@no1marauder saidEvidence of something that didn't happen? We don't have a crystal ball to know whether the employees would have remained employed, but Tom (and many other multi-millionaires who received the cash, I think you called it a "loan" LOL) did not need the money. We also don't know if he would have bought a slightly shorter boat or no boat at all without the free money.
I'd like the evidence I asked for i.e. some smidgen of facts showing that TB12 didn't use its PPP loan for payroll. You been constantly saying Tom Brady used PPP funds to buy a yacht; are you ever going to retract this now that you know it's not true?
No I will not retract the statement. He did not need the money. But because the government was offering, he took the free money and then he bought a yacht. Are you disputing any of that?
2 edits
@no1marauder saidIn case you forgot, the outcome of COVID was massive increases to wealth disparity in America.
In case you forgot, there was an economic crisis with the possibility of millions or even tens of millions of layoffs. While you seem to think business owners out of the goodness of their hearts would be willing to front their personal assets to corporations they owned a stake in even when consumer spending and incomes had plummeted, Congress wasn't as ignorant as you (st ...[text shortened]... n keeping millions employed though some decisions by Trump's Treasury Department made abuses easier.
Are you saying trickle-down economics works, but only in the context of a crisis? Or that it works carte blanche? I was under the impression it was a largely debunked theory that rich people invented to get free government money, but the return on investment for the average tax paying schmuck is pennies on the dollar.
PPP was $800 billion total, I think. That's enough to give a substantial group of low-income Americans facing layoff enough to pay their mortgage for a good stretch. In my opinion, that would have been a much better use of these funds.
If the alternative to PPP was 8 million temporary layoffs, the $800 billion would give each of those people $800,000.
@wildgrass saidYes, I dispute "he" took the money.
Evidence of something that didn't happen? We don't have a crystal ball to know whether the employees would have remained employed, but Tom (and many other multi-millionaires who received the cash, I think you called it a "loan" LOL) did not need the money. We also don't know if he would have bought a slightly shorter boat or no boat at all without the free money.
No I wi ...[text shortened]... ment was offering, he took the free money and then he bought a yacht. Are you disputing any of that?
As I've patiently explained, a corporation which someone, in this case Tom Brady, has some stake in, isn't that person.
What part of such basic legal and economic reality can't you get through your head?
@wildgrass saidYour opinion is economically ignorant. Allowing millions of workers to lose their jobs and thousands of small businesses to shut their doors forever is an odd and ineffective way to address income inequality.
In case you forgot, the outcome of COVID was massive increases to wealth disparity in America.
Are you saying trickle-down economics works, but only in the context of a crisis? Or that it works carte blanche? I was under the impression it was a largely debunked theory that rich people invented to get free government money, but the return on investment for the average tax ...[text shortened]... e to PPP was 8 million temporary layoffs, the $800 billion would give each of those people $800,000.
@no1marauder saidI don't know about Brady, but I do know the government gave me ~ $20,000 for basically no reason. In 2021, I simply filled out a form on the sites of one of these PPP service agencies, telling the 100% truth on every line (my main source of income was self-employment) and boom, I got a note saying that I was eligible for a ~ $20,000 PPP loan. So I took it. Hey, why not? At worst, it was a no/low interest loan.
In case you forgot, there was an economic crisis with the possibility of millions or even tens of millions of layoffs. While you seem to think business owners out of the goodness of their hearts would be willing to front their personal assets to corporations they owned a stake in even when consumer spending and incomes had plummeted, Congress wasn't as ignorant as you (st ...[text shortened]... n keeping millions employed though some decisions by Trump's Treasury Department made abuses easier.
Then, a few months later, I filled out another one-page form to get the loan forgiven, and was again 100% truthful. Basically, all I had to assert was that I used the loan money to pay myself (which was expressly included in the grounds for forgiveness), pressed submit, and that was it.
Heck, they didn't even ask me if I thought I needed to loan forgiven. They basically just dropped the money in my lap. I didn't even have to assert that I needed or even wanted the money. Nor was I asked for any receipts or anything (though I suppose they could have cross-referenced it with my 1099s to confirm the content).
I'm not complaining, of course. I have a bunch of kids and New York cost of living is insane, so some extra dough always helps. But it did seem like kind of a ridiculously loosely administered program.
I have no trouble believing that PPP bought Tom Brady a boat.
@sh76 saidMany people have no problem believing things that are demonstrably not true.
I don't know about Brady, but I do know the government gave me ~ $20,000 for basically no reason. In 2021, I simply filled out a form on the sites of one of these PPP service agencies, telling the 100% truth on every line (my main source of income was self-employment) and boom, I got a note saying that I was eligible for a ~ $20,000 PPP loan. So I took it. Hey, why not? At worst ...[text shortened]... ously loosely administered program.
I have no trouble believing that PPP bought Tom Brady a boat.
Join the crowd.
@no1marauder saidIf WG's point was that the PPP was sloppily run, I agree with him.
Many people have no problem believing things that are demonstrably not true.
Join the crowd.
If your point on page 1 of the thread is that the PPP was a good idea but went sour in administration, I have no quarrel with that.
Whether Tom Brady actually bought a yacht with PPP money doesn't concern me, and so I'm not going to waste time and energy looking into it.
@sh76 saidCheck out the thread's title.
If WG's point was that the PPP was sloppily run, I agree with him.
If your point on page 1 of the thread is that the PPP was a good idea but went sour in administration, I have no quarrel with that.
Whether Tom Brady actually bought a yacht with PPP money doesn't concern me, and so I'm not going to waste time and energy looking into it.
A corporation Tom Brady had some unclear ownership stake in received a $960,000 PPP loan that was to be used to cover payroll costs in April 2020.
8 months later Tom Brady traded in his $2 million yacht for a $6 million dollar one. His NFL salary that year was $37 million.
I asked for some evidence PPP funds were used for the yacht purchase. Wildgrass has provided none.
My opinion of PPP is more nuanced than you describe. By and large, I think the program was successful in keeping millions employed and thousands of small businesses open, but administrative tweaks by Mnuchin led to larger companies and wealthier individuals benefiting from the program who were never intended to by Congress.
@sh76 saidyou are awesome...now explain to us less fortunate how you buy a $6 million boat with $900,000
I don't know about Brady, but I do know the government gave me ~ $20,000 for basically no reason. In 2021, I simply filled out a form on the sites of one of these PPP service agencies, telling the 100% truth on every line (my main source of income was self-employment) and boom, I got a note saying that I was eligible for a ~ $20,000 PPP loan. So I took it. Hey, why not? At worst ...[text shortened]... ously loosely administered program.
I have no trouble believing that PPP bought Tom Brady a boat.
@no1marauder saidthe main goal was to infuse money into the economy, benefiting small business was secondary
Check out the thread's title.
A corporation Tom Brady had some unclear ownership stake in received a $960,000 PPP loan that was to be used to cover payroll costs in April 2020.
8 months later Tom Brady traded in his $2 million yacht for a $6 million dollar one. His NFL salary that year was $37 million.
I asked for some evidence PPP funds were used for the yacht ...[text shortened]... panies and wealthier individuals benefiting from the program who were never intended to by Congress.
@no1marauder saidPut me down as 'not a fan' of trickle down economics. I may not be an economist by training, but I can read The Economist magazine.
Your opinion is economically ignorant. Allowing millions of workers to lose their jobs and thousands of small businesses to shut their doors forever is an odd and ineffective way to address income inequality.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidIt was both. Eligibility was supposed to be limited; from the Department of Treasury:
the main goal was to infuse money into the economy, benefiting small business was secondary
"The Paycheck Protection Program is providing small businesses with the resources they need to maintain their payroll, hire back employees who may have been laid off, and cover applicable overhead.
Small Business Paycheck Protection Program
The Paycheck Protection Program established by the CARES Act, is implemented by the Small Business Administration with support from the Department of the Treasury. This program provides small businesses with funds to pay up to 8 weeks of payroll costs including benefits. Funds can also be used to pay interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities."
https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/coronavirus/assistance-for-small-businesses/paycheck-protection-program
@wildgrass saidYou don't understand what "trickle down economics" is if you think a program directly providing small businesses with funds to meet their payroll is an example of it.
Put me down as 'not a fan' of trickle down economics. I may not be an economist by training, but I can read The Economist magazine.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidMany real economists disagree strongly with your point of view. As far as I can tell your argument in favor of PPP seems to be "it had some benefit" but (no offense) that is a dumb argument. Of course if you flush an economy with an insane amount of hundreds of billions, that will provide benefit to certain people. The point is not that it did some good, it's that a vast majority of the money went to folks who did not need it it and were not even asked to provide any justification of need. European countries did just as good with their stimulus but spent less money. The American program was poorly designed, or poorly administered, it is a distinction without a difference. If America intends to waste less money next time, it would be better to plan for a more rational solution than to defend this garbage.
You don't understand what "trickle down economics" is if you think a program directly providing small businesses with funds to meet their payroll is an example of it.
Business loans from the federal government did prevent job losses, but only to a limited extent: less than a third of ppp dollars went to workers who would otherwise have been laid off. Roughly three-quarters of the programme’s spending went to business owners and shareholders. Almost $366bn—72% of funding in 2020—went to households making more than $144,000 per year.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2022/01/31/americas-covid-job-saving-programme-gave-most-of-its-cash-to-the-rich
@wildgrass saidEven the most critical assessment of the program concedes it saved millions of jobs.
Many real economists disagree strongly with your point of view. As far as I can tell your argument in favor of PPP seems to be "it had some benefit" but (no offense) that is a dumb argument. Of course if you flush an economy with an insane amount of hundreds of billions, that will provide benefit to certain people. The point is not that it did some good, it's that a vast ma ...[text shortened]... .com/graphic-detail/2022/01/31/americas-covid-job-saving-programme-gave-most-of-its-cash-to-the-rich
That's enough for me.