America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by wnevets on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @06:03PM (#30170894)

And no one was worried about "socialism" when the tax payers gave tons of cash to the rich. Certain people only seem to worry about "socialism" when it helps regular people.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by jdminhbg on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @06:12PM (#30171017)

> no one

This is an article in the Economist decrying it, so I don't think you can claim that no one is worried.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by wnevets on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @06:26PM (#30171197)

>so I don't think you can claim that no one is worried.

No that isn't what I claimed, I claimed no one was worried. Using an article written almost two years after fact as proof against my claim doesn't make a whole a lot of sense.

Now obviously my no one claim is hyperbole but the fact the bill's passing was near-unanimous is my point. Using one of the very few no votes in congress as proof against my claim would make a lot more sense.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by chrisseaton on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @06:46PM (#30171451)

> Now obviously my no one claim is hyperbole

Code for 'nonsense but I said it anyway and now someone's calling it out so I'll claim it was a prank all along'.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by wnevets on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @06:58PM (#30171577)

Your reading comprehension needs some serious improvement.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by codeivore on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @05:07AM (#30175711)

yeah, an article in a publication where the authors are anonymous because the views published in it are painfully true enough to make you real life enemies

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by biorach on Wednesday February 02, 2022 @07:11AM (#30176473)

all of the economist articles are anonymous

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2013/09/04/...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by codeivore on Saturday February 05, 2022 @07:34AM (#30220414)

that's my point

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by biorach on Saturday February 05, 2022 @01:36PM (#30224194)

> the views published in it are painfully true enough to make you real life enemies

That is not why the Economist's articles are anonymous. Please read the article I posted which explains why.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by anm89 on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @09:54PM (#30173066)

I know plenty of people who got fat checks and were quite open about pointing out that it was socialism, and a complete waste of money.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by kkjjkgjjgg on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @06:23PM (#30171149)

The same "no one" that was unable to predict inflation? Come on. Maybe you just listen to the wrong sources.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:America’s Covid job-saving programme gave most of its cas... by geoduck14 on Tuesday February 01, 2022 @08:05PM (#30172158)

Let's not forget that a lot of people were distracted with other things: Trump getting impeached for the second time and a global pandemic are the two that come to mind

[ Parent | on HN ]