American Auto Industry Bailout, sí o no

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- American Auto Industry Bailout, sí o no

Posted by daydreamer on Dec-05-2008 03:20:

American Auto Industry Bailout, sí o no

now why should they bailout these idiots.

Posted by Q5echo on Dec-05-2008 03:26:

so Congress can stay in good graces with the unions?

Posted by jerZ07002 on Dec-05-2008 03:33:

Re: American Auto Industry Bailout, sí o no

quote:
Originally posted by daydreamer
now why should they bailout these idiots.

Because if the goal is to stabilize the economy losing hundreds of thousands of additional jobs isn't the answer. plus, what's 40 billion when the financial aid given to banks far eclipses that number.

Posted by Q5echo on Dec-05-2008 11:21:

bump

Posted by Krypton on Dec-09-2008 02:58:

America's manufacturing capabilities continue their downward spiral. Letting the auto industry fail would accelerate this decline. Super powers with sub-prime manufacturing capabilities cease to be super powers.

Posted by atbell on Dec-09-2008 11:36:

Because no one else knows what to do with all those line workers.

Posted by George Smiley on Dec-09-2008 12:50:

Why bail them out? So they can save thousands of jobs I would have thought was the obvious answer. However, every corporation bailed out by the government (in any country) should surrender a lot of control to that government, they can't just be allowed to carry on as normal and get into the same mess they have done now. I think any "bail out" should constitute the buying up of shares in that company which would in turn benefit the country as a whole if the government is investing in extra revenue income sources

Posted by Groundhog Boy on Dec-09-2008 14:30:

quote:
Originally posted by George Smiley
Why bail them out? So they can save thousands of jobs I would have thought was the obvious answer. However, every corporation bailed out by the government (in any country) should surrender a lot of control to that government, they can't just be allowed to carry on as normal and get into the same mess they have done now. I think any "bail out" should constitute the buying up of shares in that company which would in turn benefit the country as a whole if the government is investing in extra revenue income sources

They're loans, they have to pay back interest and it'll be organized so that the taxpayers are 1st in line in the case of failure (i.e. before bondholders and stockholders). There may also be equity stakes, just as there were with the banks.

Posted by LazFX on Dec-09-2008 15:53:

quote:
Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
They're loans, they have to pay back interest and it'll be organized so that the taxpayers are 1st in line in the case of failure (i.e. before bondholders and stockholders).

I am all for that.
the loss of the auto industry would be devestating to this country. From the line worker to the dude that makes that line worker's uniform....and the lady that works for the food company that supplies the industry's food services...

it would be devestating

Posted by DrUg_Tit0 on Dec-11-2008 18:57:

Unless they start making better cars, they'll need to be bailed out every couple of months...

Posted by atbell on Dec-11-2008 20:39:

quote:
Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
They're loans, they have to pay back interest and it'll be organized so that the taxpayers are 1st in line in the case of failure (i.e. before bondholders and stockholders). There may also be equity stakes, just as there were with the banks.

First claim on zero dollars! YES!

Posted by Groundhog Boy on Dec-11-2008 23:53:

quote:
Originally posted by atbell
First claim on zero dollars! YES!

Yeah, because they have zero assets that can be liquidated.

Posted by shaolin_Z on Dec-12-2008 01:11:

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Unless they start making better cars, they'll need to be bailed out every couple of months...

LOL

Posted by pmoisse on Dec-12-2008 18:46:

If the Big 3 actually made decent cars for the past 15 years, they wouldn't be in this mess.

Instead, their fuel sucking SUV's financed the union make-work project that was building fleets of shitty Malibu's and other rental fleet beaters. GM should have killed Oldsmobile and Pontiac years ago, same with Ford & Mercury. Instead, they clung to the delusion that there was brand loyalty even though their cars were shit.

Don't get me wrong, GM, Ford and Chrysler all make some decent cars, their problem is they make too many shitcars that nobody wants.

GM had a great opportunity to take advantage of Opel and their small cars for years, yet each time they tried to bring them to the US or make the same designs in the US they fucked it up. Same with Ford. The european Focus has been great, but the North American built one has been crap.

[/end rant]

Having said all that, I think that the bailout should go ahead, but with huge restructuring requirements and sound business plans attached.

Posted by atbell on Dec-13-2008 20:24:

quote:
Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
Yeah, because they have zero assets that can be liquidated.

Oh, right forgot, returns of .05 cent's on the dollar isn't a bad deal.

Posted by atbell on Dec-13-2008 20:25:

quote:
Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
Yeah, because they have zero assets that can be liquidated.

Oh, right forgot, returns of .05 cent's on the dollar isn't a bad deal.

These companies don't have any inventory, thier machinery is worth little to anyone not making cars, and thier intelectual property is worthless.

Good will of the brand names... yeah right!