Give auto manufacturers money to make cars and products that are actually in demand, in order to actually stimulate spending.
And garnish their profits to pay back the bailout over time with interest. ^_~
I wish.
You know those financial companies that were using some of their bailout money to pay holiday bonuses? I'd like to see those people shot.
Whereas the execs from the Big Three are willing to work for $1.00 if it means the companies will be bailed out. It is strange to me that the Republicans fought (and won in many cases) to reduce the strings for the Wall Street bailout plan and to maintain a high dollar amount for it, but now that are fighting against the automotive bailout. I hate to use the cliche, but are they favoring Wall Street over Main Street? It seems so.
I'd have thought you'd see the worlds in a post-nationalist way. Jobs are jobs, companies are companies, people are people. What matters is who or what they are, very little has anything to do with which national boundaries they once fit in.
That's terribly naive, however. Physicality and locality haven't dissolved (until we invent farcasters), so the issues remain.
For example, production local to consumption saves massive amounts of transportation energy and infrastructure. Different nations have different levels of workers' rights, and we have a vested interest in maintaining ours over the production practices of most other nations. Post-nationalism doesn't mean ignoring your own collective self-interest; the reality of the world is that phsyical distance still separates.
I think you missed my point. I'm not talking about production or transporting goods from other places. I meant if a company offers jobs in one place, and they are paying your wages, and you are making goods or providing services that are a boon to society, why should it matter about national boundaries at that point? Money is transferred electronically, and the ultimate beneficiaries of that are share holders and investors who can be anywhere in the world. If people anywhere in the world are offering jobs in Detroit, how can anyone think this is a bad thing?
I come from the UK, live in Germany and work internationally. My collective self interest is improving the world. I don't expect everyone to think like this, but I incorrectly thought Emily didn't, and couldn't understand that.
Regarding subsidies...you'd be surprised how many things the government already subsidies. There's a huge amount of farming funding coming from the government already. I mean,the govt pays farmers for the extra corn they produce when there's a surplus so they don't go out of business and reduce the number of farms. If we're going to do that, why not subsidize manufacturing?
You don't think there's any kind of problem with this system?
I think there's loads of problems with the system. I'm just saying don't say "OMG we can't do that! It's socialism!" about one kind of subsidy but ignore a bunch of others. Subsidies for positive reform would be preferable to huge one-time bailouts in my opinion.
And point is that if this isn't a good way to do things, we shouldn't do it now. Just because we're doing it else where or have done it before are not good reasons to keep a bad policy.
Anyway, I've seen a report that they want $25B. That doesn't seem like that much. They can't just get a loan from a bank for that?
The thing that worries me is that the people receiving the bail out money are the same one who got themselves into this situation. Shouldn't there be some some repercussions to running a company bankrupt?
The thing that worries me is that the people receiving the bail out money are the same one who got themselves into this situation. Shouldn't there be some some repercussions to running a company bankrupt?
Yes...the company goes bankrupt...we're messing with the invisible hand! (joke, don't take seriously)
I understand that the large amount of jobs that would be lost is not desirable for America at this time given the economic state. As such there is large incentive to prevent the automotive crash. If this was a situation where the economy was going strong in most areas and the Big Three was going to declare bankruptcy would it be acceptable then to allow them to fail? They are so large and support so many people is there anyway for normal market factors to force them to become more efficient?
Given how dependent a large amount of people are on these companies I would assume they could pretty reliably bet that if any failure would happen they would get a government bail out given American politics. Also, they would always be able to rely on subsidies if times get tough. I understand why they need to be bailed out but I don’t like the situation the Big Three are in. I hope they shape up and become economically viable. I think they will just become a leach on the American economy that will be to painful to remove.
Well, seeing as how they already bailed out the banks, I'm in favor of cutting out the middleman and going straight to the government.
They can't get loans because of the credit crunch. Apparently when you have no income and manage your money poorly, banks don't want to lend you money.
Good find, this guy is very smart. Unfortunately, if he's right and we're in a recession for years my job prospects are going to suck even worse than they do now.
Here's a Washington Post article about the crash. I haven't read this entirely yet, but I'm going to read everything I can his guy has written. He sounds exactly like my Uncle who called this crash in much the same way.
The only up side for me in this mess is that since I have pretty much no money, inflation and the dropping value of the dollar won't hurt my lack of savings.
EDIT: This guy wrote a book at the beginning of last year "crash proof: how to profit from the coming economic collapse."
Let the Big Three go into bankruptcy and operate from there while they restructure and fix their horrible labor contracts. It seems like the Airlines are always jumping in and out of bankruptcy and they are still around.
I don't want to see the UAW retirees getting shafted on the benefits they were promised but can a company really afford to pay up to 90% of a workers pay as a pension especially when retirees are living longer? Can they afford to pay people 90% of their pay for not even working?
Everyone got fucked when oil closed in on $150 per barrel this summer. Now it's under $50 per barrel!!! I paid $1.71 per gallon when I filled my tank this week! Seems like only a few weeks ago I was paying over $4 per gallon.
I don't want to see the UAW retirees getting shafted on the benefits
That's the big one. Going forward, these companies need to restructure their pension/retirement/benefits policies, but to cut off people who were fiscally responsible and planned their lives and retirements based on existing promised benefits would be heinous.
Did you just finish reading Hyperion or have I just started noticing more references because I did?
I tend to liberally reference whatever novel or book I most recently finished. As Emily can attest, it was all Prince of Nothing until recently. Soon, it will be Persian Fire. ^_~
It was high gas prices and not a lack of consumer desire that hobbled SUV sales this year.
That's true. However, the problem is that there is no way gas prices will stay at this level. As soon as the economy starts to rebound, and possibly before, the prices will come back up. If not then, then when we start to run into a shortage. This price drop may be one of the worst things possible for the future of the automotive industry if they don't change their direction. If they go right back to the same things they were doing before, they will be fucked when prices start to rise again. What they SHOULD be doing is investing in "green" innovations right now. Use the money from the stupid-people-SUV-sales right now to develop the technology that will save their asses when gas becomes too expensive to afford again.
Comments
You know those financial companies that were using some of their bailout money to pay holiday bonuses? I'd like to see those people shot.
I come from the UK, live in Germany and work internationally. My collective self interest is improving the world. I don't expect everyone to think like this, but I incorrectly thought Emily didn't, and couldn't understand that.
Anyway, I've seen a report that they want $25B. That doesn't seem like that much. They can't just get a loan from a bank for that?
Given how dependent a large amount of people are on these companies I would assume they could pretty reliably bet that if any failure would happen they would get a government bail out given American politics. Also, they would always be able to rely on subsidies if times get tough. I understand why they need to be bailed out but I don’t like the situation the Big Three are in. I hope they shape up and become economically viable. I think they will just become a leach on the American economy that will be to painful to remove.
Everyone else = stupid
Here's a Washington Post article about the crash. I haven't read this entirely yet, but I'm going to read everything I can his guy has written. He sounds exactly like my Uncle who called this crash in much the same way.
The only up side for me in this mess is that since I have pretty much no money, inflation and the dropping value of the dollar won't hurt my lack of savings.
EDIT: This guy wrote a book at the beginning of last year "crash proof: how to profit from the coming economic collapse."
My notion to become a brewer is starting to look more and more attractive.
Did anyone save the receipt for Iraq?
I don't want to see the UAW retirees getting shafted on the benefits they were promised but can a company really afford to pay up to 90% of a workers pay as a pension especially when retirees are living longer? Can they afford to pay people 90% of their pay for not even working?
As far as those who may complain about Detroit making cars people do not want to buy well.... With gas falling below $2.00 per gallon, SUV sales are climbing across the country. According to General Motors, workers in their Texas plant are working overtime, and plan to do so the rest of the year while the demand remains high. It was high gas prices and not a lack of consumer desire that hobbled SUV sales this year.
Everyone got fucked when oil closed in on $150 per barrel this summer. Now it's under $50 per barrel!!! I paid $1.71 per gallon when I filled my tank this week! Seems like only a few weeks ago I was paying over $4 per gallon.
Do we just not learn from our mistakes? Seriously, isn't a major part of what happened here due to a focus on SUV sales?