Not so much hindsight as "what I've been saying all along".
It was a dynamic situation and it sounds like the only things that you were optimizing for in your mind was inflation and covid deaths whiles ignoring second order effects and data that likely wasn't available to the public.
You are like a person who kept telling everyone it was 12:00am but it wasn't, then when it finally became 12:00am and everyone agreed you jumped up and said "See guys it's 12:00am why didn't anyone listen to me! I was right all along!".
It's a bit rich to blame all the inflation on the financial response to the pandemic without taking into consideration the effect the pandemic had on logistics or considering what would have happened if the government didn't spend enough. Also it's probably worth mentioning that the Fed operates independently and is tasked with only financial functions.
> The science was out in the open in papers and government statistics for anyone with scientific training to read. Politicians were caving to polarized public opinions on both sides to take advantage of and encourage their chosen pole.
No argument here except to say it's one thing to know the science and it's another thing to act on the science.
> Those of us talking about moderation and common sense reactions were demonize by one side or usually both depending on the venue. Nobody in leadership had the balls to lead and try to make people understand a middle path based on reason.
If there is one thing I know it's that common sense only exists when people share the same values and assumptions. Why for example was it acceptable to you that 1 out of 1000 people died of covid? Why not more? Why not less?
>It's a bit rich to blame all the inflation on the financial response to the pandemic without taking into consideration the effect the pandemic had on logistics or considering what would have happened if the government didn't spend enough. Also it's probably worth mentioning that the Fed operates independently and is tasked with only financial functions.
The treasury spent an extra $2 trillion which the Fed facilitated the creation of and your response is "what about logistics??", hindsight isn't 20/20 for you and sky isn't blue it's a ham sandwich. It is pointless discussing this with people like you, this is why we can't have nice things.
So with your 20/20 vision and your ability to see into the future what was the exact dollar amount at the time that you thought should be enough to stop a total meltdown of the US economy? Using logic and reason how did you come to the exact dollar amount that would emotionally appease investors and business providing them with enough "investor confidence"?
The timescale you are looking at is very small. The federal reserve has a dual mandate to have maximum employment and stable prices. What would have happened on a longer timeframe to employment and prices if every other country effectively backstopped their economy but the USA didn't?
It's like you don't know why the fed even came to exist or have any knowledge about the great depression or just fail to recognize how catastrophic that the pandemic was to the USA economy or the world economy as a whole.
> And with all of this money being injected into the economy, we are absolutely going to get an enormous amount of inflation... eventually. You could see it as already happening with the valuation of the stock market.
To be fair when I read this I assumed you took issue with the actions of both the government and the fed since both were injecting money into the economy. The invocation of Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act also blurred the line between the actions of Government and the fed.
Still I find it odd that you would attribute the inflation solely to the money that was injected into the economy via senate bills but ignore the trillions the fed was injecting into the economy and supply chain disruptions or rising energy costs due to the war in Ukraine.
The biggest number for total global fiscal support I found was $14 trillion, but that was only from before mid-2020.
Most countries created a whole lot of new money and even if yours didn't, unless you're very economically isolated from the rest of the world the inflation hits you just the same.
It was a dynamic situation and it sounds like the only things that you were optimizing for in your mind was inflation and covid deaths whiles ignoring second order effects and data that likely wasn't available to the public.
You are like a person who kept telling everyone it was 12:00am but it wasn't, then when it finally became 12:00am and everyone agreed you jumped up and said "See guys it's 12:00am why didn't anyone listen to me! I was right all along!".
It's a bit rich to blame all the inflation on the financial response to the pandemic without taking into consideration the effect the pandemic had on logistics or considering what would have happened if the government didn't spend enough. Also it's probably worth mentioning that the Fed operates independently and is tasked with only financial functions.
> The science was out in the open in papers and government statistics for anyone with scientific training to read. Politicians were caving to polarized public opinions on both sides to take advantage of and encourage their chosen pole.
No argument here except to say it's one thing to know the science and it's another thing to act on the science.
> Those of us talking about moderation and common sense reactions were demonize by one side or usually both depending on the venue. Nobody in leadership had the balls to lead and try to make people understand a middle path based on reason.
If there is one thing I know it's that common sense only exists when people share the same values and assumptions. Why for example was it acceptable to you that 1 out of 1000 people died of covid? Why not more? Why not less?