3 ms·

Some fraction of this change is attributable to the $2 trillion CARES Act that pays workers $600 per week, contingent on them not working. I assume that the cha

Some fraction of this change is attributable to the $2 trillion CARES Act that pays workers $600 per week, contingent on them not working. I assume that the change would still be horrific if this effect is deducted, but that it isn't insignificant.

biesnecker 6y ago
Citation needed? I mean, sure, probably "some fraction" but that "some" is carrying a lot of water here.
- julianapostate 6y ago
  how would one, in good faith, cite a self-survey of people committing unemployment insurance fraud. people get laid off and are making ok money are likely not going to try as hard to find a new job.
slg 6y ago
>the $2 trillion CARES Act that pays workers $600 per week, contingent on them not having a job available to them. FTFY. Your original language implied the choice to work was up to the individual person. You can't stay on unemployment insurance if you were given the option to return to work and declined. Many people believe that part of the reason many governments were so quick to reopen in the US was because opening businesses allowed people to be kicked off unemployment insurance if they refused to return to work due to health concerns.
- collegeburner 6y ago
  Of course there are jobs. They may not pay as much as they used to, and they may not even be in one's chosen field, but both of my companies are hiring full-time workers with benefits and all.
  - slg 6y ago
    What is the point of having any unemployment insurance system if no consideration is made for what job a person had previously or is qualified to do versus what is currently available? Someone is always hiring. Should no one receive any benefits as long as there is an open job somewhere that they could potentially fill?
    - collegeburner 6y ago
      > Should no one receive any benefits as long as there is an open job somewhere that they could potentially fill? Yes? The point is to make sure people aren't starving, not to preserve their ego and satisfy the "This isn't why I got a college degree" crowd. Obviously there's a good bit of frictional unemployment, which is really what unemployment is designed to handle. That may go up a bit during times of economic stagnation or contraction, but unemployment isn't supposed to handle the "I was making X dollars before and can't maintain my lifestyle if I take a lower-paying job" sort of situation. In this sort of environment, most people will experience a significant reduction in quality of life, and probably should, as there are fewer goods and services being produced. I guess that doesn't win votes, though, so the politicians are out here telling people they shouldn't have to. And I'll get to have my retirement taken in taxes to pay for it.
osipov 6y ago
>$2 trillion CARES Act that pays workers $600 per week Having helped an older American (not on social security) to try to obtain the said $600 / week, I can tell you that it is practically impossible to get that money.
- xsmasher 6y ago
  In California it was added onto our unemployment check; not even a checkbox to click. The unemployment web site was difficult to get into for a few days, though; I'm sure people trying to apply for the first time had trouble. What was your experience?
  - coliveira 6y ago
    Like most things job-related, this is different in each state. More progressive states try to be flexible, but don't count on this happening everywhere.

biesnecker 6y ago

Citation needed? I mean, sure, probably "some fraction" but that "some" is carrying a lot of water here.

julianapostate 6y ago
how would one, in good faith, cite a self-survey of people committing unemployment insurance fraud. people get laid off and are making ok money are likely not going to try as hard to find a new job.

slg 6y ago

>the $2 trillion CARES Act that pays workers $600 per week, contingent on them not having a job available to them. FTFY. Your original language implied the choice to work was up to the individual person. You can't stay on unemployment insurance if you were given the option to return to work and declined. Many people believe that part of the reason many governments were so quick to reopen in the US was because opening businesses allowed people to be kicked off unemployment insurance if they refused to return to work due to health concerns.

collegeburner 6y ago
Of course there are jobs. They may not pay as much as they used to, and they may not even be in one's chosen field, but both of my companies are hiring full-time workers with benefits and all.
- slg 6y ago
  What is the point of having any unemployment insurance system if no consideration is made for what job a person had previously or is qualified to do versus what is currently available? Someone is always hiring. Should no one receive any benefits as long as there is an open job somewhere that they could potentially fill?
  - collegeburner 6y ago
    > Should no one receive any benefits as long as there is an open job somewhere that they could potentially fill? Yes? The point is to make sure people aren't starving, not to preserve their ego and satisfy the "This isn't why I got a college degree" crowd. Obviously there's a good bit of frictional unemployment, which is really what unemployment is designed to handle. That may go up a bit during times of economic stagnation or contraction, but unemployment isn't supposed to handle the "I was making X dollars before and can't maintain my lifestyle if I take a lower-paying job" sort of situation. In this sort of environment, most people will experience a significant reduction in quality of life, and probably should, as there are fewer goods and services being produced. I guess that doesn't win votes, though, so the politicians are out here telling people they shouldn't have to. And I'll get to have my retirement taken in taxes to pay for it.

osipov 6y ago

>$2 trillion CARES Act that pays workers $600 per week Having helped an older American (not on social security) to try to obtain the said $600 / week, I can tell you that it is practically impossible to get that money.

xsmasher 6y ago
In California it was added onto our unemployment check; not even a checkbox to click. The unemployment web site was difficult to get into for a few days, though; I'm sure people trying to apply for the first time had trouble. What was your experience?
- coliveira 6y ago
  Like most things job-related, this is different in each state. More progressive states try to be flexible, but don't count on this happening everywhere.