@Jill_L wrote:
I have rental properties. I think I'm going to lose my properties. IDK
Here's a bit of an article I found about the new coverage. i have to admit, I do not understand the info on the linked page.@MsJudi wrote:
I am interested in seeing what the minimum monthly income will be to be eligible to collect this special UE insurance or assistance money. I hope it's LOW, 'cause I don't make a lot per month after deductions.
@ wrote:
Under the bailout bill, execs who raked in more than $3M last year could get $3M plus half of any sum in excess of $3M.
So if they got $20M in 2019, they could get $3M plus half of $17M or $11.5M.
A shameless windfall at a time when millions are barely getting by.
It used to be $450 a week in CA, since it’s really cheap to live here, you know?@Tarantado wrote:
I crunched some numbers just now and found an interesting topic, as I'm fully oblivious how crucial that $600/week unemployment "relief" pay in the stimulus is for many....
I'm obviously NOT advocating one way or the other, as politics often turns ugly, but from PURELY an objective view, here's what I found....
I am from Colorado and from some quick searches, the max unemployment benefit a person can get is $618/week, which accounts for 50-60% of your adjusted gross income. Now you take into consideration the $600/week "bump" for the next 4 months (or whatever ultimately ends up being the time agreed to in the stimulus bill), this bumps this to around $1218/week, or an optimum $1200/week for the next four months. So theoretically, $600 / 50% * 52 weeks =$62,400. This means that the $62,400 is the "sweet spot" for this that would optimally benefit from this $600 extra money per week, AND you don't have to work for the next four months (minus obviously meeting the requirements for unemployment such as applying for jobs, submitting the paperwork, etc.).
And, the less you made, the more you benefit, as unemployment WILL pay you more the less you make since it's a fixed $600/week for all unemployed beneficiaries. For example, let's say you made $15/hour, full time, so $31,200 is your yearly income, or $600 per week. Let's say for unemployment, you can get paid 50-60% of your wages, or $300 to keep the numbers simple. The added $600/week bump from the stimulus brings your total unemployment benefit to $900/week. So $900/week on unemployment not working vs. bring in less income at $600/week working your normal hours.
That kinda brings some perspective on how anyone making $62,400 a year or less, may arguably be better on unemployment for the next couple months instead of working. Interesting how the numbers play out, right?
@SoCalMama wrote:
It used to be $450 a week in CA, since it’s really cheap to live here, you know?
That’s why I have an HOA.@Tarantado wrote:
@SoCalMama wrote:
It used to be $450 a week in CA, since it’s really cheap to live here, you know?
Since the shutdown beginning a week or two ago, the meters have all been free parking! So theoretically, the cost of living potentially has dropped significantly for the next 4 months, if Van Life is still a thing for my generation and Gen Z, and you're able to move into the priciest areas in Denver for free!
@LisaSTL wrote:
@Tarantado "AND you don't have to work for the next four months (minus obviously meeting the requirements for unemployment such as applying for jobs, submitting the paperwork, etc.)" Those requirements will be waived while cities and states are under shelter in place orders. The rest of your post makes the assumption the employed people being assisted won't have jobs to return to in as we re-open.
@Flash wrote:
From scratch mac 'n cheese baked with frozen shrimp, frozen bay scallops and frozen peas stirred in is a recent big winner ...
@LisaSTL wrote:
Huh?
@Tarantado wrote:
That kinda brings some perspective on how anyone making $62,400 a year or less, may arguably be better on unemployment for the next couple months instead of working. Interesting how the numbers play out, right?
@SteveSoCal wrote:
...and that's how things will get even worse. This is ranging on a political discussion, but if the idea is to put perceived wealth into woking class hands to prop up the economy, it will also have unexpected side-effects.
My sister works for a firm that's switching over a factory to make needed ventilators. The factory workers have apparently figured out that if they claim to have COVID symptoms, they will automatically be sent home and able to collect EDD, earning more than they would in the factory at their standard wage, making ventilators to keep sick people alive.
Now the price of the ventilators just went up!
@Tarantado wrote:
@SteveSoCal wrote:
...and that's how things will get even worse. This is ranging on a political discussion, but if the idea is to put perceived wealth into woking class hands to prop up the economy, it will also have unexpected side-effects.
My sister works for a firm that's switching over a factory to make needed ventilators. The factory workers have apparently figured out that if they claim to have COVID symptoms, they will automatically be sent home and able to collect EDD, earning more than they would in the factory at their standard wage, making ventilators to keep sick people alive.
Now the price of the ventilators just went up!
Exactly. While I understand the intent, which puts relief on basically the average working American and also encourages them to stay home while we weather through this crisis, the hole this creates becomes more and more apparent..... That's if people did the math and noticed this, like I did.
And like I stated earlier, this, plus the $1,200-2,400 lump sum payout proposed, still neglects a good chunk of the middle class AND/OR those living in drastically high cost of living areas (i.e. Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, NYC, etc.).