Bernie Sanders has my vote. He must win.

[Disir]

Break up the big banks
Sanders Stand Up to Wall Street Break Up Big Banks - Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont

But yet the people that will vote for Sanders would have voted for Obama, who gave massive bailouts to the banks to cover the losses caused by the CRA, which was started by the Democrats.

Liberals are very selective about bailouts. They loved Obama bailing out the filthy ass greedy UAW with the GM and Chrysler bailouts but complain about Wall Street.

If anybody is really serious about this then will join me to advocate stopping all government transfers to include welfare, bailouts, subsidies and entitlements.

Actually, if Obama gave a damn about the UAW then he wouldn't have put in Steve Rattner-which he did to fuck the union. Try again.

I think stealing money from the bondholders and using tax payer's money to cover the bloated UAW pension pretty well established Obama's position to kiss the ass of the filthy unions on the GM bailout.

It was a pretty sweet deal. The Unions gave Obama a billion dollars and he returned the favor about 20 fold.

I didn't see any of these Moon Bats that complain about Wall Street bailouts say a word about Obama doing it or bailing out GM and Chrysler.

Typical Libtard hypocrisy.

You're delusional. You don't think at all. Here's a little sumpin': the companies were jacked because they made shit cars for years. That was the greed of the executives. Not the unions. The workers didn't jack the industry and they should have ponied up to pay the pensions .

But, you bitch cry like you do and keep repeating that GOP mantra. Your filth is just about over.

 

[Iceweasel]

But I'm glad the socialist is running and hope him and Hillary drag each other through the mud.

Wait until you see what Ted Cruz does to the GOP primary.

Move it further right? I hope so!

 

[g5000]

Wait until you see what Ted Cruz does to the GOP primary.

Move it further right? I hope so!

Sieg Heil!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Now of course a lot of you cons oppose Sanders simply because he is a socialist democrat. But very few of you even know what issues he actually stands for.

He is taking on income inequality, Citizens United, and climate change. Three of the most pressing issues this country is currently facing. You know, the things republicans will NEVER try to fix.

Watch this video and become informed on actual, honest to god facts and statistics that support what he stands for.

How many facts are presented by Bernie in this video?

Sen. Bernie Sanders Says U.S. Should Look More Like Scandinavia Watch the video - Yahoo News

No, I want Sanders to be the democrat candidate, I really do.

 

[Iceweasel]

Break up the big banks
Sanders Stand Up to Wall Street Break Up Big Banks - Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont

But yet the people that will vote for Sanders would have voted for Obama, who gave massive bailouts to the banks to cover the losses caused by the CRA, which was started by the Democrats.

Liberals are very selective about bailouts. They loved Obama bailing out the filthy ass greedy UAW with the GM and Chrysler bailouts but complain about Wall Street.

If anybody is really serious about this then will join me to advocate stopping all government transfers to include welfare, bailouts, subsidies and entitlements.

Actually, if Obama gave a damn about the UAW then he wouldn't have put in Steve Rattner-which he did to fuck the union. Try again.

I think stealing money from the bondholders and using tax payer's money to cover the bloated UAW pension pretty well established Obama's position to kiss the ass of the filthy unions on the GM bailout.

It was a pretty sweet deal. The Unions gave Obama a billion dollars and he returned the favor about 20 fold.

I didn't see any of these Moon Bats that complain about Wall Street bailouts say a word about Obama doing it or bailing out GM and Chrysler.

Typical Libtard hypocrisy.

Auto bailouts seemed to have worked.

Liberals define success differently than normal people.

Taxpayer Loss From From General Motors GM Bailout Near 10 Billion And Rising
As the U.S. sells its remaining shares of GM at under the value of the stock needed to fully recover GM bailout funds, the losses rise. IBTimes/U.S. Treasury Department

The taxpayer’s cost of rescuing General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM) is about to top $10 billion, but GM’s TARP era isn’t over yet.

The U.S. Treasury Department’s latest estimate on the cost to the taxpayer for rescuing GM in 2009 is out and has officially hit almost $10 billion, and counting. The estimate was released Tuesday after markets closed. According to Deutsche Bank Markets Research, the government sold about 34 million GM shares in October, well above the monthly average since January of 12 million shares. This leaves about 67 million shares remaining.

This is the sum taxpayers have so far forked over to the private sector for rescuing the world’s second largest automaker in the wake of the subprime mortgage meltdown, the global recession and the ensuing auto industry crisis. More precisely, GM’s too-big-to-fail quality has cost taxpayers $9.98 billion as of this week, but that figure will grow.

Here’s why:

In the wake of the of the $51-billion bailout of GM as part of the massive $475-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) that also rescued Chrysler (which cost the taxpayer $1.9 billion in unrecoverable losses), the U.S. government ended up owning nearly 61 percent of the new post-bankruptcy GM. The government has reduced its stake since, namely through the November 2010 IPO that sent GM back to the stock exchange; the sale of stock to GM in December 2012; and since then through a series of stock sales.

But the investment has not turned out as intended.

For one thing the effective original cost of U.S. government shares in GM was $43.52 per share, according to the U.S. Treasury. In other words, when the U.S. government started selling GM shares following the company’s 2010 IPO it would have had to sell at that minimum price to recover the remaining amount owed to it by selling its stake.

The problem is GM’s stock hasn’t touched $43 a share. The stock price peaked in January 2011 at $39.98 and bottomed out at $19.36 in July 2012. So each time the government has sold a share at under $43, the target value of the next share it sells has to be higher. GM’s stock is currently trading around $38.

This means that it will be impossible at this point for the government to recover what’s owed by GM. The best it can hope for is that GM’s stock stays as high as possible so it can recover as much of the remaining $4.6 billion in potentially recoverable equity.

GM itself isn’t in a great financial position to start paying out of its own balance sheet. As of its most recent quarter ended Sept. 30 GM had $28.6 billion in cash and $62.6 billion in short-term obligations. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters expect GM to report 2013 net income of $5.6 billion, or $3.39 per share, on $155.2 billion in revenue.

That’s a lot of cash, but a company the size of GM with GM’s balance sheet, with an operating expense alone of $12.2 billion a month, GM needs as much money right now as it can get just to stay competitive and to keep its more than 200,000 employees employed.

 

[Iceweasel]

Wait until you see what Ted Cruz does to the GOP primary.

Move it further right? I hope so!

Sieg Heil!

????? How fucking old are you?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wait until you see what Ted Cruz does to the GOP primary.

Move it further right? I hope so!

Sieg Heil!

Did you dig that up at DailyKOS all by yourself Jake?

 

[Disir]

Is that Jake, for real?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Is that Jake, for real?

Who knows? He's a fake "republican."

 

[Disir]

No wonder he's all jacked up.

 

[initforme]

Heaven forbid someone call out this not so great nation for what it is...land of the rich, for the rich, by the rich. The rest we wish you wer=e not here. Thats the way alot of working people feel.

 

[HappyJoy]

What would have happened if we didn't bail out GM? The economy would have further cratered, even less federal income through taxes, paying out even more unemployment benefits, over 2 and a half million more unemployed

Break up the big banks
Sanders Stand Up to Wall Street Break Up Big Banks - Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont

But yet the people that will vote for Sanders would have voted for Obama, who gave massive bailouts to the banks to cover the losses caused by the CRA, which was started by the Democrats.

Liberals are very selective about bailouts. They loved Obama bailing out the filthy ass greedy UAW with the GM and Chrysler bailouts but complain about Wall Street.

If anybody is really serious about this then will join me to advocate stopping all government transfers to include welfare, bailouts, subsidies and entitlements.

Actually, if Obama gave a damn about the UAW then he wouldn't have put in Steve Rattner-which he did to fuck the union. Try again.

I think stealing money from the bondholders and using tax payer's money to cover the bloated UAW pension pretty well established Obama's position to kiss the ass of the filthy unions on the GM bailout.

It was a pretty sweet deal. The Unions gave Obama a billion dollars and he returned the favor about 20 fold.

I didn't see any of these Moon Bats that complain about Wall Street bailouts say a word about Obama doing it or bailing out GM and Chrysler.

Typical Libtard hypocrisy.

Auto bailouts seemed to have worked.

Liberals define success differently than normal people.

Taxpayer Loss From From General Motors GM Bailout Near 10 Billion And Rising
As the U.S. sells its remaining shares of GM at under the value of the stock needed to fully recover GM bailout funds, the losses rise. IBTimes/U.S. Treasury Department

The taxpayer’s cost of rescuing General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM) is about to top $10 billion, but GM’s TARP era isn’t over yet.

The U.S. Treasury Department’s latest estimate on the cost to the taxpayer for rescuing GM in 2009 is out and has officially hit almost $10 billion, and counting. The estimate was released Tuesday after markets closed. According to Deutsche Bank Markets Research, the government sold about 34 million GM shares in October, well above the monthly average since January of 12 million shares. This leaves about 67 million shares remaining.

This is the sum taxpayers have so far forked over to the private sector for rescuing the world’s second largest automaker in the wake of the subprime mortgage meltdown, the global recession and the ensuing auto industry crisis. More precisely, GM’s too-big-to-fail quality has cost taxpayers $9.98 billion as of this week, but that figure will grow.

Here’s why:

In the wake of the of the $51-billion bailout of GM as part of the massive $475-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) that also rescued Chrysler (which cost the taxpayer $1.9 billion in unrecoverable losses), the U.S. government ended up owning nearly 61 percent of the new post-bankruptcy GM. The government has reduced its stake since, namely through the November 2010 IPO that sent GM back to the stock exchange; the sale of stock to GM in December 2012; and since then through a series of stock sales.

But the investment has not turned out as intended.

For one thing the effective original cost of U.S. government shares in GM was $43.52 per share, according to the U.S. Treasury. In other words, when the U.S. government started selling GM shares following the company’s 2010 IPO it would have had to sell at that minimum price to recover the remaining amount owed to it by selling its stake.

The problem is GM’s stock hasn’t touched $43 a share. The stock price peaked in January 2011 at $39.98 and bottomed out at $19.36 in July 2012. So each time the government has sold a share at under $43, the target value of the next share it sells has to be higher. GM’s stock is currently trading around $38.

This means that it will be impossible at this point for the government to recover what’s owed by GM. The best it can hope for is that GM’s stock stays as high as possible so it can recover as much of the remaining $4.6 billion in potentially recoverable equity.

GM itself isn’t in a great financial position to start paying out of its own balance sheet. As of its most recent quarter ended Sept. 30 GM had $28.6 billion in cash and $62.6 billion in short-term obligations. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters expect GM to report 2013 net income of $5.6 billion, or $3.39 per share, on $155.2 billion in revenue.

That’s a lot of cash, but a company the size of GM with GM’s balance sheet, with an operating expense alone of $12.2 billion a month, GM needs as much money right now as it can get just to stay competitive and to keep its more than 200,000 employees employed.

It's not that simple. If GM went along with much of our economy thanks to the Bush recession, we' be even more fucked.
Was the GM Bailout Necessary

The Near Collapse

Back when the economy took a downturn, GM couldn’t hold its head above financial waters. People were losing their jobs and weren’t finding new ones easily, so they didn’t have money to buy new vehicles. The company also faced some ridicule about its latest models, which weren’t living up to the prestigious past models.

As much as the automaker didn’t want to do it, it had to file for bankruptcy.

Since GM is one of the oldest automakers and basically an American icon, George W. Bush and then Barack Obama decided to step in and help the company stay afloat to avoid liquidation.

Exploring the Bailout What-Ifs

Looking back, the bailout was actually a success in some ways. GM is still around, and it’s growing again. Actually, it’s on track to record the biggest sales growth since 2007.

But there are still some problems many people can’t look past with the GM bailout.

Taxpayers lost a lot of money – about $10 billion from the Treasury funds that were used to support the automaker.

But let’s imagine what would have happened if GM didn’t receive a government bailout. As it turns out, the bailout may have been the lesser of two evils.

If the GM closed its doors in 2009, 2.63 million jobs would have been lost, according to the Center for Automotive Research. At a time when people were already losing jobs, this would have sent the economy even farther down.

Could you imagine all of those people looking for work and collecting unemployment? It’s likely we would still be trying to come back from that because it’s not easy to come up with a couple million jobs.

Aside from the unemployment rate hitting double digits, if a bailout didn’t happen, the Center for Automatic Research estimates there would have been $105 billion lost in transfer payments and social insurance tax collection. That $10 billion isn’t looking so bad, is it?

But wait, there’s more.

If GM shut down, 600,000 retirees wouldn’t have received their pensions. Older Americans would have been at a huge financial loss, and many of them would have had to work well into their Golden Years – except there wouldn’t be enough jobs available. That means there would have been even more pressure on the government.

So maybe a bailout was necessary to save the economy from further problems – though Detroit wasn't especially saved. Sure, jobs were still intact, and there was still money to be made there, but it didn't prevent the city's own bankruptcy. Still, keeping GM going may have prevented the city from going under even sooner.

So now that the government has decided GM is strong enough to stand on its own, you’re probably wondering if there is something you can get out of the growing automaker – since it was your money that went toward keeping it around.

The good news is yes, there is definitely an investment opportunity for you.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Its probably time for the occutard, workers of the world unite imbeciles to stop worrying about what other folks have ......and account for themselves.

 

[Disir]

Obama, the UAW and the auto bailout
Statement by Jerry White, SEP candidate for US president
By Jerry White and SEP candidate for US president
17 May 2012
President Obama’s intervention in the auto industry was not aimed at “saving” jobs but of boosting the profits of these same financial sharks. The president exploited the meltdown of the auto industry—produced by the banking crisis—to impose long sought after attacks on auto workers, once the highest paid industrial workers in America. For years, Wall Street had complained about low returns caused by high wages and “Cadillac” benefits, along with outmoded job and workplace protections.

The Obama administration handed over the restructuring of the auto industry to Wall Street, appointing as “car czar” Steven Rattner, formerly of Lehman Brothers and Morgan Stanley and the CEO of the asset-stripping firm Quadrangle.

After rejecting the cost-cutting plans of GM and Chrysler as too little, too late, Obama’s Auto Task Force began a “managed bankruptcy” of the two companies—shutting down dozens of plants deemed unprofitable and eliminating 35,000 jobs. The president worked with the UAW to slash the wages of new-hires in half, ban strikes for six years and impose other devastating concessions on current and retired workers.

Any differences between Obama and Romney are purely tactical. Rather than using the bankruptcy courts to tear up union agreements and impose wage and benefit cuts unilaterally—a course Romney says he would have taken—Obama preferred to use the willing services of the UAW to suppress opposition to the dictates of Wall Street.

In exchange for destroying the hard-won gains of generations of auto workers, the UAW was handed control of the multi-billion-dollar VEBA retiree health care trust fund, including billions of dollars worth of stock in GM, Chrysler and Ford. The Obama administration realized that this would give the UAW executives a direct financial incentive to further slash the wages, benefits and health care plans of their members.

This is precisely what happened in the last round of contracts in 2011, when the UAW agreed to the lowest increase in labor costs in history. Wages have been cut so low in America, the UAW has boasted, that GM and other companies are relocating production from Mexico and China to the US, a strategy the Obama administration approvingly calls “in-sourcing.”

The UAW’s support for Obama has nothing to do with defending the interests of the working class. For workers it does not matter which big business politician takes over the White House. For the UAW apparatus, however, having Obama there to continue using it as a cheap labor contractor is critical for the income and business opportunities of King & Co.

The struggle to defend the jobs and living standards of auto workers necessitates an entirely new strategy. The prerequisite for any fight is a break with the UAW and the building of new organizations, controlled by rank-and-file workers, that are completely independent of the UAW and the Democratic Party. The aim of such organizations must be the unconditional defense of the jobs and living conditions of all workers, not the profits of the corporations and the banks. Workers cannot accept the “choice” of either having no job or starvation wages.

The experiences of workers in the US and internationally show the dead-end of so-called labor organizations based on the defense of capitalism and economic nationalism. From Greece and Spain, to Japan and the United States, workers are being impoverished to enrich the owners of the transnational banks and corporations.
Obama the UAW and the auto bailout - World Socialist Web Site

 

[LogikAndReazon]

The "World Socialist"..... Lol. Poor you.

 

[Disir]

The "World Socialist"..... Lol. Poor you.

What else do you have, because right now you don't have jack.

Are you telling me it didn't happen?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

What.... no progressive companies out there fulfilling all your needs, wants and socialist wet dreams ? Why could that possibly be ?

The postal service is always looking for a few high caliber folks of your ilk.... Lol

 

[Disir]

They may be crying about General Motors' bankruptcy today. But dumping 40,000 of the last 60,000 union jobs into a mass grave won't spoil Jamie Dimon's day.

Dimon is the CEO of JP Morgan Chase bank. While GM workers are losing their retirement health benefits, their jobs, their life savings; while shareholders are getting zilch and many creditors getting hosed, a few privileged GM lenders - led by Morgan and Citibank - expect to get back 100% of their loans to GM, a stunning $6 billion.

The way these banks are getting their $6 billion bonanza is stone cold illegal.

I smell a rat.

Stevie the Rat, to be precise. Steven Rattner, Barack Obama's 'Car Czar' - the man who essentially ordered GM into bankruptcy this morning.

When a company goes bankrupt, everyone takes a hit: fair or not, workers lose some contract wages, stockholders get wiped out and creditors get fragments of what's left. That's the law. What workers don't lose are their pensions (including old-age health funds) already taken from their wages and held in their name.

But not this time. Stevie the Rat has a different plan for GM: grab the pension funds to pay off Morgan and Citi.

Here's the scheme: Rattner is demanding the bankruptcy court simply wipe away the money GM owes workers for their retirement health insurance. Cash in the insurance fund would be replaced by GM stock. The percentage may be 17% of GM's stock - or 25%. Whatever, 17% or 25% is worth, well … just try paying for your dialysis with 50 shares of bankrupt auto stock.

Yet Citibank and Morgan, says Rattner, should get their whole enchilada - $6 billion right now and in cash - from a company that can't pay for auto parts or worker eye exams.

Preventive Detention for Pensions

So what's wrong with seizing workers' pension fund money in a bankruptcy? The answer, Mr. Obama, Mr. Law Professor, is that it's illegal.



In 1974, after a series of scandalous take-downs of pension and retirement funds during the Nixon era, Congress passed the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. ERISA says you can't seize workers' pension funds (whether monthly payments or health insurance) any more than you can seize their private bank accounts. And that's because they are the same thing: workers give up wages in return for retirement benefits.
How Obama s Car Czar Steve Rattner Is Bankrupting GM Alternet

Nobody remembers any of this shit going down?

 

[Disir]

What.... no progressive companies out there fulfilling all your needs, wants and socialist wet dreams ? Why could that possibly be ?

The postal service is always looking for a few high caliber folks of your ilk.... Lol

You fucked that too. Or don't you remember?

But, thanks. That's all I needed to see to know that you got nothing.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Agrarian communes !!!!!

Forward Comrades !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!