5 ms·

what? Competing with free money isn't like that. Would you say paying double the free money but also take up half of people's time, plus other hassles they have

by nsonha 6y ago

what? Competing with free money isn't like that. Would you say paying double the free money but also take up half of people's time, plus other hassles they have to put up with, is a good deal?

joosters 6y ago
Of course it is, particularly if (as is likely), the unemployment benefits aren't enough to get by on. Having all the free time in the world is no use if you still can't afford to eat or put a roof over your family.
taurath 6y ago
That sounds much better. You could spend your extra time and money to go to college or trade school instead of going into debt, or at least not have an insurmountable debt if you don’t get a good job after.
c2h5oh 6y ago
Considering both unemployment benefits and minimum wage are not enough to pay rent for a single bedroom apartment in every single state in US then yeah, I'd say quite a few of people would consider it at better deal.
- parineum 6y ago
  Unemployment is currently more than paying my mortgage in California.
  - c2h5oh 6y ago
    If you were making minimum wage in California your state unemployment benefits would have been $267 per week. With federal covid aid that would have gone up to $567 - close to California minimum wage, but just short of it. I welcome you to try to pay rent/mortgage + afford food with that much money.
    - imtringued 6y ago
      Even if someone manages to live exclusively off of unemployment that means this person has reduced his resource consumption and freed up scarce resources and made them available for others who actually need them.
    - parineum 6y ago
      $2000 a month is more than enough to live with roommates.
imtringued 6y ago
It literally is like that. If your company cannot compete with such a low "salary" your company shouldn't exist. It means your company is taking away resources from the economy and requires direct support from the government to function. At that point it makes more sense to just give money to individuals directly so that they can spend the money on actually productive companies.

by nsonha 6y ago

what? Competing with free money isn't like that. Would you say paying double the free money but also take up half of people's time, plus other hassles they have to put up with, is a good deal?

joosters 6y ago

Of course it is, particularly if (as is likely), the unemployment benefits aren't enough to get by on. Having all the free time in the world is no use if you still can't afford to eat or put a roof over your family.

taurath 6y ago

That sounds much better. You could spend your extra time and money to go to college or trade school instead of going into debt, or at least not have an insurmountable debt if you don’t get a good job after.

c2h5oh 6y ago

Considering both unemployment benefits and minimum wage are not enough to pay rent for a single bedroom apartment in every single state in US then yeah, I'd say quite a few of people would consider it at better deal.

parineum 6y ago
Unemployment is currently more than paying my mortgage in California.
- c2h5oh 6y ago
  If you were making minimum wage in California your state unemployment benefits would have been $267 per week. With federal covid aid that would have gone up to $567 - close to California minimum wage, but just short of it. I welcome you to try to pay rent/mortgage + afford food with that much money.
  - imtringued 6y ago
    Even if someone manages to live exclusively off of unemployment that means this person has reduced his resource consumption and freed up scarce resources and made them available for others who actually need them.
  - parineum 6y ago
    $2000 a month is more than enough to live with roommates.

imtringued 6y ago

It literally is like that. If your company cannot compete with such a low "salary" your company shouldn't exist. It means your company is taking away resources from the economy and requires direct support from the government to function. At that point it makes more sense to just give money to individuals directly so that they can spend the money on actually productive companies.