Auto Industry Bailout

[prole]

Too big to fail? That's a shit load of workers, man! The "let 'em burn" crowd gives me the willies, as usual, but these companies have fought tooth and nail against the kind of innovation that sinking them now. They've also been doing their best to gut the workers whose name they're now invoking to save their asses. I say nationalize it then let the workers run it.

[powderhound]

let em burn...it seems that these company's refuse to make the changes necessary to become and stay a profitable business.

[prole]

Yeah, I always liked that movie "Escape From New York". In real life, it'll be Escape from Michigan.

[Bug]

I took a 1960 Ford Falcon van and put in a slightly larger Ford Maverick engine and taller tires.

It went from getting 14mpg to 27mpg.

 

And Detroit can't do this?

Only a damn fool would think they didn't carefully choose this path of consumption.

 

I feel for the workers but I don't want to subsidize sub-par technology that nobody wants.

The F150 has been the most popular full sized truck in America for decades. And they can only squeeze 19mpg out of it? 16mpg if it is a 4x4?

Somebody on the Ford board owns stock in an oil company.

We have been subsidizing their dividend checks for long enough.

[prole]

But, but weren't they just responding to the market signals given them by American consumers?

[Bug]

I note your fasicious retort and regard it as funny.

Along THOSE lines....

Too bad Toyota, Honda, Subaru, and Nisson didn't share some of their research with Detroit.

[prole]

That would be at odds with the imperatives of capitalist competition.

[akhalteke]

Let em burn baby.

[Hendershot]

Instead we will see a merger between Chystler and GM.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/business/11auto.html?emc=rss&partner=rssnyt

 

Two failures and poor management can come together to make one crappy company. Cingular/ATT, Time Warner AOL, HP & Compaq

[prole]

Let em burn baby.

 

Job security for you, eh? More "co-workers" and enemies.

[tvashtarkatena]

I took a 1960 Ford Falcon van and put in a slightly larger Ford Maverick engine and taller tires.

It went from getting 14mpg to 27mpg.

 

And Detroit can't do this?

Only a damn fool would think they didn't carefully choose this path of consumption.

 

 

I took a 1978 Ford Fairmont and stopped putting oil in it. Burned a lot less gas that way.

[akhalteke]

Let em burn baby.

 

Job security for you, eh? More "co-workers" and enemies.

 

Nope. Just dont agree with corporate bailouts in general. Sink or swim imo.

[STP]

Back in the 60's there was a saying: "As GM goes, so goes the nation."

 

As GM Goes So Goes the Nation

Google "as gm goes..." for more articles w/ the same title.

 

BTW, GM is also one of the top five companies included in credit default swaps (along with Ford). And currently, they are having a problem obtaining financing through the bond market ( GM, Ford, Chrysler Face Closed Market for Auto Bonds--Bloomberg ). The government has signaled that it will not assist GM but we'll have to wait and see. GM and/or Chrysler will have to obtain gov't funds to raise enough cash to merger.

[AlpineK]

It's hard to sell vehicles when your customers can't get loans.

 

[prole]

Let em burn baby.

 

Job security for you, eh? More "co-workers" and enemies.

 

Nope. Just dont agree with corporate bailouts in general. Sink or swim imo.

 

And the fact that there are tens of thousands of people who are "on the front lines" and "just following orders" "doing management's dirty work"? Does the same sink or swim philosophy apply in your line of work or do you call for an airstrike?

[tvashtarkatena]

Let em burn baby.

 

Job security for you, eh? More "co-workers" and enemies.

 

Nope. Just dont agree with corporate bailouts in general. Sink or swim imo.

 

And the fact that there are tens of thousands of people who are "on the front lines" and "just following orders" "doing management's dirty work"? Does the same sink or swim philosophy apply in your line of work or do you call for an airstrike?

 

I'd say it would be cheaper for the taxpayers if we just pulled our heavy equipment out and left most of the troops there to fend for themselves. No vets bennies to pay out, lower transport costs, big dicrease in salary expenditures. After all, they lost the war, they don't deserve a ride home. Yeah, that sounds pretty good.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I say nationalize it then let the workers run it.

 

Of course you would, you're a Marxist puke. FOAD.

[glassgowkiss]

I say nationalize it then let the workers run it.

 

Of course you would, you're a Marxist puke. FOAD.

and buying out failed banks and insurance companies wasn't a marxists move? done by your idol gw. way to spin it golden shower boy!

[glassgowkiss]

re your auto sig: respect is earned, not given.

[prole]

"Golden Shower Boy"

 

Brilliant.

[Bug]

re your auto sig: respect is earned, not given.

[olyclimber]

link...

[Jens]

Insiders are saying that the Feds will bail out one of the two (GM or Ford) but not both.

 

Buy stock in both and make enough money on the one that gets bailed out to make it worth your while. The prices on GM and Ford stock are amazing right now.

 

My two cents: The Feds should bail them both out.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

The problem the auto companies is that they are the epicenter for manufacturing jobs in the U.S., something we sorely need to hang on to for a bunch of reasons. The effect on unemployment would be massive and devastating. It's all mellow to sit on your free-market-lotus, consentrating on the purity of your breathing...in out in...like a sheet of rice paper hung from spidersilk in a swaying breeze, but the reality of this industry evaporating is just too grim. Plus, if we ever wanna start WWIII, we're gonna need those guys to churn out all the toys.

[akhalteke]

Then lets not start WWIII and let em burn. It'll hurt for a while, but it will be worth it in the long run.