US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Oldstyle]

What's idiotic is people like you believing that any company is too big to fail!

 

[Faun]

I've heard it explained to me that because Ford wouldn't be able to get parts from suppliers...that they wouldn't be able to build their cars. That's an amazing concept to me that parts suppliers who would supposedly be losing the business of both GM and Chrysler would somehow not start building a whole lot MORE Ford parts to supply the company that was still producing cars. How does that work exactly?

Testimony of Alan R. Mulally
President and Chief Executive Officer, Ford Motor Company
House Committee on Financial Services
December 5, 2008

In particular, the collapse of one or both of our domestic competitors would threaten Ford because we have 80 percent overlap in supplier networks and nearly 25 percent of Ford's top dealers also own GM and Chrysler franchises.

The impact of a bankruptcy also reaches beyond Ford and the U.S. auto industry. It would cause further stress to our domestic banking industry and private retirement systems. Goldman Sachs estimates the impact at up to $1 trillion.

So would those Ford dealers who also own GM and Chrysler franchises not make up the loss of GM and Chrysler sales with Ford sales? Duh? That's one of the most idiotic explanations I've ever heard!

LOLOLOL

A con tool in an Internet forum calling Ford's CEO's explanation, of how his competitors bankruptcies would adversely effect Ford, idiotic.

LOLOLOL

You should explain to Ford why you should be their CEO.

On the contrary...it's not idiotic from his standpoint at all! He's simply guaranteed that no matter what...the Federal Government will always be there to bail out Ford. It's like taking out free "failure insurance"!

LOLOL

You're such a con tool, you don't know when to quit. Even as you make a complete fool of yourself.

Using that moronic example, Ford would not have wanted the government to bailout Ford. They would have wanted their competitors to go out of business, according to you, and then there would be even more bailout money for them.

You're not even capable of comprehending the obvious.

That's exactly why I asked you why Ford would appear before Congress for their competitors to receive bailout money to save them from going under.

I knew you wouldn't understand.

I knew you would spit nonsense.

You didn't disappoint.

 

[Faun]

What's idiotic is people like you believing that any company is too big to fail!

It wasn't just "any company," ya moron ... it was the American automotive industry.

And had the big three gone done, it would have taken a huge portion of the economy with it. Not that you con tools care. Slipping into a depression would have merely been another talking point for you.

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm still waiting to hear from you how Ford would have been taken down by a GM or Chrysler bankruptcy!

 

[Oldstyle]

It's like saying Pan Am's bankruptcy or Eastern Airlines bankruptcy would have taken United and South West Airlines down as well. It's not how things work in business.

 

[Faun]

I'm still waiting to hear from you how Ford would have been taken down by a GM or Chrysler bankruptcy!

You're only waiting because you're too stupid to know I already posted it.

 

[Faun]

It's like saying Pan Am's bankruptcy or Eastern Airlines bankruptcy would have taken United and South West Airlines down as well. It's not how things work in business.

No, it's not the same as that. That wasn't most of the U.S. airlines going bankrupt.

Again... the part you're incapable of comprehending because you're a con tool pushing an agenda -- Ford asked Congress to bail out GMC and Chrysler and you have no fucking clue why.

 

[Oldstyle]

Neither do you, Faun...or you'd explain it to me!

 

[Oldstyle]

Those airline bankruptcies simply illustrate what happens when huge businesses go into bankruptcy. Their viable parts are snatched up by competitors and their market share is absorbed by other companies. Pan Am going bankrupt didn't kill United.

 

[HUGGY]

US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

I blame Obama for this national tragedy!

 

[Faun]

Neither do you, Faun...or you'd explain it to me!

I already did.

 

[Faun]

Those airline bankruptcies simply illustrate what happens when huge businesses go into bankruptcy. Their viable parts are snatched up by competitors and their market share is absorbed by other companies. Pan Am going bankrupt didn't kill United.

That's cute. You actually think the predicament the U.S. auto industry faced in 2008 was "simple."

That's what I love about con tools. Because you only care about your agenda and not reality, you'll say anything, no matter how stupid, to defend your moronic positions.

 

[Rshermr]

Those airline bankruptcies simply illustrate what happens when huge businesses go into bankruptcy. Their viable parts are snatched up by competitors and their market share is absorbed by other companies. Pan Am going bankrupt didn't kill United.

That's cute. You actually think the predicament the U.S. auto industry faced in 2008 was "simple."

That's what I love about con tools. Because you only care about your agenda and not reality, you'll say anything, no matter how stupid, to defend your moronic positions.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY, COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH OLDSTYLE AND OTHER CON TROLLS. Take a look at their characteristics:
1. They make everything as simple as possible so that they can understand it.
2. They do not react to anything that takes them away from their simplistic belief.
3. They are absolutely uninterested and incapable of any changes in their belief.
4. They simply repeat what they want to believe over and over and over. They are not interested in truth.
5. They can and do lie as easily as they can tell the truth, as long as it fits their agenda.
6. They have absolutely NO integrity, no interest in integrity, or class.
7. They do as told and stick to the talking points strictly, because they are weak minded and want to be told what to believe.
8. Their belief system is based on believing what they want to believe, and what their group believe.
9. They want to be angry, so they are.

Which makes them completely worthless. Luckily there are not enough of them to win the day.

 

[Rshermr]

Neither do you, Faun...or you'd explain it to me!

I already did.

But that is what Oldstyle wants. He wants you to have to reply to him over and over and over an over. Because in his little con mind, that is a win. He is not like normal, rational people. He is a con tool, and he is proud of it. He has, you see, no normal interest in having integrity.

 

[Rshermr]

What's idiotic is people like you believing that any company is too big to fail!

Hardly, of course, Everyone with a rational mind noticed that they DID fail. All of their management is GONE. But then, you know that, and you do not care.
You see, dipshit, GM hollds no one's mortgage.

 

[Oldstyle]

Those airline bankruptcies simply illustrate what happens when huge businesses go into bankruptcy. Their viable parts are snatched up by competitors and their market share is absorbed by other companies. Pan Am going bankrupt didn't kill United.

That's cute. You actually think the predicament the U.S. auto industry faced in 2008 was "simple."

That's what I love about con tools. Because you only care about your agenda and not reality, you'll say anything, no matter how stupid, to defend your moronic positions.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY, COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH OLDSTYLE AND OTHER CON TROLLS. Take a look at their characteristics:
1. They make everything as simple as possible so that they can understand it.
2. They do not react to anything that takes them away from their simplistic belief.
3. They are absolutely uninterested and incapable of any changes in their belief.
4. They simply repeat what they want to believe over and over and over. They are not interested in truth.
5. They can and do lie as easily as they can tell the truth, as long as it fits their agenda.
6. They have absolutely NO integrity, no interest in integrity, or class.
7. They do as told and stick to the talking points strictly, because they are weak minded and want to be told what to believe.
8. Their belief system is based on believing what they want to believe, and what their group believe.
9. They want to be angry, so they are.

Which makes them completely worthless. Luckily there are not enough of them to win the day.

Yet YOU are the guy who comes here and pretends to be something he's not? Obviously, Georgie...you have issues with your own self worth! If you didn't you wouldn't be claiming things like teaching college level economics as an undergrad!

You need to accuse others of being liars because you're such a fraud yourself. It's what your participation in every string eventually evolves into because sooner or later your lies become unsustainable!

 

[Oldstyle]

What's idiotic is people like you believing that any company is too big to fail!

Hardly, of course, Everyone with a rational mind noticed that they DID fail. All of their management is GONE. But then, you know that, and you do not care.
You see, dipshit, GM hollds no one's mortgage.

I hate to tell you this Sparky but when upper level management leaves one company...they generally end up going to another one. They aren't "GONE"!

And I don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about with GM holding a mortgage! Do you?

 

[Oldstyle]

Those airline bankruptcies simply illustrate what happens when huge businesses go into bankruptcy. Their viable parts are snatched up by competitors and their market share is absorbed by other companies. Pan Am going bankrupt didn't kill United.

That's cute. You actually think the predicament the U.S. auto industry faced in 2008 was "simple."

That's what I love about con tools. Because you only care about your agenda and not reality, you'll say anything, no matter how stupid, to defend your moronic positions.

Where did I ever contend that bankruptcy is "simple"? There are very smart lawyers and accountants out there who do nothing else but handle complex bankruptcies. The person here who's dumbed this down in his usual fashion in Rshermr...who doesn't seem to grasp that you can go bankrupt and not close up business forever!

 

[Rshermr]

It's like saying Pan Am's bankruptcy or Eastern Airlines bankruptcy would have taken United and South West Airlines down as well. It's not how things work in business.

It is indeed the way things work in business. If possible, there would have been a normal bankruptcy. But, as even a troll like you probably understands, there was no Trustee that was willing to take on the task.
Consider:
"The Economist, one of the bastions of free-market thinking, came around to that view. Originally, it favored no government intervention. In April 2010, it offered an apology to President Obama.
"Given the panic that gripped private purse-strings," the magazine wrote in an editorial. "It is more likely that GM would have been liquidated, sending a cascade of destruction through the supply chain on which its rivals, too, depended."
Even Sherk at the Heritage Foundation gives Obama credit for forcing the carmakers to go through bankruptcy and the necessary restructuring that followed. The Economist concludes "by and large Mr Obama has not used his stakes in GM and Chrysler for political ends. On the contrary, his goal has been to restore both firms to health and then get out as quickly as possible."
Did President Obama save the auto industry?

And that, me boy, from normally conservative sources. Even they had to admit there was no other way.

So, me boy, you are sitting out on a very lonely island on this issue. And, you are wrong again.

 

[Rshermr]

Those airline bankruptcies simply illustrate what happens when huge businesses go into bankruptcy. Their viable parts are snatched up by competitors and their market share is absorbed by other companies. Pan Am going bankrupt didn't kill United.

That's cute. You actually think the predicament the U.S. auto industry faced in 2008 was "simple."

That's what I love about con tools. Because you only care about your agenda and not reality, you'll say anything, no matter how stupid, to defend your moronic positions.

Where did I ever contend that bankruptcy is "simple"? There are very smart lawyers and accountants out there who do nothing else but handle complex bankruptcies. The person here who's dumbed this down in his usual fashion in Rshermr...who doesn't seem to grasp that you can go bankrupt and not close up business forever!

So, more personal attacks. More lies. I said, me boy, no such thing, as you know.
Now, pay attention, me poor ignorant con tool. As I said, the problem with the auto makers going through a normal bankruptcy was that there was no trustee to finance it, as there MUST BE TO AVOID A COMPLETE LIQUIDATION. As has been stated, no financing was available, so no normal bankruptcy was possible. So in that case, the companies would have been liquidated. Plain and simple.
Now, me poor ignorant con tool, under NORMAL conditions, a bankruptcy with normal results could have and would have occurred.
Really, oldstyle, you lie all the time. And it simply proves again that you have no integrity.

You seem to be taking on the discredited Romney idea. (problem is, even he has abandoned it):
"Let's say that Governor Romney's plan was adopted in November 2008:
1. GM would have filed a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, seeking reorganization.
2. A Chapter 11 Bankruptcy would have required post-bankruptcy-petition financing by lenders to keep GM going. As stated above, there was no private post-petition financing (and therefore nothing for the government to guarantee).

3. In the absence of post-petition financing, GM would have stopped functioning and the company would have been liquidated -- either under a Trustee under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or by its management under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.

4. As a result, GM would have gone out of business, with all of the attendant consequences.

The Obama plan provided government financing, and therefore the automakers were able to successfully reorganize in Chapter 11.
At the debate, Governor Romney said, "And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry — of course not. Of course not. …" Again, to say this is literally "true" is misleading. As the analysis above shows, taking Romney's advice in the Times Op-ed would unquestionably have led to liquidation. Therefore to "suggest" that Romney would liquidate the industry is true."
A Bankruptcy Lawyer (Me), Corrects Factcheck.Org On the Auto-Bailout (Updated, re Private Funding.)