The Cellar - The New Bailout

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - The New Bailout (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=19517)

But its Bush's fault - don't forget that.:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 536311)

And people bitch about how much Bush ran up the deficit. This guy is going for a record.

It's like the special olympics, and the whole fucking "government" is competing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 536353)

But its Bush's fault - don't forget that.:rolleyes:

Quit trying to hog the glory.

Bush had his own moments of stupidity. This one is all the Dems.

Where's the rescue package for Katrina and NO?

Quote:

Katrina Who?
Fascinating article explains how full of it Dems were on Katrina reconstruction $$$, how they seem to have gotten over it now that their guy is in, and aren’t even squawking about no Katrina cut in the economic porkfest. The fascinating part isn’t so much the content. No big surprises there. What’s fascinating is the part at the very top that says:

Your go-to wire service for objective, just-the-facts Bush-bash, gently chiding the people whose water they’ve been carrying lo these many years. The one thing that is missing is an analyst or GOP type pointing out what flaming hypocrites the Dems have been, though there are a couple of diplomatic comments from a GOP rep turned lobbyist.

As for the AP and its own historic flaming hypocrisy, while this is a startling new direction, it hardly has the “when did you stop beating your wife” quality of the news agency’s average Bush coverage, and seems to be expressing more a sense of approval and relief at how reasonable everyone can afford to be now that you-know-who isn’t around to provoke an entirely understandable derangement.

As a side note, the article states as fact that the Republican president “bungled the initial response to the disaster” though it’s pretty well established that the initial bungling was done by Lousiana Democrats. Again, can’t have everything.

continues

http://www.julescrittenden.com/2009/02/19/katrina-who/

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw (Post 535835)

GM must eliminate Saab, Saturn, Pontiac, and Hummer.

Saab just filed for bankruptcy, thus allowing GM to sell.

It turns out the Swedish government was not interested in a bailout plan, opting instead to send them to bankruptcy. Huh. If only the US were as capitalist a country as Sweden...

GM killed a great brand. Saabs used to be the coolest thing on the roads. Now they are bland pieces of shit. Maybe they can be resurrected.

I was just thinking the same thing yesterday. Back in the 80s, Saabs were everywhere. I haven't seen one on the road in ages. GM killed the company. Or at least made the cars so bland I don't even see them when they are driving around.

News ticker on CNN, GM stock down to $1.57, lowest in 70 years.

Classic Saab 900 design, distinctive and cool. Not a lot of old designs still look cool:

http://cellar.org/2009/saab_900.jpg

Recent GMaab 9-3, bland and neutered, nothing about it says Saab:

http://cellar.org/2009/2005-Saab-9-3.jpg

Looks like a Beamer.

I just found this graph of Saab sales over the years. They grew steadily during the 80s and peaked in 87, which is around the time I remember I started seeing them everywhere. Then they took a nosedive.

Partway though the nosedive, GM acquired a majority stake in them (1990,) and slowly started to grow the brand again in the early-mid 90s. Then about 3-4 years ago, they took a nosedive again.

Saab and Volvo and maybe BMW seemed like they were in a market together. I would buy a BMW over the other two. I don't know about Saab but Volvo's have a significant reputation for expensive repairs. Not that BMW does not, just that there seems to be a lot more BMW places around to get them serviced and the other two seem a bit more obscure.

Datalyss posted this in Internet, but it really belongs in Politics so I am reposting it. I don't know how they actually measure the success or failure, or even compromise on each issue, but it is interesting either way.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

Quote:

Originally Posted by TGRR (Post 536054)

75 billion more in mortgage relief, proposed by Obama today.

Sometimes this shit makes me laugh until I can't stop screaming.

That will be coming from the $350 billion TARP funds. It is not added money. It was already approved before Bush left office. And the TARP was supposed to be for mortgage relief to stop forclosures, instead Hank Paulson gave the first $350 billion to banks. The banks, instead of using it to help people in foreclosure by rewriting mortgages, held onto the money or used it to buy other banks. They have done nothing to help to stop the problems they created. The housing market is where this all started, so do you think we should just continue to ignore that aspect of this mess?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 536348)

Obama Stimulus Saves Microsoft Billionaire Hundreds Of Millions

Billionaire Paul Allen is a Microsoft cofounder, the owner of the NFL's Seattle Seahawks and the owner of the NBA's Portland Trailblazers.

And, thanks to the stimulus bill President Obama signed this week, he's also about to be as much as a billion dollars richer.

Here's how:

Allen owns a majority stake in cable provider Charter Communications.
Charter Communications this month said it would reduce its debt load by $8 billion and enter Chapter 11.
Normally, partners at a firm like Charter Communications would have to pay taxes on the amount of debt forgiven in this process, which is, in a sense a one-time income windfall. Tax law calls it a "deemed distribution."

But under the new bill, companies like Charter Communications will be able to avoid paying taxes on forgiven debt until 2014. Even then, Paul will have until 2018 to pay it completely off.
Paul owns about half of Charter, so his share of the Charter Commuincations' $8 billion debt forgiveness is around $4 billion. At a tax rate of 25%, Allen could avoid paying as much as $1 billion in taxes until 2014, tax expert Robert Willens told the WSJ.

Not clear how a corporate tax benefit would be passed through to Paul's personal tax payments? A reader informs us:

"It's not a 'corporate tax' since it's a partnership rather than a corporation. The partners pay tax on their share of a partnerships income, which is why partnerships are referred to as "pass-through" entities."

For what it's worth, one of Paul's representatives told the WSJ the billionaire didn't lobby for the windfall. It just fell into his lap, lucky dog.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama...ns-phew-2009-2

And I'm quite sure, if this is true, that republicans wrote that part of the fucking bill. They ARE the ones who wanted all the fucking tax cuts. Obama put a lot of porky ones for rich people in there in order to appease them and get some votes. But they voted against it anyway. And he will have to take the heat for it. A very stupid move IMO.

I think, after the House dug their heals in and decided to completely vote against it, he should have just taken out everything he didn't want, and put the stuff back in he DID want that they took out for republican support. Fuck them. He will not get any support from them. That is pretty obvious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 536797)

GM also killed the electric car. The company should just be sold off to the highest bidder. Why are we paying so much more than the company is even worth?

And Chrysler is a private corporation owned by wealthy hedge funds. So why the hell are we bailing them out? Shouldn't they use their own money?