View Full Version : Cash For Clunkers
chipdip18
08/05/09, 01:01 PM
Discuss this latest action. Is it working? Is it not working? Why or not? How does this reflect on the current administration? Is it a good idea theory? In practice?
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 01:32 PM
Cash for Clunkers is complete bullshit. For the environmentally-conscious, it's making a slight impact on emissions with the trading in of these clunkers for slightly to significantly more fuel-efficient vehicles and the dealerships are advertising disabling these cars and junking them. However, I heard another story where some of these cars will be dumped on South America's auto market instead. I mean, what's the point of moving pollution elsewhere? Also, think about the government's greedy genius in all this. As far as GM and Chrysler goes, remember that those companies filed for bankruptcy and the government runs them now. The biggest incentives are coming from those companies and they're moving their vehicles quite well in this program. Our tax-payer dollars which are funding Cash for Clunkers trade-in incentives (up to $4500 per vehicle) are going right into the government's hands because they run two of the biggest participating companies. That's some highway robbery right there.
Now, if we never fought this deceitful war in the Middle East as well as undermining and taking advantage of the American people, including fear-mongering and gradually stripping us of our Constitutional Rights, those are just some reasons we wouldn't be in a deficit. Mortgage crisis (as a result of deceitful and radical banking firms), and I'm not even going to bother listing everything else since I'm sure people will chime in. This society turned into a joke-ass, credit-based one and it just gets pushed more and more. It's bad enough free enterprise doesn't work anymore. In the past, if a business failed, it failed with a better one readily taking its place. Now, bad businesses are bailed out and even rewarded with bailouts and other deceptive bullshit. If the government wasn't placing funds in the hands of the corrupt and powerful elite and their poorly-run companies, would we be having these stupid programs?
On a final note, global warming is also a bunch of bullshit. These are natural weather patterns occurring. Ever hear of solar flares? Ever hear of the Ice Ages in the past? Ever hear how the Earth was significantly warmer just 500 years ago than it is now? Al Gore and his cronies are making suckers out of all of you, especially the youth who really wish to make changes but end up playing for the wrong team, sometimes without even knowing about it.
EDIT: There should be a program where we can trade in all these corrupt, reptilian elite and their dedicated minions for real people. You know... people who actually have consciences and all that.
guess what I decided not to read
Animalhill
08/05/09, 01:37 PM
Cash for Clunkers is complete bullshit. For the environmentally-conscious, it's making a slight impact on emissions with the trading in of these clunkers for slightly to significantly more fuel-efficient vehicles and the dealerships are advertising disabling these cars and junking them. However, I heard another story where some of these cars will be dumped on South America's auto market instead. I mean, what's the point of moving pollution elsewhere? Also, think about the government's greedy genius in all this. As far as GM and Chrysler goes, remember that those companies filed for bankruptcy and the government runs them now. The biggest incentives are coming from those companies and they're moving their vehicles quite well in this program. Our tax-payer dollars which are funding Cash for Clunkers trade-in incentives (up to $4500 per vehicle) are going right into the government's hands because they run two of the biggest participating companies. That's some highway robbery right there.
Now, if we never fought this deceitful war in the Middle East as well as undermining and taking advantage of the American people, including fear-mongering and gradually stripping us of our Constitutional Rights, those are just some reasons we wouldn't be in a deficit. Mortgage crisis (as a result of deceitful and radical banking firms), and I'm not even going to bother listing everything else since I'm sure people will chime in. This society turned into a joke-ass, credit-based one and it just gets pushed more and more. It's bad enough free enterprise doesn't work anymore. In the past, if a business failed, it failed with a better one readily taking its place. Now, bad businesses are bailed out and even rewarded with bailouts and other deceptive bullshit. If the government wasn't placing funds in the hands of the corrupt and powerful elite and their poorly-run companies, would we be having these stupid programs?
On a final note, global warming is also a bunch of bullshit. These are natural weather patterns occurring. Ever hear of solar flares? Ever hear of the Ice Ages in the past? Ever hear how the Earth was significantly warmer just 500 years ago than it is now? Al Gore and his cronies are making suckers out of all of you, especially the youth who really wish to make changes but end up playing for the wrong team, sometimes without even knowing about it.
EDIT: There should be a program where we can trade in all these corrupt, reptilian elite and their dedicated minions for real people. You know... people who actually have consciences and all that.
:gunhead:
Hahahaahah, I didn't even see that motherfucker doesn't believe in global warming. Man you're dumb.
My mom is actually taking advantage of the last 48 hours of CFC by turning in her old Dodge Caravan to get a Civic Hybrid.
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 01:46 PM
I'm a motherfucker? I'm surprised that a lot of people on these forums, including the founder, are a bunch of brainwashed proletarians. A significant amount of music covered on this site has social and political messages, yet, no one calls bands like Thrice, Thursday, Set Your Goals, etc. crazy... or... motherfuckers.
Here's another tidbit, especially to the guy from Bellefonte, PA. Your mom is trading in her Dodge Caravan which is most likely paid in full by now for a new car. If she's relying on the $4500 incentive alone, she'll be a slave to the bank with a new car loan. Sure, a Honda Civic Hybrid is easily a way better car than the Caravan, but, it's her call. As long as she's responsible with her payments and knows what she's getting into, she'll be alright. I'm more worried about the people simply jumping into this program on impulse. The typical American consumer buys on impulse. Any deal or sale out there, we're in! I've been like that in the past and I'm still cleaning up the mess.
wesgemm08
08/05/09, 01:46 PM
Cash for Clunkers is complete bullshit. For the environmentally-conscious, it's making a slight impact on emissions with the trading in of these clunkers for slightly to significantly more fuel-efficient vehicles and the dealerships are advertising disabling these cars and junking them. However, I heard another story where some of these cars will be dumped on South America's auto market instead. I mean, what's the point of moving pollution elsewhere? Also, think about the government's greedy genius in all this. As far as GM and Chrysler goes, remember that those companies filed for bankruptcy and the government runs them now. The biggest incentives are coming from those companies and they're moving their vehicles quite well in this program. Our tax-payer dollars which are funding Cash for Clunkers trade-in incentives (up to $4500 per vehicle) are going right into the government's hands because they run two of the biggest participating companies. That's some highway robbery right there.
Now, if we never fought this deceitful war in the Middle East as well as undermining and taking advantage of the American people, including fear-mongering and gradually stripping us of our Constitutional Rights, those are just some reasons we wouldn't be in a deficit. Mortgage crisis (as a result of deceitful and radical banking firms), and I'm not even going to bother listing everything else since I'm sure people will chime in. This society turned into a joke-ass, credit-based one and it just gets pushed more and more. It's bad enough free enterprise doesn't work anymore. In the past, if a business failed, it failed with a better one readily taking its place. Now, bad businesses are bailed out and even rewarded with bailouts and other deceptive bullshit. If the government wasn't placing funds in the hands of the corrupt and powerful elite and their poorly-run companies, would we be having these stupid programs?
On a final note, global warming is also a bunch of bullshit. These are natural weather patterns occurring. Ever hear of solar flares? Ever hear of the Ice Ages in the past? Ever hear how the Earth was significantly warmer just 500 years ago than it is now? Al Gore and his cronies are making suckers out of all of you, especially the youth who really wish to make changes but end up playing for the wrong team, sometimes without even knowing about it.
EDIT: There should be a program where we can trade in all these corrupt, reptilian elite and their dedicated minions for real people. You know... people who actually have consciences and all that.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Praetor
08/05/09, 01:47 PM
I think it's hilarious that the right is trying to spin this into a failure simply because its success exceeded expectations.
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 01:55 PM
Hahahaahah, I didn't even see that motherfucker doesn't believe in global warming. Man you're dumb.
Just to get this out of the way, look into history. There was a global cooling agenda trying to be pushed in the 1960's. It's just an up-and-down environmental agenda as a result of natural weather patterns. The more I read people's responses on here and simply see how people react to mainstream news (or lack of reaction or acknowledgment thereof), I think of "the proles" and "party members" in George Orwell's book, 1984. There's a reason why there's a handful of people in this world who see things for what they are and turn against them. Unfortunately, a lot of people over time have been discredited. If it was a politician "whistle-blower", he or she would have been discredited by some sudden affair, drug conviction, or whatever else can be conjured up. As for authors, artists, and a good chunk of other people, the communist card as well as "right wing extremist", "nutjob", etc. have been played. I'll just stick to my beliefs and hope for the best in these situations.
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 01:59 PM
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
I get hit with a Billy Madison reference now? In the movie, he was rambling about that Puppy Who Lost Its Way book. Does anyone on here believe in anything other than what's shoved down their throats?
Praetor
08/05/09, 01:59 PM
Just to get this out of the way, look into history. There was a global cooling agenda trying to be pushed in the 1960's. It's just an up-and-down environmental agenda as a result of natural weather patterns. The more I read people's responses on here and simply see how people react to mainstream news (or lack of reaction or acknowledgment thereof), I think of "the proles" and "party members" in George Orwell's book, 1984. There's a reason why there's a handful of people in this world who see things for what they are and turn against them. Unfortunately, a lot of people over time have been discredited. If it was a politician "whistle-blower", he or she would have been discredited by some sudden affair, drug conviction, or whatever else can be conjured up. As for authors, artists, and a good chunk of other people, the communist card as well as "right wing extremist", "nutjob", etc. have been played. I'll just stick to my beliefs and hope for the best in these situations.
http://www.zanzig.com/miscpix/crichton1a.jpg
Oh, and namedropping George Orwell is the new Godwin.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:01 PM
I get hit with a Billy Madison reference now? In the movie, he was rambling about that Puppy Who Lost Its Way book. Does anyone on here believe in anything other than what's shoved down their throats?
No, we're all media whores who can't think for themselves.
See, here's the problem with loons like you: no affinity for facts. If someone disagrees with you, there's no "put up or shut up": we're either perpetrators or followers in a grand conspiracy.
wesgemm08
08/05/09, 02:01 PM
I get hit with a Billy Madison reference now? In the movie, he was rambling about that Puppy Who Lost Its Way book. Does anyone on here believe in anything other than what's shoved down their throats?
You rambled off three paragraphs about an economic stimulus program without once mentioning anything related to economics.
wrppdarndyrfngr
08/05/09, 02:04 PM
I think it's hilarious that the right is trying to spin this into a failure simply because its success exceeded expectations.
OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS DOING ITS JOB TOOOO WELL! IT MUST BE BROKEN BECAUSE ITS TOOO POPULAR! IF THEY CAN OPERATE A WIDLY POPLUAR PROGRAM THAT WORKS TOO WELL THEY CANT RUN YOUR HEALTH CARE EITHER!
XXX
I'm a motherfucker? I'm surprised that a lot of people on these forums, including the founder, are a bunch of brainwashed proletarians. A significant amount of music covered on this site has social and political messages, yet, no one calls bands like Thrice, Thursday, Set Your Goals, etc. crazy... or... motherfuckers.
Here's another tidbit, especially to the guy from Bellefonte, PA. Your mom is trading in her Dodge Caravan which is most likely paid in full by now for a new car. If she's relying on the $4500 incentive alone, she'll be a slave to the bank with a new car loan. Sure, a Honda Civic Hybrid is easily a way better car than the Caravan, but, it's her call. As long as she's responsible with her payments and knows what she's getting into, she'll be alright. I'm more worried about the people simply jumping into this program on impulse. The typical American consumer buys on impulse. Any deal or sale out there, we're in! I've been like that in the past and I'm still cleaning up the mess.
Wow, Tate better get in here and rape you. Here's another tidbit, my mom is trading in here Caravan she got in 2000. She's not expecting to get much for it, she's saved a great deal, so she won't have to be a slave to anybody. Seriously brainwashed?
http://www.zanzig.com/miscpix/crichton1a.jpg
Oh, and namedropping George Orwell is the new Godwin.
You rambled off three paragraphs about an economic stimulus package without once mentioning anything related to economics.
This and this.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:06 PM
OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS DOING ITS JOB TOOOO WELL! IT MUST BE BROKEN BECAUSE ITS TOOO POPULAR! IF THEY CAN OPERATE A WIDLY POPLUAR PROGRAM THAT WORKS TOO WELL THEY CANT RUN YOUR HEALTH CARE EITHER!
XXX
WHAT'S NEXT, CASH FOR CLUNKERS? PAY PEOPLE TO EAT CHICKEN?
CASH FOR BADONKADONKERS? PAY PEOPLE WITH HUGE ASSES?
CASH FOR CRUNKERS? PAY PEOPLE TO LISTEN TO BROKENCYDE?
WAKE UPPPPPP AMERICA
x
We think this way not because of party standing or right wing/left wing bullshit, we think this way because it is the truth and all we have is the truth. I voted for Obama and my voter registration card says Democrat, but I think for myself and make decisions based on logic and thought, not party politics.
saysmydoctor
08/05/09, 02:08 PM
Successful program is a failure for doing what is what meant to do. I GET IT.
Brand-new-123
08/05/09, 02:09 PM
http://www.zanzig.com/miscpix/crichton1a.jpg
Oh, and namedropping George Orwell is the new Godwin.
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/cycles/fig2.jpg
wrppdarndyrfngr
08/05/09, 02:09 PM
WHAT'S NEXT, CASH FOR CLUNKERS? PAY PEOPLE TO EAT CHICKEN?
CASH FOR BADONKADONKERS? PAY PEOPLE WITH HUGE ASSES?
CASH FOR CRUNKERS? PAY PEOPLE TO LISTEN TO BROKENCYDE?
WAKE UPPPPPP AMERICA
x
Jon Stewart'em
holy lol to that last one
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:10 PM
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/cycles/fig2.jpg
Are my eyes not seeing properly because of all the wool, or is that a sharp uptick I see in the last hundred years or so?
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 02:11 PM
http://www.zanzig.com/miscpix/crichton1a.jpg
Oh, and namedropping George Orwell is the new Godwin.
Fuck Godwin's Law, first of all. Secondly, that graph doesn't display enough. Notice the temperature dip into the 1970's? Global Cooling, it was called. Also, the graph only goes back to 1880. This point in time happens to be a peak pattern in solar activity. Of course, the temperature will be higher, according to these statistics. It's just not enough information. 129 years of back-tracking is not enough. The Earth's been here WAY longer than that, and human beings have been here longer than that as well.
Thomas Nassiff
08/05/09, 02:11 PM
guess what I decided not to read
:thumbup:
:lol:
saysmydoctor
08/05/09, 02:12 PM
To be fair, a global temperature is impossible. With that being said, global warming is global cooling. So, go read a science textbook.
saysmydoctor
08/05/09, 02:12 PM
Fuck Godwin's Law, first of all. Secondly, that graph doesn't display enough. Notice the temperature dip into the 1970's? Global Cooling, it was called. Also, the graph only goes back to 1880. This point in time happens to be a peak pattern in solar activity. Of course, the temperature will be higher, according to these statistics. It's just not enough information. 129 years of back-tracking is not enough. The Earth's been here WAY longer than that, and human beings have been here longer than that as well.
One word concerning paleoclimatology: dendrochronology.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:15 PM
Fuck Godwin's Law, first of all. Secondly, that graph doesn't display enough. Notice the temperature dip into the 1970's? Global Cooling, it was called. Also, the graph only goes back to 1880. This point in time happens to be a peak pattern in solar activity. Of course, the temperature will be higher, according to these statistics. It's just not enough information. 129 years of back-tracking is not enough. The Earth's been here WAY longer than that, and human beings have been here longer than that as well.
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
According to Drew Shindell, a climate researcher from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, NY, the most recent studies have confirmed that changing levels of energy from the Sun are not significant enough to be a major cause of global warming: "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues." For more details, see Link Between Solar Cycle and Climate is Blowin' in the Wind (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/19990408/)
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 02:17 PM
Wow, Tate better get in here and rape you. Here's another tidbit, my mom is trading in here Caravan she got in 2000. She's not expecting to get much for it, she's saved a great deal, so she won't have to be a slave to anybody. Seriously brainwashed?
That's what I mentioned in my previous post. If she has more money to back things up rather than just being dependent on the $4500 incentive and taking on a new car loan, she's acting responsibly and things will work out fine. Just because I have something to say in these Politics forums paints a picture of me as some evil, living-in-my-mom's-basement, communist, anti-American asshole. It's bullshit because I happen to care about the welfare of this country. I'm a motherfucker, a loon, and, I'm sure I'll get hit with terms like right-wing extremist and terrorist, too.
asmolitor
08/05/09, 02:18 PM
Cash for Clunkers is complete bullshit. For the environmentally-conscious, it's making a slight impact on emissions with the trading in of these clunkers for slightly to significantly more fuel-efficient vehicles and the dealerships are advertising disabling these cars and junking them. However, I heard another story where some of these cars will be dumped on South America's auto market instead. I mean, what's the point of moving pollution elsewhere? Also, think about the government's greedy genius in all this. As far as GM and Chrysler goes, remember that those companies filed for bankruptcy and the government runs them now. The biggest incentives are coming from those companies and they're moving their vehicles quite well in this program. Our tax-payer dollars which are funding Cash for Clunkers trade-in incentives (up to $4500 per vehicle) are going right into the government's hands because they run two of the biggest participating companies. That's some highway robbery right there.
Now, if we never fought this deceitful war in the Middle East as well as undermining and taking advantage of the American people, including fear-mongering and gradually stripping us of our Constitutional Rights, those are just some reasons we wouldn't be in a deficit. Mortgage crisis (as a result of deceitful and radical banking firms), and I'm not even going to bother listing everything else since I'm sure people will chime in. This society turned into a joke-ass, credit-based one and it just gets pushed more and more. It's bad enough free enterprise doesn't work anymore. In the past, if a business failed, it failed with a better one readily taking its place. Now, bad businesses are bailed out and even rewarded with bailouts and other deceptive bullshit. If the government wasn't placing funds in the hands of the corrupt and powerful elite and their poorly-run companies, would we be having these stupid programs?
On a final note, global warming is also a bunch of bullshit. These are natural weather patterns occurring. Ever hear of solar flares? Ever hear of the Ice Ages in the past? Ever hear how the Earth was significantly warmer just 500 years ago than it is now? Al Gore and his cronies are making suckers out of all of you, especially the youth who really wish to make changes but end up playing for the wrong team, sometimes without even knowing about it.
EDIT: There should be a program where we can trade in all these corrupt, reptilian elite and their dedicated minions for real people. You know... people who actually have consciences and all that.
timberwolf?
Just to get this out of the way, look into history. There was a global cooling agenda trying to be pushed in the 1960's. It's just an up-and-down environmental agenda as a result of natural weather patterns. The more I read people's responses on here and simply see how people react to mainstream news (or lack of reaction or acknowledgment thereof), I think of "the proles" and "party members" in George Orwell's book, 1984. There's a reason why there's a handful of people in this world who see things for what they are and turn against them. Unfortunately, a lot of people over time have been discredited. If it was a politician "whistle-blower", he or she would have been discredited by some sudden affair, drug conviction, or whatever else can be conjured up. As for authors, artists, and a good chunk of other people, the communist card as well as "right wing extremist", "nutjob", etc. have been played. I'll just stick to my beliefs and hope for the best in these situations.
oh, nevermind. you just got to freshman year english.
better whip out the anti-flag hoodie in case that global cooling thing comes to fruition.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:20 PM
How the hell did this turn into a climate change thread?
saysmydoctor
08/05/09, 02:20 PM
timberwolf?
oh, nevermind. you just got to freshman year english.
better whip out the anti-flag hoodie in case that global cooling thing comes to fruition.
holy fuckin' lol @ this whole post.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:21 PM
timberwolf?
oh, nevermind. you just got to freshman year english.
better whip out the anti-flag hoodie in case that global cooling thing comes to fruition.
loooooooooool
GuitarR0cker1
08/05/09, 02:21 PM
I think it's hilarious that the right is trying to spin this into a failure simply because its success exceeded expectations.
It has got to be the most terrible arguments ever made in history.Someone seriously tried arguing that it showed how government shows poor planning abilities and how this therefore means universal healthcare would be terribly managed, when the Democrats tried to give CFC 4 billion dollars but the Republicans bumped it down to 1 billion.
Oh and then there's the OMG TEH GOVERNMENT WANTS TO OWN YOUR COMPUTER argument, that has got to be the most fucking stupid thing ever.
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 02:23 PM
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
According to Drew Shindell, a climate researcher from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, NY, the most recent studies have confirmed that changing levels of energy from the Sun are not significant enough to be a major cause of global warming: "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues." For more details, see Link Between Solar Cycle and Climate is Blowin' in the Wind (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/19990408/)
So, carbon dioxide is evil? Did anyone take into account that the plant life on this planet take in carbon dioxide, then produce and release oxygen for all of us to breathe? Greenhouse gases...
Also, the level of "greenhouse gases" like carbon dioxide fluctuate with the world's temperature. If the temperature goes up, so does the amount of gases. If the temperature drops, so do the gases. Post-Industrial Revolution pollution is a terrible vice upon this world but I need more than human pollution as a factor to justify global warming. Oh, no! I don't have a graph!
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:23 PM
It has got to be the most terrible arguments ever made in history.Someone seriously tried arguing that it showed how government shows poor planning abilities and how this therefore means universal healthcare would be terribly managed, when the Democrats tried to give CFC 4 billion dollars but the Republicans bumped it down to 1 billion.
If there's one thing that Republicans are good at, it's spinning stories to their advantage. Oh, and boning people other than their spouse.
The Democrats corner the market in apologizing, compromising, and resigning.
Oh and then there's the OMG TEH GOVERNMENT WANTS TO OWN YOUR COMPUTER argument, that has got to be the most fucking stupid thing ever. Yeah, but I'm pretty sure it's only Glenn Back who has been riding that one.
How the hell did this turn into a climate change thread?
as all politically driven threads, it's one slippery slope polarizing issues into left and right. I wouldn't be surprised if a Christian crazy started posting "BABY KILLERS! All Cash For Clunkers supporters are homo baby killing tax hungry atheists!"
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:26 PM
So, carbon dioxide is evil? Did anyone take into account that the plant life on this planet take in carbon dioxide, then produce and release oxygen for all of us to breathe? Greenhouse gases...
Crazy notion: if we didn't release so much carbon dioxide, we wouldn't need to be furiously planting more trees to ensure that our kids can breathe.
Also, the level of "greenhouse gases" like carbon dioxide fluctuate with the world's temperature. If the temperature goes up, so does the amount of gases. If the temperature drops, so do the gases. Concession accepted.
Post-Industrial Revolution pollution is a terrible vice upon this world but I need more than human pollution as a factor to justify global warming. ...what?
Oh, no! I don't have a graph! Yeah, fucking facts and shit getting in the way of your conspiracy theories.
Hahaha! And over on the left, folks, you can spot a typical political thread at absolutepunk.net.
saysmydoctor
08/05/09, 02:28 PM
It has got to be the most terrible arguments ever made in history.Someone seriously tried arguing that it showed how government shows poor planning abilities and how this therefore means universal healthcare would be terribly managed, when the Democrats tried to give CFC 4 billion dollars but the Republicans bumped it down to 1 billion.
Oh and then there's the OMG TEH GOVERNMENT WANTS TO OWN YOUR COMPUTER argument, that has got to be the most fucking stupid thing ever.
You attack the strawman a lot.
GuitarR0cker1
08/05/09, 02:28 PM
If there's one thing that Republicans are good at, it's spinning.
The Democrats corner the market in apologizing, compromising, and resigning.
Yeah, but I'm pretty sure it's only Glenn Back who has been riding that one.
Tons of people have actually latched on to the Glenn Beck argument. It is pretty depressing. Yeah that's I am starting to want the blue dogs destroyed in the 2010 midterms.
I wish I had a graph for how much MattADALIE is a ***
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 02:29 PM
timberwolf?
oh, nevermind. you just got to freshman year english.
better whip out the anti-flag hoodie in case that global cooling thing comes to fruition.
That's only one book out of hundreds I've read in my entire life. I'm not trying to base everything I say on 1984. I noticed parallels to the story but that's not why I brought up most of the things I discussed.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:29 PM
I wish I had a graph for how much MattADALIE is a ***
Oh, is homophobia funny now? God I wish I got the memo.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:30 PM
You attack the strawman a lot.
I wouldn't say that that was a straw man.
saysmydoctor
08/05/09, 02:33 PM
I quoted the wrong damn person. Bah, nevermind.
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:34 PM
/interwebs fail
Oh, is homophobia funny now? God I wish I got the memo.
not at all, i meant it in a keen offensive couldn't think of anything off the top of my head to call him way, not in a homophobic way
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:36 PM
not at all, i meant it in a keen offensive couldn't think of anything off the top of my head to call him way, not in a homophobic way
Oh, so if I called you a n*gger, that would be all right? How about a spic? Or a kike? Is that acceptable? I mean, if I'm using it to put somebody down, it's not racist, right?
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 02:37 PM
I wish I had a graph for how much MattADALIE is a ***
That was highly unnecessary. I'm not even attacking anyone personally here yet I get attacked. These political threads always spiral out of control. I admit I kind of instigated it with all the shit I mentioned in my original post... but... go on with the Cash for Clunkers argument.
Oh, so if I called you a n*gger, that would be all right? How about a spic? Or a kike? Is that acceptable? I mean, if I'm using it to put somebody down, it's not racist, right?
of course, it's a term of the most offensive endearment, I think Chris Rock said it the best when the most appropriate time to say it
Oh, so if I called you a n*gger, that would be all right? How about a spic? Or a kike? Is that acceptable? I mean, if I'm using it to put somebody down, it's not racist, right?
I dunno, what if I called you a retard?
GuitarR0cker1
08/05/09, 02:38 PM
You attack the strawman a lot.
I don't think the first one is a strawman. The second one definitely is. Yeah though I have a passionate hatred for Libertarian-type straw mans that always attack the government for having secret intentions for doing things.
I dunno, what if I called you a retard?
a fun date?
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:42 PM
I dunno, what if I called you a retard?
I would find that offensive as well.
I don't think the first one is a strawman. The second one definitely is. Yeah though I have a passionate hatred for Libertarian-type straw mans that always attack the government for having secret intentions for doing things.
He quoted the wrong person.
Also, lol @ straw mans
That was highly unnecessary. I'm not even attacking anyone personally here yet I get attacked. These political threads always spiral out of control. I admit I kind of instigated it with all the shit I mentioned in my original post... but... go on with the Cash for Clunkers argument.
oh well, I meant it in good fun and jest in my unnecessary ways, fuck it - you were right, global warming is a hoax created by the government to make us buy more hybrids, I am calling up my mother and telling her that this guy on the internet convinced me that my statement backed up with a multitude of fact was wrong and so, buy a Hummer.
http://i28.tinypic.com/23rjqc4.jpg
I would find that offensive as well.
http://www.sternplanet.com/boards/images/gifs/reservoir_dogs-worlds_smallest_violin.gif
Are you serious? You're going to be offended if someone calls you a retard?
Hahahahahahahahaha!! *pause for breath* Hahahhahahahahaha!!!! *breath* Hahahahahaha!!!!
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:47 PM
http://www.sternplanet.com/boards/images/gifs/reservoir_dogs-worlds_smallest_violin.gif
Are you serious? You're going to be offended if someone calls you a retard?
Hahahahahahahahaha!! *pause for breath* Hahahhahahahahaha!!!! *breath* Hahahahahaha!!!!
I don't see a problem. Using a mental handicap as a derogatory insult to someone is...somehow better than using a skin color to insult someone? A sexual orientation to insult someone? A gender to insult someone?
GuitarR0cker1
08/05/09, 02:48 PM
He quoted the wrong person.
Also, lol @ straw mans
Everything makes sense now.
I don't see a problem. Using a mental handicap as a derogatory insult to someone is...somehow better than using a skin color to insult someone? A sexual orientation to insult someone? A gender to insult someone?
Seriously? You need me to explain why it's different to insult someone by calling them a retard as opposed to, say, a n*gger?
Praetor
08/05/09, 02:54 PM
Seriously? You need me to explain why it's different to insult someone by calling them a retard as opposed to, say, a n*gger?
Actually, yes. Both have derogatory connotations and associate the subject to group of people born with the feature ascribed to them in the word. Why is one 'better' than the other?
Fuck Godwin's Law, first of all. Secondly, that graph doesn't display enough. Notice the temperature dip into the 1970's? Global Cooling, it was called. Also, the graph only goes back to 1880. This point in time happens to be a peak pattern in solar activity. Of course, the temperature will be higher, according to these statistics. It's just not enough information. 129 years of back-tracking is not enough. The Earth's been here WAY longer than that, and human beings have been here longer than that as well.
Yes, except the earth has only ever seen ONE industrial revolution that unleashed a wave of pollution henceforth unseen by the planet. Funny how that kindof coincides with the whole "warming" phenomenon.
And let's even just SAY that global warming is a hoax...that still doesn't discount the good that a "green" efforts are doing. Treating the earth like a garbage bin is never a virtue.
So, carbon dioxide is evil? Did anyone take into account that the plant life on this planet take in carbon dioxide, then produce and release oxygen for all of us to breathe? Greenhouse gases...
Also, the level of "greenhouse gases" like carbon dioxide fluctuate with the world's temperature. If the temperature goes up, so does the amount of gases. If the temperature drops, so do the gases. Post-Industrial Revolution pollution is a terrible vice upon this world but I need more than human pollution as a factor to justify global warming. Oh, no! I don't have a graph!
That's dandy, since you're apparently the only one who makes the huge leap from "cash for clunkers" to "conspiracy theory to further the global warming crowd's agenda". It's working, and MPG's have already gone up by 60% as a result. What's wrong with that?
Oh, so if I called you a n*gger, that would be all right? How about a spic? Or a kike? Is that acceptable? I mean, if I'm using it to put somebody down, it's not racist, right?
What white trash you are...:-d
Praetor
08/05/09, 03:03 PM
That's dandy, since you're apparently the only one who makes the huge leap from "cash for clunkers" to "conspiracy theory to further the global warming crowd's agenda". It's working, and MPG's have already gone up by 60% as a result. What's wrong with that?
Where are you getting those statistics? I've been looking for a tracker of the potential economic/environmental impact of the program but have found nothing.
What white trash you are...:-d No, no, it's okay. I'm using it to put someone else down. Therefore, justified.
Actually, yes. Both have derogatory connotations and associate the subject to group of people born with the feature ascribed to them in the word. Why is one 'better' than the other?
Because mentally handicapped people are, actually, by definition, mentally retarded.
You know, they used to just call people with a mental handicap morons or idiots. It was changed to retard to be more politically correct. You should actually be more offended should someone call you a moron or an idiot.
Where are you getting those statistics? I've been looking for a tracker of the potential economic/environmental impact of the program but have found nothing.
No, no, it's okay. I'm using it to put someone else down. Therefore, justified.
Saw the article on CNN last week, but can't find it. It simply said that average MPG's for eligible turn-in's is 16. Average MPG's for 2008 was 25.6. That's a 60% increase in MPG for every car that comes in. As Borat would say, "great success".
Praetor
08/05/09, 03:10 PM
Because mentally handicapped people are, actually, by definition, mentally retarded.
You know, they used to just call people with a mental handicap morons or idiots. It was changed to retard to be more politically correct. You should actually be more offended should someone call you a moron or an idiot.
How does that dispute anything that I said?
GuitarR0cker1
08/05/09, 03:13 PM
Saw the article on CNN last week, but can't find it. It simply said that average MPG's for eligible turn-in's is 16. Average MPG's for 2008 was 25.6. That's a 60% increase in MPG for every car that comes in. As Borat would say, "great success".
The unfortunate thing is that the construction of new cars takes up oil too, so the environmental gain from CFC is somewhat diminished.
Praetor
08/05/09, 03:13 PM
Saw the article on CNN last week, but can't find it. It simply said that average MPG's for eligible turn-in's is 16. Average MPG's for 2008 was 25.6. That's a 60% increase in MPG for every car that comes in. As Borat would say, "great success".
Ah, I see. Cool.
The unfortunate thing is that the construction of new cars takes up oil too, so the environmental gain from CFC is somewhat diminished.
They didn't "construct" any extra cars for this program that wouldn't have been "constructed" anyway.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, this program was intended to stimulate the economy, not to "save the environment". However I'd bet that it's an overall net gain for the environment. More MPG's beats less any day.
How does that dispute anything that I said?
For someone to be considered mentally handicapped, legally, their IQ must be below a certain point. Their thought process is retarded in some way. Words like "kike" were ascribed to Jews because people assumed they had certain inherent character traits merely because they were Jewish--overly concerned with money, greedy, etc. Hence the derogatory connotation.
Someone's being tight with money--and a person calls them a kike.
But you see, in the case of the retard, it is true. In every single case, it's true. And it always will be true. Mentally handicapped people, as a group, are mentally retarded. They are not intelligent. The characteristic feature of their group--low intelligence--is an inherently derogatory characteristic.
To call someone a retard is to insinuate they have done something or said something with low intelligence. Do you not see it? It would be derogatory if there were such a thing as an intelligent retard. But there isn't. There is not one intelligent retard on the face of the planet.
Unintelligent. It is one word that does fit a group--retards.
rhinitus
08/05/09, 03:32 PM
There still isn't really much talk about economics here...
GuitarR0cker1
08/05/09, 03:32 PM
They didn't "construct" any extra cars for this program that wouldn't have been "constructed" anyway.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, this program was intended to stimulate the economy, not to "save the environment". However I'd bet that it's an overall net gain for the environment. More MPG's beats less any day.
This is true but in the end the higher demand for cars will lead to more cars being constructed in the future.
Yeah of course it was for the economy. The environmental/resource benefits though are nice though.
Praetor
08/05/09, 03:34 PM
For someone to be considered mentally handicapped, legally, their IQ must be below a certain point. Their thought process is retarded in some way. Words like "kike" were ascribed to Jews because people assumed they had certain inherent character traits merely because they were Jewish--overly concerned with money, greedy, etc. Hence the derogatory connotation.
Someone's being tight with money--and a person calls them a kike.
But you see, in the case of the retard, it is true. In every single case, it's true. And it always will be true. Mentally handicapped people, as a group, are mentally retarded. They are not intelligent. The characteristic feature of their group--low intelligence--is an inherently derogatory characteristic.
To call someone a retard is to insinuate they have done something or said something with low intelligence. Do you not see it? It would be derogatory if there were such a thing as an intelligent retard. But there isn't. There is not one intelligent retard on the face of the planet.
Unintelligent. It is one word that does fit a group--retards.
How does that make the word 'retard' when not applied to actual retards any less derogatory?
'Retard' might be the technical term for the mentally handicapped but it's been warped, much like the word 'gay'. If someone said to me "Hey, they jacked the price of gas up a few cents" and I replied "Wow, that's so gay" that would be derogatory. Gay is the technical term for homosexuals, and if I was saying that about someone who actually was gay then that might not be derogatory. But because of the context I used it in, it is.
How does that make the word 'retard' when not applied to actual retards any less derogatory?
'Retard' might be the technical term for the mentally handicapped but it's been warped, much like the word 'gay'. If someone said to me "Hey, they jacked the price of gas up a few cents" and I replied "Wow, that's so gay" that would be derogatory. Gay is the technical term for homosexuals, and if I was saying that about someone who actually was gay then that might not be derogatory. But because of the context I used it in, it is.
Gay is the technical term for homosexual? I'm really, really fighting the urge to not call you a retard right now. Gay is slang for homosexual. In no way, shape, or form is it technical.
It's blowing my mind how much I have to pick this apart for your meager brain to comprehend. When someone says, "Oh, that's gay," or "Man, this is gay," we all know they really mean, "Oh, that's shitty," or "Man, this sucks." They're equating being gay with being bad, or lesser, or being wrong, or being not preferable. Gay = shitty.
When someone says, "Man, that's retarded," they mean "Man, that wasn't very intelligent or smart." They are equating retarded with of low intelligence. But retards are of low intelligence. Don't you see why it's different? It's a valid comparison. Retard = unintelligent.
This is true but in the end the higher demand for cars will lead to more cars being constructed in the future.
Yeah of course it was for the economy. The environmental/resource benefits though are nice though.
Not necessarily, and the situation is far from that simple. U.S. demand for automobiles is not nearly as high as demand in Asia for automobiles.
MyNameIsRoss
08/05/09, 03:54 PM
oh, nevermind. you just got to freshman year english.
better whip out the anti-flag hoodie in case that global cooling thing comes to fruition.
:-d
Praetor
08/05/09, 03:55 PM
Gay is the technical term for homosexual? I'm really, really fighting the urge to not call you a retard right now. Gay is slang for homosexual. In no way, shape, or form is it technical.
It's blowing my mind how much I have to pick this apart for your meager brain to comprehend. When someone says, "Oh, that's gay," or "Man, this is gay," we all know they really mean, "Oh, that's shitty," or "Man, this sucks." They're equating being gay with being bad, or lesser, or being wrong, or being not preferable. Gay = shitty.
When someone says, "Man, that's retarded," they mean "Man, that wasn't very intelligent or smart." They are equating retarded with of low intelligence. But retards are of low intelligence. Don't you see why it's different? It's a valid comparison. Retard = unintelligent.
Sorry if I seem a little slow, I am in kind of a daze right now so I'm sure I'm not making the most coherent of arguments but I really do believe this nevertheless.
My bad about the gay thing, you're right, I was wrong about that.
In the end, all we disagree about truly is the context. If I call something/someone retarded (that's not actually retarded), it's meant to be derogatory both to the subject and to the mentally retarded. True? That's the exact same as if I call someone who's not actually gay, 'gay'. It is meant as an insult to both the subject and to homosexuals. Whether or not unintelligence is commonplace among retards (which I agree with you about) is irrelevant, because what truly matters is the context it is placed in.
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 03:55 PM
I saw a nice graph pertaining to me somewhere in here, but, I don't think I've made the most posts. A lot of them were as a result of one of my posts being quoted. I also saw someone being a bit reasonable and letting the "green" cause transcend mainstream media and conspiracy theories. I never said I was against turning things around for the benefit of the environment, but, I just can't grasp how a nation highly in debt continues to gather up resources for programs like Cash for Clunkers, universal health care, the economic bailouts themselves, and so on. Just to give myself more credibility, next time I post in the Political forums, I'll be better prepared with articles and videos. I understand that my word alone is easily grounds for being singled out. In this category of threads, I'm seriously looking for an intellectual outlet to vent my frustrations with what's going on in the world. It's expected to be overthrown all the time with the type of beliefs I hold. I understand that but I believe strongly in all these injustices occurring and I pray that things will eventually plateau and turn around for the better. No matter what anyone in the world will get worked up about, good will prevail.
Praetor
08/05/09, 03:57 PM
I saw a nice graph pertaining to me somewhere in here, but, I don't think I've made the most posts. A lot of them were as a result of one of my posts being quoted. I also saw someone being a bit reasonable and letting the "green" cause transcend mainstream media and conspiracy theories. I never said I was against turning things around for the benefit of the environment, but, I just can't grasp how a nation highly in debt continues to gather up resources for programs like Cash for Clunkers, universal health care, the economic bailouts themselves, and so on. Just to give myself more credibility, next time I post in the Political forums, I'll be better prepared with articles and videos. I understand that my word alone is easily grounds for being singled out. In this category of threads, I'm seriously looking for an intellectual outlet to vent my frustrations with what's going on in the world. It's expected to be overthrown all the time with the type of beliefs I hold. I understand that but I believe strongly in all these injustices occurring and I pray that things will eventually plateau and turn around for the better. No matter what anyone in the world will get worked up about, good will prevail.
The Cash For Clunkers program was funded with already-allocated money from the budget for alternative energy sources. They just diverted the funds from solar to the CFC program. No money was created out of thin air.
Sorry if I seem a little slow, I am in kind of a daze right now so I'm sure I'm not making the most coherent of arguments but I really do believe this nevertheless.
My bad about the gay thing, you're right, I was wrong about that.
In the end, all we disagree about truly is the context. If I call something/someone retarded (that's not actually retarded), it's meant to be derogatory both to the subject and to the mentally retarded. True? That's the exact same as if I call someone who's not actually gay, 'gay'. It is meant as an insult to both the subject and to homosexuals. Whether or not unintelligence is commonplace among retards (which I agree with you about) is irrelevant, because what truly matters is the context it is placed in.
Ugh, I still don't think you get it, but I have a headache. I'll continue calling people who do unintelligent things retards and you can, well, I guess, continue to be offended by it.
I saw a nice graph pertaining to me somewhere in here, but, I don't think I've made the most posts. A lot of them were as a result of one of my posts being quoted. I also saw someone being a bit reasonable and letting the "green" cause transcend mainstream media and conspiracy theories. I never said I was against turning things around for the benefit of the environment, but, I just can't grasp how a nation highly in debt continues to gather up resources for programs like Cash for Clunkers, universal health care, the economic bailouts themselves, and so on. Just to give myself more credibility, next time I post in the Political forums, I'll be better prepared with articles and videos. I understand that my word alone is easily grounds for being singled out. In this category of threads, I'm seriously looking for an intellectual outlet to vent my frustrations with what's going on in the world. It's expected to be overthrown all the time with the type of beliefs I hold. I understand that but I believe strongly in all these injustices occurring and I pray that things will eventually plateau and turn around for the better. No matter what anyone in the world will get worked up about, good will prevail.
It's called Keynesian economics, and it has a pretty good track record, as opposed to Freidman economics, the effects of which we're living in right now.
moronindisguise
08/05/09, 05:11 PM
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
HAHA, excellent response. I couldn't have said it better
I saw a nice graph pertaining to me somewhere in here,
nice, you liked my graph
http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?p=50619472#post50619 472 direct link for the retards (since, it's been deemed as an ok derogatory)
patpratt
08/05/09, 06:33 PM
tl;dr entire thread.
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 06:48 PM
nice, you liked my graph
After this thread spiraled into a political discussion and economics frenzy, the graph is now my favorite part. No lie.
I like that the Republicans are reduced to claiming it's a failure because it wasn't funded enough initially. If it had been overfunded, they'd be complaining about that too.
C4C is simple and effective. Holding it up as an example of the government's inability to run a program shows how committed the Republicans are to bitching about anything and everything.
I like that the Republicans are reduced to claiming it's a failure because it wasn't funded enough initially. If it had been overfunded, they'd be complaining about that too.
C4C is simple and effective. Holding it up as an example of the government's inability to run a program shows how committed the Republicans are to bitching about anything and everything.
Pretty much their platform nowadays...bitch about something if it works, bitch about it if it doesn't, and offer no feasible alternative for the shit they're bitching about.
Justin_stacy
08/05/09, 07:33 PM
Pretty much their platform nowadays...bitch about something if it works, bitch about it if it doesn't, and offer no feasible alternative for the shit they're bitching about.
so they're basically the democrats of the last eight years.....:hitself: Kind of how this game works.
The Democrats were an embarrassment for most of Bush's terms, but for the sake of discussion, what was it that had worked in the past 8 years?
so they're basically the democrats of the last eight years.....:hitself: Kind of how this game works.
Yep. They at least have the balls to do whatever the fuck they want. I wish the Democrats would get a touch of that.
Justin_stacy
08/05/09, 07:51 PM
What is that's worked in the last 8 months that should be silencing the Republicans?
Its all a big game, the party in power thumps its chest, and the party out of power sits in the corner and bitches.
What is that's worked in the last 8 months that should be silencing the Republicans?
The subject of the thread you just posted in?
Justin_stacy
08/05/09, 07:55 PM
I wish the Democrats would get a touch of that.
It is funny watching them accomplish so little with rather decent sized majorities.
Justin_stacy
08/05/09, 07:57 PM
The subject of the thread you just posted in?
You could easily argue against this thing.
so they're basically the democrats of the last eight years.....:hitself: Kind of how this game works.
only difference, the democrats were bitching about real problems, the republicans just bitch for the sake of bitching
You could easily argue against this thing.
Go ahead.
Justin_stacy
08/05/09, 07:59 PM
Go ahead.
go ahead and what? argue against it personally or offer a link to show where/how they're 'bitching' about it?
go ahead and what?
Argue against it. X-)
MattADALIE
08/05/09, 08:27 PM
I'm seeing this Democrat vs. Republican discussion coming up. Just notice how ridiculous it is. If these politicians really want to accomplish anything, bipartisan politics must go. It's all unnecessary infighting. Everyone should just pull together for once and try to solve problems, bringing the best of each side's abilities to the table. Of course, you'll have the Democrats sitting in the corner bitching if the Republicans are in power or vice versa. It's such a distraction. And, I'm not even touching on the Cash For Clunkers thing anymore because I know damn well where my beliefs got me. Still stickin' to them, by the way...
Justin_stacy
08/05/09, 08:34 PM
Argue against it. X-)
you respond too fast, see above.
Unlike obama's stupid move with Chrysler I'm not against this action in relation to his handling of the automotive industry. But to say its beyond criticism is comical.
The cost, the artificial and unsustainable propping up of a market, pumping more money into an industry that's already taken billions, its employment/economic impact, the level of money going towards foreign makers (Japan's similar program had a protectionism clause), its disportionate effect on Ford who didn't take federal money, the impact on the environment/oil usage its likely to have. Those are a few of the one's I see mentioned most.
You can be all for it, but its hardly a one sided 'bulls eye' issue.
you respond too fast, see above.
Unlike obama's stupid move with Chrysler I'm not against this action in relation to his handling of the automotive industry. But to say its beyond criticism is comical.
The cost, the artificial and unsustainable propping up of a market, pumping more money into an industry that's already taken billions, its employment/economic impact, the level of money going towards foreign makers (Japan's similar program had a protectionism clause), its disportionate effect on Ford who didn't take federal money, the impact on the environment/oil usage its likely to have. Just a few but that's some.
Whether one agrees with it or against it, its hardly a one sided issue.
You haven't kept up with the latest Republican talking points. They've essentially been arguing that Cash for Clunkers was underfunded and that the misjudging of the program's popularity shows the government is incapable of running anything correctly.
asmolitor
08/05/09, 10:15 PM
I'm seeing this Democrat vs. Republican discussion coming up. Just notice how ridiculous it is. If these politicians really want to accomplish anything, bipartisan politics must go.
in the current climate, i couldn't agree more.
It's all unnecessary infighting. Everyone should just pull together for once and try to solve problems, bringing the best of each side's abilities to the table. Of course, you'll have the Democrats sitting in the corner bitching if the Republicans are in power or vice versa. It's such a distraction. And, I'm not even touching on the Cash For Clunkers thing anymore because I know damn well where my beliefs got me. Still stickin' to them, by the way...
sigh. nevermind.
Machu505
08/05/09, 11:25 PM
This MattADALIE fellow brings shame to the name Matt.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
best. post. ever.
Mercy Medical
08/06/09, 10:35 AM
Is this even on topic anymore? Lol...
In regards to the OP, I was quite surprised to hear about this program. It actually seemed to be relatively innovative and smart to get customers out buying new cars which helps the ailing auto industry as well as gets more fuel efficient cars on the road and the less fuel efficient ones off of it. It seems as though they didn't anticipate the impact it would have though and underestimated how much money to set aside for the program.
I find the criticism of it from the Republicans to be laughable.
macabre
08/06/09, 11:15 AM
It's unfortunate that the majority of the cars that have been bought are foreign. Our automobile industry will still benefit from this program but I just wish it was better targeted toward our domestic car companies that really need the help at this point in time.
wrppdarndyrfngr
08/06/09, 11:20 AM
Ugh "our" auto companies are international corporations that happened to be based out of the U.S.
"Our" auto companies use large amounts of foreign parts and even foreign labor to assemble said autos.
"Foreign" auto companies are international corporations that happen to not be based in the U.S.
They use small amounts of U.S. parts and increasingly more amounts of U.S. labor.
This program benefits U.S labor no matter what company most of the cars are bought from.
asmolitor
08/06/09, 11:38 AM
After this thread spiraled into a political discussion and economics frenzy, the graph is now my favorite part. No lie.
wow, what a weird coincedence. even in the politics forum.
Is this even on topic anymore? Lol...
In regards to the OP, I was quite surprised to hear about this program. It actually seemed to be relatively innovative and smart to get customers out buying new cars which helps the ailing auto industry as well as gets more fuel efficient cars on the road and the less fuel efficient ones off of it. It seems as though they didn't anticipate the impact it would have though and underestimated how much money to set aside for the program.
I find the criticism of it from the Republicans to be laughable.
that, right there, should really be the only justification needed. but if the program is underfunded - at the initial $1 billion allocated - that's an impressive increase in consumer confidence/spending.
all things considered, it's a zero sum game in an endless cycle of recycled tax dollars between buyers/bystanders/government. but if it can increase GDP production in the slightest, that's a positive step forward to correcting the economic/psychological effects of the recession.
Ugh "our" auto companies are international corporations that happened to be based out of the U.S.
"Our" auto companies use large amounts of foreign parts and even foreign labor to assemble said autos.
"Foreign" auto companies are international corporations that happen to not be based in the U.S.
They use small amounts of U.S. parts and increasingly more amounts of U.S. labor.
This program benefits U.S labor no matter what company most of the cars are bought from.
this.
macabre
08/06/09, 11:39 AM
Ugh "our" auto companies are international corporations that happened to be based out of the U.S.
"Our" auto companies use large amounts of foreign parts and even foreign labor to assemble said autos.
"Foreign" auto companies are international corporations that happen to not be based in the U.S.
They use small amounts of U.S. parts and increasingly more amounts of U.S. labor.
This program benefits U.S labor no matter what company most of the cars are bought from.
You don't have to give me a lesson on how a multinational operates, I understand that. I just think that these ailing domestic manufacturers, given that the government has already invested a great deal in them, could have received a much-needed boost if the plan created specific incentives for American brands, along with the incentives already in place.
saysmydoctor
08/06/09, 12:48 PM
so they're basically the democrats of the last eight years.....:hitself: Kind of how this game works.
Yeah, bitching and moaning about a rampant budget deficit during an economic boom adding to the national debt, a failed series of Bush tax cuts, an unwarranted war in Iraq, a warrantless wiretapping scandal, a government torturing human beings, an unconstitutional military tribunal system, and the root of the problem: a failure of US intelligence and the Bush Administration who deliberately ignored intelligence predicting a possibility such as 9/11.
Yes, how dare the democrats have been so reasonable in their outrage to the party in power.
chipdip18
08/06/09, 01:41 PM
Well i created this thread to become educated on the subject and now i'm learning a lot more things other than the Cash for Clunkers thing. Aside from a few posts here and there.
Mercy Medical
08/06/09, 01:46 PM
Yeah, bitching and moaning about a rampant budget deficit during an economic boom adding to the national debt, a failed series of Bush tax cuts, an unwarranted war in Iraq, a warrantless wiretapping scandal, a government torturing human beings, an unconstitutional military tribunal system, and the root of the problem: a failure of US intelligence and the Bush Administration who deliberately ignored intelligence predicting a possibility such as 9/11.
Yes, how dare the democrats have been so reasonable in their outrage to the party in power.
Hahahahahahahaahaha at your avatar. I laughed so hard at that.
wrppdarndyrfngr
08/06/09, 01:48 PM
some actual info on the thread topic
Thanks in part to the program, auto sales in July rose to an annualized pace of 11.3 million units (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/fp/Cash+clunkers+boost/1863224/story.html), the highest since September 2008. And as the Associated Press reported, “if the Senate approves the additional money, it’s likely to lead automakers to increase production and bring back laid-off workers (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i_J2CDMBIZhobnHhGIYFCzqvR52wD 99T3LKG1).”
And then there are the environmental benefits. The Department of Transportation reported that “the average fuel efficiency of old cars traded in via the program is 15.8 miles per gallon, while new cars had an average MPG of 25.4 (http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/snapshot_20090805/).” As the Economic Policy Institute found (http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/snapshot_20090805/):
On average, total gas consumption will drop by 87 million gallons per year, and American consumers will use 22.2 million fewer barrels of foreign crude oil. The environmental impact of reduced gas consumption is considerable as well. We estimate that the program will result in about 850,000 fewer tons of CO2 emissions per year (3.4 tons per vehicle annually).
thinkprogress.org (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/08/06/demint-cfc/)
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 02:00 PM
Yes, how dare the democrats have been so reasonable in their outrage to the party in power.
:yawn:
You're right 200 days in and obama done nothing to egg on the Republicans.....nothing. Staled recovery, rising unemployment, wasteful spending, enlargement of government, a rushed/unread stimulus bill, a pointless energy tax bill, rushed/unread health care 'reform,' a massively expensive automotive bailout, questionable funding habbits, the closing of gittmo with absolutely no plan (or support). Where do these damn Republicans get the gall to question him....so reasonably?
Here's to hoping that was the response you wanted.
wrppdarndyrfngr
08/06/09, 02:09 PM
potential income cap ammedment to C4C
As Congress debates whether to add an additional $2 billion to the broke-due-to-extreme-popularity "Cash 4 Clunkers (http://consumerist.com/tag/cash-4-clunkers/)" program, several amendments to the program are being considered. One of them, according to the NYT, is an income limit of $50k per year for individuals, and $75k for joint filers.
The NYT says:
As part of the deal in the Senate, the Democratic leadership agreed to allow debate on seven amendments to the bill, six from Republicans. One, to be considered Thursday and offered by Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, would set income limits on who could receive the money. Under his proposal, only individuals with adjusted gross incomes of less than $50,000 or joint filers with adjusted gross incomes of less than $75,000 could take part
Agreement On A Vote to Extend Car Program (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/us/politics/06clunkers.html) [NYT]
saysmydoctor
08/06/09, 02:12 PM
:yawn:
You're right 200 days in and obama done nothing to egg on the Republicans.....nothing. Staled recovery, rising unemployment, wasteful spending, enlargement of government, a rushed/unread stimulus bill, a pointless energy tax bill, rushed/unread health care 'reform,' a massively expensive automotive bailout, questionable funding habbits, the closing of gittmo with absolutely no plan (or support). Where do these damn Republicans get the gall to question him....so reasonably?
Here's to hoping that was the response you wanted.
Staled recovery: The economy contracted more slowly last quarter. Also, it's been 200 days, not three years.
Rising unemployment: Which followed the projections and was actually stemmed by the stimulus and will continue to be.
Enlargement of government: I thought we were talking about Obama, not Bush. Department of Homeland Security? Shifting military/defense jobs to contractors which costs more.
Rushed/unread stimulus bill: Which is working.
Pointless energy tax bill: Which will cost the American family over some amount of years $176. And other like bills in the EU have curbed emissions by 4%.
Massively expensive automotive bailout: Which otherwise would have otherwise left millions unemployed and really crippled the economy
Questionable funding habits: No.
Closing Gitmo with Absolutely No Plan: Numerous prisons in the US. We do prisons right.
I see not an ounce of reason in an Republican talking points or rebuttals.
Praetor
08/06/09, 02:15 PM
We have 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prison population. If there's something that America does well, it's imprison people.
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 02:25 PM
I see not an ounce of reason in an Republican talking points or rebuttals.
I can't say it any nicer than, I never expect someone like you to.
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 02:33 PM
We have 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prison population. If there's something that America does well, it's imprison people.
I got an idiot family member who just got 10 years federal for being a courier to a major dealer, along with a gun charge for a single handgun with 2 bullets that was used against all four defendants even though ownership was proven to just one of the individuals. He also got added time because there was a recently closed highschool in the area.
I knew our system was fucked up, but its hard to truly understand how fucked up until you see it in action first hand.
Praetor
08/06/09, 02:35 PM
Jesus Christ. That really is terrible. Sorry man.
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 02:38 PM
Jesus Christ. That really is terrible. Sorry man.
Thanks, I'd been meaning to bitch about it for awhile. Its really made me gun-ho about the need for legalization and proper (and forced) rehab.
Animalhill
08/06/09, 02:41 PM
Staled recovery: The economy contracted more slowly last quarter. Also, it's been 200 days, not three years.
Rising unemployment: Which followed the projections and was actually stemmed by the stimulus and will continue to be.
Enlargement of government: I thought we were talking about Obama, not Bush. Department of Homeland Security? Shifting military/defense jobs to contractors which costs more.
Rushed/unread stimulus bill: Which is working.
Pointless energy tax bill: Which will cost the American family over some amount of years $176. And other like bills in the EU have curbed emissions by 4%.
Massively expensive automotive bailout: Which otherwise would have otherwise left millions unemployed and really crippled the economy
Questionable funding habits: No.
Closing Gitmo with Absolutely No Plan: Numerous prisons in the US. We do prisons right.
I see not an ounce of reason in an Republican talking points or rebuttals.
All of this.
Praetor
08/06/09, 02:41 PM
Legalization I agree with, but I dunno if I'm down with forced rehab.
saysmydoctor
08/06/09, 02:42 PM
I can't say it any nicer than, I never expect someone like you to.
Cool rebuttal.
saysmydoctor
08/06/09, 02:44 PM
I got an idiot family member who just got 10 years federal for being a courier to a major dealer, along with a gun charge for a single handgun with 2 bullets that was used against all four defendants even though ownership was proven to just one of the individuals. He also got added time because there was a recently closed highschool in the area.
I knew our system was fucked up, but its hard to truly understand how fucked up until you see it in action first hand.
Yet you continue to vote for the crime-control candidates rather than those of the due process of law school of thought?
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 02:46 PM
Yet you continue to vote for the crime-control candidates rather than those of the due process of law school of thought?
who do you know who I vote for? Part of your down fall is you assume to much.
Cool rebuttal.
what would of been the point?
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 02:52 PM
Legalization I agree with, but I dunno if I'm down with forced rehab.
...I think you'd understand if you saw hardcore addiction, but maybe not. Sometimes you can't always take the pretty route.
saysmydoctor
08/06/09, 02:52 PM
Probably would have elicited a better response than trying to imply I'm stupid. I kind of figured you to be above schoolyard antics. Maybe I assumed too much THERE.
Praetor
08/06/09, 02:53 PM
...I think you'd understand if you saw hardcore addiction, but maybe not. Sometimes you can't always take the pretty route.
What kind of drug are we talking about here? I think there might be some miscommunication.
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 03:02 PM
Probably would have elicited a better response than trying to imply I'm stupid. I kind of figured you to be above schoolyard antics. Maybe I assumed too much THERE.
I don't think I've ever implied you were stupid, or anyone for that matter. What I meant by that was that you already have predetermined conclusions about the issue(s) in question and it would be pointless to argue (even if I had the inclination). You quoted me with liberal talking points, and I responded in like form....hence what I said at the bottom of the original post.
Animalhill
08/06/09, 03:03 PM
...I think you'd understand if you saw hardcore addiction, but maybe not. Sometimes you can't always take the pretty route.
I've been hardcore addicted and forced rehab would have made me even more resilient to treatment. You cannot get better until you WANT to.
Justin_stacy
08/06/09, 03:05 PM
What kind of drug are we talking about here? I think there might be some miscommunication.
His addiction basically anything you could come up with. What he got charged with was weed and coke.
And by force I mean something he couldn't check himself out of in a month. Give him the opportunity to clean himself up, then throw him away for years. But there needs to be some way to offer real opportunity, forced might not be it, but i've got 7 or 8 years of seeing how everything else doesn't work or makes matters worse.
----------
Apologies for getting off topic...:-)
Praetor
08/06/09, 03:10 PM
His addiction basically anything you could come up with, and it lead to habbitual lying and stealing. What he got charged with was weed and coke.
Ah, I see. Coke, I can see because there is evidence about the dangers of that drug. But weed? No way, no how.
Senate just approved $2 billion more for Cash for Clunkers.
Machu505
08/06/09, 07:11 PM
Huzzah.
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 08:15 AM
Ah, I see. Coke, I can see because there is evidence about the dangers of that drug. But weed? No way, no how.
I'd be a hypocrite if I meant weed. But the strong drugs and the life style that comes with usage, that's something someone needs help with breaking....or its gonna end in a jail cell or death.
Animalhill
08/07/09, 08:19 AM
I'd be a hypocrite if I meant weed. But the strong drugs and the life style that comes with usage, that's something someone needs help with breaking....or its gonna end in a jail cell or death.
Like I said before, I have been a hard drug addict before, and like I also said, forced rehab does not work.
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 08:36 AM
Like I said before, I have been a hard drug addict before, and like I also said, forced rehab does not work.
Giving someone the oppourtunity to get clean is the key, I've seen that nothing else works. So rehab without the 30 day recheck in policy is needed, or at least tried. It would have help my family member, but maybe not you, no two sicknesses are alike.
Animalhill
08/07/09, 08:41 AM
Giving someone the oppourtunity to get clean is the key, I've seen that nothing else works. So rehab without the 30 day recheck in policy is needed, or at least tried. It would have help my family member, but maybe not you, no two sicknesses are alike.
That's true, so why would you suggest (correct me if I'm wrong, I thought you had posted something to this effect yesterday) streamlining treatment with forced rehab?
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 10:05 AM
That's true, so why would you suggest (correct me if I'm wrong, I thought you had posted something to this effect yesterday) streamlining treatment with forced rehab?
'Forced' might have been too strong a word. But I can't say I'm against having a tool in place so that the family can get someone in and keep them in long enough for the opportunity to get better, to be there.
Again I've seen the alternative, it doesn't work, and kills a family.
Animalhill
08/07/09, 11:08 AM
'Forced' might have been too strong a word. But I can't say I'm against having a tool in place so that the family can get someone in and keep them in long enough for the opportunity to get better, to be there.
Again I've seen the alternative, it doesn't work, and kills a family.
The alternative being letting them keep doing drugs?
I know personally I didn't stop using until I saw the effect it had on my family, and put 110% into quitting.
Machu505
08/07/09, 12:06 PM
This will be getting some more funds. (http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/07/autos/clunkers_continues/index.htm?postversion=2009080711)
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 02:45 PM
The alternative being letting them keep doing drugs?
the alternative being revolving-door rehab.
Animalhill
08/07/09, 02:51 PM
the alternative being revolving-door rehab.
I think it should be on a case-to-case basis. I just know from past experience that at the height of my usage (trust me, it was a fucking height) if someone MADE me go to rehab, I'd have flipped a fucking car.
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 02:59 PM
I think it should be on a case-to-case basis. I just know from past experience that at the height of my usage (trust me, it was a fucking height) if someone MADE me go to rehab, I'd have flipped a fucking car.
Everybody has differing experience. From the experience I had, bare in mind as an outsider looking in, the family member in question needed the push. He couldn't break the habit on his own merit, even if he had wanted to, like you did. The addiction wouldn't let him seek the help he needed. And now he's gone for 10 years and will be a burden to the state for the rest of life.
I'm not claiming to know the answers, but once someone hits adulthood the family can only do so much.
Animalhill
08/07/09, 03:01 PM
Everybody has differing experience. From the experience I had, bare in mind as an outsider looking in, the family member in question needed the push. He couldn't break the habit on his own merit, even if he had wanted to, like you did. And the addiction wouldn't let him seek the help he needed.
I'm not claiming to know the answers, but once someone hits adulthood the family can only do so much.
That is the sad truth my friend.
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 03:09 PM
That is the sad truth my friend.
that's probably my biggest issue with the current way things are handeled. I hate to see someone forced into doing anything against their will, but if they're killing themselves, is everyone supposed to step aside and watch it happen?
Animalhill
08/07/09, 03:12 PM
that's probably my biggest issue with the current way things are handeled. I hate to see someone forced into doing anything against their will, but if they're killing themselves, is everyone supposed to step aside and watch it happen?
You should read, "The Lucifer Principle" (despite its name, it stays relatively clear of religion) by Howard Bloom.
Addiction is caused by genetics, and sometimes, sadly, some people were not made to overcome such a thing.
EDIT: I didn't mean for that to sound so conclusive, but it does provide ample evidence.
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 03:20 PM
You should read, "The Lucifer Principle" (despite its name, it stays relatively clear of religion) by Howard Bloom.
Addiction is caused by genetics, and sometimes, sadly, some people were not made to overcome such a thing.
EDIT: I didn't mean for that to sound so conclusive, but it does provide ample evidence.
sure I'll look it up.
as for your 'edit' I don't being to know or understand the whole mess, I was just giving my novice, if you will, opinion on the issue based on what I've seen for the past 10 years.
Animalhill
08/07/09, 03:21 PM
sure I'll look it up.
as for your 'edit' I don't being to know or understand the whole mess, I was just giving my novice, if you will, opinion on the issue based on what I've seen for the past 10 years.
No I totally understand man- I was referring to how conclusive my statement was about addiciton coming from genetics. Its obviously true to a degree, but the book contends that it is almost exclusively the cause.
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 03:24 PM
A more realistic look at what's being bought with clunker money.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/07/autos/cash_for_clunkers_sales/index.htm?cnn=yes
1 Ford Escape
2 Ford Focus
3 Jeep Patriot
4 Dodge Caliber
5 Ford F-150
6 Honda Civic
7 Chevrolet Silverado
8 Chevrolet Cobalt
9 Toyota Corolla
10 Ford Fusion
Machu505
08/07/09, 03:30 PM
'Merican cars, fuck yeah.
macabre
08/07/09, 03:32 PM
LA8IM550tTU
RON PAWL SEZ CASH FOR CLUNK DON'T WERK
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 03:38 PM
No I totally understand man- I was referring to how conclusive my statement was about addiciton coming from genetics. Its obviously true to a degree, but the book contends that it is almost exclusively the cause.
Exclusively, that would be a little tough to take....that doesn't mean it ain't so, but tough to really grasp.
That kind of begs the question what do you do with the sick individual if it is found to be true, and you can't help them?
Justin_stacy
08/07/09, 03:42 PM
'Merican cars, fuck yeah.
you see that hummer even has a car that makes the list?
omgrawr
08/07/09, 03:44 PM
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
loooool. i kind of want to make this my standard response to anyone who says something stupid on this site now.
ShShShark
08/09/09, 02:45 PM
Is this even on topic anymore? Lol...
In regards to the OP, I was quite surprised to hear about this program. It actually seemed to be relatively innovative and smart to get customers out buying new cars which helps the ailing auto industry as well as gets more fuel efficient cars on the road and the less fuel efficient ones off of it. It seems as though they didn't anticipate the impact it would have though and underestimated how much money to set aside for the program.
I find the criticism of it from the Republicans to be laughable.
That would be the case of people were spending their money on fuel efficient vehicles. I find it laughable that the results of this program have yielded heavy SUV sales as opposed to small, truly fuel efficient vehicles.
My main criticism is that people are putting themselves back into the banks' pockets barely a year after they royally fucked our entire country.....
Praetor
08/09/09, 02:48 PM
There should have been more fuel efficiency standards.
Machu505
08/09/09, 02:49 PM
you see that hummer even has a car that makes the list?
Chinese cars, fuck yeah.
ShShShark
08/09/09, 02:57 PM
There should have been more fuel efficiency standards.
This.
..is a stupid idea
Is that what they call successful initiatives nowadays?
Is that what they call successful initiatives nowadays?
You can do your sparky comments all you want, but it hasn't REALLY done anything helpful, while healthcare and immigration flounder and fail.
You can do your sparky comments all you want, but it hasn't REALLY done anything helpful, while healthcare and immigration flounder and fail.
Elaborate. I want some substantive evidence that it "hasn't REALLY done anything helpful". If you're gonna make a claim, back it up.
Also, healthcare looks like it will pass in some form or another, and immigration simply CAN'T be addressed until 2010. One issue at a time, y'know?
saysmydoctor
08/10/09, 10:21 PM
I don't wanna get gangraped in an elevator.
I don't wanna get gangraped in an elevator.
Hence cash for clunkers was a success.
Machu505
08/10/09, 10:27 PM
I don't wanna get gangraped in an elevator.
I read that as "gan graped" at first. Huge wtf? moment.
I read that as "gan graped" at first. Huge wtf? moment.
It's pronounced "grannyraped".
Machu505
08/10/09, 10:31 PM
It's pronounced "grannyraped".
I was imagining Sean having grapes thrown at him by old people in an elevator.
:-d
I was imagining Sean having grapes thrown at him by old people in an elevator.
:-d
Granny grape gang raped.
Love the new avatar, btw.
simensays
08/10/09, 10:49 PM
Successful program is a failure for doing what is what meant to do. I GET IT.
no you don't
saysmydoctor
08/10/09, 10:51 PM
no you don't
Don't quote me if you can't read through sarcasm. I have no time to hold your hand while you post.
Justin_stacy
08/19/09, 12:26 PM
shouldn't surprise anyone.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A63RC81&show_article=1
Mercy Medical
08/19/09, 01:01 PM
You can do your sparky comments all you want, but it hasn't REALLY done anything helpful, while healthcare and immigration flounder and fail.
Getting shitty cars with shitty gas mileage off the road and cars with better gas mileage on it? Helping the auto industry out of it's slump?
Yes, this hasn't done anything...absolutely nothing at all.
wrppdarndyrfngr
08/20/09, 03:58 PM
U.S. to shut down cash for clunkers at 8 p.m. Monday (http://www.freep.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS01/90820066) [Detroit Free Press]
U.S. to shut down cash for clunkers at 8 p.m. Monday (http://www.freep.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS01/90820066) [Detroit Free Press]
'bout time they shut down that complete and utter success of a program.
/my mockery of right-wing morons in this thread.
saysmydoctor
08/20/09, 04:45 PM
shouldn't surprise anyone.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A63RC81&show_article=1
Weren't you in the past thread actually complaining about the influx of people taking advantage of this program and calling it a money pit essentially? Your implication is obvious, "of course the government reimbursement is slow." However...
I doubt the number of people taking advantage of the program and the speed of processing these reimbursement applications are connected in any way whatsoever. That's just absurd. Except it's not.
Machu505
08/24/09, 11:33 AM
Cash for Refrigerators (http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090824/bs_bw/aug2009db20090821304909)
Cash for Refrigerators (http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090824/bs_bw/aug2009db20090821304909)
I thought you were making a funny too...then I read it.
Machu505
08/24/09, 11:53 AM
I thought you were making a funny too...then I read it.
They need a clever name for it. Dollars for Dishwashers?
Mercy Medical
08/24/09, 12:14 PM
Weren't you in the past thread actually complaining about the influx of people taking advantage of this program and calling it a money pit essentially? Your implication is obvious, "of course the government reimbursement is slow." However...
I doubt the number of people taking advantage of the program and the speed of processing these reimbursement applications are connected in any way whatsoever. That's just absurd. Except it's not.
The program isn't perfect, therefore we must complain, complain, complain.
vBulletin v3.6.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.