COVID $600/week benefits slated to end this month. Thoughts?

[larkja]

I was initially very opposed to the benefit. We have a business and our justified concern was that people would not return if they were being paid this much to stay home. However, with the latest round of shutdowns and the fact that schools still haven't announced if they are opening, there are some serious issues at play.

Like many businesses, we were slated to open June, then July, then August; now who knows when? Additionally, there are many two income households. With the kids home from school, or with the schools proposing a hybrid program, one of the parents will have to stay home. How are they supposed to pay the bills? The state is hamstringing businesses as well as families.

I don't think racking up more debt is the answer, but something has to be done. You (the state of CA) take away a person's ability to earn money or make money, then you need to supplement to make up for it. Yes, I realize it's "our" money so I'm really torn here. I'm not a proponent of redistribution of wealth. But I gotta' tell ya', it really pisses me off that all these huge Silicon Valley companies and execs are playing into the Antifa and BLM narratives. I wouldn't be sad to see them be forced to contribute so some of the little people don't lose everything.

A simple solution would be a moratorium for all mortgages, loans, etc. This would apply to residential and commercial. And I'm not asking the banks to carry the load. They should also be able to take advantage of a pause until the government opens things up again.

If this continues, the writing on the wall is that many people will default on loans and the banks will be the winners because they'll just foreclose. The loans were insured so they'll just auction off the property and collect on the insurance. It's a win-win for them. Would love to see this incentive removed so the little guy doesn't get screwed.

Can't believe I sound like a lib right now.

[sd_shooter]

There should never have been a benefit to begin with. Nor a lock down for that matter!

[larkja]

There should never have been a benefit to begin with. Nor a lock down for that matter!

Agreed, but water under the bridge. Now we have to deal with it

[Milsurp1]

[Sousuke]

I was initially very opposed to the benefit. We have a business and our justified concern was that people would not return if they were being paid this much to stay home. However, with the latest round of shutdowns and the fact that schools still haven't announced if they are opening, there are some serious issues at play.

Like many businesses, we were slated to open June, then July, then August; now who knows when? Additionally, there are many two income households. With the kids home from school, or with the schools proposing a hybrid program, one of the parents will have to stay home. How are they supposed to pay the bills? The state is hamstringing businesses as well as families.

I don't think racking up more debt is the answer, but something has to be done. You (the state of CA) take away a person's ability to earn money or make money, then you need to supplement to make up for it. Yes, I realize it's "our" money so I'm really torn here. I'm not a proponent of redistribution of wealth. But I gotta' tell ya', it really pisses me off that all these huge Silicon Valley companies and execs are playing into the Antifa and BLM narratives. I wouldn't be sad to see them be forced to contribute so some of the little people don't lose everything.

A simple solution would be a moratorium for all mortgages, loans, etc. This would apply to residential and commercial. And I'm not asking the banks to carry the load. They should also be able to take advantage of a pause until the government opens things up again.

If this continues, the writing on the wall is that many people will default on loans and the banks will be the winners because they'll just foreclose. The loans were insured so they'll just auction off the property and collect on the insurance. It's a win-win for them. Would love to see this incentive removed so the little guy doesn't get screwed.

Can't believe I sound like a lib right now.

My view is there shouldn't be any more "general" stimulus. IE a tax credit of 1200.

If Congress had the ability (they don't btw), they could write a very efficient jobs bill that gave a boost to any state at a certain stage of reopening. IE if your state is fully open, no boost. If your restaurants are take out only, that industry gets a boost until out of the phase etc.

Unfortunately, our leaders are only able to use a shotgun approach, and when they hear the faucets are open they rush in and try to throw their pet concern in to the mix to bloat the cost.

[Hammertime]

We spent $10 trillion in 6 months.

If we do that to finish the year, our economy will collapse.

[sigstroker]

A simple solution would be a moratorium for all mortgages, loans, etc. This would apply to residential and commercial. And I'm not asking the banks to carry the load. They should also be able to take advantage of a pause until the government opens things up again.

And what about the people that depend on those payments, that interest, to live on? Banks aren't just guys in black top hats twirling their moustaches. Mortgages are securitized and sold as income vehicles everywhere. Mutual funds, insurance company investments, etc.

Can't believe I sound like a lib right now.

You're in California, right? You probably always sound like a lib, you just don't realize it.

[duenor]

I'm not a proponent of redistribution of wealth. But I gotta' tell ya', it really pisses me off that all these huge Silicon Valley companies and execs are playing into the Antifa and BLM narratives. I wouldn't be sad to see them be forced to contribute so some of the little people don't lose everything.
Can't believe I sound like a lib right now.

You and me both, brother. I'll tell you a story, something from just today.

I was at Home Depot today. Man are those workers scared. They are tired, they are struggling with improvised masks (all home brew, they are all different and of different quality), and even with the SD modifications it is clearly very difficult for them to minimize exposure.

And as I stood there in the return line with my goggles and respirator, I thought about how their return home must be like. like me, they probably do their best to wash all their clothes right away, avoid bringing shoes into the house, go through lots of soap and hand sanitizer. they probably take 30 minute showers, and there's probably a wife or husband at home wrangling the kids while dad or mom is able to decontaminate while also making dinner at the same time.

no doubt about it, these men and women are taking significant risks, having to spend quite a bit out of pocket, and their pay ... about that pay.

it's exactly the same as before. the same barely above minimum wage job is still the same barely above minimum wage job. they've got a lot more overhead, they're doing their best, and the pay is the same.

meanwhile, HD is doing fantastic. profits are great. their dividend is expected to go up again to happy shareholders, like it has done every single year for many years.

so why can't they pay their workers an extra buck or three per hour during this very difficult time, to compensate them for the risk and all the additional costs? why does HD insist on putting its "growth every quarter" and happy shareholders ahead of everything? why can't HD take some hits too, just like everyone else?

because, quite frankly, they don't have to. workers are replaceable easily enough, esp with unemployement at 12% and likely to go up. and that's just one illustration of what is wrong with this national response. we just aren't united in this fight. there's an entire section of our people, OUR PEOPLE! that is being slammed on all sides and the best we can do as a nation is say, hey maybe you might get $600 extra if you get laid off.

[Caligula36]

F that. I want muh free monies!

[five.five-six]

Does this mean I have to get a job?