Export-Import Bank Debate

#76
#76
DC_Vol said:
I assumed you were being sarcastic. It's silly to argue that anywhere close to 100% of any of those companies' foreign business is financed by a $150B credit line.

The hundred thousand jobs claim are hysterics that I thought were only reserved for LG.
Click to expand...

I finally got back to your post, forgive me.

The hundred thousand was an arbitrary number I tossed out, so do forgive that I didn't put down exactly 54,072 or whatever.

And the $150 billion credit line is the cap on the Ex-Im Bank. If you are talking contracts like Caterpillar for example, some, maybe a lot, I don't know, will go over years. So if South Africa orders 500 units of a product, the contract may specify over a five year period. When you break it down into a realistic timeline, the $150 billion probably does cover the international sales.
 
#78
#78
Grand Vol said:
You were the one that brought the whole "statist" moniker into the discussion.

So what can you tell me about the Ex-Im bank? I had to educate myself today about it so I could talk rationally about it with Huff. And we haven't been at each other's throat for a change. He disagrees with the principle. I don't and I think we've agreed to disagree.

You on the other hand are having a hard time separating out your hatred for government and looking at something objectively. You see "government" and "bank" and somehow have made the connection with the bailouts.

It's kind of like talking about cars and all the sudden you start mentioning Pluto. Your connection doesn't really apply here.
Click to expand...

It applies because you are dealing with government money (taxes)
That's why I say that government has no money other than the money they've stolen through taxation.

How it equates to the bailouts is that it is once again tax money.
Which program that stolen money goes to support makes no difference. Theft is theft.

Good businesses should succeed through their own merit. Bad businesses on the other hand should be allowed to go out of business. The market should decide these things, not government.
 
#79
#79
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
It applies because you are dealing with government money (taxes)
That's why I say that government has no money other than the money they've stolen through taxation.

How it equates to the bailouts is that it is once again tax money.
Which program that stolen money goes to support makes no difference. Theft is theft.

Good businesses should succeed through their own merit. Bad businesses on the other hand should be allowed to go out of business. The market should decide these things, not government.
Click to expand...

My bad, I didn't realize you were using this thread to complain about taxes.

The statist will move along.
 
#80
#80
I never thought I would see Grandvol called a statist.



Urban Dictionary: Statist.....
Modern day supporter of political slavery; A secular State-Worshiper; Member of the cult of the State; An irrational, immoral, collectivist parasite which leeches off the productive private sector at the point of a gun, while attempting to justify such behavior through invalid, unethical, altruistic arguments. Uses statist law (oppressive edicts backed by criminal violence) to intimidate and run the neo-slave racket. Typically found in government, politics, bureaucracy, police, military and law; aka Supporter of such; Governmentalist; Nationalist; A degenerate sub-human who makes your life a living hell; An accident just waiting to happen...
A statist is just about anyone who's not an anarcho-capitalist
Click to expand...
 
#83
#83
Boeing was a big proponent of the ExIM bank for "jobs" at Boeing. American airlines were not availed to the same taxpayer backed low interest loans to buy those same Boeing products as Emirates, Qatar, Aeroflot, Saudia, All Nippon, etc etc etc etc. In addition to American taxpayer backed loans, many of these airlines are supported by their federal governments. ($42 Billion to Emirates alone) As an aside, they also do not have the labor laws to abide by which allows them to fire those hot young flight attendants at will for getting old. I digress. So my question is what is it that makes Boeing jobs more important than jobs at American Airlines, United, Delta, and Southwest to name a few. I love Boeing products, and plan on retiring on one. It is pretty ironic however that American carriers are buying Airbus products while foreign carriers are buying Boeing. I for one am glad the ExIm is gone, hopefully never to return.
 
Last edited:
#93
#93
SpaceCoastVol said:
Why is my job and those of thousands of my coworkers less important than Boeing manufacturing jobs?
Click to expand...

1. I don't really know what you do, I think you are a pilot.
2. If you are a pilot, I don't know how this effects your job security.
3. I don't know anything about it, and have been dependent on people explaining the aspects of it.
4. my comment wasn't directed at you.
 
#94
#94
“People complain that the bank only helps big companies,” said Doug Oberhelman, the chairman and C.E.O. of Caterpillar. “A lot of our suppliers are small. They don’t export, but we do. And if we aren’t exporting, they aren’t selling to us.” He added, “I find it staggering that we would put highly paid export-oriented jobs at risk.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/19/o...-killers-and-the-export-import-bank.html?_r=0
 
#95
#95
LouderVol said:
1. I don't really know what you do, I think you are a pilot.
2. If you are a pilot, I don't know how this effects your job security.
3. I don't know anything about it, and have been dependent on people explaining the aspects of it.
4. my comment wasn't directed at you.
Click to expand...
My comment wasn't directed specifically at you either. I work for an American airline. The ExIm bank allows Boeing to sell airplanes to our foreign competition with US taxpayer guaranteed loans that US domestic carriers are not allowed to take advantage of. Many of those foreign carriers (Emirates, Qatar to name a couple) are state government sponsored entities which completely negates their possibility of going bankrupt due to the normal business environments. (The UAE built a multi billion dollar airport for their precious airlines just to bring traffic thru Dubai. Interesting who the largest carrier there is, and how they are able to garner such traffic... that is a completely different rant however). So the US taxpayer is in effect guaranteeing stability to foreign entities on top of their already guaranteed support from THEIR governments to undercut American business. To summarize. Boeing gets to sell aircraft to foreign carriers which then in turn use those subsidized aircraft to unfairly compete with US businesses. (In a real interesting twist of irony, look at the order books for American based carriers. Lots and lots of Airbusses on the books. Wonder why?)

Those foreign carriers also have no labor laws that they have to abide by so they can fire flight attendants for getting old or pregnant, or being gay: (Wonder what would happen to a gay flight attendant that flew into Saudi Arabia during the Haj) or whatever the flavor of the month is. We cannot do that.

I love (and fly) Boeing airplanes btw. "If it's not Boeing, I'm not going." But we are getting rid of most Boeings except 737s for the many of the reasons I stated above. They are very 'proud' of their airplanes, and up until now have had zero reasons to keep their prices competitive with Airbus. And while my rant may seem a bit contradictory, remember that Boeing also manufactures a lot of other products besides commercial airplanes. Rockets and military hardware (which are government contracted) just to name a couple Now that hopefully the abomination of the ExIm is gone, maybe they will actually compete in the commercial aircraft division. I for one certainly hope so.

/rant
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#96
#96
Abe Hoffman said:
“People complain that the bank only helps big companies,” said Doug Oberhelman, the chairman and C.E.O. of Caterpillar. “A lot of our suppliers are small. They don’t export, but we do. And if we aren’t exporting, they aren’t selling to us.” He added, “I find it staggering that we would put highly paid export-oriented jobs at risk.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/19/o...-killers-and-the-export-import-bank.html?_r=0
Click to expand...


Immelt is now an extortionist. I guess at least he has the option to take his business overseas. My industry just wants fair competition with foreign entities and want the American subsidies of those entities to stop. He is directly threatening American jobs if his margins are threatened.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top