6 ms·

There seem to be perverse incentives at play in several states, pushing them to re-open even as cases and weekly deaths rise, seemingly with the primary purpose

There seem to be perverse incentives at play in several states, pushing them to re-open even as cases and weekly deaths rise, seemingly with the primary purpose to getting people off state unemployment rolls. Not sure it's the right term to use for people, since as you say, the jobs aren't there. But for state governments, for sure.

slg 6y ago
I think a lot of people envision workers being given a choice to go back to work or stay on unemployment, but that is seldom a choice. You can't legally turn down your old job and stay on unemployment (at least in every state of which I'm aware, but every state's unemployment system is slightly different). Certainly there will be some people who do it, but you would basically have to commit fraud to do it. This causes the states' perverse incentives that you mentioned. Many people believe a big push to reopen has been motivated by states trying to get people off unemployment as they know some workers would rather stay safe at home and lose unemployment benefits than return to work in an unsafe environment.
- abfan1127 6y ago
  I know a ton of employees who have declined employment because of unemployment paying better. If Employers rat out these employees, then they come back angry. its a nasty spot to be in.
  - slg 6y ago
    Like I said: >Certainly there will be some people who do it, but you would basically have to commit fraud to do it. Also the extra unemployment benefits expired so anyone still doing this is not making more than they would at their job. Their only incentive to continue this fraud is for their own personal safety. You can't call a preference for one's own personal safety "perverse".
    - abfan1127 6y ago
      While it wasn't my statement, I think its perverse as the "free money" distorted those employees from making "normal decisions". For those employees, its a perfectly reasonable (short term) decision to prefer the larger payout. I'd argue its a bad long term decision.
      - slg 6y ago
        The money isn't "free" if you have to commit fraud to get it. I get that the temporary boost in benefits skewed the incentives a little bit more towards committing unemployment fraud and that might have been enough to sway some people who wouldn't do it under "normal" circumstances, but unemployment fraud is not a new option and this incentive to commit fraud has always existed.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - adamsea 6y ago
    I wonder if that says more about the employer than anything else.
    - abfan1127 6y ago
      what would it say about employers? They don't want to jeopardize relations, but they need employees back... I personally know small mom/pop restaurants, a small private security (rent-a-cop) firm, and a large casino that can't get people to come back because the $600/week bonus. These aren't 6 figure engineering jobs. these are low skill jobs where the most important skill is showing up on time consistently.
      - adamsea 6y ago
        Well, cry me a river for the casino, which could afford to pay a living / more competitive wage, but I see your point about the other ones. Maybe then it says more about our current economic system as a whole. But my point was it seems like if $600 / week is enough for folks to choose not to work, that says more about the work not being meaningful or the employer being unable to (or choosing not to) pay the worker well.
        abfan1127 6y ago
        while I can't speak for other casinos. This particular one paid them full wages for the 6 weeks they were originally shut down. it wasn't $600/wk. It was $600/wk plus UI. If $600/wk is enough not to work, then it can also speak to the quality of the worker and their lack of skills. Spending time complaining about how hard life is, rather than doing something about it. Not everyone is like that, and not no-one is like that either.
        smileysteve 6y ago
        > it wasn't $600/wk. It was $600/wk plus UI Severance is counted against eligibility for unemployment in most states. Source; had a friend not understand this, to wonder where their unemployment was, to get their first check after their severance ran out.
- hogFeast 6y ago
  Not your point but I think there is a definite issue here with perceptions around workplace safety. The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. I understand why some groups of people are very worried: if you are obese, if you are over 60, if you work in a hospital/care home...but if you work in an office, it isn't a "Hunger Games" situation. I don't think furlough/unemployment schemes necessarily created that incentive though. People in some places are clearly being very cautious (I am in the UK, people aren't wearing masks and not being cautious at all...I have seen larger crowds at pubs than ever...no masks) anyway. So I think the solution to the unemployment problem is a change in message from govt. If you take precautions, you will be okay (again, where I am the message was very urgent and serious...this worked at first but some people are ignoring totally and others are staying at home terrified of their own shadow...so who knows? But I think it would have success generally).
  - slg 6y ago
    >The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. If this is true, why is the outbreak here so much worse than basically any of our peer countries?
    - refurb 6y ago
      How do you define worse? Number of deaths? If so, the US is doing better than many countries. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/8993658...
      - slg 6y ago
        Totals are misleading due to each countries varied handling of the initial pandemic. Our peers are not still struggling with this the way we continue to struggle. I did some quick math based off the numbers here as an example[1][2]. The UK has had 3.0 COVID-19 deaths over the last three days per million people. The US has had nearly four times that many deaths with 11.8 per million people in that same 3 day time frame. [1] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ [2] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  Really the "avoiding work" is fundamentally a motivated lie because they don't want to pay period but especially not during the retail and tourist apocalypse that is covid-19. It is as usual incredibly short sighted and stupid as the impatient reopeners think if they ignore the fire it will just fizzle out and people will continue shopping like normal.

slg 6y ago

I think a lot of people envision workers being given a choice to go back to work or stay on unemployment, but that is seldom a choice. You can't legally turn down your old job and stay on unemployment (at least in every state of which I'm aware, but every state's unemployment system is slightly different). Certainly there will be some people who do it, but you would basically have to commit fraud to do it. This causes the states' perverse incentives that you mentioned. Many people believe a big push to reopen has been motivated by states trying to get people off unemployment as they know some workers would rather stay safe at home and lose unemployment benefits than return to work in an unsafe environment.

abfan1127 6y ago
I know a ton of employees who have declined employment because of unemployment paying better. If Employers rat out these employees, then they come back angry. its a nasty spot to be in.
- slg 6y ago
  Like I said: >Certainly there will be some people who do it, but you would basically have to commit fraud to do it. Also the extra unemployment benefits expired so anyone still doing this is not making more than they would at their job. Their only incentive to continue this fraud is for their own personal safety. You can't call a preference for one's own personal safety "perverse".
  - abfan1127 6y ago
    While it wasn't my statement, I think its perverse as the "free money" distorted those employees from making "normal decisions". For those employees, its a perfectly reasonable (short term) decision to prefer the larger payout. I'd argue its a bad long term decision.
    - slg 6y ago
      The money isn't "free" if you have to commit fraud to get it. I get that the temporary boost in benefits skewed the incentives a little bit more towards committing unemployment fraud and that might have been enough to sway some people who wouldn't do it under "normal" circumstances, but unemployment fraud is not a new option and this incentive to commit fraud has always existed.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
- adamsea 6y ago
  I wonder if that says more about the employer than anything else.
  - abfan1127 6y ago
    what would it say about employers? They don't want to jeopardize relations, but they need employees back... I personally know small mom/pop restaurants, a small private security (rent-a-cop) firm, and a large casino that can't get people to come back because the $600/week bonus. These aren't 6 figure engineering jobs. these are low skill jobs where the most important skill is showing up on time consistently.
    - adamsea 6y ago
      Well, cry me a river for the casino, which could afford to pay a living / more competitive wage, but I see your point about the other ones. Maybe then it says more about our current economic system as a whole. But my point was it seems like if $600 / week is enough for folks to choose not to work, that says more about the work not being meaningful or the employer being unable to (or choosing not to) pay the worker well.
      - abfan1127 6y ago
        while I can't speak for other casinos. This particular one paid them full wages for the 6 weeks they were originally shut down. it wasn't $600/wk. It was $600/wk plus UI. If $600/wk is enough not to work, then it can also speak to the quality of the worker and their lack of skills. Spending time complaining about how hard life is, rather than doing something about it. Not everyone is like that, and not no-one is like that either.
        smileysteve 6y ago
        > it wasn't $600/wk. It was $600/wk plus UI Severance is counted against eligibility for unemployment in most states. Source; had a friend not understand this, to wonder where their unemployment was, to get their first check after their severance ran out.
hogFeast 6y ago
Not your point but I think there is a definite issue here with perceptions around workplace safety. The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. I understand why some groups of people are very worried: if you are obese, if you are over 60, if you work in a hospital/care home...but if you work in an office, it isn't a "Hunger Games" situation. I don't think furlough/unemployment schemes necessarily created that incentive though. People in some places are clearly being very cautious (I am in the UK, people aren't wearing masks and not being cautious at all...I have seen larger crowds at pubs than ever...no masks) anyway. So I think the solution to the unemployment problem is a change in message from govt. If you take precautions, you will be okay (again, where I am the message was very urgent and serious...this worked at first but some people are ignoring totally and others are staying at home terrified of their own shadow...so who knows? But I think it would have success generally).
- slg 6y ago
  >The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. If this is true, why is the outbreak here so much worse than basically any of our peer countries?
  - refurb 6y ago
    How do you define worse? Number of deaths? If so, the US is doing better than many countries. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/8993658...
    - slg 6y ago
      Totals are misleading due to each countries varied handling of the initial pandemic. Our peers are not still struggling with this the way we continue to struggle. I did some quick math based off the numbers here as an example[1][2]. The UK has had 3.0 COVID-19 deaths over the last three days per million people. The US has had nearly four times that many deaths with 11.8 per million people in that same 3 day time frame. [1] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ [2] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Nasrudith 6y ago
Really the "avoiding work" is fundamentally a motivated lie because they don't want to pay period but especially not during the retail and tourist apocalypse that is covid-19. It is as usual incredibly short sighted and stupid as the impatient reopeners think if they ignore the fire it will just fizzle out and people will continue shopping like normal.