Crysler bailout

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:09 am

Obama was on TV the other day bragging how Crysler paid back their loan 6 years ahead of time. Obama conveniently left out the over 6 billion Crysler still owes. C'mon Obama, QUIT THE FREAKING LIEING.

link [washingtonexaminer.com]

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:22 am

hoppy;1360921 wrote: Obama was on TV the other day bragging how Crysler paid back their loan 6 years ahead of time. Obama conveniently left out the over 6 billion Crysler still owes. C'mon Obama, QUIT THE FREAKING LIEING.

link [washingtonexaminer.com]So let me see if I understand what you're saying, hoppy. Chrysler is paying back all but 6 billion dollars of the bailout money, is that what you read?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 am

conservative21.net: GM & Chrysler - Bailout Update

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:55 am

More Auto Bailout Bullshit, This Time It’s Chrysler | insignificant thoughts

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:00 am

Congress reaches tentative deal for $15 billion auto industry bailout - JSOnline

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:13 am

flopstock;1360923 wrote: conservative21.net: GM & Chrysler - Bailout Update
flopstock;1360925 wrote: Congress reaches tentative deal for $15 billion auto industry bailout - JSOnlineAnd all this means what exactly? That Obama is a liar on the subject? Or are you and hoppy insinuating that the Obama administration has been orchestrating a redistribution of funds from the american taxpayer to an Italian auto maker?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:08 am

Ahso!;1360926 wrote: And all this means what exactly? That Obama is a liar on the subject? Or are you and hoppy insinuating that the Obama administration has been orchestrating a redistribution of funds from the american taxpayer to an Italian auto maker?

I have no idea what hoppy is insinuating. Personally, I was just looking for other articles out there on the subject that aren't simply rehashing his OP link. It's interesting how many were. They get points for actually attributing their stories back to that article, but the opinions expressed seemed to be based only on that one source.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:53 pm

Hey Hoppy wasn't it GEORGE BUSH that stood in front of a banner that read MISSION ACCOMPLISHED just before the shooting really started in Iraq? :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 3:43 am

What does that have to do with the Crysler bailout? Maybe the aircraft carrier was Crysler built? Nah, it would have sunk by now if it had been.

Post by **spot** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:57 am

So are you in favor of bailing out US car assemblers or not, hoppy?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:01 am

Imagine the innovative advances we could have made if Bush had actually followed his stated principles rather than "I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." Imagine the rebound if Washington had said "Oops. Mea culpa," and simply reinstated the separation of commercial and investment banking without rewarding the mega-banks' irresponsible behavior.

Had the last two administrations/congresses let market forces take its course with the auto industry we might actually be further down the path Obama's trying to force on us - without the trillions of debt. We'll never know.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:04 am

spot;1361033 wrote: So are you in favor of bailing out US car assemblers or not, hoppy?

I'm not in favor of government bailouts, in general. For the record, I didn't like Bush's bank bailouts either.

Post by **spot** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:35 am

What you both need is a chance to vote for someone with both a realistic chance of election to the Presidency and a firm intention never to bail out commercial enterprises with tax revenue. Sadly you'll never find a candidate who's standing as a Republican or Democrat, and says that's his position, and isn't a bare-faced liar.

Bailing out the banks simply meant that new better-behaved banks couldn't fill the vacuum, that the continuing banks learned the wrong lesson (that folly is profitable and underwritten by the taxpayer). The right answer was to make their shares worthless, encouraging the next generation of shareholders to diligently scrutinise their boards' decisions in future and police bad practice.

Bailing out assembly lines with taxation merely rewards inefficiency, goodness knows why anyone thinks it can possibly benefit the country. It does, though, as with banks, benefit shareholders. It's an amazingly anti-capitalist step to take. Why the pair of you just keep bending over shouting do it to me one more time I'm not sure, it seems perverse. Maybe being raped by the rich is fun but I'd rather not find out.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:48 am

spot;1361048 wrote: Why the pair of you just keep bending over shouting do it to me one more time I'm not sure, it seems perverse.
While it pains me to help you wallow in your seething hatred for all things American, I have to ask: Where in the hell do you find anywhere in any of my posts (go back years if you wish but you seem to see it in this thread) that I support any of the bailouts, or in any way shouted "do it to me one more time"??

Show it or apologize!

Your post largely restates mine.

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:59 am

WTF is "Crysler", for Crist's sake?

Post by **spot** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:00 am

Accountable;1361052 wrote: While it pains me to help you wallow in your seething hatred for all things American, I have to ask: Where in the hell do you find anywhere in any of my posts (go back years if you wish but you seem to see it in this thread) that I support any of the bailouts, or in any way shouted "do it to me one more time"??

Show it or apologize!

Your post largely restates mine.

Your submission to financial rape is implicit in your passivity. You can't just sit on the sidelines, if you're not actively out there making it stop then you're an integral part of the problem. You could take a leaf from the Feminist movement.

Post by **spot** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:03 am

Richard Bell;1361053 wrote: WTF is "Crysler", for Crist's sake?

I'm following the terminology of the opening post on the basis that the form takes second place to the message.

Last I looked, Mr Crist was very much a spent force with no Presidential ambition left in him.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:34 am

spot;1361054 wrote: Your submission to financial rape is implicit in your passivity. You can't just sit on the sidelines, if you're not actively out there making it stop then you're an integral part of the problem. You could take a leaf from the Feminist movement.
You (without grounds whatsoever) accuse the only two who voice an opinion of passivity?? So by extension you accuse every American of the same or worse, right?

Post by **spot** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:48 am

Accountable;1361056 wrote: You (without grounds whatsoever) accuse the only two who voice an opinion of passivity?? So by extension you accuse every American of the same or worse, right?

Americans in general, and you two in particular, have the example of the Founding Fathers to follow. Withhold that proportion of your taxation which represents the abuse of which you complain. Or are you so terrified of the powers your country's devolved to the IRS that you shrink from the consequences? If you have no representation capable of changing the abuse then your position is identical with that which saw the States become self-governing in the first place.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 10:28 am

spot;1361058 wrote: americans in general, and you two in particular, have the example of the founding fathers to follow. Withhold that proportion of your taxation which represents the abuse of which you complain. Or are you so terrified of the powers your country's devolved to the irs that you shrink from the consequences? If you have no representation capable of changing the abuse then your position is identical with that which saw the states become self-governing in the first place.
ANSWER THE PHUCKING QUESTION, you smarmy, cowardly, xenophobic son of a bitch.

Post by **spot** » Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:02 pm

Accountable;1361063 wrote: ANSWER THE PHUCKING QUESTION, you smarmy, cowardly, xenophobic son of a bitch.

Well no, obviously there are many Americans with sufficient bravery to stand up and speak out against your government in spite of the personal cost. Tom Feeley springs to mind, Daniel Ellsberg, Gore Vidal, Noam Chomsky, every Wikileaks activist who lives within a US jurisdiction (which, given the asymmetric extradition laws the US has imposed abroad, is an extensive portion of the world). Is it a revolution? I do hope so, if it is then US foreign policy might finally be reconsidered. What happens outside the US borders is a matter of reasonable concern to me.

As for xenophobia, a mere 4% of the planet's population is a US citizen; you might want to look for a more appropriate word. What I write reflects my abhorrence of the world's unilateralist wannabee-overlords and their Kevlar-wrapped morally-lobotomised all-volunteer enforcers. That's not xenophobia, that's simply good taste.

Out of interest, in what sense are you using the word cowardly? That was an unjustifiable word Paul used to throw at me, I thought I'd adequately dealt with it years ago.

BeccaRachel · Post by **BeccaRachel** » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:40 am

Accountable;1361063 wrote: ANSWER THE PHUCKING QUESTION, you smarmy, cowardly, xenophobic son of a bitch.

Finally, some life among the tumbleweed. :yh_rotfl

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:59 pm

hoppy wrote: Hi Odie. Thanks. Don't know if I'll post much but know one thing. I'll avoid politics. Might just add journal stories. lol. hoppy;1360921 wrote: Obama was on TV the other day bragging how Crysler paid back their loan 6 years ahead of time. Obama conveniently left out the over 6 billion Crysler still owes. C'mon Obama, QUIT THE FREAKING LIEING.

link [washingtonexaminer.com]Who lies?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:14 pm

BeccaRachel;1361113 wrote: Finally, some life among the tumbleweed. :yh_rotflOh, don't get so excited, Accountable tends to talk dirty to Spot whenever he imagines him wearing a bikini.

BeccaRachel · Post by **BeccaRachel** » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:12 pm

Ahso!;1361141 wrote: Oh, don't get so excited, Accountable tends to talk dirty to Spot whenever he imagines him wearing a bikini.

No worries, ma'am. You're so far up the brown spot chute you can't see the light of day.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:20 pm

BeccaRachel;1361146 wrote: No worries, ma'am. You're so far up the brown spot chute you can't see the light of day.Well, thank you. Spot is a friend who wears the title with dignity. Jealousy will get you nowhere, you know.

PS-You must admit I'm cute though.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:14 am

Richard Bell;1361053 wrote: WTF is "Crysler", for Crist's sake?

I think he means chrysler - the american british leyland except not nationalised.

We might be getting russian fords next

Ford and Sollers will boost auto market — RT

Bring back Lada I say.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jun 09, 2011 9:21 am

Or, indeed, the cardboard fuel-efficient recyclable Trabant. I wonder whether any Trabants ever made it to the US?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jun 09, 2011 10:09 am

spot;1361213 wrote: Or, indeed, the cardboard fuel-efficient recyclable Trabant. I wonder whether any Trabants ever made it to the US?I believe the Trabant was here for a short time in the 70s perhaps.