What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Business, Economics, and Taxes: Capitalism. Yay? >=(

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well just cause it is a nice gift doesn't mean it has to be over priced.

I can get diamonds (quality stuff not the dreck at malls) at damned near cost and I still never buy them. Its a bland looking stone. Plenty of better ones out there.

The only thing more overpriced than diamonds is low carat gold. The average wedding band is worth like $10 tops in gold.
 
Jimjamesak said:
So it’s exactly like MTG...
Click to expand...

Yes. It's a market, like most anything else. Supply and demand intersect and find a post, barring any external forces that shift either supply or demand one way or the other. Artificially restricting supply will keep prices high, and thus reduce the quantity demanded. However, that will (almost always) also increase profits for the monopolistic entity.

In this case, neither entity is truly monopolistic (M), rather they're monopolistically competitive(MC) markets. You don't need to buy a diamond, there are other gems available, just as there are other card games than MTG. The M market and MC markets are quite similar in design, only the MC markets need to be more aware of alternatives.
 
SJHovey said:
So, someone commits fraud against a government program, the government program is sh1t? That's some pretty stellar thinking there.
Click to expand...

I'm laughing because this has been the exact conservative criticism of social programs for the last fifty years.
 
Kepler said:
I'm laughing because this has been the exact conservative criticism of social programs for the last fifty years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I started thinking about that after I posted it. Handy is on his way to the dark side. By 2024, when he's in full defense mode around here, he'll be like, "but I voted for Omar once!"
 
SJHovey said:
So, someone commits fraud against a government program, the government program is sh1t? That's some pretty stellar thinking there. Probably should cancel the second round of stimulus checks just because Rittenhouse used his $1200 to buy an AK-47 and blast a couple of people. And medicare, don't even get me started with that one.
Click to expand...

As is the case with everything this administration touches... the execution of it was complete crap.
The idea of helping out small businesses affected by the pandemic? Fantastic idea and should have been bigger and had more long-term strings attached related to keeping employees on.
 
cF[Authentic said:
;n3628150]

As is the case with everything this administration touches... the execution of it was complete crap.
The idea of helping out small businesses affected by the pandemic? Fantastic idea and should have been bigger and had more long-term strings attached related to keeping employees on.
Click to expand...

First, the PPP money was not just for payroll. It could also be used for things like rent or mortgage payments.

Second, it covered a maximum of 12 weeks of payroll. If businesses are going to be closed for more than 12 weeks, there are still going to be layoffs even if PPP money was received.

If companies were simply applying for the loan solely to obtain a low interest loan that could be paid back later, I agree that's misuse of the program. It probably could have been solved by simply raising the interest rate for any money you have to pay back. But for companies that received that amount of money, they are subject to audit, so the Biden's SBA will have plenty of opportunity to follow up to see if the applications misrepresented their need.
 
SJHovey said:
First, the PPP money was not just for payroll. It could also be used for things like rent or mortgage payments.

Second, it covered a maximum of 12 weeks of payroll. If businesses are going to be closed for more than 12 weeks, there are still going to be layoffs even if PPP money was received.

If companies were simply applying for the loan solely to obtain a low interest loan that could be paid back later, I agree that's misuse of the program. It probably could have been solved by simply raising the interest rate for any money you have to pay back. But for companies that received that amount of money, they are subject to audit, so the Biden's SBA will have plenty of opportunity to follow up to see if the applications misrepresented their need.
Click to expand...

1) Timing of the layoffs are suspect.
2) Even those they're called PPP Loans, they're not actually loans as there is no repayment requirement or amortization schedule.
 
St. Clown said:
1) Timing of the layoffs are suspect.
2) Even those they're called PPP Loans, they're not actually loans as there is no repayment requirement or amortization schedule.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the PPP money is considered a "loan" with a repayment requirement (I forget how long, I think within two years), and a 1% interest rate. However, the recipients have a right to apply to have the loan, or some portion of it, forgiven if they can demonstrate that they used it for things like payroll, rent, mortgages, etc...
 
SJHovey said:
I'm pretty sure the PPP money is considered a "loan" with a repayment requirement (I forget how long, I think within two years), and a 1% interest rate. However, the recipients have a right to apply to have the loan, or some portion of it, forgiven if they can demonstrate that they used it for things like payroll, rent, mortgages, etc...
Click to expand...

Here's what Investopedia has on PPP Loans.

https://www.investopedia.com/your-g...,Act of 2020 relaxes many PPP loan guidelines.


How PPP Loan Forgiveness Works

Important changes to PPP loan forgiveness became law with signing of the PPP Flexibility Act on June 5, 2020. All or part of the loan you receive under PPP could be forgiven provided you keep all full-time equivalent employees (FTEEs) on payroll—or rehire them within 24 weeks of receiving your loan (or by December 31, 2020, whichever comes first). Payroll costs must be 60% or more of the amount forgiven. Only 40% of the amount forgiven can be used on non-payroll expenses. The forgiveness won't happen until the end of the 24-week period of employment following receipt of your loan.10 1
U.S. Congress. "H.R. 748." Accessed Apr. 8, 2020.
Click to expand...



 
As a Door Dash driver, stuff like having no insurance is why I'm trying not to be a Door Dash driver. I'd much rather go back to retail where there are benefits instead of DD.
 
Jimjamesak said:
If they were union drivers then either a) the company violated the CBA and the lawyers will be getting paid or b) holy f- that's a terribly negotiated contract.
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true. An employer can decide that certain tasks are going to be performed by outside contractors, and that the employer will no longer have paid positions performing those duties. Lots of examples of that, with school bus drivers, professional cleaning companies instead of in-house maintenance, food service caterers instead of employee cooks, etc...

If an employer chooses to do that, they must engage in "effects" negotiations with the union, which won't necessarily stop the move, but requires the employer to at least discuss with departing employees things like severance pay, etc...
 
SJHovey said:
That's not necessarily true. An employer can decide that certain tasks are going to be performed by outside contractors, and that the employer will no longer have paid positions performing those duties. Lots of examples of that, with school bus drivers, professional cleaning companies instead of in-house maintenance, food service caterers instead of employee cooks, etc...

If an employer chooses to do that, they must engage in "effects" negotiations with the union, which won't necessarily stop the move, but requires the employer to at least discuss with departing employees things like severance pay, etc...
Click to expand...

So basically, it has to be labor that isn't considered a core competency of the organization?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top