GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Obama forces GM CEO resignation (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=896642)

Splum 03-30-2009 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platinum Bryan (Post 15687868)
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
Yes Splum Canada is not a free country

Canada has a fucking monarch dumb shit.
http://www.answers.com/monarch

You have the illusion of freedom, she can do whatever she wants with your pathetic little country.

Pleasurepays 03-30-2009 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 15689097)
Canada has a fucking monarch dumb shit.
http://www.answers.com/monarch

You have the illusion of freedom, she can do whatever she wants with your pathetic little country.

USA DISCLAIMER:

i'd just like to interject and add quickly that Americans are not typically as dumb as he is.

SL|M! 03-30-2009 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Gold (Post 15686469)
Some of you all just don't get the big picture.

The government is going to dictate to you what type of vehicle you are allowed to drive.

This is just the latest salvo in the mission to ban fun in the name of the "environment".

keep on driving hummers and be even more dependant on foreign oil. lets keep on financing american hating countries so George`s daddy can make money. let the unregulated`free`market dictate our behaviour, we saw how well that worked out for us

Bryan G 03-30-2009 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 15689097)
Canada has a fucking monarch dumb shit.
http://www.answers.com/monarch

You have the illusion of freedom, she can do whatever she wants with your pathetic little country.

:1orglaugh ok Splum, whatever you say

Why are you such an angry person?

lol

Ace_luffy 03-30-2009 02:44 PM

any aid support have a conditions... leadership is not a exception of those conditions

potter 03-30-2009 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 15689073)
Fuck you shit nugget read the rest of my posts when I said WE SHOULDNT BE GIVING THEM MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE. It isnt Congress money to give its OUR CHILDRENS money, this money didnt exist before these motherfuckers pulled it out of thin air then expect generations of Americans to pay it back. Next time you open your non-educated mouth Im going to shove my large patriotic cock down your throat bitch.

backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You're an idiot.

2012 03-31-2009 12:34 AM


Alex 03-31-2009 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 15686143)
There is nothing complicated about it, the company should be DENIED any public taxpayer money period and allowed to fail. That is a much better solution than taking our money to give yourself and your friends more power. So let me ask you this, who do you think is better qualified to spend tax payer money. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

What? You mean have consumers decide how they spend their own money?
What do you think America is? A free market? :error

Alex 03-31-2009 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane (Post 15686900)
It is pretty simple. If your company is about to go bankrupt and you come to me asking for billions in loans to help dig you out of your hole, I can set some conditions of the loan. If I say that I want the CEO that lead you into the downward spiral gone or no loan the company, and that CEO, have a choice. If they want him to stay, then they can get the money elsewhere. Nobody is forcing them to take the money.

He was in trouble before this stipulation ever came into place. There was talk of ousting him after their first appearance before congress a few months ago.


A. Its not a loan. The tax payers are never going to see a cent of that money back.
B. We shouldn't be loaning them money in the first place. Free markets correct themselves. Its the most basic of economic principles. Business are supposed to fail.

Tempest 03-31-2009 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 15686117)
What are you talking about, GM is a publicly traded company. The government LOANED GM money they didnt BUY stock. You want to know the real reason? Because STOCKS normally go UP when a CEO resigns which gives the company more money AND Im sure some of Obamas friends will make a nice nickel when they sell their shares tomorrow.

You're a fucking retard... Go fucking drink more beer, take a few more bong hits and lose yourself in your little fantasy world... the CEO wasn't forced to do anything by the company... the company didn't have to take the money.. God damn are you fucking stupid.

kane 03-31-2009 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex (Post 15690972)
A. Its not a loan. The tax payers are never going to see a cent of that money back.
B. We shouldn't be loaning them money in the first place. Free markets correct themselves. Its the most basic of economic principles. Business are supposed to fail.

A. Well, it is a loan because we are expecting to get paid back. This is why they are being hardasses about the terms of the loan. They want to see a serious plan that points to them having a profitable future and they want to make sure the pieces are in place to do so. The government loaned car companies money before and they were able to turn themselves around, become profitable and pay the money back. So we don't know that we will never get the money back and are hopeful that we will.

B. You are right. Free markets often do correct themselves and often this is a normal part of business. However, there is a problem with that thinking when it comes to something of this scale. Say we just let everything that was/is in jeopardy fail. That would mean right now most of the banks would be gone because AIG was/is so big that they had huge influence over the banks. If they failed the banking system in this country would have collapsed and banks would have fallen like dominoes. Sure, there would be some small banks left operational, but those banks probably wouldn't have the money to loan businesses to help keep them in business. Then you let the car companies fail. So great count up all the people that work in those two industries and put them in the unemployment lines. Then add up all the businesses that would go under because they can't get loans to stay in business because the banks are fucked and add those people to the line. Add in the businesses that have some cash and don't need credit to operate, but now are not selling things because unemployment is terrible and those that have a job are scared shitless and hording their money. So what are we looking at 20, 30, 40 percent unemployment? That would be fantastic! That will teach them a lesson! Maybe it wouldn't be that bad. Maybe it would be worse. And how long will it take the market to correct from this? Years? A decade? Ever?

On a small scale markets correcting themselves is a good idea. Take for example a small town that has 4 Mexican food restaurants. Then 2 of them go out of business. The other two will eventually (most likely) thrive because they will pick up the lost customers from the other now closed places. The market in that town couldn't support 4 places, but 2 is a good number and they thrive. That is fine. When you are talking about something that literally could effect about 1 in ever 15 workers in this country it is not such a small deal.

Obama isn't doing this to help make the guys at the top richer. If the companies failed and went out of business they would still walk away multi millionaires. He is doing this so that average everyday hard working people don't lose everything they have worked their asses off to get due to something that no fault of their own.

I understand that part of living in a capitalist "free" society is that nothing is guaranteed. You are not promised a job or a nice house or a nice car or, for that matter, anything. But you work hard in achieving a American Dream then some asshat comes along crashes it to the ground. You are guilty of nothing but working hard and doing the right thing, but you still pay in the end. The guy that crashed it to the ground walks away with a million dollar golden parachute. You lose your job, house , car and life savings. Maybe that is something worth defending. Maybe lending some money to the car companies in an effort to keep the pain to a minimum is an okay thing to do.

It amazes me that most people don't care about the trillions we have spent first destroying and now rebuilding Iraq. They won't bat an eye because we were able to kill a couple of terrorist, but when we spend money to help companies stay in business and hopefully rebuild our economy so that they can keep their job/business and continue to create a nice life for themselves suddenly they get irate.

Make no mistake about it. There is no good path with where we have ended up. We now get to choose between eating a shit sandwich (meaning let it all crash and burn, go into a depression and hope we can recover from it) or eating a shit sandwich with some mayonnaise on it (meaning put some money into it and hope that helps a recovery, but ultimately we will have to deal with the debt we create in doing this and that may not be pretty.) Neither are good options, but if we can keep people working and if there is a chance of making things better without letting it all crash and burn, I say give it a try.

brassmonkey 03-31-2009 03:46 AM

his pimp hand is strong

lofasz 03-31-2009 04:05 AM

Please remove your cranium from your nether-orifice
 
You seem to perceive that the company and it's CEO are NOT the biggest fuckups in US corporate history. Furthermore, you seem to perceive that the fucktards are not lined up begging for corporate welfare like a ghetto princess at county welfare. Think first, speak later.

My first inclination would be to let them just fail, the dumbass execs that had no clue deserve extinction. Except that doing so would take too many laborers down with them. I think the ores should not stop at CEO but replace the entire management team.

Of course, if the fucked up CEO had any dignity or honor he would have killed himself and saved the pees and taxpayers the trouble of having to remove him.

Splum 03-31-2009 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lofasz (Post 15691209)
My first inclination would be to let them just fail, the dumbass execs that had no clue deserve extinction. Except that doing so would take too many laborers down with them. I think the ores should not stop at CEO but replace the entire management team.

1. Stop being mad at rich people that you are a poor uneducated twat.
2. You really think they will save any jobs? :1orglaugh Michigan unemployment is now over 12% - its going to get worse. Dont fucking kid yourself Obama is fucking you.

V_RocKs 03-31-2009 10:09 PM

Best thing for the business!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123