1 1
JoeWeber

Trumps Covid Relief Executive Orders

Recommended Posts

Can anyone here who supports Trump please tell me how any of the 4 executive orders actually does anything useful? We're looking at payroll tax deferral, not forgiveness (not that we should), instructions to agencies to "consider" if there should be a ban on evictions and demands that states pick up the tab for unemployment benefits while they hope that for the first time in his life he actually pays for something he ordered. Wheres the meat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Can anyone here who supports Trump please tell me how any of the 4 executive orders actually does anything useful? We're looking at payroll tax deferral, not forgiveness (not that we should), instructions to agencies to "consider" if there should be a ban on evictions and demands that states pick up the tab for unemployment benefits while they hope that for the first time in his life he actually pays for something he ordered. Wheres the meat?

Hi Joe,

It's a veggie burger without the spices.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

We're looking at payroll tax deferral, not forgiveness (not that we should)...

First, people with jobs don't need relief; It is the people without jobs who need it. The money going into Social Security / Medicare / Medicaid this week, came out of payroll taxes last week. So this is a quick way to bankrupt the whole system. Completely asinine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ryoder said:

First, people with jobs don't need relief; It is the people without jobs who need it. The money going into Social Security / Medicare / Medicaid this week, came out of payroll taxes last week. So this is a quick way to bankrupt the whole system. Completely asinine.

Bankruptcy is Trump's specialty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

 trump abdicated Covid responsibility to the states and now he did the same to the states is a fiscal fashion.

The absence of responsibility is the trump/GOP.

Relief should be portioned out in specific guidelines, and made clear what would be covered and what would not.  Then the states should implement strategies and take responsibility for their actions.

For instance - this particular point is a hot button for me.

There should be guidelines set down to qualify people for unemployment.  Proof of loss of job, not just, not going to work anymore, because unemployment pays you more than your job did.

If the state doesn't provide that proof, then they don't get that funding.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

There should be guidelines set down to qualify people for unemployment.  Proof of loss of job, not just, not going to work anymore, because unemployment pays you more than your job did.

If the state doesn't provide that proof, then they don't get that funding.

How many people are getting unemployment because they are choosing not to work?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
32 minutes ago, olofscience said:

what about recent graduates unable to find a job?

You typically only qualify for unemployment benefits if you've worked for a company required to pay into those benefits.  Graduates would have to apply for other types of social services  - food stamps, subsidized housing and possible cash benefits.  Also, IIRC many students are still claimed as dependents by their parents up till their 25th birthday, so those parents that choose to do that have a legal responsibility to provide some support.  They also can receive medical insurance under their parents till they're 26 as well.

Edited by Coreece

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:
45 minutes ago, Coreece said:

so those parents that choose to do that have a legal responsibility to provide some support. 

Hi Coreece,

Please show me any law in any state that requires this.

What do you think it means to claim someone as a dependent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

What document would this be?

In Canada every employer has to send the federal government a Record of Employment after employment ends. One of the items on the RoE indicates how the employment ended. Based on that, you may or may not be eligible for Employment Insurance benefits.

 

Doesn't sound like the US has a similar system in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

What document would this be?

In Canada every employer has to send the federal government a Record of Employment after employment ends. One of the items on the RoE indicates how the employment ended. Based on that, you may or may not be eligible for Employment Insurance benefits.

 

Doesn't sound like the US has a similar system in place.

It sounds similar, tho I think it's mostly handled at the state level.  All you really need are your tax documents/pay stubs to determine eligibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Coreece said:

It sounds similar, tho I think it's mostly handled at the state level.  All you really need are your tax documents/pay stubs to determine eligibility.

Not here, since that would allow one to quit their job and apply for benefits. The RoE would indicate a voluntary end to employment which would disqualify you from getting any benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SkyDekker said:
4 minutes ago, Coreece said:

It sounds similar, tho I think it's mostly handled at the state level.  All you really need are your tax documents/pay stubs to determine eligibility.

Not here, since that would allow one to quit their job and apply for benefits. The RoE would indicate a voluntary end to employment which would disqualify you from getting any benefits.

Here the employer can deny the claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

How many people are getting unemployment because they are choosing not to work?

Indeed. And given that the system of checks would need to be cobbled together very quickly experience tells us two things are likely. First, the  bureaucracy will end of costing more than the small amount of claims by chancers willing to give up a steady job for a temporary unemployment increase. Secondly the system will be overly sensitive and rigidly demanding and will again deny coverage to more legitimate claimants than illegitimate ones it uncovers.

 

I don’t think any of that will remotely bother the American right though, where punishing the undeserving is the single most important goal of any benefits reform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
9 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:
11 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Here the employer can deny the claim.

Interesting. What is in it for an employer to approve any claim?

If the employee has a valid claim (laid off, hours cut, etc) then it doesn't matter what their employer thinks about it.  But if they just quit or got fired for good reason (theft, insubordination etc.) then the employer can deny the claim.

Just to add, the process to determine all this is a pain in the ass.

Edited by Coreece
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jakee said:

I don’t think any of that will remotely bother the American right though, where punishing the undeserving is the single most important goal of any benefits reform.

Reporting on which companies received relief funding and which did not makes that point pretty clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
39 minutes ago, jakee said:

 punishing the undeserving is the single most important goal of any benefits reform.

After the automotive bailout/loans/bankruptcy/restructuring, all those people that were laid off were collecting unemployment for 2-3 years and it severely taxed the system.  Unemployment reform stated that you now have to make a certain amount of money within 2 separate quarters to qualify. (Rather than just working a certain amount of time over a period of several months)

So many companies just decided to cut minimum wage workers hours (those that need the hours the most)  and just hired more people to cover the difference.  So now, not only were they making less money, but they also wouldn't qualify for unemployment thus reducing the amount of money those companies had to initially pay into unemployment.

Theoretically they could've just got a second job to make more money and qualify - but employers started giving them sporadic schedules,  making it more difficult to work with other employers.

 

Higher minimum wages have since put an end to that loophole tho - and most were doing fairly well prior to covid.

 

Also, just wanted to add that this is one of the reasons unemployment was down at that time - more people working less hours.

 

Edited by Coreece

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1