Biden’s ‘good friend,’ donor receives $20M federal loan to open foreign luxury car dealership

reply to post by jibeho



I have to accept that you are very funny. We live in a FREE COUNTRY so I could careless if you want or not tolerate my point of view.

I have a suggestion for you: You can move to Cuba or Venezuela and dictate all you want. This is the thread you started it yes, but out of that even if my point of view is off topic so What? What are you going to do?

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Foxybrain

 

You're finished!! I won't tolerate you're nonsense in on one of my threads.

Nonsense. I am not so sure. Maybe you do not agree with what foxy said. but it was related to the topic. Obama giving favoritism to his croonies. She thinks it is because he is black. It might not be PC but it is her point of view. I am sure there are others who agree. I have seen the Obama clan do so many things that I disagree with. I wasn't born a racist. I wasn't taught to be a racist. But as I get older my experiences and what I see tend to push me in that direction. I don't blame white people for this. I don't blame myself. I blame the things I see them do and the way I see them act. I am not going to apologize for it. Maybe I am making generalizations.

This whole thing confounds me. The "liberal" government is giving money to open a foreign business which will create foreign jobs, which will pay no taxes since it is overseas. A loan which probably will never be paid back. An action that will provide no benefit to the american people. That is money that easily could have gone to 40 failing small businesses to keep them going, keep americans working and paying their taxes... All I can say is hopefully this is the last time someone like this is ever elected into the Whitehouse.

Lets get ahead of the curve and discuss what a President Biden would represent. I am old and do not know how to start a TOPIC..someone?

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by jdub297

 

I did not insinuate that the families or those affected by this situation are "chump change", drawing this type of conclusion is the definition of ignorant, so deny yourself mate.

All i was trying to point out that the difference of scale on a national level, between the national bailout and this 20 million loan, which i have stated many times as ridiculous, as per the other users post.

Reading the entire thread is part of denying ignorance, do not just read one post without reading the context it was positioned. Assumptions are bad mmmkay?

Your words speak for themselves.
There is nothing to assume, and the only thing ignorant is believing that a give-away to the UAW at the expense of secured bondolders (teachers, firefighters, policemen, et c.) and the selective closing of thriving individuals' businesses for the benefit of GM (largest shareholders UAW and USA) is somehow collectively better for the country as a whole; or that the GN baillout "saved the auto industry." Hogwash.

...There is a difference between the bailout which prevented some serious consequences to the US economy as compared to supporting a car dealership...20mil is chump change in the grand scheme of things....

An organized restructuring or liquidation would not have caused "serious consequences" for our economy any greater than the direct result of the bailout. The taxpayers are out at least $26 billion just on GM alone. As the stock keeps crumbling, the losses insrease.

GM closed more than 2,000 dealerships for no reason other than to give Obama-favored dealers greater market-share and success, all chosen by EEOC standards. Every one of those closed had nearby restaurants, parts-houses, contractors and suppliers that counted on their business. Everyone one had employees, bank loans, mortgages, shareholders and investors who received NOTHING; some after 3 generations in business. And what about the employees' own loans, mortgages, and local businesses that depended upon their patronage?

"Chump change," my ass.

deny ignorance

jw

the claim that this loan uses taxpayer money is false. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation states that it is "the U.S. Government's development finance institution" and "helps U.S. businesses gain footholds in emerging markets." While it receives administrative funding from Congress, OPIC "operates on a self-sustaining basis at no net cost to American taxpayers" and has actually reduced the federal budget deficit for 34 consecutive years:

Are OPIC services U.S. taxpayer-funded? OPIC operates on a self-sustaining basis at no net cost to American taxpayers. In fact, it generated net income of $269 million in Fiscal Year 2011, helping to reduce the federal budget deficit for the 34th consecutive year. "

Indeed, during the early 1980s, OPIC returned the taxpayer money used to start up the agency to President Reagan. At the time, Reagan praised OPIC for helping advance the cause of economic freedom in the world.

The Daily Caller, Fox, and Drudge also highlight Hynansky's political contributions and relationship to Biden, but at no point do they present evidence that these donations or his friendship with Biden had any effect on his loan application.

source

With Mr. Hynansky, it probably was a Ford car dealership to be opened in the Ukraine. Like Reagan said, loans like this to Americans/American businesses helped spread the free market around the world. Nixon's "opening of China" was for trade purposes; use of the free market would open up the country for democracy , at some point, hopefully.

reply to post by jjkenobi

What could be more Communistic than the all knowing all powerful govt giving it's friends/family special treatment and then spitting on the general populace?

Um that would be any form of collectivism. Crony capitalism is collectivist.

reply to post by jibeho


Crony capitalism is collectivist, what don't you get? Mitt Romney is one too

Corporatism, also known as corporativism, is a system of economic, political, or social organization that involves association of the people of society into corporate groups on the basis of common interests.

A corporate group is a general term that describes one or more individuals, usually in the form of a family, clan, organization, or company.

en.wikipedia.org...

The corporate groups of the USA is the elite vs. non elite and Mega corps vs. Small Business

reply to post by xuenchen

Don't you think that "crony capitalism" is a codeword for Marxist/Corporatist ?

You've said it yourself that you haven't read much of Marx. But no, it surely isn't Marxism..a corporation could not exist in a communist environment.

Crony Capitalism/Corporatism are both the same thing though.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by jibeho

 

Crony capitalism is collectivist, what don't you get?

Mitt Romney is one too

Corporatism, also known as corporativism, is a system of economic, political, or social organization that involves association of the people of society into corporate groups on the basis of common interests.

A corporate group is a general term that describes one or more individuals, usually in the form of a family, clan, organization, or company.

en.wikipedia.org...

The corporate groups of the USA is the elite vs. non elite and Mega corps vs. Small Business

edit on 20-8-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

According to You?? The two are not synonymous in in my realm.

IN Obama's collectivist mind, we are all are treated as orphan children who must be guided and cared for; and only government can do that properly.

We could debate "isms" all of their sub isms all day.

This is as simple as I can possibly find for you to understand
www.realclearpolitics.com...

eta

Much like Obama's now infamous "You didn't build that" speech, this comment says a great deal about the President's collectivist philosophy. Collectivism boils down to one basic idea, that no individual is responsible for anything alone. This is a common philosophy on the political left, but few realize how sinister and damaging a philosophy like this is to a society.

Collectivism is damaging to society because it invokes and requires the absence of responsibility. Wade Michael Page, the man responsible for the Sikh Temple shooting was by all accounts a crazed madman with ties to neo-Nazi punk bands. He acted alone, and should be held singularly responsible for the atrocities he committed. The vast majority of Americans have no involvement in, and are appalled by ideas of white supremacy. And of course, mass murder is far beyond anything that Americans would consider a rational course of action.

Not so, according to Obama's collectivist philosophy. Soul searching is needed because no one individual can be responsible for anything, whether good or bad. We are all responsible for what happened in Wisconsin. This is why collectivism is sinister; it takes responsibility for terrible things away from evil people like Wade Michael Page, and gives it to honest and decent people who have nothing to do with it.

Read more: www.americanthinker.com...

reply to post by jibeho

According to You?? The two are not synonymous in in my realm.

According to the definition of collectivism and corporatism. Then your realm wants to deny facts.

collectivism
: a political or economic theory advocating collective control especially over production and distribution; also : a system marked by such control

The collective is the elites instead of the people.

And Romney said the same exact thing Obama did at the Olympics, why are you not calling him a collectivist?

You Olympians, however, know you didn't get here solely on your own power,” “For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided, communities built venues in order to organize competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them. We’ve already cheered the Olympians, let’s also cheer the parents, coaches, and communities. All right!

- Mitt Romney

Exactly, you ignore that Romney is a collectivist and said the same exact thing Obama did.