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

271–280 of 563 posts

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

#271

Post by newshorts »

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 live in the Bay Area and childcare has been shut down for a few weeks out here as well.

It’s taxing but also pretty cool to be able to work and spend time with your kid. I just wish she could interact with people when she sees them outside, she used to pick random strangers and ask for a hug (she’s 1). She’s adapting, but you can tell she’s trying to understand why she can’t run up and play with little kids she sees outside.

It’s also hard to know she sees you ignoring her from time to time. I hope this doesn’t negatively impact her long term development.

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

#272

Post by japhyr »

op03 wrote: post #169
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…

Is there a state wise breakdown? I would guess NYC is contributing a big chunk, and if things turn around there in a month or two should be okay.

Do you have any reason to think we're not going to see the situation in NYC play out in numerous other US cities over the coming weeks and months?

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

#273

Post by [deleted] »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #83
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.

> 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).…

[deleted]

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

#274

Post by MiroF »

agarden wrote: post #155
adrianN wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know. But we don't know the true fatality rate yet and we won't know it before it's way too late to act. I don't think it's okay to literally risk millions of lives on the off chance that we missed 95% of the cases with our testing.

That is a reasonable line of thought, but incomplete. How many lives are we risking by tanking the global economy? That seems like it should be a more quantifiable risk. It becomes a trade-off between the amount of lives we can calculate will be lost via our pandemic-prevention measures (and to what degree of certainty) and the number that might be lost without them (and to what degree of certainty). The trade-off is…

It is quantifiable, however it appears that periods of economic decline are strongly associated with decreased mortality rates, at least according to the best evidence I can find from Nature.

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

#275

Post by dominotw »

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.

I enrolled in ACA via job loss exception when I got let go last year. COBRA is too expensive.

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

#276

Post by scrooched_moose »

nkozyra wrote: post #113
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And they want us to believe that it will be ok because of a $1200 check and state unemployment benefits.... Not true. The unemployment benefits have also been augmented by up to $600/week above state unemployment benefits. This amount applies even if your state benefits have been exhausted. The $1200 is an extra stimulus check for people whether or not they’re still employed. Not to be confused with the unemploymen…

I don't think the $1200 goes to everyone, though, right? There's an income threshold. I mean, the number is almost irrelevant given the extent of the crisis. Might as well make it a million a person because some fundamental truths of the economy are going to completely change.

It starts phasing out at $75,000 AGI. Decreases 5% for every dollar over. For example, if you make $84,000 AGI, you would get $1200-.05*(84000-75000) = $750.

It decreases to $0 at $99,000.

Edit: double everything for a married couple - potential for $2400 that begins phasing out at $150,000 and drops to $0 at $198,000.

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

#277

Post by _curious_ »

themagician wrote: post #124
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…

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." Could this be a tipping point?

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

#278

Post by MiroF »

fock wrote: post #118
dante_dev wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Italy you see 10% mortality because Italy tests only (really) sick people. It's really likely that millions of italians have covid. This is not really demonstrable at the moment, but still https://www.wantedinrome.com/news/coronavirus-report-six-mil... Italy is treating every single patient with high standard healthcare. They did not reach the "0 free ICUs" moment yet. What we can say as of today is that the high…

sick of hearing this silliness: https://www.ecodibergamo.it/stories/bergamo-citta/coronaviru... so yeah, they barely test half the dead people (which are still double the normal deaths...). And A LOT of covid patients means a lot of deaths as well, bc. at 1.3% (Diamond Princess, where people are still not through it/dying) to 5% letality, the thing IS BAD.

A cruise ship skews older and most people from Diamond Princess should be out of it by now.

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

#279

Post by malyk »

nkozyra wrote: post #113
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And they want us to believe that it will be ok because of a $1200 check and state unemployment benefits.... Not true. The unemployment benefits have also been augmented by up to $600/week above state unemployment benefits. This amount applies even if your state benefits have been exhausted. The $1200 is an extra stimulus check for people whether or not they’re still employed. Not to be confused with the unemploymen…

I don't think the $1200 goes to everyone, though, right? There's an income threshold. I mean, the number is almost irrelevant given the extent of the crisis. Might as well make it a million a person because some fundamental truths of the economy are going to completely change.

Yes, this is true. The check amount decreases for individuals making between 75k and 100k. Over 100k you get nothing. Double those numbers for couples.

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

#280

Post by ilikehurdles »

irq11 wrote: post #254
ilikehurdles wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The financial probelms are a given. Joining some political death cult to sacrifice the weak and elderly portion of our population to feed the COVID-19 Volcano isn't going to make the virus end any sooner, and you'll have even fewer consumers left after it's all over if governments choose to go that route. The virus doesn't care, and as far as I'm concerned any economic system that isn't capable of protecting the vuln…

”Joining some political death cult to sacrifice the weak and elderly portion of our population...isn't going to make the virus end any sooner” Barring the development of a vaccine (which is far from guaranteed, and a year or more away, in the best case), letting the virus sweep through the population is pretty much the only thing that would bring this to an end quickly. We could achieve herd immunity in a few months…

Letting it sweep through uncontrollably quickly by pretending it's business-as-normal out there will lead to many times more deaths due to hospital overutilization.

Our current actions are focused on the goal of leveling the curve, not putting up a wall. There aren't armed guards outside our homes preventing us from leaving. The grocery stores are open. We can come into contact with others to order just about all goods we've always been able to order. We can go to parks and trails and beaches. This will cause more infections, and we all know it; but thanks to these measures, ER visits in our city are down over 20%, allowing healthcare some capacity to deal with the influx infected people, and our daily growth of infections doesn't look exponential anymore.

This thing hospitalizes many young (under 40 years of age) people as well, and in our state that has been on lockdown for longer than many others, medical fellows and residents from unrelated specialties are being asked to help with COVID-19 cases. In a week or two at most it's expected they'll be required to help. If our government wasn't taking these defensive measures, we'd already need more space to store the bodies.

Post reply on HN