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

311–320 of 563 posts

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

#311

Post by _curious_ »

alephnan wrote: post #250
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.

"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."

It's not cynical - it's real.

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

#312

Post by mushbino »

adrr wrote: post #298
hirsin wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They like the quality of their healthcare - the "seeing a doctor and getting healthy" aspect. If the question was "do you like working with your health insurance" the answers would be different. I've never met a single person who feels their health insurance is good or useful. R=close to zero if the hypothesis is the super majority like theirs.

Ask anyone who has Kaiser. It’s one most well liked insurance/healthcare providers in the nation.

I had Kaiser for many years and it was trash. Sure it's efficient and relatively cost effective, but the quality of service was terrible. The worst part was if you needed anything mental health related, their services were so bad to the point of being virtually nonexistent. Want to see a therapist? How about a group therapy session with 30 other people from 1-2pm every other Wednesday on the opposite side of town from where you work. Want to see a psychiatrist? Call five different numbers and wait for a few weeks for Kaiser to tell you tough shit.

Have an addiction problem and want treatment? Tough shit. It breaks my heart to think of the number of people who finally got to the point in their lives where they actively sought out help, only to be basically turned away by Kaiser. I would imagine many of those people never got a second chance.

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

#313

Post by orangecat »

throwaway55554 wrote: post #158
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.

Do you know 100 people? Pick one. Crass, no? So what if it's 1%. It's life. Nothing else matters.

So what if it's 1%. It's life. Nothing else matters.

Should we shut down the country and quarantine ourselves during every flu season? In an average year the flu kills about 0.01% of the population, and nothing else matters but trying to save those tens of thousands of people, right?

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

#314

Post by _curious_ »

swimfar wrote: post #294
_curious_ wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you worked 100% more/harder and still made less...what a perverse system.

Most people just wouldn't have taken that job. You could argue that would be better because it leaves it open for someone who needs it more.

"You could argue that would be better because it leaves it open for someone who needs it more." The generosity! Who could need it more than someone who literally does not have any job?

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

#315

Post by TeMPOraL »

airstrike wrote: post #73
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?

"Forecasting is hard, especially when it's about the future" Whether or not you need ammo probably depends on where you live... but I'd stock up on non-perishables and necessities if you can afford it. Not sure you need vodka at all, but I think that's a matter of personal preference. I'm actually trying to be as healthy and fit as possible to fight the weirdness that is self-isolation and to be ready for the virus w…

The vodka and ammo was a bit of the joke (though I think the saying goes that post-apocalypse currency is fuel, ammo and cigarettes).

I've stocked up a month ago for a minor supply chain disruption. But the more I read the news every day, the more it seems to me that it isn't going to be a minor disruption. I'm starting to worry about survival even if neither myself nor anyone around me actually catches COVID-19.

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

#316

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

malandrew wrote: post #288
treis wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 interest…

Not to mention all the assets that would be freed up for younger generations.

Is that really freeing anything up, or just accelerating inheritance? It's not as though we'll find ourselves with a magical new land of free cash for all - it'll just get passed down as it was going to anyways. Boomers are already leaving the workforce in droves, I don't expect it'd be any sort of revolution.

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

#317

Post by mushbino »

adrr wrote: post #234
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...

80% like their healthcare. I think a significant part of that 55% doesn’t realize that Medicare for all takes away their health insurance. It seems when people get educated on Medicare for all, it declines in popularity. https://news.gallup.com/poll/245195/americans-rate-healthcar...

Of the people who come of age and are eligible for Medicare, what percentage of those people turn it down? I personally know of zero.

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

#318

Post by boringg »

asdfman123 wrote: post #210
boringg wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed though I think you hit the nail on the head...how much demand will there be after the pandemic passes(?). We were at the apex of a bull market, now we're heading towards a deep depression. A lot of those jobs won't exist sadly. This goes for current markets impacted but the ripple effects are pretty large.

And lots of people don't realize how long this will last. They say we're going to reopen in a month, but right now the curve doesn't seem to be bending significantly. We're not going to reopen when there's way more cases, and that's where we're heading. Also, when we reopen, it will be short term and still pretty locked down. It's absolutely not the end, but a slight reprieve.

Good points. I would agree that when we do open up (which we will have to) it will be to a very different landscape of people who are much more cautious and have much less disposable income to spend. Without a vaccine, I would be think that infections around the world will keep bouncing around and reinfect countries without significantly coordinated efforts between countries to manage outbreaks or there would be long term shutdowns of trade, people flow amongst countries.

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

#319

Post by TeMPOraL »

MiroF wrote: post #257
toomuchtodo wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food, non-perishables, fuel? Yes. Firearms and ammo? To each their own. We did, but we're more rural. Our concern is a supply chain meltdown when you have millions infected and sick. I would rather be prepared and not need something, then need something and not be prepared.

> Our concern is a supply chain meltdown when you have millions infected and sick. This is an absurdist prediction - we are looking at maximum 2 million 75+ year olds dying with some much smaller number of people of different ages. This is the group least likely to be involved in the day-to-day functioning of our supply chains. Honestly, where are people coming up with these doomsday predictions?

Have you watched the supply chains? Spikes in demand followed by demand collapse have already wreaked havoc. From what I read from people from that business, there's total chaos.

And even if the elderly bear most of the risk, countries are shutting down completely for their sake - and that means companies stopping operations, leading to further disruptions. Also this article: US already has 10 million unemployed, and it barely started to consider doing anything about the virus.

I think this is closest to actual doomsday since the peak of Cold War.

Post reply on HN