• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GM needs up to $30 billion in aid to avoid failure

I'm more irritated by the $5B request by Chrysler than by the $30B request by GM,

If Cerberus doesn't think you're worth investing in, why the **** should we?
 
Yay, 1.5 million jobs are connected to GM I heard on TV. I don't have a link. But that can't be good.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Yay, 1.5 million jobs are connected to GM I heard on TV. I don't have a link. But that can't be good.
Click to expand...

"connected to" is a horribly vague concept. Kevin Bacon's job is as safe as it ever was, and I guarantee he's closer to GM than a large chunk of that million and a half
 
Kernel Sanders said:
"connected to" is a horribly vague concept. Kevin Bacon's job is as safe as it ever was, and I guarantee he's closer to GM than a large chunk of that million and a half
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. Only three people will be effected. :roll:
 
americanwoman said:
What's more economical- To pay them unemployment or give their company billions of dollars every couple months so they don't fail?
Click to expand...

Other companies are tied to GM. Tire manufacturers, radio manufacturers, rims, glass, plastic, aftermarket part manufacturers, and dealers. It's not just GM that would be affected.
 
True, but why are we keeping these guys afloat? There's a lot tied to them, but they obviously weren't competing well enough before the economic downturn hit. I don't know, at some level I think we have to let companies die; I don't see why I have to continually pay for bad companies.
 
americanwoman said:
What's more economical- To pay them unemployment or give their company billions of dollars every couple months so they don't fail?
Click to expand...

Depends. In the long run, they could turn out to be a profitable company that repays all their loans. Or, they could go into Chapter 11.
 
Ikari said:
True, but why are we keeping these guys afloat? There's a lot tied to them, but they obviously weren't competing well enough before the economic downturn hit. I don't know, at some level I think we have to let companies die; I don't see why I have to continually pay for bad companies.
Click to expand...

I see your point. What would be the repurcussions of letting every company fail right now, banks included? The failures are ubiquitous throughout the economy. We are a paper dragon. An immediate collapse would be catastrophic.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
I see your point. What would be the repurcussions of letting every company fail right now, banks included? The failures are ubiquitous throughout the economy. We are a paper dragon. An immediate collapse would be catastrophic.
Click to expand...

Everything being let go would break the system. I understand that part, but I don't think I should have to pay for everyone with their palms turned towards the sky. It's getting ridiculous. Plus, this just becomes a backdoor method of nationalizing private business which I really disagree with. We'll pull out of this depression, but I don't want the government to come out with well more power than it had going in like during the Great Depression. And I want some form of responsibility injected into the system. A little bit of proper oversight and to quit rewarding bad business with tax payer money.
 
Ikari said:
Everything being let go would break the system. I understand that part, but I don't think I should have to pay for everyone with their palms turned towards the sky. It's getting ridiculous. Plus, this just becomes a backdoor method of nationalizing private business which I really disagree with. We'll pull out of this depression, but I don't want the government to come out with well more power than it had going in like during the Great Depression. And I want some form of responsibility injected into the system. A little bit of proper oversight and to quit rewarding bad business with tax payer money.
Click to expand...

I understand your concerns. Capitalism fails sometimes. They tried to pretend the economy isn't a zero sum game. The pie stopped growing and it's collapsing on itself. It's not all the govt.'s fault. The is no liquidity.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Other companies are tied to GM. Tire manufacturers, radio manufacturers, rims, glass, plastic, aftermarket part manufacturers, and dealers. It's not just GM that would be affected.
Click to expand...

Answer the question. Is it cheaper to pay unemployment or to pay billions every couple of months?
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
I see your point. What would be the repurcussions of letting every company fail right now, banks included? The failures are ubiquitous throughout the economy. We are a paper dragon. An immediate collapse would be catastrophic.
Click to expand...

Well since we aren't letting every company fail, just the big 3 automakers, we'll be okay. Besides, anyone who really thinks that the foreign automakers with american plants won't fill the employment gap, at least significantly, is living in fairytale land. The demand needs to be met still and GM going under doesn't stop that. Hell, when is enough enough? This is Chrystler's, what, THIRD time coming for a bailout? Repeat after me: LET THEM FAIL.
 
Indy said:
Answer the question. Is it cheaper to pay unemployment or to pay billions every couple of months?
Click to expand...

It's tough to say. Paying unemployment for 1.5 million jobs adds up quick. I'm not sure we've established that we would have to pay billions every couple months. If you have figures, lets see them. I don't have the figures to answer you.
 
Indy said:
Well since we aren't letting every company fail, just the big 3 automakers, we'll be okay. Besides, anyone who really thinks that the foreign automakers with american plants won't fill the employment gap, at least significantly, is living in fairytale land. The demand needs to be met still and GM going under doesn't stop that. Hell, when is enough enough? This is Chrystler's, what, THIRD time coming for a bailout? Repeat after me: LET THEM FAIL.
Click to expand...

It's not just the big three. There are plenty of businesses tied to them. If the demand was there, they wouldn't be in trouble. People aren't getting the loans so it doesn't matter who builds the cars. Demand is limited by who can get financing.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
It's tough to say. Paying unemployment for 1.5 million jobs adds up quick. I'm not sure we've established that we would have to pay billions every couple months. If you have figures, lets see them. I don't have the figures to answer you.
Click to expand...

Well think of it this way, at $1,000 a month in unemployemt, that would make montly unemployment equal to 1.5 Billion a month. I've never received unemployment benefits(even though I've been unemployed), so I don't know how much you get, but isn't it a percentage of your gross pay? I don't think its unreasonable that it could cost billions a month, in unemployment. Maybe not 30 billion a month, but still a significant chunk o' change.

The problem now, is that these companies are getting bailout money and laying people off. Its basically being compounded right now.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
It's not just the big three. There are plenty of businesses tied to them. If the demand was there, they wouldn't be in trouble. People aren't getting the loans so it doesn't matter who builds the cars. Demand is limited by who can get financing.
Click to expand...

The question though is, does the destruction of the GM and Chrysler pave the way for more efficient, competitive, innovative and new upstarts?

The compilation of this list did not pave the destruction of the American automobile. http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_United_States_automobile_manufacturers
 
Goldenboy219 said:
The question though is, does the destruction of the GM and Chrysler pave the way for more efficient, competitive, innovative and new upstarts?

The compilation of this list did not pave the destruction of the American automobile. http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_United_States_automobile_manufacturers
Click to expand...

If the economic crisis wasn't a perfect storm, I would agree. We don't make much anymore. I could be wrong though. I can understand where you guys are coming from.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
It's not just the big three. There are plenty of businesses tied to them. If the demand was there, they wouldn't be in trouble. People aren't getting the loans so it doesn't matter who builds the cars. Demand is limited by who can get financing.
Click to expand...

So if there is not demand for these companies then what makes you think we won't be offering bailouts to them again? I know what you are getting at but it is still the Gov't propping up an outdated industry. What would you say if there were the big 3 betamax companies looking for a bailout? People don't use betamax but if the companies went under people would be unemployed, never mind the fact that allowing these engineers to go on their own might lead to the invention of DVD's or Blu-Ray's.
 
Indy said:
So if there is not demand for these companies then what makes you think we won't be offering bailouts to them again? I know what you are getting at but it is still the Gov't propping up an outdated industry. What would you say if there were the big 3 betamax companies looking for a bailout? People don't use betamax but if the companies went under people would be unemployed, never mind the fact that allowing these engineers to go on their own might lead to the invention of DVD's or Blu-Ray's.
Click to expand...

Cars aren't outdated like betamax. These companies didn't have the vision that Ford had regarding the future of the market.

America doesn't make much anymore. If we allow foreign companies to overtake all of our production markets we will become more of a paper giant I am afraid.

Your position has plenty of merit. Don't get me wrong. I don't see a silver bullet solution. I just lean towards a parachuting descent as opposed to being high speed dirt.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Cars aren't outdated like betamax. These companies didn't have the vision that Ford had regarding the future of the market.

America doesn't make much anymore. If we allow foreign companies to overtake all of our production markets we will become more of a paper giant I am afraid.

Your position has plenty of merit. Don't get me wrong. I don't see a silver bullet solution. I just lean towards a parachuting descent as opposed to being high speed dirt.
Click to expand...

It is extremely difficult for more efficient firms to enter the market when super giants like GM can obtain lifeline credit to stay afloat. In ordinary market conditions, only the valuable aspects of GM would have survived and been bought by private entities, while the inefficient segments would have been left to die off.

Adios! See ya all on Monday.... If im not in jail:2wave::mrgreen:
 
The problem with the 3 needs no cent to be solved. Capitalism does not fail. The problems of the 3 are problems of socialism.

All the Congress has to do is to cut hands of Unions. ‘Unions are schools of Communism’, - V. I. Lenin.

They are nto a school of Capitalism. All demands of Unions should be thrown into garbage. The pay should be cut a half. The rest should be earned in forms of profit sharing and stock purchase. The Unions can invest in pensions and medical insurance on their own, if they are so big and smart. Anyone who was making $20 per hour – may be cut to $10 per hour- the rest - % of profit and stocks, - like CEOs – so everyone would be a CEO. Work hard, compete, - get another $10 AND MORE

If a regulation roughly sketched above is enacted today, tomorrow GM stock will jump, GM cars will start selling, economy would receive a boost, - no cent spent, - smart and FAIR government regulation of the market, - labor market.

Of course, provided that Unions invested huge amount of money in Obama and Democratic Congress they want to see the profit, - nationalizing auto industry (in this or that form) and taking money from those who work hard and produce. ( The end result has been proven by experiments in many countries, - there will not be anybody willing to work hard and produce).That’s why they are not backing up an inch in negotiations. They set up Obmam and democrats to destroy one of most important fabrics and moving forces of the American society – which can be put in 2 words – FAIR COMPETTION.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom