• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dealers Still Waiting For 'Clunker' Cash...

Truth Detector said:
Change the "people" to "I" and you have a factual claim. :rofl
Click to expand...

Still waiting for backup to your claim that I am trying to pass opinion as fact instead of admitting openly that what I am sharing is opinion. I can only assume that the reason you haven't is that I am correct in my post and that you are in fact the one guilty of what you are accusing...Hypocrisy, how....fitting
 
theangryamerican said:
News, Weather and Sports for Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Minnesota and Iowa

This is the government you want running your healthcare? :shock:
Click to expand...
-
Let me EDGIMATKATE YOU.
A bill for healthcare will be passed and it will be passed with Repubs aproval.

-
Did the one that RUINED MY Country :toilet:bush:toilet: run this Country better???
**** NO!!!:roll:
Hes the one that created the mess that we are in now!
-
Just another that the Sergeant has shed the truth on!!!!
-
BTW: Do you have a job???
:yt
 
Last edited:
Midwest Lib said:
Please show me where I have made my opinions to be fact...In fact i usually lead in things such as "In my opinion" or "I believe"

Thanks for your input though:2wave:
Click to expand...

Really? Let's review most of your comments on this thread, show me where you claimed that it was "in your opinion" first:

Midwest Lib said:
The only point I am trying to make is that things COULD be worse, and while this program COULD be a bad idea, there is no way to know that for sure, so while I support your right to disagree with it, I don't agree with your blatantly saying it won't work with no way of knowing.
Click to expand...

Pure speculation with zero data to support it.

Midwest Lib said:
It's a problem when American companies generating BILLIONS in revenue move to off shore operations in the Caymans to get around paying taxes, while foolishly spending both shareholder and now taxpayer money on executive perks.
Click to expand...

Pure hyperbole with zero data to support it.

Midwest Lib said:
The problem that I have is the very obvious class warfare that is happening, where the rich get richer, and the poor continuously get poorer. Corporations are given too much power and as you know "Absolute power corrupts absolutely"
Click to expand...

False statement with zero data to support it.

Midwest Lib said:
but as it stands right now, corporate greed DOES stand in the way of all those goals and instead perpetually just benefits the people at the top, because it's too easy for them not too.
Click to expand...

False hyperbolic statement with zero data to support it.

Midwest Lib said:
For example. From 2002 Halliburton paid 0 dollars in federal taxes for four of five years?
Click to expand...

A claim that requires support; speculative at best that any company claiming profits paid zero dollars in taxes. But it is your claim, I challenge you to support it.

Midwest Lib said:
Dennis Kozlowski, disgraced CEO of Tyco International, paid himself 300 million a year (which by the way, he'd incorporated in Bermuda to avoid paying pesky U.S. taxes)
Click to expand...

I am not sure there are any facts to support this claim.

Midwest Lib said:
while his company tanked losing shareholders 80 BILLION in just his last year in control. His shareholders were also billed for a 30 million dollar, fifteen thousand square foot estate in Boca Raton, an almost 17 million dollar home on fifth avenue (plus approximately 15 million in renovations) and even a home in New York for his EX, i repeat EX wife.
Click to expand...

This one is begging for a point.

Midwest Lib said:
This is just one of MANY examples of how executive power has become just too great, and how greedy and huge corporations have become. This was the reason anti-trust legislation was created in the first place, although now, altogether ignored, for all intents and purposes.
Click to expand...

False arguments while selectively singling out two companies to make a broad false generalization of all corporations.

Midwest Lib said:
You are absolutely right, you can support this OPINION and more power to you. We are supporting our opinion. I at least have the ability to say I may be wrong, you are just arrogant in your absolute certainty that you are correct.
Click to expand...

This comment is comedic; I am trying to see where there is anything for me to admit I am wrong about.

My argument is nothing but factual; $1.6 trillion deficit and over 6,000,000 jobs lost. Obama's program based on the last 180 days has been an abject failure and we continue to shed hundreds of thousands of jobs every month.

Okay, I am still searching for: "In fact i usually lead in things such as "In my opinion" or "I believe."

NEXT! :rofl
 
Last edited:
Midwest Lib said:
Still waiting for backup to your claim that I am trying to pass opinion as fact instead of admitting openly that what I am sharing is opinion. I can only assume that the reason you haven't is that I am correct in my post and that you are in fact the one guilty of what you are accusing...Hypocrisy, how....fitting
Click to expand...

See above :2wave:
 
Hey TD: U.S. private job losses down, factory orders up - Yahoo! News

Private employers cut 298,000 job positions last month, according to the ADP Employer Services report, jointly developed with Macroeconomic Advisers LLC.

That beat the 360,000 job losses seen in July, a month in which ADP initially said the economy shed 371,000 jobs.

...

Outplacement consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc said planned layoffs at U.S. firms fell 21 percent in August, boosting hopes for improved consumer spending in the coming months.

...

A separate report from the Labor Department showed U.S. nonfarm productivity rose at a 6.6 annual rate in the second quarter, the biggest increase since the third quarter of 2003.

Other data showed new orders at U.S. factories rose 1.3 percent in July after gaining 0.9 percent the prior month, lifted primarily by transportation and civilian aircraft orders.
Click to expand...
 
F107HyperSabr said:
The government will not be running our healthcare, we who have always ran your healthcare will be. Who are we ??? We are your friendly healthcare insurance companies. We are the only ones who are qualified to run healthcare. We know how to deny claims, to raise premiuns, to impose restrictions on which drugs we will pay for, which docs will be in the Networks that we set up for you in your zip code, we tell the docs how much we will reimburse them and for what and when we will do it. OOOPS I forgot the damn government Insurance Commisioners they suck !! They make us pay claims within 18 to 24 months from date of service !!! CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT ?

The darn government is telling US, the private insurance companies that we have to pay you guys on time !!! That is SOCIALISTIC !!! It is not the government's business who we pay or how much. We the private insurance companies should have the right to decide whether we want to pay you, how much and when. We and we alone should decide if we want to insure you and for how long and we should be able to charge what the hell we want. No one should interfere !!!!
Click to expand...

Based on the above rant, it is painfully obvious that you know nothing of the topic of insurance.

But let's look at the fallacy of such rants; (1) insurance companies minimize personal risk based on actuarial tables and pooling resources; (2) insurance companies are also heavily regulated and in many states, competition is minimized due to bad legislation; (3) insurance companies employ hundreds of thousands of Americans in good paying jobs; (4) insurance companies reinvest their profits to provide capital for development and construction projects; (5) insurance company profits are taxed which helps fund those Liberal programs that are so near and dear to you; (6) insurance companies reinvest in their local communities providing youth programs/sports and many other humanitarian endeavors as do their employees; (7) without insurance companies, the risk of a major catastrophic occurrence is born by the individual.

There are many other points to this; but the main theme to demagogue the insurance companies with hyperbolic BS like you do doesn't serve anything to advance an honest intellectual debate as to the solutions to the high cost of healthcare.

When your entire debate is a diatribe to turn your opponents into evil "things" to be despised, it is painfully obvious you are uninformed.

I am not surprised that the White House and Liberal Democrats prefer to engage in this level of discourse where class envy is their primary argument; but it is a patently weak position and serves NOTHING to advance honest intellectual dialogue to seek a solution.

When your only argument is that Insurance companies are greedy and evil, and only Government can provide cost effective healthcare, it is no wonder so many Americans are scratching their heads and chanting; "Kill the Bill!"

It is transparent and even people who are less informed see through it.
 
Last edited:
Truth Detector said:
:rofl So you are making my point and think this supports your hyperbolic nonsensical effort to defend Obamanomics?

Here, let me make it plainer for you:

"Private employers cut 298,000 job positions last month"

"360,000 job losses seen in July"

Carry on. :rofl:2wave:
Click to expand...

So losing fewer jobs is bad now? And increased production and orders for goods is not worth mentioning? Keep spinning away, but this is good news.
 
FACTS:

Deficit is estimated to be $1.6 trillion this year and over $11 trillion in the next decade.

Jobs shed since December 2008: 4.5 Million

Unemployment rate in December 2008: 7.1%

Unemployment rate July 2009: 9.7%

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

GDP: Down 6.4%
News Release: Gross Domestic Product

I am sorry; I don't see how anyone can argue that Cash for Clunkers has done ANYTHING to make this dire economic situation better.

As a matter of fact, I am at a loss how anyone can think this will do anything when this program amounts to taking money from one group and giving it to another group (still unidentified so we are printing/borrowing to pay for it).
 
Last edited:
Truth Detector said:
FACTS:

Deficit is estimated to be $1.6 trillion this year and over $11 trillion in the next decade.

Jobs shed since December 2008: 4.5 Million

Unemployment rate in December 2008: 7.1%

Unemployment rate July 2009: 9.7%

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

GDP: Down 6.4%
News Release: Gross Domestic Product

I am sorry; I don't see how anyone can argue that Cash for Clunkers has done ANYTHING to make this dire economic situation batter.

As a matter of fact, I am at a loss how anyone can think this will do anything when this program amounts to taking money from one group and giving it to another group (still unidentified so we are printing/borrowing to pay for it).
Click to expand...

FACTS:

That all was mostly inevitable coming into the year.

Things improving, while bad for you, is good for the country.

Nothing you said disproved what I said.
 
Sergeant Stinger1 said:
-
Let me EDGIMATKATE YOU.
A bill for healthcare will be passed and it will be passed with Repubs aproval.

-
Did the one that RUINED MY Country :toilet:bush:toilet: run this Country better???
**** NO!!!:roll:
Hes the one that created the mess that we are in now!
-
Just another that the Sergeant has shed the truth on!!!!
-
BTW: Do you have a job???
:yt
Click to expand...

Let's square several things away here.

First, I have absolutely NO problem with healthcare reform, zip, zero, nada. The system as it exists is far from ideal, BUT the proposed changes are NOT the way to fix things.

Second, why bring the former administration in to this? CARS was not their program, neither is the current attempt for healthcare reform. I'll clue you in, I disagreed just as much with many of Bush's policies as I do with the current administration. No Bush worship here.

Regardless of WHO created the mess, the current government is not even close to taking steps to correct ANYTHING.


...and yes, I have a job. :2wave:

Now excuse me while I go wash that "truth" off that you shed on me.
 
Redress said:
So losing fewer jobs is bad now? And increased production and orders for goods is not worth mentioning? Keep spinning away, but this is good news.
Click to expand...

I don't know how anyone can argue that “cash for clunkers” allowed us to lose "fewer" jobs or that it is a good thing when the number of jobs lost every single month is in the hundreds of thousands. I find that argument stunning. What do you think happens now that the program has ended? Do you honestly think that consumers will continue buying cars? REALLY?

Increased production is meaningless when unemployment keeps skyrocketing, consumers keep hording money and GDP is in the negative 6.4% range.

I am stunned that you are still desperately arguing that programs like this are helping. Tell me something; who do you think is going to pay for the billions being doled out to people to buy cars; where do you think this money, will come from.

Here's another more pertinent question you and others desperately defending the rabid stupidity of this administration need to answer; who do you think is going to pay for this $10 to $11 trillion deficit and what will be the economic impact?

If you think that YOU and every single American in this country will be unaffected and that it will not have a profound impact on the future economic health of this nation, then you are wallowing in an amazing level willful denial.
 
Redress said:
FACTS:

That all was mostly inevitable coming into the year.

Things improving, while bad for you, is good for the country.

Nothing you said disproved what I said.
Click to expand...

More hyperbolic nonsense; everything I posted disputes your silly and desperate argument that "cars for clunkers" and similar Government boondoggles are making the difference while actually doing little or NOTHING to sustain employment.

You conveniently ignore the FACTS I posted in order to continue to make yourself look foolish. Answer any of my questions with a modicum of integrity and honesty and the OBVIOUS will become readily apparent to you.

Until then, by all means continue your silly hyperbolic tirades about how I want what is bad for the country while you, supporting the very programs sinking this country, think losing hundreds of thousands of jobs per month while sinking future generations in trillions of debt is somehow good news.

:2wave:
 
Truth Detector said:
Based on the above rant, it is painfully obvious that you know nothing of the topic of insurance.

But let's look at the fallacy of such rants; (1) insurance companies minimize personal risk based on actuarial tables and pooling resources; (2) insurance companies are also heavily regulated and in many states, competition is minimized due to bad legislation; (3) insurance companies employ hundreds of thousands of Americans in good paying jobs; (4) insurance companies reinvest their profits to provide capital for development and construction projects; (5) insurance company profits are taxed which helps fund those Liberal programs that are so near and dear to you; (6) insurance companies reinvest in their local communities providing youth programs/sports and many other humanitarian endeavors as do their employees; (7) without insurance companies, the risk of a major catastrophic occurrence is born by the individual.

There are many other points to this; but the main theme to demagogue the insurance companies with hyperbolic BS like you do doesn't serve anything to advance an honest intellectual debate as to the solutions to the high cost of healthcare.

When your entire debate is a diatribe to turn your opponents into evil "things" to be despised, it is painfully obvious you are uninformed.

I am not surprised that the White House and Liberal Democrats prefer to engage in this level of discourse where class envy is their primary argument; but it is a patently weak position and serves NOTHING to advance honest intellectual dialogue to seek a solution.

When your only argument is that Insurance companies are greedy and evil, and only Government can provide cost effective healthcare, it is no wonder so many Americans are scratching their heads and chanting; "Kill the Bill!"

It is transparent and even people who are less informed see through it.
Click to expand...

WAFJYA - I forgot more about insurance in an afternoon than you will obviously ever know. I won't even bother to tell you what my credentials are in the insurance industry becasue I seriously doubt that you would comprehend them. You also show a total lack of humor.

Why don't you try to dispute the opinion that I wrote with either your own or with some facts if you can find any instead of resorting to childish personal attacks such as attempting with feable and futile means to dimish what I wrote.
 
Truth Detector said:
Based on the above rant, it is painfully obvious that you know nothing of the topic of insurance.

But let's look at the fallacy of such rants; (1) insurance companies minimize personal risk based on actuarial tables and pooling resources; (2) insurance companies are also heavily regulated and in many states, competition is minimized due to bad legislation; (3) insurance companies employ hundreds of thousands of Americans in good paying jobs; (4) insurance companies reinvest their profits to provide capital for development and construction projects; (5) insurance company profits are taxed which helps fund those Liberal programs that are so near and dear to you; (6) insurance companies reinvest in their local communities providing youth programs/sports and many other humanitarian endeavors as do their employees; (7) without insurance companies, the risk of a major catastrophic occurrence is born by the individual.

There are many other points to this; but the main theme to demagogue the insurance companies with hyperbolic BS like you do doesn't serve anything to advance an honest intellectual debate as to the solutions to the high cost of healthcare.

When your entire debate is a diatribe to turn your opponents into evil "things" to be despised, it is painfully obvious you are uninformed.

I am not surprised that the White House and Liberal Democrats prefer to engage in this level of discourse where class envy is their primary argument; but it is a patently weak position and serves NOTHING to advance honest intellectual dialogue to seek a solution.

When your only argument is that Insurance companies are greedy and evil, and only Government can provide cost effective healthcare, it is no wonder so many Americans are scratching their heads and chanting; "Kill the Bill!"

It is transparent and even people who are less informed see through it.
Click to expand...

Instead of playing the personal insult game booppie why don'y you learn what insurance is. It is spreading the risk of financial loss among a large group of people or entities hense reducing a loss any one participant of that group. WOW almost like SOCIALISM !!1 LOL
Therefore if you me Red, Joe 1991 , etc are part of a group of people who have insured our homes ( as an example ) with a given insurance company and one of us suffers a loss that person gets reimbursed for the loss from the pool of resources which all of us had contributed. The risk of loss for any one of us has been spread among all of us therefore one of us alone does not suffer the entire loss. Hense we would have "spread the risk". The use of acturaila tables are just some tools that we use in order to facilitate the process of spreading the risk and hopfully predicting the freequency and severity of losses.

It is true that we a shckled by the regulations od fifty staes, one district and some territories. The sad part is that we do not have real universal regulations among the states.

Yet theye are regulations regarding the levels of reserves that we need to maintain in order that we are in position to pay out when a loss occurs so that we can continue to "spread the risk". This form of regulation is actually for the good for you the policy holder to insure that when and if the time comes we will have the necessary financial resources to pay you.

We are also not stupid us insurance companies since we spread the risk among ourselves through various reinsurance arrangements so that we do not suffer fatal blows from any one event such a Katrina or Andrew.

From the health side I was not joking when I sad that we us the insurance companies are in position to administer any form of insurance which a government may impose. We can and we are already administeing government insurance such a MEDICARE, TRICARE ( MILITARY AND MILITARY RETIREES AND FAMILIES). No we don't want to lose the premium dollors and reserve and investment dollors that we can obtain from running the private insurance segment but if worse come to worse we are ready !!! We will do this just as we do it for the big boys who self insure their employees. We administaer their plan at a fee of course.

Listen do you actually think that the government came up with cost containment, or ,manged care, or case management, or drug formularies. no we did. Do you think the government came up with networks of providers ? No we did.

Why did we do this ? Because your company which is the plan sponsor asked us to reduce the premium cost that they had to pay for us to provide you coverage.

So before you go off and mouth off again about someone not knowning insurance you better think twice !!! And furthermore you are he one who jumped on the partisan wagon and ASSumed partisanship on my part. How foolish are you now!!
 
Last edited:
F107HyperSabr said:
WAFJYA - I forgot more about insurance in an afternoon than you will obviously ever know. I won't even bother to tell you what my credentials are in the insurance industry becasue I seriously doubt that you would comprehend them.
Click to expand...

I didn't see anything in TD's post that was incorrect. Since you're such the expert, I'll call your bluff. Let's hear those credentials... :roll:
 
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
The only point I am trying to make is that things COULD be worse, and while this program COULD be a bad idea, there is no way to know that for sure, so while I support your right to disagree with it, I don't agree with your blatantly saying it won't work with no way of knowing.

Pure speculation with zero data to support it.

You are absolutely right...this is speculation, and I haven't argued that...I have pointed out your arrogance in doing so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
American companies generating BILLIONS in revenue move to off shore operations in the Caymans to get around paying taxes, while foolishly spending both shareholder and now taxpayer money on executive perks.

Pure hyperbole with zero data to support it.

Is the top 25 companies good enough? Citizen Works - 25 Fortune 500 Corporations With the Most Offshore Tax-Haven Subsidiaries


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
The problem that I have is the very obvious class warfare that is happening, where the rich get richer, and the poor continuously get poorer. Corporations are given too much power and as you know "Absolute power corrupts absolutely"

False statement with zero data to support it.

Difference in private and public sector...
Benefits widen public, private workers' pay gap - USATODAY.com

Ratio between executive and worker pay...CEO pay: Redefining sky-high - Aug. 30, 2005


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
but as it stands right now, corporate greed DOES stand in the way of all those goals and instead perpetually just benefits the people at the top, because it's too easy for them not too.

False hyperbolic statement with zero data to support it.

Have given examples of many companies and multiple executives, and if necessary would happily give more, although I'm sure I would just be accused of being hyperbolic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
For example. From 2002 Halliburton paid 0 dollars in federal taxes for four of five years?
A claim that requires support; speculative at best that any company claiming profits paid zero dollars in taxes. But it is your claim, I challenge you to support it.

After further research I am not able to back this up, and withdraw my previous statement (I can admit when I am wrong)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
Dennis Kozlowski, disgraced CEO of Tyco International, paid himself 300 million a year (which by the way, he'd incorporated in Bermuda to avoid paying pesky U.S. taxes)

I am not sure there are any facts to support this claim.
The fact that he was convicted isn't enough?? [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kozlowski]Dennis Kozlowski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
while his company tanked losing shareholders 80 BILLION in just his last year in control. His shareholders were also billed for a 30 million dollar, fifteen thousand square foot estate in Boca Raton, an almost 17 million dollar home on fifth avenue (plus approximately 15 million in renovations) and even a home in New York for his EX, i repeat EX wife.

This one is begging for a point.

I think my point is quite clear...In demonstrating the atrocious spending habits on the shareholders dime, I have shown a clear example of corporate and executive greed. It's actually a fairly clear point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
This is just one of MANY examples of how executive power has become just too great, and how greedy and huge corporations have become. This was the reason anti-trust legislation was created in the first place, although now, altogether ignored, for all intents and purposes.

False arguments while selectively singling out two companies to make a broad false generalization of all corporations.


Am I saying EVERY corporation is guilty of these charges? Yes, I chose two companies because I didn't feel it necessary to waste everyone's time with more examples of clearly present greed. But please, tell me how many addition examples you would like?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midwest Lib View Post
You are absolutely right, you can support this OPINION and more power to you. We are supporting our opinion. I at least have the ability to say I may be wrong, you are just arrogant in your absolute certainty that you are correct.

This comment is comedic; I am trying to see where there is anything for me to admit I am wrong about.

My argument is nothing but factual; $1.6 trillion deficit and over 6,000,000 jobs lost. Obama's program based on the last 180 days has been an abject failure and we continue to shed hundreds of thousands of jobs every month.


You continuously miss the point. At no point have I said that you are wrong, only that it is arrogant to be so certain about something without absolute certainty. I never asked you to admit that you are wrong.


Your move...:2wave:
 
F107HyperSabr said:
WAFJYA - I forgot more about insurance in an afternoon than you will obviously ever know. I won't even bother to tell you what my credentials are in the insurance industry becasue I seriously doubt that you would comprehend them. You also show a total lack of humor.

Why don't you try to dispute the opinion that I wrote with either your own or with some facts if you can find any instead of resorting to childish personal attacks such as attempting with feable and futile means to dimish what I wrote.
Click to expand...

Correction; YOU THINK you know more about insurance in an afternoon, but you type like someone who wanders around the forum blathering your typical uninformed nonsense.

Carry on; I look forward to seeing you actually type something credible with even a slight level of intellectual honesty.
:2wave:
 
theangryamerican said:
Let's square several things away here.

First, I have absolutely NO problem with healthcare reform, zip, zero, nada. The system as it exists is far from ideal, BUT the proposed changes are NOT the way to fix things.

Second, why bring the former administration in to this? CARS was not their program, neither is the current attempt for healthcare reform. I'll clue you in, I disagreed just as much with many of Bush's policies as I do with the current administration. No Bush worship here.

Regardless of WHO created the mess, the current government is not even close to taking steps to correct ANYTHING.


...and yes, I have a job. :2wave:

Now excuse me while I go wash that "truth" off that you shed on me.
Click to expand...
-
What do you expect to happen in the few months Obama has been in office?:roll:
-
The proposed changes are not the way to fix things?
Ya, we'll believe YOU over our Gov. findings!:roll:
-
Do you really have a Job?:lol:
-
BTW: If you haven't washed up since Bush was in office then yes I agree that you should go wash up!:lol:
 
Sergeant Stinger1 said:
The proposed changes are not the way to fix things?
Ya, we'll believe YOU over our Gov. findings!:roll:
Click to expand...

I find this statement from Libruls who told everyone that Government was NOT to be trusted when Bush was in charge. Yet now with their dude in charge, Government is suddenly to be trusted.

The gullibility and lemming like willingness to suspend disbelief it takes to be a Librul is stunning to say the least.

Sergeant Stinger1 said:
BTW: If you haven't washed up since Bush was in office then yes I agree that you should go wash up!:lol:
Click to expand...

What irony considering your previous comments. By the way, it is highly unlikely you will ever be able to wash the stench away left by this Administration when they are done screwing the American people royally.

It will take at least a generation, perhaps two, to pay for the debt and deficits the current cabal of morons who are currently running our Government are running up.
 
Truth Detector said:
I find this statement from Libruls who told everyone that Government was NOT to be trusted when Bush was in charge. Yet now with their dude in charge, Government is suddenly to be trusted.
WELL every one in the WORLD now knows that bushieVoyIdiotLoser cannot be trusted so when will you get around to finding that out?
-

The gullibility and lemming like willingness to suspend disbelief it takes to be a Librul is stunning to say the least.
Duuuu, hey, yo, yo yo, I voted for McCain!!!
-



What irony considering your previous comments. By the way, it is highly unlikely you will ever be able to wash the stench away left by this Administration when they are done screwing the American people royally.
ONCE AGAIN YO YO, I voted for McCain.

It will take at least a generation, perhaps two, to pay for the debt and deficits the current cabal of morons who are currently running our Government are running up.
Click to expand...
The only MORONS are the ones that voted for bushieBoyLowlifeAmericanTroopHatter the second time.
-
BTW: The TRILLIONS bush spent in Iraq while Osama was rebuilding and is now killing American Troops more so now than when we first went into Afgain is OK???
AND the TRILLIONS he handed to HALLIBURTON with NO BID CONTRACTS is OK by U???
 
Truth Detector said:
My argument is nothing but factual; $1.6 trillion deficit and over 6,000,000 jobs lost. Obama's program based on the last 180 days has been an abject failure and we continue to shed hundreds of thousands of jobs every month.
Click to expand...

Truth Detector said:
FACTS:

Deficit is estimated to be $1.6 trillion this year and over $11 trillion in the next decade.

Jobs shed since December 2008: 4.5 Million

Unemployment rate in December 2008: 7.1%

Unemployment rate July 2009: 9.7%

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

GDP: Down 6.4%
News Release: Gross Domestic Product

I am sorry; I don't see how anyone can argue that Cash for Clunkers has done ANYTHING to make this dire economic situation better.
Click to expand...

Your entire premise; that cash for clunkers has done nothing to make the economic situation better and therefore the program has failed, is based on a non-Sequitur.

It affirms the consequent.

If the economy has gotten worse, then cash for clunkers has failed.

Cash for clunkers has failed.

Therefore the economy has gotten worse.

You can prove that the economy has gotten worse, but it would still be fallacious to think this has been caused by a failure of the cash for clunkers program. Many other factors could cause the economy to worsen other than the cash for clunkers program failing, such as overproduction, underproduction, financial crisis, etc.

It is also based on division. The economy is in decline; therefore cash for clunkers related industry is declining. You could fix this fallacy by actually posting some information about the auto industry, which is much more related to cash for clunkers, instead of the entire economy. Until you do however, you have proven nothing about any failures of cash for clunkers. All your facts have proven to me are failures of the economy as a whole.


Truth Detector said:
As a matter of fact, I am at a loss how anyone can think this will do anything when this program amounts to taking money from one group and giving it to another group (still unidentified so we are printing/borrowing to pay for it)
Click to expand...

This is an un-supported conclusion. Yes, you have identified the program does take government money and grant it to car dealerships. Why does this mean the program will do nothing for the economy?

Truth Detector said:
I don't know how anyone can argue that “cash for clunkers” allowed us to lose "fewer" jobs or that it is a good thing when the number of jobs lost every single month is in the hundreds of thousands. I find that argument stunning.
Click to expand...

You have committed the same fallacy; division, and affirming the consequent. Your argument so far is stunning.

Truth Detector said:
What do you think happens now that the program has ended? Do you honestly think that consumers will continue buying cars? REALLY?
Click to expand...

From this statement: “Do you honestly think that consumers will continue buying cars?” I’m guessing you are saying cash for clunkers has allowed people to buy cars, hence the word “continue” in your question. It is hard telling since you are arguing by question though.

If this is the case you are committing a fallacy here:

If cash for clunkers is running, then people will buy cars.

Cash for clunkers is not running.

Therefore People will not buy cars.

This is denying the antecedent. Although cash for clunkers is over, people will continue to buy cars for other reasons such as an old one breaking down, they like a new car, their old car is not fuel efficient, a new driver needs a new car, etc. You are ignoring other common causes for people to buy cars.

Truth Detector said:
Increased production is meaningless when unemployment keeps skyrocketing, consumers keep hording money and GDP is in the negative 6.4% range.
Click to expand...

This is irrelevant considering cash for clunkers did nothing to increase production. Cash for clunkers focused on increasing demand for cars by offering incentives to buy.

Truth Detector said:
I am stunned that you are still desperately arguing that programs like this are helping. Tell me something; who do you think is going to pay for the billions being doled out to people to buy cars; where do you think this money, will come from.
Click to expand...

I think it is going to come from the U.S. federal government. How does this cause cash for clunkers to fail at stimulating the economy? You have made another unsupported remark.

Truth Detector said:
Here's another more pertinent question you and others desperately defending the rabid stupidity of this administration need to answer; who do you think is going to pay for this $10 to $11 trillion deficit and what will be the economic impact?


If you think that YOU and every single American in this country will be unaffected and that it will not have a profound impact on the future economic health of this nation, then you are wallowing in an amazing level willful denial.
Click to expand...

It is a $10 to $11 trillion debt, not deficit. This is unimportant to the overall point of your question, but it is often confused. I think the U.S. government will pay for its debt.

You fail to state your position. You are too busy bashing others and arguing through question to realize you have not stated whether or not this profound impact on the economic health of this nation would be positive or negative. I will guess you believe it will be negative.

How does this cause cash for clunkers to fail at stimulating the economy? You are trying to argue through division once again. Cash for clunkers has added to the overall debt, but does not represent the whole debt. Cash for clunkers could still stimulate the economy while adding onto the debt.

…

To recap all you have proven to me is the economy is in a downturn and this program (cash for clunkers) amounts to taking money from one group and giving it to another group.

I happen to think cash for clunkers was effective at increasing demand for cars, selling cars, and stimulating the auto industry during this recession. The article supports my opinion saying:

“Auto makers will release their monthly sales reports Tuesday and they're expected to show the first year-to-year increase since 2007.
…
During the month long program, Billion Automotive sold close to a thousand vehicles…”
Click to expand...

The article does say cash for clunkers has been slow to pay for some sold cars. This is a downside to the program that I will not deny, but it does not mean the program has been a failure. Especially when at the end of the article it said, “…Billion thinks he'll get his money eventually, it just may take longer than what the government first said.”
 
drz-400 said:
Your entire premise; that cash for clunkers has done nothing to make the economic situation better and therefore the program has failed, is based on a non-Sequitur.

It affirms the consequent.

If the economy has gotten worse, then cash for clunkers has failed.

Cash for clunkers has failed.

Therefore the economy has gotten worse.

You can prove that the economy has gotten worse, but it would still be fallacious to think this has been caused by a failure of the cash for clunkers program. Many other factors could cause the economy to worsen other than the cash for clunkers program failing, such as overproduction, underproduction, financial crisis, etc.

It is also based on division. The economy is in decline; therefore cash for clunkers related industry is declining. You could fix this fallacy by actually posting some information about the auto industry, which is much more related to cash for clunkers, instead of the entire economy. Until you do however, you have proven nothing about any failures of cash for clunkers. All your facts have proven to me are failures of the economy as a whole.

This is an un-supported conclusion. Yes, you have identified the program does take government money and grant it to car dealerships. Why does this mean the program will do nothing for the economy?

You have committed the same fallacy; division, and affirming the consequent. Your argument so far is stunning.

From this statement: “Do you honestly think that consumers will continue buying cars?” I’m guessing you are saying cash for clunkers has allowed people to buy cars, hence the word “continue” in your question. It is hard telling since you are arguing by question though.

If this is the case you are committing a fallacy here:

If cash for clunkers is running, then people will buy cars.

Cash for clunkers is not running.

Therefore People will not buy cars.

This is denying the antecedent. Although cash for clunkers is over, people will continue to buy cars for other reasons such as an old one breaking down, they like a new car, their old car is not fuel efficient, a new driver needs a new car, etc. You are ignoring other common causes for people to buy cars.

This is irrelevant considering cash for clunkers did nothing to increase production. Cash for clunkers focused on increasing demand for cars by offering incentives to buy.

I think it is going to come from the U.S. federal government. How does this cause cash for clunkers to fail at stimulating the economy? You have made another unsupported remark.

It is a $10 to $11 trillion debt, not deficit. This is unimportant to the overall point of your question, but it is often confused. I think the U.S. government will pay for its debt.

You fail to state your position. You are too busy bashing others and arguing through question to realize you have not stated whether or not this profound impact on the economic health of this nation would be positive or negative. I will guess you believe it will be negative.

How does this cause cash for clunkers to fail at stimulating the economy? You are trying to argue through division once again. Cash for clunkers has added to the overall debt, but does not represent the whole debt. Cash for clunkers could still stimulate the economy while adding onto the debt.

…

To recap all you have proven to me is the economy is in a downturn and this program (cash for clunkers) amounts to taking money from one group and giving it to another group.

I happen to think cash for clunkers was effective at increasing demand for cars, selling cars, and stimulating the auto industry during this recession. The article supports my opinion saying:

The article does say cash for clunkers has been slow to pay for some sold cars. This is a downside to the program that I will not deny, but it does not mean the program has been a failure. Especially when at the end of the article it said, “…Billion thinks he'll get his money eventually, it just may take longer than what the government first said.”
Click to expand...

After suffering through this long winded diatribe which basically says NOTHING; it is begging for a point. What is your point?

Is it in support of the Government stealing money from hard working taxpayers and giving it to specific groups for purely partisan political purposes is a good thing?

Is it supporting a Government that has spent us into a $1.6 trillion dollar hole as a good thing?

Is it suggesting that watching the National Debt continue to climb at the rate of $1 million a day is a good thing?

What is your point dude? Perhaps it is just an effort to prove you don't know what the hell you are talking about like Golden Boy and think that borrowing and printing money the Government doesn't have is a good thing?

It once again raises the question; if after another two years of this stupidity there are no improvements in the economic malaise we are in, will you then acknowledge that Obama is a moron who is destroying the country and you were a fool for buying into this rabid stupidity?

Carry on. :roll:
 
And....we should all realize cfc was nothing but a rebate...manufacturers have been doing this for years and for the same reason...a temporary boost in sales that either lighten current inventories or market a target vehicle or both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom