Rant of government bailouts

**ninja9578** · 12-22-2008 07:37 PM

AHHHH!

The democrats handed hundreds of billions of dollars to big banks to get them loaning money again, now almost all of that money is unaccounted for. The banks refuse to say where the money went and have no intention of telling anyone. It also didn't get the economy moving again because the bailout money didn't get the big banks lending again, there's just a big lending crisis now as there ever was.

Those massive mortgages that the banks gave out when the Republican party abolished the Clinton regulations have not been bought out and people continue to lose their houses.

Now Bush had given 17 billion to the automakers because they were going down the tube because of their own incompetence because they continued to push out cars with less than 30mpg when most americans want cars that get close to fifty and they lost their huge overseas market because the best american cars don't meet foreign emission and mpg standards. It's not impossible to make a car that gets 50+ mpg, the Chinese standard is 55.

The automakers also area bout to lose the wealthiest state in the country because California is upping it's own mpg standards to 32 (I think,) the automotive companies sued because they didn't want to spend the money on making cars that could do that so all cars in CA will be foreign.

The unions are also to blame for the US auto problems. An assembly line worker is unskilled labour and they shouldn't make $40/hour, they shouldn't even make half that.

Seems that Bush believes in the free market only as long as the free market doesn't buy better cars from over seas.

I know Bush is stupid, but can't he learn from past mistakes like the 2001 airline bailout? When the airlines were falling apart because of their own inefficiency the congress gave them 15 billion so that they wouldn't lay people off and go under, but they laid people off anyway because they spent the money in corporate bonuses. Immediately after several of them went under, just like the auto companies are going to do now.

Why won't anyone listen to the president-elect and force the companies to reorganize if they want the money? These idiot companies should track every cent of taxpayer money and if they do something wrong they should lose it. There is no incentive to fix a bad system if the companies know that the government will bail them out.

AHHHH!

**drewmandan** · 12-22-2008 07:55 PM

First of all, my general comment on the idea of taking taxpayer money, or worse, printing money, and giving it to banks without any strings is "WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU EXPECT?".

But I'm sure many wealthy families are having a good ole laugh over this whole crisis. Afterall, the government is now taxing people's incomes and giving the money directly to the rich. Welfare is one thing, but now this? Holy shit.

But I would like to warn you, ninja, regulation and dirty government fingers in the gears of industry will not fix the problem. Read a little history. American involvement in WW2 was basically a direct result of the fascist policies of FDR (who was elected for 4 terms, by the way).

**Universal Mind** · 12-22-2008 08:13 PM

This is where Bush is a Democrat. A real conservative would flip off the companies while lowering their taxes.

**ninja9578** · 12-22-2008 08:36 PM

Originally Posted by drewmandan

But I would like to warn you, ninja, regulation and dirty government fingers in the gears of industry will not fix the problem. Read a little history. American involvement in WW2 was basically a direct result of the fascist policies of FDR (who was elected for 4 terms, by the way).

Regulation works a hell of a lot better than a free market.

Uhm, Nazi spread was a legitimate reason for war.

Bush is only a democrat when it comEs to actually giving the money awa, he goes right back to the republican "free_maRKET" APProACH afterwards, gIViNg It AWAY WItH No regulations on how it's spent.

Also< I BLAME BUsH for mY SHIFt KEy sticking.

**drewmandan** · 12-22-2008 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Regulation works a hell of a lot better than a free market.

You're confusing terms here. Please be precise. I agree that companies should be restricted from certain practices, like dumping toxic waste in the oceans or committing anti-trust violations like cartels or purposefully crashing their own stock, like Enron. I don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees with you here. But you have not given a reason why this regulation should be carried out by coercive forces, such as government, or why only government can accomplish this. Would not contracts and insurance complete with financial penalties for breach of said contracts be sufficient?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Uhm, Nazi spread was a legitimate reason for war.

For the victims of Nazi spread. Like I said in another thread, American involvement did not shorten the war and caused millions of innocent deaths.

**StonedApe** · 12-22-2008 11:25 PM

The bailout is one of the most retarded ideas I've ever heard of in my life. It was obvious that it was going to fail from the begining.

**ninja9578** · 12-22-2008 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by drewmandan

You're confusing terms here. Please be precise. I agree that companies should be restricted from certain practices, like dumping toxic waste in the oceans or committing anti-trust violations like cartels or purposefully crashing their own stock, like Enron. I don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees with you here. But you have not given a reason why this regulation should be carried out by coercive forces, such as government, or why only government can accomplish this. Would not contracts and insurance complete with financial penalties for breach of said contracts be sufficient?

Because big companies will back out of contracts and find loopholes. Only a government (preferably an international collaboration) can control huge companies, they are just too powerful. Pharmaceutical and Big Oil already exert a huge amount of pull in the american Senate.

For the victims of Nazi spread. Like I said in another thread, American involvement did not shorten the war and caused millions of innocent deaths.

The US invasion of Europe literally turned the war in the other direction. The bombs were the stupidest thing, but we did win the war.

**drewmandan** · 12-23-2008 12:04 AM

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Because big companies will back out of contracts and find loopholes. Only a government (preferably an international collaboration) can control huge companies, they are just too powerful. Pharmaceutical and Big Oil already exert a huge amount of pull in the american Senate.

That depends entirely on the language of the contracts in question. Today's contracts do have rather lenient penalties, but that's only because the government itself allows that to happen. So in my understanding, that's not a point for government.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

The US invasion of Europe literally turned the war in the other direction. The bombs were the stupidest thing, but we did win the war.

It was more like the Nazi empire collapsed in on itself than being defeated. It's well known that Hitler went insane at least by 1944, probably earlier, and the USSR would have easily crushed Germany if given the chance. So my question to you is: If the Allies got originally entangled in the war to save Poland, why did they so easily let it be taken by Stalin?

**Jeff777** · 12-23-2008 12:27 AM

What? Bush loaned 17 billion dollars to the auto-makers? But I thought the Senate rejected the auto-bailout???

**ninja9578** · 12-23-2008 12:32 AM

Bush used emergency executive powers to give an immediate bailout.

**StonedApe** · 12-23-2008 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Bush used emergency executive powers to give an immediate bailout.

AHAHAHHAH. We are fucked!YES!

Maybe people will start to see that we need to reform the electoral process now.

I had no idea this was THAT retarded ninja, thanks for keeping me posted.

**ninja9578** · 12-23-2008 12:52 AM

The stupidest thing is that the senate shot the bailout down because it wasn't regulated well enough, Bush gave them some rules, but it was essentially just a check.

**Jeff777** · 12-23-2008 05:25 AM

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Bush used emergency executive powers to give an immediate bailout.

Well fucking hell...I suppose he wants to go out with a BANG before he leaves.

**ninja9578** · 12-23-2008 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by Jeff777

Well fucking hell...I suppose he wants to go out with a BANG before he leaves.

He's a christian. He wants to meet Jesus. You can't meet Jesus with the apocalypse.

**StonedApe** · 12-23-2008 06:30 AM

Actuallyy ninja as a fundie he believes that revalation is a prophecy. This prophecy is supposed to be fullfilled at about this point in time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R370YkYhV0w

**arby** · 12-29-2008 07:11 PM

Even canada has jumped on the bailout bandwagon =/

Thread: Rant of government bailouts

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Rant of government bailouts

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions