$5,000 is a reasonable estimate of what we really should get after tax manipulations and reality sets in.
$500,000. is an estimate of what each of us would get if we didn't bailout corporations and banks.
$23,000 is what the stimulus package so far is costing each man, woman, and child in this country.
Looking at these numbers, is anyone out there happy with President Obama's bailout? Okay, how about Bush's bailout? Are you happy GM's CEO got pushed out by the Messiah Obama?
No? Okay, now, he's telling Chrysler to merge with Fiat or go bankrupt. Someone needs to tell the messiah I just promoted him to tyrannical king.
Impeach Obama before it's too late.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 34
That he isnt a republican or that he is still black?
He's doing exactly what he said he would do. Our only remedy is at the ballot box next time around.
You can dislike him. You can slam him. But calling for his impeachment shows not only your lack of understanding what impeachment means and your lack of good judgement.
Ok, I would love to be able to impeach the man, but even though he has committed no high crimes, proven yet, I still battle cry Impeach Obama.....
Ok Lori F, my problem is not that Obama is not republican, and its not that he's black.
I disagree with the way hes handling things, by spending more.
I truly love how race is brought into any discussion where a person doesn't like Obama, I've been called racist enough myself, and you wonder why I deleted your comments one day?
My biggest problem with Obama (outside of him being elected), is his pushing the stimulus bill through without allowing time for it to be read, maybe if that time had been allowed then the bonuses would not have happened.
I wasn't for the bailouts under Bush, I'm still not for them under Obama
And I'm even less for the almost trillion dollars he spent in his first month and a half.
I didn't like the cost incurred by the war during the Bush, however, no one provided an alternate solution.
Mooch
I am not overly fond of bailouts either. Take AIG I think its time to let them go. They are not saveable and even if the government does manage to keep them from collapsing I doubt whether they are worth it.
Aw, come on. Is three bailouts really enough? Just messing with you Lori.
Last December the auto guys flew to Wash. D. C., begged for money, and promised to restructure their companies, or to at least have a plan.
They did not, do not.
Remember now, Rick Wagoner has been CEO of GM for 8 years at a salary of $15 Mil, plus bonuses and perks.
He was the leader of his company as it got into trouble, the bail out is to try to save some jobs . . . He did not do what he promised he would do, present a plan that would restructure the company to keep it in business.
I am liberal,
I would love to say good buy to all of them, Banks/AIG/Auto Ind.
Chaos is quite dangerous, don't think there would not be chaos if all the bailed out were allowed to fail.
I don't think it would be better.
That does not keep me from being angry.
I have no problem with Wagoner being gone, but it should be the decision of shareholders and the board of directors, not the government.
------------
You mean Carol is a racist? =D I don't beleive it Lori F.
Opp's sorry, I forgot we were on Carol's post....But is he? =D
He didn't fire anyone.
He just left the cigarette and the Luger in the room and walked out.
Seems like GM's board of directors have been on vacation for the last several years.
GM did not get into trouble for 1 bad year, please tell me that a company that huge and that old had no contingency plan?
The economy has down then up and down 3 times since 2001,
It has been obvious the nation was headed for an economic disaster since 2004.
.......
That's beautiful. I like that.
It doesn't matter if they were on vacation for the last several years or not. They are a private company and it sets a dangerous precedent when the President of the United States reaches into a private boardroom and makes business decisions for a private company.
But that is not the case with GM and Obama has no business playing any role in the departure of the CEO.
My personal thought is if I had a private business I would not want the government involved in it in the first place. Closing plants, lowering the cost of operating, and stuff such as that would be my prerogative if I wanted to keep my business. If all else failed I would sell the business and bow out gracefully with some money in my pocket. However these folks went to the government and begged for a handout. They received it and still are coming back for more. When someone invests money into a company they become partial owners of that company until that money is paid back. If it looks like that company wont be able to pay it back that new partner is going to do everything in their power not to lose their entire investment and if possible find ways to make the company learn new ways to make a profit.
Then again...thats the way i see things.
The auto companies are different because they were given loans. This was not the same type of bailout that the financial firms received.
Typically loan conditions are agreed upon in advance. If you were the head of a business and went to the bank for a loan, received the loan, and then had the bank come back a couple of months later and tell you they wanted you to step down, how would you take that?
AIG is a different scenario because the taxpayer actually bought shares of the company and became a a part owner of the company. Apples and oranges here.
Unfortunately, Obama and his advisers do not understand the nature of the problem they face either.
Im not entirely saying you are wrong. You present a very valid argument, however I just see it differently.