UI bennies curiousity

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
SecTreas was on some show the other day talking about that $600/week UI kicker from the Fed, and that it's going away next week if they don't reup it in the new stimulus.

It has come out that some people are making more off their UI with the kicker than they made when they were employed, and the pols don't think that's right. And at first blush it does seem to be irregular, but then I got to thinking about the millions they hemorrhaged at the Kennedy Center and other rich people orgs, and all the billion $$$ businesses that got paid as well, not to mention the extraordinarily wealthy Catholic Church, and yet they think that real humans getting $2400/mo to live on is outrageous. Especially since they're the ones who put us out of business and created this mess in the first place.

On top of that, they tax UI benefits. As in they take our money for taxes, and if they put us out of work and have to pay us a pittance to live on, they tax that as well.

For one thing, unemployment benefits should be tax exempt.

For another, they should pay out to the regular folks and not the 1%ers who don't need it to survive.

I understand why Trump signed these stimulus packages - because the Democrats and Republican Deep Staters were holding that relief money hostage to get what they and their fat cat donors want, and if Trump refused the press would present it as Trump holding back money from people who can't pay their rent, starving children, dying in the streets, etc. This is a timeworn tactic that we see play out each year, so we should all know the score.

It's infuriating how much of our tax money goes to the wealthy to line their pockets, while seniors are scraping pennies and military personnel qualify for welfare.

But we're dumb because we not only tolerate this greed, we think that a guaranteed basic income would be great. I mean, I think it would be great because I'm in my late 50s and live in a large car, and would get that money without having to pay the bill later. However, the young people clamoring for this don't seem to understand that the wealthy elite aren't just going to give them a red cent without getting billions in return. "Here's your $2000. Oh, by the way, your rent just went up and so did food. And there's a new tax on utilities, plus we jacked up the interest rates....."

So that's what I'm thinking about today.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
It has come out that some people are making more off their UI with the kicker than they made when they were employed, and the pols don't think that's right.

That is 100% true for a relative of mine - he has zero incentive to find a job, as his benefits currently exceed what he made on the job.
 

Sneakers

Just sneakin' around....
The current Republican plan calls for a new UI of not more than 70% of the person's original wage and agree that paying more than their original salary is stupid.

Dems, on the other hand, want to give everyone another $600/w across the board.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
That is 100% true for a relative of mine - he has zero incentive to find a job, as his benefits currently exceed what he made on the job.

See, and I'd rather my tax bucks go to your relative than to the Kennedy Center and the Catholic Church. I'd definitely rather pay him than some country full of terrorists.

I used to say that trickle down works - that trickle down is how it works - but when Bezos has a $180billion and his workers qualify for welfare, that means he's not trickling down. Bernie Sanders has a point when he says it's wrong for a few to have so much when millions have so little - the problem is that we know he doesn't mean it and just says it to get people to vote for whoever pays him to drop out of a presidential race.

It's always irked me to see ridiculously wealthy people pretend they give a damn about the poor, and do their little fundraisers and foundations where they and their rich buddies get the bulk and maybe some poor kid somewhere gets a winter coat. I'm like, bitches, you're supposed to be trickling down.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
The current Republican plan calls for a new UI of not more than 70% of the person's original wage and agree that paying more than their original salary is stupid.

Dems, on the other hand, want to give everyone another $600/w across the board.

The Dems have it right on this one (ugh it was painful to type that) because calculating 70% of millions of people's former wages will be a logistical nightmare. It will take forever to get that paperwork done, and what should people live on in the meantime?

I just read somewhere that according to Yelp more than half of restaurants that closed during the shutdowns won't be reopening. That's a lot of lost jobs, and many of those workers aren't really qualified to do anything else. Our government practically wiped out an entire industry, so I think the least they could do is pony up for those people. They find money to give to their rich buddies with no problem.
 

Crabcatcher79

Well-Known Member
That is 100% true for a relative of mine - he has zero incentive to find a job, as his benefits currently exceed what he made on the job.


Maybe we should be concerned about the low wages available to people. the federal minimum wage has been $7.25 for more then 10 years.

Instead Fox news makes you resent your relative and not the billionaires getting rich off the minimum wage workers.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
.... but when Bezos has a $180billion and his workers qualify for welfare,


Bezo wealth is largely imaginary .... until he sells his stock, its all vaporware

people had the same complaint about Wal Mart

if people work at these places and still qualify - blame the states for setting the local welfare standards

that said ..... these 100 million dollar companies COULD pay more ..... but they pay what the market will bare


Wal Mart in ND did end up paying $ 21 bucks and hour when the Fracking Craze made a shortage in available labor
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Maybe we should be concerned about the low wages available to people. the federal minimum wage has been $7.25 for more then 10 years.

Except that most small business owners don't make much more than that themselves. If they had to pay their employees $15/hr, they'd have to raise prices to cover it. And since Walmart can buy in bulk from Chinese manufacturers using slave labor and already beats their prices, that means small business will go away and Big Box will take over more than it already has.

Raising minimum wage across the board isn't the answer, and in fact will cause the collapse of independently owned small businesses.

I'm thinking that big businesses should be required to have profit sharing for their employees, but that's off the top of my head and not thought out in any meaningful way.
 
Last edited:

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Maybe we should be concerned about the low wages available to people. the federal minimum wage has been $7.25 for more then 10 years.

Companies pay what the market will bare ..... setting artificial standards does no one any favors

Go Ahead and push for McDonalds to pay $ 25 ....... you will see MORE People out of Work

A report from the Bakken oil fields, where the jobless rate is 0.9 percent and Walmart is paying 2.4 times the minimum wage

The photo above of wages at the Williston Walmart highlights some important economic concepts:

1. Walmart pays wages that reflect the economic conditions in a local market based on the supply and demand realities of the local labor market. In other words, Walmart can’t really set wages independent of market forces and it’s really at the mercy of the market in every local community. If Walmart offered the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour in the Bakken area, it wouldn’t be able to staff its stores.

2. The fact that Walmart is paying almost 2.5 times the minimum wage in Williston, ND is evidence that a single, national minimum wage for every city, county, labor market in the country can’t possibly make sense. Even proponents of the minimum wage have to agree that a single national minimum can’t be optimal for every labor market in the country. In that case, they would logically have to support thousands of minimum wages tailored to thousands of local communities, or maybe even more logically agree that minimum wages are unworkable.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
I'm thinking that big businesses should be required to have profit sharing for their employees, but that's off the top of my head and not thought out in any meaningful way.


since the Trump tax cuts Wally World has spread around a bit more cash
 

Crabcatcher79

Well-Known Member
Except that most small business owners don't make much more than that themselves. If they had to pay their employees $15/hr, they'd have to raise prices to cover it. And since Walmart can buy in bulk from Chinese manufacturers using slave laborer and already beats their prices, that means small business will go away and Big Box will take over more than it already has.

Raising minimum wage across the board isn't the answer, and in fact will cause the collapse of independently owned small businesses.

I'm thinking that big businesses should be required to have profit sharing for their employees, but that's off the top of my head and not thought out in any meaningful way.

One thing that needs to be done is to write legislation to disallow sharing one 40 work week between two people or to encourage these big box stores to empty workers full time. Many of them keep their employees hours under the threshold so they dont have to provide healthcare or any other benefits even when those employs want to work full time.
 
Top