Weren’t we told by Obama the auto companies had to be saved and that bankruptcy was not an option? Government must intervene he said. So he pumped billions of our tax dollars into Chrysler and they ended up filing for bankruptcy anyway. So in the end we really didn’t need to spend all those billions of our money on Chrysler.

Now I’m hearing that his union friends are going to end up with majority control in the company even though they have less money invested in bonds than the private investors. I’ll bet GM ends up doing the same thing. I smell a huge Obama rat.

So from a political standpoint it appears to be an epic failure. I think from Obama’s standpoint he’s getting exactly what he planned for. Government and union control over the big three… or at least the big two for now. Add in control over a few major banks that fund the auto makers and you have a nice little package for the government. Who’s business will be taken over next?

I also understand the tax cut for 95% of all American is gone too… another big lie. "If you earn under $250k you won't see your taxes go up one dime." Yet another lie.

Just wait until the tax increases hit the middle class and watch what happens to the economy and jobs.

Obama owns this economy now and from where I sit I see nothing but a huge failure. The economy is still tanking and his policies have done nothing to help and in fact will continue to damage far into the future and our kids future. You can’t blame Bush forever… It’s Obama’s baby now and he’s making a mess of it.

Next on the list? The health care takeover. I’m sure the government will do a fine job running it. Just look how well they did with social security. Oh I forgot... it’s bankrupt too.

It's going to be a long 4-8 years for a lot of people.

No one seems to be offering up what the alternatives might have been if the current adminstration hadn't been elected. Not much comment either on what preceeded all of the current messes that we're in.

Going back to the recent elections, I feel the best man (of the two) for the job won.

I don't think either one was worth a <blank> but my money says McCain would be taking a different path. I guess if one is a fan big government, higher taxes and out of control spending then BO was a good choice. Personally I think he is an complete disaster and time will prove it.

How do you feel about spending billions and billions to save a company that ultimately filed for bankruptcy anyway?

I think there were plenty of alternatives proposed and in Obama's promised bipartition spirit he listened to none of them even though he has ZERO executive experience with the economy or anything else for that matter.

Originally Posted by BobKat1

It's going to be a long 4-8 years for a lot of people.

No one seems to be offering up what the alternatives might have been if the current adminstration hadn't been elected. Not much comment either on what preceeded all of the current messes that we're in.

Going back to the recent elections, I feel the best man (of the two) for the job won.

i

Quoting the starter of this thread.

"Government must intervene he said. So he (Obama)pumped billions of our tax dollars into Chrysler and they ended up filing for bankruptcy anyway."

Gee, too bad this was done by George Bush prior to the election. Chrysler was hanging on by the $4 billion Bush gave them. So McCain wouldn't have done anything different either.

http://www.economist.com/business/di...ry_id=12833915

God, don't you just hate details?

No, I love the details. Bush should have been taken to the wood shed as well for doing such a stupid irresponsible thing, in fact I think he was. We lost. Bush started it and now Obama has hyper-accelerated it.

Don't assume that because I think Obama is an abject incompetent failure that I blindly supported Bush like Obama supporters blindly support Obama.

BTW, Bush gave them 4 billion. Obama gave them 8 billion more just the other day.

the party faithful will have no choice but to cease looking for the blame as in who did what and when....the facts would also bear out their backward horizon for the "blame" extends past Bush!!!

So, HOPEFULLY, when that point arrives we can look forward to a discussion about an issue(s) encompassing the here and now....what was done? what did it yield? what was it supposed to do/yield?

Executives own what they inherit from the day they take the job. During my stint in corporate America it was never allowed to blame a result or lack of result on the predecessor. Real....and I mean REAL corporate management and boards of directors know why they have a new executive (just like voting in a new POTUS).....the big difference is the new executive must produce results....not words about who did what.

As posted many times before....I patiently await any program from the new administration that defines exactly what is to be done and when on a given issue. How much it will cost. Where the money will come from. Who is responsible. And when will the results be reviewed that show progress or not.

The above is not possible because lawyer types...you know the politicians don't know how first of all. Secondly there is no one to hold them accountable. And we the people certainly won't. Never have. Never will.
Want proof? Just check the roster of the do nothing, been in office forever
dregs that constipate Washington that are repeatedly re-elected by we the people.

Looking back for blame is a partisan waste of time adding no value in discussion or results obtained!

BTK

Originally Posted by dklassen

Next on the list? The health care takeover. I’m sure the government will do a fine job running it.

Do you have a problem with the VA? Or TriCare? Or do you think the health insurance companies could do it better?

Tricare - "It’s pretty much a given fact that the men and women serving in our country’s Armed Forces aren’t paid a whole lot. A large majority of them are living paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by. Many of our Veterans are in the same position, some even worse off, as evidenced by the numbers of homeless veterans in our country. When I read about this particular proposal to cut Tricare benefits for Military Families and Veterans I was none too happy.

A recent report from the Congressional Budget Office details just one proposal that would increase out of pocket expenses for medical care for Military Families and Veterans, while others would lose their VA benefits altogether. Other proposals would raise Tricare fees, co-payments and deductibles. Veterans whose medical condition isn’t service related could end up no longer being eligible for VA medical care at all."

-----------------------------------------------------------

"The Department of Veterans Affairs' 1,400 clinics and hospitals suffer from hundreds of problems, including worn carpet, damaged floor tiles, leaking roofs and cockroach infestations, a department report released Wednesday shows."

"Who's been minding the store?" said Murray, a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. "They keep putting Band-Aids on problems when what the agency needs is major triage."




Government health care coming to a store near you...

Originally Posted by LORNEOLSEN

When the union owns controlling interest in chrysler they will be the employer . So negotiations for new union contracts will be between the union and the union.

This will make interesting law on conflict of interest matters.

I don't see a conflict of interest here. Next contract they get big pay raises the company has to file Bankruptcy again. Obama bails them out again.

By my calculation, the current president has completed about 7% of his term. It's probably premature to heap too much disapproval (or praise) on him at this time.

A lot can happen either way in the remaining 93% of his first term.

That's what's so scary, 93% left to go. If the first 100 days are any indication we should be adding the hammer and sickle to the flag by 2012... to cheering crowds I'm sure.

Maybe by then my IT job will be reassigned to a government run bakery somewhere turning out hundred dollar loafs of bread.

Hammer and sickle? Come on