driveby Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Jesus, was there this much whining when Chimpy was elected EITHER time? BJ, scare up a thread or two willya? Anyone propose civil war when Rainman (without the savant part) won? Hey Cre and dumb Hollywood chicks are on the same email list. "The sort of criticism over the last couple of weeks is a bit unfounded, he's been in office for barely any time and I think he inherited a lot on his plate and he's doing a pretty remarkable job," quipped Mandy Moore. "I think it's cool that he went on Leno and I watched the "60 minutes" interview as well last week. The guy is just so articulate and he is so well versed in something that is so new to him and I think he has a good team around him. It sounds cliché, but he makes me feel proud to be an American." Debra Messing also told Tarts that our new President is not only meeting her expectations, but going far beyond. "He is thoughtful and considerate and he gets all the information before he speaks which I think is a wonderful quality for the ruler of the free world to have," she explained. The ladies of "Entourage" certainly showed their Obama-loyalty too. "It's not an over night process. It's going to get worse before it gets better; we're all kind of in the same boat now. Everybody's broke and everybody's struggling and he makes me feel like I know him and that I know Michelle and that they’re like us and they’re out to try to save the USA. It's just an amazing period to watch him take on these challenges and everyday in the news to hear about AIG or possibly global currency changing, it's incredible. He's facing big challenges and he's got a lot of support and I'm just praying things get better," Debi Mazar said, while co-star Perrey Reeves added that Obama is a "wonderful leader" and she’s looking forward to his future endeavors. slurp, slurp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Hey Cre and dumb Hollywood chicks are on the same email list. slurp, slurp Dude, I'd cozy up to either of them even if they were ditto heads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 EDIT: BTW, I totally disagree that the goverment should break up, or have anything to do with "too big to fail" companies. Either the companies are violating anti-trust laws, or not. Otherwise, let them live or die as constituted. I disagree - the "too big to fail" appellation in effect makes these companies wards of the government by default, since their failure is a disaster for the nation and beyond that forces government(s) to step in. Ergo, the government acting on behalf of the rest of the economy has every right - and the duty - to break them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 How do we know if they're too big to fail, when we do't let them fail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirehairman Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 How do we know if they're too big to fail, when we do't let them fail? Beat me to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 How do we know if they're too big to fail, when we do't let them fail? How do you know you'll die if you put a slug in your brain unless you pull the trigger? Honest answer: just look at AIG which has it's tentacles everywhere. Look at the contracts and extrapolate the dominos that fall I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 this move is all a show. the govt needs to say they did something in order to funnel more of our money into a failed company and industry. communism rocks!!! si, amigo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I disagree - the "too big to fail" appellation in effect makes these companies wards of the government by default, since their failure is a disaster for the nation and beyond that forces government(s) to step in. Ergo, the government acting on behalf of the rest of the economy has every right - and the duty - to break them up. yep, where is wiegie to give the economists pov as to why these companies are "too big to fail" (while I dont necissarily agree with that I do understand it and understand that extreme instances take extreme measures, IE: the shape our economy is in now)....and I bet if Obama and his administration wasnt giving these companies money and letting them live or die on their own accord then people would be yelling they are too big to let fail and Obama needs to do something about it...it is a no win situation at the present from a political aisle pov and in the end we will only know if it was a win or lose based on what happens to our country and economy in the future...if there was a quick easy and right fix I am sure it would have been implemented by now...however like i said in extreme circumstances where there are no answers there are risks and unfortunately like them or not these are elected officials by US(read, us and also United States) so until we send a message of change (to the Dems and Repubs) we have to live with what we get and hope for the best and I truly do hope for the best because right now that is the one constant that everyone has(rich or poor) and that is HOPE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 yep, where is wiegie to give the economists pov as to why these companies are "too big to fail" (while I dont necissarily agree with that I do understand it and understand that extreme instances take extreme measures, IE: the shape our economy is in now)....and I bet if Obama and his administration wasnt giving these companies money and letting them live or die on their own accord then people would be yelling they are too big to let fail and Obama needs to do something about it...it is a no win situation at the present from a political aisle pov and in the end we will only know if it was a win or lose based on what happens to our country and economy in the future...if there was a quick easy and right fix I am sure it would have been implemented by now...however like i said in extreme circumstances where there are no answers there are risks and unfortunately like them or not these are elected officials by US(read, us and also United States) so until we send a message of change (to the Dems and Repubs) we have to live with what we get and hope for the best and I truly do hope for the best because right now that is the one constant that everyone has(rich or poor) and that is HOPE. I wasn't aware that we had hope.... are you sure that is an option at this point?....I think the US economic state is and will continue to be hopeless for the next 4-6 years at a minimum.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 How do we know if they're too big to fail, when we do't let them fail? My point exactly. It just seem like one more way for a politician to be corrupted. Here's a $125,000 donation if you will make sure to recognize my largest competitor as "too big too fail" and will bust them up. We already know they will look the other way like Obama, Frank, and Dodd did with Fannie , Freddie and AIG, what is to keep them from helping their contributors by naming competitors too big to fail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 How do we know if they're too big to fail, when we do't let them fail? Good question How do you know you'll die if you put a slug in your brain unless you pull the trigger? Honest answer: just look at AIG which has it's tentacles everywhere. Look at the contracts and extrapolate the dominos that fall I guess. Good answer Although I care a lot about capitalism succeeding, I care nothing for the companies themselves. None are necessary, only the functionality they provide. Take Wells Fargo - if it collapsed tomorrow, the global system should not have to miss a beat. By the end of the week, all Wells Fargo's customers would be signed up with another bank. That's how it should work and that's how it's going to have to work in the future because for damn sure we can't afford this again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 That's how it should work and that's how it's going to have to work in the future because for damn sure we can't afford this again. I think you need to differentiate between what is actually stimulus, and what is a blind power grab and gross expansion of government. We could probably afford several more real stimuli if the expansion of government wasn't attached to them. Not saying I want to, but saying we could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Not saying I want to, but saying we could. Sure we could but why when we don't have to? It is totally unlike you to support any government interference in business - I expected you to oppose me wanting the government to break these companies up but I also expected you to oppose any form of government bailout too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 yep, where is wiegie to give the economists pov as to why these companies are "too big to fail" (while I dont necissarily agree with that I do understand it and understand that extreme instances take extreme measures, IE: the shape our economy is in now)....and I bet if Obama and his administration wasnt giving these companies money and letting them live or die on their own accord then people would be yelling they are too big to let fail and Obama needs to do something about it...it is a no win situation at the present from a political aisle pov and in the end we will only know if it was a win or lose based on what happens to our country and economy in the future...if there was a quick easy and right fix I am sure it would have been implemented by now...however like i said in extreme circumstances where there are no answers there are risks and unfortunately like them or not these are elected officials by US(read, us and also United States) so until we send a message of change (to the Dems and Repubs) we have to live with what we get and hope for the best and I truly do hope for the best because right now that is the one constant that everyone has(rich or poor) and that is HOPE. Well stated and non-politically driven post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Sure we could but why when we don't have to? It is totally unlike you to support any government interference in business - I expected you to oppose me wanting the government to break these companies up but I also expected you to oppose any form of government bailout too. I don't agree with the bail outs. The only one I even considered for a moment was AIG under the too big to fail ruse. I've since come to the conclusion we should be bailing out anyone. I think we should let them all die, if they can't make it on their own. Sure it would be a tough on the nations economy for them to fail, but I think we would recover. If we need a stimulus to help recover from the affects then so be it, though I'm talking stimulus not bail out or government expansion. Does that make sense to you? Edited March 30, 2009 by Perchoutofwater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Well stated and non-politically driven post. thanks because I really dont care how the economy gets fixed as long as it gets fixed (and I dont think there is a quick fix...fwiw I happen to unfortunately agree with Avernus on the 6-8 time frame and I felt that way before the election had even happened)...I just know that I don't want to be 72 in 30 years talking about this time like my grandparents talked about how tough they had it during the great depression so with that said I have no problem with our leaders doing things and thinking outside the box to try and fix our economy. Edited March 30, 2009 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I wasn't aware that we had hope.... are you sure that is an option at this point?....I think the US economic state is and will continue to be hopeless for the next 4-6 years at a minimum.... Of course you are aware we have hope... Dont you HOPE that this economic crisis does NOT last 4-6 years? Dont you HOPE that you dont lose your job or ability to take care of yourself/family(if you have one)? Right now for many people HOPE truly is all they have...they HOPE they dont lose their job...they HOPE they can find a new job because they just lost their job....they HOPE that the economy gets fixed so their children dont have to suffer thru what they are suffering thru...they HOPE that their loved ones fighting in IRAQ etc come home safe. like him or hate him for whatever reason can anyone say that they really HOPE that Obama fails to fix our economy? No matter if you agree with his methods or not do people really HOPE he fails? to quote one of my favorite actors from one of my favorite movies: "either we heal now as a team. Or we will die as individuals" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Honest answer: just look at AIG which has it's tentacles everywhere. Look at the contracts and extrapolate the dominos that fall I guess. Meh - I say stick a fork in all of them - especially if they have been significant contributors to political campaigns. We're all (us, our kids and their kids...) are going to pay the piper now. Claiming that to let this companies fail would be too painful is short-sighted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Claiming that to let this companies fail would be too painful is short-sighted. I share your level of excitement on bailing out companies, but there are some incredibly intelligent people who don't agree with your last statement. I know that a lot of what is going now falls in line with some of the more popular right-wing conspiracy theories, but there is a very good chance that all these bailouts are taking place because we need to stop the snowball effect, and it would simply be a hell of a lot worse to do nothing. Edited March 30, 2009 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Because I work in the entertainment business and that phrase is as old as dirt TV itself? No...it's not everywhere wv. But I think if you keep looking you'll satisfy yourself to having found it regardless. It appears we have a rather large sarchasm here... Perhaps I should have used the ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 I share your level of excitement on bailing out companies, but there are some incredibly intelligent people who don't agree with your last statement. I know that a lot of what is going now falls in line with some of the more popular right-wing conspiracy theories, but there is a very good chance that all these bailouts are taking place because we need to stop the snowball effect, and it would simply be a hell of a lot worse to do nothing. I'd rather see us do nothing with regards to bailouts. If warranted some stimulus could be done, but it should be temporary, not permanently increasing the size of government. Personally I think I'm going to end up coming out of Obama's stimulus package smelling like a rose, but I'd rather not have a stimulus than the grand expansion of government he is trying to push on us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 How do you know you'll die if you put a slug in your brain unless you pull the trigger? Honest answer: just look at AIG which has it's tentacles everywhere. Look at the contracts and extrapolate the dominos that fall I guess. This is a ridiculously fallacious argument. The slug in the brain is the law of physics. That's hard science. There's a reason why economics is called a "social" science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Fiat might just be the world's worst cars now that Trabant and Lada have gone away. That's what I was thinking. I'd be much happier if Renault, Peugeot, Kia... or anyone else was buying Chrysler. Maybe that's the leverage that Chrysler has now... a 6 billion dollar incentive to someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Whatever happened to the Ford-GM merger talk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 What I'd really like to hear from all you libs is the constitutional justification for the obamessiah taking over car companies, or any bailouts for that matter. You killed shrub (rightly so) for his trampling of constitutional rights with Patriot, gitmo, etc. But now strangely silent about the constitution, or you offer justifications (just like the righties did defending shrub). 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.