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

431–440 of 563 posts

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

#431

Post by usaar333 »

doh wrote: post #415
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…

This is just a personal opinion, but I think ~15% unemployment peak is far too optimistic. I believe that 50-75% of restaurants will never reopen. 20-35% of small to mid-size hotels, venues, spas will declare bankruptcy within this year. Both employ a lot of people. So I'm afraid the number is going to much higher, maybe even double.

Oddly enough, here in the Bay Area (SIP 2.5 weeks in), most restaurants seem open. Take-out is a thing after all.

Travel/conference focused items (hotels, venues, cruises) are much more affected.

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

#432

Post by doh »

tachyonbeam wrote: post #426
doh wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a personal opinion, but I think ~15% unemployment peak is far too optimistic. I believe that 50-75% of restaurants will never reopen. 20-35% of small to mid-size hotels, venues, spas will declare bankruptcy within this year. Both employ a lot of people. So I'm afraid the number is going to much higher, maybe even double.

I know it's really not PC to talk about this (how dare you value money over human lives!?), but at what point does the economic damage this causes become too much? 15% joblessness would be ~50M americans. If just 0.1% of them commit suicide as a result of losing their jobs or businesses, that would be 50,000 dead. Maybe there's some kind of intermediate between forcing everyone to stay home and not having any mitigat…

I think the difference here is that virus bring death to us. Suicides can be reduced if governments create the correct stimulus.

Again, it's super easy to criticize when not in charge, but my reaction would have been to shut down any means of travels to and from the country, shut down the country for 45 days completely, slowly restart the economy from crucial business to less and introduce couple of strong measurements to compensate workers for lost income.

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

#433

Post by doh »

usaar333 wrote: post #431
doh wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a personal opinion, but I think ~15% unemployment peak is far too optimistic. I believe that 50-75% of restaurants will never reopen. 20-35% of small to mid-size hotels, venues, spas will declare bankruptcy within this year. Both employ a lot of people. So I'm afraid the number is going to much higher, maybe even double.

Oddly enough, here in the Bay Area (SIP 2.5 weeks in), most restaurants seem open. Take-out is a thing after all. Travel/conference focused items (hotels, venues, cruises) are much more affected.

I live in LA. It's not that different. I did talk to some owners of the restaurants and they said that their revenue is down by around 80% even with takeouts. Most people are not spending money. So it's something, but hardly enough.

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

#434

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#435

Post by redisman »

0xffff2 wrote: post #325
nkozyra wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you really need to distinguish between industries at this point. It's all bad.

Is it really? I only have two direct data points, but I (government contractor) and my brother (large company) are both still fully employed with no immediate risk of unemployment, reduction in salary, etc. Just look at the numbers. 20% unemployment, while horrific in both human and economic terms, also implies 80% employment . When nearly everyone in the hospitality industry is out of a job, I have to think that som…

There's going to be a lag but software is an expense to the real-world companies and consumers. Our revenues don't materialize from the ether. Not to even mention what any VC-reliant companies are going to face when their runway is over.

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

#436

Post by marricks »

usaar333 wrote: post #431
doh wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a personal opinion, but I think ~15% unemployment peak is far too optimistic. I believe that 50-75% of restaurants will never reopen. 20-35% of small to mid-size hotels, venues, spas will declare bankruptcy within this year. Both employ a lot of people. So I'm afraid the number is going to much higher, maybe even double.

Oddly enough, here in the Bay Area (SIP 2.5 weeks in), most restaurants seem open. Take-out is a thing after all. Travel/conference focused items (hotels, venues, cruises) are much more affected.

That is interesting but probably not indicative of elsewhere.

Portland OR is a bit techy and boogie but even then it has still been hit HARD. The places I frequent all have had drastically reduced hours and business. I haven’t heard of any closed for good but more and more and just on a long hiatus or boarded over...

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

#437

Post by usaar333 »

tachyonbeam wrote: post #426
doh wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a personal opinion, but I think ~15% unemployment peak is far too optimistic. I believe that 50-75% of restaurants will never reopen. 20-35% of small to mid-size hotels, venues, spas will declare bankruptcy within this year. Both employ a lot of people. So I'm afraid the number is going to much higher, maybe even double.

I know it's really not PC to talk about this (how dare you value money over human lives!?), but at what point does the economic damage this causes become too much? 15% joblessness would be ~50M americans. If just 0.1% of them commit suicide as a result of losing their jobs or businesses, that would be 50,000 dead. Maybe there's some kind of intermediate between forcing everyone to stay home and not having any mitigat…

We're not going to hold stay at home forever - even Wuhan is exiting lockdown (after 2.5 months).

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

#438

Post by brewdad »

usaar333 wrote: post #431
doh wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a personal opinion, but I think ~15% unemployment peak is far too optimistic. I believe that 50-75% of restaurants will never reopen. 20-35% of small to mid-size hotels, venues, spas will declare bankruptcy within this year. Both employ a lot of people. So I'm afraid the number is going to much higher, maybe even double.

Oddly enough, here in the Bay Area (SIP 2.5 weeks in), most restaurants seem open. Take-out is a thing after all. Travel/conference focused items (hotels, venues, cruises) are much more affected.

A bunch of Portland restaurants found that they were losing money faster by offering takeout versus simply closing their doors completely. Obviously, a number of factors play into whether this is true for any given restaurant but takeout business isn't necessarily a panacea.

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

#439

Post by redisman »

robszumski wrote: post #105
baron_harkonnen wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a lot of cognitive dissonance for tech employees partially because tech thrived in the 2008 crisis. Investors looking to make high risk/reward investments had no where else to go but SV. If you aren't old enough to remember the dot-com boom it's understandable you might feel tech is invincible. Tech will not be insulated from this and in general I think we'll see a major contraction of the tech labour…

VCs, possibly. The larger tech companies are selling 1 and 3 year deals for software, which will see some impact, but largely distance them from the deep V because of the length of the terms.

Sure, but what if you sold your 3 year deal to an airline that is now effectively stuck in bankruptcy for the next 10 years. Or any of the 100 other industries/sub-industries that are completely shut down right now. If I can't afford to pay rent on my office I sure as heck am not paying Microsoft either.

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

#440

Post by generalpass »

carleverett wrote: post #425
generalpass wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you have any sources that compare government and private savings at the two time points? I am surprised by your claim that savings were higher at the height of the great depression Not immediately, but the U.S. was on a gold standard at the time and funded the war through war bonds (and establishment of income taxes) which were largely purchased domestically. The gold standard bit is important because the govern…

It sounds like you're arguing against the idea of debt altogether. Debt is a great, great thing that's allowed us to accomplish way more as a society than we ever could before. Way faster too. Yes, there is irresponsible lending that winds up in temporary value being created that we later find out was fake, and yes it's scary when the government is that lender. Maybe ironically, gold now works as a store of value tha…

> It sounds like you're arguing against the idea of debt altogether. Debt is a great, great thing that's allowed us to accomplish way more as a society than we ever could before. Way faster too.

> Yes, there is irresponsible lending that winds up in temporary value being created that we later find out was fake, and yes it's scary when the government is that lender. Maybe ironically, gold now works as a store of value that hedges against government money going bad.

> But debt it still a great system that will continue to work well after COVID-19.

There is no argument for or against debt. You are inserting something not there.

It is notable, however, that to create debt there must be a creditor.

Post reply on HN