Should the term GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE be changed to TAXPAYER ASSISTANCE?

the gov help that went to GM was NOT to prevent the finacing arm from going under, it was to protect the manufacturing arm from going under...

the fact that it benefts middle class working ppl, and didn't help your buisness college buddies is what is stuck in your craw... and you know it.

get of the backs of average ppl as suck it up man.

Now you are arguing with yourself. GM still owes more than half the $50 billion in federal funds it received when its costly union contracts drove it into bankruptcy. And its lending arm, GMAC (now Ally Financial), still owes $14.5 billion.
You fail to acknowledge the money was lent to keep GM from going bankrupt, BUT THEY DID ANYWAY.
You fail to acknowledge the thousands of layoffs from GM, regardless of the taxpayer bail out.
You fail to acknowledge the job losses and the dealers that are now closed and will never reopen.
You fail to acknowledge, of the top bailout recipients, GM is the biggest laggard. Bank of America, Citigroup, Chrysler and Chrysler Financial all have paid off their debt and left the TARP program. Even AIG has paid back more than 75% of what it owes taxpayers.

Oh and guess what, I am blue collar, as are most of my buddies. And we ARE the ''average people''.

Oh and 0WEbama does? You are nothing but a useful idiot to him.

then don't vote at all if you feel that way.

DONT VOTE? Maybe its you the LWNJ 0WEbama diaper licker that needs to stay home on election day.

I served 6 years so morons such as yourself can be a clueless IDIOTS.

Please tell me how Americans will benefit from 0WEbama and Holder arming the Mexican drug cartels?

you would have to ask GWB and his staff about that one... they are the ones who concevied of the gun running program...

once holder found out about what had been going on, he stopped it.

Why would I vote for a Job Killer like 0bama?
Why doesn't Romney care about me?
Because he's rich?

''GM, on the other hand, still owes more than half the $50 billion in federal funds it received when the combination of the recession and its costly union contracts drove it into bankruptcy.''

no cite... no class.

Here's your cite dipstick. I wouldn't need to do this if you had bothered to take a peak at previous links (educate yourself).
This very link was posted to YOU earlier in this thread.
''Of the top bailout recipients, GM is the biggest laggard, the TARP watchdog says in his latest quarterly report to Congress. Bank of America, Citigroup, Chrysler and Chrysler Financial all have paid off their debt and left the TARP program. Even AIG has paid back more than 75% of what it owes taxpayers.

GM, on the other hand, still owes more than half the $50 billion in federal funds it received when the combination of the recession and its costly union contracts drove it into bankruptcy. And its lending arm, GMAC (now Ally Financial), still owes $14.5 billion.
http://news.investors.com/art...

Suker you have been SERVED.

KING 0WEbama didnt learn, $10 BILLION on 'green' energy SCAMS to pay back his campaign bundlers and the failure a year later after they received the money.

YOU support FAILURE.

no, i support taking risks that might pay off in big ways.

The risk Romney took did pay off and the Risk owebama took WITH MY TAX DOLLARS has been a dismal failure.

win some, lose some

risk.

LWNJ LOGIC.

Romney wins 80% of the time using his money and those willing to take the risk.
0webama losses 90% of the time using my money and I had no say so in the matter. See the difference? looser.

prove that 90% statement...

i dare you.

show your work.

http://www.sodahead.com/unite...

I'm still looking for the 10% of successes. Bare with me

The problem is EVERY SINGLE ONE FAILED MISERABLY. So YOU support FAILURE.

Good idea except how much will that cost us.

We should call it what it is.

Then you would have to change all things "government" to "taxpayer" and it would be a waste of time and money.

I like it

Only if it is given to those who pay taxes, or who have consistently paid them until they came upon hard times not of their own doing, or they became disabled. TAXPAYER assistance should be for TAX PAYERS. Otherwise, it should be called WELFARE and doled out only to those really in NEED, not scammers.

I believe the implication here is that it is assistance from taxpayers not the government, the government technically has nothing it pull its wealth fro the people....

That's in effect what it is.

I don't agree, many on government assistance are not taxpayers, too many have never been or have not been able to hold down a job their whole lives.

It does not make me think of assistance from taxpayers to others, it makes me think of assistance to taxpayers, maybe because I think that is the way it should be.

I think we are viewing this question differently.
The way I'm reading it was: Assistance From the tax payer, not necessarily for. I was perceiving it from the Reaganesque "Welfare Queen" who lived a lavish lifestyle funded by the American Taxpayer.

I believe those who need public assistance should get up off their no good lazy asses and work for it which would cut assistance rolls down to next to nothing over night!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe that Companies that report record profits quarterly should tell the government that they no longer need Government subsidies, and Politicians who are no longer in office shouldn't be getting checks for life. Especially since retired politicians make anywhere between $200-450K annually while they are out of office while Veterans make less than $40,000 for their service.

Sounds good to me!!!!!!!!!!!!