Ideology says, 'let the market kill off the failed US auto industry'

[Craig234]

So first you say, "If Republicans voted for it, you'd have a point" - now you're taking it back and changing your definition to better fit this argument? Cute - and I'm the one you accuse of being partisan.

No, I'm saying the same thing I always did. It was clear I was referring to most Republicans voting for it - she doesn't owe give Republicans equal credit for passing it when nearly all of them voted against it. Your confusion and my pointing out your error doesn't represent my changing the statement.

Also, you've still completely missed my point several times now, because all you're interested in is partisan shrieking.

I wish I had.

Again - you're entirely missing the point. As I already said - try some critical thinking here, ya know, outside the partisan kicking-and-screaming box.

You're being absurd, the words critical thinking are far from your post, not mine.

No one, anywhere, thinks that by saying "Congress passed this bill" that it implies everyone in Congress voted for it. Seriously. Nobody. Not you (and please don't try to claim it, you, I, and everyone else reading knows that would be an outright lie), not me, not anyone. Therefore, it really didn't need to be said. Its kicking a hornet's nest just for the fun of it.

That's not what I said. Saying 'Congress passed it' leaves it at least open to the possibility that a majority of both parties did.

It does not, correctly, point out, which was part of her intention in taking credit for her party's good policy over her opponents', that the Republicans opposed the policy.

Again...I'll repeat for you....I'm not questioning whether or not she's correct in saying Democrats passed the bill. I *never* claimed that, and if you try to say it again, you will be *lying*, so please, don't bother. My point is that it didn't belong in her statement, whether it was correct or not.

I didn't say you said she was not correct. I said you are incorrect with some hyper-exaggerated definition of what's appropriate to attack her for telling the truth.

What are you talking about?? Where do you get this nonsense from? Held accountable for WHAT? Nobody - not a single person in the entire world - is crediting the Republican party for passing this bill, nor am I trying to "protect" them. I'm trying to remove derisive nonsense from the general discourse that doesn't belong.

There are all kinds of people who will not understand the Republicans were opposed to the bill, unless they're told, in statements like this.

You are having the effect of protecting them, by keeping people from knowing the fact, by demanding the facts not be stated for some deluded idea of 'too partisan'.

Find a Republican that didn't vote for this bill that is taking credit for it.

The point isn't Republicans actively taking credit. though I can find all kinds of examples of them doing that on a variety of issues they opposed.

The point is that many voters will not understand the difference between the parties, the Republicans benefiting from ignorance, if they aren't told who did what.

You have what now, a half dozen straw men raising false issues I didn't say?

 

[Zebo]

I agree, the money spent to keep the auto industry afloat wasn't much when compared to other "bail outs". So what? I don't agree with any of it. I'd rather have seen a million people lose their jobs and get pissed off at their government and FORCE change, than sit back mild mannered and content because they're to easily manipulated.

People say they want change, they say they hope for it, but they're all just a bunch of cowards with no conviction. Wave a dollar bill and they fold. Assholes.

Me nether, I wish we could go back to idealistic sink or swim back when we had no competition and they were all bombed out, but I'm not sure it works ANYMORE when other countries heavy subsidize industry in order to provide jobs for their people. We are competing against nations not factory to factory in our our little world. Like I said All their competition gets state subsidies whether chaebols, keiretsu, state heath insurance and national retirement etc none are lone wolfs and throwing millions on the street for old ideologies may not be smart.

Beyond just taking livelihood away for those middle class jobs and putting them on public assistance or the ever popular "re-education" for techjobs not there, we also destroy our wherewithal to compete as a nation having all that dead wood sitting at home/factories boarded up. Eventually this presents national security issues in addition to us going broke.

For me America is #1, unlike that fool Glenn who rags on Americans products even though JD power says they are good, rags on little people making too much money, and wants to destroy it I'd rather we have those jobs than bunch low wage service jobs and state dependents. Save was worth it.

The facts are our workers are not overpaid. Germans and Japanese make even more, their CEO's make a lot less, but what really saves these companies is not having to worry about HC and retirement costs. We do and everyone knows that's the bulk of Automakers problems.

 

[Zebo]

While i'm in the "let the finance industry fail" camp... I will say that almost all of that money is being recouped plus interest. TARP did work.

We are now facing serious issues with inflation though because of the feds free money policies. They are reinflating the Greenspan bubble.

The comparisons are ridiculous.

Automakers did not defraud they were beat by nations united in cause. We hate each other so we don't unite.
Automakers were reshuffled heavily, bankers still in place with heavy rewards for their fail setting up massive moral hazard for next time.
Automakers got chump change relative to what the FED and govt is giving bankers.
Automakers are producers making wealth bankers are skimmers who live off stripping wealth.

 

[Craig234]

The facts are our workers are not overpaid. Germans and Japanese make even more, their CEO's make a lot less, but what really saves these companies is not having to worry about HC and retirement costs. We do and everyone knows that's the bulk of Automakers problems.

Which would be solved and good for business if progressives were a majority and passed the universal single-payer healthcare they want like every other advanced country.

Less of the economy devoted to it, businesses freed of the cost and wasted resources, a healthier workforce - a huge moneysink of private insurace waste and profit in consumers' pockets.

 

[Zebo]

Which would be solved and good for business if progressives were a majority and passed the universal single-payer healthcare they want like every other advanced country.

Less of the economy devoted to it, businesses freed of the cost and wasted resources, a healthier workforce - a huge moneysink of private insurace waste and profit in consumers' pockets.

It's no accident most engine factories are across the border from Michigan in Ontario. Yeah.

 

[Zebo]

Which would be solved and good for business if progressives were a majority and passed the universal single-payer healthcare they want like every other advanced country.

Less of the economy devoted to it, businesses freed of the cost and wasted resources, a healthier workforce - a huge moneysink of private insurace waste and profit in consumers' pockets.

We are devoted to wealth strippers instead of wealth makers.

Wealth or what we call wealth are things that are grown, mined or manufactured. Everything else lives off that wealth. I'm not trying to set up a noble chain of command here or anything because services are needed to facilitate and enjoy wealth creation but those services (HC, banking, etc) has moved a lot of wealth creation off shore and jobs with it. We take on debt to hide it but it's unsustainable.

 

[Darwin333]

But when it comes to the laws you broke, that's another matter?

And then you say, 'what laws are you talking about that I broke?'

And then I say, 'is it really relevant which laws you broke? If you can blatantly break one you can break others.'

Hold on, you need to show they broke any laws, and preferably which ones, before just treating it as an assumption they did in a question.

Contract laws/bankruptcy laws when they boned the bondholders.

Do you think the US government, including a Republican led one, should have the ability to change good faith and "fair" contracts and/or blatantly violate bankruptcy laws in favor of a private company whenever it feels like it?

 

[chucky2]

Contract laws/bankruptcy laws when they boned the bondholders.

Do you think the US government, including a Republican led one, should have the ability to change good faith and "fair" contracts and/or blatantly violate bankruptcy laws in favor of a private company whenever it feels like it?

This bailed out the unions, who vote largely Dem., so Craig will be for it.

If this was about the Gov spending $65B to bail out small businesses that are self-reported as largely Rep., Craig would be screaming about improper use of Gov funds or some other such sh1t.

That they're exactly the same thing totally escapes him.

Chuck

 

[Acanthus]

The comparisons are ridiculous.

Automakers did not defraud they were beat by nations united in cause. We hate each other so we don't unite.
Automakers were reshuffled heavily, bankers still in place with heavy rewards for their fail setting up massive moral hazard for next time.
Automakers got chump change relative to what the FED and govt is giving bankers.
Automakers are producers making wealth bankers are skimmers who live off stripping wealth.

I agree with you 100%.

I supported the automaker bailout and opposed the financial bailout, for the economic reasons i cited.

I wasn't totally clear on my position though... I added that the fed's free money policy is causing inflation which is further damaging the economy and reinflating the housing bubble.

 

[Acanthus]

Which would be solved and good for business if progressives were a majority and passed the universal single-payer healthcare they want like every other advanced country.

Less of the economy devoted to it, businesses freed of the cost and wasted resources, a healthier workforce - a huge moneysink of private insurace waste and profit in consumers' pockets.

They had a supermajority and failed to pass it. I fault the dems for that.

 

[rudder]

I am looking through the list of actual costs to the US government, and this figure looks clearly misleadingly high.

Besides the debt Chrysler already paid off, you do have a bit of US ownership in Chrysler which should be sold off in the future. You also had a significant US government stake in GM which is and has been sold off to the general market in order to pay back much of the bailout costs.

As I already covered, without bailing out the companies and the unions if the two companies failed, the US would have ultimately ended up being responsible for paying off a greater debt burden given the pension, health care costs, and other burdens which still would have ultimately fallen upon the US government. This is before you even get into the reality of how many people would have been impacted, including indirectly due to other companies which basically exclusively supply parts to these two companies failing.

Where did you hear that the US government HAD a large stake in GM? They still have a 26% stake in GM. Haven't look at stock prices today but if these shares were sold they would lose about $11 billion dollars or more.

These companies were bailed out and the taxpayer is still paying for pensions and healthcare costs of union workers.

 

[Zebo]

I agree with you 100%.

I supported the automaker bailout and opposed the financial bailout, for the economic reasons i cited.

I wasn't totally clear on my position though... I added that the fed's free money policy is causing inflation which is further damaging the economy and reinflating the housing bubble.

You think housing is being reinflated? It's still inflated. Banks are not forced to recognize loses with continued free % money from FED, and FASB M2M BS. So they hold them on the books rather than being forced to dump them.

 

[Craig234]

They had a supermajority and failed to pass it. I fault the dems for that.

That's a pretty idiotic position. Fault the Dems who opposed it - but a lot more Republicans not only opposed it, but filibustered it. You don't mention them.

You also give zero credit to the one bloc who supported it - basically all Dems, the progressive bloc. So, like I said, pretty idiotic position.

 

[Craig234]

Before recent issues, I said Mitt Romney was an incredible position changer, not for the right reasons but for political convenience.

Now, on the auto bailouts. When the policy was being pushed by Democrats, Romney wrote a New York Times op-ed, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt".

Not only did he push the wrong policy, he said that the Obama plan would kill the auto industry.

Now, a reporter asked his campaign to comment given the success of the program.

His campaign responded that Romney had the bailout idea first before Obama.

It's just shameful.

Watch the clip here from Rachel Maddow starting at 2:05:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/

 

[Acanthus]

That's a pretty idiotic position. Fault the Dems who opposed it - but a lot more Republicans not only opposed it, but filibustered it. You don't mention them.

You also give zero credit to the one bloc who supported it - basically all Dems, the progressive bloc. So, like I said, pretty idiotic position.

The dems are a fractured group of basically "non republicans" that represent a huge swath of ideas.

Republicans pretty much lay out their ideology on the table and vote accordingly. At least recently the tea partiers have shaken up things a bit for the R's so they don't vote in total lockstep on everything anymore.

I still say they blew the one chance they had in a generation (or more) to do the whole country some actual good.

 

[Acanthus]

Surprise surprise.

Fiat to buy remaining govt stake in Chrysler.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fiat-...0.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=6&asset=&ccode=

I'm sure this has to do with Chrysler getting about $6B of US Treasury debt forgiven.

 

[Craig234]

The dems are a fractured group of basically "non republicans" that represent a huge swath of ideas.

Yes, they are. And you still don't give credit to the progressives who supported this.

Republicans pretty much lay out their ideology on the table and vote accordingly. At least recently the tea partiers have shaken up things a bit for the R's so they don't vote in total lockstep on everything anymore.

I still say they blew the one chance they had in a generation (or more) to do the whole country some actual good.

And you still don't put blame on the Republicans where it belongs - you only blame all the Democrats, not just the ones who opposed it.

So, it's still a bad position. Blame opponents and credit supporters (progressives).

Your type of twisting that is a reason why we don't have a progressive majority who would pass this.

 

[Brigandier]

Yes, they are. And you still don't give credit to the progressives who supported this.



And you still don't put blame on the Republicans where it belongs - you only blame all the Democrats, not just the ones who opposed it.

So, it's still a bad position. Blame those who opposed it, credit those who supported.

Your type of twisting that is a reason why we don't have a progressive majority who would pass this.

I blame the system, not the parties. The choice is: do you want to be kicked in the groin or punched in the face. I just want to walk down the street, well, it'd be easier to walk if you got punched in the face..

 

[Craig234]

I blame the system, not the parties. The choice is: do you want to be kicked in the groin or punched in the face. I just want to walk down the street, well, it'd be easier to walk if you got punched in the face..

We're talking about blame for not passing universal single-payer healthcare.

I'm saying to blame those who opposed it and support those who supported it.

 

[wantedSpidy]

This country needs universal healthcare. The only way we will be able to pay for it is if the US govt makes an effort towards shrinking the insurance industries. The middle layers are just adding to the costs, and tbh they offer nothing at this point.

Someone needs to start a movement that makes it really obvious which politicians are taking kickbacks and lobbyist money and how that is effecting their votes in the house. It's a shame, that these politicians (both R and D) are treating us like we're a stupid populous.

 

[Zebo]

Not just insurance glass buildings and billion dollar payrolls which need to go.

Our HC providers make 2-5x what all other first worlds make.
Our meds are 10x-100x more than others pay.
Our medical devices same.

It's a rip off top to the bottom which is crippling us.

 

[wantedSpidy]

Before recent issues, I said Mitt Romney was an incredible position changer, not for the right reasons but for political convenience.

Now, on the auto bailouts. When the policy was being pushed by Democrats, Romney wrote a New York Times op-ed, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt".

Not only did he push the wrong policy, he said that the Obama plan would kill the auto industry.

Now, a reporter asked his campaign to comment given the success of the program.

His campaign responded that Romney had the bailout idea first before Obama.

It's just shameful.

Watch the clip here from Rachel Maddow starting at 2:05:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/

imo blatant lies and game playing like that should be enough for us to take a stand. Make an example out of one politician, and see how that effects everyone.

 

[wantedSpidy]

Not just insurance glass buildings and billion dollar payrolls which need to go.

Our HC providers make 2-5x what all other first worlds make.
Our meds are 10x-100x more than others pay.
Our medical devices same.

It's a rip off top to the bottom which is crippling us.

Very good points. I remember last year (when I was travelling in India) I had no health insurance, got really sick a couple of times, stayed in a hospital for 2-3 days straight, and came out with only a $200 bill ... WTF? Not to mention the meds were dirt cheap too.

Also within the health industry itself, the pay discrepancies are fckin unbelievable. For example primary care physicians get paid so little compared to the 'specialists'. Specialists like 'anesthesiologist' make about 3-4x more than primary care doctors, and now we have a MAJOR shortage of primary care physicians cuz all these money thirsty students want to specialize. Its crazy in this country.

 

[Zebo]

Yeah primary care it's not even wort going to medical school barley.

 

[Acanthus]

Yes, they are. And you still don't give credit to the progressives who supported this.



And you still don't put blame on the Republicans where it belongs - you only blame all the Democrats, not just the ones who opposed it.

So, it's still a bad position. Blame opponents and credit supporters (progressives).

Your type of twisting that is a reason why we don't have a progressive majority who would pass this.

I don't think you understand my position well.

I consider almost all republican ideas bad ones, but i also consider their existence as a fact of life in a 2 party system.

While i do applaud the progressives for attempting to get it passed, the watered down garbage they actually passed isn't going to do anything to bring down costs.

They had a real chance to get landmark legislation passed, and they squandered the once in a lifetime opportunity on bickering over little shit and earmarks.