Lets HELP GM
06-15-2009, 03:13 AM
#81
TECH Fanatic
Wabmorgan, I really don't have that much of a problem with our government loaning GM money in order to help them succeed in building the automobiles that we want to drive, but I do have a problem when our government gives bailout money to them and because of GM taking that money Obama can come in and OVERNIGHT fire Rick Wagoner who was the CEO. That is where I have a problem. Our government is now dictating every thing in our lifes. They are firing CEO'S, telling us what we have to drive, telling our hard working farmers that if their cattle expels gas they are considering a $20 tax per head if they have a cow or horse that blows a fart. This is a government that is totally out of control. I remember back years ago our government gave a loan to Chrysler and under the leadership of Lee Iacocca pulled Chrysler out of a financial mess. But at the same time the government didn't go in and start firing the CEO of Chrysler like Obama did with GM. He is flying all over the world on his "APOLOGY TOUR". He is telling Communistic countries like Venezuela that we should have treated them differently. Why doesn't he go over to North Korea now and tell Kim Jon Il how sorry he is on how the USA is treating North Korea? Obama would be lucky if he made it out of North Korea alive.
Now Wabmorgan I gather that you are presently serving in the Military since you are stationed on the USS Enterprise. I wish to thank you and every other man and woman that is serving in the Military and keeping all of us safe here at home. A GREAT BIG THANK YOU GOES OUT TO YOU AND EVERY MAN AND WOMAN SERVING IN OUR MILITARY. I just wish that our present administration had the same respect for our Military like President George W. Bush had. Whether a person liked President George W. Bush or not NOBODY can't say that he didn't respect our Military. You and all the men and women in the Military are always in my prayers.Stay safe Buddy.
Rich
Now Wabmorgan I gather that you are presently serving in the Military since you are stationed on the USS Enterprise. I wish to thank you and every other man and woman that is serving in the Military and keeping all of us safe here at home. A GREAT BIG THANK YOU GOES OUT TO YOU AND EVERY MAN AND WOMAN SERVING IN OUR MILITARY. I just wish that our present administration had the same respect for our Military like President George W. Bush had. Whether a person liked President George W. Bush or not NOBODY can't say that he didn't respect our Military. You and all the men and women in the Military are always in my prayers.Stay safe Buddy.
Rich
I do however support our military and do agree that President George W. Bush had great respect for our military.
I think it is sad 
we have someone as President now that certainly doesn't have that kind of respect.I also agree Obama meddling in GM's business is not a good thing. I think it likely his meddling is likely to produce cars that are sorry pieces of
that people won't want and I fear for the future of the Corvette and any other performance models. Last edited by wabmorgan; 06-15-2009 at 03:24 AM.
06-15-2009, 08:20 PM
#82
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NE PA
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=wabmorgan;11758232]I wish I could take the credit you put forth there.... but I am not serving on the USS Enterprise. That's just support for the new STAR TREK movie.
HA Ha Ha, wabmorgan, you fooled me on that one. I bust my gut laughing on that one.
Irregardless we should all support the men and women in the Military and not undermine their moral like Pelosi wants to do by releasing the pictures of how we extract information from the terrorists. That woman is a nut case along with all the others that I mentioned previously.
Now we are supposed to give any terrorists that are arrested their Miranda Rights. Next she will want to give the Gitmo Detainees Surf& Turf a couple times a week. Like I stated earlier this is a Government that is totally out of control. We got the CHANGE that some people wanted all right. A Government that is all about POWER, Very Sad.
Thanks for supporting our troops. Much appreciated.
Rich
HA Ha Ha, wabmorgan, you fooled me on that one. I bust my gut laughing on that one.
Irregardless we should all support the men and women in the Military and not undermine their moral like Pelosi wants to do by releasing the pictures of how we extract information from the terrorists. That woman is a nut case along with all the others that I mentioned previously.
Now we are supposed to give any terrorists that are arrested their Miranda Rights. Next she will want to give the Gitmo Detainees Surf& Turf a couple times a week. Like I stated earlier this is a Government that is totally out of control. We got the CHANGE that some people wanted all right. A Government that is all about POWER, Very Sad.
Thanks for supporting our troops. Much appreciated.
Rich
06-16-2009, 08:04 AM
#84
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Georgia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have two problems guys, people want something for nothing and our main source of fuel's price is like guessing how Rex Grossman is going to play or who Paris Hilton is banging.
It's a crapshoot. Yeah I know the housing bubble popped yadda yadda yadda yadda......
We have the technology to solve our problems. But we can't implement them. We've got too many whiny babies that are scared. We've got too many politicians getting padded pockets and we've got too many uninformed constituents.
Take Nuclear energy. Raises red flags. First thing you hear is "Not in my backyard!!!". So a coal fired one is fine? We have not really built reactors since the 70s. Just one here and there. RETARDED.
Designs have been proposed that could push new plants efficiency levels much much higher than currently operating plants, many of which are older than most of us. "Overall, nuclear power produces far less waste material than fossil-fuel based power plants. Coal-burning plants are particularly noted for producing large amounts of toxic and mildly radioactive ash due to concentrating naturally occurring metals and radioactive material from the coal. Contrary to popular belief, coal power actually results in more radioactive waste being released into the environment than nuclear power. The population effective dose equivalent from radiation from coal plants is 100 times as much as nuclear plants."
What about that waste stuff??? Its not THAT dangerous. Don't take Chernobyl as the only example. "The World Nuclear Association provides a comparison of deaths due to accidents among different forms of energy production. In their comparison, deaths per TW-yr of electricity produced from 1970 to 1992 are quoted as 885 for hydropower, 342 for coal, 85 for natural gas, and 8 for nuclear."
And don't even get me started on fusion. If we managed to solve the problems with fusion there is enough fuel to last at LEAST thousands of years possibly BILLIONS. Yes that is BILLIONS. And it's waste products half life is measured in decades not thousands.
We can't count on Oil guys, plain and simple. No matter where it comes from us or them. We need to count on one thing. Our technical know how and ***** to implement it. And we've let anxiety prone pussies and short term economic goals run the show. Think of oil as a finite resource and then you realize why COUNTING ON IT FOR SOO MUCH IS STUPID.
If we made electricity cheap and consistent enough, whether that be fission or fusion or whatever, we could AFFORD to use electrolysis and get hydrogen from water to fuel our needs.
Us hotrodders could easily retrofit what we have.
So if you want performance anything, you need cheap fuel, and oil isn't going to be cheap for long. So what's it going to be guys?
And yes support the troops
Edit: BTW I don't like all the nonsense Obama is doing but he did do one thing right appointing a nobel prize winning scientist at the helm of the energy department. He co won the prize in 1997 and NEARLY won it in the 80s. We need smart people that will weigh the pros and cons of everything and will do something right.
I mean christ Bush had Bodman. Bodman led a Texas based company (Cabot) that was DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO OIL refining (chemical company) and managed to make it on the top five worst polluters list for years. If you guys don't smell the bullshit in that you are blind.
It's a crapshoot. Yeah I know the housing bubble popped yadda yadda yadda yadda......
We have the technology to solve our problems. But we can't implement them. We've got too many whiny babies that are scared. We've got too many politicians getting padded pockets and we've got too many uninformed constituents.
Take Nuclear energy. Raises red flags. First thing you hear is "Not in my backyard!!!". So a coal fired one is fine? We have not really built reactors since the 70s. Just one here and there. RETARDED.
Designs have been proposed that could push new plants efficiency levels much much higher than currently operating plants, many of which are older than most of us. "Overall, nuclear power produces far less waste material than fossil-fuel based power plants. Coal-burning plants are particularly noted for producing large amounts of toxic and mildly radioactive ash due to concentrating naturally occurring metals and radioactive material from the coal. Contrary to popular belief, coal power actually results in more radioactive waste being released into the environment than nuclear power. The population effective dose equivalent from radiation from coal plants is 100 times as much as nuclear plants."
What about that waste stuff??? Its not THAT dangerous. Don't take Chernobyl as the only example. "The World Nuclear Association provides a comparison of deaths due to accidents among different forms of energy production. In their comparison, deaths per TW-yr of electricity produced from 1970 to 1992 are quoted as 885 for hydropower, 342 for coal, 85 for natural gas, and 8 for nuclear."
And don't even get me started on fusion. If we managed to solve the problems with fusion there is enough fuel to last at LEAST thousands of years possibly BILLIONS. Yes that is BILLIONS. And it's waste products half life is measured in decades not thousands.
We can't count on Oil guys, plain and simple. No matter where it comes from us or them. We need to count on one thing. Our technical know how and ***** to implement it. And we've let anxiety prone pussies and short term economic goals run the show. Think of oil as a finite resource and then you realize why COUNTING ON IT FOR SOO MUCH IS STUPID.
If we made electricity cheap and consistent enough, whether that be fission or fusion or whatever, we could AFFORD to use electrolysis and get hydrogen from water to fuel our needs.
Us hotrodders could easily retrofit what we have.
So if you want performance anything, you need cheap fuel, and oil isn't going to be cheap for long. So what's it going to be guys?
And yes support the troops
Edit: BTW I don't like all the nonsense Obama is doing but he did do one thing right appointing a nobel prize winning scientist at the helm of the energy department. He co won the prize in 1997 and NEARLY won it in the 80s. We need smart people that will weigh the pros and cons of everything and will do something right.
I mean christ Bush had Bodman. Bodman led a Texas based company (Cabot) that was DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO OIL refining (chemical company) and managed to make it on the top five worst polluters list for years. If you guys don't smell the bullshit in that you are blind.
Last edited by Lickeyman; 06-16-2009 at 10:34 AM.
06-16-2009, 08:16 AM
#85
Administrator
06-16-2009, 11:07 AM
#86
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Next time you get a loan they should tell how you can spend it, where you can spend, and fire your wife because she isn't up to snuff for them too I suppose? Slightly far fetched, but not too far off from what our government is trying to do.
06-16-2009, 11:29 AM
#88
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Georgia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm pretty sure if you get a home loan you have to buy a house. And they check loan to value ratio.
Business loans....same.
You don't get loans without technically giving the items to a bank. So the how and where is there.
Student loans are to go for student expenses etc............
Personal loan is about the only thing besides credit cards that you can buy whatever and guess what.......the rates are ginormous.
And the last time I checked when a single investor (government in this case) owns enough stock in the company (60%) they have enough power to do what they want with the company. It's called being the controlling interest. Has happened many times in plain ole business. So the fire is there too.
Would you rather GM get huge hand outs with no stipulations and be able to reimburse ceo's with multi-million dollar bonuses or something similar?
Last edited by Lickeyman; 06-16-2009 at 11:41 AM.
06-16-2009, 11:52 AM
#89
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NE PA
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Lickeyman;
And the last time I checked when a single investor (government in this case) owns enough stock in the company (60%) they have enough power to do what they want with the company. It's called being the controlling interest. Has happened many times in plain ole business. So the fire is there too.
Since the US Government borrowed the money from China for all these bailouts I would say that China owns GM & Chrysler ????
Rich
And the last time I checked when a single investor (government in this case) owns enough stock in the company (60%) they have enough power to do what they want with the company. It's called being the controlling interest. Has happened many times in plain ole business. So the fire is there too.
Since the US Government borrowed the money from China for all these bailouts I would say that China owns GM & Chrysler ????
Rich
06-16-2009, 12:06 PM
#90
Administrator
That's not a loan. It's government ownership in a public company. Big difference. Maybe the bailout was sold to the public as a loan, but it's certainly not since none of that money will ever be returned. I don't agree with what's going on, but that's the reality of it.
06-16-2009, 12:09 PM
#91
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Georgia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote=TURBO BUICK;11765306][quote=Lickeyman;
And the last time I checked when a single investor (government in this case) owns enough stock in the company (60%) they have enough power to do what they want with the company. It's called being the controlling interest. Has happened many times in plain ole business. So the fire is there too.
Since the US Government borrowed the money from China for all these bailouts I would say that China owns GM & Chrysler ????
Rich[/QUOTE]
Well, your opening another can of worms altogether. At the end of 2006, foreigners held 44% of federal debt held by the public. And since China owns 24% (Japan has 20%) of that 44% pie it's still not a controlling interest
Interesting fact for you. As of right now our debt level is at 82% gross domestic product. In 1950 it was 94% GDP. Our projected is going to be al least 100% in 2010-2019.
Until we do something about entitlement programs (medicare, proposed health care) we will have ever increasing debt problem. Currently more than 16% of all of our income taxes go to paying on debt.
So we need to do two things. Reform entitlement programs and solve the energy problem like I said above.
And the last time I checked when a single investor (government in this case) owns enough stock in the company (60%) they have enough power to do what they want with the company. It's called being the controlling interest. Has happened many times in plain ole business. So the fire is there too.
Since the US Government borrowed the money from China for all these bailouts I would say that China owns GM & Chrysler ????
Rich[/QUOTE]
Well, your opening another can of worms altogether. At the end of 2006, foreigners held 44% of federal debt held by the public. And since China owns 24% (Japan has 20%) of that 44% pie it's still not a controlling interest
Interesting fact for you. As of right now our debt level is at 82% gross domestic product. In 1950 it was 94% GDP. Our projected is going to be al least 100% in 2010-2019.
Until we do something about entitlement programs (medicare, proposed health care) we will have ever increasing debt problem. Currently more than 16% of all of our income taxes go to paying on debt.
So we need to do two things. Reform entitlement programs and solve the energy problem like I said above.
06-16-2009, 12:31 PM
#92
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not, the banks did. And like I said that was a little stretched, but high rates and stipulations doesn't equal firing ceo's and telling them what car's/dealer's they get to keep or get rid of. That's like getting a car loan and the bank telling you to buy a Prius, even if you just wanted a Focus.
06-16-2009, 12:34 PM
#93
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ding, ding, ding, winnah!!. None of that money will be repaid, by Chrysler or GM, those billions may as well have been sent to the bottom of the ocean. Oh well, Government Motors will soon have a Prius for all of us to drive, and little else.
06-16-2009, 12:42 PM
#94
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Georgia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not, the banks did. And like I said that was a little stretched, but high rates and stipulations doesn't equal firing ceo's and telling them what car's/dealer's they get to keep or get rid of. That's like getting a car loan and the bank telling you to buy a Prius, even if you just wanted a Focus.
It is technically not just a loan. The money doled out provided the government with an interest stake. And besides, GM AND CHRYSLER took the money with the scenario you describe, you can have this money but you have to do this with it.
Sux ***** but they took it. No one's fault but the companies. They could have just went under and not asked for the money and had other investors come in but who would have wanted to FU#% with the UAW and the monstrous debt?
06-16-2009, 12:58 PM
#95
TECH Fanatic
I've been saying that for a long time now.... for one.... it is simply too much debt.... that it would become little more than a government subsidy.
06-16-2009, 01:09 PM
#96
TECH Fanatic
OK.... I should have simply said Obama ******* **** up.
By meddling.... I meant Obama is going to have GM making sorry pieces of
mobiles that no one will want. All will be Cavalier copy cats. Cavalier=GM's K car.
K-car might have saved Chrysler's *** years ago.... but that line of thinking is NOT going to do crap now. GM will need innovative products IF it is ever to turn around and get off of government life support.... which I have serious doubt that will ever happen.
Last edited by wabmorgan; 06-17-2009 at 10:20 PM.
06-16-2009, 01:09 PM
#97
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparks NV
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What if we all bought GM shares as a show of support and financial backing. It could only help and if they pull out we might make a little money. If every Tech member bought 20 shares, think what an impact and what a statement it would make. In short, quit telling me how great your LSX is, and DO something for the company who brought it to you!!!
Besides it's GMs hole not mine. Me and China have given them enough already. And I REFUSE to buy anything that is run by the government IF I have a choice in the matter. As far as I'm concerned until that 60% controlling interest in GM is given back to the bondholders GM is not a legit company. I love the new camaro and I'd love to have a new silverado. But I think if I'm going to buy a brand new car. It might have to be a ford just on principle. And since I'm not a ford fan... I guess I'm not buying anything.
