I know many of the engineering and business school types sneer at the fact that they have to take electives that have nothing to do with their degrees, but so what? You can get a lot out of them if you pick the right ones. No one is forcing you to take basket-weaving if you'd prefer to take a biology class.
I majored in political science, but I used my electives to dabble in psychology, philosophy, English, sociology, etc., and I came out with a much more well-rounded education as a result.
I guess if I knew the government was eventually paying for my classes I wouldn’t have bitched about it, but these days at 2k per class, I’d rather not waste that money on Music Appreciation.
I know many of the engineering and business school types sneer at the fact that they have to take electives that have nothing to do with their degrees, but so what? You can get a lot out of them if you pick the right ones. No one is forcing you to take basket-weaving if you'd prefer to take a biology class.
I majored in political science, but I used my electives to dabble in psychology, philosophy, English, sociology, etc., and I came out with a much more well-rounded education as a result.
I think the engineering and business school types were sneering at the people majoring or taking anything like political science, psychology, philosophy, English, sociology, etc.
Weren’t the PPP loans designed to be forgiven when they were granted? Wasn’t it done so that employers didn’t just terminate a bunch of employees and put them on EI?
I’m confused how these are comparable. I could be wrong about the PPP though.
Weren’t the PPP loans designed to be forgiven when they were granted? Wasn’t it done so that employers didn’t just terminate a bunch of employees and put them on EI?
I’m confused how these are comparable. I could be wrong about the PPP though.
Yeah. It's been hashed out in this thread. They were basically grants given with conditions that you that you kept your employees on the payroll, or you had to pay it back if you didn't.
The more pertinent question is why does a youtube/podcast creating company would face hardship during the pandemic, which was the point of the ppp loans. I'd imagine a right wing podcast company probably benefitted from the controversy of pandemic shutdowns.
Yeah. It's been hashed out in this thread. They were basically grants given with conditions that you that you kept your employees on the payroll, or you had to pay it back if you didn't.
The more pertinent question is why does a youtube/podcast creating company would face hardship during the pandemic, which was the point of the ppp loans. I'd imagine a right wing podcast company probably benefitted from the controversy of pandemic shutdowns.
I’m not in a position to know why but was there a financial hardship requirement to the loan? I thought it was just a blanket offering.
Yeah. It's been hashed out in this thread. They were basically grants given with conditions that you that you kept your employees on the payroll, or you had to pay it back if you didn't.
It actually really hasn't been, because there has been almost no oversight of the program to determine its efficacy. What oversight has been done has uncovered a ton of abuses. The PPP loan program was used and abused as a huge giveaway. Bottom line, it was tax payers giving money to businesses to keep them open and people getting paid, but the reality is that only a quarter of the money from the program went to employees, the rest (75%) went to business owners as profit or returns to shareholders. The program was a giveaway of money to those who already had it, not to those who needed it. To suggest this was executed the way the program was designed is just wrong. The people who were hurting continued to hurt. The people who were making money hand over fist received the greatest benefit, just like it did with the CARES program. If there is one thing we can count on, any government program proposed by the Republicans is certain to benefit those who already have the money and penalize those who have no money to give.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
It actually really hasn't been, because there has been almost no oversight of the program to determine its efficacy. What oversight has been done has uncovered a ton of abuses. The PPP loan program was used and abused as a huge giveaway. Bottom line, it was tax payers giving money to businesses to keep them open and people getting paid, but the reality is that only a quarter of the money from the program went to employees, the rest (75%) went to business owners as profit or returns to shareholders. The program was a giveaway of money to those who already had it, not to those who needed it. To suggest this was executed the way the program was designed is just wrong. The people who were hurting continued to hurt. The people who were making money hand over fist received the greatest benefit, just like it did with the CARES program. If there is one thing we can count on, any government program proposed by the Republicans is certain to benefit those who already have the money and penalize those who have no money to give.
It's a complicated and nuanced argument. You say "75% went to business owners as profit or returns to shareholders", I can show you a dozen local restaurants and other small businesses who used that 75% to pay their lease , mortgage payments or other accounts payable. Those businesses are up and thriving now and employing 50-100 people, and would have likely gone under without help.
I can accept there was probably a lot of abuse of the PPP, but I'd argue it was one of the better programs for quickly targeting the money to the people most hurt by the covid shutdowns. I, personally, would not shame any of them for taking the money if they kept paying their employees and are still paying people now.
It's a complicated and nuanced argument. You say "75% went to business owners as profit or returns to shareholders", I can show you a dozen local restaurants and other small businesses who used that 75% to pay their lease , mortgage payments or other accounts payable. Those businesses are up and thriving now and employing 50-100 people, and would have likely gone under without help.
I can accept there was probably a lot of abuse of the PPP, but I'd argue it was one of the better programs for quickly targeting the money to the people most hurt by the covid shutdowns. I, personally, would not shame any of them for taking the money if they kept paying their employees and are still paying people now.
The PPP loans are being brought up against people saying handouts are bad yet are ones who took part themselves. The hypocrisy is ripe but typical for those people.
I think the engineering and business school types were sneering at the people majoring or taking anything like political science, psychology, philosophy, English, sociology, etc.
Should have probably gotten a more well-rounded education if you can't see the value in those majors.
I wondered when it would happen, thinking maybe if Trump runs and loses the Republican primary for 2024 but extremist Laura Loomer says she will not concede her loss in the primary to another Republican, blaming election fraud.
I know that these journals have some amount of overhead to run, but the prices they've been charging for paywall access in the first year have been so astronomical that even my library can't afford to pay for journals like Nature.
I mean seriously, I have to beg articles from other institutions who have access to the most prominent and well known scientific journal. It's not like this is some obscure random journal...this is Nature.
Pretty pleased by this. It's another cost lowering measure that can be passed on to students as well.
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
I know that these journals have some amount of overhead to run, but the prices they've been charging for paywall access in the first year have been so astronomical that even my library can't afford to pay for journals like Nature.
I mean seriously, I have to beg articles from other institutions who have access to the most prominent and well known scientific journal. It's not like this is some obscure random journal...this is Nature.
Pretty pleased by this. It's another cost lowering measure that can be passed on to students as well.
For sure. I'm also of the opinion that knowledge shouldn't be commodified.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
