Help me out here. As I am understanding this a person that say owns a small resturant with say 5 people can get the grant for various things including paying employees wages that are not working due to closing. So does that mean that the employee gets 1. Payment of 2,500 for stimulus 2. Pay from employer from the grant for his wages. 3. Pay from his state unemployment for being layed off .4.Plus Extra 600 per week from Govt on top of unemployment,for four months. Surley I am missing something or no one will go back to work.
Hi jmk,
There are alot of rules and details am not sure about a couple of your items.
1. Are you referring to the individual checks that are actually 1,200 or 2,400/couple?
2. Small businesses can get big loans to pay employees and those loans can be forgiven..........FREE but I think they must keep 90% of their employees.
3 &4. If 2 happens, then 3 and 4 don't but if the employee does get laid off(taken off the payroll) or "furloughed" where they stay on the payroll, and they qualify for their states usual unemployment, they get that check +600 added to it. In many cases, that means close to 1,000/week for people out of work. Seems to me that means alot of people will be making more money by not working. That is a problem for a couple of reasons.
It's one thing to make people whole that are hit by this crisis but its wrong to pay them more not to work.
a. This coronavirus relief package is already likely to cause tremendous damage/problems down the road because of how it effects the budget/debt. Our politicians are acting like its a magic money tree and suddenly the principles of economics and finance no longer apply. There are elements of the package that just are going overboard and making it worse for the budget than it needs to be. This seems to be one of them.
b. People/businesses will make a choice to be less productive if it pays more. This package provides for some environments that pay more to be less productive or completely unproductive.
Some people think the $2,000,000,000,000 is no big deal.
metmike
You are right I had the check wrong should have said $1,200. The talking head I heard on tv made it sould like the employee would get both his pay from his employer if told to stay home, and unemployment. One question I havent heard a answer to is who determines when this thing is over? You just know if in say three months Trump says go back to work you will have several people on the other side say no its not safe. There will be just as many Drs. saying go as there will be saying no. I can see a real mess comming.
For sure there will be tremendous confusion and disagreement about what to reopen and when.
Mike on #4 above . It is my understanding that max unemployment was $400and now a unemployed can draw up to $1000 or 100% of their pay for the last 3? quarters. I have not researched this to know if it is true.
What I do know for sure is that an employee can quit you get a job somewhere else for 2 weeks get Laid off and draw off our rate even if we say we will take the employee back. Note: employers have an experience rate for unemployment tax. Unfair in my opinion, and causes people to not wish to work. Venezuela here we come.
Our other family business employes some 20 people
1st my son went into voluntary isolation after returning from a convention related to his business in Las Vegas, just days before mandatory lock down if you had travelled outside the country. My son decided with an abundance of caution, even though the rules did not require him to isolate
He closed the door to his office and communicated by telephone, through out the office and plant
He had his own entrance and other facilities separate from the workers
2 things to note
1: the people wanted to see him physically every day, even if thru the glass partion, they were re-assured by his presence
2:
The employees have indicated they want to work, and not avail them selves of any gov't money to stay home. They want the business to keep on producing and know the business will still be in operation any time in the future. They do not want the business to fail for lack of workers and fail to meet contractual obligations, to deliver, on time
They think a short sighted approach to staying home might mean the doors might be closed and locked some time in the future with no jobs, ever coming back. They think it is in their best interest to keep a job which means the business has the ability to pay the bills and not go BK
No business can pay the bills with out workers producing. Given the USA experience with SBA these people think the gov't is sure to muck the system up and put their jobs in jeprady if they stay home
Thus business as usual seems the safest route for these workers. So far, my son is considered an essential business with the new rules that keep changing by the day, it seems.
We are very proud of the decision our workers have made and will do our best on our end of the bargain between workers and owners of the business
Not saying things could change but so far that is our experience with our small family business
On the farm front we have people asking to work for us, so that is also good
We are keeping a tightly held, close relationship with family, with an abundance of caution. We don't even allow family to gather in more than 5 at one time and place. Just some small things that may not be required but by the time we find out somebody is infected, the circle of exposure should be limited, if that even happens.