|
Post by ilikewaffles on Aug 22, 2021 15:09:27 GMT -5
The motivation for ending UI benefits couldn't *possibly* have been about something other than juicing red state economies, could it? What left leaning think tank did the study ?
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Aug 22, 2021 15:30:45 GMT -5
The motivation for ending UI benefits couldn't *possibly* have been about something other than juicing red state economies, could it? What left leaning think tank did the study ? The authors referenced about half a dozen studies, including one from that notoriously leftist Wall Street titan, JPMirgan Chase. You know, that company led by noted communist Jamie Dimon?
|
|
|
Post by ilikewaffles on Aug 25, 2021 18:48:30 GMT -5
What left leaning think tank did the study ? The authors referenced about half a dozen studies, including one from that notoriously leftist Wall Street titan, JPMirgan Chase. You know, that company led by noted communist Jamie Dimon? The JP Morgan "study" examined google searches to see if they could detect increased activity in people looking for work. Seems like an odd way to research how many people are looking for work in the service and retail sectors, where many go to the employer to fill out an application in person. Here's another doozy from the study: We do find an increase in Google searches for ‘unemployment’ in states ending benefits in the days after the announcement, suggesting increased attention to the issue.
Well yeah. Sucks when those benefits end.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Sept 6, 2021 7:46:34 GMT -5
7.5 million people lose their unemployment benefits today. Seems suboptimal.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Sept 6, 2021 11:46:00 GMT -5
7.5 million people lose their unemployment benefits today. Seems suboptimal. The average household receiving UI has 3.8 members, so it's actually more like 30 million people losing benefits. Even less optimal!
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,131
|
Post by trojansc on Sept 6, 2021 12:56:56 GMT -5
7.5 million people lose their unemployment benefits today. Seems suboptimal. www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrats-pandemic-unemployment-benefits-biden-aides-alarmInteresting article . . . I believe many states simply didn't even address whether they would or would not extend the benefits. I guess they still theoretically can, but who knows if they will. Is a ploy plausible, where states wait a couple weeks/month after expiration to see if people go get jobs? Dunno.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Sept 6, 2021 13:44:28 GMT -5
7.5 million people lose their unemployment benefits today. Seems suboptimal. www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrats-pandemic-unemployment-benefits-biden-aides-alarmInteresting article . . . I believe many states simply didn't even address whether they would or would not extend the benefits. I guess they still theoretically can, but who knows if they will. Is a ploy plausible, where states wait a couple weeks/month after expiration to see if people go get jobs? Dunno. There isn't a single state set to extend benefits. Congress and the White House need to act now or tens of millions of people are going to get hurt.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,131
|
Post by trojansc on Sept 6, 2021 13:51:15 GMT -5
There isn't a single state set to extend benefits. Congress and the White House need to act now or tens of millions of people are going to get hurt. If they do, the people living in Red states will still get hurt, because their states reject that money. Many of them cut off the normal weekly extensions, not just the extra $300.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Sept 6, 2021 13:55:58 GMT -5
There isn't a single state set to extend benefits. Congress and the White House need to act now or tens of millions of people are going to get hurt. If they do, the people living in Red states will still get hurt, because their states reject that money. Many of them cut off the normal weekly extensions, not just the extra $300. There's no reason to let individual states reject federal money. They could simply not give them the choice.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Sept 6, 2021 14:24:41 GMT -5
QUESTION...
How is the job market in the State that you all live in? In Minnesota/ Twin Cities area I see a LOT of help wanted signs.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Sept 6, 2021 14:49:10 GMT -5
Around us service industry is hurting bad. Shocking that restaurants can't hire people on at awful wages to get overworked. Even the fast casual places are only paying $11 or $12 an hour and are screaming nobody that wants to work.
White collar jobs seem to be fine.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,131
|
Post by trojansc on Sept 6, 2021 14:53:18 GMT -5
Around us service industry is hurting bad. Shocking that restaurants can't hire people on at awful wages to get overworked. Even the fast casual places are only paying $11 or $12 an hour and are screaming nobody that wants to work. White collar jobs seem to be fine. There are not a lot of front of house/tipped employee restaurant jobs available in my area. Both my mother and sister work one of those jobs and had their hours reduced. Now, they've had the NOW HIRING sign up since pre-pandemic for a Full Time Cook and have never, ever took it down. Multiple years now. This is in a state that already cut off unemployment benefits, so, why can't they get people to work?! It's just a dumbfounding question.....
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Sept 6, 2021 15:25:09 GMT -5
If they do, the people living in Red states will still get hurt, because their states reject that money. Many of them cut off the normal weekly extensions, not just the extra $300. There's no reason to let individual states reject federal money. They could simply not give them the choice. Except it’s the states who would still be required to be the facilitators. I don’t think the feds could force a state to do that.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Sept 6, 2021 15:33:44 GMT -5
There's no reason to let individual states reject federal money. They could simply not give them the choice. Except it’s the states who would still be required to be the facilitators. I don’t think the feds could force a state to do that. They could require the states to report their UI rolls and pay people directly through a federal agency.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 6, 2021 16:24:58 GMT -5
You can't *make* people (or states) take money. Or anything else. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
I remember when Washington State (not a red state) refused to take FEMA money to do planning for how, in an evacuation emergency, they were going to load up double-length buses in Seattle and drive people to the eastern half of the state. Over the mountains. In buses that could barely get over the mountains if they were empty. So the passengers would have to walk alongside the buses.
The state said this was nonsense make-work prepper theater, and refused to participate.
|
|