Live data from Hacker News

Additional 6.6M File for Initial Unemployment Benefits [pdf]

dol.gov

441–450 of 563 posts

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

#441
post #323

The long term scars of this upcoming Depression will be unlike anything anyone under 70 has experienced. And the scars will be long lasting. My mother in law used to use Cool Whip containers for leftovers. When we'd visit, she'd send us home with food packed in them. Usually stuff like mashed potatoes, but often good stuff too. And when we'd visit her in a few weeks/month, she'd ask where her containers were. This wa…

> And when we'd visit her in a few weeks/month, she'd ask where her containers were.

The correct thing to do here is to return the containers filled with good stuff that you made for her.

Then the reciprocal gestures can continue like an endless game of ping-pong.

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

#442
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not too bad... here in Belgium we currently have half of the working population on unemployment benefits.

Then again for the part of that which is related to corona it’s mostly through the mechanism of temporary unemployment, where the state takes over paying part of the paycheck for the duration of the time that the workers can’t work, and they are expected to return to their jobs once the lockdown is over. Of course not all companies will survive post-corona but it seems like an approach that potentially better preserv…

Canada too, up to 75% of the payroll, for companies with 30%+ decline in revenue. It will take weeks to roll though, it is all promises as of now

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

#443
post #415

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.

What happens to all this commercial rental space? Rents are going to drop through the floor, and any business who signs up will have dramatically lower operating costs than in January.

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

#444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

I mean, I hope not, it certainly doesn't seem realistic to do so, but I see people pushing for multi-month lockdowns until mid-summer.

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

#445
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you feel is stupid about the response to this? 1% is a lot of people. The whole point of social distancing and staying at home is to not overwhelm the healthcare system and to give more time to develop proper care procedures.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, 1% would be approximately the same number of deaths we get in a typical year. Slightly more, yes, but some number of the COVID deaths are probably people that had a high likelihood of dying this year anyway, so it seems like an okay estimate. In that case we are doubling our deaths for a year. Very significant, but in the grand scheme of things it poses no real danger to the spe…

Even 70% dying wouldn't pose a threat to humans as species, not sure what kind of point is supported by this argument.

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

#446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand- they are not providing the service but also not reimbursing fees? That makes zero sense to me- do you pay monthly, and ahead of time?

Monthly on the first of every month for services to be rendered that month. It makes sense that they charge, but I just don’t like it. Similar to if you don’t use your apartment- your landlord isn’t refunding you for that.

Right- but if I was unable to enter my home, I would not be paying rent. This isn't a "the service is there, but I am choosing not to use it" situation, unless I am misunderstanding something- this is a "I am legally not allowed to use this service" or another way to look at it- they are legally not allowed to provide this service.

I know in nyc, lining up childcare can be a crazy process involving waitlists and such- but I can't imagine paying them in months they are unable to provide service by law.

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

#447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most obvious and direct way to help people is to send them cash payments. The IRS is already set up to be capable of doing this, and to do so at the scale required. Paying hospital bills would be exponentially more complex of an operation, and there isn't an organization already set up to administer something like that at this scale.

> ...to help people Sure, but I was talking about helping the infected people. Yeah, it's more complex, but if it was a priority, it could be arranged. It's not like it has to be done quickly. Bills can be settled months later. My cynical explanation is that Covid infected do not have a lobbyist at the table when these things are decided.

The US is helping infected people. Infected people are a subset of all people.

But, how or why would any infection requirement be necessary or a good idea?

1. The economic toll that is happening is not even remotely limited to those who are infected.

2. We aren't testing everyone and we don't have the resources to do so, so how would you accurately allocate the funds to those who are infected?

3. Those 10 million people who lost their jobs over the last two weeks mostly aren't infected (yet) but still have healthcare needs.

4. Much/most of the population is projected to contract the virus at some point anyway.

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

#448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Unfortunately not really https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-02/chinese-c...

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

#449
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.

What happens to all this commercial rental space? Rents are going to drop through the floor, and any business who signs up will have dramatically lower operating costs than in January.

Landlords are scraping by already. We have multiple offices across the World and our landlord begged us with tears to pay the April rents.

Commercial real estate will be impacted as heavily as any other business.

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

#450
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…

the problem with your statement that NOT doing any of the counter measures (like self isolation) would result in the overloading of the healthcare system and many people dying. (heck, the healthcare system in the US seems to be overloaded already).

When you have no further option for healthcare because the system is broken and overloaded, why would going into work make any sense if it resulted in either an period of illness with structural symptons or even death.

In times of crisis, people want food on the table and a roof over their head, if the cost benefit of doing legal work and following the rule of law turns negative, people might aswell just steal food and stop paying rent, who is there to stop them?

Post reply on HN