Are there still any hopeless romantics who support the bailout?

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These, 'I have the economic issues figured out' threads look to me like attempts to manage fear, much like when we replay and replay some traumatic event in our head, compulsively. I sense a need to be in control and the horrible fear that our fate is out of our hands. The beauty of say, Islam, is the notion that all that happens is the will of God and that a good man has nothing to fear, in this life, or the next. The wind that blows, the sun that warms my skin, the birds that land in my yard are all free and don't care about the economy and I am rich beyond measure.

If that's all you need to be rich, then why do you support welfare? All those poor people should just be happy with their birds and sun.

I don't support welfare. I support a social structure that eliminates the notion of jobs and provides for all who provide for others, a system that rewards social capital. I believe the only real purpose in life is to live, and to live is to develop your human potential.

Welfare destroys personal development. Work destroys the human spirit. That's why people who have to work and are taxed hate everyone.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: wwswimming
i don't think that you have to be a hopeless romantic to support the bailout.

just aware of the alternatives, that is, of what will happen if the government does
not try to halt the slowing down of the economy.

for example, this farm town in the California Central Valley (you know, the people
who grew much of our food).

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11803992

they are having very hard times because of the drought.

in a sane society, we would build aqueducts, so that regions that have too much
water can divert it to regions that need water to grow food.

so, yes, i support the bail-out, IF it is used to start infrastructure projects that
we NEED. also, as long as we don't bail out wealthy investors who invested
stupidly.

Question #1 - are we having a smart bail-out or a stupid bail-out ?

( a little of each, more of the latter - i support smart bail-outs. )

Question #2 - what year do you want Great Depression 2 to begin, 2009
(definitely) or 2010 (maybe) ?

Obama's between a rock and a hard place. i had a feeling his hair was
going to turn gray awful fast.

Wait. Silicon Valley hasn't invented the hunger killing chip yet? Damn!

Seriously, Obama is confronting the fact that we've financed the growth and wars of the last three decades with a lot of IOU's to Japan, Europe, China etc.. The financial meltdown is telling the U.S. that they are now due. The question confronting Obama is how they will be paid off. I think he's a smart guy and will figure it out hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These, 'I have the economic issues figured out' threads look to me like attempts to manage fear, much like when we replay and replay some traumatic event in our head, compulsively. I sense a need to be in control and the horrible fear that our fate is out of our hands. The beauty of say, Islam, is the notion that all that happens is the will of God and that a good man has nothing to fear, in this life, or the next. The wind that blows, the sun that warms my skin, the birds that land in my yard are all free and don't care about the economy and I am rich beyond measure.

Does this differ from your constant "I have you all figured out" posts?

Most certainly. You hand me your fear and I hand you free wind sun and birds.

You sound like Guru Pitka

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These, 'I have the economic issues figured out' threads look to me like attempts to manage fear, much like when we replay and replay some traumatic event in our head, compulsively. I sense a need to be in control and the horrible fear that our fate is out of our hands. The beauty of say, Islam, is the notion that all that happens is the will of God and that a good man has nothing to fear, in this life, or the next. The wind that blows, the sun that warms my skin, the birds that land in my yard are all free and don't care about the economy and I am rich beyond measure.

These issues matter only if you think they matter. Most of this stuff is not going to kill anyone, unless you can't afford your shots. No one will contract polio because a hedge fund failed. And even if we go to zero, and have to start all over again, it can be done and will be done.

I fear nuclear war much more than financial meltdown.

-Robert

Exactly, but what you think is typically programming. Most people, because they hate themselves and have no real self worth, seek some substitute instead. That is typically whatever it is that the culture provides as a substitute, such as money. Thus we live in an upside down world where to have anything we must be worth something when in fact there is no amount of money that could ever compare to our real value.

And you should fear nuclear war. The sickness of the human psyche is powerfully seeking a cure, but will not look at the real cause of its illness, self hate. Instead it seeks to eliminate the hate we project on others by wishing them dead. This death with, of course, is for our own death since WE are the OTHER.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Red DawnIf the cost of them failing wouldn't make the cost of bailing them out look like peanuts I'd say let them fail. Unfortunately if they fail the result would be devastating on the economy.

I'm with you on this. I would love to see them go out of business, but not now... our current economy is too weak to take such hit.

Yet it is strong enough to keep pumping money into failed business models?


Holy s*it people actually think like this....

before you spout out like a 3 yr old (as always), consider the whole picture.

GM supports the operation of tons of suppliers. If GM fail, most if not all of these suppliers will be brought down as well, creating a multiplier effect. By keeping GM alive (for now), we are keeping these suppliers up as well, keeping jobs for people and pumping money into economy.

Nobody is buying cars. You think GM is going to keep production high when nobody is buying cars? When production drops so will demand for suppliers.

impossible false premise.

The effect is already in full swing. The only difference is you insist on pumping a cancer patient full of drugs to keep him alive just a bit longer so the nurses wont lose their job.

I sincerely hoped what you said is true, that the effect is already in full swing, then we are not in too bad of a shape. However, its most likely the opposite, we havn't seen nothing yet.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These, 'I have the economic issues figured out' threads look to me like attempts to manage fear, much like when we replay and replay some traumatic event in our head, compulsively. I sense a need to be in control and the horrible fear that our fate is out of our hands. The beauty of say, Islam, is the notion that all that happens is the will of God and that a good man has nothing to fear, in this life, or the next. The wind that blows, the sun that warms my skin, the birds that land in my yard are all free and don't care about the economy and I am rich beyond measure.

Does this differ from your constant "I have you all figured out" posts?

Most certainly. You hand me your fear and I hand you free wind sun and birds.

You sound like Guru Pitka

I look at you all see the love there that's sleeping
While my guitar gently weeps
I look at the floor and I see it need sweeping
Still my guitar gently weeps

I don't know why nobody told you
how to unfold you love
I don't know how someone controlled you
they bought and sold you

I look at the world and I notice it's turning
While my guitar gently weeps
With every mistake we must surely be learning
Still my guitar gently weeps

I don't know how you were diverted
you were perverted too
I don't know how you were inverted
no one alerted you

I look at you all see the love there that's sleeping
While my guitar gently weeps
I look at you all
Still my guitar gently weeps

Oh, oh, oh
oh oh oh oh oh oh oh
oh oh, oh oh, oh oh
Yeah yeah yeah yeah
yeah yeah yeah yeah

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Strk

I doubt it would be indefinite, but it won't be short either. The one thing I don't get is why AIG and the banks are given money so freely that, let's face, we will never see again. Yet GM can barely get a fraction of it with guarantees to repay the loans.

you can't have an economy at all without a money supply. the money supply is, ultimately, the government's responsibility. and the credit markets are the heart of the money supply.


the other issue is that no one on the hill really has any clue about banking, but all of them have probably experienced the crappiness of the american automobile over the last 30 years. 'why don't you build a product that doesn't suck' is an easy question to ask.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

anyone who thought that giving money to a failing business was a good idea is a moron

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Skoorb

We are now bailing out the banks, AIG, and the auto manufacturers all at the same time. The impact of all that gifting will ultimately bring down everything, or that's my fear. I hope I'm wrong.

Apparently the stock market doesn't think so.

People need to stop watching the stock market like a hawk. All of this day trading BS and spotlight focus on those numbers every hour is causing a lot of issues. Things take time. Our econ is based far too much on speculation and the stock market is just one prime example of that. It currently is not reflecting the true condition of a lot of businesses out there right now. The speculation alone is making things much worse than it actually is and that is a huge problem.

I know times are tough and people are really concerned, but I urge everyone to take it slow and think carefully before you react especially when it comes to your investments. The frantic chaos which is causing all of the rampant selling and deflation needs to come to halt.

I don't disagree, but frankly it is exciting to watch, even if every time it tanks I lose more money.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These, 'I have the economic issues figured out' threads look to me like attempts to manage fear, much like when we replay and replay some traumatic event in our head, compulsively. I sense a need to be in control and the horrible fear that our fate is out of our hands. The beauty of say, Islam, is the notion that all that happens is the will of God and that a good man has nothing to fear, in this life, or the next. The wind that blows, the sun that warms my skin, the birds that land in my yard are all free and don't care about the economy and I am rich beyond measure.

If that's all you need to be rich, then why do you support welfare? All those poor people should just be happy with their birds and sun.

I don't support welfare. I support a social structure that eliminates the notion of jobs and provides for all who provide for others, a system that rewards social capital. I believe the only real purpose in life is to live, and to live is to develop your human potential.

Welfare destroys personal development. Work destroys the human spirit. That's why people who have to work and are taxed hate everyone.

Now I know you're delusional. Work is simply a function of life.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: K1052
By what measure?

The Big 3 and their supporting companies (part manufacturers, dealers, repair shops, etc) are about 3% of the GDP. Yes, losing 3% of GDP would be bad. But it isn't devastating. It is the difference between a growing economy and a flat economy (3% growth vs 0% growth). Or the difference between a flat economy and a mild but prolonged recession. Plus, the Big 3 would likely be bought up and other companies will be making the cars soon enough and rehiring the same people (albiet at lower wages) and using the same factories (although maybe fewer factories).

Housing construction and their supporting companies (part manufacturers, realtors, home improvement stores, etc) are about 20% of the GDP. New home construction has almost ended completely. Loss of 20% of GDP is massive. That is the difference between a great economy and depression.

Oh and as another comparison: new car sales are down roughly 50% (depending on the company) while new home sales are down roughly 80%. Not only are the Big 3 small potatoes they are also not as bad off.

Worrying about car companies and ignoring housing is like worrying about a pimple when you are in an airplane that is about to crash. I'm not saying that people should ignore the big 3 problems. But don't overblow them either. At least for Chrysler, bankruptcy is the ONLY answer. Chrysler will cease to exist, but a new pheonix will rise from its ashes. The same might happen at GM.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: dullard
Plus, the Big 3 would likely be bought up and other companies will be making the cars soon enough and rehiring the same people (albiet at lower wages) and using the same factories (although maybe fewer factories).

What companies do you think are waiting in the wings to buy up the Detroit 3? It's easy to make a statement like that. It quickly dismisses the problem and makes it seem much more palatable. It's not even close to reality.

Throw out some names. I'd be interested in seeing who you think is just dying to get into the business of manufacturing cars.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: dullard
Plus, the Big 3 would likely be bought up and other companies will be making the cars soon enough and rehiring the same people (albiet at lower wages) and using the same factories (although maybe fewer factories).

What companies do you think are waiting in the wings to buy up the Detroit 3? It's easy to make a statement like that. It quickly dismisses the problem and makes it seem much more palatable. It's not even close to reality.

Throw out some names. I'd be interested in seeing who you think is just dying to get into the business of manufacturing cars.

If they can start over without unions, they are already ahead of the curve.

 

[theeedude]

Do you realize what GM bankruptcy would mean:
Government gets stuck bailing out its pension obligations and also those of suppliers who fail as result.
Government gets stuck paying unemployment for GM and supplier employees.
Other manufacturers get hit with supply disruptions and may go under or lay off workers.

So either way it's going to cost taxpayers a bundle. I think Chrysler should be allowed to fail to see what happens, then if all goes well, GM.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: boomerang
Throw out some names. I'd be interested in seeing who you think is just dying to get into the business of manufacturing cars.

There is tons of private money sitting on the sidelines. Anyone can sweep up the ashes for pennies on the dollar (or less), get the factories for virtually free, and have desperate mass of unemployed autoworkers ready and willing to work for far less than they earned under the Big 3.

Tons of cars are still being sold. Just it is less than before. Imagine a company without the burden of massive debt, massive pensions, and massive payments to union workers. That new company could make a killing, even in this reduced market.

I'm certainly not one knowledgeable enough to name good names. But I can throw out a few with the cash and the desire to be into automobiles. These may not be perfect fits, but what about Kirk Kerkorian, The Blackstone Group, Carl Icahn, etc?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Do you realize what GM bankruptcy would mean:
Government gets stuck bailing out its pension obligations and also those of suppliers who fail as result.
Government gets stuck paying unemployment for GM and supplier employees.
Other manufacturers get hit with supply disruptions and may go under or lay off workers.

So either way it's going to cost taxpayers a bundle. I think Chrysler should be allowed to fail to see what happens, then if all goes well, GM.

From the sounds coming from auditors of GM the govt will be doing that anyways. Just a matter of how much above and beyond we want to spend to keep it from happening immediately.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: senseamp
Do you realize what GM bankruptcy would mean:
Government gets stuck bailing out its pension obligations and also those of suppliers who fail as result.
Government gets stuck paying unemployment for GM and supplier employees.
Other manufacturers get hit with supply disruptions and may go under or lay off workers.

So either way it's going to cost taxpayers a bundle. I think Chrysler should be allowed to fail to see what happens, then if all goes well, GM.

From the sounds coming from auditors of GM the govt will be doing that anyways. Just a matter of how much above and beyond we want to spend to keep it from happening immediately.

Pretty much. His idea about Chrysler is not bad, but it's going to soon be out of gov's hands anyway, this economy is a house of cards and trying to be propped up on fairy tales and magic candy corn.

 

[jpeyton]

Yup, I still support the bailouts.

And I don't think it's smart to allow GM to go under. Taxpayers would be paying billions regardless in unemployment, health care, food stamps, etc., as the effects of a GM failure ripple through the supply chain.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: senseamp
So either way it's going to cost taxpayers a bundle. I think Chrysler should be allowed to fail to see what happens, then if all goes well, GM.

:thumbsup:

 

[Kwatt]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: senseamp
Do you realize what GM bankruptcy would mean:
Government gets stuck bailing out its pension obligations and also those of suppliers who fail as result.
Government gets stuck paying unemployment for GM and supplier employees.
Other manufacturers get hit with supply disruptions and may go under or lay off workers.

So either way it's going to cost taxpayers a bundle. I think Chrysler should be allowed to fail to see what happens, then if all goes well, GM.

From the sounds coming from auditors of GM the govt will be doing that anyways. Just a matter of how much above and beyond we want to spend to keep it from happening immediately.

Pretty much. His idea about Chrysler is not bad, but it's going to soon be out of gov's hands anyway, this economy is a house of cards and trying to be propped up on fairy tales and magic candy corn.

We'll all be drinking free Bubble Up and eating Rainbow Stew.:laugh:

Just ask CNBC

.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: K1052
By what measure?

The Big 3 and their supporting companies (part manufacturers, dealers, repair shops, etc) are about 3% of the GDP. Yes, losing 3% of GDP would be bad. But it isn't devastating. It is the difference between a growing economy and a flat economy (3% growth vs 0% growth). Or the difference between a flat economy and a mild but prolonged recession. Plus, the Big 3 would likely be bought up and other companies will be making the cars soon enough and rehiring the same people (albiet at lower wages) and using the same factories (although maybe fewer factories).

Housing construction and their supporting companies (part manufacturers, realtors, home improvement stores, etc) are about 20% of the GDP. New home construction has almost ended completely. Loss of 20% of GDP is massive. That is the difference between a great economy and depression.

Oh and as another comparison: new car sales are down roughly 50% (depending on the company) while new home sales are down roughly 80%. Not only are the Big 3 small potatoes they are also not as bad off.

Worrying about car companies and ignoring housing is like worrying about a pimple when you are in an airplane that is about to crash. I'm not saying that people should ignore the big 3 problems. But don't overblow them either. At least for Chrysler, bankruptcy is the ONLY answer. Chrysler will cease to exist, but a new pheonix will rise from its ashes. The same might happen at GM.

I'd consider the nearly instantaneous loss of about a million jobs just at the Big 3 and their suppliers to be a tiny hiccup given our current state. Then there is the consequent load on our unemployment rolls, a total loss of shareholder equity, and probably a couple hundred billion worth of bonds defaulting within days. That's just the immediate effects.

Car sales are way down and still falling. I don't think many people are going to be lining up to buy the defunct production lines when most of the part suppliers have gone tits up. To revive even one company you've have to resuscitate the entire supply chain too at enormous expense.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These, 'I have the economic issues figured out' threads look to me like attempts to manage fear, much like when we replay and replay some traumatic event in our head, compulsively. I sense a need to be in control and the horrible fear that our fate is out of our hands. The beauty of say, Islam, is the notion that all that happens is the will of God and that a good man has nothing to fear, in this life, or the next. The wind that blows, the sun that warms my skin, the birds that land in my yard are all free and don't care about the economy and I am rich beyond measure.

A thoroughly insane duo is formed.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: K1052
I'd consider the nearly instantaneous loss of about a million jobs just at the Big 3 and their suppliers to be a tiny hiccup given our current state. Then there is the consequent load on our unemployment rolls, a total loss of shareholder equity, and probably a couple hundred billion worth of bonds defaulting within days. That's just the immediate effects.

Car sales are way down and still falling. I don't think many people are going to be lining up to buy the defunct production lines when most of the part suppliers have gone tits up. To revive even one company you've have to resuscitate the entire supply chain too at enormous expense.

There is really no pretty picture here. I defy anybody to paint a picture that has any semblance of reality in which by, say, the end of this year things are looking up for GM and its employees without it costing the government continual prop-up billions to keep the ruse going. Either it gets continual billions per month to keep its lights on (quite literally) or it goes and unemployment quickly shoots past 10%.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: K1052
I'd consider the nearly instantaneous loss of about a million jobs just at the Big 3 and their suppliers to be a tiny hiccup given our current state. Then there is the consequent load on our unemployment rolls, a total loss of shareholder equity, and probably a couple hundred billion worth of bonds defaulting within days. That's just the immediate effects.

Car sales are way down and still falling. I don't think many people are going to be lining up to buy the defunct production lines when most of the part suppliers have gone tits up. To revive even one company you've have to resuscitate the entire supply chain too at enormous expense.

There is really no pretty picture here. I defy anybody to paint a picture that has any semblance of reality in which by, say, the end of this year things are looking up for GM and its employees without it costing the government continual prop-up billions to keep the ruse going. Either it gets continual billions per month to keep its lights on (quite literally) or it goes and unemployment quickly shoots past 10%.

If didn't cost the government much less to keep it alive than deal with it's ginormous rotting carcass that will poison everything within sight they'd let it sink. If they can secure the union concessions they need and swap some of their debt for equity they stand a chance at least.

Chrysler as a whole is beyond any sane level of help and needs to be wound down and have their healthier lines rolled into GM as a condition of continued government support.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: craftech
-snip-
There are no calls for AIG to restructure...

Yes there are.

Specifically to break it up into it's various divisions, some of which are profitable, and sell them off.

Fern