
Many Americans are getting more money from unemployment than  from their job - paulpauper
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/many-americans-are-getting-more-money-from-unemployment-than-they-were-from-their-jobs/
======
throwanem
_Were_ getting. The article is from May. The CARES Act benefit, which it
describes, expired today. [https://www.cnet.com/personal-
finance/extra-600-cares-act-un...](https://www.cnet.com/personal-
finance/extra-600-cares-act-unemployment-benefit-ends-today-heres-where-
things-stand/)

~~~
mzs
And also having an incentive for more people to stay home during a pandemic
might even be wise.

------
zozin
I hope people are saving their temporary unemployment benefits. State budgets
are tapped out and even the most generous states only give ~9 months worth of
benefits. Come January/February whatever Congress passes will expire again and
so will state benefits. Right in time for what amounts as the worst months for
virus contagiousness.

Strap in everyone, 2021 might be worse than 2020.

------
reaperducer
This is a broad generalization, and for most unemployed Americans, wrong.

The New York Times did a very large, good chart about this a few months ago.
Only people in about half of the American states might possibly end up getting
more while unemployed than they did at work. The way some states' unemployment
systems are set up, it's simply not possible.

Further, it can only happen if the unemployed person qualifies for the
_maximum_ benefit in their state, which the vast majority of unemployed people
do not.

The whole "Americans are making more money from not working" is not only a
three-month-old meme, it's only true in a small percentage of cases. The only
thing it is good for is getting people like my mother riled up with, "People
aren't working because they're getting too much unemployment!" Completely
ignoring the fact that there simply _are no jobs_ to be had, and businesses
are still shutting down left and right.

But, each to her own bubble.

~~~
glofish
I don't see how having only 50% make more is any less ludicrous.

Should anyone ever make more money while unemployed than when employed?

Won't that completely alter the valuation of work and with that the proper
functioning of the economy?

PS I know people that own businesses that can't reopen because people that
usually would work for them don't want to come back as the salary he pays is
less than the unemployment benefit.

~~~
landryraccoon
Isn't the ultimate goal of technology for _no one_ to have to work unless they
want to, while providing utopian material abundance to everyone regardless of
whether they work? Of course this isn't possible with our current level of
technology, but isn't that what we are striving towards?

I mean, what's the point of building AI and robots and advanced energy sources
and bio engineering if they don't fundamentally improve the quality of life
for everyone? I certainly don't think there's some _moral_ requirement to
force everyone to work.

~~~
WalterBright
People thrive when they have a purpose in life and problems to solve. Take
away their problems and purpose and:

1\. they'll invent problems

I.e. "first world problems". We (in America, anyway) live in an incredible
utopia by any historical standard. But I read on the news every day about an
endless series of phony crises. (The coronavirus thing is a real crisis, but
even so, by historical epidemics it is not that bad. The bubonic plague, for
example, killed something like 35%.)

2\. they'll be miserable and self-destructive

This is a well known problem with the offspring of very wealthy people who
never had to try at anything.

3\. they die

People often die shortly after their retirement. They don't survive the loss
of purpose.

~~~
landryraccoon
Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerburg never need to work another day in
their lives. Are you arguing they are miserable, self destructive, have lost
purpose and will soon die?

People don't need a Sword of Damocles hanging over their head threatening them
with homelessness, loss of medical treatment and hunger solely because they
didn't find purpose in life.

How is being miserable and self destructive and losing purpose, as a worst
case scenario, worse than homelessness, drug addiction, loss of friendship,
family, self respect, health and medical treatment?

I mean, I don't see the connection. Are you saying that unless people are
literally threatened with homelessness, starvation and death they won't find
purpose on their own?

~~~
WalterBright
Some people do find purpose on their own. Many do not. I recall a story about
a guy in his 90's who got a job as a Walmart greeter. The reporter asked him
why not just enjoy his golden years? The fellow said he needed a reason to get
up in the morning. He worked at that Walmart until he died, living many more
(by all reports happy) years.

~~~
landryraccoon
I don’t get it. Why would having his basic needs met stop him from being a
Walmart greeter? If someone wants to be a Walmart greeter they can still do
that. Basic income and social support doesn’t stop that.

~~~
WalterBright
Imagine your 30 year old son is living in your basement playing video games,
which is all he's done since high school. You can easily afford to continue to
support him - but how would you feel about it?

~~~
landryraccoon
It's funny you mention that, because using video games as an example says more
about the era you were brought up in than anything else.

The top video game streamers in the world today make millions of dollars a
year:

[https://www.esportsbets.com/news/highest-paid-twitch-
streame...](https://www.esportsbets.com/news/highest-paid-twitch-streamers/)

I'm guessing you wouldn't look down on your son for playing football hard in
High School and trying to go pro. Would you berate your child for dreaming of
playing for the NFL if they had some talent for the game? Well, nowadays, your
son could go pro in video games. Tyler Bevins, for example, from the article,
was entertaining over 14 million fans and was making over $500K per month.

If it's between my kids dreaming of going pro in eSports vs being a quiet
Walmart greeter for 30 years - you can bet I'd encourage them to get good at
those games. Play that Nintendo, son.

~~~
WalterBright
> football hard

I'd council him that football is a career with a very small chance of success,
with a high probability of brain injury and/or other debilitating injuries,
and a profession you're forced out of young.

> Play that Nintendo, son.

If he's 30, still living in your basement and hasn't made a dime yet, that
ship sailed long ago.

> a quiet Walmart greeter for 30 years

Somehow I escaped being a Walmart greeter :-)

Hey, you can advise or support your son however you wish. But don't ask others
to pay for his Nintendo dreams.

------
WWLink
I thought that was intentional, to make sure that people stayed home instead
of looking for extra work.

~~~
sjs7007
That'd make sense only if everyone had that option. Right now this led to
people who are risking their lives and out there working potentially earning
less than the people who are at home not working.

~~~
WWLink
Putting my "free market" hat on for a moment, the people who are risking their
lives are in an advantageous situation for bargaining. To some degree, it
worked too! Lots of stores and delivery services appeared to be paying more.

I think people often look at this with the "glass half empty" viewpoint
though. "PERSON A MAKES MORE THAN I DO! THEY SHOULD GET LESS!" Why not think
"PERSON A MAKES MORE THAN I DO! I SHOULD MAKE MORE!"

------
UnpossibleJim
Does no one think that these types of articles are a distraction while larger
corporate entities get that majority of the bailout monies? Small businesses
and the general public are fighting over the scraps of these bailout bills
while the lion's share go to the larger corporations and to prop up the stock
market (which, according to quite a few has been in need of a correction since
Clinton - though economics is not my area and I defer to those who are more
knowledgeable). It seems to me a bottoms up approach would work better to stem
the tide of oncoming homelessness and broad housing/business market crashes
that stem from failing systems, rather than putting our faith in "trickle down
economics" during a pandemic where the only viable means of shopping is
delivery, thus ridding the service sector which is a major vacuum in the whole
"trickle down" web.

Admittedly, I could be wrong on several points and do look forward to
correction. Please do point out my mistakes.

------
claudeganon
...because unemployment checks are the only thing preventing a broader,
systemic collapse when millions can’t pay for their housing, healthcare, and
consumer demand implodes. Now that the extra benefit has expired, we’re in for
for some real uncharted waters.

~~~
dragonwriter
> ...because unemployment checks are the only thing preventing a broader,
> systemic collapse when millions can’t pay for their housing, healthcare, and
> consumer demand implodes.

One of many necessary things, but not the only thing or sufficient by itself.
Eviction protections, etc., are also part of the mix.

------
droptablemain
Maybe, just maybe, this is a good indication that their earnings were
criminally low to begin with. Might have something to do with the relationship
of exploitation between employers and employees.

------
mehrdadn
> The question is whether this will be a problem as the economy starts to
> reopen.

Isn't the question whether the economy _should_ reopen?

------
phonon
1\. You also need to take into account non-wage compensation (e.g.
healthcare).

2\. This also provides a certain amount of "rough justice" for replacement of
unreported wage income. While ordinarily that would not be an appropriate use
of the UI system, these are not ordinary times.

3\. Excess UI benefits will not last forever, while the effects to lower wage
workers in food/hospitality and other industries will leave financial scarring
for years. Giving people a little more upfront, then slowly phasing it out,
gives laid off workers a reasonable opportunity to plan on a career change, if
needed, or to reduce household expenses going forward. (E.g. finding a cheaper
apartment).

------
jtdev
This is true because a large portion of working people live in poverty in the
U.S. This reflects poorly on our human-jackal employers that extract wealth
from the labor of the poor (Walmart, Amazon... restaurant chains, etc.).

------
jungletime
Having just tried to hire some trade persons. The going rate seems to be
1K-3K/per day in Canada.

1) 200 sqft laminate flooring in a square room. Quoted $1500 for installation.
One day job.

2) 2 day job to install a minisplit system I bought separately. $6000+

My sister was quoted over 1k for replacing a valve by a plumber, for less than
an hours work.

These were not even labour intensive or high skill dependent things. Just
basic trade person type of things.

Your $10/hour job can buy you plastic things made in China at the dollar
store.

So I think these are the real wages in this economy.

~~~
saagarjha
That's probably going to the person who is managing it, I would assume? The
actual people doing the unskilled work are likely making minimum wage.

------
giantg2
"The question is whether our totally antiquated systems will be capable of
pulling that off."

COBOL anyone?

~~~
sushshshsh
Easiest thing to do at this point would be an excel spreadsheet and a single
employee who venmos everyone their unemployment manually.

~~~
giantg2
I had a COBOL class and sort of liked it. The debugging wasn't great and the
JCL can be tricky, but it wasn't bad.

The real problem is that companies/goverments didn't anticipate the retirement
of COBOL resources. Nobody wants to train anyone or give them a career. They
all want to hire senior people.

I see a similar trend emerging in other technologies. I see tons of senior
positions but very few positions where the company will provide training. Even
internal transfers at my company provide _zero_ training.

~~~
dragonwriter
> The real problem is that companies/goverments didn't anticipate the
> retirement of COBOL resources.

Yes, they did. What they didn't anticipate was that major system change would
not be driven by policy changes that they were free to time (and, if
necessary, take the time to make it a replacement of major system components
or whole systems with newer technology), but that there would be an emergency
causing simultaneous needs across the nation which would exhaust the limited
(mostly contract) resources that everyone reliea on for major changes to major
systems.

~~~
giantg2
That's pretty much the same as what I'm saying - demand has outpaced supply
and nobody is willing to train.

Policy changes are never able to be timed more than the duration of the
election cycle. And frankly, neither party will pony up the money for a
technical upgrade that the constituents could care less about.

~~~
dragonwriter
> That's pretty much the same as what I'm saying

“Didn’t anticipate retirement of COBOL resources” is what you said.

That's very different than “anticipated and have been dealing with retirement
of COBOL talent with strategies that didn't accommodate an unprecedented black
swan event creating a massive simultaneous nationwide demand surge.”

> Policy changes are never able to be timed more than the duration of the
> election cycle.

Yes, they are; it's very common for new laws that would have system impacts
(either to the adopting government, or externally entities, or both) to come
with implementation timelines that are long to provide time for system
implementation, which certainly often cross election cycles. Sure, intervening
elections sometimes change those plans, but almost exclusively to eliminate
the requirement or extend the timeline, not accelerate it.

~~~
giantg2
The retirement of COBOL resources across the nation, whether anticipated or
not, has no difference on the outcome of situation - management did not
adequately plan for the scarcity of the resources.

You can only plan based on what you know. You could plan based on
implementation timelines in legislation. You can't plan on what may or may not
come in the next 2-4 years. Waiting indefinitely for modernization plans is
not realistic, although that is what happens in many states.

~~~
dragonwriter
> The retirement of COBOL resources across the nation, whether anticipated or
> not, has no difference on the outcome of situation

Sure, but I'm not the one who claimed that the problem was “failure to
anticipate the retirement of COBOL resources.”

I agree that retirement of COBOL resources is basically irrelevant.

~~~
giantg2
LOL ok. I guess resource scarcity is not the primary driver of the lack of
COBOL resources (what else could it be?).

------
sfoblows
FYI: Americans = Really poor people who will probably never get their job
back.

------
bzb3
The way it's always worked in southern Europe, hence the high unemployment
rates.

------
nodesocket
Naval Ravikant (of AngelList) nailed the problem with government pay subsidies
on a podcast with Joe Rogan.

"A slippery slide transfer straight into socialism. The moment people can
start voting themselves money, combined with democracy it's just a matter of
time before the bottom 51 votes themselves into the top 49. By the way, the
slippery slope fallacy is not a fallacy; they haven’t thought it through.”

"The moment you start having a direct transfer mechanism like that in
democracy, you're basically doing away with capitalism which is the engine of
economic growth. You're also forcing the entrepreneur out, or telling them not
to come here."

"People who are down on their luck, they're not looking for handouts. It's not
just about money, it's also about status and meaning. The moment I start
giving money to you, I've lowered your status and made you a second class
citizen.”

"You have to teach a man to fish, not to basically throw your rod in and eat
the leftover scraps."

~~~
throwanem
That sure is a pile of quotes. I love the assumption that the problem is
people just not wanting to learn how to fish. What has he, or have you, to
back that assumption up? Evidence, please, not more assertions that read as if
they fell through a hole in time from the red-baiting 1950s, when you really
_could_ just up and get a job that paid a living wage most places.

~~~
nodesocket
> What has he, or have you, to back that assumption up

I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but Naval does talk about his very modest
upbringing, basically coming from nothing. His single mom, being a minority in
a tough neighborhood in New York. However, his thirst for knowledge, status,
and hard work has built a great amount of peer respect, economic output, and
success.

~~~
throwanem
Thirst for knowledge, status, and hard work, huh? Sure, those count for
something. Do you think having had the good luck to win the dotcom boom
lottery might count for more?

