that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:17:17 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:21:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

hell, bush spent a trillion dollars on the iraq war alone. that ****ed
money away like it was water

That used to be s shock line and you had to do some creative
bookkeeping to get to a trillion.

uh no. the trillion is dead nuts on

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

and the iraq war killed 4400 americans

is that how you right wingers view money? **** it away in useless wars
that create terrorism, kill young americans and make war profiteers
like dick cheney's halliburtoin rich...

but TARP was uselss 'cuz it didn't allow unemployment to to go 25%?

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:28:15 -0500, wrote:




We'll see how much really gets paid. The big banks were able to pay
but some of them are now saying they didn't really need the money in
the first place. The rat hole that won't give up any of it's money is
AIG. There is nobody there to pay it back. Hedge fund guys like Soros
have it all.

and how much money will iraq pay to the US for the trillion we spent
there?


Again, you can hate Haliburton but they did create a lot of jobs

and the war created 4400 corpses...the flower of american youth. but,
then, they were middle class kids. and the right doesn't particularly
care about american soldiers.

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

On 1/29/10 6:23 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:28:15 -0500, wrote:




We'll see how much really gets paid. The big banks were able to pay
but some of them are now saying they didn't really need the money in
the first place. The rat hole that won't give up any of it's money is
AIG. There is nobody there to pay it back. Hedge fund guys like Soros
have it all.

and how much money will iraq pay to the US for the trillion we spent
there?


Again, you can hate Haliburton but they did create a lot of jobs

and the war created 4400 corpses...the flower of american youth. but,
then, they were middle class kids. and the right doesn't particularly
care about american soldiers.



The right cares about profits and the growth of corporatism. It is good
at manipulating boobus Americanus, as evidenced by Tosk here being a
rightie. Tosk is an uneducated, skill-less, jobless drag on society, and
yet he thinks his interests lie with a side who views him as nothing
more than a serf to be exploited. D'oh.

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:21:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

hell, bush spent a trillion dollars on the iraq war alone. that ****ed
money away like it was water
That used to be s shock line and you had to do some creative
bookkeeping to get to a trillion.
The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time. We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making vehicles for the insurgents to blow
up, materiel for the troops and all manner of industrial goods we gave
the Iraqis.
At a certain point what we paid AIG makes Haliburton look like small
time thieves pinching candy bars from the 7-11. Geithner was on TV
yesterday trying to convince me that was a good idea.


Most of TARP has or will be repaid. Not so with the deaths in Iraq.
Haliburton soak us out of billions, and it's still going on.


It costs lots of money to run a couple of wars toots. If Halliburton
wasn't profitable then Obama would be bailing them out. No?

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.

The idea that it "saved or created" any jobs has been pretty much
debunked. Just in the tiny little State of CT, we had new districts
created and all kinds of other "oooooops" moments, all on the positive
side for the media;)

Scotty

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

On 1/29/10 11:43 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.

The idea that it "saved or created" any jobs has been pretty much
debunked.


Just because you have no job skills and are unemployable doesn't mean
others are in your burning boat.

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:42:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Not so with the deaths in Iraq.
Haliburton soak us out of billions, and it's still going on.

I agree the Iraq war was stupid but I have thought that since 1991. We
should have come home when Powell said we should.

Haliburton was simply the price we paid for not having a draft. In
earlier times it would have been army draftees doing those jobs.
Haliburton was simply the only company that had the resources to do
the mission. They really don't have any meaningful competition in that
arena. This is not really a "Cheney" problem. I made a lot of money in
the 90s on HAL when it was Clinton buying their services ... in a no
bid contract. If you realized Clinton was not going to stop the Iraq
war in 1992 and loaded up on HAL in the single digits you saw it go
to $30. They were doing the logistics for the ground services in the
"no fly zone" war too.
That was where we got the money for our kitchen remodel ;-)

Very solid thinking..

Scotty

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:42:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:21:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

hell, bush spent a trillion dollars on the iraq war alone. that ****ed
money away like it was water

That used to be s shock line and you had to do some creative
bookkeeping to get to a trillion.
The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time. We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making vehicles for the insurgents to blow
up, materiel for the troops and all manner of industrial goods we gave
the Iraqis.
At a certain point what we paid AIG makes Haliburton look like small
time thieves pinching candy bars from the 7-11. Geithner was on TV
yesterday trying to convince me that was a good idea.


Most of TARP has or will be repaid. Not so with the deaths in Iraq.
Haliburton soak us out of billions, and it's still going on.


We'll see how much really gets paid. The big banks were able to pay
but some of them are now saying they didn't really need the money in
the first place. The rat hole that won't give up any of it's money is
AIG. There is nobody there to pay it back. Hedge fund guys like Soros
have it all.

AIG owes about $70B. That's about 1 years worth of the Iraqi war. I believe
all of the major banks have paid back the money. Keep blaming Soros if that
makes you feel better.


Again, you can hate Haliburton but they did create a lot of jobs. How
many jobs did TARP create? For that matter you really need a good
sense of humor to believe the stimulus is creating many jobs. The $2B
clunker deal may have kept some Canadians and Japs working an extra
month last fall and a few car dealers got through Thanksgiving with
the lights on but they are screwed again now.

Believe what you want. The stim helped, which is obvious. Is it the final
answer, no.

--
Nom=de=Plume

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:23:39 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:28:15 -0500, wrote:




We'll see how much really gets paid. The big banks were able to pay
but some of them are now saying they didn't really need the money in
the first place. The rat hole that won't give up any of it's money is
AIG. There is nobody there to pay it back. Hedge fund guys like Soros
have it all.

and how much money will iraq pay to the US for the trillion we spent
there?


Again, you can hate Haliburton but they did create a lot of jobs

and the war created 4400 corpses...the flower of american youth. but,
then, they were middle class kids. and the right doesn't particularly
care about american soldiers.

I am not a fan of the war, never have been. I am still waiting for
Obama to get us out.


But it's his fault that the country is in financial trouble, even though
Bush got us into Iraq, which is costing $10B a month???

--
Nom=de=Plume

that BASTARD criticizes previous administration!!!
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:42:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Not so with the deaths in Iraq.
Haliburton soak us out of billions, and it's still going on.

I agree the Iraq war was stupid but I have thought that since 1991. We
should have come home when Powell said we should.

Haliburton was simply the price we paid for not having a draft. In
earlier times it would have been army draftees doing those jobs.
Haliburton was simply the only company that had the resources to do
the mission. They really don't have any meaningful competition in that
arena. This is not really a "Cheney" problem. I made a lot of money in
the 90s on HAL when it was Clinton buying their services ... in a no
bid contract. If you realized Clinton was not going to stop the Iraq
war in 1992 and loaded up on HAL in the single digits you saw it go
to $30. They were doing the logistics for the ground services in the
"no fly zone" war too.
That was where we got the money for our kitchen remodel ;-)


Give me a break. Cheney orchestrated the increase of use of Haliburton and
Blackwater.

--
Nom=de=Plume