AM I NEXT? WHY ARE YOU APPLAUDING THE CORONAVIRUS STIMULUS?

I am seeing numerous employers and employees cheering the proposed coronavirus stimulus legislation that appears to pay furloughed employees their entire salaries for a period of up to four months, and with a maximum proposed limit of $1,100 per week. Other provisions apply to the unemployed and those independent contractors engaged in the “gig” economy.

The idea is to help businesses to survive closures and the loss of revenue — and the continuing personnel costs. Unfortunately, many things in life have unintended consequences.

Think about it. Employers are being incentivized to furlough employees with all of the employment costs borne by the taxpayer. It sounds like a win-win for both employers and employees. Especially the larger corporations with large cash reserves.

What happened to the contract between the employer and the state in paying for state unemployment and disability premiums?

The problem is that many of those employees furloughed are not guaranteed a job when they return in four months or if the returning employee will receive the same position, salary, and benefits.

Bottom line…

Be careful what you wish! However, it might be a great opportunity to explore employment alternatives to create multiple independent revenue streams from a part-time business that can be run from your home.

THIS BILL IS NOT AGREED TO BY BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE AND SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT.

AM I NEXT? GAMBLING ON ELON MUSK?

JANUARY 13, 2021 — A SCARY STATISTIC

Tesla would need 1,600 YEARS to earn the money invested in the company on the stock market

“Experts warn that the company would need 1,600 years to earn as much money as has been invested in the stock market at this current earnings rate. Its share price is currently 128 times the amount of earnings per share. The industry average is for the share price to be around 15 times the price of earnings per share. <Source>

MAY 3, 2018 — TESLA: AND THE GAME GOES ON

It is a testament to the personal charisma of Elon Musk, the effectiveness of his graphic arts people and public relations team,  and the apparent willingness of investors to highly value a company whose cash burn rates are phenomenal and whose history is one of over-promising and under-delivering. With the only profitable quarter resulting from the sale of emissions credits to other vehicle manufacturers, one might ask what the real value is other than promises of a productive and profitable future?

Here is a vehicle company mired in side-deals like Space-X, The Boring Company, Solar City, and various battery production ventures which appear cross-collateralized to some degree. All of which require government tax abatements, grants, contracts, and subsidies to exist. It is almost like all of the Musk-related enterprises have a single customer: the government. 

It appears that Musk escaped, once again, another day of reckoning by posting another loss, but one that was smaller than Wall Street expectations – and, of course, promising a better, brighter future. In this case, claiming that the company “aimed to achieve profitability and a positive cash flow by the third and fourth quarters, turning around an era of cash burn that has fueled skepticism about the electric-car and solar-panel maker.” 

As has been mentioned before, there is nothing special about Tesla’s battery technology. And that other vehicle makers who will be entering the market in the near future with massive offerings might pose an existential threat to Tesla’s lower-cost vehicles – especially if they step-up their design game and offer a good-looking product.  Tesla’s self-driving and feature software are still questionable, and then there is the specter of soul-sucking unionization. 

Let us not forget that while Tesla is not profitable at present, it does have approximately $2.67 billion in cash-on-hand, and reported $3.4 billion in first-quarter revenue.  According to analysts, up to 31% of Tesla’s shares were borrowed by short-sellers who hope to profit from underperformance and continued delivery delays. 

IS ELON MUSK TRAPPED IN A BUBBLE?

So while investors gamble on profitability, Tesla's employees are gambling on continued employment. Even though Tesla did fire more hundreds of employees with little or no warning, citing poor performance reviews, there is no guarantee that Tesla will not adjust its headcount to meet Wall Street projections. Perhaps time to execute your side-hustle and reduce living expenses?

Change is coming. There will always be a tomorrow, no matter how much you may try to ignore it. There are no guarantees in life or promises for a bright future. Just because something bad hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't. It can happen to anyone, anytime, anywhere. No one is guaranteed to wake up tomorrow and still have a job by evening. Are you now wondering, Am I Next?

AUTOMATED AGE DISCRIMINATION

According to an investigative report from ProPublica and the New York Times, it appears that many of the nation’s most prominent companies like Amazon, Goldman Sachs, Target, Verizon, UPS, and Facebook have apparently engaged in a form of automated age discrimination on Facebook by choosing to limit the display of available jobs to selected criteria, including age ranges.

Some claim that this practice may be “blatantly unlawful” while others suggest that the companies are targeting their advertising in a cost-effective manner on a cohort that is indicative of the company’s culture.

Of course, Facebook disagrees. Ron Goldman, Vice President of Facebook Advertising has claimed in a news release that, “Used responsibly, age-based targeting for employment purposes is an accepted industry practice and for good reason: it helps employers recruit and people of all ages find work.” However, Goldman also states that: “In the last year ProPublica has uncovered a number of different flaws in our advertising systems. Several of them were serious failures on our part. It’s why we apologized and took immediate action to prevent them in the future.” Justifying Facebook’s targeting practice by claiming, “US law forbids discrimination in employment based on age, race, gender and other legally protected characteristics. That said, simply showing certain job ads to different age groups on services like Facebook or Google may not in itself be discriminatory — just as it can be OK to run employment ads in magazines and on TV shows targeted at younger or older people. What matters is that marketing is broadly based and inclusive, not simply focused on a particular age group. In addition, certain employers want to attract retirees, or recruit for jobs with specific age restrictions like the military or airline pilots.”

It should come as no surprise that someone sought to litigate the issue by bringing a legal action against Facebook in the United States District Court for Northern California.

“In this action, the Communications Workers of America (“CWA”), Linda Bradley, Maurice Anscombe, and Lura Callahan (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) seek to vindicate the rights of older workers to be free of age discrimination in employment advertising, recruitment, and hiring. They bring this action against T-Mobile US, Inc. (“T-Mobile”), Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”), Cox Communications, Inc., Cox Media Group, LLC (collectively, “Cox”), and a Defendant Class of hundreds of major American employers and employment agencies that, upon information and belief, routinely exclude older workers from receiving their employment and recruiting ads on Facebook, and thus deny older workers job opportunities. These companies eliminate older workers from receiving job ads by specifically targeting their employment ads to younger workers via Facebook’s ad platform.”

Perhaps it is time for older Americans to rethink what personal information they provide on social media sites like Facebook, LinkedIn, and others.