Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf] • Hacker News Board

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

#241

Post by onlyrealcuzzo » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:39 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #37

stupandaus wrote: post #2

Building on my analysis from last week: 1. This week's 6.6M new jobless claims represents ~4% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce. 2. This is incremental to the 3.3M new jobless claims filed week ending 3/21, totaling ~10M total jobless claims in the past 2 weeks. 3. The US unemployment rate was ~3.5% as of EOM February [1], so cumulatively that means we've hit ~10% unemployment as of EOW 3/28 (~10M incremental j…

Data released in New York alone is that they are getting 250-300k successful initial claim calls per day, and many people are not successful. This is going to be the most profund economic event of our lives. Hopefully more like 1893 than 1929.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1893

^ for anyone who doesn't know, 1893 seemed to be the first of many Argentine financial crises, caused by a wheat crop failure, which caused a negative feedback loop as (mostly) European investors pulled out of South Africa and Australia. The effects spilled over into the US and UK financial systems, led to runs on the banks, and caused a severe recession for 2 years.

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

#242

Post by omilu » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:40 PM UTC

binaryorganic wrote: post #26

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.

Your math doesn't check out. 5% of people that get it (among a wide range of ages) require serious medical care for weeks. And if we send 5% of any population to the hospital in a given month the death rate for ALL diseases goes way up.

>> 5% of people that get it

The number of people that have it is under reported, so the death rate and hospitalization rates are exaggerated.

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

#243

Post by _curious_ » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:40 PM UTC

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…

"If I'm laid off, I'll first look at my savings and hit the job market before I consider driving right into unemployment."

Seek and you shall find.

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

#244

Post by malandrew » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:40 PM UTC

RIMR wrote: post #163

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.

You fear a revolution towards healthcare, housing, food, etc. as human rights? Personally that revolution can't come fast enough. This country has betrayed its constitutional duties to its people for decades (supporting the general welfare, anyone?). We NEED revolution at this point since it seems both of our two parties are on the same side when it comes to Working Class America.

At no points have the courts ever taken anywhere near as broad an interpretation of the welfare clause as you're suggesting it to be. And such a broad interpretation would be incongruous with the views of its primary authors (Jefferson and Hamilton).

The framers would more likely to suggest that we NEED a revolution over the expansion of the federal government beyond their limited enumerated powers. They'd also certainly disagree with income taxes as well.

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

#245

Post by treis » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:41 PM UTC

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #157

nck4222 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

If the economy bounced back to what it was on Feb 28th, what is your acceptable number of dead? Would you trade 9 million unemployed for 9 million dead? Do you think that wouldn't have an effect on the market as well? We're in it now, and no amount of wanting to hit the abort button will change anything. It's a fantasy to assume people will just go back to work, the economy will get better, and everything will return…

>If the economy bounced back to what it was on Feb 28th, what is your acceptable number of dead? Would you trade 9 million unemployed for 9 million dead? Do you think that wouldn't have an effect on the market as well?

The vast majority of those dead are going to be 65+. Maybe I'm just feeling salty this morning, but considering how much that generation has stuck it to my generation I'm not even a little bit interested in trading economic collapse for their lives.

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

#246

Post by monktastic1 » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:41 PM UTC

withinboredom wrote: post #184

Retric wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While many people will likely get very sick, they only stay that way for ~2-6 weeks. Further, around half of people below 50 will show minimal if any symptoms. So, while most non essential jobs are shut down we are likely to see a surplus of labor in terms of trucking etc. My guess is plenty of essential jobs will have heavy overtime while many people are unemployed. Simply because the disruptions are going to cascad…

> around half of people below 50 will show minimal if any symptoms. I have a middle finger for you for how cold hearted you sound. As though “it’s no big deal”. My wife went through this (previously healthy 34 year old) and it was terrible. The docs just said: “there’s nothing more we can do”

I'm sorry for what you're going through. Maybe reading a thread on the economic implications of this disaster -- which will inevitably discuss both the terrible parts and the silver linings -- isn't the healthiest thing for you right now?

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

#247

Post by _curious_ » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:41 PM UTC

withinboredom wrote: post #156

Frost1x wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> If I'm laid off, I'll first look at my savings and hit the job market before I consider driving right into unemployment. This is a great case of “the world doesn’t revolve around you.” 1. Most states only give you a few weeks to apply. 2. You already “pay” for your unemployment several times over during your career through unemployment insurance. Your employer pays this, but they could have paid you more if they di…

"2. You already “pay” for your unemployment several times over during your career through unemployment insurance. Your employer pays this, but they could have paid you more if they didn’t have to."

Do you have any data on this assertion?

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

#248

Post by landryraccoon » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:41 PM UTC

treyfitty wrote: post #92

For those living in cities that are locked down, what do yall do about daycare? In NYC, my daycare isn't reimbursing fees, so we're continuing to be charged with a promise of "if insurance pays out, we'll pass it down." With 2 kids, that’s $5,000. Assuming they’re closed for 3 months total, that’s $15,000 down the drain. Now, I get that they're a small business, but their problem is that they can't exactly layoff the…

I’m curious, if the city is locked down why are the kids in daycare and not at home? Are you working as a healthcare provider?

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

#249

Post by toomuchtodo » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:42 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #230

trymas wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"Americans' satisfaction with the way the healthcare system works for them varies by the type of insurance they have. Satisfaction is highest among those with veterans or military health insurance, Medicare and Medicaid, and is lower among those with employer-paid and self-paid insurance. Americans with no health insurance are least satisfied of all." [1]

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-hea...

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

#250

Post by alephnan » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 2:43 PM UTC

bearjaws wrote: post #9

My job has been inundated with applications from people who are not even in tech in any way (think like barbers & home depot workers). I see now why so many companies use automation to filter out resumes.

One of the requirements for unemployment is to show proof of actively applying for jobs.

If workers are not interested in actually resuming work for the time being, they would apply jobs for which they would not qualify for, preferably ones that won’t even contact them back.

This is a very cynical view, but could be a partial explaination.