Big 3 bail out?

[ExoticSpotting]

Originally Posted by old_master

Everything the Democrats get their hands on goes down the toilet.

You have reached what we conservatives call 'enlightenment'.

I oppose the bailout 100%.

- If a company doesn't plan for future problems and they go bankrupt, it's their fault for not planning ahead.

- If you can't compete with other manufacturers, you go under. Its called a 'free market'.

- It's not the goverments place to interfere with these companies, let me stress that-it's not the goverments job.

- The goverment has no right to stael taxpayer dollars to help a failed buisness, it's not hte goverments money.

[drunken monkey]

so you prefer the 3 to go under, make hundreds of thousands of people worldwide unemployed and further the global economic recession?

[ExoticSpotting]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

so you prefer the 3 to go under, make hundreds of thousands of people worldwide unemployed and further the global economic recession?

Even if we go through with the bailout they'll go under anyway.
You can't fix a reccesion by shoveling money into failed buisnesses.

[drunken monkey]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

Even if we go through with the bailout they'll go under anyway.

Is that a 100% given fact?

The question that I have regarding this and any other bailout plan is exactly this; that of the viability of their survival with a cash injection. Without knowing further details, simply saying that they will fail no matter what is pointless and ignorant in the true meaning of the word. To simply say let them die and bring on the unemployment and global effects of their demise is short-sighted.

For some of the major companies that are having cash problems is just this, a cash problem. The nature of a manufacturing business is such that the company could well be profitable but without cashflow, they can't continue with the process/manufacture that equates to the profit.

the worlds fastest rower isn't going to much without oars.

Of course, these guys' problems, especially GM's, is well documented and a superficial cash injection is not the sole solution but it may well be what is needed for it to move towards fixing their problems.

[ExoticSpotting]

The big problem is that they are handing over the bailouts with no strings attached. If you want to use taxpayer dollars to reinvigorate a failing buisness, you have to change the fundamentals of how that company is run.

If the feds come up with an actual plan that involves removing the ceo's and managers, rewriting standard procedure, and reducing the power of the unions, I might reluctantly agree. But thats not what they're doing, the incompetent people running these buisnesses want money, not a solution.

Giving them a bailout without adressing the actual problem is pretty much like throwing money up in the air and walking away.

[drunken monkey]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

The big problem is that they are handing over the bailouts with no strings attached.

who said that the bailout comes with no strings?
As far as I was aware, the Senate, before it completely collapsed due to wage cut issues, was that the restrictions on the three companies wasn't enough.
i.e there were restrictions in the first place.

I'm confused here: the unions refuse to agree to a wage cut but would rather see their employers go bust and thus, the workers lose their jobs.

Who benefitted and who lost here?

[zzyzzx2]

I think that you need to look at the bailouts in their proper prospective. The automakers will do fine under Chapter 11. It's the unions that will get screwed. So stop talking about a bailut for the big 3, and start talking about how all this is going to do is bail out the unions (who don't deserve a bailout).

[AutomotiveTech]

The businesses themselves might still be doing OK (But it is obvious that they are not making cars that people want to buy), but with the unions involved their expenses are just too much. I just recently read a couple news stories about how these factory workers are making between $40 and $55 per hour! That does not include benefits. I also read one about how many of them who are laid off still get 95% of their pay...I wish I could sit at home and still make almost as much as I did when I was working.

[speediva]

Here's what gets me... Having seen President Bush address the nation about this bailout - he mentioned that the reason the government is opting to bail out the big 3 is because consumers will be afraid to buy the products if the companies enter bankruptcy. WTF????

So my tax money going to save the big 3 AND having to spend more money on an inferior product is going to make the situation better?!?! Since when? And having the government bail out the company is going to increase my confidence whereas bankruptcy would shatter consumer confidence? Someone needs to remove their head from their sphincter and THEN talk.

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by speediva

Here's what gets me... Having seen President Bush address the nation about this bailout - he mentioned that the reason the government is opting to bail out the big 3 is because consumers will be afraid to buy the products if the companies enter bankruptcy. WTF????

This is quite true. People will buy quickly-consumed services (like airline tickets) from a bankrupt company (and have done so in the past) but not cars.
People look towards a long-term relationship with the manufacturer for warranty issues, parts/service and resale value when they buy a car. It's been shown many times (Kaiser, Packard, Studebaker, Bricklin, DeLorean and even recently, Daewoo) when a company is rumored to be going under, people will not buy their cars, thus hastening the demise.

Also Bush had to put a conservative spin on what is a pretty center-left decision.

Originally Posted by speediva

So my tax money going to save the big 3 AND having to spend more money on an inferior product is going to make the situation better?!?! Since when? And having the government bail out the company is going to increase my confidence whereas bankruptcy would shatter consumer confidence? Someone needs to remove their head from their sphincter and THEN talk.

The government is doing their job of protecting the public interest with this bailout...... so long as they ensure the companies meet certain performance criteria.
The companies deserve bankruptcy due to their mismanagement. But the population of the US and Canada should not be made to suffer the economic fallout if they do.

[old_master]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

You have reached what we conservatives call 'enlightenment'.

I oppose the bailout 100%.

- If a company doesn't plan for future problems and they go bankrupt, it's their fault for not planning ahead.

- If you can't compete with other manufacturers, you go under. Its called a 'free market'.

- It's not the goverments place to interfere with these companies, let me stress that-it's not the goverments job.

- The goverment has no right to stael taxpayer dollars to help a failed buisness, it's not hte goverments money.

Absolutely 100% correct on all counts!

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

You have reached what we conservatives call 'enlightenment'.

I oppose the bailout 100%.

- If a company doesn't plan for future problems and they go bankrupt, it's their fault for not planning ahead.

- If you can't compete with other manufacturers, you go under. Its called a 'free market'.

- It's not the governments place to interfere with these companies, let me stress that-it's not the goverments job.

- The goverment has no right to stael taxpayer dollars to help a failed buisness, it's not hte goverments money.

Your principle here makes little sense,
Remember this bailout is a LOAN, not a GIFT!! It's no different than if you lost your job and had to borrow money so you could feed your family and keep your house until you got another job!!

Many businesses require financing to see them through rough spots. If financing did not exist, industrialization would never have happened and we all would be peasant farmers. In this case, the firms are so large, the government is the only source of sufficient capital.

Furthermore, what you promote here is laissez-faire capitalism, as envisioned by Adam Smith (look him up).

It's great in theory, but any economist would say it is unenlightened.
The government MUST get involved in the economy in an intelligent and thoughtful way, to moderate the extreme highs and lows that an unregulated economy experiences.

Frankly, if the Big 3 went under the loss in tax dollars would be far greater than the bailout would coast.

[03cavPA]

Originally Posted by MagicRat

The government MUST get involved in the economy in an intelligent and thoughtful way, to moderate the extreme highs and lows that an unregulated economy experiences.

Aye, there's the rub. The operative thought is intelligent and thoughtful. Precious little of that coming out of congress these days. Witness the bank handou....er, I mean, "bailout".

We'll be lucky if that little gem doesn't eventually bury us all.

Not much confidence that the auto makers' bailou... er, um, "loan" will be administered a whole lot better.

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by 03cavPA

Aye, there's the rub. The operative thought is intelligent and thoughtful. Precious little of that coming out of congress these days.

I would agree, hence my inclusion of those caveats.
When a government chooses to get involved in business, for the sake of the public good, often they can do a reasonably good job of it.... like the Post Office, NASA etc.

When a government feels that they are forced into a business they often seem to screw it up. The British government nationalized many companies, including most of their domestic auto industry. That governments refusal to fix the basic problems that industry had meant they drove it right into the ground in a few short years.

I sincerely hope GM, Chrysler etc do not become synonymous with 'British Leyland'

[danielsatur]

Combine All 3 into the Big One! ''American Motors''

If we are going to compete with the rest of the world,the UAW needs to Retire!

MCGIVER