Blast from the past - Brexit - Page 322
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 322 of 334 FirstFirst ... 222272312320321322323324332 ... LastLast
Results 6,421 to 6,440 of 6663
  1. #6421
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Surbiton, surrey, UK
    Posts
    1,643
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2032
    Likes (Received)
    1056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RC99 View Post
    The old ones who are still socialists are the ones who have sponged off others all their lives.

    Think the the types who work in heavily government protected sectors. Law, education, medicine, government bureaucracy etc etc.
    Ah just fumes, you got to be in the big club for Champion Sponger bragging rights.

  2. #6422
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,986
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nyc123 View Post
    Doesn't seem like a fair comparison. Tariff revenue was then turned over into aid. There was no revenue for the auto bailout - they just bailed them out.

    I guess you could argue that someone paid for it along the way - a combination of the farmers, the trading companies, the end consumers - but it gets a bit more complicated . ..

    Figuring this out for the auto bailout is much more a straight-line calculation. It just came out of the federal budget. There was no revenue collected, nor any cost burdens shared by specific groups, just taxpayers.
    This is totally wrong.

    Auto "bailout" - GM and Chrysler basically went chapter 11, with the understanding that the government would buy enough stock to create a "new" GM and Chrysler. Later on, the US goobermint sold the stocks (or engineered the purchase by Fiat, in Chrysler's case). Shortfall came out to about 9 billion. GM and Chrysler are still alive, along with all the suppliers who would have gone under (Ford was promoting this plan as well, even though they were not in trouble, because a ton of their common suppliers would have gone under.)

    Meanwhile, Bush and Obummer poured several trillion into the banks from which they got zero in return, and under a hundred billion into auto, of which they got all but nine back - and we kept the US auto industry.

    Payoffs to soybean "farmers" (apparently the addresses those checks have gone to are in Manhattan, where the absentee landlords live) come to about 28 billion so far. We ain't gonna see one penny of that back, ever. Farm bankruptcies are up to 24%, the highest in decades.

    Agreed, the situations are different. But they ain't different in the way you described it.

  3. Likes Scottl, Oldwrench liked this post
  4. #6423
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    4,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4661
    Likes (Received)
    4653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rand View Post
    Would it have been better to let the banks collapse, as they were allowed to in the 1929 great depression? 25% unemployment and soup kitchens aren't fun...
    Not all of the banks collapsed. One author called it The Great Country Duck Dinner because the big boys on Wall Street snapped up the assets of smaller failed banks for pennies on the dollar. This is how we came up with the concept of "too big to fail".

    Glass-Steagall was designed to correct the flaws in the system and worked quite well until the Wall Street boys got their elected puppets to start repealing it a piece at a time. Dodd-Frank is a piss-poor substitute and 2008 won't be the last bit of trouble.

    PS: The Federal Reserve was created in 1913, supposedly to prevent crashes like the one that happened years later.

  5. #6424
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    243
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    64
    Likes (Received)
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    This is totally wrong.

    Auto "bailout" - GM and Chrysler basically went chapter 11, with the understanding that the government would buy enough stock to create a "new" GM and Chrysler. Later on, the US goobermint sold the stocks (or engineered the purchase by Fiat, in Chrysler's case). Shortfall came out to about 9 billion. GM and Chrysler are still alive, along with all the suppliers who would have gone under (Ford was promoting this plan as well, even though they were not in trouble, because a ton of their common suppliers would have gone under.)
    I stand corrected. So they recouped some of the loss through realized gains on stock. And it still came out to a net loss of 10-11 billion according to Google.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Meanwhile, Bush and Obummer poured several trillion into the banks from which they got zero in return, and under a hundred billion into auto, of which they got all but nine back - and we kept the US auto industry.
    Incorrect. The actually made money on this. Unlike the auto bailout where they lost money. 266 billion more than they paid out, according to the Treasury.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Payoffs to soybean "farmers" (apparently the addresses those checks have gone to are in Manhattan, where the absentee landlords live) come to about 28 billion so far. We ain't gonna see one penny of that back, ever. Farm bankruptcies are up to 24%, the highest in decades.
    Also incorrect. The tariff revenue paid for this. It wasn't a direct payout from the Treasury like the GM thing. There was money to pay it from the beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Agreed, the situations are different. But they ain't different in the way you described it.
    They are different in the way I described. Explain how they're not.

    You have one where the Treasury dispersed money to buy stock. They then sold that stock later at a higher price and got some money back, according to you. So they made *some* of the money back, but still ended with a net loss. They had no revenue stream to pay for it upfront - they only got it afterwards. The money to pay for it came from every taxpayer - there was no heavier tax burden on specific groups.

    Then you have the soybean stuff. There was tariff revenue in the billions from the get-go. That money went into the Treasury's coffers. The Treasury then disbursed money for trade-related-aid for farmers. The cost of that was concentrated on specific groups, namely farmers, commodity trading companies, and end consumers. I don't remember seeing soybean and soybean products go up, so if that's the case, the farmers and trading companies felt most of that, unlike the GM case where it's all taxpayers.

    Hope that helps.

  6. #6425
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,783
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    493
    Likes (Received)
    1979

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    ...Farm bankruptcies are up to 24%, the highest in decades.
    There are 2.2 million family farms in the US that could be eligible for the Chapter 12 bankruptcy. 24% would be over 500,000 farms.

    This did not sound right- I looked up the stats.

    The number of Chapter 12 filings in FY 2019 was 580. That's a 24% increase from 2018, which had 501.

    For comparison:
    1987 4,812
    2003 700
    2010 723
    2011 637

    So not only is it not the highest in decades, it's not even the highest in this decade...

  7. Likes adh2000, digger doug liked this post
  8. #6426
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    near Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    5,542
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    441
    Likes (Received)
    2071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barbter View Post
    I reckon within 20 years I bet we'll be voted back in.

    The old people now were the hippies of the sixties and seventies. I am sure back then they would have been red hot Labour supporters as well.

    When people are forced to go outside the walled garden of government security and have to venture into the real world, their views of the world changes.

  9. Likes digger doug, barbter, Oldwrench liked this post
  10. #6427
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    4,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2638
    Likes (Received)
    2384

    Default

    I voted conservative at every election from the 1979 to 2015. Not any more...

  11. #6428
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2092
    Likes (Received)
    1375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rand View Post
    I voted conservative at every election from the 1979 to 2015. Not any more...
    So it's another vote for the Monster Raving Loony Party from now on then?

  12. #6429
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    28,209
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barbter View Post
    So it's another vote for the Monster Raving Loony Party from now on then?
    Thot it was illegal to cast a vote for all forty-leben parties in the same election cycle?

  13. #6430
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2092
    Likes (Received)
    1375

    Default

    ..and when you've finished shining these, get me a cup of tea....
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails eclrabmwwaax227.jpeg.jpg  

  14. #6431
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    28,209
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barbter View Post
    ..and when you've finished shining these, get me a cup of tea....
    LOL!

    Evidence has it our Boris is indeed a bit crackers, but expecting that partic'lar Frenchman to be able to even distinguish between a teapot and a chambre pot would be be clear around the bend!

    To be fair, not sure Boris would notice which one it was brewed in, regardless.

    You'd have to ken Politicians...


  15. #6432
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,986
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    The number of Chapter 12 filings in FY 2019 was 580. That's a 24% increase from 2018, which had 501.
    You're right, janc, and what I intended to say. An increase in bankruptcies of 24%, which may or may not be meaningless but certainly does not indicate that farming is smoothly riding the waves of this tariff crap ...

    Note that I do not mean that corrections to trade imbalances is stupid. It's not. But the way it was done is retarded. (If the goal was to improve our trade position. If the goal was just to impose a tax to offset the giveway he managed immediately after inauguration, then it was brilliant. The yokels are applauding a tax increase on themselves, whoda thunk it ?)

    Quote Originally Posted by nyc123 View Post
    I stand corrected. So they recouped some of the loss through realized gains on stock. And it still came out to a net loss of 10-11 billion according to Google.
    According to everything I have seen, the number is nine billion. And the goobermint could have done better (probably made a pretty good profit, as they did with Chrysler under Iacocca) if they kept the stock longer, but they ditched it early for political reasons (probably so Obama could say "every penny is paid back." Well, every penny handed out under his administration was paid back, but not the money disbursed under Bush. Politics rears its ugly head.

    Plus it's not "my claim", it's the closest I can find to fact, verified in several places by several entities.

    However, according to sources, Bush didn't want to disburse ANY money to the auto industry but was perfectly happy to hand out hundreds of billions, which became trillions, to the fucking asshole Goldman-Sachs & Clowns who caused the entire meltdown Depression with their fraudulent criminal activities. So, in the big picture, under eighty billion to save GM, Chrysler, and their suppliers -- basically the entire US auto industry - was an intelligent move. Especially since it ended up costing nine billion total and Ford would have gone down the shitter as well, since they couldn't get any parts. No idea what would have happened to the entire ag equipment industry as well, since they use the same suppliers. Nine billion to save much of what's left of US manufacturing, yeah, they shoulda just let them chips fall where they may, eh ?

    Except for banking, them guys is important !

    If Japan had done this, people would be standing on their seats applauding a great industrial policy. In fact Japan did do this, Toyota lost money and built crap for a decade before they got it together. Every time "pundits" talk, it's how wonderful Toyota is at the top of their list of great auto companies. Sorry, but you need to put up with fertilizing the ground to grow good tomatoes.

    Jump to the US. We are fucking idiots. Investment banks are nothing but slimy crooks and shysters, worse than used car sleazeballs with sawdust in the oil and Mounds bars through the sparkplug holes, so that's where we invest our resources. We, as in "the US taxpayer" is beyond stupid.


    Incorrect. The actually made money on this. Unlike the auto bailout where they lost money. 266 billion more than they paid out, according to the Treasury.
    We "made money" on TARP ? Are you out of your rabbit-ass mind ? That's as far as I'm gonna go on this one ! you have just totally discredited yourself ...

    Also incorrect. The tariff revenue paid for this. It wasn't a direct payout from the Treasury like the GM thing. There was money to pay it from the beginning.

    Then you have the soybean stuff. There was tariff revenue in the billions from the get-go. That money went into the Treasury's coffers. The Treasury then disbursed money for trade-related-aid for farmers.

    Hope that helps.
    This is all speculation and therefore, horseshit. You have no idea where any tariff monies went, where the money to pay soybeans absentee landlords came from, who got hurt and who benefitted. Lets see some real numbers instead of speculation. Just because money was collected from tariffs does not mean that the same monies went to these payoffs.

    From acquaintance with US government fiscal shenanigans, I'm gonna speculate that outgo did not come from the same place as inflow. But I'm honest enough to say this is speculation, not present it as fact, unlike some others here ...

    Further, what about all the little exporters slammed or put out of business by these tariffs ? Lobster guys in Maine, fifty million annually and years of work, down the shitter. Pistachio farmers, same. Cheese and milk exporters. Machinery and equipment (much of that is made elsewhere now, powerhouse US whoop-dee-doo, but what about guys like CarbideBob ? MotionGuru ? I was even at one time peripherally involved in a carbonless paper project, equipment designed and built in Los Angeles. That'd be deader than last year's fruitcake now.) There were lots of small companies with little offices here selling stuff. Mort. Morter than mort. Where's the numbers on these ?

    Meanwhile, Home Depot, Lowes, Walmart keep on selling China stuff with an additional 15 - 25% tax laid on top, because you have no other suppliers for this stuff. Who is paying that ? One guess.

    Clue - not them. They don't care if rmb-to-$ goes to 50:1 and euros are unaffected, they don't need to buy US products anyhow. Tariffs change nothing internally. What does the US make that you can't buy anywhere else ? There is no cost to China in this yet, they have so many dollars stockpiled they can buy anything they want on the world markets for a long time. Trump will be long gone before it costs China anything substantial, meanwhile they will alter their future plans to include us out.*

    Your simplistic version of events isn't a help. You are just re-mouthing the crap that Wall Street - the same bunch of assholes who brought us the 2006 Depression and "for every domestic job lost, four or five new jobs will be created" - spew. (They forgot to mention that the new jobs would be stacking boxes or selling french fries. Maybe a greeter at Home Depot if you were lucky. "Spill on aisle five ! cleanup to aisle five !" yeah, great.)

    It's repulsive vomit.

    * p.s. just had new year's eve dinner, a day early. For the first time I can remember there were no pork dishes. We had fish, chicken, beef, clams, and a concoction I made with chicken in a scooped-out cantaloupe (wasn't too bad, thank god.) Green beans and succotash and li zi and some other vegetable the US doesn't have. Probably some stuff I forgot, still feel too full. Could have had pork, it is more expensive than before so less common in the cheap noodle shops, but I suggested no. Screw Trump and the horse he rode in on. Sorry, pundits, China is not starving.


    pps Drooling moron Biden tells miners to 'learn to program' in order to find 'jobs of the future'

    IBM tried this with predictable results. He could look it up if he could read. What do these people use to keep their ears from clanging together ? Some kind of cotton batting, possibly ? Imported from China ?

    What the F is wrong with the US, 350 million people but we can't find five or six with an IQ over 12 to run for president ? Even if this did work (it doesn't, IBM already proved the concept a total failure), wtf would we do with another million programmers ? Create two million more websites that don't work ? This is going to pay whom, exactly ? Libtards take this seriously. How stupid can you get ? Why not tell them to learn to clean toilets or move to California and pick lettuce for $2 a week ? At least that'd be honest.

    wtf, over ?


    One other little thing that goes with New Years - December 29, Wounded Knee South Dakota. 20 medals of "honor". Something to remember every year, the Christmas gift that keeps on giving.

    Thank you for your service.

    .
    Last edited by EmanuelGoldstein; 12-31-2019 at 12:08 AM.

  16. #6433
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    243
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    64
    Likes (Received)
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    You're right, janc, and what I intended to say. An increase in bankruptcies of 24%, which may or may not be meaningless but certainly does not indicate that farming is smoothly riding the waves of this tariff crap ...
    That's one hell of a way of admitting you were flat out wrong. Your numbers were off. Why can't you just own it like an adult? I would say "you should learn to admit your mistakes", but since you're adult, we're beyond that; you'll always be a child in that respect.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    According to everything I have seen, the number is nine billion.

    Plus it's not "my claim", it's the closest I can find to fact, verified in several places by several entities.
    Trump says GM owes taxpayers $11B from bailout if it cuts jobs | Autoblog

    "The U.S. government lost $11.2 billion on its bailout of General Motors, according to a 2014 government report."

    Is there a newer updated number? I'm not going to take up my time doing this. I don't mind admitting I'm off if you can find it.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Except for banking, them guys is important !
    ....well that's because they are. Do you not understand this? Banks are where credit comes from. If all the largest banks fail, then all the largest companies in the US (and globally) relying on them run into funding problems. It's like a domino effect. GM is big, but it ain't bulge bracket banking big. I can't believe I have to explain this...

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    We "made money" on TARP ? Are you out of your rabbit-ass mind ? That's as far as I'm gonna go on this one ! you have just totally discredited yourself ...
    We made money on the portion paid out to banks. Instead of me discrediting myself, you've just shown yourself to be pulling stuff out of nowhere....again. You'd do better to fact-check yourself. How have you not learned this by now? What is this, the 9th or 10th time you've been wrong now when you include the China discussion? This is pathetic.

    https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives...09.26.2012.pdf

    This is a report from the Treasury. You know, that place that pays out government money for stuff. Now look under the "Disbursed" column in the "Bank Program Totals" row. $245.1 Billion. Now look to the right under the "Total Cash Back" column. $265.9 Billion. Now let's do some math. Which number is bigger, "Emmanuel"? $245 or $265? $265, yes? So they paid it back and made money on it. You're welcome. Now Venmo me for that tutoring, and no you don't get your dignity back in return.

    Also, correction from my last post: 266 was not the amount of profit they made, it was the amount paid back.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    This is all speculation and therefore, horseshit. You have no idea where any tariff monies went, where the money to pay soybeans absentee landlords came from, who got hurt and who benefitted. Lets see some real numbers instead of speculation. Just because money was collected from tariffs does not mean that the same monies went to these payoffs.
    Time for another lesson, apparently. You take in billions in revenue x. You pay out billions in payout y. X is tariff revenue. Y is farm aid payouts. If revenue x is greater than payout y, then x paid for y. Tariff revenues were greater than the farm aid payouts. Do you understand now? Rhetorical question - of course you do, but will never admit it.

    There is no noticeable, huge inflation in the data from the government. So that cost was spread over farmers and trading companies. If there's no consumer inflation, then consumers did not bear the brunt of that. That only leaves two groups. Please pay me for this time.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Further, what about all the little exporters slammed or put out of business by these tariffs ? Lobster guys in Maine, fifty million annually and years of work, down the shitter. Pistachio farmers, same. Cheese and milk exporters. Machinery and equipment (much of that is made elsewhere now, powerhouse US whoop-dee-doo, but what about guys like CarbideBob ? MotionGuru ? I was even at one time peripherally involved in a carbonless paper project, equipment designed and built in Los Angeles. That'd be deader than last year's fruitcake now.) There were lots of small companies with little offices here selling stuff. Mort. Morter than mort. Where's the numbers on these ?
    Ok. You're the US president. How do you combat this? I can't wait for this answer....Double stupid points for saying "take it to the WTO". I already said multiple times prior that I don't believe he's going about it in the right way. However, the right way is going to inevitably involve tariffs, in my opinion. I don't see another way around that. You will have to have anti-dumping or countervailing duties of some sort, which are tariffs.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Meanwhile, Home Depot, Lowes, Walmart keep on selling China stuff with an additional 15 - 25% tax laid on top, because you have no other suppliers for this stuff. Who is paying that ? One guess.
    Where is this inflation? I don't see 15-25% inflation. Please cite your numbers with inflation data. Otherwise, it's bullshit. I know there's been hikes here or there, but the economy is still going forward. There is no huge marked, noticeable rise in inflation. Meanwhile, China's economy is slowing, and all the statistic-fixers are playing all the games they can to hide that. Just about everybody knows that. "Made in China" statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    * p.s. just had new year's eve dinner, a day early. For the first time I can remember there were no pork dishes. We had fish, chicken, beef, clams, and a concoction I made with chicken in a scooped-out cantaloupe (wasn't too bad, thank god.) Green beans and succotash and li zi and some other vegetable the US doesn't have. Probably some stuff I forgot, still feel too full.....
    Nobody gives a shit.

    I'm not wasting my time sloshing through the rest of the crap you wrote.

  17. #6434
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,986
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nyc123 View Post
    That's one hell of a way of admitting you were flat out wrong. Your numbers were off.
    Suck my dick. There was a 24% increase in bankruptcies. I wrote it wrong. I said so.

    esad, idiot.

    Ok. You're the US president. How do you combat this? I can't wait for this answer....Double stupid points for saying "take it to the WTO". I already said multiple times prior that I don't believe he's going about it in the right way. However, the right way is going to inevitably involve tariffs, in my opinion. I don't see another way around that. You will have to have anti-dumping or countervailing duties of some sort, which are tariffs.
    Because neither you nor the Donald have a fucking clue how China works. If one actually wanted RESULTS then one would go for information and tactics to people with experience. Not a single person who lives or has done business in China would endorse this braindead approach. Even Gordon C Clarke is smarter than this.

    You cannot deal effectively with a partner if you don't know a god-damned thing about them. Maybe a slave, but not a partner or customer or supplier. Anyone of us who has had a business understands that.

    Nobody gives a shit.
    Of course not. Two weeks ago when it was "China will starve without our pork ! That's the most common meat in China ! They are helpless, they will knuckle under !" then you cared.

    Now that your claims are stinky shit, "nobody cares."

    About banking, you are full of it. Humanity survived for hundreds of thousands of years without "bank credit". Not that investment banks do credit anyhow but beyond that, in every historical case where a nation went from making things, real things of value, to finance, they went down the toilet shortly thereafter. Humanity has done fine, not only fine but in many ways better, without banking of any kind. Certainly better without dishonest worthless sleazebag banks such as Goldman-Sachs.

    They did not ever pay back more than they got. The middle class was fleeced for tribute to Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein. We will never get back what was stolen, just by the "qualitative easing" whitewash for "printing worthless paper that devalued what you thought you had by half."

    What you thought you had in the bank.

    Nice people.

    Where is this inflation? I don't see 15-25% inflation. Please cite your numbers with inflation data.
    Are you stupid or something ? Do tariffs exist ? Is 60% of what the US buys coming from China ? (I made that number up but go to the hardware store some day and deny it ... or even say it's only 30%, makes no difference.)

    So let's see. Let's just imagine it's only 20% of consumer goods come from China, there are now 15 to 25% tariffs on these goods, is someone paying that or not ? Simple question.

    If your answer is "China is paying it" (taking a leaf from Mr Trump's book) then I fail to see how because no one's salary has been decreased and no one's purchasing power has been decreased .... there are some imports that have died but they were luxuries, we'll just have to buy LV instead of Coach, oh-oh, or maybe the three guys who bought Camaros last year paid for it all ?

    US companies and purchasers (and most likely the guys who work for Walmart and Home Depot) are paying that tax.

    There are other metrics besides "inflation." Besides, who said "inflation" ? You said inflation. Not me.


    Beyond that, the whole subject of inflation and statistics is suspect. I spent some time north of Seattle this summer. During that time several things increased in cost by 20 to 25%, yet "there is no inflation". That's quite odd. Many of the things I bought went up by 15 to 25% but there was no inflation. Won't go to Edaleen any more, they can suck cock. "God loves a farmer" but I guess Mammon loves him more. And this was in just a short time.

    It has never done me any good at Safeway to tell the checker that "there is no inflation, therefore I am not going to spend fifty cents more on this than last week ! you must be in error !"

    Maybe you have more luck with that than me, but I trust what comes out of my pocket more than what someone with an axe to grind in Worshington claims.

  18. #6435
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    243
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    64
    Likes (Received)
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Suck my dick. There was a 24% increase in bankruptcies. I wrote it wrong. I said so.

    esad, idiot.
    Yeah yeah yeah, talk big behind the keyboard. Whatever.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Because neither you nor the Donald have a fucking clue how China works. If one actually wanted RESULTS then one would go for information and tactics to people with experience. Not a single person who lives or has done business in China would endorse this braindead approach. Even Gordon C Clarke is smarter than this.

    You cannot deal effectively with a partner if you don't know a god-damned thing about them. Maybe a slave, but not a partner or customer or supplier. Anyone of us who has had a business understands that.
    That isn't an answer to what I asked.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Now that your claims are stinky shit, "nobody cares."
    You were wrong about the GM bailout loss. You were wrong about the TARP money to banks. Somehow now I'm the one with "claims"?

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    About banking, you are full of it. Humanity survived for hundreds of thousands of years without "bank credit". Not that investment banks do credit anyhow but beyond that, in every historical case where a nation went from making things, real things of value, to finance, they went down the toilet shortly thereafter. Humanity has done fine, not only fine but in many ways better, without banking of any kind. Certainly better without dishonest worthless sleazebag banks such as Goldman-Sachs.
    ....k.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    They did not ever pay back more than they got. The middle class was fleeced for tribute to Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein. We will never get back what was stolen, just by the "qualitative easing" whitewash for "printing worthless paper that devalued what you thought you had by half."
    Now there, there. We already went over this. I put numbers there from the Treasury. You were wrong and it's clear to everyone reading this. It's ok. It's the internet. You will wake up tomorrow. The sun will still shine. I promise.

    On another note, can we please have a moderator do something? I don't think this person adds much of value here except teaching people how to fact-check. Saying "eat shit and die" and "suck my dick" after I started this off cordially.....Forum rules? Any moderator going to enforce this?
    Quote Originally Posted by Spinit View Post
    By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.
    A copy of forum rules from ownership. A reminder FYI

  19. #6436
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,986
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nyc123 View Post
    You were wrong about the GM bailout loss. You were wrong about the TARP money to banks. Somehow now I'm the one with "claims"?
    You are full of shit so I will leave this. Politifact says nine billion. Trump says eleven. Hmmm.

    Neither of those account for what would have happened to the entire rest of US manufacturing when all the automotive suppliers went tits-up. Nine billion is tiny compared to that. Want to talk loss ? That would be a loss you could count.

    And you can take your claims of TARP "paying back" and put them where the sun don't shine. You're insane.

    About value, care to point to any machining discussion where you have added value ? Show us a video of yourself drilling two holes in a straight line and I will change my estimate of your value. Until then, sayonara.

  20. #6437
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    243
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    64
    Likes (Received)
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    You are full of shit so I will leave this. Politifact says nine billion. Trump says eleven. Hmmm.
    *buzzer* Wrong. The government says 11.2 Billion. Read the article I posted before. Do you want me to go fetch the government report now? You just never learn.

    U.S. government says it lost $11.2 billion on GM bailout - Reuters

    Update: Found the report direct from the government both are citing.

    Office of the Special Inspector General For The Troubled Asset Relief Program

    Page 219 reads as follow...

    As of March 31, 2014, taxpayers had lost $11.2 billion on the TARP investment in GM from selling GM common stock at prices below the Government’s cost basis, as well as from the write-off of its remaining investment in Old GM in theamount of $826 million, according to Treasury.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Neither of those account for what would have happened to the entire rest of US manufacturing when all the automotive suppliers went tits-up. Nine billion is tiny compared to that. Want to talk loss ? That would be a loss you could count.
    Well, who said they shouldn't have? You said they got back some of the money they paid out to GM (through stock purchases), but that none of the money was paid back by the banks. That was shown to be wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    And you can take your claims of TARP "paying back" and put them where the sun don't shine. You're insane.
    Lol. The US Department of the Treasury is just "claiming", and instead we should believe some random on the internet. You're a funny guy.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    About value, care to point to any machining discussion where you have added value ? Show us a video of yourself drilling two holes in a straight line and I will change my estimate of your value. Until then, sayonara.
    I don't post in the other forums. I stick to this one. I don't have to know how to turn handles on a Bridgeport. A lot of this forum subsection is just political. Anyway, I'm just stating the obvious at this point...

    Moderators? Anyone?

  21. #6438
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,986
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1395

    Default

    For those who are obsessed by small differences,

    "All told, the Treasury Department reported that the program cost taxpayers $79.7 billion, of which $70.4 billion was recovered."

    To me, that is 9.3 billion dollars.

    Obama says automakers have paid back all the loans it got from his admin 'and more' | PolitiFact

    Now, since the whole endeavor was quite complicated, one can split the entire operation into parts and switch numbers around. Hence, variations in accounting. There were loans, there was bankruptcy, there were retirement funds spun off, there were bondholders who lost out, there were stocks which could have done better or could have done worse. You can fiddle with the figures. But to me, 79.7 minus 70.4 equals 9.3.

    The initial claim was that this was a giant waste and money-loser with an implied criticism that we should not have done this. I responded to that. It was not accurate. In fact, it was dishonest.

    Umm, let's see ... how many people in the US auto industry ? If 2/3 of it went bankrupt, what would that do not only to the people in those companies, but to their suppliers ? And to their suppliers ? From steel and glass to dealers and detailers, and all the companies that make pistons and rings and seat covers and paint and gaskets for GM and Ford and Chrysler and Cummins and John Deere and Bobcat and Pierce and E-One and even the mighty Caterpillar, on their knees if they were lucky, broke and gone if less so. Yay, let's annihilate half of US manufacturing, we can easily replace it with imports.

    Yeah, I'd have to agree that 9.3 billion was an unconscionable waste of good taxpayer money.

  22. #6439
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    243
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    64
    Likes (Received)
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    For those who are obsessed by small differences,

    "All told, the Treasury Department reported that the program cost taxpayers $79.7 billion, of which $70.4 billion was recovered."

    To me, that is 9.3 billion dollars.

    Obama says automakers have paid back all the loans it got from his admin 'and more' | PolitiFact
    I thought you said sayonara? Did I get you that worked up? Haha.

    I trust the US Treasury more than "Politifact". Anyone that trusts Politifact over the government department that is actually keeping track of these numbers and disbursed the actual money would be crazy. But I guess you fit that description.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Now, since the whole endeavor was quite complicated, one can split the entire operation into parts and switch numbers around. Hance, variations in accounting. There were loans, there was bankruptcy, there were retirement funds spun off, there were bondholders who lost out, there were stocks which could have done better or could have done worse. You can fiddle with the figures. But to me, 79.7 minus 70.4 equals 9.3.
    The numbers are pretty clear. The Treasury said it lost 11.2 billion when it sold its last shares of GM. There is no debate to be had here. What I have found since then is that this doesn't include GM's financing arm - but even then you still come up with a number over 10 billion, not 9.

    Here's an article I found helpful. This site's really good at explaining financial topics. You should read it - seriously. Reading it doesn't mean you're "crossing over to the darkside" or something and cozying up to banksters or whatever.

    Auto Industry Bailout (GM, Chrysler, Ford)

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    The initial claim was that this was a giant waste and money-loser with an implied criticism that we should not have done this.
    Please cite that claim. I know I never said that nor implied it. That's all in your head. Instead of getting so worked up, you'd do better to just be calm and have a discussion. It's really not that hard.

    Also, your Politifact article said this:

    "All told, the Treasury Department reported that the program cost taxpayers $79.7 billion, of which $70.4 billion was recovered. Under that estimate, the program lost about $9.3 billion. In April, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the program would end up costing about $14 billion."

    This just gets more confusing. From what I'm seeing there and on the Treasury's actual TARP accounting updates (they release them monthly), these numbers fluctuate. Which makes sense with what your article says here:

    "But it’s two years later, and the Treasury has since sold off most of its holdings in both companies. So we decided to take a look at this issue again."

    And if you go after your article from PolitiFact written in Jan 2015, both of mine and the original govt report from 2014, and instead look at the TARP report from Q1 of 2016, you then have new numbers of estimates.

    https://www.sigtarp.gov/Quarterly%20...o_Congress.pdf

    From page 88 in the table:

    CBO Estimate from 1/31/2015-3/18/2015 data: Cost of 12 billion
    OMB Estimate from 11/30/2014-2/2/2015 data: Cost of 19.4 billion
    Treasury Estimate, TARP Audited Agency Financial Statement using 9/30/2015-11/10/2015 data: Cost of 12.1 billion

    They must still have stakes or loans out somewhere. I don't know, and honestly I don't care at this point anymore. This is research done for the sake of arguing over a number. If you wanna figure it out, I'm all eyes. Almost 3:30 here, gnite

  23. #6440
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2092
    Likes (Received)
    1375

    Default

    Wooohoa there!
    THIS is just about the only UK thread on this board - don't you boyz go getting it locked squabbling 'bout Murrica!
    We've still got a few years left to run here...


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •