General Motors

[dnno1]

And why do you think that? That would be 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008.....and yes I voted in all of them....

BUT, in 2004 election, I did not vote for president (I thought they were both idiots) but I did vote.

So i was right. You didn't vote in all of the presidential elections.

 

[XpunkRocker]

So i was right. You didn't vote in all of the presidential elections.

yes, but you also mis read what kel wrote. kel didn't say presidential elections. Kel said elections in general. so....... basically kell is right too from the origional post.

 

[Kelly]

So i was right. You didn't vote in all of the presidential elections.

And? Oh please, you just didn't think I was old enough to have voted in the last 5.....

My point still stands, your partisan comment about me was silly....


I'm truly an independent and my voting record shows it..and I'm an equal opportunity slamming of the candidates.....etc around here...........I have said it many times, I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal.........I do not like money being given out with little to no oversight, and if you read.. ANYTHING other than that in my posts, well then you are not reading my posts.................

unfortunately, it doesn't matter these days who you vote for.......it seems that the Republicans have left their fiscal conservatism behind....and Pelosi has put a trance on the entire house.

 

[Visionary]

well, anyone that wants an entire nation to crash and burn definantly has issues. glad to say i am not one of those people

but if you like seeing an entire nation crash and burn, then that is your perogative

That's just it, the entire nation won't crash and burn. The world has functioned without General Motors, it can do it again. The place is corrupt from the inside out, it need not be saved, it needs to be destroyed. Like Cancer.

 

[XpunkRocker]

And? Oh please, you just didn't think I was old enough to have voted in the last 5.....

My point still stands, your partisan comment about me was silly....


I'm truly an independent and my voting record shows it..and I'm an equal opportunity slamming of the candidates.....etc around here...........I have said it many times, I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal.........I do not like money being given out with little to no oversight, and if you read.. ANYTHING other than that in my postsng, well then you are not reading my posts.................

unfortunately, it doesn't matter these days who you vote for.......it seems that they Republicans have left their fiscal conservatism behind....and Pelosi has put a trance on the entire house.

this is one of the best and most honest posts i have seen in this forum. and to be honest, i also thought that you would turn out to be too young to vote 5 times for president (i only voted twice for pres) but that had nothing to do with your point.

And i too am fiscally conservative and socially liberal, so i know the dilemma that neither of these parties work well for me. Especially since both parties spend way too much money now. but to me, both parties are becoming very much the same. they just give it a different name. obama and mccain had almost identical promises by the time election came on gay rights, iraq, afgahn, the economy, and much more. the only thing they had different plans on were abortion and healthcare, which i don't agree with any of them on. i take the local elections more seriously. local officials are more crucial at job growth and most other issues.

That's just it, the entire nation won't crash and burn. The world has functioned without General Motors, it can do it again. The place is corrupt from the inside out, it need not be saved, it needs to be destroyed. Like Cancer.

but you said the "american people deserve it." why do the american people deserve to lose 250,000 jobs? i can see how the company deserves to go away, but the "american people?" why does the american people deserve to lose one of its backbone economic forces?

the auto industry isn't as corrupt as most big companies. their main problem is that they cannot compete, and the economy is bad. if you cant compete in a bad economy, you lose. it is that simple. it is basic darwinism. no coruption

 

[dnno1]

world wide:
http://oica.net/wp-content/uploads/world-ranking-2007.pdf

as you can see, toyota made/sold the most cars. even more than GM. and their cars sell for more and are cheaper to make. so toyota makes way more profits than GM. not to mention Ford as well. the whole industry is in trouble, yet gm, ford, and chrysler are the only ones that need help? the other companies are doing fine.... they are hitting a down year as well.

That is why I said not in North America, and this market is where everybody is getting hurt. If it weren't for the tarrifs that some of these foriegn countries, like Japan and China, have on their imports, the Big 3 would be dominating there as well (why else would they have done that if not?). Now that China has joined the WTO these restrictions are no longer a hinderance in South East Aisa. Unfortunately becasue of the economy and current financial crisis, it is near impossible for them to establish plants in countries like China and Russia. This is why they need the bridge loans. Once the financial markets stablize sometime next year, they will be able to do this.

it wouldn't imply that.... this is going to be a lot more money than what chrysler got 25 years ago. if you haven't noticed, the economy is much different than it was back in the day...

You know, I like to go to the "]Mineapolis Federal Reserve Bank to find out what a dollar is worth (corrected for inflation). Back in 1979, Chrysler was awarded $1.5 billion in loans to keep them afloat. That same $1.5 billion in 1979 is worth $4.5 billion today. That would mean that the three automakers would get about $13.5 billion for it to be equivalent. It seems that right now both Congress and the White House are talking about $15 billion, so we are in the ballpark (although I still think they should be guaranteed more in private loans afterwards).

 

[Kelly]

I'll agree, our trade policy SUCKS.................sorry can't come up with a better word.

 

[dnno1]

Point taken.

 

[XpunkRocker]

That is why I said not in North America, and this market is where everybody is getting hurt. If it weren't for the tarrifs that some of these foriegn countries, like Japan and China, have on their imports, the Big 3 would be dominating there as well (why else would they have don that if not?). Now that China has joined the WTO these restrictions are no longer a hinderance in South East Aisa. Unfortunately becasue of the economy and current financial crisis, it is near impossible for them to establish plants in countries like China and Russia. This is why they need the bridge loans. Once the financial markets stablize sometime next year, they will be able to do this.

a lot of foriegn markets don't let our cars get imported because our cars don't meet the minimal standard. we can't even sell our cars in china, because they are not good enough. as far as tarrifs go, which ones are you talking about that effect the auto industry?

You know, I like to go to the "]Mineapolis Federal Reserve Bank to find out what a dollar is worth (corrected for inflation). Back in 1979, Chrysler was awarded $1.5 billion in loans to keep them afloat. That same $1.5 billion in 1979 is worth $4.5 billion today. That would mean that the three automakers would get about $14.5 billion for it to be equivalent. It seems that right now both Congress and the White House are talking about $15 billion right now so we are in the ballpark (although I still think they should be guaranteed more in private loans afterwards).

there are other factors to figure in. GM, i think, is already 30 billion in debt. rule of thumb when loaning money: don't ever loan a lot of money to someone who owes a lot of money. everything is different today, inflation is just one of them. interest, business, banks, everything is handled differently today.

 

[Kelly]

this is one of the best and most honest posts i have seen in this forum. and to be honest, i also thought that you would turn out to be too young to vote 5 times for president (i only voted twice for pres) but that had nothing to do with your point.

And i too am fiscally conservative and socially liberal, so i know the dilemma that neither of these parties work well for me. Especially since both parties spend way too much money now. but to me, both parties are becoming very much the same. they just give it a different name. obama and mccain had almost identical promises by the time election came on gay rights, iraq, afgahn, the economy, and much more. the only thing they had different plans on were abortion and healthcare, which i don't agree with any of them on. i take the local elections more seriously. local officials are more crucial at job growth and most other issues.

Well, I don't necessarily see them as becoming the same........I see the far left and far right making all the decisions........even though we are very much a centrist nation. MY HOPE, and I actually see it in his choices so far...that Obama is doing what many do, and that is.......campaigned in black and white, but will govern in gray. I think he understands the need to receive input from both sides, BUT listen to his citizens as well. I certainly hope so, and right now I'm pretty positive.

 

[Paradoxium]

I'll agree, our trade policy SUCKS.................sorry can't come up with a better word.

hahahaha if you think it sucks wait till China makes good on devaluing their currency by 30%

You can thank Hanky Panky for pissing them off

 

[Kelly]

hahahaha if you think it sucks wait till China makes good on devaluing their currency by 30%

You can thank Hanky Panky for pissing them off

Ya know, I try and teach the concept of interdependence in my classroom using our trade policy......and I almost puke every time.

 

[Kelly]

It is ****ing amazing to me.............

That Bank of America....A BANK THAT GOT A LOAN FROM ME.....................and people in businesses around our country....and they are cutting off loans to these business so that they can pay their workers.

The government is full of crap..............because the American people don't own ****....all we are doing is keeping the banks going, the money is going NO WHERE ELSE....

I am taking a stand right here.....ANY...................ANY Texas represenative who votes for ANY OTHER BAILOUT will #1. not get my vote, and #2 I will build a coalition of teachers in Houston to campaign against them in the next election. My tax money is to be spent on things that make this country better and stronger, not this crap.



MAN, I really need to stop watching the news.............

 

[XpunkRocker]

Well, I don't necessarily see them as becoming the same........I see the far left and far right making all the decisions........even though we are very much a centrist nation. MY HOPE, and I actually see it in his choices so far...that Obama is doing what many do, and that is.......campaigned in black and white, but will govern in gray. I think he understands the need to receive input from both sides, BUT listen to his citizens as well. I certainly hope so, and right now I'm pretty positive.

i can see that. The radicals on both sides make most of the rules, because the people in the middle never stand up. the people in the middle don't have the passion the radicals do, because the people in the middle use their brains and not their feelings.

When i say they are becoming the same, it is like this. The bush tax cuts are pretty much booed by the democrats. but from the looks of it, obama and the democrat congress are going to keep them pretty much the same. it is little things like that. there are a lot of them. they seem to have a....mutual understanding. i personally think that the more the radicals continue to be vocal, the more chances of someone starting a new party of rational people. because i cant see the moderates sticking around with the radicals forever.

btw, i am not a moderate. i have.... quite a different view on politics.

 

[Paradoxium]

It is ****ing amazing to me.............

That Bank of America....A BANK THAT GOT A LOAN FROM ME.....................and people in businesses around our country....and they are cutting off loans to these business so that they can pay their workers.

The government is full of crap..............because the American people don't own ****....all we are doing is keeping the banks going, the money is going NO WHERE ELSE....

I am taking a stand right here.....ANY...................ANY Texas represenative who votes for ANY OTHER BAILOUT will #1. not get my vote, and #2 I will build a coalition of teachers in Houston to campaign against them in the next election. My tax money is to be spent on things that make this country better and stronger, not this crap.



MAN, I really need to stop watching the news.............

They are not lending because of a credit shortage, we are in the deflation phase as of right now (or heading towards it), then after this is over, the next roller coaster ride is hyperinflation. I have no idea how long this deflationary period will last, but the road will lead to inflation.

And if you think this is bad - a while back, I pointed out the Baltic index which is one of the purest index (no speculators) in terms of trade. The link will explain everything...

http://greenlightadvisor.com/glablog/2008/12/05/baltic-dry-index-a-valuable-indicator/

People are delusional if they think the economy will stabilize by next year. We haven't even hit the "bad" part yet. You can thank the Keynesians who thought they get away with doing a full blown "service" economy.

 

[XpunkRocker]

i think it will take about 3-5 years for the recession to stop. once it stops, it will slowly grow back.

at least that is what is expected.

 

[dnno1]

a lot of foriegn markets don't let our cars get imported because our cars don't meet the minimal standard. we can't even sell our cars in china, because they are not good enough. as far as tarrifs go, which ones are you talking about that effect the auto industry?..

I would like to know where that is. There isn't a standard in existence that can not be designed for, and I find it hard to believe that countries like China, Russia, and India would have better standards than those in the United States. The reason why we have had trouble selling cars in China is because the Chinese government had been restricting imports of finished products in lieu of investing in the development of China's own industrial complex. This is not so much the case now that they have been a part of the WTO.

...there are other factors to figure in. GM, i think, is already 30 billion in debt. rule of thumb when loaning money: don't ever loan a lot of money to someone who owes a lot of money. everything is different today, inflation is just one of them. interest, business, banks, everything is handled differently today.

You don't think Chrysler was in debt when the got their bailout in 1979? They were on the verge of bankruptcy, meaning the were more than likely not able to get conventional loans from private banks. That is why the government had to guarantee them loans. This is the same case now some 30 years later.

 

[dnno1]

And? Oh please, you just didn't think I was old enough to have voted in the last 5.....

No. I just had a feeling that it was a trick question and my instincts just told me to give that answer.

My point still stands, your partisan comment about me was silly....

I don't think you ever said what your point was (you just asked a question), and my partisan comment is not silly. This whole conservative mentality that there is a free maket and that the failure of an entire industry is just the free market working is what is really silly. There is no such thing as a free market and this whole ideology is what got us into the Great Depression of the 1930's. If you would notice this goverment made some safeguards so that that wouldn't happen again and a number of conservatives are trying to destroy that. If people like you keep it up we will be doomed to repeat it.

I'm truly an independent and my voting record shows it..and I'm an equal opportunity slamming of the candidates.....etc around here...........I have said it many times, I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal.........I do not like money being given out with little to no oversight, and if you read.. ANYTHING other than that in my posts, well then you are not reading my posts.................

unfortunately, it doesn't matter these days who you vote for.......it seems that the Republicans have left their fiscal conservatism behind....and Pelosi has put a trance on the entire house.

When I hear people say that that just means that they are ashamed to say that they are conservatives. I am quite sure that more times than none you have voted that way and hence that is your true alignment (conservative). Saying you are an independan is just a cop out and just BS.

 

[XpunkRocker]

I would like to know where that is. There isn't a standard in existence that can not be designed for, and I find it hard to believe that countries like China, Russia, and India would have better standards than those in the United States. The reason why we have had trouble selling cars in China is because the Chinese government had been restricting imports of finished products in lieu of investing in the development of China's own industrial complex. This is not so much the case now that they have been a part of the WTO. .

Ahhhhh... so you don't know that american cars cannot be sold in china because they don't meet the minimum standard. well, let me teach you then. here is a good article that explains the details:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2004-10-08-china-fuel-efficiency_x.htm

now, here are some quotes from the article that should stick out in your mind.

Though not particularly stringent, the new requirements are stricter than U.S. standards, which haven't been updated for more than 20 years, Yang noted.

Models approved by the Chinese government before July 2005 will have a one-year grace period for both phases.

The new standards could oblige foreign automakers to boost their already ambitious investment plans for China because they may have to modify some vehicles due to be introduced here.

I only speak the truth on this.

You don't think Chrysler was in debt when the got their bailout in 1979? They were on the verge of bankruptcy, meaning the were more than likely not able to get conventional loans from private banks. That is why the government had to guarantee them loans. This is the same case now some 30 years later.

how much "in debt" were they at the time? it is not the same. Their problems right now is that the economy is bad and they are getting beat by competition. 30 years ago, they had no foreign competition and the economy wasnt as bad as it is now. I don't see them making a profit any time soon to pay off that much money.

Not to mention.... if you think tarrifs are really bad, it works both ways. The US could put a tarriff on foriegn cars brought here, that way it will help the american auto companies. that is what we did with harley davison. there motorcyles were crap, and until we put tarrifs on jappanese bikes, harley didn't make enough money to do research to build better bikes. and that is how harley davidson became successful. we don't usually tarrif things now, because if we raise our tarrifs, they raise theirs. so usually, not always, it is pretty fair

When I hear people say that that just means that they are ashamed to say that they are conservatives. I am quite sure that more times than none you have voted that way and hence that is your true alignment (conservative). Saying you are an independan is just a cop out and just BS.

you can be conservative and independent at the same time. Coservative is a political belief, independent is a party affiliation. What kel is saying is that he/she is a conservative, but not alligned with either of the two major parties. you can be a conservative, and be a republican. or you can be a conservative and be a democrat. party alignments and political beliefs are two different things

 

[Kelly]

No. I just had a feeling that it was a trick question and my instincts just told me to give that answer.



I don't think you ever said what your point was (you just asked a question), and my partisan comment is not silly. This whole conservative mentality that there is a free maket and that the failure of an entire industry is just the free market working is what is really silly. There is no such thing as a free market and this whole ideology is what got us into the Great Depression of the 1930's. If you would notice this goverment made some safeguards so that that wouldn't happen again and a number of conservatives are trying to destroy that. If people like you keep it up we will be doomed to repeat it.




When I hear people say that that just means that they are ashamed to say that they are conservatives. I am quite sure that more times than none you have voted that way and hence that is your true alignment (conservative). Saying you are an independan is just a cop out and just BS.

Well with your replies to my post, I can see that in your case......there won't be too much discussion between us. I'm not ashamed of anything, I am proud of being an independent. I don't look at the (D)or(R) I look at the person, and if I believe they have the same philosophy of government that I have, then they will get my vote.

It is very obvious that you do not read posts throughly, therefore it will be a debate taken into a black hole somewhere to discuss anything with you. BUT, enjoy your time here, there is some really good reading to be had.

 

[Corey]

When I hear people say that that just means that they are ashamed to say that they are conservatives. I am quite sure that more times than none you have voted that way and hence that is your true alignment (conservative). Saying you are an independan is just a cop out and just BS.

So, wait. You're saying that if someone claims to be independant, they're lying, because the only logical event is for someone to conveniently totally line up within some two sets of man-made "ism" extremes--instead of being somewhere in the middle/all over the place?


That makes total sense.


I think too often people get so carried away with partison politics that they can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[dnno1]

So, wait. You're saying that if someone claims to be independant, they're lying, because the only logical event is for someone to conveniently totally line up within some two sets of man-made "ism" extremes--instead of being somewhere in the middle/all over the place?

Yes.

 

[XpunkRocker]

Yes.

that sounds like a sad world.

 

[Kelly]

you can be conservative and independent at the same time. Coservative is a political belief, independent is a party affiliation. What kel is saying is that he/she is a conservative, but not alligned with either of the two major parties. you can be a conservative, and be a republican. or you can be a conservative and be a democrat. party alignments and political beliefs are two different things

I said I am a "fiscal conservative" BUT, I am "socially liberal" so actually I'm closer to a Libertarian than I am a Republican.


I find it hysterical that dnno1 called me partisan....after his last post. wow....

 

[dnno1]

Ahhhhh... so you don't know that american cars cannot be sold in china because they don't meet the minimum standard. well, let me teach you then. here is a good article that explains the details:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2004-10-08-china-fuel-efficiency_x.htm

now, here are some quotes from the article that should stick out in your mind.

Though not particularly stringent, the new requirements are stricter than U.S. standards, which haven't been updated for more than 20 years, Yang noted.

Models approved by the Chinese government before July 2005 will have a one-year grace period for both phases.

The new standards could oblige foreign automakers to boost their already ambitious investment plans for China because they may have to modify some vehicles due to be introduced here.

I only speak the truth on this.

Oh really? Where does the article say that the U.S. automakers could not meet their standards? This is what I read:

While most smaller vehicles can meet the new standards' first phase with few changes if any, rules for heavier vehicles may require automakers to invest in research and development, auto analysts say.

The fact of the matter is according to a Congressional Research Service report, GM and Ford was able to sell over 1 million cars in China over the last two years (see page 9). You can't say that they don't let them sell cars because of the standards because they are selling cars there. In fact, GM wants to invest $5 billion in China over the next five years becasue they want to expand their production facilities there. Next time try and speak the truth with more up to date info.

how much "in debt" were they at the time? it is not the same. Their problems right now is that the economy is bad and they are getting beat by competition. 30 years ago, they had no foreign competition and the economy wasnt as bad as it is now. I don't see them making a profit any time soon to pay off that much money.

I don't have access to their 1979 or 1980 annual reports, but I would be safe to assume that they were at least a $1 billion in debt (maybe more). That is why they got the loan guarantees.

Not to mention.... if you think tarrifs are really bad, it works both ways. The US could put a tarriff on foriegn cars brought here, that way it will help the american auto companies. that is what we did with harley davison. there motorcyles were crap, and until we put tarrifs on jappanese bikes, harley didn't make enough money to do research to build better bikes. and that is how harley davidson became successful. we don't usually tarrif things now, because if we raise our tarrifs, they raise theirs. so usually, not always, it is pretty fair.

They could but that is not going to help the Big 3 right now. What they need is cash to keep their businesses going.

you can be conservative and independent at the same time. Coservative is a political belief, independent is a party affiliation. What kel is saying is that he/she is a conservative, but not alligned with either of the two major parties. you can be a conservative, and be a republican. or you can be a conservative and be a democrat. party alignments and political beliefs are two different things

No your voting record will tell where you stand.