| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Bailout mania...
At first, I was ok with the Treasury buying up mortgage securities and
stabilizing the mortgage industry. Then I got a little itchy when that changed into a bank bailout, but I rationalised that as necessary to keep the country's economics stable. I became concerned that after the money was dispersed, there didn't seem to be a lot of money coming back out in the form of loans to small business and/or stabilizing a rational approach to mortgage lending for private and commercial development. I became annoyed when the Little Three wanted money to bail out their ridiculous UAW health care system and keep them afloat with failed business plans and no plans forthcoming for the future. Now I'm ****ed off. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11047116 |
Bailout mania...
On Dec 15, 7:25*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: At first, I was ok with the Treasury buying up mortgage securities and stabilizing the mortgage industry. Then I got a little itchy when that changed into a bank bailout, but I rationalised that as necessary to keep the country's economics stable. I became concerned that after the money was dispersed, there didn't seem to be a lot of money coming back out in the form of loans to small business and/or stabilizing a rational approach to mortgage lending for private and commercial development. I became annoyed when the Little Three wanted money to bail out their ridiculous UAW health care system and keep them afloat with failed business plans and no plans forthcoming for the future. Now I'm ****ed off. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11047116 Don't eat any yellow snow! |
Bailout mania...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:25:11 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: At first, I was ok with the Treasury buying up mortgage securities and stabilizing the mortgage industry. Then I got a little itchy when that changed into a bank bailout, but I rationalised that as necessary to keep the country's economics stable. I became concerned that after the money was dispersed, there didn't seem to be a lot of money coming back out in the form of loans to small business and/or stabilizing a rational approach to mortgage lending for private and commercial development. I became annoyed when the Little Three wanted money to bail out their ridiculous UAW health care system and keep them afloat with failed business plans and no plans forthcoming for the future. Now I'm ****ed off. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11047116 Enough stupiditiy to make me give up skiing: "In that vein, 70 ski resorts across the nation are lobbying Congress for mandatory caps on carbon-dioxide emissions, hoping to decrease the amount of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming." -- John |
Bailout mania...
"John" wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:25:11 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: At first, I was ok with the Treasury buying up mortgage securities and stabilizing the mortgage industry. Then I got a little itchy when that changed into a bank bailout, but I rationalised that as necessary to keep the country's economics stable. I became concerned that after the money was dispersed, there didn't seem to be a lot of money coming back out in the form of loans to small business and/or stabilizing a rational approach to mortgage lending for private and commercial development. I became annoyed when the Little Three wanted money to bail out their ridiculous UAW health care system and keep them afloat with failed business plans and no plans forthcoming for the future. Now I'm ****ed off. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11047116 Enough stupiditiy to make me give up skiing: "In that vein, 70 ski resorts across the nation are lobbying Congress for mandatory caps on carbon-dioxide emissions, hoping to decrease the amount of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming." A point to ponder. Why should UAW be any more preferential than the other 98 to 99% of the population losing their jobs and livelyhood that have nothing to do with autos? Could it be Cerberus management after taking the cash and profitable bits out of Chrysler and repackaging the dog now want to dump it on the government? Only a few years ago their ponzi scheme mad billions! Or could it be Congress person has a lot of GM bonds in their private accounts? Maybe a little payolla for re-election? Or could it be the super rich want some money out of GM and Cerberus-Chrysler and will syphon the bailout money? Why do they want to avoid chapter 11 that could fix a lot of problems? Could it be the books are cooked? Money gone missing? Maybe the same ex-CEO is getting an obscene pension that was never properly funded is calling is Harvard buddies? GM and Chrysler need to do chapter 11 on principle if the system is 1/2 baked honest. Trying to bail out every business and industry can and will bankrupt the USA. By allowing chapter 11, the GM and Chrysler books can be examined for waste and corruption. It allows a real cleanup and back to basic tried and true business practices. GM management and board need to be fired with cause, they have been losing money so long managment has forgotted about how to run a sucessful business. GM & Cerberus-Chrysler are dogs. |
Bailout mania...
Canuck57 wrote:
"John" wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:25:11 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: At first, I was ok with the Treasury buying up mortgage securities and stabilizing the mortgage industry. Then I got a little itchy when that changed into a bank bailout, but I rationalised that as necessary to keep the country's economics stable. I became concerned that after the money was dispersed, there didn't seem to be a lot of money coming back out in the form of loans to small business and/or stabilizing a rational approach to mortgage lending for private and commercial development. I became annoyed when the Little Three wanted money to bail out their ridiculous UAW health care system and keep them afloat with failed business plans and no plans forthcoming for the future. Now I'm ****ed off. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11047116 Enough stupiditiy to make me give up skiing: "In that vein, 70 ski resorts across the nation are lobbying Congress for mandatory caps on carbon-dioxide emissions, hoping to decrease the amount of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming." A point to ponder. Why should UAW be any more preferential than the other 98 to 99% of the population losing their jobs and livelyhood that have nothing to do with autos? The UAW's jobs are no more important than they guy down the street who lost his job last week. Could it be Cerberus management after taking the cash and profitable bits out of Chrysler and repackaging the dog now want to dump it on the government? Only a few years ago their ponzi scheme mad billions! The management at Cerberus deserves the losses they incur. If Daimler Benz found out that Chrysler was a dog why did Cerberus think they could do anything with it? Or could it be Congress person has a lot of GM bonds in their private accounts? Maybe a little payolla for re-election? Lot's of payola to the numerous Democrat campaign funds. Or could it be the super rich want some money out of GM and Cerberus-Chrysler and will syphon the bailout money? Everyone is trying to figure out how to get their hands on some bailout money. Why do they want to avoid chapter 11 that could fix a lot of problems? Could it be the books are cooked? Money gone missing? Maybe the same ex-CEO is getting an obscene pension that was never properly funded is calling is Harvard buddies? Nobody wants their books examined. The accounting firms and the CEO and CFO of GM and Chrysler may be looking at some time in a federal pen. GM and Chrysler need to do chapter 11 on principle if the system is 1/2 baked honest. Trying to bail out every business and industry can and will bankrupt the USA. By allowing chapter 11, the GM and Chrysler books can be examined for waste and corruption. It allows a real cleanup and back to basic tried and true business practices. GM management and board need to be fired with cause, they have been losing money so long managment has forgotted about how to run a sucessful business. AIG should been left to go thru Chapter 11. Congress is full of idiots for giving Sec of Treas unlimited freedom to spend $700 billion without any controlls. GM & Cerberus-Chrysler are dogs. 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. |
Bailout mania...
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. |
Bailout mania...
wrote in message ... 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. |
Bailout mania...
On Dec 16, 12:16*am, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message ... 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... |
Bailout mania...
|
Bailout mania...
On Dec 16, 5:34*am, BAR wrote:
wrote: On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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 |
Bailout mania...
wrote in message ... On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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... ************************************************** ***** You are freekin' unbelievable! In one breath you whine about getting a free handout so you can buy a new vehicle and in the next, badmouth the hard working uniom man for expecting to get money without working. What makes you so special? |
Bailout mania...
Don White wrote:
wrote in message ... On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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... ************************************************** ***** You are freekin' unbelievable! In one breath you whine about getting a free handout so you can buy a new vehicle and in the next, badmouth the hard working uniom man for expecting to get money without working. What makes you so special? JustHate is an important man...he runs a boat-building company that doesn't build boats and a motorcycle racing team that doesn't race motorcycles. |
Bailout mania...
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:34:29 -0500, BAR wrote:
wrote: On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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 |
Bailout mania...
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 ... 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. |
Bailout mania...
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 ... 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. Then why subsidize the assemblers of products produced overseas? I notice that you include Canada but exclude Mexico. What's up with that, Dude? |
Bailout mania...
BAR wrote:
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 ... 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. I wouldn't argue that point, but...the purpose of such a voucher is to help the U.S. auto industry. You don't help the industry by buying goods whose most expensive pieces and parts are made overseas. I rent different cars on business trips. Since I am usually traveling on some union's business, I rent "American cars" built by the Big Three. I try to alternate, but I've sort of kicked GM off the list entirely. I've been disappointed by something substantial on each GM car I've rented over the years. The Fords have been fine, and so have the few Chrysler products that have been readily available at my destination. I rented a nice Ford Exploder on my last trip to Boston a month or so ago. There was nothing about the car I didn't like, and it only cost me $38 a night (holy schitt!) to park it in the hotel's garage. |
Bailout mania...
Jim wrote:
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 ... 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. Then why subsidize the assemblers of products produced overseas? I notice that you include Canada but exclude Mexico. What's up with that, Dude? They aren't UAW members. |
Bailout mania...
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 ... 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! |
Bailout mania...
"Boater" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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... ************************************************** ***** You are freekin' unbelievable! In one breath you whine about getting a free handout so you can buy a new vehicle and in the next, badmouth the hard working uniom man for expecting to get money without working. What makes you so special? JustHate is an important man...he runs a boat-building company that doesn't build boats and a motorcycle racing team that doesn't race motorcycles. I heard he races that new bike around the kitchen table. |
Bailout mania...
wrote in message ... On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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... --------- Really, you hit the nail on the head. The middle class has slowly become debt ladden and can no longer afford more. Worse yet, the defaults are crushing the very system itself. By some estimates we are only about 1/3rd through the unwinding with ARMs and others coming up soon. Some say the worst has yet to come because it is as least as big as what we have seen and the economy is already weak. There is no question this is a long lasting recession at best and is in reality a depression. Historically, this will be as bad as 1929. Forget 1982. You are 100% correct though, it is the middle class that needs a bailout. It is also the only way out. You can bailout others but there is no point so long as the middle class is in trouble. Case in point, so what if GM, Cerberus Chrysler is bailed out? Families are not just dumping homes but autos to reduce costs. Without credit they must live inside their means. Used to have 2 or 3 cars? Now 1 or 2 cars. It will take at least 5 years for demand to rise. At GM's burn rate of 2 billion a month that is $125 billion just to keep them going! Add another $125 billion you have 1/4 trillion just for GM. All of this bailout BS has to be paid in time, and guess what, the middle class pays it. Further reducing their ability to spend to drive the economy. This guarantees a long recession or depression as in fact like the middle class, the government too is broke. They are printing the money as they too can't borrow. This is going to at some point cause a large inflationary wave that will further put the middle class at a disadvantage. Why is government doing this? Simply put, survival of government. Government should be scaling back, exiting a war they can no longer afford or win, and reducing it's size and spending in a huge way. Targets like 50% reduction in size and spending. Returning more to the middle class in income tax reductions to they can pay their bills. I don't know if it is just plain stupidity and massive denial, or a conspiracy, but the finacial system as we know it is bankrupt. And the government seems less worried about the country and more worried about the rich that will not have a musical chair when the music ends at our expense. Many today, even newborns will not see the end of this event sad to say. |
Bailout mania...
"BAR" wrote in message ... wrote: On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. Same here. Already owned GM and Chrysler. I am not a repeat customer any more. The last two were Fords. Had a Nissan 1995 Pathfinder once, better than GM and Chrysler but not the best. They too had troubles back then. Don't know about now. Since then, burn me once and I don't come back. Now that they have their hands in my pocket, well, it is a given. I don't patrionise pocket pickers. |
Bailout mania...
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 16, 5:34 am, BAR wrote: wrote: On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. |
Bailout mania...
"John" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:34:29 -0500, BAR wrote: wrote: On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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 Actually I would too. 75% off minimum. Boat pulling Duramax. |
Bailout mania...
"Don White" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Dec 16, 12:16 am, "Canuck57" wrote: wrote in message ... 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... ************************************************** ***** You are freekin' unbelievable! In one breath you whine about getting a free handout so you can buy a new vehicle and in the next, badmouth the hard working uniom man for expecting to get money without working. What makes you so special? Socialism does decay into a scenario of 50 hungry rates in a cage and 1 small piece of cheese. Subsidize on and the other 49 become vicious. |
Bailout mania...
BAR wrote:
Jim wrote: 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 ... 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. Then why subsidize the assemblers of products produced overseas? I notice that you include Canada but exclude Mexico. What's up with that, Dude? They aren't UAW members. Ah Ha! So this isn't about the automakers at all. It's about propping up the unions. I see no reason to do that. Do You? |
Bailout mania...
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote: 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 ... 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. I wouldn't argue that point, but...the purpose of such a voucher is to help the U.S. auto industry. You don't help the industry by buying goods whose most expensive pieces and parts are made overseas. GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. I rent different cars on business trips. Since I am usually traveling on some union's business, I rent "American cars" built by the Big Three. I try to alternate, but I've sort of kicked GM off the list entirely. I've been disappointed by something substantial on each GM car I've rented over the years. The Fords have been fine, and so have the few Chrysler products that have been readily available at my destination. When I travel on business I always rent a Chevy Impala. The reason is that I fit in the car. I have a long torso and I know that I will fit. There is no other reason that I choose this vehicle. I rented a nice Ford Exploder on my last trip to Boston a month or so ago. There was nothing about the car I didn't like, and it only cost me $38 a night (holy schitt!) to park it in the hotel's garage. You should have checked with the hotel before renting. It would have been cheaper to catch a cab from the airport and to and from your appointments. |
Bailout mania...
|
Bailout mania...
"BAR" wrote in message ... Jim wrote: 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 ... 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. Then why subsidize the assemblers of products produced overseas? I notice that you include Canada but exclude Mexico. What's up with that, Dude? They aren't UAW members. Or more importantly, this is PR to make us think it is UAW or CAW. A rouse. The real powerful are just using them. When the real motive is to bail out rich investment houses that put money into GM bonds and the like and they want to be paid. So they call up their Harvard buddies in congress for a bailout while they try to unload bad paper. In short, dumping a wall street issue on main street. Corrupt capitalism. Anyone whole knows me at all, knows I am a capitalist, not a sleezy in your pocket type, I want earned value and less pocket picking for main street so they can buy products in companies I invest in. Sucking the mddle class dry via bailout taxation will kill the American dream for a very long time. |
Bailout mania...
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote: BAR wrote: 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 ... 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. I wouldn't argue that point, but...the purpose of such a voucher is to help the U.S. auto industry. You don't help the industry by buying goods whose most expensive pieces and parts are made overseas. GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. I rent different cars on business trips. Since I am usually traveling on some union's business, I rent "American cars" built by the Big Three. I try to alternate, but I've sort of kicked GM off the list entirely. I've been disappointed by something substantial on each GM car I've rented over the years. The Fords have been fine, and so have the few Chrysler products that have been readily available at my destination. When I travel on business I always rent a Chevy Impala. The reason is that I fit in the car. I have a long torso and I know that I will fit. There is no other reason that I choose this vehicle. I rented a nice Ford Exploder on my last trip to Boston a month or so ago. There was nothing about the car I didn't like, and it only cost me $38 a night (holy schitt!) to park it in the hotel's garage. You should have checked with the hotel before renting. It would have been cheaper to catch a cab from the airport and to and from your appointments. I went to seven different construction sites and another hotel over two days. No time to wait for cabs, and I had a movie cameraman and soundman and their gear to lug around, too. But had I been going to meetings at offices around the downtown hotel, I wouldn't have rented a car. It certainly is cheap to cab in from Logan to downtown. |
Bailout mania...
On Dec 16, 10:21*am, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote: BAR wrote: 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 ... 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. I wouldn't argue that point, but...the purpose of such a voucher is to help the U.S. auto industry. You don't help the industry by buying goods whose most expensive pieces and parts are made overseas. GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. Not to mention 250,000 union workers are paying for 750,000 retirees and their dependents... They just can't so we will be forced to. I rent different cars on business trips. Since I am usually traveling on some union's business, I rent "American cars" built by the Big Three. I try to alternate, but I've sort of kicked GM off the list entirely. I've been disappointed by something substantial on each GM car I've rented over the years. The Fords have been fine, and so have the few Chrysler products that have been readily available at my destination. When I travel on business I always rent a Chevy Impala. The reason is that I fit in the car. I have a long torso and I know that I will fit. There is no other reason that I choose this vehicle. I rented a nice Ford Exploder on my last trip to Boston a month or so ago. There was nothing about the car I didn't like, and it only cost me $38 a night (holy schitt!) to park it in the hotel's garage. You should have checked with the hotel before renting. It would have been cheaper to catch a cab from the airport and to and from your appointments.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
Bailout mania...
|
Bailout mania...
BAR wrote:
The perfect example of why Social Security is going to fail and why we need to abandon it now. For some people it will be unfair and it will hurt but that is too bad. Everyone younger than 35 gets no Social Security but, they still fund it. Corporations with defined pension programs should not be allowed to "unfund" their pension liabilities. |
Bailout mania...
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote: The perfect example of why Social Security is going to fail and why we need to abandon it now. For some people it will be unfair and it will hurt but that is too bad. Everyone younger than 35 gets no Social Security but, they still fund it. Corporations with defined pension programs should not be allowed to "unfund" their pension liabilities. That's why the unions should be the clearing house for their members. Provide 100 workers at a rate of $50 per hour to meet a quota of 500 cars a day. What the union does with the money is between the union and the workers. First rule: Get the money up front. |
Bailout mania...
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:21:29 -0500, BAR wrote:
GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. Help me out here, you're a good Conservative. How do you justify *giving* $3.6 billion to foreign auto makers, but aren't willing to *loan* money to keep American manufacturers alive. Seems a little unfair, and perhaps, un-American, doesn't it? http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp...Type=Printable |
Bailout mania...
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote: BAR wrote: The perfect example of why Social Security is going to fail and why we need to abandon it now. For some people it will be unfair and it will hurt but that is too bad. Everyone younger than 35 gets no Social Security but, they still fund it. Corporations with defined pension programs should not be allowed to "unfund" their pension liabilities. That's why the unions should be the clearing house for their members. Provide 100 workers at a rate of $50 per hour to meet a quota of 500 cars a day. What the union does with the money is between the union and the workers. First rule: Get the money up front. Well, that's similar to what the construction worker unions do. sort of. The construction unions negotiate a rate with the contractors...the contractors pay the workers their hourly paycheck rate and deduct and forward the required taxes to the feds. The deductions for health and welfare go directly to the jointly administered union-contractor health and welfare pension and benefit fund offices. Anyone who has access to any of the funds at the benefit is bonded. Typically, the trustees retain a reputable trust funder "advisor" who helps the trustees invest the funds in "safe" investments that pay a return higher than the anticipated payout for pensions and other benefits. There are no unfunded liabilities. The employer for whom the union workers work has no access to the pension funds. These are defined pensions, not 401k's. The employer may offer a 401k, but it isn't typically administered by the joint trustees. |
Bailout mania...
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:21:29 -0500, BAR wrote: GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. Help me out here, you're a good Conservative. How do you justify *giving* $3.6 billion to foreign auto makers, but aren't willing to *loan* money to keep American manufacturers alive. Seems a little unfair, and perhaps, un-American, doesn't it? http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp...Type=Printable The consistent theme in all the rightie "Cures" for the Big Three is to bust the unions. There's nothing more to it. |
Bailout mania...
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:21:29 -0500, BAR wrote: GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. Help me out here, you're a good Conservative. How do you justify *giving* $3.6 billion to foreign auto makers, but aren't willing to *loan* money to keep American manufacturers alive. Seems a little unfair, and perhaps, un-American, doesn't it? http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp...Type=Printable I'm sure that if GM, Ford and Chrysler wanted to build plants in southern states and bring jobs to those state the state governments would be happy to build infrastructure and give tax breaks to obtain those jobs. Even my county will give tax breaks to companies to keep white collar jobs in the county and the state will give tax breaks to keep the jobs in the state. All you have to do is engage a commercial real estate agent in another county or state and you will get a call form your county and states business development office. |
Bailout mania...
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:49:43 -0500, BAR wrote:
wrote: On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:21:29 -0500, BAR wrote: GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. Help me out here, you're a good Conservative. How do you justify *giving* $3.6 billion to foreign auto makers, but aren't willing to *loan* money to keep American manufacturers alive. Seems a little unfair, and perhaps, un-American, doesn't it? http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp...Type=Printable I'm sure that if GM, Ford and Chrysler wanted to build plants in southern states and bring jobs to those state the state governments would be happy to build infrastructure and give tax breaks to obtain those jobs. Even my county will give tax breaks to companies to keep white collar jobs in the county and the state will give tax breaks to keep the jobs in the state. All you have to do is engage a commercial real estate agent in another county or state and you will get a call form your county and states business development office. Oh, so it's about helping yours, not ours, is that it? So, for Shelby, Corker, Mitchell, et.al, it wasn't about keeping government out of the marketplace, was it? It was about protecting foreign companies at the expense of American companies. Then, perhaps, you can explain how we managed to sign a "free trade" agreement, that limits American manufacturers to selling 5,000 cars in South Korea, but allows them to sell 600,000 cars here. Our government played a role in getting Detroit into this mess, perhaps small, but still a role. It should play a role in getting it out of this mess. |
Bailout mania...
"BAR" wrote in message ... wrote: On Dec 16, 10:21 am, BAR wrote: Boater wrote: BAR wrote: 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 ... 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. I wouldn't argue that point, but...the purpose of such a voucher is to help the U.S. auto industry. You don't help the industry by buying goods whose most expensive pieces and parts are made overseas. GM and Chrysler need to go bankrupt. Their management needs to change and their union contracts need to be voided. The skill in putting pieces of a car together does not warrant the money that the union workers receive. And, getting paid 95% for sitting around reading a newspaper all day long is ridiculous. Whomever agreed to that on both sides of the table should be take out back and shot. Not to mention 250,000 union workers are paying for 750,000 retirees and their dependents... They just can't so we will be forced to. The perfect example of why Social Security is going to fail and why we need to abandon it now. For some people it will be unfair and it will hurt but that is too bad. Everyone younger than 35 gets no Social Security but, they still fund it. Good idea but... Too many are far too undiciplined to save. How about keep it but with a twist. 401KL - 401K locked in. Your SSN taxes are the same but go into an account exclusively in your name. Forced savings if you will. For company pensions, obviously mismanaged the same. They contribute to the 401KL directly and pay as it goes without the "shortfall" promises made to GM and hundreds of millions of others. You can't loan on it, you can't withdraw on it until 60 and officially retired. Withdrawls are taxed like any other pension income once eligible and rates of qualified withdrawl have limittions as well. Fair too. Gets companies and governments honest. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com