It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by RealSpoke
Honest question RealSpoke, have you ever said anything negative about Obama on ATS? Or have you ever created an anti-Obama thread? Your Romney hate runs deep, my friend... i just wish you opened your eyes up to Obama every once in a while... Not saying either candidate is perfect, but you seem to act like Obama was a great president...
By contrast, Mr. Romney’s advisers have privately urged him to “rescind and replace President Obama’s executive order” and permit secret “enhanced interrogation techniques against high-value detainees that are safe, legal and effective in generating intelligence to save American lives,” according to an internal Romney campaign memorandum.
Really man.
Originally posted by jhn7537
Obama invested our money into GM, GM is trading today at less than $23 per share and the government's remaining 500 million shares would have to sell for around $53 per share for the U.S. to break even. Is this a success or failure?
Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Tw0Sides
Money better be a VERY important part of any type of bailout, if not, then what's the point?? If anything, Obama is just jeopardizing our countries future... The Govt. needs to treat its spending like a business... Everyone today can't be helped, everyone doesnt deserve an equal share of the pie, if that's what you want then you obviously want a socialist america... Life isn't always fair and life isn't always equal...
Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by longlostbrother
Staying with the topic that he saved the auto industry, I just read something quite interesting.. Would you consider the passage below a success or a failure?
Obama invested our money into GM, GM is trading today at less than $23 per share and the government's remaining 500 million shares would have to sell for around $53 per share for the U.S. to break even. Is this a success or failure?
Obama bailed out the unions at our expense, nationalized GM and three years later this "saved" industry still owes the taxpayers tens of BILLIONS, so basically we still have the same situation - stagnant auto industry, burdensome regulations, and a labor market that is so over-priced that it can't compete with the rest of the world. The auto bailout was just more buying votes by the dems.edit on 30-9-2012 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)
Chrysler: repaid $9.2 billion, fulfilling its debt obligations to the U.S. and Canadian governments, and is now owned by Italian automaker Fiat (58.5%) and a health care trust for UAW retirees (41.5%). Overall, taxpayers lost $1.3 billion on the Chrysler bailout. In full recovery mode, Chrysler is currently the fastest-growing carmaker in the world.
Originally posted by Ghostx
Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Tw0Sides
Money better be a VERY important part of any type of bailout, if not, then what's the point?? If anything, Obama is just jeopardizing our countries future... The Govt. needs to treat its spending like a business... Everyone today can't be helped, everyone doesnt deserve an equal share of the pie, if that's what you want then you obviously want a socialist america... Life isn't always fair and life isn't always equal...
In an ideal world. The bailout has many more points though than just to make money. It's to save the company. If there weren't bailouts at times the country would be worst off. If banks, companies etc were not bailed out then the population would lose a ton of money, and not have access to the resources that were helped out by the bailouts.
If you don't understand...basically Obama was giving money to GM, etc to let them continue on as companies instead of watching them drop out completely.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
Originally posted by Ghostx
Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Tw0Sides
Money better be a VERY important part of any type of bailout, if not, then what's the point?? If anything, Obama is just jeopardizing our countries future... The Govt. needs to treat its spending like a business... Everyone today can't be helped, everyone doesnt deserve an equal share of the pie, if that's what you want then you obviously want a socialist america... Life isn't always fair and life isn't always equal...
In an ideal world. The bailout has many more points though than just to make money. It's to save the company. If there weren't bailouts at times the country would be worst off. If banks, companies etc were not bailed out then the population would lose a ton of money, and not have access to the resources that were helped out by the bailouts.
If you don't understand...basically Obama was giving money to GM, etc to let them continue on as companies instead of watching them drop out completely.
Or let a Mitt Romney come along, "harvest the value" of the companies, and leave hundreds unemployed.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
I guess the question is just what is Torture?
When we look at our POWs most would rule endless boredom as the biggest torture they endured. Sleep deprivation is also extremely torturous too and can actually kill you. When we look at water boarding (that is what we are talking about here right?) it is torture just as anything else we do, BUT at what point is all this unacceptable.
The truth of the matter is weatherboarding does work, as does other non-invasive techniques. Causing the automatic drowning response while not actually drowning is extremely uncomfortable to say the least, but we are always on that thin line as to what is too much and what just doesn't do anything.
Obama says it is over the line...Romney says...wait..he is not President so we really do not know what he will do even though many of you act like he has been in some kind of active administration for years, well unless he was using weatherboarding techniques as Governor.
You guys draw extreme hypothetical conclusions by cherry picking anything you could possibly deem related to you biased views. Try that with Obama too and see what you get...
Originally posted by jhn7537
If companies mismanage their business why is it the tax payers duty to bail them out??
Originally posted by Tw0Sides
Originally posted by jhn7537
If companies mismanage their business why is it the tax payers duty to bail them out??
You would have to ask Bush43, to the tune of 780Billion for Wall Street Companies.
It seemed like a good idea to him.
Originally posted by jhn7537
Originally posted by longlostbrother
Originally posted by Ghostx
Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Tw0Sides
Money better be a VERY important part of any type of bailout, if not, then what's the point?? If anything, Obama is just jeopardizing our countries future... The Govt. needs to treat its spending like a business... Everyone today can't be helped, everyone doesnt deserve an equal share of the pie, if that's what you want then you obviously want a socialist america... Life isn't always fair and life isn't always equal...
In an ideal world. The bailout has many more points though than just to make money. It's to save the company. If there weren't bailouts at times the country would be worst off. If banks, companies etc were not bailed out then the population would lose a ton of money, and not have access to the resources that were helped out by the bailouts.
If you don't understand...basically Obama was giving money to GM, etc to let them continue on as companies instead of watching them drop out completely.
Or let a Mitt Romney come along, "harvest the value" of the companies, and leave hundreds unemployed.
If companies mismanage their business why is it the tax payers duty to bail them out??
Originally posted by jhn7537
Originally posted by Tw0Sides
Originally posted by jhn7537
If companies mismanage their business why is it the tax payers duty to bail them out??
You would have to ask Bush43, to the tune of 780Billion for Wall Street Companies.
It seemed like a good idea to him.
I agree with zero bailouts, it doesnt matter if we have a republican or democrat in office, if a company mismanages their business, then they fail.. Too big? Dont care.... No one deserves a handout in life...
Originally posted by longlostbrother
Obama is a better President than many believe, and in time will be seen as such.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
He saved the US auto-industry, he managed to get a lot more people healthcare, he managed to pull the trigger - so to speak - on Osama, he's managed to not get the US involved in another major war (so far).
Originally posted by longlostbrotherPretty ok.
Originally posted by longlostbrotherAnd on top of that, between his first budget and now, the unemployment rate has dropped and the US went from haemorrhaging jobs under Bush, to gaining jobs.
Originally posted by longlostbrotherPerfect? No.
Originally posted by longlostbrotherBetter than George W Bush? Yep. Worst President Ever? Only if you're a partisan hack.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
Or let a Mitt Romney come along, "harvest the value" of the companies, and leave hundreds unemployed.