So much for the gov't takeover of GM

Onceler said:
It's a disingenuous argument for anyone to try to use who is trying to prove either socialism or some sort of gov't takeover of industry, and you know it. They have half the stake they had, and will likely halve it again (or more) in 6 months time.

The "creep" of takeover that we were warned about didn't happen, and isn't happening. The opposite is. If you'd like, we can wait another 6 months or a year before revisiting this discussion, but the writing is clearly on the wall.

Personally, I'll have no problem bumping this thread in a year's time, because I know exactly where things are headed w/ regard to the gov't's involvement in GM.
Click to expand...

I agree... it is equally disingenuous to state that it is not ownership. I know what you meant, but like about 20 others on this thread you misstated the case.

The fact that they most certainly have had controlling interest up until today, the fact that they are talking about government subsidies for those that buy the volt, the fact that they created second class citizens with regards to the stock ownership in the pre-11 GM.... you can make arguments for abusive use of power by the government within this sector.

Is it socialism, no. As you stated, they never intended to maintain the ownership long term. Just long enough to benefit their union buddies.

On a separate note: an interesting article on Obama's man... who ran the takeover/fuckover of certain shareholders.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/mon...-and-the-terrible-horrible-very-good-day.html
 
Superfreak said:
The volt is going to be a complete flop.... the ONLY way they see sales is if the government (you know, that owner that isn't exerting any control) goes ahead with the massive federal rebates to the prospective buyers.

At $40k per vehicle... no way does that sell without a massive subsidy from Uncle Sam.
Click to expand...

That price will come down when the Nissan Leaf comes out.
 
Onceler said:
The #'s have been reported differently, it seems.

Is it your contention that they would have been in the clear at 36%, but that 40% represents strong socialistic practice?
Click to expand...

no, it is my position that the 61% represents a strong socialistic practice......how do you feel about the 51% of Chrysler we simply handed to the UAW in exchange for nothing....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm having a bit of trouble understanding all this talk about 36%.....



http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-11-11-nader-gm-ipo_N.htm
Click to expand...

It all depends on where you read it, the BBC says this:

The share sale, known as an initial public offering (IPO), will allow the US government to reduce its current 61% stake in the company to as low as 33%.

I think that it really pisses off many on the right that this IPO was such a success, it is an indication that the corner has turned and the economy is recovering. Without the bailout the entire US car industry was likely to have collapsed with the resultant loss of millions of jobs. These are the exact same people who bellyache about the high level of unemployment currently, so God knows what it would of been without the bailout. Laissez Faire economics belongs to the 19th and early 20th centuries.
 
Onceler said:
LOL

I just checked Dixie's "socialism" thread from a year ago. Again - I can bump it if you want. You were screaming about how the gov't controlled the means of production & ran GM.

This story is pretty bad egg in the fact for you, unfortunately...
Click to expand...

i accept, bump it

you know you're lying, so you will never bump it
 
Yurt said:
i accept, bump it

you know you're lying, so you will never bump it
Click to expand...

I'm not lying. I'm just wised up to the idiotic games you play after people meet your "demands."

Acknowledge the parameters, & accept the terms. Or wimp out. It's up to you.
 
Onceler said:
I'm not lying. I'm just wised up to the idiotic games you play after people meet your "demands."

Acknowledge the parameters, & accept the terms. Or wimp out. It's up to you.
Click to expand...

my demands? you offered to bump the thread if i wanted...i didn't demand anything you lying sos

you're lying and won't bump it because you will once again look like a dishonest hack, if you had something, you would without a doubt run and fetch it and try to make me look bad, you do it all the time to people....

tff how you offered and are now to scared to bump it....nice job liar :clink:
 
Onceler said:
Let's get you on record first: are you denying that you claimed that the GM situation was socialism, and that the gov't owned & ran the means of production?

And if I bump a thread where you make such claims, will you come out with the following statement:

"I sincerely apologize that I asked Onceler once again to link up something I knew was true, and I will make no effort to distract from getting busted in my stupidity, and make no attempt to move the goalposts."
Click to expand...

These are VERY simple terms, Yurtsie. Your fear about agreeing to them speaks volumes.

All you have to do is say okay on these, and I'll do some bumping. If you're 100% sure you didn't call it socialism or say gov't ran the means of production or fearmonger, you'd have no problem at all doing that.

You're not 100% sure though, are you?
:)
 
i am 100% positive i did not fear monger

i am 100% positive you're lying and you keep proving that fact by not bumping the thread and then creating more lies by claiming i put "demands" on you...which is of course false as you offered to bump the thread if i want....i've asked you a dozen times to bump it

you're afraid too because it will show you're lying....this is great onceler, you keep showing you're a liar everytime you fail to bump it :)
 
Yurt said:
i am 100% positive i did not fear monger

i am 100% positive you're lying and you keep proving that fact by not bumping the thread and then creating more lies by claiming i put "demands" on you...which is of course false as you offered to bump the thread if i want....i've asked you a dozen times to bump it

you're afraid too because it will show you're lying....this is great onceler, you keep showing you're a liar everytime you fail to bump it :)
Click to expand...

Ya know, I have said previously that people on message boards aren't "afraid," but I may have to amend that: you clearly are.

If you're 100% sure....why not agree? It seems so simple.

But, you're not 100% sure....
 
Onceler said:
LOL

I figured you were frantically searching because you weren't 100% sure.

The terms, Yurtsie - the terms. If you really want to see your fearmongering, just agree.
Click to expand...

another lie, i've been 100% sure since you first made the claim, hence why i immediately accepted your offer to have you bump the thread

i looked for the thread to show how i am not afraid to bump the thread, you on the other hand are because you know you lied...the thread is linked and you still won't show where i fear mongered....tff

simple concept really, but i'm not surprised it is too complex for you to understand
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top