Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-11-2012, 03:01 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by kswier Quote
The question I have is whether other automotive companies are also trying to fluff their numbers. Is GM doing this because their business model is not profitable, or is it because we are in a slight economic downturn (GM was making profit before the downturn). If it is the latter, it really has no bearing on the success of the bailout, and GM will start making larger profits when the economy gets a bit better.
They were profitable because of the GMAC. In the USA GM was losing money on every car made, but making it up on the financing side. It is a good question regarding how other companies report sales and do they do it like GM.

How much of the GM profits come in the form of government subsidies and tax credits? We know the money GM used to pay back part of the bailout was public money, so it was really taxpayer money that was used to repay the taxpayers. A shell game.

QuoteOriginally posted by kswier Quote
This is clearly a biased article. You can tell by the way it is written. Thus, I do not trust everything it is saying. They do not explain why government purchases of GM vehicles rose 79% in June. Why only look at one month? Did the government purchase 79% more cars in June? Did GM give the government a good deal to help boost their sales? Sure, it could be corruption, but I need an unbiased source. Why isn't the government selling GM stock? Is it because the original agreement was that the government would hold the stock for a certain period of time? is it because a large sell off would be detrimental to GM at this point in time so they are selling it gradually? The real question is whether the Government has a plan to get rid of GM stock (I do not know if they do or do not). This article does a good job explaining what is happening, but jumps to political motives when trying to explain why it is happening.
Zero Hedge is one of the top 20 investment blogs on the net. The 20 Most Influential Blogs In Financial Media | In The Mix | Minyanville.com. ........ or Full List - The 25 Best Financial Blogs - TIME They pretty much make everyone's list when it comes to traffic and content. Their main focus is investing. Is GM a good investment? Yes, they are critical. They think the government is distorting the numbers and misleading investors on the financial strength of GM. If you read the blog during the Bush era you would have thought they were biased against Bush.

GM is stockpiling inventories at dealerships. What is going to happen when the dealerships can't absorb anymore? Are we going to turn around and bailout the dealerships again? Do we keep subsidizing a loosing business model?

Uncle Sam gave GM $49.5 billion last summer in aid to finance its bankruptcy. (If it hadn't, the company, which couldn't raise this kind of money from private lenders, would have been forced into liquidation, its assets sold for scrap.) So when Whitacre publishes a column with the headline, "The GM Bailout: Paid Back in Full," most ordinary mortals unfamiliar with bailout minutia would assume that he is alluding to the entire $49.5 billion. That, however, is far from the case.

Because a loan of such a huge amount would have been politically controversial, the Obama administration handed GM only $6.7 billion as a pure loan. (It asked for only a 7 percent interest rate—a very sweet deal considering that GM bonds at that time were trading below junk level.) The vast bulk of the bailout money was transferred to GM through the purchase of 60.8 percent equity stake in the company—arguably an even worse deal for taxpayers than the loan, given that the equity position requires them to bear the risk of the investment without any guaranteed return. (The Canadian government likewise gave GM $1.4 billion as a pure loan, and another $8.1 billion for an 11.7 percent equity stake. The U.S. and Canadian government together own 72.5 percent of the company.)

But when Whitacre says GM has paid back the bailout money in full, he means not the entire $49.5 billion—the loan and the equity. In fact, he avoids all mention of that figure in his column. He means only the $6.7 billion loan amount.

But wait! Even that's not the full story given that GM, which has not yet broken even, much less turned a profit, can't pay even this puny amount from its own earnings.

So how is it paying it?

As it turns out, the Obama administration put $13.4 billion of the aid money as "working capital" in an escrow account when the company was in bankruptcy. The company is using this escrow money—government money—to pay back the government loan.


07-11-2012, 03:12 PM   #17
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
]
did you mention "cooking the books" snicker.. just for you....................
Blame Barclays, not capitalism, for LIBOR scandal - Jonah Goldberg
QuoteQuote:
Here are the basics: Barclays is the second-largest bank in Britain and one of the largest in the world. It has admitted to U.S. and British regulators that it manipulated the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, which basically measures how much it costs banks to borrow money from one another for various periods of time. If you ever read the fine print on a home mortgage, credit card agreement or car loan, you've seen reference to Libor.

Indeed, a conservative estimate is that some $350 trillion in bonds and loans are pegged to Libor worldwide. That's more than 20 times the GDP of the United States.

In email exchanges between Barclays' New York traders and the bank officials who are supposed to submit honest data to the entity that calculates Libor, it's clear that the bank routinely rigged the data to maximize profits. It was so routine that nobody even bothered to hide their corruption in euphemism. One official responded to a request from a trader to fix the number, "Always happy to help, leave it with me, Sir." Another replied, "Done ... for you big boy ..."

Barclays agreed to pay $450 million in fines to avoid prosecution. Several officials at the bank, including American-born CEO Robert Diamond, have resigned.

The left's response, predictably, is to pound the table about corruption, the need for more regulation and the inherent sinfulness of capitalism.

They're entirely right about the first part, possibly right about the second and deeply confused about the third.

The corruption really is outrageous, and I wish my fellow conservatives could muster a bit more public disgust. There's really no point in simultaneously talking about "leaving things to the market" and celebrating the rule of law if you're going to respond to this kind of game-rigging with a yawn.

Moreover, as a political matter, staying on the sidelines almost guarantees that the problem will be made worse. The relentless push for more regulation and more oversight boards, commissions and agencies hasn't done anything to curb such scandals. But making the relationship between government and business more interwoven and complex has entrenched the "too big to fail" mind-set. What's required aren't new regulations so much as relentless enforcement of the existing laws, without fear or favor.

As the Manhattan Institute's Nicole Gelinas notes, despite several huge big-bank scandals -- municipal finance manipulation at JPMorgan Chase, money laundering at ING, etc. -- we haven't seen any big banks go out of business for criminal transgressions. They've paid some big fines, but those costs are passed on to consumers, taxpayers and shareholders. "The answers to our problems are straightforward," Gelinas writes. "When a bank egregiously breaks the law, it should run the risk of a criminal conviction's throwing it out of business."

If you start caring I'll start caring.. agreed???
07-11-2012, 04:05 PM   #18
Veteran Member
Tom S.'s Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Michigan
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,317
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
They were profitable because of the GMAC. In the USA GM was losing money on every car made, but making it up on the financing side. It is a good question regarding how other companies report sales and do they do it like GM.

Not entirely true, unless you are choosing to ignore the truck and SUV market which was making GM a lot of money until oil prices crushed those sales.

How much of the GM profits come in the form of government subsidies and tax credits? We know the money GM used to pay back part of the bailout was public money, so it was really taxpayer money that was used to repay the taxpayers. A shell game.



Zero Hedge is one of the top 20 investment blogs on the net. The 20 Most Influential Blogs In Financial Media | In The Mix | Minyanville.com. ........ or Full List - The 25 Best Financial Blogs - TIME They pretty much make everyone's list when it comes to traffic and content. Their main focus is investing. Is GM a good investment? Yes, they are critical. They think the government is distorting the numbers and misleading investors on the financial strength of GM. If you read the blog during the Bush era you would have thought they were biased against Bush.

GM is stockpiling inventories at dealerships. What is going to happen when the dealerships can't absorb anymore? Are we going to turn around and bailout the dealerships again? Do we keep subsidizing a loosing business model?

What will (and is) happen is you will start seeing incentives, just there have been for the past 20 years whenever car sales decline. No, we are not going to bailout the dealers again (not that we ever did in the first place).

Uncle Sam gave GM $49.5 billion last summer in aid to finance its bankruptcy. (If it hadn't, the company, which couldn't raise this kind of money from private lenders, would have been forced into liquidation, its assets sold for scrap.) So when Whitacre publishes a column with the headline, "The GM Bailout: Paid Back in Full," most ordinary mortals unfamiliar with bailout minutia would assume that he is alluding to the entire $49.5 billion. That, however, is far from the case.

Because a loan of such a huge amount would have been politically controversial, the Obama administration handed GM only $6.7 billion as a pure loan. (It asked for only a 7 percent interest rate—a very sweet deal considering that GM bonds at that time were trading below junk level.) The vast bulk of the bailout money was transferred to GM through the purchase of 60.8 percent equity stake in the company—arguably an even worse deal for taxpayers than the loan, given that the equity position requires them to bear the risk of the investment without any guaranteed return. (The Canadian government likewise gave GM $1.4 billion as a pure loan, and another $8.1 billion for an 11.7 percent equity stake. The U.S. and Canadian government together own 72.5 percent of the company.)

But when Whitacre says GM has paid back the bailout money in full, he means not the entire $49.5 billion—the loan and the equity. In fact, he avoids all mention of that figure in his column. He means only the $6.7 billion loan amount.

But wait! Even that's not the full story given that GM, which has not yet broken even, much less turned a profit, can't pay even this puny amount from its own earnings.

What are you basing this line of crap on? GM has posted numerous quarterly proffits since the baiout. Next you're going to say that the World Trade Center was a government plot and NASA never landed on the moon.

So how is it paying it?

As it turns out, the Obama administration put $13.4 billion of the aid money as "working capital" in an escrow account when the company was in bankruptcy. The company is using this escrow money—government money—to pay back the government loan.
I think you need loosen your tin foil hat.
07-12-2012, 05:17 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 426
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Zero Hedge is one of the top 20 investment blogs on the net. The 20 Most Influential Blogs In Financial Media | In The Mix | Minyanville.com. ........ or Full List - The 25 Best Financial Blogs - TIME They pretty much make everyone's list when it comes to traffic and content. Their main focus is investing. Is GM a good investment? Yes, they are critical. They think the government is distorting the numbers and misleading investors on the financial strength of GM. If you read the blog during the Bush era you would have thought they were biased against Bush.
My problem is not that the article is critical of the Obama administration. Being critical and having a healthy scepticism is good. My problem is some of the language that was used, that results in me having a healthy scepticism of some of the claims that are made.


Sounds like a politician to me (in defence of the article, I think this was in a quote)
QuoteQuote:
Expect Government Motors to...

Why try and associate unions with "non-existent" manufacturing base (I am pretty sure the US actually does have a pretty large manufacturing base...just not as large as it used to)
QuoteQuote:
Because when half of your sales go to the one country which America's non-existent (and unionized) manufacturing base loves to hate, the last thing you want is to bite the hand the pays the bills.

Really...cronies of the Administration (again, this appears to be in a quote...though I do not see the source)
QuoteQuote:
The DOE seems to be one of the main conduits to funnel taxpayer funds to cronies of the Administration.

The article did not show (or did not show well) that the government was trying to prop up GM to get extra votes. Most of the good data in the article showed that GM is sending cars to its dealer network, which is not selling enough (and thus propping up their sales). It is a bit of a leap to say that it is government corruption. As I said before, it might be government corruption, but the article did not show this (so why mention it).
QuoteQuote:
Yet this is precisely what is going on as the politics of this country become so misguided that in the pursuit of a few extra votes, the administration is willing to sacrifice what little clout and momentum the recently bankrupted automaker may have generated.

In addition tot these quotes, adjectives throughout the article hint at republican talking points. The blog may be a good and they may have been critical of Bush, but I have a hard time trusting many of the claims made in this specific article without additional information (stated in a more neutral way).


If this was an article telling me that investing GM was a bad idea, I would agree. Their stock price is likely inflated, and the data in the article shows they are boosting their numbers artificially by stacking their dealers. If the main point of the article is that investing GM was a bad idea, it would not need the political language. If the point of the article is that there is government corruption propping up GM, they need better data, and language that is more neutral. Sorry for the rant, but this is a pet peeve of mine. If the data in the article is good enough to stand on its own, there is no need for politically motivated language. When I see politically motivated language (seemingly biased to either democrats or republicans), it makes me wonder if the data is good enough to stand on its own, and I do not take the article seriously. Is there government corruption surrounding GM...probably. But this article does a poor job of showing it for the reasons stated above and in my first post.

07-25-2012, 07:11 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
http://sdnyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/12cv5124-Scott-v.-GM-et-al..pdf

Scott Vs. GM. Lawsuit filed against GM by shareholders (post bankruptcy) alleging that GM is channel stuffing to inflate sales numbers and deceiving investors.

Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Files Class Action Lawsuit Against General Motors Company - Yahoo! Finance

President Obama’s campaign claim that he rejuvenated the ailing General Motors depends on practices called “overbuilding” and “channel stuffing,” critics say.

Car dealerships’ lots are filling up with unsold trucks and SUVs because GM built more vehicles than it can sell in order to inflate sales claims and artificially boost its profits. The Detroit automotive giant records sales for vehicles in dealers’ inventories before car buyers make their purchases, said Mark Modica, a National Legal and Policy Center associate fellow. GM’s overbuilding “probably helped [GM] in the second quarter, but will hurt in the third quarter,” a Standard and Poor’s Capital IQ analyst added. Third quarter results won’t be made public until after the November election, allowing Obama to tout the company’s short-term success while masking troubles that are not yet apparent to voters.

GM spokesman Jim Cain said the company is “overbuilding” because it plans to shutter four assembly plants for a combined 29 non-consecutive weeks in order to ready them for production of its newest models.


Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against GM For Channel Stuffing | ZeroHedge
07-26-2012, 06:55 AM   #21
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
http://sdnyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/12cv5124-Scott-v.-GM-et-al..pdf

Scott Vs. GM. Lawsuit filed against GM by shareholders (post bankruptcy) alleging that GM is channel stuffing to inflate sales numbers and deceiving investors.

Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Files Class Action Lawsuit Against General Motors Company - Yahoo! Finance

President Obama’s campaign claim that he rejuvenated the ailing General Motors depends on practices called “overbuilding” and “channel stuffing,” critics say.

Car dealerships’ lots are filling up with unsold trucks and SUVs because GM built more vehicles than it can sell in order to inflate sales claims and artificially boost its profits. The Detroit automotive giant records sales for vehicles in dealers’ inventories before car buyers make their purchases, said Mark Modica, a National Legal and Policy Center associate fellow. GM’s overbuilding “probably helped [GM] in the second quarter, but will hurt in the third quarter,” a Standard and Poor’s Capital IQ analyst added. Third quarter results won’t be made public until after the November election, allowing Obama to tout the company’s short-term success while masking troubles that are not yet apparent to voters.

GM spokesman Jim Cain said the company is “overbuilding” because it plans to shutter four assembly plants for a combined 29 non-consecutive weeks in order to ready them for production of its newest models.


Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against GM For Channel Stuffing | ZeroHedge
Should we talk about banks "channel stuffing" mortgages.. ???
Seems nothing you mention is really out of the norm for "business" at one level or another.....
07-26-2012, 09:21 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
Should we talk about banks "channel stuffing" mortgages.. ???
Seems nothing you mention is really out of the norm for "business" at one level or another.....
It probably would not be an issue, except GM promised NOT to do it under the terms of the restructuring. There is also a difference in what a private company can do, what a public company can do, and what a company that is still emerging from bankruptcy can do. No other car manufacturer has come close to pushing the excess inventory that GM has pushed out to dealers.

The biggest reason it is an issue right now is because Obama is using GM's inflated numbers as a political platform. GM is Obama's success story. But the question is.... is it really a success story or is it an accounting shell game. I'm not a big believer in coincidences in election years. Crony-capitalism at its best.

07-26-2012, 09:33 AM   #23
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
It probably would not be an issue, except GM promised NOT to do it under the terms of the restructuring. There is also a difference in what a private company can do, what a public company can do, and what a company that is still emerging from bankruptcy can do. No other car manufacturer has come close to pushing the excess inventory that GM has pushed out to dealers.

The biggest reason it is an issue right now is because Obama is using GM's inflated numbers as a political platform. GM is Obama's success story. But the question is.... is it really a success story or is it an accounting shell game. I'm not a big believer in coincidences in election years. Crony-capitalism at its best.
The whole banking industry is a "shell game".. your obsessing... People have jobs, local biz and suppliers have income ,retirees have cash flow ect.. By any "normal" metric it is a success story...........

At the least it bought breathing room to retrench/recapitalize/retool instead of the wham bam thank you mam destruction you like to "encourage".............

will it last?.. hey all things are "cyclical" eh..
07-26-2012, 12:01 PM   #24
Veteran Member
Tom S.'s Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Michigan
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,317
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
It probably would not be an issue, except GM promised NOT to do it under the terms of the restructuring. There is also a difference in what a private company can do, what a public company can do, and what a company that is still emerging from bankruptcy can do. No other car manufacturer has come close to pushing the excess inventory that GM has pushed out to dealers.

The biggest reason it is an issue right now is because Obama is using GM's inflated numbers as a political platform. GM is Obama's success story. But the question is.... is it really a success story or is it an accounting shell game. I'm not a big believer in coincidences in election years. Crony-capitalism at its best.
Out of curiosity, are you a former Saturn employee?
07-27-2012, 06:57 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
The whole banking industry is a "shell game".. your obsessing... People have jobs, local biz and suppliers have income ,retirees have cash flow ect.. By any "normal" metric it is a success story...........

At the least it bought breathing room to retrench/recapitalize/retool instead of the wham bam thank you mam destruction you like to "encourage".............

will it last?.. hey all things are "cyclical" eh..
And I think I have said several times that the banking industry needs to be radically changed.

It is not a success story if the it is accomplished through fraud and crony-capitalism. What destruction did I "encourage"? I said it should have been allowed to fail (bankruptcy with out government support). American Airlines has file bankruptcy twice in its history and is still here. If GM had been allowed to fail it could have emerged a much stronger company. Maybe GM and Chrysler should have merged into a single, stronger company.

And you are still missing the point. This is a company that agreed NOT to engage in this type of deceptive accounting as part of its restructuring.

Why defend a company that is engaging in this type of activity? If this was a bank engaged in similar activities would you defend them too? Are you turning into a greedy capitalist who supports the mega-corporations? Or it simply because of politics? This is a platform for Obama so you defend it. If it was Romney that was claiming GM was a success story would you be still defending it?

Last edited by Winder; 07-27-2012 at 07:05 AM.
07-27-2012, 07:00 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Tom S. Quote
Out of curiosity, are you a former Saturn employee?
No. I know about a dozen former/current Saturn/GM employees, and a couple former Saganaw/Delphi (formerly GM) employees down in Decatur, Alabama. I go down to bike week in Key West with a couple of them.
07-27-2012, 07:17 AM   #27
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
And I think I have said several times that the banking industry needs to be radically changed.

It is not a success story if the it is accomplished through fraud and crony-capitalism. What destruction did I "encourage"? I said it should have been allowed to fail (bankruptcy with out government support). American Airlines has file bankruptcy twice in its history and is still here. If GM had been allowed to fail it could have emerged a much stronger company. Maybe GM and Chrysler should have merged into a single, stronger company.

And you are still missing the point. This is a company that agreed NOT to engage in this type of deceptive accounting as part of its restructuring.
GM's pure bankruptcy has been painted as a very, very, large wound to people and the economy.. The auto industry since the 50's has been "too big to fail" Seems we like it that way in our businesses..

GM/Ford/Toyota ect .all had common suppliers.. Though Ford et. al. attempted to reshuffle things in the event of GM's total collapse we cannot know if it would have been successful..

As to current shenanigans.. so sue them...it's the American way!

From Iran/Contra down the line.. honesty is NOT part of our gov.............anymore.

The Futility of the Government Airline Bailout | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

And care to argue w/ the CEO of Ford??
QuoteQuote:
Although Ford did not receive government assistance during the auto bailouts of 2008 and 2009, the bailouts were "the right thing for the industry," Alan Mulally, Ford's chief executive officer, told Yahoo.

"If GM and Chrysler would've gone into free-fall, they could've taken the entire supply base into free-fall also, and taken the U.S. from a recession into a depression," Mulally said. "That's why we testified on behalf of our competitors even though we clearly did not need precious taxpayer money."

Mulally noted that it was a big decision to testify, but that the U.S. was in a very serious economic situation at the time.

The reason he said he testified was because the auto industry is such an integral part of the U.S. economy—making up 10 to 12 percent of the GDP—and for every U.S. auto job there are another nine to 10 jobs.

"Today looking back I think we would absolutely make the same decision," Mulally said.
Read more: Ford CEO: GM, Chrysler Bailouts Were 'Right Thing' to Do
07-27-2012, 11:48 PM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
GM's pure bankruptcy has been painted as a very, very, large wound to people and the economy.. The auto industry since the 50's has been "too big to fail" Seems we like it that way in our businesses..

GM/Ford/Toyota ect .all had common suppliers.. Though Ford et. al. attempted to reshuffle things in the event of GM's total collapse we cannot know if it would have been successful..
The industry would have survived. The need for cars was not going to disappear.

QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
As to current shenanigans.. so sue them...it's the American way!

From Iran/Contra down the line.. honesty is NOT part of our gov.............anymore.
So we should just accept fraud in the banks and auto industry as the "American way" and move on? Now who has a defeatist attitude? If honesty is not part of our government, then why do you want them controlling the economy? That doesn't make much sense. For someone who champions the fascist view of economics I would think you would trust government implicitly.
07-28-2012, 04:47 AM   #29
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
The industry would have survived. The need for cars was not going to disappear.



So we should just accept fraud in the banks and auto industry as the "American way" and move on? Now who has a defeatist attitude? If honesty is not part of our government, then why do you want them controlling the economy? That doesn't make much sense. For someone who champions the fascist view of economics I would think you would trust government implicitly.
Hmmm.. AFAIKT a "fascist" view is not on my horizon..

do I think the gov. has the unenviable position of "herding cats" as to it's role in Capitalism.. Sure.. do I think a few industries i.e energy,health coverage is better in the hands of an "honest" fed than an "honest" business yes.. Do I believe that all the bruhahah re: US debt is a modern urban legend.. yes..

Do I believe the Fed and capitalism need a more interactive structure, well for efficiency yes.. Some of the inefficiency is because of doing things half arsed for political or economic reasons..

Fascist I don't think so. socialist? not much more than we already are..just a bit tighter..

I trust neither the gov. nor industry to always do the "right thing" and historically I am correct more than incorrect on both counts..Neither did the "founding fathers".........
Which really is the beauty of the system.."trust but verify"....

Capitalism is by definition amoral.. Denying that is dangerous. Gov. by def is intrusive.. denying that or eliminating that is also dangerous. 2 edged sword..

What I believe would be a sure fire economy booster.. Cut all personal taxes (FICA,SOC SEC,IRS, Medicare for all, Gov. "pay raise" i.e 25 cent/hr fed pay suppliment. Mortgage relief via "individual to banks"


QE is stupid, T bonds are not needed to fund anything....

Not sure I fit in any "category"...

ect.



GM "shenanigans" are just another herd of cats.........that we just so happen to notice.. There are surely others..........
07-28-2012, 10:21 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
Hmmm.. AFAIKT a "fascist" view is not on my horizon..

do I think the gov. has the unenviable position of "herding cats" as to it's role in Capitalism.. Sure.. do I think a few industries i.e energy,health coverage is better in the hands of an "honest" fed than an "honest" business yes.. Do I believe that all the bruhahah re: US debt is a modern urban legend.. yes..

Do I believe the Fed and capitalism need a more interactive structure, well for efficiency yes.. Some of the inefficiency is because of doing things half arsed for political or economic reasons..

Fascist I don't think so. socialist? not much more than we already are..just a bit tighter..
The tighter the control gets the less freedoms people have, and the closer you get to fascism.

QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
I trust neither the gov. nor industry to always do the "right thing" and historically I am correct more than incorrect on both counts..Neither did the "founding fathers".........
Which really is the beauty of the system.."trust but verify"....

Capitalism is by definition amoral.. Denying that is dangerous. Gov. by def is intrusive.. denying that or eliminating that is also dangerous. 2 edged sword..
What makes free market capitalism "amoral"? Crony-capitalism is amoral, but crony-capitalism is fascism or Neo-Corporatism as it is currently called since fascism is such a dirty word. It is the same thing. There is nothing amoral about freedom.


QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
GM "shenanigans" are just another herd of cats.........that we just so happen to notice.. There are surely others..........
So when GM does it you call it "shenanigans", but when mortgage companies do it you call it fraud? Why the double standard?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bankruptcy, doe, gm, million, process, purchases, taxpayer, taxpayers
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sensor spot success story. charliezap Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 3 09-19-2011 09:47 AM
success... but... icywarm Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 12 10-03-2010 09:30 AM
Kx dust removal success story future_retro Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 07-24-2010 07:15 AM
So, was K-7 a success?? Nubi Pentax DSLR Discussion 99 07-20-2010 03:09 PM
The story of #2, Mikes story (the Online Photographer) Steelski Pentax News and Rumors 9 05-22-2009 11:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top