The 86 million invisible unemployed

General Buck Turgidson said:
I love the 86 million number. There's a legitimate problem with long-term unemployed that have given up looking for work (as well as the underemployed) but the 86 million number is a joke.
Click to expand...

I would love to see how they calculate that. 330 million people in this country... about a fifth are under 18, about a fifth are over 65. Hmmm....
 
Damocles said:
Just repeating that somebody is "wrong" about something doesn't make it reality.

An analogy.

We plan on painting a community barn. One plan is to use crappy red paint, another is to use long-lasting outdoor green paint. I argue to paint the barn green, you take a vote, the barn is painted red. Later you come back to say dumb stuff and to tell me that the barn is red, therefore I was "wrong". It doesn't make me wrong. The green paint would last longer, even though the barn is red.
Click to expand...

GM reported another expectation-exceeding profit just today. The Treasury recently reported that taxpayers will end up profiting on TARP.

So, you were wrong.
 
Onceler said:
GM reported another expectation-exceeding profit just today. The Treasury recently reported that taxpayers will end up profiting on TARP.

So, you were wrong.
Click to expand...

LMAO... GM is one of the only companies not to repay TARP. Add in the losses we will take on the stock price and it is going to result in massive losses to the taxpayers.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... GM is one of the only companies not to repay TARP. Add in the losses we will take on the stock price and it is going to result in massive losses to the taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Don't invade his world with truth. It hurts and then he'll deploy his amazing powers of diagnosis and declare you ODS.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... GM is one of the only companies not to repay TARP. Add in the losses we will take on the stock price and it is going to result in massive losses to the taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. And do explain - what would the math be if, instead of a thriving GM at the center of one of our few remaining manufacturer bases, we had a failed GM that lost twice as many jobs itself, leading to the constriction & downfall of suppliers and all of the other business that were reliant on GM, in just about every area of the country?

LOL indeed. You don't have a leg to stand on; we're better off from the bailouts. A LOT better off.
 
For the record... GM stock was issued at $34 per share, we need $55 to break even on the taxpayers money. The stock, despite all the media coverage (not to mention the Obama admin) of how successful GM has been since the bailout... is just under $22.40. It has lost 35% of its value and would need to increase about 50% just to get back to its IPO. It needs another 100%+ to get to break even.
 
Rana said:
Maybe it would force manufacturing to return here?
Click to expand...

It would. But it would come at a very high price. The average person would not be able to afford the amenities we have become accustomed to. Everything would inflate drastically in price. It would also hurt our exports as other countries would retaliate. Which ends up diminishing sales for everyone. Which puts people out of work. It was tried before. Tariff wars are insane. They benefit no one.
 
Onceler said:
Uh huh. And do explain - what would the math be if, instead of a thriving GM at the center of one of our few remaining manufacturer bases, we had a failed GM that lost twice as many jobs itself, leading to the constriction & downfall of suppliers and all of the other business that were reliant on GM, in just about every area of the country?

LOL indeed. You don't have a leg to stand on; we're better off from the bailouts. A LOT better off.
Click to expand...

Dear Onceler... why are you creating straw men? I did not state that we should not have bailed them out. I stated that your comment that the taxpayer would profit on TARP is false. Especially in the case of GM.
 
Superfreak said:
Dear Onceler... why are you creating straw men? I did not state that we should not have bailed them out. I stated that your comment that the taxpayer would profit on TARP is false. Especially in the case of GM.
Click to expand...

My points on GM and TARP were completely separate. Leave it to you to move Le Goalpost and try to make them one...
 
Onceler said:
My points on GM and TARP were completely separate. Leave it to you to move Le Goalpost and try to make them one...
Click to expand...

Your quote...

GM reported another expectation-exceeding profit just today. The Treasury recently reported that taxpayers will end up profiting on TARP.

So, you were wrong.
Click to expand...

My comment was that GM will be a loss to the taxpayers. That TARP money that taxpayers are profiting on... WHERE IS IT? Not just the profits... but the money that was 'repaid'???

Not moving goal posts Onceler... I am commenting on both of your 'separate' points.
 
Superfreak said:
Your quote...



My comment was that GM will be a loss to the taxpayers. That TARP money that taxpayers are profiting on... WHERE IS IT? Not just the profits... but the money that was 'repaid'???

Not moving goal posts Onceler... I am commenting on both of your 'separate' points.
Click to expand...

Now, you're moving the goalposts back.

Everything I said is 100% fact. GM is reporting profit today that exceeded expectations. The Treasury reported last month that the taxpayers will end up profiting on TARP.

You can call the GM report a lie, and say that the Treasury is fabricating stuff. I don't really care.
 
Superfreak said:
Also Onceler... why do you suppose GM stock has fallen so drastically when they keep reporting 'super awesomeness'???
Click to expand...

You know the market; GM still has a long way to go to rebuild credibility w/ investors. That has nothing to do w/ the fact that bailing them out was the right thing to do (which you seem to agree with, sometimes, when you're not rushing to the aid of Damo), and likely saved millions of jobs...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top