Turns out $600 extra Unemployment does NOT stop people from going back to work.

[Elegiac]

Couple things: Wages are, in large part, based on the combination of market value of a particular skill or skillset and negotiated agreement of payment between employee and employer.

Cool, and as long a the choice is between employment and destitution for workers they are never going to be an equitable negotiating position, meaning that labor is never paid as a function of its actual worth in a capitalist society. Try again.

Something in happened the last 25yrs where people suddenly started thinking "I should be able to have more of the nice things while still just flipping burgers or working a cashier".

The fact the entire point of a developed economy is that people don't have to struggle as much just to get by, let alone live at the standard expected of people living in said developed economy?

And no, actually; the idea that people shouldn't be able to afford to live on full time employment is the recent aberration and is the exception to the norm, because the US is uniquely shitty to its workers out of the developed countries.

Now true, inflation has been unstable and wage growth has not kept up with cost of living.. Also, as a reminder, it was a democrat who came up with the minimum wage. While well intended to be sure... the federal minimum wage basically removed a fair amount of negotiating power that the prospective employee has in determining his value as said employee. Companies can, as a result of the MW, simply decline an applicant seeking more per week in favor of an applicant who will readily take it. It is all a matter of perspective.

Removing their ability to accept what is practically wage slavery is technically a form of removing negotiating power, I guess.

Only in America is the freedom to be exploited regarded as a good, aspirational thing.

ll that said, Paying people more than their normal paycheck is quite unnecessary... And it is check that will come due. If they had simply required unemployment to pay 100% of employees wage.. and maybe MAYBE an extra 100 to 200 for the first 90 days, that would be one thing. But upwards of 100 to 150% of a person's wage is unjustifiable imo. Not to mention, it isn't even helping the people that the dems claimed it would (and they knew that it wouldn't) because people didn't purchase from small businesses to keep them afloat.. how could they, when the government was making them close down all while allowing walmart/costco/best buy etc (the big boy businesses) to operate as usual.. AND EVEN BETTER no one in the HoR is even talking about actions against WalMart for openly stating that they will still serve customers who violate the mask protocols established in the states that have them.... But god damned if someone wants to open their shop to serve the community, and try to put some bread on the table for the family.

Businesses are making the decision on their own how to re-open their businesses.. My company is working at 50% staff, because we have limits on the number of customers we can have. As a result, not everyone gets called in and so those who don't get called can continue getting their benefits, and those who come in are getting a pay increase. Doesn't seem that hard.

People's health and welfare is more important than your business. They have a right to life, you don't have a right to make money. Sorry.

[Monster Hunter]

Is Corbyn a real estate mogul, whose hotel and golf property is directly impacted by lockdowns required in containing the virus?

Did you even read my post?

[Felya]

Did you even read my post?

Indeed, it’s why my reply to this:

real root issue with trump is the same as the root issue with corbyn economy wise

Is if Corbyn was a real estate mogul. Because if he isn’t, the root issue of the economy, during covid... Cannot be he same... Unless Corbyn has a fortune riding on Hotels and Golf courses, the root issue in the economics of opening up hotels and golf courses, cannot be the same.

[Shadowferal]

Corbyn is in too weak a position.

[Monster Hunter]

Indeed, it’s why my reply to this:



Is if Corbyn was a real estate mogul. Because if he isn’t, the root issue of the economy, during covid... Cannot be he same... Unless Corbyn has a fortune riding on Hotels and Golf courses, the root issue in the economics of opening up hotels and golf courses, cannot be the same.

He has a fortune riding in coffee, but you still haven't grasped what I said in my comment. So come back when you have.

[Saltysquidoon]

Couple things: Wages are, in large part, based on the combination of market value of a particular skill or skillset and negotiated agreement of payment between employee and employer. Flipping burgers, or working a cashier is not the same as being a sanitation worker or police officer etc... And it used to be the case that an accepted ascension was essentially: get a job as a teen/HS graduate at a fast food or delivery place (the wage was lower, but it was first job and foot in the door of job experience).. later you either went to college, joined a trade, joined the military, or created a company.. Making more money and establishing your career.

Something in happened the last 25yrs where people suddenly started thinking "I should be able to have more of the nice things while still just flipping burgers or working a cashier". Now true, inflation has been unstable and wage growth has not kept up with cost of living..

Yes I'm sure wage suppression stagnation is just a coincidence and is entirely outside of the control of either government or business.

Also, as a reminder, it was a democrat who came up with the minimum wage. While well intended to be sure... the federal minimum wage basically removed a fair amount of negotiating power that the prospective employee has in determining his value as said employee. Companies can, as a result of the MW, simply decline an applicant seeking more per week in favor of an applicant who will readily take it. It is all a matter of perspective.

This is a lie, you are knowingly or unknowingly lying.

Overall the most up to date body of research from US, UK and other developed countries points to a very muted effect of minimum wages on employment, while significantly increasing the earnings of low paid workers. Importantly, this was found to be the case even for the most recent ambitious policies.

Therefore, it concludes that, based on the overall weight of the available evidence, there is room for exploring a more ambitious NLW remit in the UK in the coming years, in the range of 60% to two-thirds of median hourly earnings.

[Beazy]

It does for meeEEEeee!

I got laid off a few weeks ago and all this TWC money has allowed me to take two extra weeks off. But seriously, why did TX give me so much money for unemployment? I only needed like 500 bucks tops. . . .

[Felya]

He has a fortune riding in coffee, but you still haven't grasped what I said in my comment. So come back when you have.

That’s fantastic, still means you are wrong. It’s not that you fail to grasp what I said, just wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

It does for meeEEEeee!

I got laid off a few weeks ago and all this TWC money has allowed me to take two extra weeks off. But seriously, why did TX give me so much money for unemployment? I only needed like 500 bucks tops. . . .

Because you are not the base line...

[Monster Hunter]

That’s fantastic, still means you are wrong. It’s not that you fail to grasp what I said, just wrong.

- - - Updated - - -



Because you are not the base line...

Not wrong because what you said has nothing to do with what I said. I explained in my original post. It's up to you to read it.

[Zan15]

By the way.. The reason those people returned to work was because their employer was probably smart and informed them that, if they were called upon to return to work and they adamantly refused with a documentable reason.. That employee can be reported to the state employment commission and have their unemployment yanked.

Maybe you missed the actual data, instead of months old articles "guessing" people won't go back to work. it was in the first post.
Turns out that 70%+ of the people returning to work were making more money on unemployment.
with no indication it was out of fear.

Unemployment offices would not be able to handle any kind of enforcement right now. They will go back next year and audit the hell out of these people, but right now the threat really does not hold any real sway.


https://money.yahoo.com/extra-600-in...182827326.html
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/...P_202062-1.pdf

I could understand having Unemployment being 100% of income as opposed to 80% (normal number)... but adding THAT much was ALWAYS going create this problem.

Here's the thing, people at the low income bracket are so underpaid that :

The gure demonstrates that it is quite dicult to achieve high replacement rates for most workers without also having replacement rates over 100% for many workers. For example, even at a xed payment of $300, 42% of workers have replacement rates above 100%.
At the same time, this lower xed payment of $300 would leave one-quarter of unemployed workers with replacement rates below 60% and thus potentially sizable liquidity concerns


My guess is most of those people went back to work because 16 weeks @600 is not better than 16 years @ actual salary, benefits, 401k, Social Security accrual, etc etc.

Also most people know if 100 people got laid off, there is not 100 jobs magically to go back to. They will be lucky based on depressed business activities to see 25-50% of those job come back this year.

Democrats want to keep the 600 coming is because they want to cement votes... Republicans want to roll it back because, in fact, if people have the option to simply stay home and collect MORE than what they did WORKING they will.

Republicans wanted to roll it back for two reasons. First because democrats supported it and it was a positive move for democrats. Second, because they would rather use the money on trickle down economic stimulus by giving money to corporations and the military. i already listed several pages back how much money in this plan is going to corporations vs unemployment.
The data clearly shows that the payments are no real barrier to get people back to work, its the fact the jobs don't exist right now.


Democrats clearly want to give the money because its an economic stimulus and keeps people from losing a lot, but yes most Politian's do things for votes. Oddly enough republicans cutting and voting against this is them again shooting their own supporters right in the foot, knee and balls. Just look at the unemployment rates in red states.

Democrats are no different than republicans giving tens of billions every few months to farmers, without votes or debates to guess what.....guess....try it....come on.... NOT TO WORK, NOT TO GROW, TO DESTROY CROPS, TO PRICE FIX AT HIGHER RATES, ETC ETC....

so if giving money, more than you normally make is a disincentive then why have we been doing it for decades to farmers?

- - - Updated - - -

Couple things: Wages are, in large part, based on the combination of market value of a particular skill or skillset and negotiated agreement of payment between employee and employer.......SNIP

.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAaaahhahh

the fact that you left out that wages have been kept artificially low by corporations who agree as a whole to keep them there. What would be anticompetitive behavior is ignored because it helps the stock market and stock prices and keep the rich getting richer.

If it wasn't for amazon in the last decade there would have been negative movement after COLA of wages. They needed so many workers they upended the lowest end of the wage market just to get enough workers in the door. They still pay like shit but they forced other warehouses and places like Walmart to increase wages.

Even then its not even keeping pace with inflation.

You talk about flipping burgers. in 1987-1989 i made 7-8.25 an hour flipping burgers at McDonalds. How is it in 2020 some McDonalds pay the same amount? How is it top end is short of inflation by about 40-50%?

C

Something in happened the last 25yrs where people suddenly started thinking "I should be able to have more of the nice things while still just flipping burgers or working a cashier". Now true, inflation has been unstable and wage growth has not kept up with cost of living.. Also, as a reminder, it was a democrat who came up with the minimum wage. While well intended to be sure... the federal minimum wage basically removed a fair amount of negotiating power that the prospective employee has in determining his value as said employee. Companies can, as a result of the MW, simply decline an applicant seeking more per week in favor of an applicant who will readily take it. It is all a matter of perspective.

.

A job is a fucking job. There is no such thing as a "starter job" or jobs that should only be had by high school kids.

Why should a company get access to sub livable wage workers just because they might be young or desperate? Because a few billion in profit is not enough? Funny how workers income should be limited in these kind of jobs, but profit seems to be in line with some of the highest industries and highest paid workers companies. Explain that??


You ever flip burgers in a McDonalds when its 101 out and the owner does not put on the AC in the grill area? You think garbage men have it rough, lol....

How about enough money just to pay your bills?
Nothing these "burger flippers" are asking for will allow them to do much more than pay their bills and maybe pay for college.

[Felya]

Not wrong because what you said has nothing to do with what I said. I explained in my original post. It's up to you to read it.

I don’t need to explain... I’m saying the basis for comparison is off, because Trump has direct financial streak in businesses being open. The fact that you can’t handle Trump criticism, is not my problem... sorry...

[Monster Hunter]

I don’t need to explain... I’m saying the basis for comparison is off, because Trump has direct financial streak in businesses being open. The fact that you can’t handle Trump criticism, is not my problem... sorry...

but the finance wasnt my comparison. so i go back to wondering what your point is?

like read my post its pirtty self encapsualting, i state exactly what im comparing and that i belive it is the root problem and it has nothing to do with the financials or political wing as i said of corbyn and trump.

[Felya]

but the finance wasnt my comparison. so i go back to wondering what your point is?

Jesus fucking Christ... I am saying that the economics of coronavirus in US, are directly impacted by Trump’s finances. I know it’s not part of your comparison, which is why the comparison is flawed... wtf?

like read my post its pirtty self encapsualting, i state exactly what im comparing and that i belive it is the root problem and it has nothing to do with the financials or political wing as i said of corbyn and trump.

It does have a lot to do with it, you choose to ignore it... which is why I am pointing it... seriously... this is basic human communication. Cringe to the max...

[Monster Hunter]

Jesus fucking Christ... I am saying that the economics of coronavirus in US, are directly impacted by Trump’s finances. I know it’s not part of your comparison, which is why the comparison is flawed... wtf?



It does have a lot to do with it, you choose to ignore it... which is why I am pointing it... seriously... this is basic human communication. Cringe to the max...

it has nothing to do with it. my comment was an observation unrelated to the current handling of this specific problem but as a broader note. so your comment was litteraly irrelevent to what i said.

also some financial aspect of the pandemic not being part of a comparison dosnt make the comparison flawed when the comparison was nothing to do with the corona virus pandemic, but as an observation of a commonality between the two that leads to large outdated flaws in both of those peoples thinkings

[unfilteredJW]

it has nothing to do with it. my comment was an observation unrelated to the current handling of this specific problem but as a broader note. so your comment was litteraly irrelevent to what i said.

also some financial aspect of the pandemic not being part of a comparison dosnt make the comparison flawed when the comparison was nothing to do with the corona virus pandemic, but as an observation of a commonality between the two that leads to large outdated flaws in both of those peoples thinkings

"If I keep narrowing the scope down I can be right."

[Monster Hunter]

"If I keep narrowing the scope down I can be right."

i narrowed it right at the begining. its in my OP specificaly what i was talking about. i was intentionaly specific.

fuck knows what failya is on about. having the USA black listed as a cornavirus shit hole by almost every other nation in the world is hardly good for any US market let alone the hotel and golf course buissness.

[Felya]

it has nothing to do with it. my comment was an observation unrelated to the current handling of this specific problem but as a broader note. so your comment was litteraly irrelevent to what i said.

also some financial aspect of the pandemic not being part of a comparison dosnt make the comparison flawed when the comparison was nothing to do with the corona virus pandemic, but as an observation of a commonality between the two that leads to large outdated flaws in both of those peoples thinkings

Let me repeat this again... I believe and explained, why this is an important aspect of it. You regurgitating different variations of either me not understanding or vehemently opposing even the idea that it is part of the equation, doesn’t have anything to do with it. That is not how you counter what I said...

I asked and you confirmed, that Trump, a real estate tycoon, is in a unique predicament that Cobyn isn’t. This predicament or personal interest, is what is contributing to Trump’s push to open up the US. This personal interest of being a billionaire that owns hotels and golf courses, directly impacted by shut downs to contain the spread. It’s why Cobyn, never tweeted for rioters to liberate New Castle... it’s why the EU travel ban, originally excluded Ireland and England, where Trump owns golf courses. It’s why the White House included an FBI building renovation, which would make Trump’s hotel across the street, the closest hotel to the building, while preventing competing hotels, in the corona relief bill.

The way you counter this, is not by doing the bullshit you have... it’s by showing Trump’s tax records, showing that earning from these business do not justify Trump’s actions. I guess you can’t do that, since Trump is fighting to hide his taxes. Well... see if you can come up with a way to show that Trump doesn’t care about success of Trump corporation... Just to irritate, you not intending people to criticize your post, is not a justifiable excuse, nor is it a fault of my reading...

- - - Updated - - -

i narrowed it right at the begining.

Indeed... which covers up reality... those parts you slice off, to make your assertions narrow, exist... regardless if you don’t intend others to point them out.

[Zan15]

Gdp is out tomorrow expected to be the worst GDP report in history.

The question is how ...worst...it will be

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-expect...155015482.html

[Felya]

Gdp is out tomorrow expected to be the worst GDP report in history.

The question is how ...worst...it will be

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-expect...155015482.html

Best, most beautiful, ever?

[Monster Hunter]

Let me repeat this again... I believe and explained, why this is an important aspect of it. You regurgitating different variations of either me not understanding or vehemently opposing even the idea that it is part of the equation, doesn’t have anything to do with it. That is not how you counter what I said...

I asked and you confirmed, that Trump, a real estate tycoon, is in a unique predicament that Cobyn isn’t. This predicament or personal interest, is what is contributing to Trump’s push to open up the US. This personal interest of being a billionaire that owns hotels and golf courses, directly impacted by shut downs to contain the spread. It’s why Cobyn, never tweeted for rioters to liberate New Castle... it’s why the EU travel ban, originally excluded Ireland and England, where Trump owns golf courses. It’s why the White House included an FBI building renovation, which would make Trump’s hotel across the street, the closest hotel to the building, while preventing competing hotels, in the corona relief bill.

The way you counter this, is not by doing the bullshit you have... it’s by showing Trump’s tax records, showing that earning from these business do not justify Trump’s actions. I guess you can’t do that, since Trump is fighting to hide his taxes. Well... see if you can come up with a way to show that Trump doesn’t care about success of Trump corporation... Just to irritate, you not intending people to criticize your post, is not a justifiable excuse, nor is it a fault of my reading...

why would i counter something that has fuck all to do with the comparison i was making? i made the comparison that both trump and corbyn are working from old pre thatcher/ragen politics, aka trumps protectionism and corbyns old school socialism. and i was litteral by that point. the little things hes done to further his buissness empire is the micro level. that i really dont give a shit about, when on the macro broad level, at the very root of where his policy comes from is the same fallacy corbyn made of using antiqueted policy.

do you really not see how exempting england from the travel ban is a seperate thing from there being a travel ban at all ?? or the tariffs e.t.c

if you want to argue against it then argue against it on the macro level not some random shit thats below the issue, tell me why trump isnt using early 1900's protectionism or something that actualy is what i was on about, not random concpiracy theorys about how making america a coronavirus hell hole blocked on every nations travel list some how helps his hotels or some shit.

in engineering we would call it the difference between architecture and implimentation, you going on about some implimentation flaws when im pointing out the whole architecture is wrong.

helping his buissness empire probly is one of his goals but thats aside from the root fallacy his brain is operating from and it negativly effects both his goals and america's economy. im talkjing about stuff deeper, things going on bhind his poxy little goals and what he wants, were talking about the ideology's and philosophys that dicatate the actions he thinks will achive those goals being worng. the same out dated thinking that made corbyn some how think 1. nationalisation was still popular and 2. that nationalisation without the public dividend works in anyway to make society better. stuff we found out in the 1960's and 70s that just being goverment controled dosn't make a company run better or cheeper or magicaly help society, often times it becomes bloated and ineffecint and without some way to pass the profit back onto the people directly all you do is make a bad service worse.