"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 30/12/2009 6:43 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 30/12/2009 10:13 AM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:45:20 -0700,
wrote:

On 29/12/2009 8:41 PM, Bill McKee wrote:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4725887

What with 10-20% unemployment, terrorists, economic melt down, they
schedule
hearings on a college football playoff system.

Fire them all for incompetence!

They want to play football so they can fumble it and not cost $100
billion. Might be progress for the dim-wits. Either that or they ran
out of credit.

No, they want to esblish an Office of Football Management, with it's
own Czar and several thousand underlings. They'll show how well it
works, and then establish the same for baseball, basketball, hockey,
and socker. Maybe rugby also. Then they'll need a Department of Sports
Control with another cabinet member and a few thousand more
underlings.

It's the socialist way.

I hope they play football.

As they are now going to pork more money into GMAC to hell bailout
Warren
Buffet. Now poeple can't afford boats. Many loosing their jobs and
homes, even families because they fall short of cash to pay bills in
this
failing economy of debt and corruption.

And they continue to use the tax system to bailout corrupt corporations
and banks where the executives need to be so fired for gross negligence.
No accountability, SOX was a huge waste of time.. not enforced. Not one
GM, Chrysler or banker has even been charged for the fraud. I say fraud
as GM even had a successful class action judgement for mistatement of
the
books, and Wagoner gets a $20M pension.

Think, 4-5 years ago GMAC bragged how much money it had. Wonder where
it
went? If I were president I would send in accounting forensic experts
and
turn GM& GMAC upside down.

This so stinks. I will not buy a GM, GMAC, Chrysler, Carlyle, Cerberus,
CAW/UAW piece of crap again...makes me so mad.


It is very frustrating... I understand the economics of why they're doing
it
I suppose, but it still stinks. Wagoner should get nothing.

I own an ancient Ford pickup and my "real" car is German, which impresses
me
and the occasional client. I never much liked GM's offerings.

Unfortunately the road to hell is paved with good intentions. What is it
morally or ethically correct to tax people for corprations with malace and
negligence operate a company beyond bankruptcy and in a material way that
is in fact fraud?

What justifies it? Saving a few jobs? For what this is costing the
taxpayers it would be cheaper to put them all on unemployment benefits for
10 years or more if needed and conficate the assets in chapter 7 for
recovery of what is left.

And who is bailing out he other 98% that lost jobs? How many will loose
jobs, have lower wages, lesser prospect for decades as the mountain of
liberal debt gets a good tax rape on business and individual taxes? On,
banks will win, that is why the biggest debtor, goverment wants them.

I don't think it is about jobs. It is about congress/government not doing
the job of shutting down the GMs and the Chrylsers some 5 to 8 years ago
as they have been bankrupt for a very long time. It is about rich cats
like Buffet and the client lists of Carlyle and Cerberus calling
politicians with gentle conversations about who to donate to. It is about
spining a good BS story that GM is too big to die.

GM isn't too big to die. At least two other larger companies than GM died
without bailouts and the sky didn't fall. Thousands of others have died
and it doesn't even make the papers. Many died and unemployed thousands
without bailouts before GM bankruptcy because they couldn't force GM to
pay it's damned bills.

In part, this is about a growning reality that the American system has
become corrupt. No different than a Chavez or Castro. Castro
nationalized. How does Chavez taking Connoco Phillips assets and asking
people to work for less and different than what Washington DC is doing
with taxations and GM/GMAC and others?

Freaking bunch of hypocrits.


Unfortunately, the bailouts started during the last administration. In for a
penny, in for a pound? I wasn't a big fan of it either, but there was a
cogent argument for it then and now. At this point, the economy is still so
fragile that letting a big company like GM or big banks go under would
undermine the situation even more, especially on the jobs front, which is
awful.


--
Nom=de=Plume