Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

6 (12.8%)

No

18 (38.3%)

Not Citizen, Yes

3 (6.4%)

Not Citizen, No

9 (19.1%)

I don't care, but I like to vote!

11 (23.4%)

Total Members Voted: 47

[PTTG??]

I am burning with curiosity. I think it's only fair that I share my thoughts with you, and that is, though I am a liberal, I am against it and I am very frustrated with the Democratic Congress for continuing to support an obviously failed industry. For once I'm rooting for the GOPs.

[Warlord255]

I would like to think that this is the sort of pressure we need to get the automakers to push out of the current glut of inefficient vehicles.

[Cthulhu]

Supposedly Ford has a European car that gets 60 or 70 miles to the gallon, but it doesn't pass American emissions standards.  Perhaps we should have Al Gore drive one off of a cliff.

[Mephisto]

Seeing as how the auto manufacturers actually stated that consumers are the reason they make shitty cars, I don't think they should get anything.

[lumin]

A huge NO from me.

Why can't the government just get out of the way and let capitalism be capitalism?  The longer they prolong the auto-industry collapse, the greater it's fall will be later.

What happened to Abe Lincoln's mentality?
"Government of the people, by the people, for the people".

[mainiac]

Ford: absolutely
GM: yes
Chrysler: let them fail

Ford is in the best shape of the lot and I genuinely believe they wouldn't need a bailout if the credit markets weren't in such bad shape right now.  They are taking tentative steps in the right direction.  Also, they are pointedly not asking for a bridge loan, what they really need is the government support to raise confidence again.  They could probably survive the best without government support but government support will prevent a lot of fallout at minimal risk to the taxpayer.  Ford should absolutely be supported.

GM is far from a well run company but they show more promise then you'd think.  The destruction of the EV1 and subsequent failure of the SUV culture was apparently a wake up call for GM, they are making very promising developments with plug in hybrids (something Toyota isn't even pursuing) and have got some decent lines on the market right now.  I believe the basic problem with GM is lack of foresight, they racked up too much debt when times are good.  Although they made some stupid investments lately it's not all bad and if GM weren't burdened by it's outstanding debt and payments to retired workers accrued when they had a larger workforce they wouldn't be in such bad shape right now.
But GM can recover.  Plug in hybrids will start making a profit in 3-7 years and GM will look visionary cause the Japs will be about 5-10 years behind in electric vehicles development.  Retirement costs for American owned companies are going to decline as their workers die off while retirement costs for their foreign owned competition operating in America will rise as they start having to pay for pension plans, reducing the current competative disadvantage.  It's a long road to recovery but with good management, GM could be the world's best auto company in 10 years.  Save GM.

Chrysler is a turd sandwich.  They're not interested in surviving.  They're interested in looking viable so that they're parent company, Cerberus, can sell the business to someone else.  But Chrysler is doing a laughably pitiful job at disclosure and Cerberus refuses to invest their own capital into the business.  Letting Chrysler fail will save taxpayer money and send a powerful message about accountability.  Let Chrysler crash and burn.

Wow, I'm the first person to vote yes.  Of course, IMHO they're doing a really piss poor job explaining why this bailout should go through.

[woose1]

they should read this on the news.

"Hm, 7 out of 8 people dissagree with the bailout plan. MAYBE WE SHOULD STOP DOING IT THEN."

"Ah, whatever. Who cares about the bloody popualation of the country anyway?"

[mainiac]

they should read this on the news.

"Hm, 7 out of 8 people dissagree with the bailout plan. MAYBE WE SHOULD STOP DOING IT THEN."

"Ah, whatever. Who cares about the bloody popualation of the country anyway?"

Yeah, cause this is a really scientific survey of the population.  And leaders should never make unpopular choices.  Y'know, I believe the Smoot-Hawley tarrifs were pretty popular at first despite what the eggheads were saying.

[Reasonableman]

Supposedly Ford has a European car that gets 60 or 70 miles to the gallon, but it doesn't pass American emissions standards.  Perhaps we should have Al Gore drive one off of a cliff.

This, exactly.

[Nilocy]

No way in hell. American car industries are terrible compared to their european counterparts. They're more inefficient, cost more, both finacially and resource wise. And would do the world a whole lotta good if GM and that other one went down. Its their own fault that they're being out competed by the better companies, don't bail out a weaker species, it'll only contaminate the gene pool!

[mainiac]

No way in hell. American car industries are terrible compared to their european counterparts. They're more inefficient, cost more, both finacially and resource wise. And would do the world a whole lotta good if GM and that other one went down. Its their own fault that they're being out competed by the better companies, don't bail out a weaker species, it'll only contaminate the gene pool!

Show me a foreign answer to the Volt before you tell me that it would be good for GM to go down.

[Bromor Neckbeard]

I voted yes, but there should be some onerous conditions attached.  I'd have it so that they can make any size vehicles they want, as long as they get a minimum of 40 miles to the gallon.  They also need to make the "golden parachute" a literal reality.

[Vactor]

where is the government buyout vote?  truly free marketism has all the stability of an wildfire based ecosystem.  "Let things grow fast before the next big devastation"  great for rich to get rich, awful for the welfare of the country

the last thing we need right now is more unemployment and it takes far too long for voids in industry to be filled by other companies. 

[lumin]

By passing this bailout, what is really happening is that the government is trying to pour water on a wildfire that already burned the forest years ago.

How much you wanna bet that A. they'll go out of business anyway, or B. They'll be asking for another bailout, in a few years from now?

The $700 Billion mortgage bailout has already made absolutely zero difference, why should we expect a different result here?

[Vactor]

By passing this bailout, what is really happening is that the government is trying to pour water on a wildfire that already burned the forest years ago.

How much you wanna bet that they'll A. go out of business anyway, or B. They'll be asking for another bailout, in a few years from now?

The $700 Billion mortgage bailout has already made absolutely zero difference, why should we expect a different result here?

i completely agree which is why i want buyout, not a grant.  Compare it to a mortgage, If I owned a house and was unable to make my payments the bank dosen't come and burn my house down, they take it from me and sell it to someone who can make the payments. (I know its different than a company but i'm just trying to make a point)  It makes little sense to stand around and idly watch things fall apart, but if a company cannot run itself successfully, it should no longer be allowed to run itself.  If we are going to put money towards saving the industry it shouldn't be to save the companies. 

I'm not advocating that the government should operate these companies, rather they should facilitate the transferal of ownership to other companies that are in the best interest of our country.