I’m just trying to understand which restaurant employees you think a federal program should help. It sounds like it’s those not associated with a brand (as franchised and brand managed each looks like a disqualifier to you). And then I’d like you to estimate what percentage of the restaurant workers in the country those limitations would disqualify. Then detremine if that would make the program more or less imperfect, or have more desired results of employment retention, than just making the access more universal and uncapped. I haven’t misrepresented anything. I think you’re advocating for narrowing the program. And I’m sure legislators considered these things, too, and and attempted for it to be farther reaching if imperfect.
A bad “republican” argument for narrowing unemployment is that it’s abused (when we all know that’s true but statistically insignficant). I think you want this narrowed because a handful of large restaurant owners access dollars they were intentionally given access to (not even abused). That seems like a similar argument. Ruths Chris got money so the progam is immediately a farce.
Actually you’ve just highlighted the difference between individual and structural power systems, and why it’s important to focus on the big one (structural), because the small one (individual) is statistically insignificant.
Ah yes. That pesky other 51% of the country. Always showing up a the table. (And I’m not a Republican fwiw.)
See my ETA above…
maybe give THEM direct help instead of funneling this money to the wealthy, who aren’t going to lose their only means of income over this.
You very much did. You put meaning into my comment that you very much are aware I was not arguing.
I’m advocating for supporting ACTUAL small businesses, which employ about half the working population.
Just because it was intentionally put there, (by the GOP, McConnell and Rubio) doesn’t mean it’s not privileging large corporations over smaller ones that don’t have the same resources. How about have a separate program for franchisees instead of fucking over small businesses.
I can’t find statistics for the current Congress offhand, but in 2014, Republicans had a majority in the Senate but represented will less than half of the population.
But based on population, Democrats actually represent more people. Republican senators, while holding enough seats to control the Senate, represent about 47 percent of the U.S. population, while Democrats represent about 53 percent.
The only reason Republicans have a “majority” is because the federal government thinks land mass should count.
And let’s not forget voter suppression, either. They know their policies are retrograde and increasingly only benefit a tiny minority of voters, so they do all they can to spread misinformation and suppress the vote around who they perceive to be the democratic core (instead of, you know, trying to appeal to them and shape policies that they might like and agree with).
Excellent! I will pass this on.
The SBA has a size standards table it publishes with number of employees for some business types and gross receipts yearly that qualifies firms to be certified as small businesses- different gross receipts by NAICS codes the firms operate under. The 500 employees standard comes from this SBA standard that defines what a small business is.
500 employees is the limit regardless of which NAICS Codes (North American Industry Classification System) a business operates under to be considered a small business. This is based upon a methodology that is defined in the regulations that govern ms the SBA.
Title 13: Business Credit and Assistance
PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE REGULATIONS
Contents
But see, it’s the important, job creators that make up much of that 30%, so they count for 51% of the country… /s
Ehhh… the data you linked to couldn’t be more even-keeled.
Check the numbers in the link. I’m in the 36% that gets lost between two extreme sides, and that’s the real problem for all of us. The stress on the program was: (i) do you help hotels & restaurants only (many of which are larger than 500 ppl, especially hotels), or (ii) everyone. They tried to skin a compromise into one program and of course it was imperfect. (Consider the minority of small businesses, like fabric stores as one example, doing better but who also still qualify; I don’t spite them.) It was done by humans in a rush and panic and certainly with both sides impacted by lobbying efforts. I happen to think it was a valiant effort, and not a total scam or jam job on main street to help Wall Street. I think uncapping it would fix it easier than taking money back and rewriting it would. But to each his/her own.
Seperate legislation was needed. Full stop.
No, McConnell and Rubio were funneling money to large corporations.
I’d wager that was a bill waiting for an opportunity, becuase no one writes over 800 pages of dense legislation in a week or two.
We have no reason to believe that, given that they almost always help wall street over mainstreet.
Or having separate legislation for larger corporations.
If you’re a bank and you can support your best, largest clients and do less work by processing fewer loans - you’ll support the big firms (that may also have people on your board)).
And if the pols are also pushing you to take care of these large firms that donate to them? The little gal doesn’t stand a chance- at least not without stringent regulations and oversight.
The 5/3 Compromise
EtA: This comment not sponsored by Fifth Third Bank
From the article: In fact, the U.S. government has allocated at least $243.4 million of the total $349 billion to publicly traded companies, the firm said.
That maths in at 0.07%. C’mon: does that actually stink to you?
I’d say the program did pretty well getting to small businesses in the other 99.93%. Actually, a lot better than I thought since the top of this forum.
You might say that - but the article does not. Not all larger businesses are publicly traded. Many are set up as LLC’s these days - with Russian dolls of subsidiaries and affiliates.
A certain Orange Gentleman runs an eponymous organization- is self reportedly a billionaire several times over - and not a publicly traded business among his rats warren of associated businesses.
“ The Trump Organization is a groupof about 500 business entities of which Donald Trump is the sole or principal owner.[4]”
Of course many companies have oodles of shell subsidiaries, which is precisely why the program requires aggregation of all of a companies LLCs/subsidiaries in calculating the 500 ppl EXCEPT hotels and restaurants. Not all large companies are publicly traded, I will concur. Nor are all publically traded companies large, although that’s what the article suggests despite its chart showing companies with markets caps of $6mm which (a) have no business being public, and (b) clearly aren’t doing well. I didn’t spend the 5 mins to find out what TSR is or does, but if it’s has $6mm in market cap and also $6.7mm in payroll needs in the next 10 weeks (which is the math for the loan size) then I’d say that company looks pretty dire and didn’t have better capital raising options.
Being public is only a proxy but not a rule for being large. Being a chain or brand (managed or franchised) is only a proxy, too. I personally think it’s a lot of headline grabbing and people crying about marginal imperfection that any program will have.
Yes.
Here are the 2019 numbers for the top 10, including a very familiar name at #2 and 3 companies that know a lot about playing financial games:
10- C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc. – $27 billion in revenue and 16,200 employees
9- Reyes Holdings – $27.8 billion in revenue, 31,000 employees.
8- Publix Super Markets – $34.6 billion, 193,000 employees
7- Ernst & Young – $34.8 billion, 250,000 employees
6- Mars, Inc. – $35 billion in revenue, 100,000 employees
5- PricewaterhouseCoopers – $41.3 billion in revenue, 236,000 employees
4- Deloitte – $43.2 billion revenue, 263,000 employees.
3- Albertsons – $59.9 billion in revenue, 275,000 employees.
2- Koch Industries – $110 billion in revenue, 120,000 employees.
1- Cargill, Inc – $114.7 billion revenue, 155,000 employees
[Source: Top 10 Huge Private Companies In The US [Guide] - ValueWalk]
I wonder how much these “small businesses” (because they’re not publicly traded, natch) will be taking from that fund. I wonder if we’ll ever find out.
Unless any of those companies’ industries is excluded from aggregating (that’s the program term for adding up all the employees under every holding company), then none is elgibile, and access would only be via fraud. Not because there was a bone thrown.
