GM is down 25% this morning.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=gm

Obama is a one man stock market wrecking crew.

Yep, a bunch of Obama's are on the assembly line as well as on the board of directors ....

Rumors are that a lot of other Obama's are at AIG ....

:Oh crap

Yeah like GM and it's idiot CEOs had nothing to do with it's problems. I mean it was running just fine until today.

The market is reacting to Obama's unprecedented Socialist agenda, not the fundamentals at GM.

The problem isn't so much that Obama wanted the guy out. The issue is that it was done publicly and it was made known this is what the Administration wanted and got.

This will cause way more issues than just at GM. Obama is playing for a huge power grab that in essence is circumventing the balance of power in the government. People are seeing this and it is making them cautious as to where they put their money.

There are even Democrats, like Senator Byrd, that have gone on record saying this huge effort to grab more power by the President/White House is totally wrong. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19303.html

Go obama go :)

Very good point.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
Yes Splum Canada is not a free country

It was a combination of both, just look at GM's sales decline over the past 5 years. Pull your head out of your ass and stop being so partisan, people like YOU are whats wrong with America right now. Too concerned about supporting your parties ideology, instead of doing what is right.

splum is an idiot as always

If you want people to listen to your crap you should know what your talking about first... "Socialist Agenda" is merely an empty talking point... if Obama were a socialist he would have nationalized everything right from jump. As far as socialism goes... Obama hasn't introduced anything new to the equation... we have been a socio capitalist country ever since the New Deal.

People don't understand the definition of socialism at all. The big problem is the right-wing agenda using it as a media tactic.

Obama, the dems and the liberals. All the "evil socialists". Are for things like public programs, welfare, and bailouts etc. All of which are the exact opposite of socialism.

In true socialism, there is no unemployment or welfare. Everyone MUST work. Everyone MUST have a job. There is no getting money for not working, or getting a bailout. That IS NOT socialism.

Also, although everyone realizes splum is an idiot. It should be brought to his attention.

The auto industry came to congress. It wasn't the other way around. Splum, you should remember that before opening your mouth again. :2 cents:

This is nonsense. Even Chavez who is an avowed socialist has not nationalized everything all at once. The popular support for big government socialism is not strong enough to do it all at once, so it has to be done a piece at a time. Obama is a longtime leftist radical so his moves towards a socialist agenda are hardly surprising. He is attempting to mask his radical agenda by using euphemisms like "change" and "stimulus."

Even the Bolsheviks took more than 20 years to nationalize the whole economy in the USSR and they were certainly not "stealth socialists" like Obama. Obama was trained by Saul Alinksy and is using classic Alinksy techniques to implement a hard left agenda against the will of the general populace. He is manipulating legitimate public fears and populist sentiments over the current economic crisis to lead the country down the path towards a state planned and controlled economy. Only his most deluded supporters or leftists propagandists who support his real agenda would dispute that at this point. :2 cents:

Actually, nationalization does not equal socialism. Also, what is happening is not nationalization. What is happening is a business taking on a government loan, and adhering to the terms of that loan.

The government is not controlling or nationalizing any part of this business. The business made the decision to sign and agree to the terms. They took on that responsibility. The auto industry itself is in no way going to go under or become nationalized. There is a big difference between what you're suggesting and what is actually happening here.

Nationalization does not equal socialism but it is an important step in the process. I agree that the current situation with GM or the banks is not a full nationalization. As I made pretty clear above Obama is attempting to implement his socialist agenda a small piece at a time, as their is not much public support for his radical long term goals. Even if he is unable to take the country all the way down the path towards a state run economy he will certainly do a lot of irreversible damage on his way.

Even the Europeans are aghast at his agenda. They understand the long term implications better than most in the US.

You really only sound like a conspiracy theorist though. Do you have any proof or factual information to provide that will back what you're saying?

Because this isn't Obama's doing, and he isn't attempting anything in this situation. What has happened was a business decision. The auto companies came to congress and asked for a loan. Those loans came with terms which they agreed to. Right now they are simply adhering to those terms. They failed to meet certain qualifications at which this time there are consequences to not meeting them.

The whole socialism argument is bull... it rings totally of the same shit that was pulled when McCarthy was looking for communists. It's a pure smear campaign being fed by the right in a weak attempt to disregard their own record of failure and corruption.

Why do you even care cykoe6? Your russian right? I would think you would be much more concerned with what your own govt is doing... We don't have half of the "power grabbing" issues that your country has.

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.

My party? What the fuck are you talking about? Because I disagree with giving failed companies money I am now in some kind of "party". You blind liberal fuck go drink your monkey kool-aid.

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.

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

:1orglaugh ok Splum, whatever you say

Why are you such an angry person?

lol

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

backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You're an idiot.

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

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.

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.

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.

his pimp hand is strong

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.

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.

Best thing for the business!