Obama treating autos worse than Wall St

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Craig234
[
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?

Very well stated!!

 

[Pocatello]

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

Of course it's all for show. Obama knows how much the American people are sick of the government bailing out companies. In the end, GM will get the money. Chrysler will be getting some help too, somehow. Fiat will get a lot help from the US government to invest in Chrysler.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

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

Nope, I'v enever said anything other than it'll take time to see what the results are. Hardly any of the money has been 'spent' yet

And as far as failing on the economy, I've said something like - :"too soon to judge, he's just now taking test and the grades won't be in for while."

(Why I bother with you silly partisan hacks and hero worshippers, IDK)

Yeah, no doubt I'll find something to criticize him for. He's a politician so it won't be hard.

I didn't like his economic policies when he first announced them, and still don't. I'm very dubious of bailouts.

You like the Chrysler 'play' he made yesterday?

I don't. The other way to look at his remarks yesterday is he just promised Fiat he'd give them a $6 Billion gov loan if they take Chrysler off his hands. I don't like the idea of that.

A lot of you here complain about state governments offering 'goodies' (grants, loan etc) to entice companies to locate in their state/area. Well, Obama just offered a $6 billion 'goody' to Fiat to come set up in the USA (and take over one of our companies).

And I'm d@mned interested to see the details of loan. I don't wanna hear about any more non-recourse stuff. Fiat needs to be on hook for it, or it's a flat-out give-away and won't be repaid.

Fern

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: 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?

You guys are absolutely amazing. Until the financial crisis hit (hats off to the bankers) GM sold more cars than any other car maker in the world. Yet the rhetoric coming out of people with the mindset such as yourself, is that they weren't building what people wanted.

Well, they most certainly did build what people wanted to buy and their sales figures proved it. Year after year after year I might add.

Just because you didn't want to buy what they made is no blanket statement that covers the rest of the world.

The axes are being ground to a keen edge in this thread.

Despite whatever actions were taken by the Bush administration, despite whatever actions are being taken by the Obama administration, GM is not going to survive. They are as good as dead right now.

Arguing the reasons for their downfall is immaterial. It accomplishes nothing but to help hone the edge of the axe. No change in top leadership, no infusion of cash, no worker sacrifice and certainly no cadre of Washington 'experts' to help guide them through is going to make one iota of difference. Cars aren't selling. When you're in the business of selling cars, guess what you need to sell? It can't be any simpler than that.

Chapter 7 bankruptcy before the end of the 2nd quarter. Ego's may bring on an initial filing of Chapter 11, but it will become apparent very quickly that it's an unworkable solution. The company and it's assets will be liquidated.

So, many of you will get your wish. The dirty masses of overpaid, overcompensated workers will finally be taught a lesson. But guess who gets to support them?

I'm sure to some of you it will be worth it.

 

[StageLeft]

You know what, yes they are getting more bailouts than the automakers, but who here works for a company that has received a bailout? We had a round of layoffs recently. How much money has my company gotten in bridge loans and other such sh*t? $0.

BTW, I have said and I think that if even a decent, but small fraction of what's been thrown at the banks so far, was given to the automakers--say $100B--then it would let them erase tons of liabilities and debts and they'd probably be good for quite a few more years before screwing up again. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but at least there could be a more tangible return on investment with it.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: boomerang
-snip-
You guys are absolutely amazing. Until the financial crisis hit (hats off to the bankers) GM sold more cars than any other car maker in the world. Yet the rhetoric coming out of people with the mindset such as yourself, is that they weren't building what people wanted.

Well, they most certainly did build what people wanted to buy and their sales figures proved it. Year after year after year I might add.

Just because you didn't want to buy what they made is no blanket statement that covers the rest of the world.

I mostly agree with you^

But they haven't had an operating profit going back at least to 2004 Link. I haven't checked further back. (In 2004 they did have a small net profit, but interest income pulled their bacon out of the fire that year.)

Those series of losses left them far too vulnerable when the downturn hit.

Fern

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: boomerang
-snip-
You guys are absolutely amazing. Until the financial crisis hit (hats off to the bankers) GM sold more cars than any other car maker in the world. Yet the rhetoric coming out of people with the mindset such as yourself, is that they weren't building what people wanted.

Well, they most certainly did build what people wanted to buy and their sales figures proved it. Year after year after year I might add.

Just because you didn't want to buy what they made is no blanket statement that covers the rest of the world.

I mostly agree with you^

But they haven't had an opertaing profit going back at least to 2004 Link. I haven't checked further back. (In 2004 they did have a small net profit, but interest income pulled their bacon out of the fire that year.)

Those series of losses left them far too vulnerable when the downturn hit.

Fern

No argument there whatsoever. You can't argue with the true facts. Many mistakes have been made. Too many.

 

[Chunkee]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: 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?

You guys are absolutely amazing. Until the financial crisis hit (hats off to the bankers) GM sold more cars than any other car maker in the world. Yet the rhetoric coming out of people with the mindset such as yourself, is that they weren't building what people wanted.

Well, they most certainly did build what people wanted to buy and their sales figures proved it. Year after year after year I might add.

Just because you didn't want to buy what they made is no blanket statement that covers the rest of the world.

The axes are being ground to a keen edge in this thread.

Despite whatever actions were taken by the Bush administration, despite whatever actions are being taken by the Obama administration, GM is not going to survive. They are as good as dead right now.

Arguing the reasons for their downfall is immaterial. It accomplishes nothing but to help hone the edge of the axe. No change in top leadership, no infusion of cash, no worker sacrifice and certainly no cadre of Washington 'experts' to help guide them through is going to make one iota of difference. Cars aren't selling. When you're in the business of selling cars, guess what you need to sell? It can't be any simpler than that.

Chapter 7 bankruptcy before the end of the 2nd quarter. Ego's may bring on an initial filing of Chapter 11, but it will become apparent very quickly that it's an unworkable solution. The company and it's assets will be liquidated.

So, many of you will get your wish. The dirty masses of overpaid, overcompensated workers will finally be taught a lesson. But guess who gets to support them?

I'm sure to some of you it will be worth it.

Yes, this is more than likely the scenario. How can resolution come from incompetence when those attempting to provide the resolutions are just as incompetent? It is not really the people that are at the rope, but the processes that have allowed them to do so. Same with the government right now...I guess no one sees how that they are stealing from the marginally poor (taxpayers) to keep the better off, ....well..better off? It is one great big circle jerk...you and I are not in there, that is all.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You know what, yes they are getting more bailouts than the automakers, but who here works for a company that has received a bailout? We had a round of layoffs recently. How much money has my company gotten in bridge loans and other such sh*t? $0.

BTW, I have said and I think that if even a decent, but small fraction of what's been thrown at the banks so far, was given to the automakers--say $100B--then it would let them erase tons of liabilities and debts and they'd probably be good for quite a few more years before screwing up again. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but at least there could be a more tangible return on investment with it.

Even though it would be investing money in a failing company, it is a plausible idea. Give GM enough to get through the recession and then they could restructure without putting millions of Americans out of jobs. The thing that sucks about this situation is that prudent, successful companies like Toyota/Honda get nothing more than a pat on the back. So all in all, GM shouldn't be getting special treatment IMO. They aren't too big to fail is the sad truth.

 

[Fingolfin269]

The Obama circle jerk is yet again in full effect in this thread. The lack of ability for some of you guys to admit even ONE f-up is ridiculous. Anyone who thinks it was a great idea for him to publicly say Chrysler MUST make a deal in 30 days or go into bankruptcy is basically saying it is okay for him to say 'Chrysler... bend over for the Italians and like it'.

You guys are so hilarious. I AGREE that Chrysler needs to bend over. But Obama effed this one up from a tact perspective and you guys are so blind you can't even admit it.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
The Obama circle jerk is yet again in full effect in this thread. The lack of ability for some of you guys to admit even ONE f-up is ridiculous. Anyone who thinks it was a great idea for him to publicly say Chrysler MUST make a deal in 30 days or go into bankruptcy is basically saying it is okay for him to say 'Chrysler... bend over for the Italians and like it'.

You guys are so hilarious. I AGREE that Chrysler needs to bend over. But Obama effed this one up from a tact perspective and you guys are so blind you can't even admit it.

So you agree with what Obama said and you fault him for stating the obvious? Um, ok.

 

[dphantom]

In the end, Obama has guaranteed that Fiat will get Chrysler at whatever price Fiat wants to pay if it chooses to go ahead. Obama's public statement was foolish, never show your cards especially if you are not holding any.

As for GM, GM will go into bankruptcy and emerge as an employee owned firm. That is, the UAW will own GM or at least a sizeable piece of the company. This will be Obama's payoff to the unions.

Finally, the notion a President can decide to fire anyone from any company should scare the beejeezus out of anyone. Adding to that the public guarantee of backing all warranties issued by GM on new car sales, and I simply do not accept that the US is anywhere near being the leader of a free, capitalistic economy.

I know of no law that allows any President to make such a guarantee; yet here we have one assuming powers clearly not granted within the US Constitution.

 

[Genx87]

So months later and billions in Tax payers money wasted they arent big enough to fail.
This should have been done before Christmas.

 

[AndrewR]

So, what are the chances that Obama is going to carry Michigan and Ohio in 2012?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: AndrewR
So, what are the chances that Obama is going to carry Michigan and Ohio in 2012?

If he saves those companies and millions of jobs, the odds are pretty good.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Jiggz
AIG "too big to fail"; Big 3 "NOT too big to fail"

AIG fails, we go into depression. GM fails, , they file bankruptcy, get restructured and bought out by a new entity without having the rules and deals GM was stuck too. The factories continue to produce under new management and all is well - minus some layoffs.

What, you cant see the difference? You must be republican =)

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Jiggz
AIG "too big to fail"; Big 3 "NOT too big to fail"

AIG fails, we go into depression. GM fails, , they file bankruptcy, get restructured and bought out by a new entity without having the rules and deals GM was stuck too. The factories continue to produce under new management and all is well - minus some layoffs.

What, you cant see the difference? You must be republican =)

Really? Because it was mainly republicans who didnt want to give the initial bailout money before Christmas and democrats including Pelosi proclaiming the Big 3 were too big to fail.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: AndrewR
So, what are the chances that Obama is going to carry Michigan and Ohio in 2012?

If he saves those companies and millions of jobs, the odds are pretty good.

Miracles can happen.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: 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

Obviously the workers of America are overpaid and under worked while the wizards of Wall street are worth their weight in gold no matter what they do.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Genx87
So months later and billions in Tax payers money wasted they arent big enough to fail.
This should have been done before Christmas.

Obama was supposed to do this?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Genx87
So months later and billions in Tax payers money wasted they arent big enough to fail.
This should have been done before Christmas.

Obama was supposed to do this?

Where did I say that?

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Genx87
So months later and billions in Tax payers money wasted they arent big enough to fail.
This should have been done before Christmas.

Obama was supposed to do this?

Where did I say that?

I'm just trying to get clarification who was supposed to be responsible.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Jiggz
AIG "too big to fail"; Big 3 "NOT too big to fail"

AIG fails, we go into depression. GM fails, , they file bankruptcy, get restructured and bought out by a new entity without having the rules and deals GM was stuck too. The factories continue to produce under new management and all is well - minus some layoffs.

What, you cant see the difference? You must be republican =)

Really? Because it was mainly republicans who didnt want to give the initial bailout money before Christmas and democrats including Pelosi proclaiming the Big 3 were too big to fail.

She is an idiot...

But the bailouts were an emergency measure to get them by for a few months - now that their business plans have been thoroughly looked at, its obvious they cant sustain the way they are today.

That, and like I said, if they file bk - its not like all factories close and everyone goes home. There are billions upon billions of dollars in factories, IP, and experience - it will be bought out, cut the fat (UAW contracts and hopefully poorly designed cars) and restart under new management. this is unlike the banks, if they fail, we would be in a massive depression.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Genx87
So months later and billions in Tax payers money wasted they arent big enough to fail.
This should have been done before Christmas.

Obama was supposed to do this?

Where did I say that?

I'm just trying to get clarification who was supposed to be responsible.

The whole damned govt. Does that clarify it for you?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Jiggz
AIG "too big to fail"; Big 3 "NOT too big to fail"

AIG fails, we go into depression. GM fails, , they file bankruptcy, get restructured and bought out by a new entity without having the rules and deals GM was stuck too. The factories continue to produce under new management and all is well - minus some layoffs.

What, you cant see the difference? You must be republican =)

Really? Because it was mainly republicans who didnt want to give the initial bailout money before Christmas and democrats including Pelosi proclaiming the Big 3 were too big to fail.

She is an idiot...

But the bailouts were an emergency measure to get them by for a few months - now that their business plans have been thoroughly looked at, its obvious they cant sustain the way they are today.

That, and like I said, if they file bk - its not like all factories close and everyone goes home. There are billions upon billions of dollars in factories, IP, and experience - it will be bought out, cut the fat (UAW contracts and hopefully poorly designed cars) and restart under new management. this is unlike the banks, if they fail, we would be in a massive depression.

Look I agree with you regarding the bankruptcy. I am just miffed it took billions of taxpayers money to come to the same conlcusion anybody with a brain knew 3 months ago. We didnt need to look at their books for 3 months and spend billions to know they had a failed business model.