Yesterday I had a long discussion with my boys on WhatsApp. Our discussion ranged from who'll be most hard hit by the impending recession, how middle to lower level jobs are not safe, who should be allowed to take a loss, eat the rich and economic balance.

Summary:

The discussion started when @_Nwosu_ sent a video of the CEO of an investment firm talking about the lack of social responsibility from the US govt in terms of protection for lower level jobs and how bailout funds only help already rich billionaires and CEOs.

Chamath Palihapitiya a CEO of an investment firm thinks billionaires should be allowed to take the loss while securing lower level jobs whose security will be comprised due to cost cutting and how bail out funds will be used to shore up stock prices instead of secure employment.

He said. Most of these stocks are owned by millionaires and billionaires and as such, if the stocks are allowed to fail while ensuring that people do not lose their jobs. Then the losses from stock price will affect the upper class who already have enough while ensuring that the

lower class can keep their jobs as they'll be paid with bailout funds these companies get.

@avogroovy briefly distracted us with the talk about how self isolation with other people of the opposite sex will likely result in orgies (which was something we were discussing prior).

He eventually focused and said this.

"The guy kinda have a robin hood approach. Rob the reach to feed the poor. People like him actually developed this ideology from the 2008 global crisis. The people suffered but rich and poor performing CEO’s got richer and got away with it"

*WARNING* I think I'm going to fail at summarizing already. Hopefully it is a fun read and you can get to the end of it even though it'll be long.

We are all suffering from attention deficit these days so I'm not holding my breath on that.

We move...

@_Nwosu_ said that although that is one way of looking at it. The other way is that system is structured to favour the rich while pushing lower level employees to the streets when instead the system should be take into cognisance the plight of the poor too and ensuring they are

not badly hit.

If you have an entry level job. You should be worried, especially if it is not in a big firm. The effects of the pandemic on profit will mean cost saving will becomes a thing and as such, you'll be considered collateral damage.

Which is exactly what we are

hoping doesn't have to be the case. But our own situation is even peculiar such that. The govt is not giving anybody bailouts because due to low oil prices, it can barely fund itself, while the rest will be stolen by awon eyan Spending. So our only hope is socially responsible

business owners and CEOs who will allow their own pay to be affected for the sake of the entry level employees.

Again, not holding my breath on that one.

But at least, if i open a onlyfans account, you can understand why I did it.

Please subscribe in advance

But again, the question becomes. In the natural order of things, there's a food chain. Big fish eat little fish. Why would a big fish allow itself to be eaten for the benefit of the little fish? Big fish might not die but it'll feel a lot of chunks taken out of its body.

Why would it let that happen?

The CEOs and Hedge Fund owners contribute greatly to campaigns of public officials and fund some of the most powerful lobbying groups. Which means they can pull strings to ensure bailout funds work in their own favour instead of little fish.

So why exactly would they use it to pay employees instead of using it to shore up stock prices in which they have the biggest shares. Why would anyone do that?

An instance was made of Diamond Bank when it laid off a lot of employees due to bad loans. Most of these big bad loans were given to friends of EDs, they were not authorized by the branch staff, they were facilitated by EDs but when these loans went bad. Branch staff took

the hit.

So how does the govt in this case respond. We are not talking about the Nigerian govt because we don't have one. We are talking about government of these big countries. Also owing to the fact that most people are voting conservatives now because they feel liberals are

crazy people who do not know when to draw a line. Like in the cases of the US and most recently. The UK. Liberal govts who are more socially responsible do not get to make these decisions. I think someone like Bernie Sanders will consider a bailout structured in such a way that

it mostly covers the benefits of low level employees. A conservative govt would not be that thoughtful. Which brings up the merits of liberalism vs conservatism. I feel like liberals hold the edge in ensuring social responsibility. I doubt Donald Trump will do such.

@ozoemena_nonso Added

"I was tweeting this yesterday. I find it absurd that people pick one ideology and follow through. Both have their merits. For a situation like this...Left leaning...welfarist policies will work ...but they will brand u a socialist if u say so"

"For most of the time...I'm a big fan of the market economy...but at a time when the market fails due to an unforseen externality...the govt must be a mother of some sort"

We moved on to.

Self preservation by the billionaires and how they do it to the point of cannibalism.

Personally i feel, coronavirus might be the trigger for eat the rich movement to become full blown, if the rich do not stop their acts of self preservation to the point of cannibalism.

What would it take to allow yourself lose a few 100 of millions when you own 10 of billions.

@_Nwosu_ expressed his disagreement with the eat the rich rhetoric. He feels they should only be compelled to be more socially responsible.

To which i replied he's talking from a place of privilege. Poor people will band together to protect themselves if the rich do

not take it upon themselves instead of being compelled.

We talked about balance.

Lower class- Middle class- Upper class.

And how what is considered balance evolves over time. How balance gives way to imbalance and how that in turn creates balance.

The animal kingdom does not run out of food because the Lion who is the king of the food chain doesn't feel the need to stockpile more antelopes than he can eat at once.

Humans in our sophistication create our own shortages and instead of the billionaires to fix up, they fund

initiatives that tell you we need birth control because it is because of the population growth we are running out of food.

The Animal Kingdom has no birth control.

Maybe the rich should look deep within themselves and see they are part of why we have a scarcity problem

because they simply choose to acquire more than they need for good living.

Why do you own 20 sports cars and 6 mansions when youou can't drive more than one and live in more than one at the same time.

Why is the government official stealing in billions every month?

What do you need all that money for? It is more than you need to survive and live well.

Maybe we might have to eat the rich indeed. Or maybe the rich will fix up.

For now we have concluded on researching how pandemics have historically forced economic policies.

@William_Ukpe and @InexorableGuy were absent in session and hopefully, they lead the next session on what we should expect from outbreak economically looking at information from the past ones like the influenza and black death.

If you have made it to the end of this thread.

Congratulations you're officially bored.