• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Can any real conservative tell me this is okay with them?

ModernDiogenes said:
That’s not what Obama did. We know precisely what corporations got what bail out funds. TARP actually produced a small profit. So did the bail out of the auto industry.

Fill accountings we’re mandated. There was Congressional oversight.

That’s not what’s happening this time.

Don’t get me wrong. The Demsxare just as responsible here. The knee jerked thus and are trying to fix it after the fact. That Trump cronies took full advantage of this, and of full investigations took place we’d find money went places it shouldn’t have gone, I have no doubt. Just like the money we sent to Afghanistan (9 Billion unaccounted for... just list and gone forever).
Click to expand...

:lamo
 
independentusa said:
We are a representative democracy and we elect people to represent us at all levels of legislative bodies including the US Congress. Now congress passed trillions in relief money to help out the economy and now the Trump administration refuses to tell congress where the money went, who got the money and what it was used for. We are talking trillions of dollars and the bill authorizing the money said that the congress had oversight rights and yet the trump administration refuses. I can not believe that any real conservative would think that this is a good idea. So cons, what do you think?
Click to expand...

I think it all just went to white folk and that is why they "refuse() to tell congress where the money went"
 
Lutherf said:
If it's made a matter of public record it puts the recipients at GREAT risk should the media begin a campaign to incite violence against those businesses as it has incited violence against police and general civil order in many of our cities. At no point was any applicant for this funding informed that accepting the loan would place their business information in a public database. That was NEVER listed as being part of the deal and now, for purely political purposes, you guys want to change the deal and put more people at risk. Is the recent burning and looting not enough for you? Did you get your rocks off watching it all go down and now feel a need to fan those flames some more?
Click to expand...

First off, no, I do not get my rocks off watching the destruction of people's property and the ruination of their livelihoods. And I think that if people do get this money, they should be informed in advance that the receipt of public funds subjects them to Freedom of Information Act requests, with certain information blacked out to prevent identity theft and harassment. And yes, I understand that the only reason most businesses are in the state where they have to request these loans is because they were forcibly shut down by state governments. I am sympathetic to your argument and the risks of what might occur.

But I also believe that in order for our governments to be held to account properly, we need to know about the literal accounts, and the people need to know where their tax monies are going to. The only exception I see to this is if there is a national security interest at stake, or there is a cognizable harm that would very likely occur if such information was released, in which case the information should be limited.

Lutherf said:
I get it, Capitalism must be destroyed. It's all the people's stuff anyway and business owners just stash it all away to keep the little guy down. I get it that so many of you HATE the idea of individual success and would rather see a nation of lemmings trotting off to follow whichever Democrat happens to be the flavor of the day but a lot of us worked our asses off to build businesses that serve the needs the public ASKS for and provide the jobs so many rely on. If you want to put all that at risk, after shutting us all down didn't work to get rid of us, then go for it. The whole ****ing country is on fire right now but if you feel a need to spit some more gasoline on the flames then you go right ahead. Just don't come bitching to me when you find out that things aren't quite going the way you prefer.
Click to expand...

I am going to presume that you are using the royal "you," Luther. Because, no, I do not believe capitalism should be destroyed. I want the free market protected, but I also want the government to be prevented from engaging in crony capitalism, self-dealing and regulatory capture and it is more difficult to prevent that if the government is able to hide information about where the money went.
 
Felis Leo said:
First off, no, I do not get my rocks off watching the destruction of people's property and the ruination of their livelihoods. And I think that if people do get this money, they should be informed in advance that the receipt of public funds subjects them to Freedom of Information Act requests, with certain information blacked out to prevent identity theft and harassment. And yes, I understand that the only reason most businesses are in the state where they have to request these loans is because they were forcibly shut down by state governments. I am sympathetic to your argument and the risks of what might occur.

But I also believe that in order for our governments to be held to account properly, we need to know about the literal accounts, and the people need to know where their tax monies are going to. The only exception I see to this is if there is a national security interest at stake, or there is a cognizable harm that would very likely occur if such information was released, in which case the information should be limited.



I am going to presume that you are using the royal "you," Luther. Because, no, I do not believe capitalism should be destroyed. I want the free market protected, but I also want the government to be prevented from engaging in crony capitalism, self-dealing and regulatory capture and it is more difficult to prevent that if the government is able to hide information about where the money went.
Click to expand...

If people want to dispute the necessity or the wisdom of these loans then they should certainly be free to do so however, when the government provides a LOAN to private businesses with absolutely no notice or advice that acceptance of such a loan would involve the release of private, personal information to the public.

If, at some point, a given loan recipient is found to have committed fraud in obtaining the loan or fraudulently applied for forgiveness then AND ONLY THEN should it be permissible to release ANY personal information. Let me put it this way, the idea of releasing information of PPP recipients is directly analogous to releasing the personal information of TANF recipients or Section 8 recipients or even Medicare and Social Security recipients.

If the 4th Amendment only applies when government decides it applies then it is no longer a "right", it becomes a privilege. Undermining one right for purposes of political expedience effectively undermines all rights and entirely defeats the purpose of the Constitution.
 
Lutherf said:
If people want to dispute the necessity or the wisdom of these loans then they should certainly be free to do so however, when the government provides a LOAN to private businesses with absolutely no notice or advice that acceptance of such a loan would involve the release of private, personal information to the public.

If, at some point, a given loan recipient is found to have committed fraud in obtaining the loan or fraudulently applied for forgiveness then AND ONLY THEN should it be permissible to release ANY personal information. Let me put it this way, the idea of releasing information of PPP recipients is directly analogous to releasing the personal information of TANF recipients or Section 8 recipients or even Medicare and Social Security recipients.

If the 4th Amendment only applies when government decides it applies then it is no longer a "right", it becomes a privilege. Undermining one right for purposes of political expedience effectively undermines all rights and entirely defeats the purpose of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Well, certainly. You bring up reasonable points. I do not think that the disclosures should be retroactive and people's business information should be exposed for all to see without such risk being made crystal clear prior to application. And you bring up a good point: If you apply for public funds, whether as a corporation, a business, or an individual, I think that by the same principle I articulated previously, your basic information should be subject to FOIA requests. And by "basic" I mean your name. Not your address, phone number, birthday and where your children go to school.
 
TypicalRussian said:
it was for corona relief, not the trump check
Click to expand...

You express the stated end result, as opposed to the actual result.

Pockets ARE getting lined.

When the Trump administration finally dies, that will be emblazoned on it’s tombstone: “Pockets were lined.”
 
Felis Leo said:
Well, certainly. You bring up reasonable points. I do not think that the disclosures should be retroactive and people's business information should be exposed for all to see without such risk being made crystal clear prior to application. And you bring up a good point: If you apply for public funds, whether as a corporation, a business, or an individual, I think that by the same principle I articulated previously, your basic information should be subject to FOIA requests. And by "basic" I mean your name. Not your address, phone number, birthday and where your children go to school.
Click to expand...

Even releasing just the name is problematic. If your name is John Smith and you live in Manhattan it doesn't really tell people much but if your name Kazir Alduba and you live in Surprise, Arizona then people just might be able to pick you out in a crowd.

If you want public information then gross amounts distributed, even by region is fine. If you want to break it down by industry that's fine too. Beyond that, we start getting into stuff that simply isn't fine. There is a very serious risk, especially in a political environment like we are seeing today, that ANY public information will be used against the recipients.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
You express the stated end result, as opposed to the actual result.

Pockets ARE getting lined.

When the Trump administration finally dies, that will be emblazoned on it’s tombstone: “Pockets were lined.”
Click to expand...

actually the democrats forced people who had a livelihood to be shut down and promoted riots to burn their businessess

the working class votes red for a reason
 
TypicalRussian said:
actually the democrats forced people who had a livelihood to be shut down and promoted riots to burn their businessess

the working class votes red for a reason
Click to expand...

That the working class votes Red isn't actually true. White working class men in certain state vote Red. That would be a more accurate statement.

Those same White working class men in those states use to vote Blue only a couple of decades back. These things are cyclic.

What I reference is criminality. The rising incidence of the corruption of public servants. The "Swamp", which has gotten significantly more "swampish" since the President Trump arrived at the Oval. That isn't a political statement. That is a police detective talking about crime.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
That the working class votes Red isn't actually true. White working class men in certain state vote Red. That would be a more accurate statement.

Those same White working class men in those states use to vote Blue only a couple of decades back. These things are cyclic.

What I reference is criminality. The rising incidence of the corruption of public servants. The "Swamp", which has gotten significantly more "swampish" since the President Trump arrived at the Oval. That isn't a political statement. That is a police detective talking about crime.
Click to expand...

and white working class women

the left does not know what the working class is
 
Cat food and subsidizing Instagram models. That's where it went. All of it. A trillion dollars on cat food and booty.
 
TypicalRussian said:
and white working class women

the left does not know what the working class is
Click to expand...

If you believe the polls they are breaking Biden, by a significant margin.

If that is true Trump’s in real trouble.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
If you believe the polls they are breaking Biden, by a significant margin.

If that is true Trump’s in real trouble.
Click to expand...

its not true, I havent been polled in my life and everyone has the same

the samples are pathetic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom