US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Rshermr]

What's interesting is that Mulally himself has come out and stated that he didn't feel that Ford was in danger of having to file bankruptcy back in 2008 and 2009.

Yet you can't explain why Ford losing it's main competitor would make it go down the tubes as well? Your only "explanation" for that is the CEO of Ford SAID it would? That's pretty weak, Faun...and I think you know it! You resort to calling me a liar for the same reasons, Rshermr does...because I ask questions that you have no answers for.

Sadly, the con tool loon continues to lie.

No, con tool loon, that is not all I posted. I also quoted some of his reasons.

See that? I'm not calling you a liar because I can't answer your questions (that too is a lie by you). I call you a liar because you lie. You lied when you falsely inferred I didn't answer even though I actually did answer by quoting Ford's CEO at the time. Now you at least admit I quoted him; but now you lie by falsely claiming I didn't cite his reasons.

As I often say, if the truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like ya do.

The REASON that people like you and Rshermr have to resort to calling others "liars", Faun is that you struggle so much to explain how your progressive agenda works in the real world! I ask a very simple question...why Ford would go out of business simply because GM went bankrupt...and you really don't have an answer to that question other than to ask me why the CEO of Ford would push for a bailout! As if THAT somehow explains something that goes counter to what I've learned running businesses for 40 years!

I am struggling with nothing, ya con tool. Sadly for you, you lie because truth and facts are not on your side.

The thing is, with Oldstyle around, all conversations about economic subjects go out the window. But we all get a thorough lesson on advanced lying techniques. While most take the evidence provided to them, and have the integrity to admit their error, Oldstyle NEVER admits anything. He just ignores the evidence and keeps on lying. With no problem at all, because if you have no integrity, it makes no difference if you are spreading your agenda by lying or telling the truth. Just a con tool trait.

Integrity? From you, Georgie? You ran and hid from my request that you provide the formula that the Obama Administration used to determine "jobs saved" after embarrassing yourself with A-B=Jobs Saved! You were shown to be so clueless you pretended that you had me on ignore in a rather pathetic attempt to save face. Then you come here and pontificate about "lying techniques"? That's a hoot!

No georgie here, me boy. And no argument regarding economics from you, as usual. And really, me boy, you of all people should never bring up the term integrity.

 

[Oldstyle]

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.

You seem proud to display your ignorance as to how a bankruptcy works. Yet you can't help yourself by making a fool of yourself by constantly showing what you do not know.

You're the one who's clueless. It would not have just been another, oh well, a company went bankrupt. It would have been an entire industry as all 3 major U.S. automotive companies would have gone down. Even worse, that industry would have gone under while the country was amidst a massive recession and trying to avoid slipping into a recession.

With the typically closed mind of a Progressive, you are incapable of grasping the TRUTH AND FACTS. Perhaps, just perhaps, someone else can explain it in a way understandable to you. Highly doubtful though since Progressives routinely refuse to read opposing views...unlike Conservatives.

Bailouts and Bankruptcy
By Walter E.Williams
December 9, 2008 5 Min Read

Let's not allow Congress and members of the bailout parade panic us into allowing them to do things, as was done in the 1930s, that would convert a mild economic downturn into a true calamity. Right now the Big Three auto companies, and their unions, are asking Congress for a $25 billion bailout to avoid bankruptcy. Let's think about that a bit.

What happens when a company goes bankrupt? One thing that does not happen is their productive assets go poof and disappear into thin air. In other words, if GM goes bankrupt, the assembly lines, robots, buildings and other tools don't evaporate. What bankruptcy means is the title to those assets change. People who think they can manage those assets better purchase them.

Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, where the control of its business operations are subject to the oversight and jurisdiction of the court, gives companies a chance to reorganize. The court can permit complete or partial relief from the company's debts and its labor union contracts.

A large part of the problem is the Big Three's cozy relationship with the United Auto Workers union (UAW). GM has a $73 hourly wage cost including benefits and overtime. Toyota has five major assembly plants in the U.S. Its hourly wage cost plus benefits is $48. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out which company will be at a competitive disadvantage. Then there's the "jobs bank" feature of the UAW contract where workers who are laid off workers get 95 percent of their base pay and all their benefits. Right now there's a two-year limit but in the past workers could stay in the "jobs bank" forever unless they turned down two job offers within 50 miles of their factory. At one time job bank membership exceeded 7,000 "workers." GM, Ford and Chrysler face other problems that range from poor corporate management and marketing, not to mention costly government regulations.

Two vital marketplace signals are the profits that come with success and the losses that come with failure. When these two signals are not allowed to freely function, markets operate less efficiently. To be successful a business must take in enough revenue not only to cover wages, rents and interest but profits as well. In order to accomplish that feat executives must not only satisfy customers but they must do it in a manner that efficiently utilizes all of their resources. If they fail to cover costs, it means that resources are not being used efficiently and/or consumers don't value the good being produced relative to some other alternative. When a firm routinely fails to turn a profit, there are bankruptcy pressures. The firm's resources, workers, building and capital become available to someone else who might put them to better use. When government steps in with a bailout, it enables executives to continue mismanaging resources.

How much congressional involvement do we want with the Big Three auto companies? I'd say none. Congressmen and federal bureaucrats, including those at the Federal Reserve Board, don't know anymore about the automobile business than they know about the banking and financial businesses that they've turned into a mess. Just look at the idiotic focus of congressmen when the three auto company chief executives appeared before them. They questioned whether the executives should have driven to Congress rather than flown in on corporate jets. They focused on executive pay, which is a tiny fraction of costs compared to $73 hourly compensation to 250,000 autoworkers. The belief that Congress poses the major threat to our liberty and well-being is why the founders gave them limited enumerated powers. To our detriment, today's Americans have given them unlimited powers.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
Bailouts and Bankruptcy by Walter E.Williams

Wow. Were you so stupid as not to know that George Mason University is a joke among the open minded? And Williams is the tip of the joke, an admitted Libertarian.
"Walter E. Williams (b. 1936) is John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University and libertarian media pundit."
Walter E. Williams - SourceWatch

I should go get some information from the Democratic Underground. Ah, no, I prefer to have integrity. dipshit.

Or I could list a left wing funded and managed University like George Mason University. Except there are none. Only cons like Koch pay universities to teach what he wants them to as a condition for his contributions.
"George Mason University is a Virginia-based public university near Washington, D.C. A "magnet for right-wing money" [1] and heavily Koch-funded[1], it is notable for hosting over 40 libertarian research centers and affiliates including the Institute for Humane Studies and the Mercatus Center."
George Mason University - SourceWatch

Now, me boy, do you have an impartial site???

George Mason University is a joke among the open minded? Did you really just claim that? The economics faculty at GM has two Nobel Prize winners on it. It is not a right wing school or even a libertarian school but that's about all you've got when you can't counter someone's point of view!

 

[Oldstyle]

What's interesting is that Mulally himself has come out and stated that he didn't feel that Ford was in danger of having to file bankruptcy back in 2008 and 2009.

Sadly, the con tool loon continues to lie.

No, con tool loon, that is not all I posted. I also quoted some of his reasons.

See that? I'm not calling you a liar because I can't answer your questions (that too is a lie by you). I call you a liar because you lie. You lied when you falsely inferred I didn't answer even though I actually did answer by quoting Ford's CEO at the time. Now you at least admit I quoted him; but now you lie by falsely claiming I didn't cite his reasons.

As I often say, if the truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like ya do.

The REASON that people like you and Rshermr have to resort to calling others "liars", Faun is that you struggle so much to explain how your progressive agenda works in the real world! I ask a very simple question...why Ford would go out of business simply because GM went bankrupt...and you really don't have an answer to that question other than to ask me why the CEO of Ford would push for a bailout! As if THAT somehow explains something that goes counter to what I've learned running businesses for 40 years!

I am struggling with nothing, ya con tool. Sadly for you, you lie because truth and facts are not on your side.

The thing is, with Oldstyle around, all conversations about economic subjects go out the window. But we all get a thorough lesson on advanced lying techniques. While most take the evidence provided to them, and have the integrity to admit their error, Oldstyle NEVER admits anything. He just ignores the evidence and keeps on lying. With no problem at all, because if you have no integrity, it makes no difference if you are spreading your agenda by lying or telling the truth. Just a con tool trait.

Integrity? From you, Georgie? You ran and hid from my request that you provide the formula that the Obama Administration used to determine "jobs saved" after embarrassing yourself with A-B=Jobs Saved! You were shown to be so clueless you pretended that you had me on ignore in a rather pathetic attempt to save face. Then you come here and pontificate about "lying techniques"? That's a hoot!

No georgie here, me boy. And no argument regarding economics from you, as usual. And really, me boy, you of all people should never bring up the term integrity.

You want to discuss economics? Fine, tell us what the formula was that the Obama Administration used to determine "Jobs Saved"? Or are you sticking with A-B=Jobs Saved?

You can't discuss economics, Georgie...you've proven that over and over again. All you do is embarrass yourself.

 

[Rshermr]

Wow. Were you so stupid as not to know that George Mason University is a joke among the open minded? And Williams is the tip of the joke, an admitted Libertarian.
"Walter E. Williams (b. 1936) is John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University and libertarian media pundit."
Walter E. Williams - SourceWatch

I should go get some information from the Democratic Underground. Ah, no, I prefer to have integrity. dipshit.

Or I could list a left wing funded and managed University like George Mason University. Except there are none. Only cons like Koch pay universities to teach what he wants them to as a condition for his contributions.
"George Mason University is a Virginia-based public university near Washington, D.C. A "magnet for right-wing money" [1] and heavily Koch-funded[1], it is notable for hosting over 40 libertarian research centers and affiliates including the Institute for Humane Studies and the Mercatus Center."
George Mason University - SourceWatch

Now, me boy, do you have an impartial site???[/QUOTE]

George Mason University is a joke among the open minded? Did you really just claim that? The economics faculty at GM has two Nobel Prize winners on it. It is not a right wing school or even a libertarian school but that's about all you've got when you can't counter someone's point of view![/QUOTE]

Well, lets check and see if you are lying again:
"George Mason University is a Virginia-based public university near Washington, D.C. A "magnet for right-wing money" [1] and heavily Koch-funded[1], it is notable for hosting over 40 libertarian research centers and affiliates including the Institute for Humane Studies and the Mercatus Center.
George Mason University - SourceWatch

Now, one of Oldstyles favorite sites, a nut case crazy conservative web site called The Blaze, said the following:
"3. George Mason University: George Mason University has served as a libertarian enclave with close ties to K Street lobbyists since the 1980s, when Charles Koch began donating heavily to the school. Koch Industries’ executive vice president for public policy, Rich Fink, heads two Koch programs at the school. Matt Kibbe and other leading libertarian activists are alumni of George Mason’s free market economics department."
Progressives identify America’s ‘Top 5 Most Conservative Colleges’"

So, no me boy. You are indeed lying again. Everyone knows what George Mason is all about. It is paid to teach what the Koch brothers want taught. And the areas of interest for the Koch brothers are economics (they are, of course, Libertarians) and politics. The Nobel Prize winner is in Bioscience. Can't find another, though he/she may well be there.

 

[Faun]

Both you and Rshermr are struggling to answer simple questions, Faun...it's why Georgie pretended to put me on ignore and you pepper your posts with "con tools" and accusations of lying! Rshermr couldn't come up with the economic formula that the Obama Administration used to figure out "jobs saved" so he ran away and hid behind the ignore feature. You can't explain why losing your competitors would make Ford go out of business so you get abusive.

Simple questions that you can't deal with. That says volumes about the truth in your positions.

What a shame you can't stop lying. As I've already said, and I'll say it again, I've already answered your question. The very one you claim I'm struggling to answer.

 

[Rshermr]

Both you and Rshermr are struggling to answer simple questions, Faun...it's why Georgie pretended to put me on ignore and you pepper your posts with "con tools" and accusations of lying! Rshermr couldn't come up with the economic formula that the Obama Administration used to figure out "jobs saved" so he ran away and hid behind the ignore feature. You can't explain why losing your competitors would make Ford go out of business so you get abusive.

Simple questions that you can't deal with. That says volumes about the truth in your positions.

What a shame you can't stop lying. As I've already said, and I'll say it again, I've already answered your question. The very one you claim I'm struggling to answer.

He's a poor stupid bastard. If he wasn't so obnoxious, I would feel sorry for him.

 

[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.

You seem proud to display your ignorance as to how a bankruptcy works. Yet you can't help yourself by making a fool of yourself by constantly showing what you do not know.

You're the one who's clueless. It would not have just been another, oh well, a company went bankrupt. It would have been an entire industry as all 3 major U.S. automotive companies would have gone down. Even worse, that industry would have gone under while the country was amidst a massive recession and trying to avoid slipping into a recession.

With the typically closed mind of a Progressive, you are incapable of grasping the TRUTH AND FACTS. Perhaps, just perhaps, someone else can explain it in a way understandable to you. Highly doubtful though since Progressives routinely refuse to read opposing views...unlike Conservatives.

Bailouts and Bankruptcy
By Walter E.Williams
December 9, 2008 5 Min Read

Let's not allow Congress and members of the bailout parade panic us into allowing them to do things, as was done in the 1930s, that would convert a mild economic downturn into a true calamity. Right now the Big Three auto companies, and their unions, are asking Congress for a $25 billion bailout to avoid bankruptcy. Let's think about that a bit.

What happens when a company goes bankrupt? One thing that does not happen is their productive assets go poof and disappear into thin air. In other words, if GM goes bankrupt, the assembly lines, robots, buildings and other tools don't evaporate. What bankruptcy means is the title to those assets change. People who think they can manage those assets better purchase them.

Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, where the control of its business operations are subject to the oversight and jurisdiction of the court, gives companies a chance to reorganize. The court can permit complete or partial relief from the company's debts and its labor union contracts.

A large part of the problem is the Big Three's cozy relationship with the United Auto Workers union (UAW). GM has a $73 hourly wage cost including benefits and overtime. Toyota has five major assembly plants in the U.S. Its hourly wage cost plus benefits is $48. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out which company will be at a competitive disadvantage. Then there's the "jobs bank" feature of the UAW contract where workers who are laid off workers get 95 percent of their base pay and all their benefits. Right now there's a two-year limit but in the past workers could stay in the "jobs bank" forever unless they turned down two job offers within 50 miles of their factory. At one time job bank membership exceeded 7,000 "workers." GM, Ford and Chrysler face other problems that range from poor corporate management and marketing, not to mention costly government regulations.

Two vital marketplace signals are the profits that come with success and the losses that come with failure. When these two signals are not allowed to freely function, markets operate less efficiently. To be successful a business must take in enough revenue not only to cover wages, rents and interest but profits as well. In order to accomplish that feat executives must not only satisfy customers but they must do it in a manner that efficiently utilizes all of their resources. If they fail to cover costs, it means that resources are not being used efficiently and/or consumers don't value the good being produced relative to some other alternative. When a firm routinely fails to turn a profit, there are bankruptcy pressures. The firm's resources, workers, building and capital become available to someone else who might put them to better use. When government steps in with a bailout, it enables executives to continue mismanaging resources.

How much congressional involvement do we want with the Big Three auto companies? I'd say none. Congressmen and federal bureaucrats, including those at the Federal Reserve Board, don't know anymore about the automobile business than they know about the banking and financial businesses that they've turned into a mess. Just look at the idiotic focus of congressmen when the three auto company chief executives appeared before them. They questioned whether the executives should have driven to Congress rather than flown in on corporate jets. They focused on executive pay, which is a tiny fraction of costs compared to $73 hourly compensation to 250,000 autoworkers. The belief that Congress poses the major threat to our liberty and well-being is why the founders gave them limited enumerated powers. To our detriment, today's Americans have given them unlimited powers.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

Bailouts and Bankruptcy by Walter E.Williams

Oh, look... you found a conservative economist who agrees with you.

Good for you.

 

[Oldstyle]

Wow. Were you so stupid as not to know that George Mason University is a joke among the open minded? And Williams is the tip of the joke, an admitted Libertarian.
"Walter E. Williams (b. 1936) is John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University and libertarian media pundit."
Walter E. Williams - SourceWatch

I should go get some information from the Democratic Underground. Ah, no, I prefer to have integrity. dipshit.

Or I could list a left wing funded and managed University like George Mason University. Except there are none. Only cons like Koch pay universities to teach what he wants them to as a condition for his contributions.
"George Mason University is a Virginia-based public university near Washington, D.C. A "magnet for right-wing money" [1] and heavily Koch-funded[1], it is notable for hosting over 40 libertarian research centers and affiliates including the Institute for Humane Studies and the Mercatus Center."
George Mason University - SourceWatch

Now, me boy, do you have an impartial site???

George Mason University is a joke among the open minded? Did you really just claim that? The economics faculty at GM has two Nobel Prize winners on it. It is not a right wing school or even a libertarian school but that's about all you've got when you can't counter someone's point of view![/QUOTE]

Well, lets check and see if you are lying again:
"George Mason University is a Virginia-based public university near Washington, D.C. A "magnet for right-wing money" [1] and heavily Koch-funded[1], it is notable for hosting over 40 libertarian research centers and affiliates including the Institute for Humane Studies and the Mercatus Center.
George Mason University - SourceWatch

Now, one of Oldstyles favorite sites, a nut case crazy conservative web site called The Blaze, said the following:
"3. George Mason University: George Mason University has served as a libertarian enclave with close ties to K Street lobbyists since the 1980s, when Charles Koch began donating heavily to the school. Koch Industries’ executive vice president for public policy, Rich Fink, heads two Koch programs at the school. Matt Kibbe and other leading libertarian activists are alumni of George Mason’s free market economics department."
Progressives identify America’s ‘Top 5 Most Conservative Colleges’"

So, no me boy. You are indeed lying again. Everyone knows what George Mason is all about. It is paid to teach what the Koch brothers want taught. And the areas of interest for the Koch brothers are economics (they are, of course, Libertarians) and politics. The Nobel Prize winner is in Bioscience. Can't find another, though he/she may well be there.[/QUOTE]

LOL...you can find all that bullshit...but you can't find the two Nobel Prize winners for Economics for George Mason University? That would be James Buchanan in 1986 and Vernon Smith in 2002. It took me all of twenty seconds to "find" them...but you couldn't? That just proves what a political hack you really are, Georgie!

As for The Blaze being one of my favorite sites? I had to Google it because I didn't have a clue what it was! Not only is it not a favorite site of mine but I can state quite confidently that it is a site that I've never been to.

So now that you're done telling lies about George Mason University and myself...did you want to provide the formula that the Obama Administration used to determine "jobs saved"? Or are you going to continue to duck that one?

 

[Oldstyle]

Both you and Rshermr are struggling to answer simple questions, Faun...it's why Georgie pretended to put me on ignore and you pepper your posts with "con tools" and accusations of lying! Rshermr couldn't come up with the economic formula that the Obama Administration used to figure out "jobs saved" so he ran away and hid behind the ignore feature. You can't explain why losing your competitors would make Ford go out of business so you get abusive.

Simple questions that you can't deal with. That says volumes about the truth in your positions.

What a shame you can't stop lying. As I've already said, and I'll say it again, I've already answered your question. The very one you claim I'm struggling to answer.

You gave me an answer to why GM's going bankrupt would cause Ford to go bankrupt as well? When?

 

[Faun]

Both you and Rshermr are struggling to answer simple questions, Faun...it's why Georgie pretended to put me on ignore and you pepper your posts with "con tools" and accusations of lying! Rshermr couldn't come up with the economic formula that the Obama Administration used to figure out "jobs saved" so he ran away and hid behind the ignore feature. You can't explain why losing your competitors would make Ford go out of business so you get abusive.

Simple questions that you can't deal with. That says volumes about the truth in your positions.

What a shame you can't stop lying. As I've already said, and I'll say it again, I've already answered your question. The very one you claim I'm struggling to answer.

You gave me an answer to why GM's going bankrupt would cause Ford to go bankrupt as well? When?

In the post where I quoted Mulally.

 

[Oldstyle]

What, where he said it was "the right thing to do"? Why, Faun? Why was it the right thing to do for Ford? Why would GM's bankruptcy have caused a bankruptcy by Ford? Why is it the GM's bankruptcy didn't cause Ford problems? Why did Mulally also state that GM's going into bankruptcy was great for Ford's sales?

 

[Faun]

What, where he said it was "the right thing to do"? Why, Faun? Why was it the right thing to do for Ford? Why would GM's bankruptcy have caused a bankruptcy by Ford? Why is it the GM's bankruptcy didn't cause Ford problems? Why did Mulally also state that GM's going into bankruptcy was great for Ford's sales?

Nope, wrong quote. Now try looking at the Mulally quote I posted where he cited some reasons a GM & Chrysler collapse would have threatened Ford.

 

[Oldstyle]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

 

[Rshermr]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

Let me explain, me boy.
1. You are a proven liar. Liars typically do not stop lying. And that is what we have been telling you over and over.
2. You are either butt stupid or dishonest. Reading an article by the CEO of Ford that even people not familiar with the situation understand easily, and have no problem at all understanding, and you not getting it, is more than suspicious.
3. You have a long, well documented history of taking a lie and using it. in some cases over a hundred times, to push your agenda. Nothing new.
4. Trying to say that Mulalli was wrong just does not pass the giggle test. It is a little hard to listen to a agenda driven con tool trying to make a point that makes absolutely no rational sense. You have not 2% of the credibility of Mulalli, yet push on even suggesting that he had ulterior motives, all be it motives that are only believable to those that have an agenda.
5. You are completely incapable of finding an other expert sources that agree with your ignorant point of view. Even one. Because there are none, but there are plenty of others who agree with him.

Net net, there is no way anyone is going to change the agenda driven opinion of a dishonest and apparently completely ignorant conservative tool like yourself. You love wasting people's time.

 

[Rshermr]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

You have no point. None at all. You have taken the quote, and suggested you do not understand it. I have explained it more than once Faun has explained it multiple times. The problem me boy, is you. Obviously.

 

[Oldstyle]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

You have no point. None at all. You have taken the quote, and suggested you do not understand it. I have explained it more than once Faun has explained it multiple times. The problem me boy, is you. Obviously.

You can't explain what the formula was for determining "jobs saved"...Faun can't explain why losing one's major competitor would be bad for any business...but I'm the one with the problem?

You both have a problem because neither of you can rationalize the bullshit you're putting out on this board!

You can't find that formula you promised to deliver (how pathetic is A-B=Jobs Saved!) and you couldn't find the two Nobel Peace Prize winners from George Mason University? You're not that bright...are you, Georgie?

 

[Oldstyle]

You spout off about what a "liar" I am (without being specific about what "lie" I've supposedly told!) as if you repeat that enough it will somehow become fact. In the meantime you announce that you're going to put me on ignore...pretend to have done so for weeks in an attempt to avoid coming up with the economic formula you promised you had...and then call me a "liar" because I call you on it? And WHY am I a liar? Because I actually believed you when you told me you were putting me on ignore and then pretended to have done so? Day in and day out...you are the biggest bullshit artist on this board, Rshermr! From your claim to have taught economics at the college level but not knowing what I was referring to when I asked what school of economics you were basing your claims on...to your ridiculous claim that you couldn't find the two Nobel Prize winners in economics from George Mason U...you're a never ending flow of grade A bullshit.

 

[Faun]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

Holyfuckingshit!

Once again, you prove Rshermr was spot on, spotting you as a con tool.

Here you are admitting you have no fucking clue what reasons Mulally gave for why a collapse of his two main competitors would have threatened Ford, yet that doesn't even slow you down from claiming it doesn't make sense.



Just goes to prove you argue from a political position and not an informed position. That's why you're a con tool.

 

[Rshermr]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

You have no point. None at all. You have taken the quote, and suggested you do not understand it. I have explained it more than once Faun has explained it multiple times. The problem me boy, is you. Obviously.

You can't explain what the formula was for determining "jobs saved"..

Says who? I can. But the offer was mine. And the offer, as you know, me lying con tool, was that I would IF you would provide the information on the Bill the Republican congress put forward to try to decrease unemployment. As you well know. And you have not. So, me boy, you long since ran out of time. You are along with being a lying con tool, a fraud.

.Faun can't explain why losing one's major competitor would be bad for any business...but I'm the one with the problem?
Now try to concentrate, dipshit. Faun is 100% correct, he has posted the reasons why the ceo of ford said it would have brought ford down, and you just keep saying he did not. More lies, and more wasting people's time.

You both have a problem because neither of you can rationalize the bullshit you're putting out on this board!
Not so, me lying con tool. What we put on the board was rational and ethical. No lies or game playing. That is you, me con tool.

You can't find that formula you promised to deliver (how pathetic is A-B=Jobs Saved!)
I will try to find a response from Georgie. OOOOPS, there is no Georgie. Must be Oldstyle playing games again.
Not true, me boy. But it does show you are playing games. I can and would have provided you the formula, which you really do not want. But that is not your point. Because I have told you multiple times that you need to keep your side of our bargain, and name the bill put forward by republicans to decrease unemployment. Which you can not do. As you well know.
and you couldn't find the two Nobel Peace Prize winners from George Mason University? You're not that bright...are you, Georgie?

I did not look for them, me boy. Because there was no reason to. You simply mentioned there were two, and I did not dispute that. I found one by chance. The other economics Laureate is dead. Maybe you were referring to this guy:
Fake Nobel prize taken away from George Mason prof who asked for RICO investigation of climate skeptics
JunkScience has done it again.
I was alerted this morning that Jagadish Shukla, the professor and climate profiteer leading the charge to have skeptics investigated under RICO, had falsely claimed to be a Nobel prize winner on George Mason University’s web site.
Fake Nobel prize taken away from George Mason prof who asked for RICO investigation of climate skeptics
He is not actually dead like the other Laureate, just his reputation is.

 

[Rshermr]

That's my entire point, Faun...

How does the collapse of Ford's main competitor in a market create a "threat" to Ford? It makes zero sense yet you and Georgie have accepted that as "gospel"!

Holyfuckingshit!

Once again, you prove Rshermr was spot on, spotting you as a con tool.

Here you are admitting you have no fucking clue what reasons Mulally gave for why a collapse of his two main competitors would have threatened Ford, yet that doesn't even slow you down from claiming it doesn't make sense.




Just goes to prove you argue from a political position and not an informed position. That's why you're a con tool.

The boy never argues from an informed position. He is totally agenda driven. Nice thing is, if you know the subject, you know what oldstyle will have to say. Often from this site:
"Be armed with Conservative Talking Points (CTP) as your powerful arsenal if you are forced into a debate"
Conservative Talking Points - A Conservative's Debating Tool and Reference Database of Political Knowledge

Poor stupid bastard.