Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

COVID-19 Talk


mappy
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

Virginia with it's largest one day case count increase today, not sure what the daily testing numbers are like though. 

This is after I saw something last night that numbers were improving for VA.  Seems the weekend lag is the cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yeoman said:

Employers can't force you come to work. You can tell them you don't feel comfortable doing so and they will find someone who will.. plenty of hurting people out there who would love a job and are capable of following safety guidelines.

So basically you envision at risk people being fired for not going to work in a pandemic.

 

Good to know. I don't think that's going to fly in most states lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yeoman said:

Employers can't force you come to work. You can tell them you don't feel comfortable doing so and they will find someone who will.. plenty of hurting people out there who would love a job and are capable of following safety guidelines.

So you lose your job because work wants to risk your life.  Gotta love capitalism.  This is exactly what we are trying to avoid.  The need to work over health and safety.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, supernovasky said:

So basically you envision at risk people being fired for not going to work in a pandemic.

 

Good to know. I don't think that's going to fly in most states lol.

Don't know how that will work.. hopefully only furloughed so they can keep their benefits. Bottom line - the work needs to be done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, H2O said:

So you lose your job because work wants to risk your life.  Gotta love capitalism.  This is exactly what we are trying to avoid.  The need to work over health and safety.  

Plenty of work from home jobs available if you don't want to leave your house.. gotta love it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

Plenty of work from home jobs available if you don't want to leave your house.. gotta love it

So maybe its up to business to change the dynamic.  More people can work from home and still get shit done so who needs a ton of office space.  You seem to contradict yourself by insisting business just fire people and find others if they can just work from home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, H2O said:

So you lose your job because work wants to risk your life.  Gotta love capitalism.  This is exactly what we are trying to avoid.  The need to work over health and safety.  

You should love capitalism. My guess is that most employers would show some compassion in this regard. And don't forget that those who contract the virus recover from it. And many don't even know they had it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, H2O said:

So maybe its up to business to change the dynamic.  More people can work from home and still get shit done so who needs a ton of office space.  You seem to contradict yourself by insisting business just fire people and find others if they can just work from home.

Obviously there are jobs which can't be done from home.. if you're in that position then it's probably be in your best interest to find something that allows you to work remotely if you're scared to go out.. Of course depends on your current situation, skills, etc. That way you're in a good position for the next health issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yeoman said:

Obviously there are jobs which can't be done from home.. if you're in that position then it's probably be in your best interest to find something that allows you to work remotely if you're scared to go out.. Of course depends on your current situation, skills, etc. That way you're in a good position for the next health issue

hes been going to work daily since this began. the shit plant doesn't close.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

If we’re going to open things up we should at least be intellectually honest and cognizant that while some employers will be compassionate, a lot won’t.

In a rushed drive to get the economy up and running again, poor people and people of color get run over. A lot of those people have two options: work or be unemployed. Obviously there are jobs that need to be done, but someone that’s high risk shouldn’t lose their livelihood because they’re susceptible...in a global pandemic.

Forget a liability shield for big employers. Employees need protections.  

‪https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/us/coronavirus-chicken-meat-processing-plants-immigrants.html?smid=tw-share‬

This isn't only good for the employees, it's good for all of us. It will result in much more stringent precautions being taken in workplaces that we interface with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

Obviously there are jobs which can't be done from home.. if you're in that position then it's probably be in your best interest to find something that allows you to work remotely if you're scared to go out.. Of course depends on your current situation, skills, etc. That way you're in a good position for the next health issue

Have you gone into your job every day?  I know I have.  Because my job and place of work needs to stay open.  And what I do doesn't give the luxury of office work every day.  My fear of going out is replaced by having to be the sole income earner for my family.  So while you armchair QB there are plenty of people just like me who have done all we can to work and not get sick.  To force people to go in just because there is a cubicle empty is irresponsible.  And to threaten firing is even more so.  Accommodations have already been made for many to work and can still be done that way.

 

  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

If we’re going to open things up we should at least be intellectually honest and cognizant that while some employers will be compassionate, a lot won’t.

In a rushed drive to get the economy up and running again, poor people and people of color get run over. A lot of those people have two options: work or be unemployed. Obviously there are jobs that need to be done, but someone that’s high risk shouldn’t lose their livelihood because they’re susceptible...in a global pandemic.

Forget a liability shield for big employers. Employees need protections.  

‪https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/us/coronavirus-chicken-meat-processing-plants-immigrants.html?smid=tw-share‬

On Thursday will probably find that 30M+ have lost their jobs on since this all started.. I'm sure many of those are high risk folks.. Are you supposed to give them monopoly money? Either you have the money to pay them or you don't.. 

 

6 minutes ago, H2O said:

Have you gone into your job every day?  I know I have.  Because my job and place of work needs to stay open.  And what I do doesn't give the luxury of office work every day.  My fear of going out is replaced by having to be the sole income earner for my family.  So while you armchair QB there are plenty of people just like me who have done all we can to work and not get sick.  To force people to go in just because there is a cubicle empty is irresponsible.  And to threaten firing is even more so.  Accommodations have already been made for many to work and can still be done that way.

 

  

Why do you think I have a problem with you? You're exactly the type of person that I'm inspired by.. you risk yourself to provide for your family, not cower in a corner. I'm not talking about people with the ability to work from home. Those people should do so as long as realistically possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

That’s where things like paid sick leave matter. A business, especially a small one can’t just come up with money to pay employees, but I know a multi-trillion dollar government can. 

Before my conservative friends come out with knives lol I’m not talking about “free” money indefinitely, I’m just talking about looking out for the average American and the least among us and their economic security. I’ve been consistently saying we have to look at public health and economic security equally. There are people who cannot go into work right now. We don’t throw their actual or economic lives away because they just happen to be older or less healthy.

Wish I could recommend this 1000 times...spot-on concerning public health and economic security!!  This country has about the most minimal safety net in the western world, and yet everyone complains when there are attempts to expand it or help people in this type of emergency situation.  We cannot afford that, apparently...but hey, we can give $2T in tax cuts for multi-millionaires, so whatever.  Oy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Always in Zugzwang said:

Wish I could recommend this 1000 times...spot-on concerning public health and economic security!!  This country has about the most minimal safety net in the western world, and yet everyone complains when there are attempts to expand it or help people in this type of emergency situation.  We cannot afford that, apparently...but hey, we can give $2T in tax cuts for multi-millionaires, so whatever.  Oy!

Public corporations spent most of their windfall from the corporate tax cut into buying back their shares.  Since the stock market crashed (most of which happened before the restrictions), those trillions of dollars disappeard.  Poof.  It'd be nice if companies socked away some money in a rainy-day fund so, you know, they can provide sick-day compensation during times like this.  But nope - gotta return that money to investors.  Investors always get priority over workers in our system, unfortunately.  That mindset began in the early 1980s and continues today.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

 

 

Why do you think I have a problem with you? You're exactly the type of person that I'm inspired by.. you risk yourself to provide for your family, not cower in a corner. I'm not talking about people with the ability to work from home. Those people should do so as long as realistically possible. 

Sorry.  I just bristle at the notion that workers are expendable and we have to sacrifice as much as we do to keep jobs and earn an income.  I would love for this drastic change to how things are done spur a shift in what we value and how the worker matters more than they do now.  People are suffering and I am still very lucky to have what I have.  But it is a risk and I dont want others to be subjected to it if they dont have to.

I keep hearing how essential workers should be given a bonus or this or that.  If I am eligible for one because of what I do I would rather it go to someone else who even risked more than me or someone really affected by this and needs to pay bills or buy food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said:

Public corporations spent most of their windfall from the corporate tax cut into buying back their shares.  Since the stock market crashed (most of which happened before the restrictions), those trillions of dollars disappeard.  Poof.  It'd be nice if companies socked away some money in a rainy-day fund so, you know, they can provide sick-day compensation during times like this.  But nope - gotta return that money to investors.  Investors always get priority over workers in our system, unfortunately.  That mindset began in the early 1980s and continues today.

Well put..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, H2O said:

Sorry.  I just bristle at the notion that workers are expendable and we have to sacrifice as much as we do to keep jobs and earn an income.  I would love for this drastic change to how things are done spur a shift in what we value and how the worker matters more than they do now.  People are suffering and I am still very lucky to have what I have.  But it is a risk and I dont want others to be subjected to it if they dont have to.

I keep hearing how essential workers should be given a bonus or this or that.  If I am eligible for one because of what I do I would rather it go to someone else who even risked more than me or someone really affected by this and needs to pay bills or buy food.

Bonuses for front line folks are imperative - on the order of 50% or more of their salary. I've purchased $700 in gift cards for local restaurants and will continue to do more, so should others that have the means. These small businesses employ 50% of our workers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said:

Public corporations spent most of their windfall from the corporate tax cut into buying back their shares.  Since the stock market crashed (most of which happened before the restrictions), those trillions of dollars disappeard.  Poof.  It'd be nice if companies socked away some money in a rainy-day fund so, you know, they can provide sick-day compensation during times like this.  But nope - gotta return that money to investors.  Investors always get priority over workers in our system, unfortunately.  That mindset began in the early 1980s and continues today.

Yep....and we’re always left waiting for it to trickle down, only ever seems to trickle up to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

Bonuses for front line folks are imperative - on the order of 50% or more of their salary. I've purchased $700 in gift cards for local restaurants and will continue to do more, so should others that have the means. These small businesses employ 50% of our workers.

They definitely should get bonuses of some sort.

On an individual level, I still patronize places I've liked (restaurants) when I can just to be supportive and hopefully help keep them afloat.  Of course, my contribution as one person is a drop in the bucket, but if enough people do that at carry-out or grab-and-go places, that's something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 40westwx said:

PSU.. that has a really bad trickle up effect that causes instability in financial systems that depend on debt/rents/utilities.  You also cannot unilaterally impose policy that interferes with such markets, when by doing so prevents one from their own pursuits in a market economy... This is protected in the 5th and 14th amendment. Closing down businesses in the US is getting dangerously close to crossing the line.. if is hasnt already done so.  It is only going to be a matter of time before people start to realize what is going on here and realize whats at stake.

A line must be drawn somewhere.   

I would think you of all people would understand that..  

Oh really???  That’s news to me. I must have missed those clauses when I taught Constitutional Law.  Must have been in invisible ink somewhere after eminent domain and double jeopardy. If you are referring to the procedural and substantive due process clauses you are “implying” a right that is not clearly expressed. As such the federal courts become the arbiter as with all implied powers cases. And the precedence is that the government has quite a wide berth when asserting emergency powers for the public health and safety. In those situations suspensions of most liberties has been deemed acceptable in the past. 

12 hours ago, SnowGolfBro said:

this is largely being done. Utilities are not shutting off service for nonpayment at least where i live.  Mortgage banks are allowing payments to be missed in the short term. Interest still accrues. But this can only last about 90 days.  The bond holders need to be paid and banks only have so much liquidity on their balance sheets. If the mortgage bond market crashes the pain inflicted will be catastrophic. 

As for the points about businesses and financial institutions needing those payments...not if you freeze financial obligations on both ends. Both to AND FROM those institutions. They wouldn’t need to service their debt or obligations either until it’s over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Oh really???  That’s news to me. I must have missed those clauses when I taught Constitutional Law.  Must have been in invisible ink somewhere after eminent domain and double jeopardy. If you are referring to the procedural and substantive due process clauses you are “implying” a right that is not clearly expressed. As such the federal courts become the arbiter as with all implied powers cases. And the precedence is that the government has quite a wide berth when asserting emergency powers for the public health and safety. In those situations suspensions of most liberties has been deemed acceptable in the past. 

As for the points about businesses and financial institutions needing those payments...not if you freeze financial obligations on both ends. Both to AND FROM those institutions. They wouldn’t need to service their debt or obligations either until it’s over. 

I’m telling you that this kind of arrangement can only work for about 90 days or so before real, devastating problems start to take shape in the banking, mortgage and bond markets.  The proposition you are proposing is not a long term solution.  Just saying you can freeze everything without consequences is not an accurate statement.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SnowGolfBro said:

I’m telling you that this kind of arrangement can only work for about 90 days or so before real, devastating problems start to take shape in the banking, mortgage and bond markets.  The proposition you are proposing is not a long term solution.  Just saying you can freeze everything without consequences is not an accurate statement.  

Ok so let’s try 90 days...so far we haven’t done it at all so not sure what your point here is. I never said freeze forever!  And I never said there are no consequences but it’s a manageable problem. Lesser of evils and all that Jazz. But the main consequences of that policy would be the executives at these institutions would have to stop drawing multi million dollar salaries during the emergency freeze.  I think most could live with that...the alternative on the other hand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...