If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Investors Business Daily)   IBD fails to acknowledge the difference between a "paper loss" and an "actual loss" because they don't like the current President. It's cool, even George Washington had to deal with this crap   (news.investors.com) divider line 44
    More: Fail, Lando Calrissian, Andrew Malcolm, book value  
•       •       •

3805 clicks; posted to Business » on 04 Jul 2012 at 12:49 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-04 09:23:39 AM
So where people just whining when they had all those "paper losses" in their 401k in 2009?
Was that nothing?
 
2012-07-04 09:49:53 AM
Irritable Bowel Disease is at it again? What a shock!
 
2012-07-04 10:02:13 AM

DarwiOdrade: Irritable Bowel Disease is at it again? What a shock!


Well, they do spew a lot of shiat uncontrollably.
 
2012-07-04 10:18:13 AM
Call me ignorant, but wasn't the auto bailout started under President Bush? Was there a second one under Obama?
 
2012-07-04 10:19:23 AM
With losses like that maybe we should bring back Glass Steagle.
 
2012-07-04 10:46:31 AM
Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.
 
2012-07-04 12:32:25 PM
A broken, retarded, derp-spewing clock is partially right twice a day, but for all the wrong reasons.

Part of the reason the shares are down is due to market expectations. Every investor knows that as soon as the price of GM rises to the point of break-even or profitability, the government will start selling shares. That eventual wave of 500 million shares IS a downward pressure on GM prices.

Personally, I'd like to see the administration sell the shares, take the loss, and be done with the situation. The bailout was to prevent the entire Midwestern United States from collapsing into 40% unemployment. It did that. Making money on the deal is just gravy. Raise taxes and get a more consistent source of revenue - both for the market and for the government.
 
2012-07-04 01:07:38 PM

Sid_6.7: Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.


THIS.
 
2012-07-04 02:16:56 PM
I love business journalism. The guy who wrote that article is one bang-up business journalist, too, let me tell you! No political hack with an agenda, he! Oh no, not at all.
And his "facts" - so accurate! So honestly interpreted!
Be still, my beating heart.
 
2012-07-04 02:25:54 PM
The who did what, when?
 
2012-07-04 02:51:02 PM

Farty McPooPants: The who did what, when?


Obama is the single cause of every problem of the United States. He was responsible for Pearl Harbor, the Harding administration, and the failure of Billy Beer.
 
2012-07-04 03:02:56 PM
Like "mainstreet" the phrase "Government Motors" should be taken out back and shot in the head with at least two slugs.
 
2012-07-04 03:22:32 PM

Sid_6.7: Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.


or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.

They have it and now they have more.
 
2012-07-04 04:20:15 PM
Isn't it only a loss when they sell the stock? If they hold on to it and it gains and rebounds higher than when they bought it, won't it be a profit? Did they set a timeline for selling the shares? Plus when they started selling (I'm guessing they won't dump it all at once) wouldn't that trigger a sell-off resulting in even lower stock prices? So they could manipulate the system by starting to sell off a few shares, trigger others to sell, then keep their remaining stock and profit?

/Doesn't know much about the stock market, that's what my broker is paid to do.
 
2012-07-04 04:28:45 PM

TDBoedy: Sid_6.7: Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.

or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.

They have it and now they have more.


What was exactly transferred to the "unions" (which I'm guessing actually means the people that work for GM)?
 
2012-07-04 04:50:30 PM
35 billion is chump change. Let's figure out how much of a bailout the banks have received from being able to borrow money at 0% interest then turning around and using the same money to buy treasuries. Oh right, that is not a bailout. It is just good business sense by the job creators.
 
2012-07-04 05:25:20 PM
It just can't be the fact that they make crappy vehicles that nobody really wants. It just has to be that greedy union man earning enough to send his kids to college. How farking dare he enjoy modest economic security.
 
2012-07-04 06:29:38 PM

Moopy Mac: What was exactly transferred to the "unions" (which I'm guessing actually means the people that work for GM)?


Well, when GM declared bankruptcy they would've lost their pensions, their union contracts, and presumably their jobs.
 
2012-07-04 06:42:19 PM

the_geek: Moopy Mac: What was exactly transferred to the "unions" (which I'm guessing actually means the people that work for GM)?

Well, when GM declared bankruptcy they would've lost their pensions, their union contracts, and presumably their jobs.


And 12.8% of the company.
 
2012-07-04 06:42:39 PM
Gawd forbid they should actually lose a few pennies more versus this President. Heaven forfend!
 
2012-07-04 06:43:50 PM
Eff you, firefox. Not recognizing forfend or firefox
 
2012-07-04 08:48:31 PM

TDBoedy: Sid_6.7: Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.

or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.

They have it and now they have more.


I especially like the "yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business" part. Hilarious.
 
2012-07-04 09:56:26 PM

TDBoedy: or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.



So which is more important? A company saved from collapsing or some people keeping their job? Why can't both be important? Why do you highlight unions being the only beneficiaries as if it was some magical conspiracy theory? Not to mention the auto bailout was started by your hero GEORGE W BUSH
 
2012-07-04 10:16:03 PM
People also hitched about money gas companies were making while oil poured out in the gulf when the sums they were arguing were not the same as profits.

Bottom line is that people are stupid, its why all of you are split into "the left is better", "no, the right is bettah!" While neither side realizes they are both getting played.
 
2012-07-04 10:38:56 PM

Aar1012: Farty McPooPants: The who did what, when?

Obama is the single cause of every problem of the United States. He was responsible for Pearl Harbor, the Harding administration, and the failure of Billy Beer.


When did Tonya get elected president?
 
2012-07-04 10:40:52 PM

the_geek: Moopy Mac: What was exactly transferred to the "unions" (which I'm guessing actually means the people that work for GM)?

Well, when GM declared bankruptcy they would've lost their pensions, their union contracts, and presumably their jobs.


So what was transferred? The government stepped in to guaranteed the contractual obligations of GM to its workers. Is the argument that the bailout is horrible because these workers got to keep their pensions and jobs?
 
2012-07-04 11:18:05 PM
The IBD editors are the same geniuses who warned against a national healthcare plan with this gem:

"The U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) basically figures out who deserves treatment by using a cost-utility analysis based on the "quality adjusted life year." One year in perfect health gets you one point. Deductions are taken for blindness, for being in a wheelchair and so on. The more points you have, the more your life is considered worth saving, and the likelier you are to get care. People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."
 
2012-07-04 11:38:19 PM

Moopy Mac: So what was transferred?


12.8% of the company.
 
2012-07-04 11:56:00 PM

Moopy Mac: TDBoedy: Sid_6.7: Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.

or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.

They have it and now they have more.

What was exactly transferred to the "unions" (which I'm guessing actually means the people that work for GM)?


tax payer funds...A.K.A. money to shore up failing pensions.
 
2012-07-04 11:59:05 PM

intelligent comment below: TDBoedy: or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.


So which is more important? A company saved from collapsing or some people keeping their job? Why can't both be important? Why do you highlight unions being the only beneficiaries as if it was some magical conspiracy theory? Not to mention the auto bailout was started by your hero GEORGE W BUSH


lol yes my hero...of course I suck giant republican cawk every chance I get. my I just drool at the very mention of clearing brush in crawford tx, and cindy sheehan makes me a veritable rape machine.

really? I object to naked market making by the government. I object the all of TARP, Cash 4 Clunkers, and other short term bull crap that does nothing to shore up the long term problems in our trade system/economy.

/back to slobbering on dick cheney's limp pale penis.
 
2012-07-05 12:00:45 AM

zenobia: TDBoedy: Sid_6.7: Of course, there's no chance that the Obama administration will sell off its GM stake before Election Day. That would force Obama to recognize actual losses, which would remind voters that the bailout was a massive transfer from taxpayers to unions.

WTF is this sh*t?! Yeah, we get it, you hate unions. Apparently you hate them so much you're willing to chuck logic out the window to attack them.

or if you look at how the deals were structured you will find out that it was a transfer to unions, yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business. But mostly unions. That is just a fact. Unions want what all parties want (and by parties I mean groups of like minded people) and that is control/power/influence.

They have it and now they have more.

I especially like the "yes through the companies who also benefited by not going out of business" part. Hilarious.


you do know how a payroll works right?

I mean I'm all for changing it...unions pay the employees and receive contract fees from the corporation they are contracted out to. Solves all the problems.
 
2012-07-05 12:04:10 AM

intelligent comment below: Not to mention the auto bailout was started by your hero GEORGE W BUSH


Everyone knows that we didnt have a problem with spending until January 20, 2009 but the writing on the wall was obvious since November 4th, 2008. And who was elected president at that time?

That's right - Barack HUSSEIN Fartbongo. It's all his fault
 
2012-07-05 12:07:09 AM
"And the U.S. currently is the garden spot of Ceti Alpha 6 for auto sales."

This, as well as other asnine statements are why I do not take this article or its author seriously. Come on, a star trek reference in the middle of your financial argument takedown? really?
 
2012-07-05 07:36:37 AM
On the whole, I think the bailout was a good thing,

But if it had been done correctly, bankruptsy might have been better. It lets you adjust your debts to the current value of money,

How many times has trump declared bankruptsy for just that reason?

My favorite trump quote on imus years ago: "If you owe the bank 10K and can't pay it back, you have a problem. If you owe the bank 100 million dollars and can't pay it back, THE BANK has a problem."
 
2012-07-05 08:49:34 AM
Ed Carson, the author of this nonsense, is a prominent contributor to reason.com

The first indication that you are reading libertarian bs should be when the author attributes anything associated with the federal government as being the work of Obama himself, but at no point does he refer to him as President Obama. Why?

Because it hurts their heart to hear it.

President Barack Obama
President Barack Obama
President Barack Obama.

/let me taste those biatch boy conservatears
 
2012-07-05 09:35:30 AM

Aar1012: Call me ignorant, but wasn't the auto bailout started under President Bush?


Apparently you don't get it. He's BLACK for cryin' out loud.
 
2012-07-05 11:18:34 AM
Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin are swing states. Therefore, the UAW will always get bailed out.
 
2012-07-05 01:20:55 PM
Is Funny because Mitt now wants to take credit for it.
 
2012-07-05 03:31:34 PM

gingerjet: Like "mainstreet" the phrase "Government Motors" should be taken out back and shot in the head with at least two slugs.


Doesn't fit your agenda, eh?
 
2012-07-05 04:21:24 PM

sumida sublight: The IBD editors are the same geniuses who warned against a national healthcare plan with this gem:

"The U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) basically figures out who deserves treatment by using a cost-utility analysis based on the "quality adjusted life year." One year in perfect health gets you one point. Deductions are taken for blindness, for being in a wheelchair and so on. The more points you have, the more your life is considered worth saving, and the likelier you are to get care. People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."


To be fair, he totally mislead them by hiding his accent.

/Love his voice-over work in War Games.
 
2012-07-05 05:40:53 PM

beta_plus: Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin are swing states. Therefore, the UAW will always get bailed out.



Nothing to do with them being the manufacturing heart of America's car industry, no of course not. It's all a big union conspiracy. Don't you just hate it when people make a middle class living? The nerve of those people.
 
2012-07-05 06:47:52 PM

Quiefenburger: gingerjet: Like "mainstreet" the phrase "Government Motors" should be taken out back and shot in the head with at least two slugs.

Doesn't fit your agenda, eh?


Is that the new way to say it's something only a halfwit would bother using? If so, then yes.
 
2012-07-05 09:53:26 PM

Quiefenburger: gingerjet: Like "mainstreet" the phrase "Government Motors" should be taken out back and shot in the head with at least two slugs.

Doesn't fit your agenda, eh?


Agenda? Yes, the US government has a long history of helping big companies get through tough times. Calling it "Government Motors" means you're an idiot who thinks the government has a majority say in anything. They own 25% in stock. Tell me how 25 is over 50 in your idiot math?
 
2012-07-06 09:59:13 AM

intelligent comment below: Quiefenburger: gingerjet: Like "mainstreet" the phrase "Government Motors" should be taken out back and shot in the head with at least two slugs.

Doesn't fit your agenda, eh?

Agenda? Yes, the US government has a long history of helping big companies get through tough times. Calling it "Government Motors" means you're an idiot who thinks the government has a majority say in anything. They own 25% in stock. Tell me how 25 is over 50 in your idiot math?


First of all, calm down and stop tongue punching your keyboard. Boiling the government's role in GM down to a 25% equity stake is disingenuous and makes for a poor argument. Look at the whole body of work, and tell me that this was as innocuous as "helping" out a big company.

"The Obama administration will commit another $30 billion on top of the $19.4 billion it has already given GM to cover its losses and fund its operations. The U.S. government will get a 60% equity stake in the new company after restructuring, as well as $8.8 billion in debt and preferred stock." Link

So, it might help if you did a little bit of research on the subject before making a definitive statement that exemplifies your ignorance. Throw in the amount of money we've flushed down the GMAC and Rescap shiatholes, in conjunction with the tens of billions in losses we've already cemented on the GM equity stake, plus the tens of billions in unfunded GM pension liabilities that the US assumed via the PBGC, and you start to get an idea of how stupid you sound when you try to argue the government's involvement down to a petty 25% stake in today's world.

But if it makes you feel better to hide behind a shiatty argument while calling everyone else "idiots", well I won't stand in your way. Proceed with your tongue punching.
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report