I'm glad you care about the two groups with the most control: owners and customers. Employees have to choose between working for an anti-masker, or quitting, getting no unemployment and losing health insurance, amidst high unemployment in a deadly pandemic.

Bump. Looking forward to hearing about how it's actually the Democrats who are refusing to negotiate.

It's the same story. I know you like parroting Pelosi, but it is clear its bailout for the cities for her or bust. You act like something has changed.

Maybe you're a bit behind, but, uh, yes, something has changed.

Maybe, has her offer materially changed? I don't see any indication of that.

Result: HIV delivered lol

I was forwarded an article on this today because the Democrats are demanding a full extra 12 month moratorium on eviction action as part of this.

The residential space has been okay so far for us. Less than 1% of my tenants haven't paid October rent yet as of this morning. Of those, some paid a partial, and the rest are frequent fliers on the late rent list so this is nothing new.

However, I'm starting to get a number of people trying to sublet their units and we're being more gun-shy about how we allow those to move forward. In the past, we'd let you sublet to just about anyone you want because you're still on the hook through the end of the original lease and if the new tenant doesn't qualify for residency after you're gone, that unit can just be a non-renewal or we just let the less-than-ideal people stay on with eviction as an option if things go south. We saw this coming though, so we have had to make sure that sublet tenants also fully qualify, or they become an unnecessary risk after the original lease term is over and the well-qualified tenant is gone. Whether I'm just being an ******* or not doesn't matter, because it's just reality and we're not alone in this action. That's leaving some people stuck.

Commercial is getting absolutely hammered though. I'm no expert on it, but this cannot possibly end well. I'm picturing a hose in an old Bugs Bunny cartoon. It's on but there's a kink in the line and the pressure is building. It's getting bigger and bigger and I'm not sure exactly what's inside, but at some point that thing is going to blow.

Wookie over there worried about employees who might work for an "anti-masker" but at least those people are still working.

If you are looking to find a new place right now though, you can probably get some killer deals. Particularly if you're near any major university.

Uh, not the ones who are sick or dead.

Please Trumpkin landlords, when nobody has any money to pay rents for the next 4 months because cheeto just told everyone to f off, and you finally lose everything, don't cry about anyone but your dear leader. lol

#MAGA, mother****ers!

I don't get this point. Presumably they could work even if their employer was not an anti-masker. Thus, criticism towards anti-maskers and worrying about their employees is not in any way in conflict with wishing people have a job.

And that's even setting aside that a mask-policy is a good way to reduce the risk of the business having to close or have downtime due to an outbreak.

Why should it? Trump may be dumb/drugged up enough to think he has some leverage here, and that his posturing will do something, but that doesn't mean he actually has any.

R's just did a 'take it or leave it' and then when Pelosi walked away, came crawling back and upped their offer 60%. Dems can literally just do nothing and pass whatever bill they want in 3 months after they retake the WH + Senate because Trump and the R's were too dumb to take the pre-election stimulus bump they were offered.

....


It's entirely about beating Trump and trying to make him look bad. The D's never really wanted to deal, they passed message bills that had no hope of ever becoming law (which members of their own party said as much a week or two ago. Nothing has changed. The D's rather people go with zero (than 1.6T now) than do a deal because it helps them in November. It's clear Pelosi is holding out for the 2.2T., now 2.4T, which is a non-starter in the Senate (becasue almost half it goes into city government coffers, i.e. public sector unions), muchless POTUS. The fact of the matter is, the only one holding up people actually getting some relief for the past several months has been Democrats, all in the name of city governments who pay for NFL stadiums and cut education at the same time.

That's not true. Lots has changed, like the odds that Dems need to care about what Senate Republicans want:



Trump's response to this decreasing leverage he has was to tweet today that Dems can **** off. Bold strategy!

Leverage is irrelevant. Pelosi knew back in May her bill would never pass the Senate. As far as I can tell, she has not backed off on anything in the two bills she's passed in the house (other than the timeframe of benefits). She wants her bill or nothing. Good for her, she has to win the Senate to get it, while letting Americans hurt when they could have received something. Nothing has changed. Pelosi was never going to agree to a deal that was not in line with what the house passed, which was a non-starter in the Senate, and the admin.

Non-starters only get to go one way?

...

This is just nonsense. There was only one deal the D's would have accepted, theirs.

Huh, I wonder why HIV isn't linking his source? Let's take a look:

lol! The WSJ is bashing her for wanting unemployment assistance, and what's that number? $500? Weird, I was assured that the unmovable Nancy Pelosi was at $600 or bust by the OP of this thread! I guess he's going to be very shocked when he reads this article. And that's before you get to the outright lying:

Ummmm actually a simple Google search shows that's not true; worst in the country, in that same data set, were Nevada (notable for reopening Vegas way sooner than they should have), followed by Rhode Island. Just ahead of Pennsylvania (so bad it was cited by the WSJ!) were noted liberal strongholds West Virginia and Ohio. And obviously the WSJ saying "**** COVID, open up the economy and send the drones back to work" is both horrifying and completely expected from them.

Lies from OP and lies from the WSJ; it's a Republican special!

Anyway in news based on actual reporting and not lolWSJ editorials:



So:
- Pelosi was, contrary to OP's lies, working on a compromise deal with the Trump administration
- Mitch didn't like that and told Trump to kill it because his Senate wouldn't support it
- Trump killed it

I have no idea what you think I'm lying about. Trump did not need broad GOP support, which is why he was negotiating with the D's. If he could get a deal with the D's, he only needed a few R's, there is literally no support for Pelosi's bill among any R's, which is why the D's were negotiating with the admin on a bipartisan bill, and not the senate. It's no secret a lot of R's are against a massive new spending bill, which is why Pelosi, if she wanted to do something had to small ball it.

You're lying when you claim Pelosi was only ever interested in passing her own bill. Why was she negotiating with Mnuchin if it was her way or the highway?

And yes, you're right, Trump did not need broad GOP support, he only needed ~13 Republican senators. Sounds like Mitch wouldn't allow that to happen though. Rs stick together.

HIV you've said a couple times now that the dems should accept something over nothing instead of holding R's accountable, and I just find that precious.

Right, seems like you finally got there on your own after several edits.

This bill failed because Republicans do not want to give struggling Americans money.

Right, it's all about holding the R's accountable. You just made the WSJ argument.

What? The only alternative the D's offered was more than ANY R was willing to allocate (while some R's were willing to spend something), knowing it's an R's controlled senatate and white house. How is this hard for you? The D's rather do nothing than something small. The only option was something smaller, the D's balked at that.