On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:


Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.

Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.

wrote in message
news
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:


Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.

Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.

Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel. By
the way they too need a bailout. That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. 2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? Screw them with $1250 more taxes? The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left.

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

On Dec 16, 12:16*am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:

Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.

Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.

Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! *It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. *Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. *And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel. *By
the way they too need a bailout. *That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. *2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. *Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? *Screw them with $1250 more taxes? *The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. *You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. *Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. *The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. *Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...

wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel. By
the way they too need a bailout. That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. 2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? Screw them with $1250 more taxes? The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...

If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy a
Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

On Dec 16, 5:34*am, BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! *It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. *Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. *And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel. *By
the way they too need a bailout. *That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. *2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. *Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? *Screw them with $1250 more taxes? *The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. *You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. *Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. *The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. *Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...

If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy a
Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

I'd buy a Dodge/Cummins

On Dec 16, 7:29*am, Tim wrote:
On Dec 16, 5:34*am, BAR wrote:





wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! *It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. *Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. *And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel.. *By
the way they too need a bailout. *That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. *2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. *Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? *Screw them with $1250 more taxes? *The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. *You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. *Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. *The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. *Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...

If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy a
Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

I'd buy a Dodge/Cummins- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Amen, I love my Dodge truck!

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 16, 5:34 am, BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it
wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335
million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in
1
week! It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and
say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and
not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. And that is if they
instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel.
By
the way they too need a bailout. That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. 2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses
out
there? Screw them with $1250 more taxes? The last points bill must be
paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. You can't print out
of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession.
Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. The war
in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of
the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. Will make some good case
study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has
left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...

If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy a
Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

I'd buy a Dodge/Cummins
--------
Cummins is a good drive train, something Chrysler needed. Have a friend
that owns one and loves it.

But I don't patronize pocket pickers and what Cerberus/Chrysler is doing is
aristocratic theft of tax payer dollars. They bought Chrysler taking out
the good parts at quick nice profits a few years back. Chrysler now missing
it's good assets and cash, Cerberus is now looking to dumb this turkey into
the governments lap.

If I don't buy them, then they do chapter 11 then they will be out of my
pocket.

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:34:29 -0500, BAR wrote:

wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel. By
the way they too need a bailout. That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. 2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? Screw them with $1250 more taxes? The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.

Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...

If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy a
Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

Depends on the size of the voucher. I'd buy another GM pickup if the
voucher were big enough to overcome my doubts about future warranty
service.
--
John

John wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:34:29 -0500, BAR wrote:

wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335 million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and Ford in 1
week! It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. Assuming Chrysler needs about the same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. And that is if they instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in NorTel. By
the way they too need a bailout. That is about $1250 out of each middle
class workers pocket. 2-3 car payments for cars they don't own. Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and businesses out
there? Screw them with $1250 more taxes? The last points bill must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. You can't print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of recession. Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. The war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. Will make some good case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.
Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...
If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy a
Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

Depends on the size of the voucher. I'd buy another GM pickup if the
voucher were big enough to overcome my doubts about future warranty
service.


A voucher might be worthwhile if its use were restricted to high-mileage
vehicles with a certified "manufactured in the USA or Canada" content
of at least 90%. Not assembled...manufactured.

I see no reason to subsidize purchases of products produced overseas.

Boater wrote:
John wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:34:29 -0500, BAR wrote:

wrote:
On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

news
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:06:30 -0500, BAR wrote:
Chrysler should have been left to go bankrupt back in 1980. If it
wasn't
for the M1 Abrams the government never would have stepped in.
Maybe, but then the government would have missed out on the $335
million
profit they made on the $1.5 billion loan guarantee.
Today has 2 major differences.

First, $1.5 billion is about the burn rate for GM, Chrysler and
Ford in 1
week! It is estimated for GM alone, $75 to 125 billion is needed for
solvency and sustainability. Assuming Chrysler needs about the
same and say
$50 billion for Ford, further assuming their numbers are accurate
and not
cooked they collectively need $250 billion. And that is if they
instantly
fix the problems, which historically, it is like investing in
NorTel. By
the way they too need a bailout. That is about $1250 out of each
middle
class workers pocket. 2-3 car payments for cars they don't own.
Oh, and
parts suppliers like JCI and Magna, extra.

Second, what do you do with the other 98% of the people and
businesses out
there? Screw them with $1250 more taxes? The last points bill
must be paid
or the next loaf of bread might as well cost $1000. You can't
print out of
debt on this scale without at least a working generation of
recession. Keep
in mind, government revenue is going down at an alarming pace. The
war in
the middle east will not end with peace, it will end in bankruptcy
of the
government and currency itself.

North America can no long afford these dogs. Will make some good
case study
for Harvard and Yale is the only redeeming value GM and Chrysler
has left..

This is going to come down to American bankruptcy into the currency.
Said it before, so did several others. Give us middle class folks a
voucher to help pay for a new car. We get a bailout, GM gets to sell
cars, then put folks to work building new ones.... But the Union
doesn't want that, it would mean they would have to go back to work to
get the money...
If I received a voucher I wouldn't buy a GM or Chrysler. I would buy
a Ford, Toyota, Honda or Nissan.

Depends on the size of the voucher. I'd buy another GM pickup if the
voucher were big enough to overcome my doubts about future warranty
service.


A voucher might be worthwhile if its use were restricted to high-mileage
vehicles with a certified "manufactured in the USA or Canada" content
of at least 90%. Not assembled...manufactured.

I see no reason to subsidize purchases of products produced overseas.

I wouldn't use the voucher if I was forced to purchase a vehicle I would
not normally purchase. A cheap headache is still a headache.