Fuck its silent in here.......

[Yeti]

Overall, 91 percent of the owners reported all their credit needs met or they did not want to borrow, up one point. Credit may be harder to get compared to the bubble period (as it should be) and is always harder to arrange in a recession. But credit availability does not appear to be the cause of slow growth as many allege.

Sounds to me like the banks are doing fine in lending to small businesses.  The small businesses just don't want or need the credit.

I looked at that PDF.  They don't define "small."  Small can be under $25 mm in sales or under $500mm in sales, depending who is talking.

As someone who lends to the under $50mm revenue crowd regularly, I can tell you that this report understates their needs.  Given that the 504 is targeted at companies under $15mm in net worth, this is an awesome program.  I already have a project lined up that will create about 15 project jobs and 6 jobs permanent and require $7mm in new capital spending.  It's not doable without this funding.

I'm glad it's helping you, Chuck.  I cannot conclude anything from your anecdote except that.

Are you obtusely poke-sticking on purpose?  For your perusal, I have put in bold the parts of Chuck's anecdote that have nothing to do with whether anything is helping Chuck.

Man, I'm in a shitty mood.

The bill passed today by a 237-187 vote. That would be Republican votes.  0.

So much for helping small business.

Feel happier?

I didn't mean I was in a shitty mood because of the bill...I was just updating my general mood for everyone.

No Republican votes is least surprising something something (are we still running with this meme?).

You're damn right we are. The fact that we're still doing it is the least surprising something something since something.

[morpheus]

Overall, 91 percent of the owners reported all their credit needs met or they did not want to borrow, up one point. Credit may be harder to get compared to the bubble period (as it should be) and is always harder to arrange in a recession. But credit availability does not appear to be the cause of slow growth as many allege.

Sounds to me like the banks are doing fine in lending to small businesses.  The small businesses just don't want or need the credit.

I looked at that PDF.  They don't define "small."  Small can be under $25 mm in sales or under $500mm in sales, depending who is talking.

As someone who lends to the under $50mm revenue crowd regularly, I can tell you that this report understates their needs.  Given that the 504 is targeted at companies under $15mm in net worth, this is an awesome program.  I already have a project lined up that will create about 15 project jobs and 6 jobs permanent and require $7mm in new capital spending.  It's not doable without this funding.

I'm glad it's helping you, Chuck.  I cannot conclude anything from your anecdote except that.

Are you obtusely poke-sticking on purpose?  For your perusal, I have put in bold the parts of Chuck's anecdote that have nothing to do with whether anything is helping Chuck.

Man, I'm in a shitty mood.

Fine, it will also help the lucky 15 people that will be hired by Chuck's client, but at what expense?  Chuck's ability to line up such a project has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with whether this bill was necessary.  I presented evidence that it was not necessary.  Real, aggregate, statistical evidence, which is necessary because we're talking about a Federal Government program.  He countered with a weak attempt to discredit the evidence, and an anecdote.  We have no idea if his anecdote can be extrapolated to small business as a whole, we only know that it has helped him and his client.

Then Chuck follows with "0 Republican votes = Republicans don't want to help small businesses."  Yet another poorly supported conclusion, since it's not at all clear that this bill was necessary or will even help small business in the aggregate.  It might help certain ones (i.e., Chuck's new loan), but we have no idea whether the counterfactual would have been better on the whole.  Chuck's client is simply responding to the incentives placed in front of him, but that taxpayer money could have been used elsewhere (or not spent at all), possibly giving greater utility to the rest of the country.  Seriously, this is not a slam dunk.  Why is that so hard to see?

Also, I was able to find some figures on the NFIB's makeup.  Nationally, the average member has 10 employees and gross revenues of $500,000 annually.  A sample of 2,000 firms participated in the survey in question; this is randomly drawn from their membership of something like 350,000.

[Oleg]

Overall, 91 percent of the owners reported all their credit needs met or they did not want to borrow, up one point. Credit may be harder to get compared to the bubble period (as it should be) and is always harder to arrange in a recession. But credit availability does not appear to be the cause of slow growth as many allege.

Sounds to me like the banks are doing fine in lending to small businesses.  The small businesses just don't want or need the credit.

I looked at that PDF.  They don't define "small."  Small can be under $25 mm in sales or under $500mm in sales, depending who is talking.

As someone who lends to the under $50mm revenue crowd regularly, I can tell you that this report understates their needs.  Given that the 504 is targeted at companies under $15mm in net worth, this is an awesome program.  I already have a project lined up that will create about 15 project jobs and 6 jobs permanent and require $7mm in new capital spending.  It's not doable without this funding.

I'm glad it's helping you, Chuck.  I cannot conclude anything from your anecdote except that.

Are you obtusely poke-sticking on purpose?  For your perusal, I have put in bold the parts of Chuck's anecdote that have nothing to do with whether anything is helping Chuck.

Man, I'm in a shitty mood.

Fine, it will also help the lucky 15 people that will be hired by Chuck's client, but at what expense?  Chuck's ability to line up such a project has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with whether this bill was necessary.  I presented evidence that it was not necessary.  Real, aggregate, statistical evidence, which is necessary because we're talking about a Federal Government program.  He countered with a weak attempt to discredit the evidence, and an anecdote.  We have no idea if his anecdote can be extrapolated to small business as a whole, we only know that it has helped him and his client.

Then Chuck follows with "0 Republican votes = Republicans don't want to help small businesses."  Yet another poorly supported conclusion, since it's not at all clear that this bill was necessary or will even help small business in the aggregate.  It might help certain ones (i.e., Chuck's new loan), but we have no idea whether the counterfactual would have been better on the whole.  Chuck's client is simply responding to the incentives placed in front of him, but that taxpayer money could have been used elsewhere (or not spent at all), possibly giving greater utility to the rest of the country.  Seriously, this is not a slam dunk.  Why is that so hard to see?

Also, I was able to find some figures on the NFIB's makeup.  Nationally, the average member has 10 employees and gross revenues of $500,000 annually.  A sample of 2,000 firms participated in the survey in question; this is randomly drawn from their membership of something like 350,000.

If the average age of this country is 35 (I have no idea whether it is, I'm guessing it's around 35) and I take a survey and conclude that 91% of the respondents say that they don't need Medicare, am I really saying anything?  is that enough information for you to conclude that we should get rid of Medicare (politics aside)?

edit - I have no idea if that makes sense.  I have no knowledge of antyhign relating to small business.  My whole point is that Morph decided to ignore a bunch of Chuck-words in order to drive home a point that may or may not be valid.  Ignoring Chuck-words is not really all that uncommon, though.

To attone:

[Chuck to Chuck]

Fine, it will also help the lucky 15 people that will be hired by Chuck's client, but at what expense?

Very little.  Some small fees are waived and the client pays interest at a spread above a government issued bond.  If the client pays the loan in full, the SBA makes a profit.

He countered with a weak attempt to discredit the evidence, and an anecdote.  We have no idea if his anecdote can be extrapolated to small business as a whole, we only know that it has helped him and his client.

I didn't attempt to discredit it.  I showed that the data you presented didn't state that the companies questioned would even qualify for this program.  Therefore, the 91% that have no credit needs may or may not be relevant to the 504 program.

Then Chuck follows with "0 Republican votes = Republicans don't want to help small businesses."

Chuck's client is simply responding to the incentives placed in front of him, but that taxpayer money could have been used elsewhere (or not spent at all), possibly giving greater utility to the rest of the country.

A) If not for this program, they get nada for another 12 months.  That's not responding to incentives, that's me being able to count 504 money as equity that allows me to approve credit.
B) These bonds are segregated and not available for financing general US Government obligations.  You want to argue that there's a crowding out effect or a slight inflation of interest rates due to this program, fine.  But this money is not available for the greater utility to the rest of the country.

Also, I was able to find some figures on the NFIB's makeup.  Nationally, the average member has 10 employees and gross revenues of $500,000 annually.  A sample of 2,000 firms participated in the survey in question; this is randomly drawn from their membership of something like 350,000.

Now, that is interesting.  I will look at it later.  At the same time I view the video.

[SKO]

Overall, 91 percent of the owners reported all their credit needs met or they did not want to borrow, up one point. Credit may be harder to get compared to the bubble period (as it should be) and is always harder to arrange in a recession. But credit availability does not appear to be the cause of slow growth as many allege.

Sounds to me like the banks are doing fine in lending to small businesses.  The small businesses just don't want or need the credit.

I looked at that PDF.  They don't define "small."  Small can be under $25 mm in sales or under $500mm in sales, depending who is talking.

As someone who lends to the under $50mm revenue crowd regularly, I can tell you that this report understates their needs.  Given that the 504 is targeted at companies under $15mm in net worth, this is an awesome program.  I already have a project lined up that will create about 15 project jobs and 6 jobs permanent and require $7mm in new capital spending.  It's not doable without this funding.

I'm glad it's helping you, Chuck.  I cannot conclude anything from your anecdote except that.

Are you obtusely poke-sticking on purpose?  For your perusal, I have put in bold the parts of Chuck's anecdote that have nothing to do with whether anything is helping Chuck.

Man, I'm in a shitty mood.

Fine, it will also help the lucky 15 people that will be hired by Chuck's client, but at what expense?  Chuck's ability to line up such a project has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with whether this bill was necessary.  I presented evidence that it was not necessary.  Real, aggregate, statistical evidence, which is necessary because we're talking about a Federal Government program.  He countered with a weak attempt to discredit the evidence, and an anecdote.  We have no idea if his anecdote can be extrapolated to small business as a whole, we only know that it has helped him and his client.

Then Chuck follows with "0 Republican votes = Republicans don't want to help small businesses."  Yet another poorly supported conclusion, since it's not at all clear that this bill was necessary or will even help small business in the aggregate.  It might help certain ones (i.e., Chuck's new loan), but we have no idea whether the counterfactual would have been better on the whole.  Chuck's client is simply responding to the incentives placed in front of him, but that taxpayer money could have been used elsewhere (or not spent at all), possibly giving greater utility to the rest of the country.  Seriously, this is not a slam dunk.  Why is that so hard to see?

Also, I was able to find some figures on the NFIB's makeup.  Nationally, the average member has 10 employees and gross revenues of $500,000 annually.  A sample of 2,000 firms participated in the survey in question; this is randomly drawn from their membership of something like 350,000.

If the average age of this country is 35 (I have no idea whether it is, I'm guessing it's around 35) and I take a survey and conclude that 91% of the respondents say that they don't need Medicare, am I really saying anything?  is that enough information for you to conclude that we should get rid of Medicare (politics aside)?

edit - I have no idea if that makes sense.  I have no knowledge of antyhign relating to small business.  My whole point is that Morph decided to ignore a bunch of Chuck-words in order to drive home a point that may or may not be valid.  Ignoring Chuck-words is not really all that uncommon, though.

To attone:

And yet, with perfection like that in this world, you deny the existence of a God.

[Bort]

Overall, 91 percent of the owners reported all their credit needs met or they did not want to borrow, up one point. Credit may be harder to get compared to the bubble period (as it should be) and is always harder to arrange in a recession. But credit availability does not appear to be the cause of slow growth as many allege.

Sounds to me like the banks are doing fine in lending to small businesses.  The small businesses just don't want or need the credit.

I looked at that PDF.  They don't define "small."  Small can be under $25 mm in sales or under $500mm in sales, depending who is talking.

As someone who lends to the under $50mm revenue crowd regularly, I can tell you that this report understates their needs.  Given that the 504 is targeted at companies under $15mm in net worth, this is an awesome program.  I already have a project lined up that will create about 15 project jobs and 6 jobs permanent and require $7mm in new capital spending.  It's not doable without this funding.

I'm glad it's helping you, Chuck.  I cannot conclude anything from your anecdote except that.

Are you obtusely poke-sticking on purpose?  For your perusal, I have put in bold the parts of Chuck's anecdote that have nothing to do with whether anything is helping Chuck.

Man, I'm in a shitty mood.

Fine, it will also help the lucky 15 people that will be hired by Chuck's client, but at what expense?  Chuck's ability to line up such a project has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with whether this bill was necessary.  I presented evidence that it was not necessary.  Real, aggregate, statistical evidence, which is necessary because we're talking about a Federal Government program.  He countered with a weak attempt to discredit the evidence, and an anecdote.  We have no idea if his anecdote can be extrapolated to small business as a whole, we only know that it has helped him and his client.

Then Chuck follows with "0 Republican votes = Republicans don't want to help small businesses."  Yet another poorly supported conclusion, since it's not at all clear that this bill was necessary or will even help small business in the aggregate.  It might help certain ones (i.e., Chuck's new loan), but we have no idea whether the counterfactual would have been better on the whole.  Chuck's client is simply responding to the incentives placed in front of him, but that taxpayer money could have been used elsewhere (or not spent at all), possibly giving greater utility to the rest of the country.  Seriously, this is not a slam dunk.  Why is that so hard to see?

Also, I was able to find some figures on the NFIB's makeup.  Nationally, the average member has 10 employees and gross revenues of $500,000 annually.  A sample of 2,000 firms participated in the survey in question; this is randomly drawn from their membership of something like 350,000.

If the average age of this country is 35 (I have no idea whether it is, I'm guessing it's around 35) and I take a survey and conclude that 91% of the respondents say that they don't need Medicare, am I really saying anything?  is that enough information for you to conclude that we should get rid of Medicare (politics aside)?

edit - I have no idea if that makes sense.  I have no knowledge of antyhign relating to small business.  My whole point is that Morph decided to ignore a bunch of Chuck-words in order to drive home a point that may or may not be valid.  Ignoring Chuck-words is not really all that uncommon, though.

To attone:

And yet, with perfection like that in this world, you deny the existence of a God.

According to scripture, God chose Chuck and PenFoe over her. Think about that and tell me He exists.

[Chuck to Chuck]

According to scripture, God chose Chuck and PenFoe over her. Think about that and tell me He exists.

I've seen her without makeup.

[Tinker to Evers to Chance]

The only thing I got out of the last few pages is that Chuck would rather have sex with PenFoe than Christina Hendricks.

[Slaky]

The only thing I got out of the last few pages is that Chuck would rather have sex with PenFoe than Christina Hendricks.

He wouldn't even admit to the opposite that stubborn bastard.

[Wheezer]

When I was falling asleep last night watching Kolchak, the Night Stalker, I had a thought about the upcoming elections. 

Tell me it was "The Energy Eater" episode. I used to love those tunnels.

[Gilgamesh]

When I was falling asleep last night watching Kolchak, the Night Stalker, I had a thought about the upcoming elections. 

Tell me it was "The Energy Eater" episode. I used to love those tunnels.

I don't really recall what it was about, but I think it had something to do with a headless motorcyclist.

What an odd show. 

[Wheezer]

When I was falling asleep last night watching Kolchak, the Night Stalker, I had a thought about the upcoming elections. 

Tell me it was "The Energy Eater" episode. I used to love those tunnels.

I don't really recall what it was about, but I think it had something to do with a headless motorcyclist.

What an odd show.

"Chopper." Another excellent installment in the too-brief series.

[Internet Apex]

According to scripture, God chose Chuck and PenFoe over her. Think about that and tell me He exists.

I've seen her without makeup.

You saw a picture of her without make up.

[Wheezer]

Having just rewatched the original "Night Stalker" TV movie, I have to say that its basic idealization of the fourth estate and even assumption of the unavoidable self-interest of the administrative branch are wildly liberal by modern jizzbowl reactionary standards.

[flannj]

When I was falling asleep last night watching Kolchak, the Night Stalker, I had a thought about the upcoming elections. 

Tell me it was "The Energy Eater" episode. I used to love those tunnels.

AKA "Machemondo" an excellent episode Wheezer.
"Vampire" and "The Werewolf" are terrific as well.

What a great show.