Obama saved GM

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5762
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

He’ll be rewarded in November :chuckle:

GM has to go where their customers are and I think the white racists are a declining bunch.

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/blogs/au ... autos_3174

“Travis Parman, Nissan's corporate communications director who happened to complete his master's degree thesis on the LGBT community, told the Detroit Free Press that Chevy's ad may signal a resurgence of niche marketing, which was hurt during the bleak financial realities of the Great Recession. "As the economy starts to come back," he said, "people become more confident in investing in the niche media again."

[Source: Detroit Free Press; PrideSource; The Car Connection.]

,,,,,,”bleak financial realities of the Great Recession” aka the Bush years

We certainly don’t need another repeat of the Bush years with a tax avoiding Romney

Telcoman


User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

Obama saved GM is so much bullsh*t. If you want to credit him for something, Id find another item. Obama gave a solid to the autoworkers unions. US Law already has methods that would have well allowed GM to save themselves, but it might not have been the best thing for every worker. Instead Obama circumvented law just to keep big labor happy. Also, I do believe GM still owes us a bit no?

But GM didn't build that business anyway right? Someone else did that.

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

He did something right with Chrysler because somehow they are still around ....

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

bigbadberry3 wrote:He did something right with Chrysler because somehow they are still around ....
he didnt do anything right. they simply realized how close to closing they got to closing their doors, and slowly corrected their behavior so not ALL the money is squandered off. some is still kept around to actually pay the bills lol

American cars in general are nothing more than visual sales gimmicks. instead of making the cars better, they slightly change the appearance and call it a day.
Case in point they dent the driver door, and tag it as 2012.

Image

Image

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5762
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

American cars for the most part are all POS but Obama made a tough decision and saved well over 1 nillion American jobs and an improving economy. Allowing them to go bankrupt would have destroyed their pension plans so not only would they have no job but no pension either.
That is what Romney wanted to do so he could have made even more money at middle class expense

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

telcoman wrote:Obama made a tough decision and saved well over 1 nillion American jobs and an improving economy. Allowing them to go bankrupt would have destroyed their pension plans so not only would they have no job but no pension either.
That is what Romney wanted to do so he could have made even more money at middle class expense
obama did NOTHING to improve the economy. he added 4 billion dollars of debt PER DAY. Unemployment stuck above 8 percent. Family incomes falling. Barack Obama can't run on that record. AND WHERE DID THAT 4 BILLION COME FROM?
YOU GUESSED IT - THE MIDDLE CLASS. so its not only Romney who is "after the middle class." As a hard core conservative i can honestly say politicians wouldn't have a dime to spend if it wasn't for the middle class. so they ALL are after our money. more than 50% of the country doesn't pay taxes, the RICH are not enough in total to support even 1 state, let alone the country.

dude you cant possibly believe your own biased liberal drivel, right? you have to be joking....?

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

ImStricken wrote: he didnt do anything right. they simply realized how close to closing they got to closing their doors, and slowly corrected their behavior so not ALL the money is squandered off. some is still kept around to actually pay the bills lol

American cars in general are nothing more than visual sales gimmicks. instead of making the cars better, they slightly change the appearance and call it a day.
As do almost every car company? :rolleyes:

Thanks to the bail out money they had some time to save their doors from permanently closing.

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

bigbadberry3 wrote:
ImStricken wrote: he didnt do anything right. they simply realized how close to closing they got to closing their doors, and slowly corrected their behavior so not ALL the money is squandered off. some is still kept around to actually pay the bills lol

American cars in general are nothing more than visual sales gimmicks. instead of making the cars better, they slightly change the appearance and call it a day.
As do almost every car company? :rolleyes:

Thanks to the bail out money they had some time to save their doors from permanently closing.
we have laws in this country to let a company seek protection and still be able to figure out their internal problems. many companies have done it, and many bounce back into action. Obama simply wanted to secure & thank a giant voting block right from the head start = UNIONS. and unions vote Democrat.

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

Image

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

bigbadberry3 wrote:Image
very mature.
what no politician has ever "thanked" a voting block, or primed a voting block prior to that of an election? has no politician ever had ulterior motives to a certain bill, ban, or financial decision? i guess im speaking "conspiracy theory" talk. i get it.

what do you think this 'obama allowing non-criminal illegals' to stay BS was all about? He thinks that will secure the Hispanic vote from the legal ones.
But what Mr. Obama doesnt understand, is that LEGAL non-US born folks HATE illegals. WE(myself included) all paid and waited a long time to come here legally, now work, and dont want others cutting in line (before our loved ones get the legal chance).

User avatar
R/T Hemi
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:11 am
Car: 2010 Challenger R/T
2012 TSX
Location: Sandy Eggo.

Post

American cars in general are nothing more than visual sales gimmicks. instead of making the cars better, they slightly change the appearance and call it a day.
Case in point they dent the driver door, and tag it as 2012.

I've never noticed you before. You're new to the car scene aren't you? Many manufacturers carry over the same model, with minimum changes, for several years. Nissan and Infiniti are no exception.

I love the comment about American Cars being visual sales gimmicks. It made me think of the Cadillac CTS-V. Uninspiring and unexciting as that car is. :rolleyes: Or perhaps a Corvette ZR-1. Butt ugly visual sales gimmick right? :rolleyes:

I don't deny that Asian cars are typically great cars, but you're painting American cars with a wide brush in a uninspiring shade of "I haven't got a clue" yellow.

Even the Hemi, as dead in the evolutionary process as that engine is, inspires the crap out of you when 400+ lb/ft of torque accelerates you to freeway speed.

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

R/T Hemi wrote:I've never noticed you before. You're new to the car scene aren't you? Many manufacturers carry over the same model, with minimum changes, for several years. Nissan and Infiniti are no exception.

I love the comment about American Cars being visual sales gimmicks. It made me think of the Cadillac CTS-V. Uninspiring and unexciting as that car is. :rolleyes: Or perhaps a Corvette ZR-1. Butt ugly visual sales gimmick right? :rolleyes:

I don't deny that Asian cars are typically great cars, but you're painting American cars with a wide brush in a uninspiring shade of "I haven't got a clue" yellow.

Even the Hemi, as dead in the evolutionary process as that engine is, inspires the crap out of you when 400+ lb/ft of torque accelerates you to freeway speed.
cts-v, zr-1 are not included into my prior statement. those are certainly exceptions. a lot of work and detail went into those cars. that i cant deny. im talking about the gimmicky non-high performance cars.

take dodge's "rumble bee" - "daytona" - "green GTX" - "HemiSport" - "Express" - "NightRunner " - "Limited Edition Indy Pace and SS/T pkg" - "Dodge Ram R/T" etc. thats what i refer to as "sales gimmicks". they dont want improve the quality, so they slap on a couple funky stickers & a "limited edition" label, in hopes that lands a few extra sales for is ordinarily a Dodge Ram 1500 with a fake hood scoop. (cant forget the mossy oak, long horn, etc etc etc editions lol)

Image
Image
Image
Image
standard ram 1500
Image

User avatar
R/T Hemi
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:11 am
Car: 2010 Challenger R/T
2012 TSX
Location: Sandy Eggo.

Post

Your opinion overlooks the fact that chrome wheels and paint stripes over bright colors sell cars/trucks. Some people find white sedans boring. They end up at Stillen buying the same stuff you're criticizing the American auto industry for doing at the factory.

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

R/T Hemi wrote:Your opinion overlooks the fact that chrome wheels and paint stripes over bright colors sell cars/trucks. Some people find white sedans boring. They end up at Stillen buying the same stuff you're criticizing the American auto industry for doing at the factory.
i agree, plain cars are not the most appealing. but what american engineering does, is over-looking quality and instead concentrate on what "sells", versus what "lasts".

many companies only care about selling the product TODAY, because tomorrow when the customers are going to realize what they bought sucks - that same piece of garbage wont be around anymore (or so the sheeple think) - because when they think they are buying a Cobalt, all they really are buying is a redesigned cavalier.
windstar, aerostar.
caravan , now its the GRAND caravan, voyager, town & country.
taurus = 500, and now back to taurus. lol
playing name games, works for a while, and then people catch on. why do you think that american manufacturers did that?
EXAMPLE: dodge caravan. plymouth voyager. chrysler town&country. john doe buys the dodge caravan, and realizes its garbage. after 60,000 miles - sells it, and goes and buys a town&country - OBLIVIOUS THAT ITS THE SAME CRAP, JUST RE-BADGED. does the same mistake again, with vogayer lol
ford explorer. mercury mountaineer. lincoln aviator. all re-badged name games of the same junk truck.
they are hoping that jane smith who had problems with her explorer would be foolish to think that a mountaineer is better quality or "different".


names, logo's, stickers, "limited editions" = these are all schemes in order just to sell. they work, when your a fly by night company. but when your major manufacturer eventually people catch on, and stop being fooled. the idiots stay, but majority move on to better investments. THATS WHY THEY ALL ALMOST FAILED.

its those companies that fail all the time. those that only care about TODAYS SALES FIGURES, and not tomorrow's reputation.
while international markets like toyota, honda, nissan are more worried about making a quality item that lasts, so they have a repeat customer. they are not sticking 5 different funky stickers & offering 5 "limited editions" hoping to fool anyone. their quality speaks for it self.

GOTTA RUN GUYS. TTYL HAVE A SAFE WEEKEND :)

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

The whole point I was making, was that Obama made a move he didn't have to make, there were already sound principles in place that allow companies to save themselves, through legal manuevers. The move Obama made was NOT in the interest of GM as a business, but in the interest of the autoworkers unions. It was a solid for big labor, and nothing more. I dont think the government sits in a position that they have a right to decide who wins and loses in commerce, but bending rules as they go for companies they favor. I dont care how large they are, government should not have that sort of impact on a free market. If GM had died, which believe me, it wouldn't have, it just might have looked a bit different, but say it had failed completely and went away. The market would still recover, others would rise to meet demand, and in meeting demand they would replace most of not all of the jobs lost on the front end. Make no bones about it, in this area I also fault 'ol "W", as Obama really just took a page out of "W"s playbook here, and thats why modern republicans have no right to call themselves conservatives.

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

stebo0728 wrote:The whole point I was making, was that Obama made a move he didn't have to make, there were already sound principles in place that allow companies to save themselves, through legal manuevers. The move Obama made was NOT in the interest of GM as a business, but in the interest of the autoworkers unions. It was a solid for big labor, and nothing more. I dont think the government sits in a position that they have a right to decide who wins and loses in commerce, but bending rules as they go for companies they favor. I dont care how large they are, government should not have that sort of impact on a free market. If GM had died, which believe me, it wouldn't have, it just might have looked a bit different, but say it had failed completely and went away. The market would still recover, others would rise to meet demand, and in meeting demand they would replace most of not all of the jobs lost on the front end. Make no bones about it, in this area I also fault 'ol "W", as Obama really just took a page out of "W"s playbook here, and thats why modern republicans have no right to call themselves conservatives.
Although I am not convinced this was just for the unions, I was opposed to the bailouts. Just as I opposed W's. Any idea which of the bailouts the government took a smaller loss on though before your google it?

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54538
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

Love it. Howie poops on the floor, and suddenly it becomes a bonfire.

The first post in this thread was laughable. "White racists"? Howie, didn't we already establish you as one of those "White racists"?

How's the President's left nut taste? :rolleyes:

And Howie, if "American cars are POS", why the hell do you care if those companies were saved? If they sucked, then The Almighty BO did a disservice by "saving" them. He should have let them fail, since their workers are obviously too stupid to build a proper car.

Which is it? Pick ONE. For once in your limp, scatterbrained existence, pick a side, and support the position with LOGIC.
R/T Hemi wrote:you're painting American cars with a wide brush in a uninspiring shade of "I haven't got a clue" yellow.
Does that include Howie's "all American cars are POS" proclamation?

I just found his statement interesting, considering he doesn't exceed 45mph. :)
bigbadberry3 wrote:He did something right with Chrysler because somehow they are still around ....
We've been over this before. Where, pray tell, would Chrysler HAVE gone, absent the Messiah's Touch? You opposed the bailouts, so how did he "do something right"? You lost me there.

You think they'd have just disappeared? That's what BO wanted you to think, but it's false. They'd have simply restructured, under observation of the courts. Similar number of layoffs, similar number of cutbacks. similar outcome - Except without the $800K-per-job smack to the taxpayers.

BO didn't "save" GM, or Chrysler, or any other company. He doesn't have that kind of authority, and wouldn't know what to do with it if he did. He's never run a lemonade stand, much less a company, and this misguided adoration from the leftiest-of-the-loony-lefties does nothing but tarnish the image of the Democrats who DO have a clue.

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

AZhitman wrote:


We've been over this before. Where, pray tell, would Chrysler HAVE gone, absent the Messiah's Touch? You opposed the bailouts, so how did he "do something right"? You lost me there.

You think they'd have just disappeared? That's what BO wanted you to think, but it's false. They'd have simply restructured, under observation of the courts. Similar number of layoffs, similar number of cutbacks. similar outcome - Except without the $800K-per-job smack to the taxpayers.

BO didn't "save" GM, or Chrysler, or any other company. He doesn't have that kind of authority, and wouldn't know what to do with it if he did. He's never run a lemonade stand, much less a company, and this misguided adoration from the leftiest-of-the-loony-lefties does nothing but tarnish the image of the Democrats who DO have a clue.
I was against it go back and look at my posts from that time. Even more so against the wall street bail outs, go back and check.

Worked out decently. Chrysler did not go under and please explain this 800k per job figure? Gov lost 1 billion so you think we saved 1200 jobs?

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54538
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

Chrysler wouldn't have "gone under".

In addition to the more than $50 billion given to General Motors in the bailout, the Obama administration quietly snuck in a special tax break for GM, which allows the company to write off approximately $45 billion in post-bankruptcy losses against post-bankruptcy profits.

The result? In 2011, GM paid nothing in federal income taxes despite claiming record profits of $7.6 billion, the “highest profits in the 100 year history of that company” according to President Obama.

In fact, that’s not quite right. GM paid a tax rate of negative 1.5% on its record profits – LESS than nothing.

That’s right, while you were paying your income taxes last month, the IRS was sending General Motors a check for $110 million. And GM’s tax break is a gift that will keep on giving every year at tax time.

It’s good for twenty years.

Now, read this part carefully:
GM’s tax break arises from the Obama administration’s distortion of legitimate tax provisions which allow companies to use prior-year losses – of which the Old GM had plenty – and certain other costs to reduce their current-year federal income taxes. In Section 382 of the tax code, Congress limited these "net operating loss" (NOL) carry-forwards to discourage the buying and selling of tax deductions.

As a result, New GM could not have written off the Old GM losses that were discharged in the bankruptcy. However, as Harvard Law School Professor J. Mark Ramseyer and Indiana University’s Dalton Professor of Business Eric Rasmusen explain, the Obama Treasury Department “‘solved’ this problem by issuing a series of ‘Notices’ in which it announced that [Sec. 382] did not apply [here].”

Hey Howie - LOOK! "Fat cats" who don't pay taxes!!!

If GM’s tax gift were counted, the official cost of the bailout would double from $22 billion to $40 billion.

BTW, that's *just* GM. We're not even counting Chrysler (which SHOULD have gone under).

p.s. Don't shoot the messenger. The aforementioned info is courtesy of Curt Levey, the Executive Director of the Committee for Justice in Washington, DC. He can be reached at @Curt_Levey on Twitter.

Why people would think that this inexperienced bozo could POSSIBLY pull off such a heroic salvation of an economy, much less a corporation, is beyond me. THINK about it - if he could, don't you think he'd be jet-setting with Bransons and Gates's, not making $700K getting picked on by people a lot smarter than him?

C'mon.

Only an idiot would ascribe that level of importance, and impressiveness, to this man.

EDIT: Oh, here - Didn't BO go to Harvard? Here's THEIR take on the shenanigans: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/20 ... ryforward/

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5762
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

AZhitman

You need to calm down and take your meds.
Romney needs to release 12 tears of his tax returns
Unions are less than 7% of the US workforce which is why the economy is as weak as it is.
I'm no fan of Henry Ford but even he understood that raising wages for workers would enable them to buy his products.
Obama understands this!
Unfortunately you not.

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

telcoman wrote:AZhitman, You need to calm down and take your meds.
hey telecoman, can you drop anymore of a typical liberal insult? AZHitman sounded just fine, and not yelling, or anything like that. but out of the whole post, the FIRST thing you decided to say was a leftist insult? typical liberal.
you all fail to stick to the topic, facts, agenda's and when to many facts/statistics/over-powering states are made, you resort to grammar/spelling/and volume patrol.

im shocked you didnt make any sara palin jokes, nor dropped the "racist" - "bigot" - "fear monger" lines either!

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

AZhitman wrote:Chrysler wouldn't have "gone under".

In addition to the more than $50 billion given to General Motors in the bailout, the Obama administration quietly snuck in a special tax break for GM, which allows the company to write off approximately $45 billion in post-bankruptcy losses against post-bankruptcy profits.

The result? In 2011, GM paid nothing in federal income taxes despite claiming record profits of $7.6 billion, the “highest profits in the 100 year history of that company” according to President Obama.

In fact, that’s not quite right. GM paid a tax rate of negative 1.5% on its record profits – LESS than nothing.

That’s right, while you were paying your income taxes last month, the IRS was sending General Motors a check for $110 million. And GM’s tax break is a gift that will keep on giving every year at tax time.

It’s good for twenty years.

Now, read this part carefully:
GM’s tax break arises from the Obama administration’s distortion of legitimate tax provisions which allow companies to use prior-year losses – of which the Old GM had plenty – and certain other costs to reduce their current-year federal income taxes. In Section 382 of the tax code, Congress limited these "net operating loss" (NOL) carry-forwards to discourage the buying and selling of tax deductions.

As a result, New GM could not have written off the Old GM losses that were discharged in the bankruptcy. However, as Harvard Law School Professor J. Mark Ramseyer and Indiana University’s Dalton Professor of Business Eric Rasmusen explain, the Obama Treasury Department “‘solved’ this problem by issuing a series of ‘Notices’ in which it announced that [Sec. 382] did not apply [here].”

Hey Howie - LOOK! "Fat cats" who don't pay taxes!!!

If GM’s tax gift were counted, the official cost of the bailout would double from $22 billion to $40 billion.

BTW, that's *just* GM. We're not even counting Chrysler (which SHOULD have gone under).

p.s. Don't shoot the messenger. The aforementioned info is courtesy of Curt Levey, the Executive Director of the Committee for Justice in Washington, DC. He can be reached at @Curt_Levey on Twitter.

Why people would think that this inexperienced bozo could POSSIBLY pull off such a heroic salvation of an economy, much less a corporation, is beyond me. THINK about it - if he could, don't you think he'd be jet-setting with Bransons and Gates's, not making $700K getting picked on by people a lot smarter than him?

C'mon.

Only an idiot would ascribe that level of importance, and impressiveness, to this man.

EDIT: Oh, here - Didn't BO go to Harvard? Here's THEIR take on the shenanigans: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/20 ... ryforward/
You start off saying Chrysler wouldn't have gone under and finish with Chrysler should have gone under. Missing the sarcasm button maybe?

Can you launch this furor at other companies that receive corporate tax breaks please :)

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

telcoman wrote:I'm no fan of Henry Ford but even he understood that raising wages for workers would enable them to buy his products.
Obama understands this!
Liberals View:
Companies should forgo expansion & growth due to taking the profit margin and giving it back to the employees in forms of better wages, bonuses, free medical benefits, and raises. = resulting in the company never actually growing; or growing in such a slow pace that the company begins to lag behind. It stays where its at. All the profit that would be used to grow the company, is returned BACK to its employees. Hence why American manufacturers produced sub-par cars, cars without real engineering, they stole ideas from Asian & European makers. Many American makers simply copied other markets. - WELL PEOPLE CAUGHT ON, AND MOVED ON LEAVING THE BLOATED UNION COMPANIES BEHIND. Liberals think the company is there to better the lives of its employees.

Republican Views:
Companies are not started to teach job skills, give second chances to felons, now to make its employees rich. No one dreams of one day opening a company and to making all their employees rich. People open companies in order to make a good product, AND GROW. You cant grow if your not making profit. You cant expand to different markets, if your profit margin is so small that your have to save up just to get research & development funded. Republicans understand that if we dont pay fair wages, out company wont grow. but we also understand that if we give all out money away WE dont grow, while our employees do. Republicans can find that middle ground to were our employees help keep our company moving, and we are are still growing.
The EVIL FOR PROFIT companies had enough to re-invest into the company, hiring new people, inventing new idea's, making fresh new idea's to make their cars stand out and lean towards the future. EVIL PROFIT making companies grew, and opening their doors to more jobs and during a time of economic instability were solid enough to not need bail-outs.


see why liberals, unions, and democrats loose? LOOK AT EUROPE AND MANY SOUTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES. SOCIALISM CENTRAL. AND THEY ARE LOOSING BIG TIME.

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

ImStricken wrote:
Your view on the Liberals View:
Companies should forgo expansion & growth due to taking the profit margin and giving it back to the employees in forms of better wages, bonuses, free medical benefits, and raises. = resulting in the company never actually growing; or growing in such a slow pace that the company begins to lag behind. It stays where its at. All the profit that would be used to grow the company, is returned BACK to its employees. Hence why American manufacturers produced sub-par cars, cars without real engineering, they stole ideas from Asian & European makers. Many American makers simply copied other markets. - WELL PEOPLE CAUGHT ON, AND MOVED ON LEAVING THE BLOATED UNION COMPANIES BEHIND. Liberals think the company is there to better the lives of its employees.

Your view on the Republican Views:
Companies are not started to teach job skills, give second chances to felons, now to make its employees rich. No one dreams of one day opening a company and to making all their employees rich. People open companies in order to make a good product, AND GROW. You cant grow if your not making profit. You cant expand to different markets, if your profit margin is so small that your have to save up just to get research & development funded. Republicans understand that if we dont pay fair wages, out company wont grow. but we also understand that if we give all out money away WE dont grow, while our employees do. Republicans can find that middle ground to were our employees help keep our company moving, and we are are still growing.
The EVIL FOR PROFIT companies had enough to re-invest into the company, hiring new people, inventing new idea's, making fresh new idea's to make their cars stand out and lean towards the future. EVIL PROFIT making companies grew, and opening their doors to more jobs and during a time of economic instability were solid enough to not need bail-outs.


see why liberals, unions, and democrats loose? LOOK AT EUROPE AND MANY SOUTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES. SOCIALISM CENTRAL. AND THEY ARE LOOSING BIG TIME.
Fixed.

People open companies to make a good product? Doubtful.

Please specify all the socialist countries, why they are socialist, and how this is the root of their poor standing in the world.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5762
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

ImStricken
One word
Compromise
Whether it is labor and management
or
Republicans and Democrats
compromise needs to be on the table
Signing pledges to a non elected person to never vote to raise taxes or elected congressman stating that their only goal is to make our current president a one term president and waste the peoples time voting 33 times to repeal a bill that is going nowhere is why we are in the mess we are in.
You forgot to mention the republican agenda of jobs ie abortion, abortions, abortion

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

bigbadberry3 wrote:Please specify all the socialist countries, why they are socialist, and how this is the root of their poor standing in the world.
unfortunately, right now i dont have a lot of time to give you a history lesson. but Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery. In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery. that people were fleeing Haiti and traveling almost 500 miles by ocean to get to the “evil capitalist empire” when they were only 50 miles from the “workers’ paradise” of Cuba?

Russia - i was born & raised in Russia. my whole family history is Russian. So be careful when you even TRY to save face of socialism.

Venezuela: this country is seeing class warfare and failing business left & right. people fleeing this horrid country. the only happy people are the lazy ones getting things for free.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLVY-MhIPi8[/youtube]

Italy - i also lived in Italy prior to coming to america. (people then traveled through Italy & Austria in order to get to the "great YOU-S of A. lol lil borat joke there). i saw exactly how these folks live they party & relax more than they work. thats why they all have nothing but inherited property.


Cuba - It does little good for ordinary Cubans who have lived for decades under dictator Fidel Castro since 1959 that he now freely admits communism has failed in his island nation. and dont tell me socialism is not communism. they go hand in hand. any government strong enough to give you everything you need/want is strong enough to take anything THEY want away. Castro has now confessed what has been obvious for many decades: that communism is a failure. But not only did Castro think spreading Cuban-style communism was a bad idea, he acknowledged it had failed even in his own country: “The Cuban model doesn’t even work for us anymore,” the retired tyrant declared.

Spain - are you watching current events?

Greece are you watching the news? do you really need an explanation?

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5762
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

We have a democracy here.
Elected officals that do not understand compromise will be voted out of office
ImStricken wrote:
hey telecoman, can you drop anymore of a typical liberal insult? AZHitman sounded just fine,

im shocked you didnt make any sara palin jokes, nor dropped the "racist" - "bigot" - "fear monger" lines either!
He didn't sound fine to me. Could be something in the water out there or the excessive heat from global warming.

As for Palin she was a big joke. Never did Meet the Press or Face the Nation. Two shows Romney has avoided up till now,
He's not ready for prime time nor will he ever be

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post

ImStricken wrote:
bigbadberry3 wrote:Please specify all the socialist countries, why they are socialist, and how this is the root of their poor standing in the world.

Russia - i was born & raised in Russia. my whole family history is Russian. So be careful when you even TRY to save face of socialism.

Venezuela: this country is seeing class warfare and failing business left & right. people fleeing this horrid country. the only happy people are the lazy ones getting things for free.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLVY-MhIPi8[/youtube]

Italy - i also lived in Italy prior to coming to america. (people then traveled through Italy & Austria in order to get to the "great YOU-S of A. lol lil borat joke there). i saw exactly how these folks live they party & relax more than they work. thats why they all have nothing but inherited property.


Cuba - It does little good for ordinary Cubans who have lived for decades under dictator Fidel Castro since 1959 that he now freely admits communism has failed in his island nation. and dont tell me socialism is not communism. they go hand in hand. any government strong enough to give you everything you need/want is strong enough to take anything THEY want away. Castro has now confessed what has been obvious for many decades: that communism is a failure. But not only did Castro think spreading Cuban-style communism was a bad idea, he acknowledged it had failed even in his own country: “The Cuban model doesn’t even work for us anymore,” the retired tyrant declared.

Spain - are you watching current events?

Greece are you watching the news? do you really need an explanation?
Communism does not equate to socialism.

Socialism - A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Those countries you listed have some government programs so that must mean that they are 100% all in on socialism!!!!! Horrible that socialism never works like in Denmark or Sweden. Go back and reevaluate your reasoning.

Also why does union = liberal, democrat? There is no political exclusivity for joining a union, remember voting booths are private. :slap:

User avatar
R/T Hemi
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:11 am
Car: 2010 Challenger R/T
2012 TSX
Location: Sandy Eggo.

Post

Hindsight, foreskin, whatever, Baby Bush was one major mistake for this country and the Republican party. Who is going to deny that?

That Telcoman is a liberal Democrat and obviously a blue state dweller, only adds to his credibility. As a fellow blue state dweller, we take what those red state publicans offer with a grain of salt. :)

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

telcoman wrote:We have a democracy here.
WRONG. DEAD WRONG.

And frankly thats a big part of the problem. Public education has failed to teach countless generations about the dangers of democracy that our founding fathers understood all too well. Allow me to enlighten you, to educate you a bit about our country. We are by no means a democracy, we were never intended to be a democracy, and I pray we never dawn the doors of a democracy. So if we arent a democracy, then what are we?

Constitutional Republic

It may be too late in life for you to comprehend the difference, but alas the difference is quite staggering. We are NOT ruled by the majority, in any way. We are ruled by LAW. The Constitution is the law of our land, not the whim of a majority of uninformed complacent Jersey Shore watching tards. Our nations creators took great steps to squeeze as much democracy out of our workings as possible. We have the electoral college. Do you even understand its purpose, do you understand why its so important? Ask the UN at its founding how it felt about democracy, and giving the USSR a standing vote for each of its provinces. You think each province would have cast its own vote? You think the overwhelming majority residing in California and Texas alone should get to speak for the rest of the nation?

Instead of smearing Obamas poo all over this forum, why don't you pick up a few history books, and I dont mean Houton Mifflin either.


Return to “Politics Etc.”