|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
05-08-2012, 09:30 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
Isn't this thread about Romney taking credit for it?
|
It's about politics and politicians. They want to take credit when things go right, and deflect when the poop hits the fan. Romney wants to position himself as being on the right side of the auto bail out while on his way to campaign in Michigan. Obama and company get pissed cuz they took the credit for it already. Whoopee.
They both wanna take credit for it? Great. Take it. It was a bonehead move that so far has taxpayers on the hook for over $20 billion and counting.
|
05-08-2012, 09:35 PM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
It's about politics and politicians. They want to take credit when things go right, and deflect when the poop hits the fan. Romney wants to position himself as being on the right side of the auto bail out while on his way to campaign in Michigan. Obama and company get pissed cuz they took the credit for it already. Whoopee.
They both wanna take credit for it? Great. Take it. It was a bonehead move that so far has taxpayers on the hook for over $20 billion and counting.
|
I assume that in that inflated figure, you're not accounting for the additional tax revenue that is derived from thousands and thousands of workers in decent paying jobs, and thousands and thousands fewer needing unemployment benefits and other social services.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
05-08-2012, 09:54 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
I assume that in that inflated figure, you're not accounting for the additional tax revenue that is derived from thousands and thousands of workers in decent paying jobs, and thousands and thousands fewer needing unemployment benefits and other social services.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
It ain't inflated. That's just the estimate for GM. A host of other companies got bailed out too, but that's another story.
The talk track on the auto bailouts has always been that if the government hadn't stepped in, all those workers would be unemployed. That's sophistry.
The demand for cars would not have gone away. GM's manufacturing capacity and cuurent sales would likely have allowed it to sustain operations - albeit at a reduced level - while it shed costs and debt in a traditional bankruptcy. Even with government intervention, the workforce was still reduced. That would likely have happened in a traditional bankruptcy. Pension and labor costs might have been reduced more effectively in a traditional bankruptcy as well. It also might have given GM greater flexibility to shift labor and productive capacity to plants that were producing product that was in higher demand.
I guess we'll never know, though...
|
05-08-2012, 09:59 PM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,913
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
It's about politics and politicians. They want to take credit when things go right, and deflect when the poop hits the fan. Romney wants to position himself as being on the right side of the auto bail out while on his way to campaign in Michigan. Obama and company get pissed cuz they took the credit for it already. Whoopee.
|
However, Obama can justly claim some credit. He was, after all, President at the time and directly involved with the decision-making that led to where we are today (i.e., GM and Chrysler alive).
Romney had no role whatsoever in it. He was neither on Obama's team, nor on the Congressional Republican team opposing it. He was irrelevant on this issue. Period.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
05-08-2012, 11:20 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,228
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
It ain't inflated. That's just the estimate for GM. A host of other companies got bailed out too, but that's another story.
The talk track on the auto bailouts has always been that if the government hadn't stepped in, all those workers would be unemployed. That's sophistry.
The demand for cars would not have gone away. GM's manufacturing capacity and cuurent sales would likely have allowed it to sustain operations - albeit at a reduced level - while it shed costs and debt in a traditional bankruptcy. Even with government intervention, the workforce was still reduced. That would likely have happened in a traditional bankruptcy. Pension and labor costs might have been reduced more effectively in a traditional bankruptcy as well. It also might have given GM greater flexibility to shift labor and productive capacity to plants that were producing product that was in higher demand.
I guess we'll never know, though...
|
Just great your idea on welching on pensions and wages not to mention unfettering management to further erode the already weakened UAW. I guess that was an intended benefit of the bailout. Hadn't heard about that aspect. That is a win win my book. Sounds like a truly good course of action to take when a large employer decides to call it quits. They should never be allowed to play possum and shed their responsibility to the citizenry.
What is astounding to me is this cannibalistic mindset that unions are bad for the country. The country is it's citizenry not these corporations whose only purpose is profit. Without protection afforded by collective bargaining you end up with the citizenry reduced to wage slaves. It's such a simple concept.
No unions = no 40hr workweek, no unions = no five day workweek, no unions =no paid holidays, no unions = no child labor laws, no unions = no workplace safety standards, no unions =no paid sick leave, no unions= no liveable wages, no unions = no health insurance, no unions = no overtime.
So Whell, how many of these benefits do you enjoy in your place of employment?
More to the point why do you continue to accept these benefits in the face of your outspoken distaste for unions.
Why in the world would you accept blood money hard won by union workers and organizers of yesteryear? I'm truly curious as to your rationale cause it really escapes me.
__________________
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
- Mr. Underhill
|
05-09-2012, 06:18 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,252
|
|
I am so glad mittens wrote an oped in the NY Times that single handedly saved the auto industry.
The only problem with his plan was it relied on private sector money. You want to tell me who would have provided the capital for the structured bankruptcy. No one was loaning money, in the private sector, at the time.
|
05-09-2012, 07:56 AM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
It's about politics and politicians. They want to take credit when things go right, and deflect when the poop hits the fan. Romney wants to position himself as being on the right side of the auto bail out while on his way to campaign in Michigan. Obama and company get pissed cuz they took the credit for it already. Whoopee.
They both wanna take credit for it? Great. Take it. It was a bonehead move that so far has taxpayers on the hook for over $20 billion and counting.
|
The difference is that the Obama team deserves some credit. Romney had nothing to do with it. He's full of shit, as usual. Stealing credit for other peoples work is, most likely, a skill he picked up in the corporate world. We've all seen that crap in our careers, many a time.
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
05-09-2012, 07:59 AM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobabode
Just great your idea on welching on pensions and wages not to mention unfettering management to further erode the already weakened UAW. I guess that was an intended benefit of the bailout. Hadn't heard about that aspect. That is a win win my book. Sounds like a truly good course of action to take when a large employer decides to call it quits. They should never be allowed to play possum and shed their responsibility to the citizenry.
What is astounding to me is this cannibalistic mindset that unions are bad for the country. The country is it's citizenry not these corporations whose only purpose is profit. Without protection afforded by collective bargaining you end up with the citizenry reduced to wage slaves. It's such a simple concept.
No unions = no 40hr workweek, no unions = no five day workweek, no unions =no paid holidays, no unions = no child labor laws, no unions = no workplace safety standards, no unions =no paid sick leave, no unions= no liveable wages, no unions = no health insurance, no unions = no overtime.
So Whell, how many of these benefits do you enjoy in your place of employment?
More to the point why do you continue to accept these benefits in the face of your outspoken distaste for unions.
Why in the world would you accept blood money hard won by union workers and organizers of yesteryear? I'm truly curious as to your rationale cause it really escapes me.
|
Nice post, Bob.
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
05-09-2012, 11:57 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Diego via Vermilion Ohio and Points Between
Posts: 11,538
|
|
Right on Bob,
Everyone is forgetting that Romney wanted private investment firms to bail out the industry at a time when there was no private credit to be had (Romney knew this too...was Bain Capital asked to participate?). Obama used the Federal Government because it worked and he had no other choice. Sort of like the difference between FDR (Obama) and Hoover (Romney)
google alf landon whell...and thomas dewy and wendell wilkie while your at it
__________________
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
|
05-09-2012, 12:19 PM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
Obama = FDR?
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31 AM.
|