Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	What do Perdue, Loeffler & St Paul have in common?
Date:	12/29/2020 10:24:52 PM (updated 12/29/2020 10:28:27 PM)

After seeing David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler go from opposing any new direct payments in April, May, June and July to supporting $600 payments 3 weeks ago to supporting $2000 payments today, it is obvious they, like St Paul have had some sort of ''road to Damascus moment''!

When sombody actually, intentionally or unintentually, shows you who they are it is wise to pay attention and accept their revelation.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	ARCH-DUMB-DIMOKRAP-IDIOT
Date:	12/30/2020 10:40:51 AM

Do you not understand the difference between a one time payment to all taxpayers and a weekly welfare bonus to unemployed (many of whom enjoy unemployment).

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	NEW COUNT 2 INTELLECTS AND 1 BIGOT
Date:	12/30/2020 11:25:14 AM (updated 12/30/2020 11:28:18 AM)

WIX>>>Get your facts straight. Archie and I were having an intellectually high level conversation about the health of your kind.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	WIX>>>>What's Your Point
Date:	12/30/2020 11:34:55 AM (updated 12/30/2020 11:36:40 AM)

WIX, please make sense when you post. Looking at your posts over the past 12 months shows a deterioration in the contents and your ability to stay focused. I am quite certain Mr Archie is well aware that payments to those of your kind are typically monthly. 

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	What do Perdue, Loeffler & St Paul have in common?
Date:	12/30/2020 1:07:59 PM (updated 12/30/2020 1:10:34 PM)

Two questions that require easy answers on your part Archie.

1.  How did Perdue and Loeffler VOTE on the initial COVID relief packages that you speak of?

2.  Are you in favor of COVID relief money going to individuals who have not sustained any sort of income drop due to the pandemic?

     If you are, and these individuals were your employees, why don't you pay them more yourself?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	If I asked those Mr H would say they are “gotcha”
Date:	12/30/2020 1:34:51 PM (updated 12/30/2020 1:37:44 PM)

question but probably not if they come from you.  I answer with comments for context

1/.  Yes both of them voted for the compromise COVID bill earlier this month but, if you can believe their own words...doubtful, if the issue had come up in May they would have been opposed and had it not been for Jan 5 they would probably still have opposed the current measure and it is a “bet the farm” certainty they would not be now clambering for a $1400 increase if it were not for Jan 5.  Their “road to Damascus. Moment” was the realization it is more important to not buck your and their “hero” along with his rabid base if they expect to have any chance of winning the runoff.  It’s election politics pure and simple.  You know it and I know it.

2/.   Yes the payment should go to ALL who meet the income limits because this is as much to boost the economy as much as aid the work force.  The bet is those who have been effected will spend it on rent and groceries and utilities, those who have not been effected will spend it on luxuary items or on investment opportunities.  The operative word is “spend”.  You know it and l know it.

The in-numbered question actually is a classic “gotcha” question unworthy of being asked or answered.  You know it and l know it.

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	If I asked those Mr H would say they are “gotcha”
Date:	12/30/2020 1:49:31 PM

So an employer, who is busting his butt, taking whatever pay cut he deems necessary in order to keep his business afloat and not diminish the salaries of his loyal employees, nor laying off any employees, has to watch his employees qualify for Federal relief so they can purchase, in your words,  "luxury items or investment opportunites"?  All the while, he suffers with a token offer for a PPP loan which requires payback.  Yes, sounds about right in your world Archie.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	It ain't gotcha it's hypocrisy
Date:	12/30/2020 2:03:09 PM (updated 12/30/2020 2:13:14 PM)

As I read it, the money received that was used for salaries is not paid back, and it appears, they can still deduct the salaries as an expense when they file. Funny how Conservatives love welfare when it lines their pockets. 

Conservatives are hypocrits. they hate big government until a hurricane strikes their beach cottage and then shout  FEMAAAAAA. They hate and resent anyone who receives welfare until their pockets are lined with Government welfare...PPP. At least try to be honest with yourself.

The Right's motto "Welfare and Big Government suck except when they line my pockets"

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	It ain't gotcha it's hypocrisy
Date:	12/30/2020 2:19:19 PM

My point Fish, was, did Archie support COVID relief funding to those individuals who sustained no drop in income, but did qualify under the wage limits prescribed.  I have a problem with that.  As did Perdue and Loeffler in the spring.   I am not screaming for gov't welfare, I have not received a dimes worth of COVID relief.  That amount of money does not benefit me, but it should go to those who have sustained either a job loss or greater than 75% wage cut due to the pandemic.  It should not be a handout. 

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	If I asked those Mr H would say they are “gotcha”
Date:	12/30/2020 4:53:15 PM

You still don't understand what makes a question "loaded".  It is a question, that if answered, gives tacit agreement to an argument that the respondent may not agree with.  A classic loaded question would be "Does your mother know that you beat your wife?"  Whether the answer is yes or no it implies the person answering the question agrees that he (or in these days she) beats his/her wife.  

That does not apply to CRD's questions. 

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	It ain't gotcha it's hypocrisy
Date:	12/30/2020 4:59:32 PM

Au contraire.  Responding to hurricanes, tornadoes, riots, and so forth is essential to the SMALLER government role conservatives espouse.    It is the give away a bunch of free stuff to keep them on the plantation that, among other things like paying for putting a shrimp on a treadmill, we object to. 

I am surprised at your post.  You know better than what you wrote.  

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	It ain't gotcha it's hypocrisy
Date:	12/30/2020 5:17:43 PM

For some unknown reason, the truth always surprises you.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	It ain't gotcha it's hypocrisy
Date:	12/30/2020 7:38:59 PM

Nothing in your post surprises me except that you would make those ridiculous claims about big government. There is plenty hypocrisy to go around and no group is without some hypocrites, but your comments about republicans and big government are ludicrous. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Interesting
Date:	12/30/2020 7:43:55 PM (updated 12/30/2020 8:01:36 PM)

So when and where are you going to post your condemnation of Loeffler ans Perdue for suddenly deciding that if it gets them votes they kind of like ''welfare'' after all.  As I said...it's politics on their part and you know it but since they have an R after their name you cannot bring yourself to be critical even though they are now in league with Bernie Sanders.  Now THAT is hypocrisy!! You know it and I know it.

Again, the individual payment is as much about the economy as the employees.  As for who will be spending on luxury and or investments...in general that will be the SOP of the employers not the employees.  Even if they have not lost anything monetarily due to the pandemic it is probable all employees have ''paid'' in other ways and will not be buying gold and golf memberships but maybe taking a vacation which just might keep a few hotels in business and paying salaries to the black mom cleanig their rooms or the Hispanic kid cutting the grass. They might be making a down payment on a car keeping dealerships in business.  Perhaps adding their $4000 to savings and remodeling the kitchen benefitting Home Depot and their workforce. 

Sorry CRD, but you, like MM, really come across as a first class private school, gated community, pearl clutching snob.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Also Interesting
Date:	12/30/2020 10:51:30 PM (updated 12/30/2020 10:55:57 PM)

that someody who has had their income cut by only 74% doesn't deserve a ''handout'' but those who have a 76% cut deserve a helping hand-up!

So, give it to the guy who had his salary cut from $250,000 to a measly $60,000 but not the single mom who had her wages cut from  $25,000 to $6500!  Like I say...snob.

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	Also Interesting
Date:	12/31/2020 8:12:36 AM

One can see that Archie does not have a clue when it comes to human resource management.  Do you think an employer would be so brutal as to hold up an employees relief aid over a 1% wage discrepancy?  If their wages were cut 74%, 99.9999999% of employers would bump them into the appropriate trigger wage.  Your comment was useless and not reality based.  Calling me a snob, are you?  My unreimbursed charitable services provided this year most likely triples your yearly income.  How bout you?

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	If I asked those Mr H would say they are “gotcha”
Date:	12/31/2020 8:27:06 AM

I am in agreement with you Mr. H.  The questions that Archie finds difficult to go on record and answer, he labels "gotcha".  My question had no alterior motive.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Yeah, sure and pigs fly
Date:	12/31/2020 9:13:51 AM

When a ''yes or no" is requested as an answer without context to a question about a complicated and nuanced issue there is ALWAYS and ulterior motive.  That is true of some of my questions and true for some of yours...including the foregoing post!

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	Yeah, sure and pigs fly
Date:	12/31/2020 12:23:05 PM

This was my third question, required more of a nuanced answer, not a yes or no.  

If you are, and these individuals were your employees, why don't you pay them more yourself?

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Yeah, sure and pigs fly
Date:	12/31/2020 6:39:22 PM

There is nothing subtle or nuanced about how they voted.  If you don't know just say so, but the answer might have some bearing on a logical and reasonable debate of the issue, and not be a "gotcha" question.

Either you favor, don't favor, or just don't care about relief money being given to those like us who haven't felt the economic impact of the pandemic.  He is asking how you feel about it - indeed asking your opinion/position on it.

Finally, If, then statements are basic logic.  Slightly modifying CRD's words, CRD said:

IF you are in favor of giving COVID relief to those who don't need it, and IF (some of) these individuals are your employees, THEN one wonders why you wouldn't increase their pay commensurate with what they might otherwise get, thus leaving the Government relief to those who really have been impacted.

So, once again, there is nothing wrong with CRD's line of questions and logic - that is unless providing truthful answers serves to mitigate or remediate your radical position(s).

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Did you even read my reply?
Date:	12/31/2020 9:39:36 PM (updated 12/31/2020 10:12:44 PM)

I answered each of his questions including the un-numbered one.  Your problem is you didn't like the answers.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hey CRD
Date:	12/31/2020 10:01:20 PM (updated 12/31/2020 10:12:00 PM)

You are the one who made the suggestion of the +/-75% income loss being the determinant as to whether someone was worthy of relief.  Your very equating the whole scenario to the goodness of an employer show your tendancy toward snobbery.  If someone has had a 76% loss of income it is very very unlikely it is because his or her employer has cut their wages 76%.  It is much more likely that the employer has had to fire them through no fault of their own and they have been working odd jobs to maintain whatever income they can but under your plan if they slip up an make a few dollars too much you would say ''tough'' no soup for you!

In the real world anybody that assumes their contributions to what they decide to be good causes is likely to be triple the income of someone else they have never met could be assumed to be a little too proud of themself...namely a snob.  I suspect you have very little idea as to what is going on in the demographic of this nation that will never have the opportunity like you and me to be able to retreat and decompress at a second lake or beach home.  They are trying too hard to be able to stay in their first home.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Did you even read my reply?
Date:	1/1/2021 12:27:44 PM

My apologies, yes I did read that some time back and it slipped through the sieve known as my brain.  However, the one you say is a "gotcha", is simple logic and there is no gotcha to it:

If "A" is true,

And "B" is true,

Then "C".

In this case if either A or B is false, C is not a logical follow-on.  If they are, it is a fair question to ask. Obviously you don't have to answer if you don't want to as it is somehat of a hypothetical since we don't know if you have employees.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Thank you. Apology appreciated and accepted
Date:	1/2/2021 4:56:33 PM (updated 1/2/2021 5:05:57 PM)

It restores some of my faith that you are not one of the fanatics.

I have always been a one man shop.  Back before I intentionally cut back on commissions accepted to those I really want to do or felt obligated to do because they were from previous clients, I often hired help by the hour or farmed out some work to other firms with employees who were slack.  I am a bleeding heart and don't think I am mentally prepared to lay off somebody who does good work and has a mortgage and kids that depend on his or her salary. I like sleeping at night.

CRD's first 2 questions were definitely ''gotcha''.  Any question that has to be answered yes or no with no opportunity to include context and clarification is a ''gotcha'' question.  I will stick with non answer answer for the other question.  It only is applicable if CRD's assumptions and limitations suggestion are in play...they are not.  I think whatever individual payment is decided on needs to go as proposed to anybody whose tax return shows they meet the income limitations with a gradual phase out as one exceeds the limit for max payment.  If you start getting into the weeds by setting limits along the lines proposed by CRD it becomes a logistical and bookkeeping nightmare for the individual taxpayer and for an employer or business owner.  Keep it simple, get it done!

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Thank you. Apology appreciated and accepted
Date:	1/2/2021 6:10:27 PM (updated 1/2/2021 6:11:47 PM)

Apparently you weren't in receive mode the times i told you i think for myself. Also that i dont like DJT as a person but believe he is far better as a President than either of the clowns that were "apparently" elected to succeed him might be. And a yes-no question is only a "gotcha" if answering it serves to disprove your position. I am done with this thread. Have fun bashing Trump until Jan 20th. If indeed he is then the former President he will be a private citizen and you can expect responses like "but he isn't president and Alzheimer's Joe is proving Obama right when he said "(Biden) can f... up anything." 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	The success of a ''clown''
Date:	1/2/2021 10:33:52 PM

is always determined by whether they give a performance that impresses the audence.  I know you are disappointed and find it hard to believe, but the American people by both popular vote and EV have decided they are unimpressed and decided it is time for the current clown to exit the center ring.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	The success of a ''clown''
Date:	1/2/2021 11:20:13 PM

SSDD.