By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - There! Fourteen billions for big3 autos

Kasz216 on 19 December 2008

I thought they were just taking the money out of the bank bailout.

The reaction on it is pretty hilarious too....

a bunch of union democrats basically having to thank Bush of all people for keeping their healthcare.

Still they seem happy with anything that'll help them stay afloat.  Because unlike most people who pay attention to politics... their sane.

 



Around the Network
akuma587 on 19 December 2008
theRepublic said:
akuma587 said:
halogamer1989 said:
Yup another bailout recommended and overseen by none other than Elmer freakin' Fudd. Barney Frank needs to grow a pair and learn to obligate MASSIVE overhaul and not just take the $$$ and run schemes. As for the necessity to fix their problem with the money disbursements--r u kidding me! Fix the crap first and then bail out what is left. File for Chapter 11 and restructure. Hell, merge GM and Chrysler and get rid of the redundant fleet.

While I do agree that Chapter 11 would solve more of GM's problems than a loan would, the last thing the economy needs right now is more bad news. The economic environment has gotten even worse since GM et al first asked for a bailout.

And this plan seems to be much more well-implemented from the start than the $700 billion bailout. Not to mention it is a fraction of the price.

The economy can't just keep taking every punch that's thrown at it, or we will sink into a depression rather than just a recession.

 

Although I'm not sure if I support this bailout or not, there is an interesting argument against bankruptcy.

When some of the airlines filed for Chapter 11, people continued to fly with them because it is a one time service that occurs only a short time into the future.

When you buy a new car from a company in Chapter 11, you have to worry about if that company will continue to exist. That means you have to worry about your warranty, parts, and service for the vehicle.

I heard on the radio about a poll that said about 80% of Americans would not buy a car from a company going through bankruptcy. I'm not sure how much faith I have in that number though.

Absolutely.  The car industry is a completely different animal.  Even when a retailer goes bankrupt you can still go to the store and buy something without having to worry about it (assuming you aren't concerned with returns).

Cars are completely different.

People love to piss and moan that the government is wasting money doing this, but they would be pissing and moaning at the government much more if the economy sunk into a depression.  So politicians have the option of listening to a little bit of pissing and moaning and watch most people move on after the economy recovers, or potentially listening to a lot more pissing and moaning if the economy collapses.

And for once Bush and Cheney are doing the best thing for their party.  They realize that if nothing happened because the GOP was stubborn and an economic catastrophe happened, the Republicans would be the Herbert Hoovers of the 21st century.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Kasz216 on 19 December 2008
akuma587 said:
theRepublic said:
akuma587 said:
halogamer1989 said:
Yup another bailout recommended and overseen by none other than Elmer freakin' Fudd. Barney Frank needs to grow a pair and learn to obligate MASSIVE overhaul and not just take the $$$ and run schemes. As for the necessity to fix their problem with the money disbursements--r u kidding me! Fix the crap first and then bail out what is left. File for Chapter 11 and restructure. Hell, merge GM and Chrysler and get rid of the redundant fleet.

While I do agree that Chapter 11 would solve more of GM's problems than a loan would, the last thing the economy needs right now is more bad news. The economic environment has gotten even worse since GM et al first asked for a bailout.

And this plan seems to be much more well-implemented from the start than the $700 billion bailout. Not to mention it is a fraction of the price.

The economy can't just keep taking every punch that's thrown at it, or we will sink into a depression rather than just a recession.

 

Although I'm not sure if I support this bailout or not, there is an interesting argument against bankruptcy.

When some of the airlines filed for Chapter 11, people continued to fly with them because it is a one time service that occurs only a short time into the future.

When you buy a new car from a company in Chapter 11, you have to worry about if that company will continue to exist. That means you have to worry about your warranty, parts, and service for the vehicle.

I heard on the radio about a poll that said about 80% of Americans would not buy a car from a company going through bankruptcy. I'm not sure how much faith I have in that number though.

Absolutely.  The car industry is a completely different animal.  Even when a retailer goes bankrupt you can still go to the store and buy something without having to worry about it (assuming you aren't concerned with returns).

Cars are completely different.

People love to piss and moan that the government is wasting money doing this, but they would be pissing and moaning at the government much more if the economy sunk into a depression.  So politicians have the option of listening to a little bit of pissing and moaning and watch most people move on after the economy recovers, or potentially listening to a lot more pissing and moaning if the economy collapses.

And for once Bush and Cheney are doing the best thing for their party.  They realize that if nothing happened because the GOP was stubborn and an economic catastrophe happened, the Republicans would be the Herbert Hoovers of the 21st century.

 

I got nothing wrong with this one.  Cause it's mostly helping out the small guys.

The bank bailout.... yet to be seen. 

I really think a new market could of rose up and took the place of the worst parts of the credit crunch...

or really the government itself could of issued loans directly to people rather then going through the failed banking institutions if one didn't come up.

Hire the failed companys workers replace the management and turn the government companies private once everything sorted out... and the loans are made back.

 



Galaki on 19 December 2008

Suppose you bail them out.
And they continue business as usual, pooping out cars nobody buys.

Meanwhile, economy's in a slump and less and less people buying cars.


They should invest in public transit, where people will actually be using.



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

Soleron on 20 December 2008
Galaki said:
Suppose you bail them out.
And they continue business as usual, pooping out cars nobody buys.

Meanwhile, economy's in a slump and less and less people buying cars.


They should invest in public transit, where people will actually be using.

Precisely. The car industry failed, not because of the recession but because of poor response to competition. Failure to compete should be punished by a failure of the company - that's practically the foundation of a free market. Unlike the banks, few people lose service (OK, current owners do but the market for parts will still exist).

So, instead of a bailout, I would label this illegal protectionism (amounting to subsidising domestic manufactured goods over foreign imports). I didn't agree with the bank bailout because it wasn't practical and wasn't the best way to solve the issue, but the car bailout (and the UK have one as well) has the potential to damage the market itself: if e.g. Toyota's business is more profitable than the Three but Toyota dies because the Three were bailed out, what is the incentive to be more profitable and efficient? Why not just run a bad business and continually ask for subsidies?