Mark Cuban, "spend it or lose it" idea.

[Brian37]

At least Cuban is offering a plan that doesn't include injecting disinfectant.

His idea is to get the money moving within the economy in an immediate and direct way.    

It would have been nice to provide some sort of link.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sethcohen/2...d99ea266b0

My friend most likely thinks Cuban is truly being altruistic, but if that were the case why wasn't he saying what billionaire Nick Hanauer was saying over a decade ago? Getting ahead of a problem is far more effective and cost efficient than waiting for something bad to happen then reacting. 

Nick was being bluntly honest about his wealth, not apologizing for it, but also thinking long term in that worker stability matters. I don't see Mark Cuban thinking like that while saying use it or loose it. While the bandaid is unfortunately needed now, it still doesn't change the long term structural problems that will still exist even after a vaccine is found. 

Point being we cant simply throw bandaids at everything everytime an economic disaster happens. 

For now, but then what? Mark is simply going to go right back to doing what he has always done, and most in his class will, after this virus is gone, and it won't stop the next one.

Humans need to think long term, instead of short term. It isn't good enough, simply to keep repeating short term band aids, even if needed now. 

It still remains that the stock market is widely fluctuating and sometimes even going up despite high unemployment, and illness bankrupting more and more regardless of what the stock market does. The stock market doing well sometimes only means investors are doing well, and most of them are already billionaires and millionaires. And that is unsustainable long term.

---

I wish I could remember the guy's name who was on MSNBCs KasieDC show. 

Long before this virus, this author was warning about "too big to fail" and giant companies constantly merging with other companies. Corporate farms are a prime example right now that this author brought up,  as to why big is not  always better. You have one company with a lopsided monopoly in that industry and it has to shut down, you have to work harder to find other sources. Tyson shutting down it's plant is a prime example. Because it is such a big company, that shutdown made meat harder to get and drives up prices for the meat that does make it to market. And farmers are stuck with excess livestock they now cant feed and have to put down. 

This pandemic is proving the need for anti monopoly laws. Breaking companies that get too big up, insures that if one fails, they don't all fail.