Let GM go Bankrupt

@BillRM,

What nonsense.

Of course the Japanese auto manufacturers have established manufacturing plants in America to advance their profits.

They wisely realized that their better products alone would not win the day for them in the American market.

They knew that without providing jobs in America, they were subject to a nationalistic backlash.

They were also very wise to provide those jobs in a region of our country not held in thrall by unions.

As a result they produce cars that Americans want to buy, are not ashamed to buy, and at a cost that undercuts the Detroit automakers.

There is a reason that Detroit is considered a part of the Rust Belt, while TN, AL and SC are considered parts of the Sun Belt.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Thank Finn DAbuzz as you stated what we all know the main desire here and in some congressmen is the destruction of evil unions no matter at what cost to the rest of society.

How dare those blue collar workers demand a middleclass income/lifestyle and thereby reduce the bonuses of upper management and the pay out to shareholders.

Two dollars a day should be fine for them.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Sorry it have to do more with the trade laws and duty on cars if they was not partly manufacture in the US.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

How dare these blue collar workers demand more money FROM THE TAXPAYERS!

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

How dare those blue collar workers demand a middleclass income/lifestyle and thereby reduce the bonuses of upper management and the pay out to shareholders.

What a pathetic red herring.

Do the workers at the Toyota, Honda and BMW plants make $2 a day?

Do you clowns really believe that by spewing this sort of nonsense you will win the day? Or is it all about impressing your fellow clowns?

0 Replies

@BillRM,

You are simply wrong.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

The same way that gay couples can demand extra funds from the taxpayers.
Oh sorry wrong thread<grin>!

In any case I hope all of you anti-union nuts enjoy seeing your 401 k go down to a dime on the dollar as a result of not bailing our those non-viable hundred years old companies.

Myself the bulk of my 401 k funds is in money market funds and so far my retirement saving had been going up if slowly.

What a damn shame however that we are going to lost trillions of dollars because some of the people in power hate unions and will not give the big three 25 billions.

Pocket channge compare to what is going to happen as a result.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

On and on you drone.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

The fuel economy of a Ford Model T was equal to the average fuel economy of Ford's CURRENT fleet.

When a company doesn't plan for it's future, it becomes NON-VIABLE.

I'm not happy Ford, GM, Chrysler did this to themselves, but I'm even more unhappy that they're asking ME to bail them out.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

You know I have to laugh here we had firms that had been in business for a 100 years or so and all at once the experts on this thread are declaring them not viable!

Possibly I've missed something, but I believe they have declared themselves to be not viable.

1 Reply

@roger,

But he has to laugh because they have been in business for 100+ years and so must be immortal.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
Too frequently lately; I've observed arguments seemingly compelled by a belief that we should provide assistance according to need, rather than deed. This way, maybe, we can all be winners! The problem is: this is the summary difference between communism and socialism... and I think it’s important that we recognize the road this could lead to before investing too much of our great grand children's money in demonstrably, disastrous non-solutions.

WE CAN’T ALL BE WINNERS.

Now there is the Occom Bill I know and love.

And here you thought I'd moved to the "dark side". Laughing

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Of course we can't.

The best we can strive for is a society where the winners have earned their laurels with integrity and through creativity, smarts, and old fashioned hard work.

Losing need not mean abject poverty or destruction, but there simply isn't an even imaginable system that will result in everyone winning; where winning actually means something.

We can come close to all losing together though, but history has shown us that even then there are winners: just not the industrious, but the powerful.

Zero-tolerance in any context is untenable and will always lead to irrational and/or harmful decisions and actions.

If no one can be left behind, we will not advance.

Your points are very well stated. We can't all win, but we most certainly can all lose. Ask any former Soviet how well things run when bureaucrats take over business. I'd rather see all three disappear before seeing them nationalized. I really can't see much light between subsidizing failed business models and nationalization.

I wonder if Lee Iacocca still has a sound mind. Ford made billions during his tenure and Chrysler paid their government backed loan off many years ahead of schedule.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

But he has to laugh because they have been in business for 100+ years and so must be immortal.

You do have to wonder how a fella can cry foul because you question the viability of a company screaming “please help or were doomed!”

0 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

No Spendi. What I'm suggesting is that the current business model doesn't work and adding more government money and control is unlikely to improve it. I didn't suggest $10 an hour peeps would be better; I suggested that it's unfair to tax them to prop up jobs that pay more.

By and large; I don't have a problem with high salaries or Private Jets for people whose time is worth more than the added expense either… but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid to use them on your way to beg for financial help.

I really don't think any of us on here know anywhere near enough about these matters for our comments to have any credibility.

One could say that a Darwinian would be against bailouts in all circumstances. And pork. And a lot of other things.

I think those guys must have considered travelling on commercial planes but they might have thought we would object to them patronising us so blatantly.

It is perfectly justifiable that they travel as they normally do. Any objections to their private jets should have been made long ago. That clunker who raised the matter must have known about them all along. He was just playing to the gallery of the dimwits. I'd bet he benefits from largesse. I would question his election.

Isn't the problem they face due to much reduced demand and not to their management. Otherwise you have to question how the US chooses its CEOs.

Then you are in murky waters.

The only function this thread has is to allow a ridiculous display of a light smattering of economic knowledge gleaned from "media sources" which we all ought to know are unlikely to be objective.

If they are not bluffing then you have the two choices. Bail them out or lose them and all that sail in them. It's politics--not economics.

0 Replies

Im still standing on the fact that, allowing the companies to merely reorganize (UNDER FEDERAL LAWS GENEROUSLY PERMITTING BANKRUPTCY of industries but limiting those of individuals), they can merely dispense with having to pay back creditors. Their owe to creditors occupies much more than any union considerations. Its therefore Ok for the Finnzies to merely allow a form of fascism take its place as valid fiscal policy for automakers.

If you allow them to go Chapter 11, they are merely being offered the opportunity to cheat their subs. Theres no guiarantee that theyll come roaring back with new ideas.

Like BArrons said(I hate to beat the dead horse), they reccomend such A loan for everyone cept Chrysler, with strictly monitored strings, a plan for change, RD and energy efficiency (seems that quality is a given as per JD Powers) caps on salaries and deferral of any union considerations (Unions would have to take a 5 year freeze or even deeper concessions or leave and let the workplace be backfilled with nonunion skilled workers ).

The loans would allow continued cash streams to subs and suppliers and probably, there would be a deep change in management to stress engineering and product rather than financie and managem,ent systems. (ENGINEERS over MBA's)
PS, that exactly what the Japanese companies have done. The Japanese have always been derivative in design but have excelled in management and production.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Caricature economics. English expression abysmal.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Lord the model T had a toy engine compare to modern cars.

Off hand I don't know the horse power of the model T car or it top speed for that matter but still to compare the model T to any modern car mph is similar as comparing a modern jet fuel consummation to that of the 1903 Wright flyer with it 7 Hp engine.

Your comment sound good but is complete nonsense.

1 Reply

I am with someone I read (NYT's?) that the stockholders should get rubbed out, that management must be replaced, that new fuel standards must be written onto law, and that the US would extend a line of credit sufficient to get the big three through Chapter 11 bankrupsy.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Off hand I don't know the horse power of the model T car or it top speed for that matter but still to compare the model T to any modern car mph is similar as comparing a modern jet fuel consummation to that of the 1903 Wright flyer with it 7 Hp engine.

It is not really similar Bill. Mr Wright had one 7 Hp engine on his own. Millions have the modern car with in-capsule entertainment and white wall tires. And roads to ride them down at much less risk that Mr Wright took.

Think of the pleasure these companies have given to the people for many decades. Think of how they provided that housing could be placed at a distance from industry and suburbs become possible. Think of the drive-in movie.

With-holding a mere $25 billion dollars and thus crushing them into the dirt with the heel of our shoes just shows what thanks you get from this Liberty Lady. She is as tight as an electrocuted duck's arse. A thanksless Mistress.

These companies are national institutions. One only has to say the words "General Motors" and waves of warm reassurance flow through the body.

Perhaps they have been a little over-confident but that's the way of heads of national institutions. It's human nature and we should all be glad to see them showing that it is still alive and kicking. And we made them a national institution our very selves by our very own choice which is not like having them foisted upon us like some national institutions I could mention.

Every taxpayer in the land ought to be willing to kick in a few bucks to save them. It's only 80 bucks each if everybody shares the wealth. I agree with tightening up procedures a bit though.

1 Reply

@spendius,

$25 billion will not save anything, if the auto companies don't change no amount of money will save them. At this point $25 billion would be throwing good money after bad.

Quote:

These companies are national institutions. One only has to say the words "General Motors" and waves of warm reassurance flow through the body.

Boy are you out of touch. At this point the big three are symbols of modern America's incompetence, unwillingness to change with the times, of gross mismanagement.

1 Reply

Let GM go Bankrupt

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know