Question for Obama Haters

[glwilson]

Pagemaster... don't include me in those that like politicians. I don't like any of them; no matter the party. I just happen to like the democrat's approach far less.

I have always stated that the problems of this country begin and end with our government. It is hard to deny that opinion.

While you and others blame big companies for lobbying politicians (forcing politicians to do what they want); you seem to not mention all parties are guilty of that.

But you also seem to just come short of blaming the right people for lobbying's ills... I believe you mentioned or insinuated that big-companies, banks, and etc are to blame for this.

Actually, I believe you are wrong.

The government is to blame for this. Our government is the only body that can make it illegal for lobbying to continue its undue influence on them. Businesses cannot make the laws; and are not going to stop lobbying politicians since their competition is and if they want to survive they are forced to do the same. It is a maddening situation; and does need to be addressed immediately to stop the madness and the politicians lining their pockets (which is why we likely will not see them stop or limit lobbying -- unfortunately).

But, make sure you remember Obama received his biggest amount of money from banks and "wall-street". (although I am not sure what most people know wall-street to be -- I think some are confused as to "who" wall-street is).

It is difficult to blame anyone but our government for the housing debacle. It started as a political-plan and grew with the greed of politicians being lobbied; and eventually allowed politicians to actually rob the system to make themselves wealthier. Obama was one of them, records show. Others were as well.

This issue with Barney Frank is that he was beyond his capabilities in handling his job. It became far too complex for him to understand... and he simply missed the ball and didn't heed the warnings of its eventual problems.

The problem was not unforeseen, as Washington would like for everyone to think it was. Hell, anyone with a head on their shoulders could see it was destined to fall hard. For that, I say he is incompetent and should have been booted-out. You and I would have been fired if we were that incompetent -- don't you believe?

So, given some of what you have said about how crooked politicians are and how the system is fraught with inefficiencies and so forth... how can you support a federally controlled healthcare system?

If they cannot control the lobbying, or see the problems in advance, or keep themselves from lining their pockets from the healthcare program... what makes you think a federally controlled system is going to be great?

I simply just don't understand the logic of it.

We both agree things need to be changed with the situation; but having a federally controlled system appears to be something no one needs, or can live with... literally.

Please address my points here if you would. (I'll keep it civil, if you do. Deal?)

[Netnorske]

Here are some memorable quotes from the greatest modern day American
President of our time, Ronald Reagan. They are timeless in their message and as relevant today as when he first spoke the words....


“Remember that every government service, every offer of government - financed security, is paid for in the loss of personal freedom... In the days to come, whenever a voice is raised telling you to let the government do it, analyze very carefully to see whether the suggested service is worth the personal freedom which you must forgo in return for such service. ”


“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”


“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”


“Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the democrats believe every day is April 15.”


“The greatest leader is not necessarily the one who does the greatest things. He is the one that gets the people to do the greatest things.”


“We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much.”


“Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”


“Our natural, inalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation from government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.”


“Don't be afraid to see what you see.”


“A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.”


“We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”


“Socialists ignore the side of man that is the spirit. They can provide you shelter, fill your belly with bacon and beans, treat you when you're ill, all the things guaranteed to a prisoner or a slave. They don't understand that we also dream.”


“Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives”


“The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away.”


“Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets.


“You can’t tax business. Business doesn’t pay taxes. It collects taxes.”


“If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.”


“You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order --or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path.”


“Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty.”


“The size of the federal budget is not an appropriate barometer of social conscience or charitable concern.”



and my personal favorite....

“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem. It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”

[waterman]

Originally Posted by pagemastr

If you are going to make arguments on current events, at least reference current articles please. Both of these links 22- 24 months old.

Same song, second verse pagemastr. Nothing has changed in the 24 months. US still ownes roughly 30% of GM at less value than what was paid for it. GM is racking in profits but has no interest in paying (buying back) for its shares that the U.S. government owns.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/03/...m-pay-us-back/

[canedriver]

To say they don't have an interest in paying back the government is a bit of a stretch. Did you actually read the article or just look at numbers.

It even points out that akerson may choose to buy back the shares at full price. There is a lot of different things GM needs to do in the short term. I wont discuss them as the article points them out.

Hell it even points out that "Regardless of your feelings about the bailout (or the president, and it's worth noting that loans to GM were made under both Presidents Bush and Obama), here in 2012, it's clear that the restructuring was a big success from a business perspective."

Eventually the stock price will rise, especially if expansion into china works out.

[waterman]

Originally Posted by canedriver

To say they don't have an interest in paying back the government is a bit of a stretch. Did you actually read the article or just look at numbers.

It even points out that akerson may choose to buy back the shares at full price. There is a lot of different things GM needs to do in the short term. I wont discuss them as the article points them out.

Hell it even points out that "Regardless of your feelings about the bailout (or the president, and it's worth noting that loans to GM were made under both Presidents Bush and Obama), here in 2012, it's clear that the restructuring was a big success from a business perspective."

Eventually the stock price will rise, especially if expansion into china works out.

Read the article. It claims they "might" pay the difference if the stock price doesn't reach the $53 that it will take to break even on this.

Boosting the share price will help reduce the gap between the stock's value and the amount owed, but it seems unlikely that GM stock will hit the price needed for the Feds to break even -- about $53 -- any time soon. More likely is that the government's eventual sale will still leave it several billion short.
What then? GM could offer to pay the difference in cash, and Akerson well might. A former Naval officer, Akerson is known to see his role at GM as something of a patriotic duty. GM won't be obligated to pay a cent, but paying back the government in full might well appeal to him - and the public.

Might and will is a very big difference in opinion. The more likely outcome will be that the sale will occur and GM will not make up the difference because it will feel more obligated to share holders.

I never was in favor of the bailout of either GM or Chrysler. It was a big payout to the unions. Let them fail. Ford never took any of the money and that is why I will keep buying Ford.

[NRiderUSA]

Prepare to be assimilated into the collective, resistance is futile.... Welcome to the ant farm comrades.

[pagemastr]

Originally Posted by waterman

Same song, second verse pagemastr. Nothing has changed in the 24 months. US still ownes roughly 30% of GM at less value than what was paid for it. GM is racking in profits but has no interest in paying (buying back) for its shares that the U.S. government owns.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/03/...m-pay-us-back/

Just ask the GM workers, suppliers, banks, auto dealers, their mechanics, sales people, secretaries, GM and Dodge new hires, their families, and the thousands of others connected with the supply / support chain in the Auto industry if the bailout was worth it. Ask Honda, Toyota, and other American car builders what would have likely happened to their suppliers without the big three still in business if it was worth it. I never worked for them but have family and friends who have. Though my job at the time wasn't dependent on GM we did supply equipment to them, rim rollers, stackers, slitters, shears and other equipment, and their business contributed to some semblance of job security as was possible back then.

They are better off for the restructuring than before it. It ain't over but I guess it just isn't happenning fast enough. Given that it kept tens of thousands of people working and keeping a roof over their head and food on their table, keeping them off the welfare roles and food stamps and keeping them from bankruptcy as well (though thousands were not so lucky), I support the GM bailout so much more than the banking industry bailout though neither should have been necessary with better management or less greed.

[canedriver]

Your right. Might and will are 2 different things so why be in a hurry for a repayment on those stocks? Just sit on them and wait.

pagemstr your never going to convince these guys the bail out was a good idea. This despite the fact Bush started the bail out.

I for one was for the bail out for the exact reasons you stated. The supply chain for the big 3 is a huge domino effect if they were to fail.

Also while Ford didn't take bail out money the CEO did in fact lobby hard for the bail out. They also asked for a 9 Billion dollar line of credit in case they needed it during the bail out in case the economy got worse and the company needed it. In 2009 they also took a government loan of 5.9 Billion to retool its manufacturing plants for more fuel efficient cars.

So yes on the surface it is true ford didn't get a bail out, BUT they certainly positioned themselves for a line of credit and lobbied hard for the bail out to keep a worsening economy from sending them under.

[NRiderUSA]

The bottom line seems to be that the TARP loans were "repaid" with other TARP funds in a Treasury escrow account. The TARP loans were not repaid from money GM is earning selling cars, as GM and the Administration have claimed in their speeches, press releases and television commercials.

GM Pays Back TARP Loans With...TARP Loans!
http://reason.com/blog/2010/04/23/gm...p-loans-withta

This would seem to be validation that Obama and Congress did the right thing by bailing out the automakers who are now operating on much more stable ground. This would also seem to be another feather in Obama’s cap he can use during the upcoming 2012 election against the Republicans who doubted the wisdom of the move. Finally, big government has done something right everyone can get behind, right? WRONG!

Per usual, this is just smoke and mirrors from the administration, GM and Chrysler. In fact, the only reason these moves were made by the automakers was to get out from underneath the onerous hand of government control that appears to be so beneficial. They can’t get back to business as usual with the Feds monitoring their every move from with-in.

In the case of GM, they simply used an equity line from the TARP program to pay off their bailout. That’s just a shift from one government bailout program to another, however the latter doesn’t contain the strings the specified automaker bailout did. Then there is the separate case of the $50 billion dollar bridge loan based upon stock valuations as well yet to come.

Chrysler didn’t use TARP money, rather they simply swapped out the government loan with private investor equity lines with far preferable terms. They still owe the same amount, only with much less interest in the future.

Chrysler pays off its government bailout loan – it’s all good, right?

http://spellchek.wordpress.com/2011/...ll-good-right/

[ponch]

Originally Posted by NRiderUSA

The bottom line seems to be that the TARP loans were "repaid" with other TARP funds in a Treasury escrow account. The TARP loans were not repaid from money GM is earning selling cars, as GM and the Administration have claimed in their speeches, press releases and television commercials.

GM Pays Back TARP Loans With...TARP Loans!
http://reason.com/blog/2010/04/23/gm...p-loans-withta

This would seem to be validation that Obama and Congress did the right thing by bailing out the automakers who are now operating on much more stable ground. This would also seem to be another feather in Obama’s cap he can use during the upcoming 2012 election against the Republicans who doubted the wisdom of the move. Finally, big government has done something right everyone can get behind, right? WRONG!

Per usual, this is just smoke and mirrors from the administration, GM and Chrysler. In fact, the only reason these moves were made by the automakers was to get out from underneath the onerous hand of government control that appears to be so beneficial. They can’t get back to business as usual with the Feds monitoring their every move from with-in.

In the case of GM, they simply used an equity line from the TARP program to pay off their bailout. That’s just a shift from one government bailout program to another, however the latter doesn’t contain the strings the specified automaker bailout did. Then there is the separate case of the $50 billion dollar bridge loan based upon stock valuations as well yet to come.

Chrysler didn’t use TARP money, rather they simply swapped out the government loan with private investor equity lines with far preferable terms. They still owe the same amount, only with much less interest in the future.

Chrysler pays off its government bailout loan – it’s all good, right?

http://spellchek.wordpress.com/2011/...ll-good-right/

And Ford didn't take anything.

[NRiderUSA]

Yep, although not in the same manor.....

Ford, Toyota, Harley-Davidson, and BMW borrowing from the Federal Reserve. The Bloomberg data also shows that Kenworth / Peterbilt trucks borrowed from the Fed, to the tune of $729M.

Read the whole story here:

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/08/23...rley-davidson/

[NRiderUSA]

And...defend it believe it or dont believe it......... here's more for the inquiring minds..

Taxpayer loss on GM stock threatens Obama's re-election

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...ss-taxpayers/1

GM stock price leads to greater estimate of losses on bailouts

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/01/g...s-on-bailouts/

'Anybody's guess' when U.S. will sell its GM stock

The government decided to swap most of its loans made to GM for shares of stock, rather than require GM to repay all of its government loans.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...l-its-GM-stock

[canedriver]

Originally Posted by Netnorske

Here are some memorable quotes from the greatest modern day American
President of our time, Ronald Reagan. They are timeless in their message and as relevant today as when he first spoke the words....

Lets not forget Reagan.jpg

[Loafer]

WOW, I don't remember him saying that.
I have modeled my life after him.
Make a decision, take a nap, have something to eat, take a nap. So on and so............

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Loafer

WOW, I don't remember him saying that.
I have modeled my life after him.
Make a decision, take a nap, have something to eat, take a nap. So on and so............

Dye your hair?