Tax Reform

CM189191

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

I'm sorry, I think it's terrible for people to think positively of the French Revolution, even just a little bit.  The fact that a popular left wing rag is called Jacobin is shameful.  

What revolutions do you think are ok?

The American Revolution, as an example, where the point wasn't to execute citizens, rather to fight soldiers.  

Do you think it's perfectly acceptable to execute citizens, men, women and children?  And if you studied the French Revolution, you'll know that the reign of terror quickly spread to the same peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed.  See Robespierre, Maximilien.  

peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed:

Um okay, non-sequitur.  What are you saying then, because of these douchebags we should start executing other citizens?  I'm not following the logic. 

Citizens are already being executed.  It's already started.  

So you're all about that?  Eye for eye?  Are they being executed like in a Soviet Gulag?  Is it more like a Nazi deathcamp?  Or are we seeing it in the public square like the French Revolution? Where does it start, where does it stop?  Are you actually thinking through what you are supporting here, because this feels like a Breitbart conversation.  

It's already started.  

Voting has failed us
The courts have failed us
The police have failed us
Peaceful protesting has failed us

Now it's just a matter of who gets to decide where and when it stops.  





"Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves.

"Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honorably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness.

"God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.

"We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

"Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

That's fucking crazy talk.  If you think that's the future, you would be wise to head to Canada right now.  If I thought that, I would be gone.  

I don't think that's future. 

It's happening now. 

Right before our eyes.

mrussel1

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

I'm sorry, I think it's terrible for people to think positively of the French Revolution, even just a little bit.  The fact that a popular left wing rag is called Jacobin is shameful.  

What revolutions do you think are ok?

The American Revolution, as an example, where the point wasn't to execute citizens, rather to fight soldiers.  

Do you think it's perfectly acceptable to execute citizens, men, women and children?  And if you studied the French Revolution, you'll know that the reign of terror quickly spread to the same peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed.  See Robespierre, Maximilien.  

peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed:

Um okay, non-sequitur.  What are you saying then, because of these douchebags we should start executing other citizens?  I'm not following the logic. 

Citizens are already being executed.  It's already started.  

So you're all about that?  Eye for eye?  Are they being executed like in a Soviet Gulag?  Is it more like a Nazi deathcamp?  Or are we seeing it in the public square like the French Revolution? Where does it start, where does it stop?  Are you actually thinking through what you are supporting here, because this feels like a Breitbart conversation.  

It's already started.  

Voting has failed us
The courts have failed us
The police have failed us
Peaceful protesting has failed us

Now it's just a matter of who gets to decide where and when it stops.  





"Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves.

"Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honorably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness.

"God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.

"We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

"Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

That's fucking crazy talk.  If you think that's the future, you would be wise to head to Canada right now.  If I thought that, I would be gone.  

I don't think that's future. 

It's happening now. 

Right before our eyes.

What are these examples of government executing citizens? And don't use police brutality because that's been happening for 200 years. 

CM189191

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

I'm sorry, I think it's terrible for people to think positively of the French Revolution, even just a little bit.  The fact that a popular left wing rag is called Jacobin is shameful.  

What revolutions do you think are ok?

The American Revolution, as an example, where the point wasn't to execute citizens, rather to fight soldiers.  

Do you think it's perfectly acceptable to execute citizens, men, women and children?  And if you studied the French Revolution, you'll know that the reign of terror quickly spread to the same peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed.  See Robespierre, Maximilien.  

peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed:

Um okay, non-sequitur.  What are you saying then, because of these douchebags we should start executing other citizens?  I'm not following the logic. 

Citizens are already being executed.  It's already started.  

So you're all about that?  Eye for eye?  Are they being executed like in a Soviet Gulag?  Is it more like a Nazi deathcamp?  Or are we seeing it in the public square like the French Revolution? Where does it start, where does it stop?  Are you actually thinking through what you are supporting here, because this feels like a Breitbart conversation.  

It's already started.  

Voting has failed us
The courts have failed us
The police have failed us
Peaceful protesting has failed us

Now it's just a matter of who gets to decide where and when it stops.  





"Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves.

"Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honorably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness.

"God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.

"We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

"Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

That's fucking crazy talk.  If you think that's the future, you would be wise to head to Canada right now.  If I thought that, I would be gone.  

I don't think that's future. 

It's happening now. 

Right before our eyes.

What are these examples of government executing citizens? And don't use police brutality because that's been happening for 200 years. 

Enjoy Canada

mrussel1

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

I'm sorry, I think it's terrible for people to think positively of the French Revolution, even just a little bit.  The fact that a popular left wing rag is called Jacobin is shameful.  

What revolutions do you think are ok?

The American Revolution, as an example, where the point wasn't to execute citizens, rather to fight soldiers.  

Do you think it's perfectly acceptable to execute citizens, men, women and children?  And if you studied the French Revolution, you'll know that the reign of terror quickly spread to the same peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed.  See Robespierre, Maximilien.  

peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed:

Um okay, non-sequitur.  What are you saying then, because of these douchebags we should start executing other citizens?  I'm not following the logic. 

Citizens are already being executed.  It's already started.  

So you're all about that?  Eye for eye?  Are they being executed like in a Soviet Gulag?  Is it more like a Nazi deathcamp?  Or are we seeing it in the public square like the French Revolution? Where does it start, where does it stop?  Are you actually thinking through what you are supporting here, because this feels like a Breitbart conversation.  

It's already started.  

Voting has failed us
The courts have failed us
The police have failed us
Peaceful protesting has failed us

Now it's just a matter of who gets to decide where and when it stops.  





"Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves.

"Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honorably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness.

"God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.

"We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

"Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

That's fucking crazy talk.  If you think that's the future, you would be wise to head to Canada right now.  If I thought that, I would be gone.  

I don't think that's future. 

It's happening now. 

Right before our eyes.

What are these examples of government executing citizens? And don't use police brutality because that's been happening for 200 years. 

Enjoy Canada

Uh huh

Gern Blansten

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

I'm sorry, I think it's terrible for people to think positively of the French Revolution, even just a little bit.  The fact that a popular left wing rag is called Jacobin is shameful.  

What revolutions do you think are ok?

The American Revolution, as an example, where the point wasn't to execute citizens, rather to fight soldiers.  

Do you think it's perfectly acceptable to execute citizens, men, women and children?  And if you studied the French Revolution, you'll know that the reign of terror quickly spread to the same peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed.  See Robespierre, Maximilien.  

peasants and bourgeoisie who led the initial bloodshed:

Um okay, non-sequitur.  What are you saying then, because of these douchebags we should start executing other citizens?  I'm not following the logic. 

Citizens are already being executed.  It's already started.  

So you're all about that?  Eye for eye?  Are they being executed like in a Soviet Gulag?  Is it more like a Nazi deathcamp?  Or are we seeing it in the public square like the French Revolution? Where does it start, where does it stop?  Are you actually thinking through what you are supporting here, because this feels like a Breitbart conversation.  

It's already started.  

Voting has failed us
The courts have failed us
The police have failed us
Peaceful protesting has failed us

Now it's just a matter of who gets to decide where and when it stops.  





"Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves.

"Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honorably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness.

"God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.

"We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

"Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

That's fucking crazy talk.  If you think that's the future, you would be wise to head to Canada right now.  If I thought that, I would be gone.  

I don't think that's future. 

It's happening now. 

Right before our eyes.

your hero tRump is allowing this to happen?  Blasphemy!! 

cincybearcat

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

static111 said:

Many people are saying that trump paid $750 more than Amazon in taxes, but that’s just smart business.

Good for the stockholders too

I don't defend either.  But remember, with Trump we are talking about his personal income taxes, not how much a particular business paid.  These are two separate things.  And in neither case do I think Bezos or Trump should be executed. 

To me it makes a case that the tax code is a bigger problem than Trump only paying $750.  Obviously Trump tipped the scale more in favor of the ultra wealthy, but it didn’t start with him.  Which is why this story will go away,  too many moneyed interests and high net worth people have too much to lose by focusing a microscope on tax codes and loopholes that benefit the rich.

My favorite defense from a trumper former co-worker is "Who wrote the tax codes??? Biden was in congress for 47 years!!!! Trump is just taking advantage of it".  He also goes on and on about "term limits for congress".

But when I asked him if he ever voted against Chuck Grassley or his new senator Lindsey Graham since they've spent 45 & 25 years respectively in congress.....he gets quiet.  Blame the people that write the tax codes when people cheat but it's always the other guy's rep or senator that's the problem!!!

Gern Blansten

cincybearcat said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

static111 said:

Many people are saying that trump paid $750 more than Amazon in taxes, but that’s just smart business.

Good for the stockholders too

I don't defend either.  But remember, with Trump we are talking about his personal income taxes, not how much a particular business paid.  These are two separate things.  And in neither case do I think Bezos or Trump should be executed. 

To me it makes a case that the tax code is a bigger problem than Trump only paying $750.  Obviously Trump tipped the scale more in favor of the ultra wealthy, but it didn’t start with him.  Which is why this story will go away,  too many moneyed interests and high net worth people have too much to lose by focusing a microscope on tax codes and loopholes that benefit the rich.

My favorite defense from a trumper former co-worker is "Who wrote the tax codes??? Biden was in congress for 47 years!!!! Trump is just taking advantage of it".  He also goes on and on about "term limits for congress".

But when I asked him if he ever voted against Chuck Grassley or his new senator Lindsey Graham since they've spent 45 & 25 years respectively in congress.....he gets quiet.  Blame the people that write the tax codes when people cheat but it's always the other guy's rep or senator that's the problem!!!

And the tax code is just a method of reporting....he still lost money...that he is able to take "depreciation" is beside the point because depreciation just represents expensing property.  Yes, sometimes you can take more expense than you have actually paid cash for (i.e. you buy a piece of equipment for $100K and write the whole thing off at once even though you bought it with borrowed money) but over time depreciation just represents cash paid.

I remember Bill Maher talking about how you could tell tRump didn't have any money because of the shit he would put his name on.  Water, vodka, steak, TrumpU, etc.  He needs cash from whatever source he can get it because the banks are choking him.  And I'll never forget him suggesting that he could still do The Apprentice from the WH.  He fucking needs the money.

My point being...it isn't the tax code...he doesn't make any fucking money

Halifax2TheMax

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

static111 said:

Many people are saying that trump paid $750 more than Amazon in taxes, but that’s just smart business.

Good for the stockholders too

I don't defend either.  But remember, with Trump we are talking about his personal income taxes, not how much a particular business paid.  These are two separate things.  And in neither case do I think Bezos or Trump should be executed. 

To me it makes a case that the tax code is a bigger problem than Trump only paying $750.  Obviously Trump tipped the scale more in favor of the ultra wealthy, but it didn’t start with him.  Which is why this story will go away,  too many moneyed interests and high net worth people have too much to lose by focusing a microscope on tax codes and loopholes that benefit the rich.

My favorite defense from a trumper former co-worker is "Who wrote the tax codes??? Biden was in congress for 47 years!!!! Trump is just taking advantage of it".  He also goes on and on about "term limits for congress".

But when I asked him if he ever voted against Chuck Grassley or his new senator Lindsey Graham since they've spent 45 & 25 years respectively in congress.....he gets quiet.  Blame the people that write the tax codes when people cheat but it's always the other guy's rep or senator that's the problem!!!

And the tax code is just a method of reporting....he still lost money...that he is able to take "depreciation" is beside the point because depreciation just represents expensing property.  Yes, sometimes you can take more expense than you have actually paid cash for (i.e. you buy a piece of equipment for $100K and write the whole thing off at once even though you bought it with borrowed money) but over time depreciation just represents cash paid.

I remember Bill Maher talking about how you could tell tRump didn't have any money because of the shit he would put his name on.  Water, vodka, steak, TrumpU, etc.  He needs cash from whatever source he can get it because the banks are chocking him.  And I'll never forget him suggesting that he could still do The Apprentice from the WH.  He fucking needs the money.

My point being...it isn't the tax code...he doesn't make any fucking money

He loses more than he makes, way more. The Team Trump Treason organization is a Ponzi scheme and it’s going to come tumbling down. Bernie Madoff kept his afloat for 25 years. Seems about right.

Halifax2TheMax

We don't need tax reform, naaaaaaaaah, what we really need is a tax cut for the wealthy 1%.

The richest 1 percent dodge taxes on more than one-fifth of their income, study shows

Those at the very top of the income spectrum deny the U.S. government roughly $175 billion a year in revenue, researchers estimate.

The richest Americans are hiding more than 20 percent of their earnings from the Internal Revenue Service, according to a comprehensive new estimate of tax evasion, with the top 1 percent of earners accounting for more than a third of all unpaid federal taxes.

That’s costing the federal government roughly $175 billion a year in revenue, according to the findings by a team of economists from academia and the IRS.

The data come as Senate Democrats consider raising taxes on the ultrawealthy to reduce inequality and fund their legislative priorities. President Biden, in a sharp reversal from his predecessor, has signaled that he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy, corporations and estates.

The researchers say that years of IRS funding cuts, combined with the increased sophistication of tax evasion tactics available to the rich, have made shirking tax obligations easier than ever. And they say that these estimates probably understate the true extent of tax evasion at the top of the income spectrum.

To catch tax cheats and measure evasion, the IRS randomly audits returns. But such reviews turn up very little evidence of evasion among the extremely wealthy, in part because the rich use sophisticated accounting techniques that are difficult to trace, like offshore tax shelters, pass-through businesses and complex conservation easements.

The IRS attempts to correct for this through a number of statistical methods. But the new study finds that even the IRS’s standard corrections underestimate the true extent of tax evasion among the rich.

The researchers were able to demonstrate this after the IRS and Justice Department initiated a crackdown on tax evasion in 2008. That effort led to the creation of the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program, which allowed taxpayers to disclose previously hidden offshore assets and pay a penalty in exchange for immunity from prosecution. According to the IRS, tens of thousands of taxpayers took advantage of the program before it shut down in 2018.

Hundreds of those taxpayers, as it turns out, had also been randomly audited before the creation of the program. The researchers matched those audits with the subsequent disclosures, and found that IRS auditors missed the offshore assets roughly 93 percent of the time.

These riches sheltered overseas, moreover, were concentrated almost exclusively among the very top earners.

The study also uncovered evidence of widespread underreporting of income among proprietors of pass-through businesses, whose revenue are taxed on their owners’ returns. “Up to 35% of the income earned at the top is not comprehensively examined in the context of random audits,” the authors found.

Factoring in underreporting from overseas tax shelters and pass-through businesses alone, the authors produced an estimate of the true distribution of tax evasion in the United States. Taxpayers in the bottom half of the income spectrum evade taxes on around 7 percent of their income. Among the top fifth of taxpayers, however, avoidance rises to around 10 percent.

But evasion peaks among the richest 5 percent, who have an income of at least $200,000 and who, as a cohort, capture more than one-third of total national earnings. Taxpayers in this group hide more than 20 percent of their income from tax collectors.

In total, nearly $1 out of every $12 earned in the United States is sheltered from federal income taxes because of the sophisticated evasion techniques of people earning more than $200,000 a year.

“The IRS needs a lot more resources from Congress,” said Daniel Reck, a lead author of the study, via email. He said the agency should “invest in more comprehensive examination strategies, involving audits of individuals, pass-through businesses, and other private entities (charities, trusts, etc.). It needs to hire and train large numbers of experts to conduct those more comprehensive examinations.”

“They can absolutely do all of this, but budget cuts have severely curtailed their ability to do it,” he added.

Since 2010, total funding for the IRS fell by about 20 percent, according to recent congressional testimony by IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig. The number of enforcement staff employed by the agency fell 30 percent over the same period.

Those staffing cuts have, in turn, driven a sharp drop in audit rates, especially for wealthy taxpayers. In the mid-2010s, close to 30 percent of the returns of the richest 0.01 percent of taxpayers — those earning at least $10 million a year — were typically audited. By 2019, that number had fallen to well under 10 percent.

Steven Rosenthal, a tax policy expert at the Urban Institute who was not involved with the research, cautioned that tax return data from the pre-offshore crackdown era may be limited in terms of what it can tell us about evasion today.

“Since the 2000s, the IRS effectively shut down offshore accounts by aggressive enforcement, reporting, etc.,” he said via email. “And I do not see why we would expect taxpayers who used offshore accounts in the 2000s to migrate to other unlawful activity.”

But, Reck countered, “it would be a big mistake to claim that offshore evasion is virtually nonexistent in 2021.” To prove his case, he points to whistleblower reports claiming large banks continued to help wealthy clients stash money offshore after the crackdown, a 2018 Treasury Department report criticizing the IRS for not pursuing offshore evasion aggressively enough, and the 2020 federal indictment of billionaire software executive Robert Brockman on tax evasion charges involving offshore holdings.

“People might have a harder time simply stashing wealth in Switzerland now, but they can still create complex networks of offshore and US entities and adopt ludicrously aggressive tax positions, like Brockman did,” Reck said.

Rosenthal also noted that the distinction between legal tax avoidance and illegal tax evasion gets extremely muddy at the top of the income spectrum, where billionaires like Donald Trump employ teams of lawyers and accountants to push the limits of what the tax code allows — in Trump’s case, allowing him to pay just $750 in 2017 on millions of dollars in income.

“Lowering your tax bill from many complicated structures is not clearly unlawful,” he said. “The IRS might win or lose in court,” or they might simply opt for a settlement somewhere in the middle.

“Hiring more agents would help,” he added. But, “the solution to this avoidance at the top end is write better tax rules.”

Gern Blansten

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

static111

Lol remember the debates going on about the 1400 because “rich” combined incomes of up to 150k might get a little help...this government is psychotic

mrussel1

static111 said:

Lol remember the debates going on about the 1400 because “rich” combined incomes of up to 150k might get a little help...this government is psychotic

I don't understand this.  

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

JB16057

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

I don't think we'll ever know the extent of the damage these PPP loans have done. I know they've helped quite a few businesses stay open as some people used these funds for their true purpose and they really did need them. I've talked to quite a few different businesses and have asked them if they took these PPP loans. Out of all them I've talked to, 90% of them did not need these loans and took advantage. Construction companies made out like bandits because they were never really shut down and by March of last year, they had a full year of scheduled work on the books already. They took these PPP loans and increased their own wealth. They didn't need to take these PPP loans to stay open. I don't know the situation with Pearl Jam but they took one of these loans as well. Did they really need that money? I don't know about their financial position but the band itself is worth millions so I doubt they really needed that money.

The last guy I spoke with is starting a porta potty business which he already owns another succesful business. He told me that all of the equipment he bought was all paid for. He had spent somewhere around $36,000 without having to take a loan. He then told me that he took the PPP loans for his main business which allowed him to transfer money over to start this new porta potty business. I've heard other business people buying boats and cars with their PPP loans.

Someone is going to have to pay for these free loans. I know it helped a ton of people but it makes me sick to think that so many people took this money and didn't really need it. Most won't have to pay back these loans because they were able to take advantage of the system.

I own a business and I didn't take any of these loans because I didn't need them. My business took a huge hit but the business was able to survive and I'm too honest. "Don't get me wrong... if I qualified I would get it" is such an irresponsible way to think about this but this is the norm. If you truly needed it, I would understand but these programs are mostly helping the rich get richer and is just increasing the deficit.

mrussel1

JB16057 said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

I don't think we'll ever know the extent of the damage these PPP loans have done. I know they've helped quite a few businesses stay open as some people used these funds for their true purpose and they really did need them. I've talked to quite a few different businesses and have asked them if they took these PPP loans. Out of all them I've talked to, 90% of them did not need these loans and took advantage. Construction companies made out like bandits because they were never really shut down and by March of last year, they had a full year of scheduled work on the books already. They took these PPP loans and increased their own wealth. They didn't need to take these PPP loans to stay open. I don't know the situation with Pearl Jam but they took one of these loans as well. Did they really need that money? I don't know about their financial position but the band itself is worth millions so I doubt they really needed that money.

The last guy I spoke with is starting a porta potty business which he already owns another succesful business. He told me that all of the equipment he bought was all paid for. He had spent somewhere around $36,000 without having to take a loan. He then told me that he took the PPP loans for his main business which allowed him to transfer money over to start this new porta potty business. I've heard other business people buying boats and cars with their PPP loans.

Someone is going to have to pay for these free loans. I know it helped a ton of people but it makes me sick to think that so many people took this money and didn't really need it. Most won't have to pay back these loans because they were able to take advantage of the system.

I own a business and I didn't take any of these loans because I didn't need them. My business took a huge hit but the business was able to survive and I'm too honest. "Don't get me wrong... if I qualified I would get it" is such an irresponsible way to think about this but this is the norm. If you truly needed it, I would understand but these programs are mostly helping the rich get richer and is just increasing the deficit.

I can give you some counter-anecdotal information.  My company has about 100 suppliers in our network.  They range from 10 to 300 employees.  We monitor their staffing levels weekly.  When COVID hit, almost all of them furloughed employees immediately.  However, by the early summer, almost all of them were back to full staff even though one of our core products was on hold due to COVID.  They only re-staffed because of PPP.  
When PPP was passed, we didn't know how low the recession would be, how deep the cuts would be, etc.  We knew that the predictions for GDP loss would be -25% or more.  So I don't blame the gov't one bit for taking aggressive action.  While certainly some people took advantage of it because their company didn't need the money, plenty did.  Further, if a company furloughed, then they would go to unemployment anyway.  So it's just moving payments from one channel to another. 
It's the same argument that people use to say "Welfare is abused, so it needs to be stopped!".  Well yes it's abused, but 90% of the people actually need it.  Who knows what the actual number is for PPP, and who knows how low the recession COULD have gone had the gov't done nothing.  

Gern Blansten

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

True....but him and his wife are the employees.  Goes right in his pocket.  As I said....I would do it too...but it's fucked up.

Gern Blansten

JB16057 said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

I don't think we'll ever know the extent of the damage these PPP loans have done. I know they've helped quite a few businesses stay open as some people used these funds for their true purpose and they really did need them. I've talked to quite a few different businesses and have asked them if they took these PPP loans. Out of all them I've talked to, 90% of them did not need these loans and took advantage. Construction companies made out like bandits because they were never really shut down and by March of last year, they had a full year of scheduled work on the books already. They took these PPP loans and increased their own wealth. They didn't need to take these PPP loans to stay open. I don't know the situation with Pearl Jam but they took one of these loans as well. Did they really need that money? I don't know about their financial position but the band itself is worth millions so I doubt they really needed that money.

The last guy I spoke with is starting a porta potty business which he already owns another succesful business. He told me that all of the equipment he bought was all paid for. He had spent somewhere around $36,000 without having to take a loan. He then told me that he took the PPP loans for his main business which allowed him to transfer money over to start this new porta potty business. I've heard other business people buying boats and cars with their PPP loans.

Someone is going to have to pay for these free loans. I know it helped a ton of people but it makes me sick to think that so many people took this money and didn't really need it. Most won't have to pay back these loans because they were able to take advantage of the system.

I own a business and I didn't take any of these loans because I didn't need them. My business took a huge hit but the business was able to survive and I'm too honest. "Don't get me wrong... if I qualified I would get it" is such an irresponsible way to think about this but this is the norm. If you truly needed it, I would understand but these programs are mostly helping the rich get richer and is just increasing the deficit.

Exactly....I have two different clients that each got about $600K in PPP money tax free.  One was a trucking company that really wasn't affected by Covid.  The other owns several businesses that weren't really affected.

I got $55K.  Free fucking money.  I had my best year ever in 2020 without the PPP money.

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

True....but him and his wife are the employees.  Goes right in his pocket.  As I said....I would do it too...but it's fucked up.

Oh it's a two person company.. yeah that's a moral issue.  But at the end of the day, you don't make public policy or laws based on the exceptions.  The gov't would never do anything in that case. 

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

JB16057 said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

I don't think we'll ever know the extent of the damage these PPP loans have done. I know they've helped quite a few businesses stay open as some people used these funds for their true purpose and they really did need them. I've talked to quite a few different businesses and have asked them if they took these PPP loans. Out of all them I've talked to, 90% of them did not need these loans and took advantage. Construction companies made out like bandits because they were never really shut down and by March of last year, they had a full year of scheduled work on the books already. They took these PPP loans and increased their own wealth. They didn't need to take these PPP loans to stay open. I don't know the situation with Pearl Jam but they took one of these loans as well. Did they really need that money? I don't know about their financial position but the band itself is worth millions so I doubt they really needed that money.

The last guy I spoke with is starting a porta potty business which he already owns another succesful business. He told me that all of the equipment he bought was all paid for. He had spent somewhere around $36,000 without having to take a loan. He then told me that he took the PPP loans for his main business which allowed him to transfer money over to start this new porta potty business. I've heard other business people buying boats and cars with their PPP loans.

Someone is going to have to pay for these free loans. I know it helped a ton of people but it makes me sick to think that so many people took this money and didn't really need it. Most won't have to pay back these loans because they were able to take advantage of the system.

I own a business and I didn't take any of these loans because I didn't need them. My business took a huge hit but the business was able to survive and I'm too honest. "Don't get me wrong... if I qualified I would get it" is such an irresponsible way to think about this but this is the norm. If you truly needed it, I would understand but these programs are mostly helping the rich get richer and is just increasing the deficit.

Exactly....I have two different clients that each got about $600K in PPP money tax free.  One was a trucking company that really wasn't affected by Covid.  The other owns several businesses that weren't really affected.

I got $55K.  Free fucking money.  I had my best year ever in 2020 without the PPP money.

But what you don't know is if you would have had the best year ever if NO company got PPP. How much of your great year is due to the other companies staying alive and generating business for you.  That's the unprovable and in my opinion, the fallacy of some of these arguments. 

static111

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

I had a client call me yesterday asking for help on the 2nd round of PPP loans.  He's got like $2mil in real estate and lives in a $2mil home and is applying for more free money.

It doesn't make sense. 

Don't get me wrong...if I qualified I would get it.  My beef is that it doesn't make sense to give more money to rich people for no fucking reason.

I don't get this either.  He doesn't qualify for ppp, it's his business right? Those loans are not about the personal wealth of its owners,  it was about keeping people employed. 

True....but him and his wife are the employees.  Goes right in his pocket.  As I said....I would do it too...but it's fucked up.

Oh it's a two person company.. yeah that's a moral issue.  But at the end of the day, you don't make public policy or laws based on the exceptions.  The gov't would never do anything in that case. 

Which is why I brought up the hypocrisy of not wanting those rich 150,000aires based on 2019 taxes to get checks based on an exception.  When the amounts of the many scandalous PPP loans are much more and going to actual rich people.