As he takes his glory lap today at Carrier, he announced there would be many more deals like it under his presidency. Does anybody now doubt that?

In fact, the Dems are giving Trump credit but are also pointing out a few things:
1) It looks like Pence gave Carrier a break on state taxes, so the taxpayers of Indiana are going to have to pony up to make up the difference or give up the same amount in service cuts.  This might not be a great model for saving jobs.
2) Trump only saved about half the jobs that were being cut.
3) Obama saved 1 MILLION jobs of auto workers and their suppliers when he bailed out GM and Chrysler.  And he got back all the money.  Today the two companies are healthy, making great products and paying taxes, as are their workers.
So give Trump credit but he has a long way to go to match his predecessor.

The taxpayer took it up the ass to the tune of over $9 billion and that was one of the many reasons I was against it. I am going to wait on the details of this Carrier deal before I praise it or rip it.  

the total invested in the bailout was more than $80 billion.  So losing $9 billion to save 1 million jobs is fine with me, and with most people.
As for the Carrier deal, Trump will be too busy trying to keep his head above water to do this over and over again.  It's not a game changer.

You just got done saying $7,000 per job is a bad deal but then praised Obama's $9,000 per job as OK.

Prior to that deal I would have bet big money such a deal never could have happened, as would anyone who knew even the least bit about the difference between "debt" and "equity" This was the biggest fucking of secured creditors I have ever heard of and completely against the law, but our last POTUS never seemed to care much about the law except how to manipulate, circumvent and outright break the law. I look forward to Trump undoing as much of what Obama did over the last 8 years as legally possible.

A thousand jobs saved at one plant and President Trump hasn't been sworn in yet.

Trump is turning leftists like Laffy into deficit hawks!  

Welcome back to the two of you!

To even be comparing a deal that saved ONE MILLION JOBS with one that save A THOUSAND.  And then to actually pull out a calculator to quibble over a difference of $2,000 a job.
You have no idea how silly you look, do you, ed?

Had Obama simply marked all the money as loans, and not handouts, we would have recouped all the money.

Luckily it wasn't worth much but it got vaporized.  Fortunately for me, I have a nice diversified portfolio and it didn't hurt much at all.  And it's been more than made up for (many times over) by the huge run-up in the markets since Obama came to office. You two clowns are aware that the Dow is up about 11,000 points since its low in 2009

You caught a lot of shit for your support of Trump, plenty of it from me.  Well, you were right and I was wrong.  I still hate the guy but he won.  I'll be watching him very warily.  But you at least deserve some props for picking the right horse.
And that's all the slack you are likely to get from me.
But no more pictures of people walking on all fours.
Still, if he fucks up I reserve the right to yell: "I TOLD YOU SO!"  And I promise to cut Trump all the slack you and your fellow Trump supporters gave Obama.

Try to spin it any way you think is rational. It only demonstrates your irrational thought processes. While you're at it throw in the GM bond holders contribution due to the illegal activities of Obama's bailout of the UAW. Going in, GM held about $43 billion in debt. One estimate is their debt holders ended up with as little as 25 cents on the dollar. Pay close attention now because I'm going to get my calculator out again. Math may not be your strong suit but that means the bond holders were forced to contribute as much as $32,000 per job saved. Care to quibble over that?

but the bond holder of GM and Chrysler didn't "lose" their money in the market, they were fucked out of it by the US government who blatantly ignored laws that have been in place since there were financial markets.  

God you're such an insufferable prick.

Or to subsidies Billion dollar companies to stay doesn't sit well with me. He talk about being tough to corporate America and now he caves in. Maybe he isn't the deal maker he led us all to believe. But time will tell.

So I was well aware of how all stakeholders got fucked, and the difference between debt and equity.  I also note that BOTH of you used the same diversion about debt vs. equity to avoid commenting on the fact that, under Obama, the Dow is up thousands of points.  In fact, even if you take away the last 1,000 on the Dow as being a Trump rally, it's still up 10,000 in the past 8 years.
How will you two clowns find a way to whine about that, I wonder???

And it's even more unlikely that he knows the difference between stocks, bonds, debentures or any of the dozens of more complicated financial instruments out there. and then he wonders why I "dumb it down" around here when talking about financial matters.

You were the one who brought up the cost per job, not me.  You were the one to crow about the $2,000 difference between the cost of the GM bailout and the present little diversion of Trump's.  And NOW you want to switch the measuring tape to the bond holders and up the price to $32,000 a job.
Math may not be my strong suit but I can smell bullshit when it's under my nose.

At least ed actually argues on facts, even if he does torture them.  You just whine.  Continually.  Not one single other thing to contribute.
Must be your anal prolapse, Roger...Get to work on that.
PS: It's long since obvious who you are....Roger

But from what I can tell, yours only includes debt.  So lecture us all you want about complex financial instruments.  But not until you own some.

Look, we have to do something to bring back jobs and keep them here so I don't have a problem with an incentive to do so.

His win was hardly shattering.  He lost the popular vote, "bigly," and his win in the "blue wall" states was razor thin.  The Republicans lost seats in the Senate and the House.  So, yes, Trump won.  But it was far from a shattering win and not even close to a mandate.
Whatever you're smoking, you need to cut back.

It's the political way, I understand that. Time will tell if this is a continuing trend of doing business and it's effect, but the layoff is small so we won't see effect here.But when Trump for months blast politician who did exactly what he just did is hypocritical or a lie. He got a lot of votes on a false premise of him being this so called "Tough Guy","Grand Negotiator"....His sold his "followers" on a false bill of goods.
Just be straight up and say, " I'll save us the jobs, but it may cost us"...easy peasy

You can't distinguish a cogent analysis from an ad hominem. Being called a hypocrite in this case is by no means even close to being an ad hominem, It's extremely accurate. I can now also accuse you of a quickly fading short term memory. Fortunately your posts are directly above, available for us all to read.  

They think he is a god tonight.

As for your last post, I might have read it if I wanted to read a novel to put me to sleep.  When I saw how long it was, I just laughed.
You're a real Grade A bloviator, aren't you ed?

-- Modified on 12/1/2016 10:31:08 PM

Especially when they were the least global of the big three.

to pretend that I'm laffy. Short and mostly meaningless phrases are what you prefer. Got it.

Trump has so far reneged on three and followed through on one promise. One of my Trump supporting neighbors told me recently, it looks like they were sold a basket of nuclear laced kaka during the campaign. I told him the days are still young...lol

Why don't you just slink away after this your latest beatdown? You really are pathetic.

Would have that pic "saved." Pretty sick. And you have no clue who I am. You're too stupid.

...He modestly said of himself:  "Everything I say is smart."  

Besides, it was minimal.  Having it wiped out was hardly a tragedy.

More than a couple of sentences of single syllable whining but less than a big-city phone book.

How often do you need to clean the drool from your keyboard before proceeding?
PS: Do you have any clue how transparent you are?  I'll bet the entire board knows who you are.  Too bad you haven't had this alias long enough to change it before you come out of your cave again.  Talk about embarrassing.

Oh, and "You're too stupid" is quite a comeback.  Right up there with your usual pathetic drivel.  I really thought you could do better than that but you've disappointed even my most modest hopes.

You are obviously living in an alternate reality.  Enjoy it!  Right up until the moment you return to this one, after the inauguration.
Poor lil' Beeps.

He had to have the win there and he had the leverage due to the parent's company's dependence on Government contracts to make it happen. It was a definite win for him.

EVERY PENNY that the Obama administration invested in the auto bailout was ultimately recovered by Treasury, as President Obama himself proclaimed  when he took his victory lap.  I think this was what Jake remembered when he said ALL the money was recovered –it was a big time press announcement for a few days. Obama also said “and more” – this part is arguable; but the facts are undisputed that the admin did recover all the money invested on Obama’s watch.

I will take it as a serious question and attempt to answer it in a serious way.

Did you forget that counselor?

You would have been better off having the fatty twins backing you up. ROLFMFAO.

But "attacking political opponents who don't lockstep" is NOT fascism. That's good old American politics and has been practiced by every American pol in the history of the country

but shortly after the bailouts I went out and bought a half a dozen Ford Trucks, including one for my personal use. That's how pissed off I was about the GM bailout.

Did you miss that?  But the bottom line is the Bush admin made the very loans that were never recovered. So any characterization of the bailout as the “Obama bailout”  without acknowledging the Bush role is incorrect.And why I say it is fair to say the fed gov lost money.  Further, the Obama bailout SWAT team insisted on direct equity injections rather than short term loans a la Bush. And that is why the government ultimately at least broke even when it exited.

As someone pointed out today, if Trump keeps saving 1,000 jobs a week it will take him 30 years just to save the number of jobs saved by Obama's auto bailout.  And pardon me if I fail to give a shit about the bond holders.  Since when are they sacred when the American economy is at stake?  Do you remotely recall in what horrible shape our economy was in early 2009? The failure of BM and Chrysler would have made it many times worse and possibly brought on a full depression.  So sometimes the greater good is more important than bond covenants.
Have you considered the possibility that having GaGa disagree with you is the Economists' Seal of Approval

The "give backs" were for FUTURE hires. Not any of the then current employees took a penny less in salary or benefits.

I agree there is almost nothing in common between the Carrier deal and the GM bailout.

They wouldn't touch a Chevy with your 5" pole.  One just got a Ford with a V6 turbo motor and it goes like a raped ape. They've both had Fords for years and never had a serious problem with them, even though they were used for serious long-distance towing.
I had a Dodge 2500 pickup and it was fine, too.  I'm agnostic.  I'll buy from whoever gives me the best deal.  And the best warranty.  And trade it in before that expires.

I really can't believe your crocodile tears for GM bondholders as if the covenants were a sacred trust with the Feds.  First of all, bondholders are INVESTORS.  Maybe not gambling as much as the equity holders but certainly taking on risk.  And in that environment, everyone was taking a huge haircut and there was no place to hide.  Did the bondholders suffer disproportionately?  Perhaps.  But there was a greater good, in my opinion and most others.  Because had they not been forced to take a haircut GM and Chrysler would have gone under, with consequences to the entire economy that had to be avoided at all costs.  So I'm happy to stand by my conclusions.  I believe the bondholders got 25 cents on the dollar, which is 25 cents more than I got.  
Good lord, man, the way you're whining about this it's almost as if you owned GM Bonds.  And I'm pretty sure that ain't true. Could it be principle?  Not likely either, LOL!

And yes they did make concessions:

First off let's get rid of the red herring of Obama's vs. Bush's bailout. Indeed Bush initiated the intervention but the vast majority of the "nuts and bolts" of the executive actions and decisions were taken under the Obama administration so yes, the Bush and Obama bailout. It was bad with either label.

I was so successful, I'm wondering how much you would appreciate it if I could do the same with FG30.

of the “Obama bailout” and “Republicans and Democrats” into the discussion. (Hint – it wasn’t Jake).

If he's been on yet another "forced vacation" perhaps he will come slinking back out of whatever hole he crawled into after the election?