- March 26th, 2020, 9:27 am
#598395
Jonathan Carone wrote: ↑March 26th, 2020, 8:55 amWhat do you think the % is of those who are not working right now who are doing it voluntarily? The VAST MAJORITY are not working because they are laid off because their place of work is closed. Restoring them to 100% of their working income would be unprecedented and more than fair. The Dems can preach all they want about the great American work ethic. You start paying people double what they were making to not work and there are a boatload who will suck off the government teat as long as they possibly can. Also, not working and staying at home/socially isolating/taking precautions are separate issues. You give people a pay raise and nothing but time on their hands, their is no telling what some of them will do.Purple Haize wrote: ↑March 25th, 2020, 11:21 pmMy understanding is that in this situation, the incentive is absolutely not to go to work. It’s to stay home. If they want us to stay home for months at a time, and if they’re not pausing mortgage/rent payments, then I’m all for paying a little bit more.Jonathan Carone wrote: ↑March 25th, 2020, 10:57 pmIt is not a great idea for the exact reason you just said. The inventive is for them to GO to work. All this bill is supposed to do is keep things at status quo. We are asking people to not lose their businesses and pay their employees. Paying them over what they are making makes 0 sense
If you want someone to do something, you have to give them an incentive. If we’re asking people not to work right now, the incentive has to be greater than what they were previously doing. I don’t know that $25/hr minimum is that incentive, but giving more that what they were making isn’t a crazy idea.