MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => COVID-19 => Topic started by: Keithtisbarf on May 10, 2020, 11:47:52 PM
-
I’m curious how many of you have lost your job long term or had your pay cut as a result of the covid pandemic?
-
I’m curious how many of you have lost your job long term or had your pay cut as a result of the covid pandemic?
30% paycut. Thank God it only lasted 6 weeks.
-
Also 30% pay cut. I work with COVID+ patients too.
-
I’m curious how many of you have lost your job long term or had your pay cut as a result of the covid pandemic?
Lost sales bonuses for the foreseeable future
-
7.5% paycut while keeping critical manufacturing plants up and running....and providing daycare for my two kids while my wife is working at her hospital
Not great, Bob!
-
No change in job, but guessing end of the year is looking more like Jam of the Month instead of a swimming pool.
-
I know a doctor who was an executive in an internationally-respected medical organization who still has a mullet.
And yes, he is aware that it is no longer in style. People constantly give him crap about it.
-
I know a doctor who was an executive in an internationally-respected medical organization who still has a mullet.
And yes, he is aware that it is no longer in style. People constantly give him crap about it.
Wrong thread.
Firefighting pays the same.
-
10% cut, plus new furloughs seem to be announced every Friday, have avoided those so far though.
-
Had a week "furlough." They allowed people to use vacation time, so I wasn't without pay.
-
In general, I only have one friend/associate who has lost their job.
Many have had mandatory pay cuts. But most that I know are working longer hours then ever (just for less pay).
What it emphasizes, is that those most affected fall into two categories. The small business owner, and the low income wage earner.
-
Since the porn store closed, havent had much use for a jizz mopper, so I've been playing xbox and smoking weed.
With the booths, aren't you/they able to social distance?
-
7.5% and no 401K match, which makes it about 11% in total. It’s open ended on when things will come back, but heard my company has been very fair in the past.
Hoping we all can get back to normal as soon as possible.
-
No change. I was told I was getting a 30% pay cut, but our business received an SBA loan in early April and the pay cut was rescinded before it was implemented.
-
No change, we pivoted our day to day and maintained our income streams. We will have to go back to furloughing 60% of our employees in a few weeks when PPP runs out though.
-
With the booths, aren't you/they able to social distance?
Evers hates porn and nakedness.
-
A number of friends in the health care industry have been laid off. My brother, who handles international sourcing for an auto supplier, has taken a 20% pay cut. My kid's Catholic school is soliciting donations for some of the teachers negatively impacted. Good friend is an independent financial advisor who has been unable to solicit new clients.
-
Since the porn store closed, havent had much use for a jizz mopper, so I've been playing xbox and smoking weed.
I jest in character, but my wife and i are both fortunate to not be affected by paycuts, furloughs or layoffs.
-
No effect, but did volunteer to do analytics for a second division of our company because we couldn't hire a new employee which now means I'm working two jobs for the price of one.
-
No change, but there's a decent chance that fallout from the pandemic kills my firm. Candidly, I'll be surprised if we're a going concern at the end of the summer.
-
No change in job, but guessing end of the year is looking more like Jam of the Month instead of a swimming pool.
Same here and I agree with the sentiment.
My company output is down due to some machine operators staying home out of fear, customers who closed their facilities delaying shipments to them (i.e. any company in Mexico, my orthodontic customers), and suppliers temporarily closing delaying shipment to us and we expiring inventory in the interim (one of our metal suppliers is in Peru, country was shut for multiple weeks, our plated material supplier had an employee test positive and shut for 2 weeks).
We've been giving the operators who have been coming in an extra dollar an hour.
-
20% pay cut. About a dozen at our location were laid off permanently, another 10 furloughed. Hourly folks work 4 days a week now. Revenues are down 45%.
I think certain areas, certain educational statuses .. live in bubbles. I don't personally know anyone who has lost their job. White-collar professionals aren't losing their jobs in large quantities -- yet.
I believe the picture will be more grim in 180 days.
-
So far, so good for me. Our local division of our company hit our first quarter numbers and will be close on Q2. Since we sell mostly to government, I suspect that next fiscal year will be tough for us. We are providing COVID response support for free to various government entities, so maybe that will build good will with various government entities.
We tend to do layoffs and other cost cutting. I don't think we have ever cut salaries. Doubt that would be an option.
Our parent company is German, and our European counterparts are in much better long term shape.
-
Furloughed.
-
20% pay cut
-
Own a small consulting company. Our billings are down 40%.
-
Just reading the responses on this thread really hits home the economic impact of the pandemic.
-
No change in job, but guessing end of the year is looking more like Jam of the Month instead of a swimming pool.
Same here.
-
Software sales, lucky to have a product that can help in the moment (texting platform for colleges to scale communication over SMS), but our #1 customer is higher ed, prospects are either buzz off or I need this right now.
-
12% pay cut, half of our team was furloughed/laid off.
-
FWIW I didn't give much context, but I'm with a small law firm, non-attorney staff cut over 50%, 2 associates laid off, our revenue is down apocalyptically. I'm not in on final number conversations, but I'd suspect that without the PPP lifeline those cuts would have been far deeper and far wider.
-
Nothing much yet. Officially no COLA or merit increases for the next year. Furloughs are coming, we'll see if it hits me personally or not.
-
Hospital products firm. Almost 0 T&E spend, planning on keeping flat with any elective surgery loss. Not an ultra lucrative place in the best of times but rock solid stable in a pandemic...
-
Private equity is booming. Still lots of capital chasing quality deals.
theBabyDavid's mother is active with the local Children's Hospital. Senior execs there are working for free while all staff are required to use up to 6 weeks of PTO before Dec 31. No actual loss of income, just clearing the balance sheet of liabilities.
The freeze on elective procedures drained over $60MM of forecasted revenue. Thank God the tiny testicled Governor is finally opening up the ORs.
-
Work for a relatively small publicly traded company with $4B market cap pre-pandemic, now at $2.5B market cap.
30% let go/furloughed
401k match temporarily eliminated
C-Level 50% paycuts
Director level 20% paycuts
Anyone over 100k, 10% paycut
-
Private equity is booming. Still lots of capital chasing quality deals.
theBabyDavid's mother is active with the local Children's Hospital. Senior execs there are working for free while all staff are required to use up to 6 weeks of PTO before Dec 31. No actual loss of income, just clearing the balance sheet of liabilities.
The freeze on elective procedures drained over $60MM of forecasted revenue. Thank God the tiny testicled Governor is finally opening up the ORs.
Inslee has done an outstanding job. The 1st state that was hard hit now has had fewer cases than about 20 other states. He helped save a lot of lives.
So, like your hero, you feel the need to call him names like a 12-year old. Grow up, man.
-
Inslee has done an outstanding job. The 1st state that was hard hit now has had fewer cases than about 20 other states. He helped save a lot of lives.
So, like your hero, you feel the need to call him names like a 12-year old. Grow up, man.
Inslee and Newsome really did an amazing job with this.
-
Inslee, who actually had a blah approval rating a few months ago, is now in the high 60s due to the way he has dealt with the pandemic.
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/politics/article/inslee-soars-trump-slumps-in-polls-on-covid-19-15289135.php
Meanwhile, Trump is extremely disliked in Washington state, where just 36% approve of how he is doing.
Nationally, in an aggregate of all polls, Trump's approval rating is between 43% and 45%, depending upon which aggregator one looks at. He is historically unpopular, although he of course still could win re-election because of the Electoral College system the U.S. uses to choose its president.
-
Private equity is booming. Still lots of capital chasing quality deals.
theBabyDavid's mother is active with the local Children's Hospital. Senior execs there are working for free while all staff are required to use up to 6 weeks of PTO before Dec 31. No actual loss of income, just clearing the balance sheet of liabilities.
The freeze on elective procedures drained over $60MM of forecasted revenue. Thank God the tiny testicled Governor is finally opening up the ORs.
Idiotic final sentence aside, it is interesting how the healthcare industry is being impacted by the elective surgery freeze. My company has seen a near zero purchasing pattern of products used primarily in elective surgery, but an offsetting increase to Dialysis products, as apparently this disease does a number on the kidneys. We essentially re forecast every two weeks now vs once a quarter because the situation is so volatile depending on outbreaks and such.
-
I remember reading an article that Wisconsin's hospitals have lost $300m these past 3 months.
But .. it's interesting to think about health care. You don't sell $300m of corn, steel, or lawn mowers, the world has less of those things.
Health care .. I'm not so sure about. Are Wisconsinites $300m less healthy? (COVID notwithstanding..) Or did Wisconsinites keep $300m in their pockets to their (or their insurance company's) betterment?
.. And that leads to .. lots of auto insurance companies sent refund checks because people weren't driving much, 90% fewer accidents, way less payout. Should the health insurance industry do the same?
-
Inslee and Newsome really did an amazing job with this.
Yep. I’d give both of them an A+, and Gretchen Whitmer and Larry Hogan an A.
-
Nationally, in an aggregate of all polls, Trump's approval rating is between 43% and 45%, depending upon which aggregator one looks at. He is historically unpopular, although he of course still could win re-election because of the Electoral College system the U.S. uses to choose its president.
Historically unpopular at between 43 and 45%?
Mike, Jimmy Carter was at 30% the June before his November loss to Reagan. “W” spent a lot of time in the 20s. Even President Obama spent 3 pretty long stints at the 40% mark. Didn’t look up Clinton or George the elder but I’d imagine they both spent time in the dumpster and that H.W. was pretty low at this time before his re-election loss.Reagan is the only president in the last 5+ decades who didn’t spend long periods below the Mendoza line.
-
Historically unpopular at between 43 and 45%?
Mike, Jimmy Carter was at 30% the June before his November loss to Reagan. “W” spent a lot of time in the 20s. Even President Obama spent 3 pretty long stints at the 40% mark. Didn’t look up Clinton or George the elder but I’d imagine they both spent time in the dumpster and that H.W. was pretty low at this time before his re-election loss.Reagan is the only president in the last 5+ decades who didn’t spend long periods below the Mendoza line.
Agree with you on this, Lenny. I can’t understand it, but he does keep his people on board.
-
Historically unpopular at between 43 and 45%?
Mike, Jimmy Carter was at 30% the June before his November loss to Reagan. “W” spent a lot of time in the 20s. Even President Obama spent 3 pretty long stints at the 40% mark. Didn’t look up Clinton or George the elder but I’d imagine they both spent time in the dumpster and that H.W. was pretty low at this time before his re-election loss.Reagan is the only president in the last 5+ decades who didn’t spend long periods below the Mendoza line.
Lenny, Lenny. OMB, didn't you know?
Nads will tell you again, and again and again and again...
-
Yep. I’d give both of them an A+, and Gretchen Whitmer and Larry Hogan an A.
Gov Whitmer (Michigan) gets an “A”? Wow.
What grades do you assign to the following:
DeSantis, Abbott, Kemp, DeWine
Pritzker, Cuomo, Murphy, Wolf and Lamont.
Personally, I would wait awhile - but since you think we have enough information, I’d be interested in your grading.
-
Gov Whitmer (Michigan) gets an “A”? Wow.
What grades do you assign to the following:
DeSantis, Abbott, Kemp, DeWine
Pritzker, Cuomo, Murphy, Wolf and Lamont.
Personally, I would wait awhile - but since you think we have enough information, I’d be interested in your grading.
Yep, Whitmer gets an A. If you haven’t noticed by now, I believe in science.
As for wanting more information, I never said the grades were final; those won’t come for at least another year. All anyone can do at this point is give grades to this point.
I’m not familiar enough with all the names to give grades, but Cuomo and DeSantis get C- (Cuomo for major early failures and DeSantis more recently) and Kemp (who didn’t know about asymptomatic spread until April 1) fails and gets held back a year.
-
Gov Whitmer (Michigan) gets an “A”? Wow.
What grades do you assign to the following:
DeSantis, Abbott, Kemp, DeWine
Pritzker, Cuomo, Murphy, Wolf and Lamont.
Personally, I would wait awhile - but since you think we have enough information, I’d be interested in your grading.
Yep, Whitmer gets an A. If you haven’t noticed by now, I believe in science.
As for wanting more information, I never said the grades were final; those won’t come for at least another year. All anyone can do at this point is give grades to this point.
I’m not familiar enough with all the names to give grades, but Cuomo and DeSantis get C- (Cuomo for major early failures and DeSantis more recently) and Kemp (who didn’t know about asymptomatic spread until April 1) fails and gets held back a year.
Will results figure in your final grades?
-
Will results figure in your final grades?
Absolutely. Final Exam.
-
I work in healthcare IT. Some layoffs did occur, especially independent contractors (of which I am). I didn't lose my contract or have to accept any concessions.
I really struggle to understand how a healthcare system determines which appendage(s) to lop off in this scenario. There aren't many good options. Some did postpone/cancel IT initiatives to (I assume) find money in the very short term but in the long run it's a losing venture.
-
Peeps bolted like cockroaches in da kitchen when the lights got turned on. Thank you ADA, hey?
-
I remember reading an article that Wisconsin's hospitals have lost $300m these past 3 months.
But .. it's interesting to think about health care. You don't sell $300m of corn, steel, or lawn mowers, the world has less of those things.
Health care .. I'm not so sure about. Are Wisconsinites $300m less healthy? (COVID notwithstanding..) Or did Wisconsinites keep $300m in their pockets to their (or their insurance company's) betterment?
.. And that leads to .. lots of auto insurance companies sent refund checks because people weren't driving much, 90% fewer accidents, way less payout. Should the health insurance industry do the same?
No because most of these medical claims are going to occur eventually.
My employer is self-insured. Our fiscal year ends May 31, and we had a significant decrease in our medical claims in the final quarter of the year. Our benefits advisor is telling us to expect a significant increase over the next 3-6 months as those delayed visits are rescheduled. A portion of our furloughed workforce may now decide to have that elective surgury they have been putting off for awhile.
People aren't going to make up for lost driving. They will make up for most of their deferred medical care.
-
I remember reading an article that Wisconsin's hospitals have lost $300m these past 3 months.
But .. it's interesting to think about health care. You don't sell $300m of corn, steel, or lawn mowers, the world has less of those things.
Health care .. I'm not so sure about. Are Wisconsinites $300m less healthy? (COVID notwithstanding..) Or did Wisconsinites keep $300m in their pockets to their (or their insurance company's) betterment?
.. And that leads to .. lots of auto insurance companies sent refund checks because people weren't driving much, 90% fewer accidents, way less payout. Should the health insurance industry do the same?
Largely yes, Wisconsinites got less healthy over this period(unless they started exercising, got outside, etc). Its not just surgeries, its deferred screenings, having to live with pain/bad outcomes because they aren't going to physical therapy, etc. How many people missed their mammograms or prostate exams that might have caught early stage cancer that might go undetected for another 3 months until everything gets caught up?
-
Largely yes, Wisconsinites got less healthy over this period(unless they started exercising, got outside, etc). Its not just surgeries, its deferred screenings, having to live with pain/bad outcomes because they aren't going to physical therapy, etc. How many people missed their mammograms or prostate exams that might have caught early stage cancer that might go undetected for another 3 months until everything gets caught up?
Correct. Add delayed colonoscopies, Pap smears, and even general exams that sometimes detect things like melanomas. And people living with more back pain, neck pain, etc.
And it's going to take WAY more than 3 months to catch up for a 3-month moratorium. Even though these "elective" procedures are now open, most places still aren't operating at full capacity in anticipation of the second wave. Plus, other patients likely already had appointments scheduled for the currently available time slots. So providers are going to have to figure out how to juggle the backlog with people who had existing appointments, all within a less than full-time schedule. It may take until the end of the year to get things back to normal...and that assumes we don't get a large second wave....
-
Historically unpopular at between 43 and 45%?
Mike, Jimmy Carter was at 30% the June before his November loss to Reagan. “W” spent a lot of time in the 20s. Even President Obama spent 3 pretty long stints at the 40% mark. Didn’t look up Clinton or George the elder but I’d imagine they both spent time in the dumpster and that H.W. was pretty low at this time before his re-election loss.Reagan is the only president in the last 5+ decades who didn’t spend long periods below the Mendoza line.
Lenny:
If you look at the aggregate disapproval ratings on the 538 site, Trump has a 53.4% disapproval rating through 1,219 days of his presidency.
At the exact same stage of their presidencies, here were others' disapproval ratings:
Obama - 46.5
Bush Sr - 48.6
Clinton - 37.8
Bush Jr - 51.5
Reagan - 38.0
Carter - 50.2
Nixon - 33.6
LBJ - 41.4
Ike - 17.1
Truman - 45.5
As you can see, only Dubya and Carter were over 50% disapproval at this stage, and both were still well below Trump's 53.4%.
(Approval polls only go back to Truman, and obviously JFK and Ford didn't get to 1,219 days.)
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
So when I say that Trump is historically unpopular, I'm not just pulling it out of thin air. The data does back up what I'm saying.
Now, Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating at the 1,219-day mark than Bush Sr., Carter and Truman did.
All of the above data underscores what most of us already know: Trump has tens of millions very loyal followers who will back him no matter what he does or says. On the other hand, he also is disliked by a higher percentage of Americans than any other president in the last 70+ years, at least statistically speaking through 40 or so months as president.
I understand what you're saying, too, Lenny. There were many times in which previous presidents had lower approval ratings than Trump's average. That's especially true for Carter and Bush Sr, but even Reagan and Clinton spent a little time under 40%. So I certainly am not saying you are "wrong."
I am trying to compare apples-to-apples as best I can, and I think looking at approval and disapproval ratings at the exact same stage of each presidency does that best. You obviously are free to disagree on methodology.
Trump is the only president in the history of ratings to have never hit 50% approval in an aggregate of polls. Indeed, he had only one day - just 6 days into his presidency - in which he hit 46%. His approval rating has been amazingly range-bound between approximately 40% and 45%, again a sign of the loyalty of his followers but also an indication that he has failed to bring many new supporters into his camp.
At no point during his first 1,219 days as president did Obama have as high a disapproval rating as Trump. There were a couple of days about 2 1/2 years into each man's presidency that Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating than Obama. For example, on Day 981, Trump's approval rating was 42.8% and Obama's was 42.7%.
The aggregator is pretty fun to mess around with, Lenny, gives some pretty good snapshots into various presidents' histories. Most had some very high highs and very low lows.
The site also has a lot of information on head-to-head polling, both nationally and in states, and there is info on governor's races and congressional races, too.
I enjoy having respectful, data-backed discussions like this, Lenny. Have a safe, restful Memorial Day.
-
Interesting thoughts, gents. Not saying you're incorrect, but probing questions.
While some items are delayed to be rescheduled, like a hip replacement, I get it, that's shifting an event from one quarter to the next. Maybe at best (worst) you delay your mammogram and so have one less over your lifetime, but that time horizon is measured in decades.
They've also reported that medical visits about stroke is down 40% and heart attacks down 40-60%. While a chunk of that will end up being delayed care .. another chunk was (always) false positives, chest pain for other more benign reasons.
Anecdotally, over my 50ish years, I've gone to a doc maybe a dozen times for some issue or another .. easily 80% of those times, I've walked away with, roughly, take some asprin and give it a week or two, if it persists, get back to me -- and then I was fine.
I think your point is taken .. I think though that SOME will be delayed care, and some will simply be skipped -- people had issues that actually went away with time.
My Holiday Inn Express medical and economics degree says a good half of that medical expense will NOT be shifted into another quarter.
-
As you can see, only one-term presidents Dubya
If only. Bush the Lesser was over 50% disapproval, but it was Voodoo Economics Bush that was the one-termer.
-
Lenny:
If you look at the aggregate disapproval ratings on the 538 site, Trump has a 53.4% disapproval rating through 1,219 days of his presidency.
At the exact same stage of their presidencies, here were others' disapproval ratings:
Obama - 46.5
Bush Sr - 48.6
Clinton - 37.8
Bush Jr - 51.5
Reagan - 38.0
Carter - 50.2
Nixon - 33.6
LBJ - 41.4
Ike - 17.1
Truman - 45.5
As you can see, only one-term presidents Dubya and Carter were over 50% disapproval at this stage, and both were still well below Trump's 53.4%.
(Approval polls only go back to Truman, and obviously JFK and Ford didn't get to 1,219 days.)
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
So when I say that Trump is historically unpopular, I'm not just pulling it out of thin air. The data does back up what I'm saying.
Now, Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating at the 1,219-day mark than Bush Sr., Carter and Truman did.
All of the above data underscores what most of us already know: Trump has tens of millions very loyal followers who will back him no matter what he does or says. On the other hand, he also is disliked by a higher percentage of Americans than any other president in the last 70+ years, at least statistically speaking through 40 or so months as president.
I understand what you're saying, too, Lenny. There were many times in which previous presidents had lower approval ratings than Trump's average. That's especially true for Carter and Bush Sr, but even Reagan and Clinton spent a little time under 40%. So I certainly am not saying you are "wrong."
I am trying to compare apples-to-apples as best I can, and I think looking at approval and disapproval ratings at the exact same stage of each presidency does that best. You obviously are free to disagree on methodology.
Trump is the only president in the history of ratings to have never hit 50% approval in an aggregate of polls. Indeed, he had only one day - just 6 days into his presidency - in which he hit 46%. His approval rating has been amazingly range-bound between approximately 40% and 45%, again a sign of the loyalty of his followers but also an indication that he has failed to bring many new supporters into his camp.
At no point during his first 1,219 days as president did Obama have as high a disapproval rating as Trump. There were a couple of days about 2 1/2 years into each man's presidency that Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating than Obama. For example, on Day 981, Trump's approval rating was 42.8% and Obama's was 42.7%.
The aggregator is pretty fun to mess around with, Lenny, gives some pretty good snapshots into various presidents' histories. Most had some very high highs and very low lows.
The site also has a lot of information on head-to-head polling, both nationally and in states, and there is info on governor's races and congressional races, too.
I enjoy having respectful, data-backed discussions like this, Lenny. Have a safe, restful Memorial Day.
...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.
-
Lenny, Lenny. OMB, didn't you know?
Nads will tell you again, and again and again and again...
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xT1XGPqs2QsfJCD5HW/giphy.gif)
-
If only. Bush the Lesser was over 50% disapproval, but it was Voodoo Economics Bush that was the one-termer.
D'oh ... thanks for the correction. I fixed it.
-
...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.
Ahh yes. All that unfair fake news.
More hilarious sarcasm for the man!
-
...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.
If one wants to, it's usually pretty easy to come up with "yeah but" reasons to challenge any facts on any subject ever.
For example, one could say it's incredible -- unheard of, really -- that Trump's aggregate approval rating never hit 48% even though the economy generally has done well during his term.
But I'm simply gonna stick with the data.
-
...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.
Kind of his own worst enemy. No president in my lifetime has attacked the press more and said things like "you people". That combative relationship has not helped his coverage.
-
Kind of his own worst enemy. No president in my lifetime has attacked the press more and said things like "you people". That combative relationship has not helped his coverage.
Yeah it's literally making fun of someone then crying about why they won't be your friend.
-
...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.
Yeah, they are constantly reporting on what he actually says and tweets. It’s almost like a vast left wing covfefe!
-
Kind of his own worst enemy. No president in my lifetime has attacked the press more and said things like "you people". That combative relationship has not helped his coverage.
This is true. He hasn't done himself any favors with the media. However, when he announced his candidacy he was widely mocked on CNN and other networks. And Trump's style is to fight fire with fire. In my view he would be better served to just let some things slide and not be so thin skinned.
Ultimately his candidacy just umasked that the mainstream media lean left. Fox News of course is reviled because it is the only network that has a national TV platform that leans conservative. No other TV network is so reviled, which ultimately proves the left leanings and echo chamber of the rest of TV networks whether ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC. Of course its long been known NY Times and WaPost are left leaning.
Keep in mind the mainstream media assured us of a stock market crash if Trump were elected, and that he was unhinged and mentally unstable and would lead us into war. They fanned the flames of fear and many bought in. Reality is, just the opposite happened - our economy thrived and our intervention abroad diminished. ISIS neutralized. Syria in check. North Korea tensions reduced.
Ultimately he's offensive AF to the politically correct, which is exactly where the division begins - half the country is fed up with the p.c. movement, the other half thinks it needs to continue/expand. He was correct to identify that China, not Russia, is the ultimate threat to the U.S.
-
This is true. He hasn't done himself any favors with the media. However, when he announced his candidacy he was widely mocked on CNN and other networks. And Trump's style is to fight fire with fire. In my view he would be better served to just let some things slide and not be so thin skinned.
Ultimately his candidacy just umasked that the mainstream media lean left. Fox News of course is reviled because it is the only network that has a national TV platform that leans conservative. No other TV network is so reviled, which ultimately proves the left leanings and echo chamber of the rest of TV networks whether ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC. Of course its long been known NY Times and WaPost are left leaning.
Keep in mind the mainstream media assured us of a stock market crash if Trump were elected, and that he was unhinged and mentally unstable and would lead us into war. They fanned the flames of fear and many bought in. Reality is, just the opposite happened - our economy thrived and our intervention abroad diminished. ISIS neutralized. Syria in check. North Korea tensions reduced.
Ultimately he's offensive AF to the politically correct, which is exactly where the division begins - half the country is fed up with the p.c. movement, the other half thinks it needs to continue/expand. He was correct to identify that China, not Russia, is the ultimate threat to the U.S.
Ivanka Trump brands, Made in China
-
Ultimately he's offensive AF to the politically correct, which is exactly where the division begins - half the country is fed up with the p.c. movement, the other half thinks it needs to continue/expand. He was correct to identify that China, not Russia, is the ultimate threat to the U.S.
It is not "politically correct" to abhor racists. His entire campaign evolved from his birther racism.
He also did not "identify" that China is the biggest threat. That was stated well before he was on the scene.
Trump has praised China and Xi endlessly. Just a couple months ago, he said, “He’s for China, I’m for the US, but other than that we love each other. Our relationship with China has probably never been better. We went through a very rough patch, but it has never, ever been better.”
-
If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?
-
If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?
Covfefe!
-
If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?
The country as a whole has been better under Clinton and Obama than it has under Bush or Trump. So I would be good with that.
-
If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?
That is funny. 100,000 dead, depression era economy and you are “waiting” for the country to struggle.
Thanks for making my day.
-
Ewe ain't seen nothin' yet, partner.
-
The country as a whole has been better under Clinton and Obama than it has under Bush or Trump. So I would be good with that.
Can’t argue with that.
-
“Sleepy Joe” might be old and past his mental peak, but Trump isn’t? I mean seriously, how does this guy get people to actually believe this stuff? The only difference in mental capacity between the two is one will put people in place who deserve to be there based on experience and ability to do a job and he will get out of their way and let them do it, while the other will put his rich white male friends in place and then overrule them and fire them when they try to do what is right vs. what Trump wants. And the second is a pathological liar.
-
So nice ta have an open mind, aina?🤣
-
So nice ta have an open mind, aina?🤣
Open mind on...what? We have 3.5 years of Trump in office...
-
If not for the Chinese virus we'd all be living large, hey?
#GodBlessAmerica
-
If not for the Chinese virus we'd all be living large, hey?
#GodBlessAmerica
If grandma had balls, she’d be grandpa.
What’s your point?
-
Let's just lay the whole fookin' pandemic chit show on Trump's doorstep, hey?
-
Let's just lay the whole fookin' pandemic chit show on Trump's doorstep, hey?
No. But let’s not pretend he handled it well either. Or is handling it well now.
-
Let's just lay the whole fookin' pandemic chit show on Trump's doorstep, hey?
Difference between blame, responsibility and accountability. POTUS is not to blame for the virus, but as the leader of this nation he is responsible for our federal response, and the electorate can judge how accountable they will hold him and his administration.
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
That’s a pretty damning statement.
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
The buck stops here.
-
That’s a pretty damning statement.
I’m confused, can you interpret?
Deep state sabotaging tin foil hat line of logic?
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
Wow. That is the biggest condemnation of Trump that I have seen on this board. Never would have thought you would admit this.
-
be nice if we could get back to "scandal free" gubmint, eyna?
-
Wow. That is the biggest condemnation of Trump that I have seen on this board. Never would have thought you would admit this.
Oh yeah I forgot that is a one sided issue. My apologies
-
The country as a whole has been better under Clinton and Obama than it has under Bush or Trump. So I would be good with that.
Perhaps. Yet, the country was doing better than it had in most significant (economic) benchmarks in 50+ years since Trump’s election - until the once in a 100 year pandemic struck.
Truly, for those who despise Trump, the pandemic was a God send. The longer lockdowns persist and the economy are shut down the more unrest it will cause and further increase the chances Trump doesn’t get re-elected.
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
I agree wholeheartedly. The new phrase should really be “America first...unless it comes to Trump looking bad. Then eff the hundreds of thousands of Americans that will die. We have an election to win!”
MAGA.
-
Pandemic saved Woj and may save Senile Joe, hey?
-
Perhaps. Yet, the country was doing better than it had in most significant (economic) benchmarks in 50+ years since Trump’s election - until the once in a 100 year pandemic struck.
Truly, for those who despise Trump, the pandemic was a God send. The longer lockdowns persist and the economy are shut down the more unrest it will cause and further increase the chances Trump doesn’t get re-elected.
Pandemic saved Woj and may save Senile Joe, hey?
That’s the difference between “MAGAs” and “libs.” I’d happily take 4 more years of Trump if he helped save the lives of Americans and saved the economy. Instead he worried about votes and sacrificed both. Just because you’d be celebrating deaths of humans and an economy to MAGA doesn’t mean it works the other way.
-
Difference between blame, responsibility and accountability. POTUS is not to blame for the virus, but as the leader of this nation he is responsible for our federal response, and the electorate can judge how accountable they will hold him and his administration.
And Joe would have welcomed more travelers from China. Pelosi urged more San Franciscans to go mingle on Chinatown and Cuomo mandate more nursing homes take on COViD patients - ALL AFTER THE RACIST TRUMP issued travel ban from China on Jan 31.
For real - it’s easy to play armchair QB and criticize Trump Admin response, but when you have the leadership of the Dem party making boneheaded decisions and suggestions like the above as late at mid-late March? Cmon Man.
There was zero playbook for a pandemic this large AND China was NOT forthcoming at all about the devastation, numbers, contagious nature. Yet half of this country is more angry at Trump than China. Pretty sad commentary as to where we are as a country.
-
I’m confused, can you interpret?
Deep state sabotaging tin foil hat line of logic?
I mean if Trump acted the way he did because it is an election year, that means he definitely put his own interests before the country’s.
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
So...#trumpfirst, #americasecond?
-
And Joe would have welcomed more travelers from China. Pelosi urged more San Franciscans to go mingle on Chinatown and Cuomo mandate more nursing homes take on COViD patients - ALL AFTER THE RACIST TRUMP issued travel ban from China on Jan 31.
For real - it’s easy to play armchair QB and criticize Trump Admin response, but when you have the leadership of the Dem party making boneheaded decisions and suggestions like the above as late at mid-late March? Cmon Man.
There was zero playbook for a pandemic this large AND China was NOT forthcoming at all about the devastation, numbers, contagious nature. Yet half of this country is more angry at Trump than China. Pretty sad commentary as to where we are as a country.
The pandemic response team Trump cut would’ve certainly been useful, hey?
Also, hysterical you think the administration did the best they could with the information they had. They had much more information than what they acted on from their very own people, but President Xi did a great job so who did we trust, our own or the enemy China? Hmm. I agree. Very sad that we have a president who ignores his own intel to trust China’s leadership. Absolutely wild.
-
“Sleepy Joe” might be old and past his mental peak, but Trump isn’t? I mean seriously, how does this guy get people to actually believe this stuff? The only difference in mental capacity between the two is one will put people in place who deserve to be there based on experience and ability to do a job and he will get out of their way and let them do it, while the other will put his rich white male friends in place and then overrule them and fire them when they try to do what is right vs. what Trump wants. And the second is a pathological liar.
Trump us the one sleeping through a pandemic
-
And Joe would have welcomed more travelers from China. Pelosi urged more San Franciscans to go mingle on Chinatown and Cuomo mandate more nursing homes take on COViD patients - ALL AFTER THE RACIST TRUMP issued travel ban from China on Jan 31.
For real - it’s easy to play armchair QB and criticize Trump Admin response, but when you have the leadership of the Dem party making boneheaded decisions and suggestions like the above as late at mid-late March? Cmon Man.
There was zero playbook for a pandemic this large AND China was NOT forthcoming at all about the devastation, numbers, contagious nature. Yet half of this country is more angry at Trump than China. Pretty sad commentary as to where we are as a country.
Yeah you are letting him off the hook. There were dozens of things he could have done better with but he chose to largely ignore the problem.
It’s all been laid out here already so I’m not going repeat it. And it’s not going to matter anyway.
-
And Joe would have welcomed more travelers from China. Pelosi urged more San Franciscans to go mingle on Chinatown and Cuomo mandate more nursing homes take on COViD patients - ALL AFTER THE RACIST TRUMP issued travel ban from China on Jan 31.
For real - it’s easy to play armchair QB and criticize Trump Admin response, but when you have the leadership of the Dem party making boneheaded decisions and suggestions like the above as late at mid-late March? Cmon Man.
There was zero playbook for a pandemic this large AND China was NOT forthcoming at all about the devastation, numbers, contagious nature. Yet half of this country is more angry at Trump than China. Pretty sad commentary as to where we are as a country.
The buck stops here
-
I don’t take responsibility at all.
-
Despite Americans in China warning the administration that the pandemic was a major concern, we had this...
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1220818115354923009
Thank you President Xi!
-
The pandemic response team Trump cut would’ve certainly been useful, hey?
Also, hysterical you think the administration did the best they could with the information they had. They had much more information than what they acted on from their very own people, but President Xi did a great job so who did we trust, our own or the enemy China? Hmm. I agree. Very sad that we have a president who ignores his own intel to trust China’s leadership. Absolutely wild.
Yes. We should have shut the whole country down January 24th when the first case was reported - yet we now know it was likely here earlier. Perhaps had we done that we could be at 120 million unemployed, all to save the 0.5% of health compromised people who would die from Covid.
What are your thoughts on Biden calling China travel ban xenophobic and racist?
What are your thoughts about Pelosi encouraging San Franciscans to head out and mingle in Chinatown in March?
Cuomo mandating nursing homes taking COVID patients?
End of the day, it’s subjective as to how much better/worse things could have gone.
-
Yes. We should have shut the whole country down January 24th when the first case was reported - yet we now know it was likely here earlier. Perhaps had we done that we could be at 120 million unemployed, all to save the 0.5% of health compromised people who would die from Covid.
What are your thoughts on Biden calling China travel ban xenophobic and racist?
What are your thoughts about Pelosi encouraging San Franciscans to head out and mingle in Chinatown in March?
Cuomo mandating nursing homes taking COVID patients?
End of the day, it’s subjective as to how much better/worse things could have gone.
Biden never called the travel ban xenophobic or racist. Just because you say it 750 times doesn’t make it true. You’re just lying over, and over, and over again.
But you’re right. The administration has handled this perfectly. Thank you President Xi!
What an idiot.
-
Nm
-
Yes. We should have shut the whole country down January 24th when the first case was reported - yet we now know it was likely here earlier. Perhaps had we done that we could be at 120 million unemployed, all to save the 0.5% of health compromised people who would die from Covid.
What are your thoughts on Biden calling China travel ban xenophobic and racist?
What are your thoughts about Pelosi encouraging San Franciscans to head out and mingle in Chinatown in March?
Cuomo mandating nursing homes taking COVID patients?
End of the day, it’s subjective as to how much better/worse things could have gone.
But some people who have a D next to their name did bad things too so I guess nothing is to be done! No accountability for anyone! Glad we settled that.
-
I don’t take responsibility at all.
Hey! Using a quote exactly as the words came out of his mouth is political spin!
-
What are your thoughts on Biden calling China travel ban xenophobic and racist?
He didn't.
What are your thoughts about Pelosi encouraging San Franciscans to head out and mingle in Chinatown in March?
She said it in February. Even Trump got that right. It was still a dumb thing to say, though.
What are your thoughts about Devin Nunes encouraging people to go out to eat in mid-March because there were good tables to be had, against the advice of state and federal health authorities?
Actually, don't answer that. It's irrelevant. Because nothing Nancy Pelosi or Devin Nunes did or didn't do has any bearing on the job Trump has done.
[/quote]
-
Were this not an election year, I'm guessing this would have been handled completely different from the beginning.
Trump is intentionally trying to kill off as many black and brown people as he can so they can’t vote in 5 months?
-
Hey! Using a quote exactly as the words came out of his mouth is political spin!
Or maybe an actual recording him. https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/05/23/donald-trump-golf-coronavirus-obama-ebola-sot-vpx-nr.cnn
In an interview on Fox and Friends around the same time, Mr Trump criticised then-president Obama for his love of playing golf, saying: "When you're president, you sort of say, like, 'I'm gonna give it up for a few years and I'm gonna really focus on the job'.
Mr Trump added: "There are times to play and there are times that you can't play and it sends the wrong signal."
-
This thread is WAY off "Job Status" .. sheltered in place.
-
Something I didn't know .. I was chatting with a neighbor who said his job was down to 32 hours per week, 1 day furlough. He said he is allowed to claim unemployment for those 8 hours .. ok .. but that he also gets the $600 bonus money per week.
WOW, I had no idea.
Our company put hundreds of people on 32 hours .. I guarantee you none of them want that to change as they are doubling their pay while working 20% less.
(Mind you, the $600 bonus ends Aug 1. But they'll have doubled their pay for 4 months .. if the 32/hrs lasted another 4 months, they'd be back to "even.")
-
Something I didn't know .. I was chatting with a neighbor who said his job was down to 32 hours per week, 1 day furlough. He said he is allowed to claim unemployment for those 8 hours .. ok .. but that he also gets the $600 bonus money per week.
Surprising but correct - sorta. It depends on the state unemployment laws for reduction of hours. I'm guessing WI must only have a 20% threshold. From a law firm, but interesting (and where I got my info):
https://www.steptoe.com/en/news-publications/who-cares-unemployment-benefits-for-reduced-hours-and-furloughed-employees.html
-
Something I didn't know .. I was chatting with a neighbor who said his job was down to 32 hours per week, 1 day furlough. He said he is allowed to claim unemployment for those 8 hours .. ok .. but that he also gets the $600 bonus money per week.
WOW, I had no idea.
Our company put hundreds of people on 32 hours .. I guarantee you none of them want that to change as they are doubling their pay while working 20% less.
(Mind you, the $600 bonus ends Aug 1. But they'll have doubled their pay for 4 months .. if the 32/hrs lasted another 4 months, they'd be back to "even.")
I do believe they have to be considered non-exempt (hourly) employees to collect unemployment with the one day a week furlough. A few organizations are converting salaried employees to hourly for this purpose.
-
..
-
Biden never called the travel ban xenophobic or racist. Just because you say it 750 times doesn’t make it true. You’re just lying over, and over, and over again.
We should probably just use facts. You are correct he never directly called it that. This should settle this once and for all
January 31st the White House issued a travel ban to go into effect Feb 2nd
"The entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of all aliens who were physically present within the People's Republic of China, excluding the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, during the 14-day period preceding their entry or attempted entry into the United States is hereby suspended."
Source: Donald Trump, "Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus," whitehouse.gov, Jan. 31, 2020
Less than 45 minutes later Vice President Biden responded with this at a campaign event in Iowa:
"We have, right now, a crisis with the coronavirus. This is no time for Donald Trump's record of hysteria and xenophobia - hysterical xenophobia - and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science."
Source: Trevor Hunnicutt, "Biden Slams Trump for Cutting Health Programs before Coronavirus Outbreak," reuters.com, Jan. 31, 2020
Maybe the timing was a coincidence, and you are correct he did not directly call the travel ban racist or xenophobic this time (he did with a previous travel ban). My personal belief is VP Biden wants to yell he called for the code red, but cannot. He believes the travel ban fits that description, but he didn't directly say it.
-
It also wasn’t an actual ban on all travel. Thousands of citizens continued to arrive from China after it was issued.
-
We should probably just use facts. You are correct he never directly called it that. This should settle this once and for all
January 31st the White House issued a travel ban to go into effect Feb 2nd
"The entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of all aliens who were physically present within the People's Republic of China, excluding the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, during the 14-day period preceding their entry or attempted entry into the United States is hereby suspended."
Source: Donald Trump, "Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus," whitehouse.gov, Jan. 31, 2020
Less than 45 minutes later Vice President Biden responded with this at a campaign event in Iowa:
"We have, right now, a crisis with the coronavirus. This is no time for Donald Trump's record of hysteria and xenophobia - hysterical xenophobia - and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science."
Source: Trevor Hunnicutt, "Biden Slams Trump for Cutting Health Programs before Coronavirus Outbreak," reuters.com, Jan. 31, 2020
Maybe the timing was a coincidence, and you are correct he did not directly call the travel ban racist or xenophobic this time (he did with a previous travel ban). My personal belief is VP Biden wants to yell he called for the code red, but cannot. He believes the travel ban fits that description, but he didn't directly say it.
“We should probably just use facts.”
So you confirm exactly what I said? He did not call say the travel ban on China was xenophobic? Okay, thank you for the confirmation Chicos, Mr. “I’ve never ever voted for anything but a democrat in my life but everyone else is partisan and I am not.”
What a nut.
-
Something I've been thinking about lately... If we're looking at 20%+ unemployment, then we are also looking at a lot of those folks not having health insurance... Won't that eventually lead to massive financial problems for hospitals? Could that spiral?
-
Something I've been thinking about lately... If we're looking at 20%+ unemployment, then we are also looking at a lot of those folks not having health insurance... Won't that eventually lead to massive financial problems for hospitals? Could that spiral?
People that lose their jobs are eligible for ObamaCare. In most cases, there is little or no monthly premium.
So of course, someone just renewed efforts to take it away. Cruelty IS the point.
-
Something I've been thinking about lately... If we're looking at 20%+ unemployment, then we are also looking at a lot of those folks not having health insurance... Won't that eventually lead to massive financial problems for hospitals? Could that spiral?
Absolutely. Even successful hospitals usually operate on relatively thin margins, so a significant drift to more uncompensated care could be devastating.
-
Something I've been thinking about lately... If we're looking at 20%+ unemployment, then we are also looking at a lot of those folks not having health insurance... Won't that eventually lead to massive financial problems for hospitals? Could that spiral?
Please, please, please let this lead to de-coupling employment from health insurance
-
People that lose their jobs are eligible for ObamaCare. In most cases, there is little or no monthly premium.
So of course, someone just renewed efforts to take it away. Cruelty IS the point.
Not the case at all.
-
I was shocked to learn .. our 20% paycut phase is over. They are still saying there's a possibility the cut will be reimbursed to employees later.
Shocked because I think our industry is still down 30-50%.
In conclusion, 20% more Arby's.
-
I was shocked to learn .. our 20% paycut phase is over. They are still saying there's a possibility the cut will be reimbursed to employees later.
Shocked because I think our industry is still down 30-50%.
In conclusion, 20% more Arby's.
Have not been to Arby's since COVID struck. You, sir, have convinced me to rectify that situation in short order.
-
Not the case at all.
Which part are you saying is wrong? And just to be clear, when I say “if you lose your job”, I am referring to losing your job- not being laid off temporarily.
-
I was shocked to learn .. our 20% paycut phase is over. They are still saying there's a possibility the cut will be reimbursed to employees later.
Shocked because I think our industry is still down 30-50%.
In conclusion, 20% more Arby's.
Still waiting for any little bit of that "hero pay"
-
Still waiting for any little bit of that "hero pay"
Just because you're essential does not mean you should get paid like it
-
Still waiting for any little bit of that "hero pay"
Here you go.
Macy's doled out $9 million in bonuses to top execs after thousands of jobs are cut
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/07/16/macys-gave-9-million-in-bonuses-to-execs-after-thousands-of-job-cuts.html
-
Which part are you saying is wrong? And just to be clear, when I say “if you lose your job”, I am referring to losing your job- not being laid off temporarily.
Everyone is eligible for "Obamacare". The little to no cost portion is absolutely not true.
-
Everyone is eligible for "Obamacare". The little to no cost portion is absolutely not true.
Everyone is eligible, but there are limits on income to get the ObamaCare subsidy. So, if a single person loses their job, they will almost certainly be making less than $49,000. So if he were to choose the $899 monthly, plan, his cost could be almost 0 with the subsidy.
If you are under the income limits - $49,000 for a single to $85,000 for a family of 3 - the ObamaCare subsidy will pay most or all of the monthly premium.
Just one example from a relative I helped: a cousin who made just under $60,000 a year combined income with his wife got the silver plan priced at $899 a month. He had to pay $26 a month. The rest was covered by the ObamaCare subsidy.
That is the purpose - to assist low income earners
-
Everyone is eligible, but there are limits on income to get the ObamaCare subsidy. So, if a single person loses their job, they will almost certainly be making less than $49,000. So if he were to choose the $899 monthly, plan, his cost could be almost 0 with the subsidy.
If you are under the income limits - $49,000 for a single to $85,000 for a family of 3 - the ObamaCare subsidy will pay most or all of the monthly premium.
Just one example from a relative I helped: a cousin who made just under $60,000 a year combined income with his wife got the silver plan priced at $899 a month. He had to pay $26 a month. The rest was covered by the ObamaCare subsidy.
That is the purpose - to assist low income earners
Went through the Healthcare network last year. I got the silver plan, made under 50k had to pay 130 per month. It was not great...
-
Went through the Healthcare network last year. I got the silver plan, made under 50k had to pay 130 per month. It was not great...
\
I would love to be paying that for my health insurance.
-
\
I would love to be paying that for my health insurance.
Yeah, I pay between 3 -4 times that and I’m on Medicare. Maybe he wasn’t just talking cost but other features (deductibles, choices, etc.). Even so, 130 per month is 5x higher than 26 per.
-
Obamacare was a big step forward for a lot of things with the most important being tying hospital reimbursement to certain quality metrics.
A lot to like with it for sure but to suggest it’s affordable is a bit of a stretch.
-
Went through the Healthcare network last year. I got the silver plan, made under 50k had to pay 130 per month. It was not great...
Silver plan was probably in the $800 - $900 range. So you were getting a pretty good subsidy. Just a guess, but at $40G you probably would have paid well under $50. There is also a decent chance it will be lower next year.
-
\
I would love to be paying that for my health insurance.
If you and Glow made less that $65,000 (may be a bit more - $65G was the limit for married, no deductible kids 2 years ago) combined, you could be.
Main benefits of ObamaCare are no denial for pre-existing and subsidy for low income.
-
A lot to like with it for sure but to suggest it’s affordable is a bit of a stretch.
Big difference. It is meant to be affordable for lower income people. Otherwise you pay close to full market rate.
-
Just wanted to add onto the conversation about Obama care.
It was indeed 130 per month, through cchp. Deductible was 7500, out of pocket max was 8000. Urgent care was 125, specialists were 75, primary was 50. It was basically useless unless I got cancer or was in a horrible accident that required multiple surgeries.
-
Just wanted to add onto the conversation about Obama care.
It was indeed 130 per month, through cchp. Deductible was 7500, out of pocket max was 8000. Urgent care was 125, specialists were 75, primary was 50. It was basically useless unless I got cancer or was in a horrible accident that required multiple surgeries.
Welcome to the world of high deductible plans. Sounds like you probably got either a bronze or silver plan. If you wanted to pay a lot more per month you could lower your deductible or possibly even select a co-pay plan. But that's what the carriers offer, not specific to Obamacare.
-
Just wanted to add onto the conversation about Obama care.
It was indeed 130 per month, through cchp. Deductible was 7500, out of pocket max was 8000. Urgent care was 125, specialists were 75, primary was 50. It was basically useless unless I got cancer or was in a horrible accident that required multiple surgeries.
If you required even one minor surgery, that max 8000 would save you.
Those numbers you gave seem pretty normal. If you get insurance through an employer, the monthly co-pay can be $200-$300 a month and the other numbers would be fairly similar. Maybe a little lower depending on the generosity of your employer.
Medicare for seniors runs about the same. Coverage is a bit better.
-
Those numbers you gave seem pretty normal. If you get insurance through an employer, the monthly co-pay can be $200-$300 a month and the other numbers would be fairly similar. Maybe a little lower depending on the generosity of your employer.
Yep. I had an HDHP with my last employer and my payroll deduction was more than Unleash is paying.
-
Just wanted to add onto the conversation about Obama care.
It was indeed 130 per month, through cchp. Deductible was 7500, out of pocket max was 8000. Urgent care was 125, specialists were 75, primary was 50. It was basically useless unless I got cancer or was in a horrible accident that required multiple surgeries.
My wife is an RN at the largest hospital group in the southeast ... and her medical benefits are no better while the monthly cost is more than twice as much.
Lots of employers -- including those in the health-care business -- offer truly cruddy health plans. I don't want to wish my life away, so I'm in no hurry for these next 5 years to go by, but from a cost and care perspective, I am looking forward to Medicare.
-
Can't wait until we get single payor health care. Still get the best health care in the the world...and its free. That'll be the tits, hey?
-
Can't wait until we get single payor health care. Still get the best health care in the the world...and its free. That'll be the tits, hey?
Nothing is free, obviously. But if EVERYONE pays, then we are all subsidizing each other. Which we already do. What happens when someone without insurance shows up in the ED? They won't be paying. So who does? Everyone with insurance subsidizes that person. The hospital gets their money one way or another.
But you know, we should keep paying insurance companies. Because they're the ones that provide health care... and the thousands of people working for health insurance companies are doing it for free. And all of the money the HIC's make creates better insurance. Just kidding, they're all overhead. But rubes like you continue to fail at math and want to give money blindly to HIC's so they can deny health care, and charge outrageous premiums... or stand behind insane deductibles.
We're the only country in the world to have this bloated, ridiculous system. Capitalism and health care should never be married.
-
Sounds like I shouldn’t complain about my high deductible plan through work. I pay $16 per paycheck (26 times per year) and my deductible is $2K. Then pay 20% until I reach yearly max of $3K. Plus a $250 deposit into my HSA at beginning of the year (use to be $500).
-
But you know, we should keep paying insurance companies. Because they're the ones that provide health care... and the thousands of people working for health insurance companies are doing it for free. And all of the money the HIC's make creates better insurance. Just kidding, they're all overhead.
Because there is no overhead in government?
-
Sounds like I shouldn’t complain about my high deductible plan through work. I pay $16 per paycheck (26 times per year) and my deductible is $2K. Then pay 20% until I reach yearly max of $3K. Plus a $250 deposit into my HSA at beginning of the year (use to be $500).
That is an excellent plan IMHO.
-
Can't wait until we get single payor health care. Still get the best health care in the the world...and its free. That'll be the tits, hey?
Who said these things? ...
2000: “We must take care of our own. We must have universal healthcare.”
2015: "Everybody's got to be covered … I am going to take care of everybody. I don't care if it costs me votes or not."
2016: “We do need health care for all people. What are we gonna do, let people die in the street?”
2017: “We’re going to have insurance for everybody. There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us. (Americans) can expect to have great health care. It will be in a much simplified form. Much less expensive and much better.”
-
Nothing is free, obviously. But if EVERYONE pays, then we are all subsidizing each other. Which we already do. What happens when someone without insurance shows up in the ED? They won't be paying. So who does? Everyone with insurance subsidizes that person. The hospital gets their money one way or another.
But you know, we should keep paying insurance companies. Because they're the ones that provide health care... and the thousands of people working for health insurance companies are doing it for free. And all of the money the HIC's make creates better insurance. Just kidding, they're all overhead. But rubes like you continue to fail at math and want to give money blindly to HIC's so they can deny health care, and charge outrageous premiums... or stand behind insane deductibles.
We're the only country in the world to have this bloated, ridiculous system. Capitalism and health care should never be married.
I prefer country bumpkin.
-
Because there is no overhead in government?
You might wanna check the numbers on this.
(You're a smart woman so, I'm guessing you were just making a point. I presume you already know what the numbers generally are.)
-
Welcome to the world of high deductible plans. Sounds like you probably got either a bronze or silver plan. If you wanted to pay a lot more per month you could lower your deductible or possibly even select a co-pay plan. But that's what the carriers offer, not specific to Obamacare.
That’s not true that it had nothing to do with Obamacare. I’m self employed so I’ve always bought my own health insurance.
Prior to Obamacare I was paying (individually) $225 per month for a $500 deductible and that included dental.
After Obamacare I now pay slightly more for a plan that has no dental and a high deductible ($5,000+)
-
That’s not true that it had nothing to do with Obamacare. I’m self employed so I’ve always bought my own health insurance.
Prior to Obamacare I was paying (individually) $225 per month for a $500 deductible and that included dental.
After Obamacare I now pay slightly more for a plan that has no dental and a high deductible ($5,000+)
No offense intended, but I don’t believe that.
-
Obamacare was a good step in the right direction, but low income people are still without decent routine and preventive care. The low-cost plans might have “affordable“ monthly premiums, but huge deductibles and copays. The higher-tier plans make the deductibles and co-pays more reasonable, but many low income people can’t afford the monthly premium.
As Jockey mentioned, it still helps if you suddenly need major care (the proverbial “if you get hit by a bus tomorrow“ scenario), which is probably the biggest benefit for people who had previously been uninsured.
For the rest of us, the biggest benefit is the portability, which prohibits denial based on a pre-existing condition. And that is a huge deal.
The next version will need to be better to truly give low income people access to good health care.
-
I prefer country bumpkin.
Sorry, I assumed you were a suburban rube.
Because there is no overhead in government?
Government doesn't have to operate for profit. Of course there is inefficiency in governments. Do you want everyone to have healthcare? Do you want to consider the US a developed nation? Do you enjoy seeing people's lives ruined by medical bills? Why would we pretend that we're the only country in the world that has this figured out?
-
Obamacare has a significantly higher approval rating than the president of the United States does.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
https://news.gallup.com/poll/287297/americans-approval-aca-holds-steady.aspx
https://www.kff.org/interactive/kff-health-tracking-poll-the-publics-views-on-the-aca/
When your goal is to repeal and replace it with something better, and you can't even get a simple majority of the repeal-and-replacers to agree on a replacement, it's hard to take you seriously. When your leader just wants to repeal it without replacing it -- leaving tens of millions of people with nothing, including protections for pre-existing conditions, and he does so during the middle of a global pandemic ... wow.
Obamacare is flawed. Do your jobs -- Improve it.
That's what Congress has done with flawed laws for centuries.
-
Obamacare was a good step in the right direction, but low income people are still without decent routine and preventive care. The low-cost plans might have “affordable“ monthly premiums, but huge deductibles and copays. The higher-tier plans make the deductibles and co-pays more reasonable, but many low income people can’t afford the monthly premium.
As Jockey mentioned, it still helps if you suddenly need major care (the proverbial “if you get hit by a bus tomorrow“ scenario), which is probably the biggest benefit for people who had previously been uninsured.
For the rest of us, the biggest benefit is the portability, which prohibits denial based on a pre-existing condition. And that is a huge deal.
The next version will need to be better to truly give low income people access to good health care.
In the d recent campaign add with Biden, Obama said that they always viewed Obamacare like a starter house, one that would be improved or upgraded over time. But instead of approving it, he likened the Republics efforts to repeal it as trying to bulldoze the starter house with no alternative place to live.
-
Hey guys... That's enough.
-
No offense intended, but I don’t believe that.
Seems par for the course for you. If you disagree or don’t like something...just dismiss it.
It’s absolutely true...
-
Hey guys... That's enough.
Interesting you didn’t shut this thread down but rather gave the ol’ hand slap.
When it’s conservatives veering off track and getting political on this board we don’t quite get that same leniency.
-
Interesting you didn’t shut this thread down but rather gave the ol’ hand slap.
When it’s conservatives veering off track and getting political on this board we don’t quite get that same leniency.
Ah yes. The conservatives are treated so unfairly, always.
Does it get tiresome always being a martyr?
-
If you required even one minor surgery, that max 8000 would save you.
Those numbers you gave seem pretty normal. If you get insurance through an employer, the monthly co-pay can be $200-$300 a month and the other numbers would be fairly similar. Maybe a little lower depending on the generosity of your employer.
Medicare for seniors runs about the same. Coverage is a bit better.
Eh my new plan through work is...
40 per pay period, 1300 deductible, 4200 max, $25, $25, $15. I enjoy that one a lot more.
-
Obamacare was a good step in the right direction, but low income people are still without decent routine and preventive care. The low-cost plans might have “affordable“ monthly premiums, but huge deductibles and copays. The higher-tier plans make the deductibles and co-pays more reasonable, but many low income people can’t afford the monthly premium.
As Jockey mentioned, it still helps if you suddenly need major care (the proverbial “if you get hit by a bus tomorrow“ scenario), which is probably the biggest benefit for people who had previously been uninsured.
For the rest of us, the biggest benefit is the portability, which prohibits denial based on a pre-existing condition. And that is a huge deal.
The next version will need to be better to truly give low income people access to good health care.
Isn't preventative care free by law through insurance?
-
Obamacare was a good step in the right direction, but low income people are still without decent routine and preventive care. The low-cost plans might have “affordable“ monthly premiums, but huge deductibles and copays. The higher-tier plans make the deductibles and co-pays more reasonable, but many low income people can’t afford the monthly premium.
As Jockey mentioned, it still helps if you suddenly need major care (the proverbial “if you get hit by a bus tomorrow“ scenario), which is probably the biggest benefit for people who had previously been uninsured.
For the rest of us, the biggest benefit is the portability, which prohibits denial based on a pre-existing condition. And that is a huge deal.
The next version will need to be better to truly give low income people access to good health care.
The other part of ObamaCare was it stabilized the insurance cost at employers. I was told by HR people at multiple places and experienced myself firsthand that the amount taken out of a paycheck was flat for 5 straight years. An HR quote to me was " It goes up every year but not after ObamaCare implementation."
-
Interesting you didn’t shut this thread down but rather gave the ol’ hand slap.
When it’s conservatives veering off track and getting political on this board we don’t quite get that same leniency.
Rather than act like a wounded victim, you might want to check on the stuff guru has been spewing in the main COVID thread. Not only does it have nothing to do with COVID, but it is overtly political. And not only is it overtly political, but it resorts to name-calling of everybody who disagrees with his extreme-right viewpoints.
Many of us (from either "side") have received time-outs for far less.
And yet rocky is trying to engage him and reason with him. Patience of a saint.
-
Eh my new plan through work is...
40 per pay period, 1300 deductible, 4200 max, $25, $25, $15. I enjoy that one a lot more.
Definitely, you'll often get a better deal through your employer thanks to group purchasing. But if you had to obtain insurance on your own w/o the subsidies through Obamacare you're going to pay full freight, which is extremely expensive.
-
Interesting you didn’t shut this thread down but rather gave the ol’ hand slap.
When it’s conservatives veering off track and getting political on this board we don’t quite get that same leniency.
Victimization and "it's not what is said but who says it"? Check
Appeal to authority of random, outlier voices? Check
Rehashing of previous, disproven arguments? Check
What's up cheeks?
-
Guru isn't cheeks.
-
Guru isn't cheeks.
He didn’t quote guru
-
Can't wait until we get single payor health care. Still get the best health care in the the world...and its free. That'll be the tits, hey?
In your version of this country can Muslims get equal access to healthcare? Or are they considered “others”?
-
He didn’t quote guru
Oops.
-
Sure, anyone can get anything as long as you pay for it.
-
Sure, anyone can get anything as long as you pay for it.
Weird, because you posted an Islamophobic chain email on this site not long ago, so just wanted to make sure.
AMDG Doc
-
Eh my new plan through work is...
40 per pay period, 1300 deductible, 4200 max, $25, $25, $15. I enjoy that one a lot more.
Good to hear, Unleash. Excellent plan and numbers look good.
Your co-pay at work is lower than most employer provided insurance. The numbers you give are more in line with the gold plan of Obamacare, which even with subsidy may have cost you $400 a month or more.
-
Isn't preventative care free by law through insurance?
Yes and no - a very specifically defined set of 'Preventive Services' are covered by law...but the range of services is much narrower than most physicians recommend, and doesn't give docs discretion to add much of anything based on family history and such. Better than before, but not as good as you would be expecting if you have had good coverage in the past.
I suspect the definition was the result of compromises to get it passed. A step in the right direction, but hopefully not the last step.
-
Seems par for the course for you. If you disagree or don’t like something...just dismiss it.
It’s absolutely true...
Have you past a 5 year milestone (25, 30, 35) since then? Because premiums go up with age of course you pay more. Am I missing something?
I have been self employed for 20 years and my premiums are 4 times what they were 20 years ago.
-
Have you past a 5 year milestone (25, 30, 35) since then? Because premiums go up with age of course you pay more. Am I missing something?
I have been self employed for 20 years and my premiums are 4 times what they were 20 years ago.
At the time of the change it would have been age 23 vs 24 so the answer is no.
I’m not sure how you had a different experience with this bc everyone else in my same peer group experienced the same increase.
-
At the time of the change it would have been age 23 vs 24 so the answer is no.
I’m not sure how you had a different experience with this bc everyone else in my same peer group experienced the same increase.
Okay given your age this makes sense. Thanks.
-
My company is now officially work from home (except when field work is necessary) until 2021.
-
My company is now officially work from home (except when field work is necessary) until 2021.
Our bank is the same.
-
My company .. really hasn't done anything official. There's a skeleton crew shipping in the warehouse, everyone else is indefinitely WFH.
I'm guessing I never go back more than occasionally.
-
My company just announced a big culling today. I've been through sales layoffs at Groupon and Stericycle years ago but damn when you enjoy what you do and don't have a job that you can replace in a week it's considerably more nerve racking.
-
My company just announced a big culling today. I've been through sales layoffs at Groupon and Stericycle years ago but damn when you enjoy what you do and don't have a job that you can replace in a week it's considerably more nerve racking.
Sorry to hear it, best of luck.
This will be the story of the fall/winter with the lack of stimulus from congress. We have a very weak economy right now, so staffing down is the only way to mitigate risk as a business owner.
-
Just wondering how many people are back in the office and how many people are still work from home.
I will be work at home until at least June 2021 now and I'm guessing it will be longer than that. I miss interacting with people in the office but am happy to still have a job. I also appreciate the flexibility working from home offers (was really nice when both my kids' schools switched to virtual for a couple weeks in November) and am happy to not be around a ton of people in an office right now - still worried about Covid spread. It will sure be weird to go back in the office eventually though as I will have worked at home for well over a year before I return to the office - let's see if I can still remember my code to get into the building by then :).
-
I go back to work Friday. Wife is working from home, but once she has her energy and stamina back, she will probably go back into the office. Probably the week of 12/14.
-
Just wondering how many people are back in the office and how many people are still work from home.
I will be work at home until at least June 2021 now and I'm guessing it will be longer than that. I miss interacting with people in the office but am happy to still have a job. I also appreciate the flexibility working from home offers (was really nice when both my kids' schools switched to virtual for a couple weeks in November) and am happy to not be around a ton of people in an office right now - still worried about Covid spread. It will sure be weird to go back in the office eventually though as I will have worked at home for well over a year before I return to the office - let's see if I can still remember my code to get into the building by then :).
I spent most of the fall semester in the office. Back home now until at least February 1.
I don't like working from home for the most part.
-
Just don't pull a Jeffrey Toobin, hey?
-
I use traffic as a gauge of how many have returned to the office. I'd say right now, traffic levels are back to over 90% of pre-COVID levels.
-
I won’t be back in for the foreseeable future. Even then, it will probably be a hybrid.
-
Just wondering how many people are back in the office and how many people are still work from home.
I will be work at home until at least June 2021 now and I'm guessing it will be longer than that. I miss interacting with people in the office but am happy to still have a job. I also appreciate the flexibility working from home offers (was really nice when both my kids' schools switched to virtual for a couple weeks in November) and am happy to not be around a ton of people in an office right now - still worried about Covid spread. It will sure be weird to go back in the office eventually though as I will have worked at home for well over a year before I return to the office - let's see if I can still remember my code to get into the building by then :).
Our department is WFH indefinitely, with talk that people won’t go back on a regular basis until after they get vaccinated. Even when people can go back, my sense is that many will be able to WFH permanently.
And my daughter just told me her office is WFH until at least March 31.
-
We'll now have ~5 people in an office that formerly had 120 .. About 50 are working from home, the rest laid off. Our lease is up in 1.5 years.
I can very much imagine that we'll shrink to a very small office with a few conference rooms, and all but a handful will work from home.
We had another office in the Chicago area .. it was remodeled a year ago, beautiful cubes, desks, conference rooms, everything top notch. Now all are working from home, the place is abandoned. High possibility they'll never go back to that office.
-
I’ve heard 30-50% reduction in office space is reasonable for a company.
Personally I don’t think I will work a full week in the ‘office’ for the rest of my career.
-
I’ve heard 30-50% reduction in office space is reasonable for a company.
Personally I don’t think I will work a full week in the ‘office’ for the rest of my career.
Yeah I'm kind of figuring on only returning to the office for maybe 1-2 days a week and working from home most of the time still even when they decide to let people back into the office. I think a lot is going to be left up to managers and I think in my area we're all very productive working from home and I have a manager who supports that.
And this all reminds me I changed jobs in May internally while working from home and my desk is still in my old area so one of the first things I'll have to do when/if I go back to the office is move :).
-
I’ve been in the office regularly since the summer. I really prefer it. The ideal “new” would be a more condensed day, in the office say 10-4, with calls/emails from home on each side. Would suit me as I do a lot of international touch base when I wake up. I would rather be in the office every day than WFH.
My GF works for commercial real estate fund/firm and has been WFH since May. They were eying a Jan 1 restart in the office in NYC, but given happenings there, they are back 4/1 at the earliest. My youngest sister works for a SEM/digital marketing firm also in NYC. They are indefinitely WFH and likely won’t make a call until next summer.
-
Our season wrapped up last week and I moved my office home probably until April. Probably go in once a week for printing and pick up all the packages I send to the office.
-
Been going to the office every day since pandemic began. Small company and I don't really have a choice since we've asked factory workers to come in the whole time. I figured not a good look. Plus I have other duties besides sales that is just way easier to address in the office.
Only our sole finance person has been doing 1-3 days WFH since pandemic began.
-
WFH since 3/13, in tech sales so really can be done from anywhere. I think our bosses want folks to be back in the office at least 1x-2x a week after vaccinations are widespread. About a 1/4 of the company has relocated to different states and leadership has been fine with it, but I think they are trying to clamp down on it since having employees working from 10 different states is a PIA for finance.
-
Work from home since 2nd week of March. All travel suspended indefinitely.
My client has closed all four of their Regional offices (out of which I worked) so looks like I am permanently WFH.
US HQ for my company is in NY. They have re-opened office on a very limited basis but are not requiring any employees to return. It is purely voluntary. I don’t know a single person on team of about 80 that is going to office. Maybe by next summer.
-
Been at work since the start. WFH isn't really feasible. That's life.
-
I've been in the office everyday since this started, owner doesn't allow us to WFH.
-
Fortune 500 value added reseller for IT equipment. Some of the sales team has been back in the office. Im in analytics and was already three days at home before this so probably will be on the later end to return. They make the call whether to extend past the new year tomorrow.
-
Our offices are closed until at least 4/1.
I fly to customers but that is also on hold thru the same times.
They are expecting a reduction in travel of 30-40%.
-
I've been working from home since late March. I am not scheduled to go back until half the country has a vaccine. My guess is that I'll be in a hybrid role moving forward.
-
Worked from home for three days and then back to empty office building in downtown MKE. Rest of our team has been back since Memorial Day. Downtown MKE remains a ghost town.
-
6% pay cut and 1 day a week furlough through December. I actually haven't minded the three day weekend. I've been going in more often than not since mid-September (my office is kind of secluded) but am quarantining at home right now after traveling out of town last weekend. When I would say fewer than 20% of our staff is there and I only have my assistant come in one day a week.
What frustrated us at work is if they hadn't taken an "it's all going to be ok" approach over the summer we could have come out ahead with UE and the $600 bonus. Perfect timing to get the news two weeks after closing on a condo.
My wife hasn't dealt with pay cuts but she is now FT WFH. Her company was supposed to move to a larger office space but after this, they canceled the contract and are consolidating corporate offices instead.
-
No need for office space anymore
-
My boss duzant allow mee ta werk from home, hey?
-
My boss duzant allow mee ta werk from home, hey?
If you could figure out how to do teledentistry you'd make real money.
-
My boss duzant allow mee ta werk from home, hey?
Surely you have some power tools in the garage?
-
No need for office space anymore
I just don't agree with this, and five years from now a lot of these predictions aren't going to look very good. I think people work better in-person, at a work location and away from home. I bet 90% of people are back in an office a year or two when this is over.
-
Offices space will be needed going forward. As many people dislike working from home as like it.
-
I just don't agree with this, and five years from now a lot of these predictions aren't going to look very good. I think people work better in-person, at a work location and away from home. I bet 90% of people are back in an office a year or two when this is over.
Totally agree. People are confusing necessity or making things work in a pinch with a preferred way of working moving forward.
And I’m a millennial. I know plenty like me who aren’t all gunned up to WFH indefinitely.
-
It's not "if" there will be fewer office-workers, it's "how many" fewer -- in, say 5 years.
Fluffy BM says -10% .. From a landlord perspective, that's the most optimistic estimate possible.
From a corporate, sheer profit/loss perspective, you'd want to pay -100% less rent.
From a management/leadership/sales perspective, there's value in collaboration, in dazzling potential clients, synergy, morale. But how much? What is the worth of bringing everyone back to an office? Maybe just some folks? Who? Will your revenue go up if you have an office full of workers? Will it go up more than rent?
A very healthy chunk of people love WFH. I think we're only in the 3rd inning of learning how to WFH. It'll get better, more natural.
I was thinking about our accounting department and how the hell they are working from home, with all the paper shuffling .. then I remembered, we gave them a e-document management system 5+ years ago. There is no paper.
The past 5+ years, IT and data processing has been moving to the cloud, the pandemic has lit a fire under that. Now we're moving "people to the cloud."
I think it's going to be an enormously tough sell to bring people back for huge swaths of office businesses.
My guess? 50% will never return. Halving or eliminating your rent is extraordinarily attractive for the bottom line for the unknown price of "synergy."
-
It's not "if" there will be fewer office-workers, it's "how many" fewer -- in, say 5 years.
Fluffy BM says -10% .. From a landlord perspective, that's the most optimistic estimate possible.
From a corporate, sheer profit/loss perspective, you'd want to pay -100% less rent.
From a management/leadership/sales perspective, there's value in collaboration, in dazzling potential clients, synergy, morale. But how much? What is the worth of bringing everyone back to an office? Maybe just some folks? Who? Will your revenue go up if you have an office full of workers? Will it go up more than rent?
A very healthy chunk of people love WFH. I think we're only in the 3rd inning of learning how to WFH. It'll get better, more natural.
I was thinking about our accounting department and how the hell they are working from home, with all the paper shuffling .. then I remembered, we gave them a e-document management system 5+ years ago. There is no paper.
The past 5+ years, IT and data processing has been moving to the cloud, the pandemic has lit a fire under that. Now we're moving "people to the cloud."
I think it's going to be an enormously tough sell to bring people back for huge swaths of office businesses.
My guess? 50% will never return. Halving or eliminating your rent is extraordinarily attractive for the bottom line for the unknown price of "synergy."
I think this is a good way to think about it, but it is not an all or nothing proposition.
There is just going to be a lot more workplace flexibility for a time. Apparently there are new technologies that can merge physical and virtual meetings. If those work, then more and more people will be not 100% in the office. Jim/Jane from accounting will book a desk for month-end when its more efficient to work together. However neither will have their office/cube with the family pictures, etc.
-
It's not "if" there will be fewer office-workers, it's "how many" fewer -- in, say 5 years.
Fluffy BM says -10% .. From a landlord perspective, that's the most optimistic estimate possible.
From a corporate, sheer profit/loss perspective, you'd want to pay -100% less rent.
From a management/leadership/sales perspective, there's value in collaboration, in dazzling potential clients, synergy, morale. But how much? What is the worth of bringing everyone back to an office? Maybe just some folks? Who? Will your revenue go up if you have an office full of workers? Will it go up more than rent?
A very healthy chunk of people love WFH. I think we're only in the 3rd inning of learning how to WFH. It'll get better, more natural.
I was thinking about our accounting department and how the hell they are working from home, with all the paper shuffling .. then I remembered, we gave them a e-document management system 5+ years ago. There is no paper.
The past 5+ years, IT and data processing has been moving to the cloud, the pandemic has lit a fire under that. Now we're moving "people to the cloud."
I think it's going to be an enormously tough sell to bring people back for huge swaths of office businesses.
My guess? 50% will never return. Halving or eliminating your rent is extraordinarily attractive for the bottom line for the unknown price of "synergy."
This.
With literally no notice (we were told on a Wednesday afternoon that the office was closing starting on Thursday. No one has been back since, and the accounting department functioned with barely a hitch - and we were smack dab in the middle of implementing a completely new ERP system.
The bad news about the WFH thing is that not only do certain folks never need to be in the office - they don't even need to be in the U.S. I think you are going to see a lot more back-of-the-house functions outsourced to India and other countries where labor costs are lower.
-
I’m sure studies will come out, but I don’t believe for a bloody second that productivity and energy dedication is nearly the same WFH as in office. Sure, there are plenty of opportunities to waste time in the office and be unproductive, but that’s not factoring in errands, chores, TV watching, exercise, childcare, etc... that all get done on the clock in a WFH setting. Unless companies start monitoring that sort of thing, I think rent savings start being balanced against loss of productivity.
Training and on boarding new employees or team members will take significant hits.
People have this almost blissful ideal of “keeping doing your job but from home, live where you want!” And thinking it’s a no brainer for their companies to save money. But they won’t consider offshoring, automation, and other inevitable outcomes if your physical presence in an office and member of a team is no longer a priority.
Also, interestingly, could be a talent shift too. If I worked for a company that was aggressively approaching WFH, cutting travel, looking at most being remote, I would without a doubt begin job searching. It’s one thing if you’re working tech or certain sales where that is a factor when you approached the job pre-COVID, but another entirely of a company radically was reshaping their workplace view, overreaction or not, coming out of this.
-
I’m sure studies will come out, but I don’t believe for a bloody second that productivity and energy dedication is nearly the same WFH as in office. Sure, there are plenty of opportunities to waste time in the office and be unproductive, but that’s not factoring in errands, chores, TV watching, exercise, childcare, etc... that all get done on the clock in a WFH setting. Unless companies start monitoring that sort of thing, I think rent savings start being balanced against loss of productivity.
Training and on boarding new employees or team members will take significant hits.
Spot on. I'd also add that if you want to rise quickly in a company, WFH isn't the answer. Interaction with peers, and especially superiors, is absolutely necessary.
It's hard to sell yourself and promote your skillset WFH.
-
Spot on. I'd also add that if you want to rise quickly in a company, WFH isn't the answer. Interaction with peers, and especially superiors, is absolutely necessary.
It's hard to sell yourself and promote your skillset WFH.
The decision to WFH may not be the employee's choice to make.
-
The decision to WFH may not be the employee's choice to make.
Yup. I agree chick. The calculus has changed. I am not sure how it affects career development yet but 5 days in an official will become a rarity.
-
Does anyone else we don't offensively use screens?
-
Does anyone else we don't offensively use screens?
I try not to.