Coronavirus Recession

eyephone said:
Republicans cry about spending but PPP is a complete failure. No regulations over it. But how about mike Flynn? (nobody cares) lol
Click to expand...
Are there any regulations covering free money handouts, proposed by Pelosi? Any regulations around Newsom pocketing out $75M of taxpayer's money for illegals? You call it a better way?
 
adventurous said:
eyephone said:
Republicans cry about spending but PPP is a complete failure. No regulations over it. But how about mike Flynn? (nobody cares) lol
Click to expand...
Are there any regulations covering free money handouts, proposed by Pelosi? Any regulations around Newsom pocketing out $75M of taxpayer's money for illegals? You call it a better way?
Click to expand...

But Trump is in favor of another round of payments to Americans. So I guess trump and Pelosi are bad? Lol

 
The last payments were passed by the house and the senate. The senate is controlled by the GOP. So Mitch the ##### signed off on the previous stimulus packages. Remember it takes two to tango.
 
eyephone said:
But Trump is in favor of another round of payments to Americans. So I guess trump and Pelosi are bad? Lol
Click to expand...
eyephone said:
The last payments were passed by the house and the senate. The senate is controlled by the GOP. So Mitch the ##### signed off on the previous stimulus packages. Remember it takes two to tango.
Click to expand...

It's called a compromise. GOP gets their PPP funds, Dems get direct handout. It's all going to be paid by the law-abiding working taxpayers.
Then again out of two evils, I prefer PPP over handouts, for the reasons I stated above.
 
adventurous said:
eyephone said:
But Trump is in favor of another round of payments to Americans. So I guess trump and Pelosi are bad? Lol
Click to expand...
eyephone said:
The last payments were passed by the house and the senate. The senate is controlled by the GOP. So Mitch the ##### signed off on the previous stimulus packages. Remember it takes two to tango.
Click to expand...

It's called a compromise. GOP gets their PPP funds, Dems get direct handout. It's all going to be paid by the law-abiding working taxpayers.
Then again out of two evils, I prefer PPP over handouts, for the reasons I stated above.
Click to expand...

PPP is 1000000x worst than TARP. (Taxpayers will be paying for this for many years. But the US taxpayers made money under TARP.) A donut shop and snack shop shop can qualify. Should they? What if they fail? The government will most likely not take over the donut shop. They will have to write if off the books with no questions asked. I predict this will happen a lot. In addition, the process to get a PPP loan I mean PPP free money is broken.

Before the crisis there was Unemployment. Mitch and Trump did not have to sign off for the extra money but they did.
 
eyephone said:
PPP is 1000000x worst than TARP. (Taxpayers will be paying for this for many years. But the US taxpayers made money under TARP.) A donut shop and snack shop shop can qualify. Should they? What if they fail? The government will most likely not take over the donut shop. They will have to write if off the books with no questions asked. I predict this will happen a lot. In addition, the process to get a PPP loan I mean PPP free money is broken.

Before the crisis there was Unemployment. Mitch and Trump did not have to sign off for the extra money but they did.
Click to expand...
I am glad you are I agreed that Pelosi is an evil witch, who favors her political benefits over the taxpaying Americans'.
Like I said, I understand the reasons PPP is conducted in the way it is. It's meant as a quick relief for a lot of small companies, helping them to stay afloat. The full bureaucracy cycle would kill the initiative. I am not a big fan of wasting the taxpayers' money, but I find PPP program work better for the U.S. economy than inflated unemployment handouts. Some of PPP money will be repaid back. 0% of unemployment handouts will be received back. Which one looks better to you from this perspective?
Trump and McConnell didn't have another option, but sign off the relief bill. Doing otherwise would lead to the political death. Pelosi didn't have to sign off on PPP as well, but she did. Again, they call it a compromise.
 
adventurous said:
eyephone said:
PPP is 1000000x worst than TARP. (Taxpayers will be paying for this for many years. But the US taxpayers made money under TARP.) A donut shop and snack shop shop can qualify. Should they? What if they fail? The government will most likely not take over the donut shop. They will have to write if off the books with no questions asked. I predict this will happen a lot. In addition, the process to get a PPP loan I mean PPP free money is broken.

Before the crisis there was Unemployment. Mitch and Trump did not have to sign off for the extra money but they did.
Click to expand...
I am glad you are I agreed that Pelosi is an evil witch, who favors her political benefits over the taxpaying Americans'.
Like I said, I understand the reasons PPP is conducted in the way it is. It's meant as a quick relief for a lot of small companies, helping them to stay afloat. The full bureaucracy cycle would kill the initiative. I am not a big fan of wasting the taxpayers' money, but I find PPP program work better for the U.S. economy than inflated unemployment handouts. Some of PPP money will be repaid back. 0% of unemployment handouts will be received back. Which one looks better to you from this perspective?
Trump and McConnell didn't have another option, but sign off the relief bill. Doing otherwise would lead to the political death. Pelosi didn't have to sign off on PPP as well, but she did. Again, they call it a compromise.
Click to expand...

Is that all you got on Pelosi? Sorry she punked Trump so many times. The famous pointing the finger at Trump while the other GOP look disgusted at Trump. When she walked out of meeting with Trump the Internet went upside down. We can not forget about the recent remark labeling Trump obese. Lol
 
Compromise is not the word I would use to describe the PPP fake loans. It is out right robbery from the US Treasury. I am sorry a five year old knows the basic concept of borrowing a toy and returning it back.

I am sorry giving money to a business that will fail is a complete joke. It is on the record that Mnuchin and staff do not look over the loans before they are funded. But should they? Should they do an analysis of the business before handing out the money. The answer is probably yes.

The conversation came up when reporters asked about how the Lakers received the PPP loan.
 
eyephone said:
Is that all you got on Pelosi? Sorry she punked Trump so many times. The famous pointing the finger at Trump while the other GOP look disgusted at Trump. When she walked out of meeting with Trump the Internet went upside down. We can not forget about the recent remark labeling Trump obese. Lol
Click to expand...
She is an outright hypocrite. What's worse, she's throwing the country economy under the truck in order to gain political benefits. She's good at political stunts, should've been a circus clown.  You can admire her, if you wish. It's a free country.

eyephone said:
Compromise is not the word I would use to describe the PPP fake loans. It is out right robbery from the US Treasury. I am sorry a five year old knows the basic concept of borrowing a toy and returning it back.

I am sorry giving money to a business that will fail is a complete joke. It is on the record that Mnuchin and staff do not look over t he loans before they are funded. But should they? Should they
do an analysis of the business before handing out the money. The answer is probably yes.
The conversation came up when reporters asked about how the Lakers received the PPP loan.
Click to expand...
Some creative companies try to abuse the program, then get caught and punished. Ruth Steakhouse learnt it hard way. Planned Parenthood is the next in the line. If some smart a$$ finds a way to benefit from that, they will eventually get screwed.

Like I said, PPP is far away from being perfect, but it provides money to the small businesses quick and let them stay afloat. Direct unemployment handouts have zero change of return, ruin the economy. Between these two, I favor PPP.
 
Sorry unemployment benefits are different from the fake PPP loans.
You can not explain the lack of analysis before funding the PPP loans. By the way banks do an analysis/approval from management before they fund private loans but I guess not the US government. I guess the difference is that banks do not like to LOSE money, but the government under Trump does not care.


adventurous said:
eyephone said:
Is that all you got on Pelosi? Sorry she punked Trump so many times. The famous pointing the finger at Trump while the other GOP look disgusted at Trump. When she walked out of meeting with Trump the Internet went upside down. We can not forget about the recent remark labeling Trump obese. Lol
Click to expand...
She is an outright hypocrite. What's worse, she's throwing the country economy under the truck in order to gain political benefits. She's good at political stunts, should've been a circus clown.  You can admire her, if you wish. It's a free country.

eyephone said:
Compromise is not the word I would use to describe the PPP fake loans. It is out right robbery from the US Treasury. I am sorry a five year old knows the basic concept of borrowing a toy and returning it back.

I am sorry giving money to a business that will fail is a complete joke. It is on the record that Mnuchin and staff do not look over t he loans before they are funded. But should they? Should they
do an analysis of the business before handing out the money. The answer is probably yes.
The conversation came up when reporters asked about how the Lakers received the PPP loan.
Click to expand...
Some creative companies try to abuse the program, then get caught and punished. Ruth Steakhouse learnt it hard way. Planned Parenthood is the next in the line. If some smart a$$ finds a way to benefit from that, they will eventually get screwed.

Like I said, PPP is far away from being perfect, but it provides money to the small businesses quick and let them stay afloat. Direct unemployment handouts have zero change of return, ruin the economy. Between these two, I favor PPP.
Click to expand...
 
The irony is that Pence and Trump back in the day criticized the banks bailout funded by TARP. TARP made money for the US taxpayers. But I guess PPP is the exact opposite. US tax payers lose big time under PPP.
 
eyephone said:
Sorry unemployment benefits are different from the fake PPP loans.
Click to expand...
Indeed, the unemployment benefits are meant to temporarily support people, who lost their income. It's not meant to encourage people to slack out. Unfortunately, this is how House is aiming to using it.
eyephone said:
You can not explain the lack of analysis before funding the PPP loans. By the way banks do an analysis/approval from management before they fund private loans but I guess not the US government. I guess the difference is that banks do not like to LOSE money, but the government under Trump does not care.
Click to expand...
Banks give out loans to get profit. PPP is meant to keep the small businesses afloat, help them quickly. See the difference?

eyephone said:
The irony is that Pence and Trump back in the day criticized the banks bailout funded by TARP. TARP made money for the US taxpayers. But I guess PPP is the exact opposite. US tax payers lose big time under PPP.
Click to expand...
PPP is not about bailing out fat cats. It's about supporting the small business in the dire situation.
 
adventurous said:
eyephone said:
Sorry unemployment benefits are different from the fake PPP loans.
Click to expand...
Indeed, the unemployment benefits are meant to temporarily support people, who lost their income. It's not meant to encourage people to slack out. Unfortunately, this is how House is aiming to using it.
eyephone said:
You can not explain the lack of analysis before funding the PPP loans. By the way banks do an analysis/approval from management before they fund private loans but I guess not the US government. I guess the difference is that banks do not like to LOSE money, but the government under Trump does not care.
Click to expand...
Banks give out loans to get profit. PPP is meant to keep the small businesses afloat, help them quickly. See the difference?

eyephone said:
The irony is that Pence and Trump back in the day criticized the banks bailout funded by TARP. TARP made money for the US taxpayers. But I guess PPP is the exact opposite. US tax payers lose big time under PPP.
Click to expand...
PPP is not about bailing out fat cats. It's about supporting the small business in the dire situation.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day. The American people want accountability. Fat or skinny cat. They should pay back the money they owe. Boycott businesses that receive PPP! That is what happened during TARP. Fair game. But Pence in Congress made a big deal about the bank bailout, but how about now? (Not a big deal? Lol)

When is the last time you went to China? What is your favorite Chinese authentic restaurant in Irvine? (per your previous post)
Do you like Panda Express? Lol
 
Forgot to post the article:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/05...-and-more-allowed-to-reopen-in-orange-county/

Dining in restaurants and shopping inside malls and stores were given a green light in Orange County on Saturday, May 23, marking a major shift to normalcy after two months of staying at home to curb the coronavirus pandemic.

Just in time for Memorial Day weekend, Gov. Gavin Newsom?s administration approved the county?s plan to expedite the latter phase of the state?s Stage 2 of gradual reopening, the Orange County Board of Supervisors announced.

Restaurants and stores still are expected to keep safety protocols in place, such as social distancing and other hygiene practices to keep customers and employees safe.

Some workplaces, such as manufacturing and offices where working from home is not possible, also were approved to reopen, as were outdoor museums and other ?limited personal services.?
Click to expand...

Not sure where Newsom announced this, can't Google it.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Forgot to post the article:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/05...-and-more-allowed-to-reopen-in-orange-county/

Dining in restaurants and shopping inside malls and stores were given a green light in Orange County on Saturday, May 23, marking a major shift to normalcy after two months of staying at home to curb the coronavirus pandemic.

Just in time for Memorial Day weekend, Gov. Gavin Newsom?s administration approved the county?s plan to expedite the latter phase of the state?s Stage 2 of gradual reopening, the Orange County Board of Supervisors announced.

Restaurants and stores still are expected to keep safety protocols in place, such as social distancing and other hygiene practices to keep customers and employees safe.

Some workplaces, such as manufacturing and offices where working from home is not possible, also were approved to reopen, as were outdoor museums and other ?limited personal services.?
Click to expand...

Not sure where Newsom announced this, can't Google it.
Click to expand...
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-23/orange-county-cleared-to-reopen-more-businesses

Been pretty good at staying at home, buying online except hitting up the post office pretty much daily but I HAD to get some things for stuff I make to sell online. Haven't been to Joann's even though they've been open the entire time (they sell fabric for masks). They have sold so much fabric they have rows of emptiness (they sell fabric but don't get normal amounts in because fabric mills in places like Bangladesh are closed). They did have what I needed though...? including flannel at prices I see only as blockbuster black Friday deals once a year so off I went.

Need some ribbon from Michaels. They are open again. Hoping to go there tomorrow. After that I'm done shopping and we'll see how it goes with whether a second wave hits us or not.

So when are offices that can work from home ok to have workers come back just cuz they don't "choose" to work at home any more? I get a whole lot more done without the better half wandering around. I'm sure he'd be a whole lot more productive in the office. Doubt he wanders the office like he does here.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Looks like OC restaurants and retail can start reopening.

Sign me up for the first 25% to dine in (an outdoor patio :) ).
Click to expand...

Tell me how it goes. May the force be with you. :)
 
So even the data says that no lockdown would have been worse for the economy (read the link qwerty!):

Economic damage could be worse without lockdown and social distancing ? study:
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news...-without-lockdown-and-social-distancing-study

The worst thing for the economy would be not acting at all to prevent disease spread, followed by too short a lockdown, according to research based on US data.

There is much debate over the economic costs of our lockdown lives: whether the mitigation of disease spread is worth the deepening financial crisis.

New research from the University of Cambridge suggests that there is no absolute trade-off between the economy and human health ? and that the price of inaction could be twice as high as that of a 'structured lockdown'.

A Cambridge economist, together with researchers at the US Federal Reserve Board, has combined macroeconomics with aspects of epidemiology to develop a model for the economic consequences of social distancing.

The study uses US economic and population data, but the researchers say their findings have implications for most developed economies.

It divides the working population into 'core workers' ? those in healthcare as well as food and transportation, sanitation and energy supply, among others ? and then everyone else, and models the spread of the virus if no action is taken.

?Without public health restrictions, the random spread of the disease will inevitably hit sectors and industries that are essential for the economy to run,? said co-author Prof Giancarlo Corsetti, from Cambridge?s Faculty of Economics.

?Labour shortfalls among core workers in particular strip more value from the economy. As essential team members within this core sector drop out of the workforce, it impairs production far more than losing those in other areas of the economy.?

By separating the core and non-core workers, the study suggests that the economy would shrink by 30% or more without lockdown and social distancing. ?By ignoring this division in the workforce, we may badly underestimate the true depth of economic damage,? Corsetti said.
Click to expand...

So there is opinion that has scientific and socioeconomic data behind it... and opinion that is backed by... qwerlogic. :)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top