Reply With Quote
Ultimately from the GM bailout thread where you revealed yourself as a rank corporatist (on behalf of the 99%, of course)
i think the monotony got to him
Ultimately from the GM bailout thread where you revealed yourself as a rank corporatist (on behalf of the 99%, of course)
Last edited by Winehole23; 12-10-2011 at 04:48 AM. Reason: gross attribution failure italicized and bolded
now, because I enjoy it.
I was/am pro GM bailout because the WORKERS' jobs, at GM and their suppliers and their suppliers, were at risk. GM's old mgmt got cleaned out.
Can't save the jobs without saving the corporation.
no comeback, no denial
just a half assed excuse
"GM's old mgmt got cleaned out."
most of the workers and the suppliers' workers kept their jobs. GFY
there's the lame excuse I was talking about.
the corporation is not its officers, boutons. GM never died.
your scheme of corporatism saves any sufficiently massive corporate concern. anyone employing "10s of 1000s of the 99%," is en led to the help, according to you.
which leads us back to:
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...88&postcount=2
no, not "anyone". case by case
So you were for letting GM and all its employees and suppliers go down?
oh, so only where massive trade unions are in place then?
off the rack interest bloc corporatism
I don't see why not. Why not?
too many jobs lost in GM and all the supplier, a pro-cyclic move.
should have done the same with TBTJ, take them over, fire the top layers of mgmt with no golden parachutes, "asset strip" and sell of the assets, and wipe out shareholders and bond holders.
but you're pro-cyclic guy, so no problem, right?
(silence implies agreement)
So you're using trickle-down theory to justify corporate welfare. How Republican of you.
bump. boutons showed his ass here.
what? you pitifully dig up a 2 yr old thread and think you got a point? which is?
I have no response to your spit take. The thread speaks for itself for anyone who reads through.
it's understandable you're sore. no one likes to be reminded of bone-headed remarks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
