Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Celerity

(42,646 posts)
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 06:32 AM Aug 2020

Krugman : The Unemployed Stare Into the Abyss. Republicans Look Away.

The cruelty and ignorance of Trump and his allies are creating another gratuitous disaster.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/opinion/republicans-unemployed-coronavirus.html



In case you haven’t noticed, the coronavirus is still very much with us. Around a thousand Americans are dying from Covid-19 each day, 10 times the rate in the European Union. Thanks to our failure to control the pandemic, we’re still suffering from Great Depression levels of unemployment; a brief recovery driven by premature attempts to resume business as usual appears to have petered out as states pause or reverse their opening.

Yet enhanced unemployment benefits, a crucial lifeline for tens of millions of Americans, have expired. And negotiations over how — or even whether — to restore aid appear to be stalled. You sometimes see headlines describing this crisis as a result of “congressional dysfunction.” Such headlines reveal a severe case of bothsidesism — the almost pathological aversion of some in the media to placing blame where it belongs.

For House Democrats passed a bill specifically designed to deal with this mess two and a half months ago. The Trump administration and Senate Republicans had plenty of time to propose an alternative. Instead, they didn’t even focus on the issue until days before the benefits ended. And even now they’re refusing to offer anything that might significantly alleviate workers’ plight. This is an astonishing failure of governance, right up there with the mishandling of the pandemic itself. But what explains it? Well, I’m of two minds. Was it ignorant malevolence, or malevolent ignorance?

Let’s talk first about the ignorance.

The Covid recession that began in February may have been the simplest, most comprehensible business downturn in history. Much of the U.S. economy was put on hold to contain a pandemic. Job losses were concentrated in services that were either inessential or could be postponed, and were highly likely to spread the coronavirus: restaurants, air travel, dentists’ visits. The main goal of economic policy was to make this temporary lockdown tolerable, sustaining the incomes of those unable to work.

snip
25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Krugman : The Unemployed Stare Into the Abyss. Republicans Look Away. (Original Post) Celerity Aug 2020 OP
trump and republicans are stiffing the elderly again , duforsure Aug 2020 #1
how much should the elderly be getting in additional payments? Celerity Aug 2020 #2
I don't think anyone is proposing paying retired elderly unemployment. rgbecker Aug 2020 #3
the poster I replied seem to be saying that they should get the 2400 per months (or in not the full Celerity Aug 2020 #4
$2000 a month for everyone duforsure Aug 2020 #17
Wooooo hoooo...I wish! Trueblue Texan Aug 2020 #5
yes, I see that the average is 1500 usd per person per month, which is very low Celerity Aug 2020 #7
there should be a formula for stay at home mums as they deffo provided a large economic input Celerity Aug 2020 #9
MOST SS recipients come nowhere close to getting the FULL amounts you list Captain Zero Aug 2020 #6
yes, I saw that after the first person relied with the average payment which is indeed far less Celerity Aug 2020 #8
Wouldn't 3,790 be for those who were at the top of the earning scale and thus, contributed most to 3Hotdogs Aug 2020 #10
yes, it is the full payment , the most possible nt Celerity Aug 2020 #11
Like was promoted and passed by the House, $2000 per month, duforsure Aug 2020 #12
thank you for the cogent reply Celerity Aug 2020 #14
See number 12 duforsure Aug 2020 #13
Nobody that I know who filed at 62 or 65 or 70 is getting anywhere near that level of payment. niyad Aug 2020 #15
I get a shade over $1800/mo. I ret'd at 62 out of need... Wounded Bear Aug 2020 #24
All would get 2k monthly duforsure Aug 2020 #16
when you say all would get 2K monthly, is that an additional 2K or enough to make sure that an Celerity Aug 2020 #21
Those figures are bogeous. I retired at 62, 10 years ago and get less than $1150. monthly judesedit Aug 2020 #19
no, they are not 'bogus', they are, as I said the max payments Celerity Aug 2020 #20
Those are the numbers for a Plant Manager, MBA Captain Zero Aug 2020 #22
Thank you. Definitely in no way represents the majority of Americans. judesedit Aug 2020 #23
"House Dems passed a bill specifically designed to deal with this mess 2-1/2 months ago." Hortensis Aug 2020 #18
"Looking away" implies shame JHB Aug 2020 #25

duforsure

(11,882 posts)
1. trump and republicans are stiffing the elderly again ,
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 06:46 AM
Aug 2020

By giving the $300 a month compared to $2400 a month for the unemployed, unlike other countries have done like Canada, and have seen much better economic results , and helped their elderly get by much better , and stimulated the economy much better. All while trump puts trillions into the markets so he can brag everything is fine, he's stiffing the seniors again, and will pay dearly for it in States like Florida for screwing them over, again. $2000 a month with direct checks might save us from a trump depression, but a one time $1200 check won't , and be woefully inadequate sending this country into a trump depression. trump spent trillions for the wealthy for his tax scam bill he signed, and now trump and Mitch are screwing over the elderly, again. This is backfiring on trump and republicans .

Celerity

(42,646 posts)
2. how much should the elderly be getting in additional payments?
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 07:10 AM
Aug 2020

Full socially security payments are

3,790 for someone who files at age 70
$3,011 for someone who files at full retirement age (FRA)
$2,265 for someone who files at 62


Surely you are not saying that they should get the full $2400 per month per person if they are getting full SS.

If that was the case, you would have some elderly couples potentially getting $12,380 per month in payments. That is never going to fly, and is profoundly unfair to us younger people.

Not that the extra payments would last that long, but that is almost 150 thousand USD per year to people with a lifetime of savings, often with massive home equity, and who also have reduced expenses compared to working folk, especially those with children.

rgbecker

(4,806 posts)
3. I don't think anyone is proposing paying retired elderly unemployment.
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 07:24 AM
Aug 2020

The $600/week has been for unemployed workers.

Average SS benefits for retired workers is about $1500/Mo.


[link:https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=what+is+average+social+security+benefit+per+month|

Celerity

(42,646 posts)
4. the poster I replied seem to be saying that they should get the 2400 per months (or in not the full
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 07:33 AM
Aug 2020

2400 usd, then at least far more than what they get now).

I do agree that 1500 usd per month in SS is shit, especially if it is only a single person and not a couple (thus 3000 per moth which is far more liveable upon an amount).

duforsure

(11,882 posts)
17. $2000 a month for everyone
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 09:02 AM
Aug 2020

Isn't much to get when they funnel trillions and millions to help the wealthy. If the people allow this to continue the wealth gap will increase more , and middle class and the poor will suffer, especially now.

Trueblue Texan

(2,371 posts)
5. Wooooo hoooo...I wish!
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 07:45 AM
Aug 2020

Social Security benefit is income-based. Many people don't even make $500 a month. And women who stayed home with children usually get FAR less.

Captain Zero

(6,714 posts)
6. MOST SS recipients come nowhere close to getting the FULL amounts you list
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 07:47 AM
Aug 2020

Those full amounts are not the gauge, Very few people earn them.
Right now the benefit is based on average of yearly income reported for the previous 36 years for a full retirement.

3Hotdogs

(12,207 posts)
10. Wouldn't 3,790 be for those who were at the top of the earning scale and thus, contributed most to
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 08:00 AM
Aug 2020

the system?

My net is $1,581. I retired in 2006 at age 66.

duforsure

(11,882 posts)
12. Like was promoted and passed by the House, $2000 per month,
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 08:48 AM
Aug 2020

Which goes to everyone until this gets better, like others have done, but many aren't getting larger amounts now monthly for their SS .many don't get $1,000 a month and can't afford meds, and some food, but trump and the GOP have trillions to give to the wealthy, and who'll pay that bill when it comes due? The seniors with reductions to Medicaid, Medicare, and to Social Security. No telling how many trillions are being printed up to protect the wealthy in the stock markets, but can't give $2000 a month to the poor and elderly now? Billions of stimulus was given to millionaires and billionaires , and I suspect playoffs to trump from them getting it with funneling money thru his businesses, or for campaign donations which he funnels into his pockets. $1200 direct check is just another slap in the face to people needing help the most when they give the rich windfall amounts without care for the rest.

niyad

(112,432 posts)
15. Nobody that I know who filed at 62 or 65 or 70 is getting anywhere near that level of payment.
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 08:52 AM
Aug 2020

And I do know exactly how much they are getting.

Wounded Bear

(58,437 posts)
24. I get a shade over $1800/mo. I ret'd at 62 out of need...
Fri Aug 7, 2020, 10:43 AM
Aug 2020

I'm pretty well off in SS terms because I had a few good earning years in the middle/end of my work life.

I have no illusions about how much others make. I know most people make no where near what I do. I'm in pretty good shape personally, but I know that many people aren't.

Send help where it is needed.

duforsure

(11,882 posts)
16. All would get 2k monthly
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 08:56 AM
Aug 2020

You fail to list many getting a small amount from SS, and barely get by already.2k was what the House passed per month, and stimulates the economy much more. Less won't. It'll also prolong the recovery faster.

Celerity

(42,646 posts)
21. when you say all would get 2K monthly, is that an additional 2K or enough to make sure that an
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 05:35 PM
Aug 2020

individual hits 2K per month?

I explain. Let's say, as many on here have pointed out, a person is now getting the average SS payment of 1500 usd per month. Would they get an additional 500 usd (so they are getting 2K total per month) or is that 2K in addition to the 1500 (ie. they would now get 3500 usd per month)?

Also, if a person is now unemployed, and was getting the 600 usd per week (so 2400 per month) in increased unemployment, would that be reduced to 2000 usd per month?

judesedit

(4,437 posts)
19. Those figures are bogeous. I retired at 62, 10 years ago and get less than $1150. monthly
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 03:03 PM
Aug 2020

I should get approx $1400, but was totally misinformed numerous times regarding my situation. Those figures are total crap for the majority of Americans who worked their butts off for years.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
18. "House Dems passed a bill specifically designed to deal with this mess 2-1/2 months ago."
Wed Aug 5, 2020, 09:55 AM
Aug 2020

Just underlining. The Republicans refused to begin negotiating a final form. MALICE.

And now they're going home for a month, and McConnell's self-cornered and having to agree to get something passed quick. INCOMPETENCE AND MALICE.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Krugman : The Unemployed ...