Bailout VS UAW

[pBills]

How do you own the car companies? Nothing has happened to help them out as of yet. And they are asking for a loan.

[Boomer860]

How do you own the car companies? Nothing has happened to help them out as of yet. And they are asking for a loan.

And while you were sleeping.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16740.html

[pBills]

"President Bush stepped in Friday to keep America's auto industry afloat, announcing a $17.4 billion bailout for GM and Chrysler, with the terms of the loans requiring that the firms radically restructure and show they can become profitable soon."

 

 

Ok, so they approved the LOAN. Great news!!

[Tux of Borg]

"President Bush stepped in Friday to keep America's auto industry afloat, announcing a $17.4 billion bailout for GM and Chrysler, with the terms of the loans requiring that the firms radically restructure and show they can become profitable soon."

 

 

Ok, so they approved the LOAN. Great news!!

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home

 

"Under the terms of the plan, if the companies can’t demonstrate financial viability by March 31 the loans will be called and the money must be returned, the statement said."

 

"The automakers much cut their debt by two thirds in an equity exchange, make half of the payments to a union retirement fund in equity, eliminate a program that pays union workers when they don’t have work and have union costs and rules competitive with foreign automakers by Dec. 31, 2009."

[KD in CA]

If you can't see how WALL STREET has screwed the entire economic system then you are willfully stupid. As late as 2001 the big three were booking record profits. They were making money hand over fist.

Translation: No, I can not explain how the market meltdown over the past 3 months is responsible for the decades long deterioration of US automakers. But I can throw a hissy fit with the best of them!

 

The american consumer wanted big SUVs. The BIG THREE DID NOT hold a gun to anyones head and make them buy them. YOU the american consumer wanted to buy them. Bling! Bling!

The American consumer wants what it is told to want. But anyway, please explain how Wall Street made consumers buy SUVs? I guess it was JP Morgan and Goldman that were spending billions running TV ads challenging the manhood of guys who didn't buy a Ford Gigantica.

 

Then suddenly, gas prices went to $4 dollars a gallon, because WALL STREET drove the price up with speculation and all of a sudden it's the big three's fault that we don't have small cars.

Yeah, because no one could ever have foreseen the possibility that oil prices might rise. After all, history teaches us that oil prices have NEVER fluctuated and it has NEVER been in the best interests of consumers or automakers to make fuel efficient cars. Plus, automakers have no reason or responsibility to plan for the impact of higher oil prices, and have no need to build any contingency plans for reacting to such changes in the market or economy. Brilliant.

 

And finally, since your argument is centered on the impact of rising gas prices on the automakers, maybe you'd care to explain why GM was losing BILLIONS of dollars BEFORE the run up of gas prices?

 

Then, suddenly, gas prices drop because CHINA has decided to go back to riding bikes (YEA RIGHT!). And the American consumer will return to driving big rigs . . . and all will be right with the world.

Right, and the automakers will go right back to building huge gas guzzlers to grab the short term profits, and then when oil prices rise again and they are out of money, dopes like you will still blather about Wall Street and fail to understand that these people don't know how to run a business.

 

 

But wouldn't have Wall Street screwed everything up for the Japanese automakers as well?

Oh yeah, there's always that 'inconvenient truth' that certain people here continue to ignore.

[John Adams]

So basically tons of businesses (car dealerships) all over the country are being wiped out because of Wall Street.

 

I did a google of "dealership closing" not too long ago and some dealers were happy, while others were sad because they spent their whole life selling cars and building their businesses. Those people built their businesses and they wanted to pass them along to their children. Now it's never going to happen. I don't think banks are going to give these people money to go independent. Whatever happened to loyalty in this country.

 

This actually was going to happen anyway, but I do believe after doing business for 30 some odd years (in some cases) these business people deserve some sort of compensation.

 

When I bought a Lexus, I had a choice of two dealers. They are 60 miles apart and I live between them. Terribly inconvenient. When I asked the dealer why they were so spread out, he said that Lexus requires them to not be near one another.

 

On the other hand, within 10 miles of me are 5 GM dealers that I can think of. GM has something like triple the number of dealerships that Toyota has. Which company is doing better? And how is that Wall Street's fault? Show your work.

 

"Deserve some sort of compensation." So you're in the camp who believes that every time a bell rings, a car dealership should get some money? Do you have ANY understanding that business in this country is based on risk? When things go well, businesses make money. When things go poorly, businesses suffer. That's how things work. There's no bailout fairy for most people. No Elves making magic cars to save American auto. Business is supposed to be, by definition, risky. There's no "deserve" or any of that kumbaya bull sh-- unless the parties to a transaction agree to be nice (which often happens but is not required). I'm guessing you're an academic. A government worker. A student. Or unemployed. If you're none of these, you're just clueless.

[RLflutie7]

Translation: No, I can not explain how the market meltdown over the past 3 months is responsible for the decades long deterioration of US automakers. But I can throw a hissy fit with the best of them!

 

 

The American consumer wants what it is told to want. But anyway, please explain how Wall Street made consumers buy SUVs? I guess it was JP Morgan and Goldman that were spending billions running TV ads challenging the manhood of guys who didn't buy a Ford Gigantica.

 

 

Yeah, because no one could ever have foreseen the possibility that oil prices might rise. After all, history teaches us that oil prices have NEVER fluctuated and it has NEVER been in the best interests of consumers or automakers to make fuel efficient cars. Plus, automakers have no reason or responsibility to plan for the impact of higher oil prices, and have no need to build any contingency plans for reacting to such changes in the market or economy. Brilliant.

 

And finally, since your argument is centered on the impact of rising gas prices on the automakers, maybe you'd care to explain why GM was losing BILLIONS of dollars BEFORE the run up of gas prices?

 

 

Right, and the automakers will go right back to building huge gas guzzlers to grab the short term profits, and then when oil prices rise again and they are out of money, dopes like you will still blather about Wall Street and fail to understand that these people don't know how to run a business.

 

 

 

Oh yeah, there's always that 'inconvenient truth' that certain people here continue to ignore.

 

 

You are the dumbest person on this message board.

 

THE AMERICAN CONSUMER HATES SMALL CARS. THE AMERICAN CONSUMER WILL NEVER WANT TO DRIVE A 4-banger (4 Cyl car). The American consumer likes big cars and truck with big engines. The American consumer likes V8 engines and they hate 4 cyl. engines. Why do you think Toyota and Honda don't have small cars in their lineup any longer? They came to the USA with just 4-bangers.

 

Wall Street did not make American consumers buy SUVs. I never said that. I said:

 

Wall Street created an oil price bubble through deception and lies (China using tons of oil - that was a lie) and caused a crash in demand of SUVs.

 

Decades long slide for the big 3: We must be getting our information from a different source. The Big 3 were booking record profits not long ago (based on big SUVs and Trucks). Volume fell, you got me there. But profits were way up.

 

It's impossible for any automaker to respond that quickly. Do you want them to build small gas savers and let them rot on the car lots for years just so they can be ready for what "might" happen? Get a clue! No business would operate that way. And they can't operate that way and they won't operate that way.

 

And you are right. They are going to go back to selling gas guzzlers. I don't have an answer for that.

 

I said in another post that the Big 3 should make stripped down cars and force the American public to buy them and no more 5 year loans. But I know that's not going to work. In an ideal world it would work. But that's not how big fat Americans want it.

[John Adams]

You are the dumbest person on this message board.

 

THE AMERICAN CONSUMER HATES SMALL CARS. THE AMERICAN CONSUMER WILL NEVER WANT TO DRIVE A 4-banger (4 Cyl car). The American consumer likes big cars and truck with big engines. The American consumer likes V8 engines and they hate 4 cyl. engines. Why do you think Toyota and Honda don't have small cars in their lineup any longer? They came to the USA with just 4-bangers.

...

 

I said in another post that the Big 3 should make stripped down cars and force the American public to buy them and no more 5 year loans. But I know that's not going to work. In an ideal world it would work. But that's not how big fat Americans want it.

 

Your post boils down to this: "American carmakers made bad decisions and are now paying the price." And your solution for a horrible business decision is to make me bail them out?

 

And you have the never to say he's the dumbest person on this message board?

[RLflutie7]

When I bought a Lexus, I had a choice of two dealers. They are 60 miles apart and I live between them. Terribly inconvenient. When I asked the dealer why they were so spread out, he said that Lexus requires them to not be near one another.

 

On the other hand, within 10 miles of me are 5 GM dealers that I can think of. GM has something like triple the number of dealerships that Toyota has. Which company is doing better? And how is that Wall Street's fault? Show your work.

 

"Deserve some sort of compensation." So you're in the camp who believes that every time a bell rings, a car dealership should get some money? Do you have ANY understanding that business in this country is based on risk? When things go well, businesses make money. When things go poorly, businesses suffer. That's how things work. There's no bailout fairy for most people. No Elves making magic cars to save American auto. Business is supposed to be, by definition, risky. There's no "deserve" or any of that kumbaya bull sh-- unless the parties to a transaction agree to be nice (which often happens but is not required). I'm guessing you're an academic. A government worker. A student. Or unemployed. If you're none of these, you're just clueless.

 

 

I am none of those. I just landed a new job. I was unemployed, the first time in my life.

 

I ran my own business for 10 years and I know a BS situation when I see it. I know all about risk, I've lived it.

 

I don't like what Chrysler is pulling. They have owners that have the money to put into the business. GM does not.

 

Regardless of all of that: YOU DON'T TREAT BUSINESS PARTNERS THAT WAY. IT'S NOT DONE THAT WAY REGARDLESS OF HOW BAD IT IS.

 

What's so wrong with a buyout? What's so wrong with a buyout with governement money. Wall Street gets the money.

 

You have no problem with insurance agents getting massages at a resort, but the car dealer can just can eat s--t.

 

Last I checked AIG was insolvent.

[TheMadCap]

What's so wrong with a buyout? What's so wrong with a buyout with governement money. Wall Street gets the money.

 

You have no problem with insurance agents getting massages at a resort, but the car dealer can just can eat s--t.

 

Last I checked AIG was insolvent.

 

 

Where does the government get the money from?

How does Wall Street getting money have anything to do with auto industry?

 

Sounds like your argument is a classic, "well that guy got something, I should too"...

[John Adams]

I am none of those. I just landed a new job. I was unemployed, the first time in my life.

 

I ran my own business for 10 years and I know a BS situation when I see it. I know all about risk, I've lived it.

 

I don't like what Chrysler is pulling. They have owners that have the money to put into the business. GM does not.

 

Regardless of all of that: YOU DON'T TREAT BUSINESS PARTNERS THAT WAY. IT'S NOT DONE THAT WAY REGARDLESS OF HOW BAD IT IS.

 

What's so wrong with a buyout? What's so wrong with a buyout with governement money. Wall Street gets the money.

 

You have no problem with insurance agents getting massages at a resort, but the car dealer can just can eat s--t.

 

Last I checked AIG was insolvent.

 

You obviously do not understand the company that owns Chrysler. Just because it has access to a ton of money doesn't mean it should pour it into Chrysler. They are in business to make money. Why should they dump cash into Chrysler, which is a hugely risky investment, when they have other safer investments? Would you? Of course not. Again, your lack of understanding is baffling.

 

When it comes time to cut back, you cut back. It sucks for long-time business partners as you sever relationships. It sucks for employees. There's no easy way to do it. You just do it. Unless you live in your fairytopia where some gilded-greenbacked angel bails you out.

 

Car dealers can eat sh-- because having too many is part of the problem. The solution is not forcing me to fund them. The dealers took the risk when they went into business with GM and Chrysler that some day, GM and Chrysler might struggle. Now that risk is home to roost.

[RLflutie7]

Translation: No, I can not explain how the market meltdown over the past 3 months is responsible for the decades long deterioration of US automakers. But I can throw a hissy fit with the best of them!

 

 

The American consumer wants what it is told to want. But anyway, please explain how Wall Street made consumers buy SUVs? I guess it was JP Morgan and Goldman that were spending billions running TV ads challenging the manhood of guys who didn't buy a Ford Gigantica.

 

 

Yeah, because no one could ever have foreseen the possibility that oil prices might rise. After all, history teaches us that oil prices have NEVER fluctuated and it has NEVER been in the best interests of consumers or automakers to make fuel efficient cars. Plus, automakers have no reason or responsibility to plan for the impact of higher oil prices, and have no need to build any contingency plans for reacting to such changes in the market or economy. Brilliant.

 

And finally, since your argument is centered on the impact of rising gas prices on the automakers, maybe you'd care to explain why GM was losing BILLIONS of dollars BEFORE the run up of gas prices?

 

 

Right, and the automakers will go right back to building huge gas guzzlers to grab the short term profits, and then when oil prices rise again and they are out of money, dopes like you will still blather about Wall Street and fail to understand that these people don't know how to run a business.

 

 

 

Oh yeah, there's always that 'inconvenient truth' that certain people here continue to ignore.

 

 

I forgot> Gas prices have killed Toyota as well. Toyota sales dropped. I think I read 28% or 35%.

[RLflutie7]

Your post boils down to this: "American carmakers made bad decisions and are now paying the price." And your solution for a horrible business decision is to make me bail them out?

 

And you have the never to say he's the dumbest person on this message board?

 

 

You missed my point> and now you are the dumbest person on this message board.

 

I SAID THEY DID NOT MAKE BAD DECISIONS. GM made products that FAT AZZ Americans wanted. Market forces changed overnight. It's impossible to correct the situation overnight.

 

They deserve a bailout.

 

Former GM CEO Roger Smith said it best: "Americans don't like small cars" Vintage 1979. And . . . he was right.

[RLflutie7]

Where does the government get the money from?

How does Wall Street getting money have anything to do with auto industry?

 

Sounds like your argument is a classic, "well that guy got something, I should too"...

 

 

It's not a good idea for the US gov't to let the car makers go. I think you need to follow the news a little better. That's what the president said.

[TheMadCap]

You missed my point> and now you are the dumbest person on this message board.

 

I SAID THEY DID NOT MAKE BAD DECISIONS. GM made products that FAT AZZ Americans wanted. Market forces changed overnight. It's impossible to correct the situation overnight.

 

They deserve a bailout.

 

Former GM CEO Roger Smith said it best: "Americans don't like small cars" Vintage 1979. And . . . he was right.

 

 

wow. Just....WOW.

 

This guy is putting us on, there is no way he believes this...

[pBills]

Where does the government get the money from?

How does Wall Street getting money have anything to do with auto industry?

 

Sounds like your argument is a classic, "well that guy got something, I should too"...

 

 

 

Well when the favorite term used in the news is "Bailout" people should look at every company that received money. I am not to sure, but are the financial companies expected to pay their money received back? I guess that's the difference between wall street and the auto industry. Well, that and there was no time frame given to wall street either.

[VABills]

So, the union bosses don't like the "bailout". They said they'll change it in 3 weeks when their boy gets into office. WTF.

[RLflutie7]

You obviously do not understand the company that owns Chrysler. Just because it has access to a ton of money doesn't mean it should pour it into Chrysler. They are in business to make money. Why should they dump cash into Chrysler, which is a hugely risky investment, when they have other safer investments? Would you? Of course not. Again, your lack of understanding is baffling.

 

When it comes time to cut back, you cut back. It sucks for long-time business partners as you sever relationships. It sucks for employees. There's no easy way to do it. You just do it. Unless you live in your fairytopia where some gilded-greenbacked angel bails you out.

 

Car dealers can eat sh-- because having too many is part of the problem. The solution is not forcing me to fund them. The dealers took the risk when they went into business with GM and Chrysler that some day, GM and Chrysler might struggle. Now that risk is home to roost.

 

 

 

Another stupid post:

Why should they dump cash into Chrysler, which is a hugely risky investment?

 

Because that's what owning and running a business is all about. What the hell do you think running a business is about, man? It's not going to always be positive. You have to ride out the bad times to get to the good times.

 

Would I dump money into Chrysler>>>>> Yes!! If I have money and I want to keep my business going. I'm willing to show the gov't good faith by doing so . . . until I can sell it or merge with GM.

 

BTW Ford said they don't need the money. There's a big difference in what Ford is doing compared to what Chrysler is doing. Chrysler is acting like a weasel plan and simple.

 

And that's why you don't want Private Equity firms running things. They bought Chrysler for a bargain basement price. They knew about the UAW when they did and now they're acting like weasels.

[John Adams]

You missed my point> and now you are the dumbest person on this message board.

 

I SAID THEY DID NOT MAKE BAD DECISIONS. GM made products that FAT AZZ Americans wanted. Market forces changed overnight. It's impossible to correct the situation overnight.

 

They deserve a bailout.

 

Former GM CEO Roger Smith said it best: "Americans don't like small cars" Vintage 1979. And . . . he was right.

 

Please tell me you're a troll.

 

So now you're telling me that whenever the American consumer changes his mind, someone should get a bailout? That's rich brother.

 

Somehow Toyota--though struggling--is not about to collapse. And yet they make mostly smaller cars. How could this be? Could it be that they were better managed? Had better insight? Had less dealers? Invested in fuel efficient cars while GM was putting out Suburbans?

 

And for this failure of foresight, you argue--not just that Am auto needs rescue for the economy's sake--but that they "deserve" a bailout. As if failure somehow MERITS reward. Tell us you're Hogboy, please.

[pBills]

So, the union bosses don't like the "bailout". They said they'll change it in 3 weeks when their boy gets into office. WTF.

 

 

Of course not Bush put a lot of the bail out on the workers... in a nutshell blaming them.