Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At It

[alfablue]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Maybe I'm missing the point you are making, and if so my apologies, but if your employer has work for you, you are not going to be sitting home collecting unemployment. If your employer is open for business and you choose to stay away from work on the possibility you might contract or be exposed to coronavirus you are not going to be eligible for unemployment. Unemployment is for those who have an employer who let lays them off. I suppose if your employer laid off half the workforce, the other half still working could theoretically be making less money, but that generally would only happen for people who were fairly low paid or for people in the handful of states with what are relatively generous benefits.

Like with most of our social safety net, we give faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more money in corporate welfare than we ever give to people who work for a paycheck.

The point is that for a very small amount of people, and for a very brief time, they are getting more money staying home than working. So if a company wants them back before time is ready- they need to pay them more than what they are getting staying home. It is a very tiny population, no question. And it's not great to live on that- but some people's jobs are so bad, well....

And it's infuriating that people focus on the welfare to get people just survive vs corporations that really don't need it. Drives me crazy. For many reasons- but the worst of the worst is the direct impact on the economy- the poor spends every dollar they get, businesses don't. And in an economy where spending money is the most important thing- giving money to poor people is the best investment in the economy.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Doctor who delayed retirement to fight pandemic at low-income hospital dies of COVID-19 <a href="https://t.co/Y9p1pMty0E">https://t.co/Y9p1pMty0E</a> <a href="https://t.co/CEGwzFyZFN">pic.twitter.com/CEGwzFyZFN</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1262631610756870144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

There's a true hero. I wonder how many lives he saved- I'm sure it's a lot. The world thanks you. Real thoughts and prayers to his family.

 

[geezer]

The point is that for a very small amount of people, and for a very brief time, they are getting more money staying home than working. So if a company wants them back before time is ready- they need to pay them more than what they are getting staying home. It is a very tiny population, no question. And it's not great to live on that- but some people's jobs are so bad, well.....

Well... let’s not be too Trumpian with the rhetoric. It’s 600/week in addition to 70% of your normal wage. There are more than a tiny number of us poor idiots with jobs that are “so bad” they pay less than $104 k/yr

 

[alfablue]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Well... let’s not be too Trumpian with the rhetoric. It’s 600/week in addition to 70% of your normal wage. There are more than a tiny number of us poor idiots with jobs that are “so bad” they pay less than $104 k/yr

Ok- I actually have not looked into the actual numbers. But I still don't see a problem that companies need more incentive to get people to work given the risks of going to work. Maybe it's me seeing what my company is doing getting back to work (as of yesterday), wondering why everyone else should not do the same. Especially when you see the progress Michigan has taken, and how close it appears for the state.

Still much of the payments is to keep the economy flowing in spite of less people working- which it partially has seeing how on line orders has spiked. Yes, the economy sucks, and is down a lot. But it's better than it could have been. All we need to do now is pay for it- so Biden's first thing is to overturn both the dumy and Bush tax cuts- that should help pay for it a lot.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Wanna guess the types losing their s**t about these fees on FB?

Check your bills: Some businesses are adding a COVID-19 surcharge

I demand that you reopen now!!
You wanna charge me what?

And this woman is a gem!

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I am heartened to see that, after a year of thinking about it, <a href="https://twitter.com/jpmorgan?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jpmorgan</a> CEO Jamie Dimon agrees that workers at his company shouldn’t go hungry while he makes $31 million a year. <a href="https://t.co/qqImzXBD6s">https://t.co/qqImzXBD6s</a></p>— Rep. Katie Porter (@RepKatiePorter) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepKatiePorter/status/1262749240544989185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Wanna guess the types losing their s**t about these fees on FB?

Check your bills: Some businesses are adding a COVID-19 surcharge

I demand that you reopen now!!
You wanna charge me what?

The same people that whine because restaurants put a surcharge so their workers could actually make a living wage?

I bet half of Edina is up in arms about it right now.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Another reason to go out less.

Half of Edina is probably still mad about minimum wages being raised

 

[French Rage]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Wanna guess the types losing their s**t about these fees on FB?

Check your bills: Some businesses are adding a COVID-19 surcharge

I demand that you reopen now!!
You wanna charge me what?

Let the COVIDs pay the COVID tax! I pay the Homer tax!

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

I think my favorite surcharge was at the old Riviera casino in Las Vegas, now long since demolished. One of the last times we checked in, we looked at the bill and saw a daily charge of $1.15 for "electricity." My buddy asked them if they would waive it if we promised not to turn on the lights.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Covid has cancelled a cruise with garrison keilor.
I’m sure there’s a few good jokes here

http://www.citypages.com/arts/seeki...se-guests-get-uncertainty-limericks/570561001

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Annie Glenn, wife of pioneering NASA astronaut John Glenn, passed away at a St. Paul-area senior living complex of complications from COVID-19. She was 100 years old. <a href="https://t.co/dmcd0pSya8">https://t.co/dmcd0pSya8</a> <a href="https://t.co/45M31tGgoB">pic.twitter.com/45M31tGgoB</a></p>— KARE 11 (@kare11) <a href="https://twitter.com/kare11/status/1262772609508421635?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[burd]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

I think my favorite surcharge was at the old Riviera casino in Las Vegas, now long since demolished. One of the last times we checked in, we looked at the bill and saw a daily charge of $1.15 for "electricity." My buddy asked them if they would waive it if we promised not to turn on the lights.

Aren't those things usually battery operated?

 

[Scarlet]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

A good friend of mine has an annual Memorial Day Weekend cookout at her house. About two weeks ago she posted that, sadly, it was cancelled. MA Governor Baker hadn't released his phased re-opening plan, she also had concerns about finding enough food since supermarkets are limiting the amount of meat, etc. that you can purchase. A smart idea all around.

Today she posts that she was hoping to actually have it but the phased re-opening plan forbids gatherings of more than 10 people and she said she would hate for her guests to be arrested. I almost replied that I was glad she was canceling because I was hoping she would hate for her guests to come down with a debilitating disease as well. Why does nobody think of it that way? Sheesh.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

And it's infuriating that people focus on the welfare to get people just survive vs corporations that really don't need it. Drives me crazy. For many reasons- but the worst of the worst is the direct impact on the economy- the poor spends every dollar they get, businesses don't. And in an economy where spending money is the most important thing- giving money to poor people is the best investment in the economy.

Social safety net programs like SNAP and unemployment insurance create more wealth than they cost for the exact reason you point out. People receiving these benefits spend them as soon as they get them, and they spend them in the communities where they live. Corporate giveaways, meh, not so much. The states where the unemployment benefit is more generous get it right. Yes, you don't want to routinely give a laid off worker 110% of their previous income, and you do want them to go back to work as soon as they can replace 90% or so of their income, but those benefits are cost-effective. And you know what? Even if they were less cost effective, I'd still say continue or them or even make them more generous. Our society owes it to people who work for a living to take care of each other when we face extreme hardship through no fault of our own. If we had an income tax system that was truly fair we could do all of that, and there would still be people like Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates who are worth more than God.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Doctor who delayed retirement to fight pandemic at low-income hospital dies of COVID-19 <a href="https://t.co/Y9p1pMty0E">https://t.co/Y9p1pMty0E</a> <a href="https://t.co/CEGwzFyZFN">pic.twitter.com/CEGwzFyZFN</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1262631610756870144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

If we honored people like this gentleman at the first media timeout of the second period in our hockey rinks, I might renew my season tickets. This man deserves a hero's funeral and someone from his family are the kind of people presidents should be inviting to State Of The Union speeches.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

the kind of people presidents should be inviting to State Of The Union speeches.

That's reserved for people caught coming back from the Dominican Republic with suitcase full of Viagra prescribed to someone else.

 

[geezer]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

Social safety net programs like SNAP and unemployment insurance create more wealth than they cost for the exact reason you point out. People receiving these benefits spend them as soon as they get them, and they spend them in the communities where they live. Corporate giveaways, meh, not so much. The states where the unemployment benefit is more generous get it right. Yes, you don't want to routinely give a laid off worker 110% of their previous income, and you do want them to go back to work as soon as they can replace 90% or so of their income, but those benefits are cost-effective. And you know what? Even if they were less cost effective, I'd still say continue or them or even make them more generous. Our society owes it to people who work for a living to take care of each other when we face extreme hardship through no fault of our own. If we had an income tax system that was truly fair we could do all of that, and there would still be people like Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates who are worth more than God.

Again, the problem with this is that those nurse's aides, grocery workers and truck drivers who actually are keeping us alive are getting shafted by their colleagues who are claiming benefits (background checks have been waived, so nobody is checking this year to see if you could work or not). Why not send the benefit to everyone rather than helping only the shirkers? The people going out to work essential jobs are spending more $ anyway by getting up off the couch and driving, eating fast food, and whatnot, but they're being penalized for it. Literally dozens of my daughter's grocer colleagues have quit over the last few months and brag to her that they're earning a lot more now that they are doing the critical work of sitting on the couch watching soaps and eating bon bons. And she's double-shifting to cover for them.

A new analysis by Peter Ganong, Pascal Noel and Joseph Vavra, economists at the University of Chicago,1 uses government data from 2019 to estimate that 68 percent of unemployed workers who can receive benefits are eligible for payments that are greater than their lost earnings. They also found that the estimated median replacement rate — the share of a worker’s original weekly salary that is being replaced by unemployment benefits — is 134 percent, or more than one-third above their original wage.

edit: sorry u/WeAreNDHockey, it looks like you were being perfectly reasonable but for some reason I quoted your thoughts as a question to be answered by my rant. Not sure why.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

The point is that for a very small amount of people, and for a very brief time, they are getting more money staying home than working. So if a company wants them back before time is ready- they need to pay them more than what they are getting staying home.

I'm very fortunate not to know how any of this works, but I thought it worked like this:

1. I'm working for $X
2. Covid hits, I get laid off, CARES/PPP act means I end up getting, say $1.1X while I'm on unemployment
3. Company re-opens and says, "ok, time to come back and work for $X"

At that point, aren't my options:

A. Go back to work for $X
B. Refuse to go back to work and sit at home for $0

There's no option for continuing to sit at home and keep collecting the $1.1X. Is there?

Companies shouldn't have to compete with the 1.1X - they're competing with $0, so there should be no reason they'd have to offer more than the original $X. If their employees can't do that math, then they can probably hire other people who *can* do math for $X.

 

[geezer]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

I'm very fortunate not to know how any of this works, but I thought it worked like this:

1. I'm working for $X
2. Covid hits, I get laid off, CARES/PPP act means I end up getting, say $1.1X while I'm on unemployment
3. Company re-opens and says, "ok, time to come back and work for $X"

At that point, aren't my options:

A. Go back to work for $X
B. Refuse to go back to work and sit at home for $0

There's no option for continuing to sit at home and keep collecting the $1.1X. Is there?

Companies shouldn't have to compete with the 1.1X - they're competing with $0, so there should be no reason they'd have to offer more than the original $X. If their employees can't do that math, then they can probably hire other people who *can* do math for $X.

Legally and morally speaking, you are correct. In 2020, no. There are no certifications or audits on claims.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Covfefe-19 The 10th Part: Might As Well Reject No Shirt, No Shoes While You're At

.

edit: sorry u/WeAreNDHockey, it looks like you were being perfectly reasonable but for some reason I quoted your thoughts as a question to be answered by my rant. Not sure why.

If I was being perfectly reasonable about something, that's probably what led to confusion! I'm rarely reasonable and never perfect!