NickF1011 Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 Be glad you don't live in NJ...you'd be supporting Al and MD. I live in MD. I support MD plenty for the both of us. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Right. Because what happens in Michigan has NO bearing whatsoever on what happens in Alabama. Heck, Michigan's not even in the same COUNTRY as Alabama. No, wait, the South LOST the Civil War. I forgot. a pretty snarky response from you a lot of people don't agree with bailing out well connected private equity fat cats like Cerberus, especially when Cerberus refuses to give Chrysler any cash. GM and Chrylser have been badly mismanaged, sort of like the city of Detroit and their mayor, why should other states step in to bail out that mess? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 why should other states step in to bail out that mess? How much federal money went to Mobile and Biloxi after Katrina? Exactly. It's not like those people didn't KNOW about hurricanes, and it's not like people didn't CHOOSE to build where there are hurricanes, and it's not like people didn't ASSUME risk that they later fobbed off on the Federal government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 How much federal money went to Mobile and Biloxi after Katrina? Exactly. It's not like those people didn't KNOW about hurricanes, and it's not like people didn't CHOOSE to build where there are hurricanes, and it's not like people didn't ASSUME risk that they later fobbed off on the Federal government. I wasn't aware that New Orleans, and Biloxi are owned by a Wall Street private equity firm, thanks for enlightening us. great apples to oranges comparison there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 It seems some people seem to forget it's the United States. We're all in this together, like it or not. What affects one, affects the others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retro-man Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 The biggest federal expenditures are for Social Security and Medicare - both collected by senior citizens. Many senior citizens retire to the warmer, southern states, and those federal dollars follow them. So that statistic doesn't really mean all that much, unless someone is advocating the reform of those federal programs, but the last time I checked, Democrats raised the specter of grandma starving in the streets if anyone so much as thought about tinkering with those programs. Come on gr, read the link. Or are you going to tell us that Alabama is a retirement haven? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 I wasn't aware that New Orleans, and Biloxi are owned by a Wall Street private equity firm, thanks for enlightening us. great apples to oranges comparison there 1) You've seen my comments about bailing out Cerberus here. 2) You made it an issue of bailing out another state's 'mess' with your reference to Detroit, the city. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 2) You made it an issue of bailing out another state's 'mess' with your reference to Detroit, the city. I said GM and Chrysler were mismanaged like the City of Detroit, from that you make some strange comparison to Katrina ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) I said GM and Chrysler were mismanaged like the City of Detroit, from that you make some strange comparison to Katrina ? Over a million people living at or below sea level in a hurricane zone is ===GOOD=== management? Understand, I'm not AGAINST Federal aid to Katrina victims in the same way I'm not AGAINST aid to GM & Chrysler employees. I would argue that YOU are drawing the odd distinction between aid to people in one part of the country vs. aid to people in another part. Edited December 17, 2008 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Put it this way: Joe Shrimp: - Chose to live in Mobile, Alabama - Got flooded out by Katrina - Needed Federal assistance in order to rebuild Joe Lunchbucket - Chose to work for GM - Is (presently) at risk of losing his job because GM is on the verge of collapse - Needs Federal assistance to GM in order to keep what he's got. ------- Ultimately, if you're going to say, "Joe Lunchbucket shouldn't've gone to work for GM", then you should say, "Joe Shrimp shouldn't've bought a house in Mobile." Situations are the same. Each guy made a choice that put him 'in harm's way'. Therefore, it would seem saying "Aid to GM is bad, aid to Katrina victims is good" is a bit hypocritical. Even down to the potential downsides: Joe Shrimp: - Aid allows Alabama to rebuild housing in a hurricane zone meaning Alabama may need to be 'bailed out' again when the next big hurricane hits Joe Lunchbucket: - Aid allows GM to continue to operate (potentially) without necessary changes to operations meaning GM may need to be bailed out again when the next economic crisis hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) Over a million people living at or below sea level in a hurricane zone is ===GOOD=== management? Understand, I'm not AGAINST Federal aid to Katrina victims in the same way I'm not AGAINST aid to GM & Chrysler employees. I would argue that YOU are drawing the odd distinction between aid to people in one part of the country vs. aid to people in another part. Bad comparison. Many Katrina 'victims' didn't produce anything useful to society like products or tax revenues or anything else (and still don't). Just ask the citizens of Houston how much they contributed to their fair city. I believe you'll find that Houston (along with the others) were only too happy to get rid of them. If we all recall, the crime rate spiked when the Katrina 'victims' came to town. It looks to me like those who welcomed them were the real victims. Follow this link for more information. The ones who ARE useful to society had insurance that paid to either rebuild or relocate their homes. I live in a state that periodically suffers hurricane damage, and I favor private property owners insuring themselves (as I do), not looking to the government to insure their beach property. Edited December 17, 2008 by RangerM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 l would like to throw Mrs Moulds entire shoe collection at Richard Shelby my God l have no respect for that guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildosvt Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 It seems some people seem to forget it's the United States. We're all in this together, like it or not. What affects one, affects the others. You sir have the post of '08! And I agree! BUT! We live in the Divided States of America. The greatest fad right now is being selfish. Its been that way for years. "What about ME!!!!". There's no "I" in "TEAM" just "ME". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Another thing to consinder...if we where in better finacanal times, do you think that Gm or Chrysler would even get the goverment to consider bialing them out? The whole problem of this is that if either one of them do go under, its going to drag the whole entire economy with it down even further. If the Economy was healthlier, we wouldn't see this happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) Put it this way: Joe Shrimp: - Chose to live in Mobile, Alabama - Got flooded out by Katrina - Needed Federal assistance in order to rebuild Joe Lunchbucket - Chose to work for GM - Is (presently) at risk of losing his job because GM is on the verge of collapse - Needs Federal assistance to GM in order to keep what he's got. ------- Ultimately, if you're going to say, "Joe Lunchbucket shouldn't've gone to work for GM", then you should say, "Joe Shrimp shouldn't've bought a house in Mobile." Situations are the same. Each guy made a choice that put him 'in harm's way'. Therefore, it would seem saying "Aid to GM is bad, aid to Katrina victims is good" is a bit hypocritical. Even down to the potential downsides: Joe Shrimp: - Aid allows Alabama to rebuild housing in a hurricane zone meaning Alabama may need to be 'bailed out' again when the next big hurricane hits Joe Lunchbucket: - Aid allows GM to continue to operate (potentially) without necessary changes to operations meaning GM may need to be bailed out again when the next economic crisis hits. a pretty bizarre comparison if you ask me, just shows what lengths you have to go to try to justify this bizarre bail out and throwing money at a Private Equity Investment Firm rebuilding New Orleans = bailout out of the rich, politically connected Wall Street fat cats at Cerberus yeah, right a lot of people didnt like sending money to Katrina victims but equating the Katrina bailout with a bailout of a Private Equity Investment Firm is a real stretch Edited December 17, 2008 by JasonM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) since Cerberus won't give Chrysler any cash, why doesn't Daimler, they still own 20%? why should taxpayers cough up money for Chrysler when those two won't? Edited December 17, 2008 by JasonM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) Come on gr, read the link. Or are you going to tell us that Alabama is a retirement haven? The link focuses on military spending, and that is not the largest portion of federal spending. This selective focus does not give a true picture of total federal spending. In 2008, Social Security and Medicare claimed the largest portion of discretionary federal spending - 43.5 percent. Defense and security spending claimed 29.2 percent. The defense spending percentage did increase from 2001 to 2008, and the Social Security and Medicare proportion did decline during that same period. But they are still the largest drivers of federal spending. Most of the Baby Boomers haven't even retired yet, so I highly doubt that the percentages for Social Security and Medicare will decline in the coming years. The report also contains these sentences: A new report by the Political Economy Research Institute shows that public spending on education creates more jobs that are higher paying than the same amount of money spent on the military. Public spending on other areas such as health care and energy efficiency also create more jobs than the equivalent amount spent on the military, though the jobs have lower pay and benefits. The goal of federal spending is not to create jobs. It's to procure necessary services that the states, acting on their own, cannot provide. Defense is one of these vital services, which is why the Constitution specifically reserves this area for the federal government. We can certainly debate on whether the current level of spending is necessary - although I would note that defense spending is currently at 4 percent of gross domestic product; during the Korean War, it was at 11 percent of gross domestic product; during the beginning of the Kennedy Administration in 1960, it was over 9 percent of gross domestic product. And any discussion of defense spending touches upon America's role in the world. If we are going to be the world's policeman, then we will have to spend lots of money on defense. The Democrats have certainly not advocated that America abandon this role. Of course, an activist approach to foreign relations isn't a "Republican" or "right wing" or "neocon" approach. The progressives in the early part of the 20th century were some of the most enthusiastic boosters of an America that projected its miliary power across the globe and intervened in foreign disputes. Democrats don't mind that America plays policeman; they just didn't like the way George Bush handled that role. And, despite the carping from the Europeans, they still expect us to maintain this role. Again, their beef was with George Bush, not with America being in charge. So, unless President-elect Obama radically restructures America's role in the world, he can't make drastic cuts in defense spending. The simple fact is that, despite the wailing from many other nations, deep down inside a lot of them like the Pax Americana. Education is a state matter, and there is no proof that increased spending results in increased student achievement. That should be the goal of increased education spending - not the creation of jobs. The Washington, D.C., school district spends more than most districts in the nation, and its student achievement results are abysmal. And, yes, lots of people do retire to Alabama. I doubt that they are retiring from Washington state to Alabama, as there are plenty of states out West that are attractive to retirees and closer to family members who remain behind. But for Northeastern and Midwestern retirees, the southern states, with their lower taxes and milder climates, are attractive. It's true that they often have less effective school systems, but retirees, whose children have left home, don't care about this. I've seen this trend in my own family, where, once the kids are through school, the parents move south for the warmer weather and lower taxes after retirement. Edited December 17, 2008 by grbeck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) a pretty bizarre comparison if you ask me, just shows what lengths you have to go to try to justify this bizarre bail out and throwing money at a Private Equity Investment Firm rebuilding New Orleans = bailout out of the rich, politically connected Wall Street fat cats at Cerberus yeah, right a lot of people didnt like sending money to Katrina victims but equating the Katrina bailout with a bailout of a Private Equity Investment Firm is a real stretch He's not talking about the fat cats at Cerberus. He's talking about Joe Toolbox who shows up everyday at the auto plant to earn a living for his family. He's caught up in a potential disaster not of their makng that could affect his life in much the same way as those affected by hurricanes. To me, this bailout isn't about the fat cats (in the case of GM & Chrysler they should shown the door as part of the bailout deal). It's about the thousands of workers who will be left flapping in the wind (sorry for the pun) due to no actions on their part. Edited December 17, 2008 by TomServo92 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) due to no actions on their part. Or, rather, due to the action of going to work for GM or Chrysler (as compared to taking up residence in a hurricane zone). That's pretty much the extent of their involvement in the mess they're in. Edited December 17, 2008 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 He's not talking about the fat cats at Cerberus. He's talking about Joe Toolbox who shows up everyday at the auto plant to earn a living for his family. He's caught up in a potential disaster not of their makng that could affect his life in much the same way as those affected by hurricanes. To me, this bailout isn't about the fat cats (in the case of GM & Chrysler they should shown the door as part of the bailout deal). It's about the thousands of workers who will be left flapping in the wind (sorry for the pun) due to no actions on their part. to say the UAW is some innocent bystander in all this is ignoring the damage the UAW has done to the auto industry year after year and the UAW approved of the DCX breakup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) to say the UAW is some innocent bystander in all this is ignoring the damage the UAW has done to the auto industry year after year and the UAW approved of the DCX breakup Gee, I'm looking for UAW in TomServo92's post, and I'm just not seeing it. He's not talking about the fat cats at Cerberus. He's talking about Joe Toolbox who shows up everyday at the auto plant to earn a living for his family. He's caught up in a potential disaster not of their makng that could affect his life in much the same way as those affected by hurricanes. To me, this bailout isn't about the fat cats (in the case of GM & Chrysler they should shown the door as part of the bailout deal). It's about the thousands of workers who will be left flapping in the wind (sorry for the pun) due to no actions on their part. Oh, there it is. How silly of me to miss it. Edited December 17, 2008 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Gee, I'm looking for UAW in TomServo92's post, and I'm just not seeing it. Oh, there it is. How silly of me to miss it. silly me for thinking the employees were represented by the UAW silly me for thinking that was Joe Toolbox on the picket lines at the launch of the Chevrolet Malibu this year silly me for thinking that was Joe Toolbox striking and costing GM $2 Billion this year I guess to accept your argument we have to reject history and reality no wonder this bail out has had such difficulty, the arguments for it are a real stretch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 silly me for thinking the employees were represented by the UAW silly me for thinking that was Joe Toolbox on the picket lines at the launch of the Chevrolet Malibu this year silly me for thinking that was Joe Toolbox striking and costing GM $2 Billion this year I guess to accept your argument we have to reject history and reality no wonder this bail out has had such difficulty, the arguments for it are a real stretch OK, so let me get this straight: According to you, everyone in the domestic auto industry, top to bottom, is to blame and should be thrown under the bus? How about the secondary businesses and industries that aren't tied directly to the Detroit and the UAW? We should just let them go down in flames as well? I bet if your livelihood was at stake, you wouldn't be taking the same position you are now.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 OK, so let me get this straight: According to you, everyone in the domestic auto industry, top to bottom, is to blame and should be thrown under the bus? How about the secondary businesses and industries that aren't tied directly to the Detroit and the UAW? We should just let them go down in flames as well? I bet if your livelihood was at stake, you wouldn't be taking the same position you are now.... narrow minded angst causes tunnel vision and inability to see the BIG picture..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 narrow minded angst causes tunnel vision and inability to see the BIG picture..... Ya know...this reminds me of arguments with someone else who you used to be on this forum. Gee, I wish I could remember his name.... :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.