MUScoop

MUScoop => The Superbar => COVID-19 => Topic started by: mu_hilltopper on April 30, 2020, 09:59:51 AM

Title: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on April 30, 2020, 09:59:51 AM
We should have a thread on economic stuff .. saw this tweet and found it interesting:


https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1255479750593859584


This is stunning: Nearly half of the Q1 decline in GDP can be attributed to healthcare, which is presumably delaying of elective procedures.

It's a strange reality that in the midst of a pandemic, we have a healthcare-led recession.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on April 30, 2020, 10:14:33 AM
Two aspects of that are pretty amazing.

1) Healthcare expenditures makes up 17% of our entire GDP.

2) Elective procedures make up enough of that to have a massive economic effect.

C) What happens in Q2, when economic impacts really starts to hit other sectors.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on April 30, 2020, 10:27:55 AM
Two aspects of that are pretty amazing.

1) Healthcare expenditures makes up 17% of our entire GDP.

2) Elective procedures make up enough of that to have a massive economic effect.

C) What happens in Q2, when economic impacts really starts to hit other sectors.

Re point C -- you're right. But hopefully by then the health-care sector will be in full rebound mode. For example, the 2 major Charlotte hospitals, one of which is the largest employer in North Carolina, just started allowing "elective" procedures again.

Right now, it's almost impossible to get a dental or eye appointment that isn't an absolute emergency. That should change very soon, too. At least in theory. Those are big money-makers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on April 30, 2020, 11:17:47 AM
Re point C -- you're right. But hopefully by then the health-care sector will be in full rebound mode. For example, the 2 major Charlotte hospitals, one of which is the largest employer in North Carolina, just started allowing "elective" procedures again.

Yup. If healthcare experiences April-like losses for another couple of months, the funding devoted to health care in the latest stimulus/bailout bill is going to look like an amuse bouche compared to what's required next. The healthcare system is at a point where if it isn't business as usual soon, we're going to have a system with all the costs of being totally reliant on government funding, without any of the consumer-side benefits.  Pretty neat.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on April 30, 2020, 11:28:04 AM
Funding like single payer without the side benefits of universal coverage?!?!?   Sign me up!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on April 30, 2020, 12:05:47 PM
Funding like single payer without the side benefits of universal coverage?!?!?   Sign me up!

Hey now, that's not fair.  Look at all of this awesome innovation we are getting in exchange for our healthcare cost-induced bankruptcies.  If it wasn't for the awesome system we have now, our pharma overlords wouldn't have been incentivized to create all of the faulty tests and ineffectual off label treatments that are rescuing us from our covid nightmare.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on April 30, 2020, 12:30:57 PM
On the bigger picture of the Covid economy, what are the opinions for how long it takes to get back to normal - or at least 80%-90% of normal?

As things are now, I'm guessing 18 months to 2 years. If Covid comes back in the fall as bad as some predict, all bets are off and I see a prolonged depression.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on April 30, 2020, 12:41:17 PM
On the bigger picture of the Covid economy, what are the opinions for how long it takes to get back to normal - or at least 80%-90% of normal?

As things are now, I'm guessing 18 months to 2 years. If Covid comes back in the fall as bad as some predict, all bets are off and I see a prolonged depression.

There will be a breaking point somewhere within the next 12. Those who are healthy will venture out and those who are not will bunker down.



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on April 30, 2020, 12:48:27 PM
We should have a thread on economic stuff .. saw this tweet and found it interesting:


https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1255479750593859584


This is stunning: Nearly half of the Q1 decline in GDP can be attributed to healthcare, which is presumably delaying of elective procedures.

It's a strange reality that in the midst of a pandemic, we have a healthcare-led recession.

Good topic.

The two doctors I linked to their videos the other day that YouTube felt should be censored alluded to this.  Hospitals shutting down floors, urgent care centers are ghost towns, elective procedures delayed, and more serious stuff where patients that need care are staying away. 

The healthcare business is a relatively low margin business that depends on scale.  When scale isn't there, the system has a hard time recovering in short order.  Several nursing relatives have been assigned tasks like counting PVE supplies, guarding supplies, when they normally work to care for patients.  They just do not have the volume and both are in fairly large urban areas  (Miami and Denver).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on April 30, 2020, 12:52:11 PM
Good topic.

The two doctors I linked to their videos the other day that YouTube felt should be censored alluded to this.  Hospitals shutting down floors, urgent care centers are ghost towns, elective procedures delayed, and more serious stuff where patients that need care are staying away. 

The healthcare business is a relatively low margin business that depends on scale.  When scale isn't there, the system has a hard time recovering in short order.  Several nursing relatives have been assigned tasks like counting PVE supplies, guarding supplies, when they normally work to care for patients.  They just do not have the volume and both are in fairly large urban areas  (Miami and Denver).

Some good to come out of this will be universal income and national healthcare.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 30, 2020, 12:57:50 PM
On the bigger picture of the Covid economy, what are the opinions for how long it takes to get back to normal - or at least 80%-90% of normal?

As things are now, I'm guessing 18 months to 2 years. If Covid comes back in the fall as bad as some predict, all bets are off and I see a prolonged depression.

I saw this in my newspaper today in the business section:



Economists: Quick rebound unlikely

Hopes are beginning to arise that the U.S. economy might be poised to rebound by the second half of the year. The idea is that the economy might be able to mount a sharp comeback if more employees and consumers were to gradually return to working and spending. Yet most economists say such expectations should be kept in check. Among their concerns is that the coronavirus could flare up again after the economy is re-opened, forcing reopened businesses to shut down again. Another is that people will remain too wary of contracting the coronavirus to return to anything resembling normal economic behavior.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on April 30, 2020, 01:23:16 PM
I saw this in my newspaper today in the business section:



Economists: Quick rebound unlikely

Hopes are beginning to arise that the U.S. economy might be poised to rebound by the second half of the year. The idea is that the economy might be able to mount a sharp comeback if more employees and consumers were to gradually return to working and spending. Yet most economists say such expectations should be kept in check. Among their concerns is that the coronavirus could flare up again after the economy is re-opened, forcing reopened businesses to shut down again. Another is that people will remain too wary of contracting the coronavirus to return to anything resembling normal economic behavior.

I think theee are exceptional points.

But they don’t take human nature into account. As people go back to work and get a regular paycheck again, most of that money (at least for a while) will be used to pay off the debts incurred over months with little or no income. What’s left will be put away as insurance for when/if there is a second wave. Not a lot of the money will be streaming back into the economy. So, without demand, it will be harder for the economy to rev up.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 30, 2020, 01:24:03 PM
If either of these are unrelated to the topic, please remove:

1. Why is it "okay" to bailout large corporations that are struggling due to the impacts of the virus, but not "okay" to bailout states that are struggling due to the impacts of the virus?

2. I sincerely fear for the post-covid economy. When the country was stabilized following the recovery from the 2008 recession, we easily saw where the vast majority of resources/money ended up. I fear it could be even worse this time.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on April 30, 2020, 01:35:45 PM
If either of these are unrelated to the topic, please remove:

1. Why is it "okay" to bailout large corporations that are struggling due to the impacts of the virus, but not "okay" to bailout states that are struggling due to the impacts of the virus?

2. I sincerely fear for the post-covid economy. When the country was stabilized following the recovery from the 2008 recession, we easily saw where the vast majority of resources/money ended up. I fear it could be even worse this time.

There is a big difference between states that have been bleeding money and a financial disaster for years like Illinois, and a company that’s been profitable until all opportunity to make money was turned off.

I realize that you’ve been banging in this corporate bailout drum pretty obsessively, but comparing corporations to states is not apples to oranges.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on April 30, 2020, 02:23:46 PM
I am confused why we are supposed to have a 3-6 month savings safety net, but corporations, especially those makings billions a quarter in profit, aren't.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on April 30, 2020, 03:00:22 PM
I am confused why we are supposed to have a 3-6 month savings safety net, but corporations, especially those makings billions a quarter in profit, aren't.

You’re right. I agree with Wags that states are different than corporations, but a ton of money went and will be going to corporations that were brazenly careless with their huge corporate profits - airlines may be the best example.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 30, 2020, 03:04:00 PM
There is a big difference between states that have been bleeding money and a financial disaster for years like Illinois, and a company that’s been profitable until all opportunity to make money was turned off.

I realize that you’ve been banging in this corporate bailout drum pretty obsessively, but comparing corporations to states is not apples to oranges.

Fair.

But what if those currently bailed-out corporations also had pre-existing issues that greatly impacted the virus effects? Is that significantly different?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on April 30, 2020, 03:05:32 PM
God
@TheTweetOfGod
America has to have a healthy economy for people to die in.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 30, 2020, 03:11:43 PM
There is a big difference between states that have been bleeding money and a financial disaster for years like Illinois, and a company that’s been profitable until all opportunity to make money was turned off.

I realize that you’ve been banging in this corporate bailout drum pretty obsessively, but comparing corporations to states is not apples to oranges.

Correct. Not that I'm upset with the government for giving out money in the time of need, but I believe it belongs in the hands of the people first.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on April 30, 2020, 03:18:32 PM

I saw this in my newspaper today in the business section:



Economists: Quick rebound unlikely

Hopes are beginning to arise that the U.S. economy might be poised to rebound by the second half of the year. The idea is that the economy might be able to mount a sharp comeback if more employees and consumers were to gradually return to working and spending. Yet most economists say such expectations should be kept in check. Among their concerns is that the coronavirus could flare up again after the economy is re-opened, forcing reopened businesses to shut down again. Another is that people will remain too wary of contracting the coronavirus to return to anything resembling normal economic behavior.


I think the underlined part is a very real possibility. Governors/states could open up tomorrow, but if consumers do not feel safe going out, it won’t matter. The the businesses will open, but the stores will still be empty. That’s why I am concerned with the “just let the healthy/low-risk people go out“ attitude.

Yesterday, I heard an interview with an owner of a nail salon in Atlanta. She had been receiving calls from customers eager to return as soon as she could open up. She opened on Friday and had a surge of customers for a day or two, but then business dried up. The salon has been virtually empty for the past few days, and has few appointments booked. For now, she has decided to open on a “by appointment only“ basis.

That may work for a while and for some businesses, but it is not enough for a viable recovery.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on April 30, 2020, 04:59:30 PM
There is a big difference between states that have been bleeding money and a financial disaster for years like Illinois, and a company that’s been profitable until all opportunity to make money was turned off.

I understand what you're saying about the states, and I actually agree ... but Boeing literally was killing people through utter incompetence and hubris, and the airlines were squeezing customers for every last nickel while using stock buybacks to enrich their upper 0.1%. Just to name a few of the one-time profitable companies who need bailouts now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on April 30, 2020, 05:14:01 PM
I understand what you're saying about the states, and I actually agree ... but Boeing literally was killing people through utter incompetence and hubris, and the airlines were squeezing customers for every last nickel while using stock buybacks to enrich their upper 0.1%. Just to name a few of the one-time profitable companies who need bailouts now.

I understand, and that’s why I’m glad there are restrictions on the funds given to airlines and others.  Regardless, even with the massive damage to Boeing’s bottom line, without this pandemic they would have went through some pain, their stock would continue to get beat up, and then they would U back up cause they are one of 2 major players in a significant space, and still probably best of breed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 30, 2020, 05:45:46 PM
I understand, and that’s why I’m glad there are restrictions on the funds given to airlines and others.  Regardless, even with the massive damage to Boeing’s bottom line, without this pandemic they would have went through some pain, their stock would continue to get beat up, and then they would U back up cause they are one of 2 major players in a significant space, and still probably best of breed.

I want to believe in the restrictions.

A quick Google search brought up this: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/02/coronavirus-corporate-bailout-deal-161374

Anyone have anything more recent that demonstrates strict bailout conditions?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2020, 09:53:56 PM
I think the underlined part is a very real possibility. Governors/states could open up tomorrow, but if consumers do not feel safe going out, it won’t matter. The the businesses will open, but the stores will still be empty. That’s why I am concerned with the “just let the healthy/low-risk people go out“ attitude.

Yesterday, I heard an interview with an owner of a nail salon in Atlanta. She had been receiving calls from customers eager to return as soon as she could open up. She opened on Friday and had a surge of customers for a day or two, but then business dried up. The salon has been virtually empty for the past few days, and has few appointments booked. For now, she has decided to open on a “by appointment only“ basis.

That may work for a while and for some businesses, but it is not enough for a viable recovery.

So now you’re concerned with the “just let the healthy/low risk people go out” attitude because you don’t think the businesses will get back to normal (or anything like it) right away? Of course they won’t. It will take time whenever (one month, six months, a year) we reopen to get back to normal. But I read a stat that 49% of workers in the US live paycheck to paycheck (down from 78% in 2017, thank God) and unemployment $ doesn’t last forever or even pay all the bills.

I wonder if any Scoopers who downplay what a prolonged shutdown could mean to our social fabric are among those 49% living paycheck to paycheck who have lost their jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on April 30, 2020, 09:55:54 PM
So now you’re concerned with the “just let the healthy/low risk people go out” attitude because you don’t think the businesses will get back to normal (or anything like it) right away? Of course they won’t. It will take time whenever (one month, six months, a year) we reopen to get back to normal. But I read a stat that 49% of workers in the US live paycheck to paycheck (down from 78% in 2017, thank God) and unemployment $ doesn’t last forever or even pay all the bills.

I wonder if any Scoopers who downplay what a prolonged shutdown could mean to our social fabric are among those 49% living paycheck to paycheck who have lost their jobs.

I am just being realistic. Sorry if that bothers you.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2020, 10:20:17 PM
I am just being realistic. Sorry if that bothers you.

Realism doesn’t bother me.

I just think you moved the goalposts a little - from being against opening up because you don’t think it’s safe to being against it because you now think it won’t result in business as usual immediately (which I and everyone I’ve spoken to readily acknowledge). If I misinterpreted your remarks I apologize.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on April 30, 2020, 10:51:12 PM
Realism doesn’t bother me.

I just think you moved the goalposts a little - from being against opening up because you don’t think it’s safe to being against it because you now think it won’t result in business as usual immediately (which I and everyone I’ve spoken to readily acknowledge). If I misinterpreted your remarks I apologize.

FWIW I am concerned about both. I have mainly been talking about the safety part because that is my primary concern; if we open too quickly, I envision a terrible fall and winter.

I only brought up the business part because it looks like we are opening up sooner regardless of my concerns, so I wanted to express my opinion that many people are overstating the rebound that will come from reopening.

Instead of me moving the goalposts, think of it as me changing my responses as the goalposts are already moving (the economy reopening before I think it should).

I would LOVE to be wrong. I hope the second wave is smaller than I expect. And I hope the economy rebounds faster than I expect. Truly. I just can’t see it....
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2020, 10:58:04 PM
FWIW I am concerned about both. I have mainly been talking about the safety part because that is my primary concern; if we open too quickly, I envision a terrible fall and winter.

I only brought up the business part because it looks like we are opening up sooner regardless of my concerns, so I wanted to express my opinion that many people are overstating the rebound that will come from reopening.

Instead of me moving the goalposts, think of it as me changing my responses as the goalposts are already moving (the economy reopening before I think it should).

I would LOVE to be wrong. I hope the second wave is smaller than I expect. And I hope the economy rebounds faster than I expect. Truly. I just can’t see it....

Fair enough, Gooo
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on April 30, 2020, 11:03:11 PM
Nashville proposed a 32% increase in property taxes.  Other municipalities will have to come up with ways to fill in gaps to their budgets through cuts or large tax increases.  Likely new realities coming, but what to extremes in the COVID economy?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495311-nashville-mayor-proposes-32-property-tax-hike-in-response-to-coronavirus
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 01, 2020, 07:41:19 AM
Nashville proposed a 32% increase in property taxes.  Other municipalities will have to come up with ways to fill in gaps to their budgets through cuts or large tax increases.  Likely new realities coming, but what to extremes in the COVID economy?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/495311-nashville-mayor-proposes-32-property-tax-hike-in-response-to-coronavirus

Massive layoffs and pay cuts are likely coming to state and local governments

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/coronavirus-relief-bill-layoffs-coming-to-state-local-governments.html

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 01, 2020, 07:55:13 AM
My city has continued to run staffing levels at great recession level.    20% lower than prior to 2008.     A rainy day fund equivalent to 1/3 of an annual budget.   No layoffs yet, but a hiring freeze and a recognition that the layoffs may be coming in a year.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 01, 2020, 08:16:35 AM
When businesses are able to reopen at limited capactiy... will they?  Will restaurants open at 50% capacity?  The risk vs reward for doing so would be pretty small.  You'd have to add staff, clean meticulously, and do all the normal things you'd do as a business... but at an increased cost... and with less customers than a 'normal' day.  Do you raise prices to compensate?  People's budgets are already tight so that may not work.  Then what happens if we get a second surge of cases and shut downs happen again.  If it's me, I don't reopen my restaurant, and continue with lower overhead and try to weather the storm with takeout and delivery.  Especially if my restaurant is smaller in size.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on May 01, 2020, 08:23:21 AM
It will be interesting how Wisconsin municipalities deal with this.

Depending on your property wealth, municipalities have two funding sources .. local property taxes, plus some state shared revenue.   

Every year, a handful of properties won't pay their taxes.  The county will send money to the municipalities anyhow and make them whole .. the county goes after the late payers.   Because of this, Wisconsin municipalities are somewhat immune to tax collection issues.

But .. imagine if 20% of all properties can't pay their property taxes.  Or 50%.  The county wouldn't be able to absorb that problem. 

I'm not sure about school funding, but it's likely the same -- but an even bigger problem.


#doom
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 02, 2020, 09:02:51 AM
If either of these are unrelated to the topic, please remove:

1. Why is it "okay" to bailout large corporations that are struggling due to the impacts of the virus, but not "okay" to bailout states that are struggling due to the impacts of the virus?

2. I sincerely fear for the post-covid economy. When the country was stabilized following the recovery from the 2008 recession, we easily saw where the vast majority of resources/money ended up. I fear it could be even worse this time.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rich-americans-seize-historic-chance-110000526.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on May 07, 2020, 10:40:00 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-06/temporary-coronavirus-layoffs-are-turning-permanent-around-u-s

Every day that goes by, it's harder to see how the world doesn't burn down in a  vicious cycle of evaporating demand and unemployment.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 07, 2020, 10:51:15 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-06/temporary-coronavirus-layoffs-are-turning-permanent-around-u-s

Every day that goes by, it's harder to see how the world doesn't burn down in a  vicious cycle of evaporating demand and unemployment.

It almost sounds like you're implying that Wojo getting to the NCAA tournament 3 of the last 4 years but failing to win a tourney game is not the one problem that is on most of America's collective mind.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 07, 2020, 11:44:06 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-06/temporary-coronavirus-layoffs-are-turning-permanent-around-u-s

Every day that goes by, it's harder to see how the world doesn't burn down in a  vicious cycle of evaporating demand and unemployment.
It is starting to be a US-centric problem. Of course the economic connections are global now, but many of the other countries in the world have started to get it under control. Us, not so much.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 07, 2020, 01:23:16 PM
It is starting to be a US-centric problem. Of course the economic connections are global now, but many of the other countries in the world have started to get it under control. Us, not so much.

Don't worry. We're just waiting on the 'magic.'
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on May 07, 2020, 02:44:34 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-06/temporary-coronavirus-layoffs-are-turning-permanent-around-u-s

Every day that goes by, it's harder to see how the world doesn't burn down in a  vicious cycle of evaporating demand and unemployment.

Glad I own multiple shotguns.  I expect some of my anti-gun friends may come over for some advice. Ha ha.


One good outcomes (maybe) are mortgage refi.  Got ours redone earlier this week for under 3%.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 08, 2020, 08:08:44 AM
Will Americans react like this when Disney reopens its parks here?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-disney-shanghai/shanghai-disneyland-tickets-sell-out-as-park-prepares-to-re-open-idUSKBN22K0N6

Tickets for the earliest days of Shanghai Disneyland’s re-opening in China sold out rapidly on Friday, according to the park’s website, as it prepares to next week end a three-month shutdown because of the coronavirus outbreak.

As businesses like this -- theme parks, amusement parks, concert venues, sports facilities, etc -- reopen, it's going to be an interesting look into the psyches of American consumers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on May 08, 2020, 08:48:11 AM
Based on how they flocked to beaches during lockdowns, I’m not optimistic they will show any restraint at all.
Article says they are will be operating at less than 30% capacity.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 08, 2020, 08:49:51 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 08, 2020, 08:54:46 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     

Travel recreational baseball in two weeks?  We may not even see professional baseball this year, and most certainly won't see it for at least another month or two.

Seems like a terrible idea.  I know it sucks to basically lose our summer...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 08, 2020, 09:02:07 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     

Wow, tower ... that's an interesting situation and quite a dilemma.

I was going to umpire at Cooperstown again in June but they canceled the entire summer schedule -- which is fine because I would have withdrawn anyway. Our spring youth baseball season in Charlotte obviously was canceled, and I have already decided I won't do any tournaments this summer if there are any. I also have decided to not coach at the Hornets' youth camps this summer. Just isn't worth it to me. Fall baseball is big here, and I'll decide about umpiring there in a few months. I fully expect to get back into coaching basketball in November, but who knows what "fun" the virus will have in store for us all then?

If I were a parent in your situation, I'm not sure how I'd react. Any of us can say what we think we'd say or do in a given situation, but until it actually presents itself, we can't really know.

Unless I'm reading you wrong, it sounds like you are one who is "all for it." Would you be interested in sharing why that's your stance?

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: StillAWarrior on May 08, 2020, 09:06:49 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     

For the moment, AAU is still saying that it plans on going forward with its volleyball nationals in Orlando next month.  They are saying no spectators, but each team will be given something like 10 "chaperone" passes (along with coaching staff).  So, basically, one parent.  This event typically draws 10's of thousands of people.

Personally, I don't believe it will happen; it would be a spectacularly bad idea.  I know that many of the bigger clubs have already pulled out and others are following.  In most places, teams aren't even practicing.  Also, I don't think that any colleges would be recruiting, so it would lose that part of its appeal (which is significant).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on May 08, 2020, 09:22:50 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     

I can imagine the dialog.  Personally, I dont get it.  We can't keep our meat plants open because of virus spread but all in on summer sports?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 08, 2020, 09:29:15 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     

According to the most recent numbers from Johns Hopkins, cases in TN have increased by 36% from last week to this. Not leveling off, and certainly not decreasing. I agree with your wife.

https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-caseloads-states-b24899a3-286e-4ea9-bd71-0e88ed645e68.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 08, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
The coach of my son's 13U travel baseball team found a tournament going on in Pigeon Forge the weekend of May 23.    Because of all of the cancelled tournaments this spring, he really wants the team to drive the 11 hours and go play in it.    The reaction of the parents has been educational.    We have the one family with the father who got it 4 weeks of feeling terrible but not hospitalized bad who are opposed.    My wife is as negatively wound up as I have ever seen her and taking it out on me like it was my idea, because I am not in lockstep agreement with her.   We have at least 7 families out of the 12 who are all for it.     

Tower, is this part of a league team or just 12 kids playing? 

Personally, I'd wait.  Our first tournament is now June 6th/7th and wouldn't be surprised if that is cancelled.

The thing to remember is that everyone is in the same boat.  The Lugnuts aren't getting an advantage over the Carburetors, cuz neither team is playing.

Side note:  if anyone is a youth baseball coach, there is a ton of instruction being put out my pro, college and high school coaches.   USA baseball has 2 or so sessions a week, tons of other options too.  If anyone is interested, pm me and i can get you more info.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 08, 2020, 11:22:02 AM
It is a travel team organized through a fairly large local baseball factory.     Originally had double digit tourneys scheduled for the year, as well as 1-2 games a week against other teams from local travel ball organizations.     Week night games will probably start after June 1.   

For the record, our coach was unable to get 10 families to commit to yes, so the team will not be going to Pigeon Forge. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: CreightonWarrior on May 08, 2020, 07:48:17 PM
These youth sport tournament directors are way too greedy to not go after the paychecks they get from these things.

Safety is not their number one concern.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 08, 2020, 10:07:45 PM
In the latest Pew poll of 11,000 American adults, 68% worry their state governments are lifting COVID-19 restrictions too quickly. Meanwhile, only 31% of those polled feel their states are not lifting restrictions quickly enough.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article242593036.html?

Several other pollsters have done similar polls the last few weeks, and the results have been consistent: Anywhere from 3/5ths to 3/4th of Americans polled are concerned restrictions are being lifted too quickly.

And while Democrats and those who lean left are more concerned than Republicans are, nearly half of the Republicans polled (47%) feel that way, too.

That is not me saying what should or shouldn't be done. Frankly, I don't pretend to know exactly what should be done, and I'm glad I don't have the responsibility of making such a momentous decision.

However, the narrative that most Americans want to rush the economy "back to normal" -- a narrative being pushed by the White House -- is obviously false.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 09, 2020, 09:39:47 AM
Learning from history if you open up too early.

https://time.com/5830265/1918-flu-reopening-coronavirus/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=history_opinion_covid-19&linkId=88198307
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 09, 2020, 08:40:50 PM
Learning from history if you open up too early.

https://time.com/5830265/1918-flu-reopening-coronavirus/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=history_opinion_covid-19&linkId=88198307

I'm not liking the constant comparisons to the spanish flu. That crap was actually BAAAAAAAAD Like 100 million dead with a quarter population and slower travel baaaaaaaaad. That crap would drop an active 25 year old in an instant.

Will opening back up cause more deaths? Probably. But we closed down because our systems were not in place to fight a pandemic. We've now ramped up testing. The "drive thru" clinics are actually starting to be spotted around the country. Ventilators are being produced like tanks in the second world war. At some point we do need to open back up and let the virus run its course.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 09, 2020, 09:01:32 PM
I'm not liking the constant comparisons to the spanish flu. That crap was actually BAAAAAAAAD Like 100 million dead with a quarter population and slower travel baaaaaaaaad. That crap would drop an active 25 year old in an instant.

Will opening back up cause more deaths? Probably. But we closed down because our systems were not in place to fight a pandemic. We've now ramped up testing. The "drive thru" clinics are actually starting to be spotted around the country. Ventilators are being produced like tanks in the second world war. At some point we do need to open back up and let the virus run its course.

The death rate for the Spanish flu was around 1.5-2%, with many of those dying from secondary bacterial infections, before the development of antibiotics and advanced medical care.

The death rate for CoVID is around 0.8-1.2%, with antibiotics, and advanced medical care. The comparison is apt. If we didn't have antibiotics and advanced medical care, this would have easily have a higher mortality rate than the Spanish flu.

There are estimated to be around 675k deaths due to the Spanish flu in the US, over roughly a 1 year time period. We have had nearly 100k deaths in 2 months from CoVID, the only thing that is going to keep the total number of deaths in the US below that of the Spanish flu, is if it goes away on its own (unlikely), we develop a vaccine in the next 6 months, or we quarantine. Personally I think we will see varying degrees of the above, which may keep the total deaths down.

But as a disease, this is as deadly, or more deadly than the Spanish flu. If the Spanish flu happened today, we'd probably top out at a max of 100k US deaths, due to advancements in medical care.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 09, 2020, 09:38:09 PM
The death rate for the Spanish flu was around 1.5-2%, with many of those dying from secondary bacterial infections, before the development of antibiotics and advanced medical care.

The death rate for CoVID is around 0.8-1.2%, with antibiotics, and advanced medical care. The comparison is apt. If we didn't have antibiotics and advanced medical care, this would have easily have a higher mortality rate than the Spanish flu.

There are estimated to be around 675k deaths due to the Spanish flu in the US, over roughly a 1 year time period. We have had nearly 100k deaths in 2 months from CoVID, the only thing that is going to keep the total number of deaths in the US below that of the Spanish flu, is if it goes away on its own (unlikely), we develop a vaccine in the next 6 months, or we quarantine. Personally I think we will see varying degrees of the above, which may keep the total deaths down.

But as a disease, this is as deadly, or more deadly than the Spanish flu. If the Spanish flu happened today, we'd probably top out at a max of 100k US deaths, due to advancements in medical care.

That death rate for corona, is well simply, inaccurate. Very inaccurate. I also know the death total is fudged, because I've witnessed it first hand being fudged. (I don't want to get into this on this post)

The spanish flu dropped people who were 25. We're not giving antibiotics or advanced medical care to too many 25 year olds.

A case study I've been very interested in is the Theodore Roosevelt ship. Over 1000 cases onboard, so far a single reported death. So we have a healthy, fit, and active group out there. Currently the death rate on board is under .1%. A stark difference in the death rate in the overall population.

So we can extrapolate a couple of things from that:

A) Corona is very good at killing compromised individuals over the age of around 65.
B) It is very bad at putting down healthy, active individuals under the age of say 50.

From my experience in working directly with covid patients, most seem to have a few things in common. Old age, obese, and a lot of underlying issues. If I'm being honest, of those I've seen actually die to covid. I'd wager about 80% of them weren't going to live another two years.

In closing, I'd say that the Spanish flu was much more deadly. Regardless of antibiotics or advanced medical practices (We're not giving either of these to a vast majority of people with covid)


Edit: Missed something here. The 675k death number is a weak argument. Why would you not take the total dead worldwide of 100million? America weathered the spanish flu much better then most places.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 09, 2020, 09:42:14 PM
One last post on the matter of the Spanish flu being waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more deadly


https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/fxucds/for_everyone_asking_why_i_didnt_include_the/

This shows the death rate of a bunch of novel viruses. You'll see covid make a slight appearance in 2nd place towards the end. If you want to put an even more shocking thought into your mind after watching this, remember the world had 1/4 the population it does now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on May 11, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Glad I own multiple shotguns.  I expect some of my anti-gun friends may come over for some advice. Ha ha.


One good outcomes (maybe) are mortgage refi.  Got ours redone earlier this week for under 3%.

This is no joke. We've been kicking the tires on refi for the last year because Wells Fargo is making things difficult.

We're loping 9 years off our mortgage; payment is staying nearly the same. No appraisal. No closing appearance needed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 11, 2020, 12:45:03 PM
Regardless of antibiotics or advanced medical practices (We're not giving either of these to a vast majority of people with covid)

So the medical care the people infected with COVID today isn't any more advanced than that provided to flu victims 1918.
I'm far from an expert in medicine, but this seems to be an outlandish statement.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 11, 2020, 01:07:40 PM
So the medical care the people infected with COVID today isn't any more advanced than that provided to flu victims 1918.
I'm far from an expert in medicine, but this seems to be an outlandish statement.

The vast treatment of COVID is this. Stay at home, don't leave. If you start dying, come to the hospital. So yes, our treatment for most people with covid is actually less then that of treatment to flu victims in 1918.

You are getting hung up on those who REQUIRE hospitalization.

Heres the CDC's recommended treatment:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/if-you-are-sick/steps-when-sick.html

Here's the CDC's study on hospitalization: (For march 1st-30th)  (This actually states that 90% of those hospitalized have underlying conditions, even more then I suspected)
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 11, 2020, 01:57:47 PM
The vast treatment of COVID is this. Stay at home, don't leave. If you start dying, come to the hospital. So yes, our treatment for most people with covid is actually less then that of treatment to flu victims in 1918.

You are getting hung up on those who REQUIRE hospitalization.


Because those are the people who are actually dying.  Impacting the death rate, which is where this topic was heading.

For instance, we didn't have ventilators during the Spanish flu.  Or at least ones similar to what we have now.  The first iron lung wasn't invented until the late 20s.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 11, 2020, 02:11:42 PM
The vast treatment of COVID is this. Stay at home, don't leave. If you start dying, come to the hospital. So yes, our treatment for most people with covid is actually less then that of treatment to flu victims in 1918.

You are getting hung up on those who REQUIRE hospitalization.

The discussion was regarding medical treatments. Telling someone to stay at home is not a medical treatment.
You're just wrong here. Our knowledge of epidemiology and the treatment of these viruses far exceeds anything we had 102 years ago, giving every infected person today a far better chance of surviving this illness.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on May 11, 2020, 02:20:19 PM
I for one wouldn't hang my hat on what COVID is or isn't 5-7 months in...in fact feels like something we wont know the answer to for a very long time.

I would guess that if 1918 Spanish flu came today we would have lower mortality due to better care and overall better living conditions today.  On the flip side it would have spread so much faster - which could have led to higher mortality on that front. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 11, 2020, 02:48:10 PM
I for one wouldn't hang my hat on what COVID is or isn't 5-7 months in...in fact feels like something we wont know the answer to for a very long time.

I would guess that if 1918 Spanish flu came today we would have lower mortality due to better care and overall better living conditions today.  On the flip side it would have spread so much faster - which could have led to higher mortality on that front.

On the latter point, it may not have spread faster. The big reason the Spanish Flu was so devastating was WWI, and the massive amount of people being transported in close quarters for war purposes.

Also, your point on we shouldn't comment 5-7 months in is also very apt. If we did that for the Spanish Flu, we wouldn't have thought it was so bad. Then it mutated the next fall and the 2nd iteration devastated the world.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 11, 2020, 02:55:39 PM
The discussion was regarding medical treatments. Telling someone to stay at home is not a medical treatment.
You're just wrong here. Our knowledge of epidemiology and the treatment of these viruses far exceeds anything we had 102 years ago, giving every infected person today a far better chance of surviving this illness.

As usual, you are missing the point. I'm not sure if it's on purpose or not to "win the argument"

I'm going to explain this as clearly as I can.

The spanish flu dropped healthy people in their 20s. Corona does not.

The spanish flu killed 100 million. Corona has 250k currently.

If you didn't receive medical treatment for the Spanish flu you had a high chance of death (a pretty high one with medical treatment). The vast majority of people who get Corona do not need any medical treatment.

The Spanish flu, if released today would still kill more then Corona. You argue with our vastly superior knowledge that we would be able to easily conquer the Spanish flu. That is completely untrue.

We are having massive issues with Corona due to the limited amount of medical treatment we can provide currently. How in anyway would that be different under the spanish flu?

Would the Spanish flu be anywhere near as deadly now as it was in 1918? No. Would it be much more deadly then Corona? Yes.

Stop making strawmen arguments out of this. The overall post was about the Spanish flu being much deadlier. That is undeniably true.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 11, 2020, 03:26:38 PM
Stop making strawmen arguments out of this. The overall post was about the Spanish flu being much deadlier. That is undeniably true.

It's a strawman argument to respond to your exact words?
The Spanish flu may very well have been deadlier. But the deadliness of any virus is going to depend greatly on the quality and effectiveness of available health care.
And to suggest - as you did - that the medical care being given to COVID patients today is the same or less than that provided to Spanish flu patients 102 years ago is undeniably false.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 11, 2020, 03:59:22 PM

And to suggest - as you did - that the medical care being given to COVID patients today is the same or less than that provided to Spanish flu patients 102 years ago is undeniably false.

This is your strawman right here.

My words were "The vast majority of treatment of COVID is this. Stay at home, don't leave." In other words, the medical treatment for the vast majority of patients is to do absolutely nothing.

Now you're trying to argue because we put the worst cases of covid on ventilators that my statement is false. Which its not, at all. A very very large (think over 97%) of covid patients do not go on a ventilator.

Which if you see from my original quote of "the vast majority of treatment of covid is" and then take a look at "the vast majority". You will see that the "vast majority" of our treatment for covid is less then or equal to that of the spanish flu.

But you continue to go down the  "BuT vEnTiLaToRs" route. Strawman.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 11, 2020, 04:09:57 PM
This is your strawman right here.

My words were "The vast majority of treatment of COVID is this. Stay at home, don't leave." In other words, the medical treatment for the vast majority of patients is to do absolutely nothing.

Now you're trying to argue because we put the worst cases of covid on ventilators that my statement is false. Which its not, at all. A very very large (think over 97%) of covid patients do not go on a ventilator.

Which if you see from my original quote of "the vast majority of treatment of covid is" and then take a look at "the vast majority". You will see that the "vast majority" of our treatment for covid is less then or equal to that of the spanish flu.

But you continue to go down the  "BuT vEnTiLaToRs" route. Strawman.

It's ironic you're accusing me using a strawman ... while claiming I've written something about ventilators. That's the only strawman here. I've written nothing about ventilators, and my response to you came well before your silly argument that telling people to stay home is "medical treatment."

This isn't worth continuing, but let it never be said you won't defend a bad argument to the death.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 11, 2020, 04:25:52 PM
As usual, you are missing the point. I'm not sure if it's on purpose or not to "win the argument"

I'm going to explain this as clearly as I can.

1. The spanish flu dropped healthy people in their 20s. Corona does not.

2. The spanish flu killed 100 million. Corona has 250k currently.

3. If you didn't receive medical treatment for the Spanish flu you had a high chance of death (a pretty high one with medical treatment). The vast majority of people who get Corona do not need any medical treatment.

4. The Spanish flu, if released today would still kill more then Corona. You argue with our vastly superior knowledge that we would be able to easily conquer the Spanish flu. That is completely untrue.

5. We are having massive issues with Corona due to the limited amount of medical treatment we can provide currently. How in anyway would that be different under the spanish flu?

6. Would the Spanish flu be anywhere near as deadly now as it was in 1918? No. Would it be much more deadly then Corona? Yes.

Stop making strawmen arguments out of this. The overall post was about the Spanish flu being much deadlier. That is undeniably true.

Let's go through these, as there are a lot to unpack. I renumbered yours above to make things clearer.

1. The cumulative overall death rate in the hardest hit areas of the Spanish flu were around 10-15 per 1000 people (that is all ages). As of May 2nd, 11.8 per 1000 18-29 year old were hospitalized for COVID, over all ages, 50 per 1000 were hospitalized. In 1918, they would not have gotten intensive care, and most/many would have died. So 18-29 year olds are being hit hard. They just survive because of modern health care, which includes antibiotics to treat secondary bacterial infections, that was not available in 1918.

https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/covidnet/COVID19_3.html

2. The Spanish flu is estimated to have killed 20-50 million worldwide. We do not know how many, but it wasn't 100 million. It also occurred over a 2-year time window, during a major war, when nations were not quarantining but instead shipping people around packed like sardines either to fight, or return from war. They also didn't have any testing procedures etc., to mitigate spread.

3. The vast majority of people who got the Spanish flu survived without any treatment at all, except rest. At least 500 million people were infected (most likely higher). Most recovered without treatment, as almost no treatments existed. Common treatments included blood-letting, which likely killed some patients on their own. Another treatment was high-aspirin dosages, which also killed a lot of patients as they didn't understand its toxicity.

For COVID, about 5-10% of all patients need intensive medical care. All of which was unavailable in 1918. The 5-10% does not include treatments with antibiotics for possible secondary infections, also not available in 1918. Blood-letting is not being used.

4. Well that's one theory. Completely unprovable. But just based on the fact that we have antivirals, like tamiflu, and treatments that suppress the immune system and treat cytokine storm (which is what killed most during the Spanish flu), your stance is not well supported.

5. Your right. Both would overwhelm the system unless quarantine measures were used. We have the ability to track and trace diseases now, which can mitigate spread and flatten the curves.

6. Well that's one theory. Again completely unprovable. Based on mortality rates, and hospitalization rates, as well as the primary causes of death in the Spanish Flu, I think the best argument is they would have had comparable mortality.

With the best data we have from serological tests (antibodies) in NYC, the numbers bare out essentially the same overall mortality rate for both COVID and the Spanish flu in the US.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 11, 2020, 04:32:08 PM
They both suck.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: StillAWarrior on May 11, 2020, 04:35:48 PM
They both suck.

https://youtu.be/pWdd6_ZxX8c
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 11, 2020, 04:39:24 PM
They both suck.

Both sides, aina?   ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 11, 2020, 04:42:14 PM
Both sides, aina?   ;D

Some people say...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 11, 2020, 05:07:41 PM
Some people say...

500 viruses
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 11, 2020, 06:48:38 PM
500 viruses

Some people say...

Both sides, aina?   ;D

They both suck.   

https://youtu.be/pWdd6_ZxX8c

Each and everyone of these was hilarious. Thank you all. Needed a laugh today.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 12, 2020, 07:32:53 PM
It is a travel team organized through a fairly large local baseball factory.     Originally had double digit tourneys scheduled for the year, as well as 1-2 games a week against other teams from local travel ball organizations.     Week night games will probably start after June 1.   

For the record, our coach was unable to get 10 families to commit to yes, so the team will not be going to Pigeon Forge.

Here's a tournament in Missouri for y'all next weekend.   

https://www.kansascity.com/news/coronavirus/article242669366.html (https://www.kansascity.com/news/coronavirus/article242669366.html)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 13, 2020, 09:32:08 AM

1. The cumulative overall death rate in the hardest hit areas of the Spanish flu were around 10-15 per 1000 people (that is all ages). As of May 2nd, 11.8 per 1000 18-29 year old were hospitalized for COVID, over all ages, 50 per 1000 were hospitalized. In 1918, they would not have gotten intensive care, and most/many would have died. So 18-29 year olds are being hit hard.
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/covidnet/COVID19_3.html

This will be the only one I respond to, as the rest are either totally incorrect, or you are just playing a selective stat game (that we already went over on why they are wrong)

We both know they stats are highly skewed. As until very recently (like yesterday) they were only testing people who were severe enough to be eligible to receive a test.  We both know that the 11.8 per 1000 on 18-29 year olds stat is completely incorrect. They are the demographic most likely to receive zero testing. Meaning that stat is completely inflated due to only severe cases being tested.

I will once again, point in the direction of the Theodore Roosevelt ship (that you completely ignored?) This is the only true case study we have of active, healthy individuals in close quarters. As of April 29th (the day they stopped reporting) 96% of crew were tested. 969 cases were positive. 3904 were negative.

7 of these 969 were hospitalized. (Already going against your 11.8 on 18-29) Of course, were all 7 of these 18-29? No. We unfortunately only know the age of one. The single death on board, age 41. So while we can't assume that all 7 hospitalized were older in age, it is very likely.

The last thing I will say on this subject is the death rate. We have 1/969 reported. This is strikingly different then the one being broadcast around the world. Meaning 1 of 2 things, the death rate is being fudged (I've alluded to this happening in the hospital I work at) or this virus is really only lethal to those with extreme underlying conditions.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 13, 2020, 10:24:10 AM
This will be the only one I respond to, as the rest are either totally incorrect, or you are just playing a selective stat game (that we already went over on why they are wrong)

We both know they stats are highly skewed. As until very recently (like yesterday) they were only testing people who were severe enough to be eligible to receive a test.  We both know that the 11.8 per 1000 on 18-29 year olds stat is completely incorrect. They are the demographic most likely to receive zero testing. Meaning that stat is completely inflated due to only severe cases being tested.

I will once again, point in the direction of the Theodore Roosevelt ship (that you completely ignored?) This is the only true case study we have of active, healthy individuals in close quarters. As of April 29th (the day they stopped reporting) 96% of crew were tested. 969 cases were positive. 3904 were negative.

7 of these 969 were hospitalized. (Already going against your 11.8 on 18-29) Of course, were all 7 of these 18-29? No. We unfortunately only know the age of one. The single death on board, age 41. So while we can't assume that all 7 hospitalized were older in age, it is very likely.

The last thing I will say on this subject is the death rate. We have 1/969 reported. This is strikingly different then the one being broadcast around the world. Meaning 1 of 2 things, the death rate is being fudged (I've alluded to this happening in the hospital I work at) or this virus is really only lethal to those with extreme underlying conditions.

There was an error in my stat regarding hospitalization rates. I don't know if it is due to them updating (changing) the webpage or just me reading it wrong.

If you use the serological data from NY (actual total infections) though, and extend to total number of infections equivalent to the Spanish Flu, the results end up roughly the same.

I only correct these, because I think it is important for the overall analysis to be right. It is clear that you have you mind set, and will reject any data that runs contrary to your opinion. Given that all of this in the end is unprovable. I find no benefit in continuing to present firm data.

I only add, that contrary to what you state, the rest of my statements are from scientific literature sources, in peer reviewed journals. So if you have a problem with the data, take it up with the scientific community.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 13, 2020, 11:42:51 AM

There was an error in my stat regarding hospitalization rates. I don't know if it is due to them updating (changing) the webpage or just me reading it wrong.

If you use the serological data from NY (actual total infections) though, and extend to total number of infections equivalent to the Spanish Flu, the results end up roughly the same.

I only correct these, because I think it is important for the overall analysis to be right. It is clear that you have you mind set, and will reject any data that runs contrary to your opinion. Given that all of this in the end is unprovable. I find no benefit in continuing to present firm data.

I only add, that contrary to what you state, the rest of my statements are from scientific literature sources, in peer reviewed journals. So if you have a problem with the data, take it up with the scientific community.

I reject data that we both know to be incomplete.

It's weird however that you continue to ignore the only study where they tested 95% of the population.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on May 13, 2020, 11:51:41 AM
I love this gem from yesterday's MU Law School poll .. taken about 10 days ago.

Over the past year, do you feel the economy has gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same?

28% said the economy has gotten better over the last year.
20% said the economy has stayed the same.

Also, 48% told the pollster they were at Arby's right now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 13, 2020, 12:40:15 PM
I love this gem from yesterday's MU Law School poll .. taken about 10 days ago.

Over the past year, do you feel the economy has gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same?

28% said the economy has gotten better over the last year.
20% said the economy has stayed the same.

Also, 48% told the pollster they were at Arby's right now.


Supporters of the prez will never admit anything is wrong as that would be a criticism of him.  They don't do that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 13, 2020, 12:47:45 PM
Denial.  Not just a river in Egypt.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: StillAWarrior on May 13, 2020, 12:56:37 PM

Supporters of the prez will never admit anything is wrong as that would be a criticism of him.  They don't do that.

A number of "supporters of the prez" have criticized him on this board.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on May 13, 2020, 01:02:38 PM
It's weird however that you continue to ignore the only study where they tested 95% of the population.

And was that population representative of the population at large? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on May 13, 2020, 01:04:10 PM
What economy, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 13, 2020, 01:17:49 PM
And was that population representative of the population at large?

Depends on how much you believe in the navy fitness system.

I myself would show this as proof its not deadly to those with no under lying conditions and to be a start to herd immunity for the "general" population
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 13, 2020, 02:47:20 PM
What economy, hey?

Exactly.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 14, 2020, 12:14:22 PM
Kroger says it has hired more than 100K workers in the past eight weeks, including those from the hardest-hit sectors like restaurants, hotels and food service distributors.

https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17871686-kroger-family-of-companies-provides-new-career-opportunities-to-100000-workers

"Throughout the pandemic, Kroger's top priority has been to provide and maintain a safe environment for our associates and customers with open stores, comprehensive ecommerce solutions and an efficiently operating supply chain," said Rodney McMullen, Kroger's chairman and CEO. "Since March, we have invested to reward our associates and safeguard our associates, customers and communities."

The Kroger Family of Companies has invested $700 million since March to reward associates and safeguard associates, customers and communities.

"In the coming months, we know that our associates' needs will continue to evolve and change, and our commitment is that we will continue to listen, be responsive and make decisions that advance the needs of our associates, customers, communities and business," continued McMullen.


This would seem to fly in the face of the narrative that "nobody" wants to work when they can simply collect unemployment benefits instead.

By and large, people want to work.

Regardless, the increased unemployment benefits are only a Band-Aid -- and one meant to stimulate a flagging economy. Decades of studies have shown unemployment benefits to be among the very best stimulus plans because they typically go right back into the economy. People aren't getting unemployment benefits and then investing that money or burying it in the backyard. They are consumers who quickly spend it at businesses that desperately need economic help.

Unfortunately, some folks are very afraid that the "least of these" might be gaming the system somehow. Much better that only rich people game the system.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 14, 2020, 03:20:16 PM
Went out on Saturday and bought a couple of mattresses.  Went by appointment, had the store to ourselves.

Received a handwritten thank you card from the salesman today.   For a $1000 purchase.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 14, 2020, 03:43:54 PM
Went out on Saturday and bought a couple of mattresses.  Went by appointment, had the store to ourselves.

Received a handwritten thank you card from the salesman today.   For a $1000 purchase.

Classy guy.  I bet you'll go back as well as rec him to friends and fam.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 14, 2020, 04:41:58 PM
It was a pleasant experience.   And yes, I will be recommending him to others.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on May 14, 2020, 05:38:06 PM
Went out on Saturday and bought a couple of mattresses.  Went by appointment, had the store to ourselves.

Received a handwritten thank you card from the salesman today.   For a $1000 purchase.


The handwritten card is always a nice touch, I try to get my guys to do that. Never do, made them do it for holiday cards this year, so many compliments back.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 14, 2020, 08:09:00 PM
I’ve went mattress shopping twice, and both ended up being one of the best sales experiences I’ve ever had. Where you found yourself wishing it was a more frequent purchase that you could go to your salesperson again more often.

Meanwhile, I’ve had some business dealings with the group behind Sleep Number beds, who created a niche to surpass that whole in store purchase experience, and they ended up being some of the biggest unpleasant dbags I’ve ever met professionally.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on May 14, 2020, 08:12:20 PM
Sumwon 'splain ta me y mattress stores, car washes, liquor stores, and garden centers are considered "essential" in Sconnie, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 14, 2020, 08:31:01 PM
Knott sconnie, hay
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Eldon on May 14, 2020, 08:40:15 PM
Conspiracy theory: Mattress stores are a huge money-laundering operation.

https://www.npr.org/2018/12/13/676543180/why-are-there-so-many-mattress-stores

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on May 14, 2020, 08:48:59 PM
Classy guy.  I bet you'll go back as well as rec him to friends and fam.

How often are you burning through mattresses that you go back?  Live in West Virginia or Racine?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 15, 2020, 06:41:36 AM
How often are you burning through mattresses that you go back?  Live in West Virginia or Racine?

You're thinking couches, bro!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on May 15, 2020, 09:22:51 AM
Sumwon 'splain ta me y mattress stores, car washes, liquor stores, and garden centers are considered "essential" in Sconnie, hey?

Liquor stores had to stay open after the bars were closed. If all the alcoholics were forced to go cold turkey the healthcare system would have been overwhelmed. Obviously dentists are mainly unessential except for emergency situations.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: StillAWarrior on May 15, 2020, 03:54:24 PM
This Unemployment Insurance Calculator (https://bfi.uchicago.edu/insight/blog/ui-calculator/) illustrates an issue that has been discussed previously in this thread (or on this board, anyway...if this is the wrong thread).  I know that some employers are having a bit of a challenge because some employees who are on unemployment are getting considerably more than they get when they are working.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on May 22, 2020, 03:31:50 PM
Man, the economy is so .. effed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/business/economy/coronavirus-unemployment-claims.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/business/economy/coronavirus-unemployment-claims.html)

“I hate to say it, but this is going to take longer and look grimmer than we thought,” Nicholas Bloom, an economist at Stanford University, said of the path to recovery.
Mr. Bloom is a co-author of an analysis that estimates 42 percent of recent layoffs will result in permanent job loss.

“Firms intend to hire these people back,” he said, referring to a recent survey of businesses by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. “But we know from the past that these aspirations often don’t turn out to be true.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 22, 2020, 03:35:05 PM
Georgia’s early move to start easing stay-at-home restrictions nearly a month ago has done little to stem the state’s flood of unemployment claims — illustrating how hard it is to bring jobs back while consumers are still afraid to go outside.

Weekly applications for jobless benefits have remained so elevated that Georgia now leads the country in terms of the proportion of its workforce applying for unemployment assistance. A staggering 40.3 percent of the state's workers — two out of every five — has filed for unemployment insurance payments since the coronavirus pandemic led to widespread shutdowns in mid-March, a POLITICO review of Labor Department data shows.


I said weeks ago that the recovery could take a couple years. I'm starting to hope that it is that short.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 22, 2020, 04:26:40 PM
Man, the economy is so .. effed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/business/economy/coronavirus-unemployment-claims.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/business/economy/coronavirus-unemployment-claims.html)

“I hate to say it, but this is going to take longer and look grimmer than we thought,” Nicholas Bloom, an economist at Stanford University, said of the path to recovery.
Mr. Bloom is a co-author of an analysis that estimates 42 percent of recent layoffs will result in permanent job loss.

“Firms intend to hire these people back,” he said, referring to a recent survey of businesses by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. “But we know from the past that these aspirations often don’t turn out to be true.”


I think the pessimism is due to employer fear that: (1) customers are going to come back slowly and cautiously; and (2) there will be a significant second wave later this summer or in the fall. If we had waited until all states met the CDC criteria for reopening, we would have seen more short-term economic pain, but I believe the rebound would have been more robust and sustainable.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 22, 2020, 06:19:25 PM

I think the pessimism is due to employer fear that: (1) customers are going to come back slowly and cautiously; and (2) there will be a significant second wave later this summer or in the fall. If we had waited until all states met the CDC criteria for reopening, we would have seen more short-term economic pain, but I believe the rebound would have been more robust and sustainable.

There will be some great psychological studies and papers in the years ahead. How did people react when things started to open back up? Did they make changes to their spending/savings habits? Where they willing to take on risk as restaurants began to function? Were they fearful of a 2nd wave and did they try to position themselves financially in case it came. How many bankruptcies due to people not wanting to mingle at stores? How will common folks react when the rich and powerful use the recovery as an opportunity to screw everyone else?

There will be a hundred more questions as well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 22, 2020, 07:01:46 PM
There will be some great psychological studies and papers in the years ahead. How did people react when things started to open back up? Did they make changes to their spending/savings habits? Where they willing to take on risk as restaurants began to function? Were they fearful of a 2nd wave and did they try to position themselves financially in case it came. How many bankruptcies due to people not wanting to mingle at stores? How will common folks react when the rich and powerful use the recovery as an opportunity to screw everyone else?

There will be a hundred more questions as well.

It takes 21 days of consistent effort to break a habit. We had way over 21 days of shelter in place.

It takes 21 days of consistent effort to create a new habit. It will take awhile for people to get back in the habit of "being normal".
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 22, 2020, 07:17:55 PM
It takes 21 days of consistent effort to break a habit. We had way over 21 days of shelter in place.

It takes 21 days of consistent effort to create a new habit. It will take awhile for people to get back in the habit of "being normal".

I don't know. The diet industry thrives because 21 days don't matter aren't enough. People fall back into their old habits.

For other things, it may well be the case.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 22, 2020, 07:25:24 PM
I don't know. The diet industry thrives because 21 days don't matter aren't enough. People fall back into their old habits.

For other things, it may well be the case.

21 days was my magic number to quit smoking.

Diet and exercise....not so much.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 22, 2020, 08:59:12 PM
It takes 21 days of consistent effort to break a habit. We had way over 21 days of shelter in place.

It takes 21 days of consistent effort to create a new habit. It will take awhile for people to get back in the habit of "being normal".


That might mean people will become habituated to getting out after 21 days...if numbers aren’t starting to go back up by then. But if the numbers are ramping up, we may need continual “resets.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 22, 2020, 09:03:36 PM
In study of the human mind...

6 months of consistency to become a routine. 12 months to become a habit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 22, 2020, 09:14:57 PM
Here in NC, restaurants are being allowed to reopen (with restrictions) but bars aren’t. They just announced today that breweries and taprooms will be allowed to reopen. My buddies and I are talking about reviving our traditional Thursday night get-together next week
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on May 22, 2020, 09:49:02 PM
It takes 21 days of consistent effort to break a habit. We had way over 21 days of shelter in place.

It takes 21 days of consistent effort to create a new habit. It will take awhile for people to get back in the habit of "being normal".

Wonder how many recovering alcoholics and drug addicts (for whom in person 12 step meetings are deemed non essential) will fall off the wagon and ruin their own lives and the lives of those close to them as they revert to old habits. Meanwhile, liquor stores and pot shops are deemed essential.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on May 22, 2020, 10:29:07 PM
Here in NC, restaurants are being allowed to reopen (with restrictions) but bars aren’t. They just announced today that breweries and taprooms will be allowed to reopen. My buddies and I are talking about reviving our traditional Thursday night get-together next week


Ewe got buds, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 22, 2020, 10:29:35 PM
Wonder how many recovering alcoholics and drug addicts (for whom in person 12 step meetings are deemed non essential) will fall off the wagon and ruin their own lives and the lives of those close to them as they revert to old habits. Meanwhile, liquor stores and pot shops are deemed essential.

As someone who has a couple close friends that fall into that camp. I hope they are all getting the help they need. They should absolutely be considered essential. Maybe have more meetings, and keep them smaller, but they should have been ongoing this entire time.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 23, 2020, 07:11:34 AM
, liquor stores and pot shops are deemed essential.

Alcohol withdrawal is legit one of the deadliest. Pot is a very good drug alternative to tons of liver killing legal ones.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 23, 2020, 08:09:00 AM

Ewe got buds, hey?

Nah ... 2 expennsuv. Eye still ewez hedfonez.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 23, 2020, 12:47:24 PM
Pressure cooker starting to get turned up on Govs who are still enforcing strict stay at home orders, business restrictions.  The wake up call for those Govs and public sector will happen in next few months.  States just now starting to feel the affects of what happens when sales tax revenue doesn't come in.  Keep in mind heavy local taxes on hotels, rental cars, not coming in. etc.  Layoffs = no  State Income Tax Revenue.  State Fairs getting cancelled.

Massive layoffs and paycuts will soon play out in the public sector/universities, just as has been taking place in private sector since April 1.  Will be interesting to see how the tune changes as state aid programs need to get cut and taxes raised further in the states with some of the highest taxes already - New York, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, Illinois, California.  All but MN will probably see their Bond Ratings return to Junk and will see further underfunding of pension funds, with additional raises in taxes.


Easy to argue for continued shelter in place if still employed.  For the 40 million Americans out of work and 100,000s of small business owners out of business - they probably feel differently.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 23, 2020, 01:58:54 PM
Pressure cooker starting to get turned up on Govs who are still enforcing strict stay at home orders, business restrictions.  The wake up call for those Govs and public sector will happen in next few months.  States just now starting to feel the affects of what happens when sales tax revenue doesn't come in.  Keep in mind heavy local taxes on hotels, rental cars, not coming in. etc.  Layoffs = no  State Income Tax Revenue.  State Fairs getting cancelled.

Massive layoffs and paycuts will soon play out in the public sector/universities, just as has been taking place in private sector since April 1.  Will be interesting to see how the tune changes as state aid programs need to get cut and taxes raised further in the states with some of the highest taxes already - New York, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, Illinois, California.  All but MN will probably see their Bond Ratings return to Junk and will see further underfunding of pension funds, with additional raises in taxes.


Easy to argue for continued shelter in place if still employed.  For the 40 million Americans out of work and 100,000s of small business owners out of business - they probably feel differently.

I've argued for reasonable compromises between health and economy on here. What we are doing now in some locations, and is not a reasonable compromise it places the economy as the priority.

There are things we can do to offset economic losses. We can support specific industries, do basic universal incomes, temporarily to make sure businesses and people are not adversely affected by partial shutdowns.

We cannot bring people back from the dead.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 23, 2020, 05:53:39 PM
21 days was my magic number to quit smoking.

Diet and exercise....not so much.

I read your comments - and you may have quit smoking but did you really quit “smoking”?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 23, 2020, 10:41:11 PM
I read your comments - and you may have quit smoking but did you really quit “smoking”?

No more Marlboros but still smoking the libs with my keyboard, yah?

Or do you mean the weed?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on May 24, 2020, 02:38:34 AM
Pretty sure some here have got what Uncle Joe has, without the national stage to pee themselves.

#driedupbrainmatter
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Mutaman on May 24, 2020, 03:58:31 AM
Pretty sure some here have got what Uncle Joe has, without the national stage to pee themselves.

#driedupbrainmatter

Whatever we  and/or Joe has, I doubt we're  so unnatural carnal knowledgeed up that  you'll hear any of us running around accusing some morning show tv host of murder. On the weekend the country closes in on 100K coronavirus deaths.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 24, 2020, 07:55:13 AM
No more Marlboros but still smoking the libs with my keyboard, yah?

Or do you mean the weed?
Keyboard Warrior, Action Pose
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9kRd9899jGg/UJNsL6T8mEI/AAAAAAAAAB0/fJX3gxifdVA/w1200-h630-p-k-nu/Internet+Warrior.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 24, 2020, 11:17:58 AM
I've argued for reasonable compromises between health and economy on here. What we are doing now in some locations, and is not a reasonable compromise it places the economy as the priority.

There are things we can do to offset economic losses. We can support specific industries, do basic universal incomes, temporarily to make sure businesses and people are not adversely affected by partial shutdowns.

We cannot bring people back from the dead.

You could argue mandating small business owners to close and exponentially increase their likelihood of losing their business (and employees) that they've invested personal capital, sweat, energy, and effort into for years isn't a reasonable compromise.

I supported the lock down measures.  However, at this stage with 40 million unemployed, companies failing on the regular, it cannot continue.  The CARES act tried to help small business,
but didn't stop thousands if not hundreds of thousands from calling it quits.  Companies and businesses don't just get made overnight - they take years to grow and sustain.  Re-creating jobs after this passes is NOT going to happen quickly.

Everyone has a date with death.  Those elderly and with underlying risk factors should absolutely be quarantined and stay home.  But for the rest of the world who have minuscule risk of death?  Policy that has left 40 million Americans unemployed in a matter of 7 weeks, cannot continue. 

The rest of us can do our part by wearing masks, social distancing publicly, not bring risk to those older loved ones by visiting.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 24, 2020, 11:48:22 AM
Everyone has a date with death.  Those elderly and with underlying risk factors should absolutely be quarantined and stay home.  But for the rest of the world who have minuscule risk of death?  Policy that has left 40 million Americans unemployed in a matter of 7 weeks, cannot continue. 

The rest of us can do our part by wearing masks, social distancing publicly, not bring risk to those older loved ones by visiting.

Gross cavalier attitude notwithstanding, which states aren't in the process of reopening?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 24, 2020, 11:57:53 AM
You could argue mandating small business owners to close and exponentially increase their likelihood of losing their business (and employees) that they've invested personal capital, sweat, energy, and effort into for years isn't a reasonable compromise.

I supported the lock down measures.  However, at this stage with 40 million unemployed, companies failing on the regular, it cannot continue.  The CARES act tried to help small business,
but didn't stop thousands if not hundreds of thousands from calling it quits.  Companies and businesses don't just get made overnight - they take years to grow and sustain.  Re-creating jobs after this passes is NOT going to happen quickly.

Everyone has a date with death.  Those elderly and with underlying risk factors should absolutely be quarantined and stay home.  But for the rest of the world who have minuscule risk of death?  Policy that has left 40 million Americans unemployed in a matter of 7 weeks, cannot continue. 

The rest of us can do our part by wearing masks, social distancing publicly, not bring risk to those older loved ones by visiting.

We know it can’t continue. That’s why states are reopening.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 24, 2020, 12:08:00 PM
You could argue mandating small business owners to close and exponentially increase their likelihood of losing their business (and employees) that they've invested personal capital, sweat, energy, and effort into for years isn't a reasonable compromise.

Well I wouldn't mandate small businesses to close right now. So not sure what you are getting at. Seems like its way off base an trying to put words into peoples mouth.

And regarding small business owners. PPP failed. It never took into consideration the lost revenue for the small business owner, and his responsibilities. That lost revenue is never coming back (although I've seen prices at some local places now double what they used to be).

That doesn't mean that there aren't better alternatives to protect the small business owner and their investments.

I just hope when this is all said and done, we all get on board and recognize health emergencies shouldn't ruin peoples lives. And that those that invested their hard work, and energy to save a nest egg, only to have to declare bankruptcy for a health emergency are treated the way they should. That it is not their fault, and they shouldn't have to pay for it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 24, 2020, 02:35:28 PM

The rest of us can do our part by wearing masks, social distancing publicly, not bring risk to those older loved ones by visiting.



Unfortunately, huge numbers of people are ignoring these simple, common sense measures. This was yesterday afternoon in Ocean City....

https://twitter.com/HellgrenWJZ/status/1264311034996838401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1264311034996838401&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fbaltimore.cbslocal.com%2F2020%2F05%2F23%2Foceancity-maryland-ocmd-memorialday-weekend-summer-boardwalk-coronavirus-health%2F
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 24, 2020, 02:47:54 PM
Gross cavalier attitude notwithstanding, which states aren't in the process of reopening?

California?  Minnesota?  Illinois?  Opening business to 25% capacity while "opening," isn't "opening."  You have barber shops/hair salons who can only open at 25% capacity.  Many restaurants the same. Many bars not able to open.  Those economics don't work.  Let them open 100%.  You walk into a restaurant/salon and feel it is too crowded?  Leave.  Nobody forces you or the employees to participate.

Yea, but what about hospitals then being overwhelmed?  Most who get COVID do not end up in the hospital, many are asymptomatic.  Hospitalization rate of COVID patients?  4.6 per 100,000. In highest risk group over 65?  13.8 per 100,000 people. 

The horror out of NYC is not something that can be replicated anywhere else in the U.S - aside from perhaps Chicago, San Francisco, Boston - cities reliant on mass transit.  NYC was the perfect breeding ground for massive outbreak - global tourism/business travel, subways where you are packed like sardines, same with sidewalks, people living on top of each other in apartment/condo buildings, population density greater than anywhere else in the U.S.

I don't find it cavalier to care about the 40 million healthy and able-bodied Americans out of work. COVID's mortality rate will eventually settle around 0.5%, and ~98% of those who do die are over 65 and have severe underlying health problems - who's quality of life was either already compromised or soon would be in decline.  For those in that risk group?  Stay home.  Don't take visitors.  The rest of us, stay away.  Don't think anybody with loved ones in high risk group would disregard what we know - to stay away.

BTW - As I recall you are involved in healthcare on some level?  And from past discussions, I know you are well-informed and bright on the healthcare side of things.  Do you think we will have a vaccine for COVID in next 12 months?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 24, 2020, 03:08:22 PM
Yea, but what about hospitals then being overwhelmed?  Most who get COVID do not end up in the hospital, many are asymptomatic.  Hospitalization rate of COVID patients?  4.6 per 100,000. In highest risk group over 65?  13.8 per 100,000 people. 

The horror out of NYC is not something that can be replicated anywhere else in the U.S - aside from perhaps Chicago, San Francisco, Boston - cities reliant on mass transit.  NYC was the perfect breeding ground for massive outbreak - global tourism/business travel, subways where you are packed like sardines, same with sidewalks, people living on top of each other in apartment/condo buildings, population density greater than anywhere else in the U.S.

You are citing hospitalization rates, that are based on total population, not cases. Those rates are during a nationwide shutdown/quarantine. They do not remotely represent the hospitalization rates on a case basis, or what would occur on a population basis if we have no shutdown/quarantine.

Regarding it can't happen anywhere else, well except for New Orleans, and Baton Rouge, and a number of other smaller cities in Louisiana...oh yeah, and that dense urban jungle called Montgomery, Alabama that is currently experiencing it.

What you are stating are no where near the reality on the ground.

I don't find it cavalier to care about the 40 million healthy and able-bodied Americans out of work. COVID's mortality rate will eventually settle around 0.5%, and ~98% of those who do die are over 65 and have severe underlying health problems - who's quality of life was either already compromised or soon would be in decline.

The mortality rate will likely be around the 0.8-1.0% that has been predicted from the early days. And your stat that 98% of those who do die are over 65 with severe underlying health problems is just completely false. In NY right now, 26% of all deaths have been under the age of 65. And they don't track "severe underlying problems" they track "underlying problems" which could be as mundane as being overweight, or high cholesterol.

You are being cavalier about disregarding human life. Not to mention, that many of the people that do survive in these younger age demographics may have life-long quality of life impacts from the disease.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 24, 2020, 03:20:47 PM

The rest of us can do our part by wearing masks, social distancing publicly, not bring risk to those older loved ones by visiting.

Lake of the Ozarks yesterday:
(https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.flyertalk.com-vbulletin/733x620/ozarks_768c4d3908de5b5bea7e72c8d08e67c1f29950c8.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 24, 2020, 03:22:07 PM
BTW - As I recall you are involved in healthcare on some level?  And from past discussions, I know you are well-informed and bright on the healthcare side of things.  Do you think we will have a vaccine for COVID in next 12 months?

I'm not in position to debate every point, but I'll just say allowing people to decide for themselves isn't an option with a pandemic. This isn't like smoking where a person makes a risky choice, gets cancer and dies. The spread doesn't stop with the person who takes the risk. That person carries the virus to friends, family, co-workers, fellow parishioners, etc., who can then pass it on to their friends, family, co-workers, fellow parishioners, etc. That's how a pandemic works and why "it's my choice" slogans are dumb. It may be your choice to go to a crowded restaurant, but it's not the choice of everyone you come into contact with for the next couple of weeks, or that of the people they come into contact with.
And forcing millions of out-of-work people to choose between unemployment without benefits and working in potentially dangerous conditions doesn't seem like much of a choice.

A .5% mortality rate would be devastating and there's almost no chance that 98 percent of those killed will be over 65 (that figure currently sits at about 73 percent, per the CDC).

Lastly, no, I'm not in the health care industry and anything I say about the prospects of a vaccine would be total speculation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 24, 2020, 04:18:39 PM
I'm not in position to debate every point, but I'll just say allowing people to decide for themselves isn't an option with a pandemic. This isn't like smoking where a person makes a risky choice, gets cancer and dies. The spread doesn't stop with the person who takes the risk. That person carries the virus to friends, family, co-workers, fellow parishioners, etc., who can then pass it on to their friends, family, co-workers, fellow parishioners, etc. That's how a pandemic works and why "it's my choice" slogans are dumb. It may be your choice to go to a crowded restaurant, but it's not the choice of everyone you come into contact with for the next couple of weeks, or that of the people they come into contact with.
And forcing millions of out-of-work people to choose between unemployment without benefits and working in potentially dangerous conditions doesn't seem like much of a choice.

A .5% mortality rate would be devastating and there's almost no chance that 98 percent of those killed will be over 65 (that figure currently sits at about 73 percent, per the CDC).

Lastly, no, I'm not in the health care industry and anything I say about the prospects of a vaccine would be total speculation.

If we do mass testing, the mortality rate will drop a lot. Guessing to .03-.05. The rate of hospitalization will also skew much more towards those over 65.

Right now the statistics are very skewed due to the little amount of testing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 24, 2020, 04:27:05 PM
You are citing hospitalization rates, that are based on total population, not cases. Those rates are during a nationwide shutdown/quarantine. They do not remotely represent the hospitalization rates on a case basis, or what would occur on a population basis if we have no shutdown/quarantine.

Regarding it can't happen anywhere else, well except for New Orleans, and Baton Rouge, and a number of other smaller cities in Louisiana...oh yeah, and that dense urban jungle called Montgomery, Alabama that is currently experiencing it.

What you are stating are no where near the reality on the ground.

The mortality rate will likely be around the 0.8-1.0% that has been predicted from the early days. And your stat that 98% of those who do die are over 65 with severe underlying health problems is just completely false. In NY right now, 26% of all deaths have been under the age of 65. And they don't track "severe underlying problems" they track "underlying problems" which could be as mundane as being overweight, or high cholesterol.

You are being cavalier about disregarding human life. Not to mention, that many of the people that do survive in these younger age demographics may have life-long quality of life impacts from the disease.

I guess I haven't seen the proliferation of cases/death coming out of Alabama.  Of course cases are going to be on the rise everywhere as we are testing exponentially more people, and as that happens mortality rate will come down to less than 1%.

I think it is great to be optimistic about a vaccine, yet that certainly isn't guaranteed, and if it does happen, my guess is it won't be ready for approval/use for 8-12 months.  But what if there isn't a vaccine in 12 months?  Looking at the carnage of the economy in the last 7 weeks - it can't continue.  Herd immunity ultimately might be the only solution.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 24, 2020, 04:32:45 PM
I guess I haven't seen the proliferation of cases/death coming out of Alabama.  Of course cases are going to be on the rise everywhere as we are testing exponentially more people, and as that happens mortality rate will come down to less than 1%.

I think it is great to be optimistic about a vaccine, yet that certainly isn't guaranteed, and if it does happen, my guess is it won't be ready for approval/use for 8-12 months.  But what if there isn't a vaccine in 12 months?  Looking at the carnage of the economy in the last 7 weeks - it can't continue.  Herd immunity ultimately might be the only solution.

The 0.8-1% is based on antibody testing in NY.

Regarding Alabama, it is rural, there aren't thousands of bodies piling up, so it doesn't get the attention.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/21/us/montgomery-alabama-icu-bed-shortage/index.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/dire-coronavirus-alabama-icu-no-beds-2020-5
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 24, 2020, 05:20:26 PM
The 0.8-1% is based on antibody testing in NY.

Regarding Alabama, it is rural, there aren't thousands of bodies piling up, so it doesn't get the attention.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/21/us/montgomery-alabama-icu-bed-shortage/index.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/dire-coronavirus-alabama-icu-no-beds-2020-5


Thanks for the links.  Cases are on the rise, certainly due to increased mobility AND increased testing.  We have concrete data that shows 40 million Americans have encountered financial distress and hardship due to COVID.  0.8% of people who get COVID will die.  To your earlier point in NYC - 74% were over 65.  Underlying health issues such as obesity, high cholesterol, increase risk of death as they do in general - no surprise there. We know who is most susceptible and should be quarantined. To me it's a utilitarian decision at this point.

What's your best guess on a vaccine timeline?  Do you feel it is feasible and realistic to have the continued the lockdown measures of the past 2 months, to extend out to your projected vaccine timeline?

I've seen half of my office let go/furloughed.  Some great people, some who are expecting newborns.  Some of my colleagues spouses also lost their jobs.  They have ZERO household income.  Many Americans have little to no savings.  Imagine their reality.  And they probably can't even go move back in with their parents due to their parents being 60+.

Virtually every company I encounter/call on has a spending freeze, hiring freeze. I think it is wishful thinking to think that the economy/business can bounce back from this.  The longer lockdown measures continue, you are exponentially increasing the timeframe for recovery.  Just feel we are to the point of needing to rip the band aid off - neither option is a good one - but we must get our country/world back to work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 24, 2020, 05:27:39 PM
If we see a second wave after the economy opens back up that is similar or worse to the first one, I think you would see a permanent or very long term major hit to the economy.
Yes, we have to open back up, but I think recent visuals from Maryland and Missouri show that we can't trust the public to be responsible. So, we have to figure out a way to mitigate that. If you don't, we are almost ensuring a second wave. It will just be how bad to determine its long term impact.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 24, 2020, 05:33:13 PM
Herd immunity ultimately might be the only solution.
Just to put some numbers around this:

The most optimistic number I've seen for herd immunity is 70%.
Let's also optimistically say the fatality rate is .5%.

That comes out to 330M * .70 *.005 = 1,150,000 dead in the U.S.

I don't think 1.15M dead will be acceptable to the populace. But I also think we'll have better treatments coming along that will make this more survivable; I'm less optimistic that a vaccine will be effective.

So just keep in mind that fully opening up and going back to how we operated before COVID will consign more than another 1,000,000 people to death. And yeah, I'm not going to even get into the "well, they were over 65 anyway" line of rationalization.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 24, 2020, 05:34:02 PM
If we see a second wave after the economy opens back up that is similar or worse to the first one, I think you would see a permanent or very long term major hit to the economy.
Yes, we have to open back up, but I think recent visuals from Maryland and Missouri show that we can't trust the public to be responsible. So, we have to figure out a way to mitigate that. If you don't, we are almost ensuring a second wave. It will just be how bad to determine its long term impact.

Generally agree.  In some ways, I feel the dipsh$ts in Missouri/Maryland are doing the rest of us a favor - they will simply accelerate the timeline for us to develop herd immunity.  The big unknown/risk factor ultimately probably is how the healthcare system can keep up should servere cases of COVID surge all at once.

Seems most in medical community seem resigned to the fact that there will be a second wave this fall/flu season - perhaps it is better to accelerate the cases over the summer to mitigate potential double whammy of flu season and COVID? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Elonsmusk on May 24, 2020, 05:44:48 PM
Just to put some numbers around this:

The most optimistic number I've seen for herd immunity is 70%.
Let's also optimistically say the fatality rate is .5%.

That comes out to 330M * .70 *.005 = 1,150,000 dead in the U.S.

I don't think 1.15M dead will be acceptable to the populace. But I also think we'll have better treatments coming along that will make this more survivable; I'm less optimistic that a vaccine will be effective.

So just keep in mind that fully opening up and going back to how we operated before COVID will consign more than another 1,000,000 people to death. And yeah, I'm not going to even get into the "well, they were over 65 anyway" line of rationalization.

I generally agree with your sentiments.  I too believe there will be some treatments in the next 3-6 months that reduce fatality from COVID. 

To clarify, I am not saying those over 65 aren't valuable to our society, etc.  My Mom is in a high risk group - diabetic and 75. She's taking all pre-cautionary measures and I don't visit her.  I feel pretty confident that she won't contract COVID due to her decision to truly shelter in place, and her friends/loved ones NOT exposing her to potential risk through visits.

My over-arching theme there is that if you are in a high risk group due to age/underlying health - stay quarantined and keep loved ones away.  Common sense.  However, for those of us highly, highly, highly unlikely to die from COVID?  We need to get back at it and out and about supporting businesses (with masks on).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 24, 2020, 06:03:35 PM
Generally agree.  In some ways, I feel the dipsh$ts in Missouri/Maryland are doing the rest of us a favor - they will simply accelerate the timeline for us to develop herd immunity.  The big unknown/risk factor ultimately probably is how the healthcare system can keep up should servere cases of COVID surge all at once.

Seems most in medical community seem resigned to the fact that there will be a second wave this fall/flu season - perhaps it is better to accelerate the cases over the summer to mitigate potential double whammy of flu season and COVID?

If we just had a crystal ball. We are all guessing and no one really knows the answer. I hope that it is less of a problem than some forecast, as we see, I doubt the American public has the ability to do the right thing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 24, 2020, 06:39:09 PM
Generally agree.  In some ways, I feel the dipsh$ts in Missouri/Maryland are doing the rest of us a favor - they will simply accelerate the timeline for us to develop herd immunity.  The big unknown/risk factor ultimately probably is how the healthcare system can keep up should servere cases of COVID surge all at once.

Seems most in medical community seem resigned to the fact that there will be a second wave this fall/flu season - perhaps it is better to accelerate the cases over the summer to mitigate potential double whammy of flu season and COVID?

Given what we're seeing from Sweden's herd immunity experiment, it seems a vaccine will come along well before natural realization of herd immunity, it it's even possible.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 24, 2020, 06:41:36 PM

What's your best guess on a vaccine timeline?  Do you feel it is feasible and realistic to have the continued the lockdown measures of the past 2 months, to extend out to your projected vaccine timeline?



I'm optimistic we have some type of vaccine by January. That is because it has become a political competition, so no matter what I think something is forced out. Now, I'm very hesitant on what that means and what its effectiveness is, and I have some concerns about the safety of whatever vaccine is pushed forward. I've discussed that to some extent in the vaccine thread.

And if you look on here, I've been a proponent of the original plan. To use social distancing as a way to get things under control, develop proper testing, and to have adequate contract tracing, so we could rationally open and handle any surges in cases. As I've commented on here, the problem was we had a leadership failure in pushing testing, pushing contract tracing, and empowering the CDC to do its job. That has all but screwed the original plan.

So now what? Honestly, we are in a jam. We weren't in a situation where we could open safely, because we squandered the time we bought. We are now in a place where I think we have to open to at least 50%, simply because there is no indication that we will be better prepared, because we wait longer, and because of inherent economic risks. Sadly, that means many are likely to die. I place those deaths on those in charge who failed in regards to testing, leadership, and contact racing.

We are now forced to risk an even worse economic possibility, that we have a massive second wave and have to shut things down entirely again, or risk 1-2M lives. If that happens, the economic fallout will be even greater than staying closed for 2-months. We are essentially praying that summer has a significant impact.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 24, 2020, 07:33:23 PM
I think the scientists are close to nailing down a treatment regimen.   Need all the survivors to donate plasma.   The states are opening.   If it goes well they will open further.   If it goes sideways, we are going to need a better plan.   I hope it goes well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 24, 2020, 07:40:05 PM
I'm optimistic we have some type of vaccine by January. That is because it has become a political competition, so no matter what I think something is forced out. Now, I'm very hesitant on what that means and what its effectiveness is, and I have some concerns about the safety of whatever vaccine is pushed forward. I've discussed that to some extent in the vaccine thread.



If a vaccine is out in January, will you get vaccinated? In such a case there will have been no trials on long-term effects. As someone who has shown themselves to be very knowledgeable on the Covid board, what would your feelings be?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 24, 2020, 07:42:51 PM
I think the scientists are close to nailing down a treatment regimen.   Need all the survivors to donate plasma.   The states are opening.   If it goes well they will open further.   If it goes sideways, we are going to need a better plan.   I hope it goes well.


I like your optimism... and I hope enough survivors donate plasma (repeatedly) to make it a viable large-scale treatment.

If we can get enough convalescent plasma and the idiots in places like Ocean City don’t bring a huge second wave, we may have a puncher’s chance of getting through without a second shutdown.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 24, 2020, 07:48:48 PM
If we do mass testing, the mortality rate will drop a lot. Guessing to .03-.05. The rate of hospitalization will also skew much more towards those over 65.

Right now the statistics are very skewed due to the little amount of testing.

Your numbers make no sense, and have no logical basis. At the time of this post, we have already had 0.03% of the US population die from COVID. So if everyone in the entire US gets this, and not a single other person dies, we would still be at the lower end of your 0.03%.

If we use NY as an example, which has been hardest hit. 0.15% of the entire population of NY has already died from COVID. So that should be the lower bound of any mortality estimate, and even that assumes no one else in NY will die, and everyone will eventually be infected, which is entirely unrealistic.

Using antibody testing in NY as a baseline, says 15% of NY has been infected. If you scale that up to the entire population, and assume death rates remain constant, that is a 1% mortality. Assuming that the antibody tests do not have too many false positives that should be the upper bound.

All this assumes we are not undercounting deaths currently, which most experts think we are.

If we get better treatments onboard, I can see the floor being around 0.4-0.5%. But 0.03-0.05 is simply an impossibility and ignores reality. Like Tower, I am also optimistic we get a good treatment regimen in, but even in that scenario I think the floor is around 0.4%. The virus is too aggressive and will still ravage vulnerable parts of the community, what the treatments will do is limit the loss of life for those under 65.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on May 24, 2020, 08:14:04 PM
I see lots of people here and elsewhere saying how high -risk people should quarantine. But what about high-risk people, whether by age or health, who need to work? Not all high risk people are retired, and even some retirees need to supplement their social security. How do they support themselves, if we are telling them to quarantine so others can go back to work. Or low-risk people who live with high-risk people? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 24, 2020, 08:19:20 PM
I see lots of people here and elsewhere saying how high -risk people should quarantine. But what about high-risk people, whether by age or health, who need to work? Not all high risk people are retired, and even some retirees need to supplement their social security. How do they support themselves, if we are telling them to quarantine so others can go back to work. Or low-risk people who live with high-risk people?

I've thought about posting on this. In poorer communities, these high risk people often work. They have to. They also can't afford to have food delivered, etc, and often either have to live with family members that also can't afford to stay home, or they live alone and are heavily reliant on things like mass transportation to even sustain life.

They are vulnerable with no options.

Your average person on here has little understanding of what life is like in these communities, those people are forgotten, and in some regards discarded.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 24, 2020, 08:29:57 PM
Or low-risk people who live with high-risk people?

Yep. According to this, 64 million Americans live in a multi-generational household.  If one of those household members is over 65, obese, suffers from diabetes, etc., do we expect everyone else in the home to quarantine? Kids living with grandma to homeschool? Seems like an unreasonable expectation.
And what about people at risk who need caretakers or therapy in or out of the home?
 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on May 24, 2020, 08:39:30 PM
Yep. According to this, 64 million Americans live in a multi-generational household.  If one of those household members is over 65, obese, suffers from diabetes, etc., do we expect everyone else in the home to quarantine? Kids living with grandma to homeschool? Seems like an unreasonable expectation.
And what about people at risk who need caretakers or therapy in or out of the home?

Pakuni 

Say 40 million fit that bill - it’s still better than quarantining 300 million. As for people at risk who need caregivers, It’s awful but they are at risk no matter what you do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 24, 2020, 08:40:35 PM
I see lots of people here and elsewhere saying how high -risk people should quarantine. But what about high-risk people, whether by age or health, who need to work? Not all high risk people are retired, and even some retirees need to supplement their social security. How do they support themselves, if we are telling them to quarantine so others can go back to work. Or low-risk people who live with high-risk people?


Good point. And given recent evidence that obesity seems to be the most significant risk factor other than age, the number of “high-risk” people is likely much greater than people realize.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 24, 2020, 08:48:20 PM
Pakuni 

Say 40 million fit that bill - it’s still better than quarantining 300 million. As for people at risk who need caregivers, It’s awful but they are at risk no matter what you do.

Agreed.
But 300 million people aren't being quarantined. Or anything close to it.
I live in a supposedly locked down state. In the last two days I've made multiple trips to the grocery store, gone to the Home Depot for gardening supplies, visited a bike shop, stopped at a pet supply store for something for my kid's fish tank, picked up dinner at a local restaurant and taken walks through public parks.
Things definitely aren't normal, but it's a long way from quarantine.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on May 24, 2020, 09:10:21 PM
Agreed.
But 300 million people aren't being quarantined. Or anything close to it.
I live in a supposedly locked down state. In the last two days I've made multiple trips to the grocery store, gone to the Home Depot for gardening supplies, visited a bike shop, stopped at a pet supply store for something for my kid's fish tank, picked up dinner at a local restaurant and taken walks through public parks.
Things definitely aren't normal, but it's a long way from quarantine.

But we are (finally) trying our best to quarantine the nursing homes. To the extent that’s it’s feasible I’d like us to try to also quarantine (and subsidize) those 40 million in the multi generational families most at risk.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 24, 2020, 10:05:11 PM
Pakuni 

Say 40 million fit that bill - it’s still better than quarantining 300 million. As for people at risk who need caregivers, It’s awful but they are at risk no matter what you do.

Home health care and companion care didn't stop with lockdown.  Those clients still received their care.  I know you know that, Lenny, but it doesnt fit in with others' agendas.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 24, 2020, 11:14:21 PM
Home health care and companion care didn't stop with lockdown.  Those clients still received their care.  I know you know that, Lenny, but it doesnt fit in with others' agendas.

Point missed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 25, 2020, 07:18:05 AM
Pakuni 

Say 40 million fit that bill - it’s still better than quarantining 300 million. As for people at risk who need caregivers, It’s awful but they are at risk no matter what you do.


But we aren't quarantining 300 million.  We never were.

The fallacy is we really can't truly be open, have essential workers go to work, and protect the vulnerable all at the same time.  So we have to create workspaces where people can be reasonably safe, open up businesses if they can reasonably accomodate distancing and require masking as much as possible, and then take care of people who don't have a job because of the above accomodations.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on May 25, 2020, 10:28:13 AM

The fallacy is we really can't truly be open, have essential workers go to work, and protect the vulnerable all at the same time.  So we have to create workspaces where people can be reasonably safe, open up businesses if they can reasonably accomodate distancing and require masking as much as possible, and then take care of people who don't have a job because of the above accomodations.

At this point, I don't even understand the "open up the economy" statements.  Many things are already open to the capacity/restrictions we *think* is safe. 

Are we just supposed to go back to March 10 and pretend nothing has happened?

No doubt "shutting down" has had a major effect on the economy.  But despite appearances, I have a feeling a lot of companies would have had disappointing 2nd Q numbers regardless.  Based on what I saw in the 1Q (pre-shutdown), financials were not in the picture perfect shape that was being projected.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 25, 2020, 12:54:16 PM
Interesting perspective.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-24/republicans-risk-political-backlash-in-trump-s-haste-to-reopen

 In states Trump won in 2016, 23 people have lost a job for every 1 person infected. In states Democrat Hillary Clinton won, 13 people have lost a job for every person infected.

Put another way, in Trump country, the virus’s greater pain has been economic, which helps explain why support for a swift reopening is so much more intense there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on May 26, 2020, 08:21:51 AM
Interesting perspective.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-24/republicans-risk-political-backlash-in-trump-s-haste-to-reopen

 In states Trump won in 2016, 23 people have lost a job for every 1 person infected. In states Democrat Hillary Clinton won, 13 people have lost a job for every person infected.

Put another way, in Trump country, the virus’s greater pain has been economic, which helps explain why support for a swift reopening is so much more intense there.



Relatively speaking, you are correct. When everyone is shut down, it only make sense that areas with much lower infection rates will suffer more job losses per infection. But the total picture that this article shows (although the author never connects the dots) is that things are much worse both infection wise and economically in Hillary country. A 274% higher infection rate with a 177% better job loss to infection rate still yields a 155% greater job loss rate.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 26, 2020, 08:59:34 AM
NC entered “Phase 2” on Friday. Most businesses were allowed to reopen, with some restrictions.

Regarding worries that businesses would lose their employees due to increased unemployment benefits, here’s what the owner of a just-reopened brewery said ...

+++
When the stay-at-home order was issued, Buchy took his staff of 150 employees down to only 11. With the federal government offering some furloughed employees an additional $600 in unemployment benefits, Buchy said he was a little concerned some might not opt to come back — but every one of them did.

“We were a little worried about that, but we didn’t have a single staff member that we asked to come back say no,” Buchy said. “Everybody came back, and everybody’s super excited to be back.”
+++

People want to work. Plus, the benefits are extremely short-term.

Also, practically 100% of such benefits go right back into the economy. Historically unemployment benefits have been among the best kind of stimulus for that reason.

Read more here: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/charlottefive/c5-food-drink/article242930246.html?#storylink=cpy
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on May 26, 2020, 09:13:40 AM
NC entered “Phase 2” on Friday. Most businesses were allowed to reopen, with some restrictions.

Regarding worries that businesses would lose their employees due to increased unemployment benefits, here’s what the owner of a just-reopened brewery said ...

+++
When the stay-at-home order was issued, Buchy took his staff of 150 employees down to only 11. With the federal government offering some furloughed employees an additional $600 in unemployment benefits, Buchy said he was a little concerned some might not opt to come back — but every one of them did.

“We were a little worried about that, but we didn’t have a single staff member that we asked to come back say no,” Buchy said. “Everybody came back, and everybody’s super excited to be back.”
+++

People want to work. Plus, the benefits are extremely short-term.

Also, practically 100% of such benefits go right back into the economy. Historically unemployment benefits have been among the best kind of stimulus for that reason.

Read more here: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/charlottefive/c5-food-drink/article242930246.html?#storylink=cpy

To be fair a brewery is the sort of business that you'd expect people to come back to. The workers are generally passionate about the work. It's not exactly bagging groceries
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on May 26, 2020, 09:23:32 AM
NC entered “Phase 2” on Friday. Most businesses were allowed to reopen, with some restrictions.

Regarding worries that businesses would lose their employees due to increased unemployment benefits, here’s what the owner of a just-reopened brewery said ...

+++
When the stay-at-home order was issued, Buchy took his staff of 150 employees down to only 11. With the federal government offering some furloughed employees an additional $600 in unemployment benefits, Buchy said he was a little concerned some might not opt to come back — but every one of them did.

“We were a little worried about that, but we didn’t have a single staff member that we asked to come back say no,” Buchy said. “Everybody came back, and everybody’s super excited to be back.”
+++

People want to work. Plus, the benefits are extremely short-term.

Also, practically 100% of such benefits go right back into the economy. Historically unemployment benefits have been among the best kind of stimulus for that reason.

Read more here: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/charlottefive/c5-food-drink/article242930246.html?#storylink=cpy

I wonder if some people just want to get out of the house and back to some normalcy. Which would make people not coming back very much the exception.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 26, 2020, 09:44:58 AM
I think people will go back.  But using the brewery example, they go have one.  Skip the food.  And instead of going back every weekend, they'll stay at home next weekend because the wife was furloughed.

IOW, people will go out, they just won't go out the same way.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on May 26, 2020, 09:49:11 AM

I think people will go back.  But using the brewery example, they go have one.  Skip the food.  And instead of going back every weekend, they'll stay at home next weekend because the wife was furloughed.

IOW, people will go out, they just won't go out the same way.


People who have been furloughed aren’t the only ones who will be more conservative. Many who still have jobs have taken pay cuts, and for those who have been working with full pay there is still a great deal of concern about what happens next. The real question is whether this “not going out the same way” will be enough to sustain businesses that are already teetering on the edge.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 26, 2020, 10:05:46 AM
The questions raised and/or points made since my post are legit.  I simply think the worry that “we’re giving the ‘takers’ too much and they’re gonna screw us all,” was unfounded. (Not saying any of y’all said that, but some folks have said such dribble.) It was a 4-month stimulus. It ends soon. People want to work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on May 26, 2020, 01:33:16 PM
It was a 4-month stimulus. It ends soon. People want to work.

Didn’t the House just pass a brand spanking new $3,000,000,000,000+ stimulus bill? I know this particular iteration won’t get through the Senate but I wouldn’t be too sure that Washington is done quite yet.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on May 26, 2020, 01:38:18 PM
Didn’t the House just pass a brand spanking new $3,000,000,000,000+ stimulus bill? I know this particular iteration won’t get through the Senate but I wouldn’t be too sure that Washington is done quite yet.

MM said there would be another round.  Sounds like It won’t be the house version and it may be a month out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on May 26, 2020, 04:23:48 PM
The bizjournal has an article with a Bartolotta speculating that restaurant prices have to increase substantially. I've suspected something like that, we are often reminded that the margins are so slim, perhaps dining out was too cheap and it may never be as common in the future.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on May 26, 2020, 05:05:21 PM
Point missed.

Was your point that the home care workers should be quarantining outside of work so they dont infect the clients? Because as someone who works directly in that field, the DSP's don't make nearly enough for that to ever happen.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 26, 2020, 05:48:51 PM
Was your point that the home care workers should be quarantining outside of work so they dont infect the clients? Because as someone who works directly in that field, the DSP's don't make nearly enough for that to ever happen.

We were discussing the practicality and effectiveness of "protecting the vulnerable" by placing them on quarantine while the rest of us go about our daily businesses as usual.

Among the reasons some of us don't see that as a particularly strong or simple formula for success are that many of the vulnerable have to go out in the world - 20% of Americans over 65 still work, as do younger people with diabetes, asthma, immune system deficienes, etc.

And for those who can  avoid leaving home, they still need to interact with caretakers, such as home health care workers. Completely opening things up sans measures to reduce spread would heighten the likelihood those caretakers become infected and then pass along the disease to the vulnerable. Hence, quarantining the vulnerable but increasing the infection rate among the people the vulnerable interact with doesn't seem ideal.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 26, 2020, 06:05:24 PM
Didn’t the House just pass a brand spanking new $3,000,000,000,000+ stimulus bill? I know this particular iteration won’t get through the Senate but I wouldn’t be too sure that Washington is done quite yet.


That was kind of like Congress casting dozens of votes to eliminate Obamacare. It was symbolic, a way to make a political point. Maybe it also was a "wish list" of sorts. Pretty sure you knew all of that too, Lenny.

MM said there would be another round.  Sounds like It won’t be the house version and it may be a month out.

I'll worry about what's in that when it happens.

But again, unlike tax cuts for bazillionaires -- who then give themselves raises, do stock buybacks, raise dividends for themselves because they are their companies' largest shareholders, etc -- umemployment benefits come right back into the economy. They largely are used by the opposite of bazillionaires to buy crazy stuff like food and shelter.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 26, 2020, 08:40:51 PM
The bizjournal has an article with a Bartolotta speculating that restaurant prices have to increase substantially. I've suspected something like that, we are often reminded that the margins are so slim, perhaps dining out was too cheap and it may never be as common in the future.

Please please do it - if only to get rid of tipping.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on May 26, 2020, 10:38:53 PM


If we get better treatments onboard, I can see the floor being around 0.4-0.5%. But 0.03-0.05 is simply an impossibility and ignores reality. Like Tower, I am also optimistic we get a good treatment regimen in, but even in that scenario I think the floor is around 0.4%. The virus is too aggressive and will still ravage vulnerable parts of the community, what the treatments will do is limit the loss of life for those under 65.

Forgetful

CDC is now estimating a .3% fatality rates. Do you think that is reasonable/likely?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on May 26, 2020, 11:36:01 PM
Forgetful

CDC is now estimating a .3% fatality rates. Do you think that is reasonable/likely?

While it is possible with better treatments, that is just unrealistic at the moment. And the CDC is claiming that is the current mortality rate, not the one moving forward with better treatments. As I mentioned, as of today the state of NY has had 0.15% of its entire population die from COVID. That is with 15% of the population infected according to antibody studies using one of the most accurate kits on the market. A 0.3% fatality rate would suggest that the same number would die if the remaining 85% of the population were to be infected.

The CDC's numbers just don't make sense. I'd like to see how they came up with that estimate. I've looked for the origin of that number, but can't find it anywhere. All the CDC says as a source is "preliminary CDC estimates".

To put it into perspective, their "estimate" would suggest that the NY antibody studies, were off by almost a factor of 4, and that the real number of infections in the state of NY is 50% of the entire population. Antibody tests are very accurate at catching infections, the risk is that they actually have false positives (as high as 20%), and actually over count the number of infections.

Someone is way off, and the state of NY showed their data, so I'm rolling with them for now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 27, 2020, 06:00:53 AM
For that .4% mortality rate to be accurate in Michigan, 1.25 million people must have been infected. 

55104 known cases.
5266 deaths.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on May 29, 2020, 11:11:21 AM
What a crazy set of numbers ..

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/29/21274416/household-income-surge-april-cares-act-coronavirus-stimulus

Consumer Spending down 13.6% .. Unemployment at record highs ..

But .. Personal Income rose 10% in April. 

That is bonkers. -- This is due to the stimulus checks + unemployment checks + $600 weekly bonus.    Those numbers would indicate that at a macro level, financial pain for the labor force isn't bad at all.  Of course, that's a sugar high from federal $$ to end in a few months.

Strange data.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 29, 2020, 11:59:56 AM
What a crazy set of numbers ..

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/29/21274416/household-income-surge-april-cares-act-coronavirus-stimulus

Consumer Spending down 13.6% .. Unemployment at record highs ..

But .. Personal Income rose 10% in April. 

That is bonkers. -- This is due to the stimulus checks + unemployment checks + $600 weekly bonus.    Those numbers would indicate that at a macro level, financial pain for the labor force isn't bad at all.  Of course, that's a sugar high from federal $$ to end in a few months.

Strange data.

Still haven't received ours. IRS website continues to say "Payment status not available". So frustrating.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 29, 2020, 12:09:06 PM
Please please do it - if only to get rid of tipping.

Any server who works in a reasonably busy, non-diner restaurant makes way more in tips that any restaurant owner would be willing to pay as an hourly wage.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 29, 2020, 12:11:59 PM
Any server who works in a reasonably busy, non-diner restaurant makes way more in tips that any restaurant owner would be willing to pay as an hourly wage.

Sure.

But I still hate the whole system - "grouping" tips for the entire staff, expectation of tips, etc
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 12:28:49 PM
Any server who works in a reasonably busy, non-diner restaurant makes way more in tips that any restaurant owner would be willing to pay as an hourly wage.

I'm not sure this is accurate.
According to this study (from 2015, so fairly recent), bartenders and servers in the best-tipping markets earned a whopping median of $13 an hour in tips. Those in worse-tipping markets earned as little as $7 an hour.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/how-much-do-waiters-really-earn-in-tips/385515/

And then there's the problem that tipping is often discriminatory, encourages sexual harassment and leads to billions of dollars on unreported income, costing the rest of us taxpayers.

https://www.eater.com/a/case-against-tipping
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 29, 2020, 12:38:49 PM
The good news is that our ever-diligent, ever-caring Education Czar, Betsy DeVos, is now funneling federal stimulus money into rich, private schools.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/us/politics/betsy-devos-coronavirus-religious-schools.html

WASHINGTON — Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is using the $2 trillion coronavirus stabilization law to throw a lifeline to education sectors she has long championed, directing millions of federal dollars intended primarily for public schools and colleges to private and religious schools.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, signed in late March, included $30 billion for education institutions turned upside down by the pandemic shutdowns, about $14 billion for higher education, $13.5 billion to elementary and secondary schools, and the rest for state governments.

Ms. DeVos has used $180 million of those dollars to encourage states to create “microgrants” that parents of elementary and secondary school students can use to pay for educational services, including private school tuition. She has directed school districts to share millions of dollars designated for low-income students with wealthy private schools.

And she has nearly depleted the 2.5 percent of higher education funding, about $350 million, set aside for struggling colleges to bolster small colleges — many of them private, religious or on the margins of higher education — regardless of need.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 29, 2020, 12:43:25 PM
What a crazy set of numbers ..

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/29/21274416/household-income-surge-april-cares-act-coronavirus-stimulus

Consumer Spending down 13.6% .. Unemployment at record highs ..

But .. Personal Income rose 10% in April. 

That is bonkers. -- This is due to the stimulus checks + unemployment checks + $600 weekly bonus.    Those numbers would indicate that at a macro level, financial pain for the labor force isn't bad at all.  Of course, that's a sugar high from federal $$ to end in a few months.

Strange data.

To me, all we have done is pushed the cliff a couple of weeks later.  We're really good at that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 29, 2020, 01:29:48 PM
The good news is that our ever-diligent, ever-caring Education Czar, Betsy DeVos, is now funneling federal stimulus money into rich, private schools.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/us/politics/betsy-devos-coronavirus-religious-schools.html

WASHINGTON — Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is using the $2 trillion coronavirus stabilization law to throw a lifeline to education sectors she has long championed, directing millions of federal dollars intended primarily for public schools and colleges to private and religious schools.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, signed in late March, included $30 billion for education institutions turned upside down by the pandemic shutdowns, about $14 billion for higher education, $13.5 billion to elementary and secondary schools, and the rest for state governments.

Ms. DeVos has used $180 million of those dollars to encourage states to create “microgrants” that parents of elementary and secondary school students can use to pay for educational services, including private school tuition. She has directed school districts to share millions of dollars designated for low-income students with wealthy private schools.

And she has nearly depleted the 2.5 percent of higher education funding, about $350 million, set aside for struggling colleges to bolster small colleges — many of them private, religious or on the margins of higher education — regardless of need.


Poor kids getting access to choice or charter schools to give them a chance to escape horrid public schools is DeVos catering to "rich schools?"

(https://media.giphy.com/media/a3zqvrH40Cdhu/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 29, 2020, 01:32:43 PM
Poor kids getting access to choice or charter schools to give them a chance to escape horrid public schools is DeVos catering to "rich schools?"

(https://media.giphy.com/media/a3zqvrH40Cdhu/giphy.gif)

THEIF!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 01:39:52 PM
Poor kids getting access to choice or charter schools to give them a chance to escape horrid public schools is DeVos catering to "rich schools?"

Charter schools are swell. Funding them by taking money away from already underfunded schools in low-income neighborhoods, thereby making them more "horrid," is not so swell.
Using federal money to fund religious schools, also not so swell.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 29, 2020, 01:44:32 PM
Charter schools are swell. Funding them by taking money away from already underfunded schools in low-income neighborhoods, thereby making them more "horrid," is not so swell.
Using federal money to fund religious schools, also not so swell.

Why dont you want poor kids to have the same opportunity as white kids? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 29, 2020, 01:58:06 PM
Why dont you want poor kids to have the same opportunity as white kids?

Now you want a fair world?  You're a socialist now?  ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 29, 2020, 02:00:01 PM
Charter schools around here have no better results than public schools.   Feel good symbolism, but not better education.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 29, 2020, 02:09:31 PM
Now you want a fair world?  You're a socialist now?  ;D

You libbies should all be in favor of choice, aina?   ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 29, 2020, 02:30:51 PM
You libbies should all be in favor of choice, aina?   ;)

"depends on the socialism" I guess.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MarquetteDano on May 29, 2020, 02:34:38 PM
Charter schools are swell. Funding them by taking money away from already underfunded schools in low-income neighborhoods, thereby making them more "horrid," is not so swell.
Using federal money to fund religious schools, also not so swell.

Pakuni, forget if you live in Chicago but Chicago is a good example that spending and quality of education is not really aligned. Cook county taxpayers shell out huge dollars per high school student, sometimes more than private schools and the results are not good.

Not saying we just strip them of funding but funding at the high school level is quite high with crap results.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on May 29, 2020, 03:00:23 PM
Pakuni, forget if you live in Chicago but Chicago is a good example that spending and quality of education is not really aligned. Cook county taxpayers shell out huge dollars per high school student, sometimes more than private schools and the results are not good.

Not saying we just strip them of funding but funding at the high school level is quite high with crap results.

Tell that to young, northside, Peyton, Jones, lane, and Lincoln park. Also spending goes toward security, social work, spec Ed, meal programs, etc that are not as needed or are privately funded when you go to a lot of the burbs or charters.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 03:21:29 PM
Why dont you want poor kids to have the same opportunity as white kids?

Why don't you want poor kids to have the same opportunity as white kids?
If that's your goal - and no doubt it is - take money from the wealthy suburban districts to fund schools (charter or otherwise) in low-income areas. Sure a man who believes in equity as strongly as you do would agree that's fairer than taking money from schools in poor areas to fund other schools in poor areas.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 03:33:36 PM
Pakuni, forget if you live in Chicago but Chicago is a good example that spending and quality of education is not really aligned. Cook county taxpayers shell out huge dollars per high school student, sometimes more than private schools and the results are not good.

Not saying we just strip them of funding but funding at the high school level is quite high with crap results.

Most of the best schools in the state, and several of the best schools in the country, are in Cook County.
18 of the top 25 high schools in the US News rankings are in Cook.
15 of the top 30 "traditional" (i.e. not magnet) high schools are in Cook.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/illinois/rankings

And, fwiw, median property taxes in Cook County are lower than in the collar counties.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 29, 2020, 03:43:07 PM
Some apparently missed the part in which she is directing stimulus money to rich, secular, private schools - think Chicago Latin or Charlotte Country Day.

Also, this:

And she has nearly depleted the 2.5 percent of higher education funding, about $350 million, set aside for struggling colleges to bolster small colleges — many of them private, religious or on the margins of higher education — regardless of need.

This is NOT the same as including charter schools in public-funding plans.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 29, 2020, 04:34:23 PM
Why don't you want poor kids to have the same opportunity as white kids?
If that's your goal - and no doubt it is - take money from the wealthy suburban districts to fund schools (charter or otherwise) in low-income areas. Sure a man who believes in equity as strongly as you do would agree that's fairer than taking money from schools in poor areas to fund other schools in poor areas.

I'm surprised that someone as smart as you wouldnt recognize a quote from the Democratic presidential nominee.

But keep on keepin on, keyboard hero.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MarquetteDano on May 29, 2020, 04:57:11 PM
Most of the best schools in the state, and several of the best schools in the country, are in Cook County.
18 of the top 25 high schools in the US News rankings are in Cook.
15 of the top 30 "traditional" (i.e. not magnet) high schools are in Cook.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/illinois/rankings

And, fwiw, median property taxes in Cook County are lower than in the collar counties.

I am not anti charter schools. But a lot is spent at the poor result schools as well.  So clearly just throwing money at it is the only answer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 06:12:13 PM
I'm surprised that someone as smart as you wouldnt recognize a quote from the Democratic presidential nominee.

But keep on keepin on, keyboard hero.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/872ntJNVnYXKwoT0BA/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 29, 2020, 06:30:46 PM
I'm not sure this is accurate.
According to this study (from 2015, so fairly recent), bartenders and servers in the best-tipping markets earned a whopping median of $13 an hour in tips. Those in worse-tipping markets earned as little as $7 an hour.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/how-much-do-waiters-really-earn-in-tips/385515/

And then there's the problem that tipping is often discriminatory, encourages sexual harassment and leads to billions of dollars on unreported income, costing the rest of us taxpayers.

https://www.eater.com/a/case-against-tipping

You will never get accurate aggregated information on tips because most servers and bartenders don't report all of their tips for tax purposes, and very few people in general would admit that to anyone who is writing it down..

 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on May 29, 2020, 06:40:31 PM
What a crazy set of numbers ..

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/29/21274416/household-income-surge-april-cares-act-coronavirus-stimulus

Consumer Spending down 13.6% .. Unemployment at record highs ..

But .. Personal Income rose 10% in April. 

That is bonkers. -- This is due to the stimulus checks + unemployment checks + $600 weekly bonus.    Those numbers would indicate that at a macro level, financial pain for the labor force isn't bad at all.  Of course, that's a sugar high from federal $$ to end in a few months.

Strange data.

There are some people making more
Money right now laid off than when they were working.  Asked if they want to return to work the answer was, “why?”. 

Overpaid people probably to prevent rioting and social unrest.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 29, 2020, 06:42:04 PM
Why don't you want poor kids to have the same opportunity as white kids?
If that's your goal - and no doubt it is - take money from the wealthy suburban districts to fund schools (charter or otherwise) in low-income areas. Sure a man who believes in equity as strongly as you do would agree that's fairer than taking money from schools in poor areas to fund other schools in poor areas.

Because it has been clearly demonstrated that throwing money at bad school systems improves them.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 29, 2020, 07:02:41 PM
Because it has been clearly demonstrated that throwing money at bad school systems improves them.

Ah the typical lecturing suburban response...

Throwing money no. Wise investment yes.

The key is figuring out what works and what doesn’t.

What clearly doesn’t work is taking resources away. So what we have decided to do is lift up the few at the expense of the many. Because systematic change is too hard and expensive.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 29, 2020, 08:17:00 PM
Ah the typical lecturing suburban response...

Throwing money no. Wise investment yes.

The key is figuring out what works and what doesn’t.

What clearly doesn’t work is taking resources away. So what we have decided to do is lift up the few at the expense of the many. Because systematic change is too hard and expensive.

So all the current money is wisely spent and there isn't a single penny that could be redirected to better use?

I am all for successful programs.  But the unsuccessful ones never seem to go away, so it is indeed throwing money at a problem and hoping something sticks.

And by the way, my kids went to a majority-minority high school in a school district whose spending is lower than most of the rest of the suburbs (and Chicago as well).  They got a great education. The kids whose parents weren't engaged, not so much.  If you can find something to spend money on that would make parents give a crap about their kids' education, I would be all for it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 08:35:09 PM
You will never get accurate aggregated information on tips because most servers and bartenders don't report all of their tips for tax purposes, and very few people in general would admit that to anyone who is writing it down..

You didn't read the links, did you?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on May 29, 2020, 08:40:02 PM
Because it has been clearly demonstrated that throwing money at bad school systems improves them.

Yup. This is the standard answer. People love charter schools for kids from low-income families ... right until they're asked to pay for them.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on May 29, 2020, 09:07:48 PM
Crean sucks
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on May 30, 2020, 04:59:20 PM
Most of the best schools in the state, and several of the best schools in the country, are in Cook County.
18 of the top 25 high schools in the US News rankings are in Cook.
15 of the top 30 "traditional" (i.e. not magnet) high schools are in Cook.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/illinois/rankings

And, fwiw, median property taxes in Cook County are lower than in the collar counties.

I struggle with USNews analyzing colleges as valid, but they have resources to do this for high schools?  Their college ranking are often dismissed and I cannot imagine much credibility going to an even lower rung on the academic scale.  Some of the high schools they list have wonderful reputations, but some also are trading on that reputation more than what they deliver to the student and these rankings. 

Years ago the Atlantic wrote something about how flawed and meaningless these are and I doubt much has changed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 30, 2020, 09:38:02 PM
I struggle with USNews analyzing colleges as valid, but they have resources to do this for high schools?  Their college ranking are often dismissed and I cannot imagine much credibility going to an even lower rung on the academic scale.  Some of the high schools they list have wonderful reputations, but some also are trading on that reputation more than what they deliver to the student and these rankings. 

Years ago the Atlantic wrote something about how flawed and meaningless these are and I doubt much has changed.
[/s]

I stopped reading.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on May 31, 2020, 09:34:01 AM
This isn't about covid, and marginally about economy (which is a different word than education).  MU82 - stop it - you derailed this one.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 31, 2020, 09:46:03 AM
This isn't about covid, and marginally about economy (which is a different word than education).  MU82 - stop it - you derailed this one.

Yessir. I will step away from this thread for several days. Upon return, I will limit my posts to those about COVID-19 economy. Here's hoping others do, too.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on June 05, 2020, 07:59:16 AM
Surprisingly good news on employment today. Far from out of the woods, but a glimmer of hope.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/unemployment-rate-falls-13-3-percent-economy-gains-surprise-2-n1223236
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on June 05, 2020, 08:21:41 AM
Surprisingly good news on employment today. Far from out of the woods, but a glimmer of hope.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/unemployment-rate-falls-13-3-percent-economy-gains-surprise-2-n1223236

Good news yes, but all the gains were from temporary laid off folks coming back to work (dentist clinics, healthcare workers, construction...) full-time employees net lost another 295K jobs or so.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on June 05, 2020, 08:37:11 AM
Good news yes, but all the gains were from temporary laid off folks coming back to work (dentist clinics, healthcare workers, construction...) full-time employees net lost another 295K jobs or so.

Isn't good news that people previously laid off/furloughed are getting their jobs back?

@byHeatherLong: This is telling. Look at the where the jobs were gained v. lost in May

GAINS
Restaurants: +1.4 million
Construction: +464,000
Healthcare: +312,000
Retail: +368,000
Manufacturing: +225,000
Business: +127,000

LOSSES
Government: -585,000
Hotels: -148,000
Air transport: -50,000
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 05, 2020, 08:38:27 AM
Air transport and hotels will also return as well.  The government jobs though....
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on June 05, 2020, 08:57:13 AM
Isn't good news that people previously laid off/furloughed are getting their jobs back?

@byHeatherLong: This is telling. Look at the where the jobs were gained v. lost in May

GAINS
Restaurants: +1.4 million
Construction: +464,000
Healthcare: +312,000
Retail: +368,000
Manufacturing: +225,000
Business: +127,000

LOSSES
Government: -585,000
Hotels: -148,000
Air transport: -50,000

I said it was good news...but again, FTE still dropped 300K plus, and I am hopeful these gains will remain when PPP runs out
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 05, 2020, 09:02:39 AM
Air transport and hotels will also return as well.  The government jobs though....

It's just people the POTUS is firing for disagreeing with him
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on June 05, 2020, 09:06:21 AM
I said it was good news...but again, FTE still dropped 300K plus, and I am hopeful these gains will remain when PPP runs out

I probably should have added a qualifier like "far from out of the woods."   ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 05, 2020, 09:25:09 AM
A glimmer of hope during a time when we need hope.

Now we need those back at work and those patronizing the businesses to take masks, cleaning and social distancing more seriously than ever, lest we lose these jobs again in a second wave.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on June 05, 2020, 09:42:12 AM
Shocking upswing for June 5th, no doubt.   I would have expected those numbers in July or August.

I do wonder if those +1.4m restaurant jobs will stick around.   25-50% capacities on a low margin business is not sustainable.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 05, 2020, 10:04:31 AM
What happens when PPP runs out?  Do some postponed layoffs then happen?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 05, 2020, 10:47:23 AM
What happens when PPP runs out?  Do some postponed layoffs then happen?

Yup.  Today is the day it runs out, so any of our employees who are not working starting Monday will be eligible for UI again.  Since congress as decided to rest on their laurels the assistance is over. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: WarriorDad on June 05, 2020, 12:17:24 PM
Surprisingly good news on employment today. Far from out of the woods, but a glimmer of hope.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/unemployment-rate-falls-13-3-percent-economy-gains-surprise-2-n1223236

Good news.  Have to think that glimmer of hope is because we started to open back up.  If we had not, the unemployment numbers would remain dismal.  These are the trade offs I have been talking about.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 05, 2020, 02:16:19 PM
Yup.  Today is the day it runs out, so any of our employees who are not working starting Monday will be eligible for UI again.  Since congress as decided to rest on their laurels the assistance is over.

The important folks got theirs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 05, 2020, 02:34:11 PM
And now Trump says the improved jobs numbers make today "a great day" for George Floyd.

Seriously, I am not making this up....

Trump calls improved jobs numbers 'great day' for George Floyd

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-calls-improved-jobs-numbers-great-day-george/story?id=71089946
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on June 05, 2020, 04:00:42 PM
Could have at least wished Breonna Taylor a happy 27th birthday.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Marquette Gyros on June 05, 2020, 04:40:18 PM
Re COVID economy and not politics....

https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/888/topics/816151-corona-virus-impact-to-las-vegas-market?page=14

Fascinating thread from another board I read occasionally. Optimists and pessimists exist there as here, but it’s hard to see good times for Vegas in the future - especially with NV unemployment hovering near 30%.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 05, 2020, 05:01:32 PM
And now Trump says the improved jobs numbers make today "a great day" for George Floyd.

Seriously, I am not making this up....

Trump calls improved jobs numbers 'great day' for George Floyd

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-calls-improved-jobs-numbers-great-day-george/story?id=71089946

Yes, the deceased Mr. Floyd is enjoying these numbers, for sure. I'm certain they are all his loved ones are thinking about, too.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 05, 2020, 05:16:13 PM
Rich get richer, even when it comes to the stimulus packages for North Carolina hospitals ...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article243301846.html?

Hospitals in North Carolina got more than $600 million from the federal Provider Relief Fund. An Observer analysis found that the majority of it went to just four large hospital chains with billions in combined reserves: Atrium Health, Novant Health, Duke Health and UNC Health Care.

So far, relatively little of the federal grant money has gone to dozens of smaller hospitals, many of which are financially struggling as a result of the pandemic.

That’s because the federal funding formulas were based largely on how much money hospitals received from Medicare and other sources last year.

“If you’re going to base it on what you got last year, the rich will get richer – and the poor will get poorer,” said Dr. Robert Berenson, an expert on health care finance with the Urban Institute, a Washington research group.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on June 05, 2020, 08:46:49 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/05/business/jobs-report-stock-market-coronavirus.html


But there are millions of people who are not working and want a job that this rate leaves out, including those part-time because their hours were cut, as well as those not looking for work because of fears about getting sick or responsibilities like caring for children.Combining these and other groups results in a 27 percent expanded unemployment rate, which could more closely reflect the share of the labor force whose employment has been negatively affected by the pandemic.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 05, 2020, 08:56:05 PM
PBI there is so much going on right now from PPP extensions to people leaving the workforce with voluntary retirement or other.  My guess is we’ve passed the trough.  Now where it normalizes is anyone’s guess. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 06, 2020, 08:01:08 AM
My wife's school district is going through layoffs for next school year.  I know her district is not the the only town going through.  These won't show up in figures until July.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 06, 2020, 09:31:12 AM
While the unemployment rate surprisingly fell last month, it actually rose for blacks and Latinos.

Overall, the jobs report was good news. But it wasn't great news. COVID-19 has disproportionately hurt communities of color, and it continues doing so.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on June 06, 2020, 11:25:53 AM
My wife's school district is going through layoffs for next school year.  I know her district is not the the only town going through.  These won't show up in figures until July.

Connecticut, I presume?

I'll be interested in what happens in Wisconsin.  WI's schools are funded by three things .. State revenue (income, sales taxes) .. Federal $ and local property taxes.

Clearly, WI state revenue is going to go down, although it remains to be seen what will get cut -- or if there'll be any federal money like there was in 2008.

Then there's school districts, who can increase their property tax levies -- but I think there's a limit on that.

So I have no idea what will happen, but much of it needs to be sorted out in the next ~90 days because .. school will start again in some capacity.

I .. hope?  .. that school districts will try temporary salary cuts before staffing cuts.  I mean .. tons of private industry is on 5-10-20-30% pay cuts right now, to stave off layoffs.

 Reminder:  While teachers' unions exist in Wisconsin, they have no bargaining rights.  A Wisconsin school district can offer a teacher whatever salary they wish, year to year.  Understood that most states have unions who would likely  fight this (likely to their detriment.)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on June 06, 2020, 08:08:08 PM
So apparently the government misclassified 5M people, who should have been counted as unemployed, but were counted as employed in the previous unemployment report.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/06/politics/seth-harris-may-jobs-report-misclassification-error-cnntv/index.html

Happened 2-months in a row?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on June 06, 2020, 10:57:15 PM
So apparently the government misclassified 5M people, who should have been counted as unemployed, but were counted as employed in the previous unemployment report.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/06/politics/seth-harris-may-jobs-report-misclassification-error-cnntv/index.html

Happened 2-months in a row?

Oopsie!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 11, 2020, 01:03:19 PM
Getcha popcorn ready.  Dow finally realizing what the rest of us see.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 11, 2020, 01:18:28 PM
Getcha popcorn ready.  Dow finally realizing what the rest of us see.

Nah, the Fed just didn’t buy like crazy overnight into today. This has nothing to do with anything other than Powell and Company backstopping and pushing everything up. When they don’t, the market falls. Been that way for weeks. Big money won’t fight the trend and retail has been rising the coattails blissfully
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 11, 2020, 01:44:31 PM
Nah, the Fed just didn’t buy like crazy overnight into today. This has nothing to do with anything other than Powell and Company backstopping and pushing everything up. When they don’t, the market falls. Been that way for weeks. Big money won’t fight the trend and retail has been rising the coattails blissfully

Or the unemployment numbers are about to get crazy now that the PPP is running out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 11, 2020, 01:47:14 PM
https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9yc3MuYXJ0MTkuY29tL2ZyZWFrb25vbWljcy1yYWRpbw&ep=14&episode=NDM4NDlkMGMtMDQ2Yi00NDBmLTk2NTAtYWJkNzAwMTRkNzIz

Freakonomics podcast on how to avoid a great depression at this point
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 11, 2020, 03:08:53 PM
Glad I moved much of my portfolio into fixed income securities a couple of months back. And of the part I kept in stock (mostly AT&T and Microsoft), I sold half late yesterday. Whew!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 11, 2020, 04:36:23 PM
Glad I moved much of my portfolio into fixed income securities a couple of months back. And of the part I kept in stock (mostly AT&T and Microsoft), I sold half late yesterday. Whew!

Nice sell of MSFT and T yesterday. But really, even after this sell-off, most stocks are higher than they were a week ago.

Doesn’t mean you were “wrong” to have sold your other stuff a couple months back. I mean, I sold some stuff last year that would be up now if I had held.

It’s about comfort level, goals, building a diverse portfolio, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 11, 2020, 04:56:08 PM
Nice sell of MSFT and T yesterday. But really, even after this sell-off, most stocks are higher than they were a week ago.

Doesn’t mean you were “wrong” to have sold your other stuff a couple months back. I mean, I sold some stuff last year that would be up now if I had held.

It’s about comfort level, goals, building a diverse portfolio, etc.


Absolutely. The selloff of a couple months ago cost me some with the recent run-up, but I am fine with that because it gave me the peace of mind of having a secure nest egg that will allow me to live comfortably for a long time.

I just left my “extra” money in the market, figuring I could still survive if it goes down the drain, and play with the earnings of it doesn’t. And my selloff from yesterday won’t be a long – term move. I just had a gut feeling we could be near a peak, so I pulled the trigger when they were at high levels. There’s a good chance I will put it back in sometime in the future after we tumble for a while.

And yeah - I realize I am very lucky to have this flexibility. I do not take that for granted.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 11, 2020, 05:29:07 PM
Getcha popcorn ready.  Dow finally realizing what the rest of us see.

Hilarious.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 11, 2020, 05:31:24 PM
Getcha popcorn ready.  Dow finally realizing what the rest of us see.

LOL.

See JWags for the real story.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 11, 2020, 07:10:57 PM
LOL.

See JWags for the real story.

They're related.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Chili on June 11, 2020, 07:26:22 PM
They're related.

Yup - real story will start in July when companies that reported March report their latest quarter. It will show the real impact.

We'll see how much debt the fed will saddle every American with in their drunken buying spree which will continue to push the fed into riskier and riskier situations.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 15, 2020, 10:20:33 AM
Mark Cuban encouraging CEOs and other company execs to cut their own compensation before hurting underlings.

https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/1271522167700754432?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20200615&instance_id=19398&nl=dealbook&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=30932&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 17, 2020, 09:52:46 AM
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/17/878946307/the-rich-have-stopped-spending-and-thats-tanked-the-economy?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_source=twitter.com

"The Rich Have Stopped Spending And That Has Tanked The Economy"


This is really fascinating.  Higher income people are the ones holding up their spending.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on June 17, 2020, 10:20:12 AM
It's an interesting headline, but a bit misleading.  In the body of the article:

Quote
before the pandemic were spending a significant chunk of that going to nice restaurants, the theater, or traveling and staying in nice hotels. Those are precisely the things that have been off-limits since the coronavirus hit.

I suspect a number of folks here fit that category.  They were talking about top 25% which is household income $72k and up. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on June 17, 2020, 10:22:01 AM
"The people so poor that 100% of their income goes to food, rent, and bills continues to spend 100% of their income despite there being a pandemic!"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 17, 2020, 11:34:53 AM
I don't think it's especially surprising at all.

First, as rocky noted, they are including lots and lots of folks bringing in under $100K as "rich."

Second, lots of states either just recently re-opened or are still not allowing restaurants to re-open dine-in service, movies to re-open, concert halls, theaters, stadiums and other entertainment venues to re-open, etc. Here in NC, bars and most entertainment venues are not open. The last couple of months, in an awful lot of big cities, there haven't been a lot of places where folks can spend their money.

Third, a lot of people are still not thrilled about going out. My wife and I went 2 weeks ago, nobody was wearing masks, and she said she won't go out again to any restaurant that doesn't have stricter policy for staff. We are getting together with another couple this weekend, but the wife has an underlying condition, so we are doing take-out and eating at their place. That's what establishments are up against.

Indeed, I would have been surprised had more entertainment/dining money been spent.

And of course lower-income folks are kicking out all their $$$. That's what they always have to do. There are millions of Americans literally living paycheck-to-paycheck. It's why many economists think the single best stimulus is unemployment insurance. Unemployed people aren't sticking their money into the stock market. They're putting the $$$ right back into the economy by buying crazy stuff like food and shelter.
 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on June 18, 2020, 06:53:48 AM
Heartbreaking story...

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/06/17/20-year-old-robinhood-customer-commits-suicide-after-seeing-a-730000-negative-balance/amp/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 18, 2020, 08:10:10 AM
Heartbreaking story...

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/06/17/20-year-old-robinhood-customer-commits-suicide-after-seeing-a-730000-negative-balance/amp/

Brutal

Wall Street is a casino.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 18, 2020, 08:18:17 AM
Brutal

Wall Street is a casino.

Yes, but play stupid games, get stupid results.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 18, 2020, 11:51:29 AM
Heartbreaking story...

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/06/17/20-year-old-robinhood-customer-commits-suicide-after-seeing-a-730000-negative-balance/amp/

Effen amazing. And extremely sad.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 18, 2020, 11:51:44 AM
Brutal

Wall Street is a casino.

Get rich (or in most cases, poor) quick. The American way.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 18, 2020, 01:14:50 PM
Heartbreaking story...

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/06/17/20-year-old-robinhood-customer-commits-suicide-after-seeing-a-730000-negative-balance/amp/

Very sad. A story like this begs the question of whether a person should be required to be an accredited investor to invest in certain types of trades, even if they involve SEC-regulated securities. This poor kid obviously had no idea what he was doing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on June 18, 2020, 02:03:05 PM
Very sad. A story like this begs the question of whether a person should be required to be an accredited investor to invest in certain types of trades, even if they involve SEC-regulated securities. This poor kid obviously had no idea what he was doing.

I'm generally against such regulations. But here I see two problems/solutions: 1) In a trade of this type, the book-keeping systems could easily be modified with a warning/alert that the balance does not yet include reconciliation from shares acquired. 2) You should have to approve certain types of trades, and acknowledge associated risk. Here, even after reconciliation, unless I'm reading it wrong, he is purchasing over 700,000 in shares. Unless he had that kind of money in his account, or approved buying on margin, that shouldn't be happening.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 18, 2020, 03:25:26 PM
I'm generally against such regulations. But here I see two problems/solutions: 1) In a trade of this type, the book-keeping systems could easily be modified with a warning/alert that the balance does not yet include reconciliation from shares acquired. 2) You should have to approve certain types of trades, and acknowledge associated risk. Here, even after reconciliation, unless I'm reading it wrong, he is purchasing over 700,000 in shares. Unless he had that kind of money in his account, or approved buying on margin, that shouldn't be happening.

There's lots of things that *shouldn't* be happening on wall St. Alas, deregulation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 18, 2020, 04:15:07 PM
Very sad. A story like this begs the question of whether a person should be required to be an accredited investor to invest in certain types of trades, even if they involve SEC-regulated securities. This poor kid obviously had no idea what he was doing.

As an active stock/options trader, since I was his age really, this story was sad but interesting in a lot of ways. I’m never got to defend Robinhood, I think it’s a scummy app and has been since the beginning. I have no clue how they are in business or retaining customers after their entire platform was down for an ENTIRE DAY multiple times during the crash a few months back.  Not to mention every major brokerage is commission free now, so there is no reason to stay with them other than a “simple” interface. I used it briefly but left when I saw some inconsistencies in order fills and realized it was shady in some ways.

So this isn’t a defense of RH, but I have a bit of trouble completely feeling bad and punting any blame from the victim here. He clearly did no research into his leverage or positions. I get that big red number, but it literally is a simple investigation to find out the balance issue. If he was wildly trading credit/debit spreads without knowing what it entailed or what he was doing, as Hards said, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Also, you need to apply for higher level option trading clearance to do anything more than naked buying or covered positions. He wasn’t some naive sucker. He took advantage of loose limits and freaked out.

Again, I don’t intend this to be victim blaming, and there is PLENTY to side eye both RH and the stock market about, but it rubs me the wrong way that it’s being made out that this kid was some doe eyed innocent who was deceived into a losing position that pushed him to suicide. I call absolute and complete BS that he had no idea he was trading on margin and did know that things could ballon like that.

I'm generally against such regulations. But here I see two problems/solutions: 1) In a trade of this type, the book-keeping systems could easily be modified with a warning/alert that the balance does not yet include reconciliation from shares acquired. 2) You should have to approve certain types of trades, and acknowledge associated risk. Here, even after reconciliation, unless I'm reading it wrong, he is purchasing over 700,000 in shares. Unless he had that kind of money in his account, or approved buying on margin, that shouldn't be happening.

There is a lot that isn’t being shared from a privacy and disclosure perspective. Like I said, I find it very hard to believe he had no part in the margin process. And as far as your second point, I’ve had multiple times where I have an option finish in the money at expiration, usually by some sort of lack of fill. If you don’t have anywhere close to the equity needed to purchase the shares, there is almost always a clearing activity in which they execute, immediately sell the shares, and the difference is credited to you (minus a fee)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on June 18, 2020, 04:18:37 PM
As an active stock/options trader, since I was his age really, this story was sad but interesting in a lot of ways. I’m never got to defend Robinhood, I think it’s a scummy app and has been since the beginning. I have no clue how they are in business or retaining customers after their entire platform was down for an ENTIRE DAY multiple times during the crash a few months back.  Not to mention every major brokerage is commission free now, so there is no reason to stay with them other than a “simple” interface. I used it briefly but left when I saw some inconsistencies in order fills and realized it was shady in some ways.

So this isn’t a defense of RH, but I have a bit of trouble completely feeling bad and punting any blame from the victim here. He clearly did no research into his leverage or positions. I get that big red number, but it literally is a simple investigation to find out the balance issue. If he was wildly trading credit/debit spreads without knowing what it entailed or what he was doing, as Hards said, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Also, you need to apply for higher level option trading clearance to do anything more than naked buying or covered positions. He wasn’t some naive sucker. He took advantage of loose limits and freaked out.

Again, I don’t intend this to be victim blaming, and there is PLENTY to side eye both RH and the stock market about, but it rubs me the wrong way that it’s being made out that this kid was some doe eyed innocent who was deceived into a losing position that pushed him to suicide. I call absolute and complete BS that he had no idea he was trading on margin and did know that things could ballon like that.

There is a lot that isn’t being shared from a privacy and disclosure perspective. Like I said, I find it very hard to believe he had no part in the margin process. And as far as your second point, I’ve had multiple times where I have an option finish in the money at expiration, usually by some sort of lack of fill. If you don’t have anywhere close to the equity needed to purchase the shares, there is almost always a clearing activity in which they execute, immediately sell the shares, and the difference is credited to you (minus a fee)

Thanks for the info. I was wondering whether something like the immediate sell would exist.

This is significantly outside my area of knowledge.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 18, 2020, 04:19:48 PM
As an active stock/options trader, since I was his age really, this story was sad but interesting in a lot of ways. I’m never got to defend Robinhood, I think it’s a scummy app and has been since the beginning. I have no clue how they are in business or retaining customers after their entire platform was down for an ENTIRE DAY multiple times during the crash a few months back.  Not to mention every major brokerage is commission free now, so there is no reason to stay with them other than a “simple” interface. I used it briefly but left when I saw some inconsistencies in order fills and realized it was shady in some ways.

So this isn’t a defense of RH, but I have a bit of trouble completely feeling bad and punting any blame from the victim here. He clearly did no research into his leverage or positions. I get that big red number, but it literally is a simple investigation to find out the balance issue. If he was wildly trading credit/debit spreads without knowing what it entailed or what he was doing, as Hards said, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Also, you need to apply for higher level option trading clearance to do anything more than naked buying or covered positions. He wasn’t some naive sucker. He took advantage of loose limits and freaked out.

Again, I don’t intend this to be victim blaming, and there is PLENTY to side eye both RH and the stock market about, but it rubs me the wrong way that it’s being made out that this kid was some doe eyed innocent who was deceived into a losing position that pushed him to suicide. I call absolute and complete BS that he had no idea he was trading on margin and did know that things could ballon like that.

There is a lot that isn’t being shared from a privacy and disclosure perspective. Like I said, I find it very hard to believe he had no part in the margin process. And as far as your second point, I’ve had multiple times where I have an option finish in the money at expiration, usually by some sort of lack of fill. If you don’t have anywhere close to the equity needed to purchase the shares, there is almost always a clearing activity in which they execute, immediately sell the shares, and the difference is credited to you (minus a fee)

Plus I am sure there were other issues besides this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 18, 2020, 05:28:26 PM
As an active stock/options trader, since I was his age really, this story was sad but interesting in a lot of ways. I’m never got to defend Robinhood, I think it’s a scummy app and has been since the beginning. I have no clue how they are in business or retaining customers after their entire platform was down for an ENTIRE DAY multiple times during the crash a few months back.  Not to mention every major brokerage is commission free now, so there is no reason to stay with them other than a “simple” interface. I used it briefly but left when I saw some inconsistencies in order fills and realized it was shady in some ways.

So this isn’t a defense of RH, but I have a bit of trouble completely feeling bad and punting any blame from the victim here. He clearly did no research into his leverage or positions. I get that big red number, but it literally is a simple investigation to find out the balance issue. If he was wildly trading credit/debit spreads without knowing what it entailed or what he was doing, as Hards said, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Also, you need to apply for higher level option trading clearance to do anything more than naked buying or covered positions. He wasn’t some naive sucker. He took advantage of loose limits and freaked out.

Again, I don’t intend this to be victim blaming, and there is PLENTY to side eye both RH and the stock market about, but it rubs me the wrong way that it’s being made out that this kid was some doe eyed innocent who was deceived into a losing position that pushed him to suicide. I call absolute and complete BS that he had no idea he was trading on margin and did know that things could ballon like that.

There is a lot that isn’t being shared from a privacy and disclosure perspective. Like I said, I find it very hard to believe he had no part in the margin process. And as far as your second point, I’ve had multiple times where I have an option finish in the money at expiration, usually by some sort of lack of fill. If you don’t have anywhere close to the equity needed to purchase the shares, there is almost always a clearing activity in which they execute, immediately sell the shares, and the difference is credited to you (minus a fee)


Thanks for your input. My trading expertise begins and ends with buying and selling stocks and mutual funds, so my post throwing out the accredited investor idea was mostly just a shot in the dark. You may very well be right that he was more knowledgeable than the story implies.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 18, 2020, 07:22:49 PM
Plus I am sure there were other issues besides this.

Definitely. That was one of my first thoughts as well.

 

Thanks for your input. My trading expertise begins and ends with buying and selling stocks and mutual funds, so my post throwing out the accredited investor idea was mostly just a shot in the dark. You may very well be right that he was more knowledgeable than the story implies.

No problem. He was a 20 year old college student who was trading a 5 figure account. It’s not hard to get over your head and the outcome is still tragic, but it just rings hollow when they act like he was a naive teen buying and selling DIS and AMZN who fell victim to an app and Wall Street.

 No matter how easy and user friendly, putting on any of the spread trades that could likely lead to this sort of temporary balance isnt a ”whoops, I clicked buy when I meant to sell. It’s multiple trades on multiple strike prices. You cant “accidentally” enter a spread, even if the app is as fun and easy as Candy Crush.

As for oversight, when you start trading options, there are various levels of approval. This would be under ”Level 3”. To get past Level 1 and Level 2 approval, you need to meet certain equity balance requirements as well as trading history. It’s not like you’re passing the Series 7, but its not like little Timmy can open an account, put $250 in and start ripping huge trades
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 19, 2020, 05:58:46 PM
The one Robinhood investor (low 3 figures) I know had  problem which while not life-shattering, were annoying and relatively expensive.

They gave him one free share of stock for signing up, and then sent him a 1099-misc for it.

His two shares of a particular stock had a gain of some sort that required him to complete an additional form for his tax return.  His gain was something like $15; the version of Turbo Tax that includes that form costs $90.  Otherwise, he could have filed with the free version.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 19, 2020, 09:24:33 PM
Now that all the brokerages do commission-free trading, there is no reason for anybody to use Robinhood.

Fidelity and Schwab even are letting investors buy "slices" of stocks. I am in the early stages of building a college fund for my new grand-twins, and I just bought $50 each of AMZN and GOOGL using Schwab Slices, totally cost-free.

Schwab and Fidelity are SO much better than Robinhood, with lots of good research available, fast times for trades, excellent customer service, never outages, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 21, 2020, 11:02:23 AM
I feel really sorry for the many business owners who have been decimated by the ramifications of COVID-19.

There was a very good article in today's Charlotte Observer about several of them, and what happens if the governor doesn't go to the next phase this coming week (supposedly it could start on Friday.)

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/whats-in-store/article243631032.html?

In particular, there is the stuff about bowling alleys, and one establishment owner who makes a great case for why they should be allowed to re-open.

Paul Kreins is willing to risk a fine or even jail to reopen bowling at his Victory Lanes Events & Entertainment Center in Mooresville June 26, even if Cooper changes his mind about the timing of Phase 3.

Kreins, the local Chamber of Commerce’s 2020 Entrepreneur of the Year, said he has lost $750,000 in revenue so far during the coronavirus closing. He questions the fairness of allowing small restaurants and retailers with a greater potential for crowding to reopen already.

“We are officially in Phase ‘Enough is Enough,’ ” Kreins told the Observer.

In an email, he also assured the center’s 1,000 bowling league players that numerous COVID-19 preventive measures will greet them when the lanes reopen.

Customers who don’t have their own bowling balls, for instance, will choose a pre-sanitized house ball from an attendant. To ensure social distancing of 8 to 10 feet, a lane will remain dark between any lanes in use.

Bowling shoes will be sanitized and disinfected after each use, and employees will wear masks and be temperature-screened every day before clocking in.

Staff at the entrances and exits of the 48,000-square-foot center also will make sure people are social distancing. And floor decals will denote proper social distancing as well.


This entrepreneur estimates that he already has lost $750K, and said he can't see why bowling alleys are forced to remain closed while brewpubs are allowed to be open.

I generally think our governor has done a good job, but I believe there have been a few inconsistencies in his decisions about which businesses can and can't re-open.

It's certainly hard to argue with this bowling establishment's owner, and his steps to keep his facility safe for customers and staff are laudable. I hope the governor lets him and others go back to earning an honest living.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 21, 2020, 01:13:56 PM

I generally think our governor has done a good job, but I believe there have been a few inconsistencies in his decisions about which businesses can and can't re-open.

It's certainly hard to argue with this bowling establishment's owner, and his steps to keep his facility safe for customers and staff are laudable. I hope the governor lets him and others go back to earning an honest living.



I feel exactly the same way here in MN. While I don't always agree with our governor's decisions and timing, he generally seems to be consulting with the appropriate experts and balancing safety with business.

But we too have had inconsistencies or gaps that don't make sense. Recently I read an article about how a certain definition permitted most fitness centers to open, but excluded CrossFit gyms. The owner quoted in the article explained how he was willing and able to implement the same protections as similar facilities, and made a pretty compelling case that the distinction was arbitrary. I haven't heard any follow-up, but I hope this got resolved fairly.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on June 21, 2020, 01:40:20 PM
Curiosity question -how do you effectively sanitize the holes in a bowling ball? I would be using hand sanitizer after every use. The shoes, I’m not as concerned about.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 21, 2020, 02:55:38 PM
Curiosity question -how do you effectively sanitize the holes in a bowling ball? I would be using hand sanitizer after every use. The shoes, I’m not as concerned about.

Wear a latex glove.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 21, 2020, 03:53:20 PM
Went to brunch today for Father’s Day in MKE. In lieu of traditional menus, they had a QR code that you’d scanned to pop up a digital menu on your phone. Same way with the check, you scanned and a bill payment interface pops up.

I’ve been pretty bearish on the wide scale changes as a result of COVID as it pertains to businesses or professional situations, but this is something I can see getting legs. It’s “green”, it’s a cost savings for the restaurant, etc...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 21, 2020, 04:13:20 PM
Went to brunch today for Father’s Day in MKE. In lieu of traditional menus, they had a QR code that you’d scanned to pop up a digital menu on your phone. Same way with the check, you scanned and a bill payment interface pops up.

I’ve been pretty bearish on the wide scale changes as a result of COVID as it pertains to businesses or professional situations, but this is something I can see getting legs. It’s “green”, it’s a cost savings for the restaurant, etc...

It would be great if things like that catch on widely. Like you said, seems like a win-win.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 21, 2020, 04:15:15 PM
Went to brunch today for Father’s Day in MKE. In lieu of traditional menus, they had a QR code that you’d scanned to pop up a digital menu on your phone. Same way with the check, you scanned and a bill payment interface pops up.

I’ve been pretty bearish on the wide scale changes as a result of COVID as it pertains to businesses or professional situations, but this is something I can see getting legs. It’s “green”, it’s a cost savings for the restaurant, etc...

I was thinking that so many restaurants have expanded and simplified ordering take-out.  You don't have to call in and hope they wrote your order down correctly. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on June 21, 2020, 05:38:21 PM
Wear a latex glove.

Was this advice for the bowling or strip club?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 21, 2020, 05:54:10 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/21/banks-have-grown-by-2-trillion-in-deposits-since-coronavirus-first-hit.html

Does this mean good, bad or indifferent things for your average American?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 21, 2020, 07:48:34 PM
Went to brunch today for Father’s Day in MKE. In lieu of traditional menus, they had a QR code that you’d scanned to pop up a digital menu on your phone. Same way with the check, you scanned and a bill payment interface pops up.

I’ve been pretty bearish on the wide scale changes as a result of COVID as it pertains to businesses or professional situations, but this is something I can see getting legs. It’s “green”, it’s a cost savings for the restaurant, etc...

I love this.  I’ve been using an Apple credit card with contactless Apple Pay as much as possible.  Between that and some restaurants taking Venmo, etc.  I hope I never have to sign another CC receipt ever again. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 21, 2020, 08:06:51 PM
I love this.  I’ve been using an Apple credit card with contactless Apple Pay as much as possible.  Between that and some restaurants taking Venmo, etc.  I hope I never have to sign another CC receipt ever again.


Yep. Apple Pay is awesome!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 21, 2020, 09:15:41 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/21/banks-have-grown-by-2-trillion-in-deposits-since-coronavirus-first-hit.html

Does this mean good, bad or indifferent things for your average American?


It means the economy will grow slower than a lot of people expect over the summer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on June 22, 2020, 07:50:50 AM

It means the economy will grow slower than a lot of people expect over the summer.

You're probably right, but when I read that article, it would lead me to conclude/hope the opposite.

People have a ton of money in the bank.  They didn't have a place to spend money, no entertainment, little retail, they saved and built bank balances.  Sure, 20% may be out of work, but 80% are collecting paychecks. 

With economies "opening up" .. now they have a place to spend their savings.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 22, 2020, 07:53:58 AM
You're probably right, but when I read that article, it would lead me to conclude/hope the opposite.

People have a ton of money in the bank.  They didn't have a place to spend money, no entertainment, little retail, they saved and built bank balances.  Sure, 20% may be out of work, but 80% are collecting paychecks. 

With economies "opening up" .. now they have a place to spend their savings.

Those weekly $600 "enhanced unemployment" checks end in one month and McConnell has already said that's it for those. There will be a lot fewer people with any extra money, and the employment level will still be at its worst level since the Great Depression.

I'd love to be as hopeful as you, 'toppy, but I'm not sure I can be.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 22, 2020, 07:58:47 AM
Those weekly $600 "enhanced unemployment" checks end in one month and McConnell has already said that's it for those. There will be a lot fewer people with any extra money, and the employment level will still be at its worst level since the Great Depression.

I'd love to be as hopeful as you, 'toppy, but I'm not sure I can be.

I know it's anecdotal, but over the last week or so I struck up conversations with several business owners who told me they are having trouble filling their open positions because people would rather collect the enhanced unemployment.

It will be interesting to see what the unemployment rate is a few weeks after that program ends.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 22, 2020, 08:56:47 AM
I know it's anecdotal, but over the last week or so I struck up conversations with several business owners who told me they are having trouble filling their open positions because people would rather collect the enhanced unemployment.

It will be interesting to see what the unemployment rate is a few weeks after that program ends.

Uber/Lyft drivers have all but disappeared in Indianapolis because of unemployment payments. Even someone who only drove a few hours per week apparently was eligible for the payments.

Because of that, waiting times and costs for rides were astronomical this weekend.

July 4 weekend will be interesting.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 22, 2020, 09:32:09 AM
I know it's anecdotal, but over the last week or so I struck up conversations with several business owners who told me they are having trouble filling their open positions because people would rather collect the enhanced unemployment.

It will be interesting to see what the unemployment rate is a few weeks after that program ends.

Did they furlough their old employees or terminate them?

And I agree, the PPP ended over a week ago for us, so now 50% of our employees are headed back to UI.  IMO, the UI numbers will skyrocket until the extra UI money ends.  IMO, that probably should have coincided with PPP ending.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on June 22, 2020, 09:50:12 AM
I know it's anecdotal, but over the last week or so I struck up conversations with several business owners who told me they are having trouble filling their open positions because people would rather collect the enhanced unemployment.

It will be interesting to see what the unemployment rate is a few weeks after that program ends.

Luckily one of my competitors started paying cash for one particular type of trade. I've lost two long term employees due to this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MarquetteDano on June 22, 2020, 10:27:18 AM
I know it's anecdotal, but over the last week or so I struck up conversations with several business owners who told me they are having trouble filling their open positions because people would rather collect the enhanced unemployment.

It will be interesting to see what the unemployment rate is a few weeks after that program ends.

I think economists are saying this is way more than anecdotal.  Instead of the just the set $600 per week amount,  most economists are saying that $600 plus state unemployment should never be more than 90% of your max earnings from the past 2 years.

If they keep the additional payment it MUST have a max based on previous earnings.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on June 22, 2020, 10:44:01 AM
I know it's anecdotal, but over the last week or so I struck up conversations with several business owners who told me they are having trouble filling their open positions because people would rather collect the enhanced unemployment.

It will be interesting to see what the unemployment rate is a few weeks after that program ends.

This is currently my problem at our group homes. We are so short staffed because we can't hire anyone due to them all making just as much on unemployment.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 22, 2020, 01:07:38 PM
It's definitely more than anecdotal.

It's also temporary, and will be ending in a month.

At the time they set policy, politicians did not know when significant hiring would be able to resume, and they wanted to help people devastated by the pandemic pay their rent, buy food, pay for critical services, etc. So they made an educated guess and went with April 4 - July 25 as the period for the $600/week extra UI payments.

Had they only gone through, say, June 15 and it was worse than that, they would have had to call emergency sessions and pound something else through. Had they gone to, say, Sept. 15, and economies opened sooner, they would have gone too far.

It's easy to sit here at the end of June and talk about a decision they had to make 3 months ago, when the pandemic was so bad that even a president who had been in total denial was forced to acknowledge it. All in all, given what they knew, I think they did pretty decent job.

The $600 will end in a matter of weeks, and then we'll see how many jobs there are for those folks to go to. Hopefully lots of 'em.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on June 22, 2020, 02:22:38 PM
Those weekly $600 "enhanced unemployment" checks end in one month and McConnell has already said that's it for those. There will be a lot fewer people with any extra money, and the employment level will still be at its worst level since the Great Depression.

I'd love to be as hopeful as you, 'toppy, but I'm not sure I can be.

You mis-read.  I am not hopeful.   There will be extra spending by the 80% -- and the 20% aren't destitute right now .. but they will be.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 22, 2020, 02:37:45 PM
You mis-read.  I am not hopeful.   There will be extra spending by the 80% -- and the 20% aren't destitute right now .. but they will be.

I understand. Sorry about the confusion.

Meanwhile ...

This is a big week in NC, as our governor will decide if we're ready for Phase 3, which would mean the re-opening of pretty much the entire economy. Already, most restaurants and numerous other establishments are open for business here.

Unfortunately, the metrics aren't really favorable.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article243707932.html?

Phase Two of North Carolina’s coronavirus reopening is scheduled to end Friday.

But the state is dealing with a rising number of cases, hospitalizations and percentage of tests that are positive — three of the key indicators Gov. Roy Cooper and his administration said they are watching as they make decisions about reopening.

“Key metrics are moving in the wrong direction,” Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Mandy Cohen said Monday afternoon.

Cohen said officials are trying to balance competing interests — “reigniting” the state’s economy, protecting public health and not overburdening the health care system.

Data from hospitals indicate that the Charlotte, Triangle and Greenville regions are driving the state’s rapid rise in hospitalizations from COVID. A new report analyzing those numbers suggests that those regions have between six and 13 weeks of hospital capacity left “if current conditions hold.” The report indicated that things can change swiftly.

“As we think about Phase Three, one option I think we have is to approach Phase Three regionally,” said Aaron McKethan, a faculty member at Duke’s School of Medicine and part of the group that analyzed the numbers and produced a six-page brief. “There are certain regions that need to be more aggressive than others in suppressing the rate of transmission.”


The governor has alluded in the past to a possible Phase 2.5, and that last paragraph might give a hint to how he might go about that should he choose to do so.

I don't envy him for this decision.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MarquetteDano on June 22, 2020, 02:42:32 PM
It's definitely more than anecdotal.

It's also temporary, and will be ending in a month.

At the time they set policy, politicians did not know when significant hiring would be able to resume, and they wanted to help people devastated by the pandemic pay their rent, buy food, pay for critical services, etc. So they made an educated guess and went with April 4 - July 25 as the period for the $600/week extra UI payments.

Had they only gone through, say, June 15 and it was worse than that, they would have had to call emergency sessions and pound something else through. Had they gone to, say, Sept. 15, and economies opened sooner, they would have gone too far.

It's easy to sit here at the end of June and talk about a decision they had to make 3 months ago, when the pandemic was so bad that even a president who had been in total denial was forced to acknowledge it. All in all, given what they knew, I think they did pretty decent job.

The $600 will end in a matter of weeks, and then we'll see how many jobs there are for those folks to go to. Hopefully lots of 'em.


No question it was rushed through.  But if it continues they will just need to max it out per economists.  A flat $600 makes no sense in a country where one state average earnings can be nearly double another's. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 23, 2020, 06:56:51 PM
More stimulus checks coming?

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article243731547.html?ac_cid=DM223099&ac_bid=1233436261

On Monday, the president suggested he was open to another round of direct payments as the coronavirus crisis continues to wreak havoc on the U.S. economy. COVID-19 cases are on the rise across the nation, and more than 1, 500,000 Americans filed jobless claims in the last week, U.S. Department of Labor data show.

“We will be doing another stimulus package,” Trump told a Scripps TV reporter. “It will be very good. It’ll be very generous.”

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 23, 2020, 09:08:48 PM
Socialist!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 24, 2020, 12:36:56 PM
More stimulus checks coming?

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article243731547.html?ac_cid=DM223099&ac_bid=1233436261

On Monday, the president suggested he was open to another round of direct payments as the coronavirus crisis continues to wreak havoc on the U.S. economy. COVID-19 cases are on the rise across the nation, and more than 1, 500,000 Americans filed jobless claims in the last week, U.S. Department of Labor data show.

“We will be doing another stimulus package,” Trump told a Scripps TV reporter. “It will be very good. It’ll be very generous.”

Would be smart to make this the beginning of the UBI that will be needed.  But I guess that would be too socialist to make work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 24, 2020, 01:42:53 PM
Baseball Hall of Fame is scheduled to re-open on Friday.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 25, 2020, 07:39:49 AM
Lack of focus on control starting to have real economic impacts

 https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/503953-louisiana-pushes-back-next-reopening-phase-by-4-weeks-as-coronavirus (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/503953-louisiana-pushes-back-next-reopening-phase-by-4-weeks-as-coronavirus)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on June 25, 2020, 11:30:39 AM
Dead people really made out on this whole stimulus thing.

WASHINGTON — The government’s fiscal watchdog said Thursday that $1.4 billion in stimulus payments were sent to roughly 1.1 million people who had already died, bypassing IRS procedures put in place seven years to ago to prevent such improper payments.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2020/06/25/irs-sent-14b-in-stimulus-payments-to-11m-dead-people-mostly-after-trump-called-snafus-a-tiny-problem/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 25, 2020, 12:05:35 PM
Just saw this story on Fox Business.

Can you just imagine what our "businessman president" would be twatting if this happened on the watch of any other president, especially the Kenyan Muslim? Wow!

Out of curiosity, before you hit the "Post" button, do you reread what you have typed?  I know self quarantine yourself often from these threads, but yeesh man, what does your post attempt to accomplish?  Just trying to upset the Trumpers?  They've left mostly... soooooooooooo...

I dunno man.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 25, 2020, 12:48:13 PM
Dead people really made out on this whole stimulus thing.

WASHINGTON — The government’s fiscal watchdog said Thursday that $1.4 billion in stimulus payments were sent to roughly 1.1 million people who had already died, bypassing IRS procedures put in place seven years to ago to prevent such improper payments.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2020/06/25/irs-sent-14b-in-stimulus-payments-to-11m-dead-people-mostly-after-trump-called-snafus-a-tiny-problem/

The Onion is on it!

Heaven Flush With Cash After Trump Administration Sends $1.4 Billion In Stimulus To Dead Americans
https://www.theonion.com/heaven-flush-with-cash-after-trump-administration-sends-1844165406?utm_source=TheOnion_Daily_RSS&utm_medium=email
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 25, 2020, 06:32:37 PM
Haven't left. Just sew fookin' slammed in dis white hot economy. Tryin' ta take care of 12 months of patients in 9.5 months = workin' my ass off, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 25, 2020, 06:36:45 PM
Haven't left. Just sew fookin' slammed in dis white hot economy. Tryin' ta take care of 12 months of patients in 9.5 months = workin' my ass off, hey?

I bet.  Are you able to see the same number of patients or did you have to extend hours?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 25, 2020, 06:42:17 PM
Ours lengthened plus Saturdays
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 25, 2020, 07:04:32 PM
Ours lengthened plus Saturdays

Working more for less seems like the theme of Covid. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on June 25, 2020, 07:25:28 PM
Haven't left. Just sew fookin' slammed in dis white hot economy. Tryin' ta take care of 12 months of patients in 9.5 months = workin' my ass off, hey?

  and we need more time per patient for temp taking, paperwork/consent forms, extra room disinfection.  they did however, drop the 15 minute mini quarantine of  rooms which had aerosol producing procedures
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 29, 2020, 10:47:51 AM
Don't go to bars.  Don't go to restaurants where spacing isn't a thing.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/26/this-chart-shows-the-link-between-restaurant-spending-and-new-coronavirus-cases.html?__source=sharebar%7Ctwitter&par=sharebar

"Higher restaurant spending appears to be linked to a faster spread of the coronavirus, according to a JPMorgan study.

Analyst Jesse Edgerton analyzed data from 30 million Chase credit and debit cardholders and from Johns Hopkins University’s case tracker. He found that increased restaurant spending in a state predicted a rise in new infections there three weeks later.

He also said restaurant spending was the strongest predictor across all categories of card spending."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 29, 2020, 11:09:54 AM
Don't go to bars.  Don't go to restaurants where spacing isn't a thing.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/26/this-chart-shows-the-link-between-restaurant-spending-and-new-coronavirus-cases.html?__source=sharebar%7Ctwitter&par=sharebar

"Higher restaurant spending appears to be linked to a faster spread of the coronavirus, according to a JPMorgan study.

Analyst Jesse Edgerton analyzed data from 30 million Chase credit and debit cardholders and from Johns Hopkins University’s case tracker. He found that increased restaurant spending in a state predicted a rise in new infections there three weeks later.

He also said restaurant spending was the strongest predictor across all categories of card spending."


Not terribly surprising. Restaurants are the one place where even people who want to wear masks have to take them off eventually. Add the fact that you are putting things into your mouth and generally putting your hands around your face, and you have the ideal scenario for the virus to spread.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on July 01, 2020, 07:26:54 AM
Lack of focus on control starting to have real economic impacts

 https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/503953-louisiana-pushes-back-next-reopening-phase-by-4-weeks-as-coronavirus (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/503953-louisiana-pushes-back-next-reopening-phase-by-4-weeks-as-coronavirus)

My point in a picture

(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/B3-GZ240_Dshot_NS_20200701041712.png)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 01, 2020, 07:40:25 AM
Yep.  People aren't going to go out unless they feel safe. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on July 03, 2020, 08:40:48 AM
This is interesting but also bode well for a quick recovery. 

https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1278766321610735620?s=21 (https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1278766321610735620?s=21)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on July 03, 2020, 08:42:25 AM
This is interesting but also bode well for a quick recovery. 

https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1278766321610735620?s=21 (https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1278766321610735620?s=21)

Just posted the same in the restaurant thread 😂
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on July 30, 2020, 11:22:14 AM
Wondering if the business folks can help explain this. The 2nd quarter GDP numbers came out with a decrease in GDP for the quarter of $1.8T. Confused how that is possible.

The total GDP for the quarter based on our current GDP would be around $5.1T. So a decrease of $1.8T would indicate a net activity of $3.3T.

The government exceeded that number in spending alone (not sure if FED stimulus gets lumped in, but even the direct government spending was around $3.3T).

I'm sure I'm missing a lot, but can anyone explain this further to me.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on July 30, 2020, 11:31:47 AM
Wondering if the business folks can help explain this. The 2nd quarter GDP numbers came out with a decrease in GDP for the quarter of $1.8T. Confused how that is possible.

The total GDP for the quarter based on our current GDP would be around $5.1T. So a decrease of $1.8T would indicate a net activity of $3.3T.

The government exceeded that number in spending alone (not sure if FED stimulus gets lumped in, but even the direct government spending was around $3.3T).

I'm sure I'm missing a lot, but can anyone explain this further to me.

I have to look more into the numbers, but government payments don’t factor into GDP
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on July 30, 2020, 11:43:08 AM
I have to look more into the numbers, but government payments don’t factor into GDP

Thanks, I figured they would count as government spending, but I guess they may treat it more like Social Security. I would also think then the raw numbers make the GDP effect seem worse than it is in reality, that money is now out there and will enter the GDP.

But I am a bit naive in this area, so appreciate any info/corrections.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on August 17, 2020, 06:03:53 AM
Japan 2Q GDP down 7.8% QoQ and 28% annualized.  In my opinion this shows the enemy pretty clearly as they did not have overly restrictive lockdowns there as they have been working to contain the virus. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on September 01, 2020, 04:21:47 PM
I suspect this story is playing out in tens of millions of households around the country. Great for the financial stability of the individual and his/her family, but it doesn’t seem like a recipe for economic growth.

How the Pandemic Will Change the Way We Manage Money Forever

https://www.newsweek.com/2020/09/04/how-pandemic-will-change-way-we-manage-money-forever-1528556.html

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 01, 2020, 05:06:43 PM
I suspect this story is playing out in tens of millions of households around the country. Great for the financial stability of the individual and his/her family, but it doesn’t seem like a recipe for economic growth.

How the Pandemic Will Change the Way We Manage Money Forever

https://www.newsweek.com/2020/09/04/how-pandemic-will-change-way-we-manage-money-forever-1528556.html

I was in HS during 9/11 and trying to find a job in terrible circumstances during the 2008 crash, so I didn’t read or have the perspective, but was it as heavy with “how XYZ will change FOREVER” articles” as this is now?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on September 01, 2020, 05:08:32 PM
I was in HS during 9/11 and trying to find a job in terrible circumstances during the 2008 crash, so I didn’t read or have the perspective, but was it as heavy with “how XYZ will change FOREVER” articles” as this is now?


Yes, it was.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on September 01, 2020, 05:11:30 PM
I was in HS during 9/11 and trying to find a job in terrible circumstances during the 2008 crash, so I didn’t read or have the perspective, but was it as heavy with “how XYZ will change FOREVER” articles” as this is now?

Goo, I'm too lazy to go back and look, but I believe it was April or May when I posted that this would happen. Too many people got caught with no fallback money. At least for the next several years, Covid will change the way people handle their cash.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 01, 2020, 07:17:18 PM
At least for the next several years, Covid will change the way people handle their cash.

Not to mention their toilet paper stockpile.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on September 01, 2020, 09:12:06 PM
I was in HS during 9/11 and trying to find a job in terrible circumstances during the 2008 crash, so I didn’t read or have the perspective, but was it as heavy with “how XYZ will change FOREVER” articles” as this is now?

There were a ton of such articles after 9/11, but I believe the RANGE of things predicted to change is broader this time.

After 9/11, everybody assumed most everything related to travel or going to crowded venues would change (and that largely has proven true; witness an airport security line or getting into a sporting event). This time, the changes relate to everything from where you work, to whether you go out to eat, to the way people spend their money, and more.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 01, 2020, 09:50:26 PM
There were a ton of such articles after 9/11, but I believe the RANGE of things predicted to change is broader this time.

After 9/11, everybody assumed most everything related to travel or going to crowded venues would change (and that largely has proven true; witness an airport security line or getting into a sporting event). This time, the changes relate to everything from where you work, to whether you go out to eat, to the way people spend their money, and more.

Fair enough. Certain things changed, but life largely resumed as normal in the vast majority of fashions. I feel the same will happen with COVID on a longer time frame. Sure there will be changes, but people will go back to going out to restaurants, packing stadiums, flying, going to the office, etc... hence I sort of roll my eyes at everything but the nuanced “COVID has shown the impracticality of X” examples. If people didn’t radically improve their saving/spending/money management after 2008, I find it hard to believe the last 6 months, where evictions were protected and financial incentives were given to many, usher in some profound sea change in perpetuity.

As we’ve mentioned plenty of times, humans, especially Americans, are very resilient and elastic, which leads to skepticism over all the brave new world forecasts across the board
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on September 01, 2020, 10:10:09 PM
If people didn’t radically improve their saving/spending/money management after 2008, I find it hard to believe the last 6 months, where evictions were protected and financial incentives were given to many, usher in some profound sea change in perpetuity.

Generally agree, but it has been 12 years since. I do believe this had spurred a new wave of young savers that had only seen increasing stock market returns for a decade...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on September 01, 2020, 10:11:01 PM
Fair enough. Certain things changed, but life largely resumed as normal in the vast majority of fashions. I feel the same will happen with COVID on a longer time frame. Sure there will be changes, but people will go back to going out to restaurants, packing stadiums, flying, going to the office, etc... hence I sort of roll my eyes at everything but the nuanced “COVID has shown the impracticality of X” examples. If people didn’t radically improve their saving/spending/money management after 2008, I find it hard to believe the last 6 months, where evictions were protected and financial incentives were given to many, usher in some profound sea change in perpetuity.

As we’ve mentioned plenty of times, humans, especially Americans, are very resilient and elastic, which leads to skepticism over all the brave new world forecasts across the board


I agree that many of the headlines overplay the degree to which things will change long–term. Still, I still think the changes we do see will be far more significant and wide-ranging than they were after 9/11.

I also think it will take longer for many of the ‘temporary‘ changes to get back to normal, because a disaster that goes on for months and months has a way of sticking in peoples’ memories.

Time will tell, but first we need to get past the immediate crisis. I only hope we aren’t still waiting for the ‘after’ phase six months from now…
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on September 02, 2020, 05:29:37 AM
The reason there is so much speculation is these events always drive great change.  It’s just that no one knows exactly what. 

Is it all going to happen, no.  Is it a ‘Meh the media’ moment.  Nope. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 16, 2020, 05:29:42 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/11/business/share-buybacks-hazard-pay/index.html

Cool.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 24, 2020, 10:21:24 AM
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/09/23/companies-shed-workers-paid-dividends-after-getting-fed-aid-panel-finds-420537

ELI5?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Eldon on September 24, 2020, 06:47:49 PM
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/09/23/companies-shed-workers-paid-dividends-after-getting-fed-aid-panel-finds-420537

ELI5?

Do you really care to understand or are you making a point?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on September 24, 2020, 07:06:35 PM
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/09/23/companies-shed-workers-paid-dividends-after-getting-fed-aid-panel-finds-420537

ELI5?

There were a couple of ways that the federal government intervened to prop up businesses during the beginning of this economic downturn. The most visible way was the SBA loans that were approved by congress via the CARES act: PPP and EIDL funds. PPP and EIDL money came with acceptable use stipulations. At first you could only use PPP money for payroll, but they expanded that to match the EIDL, which is basically "any business purpose is fine."

The CARES act also authorized the Fed to buy corporate & municipal bonds. Big problem, if you care about small business, with buying corporate bonds is that they're only issued by very large up to gigantic corporations. Another big problem with stimulating businesses that way: There are no stipulations if you took the Fed's money.

So... to heck with it. You are running a giant corp, and your success metrics determine your compensation. It is absolutely in your best interest to issue a ton of debt at an ultra low rate to raise a bunch of money. The private market will buy because it's backstopped by the federal gov't now. Then you cut operating costs by firing as much staff as you can stomach. Boom, your stock price pops, you get your bonus, and your shareholders + BoD are happy with the job you did. Business as usual with public companies, honestly.

I'm no economist, and most of this is from memory so I'd appreciate corrections that anyone has. Here's a quote from Nate Tankus that I had to look up:

> Of course, the nature of explicit interventions are changing. Both the Corporate Credit Facilities and the Municipal Liquidity Facility have had very few purchases, but for different reasons. The Corporate Credit Facilities have provided such a strong backstop that private markets have provisioned all the liquidity qualifying corporations need. On the other hand, the Municipal Liquidity Facility is priced so unfavorably that only Chicago has entered the facility’s lone transaction. 

Edit: Looks like businesses were doing stock buybacks after having taken PPP money as well. As long as they didn't use PPP money for stock buybacks it isn't against the rules. It does mean, though, that undeserving companies took PPP money. Shocker.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 25, 2020, 11:03:12 AM
Much appreciated
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on September 25, 2020, 11:29:51 AM
There were a couple of ways that the federal government intervened to prop up businesses during the beginning of this economic downturn. The most visible way was the SBA loans that were approved by congress via the CARES act: PPP and EIDL funds. PPP and EIDL money came with acceptable use stipulations. At first you could only use PPP money for payroll, but they expanded that to match the EIDL, which is basically "any business purpose is fine."

The CARES act also authorized the Fed to buy corporate & municipal bonds. Big problem, if you care about small business, with buying corporate bonds is that they're only issued by very large up to gigantic corporations. Another big problem with stimulating businesses that way: There are no stipulations if you took the Fed's money.

So... to heck with it. You are running a giant corp, and your success metrics determine your compensation. It is absolutely in your best interest to issue a ton of debt at an ultra low rate to raise a bunch of money. The private market will buy because it's backstopped by the federal gov't now. Then you cut operating costs by firing as much staff as you can stomach. Boom, your stock price pops, you get your bonus, and your shareholders + BoD are happy with the job you did. Business as usual with public companies, honestly.

I'm no economist, and most of this is from memory so I'd appreciate corrections that anyone has. Here's a quote from Nate Tankus that I had to look up:

> Of course, the nature of explicit interventions are changing. Both the Corporate Credit Facilities and the Municipal Liquidity Facility have had very few purchases, but for different reasons. The Corporate Credit Facilities have provided such a strong backstop that private markets have provisioned all the liquidity qualifying corporations need. On the other hand, the Municipal Liquidity Facility is priced so unfavorably that only Chicago has entered the facility’s lone transaction. 

Edit: Looks like businesses were doing stock buybacks after having taken PPP money as well. As long as they didn't use PPP money for stock buybacks it isn't against the rules. It does mean, though, that undeserving companies took PPP money. Shocker.

So, same thing different day, sigh. That is why the bulk money needed to go directly to the people.

And anyone that was concerned about people who took $600 unemployment, perhaps, stay with me here, the real issue is that those people are not paid enough in the first place.

Finally, the stock market is not the economy, the stock market is not the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 01, 2020, 12:52:57 PM
Federal Bank: Economy won't recover until virus is under control

The U.S. economy will not recover until the coronavirus is under control, said Neel Kashkari, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.


“This is not about politics -- it’s about confidence,” Kashkari said during a Wednesday webinar held by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the state’s largest business association.

Kashkari’s overview of what’s ahead was not encouraging, and he called on Congress to provide more support for small businesses and people who have lost their jobs because of the pandemic.

It will be six months to a year before a vaccine is widely available, he said, and until then, people will be wary of going to restaurants, movie theaters and sporting events.


Furloughs are becoming permanent job losses, he said, and bankruptcy filings by businesses are beginning to increase.

“If thousands and thousands of businesses go bankrupt, this recovery is going to be much slower,” Kashkari said.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 02, 2020, 06:07:54 AM
The president has at least three risk factors that we know about (weight, age, sex). You have to assume everyone at the debate is at risk based on what we know. 

Has there ever been this much election uncertainty?  Does this get the stimulus through?  I feel like Heisenberg. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on October 02, 2020, 09:41:46 AM
The president has at least three risk factors that we know about (weight, age, sex). You have to assume everyone at the debate is at risk based on what we know. 

Has there ever been this much election uncertainty?  Does this get the stimulus through?  I feel like Heisenberg.

Don't forget a 4th, low-income.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 02, 2020, 09:51:52 AM
The president has at least three risk factors that we know about (weight, age, sex). You have to assume everyone at the debate is at risk based on what we know. 

Has there ever been this much election uncertainty?  Does this get the stimulus through?  I feel like Heisenberg. 


If you were Heisey, you would have posted this on Hangin' at the Al.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 02, 2020, 09:53:18 AM
Don't forget a 4th, low-income.

<hat tip>
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 02, 2020, 12:12:45 PM
Don't forget a 4th, low-income.


Funniest thing I have read today.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on October 02, 2020, 12:18:35 PM
Federal Bank: Economy won't recover until virus is under control

The U.S. economy will not recover until the coronavirus is under control, said Neel Kashkari, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.


“This is not about politics -- it’s about confidence,” Kashkari said during a Wednesday webinar held by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the state’s largest business association.

Kashkari’s overview of what’s ahead was not encouraging, and he called on Congress to provide more support for small businesses and people who have lost their jobs because of the pandemic.

It will be six months to a year before a vaccine is widely available, he said, and until then, people will be wary of going to restaurants, movie theaters and sporting events.


Furloughs are becoming permanent job losses, he said, and bankruptcy filings by businesses are beginning to increase.

“If thousands and thousands of businesses go bankrupt, this recovery is going to be much slower,” Kashkari said.

my wife does small business lending and she's as busy as she's ever been. Some of her clients are scaling down (one went from two restaurants to one), others are asking for further money or extensions, others are just shutting down, either temporarily or permanently. In Portland we've lost numerous breweries recently and the restaurant industry has been devastated, especially downtown where a combination of the riots, homelessness and COVID (having) are resulting in some highly renowned restaurants are closing and other businesses sitting it out for now and not reponeing. Commerical real estate is going to take the biggest hit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 06, 2020, 09:44:50 AM
ShopperTrack projects that brick and mortar holiday traffic will be down 22-25% this year.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/the-number-of-holiday-shoppers-at-stores-to-drop-25percent-says-shoppertrak.html

Honestly, I'm surprised the number is so low. I will try to get to a few smaller mom-and-pop places to help keep them afloat, but between Covid and the continuing rise of online shopping, I struggle to see a shopping mall or big box store in my near future. Others?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 06, 2020, 10:27:12 AM
I have been to both.   Christmas shopping will probably be on line.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 06, 2020, 02:27:30 PM
Trump tweets that he will no longer negotiate on a second stimulus until after the election.
His precious stock market immediately collapses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 06, 2020, 02:47:00 PM
Trump tweets that he will no longer negotiate on a second stimulus until after the election.
His precious stock market immediately collapses.


I don't understand his political calculus here.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: SoCalEagle on October 06, 2020, 02:56:38 PM
I don't understand his political calculus here.

Crash and burn?

Take everyone down with me?

Take my ball and go home?

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 06, 2020, 03:16:49 PM
I don't understand his political calculus here.

He is on steroids.  And out of his mind.  Normal people 25th until he is better, but we are all gas no brakes society now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 06, 2020, 03:25:03 PM
Crash and burn?

Take everyone down with me?

Take my ball and go home?

Bingo. If he wins, they agree to something and he’s a hero. If he loses, F everyone wait until Biden gives you something in February.

It’s pretty gross, even for him.  It could be a bluff, but it feels an awful lot like having his troops start to salt the fields
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 06, 2020, 03:31:04 PM
I think the Senate also plays into this too.  This would have to be bi-partisan to pass there and a significant bloc of R's doesn't want a significant stimulus there for fiscal reasons.  If they jam it through McConnell may not be the next Senate leader or minority leader.  I think in his mind the Judge impacts the election and the stimulus doesn't -- which as we know is the best way to influence Mr T.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 06, 2020, 03:54:10 PM
I think the Senate also plays into this too.  This would have to be bi-partisan to pass there and a significant bloc of R's doesn't want a significant stimulus there for fiscal reasons.  If they jam it through McConnell may not be the next Senate leader or minority leader.  I think in his mind the Judge impacts the election and the stimulus doesn't -- which as we know is the best way to influence Mr T.

I'd lean the other way, in that I think McConnell and the Senate Republicans very much want/need a deal. There are incumbent Republicans in some tight races (Ernst, Collins, Tillis, Garnder, McSally) and this would be a huge missed opportunity for them to win over moderates and suburban voters.
McConnell doesn't give a flying you-know-what about Trump. In fact, he likely hates him. McConnell cares very much about retaining control of the Senate, and this wouldn't seem to help that cause.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 06, 2020, 04:15:26 PM

I'd lean the other way, in that I think McConnell and the Senate Republicans very much want/need a deal. There are incumbent Republicans in some tight races (Ernst, Collins, Tillis, Garnder, McSally) and this would be a huge missed opportunity for them to win over moderates and suburban voters.


Agree with this. Regardless of what happens with Trump, lots of Rs are fighting for their seats and McConnell's pulpit. If they don't get a plan through because of Trump's petulance, they may go down with him.

Maybe Trump is bluffing, or maybe he's serious because he believes he's gonna lose. If he is serious and holds this position, he will do considerable damage to the Rs' ability to hold the Senate majority.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 06, 2020, 04:29:57 PM
I'd lean the other way, in that I think McConnell and the Senate Republicans very much want/need a deal. There are incumbent Republicans in some tight races (Ernst, Collins, Tillis, Garnder, McSally) and this would be a huge missed opportunity for them to win over moderates and suburban voters.
McConnell doesn't give a flying you-know-what about Trump. In fact, he likely hates him. McConnell cares very much about retaining control of the Senate, and this wouldn't seem to help that cause.

Nothing I said disagrees with your take except that I think they are betting that focusing on the Judge will get them more votes for those senators. Whether or not this is correct is to be seen.  McConnell tried to pass their own version of the stimulus and it was a disaster--that shows you a bit of how important they think it is (i.e. they can't do it alone).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 06, 2020, 04:44:41 PM
Nothing I said disagrees with your take except that I think they are betting that focusing on the Judge will get them more votes for those senators. Whether or not this is correct is to be seen.  McConnell tried to pass their own version of the stimulus and it was a disaster--that shows you a bit of how important they think it is (i.e. they can't do it alone).

Getting their judge through only helps them with their base, which they're getting whether or not she's confirmed. Staunch pro-lifers and evangenicals aren't voting Democratic if ACB's nomination gets delayed.
Moderates, on the other hand, will continue to turn on Republicans is they're perceived as killing hopes for a second stimulus deal and further tanking the economy.

Case in point, a poll just released shows that 74 percent of voters  - including 77 percent of independents and 55 percent of Republicans - believe a second stimulus should be prioritized over ACB.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/519650-poll-74-percent-of-voters-want-senate-to-take-on-covid-relief

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 06, 2020, 05:14:50 PM
Edit: sorry that is getting off track. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 06, 2020, 07:56:51 PM
Nothing I said disagrees with your take except that I think they are betting that focusing on the Judge will get them more votes for those senators. Whether or not this is correct is to be seen.  McConnell tried to pass their own version of the stimulus and it was a disaster--that shows you a bit of how important they think it is (i.e. they can't do it alone).

There is absolutely no reason they couldn't have passed a stimulus bill and seated a new SCOTUS justice. They are not mutually exclusive activities.

I agree with Pak and others that this hurts several GOP senators who hope to keep their jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 06, 2020, 09:02:46 PM
There is absolutely no reason they couldn't have passed a stimulus bill and seated a new SCOTUS justice. They are not mutually exclusive activities.

I agree with Pak and others that this hurts several GOP senators who hope to keep their jobs.


Agreed. The SCOTUS approval process is mostly a matter of scheduling, and specifically making sure they have enough people there for the votes (in committee and the full Senate). The stimulus is mostly Pelosi and Mnuchin negotiating, since the Rs in Congress will almost certainly approve anything Mnuchin and Trump want.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 09, 2020, 09:18:00 AM
Mitch McConnell says a coronavirus stimulus package is ‘unlikely in the next three weeks’

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/09/coronavirus-stimulus-mitch-mcconnell-says-relief-deal-unlikely-soon.html

Congress likely will not pass another coronavirus stimulus package before the Nov. 3 election, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Friday.

The White House and Democrats have restarted last-ditch talks toward an elusive relief deal. Speaking in his home state of Kentucky, the Republican said “the situation’s kind of murky” as negotiators try to “elbow for political advantage.”

“I’d like to see us rise above that like we did back in March and April, but I think that’s unlikely in the next three weeks,” he said.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 09, 2020, 10:47:55 AM
Any stimulus should go to individuals. Not corporations/business/industries.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on October 09, 2020, 10:59:08 AM
Any stimulus should go to individuals. Not corporations/business/industries.

I would add state governments to that list.   Otherwise: Doom.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 09, 2020, 11:18:42 AM
About a half-hour ago, Trump tweeted that talks are progressing and urged negotiators to "Go Big!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1314593632733847552

He saw that he was getting blamed. He also wants the markets to keep going up these next few weeks.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 10, 2020, 07:54:06 AM
Ministry that spent $180k at Trump DC Hotel in 2018, receives $350k-$1 Million PPP loan in 2020.

https://twitter.com/Z_Everson/status/1314909063919132674?s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 10, 2020, 03:33:49 PM
Republicans in the Senate have problems with White House offer on stimulus.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/520489-senate-republicans-rip-new-white-house-coronavirus-proposal?fbclid=IwAR1TngesqpesMjfUTNr9qNH2xk-qI8S6wpTcn-AahZ0kNcuie_rSvSJxW8k (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/520489-senate-republicans-rip-new-white-house-coronavirus-proposal?fbclid=IwAR1TngesqpesMjfUTNr9qNH2xk-qI8S6wpTcn-AahZ0kNcuie_rSvSJxW8k)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 10, 2020, 04:06:18 PM
Republicans in the Senate have problems with White House offer on stimulus.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/520489-senate-republicans-rip-new-white-house-coronavirus-proposal?fbclid=IwAR1TngesqpesMjfUTNr9qNH2xk-qI8S6wpTcn-AahZ0kNcuie_rSvSJxW8k (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/520489-senate-republicans-rip-new-white-house-coronavirus-proposal?fbclid=IwAR1TngesqpesMjfUTNr9qNH2xk-qI8S6wpTcn-AahZ0kNcuie_rSvSJxW8k)

Trump is throwing a Hail Mary before the election, and the Senate Republicans are taking a more long-term (traditionally conservative) view.

The sad part is that there are some truly needy people who are caught in the middle.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 10, 2020, 04:46:10 PM
Trump wants money that he can dole out. House Dens want the money to be designated for specific things. McConnell wants none of it - just another conservative SCOTUS while he still has a president under his sway.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 15, 2020, 08:48:12 AM
From the NYT:

We already know, thanks to Bob Woodward’s book, that Trump was fully aware of how severe the coronavirus was back in February, even as he was publicly downplaying it and lying about it for months.

As it happens, Larry Kudlow and other senior White House economists that month repeatedly warned board members at the conservative Hoover Institution — many of them Republican donors — about the dangers of the virus during closed-door meetings, at a time when some of those same officials were giving rosy predictions to the public.

A hedge fund consultant who attended the meetings wrote a memo that circulated among hedge fund investors, with one clear message: that a devastating virus outbreak in the United States was increasingly likely.

Or, as one major investor who was briefed on the memo reacted, “Short everything!”

The information from the administration helped give elite traders a financial advantage by offering them a sobering economic assessment during a chaotic stretch in late February, when the public was struggling to understand the severity of the crisis.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 15, 2020, 09:35:24 AM
Nearly 900,000 filed new state unemployment claims last week.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/10/15/business/us-economy-coronavirus?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#nearly-900000-filed-new-state-unemployment-claims-last-week

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 15, 2020, 09:46:08 AM
From the NYT:

We already know, thanks to Bob Woodward’s book, that Trump was fully aware of how severe the coronavirus was back in February, even as he was publicly downplaying it and lying about it for months.

As it happens, Larry Kudlow and other senior White House economists that month repeatedly warned board members at the conservative Hoover Institution — many of them Republican donors — about the dangers of the virus during closed-door meetings, at a time when some of those same officials were giving rosy predictions to the public.

A hedge fund consultant who attended the meetings wrote a memo that circulated among hedge fund investors, with one clear message: that a devastating virus outbreak in the United States was increasingly likely.

Or, as one major investor who was briefed on the memo reacted, “Short everything!”

The information from the administration helped give elite traders a financial advantage by offering them a sobering economic assessment during a chaotic stretch in late February, when the public was struggling to understand the severity of the crisis.
And the punishment for trading on inside information will be?

Yeah, I know.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 15, 2020, 10:02:15 AM
And the punishment for trading on inside information will be?

Yeah, I know.


I don't think this violates insider trading laws.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 15, 2020, 10:29:53 AM

I don't think this violates insider trading laws.
You may be right, I am no expert on it. They were trading on information not publicly available, yet I do not know if it meets the letter of the law. Either way, it shows how unnatural carnal knowledgeed up the system is.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 15, 2020, 10:44:04 AM
You may be right, I am no expert on it. They were trading on information not publicly available, yet I do not know if it meets the letter of the law. Either way, it shows how unnatural carnal knowledgeed up the system is.

I know they wouldn't be charged for it, but...

Were the officials paid, either directly or as donations, for their attendance and information. If so, could you get them on federal bribery charges. Disclosing non-public information for personal benefit, then lying about the information in public.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 15, 2020, 10:51:15 AM
You may be right, I am no expert on it. They were trading on information not publicly available, yet I do not know if it meets the letter of the law. Either way, it shows how unnatural carnal knowledgeed up the system is.


Insider trading laws are about company insiders trading on information about that company, or a company they have a relationship with.  Not about information shared that impacts the economy or markets at large.

At least this is my understanding.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 15, 2020, 12:58:07 PM
Illegal or not, to give the 0.1% privileged information about a deadly virus just so they can make money off of it, while telling the 99.9% the exact opposite, is about as unethical and corrupt as it gets.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 15, 2020, 01:18:53 PM
Illegal or not, to give the 0.1% privileged information about a deadly virus just so they can make money off of it, while telling the 99.9% the exact opposite, is about as unethical and corrupt as it gets.


Oh I don't disagree with that.

And it's not just giving the information that's unethical, it's the decision to profit off of it instead of spreading the news far and wide.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 15, 2020, 01:48:38 PM

Insider trading laws are about company insiders trading on information about that company, or a company they have a relationship with.  Not about information shared that impacts the economy or markets at large.

At least this is my understanding.
Pretty sure Martha Stewart wasn't a company insider when she get pinged. Also, if I tell my buddy about good or bad news about to come out and he trades on the information, he is guilty of insider trading despite not being an insider at the company.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 15, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
Pretty sure Martha Stewart wasn't a company insider when she get pinged. Also, if I tell my buddy about good or bad news about to come out and he trades on the information, he is guilty of insider trading despite not being an insider at the company.


But the tip she received was about a specific company, not the economy overall.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 15, 2020, 02:49:42 PM

But the tip she received was about a specific company, not the economy overall.

Right, your buddy who works on Capitol Hill and hears something about legislation being passed or the weekly unemployment numbers and tells you is different than working at public company and tipping you off about earnings beating/missing, or leaking that a scandal/merger deal is happening days before it does
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 15, 2020, 03:41:17 PM
Right, your buddy who works on Capitol Hill and hears something about legislation being passed or the weekly unemployment numbers and tells you is different than working at public company and tipping you off about earnings beating/missing, or leaking that a scandal/merger deal is happening days before it does

Yep. The way I like to explain the law is to distinguish between 'company-specific' inside information and more general information that might affect multiple companies.

If a person gets material non-public information about a specific company and trades on it, it's likely insider trading. If he gets material non-public information about the overall economy or a piece of legislation and trades on it, it isn't.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 15, 2020, 05:43:51 PM
FWIW, the SEC's definition of insider trading:

Illegal insider trading refers generally to buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust and confidence, on the basis of material, nonpublic information about the security. Insider trading violations may also include "tipping" such information, securities trading by the person "tipped," and securities trading by those who misappropriate such information.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 15, 2020, 06:06:58 PM
FWIW, the SEC's definition of insider trading:

Illegal insider trading refers generally to buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust and confidence, on the basis of material, nonpublic information about the security. Insider trading violations may also include "tipping" such information, securities trading by the person "tipped," and securities trading by those who misappropriate such information.

Hmmm.

Lock them up! Lock them up!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 15, 2020, 11:17:17 PM
Give money to the individuals who need it.

Ideally, monthly checks of 1200+ to those making less than 125k (or other set amount) until the "end" of the pandemic.

Pelosi needs to accept the deal with minor changes. But politics>policy in washington.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 16, 2020, 09:14:21 AM
Give money to the individuals who need it.

Ideally, monthly checks of 1200+ to those making less than 125k (or other set amount) until the "end" of the pandemic.

Pelosi needs to accept the deal with minor changes. But politics>policy in washington.

I'm not sure Pelosi is the hold up here.  McConnell is and has been.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-torpedoes-stimulus-package-180157058.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 16, 2020, 09:42:42 AM
I'm not sure Pelosi is the hold up here.  McConnell is and has been.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-torpedoes-stimulus-package-180157058.html

McConnell is definitely the hold up to the larger package but Pelosi is holding up the counteroffer. 

With the election so close I don’t understand why she doesn’t just take what she can get now especially when the larger overall package appears to have 0% chance of passing the senate and then in a couple months she can go back and get the rest from a presumably dem controlled White House and senate.

The $500 billion McConnell is ready to sign today would be for stimulus checks to people desperate for financial help, airline support, schools/hospitals, and other businesses who need the support today from what I understand. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 16, 2020, 09:44:08 AM
I'm not sure Pelosi is the hold up here.  McConnell is and has been.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-torpedoes-stimulus-package-180157058.html

Generally agree. But Pelosi's House largely postured by passing a $3T+ package and then refusing to seriously negotiate for months. And Trump has been all over the place  -- saying a deal was imminent numerous times; saying that he ordered Mnuchin to stop negotiating and that there would be no deal till after the election; coming back the next day to say a deal again was possible and urging Congress to "Go Big"; saying he wanted more than the House's $2.2T package but then putting out a $1.8T package; etc.

But yes, McConnell early on said he wasn't sure new stimulus would fly with Senate Republicans, and he never really tried to get them on the same page.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 16, 2020, 09:58:33 AM
The first stimulus wasn't good enough by a long shot. This one is worse.

Aren't we all taught as children that assuming makes an ass out of you and me. Pass a bad deal now and it's possible next year there may not be another one.

The current Republican deal isn't close. That's on them. Many voters know that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 16, 2020, 10:10:06 AM
The first stimulus wasn't good enough by a long shot. This one is worse.

Aren't we all taught as children that assuming makes an ass out of you and me. Pass a bad deal now and it's possible next year there may not be another one.

The current Republican deal isn't close. That's on them. Many voters know that.

And maybe it’s not, haven’t seen the specifics of either deal.  If they pass the senates counter offer and once the details are released it turns out to be awful then I imagine any remaining undecided voters would hold them accountable.  When there is a $500 billion stimulus deal that could be signed today to me it’s just politics being played at the expense of badly needed financial assistance.

As Wolf told Nancy this week, “don’t sacrifice the good for the perfect”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 16, 2020, 10:18:31 AM
And maybe it’s not, haven’t seen the specifics of either deal.  If they pass the senates counter offer and once the details are released it turns out to be awful then I imagine any remaining undecided voters would hold them accountable.  When there is a $500 billion stimulus deal that could be signed today to me it’s just politics being played at the expense of badly needed financial assistance.

As Wolf told Nancy this week, “don’t sacrifice the good for the perfect”

To name just one example, the McConnell prefers the deal to include zero money directly to people, not even the one time (not repeated over time) $1200, a number that was far too low in the first place. It isn't a good deal.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 16, 2020, 10:53:24 AM
McConnell is definitely the hold up to the larger package but Pelosi is holding up the counteroffer. 

With the election so close I don’t understand why she doesn’t just take what she can get now especially when the larger overall package appears to have 0% chance of passing the senate and then in a couple months she can go back and get the rest from a presumably dem controlled White House and senate.

The $500 billion McConnell is ready to sign today would be for stimulus checks to people desperate for financial help, airline support, schools/hospitals, and other businesses who need the support today from what I understand.

*fart noises*

Pelosi and Mnuchin (Trump) have agreed.  McConnell is the hold up.  Stop being so obtuse.  McConnell shouldn't get what he wants all the time, he isn't the boss.  So MAYBE he needs to compromise for once in his miserable life.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on October 16, 2020, 12:47:17 PM
I'm not sure Pelosi is the hold up here.  McConnell is and has been.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-torpedoes-stimulus-package-180157058.html

Pelosi passed the HEROES ACT back in May and well, Mitch has done nothing with it except try to ram a Supreme Court nominee through.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Plaque Lives Matter! on October 16, 2020, 03:22:48 PM
Nancy is just as bad as most of them but in what world is compromising with Mitch McConnell ever going to get you what you think you are actually compromising on? That will just further move the goal posts. It is all or nothing with him.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 16, 2020, 09:44:02 PM
If you're Nancy, accept the deal with Trump. Then let him pressure the senate GOP.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 18, 2020, 05:46:14 PM
We now have data supporting the false choice paradigm that was fought over months ago.  Surprise, the experts were right —control the virus & economy fares better

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1317924980659785728?s=21 (https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1317924980659785728?s=21)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 19, 2020, 08:35:10 AM
With Covid-19 Under Control, China’s Economy Surges Ahead

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/china-economy-covid.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

As most of the world still struggles with the coronavirus pandemic, China is showing once again that a fast economic rebound is possible when the virus is brought firmly under control.

The Chinese economy surged 4.9 percent in the July-to-September quarter compared with the same months last year, the country’s National Bureau of Statistics announced on Monday. The robust performance brings China almost back up to the roughly 6 percent pace of growth that it was reporting before the pandemic.

Many of the world’s major economies have climbed quickly out of the depths of a contraction last spring, when shutdowns caused output to fall steeply. But China is the first to report growth that significantly surpasses where it was at this time last year. The United States and other nations are expected to report a third-quarter surge too, but they are still behind or just catching up to pre-pandemic levels.

China’s lead could widen further in the months to come. It has almost no local transmission of the virus now, while the United States and Europe face another accelerating wave of cases.


-----------------

Who would have guessed that getting the pandemic under control first is the key to getting the economy back on track?!?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 19, 2020, 08:50:34 AM
I wish i knew how to paste an image from a morning market roundup I receive, but it has WI COVID cases as well as WI initial jobless claims plotted on a line chart.  Both 7 day moving averages and both with identical slopes.  The point is that when cases accelerate, people are self selecting out of the economy and it impacts jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 20, 2020, 03:56:08 PM
McConnell still the problem. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/business/pelosi-mnuchin-stimulus.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/business/pelosi-mnuchin-stimulus.html)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2020, 04:08:43 PM
If you're Nancy, accept the deal with Trump. Then let him pressure the senate GOP.

It really is a win-win.
Not sure Pelosi just doesn't understand that, or if she's afraid McConnell will call the bluff and push it through.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 04:11:10 PM
McConnell still the problem. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/business/pelosi-mnuchin-stimulus.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/business/pelosi-mnuchin-stimulus.html)


Throwing Trump under the bus and screwing lots of really desperate people, all because he doesn't like Pelosi. Wow.

Now is not the time to haggle over minute details to get everything perfectly the way you want - it's the time to give it your best shot like they did in the spring.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 04:15:47 PM
It really is a win-win.
Not sure Pelosi just doesn't understand that, or if she's afraid McConnell will call the bluff and push it through.

Pelosi understands. McConnell doesn't.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 20, 2020, 04:23:11 PM

Throwing Trump under the bus and screwing lots of really desperate people, all because he doesn't like Pelosi. Wow.

Now is not the time to haggle over minute details to get everything perfectly the way you want - it's the time to give it your best shot like they did in the spring.

I would characterize it as Preparing for their next act of caring about budgets again. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2020, 05:23:31 PM
Pelosi understands. McConnell doesn't.

Then cut a deal and sent it to the Senate.
Make Lindsey and Cory and Susan and Joni and Thom and Steve and Martha choose between their seats and Mitch.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 20, 2020, 05:42:02 PM

Throwing Trump under the bus and screwing lots of really desperate people, all because he doesn't like Pelosi. Wow.

Now is not the time to haggle over minute details to get everything perfectly the way you want - it's the time to give it your best shot like they did in the spring.

If we get a repeat of Spring - bailouts to corporations, money into the hands of the donor-class, wall street cash infusions for months, severe trickle-up, etc - that will be worse long-term than nothing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 20, 2020, 05:55:44 PM
If we get a repeat of Spring - bailouts to corporations, money into the hands of the donor-class, wall street cash infusions for months, severe trickle-up, etc - that will be worse long-term than nothing.


Amen!

Stimulus, $$$ for small business, $$$ to states, & rent assistance should be the bulk of the bill.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 07:45:21 PM
If we get a repeat of Spring - bailouts to corporations, money into the hands of the donor-class, wall street cash infusions for months, severe trickle-up, etc - that will be worse long-term than nothing.


In the long term, yes it would be worse. And I can survive either way, so if it was just about me I would prefer that Pelosi hold out. But in the short term, many people are trying to figure out where their next meal is coming from.

On the plus side, Mitch is not going to have control of the Senate much longer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 20, 2020, 08:05:06 PM

In the long term, yes it would be worse. And I can survive either way, so if it was just about me I would prefer that Pelosi hold out. But in the short term, many people are trying to figure out where their next meal is coming from.

On the plus side, Mitch is not going to have control of the Senate much longer.

Im saying that any stimulus that isn't majority for individuals is a long term problem. And barely a short term fix.

Pelosi should cave. And she should cave to a plan that gets money to individuals now. Nothing for donor class. Nothing for corporations. Nothing for wall street.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 08:10:19 PM
Im saying that any stimulus that isn't majority for individuals is a long term problem. And barely a short term fix.

Pelosi should cave. And she should cave to a plan that gets money to individuals now. Nothing for donor class. Nothing for corporations. Nothing for wall street.


I don’t get why you keep saying “Pelosi should cave.“ All the reporting seems to indicate that she has already come to an agreement with Mnuchin, but McConnell will not allow the Senate to pass it.

What is she supposed to do? She can’t force McConnell to call a vote on a bill he doesn’t want to bring to the floor.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2020, 08:31:39 PM

I don’t get why you keep saying “Pelosi should cave.“ All the reporting seems to indicate that she has already come to an agreement with Mnuchin, but McConnell will not allow the Senate to pass it.

What is she supposed to do? She can’t force McConnell to call a vote on a bill he doesn’t want to bring to the floor.

She can push a bill through the House and send it to the Senate. If Moscow Mitch is going to kill it,  he kills it. But right now she's not even forcing his hand.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 08:36:01 PM
She can push a bill through the House and send it to the Senate. If Moscow Mitch is going to kill it,  he kills it. But right now she's not even forcing his hand.


It would be an exercise in futility. Mitch has said he’s not going to hold a vote. Doesn’t matter whether there’s a bill sitting there or not.

Unless you like political theater for the sake of political theater…
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2020, 08:44:22 PM

It would be an exercise in futility. Mitch has said he’s not going to hold a vote. Doesn’t matter whether there’s a bill sitting there or not.

Unless you like political theater for the sake of political theater…

1. I do
2. Not passing a bill because you're afraid Mitch won't bring it to a vote allows him and the GOP majority to win without paying the political price. If he wants to be the villain here, make him at least do it in a very public way and let the voters decide whether or not to punish them for it. Don't wave the white flag before firing a single shot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 08:48:05 PM
1. I do
2. Not passing a bill because you're afraid Mitch won't bring it to a vote allows him and the GOP majority to win without paying the political price. If he wants to be the villain here, make him at least do it in a very public way and let the voters decide whether or not to punish them for it. Don't wave the white flag before firing a single shot.

I see your point, but I guess we disagree on the significance of the House passing a bill that it knows the Senate won’t pass. McConnell has already said very publicly that he won’t take it to the floor for a vote, so I believe he has already cast himself as the villain.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 20, 2020, 08:48:52 PM
She can push a bill through the House and send it to the Senate. If Moscow Mitch is going to kill it,  he kills it. But right now she's not even forcing his hand.

This has already been done.  The only way to put more pressure on the senate to vote is to agree with the WH first, which is what is currently happening. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 20, 2020, 09:19:50 PM
She already had gotten 2 bills passed. The first, last spring, was obviously for show. But the second was mostly legit; hell, Trump said it wasn’t enough.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 20, 2020, 09:54:18 PM

I don’t get why you keep saying “Pelosi should cave.“ All the reporting seems to indicate that she has already come to an agreement with Mnuchin, but McConnell will not allow the Senate to pass it.

What is she supposed to do? She can’t force McConnell to call a vote on a bill he doesn’t want to bring to the floor.

What Pak said. Agree to a bill with the WH. Put it publicly on the Senate to deny the people stimulus.

Personally, I don't think Pelosi will do it because the Dems believe and stimulus for the country could be counted as a win for Trump that could swing the election. And, secondly, I hope nothing does get passed because no one in congress is going to do anything meaningful for the majority of Americans and that's the only place the money should go
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 10:07:24 PM
What Pak said. Agree to a bill with the WH. Put it publicly on the Senate to deny the people stimulus.

Personally, I don't think Pelosi will do it because the Dems believe and stimulus for the country could be counted as a win for Trump that could swing the election. And, secondly, I hope nothing does get passed because no one in congress is going to do anything meaningful for the majority of Americans and that's the only place the money should go

So you want her to pass something, but you also don’t want anything to go through?

That’s political theater for the purpose of political theater. I get that some people enjoy that, but I think it’s kind of silly.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 20, 2020, 10:13:50 PM
I see your point, but I guess we disagree on the significance of the House passing a bill that it knows the Senate won’t pass. McConnell has already said very publicly that he won’t take it to the floor for a vote, so I believe he has already cast himself as the villain.

Which she has already done.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 20, 2020, 10:26:07 PM
Which she has already done.


And now people here are calling for her to do it yet again. Why? How many futile bills will it take to make you happy?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 20, 2020, 11:10:42 PM
So you want her to pass something, but you also don’t want anything to go through?

That’s political theater for the purpose of political theater. I get that some people enjoy that, but I think it’s kind of silly.

Not exactly.

I want her to pass a stimulus bill for the people.

I don't think she (or anyone else in DC) would go for that type of bill, so I think we'd be better off with nothing.

I'm not all about that political drama.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 21, 2020, 12:10:33 AM
Not exactly.

I want her to pass a stimulus bill for the people.

I don't think she (or anyone else in DC) would go for that type of bill, so I think we'd be better off with nothing.

I'm not all about that political drama.


I guess I’m confused between this and your earlier post. Earlier you said you wanted her to agree to a bill with the White House, even though it would never get through the Senate. Now you say you want her to pass something that neither the White House nor the Senate would support.

Maybe it’s easiest if we take Pelosi out of this, because I agree with your bottom line sentiment - that we should help the people who are struggling the most. I also share your sense that this will never happen, and agree that doing nothing would be better than giving another handout to the wealthy.

Alas...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 21, 2020, 07:44:10 AM
She can push a bill through the House and send it to the Senate. If Moscow Mitch is going to kill it,  he kills it. But right now she's not even forcing his hand.


I don't think political theatre is going to matter any more.  So many people have voted already that I don't think much can stop the outcome of 99% of the races at this point.  And the Reps are all home campaigning anyway.

Not to mention that one of the Dems strategies may be for Pelosi to lay low anyway.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 21, 2020, 08:06:25 AM

I don't think political theatre is going to matter any more.  So many people have voted already that I don't think much can stop the outcome of 99% of the races at this point.  And the Reps are all home campaigning anyway.

Not to mention that one of the Dems strategies may be for Pelosi to lay low anyway.

About 35 million have voted so far. If the total vote is the same as 2016 - I think all signs point to it being higher, but for arguments sake - that means we're at roughly 22 percent of the total.
I wouldn't feel comfortable saying anything is decided at this point.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 21, 2020, 08:15:56 AM

I guess I’m confused between this and your earlier post. Earlier you said you wanted her to agree to a bill with the White House, even though it would never get through the Senate. Now you say you want her to pass something that neither the White House nor the Senate would support.

Maybe it’s easiest if we take Pelosi out of this, because I agree with your bottom line sentiment - that we should help the people who are struggling the most. I also share your sense that this will never happen, and agree that doing nothing would be better than giving another handout to the wealthy.

Alas...

Agree with your second paragraph.

Huzzah
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 21, 2020, 08:20:40 AM
About 35 million have voted so far. If the total vote is the same as 2016 - I think all signs point to it being higher, but for arguments sake - that means we're at roughly 22 percent of the total.
I wouldn't feel comfortable saying anything is decided at this point.


I just don't think much can be done to change people's minds at this point.  A Pelosi lead effort to try to get something through isn't going to move the needle much.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 21, 2020, 08:55:29 AM

I just don't think much can be done to change people's minds at this point.  A Pelosi lead effort to try to get something through isn't going to move the needle much.

Oh, I agree. I think the number of undecideds is extremely tiny, if not nonexistent.  But I do think there are still levers out there that can get people to vote or not vote, depending on their leanings. For example, there may be nothing dumb Biden can do or say that would turn a Trump hater into Trump voter,  but it may keep that person at home.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 21, 2020, 09:26:28 AM
About 35 million have voted so far. If the total vote is the same as 2016 - I think all signs point to it being higher, but for arguments sake - that means we're at roughly 22 percent of the total.
I wouldn't feel comfortable saying anything is decided at this point.


Yes, but that 35 million number is artificially low, perhaps significantly so. A few examples why:

(1) several states (including NY, which is kinda big) still haven't reported absentee/early voting numbers at all;

(2) the numbers don't include ballots that have been mailed or dropped off but not yet received or entered into the system (here in MN, I dropped mine into a box at the voting office and it took a couple days for it to be officially 'recorded'); and
 
(3) some states only update their numbers periodically (examples: MN last updated October 16; MS - October 13; and several states last reported on October 19. Even though the latter is only two days, that could mean many millions of votes.)

I would not be the least bit surprised if the number who have actually completed and dropped off or mailed their ballot is at least double that reported.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 21, 2020, 09:57:38 AM
I can maybe see some folks being undecided about U.S. Senate and House races, or state and local races.

But I am flabbergasted when I hear of folks who supposedly have not yet decided between two presidential candidates we already know everything about. One has been in public service for some 5 decades, and the other has been in our faces every hour of every day for 4 years.

Maybe they are waiting to see if one of them literally pulls down his drawers and takes a dump on the debate stage tomorrow night.

"Hmmm, I was going to vote for (insert candidate name), but after the excrement incident, I think I'll go for the other guy. Then again, I'm still a little undecided ... "
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on October 21, 2020, 10:26:06 AM
As far as what I read Undecideds this time in 2016 were 10%plus and in 2020 undecideds are under 5%. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 21, 2020, 10:44:40 AM
"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signaled a willingness to allow the Senate to consider a stimulus deal struck between the Trump administration and the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives, potentially increasing the odds of renewed stimulus funding in the near term."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/10/20/mcconnell-says-white-house-backed-stimulus-bill-would-get-senate-floor-vote/#83461c05b267
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on October 21, 2020, 11:57:14 AM
I can maybe see some folks being undecided about U.S. Senate and House races, or state and local races.

But I am flabbergasted when I hear of folks who supposedly have not yet decided between two presidential candidates we already know everything about. One has been in public service for some 5 decades, and the other has been in our faces every hour of every day for 4 years.

Maybe they are waiting to see if one of them literally pulls down his drawers and takes a dump on the debate stage tomorrow night.

"Hmmm, I was going to vote for (insert candidate name), but after the excrement incident, I think I'll go for the other guy. Then again, I'm still a little undecided ... "




I find it hard to believe also. Especially, when one candidate has accomplished more in 47 months, than the other has in 47 years, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 21, 2020, 12:03:10 PM
I find it hard to believe also. Especially, when one candidate has accomplished more in 47 months, than the other has in 47 years, aina?


Sending the country down the toilet in 47 months *is* an accomplishment.  Just not one that warrants another run. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 21, 2020, 12:19:55 PM
 :P



I find it hard to believe also. Especially, when one candidate has accomplished more in 47 months, than the other has in 47 years, aina?

Was this supposed to be in teal?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 21, 2020, 12:28:11 PM
Not from him.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 21, 2020, 12:29:00 PM

Sending the country down the toilet in 47 months *is* an accomplishment.  Just not one that warrants another run.
What the petulant man-child tries to "accomplish" in the  2 1/2 months between being voted out and being dragged from the office is going to be an extreme test of our democracy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on October 21, 2020, 02:34:50 PM
What the petulant man-child tries to "accomplish" in the  2 1/2 months between being voted out and being dragged from the office is going to be an extreme test of our democracy.

A friend and I had a text conversation last night wondering which country turns on him first and exposes what they were doing for him: China or Russia. 

Also, which Trump spawn goes to jail first? Watch it be Tiffany.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 21, 2020, 02:56:55 PM



I find it hard to believe also. Especially, when one candidate has accomplished more in 47 months, than the other has in 47 years, aina?

You make a good point. It's difficult for any president to oversee the deaths of 220K+ Americans on his watch, the unemployment of millions of Americans on his watch, and the permanent closure of hundreds of thousands of businesses on his watch, all while stoking the worst racial unrest in America since the 1960s.

Accomplishments galore, oona!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Mutaman on October 21, 2020, 03:24:16 PM

Yes, but that 35 million number is artificially low, perhaps significantly so. A few examples why:

(1) several states (including NY, which is kinda big) still haven't reported absentee/early voting numbers at all;



Early voting,as opposed to absentee, in NY doesn't start until next week. Easier to vote in Kentucky. Thank you Governor Cuomo. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 21, 2020, 06:00:00 PM



I find it hard to believe also. Especially, when one candidate has accomplished more in 47 months, than the other has in 47 years, aina?

Remember this next time you whine about politics on the board.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 21, 2020, 06:28:14 PM
Early voting,as opposed to absentee, in NY doesn't start until next week. Easier to vote in Kentucky. Thank you Governor Cuomo.


Isn't this the 1st time New Yorkers can vote early in a presidential race? Wasn't Cuomo the one that signed it into law?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 21, 2020, 07:01:08 PM
Senate voted on the $500B plan, which McConnell admitted was largely for show, and it got rejected.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-stimulus-500-billion-plan-fails-as-larger-deal-deadline-looms-174627586.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Mutaman on October 21, 2020, 08:24:46 PM
 >:(

Isn't this the 1st time New Yorkers can vote early in a presidential race? Wasn't Cuomo the one that signed it into law?

Its a little more complicated than that.
Yes this is the 1st time New Yorkers can vote early in a presidential race.
Yes Cuomo is the one that signed it into law.
Yes Como has been governor for 9 years- so why did it take so long? This is the first time the Dems have controlled both houses of the state legislature. The Republicans always controlled the State Senate even though there were more Democratic Senators , due to a group called the Independent Democratic Conference (IDC) , Democrats who voted as Republicans   in return for quid pro quos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Democratic_Conference

Cuomo could have broken up the IDC any time he wanted, but chose not to. Why? "Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, has at times benefited from that strange reality: Having a divided Legislature allowed him to position himself as a deal-making centrist."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/09/nyregion/cuomo-stewart-cousins-new-york-senate-democrats.html

Finally, the IDC members were trounced in the last election, the Dems took over the Senate, and various positive laws have been passed which Cuomo has had no choice but to sign.- see the revolutionary 2019 NY Rent Reform Law.

So why does Cuomo, who the whole world thinks of as a big liberal, continue to govern like a Republican unless dragged kicking and screaming by the overwhelming Democratic majority in the state? Ask Andy.

In any event, starting in a few days NYers, members of one of the most liberal states on the planet, will be able to vote early. And it only took nine years.

I'm told that someday, despite Andy's best efforts, , NY might actually legalize reefer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 22, 2020, 12:12:51 AM
Thanks for the reply, Muta. Always good to hear from someone closer to the situation.

BTW, I always considered him to be a centrist. Never understood why people saw him as a Lib.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Mutaman on October 22, 2020, 01:14:12 AM
Thanks for the reply, Muta. Always good to hear from someone closer to the situation.

BTW, I always considered him to be a centrist. Never understood why people saw him as a Lib.

I hate labels but gun to my head , I'd call Andy a Rat Face. Have never voted for him. But I will say that he has provided some strong leadership during covid. We were blindsided out here but having a leader stand and say "put on masks, social distance, and wash your hands and I'll keep the bars shut until you do," has helped. What a concept. And as a whole, New Yorkers have acted with a lot of common sense throughout this ordeal, with a few exceptions.
Andy's endless pissing contests with the mayor serve no purpose though.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 22, 2020, 07:19:10 AM
>:(
Its a little more complicated than that.
Yes this is the 1st time New Yorkers can vote early in a presidential race.
Yes Cuomo is the one that signed it into law.
Yes Como has been governor for 9 years- so why did it take so long? This is the first time the Dems have controlled both houses of the state legislature. The Republicans always controlled the State Senate even though there were more Democratic Senators , due to a group called the Independent Democratic Conference (IDC) , Democrats who voted as Republicans   in return for quid pro quos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Democratic_Conference

Cuomo could have broken up the IDC any time he wanted, but chose not to. Why? "Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, has at times benefited from that strange reality: Having a divided Legislature allowed him to position himself as a deal-making centrist."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/09/nyregion/cuomo-stewart-cousins-new-york-senate-democrats.html

Finally, the IDC members were trounced in the last election, the Dems took over the Senate, and various positive laws have been passed which Cuomo has had no choice but to sign.- see the revolutionary 2019 NY Rent Reform Law.

So why does Cuomo, who the whole world thinks of as a big liberal, continue to govern like a Republican unless dragged kicking and screaming by the overwhelming Democratic majority in the state? Ask Andy.

In any event, starting in a few days NYers, members of one of the most liberal states on the planet, will be able to vote early. And it only took nine years.

I'm told that someday, despite Andy's best efforts, , NY might actually legalize reefer.

Respectfully, having both lived in NYC and other places across the country, I would disagree that Cuomo has a liberal reputation. The only people that say that or think that are people with an agenda intentionally trying to misrepresent him for personal gain. This isn't much different than with other centrists, Obama, Clinton, Biden, etc...many people (even fsr outside of NYC) are well aware of Cuomo's policies and governing. If you take center, middle left, and far left as the categories, many are well aware Cuomo is center.

I would say many people are far less aware of the state legislature and your good information there.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 22, 2020, 07:43:55 AM
Respectfully, having both lived in NYC and other places across the country, I would disagree that Cuomo has a liberal reputation. The only people that say that or think that are people with an agenda intentionally trying to misrepresent him for personal gain. This isn't much different than with other centrists, Obama, Clinton, Biden, etc...many people (even fsr outside of NYC) are well aware of Cuomo's policies and governing. If you take center, middle left, and far left as the categories, many are well aware Cuomo is center.

I would say many people are far less aware of the state legislature and your good information there.

Yup, large swaths of New York STATE are very conservative.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on October 22, 2020, 08:05:57 AM

Isn't this the 1st time New Yorkers can vote early in a presidential race? Wasn't Cuomo the one that signed it into law?

True Blue Connecticut still has no early voting.  And before COVID-19 it was very hard to get an absentee ballot.  The Governor made a declaration and allowed for COVID-19 as an excuse for an absentee ballot in the primaries but his "emergency declaration powers" technically expired in September.  So the legislature held a special session and passed the COVID-19 excuse for absentee ballots for the general election. 
Apparently, to make "no excuse" absentee ballots or early voting permeant law requires an amendment to the the state constitution.  The legislature has to approve a referendum question for a general election then the referendum has to pass and then they have to pass a law.  And there might be 2/3 majority approval requirements along the way.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 22, 2020, 08:53:02 AM

I hate labels but gun to my head , I'd call Andy a Rat Face. Have never voted for him. But I will say that he has provided some strong leadership during covid. We were blindsided out here but having a leader stand and say "put on masks, social distance, and wash your hands and I'll keep the bars shut until you do," has helped. What a concept. And as a whole, New Yorkers have acted with a lot of common sense throughout this ordeal, with a few exceptions.

Andy's endless pissing contests with the mayor serve no purpose though.


Agree completely, and especially on the underlined. There have been occasions where it seems he publicly disagrees just for the sake of disagreeing, and then later goes with the mayor's plan anyway...like with the NYC restrictions in the zip codes with recent surges.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on October 22, 2020, 10:45:10 AM
True Blue Connecticut still has no early voting.  And before COVID-19 it was very hard to get an absentee ballot.  The Governor made a declaration and allowed for COVID-19 as an excuse for an absentee ballot in the primaries but his "emergency declaration powers" technically expired in September.  So the legislature held a special session and passed the COVID-19 excuse for absentee ballots for the general election. 
Apparently, to make "no excuse" absentee ballots or early voting permeant law requires an amendment to the the state constitution.  The legislature has to approve a referendum question for a general election then the referendum has to pass and then they have to pass a law.  And there might be 2/3 majority approval requirements along the way.

Don't people realize they can just make up an excuse?  When I worked for the WI GOP we even sent out mailers instructing people on how to request an absentee ballot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 22, 2020, 12:45:42 PM
Don't people realize they can just make up an excuse?  When I worked for the WI GOP we even sent out mailers instructing people on how to request an absentee ballot.


Yep. "I will be out of town November 3." It isn't as though someone is gonna track your whereabouts. And even if they did, you could just say your plans changed at the last minute, after your sent in the ballot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 23, 2020, 08:32:29 AM
The cure is worse than the disease?  It's just the disease....and always has been

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/business/economy/economy-coronavirus-lockdown-iowa.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/business/economy/economy-coronavirus-lockdown-iowa.html)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 23, 2020, 09:15:43 AM
The cure is worse than the disease?  It's just the disease....and always has been

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/business/economy/economy-coronavirus-lockdown-iowa.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/business/economy/economy-coronavirus-lockdown-iowa.html)

I just read this piece, Frenns. The pandemic IS the economy. Control the pandemic, develop an effective vaccine and get the public to take it, and THEN the economy will come back, albeit probably not as fast as most would want.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 23, 2020, 10:07:51 AM
"Out of work in America"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/10/22/us/pandemic-unemployment-covid.html?smid=tw-share
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 23, 2020, 10:32:36 AM
The cure is worse than the disease?  It's just the disease....and always has been

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/business/economy/economy-coronavirus-lockdown-iowa.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/business/economy/economy-coronavirus-lockdown-iowa.html)

Yep. Many of us have recognized the false dichotomy of 'fight pandemic' vs 'support economic recovery' for a long time. The truth is that to support economic recovery in any lasting way, we need to first get the pandemic under some semblance of control.

The article gives the example of Iowa, but North Dakota is another good example. Never a lockdown, still no mask mandate...and leading the country in per capita cases. My daughter lives in Fargo, and tells me of mostly empty restaurants and shops, businesses closing, people out of work. The economy is struggling because the pandemic is raging on...NOT because of any (non-existent) lockdown or mask mandate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 23, 2020, 02:48:12 PM
Or as a wise man said: "I'm gonna shut down the virus, not the country."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 25, 2020, 11:44:08 AM
My concern economy wise is we have already done substantial damage, spent trillions, in the background of historically low taxes that from a budget perspective was already untenable.

Besides trillions more in deficit spending, we have no tools at our disposal to help dig us out of this mess.

So, the longer it takes us to get control of COVID, the deeper the long-term financial hole the nation is in, and the more likely that whoever is in Washington next term, has no chance of digging us out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 25, 2020, 12:02:10 PM
My concern economy wise is we have already done substantial damage, spent trillions, in the background of historically low taxes that from a budget perspective was already untenable.

Besides trillions more in deficit spending, we have no tools at our disposal to help dig us out of this mess.

So, the longer it takes us to get control of COVID, the deeper the long-term financial hole the nation is in, and the more likely that whoever is in Washington next term, has no chance of digging us out.


Agreed. Whether it is Trump or Biden, the economy is gonna be hurting for a long time. And the longer we wait to get the virus under some semblance of control (likely not until Inauguration Day, at the earliest), the harder it's going to be to recover.

And as the bill goes up, so does the national debt that we pass on to our children and grandchildren.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 25, 2020, 12:44:15 PM
Going to have to raise some taxes and cut some spending.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 25, 2020, 01:05:01 PM

Agreed. Whether it is Trump or Biden, the economy is gonna be hurting for a long time. And the longer we wait to get the virus under some semblance of control (likely not until Inauguration Day, at the earliest), the harder it's going to be to recover.

And as the bill goes up, so does the national debt that we pass on to our children and grandchildren.

The problem is, I don't think the average American is aware of the long-term impacts of all of this. Rather, they take a very short-term perspective on it all.

I don't think that they understand that current economic conditions (unless something major like COVID), is a result of years old policies. And that current decisions, will impact the economy for the next 5-10 years.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 25, 2020, 01:17:52 PM
Going to have to raise some taxes and cut some spending.

Neither party is adept at the second half of that equation.

For example, Obama asked Simpson and Bowles to give him recommendations for the economy and he then ignored it, especially the “cut spending” part.

For another, Dubya did the tax cut and created a new welfare program and oversaw two unfunded, unnecessary wars.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 26, 2020, 06:58:11 AM
Pandemic fall out.

One million pounds of food daily for Houston's needy.

https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-houston-bf8acccbe9c47a4a402046316aef5c67?utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=SocialFlow
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 26, 2020, 07:35:30 AM
The problem is, I don't think the average American is aware of the long-term impacts of all of this. Rather, they take a very short-term perspective on it all.

I don't think that they understand that current economic conditions (unless something major like COVID), is a result of years old policies. And that current decisions, will impact the economy for the next 5-10 years.


Yeah debt can be managed if the economy is doing well. 

But everything that is bad about the U.S. economic system is being exposed through this pandemic.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 26, 2020, 09:23:19 PM
Senate adjourned until Nov. 9
Guessing that means no relief package until 2021.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 26, 2020, 09:44:23 PM
Senate adjourned until Nov. 9
Guessing that means no relief package until 2021.

The Congress doesn't give a unnatural carnal knowledge about regular Americans. They really, truly don't. Monied interests - military industrial complex, big pharma/health, global corporations and wall street - are the only ones who have influence.

And if everyone is going to vote for one of the 2 main candidates anyway, why should they?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 26, 2020, 10:03:41 PM
The Congress doesn't give a unnatural carnal knowledge about regular Americans. They really, truly don't. Monied interests - military industrial complex, big pharma/health, global corporations and wall street - are the only ones who have influence.

And if everyone is going to vote for one of the 2 main candidates anyway, why should they?


Agree with the first paragraph. Politics as usual.

With regard to the second paragraph, not everybody is going to vote for one of the two main candidates. I saw a Kanye for President sign on my walk this evening, so at least one person is apparently voting for him.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 26, 2020, 10:07:31 PM

Agree with the first paragraph. Politics as usual.

With regard to the second paragraph, not everybody is going to vote for one of the two main candidates. I saw a Kanye for President sign on my walk this evening, so at least one person is apparently voting for him.

Ya. But you know what I mean.

Neither party truly has to work for their votes. For example, what is either candidate offering in terms of policy for the majority of the country? Biden told wealthy donors that nothing would fundamentally change. And the DNC had GOPers speak at their convention and are being considered for cabinet positions. Trump/GOP is no better as evidenced by the tax cuts they passed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 27, 2020, 08:39:19 AM
Ya. But you know what I mean.

Neither party truly has to work for their votes. For example, what is either candidate offering in terms of policy for the majority of the country? Biden told wealthy donors that nothing would fundamentally change. And the DNC had GOPers speak at their convention and are being considered for cabinet positions. Trump/GOP is no better as evidenced by the tax cuts they passed.

I would take some of that with a grain of salt.

Candidates will tell different target voter demographics different things in order to win. I can assure you Biden isn't telling wealthy progressive donors that nothing will fundamentally change.

I can also assure you that Biden will receive enormous pressure to move to the middle left on some issues and he will. He won't on some others. But thr net result is improvement. Example: The Environment etc... In order to win, one target demographic is moderates, Independent, Republican, Democrat. Biden wants their votes to win. So he will balance a genuine message with not turning off these voters. The strategy also includes being more progressive with some other issues. But they choose the best path to win. Once in power, that's much different. Example below:

For example, I'd be very surprised if the Supreme Court didn't expand to 13 in the near future. In 1869, the Supreme Court expanded from 7 to 9 to match the number of Federal Circuits. There are now 13 Federal Circuits. And it would be 100% justified after being put in that position. Biden isn't going to shout this from the rooftops prior to the election. It is never good to answer hypothetical questions. Winning the election is his priority. Governing comes after. Waiting to see what happened last night first.

With regard to COVID-19 Economy, the House passed a 2nd round of relief many, months ago. That relief would finally arrive to people if the make up of the Senate changes. Voting matters. If you don't choose from the two, things will stay the same.

Prioritizing the Pandemic, and with it economic recovery for many would happen with one of the two Presidential candidates and one of the two candidates in other Senate and House races.

Not choosing one of the two would keep things as they are if that is what you or others want.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on October 27, 2020, 09:21:14 AM
Ya. But you know what I mean.

Neither party truly has to work for their votes. For example, what is either candidate offering in terms of policy for the majority of the country? Biden told wealthy donors that nothing would fundamentally change. And the DNC had GOPers speak at their convention and are being considered for cabinet positions. Trump/GOP is no better as evidenced by the tax cuts they passed.

Biden actually told a group of wealthy donors that he was raising their taxes. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 27, 2020, 11:00:53 AM
I would take some of that with a grain of salt.

Candidates will tell different target voter demographics different things in order to win. I can assure you Biden isn't telling wealthy progressive donors that nothing will fundamentally change.

I can also assure you that Biden will receive enormous pressure to move to the middle left on some issues and he will. He won't on some others. But thr net result is improvement. Example: The Environment etc... In order to win, one target demographic is moderates, Independent, Republican, Democrat. Biden wants their votes to win. So he will balance a genuine message with not turning off these voters. The strategy also includes being more progressive with some other issues. But they choose the best path to win. Once in power, that's much different. Example below:

For example, I'd be very surprised if the Supreme Court didn't expand to 13 in the near future. In 1869, the Supreme Court expanded from 7 to 9 to match the number of Federal Circuits. There are now 13 Federal Circuits. And it would be 100% justified after being put in that position. Biden isn't going to shout this from the rooftops prior to the election. It is never good to answer hypothetical questions. Winning the election is his priority. Governing comes after. Waiting to see what happened last night first.

With regard to COVID-19 Economy, the House passed a 2nd round of relief many, months ago. That relief would finally arrive to people if the make up of the Senate changes. Voting matters. If you don't choose from the two, things will stay the same.

Prioritizing the Pandemic, and with it economic recovery for many would happen with one of the two Presidential candidates and one of the two candidates in other Senate and House races.

Not choosing one of the two would keep things as they are if that is what you or others want.

Oh, honey.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 27, 2020, 01:21:14 PM
I would take some of that with a grain of salt.

Candidates will tell different target voter demographics different things in order to win. I can assure you Biden isn't telling wealthy progressive donors that nothing will fundamentally change.

I can also assure you that Biden will receive enormous pressure to move to the middle left on some issues and he will. He won't on some others. But thr net result is improvement. Example: The Environment etc... In order to win, one target demographic is moderates, Independent, Republican, Democrat. Biden wants their votes to win. So he will balance a genuine message with not turning off these voters. The strategy also includes being more progressive with some other issues. But they choose the best path to win. Once in power, that's much different. Example below:

For example, I'd be very surprised if the Supreme Court didn't expand to 13 in the near future. In 1869, the Supreme Court expanded from 7 to 9 to match the number of Federal Circuits. There are now 13 Federal Circuits. And it would be 100% justified after being put in that position. Biden isn't going to shout this from the rooftops prior to the election. It is never good to answer hypothetical questions. Winning the election is his priority. Governing comes after. Waiting to see what happened last night first.

With regard to COVID-19 Economy, the House passed a 2nd round of relief many, months ago. That relief would finally arrive to people if the make up of the Senate changes. Voting matters. If you don't choose from the two, things will stay the same.

Prioritizing the Pandemic, and with it economic recovery for many would happen with one of the two Presidential candidates and one of the two candidates in other Senate and House races.

Not choosing one of the two would keep things as they are if that is what you or others want.
Since the nomination, can you direct me to a source that demonstrates Biden's progressive/left priorities/policies?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 27, 2020, 01:40:40 PM
Since the nomination, can you direct me to a source that demonstrates Biden's progressive/left priorities/policies?

Change your comment to: "Since the inauguration" because he hasn't won yet.

And many of these things are not radically progressive, and are popular with the majority of Americans. 

The Biden campaign has calculated what it will take to win the election. There is a heavier focus on the votes of Moderate/Centrist Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. In order to win the Biden campaign believes it needs to be more successful with the above demographic. Floating the possibility of Republican Cabinet names was intentional in order to get votes. There is a calculation from within the Biden Campaign that they need to do these types of things in order to win. That approach to them would be more successful than listing many progressive agenda items.  That is their strategy. We'll see if it works. (Increasing voter turnout, especially Black, other minority and elderly votes have also been a targeted strategy. Right now some predictions are for roughly 66% voter turnout vs 62% in 2008.)

Trump for example campaigned on all kinds of things in order to win and he has done virtually none of them as President. Now, Biden of course is a different person. He is of course a Moderate, Centrist, even Conservative Democrat if you will on quite a few things.

Some things will happen quickly with a Dem across the board, House, Senate, Presidency, such as removing the Filibuster, re-instating voting rights act, Climate Change, Healthcare protection, COVID-19, pioritizing managing the Pandemic, from health to economy etc...

Biden isn't going to say publicly that he will expand The Supreme Court. But do I believe he will eventually do it? I believe there is a good chance, yes. And that would not necessarily be considered super progressive, but it is an example of Biden doing something that as an individual he would prefer to not have to do. He has even said it isn't something he prefers. But he has not said he wouldn't do it. It won't be the first thing he does, but yes I do believe it will happen eventually. Longer term items include the abolition of the Electoral College reforming the tax code, etc...

Biden isn't all of a sudden going to turn into a progressive as many Presidents are Centrists. However, there are many things that can be accomplished with the above mentioned alignment that would never happen otherwise. for example, Biden isn't Medicare for All or Green New Deal, but he would work with those for them and improve these categories. If you cannot find value in that, not sure what else I can say.

We literally can't send a $1200 dollar or more check to Americans who need it right now. look at where we are and where we are headed. Yes it can always get worse. So yes voting matters, and choosing one of the two matters vs writing in someone else.




Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on October 27, 2020, 02:19:45 PM
Change your comment to: "Since the inauguration" because he hasn't won yet.

And many of these things are not radically progressive, and are popular with the majority of Americans. 

The Biden campaign has calculated what it will take to win the election. There is a heavier focus on the votes of Moderate/Centrist Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. In order to win the Biden campaign believes it needs to be more successful with the above demographic. Floating the possibility of Republican Cabinet names was intentional in order to get votes. There is a calculation from within the Biden Campaign that they need to do these types of things in order to win. That approach to them would be more successful than listing many progressive agenda items.  That is their strategy. We'll see if it works. (Increasing voter turnout, especially Black, other minority and elderly votes have also been a targeted strategy. Right now some predictions are for roughly 66% voter turnout vs 62% in 2008.)

Trump for example campaigned on all kinds of things in order to win and he has done virtually none of them as President. Now, Biden of course is a different person. He is of course a Moderate, Centrist, even Conservative Democrat if you will on quite a few things.

Some things will happen quickly with a Dem across the board, House, Senate, Presidency, such as removing the Filibuster, re-instating voting rights act, Climate Change, Healthcare protection, COVID-19, pioritizing managing the Pandemic, from health to economy etc...

Biden isn't going to say publicly that he will expand The Supreme Court. But do I believe he will eventually do it? I believe there is a good chance, yes. And that would not necessarily be considered super progressive, but it is an example of Biden doing something that as an individual he would prefer to not have to do. He has even said it isn't something he prefers. But he has not said he wouldn't do it. It won't be the first thing he does, but yes I do believe it will happen eventually. Longer term items include the abolition of the Electoral College reforming the tax code, etc...

Biden isn't all of a sudden going to turn into a progressive as many Presidents are Centrists. However, there are many things that can be accomplished with the above mentioned alignment that would never happen otherwise. for example, Biden isn't Medicare for All or Green New Deal, but he would work with those for them and improve these categories. If you cannot find value in that, not sure what else I can say.

We literally can't send a $1200 dollar or more check to Americans who need it right now. look at where we are and where we are headed. Yes it can always get worse. So yes voting matters, and choosing one of the two matters vs writing in someone else.

Biden himself has said he's been reading a lot of books lately on FDR's first 100 days and believes he needs to do the same to correct course and undo the damage caused by the pandemic & Trump.     
Make of that what you will.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 27, 2020, 02:42:20 PM
Biden himself has said he's been reading a lot of books lately on FDR's first 100 days and believes he needs to do the same to correct course and undo the damage caused by the pandemic & Trump.     
Make of that what you will.

So that's what he's been doing in the basement!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 27, 2020, 02:50:13 PM
So that's what he's been doing in the basement!

Is Bunker Boy really trying to redirect the criticism by saying something about Biden being in a basement? That's pretty funny.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on October 27, 2020, 03:15:10 PM
So...covid economy guys...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 27, 2020, 03:24:30 PM
Economy can't be fixed until the virus starts to be controlled.    You thought it was a mess in the spring?    Just wait a few more weeks.  See what happens to the economy when there is a 100k new cases and 1000 deaths per day.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 27, 2020, 03:27:48 PM
Economy can't be fixed until the virus starts to be controlled.    You thought it was a mess in the spring?    Just wait a few more weeks.  See what happens to the economy when there is a 100k new cases and 1000 deaths per day.

Haven't you heard?

(https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU4NjIwMS9vcmlnaW4uZ2lmIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNzMwMzU2N30.L4v5PInw5oj5Ee1-sTjtojXWUKeRf8tvAXtwfWdyrUQ/img.gif?width=210)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 27, 2020, 03:36:33 PM
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Trump-Administration-ST-Highlights-2017-2020.pdf

My bad.   COVID crisis is over.   The White House won.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 27, 2020, 03:50:42 PM
Change your comment to: "Since the inauguration" because he hasn't won yet.

I meant since he won the Dem nomination/primary.

I truly appreciate you putting out your perspective.

I'm a bit more cynical based on his history of policy and voting in the Senate

Kamala has a progressive history. But she has as much history flip flopping on things, so who knows.

Anyway, it's a sad election. Trump vs not-Trump.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on October 27, 2020, 03:53:53 PM
I meant since he won the Dem nomination/primary.

I truly appreciate you putting out your perspective.

I'm a bit more cynical based on his history of policy and voting in the Senate

Kamala has a progressive history. But she has as much history flip flopping on things, so who knows.

Anyway, it's a sad election. Trump vs not-Trump.

It gets sadder when you realize that the presidents from 92-2000 2000-08 and 08-16 are all still younger than these two options.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 27, 2020, 04:04:22 PM
It gets sadder when you realize that the presidents from 92-2000 2000-08 and 08-16 are all still younger than these two options.


Good lord.  That's incredible.

I mean, Trump is only a couple months older than WJC and GWB, but still those two haven't been president for 20 and 12 years.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 27, 2020, 07:31:37 PM
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/local-companies/2020/10/26/before-filing-for-bankruptcy-at-least-18-companies-hand-out-135-million-in-executive-bonuses/

Shameful. Rigged economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 27, 2020, 07:57:48 PM
Biden himself has said he's been reading a lot of books lately on FDR's first 100 days and believes he needs to do the same to correct course and undo the damage caused by the pandemic & Trump.     
Make of that what you will.

Biden has proved to be a lifelong institutionalist and corporatist.

FDR was a social Democrat.

I hope, but don't expect, for any serious progressive legislation or plan.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 27, 2020, 07:59:49 PM
Biden actually told a group of wealthy donors that he was raising their taxes.

Contrast that with the other candidate, who showed up to a fundraiser knowing he was infected with a highly contagious virus that he himself called "more deadly than even your strenuous flus" -- and he didn't tell them he had it. Nor did he tell anybody to wear masks or social distance.

One candidate has done nothing but lie and hold super-spreader events. The other is Joe Biden.

As the very conservative New Hampshire Union Leader said: "Joe Biden may not be the president we want, but in 2020 he is the president we desperately need. He will be a president to bring people together and right the ship of state."

Edits to add link: https://www.unionleader.com/opinion/editorials/our-choice-is-joe-biden/article_e2053388-cc66-59f4-9e7f-8e01a1ea11df.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 27, 2020, 08:29:03 PM
Biden has proved to be a lifelong institutionalist and corporatist.

FDR was a social Democrat.

I hope, but don't expect, for any serious progressive legislation or plan.

What specifically are you seeking? Examples?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Lens on October 27, 2020, 09:25:03 PM
I meant since he won the Dem nomination/primary.

I truly appreciate you putting out your perspective.

I'm a bit more cynical based on his history of policy and voting in the Senate

Kamala has a progressive history. But she has as much history flip flopping on things, so who knows.

Anyway, it's a sad election. Trump vs not-Trump.

This “Not Trump” is the perfect candidate to get people to cross the aisle.  I think the Dems got it right this time. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 27, 2020, 09:48:46 PM
This “Not Trump” is the perfect candidate to get people to cross the aisle.  I think the Dems got it right this time.

Yeah. Joe Biden is about as vanilla as they come. Which is exactly what we need. He's not going to shake things up, but neither will he f--- things up. We just need someone to restore stability and normalcy for a while.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 27, 2020, 11:18:14 PM

We just need someone to restore stability and normalcy for a while.


Agree. The last four years have been surreal and exhausting. A calm term with an emphasis on science, rebuilding trust with our allies, and gradual shifts to the left would be just fine by me. Even if it doesn’t lead to big changes, we’d be better off than we are now.

The biggest specific goals - after getting past the pandemic - are ‘Obamacare 2’ and positive movement on the environment.

That kind of stability and predictability is good for the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 28, 2020, 02:05:32 AM
This “Not Trump” is the perfect candidate to get people to cross the aisle.  I think the Dems got it right this time.

Disgust with Trump let the Dems flip the House in 2018. Women, especially, are repulsed by him.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: SERocks on October 28, 2020, 07:21:32 AM
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/local-companies/2020/10/26/before-filing-for-bankruptcy-at-least-18-companies-hand-out-135-million-in-executive-bonuses/

Shameful. Rigged economy.

It is just this type of crap that got me to vote blue for the first time in my life.   Voted independent last time.  Been having a dramatic change in views over the last ten or so years on our system of capitalism.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 28, 2020, 08:11:15 AM
It is just this type of crap that got me to vote blue for the first time in my life.   Voted independent last time.  Been having a dramatic change in views over the last ten or so years on our system of capitalism.
The landscape has most definitely been changing. Its commendable, and frankly rare, to modify your views as facts continue to change.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on October 29, 2020, 05:37:00 AM
Some specifics about the COVID-19 relief discussions:

https://twitter.com/apalmerdc/status/1321760996747288577?s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 10:30:30 AM
https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/2020/10/29/gdp-u-s-economy-grew-33-1-annualized-q-3-businesses-reopened/6064109002/

Great economic news across the board with weekly jobless claims also continuing to decline.

Crazy to think that while still stuck in the middle of a global pandemic our economy has almost fully recovered.  While the federal response has been far from perfect they deserve a tip of the cap here. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 10:38:20 AM
https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/2020/10/29/gdp-u-s-economy-grew-33-1-annualized-q-3-businesses-reopened/6064109002/

Great economic news across the board with weekly jobless claims also continuing to decline.

Crazy to think that while still stuck in the middle of a global pandemic our economy has almost fully recovered.  While the federal response has been far from perfect they deserve a tip of the cap here.

Our economy is not anywhere near recovered. Holy crap this is a terrible comment.

Wall street or the stock market does not equal the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 29, 2020, 10:41:24 AM
https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/2020/10/29/gdp-u-s-economy-grew-33-1-annualized-q-3-businesses-reopened/6064109002/

Great economic news across the board with weekly jobless claims also continuing to decline.

Crazy to think that while still stuck in the middle of a global pandemic our economy has almost fully recovered.  While the federal response has been far from perfect they deserve a tip of the cap here.

The economy is an effen dumpster fire.

If Biden wins the election, the current administration will be the first in eons to exit with fewer employed Americans than it started with. Just this month, Exxon Mobil, Boeing, Disney, American Airlines, United Airlines and several other major corporations announced huge job cuts.

Control the pandemic, save the economy. This administration has done neither.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 29, 2020, 10:43:52 AM
https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/2020/10/29/gdp-u-s-economy-grew-33-1-annualized-q-3-businesses-reopened/6064109002/

Great economic news across the board with weekly jobless claims also continuing to decline.

Crazy to think that while still stuck in the middle of a global pandemic our economy has almost fully recovered.  While the federal response has been far from perfect they deserve a tip of the cap here.

Fundamental misunderstanding, willfully ignorant, or intellectual dishonesty.  I'm not sure which, today.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on October 29, 2020, 10:47:55 AM
Write, wee hafta kontrol da virus. Obviously, George kant due it. C'mon man, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 29, 2020, 10:52:05 AM
Pace apparently has a lack of understanding of math.

Of course the improvement during the 3rd quarter was great.  Its because the 2nd quarter was an absolute dumpster fire.  Overall GDP is still well below where it was pre-pandemic, and is likely going to stall or retreat in the coming quarters due to high unemployment and lack of additional stimulus spending.  And I don't hold out a lot of optimism because we are backsliding so quickly against the pandemic right now.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 29, 2020, 11:08:09 AM
Q1 we also had a YoY contraction of about 5%

The economy is currently still worse off than the crisis in 2008. And that's after we pumped trillions into the economy.

We're going to need another stimulus package in the next few weeks. I'd rather not see riots this winter.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 29, 2020, 11:38:10 AM
Fundamental misunderstanding, willfully ignorant, or intellectual dishonesty.  I'm not sure which, today.
When isn't Chicos intellectually dishonest?

(https://images2.imgbox.com/e2/4f/1qzqQSqg_o.png) (https://imgbox.com/1qzqQSqg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 11:39:04 AM
Our economy is not anywhere near recovered. Holy crap this is a terrible comment.

Wall street or the stock market does not equal the economy.

Article doesn’t mention stock market once.  Did you even read it?

GDP is still 3.5% below what it was pre-pandemic but being that we are not post pandemic yet but squarely in the middle of this thing with a lot of states still largely shut down I think it’s a helluva accomplishment to be within ear shot of prepandemic GDP numbers.  Once this is behind us and all states fully open that 3.5% gap should close quickly. 

In the article Barclays estimates 4th quarter GDP growth at about 3% which means after going through a once in a life time epidemic we will be ringing in the new year largely at the same level of GDP performance as we started 2020 in, not too shabby.

Consumer spending in the 3rd quarter increased 40% topping the 33% decline in the second quarter, economists from TD Ameritrade credited the stimulus package passed by the administration for that record bounce back and yes they acknowledged there needs to be another round of it lost election which I’m sure congress will get figured out no matter who wins next week.

Business investment jumped 20%, best quarterly jump since 1983.  With investments in factory equipment, computers, etc climbing 70%.

Housing construction and renovation increased 60% and the article states this industry is the brightest spot right now in the economy. 

See, not a single mention of the stock market my friend.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 29, 2020, 12:05:36 PM
Write, wee hafta kontrol da virus. Obviously, George kant due it. C'mon man, hey?

Sometimes it's hard to be a Scooper
Giving all your love to just one man.
You'll have sad times,
And he'll have raving mad times
Doin' things only a stable genius can.

But if you love him
You'll be so proud of him
When he says, "Person woman man camera TV."
And if you blindly love him
Say Covid was handled superbly by him
'Cause, "It affects virtually nobody."

Stand by your man
Give him two terms to kill you
And porn stars to write checks to
When Mel makes nights cold and lonely

Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can!
Stand by your man!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2020, 12:06:58 PM
1. Today's economic news is good
2. Attempting to spin today's economic news as evidence the economy is in good shape, or soon will be, is complete foolishness.

It's like a basketball team celebrating that it's cut a 50-point deficit in half, while ignoring the fact you're still trailing by 25 points.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on October 29, 2020, 12:09:44 PM
Write, wee hafta kontrol da virus. Obviously, George kant due it. C'mon man, hey?

keep running with the George lie:

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-george-lopez-social-media-27e0006230358f0d0d98bf0e4c5959ca

Yes, Biden did say “George,” which some social media users concluded was a reference to former President George W. Bush. But many of these posts omit a critical detail: The interviewer was named George too.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 12:19:58 PM
Article doesn’t mention stock market once.  Did you even read it?

GDP is still 3.5% below what it was pre-pandemic but being that we are not post pandemic yet but squarely in the middle of this thing with a lot of states still largely shut down I think it’s a helluva accomplishment to be within ear shot of prepandemic GDP numbers.  Once this is behind us and all states fully open that 3.5% gap should close quickly. 

In the article Barclays estimates 4th quarter GDP growth at about 3% which means after going through a once in a life time epidemic we will be ringing in the new year largely at the same level of GDP performance as we started 2020 in, not too shabby.

Consumer spending in the 3rd quarter increased 40% topping the 33% decline in the second quarter, economists from TD Ameritrade credited the stimulus package passed by the administration for that record bounce back and yes they acknowledged there needs to be another round of it lost election which I’m sure congress will get figured out no matter who wins next week.

Business investment jumped 20%, best quarterly jump since 1983.  With investments in factory equipment, computers, etc climbing 70%.

Housing construction and renovation increased 60% and the article states this industry is the brightest spot right now in the economy. 

See, not a single mention of the stock market my friend.

Most of those numbers are useless. You do realize that housing or other bubbles exist or have existed and are ultimately bad for the economy? You do realize that investments can be tied to concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few which can be ultimately bad for the economy?

How is the average american, or the bottom 50% of americans, faring right now, economically? 

That's the important stuff.

GDP specific critique: https://youtu.be/fn39vHu0tm8

Anyway, you're notorious from arguing from disingenuous positions. So I guess you're consistent?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 12:22:13 PM
1. Today's economic news is good
2. Attempting to spin today's economic news as evidence the economy is in good shape, or soon will be, is complete foolishness.

It's like a basketball team celebrating that it's cut a 50-point deficit in half, while ignoring the fact you're still trailing by 25 points.

I acknowledged it’s not back to where it was or needs to be.  But if economist predictions of 3-4% 4th quarter growth holds true we will have gone through a year long crapfest of a pandemic without seeing any contraction in the overall economy, that would be stunning.

When you look deeper into the figures it’s obvious that the foundation remains solid, just need to get the virus in the rear view and we will be fully back humming along.  Another big round of 4th quarter stimulus to get us by until the spring will be key.

I’m not spinning anything, just quoting data and economist predictions.  The news is so good it doesn’t need to be spun. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 12:26:50 PM
Most of those numbers are useless. You do realize that housing or other bubbles exist or have existed and are ultimately bad for the economy? You do realize that investments can be tied to concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few which can be ultimately bad for the economy?

How is the average american, or the bottom 50% of americans, faring right now, economically? 

That's the important stuff.

GDP specific critique: https://youtu.be/fn39vHu0tm8

Anyway, you're notorious from arguing from disingenuous positions. So I guess you're consistent?

I think avg Americans are surviving economically as evidence of the strong housing market and historically high balances in their savings account albeit that has dipped a bit recently because stimulus program running out but generally speaking I think we’re all doing ok.  Unemployment rate way to high but to be expected when large swaths of the country and still shut down, i imagine once things open back up fully that will drop to record lows again, question is can congress get it together to pass a last round of stimulus to keep these folks afloat until they have the opportunity to get back to work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 29, 2020, 12:31:25 PM
I acknowledged it’s not back to where it was or needs to be.  But if economist predictions of 3-4% 4th quarter growth holds true we will have gone through a year long crapfest of a pandemic without seeing any contraction in the overall economy, that would be stunning.


Sigh.  No.  You are bad at math.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/10/26/dont-let-flashy-3rd-quarter-gdp-growth-fool-you-the-economy-is-still-in-a-big-hole/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 29, 2020, 12:32:34 PM
I checked out of this part of the board a while ago, but it seems that Pace got outed as Chicos?

Gotta tell ya, that scans.

Impressive work on pretending to be a healthcare worker back when it was apt to give you the most possible praise. I thought you were merely the kind shortsighted person I might genuinely have a few disagreements with but who is otherwise earnest in their beliefs, but now that I know you were actually putting on an act... A little impressed, a little genuinely confused as to why you do this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 12:36:30 PM
I checked out of this part of the board a while ago, but it seems that Pace got outed as Chicos?

Gotta tell ya, that scans.

Impressive work on pretending to be a healthcare worker back when it was apt to give you the most possible praise. I thought you were merely the kind shortsighted person I might genuinely have a few disagreements with but who is otherwise earnest in their beliefs, but now that I know you were actually putting on an act... A little impressed, a little genuinely confused as to why you do this.

You are insane.  I’m neither Chico’s nor a healthcare worker, never said or pretended to be one. 

You might be surprised to hear that hospitals are full of people who don’t work as frontline healthcare workers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2020, 12:42:39 PM
I acknowledged it’s not back to where it was or needs to be.  But if economist predictions of 3-4% 4th quarter growth holds true we will have gone through a year long crapfest of a pandemic without seeing any contraction in the overall economy, that would be stunning.

When you look deeper into the figures it’s obvious that the foundation remains solid, just need to get the virus in the rear view and we will be fully back humming along.  Another big round of 4th quarter stimulus to get us by until the spring will be key.

I’m not spinning anything, just quoting data and economist predictions.  The news is so good it doesn’t need to be spun.

Your math is off.
If the economy slumps 10 percent one quarter, rebounds 6 percent the next and 3 percent the one after that, we're not almost even. Because the 10 percent drop is being calculated against a higher figure than the 6 percent and 3 percent increases.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 12:43:43 PM
I do enjoy trying to serve as a counterbalance to a very one sided message board though.  Nothing wrong with challenging people’s belief’s a little bit. 

Not always successful at keeping it good, cordial discussion but when a lot of the responses come with a slew of name calling and weird accusations I lose my cool a bit. 

And if I’m posting anytime after 9pm that usually means their is a decent amount of bourbon fueling the fire.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 12:46:42 PM
Your math is off.
If the economy slumps 10 percent one quarter, rebounds 6 percent the next and 3 percent the one after that, we're not almost even. Because the 10 percent drop is being calculated against a higher figure than the 6 percent and 3 percent increases.

I’ll never call myself a mathematician but so if we’re 3.5% below where we started the year at and GDP grows 4% in 4th quarter let’s assume, that wouldn’t put us back to end of 2019 GDP?  If you say no I wouldn’t question that at all, it’d have to get us pretty damn close at least id imagine.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 29, 2020, 12:56:56 PM
I’ll never call myself a mathematician but so if we’re 3.5% below where we started the year at and GDP grows 4% in 4th quarter let’s assume, that wouldn’t put us back to end of 2019 GDP?  If you say no I wouldn’t question that at all, it’d have to get us pretty damn close at least id imagine.

Some are projecting a flat 4th quarter or even a decline. The growth has flattened considerably, and without another stimulus, consumer spending is also flattening or declining.

Any additional stresses because of COVID increases and potential shutdowns will drag on the economy further.

Not to mention European shutdowns having a ripple effect. I'd fell much more comfortable with a 4th quarter projection right now of between -1% - +1%. With more downside risk than possible upside gain.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 29, 2020, 01:01:04 PM
From today's column by lifelong conservative Republican George Will:

His replacement for Obamacare remains as nonexistent as his $1 trillion infrastructure program. ...

In defeat, Trump probably will resemble another figure from American fiction — Ring Lardner’s “Alibi Ike,” the baseball player whose talent was for making excuses. Trump will probably say that if not for the pandemic, Americans would have voted their pocketbooks, which would have been bulging because of economic growth, and reelected him. Americans, however, are more complicated and civic-minded than one-dimensional economy voters. But about those pocketbooks:

The 4 percent growth Trump promised as a candidate and the 3 percent he promised as president became, pre-pandemic, 2.5 percent during his first three years, a negligible improvement over the 2.4 percent of the last three Barack Obama years. This growth was partly fueled by increased deficit spending (from 4.4 percent of gross domestic product to 6.3 percent, by the International Monetary Fund’s calculation).

Bloomberg Businessweek reports, “In the first three and a half years of Trump’s presidency the U.S. Department of Labor approved 1,996 petitions [for Trade Adjustment Assistance] covering 184,888 jobs shifted overseas. During the equivalent period of President Barack Obama’s second term, 1,811 petitions were approved covering 172,336 workers.”

And the Economist says: “Recent research suggests that Mr. Trump’s tariffs destroyed more American manufacturing jobs than they created, by making imported parts more expensive and prompting other countries to retaliate by targeting American goods. Manufacturing employment barely grew in 2019. At the same time, tariffs are pushing up consumer prices by perhaps 0.5 percent, enough to reduce average real household income by nearly $1,300.”


As I said, the economy is a dumpster fire.

It was only decent (not "the greatest in American history") before the pandemic, and it's a disaster now after months and months and months of denying, lying, downplaying, mocking and, most despicably, actively fueling it by repeatedly holding mask-less, social-distance-less, super-spreader events for his own aggrandizement.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 01:01:19 PM
Some are projecting a flat 4th quarter or even a decline. The growth has flattened considerably, and without another stimulus, consumer spending is also flattening or declining.

Any additional stresses because of COVID increases and potential shutdowns will drag on the economy further.

Not to mention European shutdowns having a ripple effect. I'd fell much more comfortable with a 4th quarter projection right now of between -1% - +1%. With more downside risk than possible upside gain.

Ya almost impossible to try and predict.  Couple articles I read today the “expert” was asked given the upward trend in positive cases if they would adjust 4th quarter prediction and none of them said they would shift expectations much.  Unless of course Biden wins then they would adjust expectations down huge!!!

Joking of course.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 01:05:09 PM
I think avg Americans are surviving economically as evidence of the strong housing market and historically high balances in their savings account albeit that has dipped a bit recently because stimulus program running out but generally speaking I think we’re all doing ok.  Unemployment rate way to high but to be expected when large swaths of the country and still shut down, i imagine once things open back up fully that will drop to record lows again, question is can congress get it together to pass a last round of stimulus to keep these folks afloat until they have the opportunity to get back to work.

Seriously?

That housing market was incredibly strong in 06 and 07 too.

Savings? Do you do any investigating before you say things?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nearly-25-of-americans-have-no-emergency-savings-and-lost-income-due-to-coronavirus-is-piling-on-even-more-debt-2020-06-03

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/19/nearly-40percent-of-cash-strapped-americans-cant-last-a-month-on-savings.html

A large chuck of the country has no savings at all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 01:13:40 PM
Seriously?

That housing market was incredibly strong in 06 and 07 too.

Savings? Do you do any investigating before you say things?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nearly-25-of-americans-have-no-emergency-savings-and-lost-income-due-to-coronavirus-is-piling-on-even-more-debt-2020-06-03

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/19/nearly-40percent-of-cash-strapped-americans-cant-last-a-month-on-savings.html

A large chuck of the country has no savings at all.

I do read in fact.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/246268/personal-savings-rate-in-the-united-states-by-month/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 01:14:59 PM
Seriously?

That housing market was incredibly strong in 06 and 07 too.

Savings? Do you do any investigating before you say things?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nearly-25-of-americans-have-no-emergency-savings-and-lost-income-due-to-coronavirus-is-piling-on-even-more-debt-2020-06-03

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/19/nearly-40percent-of-cash-strapped-americans-cant-last-a-month-on-savings.html

A large chuck of the country has no savings at all.

I can send you a bunch of links if you’d like.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3319970001
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 01:17:54 PM
I can send you a bunch of links if you’d like.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3319970001

Lol.

"High income earners" are definitely not average americans.

Your interpretation of the economy at this point in time is laughable.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 29, 2020, 01:18:18 PM
I can send you a bunch of links if you’d like.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3319970001

This is offtopic, but don't use amp links.  They're bad for a fair internet.   8-)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on October 29, 2020, 01:19:22 PM
The reliable thing about a Jamie, is that they can't stop being a Jamie.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 01:19:48 PM
Lol.

"High income earners" are definitely not average americans.

Your interpretation of the economy at this point in time is laughable.

🤷‍♂️I said savings accounts are historically high, which was true.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 29, 2020, 01:22:25 PM
The reliable thing about a Jamie, is that they can't stop being a Jamie.

Back to name calling, nice.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on October 29, 2020, 01:24:47 PM
Back to name calling, nice.

It's only insulting if you take it as an insult. There's no denying the similarities that can be drawn and he only pointed out the similarities
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on October 29, 2020, 01:28:12 PM
🤷‍♂️I said savings accounts are historically high, which was true.

But is it a good thing if those saving are high-income savings rather than spending? It seems like the spike up is more because high income aren’t spending on vacations, nights out, etc. It doesn’t seem like lower income people are able to save more and keep more of their paychecks.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 01:28:54 PM
🤷‍♂️I said savings accounts are historically high, which was true.

Actually what you said was average americans are surviving because their savings accounts are historically high.

That is false.

The national savings rate is high. That doesn't mean average americans have high savings rates.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 29, 2020, 01:32:37 PM
But is it a good thing if those saving are high-income savings rather than spending? It seems like the spike up is more because high income aren’t spending on vacations, nights out, etc. It doesn’t seem like lower income people are able to save more and keep more of their paychecks.

Yeah, the FRED doesn't have that level of detail that I can find.  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/tags/series?t=savings
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2020, 01:33:26 PM
Actually what you said was average americans are surviving because their savings accounts are historically high.

That is false.

The national savings rate is high. That doesn't mean average americans have high savings rates.

Only 71 percent of Americans even have a savings account. The median amount is $3,500. A third of them are $1,000 or less.

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/research/average-savings-account-balance/

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 01:35:02 PM
Only 71 percent of Americans even have a savings account. The median amount is $3,500. A third of them are $1,000 or less.

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/research/average-savings-account-balance/

Don't tell that to Pace. Everything is fine. Americans are thriving because of the significant amounts of cash in everyone's savings accounts
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on October 29, 2020, 01:36:29 PM
Only 71 percent of Americans even have a savings account. The median amount is $3,500. A third of them are $1,000 or less.

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/research/average-savings-account-balance/

I don't have a savings account. I have a checking, 401k, and a brokerage. Savings are utterly useless.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 29, 2020, 01:41:11 PM
I don't have a savings account. I have a checking, 401k, and a brokerage. Savings are utterly useless.

An annual yield of .5% on cash held is better than a yield of .1% in a checking account. Gotta put that money to work, especially when you're holding more cash than normal when you're getting ready to buy a house, or if you're if you're going into the winter of the first pandemic during your lifetime.

I guess if you don't have much money in the first place it doesn't matter though. I'm not taking a shot, I'm just thinking it through.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 29, 2020, 01:41:45 PM
I don't have a savings account. I have a checking, 401k, and a brokerage. Savings are utterly useless.


Not really.  I only keep the $$ in my checking to cover my expenses between paychecks.  I keep $$ in a savings to have money I can get instantly for unexpected expenses and for things like Christmas, donations, etc. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2020, 01:44:20 PM
I don't have a savings account. I have a checking, 401k, and a brokerage. Savings are utterly useless.

Speaking of retirement savings, from the same report:

Just 54% of families headed by workers aged 32 to 61 participate in any kind of retirement plan, which means nearly half of families have no retirement savings at all, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
Meanwhile, the estimated median retirement savings across all generations is $50,000.
This figure increases with age: $23,000 for millennials, $64,000 for Gen Xers, and $144,000 for baby boomers, according to the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2020, 01:47:29 PM
Speaking of retirement savings, from the same report:

Just 54% of families headed by workers aged 32 to 61 participate in any kind of retirement plan, which means nearly half of families have no retirement savings at all, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
Meanwhile, the estimated median retirement savings across all generations is $50,000.
This figure increases with age: $23,000 for millennials, $64,000 for Gen Xers, and $144,000 for baby boomers, according to the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies.


I like when wall street folks say how important it is for everyday americans that we do all that we can as a nation to help the stock market because of retirement investments.

Except that a huge portion of average americans don't have any retirement savings at all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 29, 2020, 01:59:18 PM
I like when wall street folks say how important it is for everyday americans that we do all that we can as a nation to help the stock market because of retirement investments.

Except that a huge portion of average americans don't have any retirement savings at all.

Only about 55% of Americans own even 1 share of stock. That’s according to an April 2020 poll by Gallup, which asks whether households owned stocks either directly or as part of a fund.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 29, 2020, 02:39:50 PM
Lol.

"High income earners" are definitely not average americans.

Your interpretation of the economy at this point in time is laughable.
Chicos never did read past the headline of his links.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 29, 2020, 02:54:09 PM
Chicos never did read past the headline of his links.

What an odd similarity.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on October 29, 2020, 02:58:23 PM
Back to name calling, nice.

A Jamie is not ashamed of being a Jamie. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2020, 03:57:00 PM
A Jamie is not ashamed of being a Jamie.

What's a Jamie?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 29, 2020, 05:48:29 PM
Scoop term for Karen, thanks to PA2
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 31, 2020, 07:10:54 PM
https://qz.com/1925142/us-personal-income-is-lagging-behind-gdp-growth/

Hmmm.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on October 31, 2020, 10:20:26 PM
What an odd similarity.

Jamie gonna Jamie.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 01, 2020, 07:48:37 AM
Walmart Economy. (There are countless other examples)

This is it right here in a nutshell.

No one is saying people can't be successful, can't make a lot of money, can't invest their money, can't have nice things.

But the discrepancy between average worker pay and executive pay requires immediate attention.

https://twitter.com/davidmwessel/status/1322891969589317634?s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on November 01, 2020, 08:12:12 AM
But the discrepancy between average worker pay and executive pay requires immediate attention.

https://twitter.com/davidmwessel/status/1322891969589317634?s=19

I understand how enormous the differences are between the 1% and .1% and the 99%.  -- Enormous isn't even the right word, maybe galactic is closer.

And I certainly "feel" like the gap is very wrong and needs to be fixed.  But .. I've never been sure as to if it matters.   

Yes, we should continue and augment poverty programs, yes, we should invest heavily in economic mobility programs, yes we should tax the upper 1% far more.   

I'm not convinced that having 700 billionaires is necessarily a bad thing, preventing society from succeeding. 

Change my mind.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on November 01, 2020, 08:15:23 AM
I understand how enormous the differences are between the 1% and .1% and the 99%.  -- Enormous isn't even the right word, maybe galactic is closer.

And I certainly "feel" like the gap is very wrong and needs to be fixed.  But .. I've never been sure as to if it matters.   

Yes, we should continue and augment poverty programs, yes, we should invest heavily in economic mobility programs, yes we should tax the upper 1% far more.   

I'm not convinced that having 700 billionaires is necessarily a bad thing, preventing society from succeeding. 

Change my mind.

I think the greater problem is when the government “works for the little guy” but the biggest benefactors end up being the uber rich.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on November 01, 2020, 08:28:13 AM
I think the greater problem is when the government “works for the little guy” but the biggest benefactors end up being the uber rich.

This. I don’t think income and wealth differentiation is as big of a problem as government programs and taxation that doesn’t help lead to more equitable opportunities.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on November 01, 2020, 08:38:07 AM
I agree with both of you.  No doubt the current structure of politicians, campaign finance, and the exercise of power clearly benefits the wealthy 100x.

But .. it's not beyond imagination that the political winds change.  While both parties are suspect, there's no wing of the GOP pushing for the little guy.  It's not beyond imagination that AOC and/or Bernie Sanders' makes positive change for the little guy.  -- It's an uphill battle, but possible.   They won't eliminate billionaires. 

I guess the point is .. it's the voters who enable the "bad" political behavior.    You could have billionaires and excellent poverty and upward mobility programs at the same time.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 01, 2020, 08:46:42 AM
This. I don’t think income and wealth differentiation is as big of a problem as government programs and taxation that doesn’t help lead to more equitable opportunities.

It's of course both. These are not livable wages in many examples. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 01, 2020, 08:48:40 AM
I understand how enormous the differences are between the 1% and .1% and the 99%.  -- Enormous isn't even the right word, maybe galactic is closer.

And I certainly "feel" like the gap is very wrong and needs to be fixed.  But .. I've never been sure as to if it matters.   

Yes, we should continue and augment poverty programs, yes, we should invest heavily in economic mobility programs, yes we should tax the upper 1% far more.   

I'm not convinced that having 700 billionaires is necessarily a bad thing, preventing society from succeeding. 

Change my mind.

https://youtu.be/swOpLpZaA78

IMO, it's a problem, but not sure how much. Easy fixes would be to treat labor and capital equally as well as guarantee minimum wage keeps up with inflation, cost of living or productivity.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 01, 2020, 08:52:59 AM
No question you can have billionaires and an economy that helps the less fortunate. The problem is that our government has increasingly helped the billionaires get even wealthier, instead of helping those at the bottom end.

A good metaphor is the 'level playing field' concept. We don't have a level playing field, and probably shouldn't even have one. Unfortunately, our playing field is tilted in favor of those who need help the least, instead of those who need it the most. IMO it should be turned around; not to the point that we eliminate billionaires, but to the point where the less fortunate can still live decent lives.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on November 01, 2020, 09:00:26 AM
I agree with both of you.  No doubt the current structure of politicians, campaign finance, and the exercise of power clearly benefits the wealthy 100x.

But .. it's not beyond imagination that the political winds change.  While both parties are suspect, there's no wing of the GOP pushing for the little guy.  It's not beyond imagination that AOC and/or Bernie Sanders' makes positive change for the little guy.  -- It's an uphill battle, but possible.   They won't eliminate billionaires. 

I guess the point is .. it's the voters who enable the "bad" political behavior.    You could have billionaires and excellent poverty and upward mobility programs at the same time.

The Gilded Age lead to the Progressive Era. It can happen again.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 01, 2020, 09:12:16 AM
I certainly agree with some of the above. But, in addition to that, average workers at many places are vastly underpaid. The wealthy execs can still be wealthy execs and pay taxes, pay living wages etc...not enough discussion here about pay, in addition to the other things, with which I agree.

The Walton family has increased their wealth by $45 billion since March.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-10-30/u-s-billionaires-got-1-trillion-richer-in-trump-s-first-term?__twitter_impression=true

Jeff Bezos could pay every Amazon employee $105,000 and still have as much money as he did before the Pandemic.

Federal minimum wage is the same as it was the previous decade, $7.25. (states vary).

It's also about not paying your employees enough money and benefits, while still maintaining your higher standard of living. And it is not just billionaires.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on November 01, 2020, 09:21:08 AM
No question you can have billionaires and an economy that helps the less fortunate. The problem is that our government has increasingly helped the billionaires get even wealthier, instead of helping those at the bottom end.

A good metaphor is the 'level playing field' concept. We don't have a level playing field, and probably shouldn't even have one. Unfortunately, our playing field is tilted in favor of those who need help the least, instead of those who need it the most. IMO it should be turned around; not to the point that we eliminate billionaires, but to the point where the less fortunate can still live decent lives.

Yep, this.
The problem isn't that billionaires exist (and will continue to exist). The problem is an economic system and government policies - specifically tax policies - that are rigged in favor of those billionaires.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on November 01, 2020, 09:38:08 AM
Yep, this.
The problem isn't that billionaires exist (and will continue to exist). The problem is an economic system and government policies - specifically tax policies - that are rigged in favor of those billionaires.

I agree ..//  it is a different problem than wealth inequality. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on November 01, 2020, 09:45:23 AM
I certainly agree with some of the above. But, in addition to that, average workers at many places are vastly underpaid. The wealthy execs can still be wealthy execs and pay taxes, pay living wages etc...not enough discussion here about pay, in addition to the other things, with which I agree.

The Walton family has increased their wealth by $45 billion since March.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-10-30/u-s-billionaires-got-1-trillion-richer-in-trump-s-first-term?__twitter_impression=true

Jeff Bezos could pay every Amazon employee $105,000 and still have as much money as he did before the Pandemic.

Federal minimum wage is the same as it was the previous decade, $7.25. (states vary).

It's also about not paying your employees enough money and benefits, while still maintaining your higher standard of living. And it is not just billionaires.
And Henry Ford figured out that paying his employees enough created more customers for his products.   If Bezos paid all of his employees even $90k, how much more business would it create for him?
 Pushing capital down leads to more spending.  Concentrating wealth constricts spending.    More spending is simply better for the economy, tax revenues, etc.

Trickle down simply doesn't work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 01, 2020, 09:46:32 AM
And Henry Ford figured out that paying his employees enough created more customers for his products.   If Bezos paid all of his employees even $90k, how much more business would it create for him?
 Pushing capital down leads to more spending.  Concentrating wealth constricts spending.    More spending is simply better for the economy, tax revenues, etc.

Trickle down simply doesn't work.

I will never again vote for a candidate or group who believes in trickle down policy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on November 01, 2020, 12:08:09 PM
And Henry Ford figured out that paying his employees enough created more customers for his products.   If Bezos paid all of his employees even $90k, how much more business would it create for him?
 Pushing capital down leads to more spending.  Concentrating wealth constricts spending.    More spending is simply better for the economy, tax revenues, etc.

Trickle down simply doesn't work.

Devil's advocate here, but .. notwithstanding COVID, on the whole, consumer spending is bonkers high.   We buy more and more crap like there's no tomorrow.     We buy new cell phones every 3 years.   Our caloric intake climbs every decade as we transition to a diet of delicious sugar filled processed food instead of crappy vegetables.  Our pets have Halloween costumes. 

Admittedly, spending is lumpy across the economic quadrants, but it grows higher for each.   -- Of course, computer robots can't come soon enough so we can get rid of pesky human labor, so we have that to look forward to.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 02, 2020, 10:28:56 AM
Disclaimer: The stock market is not the economy.

A comparison of Presidential stock market performance:

S&P performance first term:

Obama 66.1%
Clinton 62.1 %
GHW Bush 45.9%
Trump 44.5% (during 40% Corporate Tax Rate Reduction)
GW Bush -15.8%

https://www.axios.com/trump-stock-market-performance-eclipsed-obama-c41ce790-13a1-400a-afd2-84f903e56745.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: DegenerateDish on November 10, 2020, 07:17:25 PM
I got RIF’d this morning (along with 800 other people). It sucks, really sucks. To those of you who have lost jobs this year, I feel your pain.

Will get through this, but pretty bummed out (I was having a great sales year, even with Covid).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on November 10, 2020, 08:23:58 PM
Sorry to hear.  Awful news.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 10, 2020, 08:59:10 PM
Very sorry Dish. I hope the move is short-lived.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on November 11, 2020, 06:54:17 AM
Poop.  Good luck, dish.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 11, 2020, 08:02:24 AM
Never fun, Dish. I hope things get better for you quickly.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on November 11, 2020, 09:08:47 AM
I got RIF’d this morning (along with 800 other people). It sucks, really sucks. To those of you who have lost jobs this year, I feel your pain.

Will get through this, but pretty bummed out (I was having a great sales year, even with Covid).

Hey, you got your gambling to fall back on.   ;D

Seriously, hope you got a good severance, can enjoy the holidays with your family, and get a new gig soon.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on November 11, 2020, 11:22:40 AM
We all hope for the best for you, Dish.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on November 11, 2020, 12:09:49 PM
I got RIF’d this morning (along with 800 other people). It sucks, really sucks. To those of you who have lost jobs this year, I feel your pain.

Will get through this, but pretty bummed out (I was having a great sales year, even with Covid).

sorry to hear it. I've got friends in similar situations and my entire department was cut down to four days a week.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on November 11, 2020, 01:24:07 PM
Dish, not sure what kind of sales you are in (I’m in SaaS), but PM me, and if I can do anything at all, just holler.

Stay strong, my man
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 11, 2020, 01:43:03 PM
Typical person yanked $12,000 from 401(k) during coronavirus pandemic: Vanguard

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/11/the-typical-401k-saver-withdrew-12000-during-coronavirus-vanguard.html

The CARES Act allowed investors to withdraw up to $100,000 from 401(k) plans, individual retirement accounts and other account types, through Dec. 30 in the form of a coronavirus-related distribution. Investors don’t have to pay a tax penalty for withdrawing retirement funds early and get some flexibility around paying income taxes. 

The typical amount withdrawn has increased slightly since May, to $12,000 from about $10,400.

In May, the typical investor withdrew more than half their 401(k) savings in the form of a coronavirus distribution, according to an earlier Vanguard analysis.


---------------

I understand the logic and benefit of allowing people to use 401(k) money in the midst of a crisis. Obviously, the immediate need to put food on the table is paramount if you are on the edge. But IMO the long-term impact could be one of the hidden consequences of the pandemic - more people completely (or mostly) dependent on Social Security in retirement.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on November 11, 2020, 02:46:11 PM
Dish, not sure what kind of sales you are in (I’m in SaaS), but PM me, and if I can do anything at all, just holler.

Stay strong, my man

Younique is not SaaS sales.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: DegenerateDish on November 11, 2020, 03:01:43 PM
Thanks all, you guys (and gals) are always great. I've said it before, as much as we all go back and forth about whatever (Wojo, football, politics), the MU community is one I'm so proud to be a part of. Appreciate all that have posted or reached out, really means a lot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on November 11, 2020, 03:23:49 PM
Thanks all, you guys (and gals) are always great. I've said it before, as much as we all go back and forth about whatever (Wojo, football, politics), the MU community is one I'm so proud to be a part of. Appreciate all that have posted or reached out, really means a lot.

It's a tough time for us all, something not of our doing and out of our control. I was really mad over the one day a week furlough and salary cut but I see colleagues across the country getting similar, if not more cut. My buddy does event planning and used to do 280-300 fundraising events a year, he got let go and wasn't surprised. It's why it is so important for us as a society do what we need to in order to turn this around. Peace.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on November 11, 2020, 03:41:36 PM
Dish, not sure what kind of sales you are in (I’m in SaaS), but PM me, and if I can do anything at all, just holler.

Stay strong, my man

Onlyfans?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 12, 2020, 06:13:15 AM
Typical person yanked $12,000 from 401(k) during coronavirus pandemic: Vanguard

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/11/the-typical-401k-saver-withdrew-12000-during-coronavirus-vanguard.html

The CARES Act allowed investors to withdraw up to $100,000 from 401(k) plans, individual retirement accounts and other account types, through Dec. 30 in the form of a coronavirus-related distribution. Investors don’t have to pay a tax penalty for withdrawing retirement funds early and get some flexibility around paying income taxes. 

The typical amount withdrawn has increased slightly since May, to $12,000 from about $10,400.

In May, the typical investor withdrew more than half their 401(k) savings in the form of a coronavirus distribution, according to an earlier Vanguard analysis.


---------------

I understand the logic and benefit of allowing people to use 401(k) money in the midst of a crisis. Obviously, the immediate need to put food on the table is paramount if you are on the edge. But IMO the long-term impact could be one of the hidden consequences of the pandemic - more people completely (or mostly) dependent on Social Security in retirement.

Agree. Could have serious long-term consequences for thousands upon thousands.

And this, from Yahoo Finance, looks even worse ...

The long-term damage inflicted on the labor market during the COVID-19 pandemic is starting to make itself known.

‌Last Friday, the October jobs report came in better than expected.

Some 638,000 jobs were added back to the economy with the unemployment rate falling to 6.9%. And this drop in the unemployment rate came, encouragingly, as labor force participation rose 0.3% from the prior month.

But October also saw the number of permanent job losers eclipse those on a temporary layoff for the first time since this crisis began, with 3.7 million workers declaring themselves permanently unemployed while 3.4 million see themselves temporarily unemployed. In June, there were 2.89 million permanently unemployed workers. Last October, there were just 1.26 million.

And permanent job losers as a percentage of the total unemployed population continues to rocket higher, hitting 33% in October, the highest level since February 2013. In April, when the majority of folks out of work were furloughed or temporarily laid off, this percentage fell to less than 9% of the unemployed population.

The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS report, for September published Tuesday also showed that overall dynamism in the labor market is declining as well.

Overall job openings remains subdued, totaling 6.44 million in September and down almost a million open jobs from the record levels seen in late 2018 and early 2019.

‌And this ossification of the labor market just a few months into an economic rebound that follows the unprecedented forced shutdown is concerning as COVID-19 cases continue to rise around the country.

‌Especially as lawmakers across the country take action to restrict economic activity in an effort to contain the spread of the virus, as seen in New York on Wednesday.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on November 12, 2020, 07:26:29 PM
Onlyfans?

Sorry, not a feet centered channel, so not your thing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on November 12, 2020, 07:28:04 PM
Younique is not SaaS sales.

If I sell a bit more software this month, that Pink Cadillac is mine!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 14, 2020, 07:19:22 AM
Interesting column from Yahoo's Andy Serwer on U.S.-China relations post-COVID ...

https://au.news.yahoo.com/the-new-us-china-digital-cold-war-124952102.html

One of the top priorities President-elect Joe Biden will have to tackle—right after COVID-19 and shoring up the economy—is our relationship with China, (which of course figures in those two issues as well.) The U.S.-China relationship re-emerged this past week and I suspect will continue to do so as we move towards Inauguration Day.

It was a central tenet of Trumpism that China was demonized and blamed for our economic and societal woes—everything from job losses and trade deficits to fentanyl—and of course the COVID-19 pandemic too. And guess what? In some respects President Donald Trump was spot on, but he so conflated these truths with hyperbole and falsehoods that he undermined his own argument and as such gave ammunition to the Chinese.

Bottom line: Relations between the two biggest economies in the world are a mess right now. (Just this week Trump banned investments in Chinese companies he says do business with its military.) The question is what should Biden, (who late this week was belatedly congratulated by the Chinese for winning the election), do? We need a reset to be sure. But exactly how, and to what end?

One thing’s for sure, we’re never going back to where we were before with China, simply because the Chinese economy has nearly caught up with ours.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on November 14, 2020, 11:08:21 AM
The China trade war is some grand-scale buffoonery by the current administration, resulting in years of bailouts for our nation's farmers.

The US should rejoin the Trans-Pacific Partnership (the partnership negotiations started by George W. Bush, continued by Obama, and hissy-fit withdrawn by Trump but signed by all other member-nations) and be done with it. Get back on the free-trade path, it has been extremely profitable for US businesses and shareholders. This "America first" crap to sell a bygone era to middle America is nothing but a pipe dream, and ending the trade war would be a huge shot in the arm for US companies as we come out of the pandemic.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 14, 2020, 11:25:23 AM
The China trade war is some grand-scale buffoonery by the current administration, resulting in years of bailouts for our nation's farmers.

The US should rejoin the Trans-Pacific Partnership (the partnership negotiations started by George W. Bush, continued by Obama, and hissy-fit withdrawn by Trump but signed by all other member-nations) and be done with it. Get back on the free-trade path, it has been extremely profitable for US businesses and shareholders. This "America first" crap to sell a bygone era to middle America is nothing but a pipe dream, and ending the trade war would be a huge shot in the arm for US companies as we come out of the pandemic.

We agree, though there has been an appetite from some on both sides of the aisle for warring with China. That Republicans, who always had been for free trade, were so easily sucked in by the soon-to-be-ex-prez was mildly surprising at first. But only at first.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 14, 2020, 01:09:49 PM
TPP is terrible for multiple reasons.

What's good for business and shareholders is not necessarily good for US citizens. Remember that the majority of US citizens are not involved in the stock market.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on November 14, 2020, 01:40:19 PM
TPP is terrible for multiple reasons.

What's good for business and shareholders is not necessarily good for US citizens. Remember that the majority of US citizens are not involved in the stock market.

What's good for business is literally good for US citizens.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 14, 2020, 01:58:09 PM
What's good for business is literally good for US citizens.

Disagree, and that's fine.

Most companies that would profit from TPP or the like are global, which may have minimal material effect on the US
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Eldon on November 14, 2020, 06:40:02 PM
TPP is terrible for multiple reasons.

What's good for business and shareholders is not necessarily good for US citizens. Remember that the majority of US citizens are not involved in the stock market.

We're listening...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 15, 2020, 02:29:01 PM
Not good ...

The recipients of a $60.5 million state grant program for businesses and nonprofits hurt by COVID-19 include at least a dozen large companies headquartered in other states, 22 country clubs and golf clubs, eight churches and several advocacy and trade groups like the NC Chamber.

The Job Retention Grants’ requirement that recipients must have kept at least 90% of their pre-COVID staffing levels meant that only a few of the hardest-hit businesses — such as restaurants, hotels, nail salons and bars — got any help.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 15, 2020, 04:29:30 PM
The line to a food bank in Dallas, TX yesterday:

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on November 16, 2020, 07:53:32 PM
TPP is terrible for multiple reasons.
. Remember that the majority of US citizens are not involved in the stock market.

Not true:  https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-owns-stock.aspx

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on November 16, 2020, 08:21:51 PM
The China trade war is some grand-scale buffoonery by the current administration, resulting in years of bailouts for our nation's farmers.

The US should rejoin the Trans-Pacific Partnership (the partnership negotiations started by George W. Bush, continued by Obama, and hissy-fit withdrawn by Trump but signed by all other member-nations) and be done with it. Get back on the free-trade path, it has been extremely profitable for US businesses and shareholders. This "America first" crap to sell a bygone era to middle America is nothing but a pipe dream, and ending the trade war would be a huge shot in the arm for US companies as we come out of the pandemic.

I agree. 
And isn't the NAFTA 2.0 Windows 10 upgrade known as whatever dumb name Trump gave it, essentially many of the elements that Canada and Mexico already agreed to in the TPP except Trump watered them down every further.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 16, 2020, 08:41:52 PM
Not true:  https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-owns-stock.aspx

Fair. Appreciate the correction.

I would still come to the same conclusion that what's good for global corporations is not necessarily good for US citizens. Especially long-term
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on November 16, 2020, 09:17:01 PM
Not true:  https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-owns-stock.aspx



You're not wrong disputing "most." The SEC has a good breakdown (with more exact information than Gallup has) along with the vulnerable segments of the population that jesmu84 was referring to on pg. 7 and 8.

https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/fixed-income-advisory-committee/finra-investor-education-foundation-investor-households-fimsa-040918.pdf
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on November 16, 2020, 09:40:32 PM
Fair. Appreciate the correction.

I would still come to the same conclusion that what's good for global corporations is not necessarily good for US citizens. Especially long-term

Not the place for this discussion, but there is more to the TPP than immediate economic effects. There is also a fight for geo-political influence, market access, and numerous other political and economic ramifications.

TPP was as much a battle for influence and market access as it was a trade pact. The political influence aspects alone were of high value to the average American, it is just more difficult to quantify and to realize than immediate economic gains.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 17, 2020, 07:39:50 AM
1)  What are some of the solutions for those people, when we want to discuss 401k's etc...since we're here to solve problems. Half don't have them, and the average amounts, see #2.

2) Before we move on, what's in those 401k's? Here is some data to suggest that the average amount in a worker 401k recently was $18,443, or a retirement check of $104 a month.


https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/taxes/ceo-compensation-pension/

https://www.foreffectivegov.org/two-retirements

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on November 17, 2020, 09:28:17 AM
1)  What are some of the solutions for those people, when we want to discuss 401k's etc...since we're here to solve problems. Half don't have them, and the average amounts, see #2.

2) Before we move on, what's in those 401k's? Here is some data to suggest that the average amount in a worker 401k recently was $18,443, or a retirement check of $104 a month.


https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/taxes/ceo-compensation-pension/

https://www.foreffectivegov.org/two-retirements

That data is slightly out of date (from 2013). Below is a more detailed look by age ranges. Still not great, but slightly better. At retirement age, the median balance is ~$60,000.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/09/e8/oIA9SZva_o.png) (https://imgbox.com/oIA9SZva)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 17, 2020, 09:45:55 AM
That data is slightly out of date (from 2013). Below is a more detailed look by age ranges. Still not great, but slightly better. At retirement age, the median balance is ~$60,000.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/09/e8/oIA9SZva_o.png) (https://imgbox.com/oIA9SZva)

2019 Median $22,217. Vanguard analysis.

https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-401k-balance
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on November 17, 2020, 09:50:14 AM
At this point, with cases rising as rapidly as they are, a 30-day shutdown would likely save over 100,000 lives. Is that worth it, I believe it is.

We can try to get this under control, while ramping up vaccine production. Emerge from a 30-45 day shutdown (get past the holidays) with possibly 35M vaccinated or soon to be vaccinated.

Targeted stimulus package focusing on small business owners, and those out of work. Make them whole during the shutdown.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on November 17, 2020, 09:55:59 AM
That data is slightly out of date (from 2013). Below is a more detailed look by age ranges. Still not great, but slightly better. At retirement age, the median balance is ~$60,000.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/09/e8/oIA9SZva_o.png) (https://imgbox.com/oIA9SZva)

How many of these are accounts that someone has earned from previous employers and simply haven't been rolled-over or consolidated?  I say this because it says average balance of 401k, and not 401k savings per individual.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on November 17, 2020, 10:04:12 AM
At this point, with cases rising as rapidly as they are, a 30-day shutdown would likely save over 100,000 lives. Is that worth it, I believe it is.

I don't think that is the path that will be taken anywhere from here forward - too blunt and charged.  I personally think targeted interventions are warranted almost everywhere.  We have a good case study of what is checking the exponential rise in cases in EU and now a state model coming with MI if they are able to stick to it.  That is more likely what occurs with week by week re-evaluation. 

We unfortunately live in a time of hyperbole and over-simplification - when nuance and flexible adjustments is likely the path that gets us to the vaccine with minimal death and economic disruption
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on November 17, 2020, 10:31:22 AM
Not true:  https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-owns-stock.aspx

That is a gallup poll.  You trust Americans knowledge far too much.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on November 17, 2020, 11:01:38 AM
I don't think that is the path that will be taken anywhere from here forward - too blunt and charged.  I personally think targeted interventions are warranted almost everywhere.  We have a good case study of what is checking the exponential rise in cases in EU and now a state model coming with MI if they are able to stick to it.  That is more likely what occurs with week by week re-evaluation. 

We unfortunately live in a time of hyperbole and over-simplification - when nuance and flexible adjustments is likely the path that gets us to the vaccine with minimal death and economic disruption

I think we are in agreement. When I say shutdowns, they largely mirror the targeted interventions. Shut down bars. Restaurants take out only, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on November 17, 2020, 11:34:34 AM
That is a gallup poll.  You trust Americans knowledge far too much.

You don't think most Americans know whether or not they own stocks or not?

If anything, the percentage might be too low, because there are some people who are going to say, "I don't own any stock. My 401k is in mutual funds."  Or "I don't own any stocks because I have a pension", not realizing that most pensions are backed by investments.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 17, 2020, 12:01:32 PM
COVID-19 Economy.

The lines at the Milwaukee WI Food Bank:

https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/1328518218034671616?s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on November 17, 2020, 12:26:52 PM
You don't think most Americans know whether or not they own stocks or not?

If anything, the percentage might be too low, because there are some people who are going to say, "I don't own any stock. My 401k is in mutual funds."  Or "I don't own any stocks because I have a pension", not realizing that most pensions are backed by investments.

Whether 47 percent or 51 percent of 55 percent of the public owns stock kinda misses the point, because the vast majority of those people own very little stock.
The fact is that the top 10 percent of households by net worth own about 88 percent of the market.
So when people point to the market as an indicator of economic, what they're really saying is that the economy is good for the already wealthy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on November 17, 2020, 12:56:13 PM
Whether 47 percent or 51 percent of 55 percent of the public owns stock kinda misses the point, because the vast majority of those people own very little stock.
The fact is that the top 10 percent of households by net worth own about 88 percent of the market.
So when people point to the market as an indicator of economic, what they're really saying is that the economy is good for the already wealthy.

So, the crash of 1929 and Black Monday of 1987 didn't affect anyone but people who owned stock?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on November 17, 2020, 12:59:44 PM
You don't think most Americans know whether or not they own stocks or not?

If anything, the percentage might be too low, because there are some people who are going to say, "I don't own any stock. My 401k is in mutual funds."  Or "I don't own any stocks because I have a pension", not realizing that most pensions are backed by investments.

Yes, that is what I am saying.  Or they think they do.  Or they think social security is 'stocks'.  The average person if far far dumber than you're giving them credit for.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on November 17, 2020, 01:09:19 PM
So, the crash of 1929 and Black Monday of 1987 didn't affect anyone but people who owned stock?

Holy red herring ...
If that's what honestly you got from what I wrote, I don't know what to say.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on November 17, 2020, 01:11:13 PM
So, the crash of 1929 and Black Monday of 1987 didn't affect anyone but people who owned stock?


Initially?  No. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 17, 2020, 01:20:50 PM
You don't think most Americans know whether or not they own stocks or not?

If anything, the percentage might be too low, because there are some people who are going to say, "I don't own any stock. My 401k is in mutual funds."  Or "I don't own any stocks because I have a pension", not realizing that most pensions are backed by investments.


Gallup specifically asked about mutual funds, and anything owned in a "retirement savings account, like a 401(k) or IRA."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-owns-stock.aspx

Gallup's measure of consumer stock ownership is based on a question asking respondents about any individual stocks they may own, as well as stocks included in a mutual fund or retirement savings account, like a 401(k) or IRA.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on November 17, 2020, 01:39:40 PM

Gallup specifically asked about mutual funds, and anything owned in a "retirement savings account, like a 401(k) or IRA."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-owns-stock.aspx

Gallup's measure of consumer stock ownership is based on a question asking respondents about any individual stocks they may own, as well as stocks included in a mutual fund or retirement savings account, like a 401(k) or IRA.



55% of respondents to the poll said they owned stock.  Hards implied that a plurality of Americans are too stupid to respond to this question correctly.  So what would is the more likely scenario: that people said that they didn't own stock when they actuality did, or that they thought that they owned stock when in reality, they didn't?  Looks like a false negative is more likely than a false positive.

Also, they didn't ask about pensions, which would bump that 55% up a few more points.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on November 17, 2020, 01:50:58 PM


55% of respondents to the poll said they owned stock.  Hards implied that a plurality of Americans are too stupid to respond to this question correctly.  So what would is the more likely scenario: that people said that they didn't own stock when they actuality did, or that they thought that they owned stock when in reality, they didn't?  Looks like a false negative is more likely than a false positive.

Also, they didn't ask about pensions, which would bump that 55% up a few more points.

To be precise, a narrow majority of Americans does own stocks, according to credible recent studies. But Khanna has a point that Americans of modest incomes are significantly less invested in the stock market than wealthier Americans are. Other large groups, including minorities and those without a college education, also lag in stock ownership, meaning that the stock rally is largely passing them by.

Okay, I will give you that the majority of Americans BELIEVE they own "stocks", but most that do own stocks, don't own much. 

Also, it is well established that self reporting is a terrible way of measuring something like this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 17, 2020, 02:06:25 PM
As some have pointed out, let's see the forest for the trees as opposed to being pedantic about other things.

Many people don't own stocks. And regarding the ones who do, the amount owned is small.

When the stock market does well, how does that help the many who don't own stocks, and, again, of they do, own such a small amount? Wealthy Corporate Buybacks don't help these people etc ..

Some people (not all) get caught up in discussing the stock market when discussing the economy. Gotta meet those quarterly numbers like a hamster on a wheel. As has been pointed out, that's great for the small percentage of people who own the majority of stocks and have thr majority of wealth. But there is the whole other big group of everyone else out there.

Let's see the forest.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on November 17, 2020, 02:39:10 PM
Average 401k balance means nothing. It is a worthless statistic.

I have 3 401ks. One has over $100k, one has about $30k and the other has about $25k.

My average is about $50k, even though I have 3x that in actual savings.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on November 17, 2020, 02:51:38 PM
To be precise, a narrow majority of Americans does own stocks, according to credible recent studies. But Khanna has a point that Americans of modest incomes are significantly less invested in the stock market than wealthier Americans are. Other large groups, including minorities and those without a college education, also lag in stock ownership, meaning that the stock rally is largely passing them by.

Okay, I will give you that the majority of Americans BELIEVE they own "stocks", but most that do own stocks, don't own much. 

Also, it is well established that self reporting is a terrible way of measuring something like this.

Versus your, like, opinion, man? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on November 17, 2020, 05:13:18 PM
2019 Median $22,217. Vanguard analysis.

https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-401k-balance
Yes, the chart I included was also from Vanguard. The difference is, the median balance includes a whole lot of people that aren't anywhere near retirement age.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 17, 2020, 05:32:28 PM
For a number of reasons that people have already pointed out, it’s difficult to draw any firm conclusion about how much a change in the stock market affects everyday Americans.

Sure, a lot of people own stock...but a lot of people don’t. And as others have pointed out, ‘average’ 401(k) or IRA balances are difficult to draw any conclusions from, because of people with multiple accounts, among other things.

I think the best we can say is that a good or bad market ultimately affects everybody, but the good and bad effects are felt more directly and immediately by those in a higher income bracket.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on November 17, 2020, 10:39:17 PM
What a broad and largely baseless claim prediction from Gates. “More than 50% of business travel will disappear post-COVID”. Just absolutely asinine

https://twitter.com/jjjinvesting/status/1328899829200773122?s=21

But I’m not surprised at all from a completely detached billionaire who hasn’t dealt directly with clients on a day to day in decades and who has very vested interest in further growth and demand for video conferencing and remote work software.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 17, 2020, 10:45:29 PM
What a broad and largely baseless claim from Gates. “More than 50% of business travel will disappear post-COVID”. Just absolutely asinine

https://twitter.com/jjjinvesting/status/1328899829200773122?s=21

But I’m not surprised at all from a completely detached billionaire who hasn’t dealt directly with clients on a day to day in decades and who has very vested interest in further growth and demand for video conferencing and remote work software.


It’s a prediction, not a claim. Still, I agree that it’s pretty far out there....
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on November 17, 2020, 11:41:59 PM
What a broad and largely baseless claim from Gates. “More than 50% of business travel will disappear post-COVID”. Just absolutely asinine

https://twitter.com/jjjinvesting/status/1328899829200773122?s=21

But I’m not surprised at all from a completely detached billionaire who hasn’t dealt directly with clients on a day to day in decades and who has very vested interest in further growth and demand for video conferencing and remote work software.

I don't know about travel, but I would hate to be heavily invested in office space right now.  Why pay thousands of dollars in rent for an employee who has demonstrated that they can do their job perfectly well at home?

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on November 18, 2020, 12:35:12 AM
I don't know about travel, but I would hate to be heavily invested in office space right now.  Why pay thousands of dollars in rent for an employee who has demonstrated that they can do their job perfectly well at home?

I can agree with that. I think office arrangements and commercial space will be transformed in some significant ways.

But the whole assumption that business travel is some frivolity that can be easily replaced by a video chat or Zoom is just so pervasive the last 6 months, and a flawed assumption. Hell, WebEx and video chat has existed for well over a decade. And it’s not like businesses and economies are thriving and running hot right now, proving that travel was unnecessary. Interchanging “helpful to bridge the gap and get by in a crisis” with “the new standard” is awful presumptuous.

I guess I’m more just irked about stuff like this that does nothing to help strategize about how to solve forthcoming dilemmas in getting back going, but rather incites panic that business won’t be able to return to prior ways or levels without some massive overhaul in a fundamental component, in the face of enough other headwinds already
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on November 18, 2020, 02:05:45 AM
But the whole assumption that business travel is some frivolity that can be easily replaced by a video chat or Zoom is just so pervasive the last 6 months, and a flawed assumption.

You're not wrong, but I don't think Gates is either.  I don't know your profession (I probably should pay more attention and know by now), but I'd guess about 50% of business travel was frivolous - and that's the drop Gates is seeing.  Certainly I see that in my industry.  Of course, it depends on timeframe - as the amount of frivolous business travel seems to go in decade-ish long cycles.  So for the next 3 years - including a vaccine - I think businesses making their numbers is still going to be hard.  And travel expenditures will be scrutinized heavily - and thus drop.  But still half  the pre-pandemic trips will happen - as you note they need to - and thus - "both sides"  ;D

And I think you're way over the top on this inciting panic.  It's really just trying to understand how this is going to affect business travel related (dependent?) organizations.  A vaccine is great, but it's not some switch that's going to make the world go back to Oct 2019.  There's a world of hurt to fix before we can get back there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on November 18, 2020, 06:00:30 AM
I can agree with that. I think office arrangements and commercial space will be transformed in some significant ways.

But the whole assumption that business travel is some frivolity that can be easily replaced by a video chat or Zoom is just so pervasive the last 6 months, and a flawed assumption. Hell, WebEx and video chat has existed for well over a decade. And it’s not like businesses and economies are thriving and running hot right now, proving that travel was unnecessary. Interchanging “helpful to bridge the gap and get by in a crisis” with “the new standard” is awful presumptuous.

I guess I’m more just irked about stuff like this that does nothing to help strategize about how to solve forthcoming dilemmas in getting back going, but rather incites panic that business won’t be able to return to prior ways or levels without some massive overhaul in a fundamental component, in the face of enough other headwinds already

One of the biggest barriers to using these technologies was user acceptance which has occurred out of necessity.  That won’t be undone. 

While I don’t look forward to a world where I am on zoom 8 hours a day in lieu of travel, I can easily see my travel halving.  I have been having more frequent touch points and better accessibility with my clients. It works great when you have an already deep relationship.  Not as much when building one. 

Part of strategizing is guessing how the external environment is changing.  I’m not sure why poor bill gets lambasted for things we are all doing ourselves. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on November 18, 2020, 07:55:04 AM
I agree with Rocky and Gates. 

A good 12 years ago, I bought a webcam and set up a video conferencing station at my business.  The thought was, employees could jump on there and have an immediate showing of products to our clients.   It sat, unused.

Now .. 100% of the workforce knows how to use Zoom, Google Meet, etc.

It is unquestionable that business travel will never get back to previous levels.  The only remaining question is how much.   50% might be high, but I wouldn't bet against it.

Even from a supply perspective .. in 1-2 years, there will be fewer airlines, fewer routes, way fewer seats to sell.  Demand down, supply down, prices way up.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on November 18, 2020, 08:08:04 AM
You're not wrong, but I don't think Gates is either.  I don't know your profession (I probably should pay more attention and know by now), but I'd guess about 50% of business travel was frivolous - and that's the drop Gates is seeing.  Certainly I see that in my industry.  Of course, it depends on timeframe - as the amount of frivolous business travel seems to go in decade-ish long cycles.  So for the next 3 years - including a vaccine - I think businesses making their numbers is still going to be hard.  And travel expenditures will be scrutinized heavily - and thus drop.  But still half  the pre-pandemic trips will happen - as you note they need to - and thus - "both sides"  ;D

And I think you're way over the top on this inciting panic.  It's really just trying to understand how this is going to affect business travel related (dependent?) organizations.  A vaccine is great, but it's not some switch that's going to make the world go back to Oct 2019.  There's a world of hurt to fix before we can get back there.

This bolded part.  I have been traveling for work for the last 30+ years, the last 2 decades in sales support.  Easily 50% of those trips were frivolous.
Our execs have already said travel will likely be reduced significantly after the pandemic.
For sales and sales support people, I can easily see it reduced significantly. Maybe not 50%, but a substantial amount.  No more travel for an hour meeting.
For consultants, the other big portion of business travel, we have had almost a year of work from home. It will now be more acceptable for consultants working remotely from now on.

Another factor to consider. As mentioned above, office space will be likely reduced with more work from home. Where are those business travels going to go to visit? People's homes?  It was easy when every one was in an office to organize a meeting with people flying in. Now, they will have to coordinate those meetings.

We will emerge from this pandemic with a new work model.  It will be interesting. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on November 18, 2020, 08:13:03 AM
I bet three to five years post pandemic, business travel will be back to about 90% of what it was in 2019.  There are limits to the things you can do via video.  There is a lot of qualitative interactions that take place in person that cannot be easily replicated online.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on November 18, 2020, 08:53:39 AM
I can agree with that. I think office arrangements and commercial space will be transformed in some significant ways.

But the whole assumption that business travel is some frivolity that can be easily replaced by a video chat or Zoom is just so pervasive the last 6 months, and a flawed assumption. Hell, WebEx and video chat has existed for well over a decade. And it’s not like businesses and economies are thriving and running hot right now, proving that travel was unnecessary. Interchanging “helpful to bridge the gap and get by in a crisis” with “the new standard” is awful presumptuous.

I guess I’m more just irked about stuff like this that does nothing to help strategize about how to solve forthcoming dilemmas in getting back going, but rather incites panic that business won’t be able to return to prior ways or levels without some massive overhaul in a fundamental component, in the face of enough other headwinds already

I'm in manufacturing sales and I need to meet my customers in person.  Video just won't work.  As someone else said, most of my company's customers, I don't have a longtime business relationship with, so a video conference is awkward and feels out of place and most don't want to do.  Every customer I've personally met in person I've walked away with more business, a locked in contract or at the very least the opportunity to quote a project to break in.   

My corporation has always been pretty good about not flying people in from all over for an hour or two meeting.  Those have always been teleconferences now moved on to Microsoft Teams meetings.  Where they usually say "don't turn on video because it uses too much bandwidth" which I find odd.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on November 18, 2020, 09:45:44 AM
I can agree with that. I think office arrangements and commercial space will be transformed in some significant ways.

But the whole assumption that business travel is some frivolity that can be easily replaced by a video chat or Zoom is just so pervasive the last 6 months, and a flawed assumption. Hell, WebEx and video chat has existed for well over a decade. And it’s not like businesses and economies are thriving and running hot right now, proving that travel was unnecessary. Interchanging “helpful to bridge the gap and get by in a crisis” with “the new standard” is awful presumptuous.

I guess I’m more just irked about stuff like this that does nothing to help strategize about how to solve forthcoming dilemmas in getting back going, but rather incites panic that business won’t be able to return to prior ways or levels without some massive overhaul in a fundamental component, in the face of enough other headwinds already

If you agree on the bolded you have to expect that a significant amount of business travel will be gone. A lot of business travel was to these large "office headquarters". To get people together at a central site. If the large "headquarters" model dissipates, there is no central site to get together, instead the logical central site is on zoom.

That won't apply to all industries, but there certainly is a strong possibility that it is pervasive in enough industries to significantly impact business travel.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on November 18, 2020, 11:40:53 AM
You're not wrong, but I don't think Gates is either.  I don't know your profession (I probably should pay more attention and know by now), but I'd guess about 50% of business travel was frivolous - and that's the drop Gates is seeing.  Certainly I see that in my industry.  Of course, it depends on timeframe - as the amount of frivolous business travel seems to go in decade-ish long cycles.  So for the next 3 years - including a vaccine - I think businesses making their numbers is still going to be hard.  And travel expenditures will be scrutinized heavily - and thus drop.  But still half  the pre-pandemic trips will happen - as you note they need to - and thus - "both sides"  ;D

And I think you're way over the top on this inciting panic.  It's really just trying to understand how this is going to affect business travel related (dependent?) organizations.  A vaccine is great, but it's not some switch that's going to make the world go back to Oct 2019.  There's a world of hurt to fix before we can get back there.

You're right. Business travel won't disappear, but I guarantee you it will decline. Instead of going to conferences in person like I have every year, I have attended online training, and its just as valuable and 5x cheaper.

Will executives still travel to secure big deals? Sure. But the average worker bee will travel MUCH less, if at all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 18, 2020, 01:28:46 PM


You're right. Business travel won't disappear, but I guarantee you it will decline. Instead of going to conferences in person like I have every year, I have attended online training, and its just as valuable and 5x cheaper.

Will executives still travel to secure big deals? Sure. But the average worker bee will travel MUCH less, if at all.



Agreed. Top level execs, salespeople making major deals, and other 'high end' business travel will likely revert back to normal or near normal levels. But midlevel employees, consultants going to 1-hour meetings, professionals traveling to continuing education conferences and the like will probably decline dramatically.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on November 18, 2020, 02:36:24 PM
If you agree on the bolded you have to expect that a significant amount of business travel will be gone. A lot of business travel was to these large "office headquarters". To get people together at a central site. If the large "headquarters" model dissipates, there is no central site to get together, instead the logical central site is on zoom.

That won't apply to all industries, but there certainly is a strong possibility that it is pervasive in enough industries to significantly impact business travel.

I don’t necessarily agree. I certainly don’t think you’re gonna have people go 100% remote who weren’t before. If you’re 50/50 or something with in person and WFH, you schedule meetings around that.  I think there is just too much focus on this huge across the board sweeping changes in a flash instead of a migration over time to new formats.

I really think it depends on the type of travel. Inter company movement or touch bases? Ok sure. Some quick customer meetings? Sure. But I see people talking about the demise of international business travel, which is just silly. As I’ve mentioned, that’s a large component of my business and my volume of Zoom meetings or the like have just upticked a bit, nothing significant, and all people can talk about is a return to standard travel.

My old roommate is in enterprise sales for Oracle. His team he manages is spread around a few offices across the country.  I asked about his travel post-COVID and he said he doesn’t anticipate much change. People often don’t want to be sold to over video for big packages and programs, even for software and tech.

Conferences will decline, but trade shows won’t. Any efforts to move the latter online have been disastrous from many that I’ve spoken with.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on November 18, 2020, 02:57:42 PM
Business travel will certainly decrease, the question is how much.

Tangential to this is the question of whether further airline consolidation is likely. A year ago I would have said there's no way from an antitrust perspective but you have airlines hemorrhaging money and jobs right now. I could see any of the following possibilities happening to create synergies and economies of scale...

Any of the Legacy big 3 (United, Delta, American) buying a JetBlue or Frontier

A JetBlue-Alaska merger

Southwest buying Spirit or Frontier
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 18, 2020, 03:24:39 PM
This is a good time to remind that we pumped TRILLIONS into the market, but told individuals (and especially those who aren't invested in the market) "sorry, we don't have more than $1200 for each of you".

Not to mention the loss of jobs, loss of healthcare, forced evictions, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 18, 2020, 04:06:25 PM
Lockdown vs stimulus

https://youtu.be/k0O6Ttjp0fs
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on November 18, 2020, 04:18:04 PM
Lockdown vs stimulus

https://youtu.be/k0O6Ttjp0fs

Vote 3rd party, get rid of the nonsense.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MarquetteDano on November 18, 2020, 04:22:20 PM
Business travel will certainly decrease, the question is how much.

Tangential to this is the question of whether further airline consolidation is likely. A year ago I would have said there's no way from an antitrust perspective but you have airlines hemorrhaging money and jobs right now. I could see any of the following possibilities happening to create synergies and economies of scale...

Any of the Legacy big 3 (United, Delta, American) buying a JetBlue or Frontier

A JetBlue-Alaska merger

Southwest buying Spirit or Frontier

Anecdotal admittedly,  but I expect my company to travel about 33% less going forward (have small consulting company).  We were travelling 75%.  I think we have proven to clients that 50% is doable.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 18, 2020, 04:28:57 PM
Anecdotal admittedly,  but I expect my company to travel about 33% less going forward (have small consulting company).  We were travelling 75%.  I think we have proven to clients that 50% is doable.


A friend who is a consultant in Portland tells me roughly the same thing. She and her staff spent about 75% of their time on the road before Covid. Her sense, after talking with her largest clients, is that this will be 25-50% post-Covid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 20, 2020, 10:07:55 AM
Whether 47 percent or 51 percent of 55 percent of the public owns stock kinda misses the point, because the vast majority of those people own very little stock.
The fact is that the top 10 percent of households by net worth own about 88 percent of the market.
So when people point to the market as an indicator of economic, what they're really saying is that the economy is good for the already wealthy.

Yes, this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 21, 2020, 08:13:53 AM
Who says COVID-19 is bad for the economy?

From the AP ...

The Texas border county of El Paso, where more than 300 people have died from COVID-19 since October, is advertising jobs for morgue workers capable of lifting bodies weighing 175 pounds or more. Officials are offering more than $27 an hour for work described as not only physically arduous but “emotionally taxing as well.”

The county had already begun paying jail inmates $2 an hour to help move corpses and has ordered at least 10 refrigerated trucks as morgues run out of room.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on November 21, 2020, 10:34:19 AM
Walmart made $129B in profit last year, but at least 14,500 of their employees receive SNAP benefits.

McDonald's made $11B in profit, but at least 8,780 employees receive SNAP benefits.


https://twitter.com/washpostbiz/status/1329185396891201537



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 21, 2020, 01:32:59 PM
Walmart made $129B in profit last year, but at least 14,500 of their employees receive SNAP benefits.

McDonald's made $11B in profit, but at least 8,780 employees receive SNAP benefits.


https://twitter.com/washpostbiz/status/1329185396891201537

So taxpayers are subsidizing private corporation employees with resulting profits going to a small segment of the upper crust of society.

Something sure feels backwards here...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on November 21, 2020, 02:14:23 PM
Who says COVID-19 is bad for the economy?

From the AP ...

The Texas border county of El Paso, where more than 300 people have died from COVID-19 since October, is advertising jobs for morgue workers capable of lifting bodies weighing 175 pounds or more. Officials are offering more than $27 an hour for work described as not only physically arduous but “emotionally taxing as well.”

The county had already begun paying jail inmates $2 an hour to help move corpses and has ordered at least 10 refrigerated trucks as morgues run out of room.


Yah capitalism!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on November 21, 2020, 04:39:24 PM
Several years ago my church sponsored a talk about the social cost of low prices. Walmart was mentioned then as a huge employer with large chunks of their employees on various government programs, due to the wages they pay.
Even now I see many people who swear on the internet that they want to buy American, only to complain that the prices are higher.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on November 22, 2020, 01:10:55 PM
Back to the COVID economy

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-22/boatloads-of-cargo-off-los-angeles-grind-gears-of-world-economy?srnd=premium

Ports on the West Coast are overfull and ships are unable to offload.

Labor shortages in receiving and trucking are a bottleneck for getting imports into the country. This happened during the first shutdown too, impacting most manufacturing companies I am partnered with. It only takes one cog to be stuck on a ship to bring a whole supply chain to a grinding halt. It only takes one trucking company to have a covid outbreak to bring a region to an abrupt halt.

> “We expect many of the supply-chain congestion issues we’ve seen throughout the pandemic to continue through Chinese New Year” in February, Manders said.

Without another round of stimulus, there will be severe pain in small to medium manufacturing & logistics companies this winter. Large & ultra-large companies will likely be fine since the Fed is continuing to buy newly issued debt at a very high rate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 22, 2020, 01:36:37 PM
In an attempt to make things as horrible as possible for Biden, Trump and his team are playing games with remaining stimulus funds, with the Fed's ability to manage difficult times, etc.

The anti-American vindictiveness never ends.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 22, 2020, 01:40:31 PM
In an attempt to make things as horrible as possible for Biden, Trump and his team are playing games with remaining stimulus funds, with the Fed's ability to manage difficult times, etc.

The anti-American vindictiveness never ends.


The really sad part about this is that it affects those who need it the most...and that includes both Biden and Trump supporters.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 22, 2020, 01:42:51 PM

The really sad part about this is that it affects those who need it the most...and that includes both Biden and Trump supporters.

Of course. It’s despicable and indefensible. Like a huge percentage of the emperor’s policies and statements.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on November 22, 2020, 02:07:47 PM
Back to the COVID economy

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-22/boatloads-of-cargo-off-los-angeles-grind-gears-of-world-economy?srnd=premium

Ports on the West Coast are overfull and ships are unable to offload.

Labor shortages in receiving and trucking are a bottleneck for getting imports into the country. This happened during the first shutdown too, impacting most manufacturing companies I am partnered with. It only takes one cog to be stuck on a ship to bring a whole supply chain to a grinding halt. It only takes one trucking company to have a covid outbreak to bring a region to an abrupt halt.

> “We expect many of the supply-chain congestion issues we’ve seen throughout the pandemic to continue through Chinese New Year” in February, Manders said.

Without another round of stimulus, there will be severe pain in small to medium manufacturing & logistics companies this winter. Large & ultra-large companies will likely be fine since the Fed is continuing to buy newly issued debt at a very high rate.

Though not in shipping, I’ve been seeing it in the diamond/Jewelery industry the last 6-8 weeks. After a big downswing, demand has picked back up. From a pure demand perspective, people forecasted a slightly down, but fairly normal holiday season.  However, COVID is still very much an issue in India where the majority of diamonds are being cut and lots of jewelry is made.  Also, even domestically, reductions in labor cause of COVID and restrictions create more backlog. So now orders that would take 1-2 weeks to normally fill, are taking 6 weeks or more. It’s a DISASTER.

You survive a downswing, but then you can’t execute/fulfill/finish sales cause the backend is still a mess so you’re still dead in the water
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 22, 2020, 02:44:27 PM
Though not in shipping, I’ve been seeing it in the diamond/Jewelery industry the last 6-8 weeks. After a big downswing, demand has picked back up. From a pure demand perspective, people forecasted a slightly down, but fairly normal holiday season.  However, COVID is still very much an issue in India where the majority of diamonds are being cut and lots of jewelry is made.  Also, even domestically, reductions in labor cause of COVID and restrictions create more backlog. So now orders that would take 1-2 weeks to normally fill, are taking 6 weeks or more. It’s a DISASTER.

You survive a downswing, but then you can’t execute/fulfill/finish sales cause the backend is still a mess so you’re still dead in the water


Cut, Color, Clarity, Carat...and Covid? :(
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on November 22, 2020, 06:52:54 PM
Though not in shipping, I’ve been seeing it in the diamond/Jewelery industry the last 6-8 weeks. After a big downswing, demand has picked back up. From a pure demand perspective, people forecasted a slightly down, but fairly normal holiday season.  However, COVID is still very much an issue in India where the majority of diamonds are being cut and lots of jewelry is made.  Also, even domestically, reductions in labor cause of COVID and restrictions create more backlog. So now orders that would take 1-2 weeks to normally fill, are taking 6 weeks or more. It’s a DISASTER.

You survive a downswing, but then you can’t execute/fulfill/finish sales cause the backend is still a mess so you’re still dead in the water

That resonates with my father's feeling. He's an overwhelmed goldsmith right now. Customers are getting new, or updated rings & jewelry at a crazy clip. Jewelers aren't as in tune to the price of gold as he is, nor are they as in tune to the sourcing of specific qualities of diamonds.

Similar to the wine industry. While bars & restaurants are getting smoked, retail wine has really picked up. Big challenge, though: France et al decided not to ship much wine to the US this year because we, as a nation, are a complete disaster when it comes to this pandemic. This would be THE year for domestic wine producers to break the budget on marketing and show out against international producers, but I think it's hard for any business to decide to spend in a climate like this.

No matter how your business is doing, it's a defensible position to cut staff and weather this storm, even if you see an opportunity.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on November 22, 2020, 06:57:55 PM
I suspect some california vineyards are in a world of hurt.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on November 22, 2020, 07:10:45 PM
I suspect some california vineyards are in a world of hurt.

The fires were devastating
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on November 24, 2020, 03:25:40 PM
https://youtu.be/nBFei_-hG9A
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 29, 2020, 07:37:18 AM
As Trump does nothing but golf and make false claims about election fraud, Mnuchin threatens to claw back billions of dollars that were supposed to help Americans, and McConnell curls up in the fetal position, governors and other state officials of both parties desperately try to give their hurting residents some economic relief.

From the AP ...

SANTA FE, N.M. Faulting inaction in Washington, governors and state lawmakers are racing to get pandemic relief to small-business owners, the unemployed, renters and others whose livelihoods have been upended by the widening coronavirus outbreak.

In some cases, elected officials are spending the last of a federal relief package passed in the spring as an end-of-year deadline approaches and the fall COVID-19 surge threatens their economies anew. Democrats have been the most vocal in criticizing President Donald Trump and the GOP-controlled Senate for failing to act, but many Republican lawmakers are also sounding the alarm.

Underscoring the need for urgency, the number of new COVID-19 cases reported in the United States reached 205,557 on Friday, according to data from Johns Hopkins University – the first time its daily figure topped the 200,000 mark. Its previous daily high was 196,000 on Nov. 20.

The total number of cases reported in the U.S., since the first one in January, has topped 13 million.

The Democratic governors of Colorado and New Mexico convened special legislative sessions in the closing days of November to address the virus-related emergency. Earlier this week, the New Mexico Legislature passed a bipartisan relief bill that will deliver a one-time $1,200 check to all unemployed workers and give up to $50,000 to certain businesses.

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said the state took action to help residents “who have real issues about keeping food on their table, a roof over their head.”

“While the United States of America is on fire, the Trump administration has left states to fight this virus on their own,” she said, noting state efforts alone simply are not enough. “It is clear no help is coming – not from this president, not from this administration. As we have done every day this year, New Mexico will step up.”

In Colorado, a special session scheduled for Monday will consider roughly $300 million in relief to businesses, restaurants and bars, child-care providers, landlords, tenants, public schools and others.

“Even as cases have exploded across the country, Congress and the president have not yet passed much-needed relief for people,” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said in announcing the session. “Here in Colorado, we want to do the best with what we have to take care of our own.”

In New Jersey and Washington state, Republicans who are a minority in both legislatures were the ones pushing for special sessions. They want to direct more money to struggling small-business owners.

Republican lawmakers in Wisconsin, who control both houses of the Legislature, are considering whether to return in December to address effects of the latest coronavirus wave after Democratic Gov. Tony Evers put forward a $500 million COVID-19 relief bill earlier this week. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, plans to convene lawmakers in December to contend with the virus, partially at Republicans’ urging.

“Senate Republicans are committed to recovering our economy that has been harmed by broad and prolonged shutdowns,” Minnesota Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka said in a statement. “We will work with anyone to find solutions.”

State government leaders want Trump and Congress to extend the Dec. 30 deadline for spending virus relief money already allocated under the CARES Act, which was approved in March, and to provide more federal funding to deal with the consequences of the latest surge.

“It’s just heartbreaking what they’re allowing to happen with no federal government intervention,” said Washington state House Speaker Laurie Jinkins, a Democrat.

In making his decision to call the Minnesota Legislature into special session, Walz cited “a sense of urgency” around doing something on the state level due to the lack of a federal response.

The Minnesota Council of Nonprofits reported that more than half of the state’s charitable organizations received forgivable loans through the CARES Act’s Paycheck Protection Program this year, while another $12 million from the CARES Act is going to organizations that provide food to the needy. But all that will be spent – or lost – by the end of December without congressional action.

“I would reiterate to our federal partners – to the outgoing administration and to the incoming Biden administration – please work together, please find a compromise in there, please. If you have to, move a package now with the idea that you will come back and move one later,” Walz said. “COVID is not going to end at the end of the month. We are in an unrelenting spike.”

In Ohio, where Republicans control every branch of government, Gov. Mike DeWine and legislative leaders pushed a $420 million pandemic spending package through a special bipartisan panel late last month. Funded through the CARES Act, it offered grants to small businesses, bars and restaurants, low-income renters, arts groups, and colleges and universities.

Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff, a Republican, gives credit to the federal government for the billions in aid previously sent out, but he said small businesses and people who have lost work need more federal assistance.

“The election’s over,” Benninghoff said. “This is not a time for finger-pointing.”

In neighboring New Jersey, the partisan divide over $4 billion in COVID-19 borrowing backed by the Democratic governor and Legislature prompted a court challenge by minority Republicans. The state’s high court sided with Gov. Phil Murphy’s administration, citing the unprecedented nature of the outbreak.

Even so, Murphy has regularly pleaded with Congress for more aid.

“It’s shameful that they have not acted in Congress, especially (Senate Majority Leader Mitch) McConnell and the Republican Senate, to throw a lifeline to small businesses,” he said.

Republicans have proposed a $300 million aid package to small businesses and nonprofits, but the legislation is stalled. GOP lawmakers told the governor if he does not call a special session to address the need, many businesses and charities “might not survive the winter.”

Lawmakers in one state, Illinois, threw up their hands and went home despite an unaddressed $3.9 billion budget deficit. They cited the health threat posed by the virus and hope for help from the nation’s capital.

“If the federal government doesn’t stand up and step in, we’re in a very bad situation – for our schools, colleges and universities, health care programs, child care, senior services,” House Majority Leader Greg Harris, a Democrat, said. “This isn’t like all the blue states are hurting and all the red states are humming along. Everybody’s in bad shape.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on November 29, 2020, 10:06:18 AM
The continued inaction by Trump and McConnell is a national disgrace. Americans (including many who voted for Trump) are suffering, yet they do nothing to ease the pain. This is a nationwide crisis that calls for nationwide action - punting it to the states is sheer cowardice.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on November 29, 2020, 11:58:32 AM
The continued inaction by Trump and McConnell is a national disgrace. Americans (including many who voted for Trump) are suffering, yet they do nothing to ease the pain. This is a nationwide crisis that calls for nationwide action - punting it to the states is sheer cowardice.

Yep, and not just "many" who voted for Trump but tens of millions who voted for him. He simply does not care.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on November 29, 2020, 02:02:05 PM
The continued inaction by Trump and McConnell is a national disgrace. Americans (including many who voted for Trump) are suffering, yet they do nothing to ease the pain. This is a nationwide crisis that calls for nationwide action - punting it to the states is sheer cowardice.
As usual, they've said the quiet parts out loud. Just as they attempted to sabotage Obama during the Great Recession, they've been clear they are going to do the same thing to Biden. And, after running up a $7T deficit under Trump, they've already said they are suddenly bery, very worried about the deficit. And the mainstream media will dutifully report about their "concerns" as if they are legitimate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on November 29, 2020, 04:55:33 PM
When states start doing their budgets for next year, we are going to see the real damage to the economy. Ain’t gonna be pretty.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 01, 2020, 02:08:57 PM
McConnell refuses to consider a Covid relief package that was crafted by a bipartisan group of Senators and Congresspeople.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/coronavirus-stimulus-update-senators-to-unveil-relief-bill.html

He just doesn't give a rat's a$$ how much people are suffering.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 01, 2020, 02:13:32 PM
McConnell refuses to consider a Covid relief package that was crafted by a bipartisan group of Senators and Congresspeople.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/coronavirus-stimulus-update-senators-to-unveil-relief-bill.html

He just doesn't give a rat's a$$ how much people are suffering.


Pelosi didn't agree to consider it either.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 01, 2020, 03:10:40 PM

Pelosi didn't agree to consider it either.



She has already tried, and the House actually passed a bill this summer. But she realizes it would be futile to do anything when McConnell has made it clear he won't act.

What would you propose she do? Pass yet another bill, just to watch Mitch sit on his hands once again? My sense is that, if Mitch agreed to consider it, Nancy would hold a vote in a New York minute. Do you believe otherwise?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 01, 2020, 03:22:29 PM

She has already tried, and the House actually passed a bill this summer. But she realizes it would be futile to do anything when McConnell has made it clear he won't act.

What would you propose she do? Pass yet another bill, just to watch Mitch sit on his hands once again? My sense is that, if Mitch agreed to consider it, Nancy would hold a vote in a New York minute. Do you believe otherwise?


I have no idea.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 01, 2020, 03:56:13 PM
Mcconnell only wants liability restrictions.

Pelosi only wants no liability restrictions.

They both want money to the elites/corporations.

Neither want primary money for individuals.

Sad.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 01, 2020, 04:48:15 PM
Mcconnell only wants liability restrictions.

Pelosi only wants no liability restrictions.

They both want money to the elites/corporations.

Neither want primary money for individuals.

Sad.


My understanding is that the Heroes Act called for an additional $1200 payment per person, protection of healthcare benefits, payroll protection to keep more people employed, and an additional $600/week unemployment for those who don’t have work.

Is that not true?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 01, 2020, 05:24:03 PM
Mcconnell only wants liability restrictions.

Pelosi only wants no liability restrictions.

They both want money to the elites/corporations.

Neither want primary money for individuals.

Sad.

I do not believe all of that you just said is true at all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 01, 2020, 06:40:51 PM

My understanding is that the Heroes Act called for an additional $1200 payment per person, protection of healthcare benefits, payroll protection to keep more people employed, and an additional $600/week unemployment for those who don’t have work.

Is that not true?

There's certainly more proposed in the Heroes Act.

Mcconnell is highly unlikely to pass anything without liability restrictions.

Neither party wants the priority of the money to go to individuals.

Both parties want the great majority of the money to go to corporations.

The last 2 sentences are the really sad part.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 01, 2020, 07:13:54 PM
There's certainly more proposed in the Heroes Act.

Mcconnell is highly unlikely to pass anything without liability restrictions.

Neither party wants the priority of the money to go to individuals.

Both parties want the great majority of the money to go to corporations.

The last 2 sentences are the really sad part.

Liability restrictions IMO are fine with me IF businesses are following local health guidelines. Right now with everything so widespread, liability is less of an issue anyway.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 02, 2020, 04:44:48 PM
https://youtu.be/v-DRvLA1gbI
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 03, 2020, 08:26:26 AM
From the NYT:

More than 5.2 million companies received loans from the Paycheck Protection Program, the $523 billion centerpiece of the government’s pandemic aid for businesses. But the first full accounting of the data from the Small Business Administration shows what most suspected: More than a quarter of the money went to just 1 percent of borrowers, The Times’s Stacy Cowley and Ella Koeze report.

Some of the most prominent recipients:

National restaurant chains: Ted’s Montana Grill, T.G.I. Friday’s and P.F. Chang’s were among those that each received the maximum of $10 million, after the industry successfully lobbied to make large chains eligible for aid aimed at small businesses.

Law firms: Boies Schiller Flexner and Kasowitz Benson Torres, which was founded by the Trump ally Marc Kasowitz, each collected $10 million.

Tenants of Trump properties: Nearly 100 businesses listing an address at 40 Wall Street, a building with ties to the Trump Organization, received a total of more than $34 million in loans.

The program’s effectiveness is in question. The payroll provider Gusto found that the chances that workers would lose their job at a company that took a P.P.P. loan — which was forgivable if companies kept employees on their books for a period of time — increased by 25 percent during the week that the loan’s restrictions ended.

Some 232,000 jobs may have been eliminated as the restrictions expired. “Companies really emerged in no better shape,” said Luke Pardue, a Gusto economist. “A lot of that is due to the fact that the economy is in no better shape.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 03, 2020, 11:18:05 AM
From the NYT:

More than 5.2 million companies received loans from the Paycheck Protection Program, the $523 billion centerpiece of the government’s pandemic aid for businesses. But the first full accounting of the data from the Small Business Administration shows what most suspected: More than a quarter of the money went to just 1 percent of borrowers, The Times’s Stacy Cowley and Ella Koeze report.

Some of the most prominent recipients:

National restaurant chains: Ted’s Montana Grill, T.G.I. Friday’s and P.F. Chang’s were among those that each received the maximum of $10 million, after the industry successfully lobbied to make large chains eligible for aid aimed at small businesses.

Law firms: Boies Schiller Flexner and Kasowitz Benson Torres, which was founded by the Trump ally Marc Kasowitz, each collected $10 million.

Tenants of Trump properties: Nearly 100 businesses listing an address at 40 Wall Street, a building with ties to the Trump Organization, received a total of more than $34 million in loans.

The program’s effectiveness is in question. The payroll provider Gusto found that the chances that workers would lose their job at a company that took a P.P.P. loan — which was forgivable if companies kept employees on their books for a period of time — increased by 25 percent during the week that the loan’s restrictions ended.

Some 232,000 jobs may have been eliminated as the restrictions expired. “Companies really emerged in no better shape,” said Luke Pardue, a Gusto economist. “A lot of that is due to the fact that the economy is in no better shape.”

Largest upward transfer of wealth in history.

Edit: the entire Cares act, not just the PPP loans
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 03, 2020, 02:24:31 PM
Largest upward transfer of wealth in history.

Edit: the entire Cares act, not just the PPP loans

Yes, it appears to even have surpassed the Tax Cuts For Billionaires Act in that regard.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 03, 2020, 04:36:50 PM
https://youtu.be/SKkX5SInOCI

The optimist in me says the Dems just messed up 6 weeks ago and have now lost a significant amount of their negotiating power and will have to agree to a measly stimulus plan that won't help many.

The pessimist in me says the Dems intentionally didn't do anything 6 weeks ago because they didn't want to as they have no real interest in helping individuals and the corporations/wall street already got their money in the spring.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 03, 2020, 04:57:57 PM
https://youtu.be/SKkX5SInOCI

The optimist in me says the Dems just messed up 6 weeks ago and have now lost a significant amount of their negotiating power and will have to agree to a measly stimulus plan that won't help many.

The pessimist in me says the Dems intentionally didn't do anything 6 weeks ago because they didn't want to as they have no real interest in helping individuals and the corporations/wall street already got their money in the spring.

Here is my take: It's both.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 03, 2020, 06:38:11 PM
Here is my take: It's both.

 :'(
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 03, 2020, 06:38:23 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/01/ppp-sba-data/

Whoops!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 04, 2020, 11:21:29 AM
Surprisingly the trump and kushner families received money.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 04, 2020, 12:25:52 PM
Surprisingly the trump and kushner families received money.


I'm sure they'll do the right thing and give it to those in need.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 04, 2020, 01:58:01 PM
We know who wants to get something done and who doesn't. Yesterday, republicans made a motion to adjourn in the House.

They just don't care.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 04, 2020, 02:23:56 PM
We know who wants to get something done and who doesn't. Yesterday, republicans made a motion to adjourn in the House.

They just don't care.

Or, like Hards said, it’s both. I know in your mind all Republicans are vile serpents, but both sides have been absurdly pigheaded and selfish and pathetic. Acting like the lack of stimulus is just a “the GOP is callous and disgusting” issue is willfully biased. Pelosi and company aren’t some altruistic public benefit crusaders who have tried all they could against the evil machine
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 05, 2020, 08:19:14 AM
The House passed a bill to decriminalize pot, but McConnell probably won't even give it a go in the Senate. He and the rest of the party are using COVID-19 as an excuse, saying that any legislation besides a stimulus package is a "distraction."

1. Walk and chew gum at the same time. You are well-paid, theoretically talented public servants. You can do two things simultaneously.

2. You don't even have to do two things simultaneously. You have different committees focused on different issues. Reading potential laws and voting on them takes little time; lots of lawmakers often admit that they don't even read the laws they pass or reject.

The House bill no doubt needs a little tweaking (so they could hire tweakers - ha!) but this is a lame-arse excuse to ignore what would be good legislation that is supported by a majority of Americans.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 05, 2020, 10:46:50 AM
https://youtu.be/SKkX5SInOCI

The optimist in me says the Dems just messed up 6 weeks ago and have now lost a significant amount of their negotiating power and will have to agree to a measly stimulus plan that won't help many.

The pessimist in me says the Dems intentionally didn't do anything 6 weeks ago because they didn't want to as they have no real interest in helping individuals and the corporations/wall street already got their money in the spring.

I know a big issue was the insistence by the GOP of blanket immunity for all businesses regarding COVID liability.

I believe that the current negotiated bipartisan bill has removed the permanent liability waiver, and instead only has a temporary one, to allow states to draft their own legislation.

That is a big change, and changes the calculus for the House leadership in many regards.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 05, 2020, 10:59:27 AM
I know a big issue was the insistence by the GOP of blanket immunity for all businesses regarding COVID liability.

I believe that the current negotiated bipartisan bill has removed the permanent liability waiver, and instead only has a temporary one, to allow states to draft their own legislation.

That is a big change, and changes the calculus for the House leadership in many regards.

That's accurate, it appears.

But the lack of support for individual citizens is my big sticking point
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 05, 2020, 08:18:00 PM
That's accurate, it appears.

But the lack of support for individual citizens is my big sticking point

I agree with you. I'm just going to give them a smidgeon of a benefit of the doubt and hope they deliver to the individual citizens.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 06, 2020, 12:44:20 PM
This is becoming a self-created disaster:

https://twitter.com/jakecoco/status/1334993874276786178?s=19

 https://youtu.be/epzPSuvdUe4

Longer video with commentary: https://youtu.be/8aOLuf-qlko
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 06, 2020, 12:54:59 PM
This is becoming a self-created disaster:

https://twitter.com/jakecoco/status/1334993874276786178?s=19

 https://youtu.be/epzPSuvdUe4

Longer video with commentary: https://youtu.be/8aOLuf-qlko

One is a film company that created an outdoor space for people to eat. The other is a restaurant. These are different things.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 06, 2020, 12:56:16 PM
Locally, on-line there is a carry out challenge to try to inspire more people to get carry out form the restaurants.    Which is cool, but we were already doing that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 06, 2020, 01:13:28 PM
One is a film company that created an outdoor space for people to eat. The other is a restaurant. These are different things.


But if the restaurant patrons and film crew were held to the same rules, the risks should be basically the same.

Seems like just another example of a big $$$$$ business getting to play by different rules than mom and pop shops.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on December 06, 2020, 03:12:30 PM
Two things make America incapable of dealing with this virus without getting bailed out by a vaccine.  One is that we define freedom as the absence of any element of collectivism whatsoever. The other is that we'd rather die than just give people money, even if it is the economically rational thing to do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 06, 2020, 03:40:50 PM
Shut things down and pay people.

Or open everything.

Keeping only some things open (largest corporations/organizations) funnels more money to the top.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 06, 2020, 04:35:38 PM

But if the restaurant patrons and film crew were held to the same rules, the risks should be basically the same.

Seems like just another example of a big $$$$$ business getting to play by different rules than mom and pop shops.

The only thing I can think of, is they aren't being held to "the same rules" though. The film companies are required to regularly test all staff/crew/etc for COVID-19 and have plans in place to mitigate any spread.

The restaurant does not. So in theory, the film company can stop any infected people from being present, the restaurant has no idea on whether staff, or patrons are infected.

Extremely terrible optics, but I do understand a bit key differences. I bet if she proposed to the mayor, that all patrons would be given a rapid 15-minute test prior to being seated, they would be allowed to stay open (obviously ridiculous, but that is essentially what the film companies are having to do).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 06, 2020, 04:40:46 PM
Two things make America incapable of dealing with this virus without getting bailed out by a vaccine.  One is that we define freedom as the absence of any element of collectivism whatsoever. The other is that we'd rather die than just give people money, even if it is the economically rational thing to do.

Yep.

Shut things down and pay people.

Or open everything.

Keeping only some things open (largest corporations/organizations) funnels more money to the top.

And yep.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 06, 2020, 04:56:03 PM
The only thing I can think of, is they aren't being held to "the same rules" though. The film companies are required to regularly test all staff/crew/etc for COVID-19 and have plans in place to mitigate any spread.

The restaurant does not. So in theory, the film company can stop any infected people from being present, the restaurant has no idea on whether staff, or patrons are infected.

Extremely terrible optics, but I do understand a bit key differences. I bet if she proposed to the mayor, that all patrons would be given a rapid 15-minute test prior to being seated, they would be allowed to stay open (obviously ridiculous, but that is essentially what the film companies are having to do).

Right. If you want to say that movie studios shouldn’t be essential, that’s fine. But since they have that designation, setting up an outdoor dining area is responsible.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 06, 2020, 05:35:08 PM
Shut things down and pay people.

Or open everything.

Keeping only some things open (largest corporations/organizations) funnels more money to the top.

I agree with this. Personally, I prefer the shut things down and pay people.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 06, 2020, 05:59:33 PM
The only thing I can think of, is they aren't being held to "the same rules" though. The film companies are required to regularly test all staff/crew/etc for COVID-19 and have plans in place to mitigate any spread.

The restaurant does not. So in theory, the film company can stop any infected people from being present, the restaurant has no idea on whether staff, or patrons are infected.

Extremely terrible optics, but I do understand a bit key differences. I bet if she proposed to the mayor, that all patrons would be given a rapid 15-minute test prior to being seated, they would be allowed to stay open (obviously ridiculous, but that is essentially what the film companies are having to do).


Perhaps. But once again, this just highlights the advantages of the ‘haves’ over the ‘have nots.’ They are given opportunities that others aren’t given, and they have the resources to take advantage of those opportunities.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 06, 2020, 06:00:38 PM
I agree with this. Personally, I prefer the shut things down and pay people.


Agreed. This is the model that many European countries used, and even though they have had outbreaks, they have been able to tamp them down much more effectively than we have.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 06, 2020, 07:01:53 PM
I support paying people for a few reasons-it’s good for the economy to give money to people who spend it and second people need support right now. 

I don’t think though we are in a place where the black/white or binary makes sense.  Europe’s lockdown was far less restrictive than last time, France kept elementary schools open, etc.  There is no social will for a complete shutdown.

We just need to accept there are pandemic losers and we need to help them get by until next year. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 06, 2020, 07:05:13 PM
I support paying people for a few reasons-it’s good for the economy to give money to people who spend it and second people need support right now. 

I don’t think though we are in a place where the black/white or binary makes sense.  Europe’s lockdown was far less restrictive than last time, France kept elementary schools open, etc.  There is no social will for a complete shutdown.

We just need to accept there are pandemic losers and we need to help them get by until next year.

France was able to keep schools open because they completely shut down bars and restaurants. If we had the political will to do that, schools could likely remain open.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 06, 2020, 07:13:12 PM
France was able to keep schools open because they completely shut down bars and restaurants. If we had the political will to do that, schools could likely remain open.

I’m with you on bars and restaurants.  But industry was much more liberal this time around.  Much more people were working during this shutdown. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 06, 2020, 11:19:12 PM
Never thought I would agree with Kevin o'leary

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/a-second-stimulus-check-should-be-in-the-next-aid-package-shark-tanks-kevin-o-leary-131545624.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 07, 2020, 05:27:04 PM
https://youtu.be/3kt7QAiEUhA

Idiots. All of them.

Let's hope that somehow AOC/Hawley wield their populist power for good.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 07, 2020, 05:40:23 PM
Quote
Percent of wages currently subsidized by governments due to COVID:

Japan: 100% for small businesses; 80% for large firms

Netherlands: Up to 90%

Norway: Up to 90%

Germany: Up to 87%

France: Up to 84%

Italy: 80%

United Kingdom: Up to 80%

Canada: Up to 75%

United States: 0%

https://twitter.com/Public_Citizen/status/1333443931648917504?s=20
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 08, 2020, 07:59:18 PM
https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1336478192916459522?s=19

Someone smarter than me. Please. Explain to me how an individual or family is supposed to survive on $1200 or potentially $1800 in 9 months + unemployment (if eligible)

We are watching our own government be intentionally cruel to the working class.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 08, 2020, 08:54:24 PM
As I have stated numerous times:

Cruelty IS the point.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 09, 2020, 12:49:18 PM
There are those who are months behind in rent or mortgage payments and facing evictions with the end of the moratorium.

So what's gonna happen with $600? Nothing.

But that also leaves landlords and mortgage companies in a tough spot.

I wonder which group will get bailed out assuming this all goes south?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 09, 2020, 12:54:34 PM
There are those who are months behind in rent or mortgage payments and facing evictions with the end of the moratorium.

So what's gonna happen with $600? Nothing.

But that also leaves landlords and mortgage companies in a tough spot.

I wonder which group will get bailed out assuming this all goes south?

Both should, of course.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 09, 2020, 01:10:47 PM
There are those who are months behind in rent or mortgage payments and facing evictions with the end of the moratorium.

So what's gonna happen with $600? Nothing.

But that also leaves landlords and mortgage companies in a tough spot.

I wonder which group will get bailed out assuming this all goes south?

Actually you could do it once. Application for government funded rent forgiveness.  To participate the landlord needs to reset the clock prior to pursuing a future eviction.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 09, 2020, 01:43:38 PM
Actually you could do it once. Application for government funded rent forgiveness.  To participate the landlord needs to reset the clock prior to pursuing a future eviction.


Yep. Essentially, the landlord agrees to forgive any outstanding rent in exchange for a payment of a certain percentage of the rent owed. The landlords get their money (maybe not 100%, but a heck of a lot better than evicting the tenant and probably getting nothing), and the tenants get off the hook.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 09, 2020, 05:07:36 PM
https://youtu.be/-tq_SlY_lJs

2nd housing collapse coming?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 09, 2020, 05:38:44 PM
https://youtu.be/-tq_SlY_lJs

2nd housing collapse coming?

This has been bubbling for awhile, even pre-Covid
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 09, 2020, 05:46:12 PM
This has been bubbling for awhile, even pre-Covid

Agreed.  Some places will be more insulated than others.  I advised my coworkers to not purchase a house, but they got sick of living in an apartment in August.  I imagine that they will be underwater sometime in the next couple of years.  Then again, I have been waiting for the bottom to fall out on housing for years, and have been wrong every time I've said, "soon".  So what the hell do I know.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 09, 2020, 06:14:47 PM
Glad mine is paid for and I am not moving for a couple decades.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 09, 2020, 06:27:23 PM
https://youtu.be/-tq_SlY_lJs

2nd housing collapse coming?

We are talking about moving to the Seattle area in the next year or two to be closer to our daughter and new grandson. It's outrageously expensive there.

Ideally, we would sell our Charlotte house just before the housing collapse and then swoop in to buy one in Seattle after the collapse.

But that kind of luck hardly ever happens.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 09, 2020, 06:54:33 PM
This has been bubbling for awhile, even pre-Covid

Truth. But obviously accelerated now.

And if it comes to be, corporate landlords will buy up mom and pop rentals. And wall street will buy up tons of homes. More movement to the top.

How anyone can look at the current economics (not even considering covid) of the US and think we're in a good/safe place is ridiculous
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 09, 2020, 10:37:51 PM
We are talking about moving to the Seattle area in the next year or two to be closer to our daughter and new grandson. It's outrageously expensive there.

Ideally, we would sell our Charlotte house just before the housing collapse and then swoop in to buy one in Seattle after the collapse.

But that kind of luck hardly ever happens.

If the WFH revolution that everyone is frothing over comes to fruition, Seattle would likely have a major bubble pop. All those software and tech firms that brought people to the city and sent housing prices SOARING would suddenly no longer be tied to the city.  Everyone talks about Manhattan, but I would think the exodus out of Silicon Valley and Seattle would be profound given then types of jobs there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 09, 2020, 11:17:01 PM
If the WFH revolution that everyone is frothing over comes to fruition, Seattle would likely have a major bubble pop. All those software and tech firms that brought people to the city and sent housing prices SOARING would suddenly no longer be tied to the city.  Everyone talks about Manhattan, but I would think the exodus out of Silicon Valley and Seattle would be profound given then types of jobs there.

Frankly, I wouldn't wish suffering on others just so I could save some money on a house. When the time comes, we'll see what's what.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 10, 2020, 06:14:56 AM
Truth. But obviously accelerated now.

And if it comes to be, corporate landlords will buy up mom and pop rentals. And wall street will buy up tons of homes. More movement to the top.

How anyone can look at the current economics (not even considering covid) of the US and think we're in a good/safe place is ridiculous

Surely, the Democrats will fix this problem!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 10, 2020, 06:31:29 AM
Surely, the Democrats will fix this problem!

Without a doubt.

That's why the "stimulus" has been halved.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 10, 2020, 07:00:18 AM
Without a doubt.

That's why the "stimulus" has been halved.

Just as their masters have requested.  The trick is to break the average man, without breaking the system for the rich guy... while at the same time appearing to be on the side of the average man. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 10, 2020, 07:26:00 AM
Interesting Pew study on working from home preferences post-COVID:

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3643170-majority-of-work-from-homers-dont-want-to-go-back-to-office?utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha

As companies keenly await COVID-19 vaccines that promise to return staff to the office, a new survey from the Pew Research Center suggests that won't be so easy.

More than half of U.S. employees currently working from home say they'd like to keep their remote arrangements beyond the pandemic and one-third of those surveyed said they want the option to telework at least sometimes. Only 11% said they rarely or never want to work from home.

There's also a clear class divide. 62% of workers with a bachelor's degree or more education say their work can be done from home, compared with only 23% of those without a four-year college degree. Similarly, while a majority of upper-income workers can work remotely, most lower- and middle-income workers cannot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 10, 2020, 07:29:07 AM
Interesting Pew study on working from home preferences post-COVID:

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3643170-majority-of-work-from-homers-dont-want-to-go-back-to-office?utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha

As companies keenly await COVID-19 vaccines that promise to return staff to the office, a new survey from the Pew Research Center suggests that won't be so easy.

More than half of U.S. employees currently working from home say they'd like to keep their remote arrangements beyond the pandemic and one-third of those surveyed said they want the option to telework at least sometimes. Only 11% said they rarely or never want to work from home.

There's also a clear class divide. 62% of workers with a bachelor's degree or more education say their work can be done from home, compared with only 23% of those without a four-year college degree. Similarly, while a majority of upper-income workers can work remotely, most lower- and middle-income workers cannot.

Just think of all the savings on office space that these companies will pass on to their workers as increased pay!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 10, 2020, 07:31:35 AM
If the WFH revolution that everyone is frothing over comes to fruition

I never thought WFH was so controversial that there are people frothing at the mouth over it. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 10, 2020, 09:50:21 AM
Just as their masters have requested.  The trick is to break the average man, without breaking the system for the rich guy... while at the same time appearing to be on the side of the average man.

Thomas Friedman agrees.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 10, 2020, 09:58:25 AM
Thomas Friedman agrees.

Thomas Friedman is part of the problem, not the solution.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 10, 2020, 10:07:20 AM
I never thought WFH was so controversial that there are people frothing at the mouth over it.

I just meant people falling all over themselves to call for the end of offices, the demise of major cities, “THE WAY WE WORK IS FOREVER CHANGED”.  WFH isn’t controversial, but the speed in which it supposedly will become the “norm” is.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 10, 2020, 10:09:22 AM
We are talking about moving to the Seattle area in the next year or two to be closer to our daughter and new grandson. It's outrageously expensive there.

Ideally, we would sell our Charlotte house just before the housing collapse and then swoop in to buy one in Seattle after the collapse.

But that kind of luck hardly ever happens.




Ya kould allweys due chores at keefe's crib four room and boored, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 10, 2020, 10:12:23 AM
Thomas Friedman is part of the problem, not the solution.

I don’t disagree.

I was just referring to his book on the subject of people voting against their best interests.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 10, 2020, 06:21:39 PM



Ya kould allweys due chores at keefe's crib four room and boored, hey?

I was thinking we might hire him to provide security for our mansion.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on December 10, 2020, 08:30:29 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/10/pandemic-shoplifting-hunger/#click=https://t.co/rNKIWmZ9Ep

"Stealing to Survive"

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on December 10, 2020, 09:41:54 PM
If the WFH revolution that everyone is frothing over comes to fruition, Seattle would likely have a major bubble pop. All those software and tech firms that brought people to the city and sent housing prices SOARING would suddenly no longer be tied to the city.  Everyone talks about Manhattan, but I would think the exodus out of Silicon Valley and Seattle would be profound given then types of jobs there.

My kid is renting in Seattle and would love to see the bubble pop. With the exception of the cost of living (and being so far from his mom, natch  ;)) he loves it there and would welcome the opportunity to be a homeowner. It's out of his reach right now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 10, 2020, 09:55:10 PM
My kid is renting in Seattle and would love to see the bubble pop. With the exception of the cost of living (and being so far from his mom, natch  ;)) he loves it there and would welcome the opportunity to be a homeowner. It's out of his reach right now.

Crazy expensive, but yes, my daughter loves it there.

If we move there, we’ll probably rent, at least at first. That’s outrageous too but at least we wouldn’t be tied down.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 10, 2020, 10:58:04 PM
Crazy expensive, but yes, my daughter loves it there.

If we move there, we’ll probably rent, at least at first. That’s outrageous too but at least we wouldn’t be tied down.


Your wife finally get tired of supporting you and decided to retire?  ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 11, 2020, 05:14:58 AM
You will all be hanging out with keefe.......
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 11, 2020, 06:33:34 AM
Tiny house.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 11, 2020, 09:21:16 AM
Tiny house.

#vanlife
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 11, 2020, 09:34:48 AM


Your wife finally get tired of supporting you and decided to retire?  ;)

Everybody should have a Sugar Mama. Or two!

Seriously, it's totally her call. She knows she could retire tomorrow, next month, next year or whenever. But she likes her job and it's important work, so really she should keep working as long as she gets satisfaction out of it. But the pull to be near family is significant, too. We actually had a long talk about it just the other day, and she's thinking 2022 or 2023. We'll see!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 11, 2020, 10:46:19 AM
Everybody should have a Sugar Mama. Or two!

Seriously, it's totally her call. She knows she could retire tomorrow, next month, next year or whenever. But she likes her job and it's important work, so really she should keep working as long as she gets satisfaction out of it. But the pull to be near family is significant, too. We actually had a long talk about it just the other day, and she's thinking 2022 or 2023. We'll see!

Wife and I are in the same boat and this pandemic has helped us push our goals. She is pushing her company to support WFH permanently to support a life of travel. She is also pushing to move from full time to part time plus full benefits. The company gets to keep an excellent worker with deep experience. We get to keep mega-corp health insurance until we hit 65 and Medicare kicks in. It's also hard to turn down huge mid-career salaries even if you've already hit your number.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 11, 2020, 01:06:35 PM
Wife and I are in the same boat and this pandemic has helped us push our goals. She is pushing her company to support WFH permanently to support a life of travel. She is also pushing to move from full time to part time plus full benefits. The company gets to keep an excellent worker with deep experience. We get to keep mega-corp health insurance until we hit 65 and Medicare kicks in. It's also hard to turn down huge mid-career salaries even if you've already hit your number.

I hope your wife's company works with her to make all parties happy.

Totally agree with your last line. My goal has always been to have "more than enough." But it's always alluring to keep going for "more than more than enough."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 12, 2020, 07:25:31 AM
Survey about WFH (aka mouth frothing).

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/529446-half-of-at-home-workers-say-theyd-like-to-keep-arrangement (https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/529446-half-of-at-home-workers-say-theyd-like-to-keep-arrangement)

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 14, 2020, 04:15:39 PM
https://twitter.com/BernieBroStar/status/1336488069009190914?s=19

Crime against US workers
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 14, 2020, 06:04:33 PM
https://twitter.com/BernieBroStar/status/1336488069009190914?s=19

Crime against US workers

Dems need to pull the plug. Then go to Georgia and outline exactly what the election means financially for people (stimulus, UI, and aid to states and small businesses).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 15, 2020, 06:22:50 AM
Dems need to pull the plug. Then go to Georgia and outline exactly what the election means financially for people (stimulus, UI, and aid to states and small businesses).

They won't because 3/4th of the party is run by corporate America and has been since 1992.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 15, 2020, 08:03:39 AM
They won't because 3/4th of the party is run by corporate America and has been since 1992.

This is sad/true. Biden stocking admin with goldman/black rock/mckinsey/raytheon
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on December 15, 2020, 08:44:37 AM
Joel Osteen with the $4.4 million PPP loan:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/religion/article/Joel-Osteen-s-Lakewood-Church-got-4-4M-in-15800887.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter.com

Also:

Feeding America says over 50 million Americans are Food Insecure, up from 35 million prior to the Pandemic.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on December 15, 2020, 08:55:06 AM
Joel Osteen with the $4.4 million PPP loan:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/religion/article/Joel-Osteen-s-Lakewood-Church-got-4-4M-in-15800887.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter.com

Also:

Feeding America says over 50 million Americans are Food Insecure, up from 35 million prior to the Pandemic.

John 2:13-16
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 15, 2020, 09:20:09 AM
This is sad/true. Biden stocking admin with goldman/black rock/mckinsey/raytheon

Not overjoyed by this.

Joel Osteen with the $4.4 million PPP loan:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/religion/article/Joel-Osteen-s-Lakewood-Church-got-4-4M-in-15800887.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter.com

And don't get me started on this kind of crapola.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on December 15, 2020, 09:28:32 AM
This is sad/true. Biden stocking admin with goldman/black rock/mckinsey/raytheon

::shrieking voice:: STOP IT YOU ARE HANDING THE ELECTION TO TRUMMMMPPPPPPPP
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 15, 2020, 09:49:39 AM
Joel Osteen with the $4.4 million PPP loan:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/religion/article/Joel-Osteen-s-Lakewood-Church-got-4-4M-in-15800887.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter.com

Also:

Feeding America says over 50 million Americans are Food Insecure, up from 35 million prior to the Pandemic.

Now do the stats for those behind on their mortgage/rent and facing evictions once the moratorium is ended
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 15, 2020, 12:53:18 PM
They won't because 3/4th of the party is run by corporate America and has been since 1992.

You are right. That's why I just said they "need" to do it. Corporate America is about getting their share (plus most of other people's share) more than about controlling the Senate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 15, 2020, 11:04:04 PM
Can anyone confirm...

Today I heard that PPP loans (100% taxpayer-funded) were originally given out to businesses and, in exchange for the money, if 100% went to employees/payroll, the loans were forgiven.

But, somewhere in the legislative process, that % was changed to 60%. So any company that received money, only had to spend 60% of the total on payroll and the entire loan amount would be forgiven. That would mean any company who applied, got approved and accepted a loan of any amount, got a taxpayer-funded "gift" of 40% of the amount of the their loan.

Is that correct?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 15, 2020, 11:06:02 PM
I am frequently reminded of this:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/federal-reserve-to-lend-additional-1-trillion-a-day-to-large-banks

I sure hope we have frequent discussions on what we can/can't afford for individual US citizens.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on December 15, 2020, 11:19:39 PM
I sure hope we have frequent discussions on what we can/can't afford for individual US citizens.

While I'm not naïve enough to thing some of this money won't be wasted and is being throw away, you also seem to be ignoring that it's a loan. 

Quote
That is in addition to $1 trillion in 14-day loans it is offering every week. Banks, so far, have not borrowed nearly as much as the New York Fed is offering, and the loans are quickly repaid. None of the funding is from taxpayer dollars.
 

Also, a lot of this money is being loaned to communities since municipal bonds have lost favor:

Quote
All the Fed’s emergency steps are intended to pump cash into a financial system that has seen a spike in demand for dollars as investors unload Treasuries, municipal bonds, and other securities. With the economy likely in recession, banks, money market funds and other institutional investors are increasingly wary about holding securities that may lose value.

Companies will see revenue and earnings plunge, while local and state governments are likely to see lower tax revenue. That makes it harder for them to borrow.

So in essence, some of these are loans to keep local government entities operating, and keep local (police, fire, schools, water) jobs in tact.

But the sheer volume of money needed is concerning...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 16, 2020, 02:03:20 AM
Can anyone confirm...

Today I heard that PPP loans (100% taxpayer-funded) were originally given out to businesses and, in exchange for the money, if 100% went to employees/payroll, the loans were forgiven.

But, somewhere in the legislative process, that % was changed to 60%. So any company that received money, only had to spend 60% of the total on payroll and the entire loan amount would be forgiven. That would mean any company who applied, got approved and accepted a loan of any amount, got a taxpayer-funded "gift" of 40% of the amount of the their loan.

Is that correct?

That 40% is not a free for all gifted bag of money. The “non-payroll” 40% portion includes rent, mortgage, and utilities paid. You need to layout what funds went where or you’re not being forgiven. We just had our PPP forgiven and it was a 2-3 week process of clarifying and providing proof of valid expenditures
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2020, 06:36:44 AM
That 40% is not a free for all gifted bag of money. The “non-payroll” 40% portion includes rent, mortgage, and utilities paid. You need to layout what funds went where or you’re not being forgiven. We just had our PPP forgiven and it was a 2-3 week process of clarifying and providing proof of valid expenditures

Thanks for clarifying
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2020, 12:23:08 PM
https://www.npr.org/2020/12/16/946739398/scores-of-private-charitable-foundations-got-paycheck-protection-program-money
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 16, 2020, 12:59:23 PM
https://www.npr.org/2020/12/16/946739398/scores-of-private-charitable-foundations-got-paycheck-protection-program-money


I would need to know lot more about what these foundations do before I decided whether this was troubling. If a foundation provides legitimate services to people in need, then I am all for them getting the same type of support as other businesses. But if the foundation is simply a vanity play for the founder (*cough, cough Trump Foundation*), then it would be infuriating.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: LON on December 16, 2020, 01:01:17 PM
That 40% is not a free for all gifted bag of money. The “non-payroll” 40% portion includes rent, mortgage, and utilities paid. You need to layout what funds went where or you’re not being forgiven. We just had our PPP forgiven and it was a 2-3 week process of clarifying and providing proof of valid expenditures

Also, if the loan was over $2M the SBA is going to do an audit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 16, 2020, 01:10:58 PM

I would need to know lot more about what these foundations do before I decided whether this was troubling. If a foundation provides legitimate services to people in need, then I am all for them getting the same type of support as other businesses. But if the foundation is simply a vanity play for the founder (*cough, cough Trump Foundation*), then it would be infuriating.

IMO the threshold is more simple: If you have people on payroll, and your business was negatively impacted by the pandemic, PPP should help you with payroll. No reason to terminate half of your staff because of something totally out of your control.

Even though I am fervently anti-religion, I think that threshold encompasses places of worship and private foundations. All businesses. PPP was capped at something like a $100k salary, which isnt' a ton in a HCOL area. Nobody deserves to lose their paycheck because of this temporary thing. This is literally why I pay my taxes, so that the gov't can provide a backstop in situations like these.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 16, 2020, 01:31:07 PM
IMO the threshold is more simple: If you have people on payroll, and your business was negatively impacted by the pandemic, PPP should help you with payroll. No reason to terminate half of your staff because of something totally out of your control.

Even though I am fervently anti-religion, I think that threshold encompasses places of worship and private foundations. All businesses. PPP was capped at something like a $100k salary, which isnt' a ton in a HCOL area. Nobody deserves to lose their paycheck because of this temporary thing. This is literally why I pay my taxes, so that the gov't can provide a backstop in situations like these.


Very fair points.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 16, 2020, 01:56:52 PM
IMO the threshold is more simple: If you have people on payroll, and your business was negatively impacted by the pandemic, PPP should help you with payroll. No reason to terminate half of your staff because of something totally out of your control.

Even though I am fervently anti-religion, I think that threshold encompasses places of worship and private foundations. All businesses. PPP was capped at something like a $100k salary, which isnt' a ton in a HCOL area. Nobody deserves to lose their paycheck because of this temporary thing. This is literally why I pay my taxes, so that the gov't can provide a backstop in situations like these.

Yup
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2020, 02:21:41 PM
I'm looking for more info, but it appears while the new stimulus doesn't include checks for individuals, it does include subsidies for defense contractors.

Quote
The stimulus legislation released by Republican and Democratic senators yesterday afternoon includes an extension of a program to replace the wages of certain government contractors who miss work due to COVID-19. The program, Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, allows federal agencies to reimburse contractors who are unable to work in person due to the pandemic, and whose jobs do not allow telework, for up to forty hours per week of lost wages. In effect, the program uses government money to reimburse defense contractors for giving paid leave to their employees.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 16, 2020, 02:27:10 PM
I'm looking for more info, but it appears while the new stimulus doesn't include checks for individuals, it does include subsidies for defense contractors.


According to Bloomberg as of 12pm ET:

The No. 2 Senate GOP leader said he expects the deal on pandemic relief to provide direct payments of $600 to $700 for individuals and $300-per-week in enhanced unemployment benefits.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-16/leaders-cite-progress-in-talks-no-deal-yet-congress-update?srnd=premium
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 16, 2020, 02:27:55 PM
IMO the threshold is more simple: If you have people on payroll, and your business was negatively impacted by the pandemic, PPP should help you with payroll. No reason to terminate half of your staff because of something totally out of your control.

Even though I am fervently anti-religion, I think that threshold encompasses places of worship and private foundations. All businesses. PPP was capped at something like a $100k salary, which isnt' a ton in a HCOL area. Nobody deserves to lose their paycheck because of this temporary thing. This is literally why I pay my taxes, so that the gov't can provide a backstop in situations like these.

This.  While we can laugh about Grover norquist and the ayn rand foundation, I will only really get upset if it’s found that it didn’t go for the intended uses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on December 16, 2020, 02:37:47 PM
it does include subsidies for defense contractors.

I can speak to this a bit.  There are many cases where people working in jobs directly relating to national security cannot report to their work locations.  At least to my knowledge it's not a slush fund, and being monitored very closely.  The idea is to keep those people employed because - well - national security.

https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2144750/dod-allows-payments-to-contractors-who-cannot-work-due-to-covid-19-facility-clo/

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2020, 02:39:55 PM
Thanks for updates/clarification

A little more on the defense stuff: https://youtu.be/hxDw9l0Nyh4
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2020, 03:07:13 PM
I can speak to this a bit.  There are many cases where people working in jobs directly relating to national security cannot report to their work locations.  At least to my knowledge it's not a slush fund, and being monitored very closely.  The idea is to keep those people employed because - well - national security.

https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2144750/dod-allows-payments-to-contractors-who-cannot-work-due-to-covid-19-facility-clo/

My only concerns...

1. There are a lot of americans who cannot report to their work locations. Where are their fully nationalized wages?

2. Does this timeline change the though process? https://twitter.com/GunnelsWarren/status/1338705234311442433?s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on December 16, 2020, 03:24:29 PM
1. There are a lot of americans who cannot report to their work locations. Where are their fully nationalized wages?

I don't necessarily disagree.  Though I might suggest that it's more important to protect the county than to serve eggs and bacon.  For instance, you want people around to deal with the aftermath of this:
https://apnews.com/article/us-agencies-hacked-global-cyberspying-328b4936f2535418b27cb90afa858489

(also plenty of criticism for how it happened in the first place, but that's another topic for finger pointing)

2. Does this timeline change the though process? https://twitter.com/GunnelsWarren/status/1338705234311442433?s=19

A little more on the defense stuff: https://youtu.be/hxDw9l0Nyh4

That's a lot of crap.  The CEOs begged for the money, but it's their employees that get the benefits of it.  Without it, another bunch of people would be without jobs/health insurance.  So which do you support, keeping people employed, or not?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on December 16, 2020, 03:56:10 PM
The CARES act provided up to 10 days pay if you had to miss work to quarantine etc. but that expires this month. Will there be another provision to provide this?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on December 16, 2020, 04:21:08 PM
The CARES act provided up to 10 days pay if you had to miss work to quarantine etc. but that expires this month. Will there be another provision to provide this?

I'd guess this is up to the states.  Colorado did it with their "Healthy Families and Workplaces Act" which is in effect, but starting Jan 1:  "In addition to the paid sick leave accrued by an employee, the act requires an employer, regardless of size, to provide its employees an additional amount of paid sick leave during a public health emergency in an amount based on the number of hours the employee works."

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb20-205
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 17, 2020, 02:25:33 PM
USA Today with a piece about universities seeming to have plenty of $$$ to fire and replace coaches even as they claim COVID-19 has killed them financially ...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2020/12/17/college-football-coach-firing-costs-rise-much-75-million/3930808001/?fbclid=IwAR0BRnpjF-Z4juCJ3208tkS6PjU3TupC7aJd1g1Ge-cU3F_KeNdlogaxdUk

The University of Arizona athletic department announced some troubling news last month in Tucson.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Wildcats said they faced $45 million in losses and were forced to make job cuts, including 21 layoffs.

Athletic director Dave Heeke called it “a difficult day of very tough decisions.”

“These challenging economic times have affected all of us,” Heeke said then.

Less than six weeks later, the Wildcats didn’t seem quite as broke. After his football team lost its 12th consecutive game dating to 2019, Heeke fired coach Kevin Sumlin and put Arizona on the hook to pay Sumlin $7.3 million to buy out his contract, half of which is due to Sumlin within 30 days of his termination.

This is part of a surprising trend in recent days. Despite claiming financial trouble during the pandemic, several major college football programs found the huge sums of money necessary to fire coaches for not winning enough games during a truncated season filled with disruption.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 17, 2020, 02:27:14 PM
USA Today with a piece about universities seeming to have plenty of $$$ to fire and replace coaches even as they claim COVID-19 has killed them financially ...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2020/12/17/college-football-coach-firing-costs-rise-much-75-million/3930808001/?fbclid=IwAR0BRnpjF-Z4juCJ3208tkS6PjU3TupC7aJd1g1Ge-cU3F_KeNdlogaxdUk

The University of Arizona athletic department announced some troubling news last month in Tucson.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Wildcats said they faced $45 million in losses and were forced to make job cuts, including 21 layoffs.

Athletic director Dave Heeke called it “a difficult day of very tough decisions.”

“These challenging economic times have affected all of us,” Heeke said then.

Less than six weeks later, the Wildcats didn’t seem quite as broke. After his football team lost its 12th consecutive game dating to 2019, Heeke fired coach Kevin Sumlin and put Arizona on the hook to pay Sumlin $7.3 million to buy out his contract, half of which is due to Sumlin within 30 days of his termination.

This is part of a surprising trend in recent days. Despite claiming financial trouble during the pandemic, several major college football programs found the huge sums of money necessary to fire coaches for not winning enough games during a truncated season filled with disruption.

Sports boosters don't care about an economic depression because they live in the corporate oligarch class. They'll get bailed out if they ever face financial difficulty
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 17, 2020, 02:59:37 PM
USA Today with a piece about universities seeming to have plenty of $$$ to fire and replace coaches even as they claim COVID-19 has killed them financially ...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2020/12/17/college-football-coach-firing-costs-rise-much-75-million/3930808001/?fbclid=IwAR0BRnpjF-Z4juCJ3208tkS6PjU3TupC7aJd1g1Ge-cU3F_KeNdlogaxdUk

The University of Arizona athletic department announced some troubling news last month in Tucson.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Wildcats said they faced $45 million in losses and were forced to make job cuts, including 21 layoffs.

Athletic director Dave Heeke called it “a difficult day of very tough decisions.”

“These challenging economic times have affected all of us,” Heeke said then.

Less than six weeks later, the Wildcats didn’t seem quite as broke. After his football team lost its 12th consecutive game dating to 2019, Heeke fired coach Kevin Sumlin and put Arizona on the hook to pay Sumlin $7.3 million to buy out his contract, half of which is due to Sumlin within 30 days of his termination.

This is part of a surprising trend in recent days. Despite claiming financial trouble during the pandemic, several major college football programs found the huge sums of money necessary to fire coaches for not winning enough games during a truncated season filled with disruption.


You realize the money isn't fungible right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 17, 2020, 04:42:28 PM

You realize the money isn't fungible right?

Nobody that complains about it seems to. It’s the same as when they put up the same “highest paid state employee in every state” shock and awe graphic.  You can make compelling arguments about paying athletes when examining athletic department revenues and coaches salaries, but continuing to use athletic department expenditures to contrast financial struggles in universities is misguided at best, and dishonest at worst.

I won’t even touch that  ::) worthy booster comment
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 17, 2020, 05:13:27 PM
That's a lot of crap.  The CEOs begged for the money, but it's their employees that get the benefits of it.  Without it, another bunch of people would be without jobs/health insurance.  So which do you support, keeping people employed, or not?

I want people employed. But I want them ALL employed. Not just some sectors/donors.

And if they can't work/forced to shutdown due to government mandate, their wages should be paid by that government.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 17, 2020, 05:13:40 PM
Good news!

https://youtu.be/vtVebYg0Tu8
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 17, 2020, 09:19:22 PM
Nobody that complains about it seems to. It’s the same as when they put up the same “highest paid state employee in every state” shock and awe graphic.  You can make compelling arguments about paying athletes when examining athletic department revenues and coaches salaries, but continuing to use athletic department expenditures to contrast financial struggles in universities is misguided at best, and dishonest at worst.

I won’t even touch that  ::) worthy booster comment

Right. They treat it all like it was funded by tax dollars. It’s not.  Very likely none of it was.

Legally it state dollars, but the state is just a vehicle from one entity to another for a specific purpose.

But that’s not as impressive a headline.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 18, 2020, 01:13:02 PM
Thanks for foisting this guy on the rest of us, Wisconsin.
Clearly the solution for those who can't pay the mortgage is lower emission standards.

 The Recount @therecount
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) objects to a relief bill, saying stimulus bills don't stimulate the economy.
He instead proposes “lower regulation” and “a competitive tax system.”


https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1339992007037607936
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 18, 2020, 01:51:18 PM
Thanks for foisting this guy on the rest of us, Wisconsin.
Clearly the solution for those who can't pay the mortgage is lower emission standards.

 The Recount @therecount
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) objects to a relief bill, saying stimulus bills don't stimulate the economy.
He instead proposes “lower regulation” and “a competitive tax system.”


https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1339992007037607936

Sorry about that, he's the worst.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 18, 2020, 02:19:21 PM
Thanks for foisting this guy on the rest of us, Wisconsin.
Clearly the solution for those who can't pay the mortgage is lower emission standards.

 The Recount @therecount
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) objects to a relief bill, saying stimulus bills don't stimulate the economy.
He instead proposes “lower regulation” and “a competitive tax system.”


https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1339992007037607936

Glad he's not one of my Senators.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 18, 2020, 08:20:50 PM
Sorry about that, he's the worst.

He was also the dumbest. Tommy Tuberville will give him a run for dumb, though.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 19, 2020, 08:26:48 AM
Not all state economies are hurting due to COVID-19.

From the NYT:

As Congress has spent the last few weeks debating aid to state and local governments, a number of states have announced surprising news: Their finances no longer look quite as bad as they had feared in the uncertain early days of the pandemic.

States are still broadly hurting from the economic crisis. But California expects a one-time windfall this fiscal year. Wisconsin said it might still be able to sock away some revenue in its rainy day fund. Maryland nudged up its projected revenues, for the second time this fall. And Minnesota forecasts a surplus.

This good news reflects in part the dire economic expectations of six months ago; even modest numbers look good now compared with the worst fears written into state budgets in the spring. And state officials say they’ll still need federal help as they expect the pandemic’s effects to drag on for years and batter local governments. Federal help, after all, is part of what has buoyed them so far.

The states with rosier forecasts also complicate the political fight in Washington over state aid, which is likely to get pushed into the new year after lawmakers dropped the aid from a year-end stimulus deal nearing completion. Republicans have characterized state aid as a bailout for profligate blue states. But many states that are looking better now have among the most progressive tax structures in the country, and that is part of what has rescued them this year.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 20, 2020, 06:24:06 PM
"Members of Congress were paid $130k to spend 9 months arguing about whether you deserve $600."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 21, 2020, 06:37:46 AM
"Members of Congress were paid $130k to spend 9 months arguing about whether you deserve $600."
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/f2b8afd5834383e7534fec110a7cdcc5/tenor.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 21, 2020, 11:00:14 AM
The most important part of the stimulus plan?

Executives will now be able to deduct 100% of their often extravagant lunches from their federal taxes.

Finally, some help for everyday Americans.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 21, 2020, 11:04:55 AM
How many people that are struggling financially as a direct result of the virus are going to be made whole by $600/1200?

Seriously, this is a joke.

If the fed can print money for banks/lending/wall street, it can print money for individuals directly effected by the virus.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 21, 2020, 11:06:01 AM
How many people that are struggling financially as a direct result of the virus are going to be made whole by $600/1200?

Seriously, this is a joke.

If the fed can print money for banks/lending/wall street, it can print money for individuals directly effected by the virus.

You miss the point.

Rich people make the rules.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on December 21, 2020, 11:08:00 AM
How many people that are struggling financially as a direct result of the virus are going to be made whole by $600/1200?

Seriously, this is a joke.

If the fed can print money for banks/lending/wall street, it can print money for individuals directly effected by the virus.

Yeah that is a huge joke. I mean the cheapest place I ever lived was 500/month and tack on utilities the  600 would barely have gotten me enough groceries to make it through the month. It's unbelievably disappointing that our government would have this be the best they can do
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 21, 2020, 11:10:07 AM
I hope you people realize that the $600 was pushed by one side who refused to talk more if that was increased.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 21, 2020, 11:16:20 AM
The $1,200 from last April and the $600 from this bill are not meant to make people whole.  It's stimulus money that is supposed to be spent in a way to generate economic activity.  And it didn't really work because most people stuck it into their savings accounts.

You make people whole through enhanced unemployment benefits until the economy gets back on its feet more naturally.  Until late spring or summer.  I don't think the amount passed is enough IMO.  That is where the focus should be.  Not giving people more money who are largely already whole.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 21, 2020, 11:27:08 AM
The $1,200 from last April and the $600 from this bill are not meant to make people whole.  It's stimulus money that is supposed to be spent in a way to generate economic activity.  And it didn't really work because most people stuck it into their savings accounts.

You make people whole through enhanced unemployment benefits until the economy gets back on its feet more naturally.  Until late spring or summer.  I don't think the amount passed is enough IMO.  That is where the focus should be.  Not giving people more money who are largely already whole.

I think we agree, mostly. That's why I emphasized that any benefits should be for those who have been directly impacted by the virus/shutdowns.

Not all of those impacted have been made unemployed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 21, 2020, 11:37:14 AM
The most important part of the stimulus plan?

Executives will now be able to deduct 100% of their often extravagant lunches from their federal taxes.

Finally, some help for everyday Americans.

if people are actually going out to lunch that will actually have some benefit to restaurants and restaurant workers, especially those whose business is built around the lunch hour (e.g. downtown, corporate areas).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 21, 2020, 11:37:17 AM
I think we agree, mostly. That's why I emphasized that any benefits should be for those who have been directly impacted by the virus/shutdowns.

Not all of those impacted have been made unemployed.


Agreed.  I just don't think anyone should think of stimulus payments as relief.  That's not what they are supposed to be and frankly I think they are not terribly helpful. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 21, 2020, 11:42:57 AM
And it didn't really work because most people stuck it into their savings accounts.

What is your source for this.  Everything I’ve seen says that low income people are spending at or above prior spending levels (ie people who got the money). 

It’s the high income people where spending is down and saving is up (those who did not receive the money).

Granted if there is a study in aggregate that you have seen would love to read it to see if my logic is off. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on December 21, 2020, 11:45:36 AM
I hope you people realize that the $600 was pushed by one side who refused to talk more if that was increased.
Is eligibility for the stimulus still based on 2019 income? Because I imagine for a lot of people, things have drastically changed since the end of 2019.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 21, 2020, 11:50:27 AM
What is your source for this.  Everything I’ve seen says that low income people are spending at or above prior spending levels (ie people who got the money). 

It’s the high income people where spending is down and saving is up (those who did not receive the money).

Granted if there is a study in aggregate that you have seen would love to read it to see if my logic is off. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2020/10/19/how-americans-spent-1200-stimulus-checks/?sh=7cf61be3680f

70% either stuck it in a savings account or paid down debt.  Neither are activities that stimulate the economy.

But you are correct that those who spent it were largely more poor.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-did-people-do-with-their-1-200-stimulus-checks-finally-an-answer-11597681021

Again, the whole point of these were to *stimulate* the economy.  Which doesn't really work if 70% of the people don't spend it.  And in fact the data above shows that giving people money who don't need it isn't the solution here.  The solution is giving people more through enhanced unemployment, etc.

My point is, give our resources to those who need it.  Not to almost everyone in hopes that they'll spend it and generate economic activity.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 21, 2020, 11:52:29 AM
Debt repayment is spending the money in my book. It cycles more money through the economy.  Only 36% saved it per that report.  So that would be interesting to see the income levels of that group.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on December 21, 2020, 12:07:12 PM
This is the bare minimum deal for Republicans to pass to sell to Georgia voters. Conveniently timed just before the Holidays and and January 5th election.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 21, 2020, 12:16:43 PM

Agreed.  I just don't think anyone should think of stimulus payments as relief. That's not what they are supposed to be and frankly I think they are not terribly helpful.

That's fair.

So what would be vehicles for relief? I think there needs to be more than just unemployment benefits. 15 million lost their insurance. Several million on the verge of eviction.

This is a financial/economic disaster and our leaders are treating it like a small scratch
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 21, 2020, 12:27:25 PM
Debt repayment is spending the money in my book. It cycles more money through the economy.  Only 36% saved it per that report.  So that would be interesting to see the income levels of that group.   


No debt payments isn't spending the money.  You stimulate the economy when you buy something regardless of how you pay for it.  A debt payment just goes back to the finance company, and yes that can be lent out again, but that's no different than what a bank does with your savings account assets.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 21, 2020, 12:28:54 PM
That's fair.

So what would be vehicles for relief? I think there needs to be more than just unemployment benefits. 15 million lost their insurance. Several million on the verge of eviction.

This is a financial/economic disaster and our leaders are treating it like a small scratch


I'm just saying we should be spending money on programs that are going to help those most directly impacted because it will help people who need it AND stimulate the economy. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 21, 2020, 01:17:20 PM
I hope you people realize that the $600 was pushed by one side who refused to talk more if that was increased.

And half the Democrats too.  Republicans don't care about you, Democrats only pretend to.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GB Warrior on December 21, 2020, 04:22:16 PM
The fact that $600 checks came at the expense of state and local aid is criminal. These checks won't  stimulate the economy - they'll go to debt payments and essential items for most Americans, or into a rainy day fund.

Meanwhile, bankrupting S&L governments is the GOP long game.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 21, 2020, 07:54:10 PM
Stuff like this is exactly why the money should be going directly to individuals:

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2020/12/pa-misses-deadline-to-spend-108m-in-rent-mortgage-relief-from-cares-act.html

When you add layers of complexity and give some people control over others' access to the funds, it's going to lead to problems.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 21, 2020, 10:44:23 PM
And half the Democrats too.  Republicans don't care about you, Democrats only pretend to.

The 1st sentence is flat out incorrect.

The 2nd is true.

The 3rd is semi-true.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 22, 2020, 06:35:28 AM
The 1st sentence is flat out incorrect.

The 2nd is true.

The 3rd is semi-true.

Actually, its 100% accurate, and when I said half, I meant most.  I can't believe the Democrats chose Nancy for another round of SOTH.  She has been totally ineffective.

$600 is 'significant'?  Fire that woman into the sun.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 22, 2020, 09:19:28 AM
Actually, its 100% accurate, and when I said half, I meant most.  I can't believe the Democrats chose Nancy for another round of SOTH.  She has been totally ineffective.

$600 is 'significant'?  Fire that woman into the sun.


In case you don’t pay attention, Pelosi and the Dems in the House PASSED a bill with a $1200 dollar payout. McConnell refused to vote on it.

Voting for something virtually unanimously actually means that it wasn’t just by half the Dems. Not too hard to understand.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 22, 2020, 09:33:23 AM
What are folks here who will be getting the $600 (or $1,200 if a couple, or more if there are kids) planning to do with the dough?

I am talking about Scoopers who qualify for it but don't really need it, which applies to a pretty large number (perhaps even the majority) of American citizens.

We will take our $1,200 and do the same thing we did with the $2,400 earlier this year: Give half to our favorite charities, and put the other half in the college investment accounts we have set up for our grandkids.

I have to believe there was a better way to make this stimulus money work as intended: to help those in need while boosting the economy. Making it progressive -- those more in need get more than $600, those less in need get less (or none) -- seems like a logical solution.

But hey, I am happy to help charities and my grandkids, so that's cool too.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on December 22, 2020, 09:35:44 AM
What are folks here who will be getting the $600 (or $1,200 if a couple, or more if there are kids) planning to do with the dough?

I am talking about Scoopers who qualify for it but don't really need it, which applies to a pretty large number (perhaps even the majority) of American citizens.

We will take our $1,200 and do the same thing we did with the $2,400 earlier this year: Give half to our favorite charities, and put the other half in the college investment accounts we have set up for our grandkids.

I have to believe there was a better way to make this stimulus money work as intended: to help those in need while boosting the economy. Making it progressive -- those more in need get more than $600, those less in need get less (or none) -- seems like a logical solution.

But hey, I am happy to help charities and my grandkids, so that's cool too.

Buying a new water heater without feeling the stress of something like that going out when I've already run up my credit card on Christmas gifts.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 22, 2020, 09:40:50 AM
I have to believe there was a better way to make this stimulus money work as intended: to help those in need while boosting the economy. Making it progressive -- those more in need get more than $600, those less in need get less (or none) -- seems like a logical solution.


It definitely should be more progressive.  As was pointed out above, those with lower incomes spent their stimulus checks last time, while those with more income mostly saved it or paid down debt.  So giving more to those with less, would theoretically stimulate the economy more.  Furthermore, it would theoretically lessen the demand on other social programs as well as on unemployment.

But that is antithetical with the trickle-down mindset.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 22, 2020, 10:09:28 AM

In case you don’t pay attention, Pelosi and the Dems in the House PASSED a bill with a $1200 dollar payout. McConnell refused to vote on it.

Voting for something virtually unanimously actually means that it wasn’t just by half the Dems. Not too hard to understand.

Lol they pass dog crap all the time that won't pass, and they KNOW it won't pass.  But they do it all the time for optics.  It is red meat for folks like you, and you eat it up.

Just like the Republicans attempted to repeal Obamacare how many times?  It is political theater for dopes.  Remember when Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, or Mitt Romney 'reached across the aisle' to vote with the Democrats?  How many of those votes were the deciding vote?  It is the APPEARANCE of bipartisanship.  There was enough votes without them, so they were allowed to vote to appear centrist. 

The ONLY reason that this most recent 'stimulus' passed was because the GOP was worried about the races in GA.  The messaging was starting to hurt, so he took away the message.  You know they don't care because Nancy says 600 bucks is 'significant'.  Really?  $600?  It's one of two things here, Jockey, either she believes that $600 was 'significant' and she is massively out of touch OR she is a terrible negotiator.  I'm not sure which is worse.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 22, 2020, 11:31:11 AM
https://www-bloomberg-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-12-21/beer-restaurants-and-nascar-win-tax-breaks-in-virus-relief-bill?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#skip-to-main-content

Wtf are we doing?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 22, 2020, 11:35:44 AM
When your bill is 5,000+ pages long, it will have a ton of sh*t. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on December 22, 2020, 01:21:21 PM
nm
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 22, 2020, 01:26:06 PM
Lol they pass dog crap all the time that won't pass, and they KNOW it won't pass.  But they do it all the time for optics.  It is red meat for folks like you, and you eat it up.

Just like the Republicans attempted to repeal Obamacare how many times?  It is political theater for dopes.  Remember when Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, or Mitt Romney 'reached across the aisle' to vote with the Democrats?  How many of those votes were the deciding vote?  It is the APPEARANCE of bipartisanship.  There was enough votes without them, so they were allowed to vote to appear centrist. 

The ONLY reason that this most recent 'stimulus' passed was because the GOP was worried about the races in GA.  The messaging was starting to hurt, so he took away the message.  You know they don't care because Nancy says 600 bucks is 'significant'.  Really?  $600?  It's one of two things here, Jockey, either she believes that $600 was 'significant' and she is massively out of touch OR she is a terrible negotiator.  I'm not sure which is worse.

You didn't respond to my point.

It has nothing to do with being a good negotiator. McConnell was not going to allow a vote on any bill with a $1200 payment. Period.

Can Nancy get anything done? Ask the 23,000,000 people on Obamacare.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 22, 2020, 01:28:06 PM
And at over 5,000 pages long, it is virtually certain that no elected official knows every detail tucked into the bill. Cut, paste, revise until it is unreadable and largely unread, except by teams of staffers....
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 22, 2020, 01:31:52 PM
What are folks here who will be getting the $600 (or $1,200 if a couple, or more if there are kids) planning to do with the dough?



Same as last time. Local food banks.

We don't need the money and shouldn't even get the money. But at least it will go to good use. Win/win. Food banks will get the money into the economy and people that are suffering will get help.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 22, 2020, 02:17:24 PM
You didn't respond to my point.

It has nothing to do with being a good negotiator. McConnell was not going to allow a vote on any bill with a $1200 payment. Period.

Can Nancy get anything done? Ask the 23,000,000 people on Obamacare.

lmfao.  This is exactly why Democrats are awful too.  So, I'm not surprised you don't see it either.  Ever wonder WHY McConnell caved and went for the $600 'stimulus'?  Could it be that the GOP was worried about the races in GA?  YUP.  And that's it.  He has no altruistic reason to just agree to $600 out of the blue.  As usual, the Democrats have an advantage and fail to press it.  And who gets what they want again?  McConnell and the GOP.  $600 for the plebs and billions for corporations... not to mention his two GA senate candidates get to remove the heat on them.  Do you see why this was dog crap negotiating yet?  She used her ONLY advantage to pull off a one time payment of $600 for working class people... and you're congratulating her?  For the Democrats, capitulation is applauded.  Major yikes.

As for Obamacare, the Democrats had the majority in both houses in 2008, and the Presidency, and the best they could get was Obamacare.  A retread of what Nixon proposed back in the 70's.  Wow, so impressive.  Meanwhile, the teeth has been taken completely out of the ACA, and the cost of healthcare continues to rise... and people who could barely afford it before 2020 can't pay their rent... how are they going to pay for their health insurance?  Short answer, they won't. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 22, 2020, 02:30:01 PM
The phase-out is at lower income levels this time, so checks will go to fewer people who don't need the money.

The first round of checks phased out at AGI of $99k for an individual or $198k for a couple filing jointly. This time it's $87k and $174k. Too bad they didn't use that to give more to people who really need it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 22, 2020, 03:09:57 PM
Give it to MU basketball so Woj can recruit more 5 stars. He needs it 'cuz his 3 and 4 stars are tired 9 games inta da season, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 22, 2020, 04:55:57 PM
lmfao.  This is exactly why Democrats are awful too.  So, I'm not surprised you don't see it either.  Ever wonder WHY McConnell caved and went for the $600 'stimulus'?  Could it be that the GOP was worried about the races in GA?  YUP.  And that's it.  He has no altruistic reason to just agree to $600 out of the blue.  As usual, the Democrats have an advantage and fail to press it.  And who gets what they want again?  McConnell and the GOP.  $600 for the plebs and billions for corporations... not to mention his two GA senate candidates get to remove the heat on them.  Do you see why this was dog crap negotiating yet?  She used her ONLY advantage to pull off a one time payment of $600 for working class people... and you're congratulating her?  For the Democrats, capitulation is applauded.  Major yikes.

As for Obamacare, the Democrats had the majority in both houses in 2008, and the Presidency, and the best they could get was Obamacare.  A retread of what Nixon proposed back in the 70's.  Wow, so impressive.  Meanwhile, the teeth has been taken completely out of the ACA, and the cost of healthcare continues to rise... and people who could barely afford it before 2020 can't pay their rent... how are they going to pay for their health insurance?  Short answer, they won't.

You don't understand how Obamacare works. If people only make enough where they can barely pay their rent, there is virtually no cost for Obamacare.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on December 22, 2020, 05:28:29 PM
You don't understand how Obamacare works. If people only make enough where they can barely pay their rent, there is virtually no cost for Obamacare.
Except for the copays and deductibles, and medicine
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 22, 2020, 06:53:29 PM
You don't understand how Obamacare works. If people only make enough where they can barely pay their rent, there is virtually no cost for Obamacare.

LOL.  I HAVE LITERALLY USED THE MARKETPLACE EVERY YEAR SINCE IT OPENED, AND ASSIST MY EMPLOYEES, ANNUALLY, TO DO THE SAME.  I sit next to them and explain what a deductible is, what a copay is, and help them to understand all of this.  So, you could say, I'm pretty well versed in Obamacare, bucko.

You know what, screw it, I'll do the work for you even.  I ran an average employee, and they'd be looking at $211/month for a silver plan.  This is 8.13% of their household income.  They're eligible for $351/mo TAX CREDIT.  This doesn't account for deductibles.  So that is what they pay if they never go to the hospital, and only go for the checkups.  Looks like the total possible out of pocket max for this plan is $6,800.  Well, as long as you stay in network.

https://www.kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 22, 2020, 08:03:30 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/22/congress-tax-breaks-stimulus/?outputType=amp

*Sigh*

Am I a jerk if I hope Trump vetoes this?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 22, 2020, 08:10:35 PM
https://twitter.com/RealSpikeCohen/status/1340912327667888129?s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 22, 2020, 08:25:08 PM
https://twitter.com/RealSpikeCohen/status/1340912327667888129?s=19

That is flat out wrong. There is enhanced unemployment, aid for schools and higher education, aid for states for testing and vaccine distribution, rental assistance, etc. Also a good portion of what’s going to corporations is the PPP program, which is supposed to prevent people from needing unemployment in the first place.

I’m not saying it’s great, but the author of that tweet is either lying or dumb.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 22, 2020, 09:02:07 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/22/congress-tax-breaks-stimulus/?outputType=amp

*Sigh*

Am I a jerk if I hope Trump vetoes this?

What'd you do? Call him directly?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 22, 2020, 09:09:43 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/22/congress-tax-breaks-stimulus/?outputType=amp

*Sigh*

Am I a jerk if I hope Trump vetoes this?
Probably.   The country needs what it can get now.   There will be more proposals later.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 22, 2020, 10:02:59 PM
Am I a jerk if I hope Trump vetoes this?

Classic.

His own Treasury Secretary is behind the $600 checks, and the Senate Majority Leader has been blocking any kind of deal for months and months and months ... and here we are.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on December 23, 2020, 07:10:51 AM
Classic.

His own Treasury Secretary is behind the $600 checks, and the Senate Majority Leader has been blocking any kind of deal for months and months and months ... and here we are.
I'm with Tulsi on this one.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2020, 07:52:54 AM
I'm with Tulsi on this one.

And Rashida.  8-)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 23, 2020, 12:32:59 PM
I'm with Tulsi on this one.

Me too. But I'm not for starting the process over from Square 1. Get some $$$ out now and then go at it again next month.

The lamest duck has ignored the process for weeks and weeks because there's only so much time left in the day after all the golfing and subverting of democracy. But now he's suddenly overruling his own treasury secretary, apparently to distract from his pardoning of his Felon Club. He's a master at shouting, "Squirrel!" that's for sure.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 23, 2020, 01:42:50 PM
https://twitter.com/KyleKulinski/status/1341558985858686978?s=19

*Eyeballs emoji*
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 23, 2020, 02:06:36 PM
My favorite buried amendment is the budget increase for the congressional-only healthcare clinic.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2020, 02:45:53 PM
https://twitter.com/KyleKulinski/status/1341558985858686978?s=19

*Eyeballs emoji*

Hmmm why would Trump do this?  How does this benefit Trump.  Oh, it is an assault on the GOP, who he feels has abandoned him and his attempt to overthrow the election.  So he is going to do the next best thing to benefiting himself, hurting those who didn't want to help him. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on December 23, 2020, 02:55:11 PM
It’s win/win for him, and that’s all it is about.  Congress R’s cave, DTJ congratulates himself, R’s hold their ground...DTJ, look, I was fighting for you, but let’s primary everyone who dare speak against me.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 23, 2020, 03:56:30 PM
Hmmm why would Trump do this?  How does this benefit Trump.  Oh, it is an assault on the GOP, who he feels has abandoned him and his attempt to overthrow the election.  So he is going to do the next best thing to benefiting himself, hurting those who didn't want to help him.

It’s win/win for him, and that’s all it is about.  Congress R’s cave, DTJ congratulates himself, R’s hold their ground...DTJ, look, I was fighting for you, but let’s primary everyone who dare speak against me.


Yep - it's all about DJT asserting control, taking credit for other peoples' ideas, and punishing 'disloyal' Republicans. In one move, he can congratulate himself for doing what Democrats and a few Republicans (Josh Hawley) have been asking for all along, while sending a message to Republicans who he feels abandoned him in his quest to have the election overturned.

And everybody knows that if this goes through, he will be on TV touting the 'Trump stimulus checks.'
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 23, 2020, 04:46:43 PM
Hmmm why would Trump do this?  How does this benefit Trump.  Oh, it is an assault on the GOP, who he feels has abandoned him and his attempt to overthrow the election.  So he is going to do the next best thing to benefiting himself, hurting those who didn't want to help him.

There are two reasons.

1. Revenge against McConnell for acknowledging that Biden won. Unwavering loyalty is not enough for trump. McConnell committed the unpardonable sin.

2. Its political so I won’t go into it now. If it happens, I will be here to say I told you so (even if I haven’t said it here).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 23, 2020, 05:05:40 PM
You're all correct, of course.

But I'm here for the public Trump/Pelosi vs Mcconnell fight.

*Insert popcorn eating emoji*
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 23, 2020, 05:22:11 PM
You're all correct, of course.

But I'm here for the public Trump/Pelosi vs Mcconnell fight.

*Insert popcorn eating emoji*


No fight. Pelosi will push for $2000. trump will back down. McConnell holds all the cards.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 23, 2020, 05:37:57 PM

No fight. Pelosi will push for $2000. trump will back down. McConnell holds all the cards.



Trump doesn’t back down, regardless of whether he is right or horribly wrong. See, e.g., claims that the election was stolen.

Mitch’s calculus is based on whether refusing to give in to Trump might put the GA runoffs in jeopardy. And Trump doesn’t give a rat’s a$$ about the runoffs; he just wants adulation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 23, 2020, 07:10:00 PM


Trump doesn’t back down, regardless of whether he is right or horribly wrong. See, e.g., claims that the election was stolen.

Mitch’s calculus is based on whether refusing to give in to Trump might put the GA runoffs in jeopardy. And Trump doesn’t give a rat’s a$$ about the runoffs; he just wants adulation.

By back down, I mean he will just change his mind and say he got what he wanted.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 23, 2020, 08:51:16 PM
By back down, I mean he will just change his mind and say he got what he wanted.


Perhaps. But I think the winner will depend on how they view the Georgia Senate races. If the races are close and Trump really wants to push, he can threaten to use his influence to suppress the vote. and I do not put that past him.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 25, 2020, 08:37:13 AM
From the AP article on Republicans in Congress rejecting Trump's out-of-nowhere demand for $2,000 per person checks:

Trump is ending his presidency much the way he started it – sowing confusion and reversing promises all while contesting the election and courting a federal shutdown over demands his own party in Congress will not meet.

The congressional Republican leaders have been left almost speechless by Trump’s year-end scorching of their work.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy helped negotiate the year-end deal, a prized bipartisan compromise, that won sweeping approval this week in the House and Senate after the White House assured GOP leaders that Trump supported it.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin boasted that the $600 checks all sides had agreed to for Americans would be in the mail in a week.

Instead, Washington is now hurling toward a crisis with COVID-19 aid about to collapse, as the president is at his Mar-a-Lago club. He has been lashing out at GOP leaders for refusing to join his efforts to overturn the election that Joe Biden won when the Electoral College votes are tallied in Congress on Jan. 6.

“The best way out of this is for the president to sign the bill,” Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri said Thursday. “And I still hope that’s what he decides.”


But hey, at least the lame duck is working extra hard to correct his duck hook.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 25, 2020, 08:46:53 AM
Problem is that with the January 3 end of term, if he does nothing the bill is pocket vetoed and cannot be overturned.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 25, 2020, 10:16:34 AM
I wonder how the greens are in Florida today.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 25, 2020, 03:54:11 PM
I wonder how the greens are in Florida today.

What's nice is that you, I and the rest of America's taxpayers are treating the Secret Service and the rest of the entourage to rooms, food and beverages at Mar-A-Lago at rack rates, with the profits going directly into the bank account of the president of the United States.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 25, 2020, 04:06:53 PM
What's nice is that you, I and the rest of America's taxpayers are treating the Secret Service and the rest of the entourage to rooms, food and beverages at Mar-A-Lago at rack rates, with the profits going directly into the bank account of the president of the United States.


https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/245884-trump-i-would-rarely-leave-the-white-house

I would rarely leave the White House because there’s so much work to be done,” Trump, 69, tells ITK. "I would not be a president who took vacations. I would not be a president that takes time off.”

“You don’t have time to take time off,” Trump adds.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on December 25, 2020, 04:21:05 PM
Trump is ending his presidency much the way he started it – sowing confusion and reversing promises all while contesting the election and courting a federal shutdown over demands his own party in Congress will not meet.
It's almost as if putting a narcissistic child in charge of the United States is a bad idea.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 25, 2020, 07:00:38 PM
It's almost as if putting a narcissistic child in charge of the United States is a bad idea.


Who’d have guessed?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 27, 2020, 08:55:34 AM
With the bill sitting unsigned on the lame duck's desk while he chases around his Pro-V1, unemployment benefits expired for millions of Americans yesterday. Also, funding stopped or will stop in days for food banks, rental assistance and other programs for the needy. Merry Effen Xmas!

As President-Elect Biden said: “This abdication of responsibility has devastating consequences.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 27, 2020, 09:56:09 AM
From the Washington Post:

Much of the spending allocations Trump criticized were the exact amounts he requested for those programs in his fiscal 2021 budget:

— $1.3 billion for Egypt and the Egyptian military? Trump’s budget asked for $1.3 billion.

— $134 million for Myanmar? Trump’s budget had sought $131,450,000.

— $40 million for the Kennedy Center? Trump’s budget asked for $40,400,000.
[/b]

As if anybody thinks the mad king even knew what was in his own budget.

And it's not as if he didn't have weeks - months, really - to let Mnuchin and his other negotiators know exactly what he wanted in stimulus relief.

Saying that Mnuchin negotiated the package and Trump was updated by GOP leadership during the talks, Rep. Don Bacon, Republican from Nebraska, added:

“The COVID supplement is a good compromise and the president should take it. The foreign aid items were not part of the COVID bill but did reflect the budget request made by the president. The bill will help struggling small businesses, the unemployed, and those who can’t pay their rent or mortgage. It also will help America get to the place where vaccines are readily available.”


It's all an effen reality TV show, folks, all to feed his ego and his wallet. Just like these last 4 years have been. The only difference between reality and reality TV is that in reality, real people are dying and hurting.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: CreightonWarrior on December 27, 2020, 08:20:20 PM
Reported that Trump signed the bill tonight.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 27, 2020, 08:32:38 PM
Reported that Trump signed the bill tonight.

Good. Don't fight for more for those who need it the most.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 27, 2020, 08:57:36 PM
States cannot pay out benefits for weeks that begin before the bill is signed. Since Trump delayed signing the bill, benefits will not restart until the first week of January. But the benefits will still end in mid-March, effectively trimming the extension to 10 weeks from 11.


In other words, they will all lose one week of benefits. As I have said here (over and over), cruelty IS the point.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 27, 2020, 09:15:27 PM
Just “Look at me!” bluster to distract from the immoral pardons of his criminal associates.

Called the bill a “disgrace” and then signed it anyway. Coward.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on December 28, 2020, 08:58:33 AM
What a wild ride.


Now who would you pick to be coach of Marquette. Trump or wojo?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: SERocks on December 28, 2020, 09:21:38 AM
Now who would you pick to be coach of Marquette. Trump or wojo?

Trump.  We would be unbeaten every year then. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 28, 2020, 09:26:52 AM
Trump.  We would be unbeaten every year then.


Yeah, but we'd be tired of winning.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 28, 2020, 01:48:27 PM
What a wild ride.


Now who would you pick to be coach of Marquette. Trump or wojo?

The first guy isn't available. He's coaching Trump U to its 23rd straight national title.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 28, 2020, 02:02:11 PM
And even when Marquette lost, he would appeal 50 different ways to the NCAA with the end result being.... A Marquette loss.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 28, 2020, 02:42:34 PM
Trump.  We would be unbeaten every year then.

We'd also be winless.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 29, 2020, 12:03:25 PM
And even when Marquette lost, he would appeal 50 different ways to the NCAA with the end result being.... A Marquette loss.

Except we’d have zero players left on the team after they were blamed for every loss despite the greatest most outstanding game plans in the history of basketball.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 29, 2020, 01:41:44 PM
With McConnell blocking a vote on $2000 stimulus checks, after sufficient votes to pass it in the Senate, it should be clear to everyone who is blocking economic support.

McConnell and his cronies are doing everything they can to block any support for the average American.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2020, 01:44:22 PM
With McConnell blocking a vote on $2000 stimulus checks, after sufficient votes to pass it in the Senate, it should be clear to everyone who is blocking economic support.

McConnell and his cronies are doing everything they can to block any support for the average American.

It was all orchestrated.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 29, 2020, 02:34:05 PM
Rotten Submitch.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 29, 2020, 03:01:36 PM
It was all orchestrated.

This. So obviously, brazenly political, right down to the suddenly enthusiastic support of the extra stimulus from Georgia's GOP senators.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 29, 2020, 05:18:15 PM
This. So obviously, brazenly political, right down to the suddenly enthusiastic support of the extra stimulus from Georgia's GOP senators.

yuppepperoni
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 29, 2020, 05:50:57 PM
With McConnell blocking a vote on $2000 stimulus checks, after sufficient votes to pass it in the Senate, it should be clear to everyone who is blocking economic support.

McConnell and his cronies are doing everything they can to block any support for the average American.

I’ve been saying this for 6 months.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 30, 2020, 12:43:09 AM
I’ve been saying this for 6 months.

What is hilarious is that he is just doing the bidding of the party.  He is the scapegoat, and he is happy to do it.   Everyone can 'blame' him all they want, but at any point the majority in the senate could remove him as their leader.

But they won't, and they don't.  He catches the heat, and the 'moderate' Republicans get to deflect, furl their brows, and clutch their pearls... and it is 100% for show.  These moderates are fully on board with the plan because its all for show.  And people buy it.  Mitch McConnell is the ultimate cover man.  People need a serious lesson in civics.  He could be removed TOMORROW if the GOP truly wasn't happy with what he is doing.

But they're all on board, and people will continue to fall for this crap because they have no clue how anything works.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on December 30, 2020, 09:41:09 AM
Omni Hotels received $76 million in PPP loans, but it didn't use the money to pay its workers:

https://www.npr.org/2020/12/29/950902403/omni-hotels-accepted-millions-in-ppp-funds-but-didnt-pay-workers
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 30, 2020, 04:03:41 PM
McConnell today:

"The Senate is not going to split apart the three issues that President Trump linked together just because Democrats are afraid to address two of them. The Senate is not going to be bullied into rushing out more borrowed money into the hands of the Democrats' rich friends who don't need the help. We just approved almost $1 trillion in aid a few days ago. It struck a balance between broad support for all kinds of households and a lot more targeted relief for those who need help most."

Outstanding job avoiding the fact that it is Trump who suggested the $2,000, who threatened to veto the stimulus bill over the $2,000 and who is still aggressively pushing for the $2,000. And it was Trump who called the bill (now the legislation) that McConnell is lauding "a disgrace."

But yeah ... blame the Dems.

Hate him or hate him more, he's good at his job.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 30, 2020, 04:09:25 PM
Masters of messaging and misdirection.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 30, 2020, 04:32:19 PM
I learned that senate procedure allows for any individual senator to bring a bill to the floor.

So Hawley, Sanders or anyone else could bring a clean $2k bill by themselves.

(Please correct any misunderstandings I have)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 30, 2020, 05:03:35 PM
I learned that senate procedure allows for any individual senator to bring a bill to the floor.

So Hawley, Sanders or anyone else could bring a clean $2k bill by themselves.

(Please correct any misunderstandings I have)

Anyone can block it too
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 30, 2020, 05:10:44 PM
I learned that senate procedure allows for any individual senator to bring a bill to the floor.

So Hawley, Sanders or anyone else could bring a clean $2k bill by themselves.

(Please correct any misunderstandings I have)

Yes, they can bring it TO the floor, but...

To consider a bill on the floor, the Senate (as a whole) first must agree to bring it UP – typically by agreeing to a unanimous consent request or by voting to adopt a motion to proceed to the bill.


So they could bring a clean bill to the floor, but the 1st vote is over whether to consider the bill - not voting on the actual bill itself. That is why, even though the House has passed several hundred bills, the Senate never even has a vote on them.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 30, 2020, 05:44:23 PM
Yes, they can bring it TO the floor, but...

To consider a bill on the floor, the Senate (as a whole) first must agree to bring it UP – typically by agreeing to a unanimous consent request or by voting to adopt a motion to proceed to the bill.


So they could bring a clean bill to the floor, but the 1st vote is over whether to consider the bill - not voting on the actual bill itself. That is why, even though the House has passed several hundred bills, the Senate never even has a vote on them.

Thanks for the clarification.

So couldn't they bring a clean bill to floor and see who says "no" to voting on it? Wouldn't that, in effect, be voting on the bill itself? Who is going to vote for a senator who wouldn't even be willing to vote for a bill that a significant portion of the public supports?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 30, 2020, 05:48:12 PM
Thanks for the clarification.

So couldn't they bring a clean bill to floor and see who says "no" to voting on it? Wouldn't that, in effect, be voting on the bill itself? Who is going to vote for a senator who wouldn't even be willing to vote for a bill that a significant portion of the public supports?

One person can block it and that person is MM right now. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 30, 2020, 06:20:11 PM
One person can block it and that person is MM right now.

Yup. He has blocked hundreds of bills in the last 2 years.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on December 30, 2020, 08:24:05 PM
Yup. He has blocked hundreds of bills in the last 2 years.


And a Supreme Court justice in 2016....
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 30, 2020, 10:06:04 PM
Yup. He has blocked hundreds of bills in the last 2 years.

It's the third stimulus bill that the House passed easily but MM never let the Senate vote on. This one has by far the most bipartisan support.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 02, 2021, 08:54:32 AM
Interesting report on the economy from the NYT (I bolded two paragraphs for emphasis) ...

The central, befuddling economic reality of the United States at the close of 2020 is that everything is terrible in the world, while everything is wonderful in the financial markets.

It’s a macabre spectacle. Asset prices keep reaching new, extraordinary highs, when around 3,000 people a day are dying of the coronavirus and 800,000 people a week are filing new unemployment claims. Even an enthusiast of modern capitalism might wonder if something is deeply broken in how the economy works.

To better understand this strange mix of buoyant markets and economic despair, it is worth turning to the data. As it happens, the numbers offer a coherent narrative about how the United States arrived at this point – one with lessons about how policy, markets and the economy intersect – and reveal the sharp disparity between the pandemic year’s haves and have-nots.

It starts, as so many epic tales do, with a table of data from the National Income and Product Accounts – namely, “Personal Income and Its Disposition, Monthly.”

This report captures how Americans are earning and spending, two activities that the coronavirus drastically altered in 2020. By combining the numbers from March through November (the latest available) and comparing them with the same period in 2019, we can see more clearly the pandemic’s whipsaw effects.

The first important observation: Salaries and wages fell less, in the aggregate, than even a careful observer of the economy might think. Total employee compensation was down only 0.5% for those nine months, more akin to a mild recession than an economic catastrophe.

That might seem impossible. Large swaths of the economy have been shut down; millions are out of work. The number of jobs employers reported having on their payrolls was down 6.1% in November compared with a year earlier, according to separate Labor Department data.

So how can the number of jobs be down 6% but employee compensation be down only 0.5%? It has to do with which jobs have been lost. The millions of people no longer working because of the pandemic were disproportionately in lower-paying service jobs. Higher-paying professional jobs were more likely to be unaffected, and a handful of other sectors have been booming, such as warehousing and grocery stores, leading to higher incomes for those workers.

The arithmetic is as simple as it is disorienting. If a corporate executive gets a $100,000 bonus for steering a company through a difficult year, while four $25,000-per-year restaurant workers lose their jobs entirely, the net effect on total compensation is zero – even though in human terms a great deal of pain has been incurred.


So wages, salaries and other forms of workers’ compensation dropped only a little – $43 billion over the nine months – despite mass unemployment. But there is more to the story.

For all the attacks on the coronavirus relief bill that Congress passed in late March, the degree to which it served to support the incomes of Americans, especially those who lost jobs, is extraordinary.

Americans’ income from unemployment insurance benefits was 25 times higher from March through November 2020 than in the same period of 2019. That partly reflects that millions more jobless people were seeking benefits, of course. But it also reflects a $600 weekly supplement to jobless benefits that the act included through late July – along with a program to support freelance and contract workers who lost jobs and who otherwise would have been ineligible for benefits.

In total, unemployment insurance programs pumped $499 billion more into Americans’ pockets from March to November than the previous year; $365 billion of it was a result of the expansion in the coronavirus relief bill.

The $1,200 checks to most U.S. households that were included in that legislation contributed a further $276 billion to personal income – much of which accrued to families that did not experience a drop in earnings.

And the law’s signature program to encourage businesses to keep people on their payrolls, the Paycheck Protection Program, prevented a collapse in “proprietor’s income” – profits that accrued to owners of businesses and farms. This income rose narrowly, by $29 billion, but would have fallen by $143 billion if not for the PPP and a coronavirus food assistance program.

These are remarkable numbers. When it’s all tallied up, Americans’ cumulative after-tax personal income was $1.03 trillion higher from March to November of 2020 than in 2019, an increase of more than 8%. Some of the pessimism among economic forecasters (and journalists) in the spring reflected a failure to understand just how large and influential those stimulus payments would turn out to be.

By turning to another riveting story, “Personal Consumption Expenditures by Major Type of Product, Monthly,” we see a pattern that may seem obvious with hindsight but was not as easy to predict while the economy was collapsing during the spring.

The obvious part was a decline in spending on services. All those restaurant reservations never made, flights not taken, and sports and concert tickets not bought added up to serious money. Services spending fell by $575 billion, or nearly 8%.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 02, 2021, 09:00:08 AM
Thanks 82. This shows that the relief bill was hugely important, and the next one will be the same. And it supports my assertion that the enhanced unemployment is WAY more important than the $600 stimulus. That is what needs to be kept and enhanced.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 02, 2021, 09:12:00 AM
Thanks 82. This shows that the relief bill was hugely important, and the next one will be the same. And it supports my assertion that the enhanced unemployment is WAY more important than the $600 stimulus. That is what needs to be kept and enhanced.

I totally agree. There have been numerous studies showing that unemployment payments are the single best stimulus available to Americans. Those who receive those payments are highly likely to turn right around and put the money into the economy for crazy things like food, shelter, clothing, utilities, etc.

"Stimulus" money going to those who don't need unemployment payments very often goes into savings or investing. There's nothing wrong with saving and investing; everybody should do it. But it doesn't stimulate the economy, especially in the short-term. Which is the whole idea of "economic stimulus."

It would have been foolhardy to give every man, woman and child $2,000 cash. The Dems were for it because, well, they're Dems. And Trump and select Republicans were for it because it was a brazen political ploy that would have helped them in the short term.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 02, 2021, 09:42:17 AM
Does that imply that the countries who gave regular pandemic economic payments to its citizens is doing the wrong thing?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 02, 2021, 09:52:01 AM
Does that imply that the countries who gave regular pandemic economic payments to its citizens is doing the wrong thing?


Yeah I think so.  By and large, the US economy fared better in 2020 than Europe did.  Giving people money who don't need it isn't stimulating an economy that is largely shut down.  As 82 mentioned, those people are sticking it in savings accounts or paying down debt.

Giving money to those who are unemployed, and to small business owners to help maintain payroll, seem to be better economic "stimulation" than just cutting checks to everyone.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 02, 2021, 10:31:43 AM

Yeah I think so.  By and large, the US economy fared better in 2020 than Europe did.  Giving people money who don't need it isn't stimulating an economy that is largely shut down.  As 82 mentioned, those people are sticking it in savings accounts or paying down debt.

Giving money to those who are unemployed, and to small business owners to help maintain payroll, seem to be better economic "stimulation" than just cutting checks to everyone.

Okay.

What about a slight pivot here. What if we're not talking about "economic stimulus"? What if we're talking about people who lost their jobs or took pay cuts directly as a result of government mandated shutdowns? Should they be made whole or more whole by direct government support?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on January 02, 2021, 10:33:16 AM

Yeah I think so.  By and large, the US economy fared better in 2020 than Europe did.  Giving people money who don't need it isn't stimulating an economy that is largely shut down.  As 82 mentioned, those people are sticking it in savings accounts or paying down debt.

Giving money to those who are unemployed, and to small business owners to help maintain payroll, seem to be better economic "stimulation" than just cutting checks to everyone.

I wasn’t aware that Europe cut checks to everyone.  I am aware that they have very strong unemployment support.  What countries were you referring to?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 02, 2021, 10:35:37 AM
Okay.

What about a slight pivot here. What if we're not talking about "economic stimulus"? What if we're talking about people who lost their jobs or took pay cuts directly as a result of government mandated shutdowns? Should they be made whole or more whole by direct government support?


Isn't that what the enhanced unemployment benefits are doing?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 02, 2021, 10:38:58 AM

Isn't that what the enhanced unemployment benefits are doing?

Not for those still employed (but took a pay cut, reduced hours, etc), afaik.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on January 02, 2021, 11:22:03 AM
Not for those still employed (but took a pay cut, reduced hours, etc), afaik.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Also those who work majority on commission right now. Cant imagine many restaurants and other shops are signing up for marketing businesses like Yelp or Google Ads right now meaning lots of entry sales people are living off crap base pay.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 02, 2021, 11:24:21 AM
Not for those still employed (but took a pay cut, reduced hours, etc), afaik.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

If you are working reduced hours you can collect unemployment under the rules from March. Not sure if that continues under the new law.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on January 02, 2021, 11:24:41 AM

Yeah I think so.  By and large, the US economy fared better in 2020 than Europe did.  Giving people money who don't need it isn't stimulating an economy that is largely shut down.  As 82 mentioned, those people are sticking it in savings accounts or paying down debt.

Giving money to those who are unemployed, and to small business owners to help maintain payroll, seem to be better economic "stimulation" than just cutting checks to everyone.

This is what I have been saying all along. I don't need the money (as I guess is the case for the vast majority on Scoop). Target the $$$ for the people and companies that actually need it. Then it goes back into the economy and is an actual stimulus.

But, sadly, this is Amurica. We are incapable of doing things right, it seems.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: vogue65 on January 02, 2021, 11:55:36 AM
This is what I have been saying all along. I don't need the money (as I guess is the case for the vast majority on Scoop). Target the $$$ for the people and companies that actually need it. Then it goes back into the economy and is an actual stimulus.

But, sadly, this is Amurica. We are incapable of doing things right, it seems.
No problem, besides politics and talking points, give the money away.

How can the government sort out the needy from those not in need?

To get political support you have to give the money to everyone.

Then we have the lawyers, it could be unconstitutional to favor one group over another, equal some thing or other.

When has this country ever been charitable or concerned with the common good besides WW II?

Each man out for himself, winner take all, maximise profit above all, I've got mine screw you, rules don't apply to me, only the strong survive, survival of the fittest, kill or be killed, winning through intimidation, sacrifice is for losers, the end justifies the means, the philosophy goes on.

I used my check to proudly pay part of my estimated taxes, to each his/her own.



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 02, 2021, 12:30:03 PM
If you are working reduced hours you can collect unemployment under the rules from March. Not sure if that continues under the new law.

Yep. For example, Wisconsin has “work share” which basically means you work reduced hours (up to around 50% of your normal hours) and receive partial unemployment. So you would receive 50% of your standard salary biweekly, and a corresponding unemployment payment weekly.

That was a gold mine for some as it still qualified for the $600 (then $300) unemployment benefit. Not saying it was some swindle, but some could theoretically by working 80%, taking Friday off each week, and getting an extra $2400 (or $1200) a month at the time.

But this Work Share expired as of Friday. I’ve heard nothing about it renewing as of yet
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 02, 2021, 12:38:58 PM
Yep. For example, Wisconsin has “work share” which basically means you work reduced hours (up to around 50% of your normal hours) and receive partial unemployment. So you would receive 50% of your standard salary biweekly, and a corresponding unemployment payment weekly.

That was a gold mine for some as it still qualified for the $600 (then $300) unemployment benefit. Not saying it was some swindle, but some could theoretically by working 80%, taking Friday off each week, and getting an extra $2400 (or $1200) a month at the time.

But this Work Share expired as of Friday. I’ve heard nothing about it renewing as of yet

Gotcha. Thank you.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 02, 2021, 03:22:44 PM
Thanks for the clarifications.

I certainly don't think we all need stimulus checks. But those actually hurt by the virus or the government response to the virus do need response.

Unfortunately, our infrastructure doesn't allow quick/easy filtering of just those affected and then paying out to only those. It's all or none when talking about direct payments.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on January 02, 2021, 03:53:21 PM
Sitting on this one until the taxes are done.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 02, 2021, 05:20:07 PM
2 friends of mine both are above the $75K threshold and got scaled down amounts of the $1200 this summer...but both received the full $600 yesterday. Not sure what’s up there
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on January 02, 2021, 07:31:41 PM
2 friends of mine both are above the $75K threshold and got scaled down amounts of the $1200 this summer...but both received the full $600 yesterday. Not sure what’s up there

Do they work on commission or bonuses?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 03, 2021, 02:06:17 PM
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/12/22/amazon-and-walmart-have-raked-in-billions-in-additional-profits-during-the-pandemic-and-shared-almost-none-of-it-with-their-workers/

Somewhat related.. what do people think will be the long term ramifications of ending small-business and giving more power/money to the conglomerates thanks to covid?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 03, 2021, 07:15:58 PM
Do they work on commission or bonuses?

Nope, standard salaried work
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 04, 2021, 08:26:49 PM
2 friends of mine both are above the $75K threshold and got scaled down amounts of the $1200 this summer...but both received the full $600 yesterday. Not sure what’s up there

Interesting, the $600 individual stimulus is definitely income scaled.

I believe the dependent stimulus is not income scaled though.

Is it possible that for the first stimulus, they hadn't filed this years taxes yet, so were on old taxes above the threshold, and this years taxes were on a lower income?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on January 05, 2021, 06:34:06 AM
Interesting, the $600 individual stimulus is definitely income scaled.

I believe the dependent stimulus is not income scaled though.

Is it possible that for the first stimulus, they hadn't filed this years taxes yet, so were on old taxes above the threshold, and this years taxes were on a lower income?

Dependents were scaled
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 05, 2021, 07:50:25 AM
Quick question.  The $1,200 payment from earlier was actually a credit on 2020 taxes that was prepaid.  My understanding is that those who didn't qualify for the $1,200 payment because they were a dependent on someone else's taxes will be able to collect the $1,200 should they now be independent and meet the income qualifications.

Is that the case with this $600 as well?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 05, 2021, 09:46:03 AM
Dependents were scaled

Interesting. Do you have a source. All the calculators I found do not scale dependents. And the dependent part of our stimulus was not scaled in this second stimulus. It was in the first.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUfan12 on January 05, 2021, 09:51:00 AM
Interesting. Do you have a source. All the calculators I found do not scale dependents. And the dependent part of our stimulus was not scaled in this second stimulus. It was in the first.

FWIW what I assume was our dependent payment was definitely scaled.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 05, 2021, 10:31:51 AM
FWIW what I assume was our dependent payment was definitely scaled.

Figured out the details. They are all scaled, but the income threshold changes based on the number of dependents.

Zero: 174k
One: 186k
Two: 198k

For us, numbers wise, it just happened to turn out like it wasn't scaled at all. A fluke of the numbers and scaling.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on January 08, 2021, 07:37:51 AM
https://twitter.com/FullFrontalSamB/status/1347364744009814019?s=19

White House staffers concerned about job prospects.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on January 08, 2021, 07:40:21 AM
Betsy always has selling Amway to fall back on.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 08, 2021, 08:04:29 AM
https://twitter.com/FullFrontalSamB/status/1347364744009814019?s=19

White House staffers concerned about job prospects.

Thoughts and prayers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on January 20, 2021, 08:18:23 AM
Curious, as it appears the next COVID economic relief package will be debated soon, with another $1400 being sent to ~all citizens ..

One thing I haven't read is a phased approach, spreading the dollars out a bit.  Like $500 every two months or something.  Understood, there's costs to sending out checks ..

I imagine the big-ticket industries, automobile,  residential construction, realty .. they'd prefer one big check so people feel immediately flush with cash.   I'd think the rest of the economy would prefer a constant flow of cash.

????
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 20, 2021, 09:55:41 AM
Curious, as it appears the next COVID economic relief package will be debated soon, with another $1400 being sent to ~all citizens ..

One thing I haven't read is a phased approach, spreading the dollars out a bit.  Like $500 every two months or something.  Understood, there's costs to sending out checks ..

I imagine the big-ticket industries, automobile,  residential construction, realty .. they'd prefer one big check so people feel immediately flush with cash.   I'd think the rest of the economy would prefer a constant flow of cash.

????

I'd prefer more of the cash to end up in the hands of people who need it and will immediately put it into the economy vs. those who will invest it - as folks like many of us Scoopers will do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 20, 2021, 10:14:55 AM
IMO, we shouldn't be focusing on "stimulus" payments as much as emergency funds for those directly financially troubled by covid.

Who cares about big ticket items or stimulating the economy when rent, groceries or other necessity items are needed?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 20, 2021, 10:23:47 AM
I'd prefer more of the cash to end up in the hands of people who need it and will immediately put it into the economy vs. those who will invest it - as folks like many of us Scoopers will do.

IMO, we shouldn't be focusing on "stimulus" payments as much as emergency funds for those directly financially troubled by covid.

Who cares about big ticket items or stimulating the economy when rent, groceries or other necessity items are needed?


Yep and yep. 

Studies have shown that this is better economic stimulus anyway.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on January 20, 2021, 11:46:51 AM
2 friends of mine both are above the $75K threshold and got scaled down amounts of the $1200 this summer...but both received the full $600 yesterday. Not sure what’s up there

My wife and I got a total of $435 from the last stimulus check. Her 2019 income was inflated due to a severance package and being hired to a new job before the severance expired. Meanwhile, this year I'd had to take a one day a week furlough since September but that was not taken into account.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on January 20, 2021, 07:34:07 PM
Billy, I've heard Terry Savage talk about some of these issues on the radio like the one you have, and I think there may be a way to deal with it given you 2020 income.  Maybe take a look at her website. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on January 20, 2021, 07:47:54 PM
I read (I believe on CNBC‘s website) that you can adjust for an underpayment when you file your taxes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 20, 2021, 07:58:38 PM
Billy, I've heard Terry Savage talk about some of these issues on the radio like the one you have, and I think there may be a way to deal with it given you 2020 income.  Maybe take a look at her website. 

Yes. I have mentioned this before. The stimulus checks are prepaid credits on your 2020 taxes. So if your circumstances change and it impacts the credit you received you should get the difference credited on your 2020 taxes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on January 21, 2021, 09:15:28 AM
The tax software I used this year asks about any stimulus you received in 2020.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on January 21, 2021, 11:35:59 AM
Billy, I've heard Terry Savage talk about some of these issues on the radio like the one you have, and I think there may be a way to deal with it given you 2020 income.  Maybe take a look at her website.

Thanks, I'll check it out.

Honestly, we really don't need the additional amount to get by (it would just go towards our mortgage payment) but I know there are many others in a similar situation that do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 04, 2021, 09:28:30 AM
AP Report: Sitting on billions, US Catholic dioceses amassed taxpayer pandemic aid

https://apnews.com/article/small-business-public-health-health-coronavirus-pandemic-philanthropy-db3872b0e7885c324592e49f84c9b2f9?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AP%20Morning%20Wire&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

An AP investigation has found that scores of Roman Catholic dioceses in the U.S. had more than $10 billion in cash and other readily available funds when they received at least $1.5 billion from the federal government’s small business emergency relief program.

The Paycheck Protection Program was intended for employers who were badly battered by coronavirus lockdowns. Instead of suffering financially, however, many dioceses are reporting in audited financial statements that these assets ended up growing amid the economic downturn, Reese Dunklin and Michael Rezendes write in this exclusive report.

Overall, Catholic Church recipients were perhaps the paycheck program's biggest beneficiaries. Church officials say they needed government relief to pay staff because donations from the faithful slowed when churches were ordered to close.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 04, 2021, 02:09:14 PM
AP Report: Sitting on billions, US Catholic dioceses amassed taxpayer pandemic aid

https://apnews.com/article/small-business-public-health-health-coronavirus-pandemic-philanthropy-db3872b0e7885c324592e49f84c9b2f9?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AP%20Morning%20Wire&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

An AP investigation has found that scores of Roman Catholic dioceses in the U.S. had more than $10 billion in cash and other readily available funds when they received at least $1.5 billion from the federal government’s small business emergency relief program.

The Paycheck Protection Program was intended for employers who were badly battered by coronavirus lockdowns. Instead of suffering financially, however, many dioceses are reporting in audited financial statements that these assets ended up growing amid the economic downturn, Reese Dunklin and Michael Rezendes write in this exclusive report.

Overall, Catholic Church recipients were perhaps the paycheck program's biggest beneficiaries. Church officials say they needed government relief to pay staff because donations from the faithful slowed when churches were ordered to close.


They need the cash to defend the priests who raped little boys.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on February 04, 2021, 03:42:25 PM
They need the cash to defend the priests who raped little boys.

George Carlin once suggested we could wipe out the national debt by imposing property taxes on the Catholic Church. It's time...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 04, 2021, 03:52:58 PM
George Carlin once suggested we could wipe out the national debt by imposing property taxes on the Catholic Church. It's time...

Impose it across the board too many  store front "churches" and mega churches and pay to get to another level churches out there
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 04, 2021, 04:16:06 PM
I would be fine with church tax exemptions going away, but it would never pass Supreme Court review. If anything, we are likely to see an expanding view of the 'religious exemption' with the current conservative court. We already have religious-themed amusement parks that are tax-exempt (The Holy Land Experience), and conservative groups have been actively trying to expand the exemption so that it would apply to political activities undertaken by churches.

I will leave it at that, except to say the Catholic Church should return this money, so that it can go to small businesses that really need it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 04, 2021, 07:41:12 PM
I don't have a problem with a group or business taking money offered to them.

The problem is that it should never have been made accessible in the first place.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on February 04, 2021, 08:02:23 PM
I don't have a problem with a group or business taking money offered to them.

The problem is that it should never have been made accessible in the first place.

This.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. 

Do you think no one should take tax deductions that they are legally entitled to if they can afford to pay the tax?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 04, 2021, 08:36:27 PM
I don't have a problem with a group or business taking money offered to them.

The problem is that it should never have been made accessible in the first place.


Yes, the initial availability was a problem.

But the church wants to preach (literally) moral and ethical values, so it should have been at the front of the line (in front of Shake Shack, Potbelly and Ruth's Chris) to return the money when the economic hit it expected didn't materialize.

The legislation was drafted hastily due to the urgent situation. Companies that took advantage of weaknesses in the law should step froward and do the right thing...without first having to be exposed in an AP investigation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 04, 2021, 08:40:21 PM
And the Rev. James Connell of Milwaukee agrees with me. From the article:

For its analysis, AP consulted experts in church finance and church law. One was the Rev. James Connell, an accountant for 15 years before joining the priesthood and becoming an administrator in the Milwaukee Archdiocese. Connell, also a canon lawyer who is now retired from his position with the archdiocese, said AP’s findings convinced him that Catholic entities did not need government aid — especially when thousands of small businesses were permanently closing.

“Was it want or need?” Connell asked. “Need must be present, not simply the want. Justice and love of neighbor must include the common good.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 04, 2021, 09:09:01 PM
This.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. 

Do you think no one should take tax deductions that they are legally entitled to if they can afford to pay the tax?

You’d be surprised how many people think taking advantage of deductions and loopholes is distasteful and that paying your “appropriate” tax is an honorable civic duty
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 04, 2021, 09:29:56 PM
I didn’t say anything about a taxable organization taking advantage of deductions. We are talking about an entity that benefits enormously from  tax-exempt status and literally preaches doing the right thing to its followers. Under those circumstances and given that it is flush with cash, it seems the church should do the right thing.

This has nothing to do with taxable businesses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on February 05, 2021, 12:17:11 AM
You’d be surprised how many people think taking advantage of deductions and loopholes is distasteful and that paying your “appropriate” tax is an honorable civic duty

But do they actually do it?  Do they add an extra amount to the number at the bottom of their tax return and pay that?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 04:13:42 AM
And the Rev. James Connell of Milwaukee agrees with me. From the article:

For its analysis, AP consulted experts in church finance and church law. One was the Rev. James Connell, an accountant for 15 years before joining the priesthood and becoming an administrator in the Milwaukee Archdiocese. Connell, also a canon lawyer who is now retired from his position with the archdiocese, said AP’s findings convinced him that Catholic entities did not need government aid — especially when thousands of small businesses were permanently closing.

“Was it want or need?” Connell asked. “Need must be present, not simply the want. Justice and love of neighbor must include the common good.”



One of the problems that I see is that the Church wants to be a bunch of separate and poor parishes when it benefits them, but in reality they’re not.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 05, 2021, 07:50:42 AM
This is certainly hard to police.  Some companies have been impacted more than others during the pandemic, and of course we all want money to make it to the pockets of workers who would otherwise be unemployed, but how do we determine (quickly) who needs what?  I don't love the approach that the federal government used, but I understand it.  Additionally, the second round of PPP still has money available.  I think the real shame was capping the original amount.  In the time it took for the second round of PPP to be approved, many businesses shuttered and workers were laid off.  The most important part of a fire hose approach would have been the oversight and prosecution of fraud after the money was taken. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on February 05, 2021, 07:57:44 AM
But do they actually do it?  Do they add an extra amount to the number at the bottom of their tax return and pay that?
Some do. Heck, I bet even peopleyhou know.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: SERocks on February 05, 2021, 09:46:28 AM
Some do. Heck, I bet even peopleyhou know.

In my 31 years of preparing tax returns, I have never seen anyone knowingly pay more than the law demanded.  I have seen tons try to pay less than the law demanded.  Anyone who uses the word loophole to indicate that someone is taking advantage of the tax system should be asked if they take the legal deductions that are afforded to them.  Loophole has a connotation that someone is doing something illegal when normally that person is just following the tax laws as written.  Now tax evasion is another matter.  No loophole there, just flat out lying.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on February 05, 2021, 10:27:04 AM
If you do not believe that there is grey areas and everything is black and white when it comes to tax laws, then I am glad I am not using your tax services.

People with complex tax returns may opt not to utilize some of those grey areas.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on February 05, 2021, 10:51:10 AM
Looking at charts this morning about the 1st and 2nd Stimulus checks ..

There's a constant drumbeat that "people are suffering" .. and that's true, millions are.  But the stats show that the checks .. didn't hit the mark.

Firstly, amazingly, in 2020 incomes went way up due to government checks, spending went way down.  The estimate is that there's $1.6 *trillion* in excess cash in the consumer economy ("dry powder.")

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim check.

All the rest of the stim dollars were saved / used to pay down debt. 

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 

That's just nuts.   It seems like the best argument is that *maybe maybe* in 9-12-18 months there will be pent up spending from stimulus checks.  That's pretty weak for $450 billion.   

I'd rather make that $100b targeted to household incomes below $50k, and $350b on just about anything else, like infrastructure. 

Or .. fine, if you want to dole out $1400 pp, phase it where the under $50k crowd gets it immediately, the others receive the money in 9 months when the economy is open and they can spend it on travel, restaurants, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on February 05, 2021, 11:07:45 AM
If you do not believe that there is grey areas and everything is black and white when it comes to tax laws, then I am glad I am not using your tax services.

People with complex tax returns may opt not to utilize some of those grey areas.

There is a big difference between tax advantages that you are clearly qualified for, and "gray areas" in which you aren't 100% sure, but you cross your fingers and hope The IRS agrees with you if you get audited. Some people don't mind taking an aggressive position; others wouldn't want the potential hassle or risk.

If you really aren't taking certain tax breaks because you truly believe that you aren't paying enough tax, wouldn't you be better off taking the deduction and giving that money to a well-run charitable welfare organization? If you give it to the government, they might spend it on something evil like farm subsidies or the military.  :)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 05, 2021, 11:08:49 AM
Looking at charts this morning about the 1st and 2nd Stimulus checks ..

There's a constant drumbeat that "people are suffering" .. and that's true, millions are.  But the stats show that the checks .. didn't hit the mark.

Firstly, amazingly, in 2020 incomes went way up due to government checks, spending went way down.  The estimate is that there's $1.6 *trillion* in excess cash in the consumer economy ("dry powder.")

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim check.

All the rest of the stim dollars were saved / used to pay down debt. 

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 

That's just nuts.   It seems like the best argument is that *maybe maybe* in 9-12-18 months there will be pent up spending from stimulus checks.  That's pretty weak for $450 billion.   

I'd rather make that $100b targeted to household incomes below $50k, and $350b on just about anything else, like infrastructure. 

Or .. fine, if you want to dole out $1400 pp, phase it where the under $50k crowd gets it immediately, the others receive the money in 9 months when the economy is open and they can spend it on travel, restaurants, etc.

I think the phased check is a great idea. Currently outside of takeout, home improvement and buying GameStop stock there's not much you can do with the checks so of course they're not going to help much. But you're right the moment things are open again, let's say late summer or fall, a payout would be massive to get everyone going out to dinner, movies, concert, ball game, trip etc. and really get spending.

It also might help speed up the return to normal and get people more psychologically ready to return to normal.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 11:10:11 AM
Continuing the enhanced unemployment would be much better for the economy.  Or even finding a way to restore some lost income even if they aren't unemployed.

However it isn't as politically feasible.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on February 05, 2021, 11:22:08 AM
Looking at charts this morning about the 1st and 2nd Stimulus checks ..

There's a constant drumbeat that "people are suffering" .. and that's true, millions are.  But the stats show that the checks .. didn't hit the mark.

💯

Firstly, amazingly, in 2020 incomes went way up due to government checks, spending went way down.  The estimate is that there's $1.6 *trillion* in excess cash in the consumer economy ("dry powder.")

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim check.

All the rest of the stim dollars were saved / used to pay down debt. 

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 

That's just nuts.   It seems like the best argument is that *maybe maybe* in 9-12-18 months there will be pent up spending from stimulus checks.  That's pretty weak for $450 billion.   

I'd rather make that $100b targeted to household incomes below $50k, and $350b on just about anything else, like infrastructure. 

Or .. fine, if you want to dole out $1400 pp, phase it where the under $50k crowd gets it immediately, the others receive the money in 9 months when the economy is open and they can spend it on travel, restaurants, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on February 05, 2021, 12:10:42 PM

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim chec

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 



For your first point, the checks were significantly smaller and had reductions. The check my wife was reduced from the $1200 amount by 2/3rds.

As for the idea that using it to pay debt is bad, how many people would use it to pay off debt that was accumulated during COVID due to income reductions or other hardships? The biggest issue I have is those who suffered financially due to COVID may not receive it because they were doing "well" in 2019.

For example, one of my friends is a soccer coach. He still has his job but lost all of his camp income this past summer (his primary source of income), but 2019 tax returns meant no check. Another friend is a HS basketball coach - no season and no camps/lessons resulted in a significant loss in income. But, 2019 says he was doing well, so no stimulus check.  I had a 26% decrease due to cuts/furlough. But, I don't qualify for the new stimulus because of 2019 returns.

Also, setting an income ceiling of $50K or $75K isn't equitable. $75K in Manitowoc is a hell of a lot more than $75K in San Jose. My condo is 1/3 the size of my parents' house, but cost $20K more, due to location. Telling someone in San Diego "you made $76K in 2019, you're doing just fine and don't need any help" is ignoring reality.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on February 05, 2021, 12:58:27 PM

As for the idea that using it to pay debt is bad..

I didn't say that, there's nothing "bad" about paying debt -- but the point of the bill is to assist people who lost (some/all) of their income during the pandemic, and stimulate the economy .. not pay for debts accumulated prior to the pandemic.   

I'm happy to entertain various factors for income ceilings.    Yadda yadda, the income assistance and economic stimulus should be (better) targeted to the variety of people who need it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 05, 2021, 01:01:14 PM
I think generally, spending is down across the board.  People aren't 'doing things', they're just sitting at home and using the 'stuff' they already own.

In general, people save money during uncertain times.  If we'd have approached this differently, that money would probably be moving around the economy.  $500 per month starting in April or May and we'd be in a better place.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 05, 2021, 01:03:11 PM
Really? Who's gonna pay for all these give-a-ways, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 01:06:15 PM
Really? Who's gonna pay for all these give-a-ways, hey?


From the same place we paid for the Trump tax cuts.

Seriously, if there is anything the last 12 years have taught is is that the deficit / debt doesn't really mean all that much.  It certainly isn't inflationary.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 05, 2021, 01:11:05 PM
There has been some other economic impacts that I'm seeing in manufacturing (listed below) and it will effect the next several months probably longer for sure although I'm not sure what those effects will be?  My company is near the bottom of the food chain and these things work their way up.

* The COVID snowball rolling down hill is catching up to manufacturing.  With workers in and out of work due to COVID related reasons, lead times for making anything have doubled.  My domestic metal raw material suppliers have doubled their lead times from 2-5 weeks to 6-10 weeks.  The same for my packaging related items (wood for pallets, corrugated and plastic spools).  My company is backed up too as we've had people in and out.
* Copper and steel raw material has increased about 20-25% since October and aluminum about 10%.  We're passing on to our customers who I'm sure will pass on to theirs..........
* Anything coming from Asia one must add 6 weeks to normal best case and probably more.  There are no containers or enough ships for sea transport and Chinese New Year starting next week will ensure next to nothing is moving the next 2 weeks.   My contact at my parent company, Mitsubishi Materials, told me this morning that the transportation companies in Japan are telling everyone don't even call us until March to try and book sea transport. 
* Because of the above container issue, people will be using air transport which is 3 times more expensive just to keep the lines running.  That cost will get passed on too.
* We're seeing customers increase order sizes in an attempt to compensate for the longer lead times which just.........increases the lead times even further. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 05, 2021, 01:28:12 PM
Really? Who's gonna pay for all these give-a-ways, hey?

Everyone.  And all of them have net positive results for the economy as a whole.  As opposed to tax cuts for the super rich.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 05, 2021, 01:29:59 PM

From the same place we paid for the Trump tax cuts.

Seriously, if there is anything the last 12 years have taught is is that the deficit / debt doesn't really mean all that much.  It certainly isn't inflationary.
Republicans are only fiscally concerned when there is a Democratic President. Now what could explain that?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on February 05, 2021, 03:20:26 PM
I didn't say that, there's nothing "bad" about paying debt -- but the point of the bill is to assist people who lost (some/all) of their income during the pandemic, and stimulate the economy .. not pay for debts accumulated prior to the pandemic.   

I'm happy to entertain various factors for income ceilings.    Yadda yadda, the income assistance and economic stimulus should be (better) targeted to the variety of people who need it.

how do you know if the debt was accumulated before the pandemic or not? What about someone who has run up credit card debt because they lost income? What about someone who hasn't been paying rent due to loss of income and the ability to take advantage of the rent freezes/eviction moratorium? How about someone like me so had ask for a deferment on student loan payments for the past five months?

Besides, using it to pay debt frees up more for individuals to spend.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 03:30:50 PM
how do you know if the debt was accumulated before the pandemic or not? What about someone who has run up credit card debt because they lost income? What about someone who hasn't been paying rent due to loss of income and the ability to take advantage of the rent freezes/eviction moratorium? How about someone like me so had ask for a deferment on student loan payments for the past five months?

Besides, using it to pay debt frees up more for individuals to spend.


But that's not what they are doing.  People whose income has largely not been touched are not spending the stimulus checks compared to those with less income.  They are either saving it or paying off previous debt.  The whole point of stimulus is that it is spent - like now. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 05, 2021, 03:35:53 PM

But that's not what they are doing.  People whose income has largely not been touched are not spending the stimulus checks compared to those with less income.  They are either saving it or paying off previous debt.  The whole point of stimulus is that it is spent - like now.

If you don't know when your next meal is coming, do you eat meager portions for a while, or go hog wild for a week?

There's your answer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 05, 2021, 03:53:02 PM
Looking at charts this morning about the 1st and 2nd Stimulus checks ..

There's a constant drumbeat that "people are suffering" .. and that's true, millions are.  But the stats show that the checks .. didn't hit the mark.

Firstly, amazingly, in 2020 incomes went way up due to government checks, spending went way down.  The estimate is that there's $1.6 *trillion* in excess cash in the consumer economy ("dry powder.")

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim check.

All the rest of the stim dollars were saved / used to pay down debt. 

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 

That's just nuts.   It seems like the best argument is that *maybe maybe* in 9-12-18 months there will be pent up spending from stimulus checks.  That's pretty weak for $450 billion.   

I'd rather make that $100b targeted to household incomes below $50k, and $350b on just about anything else, like infrastructure. 

Or .. fine, if you want to dole out $1400 pp, phase it where the under $50k crowd gets it immediately, the others receive the money in 9 months when the economy is open and they can spend it on travel, restaurants, etc.

1400<1200+600
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 05, 2021, 03:53:45 PM
Really? Who's gonna pay for all these give-a-ways, hey?

In the list of disingenuous posters here, you're 2nd - only to Pace.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 05, 2021, 04:12:20 PM

Besides, using it to pay debt frees up more for individuals to spend.

This.

I think there is a difference between those who save the $$$ and those who use it to pay down debt.

The second group, with less debt, instantly has more $$$ freed up to put into the economy, so the paying down of debt definitely could stimulate the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: SERocks on February 05, 2021, 04:18:12 PM
... then I am glad I am not using your tax services.


Interesting how after one post you can presume to know my abilities in the tax field and how you presume that I would want you as a client.  The relationship works both ways.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 04:42:48 PM
This.

I think there is a difference between those who save the $$$ and those who use it to pay down debt.

The second group, with less debt, instantly has more $$$ freed up to put into the economy, so the paying down of debt definitely could stimulate the economy.

But...it doesn’t.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on February 05, 2021, 07:04:06 PM
Hard to stimulate an economy that has been at least partially shut down, especially when half of the citizenry is uncomfortable leaving their homes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on February 05, 2021, 07:41:06 PM
Actually it isn’t that hard

The hard part is there are areas of the economy that are better than ever and others that are completely decimated.  Getting the help to the right place is very difficult. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on February 05, 2021, 07:55:23 PM
Actually it isn’t that hard

The hard part is there are areas of the economy that are better than ever and others that are completely decimated.  Getting the help to the right place is very difficult.

My point is when people are afraid to leave their homes and/or large segments of the economy are closed where are people going to spend the money Uncle Sam sends them?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 08:08:10 PM
My point is when people are afraid to leave their homes and/or large segments of the economy are closed where are people going to spend the money Uncle Sam sends them?

What large segments of the economy are closed? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on February 05, 2021, 08:31:23 PM
What large segments of the economy are closed?

I was talking about when the checks first started going out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 05, 2021, 08:33:06 PM
I was talking about when the checks first started going out.

Gotcha
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 05, 2021, 08:34:49 PM
I was talking about when the checks first started going out.

Even at that point - food delivery, Amazon, appliance/furniture stores, clothing, etc.

Tons was "open"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on February 05, 2021, 08:49:14 PM
Even at that point - food delivery, Amazon, appliance/furniture stores, clothing, etc.

Tons was "open"

Sure, it wasn’t impossible to spend money. But it was a lot more difficult.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on February 05, 2021, 09:24:08 PM
For your first point, the checks were significantly smaller and had reductions. The check my wife was reduced from the $1200 amount by 2/3rds.

As for the idea that using it to pay debt is bad, how many people would use it to pay off debt that was accumulated during COVID due to income reductions or other hardships? The biggest issue I have is those who suffered financially due to COVID may not receive it because they were doing "well" in 2019.

For example, one of my friends is a soccer coach. He still has his job but lost all of his camp income this past summer (his primary source of income), but 2019 tax returns meant no check. Another friend is a HS basketball coach - no season and no camps/lessons resulted in a significant loss in income. But, 2019 says he was doing well, so no stimulus check.  I had a 26% decrease due to cuts/furlough. But, I don't qualify for the new stimulus because of 2019 returns.

Also, setting an income ceiling of $50K or $75K isn't equitable. $75K in Manitowoc is a hell of a lot more than $75K in San Jose. My condo is 1/3 the size of my parents' house, but cost $20K more, due to location. Telling someone in San Diego "you made $76K in 2019, you're doing just fine and don't need any help" is ignoring reality.

I don't like the income thresholds at all for the reasons you mention here, which is why I think they should make any new stimulus related to filing this years taxes (it is already tax season).

Have anyone who can demonstrate income losses on this years taxes get a stimulus check, either the difference to make up lost income or something like $3500, whichever is lesser.

That way the money is specifically going to people who were economically harmed by the pandemic. Previously given stimulus checks subtract from the $3500. So it would be essentially allowing up to an additional $1700 above previous stimulus checks.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 06, 2021, 05:28:08 AM
I don't like the income thresholds at all for the reasons you mention here, which is why I think they should make any new stimulus related to filing this years taxes (it is already tax season).

Have anyone who can demonstrate income losses on this years taxes get a stimulus check, either the difference to make up lost income or something like $3500, whichever is lesser.

That way the money is specifically going to people who were economically harmed by the pandemic. Previously given stimulus checks subtract from the $3500. So it would be essentially allowing up to an additional $1700 above previous stimulus checks.


That is exactly what the first two are.  If someone didn't meet the income threshold based on their 2019 taxes, they can get $1,800 if their 2020 income was significantly impacted.

As I have mentioned earlier, the first two stimulus payments were immediate advances on a 2020 tax credit.

It doesn't work in reverse by the way.  If someone received both, but would not have qualified because their income rose above the threshold in 2020, they don't have to payback the credit.  It is based on 2019 OR 2020 income.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on February 06, 2021, 10:01:04 AM

That is exactly what the first two are.  If someone didn't meet the income threshold based on their 2019 taxes, they can get $1,800 if their 2020 income was significantly impacted.

As I have mentioned earlier, the first two stimulus payments were immediate advances on a 2020 tax credit.

It doesn't work in reverse by the way.  If someone received both, but would not have qualified because their income rose above the threshold in 2020, they don't have to payback the credit.  It is based on 2019 OR 2020 income.

I understand that. But there is no reason why the third one can't be a 2020 tax credit period. Where you only get additional funds if you can show an in come loss due to the pandemic (e.g. difference between 2020-2019).

If people need those funds now, they can file taxes tomorrow. If not, they get it when they file, or don't get it at all if their income wasn't affected, or if the first 2 stimuli already corrected for their net loss.

That way people can ensure it is only going to those that were impacted, and people who actually profited from the pandemic aren't getting extra funds.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 06, 2021, 10:16:56 AM
I understand that. But there is no reason why the third one can't be a 2020 tax credit period. Where you only get additional funds if you can show an in come loss due to the pandemic (e.g. difference between 2020-2019).

If people need those funds now, they can file taxes tomorrow. If not, they get it when they file, or don't get it at all if their income wasn't affected, or if the first 2 stimuli already corrected for their net loss.

That way people can ensure it is only going to those that were impacted, and people who actually profited from the pandemic aren't getting extra funds.

There is a reason that can’t happen. The law hasn’t even passed and the IRS is slated to start receiving returns next week. I can see why people should be able to get it once their 2020 returns are processed. But it’s too late to include it on the 2020 forms.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on February 06, 2021, 11:01:10 AM
There is a reason that can’t happen. The law hasn’t even passed and the IRS is slated to start receiving returns next week. I can see why people should be able to get it once their 2020 returns are processed. But it’s too late to include it on the 2020 forms.

How is this different than what I proposed. You get your 3rd stimulus when you file your 2020 returns, if you can show a net loss in income between 2019-2020.

If you need the money sooner, file tomorrow.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 06, 2021, 11:26:05 AM
How is this different than what I proposed. You get your 3rd stimulus when you file your 2020 returns, if you can show a net loss in income between 2019-2020.

If you need the money sooner, file tomorrow.


Nevermind. Not worth the effort.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 09, 2021, 04:49:27 PM
Means test universal checks to individuals.

No need to means test checks to corporations. No need to means test decisions by the Fed that benefit wall street/corporations.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 10, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Income levels currently being floated is based on really bad data.

https://youtu.be/jNVj60nheIk
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 12, 2021, 03:38:07 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/10/capitol-insurrectionists-jenna-ryan-financial-problems/

Hmmm...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 12, 2021, 05:29:35 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/10/capitol-insurrectionists-jenna-ryan-financial-problems/

Hmmm...


Financial problems, bankruptcies...yet they have enough money to buy guns and gallows.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 12, 2021, 05:53:15 PM

Financial problems, bankruptcies...yet they have enough money to buy guns and gallows.

I interpreted the story differently
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 17, 2021, 11:06:40 PM
Checking in on thst COVID-19 Economy. So many corporations with similar stories. Let's randomly pick Kroger to see how they are doing:

https://twitter.com/DanPriceSeattle/status/1361773792020807680?s=19

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1362115362070929414?s=19

(Their CEO made $21.1 Million last year)

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 18, 2021, 01:23:46 AM
CEO pay is such a dumb metric in these discussions. Especially since it’s a corporation that is very very profitable.  Kroger has roughly 2750 grocery stores (not including other stores in their portfolio). If you cut the CEO’s pay by $20MM, that’s less than $800 extra per store. It’s a drop in the bucket. It’s just scapegoating someone who’s seemingly quite good at their job for a rift in corporate versus store salaries.

Stock buybacks however is a very valid discussion and a disproportionate usage of profits. I’m all for the distaste towards that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on February 18, 2021, 05:28:58 AM
I’m not debating your points but your math is off.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 18, 2021, 06:13:58 AM
CEO pay is such a dumb metric in these discussions. Especially since it’s a corporation that is very very profitable.  Kroger has roughly 2750 grocery stores (not including other stores in their portfolio). If you cut the CEO’s pay by $20MM, that’s less than $800 extra per store. It’s a drop in the bucket. It’s just scapegoating someone who’s seemingly quite good at their job for a rift in corporate versus store salaries.

Stock buybacks however is a very valid discussion and a disproportionate usage of profits. I’m all for the distaste towards that.

You're correct, kinda. I personally think the CEO pay thing is representative of a bigger problem. Ya, one person's salary, if cut, would be a drop in the bucket. But cut every executive, every VP, etc etc. Then you have a lot of coin.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 18, 2021, 08:55:26 AM
CEO pay matters, as does Executive pay.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, CEO pay has risen 940% since 1978, while average worker pay has risen just 12% in the same time frame. (The Stock Market grew 700% in that time frame)

Wage growth for the bottom 90% would have grown twice as fast, if not for redistribution of wages to the top 1.0%. from the bottom 90%.

Share of wages from the bottom 90% fell from 70% to 60% during the time period since 1978 through 2019. Share of wages for the top 1% nearly doubled from 7 percent to just under 14%.

44% of the growth of the 0.1% category came from non financial sector "Executives". 36% of the 1.0% income share growth also came from non financial sector executives. And 23% of income share growth from both 1.0% and 0.1 percent came from financial sector workers, some of whom were executives.





Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 18, 2021, 10:52:07 AM
I’m not debating your points but your math is off.

Yea I left out a zero when I typed it.  But points remains.

I used to work at a Fortune 100 company.  People raise hell about CEO or VP pay but mention nothing of the legions of middle managers who make 200-300K with job security that is really only at risk if the company does wholesale layoffs.  Those people don’t get the heave if companies miss earnings, usually don’t have heavily performance driven comp, etc...

But I dont need to get further deeper into a very opinionated topic
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on February 18, 2021, 11:37:15 AM
Are executives members of labor or kapital, comrades?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 18, 2021, 02:07:50 PM
OT (but it needs to be broadcast everywhere) -

Quote
According to a groundbreaking new working paper by Carter C. Price and Kathryn Edwards of the RAND Corporation, had the more equitable income distributions of the three decades following World War II (1945 through 1974) merely held steady, the aggregate annual income of Americans earning below the 90th percentile would have been $2.5 trillion higher in the year 2018 alone. That is an amount equal to nearly 12 percent of GDP—enough to more than double median income—enough to pay every single working American in the bottom nine deciles an additional $1,144 a month. Every month. Every single year.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 24, 2021, 05:55:15 AM
I interpreted the story differently

 me too!  just a continuation of the the big "MSM" disinformation campaign to maintain control of the "unwashed".   if the orange dude had a 10' razor wired wall around our house with 10's of thousands of the military and police(they want to re imagine btw)i can predict the vitriol flying.  we continue to get one story which stokes the masses only to be slowly walked down at best, forgotten but not corrected at worst and  i call this "boiling the frog"  who's the dicktator now?  oh, and it's 2 masks please and don't bother doing any Christmas shopping just yet.  maybe a new apple for junior to keep up with the indoctrination classes.  hey, this was too easy.  what will the next "crisis" be?   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 24, 2021, 07:09:22 AM
me too!  just a continuation of the the big "MSM" disinformation campaign to maintain control of the "unwashed".   if the orange dude had a 10' razor wired wall around our house with 10's of thousands of the military and police(they want to re imagine btw)i can predict the vitriol flying.  we continue to get one story which stokes the masses only to be slowly walked down at best, forgotten but not corrected at worst and  i call this "boiling the frog"  who's the dicktator now?  oh, and it's 2 masks please and don't bother doing any Christmas shopping just yet.  maybe a new apple for junior to keep up with the indoctrination classes.  hey, this was too easy.  what will the next "crisis" be?
How drunk were you when you put this masterpiece together?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 24, 2021, 07:16:45 AM
Wut?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 24, 2021, 07:53:01 AM
me too!  just a continuation of the the big "MSM" disinformation campaign to maintain control of the "unwashed".   if the orange dude had a 10' razor wired wall around our house with 10's of thousands of the military and police(they want to re imagine btw)i can predict the vitriol flying.  we continue to get one story which stokes the masses only to be slowly walked down at best, forgotten but not corrected at worst and  i call this "boiling the frog"  who's the dicktator now?  oh, and it's 2 masks please and don't bother doing any Christmas shopping just yet.  maybe a new apple for junior to keep up with the indoctrination classes.  hey, this was too easy.  what will the next "crisis" be?

This was also not my interpretation
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on February 24, 2021, 09:39:02 AM
This was also not my interpretation
LOL.  That is likely because you are not totally insane.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 24, 2021, 09:49:49 AM

 me too!  just a continuation of the the big "MSM" disinformation campaign to maintain control of the "unwashed".   if the orange dude had a 10' razor wired wall around our house with 10's of thousands of the military and police(they want to re imagine btw)i can predict the vitriol flying.  we continue to get one story which stokes the masses only to be slowly walked down at best, forgotten but not corrected at worst and  i call this "boiling the frog"  who's the dicktator now?  oh, and it's 2 masks please and don't bother doing any Christmas shopping just yet.  maybe a new apple for junior to keep up with the indoctrination classes.  hey, this was too easy.  what will the next "crisis" be?



I didn't know Big Orange and his comrades had walked back the stolen election story. Do you have a link?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 24, 2021, 11:53:23 AM
2 weeks later, with no new developments, to continue a tangent that has basically nothing to do with the thread? Rocket my man...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 24, 2021, 12:44:35 PM
me too!  just a continuation of the the big "MSM" disinformation campaign to maintain control of the "unwashed".   if the orange dude had a 10' razor wired wall around our house with 10's of thousands of the military and police(they want to re imagine btw)i can predict the vitriol flying.  we continue to get one story which stokes the masses only to be slowly walked down at best, forgotten but not corrected at worst and  i call this "boiling the frog"  who's the dicktator now?  oh, and it's 2 masks please and don't bother doing any Christmas shopping just yet.  maybe a new apple for junior to keep up with the indoctrination classes.  hey, this was too easy.  what will the next "crisis" be?

(https://media1.giphy.com/media/gkQR0vgTTI7y2AmiKS/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 24, 2021, 12:51:33 PM
You are adorable, rocket.    Thanks for the chuckle.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 24, 2021, 02:40:28 PM
North Carolina, which has been open for most businesses since Memorial Day, is now ready to let bars, outdoor music venues and others open starting Friday. There will be capacity limitations, mask requirements, etc.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article249433030.html?ac_cid=DM392727&ac_bid=-447128105

I hope it's not too much too soon. The science on bars being super-spreader venues is pretty solid, but our governor and his science people have been very cautious and data-driven. So I tend to think it they say this is OK, it probably is.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 25, 2021, 12:58:56 PM
Senate Budget Hearing. Costco CEO is asked to testify, and, while there, agrees to raise starting wage at Costco to $16 an hour beginning next week. (Avg worker there makes $24/hr) They are the 2nd largest retailer with 180,000 employees.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 25, 2021, 01:20:53 PM
Arguing with Senator G while he does it.  Arguing the impact of the minimum wage on the employee rather than the employer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on February 25, 2021, 01:41:43 PM
Arguing with Senator G while he does it.  Arguing the impact of the minimum wage on the employee rather than the employer.

Federal minimum wage needs to go up.  Not sure it needs to double to $15 but anything under $10-11 is insane.

It’s a tricky topic for sure.  Folks like Costco, Amazon, and all those huuuge Fortune 500 companies can take on a giant increase to minimum wage overnight.  Same can’t be said for the typical Ma and Pa shop who are coming out of one of the toughest years they’ve probably had to endure ever.  Personally I’d hate to see such a quick drastic change to minimum wage that would inevitably lead to a quicker and more drastic shift towards big box stores and national brands.  The competitive playing field is already tipped in their favor and a drastic overnight change to minimum wage requirements would only expedite that imo.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 25, 2021, 01:48:58 PM
Federal minimum wage needs to go up.  Not sure it needs to double to $15 but anything under $10-11 is insane.

It’s a tricky topic for sure.  Folks like Costco, Amazon, and all those huuuge Fortune 500 companies can take on a giant increase to minimum wage overnight.  Same can’t be said for the typical Ma and Pa shop who are coming out of one of the toughest years they’ve probably had to endure ever.  Personally I’d hate to see such a quick drastic change to minimum wage that would inevitably lead to a quicker and more drastic shift towards big box stores and national brands.  The competitive playing field is already tipped in their favor and a drastic overnight change to minimum wage requirements would only expedite that imo.

I think the real problem is that minimum wage has to be voted on to raise at all.  It should absolutely be tied to cost of living, and should increase annually with inflation rates.  Another issue is federally mandating a wage across the US where living costs are very broad.  South Dakota isn't California.  If I were to write the legislation, I'd require states to each have their own minimum wage and base it on the cost of living in the largest city in the state.  Boom, done.  Of course, it wouldn't be perfect, but let's not make perfect the enemy of good.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 25, 2021, 02:06:02 PM
I think the real problem is that minimum wage has to be voted on to raise at all.  It should absolutely be tied to cost of living, and should increase annually with inflation rates.  Another issue is federally mandating a wage across the US where living costs are very broad.  South Dakota isn't California.  If I were to write the legislation, I'd require states to each have their own minimum wage and base it on the cost of living in the largest city in the state.  Boom, done.  Of course, it wouldn't be perfect, but let's not make perfect the enemy of good.

+1 COL needs to be the main driver for minimum wage.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 25, 2021, 02:18:31 PM
"Quick drastic change".....isn't it.

It's long overdue. Minimum living wage.

A few Senators have been saying similar things about when they were a kid, blah blah blah. Well let's take a look:

In 1977 United States Senators were paid $44,600 a year. Today it is $174,000. How many Senators would be Senators with that pay today? Why is it okay for Senator's pay to adjust but not some others?

In 1977 movies cost $2.33, gas cost $0.68. ($9.26, and $2.72 today)

$6 in 1977 would be roughly $24 today.

If you can't pay a minimum living wage (spoiler alert they can) then you don't belong in business.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 25, 2021, 02:32:20 PM
For crying out loud, even Scoop can come to a bipartisan consensus on this.  This isn't hard.

Connecticut already passed the $15 min 2 years ago. 
There's exemptions (a different min) for summer jobs and short time jobs under a certain amount of months.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 25, 2021, 03:10:03 PM
Its really interesting that everyone has found out that the fiscal issues that Republicans have touted for decades really aren't popular with a lot of people any longer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 25, 2021, 03:33:37 PM
For crying out loud, even Scoop can come to a bipartisan consensus on this.  This isn't hard.

Connecticut already passed the $15 min 2 years ago. 
There's exemptions (a different min) for summer jobs and short time jobs under a certain amount of months.


Scoop for Congress/Senate!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on February 25, 2021, 03:48:04 PM
"Quick drastic change".....isn't it.

It's long overdue. Minimum living wage.

A few Senators have been saying similar things about when they were a kid, blah blah blah. Well let's take a look:

In 1977 United States Senators were paid $44,600 a year. Today it is $174,000. How many Senators would be Senators with that pay today? Why is it okay for Senator's pay to adjust but not some others?

In 1977 movies cost $2.33, gas cost $0.68. ($9.26, and $2.72 today)

$6 in 1977 would be roughly $24 today.

If you can't pay a minimum living wage (spoiler alert they can) then you don't belong in business.

“Living wage” is obviously very different from state to state which is why a federal floor of $10-11 should help state’s bump their state minimums up to around $12-13 in some states and $15+ in the higher cost to live areas of the country.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on February 25, 2021, 03:51:57 PM
Its really interesting that everyone has found out that the fiscal issues that Republicans have touted for decades really aren't popular with a lot of people any longer.

Which is how we got Trump.  Establishment republican ideas and the dinosaurs who still support them should no longer be considered the bedrock principles if you’re right of center.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 25, 2021, 04:03:40 PM
“Living wage” is obviously very different from state to state which is why a federal floor of $10-11 should help state’s bump their state minimums up to around $12-13 in some states and $15+ in the higher cost to live areas of the country.

Your floor is too low.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on February 25, 2021, 04:49:54 PM
Your floor is too low.

Probably but I think it’s most realistic to get passed and if you value CBO input at $10 it would lead to minimal if any loss of jobs and at $15 you’re looking at 1.5 million loss jobs as a result of that “drastic” increase
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 25, 2021, 05:03:07 PM
Probably but I think it’s most realistic to get passed and if you value CBO input at $10 it would lead to minimal if any loss of jobs and at $15 you’re looking at 1.5 million loss jobs as a result of that “drastic” increase

Higher than $15.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 25, 2021, 08:09:01 PM
For crying out loud, even Scoop can come to a bipartisan consensus on this.  This isn't hard.

Connecticut already passed the $15 min 2 years ago. 
There's exemptions (a different min) for summer jobs and short time jobs under a certain amount of months.

and that's where it should be debated and put to a vote-individual states decide for themselves as $10-15 value in conneticut is different from iowa for example.  but still should be up to each individual business
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on February 25, 2021, 08:18:24 PM
and that's where it should be debated and put to a vote-individual states decide for themselves as $10-15 value in conneticut is different from iowa for example.  but still should be up to each individual business

So should it be up for a vote by state or put to the businesses.  Those are two very different ideas.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 25, 2021, 08:49:32 PM
and that's where it should be debated and put to a vote-individual states decide for themselves as $10-15 value in conneticut is different from iowa for example.  but still should be up to each individual business


Given the incredibly low federal minimum wage, the decision with has effectively been with the states for a long time. It hasn’t worked well. If we go even further and let it go to individual businesses, it would likely be even lower.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 26, 2021, 12:35:29 AM

Given the incredibly low federal minimum wage, the decision with has effectively been with the states for a long time. It hasn’t worked well. If we go even further and let it go to individual businesses, it would likely be even lower.

very commonly you will find small business paying more than minimum wage because they appreciate good hard working people and realize the cost of finding a replacement. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 26, 2021, 05:42:38 AM
very commonly you will find small business paying more than minimum wage because they appreciate good hard working people and realize the cost of finding a replacement.

Source?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 26, 2021, 06:04:05 AM
Probably but I think it’s most realistic to get passed and if you value CBO input at $10 it would lead to minimal if any loss of jobs and at $15 you’re looking at 1.5 million loss jobs as a result of that “drastic” increase

The $15 proposed minimum wage raise is phased, it wouldn't be immediate.  We're talking years.  And if your business can't accommodate those new costs or pass them on to the customer, then maybe its fine to close your doors.

and that's where it should be debated and put to a vote-individual states decide for themselves as $10-15 value in conneticut is different from iowa for example.  but still should be up to each individual business


States need a reason to vote on it or set it themselves... otherwise you're just advocating for the current system.  Which I assure you, is not working.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 26, 2021, 06:54:12 AM
The $15 proposed minimum wage raise is phased, it wouldn't be immediate.  We're talking years.  And if your business can't accommodate those new costs or pass them on to the customer, then maybe its fine to close your doors.
 

States need a reason to vote on it or set it themselves... otherwise you're just advocating for the current system.  Which I assure you, is not working.

you "assure me, it's not working"?  ok, assure me

the minimum wage jobs are meant to be entry level positions, not necessarily provide for a family of four.  the way to move up is education, which we already throw a $hit ton of money into, show up for you job, take it seriously, be a good person, watch for better positions, apply for them rinse wash repeat.  the weird thing is, many small businesses already pay more than min to the employees they value and want to keep.  the big businesses may be the ones who drag their feet, but same applies.  they pay the people they want to keep and move up.  the ones who demand the $15/hr or more, are usually your worst employees.  you know the good ones when ya see them
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 26, 2021, 07:41:45 AM
you "assure me, it's not working"?  ok, assure me

the minimum wage jobs are meant to be entry level positions, not necessarily provide for a family of four.  the way to move up is education, which we already throw a $hit ton of money into, show up for you job, take it seriously, be a good person, watch for better positions, apply for them rinse wash repeat.  the weird thing is, many small businesses already pay more than min to the employees they value and want to keep.  the big businesses may be the ones who drag their feet, but same applies.  they pay the people they want to keep and move up.  the ones who demand the $15/hr or more, are usually your worst employees.  you know the good ones when ya see them

Low hanging fruit then okay.  Do you understand what inflation is?  I'm guessing no, otherwise you wouldn't try to make this argument.

The federal minimum wage was last raised on July 24, 2009, when it rose from $6.55 to $7.25 per hour, the last step of a three-step increase approved by Congress in 2007. Before 2007, the minimum wage had been stuck at $5.15 per hour for 10 years.

So you seem to want to keep the federal minimum wage where it is... at $7.25.  I'm sure in 2009 your hair was on fire because it had just gone up to that level from the 2007 level of $5.15. 

So the last increase was over a decade ago. 

$100 in 2009 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $121.93 today, an increase of $21.93 over 12 years. The dollar had an average inflation rate of 1.67% per year between 2009 and today, producing a cumulative price increase of 21.93%

Are you saying that it is okay to keep the minimum wage stagnant regardless of what the value of a dollar is?  Are you actively advocating for everyone that makes minimum wage to make LESS money every year? 

Defend your position.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 26, 2021, 08:21:39 AM
you "assure me, it's not working"?  ok, assure me

the minimum wage jobs are meant to be entry level positions, not necessarily provide for a family of four.  the way to move up is education, which we already throw a $hit ton of money into, show up for you job, take it seriously, be a good person, watch for better positions, apply for them rinse wash repeat.  the weird thing is, many small businesses already pay more than min to the employees they value and want to keep.  the big businesses may be the ones who drag their feet, but same applies.  they pay the people they want to keep and move up.  the ones who demand the $15/hr or more, are usually your worst employees.  you know the good ones when ya see them

I just want to point out that the education systems broken. My fiancé is told by the district, people with advanced degrees, to pass kids who cannot graph basic points in geometry. A kid in high school algebra cannot add 5+9. Sometime these kids are going to become adults and are going to need those minimum wage jobs to stay off the street.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 26, 2021, 08:23:24 AM
The public cost of a low minimum "living" wage:

https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/release-the-public-cost-of-a-low-federal-minimum-wage/

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 26, 2021, 09:35:42 AM
very commonly you will find small business paying more than minimum wage because they appreciate good hard working people and realize the cost of finding a replacement.


And even more commonly, you will find small businesses paying the least possible amount.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on February 26, 2021, 10:14:10 AM
I just want to point out that the education systems broken. My fiancé is told by the district, people with advanced degrees, to pass kids who cannot graph basic points in geometry. A kid in high school algebra cannot add 5+9. Sometime these kids are going to become adults and are going to need those minimum wage jobs to stay off the street.

I didn't fully grasp how broken our educational system was until I was teaching in college. Students at that stage that couldn't even write a single proper sentence, yet graduated high school with honors. Students who couldn't do elementary school type math, yet graduated high school with good grades. And let's forget about science. The number of students who told me that they put the football coach in charge of science classes, because no one else could teach those classes anyways, is sad.

They were set up for failure before they ever stepped foot on campus. And those are the ones that at least made it to college. Others gave up way before then, because their schools had given up on even trying to get them an education.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on February 26, 2021, 11:18:32 AM
I can see this and I don’t teach college. I groan and grimace inside when I see the lack of an ability to put a sentence together, or spell, etc.
Yes we’ve all dealt with autocorrect goofiness, but that’s not what I am talking about. I used to make myself nuts over our church bulletin alone.
Just now I got an email from the president of a professional group I belong to, and I see spelling errors that jump out at me. Always double-check, especially with names!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 26, 2021, 01:24:34 PM


The federal minimum wage was last raised on July 24, 2009, when it rose from $6.55 to $7.25 per hour, the last step of a three-step increase approved by Congress in 2007. Before 2007, the minimum wage had been stuck at $5.15 per hour for 10 years.



The answer to the minimum wage seems so easy -- indexing. Why can't it be based on the cost of living per state? $15/hr. is a lot different in N. Dakota that it is in NY or Cali. You move the lowest CoL state to $10/hr. You place the highest at $15/hr; then slot in each state depending on where it lands.

Ok, now someone tell me why this is a bad idea.

Incidentally, I am disagreeing with you in any way here - just referencing the subject. I think you and I agree on this issue.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on February 26, 2021, 01:59:28 PM
I can see this and I don’t teach college. I groan and grimace inside when I see the lack of an ability to put a sentence together, or spell, etc.
Yes we’ve all dealt with autocorrect goofiness, but that’s not what I am talking about. I used to make myself nuts over our church bulletin alone.
Just now I got an email from the president of a professional group I belong to, and I see spelling errors that jump out at me. Always double-check, especially with names!

I belong to a Facebook group where a frequent contributor has spelling and grammar mistakes in nearly every post she makes.  In general, seeing that type of thing is like fingernails on a blackboard to me, but  I  didn't know her background, so I try not to judge.  But then, she posted that she was looking for a new job.  When she was asked what she did for a living, and she replied, "I'm a teacher".
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 26, 2021, 02:11:23 PM
I belong to a Facebook group where a frequent contributor has spelling and grammar mistakes in nearly every post she makes.  In general, seeing that type of thing is like fingernails on a blackboard to me, but  I  didn't know her background, so I try not to judge.  But then, she posted that she was looking for a new job.  When she was asked what she did for a living, and she replied, "I'm a teacher".

I am exactly the same way - as is my daughter who is a teacher. My wife is the opposite on emails, texts, etc - often, looking as though they were written by a 6th grade dropout. Yet, she has journaled since she was a teen and the prose/spelling is exquisite.

So, I try to go easy on the illiterate texts or emails that I so often receive.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on February 26, 2021, 02:18:13 PM
I am exactly the same way - as is my daughter who is a teacher. My wife is the opposite on emails, texts, etc - often, looking as though they were written by a 6th grade dropout. Yet, she has journaled since she was a teen and the prose/spelling is exquisite.

So, I try to go easy on the illiterate texts or emails that I so often receive.

There is a difference between a short text between two people and a paragraph that is going to live in infinity on the interwebs.

Also, seeing someone use "U" instead of "you" in an online post makes me want to drive to their house and stab them.  But then again, they must save hours of typing time over the course of a year doing that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 26, 2021, 02:19:14 PM
There is a difference between a short text between two people and a paragraph that is going to live in infinity on the interwebs.

Also, seeing someone use "U" instead of "you" in an online post makes me want to drive to their house and stab them.  But then again, they must save hours of typing time over the course of a year doing that.

Leftover from the flip phone text days...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on February 26, 2021, 03:05:24 PM
I do text in shorthand fashion, but write sentences otherwise.
I hang on TripAdvisor forums  a lot, and many people asking questions these days do so in text speak, or in run-on sentences that never end, one or the other. Various regulars will remind them that this is not a text message forum, and that paragraphs and sentences are your friend, if only to make understanding the question easier.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 26, 2021, 05:40:46 PM
you "assure me, it's not working"?  ok, assure me

the minimum wage jobs are meant to be entry level positions, not necessarily provide for a family of four.  the way to move up is education, which we already throw a $hit ton of money into, show up for you job, take it seriously, be a good person, watch for better positions, apply for them rinse wash repeat.  the weird thing is, many small businesses already pay more than min to the employees they value and want to keep.  the big businesses may be the ones who drag their feet, but same applies.  they pay the people they want to keep and move up.  the ones who demand the $15/hr or more, are usually your worst employees.  you know the good ones when ya see them

Sources for the above?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 26, 2021, 06:18:43 PM
Low hanging fruit then okay.  Do you understand what inflation is?  I'm guessing no, otherwise you wouldn't try to make this argument.

The federal minimum wage was last raised on July 24, 2009, when it rose from $6.55 to $7.25 per hour, the last step of a three-step increase approved by Congress in 2007. Before 2007, the minimum wage had been stuck at $5.15 per hour for 10 years.

So you seem to want to keep the federal minimum wage where it is... at $7.25.  I'm sure in 2009 your hair was on fire because it had just gone up to that level from the 2007 level of $5.15. 

So the last increase was over a decade ago. 

$100 in 2009 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $121.93 today, an increase of $21.93 over 12 years. The dollar had an average inflation rate of 1.67% per year between 2009 and today, producing a cumulative price increase of 21.93%

Are you saying that it is okay to keep the minimum wage stagnant regardless of what the value of a dollar is?  Are you actively advocating for everyone that makes minimum wage to make LESS money every year? 

Defend your position.

sorry-been gone most of the day-hards, but i'm just a free market guy.  criticize me all you want, but i've  been in the private sector my whole life as both an employee and an employer.

   as an employee, i sure did want to make more money.  what i found out was, become really good at what you do, create a demand for yourself and either force your present employer to pay you more or move on to something that pays more.   

  as an employer,(over 30 years) find and hire the best person for your position and PAY THEM!  i've had to fire very few people.  as the saying goes, they usually fire themselves; none of them brought me any pleasure.  once you find the right person(s) make them want to work for you; make it fun.    i'm a really easy going guy and i make things work by communicating right now as opposed to weekly, bi-weekly...meetings.  if you are honest with people, show them you are more than about the money, good things happen and the success just follows.  do not compromise those core beliefs.  being honest means you don't have to try to remember what you said

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 26, 2021, 07:29:40 PM
sorry-been gone most of the day-hards, but i'm just a free market guy.  criticize me all you want, but i've  been in the private sector my whole life as both an employee and an employer.

   as an employee, i sure did want to make more money.  what i found out was, become really good at what you do, create a demand for yourself and either force your present employer to pay you more or move on to something that pays more.   

  as an employer,(over 30 years) find and hire the best person for your position and PAY THEM!  i've had to fire very few people.  as the saying goes, they usually fire themselves; none of them brought me any pleasure.  once you find the right person(s) make them want to work for you; make it fun.    i'm a really easy going guy and i make things work by communicating right now as opposed to weekly, bi-weekly...meetings.  if you are honest with people, show them you are more than about the money, good things happen and the success just follows.  do not compromise those core beliefs.  being honest means you don't have to try to remember what you said

Can you define this?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on February 27, 2021, 07:56:09 AM
There is a difference between a short text between two people and a paragraph that is going to live in infinity on the interwebs.

Also, seeing someone use "U" instead of "you" in an online post makes me want to drive to their house and stab them.  But then again, they must save hours of typing time over the course of a year doing that.

Y r u sooooooo upset bout that? Theirs no reason too bee upset.lolz.

Off to lock my door so I don’t get stabbed.  ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 27, 2021, 08:41:42 AM
I actually like Hawleys wage increase idea. > billion dollar companies bump to 15.

I still think it could be much better by cost of living index but that is much better than nothing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on February 27, 2021, 08:55:40 AM
I actually like Hawleys wage increase idea. > billion dollar companies bump to 15.

I still think it could be much better by cost of living index but that is much better than nothing.

I thought sanders proposed it for some reason and hawley supported it. 

In any case, I’m not sure how that doesn’t functionally end up in the same place.  If corporations are in every community and dictating min wage, small business will have to come up too to keep their employees. 

I’m supportive, it just seems overly complex. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 27, 2021, 09:00:13 AM
I actually like Hawleys wage increase idea. > billion dollar companies bump to 15.

I still think it could be much better by cost of living index but that is much better than nothing.

But my understanding is that this includes a tax credit of some sort instead, which means we will all be paying for this.

Just pass the $15 wage and tie it to inflation. It’s ridiculous that we haven’t gotten there yet.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 27, 2021, 09:48:53 AM
I say scrap the minimum wage and trust businesses to pay their employees a fair wage. And while we're at it, get rid of all workplace rules, pollution regulations, anti-monopoly laws, etc.

Corporations are people, after all, and they want to be great American "citizens."

What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on February 27, 2021, 10:03:45 AM
I actually like Hawleys wage increase idea. > billion dollar companies bump to 15.

I still think it could be much better by cost of living index but that is much better than nothing.


The idea sounds reasonable on the surface, but I worry how they would manage it. For example, would it apply to franchisees and contractors of billion dollar companies? If so, it would be unfair to the mom and pop franchisees. If not, it might cause huge companies to franchise and contract out more and more of their work, to get hourly workers out of the main business.

I think it's actually easier - and in the end, more fair - to make it apply to all companies, and to peg it to widely available cost-of-living statistics.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 27, 2021, 10:33:47 AM
I say scrap the minimum wage and trust businesses to pay their employees a fair wage. And while we're at it, get rid of all workplace rules, pollution regulations, anti-monopoly laws, etc.

Corporations are people, after all, and they want to be great American "citizens."

What could possibly go wrong?

Anarcho-capitalism is a conservative utopia
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on February 28, 2021, 08:11:45 AM
London School of Economics study:

"50 years of tax cuts for the wealthy have failed to trickle down."

https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2020/L-December/Tax-cuts-for-the-rich

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/tax-cuts-rich-50-years-no-trickle-down/?__twitter_impression=true

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 28, 2021, 10:15:26 AM
London School of Economics study:

"50 years of tax cuts for the wealthy have failed to trickle down."

https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2020/L-December/Tax-cuts-for-the-rich

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/tax-cuts-rich-50-years-no-trickle-down/?__twitter_impression=true

The Rand Org agrees: https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/%3famp=true
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 28, 2021, 12:25:50 PM
London School of Economics study:

"50 years of tax cuts for the wealthy have failed to trickle down."
No one seriously believed that they did, least of all the trickle down proponents. But it was a nice way to con the rubes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 28, 2021, 12:28:26 PM
Voodoo economics indeed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 28, 2021, 01:49:38 PM
No one seriously believed that they did, least of all the trickle down proponents. But it was a nice way to con the rubes.

But as we saw the last 4 years (and continue to see), the rubes will believe it anyway.

Evidence is like science to them. Why would you believe it?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 28, 2021, 03:39:44 PM
Evidence is like science to them. Why would you believe it?
Yup. They're reality-proofed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on March 02, 2021, 07:21:43 AM
Delta:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/03/01/delta-hands-out-bonuses-to-managers-whose-pay-was-cut-in-the-pandemic.html?__twitter_impression=true

Reduced staff by 18k
Lost $12 Billion last year.
Received $8.5 Billion bailout.
No extra pay for front line employees.
Managers getting $100k raises.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 02, 2021, 01:48:14 PM
Delta:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/03/01/delta-hands-out-bonuses-to-managers-whose-pay-was-cut-in-the-pandemic.html?__twitter_impression=true

Reduced staff by 18k
Lost $12 Billion last year.
Received $8.5 Billion bailout.
No extra pay for front line employees.
Managers getting $100k raises.


Wow. I get that companies in the travel industry are hurting enormously, and I’m not surprised by the workforce reduction. But pay raises for management are not a good look.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 02, 2021, 03:46:25 PM
'Murica!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on March 02, 2021, 04:03:44 PM

Wow. I get that companies in the travel industry are hurting enormously, and I’m not surprised by the workforce reduction. But pay raises for management are not a good look.

FWIW, it’s not a raise as much as a make good.  It says a lot of management took large paycuts and these payouts went to making up some of their salary.

It’s still bad optics and questionable use of CARES Act funds, but it’s not like these were added bonuses on top of existing salaries or bumping people’s normal salaries up by X%. And it’s not executive pay. This is far more likely going to people making under 6 figures. Management is a BROAD term. My first role at PepsiCo was technically management and I wasn’t able to move out of a place with roommates in Chicago to a 1BR until I got promoted.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 08:35:47 AM
Great jobs report!!  As states begin to fully reopen in next 30-60 days the economic boom that follows could be historic.

Repurpose the 100s of billions of unused dollars already approved in the first couple Covid stimulus packages to help out those in need but I don’t see the purpose of passing this 1.9 trillion dollar package. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 08:43:08 AM
Great jobs report!!  As states begin to fully reopen in next 30-60 days the economic boom that follows could be historic.

Repurpose the 100s of billions of unused dollars already approved in the first couple Covid stimulus packages to help out those in need but I don’t see the purpose of passing this 1.9 trillion dollar package. 


Because the trend is good but we aren't near where we were in February.  Get money in people's hands to spend.

https://twitter.com/WHCOS/status/1367845935636709385?s=20

Ronald Klain
@WHCOS
If you think today's jobs report is "good enough," then know that at this pace (+379,000 jobs/month), it would take until April 2023 to get back to where we were in February 2020.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 08:52:03 AM

Because the trend is good but we aren't near where we were in February.  Get money in people's hands to spend.

https://twitter.com/WHCOS/status/1367845935636709385?s=20

Is this an acknowledgment to how wel the economy was roaring under orange bad man?  Just messing around, imo the February report is the bottom of what we’ll see over the next 8-10 months of growth. 

I’d expect as things open back up monthly job gains of 500,000+ will be the norm for awhile.  If there weren’t hundreds of billions of dollars unused sitting out there I’d understand the need to do more now but there’s still so much sitting out there, I just don’t see the need to throw more money onto the pile but if it gets passed it’s also not something that I’ll lose sleep over. 

Ronald Klain
@WHCOS
If you think today's jobs report is "good enough," then know that at this pace (+379,000 jobs/month), it would take until April 2023 to get back to where we were in February 2020.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on March 05, 2021, 08:54:40 AM
https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1367691857120145409?s=19

Chris Murphy takes less than ten minutes to explain it:
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 08:55:01 AM
Yes, Trump benefitted greatly from the Obama economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 09:03:09 AM
Yes, Trump benefitted greatly from the Obama economy.

Back handed compliment but it’s a start.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 05, 2021, 09:14:14 AM
To me, it is better to throw more money out there rather than come back in a couple of months and do this stupid song and dance all over again.  If at the end of the day there is a bunch sitting in a pot that goes unused there will be something we will need it for.  Replenish FEMA funds, VA upgrades, or.... a permanent UBI (don't drag me, it was mostly a joke).  ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 10:24:33 AM
To me, it is better to throw more money out there rather than come back in a couple of months and do this stupid song and dance all over again.  If at the end of the day there is a bunch sitting in a pot that goes unused there will be something we will need it for.  Replenish FEMA funds, VA upgrades, or.... a permanent UBI (don't drag me, it was mostly a joke).  ;D

I love the idea of UBI as long as it replaces the other programs that are full of waste and abuse.  I think the Yang Gang is onto something.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 05, 2021, 10:54:10 AM
I love the idea of UBI as long as it replaces the other programs that are full of waste and abuse.  I think the Yang Gang is onto something.

The idea that those programs are 'full' of waste and abuse is a fallacy pushed by those with an agenda to remove them.  But I can agree that a UBI could be used to reduce those services.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 11:26:29 AM
I love the idea of UBI as long as it replaces the other programs that are full of waste and abuse.  I think the Yang Gang is onto something.

Waste and abuse?

I thought you believed 99% of people follow the rules?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 11:28:58 AM
The economic fallout right now is the worst in the country's history. If the Fed hadn't backstopped wall street, God knows where we'd be. But good for the wealthy for that, at least.

We don't need more? Horsecrap. We aren't doing enough for the majority of Americans. That includes those who lost jobs or had hours/pay cut or had businesses forced to close. I don't care what side of the aisle any individual is on, they all deserve help. And significantly more help.

If you're gonna start complaining about debt/deficit, then please stop before you start. Educate yourselves on economics first. Start with modern monetary theory then continue with the true economics/finance behind the 2009 bailout (hint: $29 trillion) and go from there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 11:34:59 AM
Waste and abuse?

I thought you believed 99% of people follow the rules?

Which I admitted to being a bit of wishful thinking and in context of the vaccine card stuff we were talking about.  If the conversation would have been about following traffic rules, etc I would have not had that same 99% response but good one.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 11:36:25 AM
The economic fallout right now is the worst in the country's history. If the Fed hadn't backstopped wall street, God knows where we'd be. But good for the wealthy for that, at least.

We don't need more? Horsecrap. We aren't doing enough for the majority of Americans. That includes those who lost jobs or had hours/pay cut or had businesses forced to close. I don't care what side of the aisle any individual is on, they all deserve help. And significantly more help.

If you're gonna start complaining about debt/deficit, then please stop before you start. Educate yourselves on economics first. Start with modern monetary theory then continue with the true economics/finance behind the 2009 bailout (hint: $29 trillion) and go from there.

Yikes
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 11:46:04 AM
Forecasted 2021 gdp is set to return to prepandemic levels in a couple months, January was a record month for construction, avg American household savings at all time highs.  Are there segments of America struggling and businesses just skirting by, absolutely.

PPP loans are still widely available for small business to access and an increase in UI with federal help on back rent etc is hopefully enough to get through this.  I’m not suggesting there is zero opportunity for govt to step in and offer a hand.  From what I’ve read the vast majority of this latest package has little to do with helping those in need out though.

I never once mentioned debt or deficit, couldn’t give a sh*t less about it honestly.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 01:26:25 PM
Forecasted 2021 gdp is set to return to prepandemic levels in a couple months, January was a record month for construction, avg American household savings at all time highs.  Are there segments of America struggling and businesses just skirting by, absolutely.

PPP loans are still widely available for small business to access and an increase in UI with federal help on back rent etc is hopefully enough to get through this.  I’m not suggesting there is zero opportunity for govt to step in and offer a hand.  From what I’ve read the vast majority of this latest package has little to do with helping those in need out though.

I never once mentioned debt or deficit, couldn’t give a sh*t less about it honestly.

Educate yourself on GDP. And the flaws of the metric. There's a good video on youtube under "economics explained" to start.

If you don't care about debt/deficit, then why do you care if the government pumps out more support money?

Lastly, were you supportive of the first stimulus bill?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 01:38:46 PM
Educate yourself on GDP. And the flaws of the metric. There's a good video on youtube under "economics explained" to start.

If you don't care about debt/deficit, then why do you care if the government pumps out more support money?

Lastly, were you supportive of the first stimulus bill?

So what should I be looking at when trying to figure out the health of the economy? 

Yes I was in favor of the first and second.  Not entirely against a third, just think it can be a little more focused and pared down a bit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 02:02:29 PM
So what should I be looking at when trying to figure out the health of the economy? 

Yes I was in favor of the first and second.  Not entirely against a third, just think it can be a little more focused and pared down a bit.

It's a good question. I am not an economist. But I don't believe looking at any single one metric is good.

What do you think should be more focused? What should be removed?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 02:23:12 PM
It's a good question. I am not an economist. But I don't believe looking at any single one metric is good.

What do you think should be more focused? What should be removed?

$923 billion in the bill is for direct relief to people to include the $1400 one time check, $400 bump up in weekly, unemployment checks, increase in child tax credit, earned income tax credit, expansion of affordable care act subsidies for two years, extended paid sick leave and employee retention credit, subsidize cobra coverage for laid off workers, and a few other things.

That all makes sense.  Which leaves about 1 trillion dollars worth of things that while important and deserve govt support, I believe they should be separated out and voted on as individual policy topics.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 02:36:34 PM
Arizona joining the party in lifting all business restrictions!!!  Come on Evers, let’s do it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on March 05, 2021, 02:42:32 PM
Arizona joining the party in lifting all business restrictions!!!  Come on Evers, let’s do it.

evers doesn't need a high body count to satisfy his ego.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 05, 2021, 02:43:51 PM
Arizona joining the party in lifting all business restrictions!!!  Come on Evers, let’s do it.

His home companion care aides haven't told him to do that yet.   It's still oatmeal time.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 05, 2021, 06:03:29 PM
Arizona joining the party in lifting all business restrictions!!!  Come on Evers, let’s do it.

  highest increase in numbers of covid are all along the border, texas to california...gee, i wonder what that's all about? 

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 06:47:46 PM
  highest increase in numbers of covid are all along the border, texas to california...gee, i wonder what that's all about?

Source?

And, if true, shouldn't we be still wearing masks and shutting down in those areas?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 05, 2021, 06:50:42 PM
  highest increase in numbers of covid are all along the border, texas to california...gee, i wonder what that's all about?

Honest question, what is your problem with illegal immigration.  Genuinely curious.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 05, 2021, 07:06:22 PM
Ah, its illegal. That is all, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 05, 2021, 07:14:42 PM
Honest question, what is your problem with illegal immigration.  Genuinely curious.

teal?  "illegal' immigration is, umm, illegal eyn'a?  i'm all for coming in the front door man!

oh and jesman-google is your friend
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 05, 2021, 07:33:11 PM
Honest question, what is your problem with illegal immigration.  Genuinely curious.

you for illegal prostitution?  hows about illegal murder?  rape? not saying they're all the same except for the "illegal" part
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 07:41:17 PM
Ah, its illegal. That is all, aina?

I’m pretty sure that’s not all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 07:44:35 PM
you for illegal prostitution?  hows about illegal murder?  rape? not saying they're all the same except for the "illegal" part

So what if they simply just made it legal?  That anyone could come to the border and be a legal resident?

You would have no problem with it then right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 05, 2021, 07:48:05 PM
The illegal part is enough to start and end the discussion. Unless, of course, you believe the nonsense that no person is illegal. Just as hate has no home here, love is love, kindness is everything, and obviously, science is real, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 07:51:28 PM
The illegal part is enough to start and end the discussion. Unless, of course, you believe the nonsense that no person is illegal. Just as hate has no home here, love is love, kindness is everything, and obviously, science is real, hey?

Nice dodge.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 08:08:49 PM
teal?  "illegal' immigration is, umm, illegal eyn'a?  i'm all for coming in the front door man!

oh and jesman-google is your friend

I searched "increase covid on mexican border" and didn't find any news articles relevant on first 3 pages.

Can you share?

Edit: for those concerned about border crossing/immigrants, and you don't believe in isolationism, our country could do a much better job at how we treat latin american countries so as not to influence their residents to leave their home country
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 05, 2021, 08:10:33 PM
So what if they simply just made it legal?  That anyone could come to the border and be a legal resident?

You would have no problem with it then right?

  it is legal, if you follow the rules...what's the matter with you guys??  always the contrarian when the answers are so obvious.  you might want to "circle back" on some of your stuff.  are you for legal or illegal wedgies? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 08:14:11 PM
  it is legal, if you follow the rules...what's the matter with you guys??  always the contrarian when the answers are so obvious.  you might want to "circle back" on some of your stuff.  are you for legal or illegal wedgies?

Your analogy makes it sound like you aren't for immigration in any case. As I'm not sure anyone is "for" wedgies in any case
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 05, 2021, 08:18:31 PM
I searched "increase covid on mexican border" and didn't find any news articles relevant on first 3 pages.

Can you share?

Edit: for those concerned about border crossing/immigrants, and you don't believe in isolationism, our country could do a much better job at how we treat latin american countries so as not to influence their residents to leave their home country

  well, yeah, CNN and MSNBC for example, won't have anything.  i'm obviously hesitant to put a link out there because ANY source i cite will be chit all over anyway. 

ok, here's one that might be acceptable-that took about 45 sec and it was the first one at top of duckduckgo search fyi-does that still count?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/us/coronavirus-arizona-yuma-covid.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 05, 2021, 08:19:46 PM
Your analogy makes it sound like you aren't for immigration in any case. As I'm not sure anyone is "for" wedgies in any case

here you go..."makes it sound"  nope, come in the front door man
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 08:22:29 PM
  it is legal, if you follow the rules...what's the matter with you guys??  always the contrarian when the answers are so obvious.  you might want to "circle back" on some of your stuff.  are you for legal or illegal wedgies? 

You didn’t answer my question.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 05, 2021, 08:26:28 PM
  well, yeah, CNN and MSNBC for example, won't have anything.  i'm obviously hesitant to put a link out there because ANY source i cite will be chit all over anyway. 

ok, here's one that might be acceptable-that took about 45 sec and it was the first one at top of duckduckgo search fyi-does that still count?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/us/coronavirus-arizona-yuma-covid.html

Did you read it?  Immigrants are only part of the problem. Oh...and it’s legal immigration.

“Between October and March each year, as many as 40,000 “lechugeros,” or lettuce people, toil in Yuma, whose mild temperatures and Colorado River-irrigated land make it the ideal spot to grow leafy vegetables.

Thousands commute daily from Mexico to the verdant fields that stretch into the distance, where the rust-colored Gila Mountains glisten. Guest workers stay in motels in town.“
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 08:32:07 PM
  well, yeah, CNN and MSNBC for example, won't have anything.  i'm obviously hesitant to put a link out there because ANY source i cite will be chit all over anyway. 

ok, here's one that might be acceptable-that took about 45 sec and it was the first one at top of duckduckgo search fyi-does that still count?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/us/coronavirus-arizona-yuma-covid.html

Thanks.

That article does paint immigrants as part of the problem alongside governor choices and snowbirds.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 05, 2021, 08:52:11 PM
you for illegal prostitution?  hows about illegal murder?  rape? not saying they're all the same except for the "illegal" part

I think prostitution should be legal and regulated.  Sex work is work.

Murder obviously harms people so that is bad.

Rape obviously harms people so that is bad.

Is your belief that if something is labelled illegal then it is bad? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 09:03:00 PM
$923 billion in the bill is for direct relief to people to include the $1400 one time check, $400 bump up in weekly, unemployment checks, increase in child tax credit, earned income tax credit, expansion of affordable care act subsidies for two years, extended paid sick leave and employee retention credit, subsidize cobra coverage for laid off workers, and a few other things.

That all makes sense.  Which leaves about 1 trillion dollars worth of things that while important and deserve govt support, I believe they should be separated out and voted on as individual policy topics.

If you don't care about the debt/deficit, then why take the stance that things need to be pared down?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 09:36:51 PM
If you don't care about the debt/deficit, then why take the stance that things need to be pared down?

Debt and deficit doesn’t have to be on top of the worry list to also expect/want the govt to act as fiscally responsible as possible.  Injecting another 2 trillion into the economy when it’s not necessarily a need but rather a want with much of it brings inflation concerns etc. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 09:44:31 PM
Now WV is jumping in with both feet, yeehaww!!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 05, 2021, 10:28:45 PM
Debt and deficit doesn’t have to be on top of the worry list to also expect/want the govt to act as fiscally responsible as possible.  Injecting another 2 trillion into the economy when it’s not necessarily a need but rather a want with much of it brings inflation concerns etc.

So your concern is inflation if the government injects money into the economy? Are you sure that's an actual outcome?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 05, 2021, 10:32:37 PM
So your concern is inflation if the government injects money into the economy? Are you sure that's an actual outcome?

It’s a concern yes, is that ok with you?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2021, 06:41:32 AM
CDC: Coronavirus cases - and deaths - go higher after in-person restaurant dining is allowed. Also, use of masks greatly reduces spread of the virus.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article249716593.html?ac_cid=DM399655&ac_bid=-351608977

(https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/ck1z4d/picture249718858/alternates/FREE_1140/mm7010e3_GrowthRates-MaskMandates_IMAGE_05March21_1200x675.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 07:29:25 AM
Get your vaccinations and start to live again. Science is real, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on March 06, 2021, 07:45:10 AM
Debt and deficit doesn’t have to be on top of the worry list to also expect/want the govt to act as fiscally responsible as possible.  Injecting another 2 trillion into the economy when it’s not necessarily a need but rather a want with much of it brings inflation concerns etc.

This is incorrect and disingenuous.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 06, 2021, 07:47:13 AM
Debt and deficit doesn’t have to be on top of the worry list to also expect/want the govt to act as fiscally responsible as possible.  Injecting another 2 trillion into the economy when it’s not necessarily a need but rather a want with much of it brings inflation concerns etc. 



How is it not a need?  And with all of the deficit spending we have had in FORTY years, under both Rs and Ds, inflation hasn't been a problem.  Frankly a little inflation wouldn't be a bad thing but I doubt its going to be an actual worry.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 06, 2021, 07:47:23 AM
This is incorrect and disingenuous.

What’s incorrect?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 06, 2021, 07:50:36 AM

How is it not a need?  And with all of the deficit spending we have had in FORTY years, under both Rs and Ds, inflation hasn't been a problem.  Frankly a little inflation wouldn't be a bad thing but I doubt its going to be an actual worry.

Powell mentioned it in his remarks this week, so it’s definitely on their radar.  I’m not claiming to be an expert on this, was asked to clarify my comments so I did.  Strictly an opinion.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 06, 2021, 07:50:54 AM
Debt and deficit doesn’t have to be on top of the worry list to also expect/want the govt to act as fiscally responsible as possible.  Injecting another 2 trillion into the economy when it’s not necessarily a need but rather a want with much of it brings inflation concerns etc.

Are you equally concerned about the Fed, continuously pumping money into the financial system in order to artificially prop up the stock market, so that the rich don't lose their wealth?

Or is it just when the average American is getting some support?

Because the average American definitely needs some support right now. They've been beaten and battered economically from COVID, and many of them are the ones that had to be considered "essential workers," meaning they were more likely to get infected...and then when vaccines were available. In many GOP led states...they were suddenly not so essential anymore.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 06, 2021, 07:54:39 AM
Are you equally concerned about the Fed, continuously pumping money into the financial system in order to artificially prop up the stock market, so that the rich don't lose their wealth?

Or is it just when the average American is getting some support?

Because the average American definitely needs some support right now. They've been beaten and battered economically from COVID, and many of them are the ones that had to be considered "essential workers," meaning they were more likely to get infected...and then when vaccines were available. In many GOP led states...they were suddenly not so essential anymore.

Try to keep up forgetful.  I said the $900 billion in direct relief to those affected most (essential workers) was something I was fully on board with.  The additional trillion seems to me to warrant more debate outside of a Covid relief bill.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on March 06, 2021, 08:02:44 AM
What’s incorrect?

https://twitter.com/KJP46/status/1367827597716054029?s=09

This takes less than 10 minutes.

Your post was incorrect, and disingenuous.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 06, 2021, 08:05:18 AM
https://twitter.com/KJP46/status/1367827597716054029?s=09

This takes less than 10 minutes.

Your post was incorrect, and disingenuous.

Cant you just tell me what’s incorrect? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2021, 08:08:17 AM
Get your vaccinations and start to live again. Science is real, hey?

I fully agree ... as soon as the vast majority of Americans are vaccinated.

With only 10-15% of Americans vaccinated, now is not the time to say "the hell with it" and pretend we have won.

There are still more than 1,000 Americans a day dying of COVID-19. Back in the summer, that was considered crisis level, and not only by scaredy-cats. Now, after two months during which 3,000-4,000 Americans were dying from it every day, things are finally going in the right direction - predominantly because of mitigation tactics like masks and social distancing.

Nevertheless, we have some "leaders" shrugging their shoulders and saying, "All lives matter ... except these. Let's party!" Abbott's move smacks of somebody who was thoroughly humiliated over his handling of the frozen Texas grid and desperately needing a distraction.

The last time Abbott threw Texas wide open, the state became the epicenter of the virus and he had to sheepishly shut everything back down again. Here's hoping that doesn't happen with us so close to the finish line.

Most scientists say he is wrong to pretend COVID-19 has been defeated in Texas. Science is real, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 06, 2021, 08:14:25 AM
Try to keep up forgetful.  I said the $900 billion in direct relief to those affected most (essential workers) was something I was fully on board with.  The additional trillion seems to me to warrant more debate outside of a Covid relief bill.

What is directly COVID related is a debate we will have to have a different day.

I notice you didn't respond to the trillions pumped into the market, to help save the wealthy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 06, 2021, 08:50:09 AM
Get your vaccinations and start to live again. Science is real, hey?



If that's truly what people were doing, sure.

But the states that are fully opening up and dropping mask mandates are less than 20% vaccinated. I know you aren't worried because you are among the lucky ones to be vaccinated, but it's disingenuous to support full opening after only 20% vaccinations and claim to support science.

It's one or the other: support science, OR support full reopening when we are less than 20% vaccinated.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 06, 2021, 08:58:53 AM
What is directly COVID related is a debate we will have to have a different day.

I notice you didn't respond to the trillions pumped into the market, to help save the wealthy.

Yup what is directly Covid related is something that there are many differing opinions all of which I believe are being made in good faith.

If you’re referring to the Trump tax cuts yes I had no problem with that.  Or the first round of Covid stimulus and second round.  Half of the third round I also agree with so I’m 80% aligned with govt spending like drunken sailors.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 06, 2021, 10:42:49 AM


If that's truly what people were doing, sure.

But the states that are fully opening up and dropping mask mandates are less than 20% vaccinated. I know you aren't worried because you are among the lucky ones to be vaccinated, but it's disingenuous to support full opening after only 20% vaccinations and claim to support science.

It's one or the other: support science, OR support full reopening when we are less than 20% vaccinated.

  it's not ALL about vaccinations though.  we have had a number of people who have been infected and recovered from covid as well-symptomatic and asymptomatic.  so between the vaccine and the herd immunity, we are getting darn near putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else. 

   you guys seem to be going for totally elimination of the virus from our universe before you give your blessings.  understand, any fatality is very unfortunate, but we live in an uncertain world.  it's time to start allowing people to make their own decisions based on what they feel comfortable with.  we need a diversity of opinions based on reputable epidemiologists with no agenda.  translation-they aren't the highest paid federal gubmint employee nor hooked at the hip with WHO

btw, while people on certain sides of the political spectrum are so quick to denigrate the states that are "re-opening" claiming they are going to start a "super-spreader" event, they keep getting it wrong, yet never have to back track and admit to being as such.  note, the superbowl was supposed to be this highly irresponsible event with predictions of "mayhem" yet only 57 cases have been able to be traced.  didn't see many in the media correcting their "hair on fire" reporting

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 06, 2021, 11:21:58 AM
Texas opened. Then had to close again cause numbers exploded.

So ...?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 06, 2021, 11:29:31 AM
It’s a concern yes, is that ok with you?

Sure.

But data shows inflation isn't an actual concern when looking at the last 40 years of government spending.

So I just think you're wrong with regards to inflation concerns.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 06, 2021, 11:44:27 AM
Yup what is directly Covid related is something that there are many differing opinions all of which I believe are being made in good faith.

If you’re referring to the Trump tax cuts yes I had no problem with that.  Or the first round of Covid stimulus and second round.  Half of the third round I also agree with so I’m 80% aligned with govt spending like drunken sailors.

I thought it was pretty widely accepted at this point that the Trump tax cuts were nothing but a cash giveaway to the rich, so that wasn't what I was referring to.

I'm referring to the trillions the Fed has pumped into the financial system to backstop the market and artificially sustain the stock market. That is going to be our number one cause of inflation moving forward and was designed to make sure the wealthy didn't suffer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 06, 2021, 01:01:23 PM
  it's not ALL about vaccinations though.  we have had a number of people who have been infected and recovered from covid as well-symptomatic and asymptomatic.  so between the vaccine and the herd immunity, we are getting darn near putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else. 

   you guys seem to be going for totally elimination of the virus from our universe before you give your blessings.  understand, any fatality is very unfortunate, but we live in an uncertain world.  it's time to start allowing people to make their own decisions based on what they feel comfortable with.  we need a diversity of opinions based on reputable epidemiologists with no agenda.  translation-they aren't the highest paid federal gubmint employee nor hooked at the hip with WHO

btw, while people on certain sides of the political spectrum are so quick to denigrate the states that are "re-opening" claiming they are going to start a "super-spreader" event, they keep getting it wrong, yet never have to back track and admit to being as such.  note, the superbowl was supposed to be this highly irresponsible event with predictions of "mayhem" yet only 57 cases have been able to be traced.  didn't see many in the media correcting their "hair on fire" reporting


You still didn’t answer my question. How can you push for complete opening when vaccinations are at 15% or less? Even if you add people who have been infected, we are probably at a third of the population at best who have some form of immunity...certainly nowhere near where we would need to be to completely reopen everything.

You talk about science, yet you continually ignore it.

I am not talking about politics, drama or histrionics. You seem to be focused on that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
  it's not ALL about vaccinations though.  we have had a number of people who have been infected and recovered from covid as well-symptomatic and asymptomatic.  so between the vaccine and the herd immunity, we are getting darn near putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else. 

   you guys seem to be going for totally elimination of the virus from our universe before you give your blessings.  understand, any fatality is very unfortunate, but we live in an uncertain world.  it's time to start allowing people to make their own decisions based on what they feel comfortable with.  we need a diversity of opinions based on reputable epidemiologists with no agenda.  translation-they aren't the highest paid federal gubmint employee nor hooked at the hip with WHO

btw, while people on certain sides of the political spectrum are so quick to denigrate the states that are "re-opening" claiming they are going to start a "super-spreader" event, they keep getting it wrong, yet never have to back track and admit to being as such.  note, the superbowl was supposed to be this highly irresponsible event with predictions of "mayhem" yet only 57 cases have been able to be traced.  didn't see many in the media correcting their "hair on fire" reporting

Daily average of Americans dying from COVID-19 for the week ending Friday was 1,747.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html

Please provide links proving that 1,700+ Americans dying every day = "putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else."

Please provide links showing some other virus in America today (or in the last 50 years) that is/was killing 1,700+ Americans every single day.

Thanks in advance!

Oh, and while it was a pleasant surprise that Super Bowl weekend didn't turn out to be catastrophic (thank goodness!), Xmas and Thanksgiving indeed WERE super-spreader events. And "you guys" mocked that, too.

I guess because your hair didn't personally catch fire, it's OK to go ahead and pretend that we have emerged victorious and it's now time to party - no masks, no social distancing, no worries.

Only 1,700+ Americans are dying every day due to COVID-19! Woo-hoo! (But never forget, all life is precious!!!)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 01:19:46 PM
I fully agree ... as soon as the vast majority of Americans are vaccinated.

With only 10-15% of Americans vaccinated, now is not the time to say "the hell with it" and pretend we have won.

There are still more than 1,000 Americans a day dying of COVID-19. Back in the summer, that was considered crisis level, and not only by scaredy-cats. Now, after two months during which 3,000-4,000 Americans were dying from it every day, things are finally going in the right direction - predominantly because of mitigation tactics like masks and social distancing.

Nevertheless, we have some "leaders" shrugging their shoulders and saying, "All lives matter ... except these. Let's party!" Abbott's move smacks of somebody who was thoroughly humiliated over his handling of the frozen Texas grid and desperately needing a distraction.

The last time Abbott threw Texas wide open, the state became the epicenter of the virus and he had to sheepishly shut everything back down again. Here's hoping that doesn't happen with us so close to the finish line.

Most scientists say he is wrong to pretend COVID-19 has been defeated in Texas. Science is real, hey?



Once vaccinated, your chances of getting covid are extremely slim. And, if you do, getting very ill and/or dying are essentially off the table. Look at it this way, if you were told you had a 95% chance of winning tonight's lottery, you'd buy a ticket, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 01:22:09 PM
Nevertheless, we have some "leaders" shrugging their shoulders and saying, "All lives matter ... except these. Let's party!"


Nads, why would you bring up Gov. Cuomo, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 06, 2021, 01:27:47 PM


Once vaccinated, your chances of getting covid are extremely slim. And, if you do, getting very ill and/or dying are essentially off the table. Look at it this way, if you were told you had a 95% chance of winning tonight's lottery, you'd buy a ticket, aina?


So does this mean you are OK with waiting to open things up until everyone has had the opportunity to get fully vaccinated? Because I suspect everyone here would agree that it would be safe to do so at that point.

If not, what was the point of your post, which was premised on people being vaccinated?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 06, 2021, 01:41:58 PM
Once vaccinated, your chances of getting covid are extremely slim. And, if you do, getting very ill and/or dying are essentially off the table. Look at it this way, if you were told you had a 95% chance of winning tonight's lottery, you'd buy a ticket, aina?

This is true right now. But 91.5% of the population isn't vaccinated yet.

And, the longer this is circulating, and the more it is circulating the more and more likely that we get a true escape variant where the above isn't true.

So, even if you don't care about that 91.5%, do you want to risk an escape variant that will greatly prolong the economic and physical suffering? All because people are too much of a wuss to wear a mask?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2021, 01:53:48 PM


Once vaccinated, your chances of getting covid are extremely slim. And, if you do, getting very ill and/or dying are essentially off the table. Look at it this way, if you were told you had a 95% chance of winning tonight's lottery, you'd buy a ticket, aina?

We absolutely agree, Doc.

But right now, only a small percentage of Americans have been vaccinated. So why throw caution to the wind now, when we are mere months away from being able to do so relatively safely? Let's wait for science, aina?

Nads, why would you bring up Gov. Cuomo, hey?


Yes, it is terrible what Cuomo did. He should resign or be impeached.

There. See how easy it is to admit when a leader isn't leading, Doc?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 06, 2021, 04:28:50 PM
Texas opened. Then had to close again cause numbers exploded.

So ...?


did they?  source?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 04:38:33 PM
This is true right now. But 91.5% of the population isn't vaccinated yet.

And, the longer this is circulating, and the more it is circulating the more and more likely that we get a true escape variant where the above isn't true.

So, even if you don't care about that 91.5%, do you want to risk an escape variant that will greatly prolong the economic and physical suffering? All because people are too much of a wuss to wear a mask?
[/



And, how many of the 91.5% have had covid already and have immunity? Much ta due 'bout nothing, 'cept four promotin' certain agendas, hey?






Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 06, 2021, 05:06:01 PM
And, how many of the 91.5% have had covid already and have immunity? Much ta due 'bout nothing, 'cept four promotin' certain agendas, hey?

Edit:  Nevermind, discussing this with you is pointless, and your posts speak for themselves about you as a person.

Character revealed, time and time again.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 05:11:27 PM
If you've been vaccinated, you are not a threat to anyone, nor are they a threat to you. For those who have yet to be immunized, they should do whatever they see fit to do, to protect themselves.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 06, 2021, 05:14:20 PM

did they?  source?

I think he might be referring to in mid-october, when despite cases still being rampant, and warnings from science and health officials he opened the state up considerably, and barred local officials from over-ruling his decision despite morgues filling up and having to bring in refrigerated trucks to store the dead.

Something like 30,000 people died since, because he opened up when he shouldn't, and waited forever to dial things back down.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on March 06, 2021, 05:30:09 PM
If you've been vaccinated, you are not a threat to anyone, nor are they a threat to you. For those who have yet to be immunized, they should do whatever they see fit to do, to protect themselves.
It has not been shown that vaccinated people cannot transmit the virus.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on March 06, 2021, 05:48:18 PM
If you've been vaccinated, you are not a threat to anyone, nor are they a threat to you.

Nobody is stopping you from putting a mask on and going to do everything your heart can dream of doc.  Have at it!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 06, 2021, 06:04:38 PM

did they?  source?

Google is your friend
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on March 06, 2021, 08:21:15 PM
If you've been vaccinated, you are not a threat to anyone, nor are they a threat to you. For those who have yet to be immunized, they should do whatever they see fit to do, to protect themselves.

Scumbaggery just keeps hitting new lows with fake healthcare professionals here at Scoop.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 06, 2021, 09:15:20 PM
Edit:  Nevermind, discussing this with you is pointless, and your posts speak for themselves about you as a person.

Character revealed, time and time again.
Reality-proof.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 09:18:43 PM
Scumbaggery just keeps hitting new lows with fake healthcare professionals here at Scoop.





O, sew da science iz knot reel, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on March 06, 2021, 09:25:24 PM




O, sew da science iz knot reel, hey?

Yes it is, you moron. Science says it doesn’t know if a vaccine prevents you from spreading the virus.
I used to think your spelling was a childish, tired, unfunny shtick, but now I realize you mostly likely truly are illiterate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2021, 09:36:22 PM
Hilarious, keep bringing it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 06, 2021, 10:32:15 PM
Hilarious, keep bringing it.

So many serious, smart, serious people on here, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on March 06, 2021, 10:59:55 PM
The Senators that voted for the COVID-19 relief bill represent 42 Million more people than the Senators who voted against it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2021, 11:02:36 PM

did they?  source?

After opening pretty much everything to at least 50% capacity in May, coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths increased significantly in Texas and Abbott reversed course in June.

https://www.click2houston.com/news/texas/2020/07/09/timeline-texas-gov-greg-abbott-a-coronavirus-timeline-of-evolving-messages-to-texans-the-nation-the-world/

“If I could go back and redo anything, it probably would have been to slow down the opening of bars, now seeing in the aftermath of how quickly the coronavirus spread in the bar setting.”

-- Abbott on June 26, after ordering Texas bars to close again and restaurants to reduce to 50% occupancy as coronavirus spreads

“At this time, it is clear that the rise in cases is largely driven by certain types of activities, including Texans congregating in bars. The actions in this executive order are essential to our mission to swiftly contain this virus and protect public health.”

+++

rocket, now it's time for you to provide evidence that 1,700+ Americans dying every day = "putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else."

Thanks!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on March 06, 2021, 11:03:37 PM
Hilarious, keep bringing it.

So many serious, smart, serious people on here, aina?

You two seem agitated lately.  Talk about serious. Maybe put your masks on and go get a good steak and wine or something.  You know, support the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2021, 11:27:53 PM
The Senators that voted for the COVID-19 relief bill represent 42 Million more people than the Senators who voted against it.

Not surprising. Two polls last week showed well over 70% of Americans support it, including almost 60% of Republicans.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 07, 2021, 06:57:21 AM
After opening pretty much everything to at least 50% capacity in May, coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths increased significantly in Texas and Abbott reversed course in June.

https://www.click2houston.com/news/texas/2020/07/09/timeline-texas-gov-greg-abbott-a-coronavirus-timeline-of-evolving-messages-to-texans-the-nation-the-world/

“If I could go back and redo anything, it probably would have been to slow down the opening of bars, now seeing in the aftermath of how quickly the coronavirus spread in the bar setting.”

-- Abbott on June 26, after ordering Texas bars to close again and restaurants to reduce to 50% occupancy as coronavirus spreads

“At this time, it is clear that the rise in cases is largely driven by certain types of activities, including Texans congregating in bars. The actions in this executive order are essential to our mission to swiftly contain this virus and protect public health.”

+++

rocket, now it's time for you to provide evidence that 1,700+ Americans dying every day = "putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else."

Thanks!

  ohh, you're talking way back last spring he opened, then closed-smart move.   one of the few who can think while he's walking.  and now reopened-don't know what the beef is..

now about that 1700 + dead?  don't know what context your in here 82
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 07, 2021, 07:01:51 AM
  ohh, you're talking way back last spring he opened, then closed-smart move.   one of the few who can think while he's walking. 


You probably didn't realize the irony of this statement because Abbott literally can't walk.  ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 07, 2021, 07:10:25 AM
Yes it is, you moron. Science says it doesn’t know if a vaccine prevents you from spreading the virus.
I used to think your spelling was a childish, tired, unfunny shtick, but now I realize you mostly likely truly are illiterate.

but but but last may, your hero fowski was asked when we feel we can get back to normal and he said when we get a vaccine.  so i'm sure all of this will be clarified(used loosely) at our state of the union address...next year?  isn't there usually some kind of presser announcing updates and what plans are going forward.  they just need a jumbotron the size of dallas cowboys stadium fit into the capital for a teleprompter
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 07, 2021, 07:11:31 AM

You probably didn't realize the irony of this statement because Abbott literally can't walk.  ;)

moving
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 07, 2021, 07:22:18 AM
  ohh, you're talking way back last spring he opened, then closed-smart move.   one of the few who can think while he's walking.  and now reopened-don't know what the beef is..

He then reopened again, in October, for political reasons, despite the fact that science and health advisors indicated it would be a colossal mistake.

Led to 10's of thousands of more deaths, made Texas one of the worst off states in the country, and hid behind local government officials, who he eventually let add back closures after it was too late.

Still hasn't learned from his first two colossal mistakes. At what point does it become murder?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 07, 2021, 07:31:24 AM
He then reopened again, in October, for political reasons, despite the fact that science and health advisors indicated it would be a colossal mistake.

Led to 10's of thousands of more deaths, made Texas one of the worst off states in the country, and hid behind local government officials, who he eventually let add back closures after it was too late.

Still hasn't learned from his first two colossal mistakes. At what point does it become murder?

🤡
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on March 07, 2021, 08:18:36 AM
🤡

I agree Abbott is a clown, glad you are finally coming to your senses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 07, 2021, 08:23:52 AM
IDK, my guess is that we will see cases rise in places where rules have been lifted, but not to extent that the detractors suggest.  I guess we will see in a month. 

Anyway, going back to the $1.9 trillion bill, I am struck that unlike in 2008, the criticisms are largely about the size and focus of the bill.  Unlike 2008, it isn't about whether or not this is the appropriate role for government to play.  Economic libertarianism seems to be dead.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 07, 2021, 08:40:33 AM
  ohh, you're talking way back last spring he opened, then closed-smart move.   one of the few who can think while he's walking.  and now reopened-don't know what the beef is..

now about that 1700 + dead?  don't know what context your in here 82

Yes, I'm referring to Abbott ignoring science last spring, contributing to the deaths of thousands of Texans, and then sheepishly having to reverse himself a month later. And, as Sultan said, he did it again in October, resulting in the unnecessary deaths of thousands more Texans.

And now he's doing it again, probably mostly to distract from his state's disastrous handling of the frozen grid -- the cause of which, Abbott being Abbott, he lied about repeatedly.

As to the evidence I'd like you to provide, it's for this paragraph of yours from yesterday:

between the vaccine and the herd immunity, we are getting darn near putting this thing in the category of catching just about anything else.

Well, 1,700+ Americans are still dying every day due to COVID-19. I'd like to see your evidence of a "just about anything else" virus in the last 50 years that killed 1,700+ Americans a day.

Just because you, Abbott and the deposed president want everybody to believe things are getting back to "normal," it doesn't mean it's a fact. 1,700+ Americans are still dying daily from COVID-19.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 07, 2021, 09:59:02 AM




O, sew da science iz knot reel, hey?

What science are you even referencing?  Sure, vaccines will prevent the person who got it from showing covid symptoms, but there is not evidence yet to show that vaccinated people can't be vectors of transmission.

If we can show that people who are vaccinated don't spread the virus then I think we can talk about opening up more things, but we have no evidence one way or the other.  I know the world in lockdown is hard for you to mentally deal with, but if you want a world without this virus, just be a bit more patient and wait for the evidence so we don't have to start this process over from square one.  Wouldn't it be pretty awful to open everything up and then have a variant arise that our vaccines do nothing for?  And then we play the lockdown game again, and the vaccine creation game again, and have another wasted year of your already short life.

Be patient, we're almost there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on March 07, 2021, 10:20:21 AM
I think we should start referring to 4eva as Veruca from now on.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 07, 2021, 10:40:34 AM

Be patient, we're almost there.


Yep.

It's frustrating to see many people exercise a modicum of patience until they get their vaccines...then abruptly pivot to "reopen the world so I can live my life."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 07, 2021, 01:12:00 PM
There also is no evidence that those who are vaccinated harbor the virus, and certainly don't harbor enough to spread it.
I think it's nuts to carry on as if this is something to be concerned with, aka bullchit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on March 07, 2021, 01:20:10 PM
I feel that way about gingivitis.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on March 07, 2021, 01:27:32 PM
There also is no evidence that those who are vaccinated harbor the virus, and certainly don't harbor enough to spread it.
I think it's nuts to carry on as if this id something to be concerned with, aka bullchit.

I’m sure forgetful or gooo could give examples, but this isn’t unprecedented.  I seem to remember reading that the original polio vaccine didn’t stop transmission.  By the way that disease also had a huge asymptotic issue with transmission/spread.

Ive also read works from virologists who believe it is very plausible that you can transmit because this is an upper respiratory virus and the immunity is not triggered in that area of your body. 

They are going to figure it out very soon or the number of people vaccinated will get to a point where it won’t matter.  I think promising data has already started coming out in that regard. 

But feel free complaining endlessly....carrying on and such. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 07, 2021, 01:43:59 PM
There also is no evidence that those who are vaccinated harbor the virus, and certainly don't harbor enough to spread it.
I think it's nuts to carry on as if this id something to be concerned with, aka bullchit.

Children are often ruled by their emotions.

Wait for the study, and stop being a selfish baby.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 07, 2021, 02:18:52 PM
There also is no evidence that those who are vaccinated harbor the virus, and certainly don't harbor enough to spread it.
I think it's nuts to carry on as if this is something to be concerned with, aka bullchit.


So in the absence of data, just throw caution to the wind and assume the best? That isn’t very scientific for a ‘man of science.’ And it didn’t work very well for the previous occupant.

Wait for the data to show it is safe to resume business as usual. Until then, 500,000+ deaths suggest that caution is warranted.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 07, 2021, 05:42:01 PM

So in the absence of data, just throw caution to the wind and assume the best? That isn’t very scientific for a ‘man of science.’ And it didn’t work very well for the previous occupant.

Wait for the data to show it is safe to resume business as usual. Until then, 500,000+ deaths suggest that caution is warranted.

   just a little reminder-previous "occupant" got us a vaccine(s) in unprecedented amount of time.  please don't make us compare with what we have now...oy vey
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 07, 2021, 06:46:50 PM
   just a little reminder-previous "occupant" got us a vaccine(s) in unprecedented amount of time.  please don't make us compare with what we have now...oy vey


I know you are simply trying REALLY HARD to believe that the guy in the White House now is simply sleepy and doesn't know what he's doing, but I think even someone like you realizes he is miles ahead of who occupied the place the last four years.

Or maybe you don't.  I don't care.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on March 07, 2021, 08:36:02 PM
There also is no evidence that those who are vaccinated harbor the virus, and certainly don't harbor enough to spread it.
I think it's nuts to carry on as if this is something to be concerned with, aka bullchit.

Sun is getting real low for you, matter of time. I agree you should get out and enjoy it. Stop wearing a seatbelt and obeying red lights too.

Nature finds a way.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 07, 2021, 10:01:38 PM
   just a little reminder-previous "occupant" got us a vaccine(s) in unprecedented amount of time.  please don't make us compare with what we have now...oy vey


Yes, he supported development of the vaccine and that was a very good thing. But he did an abysmal job of getting us prepared for the distribution. And as any healthcare provider knows, a vaccine only works when it gets put into someone’s arm.

If you want to give him credit for what he did well, you should also be prepared to acknowledge what he did very poorly.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 08, 2021, 07:53:03 AM
Unlike Abbott and others, a GOP governor who gets it ...

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/give-wearing-masks-covid-cases-fall-ohio-governor/story?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210307&id=76298110&instance_id=27836&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=52986&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

Despite an increase in the number of people who have received COVID-19 vaccines, Americans should not stop wearing masks, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday.

"With the vaccine, we're now on the offense, that's the great thing. But in Ohio, we can't give up the defense. We have found that these masks work exceedingly well. Schools are a prime example. We've seen it in retail ... we know that this makes a huge, huge difference," the Republican governor told "This Week" Co-anchor Martha Raddatz.

He said by the close of business Monday there will probably be over 2 million Ohioans who will have received their first vaccine dose and a million who have gotten the second dose.

"Every day gets better and better and better," he added.

Several GOP governors this past week began lifting mask mandates and further opening up businesses amid declining coronavirus infection rates, despite guidance from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention and the Biden administration.

Raddatz asked DeWine if he thought Texas Gov. Greg Abbott had made a political decision when he lifted the mask mandate and reopened businesses.

"I don't know what's going on in Texas," he said. "I got one state to worry about, that's Ohio. And that's -- that's a full-time job."

Raddatz followed up, pressing the governor, "You have also faced pressure to end the mask mandate. You're a conservative. Your constituents know the risks now. What's wrong with the argument that people will make up their own minds?"

"Throughout (the pandemic), we've really learned a lot. You know, when this started a year ago, no one had a clue how effective these masks were," DeWine responded.

DeWine reversed an order requiring masks in businesses and retail stores a day after implementing the mandate in April.

"It became very clear to me after we put out the order that everyone in retail who walked into a store as a customer would have to do that, it became clear to me that that was just a bridge too far that people were not going to accept the government telling them what to do," he said on "This Week" May 5. "And so we put out dozens and dozens of orders, that was one that it just went too far"

DeWine instituted a statewide mask mandate in Ohio on July 23, after weeks of issuing county-level mask mandates for areas deemed to be in the “red” zone.

"When we put the mask order on and actually started enforcing it ... we saw a significant drop in cases, a slow down. So we've seen it throughout this last year, these masks really, really work," he said Sunday.

The governor has not outlined a date for when the state's mask mandate would be lifted, instead announcing Thursday that all Ohio health orders would end once the state gets down to 50 cases per 100,000 residents for two weeks.

As of Wednesday, the statewide average for COVID-19 infections was about 180 cases per 100,000 residents for the last two weeks -- less than half the average from early February.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on March 08, 2021, 10:20:36 AM
CDC says fully vaccinated people can gather without masks and social distancing.

Good news for 4ever who can now gather with the other egocentric 57-75 year old males while they eat each other's meat.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 08, 2021, 12:19:22 PM
CDC says fully vaccinated people can gather without masks and social distancing.

Good news for 4ever who can now gather with the other egocentric 57-75 year old males while they eat each other's meat.

More homophobic commentary from Mr Schmit's Gay.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on March 08, 2021, 03:17:18 PM
More homophobic commentary from Mr Schmit's Gay.



I'm not the one that started the meat eaters, just carrying the water, friend.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 09, 2021, 06:21:34 AM
Pretty sure Ziggy's not your friend, kemosabe, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on March 09, 2021, 08:46:17 AM
Pretty sure Ziggy's not your friend, kemosabe, hey?

(https://i.gifer.com/1PEw.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on March 09, 2021, 09:24:33 AM
   just a little reminder-previous "occupant" got us a vaccine(s) in unprecedented amount of time.  please don't make us compare with what we have now...oy vey
Which vaccine(s) exactly did he get? The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine, created in Germany, or the Astra Zeneca vaccine in the United Kingdom, or  the Janssen / Johnson & Johnson vaccine created in the Netherlands. Maybe Moderna, maybe. But even that was built on work of others outside the US.
There was and is a global effort to create, produce and distribute vaccines.
Businesses, scientists and money from the USA were all important, but it is fake news to claim that Operation Warp Speed created those vaccines all by itself.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on March 09, 2021, 10:13:31 AM
Businesses, scientists and money from the USA were all important, but it is fake news to claim that Operation Warp Speed created those vaccines all by itself.

The "success" of warp speed was getting the contracts in place to purchase all the doses.  That was the real win in all of this.  I'll add that "sleepy" has also arranged for more.  But the initial contracts were a big win, Canada wishes they had them.
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/967194072/biden-announces-deal-for-200-million-more-covid-19-vaccines
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on March 09, 2021, 10:15:26 AM
The "success" of warp speed was getting the contracts in place to purchase all the doses.  That was the real win in all of this.  I'll add that "sleepy" has also arranged for more.  But the initial contracts were a big win, Canada wishes they had them.
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/967194072/biden-announces-deal-for-200-million-more-covid-19-vaccines

+1 I'm all for trashing the previous administrations mishandling of this (and there's plenty there) but you gotta give credit where it's due and getting those contracts in place was a major win for us.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on March 09, 2021, 06:55:04 PM
Which vaccine(s) exactly did he get? The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine, created in Germany, or the Astra Zeneca vaccine in the United Kingdom, or  the Janssen / Johnson & Johnson vaccine created in the Netherlands. Maybe Moderna, maybe. But even that was built on work of others outside the US.
There was and is a global effort to create, produce and distribute vaccines.
Businesses, scientists and money from the USA were all important, but it is fake news to claim that Operation Warp Speed created those vaccines all by itself.

Well, the plan was to trade Puerto Rico for Germany, UK, and Netherlands straight up. He was hoping they would also throw in Greenland. If only he wouldn't have lost.
Title: Re: Vaccine/Antibody updates
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 11, 2021, 06:12:58 PM
Yeah, reely thrilled gasoline jumped over $1/gallon since January 20, hey?
Title: Re: Re: Vaccine/Antibody updates
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 11, 2021, 06:23:22 PM
Yeah, reely thrilled gasoline jumped over $1/gallon since January 20, hey?


Sign of a recovering economy!
Title: Re: Re: Vaccine/Antibody updates
Post by: tower912 on March 11, 2021, 06:27:42 PM
Yeah, reely thrilled gasoline jumped over $1/gallon since January 20, hey?

Economy picking up, Saudi's finally cutting production.   Supply, demand.   

Title: Re: Re: Vaccine/Antibody updates
Post by: rocky_warrior on March 11, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Economy picking up, Saudi's finally cutting production.   Supply, demand.

Moved the Gas discussion (old man rant) to the correct thread.  Doc needs to study up on facts (and science), but Covid did indirectly affect the prices.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-Gasoline-Prices-Will-Continue-To-Rise.html
Title: Re: Vaccine/Antibody updates
Post by: Jockey on March 11, 2021, 10:52:06 PM
Yeah, reely thrilled gasoline jumped over $1/gallon since January 20, hey?

Actually, less than half of what you claim, but arguments are always easier when lying is allowed.
Title: Re: Vaccine/Antibody updates
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 11, 2021, 11:35:49 PM
Yeah, reely thrilled gasoline jumped over $1/gallon since January 20, hey?


Agreed. The increasing demand is a great sign that the economy is headed in the right direction. Bravo!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 12, 2021, 09:05:01 AM
Nice to have a leader who actually leads, who leads all Americans, a leader for whom it isn’t all about himself.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on March 12, 2021, 09:31:20 AM
Traffic jams out there today.   Damn you, Biden!  (Shakes fist at the sky)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 12, 2021, 09:41:54 AM
Sure, and anti-fracking legislation had nothin' ta do with it. Looking at rampant inflation soon coupled with increased unemployment. Oh yeah, Old Man Diaper Rash had nothing to do with it. Guess he wuz busy taking questions after his news conference, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on March 12, 2021, 09:44:59 AM
Sure, and anti-fracking legislation had nothin' ta do with it.

What anti-fracking legislation ?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 12, 2021, 09:46:05 AM
Sure, and anti-fracking legislation had nothin' ta do with it. Looking at rampant inflation soon coupled with increased unemployment. Oh yeah, Old Man Diaper Rash had nothing to do with it. Guess he wuz busy taking questions after his news conference, hey?


Please.  If we haven't had rampant inflation with all the tax cutting and deficit spending of the last forty years, we certainly aren't going to have it now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 12, 2021, 09:47:53 AM
What anti-fracking legislation ?

Facts no-matta to the "orange man good" crowd. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 12, 2021, 09:48:31 AM
Fine, anti-pipeline, then.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 12, 2021, 09:55:44 AM
The Keystone Pipeline?  That's a Canadian jobs project.  The US produces 15 times what the Pipeline would generate anyway.

So many talking points.  So little facts.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:00 AM
Sure, and anti-fracking legislation had nothin' ta do with it. Looking at rampant inflation soon coupled with increased unemployment. Oh yeah, Old Man Diaper Rash had nothing to do with it. Guess he wuz busy taking questions after his news conference, hey?

Am I to assume you'll be referring to trump as old man diaper rash when he hits 78 in 3 years? Or are you using pointless attacks purely for partisan reasons rather than trying to actually make a point about age?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 12, 2021, 10:01:13 AM
Fine, anti-pipeline, then.

Lol. Might want to get your story straight before trying to spout off.

Tell me more about the significant inflation that has occurred in the US with all the tax cuts and spending over the past 8 presidents.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on March 12, 2021, 10:02:07 AM
Fine, anti-pipeline, then.


One unsubstantiated talking point is shot down, so you just reflexively move to another unsubstantiated talking point?

Solid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 12, 2021, 10:19:35 AM
The Keystone Pipeline?  That's a Canadian jobs project.  The US produces 15 times what the Pipeline would generate anyway.

So many talking points.  So little facts.

https://www.tcenergy.com/announcements/2020/2020-10-28-tc-energy-awards-more-than-$1.6-billion-in-american-contracts-to-build-keystone-xl-project-to-create-over-8000-union-jobs-in-2021/

I mean come on.  To suggest that EO had no impact on American jobs is just burying your head in the sand.  There is a sane argument to make for the project and against the project without ignoring reality.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 12, 2021, 10:23:27 AM
I never said it had no impact on American jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 12, 2021, 10:35:21 AM
I never said it had no impact on American jobs.

You don’t think by labeling it a Canadian jobs project you’re suggesting it is and never was something that would help American workers?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on March 12, 2021, 10:46:24 AM
Guys - COVID economy...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on March 12, 2021, 10:49:24 AM
Guys - COVID economy...

 :-X
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2021, 11:16:50 AM
Fine, anti-pipeline, then.

The pipeline caused COVID?  Hunh?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on March 12, 2021, 12:19:26 PM
Am I to assume you'll be referring to trump as old man diaper rash when he hits 78 in 3 years? Or are you using pointless attacks purely for partisan reasons rather than trying to actually make a point about age?

He hears it on FOX every day. How can he help but repeat it.

At least the senile old man is getting Covid under control. But even I would seem like a great prez after the buffoonery of the last 4 years.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on March 12, 2021, 12:24:55 PM
https://www.tcenergy.com/announcements/2020/2020-10-28-tc-energy-awards-more-than-$1.6-billion-in-american-contracts-to-build-keystone-xl-project-to-create-over-8000-union-jobs-in-2021/

I mean come on.  To suggest that EO had no impact on American jobs is just burying your head in the sand.  There is a sane argument to make for the project and against the project without ignoring reality.

It has a huge impact on my county in Wisconsin.  Its largest employer had a huge contract that was tied to the Keystone pipeline.  Another firm in Eau Claire had a large contract as well.  The cancelling of the project is projected to cost thousands of well-paying union jobs in Wisconsin alone.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2021, 01:27:04 PM
It has a huge impact on my county in Wisconsin.  Its largest employer had a huge contract that was tied to the Keystone pipeline.  Another firm in Eau Claire had a large contract as well.  The cancelling of the project is projected to cost thousands of well-paying union jobs in Wisconsin alone.

I found this on Google on Keystone and seemed pretty fair.  15-50 jobs mostly in Canada are they only permanent ones and the other 1000's are strictly temporary for less 6-8 months.
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/01/22/keystone-pipeline-jobs-lost-joe-biden-executive-order-cancel-fact-check/6673822002/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on March 12, 2021, 01:53:57 PM
I found this on Google on Keystone and seemed pretty fair.  15-50 jobs mostly in Canada are they only permanent ones and the other 1000's are strictly temporary for less 6-8 months.
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/01/22/keystone-pipeline-jobs-lost-joe-biden-executive-order-cancel-fact-check/6673822002/

Plenty of people here would love to be in a position to scoff at 8 months of guaranteed good pay with the possibility that something else will come up after that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 12, 2021, 02:18:48 PM
Plenty of people here would love to be in a position to scoff at 8 months of guaranteed good pay with the possibility that something else will come up after that.

They'll all just become computer programmers, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 12, 2021, 02:25:23 PM
They'll all just become computer programmers, hey?

Hey now, these guys aren't coal miners.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 12, 2021, 02:59:57 PM
There was little reason for Biden to use an EO to scuttle that pipeline and the thousands of U.S. jobs that went with it. He didn’t mean it to be an anti-jobs measure, but that’s what it ended up being.

Probably Biden’s worst decision as president.

No president is perfect. This one thankfully has done more to effectively deal with the coronavirus in 50 days than his predecessor did in the previous 9 months.

Indeed, for most of those 9 months, the since-deposed president actively and personally put thousands upon thousands upon thousands of Americans’ lives and health at risk.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 12, 2021, 03:10:10 PM
???

I am not sure that building pipelines to carry oil somewhere to eventually gets exported is the best way to create jobs anywhere.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2021, 03:26:18 PM
There was little reason for Biden to use an EO to scuttle that pipeline and the thousands of U.S. jobs that went with it. He didn’t mean it to be an anti-jobs measure, but that’s what it ended up being.

Probably Biden’s worst decision as president.

No president is perfect. This one thankfully has done more to effectively deal with the coronavirus in 50 days than his predecessor did in the previous 9 months.

Indeed, for most of those 9 months, the since-deposed president actively and personally put thousands upon thousands upon thousands of Americans’ lives and health at risk.

He did it to undo Trump for undoing Obama.
As Fluffy, building pipelines to carry oil somewhere to eventually gets exported is the best way to create jobs anywhere.
Besides the Canadians rejected their own pipeline from the Tar Sands to Vancouver area.
Now back to COVID.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 12, 2021, 05:35:50 PM
He did it to undo Trump for undoing Obama.
As Fluffy, building pipelines to carry oil somewhere to eventually gets exported is the best way to create jobs anywhere.
Besides the Canadians rejected their own pipeline from the Tar Sands to Vancouver area.
Now back to COVID.

I agree on why Biden did it. And my last two paragraphs were about COVID.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2021, 09:06:55 PM
I agree on why Biden did it. And my last two paragraphs were about COVID.

All good.
I was referring to myself, so as to not go off on a "Trump sucks" rant.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 15, 2021, 08:02:34 AM
Good news, not widely reported, for those who needed to claim unemployment benefits last year due to COVID-19:

Within the American Rescue Plan, there is a provision allowing most recipients to exclude benefit payments up to $10,200 when filing 2020 taxes:

https://www.irs.gov/faqs/irs-procedures/forms-publications/new-exclusion-of-up-to-10200-of-unemployment-compensation

I just found out about this yesterday, and shared the info with a couple of very grateful friends who lost their jobs for 6 months last year through no fault of their own. Spread the word.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 15, 2021, 08:48:56 AM
Good news, not widely reported, for those who needed to claim unemployment benefits last year due to COVID-19:

Within the American Rescue Plan, there is a provision allowing most recipients to exclude benefit payments up to $10,200 when filing 2020 taxes:

https://www.irs.gov/faqs/irs-procedures/forms-publications/new-exclusion-of-up-to-10200-of-unemployment-compensation

I just found out about this yesterday, and shared the info with a couple of very grateful friends who lost their jobs for 6 months last year through no fault of their own. Spread the word.

What if you already filed and received your refund?  I had a child that filed partial unemployment when his hours were cut and paid tax on the benefit?  File an amended return?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 15, 2021, 08:54:26 AM
What if you already filed and received your refund?  I had a child that filed partial unemployment when his hours were cut and paid tax on the benefit?  File an amended return?

Yep. It's what CPAs recommend if you want to get that $$$.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 18, 2021, 06:01:42 AM
What if you already filed and received your refund?  I had a child that filed partial unemployment when his hours were cut and paid tax on the benefit?  File an amended return?

Sultan -

Just saw this in NYT:

The new law made the first $10,200 of unemployment benefits received in 2020 tax-free for people with incomes of less than $150,000, a significant change for many whose jobs were affected by the pandemic. The I.R.S. said last week that it would provide a worksheet for paper filers and coordinate with tax-software companies. The agency also asked those who were eligible for the tax break but had already filed their 2020 returns not to file an amended return until it had issued additional guidance.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on March 18, 2021, 07:54:55 AM
Sultan -

Just saw this in NYT:

The new law made the first $10,200 of unemployment benefits received in 2020 tax-free for people with incomes of less than $150,000, a significant change for many whose jobs were affected by the pandemic. The I.R.S. said last week that it would provide a worksheet for paper filers and coordinate with tax-software companies. The agency also asked those who were eligible for the tax break but had already filed their 2020 returns not to file an amended return until it had issued additional guidance.



Alright thanks!  I will pass that along.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 23, 2021, 03:51:50 PM

Alright thanks!  I will pass that along.

A CPA friend of mine says the IRS is now saying that they will automatically issue refunds for those who already have filed, so an amended return shouldn’t be necessary.

I am no tax expert and have not checked this out yet, but wanted to let folks know as soon as I heard. Suggest those affected do some checking.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on April 13, 2021, 08:56:41 AM

Please.  If we haven't had rampant inflation with all the tax cutting and deficit spending of the last forty years, we certainly aren't going to have it now.

Hopefully just a one month hiccup but inflation rate from Feb to March isn’t promising. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on April 13, 2021, 06:40:07 PM
Hopefully just a one month hiccup but inflation rate from Feb to March isn’t promising. 

Meh, CPI is catching back up with the dip it had at the beginning of the pandemic. The jump isn't much if you zoom out a bit

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPIAUCSL
(https://i.imgur.com/XLaO4r4.png)

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on April 13, 2021, 07:37:21 PM
Hopefully just a one month hiccup but inflation rate from Feb to March isn’t promising.

The Fed would actually like to see a small amount of inflation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on April 16, 2021, 09:33:48 AM
The Fed would actually like to see a small amount of inflation.

The Fed has a mammoth balance sheet it needs to deal with. It'll be hard to do so without inflation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on April 16, 2021, 12:34:21 PM
The Fed would actually like to see a small amount of inflation.

Bring on inflation. I'd like to pay my mortgage with inflated dollars.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 16, 2021, 02:02:51 PM
The Fed has a mammoth balance sheet it needs to deal with. It'll be hard to do so without inflation.

There's already rampant inflation in the stock market, housing and healthcare.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 16, 2021, 02:57:32 PM
There should be inflation coming.  Raw materials have sky rocketed the last 4-5 months.  That pass along is coming.  And it will be quite a while before everyone catches up.  Tied in with the world wide container & boat shortage that existed well before the Suez Canal thing made it worse.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on April 16, 2021, 03:24:20 PM
There should be inflation coming.  Raw materials have sky rocketed the last 4-5 months.  That pass along is coming.  And it will be quite a while before everyone catches up.  Tied in with the world wide container & boat shortage that existed well before the Suez Canal thing made it worse.

Raw materials skyrocketed 9+ months ago when the supply chain was first disrupted. Inflation has been 'imminent' for years now with the tax cuts & handouts from the last administration superheating the economy even before the coronavirus stimulus. The Fed/Treasury are confounded as to why there's not much inflation yet, which is why they've softened their inflation target from 'max of 2%' to 'average of 2% over the next few years'.

I'm not a MMT guy, but we should keep printing money for the time being.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 16, 2021, 03:30:07 PM
Raw materials skyrocketed 9+ months ago when the supply chain was first disrupted. Inflation has been 'imminent' for years now with the tax cuts & handouts from the last administration superheating the economy even before the coronavirus stimulus. The Fed/Treasury are confounded as to why there's not much inflation yet, which is why they've softened their inflation target from 'max of 2%' to 'average of 2% over the next few years'.

I'm not a MMT guy, but we should keep printing money for the time being.

https://youtu.be/1HmGLV46L60

Also, I have learned that cpi goods have been spared, so far, from inflation effects. However, inflation has run rampant in other sectors not included in our typical inflation determining measurables.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on April 16, 2021, 04:07:05 PM
Raw materials skyrocketed 9+ months ago when the supply chain was first disrupted. Inflation has been 'imminent' for years now with the tax cuts & handouts from the last administration superheating the economy even before the coronavirus stimulus. The Fed/Treasury are confounded as to why there's not much inflation yet, which is why they've softened their inflation target from 'max of 2%' to 'average of 2% over the next few years'.

I'm not a MMT guy, but we should keep printing money for the time being.

100% correct.

Go to CBS On Demand and watch last Sunday’s show. Excellent interview with the Fed chief.

As a bonus, there is a great segment on the work the gov’t does regarding vaccines. Even Bunker Boy couldn’t mess it up.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on April 16, 2021, 04:16:14 PM
There should be inflation coming.  Raw materials have sky rocketed the last 4-5 months.  That pass along is coming.  And it will be quite a while before everyone catches up.  Tied in with the world wide container & boat shortage that existed well before the Suez Canal thing made it worse.
I know this isn't what you meant, but anyone else hear the story on NPR about the boat builder in Maine, called I think "Backbay Yachts"? Their boats go for $500K - $800K, and if you order now they are so backed up they can't deliver until 2023.

Damn, there is an awful lot of money sloshing around.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on April 16, 2021, 04:20:59 PM
I know this isn't what you meant, but anyone else hear the story on NPR about the boat builder in Maine, called I think "Backbay Yachts"? Their boats go for $500K - $800K, and if you order now they are so backed up they can't deliver until 2023.

Damn, there is an awful lot of money sloshing around.

I don't want to depress you further, but go look at how much the richest americans made during the pandemic.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 16, 2021, 04:33:49 PM
Raw materials skyrocketed 9+ months ago when the supply chain was first disrupted. Inflation has been 'imminent' for years now with the tax cuts & handouts from the last administration superheating the economy even before the coronavirus stimulus. The Fed/Treasury are confounded as to why there's not much inflation yet, which is why they've softened their inflation target from 'max of 2%' to 'average of 2% over the next few years'.

I'm not a MMT guy, but we should keep printing money for the time being.

Since I'm quoting buying and selling raw materials all day, I can say we've just been holding off increasing prices to our customers to see if they settle.  It does not appear that will happen any time soon in conjunction with my suppliers doing the same and only in the last 2 months notifying me of price increases.  We will pass that on and with the long lead times won't go into effect for another 3-5 months in which turn I assume my customer will pass on.........
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on April 16, 2021, 05:12:25 PM
Since I'm quoting buying and selling raw materials all day, I can say we've just been holding off increasing prices to our customers to see if they settle.  It does not appear that will happen any time soon in conjunction with my suppliers doing the same and only in the last 2 months notifying me of price increases.  We will pass that on and with the long lead times won't go into effect for another 3-5 months in which turn I assume my customer will pass on.........

And that's the crux of inflation, right? Will the customers of your goods absorb the price change, or will they change their buying behavior because of the now 'too expensive' product. Inflation often occurs when people expects inflation to occur. "Oh, this is now twice as expensive because of inflation what are you going to do?" vs "I'm not going to buy that overpriced thing when I could get it cheaper elsewhere"

The global federation of products has added significant downward pressure on the price of goods sold to consumers (but not services). A lot of the cost increases earlier in the supply chain are being absorbed in the form of hits to margin lower in the supply chain (at least with the manufacturers I've talked to) because of the price pressure. This has to vary wildly by market, though. The wood floors my friends are putting in their new-to-them Chicago mansion are easily 10x what they'd normally be with the materials cost increase + the rush order.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on April 16, 2021, 05:19:08 PM
MU Fan in CT

We have been passing on price increases for the past thirty days, to go into effect in thirty days after advised of increase. I think we will start seeing price inflation over the summer. Crazy times.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on April 16, 2021, 06:14:58 PM
I don't want to depress you further, but go look at how much the richest americans made during the pandemic.


Not just during the pandemic. The wealth gap has been rising for decades. Even when the economy is struggling, the richest Americans do fine.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on April 16, 2021, 07:18:15 PM
I know this isn't what you meant, but anyone else hear the story on NPR about the boat builder in Maine, called I think "Backbay Yachts"? Their boats go for $500K - $800K, and if you order now they are so backed up they can't deliver until 2023.

Damn, there is an awful lot of money sloshing around.

I read the story the other day, Back Cove Yachts.  My read wasn’t so much “people have more money than they know what to do with” but also, people can’t travel, can’t eat out, looking for “safe” activities, so people looked into boats.  Then you had a lot of manufacturing and supply chain issues, plus labor, and there you were.  It was kind of a perfect storm as opposed to “everyone has money to burn on yachts” cause he said it wasn’t some relentless flow of new buyers.

But the free money flying around is nuts.  My assembly/manufacturing lead at work has no market experience.  Talking to him this week, he didn’t really grasp limit vs market orders, needed explanation about “paper gains” cause he thought any gains in stock or crypto each day would just go into his account as profit...yet he’s up a few grand in crypto and stocks over the last 2 months cause the money printer is just fueling everything upwards.  It’s nuts cause I know there are thousands more like him 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: GooooMarquette on April 16, 2021, 07:26:12 PM
I read the story the other day, Back Cove Yachts.  My read wasn’t so much “people have more money than they know what to do with” but also, people can’t travel, can’t eat out, looking for “safe” activities, so people looked into boats.  Then you had a lot of manufacturing and supply chain issues, plus labor, and there you were.  It was kind of a perfect storm as opposed to “everyone has money to burn on yachts” cause he said it wasn’t some relentless flow of new buyers.

But the free money flying around is nuts.  My assembly/manufacturing lead at work has no market experience.  Talking to him this week, he didn’t really grasp limit vs market orders, needed explanation about “paper gains” cause he thought any gains in stock or crypto each day would just go into his account as profit...yet he’s up a few grand in crypto and stocks over the last 2 months cause the money printer is just fueling everything upwards.  It’s nuts cause I know there are thousands more like him


Definitely a lot of this going on in many sectors.

It's like the boom in fitness equipment: rowing machines, spinning bikes, weight equipment and such...often costing big $$$. But lots of people are spending money on that stuff because gyms are closed, at limited capacity or they just don't feel safe going there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on April 16, 2021, 07:52:01 PM
I read the story the other day, Back Cove Yachts.  My read wasn’t so much “people have more money than they know what to do with” but also, people can’t travel, can’t eat out, looking for “safe” activities, so people looked into boats.  Then you had a lot of manufacturing and supply chain issues, plus labor, and there you were.  It was kind of a perfect storm as opposed to “everyone has money to burn on yachts” cause he said it wasn’t some relentless flow of new buyers.

But the free money flying around is nuts.  My assembly/manufacturing lead at work has no market experience.  Talking to him this week, he didn’t really grasp limit vs market orders, needed explanation about “paper gains” cause he thought any gains in stock or crypto each day would just go into his account as profit...yet he’s up a few grand in crypto and stocks over the last 2 months cause the money printer is just fueling everything upwards.  It’s nuts cause I know there are thousands more like him
Yes, thanks for the correction the name, I thought I didn't quite catch it right. You are correct,  COVID was also a factor both in supply chain back-ups and increased demand from people looking for safe activities outdoors. But that is a crapload of demand for boats that cost 2-3x the average house.

Your story re your manufacturing lead also is a cautionary tale IMO. It reminds me of the internet bubble of 1999-2001 where people with no unnatural carnal knowledgeing clue were pouring money into companies that had no unnatural carnal knowledgeing realistic business plan...and you had "analysts" pumping stocks that were trading at 700x REVENUES and had absolutely no way to turn a profit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 16, 2021, 08:31:23 PM
MU Fan in CT

We have been passing on price increases for the past thirty days, to go into effect in thirty days after advised of increase. I think we will start seeing price inflation over the summer. Crazy times.

Our main brass supplier in Mexico notified us of major increases last month.  Our secondary brass supplier in Peru says their pricing is still good so we are trying to switch to them where we can.   But the customers who have the Mexico raw material PPAP'd in are in for a big surprise.

Out aluminum guy has been increasing every month this year. 

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 16, 2021, 08:36:41 PM
MU Fan in CT

We have been passing on price increases for the past thirty days, to go into effect in thirty days after advised of increase. I think we will start seeing price inflation over the summer. Crazy times.

Goose
Are you having container issues? 
As late as December we would call and be able to get a container in 1-2 weeks.
2021 - call and take first available and now it's 5-6 weeks out and a few days before pick-up you're notified it's delayed a week.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on April 16, 2021, 10:27:12 PM
cautionary tale IMO. It reminds me of the internet bubble of 1999-2001 where people with no unnatural carnal knowledgeing clue were pouring money into companies that had no unnatural carnal knowledgeing realistic business plan...and you had "analysts" pumping stocks that were trading at 700x REVENUES and had absolutely no way to turn a profit.

You don't say...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/theres-a-single-new-jersey-deli-doing-35000-in-sales-valued-at-100-million-in-the-stock-market.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on April 17, 2021, 09:42:24 AM
MU Fan

We normally stay out if the logistics side of things but have been forced into over the past few months. Containers are a mess and will be until after the holiday rush late this summer. Shipping by air is a challenge at the moment. Once the money guys figure out the added shipping costs we will see additional price increases. This has been a very stressful time for us. We do a lot with Cummins and they keep wanting more product and shipped faster. The bottleneck in the auto industry is real.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on April 17, 2021, 12:48:13 PM
You don't say...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/theres-a-single-new-jersey-deli-doing-35000-in-sales-valued-at-100-million-in-the-stock-market.html

To be fair, there is a difference between tech companies and SPACs having insane valuations due to inflation and easy free Fed money...and this which clearly seems to be a fraudulent shell company scheme.  Feels like Boiler Room all over again
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on April 17, 2021, 02:02:10 PM
To be fair, there is a difference between tech companies and SPACs having insane valuations due to inflation and easy free Fed money...and this which clearly seems to be a fraudulent shell company scheme.  Feels like Boiler Room all over again

That deli only has 63 shareholders. Should be easy to round them up for questioning.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on April 17, 2021, 05:50:38 PM
To be fair, there is a difference between tech companies and SPACs having insane valuations due to inflation and easy free Fed money...and this which clearly seems to be a fraudulent shell company scheme.  Feels like Boiler Room all over again

Of course there's a difference. It's just one point on the spectrum on the disconnect from reality.

Anyhow, that's all more "market" than economy. But while I'm blathering on, the semiconductor problem is getting real. Not just high end chips. A design my company is finalizing can't get the planned usb-c power delivery chip for something like 19 weeks. Now, we can demo with a similar pin-compatible chip and hack in a power supply, but the chip we're trying to get is something that would be used to charge a cellphone (on the phone side). Scary how these things just aren't available.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on April 17, 2021, 07:20:02 PM
Of course there's a difference. It's just one point on the spectrum on the disconnect from reality.

Anyhow, that's all more "market" than economy. But while I'm blathering on, the semiconductor problem is getting real. Not just high end chips. A design my company is finalizing can't get the planned usb-c power delivery chip for something like 19 weeks. Now, we can demo with a similar pin-compatible chip and hack in a power supply, but the chip we're trying to get is something that would be used to charge a cellphone (on the phone side). Scary how these things just aren't available.

Very good idea to include semiconductors in any infrastructure plan. They are vital to America's way of life.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on April 18, 2021, 12:12:41 PM
Very good idea to include semiconductors in any infrastructure plan. They are vital to America's way of life.

Bullish for $MU
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on April 22, 2021, 04:13:17 PM
You don't say...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/theres-a-single-new-jersey-deli-doing-35000-in-sales-valued-at-100-million-in-the-stock-market.html

OTish, but since I posted it, there is some follow-up:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/22/100-million-new-jersey-deli-company-delisted-from-otc-market.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on April 28, 2021, 06:58:37 PM
OTish, but since I posted it, there is some follow-up:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/22/100-million-new-jersey-deli-company-delisted-from-otc-market.html

As expected....

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/26/100-million-new-jersey-deli-company-owner-kills-consulting-deal-with-shareholder.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 02, 2021, 03:18:06 PM
My heart goes out to small landlords who own a property or three, or maybe a couple of small apartment buildings, and haven't been able to collect most or all of their rent for more than a year now because the government has made it illegal to foreclose on those who can't pay rent.

Their bills haven't stopped -- mortgage, insurance, property taxes, water, HOA fees, etc. There are no national or state programs (that I know of anyway) to help them. Many of them are bleeding money, and could lose their properties because they can't pay their mortgages and other bills.

It's a sad, and rarely discussed, story from the pandemic.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 02, 2021, 05:22:56 PM
My heart goes out to small landlords who own a property or three, or maybe a couple of small apartment buildings, and haven't been able to collect most or all of their rent for more than a year now because the government has made it illegal to foreclose on those who can't pay rent.

Their bills haven't stopped -- mortgage, insurance, property taxes, water, HOA fees, etc. There are no national or state programs (that I know of anyway) to help them. Many of them are bleeding money, and could lose their properties because they can't pay their mortgages and other bills.

It's a sad, and rarely discussed, story from the pandemic.

It’s interesting, cause when they stopped foreclosures, this came up.  The swell from social media, and the younger generation, was almost gleeful.  Like “too bad”, “landlords are already rich” etc...

It was the same disconnect not processing how there are small landlords who basically surviving off their properties the same was just because someone is a “CEO” or a business owner doesn’t mean their company isn’t a multi million or billion dollar megolith.  Just can’t differentiate the varied levels of the business or title.

I remember talking to multiple people who found it BAFFLING that landlords couldn’t just waive rent for a couple months and expecting to collect rent was unmitigated greed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 02, 2021, 05:53:44 PM
It’s interesting, cause when they stopped foreclosures, this came up.  The swell from social media, and the younger generation, was almost gleeful.  Like “too bad”, “landlords are already rich” etc...

It was the same disconnect not processing how there are small landlords who basically surviving off their properties the same was just because someone is a “CEO” or a business owner doesn’t mean their company isn’t a multi million or billion dollar megolith.  Just can’t differentiate the varied levels of the business or title.

I remember talking to multiple people who found it BAFFLING that landlords couldn’t just waive rent for a couple months and expecting to collect rent was unmitigated greed.

For the record, when I talk about money being thrown at CEOs -- even the sucky ones -- I'm talking about huge corporations.

And yes, you're right that scale matters. I remember when my daughter moved to Seattle and was looking for an apartment, one that she looked at was in an 8-unit complex. The owner showed it to us. He was a 50-ish guy who had been laid off during the recession and managing that building and one other he bought was how he was planning to support himself. I'm guessing he did pretty darn well in the decade to follow, but if 3, 4, 5, 6 or more of his tenants haven't paid him for a year now, that could be devastating from a cash-flow viewpoint (and other viewpoints). I feel really bad for folks like that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 02, 2021, 06:06:36 PM
For the record, when I talk about money being thrown at CEOs -- even the sucky ones -- I'm talking about huge corporations.

And yes, you're right that scale matters. I remember when my daughter moved to Seattle and was looking for an apartment, one that she looked at was in an 8-unit complex. The owner showed it to us. He was a 50-ish guy who had been laid off during the recession and managing that building and one other he bought was how he was planning to support himself. I'm guessing he did pretty darn well in the decade to follow, but if 3, 4, 5, 6 or more of his tenants haven't paid him for a year now, that could be devastating from a cash-flow viewpoint (and other viewpoints). I feel really bad for folks like that.

Yep.  My sister’s first apartment in Chicago was in Bucktown.  She lived on the first floor and her landlord and family lived on the second floor.  They were very simple, blue collar people who bought it in foreclosure.  Even at that, the only way they could afford it and rising assessment/taxes were to continually renting out the first floor.  They obviously could swing a few months here and there when tenants swapped over, but 4-6 months+? No way.  They were incredible to my sister at 22 living on her own for the first time.  I can only hope they’ve managed to ride this out
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 02, 2021, 07:17:35 PM
Where we live in rural Wisconsin, there are advertisements on the radio for several employers seeking unskilled or semi-skilled workers.

I have heard pay rates quoted between $17 and $22 an hour. They are offering paid vacations, medical, dental, and 401k contributions. Some are offering signing bonuses up to $2000 and commuting subsidies if you live farther away. This is in an area where you buy a home with that income.

I have a friend who owns a small business in the area, and even though she is offering above market wages, she says that she can't find people to work for her because people make more money by collecting unemployment.

It sounds to me that they might want to consider eliminating the broad unemployment subsidy and focus it in areas where Covid is still causing job shortages.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 02, 2021, 08:01:10 PM
Hmmm ... I don’t think people make that kind of money collecting unemployment benefits, chick. They sure as heck don’t in NC. And the national subsidy is only, what, $400/week? And there are no health benefits. And in most states unemployment benefits are capped at X number of weeks.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 02, 2021, 08:07:58 PM
Hmmm ... I don’t think people make that kind of money collecting unemployment benefits, chick. They sure as heck don’t in NC. And the national subsidy is only, what, $400/week? And there are no health benefits. And in most states unemployment benefits are capped at X number of weeks.

$300.

Anecdotal evidence is really just anecdotal.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 02, 2021, 08:20:23 PM
Hmmm ... I don’t think people make that kind of money collecting unemployment benefits, chick. They sure as heck don’t in NC. And the national subsidy is only, what, $400/week? And there are no health benefits. And in most states unemployment benefits are capped at X number of weeks.

The federal subsidy of $400/week plus your state UE chipped in weekly ($3-400) and you’re making about 45,000 a year or $22-$23 an hour for doing squat.  Not to shabby!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 02, 2021, 08:58:08 PM
$300.

Anecdotal evidence is really just anecdotal.

We have been using Wisconsin’s work share since last summer.  We recently were approved for our second 6 month run.  You work a reduced week, between 40-90% of normal hours, and get scaled unemployment for the rest. However, you are still eligible for the additional $300.

We mentioned it to people we knew in conversation. They haven’t been negatively affected by COVID at all, but applied and moved a bunch of their employees to 36 hours a week. The unemployment is negligible, but the majority are making substantially more due to an extra $1200 a month that more than covers the 10% of their salary they are forgoing. Gaming the system.

But that’s just anecdotal. The true purpose of the Work Share was a vital lifeline for us the second half of 2020 and allowed us to not only survive, but build back comfortably to the point we are profitable.  I’m sure some other people are making more than their normal salaries with the weekly $300 federal bump and a work share, but the vast majority are just staying alive with a great and underused program 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 02, 2021, 09:06:55 PM
The federal subsidy of $400/week plus your state UE chipped in weekly ($3-400) and you’re making about 45,000 a year or $22-$23 an hour for doing squat.  Not to shabby!!

You are vastly overstating the “haul” of the average person on unemployment benefits IMHO.

And again, what happens when state benefits run out? In NC, that happens after only 13 weeks. Those who have been unemployed since the early days of the pandemic haven’t received state benefits in most states for quite some time.

$300 times 52 is $15,600.

Shabby!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on May 03, 2021, 07:29:33 AM
Where we live in rural Wisconsin, there are advertisements on the radio for several employers seeking unskilled or semi-skilled workers.

I have heard pay rates quoted between $17 and $22 an hour. They are offering paid vacations, medical, dental, and 401k contributions. Some are offering signing bonuses up to $2000 and commuting subsidies if you live farther away. This is in an area where you buy a home with that income.

I have a friend who owns a small business in the area, and even though she is offering above market wages, she says that she can't find people to work for her because people make more money by collecting unemployment.

It sounds to me that they might want to consider eliminating the broad unemployment subsidy and focus it in areas where Covid is still causing job shortages.

Our Appleton plant is offering like $29 per hour and signing bonuses.  Doing billboards and radio ads and still having problems finding new employees.  It was a big issue for them before the pandemic, so I don't know what's up in northern Wisconsin? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 03, 2021, 11:16:18 AM
It was a big issue for them before the pandemic

This.

For quite some time now, there has been difficulty luring employees to lots of jobs. Farming and other agricultural jobs for obvious reasons -- the work is very difficult, and the pay isn't great. Same with other manual labor jobs. Also, many shortages in teachers, nurses, nursing aides, etc etc -- groups that have been historically underpaid and overworked in a lot of areas of the country.

I don't know why the Appleton plant can't get people to take their jobs, though. Maybe when we were at close to full employment before the pandemic, the jobs were seen as unattractive for the wages offered, and now it's just a matter of inertia? Who knows.

One thing it isn't: People living high on the hog on the $300/week in federal unemployment  benefits, especially after their state benefits run out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on May 03, 2021, 11:18:37 AM
Inflation is real and coming our way. The consumer is going to be hit in the pocket book very soon. Folks are going to need the $22+ an hour job before the year is out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 03, 2021, 11:38:43 AM
This.

For quite some time now, there has been difficulty luring employees to lots of jobs. Farming and other agricultural jobs for obvious reasons -- the work is very difficult, and the pay isn't great. Same with other manual labor jobs. Also, many shortages in teachers, nurses, nursing aides, etc etc -- groups that have been historically underpaid and overworked in a lot of areas of the country.

I don't know why the Appleton plant can't get people to take their jobs, though. Maybe when we were at close to full employment before the pandemic, the jobs were seen as unattractive for the wages offered, and now it's just a matter of inertia? Who knows.

One thing it isn't: People living high on the hog on the $300/week in federal unemployment  benefits, especially after their state benefits run out.

Agree 100% that once state benefits run out that federal kick in would be very difficult to live on. 

Wonder if the combination of multiple stimulus packages, increased UE benefits, tax returns coming in, and areas where kids still aren’t in school is just delaying folks from pulling the trigger.  There’s obviously something holding them back.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 03, 2021, 01:32:30 PM
Inflation is real and coming our way. The consumer is going to be hit in the pocket book very soon. Folks are going to need the $22+ an hour job before the year is out.

I have personal concerns about what happens when wages can't adjust quick enough. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 03, 2021, 03:53:13 PM
Agree 100% that once state benefits run out that federal kick in would be very difficult to live on. 

Wonder if the combination of multiple stimulus packages, increased UE benefits, tax returns coming in, and areas where kids still aren’t in school is just delaying folks from pulling the trigger.  There’s obviously something holding them back.

Perhaps.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 03, 2021, 04:22:19 PM
Inflation is real and coming our way. The consumer is going to be hit in the pocket book very soon. Folks are going to need the $22+ an hour job before the year is out.

I disagree, Goose. The Fed has been trying for a while to get inflation up to the 2% range and are having no luck.

I hope you are partially correct though and we can reach 2% later this year.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 03, 2021, 04:54:38 PM
Where we live in rural Wisconsin, there are advertisements on the radio for several employers seeking unskilled or semi-skilled workers.

I have heard pay rates quoted between $17 and $22 an hour. They are offering paid vacations, medical, dental, and 401k contributions. Some are offering signing bonuses up to $2000 and commuting subsidies if you live farther away. This is in an area where you buy a home with that income.

I have a friend who owns a small business in the area, and even though she is offering above market wages, she says that she can't find people to work for her because people make more money by collecting unemployment.

It sounds to me that they might want to consider eliminating the broad unemployment subsidy and focus it in areas where Covid is still causing job shortages.

I'm curious what data you are basing your conclusion on that shows these labor shortages are due to unemployment benefits vs. people largely leaving rural areas, which is a trend that has been going on for a long time.

I don't doubt what you say about employers trying to lure workers to these quiet corners of the state, as I'm sure jobs may be hard to fill. But I doubt unemployment benefits are the culprit. Unemployment claims are decreasing as they have been all spring. We will have an even better picture this Friday with the jobs numbers which are expected to be blockbuster.

People want to work. Even with the extra COVID unemployment money, a job with health/dental insurance and a 401k is going to be a better option 99% of the time. The exception may be a single mother with young kids, but if she had child care I bet you she'd still rather work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 03, 2021, 08:53:54 PM
I'm curious what data you are basing your conclusion on that shows these labor shortages are due to unemployment benefits vs. people largely leaving rural areas, which is a trend that has been going on for a long time.

I don't doubt what you say about employers trying to lure workers to these quiet corners of the state, as I'm sure jobs may be hard to fill. But I doubt unemployment benefits are the culprit. Unemployment claims are decreasing as they have been all spring. We will have an even better picture this Friday with the jobs numbers which are expected to be blockbuster.

People want to work. Even with the extra COVID unemployment money, a job with health/dental insurance and a 401k is going to be a better option 99% of the time. The exception may be a single mother with young kids, but if she had child care I bet you she'd still rather work.

My point wasn't that they should do away with enhanced unemployment altogether, but perhaps it should be targeted to areas where jobs are scarce. Jobs do not appear to be scarce in our area.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 03, 2021, 09:19:09 PM
My point wasn't that they should do away with enhanced unemployment altogether, but perhaps it should be targeted to areas where jobs are scarce. Jobs do not appear to be scarce in our area.

That’s fair, and actually an interesting idea.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: bananahammock on May 05, 2021, 11:15:08 PM
Lack of workers is becoming a major issue for many companies. I agree that adjustments are needed to the current unemployment compensation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on May 06, 2021, 12:07:23 PM
Lack of workers is becoming a major issue for many companies. I agree that adjustments are needed to the current unemployment compensation.

some of my wife's clients in the restaurant industry are having trouble hiring, even though with tips employees would make nearly $20/hour and some are even providing "signing bonuses." It's not because of a lack of candidates, they're being told by candidates can make more on unemployment instead.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on May 06, 2021, 12:43:18 PM
some of my wife's clients in the restaurant industry are having trouble hiring, even though with tips employees would make nearly $20/hour and some are even providing "signing bonuses." It's not because of a lack of candidates, they're being told by candidates can make more on unemployment instead.
In MO if you made $50,000 in 2020 you would receive $320/wk or $1376/mo unemployment insurance. A person would only have to work 68.8 hours in a month @ $20/hr to earn that. Income tax isn't included in this equation but $50K/yr ~ $25/hr so the math is pretty close.

So, either the clients are not offering employees more that 16 hours of work per week or their story is BS.

Either way $1376/month is NOT keeping people from taking jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on May 06, 2021, 12:52:42 PM
In MO if you made $50,000 in 2020 you would receive $320/wk or $1376/mo unemployment insurance. A person would only have to work 68.8 hours in a month @ $20/hr to earn that. Income tax isn't included in this equation but $50K/yr ~ $25/hr so the math is pretty close.

So, either the clients are not offering employees more that 16 hours of work per week or their story is BS.

Either way $1376/month is NOT keeping people from taking jobs.

Oregon is $476/week plus the $400, which comes out to nearly $22/hour. Plus, UE is untaxed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 06, 2021, 01:21:47 PM
Oregon is $476/week plus the $400, which comes out to nearly $22/hour. Plus, UE is untaxed.

Yea. It varies and it’s empirical, but most people saying there is no way that people are turning down work are forgetting the additional tax free $1200-1600 a month
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 06, 2021, 01:44:46 PM
Only first $10,200 is untaxed. Otherwise UE is taxed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on May 06, 2021, 02:01:06 PM
Oregon is $476/week plus the $400, which comes out to nearly $22/hour. Plus, UE is untaxed.
I must still be missing something in the equation.

If we assume for the sake of discussion that with/without taxes a person nets $1,500 per month take home. That's still only $18,000 per year which is @ or below the poverty line for households with 2+ members (setting aside the conversation that the poverty level for a single person is set at $12,880 and whether anyone could actually live on that).

People are walking away from jobs to live close to the poverty line? And if that is the case, is the problem the unemployment insurance, the wage, or something else?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 06, 2021, 02:04:21 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/05/05/labor-shortage-inflation-white-house/

I'm also reading interesting stuff about lumbar. Certainly a lot of talk about the large increase in lumbar price effecting housing and construction projects. Initially, I believed this was tied to lack of supply. But that, apparently, isn't the whole story. There's huge stockpiles of raw lumbar available right now. But in the initial pandemic, mills didn't believe their product would be needed because there would be shutdowns and economic downturn. When available supply at the end supply chain was quickly used, mills and early supple chain folks realized their chance to make $$$ and so are demanding top dollar for their product despite an abundance of materials.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 06, 2021, 02:05:08 PM
I must still be missing something in the equation.

If we assume for the sake of discussion that with/without taxes a person nets $1,500 per month take home. That's still only $18,000 per year which is @ or below the poverty line for households with 2+ members (setting aside the conversation that the poverty level for a single person is set at $12,880 and whether anyone could actually live on that).

People are walking away from jobs to live close to the poverty line? And if that is the case, is the problem the unemployment insurance, the wage, or something else?

$476+400 is 876 a week or around $3500 pretax. That’s closer to $2400 after tax assuming it’s all taxed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 06, 2021, 02:05:58 PM
I must still be missing something in the equation.

If we assume for the sake of discussion that with/without taxes a person nets $1,500 per month take home. That's still only $18,000 per year which is @ or below the poverty line for households with 2+ members (setting aside the conversation that the poverty level for a single person is set at $12,880 and whether anyone could actually live on that).

People are walking away from jobs to live close to the poverty line? And if that is the case, is the problem the unemployment insurance, the wage, or something else?


I would guess that a number of people who take these jobs are part of dual income households.  So yeah it can make some sense to have one partner working while the other one stays home, takes care of a child (for example) and collects unemployment.  And decides to continue to do so over the summer until their kids go back to in-person school in September.

Nothing is going to change though.  It is in place until September and will likely be allowed to sunset.

Overpaying is better than underpaying.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 06, 2021, 02:08:06 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/05/05/labor-shortage-inflation-white-house/

I'm also reading interesting stuff about lumbar. Certainly a lot of talk about the large increase in lumbar price effecting housing and construction projects. Initially, I believed this was tied to lack of supply. But that, apparently, isn't the whole story. There's huge stockpiles of raw lumbar available right now. But in the initial pandemic, mills didn't believe their product would be needed because there would be shutdowns and economic downturn. When available supply at the end supply chain was quickly used, mills and early supple chain folks realized their chance to make $$$ and so are demanding top dollar for their product despite an abundance of materials.

We recent built some raised beds and ended up using cedar instead of treated wood because there wasn't much a price difference.

Also, this isn't just lumber, as Goose has mentioned.  It is quite a few raw materials.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 06, 2021, 02:11:04 PM
We recent built some raised beds and ended up using cedar instead of treated wood because there wasn't much a price difference.

Also, this isn't just lumber, as Goose has mentioned.  It is quite a few raw materials.

For sure. I'm wondering if some of those raw materials have a similar story. Regardless, it doesn't appear to be a lack of materials as I first believed. More of a supply chain mess.

Re: your beds - if I had to build a house right now, pretty sure I'd choose an ICF structure as it seems comparable in price to lumbar.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on May 06, 2021, 02:18:58 PM
For sure. I'm wondering if some of those raw materials have a similar story. Regardless, it doesn't appear to be a lack of materials as I first believed. More of a supply chain mess.

Re: your beds - if I had to build a house right now, pretty sure I'd choose an ICF structure as it seems comparable in price to lumbar.

Yeah, cost-push inflation doesn't usually last as long as demand-pull inflation. Cost-push inflation usually reduces demand, which sorts itself out sooner rather than later. As usual though, economics seems to follow exceptions rather than rules.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 06, 2021, 03:19:02 PM
For sure. I'm wondering if some of those raw materials have a similar story. Regardless, it doesn't appear to be a lack of materials as I first believed. More of a supply chain mess.

Re: your beds - if I had to build a house right now, pretty sure I'd choose an ICF structure as it seems comparable in price to lumbar.

The word is lumber.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on May 06, 2021, 03:23:40 PM
The word is lumber.

He might be saying he wouldnt use his lower back to build it. Smart because that's how you throw out your lower back
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 06, 2021, 03:25:51 PM
A good lower back is worth the price.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 06, 2021, 03:26:34 PM
In MO if you made $50,000 in 2020 you would receive $320/wk or $1376/mo unemployment insurance. A person would only have to work 68.8 hours in a month @ $20/hr to earn that. Income tax isn't included in this equation but $50K/yr ~ $25/hr so the math is pretty close.

So, either the clients are not offering employees more that 16 hours of work per week or their story is BS.

Either way $1376/month is NOT keeping people from taking jobs.

We just had a news story about a poor restaurant owner that was desperate for staff. Touching.  Said unemployment insurance was the problem. Seemed genuine.
Well, except that he had just laid off about half his staff and was trying to replace them with people making minimum restaurant wage. And he couldn't fund that because other restaurants are paying more. They left that part of the story out. But it was a Sinclair station, so not surprising, their version fit their narrative.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 06, 2021, 04:19:14 PM
A good lower back is worth the price.

I'm laying on an ice pack right now.  No lumberwork for me anytime soon with my lumbar condition.  Hopefully it will loosen up for softball so Big Lumbah can hit dingers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 06, 2021, 04:36:42 PM
The word is lumber.

Lol.

I've spent too much time in spine surgery, it would seem.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 06, 2021, 04:37:00 PM
I'm laying on an ice pack right now.  No lumberwork for me anytime soon with my lumbar condition.  Hopefully it will loosen up for softball so Big Lumbah can hit dingers.

I'll send you my business card
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 06, 2021, 07:48:30 PM
People are acting as if state unemployment benefits never expire. In NC, they run out after 13 weeks. And I was the one who said $400 for national UE benefits but I was corrected -- it's actually $300, so folks can stop saying $400.

So in NC, beginning with Week 14, you are getting at most $300/week, which is equivalent to $15,600/year. Few if anybody turned down a job because of that.

I know that other states are more generous than NC, but none has unlimited UE benefits. And given that many people have been unemployed since March or April 2020, I'm guessing that for most Americans, state UE benefits are a thing of the past.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on May 06, 2021, 08:03:00 PM
The word is lumber.




Yeah, butt have ya checked da price of vertebrae lately, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 07:55:31 AM
Today's unexpectedly poor jobs report is going to increase concerns that the generous unemployment benefits are preventing people from returning to work.  Some Republican governors are pulling their states out of the program and turning the extra $300 per week into bonuses to get people back to work.

I'm not sure we are quite at the point yet, but by next month we might be.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 08:02:17 AM
Today's unexpectedly poor jobs report is going to increase concerns that the generous unemployment benefits are preventing people from returning to work.  Some Republican governors are pulling their states out of the program and turning the extra $300 per week into bonuses to get people back to work.

I'm not sure we are quite at the point yet, but by next month we might be.

I think we're there.  There are hiring signs everywhere.  Rural, Urban, and suburban.  I think what might be a major hiccup is that there are a lot of single parents out there that want jobs, but school is ending and a lot of summer programs are not going.  I know plenty of people who depend on child care from family members and summer programs for their kids so they can work.  Without that infrastructure in place they're having a hard time getting back to work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jsglow on May 07, 2021, 08:13:51 AM
Today's unexpectedly poor jobs report is going to increase concerns that the generous unemployment benefits are preventing people from returning to work.  Some Republican governors are pulling their states out of the program and turning the extra $300 per week into bonuses to get people back to work.

I'm not sure we are quite at the point yet, but by next month we might be.

We're there.  Although I'd tweak your wording to 'discouraging'.  And couple this with any remaining ill advised foreclosure/eviction moratoriums for the 'perfect storm'.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 08:18:04 AM
Goodness, on expectations of 1 million we couldn’t even muster 300k.

At least feds won’t as likely to raise rates.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on May 07, 2021, 08:21:23 AM
I saw this yesterday.  Will affect my company negatively on lead times but positively on sales figures.


Copper is ‘the new oil’ and low inventories could push it to $20,000 per ton, analysts say
PUBLISHED THU, MAY 6 2021 12:37 AM EDT
UPDATED THU, MAY 6 2021 11:50 AM EDT
Elliot Smith
@ELLIOTSMITHCNBC
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/05/06/copper-is-the-new-oil-and-could-hit-20000-per-ton-analysts-say.html

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 08:26:54 AM
And they revised March numbers over 200k lower!?!?!? What a mess
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 08:44:55 AM
Goodness, on expectations of 1 million we couldn’t even muster 300k.

At least feds won’t as likely to raise rates.

Also interesting to note is how projections could be that far off.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jsglow on May 07, 2021, 08:45:13 AM
Goodness, on expectations of 1 million we couldn’t even muster 300k.

At least feds won’t as likely to raise rates.

There's a million jobs out there.  Today.  Anyone who wants to work tonight's fish fry shift can.  We are so far from 'You don't work, you don't eat' it's unprecedented.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 08:51:07 AM
There's a million jobs out there.  Today.  Anyone who wants to work tonight's fish fry shift can.  We are so far from 'You don't work, you don't eat' it's unprecedented.

While I don't totally disagree, not all jobs are created equal.  ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jsglow on May 07, 2021, 09:20:43 AM
While I don't totally disagree, not all jobs are created equal.  ;)

Of course not.  And as it should be.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
There's a million jobs out there.  Today.  Anyone who wants to work tonight's fish fry shift can.  We are so far from 'You don't work, you don't eat' it's unprecedented.

Absolutely and to Hards point earlier, it seems everywhere I go there are hiring signs posted.  There was a big segment on local news last night saying how hard it is for companies to find employees which for me is an obvious sign that people simply don’t need the money right now because of all the stimulus being pumped out combined with rent/mortgage moratoriums, not having to pay student loans, etc...

We’ve unfortunately created this delayed timeline of folks returning to work through unnecessary policy (wouldn’t call it bad) just not needed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on May 07, 2021, 09:59:20 AM
Absolutely and to Hards point earlier, it seems everywhere I go there are hiring signs posted.  There was a big segment on local news last night saying how hard it is for companies to find employees which for me is an obvious sign that people simply don’t need the money right now because of all the stimulus being pumped out combined with rent/mortgage moratoriums, not having to pay student loans, etc...

We’ve unfortunately created this delayed timeline of folks returning to work through unnecessary policy (wouldn’t call it bad) just not needed.

I read an article in the WSJ that listed the benefits as a reason, but not the only one. Many don’t feel comfortable going back until Covid is more under control or vaccinated. Many have child care issues with schools still being remote. Many are holding out for jobs in their industry rather than setting for a job at McDonalds.

Maybe the benefits are making the above reasons easier to justify, but I don’t think we can point solely to the benefits as the issue.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on May 07, 2021, 09:59:30 AM
FWIW I'm catching more and more rumblings of job seekers looking at the choice between minimum-wage or near-min-wage jobs and unemployment as one of "poverty and misery at the cost of exploitative labor" vs "poverty and leisure." To those voicing these opinions they see no material difference between 9-10 hours of miserable work with no pathway of advancement that still leaves them accruing life-defining debt and... not doing that.

Maybe it's the rise of the gig economy creating unintended consequences, maybe its the social safety net creating unintended consequences, or maybe its labor making the choice that work at the wages offered isn't acceptable.

I honestly don't know the cause, but I suspect it's a multi-factorial solution.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on May 07, 2021, 10:01:39 AM
Absolutely and to Hards point earlier, it seems everywhere I go there are hiring signs posted.  There was a big segment on local news last night saying how hard it is for companies to find employees which for me is an obvious sign that people simply don’t need the money right now because of all the stimulus being pumped out combined with rent/mortgage moratoriums, not having to pay student loans, etc...

We’ve unfortunately created this delayed timeline of folks returning to work through unnecessary policy (wouldn’t call it bad) just not needed.

Well that's not really true. The rent/mortgage bill will come due, in full, whenever the feds or the courts lift the stay. Rent was never frozen, just the landlord's rights to evict were restricted (in certain, but far from all, circumstances)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 10:04:07 AM
One of the ways companies can attract more workers is to offer more money.  Crazy right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 07, 2021, 10:06:05 AM
I think we're there.  There are hiring signs everywhere.  Rural, Urban, and suburban.  I think what might be a major hiccup is that there are a lot of single parents out there that want jobs, but school is ending and a lot of summer programs are not going.  I know plenty of people who depend on child care from family members and summer programs for their kids so they can work.  Without that infrastructure in place they're having a hard time getting back to work.

Summer camps and events for kids are in full swing this year.

The only exception might be overnight camps, but haven't seen much in the way of a decrease.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 10:10:28 AM
One of the ways companies can attract more workers is to offer more money.  Crazy right?

Absolutely!  Hopefully those that can afford to will and that solves this.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 10:14:29 AM
There's a million jobs out there.  Today.  Anyone who wants to work tonight's fish fry shift can.  We are so far from 'You don't work, you don't eat' it's unprecedented.

Just saw that there are 7.4 million job postings currently.  Signing and retention bonuses can help speed this up a bit and would be another huge boost to economic recovery.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on May 07, 2021, 10:16:36 AM
One of the ways companies can attract more workers is to offer more money.  Crazy right?
So you're saying supply:demand economics? Crazy
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 10:16:51 AM
Summer camps and events for kids are in full swing this year.

The only exception might be overnight camps, but haven't seen much in the way of a decrease.

Not all of them, brother.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 10:22:22 AM
FWIW I'm catching more and more rumblings of job seekers looking at the choice between minimum-wage or near-min-wage jobs and unemployment as one of "poverty and misery at the cost of exploitative labor" vs "poverty and leisure." To those voicing these opinions they see no material difference between 9-10 hours of miserable work with no pathway of advancement that still leaves them accruing life-defining debt and... not doing that.

Maybe it's the rise of the gig economy creating unintended consequences, maybe its the social safety net creating unintended consequences, or maybe its labor making the choice that work at the wages offered isn't acceptable.

I honestly don't know the cause, but I suspect it's a multi-factorial solution.


And this is a really good point too.  Just because there are a bunch of open jobs, and a bunch of people who aren't employed, doesn't mean there is a skills match. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 10:27:56 AM
One of the ways companies can attract more workers is to offer more money.  Crazy right?

I've seen plenty of billboards advertising wages starting from $17-$22 for warehouse/factory work.  I think that is a fair starting wage for anyone without any sort of college degree.  Disagree?

I know you're going to say that people should be able to negotiate for whatever they think they're worth... and I agree, but these wages aren't something to balk at.  And removing the EUI should encourage people to fill these jobs.  Since that is reason why the EUI was added.  Now, with things getting back towards normal it should be allowed to sunset.

Otherwise, I don't want to hear the general pubic crying that we "need more jobs".
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 07, 2021, 11:09:43 AM
I saw this yesterday.  Will affect my company negatively on lead times but positively on sales figures.


Copper is ‘the new oil’ and low inventories could push it to $20,000 per ton, analysts say
PUBLISHED THU, MAY 6 2021 12:37 AM EDT
UPDATED THU, MAY 6 2021 11:50 AM EDT
Elliot Smith
@ELLIOTSMITHCNBC
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/05/06/copper-is-the-new-oil-and-could-hit-20000-per-ton-analysts-say.html

save your pre-1982 pennies!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 07, 2021, 11:12:01 AM
One of the ways companies can attract more workers is to offer more money.  Crazy right?

I was gonna say...there's a pretty simple answer to all of this.

If you can't compete with unemployment that pays <$20,000 a year, maybe you really can't afford workers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 07, 2021, 11:15:05 AM
I've seen plenty of billboards advertising wages starting from $17-$22 for warehouse/factory work.  I think that is a fair starting wage for anyone without any sort of college degree.  Disagree?


Let's take yours and my opinion of "fair" out of the equation.

A good wage is whatever someone is willing to work for. Whatever the market will bear. Agree?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 07, 2021, 11:31:03 AM
Well that's not really true. The rent/mortgage bill will come due, in full, whenever the feds or the courts lift the stay. Rent was never frozen, just the landlord's rights to evict were restricted (in certain, but far from all, circumstances)

As someone who worked in the apartment business for close to a decade, here is my prediction of how the delayed-eviction situation will play out.

The minute the moratorium is lifted, the required 5-day notices will go out.  The smart landlords will encourage these people to move out rather than go through the expense and hassle of eviction, and may even offer to give them a good reference to their new landlords.  That way they can rent to someone else - even to someone who is skipping out on another lease - as long as they have the current income to afford the rent.  In the meantime, they work out a payment plan with the former tenant and send the debt to collections if that doesn't work.

The issue with evictions is that once you file for eviction, you can no longer accept money from the tenant, and the courts will be backed up forever.  Even in normal circumstances, an eviction that leads to having to call the sheriff to put them out on the street can take 4-6 months or longer.  Now it will probably take a year or two.

Any any case, I doubt that any landlord will be made completely whole after all this.  The big companies can ride it out, but there are a lot of smaller landlords where rent is the sole (or major) source of their income.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on May 07, 2021, 11:38:56 AM
As someone who worked in the apartment business for close to a decade, here is my prediction of how the delayed-eviction situation will play out.

The minute the moratorium is lifted, the required 5-day notices will go out.  The smart landlords will encourage these people to move out rather than go through the expense and hassle of eviction, and may even offer to give them a good reference to their new landlords.  That way they can rent to someone else - even to someone who is skipping out on another lease - as long as they have the current income to afford the rent.  In the meantime, they work out a payment plan with the former tenant and send the debt to collections if that doesn't work.

The issue with evictions is that once you file for eviction, you can no longer accept money from the tenant, and the courts will be backed up forever.  Even in normal circumstances, an eviction that leads to having to call the sheriff to put them out on the street can take 4-6 months or longer.  Now it will probably take a year or two.

Any any case, I doubt that any landlord will be made completely whole after all this.  The big companies can ride it out, but there are a lot of smaller landlords where rent is the sole (or major) source of their income.

No need to convince me. I helped my clients navigate this whole thing from March 2020 through end of the year. I pushed them, over and over again, to move heaven and earth to help their tenants get access to the covid relief money that was made available. Most of them were able to get that money to the benefit of both tenant and landlord.

By way of example, Berada Properties in Milwaukee was notorious for being the fastest on the draw for filing evictions in the county. He was, by far, the highest volume filer. When relief funds became available, he put someone in his office whose only job was to help tenants get access to those funds. It's smart business.

However, based on my years of dealing with landlords, I would not for an instant be surprised if delinquent accounts not attached to an eviction ended up in a small claims court.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 07, 2021, 11:48:20 AM
Not all of them, brother.

You know best.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 07, 2021, 11:49:11 AM
FWIW I'm catching more and more rumblings of job seekers looking at the choice between minimum-wage or near-min-wage jobs and unemployment as one of "poverty and misery at the cost of exploitative labor" vs "poverty and leisure." To those voicing these opinions they see no material difference between 9-10 hours of miserable work with no pathway of advancement that still leaves them accruing life-defining debt and... not doing that.

Maybe it's the rise of the gig economy creating unintended consequences, maybe its the social safety net creating unintended consequences, or maybe its labor making the choice that work at the wages offered isn't acceptable.

I honestly don't know the cause, but I suspect it's a multi-factorial solution.

Well said.

I don't agree that current unemployment benefits are completely to blame here.

In fact, most small scale studies on UBI would indicate that isn't the problem at all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: bananahammock on May 07, 2021, 12:19:39 PM
My company can’t come close to getting fully staffed. Just guessing, probably need ~ 40 people immediately. Wouldn’t be surprised if they attempt to shed some business as shifts are approaching 12-16 hours. The long hours are causing many to quit and it’s an ugly cycle. Pay is decent with solid benefits and 401K. Rumors of a substantial raise and signing bonuses within the next week. Getting applications but the majority appear to fulfill the unemployment obligations. My hunch is these unemployment benefits are hurting the hiring process along with immigration laws, company biting off more than it can chew, type of work,...

Also, how will the increased wages necessary to lure employees affect inflation (if at all)?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUfan12 on May 07, 2021, 12:30:49 PM
I hire for positions from hourly manufacturing to senior/lead engineers, and it's 10x harder to find good hourly help than specialized, senior level engineers. It's a wild market right now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 12:37:26 PM
Well said.

I don't agree that current unemployment benefits are completely to blame here.

In fact, most small scale studies on UBI would indicate that isn't the problem at all.

Chamber of Commerce laid the blame primarily at the feet of the increased/expanded benefits and called for them to be shut down.

The more I’m reading about what appears to be waiting for us around the corner, the more  bleak it appears.

If we’re truly on the brink of hyper inflation and increased rates, any recommendations on what to do with IRAs etc?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on May 07, 2021, 12:46:24 PM
Chamber of Commerce laid the blame primarily at the feet of the increased/expanded benefits and called for them to be shut down.

The more I’m reading about what appears to be waiting for us around the corner, the more  bleak it appears.

If we’re truly on the brink of hyper inflation and increased rates, any recommendations on what to do with IRAs etc?

Easy does it chicken little. We're a far cry from hyper inflation.

Even if inflation increases, which I'll concede is probably a reasonably likely near term outcome, it would be a regression toward the mean of longterm average inflation rates. We've been operating in a fed-controlled low-to-zero inflation environment for so long that the idea that 3-5% inflation seems like a catastrophe when really it's probably more the norm than anything else.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 07, 2021, 12:49:54 PM
Easy does it chicken little. We're a far cry from hyper inflation.

Even if inflation increases, which I'll concede is probably a reasonably likely near term outcome, it would be a regression toward the mean of longterm average inflation rates. We've been operating in a fed-controlled low-to-zero inflation environment for so long that the idea that 3-5% inflation seems like a catastrophe when really it's probably more the norm than anything else.

🤞🤞I’ll be the first to admit this isn’t my lane.  Just been doing some reading and have been told on hear that 2% inflation is gov’t goal.  More then double that would still be acceptable, honest question? 

What % is too much?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 12:55:05 PM
Chamber of Commerce laid the blame primarily at the feet of the increased/expanded benefits and called for them to be shut down.


Wow a pro-business lobby wants to get cheap labor?  Shocking.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on May 07, 2021, 12:58:36 PM
🤞🤞I’ll be the first to admit this isn’t my lane.  Just been doing some reading and have been told on hear that 2% inflation is gov’t goal.  More then double that would still be acceptable, honest question? 

What % is too much?

That's a question well above my pay-grade. Make me call a shot though, and I'd say that most plausible inflation scenarios would just take a little getting used to as companies, money mangers, and assets reprice to accommodate. Would waking up tomorrow to 25% annualized inflation be bad? Sure would (would it be likely... nope). Would waking up tomorrow to 5%? Probably would cause a lot of people who matter to reposition and then the little guys would have some waves to ride for a bit, but does it merit full blown panic? Nope.

(just my off the cuff musings, again, way above my pay grade)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 02:21:11 PM

Let's take yours and my opinion of "fair" out of the equation.

A good wage is whatever someone is willing to work for. Whatever the market will bear. Agree?

I already said that.  But if you want to talk 'market' then get rid of the crutch that is only benefiting the worker to even the playing field, aina?  You don't want to work?  Sure that's fine, but then you don't get EUI to hold you over until you find a job that pays what you think you're worth.  Do you get to 'search' forever?  Now that the economy has demand for workers and obviously has a supply there... why should we continue to provide enhanced unemployment insurance?

Put it this way, there should be no one complaining that jobs aren't available.  We also need to realize that a lot of the jobs that went away during the pandemic aren't coming back.  They're gone.  Adios. 

Now, if we're going to do UBI, let's just do that.  I'm fully on board.  But at this point there is a pinch where the ultra wealthy and newly unemployed are getting a hell of a deal while the rest of us foot the bill.  What we currently have is an unsustainable system. 

And this is the most conservative you will probably ever see me get on this website.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on May 07, 2021, 02:39:13 PM
This isn't going to help further the discussion, but it involves Christmas Vacation so I'm giving myself a pass on account of that movie being funny.

"In seven years he couldn’t find a job?"

"Catherine says he’s been holding out for a management position."


https://twitter.com/VacationQuotes/status/1075775443121463296?s=20
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on May 07, 2021, 02:42:38 PM
But if you want to talk 'market' then get rid of the crutch that is only benefiting the worker to even the playing field, aina?  You don't want to work?  Sure that's fine, but then you don't get EUI to hold you over until you find a job that pays what you think you're worth. 

So this is the rub. The social safety net applies upward pressure on the wage market from below. And that's good! At its most extreme, I think most people agree that not working shouldn't be a death sentence, regardless of why a person isn't working.  But reasonable debate can be had on the degree to which unemployment benefits are a good market manipulator at low compensation levels. 

For me, if unemployment benefits increase the cost of labor such that businesses who are relying on a large number of below living wage earners can't compete, I won't shed any tears.  If we're going to provide benefits, I'd rather have it be in the purest form and not to subsidize for-profit companies for the sake of artificially lowering unemployment numbers and masking the problem.  But when we're talking about jobs in the low $20s per hour going unfilled? That's another story.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 07, 2021, 03:35:58 PM
🤞🤞I’ll be the first to admit this isn’t my lane.  Just been doing some reading and have been told on hear that 2% inflation is gov’t goal.  More then double that would still be acceptable, honest question? 

What % is too much?

IMO, Anything over 5% is too much.

And sustained inflation over 2% is too much. But a couple years at 3% or 4% will not be that big of a deal.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 07, 2021, 03:37:51 PM
So this is the rub. The social safety net applies upward pressure on the wage market from below. And that's good! At its most extreme, I think most people agree that not working shouldn't be a death sentence, regardless of why a person isn't working.  But reasonable debate can be had on the degree to which unemployment benefits are a good market manipulator at low compensation levels. 

For me, if unemployment benefits increase the cost of labor such that businesses who are relying on a large number of below living wage earners can't compete, I won't shed any tears.  If we're going to provide benefits, I'd rather have it be in the purest form and not to subsidize for-profit companies for the sake of artificially lowering unemployment numbers and masking the problem.  But when we're talking about jobs in the low $20s per hour going unfilled? That's another story.

I agree with this analysis.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 07, 2021, 04:09:38 PM
I agree with this analysis.

In other words, the safety net should not be a hammock.  ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 07, 2021, 04:48:17 PM
I already said that.  But if you want to talk 'market' then get rid of the crutch that is only benefiting the worker to even the playing field, aina?  You don't want to work?  Sure that's fine, but then you don't get EUI to hold you over until you find a job that pays what you think you're worth.  Do you get to 'search' forever?  Now that the economy has demand for workers and obviously has a supply there... why should we continue to provide enhanced unemployment insurance?

Put it this way, there should be no one complaining that jobs aren't available.  We also need to realize that a lot of the jobs that went away during the pandemic aren't coming back.  They're gone.  Adios. 

Now, if we're going to do UBI, let's just do that.  I'm fully on board.  But at this point there is a pinch where the ultra wealthy and newly unemployed are getting a hell of a deal while the rest of us foot the bill.  What we currently have is an unsustainable system. 

And this is the most conservative you will probably ever see me get on this website.

Feels good, donit?   ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 07, 2021, 04:59:49 PM
Feels good, donit?   ;D

Difference is you don't seem to give a rip about the rich folk dicking you down, baby.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on May 07, 2021, 06:56:56 PM
Difference is you don't seem to give a rip about the rich folk dicking you down, baby.

  what is "dicking you down" mean?  if you mean rich getting richer, that is the class warfare argument played whenever your side ain't in control.  during the years 2009-2016, the uber class did very very well.  anyone below upper/upper middle class couldn't afford to invest.  the media's dirty little secret.  kinda like today's jobs report.  main stream media either spins the bejesus out of it or doesn't want to talk about it or it's you know who's fault...btw, middle class income was up $4-5k 2016-2020
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 08:14:22 PM
  what is "dicking you down" mean?  if you mean rich getting richer, that is the class warfare argument played whenever your side ain't in control.  during the years 2009-2016, the uber class did very very well.  anyone below upper/upper middle class couldn't afford to invest.  the media's dirty little secret.  kinda like today's jobs report.  main stream media either spins the bejesus out of it or doesn't want to talk about it or it's you know who's fault...btw, middle class income was up $4-5k 2016-2020

Rich getting richer isn’t really a good thing for society. But I guess I do t expect the guy who bought daddy’s dental practice to really understand that.

By the way, do you blame the media for everything?  Amazing how you consistently use that as an excuse for poor behavior.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 07, 2021, 08:18:08 PM
Rich getting richer isn’t really a good thing for society. But I guess I do t expect the guy who bought daddy’s dental practice to really understand that.

By the way, do you blame the media for everything?  Amazing how you consistently use that as an excuse for poor behavior.

Big tough ivory tower guy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 08:37:47 PM
Big tough ivory tower guy.

Do these people pay you to defend them or are you just hoping they invite you to their next little party? Because it’s kinda pathetic you keep doing so.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on May 07, 2021, 08:46:17 PM
Rich getting richer isn’t really a good thing for society. But I guess I do t expect the guy who bought daddy’s dental practice to really understand that.

By the way, do you blame the media for everything?  Amazing how you consistently use that as an excuse for poor behavior.

the key word there sully is BOUGHT.  yeah, that was 30 years ago and guess what?  still writing out checks to 10 other people and paying A LOT of taxes
 btw, have you ever bought or run a business?  didn't think so.  still getting paid for staying home yet, ey?

never said media is to "blame" for anything but show me where i'm wrong here instead of arguing with my points because we are polar opposites.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on May 07, 2021, 08:47:29 PM
Big tough ivory tower guy.

  thanks zig..i love you man ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 08:50:36 PM
the key word there sully is BOUGHT.  yeah, that was 30 years ago and guess what?  still writing out checks to 10 other people and paying A LOT of taxes
 btw, have you ever bought or run a business?  didn't think so.  still getting paid for staying home yet, ey?

never said media is to "blame" for anything but show me where i'm wrong here instead of arguing with my points because we are polar opposites.

Thirty years later and you STILL haven’t paid it off?  Wow. Daddy must have soaked you huh?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 07, 2021, 08:52:07 PM
Do these people pay you to defend them or are you just hoping they invite you to their next little party? Because it’s kinda pathetic you keep doing so.

Oh, I'm a regular participant in the underboard mocking of you, Johnny boy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 07, 2021, 08:58:45 PM
Oh, I'm a regular participant in the underboard mocking of you, Johnny boy.

Sweet! Glad you’re/their obsessed. That indeed is a badge of honor!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 07, 2021, 09:05:54 PM
Sweet! Glad you’re/their obsessed. That indeed is a badge of honor!

Why are you the way you are?

- Michael Scott
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 07, 2021, 10:23:01 PM
the key word there sully is BOUGHT.
So you bought it with the money daddy paid you to work there. Nice.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 07, 2021, 10:53:55 PM
If someone can be pulled away from a job for a TEMPORARY $600/week max (and that's with both the state and federal parts maxed), then the job mustn't have been that good. There are also quite a few workers who don't qualify at all for state benefits because they weren't in a job paying unemployment insurance tax, but they still have to go through the state as a gatekeeper to the federal PUA, which they must apply for. If you're a freelancer whose business is off 80% or so but you're still operating, that other 20% comes off the PUA (if you're honest in applying; if not you risk being prosecuted). A PUA determination for such a person will not just automatically come in at $300.

Those on career-track jobs with benefits where the industry just happened to get hit hard won't be too hard to get back, but the dead-end jobs where employers try to limit hours and pay $10 or less an hour and then scream about no one wanting to work will need re-examination. Governors McMaster and Gianforte both are in states notorious for low pay and throwing workers under the bus.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on May 08, 2021, 06:43:28 AM
Thirty years later and you STILL haven’t paid it off?  Wow. Daddy must have soaked you huh?


is this how you talk to your students?  you don't listen very well.  where did "paid it off" come into the equation? and what does it have to do with anything?  i axked you if you ever wrote out a check for someone to live on?  someone to buy a house, a car, put food in their fridge...?  my tax dollars probably pay some of your salary, unfortunately.  we see right here what that has produced...an angry old man

   i paid for a dental practice, my 8 years of tuition at MU, tuition for my 2 sons at MU...and A LOT of taxes...more than my fair share.  paid off the practice after he retired with the knowledge i gained from working with him
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 08, 2021, 08:18:28 AM
If someone can be pulled away from a job for a TEMPORARY $600/week max (and that's with both the state and federal parts maxed), then the job mustn't have been that good. There are also quite a few workers who don't qualify at all for state benefits because they weren't in a job paying unemployment insurance tax, but they still have to go through the state as a gatekeeper to the federal PUA, which they must apply for. If you're a freelancer whose business is off 80% or so but you're still operating, that other 20% comes off the PUA (if you're honest in applying; if not you risk being prosecuted). A PUA determination for such a person will not just automatically come in at $300.

Those on career-track jobs with benefits where the industry just happened to get hit hard won't be too hard to get back, but the dead-end jobs where employers try to limit hours and pay $10 or less an hour and then scream about no one wanting to work will need re-examination. Governors McMaster and Gianforte both are in states notorious for low pay and throwing workers under the bus.

Well said
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on May 08, 2021, 09:42:00 AM
If someone can be pulled away from a job for a TEMPORARY $600/week max (and that's with both the state and federal parts maxed), then the job mustn't have been that good. There are also quite a few workers who don't qualify at all for state benefits because they weren't in a job paying unemployment insurance tax, but they still have to go through the state as a gatekeeper to the federal PUA, which they must apply for. If you're a freelancer whose business is off 80% or so but you're still operating, that other 20% comes off the PUA (if you're honest in applying; if not you risk being prosecuted). A PUA determination for such a person will not just automatically come in at $300.

Those on career-track jobs with benefits where the industry just happened to get hit hard won't be too hard to get back, but the dead-end jobs where employers try to limit hours and pay $10 or less an hour and then scream about no one wanting to work will need re-examination. Governors McMaster and Gianforte both are in states notorious for low pay and throwing workers under the bus.

Just before the pandemic, we had issues getting machine operators because we learned many potential new hires were passing on us to work in a new Amazon warehouse instead.  We raised the starting hourly rate, gave all employees who started in the last 3 years the same increase and all new operators were given a bump up in pay after 3 months if they showed they can operate the machines competently.  It helped bring in several new competent operators.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 08, 2021, 10:53:53 AM

is this how you talk to your students?  you don't listen very well.  where did "paid it off" come into the equation? and what does it have to do with anything?  i axked you if you ever wrote out a check for someone to live on?  someone to buy a house, a car, put food in their fridge...?  my tax dollars probably pay some of your salary, unfortunately.  we see right here what that has produced...an angry old man

   i paid for a dental practice, my 8 years of tuition at MU, tuition for my 2 sons at MU...and A LOT of taxes...more than my fair share.  paid off the practice after he retired with the knowledge i gained from working with him

Did your daddy teach you to be a defensive little whiner, or do you learn that on your own?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 08, 2021, 10:59:42 AM

is this how you talk to your students?  you don't listen very well.  where did "paid it off" come into the equation? and what does it have to do with anything?  i axked you if you ever wrote out a check for someone to live on?  someone to buy a house, a car, put food in their fridge...?  my tax dollars probably pay some of your salary, unfortunately.  we see right here what that has produced...an angry old man

   i paid for a dental practice, my 8 years of tuition at MU, tuition for my 2 sons at MU...and A LOT of taxes...more than my fair share.  paid off the practice after he retired with the knowledge i gained from working with him

I've done all these things and still managed to not be a short sighed idiot.  Congrats on your silver spoon, too!

Fluffy, the real issue is that these guys *think* they're truly wealthy.  When they are just comfortably Wisconsin wealthy.  They piss and moan about taxes despite the tax system having been in their favor since before the 1980s.  They're small thinkers that can't see the forest for the trees.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 08, 2021, 11:41:46 AM
“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 09, 2021, 01:22:47 PM
If someone can be pulled away from a job for a TEMPORARY $600/week max (and that's with both the state and federal parts maxed), then the job mustn't have been that good. There are also quite a few workers who don't qualify at all for state benefits because they weren't in a job paying unemployment insurance tax, but they still have to go through the state as a gatekeeper to the federal PUA, which they must apply for. If you're a freelancer whose business is off 80% or so but you're still operating, that other 20% comes off the PUA (if you're honest in applying; if not you risk being prosecuted). A PUA determination for such a person will not just automatically come in at $300.

Those on career-track jobs with benefits where the industry just happened to get hit hard won't be too hard to get back, but the dead-end jobs where employers try to limit hours and pay $10 or less an hour and then scream about no one wanting to work will need re-examination. Governors McMaster and Gianforte both are in states notorious for low pay and throwing workers under the bus.

Superb comment.  There is not a shred of evidence to dispute it, either, though some folks apparently can come up with an anecdote about a neighbor's cousin who is allegedly gaming the system.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 09, 2021, 01:42:07 PM
Superb comment.  There is not a shred of evidence to dispute it, either, though some folks apparently can come up with an anecdote about a neighbor's cousin who is allegedly gaming the system.

I mean an anecdotal experience is a “shred of evidence.”  And I have no doubt there are plenty of people choosing not to work, but my guess is that many are people who aren’t primary income earners in the household. But is this a systematic problem? Doubtful.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 09, 2021, 04:32:55 PM
I mean an anecdotal experience is a “shred of evidence.”  And I have no doubt there are plenty of people choosing not to work, but my guess is that many are people who aren’t primary income earners in the household. But is this a systematic problem? Doubtful.

You got me on “not a shred.” I’ll amend to “barely a shred,” if you prefer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 09, 2021, 04:45:23 PM
You got me on “not a shred.” I’ll amend to “barely a shred,” if you prefer.

I prefer you stop exaggerating and using hyperbole but I’m not holding my breath.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 09, 2021, 05:04:07 PM
paid off the practice after he retired with the knowledge i gained money he paid me from working with him
FIFY
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 09, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
I prefer you stop exaggerating and using hyperbole but I’m not holding my breath.

You'd better behave, 82. :o :o
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 09, 2021, 10:43:22 PM
I prefer you stop exaggerating and using hyperbole but I’m not holding my breath.

Why don’t you just apply for one of the high-paying Scoop Moderator jobs?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 10, 2021, 09:56:58 AM
In today's Charlotte Observer:

Carolina Harbor, the 26-acre water park at Carowinds, will open June 12 instead of May 29 as originally planned because of a worker shortage. The rest of the amusement park will still reopen this month as scheduled.

Other industries, notably restaurants and retail, are also struggling to hire back enough workers to operate as coronavirus restrictions ease.

“As we’re seeing across a wide range of industries, the availability of labor has been a challenge,” Carowinds spokeswoman Lisa Stryker told the Observer Monday. “In response to the hiring challenge, we have ramped up recruiting efforts and taken steps to ensure we are providing competitive wages and benefits.”

In April, the park announced it would give $500 bonuses to all seasonal hires and expected to hire 900 part-time positions from lifeguards and rides to merchandise and hospitality.

Carowinds also was looking for 60 full-time ride operators and staff at its hotel, SpringHill Suites by Marriott Charlotte at Carowinds.

The 400-acre theme park on the North and South Carolina state line near Charlotte did not open last summer because of the coronavirus pandemic.


Most of these jobs really suck IMHO. Mundane work in extreme heat and humidity. Normally, they get a lot of college students and high school kids. Not sure if that's who the shortage is with; if so, it likely has little to do with unemployment benefits and more to do with better jobs at equal or better pay being out there. If I were 20 and had to choose a job at, say, Starbucks or Target indoors and out of the heat vs an amusement park ... it would be a no-brainer.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 10, 2021, 11:09:13 AM
In today's Charlotte Observer:

Carolina Harbor, the 26-acre water park at Carowinds, will open June 12 instead of May 29 as originally planned because of a worker shortage. The rest of the amusement park will still reopen this month as scheduled.

Other industries, notably restaurants and retail, are also struggling to hire back enough workers to operate as coronavirus restrictions ease.

“As we’re seeing across a wide range of industries, the availability of labor has been a challenge,” Carowinds spokeswoman Lisa Stryker told the Observer Monday. “In response to the hiring challenge, we have ramped up recruiting efforts and taken steps to ensure we are providing competitive wages and benefits.”

In April, the park announced it would give $500 bonuses to all seasonal hires and expected to hire 900 part-time positions from lifeguards and rides to merchandise and hospitality.

Carowinds also was looking for 60 full-time ride operators and staff at its hotel, SpringHill Suites by Marriott Charlotte at Carowinds.

The 400-acre theme park on the North and South Carolina state line near Charlotte did not open last summer because of the coronavirus pandemic.


Most of these jobs really suck IMHO. Mundane work in extreme heat and humidity. Normally, they get a lot of college students and high school kids. Not sure if that's who the shortage is with; if so, it likely has little to do with unemployment benefits and more to do with better jobs at equal or better pay being out there. If I were 20 and had to choose a job at, say, Starbucks or Target indoors and out of the heat vs an amusement park ... it would be a no-brainer.

At least in the Dells, they hire a lot of kids from Europe to work the watermarks.  House them, feed them, work them.   I'm guessing that those kids aren't coming over this year, so that is probably a bigger reason.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on May 10, 2021, 11:17:01 AM
At least in the Dells, they hire a lot of kids from Europe to work the watermarks.  House them, feed them, work them.   I'm guessing that those kids aren't coming over this year, so that is probably a bigger reason.

Yes they still are. The Dells would close up without them. Every one that I have talked to feels safer here than at home. I guess they don’t realize how many hillbilly anti-vaxxers go there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 10, 2021, 12:24:25 PM
In today's Charlotte Observer:

Carolina Harbor, the 26-acre water park at Carowinds, will open June 12 instead of May 29 as originally planned because of a worker shortage. The rest of the amusement park will still reopen this month as scheduled.

Other industries, notably restaurants and retail, are also struggling to hire back enough workers to operate as coronavirus restrictions ease.

“As we’re seeing across a wide range of industries, the availability of labor has been a challenge,” Carowinds spokeswoman Lisa Stryker told the Observer Monday. “In response to the hiring challenge, we have ramped up recruiting efforts and taken steps to ensure we are providing competitive wages and benefits.”

In April, the park announced it would give $500 bonuses to all seasonal hires and expected to hire 900 part-time positions from lifeguards and rides to merchandise and hospitality.

Carowinds also was looking for 60 full-time ride operators and staff at its hotel, SpringHill Suites by Marriott Charlotte at Carowinds.

The 400-acre theme park on the North and South Carolina state line near Charlotte did not open last summer because of the coronavirus pandemic.


Most of these jobs really suck IMHO. Mundane work in extreme heat and humidity. Normally, they get a lot of college students and high school kids. Not sure if that's who the shortage is with; if so, it likely has little to do with unemployment benefits and more to do with better jobs at equal or better pay being out there. If I were 20 and had to choose a job at, say, Starbucks or Target indoors and out of the heat vs an amusement park ... it would be a no-brainer.

Summer jobs are supposed to suck.  It's character-building.  In high school my summer jobs were working as a sweeper girl at Opryland and as a Shoney's Big Boy waitress.

Whenever I was hiring a young person in an entry-level job, I always picked the person who did manual labor over someone who worked as a receptionist at her dad's law office.

Also, when did it become a rule that you shouldn't have to work if you think a job sucks?  Most jobs suck.  That's why they call it "work". 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 10, 2021, 12:37:12 PM
Why don’t you just apply for one of the high-paying Scoop Moderator jobs?

Then he'd have to stop taking unemployment.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 10, 2021, 12:39:05 PM
Summer jobs are supposed to suck.  It's character-building.  In high school my summer jobs were working as a sweeper girl at Opryland and as a Shoney's Big Boy waitress.

Whenever I was hiring a young person in an entry-level job, I always picked the person who did manual labor over someone who worked as a receptionist at her dad's law office.

Also, when did it become a rule that you shouldn't have to work if you think a job sucks?  Most jobs suck.  That's why they call it "work".

Hell yea. I loved Big Boy.

I worked TONS of sucky jobs in high school and college..... cleaning rat $hit out of cages at MU labs, painting dorm rooms, bussing tables, cleaning rich people's golf clubs, you name it. Pretty much all for minimum wage or slightly over.

I agree with you, it is character building and fine for young people to do this stuff. Teach the the value of a dollar, etc. etc.

What I don't agree with (and Chick, you didn't say this so I'm not arguing with you, just the point that many people make) is that we can expect an adult who has to support themselves, much less a kid, to take this job. That is not just. It is not a living wage.



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 10, 2021, 12:43:14 PM
Hell yea. I loved Big Boy.

Working there or eating there?

I don't think I ever had a meal there after seeing what went on back in the kitchen.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 10, 2021, 12:43:47 PM
Working there or eating there?

I don't think I ever had a meal there after seeing what went on back in the kitchen.

Eating. I was like 6 years old though. Please don't ruin it for me.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 10, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Summer jobs are supposed to suck.  It's character-building.  In high school my summer jobs were working as a sweeper girl at Opryland and as a Shoney's Big Boy waitress.

Whenever I was hiring a young person in an entry-level job, I always picked the person who did manual labor over someone who worked as a receptionist at her dad's law office.

Also, when did it become a rule that you shouldn't have to work if you think a job sucks?  Most jobs suck.  That's why they call it "work".

I don’t think we disagree at all.

What I said is that with so many jobs open in which a college kid doesn’t have to work in extreme heat and humidity, they have more choices now.

I gave Starbucks and Target as examples and there are countless others. Many would argue those jobs suck, too. And some might argue they’re just as character-building.

What they aren’t: Sucky, character-building jobs outside in the South Carolina July heat.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 10, 2021, 01:19:22 PM
This isn't new.  These "traditional summer jobs" for high school and college kids have been harder and harder to fill for years.  Students have more options and are generally working less.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 10, 2021, 01:20:59 PM



What they aren’t: Sucky, character-building jobs outside in the South Carolina July heat.

I contend that Nashville July heat with 90% humidity is worse.  And it's an 11-hour drive to the closest beach.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2021, 02:48:46 PM
If someone can be pulled away from a job for a TEMPORARY $600/week max (and that's with both the state and federal parts maxed), then the job mustn't have been that good. There are also quite a few workers who don't qualify at all for state benefits because they weren't in a job paying unemployment insurance tax, but they still have to go through the state as a gatekeeper to the federal PUA, which they must apply for. If you're a freelancer whose business is off 80% or so but you're still operating, that other 20% comes off the PUA (if you're honest in applying; if not you risk being prosecuted). A PUA determination for such a person will not just automatically come in at $300.

Those on career-track jobs with benefits where the industry just happened to get hit hard won't be too hard to get back, but the dead-end jobs where employers try to limit hours and pay $10 or less an hour and then scream about no one wanting to work will need re-examination. Governors McMaster and Gianforte both are in states notorious for low pay and throwing workers under the bus.

Oregon now offering up to what would be $25.85/hour for unemployment benefits...untaxed too.

Very easy to say a job "isn't good enough" when you can bring that in without having to work.

https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2021/05/oregon-will-boost-weekly-jobless-benefits-by-9-for-new-claims.html?utm_campaign=theoregonian_sf&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1_KlpmX21ImKeQbrlhQ9ThMf2O0ez92LD99uK1Ou8jX8vRReNlf4oP_c4
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 10, 2021, 03:10:12 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/05/07/jobs-report-labor-shortage-analysis/

Why not use the enhanced unemployment as a signing bonus? Why not come to a compromise and combine government support with private jobs?

Because no one wants a resolution
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 10, 2021, 03:13:40 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/05/07/jobs-report-labor-shortage-analysis/

Why not use the enhanced unemployment as a signing bonus? Why not come to a compromise and combine government support with private jobs?

Because no one wants a resolution

That's actually what Montana is doing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 11, 2021, 11:46:30 AM
I contend that Nashville July heat with 90% humidity is worse.  And it's an 11-hour drive to the closest beach.

OK, you ... um ... win?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 11, 2021, 02:32:28 PM
OK, you ... um ... win?

And those were coveted jobs back in the day. And they paid minimum wage. And no overtime until you hit 50 hours.

Kids today are too soft and spoiled.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Coleman on May 11, 2021, 02:41:28 PM
Kids today are too soft and spoiled.

Counterpoint....

Kids today have grown up during...

9/11 and the War on Terror
Rampant cyber bullying
Once in a century financial collapse
An opioid epidemic
Once in a century pandemic
School shootings that have become so common that they have to drill for them like we drilled for fires and tornadoes
College costs that have risen more than twice the rate of inflation

Kids have never had it harder. And this generation has been remarkably resilient, IMHO. At least, that's how I try to see things - start with compassion and give people the benefit of the doubt. Especially kids.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on May 11, 2021, 02:55:22 PM
I would say if kids are spoiled and soft, it’s as much the parents than anything.

Also, some of it is what is being prioritized. People don’t look for the hard labor on resumes or college applications. It’s more volunteer activities and internships.

Granted there’s plenty of people who don’t go that route. However, there’s probably way more ways to make money than 30 years ago. And many of those aren’t the “character building” jobs previous generations had.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on May 11, 2021, 03:13:17 PM
And those were coveted jobs back in the day. And they paid minimum wage. And no overtime until you hit 50 hours.

Kids today are too soft and spoiled.

Such a lazy ass response to call kids too soft and spoiled.  Your parents generation did the same thing, and it was lazy then too.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on May 11, 2021, 03:16:48 PM
Kids generally turn out how they are parented.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 11, 2021, 03:29:48 PM
Kids today are too soft and spoiled.


Jeez, you've been retired about a year and you already sound old.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 11, 2021, 04:47:07 PM
Kids generally turn out how they are parented.

Agreed.  And of course I didn't mean all kids.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 11, 2021, 05:46:55 PM
We should definitely keep making it worse and worse for those who aren't working (for whatever reason). We should absolutely do nothing to make working conditions/situation better for folks.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 11, 2021, 07:43:29 PM
And those were coveted jobs back in the day. And they paid minimum wage. And no overtime until you hit 50 hours.

Kids today are too soft and spoiled.

All kinds of things that were considered "true" or "good" "back in the day" actually sucked or were stupid or were lies told by old people.

If you or your kids were soft and spoiled, that's on either you or your parents. Don't generalize.

Now get out of my yard!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on May 11, 2021, 09:19:36 PM
All kinds of things that were considered "true" or "good" "back in the day" actually sucked or were stupid or were lies told by old people.

If you or your kids were soft and spoiled, that's on either you or your parents. Don't generalize.

Now get out of my yard!

And take those ornaments from my tree with you!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 12, 2021, 05:16:27 PM
And take those ornaments from my tree with you!

Exactly! If you want to put the "X" back in "Xmas," do it elsewhere!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 19, 2021, 07:41:13 AM
So...corporate hoarding?

The World Economy Is Suddenly Running Low on Everything
‘It is anything but efficient or normal.’ Surging corporate demand is upending global supply chains.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-17/inflation-rate-2021-and-shortages-companies-panic-buying-as-supplies-run-short?utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=bd&utm_source=applenews

"Mattress producers to car manufacturers to aluminum foil makers are buying more material than they need to survive the breakneck speed at which demand for goods is recovering and assuage that primal fear of running out. The frenzy is pushing supply chains to the brink of seizing up. Shortages, transportation bottlenecks and price spikes are nearing the highest levels in recent memory, raising concern that a supercharged global economy will stoke inflation.

Caught in the crosscurrents is Dennis Wolkin, whose family has run a business making crib mattresses for three generations. Economic expansions are usually good for baby bed sales. But the extra demand means little without the key ingredient: foam padding. There has been a run on the kind of polyurethane foam Wolkin uses — in part because of the deep freeze across the U.S. South in February, and because of  “companies over-ordering and trying to hoard what they can.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on May 19, 2021, 10:27:22 AM
So...corporate hoarding?

The World Economy Is Suddenly Running Low on Everything
‘It is anything but efficient or normal.’ Surging corporate demand is upending global supply chains.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-17/inflation-rate-2021-and-shortages-companies-panic-buying-as-supplies-run-short?utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=bd&utm_source=applenews

"Mattress producers to car manufacturers to aluminum foil makers are buying more material than they need to survive the breakneck speed at which demand for goods is recovering and assuage that primal fear of running out. The frenzy is pushing supply chains to the brink of seizing up. Shortages, transportation bottlenecks and price spikes are nearing the highest levels in recent memory, raising concern that a supercharged global economy will stoke inflation.

Caught in the crosscurrents is Dennis Wolkin, whose family has run a business making crib mattresses for three generations. Economic expansions are usually good for baby bed sales. But the extra demand means little without the key ingredient: foam padding. There has been a run on the kind of polyurethane foam Wolkin uses — in part because of the deep freeze across the U.S. South in February, and because of  “companies over-ordering and trying to hoard what they can.”

What I'm seeing is that customers are aware of longer lead times because of some actual shortages.  So they are ordering larger quantities to make up for it with the assumption their subsequent order will have a longer lead time also and the first will cover them until they're ready for the re-order.  (If that makes any sense.)  The problem is everyone is doing this and manufacturer's can't keep up.  For example, our brass supplier is farther down stream than us and he's so overloaded that his deliveries are 8-10 weeks late which means we may be shutting down a chunk of machines next month.  We've placed larger orders on our brass supplier because of their issues which just made things worse................and on and on...............
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 19, 2021, 10:34:53 AM
What I'm seeing is that customers are aware of longer lead times because of some actual shortages.  So they are ordering larger quantities to make up for it with the assumption their subsequent order will have a longer lead time also and the first will cover them until they're ready for the re-order.  (If that makes any sense.)  The problem is everyone is doing this and manufacturer's can't keep up.  For example, our brass supplier is farther down stream than us and he's so overloaded that his deliveries are 8-10 weeks late which means we may be shutting down a chunk of machines next month.  We've placed larger orders on our brass supplier because of their issues which just made things worse................and on and on...............

Right, hoarding is an unnecessarily aggressive word for demand planning in a supply crisis.  I'm seeing similar.  This isn't vaccines or food or TP and consumer goods, this is business.  Companies that aren't getting ahead of these supply crunches get insanely backed up.  This happens all the time in normal business cycles.  Companies will pay premiums to buy extra just to ensure no supply shortage and make it back eventually, rather than risk being slowed or squeezed out.

Its interesting actually, cause certain markets already do this sort of buying(I think of specifically China in terms of gold and precious stones for the jewellery industry) they specifically plan for 2-3 BIG buys a year instead of biweekly or monthly orders.  And the market bears it just fine.  But all of a sudden, some of the latter type of buyers shift and it throws the ecosystem out of whack.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on May 19, 2021, 12:03:56 PM
Perhaps the word hoarding raises some hackles, but "paying a premium to buy extra" amounts to very close to the same thing. It may be prudent from a planning standpoint, but it certainly sounds like this practice used broadly is contributing to not only the supply chain issues but inflation as well, no?

Feels a bit like everyone rushing to one side of the rowboat at once.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on May 19, 2021, 09:32:34 PM
Ice Cream parlor in Pittsburgh raises pay to $15/hr. and gets over 1,000 applications.

Prices didn’t go up. Employee attrition went down. Profits didn’t decrease.

https://www.msnbc.com/stephanie-ruhle/watch/ice-cream-parlor-raises-minimum-wage-to-15-hr-flooded-with-job-applications-112471621755
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 19, 2021, 09:35:27 PM
Ice Cream parlor in Pittsburgh raises pay to $15/hr. and gets over 1,000 applications.

Prices didn’t go up. Employee attrition went down. Profits didn’t decrease.

https://www.msnbc.com/stephanie-ruhle/watch/ice-cream-parlor-raises-minimum-wage-to-15-hr-flooded-with-job-applications-112471621755

Hmm... might want to get the chamber of commerce's opinion about this first.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 20, 2021, 07:51:04 AM
The NYT's David Leonhardt on the labor shortage being "more myth than reality":

The chief executive of Domino’s Pizza has complained that the company can’t hire enough drivers. Lyft and Uber claim to have a similar problem. A McDonald’s franchise in Florida offered $50 to anybody willing to show up for an interview. And some fast-food outlets have hung signs in their windows saying, “No one wants to work anymore.”

The idea that the United States suffers from a labor shortage is fast becoming conventional wisdom. But before you accept the idea, it’s worth taking a few minutes to think it through.

Once you do, you may realize that the labor shortage is more myth than reality.

Let’s start with some basic economics. The U.S. is a capitalist country, and one of the beauties of capitalism is its mechanism for dealing with shortages. In a communist system, people must wait in long lines when there is more demand than supply for an item. That’s an actual shortage. In a capitalist economy, however, there is a ready solution.

The company or person providing the item raises its price. Doing so causes other providers to see an opportunity for profit and enter the market, increasing supply. To take a hypothetical example, a shortage of baguettes in a town will lead to higher prices, which will in turn cause more local bakeries to begin making their own baguettes (and also cause some families to choose other forms of starch). Suddenly, the baguette shortage is no more.

Human labor is not the same thing as a baguette, but the fundamental idea is similar: In a market economy, both labor and baguettes are products with fluctuating prices.

When a company is struggling to find enough labor, it can solve the problem by offering to pay a higher price for that labor — also known as higher wages. More workers will then enter the labor market. Suddenly, the labor shortage will be no more.

One of the few ways to have a true labor shortage in a capitalist economy is for workers to be demanding wages so high that businesses cannot stay afloat while paying those wages. But there is a lot of evidence to suggest that the U.S. economy does not suffer from that problem.

If anything, wages today are historically low. They have been growing slowly for decades for every income group other than the affluent. As a share of gross domestic product, worker compensation is lower than at any point in the second half of the 20th century. Two main causes are corporate consolidation and shrinking labor unions, which together have given employers more workplace power and employees less of it.

Just as telling as the wage data, the share of working-age Americans who are in fact working has declined in recent decades. The country now has the equivalent of a large group of bakeries that are not making baguettes but would do so if it were more lucrative — a pool of would-be workers, sitting on the sidelines of the labor market.

Corporate profits, on the other hand, have been rising rapidly and now make up a larger share of G.D.P. than in previous decades. As a result, most companies can afford to respond to a growing economy by raising wages and continuing to make profits, albeit perhaps not the unusually generous profits they have been enjoying.

(https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic01.nyt.com%2Fimages%2F2021%2F06%2F05%2Fmultimedia%2F0520-mor-PROFITSWAGES%2F0520-mor-PROFITSWAGES-articleLarge.png&t=1621514608&ymreqid=3c8d0d78-3338-e941-1cb5-fd03d901e100&sig=fYUdyvJJpcfK_AMwpG4VXA--~D)

Sure enough, some companies have responded to the alleged labor shortage by doing exactly this. Bank of America announced Tuesday that it would raise its minimum hourly wage to $25 and insist that contractors pay at least $15 an hour. Other companies that have recently announced pay increases include Amazon, Chipotle, Costco, McDonald’s, Walmart, J.P. Morgan Chase and Sheetz convenience stores.

Why the continuing complaints about a labor shortage, then?

They are not totally misguided. For one thing, some Americans appear to have temporarily dropped out of the labor force because of Covid-19. Some high-skill industries may also be suffering from a true lack of qualified workers, and some small businesses may not be able to absorb higher wages. Finally, there is a rollicking partisan debate about whether expanded jobless benefits during the pandemic have caused workers to opt out.

For now, some combination of these forces — together with a rebounding economy — has created the impression of labor shortages. But companies have an easy way to solve the problem: Pay more.

That so many are complaining about the situation is not a sign that something is wrong with the American economy. It is a sign that corporate executives have grown so accustomed to a low-wage economy that many believe anything else is unnatural.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on May 20, 2021, 08:26:44 AM
I also think there is a disconnect between many of the people seeking work and those jobs that are open right now.  I read this somewhere and am blankingo on the source, but a lot of the jobs that are open now are ones that are generally "side hustles" or ones generally filled by younger labor. 

But the unemployed who are seeking employment are generally those who are young professionals.  And those people aren't going to take short term jobs at Target when they are looking for long-term, career oriented jobs.  Especially at the wages being offered now.

Sure the enhanced unemployment has something to do with this, but some of this is just going to need time to sort itself out.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 20, 2021, 05:31:13 PM
Our company has offices worldwide. They have, while not made it official, basically said that the WFH model will remain as an option permanently moving forward as long as your job permits. Make sense for a significant portion of employees.

Today we get a note from HR: Do not move to another country BEFORE checking with HR and your manager.  ;D I guess someone took that work from wherever you want a bit too literally.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 21, 2021, 12:37:23 PM
Our company has offices worldwide. They have, while not made it official, basically said that the WFH model will remain as an option permanently moving forward as long as your job permits. Make sense for a significant portion of employees.

Today we get a note from HR: Do not move to another country BEFORE checking with HR and your manager.  ;D I guess someone took that work from wherever you want a bit too literally.

So...Hawaii?  American Samoa?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on May 21, 2021, 01:01:21 PM
So...Hawaii?  American Samoa?

my wife's cousin and his wife relocated to Hawaii for five months. He said the only issue was having to get up at 3am.

I also think there is a disconnect between many of the people seeking work and those jobs that are open right now.  I read this somewhere and am blankingo on the source, but a lot of the jobs that are open now are ones that are generally "side hustles" or ones generally filled by younger labor. 

But the unemployed who are seeking employment are generally those who are young professionals.  And those people aren't going to take short term jobs at Target when they are looking for long-term, career oriented jobs.  Especially at the wages being offered now.

Sure the enhanced unemployment has something to do with this, but some of this is just going to need time to sort itself out.

a local chain of restaurants, pubs, and hotels is offering a $1000 immediate cash bonus for positions and $15 per hour. They still aren't getting applicants. Our state's new UE max rate is basically $26/hour when combined with the federal $300 bonus. There is talk about reinstating the requirement people actually look for work but that hasn't been decided yet.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 21, 2021, 02:03:06 PM
my wife's cousin and his wife relocated to Hawaii for five months. He said the only issue was having to get up at 3am.

a local chain of restaurants, pubs, and hotels is offering a $1000 immediate cash bonus for positions and $15 per hour. They still aren't getting applicants. Our state's new UE max rate is basically $26/hour when combined with the federal $300 bonus. There is talk about reinstating the requirement people actually look for work but that hasn't been decided yet.

Are you in Oregon? I just went to the calculator on the site to estimate the benefits for somebody who had earned $48K/year while working 40 hours/week. The max annual state payout is $15,600. Throw in another $15,600 from the feds, and that's $31,200, or $15/hour.

Let me know if I calculated that wrong; it's certainly possible as I did it in about 3 minutes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on May 21, 2021, 02:20:28 PM
Are you in Oregon? I just went to the calculator on the site to estimate the benefits for somebody who had earned $48K/year while working 40 hours/week. The max annual state payout is $15,600. Throw in another $15,600 from the feds, and that's $31,200, or $15/hour.

Let me know if I calculated that wrong; it's certainly possible as I did it in about 3 minutes.
Here's a listing by state:
https://www.ziprecruiter.com/blog/unemployment-benefits-by-state/#:~:text=The%20maximum%20unemployment%20benefit%20available%20to%20individuals%20in%20Indiana%20is,or%20about%20%2410%20per%20hour. (https://www.ziprecruiter.com/blog/unemployment-benefits-by-state/#:~:text=The%20maximum%20unemployment%20benefit%20available%20to%20individuals%20in%20Indiana%20is,or%20about%20%2410%20per%20hour.)

Still not sure why some states opted out of free federal money for their residents. Look at the amounts states like Indiana, and Tennessee get. Those people need the federal 300 the most.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on May 21, 2021, 02:48:04 PM
Are you in Oregon? I just went to the calculator on the site to estimate the benefits for somebody who had earned $48K/year while working 40 hours/week. The max annual state payout is $15,600. Throw in another $15,600 from the feds, and that's $31,200, or $15/hour.

Let me know if I calculated that wrong; it's certainly possible as I did it in about 3 minutes.

Yes.  The maximum amount is increasing to $1033/week ( including the $300 per week). That's what I was going off of to get to $26/hour.

An individual who earned $48k/year would get $838 per week now ($538 plus $300) until July 1, then $891 after July 1. That would come out to $22/hour. It's also untaxed.

This is the site to calculate benefits. I put in $12k per quarter:  https://fileunemployment.org/oregon/or-calculator/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on May 21, 2021, 02:59:17 PM
my wife's cousin and his wife relocated to Hawaii for five months. He said the only issue was having to get up at 3am.

a local chain of restaurants, pubs, and hotels is offering a $1000 immediate cash bonus for positions and $15 per hour. They still aren't getting applicants. Our state's new UE max rate is basically $26/hour when combined with the federal $300 bonus. There is talk about reinstating the requirement people actually look for work but that hasn't been decided yet.

The State of Connecticut is offering $1,000 bonus for any unemployed person currently collecting who gets a job and works for two months.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 21, 2021, 04:26:45 PM
So...Hawaii?  American Samoa?

Both customers, so maybe. Sadly, I fall into the "need to be able to fly to major US cities in a few hours", so American Samoa is out, Hawaii, I think I would have to get them to move my territory. And I think there would be a couple people ahead of me!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 21, 2021, 09:50:36 PM
Here's a listing by state:
https://www.ziprecruiter.com/blog/unemployment-benefits-by-state/#:~:text=The%20maximum%20unemployment%20benefit%20available%20to%20individuals%20in%20Indiana%20is,or%20about%20%2410%20per%20hour. (https://www.ziprecruiter.com/blog/unemployment-benefits-by-state/#:~:text=The%20maximum%20unemployment%20benefit%20available%20to%20individuals%20in%20Indiana%20is,or%20about%20%2410%20per%20hour.)

Still not sure why some states opted out of free federal money for their residents. Look at the amounts states like Indiana, and Tennessee get. Those people need the federal 300 the most.

Yes.  The maximum amount is increasing to $1033/week ( including the $300 per week). That's what I was going off of to get to $26/hour.

An individual who earned $48k/year would get $838 per week now ($538 plus $300) until July 1, then $891 after July 1. That would come out to $22/hour. It's also untaxed.

This is the site to calculate benefits. I put in $12k per quarter:  https://fileunemployment.org/oregon/or-calculator/

Thanks to both of you. That is a ton of UE benefits.

Compare it to South Carolina, where after 6/30 it works out to $8/hour. In NC, it's $16/hr now but goes down to $9/hr in September, and state benefits are eliminated after 13 weeks. Arizona is $14 now, $6 come July.

Probably needs to be a happy medium.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 22, 2021, 07:15:12 AM
Wisconsin reinstating the requirement that one has to actively look for work while collecting unemployment:

https://www.fox6now.com/news/republicans-want-work-search-requirement-reinstated-in-wisconsin
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on May 22, 2021, 09:01:23 AM
More robots
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 22, 2021, 12:53:49 PM
The NYT asked a bunch of experts about the effect of UE benefits on jobs going unfilled ...

+++

In the past few weeks, 22 states have announced they would end federal pandemic unemployment benefits, which pay recipients $300 on top of state benefits and are scheduled to extend into September. (New Hampshire is the latest.)

Many of the states’ governors, all Republicans, made statements similar to that of Gov. Henry McMaster of South Carolina, who said the expanded benefits are “incentivizing and paying workers to stay at home rather than encouraging them to return to the workplace.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the same.

Businesses of all types report that they are having trouble hiring despite high unemployment. But are expanded unemployment benefits really to blame?

We asked experts in economics, recruiting and other fields what’s making it hard for many U.S. businesses to hire right now — and what they can do to fix it.

Aaron Sojourner: ‘The labor market remains sick with the virus’
Mr. Sojourner is a labor economist and an associate professor at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota.

Are expanded unemployment payments to blame for apparent labor shortages?

The labor market remains sick with the virus, affecting both supply and demand. The virus reduces the value of jobs to workers — by making many jobs riskier for workers and their loved ones and less pleasant if policing customers — and reduces the value of jobs to many employers because they haven’t been able to serve as many customers per worker. Further, the value of being home increased both because of increased child, elder and sick care responsibilities and additional unemployment insurance benefits. What’s being called a labor shortage is still a health shortage, a wage shortage and a care shortage.

Sensible theories tell us that unemployment insurance levels could reduce workers’ job search intensity, but well-done studies found that wasn’t really the case in 2020. Demand may be rising faster than supply but things are changing fast, systematic data is slow, and so anyone who tells you they know exactly what’s happening in America broadly now is wrong.

What else is going on here?

Assuming employed, essential workers were more likely to get vaccinated earlier, the non-vaccinated rate is substantially higher for working-age Americans who are not working. My analysis of census data shows that, in January through March, for every 10 percent of working-age people vaccinated, about 1 percent more became employed. Our working-age employment rate remains about three percentage points down from February 2020. If this relationship continued to hold as we vaccinate the next 30 percent of working-age Americans, the remaining employment gap could close. It’s not that simple, but I do think that it suggests that public health remains the first-order issue.

For employers with some flexibility in setting wages, they may not raise wage offers to new hires because internal equity then pressures for raises to incumbents and that reduces their profit. These employers will feel like they want to hire, but not so much that they will raise wage offers enough to attract candidates. They will cry about labor shortages but not compete hard.

What can companies do to attract workers?

First, make the job better. Improve wages, benefits, training, safety and respect. Ensure every supervisor treats employees with respect. Are any consistently experiencing higher turnover in their unit?

Second, promote public health by taking coronavirus precautions. This will help everyone and reassure workers who’ve stayed out of the labor market due to health concerns.

Third, be more transparent about what the job offers. Many managers post vague job openings in order to preserve their bargaining flexibility, so they can make a tailored offer after learning about a specific candidate’s circumstances. However, vague vacancy descriptions can lead to two kinds of expensive errors. First, some people who would be a good fit don’t apply because they can’t recognize that the job would be a good fit. Second, people who would not be a good fit apply because the ad is not clear and then the manager has to waste time interfacing with them.

Tsedal Neeley: ‘People are not merely financial engines’
Ms. Neeley is a professor at Harvard Business School and the author of “Remote Work Revolution: Succeeding From Anywhere.”

Are expanded unemployment payments to blame for apparent labor shortages?

Context matters. People are not merely financial engines. We are still in the middle of a pandemic even though we are seeing significant improvements. Nearly every facet of people’s work and nonwork lives has been upended. For many people, support systems that were in place for child and elder care have disappeared.

What else is going on here?

Caretaking responsibilities are coupled with the fear and anxiety wrought by the contagious virus. Even those who are currently employed are hesitant to return to their workplaces immediately. It takes time to secure workplaces and give people confidence that they will be safe.

What can companies do to attract workers?

Companies can leverage flex time, the greatest gift that remote work offers. To be able to say in job searches that “mode of work is flexible” will help attract and retain workers.

A hallmark of virtual work — autonomy — allows for a degree of control over one’s working conditions and processes. Pragmatically, this means offering candidates the opportunity to segment their day as they wish, provided they are available for synchronous and asynchronous collaborative efforts.

Autonomy does not mean giving employees free rein to do whatever they want. Even if they are out of sight, remote workers are still accountable to their teammates, project goals and productivity agreements. Nor is autonomy equivalent to isolation. Employees still need leadership, guidance, feedback and connection.

Steven Rattner: ‘Government transfers only tell part of the story’
Mr. Rattner, a contributing opinion writer for The Times, led the auto industry task force during the Obama administration.

Are expanded unemployment payments to blame for apparent labor shortages?

While a variety of factors are at work, expanded unemployment benefits and stimulus payments have doubtless played a role. Though jobless benefits vary from state to state, in most parts of the country, unemployment insurance can result in higher earnings for some members of the work force than taking a job. In Pennsylvania, for example, the extra $300 per week from the federal government on top of the state benefit raises a minimum wage earner’s weekly pay by more than 50 percent. Pennsylvania residents who make close to the median hourly wage will find themselves with as much pretax income as they had when they were working. In addition, some of these earnings, as was the case for this past year, may go untaxed. All of that has led some Americans to choose to sit back and wait.

What else is going on here?

Government transfers only tell part of the story. While the economy has shed more than eight million jobs since February 2020, the overall labor force is also 3.5 million people smaller. Workers who have exited the labor force are by definition not receiving unemployment benefits (though they likely received stimulus payments), which suggests that other factors are also at play.

Many have chosen to retire somewhat earlier than expected. But others, especially mothers, have had to exit the labor force to take care of their children as schools remain closed for in-person learning. As with the expiration of expanded unemployment insurance, it will be interesting to see the extent to which the labor force grows once children are back in school and parents are no longer required at home. Ditto for those who chose not to work because of the public health crisis, as that concern recedes.

What can companies do to attract workers?

One way is the way they always have: with increased pay and incentives. In many ways, enhanced unemployment benefits are a backdoor to higher wages for those closer to the bottom. We saw an analogous situation before Covid-19, when unemployment was as low as 3.5 percent. Companies were forced to raise pay, and wage earners in the bottom quartile saw the fastest growth in pay. That trend may now be accelerating. For example, big retailers like Costco have been raising wages for entry-level applicants. That’s encouraging.


What the research says
Since the first pandemic relief bill — the CARES Act, which was passed in March 2020 — economists have studied how workers’ behavior has changed along with the value of extra federal unemployment benefits. Most researchers found that the payments didn’t have a big effect:

“We find no evidence that more generous benefits disincentivized work either at the onset of the expansion or as firms looked to return to business over time.” — Researchers at Yale used data from a company that provides scheduling software to small businesses to examine whether the $600 weekly supplement early in the pandemic led to increased layoffs or discouraged workers from returning to their jobs.

“Simple job search models predict a sharp decline in search in the wake of a substantial benefit expansion, followed by a sustained rebound when benefits expire. We instead find that the job-finding rate is quite stable.” — Researchers at the University of Chicago and JPMorgan Chase analyzed anonymized bank account data to assess the effects of the $600 supplement.

“I find little impact of job gains from the benefit reduction.” — Arindrajit Dube, an economist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, used data from the weekly Census Household Pulse Survey to show how the end of the $600 supplement affected hiring trends.

“Over all, our evidence suggests that employers did not experience greater difficulty finding applicants for their vacancies after the CARES Act, despite the large increase in unemployment benefits.” — Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, the New York Fed and Glassdoor analyzed job applications and vacancy listings data from December 2019 to June 2020.

But research that examined what happened in 2020 may not tell the full story of what is going on now, said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum. Research “unambiguously” finds that more generous unemployment insurance is linked with longer spells of unemployment, he said.

“We are increasingly, every day, coming closer to a more normal situation in the labor market, not driven by health concerns in the coronavirus,” he said. “And I’d want to look at evidence about behavior in those circumstances.”

+++

end article
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 22, 2021, 01:22:24 PM
https://www.kmaland.com/news/corporations-expanded-ceo-worker-pay-gap-during-pandemic/article_2c63ba88-b99f-11eb-a6f6-5bbf8f44184c.html

Ya. We should definitely force poor people back into underpaid jobs.

What happened to the idea of "at-will" employment? Why is the government stepping in to force people to work?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 22, 2021, 05:20:28 PM
https://www.kmaland.com/news/corporations-expanded-ceo-worker-pay-gap-during-pandemic/article_2c63ba88-b99f-11eb-a6f6-5bbf8f44184c.html

Ya. We should definitely force poor people back into underpaid jobs.

What happened to the idea of "at-will" employment? Why is the government stepping in to force people to work?

Are they forcing people to work or just enforcing UE benefits not being indefinite/unending?  You can argue that the lower paying jobs, that people are avoiding in favor of sticking with enhanced UE benefits, are underpaid and/or undesirable, but that’s a separate argument.  UE isn’t supposed to be a conduit to waiting for better or ideal jobs.

Among those still on enhanced UE, I’d be interested to see what percentage of people lost “good” jobs and don’t want to return to the workforce in a lower paying/undesirable job versus those who were in that sort of realm pre-pandemic and don’t want to return to it, especially when they can make similar through UE.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 22, 2021, 08:13:32 PM
Are they forcing people to work or just enforcing UE benefits not being indefinite/unending?  You can argue that the lower paying jobs, that people are avoiding in favor of sticking with enhanced UE benefits, are underpaid and/or undesirable, but that’s a separate argument.  UE isn’t supposed to be a conduit to waiting for better or ideal jobs.

Among those still on enhanced UE, I’d be interested to see what percentage of people lost “good” jobs and don’t want to return to the workforce in a lower paying/undesirable job versus those who were in that sort of realm pre-pandemic and don’t want to return to it, especially when they can make similar through UE.

Enhanced benefits always had an end date.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 22, 2021, 08:24:00 PM
Enhanced benefits always had an end date.

Right.  So then I’m not sure how the government is “forcing” people to work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 22, 2021, 09:18:09 PM
Right.  So then I’m not sure how the government is “forcing” people to work.

The states ending the benefits early. Or the states cutting off benefits to someone who doesn't accept a job.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on May 22, 2021, 09:33:31 PM
Or the states cutting off benefits to someone who doesn't accept a job.

That's the way unemployment has always been (to my knowledge).   1) you have to prove you're looking for work (exemptions were allowed due to pandemic). 2) Once you can get work, UE no longer pays.

I'm generally in favor of UE, and was in favor of the covid fed extensions.  But it can be true (and it is) that UE is necessary, and fed UE extensions are causing worker shortages. 

This seems like a decent compromise unless you want socialism, and then people are actually forced to work.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 23, 2021, 07:09:52 AM
https://www.youtube.com/v/vQJ1wSQAHSI
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on May 23, 2021, 07:48:22 AM
That's the way unemployment has always been (to my knowledge).   1) you have to prove you're looking for work (exemptions were allowed due to pandemic). 2) Once you can get work, UE no longer pays.

I'm generally in favor of UE, and was in favor of the covid fed extensions.  But it can be true (and it is) that UE is necessary, and fed UE extensions are causing worker shortages. 

This seems like a decent compromise unless you want socialism, and then people are actually forced to work.

Pretty sure jesmu does want socialism.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 23, 2021, 11:21:44 AM
Pretty sure jesmu does want socialism.

I want something a hell of a lot better than what we have now - a mix of corporate welfare, oligarchy, trickle down policy, etc
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 23, 2021, 12:07:42 PM
That's the way unemployment has always been (to my knowledge).   1) you have to prove you're looking for work (exemptions were allowed due to pandemic). 2) Once you can get work, UE no longer pays.

I'm generally in favor of UE, and was in favor of the covid fed extensions.  But it can be true (and it is) that UE is necessary, and fed UE extensions are causing worker shortages. 

This seems like a decent compromise unless you want socialism, and then people are actually forced to work.

FWIW, we are in agreement.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 27, 2021, 07:18:16 PM
Strange, no mention of unemployment benefits causing lazy people.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/27/economy/retail-workers-child-care-best-buy/index.html
Best Buy CEO: These 4 challenges are why it's hard to hire workers right now

Excerpt:

"Even as sales are ramping up, Best Buy is seeing a dip in job applications —although it does still receivemore applications than it has open positions, Barry said.

There are four major reasons for this, she added.

The first is the ongoing struggle of parents dealing with children at home. "There is a real lack of childcare that still exists," Barry said.While the economy is in the process of fully reopening, some schools and day care centers don't yetoperate as they did pre-pandemic — so someworking parents are still being forced to balance their child care responsibilities with their jobs. That's even trickier for those who have to leave their homes to work.

Secondly, "there are still health concerns," Barry said. "And people who maybe don't want a career in retail due to health concerns."

Third, retail is among the jobs that have changed most heavily over the last year. At many companies staff members were turned into essential front-line workers overnight, as unlike those in other industries they couldn't work from home.

Finally, companies like Best Buy are facing more competition for staff. Major companies including Under Armour (UA), Amazon (AMZN) and Walmart (WMT), have raised their minimum wage to attract workers.And picking a job during these times is no longer just about money.

Now, said Barry, "it's about a wholesome set of benefits that we can put in place, and flexibility that we can put in place, so that we're able to retain a diverse workforce."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 27, 2021, 09:24:08 PM
Strange, no mention of unemployment benefits causing lazy people.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/27/economy/retail-workers-child-care-best-buy/index.html
Best Buy CEO: These 4 challenges are why it's hard to hire workers right now

Excerpt:

"Even as sales are ramping up, Best Buy is seeing a dip in job applications —although it does still receivemore applications than it has open positions, Barry said.

There are four major reasons for this, she added.

The first is the ongoing struggle of parents dealing with children at home. "There is a real lack of childcare that still exists," Barry said.While the economy is in the process of fully reopening, some schools and day care centers don't yetoperate as they did pre-pandemic — so someworking parents are still being forced to balance their child care responsibilities with their jobs. That's even trickier for those who have to leave their homes to work.

Secondly, "there are still health concerns," Barry said. "And people who maybe don't want a career in retail due to health concerns."

Third, retail is among the jobs that have changed most heavily over the last year. At many companies staff members were turned into essential front-line workers overnight, as unlike those in other industries they couldn't work from home.

Finally, companies like Best Buy are facing more competition for staff. Major companies including Under Armour (UA), Amazon (AMZN) and Walmart (WMT), have raised their minimum wage to attract workers.And picking a job during these times is no longer just about money.

Now, said Barry, "it's about a wholesome set of benefits that we can put in place, and flexibility that we can put in place, so that we're able to retain a diverse workforce."

Despite your snark, read between the lines.  There are many people who worked in those sort of roles, who now don’t want to work in them for a variety of reasons. Health concerns, thinking they want/need more flexibility, etc...

As was stated earlier in the thread, enhanced UE benefits make it far easier or less painful to wait it out or keep looking.  There was very little, if any, talk here at all about “lazy” being the reason people were choosing not to fill open jobs.  But if you can get not-unsubstantial sums due to UE, why go back or take a job you hate or feel you’re better than?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on May 27, 2021, 09:28:17 PM
Despite your snark, read between the lines.  There are many people who worked in those sort of roles, who now don’t want to work in them for a variety of reasons. Health concerns, thinking they want/need more flexibility, etc...

As was stated earlier in the thread, enhanced UE benefits make it far easier or less painful to wait it out or keep looking.  There was very little, if any, talk here at all about “lazy” being the reason people were choosing not to fill open jobs.  But if you can get not-unsubstantial sums due to UE, why go back or take a job you hate or feel you’re better than?

Good.

Wage slavery is terrible for our country
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on May 28, 2021, 08:57:40 PM
Good.

Wage slavery is terrible for our country

So  having to work at a job one doesn't like is slavery?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on May 29, 2021, 09:33:28 AM
So  having to work at a job one doesn't like is slavery?
if the environment is such that the jobs salary is purposely kept near the poverty line and without benefits.......it may not be slavery but it is certainly purposely cruel and clearly something we should avoid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on May 29, 2021, 10:50:36 AM
if the environment is such that the jobs salary is purposely kept near the poverty line and without benefits.......it may not be slavery but it is certainly purposely cruel and clearly something we should avoid.

Some people harken back to the days without labor laws, child workers, impossibly low wages, and ultra rich benefiting.
I suspect that if there is a higher being and one has to account for their beliefs at the end, saying I had more money and a better life and worked “harder” than those picking crops in the fields, it wouldn’t be the way to pass the entrance test.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 29, 2021, 12:32:13 PM
Some people harken back to the days without labor laws, child workers, impossibly low wages, and ultra rich benefiting.
I suspect that if there is a higher being and one has to account for their beliefs at the end, saying I had more money and a better life and worked “harder” than those picking crops in the fields, it wouldn’t be the way to pass the entrance test.

Way to add an absurd non-sequiter about child labor and “impossibly low wages” to the discussion obscure the point.

Best Buy, Target, other retailers are paying $15 an hour to start, the minimum wage level people are clamoring for, but they can’t fill jobs cause people don’t want to work retail.  It’s not child labor or working in the fields, but retail often sucks so people decide they don’t want to do it.  Which is made easier by increased UE. Asking people who often don’t have demonstrable skills or differentiation to work retail instead of remaining jobless isn’t cruel and wage slavery. Stop acting like the only options are $8 an hour part time work.  “Don’t want to” is being blended into “shouldn’t have to”.  I didn’t realize every job in democratic socialist utopias like Scandinavia were enriching and fun and super well paying. Nobody works retail there unless they truly want to, and then they receive a King’s ransom

Restaurant and tipping culture is a different argument entirely, I’m firmly in favor of moving to a no tipping/higher standard wage environment for restaurants, but that just isn’t going to happen overnight.0
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on May 29, 2021, 07:58:57 PM
Way to add an absurd non-sequiter about child labor and “impossibly low wages” to the discussion obscure the point.

Best Buy, Target, other retailers are paying $15 an hour to start, the minimum wage level people are clamoring for, but they can’t fill jobs cause people don’t want to work retail.  It’s not child labor or working in the fields, but retail often sucks so people decide they don’t want to do it.  Which is made easier by increased UE. Asking people who often don’t have demonstrable skills or differentiation to work retail instead of remaining jobless isn’t cruel and wage slavery. Stop acting like the only options are $8 an hour part time work.  “Don’t want to” is being blended into “shouldn’t have to”.  I didn’t realize every job in democratic socialist utopias like Scandinavia were enriching and fun and super well paying. Nobody works retail there unless they truly want to, and then they receive a King’s ransom

Restaurant and tipping culture is a different argument entirely, I’m firmly in favor of moving to a no tipping/higher standard wage environment for restaurants, but that just isn’t going to happen overnight.0
What if Best Buy or Target decided to pay their employees $30/hr, do you think that would tip the work force into wanting those jobs? My guess is that it would. Both Best Buy and Target would still be very profitable, their stocks would still increase in value, and their officers would still get hefty bonuses. Would the profit/stock value/bonuses be as big as they were in 2020? No. But 10's of thousands of peoples lives would be improved and the economy as a whole would benefit.

Is it more important to maximize profit for the owners at any expense or are we now at a time as a society where we can temper maximizing profit for ensuring the entry level worker lives a better life?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on May 29, 2021, 08:03:11 PM
Way to add an absurd non-sequiter about child labor and “impossibly low wages” to the discussion obscure the point.

Best Buy, Target, other retailers are paying $15 an hour to start, the minimum wage level people are clamoring for, but they can’t fill jobs cause people don’t want to work retail.  It’s not child labor or working in the fields, but retail often sucks so people decide they don’t want to do it.  Which is made easier by increased UE. Asking people who often don’t have demonstrable skills or differentiation to work retail instead of remaining jobless isn’t cruel and wage slavery. Stop acting like the only options are $8 an hour part time work.  “Don’t want to” is being blended into “shouldn’t have to”.  I didn’t realize every job in democratic socialist utopias like Scandinavia were enriching and fun and super well paying. Nobody works retail there unless they truly want to, and then they receive a King’s ransom

Restaurant and tipping culture is a different argument entirely, I’m firmly in favor of moving to a no tipping/higher standard wage environment for restaurants, but that just isn’t going to happen overnight.0

Why would you support moving away from tipping culture?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 29, 2021, 08:47:34 PM
What if Best Buy or Target decided to pay their employees $30/hr, do you think that would tip the work force into wanting those jobs? My guess is that it would. Both Best Buy and Target would still be very profitable, their stocks would still increase in value, and their officers would still get hefty bonuses. Would the profit/stock value/bonuses be as big as they were in 2020? No. But 10's of thousands of peoples lives would be improved and the economy as a whole would benefit.

Is it more important to maximize profit for the owners at any expense or are we now at a time as a society where we can temper maximizing profit for ensuring the entry level worker lives a better life?

There is just so much incorrect with this.  Pre-pandemic, Best Buy’s 2019 net income was roughly $1.5B.  They furloughed 50,000 workers when stores locked down.  So let’s use 50K workers as a number.  If Best Buy doubled their hourly salary to $30 an hour as you suggest, that adds another $1.5B in salary costs, aka erases all profit.  In reality that number is probably higher.

They wouldn’t be “very profitable”, though I’m sure if they made $200MM net income you’d claim that was more than enough. Their stock certainly wouldn’t rise.  You clearly don’t follow or understand much of stock prices and market reaction if you think addition of massive costs leads to any sort of positive stock movement. I’d love to have an example of a big company that massively increased their salary costs and it lead to sustained profitability and soaring stock prices.  Also, “owners” aka shareholders have very little appetite for altruism, that in addition would not result positively for the stock price.

Not sure what to make of that last statement other than you declaring “rich” people have enough and it should be distributed to others.

Why would you support moving away from tipping culture?

It’s just flawed. Having traveled many places without tipping, I firmly disagree that it ensures better service. I think there is significant negative racial biases, affecting both server and patron.  It’s super stressful and inconsistent for staff, which again goes against a good consistent dining service.

My biggest pet peeve is I feel that a LARGE majority of patrons don’t understand anything about the restaurant industry and are grounded in antiquated BS.  You expect servers to make the majority of their income in tips yet tons of people still think anything more than 15-18% is only for EXCEPTIONAL service.  Or think that kitchen delays or mistakes are the fault of the server and thus reduce their tip. Or ignore percentages on larger bills cause it feels like “too much” to tip $100 cause your bill was $500.

It’s so much more pleasant to tip an outstanding server 5-10 Euros in Europe and see them genuinely surprised and appreciative and stay to chat for a bit as opposed to the US where churning tables is paramount
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on May 29, 2021, 09:48:13 PM
There is just so much incorrect with this.  Pre-pandemic, Best Buy’s 2019 net income was roughly $1.5B.  They furloughed 50,000 workers when stores locked down.  So let’s use 50K workers as a number.  If Best Buy doubled their hourly salary to $30 an hour as you suggest, that adds another $1.5B in salary costs, aka erases all profit.  In reality that number is probably higher.

They wouldn’t be “very profitable”, though I’m sure if they made $200MM net income you’d claim that was more than enough. Their stock certainly wouldn’t rise.  You clearly don’t follow or understand much of stock prices and market reaction if you think addition of massive costs leads to any sort of positive stock movement. I’d love to have an example of a big company that massively increased their salary costs and it lead to sustained profitability and soaring stock prices.  Also, “owners” aka shareholders have very little appetite for altruism, that in addition would not result positively for the stock price.

Not sure what to make of that last statement other than you declaring “rich” people have enough and it should be distributed to others.

It’s just flawed. Having traveled many places without tipping, I firmly disagree that it ensures better service. I think there is significant negative racial biases, affecting both server and patron.  It’s super stressful and inconsistent for staff, which again goes against a good consistent dining service.

My biggest pet peeve is I feel that a LARGE majority of patrons don’t understand anything about the restaurant industry and are grounded in antiquated BS.  You expect servers to make the majority of their income in tips yet tons of people still think anything more than 15-18% is only for EXCEPTIONAL service.  Or think that kitchen delays or mistakes are the fault of the server and thus reduce their tip. Or ignore percentages on larger bills cause it feels like “too much” to tip $100 cause your bill was $500.

It’s so much more pleasant to tip an outstanding server 5-10 Euros in Europe and see them genuinely surprised and appreciative and stay to chat for a bit as opposed to the US where churning tables is paramount
So BBY would keep their retail prices the same and not adjust any other expenses....."there's so much wrong with this". You're right, it's much easier to make profits from keeping labor costs at a minimum. BBY has a ton of intelligent folks in upper management, they could figure out how to be profitable with higher labor costs. Or they aren't as talented as they appear and should be replaced.

The rest of your response is somewhere between "yes, profits are more important than people", and "I'm a pretentious condescending prick who has travelled many places where the LARGE majority of patrons don't understand anything and love to see them genuinely surprised and appreciative". You should a) really reassess how important you are and b) know your audience.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on May 29, 2021, 10:31:45 PM
So BBY would keep their retail prices the same and not adjust any other expenses....."there's so much wrong with this". You're right, it's much easier to make profits from keeping labor costs at a minimum. BBY has a ton of intelligent folks in upper management, they could figure out how to be profitable with higher labor costs. Or they aren't as talented as they appear and should be replaced.

Would you be willing to pay $1499 for a TV instead of $999 for the same TV if Best Buy was paying $30 an hour for sales staff?  Retail is insanely competitive, we’ve seen many big retail chains go under, the ones we have seen have made strong moves into online sales.  Best Buy has one of the strongest price match guarantees otherwise they would be going the way of Radio Shack.  Would it be “worth it” in your opinion if Best Buy raised their wage to $30 and then closed a bunch of other stores and focused further on online?

They made that $1.5B on $15B in revenue. I don’t think you’re realizing the level of increased sales needed and costs to cut to carry another $2B in increased costs.  It’s not magic, the costs are gonna come from somewhere and it’s not magic “cut the CEO’s pay” cause those sums are as massive in totality as many think


The rest of your response is somewhere between "yes, profits are more important than people", and "I'm a pretentious condescending prick who has travelled many places where the LARGE majority of patrons don't understand anything and love to see them genuinely surprised and appreciative". You should a) really reassess how important you are and b) know your audience.

What the hell are you even talking about? Project much?  You mean my response where I was advocating on behalf of low paid restaurant workers who are often hurt by the current system?  Where studies have been done that show many servers of color get shortchanged on tips? I said nothing of having a generous nature or what I tip, just that many people take advantage of the current system by under tipping based on flawed assumptions or understandings.

And yes I have travelled, and experienced other things that allow me to think beyond “that’s just how it’s done in the US”.  It’s a very different experience when you tip beyond just when it’s expected. There is nothing pretentious about it.  F-Ing laughable that you took any of that to be self important.

As for knowing my audience, you mean cause I don’t lean as left as you and didn’t participate in a like minded circle jerk as a result?  I thought my audience was a board of people with differing views that are generally receptive and considerate and interested in varied experiences.  But apparently you know all about me since I don’t share your view on the absolute evils of American capitalism.  Got consume an edible chill out and stop acting like I’m rocket or a troll.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on May 30, 2021, 09:01:22 AM
The rest of your response is somewhere between "yes, profits are more important than people", and "I'm a pretentious condescending prick who has travelled many places where the LARGE majority of patrons don't understand anything and love to see them genuinely surprised and appreciative". You should a) really reassess how important you are and b) know your audience.

Completely unnecessary attack on a reasonable Scooper. Shameful, really.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on May 30, 2021, 10:49:41 AM
Completely unnecessary attack on a reasonable Scooper. Shameful, really.

Your father smells of elderberries
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 02, 2021, 11:08:29 AM
Stimulus checks had tremendous benefits on those who needed it most. Great work.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/02/us/politics/stimulus-checks-economic-hardship.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 02, 2021, 11:56:22 AM
Stimulus checks had tremendous benefits on those who needed it most. Great work.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/02/us/politics/stimulus-checks-economic-hardship.html

we used ours to buy a stock that we sold for $101 above the purchase price. So yeah, it helped.   :D

It will be interesting to see what happens with rent. One friend who is an apartment manager said over 80% of her tenants are well past due and many are refusing the pay and legally don't have to pay until February 2022. Our governor extended the eviction moratorium to the end of June. What happens between now and then is going to have a significant impact on the economy; one estimate in OR is around $1.4 billion in unpaid back rent.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 03, 2021, 06:36:08 AM
we used ours to buy a stock that we sold for $101 above the purchase price. So yeah, it helped.   :D

It will be interesting to see what happens with rent. One friend who is an apartment manager said over 80% of her tenants are well past due and many are refusing the pay and legally don't have to pay until February 2022. Our governor extended the eviction moratorium to the end of June. What happens between now and then is going to have a significant impact on the economy; one estimate in OR is around $1.4 billion in unpaid back rent.

Welcome to the next bailout.  And no, I'm not joking.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 03, 2021, 08:03:24 AM
Welcome to the next bailout.  And no, I'm not joking.

The Kochs definitely will embrace that bailout
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on June 03, 2021, 11:18:33 AM
The Kochs definitely will embrace that bailout

Booooooooooogie men.

You know one of the died, right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 03, 2021, 11:27:45 AM
Booooooooooogie men.

You know one of the died, right?

Boogie men my ass, zig.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 03, 2021, 11:42:47 AM
Welcome to the next bailout.  And no, I'm not joking.

no doubt about it. 

I know it's just one case but I wouldn't be surprised if others are taking the same approach. One of the tenants in my friend's building just bought a $2 million house. They put in their notice but needed extra time because they are doing "major renovations." They haven't paid their rent since April 2020. These types of tenants will be angling for a bailout.

In Oregon, we do have a bailout program that was poorly written. Only those currently residing in their same unit are eligible for an 80% "bailout." So, those who moved to cut costs (cheaper apartment, back with their parents, etc.) are ineligible even if they owe back rent. Crazy stuff, eh?

I wonder if back rent is going to be like student loans: people not paying because they are waiting for the government to provide relief.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 03, 2021, 11:48:49 AM
One of the tenants in my friend's building just bought a $2 million house.

And he paid cash, using only the $$$ he got from unemployment benefits!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 03, 2021, 01:09:29 PM
Booooooooooogie men.

You know one of the died, right?

Educate yourself.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-koch-brother-is-betting-big-on-distressed-real-estate-11614690003

https://fortune.com/2021/03/02/koch-real-estate-industries-pandemic/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/21/charles-koch-foundation-eviction-real-estate
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on June 03, 2021, 01:19:54 PM
Educate yourself.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-koch-brother-is-betting-big-on-distressed-real-estate-11614690003

https://fortune.com/2021/03/02/koch-real-estate-industries-pandemic/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/21/charles-koch-foundation-eviction-real-estate

The evil Koch Brothers, dead or alive, are somewhere below the texture of your daily shît in things that I give a fuq about.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 03, 2021, 01:35:18 PM
The evil Koch Brothers, dead or alive, are somewhere below the texture of your daily shît in things that I give a fuq about.

"I commented on OP without knowing what I was talking about. I'm now doubling down on that viewpoint and am also making it clear I refuse to educate myself on the current climate of housing and real estate"

Thanks Zig. Glad genuine discussion is alive and well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 03, 2021, 01:42:06 PM
Educate yourself.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-koch-brother-is-betting-big-on-distressed-real-estate-11614690003

https://fortune.com/2021/03/02/koch-real-estate-industries-pandemic/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/21/charles-koch-foundation-eviction-real-estate

the Koch's are to the far left what George Soros is to the far right.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 03, 2021, 01:48:00 PM
the Koch's are to the far left what George Soros is to the far right.

Except the Koch's donate a far more significant $ sum to conservative causes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 03, 2021, 01:49:42 PM
the Koch's are to the far left what George Soros is to the far right.

The truth or untruth behind this statement has little to do with the topic at hand.

The commodification/financialization of basic human needs like healthcare or housing by Kochs/large financial institutions/hedge funds/etc is literally ruining our country.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 04, 2021, 06:33:32 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1JlYZQG3lI

Very interesting video for someone like me not versed in supply chain/logistics.

Explains current shortages across the globe.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 09, 2021, 07:30:12 AM
From the NYT:

American employers had 9.3 million jobs available at the end of April, the most in at least two decades, according to the latest stats released yesterday. Hiring rose, too, but not by nearly as much; workers have been emboldened to seek new opportunities, and nearly four million voluntarily quit their jobs in April, the most on record.

Those 4 million didn't quit to receive unemployment benefits. You don't get those when you quit. States are rapidly ending the program, which will go away nationwide in 3 months.

No, as the NYT goes on to say:

In short, workers have the upper hand as employers struggle to hire and retain them while the economy recovers from the pandemic. That is leading to higher pay for employees who have kept their jobs. It has also brought more generous offers for job seekers in sectors that are hiring rapidly to match pent-up demand unleashed after lockdowns.

If all that sounds bad for business ... in a new Goldman Sachs survey of 10,000 business owners, 67 percent said they think things are "moving in the right direction."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 09, 2021, 10:06:18 PM
Chipotle says its raising prices again another 4% to cover modest wage increases to pay workers a living wage ($13k/yr)

Meanwhile they did $1 Billion in stock buy backs the past 5 years. CEO pay was $38 Million this past year. Executive pay increased $65 Million.



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 09, 2021, 11:46:12 PM
Chipotle says its raising prices again another 4% to cover modest wage increases to pay workers a living wage ($13k/yr)

Meanwhile they did $1 Billion in stock buy backs the past 5 years. CEO pay was $38 Million this past year. Executive pay increased $65 Million.

That $65MM was a one time pay out for performance.  For a C suite that has returned nearly double digit revenue and profit growth annually the last 5 years for a behemoth of a company.

And even a modest raise of $3-4 across 60K+ hourly workers adds up into the $100-200MM range rather quickly.  Which is substantial for a company that has net income of around $300MM annually. Raising wages is good, but people can’t expect everything to stay dirt cheap if they do.  Even if the execs worked for $50K a year, they would still need those price hikes to keep the company growing and in the black.  Public companies aren’t run to break even. Especially ones with massive overhead, employee size, and high COGS.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Lens on June 10, 2021, 09:29:07 AM
That $65MM was a one time pay out for performance.  For a C suite that has returned nearly double digit revenue and profit growth annually the last 5 years for a behemoth of a company.

And even a modest raise of $3-4 across 60K+ hourly workers adds up into the $100-200MM range rather quickly.  Which is substantial for a company that has net income of around $300MM annually. Raising wages is good, but people can’t expect everything to stay dirt cheap if they do.  Even if the execs worked for $50K a year, they would still need those price hikes to keep the company growing and in the black.  Public companies aren’t run to break even. Especially ones with massive overhead, employee size, and high COGS.

CMG also spent $100MM to relo their HQ from Denver to the OC bc their new CEO (from Taco Bell) didn't want to move.  Additionally I would speculate that their new format: traditional kitchen + digital kitchen (for online orders) has forced them to increase their labor force as well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 10, 2021, 09:53:33 AM
Chipotle says its raising prices again another 4% to cover modest wage increases to pay workers a living wage ($13k/yr)

Meanwhile they did $1 Billion in stock buy backs the past 5 years. CEO pay was $38 Million this past year. Executive pay increased $65 Million.
Simple solution: Don't eat there. Make your Mexican food fresh, at home. It tastes better, or at least mine does.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on June 10, 2021, 09:53:46 AM
Another tick up in inflation.  Worst levels in almost 3 decades, buckle up.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on June 10, 2021, 10:30:19 AM
Simple solution: Don't eat there. Make your Mexican food fresh, at home. It tastes better, or at least mine does.

E coli free at home too, hey.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 10, 2021, 10:49:13 AM
CMG also spent $100MM to relo their HQ from Denver to the OC bc their new CEO (from Taco Bell) didn't want to move.  Additionally I would speculate that their new format: traditional kitchen + digital kitchen (for online orders) has forced them to increase their labor force as well.


Fits a pattern.  A year or two ago, Subway hired a Burger King executive to run the company.
Earlier this year they announced a "new office" in Miami and several jobs were moving from Milford, CT to Miami and the only reason was the new President didn't want to leave Miami.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 10, 2021, 10:50:11 AM
I also think the concept of a "headquarters" these days isn't what it used to be.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 10, 2021, 11:14:39 AM
I also think the concept of a "headquarters" these days isn't what it used to be.

Yea, I know of multiple “HQ” where some execs sit, but the vast majority of office and other management staff are in a different location. My sister works for a company that has a HQ in NYC.  Of their 3 main offices, NYC makes up about 10% of employee volume.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 10, 2021, 01:12:00 PM

Fits a pattern.  A year or two ago, Subway hired a Burger King executive to run the company.
Earlier this year they announced a "new office" in Miami and several jobs were moving from Milford, CT to Miami and the only reason was the new President didn't want to leave Miami.

Hate to hear that about my hometown. Subway, Bic and Schick were Milford's claims to fame, corporation-wise.

Oh, and Milford Jai-Alai, of course. Miss going there! Chula!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 10, 2021, 01:24:58 PM
I also think the concept of a "headquarters" these days isn't what it used to be.

State and local tax rates
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on June 10, 2021, 01:37:00 PM
State and local tax rates


I get that.  I mean if the BK executive is THAT good, opening up a Miami office and sending a few employees down there is a minor cost overall as well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 10, 2021, 01:55:08 PM
Hate to hear that about my hometown. Subway, Bic and Schick were Milford's claims to fame, corporation-wise.

Oh, and Milford Jai-Alai, of course. Miss going there! Chula!

Schick factory is still there and thriving.  (They are a good customer of mine.)
Bic is still there, but making lighters only.  The whole facility is automated.
Subway HQ is of course still there, but Fred DeLuca died, his sister is old and had to step away and there were no other family members to take over, so they went outside who did what outsiders do - lay-off 15% of the workforce and open an office in Miami.

"Rebote, carom.  Egurbi with the win!  Zabala with the place."
I was in the Milford Winners (OTB) a few times this spring to place my Triple Crown bets and I just realized they had a Jai-Alai Memory case.  I only noticed because of COVID they were asking people to go one way and had to go out a side door to exit.  And one of the kids just found the pen in the glove compartment while cleaning out the 2006 Explorer.  I got a "What's Milford Jai Alai?"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on June 10, 2021, 02:16:32 PM
I also think the concept of a "headquarters" these days isn't what it used to be.

Yeah, our HQ is in VA. Our CEO is in TX.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 03:42:15 PM
That $65MM was a one time pay out for performance.  For a C suite that has returned nearly double digit revenue and profit growth annually the last 5 years for a behemoth of a company.

And even a modest raise of $3-4 across 60K+ hourly workers adds up into the $100-200MM range rather quickly.  Which is substantial for a company that has net income of around $300MM annually. Raising wages is good, but people can’t expect everything to stay dirt cheap if they do.  Even if the execs worked for $50K a year, they would still need those price hikes to keep the company growing and in the black.  Public companies aren’t run to break even. Especially ones with massive overhead, employee size, and high COGS.

You missed the point. Executive pay vs rest of company pay. Pay a living wage to your employees. Instead of doing so with record profits, they pass it on to customers. Paying a CEO $38 Million while saying you can’t afford hourly workers.



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 03:55:09 PM
Simple solution: Don't eat there. Make your Mexican food fresh, at home. It tastes better, or at least mine does.

Or pay your employees more money out of your profits and executive pay.

This example can be used in a lot of cases in a lot of places.

Some people shop at Walmart etc…because they will shop where it’s most affordable for them. Many who shop there know that Walmart doesn’t treat their hourly employees well. And, I’m sure they’d prefer to shop elsewhere and  also prefer that Walmart treated their employees better. But they are going to go where they need to go to get by.

Also, many people don’t have easy access to affordable grocery stores with fresh quality foods. They go where they have to go.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 10, 2021, 03:58:16 PM
You missed the point. Executive pay vs rest of company pay. Pay a living wage to your employees. Instead of doing so with record profits, they pass it on to customers. Paying a CEO $38 Million while saying you can’t afford hourly workers.

I didn’t miss any point.  I literally said that the executive pay and bonuses wouldn’t cover the salary hikes and staffing increases.

They need to hire 20K workers. If every one of those workers is only part time $14/hr, 25 hours per week (which is unlikely), that $38MM covers roughly 2000 new employees.  To hire the 20K part time workers at $17,500 a year, that’s $350MM.  Plus another $2-3 increase for the existing 40-50K hourly workers.  Again, conservatively saying they are all only 25/hr a week part time, that’s another $150MM.  It far outstrips any executive compensation.

It’s the same fuzzy emotional math that people use to act like a simple tax hike here or there will cover $1T in new spending packages.

Comparing Chipotle to Walmart as necessity born out of lack of option is utter BS.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 04:06:23 PM
I didn’t miss any point.  I literally said that the executive pay and bonuses wouldn’t cover the salary hikes and staffing increases.

They need to hire 20K workers. If every one of those workers is only part time $14/hr, 25 hours per week (which is unlikely), that $38MM covers roughly 2000 new employees.  To hire the 20K part time workers at $17,500 a year, that’s $350MM.  Plus another $2-3 increase for the existing 40-50K hourly workers.  Again, conservatively saying they are all only 25/hr a week part time, that’s another $150MM.  It far outstrips any executive compensation.

It’s the same fuzzy emotional math that people use to act like a simple tax hike here or there will cover $1T in new spending packages.

Comparing Chipotle to Walmart as necessity born out of lack of option is utter BS.

Now do Chipotle's Billion Dollar stock buybacks etc...

They have such a difficult time paying a living wage with their $6 Billion in revenue and stock biy back programs, they are opening 200 additional restaurants this year.




 

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 10, 2021, 04:19:29 PM
Now do Chipotle's Billion Dollar stock buybacks etc...

They have such a difficult time paying a living wage they are opening 200 additional restaurants this year.

Ive spoken out against buybacks here before.  But stop shifting the goalposts.  You literally just said executive compensation was the issue.  But when I disproved that, you want to talk about buybacks.  Then it will be food in the executive cafeteria or transportation allotments. 

Making profits and distributing them is evil, I get it.  And when a company takes the right steps, they can now be criticized for not doing it the "right way".  They've grown exponentially charging $2 for guac.  I'm sure their customers will be fine with a 4% increase.  Their customer base isn't buying dollar menu items cause they can't afford fresh fruits and veggies.

And its not a "difficult time", they have greatly increasing labor costs, plain and simple.  You dont only expand when you have free cash to completely cover the costs of doing so.  Thats not how investing in expansion works.  They would open those restaurants just fine if they weren't increasing labor costs across the board.  If your stance is "well they shouldn't open more restaurants until they can completely afford to raise everyone's salaries without increasing prices"...well, I'm glad you dont run any business units I own or invest in.  Especially in something as cutthroat and viciously cyclical as fast casual dining.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 10, 2021, 04:25:40 PM
You missed the point. Executive pay vs rest of company pay. Pay a living wage to your employees. Instead of doing so with record profits, they pass it on to customers. Paying a CEO $38 Million while saying you can’t afford hourly workers.

How many employees do they have in total?

One of my friends went on a Facebook rant about a similar CEO, and I pointed out that if he worked for zero salary, they could take that money and the rest of the company's employees pay by...ten cents an hour.

There are many CEOs that aren't worth what they are being paid, but let's not pretend that a lower salary for executives can directly translate into a meaningful pay raise for everyone else in the organization.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 10, 2021, 04:28:17 PM
How many employees do they have in total?

One of my friends went on a Facebook rant about a similar CEO, and I pointed out that if he worked for zero salary, they could take that money and the rest of the company's employees pay by...ten cents an hour.

There are many CEOs that aren't worth what they are being paid, but let's not pretend that a lower salary for executives can directly translate into a meaningful pay raise for everyone else in the organization.

IMO, it's not about any one organization or single CEO or single policy, etc.

The entire system is broken.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on June 10, 2021, 04:30:08 PM
IMO, it's not about any one organization or single CEO or single policy, etc.

The entire system is broken.

I hope covid fixes this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 04:31:13 PM
Ive spoken out against buybacks here before.  But stop shifting the goalposts.  You literally just said executive compensation was the issue.  But when I disproved that, you want to talk about buybacks.  Then it will be food in the executive cafeteria or transportation allotments. 

Making profits and distributing them is evil, I get it.  And when a company takes the right steps, they can now be criticized for not doing it the "right way".  They've grown exponentially charging $2 for guac.  I'm sure their customers will be fine with a 4% increase.  Their customer base isn't buying dollar menu items cause they can't afford fresh fruits and veggies.

And its not a "difficult time", they have greatly increasing labor costs, plain and simple.  You dont only expand when you have free cash to completely cover the costs of doing so.  Thats not how investing in expansion works.  They would open those restaurants just fine if they weren't increasing labor costs across the board.  If your stance is "well they shouldn't open more restaurants until they can completely afford to raise everyone's salaries without increasing prices"...well, I'm glad you dont run any business units I own or invest in.  Especially in something as cutthroat and viciously cyclical as fast casual dining.

Nice try. I never said Executive Pay is the only issue. Now you are projecting and gaslighting about it. Change subject. Begrudgingly say stock buy backs are bad. Got it

No one said making profit and distributing it is bad. You said that. What is bad is not taking care of your lower and lowest paid employees by not paying them a living wage with decent benefits.

it isn't Chipotle specific. Chipotle is the example here because they are the ones who spoke about it recently. They are the ones who said they couldn't afford to pay their hourly employees a living wage without repeated recent price increases. That of course isn't true.







Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 04:35:42 PM
How many employees do they have in total?

One of my friends went on a Facebook rant about a similar CEO, and I pointed out that if he worked for zero salary, they could take that money and the rest of the company's employees pay by...ten cents an hour.

There are many CEOs that aren't worth what they are being paid, but let's not pretend that a lower salary for executives can directly translate into a meaningful pay raise for everyone else in the organization.

Have less people in your organization if you can't pay all of them a living wage with decent benefits, where one makes say $38 Million while many others make a few bucks an hour. The percent difference between executive pay and rest of employee pay has skyrocketed over the past several decades. And that of course only covers one aspect of rhe problem.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 10, 2021, 04:38:34 PM
Have less people in your organization if you can't pay all of them a living wage with decent benefits.
[/quote

"Sorry, guys, we want to pay some other employees more money, so we are going to have to fire you."

Like that?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 10, 2021, 04:39:29 PM
Nice try. I never said Executive Pay is thr only issue. Now you are projecting and gaslighting about it. Change subject. Begrudgingly say stock buy backs are bad. Got it

No one said making profit and distributing it is bad. You said that. What is bad is not taking care of your lower and lowest paid employees by not paying them a living wage with decent benefits.

it isn't Chipotle specific. Chipotle is the example here because they are the ones who spoke about it recently. They are the ones who said they couldn't afford to pay their hourly employees a living wage without repeated recent price increases. That of course isn't true.

What would you consider a fair after-tax profit in terms of percentage?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 04:44:48 PM
What would you consider a fair after-tax profit in terms of percentage?

For example, ince 1978, CEO pay has risen 940% vs 12% typical worker compensation. Gee I don't know, seems like a lot.

https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 10, 2021, 04:47:41 PM
For example, ince 1978, CEO pay has risen 940% vs 12% typical worker compensation. Gee I don't know, seems like a lot.

https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/

That doesn't answer my question.  What do you think is a reasonable bottom-line profit percentage for a corporation?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 04:53:45 PM
That doesn't answer my question.  What do you think is a reasonable bottom-line profit percentage for a corporation?

And you didn’t reapond to what I posted.

There isn’t one quick set answer to your question. And this is about more equitably sharing profit with all of your employees.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 10, 2021, 04:56:52 PM
And you didn’t reapond to what I posted.

There isn’t one quick set answer to your question.

How can you say that Chipotle can afford to pay everyone a living wage if you can't define how much of a hit to their profits is reasonable?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 10, 2021, 05:02:42 PM
How can you say that Chipotle can afford to pay everyone a living wage if you can't define how much of a hit to their profits is reasonable?

I can, because I just did. If one cannot afford to pay its employees a living wage with decent benefits, one doesn’t need to be in business.

Here’s a piece that specifically targets this industry:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/566387/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 11, 2021, 08:07:06 AM
Although I do think it is bad for American society that CEOs and other top executives get such large slices of their compensation pies, the following are just facts that some might or might not find interesting. They were in this morning's NYT "DealBook," which is their daily business blog ...

+++

Six of the 10 largest executive pay packages of all time were awarded last year. This and other findings come from a new survey of the 200 highest paid C.E.O.s at public companies conducted for The Times by Equilar, a consulting firm. “Even in a gilded age for executive pay, 2020 was a blowout year,” writes The Times’s Peter Eavis.

The spike is due in large part to linking C.E.O.s’ pay to stock prices. This “pay-for-performance” structure is intended to align managers’ incentives with those of the company’s owners, the shareholders. But it also raises questions about how much credit executives deserve for rising stock prices, and whether the performance conditions attached to stock awards are suitably tough. C.E.O. pay jumped 14.1 percent last year, while the median worker got a 1.9 percent raise.

C.E.O.s in the survey received 274 times the pay of the median employee at their companies, up from 245 times in the previous year. Around two-thirds of companies with the largest pay packages had wider gaps between executive and employee pay after the pandemic.

“Say on pay” votes give shareholders a way to weigh in on compensation. Only around 2 percent of these nonbinding votes have historically gone against management, with recent high-profile rebukes coming at Starbucks and G.E. So far this year, votes against pay packages are on the rise, although these still tend to come in well below 50 percent disapproval.

“In tough times, it often makes sense to reward excellent leadership, even when optimum company performance may not be achievable,” said Equilar’s Dan Marcec about the initial batch of say-on-pay votes this year. “In a year mired in economic challenges and future uncertainty, this disconnect may be on further display.”

Eight C.E.O.s received pay packages last year worth more than $100 million. In 2019, only one chief executive’s pay package crossed that threshold. The top three earners all oversaw companies that went public last year. They are:

Alex Karp of Palantir, with $1.1 billion in compensation.
Tony Xu of DoorDash, with $414 million.
Eric Wu of Opendoor, with $370 million.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 11, 2021, 12:59:39 PM
If these executives actually paid income tax on their compensation it wouldn't be such a problem. But it's rich people who wrote the tax codes.

Most of the compensation is NOT in the form of a salary where they would be required to pay Federal Income tax. Instead it it stock options or something similar and then they borrow money off of that for their money and a write off.

Jeff Bezos once claimed child tax credit even though his net worth was $18 Billion. In 2011, he owed nothing in FIT. That same year he also received a $4,000 child tax credit, according to Business Insider, per ProPublica.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 11, 2021, 01:57:18 PM

Jeff Bezos once claimed child tax credit even though his net worth was $18 Billion. In 2011, he owed nothing in FIT. That same year he also received a $4,000 child tax credit, according to Business Insider, per ProPublica.
I assume you know the difference between net worth and income
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 11, 2021, 03:54:03 PM
I assume you know the difference between net worth and income

Of course.

Bezos is an example of how the richest people in the world scam all of us by structuring their "income" so they pay no federal Income taxes. Musk and Bloomberg are others who did the same. Their wealth derives from the skyrocketing value of their assets, like stock and property. Those gains are not taxable income until the they sell. And they never have a need to do that because they borrow off of these assets for the riches that they live on.

And us poor suckers foot the bill for them.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 11, 2021, 05:02:02 PM
Of course.

Bezos is an example of how the richest people in the world scam all of us by structuring their "income" so they pay no federal Income taxes. Musk and Bloomberg are others who did the same. Their wealth derives from the skyrocketing value of their assets, like stock and property. Those gains are not taxable income until the they sell. And they never have a need to do that because they borrow off of these assets for the riches that they live on.

And us poor suckers foot the bill for them.

Definitely OT...

But yes. And, at the end of the day, since the government can't (or at least in its current state is unwilling) to recover the tax revenue necessary to run government programs, eventually they will collapse. And, who will be the ones suffering the most when that happens?

Generating your wealth on the back of American labor and/or American infrastructure and then not contributing back to the country in relative manner is one of the most unpatriotic things you could do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 11, 2021, 06:46:09 PM
Definitely OT...

But yes. And, at the end of the day, since the government can't (or at least in its current state is unwilling) to recover the tax revenue necessary to run government programs, eventually they will collapse. And, who will be the ones suffering the most when that happens?

Generating your wealth on the back of American labor and/or American infrastructure and then not contributing back to the country in relative manner is one of the most unpatriotic things you could do.

Complain about tax breaks, complain about tax loopholes, fine.  But this is so dumb.  B**tch about politicians not addressing your perceived issues with the tax system, but calling people “unpatriotic” for applying legal tax reducing measures is so stupid.  I hope you avoid a couple tax deductions or credits and pay extra when you have a good year financially cause you’re a such a good American.  Otherwise it’s just hypocrisy cause you’ve decided when someone has made enough and should pay more.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 11, 2021, 07:09:56 PM
Complain about tax breaks, complain about tax loopholes, fine.  But this is so dumb.  B**tch about politicians not addressing your perceived issues with the tax system, but calling people “unpatriotic” for applying legal tax reducing measures is so stupid.  I hope you avoid a couple tax deductions or credits and pay extra when you have a good year financially cause you’re a such a good American.  Otherwise it’s just hypocrisy cause you’ve decided when someone has made enough and should pay more.

As I've said before, the problem is the system.

When the Uber wealthy control the politicians and influence those "legal loopholes", that's a problem. And we know the politicians are too chicken-crap to stand up to them.

It's not dumb at all.

And I'm not talking about middle-class joe and Jane getting a child tax credit or whatever. I'm talking about the private jet tax credit. I'm talking about allowing a business lunch write-off while reducing teacher school supply write-off. Stuff like that.

I'm talking about the Uber wealthy who basically write the tax code to enrich themselves then don't give back relative to their wealth.

That ain't sustainable for the nation.

I'm not saying these folks are doing anything illegal. I am saying it's immoral. And that falls both to the groups that push for the tax code to be written this way and those who write it for them.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on June 11, 2021, 10:51:58 PM
Jesmu doing economics and finance is can't miss scoop.  🤣🤣🤣
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 12, 2021, 07:08:03 AM
These businesses found a way around the worker shortage: Raising wages to $15 an hour or more

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/06/10/worker-shortage-raising-wages/

The owners of Klavon’s Ice Cream Parlor had hit a wall.

For months, the 98-year-old confectionary in Pittsburgh couldn’t find applicants for the open positions it needed to fill ahead of warmer weather and, hopefully, sunnier times for the business after a rough year.

The job posting for scoopers — $7.25 an hour plus tips — did not produce a single application between January and March.

So owner Jacob Hanchar decided to more than double the starting wage to $15 an hour, plus tips, “just to see what would happen.”

The shop was suddenly flooded with applications. More than 1,000 piled in over the course of a week.

“It was like a dam broke,” Hanchar said. Media coverage that followed his decision soon pushed other candidates his way.

Across the country, businesses in sectors such as food service and manufacturing that are trying to staff up have been reporting an obstacle to their success — a scarcity of workers interested in applying for low-wage positions.

The issue has raised concerns about the strength of the country’s recovery as coronavirus cases abate, with the economy still down more than 7.5 million jobs compared with before the pandemic.

Republicans have blamed enhanced unemployment benefits for the shortage; Democrats and most labor economists say the issue is the result of a complicated mix of factors, including many schools having yet to fully reopen, lingering concerns about workplace safety and other ways the workforce has shifted during the pandemic.

The experience of 12 business operators interviewed by The Washington Post who raised their minimum wage in the last year points to another element of the equation: the central role that pay — specifically a $15-an-hour minimum starting wage — plays in attracting workers right now.

Nine of the businesses had announced pay increases to at least $15 an hour since March, amid concerns about hiring in the face of the tight labor market. The other three increased wages last year.

The business operators spoke about the challenges associated with increased labor costs, with three saying they had to raise prices for consumers. One of those, as well as two that did not raise prices, said they had to reduce some seasonal staffing or staff hours to make up the cost.

Enrique Lopezlira, a labor economist at the University of California at Berkeley and an expert on the low-wage workforce, said the stories were a sign, albeit anecdotal, that the market was functioning as it should in the face of excessive demand for workers.

“The more employers improve the quality of the jobs and the more they think of workers as an asset that needs to be maximized, the better they’re going to be able to find and retain workers long term,” he said.


The article goes on to talk at length about these businesses. Here is the conclusion:

Most of the owners said the political debate in Washington about the labor shortage seemed to present a simplistic view of business challenges — none said that they believed unemployment insurance was solely to blame for hiring hurdles.

“There’s a shaming that’s happening to working-class people,” said Schaefer, the owner of the D.C.-area hardware stores. “Nobody talks about the fact that the economy is going to fall apart when a tech guy gets a $195,000-a-year salary with a 5 percent raise every year, or when lawyers are making $300,000. This conversation only happens when you’re talking about the people who make the lowest wages. And I think as a society, that’s just really insulting.”


That's a small-business owner talking, not a politician or an underpaid working stiff or me. I happen to think he's right, of course.

Anyway, the article offers an interesting, real-world look at a much-discussed situation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 12, 2021, 07:29:05 AM
Another good passage from that article for those who can't read it due to the paywall:

Many of the business operators interviewed said that the decision to raise their employees’ starting wage was not motivated primarily by altruism or a desire to do right: It just made good business sense.

They said wage increases would help attract stronger candidates, reduce turnover and elevate company morale and culture — important for customer-facing businesses such as restaurants.

“We’re going to see savings in retention and turnover, which is so expensive,” said Nicole Marquis, the founder and chief executive of HipCityVeg, a group of fast-casual vegan eateries with locations in Philadelphia and D.C. that recently announced a $15 starting wage. “And this is going to help with recruiting, which will help with our culture — and is really what drives profit at the end of the day and creates a long-lasting brand.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 12, 2021, 08:47:26 AM
Just because something has been done a certain way for a long time, doesn’t make it good or effective.

Profit is fine. Supply and demand is fine. Not sharing your profit more equitably with all of your employees is bad. It’s more about this than simply price increases for consumers. Because as prices and costs steadily increase, employee pay discrepancy also steadily increases. The problem can be addressed. Too many people and places aren’t interested in addressing it. Work from the bottom up instead of the top down. There will still be plenty more for the people higher up the pay ladder.

Taxes are a different topic. It’s been far too easy for too long for some to manipulate the complex tax system. Part of a tax system is in fact deciding when someone or some thing has enough and needs to pay more. Whether that is income tax, wealth tax etc…reliance on the good will and gestures of the masses has been a long term ineffective strategy.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 12, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Jesmu doing economics and finance is can't miss scoop.  🤣🤣🤣

If I'm triggering boomer responses, I know I'm on the right track  ;) ;) ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on June 12, 2021, 10:48:44 AM

The job posting for scoopers


Wow, first specialized discount on coasters & mugs, now jobs just for us.  I guess I should double the subscription price again.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 12, 2021, 11:23:36 AM
Wow, first specialized discount on coasters & mugs, now jobs just for us.  I guess I should double the subscription prescription price again.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on June 12, 2021, 11:47:28 AM
Wow, first specialized discount on coasters & mugs, now jobs just for us.  I guess I should double the subscription price again.

(https://tinyimg.io/i/FL9zYMt.png)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 12, 2021, 01:05:26 PM
Wow, first specialized discount on coasters & mugs, now jobs just for us.  I guess I should double the subscription price again.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I think you deserve at least twice what we all currently pay you!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 12, 2021, 01:38:56 PM
Re: chipotle discussion

https://newrepublic.com/article/162708/chipotle-burrito-cost-consumer-prices-wages
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: shoothoops on June 13, 2021, 10:39:54 PM
Re: chipotle discussion

https://newrepublic.com/article/162708/chipotle-burrito-cost-consumer-prices-wages

You’ll get nothing but crickets.

In Tennessee, 257,000 jobs posted. Only 3% pay $20k or above. (poverty line is $22k family of 3)


https://fox17.com/news/local/only-3-of-jobs-posted-on-tennessees-website-offer-more-than-20000-per-year-unemployment-pandemic-recovery-nashville-governor-bill-lee
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 14, 2021, 10:09:21 AM
You’ll get nothing but crickets.

In Tennessee, 257,000 jobs posted. Only 3% pay $20k or above. (poverty line is $22k family of 3)


https://fox17.com/news/local/only-3-of-jobs-posted-on-tennessees-website-offer-more-than-20000-per-year-unemployment-pandemic-recovery-nashville-governor-bill-lee

Because the conversation got to a place where people who disagree wouldn't agree?  And that article is light on any sort of math or calculations but has no problem saying "they can do X and still be 'immensely profitable'".  Its written by a writer who specializes in tech and national security.  Its slanted, which is fine.  It expresses a viewpoint that many agree with, which is also fine.  But its not anything earth shattering or foundational that should swing the discussion here.

Are you ever not an incessantly smug know it all?  Please spare me an 8 paragraph response telling me all the varied things you love and are interested in to validate it as well.

And the New Republic is about as far left as one could swing.  I would expect the other side to feel the same if someone posted an article about it from The National Review.  But thanks for posting an article that has nothing to do with the Chipotle discussion to punctuate your smugness.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 14, 2021, 10:38:02 AM
You’ll get nothing but crickets.

In Tennessee, 257,000 jobs posted. Only 3% pay $20k or above. (poverty line is $22k family of 3)


https://fox17.com/news/local/only-3-of-jobs-posted-on-tennessees-website-offer-more-than-20000-per-year-unemployment-pandemic-recovery-nashville-governor-bill-lee
I don't think this was fact checked. My 5 minute search for jobs on that site listed way more than the 8500 jobs over $20K that they claim. Also, many of the jobs do not list a salary, but I would presume would be over 20K (nursing, sales, etc)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 14, 2021, 10:52:28 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/08/technology/farewell-millennial-lifestyle-subsidy.html

My apologies. This was the original article the new republic cited.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 14, 2021, 11:02:31 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/08/technology/farewell-millennial-lifestyle-subsidy.html

My apologies. This was the original article the new republic cited.

All good.  Nothing to apologize for. 

That article brings up some interesting points about a lot of those tech companies.  You get immense valuations on user bases and intellectual property, but you can't run at a deficit forever.  There will have to be reckoning there.  If something seems impossibly cheap, there is probably a reason for it
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 14, 2021, 12:09:24 PM
Because the conversation got to a place where people who disagree wouldn't agree?  And that article is light on any sort of math or calculations but has no problem saying "they can do X and still be 'immensely profitable'".  Its written by a writer who specializes in tech and national security.  Its slanted, which is fine.  It expresses a viewpoint that many agree with, which is also fine.  But its not anything earth shattering or foundational that should swing the discussion here.

Are you ever not an incessantly smug know it all?  Please spare me an 8 paragraph response telling me all the varied things you love and are interested in to validate it as well.

And the New Republic is about as far left as one could swing.  I would expect the other side to feel the same if someone posted an article about it from The National Review.  But thanks for posting an article that has nothing to do with the Chipotle discussion to punctuate your smugness.

You seem a bit sensitive today. Lotsa insults.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 14, 2021, 01:05:09 PM
You seem a bit sensitive today. Lotsa insults.

I'm perfectly fine.  The comment above was a lame "checkmate" volley because I, and others, didn't feel like continuing a conversation that ran its course when both sides made complete points.  But it also fit his way of doing things here.  Look at the s***show novel with Mike in the tennis thread.

As for our interaction, I know you like to troll and get a rise out of people.  And I called it out, cause it literally added nothing to the discussion or the point I made, but I wasn't aware calling you "contrarian" is now an insult?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 14, 2021, 04:19:50 PM
I'm perfectly fine.  The comment above was a lame "checkmate" volley because I, and others, didn't feel like continuing a conversation that ran its course when both sides made complete points.  But it also fit his way of doing things here.  Look at the s***show novel with Mike in the tennis thread.

As for our interaction, I know you like to troll and get a rise out of people.  And I called it out, cause it literally added nothing to the discussion or the point I made, but I wasn't aware calling you "contrarian" is now an insult?

I appreciate the response, Wags.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 14, 2021, 04:50:37 PM
I appreciate the response, Wags.

All good my man.  The game is the game  8-)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 15, 2021, 12:06:55 PM
Educate yourself.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-koch-brother-is-betting-big-on-distressed-real-estate-11614690003

https://fortune.com/2021/03/02/koch-real-estate-industries-pandemic/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/21/charles-koch-foundation-eviction-real-estate

https://www.foxnews.com/media/blackrock-investment-firms-killing-dream-home-ownership

It continues
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 15, 2021, 12:40:59 PM
The role of pension funds in all of this is very interesting.  My fiancee works for an investment firm that owns and operates multi family rental complexes.  The vast majority of their money these days is pension funds, which is a pronounced shift from the past.  And a good number of those funds have shifted HUGE swathes of their capital into real estate.  A few have completely divested from traditional equity and bond markets into almost all RE of some sort.  And before you assume its the guidance and urging of their Wall St partners, her firm and many others like her, despite certifications, are exclusively commercial real estate investors.  So its an internal pension fund management decision to move their capital there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 16, 2021, 07:43:52 AM
Another economic victim of COVID-19: Girl Scouts (and their cookies).

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/15/us/girl-scouts-cookie-sales-membership.html?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20210616&instance_id=33101&nl=dealbook&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=60786&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

The Girl Scouts are struggling to sell a heaping pile of extra cookies: 15 million boxes of them, to be exact.

Troops with armfuls of cookies used to be a fixture outside grocery stores and on people’s doorsteps. But this year, those cookies are stuck in warehouses after Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. was confronted with two major obstacles during the pandemic: membership has declined, and the scouts had to abandon their usual in-person selling methods.

Those problems left the national organization with millions of extra Thin Mints, Samoas and other signature treats. Around 12 million of the 15 million surplus cookies never left the bakery warehouses in Kentucky and Indiana, the Girl Scouts said in a statement on Tuesday.

“Given that a majority of cookies are sold in person by girls at booths or other face-to-face methods, a decrease in sales was to be expected,” Kelly Parisi, a Girl Scouts spokeswoman, said in the statement.

The organization sells around 200 million boxes per year at about $5 a box. The Girl Scouts have been selling cookies for over a century.

Individual troops sell cookies in their community, and scouts earn badges when they sell a certain number of boxes. Troops sell the cookies at booths, at events, outside stores and online. The cookies are typically sold in the first four months of the year.

“It’s exceedingly rare to have significant excess inventory, but the pandemic greatly impacted our cookie program,” Ms. Parisi said.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 16, 2021, 10:01:29 AM
I didn’t realize Girl Scout Cookies were a literal billion dollar industry.  That’s insane
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 16, 2021, 10:40:12 AM
The girl scouts are free to stop over at my house with any extra boxes of Samoas.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 16, 2021, 05:39:12 PM
State of Indiana being sued for stopping PUA

https://www.businessinsider.com/unemployment-benefits-early-termination-indiana-lawsuit-2021-6 (https://www.businessinsider.com/unemployment-benefits-early-termination-indiana-lawsuit-2021-6)

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 19, 2021, 09:16:05 AM
Here is what I think is an interesting column by Yahoo Finance editor Andy Serwer. It isn't behind a paywall, so I'll just cut-and-paste the whole shebang.

Disclosure: I agree with this take ...

+++

Prices of everything; a house in Phoenix, a Ford F-150, a plane ticket to New York, have all gone up. That much is true.‌

Unfortunately pretty much everything else about inflation—a red hot topic these days—is conjecture. And that’s vexing, not just for the dismal scientists (aka economists), but for all of us, because whether or not prices are really rising, by how much and for how long, has massive implications in our lives. Or as Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, says: “Inflation is one of the mysteries of economic study and thought. A difficult thing to gauge and forecast and get right. That’s why the risks are high.”‌

The current debate over inflation really revolves around two questions: First, is this current spate of inflation, just that, a spate—or to use Wall Street’s buzzword of the moment, “transitory,”—or not? (Just to give you an idea of how buzzy, when I Google the word “transitory” the search engine suggests “inflation” after it.) And second, transitory (aka temporary) inflation or not, what does it suggest for the economy and markets?

Before I get into that, let me lay out what’s going on with prices right now. First, know that inflation, which peaked in 1980 at an annualized rate of 13.55%, has been tame for quite some time, specifically 4% or less for nearly 30 years. Which means that anyone 40 years old or younger has no experience with inflation other than maybe from an Econ 101 textbook. Obviously that could be a problem.‌

As an aside I remember President Ford in 1974 trying to jawbone inflation down with his "Whip Inflation Now" campaign, which featured “Win” buttons, earrings and even ugly sweaters. None of this worked and it took draconian measures by Fed Chair Paul Volcker (raising rates and targeting money supply, as described by Former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, William Poole) to eventually tame inflation and keep it under wraps for all those years.‌

Until now perhaps. Last week the Labor Department reported that consumer prices (the CPI, or consumer price index) rose 5% in May, the fastest annual rate in nearly 13 years—which was when the economy was overheating from the housing boom which subsequently went bust and sent the economy off a cliff and into the Great Recession. Core inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, was up 3.8%, the biggest increase since May 1992. (For the record, the likelihood of the economy tanking right now is de minimis.)‌

Used car and truck prices are a major driver of inflation, climbing 7.3% last month and 29.7% over the past year. New car prices are up too, which have pushed up shares of Ford and GM a remarkable 40% plus this year. Clearly Americans want to buy vehicles to go on vacation and get back to work. And Yahoo Finance’s Janna Herron reports that rents are rising at their fastest pace in 15 years.

To be sure, not all prices are climbing. As Yahoo Finance’s Rick Newman points out, prices are not up much at all for health care, education and are basically flat for technology, including computers, smartphones and internet service (an important point which we’ll get back to.)

But that’s the counterpoint really. Americans are obsessed with cars, housing is critical and many of us are experiencing sticker shock booking travel this summer. Higher prices are front and center. Wall Street too is in a tizzy about inflation, and concerns about it and more importantly Federal Reserve policy in response to inflation (see below), sent stocks lower with the S&P 500 down 1.91% this week, its worst week since February.

Given this backdrop, the tension (such as it is) was high when the Fed met this week to deliver its forecast and for Chair Jay Powell to answer questions from the media. Or at least so said hedge fund honcho Paul Tudor Jones, who characterized the proceedings on CNBC as “the most important meeting in [Chairman] Jay Powell’s career, certainly the most important Fed meeting of the past four or five years.” Jones was critical of the Fed, which he believes is now stimulating the economy unnecessarily by keeping interest rates low and by buying financial assets. Unnecessarily, Jones says, because the economy is already running hot and needs no support. The Fed (which is in the transitory camp when it comes to inflation) risks overheating the economy by creating runaway inflation, according to PTJ.

Now I don’t see eye to eye with Jones on this, though I should point out, he's a billionaire from investing in financial markets, and let’s just say I’m not. I should also point out that Jones, 66, is in fact old enough to remember inflation, never mind that as a young man he called the 1987 stock market crash. So we should all ignore Jones at our peril.

As for what the Fed put forth this past Wednesday, well it wasn’t much, signaling an expectation of raising interest rates twice by the end of 2023 (yes, that is down the road.) And Powell, who’s become much more adept at not rippling the waters these days after some rougher forays earlier in his tenure, didn’t drop any bombshells in the presser.

Which brings us to the question of why the Federal Reserve isn’t so concerned about inflation and thinks it is mostly—here’s that word again—transitory. To answer that, we need to first address why prices are rising right now, which can be summed up in one very familiar abbreviation: COVID-19. When COVID hit last spring the economy collapsed, which crushed demand in sectors like leisure, travel and retail. Now the economy is roaring back to life and businesses can raise prices, certainly over 2020 levels.

“We clearly should’ve expected it,” says William Spriggs, chief economist at the AFL-CIO and a professor of economics at Howard University. “You can’t shut down the economy and think you turn on the switch [without some inflation].”

“We had a pandemic that forced an artificial shutdown of the economy in a way that even the collapse of the financial system and the housing market didn’t, and we had a snapback at a rate we’ve never seen before—not because of the fundamentals driving recovery but because of government,” says Joel Naroff, president and chief economist of Naroff Economics.

COVID had other secondary effects on the economy though, besides just ultimately producing a snapback. For one thing, the pandemic throttled supply chains, specifically the shipping of parts and components from one part of the globe to another. It also confused managers about how much to produce and therefore how many parts to order.

A prime example here is what happened to the chip (semiconductor) and auto industries which I wrote about last month. Car makers thought no one would buy vehicles during the pandemic and pared back their orders with chipmakers, (which were having a tough time shipping their chips anyway.) Turned out the car guys were wrong, millions of people wanted cars and trucks, but the automakers didn’t have enough chips for their cars and had to curb production. Fewer vehicles and strong demand led to higher new car prices, which cascaded to used car prices then to car rental rates. Net net, all the friction and slowness of getting things delivered now adds to costs which causes companies to raise prices.

Another secondary effect of COVID which has been inflationary comes from employment, which I got into a bit last week. We all know millions were thrown out of work by COVID last year, many of whom were backstopped by government payments that could add up to $600 a week (state and federal.) These folks have been none too keen on coming back to work for minimum wage, or $290 a week. So to lure them back employers are having to pay more, which puts more money in people's pockets which allows stores for example to raise prices.

But here’s the big-time question: If COVID was temporary, and therefore its effects are temporary and inflation is one of its effects then doesn’t it follow, ipso facto, that inflation is (OK I’ll say it again), transitory?

I say yes, (with a bit of a caveat.) And most economists, like Claudia Sahm, a senior fellow at the Jain Family Institute and a former Federal Reserve economist, agree. “‘Transitory’ has become a buzzword,” she says. “It is important to be more concrete about what we mean by that. We’re probably going to see in the next few months inflation numbers that are bigger than average, but as long as they keep stepping down, that’s the sign of it being transitory. If we didn’t see any sign of inflation stepping down some, it would’ve started feeling like ‘Houston, we have a problem.’”

To buttress my argument beyond that above "if-then" syllogism, let’s take a look at why inflation has been so low for the past three decades.
To me this is mostly obvious. Prices have been tamped down by the greatest anti-inflation force of our lifetime, that being technology, specifically the explosion of consumer technology. Think about it. The first wave of technology, a good example would be IBM mainframes, saved big companies money in back-office functions, savings which they mostly kept for themselves (higher profits) and their shareholders. But the four great landmark events in the advent of consumer technology; the introduction of the PC in 1974 (MITS Altair), the Netscape IPO of 1995, Google search in 1998, and the launch of the iPhone in 2007 (I remember Steve Jobs demoing it to me like it was yesterday), greatly accelerated, broadened and deepened this deflationary trend.

Not only has technology been pushing down the cost of everything from drilling for oil, to manufacturing clothes to farming, and allowing for the creation of groundbreaking (and deflationary) competitors like Uber, Airbnb and Netflix, but it also let consumers find—on their phones—the most affordable trip to Hawaii, the least expensive haircut or the best deal on Nikes.

So technology has reduced the cost of almost everything and will continue to do so the rest of our lifetime. Bottom line: Unless something terrible happens, the power of technology will outweigh and outlive COVID.

There is one mitigating factor and that is globalism, which is connected to both technology and COVID. Let me briefly explain.

After World War II, most of humanity has become more and more connected in terms of trade, communication, travel, etc. (See supply chain above.) Technology of course was a major enabler here; better ships, planes and faster internet, all of which as it grew more potent, accelerated globalism. Another element was the introduction of political constructs like the World Trade Organization and NAFTA. (I think of the Clinton administration and China joining the WTO in 2001 as perhaps the high-water marks of globalization.)

Like its technological cousin, globalism has deflationary effects particularly on the labor front as companies could more and more easily find lowest cost countries to produce goods and source materials. And like technology, globalization seemed inexorable, which it was, until it wasn’t. Political winds, manifested by the likes of Brexit and leaders like Putin, Xi Jinping, Erdogan, Bolsonaro, Duterte and of course Donald Trump have caused globalism to wane and anti-globalism and nationalism to wax.

The internet too, once seen as only a great connector, has also become a global divider, as the world increasingly fractures into Chinese, U.S. and European walled digital zones when it comes to social media and search for example. Security risks, privacy, spying and hacking of course divide us further here too.‌

So technology, which had made globalism stronger and stronger, now also makes it weaker and weaker.

COVID plays a role in rethinking globalism as it exposes vulnerabilities in the supply chain. Companies that were rethinking their manufacturing in China but considering another country, are now wondering if it just makes sense to repatriate the whole shebang. Supply chains that were optimized for cost only are being rethought with security and reliability being factored in and that costs money.

How significant is this decline in globalization and how permanent is it? Good questions. But my point here is whether or not "globalism disrupted" is transitory (!) or not, it could push prices up, (in the short and intermediate run at least), as cost is sacrificed for predictability. Longer term I say Americans are a resourceful people. We’ll figure out how to make cost effective stuff in the U.S. It’s also likely that globalism will trend upward again, though perhaps not as unfettered as it once was.

More downward pressure on pricing could come from shifts in employment practices. Mark Zandi points out that “the work-from-anywhere dynamic could depress wage growth and prices. If I don’t need to work in New York anymore and could live in Tampa, it stands to reason my wage could get cut or I won’t get the same wage increase in the future.”

And so what is Zandi’s take on transitory? “What we’re observing now is prices going back to pre-pandemic,” he says. “The price spikes we’re experiencing now will continue for the next few months through summer but certainly by the end of year, this time next year, they will have disappeared. I do think underlying inflation will be higher post-pandemic than pre-pandemic, but that’s a feature not a bug.”

I don’t disagree. To me it’s simple: The technology wave I’ve described above is bigger than COVID and bigger than the rise and fall of globalism. And that is why, ladies and gentlemen, I believe inflation will be transitory, certainly in the long run. (Though I’m well aware of what John Maynard Keynes said about the long run.)

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 19, 2021, 12:27:12 PM
Okay, I'll be that guy.  I never read the articles when you post them at full length like this.   ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on June 19, 2021, 04:18:15 PM
Okay, I'll be that guy.  I never read the articles when you post them at full length like this.   ;D

bUt He SuPpOrTs JoUrNaLiSm.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 19, 2021, 08:07:01 PM
bUt He SuPpOrTs JoUrNaLiSm.

And you don’t, but that’s ok.

Have a nice night.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 20, 2021, 07:57:12 AM
bUt He SuPpOrTs JoUrNaLiSm.
It's a free article. But sure, disingenuously suggest posting a free article means 82 doesn't support journalism if that give you jollies, I guess.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on June 20, 2021, 10:58:46 AM
It's a free article. But sure, disingenuously suggest posting a free article means 82 doesn't support journalism if that give you jollies, I guess.

I thought some people got some heat here for posting full Matt V articles even though they weren’t behind a paywall. We were supposed to click through so he got the credit for the page hits. It led to only posting a few sentences of the article so people would read on jsonline.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 20, 2021, 12:42:05 PM
I thought some people got some heat here for posting full Matt V articles even though they weren’t behind a paywall. We were supposed to click through so he got the credit for the page hits. It led to only posting a few sentences of the article so people would read on jsonline.

I always honor paywalls.

But if what I did here bothers some folks, from now on I'll do exactly what you suggest: A summary and a link.

A suggestion ... without a passive-aggressive (and baseless) accusation. I appreciate it, cheebs. Hope you're having a nice Father's Day.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on June 20, 2021, 01:03:09 PM

A suggestion ... without a passive-aggressive (and baseless) accusation. I appreciate it, cheebs. Hope you're having a nice Father's Day.

Thanks! You too!

My first one so soaking it all in.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 20, 2021, 01:33:56 PM
Thanks! You too!

My first one so soaking it all in.

Oh, that's fantastic. Believe it or not, Father's Day will get even better for you, too! When kids are 3 and older, they actually start to understand what the day means ... and they get really good at hugs, giving homemade gifts, helping make you breakfast, and all the good stuff.

This was my second as a grandfather, and both kids and their kids have already FaceTimed. So much fun!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 21, 2021, 08:27:47 AM
Super-interesting article about the housing boom in Phoenix and, specifically, the way construction workers have to toil in dangerous heat:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/20/us/100-degree-weather.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210621&instance_id=33501&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=61277&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

PHOENIX — As the sun rose on another day of record-breaking heat, Juan Gutierrez and his construction crew were already sweating through their long-sleeve shirts. It was 91 degrees, and workers in a subdivision called Desert Oasis were racing to nail together the wooden skeletons of $380,000 homes that had sold before they were even built.

“Your skin falls off, you have to cover up everything,” said Mr. Gutierrez, 22, who has been undocumented since he came to the United States as a 4-year-old. “It’s work you have to do. You have no choice.”


Related:

I was visiting friends in Phoenix at the end of the recession in 2010 and housing was so cheap that the term "dirt cheap" didn't do it justice. Active senior communities were so desperate to sell foreclosed-upon villas that not only were they slashing prices but they were making them available to anybody over 45 - and even younger in certain circumstances. Houses in nice Scottsdale neighborhoods were selling in the mid-200s, a few that needed mostly cosmetic work were even selling below 200.

I was sooo tempted to buy some property there, but cash was tight, there was no way of knowing if the economy would improve in the next several years, and we didn't think being long-distance landlords sounded like a great plan. But those who had the $$$ and foresight to buy there then could have made out like bandits. I know that also was true for many other areas, but I just remember seeing those Phoenix and Scottsdale area homes and going, "Wow!"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 21, 2021, 11:27:16 AM
Super-interesting article about the housing boom in Phoenix and, specifically, the way construction workers have to toil in dangerous heat:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/20/us/100-degree-weather.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210621&instance_id=33501&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=61277&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

PHOENIX — As the sun rose on another day of record-breaking heat, Juan Gutierrez and his construction crew were already sweating through their long-sleeve shirts. It was 91 degrees, and workers in a subdivision called Desert Oasis were racing to nail together the wooden skeletons of $380,000 homes that had sold before they were even built.

“Your skin falls off, you have to cover up everything,” said Mr. Gutierrez, 22, who has been undocumented since he came to the United States as a 4-year-old. “It’s work you have to do. You have no choice.”


Related:

I was visiting friends in Phoenix at the end of the recession in 2010 and housing was so cheap that the term "dirt cheap" didn't do it justice. Active senior communities were so desperate to sell foreclosed-upon villas that not only were they slashing prices but they were making them available to anybody over 45 - and even younger in certain circumstances. Houses in nice Scottsdale neighborhoods were selling in the mid-200s, a few that needed mostly cosmetic work were even selling below 200.

I was sooo tempted to buy some property there, but cash was tight, there was no way of knowing if the economy would improve in the next several years, and we didn't think being long-distance landlords sounded like a great plan. But those who had the $$$ and foresight to buy there then could have made out like bandits. I know that also was true for many other areas, but I just remember seeing those Phoenix and Scottsdale area homes and going, "Wow!"

my buddy left college coaching to become a real estate agent after a health scare. He's been killing it over the last six months. With lumber prices as they have been it's no surprise housing prices are up with new construction - a combination of supply and cost of production. Quality, however, will be way down as these houses become rush jobs.

My condo is up nearly $40K since when I bought in August.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 21, 2021, 06:46:47 PM
my buddy left college coaching to become a real estate agent after a health scare. He's been killing it over the last six months. With lumber prices as they have been it's no surprise housing prices are up with new construction - a combination of supply and cost of production. Quality, however, will be way down as these houses become rush jobs.

My condo is up nearly $40K since when I bought in August.

Here in Charlotte, there is such a shortage of houses on the market that realtors are grumbling about the lack of work and lack of chances to make money. Some have had to lay off staff.

We've lived in a fairly popular, moderately priced (for the area), 180-home subdivision since 2011, and there were almost always 2-4 houses on the market. Well, there hasn't been a single house in this neighborhood on the market since the last one sold on Jan. 4. Six months, and not even a listing, let alone a sale!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 21, 2021, 06:55:04 PM
Here in Charlotte, there is such a shortage of houses on the market that realtors are grumbling about the lack of work and lack of chances to make money. Some have had to lay off staff.

We've lived in a fairly popular, moderately priced (for the area), 180-home subdivision since 2011, and there were almost always 2-4 houses on the market. Well, there hasn't been a single house in this neighborhood on the market since the last one sold on Jan. 4. Six months, and not even a listing, let alone a sale!

I was actually surprised when a former NBA player's ridiculous house went for $75K under asking last month after only a week on the market. Only $3.125 million.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 22, 2021, 06:53:29 AM
Here in Charlotte, there is such a shortage of houses on the market that realtors are grumbling about the lack of work and lack of chances to make money. Some have had to lay off staff.

We've lived in a fairly popular, moderately priced (for the area), 180-home subdivision since 2011, and there were almost always 2-4 houses on the market. Well, there hasn't been a single house in this neighborhood on the market since the last one sold on Jan. 4. Six months, and not even a listing, let alone a sale!
Same here, I've had three realtors tell me they are making just about the same as they were in more normal times. What they have gained due to rapidly inflating prices has been countered by restricted volume of properties to sell.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Lens on June 22, 2021, 08:13:06 AM
Same here, I've had three realtors tell me they are making just about the same as they were in more normal times. What they have gained due to rapidly inflating prices has been countered by restricted volume of properties to sell.

Supply is down, not a realtors dream.  Pair that with having to sort through 37 offers on one listing; gigantic time suck.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 22, 2021, 10:06:20 AM
I was actually surprised when a former NBA player's ridiculous house went for $75K under asking last month after only a week on the market. Only $3.125 million.

2.4% price drop :-P

Having said that, depending on location, there are different price cut offs where you may find houses sitting around longer.  The houses that are moving at break neck speed are the 'entry' level houses.  Once we get to 750k (again this depends on location, and is just an example) places are around longer due to there being less people able to afford that price point.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on June 22, 2021, 10:30:16 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-17/america-should-become-a-nation-of-renters

Nevermind that building wealth in America relies on home ownership
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 22, 2021, 10:45:30 AM
Update on suit against Indiana governor for stopping PUA.

https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/CaseSummary/eyJ2Ijp7IkNhc2VUb2tlbiI6IjlxZ1lUVHdDZzl1NS10N1Rubjlmc3UteVczU2NJMUdGd3dqN2JPRjdmRWcxIn19 (https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/CaseSummary/eyJ2Ijp7IkNhc2VUb2tlbiI6IjlxZ1lUVHdDZzl1NS10N1Rubjlmc3UteVczU2NJMUdGd3dqN2JPRjdmRWcxIn19)

Apparently, Indiana has a statute that they must secure all rights and benefits available under certain federal statutes.

Case set for preliminary injunction tomorrow.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 22, 2021, 11:21:18 AM
2.4% price drop :-P

Having said that, depending on location, there are different price cut offs where you may find houses sitting around longer.  The houses that are moving at break neck speed are the 'entry' level houses.  Once we get to 750k (again this depends on location, and is just an example) places are around longer due to there being less people able to afford that price point.

Definitely depends on location, as you said.

In the Seattle area, there are nice houses in nice neighborhoods listed for $1.3M that are going within 24 hours after getting multiple offers and selling for $1.5M or more.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 22, 2021, 01:15:08 PM
Real Estate in Fairfield County Connecticut has gone bonkers.
Greenwich, CT of all places, prices increased 39% from 2020 to an average price $2.97mil.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 22, 2021, 01:17:58 PM
Real Estate in Fairfield County Connecticut has gone bonkers.
Greenwich, CT of all places, prices increased 39% from 2020 to an average price $2.97mil.

Jeez Louise ... that's almost twice as much as we paid for our butler's quarters!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 22, 2021, 01:59:19 PM
Jeez Louise ... that's almost twice as much as we paid for our butler's quarters!
This?

(https://hauteliving.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/image00004.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 22, 2021, 03:27:40 PM
Ha!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on June 22, 2021, 05:31:22 PM
Definitely depends on location, as you said.

In the Seattle area, there are nice houses in nice neighborhoods listed for $1.3M that are going within 24 hours after getting multiple offers and selling for $1.5M or more.

Same thing is happening in Nashville.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on June 22, 2021, 07:08:59 PM
Real Estate in Fairfield County Connecticut has gone bonkers.
Greenwich, CT of all places, prices increased 39% from 2020 to an average price $2.97mil.

New York refugees?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 23, 2021, 07:33:58 AM
Hoo's byin' dis chit? Knot retired scribes, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on June 23, 2021, 09:00:36 AM
Definitely depends on location, as you said.

In the Seattle area, there are nice houses in nice neighborhoods listed for $1.3M that are going within 24 hours after getting multiple offers and selling for $1.5M or more.

I was just at a wedding this weekend.  Another member of the wedding party with me was saying his sister and her husband just bought in Seattle and paid $250K over asking.  And it was for a place that sold for less than $1MM.  Just insane
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 23, 2021, 10:20:50 AM
Hoo's byin' dis chit? Knot retired scribes, aina?

Maybe folks who successfully invested during the longest bull run in history, nu?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on June 23, 2021, 12:51:38 PM
Hoo's byin' dis chit? Knot retired scribes, aina?

Sounds like a great time to sell and move into that retirement community Florida.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on June 25, 2021, 02:04:35 PM
Update on suit against Indiana governor for stopping PUA.

https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/CaseSummary/eyJ2Ijp7IkNhc2VUb2tlbiI6IjlxZ1lUVHdDZzl1NS10N1Rubjlmc3UteVczU2NJMUdGd3dqN2JPRjdmRWcxIn19 (https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/CaseSummary/eyJ2Ijp7IkNhc2VUb2tlbiI6IjlxZ1lUVHdDZzl1NS10N1Rubjlmc3UteVczU2NJMUdGd3dqN2JPRjdmRWcxIn19)

Apparently, Indiana has a statute that they must secure all rights and benefits available under certain federal statutes.

Case set for preliminary injunction tomorrow.
For those who care, Judge granted the preliminary injunction and order Indiana Governor to inform Feds that they will continue in the CARES Act program.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on June 26, 2021, 08:07:59 AM
The first cruise ship to launch from the U.S. in 15 month -- the Celebrity Edge -- sets sail today.

To comply with both the CDC’s 95% vaccination requirement and a new Florida law banning businesses from requiring customers to show proof of vaccination, Celebrity  is simply asking guests if they would like to share their status.

Those who don’t voluntarily show proof of vaccination will be treated as unvaccinated -- and those people will be subjected to additional protocols such as wearing face masks and being restricted to designated seating areas in common areas like dining rooms, casinos and theaters.

Seems as good a way to do it as any.

You want full use of the ship, without having to wear a mask, prove you've been vaccinated and then enjoy!

If you refuse, you still can sail with us ... but mask up, and sit over there, with the rest of the dopes who claim they "just want everything to get back to normal" but refuse to do their part to help things get back to normal.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 26, 2021, 08:34:24 AM
Meanwhile, covid hospitalizations in Sconnie are under 100. Aka, its over, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 26, 2021, 10:48:38 AM
Meanwhile, covid hospitalizations in Sconnie are under 100. Aka, its over, aina?

On Monday, “Moscow Ronnie” Johnson will be trying to convince those in Wisconsin who are unvaccinated NOT to get the vaccine.

One of your heroes, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 26, 2021, 11:04:41 AM
Yeah, I like Sen. Johnson. But, I think all adults should be vaccinated. However, if you believe that science is real and you're vaccinated, its over. Carry on like its March 9, 2020, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on June 26, 2021, 12:50:25 PM
Yeah, I like Sen. Johnson. But, I think all adults should be vaccinated. However, if you believe that science is real and you're vaccinated, its over. Carry on like its March 9, 2030, hey?

I do. I go where I want. I do what I want. I don't wear a mask (unless required).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 02, 2021, 09:54:48 AM
From Yahoo Finance:

Michael Pearce of Capital Economics says: ‌"The potentially biggest single factor explaining the labor shortages is the surge in retirements."

He continues:

"Close to half of the 3.5 million drop in the labor force can be attributed to retirements, which we argued were unlikely to be reversed once the economy reopened. Retiree data tracked by the Dallas Fed show that, following a big initial surge in the early stages of the pandemic, retirements appear to have settled on a new, higher trend. Relative to the pre-pandemic trend, retirees account for an additional 0.6% of the population than we might have anticipated. That is equivalent to 2 million workers, which would explain more than half of the current shortfall in the labor force."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on July 02, 2021, 10:25:15 AM
As we ponder the number of entry jobs left unfilled and look for reasons (unemployment extensions!   Single moms!   Socialism!), may I suggest that a fair number of people went to work for Amazon as well as delivery services in the last year.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on July 02, 2021, 01:31:36 PM
As we ponder the number of entry jobs left unfilled and look for reasons (unemployment extensions!   Single moms!   Socialism!), may I suggest that a fair number of people went to work for Amazon as well as delivery services in the last year.

But wait.  I thought those were all crappy jobs.  Why aren't people quitting them to fill these other jobs?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on July 02, 2021, 01:44:20 PM
From Yahoo Finance:

Michael Pearce of Capital Economics says: ‌"The potentially biggest single factor explaining the labor shortages is the surge in retirements."

He continues:

"Close to half of the 3.5 million drop in the labor force can be attributed to retirements, which we argued were unlikely to be reversed once the economy reopened. Retiree data tracked by the Dallas Fed show that, following a big initial surge in the early stages of the pandemic, retirements appear to have settled on a new, higher trend. Relative to the pre-pandemic trend, retirees account for an additional 0.6% of the population than we might have anticipated. That is equivalent to 2 million workers, which would explain more than half of the current shortfall in the labor force."

So it’s chick and glows fault! Get back you work you slackers!  ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on July 02, 2021, 01:47:41 PM
But wait.  I thought those were all crappy jobs.  Why aren't people quitting them to fill these other jobs?
The Amazon jobs pay decent for entry-level jobs and the work hours are a lot more predictable than many service jobs. But not to worry, Bezos tries to get workers to quit after 18 months so there will be some rotation of workers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on July 02, 2021, 03:22:43 PM
So it’s chick and glows fault! Get back you work you slackers!  ;D

I just wish my old boss at Burger King would stop calling me and begging me to come back.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on July 02, 2021, 04:07:42 PM
I've been out of work since Visions closed.   :'( :'(
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 03, 2021, 08:23:22 AM
From the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/27/business/economy/jobs-workers-unemployment-benefits.html

MARYLAND HEIGHTS, Mo. — By lunchtime, the representatives from the recruiting agency Express Employment Professionals decided to pack up and leave the job fair in the St. Louis suburb of Maryland Heights. Hardly anyone had shown up.

“We were hoping we would see prepandemic levels,” said Courtney Boyle, general manager of Express. After all, Missouri had just cut off federal unemployment benefits.

Business owners had complained that the assistance, as Gov. Mike Parson put it, “incentivized people to stay out of the work force.” He made Missouri one of the first four states to halt the federal aid; a total of 26 have said they will do so by next month. But in the St. Louis metropolitan area, where the jobless rate was 4.2 percent in May, those who expected the June 12 termination would unleash a flood of job seekers were disappointed.

Work-force development officials said they had seen virtually no uptick in applicants since the governor’s announcement, which ended a $300 weekly supplement to other benefits. And the online job site Indeed found that in states that have abandoned the federal benefits, clicks on job postings were below the national average.

Of course, it’s early. But conversations with employers who are hunting for workers and people who are hunting for jobs in the St. Louis area revealed stark differences in expectations and assumptions about what a day’s work is worth.

The divide raises a fundamental question of what a healthy labor market looks like. Does it mean workers are on such a knife edge that they feel compelled to take the first job that comes along? Or is it one in which employers are the ones who have to scramble and feel pressured to raise wages and improve working conditions? Are the economy and the public better off when workers get to be choosy or when employers do?


The article goes on to say that many economists point out that much bigger contributors to the worker shortage are factors like child care and continuing health fears with less than half the population fully vaccinated. And knowing how in-demand they are, jobseekers are actually demanding what they consider fair pay.

The labor market’s deeper problem, said Francine D. Blau, an economist at Cornell University, is the proliferation of low-paid jobs with few prospects for advancement and too little income to cover essential expenses like housing, food and health care.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jsglow on July 03, 2021, 10:36:51 AM
So it’s chick and glows fault! Get back you work you slackers!  ;D

We spent the last month totally redoing the porch and deck.  Bring beer when you visit PBI.  :)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on July 03, 2021, 10:52:51 AM
We spent the last month totally redoing the porch and deck.  Bring beer when you visit PBI.  :)

I still have a couple from this fridge in Vegas we found a couple weeks ago……
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on July 03, 2021, 11:07:32 AM
We spent the last month totally redoing the porch and deck.  Bring beer when you visit PBI.  :)

Nice!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on July 03, 2021, 11:10:28 AM
Meanwhile, covid hospitalizations in Sconnie are under 100. Aka, its over, aina?

Check out Missouri right now. In places people refuse to get vaccinated, mostly along political lines, things are definitely not over.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 03, 2021, 04:47:11 PM
Check out Missouri right now. In places people refuse to get vaccinated, mostly along political lines, things are definitely not over.

For the vaccinated, it’s over.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on July 05, 2021, 10:17:41 AM
For the vaccinated, it’s over.

That's kind of like saying that a hurricane is over if you are in the eye of the storm.

Yes, currently, if you are vaccinated the risks are very low, and it is safe to return to life as normal. But like in the eye of a storm, it may be temporary.

The Delta variant is substantially more transmissible, and significantly for deadly. We are fortunate it does not escape the vaccine, but it does escape natural immunity. The higher rate of transmissibility increases the risk of spread in non-vaccinated populations, where it can continue to mutate, possibly generating an escape variant.

If that happens, everyone might be back in the storm.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 05, 2021, 10:30:12 AM
The eye of the hurricane implies that another part of the storm is guaranteed to hit.  But it's not.  And sure an escape variant in theory could happen, but it hasn't yet and vaccines have proven effective against those that exist currently.  Again, for the vaccinated, this is pretty much done. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on July 05, 2021, 10:35:08 AM
Unless you are one of those people who have to take care of the sick.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on July 05, 2021, 10:59:13 AM
The eye of the hurricane implies that another part of the storm is guaranteed to hit.  But it's not.  And sure an escape variant in theory could happen, but it hasn't yet and vaccines have proven effective against those that exist currently.  Again, for the vaccinated, this is pretty much done.

You know, a storm can largely dissipate when one is in the eye, so get hit by a weakened version (e.g. getting  very mild or asymptomatic COVID due to vaccination), or get hit hard again.

There is a ton unknown still about how this will proceed. Claiming its done is naive and reeks of "mission accomplished" re. Iraq 2003. I promise you those that work on the research side are still vigilant, because if we don't "keep sciencing" we might get hit by a stronger side of the storm unprepared. Not to mention those that still have to care for/treat/respond to those who are sick.

Also, a Delta+ variant is already being investigated due to it being highly over-represented in breakthrough cases in vaccinated individuals in India. If it is indeed an escape variant, and how much it reduces efficacy is still being ascertained.

But you are largely arguing for argument sake again at this point.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on July 05, 2021, 11:34:55 AM
I think saying that we don't care if the unvaccinated live or die is a statement that would be supported by many. They have made a conscious choice to not get vaccinated. The people dying now have chosen that path.

But Forgetful does make a great point and that is why we must continue to be vigilant. I certainly have no qualms about telling acquaintances who are not vaccinated that they are selfish and are putting our country at risk. I have lost a few friends. I don't care - as they have revealed who they are.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 05, 2021, 11:46:38 AM
You know, a storm can largely dissipate when one is in the eye, so get hit by a weakened version (e.g. getting  very mild or asymptomatic COVID due to vaccination), or get hit hard again.

There is a ton unknown still about how this will proceed. Claiming its done is naive and reeks of "mission accomplished" re. Iraq 2003. I promise you those that work on the research side are still vigilant, because if we don't "keep sciencing" we might get hit by a stronger side of the storm unprepared. Not to mention those that still have to care for/treat/respond to those who are sick.

Also, a Delta+ variant is already being investigated due to it being highly over-represented in breakthrough cases in vaccinated individuals in India. If it is indeed an escape variant, and how much it reduces efficacy is still being ascertained.

But you are largely arguing for argument sake again at this point.

Ah the “you keep responding to me”!lame attempt to end debate. A particular favorite of yours.

You’re too close to see the forest through the trees. Sure there are going to be variants and some vaccinated will get sick. Likely not sick enough for hospitalization and death though.

Keep sciencing for sure. But for most of us, it’s over.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 05, 2021, 11:50:10 AM
I think saying that we don't care if the unvaccinated live or die is a statement that would be supported by many. They have made a conscious choice to not get vaccinated. The people dying now have chosen that path.

But Forgetful does make a great point and that is why we must continue to be vigilant. I certainly have no qualms about telling acquaintances who are not vaccinated that they are selfish and are putting our country at risk. I have lost a few friends. I don't care - as they have revealed who they are.

What kind of person says they don’t care if people live or die?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on July 05, 2021, 01:35:53 PM
What kind of person says they don’t care if people live or die?

I don't know. Ask those who refuse to get vaccinated. Ask those who are actively contributing to other people dying. I do neither of those things. I was vaccinated the very 1st day I could get it. I have personally told every person in my extended family yo get vaccinated. I have told almost every friend to get vaccinated. So, I have actually showed that I do care.

Remember, virtually all people dying of Covid in the US now are doing so by choice. Not my choice - their choice.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on July 05, 2021, 01:42:05 PM
Ah the “you keep responding to me”!lame attempt to end debate. A particular favorite of yours.

You’re too close to see the forest through the trees. Sure there are going to be variants and some vaccinated will get sick. Likely not sick enough for hospitalization and death though.

Keep sciencing for sure. But for most of us, it’s over.

(whistling past the graveyard)    Sorry, fluffy.     As long as there are areas in the world as well as here at home where the virus is spreading unchecked, it isn't over.     We are but one variant away from being back at square one.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on July 05, 2021, 01:52:34 PM
(whistling past the graveyard)    Sorry, fluffy.     As long as there are areas in the world as well as here at home where the virus is spreading unchecked, it isn't over.     We are but one variant away from being back at square one.   

By that token, we are one vaccine resistant variant away from any commonly vaccinated disease from disaster.  20MM people are year still get measles in less developed countries but we don’t live in constant fear of that.

Saying that COVID isn’t defeated globally and some measure of caution needs to be taken? Sure.  But acting like all the vaccine work and those who are fully vaccinated still has us on the razors edge seems to be trending towards excessive worry instead of “trust/follow the science”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 05, 2021, 01:57:44 PM
I don't know. Ask those who refuse to get vaccinated. Ask those who are actively contributing to other people dying. I do neither of those things. I was vaccinated the very 1st day I could get it. I have personally told every person in my extended family yo get vaccinated. I have told almost every friend to get vaccinated. So, I have actually showed that I do care.

Remember, virtually all people dying of Covid in the US now are doing so by choice. Not my choice - their choice.


Ah.  I see you have to shift the goalposts because your original statement was so reprehensible.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on July 05, 2021, 02:07:16 PM
By that token, we are one vaccine resistant variant away from any commonly vaccinated disease from disaster.  20MM people are year still get measles in less developed countries but we don’t live in constant fear of that.

Saying that COVID isn’t defeated globally and some measure of caution needs to be taken? Sure.  But acting like all the vaccine work and those who are fully vaccinated still has us on the razors edge seems to be trending towards excessive worry instead of “trust/follow the science”

They are still sciencing.    It is truly astonishing to think how far science has come in relation to this virus in the last 18 months.   Kudos to all.   I just disagree about whether it is over for the vaccinated.     I am living my life maskless these days, but I still wear one on alarms.     And I know for a fact that I had two patients in the field who had it during the last 6 weeks.    So far, my immunities from having had a significant case of COVID as well as both vaccines has held.   And I am aware of the studies that say that combination provides the best protection.      For now. 
  It isn't over until it is contained everywhere.     And it is well enough understood to be able to stay ahead of the variants.    In my opinion.    Which I recognize is not universal.   


When I go to a fire, there are stages based on the severity of the fire.    There is the initial knockdown where you put out the fire that is so impressive to everybody watching.    The flames shooting out the window, etc.     Then the real work begins.    You look for the fire spread.    You put holes in walls, in ceilings.    You search voids.    You extinguish the hotspots and do the overhaul until you are positive that everything is out.    One of the most embarrassing things that can happen is to have to come back to find the same house burning again because you were too lazy to do the job right the first time.     The dreaded rekindle.     

In my opinion, the USA has put out the big fire.    We, as a society, are doing a perfunctory job of doing the hard work, getting into the corners and void spaces, to make sure this is done with.      And I fear that our laziness as a society will lead to a rekindle of the virus.   

  To say nothing of what is going on in the rest of the world.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on July 05, 2021, 02:52:11 PM

Ah.  I see you have to shift the goalposts because your original statement was so reprehensible.

No.

I stand by my original statement.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 05, 2021, 03:00:31 PM
No.

I stand by my original statement.

So you’re a psychopath then…
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on July 05, 2021, 04:16:04 PM
So you’re a psychopath then…

Doctor fluffy?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on July 05, 2021, 04:32:30 PM
Science is real. Its over, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on July 05, 2021, 05:25:24 PM
By that token, we are one vaccine resistant variant away from any commonly vaccinated disease from disaster.  20MM people are year still get measles in less developed countries but we don’t live in constant fear of that.

Saying that COVID isn’t defeated globally and some measure of caution needs to be taken? Sure.  But acting like all the vaccine work and those who are fully vaccinated still has us on the razors edge seems to be trending towards excessive worry instead of “trust/follow the science”

https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(21)00041-0

There are reasons virus's like measles are different. Unfortunately, unlike for measles, the threat of an escape  variant for COVID is real, and likely probable if it keeps spreading like it is.

This isn't excessive worry. I'm really not all that worried. It is following the science, which clearly shows pretending this is over is naive.

That doesn't mean vaccinated people need to go back to masks, but it does mean that we shouldn't pretend like it is over, rather those that are sciencing need to remain vigilant. And everyone else needs to be prepared  to do their part (re. masks) if it indeed becomes prudent again.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on July 05, 2021, 08:12:26 PM
https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(21)00041-0

There are reasons virus's like measles are different. Unfortunately, unlike for measles, the threat of an escape  variant for COVID is real, and likely probable if it keeps spreading like it is.

This isn't excessive worry. I'm really not all that worried. It is following the science, which clearly shows pretending this is over is naive.

That doesn't mean vaccinated people need to go back to masks, but it does mean that we shouldn't pretend like it is over, rather those that are sciencing need to remain vigilant. And everyone else needs to be prepared  to do their part (re. masks) if it indeed becomes prudent again.

Thanks for the info.  And I appreciate your perspective.  I wasn't directly addressing you about the worry.  But phrases like "back to square one", "overrun by variants", or the like seem extreme. 

I even mentioned before that I can understand and respect an far more conservative and healthier dose of caution/vigilance from those directly in the science, its their job to do so.  But attempting to dissuade from an optimism, grounded in the reality that some risk still exists globally, in favor of acting like there is a hurricane outside the front door and we'd be back to where we were in April 2020 just seems problematic and hysterical.  Especially when vaccination is so imperative and should be viewed as much as a fantastic solution as possible.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 06, 2021, 08:03:59 AM
From Yahoo Finance:

On Friday, we learned nonfarm payrolls grew by 850,000 last month, with economists viewing the report as a signal that some of the hiring pressures we've documented within the labor market are starting to ease.

But underneath the headline data — which also showed a slight uptick in the unemployment rate as the number of people looking for work increased — we wanted to flag a few charts outlining some of the big trends set to drive the labor market in the months ahead.

‌The first comes to us via Nick Bunker, an economist at Indeed, who noted that while overall labor participation was flat at 61.6% in June, we saw a notable uptick in prime-age participation.

During the month, the labor force participation rate among adults 25-54 rose to 81.7%, the highest since the pandemic began and matching the level seen in January 2018. As you may recall, the economy during that year was deemed strong enough by the Fed to warrant four rate hikes.

The labor force participation rate for prime age workers rose to its highest level since the pandemic began and matching the rate seen in January 2018, a time when the labor market was strong enough the Fed raised rates four times over the next year. (Source: FRED)

After the financial crisis, the decline in participation among prime-age workers was a major sign that the economic recovery was underserving workers and growth at-large. The rise in this rate over the second half of the 2010s was one of the most encouraging economic trends underway — before COVID-19 disrupted the economy.

‌A continued rebound in participation among those enjoying the fastest career and earnings growth will be a key gauge of the health of the post-pandemic economic recovery.

Another key area economists have been watching is the battered leisure and hospitality space, which bore the brunt of layoffs and furloughs during the most acute phase of the crisis.

As the economy has rebounded, this sector has seen some of the stiffest hiring competition, and wage increases have followed as a result. In June, average hourly earnings for this sector hit a new high of $18.23, a new record for the series and a 7.1% increase over the same month last year.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 13, 2021, 07:45:31 AM
The manager of a Lincoln, Neb. Burger King and 8 other employees took a hike -- citing low pay and poor working conditions -- and used the store's sign (and social media) to announce it:

(https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/10882002_071221-ktrk-digital-abcn1-nebraska-burger-king-matt-tn-img.jpg?w=1600)

https://illinoisnewstoday.com/burger-king-workers-in-nebraska-depart-and-leave-a-message-we-all-quit/296289/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 18, 2021, 07:32:51 AM
In many southern states (and a few others), those who likely caught COVID-19 at work are almost always denied workers compensation.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article252620273.html

North Carolina, like many GOP-run states, has very strict workers comp laws. Unlike many northern states, the legislature here refused to pass laws making it easier for people who probably got the virus at work to get compensated. Such a law was considered, but business groups spent millions lobbying against it ... and the law, like thousands of COVID-19 sufferers, died.

My wife personally knows 4 people at her hospital who almost certainly were infected on the job. All were denied workers comp. One is a 40-something long-hauler who, more than a year later, is still battling fatigue, migraines and other issues.

And yet, of course, the hospital constantly takes out ads on TV and in newspapers bragging about its "heroes" who worked tirelessly during the pandemic. It has treated many of those heroes like dirt ... but if bragging about them gets the executives (dozens of whom make $1M+) more money, heroes they are!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on July 18, 2021, 11:58:05 PM
In many southern states (and a few others), those who likely caught COVID-19 at work are almost always denied workers compensation.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article252620273.html

North Carolina, like many GOP-run states, has very strict workers comp laws. Unlike many northern states, the legislature here refused to pass laws making it easier for people who probably got the virus at work to get compensated. Such a law was considered, but business groups spent millions lobbying against it ... and the law, like thousands of COVID-19 sufferers, died.

My wife personally knows 4 people at her hospital who almost certainly were infected on the job. All were denied workers comp. One is a 40-something long-hauler who, more than a year later, is still battling fatigue, migraines and other issues.

And yet, of course, the hospital constantly takes out ads on TV and in newspapers bragging about its "heroes" who worked tirelessly during the pandemic. It has treated many of those heroes like dirt ... but if bragging about them gets the executives (dozens of whom make $1M+) more money, heroes they are!

If they catch covid at work after having the opportunity to  have been vaccinated then why should they get workers comp.  If before, then they should get it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 19, 2021, 08:48:44 AM
If they catch covid at work after having the opportunity to  have been vaccinated then why should they get workers comp.  If before, then they should get it.

The 4 people this refers to, including the long-COVID victim, each got the virus well before vaccines existed.

Each has since been vaccinated.

Interestingly (or stupidly), this large hospital system requires employees to get a flu shot every year but does not mandate COVID-19 vaccinations.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on July 19, 2021, 09:52:57 AM
The 4 people this refers to, including the long-COVID victim, each got the virus well before vaccines existed.

Each has since been vaccinated.

Interestingly (or stupidly), this large hospital system requires employees to get a flu shot every year but does not mandate COVID-19 vaccinations.

From what I understand (could be wrong) but the primary reason business are reluctant to mandate it is because it hasn’t received full FDA authorization yet.

For any legal minds on here, is there liability to the company for mandating a vaccine that is currently under an EUA and not full approval?

And what is taking so long to get full FDA clearance?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on July 19, 2021, 09:54:59 AM
From what I understand (could be wrong) but the primary reason business are reluctant to mandate it is because it hasn’t received full FDA authorization yet.

For any legal minds on here, is there liability to the company for mandating a vaccine that is currently under an EUA and not full approval?

And what is taking so long to get full FDA clearance?

It is my understanding that Aurora Advocate Health System, for example, intends to make the Covid vaccine mandatory once it gets the full FDA authorization.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 19, 2021, 09:56:23 AM
From what I understand (could be wrong) but the primary reason business are reluctant to mandate it is because it hasn’t received full FDA authorization yet.

For any legal minds on here, is there liability to the company for mandating a vaccine that is currently under an EUA and not full approval?

And what is taking so long to get full FDA clearance?


A hospital can most certainly can mandate it right now - and many have.  The reason others don't is because they have enough trouble finding nurses, custodians and food prep workers as it stands.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on July 19, 2021, 10:32:15 AM

A hospital can most certainly can mandate it right now - and many have.  The reason others don't is because they have enough trouble finding nurses, custodians and food prep workers as it stands.

Absolutely nothing stopping any hospital or business from mandating it today but is there liability to them if an employee is mandated to get it and ends up having one of the rare side effects associated with these vaccines? 

Does that liability go away with full FDA approval then?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 19, 2021, 10:38:43 AM
Absolutely nothing stopping any hospital or business from mandating it today but is there liability to them if an employee is mandated to get it and ends up having one of the rare side effects associated with these vaccines? 


I have not seen that.  I do know that if someone catches COVID in the hospital from an unvaccinated worker, that it could cause liability issues there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on July 19, 2021, 10:43:34 AM

I have not seen that.  I do know that if someone catches COVID in the hospital from an unvaccinated worker, that it could cause liability issues there.

Really?!?!  I didn’t realize that, bit of a conundrum they find themselves in.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 19, 2021, 10:59:39 AM

A hospital can most certainly can mandate it right now - and many have.  The reason others don't is because they have enough trouble finding nurses, custodians and food prep workers as it stands.

My wife believes this is the main reason (and perhaps only reason) her hospital has not mandated it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on July 19, 2021, 11:22:09 AM
My wife believes this is the main reason (and perhaps only reason) her hospital has not mandated it.

My sister is in health care administration in a deep red state and her company mandated vaccines.  Lawsuits were threatened and some people did quit but the mandate stood/stands.  FWIW, she’s become quite conservative but took the vaccine no questions asked.  Her daughter is high risk, though
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 19, 2021, 12:54:43 PM
My sister is in health care administration in a deep red state and her company mandated vaccines.  Lawsuits were threatened and some people did quit but the mandate stood/stands.  FWIW, she’s become quite conservative but took the vaccine no questions asked.  Her daughter is high risk, though

Thanks for adding perspective, Unk. And good on your sister for getting the vaccine.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on July 19, 2021, 01:46:04 PM
Froedtert South's annual golf outing is for the fully vaccinated only.

Nice.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on July 19, 2021, 08:09:37 PM
Inflation? Lol.

Inflation caused by government spending? Lolz.

https://www.youtube.com/v/s0x6UNc3XfQ
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on July 24, 2021, 09:22:23 PM
The Service Economy upended by the rude crazies...

https://www.sfgate.com/food/article/SF-Bay-Area-restaurants-customers-rude-Yelp-review-16333535.php
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on July 25, 2021, 08:21:59 AM
The Service Economy upended by the rude crazies...

https://www.sfgate.com/food/article/SF-Bay-Area-restaurants-customers-rude-Yelp-review-16333535.php


People are bonkers across the board. The article nails it, nice people are super nice. Fringe people are completely overboard. Prior to this year, we’ve had a handful of residential customers blacklisted, mostly due to non-payment/slow payment issues. We’ve added probably two dozen residential customers to the list since May.

Some of these people we’ve been servicing for 20+ years.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on July 25, 2021, 09:47:46 AM
Some of these people we’ve been servicing for 20+ years.

Hot
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on July 25, 2021, 01:17:25 PM
The Service Economy upended by the rude crazies...

https://www.sfgate.com/food/article/SF-Bay-Area-restaurants-customers-rude-Yelp-review-16333535.php

We've experienced this as well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on July 29, 2021, 11:51:50 AM
Grew 6.5% in the second quarter.   

https://news.yahoo.com/u-economy-grows-6-5-130502960.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on July 29, 2021, 11:54:53 AM
Grew 6.5% in the second quarter.   

https://news.yahoo.com/u-economy-grows-6-5-130502960.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

Versus a much higher expectation of 8.5%
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on July 29, 2021, 12:05:25 PM
Versus a much higher expectation of 8.5%

That’s a good thing - not too hot, not too cold.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on July 29, 2021, 12:09:55 PM
Supply chain issues.    Computer chips.   Insane prices for lumber.   Lack of available housing.    Back ahead of pre-pandemic levels.   Imagine if everybody had gotten vaccinated.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on July 29, 2021, 12:29:42 PM
Versus a much higher expectation of 8.5%

Lol, big miss so markets are at ATH
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on July 30, 2021, 08:01:10 PM
Eviction moratorium expires this weekend.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on July 30, 2021, 08:47:24 PM
Eviction moratorium expires this weekend.

It will take many months, if not a year or more, to get all the evictions through the courts.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on July 31, 2021, 06:59:59 AM
It should end.  At this point, I think its causing more harm than good.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on August 03, 2021, 09:02:54 AM
I agree.  It should have ended months ago, frankly.    The eviction pause was created to help during an economy that was halted by covid, with millions out of work.

Now, the economy .. is smoking.  Anyone who wants a job can have one this afternoon .. and the jobs are paying thousands better than just 24 months ago.

Zero reasons to have an eviction moratorium, August 2021, other than we don't like to have homeless people. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on August 03, 2021, 01:28:45 PM
It will take many months, if not a year or more, to get all the evictions through the courts.

Maybe? Structurally at least in Wisconsin evictions have a kind of fast track to completion. While I'm sure it won't go as fast as "normal," I don't think it will be nearly as slow to cut through the backlog as one might think.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on August 03, 2021, 02:55:23 PM
Maybe? Structurally at least in Wisconsin evictions have a kind of fast track to completion. While I'm sure it won't go as fast as "normal," I don't think it will be nearly as slow to cut through the backlog as one might think.

In the states which I have familiarity with (Illinois, Michigan, Indiana mostly), the common practice is to serve the legal 5-day notice to everyone who is a week or so late paying their rent. Five days later, you could file suit, and it took a minimum of 8 weeks to get a court date for an eviction in normal times.  Then it might take another month or more for the sheriff to "set them out".  So add that all up, and that's 3-4 months.  And that doesn't take into account that often, a judge will give them another 30 days to "find the money", which they never do.

Factor in that there are probably 10 times the number of people (or more) behind in their rent right now, and the same number of people in the court system and sheriff's department processing them all, and you tell me how long it will take to physically evict them all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on August 03, 2021, 03:01:58 PM
Wild that so many of you are in favor of kicking people out of their homes when they potentially have 12+ months of back-rent due. I wish that there was a plan to help these people with rent forgiveness. It's wild to punish the unnemployed/underemployed, but also wild to punish the landlords. Give people a path to get back on their feet, imo.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 03, 2021, 03:23:24 PM
Wild that so many of you are in favor of kicking people out of their homes when they potentially have 12+ months of back-rent due. I wish that there was a plan to help these people with rent forgiveness. It's wild to punish the unnemployed/underemployed, but also wild to punish the landlords. Give people a path to get back on their feet, imo.

Nobody is in favor of "kicking people out of their homes", but its ridiculous that there is still a moratorium handling rent/evictions in the same way as we did a year or more ago when things were in a MUCH worse place.

I don't disagree that there should be a path back, but kicking the can further down the road with a further moratorium is not the answer.  You can always find justification to keep it going if you really want to.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on August 03, 2021, 03:51:56 PM
Get the states to pay out the $47 billion put aside for this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 03, 2021, 04:12:30 PM
Get the states to pay out the $47 billion put aside for this.

This is a great point
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on August 03, 2021, 04:26:10 PM
Wild that so many of you are in favor of kicking people out of their homes when they potentially have 12+ months of back-rent due. I wish that there was a plan to help these people with rent forgiveness. It's wild to punish the unnemployed/underemployed, but also wild to punish the landlords. Give people a path to get back on their feet, imo.

Hmm.. Aren't we all interested in evicting someone with 12 months back-rent due?  If not, where do you draw the line?  13 months?  18?  24? 

Honestly .. I think the number of people who were helped by the EM because of COVID was likely a quarter of the total.  The other three quarters were people who just decided to stop paying because paying $0 for rent is better. 

This is similar to what happens from December-April on electric/gas bills when they cannot be shut off.  People don't pay, April 1 rolls around and they are cut off, then magically someone else "moves in" and opens a new account in a new name and the old bill is never paid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 03, 2021, 05:38:41 PM
Extended
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 03, 2021, 06:08:16 PM
Extended

While acknowledging it is likely unconstitutional he said he would be able to get the money out the door while it’s held up in court. 

So much for that oath of office thing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on August 03, 2021, 06:32:49 PM
Well .. on the plus side, if you're going to ignore a law it's kinda refreshing to do it to help poor people instead of, oh, I dunno, furthering your own political power.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 03, 2021, 06:37:48 PM
Well .. on the plus side, if you're going to ignore a law it's kinda refreshing to do it to help poor people instead of, oh, I dunno, furthering your own political power.

Ahhh….good to see whataboutism is back in style.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on August 03, 2021, 06:41:24 PM
Ahhh….good to see whataboutism is back in style.

Coming from you, that’s rich
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on August 03, 2021, 07:12:26 PM
Ahhh….good to see whataboutism is back in style.

It stands on its own without it looking backwards, though. 

"If he's going to ignore a law at least he's doing it to help the poor."   

The look-back is just a nice bonus.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 03, 2021, 08:12:34 PM
It stands on its own without it looking backwards, though. 

"If he's going to ignore a law at least he's doing it to help the poor."   

The look-back is just a nice bonus.

Moral consideration? Ethical consideration? Gross!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 03, 2021, 08:37:41 PM
To do this without also giving help to landlords, especially smaller operators, is bad form IMHO.

They also have bills to pay, families to provide for, kids to put through college, aging parents to care for, etc.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on August 03, 2021, 08:59:51 PM
Moral consideration? Ethical consideration? Gross!

Right you are.  My BAC is out of range and I'm not thinking straight. 


(Blood Arby's Content.)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 03, 2021, 09:01:28 PM
Coming from you, that’s rich

I’m for sure guilty of it, and was correctly called to the carpet for it.  Just figured those that were so offended by it a year ago would be consistent with their outrage.  Oh well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 03, 2021, 09:40:51 PM
To do this without also giving help to landlords, especially smaller operators, is bad form IMHO.

They also have bills to pay, families to provide for, kids to put through college, aging parents to care for, etc.

Which is why that $47 billion needs to get into the hands of rents and landlords alike. That's exactly why it's out there.

Why isn't this money getting dispersed?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 04, 2021, 12:47:44 AM
Which is why that $47 billion needs to get into the hands of rents and landlords alike. That's exactly why it's out there.

Why isn't this money getting dispersed?

Agree 100%.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on August 04, 2021, 06:28:35 AM
I said months ago, the next bailout will be landlords and renters.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 04, 2021, 06:32:27 AM
The text in this CDC extension or “bill”, not sure what to even call it is pretty insane. 

Threatening arrest and jail time to landlords who don’t comply!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 04, 2021, 06:52:58 AM
The text in this CDC extension or “bill”, not sure what to even call it is pretty insane. 

Threatening arrest and jail time to landlords who don’t comply!!

Insane to punish folks who do something illegal?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 04, 2021, 07:06:36 AM
Insane to punish folks who do something illegal?

Illegal says who?  The CDC?

The initial bill has expired.  Supreme Court has already weighed in on this and said the CDC didn’t have the power to extend it.  Biden admitted this and so did the head of the CDC over the past couple days.

Media complained enough, the squad setup a homeless camp on the stairs of the capital, and the administration caved who are now doing an admittedly unconstitutional act against the very oath of office he took.  You can spin it with some moral high ground argument and maybe it’s the right thing to do at the end of the day but this could become a slippery slope.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 04, 2021, 07:43:09 AM
Illegal says who?  The CDC?

The initial bill has expired.  Supreme Court has already weighed in on this and said the CDC didn’t have the power to extend it.  Biden admitted this and so did the head of the CDC over the past couple days.

Media complained enough, the squad setup a homeless camp on the stairs of the capital, and the administration caved who are now doing an admittedly unconstitutional act against the very oath of office he took.  You can spin it with some moral high ground argument and maybe it’s the right thing to do at the end of the day but this could become a slippery slope.

Lol. Got it

Illegal is in the eye of the beholder. Good to know for future law discussion.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 04, 2021, 07:46:38 AM
Lol. Got it

Illegal is in the eye of the beholder. Good to know for future law discussion.

And in your view what law would be broken by these landlords?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on August 04, 2021, 07:48:11 AM
Lol. Got it

Illegal is in the eye of the beholder. Good to know for future law discussion.


Defying a Supreme Court ruling sounds illegal to me. What's the punishment for that?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on August 04, 2021, 07:50:15 AM
Yeah, the SC was pretty clear on it.  The administration is just wasting everyone's time with this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 04, 2021, 09:53:10 AM

Defying a Supreme Court ruling sounds illegal to me. What's the punishment for that?

Good question.

The only article I could find (that I could actually read/understand) is this: https://newrepublic.com/article/148108/president-defies-supreme-court

Interesting discussion, for sure.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on August 04, 2021, 09:55:58 AM

Defying a Supreme Court ruling sounds illegal to me. What's the punishment for that?

Correct me if I am wrong but the Supreme Court ruling left the cdc restrictions in place by a narrow margin.  BK I believe wrote that he isn’t sure it is legal but since it is expiring on X date they should remain. 

Essentially saying a challenge if reinstated will be likely struck down. 

So while it’s pretty clear what everyone will do, nothing is in place to ‘defy’
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on August 04, 2021, 10:29:54 AM
To do this without also giving help to landlords, especially smaller operators, is bad form IMHO.

They also have bills to pay, families to provide for, kids to put through college, aging parents to care for, etc.

But there is a silver lining to this. Small operators, and small investors will go bankrupt, have to sell the properties. They can then be scooped up by Wall Street investors, who will outbid single families who want to own their own home with cash offers. That way Wall Street will now control the single-family home rental market.

That will assuredly lead to lower rents, and better treatment of renters across the board...right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on August 04, 2021, 10:39:07 AM
But there is a silver lining to this. Small operators, and small investors will go bankrupt, have to sell the properties. They can then be scooped up by Wall Street investors, who will outbid single families who want to own their own home with cash offers. That way Wall Street will now control the single-family home rental market.

That will assuredly lead to lower rents, and better treatment of renters across the board...right?

Look at what has happened in Toronto for a glimpse into the future of the housing/renter market.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 04, 2021, 11:08:42 AM
Look at what has happened in Toronto for a glimpse into the future of the housing/renter market.

Ya. Foreign and corporate investors pricing just about everyone out of market.

The financialization/commodification of human needs (shelter, healthcare, etc) in areas of inelastic demand is ruining our country
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on August 04, 2021, 02:05:17 PM
Ya. Foreign and corporate investors pricing just about everyone out of market.

The financialization/commodification of human needs (shelter, healthcare, etc) in areas of inelastic demand is ruining our country

No I'm pretty sure the thing ruining our economy is giving desperately poor people $3k a year, lol
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 06, 2021, 04:01:08 PM
Student loan payments suspended through 1/31/22
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 10, 2021, 09:25:49 AM
From Yahoo Finance:

In the view of at least one major employer, however, this present labor market imbalance may not be so far off from working itself out. Speaking with Yahoo Finance Live on Monday, Panera Brands CEO Niren Chaudhary said current pressures in the labor market are clear, but could be resolved by year-end. 

"I'm actually thinking this is actually a short-term friction between demand and supply," Chaudhary said, "and hopefully things should settle down over the next few months." Panera Brands — which houses Panera Bread, Caribou Coffee, and Einstein Bros. Bagels — employs over 110,000 people across 10 countries.

Chaudhary added that the company has hired some 10,000 workers in the last two months, and expanded not only wages but benefits. Meanwhile, the company has created clearer advancement opportunities to hire and retain talent. Moves that are becoming table stakes in this unprecedented scramble for workers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Sir Lawrence on August 10, 2021, 06:11:40 PM
My firm of about 200 employees issued a vaccination mandate today.  Get the vax or get the axe by November 1.  We are currently at about 75%.  I fear we will lose some quality employees.  Medical excuse accepted if from a MD that one is currently treating with.  No nurse practitioner or chiropractic issued exceptions allowed. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on August 10, 2021, 06:15:22 PM
My firm of about 200 employees issued a vaccination mandate today.  Get the vax or get the axe by November 1.  We are currently at about 75%.  I fear we will lose some quality employees.  Medical excuse accepted if from a MD that one is currently treating with.  No nurse practitioner or chiropractic issued exceptions allowed.

Bravo to your company.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on August 10, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
My firm of about 200 employees issued a vaccination mandate today.  Get the vax or get the axe by November 1.  We are currently at about 75%.  I fear we will lose some quality employees.  Medical excuse accepted if from a MD that one is currently treating with.  No nurse practitioner or chiropractic issued exceptions allowed.

Yup.  I got some anti-vax flack for this in the "ability to attend games" thread, but basically within a few months if you want to work, you will have to be vaccinated.

None of this will be required, several companies are now requiring the vaccine for employment.  No religious exemptions.  Within a few months, this will be far more widespread.

i.e. - a passport will not be needed.  All Americans that work will be vaccinated.  Encourage your "vax hesitant" friends to get it now before they die, and in a few months everyone will have it regardless.

On the "lose quality employees" fear, I've actually seen only the problem employees actually protest.  Good riddance to them.  Lots of vax hesitant coming around (some opting for the ease of J&J), including minorities once they find out 90% of their coworkers have already gotten the jab.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 10, 2021, 07:21:01 PM
Yup.  I got some anti-vax flack for this in the "ability to attend games" thread, but basically within a few months if you want to work, you will have to be vaccinated.

On the "lose quality employees" fear, I've actually seen only the problem employees actually protest.  Good riddance to them.  Lots of vax hesitant coming around (some opting for the ease of J&J), including minorities once they find out 90% of their coworkers have already gotten the jab.

Agree with everything here, rocky.

Companies should want team-first employees who wouldn't intentionally risk the health of their co-workers and/or customers, anyway.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 10, 2021, 07:43:35 PM
If/when the airlines/mass transit starts requiring vax, that'll be the whole she-bang
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Sir Lawrence on August 10, 2021, 09:18:39 PM
But it’s complicated.  One employee has one kidney.  No physician will give this person an exemption, but the fear of a complication from a vaccine, while perhaps unfounded, is very real. This is a decision that messes with financial well being for good employees.  I voted yes, but am worried about replacing really quality people.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on August 10, 2021, 09:43:59 PM
But it’s complicated.

It's really not.  Either you have a medical exemption, or you should be doing it for those few that can't because of a medical exemption.

Yes, there are emotions involved, but as you state, the "fear" is unfounded, and we need to help those with fear to get through this - or else they won't have a job - anywhere.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: CountryRoads on August 10, 2021, 09:56:39 PM
My firm of about 200 employees issued a vaccination mandate today.  Get the vax or get the axe by November 1.  We are currently at about 75%.  I fear we will lose some quality employees.  Medical excuse accepted if from a MD that one is currently treating with.  No nurse practitioner or chiropractic issued exceptions allowed.

Not sure what type of work you do, but that’s a ridiculous policy if a good percentage of employees were able to work from home during the pandemic and they implemented the vaccine mandate along with a return to office plan. Corporate cringe. It’s a different story if one’s career required them to be present (medical field, etc).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 10, 2021, 10:04:12 PM
But it’s complicated.  One employee has one kidney.  No physician will give this person an exemption, but the fear of a complication from a vaccine, while perhaps unfounded, is very real. This is a decision that messes with financial well being for good employees.  I voted yes, but am worried about replacing really quality people.

What about the fear of a deadly, highly contagious virus that preys upon immunity-compromised people?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on August 10, 2021, 11:34:40 PM
Not sure what type of work you do, but that’s a ridiculous policy if a good percentage of employees were able to work from home during the pandemic and they implemented the vaccine mandate along with a return to office plan. Corporate cringe.

Why exactly should remote employees be exempt from ANY corporate policy?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on August 11, 2021, 07:46:08 AM
Why exactly should remote employees be exempt from ANY corporate policy?
HR Rep1 - Sir, not only do you have pornography on your laptop but your random drug test came back positive for heroin and cocaine. Any one of these is grounds for immediate dismissal.

Employee - (leans back, puts feet on table) I work remotely.

HR Rep 2 - Dammit Bob, I told you to check that! Sorry for wasting your time sir.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on August 11, 2021, 07:54:58 AM
But it’s complicated.  One employee has one kidney.  No physician will give this person an exemption, but the fear of a complication from a vaccine, while perhaps unfounded, is very real. This is a decision that messes with financial well being for good employees.  I voted yes, but am worried about replacing really quality people.


Sorry but fear that is "unfounded" isn't really a good excuse.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on August 11, 2021, 07:57:59 AM
HR Rep1 - Sir, not only do you have pornography on your laptop but your random drug test came back positive for heroin and cocaine. Any one of these is grounds for immediate dismissal.

Employee - (leans back, puts feet on table) I work remotely.

HR Rep 2 - Dammit Bob, I told you to check that! Sorry for wasting your time sir.

So we’ve reached the point where people want to lock themselves away from their co-workers in fear of a vaccine?

This has been a fascinating year+
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on August 11, 2021, 09:51:26 AM
So we’ve reached the point where people want to lock themselves away from their co-workers in fear of a vaccine?

This has been a fascinating year+

If only they would lock themselves away for fear of the vaccine. That would be a step in the right direction.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on August 11, 2021, 11:03:30 AM
First office duece in 18 months.  🤘🤘🤘
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on August 11, 2021, 11:48:11 AM
First office duece in 18 months.  🤘🤘🤘

Road wins aren't always easy. Proud of you, bro!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on August 11, 2021, 06:21:36 PM
Why exactly should remote employees be exempt from ANY corporate policy?

Pants.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on August 13, 2021, 05:49:10 PM
Beware the "Delta Delay"

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/massive-china-port-shutdown-raises-210441619.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on August 14, 2021, 08:44:38 AM
We book containers and export all the time. As 2022 has gone on, it's gotten harder to make a booking, longer leadtime for delivery and receipt and more expensive.  And after you book a date, it usually gets delayed a few days to a week.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 20, 2021, 08:30:12 AM
Cutting off jobless benefits early may have hurt state economies

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/20/business/economy/unemployment-benefits-economy-states.html?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20210820&instance_id=38383&nl=dealbook&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=66768&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

When states began cutting off federal unemployment benefits this summer, their governors argued that the move would push people to return to work.

New research suggests that ending the benefits did indeed lead some people to get jobs, but that far more people did not, leaving them — and perhaps also their states’ economies — worse off.

A total of 26 states, all but one with Republican governors, have moved to end the expanded unemployment benefits that have been in place since the pandemic began. Many business owners blame the benefits for discouraging people from returning to work, while supporters argue they have provided a lifeline to people who lost jobs in the pandemic.

Cutting off the benefits left unemployed workers worse off on average. The researchers estimate that workers lost an average of $278 a week in benefits because of the change, and gained just $14 a week in earnings (not $14 an hour, as previously reported here). They compensated by cutting spending by $145 a week — a roughly 20 percent reduction — and thus put less money into their local economies.


For those who reject information in the NYT just because it's in the NYT, here's the actual study (for which there also is a link in the second paragraph of the NYT article):

https://files.michaelstepner.com/pandemicUIexpiration-paper.pdf

From the study:

How did the policy affect income and spending? As Figure 5 shows, UI benefits fell by $278/week
by early August. We see a small (but precisely estimated) rise in earnings of $14/week, making up
around 5 percent of the shortfall from benefit decline. The reduced income was accompanied by
a $145/week (20 percent) fall in spending.


As has been stated many times, unemployment benefits are one of the best ways to help local and national economies. The vast majority of those who receive benefits do not stash them away in brokerage accounts. The vast majority spend that money on food, shelter, clothing, wifi capability, items for children such as diapers and formula, etc. Even those who spend on "luxury" items like cellphones, toys for kids, etc, are putting the money back into the economy.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on August 20, 2021, 09:00:12 AM
I would argue that while jobless benefits certainly have good, short-term economy c benefits, enhanced benefits long-term aren’t great. I mean, if you are just going to talk about the spending that resulted, we may as well just have a universal income policy. But that’s not a good idea either.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on August 20, 2021, 09:43:05 AM
I would argue that while jobless benefits certainly have good, short-term economy c benefits, enhanced benefits long-term aren’t great. I mean, if you are just going to talk about the spending that resulted, we may as well just have a universal income policy. But that’s not a good idea either.

OT, but I'd like to hear why you don't like the idea of ubi
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on August 20, 2021, 09:48:39 AM
OT, but I'd like to hear why you don't like the idea of ubi


Because anything like that should be targeted like the child tax credits, or post-secondary education grants, etc. The “universal” isn’t really needed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on August 20, 2021, 10:19:54 AM

Because anything like that should be targeted like the child tax credits, or post-secondary education grants, etc. The “universal” isn’t really needed.

I think he understands that was the point you were making, he is probably looking for the 'why' you feel that way.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 27, 2021, 08:11:30 AM
As predicted eviction moratorium extension put in place by CDC not exactly constitutionally up to snuff.

Tough week for Uncle Joe.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on August 27, 2021, 08:27:53 AM
Hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on August 27, 2021, 08:32:42 AM
As predicted eviction moratorium extension put in place by CDC not exactly constitutionally up to snuff.

Tough week for Uncle Joe.

1. It was the correct ruling, unfortunately.
2. Being giddy over the fact that hundreds of thousands of your fellow Americans could now lose their homes because you think it's a political victory is kind of gross.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on August 27, 2021, 09:11:50 AM
Hey?

His reaction after reading one of Chico’s posts.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on August 27, 2021, 11:03:32 AM
1. It was the correct ruling, unfortunately.
2. Being giddy over the fact that hundreds of thousands of your fellow Americans could now lose their homes because you think it's a political victory is kind of gross.

1) Being disappointed that 10s of thousands of everyday Americans who own 1 or 2 rental properties aren’t going to go bankrupt/foreclose on their properties is pretty shameful Pakuni.  Not every landlord is Warren Buffet.

2) Get vaccinated, get back to work and hold up your end of the bargain to the rental agreement you signed.  It’s a big bad world out there and life isn’t always fair.

3) Washington is broken.  This problem didn’t show up overnight and Congress has had ample time to hash out a solution.  They’re all useless.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 27, 2021, 04:38:20 PM
I have a client who currently owns his landlord close to $75K in back rent.  He has plenty of money but is rather smug about the fact that he’d rather invest the money in a hot market and worry about paying it later.

I understood it at the time but the moratorium has gone too long
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 27, 2021, 06:37:27 PM
Local governments need to do a better job of distributing the money the feds made available to them to help both renters and landlords.

There are tens of billions of dollars still available.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on August 27, 2021, 07:39:35 PM
I have a client who currently owns his landlord close to $75K in back rent.  He has plenty of money but is rather smug about the fact that he’d rather invest the money in a hot market and worry about paying it later.

I understood it at the time but the moratorium has gone too long
Sorry, but your client is a complete sh!t and is everything that is wrong with people in this country
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 27, 2021, 07:53:36 PM
Sorry, but your client is a complete sh!t and is everything that is wrong with people in this country

FWIW, I was saying I understood the moratorium when it began. 

And I have no love for the dude, he’s an a**. Kind of dude that needs to be pestered and prodded to pay every invoice that is always overdue despite wearing a $50K Rolex
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on August 27, 2021, 08:00:12 PM
FWIW, I was saying I understood the moratorium when it began. 

And I have no love for the dude, he’s an a**. Kind of dude that needs to be pestered and prodded to pay every invoice that is always overdue despite wearing a $50K Rolex
Yeah I didn’t read your comment correctly. He is definitely an a**.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: reinko on August 27, 2021, 08:19:49 PM
I have a client who currently owns his landlord close to $75K in back rent.  He has plenty of money but is rather smug about the fact that he’d rather invest the money in a hot market and worry about paying it later.

I understood it at the time but the moratorium has gone too long

Seems like the kind of client who I would be weary of doing business with.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 27, 2021, 10:14:51 PM
Economy is bullish for Florida funeral homes.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/coronavirus/os-ne-florida-funeral-homes-overwhelmed-with-bodies-covid-19-surge-20210825-3dxrevbjvzffddfpdx6odpqcmm-story.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on August 28, 2021, 08:11:25 AM
Seems like the kind of client who I would be weary of doing business with.

Weary or wary?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on August 28, 2021, 08:53:37 AM
A bunch of states cut off unemployment benefits deciding, as some here have, the cause of labor shortages was too many lazy people feeding off the government trough instead of going to work.
It appears they were wrong.

In all, 26 states have cut off some or all of the pandemic-era unemployment aid before the federal expiration to combat rising concerns over labor shortages. But the early terminations have not had their intended effect.
There is a “zero correlation” between state-level employment growth in July and the timing of the early cancellation of the benefits, according to an analysis by JPMorgan. Similarly, there’s no difference in earnings growth or labor force participation in states that unenrolled from the programs early and those that didn’t.

https://www.yahoo.com/money/workers-sue-states-over-misguided-labor-policy-151938928.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 28, 2021, 10:28:40 AM
Weary or wary?

Weary is actually spot on, typo or not.  As for wary, probably, but unfortunately, in my industry, if I was wary of working with everyone that most businesses/industries would have big red flags with…I wouldn’t have many customers
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on August 28, 2021, 10:32:32 AM
Weary is actually spot on, typo or not.  As for wary, probably, but unfortunately, in my industry, if I was wary of working with everyone that most businesses/industries would have big red flags with…I wouldn’t have many customers

Good to hear wetwork is back at pre-pandemic levels

 ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on August 28, 2021, 11:51:27 AM
Weary is actually spot on, typo or not.  As for wary, probably, but unfortunately, in my industry, if I was wary of working with everyone that most businesses/industries would have big red flags with…I wouldn’t have many customers
Yup. We seldom get to choose our clients.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on August 28, 2021, 01:22:24 PM
Good to hear wetwork is back at pre-pandemic levels

 ;D

I laughed. ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on August 28, 2021, 03:10:39 PM
I understood it at the time but the moratorium has gone too long

I disagree. We're going into the 2nd winter of a multi-year pandemic. Increasing homelessness in the middle of a public health crisis is bad for the population as a whole.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 28, 2021, 05:17:46 PM
I disagree. We're going into the 2nd winter of a multi-year pandemic. Increasing homelessness in the middle of a public health crisis is bad for the population as a whole.

It was not a moratorium based on a pandemic but the accompanying economic turbulence as a result of business shutdowns and lockdowns.  If you think we are in the same place economically as last spring, I don’t know what to tell you. Take the emotion out of it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on August 28, 2021, 09:56:04 PM
It was not a moratorium based on a pandemic but the accompanying economic turbulence as a result of business shutdowns and lockdowns.  If you think we are in the same place economically as last spring, I don’t know what to tell you. Take the emotion out of it.

There's no emotion involved for me, just the threat of lockdowns this fall/winter with the existing breakthrough variants. Really poor timing, imo, but I suppose we'll see.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 29, 2021, 02:20:03 PM
There's no emotion involved for me, just the threat of lockdowns this fall/winter with the existing breakthrough variants. Really poor timing, imo, but I suppose we'll see.

I struggle to see lockdowns happening again. Especially on a national level, for a variety of reasons including uproar and push back from vaccinated people.  That being said, continuing something with vast economic implications and costs in “anticipation” of issues in 2-3 months or more is just not wise or prudent to me.  I’d say the same thing about additional stimulus payments in anticipation of lockdowns or rough months ahead
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on August 29, 2021, 06:38:14 PM
I struggle to see lockdowns happening again. Especially on a national level, for a variety of reasons including uproar and push back from vaccinated people.  That being said, continuing something with vast economic implications and costs in “anticipation” of issues in 2-3 months or more is just not wise or prudent to me.  I’d say the same thing about additional stimulus payments in anticipation of lockdowns or rough months ahead

Do you think that there will be no COVID mitigation measures this fall/winter in the North before we get to the point that hospitals are full like they are down south? So far the covid curve has followed last year nearly exactly as far as severity, time of year, and region of the US.

With regards to the eviction moratorium: Experimenting with changes like this in the middle of a pandemic is a danger to the economy as well as public health. Through all of this, Congress should have acted instead of leaving it up to the supreme court and the CDC to set policy.
 
Additionally, there's $46B aside for landlords impacted by the eviction moratorium. The Trump admin refused to distribute those dollars, and the Biden admin made it a wild maze to try and get at the dollars you're owed as an impacted landlord.  Huge whiff.

Dunno if you're a podcast person, but a few weeks ago there was a good Odd Lots episode with the president of the Dallas Fed that touched briefly (and tangentially) on this question - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-09/dallas-fed-president-rob-kaplan-on-the-economy-and-monetary-policy-right-now
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 29, 2021, 07:08:12 PM
Do you think that there will be no COVID mitigation measures this fall/winter in the North before we get to the point that hospitals are full like they are down south? So far the covid curve has followed last year nearly exactly as far as severity, time of year, and region of the US.

With regards to the eviction moratorium: Experimenting with changes like this in the middle of a pandemic is a danger to the economy as well as public health. Through all of this, Congress should have acted instead of leaving it up to the supreme court and the CDC to set policy.
 
Additionally, there's $46B aside for landlords impacted by the eviction moratorium. The Trump admin refused to distribute those dollars, and the Biden admin made it a wild maze to try and get at the dollars you're owed as an impacted landlord.  Huge whiff.

Dunno if you're a podcast person, but a few weeks ago there was a good Odd Lots episode with the president of the Dallas Fed that touched briefly (and tangentially) on this question - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-09/dallas-fed-president-rob-kaplan-on-the-economy-and-monetary-policy-right-now

No mitigation? No, I’m sure there will be. But mask mandates and potentially capacity limitations. I don’t think we see lockdowns and shelter in place orders that force close businesses and cut off people’s income again, for a variety of reasons.

I don’t disagree that Congress handled it all poorly, but I don’t see it as experimenting, just ending something that should never have been perpetual.  And further, I don’t think it should have been broad brush across the board.  I’m not clamoring for even more government input and oversight, but I think it should have been handled through UEI or the like. But that’s just me. I’m not a fan of continuing economic protections or supplements indefinitely cause COVID is ongoing, irrespective of any number of metrics on the economy and job market
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on August 31, 2021, 07:53:24 AM
From the WSJ:

U.S. workers are quitting their jobs at some of the highest rates in years, the Wall Street Journal says — including many millennials. The rate of people leaving jobs reached 2.8% in April, according to the Labor Department, the highest in at least two decades. In June, some 3.9 million Americans resigned, while the number of job openings jumped to more than 10 million; a record. Some say they are so burned out from pandemic-era work they are leaving without a Plan B, living on their savings and taking online courses in new subjects or brushing up on their skills.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on August 31, 2021, 03:22:29 PM
From the WSJ:

U.S. workers are quitting their jobs at some of the highest rates in years, the Wall Street Journal says — including many millennials. The rate of people leaving jobs reached 2.8% in April, according to the Labor Department, the highest in at least two decades. In June, some 3.9 million Americans resigned, while the number of job openings jumped to more than 10 million; a record. Some say they are so burned out from pandemic-era work they are leaving without a Plan B, living on their savings and taking online courses in new subjects or brushing up on their skills.

I believe this is a good thing, Mike.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on August 31, 2021, 03:44:18 PM
From the WSJ:

U.S. workers are quitting their jobs at some of the highest rates in years, the Wall Street Journal says — including many millennials. The rate of people leaving jobs reached 2.8% in April, according to the Labor Department, the highest in at least two decades. In June, some 3.9 million Americans resigned, while the number of job openings jumped to more than 10 million; a record. Some say they are so burned out from pandemic-era work they are leaving without a Plan B, living on their savings and taking online courses in new subjects or brushing up on their skills.


Anecdotal, my DIL left her job in May because she was completely burnt out of the remote work.  Took the summer off and did some volunteer stuff with the local pet rescue.  Doesn't think she will have trouble re-entering the workforce this Fall because she is contacted nearly daily by people in her network / headhunters.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on August 31, 2021, 04:40:12 PM
I believe this is a good thing, Mike.

I agree. I think it speaks favorably to the job market.  If people are struggling or can’t find work, you don’t willfully leave a job.

This also goes back to what we were speaking of a few months ago.  People talking about the “end” of the traditional office and business travel.   Remote work is great for some jobs and some people, but it’s certainly not for everyone nor is it suddenly the new gold standard because of what happened out of necessity during a pandemic
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 02, 2021, 07:08:04 AM
Well, here's one way to deal with the labor shortage ...

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3736251-mcdonalds-franchise-in-oregon-hiring-14-year-olds-amid-labor-shortage?app=1&mail_subject=pre-market-summary-on-your-portfolio-lojack&utm_campaign=nl-portfolio&utm_content=link-7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha

A McDonald's restaurant in Medford, Oregon is now hiring employees in their mid-teens as companies struggle to hire compete for workers in a tight labor market. 14- and 15-year-olds are allowed to legally work a maximum of three hours on a school day and 23 hours in a week in the state.

"There are always staffing issues, but this is unheard of," the Biddle Road restaurant operator, Heather Coleman told Business Insider. Coleman, whose family has operated McDonald's franchises for 40 years, praises the younger workers' drive and work ethic, along with their ability to grasp the technology "really quickly." She says that the restaurant received about 25 new applications in 2 weeks after opening the door to younger applicants as opposed to disappointing results she got from raising the minimum wage to $15.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on September 02, 2021, 07:12:57 AM
Well, here's one way to deal with the labor shortage ...

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3736251-mcdonalds-franchise-in-oregon-hiring-14-year-olds-amid-labor-shortage?app=1&mail_subject=pre-market-summary-on-your-portfolio-lojack&utm_campaign=nl-portfolio&utm_content=link-7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha

A McDonald's restaurant in Medford, Oregon is now hiring employees in their mid-teens as companies struggle to hire compete for workers in a tight labor market. 14- and 15-year-olds are allowed to legally work a maximum of three hours on a school day and 23 hours in a week in the state.

"There are always staffing issues, but this is unheard of," the Biddle Road restaurant operator, Heather Coleman told Business Insider. Coleman, whose family has operated McDonald's franchises for 40 years, praises the younger workers' drive and work ethic, along with their ability to grasp the technology "really quickly." She says that the restaurant received about 25 new applications in 2 weeks after opening the door to younger applicants as opposed to disappointing results she got from raising the minimum wage to $15.

I honestly don't know why this is news... I was working part time when I was 14.  Maybe these jobs weren't as available to teens in the early 2000s and 2010s? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on September 02, 2021, 07:31:11 AM
14 year olds have been working at McDonald's, grocery stores, etc for years.  My 14 year old worked part-time this summer and loved it.  He wanted to get a second job, but we told him no, he needed to be a kid too (so he moped and played video games).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on September 02, 2021, 08:05:19 AM
14 year olds have been working at McDonald's, grocery stores, etc for years.  My 14 year old worked part-time this summer and loved it.  He wanted to get a second job, but we told him no, he needed to be a kid too (so he moped and played video games).

Good training for adulthood.  ;D
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 02, 2021, 10:59:02 AM
I honestly don't know why this is news... I was working part time when I was 14.  Maybe these jobs weren't as available to teens in the early 2000s and 2010s?

I worked "off the books" when I was 14 but I'm pretty sure you couldn't get hired at a "real job" in Connecticut at that age in the 1970s.

I think the news angle in this particular article is the lengths companies are going to mitigate the labor shortage. Apparently, it's not all that common for companies to go out of their way to reach out to 14-year-olds.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 02, 2021, 12:40:25 PM
GM preparing to halt most North American production.  COVID and the chip shortage.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 03, 2021, 08:43:06 AM
U.S. employers add only 235K jobs in August, far fewer than expected

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/03/business/economy/august-2021-jobs-report.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20210903&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=headline&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=67998&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

The American economy slowed abruptly last month, adding 235,000 jobs, a sharp drop from the huge gains recorded earlier in the summer and an indication that the Delta variant of the coronavirus is putting a damper on hiring.

The Labor Department report on Friday follows a sharp increase in coronavirus cases and deaths that has undermined hopes that restrictions on daily activities were nearing an end.

The unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, compared with 5.4 percent in July. Economists polled by Bloomberg has been looking for gain of 725,000 jobs.

The August showing would have been respectable in prepandemic times. But after gains of 962,000 in June and 1.05 million in July — and with more than eight million people unemployed — it was a sharp deceleration.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 06, 2021, 08:04:14 AM
Two anchors of COVID safety net ending, affecting millions

https://apnews.com/article/covid-19-safety-net-ending-unemployment-evictions-bca43d873a61a9059c72fe15b88b9a9a?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Sept.%206%20AP%20Morning%20Wire&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

Mary Taboniar went 15 months without a paycheck, thanks to the COVID pandemic. A housekeeper at the Hilton Hawaiian Village resort in Honolulu, the single mother of two saw her income completely vanish as the virus devastated the hospitality industry.

For more than a year, Taboniar depended entirely on boosted unemployment benefits and a network of local foodbanks to feed her family. Even this summer as the vaccine rollout took hold and tourists began to travel again, her work was slow to return, peaking at 11 days in August — about half her pre-pandemic workload.

Taboniar is one of millions of Americans for whom Labor Day 2021 represents a perilous crossroads. Two primary anchors of the government’s COVID protection package are ending or have recently ended. Starting Monday, an estimated 8.9 million people will lose all unemployment benefits. A federal eviction moratorium already has expired.

While other aspects of pandemic assistance including rental aid and the expanded Child Tax Credit are still widely available, untold millions of Americans will face Labor Day with a suddenly shrunken social safety net.

“This will be a double whammy of hardship,” said Jamie Contreras, secretary-treasurer of the SEIU, a union that represents custodians in office buildings and food service workers in airports. “We’re not anywhere near done. People still need help. ... For millions of people nothing has changed from a year and a half ago.”

For Taboniar, 43, that means her unemployment benefits will completely disappear — even as her work hours vanish again. A fresh virus surge prompted Hawaii’s governor to recommend that vacationers delay their plans.

“It’s really scaring me,” she said. “How can I pay rent if I don’t have unemployment and my job isn’t back?”

Sectors like hotel housekeepers and office janitorial staffs have been the slowest to recover.

“Our industry is the tip of the spear when it comes to COVID,” said D. Taylor, president of UNITE HERE, a union that represents hotel housekeepers — a field that is “primarily staffed by women and people of color.”

Many of those housekeepers never returned to full employment even as Americans resumed traveling and hotel occupancy rates swelled over the summer.

Taylor said several major hotel chains have moved to permanently cut down on labor costs by reducing levels of service under the guise of COVID. Taboniar’s hotel in Hawaii for example has shifted to cleaning rooms every five days unless the guest specifically requests otherwise in advance. Even as the hotel was at more than 90% occupancy in August, she was only employed for half her usual pre-pandemic number of days.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 07, 2021, 05:24:27 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/09/05/unemployment-benefits-economy/

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-iFU5_XIAQLmeS?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 07, 2021, 05:30:12 PM
Holy predictable, batman.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 07, 2021, 06:07:32 PM
Holy predictable, batman.

Sure. But that's gonna have big consequences for a consumer-based economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 07, 2021, 06:12:29 PM
So is the lack of computer chips.   So is the lack of child care.    So are the lack of builders and contractors in Ida flood areas.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 08:33:25 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/09/10/august-wholesale-prices-rise-8point3percent-on-an-annual-basis-biggest-advance-on-record.html?__twitter_impression=true

Transitory, don’t worry.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 10, 2021, 09:23:56 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/09/10/august-wholesale-prices-rise-8point3percent-on-an-annual-basis-biggest-advance-on-record.html?__twitter_impression=true

Transitory, don’t worry.

Which is exactly why the eviction moratorium, and emergency measures to support low income earners was still needed. Until the world (and the US) gets vaccinated this will continue.

When entire major ports serving the entire world get shut down for COVID, prices rise. When entire plants shut down for COVID, prices rise. This will continue until COVID gets under control, and in the meantime the average wage-earner will suffer.

That is some of the reasons any individual prolonging COVID is a horrible person. Get vaccinated. Promote vaccination, mandate it if necessary. Wear a mask. Promote mask wearing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 09:26:43 AM
Which is exactly why the eviction moratorium, and emergency measures to support low income earners was still needed. Until the world (and the US) gets vaccinated this will continue.

When entire major ports serving the entire world get shut down for COVID, prices rise. When entire plants shut down for COVID, prices rise. This will continue until COVID gets under control, and in the meantime the average wage-earner will suffer.

That is some of the reasons any individual prolonging COVID is a horrible person. Get vaccinated. Promote vaccination, mandate it if necessary. Wear a mask. Promote mask wearing.

Has that been a major issue domestically here?  The shutting down of ports, plants etc? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on September 10, 2021, 09:37:02 AM
Has that been a major issue domestically here?  The shutting down of ports, plants etc?

I don’t know about full shutdowns. But I’ve definitely seen ports and plants slowed significantly due to Covid recently in the US.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 10, 2021, 09:40:16 AM
Has that been a major issue domestically here?  The shutting down of ports, plants etc?

Supply chain is global
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 10, 2021, 09:44:31 AM
Supply chain is global

Exactly. Many on here are far more qualified to discuss the overall impacts, but things like this:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58196477 (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58196477)

Have significant impact on the supply chain and resulting container costs. Those permeate through the entire economy leading to increases in prices for everyone.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: cheebs09 on September 10, 2021, 09:48:31 AM
Supply chain is global

True. My thought is the point he was trying to make is the US policy was fine without the mandate because we weren’t seeing Covid shutdowns at ports and plants like we see in other countries.
My view is purely anecdotal but I have seen it at least limit production in the US recently.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 09:54:51 AM
Supply chain is global

Of course it is but not sure we can help with Covid vaccination rates or messaging globally.  Seems our ports here are doing a pretty good job of limiting disruptions due to covid.  Just did a couple quick reads and doesn’t seem covid is playing much of an issue for our ports as to why they’re so congested.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 09:59:15 AM
True. My thought is the point he was trying to make is the US policy was fine without the mandate because we weren’t seeing Covid shutdowns at ports and plants like we see in other countries.
My view is purely anecdotal but I have seen it at least limit production in the US recently.

Not sure if my initial post really even had a point other then inflation is here to stay despite our eXPeRTS saying it was transitory.  Forgetful blamed it on covid shutting down ports/plants and i assumed he meant domestic ports as that really is all we can control.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 10, 2021, 10:04:06 AM
Of course it is but not sure we can help with Covid vaccination rates or messaging globally.  Seems our ports here are doing a pretty good job of limiting disruptions due to covid.  Just did a couple quick reads and doesn’t seem covid is playing much of an issue for our ports as to why they’re so congested.

That's just because in the US, we let teachers and workers simply die instead of taking proactive measures such as shutting down facilities, or even requiring masks.

When you remove any legal responsibility for worker welfare from the employers, they put money over lives in operation decisions.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 10, 2021, 10:13:54 AM
Of course it is but not sure we can help with Covid vaccination rates or messaging globally.  Seems our ports here are doing a pretty good job of limiting disruptions due to covid.  Just did a couple quick reads and doesn’t seem covid is playing much of an issue for our ports as to why they’re so congested.

I was referring to reasons for the inflation. Global supply chain has been severely disrupted. As a result, decreased supply. As a result, consumer good inflation.

Fix the supply chain, it will fix inflation.

That will take time and reduction in shutdowns due to covid spread.

The US policy on covid/vax is unrelated to the above. In fact, if we really wanted the US to help solve covid related supply chain issues, we'd ignore vax patent protections
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on September 10, 2021, 10:25:19 AM
Of course it is but not sure we can help with Covid vaccination rates or messaging globally.  Seems our ports here are doing a pretty good job of limiting disruptions due to covid.  Just did a couple quick reads and doesn’t seem covid is playing much of an issue for our ports as to why they’re so congested.

Remember when the Suez canal was blocked and how that disrupted supply chains? Take a port closure/slowdown in China and things get much worse quickly.

You've been  disingenuous posting about inflation and then attempting to blame this administration without allowing for other factors.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 10:38:53 AM
Remember when the Suez canal was blocked and how that disrupted supply chains? Take a port closure/slowdown in China and things get much worse quickly.

You've been  disingenuous posting about inflation and then attempting to blame this administration without allowing for other factors.

Guilty as charged.  Do accept the charge you provide cover for this administration by not looking at all the factors as well and focus only on the ones that have nothing to do with domestic policy? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 10, 2021, 10:43:27 AM
Has that been a major issue domestically here?  The shutting down of ports, plants etc?

Yep.
GM has shut down most of its North American plants due to a shortage of chips coming for Southeast Asia.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/03/business/gm-plant-closings-chip-shortage/index.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 10:51:31 AM
Yep.
GM has shut down most of its North American plants due to a shortage of chips coming for Southeast Asia.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/03/business/gm-plant-closings-chip-shortage/index.html

Right, but not cause a bunch of workers got Covid at their NA plants?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on September 10, 2021, 12:13:10 PM
Guilty as charged.  Do accept the charge you provide cover for this administration by not looking at all the factors as well and focus only on the ones that have nothing to do with domestic policy? 

No because I have considered domestic causes, where did I post otherwise? I never posted the only cause for inflation was port closures.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 10, 2021, 12:31:10 PM
Not sure if my initial post really even had a point other then inflation is here to stay despite our eXPeRTS saying it was transitory.  Forgetful blamed it on covid shutting down ports/plants and i assumed he meant domestic ports as that really is all we can control.

Jay Powell is the eXPeRT who has repeatedly called inflation transitory. What kind of total maroon of a president could have appointed such a stoopid Fed chair?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 10, 2021, 12:35:47 PM
Jay Powell is the eXPeRT who has repeatedly called inflation transitory. What kind of total maroon of a president could have appointed such a stoopid Fed chair?

Powell is a lawyer turned I-banker who somehow was selected to guide economic policy on the Fed Board of Governors by Obama and then promoted to chair by Trump.  Its too early to tell but I will be shocked if his tenure is looked back on favorably.  Dude has never given an ounce of concern towards inflation.

I know it was supposed to be a great Trump GOTCHA burn, but he's had bipartisan support for a decade, bafflingly.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 10, 2021, 12:37:24 PM
No because I have considered domestic causes, where did I post otherwise? I never posted the only cause for inflation was port closures.

You have never posted what you thought the causes were. Domestic, international, or otherwise so not sure what you have considered.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on September 10, 2021, 12:40:22 PM
Supply chain is global

Apparently everyone knows that except Chico.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 10, 2021, 12:40:53 PM
Remember when the Suez canal was blocked and how that disrupted supply chains? Take a port closure/slowdown in China and things get much worse quickly.

You've been  disingenuous posting about inflation and then attempting to blame this administration without allowing for other factors.

+1

Current inflation problems are transitory directly result of global supply chain issues secondary to covid shutdowns.

Stop the virus> stop the shutdowns>recover the supply chain
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 10, 2021, 01:48:16 PM
As has always been obvious.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on September 10, 2021, 02:10:39 PM
Powell is a lawyer turned I-banker who somehow was selected to guide economic policy on the Fed Board of Governors by Obama and then promoted to chair by Trump.  Its too early to tell but I will be shocked if his tenure is looked back on favorably.  Dude has never given an ounce of concern towards inflation.

I know it was supposed to be a great Trump GOTCHA burn, but he's had bipartisan support for a decade, bafflingly.

🤣🤣🤣🤣
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on September 10, 2021, 02:30:13 PM
Supply chain is global

I deal with the international container delays ongoing and weekly.

What's amazing is people not understanding increase in lead times as a result. 
"No, we can't improve the lead time because I don't have the raw material yet.  Where have you been the last 18 months?"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 10, 2021, 02:57:04 PM
Powell is a lawyer turned I-banker who somehow was selected to guide economic policy on the Fed Board of Governors by Obama and then promoted to chair by Trump.  Its too early to tell but I will be shocked if his tenure is looked back on favorably.  Dude has never given an ounce of concern towards inflation.

I know it was supposed to be a great Trump GOTCHA burn, but he's had bipartisan support for a decade, bafflingly.

Was just having some fun with the New Chicos ... but yes, thanks for confirming what we all already knew: that the president who constantly claimed to "hire only the best people" appointed this Fed chair that you say will be looked back upon unfavorably.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 10, 2021, 03:03:40 PM
I deal with the international container delays ongoing and weekly.

What's amazing is people not understanding increase in lead times as a result. 
"No, we can't improve the lead time because I don't have the raw material yet.  Where have you been the last 18 months?"

I think its 2 fold.  One people are often dense and slow to adapt.  So they can handle periodic slowdowns or changes in lead times, but when things are fundamentally altered for an extended period of time, they just lose their minds and cant process.

Two, unfortunately, there is some boy who cried wolf aspect to "changes due to COVID".  Plenty of businesses and service industry functions have used COVID as a way to cut back on service, increase lead/wait times, and just provide lower levels of service or product.  Often times its very easy to see.  When it comes to shipping and global logistics, obviously its a very real and very dire set of bottle necks, but people just assume its some excuse.

I do love how various banks, personal finance, or other call centers have been touting "longer than normal wait times due to COVID" but then you get on the phone and many of the reps are dialing in from home offices (you hear TVs, pets, children, etc...) so its not like they are extremely short staffed.  My personal favorite was buying a Google Play gift card for my cousin.  He goes to redeem it and its already been redeemed, turns out its not an uncommon issue.  I call Google (this is probably July of last year)...due to COVID they had ZERO call center representatives.  Too bad, so sad, no email to contact, just wait and see when we decide to restaff otherwise use our FAQ page!!  Just preposterous from a monstrous tech giant 

Was just having some fun with the New Chicos ... but yes, thanks for confirming what we all already knew: that the president who constantly claimed to "hire only the best people" appointed this Fed chair that you say will be looked back upon unfavorably.

Who was appointed into the group by a very un-Trumpian Obama and received near unanimous support on his selection from Senate Dems.  Everyone whiffed, don't pick and choose from my response to justify your agenda.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 10, 2021, 05:06:17 PM
As has always been obvious.

As evidenced by posts here, not so obvious to some
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on September 10, 2021, 06:20:12 PM
+1

Current inflation problems are transitory directly result of global supply chain issues secondary to covid shutdowns.

Stop the virus> stop the shutdowns>recover the supply chain

cap'n aviator glasses had a plan for all of this...what's taking so long. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on September 10, 2021, 06:44:43 PM
cap'n aviator glasses had a plan for all of this...what's taking so long.
White unvaccinated Trumpists being themselves.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 10, 2021, 07:48:56 PM
Everyone whiffed, don't pick and choose from my response to justify your agenda.

OK, boss.

We’ll see if “cap’n aviator glasses” (aka “prez sh1tty diaper”) keeps Powell on.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on September 10, 2021, 09:40:18 PM
White unvaccinated Trumpists being themselves.

you're trying a little too hard smitty.  sometimes you need to sit a few out

ummm, i've been vaxed since january btw
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 10, 2021, 09:57:44 PM
OK, boss.

We’ll see if “cap’n aviator glasses” (aka “prez sh1tty diaper”) keeps Powell on.

I prefer Sleepy Joe. Makes me envision him as a blues guitarist backing up Buddy Guy
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on September 11, 2021, 09:22:08 AM
you're trying a little too hard smitty.  sometimes you need to sit a few out

ummm, i've been vaxed since january btw
Guy who thinks it is perfectly fine for people to remain unvaxxed, thinks its a personal choice, and is vehemently against any sort of vaccine mandate blames Joe Biden for intransigent white unvaccinated Trumpists not getting vaccinated.

Do you ever listen to yourself?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on September 11, 2021, 10:13:06 AM
Its just another irony to throw on the pile that the very people who can't bring themselves to vote for or respect any political figures except old white men in the midst of obvious cognitive decline create derogatory nicknames for the president because... he is an old man in cognitive decline?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: naginiF on September 11, 2021, 10:43:38 AM
Guy who thinks it is perfectly fine for people to remain unvaxxed, thinks its a personal choice, and is vehemently against any sort of vaccine mandate blames Joe Biden for intransigent white unvaccinated Trumpists not getting vaccinated.

Do you ever listen to yourself?
Let's not forget such hits as:
- equating masks to child abuse (followed by accusing someone of actual child abuse)
- promoter of hydroxychloroquine
- defender of ivermectin
- the not so subtle racism of using ALM in response to BLM
- countless conspiracy theories
- etc, etc

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 11, 2021, 11:38:16 AM
Let's not forget such hits as:
- equating masks to child abuse (followed by accusing someone of actual child abuse)
- promoter of hydroxychloroquine
- defender of ivermectin
- the not so subtle racism of using ALM in response to BLM
- countless conspiracy theories
- etc, etc

Firing an employee who wanted to shave her head in solidarity with a friend who had cancer
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on September 11, 2021, 11:56:03 AM
Firing an employee who wanted to shave her head in solidarity with a friend who had cancer

Really? Wow that is low. What a d bag.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 11, 2021, 12:03:32 PM
Really? Wow that is low. What a d bag.

I may be misremembering. He may have just threatened to fire her if she went through with the act
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 11, 2021, 12:05:25 PM
I may be misremembering. He may have just threatened to fire her if she went through with the act


I think he fired her, but then said there were other issues. Of course those issues weren’t disclosed until he bragged about firing her for shaving her head.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on September 11, 2021, 05:20:36 PM
Firing an employee who wanted to shave her head in solidarity with a friend who had cancer


that is a lie!!!  i never fired her for this.  i fired her for not wanting to work 35 hours per week.  had nothing to do with hair styles for her "supposed friend"  she never pursued it and i never brought it up again.  you c@^ks*c#ers just can't get over this and keep trying to censor me with it.  so ya'll can stop with the bullsh!ttt
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on September 11, 2021, 05:21:41 PM

I think he fired her, but then said there were other issues. Of course those issues weren’t disclosed until he bragged about firing her for shaving her head.

i don't take pride in firing anyone
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on September 11, 2021, 05:24:46 PM
Its just another irony to throw on the pile that the very people who can't bring themselves to vote for or respect any political figures except old white men in the midst of obvious cognitive decline create derogatory nicknames for the president because... he is an old man in cognitive decline?

ohhh puhleez  see ya'll got the posse going good-you feel good?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on September 11, 2021, 09:12:18 PM

that is a lie!!!  i never fired her for this.  i fired her for not wanting to work 35 hours per week.  had nothing to do with hair styles for her "supposed friend"  she never pursued it and i never brought it up again.  you c@^ks*c#ers just can't get over this and keep trying to censor me with it.  so ya'll can stop with the bullsh!ttt

So censored you enjoy the... uh... exact same ability to post on the message board where people are "trying to censor you" that you had prior to this happening?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on September 11, 2021, 10:11:19 PM
you c@^ks*c#ers just can't get over this and keep trying to censor me with it.  so ya'll can stop with the bullsh!ttt
Do you understand the meaning of words?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 12, 2021, 07:32:53 AM
nm
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 12, 2021, 07:34:07 AM
Update in today's NYT:

Several recent studies, however, have concluded that the extra payments have played only a small role in this year’s labor shortages. And they found at most a modest increase in employment in states that abandoned the programs — most of them in June — even as millions of jobless workers have had to cut spending, potentially hurting local economies.

“The idea was that there were lots of jobs — it was just that people weren’t looking. That was the narrative,” said Arindrajit Dube, a University of Massachusetts economist who was an author of one of the studies. “I don’t think that story holds up.”

Data released Friday by the Labor Department provided the latest evidence. It showed that the states that cut benefits have experienced job growth similar to — and perhaps slightly slower than — growth in states that retained the benefits. That was true even in the leisure and hospitality sector, where businesses have been particularly vocal in their complaints about the benefits.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on September 12, 2021, 12:53:16 PM
Update in today's NYT:

Several recent studies, however, have concluded that the extra payments have played only a small role in this year’s labor shortages. And they found at most a modest increase in employment in states that abandoned the programs — most of them in June — even as millions of jobless workers have had to cut spending, potentially hurting local economies.

“The idea was that there were lots of jobs — it was just that people weren’t looking. That was the narrative,” said Arindrajit Dube, a University of Massachusetts economist who was an author of one of the studies. “I don’t think that story holds up.”

Data released Friday by the Labor Department provided the latest evidence. It showed that the states that cut benefits have experienced job growth similar to — and perhaps slightly slower than — growth in states that retained the benefits. That was true even in the leisure and hospitality sector, where businesses have been particularly vocal in their complaints about the benefits.

Beating this drum of "if the government gives us more money, we have more money to spend" seems pretty divorced from the original intention of unemployment benefits.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on September 12, 2021, 01:00:42 PM
Beating this drum of "if the government gives us more money, we have more money to spend" seems pretty divorced from the original intention of unemployment benefits.

I think this does tell us something very important.  If you give people who do not make a lot of money more - they put it back into the economy. 

We will have to see the ramifications for inflation, supply chains, etc...but i think it is worthy for the country to review the learnings from this period. 

We have a major income inequality problem that needs to be addressed somehow.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 12, 2021, 01:11:29 PM
Beating this drum of "if the government gives us more money, we have more money to spend" seems pretty divorced from the original intention of unemployment benefits.

Well, the part I highlighted in bold beat the drum of states that cut benefits have experienced job growth similar to — and perhaps slightly slower than — growth in states that retained the benefits.

Had nothing to do with what you said ... but sure, that too.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on September 12, 2021, 08:39:34 PM
I think this does tell us something very important.  If you give people who do not make a lot of money more - they put it back into the economy. 

We will have to see the ramifications for inflation, supply chains, etc...but i think it is worthy for the country to review the learnings from this period. 

We have a major income inequality problem that needs to be addressed somehow.

I definitely agree with all of that.  My only point was that trying to use unemployment benefits as a gateway to any economic goals beyond providing for people who are truly unable to work just isn't the way to go imo.

Well, the part I highlighted in bold beat the drum of states that cut benefits have experienced job growth similar to — and perhaps slightly slower than — growth in states that retained the benefits.

Had nothing to do with what you said ... but sure, that too.

Sure, but while "enhanced unemployment benefits are not connected to job growth" defeats the argument that they're preventing people from being willing to work, it also isn't an argument for enhanced unemployment benefits.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 12, 2021, 09:52:07 PM
Sure, but while "enhanced unemployment benefits are not connected to job growth" defeats the argument that they're preventing people from being willing to work, it also isn't an argument for enhanced unemployment benefits.

Fair.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on September 13, 2021, 01:37:40 PM
shocker!

https://katu.com/news/local/restaurant-owners-in-portland-see-spike-in-applications-as-federal-jobless-benefits-end?fbclid=IwAR05pe-Bq2ejIqVg8J1XQXereWMssamXMNW4ZH8MKid_0VvPqTyS6p1A_y8

The owner at Chef's Table said his team is seeing about 50% more applicants, but this comes at a time when there are still many jobs to fill.

"This is a welcome influx, but I think the people that are coming back in and applying again are going to find out, or know already, that there are massive job openings and we need this level of applications and candidates for a couple of months to fill up," Kurt Huffman said.

Tilden said he's seeing people with 18-month gaps in their resume, and tells KATU News while that may not be a fit for his restaurants, he's viewing those hires on a case-by-case basis.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 13, 2021, 02:20:40 PM
shocker!

https://katu.com/news/local/restaurant-owners-in-portland-see-spike-in-applications-as-federal-jobless-benefits-end?fbclid=IwAR05pe-Bq2ejIqVg8J1XQXereWMssamXMNW4ZH8MKid_0VvPqTyS6p1A_y8

The owner at Chef's Table said his team is seeing about 50% more applicants, but this comes at a time when there are still many jobs to fill.

"This is a welcome influx, but I think the people that are coming back in and applying again are going to find out, or know already, that there are massive job openings and we need this level of applications and candidates for a couple of months to fill up," Kurt Huffman said.

Tilden said he's seeing people with 18-month gaps in their resume, and tells KATU News while that may not be a fit for his restaurants, he's viewing those hires on a case-by-case basis.


Anecdote is not singular for data.
Now, as for the actual data:

States that withdrew early from federal unemployment programs pushed few people back to work and fueled a nearly $2 billion cut in household spending, potentially hurting their local economies, according to new research.
Twenty-six state governors — all Republican, except one — opted out of the pandemic-era programs several weeks before their official expiration on Labor Day. Enhanced benefits were keeping the unemployed from looking for jobs and fueling a labor shortage, they claimed.
That bet seems to have had a limited payoff so far, according to a paper authored by economists and researchers at Columbia University, Harvard University, the University of Massachusetts Amherst and the University of Toronto. The research was published Friday.
The data suggests unemployment benefits aren’t playing a big role in hiring challenges and that other factors are having a larger impact — a similar thrust to other recent research analyzing the policy decisions.
The new paper uses anonymized bank-account data from financial services company Earnin to track 18,648 individuals who were receiving unemployment benefits in late April. Researchers compared individuals in 19 states that withdrew federal benefits in June against those in the 23 states that kept them intact.


https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/23/ending-unemployment-benefits-had-little-impact-on-jobs-study-says.html

But hey, what's a study of 18,648 people across 42 states compared to the experience of two restaurants in Portland?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on September 13, 2021, 03:51:43 PM
Anecdote is not singular for data.
Now, as for the actual data:

States that withdrew early from federal unemployment programs pushed few people back to work and fueled a nearly $2 billion cut in household spending, potentially hurting their local economies, according to new research.
Twenty-six state governors — all Republican, except one — opted out of the pandemic-era programs several weeks before their official expiration on Labor Day. Enhanced benefits were keeping the unemployed from looking for jobs and fueling a labor shortage, they claimed.
That bet seems to have had a limited payoff so far, according to a paper authored by economists and researchers at Columbia University, Harvard University, the University of Massachusetts Amherst and the University of Toronto. The research was published Friday.
The data suggests unemployment benefits aren’t playing a big role in hiring challenges and that other factors are having a larger impact — a similar thrust to other recent research analyzing the policy decisions.
The new paper uses anonymized bank-account data from financial services company Earnin to track 18,648 individuals who were receiving unemployment benefits in late April. Researchers compared individuals in 19 states that withdrew federal benefits in June against those in the 23 states that kept them intact.


https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/23/ending-unemployment-benefits-had-little-impact-on-jobs-study-says.html

But hey, what's a study of 18,648 people across 42 states compared to the experience of two restaurants in Portland?

I'll take real world examples (BTW, this is a restaurant conglomerate) over studies that can be manipulated to get to a preferred outcome.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on September 13, 2021, 04:03:01 PM
I'll take real world examples (BTW, this is a restaurant conglomerate) over studies that can be manipulated to get to a preferred outcome.
LOL. "I'll take the anecdote that aligns with my preferred opinion over all your facts and data."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 13, 2021, 04:11:52 PM
Sounds like a typical COVID argument.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 13, 2021, 04:26:04 PM
I'll take real world examples (BTW, this is a restaurant conglomerate) over studies that can be manipulated to get to a preferred outcome.

Makes sense.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 13, 2021, 04:31:17 PM
Harris Teeter, the large Kroger-owned grocery chain that's based in Charlotte, just announced that it is reducing its hours of operation due to the labor shortage.

It's kind of an odd decision to do this now -- given that unemployment benefits have dried up so lazy workers who have gotten rich on $300/week are supposed to come out of the woodwork to accept even cruddy jobs.

Stores will now be open from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m., which seems long enough anyway. The chain is calling this a "temporary" move.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on September 13, 2021, 04:44:09 PM
This week, I'm making my first business trip since the first week of March 2020.
In Detroit to see a customer and then visit a trade show on EVs and batteries and the supply chain thereof.

Strangely, it was just announced today that my industries big every-other-year trade show to be held in Atlanta at the end of October has decided to go virtual at the last minute.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 13, 2021, 05:24:24 PM
Harris Teeter, the large Kroger-owned grocery chain that's based in Charlotte, just announced that it is reducing its hours of operation due to the labor shortage.

It's kind of an odd decision to do this now -- given that unemployment benefits have dried up so lazy workers who have gotten rich on $300/week are supposed to come out of the woodwork to accept even cruddy jobs.

Stores will now be open from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m., which seems long enough anyway. The chain is calling this a "temporary" move.

I keep seeing stuff like this and its merging two separate issues unfairly.  Assessing "temporary" or short term enhanced Unemployment benefits as a result of a black swan event should not be piggybacked onto "well some jobs should pay better". 

Its a perfectly fine perspective for people to have and I'm not trying to get into any "people are getting rich sitting home collecting $300 a week" nonsense, but this idea that the benefits need to continue cause people that had "undesirable" service or retail jobs pre-pandemic no longer want to do them, all else equal, is not at all compelling to me. 

If people willingly choose to hold out and as a result companies add financial incentives and bonuses to attract workers, great.  But that shouldn't factor into whether or not that $300 continues.  (All hypothetical of course)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on September 13, 2021, 06:24:53 PM
LOL. "I'll take the anecdote that aligns with my preferred opinion over all your facts and data."

Facts have a well known liberal bias.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 13, 2021, 08:45:04 PM
I keep seeing stuff like this and its merging two separate issues unfairly.  Assessing "temporary" or short term enhanced Unemployment benefits as a result of a black swan event should not be piggybacked onto "well some jobs should pay better". 

Its a perfectly fine perspective for people to have and I'm not trying to get into any "people are getting rich sitting home collecting $300 a week" nonsense, but this idea that the benefits need to continue cause people that had "undesirable" service or retail jobs pre-pandemic no longer want to do them, all else equal, is not at all compelling to me. 

If people willingly choose to hold out and as a result companies add financial incentives and bonuses to attract workers, great.  But that shouldn't factor into whether or not that $300 continues.  (All hypothetical of course)

I agree with this. But the flip side is also true. I know several people complaining that "people don't want to work anymore," because they can't fill an open position.

The problem, they have many people applying for the job, but they only want someone with experience, and want to pay them crap.

They too are conflating the issue. The reason they can't fill the job is they are not willing to pay what it requires to hire someone, it isn't because "people just don't want to work anymore."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on September 13, 2021, 08:56:08 PM
I agree with this. But the flip side is also true. I know several people complaining that "people don't want to work anymore," because they can't fill an open position.

The problem, they have many people applying for the job, but they only want someone with experience, and want to pay them crap.

They too are conflating the issue. The reason they can't fill the job is they are not willing to pay what it requires to hire someone, it isn't because "people just don't want to work anymore."

Ding, ding, ding.  My company is offering $5 less on average to hire delivery drivers in my market and keep blaming “covid”.  I’m a simple man, but I can look online and see what we’re offering versus market average.  That isn’t covid, that’s just being cheap because gross profits equal bigger bonuses for upper management.  I know restaurant owners who need help but aren’t offering more to get the help because before COVID they could pay a different amount.  Well, the market has changed.  Figure it out
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 13, 2021, 10:11:10 PM
I agree with this. But the flip side is also true. I know several people complaining that "people don't want to work anymore," because they can't fill an open position.

The problem, they have many people applying for the job, but they only want someone with experience, and want to pay them crap.

They too are conflating the issue. The reason they can't fill the job is they are not willing to pay what it requires to hire someone, it isn't because "people just don't want to work anymore."

Agreed.  Its nuanced on both sides to be sure, I just hate when its presented disingenuously by either side.

Ding, ding, ding.  My company is offering $5 less on average to hire delivery drivers in my market and keep blaming “covid”.  I’m a simple man, but I can look online and see what we’re offering versus market average.  That isn’t covid, that’s just being cheap because gross profits equal bigger bonuses for upper management.  I know restaurant owners who need help but aren’t offering more to get the help because before COVID they could pay a different amount.  Well, the market has changed.  Figure it out

I guess my question would be, what has fundamentally changed for restaurant workers?  Devils advocate, lets say Restaurant X paid $5 an hour plus tips to their servers and had no staff shortage.  Now they want to pay $5 again, why is there no takers?  I'm not trying to be snarky, its a legitimate question.  I guess Im curious how much the market has actually changed versus people with eviction moratoriums, increased UE benefits, stimulus,etc... feeling less pressure to work a job they don't like/doesn't pay enough.  I'm thinking more 20-somethings than those providing for a family.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 13, 2021, 11:25:42 PM
I agree with this. But the flip side is also true. I know several people complaining that "people don't want to work anymore," because they can't fill an open position.

The problem, they have many people applying for the job, but they only want someone with experience, and want to pay them crap.

They too are conflating the issue. The reason they can't fill the job is they are not willing to pay what it requires to hire someone, it isn't because "people just don't want to work anymore."

This.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 14, 2021, 08:15:54 AM
I guess my question would be, what has fundamentally changed for restaurant workers?  Devils advocate, lets say Restaurant X paid $5 an hour plus tips to their servers and had no staff shortage.  Now they want to pay $5 again, why is there no takers?  I'm not trying to be snarky, its a legitimate question.  I guess Im curious how much the market has actually changed versus people with eviction moratoriums, increased UE benefits, stimulus,etc... feeling less pressure to work a job they don't like/doesn't pay enough.  I'm thinking more 20-somethings than those providing for a family.

I can give a couple anecdotes, but they are only that.

1. Time away from the job made them realize how much they are underappreciated and taken advantage of, and in an era where their job is more dangerous because of COVID it wasn't worth it.

2. Time away from the job made them realize that they didn't necessarily need that extra income, and could make by with less if needed (e.g. save money on child care with a stay at home parent). This combined with number 1 take people out of the market without more income.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on September 14, 2021, 08:43:49 AM
Agreed.  Its nuanced on both sides to be sure, I just hate when its presented disingenuously by either side.

I guess my question would be, what has fundamentally changed for restaurant workers?  Devils advocate, lets say Restaurant X paid $5 an hour plus tips to their servers and had no staff shortage.  Now they want to pay $5 again, why is there no takers?  I'm not trying to be snarky, its a legitimate question.  I guess Im curious how much the market has actually changed versus people with eviction moratoriums, increased UE benefits, stimulus,etc... feeling less pressure to work a job they don't like/doesn't pay enough.  I'm thinking more 20-somethings than those providing for a family.

Working hospitality/restaurant sucks a lot of the time because people suck.  When you get away from that and find a happier place, you have to ask yourself at what price is it worth it.

I work a sales and the constant grinding/micro managing from above wears people down.  A lot of co-workers have left and found life to be a lot better.  Apples to oranges but I get it to why the service industry is struggling to retain and rehire people.  I believe in my experiences that you have to invest in your people in meaningful ways or even creative ways to retain them.

I’ll finish by saying it’s a razor thin margin making a restaurant/bar work and that makes it hard for owners.  That means the costs will come down on the customer which is another quandary.  There is no easy answer but without investing in employees, you’re doomed for certain
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 14, 2021, 10:13:03 AM
Appreciate the responses/perspective. Kind of leans what I was getting at I think.  Its a smaller potential workforce for those jobs, for a variety of reasons.

I totally get that sector is often brutal and not terribly desirable.  And the juice not being worth the squeeze in the examples Forgetful mentioned make sense.  I guess I'm just curious where those, that still need the income, are going if they deem these previous careers as unacceptable or unpalatable now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on September 14, 2021, 11:01:41 AM
My theory: Restaurants were too plentiful previously and prices were too low to sustain most of them in pre-pandemic days which led to Americans dining out much more than decades ago. Now that so many workers tired of that grind and are not returning there will need to be price adjustments and probably many restaurants failing if margins don't improve and less Americans can afford to dine out like previously.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 14, 2021, 11:43:20 AM
My theory: Restaurants were too plentiful previously and prices were too low to sustain most of them in pre-pandemic days which led to Americans dining out much more than decades ago. Now that so many workers tired of that grind and are not returning there will need to be price adjustments and probably many restaurants failing if margins don't improve and less Americans can afford to dine out like previously.

I was with you till the last point.  I don't think thats the case.  Those most financially impacted, to a negative extent, by the pandemic, weren't the ones out most often.

I do wonder if this will jumpstart the move to the flat price/no tipping movement.  Its not really something that individual restaurants were able to experiment with.  Most of the test case/transitioned places I knew of were restaurant groups that had economies of scale and ways to shift cost changes around.  But now with restaurants re-opening or popping up in the place of spots that closed during the pandemic, might be a fresh slate to try.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 14, 2021, 11:44:50 AM
I guess I'm just curious where those, that still need the income, are going if they deem these previous careers as unacceptable or unpalatable now.

Lots of help wanted signs out, and lots of those places pay at least as much as restaurant jobs.

For example, every grocery store I go into has a help wanted sign at the door. They all pay at least $15/hour. No college degree necessary. Some offer benefits. Petsmart here had a hiring day here, advertised $16/hour and benefits. Lowes and Home Depot are both looking for help, $16+ benefits. That kind of thing. Some might dislike those jobs, too, or they might like them. But there is stuff out there.

We have two friends who were thinking they'd work a few more years, one 59, the other 61. But they both decided during the pandemic that they didn't really need to work anymore and called it quits. They won't return to the workforce, I don't think.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 14, 2021, 12:21:49 PM
Lots of help wanted signs out, and lots of those places pay at least as much as restaurant jobs.

For example, every grocery store I go into has a help wanted sign at the door. They all pay at least $15/hour. No college degree necessary. Some offer benefits. Petsmart here had a hiring day here, advertised $16/hour and benefits. Lowes and Home Depot are both looking for help, $16+ benefits. That kind of thing. Some might dislike those jobs, too, or they might like them. But there is stuff out there.

We have two friends who were thinking they'd work a few more years, one 59, the other 61. But they both decided during the pandemic that they didn't really need to work anymore and called it quits. They won't return to the workforce, I don't think.

You just called grocery stores "cruddy jobs".  I wasn't just talking restaurants, I meant service/retail in general.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 14, 2021, 12:30:34 PM
Appreciate the responses/perspective. Kind of leans what I was getting at I think.  Its a smaller potential workforce for those jobs, for a variety of reasons.

I totally get that sector is often brutal and not terribly desirable.  And the juice not being worth the squeeze in the examples Forgetful mentioned make sense.  I guess I'm just curious where those, that still need the income, are going if they deem these previous careers as unacceptable or unpalatable now.

I thought I saw a study that showed warehouse/manufacturing was way up lately?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 14, 2021, 12:49:32 PM
You just called grocery stores "cruddy jobs".  I wasn't just talking restaurants, I meant service/retail in general.

It's a different cruddy job, one that could appeal to somebody wanting a change from being a waitress/waiter who had to beg for tips.

Also, all retail isn't equal. For example, Costco and Trader Joe's are considered very good employers, though I don't know if they have the kind of openings that Publix and Kroger do.

As jesmu might have been alluding to, Amazon and others are desperate for warehouse staff.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 14, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Appreciate the responses/perspective. Kind of leans what I was getting at I think.  Its a smaller potential workforce for those jobs, for a variety of reasons.

I totally get that sector is often brutal and not terribly desirable.  And the juice not being worth the squeeze in the examples Forgetful mentioned make sense.  I guess I'm just curious where those, that still need the income, are going if they deem these previous careers as unacceptable or unpalatable now.

One thing to remember is that we were at 3.8% unemployment before COVID. That was historically ridiculously low.

We are now at 5.2%, which is still historically low/average. So we are not talking about a lot of people out of the market. So it doesn't take that many to realize that economically it doesn't work for them to return to the labor market (across all job types/salaries).

And an important question. Does anyone know if Gig workers are still counted in unemployment? During COVID they included them in unemployment, and I'm unsure if they ever backed them out.

There are a decent number of people that have no desire to return to the traditional labor pool (especially for minimum wage) when they can make the same or more in the gig economy.

An example of these impacts occurred when I picked up pizza from a popular place in town. There were about 20 Doordash/Grubhub/Postmates etc, people waiting to pick up orders (not exaggerating, possibly under-estimating). The place was bogged down, because they had only ~6 people working total including waitstaff, cooks, and registers. They were complaining that they can't hire anyone...yet there are 20 gig-workers simply waiting to pick up food.

There is a major new competitor for labor that has grown exponentially.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 14, 2021, 02:41:15 PM


I do wonder if this will jumpstart the move to the flat price/no tipping movement.  Its not really something that individual restaurants were able to experiment with.  Most of the test case/transitioned places I knew of were restaurant groups that had economies of scale and ways to shift cost changes around.  But now with restaurants re-opening or popping up in the place of spots that closed during the pandemic, might be a fresh slate to try.

You know who would really hate the elimination of tipping?  Most servers.

If you are a good server in a decent, moderately busy restaurant, you make way more in tips than most restaurants would be willing to pay you.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on September 14, 2021, 02:43:47 PM
There are a decent number of people that have no desire to return to the traditional labor pool (especially for minimum wage) when they can make the same or more in the gig economy.

I'm not yet convinced that many people doing gig jobs have yet realized that they'll need to pay taxes on that income.  Getting 1099 income is great, until you realize they government still wants their cut and you haven't paid a dime.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 14, 2021, 02:52:01 PM
Gig workers are terrible for everyone except the companies that use them
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 14, 2021, 10:19:57 PM
You just called grocery stores "cruddy jobs".  I wasn't just talking restaurants, I meant service/retail in general.

For example ...

From the Charlotte Observer:

Amazon is hiring more than 3,500 people in the Charlotte region as the company adds new facilities. Pay starts at $15 an hour plus benefits for full-time employees, including career programs and training.

The company is also offering sign-on bonuses of up to $1,000 at some Charlotte locations, as reported by the Observer’s Catherine Muccigrosso.

Full-time and part-time employees are sought in logistics as the company expands in Charlotte, the company said in a news release Tuesday.


Maybe some would find this to be a cruddy job, too. But it's an option, with benefits.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 15, 2021, 08:04:38 AM
For example ...

From the Charlotte Observer:

Amazon is hiring more than 3,500 people in the Charlotte region as the company adds new facilities. Pay starts at $15 an hour plus benefits for full-time employees, including career programs and training.

The company is also offering sign-on bonuses of up to $1,000 at some Charlotte locations, as reported by the Observer’s Catherine Muccigrosso.

Full-time and part-time employees are sought in logistics as the company expands in Charlotte, the company said in a news release Tuesday.


Maybe some would find this to be a cruddy job, too. But it's an option, with benefits.

Quadgraphics in Hartford Wisconsin is advertising on the radio and on billboards in the area.  Full benefits, $17.50 - $33 per hour, $2K signing bonus.  That's enough to be able to buy a home in that area.  There are quite a number of other employers in the area offering similar compensation packages. No one who is unemployed around there is getting much sympathy.

The situation reminds me of the Marquette parents who complain that while their kid qualified for work study, they have been told by their student that they can't find a job anywhere on campus.

Oh, there are plenty of jobs just not too many where you can work whatever schedule you want, and can sit at a desk and do your homework.  LIMO and food service are always hiring.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 15, 2021, 08:28:33 AM
Quadgraphics in Hartford Wisconsin is advertising on the radio and on billboards in the area.  Full benefits, $17.50 - $33 per hour, $2K signing bonus.  That's enough to be able to buy a home in that area.  There are quite a number of other employers in the area offering similar compensation packages. No one who is unemployed around there is getting much sympathy.

The situation reminds me of the Marquette parents who complain that while their kid qualified for work study, they have been told by their student that they can't find a job anywhere on campus.

Oh, there are plenty of jobs just not too many where you can work whatever schedule you want, and can sit at a desk and do your homework.  LIMO and food service are always hiring.

If it sounded like I was giving "sympathy" to those unemployed where good-paying jobs are plentiful, that was not my intention.

I'm saying that a significant number of those who became unemployed during the pandemic have decided to stay that way even after unemployment benefits ended -- something that happened in about half the states a couple months ago. I'm saying that study after study have shown that the "lazy Americans getting fat on unemployment benefits" narrative that some pushed was false. And if anything, your anecdote supports that the narrative is false.

On the other end of the spectrum ...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article254236368.html?

School bus driver is one of the jobs that makes you wonder about what we value. The hours are tough, the responsibility is great and the pay is poor.

Now this essential job is among the many that are hard to fill during the pandemic. A lack of school bus drivers is a problem across North Carolina and the nation.

Last week, the North Carolina Association of Educators held a news conference with Wake County school bus drivers. The NCAE wants the legislature to increase pay for bus drivers. The state pays the drivers $12.75 an hour. Larger school districts supplement the wage, but many districts still pay less than $15 an hour.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 15, 2021, 08:33:52 AM
If it sounded like I was giving "sympathy" to those unemployed where good-paying jobs are plentiful, that was not my intention.

I'm saying that a significant number of those who became unemployed during the pandemic have decided to stay that way even after unemployment benefits ended -- something that happened in about half the states a couple months ago. I'm saying that study after study have shown that the "lazy Americans getting fat on unemployment benefits" narrative that some pushed was false. And if anything, your anecdote supports that the narrative is false.

On the other end of the spectrum ...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article254236368.html?

School bus driver is one of the jobs that makes you wonder about what we value. The hours are tough, the responsibility is great and the pay is poor.

Now this essential job is among the many that are hard to fill during the pandemic. A lack of school bus drivers is a problem across North Carolina and the nation.

Last week, the North Carolina Association of Educators held a news conference with Wake County school bus drivers. The NCAE wants the legislature to increase pay for bus drivers. The state pays the drivers $12.75 an hour. Larger school districts supplement the wage, but many districts still pay less than $15 an hour.

The school district by me pays $23 an hour (starting) and will pay for training and licensure.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on September 15, 2021, 09:13:41 AM
Hospitality jobs are down because of the changes in market conditions.

Table service? Pulled back business travel (many restaurants now closed M-W), limited party sizes (good bye big tips), no/limited capacity, delayed weddings, cancelled life event gatherings, limited concert/sports events, masks in bars. Unreliable hours. The shift from table service to counter and take-out, and the major shift delivery means tips are going elsewhere and many long-time fine dining restaurants just have decided to give it up and not change their business model.

Add in risk of COVID exposure, staff and menu shortages, and a sometimes hostile workplace as a result. The ability to earn tips has been severely reduced so they have found new jobs or made the decision it's not worth their time. The math is easy, the politicians and press are clueless.

I stayed downtown a few nights this past week. I checked in remotely, poured my own beers in the lobby bar self-pour machine, had no maid service, ordered a Door Dash pizza, and self-parked using my card. I didn't see a single Hilton employee in three days except at the breakfast buffet where the preparer was restocking the scrambled egg tray for the morning masses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 15, 2021, 09:37:18 AM
Hospitality jobs are down because of the changes in market conditions.

Table service? Pulled back business travel (many restaurants now closed M-W), limited party sizes (good bye big tips), no/limited capacity, delayed weddings, cancelled life event gatherings, limited concert/sports events, masks in bars. Unreliable hours. The shift from table service to counter and take-out, and the major shift delivery means tips are going elsewhere and many long-time fine dining restaurants just have decided to give it up and not change their business model.

Add in risk of COVID exposure, staff and menu shortages, and a sometimes hostile workplace as a result. The ability to earn tips has been severely reduced so they have found new jobs or made the decision it's not worth their time. The math is easy, the politicians and press are clueless.

I stayed downtown a few nights this past week. I checked in remotely, poured my own beers in the lobby bar self-pour machine, had no maid service, ordered a Door Dash pizza, and self-parked using my card. I didn't see a single Hilton employee in three days except at the breakfast buffet where the preparer was restocking the scrambled egg tray for the morning masses.

No maid service for 3 days?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on September 15, 2021, 09:41:45 AM
I'd be cool with it if tipping culture were a casualty of COVID.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 15, 2021, 10:24:17 AM
No maid service for 3 days?

I stayed at a Marriott property a month or two ago and it was basically housekeeping at request, not a standard turnover.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 15, 2021, 10:33:04 AM
Ditto.  I just needed a couple of towels and put my trash out once.  I can make my own bed and don't make too much of a mess in the bathroom.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 15, 2021, 11:06:18 AM
I stayed in downtown Chicago this weekend. Car was parked by valet, checked in at the front desk with a person, maids cleaned my room and had table service at every bar/restaurant I visited.
YMMV.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 15, 2021, 11:14:14 AM
Will be interesting to see if this is good for Fox News' business:

The company has agreed to abide by Biden's vaccine mandate. The White House even praised them for it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 15, 2021, 11:30:59 AM
I stayed at a Marriott property a month or two ago and it was basically housekeeping at request, not a standard turnover.

I actually kind of would prefer this model. Maybe have a linen closet on each floor where you can deposit old towels and grab fresh ones when needed.

Then maybe be able to hang a door ticket if you want a full clean/or simply schedule one with the front desk.

Infinitely easier and more convenient than current models.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on September 15, 2021, 12:03:07 PM
Will be interesting to see if this is good for Fox News' business:

The company has agreed to abide by Biden's vaccine mandate. The White House even praised them for it.

They agreed because they had already done it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on September 15, 2021, 02:42:30 PM
Hospitality jobs are down because of the changes in market conditions.

Table service? Pulled back business travel (many restaurants now closed M-W), limited party sizes (good bye big tips), no/limited capacity, delayed weddings, cancelled life event gatherings, limited concert/sports events, masks in bars. Unreliable hours. The shift from table service to counter and take-out, and the major shift delivery means tips are going elsewhere and many long-time fine dining restaurants just have decided to give it up and not change their business model.

Add in risk of COVID exposure, staff and menu shortages, and a sometimes hostile workplace as a result. The ability to earn tips has been severely reduced so they have found new jobs or made the decision it's not worth their time. The math is easy, the politicians and press are clueless.

I stayed downtown a few nights this past week. I checked in remotely, poured my own beers in the lobby bar self-pour machine, had no maid service, ordered a Door Dash pizza, and self-parked using my card. I didn't see a single Hilton employee in three days except at the breakfast buffet where the preparer was restocking the scrambled egg tray for the morning masses.

My Hilton Garden Inn - DT Detroit, the restaurant was closed because not enough staff.  They were handing out breakfast in a box as a replacement.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 15, 2021, 04:57:23 PM
I actually kind of would prefer this model. Maybe have a linen closet on each floor where you can deposit old towels and grab fresh ones when needed.

Then maybe be able to hang a door ticket if you want a full clean/or simply schedule one with the front desk.

Infinitely easier and more convenient than current models.

I have no interest in that.  I'm staying at a hotel, not a hostel.  I doubt there would be any sort of reduction in cost or equivalent services to make up for such a change, so that doesn't interest me.

However, Ive stayed at a number of hotels in Asia with a housekeeping light.  Basically you flip a switch inside your room by the door that turns on an indicator if you'd like maid service.  I'm fine with that or an equivalent request made by app or TV menu.  People's preferences may vary, but part of a hotel stay for me is service and amenities, not just a room with a bed.  I don't need Four Seasons, but skeleton service or reduced service Ive experienced during COVID blows.  Like getting Basic Economy functions on a flight while paying for a normal Economy seat.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 15, 2021, 05:32:48 PM
My Hilton Garden Inn - DT Detroit, the restaurant was closed because not enough staff.  They were handing out breakfast in a box as a replacement.

I have been to several hotels that handed out breakfast in a paper bag because of Covid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on September 15, 2021, 05:38:55 PM
I have been to several hotels that handed out breakfast in a paper bag because of Covid.
Cardboard box breakfast for me
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: dgies9156 on September 15, 2021, 10:36:24 PM
I have no interest in that.  I'm staying at a hotel, not a hostel.  I doubt there would be any sort of reduction in cost or equivalent services to make up for such a change, so that doesn't interest me.

However, Ive stayed at a number of hotels in Asia with a housekeeping light.  Basically you flip a switch inside your room by the door that turns on an indicator if you'd like maid service.  I'm fine with that or an equivalent request made by app or TV menu.  People's preferences may vary, but part of a hotel stay for me is service and amenities, not just a room with a bed.  I don't need Four Seasons, but skeleton service or reduced service Ive experienced during COVID blows.  Like getting Basic Economy functions on a flight while paying for a normal Economy seat.

Me too. I want my service when I'm away from home. Period.

What I really HATE is the number of businesses who are cutting costs and blaming Covid-19. Most of them are just plain cheap. Case in point: United Airlines. Their onboard service has reached new lows. The airline says it is Covid. I say it's Commander Scott looking for margin.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on September 16, 2021, 05:08:25 AM
I stayed in downtown Chicago this weekend. Car was parked by valet, checked in at the front desk with a person, maids cleaned my room and had table service at every bar/restaurant I visited.
YMMV.

Superspreader!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 16, 2021, 09:41:12 PM
This is one of our favorite local restaurants. The owner is great and the staff is wonderful. Great food, too.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/charlottefive/c5-food-drink/article254282443.html?

Starting next week, the Loyalist Market is raising prices on its prepared food by $1 per item. But higher food costs aren’t to blame — the money is going to straight to its staff.

Founder Christopher Sottile announced the Matthews market and restaurant’s first ever across-the-board price increase in a video on Instagram, saying: “I feel very confident that as you learn more about the why about what we’re doing, not only will you appreciate what I’m trying to accomplish, but you’ll be willing to back it because of the reasons for it.”

Full time employees at the market known for high-end cheeses and meats make $15/hour. But that “pretty much scrapes the bottom of what a true living wage means,” Sottile said. “Our people deserve more.”


My wife and I already have decided that we're going there next week, and we will happily pay a little more. We're big tippers, too!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 20, 2021, 08:04:15 AM
Here's one major reason for the worker shortage ...

‘The pay is absolute crap’: Child-care workers are quitting rapidly, a red flag for the economy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/09/19/childcare-workers-quit/?utm_campaign=wp_the7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_the7&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34bb31a%2F61486f859d2fda9d41d8c309%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F12%2F41%2F61486f859d2fda9d41d8c309

Hiring and retaining good workers has been tough in the child-care industry for years, but it is escalating into a crisis. Pandemic-fueled staffing challenges threaten to hold back the recovery, as the staffing problems at day cares have a ripple effect across the economy. Without enough employees, day cares are turning away children, leaving parents — especially mothers — unable to return to work.

Nearly 1.6 million moms of children under 17 are still missing from the labor force. They dropped out during the pandemic to care for children and have not been able to return to work as the school and day care situation remains chaotic, especially for unvaccinated children under the age of 12. There are still covid outbreaks occurring at schools, and some child-care centers and after-school programs remain closed or they are accepting fewer children.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 20, 2021, 08:13:23 AM
Obviously
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 20, 2021, 08:28:48 AM
This article claims that all 1.6 million moms of children under 17 "have not been able to return to work."  I am sure that many of these moms *could* return to work.  They are just choosing not to for various reasons - including the virus, the high cost of day care and the enhanced and immediate tax credits.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 20, 2021, 09:38:57 AM
This article claims that all 1.6 million moms of children under 17 "have not been able to return to work."  I am sure that many of these moms *could* return to work.  They are just choosing not to for various reasons - including the virus, the high cost of day care and the enhanced and immediate tax credits.

I think you are missing the point that there is a massive shortage of available child care, meaning, they cannot return to work as there is no where to place their children.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 20, 2021, 09:46:07 AM
A major problem in some metro areas right now is housing costs.

In my area, many are seeing that as their leases expire that the cost of their rentals is going through the roof. An average of a 38% increase with many far far higher.

A family I know just had their lease go to month to month. They received a notification that if they want to stay in their rental they will need to sign a new lease, where their rent increases from $1500 to $2200 a month. $700 a month increase.

They are fortunate that they can afford it, albeit, with now no longer being able to put anything towards savings...and vacations are likely out the window. Most cannot absorb these types of increases.

The result, they will either go bankrupt, or homeless.

Housing costs through the roof in part because older more affordable apartments have been torn down and replaced with more expensive rentals, and investment firms have bought up whole blocks of houses that are prime rental properties. They then immediately corner the market and jack up prices.

Question: Why should these people take a $7.50 an hour job, only to still be bankrupt or homeless? They would need to work 68 hours a week (and that is with no taxes being taken out) just to afford the rent on a $2200 a month property. And there aren't enough cheaper options for all the low paying jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on September 20, 2021, 10:03:52 AM
Back in da Fortran 4 daze der wuz an error message dat red..."garbage in, garbage out," hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 20, 2021, 10:17:50 AM
I think you are missing the point that there is a massive shortage of available child care, meaning, they cannot return to work as there is no where to place their children.


No I am not missing it.  I am saying that claiming that ALL mothers who have not returned to the workforce for that reason is likely not accurate. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 20, 2021, 01:16:02 PM

They are fortunate that they can afford it, albeit, with now no longer being able to put anything towards savings...and vacations are likely out the window. Most cannot absorb these types of increases.

The result, they will either go bankrupt, or homeless.

Housing costs through the roof in part because older more affordable apartments have been torn down and replaced with more expensive rentals, and investment firms have bought up whole blocks of houses that are prime rental properties. They then immediately corner the market and jack up prices.

Question: Why should these people take a $7.50 an hour job, only to still be bankrupt or homeless? They would need to work 68 hours a week (and that is with no taxes being taken out) just to afford the rent on a $2200 a month property. And there aren't enough cheaper options for all the low paying jobs.

Anyone who is working for $7.50 an hour right now hasn't bothered to look for a higher-paying job.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on September 22, 2021, 11:20:11 AM
*hearing about labor shortages everywhere*

*looks at border "problem"*

*sees a simple solution*

*waits on rest of US to come to similar conclusion*

But really, if we have a labor shortage, and a human surplus... why are we not allowing more immigration into the US to fill these jobs?  Birth rates have been declining for decades, and people are living longer.  If we're not going to have children to replenish the population, then we need to adjust our immigration standards to compensate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 22, 2021, 11:28:15 AM
Logical.

Cue the great replacement crowd.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 22, 2021, 12:26:28 PM
*hearing about labor shortages everywhere*

*looks at border "problem"*

*sees a simple solution*

*waits on rest of US to come to similar conclusion*

But really, if we have a labor shortage, and a human surplus... why are we not allowing more immigration into the US to fill these jobs?  Birth rates have been declining for decades, and people are living longer.  If we're not going to have children to replenish the population, then we need to adjust our immigration standards to compensate.

I can't believe you support immigrants stealing our jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 22, 2021, 12:55:59 PM
What needs to happen is real immigration reform with an increased  quota and an efficient, organized, and ethical method of processing applications, as opposed to refusing to enforce the current laws.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 22, 2021, 01:08:54 PM
Agreed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 22, 2021, 01:14:06 PM
What needs to happen is real immigration reform with an increased  quota and an efficient, organized, and ethical method of processing applications, as opposed to refusing to enforce the current laws.

Agreed. That's why this sucks:

During George W. Bush’s presidency the push for bipartisan immigration reform was defeated by a conservative revolt against amnesty for unauthorized immigrants. In 2013 another bipartisan effort failed, with the bill passing the Senate but never coming up for a vote in the GOP-led House. Since then polarization around the issue has only increased.

It's hard to imagine today's GOP, which has been co-opted by a xenophobe, agreeing on any immigration reform policy. Throw in the fact that many of the loudest Dem voices are on the far left, and there would seem to be very little appetite for middle ground.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on September 22, 2021, 01:16:59 PM
Agreed. That's why this sucks:

During George W. Bush’s presidency the push for bipartisan immigration reform was defeated by a conservative revolt against amnesty for unauthorized immigrants. In 2013 another bipartisan effort failed, with the bill passing the Senate but never coming up for a vote in the GOP-led House. Since then polarization around the issue has only increased.

It's hard to imagine today's GOP, which has been co-opted by a xenophobe, agreeing on any immigration reform policy. Throw in the fact that many of the loudest Dem voices are on the far left, and there would seem to be very little appetite for middle ground.

Pretending Democrats are better at this will get you nowhere.


What needs to happen is real immigration reform with an increased  quota and an efficient, organized, and ethical method of processing applications, as opposed to refusing to enforce the current laws.

*checks notes*

Biden has deported 690k asylum seekers using title 42.  Trump only made it to 440k

But I agree, we need to fix immigration and make it much easier.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on September 22, 2021, 02:34:25 PM
*hearing about labor shortages everywhere*

*looks at border "problem"*

*sees a simple solution*

*waits on rest of US to come to similar conclusion*

But really, if we have a labor shortage, and a human surplus... why are we not allowing more immigration into the US to fill these jobs?  Birth rates have been declining for decades, and people are living longer.  If we're not going to have children to replenish the population, then we need to adjust our immigration standards to compensate.

We also have the technology and ability to automate probably upwards of 50% of labor.

If labor shortage is a problem, then invest in automation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on September 22, 2021, 03:15:39 PM
All good discussion.

Of course, we all know they won't actually fix anything or provide meaningful funding to existing programs to solve problems. Why? Cause then they'll have nothing to argue about/divide us about.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on September 22, 2021, 05:33:29 PM
Pretending Democrats are better at this will get you nowhere.




They may be or maybe they aren't. But, even you have to admit that they try - and have tried - to get something done.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 23, 2021, 06:19:42 AM
https://www.ft.com/content/d13b204d-a0c0-4eeb-bbfa-a4b0ce1d1c3f

“The view that unemployment benefits were restraining labour supply and labour growth is completely misguided,” said Gregory Daco, chief US economist at Oxford Economics. “It was certainly one factor but it is not the only one.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on September 23, 2021, 06:54:17 AM
https://www.ft.com/content/d13b204d-a0c0-4eeb-bbfa-a4b0ce1d1c3f

“The view that unemployment benefits were restraining labour supply and labour growth is completely misguided,” said Gregory Daco, chief US economist at Oxford Economics. “It was certainly one factor but it is not the only one.”

If it was a factor how can the view be misguided?  I don’t remember anyone saying it was the only factor.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on September 23, 2021, 07:30:12 AM
Chip shortage is projected to cost auto manufacturers $210 billion in lost revenue.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 23, 2021, 09:33:54 AM
Chip shortage is projected to cost auto manufacturers $210 billion in lost revenue.

Just wait until China positions their invasion of Taiwan
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on September 23, 2021, 10:43:27 AM
Chip shortage is projected to cost auto manufacturers $210 billion in lost revenue.

I was reading about this over the weekend.

The automakers basically use a 20 year old chip design.  The chip makers see it as "old technology" and refuse to invest in new machines to increase output of them.  The chip makers are telling the automakers to switch to the new designs as they already make in extreme high volume for all electronics.  The automakers are all about "reliability" and don't move to new things "quickly" without lots of process validation and they know the "old tech" works and are taking their time moving to the latest and greatest chips.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on September 23, 2021, 11:03:35 AM
A major problem in some metro areas right now is housing costs.

In my area, many are seeing that as their leases expire that the cost of their rentals is going through the roof. An average of a 38% increase with many far far higher.

A family I know just had their lease go to month to month. They received a notification that if they want to stay in their rental they will need to sign a new lease, where their rent increases from $1500 to $2200 a month. $700 a month increase.

They are fortunate that they can afford it, albeit, with now no longer being able to put anything towards savings...and vacations are likely out the window. Most cannot absorb these types of increases.

The result, they will either go bankrupt, or homeless.

Housing costs through the roof in part because older more affordable apartments have been torn down and replaced with more expensive rentals, and investment firms have bought up whole blocks of houses that are prime rental properties. They then immediately corner the market and jack up prices.

Question: Why should these people take a $7.50 an hour job, only to still be bankrupt or homeless? They would need to work 68 hours a week (and that is with no taxes being taken out) just to afford the rent on a $2200 a month property. And there aren't enough cheaper options for all the low paying jobs.


teenagers aren't even making $7.50 an hour. I was driving through a couple small, rural towns last weekend and saw fast food establishments and convenience stores advertising positions for $13 an hour and higher. Higher in cities (I'm seeing up to $2000 signing bonuses for restaurants and as high as $28/hour at a local restaurant/bar). No luxury buildings in those small towns either.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 23, 2021, 11:26:22 AM
teenagers aren't even making $7.50 an hour. I was driving through a couple small, rural towns last weekend and saw fast food establishments and convenience stores advertising positions for $13 an hour and higher. Higher in cities (I'm seeing up to $2000 signing bonuses for restaurants and as high as $28/hour at a local restaurant/bar). No luxury buildings in those small towns either.

Hooray for the free market, right?

Anyhow, the average full-time fast food worker in the U.S. earns a shade under $24,000 a year.
Sticking to the maxim that you should spend no more than 30% of your income on housing, that's about $667 a month for rent.
Good luck with that in any major metro market.
 


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on September 23, 2021, 11:30:52 AM
teenagers aren't even making $7.50 an hour. I was driving through a couple small, rural towns last weekend and saw fast food establishments and convenience stores advertising positions for $13 an hour and higher. Higher in cities (I'm seeing up to $2000 signing bonuses for restaurants and as high as $28/hour at a local restaurant/bar). No luxury buildings in those small towns either.

Assuming that's true (and I see no reason to doubt it is), then the more inexplicable thing is why the Rs don't trip all over themselves to raise the minimum wage to a level that's still below whatever the practical floor of wages being paid right now is but is above it's current level. Why the heck not claim the free PR win unless part of your core message is "keeping the boot on necks of the serfs no matter what."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on September 23, 2021, 11:31:09 AM
Hooray for the free market, right?

Anyhow, the average fast food worker in the U.S. earns a shade under $24,000 a year.
Sticking to the maxim that you should spend no more than 30% of your income on housing, that's about $667 a month for rent.
Good luck with that in any major metro market.

I mean, I know Chicago is "cheap" for a metro market, but running a quick search for 2BR apartments under $1250 I came up with 525 available in the city right now.  Get one of your fast food  coworkers to join you as a roommate, and you can be living large.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on September 23, 2021, 11:33:38 AM
Hooray for the free market, right?

Anyhow, the average full-time fast food worker in the U.S. earns a shade under $24,000 a year.
Sticking to the maxim that you should spend no more than 30% of your income on housing, that's about $667 a month for rent.
Good luck with that in any major metro market.

I think that might be a misleading stat? Most hourly fast food workers are not full time. So, the average may be skewed by including managers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 23, 2021, 11:47:18 AM
I think that might be a misleading stat? Most hourly fast food workers are not full time. So, the average may be skewed by including managers.

I was using this, which lists "Fast Food and Counter Workers."
The median wage (not average, my bad) was "calculated by multiplying the hourly mean wage by a "year-round, full-time" hours figure of 2,080 hours."

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353023.htm
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on September 23, 2021, 12:07:21 PM
I was using this, which lists "Fast Food and Counter Workers."
The median wage (not average, my bad) was "calculated by multiplying the hourly mean wage by a "year-round, full-time" hours figure of 2,080 hours."

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353023.htm

These stats are 16 months old.  A lot has changed in the labor market since then, wouldn't you agree?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 23, 2021, 12:21:09 PM
These stats are 16 months old.  A lot has changed in the labor market since then, wouldn't you agree?

Sure. Median wages have probably tripled.  ::)

Just kidding. They're up 10% from last year, according to this report.
So now they can spend $734 a month on rent. Yuge.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/23/fast-food-wages-climbed-10percent-in-latest-quarter-the-largest-jump-in-years-report-says.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 23, 2021, 12:28:30 PM
I mean, I know Chicago is "cheap" for a metro market, but running a quick search for 2BR apartments under $1250 I came up with 525 available in the city right now.  Get one of your fast food  coworkers to join you as a roommate, and you can be living large.

I'm very curious about where these units are located and the condition they're in. Because, according to this link below, that would be on the low end for any apartment - much less 2BR - in all but the least of Chicago neighborhoods.

https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/il/chicago/


Still, that's 525 apartments in a Metro area with nearly 1.1 million rental units. Not exactly widely available.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jfmu on September 23, 2021, 12:38:27 PM
This is interesting (albeit a little old) on wage and QSR food costs

https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/why-big-mac-costs-more-seattle-austin
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on September 23, 2021, 01:03:49 PM
I'm very curious about where these units are located and the condition they're in. Because, according to this link below, that would be on the low end for any apartment - much less 2BR - in all but the least of Chicago neighborhoods.

https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/il/chicago/


Still, that's 525 apartments in a Metro area with nearly 1.1 million rental units. Not exactly widely available.

It's easy to search :)  They're all over. And not a complete listing of units, just the ones apartments.com knows about.  Not everyone needs or deserves a new fancy apartment.  Especially if you're starting out with a fast food job.
https://www.apartments.com/chicago-il/min-2-bedrooms-under-1250/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 23, 2021, 01:18:21 PM
It's easy to search :)  They're all over. And not a complete listing of units, just the ones apartments.com knows about.  Not everyone needs or deserves a new fancy apartment.  Especially if you're starting out with a fast food job.
https://www.apartments.com/chicago-il/min-2-bedrooms-under-1250/

I'm not saying everyone deserves a new fancy apartment. I'm just pointing out that fast food workers aren't suddenly living high on the hog because - gasp! - their wages have gone up a bit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on September 23, 2021, 01:31:02 PM
I'm not saying everyone deserves a new fancy apartment. I'm just pointing out that fast food workers aren't suddenly living high on the hog because - gasp! - their wages have gone up a bit.

Agreed.  Even though I threw in the "living large", I'm just also countering that 2 fast food workers could also likely survive without public assistance in Chicago.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 23, 2021, 03:31:37 PM
I'm not saying everyone deserves a new fancy apartment. I'm just pointing out that fast food workers aren't suddenly living high on the hog because - gasp! - their wages have gone up a bit.

But I think there is a difference between "high on the hog" and "good luck finding an apartment for $750 a month in a major metro".  Provided you're not living alone, it would be a breeze in Milwaukee and I know plenty of people who lived in decent areas on the North Side of Chicago for $7-800 in 2-3 BR apartments within the last 5-6 years.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 23, 2021, 03:39:59 PM
But I think there is a difference between "high on the hog" and "good luck finding an apartment for $750 a month in a major metro".  Provided you're not living alone, it would be a breeze in Milwaukee and I know plenty of people who lived in decent areas on the North Side of Chicago for $7-800 in 2-3 BR apartments within the last 5-6 years.

Hmmm ... I lived on the North Side of Chicago for my entire time there. By the time we moved to Charlotte, it was hard to find any decent 2BR in any decent neighborhood for under $1,500 ... and that was 2010.

I just decided to fact-check myself. Went to apartments.com and searched for 2BR under $1,000. To say there were slim pickin's on the North Side would be an injustice to the term "slim pickin's." Here was one of the very few, showing what you get for $995: https://www.apartments.com/2039-n-western-ave-chicago-il/sktdsw5/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on September 23, 2021, 03:45:01 PM
Hmmm ... I lived on the North Side of Chicago for my entire time there. By the time we moved to Charlotte, it was hard to find any decent 2BR in any decent neighborhood for under $1,500 ... and that was 2010.

I just decided to fact-check myself. Went to apartments.com and searched for 2BR under $1,000. To say there were slim pickin's on the North Side would be an injustice to the term "slim pickin's." Here was one of the very few, showing what you get for $995: https://www.apartments.com/2039-n-western-ave-chicago-il/sktdsw5/



I'm not sure Wags had Bucktown in mind....
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 23, 2021, 04:14:37 PM

I'm not sure Wags had Bucktown in mind....

I searched from the near North Side all the way up to the Evanston line. I actually was surprised that apartment I linked to was for under $1K, although it's tiny and it looks like shyte.

I don't like arguing for the sake of arguing ... but I really don't think there are too many 2BR apartments in any area on Chicago's North Side that any of us would consider "livable" for under $1K, let alone $7-800.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on September 23, 2021, 04:23:59 PM
But I think there is a difference between "high on the hog" and "good luck finding an apartment for $750 a month in a major metro".  Provided you're not living alone, it would be a breeze in Milwaukee and I know plenty of people who lived in decent areas on the North Side of Chicago for $7-800 in 2-3 BR apartments within the last 5-6 years.

I'd be interested in knowing more about these people living in $700-$800 two- to three-bedroom apartments on the North Side. Where are they?
Average monthly rent of a two-bedroom unit by Chicago neighborhood:

Albany Park - $1,413
Bucktown - $1,800
DePaul - $2,000
Edgewater Beach - $1,822
Edgwater - $1,700
Irving Park - $1,500
Lincoln Park - $2,190
Margate Park - $1,359 (1 bedroom)
Old Town - $2,900
Ravenswood - $1,673
Rogers Park - $1,428
West Rogers Park - $1,365
Wrightwood - $1,995

https://www.renthop.com/average-rent-in/chicago-il

I'm not saying there may not be some great deals out there, but if you're getting a 2+ bedroom on the North Side for under $800, you're very, very much the exception.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on September 23, 2021, 09:39:28 PM
I'd be interested in knowing more about these people living in $700-$800 two- to three-bedroom apartments on the North Side. Where are they?
Average monthly rent of a two-bedroom unit by Chicago neighborhood:

Albany Park - $1,413
Bucktown - $1,800
DePaul - $2,000
Edgewater Beach - $1,822
Edgwater - $1,700
Irving Park - $1,500
Lincoln Park - $2,190
Margate Park - $1,359 (1 bedroom)
Old Town - $2,900
Ravenswood - $1,673
Rogers Park - $1,428
West Rogers Park - $1,365
Wrightwood - $1,995

https://www.renthop.com/average-rent-in/chicago-il

I'm not saying there may not be some great deals out there, but if you're getting a 2+ bedroom on the North Side for under $800, you're very, very much the exception.

Sorry, I worded it poorly on further reads.  I obviously meant paying $7-800 per person in 2-3 BR apartments.

And its changing, but for a long time, so many great apartments for good prices were owner-rented, and those wouldn't show up on the Apartment tracking websites.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on September 23, 2021, 10:46:54 PM
Sorry, I worded it poorly on further reads.  I obviously meant paying $7-800 per person in 2-3 BR apartments.

And its changing, but for a long time, so many great apartments for good prices were owner-rented, and those wouldn't show up on the Apartment tracking websites.

Ah ... that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for clarifying, Wags.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 07, 2021, 08:21:39 AM
Mandates work.

United Airlines, which announced a mandate in August, recently reported that 99 percent of its workers had been vaccinated and that it had received 20,000 applications for about 2,000 flight attendant positions, a much higher ratio than before the pandemic. Tyson Foods reported a 91 percent vaccination rate ahead of a November deadline, compared with less than half before its mandate announcement in August.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 11, 2021, 04:08:20 PM
Re: jobs report..

What happened to the idea that enhanced unemployment benefits were the reason people weren't working?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 11, 2021, 05:02:35 PM
Re: jobs report..

What happened to the idea that enhanced unemployment benefits were the reason people weren't working?


They moved on to demanding more election audits.  ::)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 11, 2021, 11:28:09 PM
Re: jobs report..

What happened to the idea that enhanced unemployment benefits were the reason people weren't working?

I understand the argument on its face. It's logical. Except then the evidence started coming out that it had little to do with unemployment benefits, but by that time they were in double-down and triple-down mode.

Child care is a farce in this country. Child-care workers aren't paid squat, and yet the parents who need it most can't afford it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on October 12, 2021, 07:43:45 AM
Re: Childcare .. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/upshot/child-care-biden.html

Astonishing child-care spending in the EU.

--

.. In honesty, has anyone seen an explanation why the unemployment rate isn't ~2% right now?   

I thought part of receiving unemployment was some form of "have you looked for work this week?" .. I'd think they'd need to ask the question "how did you not get 5 job offers this week?"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 12, 2021, 11:14:32 AM
Re: Childcare .. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/upshot/child-care-biden.html

Astonishing child-care spending in the EU.

--

.. In honesty, has anyone seen an explanation why the unemployment rate isn't ~2% right now?   

I thought part of receiving unemployment was some form of "have you looked for work this week?" .. I'd think they'd need to ask the question "how did you not get 5 job offers this week?"

You've made the mistake of assuming that the unemployment rate only includes those receiving some form of benefits. It includes all who are seeking work, but still unemployed

A lot of people right now can't afford to take many of the jobs, because it would cost more in child care than the job actually pays.

There was a local dentist complaining about not being able to hire a dental assistant. His complaint was either they had no experience, or if they had more experience wanted more pay (he was offering $30k). The problem wasn't people not wanting to work, it was unrealistic expectations of the labor force, that is too low for an experienced person.

They added to the complaint that they used to have no problem getting someone to take the job as a 2nd family income (not needing high pay then). They refused to acknowledge that given current child care costs that isn't going to happen for $30k...instead blaming it on people just not wanting to work anymore.

The labor market has changed. Employers need to realize that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 12, 2021, 12:00:54 PM
You've made the mistake of assuming that the unemployment rate only includes those receiving some form of benefits. It includes all who are seeking work, but still unemployed

A lot of people right now can't afford to take many of the jobs, because it would cost more in child care than the job actually pays.

There was a local dentist complaining about not being able to hire a dental assistant. His complaint was either they had no experience, or if they had more experience wanted more pay (he was offering $30k). The problem wasn't people not wanting to work, it was unrealistic expectations of the labor force, that is too low for an experienced person.

They added to the complaint that they used to have no problem getting someone to take the job as a 2nd family income (not needing high pay then). They refused to acknowledge that given current child care costs that isn't going to happen for $30k...instead blaming it on people just not wanting to work anymore.

The labor market has changed. Employers need to realize that.

I think there is some equilibrium that needs to be found.  I think while its unreasonable for employers to think that pay can be the same as it was in 2018 or some other time pre-pandemic, I think its also unrealistic for employees to suddenly think that all compensation can shift upwards to encapsulate any new costs that may be occurred based on changes in childcare, healthcare, etc... because as much as we all want to be moved on, things are still influx and abnormal.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 12, 2021, 01:04:12 PM
Trickle down any day now....

https://www.post-gazette.com/business/money/2021/10/09/Top-1-of-US-earners-now-hold-more-wealth-than-all-of-the-middle-class/stories/202110090024
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on October 12, 2021, 02:34:48 PM
I think there is some equilibrium that needs to be found.  I think while its unreasonable for employers to think that pay can be the same as it was in 2018 or some other time pre-pandemic, I think its also unrealistic for employees to suddenly think that all compensation can shift upwards to encapsulate any new costs that may be occurred based on changes in childcare, healthcare, etc... because as much as we all want to be moved on, things are still influx and abnormal.

Agree on all that, and I do not know how it will all end.   At the moment, I'd have to guess that there will be a great rotation and those lower-level non-career jobs like hotels, restaurants .. will continue to be unfilled and more and more owners will throw in the towel.

There's a high quality restaurant a block from me that is currently closed due to staffing.  They've been opening and closing over the past 6 months.   If staffing doesn't resolve in XX months, they'll just have to close it up. -- which is my current bet.

The claim of "well, they should pay more" only works for a while.  When the pizza has to be $40 to pay for the cook and waitress, your customers will stay home.

Your local Subway owner makes $50k.  If they have to add $25k more in salary to pay for labor, you might as well close.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on October 12, 2021, 02:42:05 PM
Yeah, my current prediction is that this current "transitory" inflation, is going to cause a lot more medium term pain than is being predicted.  Those that have been running tight budgets, are going to find them suddenly busted, and debt/defaults are going to go way up.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 12, 2021, 02:44:50 PM
Re: Childcare .. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/upshot/child-care-biden.html

Astonishing child-care spending in the EU.

--

.. In honesty, has anyone seen an explanation why the unemployment rate isn't ~2% right now?   

I thought part of receiving unemployment was some form of "have you looked for work this week?" .. I'd think they'd need to ask the question "how did you not get 5 job offers this week?"


People are still receiving advances on the child tax credits. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 12, 2021, 04:21:16 PM
Agree on all that, and I do not know how it will all end.   At the moment, I'd have to guess that there will be a great rotation and those lower-level non-career jobs like hotels, restaurants .. will continue to be unfilled and more and more owners will throw in the towel.

There's a high quality restaurant a block from me that is currently closed due to staffing.  They've been opening and closing over the past 6 months.   If staffing doesn't resolve in XX months, they'll just have to close it up. -- which is my current bet.

The claim of "well, they should pay more" only works for a while.  When the pizza has to be $40 to pay for the cook and waitress, your customers will stay home.

Your local Subway owner makes $50k.  If they have to add $25k more in salary to pay for labor, you might as well close.

Yep, My BIL is in the restaurant industry in NYC area.  He has friends who owned 4-5 good, high quality and successful restaurants.  The 3 owner operators usually took home around $200-300K each a year.  Nice business that had been around for over a decade.  Staffing was brutal, had to add substantial costs there.  Suddenly a restaurant clearing $150K in profit a year has to add another $50K in additional staffing costs.  Still doable but a bit tighter.  Now add reduced traffic and suddenly a thriving business is in a really tough spot.  You don't stay in business that long in a cutthroat industry by suddenly jacking up all your menu prices.  Because the dirty little secret is most of those people who claim "I'd gladly pay more if staff was paid better!"....don't and end up going elsewhere.

Not just confined to the restaurant business, but people outside of business tend to overestimate how much cash companies keep on hand or how big margins really are and further more, how much sudden increases in costs can wreck a thriving business, and thats without myriad uncertainties, supply chain woes, etc...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on October 12, 2021, 04:32:56 PM
I've posted before that I believe we are seeing the results of too many restaurants on top of the public not dining out as frequently as pre-COVID. There might be a major reduction in the number of restaurants just beginning. From all accounts there never was much margin and now the effects are showing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 12, 2021, 05:39:02 PM

People are still receiving advances on the child tax credits.

And millions of people are going to be f-ed come April, not realizing that they are just getting their money that they would get after filing is now getting paid out in advance.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 12, 2021, 06:34:15 PM
And millions of people are going to be f-ed come April, not realizing that they are just getting their money that they would get after filing is now getting paid out in advance.

Why would they be "f-ed"? I thought it was on individuals to be responsible for themselves?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 12, 2021, 07:17:38 PM
Why would they be "f-ed"? I thought it was on individuals to be responsible for themselves?

You can be F-ed as a result of your own actions/mistakes.  I would assume thats what he means, not that they are being screwed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on October 12, 2021, 07:32:00 PM
Funny (not) .. so I got our first child tax credit check and read that I could request the IRS stop sending monthly checks. 

So I followed the directions .. got to the site .. and needed to "verify" my identity by going to ID.me and uploading my drivers' license and a piece of mail, plus a webcam picture of myself right that instant.  I jumped through the hoops, but after 2-3 attempts, it said "Sorry, we can't verify you.  But you can set up a video call and someone will help."  So I did.  The video call lady asked me to hold up my docs to the webcam, and a few minutes later I was verified.   This whole adventure took about an hour.

I could then terminate the child tax credits on the IRS website.  So I did, only to be told "half of your credit will now be stopped.  If you'd like the other half cancelled, have your spouse jump through the same hoops."

Eff that, I wasn't going to make her do another hours worth of nonsense.   So now she gets half a credit each month by check.     >:(
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 12, 2021, 07:52:09 PM
Why would they be "f-ed"? I thought it was on individuals to be responsible for themselves?

You really think the idiots that are getting their Biden bucks each month understand the tax implications?  That the govt is just prepaying their tax credits?

There will be sob story news reports about the family that didn't get their "tax refund" because they already spent that money on stupid sh!t.  Families eating cat food.    It will be heart wrenching.

This is another arguement for a flat tax.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 12, 2021, 08:14:48 PM
You really think the idiots that are getting their Biden bucks each month understand the tax implications?  That the govt is just prepaying their tax credits?

There will be sob story news reports about the family that didn't get their "tax refund" because they already spent that money on stupid sh!t.  Families eating cat food.    It will be heart wrenching.

This is another arguement for a flat tax.

I think most people understand that yes. (I’m sure you can find anecdotal evidence that will make you believe your point is valid though.)

And my understanding is that the benefits were enhanced and only half is being prepaid with the rest coming in April as usual. So people will still get a chunk in April.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 12, 2021, 08:17:01 PM
Funny (not) .. so I got our first child tax credit check and read that I could request the IRS stop sending monthly checks. 

So I followed the directions .. got to the site .. and needed to "verify" my identity by going to ID.me and uploading my drivers' license and a piece of mail, plus a webcam picture of myself right that instant.  I jumped through the hoops, but after 2-3 attempts, it said "Sorry, we can't verify you.  But you can set up a video call and someone will help."  So I did.  The video call lady asked me to hold up my docs to the webcam, and a few minutes later I was verified.   This whole adventure took about an hour.

I could then terminate the child tax credits on the IRS website.  So I did, only to be told "half of your credit will now be stopped.  If you'd like the other half cancelled, have your spouse jump through the same hoops."

Eff that, I wasn't going to make her do another hours worth of nonsense.   So now she gets half a credit each month by check.     >:(

Why would you want to have them stop sending you checks?  It seems that it would be easier, if you are worried about a penalty-inducing tax bill in April, to simply pocket the money and send it back as an estimated tax payment.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 12, 2021, 09:54:34 PM
Yep, My BIL is in the restaurant industry in NYC area.  He has friends who owned 4-5 good, high quality and successful restaurants.  The 3 owner operators usually took home around $200-300K each a year.  Nice business that had been around for over a decade.  Staffing was brutal, had to add substantial costs there.  Suddenly a restaurant clearing $150K in profit a year has to add another $50K in additional staffing costs.  Still doable but a bit tighter.  Now add reduced traffic and suddenly a thriving business is in a really tough spot.  You don't stay in business that long in a cutthroat industry by suddenly jacking up all your menu prices.  Because the dirty little secret is most of those people who claim "I'd gladly pay more if staff was paid better!"....don't and end up going elsewhere.

Not just confined to the restaurant business, but people outside of business tend to overestimate how much cash companies keep on hand or how big margins really are and further more, how much sudden increases in costs can wreck a thriving business, and thats without myriad uncertainties, supply chain woes, etc...

Nice little family-owned restaurant in the town where I live got some pub during the worst of the pandemic for making lunches for poor kids who weren’t in school and therefore weren’t getting school lunches.

A couple months ago, they announced that they were gonna raise the prices of every entree and sandwich on the menu by $1, with every penny going to their servers and support staff.

My wife and I have gone twice since the price hikes went into effect. We are happy to support such great members of our community. Both times we went, there were very nice turnouts; both were weeknights.

I agree that there will be people who will say, “Screw that, I ain’t paying more.” But I think a LOT of people know what’s what and would appreciate a restaurant handling things the way the restaurant I mentioned did.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 12, 2021, 11:00:20 PM
You really think the idiots that are getting their Biden bucks each month understand the tax implications?  That the govt is just prepaying their tax credits?

There will be sob story news reports about the family that didn't get their "tax refund" because they already spent that money on stupid sh!t.  Families eating cat food.    It will be heart wrenching.

This is another arguement for a flat tax.

Oh wow, I had no idea you were this stupid.

That's so embarrassing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 13, 2021, 05:54:07 AM
Oh wow, I had no idea you were this stupid.

That's so embarrassing.

That's substantive.

I would have put you down as a "millionaires and billionaires don't pay their fair share" due to "loopholes" kinda guy.  Guess you like all those tax deductions. Personal interest over the public good? Goose and gander, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: real chili 83 on October 13, 2021, 06:08:33 AM
Zig, be quiet now.  Didn’t you hear, Hards says you are stupid and embarrassing. He’s so salient and profound.

Remember, he only has to be tolerant of just those that think exactly like him. No one else.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 13, 2021, 06:13:31 AM
Zig, be quiet now.  Didn’t you hear, Hards says you are stupid and embarrassing. He’s so salient and profound.

Remember, he only has to be tolerant of just those that think exactly like him. No one else.

Coexist.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: real chili 83 on October 13, 2021, 06:29:15 AM
Zig, wow, a flat tax?  In my opinion, that is very flawed policy.  If you don't mind, let me share with you some of my reasoning.....

Thanks for sharing your idea.  I appreciate the exchange.  Have a great day!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 13, 2021, 07:13:51 AM
That's substantive.

I would have put you down as a "millionaires and billionaires don't pay their fair share" due to "loopholes" kinda guy.  Guess you like all those tax deductions. Personal interest over the public good? Goose and gander, hey?

Ken Griffin spent about $50 million to keep Illinois' income tax flat.
Kinda tells you all you need to know about which system benefits billionaires most, no?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 13, 2021, 07:26:43 AM
If we are going to go down this rabbit hole...

I like the concept of a flat tax.   Personal exemption to $30k, couples to $50k, $5k per kid.   Everything above that taxed to 20% (Negotiable)    The problem for me is that I don't see how you get at all of the money being stashed offshore or in other tax dodges.   
Taxes on a postcard?  Great concept.   Actual execution?   Uhhhhhhh.......
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 13, 2021, 07:58:05 AM
Zig, wow, a flat tax?  In my opinion, that is very flawed policy.  If you don't mind, let me share with you some of my reasoning.....

Thanks for sharing your idea.  I appreciate the exchange.  Have a great day!


Oh wow, I had no idea you were this stupid.

That's so embarrassing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 13, 2021, 08:08:53 AM
NC's largest school district bumps up bus-driver pay to lure back those who left during the pandemic and/or attract new drivers.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/education/article254947497.html#storylink=cpy

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools are still short dozens of bus drivers nearly two months into the school year, despite aggressive recruitment efforts, including hosting multiple job fairs and offering bonuses.

Now, the school district will bump up the hourly wage for drivers in hopes they can attract more staff. On Tuesday, the Board of Education unanimously approved increasing the starting wage from $15.75 an hour to $17.75.

The district also announced full-time "guest teacher" positions because it's been having trouble getting substitute teachers. They will receive $150 per day for every school is in session during the academic year.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 13, 2021, 08:11:03 AM
The answer to your retirement boredom.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on October 13, 2021, 09:46:51 AM
Why would you want to have them stop sending you checks?  It seems that it would be easier, if you are worried about a penalty-inducing tax bill in April, to simply pocket the money and send it back as an estimated tax payment.

I don't want to deposit the checks each month .. don't want the mail.

I don't submit estimated tax payments.  I want to deal with taxes once a year, in April.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on October 13, 2021, 09:58:51 AM

Remember, he only has to be tolerant of just those that think exactly like him. No one else.

Tolerance paradox.

has nobody looked this up since I've been saying it on every post that says something along these lines?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 13, 2021, 10:02:19 AM
I don't want to deposit the checks each month .. don't want the mail.

I don't submit estimated tax payments.  I want to deal with taxes once a year, in April.


But you failed to do that when you spent an hour on the phone trying to get them to stop giving you an interest free loan.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on October 13, 2021, 11:08:11 AM

But you failed to do that when you spent an hour on the phone trying to get them to stop giving you an interest free loan.

#sadtrombone

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 13, 2021, 12:45:45 PM
That's substantive.

I would have put you down as a "millionaires and billionaires don't pay their fair share" due to "loopholes" kinda guy.  Guess you like all those tax deductions. Personal interest over the public good? Goose and gander, hey?

Those are nice strawman arguments.  A progressive tax system is much better.  Flat tax is archaic and regressive.

For Christ's sake, just google the countries that use a flat tax.  That isn't company you'd want the US to keep.

Stick to jizz mopping.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 13, 2021, 12:50:30 PM
Zig, wow, a flat tax?  In my opinion, that is very flawed policy.  If you don't mind, let me share with you some of my reasoning.....

Thanks for sharing your idea.  I appreciate the exchange.  Have a great day!


I shouldn't need to educate you on the stupidity of a flat tax.  I think it's one of those things that sounds good, but when you do five minutes of reading on how awful it actually is, you understand why only backwards countries use it.

So, I guess you didn't actually do any analysis, you just 'used your common sense'.  That's the problem with common sense, it doesn't require you to actually think.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 13, 2021, 01:19:26 PM
I shouldn't need to educate you on the stupidity of a flat tax.  I think it's one of those things that sounds good, but when you do five minutes of reading on how awful it actually is, you understand why only backwards countries use it.

So, I guess you didn't actually do any analysis, you just 'used your common sense'.  That's the problem with common sense, it doesn't require you to actually think.

You are babbling like jockitch.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 13, 2021, 01:23:31 PM
You are babbling like jockitch.

You're cute when you're mad.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 13, 2021, 02:16:25 PM
You're cute when you're mad.

It's OK, pumpkin.  I'd be offended too if I was compared to jockitch.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 13, 2021, 02:52:59 PM
You are babbling like jockitch.

That's substantive.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 13, 2021, 03:40:27 PM
That's substantive.

You're cute when you're mad.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 13, 2021, 04:42:22 PM
It's OK, pumpkin.  I'd be offended too if I was compared to jockitch.

I'm embarrassed for you that you thought that was a good burn.

You're slippin'.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 13, 2021, 05:31:35 PM
You're cute when you're mad.

But not only when I'm mad.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on October 13, 2021, 09:10:33 PM
So the covid economy is all good eh?

(https://stockhead.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Hot-Money.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 13, 2021, 10:35:55 PM
So the covid economy is all good eh?

(https://stockhead.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Hot-Money.gif)

Is this a picture describing the current state of the economy, or this thread...both seem fitting.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 14, 2021, 06:16:45 AM
So the covid economy is all good eh?

(https://stockhead.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Hot-Money.gif)

No it's bad, but according to Zigs we just need to fix it with a flat tax.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 14, 2021, 08:32:38 AM
No it's bad, but according to Zigs we just need to fix it with a flat tax.

OK we can drop it now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 14, 2021, 11:24:40 AM
Inflation?

https://youtu.be/_ha3hiw55MY
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 14, 2021, 04:10:37 PM
Inflation?

https://youtu.be/_ha3hiw55MY

White House COS thinks inflation is a “high class problem”. #Tone Deaf
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 15, 2021, 01:45:17 PM
White House COS thinks inflation is a “high class problem”. #Tone Deaf

Just looked up the quote. He said "high class" as in secondary problems. The rest of the quote is - "We wouldn't have had them if the unemployment rate was still 10%," he continued. "We would instead have had a much worse problem."

Makes sense. Inflation is a problem, but not as bad as record unemployment. We're getting there, once the supply chain issues start abating.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 15, 2021, 02:56:30 PM
Wouldn't it be wonderful if we were able to remember the true meaning of Christmas?


Since rampant consumerism may be a lot tougher this year.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 15, 2021, 02:57:17 PM
White House COS thinks inflation is a “high class problem”. #Tone Deaf

Inflation, as defined by increase of cost of goods due to increase in money supply, is not evident.

Therefore, whatever increased costs of good we are currently seeing is likely transitory secondary to supply chain/logistics difficulties.

We should, imo, be focusing on improving domestic manufacturing to avoid this problem in the future. Unfortunately, corporate interests are against this idea.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 15, 2021, 11:21:51 PM
Inflation, as defined by increase of cost of goods due to increase in money supply, is not evident.

Therefore, whatever increased costs of good we are currently seeing is likely transitory secondary to supply chain/logistics difficulties.

We should, imo, be focusing on improving domestic manufacturing to avoid this problem in the future. Unfortunately, corporate interests are against this idea.

Larry Summers and I very much disagree with this analysis.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 16, 2021, 12:02:34 PM
Larry Summers and I very much disagree with this analysis.

Larry's been predicting apocalyptic inflation since January, and nothing close to what he forecast has materialized.
The problem with an appeal to authority argument is that it only works when the authority is right.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 16, 2021, 05:32:58 PM
Larry's been predicting apocalyptic inflation since January, and nothing close to what he forecast has materialized.
The problem with an appeal to authority argument is that it only works when the authority is right.

Economists and weather people are never held accountable for being wrong.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 16, 2021, 06:32:03 PM
Wouldn't it be wonderful if we were able to remember the true meaning of Christmas?


Since rampant consumerism may be a lot tougher this year.

The war on consumerism!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 16, 2021, 08:46:13 PM
Economists and weather people are never held accountable for being wrong.

500 economists?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on October 17, 2021, 12:26:35 PM
Very low on common items at my local grocery stores in Chicago. Only one brand option for lots of common things like flour, chips, oat milk, and canned beans. Spoke to an associate at Whole Foods and they said that it's not high demand (yet). They get shipments daily, and some things just stopped coming in for the last ~month.

How long until a rush on other common items a la the great toilet paper shortage of 2020?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 17, 2021, 04:56:49 PM
Economists and weather people are never held accountable for being wrong.

Cannot disagree. Paul Krugman predicted a depression when Trump was elected.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 17, 2021, 07:01:42 PM
Cannot disagree. Paul Krugman predicted a depression when Trump was elected.

Do you have a Source?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 17, 2021, 07:06:02 PM
Do you have a Source?

I have a source.  Paul Krugman is frequently wrong as all get out.

He should stop prognosticating.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 17, 2021, 07:15:11 PM
Do you have a Source?

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 17, 2021, 09:45:55 PM
Very low on common items at my local grocery stores in Chicago. Only one brand option for lots of common things like flour, chips, oat milk, and canned beans. Spoke to an associate at Whole Foods and they said that it's not high demand (yet). They get shipments daily, and some things just stopped coming in for the last ~month.

How long until a rush on other common items a la the great toilet paper shortage of 2020?

One thing that there has strangely been a shortage of the last month or two: Gatorade/Powerade. I like it for when I umpire and golf, and it's been hard to find a good supply of it at Charlotte-area grocery stores. Weird.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 17, 2021, 09:47:32 PM
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055

As I thought. Lenny just made something up. But I’ll let you guys continue to search for a source.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 17, 2021, 10:18:21 PM
As I thought. Lenny just made something up. But I’ll let you guys continue to search for a source.

A direct quote from the economist Lenny mentioned saying exactly what he said he predicted isn’t a source? Did you even read the link?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 17, 2021, 10:27:02 PM
A direct quote from the economist Lenny mentioned saying exactly what he said he predicted isn’t a source? Did you even read the link?

Lenny said ‘depression’. Krugman said ‘recession’.

Of all people here, I would have thought that you would know the difference.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 17, 2021, 10:33:45 PM
Lenny said ‘depression’. Krugman said ‘recession’.

Of all people here, I would have thought that you would know the difference.

From the article, from the esteemed Krugman’s own pen…

“So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight”

A recession that with no end, lasting for years, sounds awfully like…a depression. 

Earlier in the article, speaking to the market plunge after Trump’s win…” If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.”

If you’re saying “Lenny is a liar, Krugman never said depression”, sure he didn’t use exact word.  But that’s like me saying “nobody is gonna beat Marquette this year, there is no other outcome possible or likely” and then claiming “I never actual let  said Marquette would go undefeated or win a title” when they lose, when everyone knows what I actually meant
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 17, 2021, 10:44:45 PM
From the article, from the esteemed Krugman’s own pen…

“So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight”

A recession that with no end, lasting for years, sounds awfully like…a depression. 

Earlier in the article, speaking to the market plunge after Trump’s win…” If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.”

If you’re saying “Lenny is a liar, Krugman never said depression”, sure he didn’t use exact word.  But that’s like me saying “nobody is gonna beat Marquette this year, there is no other outcome possible or likely” and then claiming “I never actual let  said Marquette would go undefeated or win a title” when they lose, when everyone knows what I actually meant

I have too much respect for Lenny to call him a liar. He just misspoke by accident.

Words have meanings. We need to acknowledge that. Your analogy makes no sense.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on October 18, 2021, 05:27:12 AM
One thing that there has strangely been a shortage of the last month or two: Gatorade/Powerade. I like it for when I umpire and golf, and it's been hard to find a good supply of it at Charlotte-area grocery stores. Weird.



Try mixin' water and bleach instead , hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 18, 2021, 06:03:45 AM


Try mixin' water and bleach instead , hey?

Wtf
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on October 18, 2021, 06:26:45 AM


Try mixin' water and bleach instead , hey?

It was Trump’s idea first, give proper credit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 18, 2021, 06:36:19 AM
I don't care for your pilitical views, so while I work on your teeth, I am going to have you rinse with this bleach and water mixture I have been working on. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 18, 2021, 06:44:33 AM


Try mixin' water and bleach instead , hey?

I guess a post like this means you're jealous of roQQet, nu?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 18, 2021, 08:45:01 AM
Wtf
Not to worry, real chili will be along any moment to decry the lack civility
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 18, 2021, 10:35:04 AM


Try mixin' water and bleach instead , hey?

So now you've devolved into such a whacko that you are suggesting fellow posters kill themselves?

Quite the leap there, old man.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 18, 2021, 03:09:37 PM
So now you've devolved into such a whacko that you are suggesting fellow posters kill themselves?

Quite the leap there, old man.

At least he says it in English.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 18, 2021, 06:45:24 PM
From the article, from the esteemed Krugman’s own pen…

“So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight”

A recession that with no end, lasting for years, sounds awfully like…a depression. 

Earlier in the article, speaking to the market plunge after Trump’s win…” If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.”

If you’re saying “Lenny is a liar, Krugman never said depression”, sure he didn’t use exact word.  But that’s like me saying “nobody is gonna beat Marquette this year, there is no other outcome possible or likely” and then claiming “I never actual let  said Marquette would go undefeated or win a title” when they lose, when everyone knows what I actually meant

Wags

A global recession with no end in sight from which the markets will never recover - what Krugman predicted - is not only a depression, but because of his use of the word never it’s the mother of all depressions.

Recessions are by definition short lived. When they have the elements that Krugman predicted they turn into depressions. Krugman, of course, knew this. Obviously Jockey and 82 didn’t.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 18, 2021, 07:23:42 PM
Wags

A global recession with no end in sight from which the markets will never recover - what Krugman predicted - is not only a depression, but because of his use of the word never it’s the mother of all depressions.

Recessions are by definition short lived. When they have the elements that Krugman predicted they turn into depressions. Krugman, of course, knew this. Obviously Jockey and 82 didn’t.

A "journalist" and an underwear maker.  Both solid sources on economics.   ::)

I'd almost rather hear jesmu's socialist takes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on October 18, 2021, 08:20:28 PM
A "journalist" and an underwear maker.  Both solid sources on economics.   ::)

I'd almost rather hear jesmu's socialist takes.

come on zig, dr turgid alumnee is the end all be all man of the stay thirsty world ya know.  mvp in his own mind
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 18, 2021, 08:55:53 PM
A "journalist" and an underwear maker.  Both solid sources on economics.   ::)

I'd almost rather hear jesmu's socialist takes.

So you're saying there's a chance...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 18, 2021, 08:56:31 PM
come on zig, dr turgid alumnee is the end all be all man of the stay thirsty world ya know.  mvp in his own mind

What happened to your proper capitalization and punctuation? Did someone else use your account for a couple days?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 18, 2021, 10:58:06 PM
https://twitter.com/EconBerger/status/1449842796655874048?t=f2h_463Fk1OBkM9FBz5MUA&s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 19, 2021, 08:52:47 AM
Wags

A global recession with no end in sight from which the markets will never recover - what Krugman predicted - is not only a depression, but because of his use of the word never it’s the mother of all depressions.

Recessions are by definition short lived. When they have the elements that Krugman predicted they turn into depressions. Krugman, of course, knew this. Obviously Jockey and 82 didn’t.

Now, this is a dishonest post, Lenny.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 19, 2021, 08:57:49 AM
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055

Paul Krugman has been saying one thing for at least 21 years: "The world is on the verge of recession/depression and nobody will do what I say to avert this looming crisis." That he said such a thing in 2016 is as surprising as the Packers special teams sucking again each October. As dependable as the tides.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 19, 2021, 09:19:00 AM
Now, this is a dishonest post, Lenny.

Especially given that I totally sat out the Krugman discussion. But whatevs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 19, 2021, 10:00:49 AM
Paul Krugman has been saying one thing for at least 21 years: "The world is on the verge of recession/depression and nobody will do what I say to avert this looming crisis." That he said such a thing in 2016 is as surprising as the Packers special teams sucking again each October. As dependable as the tides.

Don’t disagree.  Someone just asked for a link. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 19, 2021, 10:36:30 AM
Paul Krugman has been saying one thing for at least 21 years: "The world is on the verge of recession/depression and nobody will do what I say to avert this looming crisis." That he said such a thing in 2016 is as surprising as the Packers special teams sucking again each October. As dependable as the tides.

Now this is an honest post. He has been claiming a looming recession for a long time. He is a "the sky is falling" guy.

To go back to the fake depression argument; if I say that the Houston Texans are losers and there is "no end in sight" to their losing, that does NOT mean I am saying that they will be losers to the end of time. It means than under the current situation, there is no end in sight. In other words, until there is change.

Lenny knows this. Wags knows this. But as much as these two decry politics on the board, they go after Krugman because of his politics.

My point still stands. He did not talk about a depression. These two guys (who poured over his quotes so intently) also intentionally left one specific word that Krugman said out of their posts. That is pushing an agenda - not an attempt at honesty.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 19, 2021, 11:31:06 AM
Now this is an honest post. He has been claiming a looming recession for a long time. He is a "the sky is falling" guy.

To go back to the fake depression argument; if I say that the Houston Texans are losers and there is "no end in sight" to their losing, that does NOT mean I am saying that they will be losers to the end of time. It means than under the current situation, there is no end in sight. In other words, until there is change.

Lenny knows this. Wags knows this. But as much as these two decry politics on the board, they go after Krugman because of his politics.

My point still stands. He did not talk about a depression. These two guys (who poured over his quotes so intently) also intentionally left one specific word that Krugman said out of their posts. That is pushing an agenda - not an attempt at honesty.

Most people go after Krugman, Ds and Rs, because he's an idiot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 19, 2021, 11:39:12 AM
Most people go after Krugman, Ds and Rs, because he's an idiot.

I'm not sure whether he's an idiot, but he's the platonic form of a hammer, and the whole world is a nail to him. He has only one solution to every economic problem and that's been the case for years. But then again, I'm not sure he's been in the business of economics in years either. He's in the business of providing predictable copy to outlets like the NYT. He sells association with his Nobel and that's about it. But hey, that's not worth nothing... having a Nobel Laureate on staff is a pretty nice reputational buff, so I see what the people who employ him get out of the bargin.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 19, 2021, 11:50:46 AM
Now this is an honest post. He has been claiming a looming recession for a long time. He is a "the sky is falling" guy.

To go back to the fake depression argument; if I say that the Houston Texans are losers and there is "no end in sight" to their losing, that does NOT mean I am saying that they will be losers to the end of time. It means than under the current situation, there is no end in sight. In other words, until there is change.

Lenny knows this. Wags knows this. But as much as these two decry politics on the board, they go after Krugman because of his politics.

My point still stands. He did not talk about a depression. These two guys (who poured over his quotes so intently) also intentionally left one specific word that Krugman said out of their posts. That is pushing an agenda - not an attempt at honesty.

Thats rich coming from you.  Not everything has to be some political axe to grind, I'm sure that is very hard for you to process.  Everything has to be blue and red, good vs evil in your world.

And I didn't even bring up Krugman, nor did I "pour" over his quotes.  It was a couple paragraph opinion piece in the NYT.  Krugman could have said it about Obama or about Biden and it still would have been castigated and moronic.  Dude is hysterical and a constant Chicken Little who makes bombastic statements to stay relevant.  He made a magnificently terrible prediction about the internet and its effects on the economy 15 years ago, and then claimed he was just "having fun" when proven to be a clown.  I couldn't care less if he was a bleeding heart liberal or a conservative stalwart, much less making dire predictions about a President I never voted for and constantly was annoyed by economically/market wise.

And in your Texans example, if you made that claim and someone said you proclaimed them to be "perennial losers", you would surely say that's incorrect.  But anyone with a brain could see that is what is inferred.  Hiding behind "thats not literally what he said" is a great way to always have an out and label others as dishonest. 

You thinking its "pushing an agenda" to deduce "there is no end in sight" to a recession is the same as forecasting depression, specifically when speaking to a 4 year presidential term which would be well within the bounds of a depression.  Well, that reeks of you trying to prove a point in your constant battle of black and white, political good vs evil.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 19, 2021, 03:04:35 PM
Especially given that I totally sat out the Krugman discussion. But whatevs.

My mistake, Mike. I thought it was you saying that I wasn’t a liar, but that I misspoke. It wasn’t you, it was Jockey. Humble apologies.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 19, 2021, 03:21:21 PM
Paul Krugman has been saying one thing for at least 21 years: "The world is on the verge of recession/depression and nobody will do what I say to avert this looming crisis." That he said such a thing in 2016 is as surprising as the Packers special teams sucking again each October. As dependable as the tides.

Source(s)?

Look, I don’t know if Paul Krugman is the stupidest man in the world. Maybe he does routinely predict recessions that will never end (i.e.,depressions) or markets that will never recover (i.e., depressions) for all sort of reasons. If so, it kind of makes you wonder how he got a Nobel Prize and how he keeps a job writing for the NYT.

But that’s what he said the day Trump was elected and he was spectacularly wrong on that occasion. And that’s a fact no matter what Jockey says.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 19, 2021, 03:31:38 PM
Paul Krugman got his Nobel Prize because he is a gifted academic who wrote a paper on a key concept of international trade, breaking ground on new knowledge in the field of economics.

Paul Krugman is a pretty bad macroeconomic forecaster whose column in the NYT could be written by anyone with a keyboard.

These can both be true.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 19, 2021, 04:13:49 PM
Look, I don’t know if Paul Krugman is the stupidest man in the world.

If getting a prediction wrong makes one "the stupidest man in the world," there are a lot of stupidest men in the world on Scoop. Both of us included.
 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 19, 2021, 04:43:34 PM
Source(s)?

Look, I don’t know if Paul Krugman is the stupidest man in the world.
If he is also anti-vax/pro-Ivermectin, then maybe.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 19, 2021, 05:06:35 PM
If getting a prediction wrong makes one "the stupidest man in the world," there are a lot of stupidest men in the world on Scoop. Both of us included.

The guy’s an economist who (according to another poster, not me) has routinely and incorrectly predicted recessions and depressions throughout the greatest bull market in history. That’s a special kind of stupid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 19, 2021, 05:24:10 PM
Paul Krugman got his Nobel Prize because he is a gifted academic who wrote a paper on a key concept of international trade, breaking ground on new knowledge in the field of economics.

Paul Krugman is a pretty bad macroeconomic forecaster whose column in the NYT could be written by anyone with a keyboard.

These can both be true.

I actually agree with this.  Paul Krugman the academic and professor is intelligent and respected and with legitimate bona fides.  However in practice and in real time, he's an awful prognosticator, which is hardly unique among economic academics cause markets and economies don't operate in perfect vacuums.

His Nobel Prize and accompanying ego and repeated brashness with terrible predictions are what makes him a joke situationally like this, in the eyes of many.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on October 19, 2021, 06:28:52 PM
Thats rich coming from you.  Not everything has to be some political axe to grind, I'm sure that is very hard for you to process.  Everything has to be blue and red, good vs evil in your world.

And I didn't even bring up Krugman, nor did I "pour" over his quotes.  It was a couple paragraph opinion piece in the NYT.  Krugman could have said it about Obama or about Biden and it still would have been castigated and moronic.  Dude is hysterical and a constant Chicken Little who makes bombastic statements to stay relevant.  He made a magnificently terrible prediction about the internet and its effects on the economy 15 years ago, and then claimed he was just "having fun" when proven to be a clown.  I couldn't care less if he was a bleeding heart liberal or a conservative stalwart, much less making dire predictions about a President I never voted for and constantly was annoyed by economically/market wise.

And in your Texans example, if you made that claim and someone said you proclaimed them to be "perennial losers", you would surely say that's incorrect.  But anyone with a brain could see that is what is inferred.  Hiding behind "thats not literally what he said" is a great way to always have an out and label others as dishonest. 

You thinking its "pushing an agenda" to deduce "there is no end in sight" to a recession is the same as forecasting depression, specifically when speaking to a 4 year presidential term which would be well within the bounds of a depression.  Well, that reeks of you trying to prove a point in your constant battle of black and white, political good vs evil.

Your post is waaaay to much effort to prove somebody said something he didn't.

You could have just disagreed with what Krugman said without saying he said something else.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 19, 2021, 06:58:23 PM
Paul Krugman got his Nobel Prize because he is a gifted academic who wrote a paper on a key concept of international trade, breaking ground on new knowledge in the field of economics.

Paul Krugman is a pretty bad macroeconomic forecaster whose column in the NYT could be written by anyone with a keyboard.

These can both be true.

Precisely this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 19, 2021, 06:58:57 PM
My mistake, Mike. I thought it was you saying that I wasn’t a liar, but that I misspoke. It wasn’t you, it was Jockey. Humble apologies.

I appreciate this, Tony. Take care.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 19, 2021, 08:09:48 PM
Your post is waaaay to much effort to prove somebody said something he didn't.

You could have just disagreed with what Krugman said without saying he said something else.

Of course you have no rebuttal for a explanatory post, just sticking to your pithy crap so you can continue to call others dishonest and playing sides.

You disagreed with me and Lenny, made BS accusations, justifications, and digs and tried to hide behind politics again.  I don't even know why I'm surprised.  Can't wait for your hypocrisy when someone with an (R) next to their name implies something without directly saying it and you have a hysterical post frothing at the mouth about whatever your keyword of the week is.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on October 19, 2021, 08:15:22 PM
Owned, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 20, 2021, 08:26:42 AM
Larry's been predicting apocalyptic inflation since January, and nothing close to what he forecast has materialized.
The problem with an appeal to authority argument is that it only works when the authority is right.

Paul Tudor Jones: Inflation not transitory…biggest threat to society.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 20, 2021, 08:34:34 AM
4th quarter GDP expectations have gone from 6% growth now revised down to 0.5% but the administration will somehow lead us to believe that’s a good thing somehow and expected.

But hey, no mean tweets.

https://mobile.twitter.com/NumbersMuncher/status/1450625098185117696
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 20, 2021, 08:37:25 AM
There was a huge water main break in Charlotte this week, and hundreds of thousands of residents are under a boil-water advisory.

It's an old water system that hasn't been updated in decades, even as Charlotte has grown to be the nation's 15th-largest city.

When most people think of "infrastructure," they think of roads, but U.S. water systems have been neglected for years. I hope like heck that what happened in Charlotte doesn't start happening in NY, Houston, DC, Miami, etc, on an even larger scale.

(Disclosure: I live just outside Charlotte, and thankfully our area wasn't affected.)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 20, 2021, 08:42:32 AM
Paul Tudor Jones: Inflation not transitory…biggest threat to society.


I mean..maybe?  I tend to think that investors like Jones view things from the world of investment more than the world of reality.  Even his comments about inflation were more about bad bond investments.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 09:28:44 AM
Paul Tudor Jones: Inflation not transitory…biggest threat to society.

Paul Tudor Jones must be the stupidest man in the world.*

Billionaire investor Paul Tudor Jones on Thursday said that America will beat the deadly coronavirus pandemic, while sharing his own personal narrative, noting that his daughter contracted the illness recently and has since recovered.
“I don’t think we need to panic,” he said.
By his own estimates, Jones speculated that the disease could infect one million people in the U.S. in a worst-case scenario and applying a 4% mortality rate—far greater than most epidemiologist are assigning to the disease—roughly 40,000 people would die due to the deadly pathogen. He said that although he believes such losses would be tragic, he compared that to lives lost during a bad influenza season


https://www.marketwatch.com/story/man-who-called-1987-crash-says-be-careful-not-to-mythologize-coronavirus-into-a-pandemic-godzilla-predicts-stocks-will-rebound-in-a-few-months-2020-03-26


As of yesterday, we've seen more than 45 million COVID infections in the U.S. and about 728,000 deaths. Paul was off just a little.

*According to the Lenny Scale of Human Stupidity
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on October 20, 2021, 09:51:40 AM
Paul Tudor Jones must be the stupidest man in the world.*

Billionaire investor Paul Tudor Jones on Thursday said that America will beat the deadly coronavirus pandemic, while sharing his own personal narrative, noting that his daughter contracted the illness recently and has since recovered.
“I don’t think we need to panic,” he said.
By his own estimates, Jones speculated that the disease could infect one million people in the U.S. in a worst-case scenario and applying a 4% mortality rate—far greater than most epidemiologist are assigning to the disease—roughly 40,000 people would die due to the deadly pathogen. He said that although he believes such losses would be tragic, he compared that to lives lost during a bad influenza season


https://www.marketwatch.com/story/man-who-called-1987-crash-says-be-careful-not-to-mythologize-coronavirus-into-a-pandemic-godzilla-predicts-stocks-will-rebound-in-a-few-months-2020-03-26


As of yesterday, we've seen more than 45 million COVID infections in the U.S. and about 728,000 deaths. Paul was off just a little.

*According to the Lenny Scale of Human Stupidity

Yes Paul was the only one back in March of 2020 who made incredibly bad predictions.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 09:54:52 AM
Yes Paul was the only one back in March of 2020 who made incredibly bad predictions.

Sorry, I don't make the rules. When someone makes an incredibly bad prediction, that person is stupid and should not be taken seriously.
Source: Lenny
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 20, 2021, 09:54:57 AM
Paul Tudor Jones must be the stupidest man in the world.*

Billionaire investor Paul Tudor Jones on Thursday said that America will beat the deadly coronavirus pandemic, while sharing his own personal narrative, noting that his daughter contracted the illness recently and has since recovered.
“I don’t think we need to panic,” he said.
By his own estimates, Jones speculated that the disease could infect one million people in the U.S. in a worst-case scenario and applying a 4% mortality rate—far greater than most epidemiologist are assigning to the disease—roughly 40,000 people would die due to the deadly pathogen. He said that although he believes such losses would be tragic, he compared that to lives lost during a bad influenza season


https://www.marketwatch.com/story/man-who-called-1987-crash-says-be-careful-not-to-mythologize-coronavirus-into-a-pandemic-godzilla-predicts-stocks-will-rebound-in-a-few-months-2020-03-26


As of yesterday, we've seen more than 45 million COVID infections in the U.S. and about 728,000 deaths. Paul was off just a little.

*According to the Lenny Scale of Human Stupidity

He’s certainly not an expert in pandemics.

If you and jesmu think inflation is transitory and no big thing, fine.

I disagree. Time will tell.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 09:58:05 AM
Florida man applied for jobs at 60 companies that publicly complained they couldn't find enough workers.
The result:
16 email responses, four follow-up phone calls, and one interview.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/worker-florida-applied-60-entry-193423909.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 20, 2021, 09:58:49 AM
Florida man applied for jobs at 60 companies that publicly complained they couldn't find enough workers.
The result:
16 email responses, four follow-up phone calls, and one interview.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/worker-florida-applied-60-entry-193423909.html

I read that yesterday.  Very interesting stuff.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 20, 2021, 10:18:35 AM
Paul Tudor Jones must be the stupidest man in the world.*

G

Someone said Paul Krugman had been consistently predicting recessions and depressions wrongly for 21 consecutive years.

To which I replied: I don’t know if Paul Krugman is the stupidest man in the world.

So I say I don’t know if a guy who hasn’t been right in his own field of expertise in 21 years is the stupidest man in the world. This morphs in your mind to Lenny says anyone who has ever been wrong on any prediction is the stupidest man in the world. Don’t know if you were being intentionally dishonest but you hit the jackpot.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 10:22:00 AM
He’s certainly not an expert in pandemics.

If you and jesmu think inflation is transitory and no big thing, fine.

I disagree. Time will tell.

Lenny,

I have no forecast on inflation or its long-term effects. I'm far from expert in that area. I suppose I could, like some people, seek out the opinions that reflect my preferences and political biases - and there are plenty - and post those here, but what would be the point?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 10:25:10 AM
G

Someone said Paul Krugman had been consistently predicting recessions and depressions wrongly for 21 consecutive years.

To which I replied: I don’t know if Paul Krugman is the stupidest man in the world.

So I say I don’t know if a guy who hasn’t been right in his own field of expertise in 21 years is the stupidest man in the world. This morphs in your mind to Lenny says anyone who has ever been wrong on any prediction is the stupidest man in the world. Don’t know if you were being intentionally dishonest but you hit the jackpot.

You also called him a "special kind of stupid," but yeah, I'm the dishonest one here.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on October 20, 2021, 10:26:30 AM
I read that yesterday.  Very interesting stuff.

A quick sleuthing of the dude says he has a felony marijuana sales verdict in his name - so maybe it would have been good to include that, as potential employers would get the same info.

We could debate all day whether marijuana sales should ever be a felony, but a lot of employers don't want to hire felons.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on October 20, 2021, 10:34:24 AM
We have a ton of issue that are causing inflation and several are here to stay, namely higher wages. I have been saying for months that we are importing inflation from China and that is my biggest concern. Prices of goods from China are up a great deal this year and I believe the Chinese government loves it. Shipping costs will eventually go down, but I think higher prices from China are here for the long haul.

We get countless calls a day with companies wanting out of China and that is much easier said than done. The biggest companies in the world struggle doing business outside of China and 99.9% of other companies do not understand how hard it is to move production to Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. and will struggle big time.

I think we are in a perfect storm for rough sledding ahead. I happen to agree with PTJ and all of his comments today. The Fed is a dangerous crew and I have been saying for months they do not have their eye on the inflationary ball.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on October 20, 2021, 10:43:22 AM
Does anyone have any articles or resources they recommend for a guy trying to get smart on the inflation issue?  I understand that all resources will have some degree of political bias in them, and I trust that I can sort through that. 

I'm not the sharpest macroeconomic crayon in the box, but it seems that we have been promised and waiting for these wage increases for the average folks since 2008.  So it strikes me as odd that now that those seem in the wings, we're shifting into decrying the corresponding inflation. I understand that inflation is a natural consequence of rising wages, but I need to learn more about what is to be done about that, short of telling the middle class to pick their poison - low wages or inflation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 20, 2021, 10:54:06 AM
Does anyone have any articles or resources they recommend for a guy trying to get smart on the inflation issue?  I understand that all resources will have some degree of political bias in them, and I trust that I can sort through that. 

I'm not the sharpest macroeconomic crayon in the box, but it seems that we have been promised and waiting for these wage increases for the average folks since 2008.  So it strikes me as odd that now that those seem in the wings, we're shifting into decrying the corresponding inflation. I understand that inflation is a natural consequence of rising wages, but I need to learn more about what is to be done about that, short of telling the middle class to pick their poison - low wages or inflation.

Jockey would suggest the works of Paul Krugman.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 20, 2021, 10:56:32 AM
Does anyone have any articles or resources they recommend for a guy trying to get smart on the inflation issue?  I understand that all resources will have some degree of political bias in them, and I trust that I can sort through that. 

I'm not the sharpest macroeconomic crayon in the box, but it seems that we have been promised and waiting for these wage increases for the average folks since 2008.  So it strikes me as odd that now that those seem in the wings, we're shifting into decrying the corresponding inflation. I understand that inflation is a natural consequence of rising wages, but I need to learn more about what is to be done about that, short of telling the middle class to pick their poison - low wages or inflation.

Slow inflation is fine.  Run away inflation is bad.

Your investments need to beat inflation to be worthwhile.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 20, 2021, 11:20:50 AM
A quick sleuthing of the dude says he has a felony marijuana sales verdict in his name - so maybe it would have been good to include that, as potential employers would get the same info.

We could debate all day whether marijuana sales should ever be a felony, but a lot of employers don't want to hire felons.

I’d think that would be a plus on a Florida job application
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 20, 2021, 11:25:05 AM
What is his mullet status?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on October 20, 2021, 11:25:32 AM
Q3 earnings are outpacing estimates by a very robust 15%+. I'd hazard to guess that while Q4 upside will not be of that magnitude (there has to be reversion to the mean at some point), we'll still see good upside. The amount of cash sloshing around, and the fact that the Great Resignation continues apace, tells me demand will continue to drive the economy in Q4, and will incidentally keep inflation turned up. Right now, demand from the American consumer is insatiable.

The supply chain issue will temper Q4, without a doubt, but there are the first hints that it is slowly (too slowly) being corrected. China, with their port closures, has caused a big chunk of the mess, but we are working on easing the backlogs in the LA and NY ports.

The change in rate of earnings increases is what typically drive the market, and personally I think the aggregate estimates for Q4 are too low. There is more volatility on the market than has been typical in recent history, but my money is on a Santa Clause really, albeit a moderate one.

I will take my Paul Krugman Award now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 20, 2021, 11:27:35 AM
Does anyone have any articles or resources they recommend for a guy trying to get smart on the inflation issue?  I understand that all resources will have some degree of political bias in them, and I trust that I can sort through that. 

I'm not the sharpest macroeconomic crayon in the box, but it seems that we have been promised and waiting for these wage increases for the average folks since 2008.  So it strikes me as odd that now that those seem in the wings, we're shifting into decrying the corresponding inflation. I understand that inflation is a natural consequence of rising wages, but I need to learn more about what is to be done about that, short of telling the middle class to pick their poison - low wages or inflation.

Inflation like everything is a balance.  Wages can rise, while inflation rises, and that isn't an issue, provided its in check and manageable.

The issue now isn't really the wages as much as it is everything else.  There was a LOT of spending to cope with the pandemic, and more on the way, and that coupled with some significant shocks to the global supply chain has costs rising everywhere.  Spending trillions, justified/needed or not, is going to cause significant inflation, regardless of what wages and the job market is doing.

There is nothing to be gained by pointing fingers, but I do have my concerns about the current Fed's ability to properly handle the danger of runaway inflation looming.  Thats far more critical and worrisome to me than any policies or plans a politician or party is trying to enact.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 20, 2021, 11:35:14 AM
The basics of supply and demand.

Right now, there is a lot of demand for goods.   The supply chain is fouled up for a number of reasons.   When demand outpaces supply, inflation spikes.


Right now, for a myriad of reasons, there are more openings than there are workers.  The demand for workers is driving up demand.   Which is oupacing the supply of workers.   Inflationary spike.

When no one was driving in the spring of 2020, gasoline prices plummeted.   Supply outpaced demand.    When there are more applicants than jobs, wages go down.

Economics 101.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on October 20, 2021, 12:20:24 PM
We have a ton of issue that are causing inflation and several are here to stay, namely higher wages. I have been saying for months that we are importing inflation from China and that is my biggest concern. Prices of goods from China are up a great deal this year and I believe the Chinese government loves it. Shipping costs will eventually go down, but I think higher prices from China are here for the long haul.

We get countless calls a day with companies wanting out of China and that is much easier said than done. The biggest companies in the world struggle doing business outside of China and 99.9% of other companies do not understand how hard it is to move production to Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. and will struggle big time.

I think we are in a perfect storm for rough sledding ahead. I happen to agree with PTJ and all of his comments today. The Fed is a dangerous crew and I have been saying for months they do not have their eye on the inflationary ball.


Very interesting perspective.  Thank you.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on October 20, 2021, 07:22:09 PM
You also called him a "special kind of stupid," but yeah, I'm the dishonest one here.

Pulling quotes out of context to alter the meaning. I honestly would have expected better from you. Here’s what I really said:

“The guy’s an economist who (ACCORDING TO ANOTHER POSTER, NOT ME) has routinely and incorrectly predicted recessions and depressions throughout the greatest bull market in history. That’s a special kind of stupid.

I don’t know (and I said as much) whether the poster (from your side of the political fence) is correct in asserting that Krugman has been that consistently and spectacularly wrong on the economy. But IF the other poster is correct, that’s a special kind of stupid.

Like what you wrote was a special kind of dishonest.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on October 20, 2021, 07:31:55 PM
Pulling quotes out of context to alter the meaning. I honestly would have expected better from you. Here’s what I really said:

“The guy’s an economist who (ACCORDING TO ANOTHER POSTER, NOT ME) has routinely and incorrectly predicted recessions and depressions throughout the greatest bull market in history. That’s a special kind of stupid.

I don’t know (and I said as much) whether the poster (from your side of the political fence) is correct in asserting that Krugman has been that consistently and spectacularly wrong on the economy. But IF the other poster is correct, that’s a special kind of stupid.

Like what you wrote was a special kind of dishonest.

in other words, krugman should be up for their highest honors, pulitzers, emmy's, honorary degrees, and last but not least...a ride on the lolita express
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 20, 2021, 07:48:44 PM
in other words, krugman should be up for their highest honors, pulitzers, emmy's, honorary degrees, and last but not least...a ride on the lolita express

So much going on here.  Random apostrophes and ellipses are solid work. The Lolita Express line is classic. 

8 of 10
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 07:54:08 PM
Pulling quotes out of context to alter the meaning. I honestly would have expected better from you.

Thanks for your sincere words, Lenny.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 20, 2021, 09:48:12 PM
Pulling quotes out of context to alter the meaning. I honestly would have expected better from you. Here’s what I really said:

“The guy’s an economist who (ACCORDING TO ANOTHER POSTER, NOT ME) has routinely and incorrectly predicted recessions and depressions throughout the greatest bull market in history. That’s a special kind of stupid.

I don’t know (and I said as much) whether the poster (from your side of the political fence) is correct in asserting that Krugman has been that consistently and spectacularly wrong on the economy. But IF the other poster is correct, that’s a special kind of stupid.

Like what you wrote was a special kind of dishonest.

Between mis-quoting and misogyny, I'm starting to worry about MU's journalism program, aina.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on October 20, 2021, 11:06:17 PM
Between mis-quoting and misogyny, I'm starting to worry about MU's journalism program, aina.

Is the jizz mopping program still solid?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on October 20, 2021, 11:22:14 PM
NY Times asking “where are the workers?” It turns out the enhanced unemployment and stimulus checks allowed people to not go back to work. Though what will happen when the cushion runs out?

Thanks to pandemic stimulus programs during both the Trump and Biden administrations, many families have received multiple checks from the federal government over the past 18 months. Those stimulus programs also increased the size of unemployment benefits. Over the same period, home values and stock prices have risen, too.

As a result, many households have more of a financial cushion than they used to. If anything, the recent increases in savings have been larger at the bottom of the economic spectrum than at the top:

With this cushion, some workers — especially those in service industries disrupted by Covid-19 — have decided that they did not like their old jobs enough to return. Others have simply quit their jobs.


Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 21, 2021, 12:34:27 AM
Is the jizz mopping program still solid?

Yessir!  Girth is important.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 21, 2021, 07:54:41 AM
NY Times asking “where are the workers?” It turns out the enhanced unemployment and stimulus checks allowed people to not go back to work. Though what will happen when the cushion runs out?

Thanks to pandemic stimulus programs during both the Trump and Biden administrations, many families have received multiple checks from the federal government over the past 18 months. Those stimulus programs also increased the size of unemployment benefits. Over the same period, home values and stock prices have risen, too.

As a result, many households have more of a financial cushion than they used to. If anything, the recent increases in savings have been larger at the bottom of the economic spectrum than at the top:

With this cushion, some workers — especially those in service industries disrupted by Covid-19 — have decided that they did not like their old jobs enough to return. Others have simply quit their jobs.


I read that piece by David Leonhardt, a journalist I respect. But he was giving only a very small part of the story, and the passage you highlighted gave en even smaller part.

For example, later in the column, Leonhardt said that despite this supposed trend of people squirreling away federal aid, "the financial cushion of most households still is not large. The median cash savings of the bottom quarter of households (ranked by earnings) has risen by 70 percent over the past two years — but it’s still only about $1,000."

So, $1,000 in the bank is going to let people feel flush with $$$ and just chill out for months and months and months?

Leonhardt also says:

With more Americans choosing not to work — including aging baby boomers — companies would then need to increase pay and improve working conditions to attract employees.

In other words, lots and lots of the 55-and-over crowd, who actually WERE flush with cash (but not from unemployment benefits), have simply said, "Screw it. I don't need to work anymore." They might have been thinking they'd work for another year or 3 or 5, but after the pandemic hit, they decided not to. This was a significant part of the workforce, as many economists have noted, and it created a domino effect.

Finally, Leonhardt concludes by recommending a piece by NYT colleague Ben Casselman, which describes some of the causes of the shortage other than the cash glut, like Covid fears and a dearth of day-care options.


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/19/business/economy/us-economy.html

Here's the lead to Casselman's piece:

Fall was meant to mark the beginning of the end of the labor shortage that has held back the nation’s economic recovery. Expanded unemployment benefits were ending. Schools were reopening, freeing up many caregivers. Surely, economists and business owners reasoned, a flood of workers would follow.

Instead, the labor force shrank in September. There are five million fewer people working than before the pandemic began, and three million fewer even looking for work.

The slow return of workers is causing headaches for the Biden administration, which was counting on a strong economic rebound to give momentum to its political agenda. Forecasters were largely blindsided by the problem and don’t know how long it will last.

Conservatives have blamed generous unemployment benefits for keeping people at home, but evidence from states that ended the payments early suggests that any impact was small. Progressives say companies could find workers if they paid more, but the shortages aren’t limited to low-wage industries.

Instead, economists point to a complex, overlapping web of factors, many of which could be slow to reverse.

The health crisis is still making it hard or dangerous for some people to work, while savings built up during the pandemic have made it easier for others to turn down jobs they do not want. Psychology may also play a role: Surveys suggest that the pandemic led many to rethink their priorities, while the glut of open jobs — more than 10 million in August — may be motivating some to hold out for a better offer.

The net result is that, arguably for the first time in decades, workers up and down the income ladder have leverage. And they are using it to demand not just higher pay but also flexible hours, more generous benefits and better working conditions. A record 4.3 million people quit their jobs in August, in some cases midshift to take a better-paying position down the street.


Again, I like Leonhardt, but I think he was way oversimplifying the reason for the labor shortage. And I don't want to shoot the messenger, BH, because you were merely relaying some of what Leonhardt said, but I think you were way, way oversimplifying things when you concluded, "It turns out the enhanced unemployment and stimulus checks allowed people to not go back to work."

There is nothing close to a consensus that it "turns out the enhanced unemployment and stimulus checks allowed people to not go back to work." Indeed, most economists seem to reject that theory.

While I have little doubt that "some workers" (as Leonhardt said) haven't returned because federal aid might have helped them generate a cash cushion, I'll go with this from the Casselman piece:

Economists point to a complex, overlapping web of factors.

Interesting discussion, though.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 21, 2021, 08:14:58 AM
Giving money to individuals is a moral hazard.

Giving money to wall Street, the military, banks and large corporations is the right thing to do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 21, 2021, 08:43:52 AM
I think there's a very real (if hard to measure) effect of "working class" type people who were ground up and spit out during the pandemic just kind of deciding being treated like garbage by their bosses and being treated like garbage by their customers just isn't worth it for trash wages anymore.

Or maybe some proportion of these people, who by and large did not have the luxury of working from home and thus were more likely to contract covid, are now either dead or long covid sufferers who are physically limited in the kind of work they can perform.

But, ultimately, I'm certain the labor shortage is the result of multiple factors, and anyone saying they have the one and only answer is probably just trying to sell an article to a publisher.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on October 21, 2021, 08:52:36 AM
I think there's a very real (if hard to measure) effect of "working class" type people who were ground up and spit out during the pandemic just kind of deciding being treated like garbage by their bosses and being treated like garbage by their customers just isn't worth it for trash wages anymore.

Or maybe some proportion of these people, who by and large did not have the luxury of working from home and thus were more likely to contract covid, are now either dead or long covid sufferers who are physically limited in the kind of work they can perform.

But, ultimately, I'm certain the labor shortage is the result of multiple factors, and anyone saying they have the one and only answer is probably just trying to sell an article to a publisher.

I agree with this analysis.  From personal experience as someone working in a field dubbed “important”, certain segments of the workforce saw unsustainable growth during the early stages of the pandemic.  Expectations weren’t adjusted post-covid (or post-lockdowns) and burn out factor is real
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on October 21, 2021, 09:11:00 AM
I agree with this analysis.  From personal experience as someone working in a field dubbed “important”, certain segments of the workforce saw unsustainable growth during the early stages of the pandemic.  Expectations weren’t adjusted post-covid (or post-lockdowns) and burn out factor is real

Add me to the +1 on this.  There's a push to explain the worker shortage amidst increasing wages with dollar-by-dollar breakdowns of exactly how much the extra unemployment benefits have been worth, how much wages need to increase, how much the average working class person has in savings.  That's a necessary exercise becuase there are absolute dollars and cents thresholds that will eventually bring folks back to the table.  But I think if you interview unemployed folks right now, it would sound more like the Office Space exchange than a lesson in household budgeting:

Quote
"What if - and believe me this is hypothetical - but what if you were offered some kind of a stock option equity sharing program. Would that do anything for you?"
"I don't know, I guess. Listen, I'm gonna go. It's been really nice talking to both you guys. Good luck with your layoffs, all right? I hope your firings go really, really well."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on October 21, 2021, 09:22:01 AM

In other words, lots and lots of the 55-and-over crowd, who actually WERE flush with cash (but not from unemployment benefits), have simply said, "Screw it. I don't need to work anymore." They might have been thinking they'd work for another year or 3 or 5, but after the pandemic hit, they decided not to. This was a significant part of the workforce, as many economists have noted, and it created a domino effect.


To add to this, the stock market run up may have gotten that 55-and-over crowd to where they wanted to be in that 3-5 years now. So no need to work.

I know others (in the 30's-40's) that had decent cash on the side that invested heavily after the crash. They made out great, and in some cases then decided they didn't need two incomes, especially if one was risky and had crappy pay (e.g. day care).

An extra $1k, when inflation has led to rent increases approaching 40% in some markets, is having no effect. Those thinking this is still about extra unemployment benefits months ago are clueless.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 21, 2021, 09:56:07 AM
I think there's a very real (if hard to measure) effect of "working class" type people who were ground up and spit out during the pandemic just kind of deciding being treated like garbage by their bosses and being treated like garbage by their customers just isn't worth it for trash wages anymore.

Or maybe some proportion of these people, who by and large did not have the luxury of working from home and thus were more likely to contract covid, are now either dead or long covid sufferers who are physically limited in the kind of work they can perform.

But, ultimately, I'm certain the labor shortage is the result of multiple factors, and anyone saying they have the one and only answer is probably just trying to sell an article to a publisher.

Yes to all of the above.

In health care and education, we know that the weight of the pandemic was very heavy. There has been significant burnout for nurses and teachers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on October 21, 2021, 09:57:25 AM
Every time I see a video of a free range Karen tormenting a retail worker I think back to when I worked a gun club in the summer between Freshman and Sophomore year. The club had a bar. Strict rules that you couldn't shoot after you started drinking. I'm scoring for a league and a guy comes up with his shotgun broken and on his shoulder, eyes just a hair glassy, voice just a hair soft--not bombed, but given my own year on the semi-professional circuit in McCormick I was certain he'd hit the bar before shooting. Now, technically, I was supposed to stop him from shooting. He asked me which position he was shooting in, and I realized then and there that $8/hr did not buy me enforcing that rule in that situation. I pointed him to position #2. You want me to confront tipsy old men who are armed? Well, I'm not sure what the going rate for that is service, but it's more than $8/hr.

The "put up with the dregs of humanity" cost keeps going up, but retail employers don't want to/can't absorb those costs. I've got no suggestions here, but I can honestly say I don't blame anyone for deciding trash wages isn't worth being abused by the worst of our society's impulses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on October 21, 2021, 10:00:30 AM
Add me to the +1 on this.  There's a push to explain the worker shortage amidst increasing wages with dollar-by-dollar breakdowns of exactly how much the extra unemployment benefits have been worth, how much wages need to increase, how much the average working class person has in savings.  That's a necessary exercise becuase there are absolute dollars and cents thresholds that will eventually bring folks back to the table. 

I'm over this idea that people aren't going back to work for the sweet sweet UE cash, but I'm pretty interested in further data and studies on the people who "didn't like" their prepandemic role and are holding out for something different, more money, etc...  There has to be a tipping point somewhere.  I don't think its just going to be some wholesale salary increase across the board, at a certain point equilibrium will come.  But I truthfully think we're quite a ways away from "normal" enough to see that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on October 21, 2021, 10:04:58 AM
To add to this, the stock market run up may have gotten that 55-and-over crowd to where they wanted to be in that 3-5 years now. So no need to work.

I know others (in the 30's-40's) that had decent cash on the side that invested heavily after the crash. They made out great, and in some cases then decided they didn't need two incomes, especially if one was risky and had crappy pay (e.g. day care).

An extra $1k, when inflation has led to rent increases approaching 40% in some markets, is having no effect. Those thinking this is still about extra unemployment benefits months ago are clueless.

Great point about the market. There are millionaires now who, 5-10 years ago, NEVER thought they'd be millionaires. You're 60 years old, the pandemic is weighing on you, you look at your 401ks and brokerage accounts and see a combined $1.8 million, and you say, "Why am I still working for the man?" Even many of those who have a third of that have had similar thoughts.

As for your second point, my own Millennial daughter and son-in-law are facing that decision. They've done very well financially, they have a young son and another child on the way, and they're doing the math on whether it's worth it -- both financially and emotionally -- for my daughter to stay in the workforce. New parents have been making those kinds of calculations for decades, but the pandemic made things "more real" for many.

Every time I see a video of a free range Karen tormenting a retail worker I think back to when I worked a gun club in the summer between Freshman and Sophomore year. The club had a bar. Strict rules that you couldn't shoot after you started drinking. I'm scoring for a league and a guy comes up with his shotgun broken and on his shoulder, eyes just a hair glassy, voice just a hair soft--not bombed, but given my own year on the semi-professional circuit in McCormick I was certain he'd hit the bar before shooting. Now, technically, I was supposed to stop him from shooting. He asked me which position he was shooting in, and I realized then and there that $8/hr did not buy me enforcing that rule in that situation. I pointed him to position #2. You want me to confront tipsy old men who are armed? Well, I'm not sure what the going rate for that is service, but it's more than $8/hr.

The "put up with the dregs of humanity" cost keeps going up, but retail employers don't want to/can't absorb those costs. I've got no suggestions here, but I can honestly say I don't blame anyone for deciding trash wages isn't worth being abused by the worst of our society's impulses.

Wow, now there's an anecdote that really does equate to some of what's going on now. Thanks for sharing it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on October 21, 2021, 10:08:47 AM
I think there's a very real (if hard to measure) effect of "working class" type people who were ground up and spit out during the pandemic just kind of deciding being treated like garbage by their bosses and being treated like garbage by their customers just isn't worth it for trash wages anymore.

Or maybe some proportion of these people, who by and large did not have the luxury of working from home and thus were more likely to contract covid, are now either dead or long covid sufferers who are physically limited in the kind of work they can perform.

But, ultimately, I'm certain the labor shortage is the result of multiple factors, and anyone saying they have the one and only answer is probably just trying to sell an article to a publisher.

There is a portion of society that was approaching retirement age, or was retirement age that decided to stop working as well.  We've seen it across the US with a school bus driver shortage.  Many drivers were retirees and part-time.  It's hard to convince them to come back to drive a bunch of walking petri dishes for any reasonable amount of money.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on October 21, 2021, 10:52:49 AM
How much of the theoretical labor market is delivering packages?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 21, 2021, 11:50:01 AM
How much of the theoretical labor market is delivering packages?

120%.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on October 21, 2021, 02:17:29 PM
https://ips-dc.org/u-s-billionaire-wealth-surged-by-70-percent-or-2-1-trillion-during-pandemic-theyre-now-worth-a-combined-5-trillion/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 02, 2021, 08:00:08 AM
On Oct. 20, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds announced a crackdown on unemployment benefits. She required recipients to double their job search activity, and she imposed strict audits—with the threat of cutting off payments to anyone who fell short—to ensure that “no Iowan who is receiving unemployment benefits unnecessarily remains on the sidelines” of the job market.

Nine days later, however, Reynolds signed legislation that pays vaccine refusers to do just that: sit on the sidelines. Under the new law, anyone “discharged from employment for refusing to receive a vaccination against COVID-19 … shall not be disqualified for benefits.”
Reynolds is one of many Republican politicians who openly advocate, and in some states have successfully imposed, a two-tiered system of unemployment insurance. It’s not a left-wing policy of money for everyone or a right-wing policy of money for no one. It’s a policy of pernicious hypocrisy: welfare for vaccine refusers, tough love for everyone else.


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/11/red-states-are-now-paying-unemployment-benefits-to-anti-vaxxers-who-quit-their-jobs.html?utm_term=OZY&utm_campaign=pdb&utm_content=Thursday_12.02.21&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 12, 2021, 08:00:16 PM
https://www.reuters.com/business/meat-packers-profit-margins-jumped-300-during-pandemic-white-house-economics-2021-12-10/

INFLATION FROM GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS!!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 12, 2021, 10:05:26 PM
https://www.reuters.com/business/meat-packers-profit-margins-jumped-300-during-pandemic-white-house-economics-2021-12-10/

INFLATION FROM GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS!!!

You still sticking with the “inflation is transitory” talking point?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 12, 2021, 10:07:21 PM
You still sticking with the “inflation is transitory” talking point?

If the logistics/supply chain issues get leveled out and companies stop inflating prices by their own choice...ya.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 12, 2021, 10:17:23 PM
If the logistics/supply chain issues get leveled out and companies stop inflating prices by their own choice...ya.

The last guy on a sinking ship is never who you want to be but to each his own.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on December 12, 2021, 10:56:37 PM
The last guy on a sinking ship is never who you want to be but to each his own.

Economics by jesmu is one of my favorite topics. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 13, 2021, 06:48:04 AM
If I'm being mocked by "trickle down" hogs, I'm on the right track

But, since you are so much wiser, please tell us all the source of the inflation so we can squash it
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 13, 2021, 08:23:17 AM
Retailers have not even begun to pass the correct price increases onto the consumer. Logistics costs have barely been passed on and cost of goods from SE Asia continue to increase. I think after the holiday sales we are going to see an uptick in pricing on consumer goods. IMO, inflation is here for awhile and it might get ugly. Our clients are facing logistics issues, labor shortages, increased cost of goods and inflated wages. Our clients range from small startups to NYSE companies and everyone is facing these problems.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 13, 2021, 09:04:32 AM
Retailers have not even begun to pass the correct price increases onto the consumer. Logistics costs have barely been passed on and cost of goods from SE Asia continue to increase. I think after the holiday sales we are going to see an uptick in pricing on consumer goods. IMO, inflation is here for awhile and it might get ugly. Our clients are facing logistics issues, labor shortages, increased cost of goods and inflated wages. Our clients range from small startups to NYSE companies and everyone is facing these problems.

Yeah one of my clients is moving all of their manufacturing near-shore. SE Asia is losing there market dominance over this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 13, 2021, 10:01:32 AM
Skatastrophy

Reshoring or near shoring is going to be a very difficult obstacle for 99% of companies out there. The capital, both in terms of labor and operational costs will make this very difficult for most. IMO, there is going to be a lot of talking on this subject and not a lot of walking. If costs were equal between SE and near shoring it still does not make a great deal of sense because of the amount of labor needed to make product. We do work in Mexico and they have a long way to go before they are ready to truly compete with SE Asia, mainly because of lack of labor and delivery goods as promised.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 13, 2021, 10:17:24 AM
So I heard this presentation the other day that said the labor shortages are really for two different reasons.

For the services market, Covid in schools and relief payments are the biggest issue.  Many of these jobs went away early in the pandemic and people just aren't going back to them quite yet because either they can't or don't need to.

For the goods market, it is is the upsurge in demand, which also occurred early in the pandemic. 

The problem is that "goods labor" can up their wages all they want to attract those who used to work in the services market, but people who used to work at a restaurant aren't going to start unloading container ships unless they are paid a super premium to do so.

Is this accurate?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 13, 2021, 10:22:11 AM
Retailers have not even begun to pass the correct price increases onto the consumer. Logistics costs have barely been passed on and cost of goods from SE Asia continue to increase. I think after the holiday sales we are going to see an uptick in pricing on consumer goods. IMO, inflation is here for awhile and it might get ugly. Our clients are facing logistics issues, labor shortages, increased cost of goods and inflated wages. Our clients range from small startups to NYSE companies and everyone is facing these problems.

Goose,

What's your impression of this article: https://digital.com/half-of-retail-businesses-using-inflation-to-price-gouge/

Quote
“In other words, businesses are inflating already inflated prices in order to turn a bigger profit amid people’s fears over uncertain times.”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 13, 2021, 10:33:05 AM
jesmu

It really is a story of the big guys vs. the small guys in regard to inflated pricing. There is no doubt that I believe the Apple, Nike, auto companies and others are sharp enough to raise prices if and when they want to. I think one thing that has not been factored in is a company having ability to understand their inflated costs in real time. The big boys can navigate virtually any obstacle thrown at them and figure out a solution, smaller companies cannot use their own plane or rent entire vessels to get goods delivered.

I guess to answer your question more directly, I do not believe that vast majority companies selling consumer goods are getting margins they were getting pre pandemic. We have clients that discontinued low-cost products from their line due the rising costs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 13, 2021, 10:42:31 AM
So I heard this presentation the other day that said the labor shortages are really for two different reasons.

For the services market, Covid in schools and relief payments are the biggest issue.  Many of these jobs went away early in the pandemic and people just aren't going back to them quite yet because either they can't or don't need to.

For the goods market, it is is the upsurge in demand, which also occurred early in the pandemic. 

The problem is that "goods labor" can up their wages all they want to attract those who used to work in the services market, but people who used to work at a restaurant aren't going to start unloading container ships unless they are paid a super premium to do so.

Is this accurate?

Yes, accurate from what I read.

I'll add two other things to this that I've read. 
* Almost 800,000 people have died and they weren't all retired persons.  There are fewer workers period because of a large number are unfortunately now dead.
* Baby Boomers are still a large share of the workforce and many just decided to retire early or those who were still working asked themselves why they still were.  "Screw COVID, I'm this close to retirement so I'm done."  For example, with my 32 person company we had two retirements last year and two more who have been retirement age and have been talking about it the last 9 months.

* Container situation is already improving.  We're not seeing any issues in New York and I was just reading that the port of Los Angles had already reduced ships waiting from 75+ to about 40. 
* We're still booking export containers.  The pick-ups usually get pushed out a week because the ship isn't ready but they are going. 
* Metal prices are way up from the beginning of 2021, but they've more or less leveled off the last 4 months.  (Except tin - no idea why that's still going up.)

* Saw a graph today that inflation is still less than the 1980's when it increased under Reagan.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 13, 2021, 10:48:32 AM
jesmu

It really is a story of the big guys vs. the small guys in regard to inflated pricing. There is no doubt that I believe the Apple, Nike, auto companies and others are sharp enough to raise prices if and when they want to. I think one thing that has not been factored in is a company having ability to understand their inflated costs in real time. The big boys can navigate virtually any obstacle thrown at them and figure out a solution, smaller companies cannot use their own plane or rent entire vessels to get goods delivered.

I guess to answer your question more directly, I do not believe that vast majority companies selling consumer goods are getting margins they were getting pre pandemic. We have clients that discontinued low-cost products from their line due the rising costs.

I can attest to this as well.  My smaller suppliers are struggling versus the big boys to get shipping appointments because the bigger boys can pay more.

Also, a lot of low-cost products are either being discontinued or taking hefty price increases to increase margins
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 13, 2021, 11:04:22 AM
We're not consumer products, but for the most part, we price our customers by breaking out metal value & fabrication price.  Our fabrication has stayed the same and the metal values fluctuate monthly and our customers will see the benefit when metal prices drop again in the future.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 15, 2021, 08:05:11 AM
From the NYT:

All of the Republican governors who opposed the $1.9 trillion Covid relief bill, which passed in March with only Democratic votes, have accepted the money it allocated to their states. Now, they’re in the awkward position of criticizing the spending while championing programs that rely on the funds. Here are some of their strategies:

Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota derided the stimulus as a “giant handout” while outlining how she would use nearly $1 billion slated for her state to invest in local water projects and build new day care centers. She said that if she rejected the funds, they would be used by other states. (If a state rejected the money, which none have, it would instead be returned to the Treasury Department.)

Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida said the $3.4 billion the state has received so far would go toward infrastructure, transportation and work force retention. He justified it by arguing that the federal government fueled economic disruption with pandemic shutdowns and vaccine and mask mandates that he opposed.

Gov. Doug Ducey of Arizona has used some of the money for education programs designed to exclude schools with mask mandates. (The Treasury Department warned Ducey in October that the state could lose some of its funds if it did not change the policy.)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 15, 2021, 12:56:58 PM
How different states have done vs Covid (health, economy, socially, economically) https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/covid-by-the-numbers-how-each-state-fared-on-our-pandemic-scorecard/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 15, 2021, 01:17:12 PM
Thanks for that link, Lenny. I just read the entire piece and found it very interesting.

I like the way the researchers/authors broke things down in each category, and I also didn't feel they were pushing an agenda. They presented the data they had, leaving it  to readers to draw their own conclusions.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on December 15, 2021, 03:11:04 PM
Thanks for that link, Lenny. I just read the entire piece and found it very interesting.

I like the way the researchers/authors broke things down in each category, and I also didn't feel they were pushing an agenda. They presented the data they had, leaving it  to readers to draw their own conclusions.

So, like, actual journalism?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on December 15, 2021, 04:08:27 PM
From the NYT:

All of the Republican governors who opposed the $1.9 trillion Covid relief bill, which passed in March with only Democratic votes, have accepted the money it allocated to their states. Now, they’re in the awkward position of criticizing the spending while championing programs that rely on the funds. Here are some of their strategies:

Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota derided the stimulus as a “giant handout” while outlining how she would use nearly $1 billion slated for her state to invest in local water projects and build new day care centers. She said that if she rejected the funds, they would be used by other states. (If a state rejected the money, which none have, it would instead be returned to the Treasury Department.)

Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida said the $3.4 billion the state has received so far would go toward infrastructure, transportation and work force retention. He justified it by arguing that the federal government fueled economic disruption with pandemic shutdowns and vaccine and mask mandates that he opposed.

Gov. Doug Ducey of Arizona has used some of the money for education programs designed to exclude schools with mask mandates. (The Treasury Department warned Ducey in October that the state could lose some of its funds if it did not change the policy.)


  wtf??  try starting a topic on this and watch what happens...you throw this bloviated crap out here to feel better knowing if we try to argue the other side or the rest of the story, this get's the LOCKDOWN faster than you can say what's the flavor of the day uncle joey

in other words, time for medication check, find a new hobby, stamp collecting, crochet, wood working, a scenic puzzle, yoga...
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 15, 2021, 04:21:58 PM
  wtf??  try starting a topic on this and watch what happens...you throw this bloviated crap out here to feel better knowing if we try to argue the other side or the rest of the story, this get's the LOCKDOWN faster than you can say what's the flavor of the day uncle joey

in other words, time for medication check, find a new hobby, stamp collecting, crochet, wood working, a scenic puzzle, yoga...

8 of 10
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 15, 2021, 04:24:06 PM
8 of 10


You're being generous this Holiday season.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 15, 2021, 04:27:19 PM

You're being generous this Holiday season.

I’m a socialist like Santa Claus
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 15, 2021, 04:35:44 PM
How different states have done vs Covid (health, economy, socially, economically) https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/covid-by-the-numbers-how-each-state-fared-on-our-pandemic-scorecard/

I agree with MU82, well written article.

One thing I would caution against in these types of articles though is "missing data." This is particularly prevalent in states with large minority populations, especially hispanic (even more so if undocumented).

Studies are showing that deaths in the poor and minorities are grossly inaccurate. In many cases, because they were less likely to seek medical care, or go to hospitals. As a result, many died at home with poor documentation as to the specific cause of death. These individuals would have greatly increased hospitalizations and deaths, and represent missing data in specific states.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 15, 2021, 07:42:04 PM
Thanks for that link, Lenny. I just read the entire piece and found it very interesting.

I like the way the researchers/authors broke things down in each category, and I also didn't feel they were pushing an agenda. They presented the data they had, leaving it  to readers to draw their own conclusions.

I agree, Mike. When delivering their “report card” to the states, as a tip of the hat to “fairness”  they’d weighed all 4 categories equally - which many will find problematic.

That said, I thought the results were interesting. In general, small, mostly midwestern and western states got the highest marks but Nevada and Wyoming were notable exceptions and ended up at the bottom.

Among the 10 most populous states, Florida (tied for 11th) was the clear winner, followed by California and Pennsylvania (tied for 25th), Illinois (29th), Ohio (31st), Texas (34th), Georgia and N Carolina (tied for39th) and Michigan and New York (tied for 44th).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 15, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
  wtf??  try starting a topic on this and watch what happens...you throw this bloviated crap out here to feel better knowing if we try to argue the other side or the rest of the story, this get's the LOCKDOWN faster than you can say what's the flavor of the day uncle joey

in other words, time for medication check, find a new hobby, stamp collecting, crochet, wood working, a scenic puzzle, yoga...

ThankQ, doQter roQQet.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 16, 2021, 08:35:45 AM
Spoke to a local CEO yesterday and he thinks the two biggest problems with the job market have been Boomers accelerating their retirement plans due to the pandemic and a hot stock market, and the lack of immigration (both documented and undocumented.)  He is quite concerned in the long-term because both speak to not having a large enough workforce for the jobs that are currently in place.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 16, 2021, 08:42:48 AM
Spoke to a local CEO yesterday and he thinks the two biggest problems with the job market have been Boomers accelerating their retirement plans due to the pandemic and a hot stock market, and the lack of immigration (both documented and undocumented.)  He is quite concerned in the long-term because both speak to not having a large enough workforce for the jobs that are currently in place.

I agree.
Every company & factory I ever worked for had there "own set of immigrants".  One would get a job and help the rest of the same ethnic community get a job in the same place.  They were usually the least to complain and could be counted on the follow procedures the best.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUfan12 on December 16, 2021, 08:57:01 AM
Spoke to a local CEO yesterday and he thinks the two biggest problems with the job market have been Boomers accelerating their retirement plans due to the pandemic and a hot stock market, and the lack of immigration (both documented and undocumented.)  He is quite concerned in the long-term because both speak to not having a large enough workforce for the jobs that are currently in place.

That's mirrors what I see on a daily basis.

Need to increase the H1-B visas as well to bridge the gap in technical talent.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 16, 2021, 09:39:10 AM
Spoke to a local CEO yesterday and he thinks the two biggest problems with the job market have been Boomers accelerating their retirement plans due to the pandemic and a hot stock market, and the lack of immigration (both documented and undocumented.)  He is quite concerned in the long-term because both speak to not having a large enough workforce for the jobs that are currently in place.

100% what I think as well.

Two of our government contacts have decided they're retiring early this year.  One with a month's notice, the other with almost none.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 16, 2021, 09:48:10 AM
That's mirrors what I see on a daily basis.

Need to increase the H1-B visas as well to bridge the gap in technical talent.

Or increase the salary for positions, and provide free college (at the very least for tech positions).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 16, 2021, 09:49:53 AM
Right increasing wages are going to fill the positions.  But that is just going to put more inflationary pressure on the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 16, 2021, 09:56:56 AM
Right increasing wages are going to fill the positions.  But that is just going to put more inflationary pressure on the economy.

No, it won't.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on December 16, 2021, 10:09:18 AM
Spoke to a local CEO yesterday and he thinks the two biggest problems with the job market have been Boomers accelerating their retirement plans due to the pandemic and a hot stock market, and the lack of immigration (both documented and undocumented.)  He is quite concerned in the long-term because both speak to not having a large enough workforce for the jobs that are currently in place.

"Some people say" - Pakuni.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 16, 2021, 10:10:11 AM
No, it won't.

Please show your work and math
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 16, 2021, 10:34:17 AM
No, it won't.


Of course it would. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 16, 2021, 06:44:43 PM
Please show your work and math

I hope we all know I'm not an Econ expert. But, my first read of that comment was in regards to people having more money, means more spending, which means more inflationary pressure.

That is a fallacy in the current economy. It suggests that demand is driving inflation, or will drive inflation. It is not. The problem is supply right now (from a overly simplified view). So the people having more money will not impact existing inflationary pressures.

Further, those who would be getting paid more, are over leveraged right now. Being paid more wouldn't lead to more spending, it would be more likely to lead to paying off debts.

Now, I didn't immediately read this from the standpoint of paying higher wages, leading to higher expenses, and then higher prices. While that is a possibility, the reality is that there are ways to relieve those industry budgetary constraints separate from price increases, they just don't like to go those routes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 16, 2021, 06:46:22 PM
I seldom agree with Fluff, but I know three people that have "retired" in the last six months and all are under 60. None of them are crazy wealthy, but the stock market rise over past 18 months made them feel comfortable to retire. I think they are crazy, but the wealth factor is in full glory at the moment.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 16, 2021, 06:54:15 PM
I hope we all know I'm not an Econ expert. But, my first read of that comment was in regards to people having more money, means more spending, which means more inflationary pressure.

That is a fallacy in the current economy. It suggests that demand is driving inflation, or will drive inflation. It is not. The problem is supply right now (from a overly simplified view). So the people having more money will not impact existing inflationary pressures.

Further, those who would be getting paid more, are over leveraged right now. Being paid more wouldn't lead to more spending, it would be more likely to lead to paying off debts.

Now, I didn't immediately read this from the standpoint of paying higher wages, leading to higher expenses, and then higher prices. While that is a possibility, the reality is that there are ways to relieve those industry budgetary constraints separate from price increases, they just don't like to go those routes.


I didn't say that increasing people's wages are the only reason, or even the main reason for current inflation.  But paying people more is going to increase inflationary pressure.  I don't think there is much dispute about that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 16, 2021, 07:01:15 PM

I didn't say that increasing people's wages are the only reason, or even the main reason for current inflation.  But paying people more is going to increase inflationary pressure.  I don't think there is much dispute about that.

Why aren't things more expensive at Costco, than Walmart? The idea that if you pay people more, it means prices go up, isn't guaranteed, it is a convenient oversimplification of business operations.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 16, 2021, 07:06:20 PM
forgetful

There is a reason employers want to pay the least amount of possible to employees, it is because it is very hard to lower them. It is virtually impossible to put the Genie back in the bottle and there is nothing positive going to happen from higher wages. I guess replacing people with robots will reverse the wage trend, but that is another discussion.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 16, 2021, 07:07:26 PM
Why aren't things more expensive at Costco, than Walmart? The idea that if you pay people more, it means prices go up, isn't guaranteed, it is a convenient oversimplification of business operations.


Talk about oversimplification.  You think inflation is solely determined by prices at Costco and WalMart?   You also don't seem to understand that supply problems and demand problems are linked.  One of the reasons supply is short is because demand is high.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 16, 2021, 07:10:53 PM
Inflation has only gotten started.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2021, 07:13:55 PM
forgetful

There is a reason employers want to pay the least amount of possible to employees, it is because it is very hard to lower them. It is virtually impossible to put the Genie back in the bottle and there is nothing positive going to happen from higher wages. I guess replacing people with robots will reverse the wage trend, but that is another discussion.

Wait...what?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 16, 2021, 07:18:35 PM
jesmu

The lower paid employees are getting more money, but it is not going to keep pace with inflation. I have zero problem with what someone gets paid as long as intelligent spending. IMO the minimum wage worker will be worse off in a year from now even with higher wages.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 16, 2021, 07:30:33 PM
Tho biggest lesson of the past couple years is that if you give more money to people that aren’t wealthy it drives a ton of economic activity. 

Will that ultimately be eaten away by higher prices and be a net negative?  That’s still to be determined. 

I personally think that the tilt in power back to the worker isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 16, 2021, 07:36:45 PM
jesmu

The lower paid employees are getting more money, but it is not going to keep pace with inflation. I have zero problem with what someone gets paid as long as intelligent spending. IMO the minimum wage worker will be worse off in a year from now even with higher wages.

Wages for lower employees hasn't kept pace with production or inflation for decades. That's why we're in this mess.

https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on December 16, 2021, 07:46:03 PM
forgetful

There is a reason employers want to pay the least amount of possible to employees, it is because it is very hard to lower them. It is virtually impossible to put the Genie back in the bottle and there is nothing positive going to happen from higher wages. I guess replacing people with robots will reverse the wage trend, but that is another discussion.

I agree it is in the short term virtually impossible to put the Genie back in the bottle, but like Jesmu, would point out that for run-of-the-mill employees wages have not kept up with increases in productivity, which has led to the wage gap we have to day, and much of the related problems. I think reversing this wage gap would be a boon for the economy and the nation.

I agree on the bolded also. It is what we should be seeing and mass scale automation would recreate modern society...but that is also why we aren't seeing it, and why it is for another discussion.

And disclaimer again. These are nothing but the random musings of a message board dude with 1-semester of economics, and the internet, so I am most definitely not saying "I'm right" just saying my thoughts. I may briefly play devils advocate to learn more from people like you and Jwags (and others in the business world).

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 17, 2021, 06:04:45 AM
I seldom agree with Fluff, but I know three people that have "retired" in the last six months and all are under 60. None of them are crazy wealthy, but the stock market rise over past 18 months made them feel comfortable to retire. I think they are crazy, but the wealth factor is in full glory at the moment.

I wonder what will happen when the market finally pulls back.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 17, 2021, 07:58:15 AM
Yeah reentering the workforce at the same level is tough if you find out you don't have enough to live 30+ years. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 17, 2021, 08:45:09 AM
Yeah reentering the workforce at the same level is tough if you find out you don't have enough to live 30+ years. 

No joke this is why some people in my grandma's retirement living community are fine with the pandemic. They're ready to go. Same with rural folks, it's wild.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 17, 2021, 09:14:27 AM

I didn't say that increasing people's wages are the only reason, or even the main reason for current inflation.  But paying people more is going to increase inflationary pressure.  I don't think there is much dispute about that.

It would be more accurate to say that rising wages CAN increase inflationary pressure. But it's by no means the case that one always follows the other.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 19, 2021, 09:32:18 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/18/business/labor-shortage-boomers-millennials-nightcap/index.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 19, 2021, 09:43:12 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/18/business/labor-shortage-boomers-millennials-nightcap/index.html

Yes, this has become the accepted explanation among economists, and the facts show why.

Many of my fellow Boomers don't want to admit it because it's much easier to shake a fist at Those Damn Millennials getting fat on government handouts.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 20, 2021, 07:42:08 AM
The latest Covid-related economic developments (from the NYT) ...

The World Economic Forum said this morning that it was postponing its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, from next month to “early summer,” citing the spread of the Omicron variant. The move suggests new uncertainties for business travel, yet another headache for C.E.O.s amid rising case counts and new questions about government efforts to contain the coronavirus. Meanwhile, U.S. stock futures are down sharply, following European and Asian markets.

Many businesses are becoming increasingly cautious. The World Economic Forum, after consulting with experts and the Swiss government, said it will instead hold virtual sessions next month. (Travel, business and otherwise, faces new pressures: Israel added the U.S. to its no-fly list, while the N.H.L. called off games involving cross-border travel until after Christmas.) In other developments:

“Saturday Night Live” sent home its audience and most of its cast and crew at the last minute, while Radio City canceled the rest of the Rockettes’ performances for the year. CNN barred all nonessential employees from its U.S. offices.

JPMorgan Chase told American workers who don’t work in bank branches that each team should determine who needs to come into the office over the next few weeks.

Not even top executives are unaffected: Rich Handler, the C.E.O. of the investment bank Jefferies, said he has been quarantining after testing positive for the coronavirus.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 20, 2021, 09:04:25 AM
Yes, this has become the accepted explanation among economists, and the facts show why.

Many of my fellow Boomers don't want to admit it because it's much easier to shake a fist at Those Damn Millennials getting fat on government handouts.

As I mentioned earlier, our city of Madison and Dane County government cohorts are both retiring.  They're in their early 60's and are sick of the grind.  And I don't blame them one bit.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on December 20, 2021, 09:13:28 AM
What is the marketimpact of the boomer retirement surge?  Presumably it is largely due to the run ups in the market, which gives these semi-early retirees confidence that they have enough.  But does that mean they'll be backing off their equities?  If so, when does the market feel that pullback?  Where do the retirees go with their money with the bond market mostly still in the tank?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 20, 2021, 09:49:38 AM
What is the marketimpact of the boomer retirement surge?  Presumably it is largely due to the run ups in the market, which gives these semi-early retirees confidence that they have enough.  But does that mean they'll be backing off their equities?  If so, when does the market feel that pullback?  Where do the retirees go with their money with the bond market mostly still in the tank?

In an inflationary environment nobody will hold cash. Either they'll go overweight equities chasing return, double-down on TIPS, or just keep holding bonds like the rest of us. Nothing gives you a low-risk consistent return rate like bonds do, and they still have a place in a modern portfolio, especially if you're retirement age.

I think the larger market impact will be further driving up wages for younger workers due to increased demand for warm bodies in the workforce.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 20, 2021, 09:52:13 AM
Pocahonist and Crazy Corey got da chit. Must knotof bin careful 'nough, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on December 20, 2021, 10:33:54 AM
What is the marketimpact of the boomer retirement surge?  Presumably it is largely due to the run ups in the market, which gives these semi-early retirees confidence that they have enough.  But does that mean they'll be backing off their equities?  If so, when does the market feel that pullback?  Where do the retirees go with their money with the bond market mostly still in the tank?

Smart retirees don't cash out the minute they retire.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on December 20, 2021, 11:08:56 AM
Smart retirees don't cash out the minute they retire.

No but they also don't retain the same investment risk as when they were still working?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 20, 2021, 11:20:09 AM
Beyond covid, so, OT...

We're gonna hit an interesting population-related hurdle sometime in the future when there are significantly more retirees than workforce as population trends decline. The financial/economic implications are going to be bad.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 20, 2021, 11:21:43 AM
I can only speak for myself, but I would need to have a crazy, crazy amount in my retirement plan to retire under the age of 65. I have always been, and remain a big risk taker, and playing with early retirement is one risk I would never entertain. While there are many smart people that have retired early, I think there are many more that are playing with fire.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 20, 2021, 11:26:31 AM
Beyond covid, so, OT...

We're gonna hit an interesting population-related hurdle sometime in the future when there are significantly more retirees than workforce as population trends decline. The financial/economic implications are going to be bad.
This has been building for some time.  Going to have to loosen immigration just to fill what we currently consider essential jobs.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 20, 2021, 11:30:56 AM
I can only speak for myself, but I would need to have a crazy, crazy amount in my retirement plan to retire under the age of 65. I have always been, and remain a big risk taker, and playing with early retirement is one risk I would never entertain. While there are many smart people that have retired early, I think there are many more that are playing with fire.

I don't want to have the discussion here for obvious reasons, Goose, but if we ever do get that chance to sit down over a beer, I'd be curious to know how much $$$ you believe you need to retire comfortably.

Going to have to loosen immigration just to fill what we currently consider essential jobs.

And that's the tough part for some, isn't it? They want all the jobs filled ... but they don't want people "invading" America to take the jobs that need to be filled.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 20, 2021, 11:49:56 AM
82

Sounds good.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 20, 2021, 01:31:34 PM
Pocahonist and Crazy Corey got da chit. Must knotof bin careful 'nough, hey?

I know you're easily influenced by the Fox News gang, but I really don't think you're stoopid, Doc. So I'll give you credit for trying to be hilarious even as you realize that vaxxed-and-boostered people who get mild cases of Covid very possibly were spared something far worse because they're fully vaxxed.

Sadly, study after study is showing it's the red-county, Trump-voting anti-vaxxers who are swamping the nation's ICUs. Which, because you can read, you're very aware of, despite what Tucker says.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on December 20, 2021, 03:51:18 PM
This has been building for some time.  Going to have to loosen immigration just to fill what we currently consider essential jobs.

R2-D2
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 20, 2021, 06:17:09 PM
I can only speak for myself, but I would need to have a crazy, crazy amount in my retirement plan to retire under the age of 65. I have always been, and remain a big risk taker, and playing with early retirement is one risk I would never entertain. While there are many smart people that have retired early, I think there are many more that are playing with fire.

10M
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 22, 2021, 11:45:16 AM
https://twitter.com/JonLemire/status/1473703761856061445?t=HKfG-S0mmVIv1THcuX-RUw&s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 22, 2021, 12:27:46 PM
https://twitter.com/JonLemire/status/1473703761856061445?t=HKfG-S0mmVIv1THcuX-RUw&s=19

Guess that means he'll break his promise to cancel 10k per student then.

I, for one, am truly shocked.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 22, 2021, 12:31:18 PM
Guess that means he'll break his promise to cancel 10k per student then.

I, for one, am truly shocked.

I'm hopeful that he'll keep his promise, and will be disappointed if he doesn't. As you said ... he's a politician so it's not shocking. But would still be disappointing.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 22, 2021, 12:45:37 PM
I'm hopeful that he'll keep his promise, and will be disappointed if he doesn't. As you said ... he's a politician so it's not shocking. But would still be disappointing.

If you want loan forgiveness take advantage of PSLF and earn it. I find it amusing that the biggest proponents in government of loan “forgiveness” are the members of “The Squad” who, despite $174k a year salaries, continue to cry poverty because they have loans they don’t want to pay off (maybe AOC could have passed in the unneeded Tesla). That Rashida Talib claims to be $200k in student loan debt from graduating from the worst law school in America in a low cost of living city, 20 years ago when tuition was under $17k/year, should disqualify her from elected office.

We understood the terms, signed voluntarily, and now people who got what the loans were for (or dropped/flunked out) are refusing to honor their obligation and demanding a hand out. Next will be mortgages.

What is most interesting is the greatest beneficiaries of forgiveness would be middle-upper and upper class whites. 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/12/putting-student-loan-forgiveness-in-perspective-how-costly-is-it-and-who-benefits/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 22, 2021, 12:55:15 PM
If you want loan forgiveness take advantage of PSLF and earn it. I find it amusing that the biggest proponents in government of loan “forgiveness” are the members of “The Squad” who, despite $174k a year salaries, continue to cry poverty because they have loans they don’t want to pay off (maybe AOC could have passed in the unneeded Tesla). That Rashida Talib claims to be $200k in student loan debt from graduating from the worst law school in America in a low cost of living city, 20 years ago when tuition was under $17k/year, should disqualify her from elected office.

We understood the terms, signed voluntarily, and now people who got what the loans were for (or dropped/flunked out) are refusing to honor their obligation and demanding a hand out. Next will be mortgages.

What is most interesting is the greatest beneficiaries of forgiveness would be middle-upper and upper class whites. 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/12/putting-student-loan-forgiveness-in-perspective-how-costly-is-it-and-who-benefits/


We can debate the moral hazard of student loan forgiveness, or even simply the usefulness of doing so without addressing long term cost, but it was a flat out campaign promise that is apparently within his authority to do so unilaterally.

So yeah I can see why people are pissed.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 22, 2021, 01:05:19 PM
If you want loan forgiveness take advantage of PSLF and earn it. I find it amusing that the biggest proponents in government of loan “forgiveness” are the members of “The Squad” who, despite $174k a year salaries, continue to cry poverty because they have loans they don’t want to pay off (maybe AOC could have passed in the unneeded Tesla). That Rashida Talib claims to be $200k in student loan debt from graduating from the worst law school in America in a low cost of living city, 20 years ago when tuition was under $17k/year, should disqualify her from elected office.

We understood the terms, signed voluntarily, and now people who got what the loans were for (or dropped/flunked out) are refusing to honor their obligation and demanding a hand out. Next will be mortgages.

What is most interesting is the greatest beneficiaries of forgiveness would be middle-upper and upper class whites. 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/12/putting-student-loan-forgiveness-in-perspective-how-costly-is-it-and-who-benefits/

"I had to do something once, so everyone should always suffer and we shouldn't advance as a society. No one should get any benefit that I couldn't receive."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 22, 2021, 01:12:21 PM
If you want loan forgiveness take advantage of PSLF and earn it. I find it amusing that the biggest proponents in government of loan “forgiveness” are the members of “The Squad” who, despite $174k a year salaries, continue to cry poverty because they have loans they don’t want to pay off (maybe AOC could have passed in the unneeded Tesla). That Rashida Talib claims to be $200k in student loan debt from graduating from the worst law school in America in a low cost of living city, 20 years ago when tuition was under $17k/year, should disqualify her from elected office.

We understood the terms, signed voluntarily, and now people who got what the loans were for (or dropped/flunked out) are refusing to honor their obligation and demanding a hand out. Next will be mortgages.

What is most interesting is the greatest beneficiaries of forgiveness would be middle-upper and upper class whites. 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/12/putting-student-loan-forgiveness-in-perspective-how-costly-is-it-and-who-benefits/

Yes, it would be terrible to spend money on such a thing that would create a massive economic boom.  Better to buy bombs and planes instead of fixing a generational problem.

USA USA USA USA!!!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 22, 2021, 01:17:39 PM
Yes, it would be terrible to spend money on such a thing that would create a massive economic boom.  Better to buy bombs and planes instead of fixing a generational problem.

USA USA USA USA!!!

To be fair, I doubt it would be much of an economic impact as we'd all spend it on drugs
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 22, 2021, 04:27:40 PM
To be fair, I doubt it would be much of an economic impact as we'd all spend it on drugs

I’d spend it on illegal NIL payments
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 22, 2021, 06:31:20 PM
If you want loan forgiveness take advantage of PSLF and earn it. I find it amusing that the biggest proponents in government of loan “forgiveness” are the members of “The Squad” who, despite $174k a year salaries, continue to cry poverty because they have loans they don’t want to pay off (maybe AOC could have passed in the unneeded Tesla). That Rashida Talib claims to be $200k in student loan debt from graduating from the worst law school in America in a low cost of living city, 20 years ago when tuition was under $17k/year, should disqualify her from elected office.

We understood the terms, signed voluntarily, and now people who got what the loans were for (or dropped/flunked out) are refusing to honor their obligation and demanding a hand out. Next will be mortgages.

What is most interesting is the greatest beneficiaries of forgiveness would be middle-upper and upper class whites. 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/12/putting-student-loan-forgiveness-in-perspective-how-costly-is-it-and-who-benefits/

Any angry post that includes "The Squad" deserves some congratulations.

Still, it's a little disappointing you forgot to mention socialism, CRT, BLM protests or voter fraud ... this time.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on December 22, 2021, 06:46:57 PM
what a well run machine-schools keep jacking tuition, gubmint pays the schools and takes on the unsecured loans, then forgives them?  who the H E double hockey sticks wouldn't be in favor of that?  i got an idea-let the schools be the bank and see how quick they are to 1) raise tuition at rates multiple times the rate of inflation every year & 2) write it all off?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 22, 2021, 07:09:33 PM
Yes, it would be terrible to spend money on such a thing that would create a massive economic boom.  Better to buy bombs and planes instead of fixing a generational problem.

USA USA USA USA!!!

Forcing taxpayers to pay off other peoples debts = an economic boom? Awesome. Why stop with profligate ex college students? If we include forgiveness of all credit card debt, mortgage debt, car loan debt, etc., we’ll be living in Utopia in no time. What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on December 22, 2021, 07:16:08 PM
How about we start with making student loan debt dischargeable in bankruptcy? There could be a rule that says that it has be a certain number of years out from when the student leaves school so that they can't file the minute they graduate.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 22, 2021, 07:28:21 PM
"I had to do something once, so everyone should always suffer and we shouldn't advance as a society. No one should get any benefit that I couldn't receive."

“Paying your honestly acquired obligations is for suckers! We can sell this BS to the dopes as a way to ‘advance society’. The con of all cons!”
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 22, 2021, 08:08:32 PM
“Paying your honestly acquired obligations is for suckers! We can sell this BS to the dopes as a way to ‘advance society’. The con of all cons!”

Lowering tax rates on the highest income earners is pretty much the same thing. But some people seem to be for that.

Either putting money into the hands of spenders benefits the economy and is good for society..or it isn’t. But I guess if they are wealthy it’s OK.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 22, 2021, 08:30:18 PM
To be fair, I doubt it would be much of an economic impact as we'd all spend it on drugs

Thanks for those words of wisdom, Joe.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 22, 2021, 08:44:12 PM
“Paying your honestly acquired obligations is for suckers! We can sell this BS to the dopes as a way to ‘advance society’. The con of all cons!”

Eliminate bankruptcy protections, then?

Maybe the better idea is to catch up with the rest of the civilized world and make higher education affordable.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 22, 2021, 09:09:11 PM
Eliminate bankruptcy protections, then?

Maybe the better idea is to catch up with the rest of the civilized world and make higher education affordable.

Bankruptcy protections don’t come without consequences. It’s a long way from loan forgiveness for all (regardless of circumstances) to bankruptcy.

I’m all for making higher education more affordable. What most colleges charge for tuition and room/board is way out of line. The least the schools could do is guarantee the loans themselves - that would bring costs down.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 22, 2021, 09:44:30 PM
Bankruptcy protections don’t come without consequences. It’s a long way from loan forgiveness for all (regardless of circumstances) to bankruptcy.


Does bankruptcy allow for the people and corporations to walk away from their honestly acquired obligations, or not?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 22, 2021, 10:49:01 PM
Does bankruptcy allow for the people and corporations to walk away from their honestly acquired obligations, or not?

Individuals who declare bankruptcy are forced to give up their credit cards. Everything you need one for is taken off the table. Bankruptcy stays on your credit report for 10 years, making it virtually impossible to be approved for most loans. It can even impact rental agreements. In addition, some tasks are required (counseling, etc.).

As things stand, it is difficult to have your student loans discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. But if one can show that his or her student loan payment presents an “undue hardship” they can be included. I assume that provision is included so that people don’t just routinely declare bankruptcy the minute they graduate or cash their final check.

So yes, individuals can walk away from their honestly acquired obligations - but not without consequence. Tearing up everyone’s current obligations (a student loan “holiday”) is very different. And very arbitrary. And very unfair. IMO.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2021, 06:16:16 AM
Individuals who declare bankruptcy are forced to give up their credit cards. Everything you need one for is taken off the table. Bankruptcy stays on your credit report for 10 years, making it virtually impossible to be approved for most loans. It can even impact rental agreements. In addition, some tasks are required (counseling, etc.).

As things stand, it is difficult to have your student loans discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. But if one can show that his or her student loan payment presents an “undue hardship” they can be included. I assume that provision is included so that people don’t just routinely declare bankruptcy the minute they graduate or cash their final check.

So yes, individuals can walk away from their honestly acquired obligations - but not without consequence. Tearing up everyone’s current obligations (a student loan “holiday”) is very different. And very arbitrary. And very unfair. IMO.

Dream on.  I have a former employee who has declared bankruptcy SEVERAL times.  She had credit cards, and a newer car than we did.  Now, of course her rates were highway robbery, but you can certainly get loans.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2021, 06:19:00 AM
Forcing taxpayers to pay off other peoples debts = an economic boom? Awesome. Why stop with profligate ex college students? If we include forgiveness of all credit card debt, mortgage debt, car loan debt, etc., we’ll be living in Utopia in no time. What could possibly go wrong?

Forcing me to pay the US government to blow up kids all over the world isn't what I'd like the money used for either, but we don't get to choose where each of our tax dollars are allocated.  We should forgive student loans for a ton of reasons.  If you'd like me to go over them for you, I can, but your mind on the matter seems pretty made up, so why bother? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 23, 2021, 06:38:16 AM
Lots of moral hazard hand-wringing and slippery slope arguments in here. Love it.

Either you believe in publicly funded education for our population or you don't. In this century, that should absolutely include a bachelor's (or at least associates).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 23, 2021, 06:58:00 AM
Lots of moral hazard hand-wringing and slippery slope arguments in here. Love it.

Either you believe in publicly funded education for our population or you don't. In this century, that should absolutely include a bachelor's (or at least associates).

Our nations choice to fight against education and heath care for all is rooted in our Christian-based founding
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 23, 2021, 08:13:18 AM
Lots of moral hazard hand-wringing and slippery slope arguments in here. Love it.

Either you believe in publicly funded education for our population or you don't. In this century, that should absolutely include a bachelor's (or at least associates).

Advocate for free college if you think it’s a good idea. Given  honest admission standards I could agree with such a law. Making it retroactive? Nope.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 23, 2021, 08:27:37 AM
Went to the post office yesterday. Incurred $7.38 in charges. Gave the dude $20.08 in cash. Received $13.30 in change. Not everyone should be going to college. Dis kountry iz sew fooked, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on December 23, 2021, 08:34:33 AM
yew by a cuppa coffee wit dat sixty?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 23, 2021, 08:39:50 AM
Korrected and skooled da kat. Figured da government knees it moore da mee, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on December 23, 2021, 08:43:41 AM
Dis kountry iz sew fooked, aina?

You act as if math has been a problem only in the past 2 years.  You know you went to school with dumbasses too!  In a "dangerous" neighborhood even!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 23, 2021, 08:45:51 AM
Our nations choice to fight against education and heath care for all is rooted in our Christian-based founding

And the worst part is we are not Christian-based founded either.  I hate when people try to push that myth.
(I know you are not, Uncle Rico.)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2021, 08:46:41 AM
Advocate for free college if you think it’s a good idea. Given  honest admission standards I could agree with such a law. Making it retroactive? Nope.

Why.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 23, 2021, 08:53:19 AM
You act as if math has been a problem only in the past 2 years.  You know you went to school with dumbasses too!  In a "dangerous" neighborhood even!


Ewe went ta skool wit mee? Hoo new, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on December 23, 2021, 08:59:52 AM
Dream on.  I have a former employee who has declared bankruptcy SEVERAL times.  She had credit cards, and a newer car than we did.  Now, of course her rates were highway robbery, but you can certainly get loans.

Several years ago I dealt with a person who basically had to declare his expenses. I can't remember the exact #s, but he had a used truck and a monthly payment of $1k. My jaw about hit the floor, when I saw his note it was an auto loan going off at like 17%. I can only assume that his credit score made the Nevada Test Range look like Malibu.

Now, your point that despite having ruinous one can get loans and have new things may be true, going through life that way is a road that ends in debt peonage and nowhere else.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on December 23, 2021, 09:03:52 AM
Individuals who declare bankruptcy are forced to give up their credit cards. Everything you need one for is taken off the table. Bankruptcy stays on your credit report for 10 years, making it virtually impossible to be approved for most loans. It can even impact rental agreements. In addition, some tasks are required (counseling, etc.).

As things stand, it is difficult to have your student loans discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. But if one can show that his or her student loan payment presents an “undue hardship” they can be included. I assume that provision is included so that people don’t just routinely declare bankruptcy the minute they graduate or cash their final check.

So yes, individuals can walk away from their honestly acquired obligations - but not without consequence. Tearing up everyone’s current obligations (a student loan “holiday”) is very different. And very arbitrary. And very unfair. IMO.

Good luck. In order to succeed in that effort you have to pass what's called the "certainty of hopelessness test." That is you have to show that you cannot repay the student loan, and under no feasible change in your circumstances could allow you to repay your loans. Basically, if you have terminal cancer and a prognosis of months to live, you've got a shot. (One case has terminal cancer person satisfying the test, one case has a person with crippling mental illness/special needs who got hooked by a for-profit scam getting denied). Almost anything else is likely to fail.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jficke13 on December 23, 2021, 09:07:32 AM
If you want loan forgiveness take advantage of PSLF and earn it. I find it amusing that the biggest proponents in government of loan “forgiveness” are the members of “The Squad” who, despite $174k a year salaries, continue to cry poverty because they have loans they don’t want to pay off (maybe AOC could have passed in the unneeded Tesla). That Rashida Talib claims to be $200k in student loan debt from graduating from the worst law school in America in a low cost of living city, 20 years ago when tuition was under $17k/year, should disqualify her from elected office.

We understood the terms, signed voluntarily, and now people who got what the loans were for (or dropped/flunked out) are refusing to honor their obligation and demanding a hand out. Next will be mortgages.

What is most interesting is the greatest beneficiaries of forgiveness would be middle-upper and upper class whites. 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/12/putting-student-loan-forgiveness-in-perspective-how-costly-is-it-and-who-benefits/

Good luck. Almost nobody successfully navigates the byzantine requirements necessary to qualify.

Oh and I hope you save enough money to pay some taxes. The tax year in which the loan is forgiven you're going to have to report the entire forgiven balance as ordinary income. But I'm sure the famously easy-going IRS will be cool about it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on December 23, 2021, 09:19:31 AM
Good luck. Almost nobody successfully navigates the byzantine requirements necessary to qualify.

Oh and I hope you save enough money to pay some taxes. The tax year in which the loan is forgiven you're going to have to report the entire forgiven balance as ordinary income. But I'm sure the famously easy-going IRS will be cool about it.

A few years ago, Rolling Stone had an article on student debt and student loans.  They covered several examples of people with obvious hardships and they were still denied and people who borrowed like $8,000 owed $35,000+ with "the penalties" and another was like $15,000 borrowed and well over $100,000 with "the penalties".
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 23, 2021, 10:04:24 AM
Good luck. Almost nobody successfully navigates the byzantine requirements necessary to qualify.

Oh and I hope you save enough money to pay some taxes. The tax year in which the loan is forgiven you're going to have to report the entire forgiven balance as ordinary income. But I'm sure the famously easy-going IRS will be cool about it.

Actually they shortened the process for this. I know a few people who have had their loans discharged.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 23, 2021, 10:05:40 AM
Went to the post office yesterday. Incurred $7.38 in charges. Gave the dude $20.08 in cash. Received $13.30 in change. Not everyone should be going to college. Dis kountry iz sew fooked, aina?

I’ll say the country is fooked. Who still uses cash?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 23, 2021, 10:06:22 AM
Advocate for free college if you think it’s a good idea. Given  honest admission standards I could agree with such a law. Making it retroactive? Nope.

Why not?  We retroactively do fiscal stuff all the time.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2021, 10:12:21 AM
Several years ago I dealt with a person who basically had to declare his expenses. I can't remember the exact #s, but he had a used truck and a monthly payment of $1k. My jaw about hit the floor, when I saw his note it was an auto loan going off at like 17%. I can only assume that his credit score made the Nevada Test Range look like Malibu.

Now, your point that despite having ruinous one can get loans and have new things may be true, going through life that way is a road that ends in debt peonage and nowhere else.

That's where she was at.  I wanted to puke on her behalf.  Unfortunately, she's never been smart, and I can't fix all of my employees problems.  Especially if they won't listen to my suggestions... like not getting a new car every two years.  She's such a financial whale for the dealership that exploits her.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 23, 2021, 10:53:37 AM
I think the whole foundation and system of student loans, as well as current college pricing, is FUBAR and in drastic need of overhaul and change.  However, I think blanket student loan forgiveness is a shiny political trinket that won't ever happen and would actually not do anything to fix the greater issue. 

For every truly sad or unfortunate story about student loan debt, there are plenty of people who took on debt to go to a university that wasn't financially prudent for a degree that never projected to financially take care of large debt burdens in a timely fashion.

FWIW, I'm strongly in favor of free CC/associate degrees.  I could come around to a $10K chop on existing balances or something of the like.  And all of this is coming from someone who has student debt themselves.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on December 23, 2021, 10:59:29 AM
I think the whole foundation and system of student loans, as well as current college pricing, is FUBAR and in drastic need of overhaul and change.  However, I think blanket student loan forgiveness is a shiny political trinket that won't ever happen and would actually not do anything to fix the greater issue. 

For every truly sad or unfortunate story about student loan debt, there are plenty of people who took on debt to go to a university that wasn't financially prudent for a degree that never projected to financially take care of large debt burdens in a timely fashion.

FWIW, I'm strongly in favor of free CC/associate degrees.  I could come around to a $10K chop on existing balances or something of the like.  And all of this is coming from someone who has student debt themselves.

Yes. A 10k chop that equates to paying off the gen Ed's that you're pressured into overpaying for at brand name universities would be a great start.

As far as the income of the degree vs debt burden I like Purdues model (or at least my understanding of it)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on December 23, 2021, 11:54:59 AM

Ewe went ta skool wit mee? Hoo new, hey?

Da hole Rocky ting iz a red hearing.  Dude lives in Cudahy, hey.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pbiflyer on December 23, 2021, 12:27:42 PM
How about just stopping charging the interest on the payments. The horror stories always revolve around massive payments on the interest.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on December 23, 2021, 12:48:45 PM
Da hole Rocky ting iz a red hearing.  Dude lives in Cuda, hey?

ftfy
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on December 23, 2021, 02:47:21 PM
ftfy

Lol!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 23, 2021, 03:37:03 PM
Yes. A 10k chop that equates to paying off the gen Ed's that you're pressured into overpaying for at brand name universities would be a great start.

As far as the income of the degree vs debt burden I like Purdues model (or at least my understanding of it)

Who pressured us? We paid for more than classes, it was the college experience of being in the dorms, the social life, freedom, maturation, etc. People who lived at home or went to CCs didn’t get that, whether by choice or other reasons.

My friend’s kids went to college 1.5 miles from home. They can walk to campus in 20 minutes. They wanted their kids to live on campus for those reasons. There was no pressure, even after his wife was laid off. That’s where some of the loans went, living expenses. Does the argument change when people recognize many of these loans went to rent and food?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 23, 2021, 05:55:58 PM
Who pressured us? We paid for more than classes, it was the college experience of being in the dorms, the social life, freedom, maturation, etc. People who lived at home or went to CCs didn’t get that, whether by choice or other reasons.

My friend’s kids went to college 1.5 miles from home. They can walk to campus in 20 minutes. They wanted their kids to live on campus for those reasons. There was no pressure, even after his wife was laid off. That’s where some of the loans went, living expenses. Does the argument change when people recognize many of these loans went to rent and food?

Times change.  School is outrageously overpriced.

Honestly, I don't care if the loans went to rent and food.  Especially if they're the government backed loans.  Private loans I could be talked into them being different.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on December 23, 2021, 06:47:13 PM
" We should forgive student loans for a ton of reasons.  If you'd like me to go over them for you, I can, but your mind on the matter seems pretty made up, so why bother? "


  why doesn't this surprise me?  everyone get's a trophy, enyn'a?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on December 23, 2021, 06:50:27 PM
Went to the post office yesterday. Incurred $7.38 in charges. Gave the dude $20.08 in cash. Received $13.30 in change. Not everyone should be going to college. Dis kountry iz sew fooked, aina?

  no wonder the usps is always losing money...head slap
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on December 23, 2021, 06:51:29 PM
" We should forgive student loans for a ton of reasons.  If you'd like me to go over them for you, I can, but your mind on the matter seems pretty made up, so why bother? "


  why doesn't this surprise me?  everyone get's a trophy, enyn'a?

6 of 10

Everyone gets a trophy was created by the baby boomer generation for their kids.  Baby boomers are arguably the worst generation of Americans.  Left the world a worse place and still complain all the time
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 23, 2021, 07:27:58 PM
6 of 10

Everyone gets a trophy was created by the baby boomer generation for their kids.  Baby boomers are arguably the worst generation of Americans.  Left the world a worse place and still complain all the time

The best thing about boomers is how they climbed the ladder of success using a perfect storm of global economic advantages plus government programs/assistance and then burned all the rungs behind them so no one else had a chance
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on December 23, 2021, 07:42:04 PM
The best thing about boomers is how they climbed the ladder of success using a perfect storm of global economic advantages plus government programs/assistance and then burned all the rungs behind them so no one else had a chance

 ::) ::)

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on December 23, 2021, 08:45:53 PM
6 of 10

Everyone gets a trophy was created by the baby boomer generation for their kids.  Baby boomers are arguably the worst generation of Americans.  Left the world a worse place and still complain all the time

that's what you got out of that?  another zero for the 0 and no trophy for uncle leeko
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 23, 2021, 08:49:21 PM
Times change.  School is outrageously overpriced.

Honestly, I don't care if the loans went to rent and food.  Especially if they're the government backed loans.  Private loans I could be talked into them being different.

So when I took out loans to study for 4 weeks but spend 7 weeks for a summer in Europe that would be forgiven under your policies because college is “overpriced.”

Can I get my mortgage forgiven too? Think of the spending I could do if I didn’t have that $2k/month payment. I mean, property here is outrageously overpriced so forgive my mortgage.

I’m for partial forgiveness if it’s earned, like PSLF. But, that’s not what millennials and Gen Z believe in: having to earn something. They got what they wanted and now don’t want to pay for it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 23, 2021, 10:30:38 PM
Times change.  School is outrageously overpriced.

Honestly, I don't care if the loans went to rent and food.  Especially if they're the government backed loans.  Private loans I could be talked into them being different.

An undergrad student can only take out a maximum of $57,500 over four years in federal loans, $23,000 which are subsidized (no interest building up while in school). Those are the first ones a student gets too. Anyone claiming to be over $100k in debt is loading up on private loans, attending schools beyond their means, using the loans for outside expenses, or went to grad school ($68,500 in subsidized loans available), a luxury expense.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 24, 2021, 06:15:05 AM
Well in that case, f*ck 'em right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 24, 2021, 07:50:42 AM
Bazillion flights getting canceled this weekend. Airlines can't staff 'em due to Covid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 24, 2021, 11:33:43 AM
An undergrad student can only take out a maximum of $57,500 over four years in federal loans, $23,000 which are subsidized (no interest building up while in school). Those are the first ones a student gets too. Anyone claiming to be over $100k in debt is loading up on private loans, attending schools beyond their means, using the loans for outside expenses, or went to grad school ($68,500 in subsidized loans available), a luxury expense.

Grad school is a luxury expense.  Unless you want to be a doctor, attorney, academic, therapist, educational administrator, business executive, dentist, speech pathologist, scientist, etc.

Or js it your contention that only the already wealthy should have access to those careers?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on December 24, 2021, 12:04:03 PM
Grad school is a luxury expense.  Unless you want to be a doctor, attorney, academic, therapist, educational administrator, business executive, dentist, speech pathologist, scientist, etc.

Or js it your contention that only the already wealthy should have access to those careers?

Those professions have salaries commiserate with the experience and degrees needed to attain them.  Salaries that allow you to pay off the acquired debt.

That debt is very different than the undergrad who went to an expensive private school to get a bachelors degree that now pays them $30-40K a year.

Instead of trying to deal with skyrocketing tuitions and the issues there, the solution is just “all school should be free, wipe out all debts from when it wasn’t” which just seems reductive and ham handed
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 24, 2021, 12:34:11 PM
Grad school is a luxury expense.  Unless you want to be a doctor, attorney, academic, therapist, educational administrator, business executive, dentist, speech pathologist, scientist, etc.

Or js it your contention that only the already wealthy should have access to those careers?

Grad school is an investment with greater returns. Med School and Dental School lead to a much higher income upon graduation. That’s the reward. How many undergrad degrees result in a $150k (and higher) starting salary? My remaining loan debt is from law school, i made the choice to leave a career to invest in that degree.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on December 24, 2021, 12:45:44 PM
Grad school is an investment with greater returns. Med School and Dental School lead to a much higher income upon graduation. That’s the reward. How many undergrad degrees result in a $150k (and higher) starting salary? My remaining loan debt is from law school, i made the choice to leave a career to invest in that degree.

The people who are the real idiots in regards to student loans are the ones that are getting liberal arts PhDs from private institutions and aren't on any sort of scholarship or fellowship. It's insane to rack up six figures in debt for a job that pays $55K a year - IF you can find a related job at all.

Awhile back, Slate presented a series of sob stories of these types of folks - and they got flamed in the comments.

https://slate.com/business/2020/07/debt-nation-the-faces-of-americas-student-loan-crisis.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 24, 2021, 01:21:51 PM
The people who are the real idiots in regards to student loans are the ones that are getting liberal arts PhDs from private institutions and aren't on any sort of scholarship or fellowship. It's insane to rack up six figures in debt for a job that pays $55K a year - IF you can find a related job at all.

Awhile back, Slate presented a series of sob stories of these types of folks - and they got flamed in the comments.

https://slate.com/business/2020/07/debt-nation-the-faces-of-americas-student-loan-crisis.html

Humanities programs account for less than 5 percent of all advanced degrees awarded.

https://www.amacad.org/humanities-indicators/higher-education/humanities-share-all-advanced-degrees-conferred
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 25, 2021, 12:00:50 PM
So when I took out loans to study for 4 weeks but spend 7 weeks for a summer in Europe that would be forgiven under your policies because college is “overpriced.”

Can I get my mortgage forgiven too? Think of the spending I could do if I didn’t have that $2k/month payment. I mean, property here is outrageously overpriced so forgive my mortgage.

I’m for partial forgiveness if it’s earned, like PSLF. But, that’s not what millennials and Gen Z believe in: having to earn something. They got what they wanted and now don’t want to pay for it.

There are so many strawmen here you've created an army
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 25, 2021, 12:03:03 PM
Humanities programs account for less than 5 percent of all advanced degrees awarded.

https://www.amacad.org/humanities-indicators/higher-education/humanities-share-all-advanced-degrees-conferred

But it makes for a great story.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 26, 2021, 10:24:52 PM
Humanities programs account for less than 5 percent of all advanced degrees awarded.

https://www.amacad.org/humanities-indicators/higher-education/humanities-share-all-advanced-degrees-conferred

Duke advertises the average starting salary upon graduating with a MBA from there is $171k.  The cost for that degree, per Duke, is $140k over two years. Columbia MBA is the highest at $174k for average starting compensation after $77k per year tuition. That’s a pretty damn good investment, but sure, let’s call those loans predatory and the 25 year olds starting at $170k a year victims.

And if someone is dumb enough to take out six figure loan debt to go to full time to joke “schools” like Cooley Law or any CBA school, or DeVry and other worthless MBA program that’s their own damn fault.

https://dwc.cnbc.com/QzhkB/index.html

https://abovethelaw.com/2018/12/the-10-worst-law-schools-in-the-country-2018/

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 27, 2021, 07:03:34 AM
Duke advertises the average starting salary upon graduating with a MBA from there is $171k.  The cost for that degree, per Duke, is $140k over two years. Columbia MBA is the highest at $174k for average starting compensation after $77k per year tuition. That’s a pretty damn good investment, but sure, let’s call those loans predatory and the 25 year olds starting at $170k a year victims.

And if someone is dumb enough to take out six figure loan debt to go to full time to joke “schools” like Cooley Law or any CBA school, or DeVry and other worthless MBA program that’s their own damn fault.

https://dwc.cnbc.com/QzhkB/index.html

https://abovethelaw.com/2018/12/the-10-worst-law-schools-in-the-country-2018/


Lol. Yeah. Screw them.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 27, 2021, 07:19:16 AM
Once again, one U.S. political party is actively, aggressively working to undermine our country's attempt to protect the health of our residents and rid us from the scourge of COVID-19.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/12/27/5-gop-led-states-extend-unemployment-aid-workers-who-lose-jobs-over-vaccine-mandates/?utm_campaign=wp_the7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_the7&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F359d985%2F61c9ac309d2fdab56be3193a%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F21%2F39%2F61c9ac309d2fdab56be3193a

At least five Republican-led states have extended unemployment benefits to people who’ve lost jobs over vaccine mandates — and a smattering of others may soon follow.

Workers who quit or are fired for cause — including for defying company policy — are generally ineligible for jobless benefits. But Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Kansas and Tennessee have carved out exceptions for those who won’t submit to the multi-shot coronavirus vaccine regimens that many companies now require. Similar ideas have been floated in Wyoming, Wisconsin and Missouri.

Critics contend that these states are incentivizing people to skip shots that public health experts say offer the best line of defense against the coronavirus. Business leaders and industry groups have argued against the rule changes because, they say, companies would shoulder much of the costs. And the efforts are playing out as the Biden administration is pressing immunization rules for private companies and as coronavirus cases are surging again because of the fast-spreading omicron variant.

Observers say it’s a mark of the politicization of the coronavirus — with fights flaring over business closures, mask mandates and more — and how it has scrambled state politics and altered long-held positions. It wasn’t long ago, they note, that two dozen Republican-led states moved to restrict unemployment aid to compel residents to return to the workforce and ease labor shortages.

“These governors, who are using the unemployment insurance system in a moment of political theater to make a statement about the vaccine mandate, are the same folks who turned off unemployment benefits early for millions of workers over the summer,”
said Rebecca Dixon, the executive director of the left-leaning National Employment Law Project. Arkansas, Iowa, Tennessee and Florida cut federal unemployment aid in June.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on December 27, 2021, 12:02:15 PM

And if someone is dumb enough to take out six figure loan debt to go to full time to joke “schools” like Cooley Law ..


https://abovethelaw.com/2018/12/the-10-worst-law-schools-in-the-country-2018/



With irony, last night we had dinner with my Uncle who was a prof at Cooley.  I had no idea I should have been giving him crap all these years.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on December 27, 2021, 12:53:30 PM
These schools have the worst LSATs and GPAs for admitted students.  That doesn't necessarily mean they are the worst law schools.

And especially since at least four of these schools are HBCUs, those that believe that standardized tests are biased might like to have a word.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on December 27, 2021, 01:45:22 PM
These schools have the worst LSATs and GPAs for admitted students.  That doesn't necessarily mean they are the worst law schools.

And especially since at least four of these schools are HBCUs, those that believe that standardized tests are biased might like to have a word.
Exactly. I would be curious (but not curious enough to look up) bar passage rates.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 27, 2021, 03:30:18 PM
Inflation update:

https://youtu.be/L0pTrNEQ-JU
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on December 28, 2021, 12:03:13 AM
Exactly. I would be curious (but not curious enough to look up) bar passage rates.

Not good (except for NC Central) which is why schools get sanctioned by the ABA (which led to Valpo closing). They’re admitting too many students who are unlikely to pass the Bar. One thing I noticed with Southern was the large number of grads who didn’t even sit for the bar, nearly 50%. But at least tuition is cheap (the school motto is “A Great Value in Legal Education,” seriously), they won’t need forgiveness.

Of course, bar passage rates need to be considered in conjunction with the passage rate of the jurisdiction.

https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/statistics/2019-bar-data-consumer-info.xlsx
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on December 28, 2021, 11:07:37 AM
Duke advertises the average starting salary upon graduating with a MBA from there is $171k.  The cost for that degree, per Duke, is $140k over two years. Columbia MBA is the highest at $174k for average starting compensation after $77k per year tuition. That’s a pretty damn good investment, but sure, let’s call those loans predatory and the 25 year olds starting at $170k a year victims.

And if someone is dumb enough to take out six figure loan debt to go to full time to joke “schools” like Cooley Law or any CBA school, or DeVry and other worthless MBA program that’s their own damn fault.

https://dwc.cnbc.com/QzhkB/index.html

https://abovethelaw.com/2018/12/the-10-worst-law-schools-in-the-country-2018/

Shifting goalposts, dropping strawmen and unloading a whopper of red herring, all in the same post.
You, sir, are the king.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on December 28, 2021, 11:42:54 AM
Once again, one U.S. political party is actively, aggressively working to undermine our country's attempt to protect the health of our residents and rid us from the scourge of COVID-19.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/12/27/5-gop-led-states-extend-unemployment-aid-workers-who-lose-jobs-over-vaccine-mandates/?utm_campaign=wp_the7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_the7&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F359d985%2F61c9ac309d2fdab56be3193a%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F21%2F39%2F61c9ac309d2fdab56be3193a

At least five Republican-led states have extended unemployment benefits to people who’ve lost jobs over vaccine mandates — and a smattering of others may soon follow.

Workers who quit or are fired for cause — including for defying company policy — are generally ineligible for jobless benefits. But Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Kansas and Tennessee have carved out exceptions for those who won’t submit to the multi-shot coronavirus vaccine regimens that many companies now require. Similar ideas have been floated in Wyoming, Wisconsin and Missouri.

Critics contend that these states are incentivizing people to skip shots that public health experts say offer the best line of defense against the coronavirus. Business leaders and industry groups have argued against the rule changes because, they say, companies would shoulder much of the costs. And the efforts are playing out as the Biden administration is pressing immunization rules for private companies and as coronavirus cases are surging again because of the fast-spreading omicron variant.

Observers say it’s a mark of the politicization of the coronavirus — with fights flaring over business closures, mask mandates and more — and how it has scrambled state politics and altered long-held positions. It wasn’t long ago, they note, that two dozen Republican-led states moved to restrict unemployment aid to compel residents to return to the workforce and ease labor shortages.

“These governors, who are using the unemployment insurance system in a moment of political theater to make a statement about the vaccine mandate, are the same folks who turned off unemployment benefits early for millions of workers over the summer,”
said Rebecca Dixon, the executive director of the left-leaning National Employment Law Project. Arkansas, Iowa, Tennessee and Florida cut federal unemployment aid in June.


I do love the absolute flip-flops are political system does. Almost like this 2 party system is useless and should be abolished.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 28, 2021, 12:21:28 PM
I do love the absolute flip-flops are political system does. Almost like this 2 party system is useless and should be abolished.

Well, I don't know how one "abolishes" a political system.

But when many leaders from one party continuously and aggressively work to undermine what this country needs during a deadly pandemic, it's more than just "routine hypocrisy."
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on December 28, 2021, 01:12:25 PM
Yeah, offering people money for not getting the vaccine is just plain sick.

It goes beyond politics into the realm of cruelty and evil.

But in reality, it IS only one party that embraces this sick stuff.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 28, 2021, 06:16:38 PM
I do love the absolute flip-flops are political system does. Almost like this 2 party system is useless and should be abolished.

Holy smokes, we agree.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on December 28, 2021, 07:54:29 PM
Shifting goalposts, dropping strawmen and unloading a whopper of red herring, all in the same post.
You, sir, are the king.

Like father, like son
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 28, 2021, 07:56:54 PM
Shifting goalposts, dropping strawmen and unloading a whopper of red herring, all in the same post.
You, sir, are the king.

(https://c.tenor.com/D7HBwILZEhYAAAAC/hail-to-the-king-baby-kiss.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on December 28, 2021, 08:50:39 PM
With irony, last night we had dinner with my Uncle who was a prof at Cooley.  I had no idea I should have been giving him crap all these years.

i know a guy whose family had a big legacy at MU law, was turned down, went to cooley and now is probably among the top 5 defense attorneys in milwaukee.  jerry boyle was practically family
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on December 29, 2021, 10:30:17 AM
Well, I don't know how one "abolishes" a political system.
Storming the capitol?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on December 29, 2021, 11:33:58 AM
Well, I don't know how one "abolishes" a political system.

But when many leaders from one party continuously and aggressively work to undermine what this country needs during a deadly pandemic, it's more than just "routine hypocrisy."


Banning both the republican party and democratic party and allowing new parties to form.

Other countries have 4,5,6+ parties that are forced to actually work together because no one ever gains a majority.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on December 29, 2021, 11:45:35 AM
A lot of those systems with multiple small parties don’t work very well either.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 29, 2021, 11:52:13 AM

Banning both the republican party and democratic party and allowing new parties to form.

Other countries have 4,5,6+ parties that are forced to actually work together because no one ever gains a majority.

Yes, because banning parties is so in line with the first amendment and democracy in general.   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 29, 2021, 12:39:03 PM
Yes, because banning parties is so in line with the first amendment and democracy in general.

A lot of people ignore that the constitution is supposed to be a living document.  The FF expected the document to evolve and change with the times.

But we haven't done much of that in the last 30 years.  And if we're being truly honest, its been more like 50 since anything 'new' was even introduced.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on December 29, 2021, 12:51:22 PM
Yes, because banning parties is so in line with the first amendment and democracy in general.


I guess we can continue with the current system of both parties gerrymandering, filibustering, and flip flopping on policies to spite the other party. That's totally been working for the past 50 years right? I think our Healthcare system is TOP notch
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2021, 12:54:41 PM

I guess we can continue with the current system of both parties gerrymandering, filibustering, and flip flopping on policies to spite the other party. That's totally been working for the past 50 years right? I think our Healthcare system is TOP notch

It’s up to the voters to force change. Otherwise they really don’t want it like they say they do.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: #UnleashSean on December 29, 2021, 12:56:36 PM
It’s up to the voters to force change. Otherwise they really don’t want it like they say they do.

Its hard to actually force change when 2 parties have a monopoly on everything. The occasional 3rd party candidate sneaks through, but not enough to make a difference. Primaries are worthless since whatever candidate we vote in is required to tow the party line or be booted.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 29, 2021, 01:15:31 PM
It’s up to the voters to force change. Otherwise they really don’t want it like they say they do.

The gerrymandering that takes place on the state level -- which includes U.S. House seats -- often makes it impossible for voters to force change. Districts are designed that let elected officials choose voters rather than the other way around. Southern states, especially, pack Black voters tightly into a few districts, clearing the way for Republicans to win a majority of statehouse and U.S. House seats even if Dems get more votes statewide.

Both parties do it, but the GOP has it down to a science.

Our country desperately needs a comprehensive voting rights law, one that will eliminate gerrymandering, mandate specific days/hours when polls are open, mandate the number of ballot drop boxes, create simple and unified rules for absentee voting, make it illegal for states to craft legislation that would let leaders of one party nullify votes they don't like, etc.

Until that happens, we can have lots of small, cosmetic changes but we won't have a system where every person's vote matters.

Unfortunately, I give about a 0.1% chance of that happening in my lifetime.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 29, 2021, 01:17:07 PM
Start a third party.  Let me know what your platform and philosophy are and if I like it I will contribute.   I've done it before. There is nothing in the constitution that prohibits it. 

Before you start, I am well aware of the structural difficulties.   Challenges make life worth living.   Go big!   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on December 29, 2021, 01:17:26 PM
The gerrymandering that takes place on the state level -- which includes U.S. House seats -- often makes it impossible for voters to force change. Districts are designed that let elected officials choose voters rather than the other way around. Southern states, especially, pack Black voters tightly into a few districts, clearing the way for Republicans to win a majority of statehouse and U.S. House seats even if Dems get more votes statewide.

Both parties do it, but the GOP has it down to a science.

Our country desperately needs a comprehensive voting rights law, one that will eliminate gerrymandering, mandate specific days/hours when polls are open, mandate the number of ballot drop boxes, create simple and unified rules for absentee voting, make it illegal for states to craft legislation that would let leaders of one party nullify votes they don't like, etc.

Until that happens, we can have lots of small, cosmetic changes but we won't have a system where every person's vote matters.

Unfortunately, I give about a 0.1% chance of that happening in my lifetime.

same.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2021, 01:24:30 PM
Its hard to actually force change when 2 parties have a monopoly on everything. The occasional 3rd party candidate sneaks through, but not enough to make a difference. Primaries are worthless since whatever candidate we vote in is required to tow the party line or be booted.


They could vote for candidates who want to change how gerrymandering works, how campaigns are financed, all through the amendment process.

But none of these issues come close to being priorities for the electorate.  I doubt either crack the top ten.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on December 29, 2021, 01:33:08 PM
Michigan just finished a bi-partisan reapportionment due to a 2018 vote that passed with 61% of the vote.  The same election that the voters directed the AG to make absentee voting basically universal in Michigan.   

The goal was to as best as possible end gerrymandering.

Both sides have elements that are ticked, so they must have done something right.   

T
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 29, 2021, 02:58:53 PM
Ranked choice voting
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 29, 2021, 08:17:43 PM
Whether science based or not, I love that the stated reason for reducing from 10 days to 5 days is because of the economy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Mutaman on December 30, 2021, 01:03:05 AM
Ranked choice voting

Did not work out very well in the NYC  Mayoratorial race.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on December 30, 2021, 06:04:52 AM
Michigan just finished a bi-partisan reapportionment due to a 2018 vote that passed with 61% of the vote.  The same election that the voters directed the AG to make absentee voting basically universal in Michigan.   

The goal was to as best as possible end gerrymandering.

Both sides have elements that are ticked, so they must have done something right.   

I finally just got around to reading a couple of articles on this gerrymander-free redistricting, which was done by an independent commission that includes Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Although, as you said, both sides are ticked off and both are threatening some kind of legal action, legal scholars seem to think this new map (or something very close to it) will stand.

I congratulate the voters of Michigan, from both parties, for doing what they could to take back their elections from the power-hungry lawmakers. If every state did something like this, we could take a major step toward having the democratic republic that was envisioned for America.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 30, 2021, 07:23:52 AM
In thinking about this, if you really wanted to introduce third parties into the system, you could create a House of Representatives that doesn't require geographic boundaries.  The only requirement in the Constitution is that the members are proportionate to the population of the state. 

Here's how it would work.  If a state gets 10 House members, each party would nominate 10 members in ranked order (or a primary would do it for them).  Then during the general election, people would vote for the party's slate.  If Republicans got 70%, and Democrats got 30%, then you would have 7Rs and 3Ds representing the entirety of the state.  In this scenario, a third party would only need 10% of the vote.  In a larger state like California, they would need even less.

No gerrymandering.  No safe seats.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 30, 2021, 03:46:42 PM
Business>science/public safety

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/30/politics/biden-administration-shifting-covid-guidance/index.html
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on December 30, 2021, 08:20:05 PM
Anyone smarter than me care to weigh in on this thread?

https://twitter.com/LeftistMoniker/status/1476173986065223680?t=QV0QyPwdZ63HLPCuVWOwAw&s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on December 30, 2021, 08:31:25 PM
Anyone smarter than me care to weigh in on this thread?

https://twitter.com/LeftistMoniker/status/1476173986065223680?t=QV0QyPwdZ63HLPCuVWOwAw&s=19

It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me because anecdotally we are having trouble hiring positions and there are vacancies all over. If this were all a PPP scam, the employment issues that exist in the real world wouldn’t actually exist.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on December 31, 2021, 03:47:40 AM
Anyone smarter than me care to weigh in on this thread?

https://twitter.com/LeftistMoniker/status/1476173986065223680?t=QV0QyPwdZ63HLPCuVWOwAw&s=19




Kan ya hold on 'til next weak? Eye'll ax anywon inn my neighboor's kindergarten klass ta chime inn, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Goose on December 31, 2021, 04:11:53 AM
Doc

Way to get the day off to a fast start. I always enjoy laughing before 4:30am
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 04, 2022, 01:44:34 PM
https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/1476310104379166725?t=Ot2H2MZUoS8-bBP9kaLwGQ&s=19

Oh ok then
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 06, 2022, 11:09:04 AM
This seems reasonable ...

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/01/06/world/omicron-covid-vaccine-tests/former-biden-advisers-call-on-the-administration-to-change-its-covid-strategy

On the day President Biden was inaugurated, the advisory board of health experts who counseled him during the presidential transition officially ceased to exist. But its members have quietly continued to meet regularly over Zoom, their conversations often turning to frustration with Mr. Biden’s coronavirus response.

Now, six of these former advisers have gone public with an extraordinary, albeit polite, critique — and a plea to be heard. In three opinion articles published on Thursday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, they are calling for Mr. Biden to adopt an entirely new pandemic strategy — one that is geared to the “new normal” of living with the virus indefinitely, not to wiping it out.

The authors are all big names in American medicine; several, including Dr. Luciana Borio, a former acting chief scientist at the Food and Drug Administration, have held high-ranking positions in government. The driving force behind the articles is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist, medical ethicist and University of Pennsylvania professor who advised former President Barack Obama.

They say the first thing the administration needs to do is to step back and take a broader vision, by recognizing that Covid-19 is here to stay. In one article, Dr. Emanuel and two co-authors — Michael T. Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, and Dr. Celine Gounder, an infectious disease expert at New York University — pointedly note that in July, Mr. Biden proclaimed that “we’ve gained the upper hand against this virus,” which in retrospect was clearly not the case.

Now, they say, with the Omicron variant fueling a dramatic new surge, concerns have risen about the United States becoming stuck in “a perpetual state of emergency.” To be better prepared for inevitable outbreaks, they suggest that the administration lay out goals and specific benchmarks, including what number of hospitalizations and deaths from respiratory viruses, including the coronavirus, that should trigger emergency measures.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 06, 2022, 11:15:52 AM
This seems reasonable ...

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/01/06/world/omicron-covid-vaccine-tests/former-biden-advisers-call-on-the-administration-to-change-its-covid-strategy

On the day President Biden was inaugurated, the advisory board of health experts who counseled him during the presidential transition officially ceased to exist. But its members have quietly continued to meet regularly over Zoom, their conversations often turning to frustration with Mr. Biden’s coronavirus response.

Now, six of these former advisers have gone public with an extraordinary, albeit polite, critique — and a plea to be heard. In three opinion articles published on Thursday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, they are calling for Mr. Biden to adopt an entirely new pandemic strategy — one that is geared to the “new normal” of living with the virus indefinitely, not to wiping it out.

The authors are all big names in American medicine; several, including Dr. Luciana Borio, a former acting chief scientist at the Food and Drug Administration, have held high-ranking positions in government. The driving force behind the articles is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist, medical ethicist and University of Pennsylvania professor who advised former President Barack Obama.

They say the first thing the administration needs to do is to step back and take a broader vision, by recognizing that Covid-19 is here to stay. In one article, Dr. Emanuel and two co-authors — Michael T. Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, and Dr. Celine Gounder, an infectious disease expert at New York University — pointedly note that in July, Mr. Biden proclaimed that “we’ve gained the upper hand against this virus,” which in retrospect was clearly not the case.

Now, they say, with the Omicron variant fueling a dramatic new surge, concerns have risen about the United States becoming stuck in “a perpetual state of emergency.” To be better prepared for inevitable outbreaks, they suggest that the administration lay out goals and specific benchmarks, including what number of hospitalizations and deaths from respiratory viruses, including the coronavirus, that should trigger emergency measures.


I agree with the bolded. Omicron was a game changer. We missed our window to gain a handle on COVID, largely due to certain entities pushing a conspiracy agenda to disrupt vaccination and suppression methods.

We need to be discussing, and moving towards a new model and a new normal. The problem is there are still distinct risks out there that current mitigation efforts suppress, so a rapid/abrupt switch may lead to a greater likelihood of COVID emergencies. I am confident that individuals are discussing these transitions, and watching Omicron data to gauge what the most prudent timeline, and format of these changes should look like.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on January 06, 2022, 11:16:37 AM
The national sick out is currently underway.    It will continue for a few weeks.     The acceleration of the great resignation will follow.   

So, where shall we get the workers to fill all of these positions?    (Hint:   Time to rethink immigration policies)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 06, 2022, 11:28:29 AM
The national sick out is currently underway.    It will continue for a few weeks.     The acceleration of the great resignation will follow.   

So, where shall we get the workers to fill all of these positions?    (Hint:   Time to rethink immigration policies)

Or start to undo the almost 50 year trend in the gap between productivity gains and salary increases. Up until 1973, increases in productivity correlated with an increase in average salary for primary workers.

Since then, all productivity gains have led to an increase in corporate profits, and executive compensation.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on January 06, 2022, 11:33:31 AM
Trickle down.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 06, 2022, 12:05:07 PM
This seems reasonable ...

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/01/06/world/omicron-covid-vaccine-tests/former-biden-advisers-call-on-the-administration-to-change-its-covid-strategy

On the day President Biden was inaugurated, the advisory board of health experts who counseled him during the presidential transition officially ceased to exist. But its members have quietly continued to meet regularly over Zoom, their conversations often turning to frustration with Mr. Biden’s coronavirus response.

Now, six of these former advisers have gone public with an extraordinary, albeit polite, critique — and a plea to be heard. In three opinion articles published on Thursday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, they are calling for Mr. Biden to adopt an entirely new pandemic strategy — one that is geared to the “new normal” of living with the virus indefinitely, not to wiping it out.

The authors are all big names in American medicine; several, including Dr. Luciana Borio, a former acting chief scientist at the Food and Drug Administration, have held high-ranking positions in government. The driving force behind the articles is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist, medical ethicist and University of Pennsylvania professor who advised former President Barack Obama.

They say the first thing the administration needs to do is to step back and take a broader vision, by recognizing that Covid-19 is here to stay. In one article, Dr. Emanuel and two co-authors — Michael T. Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, and Dr. Celine Gounder, an infectious disease expert at New York University — pointedly note that in July, Mr. Biden proclaimed that “we’ve gained the upper hand against this virus,” which in retrospect was clearly not the case.

Now, they say, with the Omicron variant fueling a dramatic new surge, concerns have risen about the United States becoming stuck in “a perpetual state of emergency.” To be better prepared for inevitable outbreaks, they suggest that the administration lay out goals and specific benchmarks, including what number of hospitalizations and deaths from respiratory viruses, including the coronavirus, that should trigger emergency measures.



I tend to think we are knee-jerking to Fall 2020 responses that aren't always necessary. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on January 06, 2022, 12:48:20 PM
The national sick out is currently underway.    It will continue for a few weeks.     The acceleration of the great resignation will follow.   

So, where shall we get the workers to fill all of these positions?    (Hint:   Time to rethink immigration policies)

Good, the illegals can teach in the public school system.  Problem solved.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 06, 2022, 01:07:10 PM
The national sick out is currently underway.    It will continue for a few weeks.     The acceleration of the great resignation will follow.   

So, where shall we get the workers to fill all of these positions?    (Hint:   Time to rethink immigration policies)

Rethink immigration policies only if you want to keep wages unnecessarily low.  Current landscape of employers desperate and fighting each other for good employees has helped improve wages almost overnight for thousands and thousands of Americans. 

Inject hundreds of thousands of immigrants into that picture and now the power gets shifted right back to the employers and away from the employees.

Honest question.  If a local district wants to give a 25% pay raise across the board to all their teachers in k-12 is that something that has to be voted on by the residents of the community or just negotiated with the union or something?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on January 06, 2022, 01:16:09 PM
Honest question.  If a local district wants to give a 25% pay raise across the board to all their teachers in k-12 is that something that has to be voted on by the residents of the community or just negotiated with the union or something?

The laws differ by states. But in most, districts need voter approval for a tax rate hike above a certain amount or to fund borrowing( like a bond issue) that would require a tax increase to repay.
So, it would depend on how the district is able to fund any pay hike.
Generally speaking, though, the residents of the community get their say when they choose their elected leaders on the school board.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on January 06, 2022, 01:16:16 PM
Rethink immigration policies only if you want to keep wages unnecessarily low.  Current landscape of employers desperate and fighting each other for good employees has helped improve wages almost overnight for thousands and thousands of Americans. 

Inject hundreds of thousands of immigrants into that picture and now the power gets shifted right back to the employers and away from the employees.

Honest question.  If a local district wants to give a 25% pay raise across the board to all their teachers in k-12 is that something that has to be voted on by the residents of the community or just negotiated with the union or something?

You're not honestly this stupid are you?  Unemployment is at 4.2% nationally.  That is in the natural level of 'full employment'.

https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/full-employment

There aren't willing workers to fill millions of job openings.  So you're suggestion is to let thousands of businesses 'fight it out' for workers that do not exist?  And what logic or rationale do you base this from?  Your feelings again?  Xenophobia?

It's fine, I know you haven't really thought this through either.  You just love to 'ask questions' or type the first thing that fires out of your brain.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 06, 2022, 01:21:44 PM
The laws differ by states. But in most, districts need voter approval for a tax rate hike above a certain amount or to fund borrowing( like a bond issue) that would require a tax increase to repay.
So, it would depend on how the district is able to fund any pay hike.
Generally speaking, though, the residents of the community get their say when they choose their elected leaders on the school board.

Interesting, thanks!!

Seems like a no brainer as a campaign promise or talking point if you’re running for a local school board .
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on January 06, 2022, 01:44:41 PM
Interesting, thanks!!

Seems like a no brainer as a campaign promise or talking point if you’re running for a local school board .

Nah.
Old people are the largest voting block in local elections. Old people don't have kids and, because of that, old people tend not to like it when school districts spend money.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on January 06, 2022, 01:48:44 PM
Nah.
Old people are the largest voting block in local elections. Old people don't have kids and, because of that, old people tend not to like it when school districts spend money.

Yuuuuup.  It is amazing when you analyze the data when it comes to local elections and why schools struggle in them to get funds.  My parents have lived in the same house I grow up in and they haven’t voted yes on a single school referendum since my sister and I were out of school.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 06, 2022, 01:56:58 PM
Yuuuuup.  It is amazing when you analyze the data when it comes to local elections and why schools struggle in them to get funds.  My parents have lived in the same house I grow up in and they haven’t voted yes on a single school referendum since my sister and I were out of school.

Boomer mentality - take advantage of every existing program (plus create new advantages for yourselves) to climb the ladder of life, then burn every rung behind you
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 06, 2022, 02:02:55 PM
You're not honestly this stupid are you?  Unemployment is at 4.2% nationally.  That is in the natural level of 'full employment'.

https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/full-employment

There aren't willing workers to fill millions of job openings.  So you're suggestion is to let thousands of businesses 'fight it out' for workers that do not exist?  And what logic or rationale do you base this from?  Your feelings again?  Xenophobia?

It's fine, I know you haven't really thought this through either.  You just love to 'ask questions' or type the first thing that fires out of your brain.


https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/participationrate.asp

Labor participation rate is a better piece of data to look at then unemployment rate.  Currently at 62% if we could convince (with increasingly higher wages)another 5-10% of those able bodied Americans currently sitting on the sidelines to get back into the workforce. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 06, 2022, 02:23:11 PM
Rethink immigration policies only if you want to keep wages unnecessarily low.  Current landscape of employers desperate and fighting each other for good employees has helped improve wages almost overnight for thousands and thousands of Americans. 

Inject hundreds of thousands of immigrants into that picture and now the power gets shifted right back to the employers and away from the employees.

Honest question.  If a local district wants to give a 25% pay raise across the board to all their teachers in k-12 is that something that has to be voted on by the residents of the community or just negotiated with the union or something?

Easy fix. Make minimum wage a living wage ($25?) And tie it to local housing/cost of living/inflation permanently
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on January 06, 2022, 02:35:01 PM
Easy fix. Make minimum wage a living wage ($25?) And tie it to local housing/cost of living/inflation permanently
Just putting this out there:

https://jacobinmag.com/2021/03/fast-food-chains-block-15-minimum-wage-relief-dunkin-arbys-sonic (https://jacobinmag.com/2021/03/fast-food-chains-block-15-minimum-wage-relief-dunkin-arbys-sonic)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 06, 2022, 02:36:46 PM
Easy fix. Make minimum wage a living wage ($25?) And tie it to local housing/cost of living/inflation permanently

Agree with a lot of this.  Federal minimum wage is useless.  States need to do a better job of making sure their state minimum wage is a livable wage and reflective to the local cost of living of each state.  $25 for a minimum wage in some areas of the country is probably a good landing spot but in other areas probably a bit to high.  Place like Wisco $15-17 seems pretty good for a minimum wage which a lot of businesses are already doing.  Should absolutely be tied to inflation as well.  How would that work, every 5-10  years adjust the wage according??
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 06, 2022, 02:37:49 PM
Agree with a lot of this.  Federal minimum wage is useless.  States need to do a better job of making sure their state minimum wage is a livable wage and reflective to the local cost of living of each state.  $25 for a minimum wage in some areas of the country is probably a good landing spot but in other areas probably a bit to high.  Place like Wisco $15-17 seems pretty good for a minimum wage which a lot of businesses are already doing.  Should absolutely be tied to inflation as well.  How would that work, every 5-10  years adjust the wage according??


You don't agree. I am saying make it $25 on a national level then tie increases to local conditions.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 06, 2022, 02:40:29 PM

You don't agree. I am saying make it $25 on a national level then tie increases to local conditions.

Ya that I don’t agree with.  It will never pass if it’s a federal minimum wage that high.  A federal minimum of $15 maybe but $25 is a pipe dream. 

Which is why it should a state issue anyway.  Do much dependence on Washington for stuff like this.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 06, 2022, 02:56:34 PM

You don't agree. I am saying make it $25 on a national level then tie increases to local conditions.

You think if we lowered corporate tax rate from where it’s at now down to 10-12% but only in lieu of raising federal minimum wage to $18-20 would be something everyone could get behind?  For me that would make a lot of sense.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on January 06, 2022, 03:09:56 PM
Just putting this out there:

https://jacobinmag.com/2021/03/fast-food-chains-block-15-minimum-wage-relief-dunkin-arbys-sonic (https://jacobinmag.com/2021/03/fast-food-chains-block-15-minimum-wage-relief-dunkin-arbys-sonic)

Jacobin magazine?  And you guys laugh at some of the conservative websites that get posted.  GTFOH.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on January 06, 2022, 03:14:46 PM
Jacobin magazine?  And you guys laugh at some of the conservative websites that get posted.  GTFOH.
You missed the joke. Read the headline.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on January 06, 2022, 04:03:45 PM
Why would you need an increased minimum wage in the times of labor shortages? The market should take care of this.  Minimum wage in Wisconsin is $7.25 an hour, but I doubt there are many people who are actually making that little, not when even the fast food places in my small rural town are advertising $15+.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on January 06, 2022, 04:18:21 PM
You missed the joke. Read the headline.

I saw the Arby's but refused to acknowledge that this clown website has anything to say about them.   ;)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on January 06, 2022, 04:28:25 PM

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/participationrate.asp

Labor participation rate is a better piece of data to look at then unemployment rate.  Currently at 62% if we could convince (with increasingly higher wages)another 5-10% of those able bodied Americans currently sitting on the sidelines to get back into the workforce.

Okay, but that rate has hovered between 58% and 67.3%.  The number has been declining since 2000.  Adding 5% would bring it back to 2000 levels; the all time high, and adding 10% is unfathomable considering year on year trends.

You're not going to talk new retirees who have had a taste of the retired life and who have had unprecedented financial growth in their lifetimes to go back to work doing jobs at positions and wages lower than they retired from.  They're simply out. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 06, 2022, 05:15:13 PM
You think if we lowered corporate tax rate from where it’s at now down to 10-12% but only in lieu of raising federal minimum wage to $18-20 would be something everyone could get behind?  For me that would make a lot of sense.

Personally, no, would not support that
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on January 06, 2022, 05:46:14 PM
Personally, no, would not support that

Comrade jesmu would want min wage at $50 an hour, 70% taxes, and bread lines.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on January 06, 2022, 07:29:05 PM
Why would you need an increased minimum wage in the times of labor shortages? The market should take care of this.  Minimum wage in Wisconsin is $7.25 an hour, but I doubt there are many people who are actually making that little, not when even the fast food places in my small rural town are advertising $15+.
I think you are looking at this backwards. There is a labor shortage amongst low paid workers precisely because the pay is too low to compensate them for those sh!tty jobs. No one wants to put up with the legion of Karens for < $10/hour.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 06, 2022, 07:29:32 PM
Comrade jesmu would want min wage at $50 an hour, 70% taxes, and bread lines.

Or... Min wage that keeps up with worker production as well as inflation/cost of living, 20% tax with no loopholes.

I don't want breadlines. We saw some of those already during the pandemic thanks to capitalism's short-term viewpoint
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on January 06, 2022, 07:47:04 PM
Or... Min wage that keeps up with worker production as well as inflation/cost of living, 20% tax with no loopholes.

I don't want breadlines. We saw some of those already during the pandemic thanks to capitalism's short-term viewpoint

хорошо сказано!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: real chili 83 on January 06, 2022, 09:34:02 PM
I think you are looking at this backwards. There is a labor shortage amongst low paid workers precisely because the pay is too low to compensate them for those sh!tty jobs. No one wants to put up with the legion of Karens for < $10/hour.

What planet do you live on?  If you are willing to work, the Amazon’s of the world will pay $18 per hour. No questions asked.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on January 06, 2022, 09:40:00 PM
What planet do you live on?  If you are willing to work, the Amazon’s of the world will pay $18 per hour. No questions asked.

No personal experience, but from what I've read, Amazon treats their "disposable" employees worse than a legion of Karens!

But if you're willing to abuse your personal car, and/or have your productivity tracked down to the minute, amazon sounds like a wonderful high starting salary employer!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 06, 2022, 09:55:46 PM
Or... Min wage that keeps up with worker production as well as inflation/cost of living, 20% tax with no loopholes.

I don't want breadlines. We saw some of those already during the pandemic thanks to capitalism's short-term viewpoint

Define “worker production” cause that seems to often come up when ignoring the interchangeability of unskilled/low level workers.  That’s not to say “oh they are worthless drones, pay them pennies”, but “they do the work, thus they should be paid way more” is awfully simplistic IMO.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on January 06, 2022, 09:57:32 PM
I think you are looking at this backwards. There is a labor shortage amongst low paid workers precisely because the pay is too low to compensate them for those sh!tty jobs. No one wants to put up with the legion of Karens for < $10/hour.

Actually, I am not.  Employers have to raise wages to the level that makes people want to accept them. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on January 06, 2022, 10:18:24 PM
What planet do you live on?  If you are willing to work, the Amazon’s of the world will pay $18 per hour. No questions asked.
Explain to me how that contradicts what I wrote. I'll wait.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 06, 2022, 11:19:56 PM
Define “worker production” cause that seems to often come up when ignoring the interchangeability of unskilled/low level workers.  That’s not to say “oh they are worthless drones, pay them pennies”, but “they do the work, thus they should be paid way more” is awfully simplistic IMO.

https://www.cepr.net/this-is-what-minimum-wage-would-be-if-it-kept-pace-with-productivity/

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

If you'd rather tie minimum wage to living wage or another metric, I'm all for discussion

A good, albeit geographically based and slightly dated, infographic on minimum wage:

(https://wvpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/RaiseTheWageStates49.png)

Point being that minimum wage jobs are a lot more of our economy than most believe
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 06, 2022, 11:42:55 PM
https://www.cepr.net/this-is-what-minimum-wage-would-be-if-it-kept-pace-with-productivity/

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

If you'd rather tie minimum wage to living wage or another metric, I'm all for discussion

A good, albeit geographically based and slightly dated, infographic on minimum wage:

(https://wvpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/RaiseTheWageStates49.png)

Point being that minimum wage jobs are a lot more of our economy than most believe

Anything from non blatantly left-leaning, pro-union sources? That CEPR article was terrible.  Basically completely devalues IP and bases their take in a bunch of far fetched hypotheticals of how he thinks an economy and corporate competition should be run.  “Yea well finance people wouldn’t make so much if we taxed them better.” “All drugs should be generic”

Listen, I think the minimum wage is woefully low. Im fine with roughly a $15/hr level, but geographic tweaks are necessary.

But the counter to the productivity argument is so much of what has increased productivity over the last 30 years isn’t just pro-corporate government regulation or business benefits, but vast technological and other innovation. If a company develops productions or tech or platforms that allow their employees to be vastly more productive, these sources would chalk it up to “there is far more worker productivity, they should be compensated” when they did not create the better mousetrap, they are just setting it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 07, 2022, 08:52:33 AM
Anything from non blatantly left-leaning, pro-union sources? That CEPR article was terrible.  Basically completely devalues IP and bases their take in a bunch of far fetched hypotheticals of how he thinks an economy and corporate competition should be run.  “Yea well finance people wouldn’t make so much if we taxed them better.” “All drugs should be generic”

Listen, I think the minimum wage is woefully low. Im fine with roughly a $15/hr level, but geographic tweaks are necessary.

But the counter to the productivity argument is so much of what has increased productivity over the last 30 years isn’t just pro-corporate government regulation or business benefits, but vast technological and other innovation. If a company develops productions or tech or platforms that allow their employees to be vastly more productive, these sources would chalk it up to “there is far more worker productivity, they should be compensated” when they did not create the better mousetrap, they are just setting it.

Wags, I agree with you on the serious flaws in the linked article, but your counter analysis also has significant flaws.

I can make a better argument that the executives, whose compensation has far exceeded productivity growth, had as little to do with that growth as a minimum wage earner. That technological development was made by your average employee, whose income has also been stagnant for the past 50 years.

A drug isn't developed by a CEO, or CSO, or other executive, in fact they have next to nothing to do with the process. It evolves typically from fundamental research by academics, or industrial researchers, who are also the ones who have developed all the technology to facilitate these discoveries (similar for any technology development). These individuals salaries are frozen, despite building the better mousetrap.

Meanwhile, the executives who set the trap redeem all the awards.

Our compensation system has been broken for 50 years. The minimum wage is a part of the problem, but it all stems back to ridiculous funneling of cash to executives.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 07, 2022, 09:15:54 AM
Anything from non blatantly left-leaning, pro-union sources? That CEPR article was terrible.  Basically completely devalues IP and bases their take in a bunch of far fetched hypotheticals of how he thinks an economy and corporate competition should be run.  “Yea well finance people wouldn’t make so much if we taxed them better.” “All drugs should be generic”

Listen, I think the minimum wage is woefully low. Im fine with roughly a $15/hr level, but geographic tweaks are necessary.

But the counter to the productivity argument is so much of what has increased productivity over the last 30 years isn’t just pro-corporate government regulation or business benefits, but vast technological and other innovation. If a company develops productions or tech or platforms that allow their employees to be vastly more productive, these sources would chalk it up to “there is far more worker productivity, they should be compensated” when they did not create the better mousetrap, they are just setting it.

Fair enough. Again, I'm open to ideas of other metrics to base min wage on. It's objectively too low right now. Corporations love it though as taxpayers are subsidizing their workforce
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MUBurrow on January 07, 2022, 09:48:38 AM
But the counter to the productivity argument is so much of what has increased productivity over the last 30 years isn’t just pro-corporate government regulation or business benefits, but vast technological and other innovation. If a company develops productions or tech or platforms that allow their employees to be vastly more productive, these sources would chalk it up to “there is far more worker productivity, they should be compensated” when they did not create the better mousetrap, they are just setting it.

This is absolutely true - but the question then has to morph into whether that reality requires significant tweaks to how we want our economic system to work in order to produce socially acceptable outcomes.  Those tweaks, however implemented, will look like socializing the gains.  But if we don't socialize any of the gains derived from private innovation that drives up productivity through technological innovation, the only possible outcome is growing economic inequality and concentrating wealth in a smaller and smaller upper class, which is what we've seen so far.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 07, 2022, 11:54:36 AM
Wags, I agree with you on the serious flaws in the linked article, but your counter analysis also has significant flaws.

I can make a better argument that the executives, whose compensation has far exceeded productivity growth, had as little to do with that growth as a minimum wage earner. That technological development was made by your average employee, whose income has also been stagnant for the past 50 years.

A drug isn't developed by a CEO, or CSO, or other executive, in fact they have next to nothing to do with the process. It evolves typically from fundamental research by academics, or industrial researchers, who are also the ones who have developed all the technology to facilitate these discoveries (similar for any technology development). These individuals salaries are frozen, despite building the better mousetrap.

Meanwhile, the executives who set the trap redeem all the awards.

Our compensation system has been broken for 50 years. The minimum wage is a part of the problem, but it all stems back to ridiculous funneling of cash to executives.

What salaries are you implying are frozen?  Minimum wage/low wage jobs?  Sure.  But you're trapping "average" to mean far more than that, which I don't know to be the case.

I know for a fact that entry/mid level jobs my peers and I were applying for in the mid-late 2000s are not the same now as they were 10-15 years ago and have risen concurrently.  My father was an entry level design engineer in the mid 80s and was making in the low 20K range and that salary is now in the mid 60s, which at the very least paces with inflation.

And I would argue that people developing new drugs or technologies are not on the lower third or even lower half of a company's pay scale.  Of course a C suite executive is not heading development a new drug, but its also not a $30K a year grunt.  Same with tech/innovation/manufacturing companies.

This is absolutely true - but the question then has to morph into whether that reality requires significant tweaks to how we want our economic system to work in order to produce socially acceptable outcomes.  Those tweaks, however implemented, will look like socializing the gains.  But if we don't socialize any of the gains derived from private innovation that drives up productivity through technological innovation, the only possible outcome is growing economic inequality and concentrating wealth in a smaller and smaller upper class, which is what we've seen so far.

I dont entirely disagree.  Its a new sort of discussion and examination of industry/business/growth/etc...  However I want that discussion to be founded/based in realities and truths, not some emotionally charged populist perspective that doesn't match with the realities of business.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: lawdog77 on January 07, 2022, 01:07:01 PM
Hospitals cutting jobs again
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/workforce/hospitals-lose-5-100-jobs-in-december.html?origin=CIOE&utm_source=CIOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=7221H7629690E9B (https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/workforce/hospitals-lose-5-100-jobs-in-december.html?origin=CIOE&utm_source=CIOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=7221H7629690E9B)

But also:
Hospitals still critically understaffed

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/workforce/more-than-19-of-us-hospitals-are-critically-understaffed-numbers-by-state.html?utm_campaign=bhr&utm_source=website&utm_content=latestarticles (https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/workforce/more-than-19-of-us-hospitals-are-critically-understaffed-numbers-by-state.html?utm_campaign=bhr&utm_source=website&utm_content=latestarticles)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 07, 2022, 01:30:19 PM
I dont entirely disagree.  Its a new sort of discussion and examination of industry/business/growth/etc...  However I want that discussion to be founded/based in realities and truths, not some emotionally charged populist perspective that doesn't match with the realities of business.

Sounds good.

But I don't think the powers that be want to have that discussion. Status quo has been good to them

Additionally, using a populist perspective would hopefully push the Overton window back to the left a bit after 40 years of super right leaning.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on January 07, 2022, 04:53:08 PM
What salaries are you implying are frozen?  Minimum wage/low wage jobs?  Sure.  But you're trapping "average" to mean far more than that, which I don't know to be the case.

I know for a fact that entry/mid level jobs my peers and I were applying for in the mid-late 2000s are not the same now as they were 10-15 years ago and have risen concurrently.  My father was an entry level design engineer in the mid 80s and was making in the low 20K range and that salary is now in the mid 60s, which at the very least paces with inflation.

And I would argue that people developing new drugs or technologies are not on the lower third or even lower half of a company's pay scale.  Of course a C suite executive is not heading development a new drug, but its also not a $30K a year grunt.  Same with tech/innovation/manufacturing companies.

Wags, thank you for the reply. There is a chart in this link which helps illustrate my point, and at the end it lists the average compensation increases since 1967.

https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2021/10/25/updated-u-s-household-incomes-a-50-year-perspective (https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2021/10/25/updated-u-s-household-incomes-a-50-year-perspective)

Those driving the development of technology are typically in the 2nd and middle quintile, where since 1967 real salaries (inflation adjusted) have increased by 63.1%, and 41.1% respectively, whereas that is better than the lowest quintiles ~31-34%, it is a far cry from the top 5% (133.5% increase) and top quintile (109.3%).

So whereas you have a point regarding the fact that productivity gains should be going to those responsible for the technology driving productivity gains, the data says that the majority of those gains are going to executives, who are just setting the mousetrap built by others.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 08, 2022, 09:08:59 AM
Duke is closing the loophole that lets those who attend athletic events skirt the mask mandate by just holding a drink in their hands ...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/college/article257143952.html#storylink=cpy

Aiming to prevent further spread of COVID-19, Duke is temporarily suspending food and beverage concession and hospitality services during home athletic events, most notably basketball games at Cameron Indoor Stadium. The change, announced by the school on Friday night, begins with Saturday’s 8 p.m. game between the No. 2 Blue Devils and Miami. The policy is in effect until Jan. 21, meaning food and beverages will also not be served for Duke’s Jan. 15 home game with N.C. State.

The omicron and delta variants of COVID-19 have caused a spike in cases over the past three weeks. According to the state’s Department of Health and Human Services, the percent of tests positive for COVID-19 reached 31.2% with Friday’s update. That’s far above the state’s goal of 5% positives.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on January 08, 2022, 11:52:14 AM
So much for anyone planning to eat popcorn one kernel at a time….
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 09, 2022, 10:32:30 AM
https://www.businessinsider.com/cancel-student-loan-debt-payments-paused-two-years-economy-2022-1
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 10, 2022, 08:12:24 AM
From the Wall Street Journal:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-finances-got-stronger-in-the-pandemicconfounding-early-fears-11641736069?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20220110&instance_id=49899&mod=hp_lead_pos9&nl=dealbook&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=79178&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

Stimulus payments brought millions out of poverty and allowed them to clear debt, and households of all income levels built up savings. The stronger finances are expected to aid stability as normal spending and higher inflation return.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: mu_hilltopper on January 10, 2022, 02:00:42 PM
From the Wall Street Journal:

Stimulus payments brought millions out of poverty and allowed them to clear debt, and households of all income levels built up savings. The stronger finances are expected to aid stability as normal spending and higher inflation return.

You know .. years from now we'll look back at that quote and understand that was the beginning of the end of Taco Bell.  And nursing homes.  And a few dozen other places where the jobs were crappy and underpaid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 10, 2022, 03:18:34 PM
From the Wall Street Journal:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-finances-got-stronger-in-the-pandemicconfounding-early-fears-11641736069?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20220110&instance_id=49899&mod=hp_lead_pos9&nl=dealbook&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=79178&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

Stimulus payments brought millions out of poverty and allowed them to clear debt, and households of all income levels built up savings. The stronger finances are expected to aid stability as normal spending and higher inflation return.

Crazy how effective it is giving money directly to individuals vs "trickle down" spending.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 17, 2022, 08:20:20 PM
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/up-to-three-quarters-of-the-800-billion-ppp-flowed-to-business-owners-instead-of-workers-study-finds-11642418448?mod=home-page

Oh
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on January 17, 2022, 09:36:14 PM
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/up-to-three-quarters-of-the-800-billion-ppp-flowed-to-business-owners-instead-of-workers-study-finds-11642418448?mod=home-page

Oh

Yeah ... stunning, right?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 18, 2022, 06:49:20 AM
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/up-to-three-quarters-of-the-800-billion-ppp-flowed-to-business-owners-instead-of-workers-study-finds-11642418448?mod=home-page

Oh

I would have assumed 100% went to business owners?  I didn’t think random employees could request or take the PPP loans.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: SERocks on January 18, 2022, 08:24:33 AM
Yeah ... stunning, right?

Trickle down works, no? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 18, 2022, 09:15:20 AM
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/up-to-three-quarters-of-the-800-billion-ppp-flowed-to-business-owners-instead-of-workers-study-finds-11642418448?mod=home-page

Oh

What would you expect the results to be?  Genuine question instead of another skewed "business/capitalism is bad" link.

PPP loans had a variety of stipulations including $100K salary caps, so its not like the funds flowed to fat cat owners pockets immediately. 

Additionally, speaking from a business owner who received PPP funds, you have other expenses beyond just salaries that still need to be paid when revenue isn't coming in like rent and utilities.  So the money was never going 100% to employee salary nor was it supposed to.

Also, owner operated businesses or a family business with 1-2 employees were gonna skew this as well.

The distribution of funds were a bit haphazard, but the bank oversight is no joke.  Anyone thinking that its tons of wealthy business owners running off with cash at the expense of their business owners fail to realize that banks were the ones administering and forgiving any eligible loans and they don't mess around.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 18, 2022, 10:31:22 AM
What would you expect the results to be?  Genuine question instead of another skewed "business/capitalism is bad" link.

PPP loans had a variety of stipulations including $100K salary caps, so its not like the funds flowed to fat cat owners pockets immediately. 

Additionally, speaking from a business owner who received PPP funds, you have other expenses beyond just salaries that still need to be paid when revenue isn't coming in like rent and utilities.  So the money was never going 100% to employee salary nor was it supposed to.

Also, owner operated businesses or a family business with 1-2 employees were gonna skew this as well.

The distribution of funds were a bit haphazard, but the bank oversight is no joke.  Anyone thinking that its tons of wealthy business owners running off with cash at the expense of their business owners fail to realize that banks were the ones administering and forgiving any eligible loans and they don't mess around.

As I understood it, PPP was supposed to be a jobs retention program. Clearly funds were used for other functions
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 18, 2022, 10:40:28 AM
As I understood it, PPP was supposed to be a jobs retention program. Clearly funds were used for other functions

You can’t retain jobs when a business closes.  It’s not like PPP funds could be used for outsized bonuses or business travel or company cars. Payroll expenses, rent and utilities, essential business purchases, that’s it.

But again, there was oversight if you wanted loan forgiveness or any of the benefits.  We had to keep a running financial analysis of what PPP funds were used for and they were in a separate bucket from other funds from the bank.  We couldn’t spend unchecked
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 18, 2022, 11:04:28 AM
You can’t retain jobs when a business closes.  It’s not like PPP funds could be used for outsized bonuses or business travel or company cars. Payroll expenses, rent and utilities, essential business purchases, that’s it.

But again, there was oversight if you wanted loan forgiveness or any of the benefits.  We had to keep a running financial analysis of what PPP funds were used for and they were in a separate bucket from other funds from the bank.  We couldn’t spend unchecked

Understood.

I wasn't actually trying to say corporations/capitalism bad in this case.

I think instead it was another dumb, short-sighted government program
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on January 18, 2022, 11:29:44 AM
Understood.

I wasn't actually trying to say corporations/capitalism bad in this case.

I think instead it was another dumb, short-sighted government program

In the link you provided it said it saved/preserved up to 3 million jobs.  Gov’t has spent a lot more and gotten much less back over the years.  Not a perfect program but wouldn’t categorize it as dumb that’s for sure.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 29, 2022, 01:33:01 PM
https://time.com/6139127/u-s-food-prices-monopoly/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 01, 2022, 01:08:36 PM
From WaPo:

Some 4.3 million people quit or changed jobs in December — down from last month’s all-time high but still near record levels, as the labor market remained unsettled and the omicron variant swept through the United States.

Employers reported some 10.9 million job openings in survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, well above pre-pandemic averages.

December proved to be an incredibly disruptive month for the labor market.

Parents scrambled to navigate their work lives as schools and day cares closed because of growing virus cases. Employees grappled with sudden outbreaks at work, with little of the social safety net protections or pandemic-controlling measures that helped cushion the blow from earlier waves. And the vaccine-evading omicron variant shook the nation’s confidence that a future without the virus was on the near horizon.

These forces magnified the desire for many workers to quit their jobs. At least four million workers resigned each month during the second half of 2021, with many of them departing to find work that had better pay, benefits, or more flexible schedules.

While the pandemic initially marked by mass joblessness — more than 20 million people lost their jobs in the earliest days of the pandemic, many temporarily — 2021 was defined by a strong labor market recovery as well as complaints by employers about difficulty finding available workers.

That shortage has meant that many companies have been racing to compete with each other for workers, raising wages, adding cash bonuses and sweetening the pot in other ways to try to attract applicants. And that in turn has created a climate for workers to have more leverage and options than perhaps any other time in recent history.

Nick Bunker, an economist at the jobs site Indeed, said that the data showed that the omicron did not have a big effect on demand for workers in December.

“It really paints this picture of a job switching boom," he said.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 01, 2022, 01:20:44 PM
Parents scrambled to navigate their work lives as schools and day cares closed because of growing virus cases. Employees grappled with sudden outbreaks at work, with little of the social safety net protections or pandemic-controlling measures that helped cushion the blow from earlier waves.

I just don't think this is accurate.  The child tax credit payments certainly made it easier for someone to quit working temporarily to manage these issues.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 01, 2022, 02:53:46 PM
I just don't think this is accurate.  The child tax credit payments certainly made it easier for someone to quit working temporarily to manage these issues.

OK, duly noted. I'm just the messenger on this one.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 01, 2022, 03:36:05 PM
I just don't think this is accurate.  The child tax credit payments certainly made it easier for someone to quit working temporarily to manage these issues.

I think a bigger reason for all of the open jobs is that high school age kids aren't working nearly as much because their parents don't want them exposed to Covid (or bringing it home). I see restaurant after restaurant begging for people to hire, or limiting hours because they can't get low wage workers to take a job.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 01, 2022, 03:39:41 PM
I think a bigger reason for all of the open jobs is that high school age kids aren't working nearly as much because their parents don't want them exposed to Covid (or bringing it home). I see restaurant after restaurant begging for people to hire, or limiting hours because they can't get low wage workers to take a job.

I think that is a good observation as well.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on February 01, 2022, 05:51:23 PM
I think a bigger reason for all of the open jobs is that high school age kids aren't working nearly as much because their parents don't want them exposed to Covid (or bringing it home). I see restaurant after restaurant begging for people to hire, or limiting hours because they can't get low wage workers to take a job.

High school kids aren't the reason for the restaurant labor shortage it's the gig economy where people make $30 per hour working when they want to. Restaurants have stayed alive solely by these workers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 01, 2022, 05:59:51 PM
The good news is a multitude of groups are pushing for more high school/teen labor opportunities
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 01, 2022, 06:06:27 PM
High school kids aren't the reason for the restaurant labor shortage it's the gig economy where people make $30 per hour working when they want to. Restaurants have stayed alive solely by these workers.

It's a combination of both.

Surprisingly, when I am in a restaurant, the vast majority of Door Dashers, etc. are not teenage kids. Overwhelmingly men and women in their 30s and 40s. On the other hand, my 18 yo grandson quit going from job to low paying job and is doing Door Dash - avg. about $25 hr.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 01, 2022, 06:39:09 PM
Wait ... I thought the reason for all of the economy's ills were freeloaders eating bon-bons and collecting unemployment benefits.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on February 01, 2022, 10:39:47 PM
Surprisingly, when I am in a restaurant, the vast majority of Door Dashers, etc. are not teenage kids. Overwhelmingly men and women in their 30s and 40s. On the other hand, my 18 yo grandson quit going from job to low paying job and is doing Door Dash - avg. about $25 hr.

Most of my Uber drivers the past few months have been 40s, 50s, and even 60s.  But every business I've been too is obviously short of staff.  Though generally the staff they do have seems to be younger.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 02, 2022, 09:23:48 AM
I think a bigger reason for all of the open jobs is that high school age kids aren't working nearly as much because their parents don't want them exposed to Covid (or bringing it home). I see restaurant after restaurant begging for people to hire, or limiting hours because they can't get low wage workers to take a job.

In the same vein, the kids are too busy to work while in high school.  My kids wanted to, but I honestly don't know where they had time to?  They seemed way busier than when I was in high school.  I only worked Friday nights and weekends, but my kids were seriously spending a lot of time on homework over the weekend.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on February 02, 2022, 11:22:30 AM
John Hopkins: Lockdowns had little to no affect on mortality but had adverse effects on the economy and society.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/johns-hopkins-study-lockdowns-had-little-to-no-effect-on-covid-19-mortality-but-had-devastating-effects-on-society
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 02, 2022, 11:42:08 AM
John Hopkins: Lockdowns had little to no affect on mortality but had adverse effects on the economy and society.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/johns-hopkins-study-lockdowns-had-little-to-no-effect-on-covid-19-mortality-but-had-devastating-effects-on-society

We never had a lockdown - we had partial lockdowns which some observed and some didn’t.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 02, 2022, 12:23:28 PM
We never had a lockdown - we had partial lockdowns which some observed and some didn’t.

If you had actually read it, it literally says "worldwide" and cites various European examples.  But I'm sure you saw it was a conservative website and dismissed it outright.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: forgetful on February 03, 2022, 12:01:25 AM
If you had actually read it, it literally says "worldwide" and cites various European examples.  But I'm sure you saw it was a conservative website and dismissed it outright.

I haven't read the article yet, and will. But the one part I did notice, is that the authors of the study were all economists, no medical experts, no epidemiologists, so I'm skeptical of their conclusions.

 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 12, 2022, 02:39:55 PM
Rand Paul is encouraging truckers to hurt the U.S. economy by disrupting traffic around the Super Bowl and blocking paths for businesses to operate.

This "medical professional" is willing to see small businesspeople lose considerable money so his cultists can die in anti-vax peace, even if it also affects those who can't get hospital beds that are being taken up by unvaccinated people who get the virus.

If Independents or Democrats encouraged protesters to use their vehicles to block highways in the name of racial justice or any other cause, Rand Paul and his cultists would be ripping them as business-hating socialists.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 12, 2022, 03:23:34 PM
Man, did someone put $.50 in you today? Nads, you be you, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 12, 2022, 04:59:38 PM
Rand Paul is encouraging truckers to hurt the U.S. economy by disrupting traffic around the Super Bowl and blocking paths for businesses to operate.

This "medical professional" is willing to see small businesspeople lose considerable money so his cultists can die in anti-vax peace, even if it also affects those who can't get hospital beds that are being taken up by unvaccinated people who get the virus.

If Independents or Democrats encouraged protesters to use their vehicles to block highways in the name of racial justice or any other cause, Rand Paul and his cultists would be ripping them as business-hating socialists.

In some states, blocking roads for protests is illegal. I think Florida instituted this law in response to BLM protests. But they also refused to enforce it when Cubans used it
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 12, 2022, 05:01:47 PM
I don’t even know what they would be protesting here. But I guess they just want to cause chaos for political purposes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 12, 2022, 05:12:58 PM
I don’t even know what they would be protesting here. But I guess they just want to cause chaos for political purposes.

Its the Canadian truck drivers protesting vaccine mandates for truck drivers in Canada.  So Paul was saying he'd be in favor of them bringing the protest to the US.  Its kind of silly all around.  As far as I saw there isn't actually a planned protest for the SB as much as saying "they should do that here too"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 12, 2022, 05:23:46 PM
Its the Canadian truck drivers protesting vaccine mandates for truck drivers in Canada.  So Paul was saying he'd be in favor of them bringing the protest to the US.  Its kind of silly all around.  As far as I saw there isn't actually a planned protest for the SB as much as saying "they should do that here too"

Right. That’s what I mean. There isn’t a mandate here. So what are they protesting exactly?  It’s just trying to cause chaos for the sake of chaos.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 12, 2022, 05:39:13 PM
Right. That’s what I mean. There isn’t a mandate here. So what are they protesting exactly?  It’s just trying to cause chaos for the sake of chaos.

Notice the majority of the trucks are material haulers? Those guys aren’t doing anything right now anyway.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 13, 2022, 07:25:19 AM
The "Canadian Trucker Protest" is a microcosm of everything wrong in the world. 
The majority of the protesters are NOT truckers.
90%+ of the truckers in Canada are vaccinated.
Seems an equal % of Canadians also want the "truckers" to go home.
The whole stunt is funded.by an extreme right  group (which the Canadian government has  since frozen it's assets).
And they were forcing 5 year old kids to line up and block the road.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 13, 2022, 08:39:44 AM
Its the Canadian truck drivers protesting vaccine mandates for truck drivers in Canada.  So Paul was saying he'd be in favor of them bringing the protest to the US.  Its kind of silly all around.  As far as I saw there isn't actually a planned protest for the SB as much as saying "they should do that here too"

Yes, except for it's more than "kind of silly." It's incredibly hypocritical and potentially damaging to American businesses small and large, all for purely political BS.

The "Canadian Trucker Protest" is a microcosm of everything wrong in the world. 
The majority of the protesters are NOT truckers.
90%+ of the truckers in Canada are vaccinated.
Seems an equal % of Canadians also want the "truckers" to go home.
The whole stunt is funded.by an extreme right  group (which the Canadian government has  since frozen it's assets).
And they were forcing 5 year old kids to line up and block the road.

Totally nailed it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 15, 2022, 08:59:03 AM
From the NYT morning news:

Traffic deaths are surging during the pandemic.
‘Social disengagement’
The United States is enduring its most severe increase in traffic deaths since the 1940s.

It is a sharp change from the recent norm, too. Deaths from vehicle crashes have generally been falling since the late 1960s, thanks to vehicle improvements, lower speed limits and declines in drunken driving, among other factors. By 2019, the annual death rate from crashes was near its lowest level since cars became a mass item in the 1920s.

But then came the Covid-19 pandemic.

Crashes — and deaths — began surging in the summer of 2020, surprising traffic experts who had hoped that relatively empty roads would cause accidents to decline. Instead, an increase in aggressive driving more than made up for the decline in driving. And crashes continued to increase when people returned to the roads, later in the pandemic.

Per capita vehicle deaths rose 17.5 percent from the summer of 2019 to last summer, according to a Times analysis of federal data. It is the largest two-year increase since just after World War II.

This grim trend is another way that two years of isolation and disruption have damaged life, as this story — by my colleague Simon Romero, who’s a national correspondent — explains. People are frustrated and angry, and those feelings are fueling increases in violent crime, customer abuse of workers, student misbehavior in school and vehicle crashes.

“We’re seeing erratic behavior in the way people are acting and their patience levels,” Albuquerque’s police chief, Harold Medina, told Simon. “Everybody’s been pushed. This is one of the most stressful times in memory.”

Art Markman, a cognitive scientist at the University of Texas at Austin, said that the emotions partly reflected “two years of having to stop ourselves from doing things that we’d like to do.” He added: “When you get angry in the car, it generates energy — and how do you dissipate that energy? Well, one way is to put your foot down a little bit more on the accelerator.”

Rising drug abuse during the pandemic seems to play an important role, as well. The U.S. Department of Transportation has reported that “the proportion of drivers testing positive for opioids nearly doubled after mid-March 2020, compared to the previous 6 months, while marijuana prevalence increased by about 50 percent.” (Mid-March 2020 is when major Covid mitigations began.)

Other factors besides the pandemic also affect traffic deaths, of course. But those other factors tend to change slowly — and often counteract each other. Improving technology and safety features reduce traffic deaths, while the growing size of vehicles and the rise of distracted driving lead to more deaths. The only plausible explanation for most of the recent surge is the pandemic.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 15, 2022, 09:10:24 AM
Clearly from people wearing masks while driving
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 15, 2022, 10:38:54 AM
Man, did someone put $.50 in you today? Nads, you be you, aina?

Remember doc, most of these people put the ice cream Buffon in the house…heading right off a cliff and the “journalists” are worried about Russiarussiarussia yet?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 15, 2022, 10:40:00 AM
Clearly from people wearing masks over their eyes while driving
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 15, 2022, 10:56:36 AM
Remember doc, most of these people put the ice cream Buffon in the house…heading right off a cliff and the “journalists” are worried about Russiarussiarussia yet?

How is that worth saying? I could say the McDonald's buffoon about trump. The spray tan buffoon. The Coca-Cola buffoon. The golfing buffoon. See how it adds absolutely nothing? All it is is a fact "he like ice cream" followed by a personal opinion "I think he's a buffoon". There's no substance. If you're hung up on him getting ice cream that's fine but admit that you and doc aren't holding your guys to the same standard. Be partisan if that's your desire but at least acknowledge that the two of your not helping divides by holding two different standards.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 15, 2022, 11:02:22 AM
Ice cream is, apparently, a very important issue.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 15, 2022, 11:05:02 AM
Remember doc, most of these people put the ice cream Buffon in the house…heading right off a cliff and the “journalists” are worried about Russiarussiarussia yet?



C'mon man, the demented buffoon is on the phone with Putin, as we type, fending off a showdown in the Ukraine, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 15, 2022, 11:12:33 AM
Well, somebody in this discussion certainly has dementia.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 15, 2022, 11:18:56 AM
How is that worth saying? I could say the McDonald's buffoon about trump. The spray tan buffoon. The Coca-Cola buffoon. The golfing buffoon. See how it adds absolutely nothing? All it is is a fact "he like ice cream" followed by a personal opinion "I think he's a buffoon". There's no substance. If you're hung up on him getting ice cream that's fine but admit that you and doc aren't holding your guys to the same standard. Be partisan if that's your desire but at least acknowledge that the two of your not helping divides by holding two different standards.


At least you know how to spell "buffoon" correctly though.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 15, 2022, 11:25:49 AM
Trump would have sent troops to help his boss, Putin.
Then he would have put the correspondence in boxes and shipped it to Mar a Lago.   While having Mazars cook his books.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 15, 2022, 11:40:45 AM
Yesterday, FD Joe was lashing out at NFL owners for the lack of black coaches in the NFL. In Dr. Martin Luther King's, I Have a Dream Speech, King longed for the day that a man would be judged by the content of his character, rather than the color of his skin. Guess we haven't accomplished much over the past 60 years, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 15, 2022, 11:43:40 AM
We all are still longing for that day. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 15, 2022, 11:44:26 AM
Absolutely Fahrenheit, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 15, 2022, 11:45:43 AM
Remember doc, most of these people put the ice cream Buffon in the house…heading right off a cliff and the “journalists” are worried about Russiarussiarussia yet?

10 of 10

I couldn’t stop laughing after reading “Buffon”.  You even capitalized it!  Tremendous work!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 15, 2022, 11:49:28 AM
Yesterday, FD Joe was lashing out at NFL owners for the lack of black coaches in the NFL. In Dr. Martin Luther King's, I Have a Dream Speech, King longed for the day that a man would be judged by the content of his character, rather than the color of his skin. Guess we haven't accomplished much over the past 60 years, hey?

Correct we haven't. Wonder why???
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 15, 2022, 11:53:12 AM
10 of 10

I couldn’t stop laughing after reading “Buffon”.  You even capitalized it!  Tremendous work!

I believe that is Phoebe's last name from Friends.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 15, 2022, 11:54:51 AM
I believe that is Phoebe's last name from Friends.

Close, that was Buffay.  Either way you cut it, I’m adding Buffon to my vocabulary.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 15, 2022, 12:06:23 PM
C'mon man, the demented buffoon is on the phone with Putin

The demented buffoon you worship constantly gave in to Putin so that the pee-pee tape - or whatever else the puppetmaster has on the puppet - wouldn't be revealed.

Yesterday, FD Joe was lashing out at NFL owners for the lack of black coaches in the NFL.

Much better to lash out at athletes for peacefully protesting, something FD Don did both before and after he called himself "an ally of all peaceful protesters."

Remember doc, most of these people put the ice cream Buffon in the house…heading right off a cliff and the “journalists” are worried about Russiarussiarussia yet?

Ya gotta love a guy who, in the process of making fun of a person's intelligence, spels inteligents rong.

Bravo, roQQet, bravo!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on February 15, 2022, 12:18:35 PM
And we wonder why we can't have nice things???

(https://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/in-before-the-lock-gif-8.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 15, 2022, 12:22:03 PM
BUFFON

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjVjZWY3NzAtNGM5Ni00NDlmLTliNDQtNWI4ZGRmOGNiYTcwXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjUyNDk2ODc@._V1_.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Warriors4ever on February 15, 2022, 01:00:56 PM
https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety

Instead of quoting one line and missing the context, try reading the entire speech….
It’s a bit discouraging that in many ways he could give the same speech today and it would be apropos.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 15, 2022, 01:11:29 PM
https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety

Instead of quoting one line and missing the context, try reading the entire speech….
It’s a bit discouraging that in many ways he could give the same speech today and it would be apropos.


Old white guys quoting MLK out of context has become quite the tradition.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 15, 2022, 01:25:29 PM

Old white guys quoting MLK out of context has become quite the tradition.

“To be or not to be.” -MLK
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 15, 2022, 02:09:31 PM
Close, that was Buffay.  Either way you cut it, I’m adding Buffon to my vocabulary.

I hear buffon goes good with covfefe.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 15, 2022, 02:48:18 PM
(https://patch.com/img/cdn/users/26955/2015/04/raw/2015045535d2f3f2add.jpg?width=695)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on February 15, 2022, 05:19:58 PM
From the NYT morning news:

Traffic deaths are surging during the pandemic.
‘Social disengagement’
The United States is enduring its most severe increase in traffic deaths since the 1940s.

It is a sharp change from the recent norm, too. Deaths from vehicle crashes have generally been falling since the late 1960s, thanks to vehicle improvements, lower speed limits and declines in drunken driving, among other factors. By 2019, the annual death rate from crashes was near its lowest level since cars became a mass item in the 1920s.

But then came the Covid-19 pandemic.

Crashes — and deaths — began surging in the summer of 2020, surprising traffic experts who had hoped that relatively empty roads would cause accidents to decline. Instead, an increase in aggressive driving more than made up for the decline in driving. And crashes continued to increase when people returned to the roads, later in the pandemic.

Per capita vehicle deaths rose 17.5 percent from the summer of 2019 to last summer, according to a Times analysis of federal data. It is the largest two-year increase since just after World War II.

This grim trend is another way that two years of isolation and disruption have damaged life, as this story — by my colleague Simon Romero, who’s a national correspondent — explains. People are frustrated and angry, and those feelings are fueling increases in violent crime, customer abuse of workers, student misbehavior in school and vehicle crashes.

“We’re seeing erratic behavior in the way people are acting and their patience levels,” Albuquerque’s police chief, Harold Medina, told Simon. “Everybody’s been pushed. This is one of the most stressful times in memory.”

Art Markman, a cognitive scientist at the University of Texas at Austin, said that the emotions partly reflected “two years of having to stop ourselves from doing things that we’d like to do.” He added: “When you get angry in the car, it generates energy — and how do you dissipate that energy? Well, one way is to put your foot down a little bit more on the accelerator.”

Rising drug abuse during the pandemic seems to play an important role, as well. The U.S. Department of Transportation has reported that “the proportion of drivers testing positive for opioids nearly doubled after mid-March 2020, compared to the previous 6 months, while marijuana prevalence increased by about 50 percent.” (Mid-March 2020 is when major Covid mitigations began.)

Other factors besides the pandemic also affect traffic deaths, of course. But those other factors tend to change slowly — and often counteract each other. Improving technology and safety features reduce traffic deaths, while the growing size of vehicles and the rise of distracted driving lead to more deaths. The only plausible explanation for most of the recent surge is the pandemic.

time to put those cars in jail and sue them for everything they have. Damn out of control killer cars.

I like how the opioid crisis is just buried in there and fentanyl is ignored. No, no issues with either high drivers or record numbers of addicts on the street living on the streets.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 15, 2022, 05:38:46 PM
time to put those cars in jail and sue them for everything they have. Damn out of control killer cars.

I like how the opioid crisis is just buried in there and fentanyl is ignored. No, no issues with either high drivers or record numbers of addicts on the street living on the streets.

Yes, there are no articles to be found about the opioid crisis anywhere. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 15, 2022, 05:40:18 PM
time to put those cars in jail and sue them for everything they have. Damn out of control killer cars.

Do you ever think before you post?

Quote
I like how the opioid crisis is just buried in there and fentanyl is ignored. No, no issues with either high drivers or record numbers of addicts on the street living on the streets.

It's literally the second reason cited for the increase, behind aggressive/erratic driving.
See my earlier question.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 15, 2022, 05:40:54 PM
Yes, there are no articles to be found about the opioid crisis anywhere.

There's an opioid crisis?
Why hasn't this been in the news?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 15, 2022, 06:08:27 PM
time to put those cars in jail and sue them for everything they have. Damn out of control killer cars.

I like how the opioid crisis is just buried in there and fentanyl is ignored. No, no issues with either high drivers or record numbers of addicts on the street living on the streets.
Right, because the story doesn't contain this paragraph:

"Rising drug abuse during the pandemic seems to play an important role, as well. The U.S. Department of Transportation has reported that “the proportion of drivers testing positive for opioids nearly doubled after mid-March 2020, compared to the previous 6 months, while marijuana prevalence increased by about 50 percent.” (Mid-March 2020 is when major Covid mitigations began.)"

Why doesn't the Bailbonds family ever read the actual information in links?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 15, 2022, 06:44:54 PM
Lol
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 15, 2022, 08:36:48 PM
time to put those cars in jail and sue them for everything they have. Damn out of control killer cars.

I like how the opioid crisis is just buried in there and fentanyl is ignored. No, no issues with either high drivers or record numbers of addicts on the street living on the streets.

You’re cute, just like pops, posting from your head firmly lodged up your pretty boy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocky_warrior on February 15, 2022, 08:41:27 PM
What's an opioid?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 15, 2022, 09:15:05 PM
What's an opioid?

I think it's the reason we have inflation. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 15, 2022, 09:15:26 PM
What's an opioid?
A huge fan of a young Ron Howard.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 15, 2022, 09:19:51 PM
You’re cute, just like pops, posting from your head firmly lodged up your pretty boy.

This is a no judgement zone man. Love is love, whoever you choose
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 17, 2022, 10:03:00 AM
From The AP:

Estimated 73% of US now immune to omicron

https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-united-states-3e7ab3f74080bac8480aa6de3e65ecce?user_email=6647dfa7189f748384d7389910f7b584c6fcfc35ae990102964c7e826d4175c7&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningWire_Feb17&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

The omicron wave that assaulted the United States this winter also bolstered its defenses, leaving enough protection against the coronavirus that future spikes will likely require much less — if any — dramatic disruption to society.

Millions of individual Americans’ immune systems now recognize the virus and are primed to fight it off if they encounter omicron, or even another variant.

About half of eligible Americans have received booster shots, there have been nearly 80 million confirmed infections overall and many more infections have never been reported. One influential model uses those factors and others to estimate that 73% of Americans are, for now, immune to omicron, the dominant variant, and that could rise to 80% by mid-March.

This will prevent or shorten new illnesses in protected people and reduce the amount of virus circulating overall, likely tamping down new waves. Hospitals will get a break from overwhelmed ICUs, experts agree.

“We have changed,” said Ali Mokdad, a professor of health metrics sciences at the University of Washington in Seattle. “We have been exposed to this virus and we know how to deal with it.”

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 17, 2022, 10:33:03 AM
Many colleges & universities are looking at ways to sensibly unwind Covid restrictions over the next few weeks.  UW System is mapping a way to be completely maskless by the end of spring break.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 17, 2022, 10:39:09 AM
Allow me to suggest disengagin' da left earloop, then disengage da right earloop. Now, grasp the mask either with both hands or with one hand, and pull forward. Shockingly and painlessly, the student is now maskless, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 17, 2022, 10:40:48 AM
OK, a better way to state this is that looking at stepping down regulations over time, from those that are the least risky to those that are the most risky.,
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 17, 2022, 11:23:56 AM
Many colleges & universities are looking at ways to sensibly unwind Covid restrictions over the next few weeks.  UW System is mapping a way to be completely maskless by the end of spring break.

Three total kids in preschool today, 10 days after dropping masks. School bus for the second grader has been 15 minutes early all week.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 17, 2022, 02:53:02 PM
Three total kids in preschool today, 10 days after dropping masks. School bus for the second grader has been 15 minutes early all week.

Because kids got Covid? Teachers got it? Parents declined to send their kids?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 17, 2022, 10:29:34 PM
Because kids got Covid? Teachers got it? Parents declined to send their kids?

Doesn’t sound like too much COVID, just general coughs, colds and runny noses that are zero tolerance. As they should be.

Masks though, worked.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 18, 2022, 09:10:12 AM
Doesn’t sound like too much COVID, just general coughs, colds and runny noses that are zero tolerance. As they should be.

Masks though, worked.

Thanks for the response.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 18, 2022, 01:55:05 PM
I'm pro vaccine.  I think the Canadian truck driver complaints are a bit excessive and dramatic.  That being said, the Canadian governments retaliation financially as of yesterday and today is kind of scary.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 18, 2022, 02:12:04 PM
I'm pro vaccine.  I think the Canadian truck driver complaints are a bit excessive and dramatic.  That being said, the Canadian governments retaliation financially as of yesterday and today is kind of scary.

The truck drivers retaliation to the mandate has been financial terrorism. Putting people out of work is more than 'dramatic'. Their goal was/is to hurt business & industry in both Canada and the US. Why shouldn't the Canadian gov't respond in kind.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on February 18, 2022, 02:15:26 PM
The truck drivers retaliation to the mandate has been financial terrorism. Putting people out of work is more than 'dramatic'. Their goal was/is to hurt business & industry in both Canada and the US. Why shouldn't the Canadian gov't respond in kind.

Do BLM next.  Hack.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on February 18, 2022, 02:16:56 PM
The truck drivers retaliation to the mandate has been financial terrorism. Putting people out of work is more than 'dramatic'. Their goal was/is to hurt business & industry in both Canada and the US. Why shouldn't the Canadian gov't respond in kind.

Civil disobedience is financial terrorism?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 18, 2022, 03:20:05 PM
Civil disobedience is financial terrorism?


Financial terrorism is a bit much, but a key concept of civil disobedience is peacefully accepting the punishment your actions. So I’m not sure it’s that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: pacearrow02 on February 18, 2022, 03:20:31 PM
The truck drivers retaliation to the mandate has been financial terrorism. Putting people out of work is more than 'dramatic'. Their goal was/is to hurt business & industry in both Canada and the US. Why shouldn't the Canadian gov't respond in kind.

Do you agree the same should have been done during the BLM demonstrations? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 18, 2022, 03:27:31 PM
The truck drivers retaliation to the mandate has been financial terrorism. Putting people out of work is more than 'dramatic'. Their goal was/is to hurt business & industry in both Canada and the US. Why shouldn't the Canadian gov't respond in kind.

Donating to the truckers means the government will find out who you are and freeze your bank accounts, as a private citizen.  You give to a GoFundMe to a group we are at odds with, we can freeze your accounts. Thats totalitarian, period.

"Financial terrorism" give me a break.  Nobody is inspiring terror.  Its a protest/defiance plain and simple.  Its a pseduo-blockade, which countries do all the time. When the truckers start detonating their trucks or ramming them into border stations, then we can talk.

 
Civil disobedience is financial terrorism?

While I agree with the BLM movement's goals and mission more than the truckers, there was no "hurting of business and industry" in their goals to get heard?

Both were trying to disrupt and inconvenience to get their missions heard/accomplished.  Again, this is excusing similar broad situations because one cause is deemed worthy and the other deemed spurious.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 18, 2022, 03:36:56 PM
Do you agree the same should have been done during the BLM demonstrations? 

Do BLM next.  Hack.

Most of the BLM demonstrations were peaceful, didn’t clog streets for weeks and shut down international borders.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 18, 2022, 04:23:04 PM
It's not "truckers".
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 18, 2022, 07:23:39 PM
Donating to the truckers means the government will find out who you are and freeze your bank accounts, as a private citizen.  You give to a GoFundMe to a group we are at odds with, we can freeze your accounts. Thats totalitarian, period.

"Financial terrorism" give me a break.  Nobody is inspiring terror.  Its a protest/defiance plain and simple.  Its a pseduo-blockade, which countries do all the time. When the truckers start detonating their trucks or ramming them into border stations, then we can talk.

 
While I agree with the BLM movement's goals and mission more than the truckers, there was no "hurting of business and industry" in their goals to get heard?

Both were trying to disrupt and inconvenience to get their missions heard/accomplished.  Again, this is excusing similar broad situations because one cause is deemed worthy and the other deemed spurious.

Groups that contributed to a coup attempt in the US are also giving to the truckers. It is not simply a protest.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on February 18, 2022, 07:55:36 PM
Groups that contributed to a coup attempt in the US are also giving to the truckers. It is not simply a protest.

coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 18, 2022, 07:56:47 PM
12/10   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 18, 2022, 08:14:53 PM
coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense

Put this in Marquette’s recruiting guide. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 18, 2022, 08:32:02 PM
Groups that contributed to a coup attempt in the US are also giving to the truckers. It is not simply a protest.

That’s fine, it’s still not “financial terrorism” that justifies confiscating crypto wallets and freezing accounts/cards they way you’d do with a discovered Al Qaeda cell.

If Trump and his cronies had did something like this to people who were contributing to the bail fund for people arrested in various BLM riots, or BLM the organization in general (not the movement), people would have lost their damn minds.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 18, 2022, 08:44:16 PM
That’s fine, it’s still not “financial terrorism” that justifies confiscating crypto wallets and freezing accounts/cards they way you’d do with a discovered Al Qaeda cell.

On the other hand, they are knowingly funding a criminal enterprise, not giving to the United Way.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 18, 2022, 08:55:44 PM
coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense

Glorious.

The Pooba of Buffons
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 18, 2022, 09:34:20 PM
coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense

Grade A RoQQet! You gave your Mad King a little mushroom woody with this one.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 19, 2022, 01:31:59 PM
coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense

Is this self parody?  I guess we'll never know for sure.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 19, 2022, 01:53:39 PM
coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense

Nah, just your run of the mill 1/6/21 incited-by-the-sitting-president-who-watched-with-glee-as-150-cops-were-injured-by-his-armed-terrorist-mob coup attempt.

You know, the one that caused your god's own kids to beg him to do something about it, the one that had all of his Foxy Friends pleading with him to put a stop to it, the one that Cancun Cruz repeatedly called a "terrorist act" (until Tucker grabbed him by the nuts), the one that the Senate minority leader just called a "violent insurrection," the one during which your god's cultists tried to overthrow the U.S. government as they chanted "Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence!" That coup attempt.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 19, 2022, 02:17:21 PM
coup attempt??  you can't be talking about cankles trying to over throw a duly elected and sitting grand pooba...you know, the smashed up blackberries, wiped out hard drives, 10's of thousands of emails flushed, tapping into potus hard drive, making schiff up to form a fake dossier to use in fisa courts, ruining innocent people's lives, taking million$ from foreign sources...you mean that coup? or the ignoring of coke head and the "big guy" selling out for money from foreign countries, selling paintings made from his used up crack pipe...
   
  ok, now you're talkin some sense

This is what happens to a brain fed a steady diet of Fox News and OANN.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Billy Hoyle on February 19, 2022, 11:52:40 PM
Most of the BLM demonstrations were peaceful, didn’t clog streets for weeks and shut down international borders.

“Most.” LOL. That makes it all ok.

$2 billion in damages. Lives lost, businesses that have never recovered. That was terrorism. Any fires, deaths, intentional damage or destruction by those hosers in Ottawa?

https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/insurance-costs-for-george-floyd-riots-will-be-most-expensive-in-history-233905.aspx
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 20, 2022, 06:25:05 AM
“Most.” LOL. That makes it all ok.

$2 billion in damages. Lives lost, businesses that have never recovered. That was terrorism. Any fires, deaths, intentional damage or destruction by those hosers in Ottawa?

https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/insurance-costs-for-george-floyd-riots-will-be-most-expensive-in-history-233905.aspx


I don't know what you mean by "make it all OK" but yeah, if most of the protests were peaceful, there should be no problem with people assembling since it is a Constitutional right.  People who cause property damage should face criminal penalties.  It's not hard.

The protests in Canada shut down an international border that cost the auto industry nearly $1B in losses.  Are the truckers going to pay for that?  The missed wages that workers had?  Doubtful.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 20, 2022, 09:47:45 AM
I have yet to see a single Scooper say that those who committed violent acts during the summer of 2020 protests shouldn't be punished to the full extent of the law. I, for one, hope each perpetrator is identified, tried, convicted and sentenced to the max the law allows.

Meanwhile, many Scoopers have minimized the financial damage these truckers have caused, have minimized the deadly neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville and, of course, have minimized the 1/6/21 coup attempt.

Oh ... and BTW ... Queen Elizabeth II has Covid.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on February 20, 2022, 11:55:17 AM
Oh, and how is the 95 yo doin', hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 20, 2022, 12:03:23 PM
Oh, and how is the 95 yo doin', hey?

God saved the queen with vaccines.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on February 20, 2022, 12:05:25 PM
God saved the queen with vaccines.

A true fascist regime.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: CountryRoads on February 20, 2022, 12:30:29 PM
I have yet to see a single Scooper say that those who committed violent acts during the summer of 2020 protests shouldn't be punished to the full extent of the law. I, for one, hope each perpetrator is identified, tried, convicted and sentenced to the max the law allows.

Meanwhile, many Scoopers have minimized the financial damage these truckers have caused, have minimized the deadly neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville and, of course, have minimized the 1/6/21 coup attempt.

Oh ... and BTW ... Queen Elizabeth II has Covid.

People on this board minimize BLM and the financial damage they caused, almost on a daily basis. Furthermore, I haven’t seen any scoopers saying that the violent acts committed in the other events (1/6, Charlottesville) shouldn’t be condemned and punished to the fullest extent of the law either. So, from what I see, it really goes both ways and is more balanced than you make it out to be. I’m still curious as to why 1/6 comes up in almost every thread. Almost never has any relevance to the topic at hand.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 20, 2022, 12:38:06 PM
People on this board minimize BLM and the financial damage they caused, almost on a daily basis. Furthermore, I haven’t seen any scoopers saying that the violent acts committed in the other events (1/6, Charlottesville) shouldn’t be condemned and punished to the fullest extent of the law either. So, from what I see, it really goes both ways and is more balanced than you make it out to be. I’m still curious as to why 1/6 comes up in almost every thread. Almost never has any relevance to the topic at hand.

Usually BLM is mentioned, then Insurrection follows.

Not sure why they both can’t even exist on their own.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on February 20, 2022, 05:47:15 PM
People on this board minimize BLM and the financial damage they caused, almost on a daily basis. Furthermore, I haven’t seen any scoopers saying that the violent acts committed in the other events (1/6, Charlottesville) shouldn’t be condemned and punished to the fullest extent of the law either. So, from what I see, it really goes both ways and is more balanced than you make it out to be. I’m still curious as to why 1/6 comes up in almost every thread. Almost never has any relevance to the topic at hand.

Actually, numerous Scoopers, led by the ALM crowd, minimize the attempted coup of 1/6/21 constantly.

They've accused antifa of starting it, they've charged Capitol police officers with faking their injuries, they've tried to claim the insurrection was mostly peaceful, they've said that the president of the United States inciting a coup attempt against his own country was no big deal, they have no interest in finding out the truth, they still believe the lie that the guy who fueled the coup attempt has repeated 10,000 times ... and anytime 1/6/21 is mentioned, they change the subject to the completely unrelated violence that broke out during protests for civil rights in the aftermath of George Floyd being murdered.

On the other hand, the violence and looting that did happen as an adjunct to the mostly peaceful civil-rights protests of 2020 has been strongly condemned by every Scooper.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on February 20, 2022, 10:00:13 PM


If Trump and his cronies had did something like this to people who were contributing to the bail fund for people arrested in various BLM riots, or BLM the organization in general (not the movement), people would have lost their damn minds.

Bingo.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 21, 2022, 09:23:44 AM
If Trump and his cronies had did something like this to people who were contributing to the bail fund for people arrested in various BLM riots, or BLM the organization in general (not the movement), people would have lost their damn minds.

Serious question for you and Lenny ...
Do you see raising funds to support the exercise of a legal and Constitutionally protected right - the posting of bond - the same as raising funds to support the exercise of a criminal act, i.e. blocking traffic and commerce?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU_B on February 21, 2022, 04:18:17 PM
Serious question for you and Lenny ...
Do you see raising funds to support the exercise of a legal and Constitutionally protected right - the posting of bond - the same as raising funds to support the exercise of a criminal act, i.e. blocking traffic and commerce?

Serious question for you.

So all those other protests  just occurred in city parks, parking lots, and stuff?  Never shut down any roads, interstates, or other "commerce".  Pretty sure we all saw plenty of traffic blocked by those mostly peaceful protestors exercising their constitutionally protected rights.  Let's not pretend this outrage is over the traffic they are blocking.

I'm not Lenny, but no I don't see any difference between these two groups fundraising efforts to support free speech.  Although, I'm not sure the leader of the Trucker Convoy bought a new house.  But nothing would surprise me.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 21, 2022, 05:46:18 PM
It's not a trucker convoy.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 21, 2022, 06:37:35 PM
Serious question for you.

So all those other protests  just occurred in city parks, parking lots, and stuff?  Never shut down any roads, interstates, or other "commerce".  Pretty sure we all saw plenty of traffic blocked by those mostly peaceful protestors exercising their constitutionally protected rights.  Let's not pretend this outrage is over the traffic they are blocking.

I'm not Lenny, but no I don't see any difference between these two groups fundraising efforts to support free speech.  Although, I'm not sure the leader of the Trucker Convoy bought a new house.  But nothing would surprise me.

The "truckers" weren't merely exercising free speech. Their blocking of traffic and disruption of commerce wasn't an unfortunate side effect of their protest. It was the goal of their protest.
And, of course, you're entirely missing the point.
By equating the funding of the "trucker" protest with posting bond for arrested BLM protesters, Lenny and Wags seem to be suggesting that the legal exercise of a fundamental right - one so essential that our founding fathers saw fit to codify it in the Bill of Rights - is really no different than funding criminal acts.
That's why I asked them for clarification. Because it reads to me that they view the posting of bond as something on par with funding the "truckers'" actions.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on February 21, 2022, 06:46:34 PM
The "truckers" weren't merely exercising free speech. Their blocking of traffic and disruption of commerce wasn't an unfortunate side effect of their protest. It was the goal of their protest.
And, of course, you're entirely missing the point.
By equating the funding of the "trucker" protest with posting bond for arrested BLM protesters, Lenny and Wags seem to be suggesting that the legal exercise of a fundamental right - one so essential that our founding fathers saw fit to codify it in the Bill of Rights - is really no different than funding criminal acts.
That's why I asked them for clarification. Because it reads to me that they view the posting of bond as something on par with funding the "truckers'" actions.
Just so I understand your argument, if the blocking of traffic and disruption of commerce is the “goal” of the protest, it’s not free speech and therefore not protected? 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 21, 2022, 07:14:26 PM
The US constitution does not apply in Canada
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 21, 2022, 07:55:15 PM
Just so I understand your argument, if the blocking of traffic and disruption of commerce is the “goal” of the protest, it’s not free speech and therefore not protected?

No, that's not my argument.
That's the ACLU's argument. Take it up with them, I guess?

II. A. Blocking traffic and entrances
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to block pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or to prevent entry and exit from buildings. For example, a federal court recently held that the Chicago police did not violate the First Amendment by arresting protesters who were impeding a heavy flow of pedestrian traffic on sidewalks near Chicago’s Soldier Field, and who disobeyed a police order to step off the sidewalk and onto the immediately adjacent gravel. Likewise, a Chicago ordinance prohibits intentional obstruction of vehicle traffic.
Indeed, the general public has a right to freedom of movement that police must protect. For example, to address widespread unlawful blockades of the entrances to reproductive healthcare facilities, Congress enacted the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994, which prohibits the use of force, threats, or obstructions to interfere with access to such facilities.

III. B. Harassment
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to harass other members of the public. For example, there is no right to block another person’s freedom of movement in the public way, and then force them to listen to an unwanted message.

https://www.aclu-il.org/en/news/when-else-can-government-regulate-time-place-and-manner-protest
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on February 21, 2022, 08:02:58 PM
No, that's not my argument.
That's the ACLU's argument. Take it up with them, I guess?

II. A. Blocking traffic and entrances
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to block pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or to prevent entry and exit from buildings. For example, a federal court recently held that the Chicago police did not violate the First Amendment by arresting protesters who were impeding a heavy flow of pedestrian traffic on sidewalks near Chicago’s Soldier Field, and who disobeyed a police order to step off the sidewalk and onto the immediately adjacent gravel. Likewise, a Chicago ordinance prohibits intentional obstruction of vehicle traffic.
Indeed, the general public has a right to freedom of movement that police must protect. For example, to address widespread unlawful blockades of the entrances to reproductive healthcare facilities, Congress enacted the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994, which prohibits the use of force, threats, or obstructions to interfere with access to such facilities.

III. B. Harassment
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to harass other members of the public. For example, there is no right to block another person’s freedom of movement in the public way, and then force them to listen to an unwanted message.

https://www.aclu-il.org/en/news/when-else-can-government-regulate-time-place-and-manner-protest
Fair enough. Where was the outrage, not saying from you, when BLM blocked freeways in Texas, California, Oklahoma, Washington, Minnesota, Virginia, among other places, multiple times?   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 21, 2022, 08:15:33 PM
Just so I understand your argument, if the blocking of traffic and disruption of commerce is the “goal” of the protest, it’s not free speech and therefore not protected?

If someone erected a barricade around your house and refused to let you leave to go to work, what would your response be?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on February 21, 2022, 08:29:02 PM
If someone erected a barricade around your house and refused to let you leave to go to work, what would your response be?

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/999/cpsprodpb/13B30/production/_114088608_fb0cd11e-d463-45dc-becf-34aa6199d45f.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on February 21, 2022, 08:39:34 PM
If someone erected a barricade around your house and refused to let you leave to go to work, what would your response be?

Are you talking about Portland, Seattle, or MPLS?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on February 21, 2022, 08:41:08 PM
No, that's not my argument.
That's the ACLU's argument. Take it up with them, I guess?

II. A. Blocking traffic and entrances
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to block pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or to prevent entry and exit from buildings. For example, a federal court recently held that the Chicago police did not violate the First Amendment by arresting protesters who were impeding a heavy flow of pedestrian traffic on sidewalks near Chicago’s Soldier Field, and who disobeyed a police order to step off the sidewalk and onto the immediately adjacent gravel. Likewise, a Chicago ordinance prohibits intentional obstruction of vehicle traffic.
Indeed, the general public has a right to freedom of movement that police must protect. For example, to address widespread unlawful blockades of the entrances to reproductive healthcare facilities, Congress enacted the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994, which prohibits the use of force, threats, or obstructions to interfere with access to such facilities.

III. B. Harassment
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to harass other members of the public. For example, there is no right to block another person’s freedom of movement in the public way, and then force them to listen to an unwanted message.

https://www.aclu-il.org/en/news/when-else-can-government-regulate-time-place-and-manner-protest

The ACLU maybe cared about rights and liberties at one point in their existence, but now they're just another left wing lawsuit machine.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on February 21, 2022, 08:46:18 PM
Fair enough. Where was the outrage, not saying from you, when BLM blocked freeways in Texas, California, Oklahoma, Washington, Minnesota, Virginia, among other places, multiple times?

I don't think there was any lack of outrage out there about BLM protests.
And many BLM protests were dispersed, and hundreds of protesters arrested, for exactly this thing.

But really, it comes down to point of view for a lot of people, right? The people most outraged by BLM protests are portraying Canadian protesters are heroes (see: Fox News' fawning coverage).
And many who ardently support BLM see the Canadian trucker protests as villainous.

Personally, I think one side has a righteous cause and the other does not, but I don't support either side disrupting the lives of bystanders and damaging businesses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on February 21, 2022, 10:04:47 PM
If someone erected a barricade around your house and refused to let you leave to go to work, what would your response be?
First, call the police. They are there to serve and protect. I’d expect them to do that. Then, probably file civil suit against the  someone who wouldn’t let me leave my own house.  Not that I’d get any recovery since someone who did that probably has no job or money.   So if you’re thinking about doing that to someone Jock, bad idea.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 21, 2022, 10:09:10 PM
First, call the police. They are there to serve and protect. I’d expect them to do that. Then, probably file civil suit against the  someone who wouldn’t let me leave my own house.  Not that I’d get any recovery since someone who did that probably has no job or money.   So if you’re thinking about doing that to someone Jock, bad idea.

Just good to know that you support Trudeau’s actions in Canada.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on February 22, 2022, 07:23:06 AM
Just good to know that you support Trudeau’s actions in Canada.
Quite the leap you make there Jocko. 

Don't change.  And I mean that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 22, 2022, 10:20:36 AM
Fair enough. Where was the outrage, not saying from you, when BLM blocked freeways in Texas, California, Oklahoma, Washington, Minnesota, Virginia, among other places, multiple times?

BLM protesters blocked I-95 in New Haven and they were cleared and arrested.
Oh and there weren't there for weeks, but more like minutes.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Jockey on February 22, 2022, 11:15:27 AM
Quite the leap you make there Jocko. 

Don't change.  And I mean that.

My mistake. I interpreted your post as saying you would want the police to stop the people who were refusing to let you leave your house to get to work. I figured you would extend your belief to those in the US and Canada who were kept from their jobs
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 04, 2022, 11:36:28 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/04/jobs-report-february-2022.html

Nonfarm payrolls rose by 678,000 in February and the unemployment rate fell to 3.8%.
Wall Street had been looking for respective figures of 440,000 and 3.9%.
Wages were little changed on the month and up 5.1% for the year, well below expectations.
Leisure and hospitality led job gains, followed by professional and business services and health care.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 04, 2022, 01:48:00 PM
White House discussing further student loan pause.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 04, 2022, 04:57:28 PM
Bye sum votes and just universally thair up da paper, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 04, 2022, 08:48:12 PM
The ACLU maybe cared about rights and liberties at one point in their existence, but now they're just another left wing lawsuit machine.

100% true. I lived close to Skokie, Il. when the ACLU represented the American Nazi Party in a lawsuit defending their right to march. They believed in free speech and freedom of assembly for all, even (especially?) the people who views they found to be the most abhorrent. They knew that if anyone’s rights were abrogated then everyone’s were in danger. They (and their allies on the left) don’t believe that anymore.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 04, 2022, 10:27:33 PM
100% true. I lived close to Skokie, Il. when the ACLU represented the American Nazi Party in a lawsuit defending their right to march. They believed in free speech and freedom of assembly for all, even (especially?) the people who views they found to be the most abhorrent. They knew that if anyone’s rights were abrogated then everyone’s were in danger. They (and their allies on the left) don’t believe that anymore.

What's the holdup?

Ah, the bums won their court case so their marching.

Who?

Illinois nazis.

I hate Illinois nazis.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on March 05, 2022, 11:20:38 AM
100% true. I lived close to Skokie, Il. when the ACLU represented the American Nazi Party in a lawsuit defending their right to march. They believed in free speech and freedom of assembly for all, even (especially?) the people who views they found to be the most abhorrent. They knew that if anyone’s rights were abrogated then everyone’s were in danger. They (and their allies on the left) don’t believe that anymore.

Google really isn't that hard. Use it occasionally and you may not post horribly wrong information as often.


Last weekend’s deadly violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, has put the American Civil Liberties Union on the defensive for representing the white supremacists and generated furious debate over First Amendment speech rights.
The ACLU has been here before.
In a statement posted Tuesday night, ACLU executive director Anthony Romero insisted hateful, bigoted speech must be aired.
“Racism and bigotry will not be eradicated if we merely force them underground,” Romero wrote. “Equality and justice will only be achieved if society looks such bigotry squarely in the eyes and renounces it.”

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/aclu-free-speech-white-supremacy/index.html

Since 2017, we have supported the constitutional rights of the NRA, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity Foundation, anti-Semitic protesters, Trump supporters, Trump himself, Republican challengers to a Democratic gerrymander, right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, and conservative and anti-gay student groups, to name but a few. We have filed multiple Supreme Court briefs with the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union, and the Institute for Justice. Here is just a sample of the work we have done since 2017 in which we have defended or stood alongside conservative voices and groups, because we believe constitutional principle demanded it, even if we disagreed with what the groups and individuals had to say.

2017

    We challenged the D.C. Metro’s refusal to post an advertisement for alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos’ book;
    We defended Donald Trump’s speech rights when he was charged with inciting violence at a Trump campaign rally;
    We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court in support of a tea party supporter challenging a ban on wearing political insignia or apparel at polling places;
    With the NRA, we supported a federal law that reduced obstacles to people with mental illness to buy guns, which we viewed as harming people with disabilities; and
    We advocated in defense of the First Amendment rights of a Columbus City Schools employee who posted an anti-gay slur on Facebook, and who faced being fired for doing so.

2018

    We filed an amicus brief supporting the NRA’s First Amendment challenge to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s directive to New York financial services organizations to reconsider the “reputational risks” of doing business with the NRA and other gun rights groups;
    We filed an amicus brief supporting Republican voters’ constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court to a Maryland partisan gerrymander that created a Democratic district for which one of our biggest donors, David Trone, was running, and ultimately won; and
    We sent a public demand letter to the Vermont governor, asking that he to stop banning gun-rights activists who posted negative comments, almost entirely political, on his official page.

2019

    We challenged Arkansas State’s “free speech” zones as applied to a homophobic and racist student organization;
    We won an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Koala v. Khosla), on behalf of a conservative student magazine denied funding by the University of California at San Diego after they published a story mocking “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces”; and
    We filed comments on Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ Title IX rule that supported fair process requirements for live hearings, cross-examination, access to all the evidence, and delays in proceedings if the student accused of wrongdoing also faced a student criminal investigation, even as we criticized the rule for reducing the obligations of schools to respond to reports of sexual harassment.

2020

    We filed a brief in Michigan supporting anti-Semitic protesters picketing in front of a synagogue on the Sabbath;
    We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court with the conservative Americans for Prosperity Foundation and the Institute for Justice in support of a case challenging a free speech zone by an evangelical Christian, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom;
    We represented a number of voters, including a Republican, to defend drive-thru voting, which was set up in Houston in November to enable safe voting during the pandemic;
    We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting a Catholic school’s religious right to discriminate in the hiring and firing of a teacher with significant religious responsibilities;
    We sent a letter on behalf of a Trump supporter in Georgia who was being criminally prosecuted for flying a flag on his own property that said, “Trump 2020: unnatural carnal knowledge Your Feelings.” Charges were dropped after the prosecutor received our letter;
    We protested New York Attorney General Letitia James’ effort to shut down the NRA based on the wrongdoing of some of its leaders as a violation of the right of association;
    We filed a brief in the Supreme Court with the Cato Institute, the Institute for Justice, the R Street Institute, and the Rutherford Institute on behalf of property rights of people declaring bankruptcy; and
    We filed an amicus brief in Esshaki v. Whitmer in support of a conservative Republican candidate for Congress who was challenging a signature collection requirement in the midst of the pandemic. The ballot access restriction favored the incumbent, a Democrat in a toss-up congressional district.

2021

    We filed a Supreme Court brief supporting the conservative nonprofits Americans for Prosperity and the Thomas More Society in a challenge to California’s donor disclosure rule as violating the First Amendment;
    We filed two Supreme Court briefs (here and here) with conservative organizations, including the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union, R Street, and the Rutherford Institute, in cases challenging warrantless searches of homes;
    We sent a letter after the Capitol insurrection to U.S. Department of Interior opposing D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s suggestion to cancel all permits through President Biden’s inauguration; and
    We questioned Twitter and Facebook’s bans of President Trump’s account.
    We filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit arguing that the First Amendment places limits on schools’ authority to punish students for expressing themselves outside of school, even when that expression includes highly offensive anti-semitic language.
    We defended New Jersey and Kansas residents’ First Amendment right to hang up “unnatural carnal knowledge Biden” signs outside their homes. The First Amendment protects our right to express our opinions on political issues without fear of punishment by the government.
    We filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a conservative Christian group’s claim that the city of Boston violated its First Amendment rights by refusing to fly a Christian flag, featuring the Latin cross, from a flagpole in front of City Hall.
    We issued a statement expressing concerns about the FBI’s raid of Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe’s home, urging the court to appoint a special master to supervise law enforcement review of seized materials.


https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/defending-speech-we-hate/
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 05, 2022, 11:34:13 AM
100% true. I lived close to Skokie, Il. when the ACLU represented the American Nazi Party in a lawsuit defending their right to march. They believed in free speech and freedom of assembly for all, even (especially?) the people who views they found to be the most abhorrent. They knew that if anyone’s rights were abrogated then everyone’s were in danger. They (and their allies on the left) don’t believe that anymore.
Its just amazing that no matter how many times "free speech" is explained to you guys, you persist in having no idea what it means. So once more:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/83/30/ZDZI3XjB_o.png) (https://imgbox.com/ZDZI3XjB)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 05, 2022, 07:01:10 PM
Google really isn't that hard. Use it occasionally and you may not post horribly wrong information as often.


Last weekend’s deadly violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, has put the American Civil Liberties Union on the defensive for representing the white supremacists and generated furious debate over First Amendment speech rights.
The ACLU has been here before.
In a statement posted Tuesday night, ACLU executive director Anthony Romero insisted hateful, bigoted speech must be aired.
“Racism and bigotry will not be eradicated if we merely force them underground,” Romero wrote. “Equality and justice will only be achieved if society looks such bigotry squarely in the eyes and renounces it.”

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/aclu-free-speech-white-supremacy/index.html

Since 2017, we have supported the constitutional rights of the NRA, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity Foundation, anti-Semitic protesters, Trump supporters, Trump himself, Republican challengers to a Democratic gerrymander, right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, and conservative and anti-gay student groups, to name but a few. We have filed multiple Supreme Court briefs with the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union, and the Institute for Justice. Here is just a sample of the work we have done since 2017 in which we have defended or stood alongside conservative voices and groups, because we believe constitutional principle demanded it, even if we disagreed with what the groups and individuals had to say.

2017

    We challenged the D.C. Metro’s refusal to post an advertisement for alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos’ book;
    We defended Donald Trump’s speech rights when he was charged with inciting violence at a Trump campaign rally;
    We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court in support of a tea party supporter challenging a ban on wearing political insignia or apparel at polling places;
    With the NRA, we supported a federal law that reduced obstacles to people with mental illness to buy guns, which we viewed as harming people with disabilities; and
    We advocated in defense of the First Amendment rights of a Columbus City Schools employee who posted an anti-gay slur on Facebook, and who faced being fired for doing so.

2018

    We filed an amicus brief supporting the NRA’s First Amendment challenge to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s directive to New York financial services organizations to reconsider the “reputational risks” of doing business with the NRA and other gun rights groups;
    We filed an amicus brief supporting Republican voters’ constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court to a Maryland partisan gerrymander that created a Democratic district for which one of our biggest donors, David Trone, was running, and ultimately won; and
    We sent a public demand letter to the Vermont governor, asking that he to stop banning gun-rights activists who posted negative comments, almost entirely political, on his official page.

2019

    We challenged Arkansas State’s “free speech” zones as applied to a homophobic and racist student organization;
    We won an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Koala v. Khosla), on behalf of a conservative student magazine denied funding by the University of California at San Diego after they published a story mocking “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces”; and
    We filed comments on Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ Title IX rule that supported fair process requirements for live hearings, cross-examination, access to all the evidence, and delays in proceedings if the student accused of wrongdoing also faced a student criminal investigation, even as we criticized the rule for reducing the obligations of schools to respond to reports of sexual harassment.

2020

    We filed a brief in Michigan supporting anti-Semitic protesters picketing in front of a synagogue on the Sabbath;
    We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court with the conservative Americans for Prosperity Foundation and the Institute for Justice in support of a case challenging a free speech zone by an evangelical Christian, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom;
    We represented a number of voters, including a Republican, to defend drive-thru voting, which was set up in Houston in November to enable safe voting during the pandemic;
    We filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting a Catholic school’s religious right to discriminate in the hiring and firing of a teacher with significant religious responsibilities;
    We sent a letter on behalf of a Trump supporter in Georgia who was being criminally prosecuted for flying a flag on his own property that said, “Trump 2020: unnatural carnal knowledge Your Feelings.” Charges were dropped after the prosecutor received our letter;
    We protested New York Attorney General Letitia James’ effort to shut down the NRA based on the wrongdoing of some of its leaders as a violation of the right of association;
    We filed a brief in the Supreme Court with the Cato Institute, the Institute for Justice, the R Street Institute, and the Rutherford Institute on behalf of property rights of people declaring bankruptcy; and
    We filed an amicus brief in Esshaki v. Whitmer in support of a conservative Republican candidate for Congress who was challenging a signature collection requirement in the midst of the pandemic. The ballot access restriction favored the incumbent, a Democrat in a toss-up congressional district.

2021

    We filed a Supreme Court brief supporting the conservative nonprofits Americans for Prosperity and the Thomas More Society in a challenge to California’s donor disclosure rule as violating the First Amendment;
    We filed two Supreme Court briefs (here and here) with conservative organizations, including the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union, R Street, and the Rutherford Institute, in cases challenging warrantless searches of homes;
    We sent a letter after the Capitol insurrection to U.S. Department of Interior opposing D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s suggestion to cancel all permits through President Biden’s inauguration; and
    We questioned Twitter and Facebook’s bans of President Trump’s account.
    We filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit arguing that the First Amendment places limits on schools’ authority to punish students for expressing themselves outside of school, even when that expression includes highly offensive anti-semitic language.
    We defended New Jersey and Kansas residents’ First Amendment right to hang up “unnatural carnal knowledge Biden” signs outside their homes. The First Amendment protects our right to express our opinions on political issues without fear of punishment by the government.
    We filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a conservative Christian group’s claim that the city of Boston violated its First Amendment rights by refusing to fly a Christian flag, featuring the Latin cross, from a flagpole in front of City Hall.
    We issued a statement expressing concerns about the FBI’s raid of Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe’s home, urging the court to appoint a special master to supervise law enforcement review of seized materials.


https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/defending-speech-we-hate/

(https://media0.giphy.com/media/uLy4Bo680hZxm/giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47fqi18gg50v87qc5p7omppkkqwil38h9domzl7tpl&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 05, 2022, 09:22:17 PM
No, that's not my argument.
That's the ACLU's argument. Take it up with them, I guess?

II. A. Blocking traffic and entrances
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to block pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or to prevent entry and exit from buildings. For example, a federal court recently held that the Chicago police did not violate the First Amendment by arresting protesters who were impeding a heavy flow of pedestrian traffic on sidewalks near Chicago’s Soldier Field, and who disobeyed a police order to step off the sidewalk and onto the immediately adjacent gravel. Likewise, a Chicago ordinance prohibits intentional obstruction of vehicle traffic.
Indeed, the general public has a right to freedom of movement that police must protect. For example, to address widespread unlawful blockades of the entrances to reproductive healthcare facilities, Congress enacted the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994, which prohibits the use of force, threats, or obstructions to interfere with access to such facilities.

III. B. Harassment
Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to harass other members of the public. For example, there is no right to block another person’s freedom of movement in the public way, and then force them to listen to an unwanted message.

https://www.aclu-il.org/en/news/when-else-can-government-regulate-time-place-and-manner-protest

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html


I inadvertently quoted the wrong post of yours. This is in response to your post quoting an ACLU public relations/propaganda piece you found on Google showing that they throw an occasional bone to conservative operations. This is an actual NY Times article on the ACLU and what it’s become rather than a public relations piece. It was also found by a simple Google search.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 05, 2022, 09:23:14 PM
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/uLy4Bo680hZxm/giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47fqi18gg50v87qc5p7omppkkqwil38h9domzl7tpl&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)

LOL. No.

Pakuni”s ACLU press release vs all the (usually liberal) news that’s fit to print.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 05, 2022, 11:07:58 PM
LOL. No.

Pakuni”s ACLU press release vs all the (usually liberal) news that’s fit to print.

"Guys, I got nothing, but I'm mad"
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2022, 12:04:35 AM
LOL. No.

Pakuni”s ACLU press release vs all the (usually liberal) news that’s fit to print.

That piece doesn't "prove" anything ... except that many in the ACLU knew how effed up we were as a country after the 2016 election.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 06, 2022, 05:02:13 AM
That piece doesn't "prove" anything ... except that many in the ACLU knew how effed up we were as a country after the 2020 election.



Damn straight, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 06, 2022, 07:48:29 AM
That piece doesn't "prove" anything ... except that many in the ACLU knew how effed up we were as a country after the 2016 election.

Here’s the $64,000 question. If someone (or some group) throws out their principles based on who wins an election did they really have any principles in the first place? “But Trump…” (or any other name) doesn’t change the honest answer to that question.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on March 06, 2022, 10:07:29 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html


I inadvertently quoted the wrong post of yours. This is in response to your post quoting an ACLU public relations/propaganda piece you found on Google showing that they throw an occasional bone to conservative operations. This is an actual NY Times article on the ACLU and what it’s become rather than a public relations piece. It was also found by a simple Google search.

Just so we're clear ...
Lenny claims the ACLU doesn't do a thing.
I post 28 examples of the ACLU doing that thing in just that last five years.
Rather than be an actual grow up and admit he was mistaken (gasp!), Lenny dismisses these 28 things as a "press release" and then in "I want to be the new Cheeks" fashion, posts a NY Times story that doesn't say what he claims it says.

Would you feel better if I posted the ACLU briefs in all 28 of those cases? Would you admit you were wrong then?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on March 06, 2022, 10:13:22 AM
Would you admit you were wrong then?

This isn’t in the American playbook anymore.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 06, 2022, 10:47:25 AM
Just so we're clear ...
Lenny claims the ACLU doesn't do a thing.
I post 28 examples of the ACLU doing that thing in just that last five years.
Rather than be an actual grow up and admit he was mistaken (gasp!), Lenny dismisses these 28 things as a "press release" and then in "I want to be the new Cheeks" fashion, posts a NY Times story that doesn't say what he claims it says.

Would you feel better if I posted the ACLU briefs in all 28 of those cases? Would you admit you were wrong then?

Just so we’re clear. You posted from a piece written by a spokesman from the ACLU defending the organization against complaints and concerns from within the organization that they had lost their way and become mostly a left wing political advocacy group. The NY Times article contains those same criticisms. The exceptions the group defends itself with don’t mean the rule isn’t true.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 06, 2022, 11:06:10 AM
Just so we’re clear. You posted from a piece written by a spokesman from the ACLU defending the organization against complaints and concerns from within the organization that they had lost their way and become mostly a left wing political advocacy group. The NY Times article contains those same criticisms. The exceptions the group defends itself with don’t mean the rule isn’t true.

LOL
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on March 06, 2022, 11:32:55 AM
Just so we’re clear. You posted from a piece written by a spokesman from the ACLU defending the organization against complaints and concerns from within the organization that they had lost their way and become mostly a left wing political advocacy group. The NY Times article contains those same criticisms. The exceptions the group defends itself with don’t mean the rule isn’t true.

John Wayne Gacy's 33 murders were just "exceptions" to the rule.
The vast majority of days he didn't kill anyone.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU82 on March 06, 2022, 05:16:42 PM
Here’s the $64,000 question. If someone (or some group) throws out their principles based on who wins an election did they really have any principles in the first place? “But Trump…” (or any other name) doesn’t change the honest answer to that question.

They actually defended Trump and his people, so there goes that argument.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 07, 2022, 10:15:10 AM
John Wayne Gacy's 33 murders were just "exceptions" to the rule.
The vast majority of days he didn't kill anyone.

Congrats -worst (by far) analogy in Scoop history.

If you’re willing to take the word of a spokesman for the ACLU that their mission hasn’t changed, that they haven’t become an advocacy organization for left wing causes and that a handful of cases they take on every year “proves” that -well, fine. I find the arguments made by members of the organization (current and former) like those stated in The NY Times and other publications to the contrary more compelling.



Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 07, 2022, 10:45:55 AM
An opinion piece that confirms your bias is certainly more accurate than dozens of documented court cases. Indeed.

Never admit you're wrong, Cheeks Lenny.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on March 07, 2022, 10:57:52 AM
Congrats -worst (by far) analogy in Scoop history.

If you’re willing to take the word of a spokesman for the ACLU that their mission hasn’t changed, that they haven’t become an advocacy organization for left wing causes and that a handful of cases they take on every year “proves” that -well, fine. I find the arguments made by members of the organization (current and former) like those stated in The NY Times and other publications to the contrary more compelling.

Guess that flew way over your head.

You're being willfully obtuse  - I hope willfully, because I fear the alternative for you.
Not only that, but you've entirely shifted the goalposts.
You started this by saying the ACLU doesn't take on certain causes like they used to. I've provided more than two dozen instances in the last five years alone that prove you wrong. These aren't "arguments," as if it's debatable that the ACLU is doing this. These are real cases. They're facts. And, as one right-wing hero likes to say, facts don't care about your feelings, Lenny.

I'm not going to argue any more with someone incapable of a good-faith discussion.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 07, 2022, 04:56:49 PM


Never admit you're wrong, Cheeks Lenny.

A lie you know is a lie. If you need proof I’ll provide it for you.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 07, 2022, 06:02:32 PM
A lie you know is a lie. If you need proof I’ll provide it for you.
Attaboy, never admit it. That's Cheeks 101.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 07, 2022, 06:05:48 PM
A lie you know is a lie. If you need proof I’ll provide it for you.

Is there any evidence that someone could provide in this situation to get you to change your mind/perspective/opinion?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 07, 2022, 08:43:57 PM
Is there any evidence that someone could provide in this situation to get you to change your mind/perspective/opinion?

I’ve already conceded that the ACLU will still occasionally take a case defending speech tights for Conservatives. Occasionally.

To the larger point, that the ACLU has largely become an advocacy group for left wing causes - I think the evidence brought up by those in and out or the ACLU indicates that answer is yes.

This is kind of like the NRA. It used to be mostly a “gun safety” organization. Today they still are involved in gun safety but some claim that they’ve largely become part of the gun lobby. I guess that can’t be true (at least to logicians like Pakuni and Smitty) because they’re still involved with gun safety. I disagree.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 07, 2022, 09:18:46 PM
Nice! Implying others have made statements that they haven't.

The Chicos is strong with this one (to paraphrase Vader).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 07, 2022, 10:56:39 PM
Nice! Implying others have made statements that they haven't.

The Chicos is strong with this one (to paraphrase Vader).

Weak attempt to copy Rico.It’s embarrassing.

He’s funny. You’re not.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 07, 2022, 11:14:41 PM
I’ve already conceded that the ACLU will still occasionally take a case defending speech tights for Conservatives. Occasionally.

To the larger point, that the ACLU has largely become an advocacy group for left wing causes - I think the evidence brought up by those in and out or the ACLU indicates that answer is yes.

This is kind of like the NRA. It used to be mostly a “gun safety” organization. Today they still are involved in gun safety but some claim that they’ve largely become part of the gun lobby. I guess that can’t be true (at least to logicians like Pakuni and Smitty) because they’re still involved with gun safety. I disagree.

Does that mean the answer to the question I asked you is "no"?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 08, 2022, 08:21:25 AM
Weak attempt to copy Rico.It’s embarrassing.

He’s funny. You’re not.
Wut? Now you are just being old and confused.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 08, 2022, 10:39:01 AM
Wut? Now you are just being old and confused.

Lenny is right.  You aren't funny or clever or witty or amusing at all.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 08, 2022, 10:40:32 AM
Lenny is right.  You aren't funny or clever or witty or amusing at all.

Shocker that you'd meander by and pile on to this
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 08, 2022, 11:31:30 AM
Lenny is right.  You aren't funny or clever or witty or amusing at all.
Your opinion is very important to me
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 08, 2022, 12:11:31 PM
Shocker that you'd meander by and pile on to this

There have been like 4 posts on the covid board the last few days. Not that hard to keep up.

Any random Twitter accounts or nonsensical YouTube videos for today?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 08, 2022, 12:21:41 PM
There have been like 4 posts on the covid board the last few days. Not that hard to keep up.

Any random Twitter accounts or nonsensical YouTube videos for today?
Thank you for providing valuable input
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on March 08, 2022, 01:00:24 PM
There have been like 4 posts on the covid board the last few days. Not that hard to keep up.

Any random Twitter accounts or nonsensical YouTube videos for today?

I didn't say it was hard to keep up.

But it's definitely your schtick to offer nothing more than snark and snide comments after others fire the first salvo
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on March 08, 2022, 01:09:23 PM
Your opinion is very important to me

First Lenny, now Ziggy.
You've completely lost Angry Old Man Scoop.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 08, 2022, 01:17:04 PM
First Lenny, now Ziggy.
You've completely lost Angry Old Man Scoop.

Zinger!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on March 08, 2022, 01:27:03 PM
Zinger!

(https://c.tenor.com/_srodCJ_gKkAAAAM/good-comeback-right-guys.gif)
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 10, 2022, 02:55:32 PM
Since certain people are only interested in getting threads locked... I'll place it here.

Federal Public Transportation Mask Mandate extended to 4/18 with the plan to end it.

Another month...   :(
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on March 10, 2022, 04:17:46 PM
Since certain people are only interested in getting threads locked... I'll place it here.

Federal Public Transportation Mask Mandate extended to 4/18 with the plan to end it.

Another month...   :(
At least there’s an end in sight.  For now.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 10, 2022, 04:31:24 PM
At least there’s an end in sight.  For now.

True, I was just really hoping it was next Friday.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 10, 2022, 04:51:18 PM
Since certain people are only interested in getting threads locked... I'll place it here.

Federal Public Transportation Mask Mandate extended to 4/18 with the plan to end it.

Another month...   :(

Are you considered public transportation?  Genuine question, no snark.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 10, 2022, 08:30:19 PM
Are you considered public transportation?  Genuine question, no snark.

Yes, we are the ADA analog of the bus system.  Especially since we are contracted by Madison Metro.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: rocket surgeon on March 11, 2022, 07:04:12 AM
Since certain people are only interested in getting threads locked... I'll place it here.

Federal Public Transportation Mask Mandate extended to 4/18 with the plan to end it.

Another month...   :(


But but but masks work eyna?


According to Jen, it has to do with people moving around from different “zones”??  The new science
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 11, 2022, 07:18:14 AM

But but but masks work eyna?


According to Jen, it has to do with people moving around from different “zones”??  The new science
Speaking of new science, where are the peer reviewed studies on HCQ and Ivermectin you promised "would bring us to our knees"? Where??
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 11, 2022, 07:45:37 AM
Covid ended March 1 wit lotsa kissin' and huggin'. I blame Putin, aina?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on March 11, 2022, 07:49:04 AM
Covid ended March 1 wit lotsa kissin' and huggin'. I blame Putin, aina?

I was told Easter Sunday 2020.  Too bad we scrapped the comprehensive pandemic plan because W got credit for it.  Sad!
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 11, 2022, 07:59:13 AM
A big country invaded a little country and that's a bad thing, hey?


#buffoon2
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Uncle Rico on March 11, 2022, 08:19:53 AM
A big country invaded a little country and that's a bad thing, hey?


#buffoon2

It is.  Are you saying it isn’t?  Anyway, I don’t think you’re a buffoon
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on March 11, 2022, 08:32:19 AM
Speaking of new science, where are the peer reviewed studies on HCQ and Ivermectin you promised "would bring us to our knees"? Where??

You spend a lot of time on your knees, with or without an HCQ study to use as an excuse.

🐷🐷
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on March 11, 2022, 08:49:13 AM
I have the utmost respect for your opinion
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Lighthouse 84 on March 11, 2022, 08:58:00 AM
A big country invaded a little country and that's a bad thing, hey?


#buffoon2
Basically, that's wrong?  Pure genius, hey?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 10, 2023, 09:29:58 AM
So workforce shortages aren't due to people being unwilling to work and/or government payments. Its almost entirely due to older people retiring before they were planning because of the pandemic.

Shocking.

https://twitter.com/NickTimiraos/status/1612773877427441664?s=20&t=dMsgFEEZVpZf-smf-qMyiQ
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 10, 2023, 11:27:11 AM
So workforce shortages aren't due to people being unwilling to work and/or government payments. Its almost entirely due to older people retiring before they were planning because of the pandemic.

Shocking.

https://twitter.com/NickTimiraos/status/1612773877427441664?s=20&t=dMsgFEEZVpZf-smf-qMyiQ

Despite the pandemic pushing up the timeline of retirements, has anyone's organizations been planning for the inevitable boomer retirements?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Pakuni on January 10, 2023, 03:06:34 PM
So workforce shortages aren't due to people being unwilling to work and/or government payments. Its almost entirely due to older people retiring before they were planning because of the pandemic.

Shocking.

https://twitter.com/NickTimiraos/status/1612773877427441664?s=20&t=dMsgFEEZVpZf-smf-qMyiQ

Typically lazy Boomers.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on January 10, 2023, 05:02:19 PM
So workforce shortages aren't due to people being unwilling to work and/or government payments. Its almost entirely due to older people retiring before they were planning because of the pandemic.

Shocking.

https://twitter.com/NickTimiraos/status/1612773877427441664?s=20&t=dMsgFEEZVpZf-smf-qMyiQ

I'll add one thing to that story is that a million plus died and aren't available to work ever again.  They all weren't retirees.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 10, 2023, 05:04:51 PM
Despite the pandemic pushing up the timeline of retirements, has anyone's organizations been planning for the inevitable boomer retirements?

1. Hiring younger, less experienced people for more money and more flexibility.

2. Pray
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 10, 2023, 05:55:57 PM
1. Hiring younger, less experienced people for more money and more flexibility.

2. Pray

Is that possible across the whole economy? Is there enough workforce available?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on January 11, 2023, 12:36:56 PM
Is that possible across the whole economy? Is there enough workforce available?

No.  First world population decline is a thing.  Countries that import workers will be able to compete in the global economy in the coming decades.  Those that expect more productivity from a smaller workforce and smaller wages will see instability.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 11, 2023, 12:59:23 PM
No.  First world population decline is a thing.  Countries that import workers will be able to compete in the global economy in the coming decades.  Those that expect more productivity from a smaller workforce and smaller wages will see instability.


And stagnation. Japan should be a warning for countries like the United States. You have to have a younger, productive workforce. And since we aren't having a lot of babies right now, growth is going to need to come through immigration.

It would do us a lot of good to fix our immigration issue, but of course we will never do that.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 11, 2023, 01:04:31 PM
No.  First world population decline is a thing.  Countries that import workers will be able to compete in the global economy in the coming decades.  Those that expect more productivity from a smaller workforce and smaller wages will see instability.

There is a weird gap in the employment workforce right now.  I'm seeing it in a variety of places.  It exists between management level and lower paid staff/worker bees.

It gets glossed over by people being like "well they don't want to do crap jobs for terrible pay" which may be true for some service industry work or whatnot, but not what I'm referring to.

For example, we've looked in the Milwaukee area for some roles that would traditionally pay $50-60K.  Previous people in that role made $40-45K, but given that was more 2018-2019, we realize thats not feasible.  In trying to source it, we're either seeing people that would be qualified but want more like $70-75K or people that are unqualified/would take a lot of work to make up the experience/expertise gap.  And that's not even factoring in people that want to be fully remote with little to no negotiating heft behind it  (sorry, I'm not going to hire someone with limited experience who worked in a hybrid role before for a position in a company that is primarily office based for a fully remote role.  One candidate removed themself from consideration because we asked for 2 days a week in office during onboarding and transitioning for 3-6 months and then reevaluation).

We've moved to hiring more staff at our office in India, as well as a contractor in Europe, not because of pure cost savings but availability and ability to work.

I know of multiple small to midsize companies who have a lot more managers/executives scrambling and doing lower level tasks cause they can't fill/backfill roles, which leads to myriad issues.  I spoke to the woman who runs operations for our apartment building, as well as 2 other complexes the company owns and manages, about staffing this morning.  She goes on maternity leave in May and is freaking out.  She's been trying to backfill her role with a much needed and overdo junior staffer and she's been having a HORRIBLE time.  Either candidates overshooting their salary range by $15-20K or people applying who have 1-2 years experience for something that would need 5-6 years.

I totally get overpaying for good talent.  We're not opposed to it.  We just hiked the salary for our controller significantly in order to compete with a job offer he received from an aggressive recruiter, but thats not always the right solution for unproven or nominally qualified talent.

TL;DR  There needs to be a coming together at the middle between employers expectations and the job seeker market in the post-COVID space both about work expectations as well as salary.  Employers need to be less rigid and stubborn and potential employees need to actually test the temperature of the job market instead of mainlining every thinkpiece they read from Twitter about what work/salary should look like in 2023.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: The Sultan of Semantics on January 11, 2023, 01:22:37 PM
But I think that gap exists because people have been moved up into management positions due to retirements above them.  I had a position open due to a retirement during the pandemic. We ended up making a great hire. But she was by far, the youngest and least experienced person I have ever hired into that role.

And now to fill the roles under her, we just aren't getting the quality of candidates I would have, say a decade ago. (The is the gap you are talking about.) So we have to interview carefully, bite the bullet and hire almost entirely based on potential. Because they don't have much experience. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Hards Alumni on January 11, 2023, 02:05:58 PM
There is a weird gap in the employment workforce right now.  I'm seeing it in a variety of places.  It exists between management level and lower paid staff/worker bees.

It gets glossed over by people being like "well they don't want to do crap jobs for terrible pay" which may be true for some service industry work or whatnot, but not what I'm referring to.

For example, we've looked in the Milwaukee area for some roles that would traditionally pay $50-60K.  Previous people in that role made $40-45K, but given that was more 2018-2019, we realize thats not feasible.  In trying to source it, we're either seeing people that would be qualified but want more like $70-75K or people that are unqualified/would take a lot of work to make up the experience/expertise gap.  And that's not even factoring in people that want to be fully remote with little to no negotiating heft behind it  (sorry, I'm not going to hire someone with limited experience who worked in a hybrid role before for a position in a company that is primarily office based for a fully remote role.  One candidate removed themself from consideration because we asked for 2 days a week in office during onboarding and transitioning for 3-6 months and then reevaluation).

We've moved to hiring more staff at our office in India, as well as a contractor in Europe, not because of pure cost savings but availability and ability to work.

I know of multiple small to midsize companies who have a lot more managers/executives scrambling and doing lower level tasks cause they can't fill/backfill roles, which leads to myriad issues.  I spoke to the woman who runs operations for our apartment building, as well as 2 other complexes the company owns and manages, about staffing this morning.  She goes on maternity leave in May and is freaking out.  She's been trying to backfill her role with a much needed and overdo junior staffer and she's been having a HORRIBLE time.  Either candidates overshooting their salary range by $15-20K or people applying who have 1-2 years experience for something that would need 5-6 years.

I totally get overpaying for good talent.  We're not opposed to it.  We just hiked the salary for our controller significantly in order to compete with a job offer he received from an aggressive recruiter, but thats not always the right solution for unproven or nominally qualified talent.

TL;DR  There needs to be a coming together at the middle between employers expectations and the job seeker market in the post-COVID space both about work expectations as well as salary.  Employers need to be less rigid and stubborn and potential employees need to actually test the temperature of the job market instead of mainlining every thinkpiece they read from Twitter about what work/salary should look like in 2023.

Part of the problem is that there is far too much middle management in the work force.   People have been promoted to those positions in positive conditions and won't go back to the day to day labor that is required.  Instead they'll job hop.  And why wouldn't they?  A ton of job opportunities and no desire to work somewhere where stress is high and pay is decreased.  There is no loyalty to a company any longer because companies have mostly done away with their loyalty to their employees.  It's a condition of the economic path we've chosen as a society.

As a good example, the local KFC has been closed going on three months now.  Prior to closing they were constantly hiring.  But unfortunately, if an entire group of people quits all at once the day to day operations cease.  The house of cards falls.  For a while the KFC was open from 2pm-8pm while they were 'hiring' up.  And now it sits empty because it turns out that if you hire three people to do the work of six people and ask them to work seven days a week they'll just eff off and find a job where the pay is similar without the unreasonable demands.  And the labor force has that power currently.  I don't see that ending any time soon. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 11, 2023, 02:45:11 PM
Part of the problem is that there is far too much middle management in the work force.   People have been promoted to those positions in positive conditions and won't go back to the day to day labor that is required.  Instead they'll job hop.  And why wouldn't they?  A ton of job opportunities and no desire to work somewhere where stress is high and pay is decreased.  There is no loyalty to a company any longer because companies have mostly done away with their loyalty to their employees.  It's a condition of the economic path we've chosen as a society.

As a good example, the local KFC has been closed going on three months now.  Prior to closing they were constantly hiring.  But unfortunately, if an entire group of people quits all at once the day to day operations cease.  The house of cards falls.  For a while the KFC was open from 2pm-8pm while they were 'hiring' up.  And now it sits empty because it turns out that if you hire three people to do the work of six people and ask them to work seven days a week they'll just eff off and find a job where the pay is similar without the unreasonable demands.  And the labor force has that power currently.  I don't see that ending any time soon.

Thats part of the issue with some of the "large company" culture.  And it creates these weird Catch-22s.  I saw it first hand.  You have younger professionals in their late 20s, early 30s who got into large Fortune 100/500 type CPG, tech, finance type companies.  They become middle management and make good money, but its partially predicated on employment in waves where there are multiple hiring classes below/behind them.  Then many realize they either have a cap to their growth or don't want to be a big company middle management drone forever.

So they seek out smaller companies.  But they fall into that realm Ive been speaking of.  They aren't low paid entry level, but they're not going to be a director or true management at a company of 50-100 people.  So they aren't going to be paid like a "senior manager" or "Assistant Group Director" or whatever their title was at the big company.  And they won't have a bunch of people to pass stuff off to.

The smarter ones get that and adapt, but many don't.  And to be completely honest, I speak about it cause I did it myself.  I honestly got so much more out of what I do now because I needed to understand things holistically and do a bunch of busy work to learn other aspects of the business.  Then all of a sudden I could approach things with a big view.  Its not hard to see why people in my position see some of that as "beneath them" given previous work experience and thats messed up.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Its DJOver on January 11, 2023, 04:31:57 PM
For example, we've looked in the Milwaukee area for some roles that would traditionally pay $50-60K.  Previous people in that role made $40-45K, but given that was more 2018-2019, we realize thats not feasible.  In trying to source it, we're either seeing people that would be qualified but want more like $70-75K or people that are unqualified/would take a lot of work to make up the experience/expertise gap.  And that's not even factoring in people that want to be fully remote with little to no negotiating heft behind it  (sorry, I'm not going to hire someone with limited experience who worked in a hybrid role before for a position in a company that is primarily office based for a fully remote role.  One candidate removed themself from consideration because we asked for 2 days a week in office during onboarding and transitioning for 3-6 months and then reevaluation).

Isn't this not up to you to determine but the free market?  You acknowledge that pre Covid pay is insufficient, but you want to control how much it should increase.  If 40-45K isn't getting you quality candidates, and 50-60K isn't getting you quality candidates shouldn't that number just keep rising until you either get quality candidates or the job's value is less than the pay?   
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: warriorchick on January 11, 2023, 08:53:59 PM
Isn't this not up to you to determine but the free market?  You acknowledge that pre Covid pay is insufficient, but you want to control how much it should increase.  If 40-45K isn't getting you quality candidates, and 50-60K isn't getting you quality candidates shouldn't that number just keep rising until you either get quality candidates or the job's value is less than the pay?

That is assuming the company can remain a going concern paying those types of salaries. Not only do you have to pay the new people that kind of money, you have to adjust the current employees as well, or they are either going to quit or be extremely resentful.  Not every company can afford a 50% increase in their salary expense.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: 🏀 on January 11, 2023, 11:05:48 PM
That is assuming the company can remain a going concern paying those types of salaries. Not only do you have to pay the new people that kind of money, you have to adjust the current employees as well, or they are either going to quit or be extremely resentful.  Not every company can afford a 50% increase in their salary expense.

Those companies just need to pull themselves up by the boot straps to keep paying exorbitant executive bonuses.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Its DJOver on January 12, 2023, 07:27:30 AM
That is assuming the company can remain a going concern paying those types of salaries. Not only do you have to pay the new people that kind of money, you have to adjust the current employees as well, or they are either going to quit or be extremely resentful.  Not every company can afford a 50% increase in their salary expense.

I guess I would say that if the only way a company can "remain going" is by paying their staff less than market value, then that is not a very successful company and capitalism would suggest that it ceases to exist.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 12, 2023, 11:55:03 AM
Isn't this not up to you to determine but the free market?  You acknowledge that pre Covid pay is insufficient, but you want to control how much it should increase.  If 40-45K isn't getting you quality candidates, and 50-60K isn't getting you quality candidates shouldn't that number just keep rising until you either get quality candidates or the job's value is less than the pay?

I guess I would say that if the only way a company can "remain going" is by paying their staff less than market value, then that is not a very successful company and capitalism would suggest that it ceases to exist.

Its not pre-Covid pay as much as its you can never accurately benchmark salaries against a figure from 4-5 years ago, regardless of pandemic.

And my point is there is a disconnect between "market rate" that candidates are looking for and what actually exists in the job market.  I don't see waves of hiring in small/medium sized companies at these spiked salary rates.  Job seekers thinking that things will be the same as 2020-2021 indefinitely and into the future aren't being realistic.

Its easy to be snarky, but assuming companies should be able to handle a 25% increase in salaries, without market conditions that concurrently bring significant increases in revenue, just because thats what people want...or they shouldn't be in business is asinine.  Benchmarking this against "exorbitant executive bonuses" that a publically traded billion dollar company has made is also misguided and unrealistic.

A successful company survives the pandemic, often with the aid of PPP funds or the like, and starts to get back to "normal" business conditions, which is not smooth sailing in MANY industries, still being affected by global logistical headwinds, product delays, and lagging consumer demand for many products.  So the only response to this company not being able to pay questionable job seeker rates is that "they shouldn't be in business then if they can't survive without underpaying employees" instead of examining maybe there is a disconnect in supply and demand that will work itself out in time?  Got it.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Its DJOver on January 12, 2023, 12:08:04 PM
I guess I just don't understand where you were getting your numbers from?  You seem to acknowledge that there needs to be a balance between what the working force realistically should be looking for and what the hiring force realistically should be offering, which I agree with.  I think our only disagreement is in how much of that bargaining power should be with the employer and how much should be with the employee. 

Going back to the example that you provided about your friend in the apartment operations business, what do you think she's going to end up doing? Hiring an experienced qualified candidate for more than she thinks that they're worth, or hire a less qualified, less experienced candidate for less money, but still more than she thinks that they're worth?  What would you do?

It seems like they're a lot of parallels between some of the struggles that the hiring force is currently facing and some of the struggles that those that are just entering the workforce are facing, and the difference in reaction is pretty stark. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 12, 2023, 02:48:39 PM
I guess I just don't understand where you were getting your numbers from?  You seem to acknowledge that there needs to be a balance between what the working force realistically should be looking for and what the hiring force realistically should be offering, which I agree with.  I think our only disagreement is in how much of that bargaining power should be with the employer and how much should be with the employee. 

The salary numbers?  Its directly from interviews, conversations, and potential staffing situations we've had. 

From your posts, you make it seem like the employer should have none and any disagreement with the "market rate" is either greediness or a sign of a business that shouldn't be around.  And from the articles, thinkpieces, and whatnot that I read, people have taken "record corporate profits" which is nearly solely related to public companies where such information is freely available and extrapolated it to mean all companies, regardless of size or industry, are making money hand over fist and employees should be demanding more cause there is money to be had.  Ive lost track over how many times Ive seen business owners or managers quoted about rising wage demands and it being painted in a negative light.

Going back to the example that you provided about your friend in the apartment operations business, what do you think she's going to end up doing? Hiring an experienced qualified candidate for more than she thinks that they're worth, or hire a less qualified, less experienced candidate for less money, but still more than she thinks that they're worth?  What would you do?

Honestly, likely hire someone less qualified and deal with growing pains.  Businesses not flush with cash aren't keen to spend 15/20/25% than anticipated more on a candidate that meets qualifications but is still an unknown, as most low to mid level candidates are short of glowing recommendations or direct reference knowledge.

If I want to pay $80K for a position and find someone that is perfect and fits extremely well, I have no issue paying $90-$100K if thats what it takes.  As I mentioned, we did it with our Controller and similarly with a software engineer we hired last year.  But thats different than just overpaying a run of the mill candidate who fits cause "oh thats the market" when that market seems out of whack.

It seems like they're a lot of parallels between some of the struggles that the hiring force is currently facing and some of the struggles that those that are just entering the workforce are facing, and the difference in reaction is pretty stark.

Not sure what you mean.  Cause like I said, the reaction from everyone who isn't a business owner or running businesses/hiring/managing a P&L seems to be "yea, f' em, bout time people are paid way more".
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Its DJOver on January 12, 2023, 03:14:13 PM
The salary numbers?  Its directly from interviews, conversations, and potential staffing situations we've had. 

From your posts, you make it seem like the employer should have none and any disagreement with the "market rate" is either greediness or a sign of a business that shouldn't be around.  And from the articles, thinkpieces, and whatnot that I read, people have taken "record corporate profits" which is nearly solely related to public companies where such information is freely available and extrapolated it to mean all companies, regardless of size or industry, are making money hand over fist and employees should be demanding more cause there is money to be had.  Ive lost track over how many times Ive seen business owners or managers quoted about rising wage demands and it being painted in a negative light.

From your posts it sounds like that because you're offering more than you were 5 years ago, you automatically think that the number that you came up with should be sufficient.  If one candidate comes in and says that you need to offer more for them to work there, that's one thing, but it sounds like all of your good potential candidates are saying something similar.  That would seem to suggest that even though you're offering more than you were in 2018, it's still not enough.

Honestly, likely hire someone less qualified and deal with growing pains.  Businesses not flush with cash aren't keen to spend 15/20/25% than anticipated more on a candidate that meets qualifications but is still an unknown, as most low to mid level candidates are short of glowing recommendations or direct reference knowledge.

If I want to pay $80K for a position and find someone that is perfect and fits extremely well, I have no issue paying $90-$100K if thats what it takes.  As I mentioned, we did it with our Controller and similarly with a software engineer we hired last year.  But thats different than just overpaying a run of the mill candidate who fits cause "oh thats the market" when that market seems out of whack.

And that's a risk that's going to have to get taken more and more.  It sounds like you understand this well and will mitigate this risk in certain circumstances, as evident by your willingness to do so with your controller and software engineer.  It varies company by company and industry by industry, but there will be a lot of grey area in-between controllers/software engineers and run of the mill candidates, and that's where a lot of the difficulties lie.

Speaking anecdotally as you have been, since I am at a company within the size range you originally specified (65 people), since I have been here (18 months) the number of active opening that we're looking to fill has never been zero and always been between 2-6.  I'm not involved in the hiring process so I'm unsure how the conversations regarding compensation with potential employees have gone, but since the referral bonus offered has risen from 1K to 10K, I would hope the salary being offered has increased as well.  If you know what you're worth, go out and get what you're worth. 
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Plaque Lives Matter! on January 12, 2023, 06:30:25 PM

Not sure what you mean.  Cause like I said, the reaction from everyone who isn't a business owner or running businesses/hiring/managing a P&L seems to be "yea, f' em, bout time people are paid way more".

In running that P&L, have you contemplated loss of business/increased 3rd party service costs? Because that's a real thing when you are facing vacancy of 10% plus. I certainly have had to put together business cases for premium labor expenses to look forward 5 years when a company's contract is up for renewal and we have delivered crappy service due to the fact we were never staffed up. (Run a large regional P&L).

Seems like there are some difficult strategic plan conversations that companies needed to be having a long time ago.

Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 13, 2023, 09:27:11 AM
From your posts it sounds like that because you're offering more than you were 5 years ago, you automatically think that the number that you came up with should be sufficient.  If one candidate comes in and says that you need to offer more for them to work there, that's one thing, but it sounds like all of your good potential candidates are saying something similar.  That would seem to suggest that even though you're offering more than you were in 2018, it's still not enough.

I never suggested that.  And its not been a stream of candidates demanding more.  But you have a couple of bites, see salary expectations that don't necessarily fit, and you make alternative arrangements. 

Some of it also has to do with the remote work aspect like I mentioned.  Which I think a lot of people aren't considering.  If you're not looking to be in an office, companies are going to have no problem filling roles with someone from a lower cost country or region.  And its not call center employees making pennies.  I can hire programmers, software engineers, etc... from somewhere like Pakistan (where we have a contractor) who speaks great English, will work basically US hours, and costs 50% less...and he's more experienced and skilled than some people we hired.

And that's a risk that's going to have to get taken more and more.  It sounds like you understand this well and will mitigate this risk in certain circumstances, as evident by your willingness to do so with your controller and software engineer.  It varies company by company and industry by industry, but there will be a lot of grey area in-between controllers/software engineers and run of the mill candidates, and that's where a lot of the difficulties lie.

Speaking anecdotally as you have been, since I am at a company within the size range you originally specified (65 people), since I have been here (18 months) the number of active opening that we're looking to fill has never been zero and always been between 2-6.  I'm not involved in the hiring process so I'm unsure how the conversations regarding compensation with potential employees have gone, but since the referral bonus offered has risen from 1K to 10K, I would hope the salary being offered has increased as well.  If you know what you're worth, go out and get what you're worth.

Yeah I don't disagree.  Like I have said previously, there is going to be some leveling out to be done.  I don't think its just going to be some wholesale spike in salaries and concessions all in favor of the workforce that just sticks.  And thats not a "screw the serfs" mentality, its just that a balance needs to be found with running sustainable profitable businesses and a satisfied workforce.

And FWIW, I think the increase of referral bonus would mean salaries haven't increased.  Cause there is more financial incentive to bring in a candidate who fits.  If salaries had increased, aka the job benefits are more desirable bringing in more candidates, they wouldn't need to increase that.

In running that P&L, have you contemplated loss of business/increased 3rd party service costs? Because that's a real thing when you are facing vacancy of 10% plus. I certainly have had to put together business cases for premium labor expenses to look forward 5 years when a company's contract is up for renewal and we have delivered crappy service due to the fact we were never staffed up. (Run a large regional P&L).

Seems like there are some difficult strategic plan conversations that companies needed to be having a long time ago.

Absolutely.  Loss of business hasn't been utmost concern, mostly because we sacrifice proactive planning or biz dev moving forward, in the near term, in order to make sure our customer base is happy or serviced appropriately.

As for 3rd party services, we don't rely on them for the most part, unless you mean contractor/job work, which we have lean into more recently, but as I mentioned before, there may be increased time/less convenience, but actual dollar costs are lower.

Totally agree about the strategic planning conversations.  What its done is forced our hand and expedited our international staffing, as Ive alluded to.  We favored jobs in the office here for a variety of reasons including in person meetings, company culture, etc...  But there are ample benefits of some of the international staffing including adding to our India and HK/China offices where the staff would work directly with our customers in that region and work on their time zones, in the local language, etc...

Growing pains and difficult strategic planning?  Absolutely.  Potential benefits in the long run from a new way of working?  Maybe so.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Its DJOver on January 13, 2023, 09:38:09 AM
I never suggested that.  And its not been a stream of candidates demanding more.  But you have a couple of bites, see salary expectations that don't necessarily fit, and you make alternative arrangements. 

Some of it also has to do with the remote work aspect like I mentioned.  Which I think a lot of people aren't considering.  If you're not looking to be in an office, companies are going to have no problem filling roles with someone from a lower cost country or region.  And its not call center employees making pennies.  I can hire programmers, software engineers, etc... from somewhere like Pakistan (where we have a contractor) who speaks great English, will work basically US hours, and costs 50% less...and he's more experienced and skilled than some people we hired.

I obviously know next to none of the details concerning the position you're looking to fill, but IMO this is a much different tone than your original complaint which was more of a "woe is me, no one wants to work anymore without an exorbitant salary".  I may have misinterpreted your OP, but I see that attitude from so many boomers that it starts to stick.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 13, 2023, 11:59:53 AM
I obviously know next to none of the details concerning the position you're looking to fill, but IMO this is a much different tone than your original complaint which was more of a "woe is me, no one wants to work anymore without an exorbitant salary".  I may have misinterpreted your OP, but I see that attitude from so many boomers that it starts to stick.

Fair enough.  And no, I'm very much a millennial and I get the myriad factors.  My wife is basically full time remote these days, my younger sister, while talented and very smart, is one of those who definitely got overpaid recently despite being underexperienced, I see all the sides.  As far as business professionals are concerned, I definitely don't think its "nobody wants to work", just a lot of frothy circumstances and people not necessarily looking at or understanding all the scenarios.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on January 26, 2023, 02:27:33 PM
GDP is high, with consumer spending headed higher. Inflation is significantly lower.

The deficit has been halved, matching Obama's accomplishment. Yet to top Clinton's 150% cut of the deficit he inherited, but the current president has some time there.

Recession averted, economy is off to the races?
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on January 26, 2023, 03:02:26 PM
GDP is high, with consumer spending headed higher. Inflation is significantly lower.

The deficit has been halved, matching Obama's accomplishment. Yet to top Clinton's 150% cut of the deficit he inherited, but the current president has some time there.

Recession averted, economy is off to the races?

How's consumer prices? Coming down?

Good news about the deficit. Assume that means there won't be a debt ceiling fight
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on January 26, 2023, 03:50:17 PM
GDP is high, with consumer spending headed higher. Inflation is significantly lower.

The deficit has been halved, matching Obama's accomplishment. Yet to top Clinton's 150% cut of the deficit he inherited, but the current president has some time there.

Recession averted, economy is off to the races?
The last 18-24 have had the weirdest sets of contradictory indicators...I don't think there is any precedent for it.

There are still quite a few potential concerns that could each provide significant headwinds (China, Russia, Republicans intentionally crashing the global economy by refusing to lift the debt ceiling to name just a few), so while I'm more cautious than characterizing it as "off to the races", I'm optimistic enough to have been feeding money into the stock market once again.

I think Jamie Dimon's and Elon Musk's predictions of catastrophe are way off base.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on January 26, 2023, 05:37:52 PM
The last 18-24 have had the weirdest sets of contradictory indicators...I don't think there is any precedent for it.

There are still quite a few potential concerns that could each provide significant headwinds (China, Russia, Republicans intentionally crashing the global economy by refusing to lift the debt ceiling to name just a few), so while I'm more cautious than characterizing it as "off to the races", I'm optimistic enough to have been feeding money into the stock market once again.

I think Jamie Dimon's and Elon Musk's predictions of catastrophe are way off base.

Totally agree.  Dimon and Musk are way off, however, I don't think it was insane at the time.  Dimon said it at a time where it looked especially bleak and the most optimistic thing people had to say was "it gets better, it always does".

China is still a HUGE unknown.  I don't love consumer sentiment in a lot of places.  Anything thats priced in dollars, globally, is still very skittish due to inflation and interest rate uncertainty.  I know of sizeable players in the Middle East and Asia who are sitting on their hands for big purchases normally done in dollars/benchmarked in dollars for a bit longer.

But I agree that I don't think the floor is dropping out in the near future
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on January 26, 2023, 05:40:48 PM
How's consumer prices? Coming down?

Good news about the deficit. Assume that means there won't be a debt ceiling fight

CPI fell for the first time in years. Every reading since ~March 2020 has been a raise.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: jesmu84 on February 03, 2023, 11:57:31 AM
Job market is great!!

https://twitter.com/JosephPolitano/status/1621510313085657093?t=AoCq9_sc0T9JNVESuhza1g&s=19

But wall street and the fed hate it

https://twitter.com/BrianMFloyd/status/1621512836865470469?t=9AAfHsj9QSL-N_Lp6gyVww&s=19
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on February 03, 2023, 12:33:20 PM
Job market is great!!

https://twitter.com/JosephPolitano/status/1621510313085657093?t=AoCq9_sc0T9JNVESuhza1g&s=19

But wall street and the fed hate it

https://twitter.com/BrianMFloyd/status/1621512836865470469?t=9AAfHsj9QSL-N_Lp6gyVww&s=19

My god the replies to that second tweet are cancer.

But it all just goes further to highlight what a unique situation we are in during these semi near-term post-Covid times.  Some stuff is really going really well, and some stuff is still a mess.  Trying to blanket brush everything with a top line headline or assessment is inaccurate and unwise.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: tower912 on February 03, 2023, 12:44:18 PM
Supply chain issues still not worked out.  Demand is still outpacing supply in many sectors.   Building from the bottom up and the middle out is great for jobs.   Still having trouble getting computer chips.   Still have random foods disappearing from grocery shelves.

It is fun to talk smack and all, but I freely acknowledge that Goose and JWags have completely valid points.  There are still headwinds, landmines, and sinkholes aplenty out there.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: Skatastrophy on February 03, 2023, 12:44:50 PM
Lowest unemployment rate in 54 years is wild.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 03, 2023, 01:42:54 PM
My god the replies to that second tweet are cancer.

But it all just goes further to highlight what a unique situation we are in during these semi near-term post-Covid times.  Some stuff is really going really well, and some stuff is still a mess.  Trying to blanket brush everything with a top line headline or assessment is inaccurate and unwise.
Agree. Said it before, the economy of the last 18-24 months is the most confusing and contradictory that I have ever seen.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on March 03, 2023, 12:53:15 PM
I’m REALLY curious to speak to some of my Chinese associates in the coming year, face to face where they are more open, and see how they really felt about everything COVID related.  Cause that’s an interesting stress test for a populous gobbling up what is spoon fed by the CCP as it would pertain to something like sizable military action.

Be good to have you follow up on this after talking to your contacts

This was in the locked Balloon thread, but Ive had some convos recently that had me follow up.

So my China office head is actually a card carrying member of the CCP.  We've had some humorous conversations about it in the past.  But over the last 3-6 months, hes been pretty over a lot of it.  Anxious to get back to work fully.  To travel, to do business in HK, etc...  He was patient and trusting, especially given government allegiance, but since the beginning of 2022 or so, he was far more worried about lasting business damage and effects than COVID dangers.  And it colored his impressions of how things were done.

My longest tenured software engineer recently retired.  She'd been working remotely in Colorado, where she is retiring to, most of the past year, but she's been in the office the last month tying stuff up.  We sponsored her immigration to the US from China, by way of Canada, 20ish years ago.  Ive joked about her distaste towards and strong dislike towards Taiwan, and she still has plenty of affinity for her home country.  She and her husband still have plenty of family spread across 3 or 4 provinces in China. Said that, between her and her husband, close to 100 friends and family members got COVID, some twice.  Must have been weaker new strains cause none were hospitalized or had enduring issues.  They joked that it was a convenient sickness cause at the time, only 1 person could leave the house for groceries or errands, and usually 1 person in the house at a time was healthy/uninfected so they took care of stuff for others.  Many of them were professionals in business, academics, and science and long were annoyed with the constriction of normal life.  Her take was that compliance and contentment was quite high...for 1-2 years.  But as the Western world opened up, other SE Asian countries took steps toward bouncing back, people became anxious and unhappy.  While media or internet is censored or biased, almost all had friends and family abroad that kept them abreast of what was going on.

I mentioned in the other thread, I know a bunch of people at a trade show in HK this week.  Mainlanders are flooding the show to do business.  The majority have been really unhappy for quite awhile cause they've felt their businesses suffer.  Retailers or wholesalers that buy millions in goods annually, havent bought in years, and suddenly find themselves unable to snap demand the same pricing or benefits.  They have no sense of demand or upcoming government actions so they are trying to buy REALLY sharp, which is causing significant issues given what I just mentioned.  There is normally a flow of "traders came in offering X, mainland wanted to buy at Y, prices settled at Z" that shake out within the first day or 2 of the show.  Entering the 4th day tomorrow, its still not sorted out, needless to say they aren't too happy.  So a lot remains to be seen.

I'm sure there are large swaths of the Chinese public that are insulated and blindly obedient and loyal, but I get the impression that is far from true for those in international business situations, with family and close friends abroad, or those that regularly travel.  Their patience ran thin long ago.
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 03, 2023, 04:52:27 PM
Wags,
Interesting take.  Thanks.
China is on my 2023 visitation list.  Still working on the timeframe(s).
Title: Re: COVID Economy
Post by: JWags85 on March 04, 2023, 09:32:41 AM
Wags,
Interesting take.  Thanks.
China is on my 2023 visitation list.  Still working on the timeframe(s).

No problem, happy to share. 

I don’t think I’ll make it to China in 2023, still so much to shake out there.  Maybe Q4 if anything.  I’ll be in HK in Sept and likely will make a Singapore/Malaysia/Indonesia trip late summer or fall.

Seeing pictures of people at the HKCC and out about in the city this week make me realize how much I missed it and mildly took it for granted being there 3 times a year for 4-5 years straight