Should unemployment be shut down to get workers back on the job

[DataPoint]

Economy is coming back strongly, but easy unemployment cash does retard it to an extent.

I certainly understand the workers doing what is best for them.

Should the government turn the unemployment spigot way down.

 

[gdgyva]

employment at will has ALWAYS worked "both" ways

the tweet is stupid

i have had more than one employee leave me thinking the grass was greener elsewhere

more power to them.....

if they can get someone to pay them more for their skillset than me, go for it

the issue i and most small business people have, is when we are competing against the government that is paying people to STAY HOME

And way more than they can earn by going to work.....that is the issue

 

[Visbek]

Economy is coming back strongly, but easy unemployment cash does retard it to an extent.

Uhhhh... No. It doesn't. It's putting cash into people's pockets, keeping them from getting evicted, allowing them to put food on their plates, and... giving them time to find work. Preferably at jobs where they aren't being treated like crap.

The states that are ending the enhanced unemployment early are shooting themselves in the foot. They're cutting off income to people who basically spend it all locally and right away.

The most recent job report doesn't support this latest right-wing "screw the poor" theory. Job growth is solid, and good in almost all sectors. Wage growth isn't soaring -- as you'd expect if employers were significantly increasing wages, as they claim. The number of people on unemployment has been gradually dropping for almost a year.

I'd add that employers have spent years complaining about alleged "labor shortages." It's pretty clear the only reason politicians believe that codswallop is because of their ideological preferences, not because of economic data.

What's really happening is that the economy can't go from 0 to 60 in 3.4 seconds. Schools and summer camps aren't up to full speed yet. Child care is still an issue. Vaccination rates are still low in many parts of the US. Anyone whose job relied on tips isn't likely to trust that they'll earn 2019 wages any time soon.

 

[Visbek]

employment at will has ALWAYS worked "both" ways

No, it hasn't. When unemployment is high, employers definitely have the upper hand. When unemployment is low, job seekers have more leverage.

There have been examples all throughout history of companies having incredible leverage over employees -- e.g. housing people in company towns; paying them in company scrip only usable in company-owned stores; and basically locking workers into their jobs.

Or: Before the ACA, and especially before COBRA, health insurance gave employers the upper hand. If you quit your job or were fired, you'd basically lose your health insurance -- no es bueno.

On the other side, unions often gave employees significant leverage, protection from abuse, protections from firing, better wage and benefit negotiations, and so on.

the issue i and most small business people have, is when we are competing against the government that is paying people to STAY HOME

sigh. Again, the data doesn't support that theory. That's just right-wing ideology, not economic reality.

 

[Kushinator]

the issue i and most small business people have, is when we are competing against the government that is paying people to STAY HOME

What you're describing is the destruction of low-skill / low-wage employer's bargaining power. In economics, we refer to this bargaining power and the mechanism that allows it to coerce the acceptance of low-wages as dynamic monopsony.

And way more than they can earn by going to work.....that is the issue

It's probably not the case. I'm sure there are some instances where a person who lived in Chicago, L.A., N.Y.C., etc... was getting about $250/week in state unemployment benefits and an additional $300 weekly in federal enhancement, bringing them up to $550/week gross.

So... in order to have qualified for $250/week base unemployment insurance, they would have had to earn around $12500 in the two previous quarters. On an annualized basis, that's $25k/year.

Now... if you made $100k/year, your benefits in Illinois are capped at $471... meaning they are now getting $771/week gross when they previously made $2000/week gross. If the formula were to apply, as it does above [(x*0.47)/26 ]where x is the gross income earned over the two previous quarters, the person earning $100k/year would have gotten a little more than $900/week plus the $300 enhancement, bringing them up to $1200 weekly. I don't know about you, but i would much rather work for $100k/year and build my career than sit home and take $771 per week.

 

[DataPoint]

Uhhhh... No. It doesn't. It's putting cash into people's pockets, keeping them from getting evicted, allowing them to put food on their plates, and... giving them time to fin

Uhhh... yes, it does. Your argument is not what I said. I was talking about the economy, not individuals, though your point about that is well taken.

 

[DataPoint]

employment at will has ALWAYS worked "both" ways

the tweet is stupid

i have had more than one employee leave me thinking the grass was greener elsewhere

more power to them.....

if they can get someone to pay them more for their skillset than me, go for it

the issue i and most small business people have, is when we are competing against the government that is paying people to STAY HOME

And way more than they can earn by going to work.....that is the issue

Pay more is the answer to that.

 

[Kushinator]

Uhhh... yes, it does. Your argument is not what I said. I was talking about the economy, not individuals, though your point about that is well taken.

It's common knowledge among economists that unemployment benefits are spent right away, as opposed to being saved or used to pay down debt. Hence, the marginal propensity of consumption of this magnitude creates a very powerful multiplier. Something like every dollar going to unemployment benefits creates $1.61 in economic growth.

For more detail, see the Keynesian multiplier and Moody's fiscal multipliers for more details.

 

[Visbek]

Uhhh... yes, it does. Your argument is not what I said. I was talking about the economy, not individuals, though your point about that is well taken.

I did, in fact, respond to your point.

You claimed that "unemployment cash" was impeding the recovery, and I pointed out how that's simply not the case.

 

[j brown's body]

States ending this unemployment program are losing billions of dollars in revenue.

 

[noonereal]

Uhhhh... No. It doesn't. It's putting cash into people's pockets, keeping them from getting evicted, allowing them to put food on their plates, and... giving them time to find work. Preferably at jobs where they aren't being treated like crap.

The states that are ending the enhanced unemployment early are shooting themselves in the foot. They're cutting off income to people who basically spend it all locally and right away.

The most recent job report doesn't support this latest right-wing "screw the poor" theory. Job growth is solid, and good in almost all sectors. Wage growth isn't soaring -- as you'd expect if employers were significantly increasing wages, as they claim. The number of people on unemployment has been gradually dropping for almost a year.

I'd add that employers have spent years complaining about alleged "labor shortages." It's pretty clear the only reason politicians believe that codswallop is because of their ideological preferences, not because of economic data.

What's really happening is that the economy can't go from 0 to 60 in 3.4 seconds. Schools and summer camps aren't up to full speed yet. Child care is still an issue. Vaccination rates are still low in many parts of the US. Anyone whose job relied on tips isn't likely to trust that they'll earn 2019 wages any time soon.

There you go again!

Always with the facts.

This is no place for that kind of talk.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

employment at will has ALWAYS worked "both" ways

the tweet is stupid

i have had more than one employee leave me thinking the grass was greener elsewhere

more power to them.....

if they can get someone to pay them more for their skillset than me, go for it

the issue i and most small business people have, is when we are competing against the government that is paying people to STAY HOME

And way more than they can earn by going to work.....that is the issue

You mean you no longer have the market on meager wages for no benefits and it’s making you clenchy.

 

[Helix]

no

 

[gdgyva]

Pay more is the answer to that.

Thanks but no thanks

The UE benefits will end

And what will happen is people are literally going to starve because they no longer want to work....and think the government should "take care of them"

Ought to be a fun thing to watch as the liberals try to figure out how to FIX that problem they have created

 

[DataPoint]

It's common knowledge among economists that unemployment benefits are spent right away, as opposed to being saved or used to pay down debt. Hence, the marginal propensity of consumption of this magnitude creates a very powerful multiplier. Something like every dollar going to unemployment benefits creates $1.61 in economic growth.

For more detail, see the Keynesian multiplier and Moody's fiscal multipliers for more details.

I was talking about the economy, and that going back to work for everyone would be better than UE benefits.

 

[DataPoint]

Thanks but no thanks

The UE benefits will end

And what will happen is people are literally going to starve because they no longer want to work....and think the government should "take care of them"

Ought to be a fun thing to watch as the liberals try to figure out how to FIX that problem they have created

What a goofy statement. No one is going to want to starve more than not work.

 

[DataPoint]

I did, in fact, respond to your point.

You claimed that "unemployment cash" was impeding the recovery, and I pointed out how that's simply not the case.

Read above.

 

[Kushinator]

I was talking about the economy, and that going back to work for everyone would be better than UE benefits.

I am talking about the economy. Try again!

 

[DataPoint]

I am talking about the economy. Try again!

Not really, you weren't.

 

[Kushinator]

Not really, you weren't.

Of course i was!

Full employment isn't happen over night, and probably not until well into 2022. In the meantime, fiscal stimulus has allowed output to be higher than without it. Do you understand this?

 

[DataPoint]

Of course i was!

Full employment isn't happen over night, and probably not until well into 2022. In the meantime, fiscal stimulus has allowed output to be higher than without it. Do you understand this?

It's clear you don't. End the UE extras and watch the economy come back as people come back to work.

 

[Kushinator]

It's clear you don't. End the UE extras and watch the economy come back as people come back to work.

Output is set to grow at 6.5% on a real basis for 2021....

 

[Hamish Howl]

I think that abruptly shutting down purchasing power is brilliant, and OP should get the Nobel Prize for economics.

 

[DataPoint]

Output is set to grow at 6.5% on a real basis for 2021....

You are looking at the fed inflation estimate or the 2nd quarter GDP estimate.

 

[Kushinator]

You are looking at the fed inflation estimate or the 2nd quarter GDP estimate.

The consensus Q4/Q4 estimate. You can look at Moody's, Goldman, JPM, BlackRock, etc... for more details.