And it cracks me up how the auto co's. are now
Posted By: Clutching at Straws on 2008-06-25
In Reply to: This is how out of touch McCain is - Just me
trying to sell the gas-guzzlers by offering 3 years of subsidized gas (@ $2.99/gal.) for those vehicles. So what are people supposed to do with those vehicles, once the 3 years is up, and the price of gas is then $8/gallon?
Small minds come up with even smaller solutions to the US's problems.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
RE: N-word 4 TT112OldTimer. Cracks me up.
Never hurts to inject a little humor into such a serious subject. Loved the graphics of the 50 jacked-up cars in the front yard.
Think the capital “B” came about sometime in the early 80s in the aftermath the B/black-awareness phase of the civil rights movement, i.e., “I’m B/black and I’m proud,” and/or “B/black is b/Beautiful.” Seems like w/Whites were given permission to use it as a socially acceptable replacement for the N/n-word. As I recall, the capital “B” confers the same status vis a vis the capital “C” as in cracker, oops whitey, uh make that honky, er I mean C/caucasian.
Maybe we could start a movement to introduce the C/c-word into the dictionary, all things being equal. We might get by with adding the H/h-word to replace h/Honky in rap so as not to offend. Broadcast media could use them to replace the bleeps during prime time.
The first QA was probably a bleeding-heart liberal who was showing uncommon QA sensitivity and the second one was probably a bigot who didn’t get her email from the first. Should have run this by the PC Editor before I posted it just to make sure I covered all the bases.
Obama campaign cracks down on misleading TV ads...sm
I can find no liberal comments on this, either blogs or liberal media. So my guess is that liberals think this is okay to do and enforce.
The first link below is the local Missouri spot on their website
Obama campaign cracks down on misleading TV ads
http://www.kmov.com/video/?z=y&nvid=285793&shu=1
http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=zieves&date=080927
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmZmZDg3NjkzMTk3OGZiMjc0YjVhOWUyY2I5YjY1ZTE=
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76308
This cracks me up..Guess where I found these advertisements..(sm)
Maybe Fox's website???...ROFL.
He got a look when Biden was making wise cracks about Justice Roberts at the swearing in. sm
I think when he is under stress he has a hard time hiding how he feels, but I think it is more a sign that he is honest about his feelings, not that he is going to act out in some crazy way.
Next auto
Why pay those pesky premiums now when we're young and healthy. And, heck, I'm a good driver. In any case, I'll get a policy once I have an accident.
And my family can get life insurance on me once I'm gone! Pay a premium or two and collect! GOOD DEAL!
For every auto job loss
that seven other people in this country are affected. Think about it: Bailing out the big 3 IS bailing out the American taxpayer.
But you see which auto workers are
handouts, and the workers are not complaining about their jobs. I am talking about the ones mentioned recently in the news here in the Southeastern US. Those workers are making(including all their benefits) around $35 an hour. The unionized big 3 workers making $70+ an hour for the same work. Is that contract worth that much?
Auto bail out s/m
Read the following report. 8-10% of total cost doesn't seem like a huge percentage for labor costs. Maybe they can't afford the big salaries and bonuses for the top dogs? About time the wealth started being redistributed. Funny I haven't heard any outrage over the outrageous salaries the top dogs in these automobile business are paid. Just whining about how much the UAW workers are paid. It's about time the working class started standing up for the working class!!!!!
Let 'em all go bankrupt. I have no doubt the idjits in Washington are way more concerned about job losses in "developing countries" than those of American citizens.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081115/ap_on_bi_ge/auto_bailout_gettelfinger
Auto industry
I feel the same way I felt about the bank bail-outs. I would say no bail-outs for ANY business. I think it borders on extortion. First the banks need a bail-out, then it's the auto companies, then AmX reorganizes so they become a holding company so THEY an qualify for some of that free money. Latest I read the newspapers are to be next in line. Where does it all end?
My reason for my no bail-out opinion is, what did it accomplish for the banking industry? Nothing if we are to believe there is a credit crisis. I noticed this evening one of the local banks was advertising that they still have money available for loans. Why is it that it's the big guys that get into trouble? Let 'em suffer. Bail-outs are going to do nothing for working middle class people.
As I said in an earlier post where do you think new automobiles will fit in consumers priority list when they are trying just to put food on the table and a roof over their heads? Pretty far down I'd say. There are new layoffs announced every day, many have nothing whatsoever to do with the automotive industry.
So that is why I say NO BAIL-OUTS.
One more thing...UAW role in the automobile woes. The public has been dreadfully misled. Most seem to think the workers make some $70 an hour when in truth they make in the neighborhood of $27.00 an hour. Not a word have I heard objecting to the executives who are paid some $6000 PLUS per hour and all kinds of perks like private jets, etc. Wouldn't one think this would have a whole lot to do with their finances? The one thing I think the union should concede is the job bank where they are paid 95%, I think it is, of their wages when they are laid off. The rest of the workforce (and my husband spent his life working as a Teamster) should have to suffer through unemployment just like the majority of other employees. I do think that employer provided benefits such as the unions have should be available to all workers. It most surely comes in handy at retirement. I think everyone should have an opportunity to retire in their older years and Social Security sure doesn't covere living expenses. I wonder if there are any MTs who have retirement benefits? Probably not. Most seem now-a-days hard pressed to even make a living.
I have some ideas about auto bailout
Let the oil companies bail them out since they directly benefited from some of the bad management decisions.
Don't bail out the companies. Give the money to the workers for re-education, etc., while the auto companies restructure.
My first suggestion was a little cynical, but I'm not sure why the second hasn't occurred to anyone. ...
For those who support the auto bailout........ sm
please answer me this.
If the Big 3 are truly in the dire financial straites they claim to be, surely this did not come on overnight. Surely they did not wake up one morning a couple of weeks ago and say "wow, we have a problem. Let's go get help from Washington." GM has already received help from the government before and it didn't seem to keep them solvent. With that line of thinking, what makes those of you who support the bailout think that they will manage whatever funds (it's up to $34K and possibly growing) they receive wisely and will not allow this to happen again?
And if we did bail out the auto industry......sm
how much is that going to cost us and where is the money going to come from?
I realize this country's economy is in the toilet at this point and people are hurting everywhere, but my question is, like I said above, where is the money going to come from (I don't believe tax increases on the wealthy are going to cover the tab) and what is going to happen when "they" call in the loans?
Auto Bailout is on C-Span. If you
want to watch it tonight, it will be on at 8 p.m. In the meantime, the plans of GM and Ford are online.
I feel sorry for the Chryler guy. He seems to be the most honest and wants the least amount of money. Sen. Corker - TN told him right out he doubts Chrysler is going to make it even with the money and they should just be bought out by someone and leave the company go.
He was also tough on the UAW Gettlefinger (or whatever his name is). I don't blame him there. The guy was squirming but he kept talking about all the concessions hurting the workers; i.e., not willing to make concessions.
Hope the link works.
Auto industry bailout...(sm)
I happen to think that the auto industry does need a bailout. No, I don't agree with keeping the current management, and I do believe in making stipulations for how that money is spent. I know most of you will disagree with that, but here's what I'm seeing in TN.
Congressman Zach Wamp (R) from TN was on the tube last night talkiing about how he does not want to do the bailout. If that's his opinion that fine ----- However, lets look at his reason. TN has been bidding for a new Volkswagon plant which has recently come to fruition---right here in my home town by the way. He has been pushing for this for years. This is obviously a good thing for people in TN because of the jobs it would create. What I find ironic though is that he would let American companies go down the tubes and yet support a foreign auto maker. My honest opinion about guys like this, is that they want the job creation, regardless of where the real money is going (overseas) and they would like to do this in such a manner so as to cut out unions.
ARRRGGGGHHHH!!!! 
unemployed auto workers' pay
per their contract, if unemployed they receive FULL pay. The loss would be benefits, but they get full pay for not working if they are laid off. That should give them time for re-education.
Here's a link for the auto industry bailout
They keep flip-flopping. The second link is Paulson's idea. That was probably posted before but am posting again just in case.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27721013
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27712153
Bush approves auto bailout........ sm
to the tune of 17.4 billion.
Mr. Bush, in a televised speech before the opening of the markets, said that under other circumstances he would have let the companies fail, as punishment for their own bad business decisions. But given the economic downturn, he said the government had no choice but to step in.
“These are not ordinary circumstances, in the midst of a financial crisis and a recession allowing the US auto industry to collapse is not a responsible action,” Mr. Bush said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20auto.html
If you are going to give money to re-educate the auto workers....... sm
then it would follow that money should be given to sustain and re-educate the people in other industries (MT comes to mind) that are suffering because of big suit mismanagement and jobs going overseas. What about the thousands upon thousands of other displaced workers in the public sector that have lost their jobs? Will they need to be re-educated as well? Will there be jobs available to them, even if they are re-educated?
Maybe that's what all those re-education centers all over America are for. hmmmmmmm
Why such a huge deal made about the auto LOAN
nm
Article I read on the auto industry and the election.
Good article and the guy they interviewed, Peter DeLorenzo (?) - a guy all up on the auto biz - said neither McCain nor Obama had a clue when it came to the auto industry. The article gave a little bit of the voting records on both related to the auto industry.
Candidates Voting Record On Auto Industry-Related Issues:
Clean Energy Achievement Criteria (2007): McCain - no vote; Obama - Yes
Preventing Petroleum Export Organizations (NOPEC Act of 2007): McCain - no vote; Obama - Yes
Reduction in Dependence on Foreign Oil (2005): McCain - No, Obama - Yes
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (No) Drilling Amendment (2005): McCain - Yes, Obama - Yes
Does Palin kno McCain voted no on reducing dependence on foreign oil?
The auto industry's V6 motor is pretty good
We get 28-30 MPH with it. Why they didn't brag this up, I have no idea. It has power, too. We could keep up with the V8's with no problem. Had a very large luxury Delta 98 LS and it was the best car we ever had...but the frame rotted away, so we kept the motor and put it into a Buick LeSabre.
Part of the problem is the unions. I've always been a union supporter, but they have really killed the industry in this country in the past 20 years. That's why there are no steel industries here anymore. That's why auto workers make a fantastic wage. Once they make good to fantastic wages, they won't back down.
Face it. People are greedy and this is a gigantic wake up call, but if they don't want to, or aren't willing to, take pay cuts, or pay more for their health insurance, then we're doomed to fall into a greater depression than seen in the 30s. A me-first-and-only-me economy doesn't work.
Example: Teachers in my area are screaming and going on strike because they don't want to pay more for health insurance. They pay $40 biweekly. I pay $200 a pay and before that, I paid $630 a month. I'm happy paying $200 a month. Are they? Nope. It's me-me-me. When are people going to wake up?
If our bailed-out auto industry doesn't invest enough
over their addiction to fossil fuels to power them, why bother to buy a new one, I'll just keep patching my old one together. At least it's paid-for, so I don't have to support the Evil and Deceitful Banking Industry with my hard-earned money. I'd rather it go to a *real* worker, like my faithful mechanic!
The whole country would crash and burn. Do you know how many jobs in Michigan alone are auto related
Michigan might as well hang a sign on the door saying last one out, turn out the lights. But then if Obama has his way, we won't have any electricity either because the coal companies will be bankrupted too. Domino effect in my opinion.
Excellent read....$25B Auto Bailout Would Be Band-Aid On Chest Wound..sm
$25B Auto Bailout Would Be Band-Aid On Chest Wound
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Mike Baker
The question really shouldn’t be “Do you support the government bailout?” Instead, the public should be asked “Do you think Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank and the rest of our gang on Capitol Hill are qualified to run the U.S. auto industry, banking industry, insurance industry and other sectors of the American economy?”
If you think big business is best managed and overseen by politicians with no business experience, then the bailout, particularly the bailout of the auto industry, must seem like a pretty good idea. If however you haven’t lost your mind, then throwing $25 billion (on top of the already approved $25 billion for plant retooling) at a business model that is broken might seem, lemme’ see, insane.
Before we go further, I should point out that I have nothing against Detroit, am saddened at the thought of the potential job losses and disheartened at the demise of the once iconic U.S. auto industry. But none of that changes the overriding concern that the only thing $25 billion would do is postpone by a factor of months the inevitable Chapter 11 of one, two or all three of the big three auto companies.
Lest you think that I’m singling out the auto industry while tacitly approving the $700 billion approved for God knows what and the $100 billion plus handed over to AIG, I’m not. Having lived and worked overseas for years and having been exposed to systems ranging from communist to socialist to dictatorial, I feel pretty comfortable saying that massive government involvement in private business eventually results in a big steaming pile of crap. Now that might not be as eloquent as some of the business theories you’ve read, but hopefully the meaning is clear.
While the PWB staff is light on sophisticated economists, it does seem that using a band-aid, even one that costs $25 billion clams, on a sucking chest wound isn’t going to save the patient. Perhaps the leaders of the big three, along with their newest best friend forever Ron Gettelfinger (head of the United Auto Workers union) think they can convince the Congress that if they just had $25 billion they could save the day by restructuring their costs, business model and product line. As opposed to watching the $25 billion go down the drain over the next few months as they continue to pay enormous legacy costs, suffer declining sales and deal with the continued credit crunch. Apparently Nancy Pelosi, using her extensive business management experience, thinks that sounds about right.
In normal political times we might get a good old fashioned difference of opinion on the Hill over an issue as important as the proposed auto industry bailout. But these aren’t normal times. During this blessed honeymoon period as we await the change in administrations, anyone voicing concern over the bailout is viewed as an obstructionist … someone who doesn’t have the best interests of the nation at heart. What a load of crap.
A few Republicans have stood up and suggested that throwing good money (should I point out, our money) at the wheezing GM and inevitably Ford and Chrysler amounts to buying a few more months on life support. The auto chieftains and BFF Gettelfinger (not related to Goldfinger) have marched on Washington to explain that failing to prop them up will result in millions of job losses, the collapse of the free world and the end of the industry that makes those pine tree shaped air fresheners that hang from our rear view mirrors.
This is the same tactic used by AIG and the financial industry. I know we have collective attention deficit disorder as a nation, but does anyone remember Hank Paulson running around the Hill with his hair on fire claiming a huge comet will hit the earth if he didn’t get $700 billion? That was a trick question. Hank is bald; a hair fire is out of the question.
But Hank did get his $700 billion, which as far as I can tell is being dispensed with all the transparency of a Russian off shore company. Some of that $700 billion was mine… some of it was yours … don’t you want to know where the h*ll it’s going? It’s like handing money over to my teenage daughter … not only do I not know where it’s going, but the next day she’s standing in front of me asking for more.
And AIG? Remember them? Apparently, much like people are saying about the auto companies, AIG was just too big to fail. At last count they’ve received two massive infusions of cash. We’ve all heard about their crazy getaway trips to resorts for spa treatments and super boozeups. But does anybody think they could’ve possibly spent the entire $150 billion (give or take a few billion, who can freakin’ keep track) on facials and Cold Duck, or whatever insurance folks throw back on vacation? Even if they spent 10 percent of the bailout money on special executive massages (15 percent with happy ending), that still leaves $135 billion to account for.
And there in lies the rub. Or in AIG’s case, the rubdown. With Hank handing out briefcases full of dosh like Howie Mandel (minus the attractive briefcase ladies), AIG already $150 billion into the trough and the auto companies snuffling around looking for their feedbag, you and me have next to no idea what the h*ll is happening to our money, our children’s money and, frankly, our grandkid’s money. Once again, if you owned a pitchfork and/or one of those old fashioned torches, now would be a good time to pull them out of the shed and go demand that the monster be killed.
What’s that you say? If we don’t bailout the auto companies millions will lose their jobs and the economy will be wrecked? That’s one scenario and I agree, along with everyone that it’s a frightening scenario. And it’s that fear that the auto industry and Mr. “Read my lips, no concessions” Gettelfinger are preying on in the hope that Congress and the White House will pull out the billfold.
What we do know is that, without a bailout, GM will in all likelihood head in to Chapter 11. As with many other large companies before them, that entails restructuring and an actual hardnosed effort to return the company to profitability by making hard choices and changes. Easy? Painless? Absolutely not and no one should underestimate that.
But I’ll bet Bobo the talking intern’s pay for the next six months that a government bailout of $25 billion or more will in all likelihood result in GM eventually heading in to Chapter 11. Which would you rather do? Deal with the problem now, or throw $25 billion on the fire and deal with the problem later?
If the Republicans hold the line I’ll be amazed. The Obamatrons have marched on Capitol Hill and the pressure to display your commitment to blind bipartisanship is building.
Politicians, I hear, aren’t necessarily known for hanging their butts out in the wind and taking a stand. While they may believe it’s the right thing to do, the pressure to go along and, more germane, to not be viewed as responsible for job losses and the pain that will follow a move into bankruptcy, will likely prove too great.
Agreeing to an unsound (political speak for stupid) idea in the name of bipartisanship makes you not only weak but unprincipled as well. I think it’s time we show some fiscal responsibility and save the $25 billion. Frankly, we’ve got to think to the future. We’re going to need the extra cash when AIG heads off for their next out of town conference.
To bail or not to bail? Let me know what you think. As always, we look forward to your comments, thoughts and insight. Send your emails to peoplesweeklybrief@hotmail.com
'Til next week, stay safe.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454444,00.html
|
