I am not sure if this is the same small sample, but it seems working is the best chance to not catch the virus. I would assume more than 17% of people are working...
Coronavirus Update: Most NY patients are retired or unemployed, survey finds
Hospitals in New York state say only 17 percent of recently admitted patients were working, Governor Cuomo announced on Wednesday
...in other New York City news the Mayor said New York City is too bankrupt to re-open.
I think that one of the few bits of common ground is that the demographics that are seeing the worst outcomes are the elderly and people with chronic pre-existing medical conditions. Both of whom are likely to be out of work. If anything 17% seems a little higher than I would expect.
IIRC the thing that really put the frighteners on the UK government and prompted their u-turn in policy was not the 'baseline' mortality statistics coming out of Northern Italy but the numbers of hospitalisations of working age/healthy individuals which seemed to have overwhelmed their healthcare systems.
A large percentage of Americans are too broke to retire or enjoy working and keep at it well into their 70's.
Found some data quickly:
About 19% of Americans aged 65 and older are now in the workforce, up from about 12% in 1996. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that by 2026, nearly 22% of people 65 and older will be working, with those 75 and older experiencing the fastest growth rate.May 1, 2019
Yeah that seems much higher than where we are in the UK - in 2018 we had 1.2M over 65s employed and 10.6M inactive. So roughly a 10% employment rate for over 65s.
Would it be perhaps explained by the state pension system here? I don't think there's something similar in the US (but happy to be corrected if I'm wrong)?
As far as I can tell the 'contributions based' national pension scheme is pretty similar in principle. The federal means tested scheme (SSI) seems more stringent - it involves an assessment of health/disability for over 65s that we don't have for Pension Credit in the UK. That gap may be filled by social security schemes at a state level?
I imagine the US posters will have better information of how it works.
SSI is based upon disability and need. If you get more money in than the SSI will pay, you are not eligible for SSI. I understand that SSI will not pay for drug and alcohol addiction itself.
RSDI is disability based upon inability to work and what you paid in FICA taxes. The FICA tax is a general revenue tax, it goes into the general revenue fund.
Social Security payments are a gratuity paid by a grateful nation.
The income tax on employees is to be collected by the employer, who is to deduct the amount from the wages "as and when paid". Section 802 (a). He is indemnified against claims and demands of any person by reason of such payment. Ibid. The proceeds of both taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way.
The argument for petitioners is that the tax moneys are not earmarked, and that Congress is at liberty to spend them as it will. The usual separability clause is embodied in the act. Section 1103.
< Message edited by RangerJoe -- 5/7/2020 1:51:31 AM >
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child