quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
However, I appreciate the Companies identified in the article need to have their failure rewarded with tax payer money provided by the this Administration and Congress. Can you blame them?  Who knows how long the Corporate Welfare for Failure Program undertaken by this Administration will continue.

Let me pose a hypothetical question: You are on a boat in the middle of the ocean. Somebody, either through stupidity or greed or any reason at all, puts a hole in the bottom of the boat. Do you think the proper response is to let the boat sink in order not to reward the person who put the hole in the boat? Or is the proper answer to patch up the hole and then worry about the proper punishment to the hole puncher?

No one wants to reward failure. But we are not in a case where letting the natrual, Darwinian forces of the market is going to fix things. If AIG fails, Joe's Insturance isn't going to step up to take up the slack. In the banking system crashes and burns, new banks aren't going to suddenly spring up to provide a meaningful alternative. In short, there is no way of letting those who deserve to sink at this moment go down without going down with them.

There is definitly a place for takign steps against the sort of thing that brought us to this situation. However, that time is after the boat is patched and no longer sinking fast. But when you're on a boat that is filling with water, I think arguing against bailing it out is not the best survival strategy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RainydayNE

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
However, I appreciate the Companies identified in the article need to have their failure rewarded with tax payer money provided by the this Administration and Congress. Can you blame them?  Who knows how long the Corporate Welfare for Failure Program undertaken by this Administration will continue.

Let me pose a hypothetical question: You are on a boat in the middle of the ocean. Somebody, either through stupidity or greed or any reason at all, puts a hole in the bottom of the boat. Do you think the proper response is to let the boat sink in order not to reward the person who put the hole in the boat? Or is the proper answer to patch up the hole and then worry about the proper punishment to the hole puncher?

No one wants to reward failure. But we are not in a case where letting the natrual, Darwinian forces of the market is going to fix things. If AIG fails, Joe's Insturance isn't going to step up to take up the slack. In the banking system crashes and burns, new banks aren't going to suddenly spring up to provide a meaningful alternative. In short, there is no way of letting those who deserve to sink at this moment go down without going down with them.

There is definitly a place for takign steps against the sort of thing that brought us to this situation. However, that time is after the boat is patched and no longer sinking fast. But when you're on a boat that is filling with water, I think arguing against bailing it out is not the best survival strategy.

nice post

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
However, I appreciate the Companies identified in the article need to have their failure rewarded with tax payer money provided by the this Administration and Congress. Can you blame them?  Who knows how long the Corporate Welfare for Failure Program undertaken by this Administration will continue.

Let me pose a hypothetical question: You are on a boat in the middle of the ocean. Somebody, either through stupidity or greed or any reason at all, puts a hole in the bottom of the boat. Do you think the proper response is to let the boat sink in order not to reward the person who put the hole in the boat? Or is the proper answer to patch up the hole and then worry about the proper punishment to the hole puncher?

No one wants to reward failure. But we are not in a case where letting the natrual, Darwinian forces of the market is going to fix things. If AIG fails, Joe's Insturance isn't going to step up to take up the slack. In the banking system crashes and burns, new banks aren't going to suddenly spring up to provide a meaningful alternative. In short, there is no way of letting those who deserve to sink at this moment go down without going down with them.

There is definitly a place for takign steps against the sort of thing that brought us to this situation. However, that time is after the boat is patched and no longer sinking fast. But when you're on a boat that is filling with water, I think arguing against bailing it out is not the best survival strategy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69
Lets say the boat is the Titanic and its got a large hole in it from an iceburg.  Do we spend lots of $$$$ on a losing effort to keep the boat afloat. ;)  Because any single patch job would not be able to keep her afloat until it were to reach port.  It would require several patch jobs over and over again costing well more then the ships worth.

quote:

Lets say the boat is the Titanic and its got a large hole in it from an iceburg. Do we spend lots of $$$$ on a losing effort to keep the boat afloat. ;) Because any single patch job would not be able to keep her afloat until it were to reach port. It would require several patch jobs over and over again costing well more then the ships worth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

Yes, Shake..we spend what we have to spend on patching it because if we don't a whole lot of people who had no responsibility for the hole in the boat are going to drown if we don't. Sometimes you have to view a problem in terms of solutions instead of assigning blame.

(in reply to MasterShake69)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

Lets say the boat is the Titanic and its got a large hole in it from an iceburg. Do we spend lots of $$$$ on a losing effort to keep the boat afloat. ;) Because any single patch job would not be able to keep her afloat until it were to reach port. It would require several patch jobs over and over again costing well more then the ships worth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

Yes, Shake..we spend what we have to spend on patching it because if we don't Ita whole lot of people who had no responsibility for the hole in the boat are going to drown if we don't. Sometimes you have to view a problem in terms of solutions instead of assigning blame.

Well, thank you for your perspective...it almost sounds as if you crossed the aisle. 
It does seem that the ideologues here who attack Bush and continuing the big lie that he blamed Sadaam for being part of the 9/11 horror....never showing any words by the former President actually stating that as a case for "regime change".  Of course there are numerous instances of his
comments on contacts between terror organizations and the Sadaam government:

)Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraq intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in aquiring poisons and gases. We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner." - President's Radio Address, White House (2/8/2003)
 
"Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network, headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner." - President Bush: "World Can Rise to This Moment", White House (2/6/2003)

"We will consult, but let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm for the safety of our people, and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him."  State of the Union, 2003
 
These are the words of a President who is not an "accomodator" as we have now in the White House.  These are the words of a President who spoke straight from the shoulder, not elequently as Barack can deliver a speech that brings chills up seasoned reporters legs, but "truth".  There was never a time when George Bush spoke out of one side of his mouth while his Chief of Staff and other drones continued the most radical social agenda this country has seen since the founders declared they would no longer bow to the King of England.  Where are the lies, the untrue statements such as we see today, from distorting the number of people who will benefit from lower tax rates (including 45 million who today do not pay taxes), to raising his chin as he so often does so often, and says with such determination: "I will go through EVERY piece of legislation, line by line, and remove those...well..you know the rest of the story.  Instead he is going to sign yet another $400 billion government spending bill (our money) that includes 9,000 earmarks!  So much for truth in politics..so much for "change"....

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69
Lets say the boat is the Titanic and its got a large hole in it from an iceburg. Do we spend lots of $$$$ on a losing effort to keep the boat afloat. ;) Because any single patch job would not be able to keep her afloat until it were to reach port. It would require several patch jobs over and over again costing well more then the ships worth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
Yes, Shake..we spend what we have to spend on patching it because if we don't a whole lot of people who had no responsibility for the hole in the boat are going to drown if we don't. Sometimes you have to view a problem in terms of solutions instead of assigning blame.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Oh great, now I have to worry about the Dems being in bed with Big Business? Shit, I knew there was not much difference between the two parties. So basically Big Business is willing to support which ever party gives them the money?

quote:

The 'ship' is already on the bottom. Any salvage effort is counterproductive to moving forward and 'winning' a war. Every war has casualties, if CitiBank, AIG, GM, or Bank of America loom as large metaphorically as the Arizona they'll make great memorials to this era as the Arizona does to its era, still 'commissioned' while sitting on the bottom of Pearl Harbor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
The Arizona sake just like the Titanic, except you can still see it. Why not on December 8th, 1941 spend all the resources possible to raise it, refit it, and get that old ship floating again versus spending the same money putting a modern destroyer class on the water to go to war? Keep the metaphor going - include in the salvage effort the removal and 'proper' burial of every innocent sailor victim. Who cares how much it costs or how many other lives are lost in the effort. The Arizona was a proud ship and no expense should be spared, no alternative reasoning or process considered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
Well, far be it from me to break a good metaphor. But the ship hasn't sunk yet. We have a big damn hole in the boat, but we have had holes before and managed to get out of it without ripping down everything and starting from scratch.

Of course, if you have some hidden idea of how to rip it all down and build it up better from scratch, by all means share it. Because, frankly, all I hear being bandied about is isolationism. a dismantling of the societal safety net and a return to the good old days of J.P Morgan and his fellow robber barons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
However, I appreciate the Companies identified in the article need to have their failure rewarded with tax payer money provided by the this Administration and Congress. Can you blame them?  Who knows how long the Corporate Welfare for Failure Program undertaken by this Administration will continue.

Let me pose a hypothetical question: You are on a boat in the middle of the ocean. Somebody, either through stupidity or greed or any reason at all, puts a hole in the bottom of the boat. Do you think the proper response is to let the boat sink in order not to reward the person who put the hole in the boat? Or is the proper answer to patch up the hole and then worry about the proper punishment to the hole puncher?

No one wants to reward failure. But we are not in a case where letting the natrual, Darwinian forces of the market is going to fix things. If AIG fails, Joe's Insturance isn't going to step up to take up the slack. In the banking system crashes and burns, new banks aren't going to suddenly spring up to provide a meaningful alternative. In short, there is no way of letting those who deserve to sink at this moment go down without going down with them.

There is definitly a place for takign steps against the sort of thing that brought us to this situation. However, that time is after the boat is patched and no longer sinking fast. But when you're on a boat that is filling with water, I think arguing against bailing it out is not the best survival strategy.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: awmslave

The article (intentionally?) puts wrong emphasis. GOP is not against businesses but they oppose corruption: rewarding failure, making profits private losses public, departure from market principles etc... the usual arguments against Bush-Obama approach.

Owner59:

Where you been that last 8 years? How was the weather there?

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

quote:

I prefer money going to successful people and industries to invest in creating a modern financial institution. I think, and see, that the policy of rewarding failure only generates more and disincentives any success.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Just two questions: How much collateral damage are you willing to accept to make sure that only the "worthy" get helped? Do you really believe that only the greedy, stupid and those deserving of destruction are going to go down with the ship?


< Message edited by SpinnerofTales -- 3/9/2009 7:37:15 PM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou


LOL, I take my big knife jab the idiot in the throat that made the hole and shove is head in the hole. It will hold until we make landfall. Or if you prefer, I take my knife jab him the throat, skin him, and use his flesh to seal the the leak. wittling his bones into make shift nails. And being here on the boat with out food, we feast on the dearly departeds flesh, while have a blood washed orgy.