I do some convention work. Most labor is hired specifically for the event itself. We won't be "laid off". We'll never be offered work in the first place.
Side note: apparently this makes getting unemployment benefits a little trickier (but not impossible), since I don't have "an employer" and I wasn't let go from a job. I have "those 4 or 5 companies that do all the conventions and who hired me in the past but aren't hiring anyone this year".
It has. About a third of the full-time SXSW staff has been laid off. (And of course, countless local servers, security, caterers, registration desk people, event hall setup, etc. etc. are simply not going to get much in the way of hours over the next number of months.)
It wasn't going to be happening anyways. Those types of programs need to come from Congress, and there was zero coalition built to make them actually happen.
Look at how nationalized healthcare works in other countries (and how the ACA rolled out here) - initially sure, lots of fearmongering about how there will be death panels and super long lines... then everything gets into the hands of semi-competent people that actually build and maintain the system and the public cries foul whenever major cutbacks to the system are proposed.
Once we've overcome the knee-jerk reactionary "Don't change anything" response, then the system becomes popular and untouchable, much like Social Security and Medicare.
1. Under a single payor system (as I outlined in reasons above) Trump would not have a monopolist style of control over healthcare - systems like that become resistant to the impulses of specific administration through their popularity.
2. Oh, the whitehouse is running around like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off - state and local officials are doing pretty well and I am pretty convinced the CDC is doing a lot of work to make sure we accelerate the vaccine development.
I really really dislike the Trump administration, but it hasn't caused my to lose faith in the idea of governance. Also, to clarify, I'm not suggesting that I'd love to see Trump establish a single payor system - I assume such a system would be immeasurably damaged by intent and exist solely to damage the concept of single payor healthcare.
Side note: apparently this makes getting unemployment benefits a little trickier (but not impossible), since I don't have "an employer" and I wasn't let go from a job. I have "those 4 or 5 companies that do all the conventions and who hired me in the past but aren't hiring anyone this year".