re: Question about why people are against stimulus benefits?

The not willing to go back to work people are going to go away once the economy is open and the stimulus is gone. My argument is you can’t get rid of the stimulus if the economy is not open. Getting rid of the stimulus as a way to try and force the economy open is the tail trying to wag the dog

quote:

---

There will be another stimulus, simply because politicians want to be re-elected in a few months. The stimulus plans will disappear after November because they are bad monetary policy.

---

While the current train wreck interests me, my question from day 1 on this virus hasn't been about THIS virus.

Mine has been simple. "OK. If we get a virus out there with these numbers...…..our reaction will be...…
Go into lockdown
Drive Millions into unemployment
Spend Trillions to support those we harm
Derail significant life events irretrievably for millions
Grant government leaders near dictator powers
etc

Cool story.

What if we have another virus like this in say, 2022? Then, maybe again in 2025?

There is nothing preventing such recurrence.

I submit that even if you can rationalize doing what we are doing now, it IS DAMNED SURE NOT frickING REPEATABLE!!

Where was this argument BEFORE the pandemic? Many people were unemployed BEFORE the pandemic and the government felt $232 a week in Alabama was plenty for an unemployed father of four to survive on. If that figure is too low now why was it plenty before the pandemic? Sure, there are more people unemployed now but if $232 is not enough now, why is it plenty after the pandemic? A couple years ago my sister was the Controller for a large equipment company making 6 figures a year. Company sells, and she's offered 232 a week unemployment. It not supposed to replace a job but I agree it could be slightly higher.

The stimulus and unemployment benefits have given state and local officials the cover to shutdown or restrict the economy whenever they feel. Without it, they’ll be accountable to citizens again.

quote:

---

I can get behind the idea that nobody should be getting paid more than 100% of what their salary is, but that’s so hard to figure out for hourly workers who’s wages change all the time,

---

Worker's Comp has a formula in place where they look at the average hourly rate from the last 4, 6 or 8 weeks depending on the jurisdiction. People don't seam to have a problem with that (there will always be some that will complain, and there is still an issue with getting people not to abuse this system and go back to work.

So, why wouldn't the State unemployment office be able to use a similar calculation, then apply for a reimbursement from the Fed for anything over the State maximum rate?

In regards to your question, I think the $1,200 checks are idiotic, but I agree with some assistance with unemployment as long as the State is in some sort of "restriction" for employer. However, it should be up to the individual to prove that the restriction is keeping them from returning to work (i.e., they worked at a bar right before the shutdown).

quote:

---

My argument is you can’t get rid of the stimulus if the economy is not open.

---

But the economy is open. We're in July, not April. Businesses are open and need workers. And those workers are being lazy bums because they're making more money to *not* go back to work.

The economy is being artificially hindered.

These payouts and ramped up unemployment benefits are just keeping people at home and keeping the economy unnecessarily stifled. Meanwhile businesses are short-handed and many are closing because we are paying people not to work. It's insanity, but I'm just about at the opinion that the bulk of the federal government wants it that way. While they're handing out "stimulus", they're also banging a loud drum for more H1B and migrant workers. Gee, I wonder why?

quote:

---

Question about why people are against stimulus benefits?

---

Because I feel the reason that the stimulus is even required in the first place is bullshite. Open everything up before handing out another round of stimulus and paying unemployment to people who could and should be working, it's my kids who are going to pay for this shite when they grow up

it never should have been more then you currently are making. if anything it should have been capped at 70-75% of what you made working. much more then the $250/wk from the state, but enough of a difference to help push returning to work.

and then it could have been cut back to 50% in the next round. still more then normal but an even bigger push to get back to work.

So you want stimulus to do what unemployment does but while still getting unemployment? We have people who aren’t looking for gainful employment because they are enjoying sitting on their couch. When they get left behind are they going to call me privileged?