Corporations Hoarding the Money

[Z06PDQ]

how the hell is Obama "anti capitalist" when he saved the industrial giant General Motors & our entire economy from ruin? see, that's you people's problem. you can't see beyond your labels & name calling. I
"talked" to Warren Buffet. he said he's glad he voted for Obama. ain't it funny how the most successful capitalist in America who just bought BNSF thinks that our POTUS was exactly what American capitalism needed? I don't feel "entitled" to anything but something like getting rid of the the sorry ass crooks that nearly ruined this great nation. you & your camp elected them, you know. next time I see the Oracle of Omaha I'll tell him to quit "chasing the money away."

[Y2Kvert4me]

Originally Posted by Z06PDQ

how the hell is Obama "anti capitalist" when he saved the industrial giant General Motors & our entire economy from ruin?

I know your logic level probably isn't up to the task, but have you ever pondered the "what-ifs" had GM endured a standard bankruptcy filing w/o that 47 billion dollar gift?

I'm sincerely curious to hear what YOU think what would have actually happened.

No name calling, no party lines, just straight up economic discussion.

[ChasC5]

[Y2Kvert4me]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Kinda my thought too.


PDQ spends this whole thread complaining about how miserable life is because these "crook" corporations aren't actively replenishing the economy with their earnings, then uses a bankrupt company as an example of a success story.

is much more appropriate.

[Peter Pan]

Originally Posted by Y2Kvert4me

I know your logic level probably isn't up to the task, but have you ever pondered the "what-ifs" had GM endured a standard bankruptcy filing w/o that 47 billion dollar gift?

I'm sincerely curious to hear what YOU think what would have actually happened.

No name calling, no party lines, just straight up economic discussion.

I see them being like most other companies that do not get 47 billion dollars to restructure the company, they fail when they come out of BR, again the Unions are the biggest winner here, not the suppliers or us tax payers who are taking it in the shorts on this bailout

[Z06PDQ]

Originally Posted by Y2Kvert4me

I know your logic level probably isn't up to the task, but have you ever pondered the "what-ifs" had GM endured a standard bankruptcy filing w/o that 47 billion dollar gift?

I'm sincerely curious to hear what YOU think what would have actually happened.

No name calling, no party lines, just straight up economic discussion.

I thought I made myself perfectly clear. in case I didn't, listen up. our economy couldn't have stood the hit of MORE THAN THREE MILLION PEOPLE hitting the streets. that's a "what if" we couldn't jack around with. especially when we were losing three quarters of a million jobs a month! now, continue with your so called "economic discussion."

[Z06PDQ]

Originally Posted by Y2Kvert4me

Kinda my thought too.


PDQ spends this whole thread complaining about how miserable life is because these "crook" corporations aren't actively replenishing the economy with their earnings, then uses a bankrupt company as an example of a success story.

is much more appropriate.

and you guys are still butt sore because the GM bailout *is* a bonafide success story. a success story that may have very well saved the nation from the worst depression known to man.

[Y2Kvert4me]

Originally Posted by Z06PDQ

I thought I made myself perfectly clear. in case I didn't, listen up. our economy couldn't have stood the hit of MORE THAN THREE MILLION PEOPLE hitting the streets. that's a "what if" we couldn't jack around with. especially when we were losing three quarters of a million jobs a month! now, continue with your so called "economic discussion."

Thanks.


BTW, GM employs less than 250,000 people worldwide.

I guess (by your own claim) when the country is already losing three times that number of jobs each month, that would make the (temporary) loss of GM seem rather insignificant, no?


Yes, I know some in the supplier food chain would have suffered too (gosh, ya think just maybe those are some of the 750k/mo in your claimed statistic?).
Oh that's right, many of them did and went bankrupt long before GM finally did. They are among the many that truly lost in this whole deal, but of course GM and the union can just get handed the fat cash from mack daddy and it's back to business as usual, and all is well again.

I guess using your logic the others that were cash-in-hand ready to purchase the $82B of GM assets would have continued production without employing anyone, and without needing any suppliers? That's a mighty amazing feat!

And yes, that scenario would likely have meant $82B of "new" money brought into this country. Not $47B taken out of OUR wallets.

I had a slight bit of hope you might put some deep thought into your reply, but it's become painfully obvious you can't fathom concepts like that.

[Peter Pan]

Originally Posted by Z06PDQ

I thought I made myself perfectly clear. in case I didn't, listen up. our economy couldn't have stood the hit of MORE THAN THREE MILLION PEOPLE hitting the streets. that's a "what if" we couldn't jack around with. especially when we were loathg three quarters of a million jobs a month! now, continue with your so called "economic discussion."

Since the 3 trillion in new debt we have taken on in the Obama admins first two budget years, we are losing jobs still at a rapid pace. It would have been better to balance the budget and closed down GM and build more Toyota's and Honda's in America, they did not ask for a bailout, oh, thats right they have no unions to take them down the tubes. For the 9.6% unemployed it is a depression, and we have not been above 9.5% like this in over a generation, it is still Bush's fault (no way after the stimilus it is all Obama's economy)

[Y2Kvert4me]

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

It would have been better to balance the budget and closed down GM

Might be one of the few times I ever disagree with you, but the GM operations would have never totally shut down, not in any practical scenario.

Failing financially, and physically locking the doors are two radically different things.

The resolve is where things went way wrong.

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

Since the 3 trillion in new debt we have taken on in the Obama admins first two budget years, we are losing jobs still at a rapid pace. It would have been better to balance the budget and closed down GM and build more Toyota's and Honda's in America, they did not ask for a bailout, oh, thats right they have no unions to take them down the tubes. For the 9.6% unemployed it is a depression, and we have not been above 9.5% like this in over a generation, it is still Bush's fault (no way after the stimilus it is all Obama's economy)

Rapid Pace; as appose to what? 2008 / 2009

Can you please post that data for us to see?

[Peter Pan]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Rapid Pace; as appose to what? 2008 / 2009

Can you please post that data for us to see?

This was the summer of recovery, oh it turned into the summer of more job losses, when you spend a trillion on stimilus shovel ready jobs you would think jobs would be on the positive note, not more job losses, 09 was under the stimilus watch of Obama, but the libs who were in charge of congress since 2007 think 100% is Bush's fault, who passed the bills those years? When you spend close to 3 trillion $$ above and beyond of tax receipts you would think there would be a huge increase in jobs, not a decrease and it does seem that the unemployed rate is stuck in the mid 9s, two years is enough to know that you can not spend your way out of the decline. Time to cut spending to what is spent and America will be better off even if the short term is not as robust as we want, but the forecast is not good with the current admin that is spending us into orbit at a record pace, this is even if the Bush's tax cuts are not renewed.

[Cobra4B]

Thank got we have logical people like Tom on this planet.... Tom please procreate a few times to offset Sheniqua and LaShonda.

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by Cobra4B

Thank got we have logical people like Tom on this planet.... Tom please procreate a few times to offset Sheniqua and LaShonda.

Sharon and Sarah are doing just fine … you should be proud that the best and Brightest Republican Women are kicking the crap out of the Best and Brightest Republican Male Leadership. We always knew they wore panties; we just needed the Women Republicans to prove it.

At least we all know what would happen if you confronted Sheniqua and LaShonda face to face without the internet to hide behind.

[DropTheTop]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Sharon and Sarah are doing just fine … you should be proud that the best and Brightest Republican Women are kicking the crap out of the Best and Brightest Republican Male Leadership. We always knew they wore panties; we just needed the Women Republicans to prove it.

At least we all know what would happen if you confronted Sheniqua and LaShonda face to face without the internet to hide behind.

They'd shout at him incoherently, assault him and go to jail - then ask Obama to bail them out like GM?!?

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by TxAg

Top 2% of the population or top 2% of the companies?

If you mean the top 2% of the population, you need to get some facts straight.

Taxation in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you paying more or less in Taxes over the last year?

[WKMCD]

Originally Posted by TxAg

Top 2% of the population or top 2% of the companies?

If you mean the top 2% of the population, you need to get some facts straight.

Corporations don't pay taxes - they collect them from the users/buyers of their product. In any business costing model taxes are a factor that must be considered. Where does the money come from to pay taxes? From an appropriate increase in the cost to the consumer to cover that expense. It's no different than any raw material or labor expense.

[Y2Kvert4me]

Originally Posted by WKMCD

Corporations don't pay taxes - they collect them from the users/buyers of their product.

That's why they are considered "crooks", no?

A typical corporation that employs, feeds the taxman, and sustains a small profit is evil, but a bankrupt company ruled by union that effectively drove 100s of those smaller corporations deep into the ground by not paying their bills, gets a $47 billion check in reward, because it was the one and only possible way to continue union backing....Is that the new definition of success?

Used to be a time when the honest and ambitious reaped the rewards...Now corrupt is the name of the game.

[Z06PDQ]

Originally Posted by Y2Kvert4me

Thanks.


BTW, GM employs less than 250,000 people worldwide.

I guess (by your own claim) when the country is already losing three times that number of jobs each month, that would make the (temporary) loss of GM seem rather insignificant, no?


Yes, I know some in the supplier food chain would have suffered too (gosh, ya think just maybe those are some of the 750k/mo in your claimed statistic?).
Oh that's right, many of them did and went bankrupt long before GM finally did. They are among the many that truly lost in this whole deal, but of course GM and the union can just get handed the fat cash from mack daddy and it's back to business as usual, and all is well again.

I guess using your logic the others that were cash-in-hand ready to purchase the $82B of GM assets would have continued production without employing anyone, and without needing any suppliers? That's a mighty amazing feat!

And yes, that scenario would likely have meant $82B of "new" money brought into this country. Not $47B taken out of OUR wallets.

I had a slight bit of hope you might put some deep thought into your reply, but it's become painfully obvious you can't fathom concepts like that.

"deep thought?" like the fact that we were losing 750,000 jobs/mo. when your boy W left office? "deep thought" like realizing that over 3 million people are indirectly employed by GM as vendors & suppliers? face the facts, dude. the bailout was a huge success for GM & the USA. burns yerass don' it?

[Z06PDQ]

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

Since the 3 trillion in new debt we have taken on in the Obama admins first two budget years, we are losing jobs still at a rapid pace. It would have been better to balance the budget and closed down GM and build more Toyota's and Honda's in America, they did not ask for a bailout, oh, thats right they have no unions to take them down the tubes. For the 9.6% unemployed it is a depression, and we have not been above 9.5% like this in over a generation, it is still Bush's fault (no way after the stimilus it is all Obama's economy)

UNIONS ARE EVIL!!!