|
|
Post by mosttoysjackswild on Nov 13, 2008 11:09:04 GMT -5
Okay everybody, this is a HOT topic. HOW DOES EVERYONE FEEL ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT BAILING OUT GM, FORD, & CHRYSLER? Here's my two-cents worth - I'm not totally against it, but to just throw (more) taxpayers money at this situation, without really delving into the root causes, (and fixing them), is a mistake. Isn't it enough that the first, (banking industry), bailout hasn't even begun to help our economy - now what we need to do is have the government "buy a stake" in the auto industry too? THAT'S SIMPLY LUDICROUS!!  What's next STARBUCKS, the THRASHERS, the PREDATORS  PS Had to throw a hockey link into this, right  |
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Nov 13, 2008 17:35:44 GMT -5
What's next STARBUCKS, the THRASHERS, the PREDATORS That's my issue with it. It's a very "slippery slope" when you start bailing EVERYONE out. |
|
|
|
Post by RedWings on Nov 13, 2008 18:27:08 GMT -5
I think it's horse crap for the Gum-mint to bail out any private enterprise. Yeah, yeah, national security my rectum.
They bailed out Chrysler in the 80s, so I don't see how this is any different. As coyote says, they already started down that slippery slope in the 80s and now they're REALLY picking up steam with the Bail-Out BS to the bankers and AIG (don't get me started on them).
Now, they are effectively talking about nationalizing our banks on a smaller scale, and even giving American Express "National Bank" status (and assurances - read as taxpayers' support).
Why in the hell are these politicians so afraid or opposed to obeying our own constitution, for crying out loud!!!
My late Uncle had it right with his bumper sticker on the back of his American made pickup..... "NEVER RE-ELECT ANYONE!".
|
|
|
|
Post by griffan on Nov 13, 2008 18:52:12 GMT -5
I was against the initial bailout because there was no real action taken against those who created the problem.
The CEO's were allowed to walk away scot free after totally mismanaging the companies and committing fraud. I'd love to have a position like Raines had where I could take 60 million in salary and bonuses by manipulating the books. Then when I'm caught, pay fines consisting of 1 million, which is covered by an insurance policy the company had, surrender 2 million in company stock, which I have now made worthless, and 6 million in benefits and deferred compensation that I have yet to claim.
Hmmm so I get to keep my 60 million and all I have to surrender is worthless stock, funds that I don't have yet and let the insurance company pay the rest? No jail time or anything else for the fraud? Where do I sign up?
What ticks me off is they were warned by McCain and others that this problem was going to happen when Slick Willie and the Skanky Bunch allowed Mae, Mac and others to give out these easy to get loans.
As for the government stepping in, what were they supposed to do? They had a hand in creating the problem so they had no choice really. They couldn't let the loans default and have massive foreclosures. That would create an enourmous homeless population and drive the pride of houses down. They had to do something and the bailout was the best they could do. Problem is they set a precedent here for every business whose financial failure could have an adverse effect on a large amount of people. The automakers sure do qualify for that. IMO they should be allowed to be part of a bailout plan.
I also feel they need to get to the root cause of the problems in both situations. But as long as we're willing to throw more money at the problem without any kind of accountability these will continue.
IMO neither bailout will show anything positive to the economy. Look at the audacity of AIG. They get 85 billion in bailout and spend 440K on a party! I just don't see any of this as having anything but a short term benefit. It'll be business as usual until the people who create the problems are held accountable.
I'd ay it's only a matter of time until the major sports organizations try the same thing.
Brian
|
|
|
|
Post by sjradio on Nov 13, 2008 20:28:59 GMT -5
Well, I look at it this way, the auto companies build products that everybody uses, Considering the number of employees the Big 3 employ, not to mention the number of other companies that depend on them, parts suppliers, transportation of vehicles, parts, dealerships, maintenance, petroleum.
Now also think about the number of government requirments for auto makers to comply to, federal safety standards, testing, efficiency, materials. Think about how much money these automakers have to spend to comply with government policies. How many different federal agencies want their piece of the action to oversee the automakers, EPA (pollution standards, environmental impact, disposal), NTSB (safety improvements, collision and impact studies).
Car makers barely make anything in California because of the different standards there because of smog.
Now the US government is demanding that car companies do more for gas conservation, they are asked to invent and develop new technologies. How much do you think that R & D costs the companies.
As for the US government, how about the failure of the US dollar, it's not the car companies fault that the worth of their products are less overseas. They can't sell their products overseas with the ease as the foreign companies do here. Most of it because of goverment regulations, policies, tariffs.
Also remember in terms of biofuels and hydogen vehichles. There is no logical reason for car companies to mass produce those types of vehicles until the infrastructure is there. How many cars can run on Bio diesel, how many bio diesel stations are there?
the same with hydrogen, how many hydrogen refueling stations are there, they are not easy to find, there is a lot more in California, than the rest of the us, Michigan has about 5 hydrogen stations and they are all near Detroit, plus only about 2 will be made available for public use.
The problem is that most of the alternative fuels are based in major US cities, and not all of us live near the cities where they are available.
Could you see yourself driving 1-2 hours just to fill up? doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of having an alternative fueled vehicle.
The government should help. They are partly to blame for the problems of the Big 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by griffan on Nov 14, 2008 0:19:31 GMT -5
Now also think about the number of government requirments for auto makers to comply to, federal safety standards, testing, efficiency, materials. Think about how much money these automakers have to spend to comply with government policies. How many different federal agencies want their piece of the action to oversee the automakers, EPA (pollution standards, environmental impact, disposal), NTSB (safety improvements, collision and impact studies). The government should help. They are partly to blame for the problems of the Big 3. They're also responsible for the high cost of military equipment. I worked for a Department of Defense subcontractor and the Mil-Specs on a lot of what we did was ridiculous. Add all that to what you mentioned above and the overhead cost is huge. The reason the government pays $300.00 for a toilet seat is now clear to me! Brian |
|
