Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And the sad fact is that 'stopping the bleeding' is only a temporary fix when major surgery is indicated. For example, we were sold a bill of goods that General Motors was 'too big to fail' and that it would be disaster if we did not funnel mega billions of dollars into it to prevent bankruptcy. So we funneled the billions into it, bankruptcy was declared anyway, and the primary stockholders are now the U.S. government and the UAW meaning that any problems with this company will now be the responsibility of the tax payers.
And NONE of the problems that previously existed and put the company into jeopardy in the first place have been fixed.
We deserve better.
Better being what? Doing nothing meant thousands of jobs lost, more homes in default, more small and medium business failures.
Yet you suggest the problems need to be fixed. How?
Artificial fixes make make things look better for a short period, but sooner or later the inevitable must be faced. We cannot continue to spend more than we have without courting economic disaster that may not be so easily reversible. Far better to let unsustainable jobs, houses, etc. go naturally at the beginning than to throw good money after bad and wind up losing those jobs, houses, and more anyway.
... this was the most efficient way to stimulate the economy.
It was not.
Which is why now we have stagnate growth and almost NO jobs being added. Because you do not create growth and create jobs with Construction spending, and Bail outs for medicare budgets. Plain and simple.
Then the question becomes: What is a more efficient way to stimulate the economy?
NO construction spending?
NO Bailouts?
Remember, as President Obama said today, "if you get into a car and want to go forward, put the car in D; if you wish to go backwards, select R."
Talk about glib and hyperbolic, I'd say that quote fills both descriptions...
What if the "car" looks as though it is about to go over a cliff?
And the sad fact is that 'stopping the bleeding' is only a temporary fix when major surgery is indicated. For example, we were sold a bill of goods that General Motors was 'too big to fail' and that it would be disaster if we did not funnel mega billions of dollars into it to prevent bankruptcy. So we funneled the billions into it, bankruptcy was declared anyway, and the primary stockholders are now the U.S. government and the UAW meaning that any problems with this company will now be the responsibility of the tax payers.
And NONE of the problems that previously existed and put the company into jeopardy in the first place have been fixed.
We deserve better.
So far as GM is concerned, I see a great number of changes and a company that can turn a profit with far fewer vehicles sold. Bankruptcy was the key and it did its job very well. Like life, it isn't how many times you get knocked down. its how many times you get back up. This was not a problem the government shol dhave been trying to fix. Hopefully by this time next year, all will be repaid and those idiots 0bama put in to help will be gone. Limiting us to the days supply we have is crazy. Low volume and low markup are a long term recipe for another disaster.
Do you really think that the Volt with a $40,000+ sticker price and a 40 mile range on an electric charge is a positive change? It will take a bit more digging by expert researchers to figure out what that project is costing the U.S. taxpayers, but you can bet we're helping finance a good portion if not all of it.
What changes have been made in basic management concept and the union entitlements and privileges that put the company into bankruptcy in the first place? With the union being a major stockholder, it doesn't look promising to me that this will take a highly beneficial turn either.
I will say they have improved their advertising campaign, but with the already so poisoned and the American public so negative re government and union ownership I think that may be too little too late. I, for instance, would not touch a GM product with a 10 foot pole right now.
I agree the government should have stayed out of it, but I'm not confident on any kind of useful fix and figure the taxpayer's investment will be wiped out in another bankruptcy on down the line.
I hope you're right and I'm wrong about that.
... this was the most efficient way to stimulate the economy.
It was not.
Which is why now we have stagnate growth and almost NO jobs being added. Because you do not create growth and create jobs with Construction spending, and Bail outs for medicare budgets. Plain and simple.
Then the question becomes: What is a more efficient way to stimulate the economy?
I suspect you're going to be told that stimulating the economy isn't possible EXCEPT with tax cuts most of which only really serve to benefit billionaires.
NO construction spending?
No they don't like that
NO Bailouts?
No they hate that, too
IN the first place they don't believe that -- had nothing been done -- the majority of the world banks would have collapsed.
In the second place most of those who object to stimulus spending don't believe that the collapse of the world's banks would effect them personally.
Hey, don't blame me, I'm only the messenger.
I think they've been misinformed, too.
So far as GM is concerned, I see a great number of changes and a company that can turn a profit with far fewer vehicles sold. Bankruptcy was the key and it did its job very well. Like life, it isn't how many times you get knocked down. its how many times you get back up. This was not a problem the government shol dhave been trying to fix. Hopefully by this time next year, all will be repaid and those idiots 0bama put in to help will be gone. Limiting us to the days supply we have is crazy. Low volume and low markup are a long term recipe for another disaster.
Do you really think that the Volt with a $40,000+ sticker price and a 40 mile range on an electric charge is a positive change? It will take a bit more digging by expert researchers to figure out what that project is costing the U.S. taxpayers, but you can bet we're helping finance a good portion if not all of it.
What changes have been made in basic management concept and the union entitlements and privileges that put the company into bankruptcy in the first place? With the union being a major stockholder, it doesn't look promising to me that this will take a highly beneficial turn either.
I will say they have improved their advertising campaign, but with the already so poisoned and the American public so negative re government and union ownership I think that may be too little too late. I, for instance, would not touch a GM product with a 10 foot pole right now.
I agree the government should have stayed out of it, but I'm not confident on any kind of useful fix and figure the taxpayer's investment will be wiped out in another bankruptcy on down the line.
I hope you're right and I'm wrong about that.
Yeah, screw that evil private business General Motors. And screw the guy down the street who contracts with the dealerships to do the constant maintenance of all those brand new cars on the lots (like shoveling the snow off, cleaning off the mud, detailing per a customer's request); screw the company that installs a GPS system or satellite radio in a new car that doesn't come with it; screw the companies that provide auto insurance.
Do you support American businesses or not?
The government created projects, not jobs. The Census is a project. Road construction is a project. Certainly not a long term job. Small businesses don't create jobs unless uncertainty in the market is minimized. Consumers are not confident, banks don't loan much and government policy on health care and taxes looks troublesome.
Now the dimwit Obama comes along and preaches wine and roses, when we all know better. The minions run about blaming every one but the one who should have been leading us the last year and a half.
Once again, after all this time, I still hear no suggestions as to what you (collectively) think he should have done. "Let the market take care of itself"??? Sure, that's what took us into this disastrous economy in the first place.
Maggie, I suggested at the time we do home foreclosures differently. My plan was to reduce principle for those who could afford a smaller payment. The loan would be rewritten and part or all of the reduced principle would go to the bank. Now we helped someone stay in their home, the bank and most likely help keep other folks home values a little higher.
Instead we have a large number of bank failures, foreclosures and a depressed housing market.
Should have let GM and Chrysler go bankrupt before considering bailouts. Smaller payouts, if any after that. Also my suggestion.
Should have left Iraq and Afghanistan a year ago. I supported that too.
None this is new, liberals just sat there and cried foul the whole time.
Oh, the Recovery Act is having a Sustained Effect - just not the one Maggie HOPES it has had.
It is having a prolonged and sustained effect of weighing down our economy and prolonging under and unemployment for millions of Americans.
You do realize that Recovery.Org is Ran BY the ADMIN right. would you have believed everything it said, had it been Bush running it? We are suppose to take their word for it because they made a web site?
LOL
Typical Liberal
Of course I know that. And yes, I would have believed it if Bush Co. had been running it because, just like the current one, the information is easily verifiable elsewhere. Duh...
Typical con.
I don't know about easily, but when verified it often turns out to be erronious or "created".
Ahh the Typical Liberal Response. When confronted with a Massive Majority that does not agree with them. We are all just to stupid to see that Liberals know best.
I see no "massive" disagreement, pal. And thanks for taking ONE COMMENT from a plethora of many fact-based comments.
Typical con, who only makes himself look like a fool having a tantrum.
"many fact-based comments?"
You must mean you're reference (the only one you cited) to Recovery.org?
Recovery Funded Jobs Reported by Recipients
755,454 Recipients
Recovery Funds Spent
500 Billion
How much does it cost taxpayers to fund One Job for a recovery fund recipient?
Of course I know that. And yes, I would have believed it if Bush Co. had been running it because, just like the current one, the information is easily verifiable elsewhere. Duh...
Typical con.
I don't know about easily, but when verified it often turns out to be erronious or "created".
When that happens, the media jumps all over it. There are thousands of fact-checkers out there, all too eager to bring errors or misstatements to the attention of the public.
July 16, 2010
Every once in a while, a news reporter reviewing the alleged misuse of Recovery Act funds will ask me a fundamental question: When can the public expect to see criminal indictments in the Recovery program? Prosecutions eventually will emerge, I explain, but then I go on to add that there’s a lot more to protecting the taxpayers’ pocketbook than bringing high-profile indictments.
Typical con, who only makes himself look like a fool having a tantrum.
"many fact-based comments?"
You must mean you're reference (the only one you cited) to Recovery.org?
Recovery Funded Jobs Reported by Recipients
755,454 Recipients
Recovery Funds Spent
500 Billion
How much does it cost taxpayers to fund One Job for a recovery fund recipient?
As I recall, those were hardly the only two "fact" links I posted. Now you're just being picky. I don't see you posting anything other than pithy insults. Yeah, that's so helpful.
"many fact-based comments?"
You must mean you're reference (the only one you cited) to Recovery.gov?
Recovery Funded Jobs Reported by Recipients
755,454 Recipients
Recovery Funds Spent
500 Billion
How much does it cost taxpayers to fund One Job for a recovery fund recipient?
Recovery.org and its counterpart Recovery.gov are full of misinformation and spin.
With real under and unemployment at 22%, it's quite apparent to anyone with functioning cognitive abilities that Obamanomics is an Epic Fail.
Actually, I got the number of recipients April 1-June 30 from Recovery.gov.
I tried to find recipients to date (which you'd expect to be on the FRONT PAGE, since it would be largest), but couldn't find it.
Can anyone else?
Do you really think that the Volt with a $40,000+ sticker price and a 40 mile range on an electric charge is a positive change? It will take a bit more digging by expert researchers to figure out what that project is costing the U.S. taxpayers, but you can bet we're helping finance a good portion if not all of it.
What changes have been made in basic management concept and the union entitlements and privileges that put the company into bankruptcy in the first place? With the union being a major stockholder, it doesn't look promising to me that this will take a highly beneficial turn either.
I will say they have improved their advertising campaign, but with the already so poisoned and the American public so negative re government and union ownership I think that may be too little too late. I, for instance, would not touch a GM product with a 10 foot pole right now.
I agree the government should have stayed out of it, but I'm not confident on any kind of useful fix and figure the taxpayer's investment will be wiped out in another bankruptcy on down the line.
I hope you're right and I'm wrong about that.
Yeah, screw that evil private business General Motors. And screw the guy down the street who contracts with the dealerships to do the constant maintenance of all those brand new cars on the lots (like shoveling the snow off, cleaning off the mud, detailing per a customer's request); screw the company that installs a GPS system or satellite radio in a new car that doesn't come with it; screw the companies that provide auto insurance.
Do you support American businesses or not?
More frothy babblings
When are you going to offer a shread of evidence that the Recovery Act is having a sustaind effect?
Recovery.org and its counterpart Recovery.gov are full of misinformation and spin.
With real under and unemployment at 22%, it's quite apparent to anyone with functioning cognitive abilities that Obamanomics is an Epic Fail.
Actually, I got the number of recipients April 1-June 30 from Recovery.gov.
I tried to find recipients to date (which you'd expect to be on the FRONT PAGE, since it would be largest), but couldn't find it.
Can anyone else?
I didn't post the recovery.gov page. I posted the ProPublica page, which links to the recovery.gov site. Of course if you bothered to just navigate around, you would find all sorts of information. But as I said at one point, you people aren't interested in sourced information. All you're interested in doing is blaming Obama and/or the "liberals" and doing so with lame blanket accusations based on what someone else said within your little groupthink.
Unless you're a complete novice and don't have a clue how to use your mouse, it's quite easy to find a plethora of information at this site.
Eye on the Stimulus - ProPublica
I'm willing to bet there isn't a single con who posts here who has ever gone to Recovery.gov. They believe it's all lies.
I don't know about easily, but when verified it often turns out to be erronious or "created".
When that happens, the media jumps all over it. There are thousands of fact-checkers out there, all too eager to bring errors or misstatements to the attention of the public.
Well, not Fact checker Earl E. Devaney, chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, which manages this website and oversees spending under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
July 16, 2010
Every once in a while, a news reporter reviewing the alleged misuse of Recovery Act funds will ask me a fundamental question: When can the public expect to see criminal indictments in the Recovery program? Prosecutions eventually will emerge, I explain, but then I go on to add that theres a lot more to protecting the taxpayers pocketbook than bringing high-profile indictments.
What a fucking moron.....
When that happens, the media jumps all over it. There are thousands of fact-checkers out there, all too eager to bring errors or misstatements to the attention of the public.
Well, not Fact checker Earl E. Devaney, chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, which manages this website and oversees spending under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
July 16, 2010
Every once in a while, a news reporter reviewing the alleged misuse of Recovery Act funds will ask me a fundamental question: When can the public expect to see criminal indictments in the Recovery program? Prosecutions eventually will emerge, I explain, but then I go on to add that theres a lot more to protecting the taxpayers pocketbook than bringing high-profile indictments.
What a fucking moron.....
Your point?
Recovery.org and its counterpart Recovery.gov are full of misinformation and spin.
With real under and unemployment at 22%, it's quite apparent to anyone with functioning cognitive abilities that Obamanomics is an Epic Fail.
Actually, I got the number of recipients April 1-June 30 from Recovery.gov.
I tried to find recipients to date (which you'd expect to be on the FRONT PAGE, since it would be largest), but couldn't find it.
Can anyone else?
Here ya go, wimp:
Tools & Data - ProPublica
I didn't post the recovery.gov page. I posted the ProPublica page, which links to the recovery.gov site. Of course if you bothered to just navigate around, you would find all sorts of information. But as I said at one point, you people aren't interested in sourced information. All you're interested in doing is blaming Obama and/or the "liberals" and doing so with lame blanket accusations based on what someone else said within your little groupthink.
Unless you're a complete novice and don't have a clue how to use your mouse, it's quite easy to find a plethora of information at this site.
Eye on the Stimulus - ProPublica
Actually, I got the number of recipients April 1-June 30 from Recovery.gov.
I tried to find recipients to date (which you'd expect to be on the FRONT PAGE, since it would be largest), but couldn't find it.
Can anyone else?
I didn't post the recovery.gov page. I posted the ProPublica page, which links to the recovery.gov site. Of course if you bothered to just navigate around, you would find all sorts of information. But as I said at one point, you people aren't interested in sourced information. All you're interested in doing is blaming Obama and/or the "liberals" and doing so with lame blanket accusations based on what someone else said within your little groupthink.
Unless you're a complete novice and don't have a clue how to use your mouse, it's quite easy to find a plethora of information at this site.
Eye on the Stimulus - ProPublica
I'm willing to bet there isn't a single con who posts here who has ever gone to Recovery.gov. They believe it's all lies.
I went there and cannot find anything to support your ridiculous assertations.
You're either dishonest, stupid, or both.
