Tell me exactly what the plan is and I'll give you an answer.
Printable View
Tell me exactly what the plan is and I'll give you an answer.
I asked you to tell me what the plan is.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBoy
would Bush have let GM go under?
if not, how would he have handled the situation?
This would be another way to look at it.
Look at the bright side. When the various benefit schemes bankrupt it, at least we will not have had a 'socialist' government in these here United States.
I'll make up my mind about these quasi government takeovers later. If the government holds on to those shares indefinately, then I'd be pretty disappointed, however, if they are able to gradually sell them back to the public after they appreciate in value a bit, then I'd be happy they made the move. Time will tell.
Im not a huge economics business buff but dont the majority of businesses, like say over 95%, asks for the goverment to step in? And in exchange for governement help, they get ahold of some of those assets?
Government is awesome at giving up control. I'm sure they will release this bird as soon as GM finds its wings again. Why would the far-left government want to control the country's biggest automotive company while they try to push environmental fascism?
And another thing. Michael Moore just about creamed his tight pants this week when talking about how THE PEOPLE now own GM and Banks. What a loser. THE PEOPLE don't own shit. Their money is being stolen, their currency inflated, and their country bankrupted.
On the upside, he finally dropped a couple lbs. Although, I think Rush is owning him on The Biggest MouthLoser.
The government will get rid of the shares, but not to the benefit of the public. GM and Chrysler are doomed to fail because it's the union costs which buried those companies and the unions are the ones who Obama wants to save. The unions made token concessions, but not nearly enough to result in sustainable companies, so what we'll end up with is either the government just donating their shares to the UAW, or selling them to the public with those proceeds going to the UAW. Either way, the Taxpayers can kiss that money goodbye.Quote:
Originally Posted by jman3000
Depends on the industry. Certain industries are political pets, like automakers and airlines. They always get help when they need it, and as such are always in need of help because why try to swim when the government won't let you sink? On the other side of that coin are industries like technology and energy. Those aren't pet industries and when those industries had their bust periods (energy in the 80s and tech in the 90s) they didn't get bailouts, they got the middle finger. Lots of companies went under, lots of people lost jobs, but what resulted were surviving companies who knew how to weather tough times. It's no coincidence that tech and energy are holding up better than everyone else through all this mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Creepn
why couldn't GM have divested itself of many of its satellite companies several years ago, instead of allowing itself to get to the point of needing a gov't handout? They have been losing tons of money for years.
They could have done these spin-offs and divestitures and streamlining measures a long time ago.
I have a couple of question;
1. Is it supposed to be 0% nationalized?
2. If it's not socialism now at what % does it become socialism.
If that happens then I'd never vote for another Democrat for the rest of my life. But we haven't crossed that bridge yet. Your'e dealing in assumptions... I'd prefer to wait and see. Either way there's nothing we can do.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
Quote:
Originally Posted by cool cat
1. Yes--of traditionally private industries. Nationalization creates a moral hazard by spreading the cost onto every single American instead of on the company itself. The cars GM makes are not public goods that we need to support because of their amazing positive externalizes. No one is complaining about the post office (or very few). If the government didn't buy the company somebody else would have and the world would have kept on spinning.
2. Everything is on a sliding scale.
Benefits up up up
Spending up up up
Debt up up up
Government Size up up up
Unemployment up up up
Taxes up up up
Interest Rates up up up
What's with the bitching. Everything is on the up and up :toast No wonder the media is pretty relaxed and focusing on more important things like Michelle's impeccable fashion sense. So beautiful. She got her hair did ya'll!
:danceclub
what's your definition of socialism?Quote:
Originally Posted by cool cat
there was never a plan or a hope that the US would own car companies. The plan and hope is still to give the companies back and have them run themselves.
this isn't like healthcare or public schools.