Posted in the Pikeville Forum
#1 Dec 16, 2013
Billions wasted on so called green energy companies.
GM Bailout we lost 10.5 billion, they took plants to China
Fast & Furious
Having IRS Audit Opposition
Obama Care Roll Out
Killed coal the cheapest energy source we have in the middle of a bad recession.
#3 Dec 16, 2013
Despite the $11 billion loss on the GM bailout, the Treasury Department was quick to point out that it has recovered a total of $432.7 billion on all investments under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) including the sale of its shares in AIG compared to $421.8 billion disbursed. Treasury said it will continue to wind down the remaining investmentsin a manner that balances maximizing the taxpayers return on investments with the speed of our exit.
A study released Monday by the Center for Automotive Research concluded that the government bailout of GM spared 1.2 million jobs in 2009 and preserved $39.4 billion in personal and social insurance tax collections in 2009 and 2010.Any complete cost-benefit assessment of the federal assistance to GM in its restructuring must consider the total net returns to the public investment researchers Sean McAlinden and Debra Maranger Menk wrote in The Effect on the U.S. Economy of the Successful Restructuring of General Motors.
If the U.S. government had refused to assist (GM and Chrysler) in a financial crisis of unprecedented proportions, then the whole U.S. economy was operating without a safety net, with the exception, of course, of the banking system, McAlinden and Maranger Menk conclude. The center independently funded the new study as a follow up to a November 2008 analysis.
The bottom line is that a failed GM would have left a lot of collateral damage, said Karl Brauer, senior analyst at Kelley Blue Book.Instead, GM is profitable, its making the best products in its 100-plus-year history, and its growing sales in the U.S. and globally. In looking at the recent history of government intervention, this one rates pretty well.
Not everyone will agree, however, and GM may never fully recover from the bruises to its reputation inflicted by its dependence on government assistance.
But Akerson said a now-healthy GM is focused on the future.Continued investments, innovation, and job creation are just some of the returns of a healthy GM and domestic auto industry. Our work continues uninterrupted, and we will keep our sights squarely on our customers and transforming the way we do business.
#4 Dec 16, 2013
On Wednesday, the State Department Office of the Inspector General (IG) issued the results of its investigation of the Benghazi Accountability Review Board that was chaired by Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Mike Mullen, as well as the State Department's implementation of its recommendations. The first finding of the report states [emphasis added]:
The Accountability Review Board process operates as intended--independently and without bias--to identify vulnerabilities in the Department of State's security programs.
That flies directly in the face of mistruths and exaggerations that were released by Darrell Issa and the focus of a hearing before his House Oversight Committee last week.
After being given advance copies of a Republican report attacking the credibility of the Benghazi review that was released on September 16, publications rushed to inform their readers of its flawed findings. There is no similar urgency on the part of the media to cover this new report which should lay to rest the notion that the Accountability Review Board was anything but an independent investigation into the tragedy that occurred in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.
CBS News' Sharyl Attkisson led her September 15 story by stating: "Republicans on the House Oversight Committee are questioning the findings, independence and integrity of the Accountability Review Board (ARB) investigation surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attacks."
Attkisson in fact filed five stories based on the Republican investigation, but did not file a single report about the Inspector General's contradictory findings.
Politico reported on Republican "criticism" that the ARB "findings were watered down and protected Clinton" in multiple articles, yet only saw fit to mention the new Inspector General report inthe in the middle of a story that primarily focused on Darrell Issa's partisan trip to Libya [emphasis added]:
Last week, Issa held a hearing to try to discredit a report by the Accountability Review Board that cited a lack of needed security at embassies but drew the criticism of Republicans for failing to criticize high-ranking State Department employees, particularly former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. A report by the inspector general released this week affirmed the independence of the ARB report.
"The Accountability Review Board process operates as intended -- independently and without bias -- to identify vulnerabilities in the Department of State's security programs," the inspector general found.
The Daily Beast's headline inaccurately read, "Congress: Hillary's Benghazi Investigation Let Top Officials Escape Blame." (It wasn't Congress, it was the Republican staff of a congressional committee releasing a report without input from Democrats.)
The article went on to state: "The State Department's investigation into the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, was not independent and failed to hold senior State Department officials accountable for the failures that led to the deaths of four Americans, according to a new investigative report compiled by the House oversight committee."
The Daily Beast has published no similar article on the IG's report debunking the very premise of its article's lede.
It goes without saying that Fox hyped the Issa hearing and report, but has provided no similar coverage to the new findings that directly contradict its narrative; instead, Fox selectively quoted from the report to falsely accuse the State Department of not implementing the ARB's recommendations.
And that's just what Darrell Issa would like
#5 Dec 16, 2013
TED ROBBINS, BYLINE: Hi, Neal, it's good to be with you.
CONAN: And what was Fast and Furious?
ROBBINS: Well, Fast and Furious, let's go back even a little farther, if we might.
ROBBINS: Because really these - it was only one program in a series of sting operations called gun walking, essentially, which began in 2006 and ended in 2011. And so it was part of I guess the umbrella would be Project Gunrunner, and it was supposed to stem the number of firearms that were leaving the United States and going into Mexico, into the hands of drug cartel members, largely because it is much easier to obtain guns in the United States than it is in Mexico, which has some fairly stringent at least legal, you know, ways to get guns, it's fairly stringent gun-control laws.
So what they would do, is instead of actually arresting a person who bought a gun, as a straw purchaser - bought a gun for somebody else, which is illegal in the United States - that's the way it works, and then they hand them over, and then they walk them into Mexico.
So instead of arresting somebody - talking about ATF right now - they would let the purchaser walk, and in this case take the guns, meaning gun walking, take the guns into Mexico in hopes of arresting the people who they gave the guns to, so leading them to bigger targets in the cartel operations.
That was the intention of Fast and Furious, as I say, which was one of a number of these kinds of operations, which actually began under the Bush administration.
#6 Dec 16, 2013
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.
Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.
The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval was a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.
"This is really a sea change," said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. "It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches."
Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversi
#7 Dec 16, 2013
The 800 billion TARP TAX PAYER PAID Wall Street Bailout was sold as, we need to refund Wall Street so called banks to free up credit. Why did they not lend the money to GM that took bankruptcy to cut new employee wages, retirement and Health Care Benefits. How many plants in Communist China did GM build and the money GM makes in China is not taxed, just their U.S. profits. Wall Street also got we found out 3 years later, 2.3 Trillion dollar .0003 loan from the Federal Reserve. If they money we gave Wall Street was to free up Credit why did the government "tax payers" have to give GM a loan? 2.3 trillion! Looks like the people that should have been doing venture capital loans as they were supposed to be doing with the money would have made the loan to GM, I would have required it before I gave them the money. Yes the loan to GM helped the working class, but it was the Communist Chinese Working Class and out politicians that owned GM stock!
#8 Dec 16, 2013
From an atrocious starting point, enrollment on HealthCare.gov is essentially quadrupling. As predicted, by next fall, the law is going to be a net plus for Obama and the Democrats.
If one looks just at the raw, bottom-line number the Department of Health and Human Services released Wednesday365,000 citizens enrolled since October 1one might be inclined to think its not so hot. And it isnt. Thats 180,000 or so a month, and if you post that number against the stated goal of 7 million by next spring, the stated goal looks awfully chimerical, and the thing seems a disaster (180,000 times six months, the enrollment period, is just 1.08 million).
Dig a little deeper and things look considerably better. If we could graph it, the bar line of enrollment would make for a pretty impressive ski slope: After just 27,000 people signed up in the whole of October, The New York Times reported over the weekend, about 100,000 people signed up in November, and then, in the first week of December alone, 112,000 chose plans. The Los Angeles Times put out slightly different numbers Wednesday but agreed on the trend. From an obviously atrocious starting place, enrollment is essentially quadrupling. If that pace were to continue, the 7 million figure would be cleared in March
#9 Dec 16, 2013
Benghazi, 4 diplomats killed in a place they were saying was dangerous and asking for reinforcement. Military off shore during the attack and Hillary would not let them go in to help. Obama knew of the precarious dangerous situation they were in. As Truman said the buck stops with the President. According to Obama no one ever tells him any thing and they had a week of lies after the diplomats got killed before the Obama administration got into the cover up phase. I remember the black U.N rep they sent out for days saying it was just a demonstration that got out of hand. Trying anything and everything to distance Obama from the incident, have U.N. rep out in front instead of Secretary of State Hillary. Hillary was Sec of State, she should have and all previous Sec of State would have been the spokes person for a State Department murder.
Fast and Furious, Holder wanted it to look like drug cartels were buying guns through straw sells, wanted to make a dramatic statement on background checks at flea markets and gun shows for his bosses anti gun policy. It blew up in his face when the guns he bought "the attorney general" run action blew up in his face when all the guns did end up across the border and an ICE agent got killed. It was not drug cartel money that bought those guns it was Holder's agency money that bought the guns and sold them to the cartels. It just backfired on him when the money trail got back to the government.
Bush never had government money buying guns for the Mexican Drug cartels. That was Holder's baby, it just come back on him when it blew up on him. He should have been fired minimum and he should have had to stand trial for it, but it got covered up as everything else does in the administration.
#12 Dec 16, 2013
How many of the 365k are subsidized?
How many did you say paid the premiums.
How many millions of people did you say who are not subsidized lost coverage?
As of Nov. 30, just shy of 365,000 indiduals had selected an insurance plan. The majority of those individuals -- 227,478, to be exact -- used the state-run marketplaces. HealthCare.gov , the much-maligned federally operated insurance website, was used by 137,204 individuals to select a plan.
The December HHS report also revealed that just two states -- California and New York -- together reported more individuals selecting an insurance plan than all of the 36 states using the federal website combined. California counted more than 107,000 residents who selected an insurance plan on the state's online marketplace, while New York's figure totaled more than 45,000.
#13 Dec 16, 2013
Consider this: Citicorp, which received $45 billion in bailout money from the government, paid one of its executives a bonus of $100 millionthat is $100,000,000 in taxpayers money paid straight into this robber barons pocket. Bank of America got a $25 billion bailout from the taxpayers and 23 cents out of every dollar of ended up in the pockets of the bank's executives as bonuses!
#14 Dec 16, 2013
Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street firm that invented that dangerous derivative that they sold in the hedge funds and bet to fail made billions in 09 while everyone else was losing money. Of course Obama put an Ex Goldman Sachs Exec in to for Secretary of Treasury and to continue Ex Goldman Sachs Secretary of Treasury "Paulson" Bailout under the Bush Administrations Bailout of Wall Street. Wall Street money poured into the Obama Campaign right before the 08 election to get him to go along with the Bush/Paulson Bailout of Wall Street.
#15 Dec 16, 2013
NSA spying on U.S. citizens, the courts said today it was illegal. The spying on U.S. citizens "telephone, email, text messages" is illegal under the constitution.
#17 Dec 16, 2013
Which is exactly why no bailout of anyone should ever have taken place. Those who created the problem should have been forced to go completely broke. From the banks to G.M to the public who borrowed money they could not afford each and every one should have paid the price. Thousands of G.M. bondholders lost their a$$ even though under bankruptcy laws they should have been paid first. Now almost 6 years later the economy is still suffering from this anti capitalist action. The banks and G.M. would have been broken up and other venture capitalists would have cleaned up this mess by now.
#25 Dec 17, 2013
Problem with letting the big Wall Street banks go broke is that if they went down they would take down the nation's whole banking system. Even the local banks in small towns in Kentucky would have gone under. You would have lost your savings if you had any above the amount insured by FDIC. Moreover, when the banks went broke all mortgages would have been called in, even if you were not behind on payments. You would have been given a length of time, probably 90 days or so, to find another bank to refinance your house and pay off the called in note. If you could not, your house would be foreclosed and sold. The "venture capitalists" as you call them, the very sort of Robber Barons who made the mess to start with and got the huge bonuses, would have made a killing in realestate by buying up mortgages for pennies on the dollar and then selling or renting your own house back to you.
#26 Dec 17, 2013
That is why Glass Stegall Act should have never been repealed, Wall Street spent millions and it took over 60 years for them to get it repealed. That act kept the local commercial banks and the so call Walled Street banks separated. The TARP funds and the 2.3 Trillion nearly no interest load that the taxpayers and the Fed gave Wall Street was supposed to free up credit. It did not and in fact if they wanted to fee up credit they could have gave the money direct to the hometown commercial banks, trickle down never works. The new Volcker Rule that they just passed is supposed to separate the commercial banks from the Wall Street banks again but a rule does not have the force and legal standing of an Act. There is a lot of agencies and money that the Volcker Rule does not cover either.
At any rate are you telling me capitalism just works when you have socialism to bail it out. The Wall Street firms that crashed out the economy should have been allowed to fail because the so called to big to fail are now 5 times larger, they also made 50% more profits since the 08 crash they called. The largest Ponzi Scheme in history and they walked away without going to jail and even got rewarded for it.
#28 Dec 17, 2013
You have a very strange definition of "socialism".
What happened in the Wall Street bailout - and our economic structure today - is nothing akin to socialism. It is not really capitalist either. It is more like a modernized version of the old Mercantilist system of early modern Europe in which private monopolies control the economy and are so powerful that they can control the government.
#29 Dec 17, 2013
True its not Socialism;its more just ANTI CAPITALISM... In a capitalist society someone has to win and someone has to lose....PERIOD..
#30 Dec 17, 2013
Capitalism Socialism or whatever you want to call it I don't care. Letting a few control all the wealth is not working in this country! The money needs to make its way down to the real working people not those who set up in a plush office speculating.
#31 Dec 17, 2013
The only way to raise the working man's wage is to create jobs. Lots of jobs. Manufacturing jobs. We have become a SERVICE job society and all we are doing is trading dollars. You operate a backhoe and dig a footer for John Doe...he pays you....Your heat pump goes out and you hire John Doe to fix it...you pay him and on and on. If the damn tree huggers and left wing sponges would quit voting for the likes of Obama who falsely says we should spread the wealth around in order to get votes and would DEMAND Congress lower your taxes and corporate taxes then more jobs would be created. Obama waged a war on coal and put thousands of good paying jobs out of business. He is sitting on his a$$ and holding off on the gas pipeline construction. He is in bed with the insurance co.'s willing and ready to bail them out with your tax money if his sainted health care legacy begins to fail and it will fail. WHERE is the wealth re-distribution he promised? You blame corporations for their wealth but the REAL problem is those same corporations are UNCERTAIN about the direction this false Marxist is leading this country and they are not willing to expand or hire. One last note;Obama's health care roll out cost 379 million dollars--there are 300 million people in this country---- it would have saved 79 million dollars if we had each been given 1 million dollars . This country needs leadership that cares about you...
#32 Dec 17, 2013
The only way to stimulate the U.S. economy is to go back to a tax structure like the one that was in place in the post-World War II years. Tax the hell out of the corporate fat cats and redistribute the money by building public infrastructure, providing education, etc. Cutting taxes on the wealthy will not fix the mess. It's what caused the present situation.
Add your comments below
|Island Creek shooting||1 min||legal eagle||100|
|What's mitch McConnell done for coal, when ther... (Jul '14)||4 hr||Paris||32,359|
|Hillary Clinton OUR next President (Jun '15)||4 hr||Noway Killery||2,218|
|Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10)||4 hr||just saying||148,850|
|Add a word, Drop a word (May '10)||5 hr||_FLATLINE--------||25,479|
|West Virgina deserved it||5 hr||Man I m not a willy||18|
|When a woman shows you no affection but doesn't... (Aug '12)||6 hr||Kat man||36|
|Glen Hammond Ray Jones Round 2||14 hr||Power Breeds Trouble||16|
Find what you want!
Search Pikeville Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC