But not everyone got PPP, as Stoll has pointed out some got it that clearly did not need it
So it goes to that fairness article. PPP allowed some businesses to survive, even to thrive, while their competition went bankrupt.
But not everyone got PPP, as Stoll has pointed out some got it that clearly did not need it
So it goes to that fairness article. PPP allowed some businesses to survive, even to thrive, while their competition went bankrupt.
Do you really not see the difference?
Loan A terms: get a special, legislatively passed loan to keep the economy afloat during uncertain times. Use the loan as described and it will be forgiven.
Loan B terms: get a loan. Pay it back. No other terms attached.
PPP was quite easy to get. What are the examples or rationale for suggesting that competition went bankrupt because some got PPP while others didn't? You either kept employing people and got PPP or you didn't. You either were financially impacted or you weren't.
I not even a fan of the program, but that's some of the softest "wiping out" that I've ever seen.To those who are labeling any fairness arguments against this forgiveness as jealousy or mean-spiritedness, here's a great article from Reason.
Why everyone is mad about Biden’s student loan forgiveness fiasco
President Biden declared yesterday that COVID-19 provides a legal basis for wiping out millions of people's student loan debt, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.reason.com
"This last reason has taken the biggest beating from folks who approve of Biden's student loan plan and are taking aim at its critics. The uncharitable summary of it is that people who suffered in avoiding or paying off student loans just want others to suffer similarly. The implication in this line of criticism is that opponents of student loan forgiveness are just kind of assholes, twirling their mustaches and shouting, "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps!" at people drowning in debt.
Someone argued to me yesterday—citing Social Security benefits for comparison—that any new entitlement program will benefit some people while leaving out others who may have benefited had it been enacted sooner. For instance, someone in his 70s when Social Security started may have stopped working sooner had it been around a few years earlier. But I don't think this comparison holds up, since older workers excluded from a few extra years of retirement weren't put at a professional disadvantage relative to their peers. The same can't be said for student loan forgiveness.
And this gets at the crux of the fairness factor here, I think. It's not just that some people made certain sacrifices—like working more hours as a student or living with parents instead of in a dorm—that made the college experience less fun. Many of the things they gave up may put them at a long-term professional disadvantage relative to those who made different decisions regarding loans.
Choosing to go to a less prestigious school. Forgoing unpaid or low-paid internships and fellowships in favor of working jobs that pay better in the short-term but provide less long-term advantage. Working for pay instead of spending more time on personal projects or research related to one's field. Living in a cheaper city after graduation, or taking a more lucrative but less elite job right out of school. Decisions like these may have helped people avoid some student loan debt or pay off their debts more quickly while costing them other important things—the right lines on their early-career resumes, networking opportunities, professional contacts, etc. This could have a long-term effect on their professional opportunities and earnings. Meanwhile, they're competing for work with people who maybe did the right internships or went to a better school because of student loans.
It's not just that the latter group may have had more fun or made decisions deemed by some to be less "responsible" (which is arguable, considering the advantages these decisions may have conferred). It's that a lot of them may have a lifelong professional advantage over the former, and perhaps the fact that they incurred loan debt mitigated this somewhat—but not anymore. And never mind that these advantages may even make them better positioned to pay off their student loans.
None of this may change anyone's calculation about whether erasing student loan debt is ultimately good or bad policy. But maybe it will help people think twice before acting as if the tradeoffs in this calculation are all frivolous and anyone upset by them simply wants people to suffer."
You make an interesting point about "lifelong professional advantage", which is why I would have at least favored lower caps on the forgiveness. However, I do think there is a lot of the jealousy/mean-spiritedness here, too. You can see it for sure in the language many posters use around it.
Moreover, much like most stuff, I think the largest part of the problems in what's happening with college education stems from parents. Between ridiculous and unrealistic pressure and decisions based on what the parents want over what the student needs, well-meaning parents have spent a better part of the last two decades saddling their kids with financial decisions the kids aren't equipped to make.
So every company that could not afford to stay open opened back up after COVID? Sone restaurants I know in Bloomington closed and never reopened. If they had PPP and stayed open, might they be in business?
Student loan forgiveness isn't the last straw. The problem is that DC ( I Wish I could say dem's) are acting on the china plan. They have a 50-100 yr to tear us appart. FSLF is a drip in the bucket. The bucket is VERY close to being full. It's about to get wet all around us and we have dirt floors (now).To those who are labeling any fairness arguments against this forgiveness as jealousy or mean-spiritedness, here's a great article from Reason.
Why everyone is mad about Biden’s student loan forgiveness fiasco
President Biden declared yesterday that COVID-19 provides a legal basis for wiping out millions of people's student loan debt, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.
"This last reason has taken the biggest beating from folks who approve of Biden's student loan plan and are taking aim at its critics. The uncharitable summary of it is that people who suffered in avoiding or paying off student loans just want others to suffer similarly. The implication in this line of criticism is that opponents of student loan forgiveness are just kind of assholes, twirling their mustaches and shouting, "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps!" at people drowning in debt.
Someone argued to me yesterday—citing Social Security benefits for comparison—that any new entitlement program will benefit some people while leaving out others who may have benefited had it been enacted sooner. For instance, someone in his 70s when Social Security started may have stopped working sooner had it been around a few years earlier. But I don't think this comparison holds up, since older workers excluded from a few extra years of retirement weren't put at a professional disadvantage relative to their peers. The same can't be said for student loan forgiveness.
And this gets at the crux of the fairness factor here, I think. It's not just that some people made certain sacrifices—like working more hours as a student or living with parents instead of in a dorm—that made the college experience less fun. Many of the things they gave up may put them at a long-term professional disadvantage relative to those who made different decisions regarding loans.
Choosing to go to a less prestigious school. Forgoing unpaid or low-paid internships and fellowships in favor of working jobs that pay better in the short-term but provide less long-term advantage. Working for pay instead of spending more time on personal projects or research related to one's field. Living in a cheaper city after graduation, or taking a more lucrative but less elite job right out of school. Decisions like these may have helped people avoid some student loan debt or pay off their debts more quickly while costing them other important things—the right lines on their early-career resumes, networking opportunities, professional contacts, etc. This could have a long-term effect on their professional opportunities and earnings. Meanwhile, they're competing for work with people who maybe did the right internships or went to a better school because of student loans.
It's not just that the latter group may have had more fun or made decisions deemed by some to be less "responsible" (which is arguable, considering the advantages these decisions may have conferred). It's that a lot of them may have a lifelong professional advantage over the former, and perhaps the fact that they incurred loan debt mitigated this somewhat—but not anymore. And never mind that these advantages may even make them better positioned to pay off their student loans.
None of this may change anyone's calculation about whether erasing student loan debt is ultimately good or bad policy. But maybe it will help people think twice before acting as if the tradeoffs in this calculation are all frivolous and anyone upset by them simply wants people to suffer."
That wasn't a result or consequence of PPP, but poor public policy (yes, hindsight is 20/20).
But PPP could uneven the field. You get it, you stay open, customers go to your business and develop the habit. I don't get it, shut down, have to try and win people back. I am a firm believer it is easier to keep a customer than win a customer.
Wow. No President should be able to increase the debt by Presidential decree, with the exception of any discretionary spending already authorized by Congress for the President to spend. This is not how it's supposed to work.So we are OK with the President having this power?
The Biden Student Loan Forgiveness Plan: Budgetary Costs and Distributional Impact — Penn Wharton Budget Model
President Biden’s new student loan forgiveness plan includes three major components. We estimate that debt cancellation alone will cost up to $519 billion, with about two-thirds of the benefit accruing to households making $88,000 or less. Loan forbearance will cost another $16 billion. The newbudgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu
"President Biden’s new student loan forgiveness plan includes three major components. We estimate that debt cancellation alone will cost up to $519 billion, with about 75% of the benefit accruing to households making $88,000 or less. Loan forbearance will cost another $16 billion. The new income-driven repayment (IDR) program would cost another $70 billion, increasing the total plan cost to $605 billion under strict “static” assumptions. However, depending on future IDR program details to be released and potential behavioral (i.e., “non-static”) changes, total plan costs could exceed $1 trillion."
But competition was effectively separated in the same camp as each other. Your medical products manufacturer wasn't shut down in any event, regardless of PPP use. Your restaurants were either mostly shut down or pickup/delivery only
There were still winners and losers. How could two competitors, one that received PPP and never had to pay it back and the other that received nothing, be considered on equal footing?
The results are in and this is found to not be true. It was HELL even in Medical products.
Like most things, one needs to look into the specific situation. Did the biz that received nothing apply for PPP? What reasons were given if rejected? What similar biz got PPP as a comparison?
To me, PPP was meant to help biz during uncertain times. Some CPA's told their clients not to apply. Others said do it. Not sure what the reasoning was behind the advice, but I am sure I can find anecdotal evidence to support each.
Because the competitor that opted not to take it must not have needed it. We have clients that never took it on because COVID was a boon and they wouldn't have qualified.
Those that received nothing either chose not to apply or weren't going to qualify.
I've not come across a single business in the sector that was shut down. They were deemed critical and allowed to stay open.
None that I am aware of were forced to shut down, but through other forces projects, production, human resources were severely diminished. I've been in the industry since 2004. I now serve med dev companies all over the world. The industry changed so much via covid, it cut my income by 50% and still has not recovered totally.
I know this isn't exactly what you were talking about to being with, but the industry was drastically diminished.
Some firms thrived during Covid and then got their PPP Covid relief loans forgiven
One publicly traded Houston company quadrupled its earnings, doubled the pay of its three top executives — and got its $2.2 million PPP loan forgiven.
www.nbcnews.com
A similar company that honestly appraised the situation and decided the "loans" weren't for them has had to compete against this company that wallowed at the trough.
Some firms thrived during Covid and then got their PPP Covid relief loans forgiven
One publicly traded Houston company quadrupled its earnings, doubled the pay of its three top executives — and got its $2.2 million PPP loan forgiven.
A similar company that honestly appraised the situation and decided the "loans" weren't for them has had to compete against this company that wallowed at the trough.
So to be clear, a competitor that likely experienced a quadrupling in earnings is now one that you are feeling sorry for, simply because they chose not to take advantage of PPP?
It seems you are conflating issues.
How much of your sales are related to elective procedures? Even those have come back strong according to everything I've seen from companies that supply Tier 1 OEMs (e.g., Medtronic, Abbott, J&J, Boston Sci, etc.). There's got to be more to the story about what's driving your divergence.
I don't feel sorry for any. I am saying the competitors of that company that maybe did not get PPP were at a disadvantage and no electrons here we're spilled in "oh woe is me" over that
But it was their choice. If they were eligible, they could have applied.
If anything, this is ammunition for why we should have less government. This isn't the SBA's first disaster
They may have been eligible but reached a good faith conclusion they were not. Just like Stoll saying he advised clients they weren't eligible just to have them turn around and find someone willing to say they were.
All of those are customers of mine. Most of my offerings are for required procedures not elective. 95% of my engagements are supporting new products, 5% for capacity expansion/ spare tooling. With covid, many if not most engendering/ R&D moved to remote work. Projects were canceled or postponed. It killed me.
I'm just not starting to reengage on projects that initially started 4-6 months precovid. But even these are only 60% of what was planned. It seems no one can hire, let alone keep an Engineer for any length of time.
Also, where is the accountability? If people didn't take advantage of what was given to them, why should we be concerned or upset?
I don't get it, I don't feel the need to demand items I do not need. I know people who want a new computer every single year, even though it is a 4 year cycle. I don't get it. Shouldn't we end the culture of demanding everything?
Are you really arguing every.single.business not just had a right to PPP but a duty to take it?
I hear rumors I could get a refund for the PLUS loan I payed off 9ver COVID, up to $10,000. I am not going to apply.
If that is true, I'd have a hard time not applying. Yes, I would have mixed feelings. See my posts about not paying income taxes and getting the EITC. But I can be bought. Ten grand wouldn't change my life, but it would sure brighten my day.
Nonsense! The gov will piss it away on something else anyway. Get that money and take your bride to some war site you want to see. Buy football tix. Gamble with it. Give it to charity. Whatever. Just get it. Get that dirty money
Here’s a situation that didn’t sit right with me, since I didn’t sniff a PPP loan or a handout check during Covid.
I have a friend that was starting up a long distance romance with some lady in Texas. She sent him the loan form for her business that didn’t exist, asking him to use his address as the business address. He did. According to him, she got around 40-45k from the government. Of course, she didn’t give him a kick back which I found hilarious. 😂 Total scam.
My wife says I am Sheldon Cooper when it comes to strange rules. For example, I finally decided I could not oppose annexation because I signed the paper I wouldn't. A neighbor argued a lot that those waivers were no longer legal, I argued it did not matter if it was legal, I signed it and would abide.
I think I paid $4000 after COVID. I am not nearly wealthy enough that the amount is insignificant. But I agreed to pay it, I paid it, I am happy.
IIUC, those waivers are still binding but they're being challenged in court, or maybe they're trying to get the legislature to do some kind of bill that would make them invalid. Same kind of crap they tried to pull a couple years ago. BICBW.
I'm not so principled. If I could get a $4000 refund I'd take it in cash and use it to go to IU ball games that I've never allowed myself to splurge on. Might even have to hit a Colts game or two before I die.
That's fine, but they why would you complain about others doing what they choose, so long as they are following within the confines of the laws and regulations of business? I don't disagree that it was a bad policy, but you should be pissed at the SBA and Federal Government, not those that partook in government handouts because they could.
Shit, if that was the criteria, everyone on this board that bought a GM or Fiat Chrysler vehicle should feel ashamed. Ford should be lauded, but nobody is doing this, are they?
I fundamentally support and share your disdain for such events and as I attempted to emphasize, the PPP was a clusterfvck. Those instances of scams and more were plentiful thanks to a disorganized response and lack of oversight from/by the Federal Government.
As I mentioned, this isn't the first or last time the government will fail through getting into direct lending (e.g., Solyndra, SBA loan debacle in the 2000s - see Allied Capital Corp, current student loan crisis, Fannie and Freddie, etc.).
Are you not able to adapt and do remote work? Are you not doing any prototyping or short run production proving out manufacturing processes?
Not trying to pry or have you give away too much personal info, I'm just attempting to understand what changed permanently for you that I'm not seeing as much from groups we work with. A client of mine does an extensive amount of work in tooling and upfront proving out of production and works hand-in-hand with internal and external (outsourced) design departments with some of the OEMs.
Vascular and other demographic-related segments really seem to have strong demand.
I'm not trying to imply that I am starving. 50% of unfvcking believable money, is still pretty awesome money. I'm not hurting, I'm just saying that the market segment that I am in has totally changed. I've been totally remote for 11 years and actually have a little side gig that would get me fired if they found out. Finding $$ is not an issue. (TOTALLY not blowing my own horn here, just framing what I was trying to say).
We (my employer) actually have some pretty good relationships with our competitors and they are all experiencing the exact same declines in this segment. We all have a "good" idea of why this segment has changed, but it's nothing that we can 100% pinpoint. I've still got $4mil of projects that are simply postponed because they can't find engineering staff to manage them. We've been a $11 - $13 mill segment for 6+ yrs. Covid hit.... It's a friggin struggle to hit $7mil. It still well pays the bills, but damn that is hard to swallow. Also it's not like we are a mom and pop. We have the support of a 136 yrs old company w/ 12,000 employees and 130 different divisions, crunching the #'s and strategizing.
Our other technologies that have 18-30 week lead times are going gang busters. My 6-10 week lead time equipment is what is hurting. I think it's simply a resource issue. They don't beat up over prices, they simply postpone new products.
Interesting geeky analysis
www.marketwatch.com
Goldman Sachs has run the numbers on student-loan forgiveness. This is its assessment.
Goldman Sachs economists Joseph Briggs and Alec Phillips ran through the numbers on the student-loan relief plan.
www.marketwatch.com
Interesting geeky analysis
Goldman Sachs has run the numbers on student-loan forgiveness. This is its assessment.
Goldman Sachs economists Joseph Briggs and Alec Phillips ran through the numbers on the student-loan relief plan.
First comment was spot on:
Unfortunately, this debt relief does not address the root cause of the problem, which is the excessively high cost of a college education. So debt relief will be a recurring cost. Thus the economic analysis treating it as a single event is misleading.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Just saw this piece, which is kinda relevant:
"before 1940, high school graduates were a small elite and a sufficient degree for management jobs; as high school became mass rather than elite, in the 1960s the same jobs now required a B.A; by the 1990s, an MBA. The sociological argument had been that mass schooling created social equality; but statistically it became clear that extending the length of schooling continued to give more credentials to the children of educated parents. In my 1979 book, I argued that equality would never be achieved along this path; better to decredentialize by banning credentials in hiring."
I don't think you can completely do that though. I want my doctor credentialed. I probably want my accountant credentialed. My lawyer. What I don't necessarily need credentialed is the call center guy who takes my insurance claim. I need the appraiser trained but I don't necessarily need him/her to have a deep understanding of 20th century Russian literature. Just identify what is wrong with car and plug in the necessary repairs into the software and get me my estimate.
What we do now is to demand credentials for things that probably do not need it. For the vast majority of jobs, a college education should be something undertaken as a personal growth step that you take to differentiate yourself once employed, not as a barrier to entry ro begin with.
