Is a win a win?

[Boarder]

Everyone who thought there was no global warming kind of felt vindicated by the whole climate-gate, would that be correct? I mean, the goal would be to not have man-made global warming, be it by reducing emissions, finding out it doesn't exist, or any other means, correct? I think that is true. So, if there is no man-made global warming, that's a win. Correct?

On another subject, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the bailouts of companies earlier this year. It signaled government control of the auto industry and a march toward the "s" word, right? So, if the companies pay the money back (http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/11/the_morning_report_gm_will_pay_back_loan_early_tar p_likely_to_remain_through_2011.html) and move toward profitability again, this would be a win, right? Wasn't that the goal and now that it is being attained we should be happy?

[Sooner Eclipse]

Everyone who thought there was no global warming kind of felt vindicated by the whole climate-gate, would that be correct? I mean, the goal would be to not have man-made global warming, be it by reducing emissions, finding out it doesn't exist, or any other means, correct? I think that is true. So, if there is no man-made global warming, that's a win. Correct?

On another subject, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the bailouts of companies earlier this year. It signaled government control of the auto industry and a march toward the "s" word, right? So, if the companies pay the money back (http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/11/the_morning_report_gm_will_pay_back_loan_early_tar p_likely_to_remain_through_2011.html) and move toward profitability again, this would be a win, right? Wasn't that the goal and now that it is being attained we should be happy?

Does this matter to the former creditors that would have been paid back some of what they lost but due to the corruption of our new gubmint they now get nothing. After they make the last payment can they kick the govt and union *********s out of the boardroom? Doubt it on either acct. If the ends are going to justify the means, lets just shoot all the sick people, then we wont need any healthcare reform.

[SoonerBorn68]

Heh. The government is now part of business. Time to get use to it, they've got the hooks in.

[JohnnyMack]

Looks like GM is paying back the small loan but not buying back the stock. Am I wrong?

Also, I made ribs this weekend and one of the racks was overly fatty. I didn't know I was supposed to trim them? Am I?

[swardboy]

Mmmmm......fat

Unlike brisket, I would trim some fat from "overly" fatty ribs, since they're not on heat long enough to melt the fat off.

Oh, and Obama said earlier that he didn't want gobermint to be in the business of owning businesses....do you see a rush on DC's part to get out?

[Partial Qualifier]

If we want to be real about it, ultimately all of us 'lost' due to the corruption driving the "man-made global warning" scheme.

And propping up GM with taxpayer money, I'll go with "undecided" because although they *say* they will pay it all back, who really knows? GM's sales have been in the crapper for a long time and I don't trust GM's management to make themselves very profitable as their sales decline year after year.


Under the plan, the automaker said it will begin paying the U.S. Treasury Department $1 billion each quarter, beginning at the end of December. The government has given GM a total of $52 billion, including $45.3 billion in exchange for a 61 percent equity stake in the company. Here's a parallel with the Global Warming debate: Do we really have enough data to reliably predict global temperature fluctuation? ..... Do we really have enough data to reliably predict what condition GM will be in... 5 years from now? 10?


Chief Executive Officer Fritz Henderson cautioned that the earnings numbers don't comply with U.S. accounting standards and cover only the part of the quarter after GM left Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on July 10. Still, the report was better than many analysts expected.Given the above disclaimer plus GM's sales figures for the past 10 years, it's hard to call this a victory just yet. You know?

[C&CDean]

Looks like GM is paying back the small loan but not buying back the stock. Am I wrong?

Also, I made ribs this weekend and one of the racks was overly fatty. I didn't know I was supposed to trim them? Am I?

Dumbass. Of course you trim as much fat as you can off. Also, you should pull the membrane off the inside of the ribs too. I trim as much fat as I can off my brisket too. Sometimes I have to cook it a while longer in the foil to get it tender, but I hate them big ol' globs of gooey fat on a brisket.

[hellogoodbye]

Given the amount of money and resources already spent on AGW that could have been used in real environmental issues, I wouldn't classify it as a win. A beginning, perhaps...

[JohnnyMack]

Dumbass. Of course you trim as much fat as you can off. Also, you should pull the membrane off the inside of the ribs too. I trim as much fat as I can off my brisket too. Sometimes I have to cook it a while longer in the foil to get it tender, but I hate them big ol' globs of gooey fat on a brisket.

I pulled the membrane off, just never occurred to my unsophisticated *** to trim the fat first. :O

[Partial Qualifier]

A beginning, perhaps...

http://acid.noobgrinder.com/Funneh/orly.gif

[yermom]

nothing has proved AGW is a hoax

someone may have doctored some data that didn't fit, but who knows why it didn't. maybe they were collecting it wrong? maybe they were just idiots.

and lots of the things that could help prevent AGW if it does exist are good for other reasons anyway. so overall, it could very well be a loss

as for paying back the bailout money. i would love a no interest loan right about now... even if they paid it back in full, they still made money, so to speak, or at least cost the US money

[OklahomaTuba]

nothing has proved AGW is a hoaxUnless you ignore "hide the decline", and ignore the fact that temperature have been declining the last 10 years while carbon emission were actually rising at the same time, then you might just be right! ;)

[Partial Qualifier]

and lots of the things that could help prevent AGW if it does exist are good for other reasons anyway.



AGREED.

[yermom]

Unless you ignore "hide the decline", and ignore the fact that temperature have been declining the last 10 years while carbon emission were actually rising at the same time, then you might just be right! ;)

do you study climate? solar output? i know i don't. i do know a little bit about science and recording data though

but i don't have a vested interest in oil money drying up either

[BermudaSooner]

On another subject, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the bailouts of companies earlier this year. It signaled government control of the auto industry and a march toward the "s" word, right? So, if the companies pay the money back (http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/11/the_morning_report_gm_will_pay_back_loan_early_tar p_likely_to_remain_through_2011.html) and move toward profitability again, this would be a win, right? Wasn't that the goal and now that it is being attained we should be happy?

There must be consequences for taking risks--if the gubment always back stops those "too big to fail," the market doesn't work.

Here's a real example. A trader at Citibank collected a $100 million bonus in July from making leveraged bets on oil. He made $700 million for Citibank, so the $100 million was his bonus based on that. Now what would have happened had his trades gone the other way--$1 billion, $10 billion, $50 billion losses? And why was he allowed to make such big bets? Cause the American taxpayer has his back. Absolutely ludicrous. If Citibank actually has to take risk, the guy doesn't get to make his bets. Since there are no real consequences, why not?