Samuel L. Jackson: BO's message meant shit-I voted for him 'cause he's Black

He saved the American auto company. We went from 10% unemployment to 8%. People with pre-exisisting conditions can get healthcare now. And the fact that he's the one making those kinds of decisions has brought a fuck ton of hope and change for people like you and me my brown brother.

 

No, it's what he SAID, not the way he said it. And you know what? In the end, I had issues with both candidates. Overall, I thought Obama was the better of the two. Especially after Sarah Palin jumped on the Republican bandwagon. That was the nail in McCain's coffin for me.

I agree with some of what you said above, especially about education. I was a single mother making diddly-squat when my son applied for financial aid. Because of my income, he did pretty well with grants but he still needed loan assistance which his father co-signed. That's the hitch, though. Some kids might not even have that option.

Jobs? I don't know. I agree that people need to be responsible and do everything possible to obtain work. When I was out of work, I temped, which led to a full-time position. That option is available to most able-bodied people. But I see people almost every day come in to our company looking for work. Some are desperate. If you're only skilled in one thing, and those jobs are taken, what do you do?

As for healthcare, it's not that simple. If you don't have a good-paying job and your employer doesn't provide healthcare, it's expensive to buy if for yourself. If you are unemployed, COBRA is around $400/mo for an individual. How the heck is someone who is unemployed supposed to come up with that? And mandating that employers cover all employees isn't a good answer either because it will put alot of small employers out of business.

I do not have a professional degree, so I don't earn alot of money. I'm compensated fairly for the work I do, and I work for a small, family-owned company. We have good health coverage, but our deductible is $3000, $2000 of which the company will pay after I satisfy the first $1000. That's alot of money for me!! Consequently, I go without some of the things I really should have to take care of my health. So getting adequate health care for an affordable price is not as simple as you make it out to be.

 

So, Paniro, (and I often agree with alot of what you have to say on a number of topics), what would McCain and Co. have done any differently? And were you a Sarah Palin supporter (just out of curiousity)? Honestly, I do agree with others that on the political front, you seem scattered and don't make sense. Maybe it's because you were in and out of the forum and dropping one-liners here and there. What exactly do you think the Republican party could have done differently, and more importantly, better?

 

Not that simple, my friend. I have been unemployed a couple of times in the last 16 years and was fortunate to have found a job quickly each time and only had to pay for COBRA for a month or two. One of those times, I had a young child at home and no one to help me with child care. There was no way I was going to work two jobs just to pay for healthcare. I would've gone without. And this last time, I was fortunate that I found work with a temp agency that had a basic insurance plan and was relatively inexpensive. Unemployment is tricky. If it doesn't pay enough, you really can't get ahead because if you go out and get a part-time job, that will reduce your unemployment. So you're no further ahead.

 

Samuel L is funny

 

Um GM is the number one car company in the world. It beat out Toyota last year. Look it up.

 

The go out and get a job defense is ridiculous. Here are the statistics. For every job there are 5 applicants. What happens to the other four? And now they're using credit history to keep people from jobs making the hurdles even that much harder. So what about those people or is it just a case of shit out of luck starve to death in the cold.

 

Paniro, its not a matter of opinion, the companies themselves and just about every reputable economist were saying the same thing as below.

"Following dramatic drops in automobile sales throughout 2008, each of the "Big Three" U.S. automakers: General Motors (GM), Ford Motor Company, and Chrysler, requested emergency loans in order to address impending cash shortages. By April 2009, the situation had worsened such that both GM and Chrysler were faced with imminent bankruptcy and liquidation. With the intent to prevent massive job losses and destabilizing damage to the entire manufacturing sector, the U.S. and Canadian governments provided unprecedented financial bailout support to allow the companies to restructure and jettison legacy debt via Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Both companies separately filed for this protection by June 1."

 

Obama won because he was a Democrat running against the epic failure of the Bush administration.

ANY DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE WOULD HAVE WON IN 2008.

Even a Black man.lol

People act like if BHO was a Republican he'd still be President.

Sam Jackson needs to be careful if he's being ironic or irreverent in an interview when most reporters are going to take what he says literally.
His comment sounds idiotic.
I assume he didn't vote in the primaries either.

 

Gotta spread it around first. Thanks for saving me the time and energy sir

 

Without these funds, at least 2 if not all 3 of the Big Three would have had to file bankruptcy, dragging thousands of jobs, productive capacity, and suppliers with them.

 

U ain't Eva lied

 

According to Paniro he is. Everything was fine when Obama came in and communist/socialist ruined this country single handedly. Wish those African Americans would know their place lol

 

I get the idea that when a company files for bankruptcy it doesn't necessarily mean the end but at the time all of this happened should be taken into account. Remember this happened at a time where this country was shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month and credit was non existant so in a perfect market situation I agree that those businesses should have failed but given the circumstances this was a smart play. This is much like the FDR did after the market crash of 30s.
One thing I have to agree with you about is socializing of loss and the privatizing of gains that government has always been about(not just Obama EVERYONE since Carter). We as a country asorbed a shit ton of that loss but got nothing for it. At the very least the country should have gotten all those toxic assets (the homes defaulted on) and turned it into temporary housing for a certain period of time so that you wouldn't have millions living out of cars and/or tents. We may not personally see it all the time because most of us are blessed enough to be emloyed or in school but that's far from the case for millions of Americans. Maybe we should do something as a group. Nothing showy or big but even taking 20 bucks this pay day and buying some food and donating it to our local food banks or salvation army would do a heck of a lot more than complaining about our government.

 

you think Paniro is going to donate anything to some lazy bums who depend on the salvation army, for a few good days out of an otherwise miserable existence?:smt043

 

Lol gotta give my brown brotha the benefit of the doubt. But seriously we should all do this

 

:lol:

 

Don't be so quick to praise Ford for not taking any government handouts, because they did....

While Ford didn't take any of the $85 billion in TARP money for automakers that went mostly to GM and Chrysler, it did get other federal support, such as $5.9 billion in federal loans in 2009 to retool its vehicles, and a $250 million loan guarantee from the Export-Import Bank of the United States to finance export sales in 2010.

And GM and Chrysler would not have been around to emerge from bankruptcy if it was not for TARP

 

The restructuring would have required shedding excess capacity in a less than orderly fashion, ergo the dumping of thousands of workers off the employment rolls. The suppliers go next, as they begin to fold in response to sharply declining orders from their traditional customers. It is a fallacy to assume that a bankruptcy filing/restructuring will allow things to continue as before. The bailout funds allowed the companies greater time and flexibility to address chronic problems, such as pensions, benefits, excess capacity, etc as well as controlling the share price fall, as the markets were assured this would be an orderly shift, not a plummet to the basement or a fire sale.

Good suggestion. All my family's unwanted clothing and furniture goes there if we don't personally know of someone who could use it.

 

LOL. listening to conservative talks shows you will find their talking points date back to the turn of the 1900's..with one exception they adding he is a black man ...we should not vote for him.