 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Bailout
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:18 PM Barbara Ehrenreich can write "An Ode to Grumpiness." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: freda underhill Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:00 AM In 2003, a US government official called Armando Falcon warned the White House that companies such as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were backing far too many dodgy mortgages, risking financial collapse and "contagious illiquidity in the market". Did the White House look at tightening up regulations? Nope. They tried to sack Falcon. He was just being "negative". An book by Barbara Ehrenreich, How Positive Thinking Fooled America and the World gives an interesting angle on how management theory of the last decade the pursuit of positives, affirmations and delusional optimism contributed to big business irresponsibility. After reading this review of the book, grumpiness seems a pretty balanced option. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: SINSULL Date: 19 Dec 08 - 11:49 AM Not yet, Amos. Not in baby bush's reign either. When the automotive industry tanks under Obama's watch, then look for an official declaration of a depression. And we know where the blame will fall... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Amos Date: 19 Dec 08 - 11:09 AM SINS: We didn't?? It sure is getting close! Hmmm. If the stock market is any indication he may have been right, but not for the reasons he cited. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: SINSULL Date: 19 Dec 08 - 10:36 AM Remember when this all started? bush insisted that we had three days to approve emergency funding for the financial industry or we would fall into a depression. It took more than a few days and we didn't. Now he's giving a sizable chunk of that money to the automotive industry. They have three months to undo years of mismanagement or face bankruptcy - under Obama's governmemt. Every city should start a pile of discarded shoes to lob at him on January 20. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout ???????????? From: Donuel Date: 18 Dec 08 - 10:59 PM There is no bail out. Rather it is the largest single bank robbery by the banks in recorded history. The hiest is spear headed by the two golden boys of Goldman Sachs, Paulson and Neil Kashcari. The biggest Ponzi scheme of all time is only 1/14th as large as the Great Bank Robbery of 08. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 18 Dec 08 - 09:14 PM Yeah, Amos... This perhaps is the worst part about the Southern Repubs taking turns at standing up and righteously attacking the UAW while Wall Street is having the bash of it life on our grandkids and their kids dime... Wish it were a dime... Every trillion dollars represents around $3,300 for every man woman and child in this country... This ain't chump change that we've seen go down the Wall Street crapper... By the time you service the debt on borrowing this kinda money it's gonna cost our grandkids more like ten grand each... And that ain't chump change either... Makes this ol' hillbilly sick... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Amos Date: 18 Dec 08 - 08:17 PM "THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2008 Congressman: Fed "Bamboozling" Americans The Fed is refusing to disclose the recipients of $2 trillion dollars in loans, even after Bloomberg sued under the Freedom of Information Act to get the information. As Bloomberg writes: "If they told us what they held, we would know the potential losses that the government may take and that's what they don't want us to know," said Carlos Mendez, who oversees about $14 billion at New York-based ICP Capital LLC.*** Congress is demanding more transparency from the Fed and Treasury on the bailout efforts, most recently during Dec. 10 hearings by the House Financial Services committee when Representative David Scott, a Georgia Democrat, said Americans had "been bamboozled."*** "Americans don't want to get blindsided anymore," Mendez said in an interview. "They don't want it sugarcoated or whitewashed. They want the complete truth. The truth is we can't take all the pain right now." The Bloomberg lawsuit said that the collateral lists "are central to understanding and assessing the government's response to the most cataclysmic financial crisis in America since the Great Depression." In response, the Fed argued that the trade-secret [law] could be expanded to include potential harm to any of the central bank's customers . . . . Trade secret law? Trade secret law protects things like valuable business methods. What's the banks' secret business method here - making stupid decisions, going bankrupt and then becoming the recipient of socialist government handouts? What's next? Will the government argue that it can't disclose the details of its torture program because it needs to protect the trade secrets of the companies that make the electro-shock machines and the waterboarding platforms?" From 'George Washington's Blog' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: heric Date: 10 Dec 08 - 12:18 PM Yeah BoA was a surprise PR, and it turns out that that place was owned about half by JP Morgan. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Dec 08 - 10:33 AM Bobert - Yeah, I live in a "Right to Work" state. That's what I remember hearing it called. You're right, of course, and when Boss Hog is allowed to hire illegal immigrants, the wages go even lower. Genie - I was surprised that B of A agreed to advance additional funds for the window and door factory. The companie is obviously either in bankruptcy, or about to go into bankruptcy--if nobody is building houses, who need windows and doors. So in reality, the bank is simply giving away the money; the window and door company will just include it in the estate of the bankruptcy. I'm sure they know that, and they are only doing it to avoid the bad publicity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Genie Date: 09 Dec 08 - 04:33 PM Speaking of the banking industry bailout: Workers win: Bank to give credit to Chicago plant ======== CHICAGO – Bank of America says it will extend credit to a Chicago window and door maker whose workers have occupied the factory for five days. The bank said Tuesday that it's willing to give the Republic Windows and Doors factory "a limited amount of additional loans." That's so it can resolve claims of employees who have staged a sit-in since Friday. The factory closed Friday after Bank of America canceled its financing. Workers were given three days' notice. But they refused to leave and vowed to stay there until receiving assurances they would receive severance and accrued vacation pay. The bank has been criticized for cutting off the plant's credit after taking federal bailout money. ======== See how well the money usually "trickles down" when the gummint gives breaks to the big guys? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 09 Dec 08 - 01:41 PM 14(b) of the Taft Hartley Act, also called the "slave labor act" was passed over the veto of Harry Treman in 1947... It is anti-union and the 14(b) clause, also known as the "Right to Work" provison allows states to enact legislation which prevents "union shops"... It doesn't go as far as saying that a worker cannot be a member of a union but that the shop cannot be all union... What this, in essence does, is strikes a critical blow to union organizing in thatr state because, hey, why join the union if yer gonna get the same benefits as the folks who pay union dues... So why bother even trying to organize... The bottom line is that in 14(b) states you flat out don't have much, if any, union activities and Boss Hog can hire you to do whatever OSCHA says ain't outright illegal and pay you as little as he can... What this has done is create a massive wage differential betweem the states, of which there are 35 or so who don't have "Eight to Work" and the "Right to Work" states, mostly southern who do... This partially explains why there is so much poverty in the South... Now what we are seein with the Big Three is the Toyota people blowin' their horns that they can make cars cheaper than Detroit... Well, yeah, they can... Doesn't matter than many of these Toyotas are being made by workers who aren't paid enough to get them above e federal poverty threshholds... It's kinda like Detroit having to compete with Chinese or Pakistani labor but within our own country and it sets the country up to have areas where third world living qualities exist... If (14)b were to be repealed then the Northeast and the South would compete fairly and the working class in the South would do much better than they historically have done... Big Mick might be able to add a few comments here but that's it in a nutshell... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 09 Dec 08 - 12:28 PM Bobert - Could you explain again what 14(b) is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 09 Dec 08 - 08:07 AM Yeah, Rigs, that is why for so many years I worked for and voted exclusivelu for Green Party candidates... All the stuff that Ralph Nader has been talking about in terms of corporate irresponsibilty, going back 20 years, has proven to be correct... Even his thoughts on globalization are now very much front and center as corportaqe greed has pushed countries into a new and very damaging protectionts thinking... We don't need to be protecting our corporations from more competitive ones... We need to puch for agreements where those competitive agree to basic human rights of their workers... Wer have the same thing going on right here in the US with Southern Sanators fighting the loans to the BIg Three because of the Toyota and Hyndai plants in Mississippi and Alabma that exploit labor there... Like I have said over and over, we need to repeal 14(b) for the good of the working class... That one act would force corporations to act more responsibly within our own country... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 08 Dec 08 - 09:35 PM The Green Party--in its most basic form--has the solution. The people who are not rich yet, and who do not stand to inherit anything, finally come to the realization that an ever expanding population to generate an ever expanding market will soon destroy the planet. Finally, everybody decides to live within their means, which promotes a level of energy and enlightenment where people are encouraged to pursue more constructive objectives. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 08 Dec 08 - 12:13 PM Ya' know, Rigs... I hope you aren't correct but there is that chance that a "culture" has set in over the last 30 years that will not allow people of a certain generation to think any other way... Unfortunately, way too many Baby Boomers and **our** kidss fall into those generations... Obama, in that regard is a freak of his generation... He does not represent them very well as I've allready seen so many 40-somethings harden... But, I hope I am wrong and that the current circumstances will jump start US outta this culture 'cause we really ain't got much choice here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 08 Dec 08 - 08:31 AM They won't learn, in my opinion, it all worked out fine for the richest ones of them, and the rest of them are all aspiring to be like the richest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 08 Dec 08 - 07:50 AM Actually, enither Dodd nor Wagnor should be replaced... But what should occur is the kind of governemnt oversight that is sorely missing from the $350B bailout of the banks... And, as I have pointed out before, if we the taxpayers are on the hook for that amount to the banks that money is somewhere in those banks yet if have some good news and some bad news... The good news is that interest rates are down... The bad news is that the banks ain't loaning none of that bailout money... Lending, duhhhhhhhhh, should have been a prerequsite for the $350B Wall Street bailout... That's exactly why that bailout was ill-cocieved... It was packages and sold to the Americans much the way the Iraq War was packaged and sold and I'm sick that the American people let our governemnt do such a stupid thing... And I'm sick of trickle down economics... They don't trickle down any better now than when the stupid Republicans changed the economic model back during Ronald Reagan... When will they ever learn, when will thay ever learn??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 07 Dec 08 - 08:44 PM If we had senators picking the management staff, we'd end up with nothing but political appointments. If Dodd said that, he should be replaced--but then, of course, we don't have time for that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: heric Date: 07 Dec 08 - 06:20 PM I probably shouldn't comment on it, as I didn't see it, but reportedly Dodd said on face the nation that GM CEO Richard Wagoner should be replaced as a condition for federal aid. This strikes me as more incompetence from the government. Others, including GM, said they didn't interpret it as a pre-condition for federal aid, and they want Wagoner to stay in place. The bailout/loan is supposed to be an emergency bridge loan, to get them into 2009. Apparently its passage is nowhere close to given. So here we have a top Senator saying Wagoner has to go, others saying he doesn't, one more thing to fight about, huge uncertainty injected, demoralizing GM while at the same time putting the entire package at risk - destroying investor confidence when confidence is always a principal goal. If Dodd were competent he would not say anything so inflammatory and destructive unless he knew he was going to make it happen, and fast. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 09:25 PM ...500... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 09:25 PM No, he wouldn't an'... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Dec 08 - 09:00 PM Yeah, well I doubt if ol' Henry would encourage buying Chinese junk either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 08:56 PM Yes, he was, Rigs... My great grand daddy went to work for Henry... My dad went to work for Henry in 1943... We need a Henry to step- to plate now and deliver that exact message in that you ain't gonna fix jack until people have jobs and can afford the stuff... Truth be known... I am tiring of the comsumption model... I'd rather see folks making more but saving more and I'd like to see our economy based more on building infastructure and schools than buying more Chinese made junk...When we have millions of mini-storage units being rented to store that excess junk there is something very, very wrong with our econmic model... Time to get back to building our country... Okay, so what it a thousand malls close??? In the big scheme of things, maybe it's time for that to happen... We have ignored our real priorties way too long ant it ain't buyin' more Chinese junk... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Dec 08 - 08:32 PM Henry Ford was way ahead of his time. If he hadn't done that, I doubt anyone else ever would have. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 06:08 PM The problems with doing that, heric, is that Honda, Toyota and Hyndai would set up assembly plants in 14(b) states and we wouldn't realy have car manufacturing plants... We would have car manufacturing plantations... And if we take this even further, by not addressing the very real problem of 30 years of working class wage stagnation we will end up not looking very much like the country that Henry Ford envisoned when he decided that if he didn't pay his workers well then who could he sell his cars to??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: heric Date: 05 Dec 08 - 05:00 PM As for the carmakers - shouldn't we make them abandon planned obsolescence as a core philosophy? I mean really, how else are they ever going to become a going concern? And GREEN GREEN GREEN what the hell, why should we believe they can do that right if they can't do a simple internal combustion engine? We should give money to Honda, Toyota and Hyundai to build plants in the US and get this show on the road. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 03:37 PM If I were Obama I'd ask that a freeze be put on the rest of the $700B until the first half was accounted for... (But he ain't president yet, Boberdz..) Oh, yes he is an' if he wants the remaining $350B frozen then he can get it frozen... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Dec 08 - 03:33 PM Yeah, that's the sick part. Nobody seems to know where the money went, or if the do, they ain't talkin'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 03:13 PM The worst of them was Senator Richard Shelby (R- Alabama) who used the opportunity to chastize and harass these CEOs... He asked them if thay had done the actual driving from Detroit or if they shared the driving how much driving they actaully did... He asked them why they didn't carpool... I mean, the Senator showed no class and no real evidence of having been brought up with any understyanding to manners and courtesy... That's sad becuase most Southerners pride themselves when it come to such... Shelby not only let down the Seanate and his parents (if they are still alive) but the South, as well... And good point, Rigs, on the pensions... Pensions are insured by the feds and Iheard this mornin' on NPR that if the Big Three go down that the taxpayers are gonna be on the hook for well over $100B!!! No matter how big and nasty the pill is, looks as if the choices are few... At least the Big Three are hjaving to say how the money will be spent... Who knows where the $350B went when the Wall Street bandits came a knockin'... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Dec 08 - 01:10 PM I didn't see the hearings. I know a number of Republicans think the cure is for the companies to go through a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, and allow the court(s) to straighten things out. What that has meant for airlines has been to dump all their pensioners off onto the government, and then start over. I don't know why they would be rude to the corporate officers though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 11:42 AM Rigs, I understand yer frustrations and the only thing I can say to ya' is, "Yeah, some folks will benefit who shouldn't" but the laternative of throwing the baby out with the bathwater just to punish that small percentage of folks to the detrement of the economy, the housing market and the majority of folks who are just trying to play by the rules isn't going to serve anyone in the long run... I learned at a very young age (polio at age 6) that life isn't always fair... That applies to what many of us are recommending here... And I'm not saying that the program will work in every case... There were very irresponsible buyers who thought they could flip properties and used the screwed up mortgage industry to do so... Some of these folks didn't have the income to be in those homes from the jump and those folks might not be in a position to hang on to those "to-be-flipped" homes even at fixed rates and lomf terms... I don't believe that their is any lifeline for those folks... Sorry, Charlie the Carpenter, if you fall into that group... But here is another observation that warrents some discussion and comment and that is the behavior of some Republican Senators toward the CEO's of the Big Three yesterday... It was appauling and rude... If these Republican Senators think that this is one big joke then they should just say that... Wall Street came in in corporate jets, got $350B right off the bat with an agreement that their CEO's wouldn't take more than a cool million in salary a year... The Dems didn't use that as an opportunity to disrespect thr Wall Street CEO's... But yesterday's display of partisan sarcasim toward men who had agreed to basicly work for free was uncivilized... If any Senator thinks that this is a time for joking around then that Senator, IMO, doesn't deserve to be in office... I mean, really folks, yesterday display was vulgar and down-right mean spirited... But worse than that, these Repubs, in essence, were trying to shift the blame of lousy governemnt by their party, to folks who didn't creat this mess... That is unacceptable... My dad was a company man for Ford Motor Company and I'm glad he isn't alive today to have heard these Repub Senators 'er he woulda been callin' my Cousin Buddy in New Jersey to come down and have a little talk with the Senators about manners... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Dec 08 - 11:16 AM Bobert - If you were going to clean up the mortgage mess, how would you go about it? Some people find themselves in foreclosure because they were greedy themselves, others are simply victims of circumstance. Others are staying out of foreclosure by making super-human efforts to pay their obligations. If the government helps some people, this last group kind of becomes a victim class themselves. I think you're basically right, that it would do the most good to start at the bottom of the food-chain, but how could it be done? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 11:01 AM No, T, what collapsed the system was bad laons that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac went merrily along with... A Home Mortgage Corp., after absorbing the worst features of these bad loans (ARM's) would provide sensible products (i.e. 30 or even 35 year fixed @ 5-6%... Beyond cleaning up Fannie and Freddie's mess the Hiome Mortgage Corp. or the various oversught agncies would restore pragmatic regulations to furure mortagages... Why is this so hard for you to understand??? Where are all thses so-called holes in what I, and many leading econimists, are recommending??? This is becoming just like another Iraq debate with you, T... You were wrong then and you are wrong now... But this time you don't have the bad intellegence to blame on it... The truth is out there in plain sight... The choices are not hard... Do we give hundreds of billions more to the moneyed class or do we do something for the workin' man??? That is the choice... It is apparent that you have cast your vote with the monied class... No wiggle in the world can change peoples perception that that is indeed where yoiu come down on this issue... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Dec 08 - 10:10 AM "Well, riggie, let's see if I can answer your questions. First off, where the hell did the term "legacy costs" come from?" Actually, Mick, I don't disagree with anything you say in the posts above, but I think I first heard of the term "legacy costs" in reference to the airlines when they began to run into trouble after deregulation. What we've seen there is cut-rate airlines like Southwest and Jet-Blue come in with substantially reduced rates. But they also have a "newer" work force simply because the companies are younger. When they first start out, they wouldn't have any pensioners at all, unless somebody got hurt on the job, maybe. If the car companies are successful in getting loans from the government, the first thing that needs to be controlled is management salaries--I certainly agree with that--but in the overall scheme of things, that isn't enough money to do much of anything with. If Hillary's health care program could have gotten off the ground 15 years ago, just thing how much American companies could have save since then, in medical costs. Getting back to Detroit, though, I don't see how the Big Three are going to make cost effective small cars if the United Auto Workers aren't included in the restructuring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Amos Date: 05 Dec 08 - 09:14 AM I don't think so, T--what collapsed the market was Wall Street bundling massive numbers of shitty loans sold by loansharks. And you may not know how ARMS work,. but the banks oftenw ill anchor the interest rate to a prime lending rate (or only if it goes up) and raise the interest rate on an ARM based on that. And they can and will do so even if the exisitng interest rate is quite profitable for them. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Teribus Date: 05 Dec 08 - 08:49 AM Eh Bobert, I do take it that you did read through that post of yours before hitting the "Submit" button. Your system and your example are so full of holes I'm stuck at just where to start. "Home Mortgage Corp" - Government sponsored "Fanny Mae" and "Freddy Mac" - A rose by any other name would sell as sweet. They f*****g well collapsed the market Bobert NOT WALL St. And they did it by giving people loans who shouldn't have had them in the first place, they wouldn't have been able to pay their mortgages anyway, oh by the bye what were the reasons and situation behind your Acme Mortgage (Wall street) doubling Charlies mortgage repayments?? You didn't go into that. It's not done on a whim, it normally only happens when something is done by the central banks to the basic interest rate, a thing that Governments are closely involved with. Another question for your example Bobert why did Acme Mortgage foreclose? They would have other options open to them that would have equally kept Charlie in his house and Acme Mortgage in pocket. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 05 Dec 08 - 07:59 AM You still aren't listening, T-Bird (pun intended here)... I never supported bailing out Wall Street directly... I have supported bailing them out indirectly like FDR did in 1933 with his Home Mortgage Corp... The way it works is really simple, T... You take the bad mortgagaes that Wall Street says are the basis of their woes and you buy them out from the bottom up... I know this is like trying to get the square pag into a round hole fir ya', T, so let me give you an example: Acme Mortgage (Wall street) loaned Charlie the Carpenter (Main St.) $250,000 to buy a house... Got it so far???... The mortage was set up as an ARM (Adjustable Rate Mortgage) which has adjusted and doubled Charlie's payments... Charlie can't pay that amount and so Acme forcloses and is stuck with an empty house... The nieghbors are also stuck with an empty house with weeds growing up around it... So here's how it works... We take the bulk of the $700B and put it into a Home Mortgage Corp. and buy back Charlie's mortgage from Acme and rework it to be a 30 year mortgage at a fixed 5 to 6% interest... Acme get back their $250,000 that they can use to loan out again... Charlie stays in his house and the interest on the mortgagae goes to: 1. shore up Social Security 2. administer the program 3. cover losses This is what ol' Bobert has been calling "trickle up" economics for years... This is smart economics... Or pragmatic, if you will... Everone gets something... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: akenaton Date: 05 Dec 08 - 03:41 AM The biggest fallacy of all is that change can be achieved without some degree of pain(Obama). Better that pain be suffered in the interests of the poor and in safeguarding our natural resources, than in the interests of the Capitalist system. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Big Mick Date: 05 Dec 08 - 03:18 AM I have no quarrel with that statement whatsoever. During the course of my career I had more than my share of trouble because of fighting the "corporate unionists". The old "we are a team, we are in it together" lines are destroying the progressive tension created by acknowledging the inherent adversarial relationship between the interests of management, the interests of capital, and the interests those that labor. Or put another way, we don't represent the friggin' bosses, or the friggin' investors, we represent the interests of the working stiffs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: akenaton Date: 05 Dec 08 - 03:05 AM "Helping" those exploited by Capitalism is akin to handing out goody bags to starving Africans. When Capitalism fucks up.....as it does fairly regularly, the "blood on the ground" always belongs to the weak and the poor! Don't get me confused with an apologist for the system....I hate it more than anything on earth.....thats why I was opposed to the Blair/Obama band aids Our financial and social problems require "MAJOR" surgery. Just look at the number on this forum who despite the evidence of their own eyes still see this system as "recoverable". I'm afraid the truth is that most of the left are grade one hypocrits, no matter how little they have, it's still more than the "poor folks" and they sure don't want to lose it! It can be argued that people who have worked long term in industrial relations, without attempting to change the system, are "enablers" who help keep the whole sorry show on the road. The collapse of the banking system and the unrest created by the coming recession should provide impetus for a real change, providing we are not side tracked down "Obama Drive"......The real enemy are not the fat cats of industry or finance, but the voices of the evolutionary left......Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Teribus Date: 05 Dec 08 - 02:56 AM Hey Bobert, this from a man I don't often agree with on this forum but, with regard to "The Big Three", in these two sentences he has it nailed to rights: "If it wouldn't hurt so many families, I would say let these bastards go and we will start over. But too many kids and families would be destroyed." - Big Mick The only flaw with it is, that with all those banks and insurance companies that you, Bobert, allowed to go to the wall earlier in the "crisis", the USA would have nothing with which to "start over". If they go, they go and are gone for good, the US only then assembles cars whose components are shipped in from elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Big Mick Date: 05 Dec 08 - 02:00 AM ake, I don't hate the system. That is the type of typical bullshit folks like you put out to obscure the issue. What I hate is the greedy pricks that abuse the system, and the friggin' lackeys that allow them to, and the paid off criminals like Cheney who are allowed to run rampant. But here's a newsflash for you, pardner. The average folks in this country are starting to figure it out. They see shit like Paulson giving the money to banks and bankers with no controls, so that the $700 million bucks of taxpayers money ends up invested in a Chinese construction company. I would class that as damn near treasonous. They are figuring out things like Wamu, who hired a CEO two weeks before they were taken over by the Feds. Paid him a $7 million signing bonus, with a $6million golden parachute for anything other than a for cause termination. End result? $13 million in compensation for 2 weeks work. Defend that if you need to. But you don't look good doing it. As to my right to decry it in angry terms. I left blood on the ground for this country. I have worked in the system, and used the laws to try and help average folks. I have earned my right to raise hell about it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: akenaton Date: 05 Dec 08 - 01:48 AM Why continue to support a system that you profess to hate so much??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Big Mick Date: 05 Dec 08 - 01:35 AM Well, riggie, let's see if I can answer your questions. First off, where the hell did the term "legacy costs" come from? It is a manufactured word that the big boys that come to Washington, DC, each in their company jet costing roughly $20,000 each for the trip; that are making 22 times the compensation of their Japanese counterparts make and 17 times the compensation that their German counterparts make while presiding over a failed business plan that MANAGEMENT was in charge of; that comes from having a middle management level that is bloated and ineffective, all the while presiding over incredible losses; the term legacy costs is one they came up with to describe pension and health care benefits that were fairly negotiated and for which autoworkers gave up compensation to have. These benefits, by the way were funded very well until Reagan courts presided over the rape of them by allowing the excess earnings of the pension funds (which were the workers funds that they negotiated for) to be skimmed off. We (meaning the Organized Labor/Unions) fought in court saying that their taking the earnings would be like taking the interest from our investment accounts. We warned that there would come a time when we would need those funds to pay benefits. We argued they didn't belong to the company to be used to pay exec's outlandishly, they belonged to the workers. The fucking Reagan courts decided that putting the money in the hands of the "risk takers" would result in enhancing trickle down economics. Further, the lowered the percentage required to be kept in pension funds to pay future benefits to something like 65% (I might be wrong, it could be 80%, but I am doing this from memory at 1 am in the morning) of the funds the actuaries said we would need to pay vested benefits. Fast forward to 2004. Silicone Valley goes bust, and the rest of the economic system collapses, and these asswipes make up the words "legacy costs" so that they don't have to say that the economic chickens of their stupid ass policy have come home to roost, and that they can't pay the people who made them rich what they promised them in good faith bargaining. And here is the kicker. If they had left the damned excess earnings in the plan, every retiree's healthcare and monthly income THAT THEY WORKED THEIR ENTIRE GODDAMN LIFE FOR, would be safe. Just as a kicker to that, right now the Autoworkers are again being asked for relief, when they just gave considerable concessions a year ago. And is this due to them not being productive, efficient, skilled, and hard working. Nope. Despite the perceptual bullshit, US autoworkers are still ranked the best in the world. It is because, among other things, they work for a bunch of greedy bastards, who don't use sound business practices, invested their R&D money on the wrong horse when the whole world was predicting they were wrong, and now are taking it out of the asses of the group that least deserves it, while they continue taking outlandish bonuses and perks. There are some things in the work rules that have to be changed, the job bank probably needs to go although even that is maligned unneccesarily. Why, in this friggin country, and among working stiffs do we always get the blame game wrong. Our buddy Utah Phillips always said he wanted to be the czar in charge of blame in this country. That's because we always blame those that least deserve it. We always say it is those damn union workers instead of the greedy corporate pricks that steal the money. We always say it is those dirty lazy ass welfare mothers (the ones working two jobs with not health insurance and getting no child support) instead of those that continually cut every program that could break the cycle of poverty. I have spent my entire working life really representing honest hardworking folks who are just trying to do their best for their communities, their kids, and their country. I am sick to death of simplistic know it all assholes that cast aspersions down to the folks that are trying the hardest, when these robbing bandit pricks ride in their jets and tell us that we all have to save their asses. I am sick to death of the Chrysler workers, who with the significant concessions they took saved their company, while Lee Iafuckingcocca took the credit. Yet when the company rebounded some years later and the workers attempted to regain a bit, they were told no. Some reward for loyalty. If it wouldn't hurt so many families, I would say let these bastards go and we will start over. But too many kids and families would be destroyed. Bet your are sorry you asked, eh? I need to go drink some whiskey. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 04 Dec 08 - 09:47 PM Well, I heard about those piccures with Reagan and the pig, too, Rigs, but seein' as I never actually saw 'um I'll just leave it at that... Did he du*k the pig??? I donno??? Prolly did, though... Back to you, T... I have a theory that has just fallen upon me... Actually, was was practicin' a new song an broke a string... Seems every time a break a string, which ain't often, I get a little "broken-string-nugget" and this was no deviation... So, T... I forgive you... You can't help yourself... You are a, ahhhhhh, ***colonialist***... Yep, it came full circle tonight... You should have lived in the Dark Ages with lords and serfs 'cause this is the way you look at everything... There are winners and there are losers... Lords and serfs... Masters and slaves... Boss Man and Negroes... Yeah, this explains why you thought it was just peachy to invade Iraq... Control of Iraq would put the masters in control of the oil (lords) and the "sand niggers" as just that (serfs)... Fast forward to the "bailout"... Same thinking... The banks (lords) loan (ot not) to the serfish car building people... I mean, Iraq and the bailout are the same game to you, T-zer... Okay to give my dough to the lords... Not so, the serfs... In the words of "The Caveman", "I get it now"... I mean no disrespect here, T-zer.... We just look at things from entirely different perspectives... You represent the lords and I represent the serfs... Yeah, I get it now... Might have taken a few years for me to really see things the way they are but, "I once was blind, but now I see".... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Riginslinger Date: 04 Dec 08 - 09:10 PM "'Ronald "The Deregulator and Union Buster" Reagan took office...'" I prefer to call him Ronald-Pig-Fuckin'-Reagan, but that's just me... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 04 Dec 08 - 08:48 PM Youn have it right, T... Why give money to the rich when wwe don't have a credit crisis, we have a wage and job crisis??? Wages have been stagnant beginning the year that Ronald "The Deregulator and Union Buster" Reagan took office... That is how long that American wages have been stagnant... And that is why we are in this pickle... Then, from these deregulations, banks offered "products" which were evil... Like crdit cards to college kids... Like interest only, no downpayment, to home buyers... I mean, the schemes they came up with were so far out that the only way to describe it is "Fact is tsranger than fiction"... Then when it looked as if so9me of these were going to backfire on the lenders they bought congressman to pass the bankruptcy "reform" (hahaha) that aloowed the lenders to harrass the borrowers right into the grave??? What was that all about, T??? I've read that upwards of 500,000 promising college kids had to quit college because of the preditory credit card lenders hounding them 24/7, hauling them into civil courts, freezing their bank accounts, putting liens on thei cars, etc... Is that your idea of goodness, T??? As for the Big Three, T, seein' as Wall Street came in and fleeced the taxpayers for, ahhhhhh, who knows for sure??? $300B??? $350B??? $600B??? Who knows??? Well, sniff, I figure if we can run that much money thru the shreader then, hey, $50B to save a million jobs??? I can live with that... That is a bargain... BTW, T. I still haven't heard yer plan other than banks is where you go to borrow money??? Is that yer plan??? Well, if so then why after getting between $300 and $700B of my tax dollars aren't they, ahhhhhh, lending any money??? I hate to say this, T, 'cause you know I have a sof spot in my heart fir ya', but the stuff you post here is, ahhhhhhhh, alot of hot air with no real substance to it... And I mean, alot... You'll prolly be up all night writing more of it... So much of it that it will fill screen after screen... That will be fine... It will keep you entertained... It will be pure unatered BS but, hey, this is the BS section so have a night of it... BTW, my econmic theories aren't that far off froma economist who was just awarded a Nobel Prize for his views... You again, are one the outside looking in... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Teribus Date: 04 Dec 08 - 08:15 PM Nice one Bobert, but Oh So Predictable from you - Not one single question answered. Remember Bobert you weren't going to give anything to the banks, who loans people money to enable them to do things? - Under your scheme they've gone completely, taking with them all the people who could pay and inject capital into the system because when the Banks go tits up they had to call in all their loans. So Bobert where does this capital now come from?? Remember Bobert you weren't going to give anything to the Insurance companies - Under your scheme they've gone completely, taking with them all the pension funds that invested in them - They oddly enough are the biggest investors and you have now robbed them of the place whereby they can generate the fund growth to meet their "pay-out" commitments. Remember Bobert you were against giving anything to the big three US car manufacturers - They go under, immediate consequence 10% unemployed - Hint as to how bad that would be Bobert - America has never seen such unemployment and that is only the "direct" unemployment such a collapse would create. Financial crisis - yes there is one if you need to sell - If you can afford to sit tight and ride out the storm long term predictions are not too bad - all things are relative. Will things bounce back - of course they will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Bailout From: Bobert Date: 04 Dec 08 - 07:55 PM By the by, T... If you have better plan then lets hear it... |
