Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

robe

Unemployment benefits

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

Hopefully the $15/hr gets 16-19 year olds a job. Only 1/3 of those currently working as opposed to 1/2 just 15 years ago.

I wonder how much that has to do with the creeping time requirements of organized sports, college prep, and more stringent drivers licenses requirements

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

Hopefully the $15/hr gets 16-19 year olds a job. Only 1/3 of those currently working as opposed to 1/2 just 15 years ago.

I don’t know what the answer is but it’s a mess. Letting kids stay on parents insurance until 26 was a double edge sword and isn’t helping our country right now.

The Masters 5k road race All American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, robe said:

I don’t know what the answer is but it’s a mess. Letting kids stay on parents insurance until 26 was a double edge sword and isn’t helping our country right now.

This is the second instance I have heard on the insurance until 26 being some issue, but how many 24-year olds are unemployed because they are still on their parents insurance?  What would the actual percentages be on this? I actually don't see a true detriment on this one, and quick google searches don't have any hits on this being an actual workforce problem.  Starting out, you are not paid well (or you are in school), so the buffer until you make a half-decent wage (if your parents choose to leave you on after you are employed) doesn't seem like a huge negative.  Now, folks not going for checkups and potential issues because they can't afford any insurance, or can't make the deductible, that seems like more of a problem.  Government incentivizing employers to tie health benefits to employment, artificially inflating premiums across the board (a little like student loans to tuition) seems more problematic.  Risking health for bankruptcy is also problematic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, robe said:

It is time to look at eliminating or greatly reducing unemployment benefits. We have a major problem with not enough employees. Supply chain is getting gum up because the situation we are in. 
 

Biden has some huge issues and despite the media protecting him he and Democrats are going to take a hit.  
 

His handling of the Covid isn’t going over very well.
 

 

Says the guy working in the Government as a Civil Servant with no chance of loosing his job.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, East Coast Aztec said:

This is the second instance I have heard on the insurance until 26 being some issue, but how many 24-year olds are unemployed because they are still on their parents insurance?  What would the actual percentages be on this? I actually don't see a true detriment on this one, and quick google searches don't have any hits on this being an actual workforce problem.  Starting out, you are not paid well (or you are in school), so the buffer until you make a half-decent wage (if your parents choose to leave you on after you are employed) doesn't seem like a huge negative.  Now, folks not going for checkups and potential issues because they can't afford any insurance, or can't make the deductible, that seems like more of a problem.  Government incentivizing employers to tie health benefits to employment, artificially inflating premiums across the board (a little like student loans to tuition) seems more problematic.  Risking health for bankruptcy is also problematic.

It’s a double edge sword. I’m just going by what I personally see. There is a huge benefit to letting kids stay on insurance but as with anything you always have a negative. Does the positive out way the negative? 
 

Protecting a tiny minority from bankruptcy if it is hurting the entire country is it worth it. When I had big medical debt.  Most places wrote it off or had extremely low payment plans. Paying 25 a month for your life doesn’t seem unreasonable or bankruptcy which isn’t a horrible option anymore either. 
 

Our generation was extremely motivated to apply for jobs with great benefits. Now it’s not as big of an issues. Jobs that had 300 hundred applicants for one job no longer have anyone applying.  
 

Im just raising the issue, I’m not sure I’m ready to support ending the insurance mandates. 
 

I will say this if you end the insurance mandate and unemployment  the hiring crisis would come to an end. A lot of entitled individuals would finally be told to grow up. 
 

I was not a fan of ending unemployment. But in this environment it isn’t needed anymore. 

The Masters 5k road race All American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, robe said:

It’s a double edge sword. I’m just going by what I personally see. There is a huge benefit to letting kids stay on insurance but as with anything you always have a negative. Does the positive out way the negative? 
 

Protecting a tiny minority from bankruptcy if it is hurting the entire country is it worth it. When I had big medical debt.  Most places wrote it off or had extremely low payment plans. Paying 25 a month for your life doesn’t seem unreasonable or bankruptcy which isn’t a horrible option anymore either. 
 

Our generation was extremely motivated to apply for jobs with great benefits. Now it’s not as big of an issues. Jobs that had 300 hundred applicants for one job no longer have anyone applying.  
 

Im just raising the issue, I’m not sure I’m ready to support ending the insurance mandates. 
 

I will say this if you end the insurance mandate and unemployment  the hiring crisis would come to an end. A lot of entitled individuals would finally be told to grow up. 
 

I was not a fan of ending unemployment. But in this environment it isn’t needed anymore. 

But this goes back to a couple of points.  I don't see the 26 still on insurance as actually being a true motivator to not work, and I don't see no insurance being a true motivator to find work at that age either.  It may not be a wash, it may be disparately detrimental to folks who won't be able to afford insurance or the deductible while they are working.  Also, is unemployment a benefit that you only get if you were previously working, and if so, isn't that one of those things people like to say "I have been paying for it" similar to SSI?  I would like integrity with unemployment, but ending it will have its own consequence.  And, the consequence is that we have forsaken people who continue to be undercut by corporations.  And us Americans cheer as they do it.  Similar to industry unions (I am not talking about public employee unions, which can go away) and their fight for decent pay and benefits and safe work environments being condemned by their fellow Americans, simply because corporate-owned media and corporate-owned politicians tell us it's bad.  So we care more about corporations than Americans.  Which, like I stated before it is not all or nothing, but a threshold of how much support we give to one or the other.  And I see far too many people side against their neighbors who just want to live without working themselves to the bone for no reason.  And as I said on another thread, there are absolutely entitled people who think they deserve more and don't show that they should, but how many others who bust their ass and are tired of being shit on, that should get our support will be back into the "grow up" bucket.


Corporations, and all who profit off it are loving your last sentence.  This is what many have been holding out for.  "They will turn on each other in no time.  Just be patient."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Isn't unemployment paid in for?  Like Social Security?  I'm not talking about the federal topper that they did.  Also, lack of workers is indicative of a smaller labor pool due to a lot of death, and the realization that corporations made out like thieves in broad daylight and still want to crack the whip for unlivable wages and people aren't tolerating it.

 

The bigger question is, do we support Americans, or corporations, more?  There is a threshold for both, but how far are you willing to stump for these billionaires?  OP has made his choice apparently to back corporations.  Government workers typically will, it seems.

Boomers have been retiring in large numbers and leaving the workforce.  This labor crunch has been predicted for some time and is made worse by Covid and the extra deaths we have seen there.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Boomers have been retiring in large numbers and leaving the workforce.  This labor crunch has been predicted for some time and is made worse by Covid and the extra deaths we have seen there.   

Should lead to a ramp up in automation and self-checkouts and extra insurance for loss in retail.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

But this goes back to a couple of points.  I don't see the 26 still on insurance as actually being a true motivator to not work, and I don't see no insurance being a true motivator to find work at that age either.  It may not be a wash, it may be disparately detrimental to folks who won't be able to afford insurance or the deductible while they are working.  Also, is unemployment a benefit that you only get if you were previously working, and if so, isn't that one of those things people like to say "I have been paying for it" similar to SSI?  I would like integrity with unemployment, but ending it will have its own consequence.  And, the consequence is that we have forsaken people who continue to be undercut by corporations.  And us Americans cheer as they do it.  Similar to industry unions (I am not talking about public employee unions, which can go away) and their fight for decent pay and benefits and safe work environments being condemned by their fellow Americans, simply because corporate-owned media and corporate-owned politicians tell us it's bad.  So we care more about corporations than Americans.  Which, like I stated before it is not all or nothing, but a threshold of how much support we give to one or the other.  And I see far too many people side against their neighbors who just want to live without working themselves to the bone for no reason.  And as I said on another thread, there are absolutely entitled people who think they deserve more and don't show that they should, but how many others who bust their ass and are tired of being shit on, that should get our support will be back into the "grow up" bucket.


Corporations, and all who profit off it are loving your last sentence.  This is what many have been holding out for.  "They will turn on each other in no time.  Just be patient."

Except Robe hasn’t worked in the private sector.  Nor have the cops I know who are “conservative” and yet retiring on multiple cush public pensions and health insurance.    

i wonder how many of these pro-senior management types are government workers with protected jobs and gold plated healthcare plans? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Should lead to a ramp up in automation and self-checkouts and extra insurance for loss in retail.  

Yes you are seeing it already particularly in CA where minimum wage has been jacked up so high things like fast food are becoming economically unviable.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, robe said:

It’s a double edge sword. I’m just going by what I personally see. There is a huge benefit to letting kids stay on insurance but as with anything you always have a negative. Does the positive out way the negative? 
 

Protecting a tiny minority from bankruptcy if it is hurting the entire country is it worth it. When I had big medical debt.  Most places wrote it off or had extremely low payment plans. Paying 25 a month for your life doesn’t seem unreasonable or bankruptcy which isn’t a horrible option anymore either. 
 

Our generation was extremely motivated to apply for jobs with great benefits. Now it’s not as big of an issues. Jobs that had 300 hundred applicants for one job no longer have anyone applying.  
 

Im just raising the issue, I’m not sure I’m ready to support ending the insurance mandates. 
 

I will say this if you end the insurance mandate and unemployment  the hiring crisis would come to an end. A lot of entitled individuals would finally be told to grow up. 
 

I was not a fan of ending unemployment. But in this environment it isn’t needed anymore. 

You want to make the labor shortage worse have 18-26 year olds die because they had no insurance or worse become permanently disabled and a long term drag on society.   

Youngsters are generally light users of health care unless it’s some type of critical care.   I can’t think of a worse way to address the worker crises then eliminating healthcare coverage.  

Perhaps instead you should look at the foolish Republican policies to restrict well trained immigrants.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HR_Poke said:

Yeah we are seeing a lot of that currently.  I've had several clients completely whiff on the housing boom we had this year because they are still waiting on their initial plats to get approved by the cities and counties that they submitted last summer....  They sent all their employees to work from home with no oversite and it's taking 3 times as long to get things recorded, not to mention all the municipalities want a huge chunk of cash related to these developments.

I believe refinancing construction loans is going to become a big thing, only question is will the buyer still qualify with the higher interest rate.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happycamper said:

I wonder how much that has to do with the creeping time requirements of organized sports, college prep, and more stringent drivers licenses requirements

A lot of this is true. My daughter did not work her Junior and Senior School years because she played Soccer and took a lot of hard classes to get ready for college. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tailingpermit said:

I believe refinancing construction loans is going to become a big thing, only question is will the buyer still qualify with the higher interest rate.

most everyone we work with isn't financing so I'm not sure.  It certainly could be an issue for the smaller developers who start projects on financing till they get some sales going. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Except Robe hasn’t worked in the private sector.  Nor have the cops I know who are “conservative” and yet retiring on multiple cush public pensions and health insurance.    

i wonder how many of these pro-senior management types are government workers with protected jobs and gold plated healthcare plans? 

There is a huge difference between unemployment and a public retirement fund. 

One is supposed to be temporary , and should be very temporary based on the job market. The other is funded by participant contributions, and as a negotiated benefit in exchange for labor. The two are not even remotely close. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

most everyone we work with isn't financing so I'm not sure.  It certainly could be an issue for the smaller developers who start projects on financing till they get some sales going. 

Specifically from the homeowner perspective of obtaining a construction loan for a set price, it doesn't account for the massive increase in lumber prices or other materials.

And, construction loans are non-conforming - they're specifically there for the notion that a house will be built in the next 6-12 months.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JP Morgan Chase CEO JAmie Dimon is much more positive on the labor market and supply chain problems than the people here. THis makes me feel much better. I don't know much about him or anything and he could be very wrong but it is someone who probably has a decent idea about this stuff at least better than most here including me.

Jamie Dimon says worst of pandemic may soon be over - CNN

Hope hes right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tailingpermit said:

Specifically from the homeowner perspective of obtaining a construction loan for a set price, it doesn't account for the massive increase in lumber prices or other materials.

And, construction loans are non-conforming - they're specifically there for the notion that a house will be built in the next 6-12 months.

all our clients offer financing through the company.  I'd imagine they will find a way to make it work....  But they did raise the cost on the homes by $35k because of lumber

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...