And to stir the pot a little: Add to all this the government restriction on evictions, which I understand is also ending soon, so those that squandered their extra money are going to be hauling that 90" tv around in the back of their civic.
-- Larry Smith lesm...@ecsis.net On Thu August 6 2020 10:33, Lewis Bergman wrote: > A lot of this has to do with the employer as well right? > > Another anecdotal story so be patient but it is a real one. My wife has a > little part time job at a jewelry store called James Avery. They sell cheap > silver stuff I think. She likes it and it only costs me about $100 a month > for her to work there. When retail was shut down they eventually laid > everyone off. Supposedly they also file unemployment for her. No idea if > she ever got it but they said they did. I don't think she ever got the $600 > a week or whatever but again, I have no idea. After a few weeks they opened > and asked her to come back which she did. I would assume that if she had > refused (so she could collect her extra $600 a week from the feds) that is > a valid reason to suspend her unemployment and JA would have challenged > that. I know I would have. > > A job offered that you used to perform and refused is a valid reason to > suspend benefits. So once your benefit is suspended what do you do? Go back > to work. If you worked for me, you would have to go get a job somewhere > else because I am not hiring you back but you still have to go find a job > somewhere or your lifestyle starts to rapidly change. > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:16 AM Carl Peterson <cpeter...@portnetworks.com> > > wrote: > > I just skimmed it but I think the TLDR on it is that since UI varies by > > state etc you can compare return to work rates for people making more and > > less then they used to and it seems they return to work at similar rates. > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:10 AM Carl Peterson > > <cpeter...@portnetworks.com> > > > > wrote: > >> Pretty sure unemployment is taxed like ordinary income at the federal > >> level. State by state varies. I think your numbers are assuming it > >> isn't taxed? > >> > >> Yale did a study on this. > >> > >> CARES-UI_identification_vF(1).pdf > >> (2,000K) > >> > >> <https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=65db33fe01&attid=0.1&permmsgid > >>=msg-a:r4257579253290864261&view=att&disp=safe&realattid=f_kdixrue20> > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 9:59 AM <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > >>> But at the risk of starting another brush fire... but I want to know: > >>> > >>> People laid of in Utah get unemployment benefits. I work hard to > >>> prevent those getting charged to me. But I know that the rates paid > >>> are $496/week max. That is Utah. > >>> So $12.40/hour take home. Equivalent to much more gross. Probably in > >>> the $17/hour range gross. > >>> > >>> Then if I understand it right, the feds were adding $600/week on top of > >>> that? $1096/week? $56,992 annual rate. Take home. Equivalent to > >>> perhaps $80K gross? > >>> > >>> So a laid off bartender gets the equivalent of $40/hour to sit at home, > >>> why would they want to work? The press and libs in congress have been > >>> freaking out about the conservatives saying the fat benefit package is > >>> an incentive to not try to work. I believe that to be true. Why would > >>> anyone work if they get that much for drinking beer and playing video > >>> games? > >>> > >>> Do I have this right? Does the fed benefit add to the state benefit? > >>> > >>> I have a son that lived on $1000/month for years while in college. He > >>> said he didn’t feel the pinch too much. Had roommates. Had a part > >>> time job. Never asked me for money. > >>> -- > >>> AF mailing list > >>> AF@af.afmug.com > >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > > AF mailing list > > AF@af.afmug.com > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
