|
Post by Cornflake on Apr 20, 2020 21:26:26 GMT -5
"I'm tested every day. Either by the Lord or by Gus. Usually Gus. Today he decided he'd try make fudge and left the pan sitting on the burner for over an hour. It boiled over and then burnt to a crisp while he was blowing up tanks on his computer."
I'm feeling a special affinity for Gus right now. My wife could explain why.
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on Apr 21, 2020 6:37:21 GMT -5
I walked a golf course yesterday. Nine holes anyway. No clubs. Just walking. Wanted to see if there's be any restrictions. I drove around to 4 local courses. 3 are Park District owned. They had signs up saying 'Closed by order of the Governor." The privately owned course had no sign. The clubhouse was dark and locked. All the carts are chained together. But no sign. And I walked down the fairway of 9 holes. Lots of people walking the cart paths or riding bikes on the paths on all courses. So there's almost as many people on the grounds as if people were playing golf. See I have my own pull cart in the trunk of my car. And I think I'm sneaking out some time this week. What the heck. Just me by my lonesome. How's that different than people walking in the park. Or john running in the woods. Sue showed me an article in today's Herald paper. Apparently, Wi, & IN allow golf courses to be open. IL has ordered them closed. The courses are protesting. So something may happen. Either way, I expect to go out sometime this week and swing away. I need some activity where I get to aggressively smack a ball around. I'm going crazy just hiking around. I need to swing at something other than my wife. By CHIP SCOGGINS / Star Tribune The weather for a morning tee time Monday at Oak Marsh Golf Course was less than ideal for the occasion. Overcast skies, 44 degrees, gusty wind, pack a parka. Folks in other states call this football weather. Here in Minnesota, it’s golf season, and a little spring chill probably felt like Malibu for those who rushed to book tee times after Gov. Tim Walz opened courses Friday in loosening COVID-19 restrictions. “If it’s 40,” says recent retiree Jake Minnig, “I’m playing.” Minnig loves golf. No, actually, he LOVES golf. He started playing seriously about seven years ago and now he keeps his calendar booked with tee times. Minnig was among those who had phone in hand and began dialing minutes after the governor gave golf courses the green light. His group teed off at Loggers Trail in Stillwater less than 24 hours later. “It was packed,” he says. That scene played out at clubs throughout Minnesota. Oak Marsh general manager/director of golf Steve Whillock noted that his course had its two busiest back-to-back days ever (with single rider carts) over the weekend. Minnig picked Monday to play Oak Marsh. One of his sons was supposed to join him but had to cancel, so he went solo and allowed me to tag along. I’m not a golfer, but the conversation and time spent outdoors were therapeutic. Self-quarantine got to me last week. I felt cooped up and irritable. The inability to socialize with others — in person, even from a distance — is near the top of the reasons why I miss reporting on sports. Zoom as an interview tool is like drinking light beer when you’re craving an IPA. Walking 18 holes with someone I had never met before Monday felt normal again. Heck, I even found myself jotting down notes about certain shots. (Minnig’s approach from 161 yards out on hole No. 4 landed 12 feet from the pin.) Sorry, old habit. Minnig is a card member of Public Country Club, which allows him to play more than 100 courses in Minnesota for a $55 monthly fee. The 65-year-old played 150 rounds last year. He visited a friend in Vegas last month and squeezed in 10 rounds in six days. He practices on simulators in the winter. Minnig prefers to walk, not ride a cart, so he has taken long walks during stay-at-home to prepare. He usually plays with his three grown sons or other family members and friends. Our conversation was delightful. We talked about our careers, our kids, and sports, of course. He grew up near Milwaukee and loves the Packers, especially Brett Favre. Minnig worked in the printing industry before becoming a chauffeur for a limousine company. He picked up P.J. Fleck after he landed as the new Gophers football coach, and his passengers also included professional athletes and celebrities over the years. He carries a 10-handicap and usually hits it straight off the tee, though his putting shows some rust. He flies through the front nine in only 90 minutes. “That was a lot faster than Saturday,” he says. The best part of golf, he says, is being outside. And being with family. He particularly enjoys playing with his boys. “When else would I get 30-year-olds to hang out with me for four hours,” he says. He flubs a few shots and his putter fails him in this round, but he never shows a reaction. Getting angry “takes the fun out of it,” he says. Fun comes in a big way on the par-5 16th, “the hardest hole on the course,” he says. He usually lays up short of a marshy area on his second shot. Too many lost balls trying to hit over it in the past. “I contradicted myself,” he says, standing over his second shot. “I’m going for it.” He crushes it, and his ball lands just off the green. “Those kinds of shots bring you back,” he says. “It’s not so cold after all.” He pauses. “Helps to have a 20-mile-per-hour wind behind you,” he says with a laugh. He’s still feeling good as he reaches his ball. “That’s one I tell my kids and they’re like, ‘Sure, Dad,’ ” he says. He’s got a witness, fellas. Minnig doesn’t keep score. Maybe he will Tuesday when he plays again. He also has golf plans for Wednesday and Thursday. Life feels a little more normal again. For a few hours Monday, it felt the same way for me, too.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Apr 21, 2020 9:03:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by millring on Apr 21, 2020 9:04:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Apr 21, 2020 9:32:47 GMT -5
I still see this and the Stanford study as bad news. I thought it was WAY more prevalent than 3-5% of the population infected.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 21, 2020 9:33:32 GMT -5
No shit. Yet somehow it will be the ignorant rube's fault.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Apr 21, 2020 9:40:28 GMT -5
I still see this and the Stanford study as bad news. I thought it was WAY more prevalent than 3-5% of the population infected. It may be, but this, and the Stanford study are the first I know of that are actually pointing out that it is way more prevalent than originally thought.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 21, 2020 10:01:27 GMT -5
I still see this and the Stanford study as bad news. I thought it was WAY more prevalent than 3-5% of the population infected. It may be, but this, and the Stanford study are the first I know of that are actually pointing out that it is way more prevalent than originally thought. Way more prevelant and WWAAAAYYYY less fucking fatal.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Apr 21, 2020 10:46:13 GMT -5
I'd be genuinely interested in people's opinions on one question.
What I think I see is that we're in for a prolonged depression no matter how the reopening issues are resolved. Unless the country falls apart completely, the pain of the depression will not fall equally on everyone. It's going to all disproportionately on people who were living on modest earnings and now face the prospect of no earnings at all.
What if anything should we do about that? The $1200 checks were a blunt tool. A lot of them went to people who didn't really need them. People need help will probably need a lot more than $1200.
Since we all know each other's general outlook, it's probably no surprise that I think we need to create a better safety net, targeting those who are hardest hit by a mess no one created. But that's welfare-statish and I know some people here have philosophical objections to that. What I'm wondering is whether people think that these unique circumstances may warrant a temporary, targeted safety net for the hardest hit, even if you'd have problems with that as a way of life.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 21, 2020 10:52:55 GMT -5
I'd be genuinely interested in people's opinions on one question. I think you're making a big assumption there: That there will be any money available to pay for any of that. Or more particularly, that the money we are able to invent out of thin air will actually be exchangeable for goods and services.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Apr 21, 2020 11:01:22 GMT -5
A safety net is like insurance; it needs healthy people producing enough to share with the stricken. Right now there's NOTHING happening. That is not sustainable for any length of time. Somebody's got to produce something for there to be anything to share.
Of course, if the situation is temporary, one can conceive of a system where the society (government) borrows funny money against future productivity to provide for the needs of the worst stricken. That's what is mostly being discussed. But it's risky business. There has to be a plan to start producing stuff soon again, or the house of cards will collapse.
I don't know when that is. But it worries me a lot.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Apr 21, 2020 11:01:54 GMT -5
I'd be genuinely interested in people's opinions on one question. I think you're making a big assumption there: That there will be any money available to pay for any of that. Or more particularly, that the money we are able to invent out of thin air will actually be exchangeable for goods and services. Yeah, I expect inflation numbers above even the Carter years. OTOH if it's global it really just moves the X axis for poverty from $12,000 to $120,000 which will bankrupt most people but at least the SS cost of living adjustment should go up.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 21, 2020 11:29:33 GMT -5
I think this idea of a "government safety net" has run it's course. If you think you're good because you're retired or you're otherwise getting checks for no work. I think you're in for a rude fucking awakening. This is the crushing moment when skyrocketing government spends runs out of fuel to keep it propped up.
Sure, let's set up yet another safety net. Why not? But don't be so goddamn cavalier about requiring everyone to hide under their beds. Easy for you to say because this shit isn't coming for you.
Yet anyways.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 21, 2020 11:29:40 GMT -5
A safety net is like insurance; it needs healthy people producing enough to share with the stricken. Right now there's NOTHING happening. That is not sustainable for any length of time. Somebody's got to produce something for there to be anything to share. Of course, if the situation is temporary, one can conceive of a system where the society (government) borrows funny money against future productivity to provide for the needs of the worst stricken. That's what is mostly being discussed. But it's risky business. There has to be a plan to start producing stuff soon again, or the house of cards will collapse. I don't know when that is. But it worries me a lot. As well it should. What happened yesterday in the oil futures market might seem obscure, but it was a harbinger of things that are coming. And it's as ugly as it gets. My initial response to Don was actually kind of misleading. This isn't about money, per se. Because of the fortunate(?) position of the US dollar and the insanity of MMT, we have the capacity to create infinite numbers of dollars. That's not the limiting factor. Marshall got closer to the mark. What are all those dollars supposed to buy? Who is going to make all the stuff? Hyperinflation isn't about some esoteric failure of monetary policy as much as it is about there just not being anything to buy because not enough people are actually doing productive work. I've talked before about the emerging concept of the "anthropocene". One way of looking at that is to say "The economy is the environment". Another way of saying that is that the inherent capacity of the Earth to sustain life has been exceeded, and the only way we manage to keep 8 billion or so people alive is the complex interactions between the natural world, technology and economic activity. We've taken a deliberate action to break the economy, without any idea of the consequences or how long it will take to get it back. It's not out of the question to say we've already written the death sentences of 25% of the world's population.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Apr 21, 2020 11:31:40 GMT -5
Jeff, Bruce, good point and I didn't mean to be assuming that away. I'm concerned about inflation but destructive inflation may or may not happen. If there's runaway inflation, I'll be out gathering edible plants and hunting for small animals.
I'm sure that tax revenues will drop a lot. How much, we don't know. But a lot of people are still working, at least for the time being. There will be some revenues. I'm not sure that many of our expenditures have a higher priority than keeping people fed and sheltered. But I'm not trying to convince anyone. I was just trying to get a sense for what people were thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Apr 21, 2020 11:43:20 GMT -5
We faced something similar in the Great Depression, and while this is a different order of disaster--less a matter of the financial realm than of the physical environment--mitigation is going to require something like the New Deal. Unless, of course, we resort to the classic answer, warfare.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 21, 2020 11:55:53 GMT -5
BTW, Bruce, if all we get is 1970's era inflation, count your self lucky.
Don, respectfully, I think if you saw what I saw every day, you would have a much different view of the economy. Supply chains for virtually everything, logistics, transportation...all of it hanging by a thread. Some of those threads are already breaking. More will break soon. As I said the other day, the last month or so was the easy one. Things are going to get a lot worse from here.
I don't think people appreciate how impossibly interconnected everything is.
Here's a simple example. One of my plants has switched over to making face masks. Take sheets of PET (polyethylene terephthalate), die cut into the correct shape, attach an injection molded headband and a big rubber band: Instant face mask. Nice, right.
Except it is getting increasingly difficult to find raw PET sheets because there aren't any to buy. Last week the Governor's staff (not Nebraska, FWIW, but discretion will keep me from identifying which one) was talking about commandeering more material to feed into that process. Which might buy a few weeks, if it happens. But soon all the pre-extruded material will be gone. What then? Just order the plant to extrude some more? Why would they, if you just commandeered the last of their inventory? And what are they going to make it with? Where's the raw material going to come from? How's it going to get to the plant?
I could go on and on, but the point is you can't just "order" things to happen. Won't work. Can't work. Has never worked.
Things the average consumer doesn't see, and has largely learned to take for granted, are breaking down in real time. Yesterday's collapse of May oil futures was just the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Apr 21, 2020 12:05:15 GMT -5
Since we all know each other's general outlook, it's probably no surprise that I think we need to create a better safety net, targeting those who are hardest hit by a mess no one created. But that's welfare-statish and I know some people here have philosophical objections to that. What I'm wondering is whether people think that these unique circumstances may warrant a temporary, targeted safety net for the hardest hit, even if you'd have problems with that as a way of life. Better safety net? What am I missing? I'm starting this discussion from the standpoint we are already 'welfare statish' to like the third power. I must know 5-10 people directly in my work or social circle who are hustling side jobs under the table, and telling the government they are broke and getting free food, healthcare, and rent subsidies. Yeah I like my life better than doing that but I think you'd be stunned if you really knew how many lower middle class types that really don't have to be are on the tit and how many ways there are to game the system. Doesn't mean no one deserves help but I'm serious - there are too many people on the dole IMO and we are talking about rural Montana where rents and cost of living are fairly cheap. So when you say "we need more social support" my first reaction is how much more do we really need and with whose and what money since we are just printing magic money at this point. I say this as a purely intellectual exercise but the answer to your question is/was we should have let Covid Covid and if the medical centers couldn't handle it then let 'em die in the parking lot or at home or kill 'em with morphine in the lobby if they are suffering. Brutal triage. For those that survived the grief would pass and those remaining would have a better life and future. Since we now know that ain't happening I think there are 4 classes of people out there: 1) Not financially affected 2) were working and are currently and suddenly unemployed 3) weren't working, don't want to work, are gaming the system, and 4) legitimately can't work for whatever reason and have a real need. So I guess the answer is don't give any money to 1. For #2 up the weekly unemployment check to a barely livable but livable average wage. For #3 identify them and throw them in the wood chipper and take their money and use it to fund #2 and #4. If you can't bear the thought of #3 left to sink or swim see the intellectual exercise above. At this point my main hope is the coming collapse happens after I'm dead be it Covid or otherwise. There is some grim shit coming my friends.
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Apr 21, 2020 12:14:52 GMT -5
Oh and FWIW I feel better now. Thank you!
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 21, 2020 12:23:09 GMT -5
Oh and FWIW I feel better now. Thank you! I don't. We just keep throwing everybody into the wood chipper because loud mouths with no skin in the game (or at least, they think they have no skin in the game) keep telling everyone to stay home and hide under the bed like they do. Fuckers.
|
|