Thursday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Chicago, home of our President, on top?
  2. Perceptions and realities, part one.
  3. Another here.
  4. Somebody somewhere very confused as to how an infusion of hundreds of billions of (free) taxpayer dollars might help your company.
  5. Child abuse and cover-up.
  6. Faith healing.
  7. Not a socialist … so what is someone who thinks controlling for excess profits is part of normal ordinary market methods?
  8. FOX for racist lowlifes (on the right)? We’ll be waiting for his “MSNBC for bigoted lowlifes” link.
  9. Speaking of bigots … I found this quote interesting ” Tebow is a theocrat, so reasonable people – even including other believers – find him to be an odious, thick-skulled ass” … uhm, exactly how/why do you come to the conclusion that Mr Tebow is a theocrat? Point to one quote actually from him that lends any credence to that statement, or perhaps “odious thick-skulled” might apply better to the blogger not the football player.
  10. Oil and recession.
  11. Pattern and predator.

6 Responses to Thursday Highlights

  1. 4.Somebody somewhere very confused as to how an infusion of hundreds of billions of (free) taxpayer dollars might help your company.

    Still trying to figure out how adding 20,000-100,000 + people to the unemployment lines and ceding a core of the auto business to Japan, Korea and maybe even China would have *helped* this *country* in 2008-9. We already heard Mark’s theory. Those 100,000 unemployed people would have went home, tinkered in their garages, and invented super flying cars ala Back to the Future or Star Trek transporter devices….but since they aren’t unemployed their creative time is wasted by their bosses during the day and at night and on weekends they have their silly paychecks to work on spending. I’d be curious and amused to see Romney take up that position and run with it. Instead he took both positions and will run with whatever seems to have been the better choice at the moment.

  2. Also free tax dollars? Last I checked the US gov’t still has a large stake of GM stock.

  3. Boonton,
    Except I wasn’t even commenting on the wisdom or folly of handing GM bags of cash, giving them extraordinary benefits in restructuring and forgiving their debts, and boosting/buying their stock in large handfuls. My remark (which is uncontested by you apparently) was to the silliness of the observation that just a few years later after that big boost (which their competitors, excluding Chrysler) did not get means that … “gosh they’re doing well know …”. Uhm, with all that largesse how could they not be doing well? Duh.

  4. You seem to not quite understand accounting here. Say you have a company and you forgive them their debts and inject a boatload of cash into them by buying a huge chunk of stock that they issue to you. OK, that doesn’t make profits happen. Even if all that happens, to make profits the company has to sell products in the future while incurring less expense. If it can’t do that, then it doesn’t make profits. Yes being able to sit on a boatload of cash may help them avoid bankruptcy court for a while, even years. In fact, after the dot-com bust there were ‘zombie companies’ who were incurring losses every year but because they had raked in hundreds of millions in their stock offerings and could afford to last years losing a few million each year.

  5. Boonton,

    You seem to not quite understand accounting here. Say you have a company and you forgive them their debts and inject a boatload of cash into them by buying a huge chunk of stock that they issue to you. OK, that doesn’t make profits happen. Even if all that happens, to make profits the company has to sell products in the future while incurring less expense. If it can’t do that, then it doesn’t make profits.

    I don’t think you understand. If you get an big infusion of cash. Yes, you can sit on it and do no improvements or do anything with it but service debts … and can find yourself back in an unprofitable state a few years later. That’s the massively stupid thing to do. If you do the ordinary thing, you invest, improve and so on and voila a few years later the default expectation is that you will now be profitable. The linked person thought it somewhat surprising and laudable that lo’ and behold, two years after a massive cash infusion GM is profitable. The only thing that reflects on is how bad he views GM management, being surprised and pleased at the non-exceptional and ordinary.

  6. It’s the default assumption only if you assume GM’s business model is still viable. Injecting boat loads of cash into the old school steel companies of the late 80’s and 90’s wouldn’t have worked like this did. Nor did it do the trick for that solar company you were making so much hey about a month or two ago. So you’re basically admitting the auto bailout worked. Welcome to the Romney world of Quantum Conservatives folks, they are both for everything, against everything, think everything worked and everything failed at all the same time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>