Wacka Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18795740 Yesterday,Solyndra, a solar technology company laid off all their workers (1,100) and declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This is the same place where Obama visited last May and said "Companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future" . The business got $535 MILLION in garenteed (sp) loans. Everything Obama touches turns to s**t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bladiebla Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 That's nothing compared to the 3$ Trillion Bush threw at Iraq purely based on related oil motives... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 That's nothing compared to the 3$ Trillion Bush threw at Iraq purely based on related oil motives... And there you have it, just like clockwork; the stereotypical, off-the-shelf, run-of-the mill, can't-think-for-themselves progressive justification for everything Obama. "Our embarrassingly stupid actions are okay because other people were more embarrasingly stupid ahead of us." Seriously, libs. Get a grip, mmmkay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 That's nothing compared to the 3$ Trillion Bush threw at Iraq purely based on related oil motives... Not relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 And there you have it, just like clockwork; the stereotypical, off-the-shelf, run-of-the mill, can't-think-for-themselves progressive justification for everything Obama. "Our embarrassingly stupid actions are okay because other people were more embarrasingly stupid ahead of us." Seriously, libs. Get a grip, mmmkay? The funny thing is, is that nobody here is defending Bush. We all agree he approved waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much spending. However, what we have here now a days is wacko Libs defending an empty suit president who has spent more in three years than Bush did in eight years. Its freakin mind boggling, really!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 China has decided to own that industry and sans protectionist policies in the rest of the world they will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Pffft, half a billion dollars. The Benbernanke can print that back up in no time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 (edited) That's nothing compared to the 3$ Trillion Bush threw at Iraq purely based on related oil motives... Actually, that's not a true or even CLOSE to being an accurate number. Having said that the war in Iraq was a mistake, but your number is still waaaaaaay off the mark. Try under $800M since it began, meaning that not even the total amount was under the Bush administration, but thanks for playing. http://costofwar.com/en/ Edited September 1, 2011 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 That's nothing compared to the 3$ Trillion Bush threw at Iraq purely based on related oil motives... Oh come on! What about the "he tried killing my daddy" thing? Actually, that's not a true or even CLOSE to being an accurate number. Having said that the war in Iraq was a mistake, but your number is still waaaaaaay off the mark. Try under $800M since it began, meaning that not even the total amount was under the Bush administration, but thanks for playing. http://costofwar.com/en/ $ 800 million? Oh please! I would have to respectfully disagree here. Veterans benefits alone to Iraq Vets are going to costs in the billions....for many decades to come! Equipment replacement is another huge cost. And the higher gas prices that resulted from the invasion pulled billions and billions out of the economy. I'd have to say the $3trillion is much closer the mark than 800 million? 800 million, that's outrageously low. It costs more each month for that war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 The funny thing is, is that nobody here is defending Bush. We all agree he approved waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much spending. However, what we have here now a days is wacko Libs defending an empty suit president who has spent more in three years than Bush did in eight years. Its freakin mind boggling, really!!! One of the dumbest thing Obama did was put the wars on budget because it allows idiots to think Obama is spending way more than Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 One of the dumbest thing Obama did was put the wars on budget because it allows idiots to think Obama is spending way more than Bush. Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 (edited) Oh come on! What about the "he tried killing my daddy" thing? $ 800 million? Oh please! I would have to respectfully disagree here. Veterans benefits alone to Iraq Vets are going to costs in the billions....for many decades to come! Equipment replacement is another huge cost. And the higher gas prices that resulted from the invasion pulled billions and billions out of the economy. I'd have to say the $3trillion is much closer the mark than 800 million? 800 million, that's outrageously low. It costs more each month for that war The Iraq war has not added $10 a barrel on a sustained basis the way the way Stiglitz suggests. That is a ridiculous number he pulled out of his ass to back up his 08 projection. I can tell you with much certitude that this is completely insane. Yes, there was a period in time where oil spiked higher because of the war and I would even go as far as to say that at certain short time periods it went up at least $10 because of it, but on a sustained basis, it is much much lower than that actual number. Specially considering that oil production is now above Pre war levels and HAS BEEN. http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=iq&product=oil&graph=production Also the benefits number he mentions isn't backed up by any real numbers, he just sort of tosses it out there loosely with nothing really backing it up and we are suppose to take it as gospel? At least substantiate that with some sort of hypothesis. He also attributes part of the US financial collapse to the War. Ok, I'm not even gonna touch that one. Edited September 1, 2011 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 One of the dumbest thing Obama did was put the wars on budget because it allows idiots to think Obama is spending way more than Bush. I'll respond like you normally would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18795740 Yesterday,Solyndra, a solar technology company laid off all their workers (1,100) and declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This is the same place where Obama visited last May and said "Companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future" . The business got $535 MILLION in garenteed (sp) loans. Everything Obama touches turns to s**t. But that $535m created more consumer denand, so we're better off for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Clearly, the answer is wealth redistribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Don't look at it as $500 million down the drain. Look at it as $500 million to employ 1,000 worker for two years. That's what people call a stimulus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Don't look at it as $500 million down the drain. Look at it as $500 million to employ 1,000 worker for two years. That's what people call a stimulus. good point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 (edited) I'll respond like you normally would. In the same vein (yes I know it's an old video, but aren't we making fun of his handling of money?): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt8hTayupE&NR=1 Edited September 1, 2011 by Joe Miner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 China has decided to own that industry and sans protectionist policies in the rest of the world they will. Fine. Let them have a monopoly on an infeasible technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Don't look at it as $500 million down the drain. Look at it as $500 million to employ 1,000 worker for two years. That's what people call a stimulus. Post of the year!! Nice one!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts