Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

dol.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 563 posts

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#131

Post by generalpass »

gwd wrote: post #78
TeMPOraL wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any speculations on how bad is this going to get? Should I stock up on TP, on food, or on vodka and ammo?

Remember that 100 years ago, and then again 80 years ago, large percentages of men in Europe were removed from their own countries and sent somewhere else; ships transporting food and supplies were actively sunk, houses and factories were bombed to smithereens. In spite of the massive economic damage that caused, civilization did not descend into anarchy, and very few people who weren't prisoners starved to death. CO…

> Remember that 100 years ago, and then again 80 years ago, large percentages of men in Europe were removed from their own countries and sent somewhere else; ships transporting food and supplies were actively sunk, houses and factories were bombed to smithereens. In spite of the massive economic damage that caused, civilization did not descend into anarchy, and very few people who weren't prisoners starved to death.

> COVID-19 isn't going to destroy any of our infrastructure, and if we mobilize properly, isn't going to kill nearly as many people. If our [great-]grandparents made it through WWII, there's no reason we can't make it through this.

In The U.S., WWII was funded by the savings of that generation, which is really amazing considering they had been in the longest, deepest economic depression in the nation's history prior to the start of the war.

After the war ended, cooler heads prevailed and all wartime orders were lifted and capital and labor could reform, as it saw fit, and as such, the year immediately following the war produced the greatest annualized economic gains in the history of the country.

Going into what we are doing right now, Americans don't have any savings plus many private and nearly all public institutions have a lot of debt.

There is no indication that the government will permit such a freely flowing economy even after whatever it is we are doing has ended, so I don't find direct comparisons relevant.

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#132

Post by [deleted] »

xwdv wrote: post #98
treyfitty wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the benefits amount to something small for cities... they've largely been the ones hit the hardest. NYC residents are more or less being ignored in these stimulus packages.

NYC residents don’t need help, if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere, and if you can’t make it, leave and free up some real estate for those who can.

[deleted]

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#133

Post by tyingq »

aluminussoma wrote: post #48
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #31

Unemployment benefits have been significantly expanded under the Coronavirus aid bill. The benefit amounts will sound small if you're living in an expensive city like SF or Seattle, but $600/week from the federal government and a similar amount from state unemployment insurance means that unemployment benefits can pay up to an equivalent of $50-60K/year right now. That goes a long way in most parts of the country, es…

What will the employees, in the US at least, do for health insurance? A pandemic is when you need it. These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA. I fear that we will see revolutions in countries where this is not contained, from either a health or economic perspective. An old saying is that you should buy stocks when there is blood in the streets. I hope that doesn't become literal.

"These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA."

That is a huge understatement. Especially for anyone that needs family coverage. The rates I paid when self-employed were more money per month than my entire paycheck until I was in my late 20's.

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#134

Post by minikites »

mmm_grayons wrote: post #50
minikites wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird how the national debt is only a problem when the proposal is helping ordinary people and never a problem when the proposal is to go to war overseas.

I don't like either and think both are largely wastes of money. In both cases there are always the very few poorest who need help from others and there are always a very few situations where we need to go to war. Would you please stop with the tu quoque now?

You have very few people who agree with you. 95% of the time "the national debt" is only used a cudgel against proposals to help the working class.

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#135

Post by rootusrootus »

lukevp wrote: post #23
buzzkillington wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And all this for a virus that kills around 1% of the people who get it, and the majority of them are retired. Future generations will look at us and wonder how we were this stupid.

What do you feel is stupid about the response to this? 1% is a lot of people. The whole point of social distancing and staying at home is to not overwhelm the healthcare system and to give more time to develop proper care procedures.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, 1% would be approximately the same number of deaths we get in a typical year. Slightly more, yes, but some number of the COVID deaths are probably people that had a high likelihood of dying this year anyway, so it seems like an okay estimate.

In that case we are doubling our deaths for a year. Very significant, but in the grand scheme of things it poses no real danger to the species. I haven't decided if I agree with the position that collapsing the economy is worse than letting those deaths happen, but I understand how someone could feel that way. Ask me again after I lose my cushy software job because it's a luxury companies can no longer afford with nobody buying anything.

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#136

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

Majromax wrote: post #94
nostrebored wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also not the reported number in Italy. The sources of error in the data are enough to make the data fairly meaningless. 1. We have no idea how many people were infected 2. We have no idea how many people who have died died from Covid 19 3. The population pyramid in Italy is extremely disparate from the rest of the world. The medical system being overwhelmed is a portion of the contribution, and what it means to…

> Treating any modeling we have of the impact of Covid 19 as reliable is an exercise in insanity. In detail, yes. In general, you can still make some good back-of-an-envelope calculations. Conservative estimates are that the coronavirus has a CFR of about 1% given adequate medical care (South Korea's statistics, where testing has been comprehensive enough that we should have identified any wide pool of asymptomatic c…

CFR is always wildly overestimated initially.

Various models and data sets put asymptomatic cases at between 20% and 50%. Those are fully asymptomatic - i.e. total end-to-end progression with either very mild symptoms indistinguishable from a minor cold, or no symptoms at all.

It's almost impossible to estimate expected population mortality with limited and noisy data, but I've seen estimates from 1.5% to 0.05%.

The only thing that can be said with certainty is that social distancing, testing, and tracking all do a lot to prevent initial infection, and good access to ICU hugely improves chances of survival after infection.

The rest is guesswork at this point. Having said that - my current hand-wavy estimate of deaths in the UK is high five, low six figures. Multiply by five or so for the US.

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#137

Post by x86_64Ubuntu »

gph wrote: post #74
toomuchtodo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the federal government is providing more stimulus juice (one time cash payment and unemployment top up), but no, it is absolutely not going to be enough for the economic challenge we're facing.

You say that with such conviction when you don't have any better info on what the future holds than anyone else. The unemployment benefits (which for many of the unemployed will actually be higher than their regular pay) last for the next four months. If the quarantine lifts by the end of May and businesses reopen then it will be enough. Obviously that's a big if, but for you to come out here and act like you know so…

We do know that things will get worse as we've seen how things have tracked in China, Iran and Italy. And if this quarantine lasts till May, I foresee many small businesses won't be around by then.

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#138

Post by nck4222 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #31

Unemployment benefits have been significantly expanded under the Coronavirus aid bill. The benefit amounts will sound small if you're living in an expensive city like SF or Seattle, but $600/week from the federal government and a similar amount from state unemployment insurance means that unemployment benefits can pay up to an equivalent of $50-60K/year right now. That goes a long way in most parts of the country, es…

This "economy is paused" idea is getting more and more unjustifiable by the day, weeks, and months.

We're not going to emerge from this and just hit the unpause button. Yes some industries will bounce back quickly, but 9 million people over two weeks losing their jobs is an absolutely massive number, and we haven't hit peak yet.

There's no way they'll just be simply rehired when this is "done".

Re: Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

#139

Post by bilbo0s »

Frost1x wrote: post #107
aluminussoma wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What will the employees, in the US at least, do for health insurance? A pandemic is when you need it. These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA. I fear that we will see revolutions in countries where this is not contained, from either a health or economic perspective. An old saying is that you should buy stocks when there is blood in the streets. I hope that doesn't become literal.

Also I'm not sure if I'm in agreement with the tactic of immediately pushing employees to unemployment. Unemployment is funded by taxes which are largely paid by the same people being laid off. If you're promoting businesses push people to unemployment instead of first trying to cover them during hardship and also taking a loss (as everyone else is), you're pushing for more tax subsidies to businesses indirectly. Une…

>Also I'm not sure if I'm in agreement with the tactic of immediately pushing employees to unemployment.

I think everyone definitely understands academically that the actuarial models underpinning unemployment collapse in that kind of environment.

>I dont want to utilize that unless I need to and my other options fail. I expect businesses to do the same and be responsible contributors to society.

Here's the issue game theoretically speaking. I'm pretty sure most businesses and people are likely not going to settle on your strategy as being optimal. (Even though, as you've pointed out, it is the communally optimal strategy given the system we have.) I'd imagine most people will opt for the immediate unemployment strategy.

Post reply on HN