Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
"It does not have to be formally 'nationalized' to be under government ownership and/or control. The government continues to hold enough GM stock to overrule any decision proposed by the board to to force he board to do anything it wants. The management serves at the pleasure of the President and can be fired by the President at a moment's notice."Yes, you are correct. The government did receive temporary partial ownership as a part of the reorganization, however the form of ownership is preferred stock which has no voting rights and thus has no voice in how the business is run. It therefore has not been nationalized.
It does not have to be formally 'nationalized' to be under government ownership and/or control. The government continues to hold enough GM stock to overrule any decision proposed by the board to to force he board to do anything it wants. The management serves at the pleasure of the President and can be fired by the President at a moment's notice.
That doesn't square at all with your statement that the government owns no part of General Motors.
It does square with you either not having a clue what you are talking about or swallowing hook, line, and sinker propaganda from some pro-Obama, pro-Marxist socialist site.
Please explain. The government holds not-voting preferred stock. How is the government going to overrule management if they have no vote in the operations of the company.
Neither originated the phrase and many with varying ideologies have repeated it.Guess who said the following, Marx or Obama?right....Since Obama is a marxist, it's basically the same thing.
do you even know what Marxism is?
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
I will type real slow so maybe you can understand.What an utterly insipid question.
This is an insipid question if you are an insopid individual without an answer.
Wow, that actually makes even less sense.
An answer to what? What country has a "better" government than America? You're seriously defending that as a question worth answering, or even asking?
It's so absurdly subjective and ill-defined you might as well ask what fruit is "better" than mangoes, what game is "better" than Yahtzee, what dog is "better" than a poodle. It's a 5 year old's question. Unless you happen to be a partizan troll, it lacks any kind of challenging or stimulating qualities. Without them, it's insipid.
It's an irrelevant question.
What the wingnuts don't understand is that this country isn't like any other country. And frankly, I don't watch their leaders close enough to judge their domestic affairs.
The facts is that the winguts golden calf is an utter disaster. He is taking this country away from it's core value, and trying to make it a marxist state.
I am hearing many who feel Obama is creating a socialist state, taking our rights away, basically creating a tyrannical government.
To those individuals I ask what real world leader, leading a real world government in a real country is better than a Obama led government in the USA.
I am guessing you will have several countries based on the total dissatifaction with Obama.
I will type real slow so maybe you can understand.This is an insipid question if you are an insopid individual without an answer.
Wow, that actually makes even less sense.
An answer to what? What country has a "better" government than America? You're seriously defending that as a question worth answering, or even asking?
It's so absurdly subjective and ill-defined you might as well ask what fruit is "better" than mangoes, what game is "better" than Yahtzee, what dog is "better" than a poodle. It's a 5 year old's question. Unless you happen to be a partizan troll, it lacks any kind of challenging or stimulating qualities. Without them, it's insipid.
Yes, a "better government" is a subjective question.
I am asking conservatives, based on their political philosophy, what leader, government, country is a better. Examples, smaller government, less taxes, more personal freedom.
Do you understand? If not I will try again and type even slower.
It's an irrelevant question.
What the wingnuts don't understand is that this country isn't like any other country. And frankly, I don't watch their leaders close enough to judge their domestic affairs.
The facts is that the winguts golden calf is an utter disaster. He is taking this country away from it's core value, and trying to make it a marxist state.
It's an irrelevant question.
What the wingnuts don't understand is that this country isn't like any other country. And frankly, I don't watch their leaders close enough to judge their domestic affairs.
The facts is that the winguts golden calf is an utter disaster. He is taking this country away from it's core value, and trying to make it a marxist state.
Mike, we've had some decent conversations.
But that was really dumb.
It's an irrelevant question.
What the wingnuts don't understand is that this country isn't like any other country. And frankly, I don't watch their leaders close enough to judge their domestic affairs.
The facts is that the winguts golden calf is an utter disaster. He is taking this country away from it's core value, and trying to make it a marxist state.
Mike, we've had some decent conversations.
But that was really dumb.
But that really is the problem with this thread.
How many people on this board have a clue about domestic policies of other countries? With the exception of expats and a few people who make certain countries their pet interest, there can't be more than a handful, and of those how many would claim to be 'expert' about more than one country? Hardly a basis for any kind of meaningful discussion.
Unless of course you were referring to the "marxist" comment, in which case I have some sympathy with your view.
Actually to compare the USA with any other country is stupid as we are unique among nations and have been since our founding.
The point is show me a better leader, a better government, a better country than our Obama led government.
It is easy to say in a theoretical sense you can do a lot better.
Show us some real world examples.
I am taking from your response you cannot name any.
We are America. We are unique. We don't need to follow the example of others. We were founded to be a beacon - a unique, free society for others to emulate.... not to emulate others. Have you never read our history?
What a fucking dumbassed question.
unique how?
We're not the only democracy
we're not the only republic
we're not the only nation with a secular government
we're not the only multiracial nation
we're not the only one with nukes
many of our civil laws are based on those we inherited from British common law
unique how?
Actually to compare the USA with any other country is stupid as we are unique among nations and have been since our founding.We are America. We are unique. We don't need to follow the example of others. We were founded to be a beacon - a unique, free society for others to emulate.... not to emulate others. Have you never read our history?
What a fucking dumbassed question.
unique how?
We're not the only democracy
we're not the only republic
we're not the only nation with a secular government
we're not the only multiracial nation
we're not the only one with nukes
many of our civil laws are based on those we inherited from British common law
unique how?
.
We are unique because we are the ONLY nation on Earth organized under a social contract in which the people would govern themselves and the role of government was to secure the rights of the people so that they would have freedom to do that.
We are unique because we are the ONLY nation on Earth organized under a social contract in which the people would govern themselves and the role of government was to secure the rights of the people so that they would have freedom to do that.
O RLY?
History of democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
