Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

MORE FREE MONEY FROM THE GOV GOING TO THE WRONG PLACES.  

The richest university in the US just got $9 million, even though they have an endowment of $41 billion.  In addition to Havard's $41 billion endowment, they ended up with a $300 million surplus in fiscal 2019.

Ruths Chris restaurant just got $20 million as well even though a lot of small businesses are bring turned away for $20k loan requests.  Politically, everyone preaches small businesses but at the end of the day both parties always sell out to the rich and powerful.

(04-20-2020, 08:49 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]MORE FREE MONEY FROM THE GOV GOING TO THE WRONG PLACES.  

The richest university in the US just got $9 million, even though they have an endowment of $41 billion.  In addition to Havard's $41 billion endowment, they ended up with a $300 million surplus in fiscal 2019.

Ruths Chris restaurant just got $20 million as well even though a lot of small businesses are bring turned away for $20k loan requests.  Politically, everyone preaches small businesses but at the end of the day both parties always sell out to the rich and powerful.

I'm not sure this is an example of "selling out to the rich and powerful" as much as it is that they had to fly the plane while they were building it.  Most programs like this go through a lengthy vetting process, with congressional hearings, and months-long negotiations, and this one had to be created in days.  So, something happened that no one thought of.

(04-20-2020, 08:49 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]MORE FREE MONEY FROM THE GOV GOING TO THE WRONG PLACES.  

The richest university in the US just got $9 million, even though they have an endowment of $41 billion.  In addition to Havard's $41 billion endowment, they ended up with a $300 million surplus in fiscal 2019.

Ruths Chris restaurant just got $20 million as well even though a lot of small businesses are bring turned away for $20k loan requests.  Politically, everyone preaches small businesses but at the end of the day both parties always sell out to the rich and powerful.

If the people don't like it, they can choose not to do business with said establishments again. People are sheep. They won't.

(04-20-2020, 09:32 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 08:49 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]MORE FREE MONEY FROM THE GOV GOING TO THE WRONG PLACES.  

The richest university in the US just got $9 million, even though they have an endowment of $41 billion.  In addition to Havard's $41 billion endowment, they ended up with a $300 million surplus in fiscal 2019.

Ruths Chris restaurant just got $20 million as well even though a lot of small businesses are bring turned away for $20k loan requests.  Politically, everyone preaches small businesses but at the end of the day both parties always sell out to the rich and powerful.

If the people don't like it, they can choose not to do business with said establishments again. People are sheep. They won't.

Truer words have never been spoken...

I've been boycotting Ruth's Chris for 50 years now, unless Corp America pays for it, or when it used to be included in the Teal Deals (I think it was $50 off bills of $125 or more)

The issue is anyone with 500 or less employees at a location was able to get money that was meant for small businesses.

All businesses needed the money though or they would fire people. The issue is most businesses don't care how much cash they have sitting around. It is all about the stock price and as soon as revenue goes down, you have to cut costs so the stock price doesn't go down and the C suite's bonuses don't get effected. It's the one bad thing about capitalism where once you lose your moral compass it can become almost as bad as socialism. Most of the largest companies could have just covered their employees like struggling small businesses are trying to do because they treat their employees like family. Most of the large companies won't though because again all the C suite cares about is the shareholders, none of the other stakeholders that actually drive the stock price matter.

(04-20-2020, 11:19 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]I've been boycotting Ruth's Chris for 50 years now, unless Corp America pays for it, or when it used to be included in the Teal Deals (I think it was $50 off bills of $125 or more)

Why buy a steak at Ruth's Chris when you can make just as good a steak at home for 1/4 the price?

(04-20-2020, 11:33 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 11:19 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]I've been boycotting Ruth's Chris for 50 years now, unless Corp America pays for it, or when it used to be included in the Teal Deals (I think it was $50 off bills of $125 or more)

Why buy a steak at Ruth's Chris when you can make just as good a steak at home for 1/4 the price?

$50 for a steak and then they charge $12 for a baked potato, and $8 for 3 or 4 strips of asparagus .... that was my most recent visit a few years back.    I'm simple .... $12.99 at Outback for a small steak, baked potato, and chop salad .... throw in a bloomin' onion for starters and i'm good to go.    Ooops, Darden Restaurants are big business as well

(04-20-2020, 11:33 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 11:19 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]I've been boycotting Ruth's Chris for 50 years now, unless Corp America pays for it, or when it used to be included in the Teal Deals (I think it was $50 off bills of $125 or more)

Why buy a steak at Ruth's Chris when you can make just as good a steak at home for 1/4 the price?

Heck, you can could buy a better steak in a restaurant for 1/4 the price. I went to Ruth's Chris once during Magical Dining Month and was unimpressed. Texas Roadhouse is my steak place of choice.

(04-20-2020, 11:50 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 11:33 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]Why buy a steak at Ruth's Chris when you can make just as good a steak at home for 1/4 the price?

$50 for a steak and then they charge $12 for a baked potato, and $8 for 3 or 4 strips of asparagus .... that was my most recent visit a few years back.    I'm simple .... $12.99 at Outback for a small steak, baked potato, and chop salad .... throw in a bloomin' onion for starters and i'm good to go.    Ooops, Darden Restaurants are big business as well

Ruths Chris steak > Outback steak

It's an experience. Nobody likes a cheapskate.

(04-20-2020, 11:25 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]The issue is anyone with 500 or less employees at a location was able to get money that was meant for small businesses.

All businesses needed the money though or they would fire people. The issue is most businesses don't care how much cash they have sitting around. It is all about the stock price and as soon as revenue goes down, you have to cut costs so the stock price doesn't go down and the C suite's bonuses don't get effected. It's the one bad thing about capitalism where once you lose your moral compass it can become almost as bad as socialism. Most of the largest companies could have just covered their employees like struggling small businesses are trying to do because they treat their employees like family. Most of the large companies won't though because again all the C suite cares about is the shareholders, none of the other stakeholders that actually drive the stock price matter.

That's partially true.  The thing is that many "chain" restaurants (as well as other businesses) are franchises.  I know a guy that has a FedEx franchise that employs roughly 15 people.  Under the rules he qualifies for the aide should he choose to apply for it.  At least that is my understanding.

(04-20-2020, 08:49 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]MORE FREE MONEY FROM THE GOV GOING TO THE WRONG PLACES.  

The richest university in the US just got $9 million, even though they have an endowment of $41 billion.  In addition to Havard's $41 billion endowment, they ended up with a $300 million surplus in fiscal 2019.

Ruths Chris restaurant just got $20 million as well even though a lot of small businesses are bring turned away for $20k loan requests.  Politically, everyone preaches small businesses but at the end of the day both parties always sell out to the rich and powerful.

The thing about all this and why I kinda sorta understand it is that most chain restaurants and hotels are franchised. It's got the Ruth's Chris name on the sign, but that particular location might be owned by Joe Smith. Ruth isn't hurting, but Joe is, and he needs that loan to make payroll, because the corporate office isn't helping. I'd prefer to see that money go directly to the franchisees and not the company, but to look at a Days Inn sign and say that hotel is doing fine and shouldn't get any stimulus funds shows a lack of understanding of how franchises work. Days Inn is fine. That particular Days Inn has probably laid off most of its staff to keep the lights on.

(04-20-2020, 12:17 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 11:50 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]$50 for a steak and then they charge $12 for a baked potato, and $8 for 3 or 4 strips of asparagus .... that was my most recent visit a few years back.    I'm simple .... $12.99 at Outback for a small steak, baked potato, and chop salad .... throw in a bloomin' onion for starters and i'm good to go.    Ooops, Darden Restaurants are big business as well

Ruths Chris steak > Outback steak

It's an experience. Nobody likes a cheapskate.

Says the guy who's whining because his $200k income means he doesn't get a $1,200 Inflation Day present.

(04-20-2020, 02:14 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 08:49 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]MORE FREE MONEY FROM THE GOV GOING TO THE WRONG PLACES.  

The richest university in the US just got $9 million, even though they have an endowment of $41 billion.  In addition to Havard's $41 billion endowment, they ended up with a $300 million surplus in fiscal 2019.

Ruths Chris restaurant just got $20 million as well even though a lot of small businesses are bring turned away for $20k loan requests.  Politically, everyone preaches small businesses but at the end of the day both parties always sell out to the rich and powerful.

The thing about all this and why I kinda sorta understand it is that most chain restaurants and hotels are franchised. It's got the Ruth's Chris name on the sign, but that particular location might be owned by Joe Smith. Ruth isn't hurting, but Joe is, and he needs that loan to make payroll, because the corporate office isn't helping. I'd prefer to see that money go directly to the franchisees and not the company, but to look at a Days Inn sign and say that hotel is doing fine and shouldn't get any stimulus funds shows a lack of understanding of how franchises work. Days Inn is fine. That particular Days Inn has probably laid off most of its staff to keep the lights on.

(04-20-2020, 12:17 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Ruths Chris steak > Outback steak

It's an experience. Nobody likes a cheapskate.

Says the guy who's whining because his $200k income means he doesn't get a $1,200 Inflation Day present.

My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:14 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]The thing about all this and why I kinda sorta understand it is that most chain restaurants and hotels are franchised. It's got the Ruth's Chris name on the sign, but that particular location might be owned by Joe Smith. Ruth isn't hurting, but Joe is, and he needs that loan to make payroll, because the corporate office isn't helping. I'd prefer to see that money go directly to the franchisees and not the company, but to look at a Days Inn sign and say that hotel is doing fine and shouldn't get any stimulus funds shows a lack of understanding of how franchises work. Days Inn is fine. That particular Days Inn has probably laid off most of its staff to keep the lights on.


Says the guy who's whining because his $200k income means he doesn't get a $1,200 Inflation Day present.

My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

Did they incorporate? Then they should receive small business loans as part of the stimulus--should have, anyway, before all involved handled those funds like a dozen monkeys [BLEEP] a football. Did they not incorporate? Good God man, why not?

And there's my heartless angle, too: I make a whole lot less than $200K, and I've managed to build up an entire year worth of safety net in savings. If something happens, I could change absolutely nothing about the way I live and sustain for an entire year. That was before the stimulus deposit came in. If someone making $200K hasn't figured out how to build up a six-month safety net, even if that involves not spending as much, then I don't know what to say beyond fire your accountant if you have one, and hire one if you don't.

(04-20-2020, 02:40 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

Did they incorporate? Then they should receive small business loans as part of the stimulus--should have, anyway, before all involved handled those funds like a dozen monkeys [BLEEP] a football. Did they not incorporate? Good God man, why not?

And there's my heartless angle, too: I make a whole lot less than $200K, and I've managed to build up an entire year worth of safety net in savings. If something happens, I could change absolutely nothing about the way I live and sustain for an entire year. That was before the stimulus deposit came in. If someone making $200K hasn't figured out how to build up a six-month safety net, even if that involves not spending as much, then I don't know what to say beyond fire your accountant if you have one, and hire one if you don't.

So, we have common ground on the handling of the funds and acting like monkeys in heat.

Now you are getting into personal responsibility of saving for "a rainy day". Most peoples rainy days don't last this long.

You bring up an interesting point about someone making a 6 figure income not figuring out how to build up a six-month safety net. Don't you feel that ALL businesses should do the same? If that were the case, there wouldn't be 10M unemployment claims in the past few weeks. Based on your example, we wouldn't even need a government if every business acted responsibly by stockpiling their reserves.

(04-20-2020, 02:44 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:40 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]Did they incorporate? Then they should receive small business loans as part of the stimulus--should have, anyway, before all involved handled those funds like a dozen monkeys [BLEEP] a football. Did they not incorporate? Good God man, why not?

And there's my heartless angle, too: I make a whole lot less than $200K, and I've managed to build up an entire year worth of safety net in savings. If something happens, I could change absolutely nothing about the way I live and sustain for an entire year. That was before the stimulus deposit came in. If someone making $200K hasn't figured out how to build up a six-month safety net, even if that involves not spending as much, then I don't know what to say beyond fire your accountant if you have one, and hire one if you don't.

So, we have common ground on the handling of the funds and acting like monkeys in heat.

Now you are getting into personal responsibility of saving for "a rainy day". Most peoples rainy days don't last this long.

You bring up an interesting point about someone making a 6 figure income not figuring out how to build up a six-month safety net. Don't you feel that ALL businesses should do the same? If that were the case, there wouldn't be 10M unemployment claims in the past few weeks. Based on your example, we wouldn't even need a government if every business acted responsibly by stockpiling their reserves.

We do indeed have common ground on that. My position has long been that taxpayers need direct relief, small businesses need cash and loan access, and big businesses should have access to government backed zero-interest loans, period. American getting billions of dollars because they chose to tie up billions in paper airplanes rather than creating cash reserves is ridiculous. Delta getting the same billions of dollars because they bought a refinery that, surprise, airlines don't need if they're not flying, and now Delta has to ask its employees to take unpaid leave? No. Airlines are saying that even by parking or just outright retiring most of their aircraft and furloughing large portions of their staff, they still can't afford to stay in business. If a company that size raking in the profit airlines do can't build up any kind of cash reserve that will hold up through a period of minimal to zero operation, then they should be more or less allowed to fail, with those bailout funds going straight to their employees based upon tenure and salary.

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:14 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]The thing about all this and why I kinda sorta understand it is that most chain restaurants and hotels are franchised. It's got the Ruth's Chris name on the sign, but that particular location might be owned by Joe Smith. Ruth isn't hurting, but Joe is, and he needs that loan to make payroll, because the corporate office isn't helping. I'd prefer to see that money go directly to the franchisees and not the company, but to look at a Days Inn sign and say that hotel is doing fine and shouldn't get any stimulus funds shows a lack of understanding of how franchises work. Days Inn is fine. That particular Days Inn has probably laid off most of its staff to keep the lights on.


Says the guy who's whining because his $200k income means he doesn't get a $1,200 Inflation Day present.

My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

If you have 200k a year in taxable income there is no excuse for you not to have enough savings to last a long time without a government handout.

(04-20-2020, 03:10 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

If you have 200k a year in taxable income there is no excuse for you not to have enough savings to last a long time without a government handout.

TRM, curious what your income threshold is for that criteria?

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:14 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]The thing about all this and why I kinda sorta understand it is that most chain restaurants and hotels are franchised. It's got the Ruth's Chris name on the sign, but that particular location might be owned by Joe Smith. Ruth isn't hurting, but Joe is, and he needs that loan to make payroll, because the corporate office isn't helping. I'd prefer to see that money go directly to the franchisees and not the company, but to look at a Days Inn sign and say that hotel is doing fine and shouldn't get any stimulus funds shows a lack of understanding of how franchises work. Days Inn is fine. That particular Days Inn has probably laid off most of its staff to keep the lights on.


Says the guy who's whining because his $200k income means he doesn't get a $1,200 Inflation Day present.

My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

The thing is, where exactly does that 75% of 200K a year go?  Dinners at Ruth's Chris rather than cash reserves?  Expensive or exotic vacations?  Are there mortgages on the rental properties?

I have a very good friend that recently sold his business (property management company) that was pretty successful even with the housing bubble bursting in 2008.  Their "income" was in the "hundreds of thousands" dollars even though their bills were close to the same.  He also carried a large amount of debt to be able to do it.  While his gross was in the "hundreds of thousands" his net wasn't really that much.  If I recall correctly he owned 25+ properties and managed well over 200 properties.  After selling his business he also sold most of his properties ( I think he currently owns a dozen or so with no mortgage debt).

It goes both ways.

(04-20-2020, 03:46 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

The thing is, where exactly does that 75% of 200K a year go?  Dinners at Ruth's Chris rather than cash reserves?  Expensive or exotic vacations?  Are there mortgages on the rental properties?

I have a very good friend that recently sold his business (property management company) that was pretty successful even with the housing bubble bursting in 2008.  Their "income" was in the "hundreds of thousands" dollars even though their bills were close to the same.  He also carried a large amount of debt to be able to do it.  While his gross was in the "hundreds of thousands" his net wasn't really that much.  If I recall correctly he owned 25+ properties and managed well over 200 properties.  After selling his business he also sold most of his properties ( I think he currently owns a dozen or so with no mortgage debt).

It goes both ways.

The avg. consumer has no idea what separates revenue vs. profit.