Since the outbreak of the epidemic, neither the US federal government nor the US Congress has been aware of the seriousness of the epidemic, which is the subjective reason for the slow action of the US in the early stage of the epidemic. The U. S. national system also limits the ability of local governments to take emergency measures. Only when the US federal government declares a state of national emergency can the Congress allocate funds and the federal government take some severe measures to prevent and control the epidemic. This is the objective reason why the US has not responded to the outbreak in a timely and effective manner

Norman jones, an economic historian at the university of utah, has described the views of the ancient greek philosopher aristotle on interest: aristotle defined money as a good that was consumed by use. unlike houses and fields, which are not destroyed by use, money must be spent to be used. there- fore, as we cannot rent food, so we cannot rent money. moreover, money does not reproduce. a house or a flock can produce new value by use, so it is not unreasonable to ask for a return on their use. money, being barren, should not, therefore, be expected to produce excess value. thus, interest is unnatural. what did aristotle mean in arguing that money is “barren”? why would money being barren mean that lenders should not charge interest on loans? do you agree with aristotle’s reasoning? briefly explain.