It is going to be much worse.

This is the first week when the managers/companies started to pay attention to what is happening.

Small companies are going to lay people off this week/next week. Mass layoffs take time as a lot of states have something like a WARN act.

One should also remember that most of tipped restaurant industry gets tips on credit cards which are included in the next weekly/bi-weekly paychecks, which means people had money coming the week of lock down/last week. It is this weeek/next week's paychecks will have nothing in them.

Here's how you know we are starting to accept reality: Uber and Lyft miss the revenue numbers; at least one of the on demand delivery services abruptly closes. Ordering food at the markups of DoorDash/Postmates/UberEats/Grubhub is denial.

In an ironic twist of fate, Uber Eats might become the stronger part of the business when ridership is down but food delivery is up. My friend who is an Uber driver tells me that's what's happening in his area, in California.

That's because people still think this will be a couple of week long speed bump. Cooking at home means 10%-25% of the restaurant cost.

This is also only the beginning, as lockdowns across the nation aren’t in full swing yet.

There is usa how the implemented lockdowns work? They forced to shut down all non-essential industries and shops? Or they just suggested it?

I am finding confusing information online. Like... Did they really give to the each employer the power to decide if they are essential or not?

Each state does it in its own way, if at all. Then local cities and provinces do their own thing anyway (sometimes loosening the state-wide rules rather than tightening them).

At least some places the mandates are at the local level and businesses decide for themselves. Example: In-law's business does print advertising. One of their big clients is a fast food chain. So their company lawyers decided they can stay open because they are part of the food business and therefore essential.

The authority has been delegated to states, each state is making their own decisions.

No. The authority was never given to the federal government. Key difference. The federal government cannot grant that which it does not have

We're saying the same thing. No need to be pedantic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States%27_rights

No, it's different. Delegated to the states implies that someone else had the power and gave it to the states. That is not true. The states always had the power, and have had it since they formed, and it was not removed upon admission to the United States.

It's like saying France was delegated the power to enforce a national quarantine. That is simply not the case.

No, you are getting it backwards. The states predated the general government. The states delegated powers to the general government.

Yes. Every state has treated it slightly different. Many high-population states are under restrictive rules right now.

Some governors issued edicts listing the non-essential businesses that were to be shuttered until April 23.

The policing policy is if you are spotted as still open by code or law enforcement, you can lose your operating license.

It varies a lot by state. I know that here in SF, they had some clear rules (obviously high-contagion things must close; obviously vital things should stay open) with a lot of gray area. But they've been removing the gray area over time. Which I think has been a good approach, as economies are complex.

Yes, government is mostly nudging people towards doing the right thing.

Do we know the weekly throughput of processing unemployment requests?

The rate is hard to determine since it’s per state. There have been many reports of online systems going down and phone queues being insanely long:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/19/business/coronavirus-unem...