OK, let's take a vote

81 posts / 0 new
Last post
krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
OK, let's take a vote

Bailout for the big 3 or no?

 

Krogoth says NO

 

 

 

caroline_culbert's picture
caroline_culbert
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 2 2008
Posts: 624
Re: OK, let's take a vote

caroline_culbert says: no to GM

(I'm unsure of Chrysler and I don't think Ford needs it)--

I'll just say NO to GM since GM is the primary reason for their begging in Washington.

Maenad's picture
Maenad
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 18 2008
Posts: 43
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote no but those guys won't listen to me anyway. ;)

They're going to get it one way or another.

tom.'s picture
tom.
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 345
Re: OK, let's take a vote

No Baliouts, at No Time, to Nobody.

barrt's picture
barrt
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 171
Re: OK, let's take a vote

you guys are just sore after all the other bank bailouts/ robberies, if the big 3 had came first would you still say no?

I say bail them out, all those millions more unemployed would be a hard blow. Plus you desperatly need more manufacturing, not less, if you are going to come out the other side of the energy deficit and the big 3 have lots of resources

 Bail them out, re-tool for the new era of renewable energy and do it fast! also get rid of ALL the fat cat management and those crippling union deals as part of the bailout and get moving quickly!

tom.'s picture
tom.
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 345
Re: OK, let's take a vote
barrt wrote:

you guys are just sore after all the other bank bailouts/ robberies, if the big 3 had came first would you still say no?

I would still say no ... they had a good car (EV1) and had their customers begging to keep them, but caved in to the oil barons. Did you watch, "Who Killed The Electric Car"? I have no sympathy for them, because of the overwhelming arrogance they showed. I hope not, but I think they will get the bailout anyway.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: OK, let's take a vote

Pre-packaged BK, consolidation of MGT into one company, set up a govt. backed equity fund for car dealerships and suppliers and mandate additional change in units produced and what type of cars (i.e. green and NO SUV's/trucks other than construction and that sort of demand).

No one is going to be buying new cars in the coming years anyway...

2009 for a turn around is akin to the bottoms and turn arounds economist have been calling for the housing market when it started to crater. Pipe dreams. Just like the word "bailout". A bailout is a bandaid.

barrt's picture
barrt
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 171
Re: OK, let's take a vote

siennablue: it seems a bit over the top to me to think its right to shut down these massive industries because of the shortsightedness and crimes of the previous leaders, prosecute those guys, send them to jail for crimes against humanity but salvage the factories and resources, we need those.

Manufacturing power and good R&D departments are massively important in the face of the energy crises

To shut them down and have a fire sale with the properties and equipment (whos gonna buy?) would be a shocking move IMHO

 

TimesAwasting's picture
TimesAwasting
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2008
Posts: 100
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote No more bailouts of any kind, for any industry (including the banksters!).

What's missing from the conversation is the destiny of the Big 3's ultimate failure... they simply cannot survive with the current cost structures and management in place. The modest union give-backs and management promises of efficiency are just not enough to fix the mess... the workers will not give back $30 an hour to be competitive; management will not fire itself for the company's greater good. Therefore Detroit MUST crash... so that some day in the future American auto manufacturing can be rebuilt as a profitable enterprise.

There is a shrinking (auto) market that will likely take years to rebuild. We simply do not need 15 million cars a year for the foreseeable future. The current need will easily be met by the much more efficient car manufacturers (Toyota, Nissan, VW, etc...) who are supplying what the market wants (smaller, fuel efficient, hybrids).

If and when the need arises for greater capacity, rest assured a new American car manufacturer will rise up. And I guarantee you, there will be no shortage of willing workers at $15 to $25 an hour.

cat233's picture
cat233
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2008
Posts: 575
Re: OK, let's take a vote
I check my mailbox daily for a bailout check... Have you gotten yours?  No... I didn't think so.  I haven't found one either, I don't have GM or C plastered on my forehead.  Small business are failing daily, no one is coming to their rescue.  I am tired of being robbed. I vote NO!
TimesAwasting is absolutely correct, there would be no shortage of workers at $15 to$25/hr.
pov56's picture
pov56
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 26 2008
Posts: 14
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote yes, if they make major restructuring of their business.  Since they have been so bad at building cars that the market needs I think they should just build a shell and let entrepreneurs finish them.  Companies like Tesla and other electric car manufacturers can not build cars efficiently so to lower the cost we need the resources of the big 3.

Rebuilding the infrastructure that they have would take too long and be too expensive so forcing them to open their business makes more sense. 

KKPSTEIN's picture
KKPSTEIN
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 20 2008
Posts: 120
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote "No".  This flawed system has to be allowed to collapse so that we can rebuild a new one, hopefully with a gold backed currency and more domestic product.  The system will collapse anyway based on Chris's course and we are just using tape and plaster to keep it together with these bailouts.

ckessel's picture
ckessel
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 12 2008
Posts: 481
Re: OK, let's take a vote
barrt wrote:

you guys are just sore after all the other bank bailouts/ robberies, if the big 3 had came first would you still say no?

I say bail them out, all those millions more unemployed would be a hard blow. Plus you desperatly need more manufacturing, not less, if you are going to come out the other side of the energy deficit and the big 3 have lots of resources

Bail them out, re-tool for the new era of renewable energy and do it fast! also get rid of ALL the fat cat management and those crippling union deals as part of the bailout and get moving quickly!

 barrt,

If you bail them out then the union policies stay along with all the rest of the bloated management decisions such as to scrap the electric car.  Seems that they need to earn their keep. Show us the BEEF rather than the PORK.

Currently there are somewhere aroung 96,000 retired employees receiving paychecks and the health coverage plan worked out by the union includes coverage for Viagra prescriptions of all things. So what are these guys doing on their off time anyway? And how can you be competitive with that kind of overhead.

I vote NO. Let them fail and if we do anything then have the American Taxpayer purchase the hard assets and negotiate a sale to a new startup US owned enterprise.  IE Don't sell the bankrupt shell and assets to a foreign company.

tom.'s picture
tom.
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 345
Re: OK, let's take a vote

baart, call me disenchanted, jaundiced, bitter, or whatever you like. I have no time for anyone on the bailout list, and would not vote for it.

Pelosi gave GM step by step instructions for the presentation they have to submit for approval, and to me that's almost a guarantee they will get the money. Nevertheless, they won't use it to turnaround, they'll find a way to feather the nests of the GM board. It's what they do now with our bailout money. We are fools if we believe anything that emerges from the mouths of politicians.

It's like the old lawyer joke, "How can you tell when politicians are lying"?
Answer .. "Their lips are moving".

joe2baba's picture
joe2baba
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2008
Posts: 807
Re: OK, let's take a vote

i vote yes for the bailout

i say yes simply because the economic theory we have been operating since reagan ruled has been 

trickle down. i simply believe that once everyone above me gets a bailout i will get one as well. it is trickle down economics and it has worked so far. i just have to survive long enough t get one. now i understand this might be a little tricky. but i am an american and i am self reliant and i believe in capitalism except when it doesnt work ................whenever that is. so i believe the big three will do what is right for the country and make really good cars that people want.

after all looking at this logically we all have to receive a bailout to be able to buy the cars. it is really just a feedback loop and we are in the loop. now i am not exactly sure where but i know we are. i trust our leaders to look out for us after all we are the backbone of this country. without us there would not be a country. we fight the wars we, make the cars we buy the cars we vote for them ...............they need us and will take care of us ..............so i vote a resounding yes

i am worried about tiger woods and phil mickelson tho ................they might lose a bunch of money from endorsements but i am sure a bailout will be in the works for them too.

now where did i put my soma

lundsta's picture
lundsta
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2008
Posts: 89
Re: OK, let's take a vote
krogoth wrote:

Bailout for the big 3 or no?

 

Krogoth says NO

 

Krogoth, my vote is no. The article below states that Ford is getting financial guidence from JP Morgan. 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=acvyeNy4syAE&refer=home

More proof that Goldman Sachs and JP are major players and have their hands in everything. Bailouts are black and white. You either do them or not. It is not wise to do both. Now that they have JP on their side they will most likely get their 34 billion lifeline.  

SkylightMT's picture
SkylightMT
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 30 2008
Posts: 125
Re: OK, let's take a vote

No - based in part on Britain's experience with auto bailouts, and because the Big 3 made too many business mistakes, and because the US should not get into the business of bailing out private industry.

pinecarr's picture
pinecarr
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2008
Posts: 2245
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote no, Krogoth, because I don't think it will make the difference. 

One of the things that bothers me about this argument is when you hear pro-bailout politicians give reasons like "they are too big to let fail", for supporting a bailout.  But there is faulty logic in that argument: the assumption that  bailing them out will PREVENT the big 3 from failing.  I don't think it will!  I think it will just delay it.   IIf the big 3 were viable, competative companies, then it'd be worth considering saving them.  But they are not.  They have a history of being poorly managed, and history is the best predictor of future performance.

Nobody wants to see these companies fail, or for the workers and their families to suffer.  But we're talking huge amounts of money, and other industries that will need bailing out after the big-3...  The likelihood that these companies will make make good with this money needs to be considered in the equation.

Whenever we went to a bank for a loan, we had to prove our credit-worhiness!  And noone though twice about us regular folks being held to that measure!

r101958's picture
r101958
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 257
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote no. Bankruptcy does not mean 3 million will lose their jobs. Bankruptcy is used to allow companies to restructure w/o threat of action by creditors. There are many things that need to be restructured within these companies, not the least of which is management compensation and union contracts. All currently very lucrative on the benefits side. This is why they are throwing around the 'D' word so much. They know the benefits will be 'restructured' out of the equation, much to their chagrine. So, 3 million jobs will not be lost.....but many excessively comfortable benefits will be lost that are now making these companies losers in a competitive market.

Maenad's picture
Maenad
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 18 2008
Posts: 43
Re: OK, let's take a vote
krogoth wrote:

Bailout for the big 3 or no?

 

Krogoth says NO

 

Since they'll probably get it anyway, at least impliment some serious rules to moderate greed and idiocy. No more of that open slather blank cheque bullshit. Every private citizen must learn about boundaries to their behaviour, and so too must corporations since they are essentially the inventions and actions of many thousands of human beings. Human beings with no respect for boundaries, no empathy, and treat other humans as objects are psychopaths and sociopaths. A work environment with no boundaries attracts personality disordered individuals whose pathology thrives in this environment. Essentially a destructive personality, the psychopath or sociopath always ends up destroying his world as he has no respect or love for his own self that he does not believe exists or his world that he thinks is mostly of his own imagining.

"The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the
reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe
that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible
reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment
principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the
world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and
when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that
reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other
new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort
out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to
just study what we do.''"
- Ron Suskind. NY Times article here.

Note the superiority and magical thinking involved in this notion, both are big red flags for personaliity disorders. Reality is for lesser beings who act as a cheer squad and audience for the greater beings whose desires and movements are akin to that of gods acting upon an almost cosmic level with no boundaries.

Watch Enron: the Smartest Guys in the Room and The Corporation.

 

Maenad

Michael Höhne's picture
Michael Höhne
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 16 2008
Posts: 119
Re: OK, let's take a vote

They will get their money, either from the government or the banks, backed up by the government, and the decision will be made depending on what the public wants to hear. If I had to choose, I would favor the government, but would force all of them to only use cars of the most efficient type available - both the managers of the big three and the politicians. And no more company cards for fueling up your car. Please pay yourself. That's the best way to improve things anyway.

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote NO.  The factories should be converted to build wind turbines instead of cars.  We already have enough cars to last until the oil runs out.

Nichoman's picture
Nichoman
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Posts: 422
Re: OK, let's take a vote

No.  Otherwise your rewarding an ineffiient business model.  Note...so far...other world automakers are not in that dire straight.   That's the problem...our system has become one that tolerates and even rewards failure.

 

Could be government incentives...through bankrupcy for them to fix problems...thats one of reasons we have bankrupcy laws.  

 

Nichoman 

SamLinder's picture
SamLinder
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 10 2008
Posts: 1499
Re: OK, let's take a vote

I vote NO.

The price has already gone from $25 billion to $34 billion and a commentator on CNN said it could climb to $125 billion.

Enough! The bucks stop here - literally!

Sam....

 

Futuo's picture
Futuo
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 15 2008
Posts: 155
Re: OK, let's take a vote

No, obviously. The conditions don't seem to matter. There are a few considerations for all you pro-bailouters to keep in mind:

 

  • The loss of jobs will be about the same, big three bankruptcy or not. Why? Look at the market for cars, especially new vehicles. How are honda, toyota, mercedes doing? The demand drop is industry wide, and it's not becaue of something the Big Three are doing wrong. Granted, they are doing plenty of things wrong, but they aren't the reason why demand for cars in general has dropped. That's due to people consuming less, realizing the oil prices are bound to reach last summer's peaks, care about the environment, etc... Giving the Big Three a bailout will only continue the production of unwanted products which will further lower their cost. The demand drop for cars in general is sufficient enough to reduce their demand for all the car parts and "associated industries" that everyone's worried about. Giving the Big Three a bailout will simply support a failed system. It won't give more money to me, the consumer, so how will this "create demand" for new cars? Who killed the electric car? GM did. So, let's let the electric car kill GM, and support the companies that are actually producing products that are desireable and good for the environment.
  • Going bankrupt does not mean those factories are shut down and destroyed. It actually gives the factories and such protection, to be used by new companies that can easily be created. Companies without all the baggage of the Big Three's history, including ridiculous union agreements and complicated

    bureaucracy, will be created in their stead. The factories will still be there, as will the people to work them. The new companies can just focus on efficient cars right off the bat. It's time to let failure earn what it should. This is like taking a college kid on a scholarship who's dropped to a D average and, instead of revoking the scholarship because he has fallen below the necessary academic mark to maintain it, giving him a 30% on his grades so he doesn't lose his money. That makes sense. New business model: do something good for a short amount of time, make your company one that draws products from as many industries as possible, and then do whatever the heck you want because you will be "too big to fail".

  • Where will the bailout money go? Has anyone read Chris's blogs about the financial system's bailout? http://www.peakprosperity.com/blog/looting-operation-cont/8374 In short, more than sixty-five percent (65%) of the bailout money received by Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs was used as bonuses. Why exactly do we trust the Big Three so much more?
rlee's picture
rlee
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 18 2008
Posts: 148
Re: OK, let's take a vote

Every auto maker has sales in the toilet - allow these idiots to deal with this issue using management and leadership skills, NOT our money!  I say absolutely, positively, NO!

BTW - if you examine the sales losses across the industry, and you take into account the overhead suffered by the big 3 as the result of the UAW, in reality, US automakers have faired better than the foreign competition!  It was the additional labor expenses that beat down the US numbers.

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: OK, let's take a vote

Here's an amazing video from BBC News:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/world_news_america/7764066.stm

What more reasons do you need to say NO? 

Orangedem's picture
Orangedem
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 29 2008
Posts: 19
Re: OK, let's take a vote--NO

The Big  3 will simply burn the money. A better idea--buy them out! Their total capitalization cannot be more than $34 billion. Then fire everyone at the top of the corporations--boards included--and start over, retooling factories for more fuel-efficient cars, but also manufacturing buses, trolleys, and trains. We're got to start thinking about rebuilding the public transportation system in this country.

KKPSTEIN's picture
KKPSTEIN
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 20 2008
Posts: 120
Re: OK, let's take a vote

Quel Surprise, Ron Paul votes "no" too:

video:

yoshhash's picture
yoshhash
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 20 2008
Posts: 271
Re: OK, let's take a vote
barrt wrote:

you guys are just sore after all the other bank bailouts/ robberies, if the big 3 had came first would you still say no?

Are you kidding me?  ESPECIALLY if they had come first!  

The internal combustion engine, at least as it is being used currently by society, is obsolete. There is good reason why it is collapsing.  I say a bailout ONLY if it means a complete overhaul of their corporate structure and product line.

tom.'s picture
tom.
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 345
Peter Schiff debates a Talking Head on Detroit Bailout

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments