Déjà vu all over again, I thought, as I contemplated writing about it again. But no, I couldn’t do it. I keep up to date on the data by looking at Worldometer. I’ve just looked now, at 8pm Sunday evening, and Australian deaths are recorded at 16 and the number of critical/serious cases at 23. At the same time, on Sky News, I saw Prime Minister Scott Morrison announcing a tightening of public-gathering restrictions from ten to just two people. Go figure, I thought to myself and couldn’t so didn’t.
Instead I will go to economics and ask where is the money coming from and what are the implications of governments spending so much of it. I note that some commentators have referred to Modern Monetary Theory for guidance (watch for lefties coming out of the woodwork to promote it). Consult my article in the last July/August issue of Quadrant if you want to know about this theory; but, sufficient to say, it sheds more obscuration than it does light.
Governments are giving vast amounts of money to businesses and individuals to try and make up for their loss of revenue and income. Is it a good policy? Yes, it is. Governments have shut economies down and, thus, there is no option. Otherwise, people would starve and businesses across the board would collapse. At the same time, the character of giving matters. Some is sensible; some wasteful.
A formula being used in the US, and maybe elsewhere, seems by far the most sensible. Small and medium sized businesses are being given loans to cover their costs, including their wage costs, which will be forgiven if they keep all their employees on. Support to large businesses is also vital to ensure they do not collapse; and support to individuals thrown out of work. Much less sensible is giving extra money to those already being totally supported by government assistance.
[…]
Before this mess, Canadian consumer debt was north of $1 trillion dollars. Some Canadian banks had to be bailed out in 2008. You won’t learn that from our msm or any banker. I know this because my own bank manager,when asked, said, nope never heard that. Her other replies were more contrite when she had to admit that deposit insirance cannot possibly cover everyone in the case of a crash. It doesn’t really matter. Your money in the bank doesn’t really belong to you. It belongs to the bank until you take it out. Not if but when this system does crash, now sooner rather than later, the new system, as of 2017 (yes trudeau’s liberals) is bail in. The banks have the right to take your deposits to bail themselves out. You guessed it, you will be the last to get back pennies on the dollar. It already happened once before, to a credit union in Alberta. With time on your hands youtube your way through Comer vs the bank of canada. If you don’t already understand reserve banking here is your opportunity to find out. Just remenber, Canada was forced by the BIS to go reserve banking because Trudeau sr. spent us deep into the red.
History doesnt repeat itself but it sure ryhmes as we sit here and trudeau the younger has his thumb on the War Measures Act.