Debate Rages On - Generous UI Benefits Cause People Not To Work, Or Do They? (contractor, mortgage)

[Thatsright19]

Originally Posted by Hemlock140

It was ridiculous to give $2,400 to couple like us who are still making as much as before working from home, and saving several hundred/month by not buying gas or going out.
All we did was put it in savings, if we need to buy anything we have the money. I suppose it was a lot easier than requiring proof of hours cut or being laid off, but if they did that, they could hire people to do the verification.

The point of a stimulus is to get money into the hands of people who might think about it in different ways. Someone who doesn’t need the $2,400 because they believe they’re financially secure might stimulate different industries....say restaurants or hotel travel...or....

And that’s the entire point. You chose to save it, and that’s your right. But on average, the hope and data would probably support that people blew it on a house repair or a new patio set.

[lchoro]

Originally Posted by TimAZ

There was a recent interview with Yide Qiao, the Secretary General of Shanghai Development Research Foundation, and he discussed how China handled the work stoppages and shutdowns during the pandemic. Unlike the U.S., China did not pay people to sit at home or give individuals “stimulus” money. Instead they gave the money to businesses who then found ways to keep healthy people doing useful work even if it was unrelated to their previous jobs.

Hubei province had very high unemployment from the lockdown.

about three times as much as the US

Some of the urban workers may have also moved back to their rural towns so the unemployment is understated.

Paying X to employ Y has the same problems of graft and corruption as overpaying Y for a job he used to do.

[TimAZ]

Originally Posted by KaraG

That's what the PPP was. They need to offer a second round for businesses that aren't back to normal levels yet.

The PPP money was looted by bank cronies and not-so-small businesses, and less than 1/4 of the funds ended up in bank accounts of the truly small businesses (less than 20 employees). Are you calling for a second round of looting?

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by Thatsright19

The point of a stimulus is to get money into the hands of people who might think about it in different ways. Someone who doesn’t need the $2,400 because they believe they’re financially secure might stimulate different industries....say restaurants or hotel travel...or....

And that’s the entire point. You chose to save it, and that’s your right. But on average, the hope and data would probably support that people blew it on a house repair or a new patio set.

Well, let's see. Until recently couldn't go anywhere. Couldn't get most goods because of supply chain. Beach was closed, Forest closed. Couldn't eat out. Hard to spend money that cannot be spent. Home Depot shelves were stripped clean in the first few weeks.

We just crammed it into savings account too. I am eyeballing some new rims and tires for my truck. But, the first 6 months was almost complete lock down here.

[turf3]

Originally Posted by Thatsright19

First of all, it was $600 a WEEK (Plus whatever their individuals state was), not per month. Your $900 per month calculation for $10,800 per year doesn’t even make sense. It was in excess of $900 per WEEK in my state for example (fed+state). So that’s $3,600 a month versus their normal $1,600. How would that NOT incentivize someone not to work? Note that I’m also saying that wasn’t wrong in this crisis, because the governments intent was to get people to not work and help shutdown the spread of the virus. Apparently I misspoke in my original post and said per month when I knew it was per week.

Second of all, you would compare the time they would make the unemployment at those heightened levels to what they would have normally made during that time frame.

Well, I can't help it if you put wrong figures in your post and I multiplied them by 12 months in a year and 4 weeks in a month.


900 x 12 = 10,800. So you can't say "it doesn't make any sense".


GIGO.

[Thatsright19]

Originally Posted by turf3

Well, I can't help it if you put wrong figures in your post and I multiplied them by 12 months in a year and 4 weeks in a month.


900 x 12 = 10,800. So you can't say "it doesn't make any sense".


GIGO.

I read your post in isolation, so it didn’t make sense. However, I went back and saw my post then. Either way, the point is people made more not working. In many cases, substantially more.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by Thatsright19

I read your post in isolation, so it didn’t make sense. However, I went back and saw my post then. Either way, the point is people made more not working. In many cases, substantially more.

One of my kids made way more being furloughed. Pool lifeguard.

[Thatsright19]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

One of my kids made way more being furloughed. Pool lifeguard.

My sister is a part time RN, who I assume makes in the $1100 to $1300 a week range and she was laid off all summer basically. Our state/federal max is $962 a week and even she was happy to be able to be off and spend the summer relaxing and she was making less...but it was close enough to still be worth it.

For people who were making double what they normally made? Forget about it.

[KCZ]

It's become very difficult to find a self-employed person, for example, housekeeper, plumber, yard guy, trash collector, who wants to work, even if their job poses minimal risk for COVID.

[KaraG]

Originally Posted by TimAZ

The PPP money was looted by bank cronies and not-so-small businesses, and less than 1/4 of the funds ended up in bank accounts of the truly small businesses (less than 20 employees). Are you calling for a second round of looting?

Those 1/4 of us need another round. And the ones who took it and didn't need it should be paying it back.