Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM
Yes, it does, although not for any reason you'd understand, apparently.
|
Don't be so quick to assume. I understand a whole helluva lot of things...doesn't mean I agree with whatever it is, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM
My eyes are wide open. Are yours?
|
Quite. AND I have my contacts in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM
I'm glad to hear they were changing course, and I hate to sound like a broken record, but so what?
|
The 'so what' is the point DG made in that very same post:
NO bankruptcy had the economy (see: NOT GM's fault) not taken a crap. And GM would have gotten liquidated, don't fool yourself. None of the brands could have survived on their own, and nobody had enough cash to buy them all, let along the resources to run them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM
On the flip side, bailing out GM added more debt to our government that's already overburdened. Furthermore, it jeopardizes the governments ability to provide social safety nets (welfare, unemployment benefits, Social Seuciryt and Medicare/Medicaid). And it creates another moral hazard (along with the banks, insurance companies, GSE's, etc...).
|
Temporary debt (that once again, you'll NEVER feel), I'm not sure what relation social security has to this, and since when has saving millions upon millions of jobs via an uncomfortable solution been deemed 'immoral'?
