We bailed out Chrysler 20 years and they still produce crappy cars and are begging for more of our money.We bailed out the likes of insurance giant AIG and superbank Citigroup with an inconceivably large $700 billion and we've seen no benefit.
Indeed the government admits to not being sure where the already spent $350 billion of it went. Outside observers believe it was spent not on adding liquidity but on mergers and acquisitions and to pay employee bonuses.
Indeed the government admits to not being sure where the already spent $350 billion of it went. Outside observers believe it was spent not on adding liquidity but on mergers and acquisitions and to pay employee bonuses.
We're bailing out the automakers when, even the U.S.'s best hope--the $40,000 green Chevy Volt will outsell the $22,000 Toyota Prius seems to this writer like a pipe dream.
And now President-elect Obama wants to spend a trillion (Yes, a trillion) dollars of our money on a bunch of government-mandated projects. (Among proposals on the table: an organized crime museum in Las Vegas--Can't the mafia afford to fund that?) the alternative energy sloppy thousandths that I've previously written about, and lots of mass transit aimed at forcing us out of our cars and into time-wasting, sardined-in public transportation.
And you and I are just going to lie back and take it. Indeed, America will be reveling in Obama's inauguration. They'll gyrate in joy over the promised "change." We'll see how long they revel. Obama will print lots of dollars that will trigger inflation; he'll raise taxes on the middle class (Yes, renege on his promise and raise taxes,) reward the unworthy with money taken from the worthy, and we WILL become a third-world nation.
2 comments:
There was a time when you were admitting that the bailout was already up to 8 T and running.
But of course, to admit to that scale of epic bailout would be to admit that the number of blog tags linking bailout or bailouts to Obama and democrats is interesting. I have not seen any article tagged with Bush or Republicans that also carries bailout tags on this blog, for instance.
So, the new talking point is to blame Obama and the democrats for all of the financial spending, and ignore the research on the real size and timing of the bailout?
Most excellent. The little people can be convinced by next election cycle that the bailout was a democrat idea, pushed by a democrat administration, and that there were no vast payouts last spring orchestrated by Repub appointees without ever approaching Congress.
Yes Bush and Paulson supported the bailouts. But nearly all Democrats in Congress supported it while most Republicans were against it or, in their own words, "held their noses" and voted for it. Bailouts are, in general and in this specific case, much more a Democrat-backed "solution."
Republicans have a large Libertarian wing, which find bailouts anathema.
Post a Comment