So where are the anti-regulation/anti union now that another mine has exploded?

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
you wrong for that one Que.........but I gotta use it :)

Dave, I relate to what Cruise is saying because I was "born into the industry". When explaining the overall situation, where can one start? It's so complex & the combination of local, state, & federal govt, it just adds to the chaos. Hell, local politics alone will leave one with a massive headache

If I had to sum it up: it was an incremental time-bomb that finally exploded, leading us to where we are presently. It needs new blood, new ideas.

When I got a chance, I used to sit & listen to the older black execs. I guarantee you, you would look at the situation from a different angle. And I'm still learnin'

I'm sure if he could express whatever knowledge he has, I would have seen some validity in Cruise's view but he didn't, so I didn't and I dismissed him as a child.
But just as you say, it's a complex situation locally, the President is looking at an even bigger picture and that bomb could not be allowed to go off as it was when it was. I'm not disagreeing at all with new blood and new ideas just the thought that the right thing to do was let GM disintegrate and take every company connected to it down as well. That wouldn't have been a Michigan disaster but an at least national disaster. Correction: another national disaster on top of the two that were already underway.
Lamarr
I know of collapsed industries, I live in NC. The shit Detroit is feeling today, we felt twenty years ago when the textile industries took their jobs to Mexico and other international locals. And I don't see anyone intelligently saying the best thing for Detroit or Flint or GM factories in surrounding states was for GM to die. Where would all the people without jobs work until the next big thing swooped in? This is why I always go back and take the contrary positions presented to me and work them out in real life situations.
 
Last edited:

Cruise

Star
Registered
negro-frowns.jpg

I guess Detroit isn't part of the black community so their opinions don't count about their own black community.

Love that arrogance.

I'm sure if he could express whatever knowledge he has, I would have seen some validity in Cruise's view but he didn't, so I didn't and I dismissed him as a child.
But just as you say, it's a complex situation locally, the President is looking at an even bigger picture and that bomb could not be allowed to go off as it was when it was. I'm not disagreeing at all with new blood and new ideas just the thought that the right thing to do was let GM disintegrate and take every company connected to it down as well. That wouldn't have been a Michigan disaster but an at least national disaster. Correction: another national disaster on top of the two that were already underway.
Lamarr
I know of collapsed industries, I live in NC. The shit Detroit is feeling today, we felt twenty years ago when the textile industries took their jobs to Mexico and other international locals. And I don't see anyone intelligently saying the best thing for Detroit or Flint or GM factories in surrounding states was for GM to die. Where would all the people without jobs work until the next big thing swooped in? This is why I always go back and take the contrary positions presented to me and work them out in real life situations.

Clueless and still coming out the side of your neck.

People like you are dangerous because you think you're smart but end up hurting everyone who listens to you.

I'm still amazed you are trying to discuss a situation you know nothing about.

Keep digging.

you wrong for that one Que.........but I gotta use it :)

Dave, I relate to what Cruise is saying because I was "born into the industry". When explaining the overall situation, where can one start? It's so complex & the combination of local, state, & federal govt, it just adds to the chaos. Hell, local politics alone will leave one with a massive headache

They think so little of the people of Detroit and Michigan, they think an article or book or speech will convey the complete experience of the region.

They want easy answers and quick solutions, and that's all they want to hear, read, or see. Oh, look, if we just do a "bailout" that solves all the problems. Oh look, we just need one more government law to fix it.

For these types, my attitude is why bother explaining anything to them? They never learn. All they do is just take it out of context to advance their own ridiculous agenda, like some tea bagger or right-wing nut job.
 
Last edited:

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
I guess Detroit isn't part of the black community so their opinions don't count about their own black community.

Love that arrogance.



Clueless and still coming out the side of your neck.

People like you are dangerous because you think you're smart but end up hurting everyone who listens to you.

I'm still amazed you are trying to discuss a situation you know nothing about.

Keep digging.



They think so little of the people of Detroit and Michigan, they think an article or book or speech will convey the complete experience of the region.

They want easy answers and quick solutions, and that's all they want to hear, read, or see. Oh, look, if we just do a "bailout" that solves all the problems. Oh look, we just need one more government law to fix it.

For these types, my attitude is why bother explaining anything to them? They never learn. All they do is just take it out of context to advance their own ridiculous agenda, like some tea bagger or right-wing nut job.


This is a textbook example of someone not being able to defend their position intelligently so he creates random straw man arguments that you think you can better defend yourself. You credit people with positions and stances they've never espoused adn then combat those instead of the actual person.
 

Cruise

Star
Registered
This is a textbook example of someone not being able to defend their position intelligently so he creates random straw man arguments that you think you can better defend yourself. You credit people with positions and stances they've never espoused adn then combat those instead of the actual person.

You announce that the Obama bailout of GM was "good" for the country because letting GM and Chrysler fail would "hurt" America.

Now, that I've called you out as some pretender, diletante, and fraud, you want to change the subject.

You were going to tell me how the people of Detroit feel about GM and Chrysler being saved. You know how much good it has done for them. You know how it would have hurt them.

So, go ahead. Tell us all about how Obama is so great for doing us a favor we never asked for nor wanted. Let's hear your new pronouncement how the great Obama "saved" us.
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
Lamarr
I know of collapsed industries, I live in NC. The shit Detroit is feeling today, we felt twenty years ago when the textile industries took their jobs to Mexico and other international locals. And I don't see anyone intelligently saying the best thing for Detroit or Flint or GM factories in surrounding states was for GM to die. Where would all the people without jobs work until the next big thing swooped in? This is why I always go back and take the contrary positions presented to me and work them out in real life situations.

You hit the nail on the head. I can't speak for the textile industry but the end result was the same. Leadership (the Cornell, Princeton & Yale types) sacrificed longevity & sense of community for short-term profits. They are pompous, self-serving & out of touch with reality. How do the smartest guys bankrupt everything? When can we go back to trusting the common man?

If GM & Chrysler were allowed to fold, maybe these people would understand there are consequences to irresponsible business practices. People would get back on their feet & try to work through it, (the productive capacity didn't leave) I just put more trust in the people to solve the issues of the country rather than the current "crew" in DC or in the boardrooms of the "Too Big To Fails"
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
You announce that the Obama bailout of GM was "good" for the country because letting GM and Chrysler fail would "hurt" America.

Now, that I've called you out as some pretender, diletante, and fraud, you want to change the subject.

You were going to tell me how the people of Detroit feel about GM and Chrysler being saved. You know how much good it has done for them. You know how it would have hurt them.

So, go ahead. Tell us all about how Obama is so great for doing us a favor we never asked for nor wanted. Let's hear your new pronouncement how the great Obama "saved" us.

Your factless and unreasoned rant has become repetitive and . . .

yawn.jpg
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
You hit the nail on the head. I can't speak for the textile industry but the end result was the same. Leadership (the Cornell, Princeton & Yale types) sacrificed longevity & since of community for short-term profits. They are pompous, self-serving & out of touch with reality. How do the smartest guys bankrupt everything? When can we go back to trusting the common man?

<font size="3"><SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">If GM & Chrysler were allowed to fold, maybe <u>these people</u> would understand there are consequences to irresponsible business practices.</span></font size> People would get back on their feet & try to work through it, (the productive capacity didn't leave) I just put more trust in the people to solve the issues of the country rather than the current "crew" in DC or in the boardrooms of the "Too Big To Fails"

I understand and agree with your reasoning with respect to "Those People" learning lessons about their conduct. If that was the end of it, perhaps, we wouldn't be discussing it -- because "They" would be feeling the pain for their actions. The problem, Lamar, is that "Those People" do not live and the consequences of their actions do not exist, in a vacuum. Other People, other innocent people, are affected. The National Interest is affected.

Do you allow the nation to suffer ruin, just to teach some bad characters a well deserved lesson ?

QueEx
 

Cruise

Star
Registered
Your factless and unreasoned rant has become repetitive and . . .

yawn.jpg

Yeah I love all the information you're bringing to the table about GM, Obama's bailouts, Detroit, and Michigan.

I guess you have so much knowledge to spread, you forgot to post it.

I understand and agree with your reasoning with respect to "Those People" learning lessons about their conduct. If that was the end of it, perhaps, we wouldn't be discussing it -- because "They" would be feeling the pain for their actions. The problem, Lamar, is that "Those People" do not live and the consequences of their actions do not exist, in a vacuum. Other People, other innocent people, are affected. The National Interest is affected.

Do you allow the nation to suffer ruin, just to teach some bad characters a well deserved lesson ?

QueEx

I see. Yet, another "expert" assessment from someone without a clue.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Conservative idiots and delusional libertarians

Conservatives Want to Go Back to the Golden Age of the 1880s

It took the Republican Party sixty years of dedicated effort to make the word “liberal” radioactive in some parts of the United States. In less than half that time they’ve also done a pretty good job of making “Republican” just as disliked, associated as it is with the politics of wretched excess, fetishizing ignorance, bowing to K street lobbyists, and diaper-wearing-toe-tapping-lesbian-bondage sexual hypocrisy.

So lately conservatives, and especially the most hard right wing of conservatives, have been on the lookout for other terms they can use rather than the dreaded “R” word when describing themselves. Some of them have jumped on board the Glenn Beck self-promotion tour. Considering that it’s an artificial movement generated around a cheap media persona, declaring yourself a supporter of the Tea Party is a bit like being a proud member of a Monkees Fan Club (and you don’t even get to hear “Last Train to Clarksville”), but hey, it plays better than being a part of the George W. Bush legacy.

Other conservatives have jumped in a different direction and declared that they’re really “small government Libertarians.” Only they don’t seem to understand what Libertarian actually means. Take for example this article in which Jacob Hornberger anoints 1880 as the peak of America’s Libertarian golden age.

Let’s consider, say, the year 1880. Here was a society in which people were free to keep everything they earned, because there was no income tax. They were also free to decide what to do with their own money—spend it, save it, invest it, donate it, or whatever. People were generally free to engage in occupations and professions without a license or permit. There were few federal economic regulations and regulatory agencies. No Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, bailouts, or so-called stimulus plans. No IRS. No Departments of Education, Energy, Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor. No EPA and OSHA. No Federal Reserve. No drug laws. Few systems of public schooling. No immigration controls. No federal minimum-wage laws or price controls. A monetary system based on gold and silver coins rather than paper money. No slavery. No CIA. No FBI. No torture or cruel or unusual punishments. No renditions. No overseas military empire. No military-industrial complex.

As a libertarian, as far as I’m concerned, that’s a society that is pretty darned golden.

Ah, the 1880s. I can hear people getting wistful from here.

A golden age in which people kept all that they earned. Of course, what they earned in the absence of those debilitating minimum wage laws could be nothing more than worthless tokens from the company store. What they earned from twelve hours of work seven days a week could be actually be a bigger debt to the company that sent you into a mine or factory and made you pay for the wear on your tools, the water you drank, the fuel for your lamp, even the blasting powder you used.

Still, a lifetime of debt wasn’t so bad in a golden age without OSHA and its safety laws, since lifetimes could be quite brief. Mining accidents didn’t kill a piddling 29 men, they killed thousands every year. Over 3 miners out of every 1,000 died on the job each year (twice the rate of Great Britain with it’s freedom-robbing concern for safety). But miners were pikers compared to folks on the railroad. Trainmen fell at a rate that made each year of work roughly equal to the risk of being among the troops on D-Day. Now that’s freedom you can feel (well, briefly). It was an age where any construction project worth its salt could measure progress by body count and factory workers were privileged to know that they really were valued far less than the machines they tended. And death wasn’t all that this golden age had to offer! It was an age when American workers could look forward to the liberation of being disabled for life, and know that they wouldn’t be burdened by the crushing burden of worker’s compensation or government aid.

Any laborer making it to to retirement would find… well, whatever they had laid aside for themselves, assuming they were paid in actual money and that they were cagey enough to hide it somewhere their employer couldn’t “borrow” it. Meaning that a large percentage got to experience the invigorating freedom of starting a second career as a beggar after decades of crippling repetitive work, breathing toxic fumes, and exposure to corrosive chemicals made them unable to continue to hum hi-ho at their old tasks. Well over half of America’s senior citizens basked in the autumnal liberty of living in poverty.

It was a golden age without labor laws in which only 5% of people faced the awful restriction of an 8 hour work day while 3 times that many were blessed with a workday that was 12 hours or longer. Many industries, breweries for example, had a standard workday of 15 hours. And with all the extra freedom of that age, many children were able to experience the blessings of back-breaking labor starting every day by the time they reached the age of 10, with more than a third generating freedom dollars before they turned 15.

Of course, that wasn’t hard since this was a golden age of few public schools. Except it wasn’t. Public education was common across the country, even in remote communities. Even the tiniest frontier village rarely went long without a school, many states had organized school districts, and in a good number of areas the ratio of teachers to students was actually higher than in our own socialistic era. Perhaps what Hornberger meant to say was that there were few schools available to minorities. In many areas minorities lived with “compulsory ignorance,” as they were not only excluded from public schools, but discouraged (often violently) from seeking education. That accounts for a literacy rate of less than 40% among African-Americans in 1880. As laws changed and more schools became available for all, that rate grew by more than 30% over the next three decades. However, white literacy remained about the same — not surprising since whites were already suffering from those socialistic public schools well before 1880.

It truly was a golden age. One in which, thanks to that lack of nasty safety requirements and the troublesome health organizations, the average lifespan was all the way up to 40! An age in which, unfettered by the shackles of regulations on clean water and Hitler-like restrictions on sewage, 50,000 Americans died of cholera. An age in which parents could experience the ultimate freedom endowed by watching 1 child in 5 die in infancy, and 1 out of 3 fail to reach adulthood. Those numbers are for white Americans. Minorities experienced even more of the freedom that comes from burying your children.

It truly was a golden age where there were “no immigration controls” as long as, you know, you were white and European. Oh, and wealthy. Otherwise, you were subject to laws like the Chinese Exclusion Act, or regulations that allowed anyone to be denied admission on the basis of poverty. Once you were in, you could love the freedom from Jim Crow laws, and the liberty that came with being denied to right to vote, or the ability to protect yourself from abuse. Of course Hispanic, Black, and Asian-Americans were all stimulated by the freedom that comes from having your home burned, your community ransacked, your wife and daughters raped, your belongings stolen, and your body left to turn as “strange fruit” in trees that sprouted across the country. All without un-American interference by the government. There’s no freedom like the freedom that comes when you aren’t forced to endure a trial by a jury of your peers and can get on with more expedited forms of justice.

It was a golden age when the last bands of Native Americans still struggling along under the illusion that they were free, were invited into the real liberty that is life on the reservation. And an age where they got to see the lands their ancestors had occupied for centuries or tens of centuries handed over for destruction. Imagine the liberty you get from seeing your lands taken away, your children beaten for speaking their own language, your religious practices used as an excuse for slaughter, and your entire culture erased.

A golden age, free from money-grubbing FEMA, where 400 people could die in a snow storm… then 400 more could die in the next. An age when Florida didn’t need no stinking assistance in picking up the thousands who died in hurricanes and Midwestern states laughed off the hundreds who died in tornadoes — all without warning from a communist government weather bureau. An age where dams could be built without concern for any damn fish living in the water, or any damn people living downstream. An age where you were free to inhale the asbestos that wafted from factories and the mercury fumes that steamed from metal refineries. And free to see the interesting effects such exposures had on your offspring.

An age without communist limits on commerce or immoral government tests, where thousands of Americans each year died from tainted food. Where you didn’t need no stinkin’ license to hand out medicines. An age free from the horrors of the FDA where parents could feel good about using a childrens’ cough remedy laced with opium, cocaine, formaldehyde, and wood alcohol. An age when nobody told us how much lead we could have in our water, or how much soot we could have in our air. An age where the injured and elderly had the God-given right to starve.

It was a golden age of rights for women in which… oh, wait. Sorry. I forgot for a moment that women don’t count when measuring freedom. Good thing, since in 1880 they couldn’t vote, were excluded from many occupations, faced restrictions on their ownership rights, and were often treated as the property of their husbands. Naturally, their reproductive rights consisted of the right to reproduce — or die trying.

Of course, what Hornberger was likely envisioning was the flip side of all this liberty. The freedom of being a rich in a society where those with money enjoyed tremendous advantage. The freedom that factory owners and robber barons enjoyed in treating workers as they wanted, employing private armies to beat or kill those who opposed them, and indulging any whim in the sure knowledge that a large enough bribe could smooth things over.

The good news for Jacob is that it’s not too late. It doesn’t require a time machine and a trip to the 1880s to experience all the joys of this golden age he so longs for. You can reach this land of paradise with a couple of flights and a short boat ride. It’s called Somalia.

The truth is, there are real Libertarians out there, people who place a very high value on individual rights and who believe this government — like most every government — too often interferes with those rights. Of course, actual Libertarians realize that for individual rights to have any meaning, they require the presence of a body that can ensure those rights. They know that freedom can’t be maintained in an absence of information, and that there must be agencies that create the transparency needed for effective individual action and ensure there are consequences to dishonesty. Real advocates of the free market realize that term has no meaning unless the market is free from coercion and the law is not defined by “might makes right.” They know that individual freedoms are incompatible with a system where corporations are treated as super-citizens and that Libertarianism requires that workers be more valued that abstract entities that live only on paper.

The difference between actual Libertarians and Republicans hiding from their tarnished name is quite easy. Actual Libertarians are concerned about the freedom of individuals. Conservatives use Libertarian as a code word meaning “I want to continue to enjoy all the privileges I do now, but I don’t want to share them with you and most of all I don’t want to pay any taxes.” Push come to shove, they’re happy to abbreviate that to “Screw freedom. I just don’t want to pay taxes.”

Lamarr, Cruise as always run the hell away from this post!:roflmao::roflmao:

Of course this summarizes the original question this thread posed!
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
I understand and agree with your reasoning with respect to "Those People" learning lessons about their conduct. If that was the end of it, perhaps, we wouldn't be discussing it -- because "They" would be feeling the pain for their actions. The problem, Lamar, is that "Those People" do not live and the consequences of their actions do not exist, in a vacuum. Other People, other innocent people, are affected. The National Interest is affected.

Do you allow the nation to suffer ruin, just to teach some bad characters a well deserved lesson ?

QueEx

One of the most important things we can demand from leadership is accountability, whether from the mining, housing, auto industry or any other. When govt intervenes, it acts as a shield (for lack of a better term). There is no incentive for the Too Big To Fail's to change their behavior if govt intervenes. In fact, it only allows them to continue the same irresponsible behavior.

I don't know man, I'd like to someone held accountable for somethin'. Failure is the ultimate regulation
 

Cruise

Star
Registered
Lamarr, Cruise as always run the hell away from this post!:roflmao::roflmao:

Of course this summarizes the original question this thread posed!

I didn't respond because it covered Republicans and their attempts at trying to re-make themselves as Libertarians.

Who cares about Republicans anyway? Let them pay the price for race-baiting for 40+ years.

Besides, the article seemed to be more an argument against a white-dominated government than anything having to do with regulation and supervision of private industry or the marketplace.

The article was making a political-party argument rather than a political-economy one.
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
The problem, Lamar, is that "Those People" do not live and the consequences of their actions do not exist, in a vacuum. Other People, other innocent people, are affected. The National Interest is affected.

Do you allow the nation to suffer ruin, just to teach some bad characters a well deserved lesson ?

QueEx

I don't want you or anybody feel I'm insensitive to the "innocent people" that would be affected but in the same breath, I would argue that those same "innocent people" are being stifled presently, by govt policy. My proof being the underemployment that is going on. Qualified individuals working at Starbucks, Walmart, Rapid Cash etc. could be contributing to the economy in more productive ways.

The comment about our National Interest is a bit overexaggerated

We need to let the economy breath and for that to happen, govt must get out of the way
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
So you do agree that the government protects us from the purely profit motivated capitalist bottom line.

There is a "role" for govt, however, I'm not convinced they are "protecting us"

All too often, I'm starting to feel DC serves the interests of the corporatists that put them there, No?
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
There is a "role" for govt, however, I'm not convinced they are "protecting us"

All too often, I'm starting to feel DC serves the interests of the corporatists that put them there, No?


So back to the question you refuse to answer. What time or era when no government regulation led to a booming economy.
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
You announce that the Obama bailout of GM was "good" for the country because letting GM and Chrysler fail would "hurt" America.

Now, that I've called you out as some pretender, diletante, and fraud, you want to change the subject.

You were going to tell me how the people of Detroit feel about GM and Chrysler being saved. You know how much good it has done for them. You know how it would have hurt them.

So, go ahead. Tell us all about how Obama is so great for doing us a favor we never asked for nor wanted. Let's hear your new pronouncement how the great Obama "saved" us.

You really add nothing to this conversation. A person who just walked in and started reading this thread would think you were responding to another thread but the posts appear in this one. Nothing you've said happened actually happened in this thread. Not what you attribute to me or even what you attribute to yourself.


I understand and agree with your reasoning with respect to "Those People" learning lessons about their conduct. If that was the end of it, perhaps, we wouldn't be discussing it -- because "They" would be feeling the pain for their actions. The problem, Lamar, is that "Those People" do not live and the consequences of their actions do not exist, in a vacuum. Other People, other innocent people, are affected. The National Interest is affected.

Do you allow the nation to suffer ruin, just to teach some bad characters a well deserved lesson ?

QueEx

That's where I am in a nutshell. The government can't always be in the "lesson teaching" business when they're looking at a situation that would push high unemployment into historic levels. The freefall of GM would have massive ripple effects on the entire economy, not just in Detroit. Should people who don't even work GM also have to suffer needlessly so that a relative handful can suffer for their poor decisions? Of course those people won't suffer, they'll leave with their big pensions and disappear into obscurity.

One of the most important things we can demand from leadership is accountability, whether from the mining, housing, auto industry or any other. When govt intervenes, it acts as a shield (for lack of a better term). There is no incentive for the Too Big To Fail's to change their behavior if govt intervenes. In fact, it only allows them to continue the same irresponsible behavior.

I don't know man, I'd like to someone held accountable for somethin'. Failure is the ultimate regulation

I absolutely agree, 100% percent.


I don't want you or anybody feel I'm insensitive to the "innocent people" that would be affected but in the same breath, I would argue that those same "innocent people" are being stifled presently, by govt policy. My proof being the underemployment that is going on. Qualified individuals working at Starbucks, Walmart, Rapid Cash etc. could be contributing to the economy in more productive ways.

The comment about our National Interest is a bit overexaggerated

We need to let the economy breath and for that to happen, govt must get out of the way

Government can't get out of the way. Business needs government and vice versa. What government can do is have policy that encourage entrepreneurship and fair business practices. That includes strong regulations that are strictly enforced and when they're flouted, the execs in charge should face penalties based on the damage done. In the case of Massey, AIG, Goldman Sachs, someone should be looking at jail time.
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
So back to the question you refuse to answer. What time or era when no government regulation led to a booming economy.

why are you trying to get me to defend a 'point of view' I don't even support?

govt has a 'role' in the lives of it's citizens, what we are all searching for is the proper 'role of govt'. I just support less govt. intervention
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
why are you trying to get me to defend a 'point of view' I don't even support?

govt has a 'role' in the lives of it's citizens, what we are all searching for is the proper 'role of govt'. I just support less govt. intervention


OK, we are narrowing it down. Since you believe in government intervention, but "less," doesn't that make you a socialist?
 

Cruise

Star
Registered
That's where I am in a nutshell. The government can't always be in the "lesson teaching" business when they're looking at a situation that would push high unemployment into historic levels. The freefall of GM would have massive ripple effects on the entire economy, not just in Detroit. Should people who don't even work GM also have to suffer needlessly so that a relative handful can suffer for their poor decisions? Of course those people won't suffer, they'll leave with their big pensions and disappear into obscurity.

It's your attitude of presumptuouness and entitlement that is so aggravating for someone from Detroit.

You out-of-towners, interlopers think you can tell Detroiters what's good for us. "Oh, we did the bailout to help you." Spare us.

No one from Detroit will call me wrong. They may not agree, but they won't call me wrong. Why? Because they know I am informed.

You on the other hand, keep mentioning Detroit to support Obama's bailout. You don't know a DAMN thing about Detroit so stop mentioning it!

Detroit doesn't need GM. GM NEEDS Detroit! But Detroit didn't get the bailout because it's full of black people only those white f**ks at GM and Chrysler.

Yet, you keep defending the bailout of those incompetent, racist, clueless, arrogant white GM MFers who keep running that company into the ground.

Just admit Obama did it to save the rich white boy. Just admit Obama doesn't give a flying f**k about Detroit or black people!

Just admit Obama's "good of the country" and "national interest" only includes whites, specifically rich whites.

At least Bush and Reagan left Detroit alone. With this Obama piece of garbage, he actually is trying to meddle in the city's business. He's doing a great job of building a load of resentment.
 
Last edited:

TheDynasty

Certified Genius
BGOL Investor
Detroit, really...Michigan, needs to start making their economy more diverse. The crumbling automotive industry has done nothing to help that state and the decline has been in process since Packard left in the late '50s. This isn't new.
 

Cruise

Star
Registered
Detroit, really...Michigan, needs to start making their economy more diverse. The crumbling automotive industry has done nothing to help that state and the decline has been in process since Packard left in the late '50s. This isn't new.

The Michigan economy is diverse. Detroit could have a diverse economy too if the DAMN GOVERNMENT QUIT INTERFERING!!!!!!!

The government is carrying these failed businesses so Wall Street can continue its party, at Detroit and Michigan's expense. Obama is the ultimate corporate stooge.
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
why are you trying to get me to defend a 'point of view' I don't even support?

govt has a 'role' in the lives of it's citizens, what we are all searching for is the proper 'role of govt'. I just support less govt. intervention

Illuminating. As I was thinking, our main bone of contention is by degrees for the most part.

It's your attitude of presumptuouness and entitlement that is so aggravating for someone from Detroit.

You out-of-towners, interlopers think you can tell Detroiters what's good for us. "Oh, we did the bailout to help you." Spare us.

It's more like we don't want your shiesty, ill run corporations to screw up the rest of us in the other 49 states.

No one from Detroit will call me wrong. They may not agree, but they won't call me wrong. Why? Because they know I am informed.

:lol::lol:
So they'll disagree but think you're right? Oh my damn.

You on the other hand, keep mentioning Detroit to support Obama's bailout. You don't know a DAMN thing about Detroit so stop mentioning it!

Detroit doesn't need GM. GM NEEDS Detroit! But Detroit didn't get the bailout because it's full of black people only those white f**ks at GM and Chrysler.

Yet, you keep defending the bailout of those incompetent, racist, clueless, arrogant white GM MFers who keep running that company into the ground.

Just admit Obama did it to save the rich white boy. Just admit Obama doesn't give a flying f**k about Detroit or black people!

Just admit Obama's "good of the country" and "national interest" only includes whites, specifically rich whites.

At least Bush and Reagan left Detroit alone. With this Obama piece of garbage, he actually is trying to meddle in the city's business. He's doing a great job of building a load of resentment.

The rest of this was just pointless and clueless but there was a very enlightening quote in it. For you, this is just about Obama, not even about regulations (which you haven't really touched on despite their being the topic) but you've spent tremendous energy on Obama. Interesting.

Right here mother fucker.
Fuck Unions
Regulation is alright in minimal doses.

Most Importantly fuck Obama!


Wow, that was deep. Thanks for your input. I don't know how we managed to get this thread to 4 pages without you.
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
What's funny to is to have a "less regulation is better" while the health insurance companies, who are not federally regulated (yet) have been allowed to do just as some would want all corporations to do.

One of the issues when you talk about government is that the corporations use the government to protect themselves but when there's pushback, it becomes "class warfare" or government takeovers of industry. I think some areas can and should be regulated less. Why do health insurers have anti trust exemptions and why do the same people wanting more competition fight to continue it? If they didn't have government protecting them from competition, health insurers would be as competitive as car insurers or home insurers.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
It's your attitude of presumptuouness and entitlement that is so aggravating for someone from Detroit.

You out-of-towners, interlopers think you can tell Detroiters what's good for us. "Oh, we did the bailout to help you." Spare us.

No one from Detroit will call me wrong. <font size="3">They may not agree,</font size> but they won't call me wrong.


:lol::lol:

<font size="3">So they'll disagree but think you're right? Oh my damn.</font size>

<font size="3">. . . the defense, rests.</font size>

QueEx
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
It's your attitude of presumptuouness and entitlement that is so aggravating for someone from Detroit.

You out-of-towners, interlopers think you can tell Detroiters what's good for us. "Oh, we did the bailout to help you." Spare us.

Cruise, a lot of Detroit's issues are misunderstood, maybe by perception, image or just plain ol ignorance. We (Detroiters, auto workers etc) been fightin this fight for a long time & it has come on deaf ears. Since I left the state, my passion to debate the issue isn't the same but let me drop a little somethin for the board that I hope should inspire "critical thinkers" to question What the f*ck is really goin on:

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=12396&ArticleId=320909

SAO PAULO -- General Motors plans to invest $1 billion in Brazil to avoid the kind of problems the U.S. automaker is facing in its home market, said the beleaguered car maker.

According to the president of GM Brazil-Mercosur, Jaime Ardila, the funding will come from the package of financial aid that the manufacturer will receive from the government and will be used to "complete the renovation of the line of products up to 2012."

Thats right, they took American taxpayer $$$ and invested that sh*t in Brazil
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Cruise, a lot of Detroit's issues are misunderstood, maybe by perception, image or just plain ol ignorance. We (Detroiters, auto workers etc) been fightin this fight for a long time & it has come on deaf ears. Since I left the state, my passion to debate the issue isn't the same but let me drop a little somethin for the board that I hope should inspire "critical thinkers" to question What the f*ck is really goin on:

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=12396&ArticleId=320909



Thats right, they took American taxpayer $$$ and invested that sh*t in Brazil


And they sold more Buick's in China last year than they did in North America. Capitalism!:smh:
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
Cruise, a lot of Detroit's issues are misunderstood, maybe by perception, image or just plain ol ignorance. We (Detroiters, auto workers etc) been fightin this fight for a long time & it has come on deaf ears. Since I left the state, my passion to debate the issue isn't the same but let me drop a little somethin for the board that I hope should inspire "critical thinkers" to question What the f*ck is really goin on:

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=12396&ArticleId=320909



Thats right, they took American taxpayer $$$ and invested that sh*t in Brazil

this is what I'm talkin bout y'all :hmm:

These cats wouldn't be in business if not for the govt, this is Corporatism to the extreme

Not really in dispute for me. But there's been 30 years of government letting big business do as they wanted and helping them stifle competitors and unions and anything that would keep them from making every single cent they can. Regulations aren't the reason we're coming out of a deep recession or that GM had to file bankruptcy or that the financial sector imploded or that mine in W. Va exploded. Lax regulation and enforcement and giant loopholes aided and abetted all of that.
 

Lamarr

Star
Registered
Not really in dispute for me. But there's been 30 years of government letting big business do as they wanted and helping them stifle competitors and unions and anything that would keep them from making every single cent they can.

ok:

What should be evident is that DC is now enabling "Big Biz" to do what they want. And they took the jobs & taxpayer $$$ away from the country in the process.

I'm just giving an illustration of how DC's intervention is helping the people of Detroit, piggybacking off what Cruise had been sayin'
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
ok:

What should be evident is that DC is now enabling "Big Biz" to do what they want. And they took the jobs & taxpayer $$$ away from the country in the process.

I'm just giving an illustration of how DC's intervention is helping the people of Detroit, piggybacking off what Cruise had been sayin'

How much of Cruise do you want to defend ? ? ?

I've noticed that you seem to have an uncanny knack of avoiding questions/issues just like he does.

QueEx
 
Top