2020 General Election

[HI54UNI]

Getting in line for their government handout - the line forms behind Grover Norquist....

And the Daily Caller. Total frauds.

And Media Matters.

[kalm]

And the Daily Caller. Total frauds.

And Media Matters.

Does MM preach for austerity and shrinking government to drownable in a bathtub size?

[HI54UNI]

And Media Matters.

Does MM preach for austerity and shrinking government to drownable in a bathtub size?

I don't know. Do they?

No media company should have gotten a PPP bailout.

[GannonFan]

Does MM preach for austerity and shrinking government to drownable in a bathtub size?

I don't know. Do they?

No media company should have gotten a PPP bailout.

To take the other side here, why wouldn't a media company be able to get a PPP loan? The whole idea of those loans were to keep people employed and keep businesses from going under permanently. A job is a job, no?

[HI54UNI]

I don't know. Do they?

No media company should have gotten a PPP bailout.

To take the other side here, why wouldn't a media company be able to get a PPP loan? The whole idea of those loans were to keep people employed and keep businesses from going under permanently. A job is a job, no?

Look at this list and tell me these companies are deserving of a taxpayer bailout.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5061 ... lief-loans

Newsweek? Daily Kos? Daily Caller? Media Matters? Snopes? How were any of those negatively impacted by the virus?

PPP was supposed to help small businesses but instead was rushed through with no thought. And it's not just media companies that are lined up at the trough.

[GannonFan]

To take the other side here, why wouldn't a media company be able to get a PPP loan? The whole idea of those loans were to keep people employed and keep businesses from going under permanently. A job is a job, no?

Look at this list and tell me these companies are deserving of a taxpayer bailout.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5061 ... lief-loans

Newsweek? Daily Kos? Daily Caller? Media Matters? Snopes? How were any of those negatively impacted by the virus?

PPP was supposed to help small businesses but instead was rushed through with no thought. And it's not just media companies that are lined up at the trough.

PPP was supposed to keep people on payrolls and not laid off. How is an employee at Newsweek or Daily Kos or anywhere else less of an employee than an employee at Sam's Main Street Hardware store? I'm not familiar with the business models of the companies you listed, but surely subscriptions or advertisements play some part in their revenue stream, so those certainly could've been and could still be in jeopardy throughout the pandemic. Would we rather these companies went ahead, not take the PPP money, and lay people off so that we could then pay those folks through the unemployment compensation funds? As long as these companies did nothing illegal in applying for and receiving this money then I don't see the problem.

[UNI88]

Look at this list and tell me these companies are deserving of a taxpayer bailout.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5061 ... lief-loans

Newsweek? Daily Kos? Daily Caller? Media Matters? Snopes? How were any of those negatively impacted by the virus?

PPP was supposed to help small businesses but instead was rushed through with no thought. And it's not just media companies that are lined up at the trough.

PPP was supposed to keep people on payrolls and not laid off. How is an employee at Newsweek or Daily Kos or anywhere else less of an employee than an employee at Sam's Main Street Hardware store? I'm not familiar with the business models of the companies you listed, but surely subscriptions or advertisements play some part in their revenue stream, so those certainly could've been and could still be in jeopardy throughout the pandemic. Would we rather these companies went ahead, not take the PPP money, and lay people off so that we could then pay those folks through the unemployment compensation funds? As long as these companies did nothing illegal in applying for and receiving this money then I don't see the problem.

I agree with both Ganny and Fiver. The problem wasn't that these or other companies took advantage of a program that could benefit them, they'd be fools not to. The problem was that it was as Fiver stated "rushed through with no thought" and companies who might not need it could benefit from it.

[AZGrizFan]

PPP was supposed to keep people on payrolls and not laid off. How is an employee at Newsweek or Daily Kos or anywhere else less of an employee than an employee at Sam's Main Street Hardware store? I'm not familiar with the business models of the companies you listed, but surely subscriptions or advertisements play some part in their revenue stream, so those certainly could've been and could still be in jeopardy throughout the pandemic. Would we rather these companies went ahead, not take the PPP money, and lay people off so that we could then pay those folks through the unemployment compensation funds? As long as these companies did nothing illegal in applying for and receiving this money then I don't see the problem.

I agree with both Ganny and Fiver. The problem wasn't that these or other companies took advantage of a program that could benefit them, they'd be fools not to. The problem was that it was as Fiver stated "rushed through with no thought" and companies who might not need it could benefit from it.

Oh there was plenty of thought put into it. Just no time for the opposition to digest what that thought was ultimately going to cause. Like the $600 unemployment kicker thats an incentive to NOT go back to work...

[CAA Flagship]

PPP was supposed to keep people on payrolls and not laid off. How is an employee at Newsweek or Daily Kos or anywhere else less of an employee than an employee at Sam's Main Street Hardware store? I'm not familiar with the business models of the companies you listed, but surely subscriptions or advertisements play some part in their revenue stream, so those certainly could've been and could still be in jeopardy throughout the pandemic. Would we rather these companies went ahead, not take the PPP money, and lay people off so that we could then pay those folks through the unemployment compensation funds? As long as these companies did nothing illegal in applying for and receiving this money then I don't see the problem.

I agree with both Ganny and Fiver. The problem wasn't that these or other companies took advantage of a program that could benefit them, they'd be fools not to. The problem was that it was as Fiver stated "rushed through with no thought" and companies who might not need it could benefit from it.

I don't know about "no thought". Time was critical. And there was no system in place that could accomplish the intended goal. This is a case where you are looking to hit certain percentages. 100% was not realistic. Even with 5 years of planning. It's like planning a battle in a war. You know you will have casualties. You just try to come up with a plan that will limit the casualties as much as possible while completing the objective.

[GannonFan]

I agree with both Ganny and Fiver. The problem wasn't that these or other companies took advantage of a program that could benefit them, they'd be fools not to. The problem was that it was as Fiver stated "rushed through with no thought" and companies who might not need it could benefit from it.

I don't know about "no thought". Time was critical. And there was no system in place that could accomplish the intended goal. This is a case where you are looking to hit certain percentages. 100% was not realistic. Even with 5 years of planning. It's like planning a battle in a war. You know you will have casualties. You just try to come up with a plan that will limit the casualties as much as possible while completing the objective.

Agreed, it had to be quick in order for it to work, and you could argue that the PPP worked very well - the money got out and it prevented even more people losing their jobs. Certainly wasn't perfect, but it got money into the hands of employees who would've otherwise had to try to collect unemployment.

[Ibanez]

Kane?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/electi ... -s-n897241

oh. Makes perfect sense.

[kalm]

I agree with both Ganny and Fiver. The problem wasn't that these or other companies took advantage of a program that could benefit them, they'd be fools not to. The problem was that it was as Fiver stated "rushed through with no thought" and companies who might not need it could benefit from it.

I don't know about "no thought". Time was critical. And there was no system in place that could accomplish the intended goal. This is a case where you are looking to hit certain percentages. 100% was not realistic. Even with 5 years of planning. It's like planning a battle in a war. You know you will have casualties. You just try to come up with a plan that will limit the casualties as much as possible while completing the objective.

I don’t blame them for taking the money either. I blame them for their lack of principle. Many of these groups mentioned, like Americans for Tax Reform or (wait for it) the Ayn Rand Institute, are funded by libertariantard well healed donors and their sole mission is to convince policy makers and the public to do the polar opposite of government intervention and bailouts.

It’s deliciously hypocritical.

[UNI88]

I don't know about "no thought". Time was critical. And there was no system in place that could accomplish the intended goal. This is a case where you are looking to hit certain percentages. 100% was not realistic. Even with 5 years of planning. It's like planning a battle in a war. You know you will have casualties. You just try to come up with a plan that will limit the casualties as much as possible while completing the objective.

Agreed, it had to be quick in order for it to work, and you could argue that the PPP worked very well - the money got out and it prevented even more people losing their jobs. Certainly wasn't perfect, but it got money into the hands of employees who would've otherwise had to try to collect unemployment.

They could have taken 1-2 more weeks and it would have been much better and would have saved money that could have been used for those most in need.

[UNI88]

I agree with both Ganny and Fiver. The problem wasn't that these or other companies took advantage of a program that could benefit them, they'd be fools not to. The problem was that it was as Fiver stated "rushed through with no thought" and companies who might not need it could benefit from it.

Oh there was plenty of thought put into it. Just no time for the opposition to digest what that thought was ultimately going to cause. Like the $600 unemployment kicker thats an incentive to NOT go back to work...

What opposition? Both sides were for this and included provisions that were favorable to their constituents.

[AZGrizFan]

Oh there was plenty of thought put into it. Just no time for the opposition to digest what that thought was ultimately going to cause. Like the $600 unemployment kicker thats an incentive to NOT go back to work...

What opposition? Both sides were for this and included provisions that were favorable to their constituents.

There were R senators (including McConnell) who voiced opposition to the $600 kicker on unemployment but were shouted down by those eager to thrust their snouts into the public trough.

[UNI88]

What opposition? Both sides were for this and included provisions that were favorable to their constituents.

There were R senators (including McConnell) who voiced opposition to the $600 kicker on unemployment but were shouted down by those eager to thrust their snouts into the public trough.

And there were D Senators opposed bailing out some businesses like airlines (who were in a precarious situation due to fiscal mismanagement used to juice up executive bonuses) but were shouted down by those eager to support companies thrusting their snouts into the public trough again.

[GannonFan]

What opposition? Both sides were for this and included provisions that were favorable to their constituents.

There were R senators (including McConnell) who voiced opposition to the $600 kicker on unemployment but were shouted down by those eager to thrust their snouts into the public trough.

And that's why any future stimulus will be slow coming out, if any at all. The $600 nationwide kicker (not adjusted for local cost of living) doesn't expire until the end of this month. I'm sure those in Congress will want to see how the lay of the land is once these measures are withdrawn and where the real problems are. Jobs are coming back at a rather quick pace and, at least around where I live, you see hiring signs everywhere (my company can't find enough people to hire right now). Could all come crashing down again, but the next month or two will be very telling.

[kalm]

What opposition? Both sides were for this and included provisions that were favorable to their constituents.

There were R senators (including McConnell) who voiced opposition to the $600 kicker on unemployment but were shouted down by those eager to thrust their snouts into the public trough.

Ah yes...the powerful and mighty working class lobby!!!

This was 100% election motivated.

[HI54UNI]

I don't know about "no thought". Time was critical. And there was no system in place that could accomplish the intended goal. This is a case where you are looking to hit certain percentages. 100% was not realistic. Even with 5 years of planning. It's like planning a battle in a war. You know you will have casualties. You just try to come up with a plan that will limit the casualties as much as possible while completing the objective.

I don’t blame them for taking the money either. I blame them for their lack of principle. Many of these groups mentioned, like Americans for Tax Reform or (wait for it) the Ayn Rand Institute, are funded by libertariantard well healed donors and their sole mission is to convince policy makers and the public to do the polar opposite of government intervention and bailouts.

It’s deliciously hypocritical.

I get the hypocrisy and agree. I also don't blame them or any other organization for taking the money because of the poorly designed program. But just criticizing the hypocrites is a distraction from the overall waste in a program that did much good.

[HI54UNI]

Look at this list and tell me these companies are deserving of a taxpayer bailout.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5061 ... lief-loans

Newsweek? Daily Kos? Daily Caller? Media Matters? Snopes? How were any of those negatively impacted by the virus?

PPP was supposed to help small businesses but instead was rushed through with no thought. And it's not just media companies that are lined up at the trough.

PPP was supposed to keep people on payrolls and not laid off. How is an employee at Newsweek or Daily Kos or anywhere else less of an employee than an employee at Sam's Main Street Hardware store? I'm not familiar with the business models of the companies you listed, but surely subscriptions or advertisements play some part in their revenue stream, so those certainly could've been and could still be in jeopardy throughout the pandemic. Would we rather these companies went ahead, not take the PPP money, and lay people off so that we could then pay those folks through the unemployment compensation funds? As long as these companies did nothing illegal in applying for and receiving this money then I don't see the problem.

Look at the 990 tax forms for the non-profits like Media Matters or Daily Caller and see if you still think they should've gotten this money.

[GannonFan]

PPP was supposed to keep people on payrolls and not laid off. How is an employee at Newsweek or Daily Kos or anywhere else less of an employee than an employee at Sam's Main Street Hardware store? I'm not familiar with the business models of the companies you listed, but surely subscriptions or advertisements play some part in their revenue stream, so those certainly could've been and could still be in jeopardy throughout the pandemic. Would we rather these companies went ahead, not take the PPP money, and lay people off so that we could then pay those folks through the unemployment compensation funds? As long as these companies did nothing illegal in applying for and receiving this money then I don't see the problem.

Look at the 990 tax forms for the non-profits like Media Matters or Daily Caller and see if you still think they should've gotten this money.

The money went to pay their employees, correct? And those employees were not laid off, correct? And if they had they would've been eligible for unemployment, correct? I could be wrong on these, so please let me know if so.

[kalm]

I don’t blame them for taking the money either. I blame them for their lack of principle. Many of these groups mentioned, like Americans for Tax Reform or (wait for it) the Ayn Rand Institute, are funded by libertariantard well healed donors and their sole mission is to convince policy makers and the public to do the polar opposite of government intervention and bailouts.

It’s deliciously hypocritical.

I get the hypocrisy and agree. I also don't blame them or any other organization for taking the money because of the poorly designed program. But just criticizing the hypocrites is a distraction from the overall waste in a program that did much good.

It’s only a distraction if their influence didn’t contribute to the current economic situation, especially regarding debt. IE: we could use the trillions we spent on the war in Iraq and the Bush-Trump tax cuts right about now. They’ll pivot in a heartbeat to say we can’t afford paying people to not work forgetting that the economy needs those people to continue spending money.

Rainy day fund and such....

[AZGrizFan]

There were R senators (including McConnell) who voiced opposition to the $600 kicker on unemployment but were shouted down by those eager to thrust their snouts into the public trough.

Ah yes...the powerful and mighty working class lobby!!!

This was 100% election motivated.

well its killing the economic rebound.

[UNI88]

Look at the 990 tax forms for the non-profits like Media Matters or Daily Caller and see if you still think they should've gotten this money.

The money went to pay their employees, correct? And those employees were not laid off, correct? And if they had they would've been eligible for unemployment, correct? I could be wrong on these, so please let me know if so.

Why were some not-for-profits (501c6's) excluded from PPP?

I don't blame organizations for applying for loans but the Act was poorly written. A company could have been in no danger of laying off employees, applied for and received a PPP loan, kept their employees on payroll and the loan would have been forgiven. For many organizations (and individuals), PPP (and the CARES Act) was free money from the government. That money would have been better spent being focused on organizations (and individuals) that really needed it.

[UNI88]

I don't know about "no thought". Time was critical. And there was no system in place that could accomplish the intended goal. This is a case where you are looking to hit certain percentages. 100% was not realistic. Even with 5 years of planning. It's like planning a battle in a war. You know you will have casualties. You just try to come up with a plan that will limit the casualties as much as possible while completing the objective.

I don’t blame them for taking the money either. I blame them for their lack of principle. Many of these groups mentioned, like Americans for Tax Reform or (wait for it) the Ayn Rand Institute, are funded by libertariantard well healed donors and their sole mission is to convince policy makers and the public to do the polar opposite of government intervention and bailouts.

It’s deliciously hypocritical.

This is derogatory and insulting towards people with special needs.