• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Clint Eastwood Superbowl ad

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,908
44
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Clint Eastwood Superbowl ad

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/video/clint-eastwood-featured-in-chrysler-ad-15522137

I thought this add was both profound but flawed. The only problem I have with what Clint said is when he said "We" came together. I don't think he was referring to the Republicans in Congress.

What's your take?

Looks like Karl Rove LOVED it. :D

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/karl-rove-offended-by-clint-eastwoods-chrysler-ad/2012/02/06/gIQAYt3HuQ_blog.html

GM poised to post record profits this year!

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/06/10330662-in-remarkable-turnaround-gm-may-post-record-profit
Ad only has one d.

Adding is an arithmetic function

Ads are a marketing function

That aside, it is wonderful to see Democrats and Eastwood beating Republicans at their own game.

Republicans gave Corporations citizenship and unlimited money to spread propaganda and rhetoric to gain and maintain power on their behalf.

It is only fitting that Democrats take advantage of the America destroying tactics the Republicans put in place against themselves.

Kudos Clint and Hollywood :thumbsup:
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
CallMeJoe

Sorry. Always did have trouble remembering how to spell the names of mythical beings that I rarely write about. I always have to look up Leprechauns too.

michal1980

"An ACTOR has integrity? LOL they only read what someone else wrote for them."

I consider that to be a pretty ignorant statement on several levels. Do you use a chart to figure out all of the characteristics of people you lump together based on a single aspect of their lives? Must have hated That Ron the actor guy too.

I'd like to know how Eastwood gets demerits to his integrity from you simply because he opposed helping auto companies initially, but in hindsight sees that it was a good thing. Only an idiot holds the same opinion after observing new information that devalues the old opinion to having little merit.

I'm man enough to admit my error when opinions I've held looked poor in light of new information or new ways of thinking about them. I imagine Eastwood might be the same. From your post, I wonder if you see the wisdom of such a progression.
Eastwood made that statement in Novemer 2011.

His opinion changed when he got a check.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
we are out billions on the auto-bailouts?

I was under the impression that all of that money has been paid back, plus interest, no?
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/21/autos/chrysler_government_exit/index.htm

On Chrysler we lost 1+billion.

Fiat (Italian) got 50%+ of a car company for free, and the UAW got a nice ~30% chunk of the rest of Chrysler for free. Taxpayers? Shafted.

http://wot.motortrend.com/new-report-says-treasury-will-lose-23-77-billion-on-bailouts-of-chrysler-gm-163223.html

20+ Billion dollar loss on GM currently. UAW? Got a nice chunk for free
 
Last edited:

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
To me the one thing that really and truly pisses off the Repubs to this very day about the auto industry bailouts and their successful recovery are those thousands and thousands of union jobs that got saved because of it. I feel it's the main reason the Repubs wanted the industry to fail: To get rid of the unions.

It also disproves the worn out myth that Repubs like to belch out any chance they get that "the unions alone caused the auto industry to go under".

I give credit to the American auto industry's management teams for much of the recovery, just as I assigned them most of the blame for it's near collapse. I also give credit to the auto unions for the concessions they offered up when it was necessary for them to do so. I also give credit to the American consumer who responded positively to the improved products the auto industry provided.

This is what I feel Eastwood reflected in his ad: That the auto industry's management, it's unionized workers and the American consumers all worked together to create the successful recovery the industry experienced.

And yes, credit is due to those responsible politicians who wanted to save all those union jobs and all those NON-union jobs related to the auto industry, and took the necessary risks to make it happen.
Management team gets credit? Why?

Before bailout:
GM losing 3k+ per car

Afterbailout
GM makes money per car.

Change: Goverment bailout allowed GM to dump debt.

Management had almost nothing to do with GMs recovery.


Now look a ford. No similar bailout, make profit because they actually dug themselves out of a hole.

They would have beeen doing even better if crappy car companies were given handouts by the goverment. They wouldn't have to compete against subsidized goverment motors.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
Management team gets credit? Why?

Before bailout:
GM losing 3k+ per car

Afterbailout
GM makes money per car.

Change: Goverment bailout allowed GM to dump debt.

Management had almost nothing to do with GMs recovery.


Now look a ford. No similar bailout, make profit because they actually dug themselves out of a hole.

They would have beeen doing even better if crappy car companies were given handouts by the goverment. They wouldn't have to compete against subsidized goverment motors.
Bullshit X10...GM didn't dump any debt obligations that was the purpose of the Taxpayer LOAN which they have almost paid all the way back now. When GM posts it's record profits this year the loan w be paid back in full and when the Gubermint sells off the stock the American tax payers will make a tidy profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/business/02gret.html
 
Last edited:

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/21/autos/chrysler_government_exit/index.htm

On Chrysler we lost 1+billion.

Fiat (Italian) got 50%+ of a car company for free, and the UAW got a nice ~30% chunk of the rest of Chrysler for free. Taxpayers? Shafted.

http://wot.motortrend.com/new-report-says-treasury-will-lose-23-77-billion-on-bailouts-of-chrysler-gm-163223.html

20+ Billion dollar loss on GM currently. UAW? Got a nice chunk for free
Your're not correct the American taxpayer got more money back in the long run then the initial investment...the only thing that will be shafted is your Political party in Nov 2012 for wanting the American auto industry to go down the tubes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/business/25chrysler.html

If you want to rage at an industry try banking...the industry that truly fucked over the American Tax Payer.
 
Last edited:

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
Your're not correct the American taxpayer got more money back in the long run then the initial investment...the only thing that will be shafted is your Political party in Nov 2012 for wanting the American auto industry to go down the tubes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/business/25chrysler.html

If you want to rage at an industry try banking...the industry that truly fucked over the American Tax Payer.
How exactly do the taxpayers get money back, or profit? Is the lesson here that government knows how to spend our money better than we do? Or is it even our money?
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,431
82
91
Right now the GOP is far to the right of Clint Eastwood. Remember, conservatives still despise the fact that we bailed out GM and Chrysler. If it were up to them, there would be no US auto industry.
Sure there would. GM could have went into bankruptcy and had a leaner meaner auto manufacturer emerge. Now we have one that still has no way to pay future pension/healthcare liabilities. And one that still operates under the slow to adapt union mentality.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,083
490
126

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,431
82
91
Bullshit X10...GM didn't dump any debt obligations that was the purpose of the Taxpayer LOAN which they have almost paid all the way back now. When GM posts it's record profits this year the loan w be paid back in full and when the Gubermint sells off the stock the American tax payers will make a tidy profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/business/02gret.html
The Federal government is selling GM shares for less than they paid. How exactly are the taxpayers making a profit?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,083
490
126
The Federal government is selling GM shares for less than they paid. How exactly are the taxpayers making a profit?
In the world of fantasy liberal economics he will tell you of all the money that was saved by the govt not having to pay welfare payments or lost revenue from the taxes lost from a company that failed.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Bullshit X10...GM didn't dump any debt obligations that was the purpose of the Taxpayer LOAN which they have almost paid all the way back now. When GM posts it's record profits this year the loan w be paid back in full and when the Gubermint sells off the stock the American tax payers will make a tidy profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/business/02gret.html

nothing you posted, refuted anything I said.

some of it actually supported what I said.

From your link

"Much of it will never be repaid,” Mr. Grassley added. “The Congressional Budget Office estimates that taxpayers will lose around $30 billion on G.M.”

I know liberals love to lie. But this is a new low.
 

McWatt

Senior member
Feb 25, 2010
405
0
71
Since that May 2010 Times article, the government made $13.6 B by selling GM preferred shares in November 2010. At that point the government still owned 33% of GM, as well. Wikipedia gives us that much, but the GM article feels pretty sparse on details or references since then.

As an aside, remember that Bush gave GM $17.4 B, while Obama refused to help them in March 2009.
 

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
0
76
Since that May 2010 Times article, the government made $13.6 B by selling GM preferred shares in November 2010. At that point the government still owned 33% of GM, as well. Wikipedia gives us that much, but the GM article feels pretty sparse on details or references since then.

As an aside, remember that Bush gave GM $17.4 B, while Obama refused to help them in March 2009.
Top Ten Investors (Source: Capital IQ)

Investor Name % O/S Pos Pos Chg % Pos Chg Filing Date Filing Type Equity Assets ($MM) Investor Type Country
United States Department of the Treasury 31.96 500,065,254 -53,782,019 -9.71 15-Mar-2011 Proxy 82,775.54 Strategic Entities United States
UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust 10.24 160,151,000 1,000 0.00 15-Mar-2011 Proxy 4,969.49 Strategic Entities United States
Canada Development Investment Corporation 8.95 140,084,746 0 0.00 15-Mar-2011 Proxy 4,346.83 Strategic Entities Canada
Capital Research Global Investors 3.98 62,298,827 1,448,663 2.38 30-Sep-2011 13F 324,208.73 Investment Managers United States
Motors Liquidation Co 2.36 36,876,283 -113,123,717 -75.42 21-Apr-2011 13D 1,192.40 Strategic Entities United States
T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. 2.28 35,596,702 4,402,565 14.11 30-Sep-2011 13F 281,970.50 Investment Managers United States
JP Morgan Asset Management 1.96 30,607,892 4,507,470 17.27 30-Sep-2011 13F 124,894.90 Investment Managers United States
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. 1.22 19,037,944 11,958,527 168.92 30-Sep-2011 13F 10,366.36 Brokerage Firms United States
Vanguard Group, Inc. 1.20 18,742,044 267,104 1.45 31-Dec-2011 13F 769,937.91 Investment Managers United States
BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. 1.20 18,702,362 996,749 5.63 30-Sep-2011 13F 702,119.48 Investment Managers United States

US Treasury owns 32%, UAW owns 10.24%, Canada owns 9%.

On an aside I love facts and charts. It makes conjecture a lot more fun.
 
Last edited:

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Since that May 2010 Times article, the government made $13.6 B by selling GM preferred shares in November 2010. At that point the government still owned 33% of GM, as well. Wikipedia gives us that much, but the GM article feels pretty sparse on details or references since then.

As an aside, remember that Bush gave GM $17.4 B, while Obama refused to help them in March 2009.
the goverment did not make money. Just lost less.

CBO December report

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/126xx/doc12611/12-16-TARP_report.pdf

Loses on GM to rise to 20 billion.

AIG to 23 billion.

Both failures that should be shut down.
 

crashtestdummy

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2010
2,894
0
0
The US government put $82 billion into the auto industry, and looks likely to get back $68 billion... a $14 billion loss. However, there's an additional $19.4 billion loss from before the bailout, meaning that the total cost of keeping them afloat was $33.4 billion. That sounds like a lot of money, and it is. It means that each of us paid about $110 to keep the auto industry alive.

There's another way to look at it, though: what would have been the cost of losing the industry? One estimate suggested a loss of $100 billion in tax revenue and $275 billion in personal income by the end of 2011. These numbers are probably a little high, because even with the bailout a lot of jobs and profits were lost in the short term (meaning that we probably didn't save as much as $350 billion by bailing them out). However, it's reasonably safe to say that the American people came out ahead economically in the medium term.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
nothing you posted, refuted anything I said.

some of it actually supported what I said.

From your link

"Much of it will never be repaid,” Mr. Grassley added. “The Congressional Budget Office estimates that taxpayers will lose around $30 billion on G.M.”

I know liberals love to lie. But this is a new low.
Lol wut????
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
The US government put $82 billion into the auto industry, and looks likely to get back $68 billion... a $14 billion loss. However, there's an additional $19.4 billion loss from before the bailout, meaning that the total cost of keeping them afloat was $33.4 billion. That sounds like a lot of money, and it is. It means that each of us paid about $110 to keep the auto industry alive.

There's another way to look at it, though: what would have been the cost of losing the industry? One estimate suggested a loss of $100 billion in tax revenue and $275 billion in personal income by the end of 2011. These numbers are probably a little high, because even with the bailout a lot of jobs and profits were lost in the short term (meaning that we probably didn't save as much as $350 billion by bailing them out). However, it's reasonably safe to say that the American people came out ahead economically in the medium term.
The Rightist in here don't give a damn about collateral damage because most of them in here don't understand the manufacturing industry.
 

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
0
76
Proof with link....
I have heard as high as $150/share for GM to breakeven, however those numbers probably include investment banking and other fees. However here is a link from MSNBC.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39316448/ns/business-autos/t/governments-break-even-price-gm/#.TzFJL8jjtJ4

Every share they sold at $36 was a loser. Especially for retail which was lining up to buy it in groves.'

The house oversight panel estimated somewhere around $55 as the break/even. Either way every share that has been sold has been a loss. Any additional sales by the Treasury will be hugely dilutive. Barring some extreme moves in earnings growth, it's going to be a hard slog for the Treasury to recoup their investment.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY