Another point not mentioned is that with the government now in control of GM and Chrysler, the system is rigged against all other competitors: Toyota etc.
They could potentially be driven almost entirely out of business, leaving only GM and Chrysler with much less competition (and therefore, higher prices for worse vehicles).
Posted 06/10/09 3:48 PM Al Langhans Elizabethville, PA
pay as you go? Only spend money that you save? Sooo if your budget has a 2 trillion deficit then you cant spend any money until you "save" it elsewhere?
Or is this just for new, "non-emergency", programs.
Maybe they should call it "Print as you go"
Posted 06/10/09 4:20 PM BruceKoerber Cedar Rapids, IA
Apolitical Political Commentary!
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Montel, Don't Be Gullible To The Political Rhetoric.
What else do politicians in the United States do besides throw out rhetoric in an attempt to get the economically illiterate masses to feel good, and then behind the cloak of the unConstitutional coup expand their power and influence by deals and schemes?
If there was freedom of speech and a free press the lies of the politicians would be out in the open and they would hear themselves scorned as liars and thieves and would be voted out of office as soon as possible.
'Repayment of TARP funds' and 'pay as you go' rhetoric is nothing but a dangling worm on a hook. Some will take it hook, line and sinker. Others will nibble (Montel be careful!) but beware because that hook will snag you and your fate will be in the hands of the holders of the knives.
The liars and thieves that are trying to bait you with their rhetoric will drown if the boat of counterfeit money is no longer functioning. That is exactly what will happen when HR 1207 passes.
Another thing about the whole "we made a profit" thing. Let's pretend for a second that Obama is absolutely 100% truthful and the government really did make this huge profit. Does that make it such a huge idea?
If I take every penny I've ever made and go to Vegas with it, and then bet it all on one game of chance and by some miracle I win, was that really a good idea? I mean, yeah I worked out, but would recommend doing that to your kids or relatives or friends? Would you think me sane if I did it a second time? My point is that putting all that money into these failing companies in the hopes of saving them and making back a profit was no brilliant economic plan, but rather a gamble. Even if he won the hand (like I said, I'm taking him at his word for the sake of this terrible analogy), it's still a terrible idea because it's nothing short of gambling. However, in the case of these bailouts, it's more than just a bad idea. It's also immoral because he's doing it with other people's money.
I liked how Dr. Paul gave a little laugh the moment that Mr. Williams raised the idea of "pay as you go". The word "laughable" is exactly how to describe the President's rhetorical BS.
As for making a "profit" on the bailouts? Another joke. The government has converted hundreds of billions of these preferred equity TARP "investments" into common shares which are likely worthless. Furthermore, many of the large banks were direct beneficiaries of the $170 billion AIG bailout in which taxpayer dollars went in the front door, and got shipped out the back, directly into the coffers of the large financial institutions. The Federal Reserve has been busy buying up hundreds of billions of "mortgage backed securities" from their pals at the big financial firms. In addition, the government changed the accounting rules to make these banks "look" profitable.
The big banks are still a mess, and without life support from the government and Federal Reserve, they would be history.
Usapatriot raises another good point. Even disregarding the likely dishonesty of whether or not a profit was actually made, the fact of the matter is that the taxpayers bore the full costs while in the end, the companies and government made the profit.
It doesn't matter whether or not those companies paid back some of the bailout money. It wouldn't make a difference if they paid back the whole thing; it wouldn't matter if they didn't pay back anything. The taxpayers who footed the bill will NEVER see a cent of those profits.
Oh sure, the government may get that money back plus a little extra. Will they give it back to the taxpayers? No, they'll go on a wild spending spree (which, I'm sure, will involve buildings overseas exploding spectacularly).
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson
Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty. [?]
