New stimulus proposal

[Grove Sh*tter]

So, the gop bill is proposing reducing the extra unemployment benefit from $600 /week to between$100-200. Additionally, they are a proposing a $450 back to work incentive PER WEEK.

This seems crazy to me. They've been paying people more than their wages to stay at he, and now they want to pay those people another $9000 over the next 20 weeks to go back to work.

It feels like a middle finger to people who have been working all along. I can even understand one time bonus to go back to work, but a huge weekly bump? What's preventing me from firing my employees and hiring them all back to get them the extra money?

 

[Cooterpoot]

Just waiting on my check

 

[ronpolk]

They can’t stop it now. All that extra money flowing has been good for the economy. They created a real problem by paying people more than they actually made while working.

 

[Grove Sh*tter]

I think the idea that it's been good for the economy may be true to an extent, but they are flooding the economy with money and meanwhile there is no production because people are not working. That can only point to inevitable inflation, unless I'm wrong (probably not wrong).

 

[Hugh's Burner Phone]

So, the gop bill is proposing reducing the extra unemployment benefit from $600 /week to between$100-200. Additionally, they are a proposing a $450 back to work incentive PER WEEK.

This seems crazy to me. They've been paying people more than their wages to stay at he, and now they want to pay those people another $9000 over the next 20 weeks to go back to work.

It feels like a middle finger to people who have been working all along. I can even understand one time bonus to go back to work, but a huge weekly bump? What's preventing me from firing my employees and hiring them all back to get them the extra money?

Yeah, giving people $450 a week to go back to work when I've never missed a day.

 

[dalmuti]

they aint got the votes, paaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwl

 

[TNT.sixpack]

I think it’s technically unemployment benefits up to 70% of what you earned before you were laid off. I get it. They need to keep some money flowing but they need to stop overpaying people who weren’t making **** before they got laid off. Granted some will take the 70% and be happy with it to keep from returning tk work. Which is why I think it makes sense to pay them something as an incentive to get back to work. It’s not for them. It’s for the business owners who can’t operate without them because those same business owners have been competing against the federal government for labor during Covid and they’ve been losing. If I own a restaurant, I need these people at work.

 

[DoggieDaddy13]

If you own a restaurant, they chances of your business surviving until January are pretty damn slim regardless.

 

[ronpolk]

I think the idea that it's been good for the economy may be true to an extent, but they are flooding the economy with money and meanwhile there is no production because people are not working. That can only point to inevitable inflation, unless I'm wrong (probably not wrong).

I agree with you 100%. Although we can certainly keep printing money and giving to people, eventually inflation is going to catch up. I’m not well versed enough in economics to tell you when that is though.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

Y’all better go eat at some of the Starkville Restaurants while you can.... most wont be around much longer....

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

They can’t stop it now. All that extra money flowing has been good for the economy. They created a real problem by paying people more than they actually made while working.

Not really. It's not like the unemployment rate is rock bottom. It's sky high.

 

[olblue.sixpack]

Y’all better go eat at some of the Starkville Restaurants while you can.... most wont be around much longer....

Thanks for weighing in, sunshine.

 

[ronpolk]

Not really. It's not like the unemployment rate is rock bottom. It's sky high.

Not really what? I’m not sure the point your making here.

Unemployment is near Great Depression levels yet retail spending is up year over year. Also, personal savings are up. So how do those 2 things happen with such high unemployment if the extra benefits aren’t propping things up?

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

Not really what? I’m not sure the point your making here.

Unemployment is near Great Depression levels yet retail spending is up year over year. Also, personal savings are up. So how do those 2 things happen with such high unemployment if the extra benefits aren’t propping things up?

Not really creating a problem by paying people more to not work. That would be creating a problem if unemployment were low, as jobs would go unfilled. But with unemployment sky high, jobs are filled regardless of if some workers on the margins are staying home. Meanwhile, what of the workers that want to work but can't find a job during sky high unemployment? They now can't afford rent etc. The drop in demand hurts business, costing jobs, etc.by

Agree that the payments are propping up spending.

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

The extra money is most definitely propping things up. Kroger and Walmart are blowing and going!

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

Not really. It's not like the unemployment rate is rock bottom. It's sky high.

Yet many companies are offering cash sign on bonuses.

 

[ronpolk]

Not really creating a problem by paying people more to not work. That would be creating a problem if unemployment were low, as jobs would go unfilled. But with unemployment sky high, jobs are filled regardless of if some workers on the margins are staying home. Meanwhile, what of the workers that want to work but can't find a job during sky high unemployment? They now can't afford rent etc. The drop in demand hurts business, costing jobs, etc.by

Agree that the payments are propping up spending.

What you can’t measure though is what percentage of people are not working because they are making more. And it’s a real number. I know of companies that have had a hard time bringing people back or hiring new people because they can’t pay what unemployment is paying, which in MS is equivalent to about $43k per year (including federal unemployment). There is no requirement for people to show progress of trying to find a job either.

I’m all for the safety net but it needs to be just that. There needs to be a monetary benefit to earning a wage and for a lot right now there is not.

 

[JungRebel]

I'm a bit turned off by the idea that people who once made less than me just made more sitting at home and will now make more to go back to lesser paying jobs, but I think about it like this: I have remained employed at a good job, gotten to work with people I like, never missed a moment of life insurance or health insurance coverage, never even missed a 401k match, and when this is all over I will still have that job. On top of that I'm going to make out with $4800 of stimulus check cash, which will translate into part of a new roof and (finally) substantial savings that arent tied to my retirement. It sucks not to be profiting as much as other people who weren't as well employed as me before this, but I wouldn't trade my position for theirs after this over for what they made out with. We have yet to see the final toll on how many businesses will not be reopening from this crisis. There are going to be a lot of people looking for work for a very long time, in a very competitive market for labor who I dont envy.

 

[msstate7]

I'm a bit turned off by the idea that people who once made less than me just made more sitting at home and will now make more to go back to lesser paying jobs, but I think about it like this: I have remained employed at a good job, gotten to work with people I like, never missed a moment of life insurance or health insurance coverage, never even missed a 401k match, and when this is all over I will still have that job. On top of that I'm going to make out with $4800 of stimulus check cash, which will translate into part of a new roof and (finally) substantial savings that arent tied to my retirement. It sucks not to be profiting as much as other people who weren't as well employed as me before this, but I wouldn't trade my position for theirs after this over for what they made out with. We have yet to see the final toll on how many businesses will not be reopening from this crisis. There are going to be a lot of people looking for work for a very long time, in a very competitive market for labor who I dont envy.

That's a really nice perspective.

 

[Digging dog]

Booking another condo on the beach when it hits. Might just buy some rims for the minivan.

 

[fishwater99]

Hope y’all enjoy the money. Some of us will be paying for y’all for years. Have not received any stimulus funds and don’t expect to with this one either.

 

[Cooterpoot]

I'm gonna need a bigger gun vault.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

Hope y’all enjoy the money. Some of us will be paying for y’all for years. Have not received any stimulus funds and don’t expect to with this one either.

I’m in the same boat you are....

 

[JungRebel]

Provided you still have your job, which I very much hope you do, and will continue to have it, sounds like I would trade mine for yours. And yes I'm proud of my job and worked hard for it, as im sure you have. You probably had enough to buy the dip when huge stocks were on sale for almost half price. You'll probably get another chance (or chances) to do that soon.

ETA: my wife is an independent contractor for her second job. We pay plenty of taxes.

ETAA: not trying to take a **** on you for being outside of the stimulus bracket. I hope you continue to do well for yourself and Covid hasn't adversely affected your business. I hope to be in that income bracket as well one day.

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

I’m in the same boat you are....

Funny how the ones that pay for the party don't get to drink. We are witnessing the most inflationary event of our lifetimes. The Fed's job is to take away the punch bowl when the party gets going.

By failing to do so in recent years, we now have to witness the government declare a handful of us the designated driver while raiding our liquor cabinet and pouring that 18 year old Scotch into punch. The saddest news is everyone at the party will be paying scotch prices for cheap vodka to pour in the punch within a few years.

I'm working on my magnum opus on interest rates, taxes, inflation, and what's to come. I will post it tomorrow.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

What you can’t measure though is what percentage of people are not working because they are making more. And it’s a real number. I know of companies that have had a hard time bringing people back or hiring new people because they can’t pay what unemployment is paying, which in MS is equivalent to about $43k per year (including federal unemployment). There is no requirement for people to show progress of trying to find a job either.

I’m all for the safety net but it needs to be just that. There needs to be a monetary benefit to earning a wage and for a lot right now there is not.

Yeah but you also can't measure what percent of those were underpaid to begin with, how much of the extra payments are offset by financial costs, etc. I'm sure the least desirable MW jobs may be having a little difficulty finding decent MW labor. But much of that is just an expression of a long running problem, and offset by other factors, so pretty marginal overall. And it pales to the problem of the laid off that can't find a job. It's just not what we should be focusing on.

 

[ronpolk]

Yeah but you also can't measure what percent of those were underpaid to begin with, how much of the extra payments are offset by financial costs, etc. I'm sure the least desirable MW jobs may be having a little difficulty finding decent MW labor. But much of that is just an expression of a long running problem, and offset by other factors, so pretty marginal overall. And it pales to the problem of the laid off that can't find a job. It's just not what we should be focusing on.

I just don’t think it’s the place of the government to compete with the private sector on wages. If someone was underpaid prior to unemployment benefits, that is something they need to work on with their employer. Maybe that is something good that will come of this is that private sector will increase wages for bottom earners.

However, my view of unemployment benefits is a safety net or insurance. If I wreck my $20k car, the insurance is not going to pay for me to have a $30k car. These unemployment benefits should be there to help someone through a hard time, especially one like this which was something that was completely out of workers hands. It’s just my opinion that it shouldn’t pay more than their previous wage.

 

[Seinfeld]

With the end of the extra $600 check last week, I think we’re about to be able measure it. I’ll take my lumps if I’m wrong, but after listening to my mother in law wail for 20 minutes last weekend about all the people that are still badly hurting, I told her we’re about to see one of the fastest drops in unemployment in the history of the U.S. during the next 3-5 weeks.

 

[M R DAWGS]

I’m in the same boat you are....

Same here, the government just takes from me.

 

[M R DAWGS]

“Money for nothing and your checks for free”

Signed Washington DC

 

[dawgstudent]

Hope y’all enjoy the money. Some of us will be paying for y’all for years. Have not received any stimulus funds and don’t expect to with this one either.

Fish "Money Bags" Water99

 

[GloryDawg]

Given the choice of sitting at home and getting unemployment from the STate plus 200.00 from the feds knowing it is going to run out after a certain period of time or going back to work making my usual pay plus for a certain period of time an additional 450.00 per week. I am going back to work. It is a good way to ease someone off that extra 600,00 per week and get them back to work. I never thought you should make more on unemployment than you make working. I can see being made even. Hell in the 80's Regan just took unemployment away and forced people to go back to work.

 

[Seinfeld]

Don’t disagree with anything you just said, but I also think you underestimate just how badly some people don’t want to work

 

[rynodawg]

Curious how the ‘back to work’ incentive is supposed to be implemented. Presumably through the state unemployment offices, but they could barely implement a flat $600 weekly. They aren’t set up to make payments to individuals who don’t qualify for state benefits. Will everyone who ever qualified for the COVID relief suddenly be eligible for an extra $450 per week, regardless of when they returned full time? The last stimulus round proved that if the unemployment payments are too complicated, the fifty individual state unemployment systems won’t be able to administer it.

 

[fishwater99]

I just don’t think it’s the place of the government to compete with the private sector on wages. If someone was underpaid prior to unemployment benefits, that is something they need to work on with their employer. Maybe that is something good that will come of this is that private sector will increase wages for bottom earners.

However, my view of unemployment benefits is a safety net or insurance. If I wreck my $20k car, the insurance is not going to pay for me to have a $30k car. These unemployment benefits should be there to help someone through a hard time, especially one like this which was something that was completely out of workers hands. It’s just my opinion that it shouldn’t pay more than their previous wage.

If the Republicans give in this time, they are done. Pelosi and the Democrats want everyone on the government tit, it's just a start towards socialism.
70% of normal wages sounds good, but you have to cap that at a certain dollar amount. If I was making $250,000, do I get 70% of that amount on unemployment now?
There are jobs out there, but if you are making more on unemployment than when you were employed, why go back to work? There is no incentive to do so.

 

[GloryDawg]

Don’t disagree with anything you just said, but I also think you underestimate just how badly some people don’t want to work

I graduated from State in 1992. I have never been unemployed or missed a paycheck since. I have been very blessed. In fact I just got a promotion. I am really in no position to estimate anything when it comes to other people. I can imagine based on my own feelings that I do not want handouts. I want to work and make it on my own. I assume that most others are like that. I was really just explaining I am ok with the planned and why.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

I just don’t think it’s the place of the government to compete with the private sector on wages. If someone was underpaid prior to unemployment benefits, that is something they need to work on with their employer. Maybe that is something good that will come of this is that private sector will increase wages for bottom earners.

However, my view of unemployment benefits is a safety net or insurance. If I wreck my $20k car, the insurance is not going to pay for me to have a $30k car. These unemployment benefits should be there to help someone through a hard time, especially one like this which was something that was completely out of workers hands. It’s just my opinion that it shouldn’t pay more than their previous wage.

Your first paragraph is a long running problem of leverage. We've spent decades removing any leverage workers have, while granting as much leverage as we can to multinational corporations. The result has predictably been decreased pay.

Your example is a good start. But expand it this way. Say the insurer has 100 claims to pay. They know the average claim is $20k, but they do not know the true value of your claim. The claims run from $15k to $25k. Would you be ok with them sending you a check for $15k? I doubt it. But that's what you want Congress to do. They difference is that no one is "owed" unemployment. It's charity. But Congress has no way of getting the right amount of money to each claimant. The system is a typical bureaucratic cluster17. That's why the $600 amount started to begin with, to ensure they provided almost all with 100% income replacement, even if some were getting over 100%. Not because they are owed it, but because of the repercussions if they dont.

 

[fishwater99]

Your first paragraph is a long running problem of leverage. We've spent decades removing any leverage workers have, while granting as much leverage as we can to multinational corporations. The result has predictably been decreased pay.

Your example is a good start. But expand it this way. Say the insurer has 100 claims to pay. They know the average claim is $20k, but they do not know the true value of your claim. The claims run from $15k to $25k. Would you be ok with them sending you a check for $15k? I doubt it. But that's what you want Congress to do. They difference is that no one is "owed" unemployment. It's charity. But Congress has no way of getting the right amount of money to each claimant. The system is a typical bureaucratic cluster17. That's why the $600 amount started to begin with, to ensure they provided almost all with 100% income replacement, even if some were getting over 100%. Not because they are owed it, but because of the repercussions if they dont.

Over 60% on unemployment are receiving more than they made working. That's a problem.

 

[Go Budaw]

What you can’t measure though is what percentage of people are not working because they are making more. And it’s a real number. I know of companies that have had a hard time bringing people back or hiring new people because they can’t pay what unemployment is paying, which in MS is equivalent to about $43k per year (including federal unemployment) . There is no requirement for people to show progress of trying to find a job either.

I’m all for the safety net but it needs to be just that. There needs to be a monetary benefit to earning a wage and for a lot right now there is not.

An important caveat to that $43k per year is that it simply cash. Those folks are still having to pay for their own health insurance, 401k, get no 401k match, pension, etc. When you include all those costs, the adjusted salary they would be making if that figure was the total compensation from an actual job, the salary component would probably well under $30k. Now, that’s still quite a bit of money for not doing anything, but its not like folks are just pocketing that $43k and living the same quality of life as someone who makes $43k at an actual job with benefits on top of it.

Ultimately, a big part of this problem is how many people view $25-$28k as a step up, which is another symptom of the problem that has been going on for decades of shrinking wages in the middle class. That’s really not a lot of money, so the fact that it is desirable and folks are willing to slightly downsize their financial footprint in order to get it shows how poor of a job the private sector has done in creating both financial incentive / wage growth opportunity and long term security at the low end of the salary spectrum for non-exempt employees. They are just as culpable for the current predicament as the government is.

 

[engie]

Let's just get sports back up and going. The Derby was just scaled down tremendously. The infield finish line build is gone. Our work there is now a 2 man job. It's a 5-7 man job in normal years. Hell, I've missed 91 days of per diem thusfar being off the road that doesn't even show as income. Over $4k just in that. Plus the loss of the paycheck. I'm lucky I was Dave Ramseying it long before this and have other avenues to make enough $$ to float or I would be in a world of hurt right now. It still sucks.