If I May Ask Obama Supporters...

[FooFa]

Let's forget for a moment my universal disdain for every president after JFK, who wasn't all that great but shouldn't have been assassinated. I voted for him because of his words and constant comparisons of how he would be better than Bush because at the time he spoke like he agreed with the congressional, constitutional system. He said he wouldn't hire lobbyists and spoke against Wall St only to turn around and use nothing but Goldman Sachs, Monsanto and other insiders throughout his adm.

I have great respect for what I would term, ekg's 'inside baseball' knowledge and retention of the chapter and verse for events and maneuvering within the beltway. I guess I think that there are those who might have ongoing zeal for him that is misplaced. Panetta, I'm sure you know, told congress a while back that the military takes it's orders from NATO and the UN and that "they may then come to congress..."  Not theory, I'll locate the clip if necessary.

My question is this:Is there one thing in your personal life that has gotten better or improved as a result of this adm? I'm talking about real world things, not food stamps(which I use)or any kind of 'hand out'.

If you don't like this or see 'crazy conspiracy theory' in this brief blurb, please just delete it rather than putting it in the section which in effect mocks the millions of people killed by governments and many other truths. I've been asked before to participate and that's what I'm trying to do.

[Howey]

Although I'm on a fixed income I'm glad to have received a substantial COLA from the gubmint for the first time inmany years. The government also gave us 8k for this beautiful home we live in. Jb is at two years employment with a great employer, making good money, amd we learned yesterday that he already has 1k in his cimpany 401k and our stock investments are positive. We are happy, planning on going on a criuse in October and finally making that trip to NY to be legal in Nov.

What was the question again?

[ekg]

Let's forget for a moment my universal disdain for every president after JFK, who wasn't all that great but shouldn't have been assassinated. I voted for him because of his words and constant comparisons of how he would be better than Bush because at the time he spoke like he agreed with the congressional, constitutional system. He said he wouldn't hire lobbyists and spoke against Wall St only to turn around and use nothing but Goldman Sachs, Monsanto and other insiders throughout his adm.

I have great respect for what I would term, ekg's 'inside baseball' knowledge and retention of the chapter and verse for events and maneuvering within the beltway. I guess I think that there are those who might have ongoing zeal for him that is misplaced. Panetta, I'm sure you know, told congress a while back that the military takes it's orders from NATO and the UN and that "they may then come to congress..."  Not theory, I'll locate the clip if necessary.

My question is this:Is there one thing in your personal life that has gotten better or improved as a result of this adm? I'm talking about real world things, not food stamps(which I use)or any kind of 'hand out'.

If you don't like this or see 'crazy conspiracy theory' in this brief blurb, please just delete it rather than putting it in the section which in effect mocks the millions of people killed by governments and many other truths. I've been asked before to participate and that's what I'm trying to do.

in the summer of 2008, I started out on my own in a new business.. in oct, hubby lost his job. The next year..year 1/2 was the worst I've had in my adult life.. it was unbelievably hard...

today, hubby has been working pretty steadily and my business is literally growing every week.. by pre-2008 standards we're doing pretty fucking awesome.. but by today's standards, we're getting by with a little extra...

Both my work and his rely on the public/private sector working and spending.. he's construction/remodel.. I'm organizing,cleaning,staging..  I am making enough to employ me 20 year old daughter.. True, I could use the money myself.. and she could use more.. but it's sustainable right now with a good chance of increasing every day.

yes.. I have seen a 200% increase in the 'positive' in my life that I accredit to Obama and the choices he's made..Had he not stopped the economic fall.. had he let the auto industry fail at the same time.. we(as a country) would have been destroyed and neither me nor my husband would be working today for more than minimum wage at some fast-food place..if we were lucky enough to get such work.. (and truthfully, I don't think he could..even if he could, he wouldn't have the temperament to last)..

[FooFa]

yes.. I have seen a 200% increase in the 'positive' in my life that I accredit to Obama and the choices he's made..Had he not stopped the economic fall.. had he let the auto industry fail at the same time.. we(as a country) would have been destroyed and neither me nor my husband would be working today for more than minimum wage at some fast-food place..if we were lucky enough to get such work.. (and truthfully, I don't think he could..even if he could, he wouldn't have the temperament to last)..

I'm doing better also because of word of mouth with my elderly assistance work and other things, thank's to my initiative. I'm glad you're doing better. How GM being given tax payer money to build and transplant it's operations to China helped anyone escapes me.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/closing-oshawa-line-could-breach-gm-bailout-conditions/article4358326/?cmpid=rss1(Canada)

http://autonews.gasgoo.com/china-news/summary-shanghai-gm-s-sales-performance-from-2002-120619.shtml

Taxpayers pumped $49.5 billion into GM to save the company and hundreds of thousands of jobs around time Romney wrote a 2008 op-ed piece The New York Times titled "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt."

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2012/06/10/Auto-Outlook-GMs-bailout-fuels-automotive-politics/UPI-89611339320600/#ixzz1yRxRRC4y

(Don't like Romney but they all sound good when they're running to some extent)

The government still owns 26 percent of GM, as it has for almost the last three years.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/government-down-16-billion-gm-bailout_646676.html (I know, I know, Weekly Standard but facts are facts.)

Monday June 18, 2012
GM-Chrysler bailout was a big-ticket move
Taxpayers will lose $23 billion; UAW retirees will gain $23 billion
Advertiser

When General Motors and Chrysler were running out of cash, an $85 billion taxpayer bailout saved the day. This was greeted as great news.

As James Sherk and Todd Zywicki said in a recent column in the Wall Street Journal, "President Obama touts the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler as one of the signature successes of his administration."

You can stop celebrating. Taxpayers are expected to lose an estimated $23 billion on the deal.

The preferential treatment the United Auto Workers received in those bankruptcy cases accounts for the entire loss, the authors say.

"A bedrock principle of bankruptcy law is that creditors with similar claims priority receive equal treatment," they write. Each creditor is entitled to an equal percentage of recovery.

But the administration gave the unsecured claims of the union's Voluntary Employment Beneficiary Association much higher priority that the claims of others.
When the automakers went under, GM owed the retiree benefits association $20.6 billion. Chrysler owed it $8 billion.

The United Auto Workers benefits association got an estimated $12.2 billion more than it would have received had it been treated like the other unsecured creditors.

"The administration also insulated the UAW from most of the sacrifices that unions usually make in bankruptcy - at taxpayer expense," the authors say.

Because of that, GM still has higher labor costs ($56 an hour) than any of its competitors (approximately $47 an hour).

"The Treasury expects the auto bailout to ultimately cost taxpayers $23 billion," Sherk and Zywicki said.

"The funds diverted to the UAW account for the taxpayers' entire net loss."

Thus was $23 billion transferred from the pockets of people who cannot retire at 55 and will have no employer-proved health care in retirement to the pockets of UAW members who can.

It's just one example of the administration's zeal to serve its political partners in organized labor.
http://www.dailymail.com/Opinion/Editorials/201206170115

[FooFa]

In further support of one long adm as I see it:

President Barack Obama’s “Nixon moment,” his assertion of   executive privilegeto prevent the release of potentially incriminating Justice Department documents relating to the Fast and Furious scandal, is at odds with Obama’s 2007 argument that administrations should not “hide behind executive privilege.”

full/w video

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-once-attacked-hiding-behind-executive-privilege.html

[Howey]

I'm doing better also because of word of mouth with my elderly assistance work and other things, thank's to my initiative. I'm glad you're doing better. How GM being given tax payer money to build and transplant it's operations to China helped anyone escapes me.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/closing-oshawa-line-could-breach-gm-bailout-conditions/article4358326/?cmpid=rss1(Canada)

http://autonews.gasgoo.com/china-news/summary-shanghai-gm-s-sales-performance-from-2002-120619.shtml

(Don't like Romney but they all sound good when they're running to some extent)

The government still owns 26 percent of GM, as it has for almost the last three years.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/government-down-16-billion-gm-bailout_646676.html (I know, I know, Weekly Standard but facts are facts.)

So you think letting GM and Chrysler fail would have helped matters, lilFoo?

Are you aware GM China is a huge contributor to GM's current success?

Are you aware the Oshawa plant is in Canada?

Are you aware it's only part of the Oshawa plant that's closing?

Are you aware the closing of the Oshawa plant is temporary?

Are you aware the Oshawa plant is being consolidated with a plant stateside to save money?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/06/01/gm-oshawa-plant.html

The union says it's been told the facility — the older part of the Oshawa car plant — will close by June 2013 and says that could mean 2,000 layoffs.

GM also has a flex assembly plant in Oshawa that is getting a share of the production of the new Chevy Impala. That flex line currently employs 2,000 people and currently makes the Chevy Camaro, Buick Regal and soon, the Cadillac XTS. If Impala production moved there, it could add another 500 jobs, Buckley said.

GM is scaling back its overall operations in Canada as part of a North American restructuring begun two years ago under bankruptcy court protection. Part of that process was an $8-billion cash injection from the governments of Ontario and Ottawa for ownership stakes in the new GM, something the union was eager to discuss on Friday.

Why would GM sell it's stock now at a loss?

[FooFa]

 I put the link about Canada followed by (Canada). The debate was whether or not GM has been a success due to the bailout. I provided several sources that all spell out how much tax payers lost and that the gov still owns 26% of an American company which has essentially set up shop in China with minimal ongoing US operations. I'm sure it's a windfall for the executives and no one else. The argument of too big to fail is a straw man and completely goes against a free market principle which has never really been a free market at all. But if you are so behind the bailouts...they weren't started by Obama.

[Howey]

Whoa..."minimal ongoing US operations"?

This I gotta hear...

[uselesslegs]

There's quite a few things that disappoint me and quite a few things I'm happy about with Obama's Presidency.

He's proven much more centrist than I personally thought he'd be and *cautiously* progressive in other areas.  I know the far right has convinced themselves they SAVED the country by blocking many of the things he would like to see put into action...but I always wonder how much better off, we (the country as a whole) would have been...had they seen fit to cooperate even just 25 percent.  I think things would be a lot different...and for the better.  But I guess we'll never know.  What if's are to debatable.

I know one thing though...I know Romney, if he wins, will come into office in full on *Corporate* mode.  It will be an ultra conservatives wet dream.  The *land of opportunity* will turn into *the thunder dome.* Hell, we're already seeing the shift in the mindset of people.  Money has become almost the only standard we gauge success by now.  Everything else is arbitrary in it's shadow.  Doesn't matter how you positively affect your community..."yea yea, here's your award for your charitable work in town and with the people...now get out of the way so we can suck the cock of this millionaire who doesn't even know the people in the community or own a home here...THAT'S SUCCESS!"

That's not to cast dispersion's at all wealthy people.  Many do outstanding work to try to make tomorrow better...and that work towards a better tomorrow should be what we get excited about...but we don't...it's their bank account that gets people hard, with this newly acquired disconnect that ignores unethical, harmful practices that got them there.  Romney represents the latter in that mindset.  Initiative and dreaming are some of the primary components in ones journey towards a bigger bank account...but that doesn't insure a damn thing. People, however, have been convinced that that's good enough to be the next billionaire.  That's a dangerous exaggeration that turned capitalism into a top down economy and kept our eyes shut while everything was melting down.

Romney scares me.  Not because he malicious.  I think he's probably a nice guy...but he's unknowingly malicious.  Business, is always business with SOME thought to ripple effects, but not anything that will keep him awake at night.  That missing component is great for business, but scary as hell for the reality it creates in the process.  There is a middle ground, but to pursue that you relegate yourself to being only very very wealthy and not fantastically, unimaginably wealthy.  And as we all know...it's just unseemly to be only very very wealthy.

[ekg]

How GM being given tax payer money to build and transplant it's operations to China helped anyone escapes me.

that's because you're not thinking it thru.. let's put this all the way down to level a stripper.. but wait? why would her job be affected by a bailout?  Because.. she need customers to drop their $1 and buy private dances.. if the local car lot was to close or the car plant, then the mechanic who worked there would lose his job..without his work he can't pay his lawn guy now the lawn guy loses that pay.. so  the law guy can't go blow his cash on a stripper and the stripper can't eat..

now, that's one person losing their job.. and it affect 3 people.. and that's just one case.. the mechanic also can't pay his wife's nail appointments anymore, so the nail girl and the shop lose another client.. too many of those and the shop closes causing a whole other ripple effect on it's own.. but we'll just stay with the mechanic.. so now his lost job has lost the lawn guy,the stripper,the nail tech and the nail salon money.. 5 lives, one job..

and we're not done because the mechanic also has to lose his housecleaner.. she will in turn have to give up her helper..to make up the difference in losing that bi-monthly income..

that's 7 people affected by a single job loss.. each of them affect their own web and that web creates chaos in any city because now we're seeing layoff not just at the GM plant or dealership, but the Wendy's and Burger King, the Publix and Books a Million.. and each and every one is multiplied exponentially..

Obama stopped that.. and that helped me.

[Howey]

that's because you're not thinking it thru..

He's not thinking it through because he's making it up.

I'm still waiting for an answer on the "minimal ongoing US operations".

[FooFa]

I respect those views. It's common sense to me that if a company completely transplants to other countries, just like the duplicitous coal restrictions that don't apply in China, that the US operations are drastically slimmed down, including dealers who had a bus for decades having it taken away from them.

I get the superficial differences between them but they are supported by the same banks. The reason that Romney's business success is bullshit is that they stripped down companies mafia style for maximum profit and let many employees get fired in the process. That's good business for the few while the many suffer. That was his companies right to do, however it makes no sense in translating to business sense that would grow the economy for everyone or certainly more people, as president. They could stick a head in a jar in the oval office for all the good they do. I just want the bill of rights and basic common laws back which go back to the magna carta.

[uselesslegs]

I respect those views. It's common sense to me that if a company completely transplants to other countries, just like the duplicitous coal restrictions that don't apply in China, that the US operations are drastically slimmed down, including dealers who had a bus for decades having it taken away from them.

I get the superficial differences between them but they are supported by the same banks. The reason that Romney's business success is bullshit is that they stripped down companies mafia style for maximum profit and let many employees get fired in the process. That's good business for the few while the many suffer. That was his companies right to do, however it makes no sense in translating to business sense that would grow the economy for everyone or certainly more people, as president. They could stick a head in a jar in the oval office for all the good they do. I just want the bill of rights and basic common laws back which go back to the magna carta.

I think you're referring to a *sense of fairness* or *fair play*...and I agree wholeheartedly.

I recently watched something, not sure if it was CNBC or CNN, but they were having a discussion with two entrepreneurs.  One was the lady who created Spanx and the other was a man and to be honest, I can't remember what he created or represented...but anyway.

Both of them being wealthy and successful had TWO different entire takes on business.  Her thought process was that you continually try to improve upon your original design and let the better product speak for itself.  That you try as best you can to take care of your employees and that your efforts are rewarded with devotion, loyalty, and pride to and for the company.

The guy, damn it's bugging me that I can't remember who he was...anyway...he LITERALLY said that business is "crushing" your competition. Annihilating it.  It's not about a better product (though desirable), it's about strangling and destroying anything that stood in your way or took even one cent from your profit.  He said something similar to the Spanx creator, about taking care of employees, but he said it more as an afterthought than something with conviction...most likely to not look like a total schmuck in comparison to her philosophy that your employees are an important part of the whole.

It was very cringe worthy to watch...and spoke volumes to the uncomfortably *comfortable* place that he and many large businesses adhere to now as a *basic business model.*

[Howey]

The debate was whether or not GM has been a success due to the bailout.

There's lots of posts on this forum that prove GM has been highly profitable since the bailout. Look them up.

American company which has essentially set up shop in China with minimal ongoing US operations.

There you go again...are you willing and able to back this statement up or are you going to continue to make shit up?

they weren't started by Obama.

I know. So what.

I think you're referring to a *sense of fairness* or *fair play*...and I agree wholeheartedly.
It was very cringe worthy to watch...and spoke volumes to the uncomfortably *comfortable* place that he and many large businesses adhere to now as a *basic business model.*

It is the basic business model anymore. Hell, if you listen to some of the Romney apologists, Bain was the second coming.

[FooFa]

There's lots of posts on this forum that prove GM has been highly profitable since the bailout. Look them up.

There you go again...are you willing and able to back this statement up or are you going to continue to make shit up?

I know. So what.

It is the basic business model anymore. Hell, if you listen to some of the Romney apologists, Bain was the second coming.

I provided fresh data about the amount debt GM has cost tax payers. My statement about GM's minimal ops here is an informed opinion which you are free to disprove or disagree as you know.