Current Events > Are overly generous stimulus checks & UI benefits a disincentive to work?

(+) Yeah! (+)

The CARES Act paid a one time $1,200 stimulus check to most Americans and on top of that, $600/week in bonus unemployment insurance payments in addition to state level UI benefits. Some people were making more money playing video games & watching Netflix than they were earning at their former jobs.

Now the congresscritters want to do it again, except with $300 UI instead of $600. And while the stimulus checks aren't in the latest draft bill, progressives have been demanding their inclusion.

Do you think cash handouts from the government are good legislative policies that promote long term jobs & economic growth? Personally I do not, but am curious to hear different perspectives on the matter. Thank you.

---

Reminder that TC called the FBI because someone beat his high score in a fighting game.
---

What homework have you done to lead you to that conclusion?

oh it's that guy, nvm

---

Yo CE sometimes though...

Thank you TC for making me feel better about myself

it is in the same way rich people stop trying to make money once they make a million dollars.


---

Anyone that says that its a disincentive to work doesnt understand in the slightest why people need it. They act like this is what will now be set in stone instead of helping people in the biggest world upheaval since the last world war.

---

The better solution would have been to avoid this mass unemployment in the first place by putting in a better social safety net up front - a wage subsidy paid to all companies that lose a certain portion of revenue to last the duration of any period of relevant business restrictions, plus at least a few weeks beyond.

---

Sonic Cannon posted...

The better solution would have been to avoid this mass unemployment in the first place by putting in a better social safety net up front - a wage subsidy paid to all companies that lose a certain portion of revenue to last the duration of any period of relevant business restrictions, plus at least a few weeks beyond.

Its up to prudent business owners to set aside a rainy day fund for unforeseen economic shocks.

---

The whole point is to get people to sit at home so this fucking pandemic can end already, jfc.

---

INTERWEBUSER posted...

Its up to prudent business owners to set aside a rainy day fund for unforeseen economic shocks.

Literally the worst pandemic in living human history buddy. Perhaps the president shouldnt of dismantled his pandemic task force and shouldnt of politicized staying home in the first place.

---

The only reason they'd be a disincentive to work is because of low wages in the first place.

---

Even if true, these people were so below the standard means of living that it took a meager income to greatly help them out. I can't blame them for not wanting to work. And nothing about the stimulus has been "overly generous" lmfao

---

There's a slight disincentive effect that's totally overwhelmed by the demand side impacts of giving out the money.

---

sounds like an incentive to increase working wages to me.

---

Reminder that TC lives with his parents and has never had to provide for himself

Rathinor posted...

Reminder that TC lives with his parents and has never had to provide for himself

Ah

---

shockthemonkey posted...

People not working in the public is a good thing right now

Lol this is tangential but I've argued it's good all the time. The thing is, generous UI is related to longer stints of unemployment. That's not bad. Helping people have the bandwidth to choose a job that works for them, rather than making them so desperate they take the very first thing they can, is actually a net economic good for everyone. It means less costly turnover for businesses

---

shockthemonkey posted...

People not working in the public is a good thing right now

---

Balrog0 posted...

Lol this is tangential but I've argued it's good all the time. The thing is, generous UI is related to longer stints of unemployment. That's not bad. Helping people have the bandwidth to choose a job that works for them, rather than making them so desperate they take the very first thing they can, is actually a net economic good for everyone. It means less costly turnover for businesses

You'd also get more dedicated, motivated and productive workers.

---

INTERWEBUSER posted...

Its up to prudent business owners to set aside a rainy day fund for unforeseen economic shocks.

I agree with this. It is not to cover all costs, just the costs of staff. The way it was done here in NZ was the business applied for a given number of staff and only gets it if they:
1) Pay 100% of the subsidy to their employees
2) Commit to paying all employees applied for at least the full subsidy amount, but use best endeavours to pay 80% of their pre-covid income

It's helped a lot with preventing unemployment. It's a lot cheaper for the economy if the links between workers nd employers are maintained during these downturns. Much faster to ramp back up (Our Q3 GDP growth was greater than our Q2 loss)

---

You got 0 votes including yourself lmao

---