It’s like watching a horror movie. No! Don’t do it!! Don’t open the door! You cover your eyes because you don’t want to look. You can’t believe they’re going to do it. But you know they are. Even though it makes no sense, and it’s obvious to everybody watching that it’s the absolute worst thing they could possibly do. They’re going to do it anyway. Why? In a horror movie it’s because it’s in the script. And ultimately, it doesn’t really matter, because it’s all make believe.
But this isn’t a horror movie. It’s real. And it affects every one of us, but we’re powerless to stop it. All we can do is write our Congressmen and say No! Don’t do it!! Don’t give them the bailout money! And that does about as much good as shouting at the movie screen Don’t open the door! Because you know they’re going to do it anyway.
First they said they needed $700 billion to bail out troubled financial institutions. Letters to Congressmen ran 20-1 against the bailout and, last September, Congress voted against the bailout bill. But they kept sweetening the pot with a little pork here and a little pork there until everybody in Congress had enough pork in the bill to lure them into voting for the bailout, in massive disregard of the indignant outcries of the people who elected them.
Then Bernanke and Paulson turned around and said, You know what? We’re not going to use this bailout money the way we originally said we would, because that would have been a really stupid thing to do. (Really? When did you figure that out, Mr. Genius? That’s what all the people writing to their Congressmen were screaming all along.) But, even after acknowledging the plan was hopeless, instead of rescinding the bailout, they decided to spend it on something else. After all, they already had the money; you could hardly expect them to just give it back! — Not that they actually do have the money. But that’s never stopped them from spending it before. Why should it stop them now? — So they voted to spend all this money they don’t actually have, and then decided not to spend it for the purpose for which they swore they needed it. So now they’re going to spend it on something else. They haven’t yet told us what, exactly. Why not? Because they don’t know. They don’t have a plan. But spend it they will.
They’ve put out the word that there’s $700 billion of free money on the table, and they’re going to give it all away. To whom are they going to give it? The criterion to qualify seems to be incompetence. But not just any incompetence, only massive incompetence will do. To qualify for some of this free money, a corporation or institution has to prove they’ve mismanaged their finances on such an unprecedented scale that they’re billions of dollars in the hole and have absolutely no way out, short of a federal bailout.
The three automakers deserve to go out of business. GM and Toyota each sold 9.37 million vehicles last year. Toyota made $17.1 billion. GM lost $38.7 billion. What more needs to be said? But, instead of letting economic Darwinism take it’s course, the government wants to compel the taxpayers to throw our hard-earned money at them so they can flush our money down the drain after their own. This is madness. Just say No! Don’t do it!! Don’t open the door!
And, of course, now everybody else is lining up for bailouts as well. Even city and state governments are getting in line. The economy is bad. An awful lot of businesses are losing money or going bankrupt, and local governments are losing tax revenue because their tax base is losing their jobs. So why not just stick a hose directly into the pockets of all the taxpayers in the country, and siphon out more and more money until the well runs dry, to keep businesses afloat that are unable to make a profit on their own merits? Surely, every business deserves to make money, whether or not they provide good value to their customers and investors. Free market be damned! Move over Rover, let Government take over. It seems the government is determined to prove they can waste even more money faster than the failures they’re bailing out.
Which brings us back to the horror movie. Everybody in the audience can see that disaster lurks behind that door. But the protagonist is about to open it. We’re all sitting on the edge of our seats, gripping the handrests, holding our breaths, and whispering through gritted teeth – No! He hesitates with his hand on the knob. Don’t do it!! (But we know he will.) He twists the knob. Don’t open the door! And then he does ———————–
Government is Not Your Daddy 
I keep seeing “Bates Motel” and the faces of Barney Frank and Chuck Shumer as managers.
.
I generally agree with your point of view, I have your blog bookmarked, But, you are way off on this one. Your thinking is shallow, dig a little deeper look at the real reasons behind the disparity in domestic and Japanese manufacturers earnings. Allow me to recommend a very good article on the subject by Pat Buchanan to get you started, and I am willing to believe that you will go further.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29586
Most importantly; what the auto companies are asking for is not a bailout like we saw with the financials, where we the people assumed the bad paper written by the greedy and undisciplined. This is a loan.
I live in Detroit; that being said, I have never worked in the auto industry on any level. You may not appreciate just how immense the auto industry is and how many peoples lives are completely enmeshed in it. We are not just talking about the big three here, there are thousands of businesses that are completely dependent upon the auto companies. Plastics, Glass, Steel, Electronics, Textiles, Tool and Die… Companies that employ millions of people all over the country. Real brick and mortar companies not financial companies employing thousands in a culture where when a bank closes they just go to another bank.
Look at the root causes, I am not saying that the big three haven’t made mistakes. But look at the impact the federal government that you have the occasion to rail against has had on the auto makers. Look at radical green freaks and the spurious claims of anthropogenic global warming, The false concept of the scarcity of oil, the treasonous trade inequities allowed to stand, consider the preposterous tax situation imposed on our American companies and people. Look a little deeper my man.
Digital Publius
Welcome to Daddyland, DP. Your comment is well taken. I read the article to which you linked, and agreed with most of it. In particular, I agree with the beginning, about how our government and the unions have put the American auto-makers in an untenable position. The part with which I disagree is at the end of the article, where the implication is that we should not allow free trade with other countries because they flood our markets with better products and put our companies out of business.
If they build better products somewhere else, the consumers should have the option to buy those products. Protectionism isnt patriotic. If American products cannot compete with the products manufactured in other countries, there’s got to be a reason. And the reason isn’t that it’s unfair because they _____. It would appear to me that the reason has to do with our overly restrictive government regulations that prevent our industries from being able to compete effectively. The solution is to restore the free market, not to curtail it further by eliminating competetition from outside our country. That would only make us weaker. Competition makes us stronger — as long as the government doesn’t tie the hands of industry behind their backs and force them to compete at an artificial disadvantage.
Thanks for your comment, and I hope you’ll be a regular visitor.
[…] Reblogged. (Original here) […]
@DP. I agree that the automaker industry encompasses many different kinds of businesses as you point out. However, bankrupcy is the best option for these companies. A bailout is a vote to remain in the status quo of how these companies operate. A bankruptcy will force them to redo the way they do business. It will also force the Union’s hand too. Sounds almost perfect to me.
Protectionism is not patriotic. I agree.
Businesses are just that, businesses. They are in the business of providing a product so that they make a profit. If a certain business cannot provide a good product at a competitive price, the business goes out of well, business.
This is called economics.
The bailout is simply an attempt to prolong failure.
They have never worked, they will never work.
All very good points, but, I have to disagree with the premise that the foreign products are better. I have a 2000 Chevy Blazer well into six figures on the millage meter, that I have beaten the crap out of, yet I turn the key everyday and that trouble free Detroit engine says; “great day in the morning”. I am not saying that the domestic automakers didn’t produce crap at one point, the eighties cars sucked big time. However the fact is American cars have been very good for a long time now.
It is largely a question of perceptions, the media is hostile towards big American business and they foster a false perception that foreign is better. I have good friend that leased a Benz for his wife and it spent almost as much time in the dealership for repairs as it did on the road. She’s on her second Cadillac CTS lease and she hasn’t had a problem.
I have no problem with competition, I have a big problem with unfair competition. Incompetence is not always the reason a company struggles Sometimes a business is more than just a business, we are not talking about the corner drugstore, and again this is not a bailout, it is a loan.
Loan or bailout, the name is irrelevant. WE THE PEOPLE should never be used as a bank for any industry. Detroit auto makers are at a significant disadvantage against “foreign” car makers because of the UAW (priamrily) and because of the incompetence at the top of each of the big three. Toyota and Honda vehicles, many manufactured in the US, are built at an average of 2000 dollars less per vehicle than their big three counterparts, the vast majority of that price difference is embeded in the cost the big three incurred because of the union contracts. Let the big three go chapter 11, this will allow them to renegotitate their union contracts, or move to a more business freindly state. Unions do not support business, they support themselves at the expense of business and productivity. Let the big three go bankrupt and get rid of the insane contracts they have with the UAW and other unions, then our auto manufcturers stand a good chance to emerge from CH11 leaner, stronger and profitable.
DP, You make fair points. But, in the free market, it’s up to each individual to decide which product is better. It isn’t up to the government to decide for them, which is what would be the case if we didn’t allow free trade with other countries. As far as perception goes, caveat emptor.
I will always come down on the side of the individual having the right and the responsibility to make free choices for themselves, without government interference. If they make bad choices, they either learn from them or they don’t. But that’s life, and that’s the free market.
I agree with you that incompetence is not the only reason a company struggles. Our government has played a big hand in the demise of, not only the American auto industry, but many American industries, through it’s multifaceted attempts to manipulate the free market with regulations, minimum wage, subsidies, tariffs, government support of unions, the list goes on and on. And the end result is that American businesses become uncompetitive or end up going off-shore. But more government manipulation is not the answer. The answer is for the government to back off, let American industries recover lost ground, and restore the free market. If that happens, I have every confidence that American businesses will be competitive again, not only here at home, but in the world market.
Remember, we used to be the leaders in just about every industry worldwide. Take off the restraints and we will be again. American ingenuity still exists. It’s just been handcuffed and hobbled by government regulation.
Here Here!! You are a first class thinker Daddy-O.
“They’ve put out the word that there’s $700 billion of free money on the table, and they’re going to give it all away.”
This is nothing but super-wild hyperbole…have you NO rational thoughts left in your head NYD??
“The three automakers deserve to go out of business”
…and to heck with the millions & millions of people that depend on that industry to get by. Look, I don’t like the fact that the auto industry has shrugged off every single chance that they’ve had in the past to reform their extremely short-sighted business practices, but I just can’t stomach the idea that letting them all “go out of business” is the best thing to do. If anything, that’s not even something that’s on the table right now…it’s either some type of loan (with many conditions attached to it to get them to change) or backruptcy (which will just likely end up screwing the working man at those companies, like it did at United Airlines not that long ago).
“The economy is bad.”
This is the understatement of our young century! Our American economy has been almost completely & totally ruined by 8 years of laissez-faire regulators and failed “trickle-down economics”. It’s going to take a looong time to fix all of that IMO.
“The false concept of the scarcity of oil”
Please…just when I thought the commentary in this blog couldn’t get any worse. Peak Oil is REAL people…learn to embrace science and not fear & denegrate it.
“about how our government and the unions have put the American auto-makers in an untenable position.”
Nonsense, why on Earth it is “wrong” for a working man in the auto industry to make a decent living is really, honestly beyond me…are the rich the only ones to get to enjoy ANY prosperity in this country?!
“It would appear to me that the reason has to do with our overly restrictive government regulations that prevent our industries from being able to compete effectively.”
Yea, like our really “bad” labor & environmental laws…please…and the GOP-fed race the bottom continues…
Only Pat Buchanan would have the balls to rail against “civil rights laws”…LOL…
“It will also force the Union’s hand too.”
This is the main reason that the Right-wing is pushing hard for the auto companies to go bankrupt…to screw union employees out of fair compensation for their work, period.
“However the fact is American cars have been very good for a long time now.”
Not when compared to the rest of the global market when it comes to implementing the latest technologies and looking forward to the REAL future needs of consumers (like more fuel-efficient cars). Heck, the Big Three’s response to high gas prices this year was to try and give people money to offset those same high gas prices (“guaranteed $2.99/gallon gasoline!”), which was EXTREMELY short-sighted on their part.
I proudly bought an “American” GM car in 1996, and then, when I opened the door to get into it for the first time, I saw a sticker that said “proudly manufactured in Ontario, Canada”…lol…
“I have a big problem with unfair competition.”
So, do I…we need *fair trade* IMO, not free trade.
The US car market is only so big. Even when it recovers, there is only a certain capacity it can support. It’s called economics. If the Detroit companies were to fail, the support industries will eventually be picked by the American plants of the foreign auto makers. Of course, the industry will be centered in the south, instead of Michigan.
The economically weak are now being exposed. The over leveraged real estate market, the banks, the hedge funds, the crooked hedge funds (Bernard Madoff), and of course the big 3 car makers. It’s one of the silver linings of tough times.
I do not begrudge anyone for making as much money as the market allows. However, the automobile market can no longer support, the UAW wage structure, the job banks, and the UAW retirement health benefits. Instead of loading legacy costs on to current autos, the big 3 and the UAW should have been setting aside money in the past.
This whole bailout scheme in predicated on preventing collateral damage to other sectors of the economy. The idea is merely to get too big to fail and Uncle Sam will have to bail you out no matter how stupid you have been.
Most of us who work in the private sector do not have that luxury. One should ask why the taxes of the management and non union auto workers of Toyota’s American plants should be forced to bail out the liabilities of their competitors.
One should ask why the UAW is not more willing to make real concessions to save the jobs of it’s members and make it’s employers economically viable. Most of the rest of us have done the same during our working lives.
“One should ask why the UAW is not more willing to make real concessions to save the jobs of it’s members and make it’s employers economically viable.”
The answer is quite simple, the UAW (ALL Unions for that matter) do not care about the vialbility of the company. The unions only care about pushing a work less-pay more agenda that recognizes longevity over production. The fiscal health of the compnay is of no concern to the union. The sad part is the number of mind numb robots who join (and support) unions and union labor.
The problem with the “Big Three” is 65% union, 35% management. Let them fail, Toyota, Honda, BMW and the other auto manufactures across the globe will pick up the slack.
As far the supposed “millions and millions of related jobs” being lost-that is pure BS! There may be a few, but when the Big Three emerge from CH11 or are bought up by someone (or group), the FEW jobs that were lost will be recovered. As long as there is a NAPA or Parts Plus, there is a market for automobile parts, logic dictates that the slower the economy moves, the more people will start tuning-up or repairing their vehicles at home or taking them to auto mechanics (not necessarily delears) to have their vehicles repaired, vice buying a new one, very few if ANY auto manufacturing “support” jobs will be lost.
“And, of course, now everybody else is lining up for bailouts as well.”
Can i get one too? Lol
I am not ready to universally condemn unions because having been on both sides, I believe that they serve a purpose. That said, the UAW has to face reality, if it wants it’s members to have a future. They have to recognize that they work for businesses which have to make a profit if they are to survive.
I’m ready to watch a couple of auto companies fail, and if a few people are affected by it, well, boo hoo. Put them on welfare, or better tey, pay them minimum wage to picj the trash up off the street. These business are not strategic or special, there are examples of successful auto companies in the US (and they are Japanese and European run). Trust me, if my company went down the tubes, not one person would stand up and say I needed to be bailed out. And I would not expect them to.
NYD said, “It would appear to me that the reason has to do with our overly restrictive government regulations that prevent our industries from being able to compete effectively.”
What regulations are you referring to? Workers in other countries may not have the benefit of those regulations, like mandatory break periods, safe working conditions, and minimum wage, to name a few. To say the problem is the regulations which mandate such things is missing the point. Workers, even in other countries, deserve basic human rights. We shouldn’t allow the sale of any goods in this country that are produced where inhumane conditions are allowed.
I’ve had this debate with some before, and invariably, they’ll say something like, “To the people in country XYZ, $1 a day is a LOT of money, and they are happy to get it.”
That’s just the point. Sad.
Wigglesworth,
This is the American automobile industry, circa 2008. If we were debating the garment industry, your comments would have a little relevance. The Detroit car makers were done in by the stupidity of their own management and labor with a little help from the greenies in Washington.
That foreign car makers can be profitable in America, and American car companies foreign divisions have been profitable, tells me where the real trouble is.
[…] presents No! Don?t Do It!! posted at Government is not your Daddy., saying, “They’ve put out the word that there’s […]
“We shouldn’t allow the sale of any goods in this country that are produced where inhumane conditions are allowed.”
How are you defining “inhumane?” A US company building a factory in the Far East to produce goods benefits everyone, the US gets low price shirts and the some Far Easterner gets a job. In countries like Cambodia, China (to an extent),Vietnam, and Korea, the cost of living is so low that a dollar a day is good money, I fail to see how that is inhumane.
A bauble, shirt or a spark plug made in China, Cambodia or Japan is still a bauble, shirt or spark plug. If the US economic policy was more condusive to business (which create jobs) there woiuld be no need to make a comment like you posted. Smart businesses make decisions like moving to where overhead cost is the lowest. The corporate taxes in the US are too high to make manufacturing here economicalas well as the ridiculous union contracts- hence the companies moves to India (or where ever) and still make their products, and contiune to sell their products and make a profit and pay their workers (albeit in a different country). If the US reduced its corporate tax rate, manufacturing jobs will start to come back to the US. Then again, some “union” would demand that a seamstress be paid $30.00 per hour and get health benefits. Causing the business to relocate again!
Get rid of the unions and cut corporate tax rates to single digits and businesses will flock back to the US.
Excellent points, DJ. I agree completely.
DJ,
“Get rid of the unions and cut corporate tax rates to single digits and businesses will flock back to the US.”
That may or may not be correct. Let’s deal with what is most likely in the short run. The Democrats will control the White House and both houses of Congress for the next 2 to 4 years. Since this party is both pro big union and nominally anti corporate, your hopes will go unfulfilled. I say nominally because Democrats such as Sen. Schumer are actually in the pocket of certain industries ( financial sector ), whom they protect.
I am a big believer in studying history, in order to somewhat predict the future. We are in a period, similar to the beginning of Clinton’s first term. The business cycle is bottoming out. There will be a natural upturn that the Democrats will get credit for. The deficits will then have to be addressed.
As in that previous period, there will be a perceived lessening of terrorist and foreign threats. As in that previous period, diplomacy will be touted as the answer to all things. The military will be cut, because it will have the least powerful lobby in Washington DC. You know that all of the hogs now getting extra slop at the public trough, will be sending kick backs to Congress. Whether history further repeats itself, and the GOP makes gains as in 1994, it depends on how smart they turn out to be. I believe the opportunity will be there in 2010.
I agree Alan, 2010 may be an opportunity IF the GOP returns to and stands-by its Conservative roots- Low Taxes and smaller government. I was not implying this could (would) be fixed in the short term, our new President is not going to allow it, nor will the Nanny-State Congress.
My point in the previous post was that in order to get businesses to return to America, the current corporate tax model needs to be SIGNIFICANTLY lessened and the Unions need to be broke-COMPLETELY. Lowering the tax burden on corporations (who really only pass the tax on to the consumer anyway) will make the US a more appealing place to manufacture again, but if Unions are allowed (or in some states required) we still have the same problem- the cost of manufacturing will cause businesses to stay overseas.
I think DJ is exactly right and I am not sure if I quite understand your arguement Alan. The fix is to make businesses want to do business here. This means making it easier for them to do business and allowing them to keep more of their money. They can’t do this with as much taxes as we are now imposing on them. They can’t do this with unions kicking them around. Whether or not we see results in the short term is irrelevant – it is what needs to be done and what must be done.
NYD, I’m sad my question to you got completely ignored except, apparently, indirectly in your reply to someone else who commented on what I said.
What do I consider “inhumane?” I think I mentioned some of the basics. The right to a safe work environment, mandatory rest periods and certain minimums of pay. I’m not saying I can quantify acceptable values for those criteria, but a complete lack of those basics I could say with high certainty would be “inhumane,” at least in my opinion.
I apologize, Wiggles. I didn’t mean to ignore your question. I haven’t been spending as much time on the blog as I should be lately. But I believed we’ve discussed this question before. And, to an extent, you anwered it yourself. If people in poor countries are glad to get $1 a day, do you think it’s somehow more moral to deprive them of the opportunity to earn $1 a day than to buy the products that provide that employment? $1 a day sounds ridiculously low here, given the cost of living. But you have to understand that, in poor countries, the cost of living is much lower. In some places, a family of four can live on $1 a day. They cannot live on nothing, though, which is what they would have if those jobs were not availalbe.
In our country, we are very fortunate that anybody who is not physically or mentally disabled (and even many who are) can learn skills that will enable them to get a job that pays competitive wages based on the level of proficiency and motivation of the employee. Unskilled labor is not the only option for the vast majority of people. In some countries, people of certain castes, ethnicities, or religions are prohibited from certain types of work, and education is only available to the elite classes. In those countries, many people can only perform unskilled labor. In our country, that is not the case. Minimum wage requirements here short circuit the free market motivation to improve one’s skills, because one is guaranteed raises no matter how poorly one performs, and it is very difficult for an employer to fire anybody unless they can afford legal representation.
Many of the “protections” for workers in this country were necessary a long time ago, but the unions have abused their collective bargaining power to negotiate wages and benefits that are far out of line with what the free market would support, and the government backing of unions gives them great coercive power.
This, in turn, drives up the cost of goods and services throughout the economy, which fuels inflation. I believe it is better for people to be paid based on their value to their employer. That provides incentive for people to improve their skill sets, which ultimately benefits them as well as their employers and, on a macro scale, the economy as a whole.
kylehuwer ,
I agree with you on what needs to be done. I was only arguing what I believe Obama and Reed and Pelosi will do. With out Republicans to smear when things go wrong, Reed and Pelosi will not be able to control their own troops. Many Democrats could support bills to placate labor, knowing that either Republicans would filibuster or Bush would veto it. Some Democrats from conservative districts will now have to double cross their union donors.
——————————————————–
The are 3 basic parts to business. Labor, management, and capital. If any one of the 3 gets too strong you have problems. Unions came in during the late 1800-early 1900s because management and capital used the mass immigrations of that time to crush labor. As the unions gained the balance of power, in areas such as steel and autos, they failed to realize that with out profits you do not attract capital and you have no jobs. Past members of management, tended to take short term views and made agreements with labor that would screw their stock holders and their successors. For this reason I do not universally condemn the current auto executives groveling to Congress.
… very interesting reading …
Might I suggest that you gentlemen consider reviewing this ‘fictional’ movie, ‘BORDERTOWN’. Starring Angelina Jolie, Antonio Banderas and Martin Sheen, it’s all about the working conditions of girls who work in ‘global’ corporations’ in Juarez, Mexico. The ‘add-on’ DOCUMENTARY is most enlightening … Highly recommend both. Lotsa BANG for the BUCK.
When STOCK markets become the PRIMARY resource for income for any corporation, the corporations end up ‘wed’ to the markets, not their ‘customers’. Corporations SELL themselves to ‘investors’ to lure in the money. When ‘business’ becomes SOLELY about PROFIT, regardless of the PLACE where that business is rooted, human ‘capital’ becomes increasingly expendable. ‘Workers’, no matter who they are or where they are, become a ‘liability’, ie. with their pesky ‘civil liberty’ groups or constantly demanding ‘unions’. ‘Efficiency’, bottom lines, and PROFIT drive the INVESTORS whip. And they increasingly now have their COLLAR on ‘corporations’.
‘America’ will not be able to ‘lure’ GLOBAL investors back, cuz, frankly, ‘investors’ really don’t give a dang about people. Their objective is PROFIT, first and foremost. HOW that profit is attained, and at whose EXPENSE, is somewhat immaterial.
Happy New Year fellas.
canadada,
I don’t doubt that there are evil corporations exploiting workers in Mexico. To tar and feather every corporation seems like more of the socialist class warfare schhbeel which elected our first President of African descent.
Questions. Do you know anything about investing? Do you have a 401k? If you do, are you looking for profits, or are you out to change the world and lose all of your retirement capital?
Further questions. Where do you think the money for the”‘fictional’ movie, ‘BORDERTOWN’ came from? It may have come from INVESTORS hoping to make a profit. It may have come from a wealthy leftwinger, like George Soros, who got so rich screwing people over in the currency markets, that he can now forgo profits. I’m also guessing that the film company is incorporated.
Lastly, stock markets are supposed to be a resource of capital for corporations, not income. When they become a source of income, it is called a fraud. Look up Ponzi scheme on Wikipedia. Also see Madoff,Ivar Krueger, and William “520 Percent” Miller.
… hmmmm, me thinks we’re in the same cage, I’m just rattling the bars a little …
Goldman Sachs has their ‘boys’ well-positioned to ‘profit’ from the current ‘bail-out’.
I have no problem with ‘profit’ as such, though to be sure, it is one of degree. The old adage of ‘buy low, sell high’ is central to how most business operates. Some expectation of ‘return on investment’ is naturally desired, (ie. usury works best with built-in percentage), but ‘windfalls’ and ‘something for nothing’ are generally ‘financial hoaxes’ or ‘blood monies’ of some kind. Like Madoff et al, as you cite.
What I have problems with is the apparently excelerating lawlessness of ‘global traders’ who are not beholden to any jurisdiction, who set up ‘head office’ in tax havens, and thru legal and capricious government channels exploit wherever and whatever they can. Collectively, they exhibit a fundamental disdain for ALL life. They USE everything and everyone SOLELY for PROFIT.
Likewise, LARGE global congomerates now exist behind a myriad of ‘fortress-like’ holding companies. They are virtually untouchable. They globally ‘govern’ without any ‘democratic’ election. Do you seriously think Bush wasn’t heavily LOBBIED by the existing OIL oligarchy to bail out the Big 3? The 17 billion ‘chicken feed throw-away’ is DESIGNED to give the Big 3 adequate time to ‘structure’ themselves for a ‘profitable’ bankruptcy filing, primarily for existing SHAREHOLDERS, not the well-being of the ‘local economies’.
I’d be most interested in reading your review of ‘BORDERTOWN’. And yes, the film was set up as a legitimate business entity with a percentage of PROFITS directed at ‘social welfare’ to assist the families of the THOUSANDS of ‘nameless’ working-class peasant girls who have been brutally raped, murdered and left as dust in the desert. Yes, it’s brutal, and yes, LIFE gets very REAL at the BORDER of the big ol’ U.S. of A.
Those girls represent the DISDAIN for human life on the planet in 2009.
Civil society has a price. If we want to retain it for our families and our children, we WILL have to ‘fight’ for it. Next time you invest in a seemingly benign ‘mutual fund’ in Asia, remember that your little profit generating investment is RE-DEFINING the VALUES that ‘America’ really does ‘represent’….
Right now, the way I see it, the middle class is gonna get slaughtered …
“The 17 billion ‘chicken feed throw-away’ is DESIGNED to give the Big 3 adequate time to ’structure’ themselves for a ‘profitable’ bankruptcy filing, primarily for existing SHAREHOLDERS, not the well-being of the ‘local economies’.”
Really? What evidence do have of this assertion? The way GM is blowing through money, 17 Billion will only get through about 7 months, that is not nearly enough time for them to restructure. The big 3 got the “bailout” funds solely to allow Bush to exit the Whitehouse with Detroit intact, pretty much just “kickin’ the can down the street” to BHO. Our President-elect MAY throw more money to Detroit to “help” them…actually, he probably will, but you must realise any monies he does send to Detroit will be to shore up the Union, NOT help the auto industry. In a sense, bailing out the local economy of Detroit for a brief period.
As I see it, the goal of the Liberals (read Socialists)and the Neo-Cons is to completly destroy the middle class; a job they are doing pretty well.
I don’t agree that the ‘bail out’ is soley to shore up the unions. What proof do you have of that? Smiley Facey Thingy. We can conjecture, but like everyone else, will have to ‘wait and see’. I do understand there is some ‘reluctance’ to disclose where monies are going for fear of ‘exposure of trade secrets’. This, from ‘globalresearch.ca’. Check it out.
I agree that it’s all a bit of a mess.
I lay the blame on the unbridled release of an innate human character trait – GREED.
The business model that the “Big Three” have is outdated. They need to go CH11 and restructure. The bailout will only buy a bit of time. The only other reason to give a bailout would be to appease the unions.
I have heard the “reluctance to disclose…” line as well, I find it very disturbing. I have opposed any and all bailouts from the begining. When the Congress was “debating” I was under the impression that there was to be oversight.
Greed is not a bad thing. Greed is what drives innovation, if not for someone wanting to spend some cash to make tons more (GREED) we would still be living in caves and communting on horseback. The real problem is regulation. Regulation creates loopholes which can be exploited, the loopholes shift the responsibilty of risk, when risk is removed from the equation accountability shifts from the company to the regulators, the regulators are then responsible for questioinable business decisions that (probably) would not have been entertained had the true risk been evaluated.
Canadada,
I don’t know when I will get around to viewing and reviewing Bordertown. Sometime perhaps.
I read with interest your exchange with DJ. I believe that everyone views the word “greed” slightly differently. The definition I looked up was ” excessive or rapacious desire, esp. for wealth or possessions.”
After reading your comments, I would say that you are more in line with that definition. Greed is self interest to the point of intentional harm to others or even harm to self.
DJ defines greed as not necessarily inherently harmful. A drive to risk taking, hard work, and innovation. Perhaps desire, with out the excessive or rapaciousness added to it. Perhaps simply capitalism.
You seem to think that your definition of greed is confined to corporations. I say it is a universal human condition, which is just as common in media, unions, and in both Houses of Congress.
“Smart businesses make decisions like moving to where overhead cost is the lowest”
…and the needless race to the bottom that “free trade” has spawned in this country continues…ugh…
“If the US reduced its corporate tax rate, manufacturing jobs will start to come back to the US.”
Nonsense…these jobs are likely gone for good in our global economy.
“but if Unions are allowed (or in some states required) we still have the same problem- the cost of manufacturing will cause businesses to stay overseas.”
Heaven forbid that ordinary people be able to bond together to fight for their common rights & interests…power to the corporations…at all costs!!
“Whether or not we see results in the short term is irrelevant”
Exactly…the real facts on the ground be damned! Re-implement the failed policies of the past…surely they will work now…not!!
“it is very difficult for an employer to fire anybody unless they can afford legal representation.”
Tell that to the millions of people that have lost their jobs recently…please…read a newspaper or something before you spout such nonsense!
Alan, my comment about ‘greed’ is universal, not restricted strictly to ‘corporations’. ‘Greed’ can manifest everywhere, as you noted.
I think it is one of the major ‘problems’ facing the HEALTHY re-surgence and re-emergence of the United States at this time. And yes, I am using the ‘traditional’ definition of the word here.
Another film for you to consider: ‘Lions for Lambs’, starring Meryl Streep, Robert REdford and Tom Cruise. Some very good points are made throughout.
When apathy replaces ‘engagement’, when ‘greedy self-interest’ replace humane civil discourse, idealism dies. When idealism dies, the slide to barbarism is not far behind …
GREED reigns in the barbaric ‘world’.
Is that the kind fo America you all WANT?
Canadada,
I get repetitive on these boards in my reliving of history, but in the early 80s I heard a lot of the same gloom and doom about America that I am hearing now. Trust me, it was worse back then. Somehow, other than the Chrysler bailout, the economy rebounded without this massive intervention from Washington.
You have attacked capitalism. In fairness you have brought up a lot of valid points. There is a lot of dishonesty, and short sightedness.
We are discussing the wisdom of the gov. auto industry bailouts. I am not clear from your writings where your position is on them.
It isn’t enough to just be critical. What are your solutions to the current situation?
I would like to point out that “greed,” regardless of what definition you choose to use, results in something being created-namely jobs. Jobs are used to create the bauble that everyone wants, which in turn generates more wealth, which then gets reinvested to create the next bauble, which requires more jobs and the cycle repeats itself- that is until givernment gets involved and “regulates” the business and removes the risk involved with creating the bauble in the first place.
Free markets (which the US hasn’t had since prior to FDR) use the ability to fail (RISK) as a major deterrent to creating things. When Governemnt removes risk out of the equation, then you no longer have a FREE MARKET, you have a REGULATED MARKET (Itialain style Fascism)-but I am starting to repeat my previous post.
Greed comes in many fashions, some are “greedy” for money or material things and some are “greedy” for attention. Regardless of your motivation, “greed” leads to creation- as an example, if you are “greedy” for attentioin, you may rob a bank or commit some other crime to obtain the attention you think you “need”, you may author your own blog to gain that attention- or you may post on said blog with the belief that “someone” will read MY comments, and respond to them-again fulfilling the “need” for attention. “Greed” and “need” go hand in hand quite a bit. The farmer who “needs” to eat, plants a field of Corn, after he eats, he sells the remainder of his crop- he could have stored it all away (this would be considered greedy would it not), or he could sell it to make a buck and perhaps make his life more enjoyable (this too would be considered greedy would it not). Greed, as pointed out, is a human trait, but without it, we, as a species, would not have advanced past Barbarians.
Where would we, as a species be WITHOUT greed?
@Alan Scott: I like how the liberals come here to argue their point, say that we are all evil, but offer no solutions except “Kill the corporations” and “corporations are evil” and then give us a movie list to watch because they can’t present the idea themselves.
PeacefulKancer ,
Why are corporations branded as evil? A corporation is just a legal instrument. It’s as good or evil as the people behind it. As if politicians and bureaucrats are less corrupt and more capable of dividing the wealth of a nation than a free market. Were there more crooks and incompetents at AIG, Fannie and Freddie, than there were on the House and Senate oversight committees that were charged with their regulation.?
The USSR was the premier example of government deciding how much wealth each person gets. You got as much wealth as your government influence and connections could buy. Loyal slugs were worth far more to the central planners than creative hard working thinkers. Even this socialist paradise could not function with out that purest of capitalist inventions, the black market.
The US from post Civil War to the New Deal of the 1930s may have been the ultimate in free markets gone wild. Just as many crooks and a lot more booms and panics. For all of that, capitalism created more wealth and distributed it better than the previous example.
@Alan Scott:
I hope that you don’t think that I am dogging corporations, because I am not. I am just pointing out that comrade 1 and comrade 2 are coming here throwing around the accusations that all of the world’s problems are due to corporations and thus capitalism. This is of course ironic because the very computer they are being permitted to type on is made possible by greed and capitalism. Without those two things, would it been possible that someone just made a computer, “just for kicks.” Maybe, but not as fast as it did.
Very good point about the market up to the New Deal. My friend and I often talk about how it is amazing how people always say the free-market doesn’t work… and then you point out that it worked, and it worked well back then (as you mentioned) and then they come up with some lame excuse as to how it didn’t work.
-KH
kylehuwer,
I’m grateful when someone answers. It’s more fun fighting with the comrades, but they always run away or label you a troll when make them defend their details.
Capitalism very definitely can be evil, because people can be evil. Capitalism, by it’s definition is supposed to have failures. It’s merely a system for individuals to take risks, pay for their failures and get paid when they win. The purest capitalists in the world today are the Somali pirates. I believe they should all be shot, but they have the most important traits of good capitalists, innovation and initiative.
Those of us that believe in capitalism, believe in limited government. For all of the supposed deregulation that caused the banking meltdown, I argue that it was too much regulation. There were plenty of financial cops on the beat. They just were too stupid and too busy taking free apples to protect us.
Way too much government multitasking. Do a few things and do them well. Like the military. Kill our enemies and win the wars. When you have too many jobs, you lose focus and accountability.
The death of capitalism gets predicted every time there is a series of financial scandals and severe recessions, or as we used to call them in the 1800s, Panics. Tell your friends to study history. You used to have to find accurate books. With the search engines of today,there is no excuse for ignorance.
@Alan Scott: Agreed! (Holds up hand) I’m a believer in capitalism.
kylehuwer,
Ask your friends to give examples of what ever they are in favor of, actually working. Ask them where Hilary’s socialized medicine is shining.
I’ve tried to find any success stories for socialism. The only ones that come to mind were small and temperary. Religious utopian societies such as Shakers had more success than secular experiments like the Owenites.
Socialism never works on a national scale because you can only successfully motivate collective economic behavior in small disciplined groups. Since large scale socialism is always secular, it cannot profit from religion’s unifying influence.
@Alan Scott,
Hey, our friends are right here… but they don’t seem to want to talk and/or answer questions. Hmmm..
-KH
kylehuwer,
“Hey, our friends are right here… but they don’t seem to want to talk and/or answer questions. Hmmm..”
I’ve done my best to pick a fight with them and it does no good. They are either really scared or they are down in D.C. enjoying their victory in the last election. Why anyone would want to stand around and freeze in portapottyville is beyond me. I’m looking out my window, watching the snow pile up, and hoping for some global warming to kick in. Of well, time to put some more anthracite on the fire.
Most often they argue that their beliefs are not Socialistic.
I believe they do not fully understand what Socialism is. Granted, there views do tend to make one “feel good” about oneself, but they fail to grasp that they are imprisioning those they are trying to help.
Obviously it is the “feel-good-warm-and-fuzzy” aurora of Socialism that is keeping them warm then!
“Obviously it is the “feel-good-warm-and-fuzzy” aurora of Socialism that is keeping them warm then!”
For their sake I hope it works! When our President gets done with the Coal Industry it is going to get pretty chilly in the North!
DJ,Kylehuwer,
It occurred to me that in our discussion about socialism
and our Democratic over lords that we have strayed from the central theme of this board, which are the bail outs. All seems to be gloom and doom. The greedy capitalists have failed and need to be bailed out by the descendants of FDR. I therefore decided to try to find big companies that did not fail and do not need to be bailed out.
I found one in the original evil capitalist industry, namely banking. A bank that did not lend billions to morons, because it kept the loans and did not sell them to Fannie and Freddie. A bank that actually verified the stuff on the loan applications. Imagine that, honest bankers doing their jobs.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/8300257
“Hudson City Bancorp has record profit, ups dividend”
I’m sure that Obama&company will now proceed to confiscate these windfall profits.
it’s already january but i hope you don’t mind me putting my two cents. ;) i like your comparison–the current situation as if it were a horror film. you know what i like about them? things that seem to be the wrong and craziest of ideas turn out to be the best solutions. i like the unexpected. let’s see what the stimulus plan can actually do and how it will really work out. we all have our inferences and opinions about it, but we’ll all have to see for ourselves what will happen =)
The last “stimulus” check didn’t work, so why will this one?
Because Obama had an approval rating before he got into office?
@Imee, Government can not fix the economy. FDR’s “new Deal” didn’t do it and Obama’s “Newer Deal” isn’t going to do it. Only the Free Market can fix this. Since Congress approved the first bailout, look at what has happened. Billions have been spread around, no one really knows where it has gone, GM is back (again) asking for another handout, Hustler Magazine is asking for a cut, and CitiBank and BOA are tanking. If the Government could not bailout MEGA corps for being foolish, how is 1000 dollars to each “deserving” American going to be any different?
Lets look at the infrastructure projects, most are only a few years long at best-nothing of a permanent nature, so all the jobs being created for them are temporary! We need growth in industry, NOT in city wide projects. No bailout can fix this economy. I applaud your optimism though!
Alan Scott,
Thanks for the link! It is nice to see a winner in the financial market. I did a check of other sources to see if anyone else had mentioned the seemingly loan (pun intended) success, I was unable to find any US coverage, only UK. I am by no means an expert at searching for stuff on the net though, I just find it odd that the AP or NYT have not mentioned it.
@DJ: Nice. I didn’t know about the Hustler bailout. I think they should get their $5B as requested. Like Hustler said… “”This is very unhealthy as a nation. Americans can do without cars and such but they cannot do without sex.” BINGO! Bailout material!
But really, I’d almost rather give it to Hustler than GM. GM is plagued with… well… the plague… At least I can be more confident that Hustler will use it’s money wisely by creating more websites and hiring more beautiful women. They will hire from within and not ship jobs overseas… and people from overseas will subscribe so we can increase our GDP. No unions in that business (that I know of).
Ha!
“The last ‘stimulus’ check didn’t work, so why will this one?”
Because it’s not just a stimulus check kiddo…
@MG: …. go onnnnn…..
Imee,
“let’s see what the stimulus plan can actually do and how it will really work out. we all have our inferences and opinions about it, but we’ll all have to see for ourselves what will happen =)”
What I am afraid of is that this stimulus package will get the credit for something that will happen anyway. With low credit rates and low energy costs the economy is already primed to advance. We are coming off the bottom right now. Once they get the toxic assets off of the books of the financial entities, the only corporate hobos will be the autos.
Things will get better before the Pelosi-Obama pork fest starts greasing their friends, pardon,,I mean stimulating the economy. Nancy and Barry will of course take credit anyway and be proclaimed by MSNBC as geniuses.
DJ,
“It is nice to see a winner in the financial market. I did a check of other sources to see if anyone else had mentioned the seemingly loan (pun intended) success, I was unable to find any US coverage, only UK.”
I was first made aware of that banking company from watching the Fox business channel.They had the head honcho on. It was such a shock to see a banker not looking for a bailout. I then just search engined on the web until I found an article that I liked.
“MG: …. go onnnnn…..”
Sorry kiddo…I don’t answer to admitted tax evaders…or trolls like “Alan Scott”…sheesh…
Mister Guy,
“Sorry kiddo…I don’t answer to admitted tax evaders…or trolls like “Alan Scott”…sheesh…”
And a gracious bon jour to you too.
This is a partial list of the pork in the stimulus package. I can’t swear 100% to it’s accuracy but I believe it to be correct.Does anyone on the opposite side of the isle have the guts to defend this list purely on the merits of being in an emergency stimulus bill?
1 billion for Amtrak
2 billion for child care subsidies
50 million for National Endowment for the Arts
400 million for Global Warming research
2.4 billion for Carbon Capture Demonstration Projects
650 million for digital TV Conversion
Come on, don’t be shy. You guys won the election. You guys run the country. Tell me how your leaders are being good stewards of the taxpayers money.
Since no one has the guts to defend the Obama PORKULUS plan, I’ve decided to again look for success stories in capitalist pig Amerika. What better sector to find a little bright news than the depressed auto industry. Admittedly this is very small but hey,, times is tough.
http://www.manufacturing.net/News-Kia-Motors-Supplier-Hiring-400-Workers-020409.aspx
“Kia Motors Supplier Hiring 400 Workers In Georgia
Manufacturing.Net – February 04, 2009
LAGRANGE, Ga. (AP) — Jobs will be up for grabs in Georgia again next week.
Sewon America, a major supplier for the Kia Motors plant coming to West Point, will begin accepting applications Monday through Wednesday for about 400 jobs on the old campus of West Georgia Technical College.”
Hyundai is also doing well. I havent’ found any hiring notices for them yet, but so far it dosn’t appear that are laying folkks off.
Well, isn’t that grand folks. MG wants to come here and call me names instead of explaining himself. Typical.
But to you two, thanks for the updates. I have nothing to add except that I have a friend that lives in Louisiana that just got a job – I believe in the service industry.
DJ,
It’s actually funny because I happen to have picked up 2 used 1999 Korean cars. A Kia sportage and a Hyundai accent. There is no comparison in quality. The Hyundai so far is the most reliable car I’ve ever owned. I can’t say the same for the Kia.
With any luck at all, nothing that Obama wants will pass. Because I believe we will pull out of the worst of this recession in the coming 6 to 12 months. China has a real stimulus plan that will suck up a lot of raw materials. Copper is bottoming. Grains are turning. They need American coal. That’s good for the rails. Right now, and I know it’s hard to believe, the Chinese are our best friends.
If Obama, Pelosi, and Reid get what they want, they will take credit for a recovery that will happen in spite of them.
Kudos to two of my least favorite Republicans for standing up against the Obama Bill of payoffs to special interests. Those two being Lindsey Graham and John McCain.
Alan Ssott,
I am no big McCain fan either, but I am having trouble giving him props for his stance on Raw Deal 2.0. After his objection to the “buy American” rule (http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/02/02/daily60.html). Don’t get me wrong, I am not a protectionist by nature, but when you have other countries contemplating the same type of economic restrictions, it only makes sense to put tariffs on imports equal to any tariff imposed on what we export. I don’t like any type of Government stimulus, but being that a Socialist won and Socialists are in control of the Congress, we are going to get some type of package. I would much rather have the package promote and provide for US jobs than jobs abroad.
DJ,
I try to buy American when I can. Unfortunately I buy used cars and buy what’s available and affordable. That said, being the student of history that I am, not like that phony Olbermann, I remember reading about what happened after the crash of 29. The US touched off a trade war that helped turn a recession in to the great depression. Smoot-Hawley tariff. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/id/17606.htm
Again these other countries are merely copying what the Democrats started with their buy American clause in the stimulus. Quite ironic. Our great new President that for 2 years said that foreign countries hate the US because of George Bush, has now given our trading partners real reason to hate us.
I believe that the cure for this irrational hatred of all things Bush, is Mr. Obama. The longer he is in office, the better Bush is going to look.
Once again in my relentless pursuit of finding examples of evil capitalist companies who are succeeding, I offer this.
Times News ( Pa.)
” Reading and Northern Railroad announced that despite a weak national economy, the company was very optimistic about its 2009 business.” ” Instead of laying off workers, the railroad plans to hire additional employees to handle its business, and instead of curtailing spending, the railroad has embarked on a series of strategic investments.”
And now in the interest of bi-partisanship I give the opposition argument for the porkulus bill.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02042009/news/politics/pelosis_500_million_person_slip_153530.htm
“Pelosi publicly stated that “every month that we do not have an economic recovery package 500 million Americans lose their jobs.””
Almost twice the population of the US will lose their jobs if Obama’s stimulus is defeated. I wonder what the press would have said if this wisdom had been uttered by George W. Bush.
Alan Scott,
I am not an advocate for high tariffs, I am an advocate for equal tariffs. If an EU country places a 3% tariff on the import of US goods, the US should place a 3% tariff on the goods from that nation. When this Raw Deal 2.0 stimulus package is signed into law, the monies that get re-distributed to the American people either by tax cuts or a direct check, may go to buy stuff. If the recipients buy a TV, the vast majority of the price of the TV will go to Japan, buying Fruits and Vegetables will send money to Mexico, Turkey or the Honduras. Hell, the only way to keep the money in the US seems to be to to buy stuff at a garage sale!
DJ,
I do not like to argue when I am not in a strong position of having a lot of facts on my side. Some would disagree with that. I don’t know a lot about our trade with the EU. I do know that a trade war with our economy in it’s current shape is the last thing we need. I have a few facts I’m going to put out. Our top export markets by countries are in the following order: Canada, Mexico. Japan was number 3 but it may or may not have been taken over by China.
I am sorry these figures are not more current. In Jan. 2008 we exported 92075 tons of steel, mostly to Canada and Mexico. So much for the evils of NAFTA. We export everything from soybeans to Boeing jets to China. Granted the Chinese sell us much more, but I hope Pelosi and Obama are cautious in getting in to a spitting contest with countries they said were going to love us once Bush was gone.
Alan Scott,
No apology is necessary. Facts are what they are. My only concern lies with a country we are exporting to applpying an import tariff to the goods we send them. If we don’t counter with a tariff on what we receivefrom said country, then that country has a price advantage. If we buy what they sell here cheaper than whatt we make here, that only supports their economy. I would prefer a Free Trade system, but I beleive it works against us if we don’t match tariff for tariff.
DJ,
We have to watch what we wish for, we might get it. I heard on a news radio station that I listen to, non partisan, that our latest trade deficit narrowed considerably. This is however not good news. It is due to our low economic activity in buying imports, rather than our exports.
There is a difference of opinion between liberals and us on the Pelosi-Reid-Obama patronage bill ,I mean stimulus bill. Both sides like to argue about the effect of FDR’s New Deal. A TV pinhead in criticizing someone on our side, made the statement that after 4 years of the New Deal, unemployment went down from 20% to 10%. The lowest rate that I could find was about 14% for 1937, after which it went back up towards 20% until WW2. The only factor, besides dishonesty, that accounts for this 4% difference is differing methods for measuring unemployment.
As you can see, I love to argue details, which is why no one from the other side will take me on. Like our new treasury secretary, Obamaniacs are kinda fuzzy on specifics. Or is it on paying taxes?
Alan Scott,
I’m with you. I enjoy the details as well. I have not found anything reporting less than 14% unemployment in 1933 either. I actually posted an article detailing the failed policies FDR pushed on “Depression-Era Values and a New deal”, lo and behold this sites resident troll, Comrade Guy automaticly dismisses it is as a “Right Wing” article. Funny how they label anything that contrdicts their narrow minded socialistic views as “right wing”, it would be nice if just once they could argue actual facts (not their opinion stated as fact), I’m not holding my breath though.
When Raw Deal 2.0 fails, it is going to be interesting how they react…oh wait, it will be Bush’s fault…my bad.
Some of the CRAP in this thing is unfathomable! A Government agency to decide indivdual health care issues- How the hell is that STIMULUS? I have notified my Reps to vote NO. I expect my Congressman will (again), my Senators though…not to sure.
DJ,
I realize that our friends on the left who post on this site do not take my word for anything. So I have tried to find someone who is at least somewhat neutral, if not on their side. When we tell these people that there is no stimulus in the current bill, they dismiss us,, ok. Well Jim Cramer of Mad Money today called the stimulus bill a joke. He is certainly no Bush lovin, Obama hatin Republican. Until recently he severely bashed Bush and praised Obama.
Hey. Obama is coming here to Arizona next week. I think I am going to go and throw my shoe at him to show him my approval rating.
“I actually posted an article detailing the failed policies FDR pushed on ‘Depression-Era Values and a New deal'”
…which was written by a proven Right-wing commentator (Gene Smiley)…on a Right-wing website (the “Library of Economics & Liberty”, which is funded by a Right-wing organization (“Liberty Fund”).
“it would be nice if just once they could argue actual facts”
LOL…it would be nice if you learned how to READ clear & concise graphs with actual FACTS in them “DJ…instead of just ignoring them”. BTW, are you the same “DJ” from kiddo’s (“Kyle Huwer”) blog that got sucked into that tax evasion scheme that he was pushing pretty hard a while back?? I sure hope not…
“A Government agency to decide indivdual health care issues”
…which isn’t in the stimulus bill at all.
BTW, the way that the govt. calculated unemployment numbers during the Great Depression has pretty much nothing to do with how it does that same function today.
Man, not only do they hate facts, they like to name call, eh?
““A Government agency to decide indivdual health care issues”
…which isn’t in the stimulus bill at all.”
Yes it is Comrade;
“The “stimulus” establishes a new government body to assess Americans’ health care and to make sure drugs and treatments “that are found to be less effective and in some cases, more expensive, will no longer be prescribed.” That’s how House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) described it.”
Link: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/05/stimulus-bill-may-change-health-care-forever/
Congressman Obey must be a Right-Winger now right?
pwned!
Konfusing Kancer,
“Hey. Obama is coming here to Arizona next week. I think I am going to go and throw my shoe at him to show him my approval rating.”
Only one. Seriously, I don’t favor violence. I’m sure that Obama has better security than Bush and you will be shot.
So I guess no one here on the Obama team will post unemployment figures that show the 10% level the MSNBC Psycho stated. There was some improvement by 1937 but it was temporary. This is all a relevant discussion since Team Obama is doing the new New Deal.
At some point the Democrats will have to stop throwing their weight around and really ask Republicans for help. When Medicare and SS go belly up in a few years and the geezers start crying, it will make this recession laughable.
Alan, I was just kidding. I don’t favor violence at all either. My point was that many of our friends thought that the shoe throwing was right, justified, and much needed. I am no Bush fan, but I don’t think that the shoe was the holy grail. I plan on hopefully having all of his (Obama’s) stuff voted down. I am averaging about 1 letter to my Congressman every week.
“When Medicare and SS go belly up in a few years and the geezers start crying, it will make this recession laughable.” QFT.
Konfusing Kancer,
“Alan, I was just kidding. I don’t favor violence at all either. ”
I know that. I just always feel big brother is monitoring everything and I don’t want a visit from some guy in a brown shirt. The shoe thing is some kind of a Muslim insult. No Muslim would ever give such an insult to a President named Obama. As an American I was insulted that it happened to any American President. I’m embarrassed that the SS allowed 2 shoes to be airborn.
Right now the Democrats have pretty much unlimited power. The great unwashed who voted them in will take a long time to see their mistake.
“Yes it is Comrade”
No, it really isn’t…Right-wing OPINION pieces being pawned off as “fact” being put aside, of course…sheesh…
Mister Guy, you are amazing. Any time I have ever seen anyone quote anything, you ALWAYS attack the source. Why? In this case, is the quoted not a valid source simply because you believe the sources is tainted? If this is your arguement, then the burden of proof is on you to show how it is is tainted and how the sources cannot be trusted. I, for one, am waiting on you to undergo this task of proving that it is inherently tainted and cannot be trusted.
Or is the fact of the matter that you only permit sources/organizations/people that publicly endorsed Obama to be true and valid sources?
kylehuwer,
“Mister Guy, you are amazing. Any time I have ever seen anyone quote anything, you ALWAYS attack the source. ”
He is too afraid to answer me. Engage him with detailed facts and he explodes. And wait until you see the quality of his sources.
AlanScott, et al,
I don’t know why but sometimes I get logged on as kylehuwer and sometimes as KonfusingKancer. Meh.
But anyways, I know very much of MG. I’ve seen him on here and elsewhere. I know very well his debating skills. And you can see that he appreciates me by calling me “kiddo” all the time. I am sure he does this to imply that I, the younger buck, am too stupid to hold an intelligent debate with him.
“Any time I have ever seen anyone quote anything, you ALWAYS attack the source. Why?”
That’s not always true, but I refuse to let Right-wingers quote obvious Right-wing *opinion* pieces as valid facts. Knowing someone’s bias (whether they are upfront about it or not) is very, very important when trying to ascertain the real facts of any given situation.
“In this case, is the quoted not a valid source simply because you believe the sources is tainted?”
Hello?? Not only is it from a well-known Right-wing newspaper (“The Washington Times”…also known as the “Moonie Times” in name of its founder), it’s from a frequent Right-wing commentator Amy Menefee (who’s written for the infamous Right-wing website “NewsBusters”) who has shilled for likes of booth John McCain & Wal-Mart and who is intentionally misrepresenting what the just-passed stimulus bill actually does as it relates to health care:
mediamatters.org/items/200902120014
“took a quote he attributed to Rep. David Obey out of context to advance the falsehood that provisions in the bill would permit the federal government to control health care. In fact, the bill contains no such provisions.”
“the corresponding section of the bill as passed by the House does not provide that the government can intervene in doctors’ treatment decisions.”
The recently-passed stimulus bill HAS NOT radically changed anything with repsect to how our health care system works, period.
Now look, I understand that a lot of you Right-wingers LOVE to read & post obviously biased sources that just spout more of your Right-wing ideals. Everyone is entitled to their own personal take on politics, but you are NOT entitled to your own set of warped “facts” to try and back up those positions. Try and use valid, unbiased, multi-cited sources and maybe you’ll get where you are trying to get faster.
“then the burden of proof is on you to show how it is is tainted and how the sources cannot be trusted.”
See above kiddo…you lose…again…good luck with the tax evasion scheme that you & “DJ” are apparently engaged in as well…
“Or is the fact of the matter that you only permit sources/organizations/people that publicly endorsed Obama to be true and valid sources?”
This is strawman argument…nice try though kiddo…
BTW, I am not “too afraid” to answer “Alan Scot”…I just don’t talk to proven Internet Trolls, period.
“And you can see that he appreciates me by calling me ‘kiddo’ all the time. I am sure he does this to imply that I, the younger buck, am too stupid to hold an intelligent debate with him.”
LOL…I call you kiddo because you are (even from your picture on your own website) obviously a kid, period. Now get over it…
@Mister guy: Oh man, you sure know how to make me laugh, and laugh HARD!
You come on here all screaming about how we are quoting right-wing groups and then you quote MediaMatters!!!
Hello!
From MediaMatter’s own site:
So it is OK for you to quote your self-proclaimed progressive group whos whole mission is to “correct CONSERVATIVE MISINFORMATION.” But it is not OK for us to quote papers written by Ph.D’s or Senators?
Oh please do tell.
And Alan Scott a troll? (Again, laughing) Can you please pull up the National Troll Database and show me that he is indeed a proven Troll as you say?
“I don’t know why but sometimes I get logged on as kylehuwer and sometimes as KonfusingKancer. Meh.”
I actually use my real name here because I ain’t ascared, but I use 2 other names on other boards. When I began to post again on these boards after an absence , I did not realize that my other alter egos were posting. I took some flak for that mistake. So don’t sweat it.
I burned out MG on the old Save the Dinosoars board on this site. He won’t answer me anymore. I love to see you engage him. My problem with him, besides the fact that he’s wrong, is that he puts out the weakest, most incoherent arguments. I do not mind arguing with competent Democrats over the stimulus. On other sites they have clarified my thinking by exposing the weak points in my position. MG on the other hand can only dish it out, he has a glass jaw.
I have no qualms with posting under my real name. Even when I have posted under this alias, you can still click on my name and go to my website, which has my real name as part of the url.
I agree. I have no problems debating people. In fact, I don’t even mind admitting that that I am wrong.
With this latest issue with MG, I do find it rather humorous that he goes and complains about someone quoting a “biased source” and then to prove it he quotes the finding of an organization that its sole mission is to essentially attack anything right of center in the news.
With this said, I wish that the media was more of a watchdog that it used to be. However, MediaMatters is not a watchdog, it is a Liberal organization that its whole mission is to not to go after not BAD news, but rather CONSERVATIVE news. Wow.
Yes, MG, Washington Times leans slightly right. Or so at least this report here UCLA claims. (Or is UCLA too red for you still?)
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
However, I personally think that there is a vast difference between a media outlet that leans right than an organization whos sole purpose is to attack anything non-liberal.
And if I am a kid, then guess what… you just got pwned by a kid here. Kiddo is waiting for you to show Alan Scott in the National Troll Database. Kiddo is waiting for you to show him how you are not a hypocrite for quoting MediaMatters.
What do we say in the game of chess at this point? Oh yeah…. CHECK…
“So it is OK for you to quote your self-proclaimed progressive group whos whole mission is to ‘correct CONSERVATIVE MISINFORMATION.'”
LOL…sure, especially when they do just that…as I clearly pointed out. The facts, unfortunately for your side, are simply NOT with you when it comes to the issue that we were discussing, period end of story.
“And Alan Scott a troll? (Again, laughing) Can you please pull up the National Troll Database and show me that he is indeed a proven Troll as you say?”
All one need to do is look at the following thread on this very website:
notyourdaddy.wordpress.com/2008/04/29/save-the-dinosaurs/
In this thread, which unfortunately goes on for months & months, “Alan Scott” makes multiple posts *to himself* (and no one else) for weeks & weeks on end. He endless quotes Right-wing websites to try & “prove” his hard Right-wing positions, and then when schooled on the real facts of what he is trying to discuss…he changes the subject of the “discussion” many, many, many times. He has also posted here under several different names, which is the textbook definition of an Internet Troll. This is a person (who if you believe his wild claims) that is actually buring coal in his own residence to heat it!! I could go on & on about him…but trolls crave attention, and that is exactly what they do not deserve…
“In fact, I don’t even mind admitting that that I am wrong.”
LOL…I’ve NEVER seen that happen kiddo…what a surprise.
“he quotes the finding of an organization that its sole mission is to essentially attack anything right of center in the news.”
Thanks for completely and INTENTIONALLY distorting their reason for being in existence. I wouldn’t expect any less from you kiddo…
“MediaMatters is not a watchdog, it is a Liberal organization that its whole mission is to not to go after not BAD news, but rather CONSERVATIVE news.”
Again…see above…it’s not working either…
“Washington Times leans slightly right.”
LOL…slightly??
Both liberals AND conservatives refer to the Washinton Times as politically conservative. It’s all part of the Wall Street Journal, the Fox “News”, and most of talk radio’s conservative media bias. Salon.com & The Daily Howler have published analyses of what are *serious* factual errors & examples of Right-wing bias in the paper’s news coverage. Even writer David Brock, who worked for the Times’ sister publication “Insight on the News”, said in his book “Blinded by the Right” that the news writers at the Times were encouraged and rewarded for giving news stories a “conservative” slant. According to the Columbia Journalism Review, “Because of its history of a seemingly ideological approach to the news, the paper has always faced questions about its credibility.”
Historian Thomas Frank has linked the Times to the modern American conservative movement, saying, “There is even a daily newspaper—the Washington Times—published strictly for the movement’s benefit, a propaganda sheet whose distortions are so obvious and so alien that it puts one in mind of those official party organs one encounters when traveling in authoritarian countries.”
“Or is UCLA too red for you still?”
LOL…once again, that’s a strawman argument. I never said that UCLA was “red”, period. This really is too easy kiddo…
“than an organization whos sole purpose is to attack anything non-liberal.”
Again, that’s NOT what Media Matters is about, but since when does the truth matter to the likes of you kiddo??
“you just got pwned by a kid here.”
No, I really didn’t, but your delusions of grandeur are kind of cute there kiddo.
“Kiddo is waiting for you to show Alan Scott in the National Troll Database.”
Yet another strawman argument…ugh…
konfusing kancer,
I read a little commentary on your website, I enjoyed it. To get back to the main topic, I would say that in principle I am against the bailout. I have to admit some hypocrisy in feeling that some targeted intervention is probably warranted. We are way beyond that.
Then I would have to also admit that if Barak Obama offered, I might take a stimulus bribe. To live with myself self, I would justify it by saying that since all of my brother citizens get it, why put myself at a competitive disadvantage in the contest of life in socialist America.
I keep telling myself not to pick on MG, since it’s like defending your self against a neighborhood squirt who can’t realize he’s up against the big kids. However, when he said,,,, “This is a person (who if you believe his wild claims) that is actually burning coal in his own residence to heat it!! I could go on & on about him”,,,,,, I had to respond. This defies belief. Even I did not realize the extent of his ignorance. I have burned coal for 25 years. I just love putting out all those greenhouse gases. It’s my contribution to making mother earth a warmer place to live for all of us.
Alan Scott,
I can see what you mean by MG. He can’t even admit when he is wrong and a hypocrite. I guess what they say is true, “Don’t feed the trolls,”
Thank for coming to my blog though. I try to put as much good news that I can find on there. I could put a lot more, but I’d be on the computer all day mashing keys.
I for one am against the bailout. If the taxpayers are going to pay for businesses’ failures, then that is just wrong. If we are going to get a “stimulus check” because the government thinks that money in our pockets will promote the economy…. how about the novel idea of not taking that money in the first place? To me, that money that they are giving out is not even really mine… it is someone elses. If I need to accept a check from the government that as taken from someone else to become advantageous, then I am in bad shape. I’ll find other ways to promote and raise myself.
And back to MG finally. I think that anyone who comes here and reads the conversation between MG and you/DJ/me will realize that he simply isn’t in the same ballpark. When you go and say that you are allowed to quote self-proclaimed whole-hearted liberal organizations but say that everyone else is not allowed to quote ANY politician or ANY report if that person isn’t a liberal (or if they are e democrat, they don’t say what a democrat should say) then that is just a laughable tactic to me. His own words speak volumes and will be his own demise.
konfusing kancer,
Ear marks or more descriptively pork are a corrupting influence. In my region of eastern Pa ,coal country, we have a long tradition of supporting crooked politicians. As long as they only steal from the feds and cut us in on a slice of pork, now and then, we never vote them out. Now if they get caught stealing local tax dollars, we become quite moral and throw them under the bus faster than the Dems did to Blago.
You are more honest than me. I always try to be recognize my own hypocrisy. I am against stimulus checks, but when the government sent them out last year, you better believe I cashed mine and paid some over due bills. If Obama puts my name on another one, I won’t refuse it. The rationale being that what I don’t spend, friends of Obama will.
I do have to have some personal standards. Some acquaintances I have, who aren’t that needy, eat at free church suppers, do not leave a donation, and take doggie bags home for “shut ins”. I can only guess that God created these folks so that I have someone to look down on, after cashing my stimulus checks.
MG does a lot of LOLs. When I said that he has a glass jaw, I meant he has no sense of humor towards himself. He will laugh at you or I, but can’t ever let himself be the butt of a joke. If he does come back on, tie one arm and one leg behind your back before you thrash him.
“He can’t even admit when he is wrong and a hypocrite.”
No kiddo…that would be *you*…as I’ve already pointed out to you. BTW, have fun railing against the state of AZ for potentially raising taxes, WHEN YOU’RE NOT EVEN PAYING ANY TAXES due to your lil tax evasion scheme! Hypocrisy?? You wouldn’t know hypocrisy if someone smaked you in the head with it kiddo…please…
“I try to put as much good news that I can find on there.”
Including quoting the above completely bogus Washinton Times Right-wing opinion peice without a retraction after it’s been proven to be completely & totally false.
“If we are going to get a ‘stimulus check’ because the government thinks that money in our pockets will promote the economy”
Have you even READ anything about the stimulus bill kiddo?? You’re NOT getting a “stimulus check” this time around, and, once again, you’re NOT even a taxpayer!
“I’ll find other ways to promote and raise myself.”
Yea, like blatant tax evasion apparently…
“I think that anyone who comes here and reads the conversation between MG and you/DJ/me will realize that he simply isn’t in the same ballpark.”
I agree…one of us bases his opinions on actual researched facts, and the other bunch of you are just spinning a bunch of nonsense based on the same-ole, same-ole Right-wing lies…
“When you go and say that you are allowed to quote self-proclaimed whole-hearted liberal organizations but say that everyone else is not allowed to quote ANY politician or ANY report if that person isn’t a liberal”
Did I ever say that kiddo?? Nope, strawman! This really is too easy…maybe I should go back to not responding to admitted tax evaders. I still would like to know if “DJ” is one of them as well…I guess he’s too scared to admit that here though…oh well…
I admit to not reading every post, so I obviously am not up to speed on these continuing “lil tax evasion scheme!” charges. Which of President Obama’s cabinet members are we talking about? I did not even know they posted here.
If it is me who you are calling an “admitted tax evader” and you no longer want to talk to me because of this label you are giving me, that would be good with me. Especially since you no longer talk to PIT (Proven Internet Troll) Alan Scott as well. Maybe we can have some constructive conversations now.
So I guess that means you will just have to talk to DJ or nobody, which sounds grand to me. Well, he’s all yours DJ!
“If it is me who you are calling an ‘admitted tax evader'”
It’s funny kiddo that you constantly feel the need to play “cat & mouse” on your obvious & admitted tax evasion (both apparently at the state of AZ level & the federal level). Intentionally lying on your tax forms and saying that you never earned any income/wages/whatever when you actually HAD is simple tax evasion, which has always failed in the end.
“So I guess that means you will just have to talk to DJ”
That is, until he admits to being a part of the very same tax evasion scheme that you clued him into on your own website, which will be eventually used against the both of you once the proper autthorities find out.
Getting back to business I thought it relevant to see how a real tax cheat Geithner is doing in his new job. Now you might think this is a dream job. Getting to spend billions. Most in Congress would lie, cheat, and steal for a job with such perks. All is not well for our Secretary of the Treasury. He is not getting the help he needs to spend all of that money. With all of the unemployed financial gurus it is still not that easy to find good help. Obama’s suddenly tough hiring checks are getting in the way.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123517668905437643.html?mod=rss_topics_obama
Good read Alan. I like it how the WSJ says:
So in other words, it doesn’t matter what hes done – crook or not – if Obama wants a crook the Democrats are going to confirm him. And to see that he still didn’t pay two of the years of his liability because, “he is obeying the law.” What bullshit.
I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting
my own weblog and was wondering what all is required to get setup?
I’m assuming having a blog like yours would cost
a pretty penny? I’m not very internet smart so I’m not 100% certain. Any recommendations
or advice would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks