President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Behshad]

Get one thing straight, I'm not following anyone around as you suggest. You want to talk about following anyone around, talk about yourself.

Look how you cheer for FF !

I cheer common sense.

Good one !

You cheer FF when he takes shit way out of context about Obama's speech, yet when Obama says he wants to help out any AMERICAN BUSINESSES needing help, avoiding to go under, then your so called common sesne tells you Obama is wrong, since FF said so ?

So how has noBOzos 2012 helped American businesses? All he's been doing his entire term is a bunch cheap talk and then spending most of his time coming up with excuses as to why he can't actually do what he's been talking about doing from day 1. Like a Snicker's bar, temporarily satisfies you but doesn't consist of any lasting nutritional value.

How about saving the US Auto industry ? Do you even understand how important it was to help out GM & Chrysler ? The bailout wasnt just about saving those two companies, but hundreds if not thousands of businesses and MILLIONS of jobs! Think about it !

[slucero]

Get one thing straight, I'm not following anyone around as you suggest. You want to talk about following anyone around, talk about yourself.

Look how you cheer for FF !

I cheer common sense.

Good one !

You cheer FF when he takes shit way out of context about Obama's speech, yet when Obama says he wants to help out any AMERICAN BUSINESSES needing help, avoiding to go under, then your so called common sesne tells you Obama is wrong, since FF said so ?

So how has noBOzos 2012 helped American businesses? All he's been doing his entire term is a bunch cheap talk and then spending most of his time coming up with excuses as to why he can't actually do what he's been talking about doing from day 1. Like a Snicker's bar, temporarily satisfies you but doesn't consist of any lasting nutritional value.

How about saving the US Auto industry ? Do you even understand how important it was to help out GM & Chrysler ? The bailout wasnt just about saving those two companies, but hundreds if not thousands of businesses and MILLIONS of jobs! Think about it !

...kind of how you "thought" auto sales profits didn't include cars that sat on dealer lots eh?

[The Sushi Hunter]

Come November this is me on my way to the voting polls to vote for ANYONE but noBOzos 2012.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YneCr6lTufs

[Behshad]

Get one thing straight, I'm not following anyone around as you suggest. You want to talk about following anyone around, talk about yourself.

Look how you cheer for FF !

I cheer common sense.

Good one !

You cheer FF when he takes shit way out of context about Obama's speech, yet when Obama says he wants to help out any AMERICAN BUSINESSES needing help, avoiding to go under, then your so called common sesne tells you Obama is wrong, since FF said so ?

So how has noBOzos 2012 helped American businesses? All he's been doing his entire term is a bunch cheap talk and then spending most of his time coming up with excuses as to why he can't actually do what he's been talking about doing from day 1. Like a Snicker's bar, temporarily satisfies you but doesn't consist of any lasting nutritional value.

How about saving the US Auto industry ? Do you even understand how important it was to help out GM & Chrysler ? The bailout wasnt just about saving those two companies, but hundreds if not thousands of businesses and MILLIONS of jobs! Think about it !

...kind of how you "thought" auto sales profits didn't include cars that sat on dealer lots eh?

Which they don't. You're misinformed. Theyre not accounted for the PROFIT until after they are REPORTED sold BY the dealer .

[Behshad]

Come November this is me on my way to the voting polls to vote for ANYONE but noBOzos 2012.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YneCr6lTufs

Didnt have much to come up with now, did you !? Waiting for FakeFinder to give you something to wave your pom poms in the air ?

[Behshad]

Get one thing straight, I'm not following anyone around as you suggest. You want to talk about following anyone around, talk about yourself.

Look how you cheer for FF !

I cheer common sense.

Good one !

You cheer FF when he takes shit way out of context about Obama's speech, yet when Obama says he wants to help out any AMERICAN BUSINESSES needing help, avoiding to go under, then your so called common sesne tells you Obama is wrong, since FF said so ?

So how has noBOzos 2012 helped American businesses? All he's been doing his entire term is a bunch cheap talk and then spending most of his time coming up with excuses as to why he can't actually do what he's been talking about doing from day 1. Like a Snicker's bar, temporarily satisfies you but doesn't consist of any lasting nutritional value.

How about saving the US Auto industry ? Do you even understand how important it was to help out GM & Chrysler ? The bailout wasnt just about saving those two companies, but hundreds if not thousands of businesses and MILLIONS of jobs! Think about it !

At a cost of $112 dollars in debt for every man, woman and child in the country.


-snip-

General Motors (GM) shares closed down 1.5% to 19.02 on Monday, hitting 18.85 intraday. That's the lowest since the U.S. auto giant came public again in November 2010 at 33 a share. Update: GM shares early Tuesday fell 1.4% to 18.76, hitting a new low.)


That raises the taxpayer loss on the GM bailout to just shy of $35 billion. Here's the math:

GM doesn't have to pay back anything else, but taxpayers are still out $26.4 billion in direct aid. The Treasury still owns 26.5% of GM — 500 million shares. The stock would have to rise to about 53 to break-even on that direct aid. At the current price, the Treasury's stake is worth just $9.51 billion. (Taxpayers lose $5 million for each penny that GM stock falls).

That would leave taxpayers out $16.9 billion. But the true cost is much higher.

President Obama let GM keep $45 billion worth in past losses to write off future earnings. These carry-forwards are typically wiped out or severely cut along with debts as part of bankruptcy. But in this case, the administration gifted huge tax breaks with an $18 billion book value. (That's how GM avoided taxes last year despite a bumper $7.6 billion profit.)

Including those tax write-offs, taxpayers are sitting on a bailout loss of $35 billion.

Listen. If they wouldve let GM and Chrysler go under, it would have affected MILLIONS of people. FACT! Not just those working directly for GM and Chrysler losing their jobs, but millions of workers for suppliers . This would also affect all the instutions who lended money to GM & Chrysler. All this would have eventually lead into Ford going down with them, cause the big three share many suppliers and most those suppliers wouldnt survive with just 1/3 of the business. You think unemplyment is bad now, we would have a 30% unemployment.
With US auto indsutry GONE, we would have to DEPEND ON FOREIGN AUTO MAKERS. And if you think the Europeans and Japs or Koreans would be selling their vehicles to us at the current market price, youre dead wrong. Youd have to pay $40k for a Honda Civic, cause they would know that we have the need and demand and without a decent publis transportation in our country we would have to pay the price they ASKED .

So yes, I am more than glad that I paid my $112 towards saving the US Auto indsutry. Much better than spending the money to bring freedom to Iraq if you ask me. I am glad they used my tax money to save our people's businesses and jobs. Arent you !?

[Behshad]

President Obama and his supporters have been more than happy to tout his bailout of the auto industry, but General Motors still owes taxpayers $42 billion according to an Inspector General's report and the company's stock has hit an all time low.


GM owes $27 billion on the nearly $50 billion it received from the auto bailout and Ally Bank, the company’s lending arm, owes $14.7 billion of the $17.2 billion taxpayer-funded bailout it received.

GM’s stock has plummeted in recent months after stagnant development in overseas markets. It hit a new low on Wednesday, falling to $18.80, a 52 percent drop from its January 2011 high of $38.90.

The rapid decline of the stock price has kept taxpayers on the hook for billions in unpaid bailout dollars. The stock would need to make a quick—and meteoric—turnaround for taxpayers to break even.

“In order to recoup its total investment in GM, Treasury will need to recover an additional $27 billion in proceeds. This translates to an average of $53.98 per share on its remaining common shares in New GM,” the IG report concluded.

The electric Chevy Volt, a GM vehicle touted by President Obama and environmentalists (the same environmentalists waging a war on coal) is also failing miserably.


Chevy sold 7,671 Volts last year. Nissan’s all-electric Leaf didn’t do much better with 9,674 sales — less than half what Nissan had expected. Car makers often give up on conventional vehicles that post such poor numbers.

For someone who is all about defending US businesses, you sure love to tout for non-US businesses and think that we should support them and let our own industry fail. Make up your mind!

[Behshad]

B won't talk bout the 20,000 non-union employees that Obama and Geithner took away their pensions because they weren't in the union. The GM bailout was just another of Obamas transfer of wealth to his union thug buddies. He saddled my family with $560 of debt to do it.

Liberals always think it's just peachy to take from others to give to their pet projects, and then when the pet project flops, as GM has done so far, they still want to call it a success.

Are you suggesting that those 20000 people would have had their pension if GM and Chrysler wouldve gone under ? Dude , get real, sometimes some sacrifices are made to save the whole company. If you can prove that without the bailout all those 20000 people wouldve kept their pensions, then I will switch sides and vote for Romney, until then shut the fuck up and get with the program.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Are you suggesting that those 20000 people would have had their pension if GM and Chrysler wouldve gone under ?

If GM would have filed for bankruptcy, their would have been a reorganization, nor more jobs would have been lost under bankruptcy than were lost in the government bailout (which did result in lots of job losses)

Dude , get real, sometimes some sacrifices are made to save the whole company. If you can prove that without the bailout all those 20000 people wouldve kept their pensions,

I wonder why the union people from that company didn't loose their pensions. Unequal treatment ? Discrimination? Same amount of people probably wold have lost their on their pensions, but it probably would be spread out evenly between union or non union workers or perhaps everone in the company would have had a lesser and equal reduction. Clearly government bureaucrats cant act justly and equitably. bribed perhaps

[Behshad]

B won't talk bout the 20,000 non-union employees that Obama and Geithner took away their pensions because they weren't in the union. The GM bailout was just another of Obamas transfer of wealth to his union thug buddies. He saddled my family with $560 of debt to do it.

Liberals always think it's just peachy to take from others to give to their pet projects, and then when the pet project flops, as GM has done so far, they still want to call it a success.

Are you suggesting that those 20000 people would have had their pension if GM and Chrysler wouldve gone under ? Dude , get real, sometimes some sacrifices are made to save the whole company. If you can prove that without the bailout all those 20000 people wouldve kept their pensions, then I will switch sides and vote for Romney, until then shut the fuck up and get with the program.

They lost their lifelong pensions because they were not in the union, and Geithner played favorites with union employees made whole. You libs are frankly disgusting. Sacrifice my ass...

Emails: Geithner, Treasury drove cutoff of non-union Delphi workers’ pensions


Published: 12:27 AM 08/07/2012

Emails obtained by The Daily Caller show that the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Timothy Geithner, was the driving force behind terminating the pensions of 20,000 salaried retirees at the Delphi auto parts manufacturing company.

The move, made in 2009 while the Obama administration implemented its auto bailout plan, appears to have been made solely because those retirees were not members of labor unions.

The internal government emails contradict sworn testimony, in federal court and before Congress, given by several Obama administration figures. They also indicate that the administration misled lawmakers and the courts about the sequence of events surrounding the termination of those non-union pensions, and that administration figures violated federal law.

Delphi, a 13-year old company that is independent of General Motors, is one of the world’s largest automotive parts manufacturers. Twenty thousand of its workers lost nearly their entire pensions when the government bailed out GM. At the same time, Delphi employees who were members of the United Auto Workers union saw their pensions topped off and made whole.

The emails TheDC has obtained show that the Treasury Department, not the independent PBGC, was running the show.

Under 29 U.S.C. §1342, the PBGC is the only government entity that is legally empowered to initiate termination of a pension or make any official movements toward doing so.

Why dont you answer my question? Do you think that without the bailout , those people would have kept their pensions? NO!

So lets see we have 2 options :

A) Save the auto industry and MILLIONS , MILLIONS of jobs! while 20000 people lose their pensions or
B) Let the auto industry go down and millions of people lose their jobs PLUS 20000 people lose their pensions.

You would still choose option B, right? cause youre a moron!

[Behshad]

Are you suggesting that those 20000 people would have had their pension if GM and Chrysler wouldve gone under ?

If GM would have filed for bankruptcy, their would have been a reorganization, nor more jobs would have been lost under bankruptcy than were lost in the government bailout (which did result in lots of job losses)

They did file for BK Chap 11 and it didnt help! It was after the bk that they needed the help for the reorganization . Had it not been for the assistance from the government , that BK wouldve let to the company to go out of business.

[The Sushi Hunter]

So how did they save millions and millions of jobs and how much did saving those jobs cost the American tax payers via government funding? What was the root cause the American auto industry needed a bailout in the first place? Obviously if business was good they wouldn't have needed the money. I think the auto industry was killed from within. Just like Safeway, the employees union will strike if they don't get specific amounts of money and benefits. The company has to make up that cost some way, so they do so by getting cheap shitty goods from the cheapest suppliers they can find which is outside America but charge the customers out the ass for the cheap shitty imported goods. That's what happened to the American Auto industry, no one wants to pay for the shit that's coming out of those factories anymore, it doesn't last, most of the parts are made in Mexico and China, costs a fortune in upkeep in the form of preventive maintenence and operating cost, depreciates quicker than most any other foreign cars on the market. I buy German and Japanese now that long term quality matters to me. If you think thats bullshit, look at how many Japanese and German cars are out on the road vs American vehicles, and don't forget to also look at what resale values are for American made cars vs imports such as BMWs and Japanese cars. That's the proof right there.

[Behshad]

So how did they same millions and millions of jobs and how much did saving those jobs cost the tax payers via government funding?

The did save millions of jobs for all the people that work for any factory that makes part for the auto makers. Yes it was paid for by our tax money, but I personally would see my money go towards saving our Auto Industry than an a war that costs us a whole lot more than that.

What was the root cause the American auto industry needed a bailout in the first place? Obviously if things were good they wouldn't have needed the money.

Well duh! No one said things were good. If things were done right in the first place from both GM and Chrysler HQ, then they wouldnt need the bailout Einstein! But arent you one who is all for supporting and saving our businesses but now when they do get help you think we shouldve ignored them?

[Behshad]

Cut all pensions accordingly and equally. It would have been the right thing to do. To take away a persons pension that put in 20 or 30 years while making the union pensions whole is nothing but favoritism.

oh I see, now you think that they should all be treated equally and all pensions cut equally, regardless of who worked for how long and how much they contributed ? You libs are disgusting

Youre still too dumb to realize that the bailout had to be done.period. Even your buddy Dubbya ( who was part of the bailout plan) said over and over again that he would do it again!

[The Sushi Hunter]

What good are jobs if the country can't defend itself from acts of war by terrorists?

[Behshad]

What good are jobs if the country can't defend itself from acts of war by terrorists?

with your (lack of ) logic : then what good are businesses if they dont manufacturer tanks and fighter jets

The war in Iraq had nothing , nothing to do with defending ourselves from terrorists.


So basically you would rather see your tax money go towards wars in middle east, to bring them freedom, rather than seeing it being spent on our own people ?

[The Sushi Hunter]

So how did they same millions and millions of jobs and how much did saving those jobs cost the tax payers via government funding?

The did save millions of jobs for all the people that work for any factory that makes part for the auto makers. Yes it was paid for by our tax money, but I personally would see my money go towards saving our Auto Industry than an a war that costs us a whole lot more than that.

What was the root cause the American auto industry needed a bailout in the first place? Obviously if things were good they wouldn't have needed the money.

Well duh! No one said things were good. If things were done right in the first place from both GM and Chrysler HQ, then they wouldnt need the bailout Einstein! But arent you one who is all for supporting and saving our businesses but now when they do get help you think we shouldve ignored them?

You want something fixed right? Go for the root cause and not a fucking temporary fix.

[Behshad]

So how did they same millions and millions of jobs and how much did saving those jobs cost the tax payers via government funding?

The did save millions of jobs for all the people that work for any factory that makes part for the auto makers. Yes it was paid for by our tax money, but I personally would see my money go towards saving our Auto Industry than an a war that costs us a whole lot more than that.

What was the root cause the American auto industry needed a bailout in the first place? Obviously if things were good they wouldn't have needed the money.

Well duh! No one said things were good. If things were done right in the first place from both GM and Chrysler HQ, then they wouldnt need the bailout Einstein! But arent you one who is all for supporting and saving our businesses but now when they do get help you think we shouldve ignored them?

You want something fixed right? Go for the root cause and not a fucking temporary fix.

and they just did that. the billions of profit and the fact that theyre still around with millions employed and new products coming out is a clear example that it did work and we did the right thing to save our auto industry.

Now tell me this, would you been happier with a 28% unemplyment , it GM wouldnt been helped? No! You wouldve blamed Obama for ignoring American businesses and let them die ! So he's damned if he does and damned if he doesnt!

[The Sushi Hunter]

What good are jobs if the country can't defend itself from acts of war by terrorists?

with your (lack of ) logic : then what good are businesses if they dont manufacturer tanks and fighter jets

The war in Iraq had nothing , nothing to do with defending ourselves from terrorists.


So basically you would rather see your tax money go towards wars in middle east, to bring them freedom, rather than seeing it being spent on our own people ?

Get your shit straight dickweed. I didn't say anything in my post about bringing freedom to anyone outside the US. You mentioned saving an auto industry vs a war. And I said what the fuck good are jobs if you can't even defend the country that the fucking jobs are in.

[The Sushi Hunter]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

[Behshad]

What good are jobs if the country can't defend itself from acts of war by terrorists?

with your (lack of ) logic : then what good are businesses if they dont manufacturer tanks and fighter jets

The war in Iraq had nothing , nothing to do with defending ourselves from terrorists.


So basically you would rather see your tax money go towards wars in middle east, to bring them freedom, rather than seeing it being spent on our own people ?

Get your shit straight dickweed. I didn't say anything in my post about bringing freedom to anyone outside the US. You mentioned saving an auto industry vs a war. And I said what the fuck good are jobs if you can't even defend the country that the fucking jobs are in.

Listen dickbag. The war in Iraq was called " Iraqi Freedom" . Thats the war I said we shouldnt have gone in. That had nothing to do with defending ourselves from terrorists. None of the countries in middle east have the power or technology to come all the way here to attack us. And if you think us going over there and bombing the shit out of them will prevent another 9/11 youre dead wrong. We have to increase our homeland security and stay on focus here, instead of sending out troops across the world to bring them freedom or democracy !

[Behshad]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

What about Ford. they were in the same dire straits. They didn't take a bailout. and they are the strongest performing company of the three.

Chrysler have been getting govt help since Lee Iaccoca since 1979 , never seem to sort their shit out and are back begging for more cash.

[Rick]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

What about Ford. they were in the same dire straits. They didn't take a bailout. and they are the strongest performing company of the three.

Chrysler have been getting govt help since Lee Iaccoca since 1979 , never seem to sort their shit out and are back begging for more cash.

Ford didn't need help like the other two. They sell a assload of vehicles to the industrial sector. Way more than GM, and Chrysler sells almost nothing. I gotta give Ford credit. They had a good game plan going on when all of that went down, with a strong line up of desirable cars for consumers. They didn't need the help and refused it, which I respected. The assholes from GM showed up in Lear Jets asking for money. That went over like a lead balloon.

[Behshad]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

What about Ford. they were in the same dire straits. They didn't take a bailout. and they are the strongest performing company of the three.

Chrysler have been getting govt help since Lee Iaccoca since 1979 , never seem to sort their shit out and are back begging for more cash.

Wrong again!
Ford was in a much better situation because Allan Mullaly played it all wisely ! When the ineterest rates were low , he borrowed as much as possible using all Ford's assests as collateral and helped build new vehicles based on new ideas and that helped them tremendously ! At the same time Ford was focusing more and more on fuel efficient vehicles while both GM and Chrysler were putting most their innovation on big gas guzzler trucks and SUVs. Ford played their cards right, but that doesnt mean we shouldve punished the other two, cause if we would have, then it wouldve killed Ford too.

GM & Chrysler were in no position to rebuild and restructure without any funds.

[The Sushi Hunter]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

So why was both GM and Chrysler out of money and ideas? What caused this to occur with both these two companies?

[The Sushi Hunter]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

What about Ford. they were in the same dire straits. They didn't take a bailout. and they are the strongest performing company of the three.

Chrysler have been getting govt help since Lee Iaccoca since 1979 , never seem to sort their shit out and are back begging for more cash.

Wrong again!
Ford was in a much better situation because Allan Mullaly played it all wisely ! When the ineterest rates were low , he borrowed as much as possible using all Ford's assests as collateral and helped build new vehicles based on new ideas and that helped them tremendously ! At the same time Ford was focusing more and more on fuel efficient vehicles while both GM and Chrysler were putting most their innovation on big gas guzzler trucks and SUVs. Ford played their cards right, but that doesnt mean we shouldve punished the other two, cause if we would have, then it wouldve killed Ford too.

GM & Chrysler were in no position to rebuild and restructure without any funds.

So does that mean Allan Mullaly build that?

[Behshad]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

So why was both GM and Chrysler out of money and ideas? What caused this to occur with both these two companies?

Read above, I just posted about it

The crisis erupted in 2008 as gas prices rocketed to record highs, turning consumers away from Detroit's largely fuel-guzzling products. The financial and housing busts further pushed down sales leaving the US big three short of cash and facing huge operating losses.

[Behshad]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

What about Ford. they were in the same dire straits. They didn't take a bailout. and they are the strongest performing company of the three.

Chrysler have been getting govt help since Lee Iaccoca since 1979 , never seem to sort their shit out and are back begging for more cash.

Wrong again!
Ford was in a much better situation because Allan Mullaly played it all wisely ! When the ineterest rates were low , he borrowed as much as possible using all Ford's assests as collateral and helped build new vehicles based on new ideas and that helped them tremendously ! At the same time Ford was focusing more and more on fuel efficient vehicles while both GM and Chrysler were putting most their innovation on big gas guzzler trucks and SUVs. Ford played their cards right, but that doesnt mean we shouldve punished the other two, cause if we would have, then it wouldve killed Ford too.

GM & Chrysler were in no position to rebuild and restructure without any funds.

So does that mean Allan Mullaly build that?

It means that Allan Mullaly helped save Ford so they didnt have to go to the government for bailout money and they managed to not only survive but also be the strongest of all three. He is a genius business man and trust me he gets paid for it and he desrves every penny
I'm not saying GM & Chrysler should basically been rewarded for being the 2 irresponsibles, BUT when you look at the big picture, despite their huge flaws, we werent in a situation to punish them by letting them die.

[The Sushi Hunter]

Why did the auto industry needed a bail out again?

Because both GM and Chrysler were out of money and out of ideas and pretty damn close to shut their doors permanently.

So why was both GM and Chrysler out of money and ideas? What caused this to occur with both these two companies?

Read above, I just posted about it

The crisis erupted in 2008 as gas prices rocketed to record highs, turning consumers away from Detroit's largely fuel-guzzling products. The financial and housing busts further pushed down sales leaving the US big three short of cash and facing huge operating losses.

This didn't turn anyone away in my area, there were just as many American name brand SUVs out on the road as ever before. They were shitty vehicles all the way around and so they had a fire sale and sold them low. People like me said fuck that shit, why buy one of those hunk of shit things and then have to spend all my money at the pump refueling the fucking thing. The Latinos bought that shit up though cause those boats could seat their entire family all in one vessel.