3 ms·

> the government paid a huge amount of money to people to not work for a long time They did? I remember three teeny tiny payments. Certainly not enough to live

by junon 5y ago

> the government paid a huge amount of money to people to not work for a long time They did? I remember three teeny tiny payments. Certainly not enough to live on for a long time.

ctrlp 5y ago
Did you go on unemployment benefits?
- xvedejas 5y ago
  This is an important question. The pandemic response added both extensions to unemployment and additional payout beyond the typical maximum ($300/week extra, if I remember correctly). If you were laid off any time over the last 18 months, you would be making well over minimum wage by doing nothing. That's a pretty big incentive for plenty of people.
  - bink 5y ago
    But if that were the case I'd expect to see the employment numbers dramatically shift in states that removed their unemployment assistance earlier than others, which I don't think we've seen any evidence of yet.
    - xvedejas 5y ago
      Has it been quite a month yet? If there is an effect I'd guess we won't even see it in the statistics yet, and that's without accounting for the fact that it takes time to find and start a job even in a favorable market.
    - downWidOutaFite 5y ago
      So far the evidence is that job growth is worse in those states. https://www.reuters.com/business/amid-covid-surge-states-that-cut-benefits-still-see-no-hiring-boost-2021-09-17 https://www.reuters.com/business/amid-covid-surge-states-tha...
  - guenthert 5y ago
    If you received maximum benefits and the extra $300, then you got more than you would have earned on minimum wage. You'll receive however maximum benefit only if you earned fairly well before. So I don't see anyone getting more benefits than they could plausibly earn, if the jobs they held before were still available to them. Last year, for a time, $600 were paid in addition to unemployment benefit, which changed that equation.
  - giantrobot 5y ago
    > That's a pretty big incentive for plenty of people. If $300 a week (before taxes) is a "big incentive" for people, they were being criminally underpaid before they lost their job.
- junon 5y ago
  Ah okay, that's the difference. No I didn't.
spoonjim 5y ago
The stimulus checks were a very small part of the overall program.
maxerickson 5y ago
For several months last year there was a $600 a week federal unemployment supplement, and there has been $300 a week since the beginning of this year (it expired a couple weeks ago). Netting out $400 a week (state+federal) isn't a huge amount of money of course. Several other rules were also changed, but there are still limits on the number of weeks people can collect unemployment. What I've seen here and there is that the states that ended benefits earlier did see a small bump in employment (but not a particularly meaningful one).
theflork 5y ago
Massively, they did, yes. By both injecting money directly and taking away the burden of repayments. And this unemployment boost that expired is just one small piece of equation: 1 - unemployment boost 2 - stimulus payments 3 - extending unemployment to workers who would normally be ineligible (contractors etc) 4 - eviction moratorium 5 - mortgage forbearance programs 6 - student loans forbearance 7 - locally available , utilities payments pauses 8 - ppp grants
listless 5y ago
I have at least 3 friends who were working retail jobs who were on unemployment for over a year. 1 has gone back to work. 2 still milk it. They just figured out how to live VERY modestly. It’s mostly trailers and video games.
- kingTug 5y ago
  Trailers and video games sounds preferable to any type of "customer is always right" retail job. Retail jobs are abusive and cause depression. They are not viable careers. I too would live on the poverty line before returning to that life.
  - unpolloloco 5y ago
    Easy solution: pay more. Easy to get people to go back if they get paid well enough! At some point, the employer will find enough people to go back to work - and that point is what (economically) the job is worth. A lot of people realized their number is higher than they thought because their alternative was not as bad as they thought.
    - fragmede 5y ago
      It's still a dead end job though. Even if it pays $100k/yr, if that's all it'll ever be, it's just not worth if the alternative is something with an actual career path.
      - giantrobot 5y ago
        If retail paid well, even if it was still a dead end unto itself, would allow people to save money. They would have options. Retail is a dead end job and barely pays above poverty level. They usually don't get any healthcare coverage either. Unless a retail worker is lucky or lives like a monk it's hard to make enough money to ever get ahead. One bad illness or injury can ruin them financially. Retail could be a starting point for someone. It doesn't have to be a career. But with low wages and no benefits it's usually just enough to keep someone barely living.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kristjansson 5y ago
The stimulus payments were just that - extra money to stimulate economic activity - not assistance to those directly impacted. There was an order of magnitude or so more money (per recipient) available through the unemployment supplement programs, and a huge amount (meditated by employers) available through the PPP program.
throwawayboise 5y ago
Well you could also stop paying rent and not get evicted, so there's that.
dragonwriter 5y ago
Those are the general stimulus payments, the upthread comment is referring to the temporary boost in unemployment to on-average full-replacement level instead of around 2/3, along with the temporary removal of job search requirements.
wrycoder 5y ago
There were many people making the equivalent of $50K per year, between federal and state payments. That was more than many of them made when working. These are all expiring now, we'll see what happens next.

by junon 5y ago

> the government paid a huge amount of money to people to not work for a long time They did? I remember three teeny tiny payments. Certainly not enough to live on for a long time.

ctrlp 5y ago

Did you go on unemployment benefits?

xvedejas 5y ago
This is an important question. The pandemic response added both extensions to unemployment and additional payout beyond the typical maximum ($300/week extra, if I remember correctly). If you were laid off any time over the last 18 months, you would be making well over minimum wage by doing nothing. That's a pretty big incentive for plenty of people.
- bink 5y ago
  But if that were the case I'd expect to see the employment numbers dramatically shift in states that removed their unemployment assistance earlier than others, which I don't think we've seen any evidence of yet.
  - xvedejas 5y ago
    Has it been quite a month yet? If there is an effect I'd guess we won't even see it in the statistics yet, and that's without accounting for the fact that it takes time to find and start a job even in a favorable market.
  - downWidOutaFite 5y ago
    So far the evidence is that job growth is worse in those states. https://www.reuters.com/business/amid-covid-surge-states-that-cut-benefits-still-see-no-hiring-boost-2021-09-17 https://www.reuters.com/business/amid-covid-surge-states-tha...
- guenthert 5y ago
  If you received maximum benefits and the extra $300, then you got more than you would have earned on minimum wage. You'll receive however maximum benefit only if you earned fairly well before. So I don't see anyone getting more benefits than they could plausibly earn, if the jobs they held before were still available to them. Last year, for a time, $600 were paid in addition to unemployment benefit, which changed that equation.
- giantrobot 5y ago
  > That's a pretty big incentive for plenty of people. If $300 a week (before taxes) is a "big incentive" for people, they were being criminally underpaid before they lost their job.
junon 5y ago
Ah okay, that's the difference. No I didn't.

spoonjim 5y ago

The stimulus checks were a very small part of the overall program.

maxerickson 5y ago

For several months last year there was a $600 a week federal unemployment supplement, and there has been $300 a week since the beginning of this year (it expired a couple weeks ago). Netting out $400 a week (state+federal) isn't a huge amount of money of course. Several other rules were also changed, but there are still limits on the number of weeks people can collect unemployment. What I've seen here and there is that the states that ended benefits earlier did see a small bump in employment (but not a particularly meaningful one).

theflork 5y ago

Massively, they did, yes. By both injecting money directly and taking away the burden of repayments. And this unemployment boost that expired is just one small piece of equation: 1 - unemployment boost 2 - stimulus payments 3 - extending unemployment to workers who would normally be ineligible (contractors etc) 4 - eviction moratorium 5 - mortgage forbearance programs 6 - student loans forbearance 7 - locally available , utilities payments pauses 8 - ppp grants

listless 5y ago

I have at least 3 friends who were working retail jobs who were on unemployment for over a year. 1 has gone back to work. 2 still milk it. They just figured out how to live VERY modestly. It’s mostly trailers and video games.

kingTug 5y ago
Trailers and video games sounds preferable to any type of "customer is always right" retail job. Retail jobs are abusive and cause depression. They are not viable careers. I too would live on the poverty line before returning to that life.
- unpolloloco 5y ago
  Easy solution: pay more. Easy to get people to go back if they get paid well enough! At some point, the employer will find enough people to go back to work - and that point is what (economically) the job is worth. A lot of people realized their number is higher than they thought because their alternative was not as bad as they thought.
  - fragmede 5y ago
    It's still a dead end job though. Even if it pays $100k/yr, if that's all it'll ever be, it's just not worth if the alternative is something with an actual career path.
    - giantrobot 5y ago
      If retail paid well, even if it was still a dead end unto itself, would allow people to save money. They would have options. Retail is a dead end job and barely pays above poverty level. They usually don't get any healthcare coverage either. Unless a retail worker is lucky or lives like a monk it's hard to make enough money to ever get ahead. One bad illness or injury can ruin them financially. Retail could be a starting point for someone. It doesn't have to be a career. But with low wages and no benefits it's usually just enough to keep someone barely living.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

kristjansson 5y ago

The stimulus payments were just that - extra money to stimulate economic activity - not assistance to those directly impacted. There was an order of magnitude or so more money (per recipient) available through the unemployment supplement programs, and a huge amount (meditated by employers) available through the PPP program.

throwawayboise 5y ago

Well you could also stop paying rent and not get evicted, so there's that.

dragonwriter 5y ago

Those are the general stimulus payments, the upthread comment is referring to the temporary boost in unemployment to on-average full-replacement level instead of around 2/3, along with the temporary removal of job search requirements.

wrycoder 5y ago

There were many people making the equivalent of $50K per year, between federal and state payments. That was more than many of them made when working. These are all expiring now, we'll see what happens next.