Did you even read the article?
Poll
Since joining BF2S's D&ST, have your political views strayed to the...
| Far Left | 9% | 9% - 6 | ||||
| Left | 7% | 7% - 5 | ||||
| Moderate Left | 19% | 19% - 12 | ||||
| Center (more or less) | 26% | 26% - 17 | ||||
| Moderate Right | 9% | 9% - 6 | ||||
| Right | 19% | 19% - 12 | ||||
| Far Right | 7% | 7% - 5 | ||||
| Total: 63 | ||||||
serious economic downturn is generally not "standard practice"lowing wrote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123375514020647787.htmlSpark wrote:
No, he hasn't. A cap - a high one - is not even close.He has told private companies what it will pay their CEO's
2 points....
yes he has
what is govt. doing bailing out private companies as a standard practice? Compitition is what the free market is about, not govt. bailouts with strings attached.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Funny how someone would link to an article that doesn't address the argument they're trying to present, and instead shows the subject of their argument to be of sound and rational thinking.
Thats liberal talk.Jaekus wrote:
Funny how someone would link to an article that doesn't address the argument they're trying to present, and instead shows the subject of their argument to be of sound and rational thinking.
Fuck Israel
Nobody hates you or your posts lowing ... we had not spend so much time debating with you if we did ... you have to differenciate between opinions and the person behind it ... we may not agree with you post and may even think your reasons is idiotic at times but that doesn't mean we think you are an idiot ... big difference ... in the heat of battle the tongue may slip but I'm sure you are aware of this ...lowing wrote:
and to think it all started by me simply questioning "neoliberal".Varegg wrote:
Since lowing entered the thread the majority of the debate has been about terminology ...11 Bravo wrote:
since when? o rite cuz it is lowing.
Problem is, this forum is so full of irratational hate for my posts, or maybe even me, that I can't say anything with out it being attacked.
I could say the sky is blue and there would be eleven bravo calling me a racist ( and insisting I prove him wrong ) ruis would dissect the statement into 4 different arguments and insist I define sky and blue, and that other idiot, who knows what he would say, something brilliant I am sure. It is all getting alittle rediculous.
And we're past rediculous some pages ago I agree
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
How can say that when he pointed it out very clearly on this very page ???11 Bravo wrote:
none of you do.Dilbert_X wrote:
The point is lowing never changes his mind about anything.
15 pages on I would have thought that was clear.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
It is more than a loan, the govt. bought part of GM. Govt. has gotten involved in private business. dictating to them on private business matters within the company.Dilbert_X wrote:
The only string is they have to pay the money back....
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-05 07:07:10)
They could have nationalised it or let them fold.lowing wrote:
It is more than a loan, the govt. bought part of GM. Govt. has gotten involved in private business. dictating to them on private business matters within the company.Dilbert_X wrote:
The only string is they have to pay the money back....
Seems the least bad option in the circumstances TBH.
Fuck Israel
ok....Varegg wrote:
How can say that when he pointed it out very clearly on this very page ???11 Bravo wrote:
none of you do.Dilbert_X wrote:
The point is lowing never changes his mind about anything.
15 pages on I would have thought that was clear.
Because GM would've closed down, making thousands of people unemployed.
They capped/want to cap salaries so execs can't use the money given to save the company to instead pay themselves, being considered "exceptional" aid, as per the link you provided.
They capped/want to cap salaries so execs can't use the money given to save the company to instead pay themselves, being considered "exceptional" aid, as per the link you provided.
Last edited by Jaekus (2010-05-05 07:16:23)
missed trhe point.. I really do not care what anyone on this forum thinks of me or my posts. Point is, there is very little debating and more personal attacks and insults and only because I said it and nothing to do with the message.Varegg wrote:
Nobody hates you or your posts lowing ... we had not spend so much time debating with you if we did ... you have to differenciate between opinions and the person behind it ... we may not agree with you post and may even think your reasons is idiotic at times but that doesn't mean we think you are an idiot ... big difference ... in the heat of battle the tongue may slip but I'm sure you are aware of this ...lowing wrote:
and to think it all started by me simply questioning "neoliberal".Varegg wrote:
Since lowing entered the thread the majority of the debate has been about terminology ...
Problem is, this forum is so full of irratational hate for my posts, or maybe even me, that I can't say anything with out it being attacked.
I could say the sky is blue and there would be eleven bravo calling me a racist ( and insisting I prove him wrong ) ruis would dissect the statement into 4 different arguments and insist I define sky and blue, and that other idiot, who knows what he would say, something brilliant I am sure. It is all getting alittle rediculous.
And we're past rediculous some pages ago I agree
well i would point out that without it GM would not exist.lowing wrote:
It is more than a loan, the govt. bought part of GM. Govt. has gotten involved in private business. dictating to them on private business matters within the company.Dilbert_X wrote:
The only string is they have to pay the money back....
and plus... dictating on matters such as?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
When you go to the lenght of making a point out of other members hating you and your posts you do care ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
GM shouldn't exist. In the US, govt. should not interfere in competition.Spark wrote:
well i would point out that without it GM would not exist.lowing wrote:
It is more than a loan, the govt. bought part of GM. Govt. has gotten involved in private business. dictating to them on private business matters within the company.Dilbert_X wrote:
The only string is they have to pay the money back....
and plus... dictating on matters such as?
Dicatating.........salaries, the opening and closing of dealships etc....
It's the government's job to look after the people. That's what they did.
I would think you know better than that....my lack of reporting any of it should indicate I do not care. My point was the lack of quality responses to what I say or ask, substitued with the distraction of personal attacks and opinion.Varegg wrote:
When you go to the lenght of making a point out of other members hating you and your posts you do care ...
It is the govts. job to ensure the freedom for us to look after ourselves.Jaekus wrote:
It's the government's job to look after the people. That's what they did.
Oh spare me your idealistic diatribe and get in the real world.lowing wrote:
It is the govts. job to ensure the freedom for us to look after ourselves.Jaekus wrote:
It's the government's job to look after the people. That's what they did.
That is the real world in the US..I really am sorry if you feel like you can not make it through life without the govt. taking care of you. I feel differently. Hense my problem with the growing entitlement of govt. dependency...Jaekus wrote:
Oh spare me your idealistic diatribe and get in the real world.lowing wrote:
It is the govts. job to ensure the freedom for us to look after ourselves.Jaekus wrote:
It's the government's job to look after the people. That's what they did.
I am not surprised however that you would. Though it makes me wanna puke to hear you actually admitting it. YOU are part of the problem. not the solution
personal responsibility in exchange for govt. dependency...go figure.
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-05 19:49:58)
and that "every single post" bs is something you yourself have refused to accept as a backing up any claim in the past. so, until you show me proof that I redefined racism anywhere here, youve got nothing to stand on.lowing wrote:
my style of argument? By mean asking you to qualify your accusations of racism? how outrageous!eleven bravo wrote:
because you sure couldnt come up with anything to back up your nonsense. my logic though, its funny you should say that because Ive been using your style of argument this entire time, even directly quoting you.
you ask the how you have redefined the term so I offer every single post you have made where you have used the term out of context from the definition..Sorry if you don't think this is proof.
again lowing, what is so hard about pointing out exactly where I redefined a term? really, if its "every single post" surely you could highlight a senteance or two for me.
Tu Stultus Es
you have done so in every single post you have used the word racist against me. You have not used it in context with the definition, in order to do so, you would have to have used in reference to my claims that my race is superior to another in any context, and since I have made no such claims, you calling me a racist is unfounded. I will not entertain this distraction any farther.eleven bravo wrote:
and that "every single post" bs is something you yourself have refused to accept as a backing up any claim in the past. so, until you show me proof that I redefined racism anywhere here, youve got nothing to stand on.lowing wrote:
my style of argument? By mean asking you to qualify your accusations of racism? how outrageous!eleven bravo wrote:
because you sure couldnt come up with anything to back up your nonsense. my logic though, its funny you should say that because Ive been using your style of argument this entire time, even directly quoting you.
you ask the how you have redefined the term so I offer every single post you have made where you have used the term out of context from the definition..Sorry if you don't think this is proof.
again lowing, what is so hard about pointing out exactly where I redefined a term? really, if its "every single post" surely you could highlight a senteance or two for me.
example?lowing wrote:
you have done so in every single post you have used the word racist against me. You have not used it in context with the definition, in order to do so, you would have to have used in reference to my claims that my race is superior to another in any context, and since I have made no such claims, you calling me a racist is unfounded. I will not entertain this distraction any farther.eleven bravo wrote:
and that "every single post" bs is something you yourself have refused to accept as a backing up any claim in the past. so, until you show me proof that I redefined racism anywhere here, youve got nothing to stand on.lowing wrote:
my style of argument? By mean asking you to qualify your accusations of racism? how outrageous!
you ask the how you have redefined the term so I offer every single post you have made where you have used the term out of context from the definition..Sorry if you don't think this is proof.
again lowing, what is so hard about pointing out exactly where I redefined a term? really, if its "every single post" surely you could highlight a senteance or two for me.
Tu Stultus Es
lowing wrote:
What a bunch of bullshit. not surprised however. Get back with me when you dig up at least 1 of "ALL the posts I have ever written"....
Tu Stultus Es
How is that? Why private companies can't do that for us?lowing wrote:
It is the govts. job to ensure the freedom for us to look after ourselves.
do you really need one? You insist I am a racist based on what I post? This is a fact. http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 6#p3075346eleven bravo wrote:
example?lowing wrote:
you have done so in every single post you have used the word racist against me. You have not used it in context with the definition, in order to do so, you would have to have used in reference to my claims that my race is superior to another in any context, and since I have made no such claims, you calling me a racist is unfounded. I will not entertain this distraction any farther.eleven bravo wrote:
and that "every single post" bs is something you yourself have refused to accept as a backing up any claim in the past. so, until you show me proof that I redefined racism anywhere here, youve got nothing to stand on.
again lowing, what is so hard about pointing out exactly where I redefined a term? really, if its "every single post" surely you could highlight a senteance or two for me.
Have I ever posted anything that decrees my race superior to any other for any reason ( the definition to racist)? Nope.