Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Why Americans Failed the November National IQ Test, In One Panel


Committed to the Inter-tubes by on
Labels:

11 comments:

  1. Craig11 December, 2012 13:08

    (*sigh*)

    Too true. . .

    ReplyDelete
  2. Old Goat 3611 December, 2012 14:50

    What is even better, 75% of the proposed tax increases by Obama will go to NEW SPENDING! This is the main reason you don't raise rates and taxes, they just look at it as a new income to spend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buck12 December, 2012 08:30

      It's been ever so. The "new stimulus" has me more incensed than the proposed rate increases.

      Delete
  3. (not necessarily your) Uncle Skip11 December, 2012 15:16

    I didn't come here looking for more challenges... I want solutions!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Andy11 December, 2012 17:59

    Ramirez left out the retarded GM/Dodge bailout (kinda hinted at it with the "electric cars" thing).

    I certainly hope that everyone that thought bailing out the UAW was necessary for the salvation of our economy is eating a heaping helping of crow tonight.

    We bought ourselves 50 pounds of trouble for an ounce of temporary relief.

    After what I saw coming out of Michigan today, I am more convinced than ever that the Auto Bailout (and every Republican that supported it) was as short-sighted as a possum at noon. Our children, grandchildren, and their children will be paying for this when we are long gone. And, for what? To keep alive an organization that hires thugs to assault patriotic Americans...patriotic Americans that know what's what, and what's not.

    A pox on them!

    Okay...I'm finished.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buck12 December, 2012 08:36

      Not me, I still think saving GM and Chrysler was in the best interests of the country. I know the UAW got a LOT more than I would have given them and the bond holders got screwed. The bailout is easy for me to justify when I think of the shape the country was in at that point in time, the impact going into traditional bankruptcy would have had on the supply chain (it wasn't JUST the car companies), and the potential social impact of unemployment shooting up in MI, IN, OH, IL (just to name four states).

      I'm much less a traditional conservative and more of a pragmatist. That said: I hate the UAW.

      Delete
    2. Craig12 December, 2012 11:02

      You would well surmise that I'm no fan of the UAW, either. And, by way of full disclosure, I get my daily bread from one of those bailed-out-entities (and as far as the bankruptcy goes, our manangement at the time deserved everything it got).

      That said, there were MILLIONS of jobs at stake with the 'bailout'; the consequences of that many lost jobs cast adrift, to be absorbed by an economy that was limping badly even apart from the car biz, would have been catastrophic. To say nothing of the strategic loss of having no domestic automotive builders. And the cost to the taxpayers is virtually already paid.

      What you're seeing from Lansing these last couple days is the desperation of a movement that's been slowly dying for 30 years, and is just now realizing it. Having lived in Michigan all my life, the idea that RtW legislation would even be introduced here, much less that it would pass both houses and be signed by the governor, is comparable to when the Berlin Wall fell, so deeply has our state been in thrall to the unions (especially the UAW).

      (And Buck, this goes to my most recent post, and why I reject being labeled as a 'Republican'; and I'm not really a pure 'conservative', either - radical free-market captilaism is too socially destructive for my taste, and I was appalled by what I heard from the 'more-favored' parts of the country as to what could happen to Michigan, for all they cared. Like Ms. Scalia, I'll aim for 'Catholic', at least as best I'm able. . .)

      Delete
    3. Andy12 December, 2012 14:20

      See guys, your logic is failed (with all due respect). There were not millions of jobs at stake with the bailout...hundreds of thousands perhaps. But, I refuse to accept the premise that all of those jobs would have been lost. Sure, some would. But, the most likely long-term outcome would have been some other car company (or companies) coming in...buying up profitable lines...shutting down unprofitable ones...and renegotiating wages/benefits/etc. to a manageable state (instead of the ridiculous ones that are in place now).

      All that a "bailout" does is reward bad business practice. I've never seen a good bailout...but if there is such a thing, it would be because "everybody" needs it. In this case, only two...count 'em two companies had to be saved. Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Hyndai, etc...none of them needed a huge infusion of our children's money (that we probably borrowed from China, giving them our children as a promissory note)...only GM & Chrysler. Hell, it's no different than when Bush bailed out the Airlines after 9/11. Southwest had taken care of business, and didn't need it. And, because they had good business practices in place, their moron competitors got the dough. (And Tom Daschle's wife made a shitload of money out of the deal).

      Bailouts suck.

      It's no different than Bush's bailout of the banks. We were all told that the sky was gonna fall...the world end...and, we'd all get mumps, and measles. Again. Bullshit. The great majority of US banks didn't need a penny...only the ones that had bad business practices in place.

      No, I won't accept the premise that any bailout is ever good, until I see a "vital" industry where EVERYBODY IN IT is on the ropes. The whole thing was BS, and designed to save high wages, and cushy pensions. And, your kids and grandkids get to pay for it. Ef 'em. Ef GM & Chrysler, and the Congress that screwed us all.

      Hell, J.C. Penneys is on the ropes. Just think of how many tens of thousands of direct jobs (plus the supply chain...and truckers...and shopping center owners...and yada yada yada) are gonna lose their jobs. We gonna' bail them out?

      Hell no. Another retailer will absorb their share of the market...hire more people...buy more from their suppliers, and life will go no.

      No. It's only when the UAW needs protection that we'll step in.

      Ef 'em! I hate the effin' UAW.

      Here's you a good article about GM: http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/09/06/fibbing-with-gm-job-creation-statistics-bill-clinton-edition/

      And, Forbes also has this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2012/08/15/general-motors-is-headed-for-bankruptcy-again/

      Read those, and tell me the fuckin' bailout was a good thing.

      Delete
    4. Buck13 December, 2012 00:20

      We could argue this all day and not move either Craig, you, or me off our respective positions so let's just agree to disagree. I read that Louis Woodhill article on Forbes some time ago when another of my right-wing friends linked it. Forbes published a rebuttal to Woodhill that said... in essence... "Bullshit." I agree with that rebuttal.

      I love my Tart, too. It's one of the best damned cars I've ever owned, bar none. Just sayin'.

      Delete
  5. Andy13 December, 2012 03:43

    so let's just agree to disagree

    Agreed.

    ReplyDelete

Just be polite... that's all I ask.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)