Sunday Talks: Secretary Mnuchin -vs- Jake Tapper…

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin appears on CNN to discuss the ongoing congressional funding issues around the Paycheck Protection Program.  Mnuchin notes the effectiveness of the Trump/Mnuchin community banks responding to their small business customers on Main Street.  This success was specifically by design and foresight two years ago.

It is important to remember the modernized community and credit union banking system was specifically created by the Trump administration in 2017 and 2018 to be the direct conduit to main street.  It is likely the effectiveness of that agile financial system has actually stunned the institutional banks and their UniParty big club politicians.  The Big Club didn’t realize how nimble the banking system was that Trump/Mnuchin created.

In my opinion, the effectiveness of the community and credit union banking system has turned the eye of Sauron onto them.  Thus the Wall St. multinational banks are attempting to punish the White House by activating their paid footsoldiers in congress to impede it.


Congress (both sides) are not blocking the PPP funding program (via SBA for Main Street) for the reasons most people think.  Pelosi and McConnell are both trying to help their Big Bank/Big Club, Wall Street, benefactors by punishing customers of the Main St banking system Trump/Mnuchin put into place two years ago….

It’s a much bigger battle than most understand.

In late October 2017 the Senate voted, narrowly, to strike down a CFPB banking rule that was set to begin in 2019. The CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), is the watchdog financial agency created by Congress in the aftermath of the mortgage mess.

The CFPB rule, five years in the making, would have allowed individual and class action lawsuits against financial institutions by consumers and lawyers instead of arbitration to settle disputes. The Democrats and those who supported the rule framed the arguments around protecting consumers from predatory banks. However, those against the rule pointed out the cost to smaller banks, community banks and credit unions.

Big banks and multinational financial enterprises (ie. The Big Club) can afford massive groups of lawyers to defend their interests; smaller community banks and credit unions cannot afford such litigious costs. The K-Street lobbyists were against the regulatory rule as a natural outcome of their general disposition toward regulation. However, K-Street was specifically ambivalent to the final senate vote because increased systemic regulation supports their competitive ability to dominate the U.S. financial system.

Trump and Mnuchin viewed the entire U.S. banking system as too monolithic and generally positioned to the benefit of Wall Street and not Main Street. As such their approach toward regulation was to split the regulatory financial system into two segments according to the size of the bank (or financial entity). Big institutional banks (more than $10 billion) retained comprehensive regulation over their practices; however, smaller banks do not have the same level of regulatory and compliance mandates. This approach is the modern era financial outlook that, like MAGAnomics, is entirely new and bold.

“we do not support a separation of banks from investment banks, we think that would have a very significant problem on the financial markets, on the economy, on liquidity; and we think that there is proper things that potentially we could look at around regulation, but we do not support a separation of banks and investment banks.”

~ Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin testifying to the Senate Banking Committee, May 18th 2017

At first blush that statement from Secretary Mnuchin might seem to run counter to the Trump administration’s prior policy statements outlining a preference for a reinstatement of some form of “Glass-Steagall” regulatory separation between commercial banking and investment banking. However, it doesn’t.

When combined with the totality of Mnuchin’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee, Mnuchin is saying the current “too big to fail” (‘too big to succeed’) issue had created a problem for lending liquidity. Specifically, if divisional separation is required – the banks’ best interests would naturally put the investment division ahead of commercial lending and the liquid capital within the overall U.S. economy would shrink.

After watching hours of interviews and presentations, and after looking at the policy briefs from within the Mnuchin led Treasury, CTH understood what the administration was  doing based on the executive orders signed earlier in the year….

Back in July 2010 when Dodd-Frank banking regulation was passed into law, there were approximately 12 to 17 banks who fell under the definition of “too big to fail”.

Meaning 12 to 17 financial institutions could individually negatively impact the economy, and were going to force another TARP-type bailout if they failed in the future. Dodd-Frank regulations were supposed to ensure financial security, and the elimination of risk via taxpayer bailouts, by placing mandatory minimums on how much secure capital was required to be held in order to operate “a bank”.

One large downside to Dodd-Frank was that in order to hold the required capital, all banks decreased lending to shore-up their liquid holdings and meet the regulatory minimums.

Without the ability to borrow funds, small businesses have a hard time raising money to modernize or create new business. In the big picture growth in the larger economy is hampered by the absence of capital.

Another downstream effect of banks needing to increase their liquid holdings was exponentially worse. Less liquid large banks needed to purchase and absorb the financial assets of more liquid large banks in order to meet the regulatory requirements. Indeed this is exactly what happened.

In 2010 there were approximately twelve “too big to fail banks”, and that was seen as a risk within the economy, and more broad-based banking competition was needed to be more secure.

Unfortunately, because of Dodd-Frank, by 2016 those twelve banks had merged into only four even bigger banks that were now even bigger risks; albeit supposedly more financially secure in their liquid holdings. This ‘less banks’ reality was opposite of the desired effect.

The four to six big banks (JP Morgan-Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, US BanCorp and Mellon) now control $9+ trillion (that’s “TRILLION). Their size is so enormous that small number of banks now control most of the U.S. financial market.

Because they control so much of the financial market, instituting a Glass-Steagall firewall between commercial and investment divisions (in addition to the Dodd-Frank liquid holding requirements), would mean the capability of small and mid-size businesses to get the loans needed to expand or even keep their operations running would stop.

2010’s “Too few, too big to fail” became 2016’s “EVEN FEWER, EVEN BIGGER to fail”.

That’s the underlying problem for a Glass-Steagall type of regulation now. The Democrats created Dodd-Frank which:

•#1 generated constraints on the economy (less lending),

•#2 made fewer banking options available (banks merged),

•#3 made top banks even bigger.

This problem is why President Trump and Secretary Mnuchin created a parallel banking system of smaller community and credit union banks that are external to Dodd Frank regulations and can act as the primary commercial banks for small to mid-sized businesses.

This intended banking design of smaller, more connected to Main Street lending, is why President Trump and Secretary Mnuchin did not support the CFPB banking rule that allowed lawsuits against all financial entities.

The goal of “Glass Steagall”, ie. Commercial division -vs- Investment division, was actually achieved by generating an entirely new system of banks under different regulation. The currently remaining ten U.S. “big banks” operate as “investment division banks” per se’, and are subject to larger regulatory requirements. However, the lesser regulated community banks/credit unions operate as the “Commercial Side” benefiting Main Street.

Instead of fire-walling an individual bank internally within its organization, the Trump/Mnuchin plan fire-walled the banking ‘system’ within the U.S. internally.

Hope that makes sense.

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Coronavirus, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Economy, President Trump, Uncategorized, US Treasury, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

80 Responses to Sunday Talks: Secretary Mnuchin -vs- Jake Tapper…

  1. 11B-Mailclerk says:

    Credit Unions been berry berry good, to me.


    Cost effective, reasonable rates and fees, respect back when a big deposit was fifty bucks. “No problem sir. And someday you may tack a zero or three on those deposits. Tell your other student friends about us, please.”

    Unlike big banks.

    Liked by 19 people

    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      “Credit Unions been berry berry good, to me.”

      Me, too!

      I know that now when you deposit your cash into a traditional bank with Dodd-Frank, the money legally becomes the banks and you are an unsecured creditor.
      I don’t know about these small to medium size banks that are described here.

      Not so with a Credit Union, which is the reason the big banks were vehemently opposed to allowing Credit Unions to be exempted from the Dodd-Frank REGULATIONS (enough onerous rules to gag every blue whale on the planet)

      Liked by 4 people

    • Your Tour Guide says:

      Bailed out of banks back in Bill Clinton’s first
      term. Banks were required, by law, to participate
      in the Community Re-Investment Act. Which
      means that OUR money is being used against
      US by financing more HUD slums in our neighborhoods.

      No way was I going to continue to do that when
      these were the “affordable housing success stories”
      that I and my neighbors heard frequent gun fire from.

      If you hate any and all things HUD, put your money
      in a credit union.

      Liked by 4 people

    • swissik says:

      I’m a member of my former employer’s credit union since 1980. The services are impeccable, the people who work there are excellent! Sometimes I pay a visit to the main branch on the university campus instead of an electronic transaction just because it makes me feel good. No mistakes ever in all these years.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Osugagal says:

      LOL. SNL ,1978 when it was actually funny sometimes, Bais-a-ball has been berry berry good to me. Or maybe just bad autocorrect?


  2. VoteAllIncumbantsOut says:

    That’s why I bank only at a community bank, traditional banking and ZERO derivatives.
    Have been doing so for years now, long before President Trump.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      “a community bank,”

      I was so satisfied with a community bank when I lived in the foothills of the Adirondack mountains from 1986 to 1996.
      When I came back to WNY, I chose a Community bank here.

      That bank was gobbled up by Capital One after Dodd-Frank. It eventually proved to be a significant problem for me when I found out (too late) that there was a 24 hour lag when you inquired about your checking account balance at a remote ATM (but not an ATM at a branch lobby).

      I didn’t have an account anywhere after that for about 5 years, in part because I had been blacklisted.

      I have been happy at a local Credit Union for about 10 years now.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Missy says:

      Me, too. I have both CU and community bank accounts. The founder of my community bank spent 30 minutes with me, going over the balance sheet personally. Explained his banking philosophy, serves primarily small businesses and non-profits, condo and HO associations, great service. No derivatives. Love it.


  3. FL_GUY says:

    If the Globullists banks, the too big to fail banks, keep pushing President Trump, they will likely end up too big to stay in business. Just Sayin….

    Liked by 8 people

    • vikingmom says:

      From your lips to God’s ears FL_GUY!!

      Liked by 5 people

    • trump20162024 says:

      Seventeen (17) days after my company applied for a PPP loan, my too-big-to-fail bankster, BofA, is still dragging its uniparty feet. No status report, nobody who will answer the phone, and certainly NO MONEY for us. George Carlin was right:


      • beth60497 says:

        Not only did my small Non profit get regular updates from our community bank about our PPP loan, we were funded within a week. ($2M budget 15 employees)


  4. Deplorable_Infidel says:

    “Instead of fire-walling an individual bank internally within its organization, the Trump/Mnuchin plan fire-walled the banking ‘system’ within the U.S. internally.

    Hope that makes sense.”

    It certainly does.
    THANK YOU for an explanation that even Joe Sixpack in Flyover, USA can understand

    Liked by 9 people

  5. Tiffthis says:

    Ok. So the president’s name is on the check memo area and Ruth’s Chris was able to get the SBA loans for businesses that have 500 or less employees. I’m not sure why a huge company like Ruth’s Chris or Shake Shack (who doesn’t franchise) qualifies for these SBA loans 🤷🏼‍♀️

    Liked by 1 person

  6. sync says:

    PPP data starting to come out…

    via Charlie Bilello: ( @charliebilello )
    “The SBA gave 1.66 million loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). There are 30.7 million small businesses in America according to the SBA. So 5.4% received funds before the program ran out of money last week. 94.6% received nothing.”

    “Overall, 44% of the loans granted were greater than $1 million. Of these, 4,412 (9% of total) were greater than $5 million. How many of these were actual small businesses?”

    “While the vast majority of actual small businesses received nothing, some of the large public companies that received funds”:

    Potbelly: $10 million
    Ruth’s Chris Steak House: $20 million
    Fiesta Restaurant Group: $10 million
    Shake Shack: $10 million
    Quantum: $10 million

    WSJ: Big Restaurant, Hotel Chains Won Exemption to Get Small Business Loans
    The Paycheck Protection Program is aimed at businesses with 500 or fewer employees, but large restaurant and hotel chains can participate regardless of how many people they employ

    SBA report:

    Click to access PPP%20Deck%20copy.pdf

    Liked by 5 people

    • swissik says:

      Directly playing into Pelosi’s and Schumer’s hand. Sometimes one really wonders about the brains of those who come up with stuff like this. Is there nobody with integrity left?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Vegas Guy says:

      LOL…My son, who operates a construction / home improvement company in LI NY & who deals with Capitol One was never allowed to actually submit an application through them. They just kept stone walling & saying they are awaiting “guidance from the Treasury” as to how they should proceed & that interested parties (read as small business owners that bank with Cap One) should just continue to check with the web site to determine when Cap One will begin accepting applications.

      Now that the PPP has used up all the available funding, adding insult to injury, Cap One sent him an email today…Sunday 4/19, informing him that they are now ready to begin accepting applications ,,, BUT …unfortunately the allocation of funding has been reached…

      But they do imply that he should nonetheless proceed to apply anyway, JIC I guess some of the approved loans are not distributed…LOL

      BTW his CO has been in business over 18 years with annual revenues averaging $5 M & he has < 20 employees with a monthly payroll of around $40 K & services all of Nassau, Suffolk & Eastern Queens. He has attempted, in an effort to avoid unemployment compensation, to maintain his people on payroll through whatever cash flow he can muster, but that will dry up this week & he will have to instruct those affected to go ahead & apply for unemployment.

      The sad part is that he has a great deal of pending work if he gets through this. @ fold problem…deposits from existing jobs has been utilized as working capitol & some has gone to purchase materials for jobs which are now postponed.. 2nd problem will be that the cash flow from those jobs won't be available until the completion of those jobs….Kind of a Catch 22….so he will have to self fund operations through that period if he can obtain material for those jobs… much of the material supplies have already dried up.

      FWIW…a real report from an impacted business…

      Liked by 3 people

      • annieoakley says:

        Thank you. I think this is what the commies want. No small businesses left. Who will ever again try to run a small company like your son? Knowing the NIH and CDC can ruin you every time a virus from China gets loose.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Missy says:

        How infuriating! I hope that the Trump admin has budgeted for the inevitable FRAUD & CHEATING that goes on with this kind of boondoggle. And goes after them with a VENGEANCE. My prayers and hopes are with your son’s company. People like him are the backbone of this country!


  7. visage13 says:

    I asked this in another thread last night, is there anyway Pres Trump can move money form somewhere and reallocate it to the Paycheck Protection Program like he did with the wall? That way he doesn’t have to sign another bill chock full of pork.

    Liked by 1 person

    • mimbler says:

      I don’t think so. Extending the PPP another few weeks is another 250 to 350 billion. Theres not that kind of money floating around to reallocate. -and- that tells you how expensive this shutdown is.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. sync says:

    I am sorry to say that the PPP was a fraud on the American people: There are 31 million businesses in the U. S.. Not every business will get the loan which is now at 1 percent over 2 years. It started out at 10 years but is now 2 years. The application form has been changed twice.

    This is the banks money, loaned out without any collateral or personal guarantee with a “promise” by the government that they will buy the loan from the banks and pay the banks a small fee.

    Knowing what a government promise is worth, the banks will take care of their best customers first.

    Once the bank does the paperwork, they forward it to the SBA to obtain a control number. At first, the mandatory time for the bank to forward the cash to the business was 5 days from receipt of the SBA control number. It is now 10 days. The SBA was not prepared for this. They normally do about 66,000 loans per year.

    A CPA in New York stated that he helped 150 of his business customers through the loan process and as of today only 7 of them have received any cash.

    If someone has a small business, you may be better off taking the refundable payroll tax credit of $5,000 per employee ( no paperwork ) under the CARES Act and let your employees go on unemployment.

    Seems to me that the problems came about by involving the banks. They could have utilized IRS tax return information, similar to the way stimulus payments are based on tax return information.

    I cannot imagine the pain a small business person and family are going through after struggling for years to build up a business that is leveraged with loans along with mortgage payments, school tuition, taxes, etc., that was shut down by government officials via extremely broad, questionable and arbitrary “executive orders”.

    I would be going out of my mind.

    The economic and societal ramifications will be felt for a generation.

    Liked by 2 people

    • sundance says:

      Much of what you have written here, without citation, is pure propaganda and false. Cut and paste less; do your own research more; and provide citations if you make a factual assertion.

      Liked by 9 people

      • massivedeplorable says:

        Thanks for busting this adjitprop rather than blocking him. I’m glad you make examples of fraud to set an example of posting integrity.

        Liked by 4 people

        • sync says:

          Why don’t you tell me what is not correct in my post


        • cosmicbluehippo says:

          He lost me at “the government” rather than “your government”, which was the way it was referred to 50 years ago.

          Sundance, all I can say is your insight is amazing. I appreciate your tireless effort to further my education.

          Liked by 4 people

        • Honeyto6 says:

          Our small business, with 40 employees and a weekly payroll averaging $50,000, applied for the PPP loan the day the applications became available at the community bank we have been banking at for many years. We got approval on April 9th and the funds we qualified for were set aside for our company by the SBA. We signed the SBA documents from our bank electronically this afternoon. Thankfully the funds will be deposited in our account tomorrow and we will be able to continue to pay our employees full pay for the next 2 months until the worst of this is over. Give the program a little more time to play out.

          Liked by 2 people

      • sync says:

        Please tell me which post you are referring to. The 4:45pm or the 4:50pm? and please tell me what you are labelling propaganda.

        The 4:45 pm post is well documented. What did I miss?

        All that I have written in the 4:50 pm post comes from these 2 broadcasts

        Josh Jalinski Talks to J.J.the CPA, Tax Insurance/Business Strategist

        Josh Jalinski Talks to Toby Mathis, Attorney/Author/Business Tax Expert

        I do not post anything on your blog that is not based on fact. All that I post is based on research.


    • Tiffthis says:

      Wait, when was the payroll tax credit approved? So much going on it’s hard to keep up sometimes

      Liked by 1 person

      • sync says:

        The payroll tax credit is part of the CARES ACT. If you take the tax credit you cannot take the PPP. Those 2 links above re: Josh Jalinski cover this.


    • John Bosley says:

      This is all by design.
      Destroy the Mainstreet economy and get the peasants so riled up they will clamor for Communism to save them .
      Once the Commies are in power, Totalitarianism starts.
      It’s been done before , witness the old USSR .
      Modern China is the template or blueprint so to speak.

      If we don’t fully support the President and end the voter shenanigans before the November vote , it will be welcome to the USSA comrades.
      Then , the real pain begins.
      We are in an existential fight for our very lives now.

      Liked by 4 people

      • cosmicbluehippo says:

        A free people, once they know freedom, can never be subjugated.

        But it is our duty to educate the young and those around us.

        Americans have always fought totalitarianism.

        This is the latest fight and we will win

        Liked by 1 person

        • Missy says:

          True Dat. We, unlike almost every other people, did not arise from feudalism, or monarchy (not for very long), warlords, etc. We got to CHOOSE who we wanted to be, and what our gov’t would BE. We got to make our own country.

          We STILL CHOOSE, if we will rise to bring our public servants into subjection to OUR WILL AND FREEDOM.

          If we don’t, or don’t do it wisely, it will be our fault, and no one else’s.


      • Diabolik says:

        Except nobody is clamoring for a chicom-like government, and after the DJT economy, no one will besides soros stooges. That fantasy ended back in November of 2016. Be thankful we have President Trump right now instead of the ultimate c*nt.


    • trumpmemesandreams says:

      This is a load of pure BS. PPP and up to $10k in EIDL ‘loans’ for sub-500 employee businesses are grants provided some simple basic require. Familiarize yourself with the terms of PPP loans, etc. and less with MSNBC talking points.

      Click to access PPP–Fact-Sheet.pdf


  9. madeline says:

    If that is the case PDT could be in trouble. My only hope is that Pelosi required those changes to be put in the bill. We need some clarity…


  10. sync says:

    Illinois pensioners receive a guaranteed 3 percent raise every year. After 20 years they are up close to an 80 percent increase.

    The president of the Illinois State Senate seeks $40 billion to help the pension system, fund unemployment insurance and aid hospitals and cities according to the New York Times.

    Last week, the National Governors Association said states needed “unrestricted fiscal support of at least $500 billion.”


    • Missy says:

      And THAT really ticks me off! Cities, too. The CEO of the League of Cities was on Cspan on Sat, demanding the the feds bail out the cities.. Gov’t employees, “services”, utilities, ad nauseum. With a straight face.

      Boggled my damn mind. Brazen.


  11. Mike says:

    I am a Trump supporter, but once again Main Street get the bills and the Banksters get the thrills. $350 billion for small business (is that an inside joke?) and an open-ended bailout for the richest amongst us once again. The worst players are give a blank check while the little guys trying to make a living get screwed.


  12. TreeClimber says:

    If I may be permitted to stretch that analogy a little further…

    Sauron was ultimately defeated by the Hobbits, short, laid-back, relaxed farmers without tons of education, not a warlike people, who he had considered not worth his while to conquer. A people who were conquered by a petty dictator, who miserably tolerated it for awhile (with a few traitors in their midst) and, as soon as those who had defeated a greater evil came and said “Drive him out!” immediately rose to drive out Saruman.

    I feel that this is truly an appropriate analogy to Americans, at this point.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Payday says:

      Actually…it was two hobbits that ended Sauron (by destroying the one ring). It was men and elves that destroyed Saruman’s army at Helms deep. It was the ENTs (with two hobbits along for the ride) that destroyed Saruman’s castle/domain. But I get your analogy.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Sorry if this is a Mr. Obvious thought but is it correct to think that one of the many prongs of this pitchfork called “covid” is an attack by Wall Street on Main street.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Scott says:

    You know Tapper wanted to lead with the Presidential Signature…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Randy Blain says:

      I loved the look and speechlessness onTapper’s face the last 10 or so seconds of that interview.. I LOL-ed. pwned!


  15. truthbomb says:

    So this is why big banks like BofA were telling people who didn’t have a banking relationship to go pound sand when the PPP started. Got it.


  16. Tiffthis says:

    This is all pretty sad for small businesses. I know some small business restaurant owners who got the SBA loans and some small businesses that did not. I still hate that big, nation wide chain restaurants got the SBA loans. Then again, that’s a LOT of people still getting a paycheck, so that’s a good thing. This shut down is just such a roller coaster


  17. Tornarosa says:

    I listened to the end of the Mnuchin interview and had a Horse Laugh when he deadpans about putting Pres Trump’s name on the checks! (M would have had the Pres sign them but he declined bec would slow them down.) What a great political move! Can you imagine the compassionate effect of getting that in the mail instead of the usual political flier? Trump’s Judo is like Road Runner setting up the Dems for another sploading cigar, while doing what the Democrats WISH they could do, but in a way that helps the innocent laid off workers while saving unemployment insurance $$$. While all the hapless Dems can do is accuse Pres Trump of the deceitful evil nastiness they are ACTUALLY doing. I could almost be persuaded that the aliens that dropped off their offal wretched sociopaths (Democrats), felt guilty and left us VSGDJT as a sort of Terminator from the future to make sure evil doesn’t actually win. ps Loved the Eye of Sauron Sundance

    Liked by 3 people

  18. BitterC says:

    Seems to me Trump/Mnuchin may have SAVED the smaller institutions, but I think it’s a stretch to say the “created” new ones.


  19. calbear84 says:

    Secty Mnuchin impressive as always! Counters the fear mongering of Fake Yapper without breaking a sweat.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cattastrophe says:

      Mnuchin and others are fully on board the Trump train which proves to me the financial guys are the most patriotic of all former and present day government employees.

      I watched the WTO meeting with Mnuchin when he first joined the President team. He was all serious and very hesitant to take the WTO to task. Now you never see a picture of him with the President where he isn’t smiling ear to ear.

      Liked by 2 people

  20. Thanks for the insight, sundance. We had no idea–by design, no doubt.

    I did know that Liz Warren’s Consumer Protection agency was really about making companies pay Protection Money to Democrats. And when she calls for breaking up Big Tech companies, it is only so there will be more companies censoring conservatives and paying extortion.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. ctmarr01 says:

    Well I applied for PPP to my small bank and received the approval and money in just over a week. Some other business owners I know went with the bigger banks and after 92 pages of application and financial data are still waiting. My form was two pages and other then perfunctory questions like am I a felon? Citizen? Etc. It was whats your average 12 month payroll multiply by 2.5 and thats your loan amount. Go MAGA go main street go Trump!

    Liked by 4 people

  22. justlizzyp says:

    My observations, based on clients I have helped with applications, are that B of A, WF and Chase seem to be going out of their way to NOT make this successful. Day 1 of PPP, B of A was all over social media because they were denying loans to long time account holders who had never had a credit relationship with them. So solid businesses who had never had to borrow from them apparently took a back seat to those who had borrowed in the past. Chase and WF weren’t even accepting applications the first day (Friday) so they were basically 3 days behind on a program with limited funds and a first come first served priority system. I have been told by Chase that they aren’t even taking applications for the EDIL loans. A company with which I work directly had ongoing communications with the Small Bus. Relationship Mgr at WF and was assured they were at the top of the list. We spent the weekend monitoring their website waiting for the link to go live. As soon as it did, the ready and waiting application forms were submitted. 10 days later we were notified by WF that the app had been approved to go to the next step. That was the same day funds ran out. Another client had to backdoor an application through a company in Utah (boyfriend of office manager’s sister) because WF wouldn’t even accept their app. Credit Unions and the non-traditional financial institutions seem more than happy to accept and process applications.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. rjones99 says:

    Amazing how sour that asshoe Tapper is while Pres Trump handles this crisis so competently. I can only imagine what a disaster we’d be in if Obama were handling this, especially after seeing him spend an ocean of money just to roll out a stupid website.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Joe says:

    Nobody I know is getting these loans. And I mean NOBODY. Since I own a small biz, of course I keep up with other small biz (and I mean small, 20 employees, to me, is a big biz) and they probably won’t receive the loan, at least not in time.

    The biggest issue is that these small owners thought they would get a loan. The way it was communicated had them convinced. The realization is devastating to them and they are lashing out in a terrible way. This one will be costly.

    I, unfortunately, bank with a biggie. They didn’t have an application available until the money was gone. I filled it out anyway, but I never expected to actually see it funded. I now regret it because I can imagine that the IRS will use these loan applications for other reasons.


    • sundance says:

      I know hundreds of small businesses that have received these loans. All are community banks and credit unions.

      All big bank customers will not get the loans. Big bank business customers are stupid not for realizing what was happening in 2017/2018 with thee banking industry and adjusting accordingly.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Missy says:

        I retired from BOA, and always told people to go with a community bank or CU. Gave them names. Changed our condo ass’n to a regional bank, w/the 6th highest rating (Bankrate) of any bank in FL. Sterling service. Screw BOA.


    • Apollo says:

      Same experience for me, Joe. I guess I’m a member at the wrong credit unions 😦


  25. jimboct says:

    As we have heard, the negotiation is close on the additional funding. I would love for our VSGPDJT to highlight for the American people what was changed so we can judge for ourselves how greedy PelosiGalore and Chuck U Schumer really are.
    These people are sick and their K street bank lobbyists are burning up the phone lines. Would love a 2 hop fisa on those crooks.

    Liked by 3 people

    • trump20162024 says:

      Porky Piglosi wants an uninterrupted supply of Gina’s Gourmet Gelato for her twin sub-zero freezers. Schmucky Schumer needs to ensure that AOC doesn’t primary him.


  26. dbobway says:

    Self reliance pertains to everything we do.
    Large Institutions in our country, run on a 50% efficiency quotient.
    They are fat and lazy. Part of this is built into the system purposely.
    More regulation starves the competition. Small companies can’t hire a building full of people to comply with all the regulations, they can’t afford it. So why compete.
    Computer technology has helped this problem, by hiding the 1/2 a loaf, way of running a business, and blaming it on the technology. Technology is only as good as the information put into the design of the software, and the person who feeds the information.
    This money was put out there to help every body, with the least amount of regulation, complexity as treasury could make it. Then they gave this plan to fat and lazy.
    You have to do the work yourself. If you have a bank, know an officer in that bank. You go there first. Don’t leave that officer alone with your loan until all the work is down. 50% efficiency works under the squeakiest wheel method. Squeak until it’s done.
    You must educate yourself on the process. Know the plan before you implement the plan.
    Or you can be fat and lazy, and complain to somebody that doesn’t care, unless they hate the President, in this case.
    Bob’s parable:
    I just visited my Dad at an assisted living complex. While I was walking to my truck, I notice an elderly women walking a small dog with while using a walker, for herself. The dog wrapped the leash around the poor woman and she fell. One of the staff got to her before I did. While this woman is laying on hot asphalt, the member of the staff, had called 911. I approached the lady, and the staff said I couldn’t touch her. We had to wait for the ambulance. He had yet to talk to the woman. I saw her fall, she barely went to the ground. I asked if anything hurt. She told me she was fine, she just needed help getting untangled and standing up. The staff was up to 4 people, who were telling me not to touch her, it’s against policy. I told them, I don’t work here and I’m going to help her up and did.She looked at me and said, “Help get me out of here, I can’t afford a ambulance.”
    Do you know Medicare will take care of a heart attack, But you have to pay for the ambulance, to get to the hospital.


  27. Apollo says:

    I’m a member of three credit unions, but none of them were participating in the SBA PPP program. I ended up applying through “Kabbage” and they took my application, but I still haven’t seen anything from it. The big banks that were actually taking applications wouldn’t give me the time of day, even one where I do hold an account, just because it wasn’t a “business” account.

    I’m wondering how any of the “little guys” who bank at credit unions actually got to access this in practical terms.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s