I didn't really look into the numbers required for that. I just knew we still had shares and could sell them for a gain. I guess not really gain but loss cutter.

I stand corrected.

And I agree, if I could afford a new car it wouldn't be a GM. If I was going for a reasonably priced American made vehicle I'd be going with a Ford because I think they've made some quality vehicles, I really like the Sync stuff they're doing with Microsoft, and I like that they were well run enough that they didn't require bankruptcy or bailout.

I Wear Pants;571239 wrote:We can get our money back assuming GM is still in business and does well for at least a couple years the government could simply sell its shares.

As long as Obama is in charge of it, they...oops...typo...I mean we will never be out of the car ownership biz. His ego and narcissism would never allow such a thing...unless it made his light shine even brighter, then he might consider it.

BGFalcons82;571344 wrote:As long as Obama is in charge of it, they...oops...typo...I mean we will never be out of the car ownership biz. His ego and narcissism would never allow such a thing...unless it made his light shine even brighter, then he might consider it.

I don't think Obama cares about the ownership, this was just a boon for a large part of his constituency. The UAW (at least the GM portion) was the biggest winner out of this mess. IMO the biggest loser was Ford. I don't think Americans will tolerate another bailout, their competition got a huge unmitigated advantage and creditors will be more reticent to buy their debt because they have to price in bailout risk.

I think the Buick LaCrosse is pretty sharp.

BoatShoes;571423 wrote:I think the Buick LaCrosse is pretty sharp.

Which one is that? Is that the Crossover?

The problem is no one under 50 would buy a Buick.

Manhattan Buckeye;571446 wrote:Which one is that? Is that the Crossover?

The problem is no one under 50 would buy a Buick.

False... we have an enclave... It is awesome, and we are under fitty...lol. Used to have a buick regal that was awesome also. Great cars.

I'd buy a Buick. But only because Tiger Woods told me to for a couple of years. Apparently you can pull mad ass if you drive a Buick...and have a billion dollars.

I Wear Pants;571255 wrote:And I agree, if I could afford a new car it wouldn't be a GM. If I was going for a reasonably priced American made vehicle I'd be going with a Ford because I think they've made some quality vehicles, I really like the Sync stuff they're doing with Microsoft, and I like that they were well run enough that they didn't require bankruptcy or bailout.

I agree, my 2009 Focus has the Sync and it is quite amazing. Seemlessly switching with voice commands between making phone calls and controlling yoru iPod is quite nice. It recognizes your phonebook and a simple "Call Mom" starts calling your mom (assuming that's how you have her listed in your phone). "Play artist Metallica" randomly plays all of your Metallica songs on your iPod, etc.

911 Assist is nice too, when the numbskull hit me a few months ago my Sync automatically called the police for me and all I had to do was tell them where the accident was located.

I'd buy a Suburban (Chevy or GMC) over another brand of SUV. Great vehicles.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/23/corporate_profits_were_highest_on_record.html

Despite cries of creeping socialism from President Obama's critics, the New York Times reports American companies are actually thriving.

"American businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.66 trillion in the third quarter... That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or non-inflation-adjusted terms."

"Corporate profits have been going gangbusters for a while. Since their cyclical low in the fourth quarter of 2008, profits have grown for seven consecutive quarters, at some of the fastest rates in history

Ty Webb;572817 wrote:http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/23/corporate_profits_were_highest_on_record.html

Despite cries of creeping socialism from President Obama's critics, the New York Times reports American companies are actually thriving.

"American businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.66 trillion in the third quarter... That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or non-inflation-adjusted terms."

"Corporate profits have been going gangbusters for a while. Since their cyclical low in the fourth quarter of 2008, profits have grown for seven consecutive quarters, at some of the fastest rates in history

I agree that the companies and the ones at the top are living the dream, however, small business and the non-Wall Street companies are still really hurting.
It seems like there is a growing gap between Wall Street and Main Street as clique as that sounds.

But...but....but ptown

I though He's doing everything he can to hurt compaines and kill them

Ty Webb;572860 wrote:But...but....but ptown

I though He's doing everything he can to hurt compaines and kill them

The argument usually goes toward small business and medium size companies and not fostering enough investment or innovation by hiking up tax rates.
The argument is not he is killing Wall Street, but all the other companies.

Wall Street is booming, but again, it is separated from the rest of the economic growth-hence the small growth we are seeing.

ptown_trojans_1;572865 wrote:The argument usually goes toward small business and medium size companies and not fostering enough investment or innovation by hiking up tax rates.
The argument is not he is killing Wall Street, but all the other companies.

Wall Street is booming, but again, it is separated from the rest of the economic growth-hence the small growth we are seeing.

Bullshit ptown...all I've heard for two years is about how is he trying to kill and how he hates all business. Then good news comes out that proves that wrong and people down play it...what the hell else do you want him to do?

Ty Webb;572871 wrote:Bullshit ptown...all I've heard for two years is about how is he trying to kill and how he hates all business. Then good news comes out that proves that wrong and people down play it...what the hell else do you want him to do?

Hey, I'm just stating what I've heard the arguments. I've heard growth is in small business and since R's feel he is not supporting that, they nail him there.
Now, this is good news, but not great news.

What do I want him to do is not the issue. What R's want him to do is continue to foster an environment where small business and medium businesses continue to grow as wel las Wall Street as well as reduce the role of government intervention.

If he can do that, and keep taxes at their current rates, then substance wise, R's may have little to nail him on.

ptown_trojans_1;572876 wrote:Hey, I'm just stating what I've heard the arguments. I've heard growth is in small business and since R's feel he is not supporting that, they nail him there.
Now, this is good news, but not great news.

What do I want him to do is not the issue. What R's want him to do is continue to foster an environment where small business and medium businesses continue to grow as wel las Wall Street as well as reduce the role of government intervention.

If he can do that, and keep taxes at their current rates, then substance wise, R's may have little to nail him on.

Was not speaking about you ptown,sorry if it came out that way.

Newt Gingrich himself said we will continue to see growth in the economy and if he keeps tax rates even close to the same he will be impossible to beat

Gibby,

You're biggest problem with this is that you take political things wayyyyy too personally. From what I understand, you like defending your Hometeam, and in some ways, consider yourself a Polster for them - but at the end of the day, nobody has slapped your mother. So, stop acting like they did, please.

If you really are concerned with how the democrats have been maligned lately, you really should look at the democrats themselves (politicians). They're a big bunch of nimrods. They brought their release of unemployment onto themselves. Stop looking at what you don't like about republicans, and look at how the dem party can improve itself. And by improvement, I mean stop acting like a bunch of nuts, listen to their constituents, think about consequences, and be willing to understand that party lines aren't always the right lines.
Democrats have accountability, believe it or not.

CenterBHSFan;572913 wrote:Gibby,

You're biggest problem with this is that you take political things wayyyyy too personally. From what I understand, you like defending your Hometeam, and in some ways, consider yourself a Polster for them - but at the end of the day, nobody has slapped your mother. So, stop acting like they did, please.

If you really are concerned with how the democrats have been maligned lately, you really should look at the democrats themselves (politicians). They're a big bunch of nimrods. They brought their release of unemployment onto themselves. Stop looking at what you don't like about republicans, and look at how the dem party can improve itself. And by improvement, I mean stop acting like a bunch of nuts, listen to their constituents, think about consequences, and be willing to understand that party lines aren't always the right lines.
Democrats have accountability, believe it or not.

So we are the only "nimrods" in DC??

How about the "nimrods" who got us into this situation?

Ty Webb;572879 wrote:Was not speaking about you ptown,sorry if it came out that way.

Newt Gingrich himself said we will continue to see growth in the economy and if he keeps tax rates even close to the same he will be impossible to beat

. . . which means he'll have abandoned liberalism and governed like a conservative.

Still, most economists say the current growth rate is far too slow to recover the considerable ground lost during the recession.

“The economy is not growing fast enough to reduce significantly the unemployment rate or to prevent a slide into deflation,” Paul Dales, a United States economist for Capital Economics, wrote in a note to clients. “This is unlikely to change in 2011 or 2012.”

Not sure if Newt and this guy are on the same page.

Ty Webb;572917 wrote:So we are the only "nimrods" in DC??

How about the "nimrods" who got us into this situation?

Because when one group gets stupid/nimrodish, they get fired. This just happened to the dems. It will happen again, with both sides.
BOTH democrats and republicans have been stupid nimrods. That's why we vote. To get them the hell outta there.

Dude, you need to politically grow the hell up. Seriously, I don't know what the hell you're thinking sometimes.

You KNOW how and why the process works, please don't act like you don't or that you were born yesterday.

*EDIT

One more thing, dems and republicans both have been held accountable. This time around, it was the dems. Nothing that I stated is false. You may not like it, but it's the truth.

And Center,YOU need to stop talking down to people like you think you're better than them

Ty Webb;574540 wrote:And Center,YOU need to stop talking down to people like you think you're better than them

Watch yourself, keep a cool head there chief. No personal attacks.

Ok...nice to see I'm allowed to be attacked and nothing is done...thanks

Ty Webb;574549 wrote:Ok...nice to see I'm allowed to be attacked and nothing is done...thanks

I warn others, it is just tone with you.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/24/majority_of_republicans_favor_racial_profiling_at_airports.html

Greg Sargent dives into a new Washington Post/ABC News poll and finds Republicans are the only partisan group that favors racial profiling at airports, with a majority supporting the policy, while Democrats and independents are strongly opposed.

Key findings: 53% of Republicans think race "should be included in a passenger's security profile" as compared to just 39% of independents and 31% of Democrats