Blakbird24

iTrader: (24)

Every damn thread in this section has the same formula anymore. There's always that guy who shows up five pages in saying something to the effect that everyone here is wrong...then disappears. It's tired.

Seeing as 90% of the threads in this section are posted about brand new, unproven vehicles/motors, the vast majority of what is posted as fact is, in reality, speculation. Yet we end up in these stupid arguments over engines and cars that have yet to even be tested independently or in the real world.

wannabess00

iTrader: (1)

Most Americans believe a lot of things based on a sensationalist political perspective. I dont think Americans really understood the gravity of the Automotive crisis. The Admin concluded the collateral damage that would follow with Big 3 collapse was a far greater threat to our economy then helping them outta trouble. Even Fords said without the actions of the fed to aid GM and Chrysler through bankruptcy, Ford wouldve collapsed shortly after with their thousands suppliers dying off quickly. And numerous other industries would have also began financial decline soon after. I would hope we can all at least agree the the Fed didnt do this with any sort of excitement. They were just as irritated as the public

It'llrun

I think the fed was far more excited... at the prospect of OWNING what were privately owned companies, not to mention the major players publicly traded that it DID get control of for at least some time. Plus, I don't think they studied the reality much at all, if any. As you pointed out, sensationalized reporting was in the middle of their decision as opposed to the reality alone. Further, they showed to not understand their own society or capitalism when they decided to spend money which ISN'T theirs, to purchase something most people(who's money it was) didn't want them to buy. It was essentially a covered up takeover of Americas largest industry(save perhaps energy itself). Don't think they're meat hooks aren't still firmly embedded into GM and Chrysler... They ARE! All the while, it doesn't COST the government a penny, but it DOES earn it income.

If I force you to give me 1 million dollars so I can purchase an entire production facility and I, but NOT you, make money... AND you never get your money back, did you win or did I? Pretty clear to me.

All those suppliers would've been hurting, to be sure. That said, they ARE hurting as is and they were already. Hundreds of thousands still lost their jobs, takeover/bailouts and all. Even so, there's no question, because history proves it, new suppliers would've come into business. It's been this way for 100+yrs and it wouldn't change, under a capitalist society. Our government, specifically those on the far left, want a socialist society instead, so that's how they governed until being hammered in the last election cycle. With that cycle, I think it's totally obvious that most Americans did NOT like the choices our government made.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

I agree.

Spoolin

iTrader: (8)

BADASS!!!

It'llrun

I don't agree, based on the reality we're forced to stare at now. What's REALLY better? Nothing... We're simply deeper in debt as a nation.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Are we?
We don't know what the "reality" would've been if GM and Chrysler were simply left to die so we can't actually comment on what might've been otherwise.
Those two companies aren't just about the cars that they build/sell, MILLIONS of other entities are connected to their survival.
The paper company that makes the boxes that parts are shipped in.
Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin etc.
DuPont paints.
The company that makes the uniforms that line workers might wear.
The trucking companies that deliver the cars, well deliver EVERYTHING to and from the factories for that matter.
The thousands upon thousands of computers/phones/desks/chairs that these companies purchase each year.
The diner up the road where the employees eat lunch.
The food provision company that sells to that diner.
The cannery that makes the cans that the provision company packages their foods in.
EVERYTHING is touched by the U.S. auto industry. If it fails we ALL lose.

What, you think Toyota, Honda, BMW etc were going to take up the slack? LOL.
As already mentioned above, even Ford feared the possible demise/loss of the other two because their world would also be seriously effected by it. Same likely goes for ALL car companies selling vehicles here.

It'llrun

We positively ARE, without a shred of question. Anyone thinking we aren't isn't paying attention. Our national debt has risen some 3.5 TRILLION DOLLARS over the past 2-3yrs alone. All the while, billions upon billions of bailouts, etc., we still also have a massive unemployment rate and our debt only grows.
We know what it's been like in the past, when other manufacturers failed, don't we? Most have failed, so we do have some solid insight there. Their "spots" were absorbed by those left standing and others popped up as well, most of which failed, basically... or were purchased by larger or stronger companies.

Nothin' new there... Millions of entities hae failed over the years... That's what capitalism is like. Some fail, some don't. Others ALWAYS take the place of a failed business if there's a need or want for a product.

Even Ford SAID they had a fear, apparently... Then again, look at the massive free advertising they got from this entire debacle... They're BUSINESSMEN, not shop keepers for someone elses shop... They're looking out for their own best interest, period. Making such a claim tends to warrant the government stepping in and that gave Ford(and others) a major leg up in the sales department.

When PACKARD failed, did the country fail? How about Oldsmobile? Edsel? There were probably more than 100 manufacturers which failed or were bought out... The country never fell apart due to any of those situations. We survived the great depression. We survived WW's I and II. We could also survive the failure of our largest auto manufacturer. I have faith in America... Don't you?

wannabess00

iTrader: (1)

Thats a different circumstance. Packard, which was purchased and then dissolved, was by no means a major player in the auto industry compared to Ford and GM. GM at that time was the largest company in the world. But we arent talking about one company closing shop, we are talking about all the American car companies that have an huge supplier base structured behind them creating a very negative impact. Just imagine the unemployment rate if that wouldve happened. And to suggest that the Obama Adm relished at the chance to own a share of a company using tax payer dollars is just absurd and you know it. Thats just lashing out at a guy because you differ with his political ideology. No one wanted to shell out more tax dollars and face a public already outraged over the bank bailouts, and other disasters

...And as far as your " I have faith in America... Don't you?" goes...lets not dumb down the conversation to a childish patriotism question..its just embarrassing

It'llrun

I've constructed two replies already, and for the sake of not wanting to help you make you look as foolish as I've seen others do in the past, and to avoid other problems here for being mean by using weapons(intelligence and knowledge) while fighting an obviously unarmed opponent, I've removed each rather than pulling the trigger on you...

Here's the thing. I'm not here to argue with you and I'm not here to put up with your lies or ignorance either. I just DO put up with it because I know I cannot change you...

So I'll just suggest that you take a look back at my posts in this thread and TAKE NOTE that I haven't done what you claim I have... For example: You claim I've spoken badly about our President and his administration... I've not mentioned EITHER even 1 time... NOT ONCE, but you LIED and said I did... I mentioned the government, the fed and Congress... Just so you'll know. I did call them out and "they" aren't the ones you're claiming... ie, not the president OR administration. I suppose that guilty feeling struck you and ya just couldn't help yourself...

Get a clue, sport. YOU are not ready for this. From what I've seen in the past, you likely never will be.

To see YOU saying someone else is dumbing down the conversation... HAH! I did laugh about that part... Somehow, to the moonbats I suppose, having FAITH in America is "dumb" and being PATRIOTIC is childish... Further, those things are also EMBARRASSING... only to those on the far left of reality, of course. The rest of the nation showed their disagreement back in Nov.

Finally, I must inform you, lest you NEVER know... There's a big difference between lashing out over differing political ideologies and what *I* actually did... I lashed out at STUPIDITY, not a political ideology.

wannabess00

iTrader: (1)

Thats a cheap stab at the everyone involved but primarily the president who was the leader in the saving of GM and Chrysler. Unless you wish to suggest that he wasnt involved in this process. Hide behind generalizations if you will but we all know who your referring to

Now you've just blown your whole argument outta the water by suggesting that only the belief that you had was superior and the idea of those who stand apart from you are in support of "stupidity" despite the fact they are highly educated people that have a much better perspective of the end result unless you wish to reveal to us that youre actually a ivy-league educated economist. They made their choice and GM and Chrysler are making money

It'llrun

Obviously NOT everyone knows who, because YOU screwed it up! I wasn't discussing the President OR his administration because, while they WERE stupid enough to fall for it, they didn't write the law and could NOT control anything about it, till it was ready for signing or veto.

I realize you're a left wing hack who has no idea what's going on around him(politically speaking), but REALLY? Do you REALLY think "my idea" couldn't be "superior" to the one(socialism) that FAILED so far? Knowing the idea I prefer is the one which made America the strongest nation EVER known to mankind JUST may give the average person pause... But no, not you... You're a died in the wool lefty and somehow, you can't comprehend the meaning of capitalism no matter who shows how well it works and no matter who shows that "your" idea(socialsim) is an utter failure...

Highly educated means NOTHING when you're still stupid AND lack common sense... Lefties don't EVER understand that, it seems. Common sense outweighs IVY LEAGUE every time in the REAL world, as opposed to the schoolhouse.

This whole, "Well, they're highly educated" nonsense is just that. Some of the most productive people on earth never completed college. Many of the wealthiest "self-made" billionaires didn't either... Indeed, I think 4 of the 5 richest Americans didn't complete college... So much for education in school. On the other hand, even the Ivy-League economists agree with my view for the most part, at least according to the news...

I also keep in mind, you're the guy who says "imagine" the bad, but don't imagine the good... You're a LEFTY, period. On that note, we should end this here. Personally, I simply don't give you the credit required to believe you'll ever understand. Mean or not, that's the deal.

PS GM and Chrysler still owe the "government"(the people) BILLIONS in unpaid loans... They may be making money, but much of why is because, like our government, they're NOT really repaying their loans...

vette0009

yeah, I like my chevy

But I hate the corporation,

My truck was assembled in Mexico, and the 2010 Camaro is made in Canada,

And then they have the Nerve to ask Americans to Bail them out ????????

When your not providing Jobs to Americans, Who incidentally are getting their asses shot off abroad so you can do business within the Safety of US Borders,

Corp Chevrolet are a Bunch Of Traitors !

Support your Couuntry or GTFO GM !

Blakbird24

iTrader: (24)

Calling someone else an idiot does not mask your own stupidity. You speak like you are somehow above everyone else's perspective on the situation when in reality you appear to understand it even less.

If you believe that Ford is somehow different from GM and Chrysler in their current state, you are right. But not for the reason you believe. ALL THREE owe massive amounts of money to the government. Far more than they ever should have been allowed to borrow to begin with. The difference is that GM and Chrysler are now good, solid profitable entities (even if only slightly profitable). Ford may NEVER again be truthfully profitable thanks to the fact that they don't actually have any assets anymore. They wagered them all to survive the recession (which btw, is not over yet). All these people that think that buying a Ford instead of a Chevy or Dodge is somehow better based on Ford not receiving funds that they know of are simply fools.

The bottom line is this...

ALL THREE major US automakers had to be saved, ALL THREE received ridiculous amounts of our money that we will never see again. It's absolutely unbelievable that it happened, but it HAD to happen. There is absolutely no question that the american automakers had to be saved. Losing the american auto industry would have turned this country into a third world nation overnight. The global economy would have been severely crippled thanks to the collapse of our own. So basically it's taking one unthinkable action simply because the alternative was far worse. If, at this point, you still believe otherwise, then there is no point in arguing with you because you can't be helped.

But please, continue calling everyone else who questions you insulting names. It really does help your cause.

It'llrun

If you're going to try so hard to insult me, at very least line up some facts 1st. Then, actually try to present a valid case for your views. So far, you've not even come close to doing either.

The only real evidence we have to fall back on is the two most important facts the FEW of you who disagree are missing... Capitalism WORKS. Socialism FAILS. That's always been the case and until something happens to prove otherwise, there's no case to support socialistic ideas. We KNOW these things because we've seen ENTIRE COUNTRIES fail in the past... NONE of which based their economy on capitalism, many of which based it on socialism. We have cases to see for countries who FLOURISHED before they adopted socialism and have since failed. By contrast, we've not seen any go to capitalism, then fail.

As for "everyone else" as you put it... I am in the MASSIVE majority on this. You 3(maybe a few more) are the odd men out... The clear majority of America sees this as I see it, whether or not you've noticed.

Blakbird24

iTrader: (24)

First, you are not the judge on what is a valid argument, nor would you be qualified for the job if there was such a position. Second, you have no idea what the majority of America sees. That's just a laughably ludicrous claim.

Finally, if you can't support your argument without resulting to personal jabs, then you may want to step back and consider the validity of said argument. Regardless, i'm not arguing this subject with you. It's clear you are set in what you believe and challenging that would only be wasting everyone's time.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

I agree.






Yes, I do have faith. For now at least.
But I don't know (and for that matter, you don't know either because it hasn't happened yet, thank god) if we could actually survive the total failure/loss of GM and all of the millions upon millions of other entities that are connected with it.
Maybe. Maybe not.


I like money, I like nice things and I certainly prefer capitalism over socialism.
You cite examples of corporate demises/failures of the past and at the same time claim that capitalism works.
But if it the system worked so flawlessly then why would otherwise good companies (not necessarily Edsel or AMC LOL but others) fail in the first place?
You (and others) are claiming that GM and Chrysler should've just been allowed to fail because that's simply how "the principles" of capitalism/free markets dictate that it should be. But they only needed the loans in the first place because the system you're referring to, in many ways, failed to work. If every company is just allowed to fail when they have a few weak years then there will be no more companies. No more jobs. No more tax base (defense/military/infrastructure etc.). And yes, no more capitalism. Looking at how things are in this nation (world) right now, it's almost as if it's doomed to eventual failure much like communism/socialism was/is.
And allowing hundreds of thousands (maybe MILLIONS) of jobs to disappear based solely on "principle" is a little shortsighted in my opinion.
But hey, it is the only system we've got so I'm stickin' with it.

It'llrun

Okay then... More silly and lame attempts from the wannabe insult factory... If I'm not the judge(and we ALL are, independently), and if no such positions exists(it does, and we call it opinion weighted by facts), how do you know who is or isn't qualified?

A valid argument is quite easy to see... You've not provided one and you probably won't, because you have none to go along with your ideas on the matter.

How could you POSSIBLY know that? You couldn't... You've never even met me. You have NO idea what you're talking about. What's ludicrous is the idea that the likes of YOU thinks he can speak for me in the 1st place. You're not getting anywhere with this whine-fest. PRESENT FACTS, or just move on with life, noting only that you haven't got any.

You're ALL ABOUT presenting your opinion ABOUT ME, but you've not yet presented any about the topic, let alone any facts to support your theories.

After all the nonsense you've added attacking me, you've got the nerve to make THAT ridiculous comment? GROW UP ALREADY!

Of COURSE you aren't... That's been widely established. You CANNOT because you haven't got anything worth adding on the subject... This is why you've gone solely with personal attacks. It's what liberals do.

You've wasted enough already, I agree.

1st off, good on you for having faith. Next, try showing it. Beyond that, there are NOT "millions and millions of other entities" connected... Thousands and thousands perhaps... Look how many people have lost their jobs anyway, and we can't even account for MOST of the money tossed to all these companies.

Then why support socialistic takeovers?

That's THE beauty of capitalism... There will be failures, but unlike socialism and similar systems, there's always been others to fill the void left by those who went away... IF the product was/is wanted by enough consumers. Supply and demand 101.

Because their offering wasn't as good as others vs the cost, plain and simple.

Basically, yes, just like countless other companies which were NOT bailed out in the past, or present. The mere idea that a company is "too big to fail" is a bad joke, awaiting a non-reactive audience.

That's absolutely not the case in any sense. They needed loans because THEY failed in at least some key areas. For example: GM and Chrysler both made bad bargaining decisions with the UAW, forcing the companies to spend more than they were making AND to "give" (pay) employees, not only a large income, but in MANY cases, the income went to workers who haven't even SHOWN UP TO WORK in as much as 2yrs, according to several news reports. The "system" isn't what caused their troubles. Bad decisions did. For that, WE ALL PAY to help them survive.

Had they been "allowed to fail," they could've simply filed the proper bankruptcy and renegotiated the terms of their agreements with ALL suppliers and even the UAW.

As the past 100+ yrs testifies, that's not the case. MILLIONS of businesses in America have failed over that time and somehow, some way, we still have companies in America. Your argument is based solidly in a completely false premise.

How's that workin' for us now? Even with the bailouts, we're still losing jobs almost as often as we're gaining them and, were it not for the "cycles" of economy, we'd be no better off at all, and at 9.7% admitted unemployment, things are FAR worse than they were just 3yrs ago.

The only real reason for that is our having the 2nd(soon to be 1st) highest corporate TAX rate in the world. Due to that, business have been leaving America since the 1970's. Capitalism has survived, just the same(though staggering), while socialism and communism have both essentially failed everywhere. Even China, the biggest "communist" country in the world... the biggest country in the world, period, is shifting it's approach to... CAPITALISM!

Shortsighted? We've lost millions of jobs in the past and survived... Remember the 70's and early 80's? Regardless, those disappearing jobs have hardly slowed down, and only as of late at that, but we've lost probably 4million already. I haven't looked into those numbers in months... too dreary. That said, the jobs "disappearing" are due to tax rates which lead businesses to take up home elsewhere, so they can make more money.

Based on your "argument," I can't tell.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

We will always have National debt. It's also used as a repressive tool by the Government. If the Government were truly serious about debt reduction, they'd collect the trillions owed the US by other Countries dating back pre-WWII.

I'm older than dirt & the "National Debt" **** has been an un-attended issue since before I was born. Live your life & quit stressing over **** controlled only by elected criminals.

It'llrun

I don't know when you were born, but those on the left seem to be of the mindset that our national debt was dropping after WWII all the way till 1980... Then, they claim it rose again THE DAY that Reagan took office and they blamed him, and the Senate, which was controlled by Republicans. I recently heard and saw (graphs mostly) a video explaining all this, done by some anonymous speaker. Next, it stated that Bush I tried to lower the debt, but failed. It even said, blatently, that it took Clinton 3yrs to lower it, but he did it... single-handedly, no doubt. They fail to mention it was Republicans in control at the time, of course. Then it went on to blame Bush II, outright, for the raising once again and said that Obama is not responsible either... Problem is, when Bush II was in office, we were at war nearly the entire time AND Obama actually had some small role in increasing debt as a Senator prior to be elected, plus, as President, he's signed into law or enacted well over 1 Trillion in spending all the while also blaming Bush, who was sitting in TX minding his own business. Anyway, the point there is, the ND wasn't, according to the left, unattended, until 1980... If you were born in 1980, your statement stands. Prior to then, even the left disagrees with you, and they'll provide the graphs to prove it!

Anyway, I don't think you're really pickin' up what I was puttin' down... We all need to be concerned for our ND because the rest of the world is actually considering removing the US dollar as the main currency. If that happens(and some places have already done it), we'll only see our money devalued and our debt could increase as it did in parts of Europe in the mid- 90's and as it did more recently in Greece and Iceland. On that note, I'm not stressing... I was merely pointing out the obvious for some who don't seem able to see it.

ND isn't completely a bad thing. That doesn't mean we should simply ignore it as citizens, even if our elected representatives appear to be doing exactly that.

I'm living my life as is, but that doesn't mean I should sit back and act like nothing matters to me. Doing that gets us into trouble.