bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,381
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 3, 2020 13:12:35 GMT -5
Count me as being pro consumer. I like the technological advances that have occurred over the past 50 years in my lifetime. I like that I am working on a computer that doesn't cost $10K with a fraction of the processing speed.
I am also in favor of trade. I support people from Kansas and Arizona trading goods and services. I support people from Kansas and Mexico trading goods and services. I like that I am able to buy organic and gluten free food where I live. Almost everything I buy was produced somewhere other than local. Buying from local mom and pop store means very little to me. Buying US made means very little to me. Buying only local and/or buying US doesn't save jobs - it just transfers jobs with net reduction in jobs.
|
|
|
Post by joetrinsey on Jul 3, 2020 20:19:12 GMT -5
Count me as being pro consumer. I like the technological advances that have occurred over the past 50 years in my lifetime. I like that I am working on a computer that doesn't cost $10K with a fraction of the processing speed.
It feels like I miscommunicated because this wasn't what I was talking about at all. Innovation is great. I can understand how you could take the Ford/Honda line that way. I'm talking about valuing things other than short-term prices. Commoditization doesn't build wealth.
There's also supply chain issues, that I believe will only get more pressing as we look a century out at potential spikes in energy costs. The 3,000 mile Caesar salad might be getting a lot more expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Brutus Buckeye on Jul 6, 2020 17:43:34 GMT -5
When do they expect to make their decision?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jul 6, 2020 18:43:17 GMT -5
When do they expect to make their decision? Given that both houses just announced a two week recess, not any time soon.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,106
|
Post by trojansc on Jul 6, 2020 18:46:20 GMT -5
When do they expect to make their decision? Given that both houses just announced a two week recess, not any time soon. I imagine a decision will be made very close to the last week of July when benefits are running out. They don't want to announce an extension too early -- it's better for them to encourage employment and make people panic for a massive decrease in income.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,106
|
Post by trojansc on Jul 13, 2020 22:20:33 GMT -5
We're about ~2 weeks out and people are starting to sweat. With lockdowns and re-openings being set back a few stages, I think it is almost certain that this will at least be partially extended, though probably not to the 600$ amount.
I also been asking around a lot to many of my friends, former co-workers, etc. about how their jobs are going and whether or not its been hard to hire employees. Post-college, a lot of my work has been in restaurant/retail management. Not many people at all are having trouble filing positions, particularly now. Many restaurants don't have the ability to create enough outdoor seating to employ all the staff necessary.
Some of my former employees and co-workers have still not received Unemployment. If you've dealt with the California system, you know that you have to start calling at 755am every day and start calling the Unemployment line to have a *chance* to get through. Many people give up, many people never get through. If you are persistent enough, you will get through. But getting through is not a guarantee to getting your case resolved. The good news is that backpay almost always comes, just not necessarily when you need it most.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 13, 2020 23:46:41 GMT -5
Some of my former employees and co-workers have still not received Unemployment. If you've dealt with the California system, you know that you have to start calling at 755am every day and start calling the Unemployment line to have a *chance* to get through. Many people give up, many people never get through. If you are persistent enough, you will get through. But getting through is not a guarantee to getting your case resolved. The good news is that backpay almost always comes, just not necessarily when you need it most. Washington got stung by some Nigerian scammers for more than half a billion dollars, and in response they decided to shut down all unemployment claims right in the middle of the crisis and only slowly start giving people money again after they were able to prove they weren't part of the scam. (It was basically an ID theft scam. They were using the names of real people who were still employed, then filing for unemployment in their names, but intercepting the money and sending it back to Nigeria.) The result was that some people lost their unemployment benefits for months while the system tried to reboot itself with the scammers kicked out.
|
|
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: 28,106
|
Post by trojansc on Jul 14, 2020 0:10:55 GMT -5
Some of my former employees and co-workers have still not received Unemployment. If you've dealt with the California system, you know that you have to start calling at 755am every day and start calling the Unemployment line to have a *chance* to get through. Many people give up, many people never get through. If you are persistent enough, you will get through. But getting through is not a guarantee to getting your case resolved. The good news is that backpay almost always comes, just not necessarily when you need it most. Washington got stung by some Nigerian scammers for more than half a billion dollars, and in response they decided to shut down all unemployment claims right in the middle of the crisis and only slowly start giving people money again after they were able to prove they weren't part of the scam. (It was basically an ID theft scam. They were using the names of real people who were still employed, then filing for unemployment in their names, but intercepting the money and sending it back to Nigeria.) The result was that some people lost their unemployment benefits for months while the system tried to reboot itself with the scammers kicked out. Ok — I can EASILY understand how scams could happen in Tax season when someone files ahead of you. But how are states not able to verify employment status and make sure claims are legitimate before they go out? Like, don’t they have to verify you’re eligible for unemployment? If you get fired for punching a coworker in the face, you’re not eligible for Unemployment?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 14, 2020 1:14:02 GMT -5
Washington got stung by some Nigerian scammers for more than half a billion dollars, and in response they decided to shut down all unemployment claims right in the middle of the crisis and only slowly start giving people money again after they were able to prove they weren't part of the scam. (It was basically an ID theft scam. They were using the names of real people who were still employed, then filing for unemployment in their names, but intercepting the money and sending it back to Nigeria.) The result was that some people lost their unemployment benefits for months while the system tried to reboot itself with the scammers kicked out. Ok — I can EASILY understand how scams could happen in Tax season when someone files ahead of you. But how are states not able to verify employment status and make sure claims are legitimate before they go out? Like, don’t they have to verify you’re eligible for unemployment? If you get fired for punching a coworker in the face, you’re not eligible for Unemployment? I don't know what the deal was exactly. It apparently had to do with their online system, because the way that they found out about it was that people who were signing up for an account with the state were finding out that there was already an unemployment claim filed for their social security number. I heard that some employers were rejecting the claims, but that wasn't stopping the problem. It was soon recommended that people who were not unemployed should go ahead and sign up for an account in their name and social security number without filing for a claim, because first of all that would let you see if someone else was already using your name and SSN, and secondly once you had an account associated with your SSN, nobody else could sign up for one.
|
|
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: 28,106
|
Post by trojansc on Jul 27, 2020 14:51:14 GMT -5
So, the additional 600$/week unemployment benefits officially ended on Saturday in every state except New York, whose benefits expired yesterday.
Unless a decision is made and able to be implemented by the end of the week, which, is very unlikely, all persons collecting unemployment will receive their state benefit only. The maximum benefit in California is $450/week (1800$/month) and Louisiana is ($247 a week/$988 per month).
The Republican proposal to determine what to do has come WAY late (literally, after the benefits expired). They want to do $200/week extra UNTIL states can figure out how to administer benefits that will provide 70% of the income they were making before they were laid off (the income cap has not been listed, but I imagine it would be $600 or something close to that). They have had the HEROES act that was reportedly never going to pass for months to debate and adjust.
It's pretty obvious what happened: They were hoping the economy would be doing better and the Coronavirus situation would have improved. States are continuously teetering on what is reopening and what is being closed down again, and different guidelines for certain types of businesses to be open. Unfortunately, now, it has become too late.
Here's where I think the mistake was made: Why wasn't this plan to implement 70% of a workers earnings being prepared for the psst two months? That way it could only take a few weeks to adjust for the changes, which is a lot different than 2 months? The eviction protections aren't clear yet either. This has been handled very very poorly. I know some Democrats are pushing hard against the Republicans here, but I'm not sure how much of that is a good thing. Pelosi keeps saying she won't accept a temporary extension, but, $200 extra a week could go a long way, even though it's not ideal.
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Jul 27, 2020 14:58:15 GMT -5
This bill is going to be a complete trainwreck. None of the republicans can agree on anything besides the fact that they won't pass anything the democrats put out from the house.
I agree that they probably weren't discussing any of this because they expected the v-shaped recovery. Still surprised they haven't at least gotten to work since June when cases started going up again in the south.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2020 15:30:13 GMT -5
Mitch McConnell was too busy confirming unqualified Fed judges.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 27, 2020 15:55:19 GMT -5
The maximum benefit in California is $450/week (1800$/month) and Louisiana is ($247 a week/$988 per month). This is crazy to me. California ranks 23rd(!) in maximum unemployment per week. This is one of the most liberal states with one of the highest costs of living. What is their justification for their safety net being that much lower than a state like Iowa (max $548)?
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Jul 27, 2020 16:06:52 GMT -5
The maximum benefit in California is $450/week (1800$/month) and Louisiana is ($247 a week/$988 per month). This is crazy to me. California ranks 23rd(!) in maximum unemployment per week. This is one of the most liberal states with one of the highest costs of living. What is their justification for their safety net being that much lower than a state like Iowa (max $548)? Not only that, the cost-of-living thing makes it so as a percentage of average wage it ranks 46th. A lot of states got smacked by the 2008 crash and haven't been able to refill the coffers. Employers (and employees that aren't thinking about the next crash) don't want the UI tax raised and without that the state can't raise unemployment benefits without taking on federal loans. I assume California ended up especially short on cash when that all happened.
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Jul 27, 2020 16:20:55 GMT -5
Employers (and employees that aren't thinking about the next crash) don't want the UI tax raised. . . In CA employees don't contribute to UI. It's all the Employer. I'm a CA employer, I wouldn't mind paying a higher UI rate if they changed the way they determined benefit amount and the amount of time an employee could collect. I think it's more employees are worried their wages will go down because business will be affected if UI tax goes up. Looking out for their job in the short term, but it will hurt them if their job is swallowed up when the economy collapses. The pro-business lobby has a lot of swing just about everywhere in the country.
|
|