COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

[bmags]

29 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

Tex you eat tacos at 6:30 in the morning? 

The unemployment stimulus killed small businesses as much as anything.  A friend had to close her restaurant because they could not get enough support staff.  They are not in an urban area but not necessarily rural either.  They could not hire people that wanted to work.  A part time person that she was paying about $100 a week was making $800 a week to sit at home.  She could not pay that person a realistic wage to come back to work.  Another union friend has been out of work since mid-March and with random side work and unemployment has no interest in going back to work.  Let's also not even get into unemployment fraud which is out of control. 

We are all screwed.  

    

 

 

You think the unemployment stimulus killed small business as much a virus that caused consumers to stay in for 8 weeks and heavy restrictions since?

You'll always be able to find micro stories like that, but it wasn't borne out in the macro data:

70% of those that returned to work in june/july were making more at home than their replacement job. Why go back? Well, people aren't idiots and most get how time work. The stimulus ended in July, and yet the job market has not surged as a result of all this talent no longer making more at home. Why? Well, on the other side of that is a loss of support for a large amount of consumers, in addition to gov't hiring scaling back. 

[Harry Chappas]

17 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This could also be a part of the problem.

Was her choice...she was a high school student that only wanted to work 4 or 5 hours a week on the weekend during school.  When she was asked to come back and to work more hours to help the carry out business her answer was no....unless they could top the $800 for doing nothing.

Thus this girl that was making a little spending money now received $6K in unemployment.

[Harry Chappas]

3 minutes ago, bmags said:

You think the unemployment stimulus killed small business as much a virus that caused consumers to stay in for 8 weeks and heavy restrictions since?

You'll always be able to find micro stories like that, but it wasn't borne out in the macro data:

70% of those that returned to work in june/july were making more at home than their replacement job. Why go back? Well, people aren't idiots and most get how time work. The stimulus ended in July, and yet the job market has not surged as a result of all this talent no longer making more at home. Why? Well, on the other side of that is a loss of support for a large amount of consumers, in addition to gov't hiring scaling back. 

Those charts look menacing if they break it down by industry I could be wrong.

How many bar and restaurant workers make over $800 a week? 

I do think the bar and restaurant industry should be bailed out but they won't.

 

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

8 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

Was her choice...she was a high school student that only wanted to work 4 or 5 hours a week on the weekend during school.  When she was asked to come back and to work more hours to help the carry out business her answer was no....unless they could top the $800 for doing nothing.

Thus this girl that was making a little spending money now received $6K in unemployment.

This doesn't really pass the smell test.

[bmags]

9 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

Those charts look menacing if they break it down by industry I could be wrong.

How many bar and restaurant workers make over $800 a week? 

I do think the bar and restaurant industry should be bailed out but they won't.

 

 

 

 

I would again say that the issue for restaurants isn't being able to recruit employees, it's that they don't need employees because many are operating at reduced capacity.

You are correct they deserve a bailout, but I don't like the term bailout for them because they are forced to operate this way. This is compensation by the state similar to eminent domain.

[Texsox]

2 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I literally have no fucking clue what you are arguing in this thread.  But let me say this, dining indoors should not be allowed, whether it’s currently a rule or not.  That should not be up for debate whatsoever and before you say “what about all the poor restaurant owners and their employees” that falls on the government to provide them with the necessary financial support to get through this pandemic.  If our government could just take care of those most impacted by COVID (like the restaurant industry) and ban all non-critical activities that greatly increase one’s exposure to COVID (like dining indoors) we’d suddenly have thousands more people are alive.  It’s really that fucking simple.

Agreed. And as I stated before

Owners need to be responsible and stay closed.

People need to stay away from illegally opened dining rooms.

And police need to responsibly apply the law.

 

[Kyyle23]

7 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This doesn't really pass the smell test.

It really doesn't.   

[Harry Chappas]

5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This doesn't really pass the smell test.

What doesn't....she worked minimal hours, was laid off, received unemployment compensation.  

She was not being hired back for the same position technically so she did not have to elect to return to work and as such received the $600 weekly benefit. 

 

[Texsox]

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Unless you're eating the bag, or you don't plate your food and wash your hands, the delivery guy has zero contact with the food.

I get supporting local businesses, I've tried to as well, but in reality the government should have shut these places down and supplemented their revenue for the time being. That didn't happen so now we're gonna lose like 50% of small businesses like restaurants.

This whole thing has been such a disaster from a leadership perspective.

I'm at a golf tournament. No touching the rakes, flags, no water coolers, no contact at all. At school anything anyone touches is treated as being contaminated. So maybe I'm being too careful. 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

8 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

What doesn't....she worked minimal hours, was laid off, received unemployment compensation.  

She was not being hired back for the same position technically so she did not have to elect to return to work and as such received the $600 weekly benefit. 

 

The whole thing.  If the person was making $100 a week, they wouldn't be making $200 a week on unemployment, even subtracting out the extra $600.  They be making something like 50 to 60% of what they were making.

Unemployment itself has all kinds of minimums for how many hours a person has to work and earn before they are even eligible for unemployment.  Someone making 4 or 5 hours a weeks at a minimum wage kind of job (which isn't going to add up to $100 a week either) wouldn't make those thresholds.  To hit those kind of numbers at a minimum wage type job, you are probably talking 15-20 hours a week.

Also if you are working a part time job as a high school student that means you are most likely living at home and a dependent.  This means you aren't able to collect unemployment anyway.

The extra $600 ended 2 and a half months ago when the GOP refused to extend it.

[greg775]

2 hours ago, Dick Allen said:

Before you dislocate your shoulder patting yourself on the back.

 

In case there was any confusion from Trump's tweets last night, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows today said: "The stimulus negotiations are off."

The stimulus bill had no chance. Politics. Pelosi was never going to agree to such a bill before the election. Our world is screwed until politicians start working together. I can dream.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

20 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I'm at a golf tournament. No touching the rakes, flags, no water coolers, no contact at all. At school anything anyone touches is treated as being contaminated. So maybe I'm being too careful. 

 

 

1. All studies have shown that surfaces really aren't the issue for the most part; it's not surviving that long outside of the host on surfaces. It is surviving in air longer though which is worrisome for winter.

2. Hundreds of hands would touch a golf pin or rake; when your food is delivered, there is literally one delivery person touching the bag. Again, they don't touch the actual food so if you remove it from the containers and plate it up and wash your hands, there's no added risk to delivery. The biggest risk to delivery is actually coming face to face with the person which is why I have the driver leave the food at the door.

[Quin]

4 minutes ago, greg775 said:

The stimulus bill had no chance. Politics. Pelosi was never going to agree to such a bill before the election. Our world is screwed until politicians start working together. I can dream.

Also, roid rage.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

4 minutes ago, greg775 said:

The stimulus bill had no chance. Politics. Pelosi was never going to agree to such a bill before the election. Our world is screwed until politicians start working together. I can dream.

There's only one side that doesn't want to give too much to poor people after giving trillions to banks who committed mass fraud, and it's not the side Pelosi is on. There's only one side that worries about poor people maybe getting a couple extra bucks.

[Texsox]

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

1. All studies have shown that surfaces really aren't the issue for the most part; it's not surviving that long outside of the host on surfaces. It is surviving in air longer though which is worrisome for winter.

2. Hundreds of hands would touch a golf pin or rake; when your food is delivered, there is literally one delivery person touching the bag. Again, they don't touch the actual food so if you remove it from the containers and plate it up and wash your hands, there's no added risk to delivery. The biggest risk to delivery is actually coming face to face with the person which is why I have the driver leave the food at the door.

I don't have a need for a delivery driver so I eliminate it. I actually hardly order restaurant food so not hiring someone to pick up my food is easy.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

50 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

Those charts look menacing if they break it down by industry I could be wrong.

How many bar and restaurant workers make over $800 a week? 

I do think the bar and restaurant industry should be bailed out but they won't.

 

 

 

 

1. Most bar/restaurant people weren't making much more than the $600 extra.

2. There's no demand; that's why those industries are going under. It has absolutely nothing to do with employees not working because they can make more on unemployment.

3. What sick world do we live in where $800/week is considered too much for any full time worker in the richest country in the world?

Now that I'm back working, I can say I was making well more than the $1000/wk unemployment paid me for a couple months but never once did I hear people like you concerned about how much less I was getting. And there are A LOT of us that were making a lot more than 52k who were forced out of work.

People were unemployed due to a demand shock; anyone who has any of the unemployment issues on a macroscale are in agreement on this. 

All you have done by forcing businesses closed (which was necessary) and not supplementing those people is destroyed an industry which will in turn destroy other ones. This will take time, but things are not in good shape; commercial and corporate real estate is going to be in big trouble, and the hotel industry is about to lose about 30% of it's size. That doesn't even account for airlines destructions.... all of this means one thing and one thing only, 99% of the people will feel this pain over the next few years. This is just the beginning of the financial crisis.

Edited October 7, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[StrangeSox]

39 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Agreed. And as I stated before

Owners need to be responsible and stay closed.

People need to stay away from illegally opened dining rooms.

And police need to responsibly apply the law.

 

 

Public leaders need to be responsible and order these businesses closed. That is Step 1-999 on "how to handle public health crisis." Take the decision out of the hands of thousands of individual businesses and millions of individual people, because we know, very very clearly, that this doesn't work.

 

 

 

Public health crises need public policy responses. When you focus on individuals during systemic failures, you'll never actually solve the problem. You fix the system.

Edited October 7, 2020 by StrangeSox

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

6 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

 

Public leaders need to be responsible and order these businesses closed. That is Step 1-999 on "how to handle public health crisis." Take the decision out of the hands of thousands of individual businesses and millions of individual people, because we know, very very clearly, that this doesn't work.

The problem is if the order doesn't come from the top, the states can't afford to shut businesses down with zero support. States are already hemorrhaging sales tax dollars, and are already way underbudget on revenues.

If the Fed's don't help the states and those who have been impacted, all shutting things down does is destroy the businesses and the homes with no assistance in sight.

Meanwhile, banks lobbied because they didn't think 12/1 debt ratio was enough and went to 40/1 pre-2008, lending to everyone they could, lying to get people approved, and then sold those bad mortgages to unknowing schmucks in local government and pension funds and etc... then when they got caught and bailed out because trillions defaulted, many padded their pockets (Bear for one) while they merged with Chase and other corrupt banks that were all doing the same shit; stealing from everyone.

It's amazing how people don't care that the 1% has literally STOLEN trillions over the last 12 years, but they get outraged when an unemployed person might make an extra $100 a week during a pandemic shutdown than they did before. 

Edited October 7, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Texsox]

Agreed. As we've seen if people don't follow the laws it keeps getting worse. 

[Dick Allen]

19 minutes ago, greg775 said:

The stimulus bill had no chance. Politics. Pelosi was never going to agree to such a bill before the election. Our world is screwed until politicians start working together. I can dream.

Pelosi passed a stimulus bill.

[turnin' two]

45 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

What doesn't....she worked minimal hours, was laid off, received unemployment compensation.  

She was not being hired back for the same position technically so she did not have to elect to return to work and as such received the $600 weekly benefit. 

 

I know several people that were in this position.  I'm not sure whats been going on since the 600 kicker went away, but this was definitely happening.  

[StrangeSox]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

The problem is if the order doesn't come from the top, the states can't afford to shut businesses down with zero support. States are already hemorrhaging sales tax dollars, and are already way underbudget on revenues.

If the Fed's don't help the states and those who have been impacted, all shutting things down does is destroy the businesses and the homes with no assistance in sight.

Meanwhile, banks lobbied because they didn't think 12/1 debt ratio was enough and went to 40/1 pre-2008, lending to everyone they could, lying to get people approved, and then sold those bad mortgages to unknowing schmucks... then when they got caught and bailed out, many padded their pockets (Bear for one) while they merged with Chase and other corrupt banks that were all doing the same shit.

It's amazing how people don't care that the 1% has literally STOLEN trillions over the last 12 years, but they get outraged when an unemployed person might make an extra $100 a week during a pandemic shutdown than they did before. 

Oh for sure. You can point to some pretty drastic and ongoing failures from people like Gov. Cuomo, but ultimately all state and local governments were screwed without a coherent and competent federal response.

 

 

Don't worry, though. Billionaires have made back $845B since March.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/business/us-billionaire-wealth-increase-pandemic/index.html

[Harry Chappas]

27 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

The whole thing.  If the person was making $100 a week, they wouldn't be making $200 a week on unemployment, even subtracting out the extra $600.  They be making something like 50 to 60% of what they were making.

Unemployment itself has all kinds of minimums for how many hours a person has to work and earn before they are even eligible for unemployment.  Someone making 4 or 5 hours a weeks at a minimum wage kind of job (which isn't going to add up to $100 a week either) wouldn't make those thresholds.  To hit those kind of numbers at a minimum wage type job, you are probably talking 15-20 hours a week.

Also if you are working a part time job as a high school student that means you are most likely living at home and a dependent.  This means you aren't able to collect unemployment anyway.

The extra $600 ended 2 and a half months ago when the GOP refused to extend it.

She was making minimum wage and worked a handful of hours and then was making much more to not work.  She then went off to college.  I didn't ask to audit the conversation but the gist is she was making 3 to 4 times more to stay at home during that period as were many people in that position.

I am not certain about he dependent status nor do I really know how the IDES works but as an employer we are on the hook for employment benefits for employees that were not laid off or had a reduction of hours because we are the more stable employer.  We have a firm that represents us and they tried to  explain this to me and I still cannot understand how the IDES works so when I heard that story I didn't really feel the need to question it . 

 

[Dick Allen]

$600 a week is still only $30k a year,  not exactly a salary that gets the bills paid.

[Texsox]

10 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

 

Public leaders need to be responsible and order these businesses closed. That is Step 1-999 on "how to handle public health crisis." Take the decision out of the hands of thousands of individual businesses and millions of individual people, because we know, very very clearly, that this doesn't work.

 

 

 

Public health crises need public policy responses. When you focus on individuals during systemic failures, you'll never actually solve the problem. You fix the system.

One more time. Yes, we need solid public health policies. 

And if people ignore that beautiful public health policy nothing changes.