greg334
Veteran Expediter
OK So it is like Obama's administration coming in and messing with a bankruptcy's proceedings for the benefit of Fiat and the UAW. When we have a president who looks at the landscape of American business and sees only a few types of people, then we have a problem but when we have a congress going along with it, then we have a serious problem.
BUT see here is the problem, the small business person, like me does not have to deal with most of these regulations - even if I am manufacturing parts or doing something else. I have to worry about how to deal with the changes to the economy and taxes in the near term to ensure I can stay in business. The ambiguity that I have to deal with stops me from spending because I will either need to have the money to hold on through harder times or use it to adjust my business if there is an increase in taxes or some other form of taxation. Having regulations from the EPA on Coal plants or having new truck emission regulations is not a business killer but can put my business in the red to adjust for those added costs.
The bottom line comes down to a couple things, first and most important is there is no real direction to the country, meaning that the ambiguity I speak of is caused by a lack of leadership within the entire government which directly affects the economy and my bottom line. The second is that it is my form of business, with my 15 employees and my little foot print on the big pond that matters more than a GM or Ford in the real sense. My form of business makes up more than 90% of the businesses in the country and forms the backbone of the economy.
You and others keep harping on the capitalism thing but you know there is an issue with it. Seeing that capitalism is still moving us ahead and there isn't much being done to kill it - which means either everyone has to be a closed shop or we have to deal with 60% taxes, there isn't much killing it as a whole. On the other hand, a few key industries are being targeted as being bad, Energy for one but in that case, this has been a battle going on longer than any one of use has been alive.
Well first off you have it all twisted around. This isn't a loan, it is a loan guarantee, which means that unlike GM and Chrysler, the loans made to Solyndra by the banks were backed by the US government. Those who invested were not given any guarantee which means they lost their money too. The tax payer will not get a dime out of this as much as they don't get a dime out of picking up pensions for those whose company p*ssed the pension money away.
There ain't no theory about it, the stock market is a speculation market based on two things - emotion of the players in the market and outside forces. No other place can someone make a million and lose it in a matter of minutes. Those two factors are important to understand, the emotion of the market is most of the time driven by greed and envy and the outside forces have to do with a lot of things ranging from economical issues to company itself - meaning their viability to make a profit in the long term.
Best return for your money?
Sure it is when it works to your advantage but it is also a risk capital market where the risk is greater than smaller return markets like bonds. Nothing backs stocks other than those factors I mentioned and no one seems to get that if you put money into the market, then you can lose it and lost it big. GM is a perfect example, and so is KMart - those two companies had lifetime investors in them and the government came in and screwed them so who is supposed to pick up the loses those people incurred?
The government?
NOPE no one.
So if someone has a big lose in my 401k, it isn't my problem because I practice prudent investment ideals - it is their problem. IF they complain about it, so what, let them because unless the government wants to take over all the markets and come up with some guarantee that ensures the 401k holders a way to recoup their cost, then we need to just live with it.
By the way, it is funny that you and other talk about capitalism but then try to put into perspective the need to maintain the stock market like this with a false sense of security and a bubble created to maintain that security.
Is that really capitalism?
Well all true to a point, what we need is a way to rid ourselves of those in office before an election takes place. We do need a recall amendment for congress and repealing the 17th amendment. THIS will give us the voice we need to get back.
The 2010 is an election where we fired a lot of people, and as Marco Rubio said it isn't time to say that they were elected on their own merits - they were not.
Obama didn't do that, congress did and they did it in an unconventional way. I am critical of those who keep claiming that they will repeal it when they get into office but it is actually too late to do that. Let's be realisitic, those conservatives who screamed about this didn't do a thing to stop it so how can they be conservatives?
Well first nope he has not gotten what he wanted, look at the record and what was stopped by dems themselves. Second Obama care was passed using procedural methods that should not have been allowed but again I didn't see the outrage in this, did you? AND I don't mean on conservative talk radio.
The Patriot Act
Although I support parts of it, it was passed without real debate and renewed.
There are others, like the renewal of the FISA court and strengthening of the TSA and creation of DHS. Not one of them has had a direct result securing in our security.
Really no sympathy?
How about some of the weather underground or Patty Hearst?
We tend to forget the mail box bombings or the attacks on the post office with people in them, right?
The public didn't care until 9/11 and still they can't connect the two things together because they are conditioned to feel a certain way about the country and this comes from that pivotal date of 1968.
Well I agree it is a problem, but it is fed by both sides and this is the problem I have - when you have two different groups of people claiming to be the right one for the country and both act the same, it does not matter what the media does, the people get muttled and go along with the crowd. This forum is a good example, many will claim conservatism is the best thing and many agree with it while others see the movement as it is defined by talk radio and others on the Internet as the same as liberalism.
Well this is a problem that the people have to put a stop to it, one way is to limit the amount of money one can use in a campaign and the other is term limits with a cap on how much one person can do in government.