Ask HN: How to employ the 30M Americans that will lose their jobs?

37 points by ksj2114 ↗ HN
Most recent Coronavirus projections show that 30-40M Americans may lose their jobs.

How can new businesses / startups provide work to or help retrain this workforce over the next 6 months?

44 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 69.4 ms ] thread
Just give them their old jobs back afterwards?
Not all the jobs will still be there afterwards. If lots of restaurants, hotels, airlines, etc. go bankrupt, rebuilding will require someone who has the capital to invest in building new businesses to replace them.
Restaurants come and go all the time, I don't think there will be any big issues there. Businesses relying on tourism might be another matter.
My father is in his late 70s, but he still runs a business employing a few dozen people. He probably can't afford to keep the business afloat while everything is shut down, and he might not have the money or energy to start everything up again in a few months.

He's probably somewhat of an outlier, since most business owners are younger and will have better chances of starting over, but some business won't recover from this.

As a former waiter turned programmer, I genuinely hope we find more ways to make more programmers, even if it is at the expense of having less waiters.

Life is simply better in every way.

30M jobs “lost” in a forced moratorium. They will be gained back when the shenanigans passes with this flu.

Not like people will stop drinking, going to activities, spending money and become monks after a couple weeks.

Flu?
What’s the technical term, Wuhan Flu?
Very much not "the flu".

As far as getting old jobs back, many companies will cease to exist unless bailout money magically sustains them, which it likely won't.

Many businesses were weak, operating with high debt and thin margins. The math that allowed them to continue to exist just got destroyed, they aren't coming back. No cash flow, no cash reserves means no ability to service that debt. Taking on additional debt to bridge this crisis would create a new level of future debt service that isn't sustainable with previously good revenues.

Disposable income is going to be gone for many until we get a vaccine rolled out in 18-24 months. Hospitality, travel, foodservicr, events and entertainment industries will be decimated until we reach herd immunity.

Number still are less than the flu. And are trending down, not up. So reality WILL kick in and people will get back to work. Except for the socialists whom will continue hiding in the basement.
The first iteration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

Today’s version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal

The federal government acts as employer of last resort.

What do we do once there's no more money to print?
Everyone will be dead by then. See Bank of Japan, or Europe and negative interest rate policy.

We can print tens of trillions and still not see inflation, if we control the costs of healthcare and education. One should not think about nation state budgets like a household budget. We’ve already spent $2 trillion on the first stimulus salvo in the US, and discussions for the next round are already taking place. The Federal Reserve has committed to “unlimited support”, so the decision has already been made; we’re just haggling over how it’s going to be spent at this point.

Do you mind explaining "We can print tens of trillions and still not see inflation, if we control the costs of healthcare and education."?
Happy to. If you have inelastic demand for something, the cost will rise to consume all available dollars. Educational costs rise faster than inflation because the federal government hands out loans that you can’t default on. Healthcare costs rise because you have no alternative to health insurance premiums, copays, and deductibles except going without (to great peril). You need a degree to check a box for employment, you need healthcare to not die. The money your central bank prints is then consumed inefficiently.

Looking at other goods and services, there’s only so much food, energy, clothing, and so on you can consume. Additional dollars beyond a certain point provide diminishing marginal utility. Bill Gates doesn’t order tractor trailers worth of food; he requires roughly the same amount of calories as you do.

So! Due to the transition to a services based economy, the US economy slowly but surely moving away from oil needed for growth (over the last 15 years), global demand for dollars, and structural demographic changes (an older population consumes less of everything except healthcare), we can print fiat without issue with some cost controls around inelastic needs.

> Do you mind explaining "We can print tens of trillions and still not see inflation, if we control the costs of healthcare and education."?

At a high level, there are only a few productive economies in the world: USA, Germany, and to a lesser extent Japan and S. Korea.

The rest of the world consists of countries that are either small, subsistence farmers or welfare states.

So the USA can basically do whatever it wants monetarily. It also helps that it's the only global currency. You can go to the farthest ends of the earth, and people hoard US dollars there.

Everyone of us might be dead in the next 30-50 years, but the coming generation will bear the fiscal burden of this profligacy (either implicitly through inflation or through a currency devaluation).

If so much money is printed (& spent) and (real economic) inflation is not seen, the logical implication is: a) The wealthy absorbed the domestic money in (real) asset price inflation (hence lower yields and higher wealth inequality). b) The money was "exported" out of the country to purchase foreign goods and services (leaving an interest rate burden that will eventually suck the "real" tax budget dry).

The petrodollar will keep the USD strong no matter how much "money printing" is done. The money "exported" to purchase goods represents the value that America gets to extract from the world from it's hegemony. We'll be fine.
We didn’t spend $2T last time; they were loans, repaid with interest.
You can print money because US dollar is used as in international exchange. Oil prices are in USD. Basically, printing money will transfer the economic burden to all others.

If third parties start using other currencies, printing money won't help.

Somewhat interesting and purely academic curiosity, but US GDP (20 trillion) split evenly among US pop (330 million) is roughly $60k/year, compared to average income at $63k/year.
Interesting, but only about half those people work, and even fewer full time.
Well, actually-

There is a way of calculating GDP that uses aggregated payroll income...but it also uses other accounting measures that reflect the notion of "national income", like corporate profits (which are revenue in excess of expenses, which include payrolls) as well as others.

The interesting point is that less than 50% of the US population are on payroll. So summing the average income of 63k/year for everyone on payroll accounts for well less than half of GDP.

The point you wanted to make was- where the F are all the rest of those sweet sweet income money dollars going?

Base it on just the adult population of around 254 million and it goes up to over $78k/year.
That includes children. And, remember that the median income is only 30k, so the average is skewed by a few people at the top making ridiculous amounts of money. But if it were split evenly, you’re right, the median American would at least double their income!
The workforce won't need retraining. The economy will need capital so there can be a workforce.
Things are getting weird. I’m not sure how many people are even going to want to go back work at a normal job after a month or two.

A lot of people losing their jobs are people making less than $20/hr, and right now unemployment pays more than working. In fact, in California if you make under $25/hr your unemployment check will be bigger than your regular check. This only goes to July 31, but this sort of distortion is going to completely upend the labor market. If you made between $7.25 and $25 an hour there is little incentive for you to look for a job until July 31.

Social distancing in some form will likely continue through June, at least. So I doubt the economy snaps back overnight and everyone gets rehired in a months time. So there is your extra slack. However you haven’t experienced this situation nor thought about it much so let me enlighten you about how there is no extra incentive to stay unemployed.

If you happen to have benefits, you lost them with unemployment. Matched retirement contributions, health insurance, tuition reimbursement, etc.

Do you know how much full insurance premiums are for most plans with COBRA? My brief unemployment experience showed me that just for me it ended up being nearly 700 a month and that’s someone in their late 20’s at the time with not the best healthcare plan I could have gotten but the middle range one with a 1500 deductible. For a family of 4? Easily 2k.

What you’re saying is we shouldn’t pay people to also sort of kinda have enough money to continue health insurance during a pandemic??? For those to don’t have it and do get sick enough to need care there goes a good portion of that extra money and likely even more, especially if it involves hospitalization - without insurance or a job they’ll likely be bankrupt unless that happen to have a lot in savings.

You also have to skip a week with unemployment before taking the benefit, that’s a week lost income. Finally only in the states with the best benefits, eg NY pays 80% of your salary, do you possibly come out ahead. Some states only pay 45-50% cause they don’t fund their versions as much comparatively.

Additionally unemployment is backlogged that means delayed payments and thus people will possibly incur late fees, interest and other penalties and costs associated with that.

Finally even if somehow someone comes out ahead due to being in a state that gives you a high percentage of your over all income, the amount of situations like that is small and if it happens it is likely a marginal increase at best. Considering we are likely not going to have enough jobs to get people back to work in any significant numbers by July anyway, consider any increase after all that a slight additional stimulus check for people who have been impacted by this and happen to also be low wage workers.

We decided to furlough people so they could keep their benefits. Also paid out their PTO balance which should hold them over until unemployment kicks in.

Here in California someone making $15/hr was making $600/wk. On unemployment they will now make $877/wk. That’s a 46% increase. It’s huge. We were trying to keep people employed while staying home but people literally started filing for unemployment anyway.

Did you offer health insurance? Again COBRA costs will easily take that extra $277 per week or more if you have a family. This situation is limited, it only applies to the few states with good unemployment compensation, if the person is a minimum wage worker and also if that someone didn’t have insurance, doesn’t opt for cobra (or has been picking up a separate plan through the ACA exchanges) and/or its just coverage for themselves for cobra then they might come out ahead. This extra money lasts until July and that’s it.

I’m guessing some people might rethink it when they see the costs of cobra and the fact that the sooner they hit the unemployment compensation the sooner they start the clock of limited benefits. If they need it for more than 6 months or whatever the state allows the max to be then they’re going to regret not first going for being furloughed. Unfortunately people also aren’t rational or forward thinking.

The way they did unemployment insurance certainly isn’t perfect in the stimulus bill. But I don’t think it’s all that problematic.

We pay 100% health insurance and will try to keep it as long as possible while they are furloughed. Things change day to day though. A number of our buyers, including some large public companies, decided to just stop paying their bills by switching to net-180 terms.

I can tell you right now most $15/hr employees aren’t too worried about health insurance. Most of them have gone their entire life without, so suddenly losing it again isn’t as big a deal as you might think.

I don't know anything about economics. My thoughts keep gravitating towards the US and Canada employing people to invest in infrastructure upgrades. It's a way to address a serious concern in both countries (especially the US), put cash into the hands of citizens, thus the economy, and give a lot of people a bit of hope.

You wouldn't need to create tens of millions of jobs directly in infrastructure, just enough that the money would move around and make related business possible.

Maybe this is a really stupid idea, I don't know.

Helicopter money. The fed has fired up the money printer and will shovel cash out the door to any company that can take it and retain/hire people (though I suspect a substantial chunk of that will be raked by business owners and financial middlemen).

The reason that helicopter money won't lead to hyper-inflation is because the entire rest of the world is just as fucked as we are, so the dollar will remain the safest currency no matter how much the money supply is increased.

Green New Deal has a Plan. Clearly the Gov. has the spare cash. Great opportunity to get serious about Climate, which if unattended-to will make Covid look like a walk in the park. Who knows, maybe we could catch up with India in renewable energy in a year or three.
What's the plan? Where do you think the cash comes from? How will climate change going to factor in?
For one, the US government subsidies a lot of fossil fuel companies, easily worth 50-60 billion in cash
That 50-60 billion isn't going to do much for the GND. You need to come up with something like 200 trillion.
This is completely baseless. Even if climate change was relevant, the money doesn't come from government, it comes from small business.

Lets not forget who started this nonsense #FakePandemic and hold them accountable: Democrats and the Mainstream Media

Give them solid union jobs in manufacturing.
I suppose that will work in states that still have unions, but I know for sure that a lot of the states that are seeing large increases in manufacturing jobs are seeing that because companies fleeing unions.
The green new deal sounds like a perfect opportunity... but unlikely in the next 6 months.

A UBI in the meantime would be a super cheap way to prevent a lot of issues.

There are also twists to this story. I am a retired engineer with considerable drainage and roadway experience. The infrastructure bill will increase the demand for my skills, which can be in short supply in normal times. I may have a technical duty to go back to work to assist enabling the actual construction work.
My biggest concern of the current recession is that a lot of jobs wont recover. They will be replaced with automation.

Companies now realise that the more services they can run autopilot the better they will weather future storms