5 ms·

Fraud aside, which is a problem, the "forgiveness" of the loans was the plan all along so it's not as if businesses were expected to pay them back. The program

by stvswn 4y ago

Fraud aside, which is a problem, the "forgiveness" of the loans was the plan all along so it's not as if businesses were expected to pay them back. The program was really a bailout so businesses could maintain their payrolls when everything was shutdown. Instead of writing the checks directly, the government decided to frame it as a loan that would be forgiven if businesses stayed in business and spent it on their payrolls. This was a good strategy for the government, because it would have been pretty tough to enforce otherwise. So the loan forgiveness was by _design_ and the point of the program was to keep businesses alive when the governments themselves were (for perhaps good reason) making it impossible for them to operate. It's not really "forgiveness" in the sense of, say, the college loan forgiveness program.

brightball 4y ago
Exactly. You kept people employed and on their employers insurance, benefits, etc. You let businesses try to remain as operational as possible during the shut down. The alternative was going to be mass layoffs, unemployment and medicaid/aca applications. The people who keep harping on PPP seem to forget everything else that was done in the same time period.
- nrmitchi 4y ago
  There’s a difference between people complaining about PPP as a concept (which I don’t think many are?) and complaining about PPP abuse, funds being given to companies that were not impacted by shut downs, straight up fraud, and people taking PPP money and buying lambos.
- tastyfreeze 4y ago
  There was another alternative of not forcing businesses to shut down in the first place.
  - hirvi74 4y ago
    From what I have gathered, 1.06 million Americans have died from Covid. Are you implying that more people should have been sacrificed to keep businesses profiting?
    - nrmitchi 4y ago
      Obviously. Grandparents should having been willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of the economy /s
    - tastyfreeze 4y ago
      The CDC reports that more than 70% of the population has had COVID. Multiple studies have also reported that 40% of COVID cases are asymptomatic. A high percentage of the population has been infected. There is zero evidence that shutting down businesses did anything to prevent infections or reduce deaths. At best "closing the economy" delayed infection. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220802/havent-had-covid-yet-wanna-bet https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220802/havent-had-covid-ye...
caseysoftware 4y ago
> So the loan forgiveness was by _design_ and the point of the program was to keep businesses alive when the governments themselves were (for perhaps good reason) making it impossible for them to operate. It's not really "forgiveness" in the sense of, say, the college loan forgiveness program. I think this is a key point. The PPP "loans" effectively became a payout to mitigate the chance & success of businesses suing the government en mass for the shutdown orders. When you sue an entity civilly, you have to show damages. The PPP "loans" countered those damages (and often more) which means the threshold for a successful lawsuit just got WAY higher.

by stvswn 4y ago

brightball 4y ago

Exactly. You kept people employed and on their employers insurance, benefits, etc. You let businesses try to remain as operational as possible during the shut down. The alternative was going to be mass layoffs, unemployment and medicaid/aca applications. The people who keep harping on PPP seem to forget everything else that was done in the same time period.

nrmitchi 4y ago
There’s a difference between people complaining about PPP as a concept (which I don’t think many are?) and complaining about PPP abuse, funds being given to companies that were not impacted by shut downs, straight up fraud, and people taking PPP money and buying lambos.
tastyfreeze 4y ago
There was another alternative of not forcing businesses to shut down in the first place.
- hirvi74 4y ago
  From what I have gathered, 1.06 million Americans have died from Covid. Are you implying that more people should have been sacrificed to keep businesses profiting?
  - nrmitchi 4y ago
    Obviously. Grandparents should having been willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of the economy /s
  - tastyfreeze 4y ago
    The CDC reports that more than 70% of the population has had COVID. Multiple studies have also reported that 40% of COVID cases are asymptomatic. A high percentage of the population has been infected. There is zero evidence that shutting down businesses did anything to prevent infections or reduce deaths. At best "closing the economy" delayed infection. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220802/havent-had-covid-yet-wanna-bet https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220802/havent-had-covid-ye...

caseysoftware 4y ago

> So the loan forgiveness was by _design_ and the point of the program was to keep businesses alive when the governments themselves were (for perhaps good reason) making it impossible for them to operate. It's not really "forgiveness" in the sense of, say, the college loan forgiveness program. I think this is a key point. The PPP "loans" effectively became a payout to mitigate the chance & success of businesses suing the government en mass for the shutdown orders. When you sue an entity civilly, you have to show damages. The PPP "loans" countered those damages (and often more) which means the threshold for a successful lawsuit just got WAY higher.