how is losing 5.3 billion dollars making money?

did you even read the article?

there is no reason this should be allowed..




.

A lot of excuses, thats how Barry rolls

The idea was sound, they spent way too much and they didn't do it right. Looking back on it where hindsight is 20/20 isn't going change things.
Just as usual the government got a lot of money and spent.

I just think it could have been done differently

i did... i dont fully believe the story that was sold to the people..

funny how when the govt started requiring all kinds of strings attached to the tarp money, banks start paying back the money...

the truth is that no one knows what would have happened because it didnt play out that way, but i will choose not to trust the govt when it comes to telling the truth..

you are welcome to your own opinion..





.

pwned....

the idea was not sound.. and looking back on what is 20/20? how is forgiving 4 billion dollars and losing another 1.5 billion = to the govt's pitch of making investments in these companies and promising taxpayers that they would see a profit?




.

They aren't losing 5.3 billion.

Yep, it's an article on debt shifting.

Never said it should have been allowed, but nothing Obama or us could have done to stop it.

So what's your excuse for not actually researching it, and what excuses has he made up? If you researched it, you would find very little excuses and a shit ton of action..... but you haven't looked at it, ever.

Did you call Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton or Bush by first names or nick names, in basically every conversion you had about them? I know you hate the man, but do you really have to disrespect our president and country, as well?

You are jumping from " I believe it is a lie " to " this is now a fact " ...

Your article is an opinion piece , the one I posted an article ...

Now, you could be right , but that would require that you research it ( instead of maybe an urban legend ) and post proof :2 cents:

the govt forgave $4 billion, that is a fact..

http://www.christonium.com/automotiv..._Case_Analysis

"Under the proposed agreement with all stakeholders, Fiat will own up to 35% of the new company. The UAW healthcare trust will own approximately 55% of the new company with the US and Canadian government controlling the remaining 10%. Daimler and Cerberus will forgive $2 billion in debt, the US government its original $4 billion bridge loan and the UAW's $6 billion in cash that was to go to the healthcare trust fund. It should be noted that the UAW will not own Chrysler but the shares will be place in trust.


+ the loss incurred with the sale of shares to fiat...

i did my research before i made the post... :thumbsup




.

No simpleton, the drooling idiot is the one that thinks that he's contributing where in reality he's just another clueless assclown with "Hello, my name is Village Idiot" tag on his stained shirt. And that would be you my little brain child.
I find it absolutely useless to argue with idiots like you. Its a waste of time. :2 cents:

the funny thing about the republican party is the way which they rail against the idea that government can do anything good. But when shit hits the fan, they turn to the government to fix all the problems created by the abysmal way republicans actually run the government.

shit was so bad in 2008, even the republicans were like...OK we need to sell out our own principles here. bailouts for everybody!

Then these revisionists, like the congressman cited in this thread, have the balls to question the bailout their party engineered in the first place.

seems even more !!!!

Meanbwhile, I like my Chrysler ... :)

wow.. thats even worse...

i will make sure i deduct more portion on my next tax return..

i'm not paying for that shit.. :thumbsup




.

I've seen that in comedy movies....but when I was in college I NEVER saw or heard of that.

And college wasn't just writing "papers" and sitting in a big hall while a professor "lectures" (like they do in the movies)

No, college was a lot of very interactive classrooms and in class testing. (and no, I never saw any big "frat parties" with naked bitches and people wearing beer helmets and shit like they do in the movies)

Yep, there is no way to know for sure. I'm basing my opinion that it would have dominoed to a deflation, which would have been a disaster, as follows...

This opinion is based on my understanding of the markets and credit (I was in investment banking for 12 years and my take seems to be consistent with most independent analysts), the fact that countries and healthy companies woke up to find they could not meet their obligations because the credit markets were frozen, and the fact that deflation was a reality as was reflected in 2009 still ending in - 0.04% despite the intervention.

If you have something more than "i dont fully believe the story that was sold to the people", I would be interested to hear it.



.

You were probably too drunk to remember. We had 2 guys get kicked out because they paid some indian guys to take a test for them. Number of people got busted for buying essays off the web. I have been asked by number of people that I tutored in the lab, to do their work.

This is exactly why I try and stay a-political. In the big picture, they are all too similar with only minor differences, and there is no group that represents my views -- mostly because our motives and necessities are in opposition.

The thing that irks me the most, and it is displayed from both sides blatantly, is the people who use politics to inform their understanding of other domains rather than the other way around.

Kudos to you for not coming across as one of them. :thumbsup


.

yeah. you & i made the same exact point to vendzilla...the bailout was necessary & proper. To me, all he did was call me names, then you step in & suddenly it was a good idea. i suppose you made the point in a way he finally understood.

& he continues to confuse the bailout & stimulus in all his comments, regardless that they are completely separate entities. Its intellectually lazy. I really need to stop debating people who cant think beyond one sentence.

i just find it depressing, the intellectual bankruptcy of republicans. The constitution is a document largely based on limiting the scope of government power. But todays republican is an unprincipled twit, railing against government even when they use it to prevent the collapse of the entire economy. Its a fucking joke.

He's not open to alternative explanations on areas where he appears to have sub par command of the data/facts.

IOW, he's not open to learning anything, only arguing regardless of whether he has to contradict himself or hand wave away prior misstatements.

It's a mental earmuffs type of approach akin to most religious adherents.


.

Yet thats all you do, argue with nothing but insults, what a moron!

forgiving the 4 billion dollars is what I would say is in the execution of the idea, not the idea itself, as well as the other things your bring up

Doing something to help was the idea
the way the government did it, both with Bush and Obama was the bad execution of it

i dont like attacking people in their own thread. But he opened the door, defending the indefensible position of an allegedly educated congressman. It truly speaks to the fact a degree has no correlation to intelligence. The college degree might be one of the biggest frauds in america.

thanks for getting my back :thumbsup

lol
If you say so. I think that same thing happened in "Animal House" and more recently in "The Social Network" too.

Did you guys have crazy "frat parties" with hundreds of hot college girls with their tits out too?

Seriously, I was just responding to people making the generalization that university educated folks are dumb. Only here on GFY (or in the mountains of West Virginia) would people equate education with stupidity.

Not saying that educated folks are always the smartest (Thomas Edison is a great example of a guy without formal education), but the vast majority of people who go to college aren't dumb and didn't pay people to do their "tests" for them.

Those of us with degrees already know that.

isn't creationism taught in Alabama schools?

You're assuming I give a shit about what past presidents have done that have to do with the current situtation.

It's about what present president is doing

And the unemployment rate is still at 9.2% so what ever the present one is doing, is wrong, anything other than a plan to act on to correct that, is an excuse.

So tell me, whats his plan?

Simple, getting an education makes you educated, it doesn't make you smart.

The congressman is educated

Take Barry, he has an education

As far as I can tell, the guy never practiced economics, but law. Then there's the potential politics of it.

There seems to be a wide and reasonable consensus that without intervention the systemic risks at play posed a highly likely exasperation (and empirical evidence of a start) of frozen credit and the failure of more than just banks, investment banks and AIG to meet their obligations.

I'm open to an explanation otherwise, maybe marketsmart will offer one.


.

i think, in the end, your attack on contessa was valid. Often during these interviews, people improvise, & fail to respond to a bad idea properly. I remain perplexed by republicans that question the bailout in the face of frozen credit markets. How does a 15 trillion economy run on cash only.

Im also suprised at your critiques of barry given he's the most republican democrat in US history. What other democrat keeps gitmo open, proposes cuts to entitlements, sells out the public option & does nothing on gun control. I happen to think obama is an outstanding president stuck with a completely dysfunctional congress.

Barry graduated from Harvard. Remind us which school you graduated from that made you so "smart" ?

I happen to think barry got into the ivys due to quotas. He basically confessed he was useless in high school. so how does he end up at harvard.

That plus Georgie went to yale. he's possibly the dumbest president in history.

We aren't talking about what past presidents have done, the post asked if called the other presidents by first name or not.

Well, he shouldn't only be focusing on jobs. It would be a bit stupid to only focus on jobs when many of the issues we had help create the job problem, so clearly some things have to be corrected first, like keeping our entire economy going.

Shortly after he took office he actually did start paying attention to the job market, the skyrocketing problem stopped, the rate has come down, and jobs have been created, in and out of his stimulus. Point being, he did not ignore it, at all.

Anyway, Obama's plan, which was put together by 26 leaders in the private sector, included things such as:

• Job education for todays jobs.
• Cutting the b.s. on construction and infastructure projects, also putting back construction workers which is a few million people.
• A huge focus on the tourism business which is extremly large employment and money wise, by making it easier/quicker to get visa's - something that greatly slows this business down right now, even with our weak ass dollar.
• And SBA loans being more available.

Some other aspects that he's already done is investing in new technologies that we can own and produce and sell to the world. Which is why he has such a push for green technology, even if it doesn't happen today or tomorrow, it will happen, and we should be the leaders of it.

While it's fun to think the free market takes care of this, as history has proven, it needs a little bump from the fed now and then to get the free market to wake up. And every time it does, we've seen the biggest economic growths in our Countries history.

the idea itself should have never been executed....

we should have let them fail... :2 cents:




.

I guess you can't read can you

Education makes you educated, not smart

Smart has to do with Intelligence Quotient, it's a mathematical equation thats based on mental age over chronological age, if you are as smart as a 20 year old and are 20 years old, you have the IQ of 100. Your IQ never changes, according to most studies, but I question that sometimes on this forum

Given you're short sided rebuttal and inability to read, I would say your IQ is around 95.

I'll keep my responses short, I have work to do

Government should help when it can, but the way they did was seriously flawed

all of which is not working, green jobs that he put so much money into failed and they have green laying off workers.
And yes, getting the jobs number to improve should after 2 1/2 years should be made a priority

i would like to see the government default. Massive crisis is the only thing that gets the clowns in DC to do anything.

Bush nor Obama actually manage this... they may get an update on it, might give some advice or direction, but they don't really do much other than speak to us about it.

Congress setup the bailout bill, Bush signed it, and some panel or group, made up of judges and politicians, manage the plan that's already laid out.

I think they should have let it fail, they screwed up doing any of the bailouts, even more so when this company has failed before. But being that it did happen, and the goal was to save the company, I really don't see where you get that they badly executed it, when the plan worked. Now they're just trying make it look pretty so the next time they try to nationalize something they'll have a fall back to show how well it worked, in their eyes.

Wow... okay then,

He has put very little into green jobs and most into research, which has sparked competition, and one of the top 25 growing industries in America in the research field alone. As well, green technology overall has more industries in the top 100 growing industries in America, more than any other overall industry. World wide, it's also one of the fastest growing industries, I believe it's in Spain that a major part of the GDP is made up of green train technology.

Before Obama was even president, green jobs 'almost' equaled fossil fuel jobs in America, a few 100k jobs between them, I don't know where it's at today.

Green has been growing for 30-40 years... it didn't start with Obama.

Well, clearly it is a priory for him when he's putting out fast action projects related to the job markets, which don't require congressional approval. I'm not exactly sure what you expect him to do to make the economy add jobs, you don't want him to invest in green, but you expect some magic industry and jobs to appear out of thin air.

Sorry buddy, when corps are making record profits and have record amounts in liquid assets, with the demand they have already, so they don't need more staff, and actually downsize and make even more profits, because that's what technology does... nothing is going to make them hire, unless 'they choose' to do it.

Our only option here is to either let companies in china come in or force us to follow a technology path that will spark worldwide growth again, much like the Internet did. And btw, the Gov fully funded that, from research to infrastructure, even the upgrades in bw, fully funded by the fed - and I don't hear you bitching about this monster that makes us all a ton of money!

Not everything they do is bad.. and embracing a new technology, is truly the only way to save our asses.

Unless you have some other ideas we should all know about?

I realize how government works, but shit goes uphill, the guy on top is ultimately responsible, just like the democrats controling the house and senate during the last two years of Bush , he got all the blame for the shit they did.
Barry is getting the blame for the shit thats going on now

For years, the Obama Administration has claimed that the stimulus will increase employment through ?green jobs?. But what are green jobs? Are they jobs in the solar and wind industry? Yes, but according to a new study, the majority of green jobs in the United States are actually jobs in waste management (garbage), mass transit, and other non-energy areas, and those jobs are not stimulus-related. Even including those mature jobs, the green or ?clean economy? jobs represent just 2 percent of all jobs in the United States, and renewable energy jobs, those touted by the Administration as being ?green?, make up just 5 percent of the ?clean economy? jobs. That compares modestly to the largest sector of the economy?health care?employing 10.2 percent of all jobs, but unlike health care employment, ?clean economy? jobs are growing slower than the U.S. economy.

http://www.instituteforenergyresearc...u-would-think/

i am all for it too...

lets let the cards fall where they may...

i seriously doubt it would be the end of times like the media would like you to believe.. :2 cents:




.

I blame Congress for the screwed up 9/11 hearings, I blame Bush for blocking out his testimony. I blame Bush for starting a false war and nobody else. I blame Bush for super increasing our debt and hiding the war costs. I blame Congress for the bailouts, I blame Bush for signing them. I blame everyone for the patriot act, even Obama for signing it again. I do not blame Obama for the housing or job market situation, at all. I do blame him for the continued spending, directly related to the war costs.

That's how blame works... if you point it in the wrong direction, it shows how little you know about the subject at hand.

Obama should get some blame, but blaming him for not fully correcting a total cluster fuck by this point, is rather ridiculous. When some credit should be given for him stopping the fall and keeping it together after one of the largest economic hits in our History.

and the only differences between us then is I blame Barry for expanding the war, failing to do anything that would actually help the unemployment rate and spending too much time on Obamacare without working with the GOP

Oh and giving the FDA control over cigarette products

I don't blame him for the houseing market, that I blame on the congress and senate and Bush for not seeing the trend and doing something about it

Only part of the money was for green jobs, most of it was for green research. The stimulus did all types of stuff, little bits at a time. You're way hung up on jobs with the stimulus, that was only a part of it, and a big part was shifted to infrastructure projects, which continue to happen today, and is working.

Btw, did you read the report you posted? We have 2.7 million green jobs.... that's a shit ton, that's bigger than fossil fuel energy!!!! Which robs the hell out of us, makes the most profits, and still doesn't hire for shit!

And did you also see:

• The “clean economy” is more export- and manufacturing-focused than the U.S. economy as a whole. About 26 percent of “clean economy” jobs are in manufacturing, compared to 9 percent for the entire economy, and the value of exports, on a per-job basis, is twice that of a typical American job.
• “Green jobs” in this assessment tend to pay better than the average American job with median wages 13 percent higher than the average.

You need to start embracing the future.... if more people would, it would take off more - the demand isn't even here yet and it's already winning. This is the best deal we have right now, unless you have some other magic idea up your sleeve.

Here again, I'm curious... when you say this are you simply talking Chrysler / GM or are you talking literally "any" of the bailouts.

I can agree that letting GM / Chrysler fail would have hurt but not been the death knell. But if you mean the whole thing, I'm curious how you would have envisioned it playing out.

Marketsmart is so far avoiding answering the question, resting instead on the vague and simple statement of "i dont fully believe the story that was sold to the people".

I'm not sure what that means or what can be gleaned from that. You want to add something?


.

It's not really complex... the bailout did not solve, fix or correct anything, it did however create problems, a trillion and a half worth of them - during a time when we were at war, spending more than we already had.

This also created a stronger monopoly for the banks and wall street firms, basically nationalizing them in micro ways, handing over 95% of the mortgage loans in our Country to a single firm that is fully managed by the fed, while allowing banks to collect more land rights. Basically, the bailout handed our Country over to corps.

Failing would have kept the power in the hands of the people... and let the free market pickup the slack, bad banks would have went belly up and good banks would have picked up the slack, which does happen when corps or industries start to fall, all over the world.

What wouldn't have happened is a major rebound in stocks, it would have taken longer, much longer - if they ever rebounded again. And without those money flowing towards those investments, it would have moved into local markets, like they naturally do, which benefit us much more than any market investment ever will.

It would have been tough at first, and most of us would have probably lost everything we invested... but we crawled out of that heap of a mess, we would have crawled out either way. I like to think the future without corps pulling every string, might be a little better than the shit hole we have to deal with today.

Now your not including the whole statement, what obama did, only included a small portion of the GREEN, with everything it's 2% of the work force, not the part Obama had anything to do with, so the 2.7 million you're talking about is way off.

I have nothing against green jobs, I have a problem with Barry giving money to companies that are laying off now after getting huge amounts of money

http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/22/pa...timulus-money/

Hehe, Obamacare has a ton of GOP crap in it, hell IT IS the a Republicans healthcare plan and is rather different than what Obama actually started with.

Well, he did campaign on expanding the afghan war and iraq, with exit dates for them both... while I don't support the wars at all, I can't blame the man for doing what he said he would do.

Only one thing could have been done to really cut the unemployment rate, and it still could be done today, is cut capital gains tax, which historically has worked just about every time. But, the results of that wont be American corps opening new business, our weak dollar would pull in major international corps, mostly from China.... and trust me, you do not want that happening, just to save a few jobs.

This build has to come from within, it has to be based around a technology, a production of something... or we're screwed.

Yeah, most people in the cig business didn't like the new regs. Personally, I think any reg is pointless that doesn't make it criminal for them to put chemicals into our smokes. I support our right to make the choice to smoke, but not if it they purposely put trash into make more addictive and kill you much quicker.

Well at least you don't blame him for everything... maybe we can get a few more items turned around on ya at some point.

The article you just posted tells you how much Obama set aside for green jobs, $30b worth... that doesn't mean he spent $30b, and $80b total was set aside for green technology, as you can see most of that was towards research, again not even all of that has been spent.

2%, is what it has grown into, that's freaking huge....

No, the 2.7 million is not way off, it's posted in the article you posted, and it's from the research directly that the report was taken from: http://www.instituteforenergyresearc...u-would-think/

This is a quote form the article "And, according to the report, the ?clean economy? employs 2.7 million Americans. That number of employees is less than the IT industry in the United States, but more than the biosciences and slightly more than the fossil fuel industry according to the authors."


You should point your hate towards bad business owners doing shady shit with money rather than what was actually planned to happen. It sucks Obama hooked up one of his buddies either way, but it's still that company directly that screwed it all up. And you would have a right to be pissed, if this continued, but as little issues have come up, they've squashed them, again one of the reasons why the stimulus went out so slow.

2% is huge, but he only had something to do with a small part of that 2%