#1 · Feb 26, 2011 06:46 UTC
...democrats are Pussies. ;D
Ahhh, what the fuck are these idiots thinking? ;D
Jesus Christ.
Ahhh, what the fuck are these idiots thinking? ;D
Jesus Christ.
#2 · Feb 26, 2011 07:41 UTC
I'm not sure what that all means. I do know that it seems like the ability of unions to represent people is going to be crushed. I'm not sure if I'd say that's a good thing... in some cases it makes sense, but mostly it just seems like, unions give money to Democrats, let's crush them.
#3 · Feb 26, 2011 22:10 UTC
Hookbender — Feb 26, 2011...democrats are Pussies. ;D
Ahhh, what the fuck are these idiots thinking? ;D
Jesus Christ.
Amazing insight as usual...well, at least you're learning to read between the lines of FOX rhetoric instead of merely parroting the party line.
#4 · Feb 27, 2011 05:43 UTC
That's deep.
#5 · Feb 27, 2011 06:22 UTC
Hookbender — Feb 27, 2011That's deep.
And what you said was?
This issue is about fucking over the unions so they lose their political power and corporate interests can get what they want: Republicans they have paid for running things.
They've paid for many Democrats, too - don't kid yourself - but the plain reality is that the middle class grows when unionization grows. When workers have some power, society as a whole benefits, because it reduces poverty.
Scott Walker is a piece of shit. He has no respect for the people of Wisconsin. The public workers caved on EVERYTHING HE WANTED, except collective bargaining. But that's what he won't let go...
Here's hoping it starts a populist revolution - we need one.
Tripper
#6 · Feb 27, 2011 07:22 UTC
The boys and girls need to go home and do their job, you know, become men and women.
Kinda in the middle on unions. I see they do some good, but I've also seen them destroy a company. Undecided on that one.
Kinda in the middle on unions. I see they do some good, but I've also seen them destroy a company. Undecided on that one.
#7 · Feb 28, 2011 03:19 UTC
Shift the class war from rich vs middle class to middle class vs middle class. Give state tax breaks to the rich ie. "business" and make up the loss on people who avg. 50k. It's fun! At the same time damage the unions who are the only groups, three of the top ten donors, that aren't corp. based donation machines. No it wasn't big business/stock market/ins scams that fucked the economy, it was poor people buying houses and the "deficit". I love the deficit part because you can forget about the tax cuts and wars and just blame it on Soc Sec and Medicare etc. Take more from the middle class and more and more....well, the poor don't have anything to take.
My dad was a teacher, he doesn't live any high life.
My dad was a teacher, he doesn't live any high life.
#8 · Mar 02, 2011 02:23 UTC
Hookbender — Feb 27, 2011The boys and girls need to go home and do their job, you know, become men and women.
You're such a shill now. God. Do you even care about the American people anymore? You don't even understand why what's going on in Wisconsin is important...typical of someone who doesn't know shit about anything.
Kinda in the middle on unions. I see they do some good, but I've also seen them destroy a company. Undecided on that one.
But how often does that actually happen, Hook? Can you cite more than two examples from memory?
Unions are NECESSARY in a society like ours...one where the government is OWNED by corporations and a smaller and smaller amount of people are accumulating more and more of the wealth of this nation. People must be able to get together and negotiate as one, or they will be fucked over and steamrolled by those who own companies in the interest of endless profits to serve their Wall Street masters...who exist solely to accumulate wealth.
Tripper
#9 · Mar 02, 2011 04:11 UTC
Do I care about the American people? Come on dude. Your making me want to go give money to a homeless person without knowing why he's homeless. :D
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I sure had reason to doubt Obama didn't I? Yep.
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I had a valid concern about the debt this country has, didn't I? Yep.
I even had a valid concern about Obamacare it seems. Yep. Sure did.
So you stick your head in a book and pretend you know everything and I'll take credit where credit is due. :D
Not sure I view Unions the same way you do. I'd have to read up on it. But my opinion doesn't count, so fuck it. ;D
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I sure had reason to doubt Obama didn't I? Yep.
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I had a valid concern about the debt this country has, didn't I? Yep.
I even had a valid concern about Obamacare it seems. Yep. Sure did.
So you stick your head in a book and pretend you know everything and I'll take credit where credit is due. :D
Not sure I view Unions the same way you do. I'd have to read up on it. But my opinion doesn't count, so fuck it. ;D
#10 · Mar 02, 2011 04:40 UTC
:D
#11 · Mar 02, 2011 05:46 UTC
None of those fancy books needed, Hook goes with his gut!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
#12 · Mar 02, 2011 15:47 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 02, 2011Do I care about the American people? Come on dude. Your making me want to go give money to a homeless person without knowing why he's homeless. :D
I'll spot you that one. But I'd add to it that people sometimes deserve a break.
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I sure had reason to doubt Obama didn't I? Yep.
Nope. IF you really want to be mad at anyone be mad at the people that have made it difficult for things to happen. People in the house and senate. Both sides of the aisle.
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I had a valid concern about the debt this country has, didn't I? Yep.
You sure do. Ask your boys the republicans about that. They are the ones that fucked us.
I even had a valid concern about Obamacare it seems. Yep. Sure did.
No you didn't. You are like a typical person. Change is scary. It's even more scary when people start tying ideas like socialism to it and make it not about the issue at hand but buzz words. Obamacare would be way better than you or I currently have. It would be something worth while. And the cool thing is you didn't have to participate you idiot. So it wouldn't HAVE to affect you at all.
So you stick your head in a book and pretend you know everything and I'll take credit where credit is due. :D
Credit for being an idiot and wrong. OK....that just makes you a stand up idiot that is self aware? Interesting, but I wouldn't trade places with you.
Not sure I view Unions the same way you do. I'd have to read up on it. But my opinion doesn't count, so fuck it. ;D
I'm part of a union. There's good and bad that go along with it. If business treated employees fairly you wouldn't NEED union/
#13 · Mar 02, 2011 19:30 UTC
Anyone who believes that crushing unions is going to have a positive effect on work in this country is nuts. The main, and only, goal, is to reduce the cost of doing business. That sounds great, right? Let's "reduce the cost of doing business." What that means is, "let's pay people less". Whoa, that doesn't sound so good, does it? After all, if everyone made the minimum wage, we could probably have 100% employment.
The secondary goal is to crush the Democratic party. Democrats get political funding from unions. If they remove that funding, while thanks to Citizens United two years ago, Republicans now have UNLIMITED corporate funding, it's like winning one competition, but getting two first place trophies.
The secondary goal is to crush the Democratic party. Democrats get political funding from unions. If they remove that funding, while thanks to Citizens United two years ago, Republicans now have UNLIMITED corporate funding, it's like winning one competition, but getting two first place trophies.
#14 · Mar 02, 2011 21:26 UTC
Sounds contrary to the principle of freedom of association.
i.e. the same principle that makes union closed shops illegal.
i.e. the same principle that makes union closed shops illegal.
#15 · Mar 03, 2011 03:05 UTC
I'm not mad at anyone. I'm disgusted with the process and lies involved in todays politics.
Wait, you mean Obama has made all the right decisions thus far? The longer the economy and unemployment continues on the path it is, things don't get much better. The housing market hasn't really even been addressed. Unemployment hasn't changed a bit. The economy has gotten better, but is still very sluggish by Obama's own admission. He spent way to much money and time on hard shit instead of doing stuff that would have an immediate positive effect. The bush tax cuts thing went on way to long. Etc. The oil spill thing went way to long before he took any action at all. Yet he bashed bush for Katrina.Need I continue?
And after all the money Obama has spent, you have the nerve to point out republicans spending habbits? They all spend to much, and that's the bottom line. End of discussion.
Ahhh, do I live in this country? Yes. So healthcare changes would effect me. First, it's gonna cost way more than predicted, as with any government involved program. Second, it's a half ass plan. It doesn't insure everyone. Its a start right, whatever. Third, the year he spent trying to get it passed while our economy was falling apart was a loss of precious time. So it has already affected me.
Lets just wait and see who's the idiot years down the road when we really feel the effect of this administration.
I don't dislike Obama. I question his decisions, some anyway. I don't see change. I see washington as normal, no matter who's fault that may be. I do respect him. I also wouldn't want to be in his shoes at this time. I don't blame him for the shape of our country's in. Like I said, I'm disgusted with the process and lies. Games. these fuckers in washington work for themselves, not America. Not the people, as they should. They don't have our best interest in mind or the best interest for our country. Their shit and deserve to be treated as shit. Its a war between dems and repubs and each side trys to out do the other instead of doing what they should. And thats the bottom line too.
Wait, you mean Obama has made all the right decisions thus far? The longer the economy and unemployment continues on the path it is, things don't get much better. The housing market hasn't really even been addressed. Unemployment hasn't changed a bit. The economy has gotten better, but is still very sluggish by Obama's own admission. He spent way to much money and time on hard shit instead of doing stuff that would have an immediate positive effect. The bush tax cuts thing went on way to long. Etc. The oil spill thing went way to long before he took any action at all. Yet he bashed bush for Katrina.Need I continue?
And after all the money Obama has spent, you have the nerve to point out republicans spending habbits? They all spend to much, and that's the bottom line. End of discussion.
Ahhh, do I live in this country? Yes. So healthcare changes would effect me. First, it's gonna cost way more than predicted, as with any government involved program. Second, it's a half ass plan. It doesn't insure everyone. Its a start right, whatever. Third, the year he spent trying to get it passed while our economy was falling apart was a loss of precious time. So it has already affected me.
Lets just wait and see who's the idiot years down the road when we really feel the effect of this administration.
I don't dislike Obama. I question his decisions, some anyway. I don't see change. I see washington as normal, no matter who's fault that may be. I do respect him. I also wouldn't want to be in his shoes at this time. I don't blame him for the shape of our country's in. Like I said, I'm disgusted with the process and lies. Games. these fuckers in washington work for themselves, not America. Not the people, as they should. They don't have our best interest in mind or the best interest for our country. Their shit and deserve to be treated as shit. Its a war between dems and repubs and each side trys to out do the other instead of doing what they should. And thats the bottom line too.
#16 · Mar 03, 2011 14:22 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 02, 2011Do I care about the American people? Come on dude. Your making me want to go give money to a homeless person without knowing why he's homeless. :D
Well at least you acknowledge you don't know what you're talking about...
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I sure had reason to doubt Obama didn't I? Yep.
I doubted him, too. Read my old posts. I wasn't skeptical out of ignorance like you, however. I was actually listening to what he promised, and considering the fact that there are a few important things he's gone back on, I'm very disappointed in his work so far. Of course, I'm not such a dolt that I make retarded right-wing arguments against Obama that have no foundation in reality.
For someone who doesn't know shit about anything, I had a valid concern about the debt this country has, didn't I? Yep.
Wow. You can see that the sky is blue. I'm IMPRESSED!
I even had a valid concern about Obamacare it seems. Yep. Sure did.
The mere fact that you call it "Obamacare" shows that you really have no fucking clue and are blinded by your right-wing educators that it's inherently bad. It's not GOOD, but it's better than what we had.
So you stick your head in a book and pretend you know everything and I'll take credit where credit is due. :D
I don't pretend or claim to know everything, but I guarantee you I know more than you do about current events, especially those involving international issues and important decisions being made by government.
Not sure I view Unions the same way you do. I'd have to read up on it. But my opinion doesn't count, so fuck it. ;D
If your opinion ever made any sense, it would count. Instead you just whine superficially about shit like a bad comedian, "what is the deal with these democrat pussies leaving Wisconsin, oh yeah, and man, that president of ours...oh, what's the deal with that airplane food..."
:P
Tripper
#17 · Mar 03, 2011 21:45 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 03, 2011
Wait, you mean Obama has made all the right decisions thus far? The longer the economy and unemployment continues on the path it is, things don't get much better. The housing market hasn't really even been addressed. Unemployment hasn't changed a bit. The economy has gotten better, but is still very sluggish by Obama's own admission. He spent way to much money and time on hard shit instead of doing stuff that would have an immediate positive effect. The bush tax cuts thing went on way to long. Etc. The oil spill thing went way to long before he took any action at all. Yet he bashed bush for Katrina.Need I continue?
The economy is in recovery and has been for the entire time you've been telling us it isn't. Every month the employment numbers and growth numbers get better. Since you are in complete denial of that, and for some reason assumed that this crisis would right itself in two years, I can't help you. Also, private sector job growth is turning around fast. Public sector--government--is laying people off. Last time I checked, that is what you wanted, too.
As for the housing market "recovering"? Who ar eyou kidding? It's never going to recover. It's not going back to where it was. The money lost in the housing market is gone. The jobs added in the housing sector are no longer needed. We don't need hundreds of thousands of home builders--because the bottom line is, people can not afford to buy the houses they are building. The market is saturated with a glut of houses a lot of people could not afford and should never have bought. The difference is, you can't get a loan anymore for a house you can't afford. What do you want Obama to do about it? Is it a right to have a house? Is it a right for you to get a loan for a house you can't afford? Is it a right to have a job in the construction industry when there is nothing to be built and houses are standing empty? This is the free market at work. The housing market that used to exist was artificially inflated and it's not coming back, nor should it.
The oil spill--you still think Obama could have sealed that well with his magic laser eyes? The Bush tax cuts thing went on too loing? What would be short enough for you? It got signed before it expired, and he got no concessions from Republicans. Blaming Obama for that is ridiculous. Who are those things named for, anyway? That is all on Bush, the guy you voted for twice. There is not a chance in hell that once you put in a tax cut, you can later remove it, or let it expire. Not a chance in hell. Unless you want to commit political suicide.
#18 · Mar 04, 2011 02:26 UTC
All you have to do is go back and read my post from the beginning of this thing with Obama to see my concerns are valid. Pretty much sums it up. No need to say it all again.
#19 · Mar 05, 2011 16:42 UTC
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/arianna-huffington-wont-tell-bill-maher-shes-voting-for-obama-in-2012/
"While none of this exactly constituted a ringing endorsement of Republicans, it certainly wasnt a rining endorsement of Obama, either she said she couldnt even rule out a third-party candidate coming on strong if unemployment remains around its current level, and criticized Obama for sometimes pushing the wrong issue at the wrong time (ex. health care over jobs). She did, however, praise his conduct on the situation in Egypt, calling his remarks about the need for true democracy Obama at his best.
Pushing the wrong issue at the wrong time.....seems I'm not the only one with this opinion. ;)
"While none of this exactly constituted a ringing endorsement of Republicans, it certainly wasnt a rining endorsement of Obama, either she said she couldnt even rule out a third-party candidate coming on strong if unemployment remains around its current level, and criticized Obama for sometimes pushing the wrong issue at the wrong time (ex. health care over jobs). She did, however, praise his conduct on the situation in Egypt, calling his remarks about the need for true democracy Obama at his best.
Pushing the wrong issue at the wrong time.....seems I'm not the only one with this opinion. ;)
#20 · Mar 06, 2011 08:40 UTC
He could have sat there for two years and tried to make "jobs" appear and we'd be in the same place we are now, except without healthcare. Then you'd be criticizing him for doing nothing for two years.
#21 · Mar 06, 2011 14:39 UTC
Nope. I wouldn't.
#22 · Mar 06, 2011 19:39 UTC
Sure, I believe you.
#23 · Mar 07, 2011 03:05 UTC
Doesn't really matter what you believe, does it? We can base our opinions on facts, not speculation or what if's.
#24 · Mar 07, 2011 05:19 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 07, 2011Doesn't really matter what you believe, does it? We can base our opinions on facts, not speculation or what if's.
Really? I haven't seen many "facts" by most everyone here! ;D
#25 · Mar 07, 2011 21:23 UTC
The president can sit around and hem and haw about jobs, but the reality is any fortune 500 CEO has more of a job impact than the president. The amount of flexibility the president has in adding and removing jobs from the government payroll is very limited. You didn't have any proposals for the president as for what he could do to improve the economy, did you? What did you want? More tax breaks? More stimulus? The economy is cyclical, and right now we are in an uptick, and it just happens that the last downtick was really horrible. We all know the reasons, it's a little tired to think that the president could wave a magic wand and fix that shit. It's kind of like waving a magic wand over the BP oil spill. It would sure be nice to think we had a magic president, but even better is when engineers design and implement a solid fix, or regulators come in and design a solid regulatory system.
#26 · Mar 08, 2011 00:06 UTC
Making the right decisions at the right time is the Presidents job. And wasting a year plus when the economy is in the shitter is not the right decision. The bush tax cuts directly effect businesses and individuals. To sit on such a no brainer decision isn't the right decision. to let a foreign oil company piss as much oil in our oceans before making critical decisions like letting other countries contribute to fixing the problem isn't the right decision. Tax breaks for business and individuals, imo, would be much more effective than fixing runways and bridges with temporary jobs is just lame. Tax breaks have a immediate effect. Lowering taxes in bad times is acceptable, but not during good times. Thats my opinion, of course.
It's not so much what Obama wants to do that I have a problem with, it's the timing of what he does.
If i make 100k and I'm 2 million in debt and the government throws money at me, I pay the debt off. Quick fix. But the key is if my spending habits stay the same, I'm right back in the same situation a fews years later. The government needs to stop spending. The governments spending habits are way the fuck out of control and we all pay the price for it. Only now we and the country pay the price, from top to bottom.
Obama seemed like he was determined to do good things during his campaign. Now he's stuck in the same ole Washington skum that all the others were. A good leader leads, he's not a effective leader.
It's not so much what Obama wants to do that I have a problem with, it's the timing of what he does.
If i make 100k and I'm 2 million in debt and the government throws money at me, I pay the debt off. Quick fix. But the key is if my spending habits stay the same, I'm right back in the same situation a fews years later. The government needs to stop spending. The governments spending habits are way the fuck out of control and we all pay the price for it. Only now we and the country pay the price, from top to bottom.
Obama seemed like he was determined to do good things during his campaign. Now he's stuck in the same ole Washington skum that all the others were. A good leader leads, he's not a effective leader.
#27 · Mar 08, 2011 00:20 UTC
House is really wasting time now tho!
#28 · Mar 08, 2011 02:23 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 08, 2011Making the right decisions at the right time is the Presidents job. And wasting a year plus when the economy is in the shitter is not the right decision. The bush tax cuts directly effect businesses and individuals. To sit on such a no brainer decision isn't the right decision. to let a foreign oil company piss as much oil in our oceans before making critical decisions like letting other countries contribute to fixing the problem isn't the right decision. Tax breaks for business and individuals, imo, would be much more effective than fixing runways and bridges with temporary jobs is just lame. Tax breaks have a immediate effect. Lowering taxes in bad times is acceptable, but not during good times. Thats my opinion, of course.
It's not so much what Obama wants to do that I have a problem with, it's the timing of what he does.
OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA!!!!!
If i make 100k and I'm 2 million in debt and the government throws money at me, I pay the debt off. Quick fix. But the key is if my spending habits stay the same, I'm right back in the same situation a fews years later. The government needs to stop spending. The governments spending habits are way the fuck out of control and we all pay the price for it. Only now we and the country pay the price, from top to bottom.
Hungh?
Obama seemed like he was determined to do good things during his campaign. Now he's stuck in the same ole Washington skum that all the others were. A good leader leads, he's not a effective leader.
OBAMA!!!!!!
#29 · Mar 08, 2011 02:56 UTC
Your really odd. Good to see you quote..???....yourself??? And me.?? ;D
Good lord man. ;D ;D ;D
Good lord man. ;D ;D ;D
#30 · Mar 08, 2011 02:58 UTC
'Tis easier thad way. heh heehh
Can you explain your analogy?
Can you explain your analogy?
#31 · Mar 08, 2011 03:49 UTC
I don't feel like it. ;D ;D
#32 · Mar 08, 2011 03:53 UTC
Just a "joke", right...
#33 · Mar 08, 2011 12:43 UTC
Your post, you mean?
#34 · Mar 08, 2011 20:01 UTC
Ask the Republicans if he's an effective leader... I'm sure they would disagree with you. Since they have committed themselves to undoing everything he's done. It is only "not effective" if you don't like his policies.
Bottom line, Reagan and Clinton both had much milder recessions in their first terms, and the recovery took even longer. This recession was horriffic--a once-in-a-lifetime event, we hope... that we have recovered as much as we have is pretty amazing to me. Since you know jack and shit about history, you have about as much perspective as a goldfish.
Bottom line, Reagan and Clinton both had much milder recessions in their first terms, and the recovery took even longer. This recession was horriffic--a once-in-a-lifetime event, we hope... that we have recovered as much as we have is pretty amazing to me. Since you know jack and shit about history, you have about as much perspective as a goldfish.
#35 · Mar 08, 2011 20:43 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 08, 2011Your post, you mean?
No, that's what you say when what you wrote makes no sense...it becomes a "joke" and, according to you, should have plenty of emoticons.
#36 · Mar 08, 2011 23:54 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 08, 2011It's not so much what Obama wants to do that I have a problem with, it's the timing of what he does.
Gotcha - and the problem with Hitler was really the rediculous tash. ;D
This post shall be interpreted under Godwin's Law. Any litigation under this proviso will be resolved in the trial courts of Godwin County, The State of the Internet etc., etc.
#37 · Mar 09, 2011 04:53 UTC
charger — Mar 08, 2011Ask the Republicans if he's an effective leader... I'm sure they would disagree with you. Since they have committed themselves to undoing everything he's done. It is only "not effective" if you don't like his policies.
Bottom line, Reagan and Clinton both had much milder recessions in their first terms, and the recovery took even longer. This recession was horriffic--a once-in-a-lifetime event, we hope... that we have recovered as much as we have is pretty amazing to me. Since you know jack and shit about history, you have about as much perspective as a goldfish.
But I do like his policies, for the most part. It's the timing of his policies I, and others, have a problem with.
And since you have your liberal head stuck so far up Obama's and any democrats ass that you defend them them even when their making bad choices makes you look dumb as a goldfish. And if one has good common sense, such as I, one must not need to know much history to see the mistakes this man is making. I also predict that he'll wait till gas hits 5 or 6 bucks a gallon before he wakes up and decides he better take some action. Of course, by them we'll be right back in recession mode and all the money he spent, wasted, will really bite us in the ass. It doesn't take much to see the priorities Obama has are all messed up, dude.
#38 · Mar 09, 2011 07:37 UTC
What action would you like him to take on gas prices?
I'm just asking because I remember the last time this happened, but it doesn't seem like you do.
And how are you going to feel when the oil companies post record profits after this quarter again? What would YOU do?
I'm just asking because I remember the last time this happened, but it doesn't seem like you do.
And how are you going to feel when the oil companies post record profits after this quarter again? What would YOU do?
#39 · Mar 09, 2011 20:06 UTC
Saudi keeps the supply up for Libya's losses...speculators keep the price rising here. Should/could BamBam end speculation?
#40 · Mar 09, 2011 20:37 UTC
He is powerless to end speculation in a global market.
#41 · Mar 09, 2011 21:14 UTC
I hearya. So hook, what should Bammah do to stop the price rise created by specution?
#42 · Mar 09, 2011 21:24 UTC
Yeah, he should end the free market. Why not? Hook seems to think the government can and should control: oil drilling, housing prices, employment... why not just become communists? and then Obama can actually accomplish the kind of things Hook wants.
#43 · Mar 09, 2011 21:39 UTC
I think he wants Obama to stop speculation in oil and restart speculation in house prices.
#44 · Mar 09, 2011 23:49 UTC
At least Scott Walker is about to show those pussies whats up!
#45 · Mar 10, 2011 03:50 UTC
charger — Mar 09, 2011What action would you like him to take on gas prices?
I'm just asking because I remember the last time this happened, but it doesn't seem like you do.
And how are you going to feel when the oil companies post record profits after this quarter again? What would YOU do?
First, I would do something like this....
http://www.thenation.com/article/159078/will-federal-regulators-crack-down-oil-speculation
Second, and this might surprise you, I don't think drilling for oil is the answer. From what I've read, it would take 10 years to have any effect on prices. And the Alaska thing, by Bush's on study, would lower prices per barrel about .75 cents after 10 years of getting it ready. Those figures may not be exactly correct, but I think their close.
We just missed a golden opportunity. GM and Chrysler were ready to call it quits and we bailed the failing companies out like idiots. The time was right to invest in smaller companies and give them huge plants to produce in to bring the price of electric cars down. Again, companies like Tesla, sp? The technology is there, they just need help getting serious in the market. And this is only one alternative.
I'm a little undecided on telling anyone how much money they can make. Or, limiting profits in any way. I think the answer is to attempt to do away with the need of their product. Getting serious about alternative auto makers that have good ideas and proven products would be a damn good investment, imo. Much better than bailing out failures like GM and Chrysler.
#46 · Mar 10, 2011 03:56 UTC
charger — Mar 09, 2011Yeah, he should end the free market. Why not? Hook seems to think the government can and should control: oil drilling, housing prices, employment... why not just become communists? and then Obama can actually accomplish the kind of things Hook wants.
Government is controlling oil drilling. And no, I don't think government should or can control house prices or employment.....but government can make a difference. They can offer help to those markets. Indirectly.
Yeah, communist. Thats good. Kinda like Obama forcing this healthcare through knowing full well a majoriety of American do not approve of the plan. ;)
#47 · Mar 10, 2011 03:57 UTC
fingers — Mar 09, 2011He is powerless to end speculation in a global market.
He may not be able to end it, but he damn sure can effect it.
#48 · Mar 10, 2011 09:06 UTC
Hookbender — Mar 10, 2011[quote author=fingers link=1298702805/25#39 date=1299703030]He is powerless to end speculation in a global market.
He may not be able to end it, but he damn sure can effect it.
No he can't, he can maybe create speculation laws in the US.
Which will have no affect worldwide except move hedge funds to Asia and Europe.
#49 · Mar 10, 2011 10:39 UTC
Ya think moving hedge funds is an effect, maybe? ;D
#50 · Mar 10, 2011 10:57 UTC
Not on oil prices,
You would just lose a chunk of the US finance industry.
You would just lose a chunk of the US finance industry.