(Lake Martin Specific)
111,170 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 5:46:58 PM
Lakes Online Forum
83,644 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 9:14:08 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,193 messages
Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM
(Lake Martin Specific)
4,170 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 5:21:13 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
(Lake Martin Specific)
169 messages
Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 9:07:16 AM
|
the US car manufacturers?
I think no. Are we in a new type of democracy where we don't let our industries fail?
But, if they fail, a lot of people will be out of work -- not just the automakers themselves, but all those industries that support the automakers.
Is it unfair if we bail out Wall Street, but then don't help the Auto makers?
What do you think?
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 9:24:05 AM
|
I think they need to help save jobs at this point. The failure of all three not only impacts them, but thousands of businesses that support the industry.
I hate the idea of government taking "ownership", I would rather just see a loan. But I realize it is a way to be able to return more back to the federal government (yes they say american tax payers - but dont believe it) should the rescue plan work.
There is a reason US manufactures have not been as successful ... one word UNIONS. The day of unions is gone ... they came about to protect workers safety.... now there are plenty of laws to do that. So let businesses run their show and reward employees on productivity & quality with a gain sharing program. So what if you promote someone that has been there less time if they are a better worker. All this bid stuff and having to call in someone to do a particular job when someone else could handle it. Most businesses professional staff is not union and somehow the business and the people survive and prosper.
I ran manufacturing had had experience in both union and non union .... the non union plants were always more productive and profitable and the employees wound up making more money and getting better benefits. When it is negotiated across the board and not based on performance all the employees lose. But that does fit with the Obama "equality" thinking.
|
| Name: |
Freshwater Bay Girl
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 9:48:41 AM
|
I think that any tax payer money going to the benefits of the unions retirement plan is a NO Deal. It is one thing to help them through a slow time, but to give tax payers money to fund their retirement plan. No one has guaranteed me health benefits or even a pay check for the next year. Why would I want my tax dollars to go to a retirement and health benefit plan for life for the auto Industry. I'm sure there will be more pork than porky the pig has surrounding his ribs!
Greed and lack of responsibility is what got us into this mess. Hard work and determination will be what will get us out. People seem to forget the reason our relatives left England in the first place. They have forgotten the principals that our founding fathers wanted to secure for the future of our democracy!
|
| Name: |
mbk
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 10:19:32 AM
|
I am certainly not an economist but it seems to me that the problem is caused by a lack of sales of their products which created a lack of profit and should have resulted in a cutback in production. Will federal money increase sales, the profit and production generator for all manufacturing, or will they continue to produce more than they can sell to appease the unions? And don't say we have to save American automakers; how many automakers in Alabama are being bailed out? Are their jobs less American because they have names like Mercedes, Hyundai, Honda, or Toyota? Could it have anything to do with the cost of production in union vs nonunion plants? BTW, my company drives all GM products.
|
| Name: |
AUCATZ
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No!!! Unless...
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 10:25:27 AM
|
The bailout somehow helps save some jobs and promotes making better cars.
The reason their business is failing is they keep pouring money into union benefits, etc., and haven't kept up with the trends to more fuel-efficient cars, etc. That's my take on it...
there is a reason car makers like Kia, Honda, and Hundai are more profitable - better cars for the economy and no unions.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 10:39:41 AM
|
Very good points. The only thing I would add is they have such huge fixed costs that cutting production is not enough right now. They have gotten to where they are because their products were not as good, innovative or fuel efficient. they are playing catch up. The unions have been the problem and I am sure that is who the democrats are trying to protect especially after the unions backed Obama.
|
| Name: |
Council Roc Doc
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 11:41:00 AM
|
An interesting fact is that $2300 is added to the value of a new car sold just to pay for the UAW mandated lavish pension obligations, healthcare etc to 780000 members. The american consumer is adamant that they will not pay a price tag that is pension inflated. Bankruptcy is a realistic option, as Ford and GMC will run out of capital by spring. The only other option is to sell assets.
If a bailout becomes reality, it should be required that the UAW forgo their reluctance to free trade. Excessive tariffs have dramatically closed markets that have been kind to the automotive industry. But Obama has a debt to pay to the unions, so I would imagine that free automotive trade will be off the table. Just attach another government leech to my wallet......
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Two Observations
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 12:04:35 PM
|
One is that each of them have multiple car companies that all produce similar products. What would happen if Ford produced only trucks, Lincoln had the luxury line and Mercury produced only the mid-line cars? (Same for GM)
Also, one of my theories about lagging sales is that I don't see cars that make me want to buy one. They all look the same. I think one of the reason why the PT Cruiser was such a hit was that it looked so completely different than anything else out there.
I have driven Hondas for years. I'm on my third one. They are reliable, have all the features I think are essential, and get good gas mileage. I was excited to see that huge Hyundai plant -- I've read that it is one of the most modern and efficient ever built.
My father, who is 81, swore that he would never drive a "foreign car"... (LOL, considering that so many of the "foreign cars are made here). But the last one he bought is a Toyota van and he brags on it all the time.
As far as the bailout, I think NO. It should be a loan and have strings regarding overhauling their product line and other efficiencies. I'd just say let them fail, but there are too many jobs at stake. I agree that Unions have killed the traditional US car manufacturers. The car industry needs to get real.
|
| Name: |
Swimmer27
-
|
|
| Subject: |
NO!!
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 1:22:14 PM
|
It will not be a bailout of the auto industry, but the UNIONS that have destroyed it. Everybody seems to agree that unions have outlived their usefullnes, yet O is higholy beholden to them so he will do the 'bailout'.
have any of you guys heard of the 'Employee Free choice Act". You think unions are a problem now, wait till this time next year. Once this act is passed, unions can organize YOUR business without ever having to take a VOTE.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Two Observations
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 2:14:16 PM
|
You sound like a republican in this post. :)
|
| Name: |
mbk
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 7:59:13 PM
|
A portion of the article. The entire article is available at the web site I posted below. We will see how bi=partisan the Obama Team is and how well they plan to "work across the aisle" on this issue. I think we know the answer - it is working across the aisle when you come to my side but forget about the D.. going the other way. Don't forget which candidates Alabama and Tennessee supported in the Presidential election.
Nationalizing Detroit
November 10, 2008 Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122628060458212379.html
A Detroit bailout would also be unfair to other companies that make cars in the U.S. Yes, those are "foreign" companies in the narrow sense that they are headquartered overseas. But then so was Chrysler before Daimler sold most of the car maker to Cerberus, the private equity fund. Honda, Toyota and the rest employ about 113,000 American auto workers who make nearly four million cars a year in states like Alabama and Tennessee. Unlike Michigan, these states didn't vote for Mr. Obama.
But the very success of this U.S. auto industry indicates that highly skilled American workers can profitably churn out cars without being organized by the UAW. A bailout for Chrysler would in essence be assisting rich Cerberus investors at the expense of middle-class nonunion auto workers. Is this the new "progressive" era we keep reading so much about?
|
representative! After all, Spencer Bachus was on the oversight committee for fanny/freddie. He was #4 on the list of those who took big money.
He took $130 k and then voted for the bailout. You must voice your opinion.
|
| Name: |
CAT BOAT
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2008 9:50:11 PM
|
I really don't want to get into this discussion. You all have valid points and interesting views. All are good honest opinions. Importantly, Unions are "Old School". Retirement/benefits for retired GM workers is expensive. Several of GM's problems began years ago, when they switched from making autos, to building tanks and other items to fight the war. GM invested in our future as far as I can tell. May be wrong on that view, but what I believe anyway. (I was wrong once, turned out I was right anyway.) Without going into details, think of the other jobs/companies at risk. Suppliers! Parts distributors! Car Stereo shops! Parts manufacturers! Steel plants! Tire manufactures! Auto electronics Companies! I think I read somewhere that 10% of jobs were directly related to the Automobile industry. Is yours? Mine sure is and I'm tight as a tick right now, and not spending any money! As far as quality goes, in my honest opinion GM is as good as any other. I may be a little out of bounds and a bit uneducated on the subject, but GM's health, retirement and other benefits are there to take care of American workers during and after years of service to an American company they so proudly worked for. Does Toyota, Honda and others do the same? I really don't know the answer to that questions. Not really trying to force my views/opinions here. Heck, Outside of the Big Three, I don't think anyone makes a truck to tow my boat. LMAO : ) I wonder how many here have at least one of the big three in there driveway right now?
|
| Name: |
Swimmer27
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/11/2008 6:21:35 AM
|
CAT, you make very valid points, but the reality is that the UAW took over the retirement benifits a few years back. It is also suppossed to be protected in a trust. What we have to look at now is the current situation. The big three are hurting becuase of poor business diecisions and unreasonable union demands. None of the 'imports' are asking for help. If they fail, somebody will buy them out, retool, and start making cars again when the economy turns around. It cost $30 an hour more to make a nion car than it does to make a non union car. The unions are killing the domestic car business, and the union bosses don't care. Not until they shut down and the dues stop coming in. Them they want to point fingers.
And why bail them out to continue to build cars that nobody is buying. Dealers like you would have a lot FULL of inventory they can't move. The manufacturers start to force the dealers to buy with 'incnentives' and then it falls on the dealers to suffer the brunt of meltdown.
Good luck to you. I have family in the car business that is suffering now also. In fact almost all of my family is in the car and mortgage business. Sucks to be them right now.
|
| Name: |
StrunkWhite
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Should the government bail out
|
|
Date:
|
11/11/2008 1:18:17 PM
|
american-- I can't speak for you, but I am an American, with a capital A.
dont -- Have an apostrophe: ' In fact, here are some more that you somehow forgot to use in this post: ' ' ' '
|
out? Come on now! Is there anyone guaranteeing me retirement benefits and a pension plan? NO. If we all ran our business like the government, we would have all sank years ago. I think that if they have to bail and then reconstruct themselves and learn from their mistakes to survive, then so be it. It is not my responsibility as a tax payer to provide benefits to other companies when we are working to maintain and employee the employees that have worked hard and been loyal to our company. There has to be some accountability and if some fail, then so be it. You see what the bank bail out did. Donald Trump said he was unable to get a loan for his new construction. He said the banks spent the bailout money buying up other banks instead of doing what it was intended for, which was stimulating the economy and keeping them floating. If the government bails out everything, then we will be in a socialized economy and there will be no turning back. The government will be in the business of banking, automotive, real estate and no telling what else!
|
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Lake Martin
Login
|
Home
