clexie
New Member
Joined: Jun 5, 2012 18:36:26 GMT -5
Posts: 37
|
Post by clexie on Apr 17, 2020 13:15:06 GMT -5
Our bank was also not set up initially to accept SBA loans. They are now and were great to work with. They're a small regional bank in mid Michigan. The small manufacturer that I work for did get PPP funding (we have about 33 people.) So we are putting people back on payroll even though we cannot open.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 17, 2020 13:15:31 GMT -5
... As for the rest, of course the unemployment systems are completely overwhelmed. They went from 0-100 overnight. People will get their checks but it is going to take some time. It is hit or miss with the people that I know personally. Some got paid fairly quickly and some (my daughter) are waiting for weeks. I can't even knock the government for this. That would be like our customers at work suddenly increased 10,000%. We would not be able to handle it. This isn't some master plan to force anyone to work. Can you imagine the cost of having the capacity to handle this situation just sitting idly by year after year "just in case"?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 13:19:11 GMT -5
Our bank was also not set up initially to accept SBA loans. They are now and were great to work with. They're a small regional bank in mid Michigan. The small manufacturer that I work for did get PPP funding (we have about 33 people.) So we are putting people back on payroll even though we cannot open. That's awesome and exactly the spirit of the loan! We are doing the same at our construction company. We laid everyone off but now we have brought them back. Salespeople are able to make calls but no door knocking. Though in some cases, I think the employees are pissed because they would have made out better with unemployment and the extra $600!
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,912
|
Post by bean29 on Apr 17, 2020 13:23:56 GMT -5
Yeah, and I know you went ahead and applied with more than one bank Mis T, but I am a rule follower, and once I applied at Chase, I did not feel I could/should go apply somewhere else too. Apparently this wasn't about processing applications in the order received, Banks processed the applications of the people that owed them the most $$/had the biggest lending relationships with them. So while my application was in at Chase on Wednesday (their fault it was not complete on the 3rd, b/c their system was opaque and I had to figure it out without any guidance from them), my work submitted on Wednesday with a different bank, they came back and asked us to make changes, I re-did the information on Thursday eve, They asked for articles of incorporation, and our Office Manger could not find them, President said he was pretty sure he had them at home, and he found them and sent them in on Saturday April 11th. By Yesterday, Thursday April 16th, our bank Notified our President the loan was authorized and they asked him to docusign some documents. He did that last night, and the money for one company hit our account this morning.
My DH is Pissed. We have probably been with chase for 10 years. He is leaving. I suggested he leave the account open and just move his business to another bank, and he said No, it is not just me - they did this to lots of smaller customers - I am leaving them.
Believe it or not, I am a huge rule follower, too. I am a CPA and would never put my license at risk by doing anything unethical or illegal. At first I refused to apply at more than one bank. I talked to our corporate attorney and he blessed it (actually he encouraged it because he knew what a shit show everything was). He said the minute we are approved, I alert the other banks to stop. That's what I did and we had no issues. When you read the application closely, you are signing that you did not receive an EIDL loan between January 31 and April 3". I was able to honestly say that we hadn't. it didn't ask if we APPLIED for more than one. I don't like big banks because you don't really have anyone pushing for you. Even if they didn't screw you over, I would recommend a large, regional bank. Not someone so small that they can't keep up with SBA programs and do it quickly, but someone small enough that you develop a relationship. There was absolutely no way to contact chase once the application was filed. I could not leave a general message. The only reason I actually talked to our branch manager was b/c I had talked to him in the past, and he cold called DH last Thursday to notify him of the program, not realizing we had already submitted an application. I asked him if he could check on the application, and he said no - we would have to wait to hear from the department processing PPP loans - but we were unable to talk to them. I also had tried to schedule an appointment with him when I was trying to figure out if my application was complete - and his appointments were 3 weeks out. Ridiculous.
The bank my work got approved with is a regional bank and a regular SBA lender. I suggested DH go there, he does not want to. His business, he gets to decide.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 13:27:44 GMT -5
Believe it or not, I am a huge rule follower, too. I am a CPA and would never put my license at risk by doing anything unethical or illegal. At first I refused to apply at more than one bank. I talked to our corporate attorney and he blessed it (actually he encouraged it because he knew what a shit show everything was). He said the minute we are approved, I alert the other banks to stop. That's what I did and we had no issues. When you read the application closely, you are signing that you did not receive an EIDL loan between January 31 and April 3". I was able to honestly say that we hadn't. it didn't ask if we APPLIED for more than one. I don't like big banks because you don't really have anyone pushing for you. Even if they didn't screw you over, I would recommend a large, regional bank. Not someone so small that they can't keep up with SBA programs and do it quickly, but someone small enough that you develop a relationship. There was absolutely no way to contact chase once the application was filed. I could not leave a general message. The only reason I actually talked to our branch manager was b/c I had talked to him in the past, and he cold called DH last Thursday to notify him of the program, not realizing we had already submitted an application. I asked him if he could check on the application, and he said no - we would have to wait to hear from the department processing PPP loans - but we were unable to talk to them. I also had tried to schedule an appointment with him when I was trying to figure out if my application was complete - and his appointments were 3 weeks out. Ridiculous.
The bank my work got approved with is a regional bank and a regular SBA lender. I suggested DH go there, he does not want to. His business, he gets to decide.
That is awful customer service. I will tell you that our client relationship manager is a SVP with the bank. It was all hands on deck and he was actually entering applications, too. They really went above and beyond to make sure their customers got filed quickly and accurately. He was the one pushing me the day before it went live to get him the stuff ASAP. He thought the money would run out sooner than it did. It's unfair that whether someone got the loan or not came down to which bank you used. That said, he was unable to handle DF's as we are not customers. I understood because they were killing themselves trying to take care of existing clients.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 17, 2020 13:47:10 GMT -5
Our bank was also not set up initially to accept SBA loans. They are now and were great to work with. They're a small regional bank in mid Michigan. The small manufacturer that I work for did get PPP funding (we have about 33 people.) So we are putting people back on payroll even though we cannot open. That's awesome and exactly the spirit of the loan! We are doing the same at our construction company. We laid everyone off but now we have brought them back. Salespeople are able to make calls but no door knocking. Though in some cases, I think the employees are pissed because they would have made out better with unemployment and the extra $600! What would be great if our organization could get the funding as start back capital in a couple of months when, hopefully, we will be seeing business again. I would just be doing pointless busy work now.
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,749
|
Post by jerseygirl on Apr 17, 2020 14:11:29 GMT -5
I did receive a number from Chase but funds ran out Chase sent an email that they will continue to work on applications, ask any questions and notify when more funding is available I think Congress is adjourned until May 4 so nothing now Really highly annoyed/angry that Democrats insisted to not just increase SBA funding by $350 billion but include other areas. Republicans agreed to fund SBA by $350 billion immediately and then work or debate another bill including other items such as money for hospitals- hospitals money is still available and has not run out yet Yes I’m talking politics but that’s what’s going on, why shouldn’t I point this out Angry at politicians in general
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 17, 2020 14:18:57 GMT -5
I did receive a number from Chase but funds ran out Chase sent an email that they will continue to work on applications, ask any questions and notify when more funding is available I think Congress is adjourned until May 4 so nothing now Really highly annoyed/angry that Democrats insisted to not just increase SBA funding by $350 billion but include other areas. Republicans agreed to fund SBA by $350 billion immediately and then work or debate another bill including other items such as money for hospitals- hospitals money is still available and has not run out yet Yes I’m talking politics but that’s what’s going on, why shouldn’t I point this out Angry at politicians in general The money ran out, in part, because business people who have no need of the money used their connections to get some of it. Angry at them also?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 14:20:46 GMT -5
I did receive a number from Chase but funds ran out Chase sent an email that they will continue to work on applications, ask any questions and notify when more funding is available I think Congress is adjourned until May 4 so nothing now Really highly annoyed/angry that Democrats insisted to not just increase SBA funding by $350 billion but include other areas. Republicans agreed to fund SBA by $350 billion immediately and then work or debate another bill including other items such as money for hospitals- hospitals money is still available and has not run out yet Yes I’m talking politics but that’s what’s going on, why shouldn’t I point this out Angry at politicians in general I agree on separating a PPP loan program from other funding. However, I disagree with another money grab. We need to tie the forgiveness to need.
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,749
|
Post by jerseygirl on Apr 17, 2020 14:21:05 GMT -5
I did receive a number from Chase but funds ran out Chase sent an email that they will continue to work on applications, ask any questions and notify when more funding is available I think Congress is adjourned until May 4 so nothing now Really highly annoyed/angry that Democrats insisted to not just increase SBA funding by $350 billion but include other areas. Republicans agreed to fund SBA by $350 billion immediately and then work or debate another bill including other items such as money for hospitals- hospitals money is still available and has not run out yet Yes I’m talking politics but that’s what’s going on, why shouldn’t I point this out Angry at politicians in general The money ran out, in part, because business people who have no need of the money used their connections to get some of it. Angry at them also? Yes I am
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 14:31:41 GMT -5
I did receive a number from Chase but funds ran out Chase sent an email that they will continue to work on applications, ask any questions and notify when more funding is available I think Congress is adjourned until May 4 so nothing now Really highly annoyed/angry that Democrats insisted to not just increase SBA funding by $350 billion but include other areas. Republicans agreed to fund SBA by $350 billion immediately and then work or debate another bill including other items such as money for hospitals- hospitals money is still available and has not run out yet Yes I’m talking politics but that’s what’s going on, why shouldn’t I point this out Angry at politicians in general The money ran out, in part, because business people who have no need of the money used their connections to get some of it. Angry at them also? I am not happy that people that didn't need the money were able to get it. But, much like tax loopholes, who is going to turn down free money? I was disgusted that I was able to get just under $1m for our companies, only one of which has a true and immediate need. Yes, collections are down some but not enough to truly harm the company (yet, who knows long term what will happen). But as the CFO, it is my job to work on behalf of my company and the shareholders. We followed the rules and received money that will almost all be forgiven. As a taxpayer, I am beyond angry that this program was set up in a way to make it a money grab. I'm even ok with the loan part being easy to get. But to get loan forgiveness, you should have to show that you were harmed. A colleague of my President's got $4.5m that he doesn't need. He is in a business that actually picked up significantly because of the pandemic. I'm absolutely disgusted that he is already making a lot of money and now will walk away with $4.5m while someone like my stylist will get nothing.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 17, 2020 14:35:01 GMT -5
... But, much like tax loopholes, who is going to turn down free money? ... People of high moral character?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 14:55:03 GMT -5
... But, much like tax loopholes, who is going to turn down free money? ... People of high moral character? I agree. I do not work for them...lol In all seriousness, I consider the owners of my company to be good people. They brought me on to make sure we do things the "right" way. But the right way to them is the legal way. They were not about to turn down $1m. Especially when we really do not know long-term what is going to happen. Perhaps more of our customers will be hurt and our collections will drop to a point where we are truly struggling. It's the big unknown...and also a big justification when you aren't currently harmed. I will say that this is the same as when the conservatives complain about the welfare moms "cheating the system" when the system is set up with major loopholes. Those on the side of those receiving the benefits say "they are playing by the rules" and if you "don't like the rules, vote to change them". I don't like those rules and I don't like these rules. I was seriously sick to my stomach when I saw how much we would get. There is the letter of the law and then there is the spirit of the law.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,912
|
Post by bean29 on Apr 17, 2020 15:12:28 GMT -5
People of high moral character? I agree. I do not work for them...lol In all seriousness, I consider the owners of my company to be good people. They brought me on to make sure we do things the "right" way. But the right way to them is the legal way. They were not about to turn down $1m. Especially when we really do not know long-term what is going to happen. Perhaps more of our customers will be hurt and our collections will drop to a point where we are truly struggling. It's the big unknown...and also a big justification when you aren't currently harmed. I will say that this is the same as when the conservatives complain about the welfare moms "cheating the system" when the system is set up with major loopholes. Those on the side of those receiving the benefits say "they are playing by the rules" and if you "don't like the rules, vote to change them". I don't like those rules and I don't like these rules. I was seriously sick to my stomach when I saw how much we would get. There is the letter of the law and then there is the spirit of the law. I completely agree, my work is well funded right now b/c we sold a few properties and did not try to do a 1031 exchange. But many of our properties need updating, in fact we are doing major tenant improvements on one, and it that tenant would go belly up before they move in, or before the end of their lease term, we could be left holding the bag. We don't know how many tenants we have that may default due to the economic conditions - so we took the money figuring we can always pay it back. But all of us are going to pay for this via our tax dollars. If you don't take your "share" of what is available to you, it is like shooting yourself in the foot and taking a competitive disadvantage for no reason. jmho
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 15:16:41 GMT -5
I agree. I do not work for them...lol In all seriousness, I consider the owners of my company to be good people. They brought me on to make sure we do things the "right" way. But the right way to them is the legal way. They were not about to turn down $1m. Especially when we really do not know long-term what is going to happen. Perhaps more of our customers will be hurt and our collections will drop to a point where we are truly struggling. It's the big unknown...and also a big justification when you aren't currently harmed. I will say that this is the same as when the conservatives complain about the welfare moms "cheating the system" when the system is set up with major loopholes. Those on the side of those receiving the benefits say "they are playing by the rules" and if you "don't like the rules, vote to change them". I don't like those rules and I don't like these rules. I was seriously sick to my stomach when I saw how much we would get. There is the letter of the law and then there is the spirit of the law. I completely agree, my work is well funded right now b/c we sold a few properties and did not try to do a 1031 exchange. But many of our properties need updating, in fact we are doing major tenant improvements on one, and it that tenant would go belly up before they move in, or before the end of their lease term, we could be left holding the bag. We don't know how many tenants we have that may default due to the economic conditions - so we took the money figuring we can always pay it back. But all of us are going to pay for this via our tax dollars. If you don't take your "share" of what is available to you, it is like shooting yourself in the foot and taking a competitive disadvantage for no reason. jmhoI agree with the bolded part. I really did have an issue with it but in the end, we did nothing wrong. The program was written so that it was available to anyone that met the criteria. We met the criteria. I just disagree with the criteria. But this program also didn't allow for time to determine whether or not you would be harmed. So you had to apply for it ASAP.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 17, 2020 15:30:47 GMT -5
People of high moral character? I agree. I do not work for them...lol In all seriousness, I consider the owners of my company to be good people. They brought me on to make sure we do things the "right" way. But the right way to them is the legal way. They were not about to turn down $1m. Especially when we really do not know long-term what is going to happen. Perhaps more of our customers will be hurt and our collections will drop to a point where we are truly struggling. It's the big unknown...and also a big justification when you aren't currently harmed. ... I see that uncertainty and think that is where repaying and not asking for it to be forgiven should come into play.
|
|
TheOtherMe
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 14:40:52 GMT -5
Posts: 27,120
Mini-Profile Name Color: e619e6
|
Post by TheOtherMe on Apr 17, 2020 15:34:11 GMT -5
The $1200 payment hasn't made it to anyone I personally know yet, most of whom are low-income. Neither of my sons nor my DS's GF (all of whom used direct deposit last year with the IRS) have received the $1200 either. I received my $1200 payment and everyone I have talked to on the phone received theirs. Several FB friends posted they received theirs. I am certainly not low-income, but on the lower end of middle income. If they moved and changed bank accounts, the money went to the old account. From what I can figure out, the payments to SS, SSDI and SSI recipients are not going out until later this month. There is also a known issue if people used preparers like Block, etc. that allow "instant" refunds. Their stimulus payments went to that account of the 3rd party preparer and not to the taxpayer because that is how the preparer gets their money back. Lots of issues with the stimulus payments and trying to issue them so fast.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 17, 2020 15:42:22 GMT -5
... If you don't take your "share" of what is available to you, it is like shooting yourself in the foot and taking a competitive disadvantage for no reason. jmho I feel good about myself when I take only what I need. I see that as a reason to not take more. jm(not so)ho
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 17, 2020 15:50:51 GMT -5
I agree. I do not work for them...lol In all seriousness, I consider the owners of my company to be good people. They brought me on to make sure we do things the "right" way. But the right way to them is the legal way. They were not about to turn down $1m. Especially when we really do not know long-term what is going to happen. Perhaps more of our customers will be hurt and our collections will drop to a point where we are truly struggling. It's the big unknown...and also a big justification when you aren't currently harmed. ... I see that uncertainty and think that is where repaying and not asking for it to be forgiven should come into play. Agreed. But I can guarantee you that no one will actually do that. It's essentially free money as long as payroll remains constant.
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,749
|
Post by jerseygirl on Apr 19, 2020 11:03:37 GMT -5
Just got an email from chase about the SBA application. Said no more funding available now Also there are 100,000 applications ahead of me at Chase
|
|
plugginaway22
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 10:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 1,655
|
Post by plugginaway22 on Apr 19, 2020 11:59:31 GMT -5
I was complaining but found out my boss got the email to docusign on Friday so now we wait for funds. We really needed this loan to prevent major layoffs and possible closing of the business. Relief.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 23:47:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 18:03:06 GMT -5
A friend of mine said her husband applied on Day 2. Ruth Chris steakhouse got $20 million. He got zero because the funding was gone.
Think how many truly small businesses $20 million might have saved.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 23:47:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 21:00:38 GMT -5
A friend of mine said her husband applied on Day 2. Ruth Chris steakhouse got $20 million. He got zero because the funding was gone. Think how many truly small businesses $20 million might have saved. Yep, and when asked if Trump wanted that changed in the next round of funding he said NO. Neat, huh?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,306
|
Post by swamp on Apr 19, 2020 21:34:43 GMT -5
It doesnt seem right that publicly traded companies are getting help under this program.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Apr 19, 2020 22:53:45 GMT -5
It doesnt seem right that publicly traded companies are getting help under this program. I think the next round should have a cap on annual revenue so that the loans can only go to true small business. DH’s company submitted an application but didn’t get any funding.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 20, 2020 6:00:34 GMT -5
A friend of mine said her husband applied on Day 2. Ruth Chris steakhouse got $20 million. He got zero because the funding was gone. Think how many truly small businesses $20 million might have saved. Yep, and when asked if Trump wanted that changed in the next round of funding he said NO. Neat, huh? I'm confused...I thought both the Senate and the House have to approve the stimulus package? All the house has to do is vote it down. The House approved it last time after putting in their own pork that got approved. Why in the world would the democrats approve something that was clearly a free money grab to so many companies that didn't need help? You can talk about the Republicans all you want, but this was approved by the Democrats. I think it is time to face reality...neither party gives a shit about small businesses. Maybe this time the House should hold up the bill for something like this and not their bullshit pork/pet projects. I would fully support not voting for the same kind of program again as I personally saw what a money grab it was and how the truly small businesses got screwed. Any refunding needs to have some strict requirements on it. And any new funding needs to be only about one damn issue. Not a 1400 page package with every pipe dream under the sun.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 20, 2020 6:01:29 GMT -5
It doesnt seem right that publicly traded companies are getting help under this program. I think the next round should have a cap on annual revenue so that the loans can only go to true small business. DH’s company submitted an application but didn’t get any funding. And they must prove that they were harmed by Covid-19. I will not be in favor of another money grab.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,353
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on Apr 20, 2020 7:04:56 GMT -5
We got notification over the weekend that our loan will be closed remotely through email and text... They didn't mention timing, but we are thinking this week.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 20, 2020 7:11:01 GMT -5
We got notification over the weekend that our loan will be closed remotely through email and text... They didn't mention timing, but we are thinking this week. They have 10 days from the date of approval to close it and fund it. Our loan docs were a combination of DocuSign and print/sign/scan. Money was in the account within hours of signing the documents.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Apr 20, 2020 7:59:40 GMT -5
Yep, and when asked if Trump wanted that changed in the next round of funding he said NO. Neat, huh? I'm confused...I thought both the Senate and the House have to approve the stimulus package? All the house has to do is vote it down. The House approved it last time after putting in their own pork that got approved. Why in the world would the democrats approve something that was clearly a free money grab to so many companies that didn't need help? You can talk about the Republicans all you want, but this was approved by the Democrats. I think it is time to face reality...neither party gives a shit about small businesses. Maybe this time the House should hold up the bill for something like this and not their bullshit pork/pet projects. I would fully support not voting for the same kind of program again as I personally saw what a money grab it was and how the truly small businesses got screwed. Any refunding needs to have some strict requirements on it. And any new funding needs to be only about one damn issue. Not a 1400 page package with every pipe dream under the sun. First, you are correct, despite Trump’s constant verbal attempts to do so, only Congress can enact legislation. Trump can ramble on about HIS vision, but any new stimulus bill will reflect Congress’ vision. Second, so Congress enacts the legislation and then the Executive Branch — Trump and all of his cabinet appointments and all of those Federal employees— gives life to that legislation. How any new law is executed and actually functions (or fails to function) is based upon how it is implemented by the Executive Branch. So, frankly, I’m not surprised that most of the first round of the “Payroll Protection” legislation went to big companies. Trump only touts big companies in his press conferences. He really has no interest in helping the vast majority of Americans who work for small businesses. Of course, any additional funding for the “Payroll Protection” program faces the same fate unless, this time, Congress explicitly identifies what size companies are entitled to the funds.
|
|