Stimulus Funds Being Used to Reward Red Status

[H_Arendt]

@STODR

So the federal government should take over the local banks in hard hit areas to make it happen? Are you listening to yourself?

Where did I propose a federal takeover of local banks? Where is that coming from.

[H_Arendt]

@STODR

All he is looking at is a percentage of work force. Totally ignoring many of those states at the bottom have gotten way more funds and loans approved. But due to the fact that they have a higher population the actual percentage is less. But that doesn’t fit his Trump is baa baa bad.

Actually, the important figure was probability of getting a loan based on total applications, not based on population. Your argument is baa baa bad.

[Snow96]

@H_Arendt

Where did I propose a federal takeover of local banks? Where is that coming from.

Still wiating for proof that either congress or the administration has targeted area’s that will help in the election and witholding from other area’s.

[H_Arendt]

@STODR

The proof your op is crap has been posted many times above. But just for you to ignore here it is again:

"Ernie Tedeschi, the Evercore analyst who calculated the eligible payroll figures, offered a few theories about why the imbalance arose in an April 15 note. One was that regions hit harder by the virus, or that had the earliest lockdowns, may have had more trouble getting lending started. Another was that more businesses in hard-hit states may not have applied because the program isn’t enough to make a difference for them. Tedeschi also floated the possibility that businesses in some states had better pre-existing relationships with community banks that were able to get applications submitted quickly.

Whatever the reason, it’s inevitable that the results will be politicized"

The guy who did the study gave possible reasons. Not one of them was because of politics. But he did predict people like you would make it political.

The statement that "the results will be politicized was not made by Tedeschi. You are distorting the article to support your position. Why not. deal with facts.

[H_Arendt]

@Snow96

@H_Arendt

Where did I propose a federal takeover of local banks? Where is that coming from.

Still wiating for proof that either congress or the administration has targeted area’s that will help in the election and witholding from other area’s.

You’re playing the same game the Supreme Court has shifted to. Just because the statistics show a completely non-random outcome that is not PROOF. You have to show deliberate action and intent. Of course, I have no ability to report on the discussions in Treasury or SBA or the Trump White House so there is no proof.

But the data show that the outcome clearly is consistent with targeting certain states to receive more money and certain states to receive less.

If. someone flips their own coin twenty times and it comes up heads every time, no doubt you would suggest there is no proof that is not a weighted coin.

[Snow96]

@H_Arendt

You’re playing the same game the Supreme Court has shifted to. Just because the statistics show a completely non-random outcome that is not PROOF.

I’m sorry but you have offered NO proof it was done intentianally. If I remember right there was only a handfull of no votes. So you’d have to say the Dem’s were complicit.

@H_Arendt

ou have to show deliberate action and intent. Of course, I have no ability to report on the discussions in Treasury or SBA or the Trump White House so there is no proof.

Then you need to stop saying it like it is fact. Congress passed a program and it’s been rolled out to the country as they intended. What would your suggestion be: Roll out in phases? Hardest hit area’s get two weeks to apply, then the next area, then the next? What if it were to run out before it got to area’s that ALSO need the money?

@H_Arendt

But the data show that the outcome clearly is consistent with targeting certain states to receive more money and certain states to receive less.

No it doesn’t. That is YOUR interpretation. They gave several reasons the data came out the way it did. You ignore that and scream “it’s political, it was done on purpose.” And that’s a load of ■■■■■■■■■

@H_Arendt

If. someone flips their own coin twenty times and it comes up heads every time, no doubt you would suggest there is no proof that is not a weighted coin.

Apples to Oranges comparison.

[H_Arendt]

@H_Arendt

But the data show that the outcome clearly is consistent with targeting certain states to receive more money and certain states to receive less.

No it doesn’t.

Actually, my statement was precise and correct. I said it “was consistent” – which does not deny the possibility of other interpretations.

If. someone flips their own coin twenty times and it comes up heads every time, no doubt you would suggest there is no proof that is not a weighted coin.[/quote]

Apples to Oranges comparison.

No: they are entirely similar in statistic terms. There is no reason in probability why a coin won’t come up twenty times in a row as heads… and there is no reason in probability why the entire bailout program wouldn’t have sent its entire budget. to Iowa.

Events that are low probability tend to raise our eyebrows. That’s all.

Instead of just battering away, pick your arguments based on what I say. Unless you just enjoy battering away.

[WuWei]

@H_Arendt

and act like one America!

Awwww! Isn’t that sweet!

[WuWei]

@conan

Sound like libs are crying because someone got more then they did.

The disparity between states has narrowed since April 13, when the SBA released the first detailed information on loans. As a share of eligible payroll, New York’s loans jumped to 40% from 23% in those three days. California’s share also increased.

From the link.

[Snow96]

I’m trying to fix your quote tags in that one post. I’m failing miserably

[WuWei]

Not a good thread.

[Snow96]

@H_Arendt

Actually, my statement was precise and correct. I said it “was consistent” – which does not deny the possibility of other interpretations.

There lies the problem. Your NOT presenting proof af anything. You are making your OWN assumption. And a court would be right to say, you have not proven they have done anything wrong (you know presumption of innocence) and rule against you – or at least they SHOULD.

@H_Arendt

No: they are entirely similar in statistic terms. There is no reason in probability why a coin won’t come up twenty times in a row as heads… and there is no reason in probability why the entire bailout program wouldn’t have sent its entire budget. to Iowa.

How many reason are there a two headed coin could come up heads every time? Your summising one one reason. Yet the study shows multiple reason (and leaves open the possability of others) of how the results could come out as they have without any political manipulation. Do that with the coin please and thank you.

@H_Arendt

Instead of just battering away, pick your arguments based on what I say. Unless you just enjoy battering away.

If you change it to your OPINION instead of fact I will. It is not fact, you have offered no proof other than an article that also has other explinations for what the results show,.

[conan]

So they are getting some of their share.

So what are the bitching about?

[STODR]

That was a percentage not a probability. Quit digging your self a hole.

[WuWei]

@STODR

That was a percentage not a probability. Quit digging your self a hole.

PUT THE DAMN SHOVEL DOWN!

[WildRose]

Your article shows no such thing. It simply shows where the highest percentage of approvals are.

Those approvals are granted or denied by the individual banks where you apply.

[markdido]

@WildRose

Your article shows no such thing. It simply shows where the highest percentage of approvals are.

Those approvals are granted or denied by the individual banks where you apply.

Didn’t take long for a Dem politician to latch on to this ■■■■■■■■■

I wonder is she’s a poster here?

'I smell a rat with orange hair' — Democrat accuses Trump of cheating blue...

[WuWei]

Seems like Pelosi is holding up reloading PPP?

[H_Arendt]

@WildRose

Your article shows no such thing. It simply shows where the highest percentage of approvals are.

Those approvals are granted or denied by the individual banks where you apply.

The banks processed the loans, but the approvals came from the SBA. Read the article, it makes the banks’ role clear.

[Explorer777]

It wouldn’t surprise me if Pelosi’s holding up of the stimulus is not only an attempt to see our President Donald Trump fail but also an attempt to move the Dow so they can make more money. I’m a sole-proprietor with no employees who has seen hardly any business for 30 days. I’ve not gotten a stimulus check, unemployment check or sba loan even though I applied. I don’t blame the POTUS for that, I will remain confident that when I open tomorrow that the work that has been done- (even though I didn’t get any help) - will help my business survive these times. I support the President, and as far as the the Blue States not getting help I believe the reason for that is that most of the Blue States already had people that were getting total help and were already making their living by sucking the government teat!