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

221–230 of 563 posts

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

#221

Post by ragona »

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.

Keep in mind that a lot of these workers were already uninsured or underinsured.

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

#222

Post by themagician »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #218
themagician wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many places being unemployed pays more than being employed. Not sure why the downvotes. It’s literally true for the first time ever. The way the new benefits work out your unemployment check STARTS at the equivalent of $15/hr x 40hr/week = $600/wk. In California, for example, you can get up to $1,050/wk instead of the old maximum of $450/wk.

> In many places being unemployed pays more than being employed. You're being downvoted because you overgeneralized ("many places"), but this is actually true in some scenarios. See "Unemployed workers could get more than 100% of their paycheck under the coronavirus bill" https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/27/how-unemployed-workers-could... It's a perverse incentive to getting people back to work, so I expect this loophole…

It’s true in a LOT of scenarios. It’s true for anyone making under $15/hr anywhere, and in some states the break even is $20/hr or more.

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

#223

Post by monktastic1 »

xwdv wrote: post #179
ianleeclark wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a cruel thing to say.

I think it’s fair, given the way people in NYC have treated the underclass for a long time.

What? The income distribution of NYC roughly matches that of the USA as a whole. Do you wish ill on the entire USA because a small percentage of Americans have acted unfairly?

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

#224

Post by rch »

thazework wrote: post #176
faet wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eh. Most Americans support a public option. M4A is down to about 26% support as of yesterday. https://i.imgur.com/H9bAwV9.png

Eh. That poll is just for Wisconsin. Nationally it's up to 55%

You're right, and Wisconsin alone isn't representative, but in our current political system a state by state breakdown would be more predictive of election outcomes than a national figure.

Edit: looking into it further, I think the WI number is more interesting than I thought given the 2016 election result:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/...

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

#225

Post by veggieburglar »

apacheCamel wrote: post #84
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…

It seems like the benefits are there for unemployment (except for the whole healthcare debate) but at the same time, our unemployment systems have never experienced such a stress test. My father and a few close friends have all applied but are still waiting to hear anything back from the offices. I hope the process goes quickly for them and anybody else who is going through this right now.

Yeah, I was laid off 3/20 (California) and applied immediately. Got a confirmation number but still haven’t heard anything else. The site was already bugging out and I made it in before the majority of people.

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

#226

Post by vsareto »

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.

> 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.

Put it on a credit card and only make minimum payments, most likely

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

#227

Post by _curious_ »

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…

"unemployment benefits can pay up to an equivalent of $50-60K/year right now."

Wow. It's bizarre one can neither create nor add value yet proceed to receive thousands of dollars for an extended period of time (often multiples more than they will ever "pay in" to the system).

I know too many people already milking it before the pandemic (including family & friends). I accept that it is their personal choice and I don't get emotionally wound up in it or treat them different, though I do feel sorry for them. Learned helplessness combined with ego/entitlement must be a painful state of cognitive dissonance in which to live.

Hard to imagine what this looks like afterwards; it seems like each unemployment instance or broader "depression" further demotivates many Americans while dis-incentivizing the immutable values of knowledge acquisition/application, hard work, sacrifice, risk taking, etc.

There is no such thing as free money. Those who think and act as as if are merely being stripped of their human spirit in exchange. Change my view.

Edit to add: ya'll can downvote but can't share your own views or debate otherwise?

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

#228

Post by lotsofpulp »

epc wrote: post #207
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #83

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. Strongly agree that health care coverage is a major concern. We have a long way to go toward an ideal situation. Sadly, many of the people who are first to be laid off are least likely to have employer-sponsored insurance benefits in the first place (hourly jobs).…

Just experienced this with my spouse leaving Google in February. COBRA window was 60 days from last date of employment. We weren't going to go with COBRA until the pandemic expanded to the US, then we paid for two months.

The money saving move is to pay for the insurance via COBRA only after you need healthcare, since it’s retroactive.

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

#229

Post by StillBored »

treis wrote: post #209
gph wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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've had plenty of recessions before and not once has the economy simply been restarted. To use an example, I work on software for a company in the dental field. The circle is: Nobody is going to the dentist because of Covid -> Dentist stops using my client's services -> Client cancels my project -> I get laid off -> I can't afford to go to the dentist -> Nobody goes to the dentist because they can't afford it. That…

Exactly, and because everyone is leveraged, unless they magically extend the terms on your mortgage (not just delay them) your going to be behind by a month or two for a lot longer than 3 months. Many people have been saying for the last decade+ that a huge portion of the population is working paycheck to paycheck. That means that they don't have enough savings to absorb an extra rent payment, and they won't have them if/when they start working again. either.

This might have worked for a couple days, but no way it works for multiple weeks.

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

#230

Post by sp332 »

trymas wrote: post #198
Chathamization wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

55% in the latest Morning Consult poll[1]. And this is after a heavy push from the healthcare industry against it, as well as strong opposition from all of the Republican leadership and most of the Democratic leadership. Before the recent blitz against it, polling was 70%[2]. [1] https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coron... [2] https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/403248-poll-seventy-pe...

Why republicans hate universal healthcare so much, even when facing unprecedented pandemic?

Have you seen the federal government lately? It's totally understandable not to want that to be in charge of your healthcare.
Post reply on HN