Jump to content

COVID-19 Personal Economics


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, IndyPoolPlayer said:

In one way, the lenders are saving customers from themselves. Prevent people from living off credit cards, running up massive revolving debt paying for daily expenses, then when this is over declaring BK.

 

On a semi-related note, to help "pay the bills", on local news last night, there are growing calls to have folks receive $2000/month for the next 7-9 months in stimulus money so they have enough, in part, to not go into too much debt, such as living off credit cards, although, there are segments that will do so no matter what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I received the final docs for e-signature by email today. Promissory note, disbursement request and authorization. Repayment begins in November.   The accompanying email states: Please

Watched this in its entirety and I am speechless. My thoughts  and I will leave it here - We botched with inaction and more should have been done while watching and waiting to hit us... 

Yeah, this is and has been an ongoing problem. I'm old enough to remember when employee benefits included separate buckets for sick time and vacation time. Steadily it has moved towards PTO which you

57 minutes ago, NorCalR1 said:

 

On a semi-related note, to help "pay the bills", on local news last night, there are growing calls to have folks receive $2000/month for the next 7-9 months in stimulus money so they have enough, in part, to not go into too much debt, such as living off credit cards, although, there are segments that will do so no matter what.

IIRC Khanna and Tlaib authored a bill and the name is escaping me. IMO this sort of legislation would protect the working/middle class while still funneling money into the community and upwards to banks. 

 

Ok, it was Khanna and Ryan, and it's the Emergency Money for the People Act: https://khanna.house.gov/media/in-the-news/will-2000-monthly-stimulus-check-proposal-save-our-economy

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, smartlypretty said:

IIRC Khanna and Tlaib authored a bill and the name is escaping me. IMO this sort of legislation would protect the working/middle class while still funneling money into the community and upwards to banks. 

 

Ok, it was Khanna and Ryan, and it's the Emergency Money for the People Act: https://khanna.house.gov/media/in-the-news/will-2000-monthly-stimulus-check-proposal-save-our-economy

Thank you. It was Ro Khanna that was speaking to a local news reporter, and this is the link regarding that content.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NorCalR1 said:

 

On a semi-related note, to help "pay the bills", on local news last night, there are growing calls to have folks receive $2000/month for the next 7-9 months in stimulus money so they have enough, in part, to not go into too much debt, such as living off credit cards, although, there are segments that will do so no matter what.

Put me in the camp that says, as loudly as possible, NOT JUST NO, BUT HELL NO! 

 

This helicoptering of money to people who couldn't be bothered to save HAS to stop.  It would be different if these were calls being made further down the road, after a reasonable six months of savings had been depleted.  But right now, someone who is employed has ZERO need for helicoptered funds and those who are out of work are getting funds.  They HAVE to make adjustments to their life JUST LIKE THOSE UNEMPLOYED PRIOR TO MARCH had to do.  I'm sick of government-funded plasma screens and Air Whoevers...the funds are NOT being used by many people in the manner contemplated by the proponents of the legislation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, centex said:

Put me in the camp that says, as loudly as possible, NOT JUST NO, BUT HELL NO! 

 

This helicoptering of money to people who couldn't be bothered to save HAS to stop.  It would be different if these were calls being made further down the road, after a reasonable six months of savings had been depleted.  But right now, someone who is employed has ZERO need for helicoptered funds and those who are out of work are getting funds.  They HAVE to make adjustments to their life JUST LIKE THOSE UNEMPLOYED PRIOR TO MARCH had to do.  I'm sick of government-funded plasma screens and Air Whoevers...the funds are NOT being used by many people in the manner contemplated by the proponents of the legislation. 

My younger son, who has been furloughed from his $16/hour retail job, is now bringing in almost as much money from unemployment (state plus the CARES $600/wk subsidy) as my older son who is continuing to work (remotely) in IT at $60K/year.  How is this any incentive to go back to work?  The only good thing is, younger son is bored out of his skull and will go back as soon as he can but even he sees the problems here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, centex said:

Put me in the camp that says, as loudly as possible, NOT JUST NO, BUT HELL NO! 

 

This helicoptering of money to people who couldn't be bothered to save HAS to stop.  It would be different if these were calls being made further down the road, after a reasonable six months of savings had been depleted.  But right now, someone who is employed has ZERO need for helicoptered funds and those who are out of work are getting funds.  They HAVE to make adjustments to their life JUST LIKE THOSE UNEMPLOYED PRIOR TO MARCH had to do.  I'm sick of government-funded plasma screens and Air Whoevers...the funds are NOT being used by many people in the manner contemplated by the proponents of the legislation. 

If you look at it that way I think it looks that way ... but the idea, it seems, is to filter money upwards. So people are shielded from the myriad effects of this.

 

Put another way, it's a bailout-from-the-bottom. As you say, people without a lot of assets don't hold money. They spend it, in their communities and overall.

 

If it keeps rent paid and mortgages paid and financial entities from being unpaid, I don't really even know what a plasma TV is but in that respect I understand the value. 

1 hour ago, wajj said:

My younger son, who has been furloughed from his $16/hour retail job, is now bringing in almost as much money from unemployment (state plus the CARES $600/wk subsidy) as my older son who is continuing to work (remotely) in IT at $60K/year.  How is this any incentive to go back to work?  The only good thing is, younger son is bored out of his skull and will go back as soon as he can but even he sees the problems here.

People seem to be forgetting this is going to end sooner rather than later. No one is going to become a career UI recipient. No one is going to long-term benefit here. It's not a strategy and it's not going to lure people away from steady jobs for long.

 

The government has no issue dumping money on business, and Shake Shack famously nabbed some small biz welfare before they got shamed into giving it back. We don't collectively mind helicoptering money on top of other piles of money, but I just don't have the energy to get mad about it going in this direction.

 

It's basically a trickle up. I don't understand the aversion, honestly. What's the big deal? Again, we won't have this going on for very long at all, and people do not want to burn their careers or long-term jobs for short-term gain. UI runs out fast. So what if they get an extra $600? We're not talking TARP scale here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, centex said:

Put me in the camp that says, as loudly as possible, NOT JUST NO, BUT HELL NO! 

 

This helicoptering of money to people who couldn't be bothered to save HAS to stop.  It would be different if these were calls being made further down the road, after a reasonable six months of savings had been depleted.  But right now, someone who is employed has ZERO need for helicoptered funds and those who are out of work are getting funds.  They HAVE to make adjustments to their life JUST LIKE THOSE UNEMPLOYED PRIOR TO MARCH had to do.  I'm sick of government-funded plasma screens and Air Whoevers...the funds are NOT being used by many people in the manner contemplated by the proponents of the legislation. 

I'll +100 this. There's a reason UI doesn't pay a lot in normal times. I know it's next to nothing for some (thinking about certain folks here on the forum) but there's enough people scamming and taking advantage of the systems that there have to be limitations. It's not supposed to be a free handout, it's supposed to keep you fed and the water turned on until you can find another job.

 

We're smack in the middle of highly unusual times and I do believe whatever assistance is given is a mostly good thing.

Edited by kaylee34
clarification
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, smartlypretty said:

If you look at it that way I think it looks that way ... but the idea, it seems, is to filter money upwards. So people are shielded from the myriad effects of this.

 

Put another way, it's a bailout-from-the-bottom. As you say, people without a lot of assets don't hold money. They spend it, in their communities and overall.

 

If it keeps rent paid and mortgages paid and financial entities from being unpaid, I don't really even know what a plasma TV is but in that respect I understand the value. 

People seem to be forgetting this is going to end sooner rather than later. No one is going to become a career UI recipient. No one is going to long-term benefit here. It's not a strategy and it's not going to lure people away from steady jobs for long.

 

The government has no issue dumping money on business, and Shake Shack famously nabbed some small biz welfare before they got shamed into giving it back. We don't collectively mind helicoptering money on top of other piles of money, but I just don't have the energy to get mad about it going in this direction.

 

It's basically a trickle up. I don't understand the aversion, honestly. What's the big deal? Again, we won't have this going on for very long at all, and people do not want to burn their careers or long-term jobs for short-term gain. UI runs out fast. So what if they get an extra $600? We're not talking TARP scale here. 

 

That's a problem I see in expensive housing markets; locally, SF and Santa Clara County come to mind. A lot of people were already just barely able to make rent, but are saved by bans on evictions and deferments. These will have to be paid and brought current, and $1200 is not cutting it, not even close.

 

If the covid-19 payments are cut off sooner rather than later, and UI is not extended, it may very well push them over the edge. Remember, in these parts, you can have a full time job with benefits, and still live in your car. As bad as it is here, in LA it is even worse, I've been there and have seen it in places I never thought I would.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, centex said:

Put me in the camp that says, as loudly as possible, NOT JUST NO, BUT HELL NO! 

 

This helicoptering of money to people who couldn't be bothered to save HAS to stop.  It would be different if these were calls being made further down the road, after a reasonable six months of savings had been depleted.  But right now, someone who is employed has ZERO need for helicoptered funds and those who are out of work are getting funds.  They HAVE to make adjustments to their life JUST LIKE THOSE UNEMPLOYED PRIOR TO MARCH had to do.  I'm sick of government-funded plasma screens and Air Whoevers...the funds are NOT being used by many people in the manner contemplated by the proponents of the legislation. 

contemplate:  "to view or consider with continued attention".  Right ...

 

While I get the desire to see funds hit the economy quickly, I fail to grasp why they didn't instead just beef up unemployment benefits significantly for a period of 4 to 8 weeks.  Such funding would yield a great economic wallop, yielding a more effective boost to consumption and directly addressing the economic need arising out of the COVID-19 shutdown.

 

Instead, they principally relied upon shotgun scattershot, sprinkling limited funds on some without need at all, and dosing those experiencing hardship with a token gesture (relative to their needs).

 

 

Edited by hdporter
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, smartlypretty said:

People seem to be forgetting this is going to end sooner rather than later. No one is going to become a career UI recipient. No one is going to long-term benefit here. It's not a strategy and it's not going to lure people away from steady jobs for long.

 

It's basically a trickle up. I don't understand the aversion, honestly. What's the big deal? Again, we won't have this going on for very long at all, and people do not want to burn their careers or long-term jobs for short-term gain. UI runs out fast. So what if they get an extra $600? We're not talking TARP scale here. 

There's PLENTY of people out there that would be career UI recipients in a heartbeat if they could and it's absolutely going to lure people away from steady jobs for as long as it lasts and then some. If I could make more sitting home playing xbox all day on UI or stand on my feet all day in a retail job and make less, it's not a difficult choice here. People take the easy road. I know enough scamming the SSDI system I'd like to get a tenth of what they make. 

 

I for one am sick of my tax money going to subsidize items the leeches in our country purchase that I can't afford to buy myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wajj said:

My younger son, who has been furloughed from his $16/hour retail job, is now bringing in almost as much money from unemployment (state plus the CARES $600/wk subsidy) as my older son who is continuing to work (remotely) in IT at $60K/year.  How is this any incentive to go back to work?  The only good thing is, younger son is bored out of his skull and will go back as soon as he can but even he sees the problems here.

My company furloughed about 90% of it's workforce with the intent to bring nearly everyone back.  In the last few weeks the rate is down to 70% as the existing staff couldn't keep ups with demand.   HR's new policy is to send both an email to the workers personal email address and snail mail offering people their jobs back with a friendly reminder that answering "No" to the question "Were you offered work and refused it?" on the unemployment certification can result in having to repay those weekly benefits.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, kaylee34 said:

I'll +100 this. There's a reason UI doesn't pay a lot. I know it's next to nothing for some (thinking about certain folks here on the forum) but there's enough people scamming and taking advantage of the systems that there have to be limitations. It's not supposed to be a free handout, it's supposed to keep you fed and the water turned on until you can find another job.

 

 

Well, I've just posted that the aid should have been used to boost UI benefits.

 

In normal times, I've got no argument with you.  There comes a point with some people who rationalize "laying back" because benefits can be strong enough to eke by comfortably, in which case, why sweat a job.

 

However, someone who's lost they job or been furloughed as a consequence of this crisis isn't looking at a ready market in which to find another job.  Let's recognize that in the short-term and, if we're determined to boost the economy by stimulating consumer spending, use that funding to best alleviate related hardship.

 

There'll be plenty of time when this is past us to add a bit of a "stick" to any assistance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, hdporter said:

 

Well, I've just posted that the aid should have been used to boost UI benefits.

 

In normal times, I've got no argument with you.  There comes a point with some people who rationalize "laying back" because benefits can be strong enough to eke by comfortably, in which case, why sweat a job.

 

However, someone who's lost they job or been furloughed as a consequence of this crisis isn't looking at a ready market in which to find another job.  Let's recognize that in the short-term and, if we're determined to boost the economy by stimulating consumer spending, use that funding to best alleviate related hardship.

 

There'll be plenty of time when this is past us to add a bit of a "stick" to any assistance.

I agree with you regarding normal times. I should have clarified that and will amend my prior post. Thanks for the catch!

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, TheVig said:

I got a couple of neighbors are fuming mad right now. They found out today, that their employer got PPP funding.

 

Now they get to go back to their pre COVID-19 paychecks of $300 a week.

 Now if the rest of them would follow suit.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NorCalR1 said:

 

That's a problem I see in expensive housing markets; locally, SF and Santa Clara County come to mind. A lot of people were already just barely able to make rent, but are saved by bans on evictions and deferments. These will have to be paid and brought current, and $1200 is not cutting it, not even close.

 

If the covid-19 payments are cut off sooner rather than later, and UI is not extended, it may very well push them over the edge. Remember, in these parts, you can have a full time job with benefits, and still live in your car. As bad as it is here, in LA it is even worse, I've been there and have seen it in places I never thought I would.

 

Sounds like we're on mirror coasts here, and view the flow of relief perhaps a bit differently.

 

Base rent here for nothing is about $2K, and that's a terrible basement apartment that floods. And I'm trapped on an island with a lot of people about to be in a bad spot. It can't be good for all of us, but also I just don't want people to suffer.

3 hours ago, kaylee34 said:

There's PLENTY of people out there that would be career UI recipients in a heartbeat if they could and it's absolutely going to lure people away from steady jobs for as long as it lasts and then some. If I could make more sitting home playing xbox all day on UI or stand on my feet all day in a retail job and make less, it's not a difficult choice here. People take the easy road. I know enough scamming the SSDI system I'd like to get a tenth of what they make. 

 

I for one am sick of my tax money going to subsidize items the leeches in our country purchase that I can't afford to buy myself.

Well, yes, most people would prefer not to have to labor for their money, I am one of the arguably lucky people who wonders how I'd manage my job if I won the lottery, because I can't ever not do my job, it's an obsessive calling and we work ourselves to death. 

 

However, this falls under "I wish every day was Christmas/my birthday" or similar -- UI is limited and always will be, this country is not even coping well with a temporary boost in it, so gnashing our teeth over it is wasted energy. 

 

I keep saying this but we ought not lose sight of the objective of this money:

 

Pay people to stay theyselves home. We do not want the people surviving on tips to make a last minute decision to head out to a packed Fridays as they're deciding if that's actually a fever or if that's blood in what they're coughing up.

 

I may be mixing up the threads here, but in general, this is an incentive. We need staying home to not only be affordable, but more attractive than chancing it. Because not everyone is considerate or very clever. In other posts I've mentioned an infected relative in my house's apartment.

 

This person is related to me, they are blood, but they are also often dumber than a box of hair. I wouldn't trust them to slide my mail under the door, much less decide whether it's time to go back to their public facing, 15 to 20 clients a day job. You wouldn't either.

 

There's some old internet axiom about half the people in the country being dumber than average. Don't look at $600 or $2000 as a plasma TV. Look at it as R naught insurance, against that person going to a service job and killing 8 grandmas. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, smartlypretty said:

There's some old internet axiom about half the people in the country being dumber than average. 

That was George Carlin: "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

 

He actually meant median. I suspect he knew that, but also knew half his audience would not understand the word.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Occam said:

That was George Carlin: "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

 

He actually meant median. I suspect he knew that, but also knew half his audience would not understand the word.

I thought it was attributed to Carlin, but attributed to Carlin itself is a genre of misinformation so I didn't wanna be wrong :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, smartlypretty said:

This person is related to me, they are blood, but they are also often dumber than a box of hair. I wouldn't trust them to slide my mail under the door, much less decide whether it's time to go back to their public facing, 15 to 20 clients a day job. You wouldn't either

Some of the guys we laid off are too stupid to get out of their own way. I honestly don’t know how they’ve managed to survive as long as they have. I kid you not. I came in after having the morning off one day this winter and two of those morons had been running a truck in the 9 foot tall garage bay with the door shut since 6am. They said they were cold and used the truck to heat the garage. Um, that’s what the big square box hanging from the ceiling is for. I don’t know how they weren’t dead.
 

People go to work sick every day in normal times. If that’s what they choose to do, and some jerks do, or that’s what they have to do, COVID-19 isn’t going to change it. I don’t want anyone’s cold, flu, stomach bug or any other nasty germ. I haven’t been sick in years. It has nothing to do with trusting them to stay home. It has everything to do with not trusting them to stay home and I act accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, kaylee34 said:

People go to work sick every day in normal times. If that’s what they choose to do, and some jerks do, or that’s what they have to do, COVID-19 isn’t going to change it. 

 

Yeah, this is and has been an ongoing problem. I'm old enough to remember when employee benefits included separate buckets for sick time and vacation time. Steadily it has moved towards PTO which you are free to use anyway you want (sick, vacation, personal matters, etc).

 

As such, there is motivation to not burn through PTO so as too "save" as much time for a 3 week continuous vacation with a day or two here and there around holidays.

 

The result is people come to work sick so they maximize vacation time.

 

With Covid-19, I don't know how this will play out in the office environment. Protocols will have to change.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, smartlypretty said:

I may be mixing up the threads here, but in general, this is an incentive. We need staying home to not only be affordable, but more attractive than chancing it.

Instead of handing out money which could be spent irresponsibly, Let's just build large housing complexes with individual units and make them all free. Government food will be delivered to each housing unit for free. On site health care will be found at each housing complex also for free. On site security will be found at each housing complex, making sure every resident is safely in their unit every night. When a highly contagious disease such as COVID-19 breaks out, the on site security can make sure everyone is safely in their unit and kept there until the all clear is given.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.





  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      180,789
    • Most Online
      2,046

    Newest Member
    Edearing5
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines