Page 83 of 199 FirstFirst ... 3373818283848593133183 ... LastLast
Results 821 to 830 of 1989

Thread: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

  1. #821
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,761

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I'm sorry, but that is total horse****. Everyone who was involved with GM, Chrysler, and the bailouts has said that they absolutely could not have been reorganized without a bailout. They each required tens of billions of dollars they didn't have, and that no one would lend them, PLUS huge concessions from the UAW. I suggest you read a couple books on the subject if you want to learn more about it:

    Amazon.com: Overhaul: An Insider's Account of the Obama Administration's Emergency Rescue of the Auto Industry: Steven Rattner: Books

    Amazon.com: Once Upon a Car: The Fall and Resurrection of America's Big Three Auto Makers--GM, Ford, and Chrysler (9780061845628): Bill Vlasic: Books

    The reason GM didn't prepare Chapter 11 filings is that they were delusional. They thought they would be bailed out and the government wouldn't force them into Chapter 11. They knew perfectly well that they couldn't file on their own. Chyrsler, OTOH, did prepare for Chapter 11 on the assumption that it would be part of any bailout. But then, at the time, Chrysler was owned by a venture capital company that had a clue.

    The two companies are now profitable and I see no reason why they won't remain profitable. They have radically changed their business models. Ironically, it's actually Chrysler that's bolstering Fiat at the moment, as Fiat tries to weather the Euro-zone crisis.
    To believe Rattner's book I would have to believe Rattner, and I do not.

    Cuomo Sues Steven Rattner in Pension Fraud Case - NYTimes.com Sued for fraud while managing one of the largest businesses in America.

    Chapter 11 reorganization is primarily because of debt structure, it allows it to placed on hold while you solidify holdings. It would amount to reorganization of all outstanding debt and obligations. You require money to do so, but Chrysler was still selling cars, just not as many. UAW would have lost in that environment as all their current contracts would be void and the UAW would have to bargain from an entirely different standpoint. I can go through all the details but you know what a Chapter 11 is and how it works, debt schedule and all so I dont know why you are making the sort of argument you're trying to make. 11 eases debt pressure and allows you to pay off smaller debts and reorganize larger ones. Frequently it requires less outlays than a current situation.

  2. #822
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I'm sorry, but that is total horse****. Everyone who was involved with GM, Chrysler, and the bailouts has said that they absolutely could not have been reorganized without a bailout. They each required tens of billions of dollars they didn't have, and that no one would lend them, PLUS huge concessions from the UAW. I suggest you read a couple books on the subject if you want to learn more about it:

    Amazon.com: Overhaul: An Insider's Account of the Obama Administration's Emergency Rescue of the Auto Industry: Steven Rattner: Books

    Amazon.com: Once Upon a Car: The Fall and Resurrection of America's Big Three Auto Makers--GM, Ford, and Chrysler (9780061845628): Bill Vlasic: Books

    The reason GM didn't prepare Chapter 11 filings is that they were delusional. They thought they would be bailed out and the government wouldn't force them into Chapter 11. They knew perfectly well that they couldn't file on their own. Chyrsler, OTOH, did prepare for Chapter 11 on the assumption that it would be part of any bailout. But then, at the time, Chrysler was owned by a venture capital company that had a clue.

    The two companies are now profitable and I see no reason why they won't remain profitable. They have radically changed their business models. Ironically, it's actually Chrysler that's bolstering Fiat at the moment, as Fiat tries to weather the Euro-zone crisis.
    How is your Italian? Fiat may be looking for employees in Italy. Amazing how little many here know about capitalism. In capitalism there is no guarantee of success and many times there is failure. In the case of GM/Chrylser there may indeed have been failure but to believe that someone wouldn't have taken over parts of GM/Chrysler is being very naive. In capitalism companies fail all the time but we come out of those failures stronger and in less debt when the taxpayers don't try and bail them out. nothing really has changed at GM as the business model is still operating and that just rewards failure. The taxpayer lost billions on the deal but that doesn't bother you since the hundred thousand union jobs saved divert from the massive spending to save union contracts in states all over the country.

  3. #823
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    11-06-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,490

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    How is your Italian? Fiat may be looking for employees in Italy. Amazing how little many here know about capitalism. In capitalism there is no guarantee of success and many times there is failure. In the case of GM/Chrylser there may indeed have been failure but to believe that someone wouldn't have taken over parts of GM/Chrysler is being very naive. In capitalism companies fail all the time but we come out of those failures stronger and in less debt when the taxpayers don't try and bail them out. nothing really has changed at GM as the business model is still operating and that just rewards failure. The taxpayer lost billions on the deal but that doesn't bother you since the hundred thousand union jobs saved divert from the massive spending to save union contracts in states all over the country.
    what bothers you is that these jobs were saved....sure, some were union, and has been explained to you countless times, repeatedly, over and over, is that more than just 'union' jobs were saved, quite a few 'non union' jobs were also saved, but you would be willing to be rid of these 'non union' jobs just to get rid of those that are union....i'd explain the economic consequences of losing all those jobs, hell, i've already explained it to you several times, it is pointless to do it again. you were all for letting chrysler/gm go under , so long as it took a bunch of 'union' jobs with it, the consequences to those workers, and the many more 'non union' workers be damned. as long as it struck a blow against the unions, all would have been well in your world.

  4. #824
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    15,273

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by randel View Post
    what bothers you is that these jobs were saved....sure, some were union, and has been explained to you countless times, repeatedly, over and over, is that more than just 'union' jobs were saved, quite a few 'non union' jobs were also saved, but you would be willing to be rid of these 'non union' jobs just to get rid of those that are union....i'd explain the economic consequences of losing all those jobs, hell, i've already explained it to you several times, it is pointless to do it again. you were all for letting chrysler/gm go under , so long as it took a bunch of 'union' jobs with it, the consequences to those workers, and the many more 'non union' workers be damned. as long as it struck a blow against the unions, all would have been well in your world.
    Is there some reason to believe that had GM/Chrysler gone through bankruptcy that they would not have emerged with their unions still in tact?

  5. #825
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    To believe Rattner's book I would have to believe Rattner, and I do not.

    Cuomo Sues Steven Rattner in Pension Fraud Case - NYTimes.com Sued for fraud while managing one of the largest businesses in America.

    Chapter 11 reorganization is primarily because of debt structure, it allows it to placed on hold while you solidify holdings. It would amount to reorganization of all outstanding debt and obligations. You require money to do so, but Chrysler was still selling cars, just not as many. UAW would have lost in that environment as all their current contracts would be void and the UAW would have to bargain from an entirely different standpoint. I can go through all the details but you know what a Chapter 11 is and how it works, debt schedule and all so I dont know why you are making the sort of argument you're trying to make. 11 eases debt pressure and allows you to pay off smaller debts and reorganize larger ones. Frequently it requires less outlays than a current situation.
    In order to qualify for Chapter 11 a corporation has to offer a plan showing that it can continue as a going concern if the plan is approved. Neither GM nor Chrysler could come close to doing so without the infusion of capital from the government. At the time of the bailouts, GM was burning through over $3 billion in cash per month. GM estimated that it would need $100 billion in debtor-in-possession financing to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy. See, Vlasic P. 546. They were just about $100 billion short and no private lender was going to give them that kind of money. They were already leveraged to the hilt.

  6. #826
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by randel View Post
    what bothers you is that these jobs were saved....sure, some were union, and has been explained to you countless times, repeatedly, over and over, is that more than just 'union' jobs were saved, quite a few 'non union' jobs were also saved, but you would be willing to be rid of these 'non union' jobs just to get rid of those that are union....i'd explain the economic consequences of losing all those jobs, hell, i've already explained it to you several times, it is pointless to do it again. you were all for letting chrysler/gm go under , so long as it took a bunch of 'union' jobs with it, the consequences to those workers, and the many more 'non union' workers be damned. as long as it struck a blow against the unions, all would have been well in your world.
    What bothers me is the fact that you believe it is the Federal Taxpayers' job to bailout out union contracts in the states. you don't seem to understand the separation of powers and the role of the state govt. in your world it is all one pot. Why don't you just send my state money directly instead of paying a bureaucrat to send it where they want?

    You buy the Obama rhetoric and simply don't think. Jobs were saved, how many? NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE nor does anyone know if those jobs would have been saved by the state taxpayers but it is easier for you to buy Obama rhetoric than actually think. Try to understand the role of the state and the role of the Federal Govt. They aren't the same

  7. #827
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    da
    He did an awful thing today - he compromised!
    There was no compromise. First he dictated an unconstitutional provision then he lied about it.

    But just for fun show me where the president has the authority to tell a company they must provide something to anyone at a cost to themselves and at no cost to the beneficiary.

    This has become a dictatorship.

  8. #828
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,761

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    In order to qualify for Chapter 11 a corporation has to offer a plan showing that it can continue as a going concern if the plan is approved. Neither GM nor Chrysler could come close to doing so without the infusion of capital from the government. At the time of the bailouts, GM was burning through over $3 billion in cash per month. GM estimated that it would need $100 billion in debtor-in-possession financing to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy. See, Vlasic P. 546. They were just about $100 billion short and no private lender was going to give them that kind of money. They were already leveraged to the hilt.
    Maybe this is why?
    No GM Buyback or Dividend Seen as Pension Gap Freezes Cash: Cars - Bloomberg

    Part of the problem with the GM and Chrysler models is that they had terrible pension liabilities and still do. Its better but now, the chances on the Unions changing their bargaining the way that they had to at Ford is almost nil. Im not going to touch the venture capital thing, that kind of volatility needs to be separated from a large capital enterprise like an auto maker.

    Secondly, if you would tell me how much the government loaned to GM and Chrysler? Im curious and I dont think it was $100B.

  9. #829
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    What bothers me is the fact that you believe it is the Federal Taxpayers' job to bailout out union contracts in the states. you don't seem to understand the separation of powers and the role of the state govt. in your world it is all one pot. Why don't you just send my state money directly instead of paying a bureaucrat to send it where they want?

    You buy the Obama rhetoric and simply don't think. Jobs were saved, how many? NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE nor does anyone know if those jobs would have been saved by the state taxpayers but it is easier for you to buy Obama rhetoric than actually think. Try to understand the role of the state and the role of the Federal Govt. They aren't the same
    It is amazing how posts like this make liberals quiet as they cannot refute the logic and reality. Come on, randel, let's hear a response? Is it the Federal Responsibility to save state union jobs and bail out state pension funds?

  10. #830
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    11-06-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,490

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    What bothers me is the fact that you believe it is the Federal Taxpayers' job to bailout out union contracts in the states. you don't seem to understand the separation of powers and the role of the state govt. in your world it is all one pot. Why don't you just send my state money directly instead of paying a bureaucrat to send it where they want?

    You buy the Obama rhetoric and simply don't think. Jobs were saved, how many? NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE nor does anyone know if those jobs would have been saved by the state taxpayers but it is easier for you to buy Obama rhetoric than actually think. Try to understand the role of the state and the role of the Federal Govt. They aren't the same
    and yet again, the word 'union' comes up in your response...just admit it and be honest, what happened would not have bothered you nearly as much if no union jobs were involved...the unions were not 'bailed out' ......you speak of 'rhetoric', yet, that is all you speak, you speak of the different roles of the federal and state governments, yet you don't understand yourself...educate yourself before you claim others dont understand.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •