On 20-Nov-2008, "Charles Momsen" wrote:

says US carmaker failure could cut 4% from the GDP. But the cost of a
bailout is no less than 6% of GDP!

No brainer!

Let them go bankrupt!

Agreed, but for a different reason -

1) The fallout would be 4 or 5 to one in support industries and services,
but who cares, we can all work at Walmart for minimum wage!

2) All production firms in the U.S. MUST move to low cost third world
countries for survival and export to the US - their only onbigation is to
the stockholders. The U.S. marketplace will have the economic viability of
Peru in a year or two but red China, India, South America are on the rise.
GM overseas will survive well.

This collpase has been in the making for 25 years and is due. GM, Ford, etc.
MUST offer vehicles in the U.S. in the same way as Toyota, Honda, etc.,
i.e., by doing final assy. in the U.S. and calling it an "American made"
vehicle. Americans are really gullible; if they believe that with Toyota,
why not GM? The market will adjust in product to suit the resulting economy.
(likley shoddy Chinese bicycles) "Americans" deserve no better any way -
they created the debacle.

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:53:24 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
said:

says US carmaker failure could cut 4% from the GDP. But the cost of a
bailout is no less than 6% of GDP!

No brainer!

Looks as if even the Dems may have figured that out. But of course saying so
would tick off the UAW, so we now have an elaborate charade in progress,
with the Dem politicians saying they won't back the bailout because the auto
execs flew into Washington on company planes instead of taking commercial
flights.

They're creating a great comedy routine.


I think you should check out your nurse Dave, I think she's slipping
something into your metamucil....

Cheers
Martin

"Marty" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:53:24 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
said:

says US carmaker failure could cut 4% from the GDP. But the cost of a
bailout is no less than 6% of GDP!

No brainer!

Looks as if even the Dems may have figured that out. But of course saying
so
would tick off the UAW, so we now have an elaborate charade in progress,
with the Dem politicians saying they won't back the bailout because the
auto
execs flew into Washington on company planes instead of taking commercial
flights.

They're creating a great comedy routine.


I think you should check out your nurse Dave, I think she's slipping
something into your metamucil....

Cheers
Martin


Especially since Pelosi just said that if the Big 3 don't have a plan, they
won't get the cash. I believe the deadline is 12/3.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:15:44 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Especially since Pelosi just said that if the Big 3 don't have a plan,
they
won't get the cash. I believe the deadline is 12/3.

Clever ploy. When the big 3 come back for another round for twice as much
money after the first round doesn't do the job, she can always say "Not my
fault. I was brainwashed into thinking their plan would work."


So, you now believe they *should* get the bailout, but with no strings.
Seems a bit contradictory, given the noise you've been making in the other
thread!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:38:10 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Clever ploy. When the big 3 come back for another round for twice as
much
money after the first round doesn't do the job, she can always say "Not
my
fault. I was brainwashed into thinking their plan would work."


So, you now believe they *should* get the bailout, but with no strings.
Seems a bit contradictory, given the noise you've been making in the other
thread!

Nope. I think the automakers shouldn't be handed taxpayer dollars. I also
recognize that a major driver for the handout is a desire on the part of
the
Dems to appease their UAW backers. So when they vote for the handout
they're
gonna need an excuse at some point for why it didn't work. I'm crediting
Pelosi with setting up that excuse well in advance.


God forbid that democrats want to forstall a complete meltdown of the
enconomy! Pelosi asked for a plan, which involves more than flying in on the
Big 3's executive jets.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:20:11 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Pelosi asked for a plan, which involves more than flying in on the
Big 3's executive jets.

As well she should. She'll need everything she can get to cover her ass
when
one or more of those companies goes south after throwing more taxpayer
billions at them.

Dave,

The not so Big Three going under is a worse calamity than global warming!

The entire world will end if the UAW doesn't get to keep their fat pensions
going for 6 more months.

Complete global meltdown!

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:20:11 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Pelosi asked for a plan, which involves more than flying in on the
Big 3's executive jets.

As well she should. She'll need everything she can get to cover her ass
when
one or more of those companies goes south after throwing more taxpayer
billions at them.


You just got done claiming that Pelosi is attempting to justify *not*
bailing them out, and since the democrats are in control of Congress, that's
certainly possible. Now, you're claiming that she's going to authorize the
money to bail them out?? You might want to try and get your arguments in
order before you write them down.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:38:16 -0500, Marty said:

I think you should check out your nurse Dave, I think she's slipping
something into your metamucil....

I think you should lay off the ad hominem attacks, Marty, and substitute
something more reasoned.


Something more reasoned? You mean like your paranoid delusion that the
UAW and the Teamsters are running the world and are responsible for the
financial catastrophe we are currently undergoing?

You are starting to sound like Larry, oh I know it's an ad hominem, only
ok when you deliver them....


Cheers
Martin

"Marty" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:38:16 -0500, Marty said:

I think you should check out your nurse Dave, I think she's slipping
something into your metamucil....

I think you should lay off the ad hominem attacks, Marty, and substitute
something more reasoned.


Something more reasoned? You mean like your paranoid delusion that the UAW
and the Teamsters are running the world and are responsible for the
financial catastrophe we are currently undergoing?

You are starting to sound like Larry, oh I know it's an ad hominem, only
ok when you deliver them....


Cheers
Martin


The UAW and Teamsters aren't???? Whew.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:25:39 -0500, Marty wrote:

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:38:16 -0500, Marty said:

I think you should check out your nurse Dave, I think she's slipping
something into your metamucil....

I think you should lay off the ad hominem attacks, Marty, and substitute
something more reasoned.


Something more reasoned? You mean like your paranoid delusion that the
UAW and the Teamsters are running the world and are responsible for the
financial catastrophe we are currently undergoing?

You are starting to sound like Larry, oh I know it's an ad hominem, only
ok when you deliver them....


Cheers
Martin

Dave has previously told us how he advises bank regulators. I'm
beginning to suspect the real root of the financial mess. No wonder
Dave is trying to throw up a smoke screen.