What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[Sean Renaud]

Speaking of change, Obama took an oath to uphold the Constitution but maintained he wanted to fundamentally change the country. So the question is how can he support and defend the nation and the Constitution when he obviously has no love for either as they stood when he took the oath? zhe spends his time plotting ways to circumvent the Constitution.

Wanting to advance your country doesn't mean you don't love it.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

July 3, 2012

Chrysler Group LLC Reports June 2012 U.S. Sales Increased 20 Percent; Best June Sales in Five Years

http://www.chryslergroupllc.com/Investor/PressReleases/sales/ChryslerDocuments/ChryslerGroupLLC_Sales_2012July03.pdf

 

[phrodeau]

Speaking of change, Obama took an oath to uphold the Constitution but maintained he wanted to fundamentally change the country. So the question is how can he support and defend the nation and the Constitution when he obviously has no love for either as they stood when he took the oath? zhe spends his time plotting ways to circumvent the Constitution.

There isn't a politician alive who can make a career out of promising to leave the country exactly the way he found it.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

You, saying trickle down economics don't work.

Response does not follow the question.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Let's see if we can wind up Merc a little but:




Government Motors: As GM shares near record low, taxpayer loss on bailout rises to $35 billion

By ED CARSON

To quote Lando Calrissian, this deal's getting worse all the time.

General Motors(GM) shares fell to a fresh 2012 closing low of 19.57 on Monday. The stock hit 19 in mid-December, the lowest since the auto giant came public at $33 in November 2010 following its June 2009 bankruptcy.

Normally you might say, tough luck investors. But this is Government Motors. The Treasury still owns 26.5% of GM, or 500 million shares. Taxpayers are still out $26.4 billion in direct aid. Shares would have to hit $53 for the government to break even.

Those shares were worth about $9.8 billion as of Monday. That would leave taxpayers with a loss of $16.6 billion.

But that's not the full tally. Obama let GM keep $45 billion in past losses to offset future profits. Those are usually wiped out or slashed, along with debts, in bankruptcy. But the administration essentially gifted $45 billion in write-offs (book value $18 billion) to GM. So when GM earned a $7.6 billion profit in 2011 (more on that below), it paid no taxes.

Include that $18 billion gift, and taxpayers' true loss climbs to nearly $35 billion.

http://news.investors.com/article/6...ailout-taxpayer-loss-rises-as-shares-fall.htm

I'm fine with the terms of the bailout including allowing GM to carry over $18 billion in losses. That's a much better way of doing things than sending investors a fruit basket with a card telling them to go fuck themselves.

Whatever happened to your bitching about the GM escrow account (that GM purchased with stock) being used to pay back their loans? did you give up that angle after facts shed a little light on your hysteria?

 

[unregistered]

 

[bra_man69]

I'm fine with the terms of the bailout including allowing GM to carry over $18 billion in losses. That's a much better way of doing things than sending investors a fruit basket with a card telling them to go fuck themselves.

Whatever happened to your bitching about the GM escrow account (that GM purchased with stock) being used to pay back their loans? did you give up that angle after facts shed a little light on your hysteria?

You do mean a second time of saying go fuck themselves
guess the first tine doesn't count.

 

[mercury14]

All is well, right Merc?

Yawn.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Oh so, liberals want to ditch capitalism now.

You're resorting to so many levels of dumbfuckery to avoid answering the question. Every post you make is just another layer of distortion to avoid being accountable for your own beliefs. It's makin' meh dizzy.

Yes, they do. I thought President Obama made that abundantly clear...

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.

To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf...,
Barack Hussein Obama
2001 Radio Interview

Economic Justice = Redistribution of wealth because Obama believes, as do a lot of the liberal "thinkers," that Government is the source of Capital and that the confiscation of wealth has nothing to do with Capital and that the act of redistribution creates a healthy economy because people then go out and spend their wealth. This thinking has worked wonders wherever it has been tried. It's going to work well here to because it will level the playing field between the middle class and the poor, drawing them closer together.



Did you ever go look up what I said about how the "stock market was going to crash" when the mandate was found constitutional?

 

[mercury14]

None of that shows in the least bit that Democrats want to ditch capitalism. I'd ask you to try again but we both know you're going to fail at this.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

None of that shows in the least bit that Democrats want to ditch capitalism. I'd ask you to try again but we both know you're going to fail at this.

We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do. Don't go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we're encouraging our young people to do that.
Michelle Obama

A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States...,
John P. Holdren
White House Office of Science and Technology Director

"The primary function of regulation in health care, especially as it affects the quality of medical care, is to constrain decentralized, individualized decision making."
Donald Berwick
Death Panel Czar

“And guess what this liberal will be all about? This liberal will be all about socializing, uh, uh… would be about basically about taking over the government running all of your companies.”
Maxine Waters

“The federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country.”
Fortney Hillman "Pete" Stark, Jr. (D)

It really doesn’t prohibit the government from doing virtually anything — the federal government. So I don’t know the answer to your question, because I am not sure there is anything under current interpretation of the commerce clause that the government couldn’t do.
John Yarmuth (D)

“Are you serious? Are you serious?”
Nancy Pelosi (D) (on being asked, “Can you find it in The Constitution?”)

 

[mercury14]

Again, none of that proves your point at all.


"We need to protect Medicare for future generations"
- The RNC website.


By your definition conservatives want to ditch capitalism too. See how that works?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Many of the Republican do.

As long as they run the government, they kinda like it...

I've said that many times. The only one here in denial is you because your party can do no wrong and your loyalty, knowing no bounds, will cause you to say the craziest, most inconsistent things.

"Speaking in Kansas where Teddy Roosevelt advocated for socialism 101 years ago, President Obama argues against free markets, explaining that the founders concept of a capitalist society doesn't work, and the risks of liberty are too great. It's bigger government that's needed."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qmj4trja7w

A_J's corollary #3, “The New Age Liberal maintains contradictory positions comfortably compartmentalized. (This is because the New Age Liberal is a creature that believes in consensus as a short-cut to an examination of the facts and a reasoned judgment about said facts. Corollary #2.)”

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Remember Osawatomie?

 

[mercury14]

Many of the Republican do.

As long as they run the government, they kinda like it...

I've said that many times. The only one here in denial is you because your party can do no wrong and your loyalty, knowing no bounds, will cause you to say the craziest, most inconsistent things.

"Speaking in Kansas where Teddy Roosevelt advocated for socialism 101 years ago, President Obama argues against free markets, explaining that the founders concept of a capitalist society doesn't work, and the risks of liberty are too great. It's bigger government that's needed."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qmj4trja7w

A_J's corollary #3, “The New Age Liberal maintains contradictory positions comfortably compartmentalized. (This is because the New Age Liberal is a creature that believes in consensus as a short-cut to an examination of the facts and a reasoned judgment about said facts. Corollary #2.)”

Nothing you've posted in this thread this morning is true.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This is the Democrat variant of "Who you gonna believe bitch, me or your lying eyes..."

 

[mercury14]

This is the Democrat variant of "Who you gonna believe bitch, me or your lying eyes..."

So no proof to back your idea that Democrats want to ditch capitalism? Just another day in AJ land.

Busybody has more personal accountability than you.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Look, if you are going to dismiss their words and actions, then if I were you, I would seek professional counseling.


You just don't make it any clearer than President Obama did in Osawatomie...

 

[mercury14]

Look, if you are going to dismiss their words and actions, then if I were you, I would seek professional counseling.


You just don't make it any clearer than President Obama did in Osawatomie...

It doesn't matter what I do because their words don't prove that Dems want to ditch capitalism.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It doesn't matter what I do because their words don't prove that Dems want to ditch capitalism.

That's right. The Democrat Party is the last bastion of Capitalism remaining in the United States.

All hail Obama...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Merkel has given the minimum each step of the way. However there have been too many give-aways to count. Each cave-in, no matter how small, has had a cumulative effect. Each time she makes a concession, she adds risk of an adverse ruling in the constitutional court or risk of increased political fallout.

Her latest pre-planned escapade in Brussels puts her at risk of both.

The constitutional court already had the ESM under review. Additional challenges will be filed. I suspect the court will OK the treaty but with a stern warning. And speaking of stern warnings, CSU party leader Horst Seehofer just issued one in no uncertain terms.

This may be the end of the line of what Merkel can agree to without a referendum. When yields head North again in Spain and Italy (and they will because nothing has been solved), Merkel will be in serious trouble.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com