511–520 of 711 posts
A few things to note: 1. These figures are only new claims as of 3/21, so the numbers will get worse. 2. This is ~2% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce. 3. This is nearly 5x (!) the prior record of 671K new jobless claims from 1982, and redefines the scale for jobless claims. [1] 4. This does not account for the countless gig workers that are part of the modern economy that likely did not file for unemployment s…
And this is just the start. While I think the US response to Corona was slower than the response in my country I feel the US is the only country that's seriously discussing economic repercussions and debating the medical experts. In EU (at least in my country) it's doctors running things and we are in "stop the pandemic at all cost". Everyone is in panic due to Italy situation. But doctors are only trained to see the…
Here's a set of 3 questions that I think leads to a possible answer.
- How much would someone have to pay you to be put to sleep for 8 years, during which period you have no sensory input or output?
- Would you rather be put to sleep for 8 years now or at the end of your life?
- Do you have a preference over being put to sleep for the last 8 years of your life vs just dying straight up?
I think most people would be willing to go to sleep for 8 years for $2 million. And, most would prefer dying 8 years sooner over going to sleep now.
In other words, $2m > sleep for 8 years now > dying 8 years earlier == coronavirus victim
The moral dilemma is that we're asking one person to die 8 years sooner to create an outbalanced improvement in quality of life increase for someone else. That is, you're taking away well-being from one person to give to another. I think government officials implement policies that redistribute human well-being all the time, but it raises alarm bells when we start dealing with life and death.
> A week ago, he said he had “a good middle-class job” which paid him $35.50 an hour plus health care and retirement benefits. Now he is struggling to figure out how he’ll pay a $300 electric bill and $1,000 in rent for his townhouse. He also lost his health insurance. You make $35.5/hour in (I suppose?) a stable job but if the work stops for a week, you struggle with a $300 bill? I know some people are living payche…
Now you have to debate selling your stock at such low prices and realizes huge loses or paying your bills - I think most people are going to try to hold out for unemployment/use credit before they do that.
A few things to note: 1. These figures are only new claims as of 3/21, so the numbers will get worse. 2. This is ~2% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce. 3. This is nearly 5x (!) the prior record of 671K new jobless claims from 1982, and redefines the scale for jobless claims. [1] 4. This does not account for the countless gig workers that are part of the modern economy that likely did not file for unemployment s…
And yet DJIA is up almost 1000 points. Is this the stimulus $$$ in work, or what is going on here?
A few things to note: 1. These figures are only new claims as of 3/21, so the numbers will get worse. 2. This is ~2% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce. 3. This is nearly 5x (!) the prior record of 671K new jobless claims from 1982, and redefines the scale for jobless claims. [1] 4. This does not account for the countless gig workers that are part of the modern economy that likely did not file for unemployment s…
This should be normalized to be per-capita, comparing absolute figures is distorted by population growth. The US was only 230M people in 1982, 100M less than today.
After normalizing it's more like 3.9x.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's weird to point at Nancy Pelosi given the current state of politics. McConnell and the republicans denounce any Democratic bill that is passed as partisan, so why would this be any different? And you feel that Steve Mnuchin and his $500B corporate bailout slush fund meet the criteria laid out for crisis spending? Give me a break. The Democrats are trying to include things like vote-by-mail, since this cri…
>I think it's weird to point at Nancy Pelosi given the current state of politics. McConnell and the republicans denounce any Democratic bill that is passed as partisan, so why would this be any different? This is not about the current state of politics. People are dying. Immediate measures to fix this need to be taken to save their lives. This is not the time for politicians to push their agenda, even they believe it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact is this is a good pandemic to practice on. We are very very lucky, to even be debating the economy right now. If this virus was far deadlier and affected young people, I think the tone on this very site would change in a heartbeat.
Sure, it's great practice, but practice that comes with heavy costs. And who knows when/where/if the next pandemic hits. If it's not within the next 10 years, the lessons may have been forgotten and the practice was expensive and useless.
Similar to what happened after the financial crisis with additional financial regulation.
I have no doubt another pandemic will happen, and we'll likely have forgotten what it's like, so having policies in place becomes even more important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw this idea floated around on Reddit a few days ago. Basically the crux is that unemployment has a death toll, too. So if you close all non-essential businesses, unemployment rises, which increases the likelihood of people losing health insurance, losing homes, not paying electrical bills, communication (internet / phone) bills, etc. If some people lose all those things and don't have access to them again for 2+…
> losing health insurance, losing homes, not paying electrical bills, communication (internet / phone) bills, etc. None of this is true because non-essential bills have also been shut down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously? There were a number of submissions yesterday to HN discussing the relative merits of sacrificing millions for the sake of the market. Perhaps you missed those?
"sacrificing millions for the sake of the market" This is an unfair way to characterize this difficult issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went to my local 7-11 a couple of weeks ago to get some cash at the ATM. Next to it was a garbage bin for throwing away your receipt. Out of curiosity, I went through about a dozen and not a single one had a balance above $1,000. Most were below $500. There is little financial literacy in this country. Basic lessons about opening a bank account, the difference between checkings and savings, etc. is not something th…
That's a pretty biased sample. Most people with financial literacy aren't withdrawing cash at a 7/11. They're doing it at their own bank branch to avoid paying any fees. The reasoning here is circular. At the ATM in 7/11 that would only be used by people who aren't financially literate enough to absorb excessive fees, we find evidence of poor finances and poor financial literacy.
Or maybe they're just doing it out of convenience? Have you never payed a fee for convenience?
Have you tipped in a restaurant? Have you taken the highway instead of the back roads and payed a toll? Have you ever had food delivered to you?
Congrats you're doing the same thing people who pull money out of an ATM are doing you financially illiterate rube.