Hey Barfo!

[Denny Crane]

[video=youtube;Ll5DXNiBQmc]

LOL at this:

[video=youtube;mqaWiI_sM0c]

 

[Rodolfo]

Is that searchable database available?

 

[Denny Crane]

Hey barfo,

This time he really means it?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101222/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_economy
Obama pledges economic focus during next 2 years
– Wed Dec 22, 4:42 pm ET

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-21/...ck-health-plan-president-obama?_s=PM:POLITICS
Obama to focus hard on economy after Democratic loss
January 21, 2010|By Ed Henry, CNN Senior White House Correspondent

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-12-03-obama-jobs_N.htm
Obama puts renewed focus on job creation
Updated 12/4/2009 11:53 AM

 

[barfo]

Hey barfo,

This time he really means it?

Are you implying that he hasn't focused on the economy?

Whether you like the approach or not, many of the major actions so far have been focused on the economy:

ARRA (aka the stimulus bill)
Bailouts of Chrysler and GM
Wall street regulation reform
Tax cut extension (aka stimulus #2)

Arguably, the health care reform bill has important economic implications as well.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Are you implying that he hasn't focused on the economy?

Whether you like the approach or not, many of the major actions so far have been focused on the economy:

ARRA (aka the stimulus bill)
Bailouts of Chrysler and GM
Wall street regulation reform
Tax cut extension (aka stimulus #2)

Arguably, the health care reform bill has important economic implications as well.

barfo

Wolf in sheep's clothing. You point to a pork laden bill that was full of progressive agenda items that had nothing to do with economic stimulus. And you point to two other things that might be reasonable in good economic times. You omit things like increasing CAFE standards that helped put Chrysler and GM in the need for bailouts.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1995113,00.html
Will German Austerity Help or Hurt the Global Recovery?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...IVl5Tg?docId=7a40a90ed67f407489caa51b189b3f52
German consumer confidence dips from high level

BERLIN (AP) — German consumer confidence has slipped slightly from high levels amid expectations that the country's strong economic growth will ease in the coming months, according to a survey published Tuesday.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...tedly-rises-to-record-on-domestic-demand.html
German Business Confidence Unexpectedly Rises to Record on Domestic Demand

http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1304540&srvc=rss
Boston Fed chief: U.S. unemployment to stay above 9% in ’11

 

[barfo]

You omit things like increasing CAFE standards that helped put Chrysler and GM in the need for bailouts.

Well, now that's a rather interesting argument. So, Obama announcing higher future CAFE standards on May 19, 2009 caused Chrysler and GM to need bailouts?

Curious that Chrysler was already in bankruptcy by then, and GM was only 2 weeks from declaring bankruptcy.

I guess Mr. Bush must have understood this when he provided the first bailout money in 2008. "Well, Obama is probably going to raise the CAFE, so these auto boys are gonna need some cash".

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

So there weren't CAFE standards before the bailouts?

Why do you think the car companies fought those things all along?

 

[barfo]

So there weren't CAFE standards before the bailouts?

I believe we were discussing Obama's focus on the economy. It's hard for me to see how CAFE standards enacted by previous administrations are relevant to that topic.

Why do you think the car companies fought those things all along?

Because they were run by idiots.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

I believe we were discussing Obama's focus on the economy. It's hard for me to see how CAFE standards enacted by previous administrations are relevant to that topic.



Because they were run by idiots.

barfo

How's that hopey changey thing working for people? Like the ~19% unemployed or underemployed? Or the 28% of people whose homes are underwater?

The car makers were making cars people wanted to buy. CAFE standards made them make cars people didn't want to buy as much.

 

[barfo]

The car makers were making cars people wanted to buy. CAFE standards made them make cars people didn't want to buy as much.

The success of the Japanese car companies suggests that people weren't uninterested in buying smaller, more efficient cars. They just wanted good ones instead of bad ones. Too bad the US companies took decades to figure that out.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

The success of the Japanese car companies suggests that people weren't uninterested in buying smaller, more efficient cars. They just wanted good ones instead of bad ones. Too bad the US companies took decades to figure that out.

barfo

The #1 and #2 top selling vehicles in the USA in 2010 are trucks. #5 is an SUV, #6 a truck.

GM's best selling vehicle is the Equniox, an SUV.

People seem most interested in buying trucks and SUVs still.

 

[barfo]

The #1 and #2 top selling vehicles in the USA in 2010 are trucks. #5 is an SUV, #6 a truck.

GM's best selling vehicle is the Equniox, an SUV.

People seem most interested in buying trucks and SUVs still.

And therefore...?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

And therefore...?

barfo

And therefore they were selling what people want, all along. Not so stupid.

 

[barfo]

And therefore they were selling what people want, all along. Not so stupid.

And therefore CAFE standards haven't kept them from selling those trucks, have they?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

And therefore CAFE standards haven't kept them from selling those trucks, have they?

barfo

Steadily declining profits as CAFE went up, and it is a causal relationship.

 

[barfo]

Steadily declining profits as CAFE went up, and it is a causal relationship.

That's pretty silly. There is plenty of profit to be made on fuel-efficient cars. The American companies were just way too slow to figure out how.

If no one bought fuel-efficient cars, you might have a case. But in fact lots of them have sold - just not the ones made by Ford, GM, and Chrysler.

Fuel economy standards are much higher in Europe and Japan, and yet it is the American car companies that can't make a profit due to CAFE?

They made crappy cars, people bought from their competitors, and their market share and profit declined.

CAFE has very little to do with it.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

That's pretty silly. There is plenty of profit to be made on fuel-efficient cars. The American companies were just way too slow to figure out how.

If no one bought fuel-efficient cars, you might have a case. But in fact lots of them have sold - just not the ones made by Ford, GM, and Chrysler.

Fuel economy standards are much higher in Europe and Japan, and yet it is the American car companies that can't make a profit due to CAFE?

They made crappy cars, people bought from their competitors, and their market share and profit declined.

CAFE has very little to do with it.

barfo

GM may have been the top producer of ethanol ready vehicles before Obama took 'em over. And Ford was selling a 60+ MPG diesel vehicle in Europe that was outlawed to sell in the USA.

GM's share of the overall market may have declined, but it's sales were quite consistent.

 

[barfo]

GM's share of the overall market may have declined, but it's sales were quite consistent.

Worldwide. But between 1999 and 2007, their sales in the US of A declined by 20%. And then they declined by a lot more in 2008 and 2009.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

And your point is?

 

[barfo]

And your point is?

My point is to disagree with your point that CAFE is what drove the US automakers under.

At most, it was their response to CAFE, not CAFE itself. I guess you could argue that when the government said "make fuel-efficient cars" Detroit heard "make shitty cars". But that's not the government's fault, that's the automakers fault. Figuring out that that fuel-efficient isn't a synonym for shitty doesn't require a marketing genius.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

My point is to disagree with your point that CAFE is what drove the US automakers under.

At most, it was their response to CAFE, not CAFE itself. I guess you could argue that when the government said "make fuel-efficient cars" Detroit heard "make shitty cars". But that's not the government's fault, that's the automakers fault. Figuring out that that fuel-efficient isn't a synonym for shitty doesn't require a marketing genius.

barfo

You keep saying they made shitty cars, but they didn't. They made more fuel efficient ones which weren't the ones that were selling for them.

And all of this is a smokescreen for Obama's "focus like a laser beam" on the economy, those statements of his usually followed by some vacation or overseas trip.

 

[barfo]

You keep saying they made shitty cars, but they didn't. They made more fuel efficient ones which weren't the ones that were selling for them.

They certainly did make shitty cars. The Pinto, the Vega, the Pacer, the Chevette... shitty, shitty cars.

Fuel efficient cars became popular after the days of gas rationing and have been popular ever since. Had Detroit produced good cars to meet that need, they would have been selling those. Instead they produced astonishingly bad cars, and thus created entire generations of Americans who wanted nothing to do with their cars.

And all of this is a smokescreen for Obama's "focus like a laser beam" on the economy, those statements of his usually followed by some vacation or overseas trip.

You were the one who put up this smokescreen about CAFE standards. It isn't relevant to the initial discussion, as I pointed out at the time.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

They certainly did make shitty cars. The Pinto, the Vega, the Pacer, the Chevette... shitty, shitty cars.

Fuel efficient cars became popular after the days of gas rationing and have been popular ever since. Had Detroit produced good cars to meet that need, they would have been selling those. Instead they produced astonishingly bad cars, and thus created entire generations of Americans who wanted nothing to do with their cars.



You were the one who put up this smokescreen about CAFE standards. It isn't relevant to the initial discussion, as I pointed out at the time.

barfo

The automakers didn't make those models you listed during the time their market share declined. I owned a Chevette during the early 1980s and loved it. Aside from a Jeep Grand Cherokee I owned for over 10 years, the Chevette was the best American made car I ever owned.

And still the question remains, "does he mean it this time?"

Given past history, he's said he'd focus on the economy and then focuses on other things instead. All hat, no cattle. Or no clue. Probably no clue given the results.

 

[barfo]

The automakers didn't make those models you listed during the time their market share declined. I owned a Chevette during the early 1980s and loved it. Aside from a Jeep Grand Cherokee I owned for over 10 years, the Chevette was the best American made car I ever owned.

I notice that you qualified it as the best "American made car" you ever owned. Not the best car you ever owned?
I'm happy you enjoyed your Chevette, but I think your experience is fairly atypical.
It takes time to earn a reputation. Those bad cars in the late 70's, early 80's led to people looking elsewhere for their next cars, and to a widespread belief that American cars were poorly designed and poorly built. The market share they ceded in small cars allowed Toyota, Honda, et al. to become stronger, and able to compete with Detroit in larger cars too, and that competition further weakened Detroit.

And still the question remains, "does he mean it this time?"

Given past history, he's said he'd focus on the economy and then focuses on other things instead. All hat, no cattle. Or no clue. Probably no clue given the results.

A couple of days ago, you said that, and in response I listed several major economic actions. You dismissed the list by saying that I hadn't mentioned CAFE standards, and off we went into Pinto-land.

I expect you to disagree with everything that's been done, and claim that it was all bad for the economy rather than good.
But to imply as you are here that nothing has been done - if facts don't matter to you, you might as well just claim he's a socialist terrorist born in Kenya and be done with it.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

You list actions that punish economic success as if they're a good thing. Extending the tax cuts wasn't even a stimulus, though the FICA tax holiday is the first reasonable thing done to help the private sector. So I don't disagree with _everything_ that was done, it's just too little too late at this point (to help anyone for the past two years, Obama's entire presidency, super majority in the senate, etc.).

It's rather stunning that the strongest economic area is within a few miles of the capital. It should be the Texas R&D corridor or Silicon Valley.

I consider my old '72 VW Bus to be a great vehicle I owned. I owned a 15 year old Porsche 944, which was fast and fun, and easy to park. The Jeep was overall the best quality vehicle I've owned. An American car. The Chevette? I used to commute in it to work during the Chicago winters and it handled really well and the heater worked and I laughed at the Corvettes I saw sitting (spun off) in the ditch by the side of the road.

 

[Denny Crane]

Hey barfo,

What do you think of Obama having the military bomb Pakistan? Stinks of Nixon and Cambodia during the Vietnam days, to me.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-12/28/c_13667814.htm
12 killed in U.S. drone strike in Pakistan

 

[barfo]

Hey barfo,

What do you think of Obama having the military bomb Pakistan? Stinks of Nixon and Cambodia during the Vietnam days, to me.

1. What is it that reminds you of Cambodia?
2. What would you suggest doing instead?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

1. What is it that reminds you of Cambodia?
2. What would you suggest doing instead?

barfo

Bombing a neighboring country to where we're fighting, and that we're not at war with.

Bring the troops home. Leave an aircraft carrier (group) in the region and bomb the taliban if they make their presence known.

 

[barfo]

Bombing a neighboring country to where we're fighting, and that we're not at war with.

We aren't at war with Afghanistan, either.

Bring the troops home. Leave an aircraft carrier (group) in the region and bomb the taliban if they make their presence known.

So, what you'd do differently is bomb Pakistan from an aircraft carrier instead of bombing Pakistan from drones?
I'm not sure if I can handle that amount of radical thinking this early in the morning.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

We aren't at war with Afghanistan, either.



So, what you'd do differently is bomb Pakistan from an aircraft carrier instead of bombing Pakistan from drones?
I'm not sure if I can handle that amount of radical thinking this early in the morning.

barfo

We've got 100,000 troops stationed in Afghanistan and none in Pakistan.

Who said anything about bombing Pakistan? Isn't the idea to prevent the country's wealth (such as it is) from funding terrorist organizations?

Oh yeah, mission creep. What we're doing there isn't reasoned anymore.