JTT
 
  1  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 10:36 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
that the many suppliers of both GM and Ford


I thought Ford was fine and didn't ask for any money.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 02:04 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Clycloptichorn wrote:
... it was determined that allowing them to fail would lead to an unacceptable level of further job and business losses. ... many suppliers of both GM and Ford would also have failed

Who determined that? GM's union?

The union knew their exorbitant union contracts would be in jeaporady if GM declared bankruptcy and reformed. The OD knew it too.

GM repaid its government loans with TARP gifts from the government.

Subsidizing GM has led to an even further unacceptable level of further job and business losses.

Ford turned down bailout money, and it and its suppliers are doing much better than GM and its suppliers.
JTT
 
  2  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 03:41 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
The union knew their exorbitant union contracts would be in jeaporady[sic] if GM declared bankruptcy and reformed.


What is exorbitant about free enterprise negotiations between two competent parties?

Why are there no complaints from you about exorbitant bonuses for failed companies' execs, for exorbitant salaries for failed companies' execs, about exorbitant profits being made?

It's the responsibility of management, is it not to ensure that a company makes money. Who failed in that respect?
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 04:05 pm
@JTT,
JTT, Good points; I agree with your valid questions about failed companies vs negotiated contracts with unions.
roger
 
  2  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 04:25 pm
@talk72000,
Corporations are state entities. Deleware is a popular state in which to register. You've got to stop deciding what sounds right and posting it as fact.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 07:12 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Arigatou gozaimashita, CI San!

Hisashiburi da ne! Doko e ikimashita ka.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Sun 1 Aug, 2010 08:45 pm
Excessive salaries and benefits paid to both employees and their management is are bad for business. However, the survival of GM was put in far greater jeopardy by the very high cost of their union contracts that their management negotiated with their unions than they were by the high salaries paid to their management.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 10:11 am
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

Clycloptichorn wrote:
... it was determined that allowing them to fail would lead to an unacceptable level of further job and business losses. ... many suppliers of both GM and Ford would also have failed

Who determined that? GM's union?


The Federal government and many economists.

Cycloptichorn
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 12:57 pm
ican says
Quote:
However, the survival of GM was put in far greater jeopardy by the very high cost of their union contracts that their management negotiated with their unions than they were by the high salaries paid to their management.
And it was put most in jeaopardy by several decades of a series of very bad decisions by BM's inbred and ridiculously overcompensated high executives, as typified by:
.
shareholder: "GM doesn't make an entry-level vehicle any more"
GM executive: "Tell entry-level buyers to buy a used Buick"
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 01:39 pm
@MontereyJack,
When ican gets an idea into his brain, he doesn't see the other trees in the forest.
parados
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 01:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Don't you mean when ican gets a twig in his brain....

I don't think I can classify half of what ican posts as "an idea".
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 01:46 pm
@parados,
More precisely, I'd say "other twigs."
ican711nm
 
  0  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 02:22 pm
@cicerone imposter,
IT'S ALL THERE:
Roots, trunks, branches, twigs, blossoms, fruit and seeds plus a camera!
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 02:59 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
The OBAMA DEMOCRAT Federal government and many economists DETERMINED THAT INCREASED SPENDING BY THE GOVERNMENT WILL PRODUCE A DIFFERENT RESULT THAN DID HOOVER AND ROOSEVELT WHEN THEY INCREASED SPENDING AND RAISED TAXES.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 03:02 pm
@ican711nm,
I think you meant to say 'The Bush Administration.' For it was they who determined that letting GM collapse was unacceptable.

Cycloptichorn
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 03:08 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
For it was they who determined that letting GM collapse was unacceptable
the Bush admin did not want to deal with GM, so they gave GM just enough to get along till Obama came to town.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -3  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 03:41 pm
Quote:
Chuck Norris: '0bama's US Assassination Program'

Now, if you REALLY want to read something that'll scare your pants off!....

Can't help wondering if the Tea Party Patriots may be in their hairline scope.

VISION TO AMERICA: Part I: A couple of excerpts:

And it's the gravest nightmare of U.S. citizens and abandonment of our Constitution to date: a presidential assassination program in which U.S. citizens are in the literal scopes of the executive branch, based upon nothing more than 'allegations of terrorism involvement' as the branch defines it.

The European Union Times reported, "Foreign Ministry reports circulating in the Kremlin today are warning that 'an already explosive situation in the United States is about to get a whole lot worse as a new law put forth by President Obama is said capable of seeing up to 500,000 American citizens jailed for the crime of opposing their government'."
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 03:45 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I think you meant to say 'The Bush Administration.' For it was they who determined that letting GM collapse was unacceptable.

The Democrat majority Congress and the Bush administration "determined that letting GM collapse was unacceptable."
Both were wrong.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 08:28 pm
Good evening.
I was a bit surprised to see the issue of the bailouts of the banks and the auto companies come up again here. I thought we had talked that to death months ago on this thread, on the "Where is the economy" thread and the "Conservatism" thread.
I was reading recently about the deficits being racked up by state and local governments. Huge deficits. I read a projection - which I alas can not cite - that some 800K workers may be terminated. Some may be the guys who lean on shovels staring at a pothole. Others may be teachers and cops. 800K nationally.
Does that, in your minds, rise to the level of a crisis worthy of some kind of federal government assistance? Or should we let these state and local governments collapse?
An A2Ker who no longer participates in discussions here because of the petty and often bitter bickering emailed me a long article today about the storm clouds she sees brewing on the state and municipal levels.
I am still digesting that and working on connecting it to stuff I have collected.
plainoldme
 
  0  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 08:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I was thinking of posting a link to the song "Johnny One Note" for ican.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1732
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 07/19/2025 at 03:16:56