amazingly stupid/scary: treasury filing for Chrysler bankruptcy

#26
#26
hatvol96 said:
Not really. It's all about government expanding its power and justifying/perpetuating its existence.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
True. Not to mention that Obama has been steadily attempting to inject governmental control into the business sector at an alarming rate.
 
#28
#28
hatvol96 said:
Not really. It's all about government expanding its power and justifying/perpetuating its existence.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It's not as if it's existence wasn't already justified and perpetuated. This is simply the horseshat shenanigans of an idiot who believes in government as the solution rather than an enabler for the populace.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#29
#29
BigPapaVol said:
It's not as if it's existence wasn't already justified and perpetuated. This is simply the horseshat shenanigans of an idiot who believes in government as the solution rather than an enabler for the populace.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
I don't see this as being philosophically different from government deciding to issue marriage licenses or tell me what I can't ingest into my body. They are all examples of something they have absolutely no business doing.
 
#30
#30
BigPapaVol said:
It's not as if it's existence wasn't already justified and perpetuated. This is simply the horseshat shenanigans of an idiot who believes in government as the solution rather than an enabler for the populace.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
The populace should be enabling the government, not the other way around. They have no more power than that which we allow them to have.
 
#31
#31
hatvol96 said:
The populace should be enabling the government, not the other way around. They have no more power than that which we allow them to have.
Click to expand...

Considering Texas Gov. Perry was mocked heavily by quoting the 10th Amendment... this is where it's going.


The populace is enabling the government to continue along this path.
 
#32
#32
DC Vol said:
The populace is enabling the government to continue along this path.
Click to expand...
100% correct and both sides of the aisle are getting exactly what they deserve. The puritans and fairy tale believers deserve to see their beloved free market shredded and the anything goes/live and let live crowd deserves to have their drugs criminalized and a definition of marriage forced upon them. Why? They only speak up about government's propensity for interjecting itself where it has no place or right to be when it is one of their pet oxen being gored. They are being strangled by their own hypocritical self interest. Sounds good to me.
 
Last edited:
#33
#33
hatvol96 said:
100% correct and both sides of the aisle are getting exactly what they deserve. The puritans and fairy tale believers deserve to see their beloved free market shredded and the anything goes/live and let live crowd deserves to have their drugs criminalized and a definition of marriage froced upon them. Why? They only speak up about government's propensity for interjecting itself where it has no place or right to be when it is one of their pet oxen being gored. They are being strangled by their own hypocritical self interest. Sounds good to me.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem. "One issue" voters are small minded. Small minded people are eventually led around like sheep. It is a fundamental, undeniable truth.
 
Last edited:
#34
#34
Lexvol said:
Therein lies the problem. "One issue" voters are small minded. Small minded people are eventually led around like sheep. It is a fundamental, undeniable truth.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Those who don't see the correlation between, for example, criminalization of marijuana and statutory erosion of the Second Amendment are being terribly myopic.
 
#35
#35
hatvol96 said:
Exactly. Those who don't see the correlation between, for example, criminalization of marijuana and statutory erosion of the Second Amendment are being terribly myopic.
Click to expand...

That's why I started PWG - Potheads With Guns.

I just can't remember were I put the bylaws...what was I talking about?
 
#38
#38
hatvol96 said:
I don't see this as being philosophically different from government deciding to issue marriage licenses or tell me what I can't ingest into my body. They are all examples of something they have absolutely no business doing.
Click to expand...
and I'm not arguing. I'm absolutely for the government moving the hell out of the way.
 
#39
#39
BigPapaVol said:
and I'm not arguing. I'm absolutely for the government moving the hell out of the way.
Click to expand...
If all the federal government did was coin money, provide transportation infrastructure, conduct diplomacy, ensure the protection of the individual rights provided by the Constitution, and run a well trained, properly equipped military, I'd be perfectly content.
 
#40
#40
hatvol96 said:
If all the federal government did was coin money, provide transportation infrastructure, conduct diplomacy, ensure the protection of the individual rights provided by the Constitution, and run a well trained, properly equipped military, I'd be perfectly content.
Click to expand...
period
 
#41
#41
hatvol96 said:
If all the federal government did was coin money, provide transportation infrastructure, conduct diplomacy, ensure the protection of the individual rights provided by the Constitution, and run a well trained, properly equipped military, I'd be perfectly content.
Click to expand...

unfortunately, Article 1 Section 8 appears to have been redacted from the Constitution they use in Washington DC.
 
#42
#42
looks like obama is trying to screw the gm boldholders too to bail out the unions. amazing. and of course NO ONE is talking about this.
 
#43
#43
volinbham said:
That's why I started PWG - Potheads With Guns.

I just can't remember were I put the bylaws...what was I talking about?
Click to expand...

Save the rain forests, make mental notes.

63850_600.jpg


droski said:
looks like obama is trying to screw the gm boldholders too to bail out the unions. amazing. and of course NO ONE is talking about this.
Click to expand...

GE shareholders and management clash.

Here is the inside story at CNBC, the cable channel dedicated to business coverage, which actually sparked the entire national tea party movement when veteran Chicago reporter Rick Santelli called on Americans to protest Obama’s plans to have taxpayers pick up the mortgage bills of irresponsible borrowers. Santelli’s rant became a YouTube smash hit, and the citizen movement grew rapidly from there. Corporate executives like Zucker, who relish close ties to Obama, want this stopped.
Click to expand...

32928621_400x400-300x300.jpg
 
#44
#44
droski said:
looks like obama is trying to screw the gm boldholders too to bail out the unions. amazing. and of course NO ONE is talking about this.
Click to expand...
Anyone who has remained invested in American automakers is not worthy of my sympathy. Invest in garbage, get trashed. It's a simple concept.
 
#45
#45
hatvol96 said:
Anyone who has remained invested in American automakers is not worthy of my sympathy. Invest in garbage, get trashed. It's a simple concept.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree in principal since most of the original bondholders probably have sold and the only that remain were probably relying on a gov't bailout to make some quick cash. but this sets a very bad precident and flys in the face of 100 years of US bankruptcy laws. Why would any private captial ever invest in these companies again (or any unionized company in financial trouble) if the bondholders can't rely on at the very least owning the company in the worst case scenario? this could seriously increase the cost of debt borrowing for a lot of companies who can't afford the higher rates.
 
#46
#46
hatvol96 said:
Anyone who has remained invested in American automakers is not worthy of my sympathy. Invest in garbage, get trashed. It's a simple concept.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree here. But, what the government is doing does set a very bad precident.
 
#47
#47
droski said:
I'd have to agree in principal since most of the original bondholders probably have sold and the only that remain were probably relying on a gov't bailout to make some quick cash. but this sets a very bad precident and flys in the face of 100 years of US bankruptcy laws. Why would any private captial ever invest in these companies again (or any unionized company in financial trouble) if the bondholders can't rely on at the very least owning the company in the worst case scenario? this could seriously increase the cost of debt borrowing for a lot of companies who can't afford the higher rates.
Click to expand...
It is a horrible precedent. I was just expressing my opinion that people who have willingly remained on a sinking ship don't get much of my sympathy.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top