Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (643691)	1/26/2012 10:00:06 PM
From: Don Hurst	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578706

>>"Maybe you can tell us how the Democrats rescued Intel when they were suffering in the 80's, IBM when they were lost in the wilderness a decade later, or Apple when they were without Steve Jobs."<< For you to even use/compare the Intel, IBM and Apple situations with the free fall of the American Auto Industry in 2008 and its disastrous implications to the entire American economy in 2008 is so irrelevant and incredibly stupid but certainly par for your type of posts OHMIGOSH

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (643691)	1/26/2012 10:21:28 PM
From: J_F_Shepard	Respond to of 1578706

"Maybe you can tell us how the Democrats rescued Intel when they were suffering in the 80's, IBM when they were lost in the wilderness a decade later, or Apple when they were without Steve Jobs." Maybe you can tell us...? I remember IBM buying an interest Intel to the tune of 100-200 million dollars....Intel b bought it back rather quickly. I don't remember IBM needing gov'mint money... IBM had it's huge layoffs when Gerstner took over in the early 90"s

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (643691)	1/27/2012 12:47:12 AM
From: i-node	10 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578706

>>> All three of them are successful, thriving American "icon" companies today. None of them needed to be "bailed out." The term "bailout" as it pertains to the automakers ought to be eliminated in favor of the proper term -- "political payoffs to unions".