Welcome to Thunderdome

GORDON wrote:Tons of criticism how the loss of tax revenue is going to hurt the country more than saving 700 jobs.

Like I said, he could cure cancer and get criticized.

Malcolm wrote:

Like I said, he could cure cancer and get criticized.

I'm extremely excited to have back in our midst a company that:
(i) fucked up so badly a few years back, they needed a government bailout and
(ii) are posterboys for "why excessive entitlement doesn't work" and
(iii) works in an industry almost synonymous with the union/mob

A domestic terrorist/murderer wrote Obama's official biography, didn't he?

Leisher wrote:Interesting how none of that stuff mattered until a Republican started doing it. No media bias, right?

Leisher wrote:Ford didn't need a bailout. They knew what they were doing and were cutting costs in anticipation of the economy going south.

In November 2008, the Big 3 automakers asked Congress for $50 billion to avoid bankruptcy and the loss of three million jobs. GM had become so desperate for cash that it delayed incentive program reimbursements to dealers. Ford, on the other hand, didn't really need the funds. It only asked to be included so it wouldn't suffer by competing with subsidized companies.
...
Ford Credit used funds from the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF). That was a government program for auto, student, and other consumer loans.
...
Although Ford did not receive TARP funds, it did receive government loans. It requested a $9 billion line-of-credit from the government. In return, it pledged to spend $14 billion on new technologies.
...
On June 23, 2009, Ford received a $5.9 billion loan from the Energy Department's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program. In return, it pledged to accelerate development of both hybrid and battery-powered vehicles, close dealerships, and sell Volvo.
...
Many argue that Ford needed the funds to sustain its cash flow during the recession. Ford says it was in better shape than the other two because it had mortgaged its assets in 2006 to raise $23.6 billion. It used the loans to retool it product lineup to focus on smaller, energy-efficient vehicles. It got the United Automobile Workers to agree it could finance half of a new retiree health care trust with company stock.

GORDON wrote:And furthermore.... this push from the left to eliminate "fake news" from the internet has me concerned. For a decade the democrats have been utilizing social media to its full potential. Now that the right is catching up, suddenly we need to filter out their messages as "fake news."

It bugs me, and it'll probably happen.

Leisher wrote:They've been campaigning to make Fox seem like a less legitimate source of news for years, and in a way it has worked. They did this strictly through public shaming and mockery.

Leisher wrote:Fox is no more corrupt or incompetent than CNN, yet CNN is seen as some bastion of journalistic integrity.

Leisher wrote:One way to make news becoming more legit is to simply force some sort of source/proof. End the mad rush to get clicks/ratings. Otherwise, you will NEVER be able to get rid of bullshit news...unless you control all media outlets...

It's all part of the economic turmoil in transitioning to the digital economy; the period where advertising pays for everything is going to start to come to an end.

TPRJones wrote: I'm pretty sure the leading cause of reduction in Fox viewership is death from old age, not anything the liberals are doing.