My point is that the governors and mayors always had to weigh the economic damage they were doing to people whenever they made a shutdown decision, which resulted in erratic, complicated, and somewhat nonsensical shutdown orders. If the federal government had backstopped the economy properly and compensated any business or person directly affected by a shutdown, then the governors / mayors would have been able to take more coordinated, effective action. You can't maintain aggressive shutdowns if every day of your shutdown is destroying peoples' bank accounts.

The way the US is structured makes this very difficult. We're not a country of countries like the United Kingdom, but the US is a country of States. Despite our federal solidification over the past century, states still have a lot of autonomy. Passing marijuana laws that contradict Federal law, is probably the most prevalent example of this.

The Federal government tried to create PPP programs, but look at what happened. Multi-million dollar franchises pulled in huge chunks while small restaurants got nothing. It's the 2008 bank bailouts all over again. It's like PS5/nvidia graphics cards scalping for businesses.

The corruption flows through every system, and the blame can be focuses on businesses with the means and people and legal staff to take advantage of the situation at the expense of every possible competitor.

They could have done a tiered fund. A PPP pool for businesses under $<1M, $<10M, etc.

Also Trump removed the independent watchdog for the coronavirus funds.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/07/trump-removes-indep...

Most governors and mayors didn't perform a rigorous cost benefit analysis before making shutdown decisions. Many of the lockdown orders were arbitrary and capricious, full of exemptions for politically favored groups. These were largely faith based policies without proper scientific backing from an evidence-based medicine perspective.

Free money from the federal government wouldn't have improved that situation. If state governors want to shut down businesses then state governments should be issuing relief payments.

When we’re talking about 30% of national GDP and millions of lives, then turning it into a state v state issue doesn’t sound like a recipe for long term stability.

A lot of free money went to governments, my state largely squandered that money, and hoped more would come to actually help people. They used it to avoid any sort of budget cuts for the current and previous years, and even set up a tuition grant that helps our governor look better at achieving campaign promises.

What in your view would've been more effective action? Do you not think enough businesses are closed or enough masks are being worn?

Big city mayors, some of whom then turned around and dined indoors at $400 a plate kind of restaurants.

Don't leave the governors out! They're enjoying the party too!