Obama treating autos worse than Wall St

[coolVariable]

Seems like financial scammers (that what CDSs are) get rewarded and the workers of america, as well as the financiers that back american enterprises (GM/Chrysler bondholders) get punished.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...ated-apf-14789941.html

 

[Fern]

I've been expecting this to come up. I couldn't help but think of the much larger bailouts Wall Street was getting compared to the auto makers.

Watching this develop since late last night, seems like waaaay too much drama to me. I think we're seeing an awful lot of political theatre.

Fern

 

[Cattlegod]

I think it was probably the right decision (I've worked at ford for the past 6 years). The difference with the bank CEOs is they know exactly what got them into the mess and know what not to do going forward. The banks weren't in the situation of making bad operating decisions that span decades. They took advantage of a non regulated financial instrument. The problem with Chrysler and GM CEOs is they don't know how to get out of this mess and made bad operating decisions for the last 15-20 years. I think the main reason they need a change at the guard is because the current regime is too ingrained in the 'old ways' and they are not willing to make the huge and deep chainsaw cuts that are necessary to turn around a failing company.

 

[MovingTarget]

The Wall Street shysters are the golden boys of both the Democrats and Republicans. The people who actually produce in our economy have been sitting at the kiddie table for quite some time. Obama is a centrist, and his treatment of both these groups as such comes as no surprise to me. Even I know I can't be too hopeful sometimes...

 

[Jiggz]

AIG "too big to fail"; Big 3 "NOT too big to fail"

 

[aphex]

I don't think ANY amount of money pumped into the US automakers could make any difference at this point, pumping any money into them is just delaying the inevitable.

 

[Paratus]

The disapointing thing is GM has been making better cars the last couple of years.

I bought a new Malibu LTZ last year. It get's better mileage than Accord or Camry and has a much better interior IMHO.

GM just waited to long turn around.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Paratus
The disapointing thing is GM has been making better cars the last couple of years.

I bought a new Malibu LTZ last year. It get's better mileage than Accord or Camry and has a much better interior IMHO.

GM just waited to long turn around.

Chrysler needs to leave the picture, but GM and Ford need to consolidate (the former more than the latter) and just need to use bankruptcy laws to their advantage. Unfortunately, with the credit crunch, it would be extremely hard to get funding for the restructuring process.

 

[LostUte]

The auto companies are fundamentally flawed, whereas the banks will be profitable once the credit crisis is sorted out.

 

[brownzilla786]

Originally posted by: LostUte
The auto companies are fundamentally flawed, whereas the banks will be profitable once the credit crisis is sorted out.

Also the car companies are not essential to the American economy. Banks are.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: aphex
I don't think ANY amount of money pumped into the US automakers could make any difference at this point, pumping any money into them is just delaying the inevitable.

One can make the same argument on banks.

 

[ranmaniac]

Originally posted by: brownzilla786

Originally posted by: LostUte
The auto companies are fundamentally flawed, whereas the banks will be profitable once the credit crisis is sorted out.

Also the car companies are not essential to the American economy. Banks are.

ROFL!

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: brownzilla786

Originally posted by: LostUte
The auto companies are fundamentally flawed, whereas the banks will be profitable once the credit crisis is sorted out.

Also the car companies are not essential to the American economy. Banks are.

The Big 3 fail, they take down all the NA suppliers that also supply the foreign auto co's in the US.

You would see a ripple effect that would lead to a couple million more unemployed relatively overnight.

 

[LTC8K6]

Henderson was a big part of GM's downfall, and yet he is now CEO...

FIAT slides:

http://www.irishtimes.com/busi...ets/1224243731176.html

 

[Fern]

Bah, I still say this is all political theater.

So he cans the top guy as a sacrifice. IMO, changing one executive isn't going to help with the deep systemic problems of our domestic auto makers.

They're gonna get bailed out again.

This is just a big show to make the American people tolerate what are otherwise unpopular bailouts.

The auto makers plans have been denounced by the beaurocrats as insufficient to ensure their viability.

Next step is 30-60 days of bailout money, and that followed by the proclamation that the gov beaurocrats have been successful is devising a winning plan for them. Yeah for the goverment! Maybe some more scolding from 'Mommy government', but the money will flow.

Automakers and unions are a big Dem constuency, I do not beleive they will allow them to fail.

Obama has got to make it look like certain doom, then step in and say he fixed it and taking all kinds of credit. It's just political theatre. They should be doing the really hard financial work and other planing like (quiet and) serious adults, not running around in front of the cameras saying dramatic remarks. Too much drama, too little honest-to-god seriousness for my tastes.

Fern

 

[LTC8K6]

He has said pretty much flat out that Chrysler has 30 days to do a deal with FIAT or there will be no more money. Of course, his word historically has not meant much, imo.

**********

And that's why we'll give Chrysler and Fiat 30 days to overcome these hurdles and reach a final agreement -- and we will provide Chrysler with adequate capital to continue operating during that time. If they are able to come to a sound agreement that protects American taxpayers, we will consider lending up to $6 billion to help their plan succeed. But if they and their stakeholders are unable to reach such an agreement, and in the absence of any other viable partnership, we will not be able to justify investing additional tax dollars to keep Chrysler in business.

 

[Xellos2099]

Get rid of the stupid union pay, work bank, huge pension and health benefit after retire will solve 80% of the problem. Ford deal with the problem and they are better off atm.

 

[Billb2]

The banks/auto companies are basically "owned" by the government now (due to the amount of money they owe to pay back the loans).

So, basically they are no longer "public" in the sense that individual shareholders are no longer the major owners.

So, to whom are their boards of directors responsible? At the present time...no one! The share holders have such a small, minority interest that they no longer have any power. The government hasn't been doing anything. So the Boards of Directors are kind of in never-never land. They can do what ever they want, and that's covering their asses, whether it's future employment, massive bonuses, golder parashoots, etc..

The government has the responsibility ( I would say, the duty) to control these companies just as the shareholders do (did?). And they haven't been doing that. Though I would not at all be surprised to learn that Obama has told the banks "Get your problems solved or I'll nationalize your asses and then sell you to the highest bidder.", as that would be one way to deal with the "toxic debt", whether it's forcing the banks to do something, or actually going through with the threat.

So, for Obama to step up and say "Fvck this sheit, you're out" is a good thing. Whether it's the right thing remains to be seen.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
He has said pretty much flat out that Chrysler has 30 days to do a deal with FIAT or there will be no more money. Of course, his word historically has not meant much, imo.
-snip-

Upon hearing that my first thought was "Damn, that sure put Chrysler in a poor bargining position".

"Either take our deal, as is, or your President will shut you down".

I'm still amazed he did that publicly, and amazed no one's criticizing him for it.

Amatuer mistake, and a whopper at that.

That's the kind of stuff you say behind closed doors. Fiat didn't need to be aware of that, now they know they've got all the leverage. And on top of it, they are a foreign company.

People used to howl about our domestic companies being bought up by foreigners, here's Obama forcing it. Again, no complaints here either.

Fern

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
He has said pretty much flat out that Chrysler has 30 days to do a deal with FIAT or there will be no more money. Of course, his word historically has not meant much, imo.
-snip-

Upon hearing that my first thought was "Damn, that sure put Chrysler in a poor bargining position".

"Either take our deal, as is, or your President will shut you down".

I'm still amazed he did that publicly, and amazed no one's criticizing him for it.

Amatuer mistake, and a whopper at that.

That's the kind of stuff you say behind closed doors. Fiat didn't need to be aware of that, now they know they've got all the leverage. And on top of it, they are a foreign company.

People used to howl about our domestic companies being bought up by foreigners, here's Obama forcing it. Again, no complaints here either.

Fern

A little knowledge is dangerous. You might actually fool some people with that.

Obama had obligations to the American people regarding Chrysler's request for more funds and responding to the plan Chriysler submitted as a requirement of the previous bailout. He isn't telling Fiat anything they don't already know, that he didn't need to say at this time. Chrysler's said it can't stay in business without the loan...

Once in a while, your logic sinks to the level of some of the worse Obama bashers.

Obama's being straight

You aren't used to that, are you?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: aphex
I don't think ANY amount of money pumped into the US automakers could make any difference at this point, pumping any money into them is just delaying the inevitable.

This. It looks really bad, though it does make sense. The only left to do is prop up the banks because we're truly screwed if that system is allowed to collapse, but make sure their houses are clear of the worthless MBAs that have been mucking up the system for decades now. Really, no use for those fucktards anywhere.

The auto industry shot themselves in the foot, as well...but they've been doing it for far longer than the financial industry. They utterly refused to compete with Japanese and European automakers for decades and give the American people the type of car they demanded. Instead, they tried again and again to cram down our throats a BS idea of the type of car they thought we wanted, and we showed them that they were fools.

Fuck them.

At least they can restructure and get their asses in gear to working for the market, rather than against it. I've never bought into the "Buy American: It's costing jobs" mentality. Sorry, no. They're costing their own jobs. Put out a product that we want, and we'll buy it. That's how glorious capitalism works.
The good thing, I hope, is that we now have the chance to see what the American industrial machine can be, what it once was, when those minds and those workers really get cranking. Think they've learned their lesson?

 

[Saga]

Say whatever you want, anything that potentially has the ability to finally remove the Unions is both necessary and long overdue.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
I think it was probably the right decision (I've worked at ford for the past 6 years). The difference with the bank CEOs is they know exactly what got them into the mess and know what not to do going forward. The banks weren't in the situation of making bad operating decisions that span decades. They took advantage of a non regulated financial instrument. The problem with Chrysler and GM CEOs is they don't know how to get out of this mess and made bad operating decisions for the last 15-20 years. I think the main reason they need a change at the guard is because the current regime is too ingrained in the 'old ways' and they are not willing to make the huge and deep chainsaw cuts that are necessary to turn around a failing company.

The problem with Chrysler and GM CEOs is they don't know how to get out of this mess and made bad operating decisions for the last 15-20 years. I think the main reason they need a change at the guard is because the current regime is too ingrained in the 'old ways' and they are not willing to make the huge and deep chainsaw cuts that are necessary to turn around a failing company.

Very well said!!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Fern
Bah, I still say this is all political theater.

So he cans the top guy as a sacrifice. IMO, changing one executive isn't going to help with the deep systemic problems of our domestic auto makers.

They're gonna get bailed out again.

This is just a big show to make the American people tolerate what are otherwise unpopular bailouts.

The auto makers plans have been denounced by the beaurocrats as insufficient to ensure their viability.

Next step is 30-60 days of bailout money, and that followed by the proclamation that the gov beaurocrats have been successful is devising a winning plan for them. Yeah for the goverment! Maybe some more scolding from 'Mommy government', but the money will flow.

Automakers and unions are a big Dem constuency, I do not beleive they will allow them to fail.

Obama has got to make it look like certain doom, then step in and say he fixed it and taking all kinds of credit. It's just political theatre. They should be doing the really hard financial work and other planing like (quiet and) serious adults, not running around in front of the cameras saying dramatic remarks. Too much drama, too little honest-to-god seriousness for my tastes.

Fern

bah.....aren`t you one of those idiots who after the first 2 days Obama was in office was not happy because he did`nt turn the economy around overnight?

wait..hold the presses.....it really doesn`t matter what Obama does your going to find something to critisize!!
hahaha

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
He has said pretty much flat out that Chrysler has 30 days to do a deal with FIAT or there will be no more money. Of course, his word historically has not meant much, imo.
-snip-

Upon hearing that my first thought was "Damn, that sure put Chrysler in a poor bargining position".

"Either take our deal, as is, or your President will shut you down".

I'm still amazed he did that publicly, and amazed no one's criticizing him for it.

Amatuer mistake, and a whopper at that.<--- hardly a mistake at all......the auto makers made their beds they can lie in them..


That's the kind of stuff you say behind closed doors. Fiat didn't need to be aware of that, now they know they've got all the leverage. And on top of it, they are a foreign company.

People used to howl about our domestic companies being bought up by foreigners, here's Obama forcing it. Again, no complaints here either.

Fern