighting. Rather, it's a fucking strawman made in bad faith.

The stakes are not "my stocks". The stakes are civil society, which as you may or may not know, can't exist for long without a functioning economy.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Wednesday April 15, 2020 @09:44AM (#22877587)
You're right, the stakes are civil society. Which you no longer get to claim you have when you sacrifice the weak and the sick to Moloch for pseudofictional accounts in a computer somewhere.

We must take care of each other, it is our basic obligation as citizens of a civil society, and this is the only way we can do that right now.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nate_meurer on Wednesday April 15, 2020 @11:33PM (#22885774)
If that's what you mean then fucking say it. Tarring folks who express concern over the economy with a bullshit strawman just makes you the asshole.
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nightstaywalki on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @08:57PM (#22873289)
> “hang your Grandma for my stocks”

But people feed their children using the value of their stocks.

Do you think it's possible that a seriously damaged economy will lead to more suffering and deaths than are being prevented by the lockdown?

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @08:57PM (#22873302)
In no realistic permutation. Thanks for asking!
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nightstaywalki on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:00PM (#22873325)
Hmm I'm not as sure, and I'm not sure why other people are so sure. People seem to generally respond 'of course not' and get offended that I've suggested it. I'm not really sure why.
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:09PM (#22873386)
On the off chance that you're saying this in good faith? Generally speaking it's because Just Asking Questions comes with motives that suck. Maybe you're the one whose don't and you are tragically caught up amidst the sewage flow of "screw 'em" types, but playing the percentages on bad-faith argumentation is pretty safe. Trolls and other turds make a point of wasting people's reserves of good faith as a tactic to dominate discourse--there's no reason to let them do so. Flat dismissal is the milder form of "block and move on".
Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nightstaywalki on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:16PM (#22873437)
I'm just as confused. It's prompted another strong reaction in you but I genuinely don't get why. I don't know what motives you think I have, or why I might be arguing in bad faith, or why you're talking about trolls and turds (?).

Why is it so wrong to ask 'are we sure we're going the right way - this way seems to have a lot of problems - are we sure the other way has more?' Some people literally kill themselves when they become unemployed. We have millions of new unemployed people.

You say it's not forbidden but you're comparing me to a turd for doing it. Why does it cause people to abuse me?

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:30PM (#22873518)
We are confident the other way has more problems and more outright destruction because the other way blows up our hospitals and everyday life becomes nonfunctional anyway.

This is my last message in this subthread because your misreading of my post to put on a hairshirt has convinced me that you are not here to discuss the topic in good faith. HAND.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by CydeWeys on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @11:07PM (#22874084)
Millions of people would have become newly unemployed regardless, as a result of the pandemic. The pandemic is an ongoing global catastrophe. Refusing to take efforts to mitigate it doesn't mean it's not still a catastrophe. Social distancing was always going to happen regardless of whether it was mandated. People are rational enough that they won't put themselves into close proximity with others if it could easily mean death (especially because of how overcrowded the hospitals would be).

There isn't a country on Earth right now that isn't doing social distancing of one form or another. It's an inevitable consequence of a pandemic; it's not some elective choice that we made.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by salawat on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:47PM (#22873626)
I know next to no one who ever uses "Stocks" to pay for everyday costs of raising a family or just getting by. I am aware that, yes, retirees stand to lose a lot; which is tragic, and also why I downright disagree with the idea of privatized retirement accounts based on held and sold equity based on the assumption that growth will always occur. In fact, the architecture of such a system is the driving force in the propagation of cross-generational fiscal inequality, and will inevitably result in a slow inexorable trickle up without an active mechanism in place to ensure that wages grow by the same factor that technology obviate the need to have someone do a job. In a crisis, someone is inevitably left with the empty bag as things spiral.

That said; the economy taking a dive is preferential to the population doing the same. There will always be work to be done as long as we wake up every day; and the trick is figuring out how to adapt to new circumstances to get that done.

For instance, now would be a fantastic time to train additional medical personnel or build additional infrastructure for them. Research efforts into mitigating the pandemic are also highly desirable. Logistics solutions to enable financial compensation and product dispatch from community kitchens restauraunts, etc without necessitating physical congregation are sure bets, and just about anything that isn't dependent on getting a bunch of people all in the same place at the same time is also good.

The economy is perfectly fine if you don't assume there is an implicit guarantee that the same endeavors that were profitable yesterday must remain so always. What we're experiencing is an economic record scratch and pivot.

Perhaps for a while most actual economic transactions will be centered on "because it needed to be done, and the government is subsidizing everything until we can find a way to get private enterprise running freely again." Who cares? Life'll have to keep going. If a Jubilee has to happen to reset things... Oh well. It'll suck; but no one asked for this.

The type of work to have people thrown at it is what has changed, and the acceptable methods of execution have been altered. I doubt we'll see a wholesale collapse of civilization by a long shot. What'll be far more interesting to see is if we'll weather the transition to less globalised work smoothly or not. The predictability of life just took a hit; that's all. Time to show how to change. No?

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by randallsquared on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:17PM (#22873448)
Is ~20 million out of work people in the US alone not realistic? That's already happened, so you might want to become concerned.

Are widespread food shortages in six months realistic? I guess we'll see.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by eropple on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @09:31PM (#22873529)
20m out of work is awful and can be dealt with without causing a public health crisis. Keynes won; we understand how to deal with this.

Food shortages don't appear to be realistic and hinge on assumptions that don't seem to hold water.

Re:L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Elim... by nate_meurer on Wednesday April 15, 2020 @01:32AM (#22874845)
Just a few months into this thing, infections still accelerating, and food supply chains are showing signs of widespread stress and deterioration. Everything from harvest to logistics to stocking shelves is being fretted over by the people in charge of them.

I could be wrong, but I'm going to guess you have no idea what you're talking about on this particular topic.