Those R Pols who are against extending the $600 UI benefit EACH make at least $174,000 a year

[stopbush]

$174,000 a year. That’s the base salary for a US Senator or House Rep.

Mitch McConnell is worth $34-million and is paid $193,400 a year as Senate Majority Leader.

Yet, the Rs believe that giving unemployed Americans $600 a week ($2400 a month, $31,200 a year) is “too generous,” and a “disincentive to going back to work,” even though most of those unemployed have lost their health insurance along with their jobs - a major part of any worker’s financial reality that never seems to get mentioned by the “too generous” crowd.

BTW: $600 a week = 40 hours a week @ $15 an hour. Basically, what a minimum wage job SHOULD pay in 2020. Minimally. In short, Rs think people getting the equivalent of MINIMUM WAGE is being too generous.

Do we ever stop to think just how obscene this all is?

[Brainfodder]

1. Every day since I am both unemployed and no HC insurance in sight?

One major problem from deeper hole then 1 might expect to ever get out of, all caz of greed in that whole industry in the U.S. and one that should be taken over, IMHO, entirely for the good of the citizenry since we are all really involved and paying 2-3x more than we should for it?

The rich will still have every advantage no matter what, the cost is too fucking high for all!!!!

Pharma companies get tax payers funding their R&D and then turn around and rip us off on prices?
WTF is the outrage and protesting on THIS?

[LonePirate]

2. Repubs are we only concerned with humans being at work making them money.

They don’t want people sitting home and not spreading this virus because the Repubs wealthy benefactors do not make money when people stay home. They believe humans lost due to the virus can be replafed; but they cannot replace lost income due to shutdowns.

[Hoyt]

3. To be a bit fair, UI also get state unemployment. In my red state, that pumps the yearly equivalent

to over $51,000. That is one of the things that have helped prop up the economy.

I'm all for extending the $600, although I'd bet that the GOPers will put a cap on it such that the combined payment can't be more than one's average/typical wage before the pandemic.

[stopbush]

4. But there is a wide range to what each state pays.

Here in CA, the max is $450 a week. And not everyone gets the max.

Unemployment generally pays 50% of your weekly gross income, so, if you are making $10 an hour, expect to receive $5 an hour in UI benefits, or $200 a week.

Also, if the GOP is going to “cap” your benefit based on what you actually make, what happens if you live in CA where your fulltime job was paying you $3000 a week? Do you get $1500 a week instead of the $450+$600?

[Hoyt]

5. So, in California someone who was making roughly $20K a year gets roughly $40K in UI

with combined fed and state funding until the end of July.

If the person was making "$3000 week," in your last example, that's over $150,000 a year. I'm sorry, I don't think any unemployment plan should replace that much income.

If you meant $3000/month (equivalent to $36K a year), you'd get $36K under the fed plus state plan if feds had a cap.

[stopbush]

6. Income is relative. My rent is $3200 a month. It's not what you make,

it’s what you keep.

As far as getting $40k as opposed to $20k - only if the Fed $600 runs for 52 weeks. As it is now, it expires after about 20 weeks. And as it is now, that person making $20,000 in CA will be down to $192 a week in UI benefits if the $600 isn’t extended.

[Hoyt]

7. I'll bet they extend the federal share, but again with a cap.

[stopbush]

8. I think they will, too.

BTW - median middle-class income in CA is $77,000.

Average rent runs 70% higher than median in the rest of the country.