• 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, Chrysler Get Ultimatum From Obama on Turnaround

If the government cannot constitutionally enter into an agreement to back domestic automaker's warrantees while they are in bankruptcy, then the FDIC is unconstitutional, as well as any and all federal loan guarantees.

Gee.

Ya think?

The fact is, the government has been doing this sort of thing practically since our founding.

No, it hasn't.

It's unconstitutional, and the people used to know what the Constitution was for. The people today think, wrongly, that it's a license to do anything and everything.

You do not have a constitutional right to having a warrantee backed by the private sector only.

That has got to be one of the stupidest statements ever made.

The Constitution forbids the federal government from loaning money to private companies, and it certainly forbids the federal government from providing warranties on products sold by private companies. In fact, the word "warranty" isn't used once, not in the entire Constitution.
 
Lot of hyperbole being thrown around in this thread. The administration simply stated that as a condition of additional government assistance, the CEO would have to step down.

Right.

Like the man said, the administration strong-armed GM's CEO out of a job.


How is that any different then say if Warren Buffet bailed them out and made the same condition? If GM wanted to keep the guy, they could have just declined additional assistance.

Warren Buffet uses his own money?

That would seem like a huge difference to honest people like me.
 
And how is that not strong-arming?

Democrats don't strong-arm, obviously. Clearly Speaker-Of-The-Age, His Most Honorably Eloquent, the Great Teleprompter Reader himself can't strong arm anyone. He's a "persuader".

Did you know sales of Atlas Shrugged are surging lately? Get your copy. This administration is frightening in the parallels it's creating.
 
Its a valid question whether money should be given at all, but if it is, its perfectly appropriate to create requirements for a bailout.

That's....oh, get this, it's really tricky....the job of Congress to decide those matters, not the Teleprompter Reading Messiah.
 
Obama is now being criticized for NOT giving our money to a failing corporation? :roll:

I think this is one of the better moves he's made since taking office. I'm all for backing the warranties.

It is more cost effective than continuing to pump money into a failing corporation that is destined to fail if things are not radically overhauled.

Think of it this way:

If we don't back the warranties, then Joe Lunchbox will be the one who gets screwed in a hard economy.

But by only backing the warranties, we prevent harm to Joe Lunchbox while allowing GM to sink or swim on their own.

And I WANT Obama to say "There's no way we're bailing out this piece of **** company if there aren't some serious changes made in their corporate hierarchy"

If he's gonna be handing out money, give it to companies that show they want to work for it, instead of being handed it without having to fix the problems.

It's just like welfare. I don't mind it if it has caveats preventing people from abusing it. So it should also be with this bailout money.

If GM doesn't back the warranties, and no one else does, Joe won't be stupid enough to buy a GM car, and GM goes bye-bye, like it should, but that would cost the goddamned uniongoons all those overpriced jobs and cost the Democrats votes. Can't have that.

That's all this is about, Democrat votes and uniongoon jobs.

The money shouldn't be handed out, and the government should stop throwing good money after bad.

There's only two steps left to be taken that I can see.

The Teleprompter Reading Messiah is going to demand the taxpayer subsidize the sale of GM cars.

Then, when GM sales remain flat, the TRM is going to raise taxes on people who don't own a GM car. This last will be called the GM Car Emergency Tax Credit.

It's what fascist states like the one the TRM is building do.

It's just like welfare. I don't mind it if it has caveats preventing people from abusing it. So it should also be with this bailout money.

Glad to see all the anti-bushbots are now in total support of corporate welfare. Are you guys on the flip side, or the flop side, today?
 
Last edited:
If GM doesn't back the warranties, and no one else does, Joe won't be stupid enough to buy a GM car, and GM goes bye-bye, like it should, but that would cost the goddamned uniongoons all those overpriced jobs and cost the Democrats votes. Can't have that.

That's all this is about, Democrat votes and uniongoon jobs.

The money shouldn't be handed out, and the government should stop throwing good money after bad.

There's only two steps left to be taken that I can see.

The Teleprompter Reading Messiah is going to demand the taxpayer subsidize the sale of GM cars.

Then, when GM sales remain flat, the TRM is going to raise taxes on people who don't own a GM car. This last will be called the GM Car Emergency Tax Credit.

It's what fascist states like the one the TRM is building do.

Backing the warranties protect those who purchased GM prior to their total collapse as well, not just people who buy them form here on out.

I don't think government support of warranties will do **** to help GM sales. Do you actually think there is any chance it would?

Glad to see all the anti-bushbots are not in total support of corporate welfare. Are guys on the flip side, or the flop side, today?

How am I an anti-bushbot?
 
Backing the warranties protect those who purchased GM prior to their total collapse as well, not just people who buy them form here on out.

I don't think government support of warranties will do **** to help GM sales. Do you actually think there is any chance it would?

No. I don't.

I wasn't stupid enough to vote for Obama, either.

Obama must think it will, or why would he do it?



How am I an anti-bushbot?


Outside of your sudden praise and admiration of corporate welfare?

You mean perhaps you've always felt that way, that you've always supported fascist interference in what's supposed to be a free economy? Then maybe you're not a flipflopping anti-bushbot.
 
Personally I'm kind of curious why more Obama supporters and liberals in general aren't more disgusted with this entire Obama corporate bailout plan. Considering that corporate America disgusts so many liberals one would think that the government actually giving bailout money to said corporations would disgust them as well.
 
No. I don't.

I wasn't stupid enough to vote for Obama, either.

Obama must think it will, or why would he do it?

Maybe to protect the consumers who already have GM vehicles under warranty when the company fails?






Outside of your sudden praise and admiration of corporate welfare?

Where was that exactly?

You mean perhaps you've always felt that way, that you've always supported fascist interference in what's supposed to be a free economy? Then maybe you're not a flipflopping anti-bushbot.

How would I be any type of anti-bushbot, flip-flopping or otherwise?

HINT: This is where you actually support the ad-hom instead of spewing more nonsense.
 
It's somewhat amusing to see Bushies complain about obama's abuse of office. Obama supporters were sucked in by a smooth talker and he's mirrored the bush admin so much we should just call him Obushama. It would be awesome if we could see a realistic poll of how many who are condemning this move also condemned Bush's 9/11 airline $$ for silence scheme, otherwise known as the Victims' Fund, which was signed into law on less than two weeks after the attacks. People supporting moves like that is what sets a precedent for later sell-outs to follow.
 
While I was at the gym, there was mention of a $4,000 tax credit for the purchase of an American made vehicle, on the TV. Obviously I couldn't hear what they were saying about it, and could only read the headlines, but apparently thats being opposed by the people in the used car market and the auto repair industry. So essentially to help one, you invariably screw the other. I can see where people in the auto repair business would oppose government backed warranties, but outside of that group I don't see why that's a terrible thing in and of itself.

Do I think GM should sink? Sure, just as donsutherland stated, Chapter 11 is probably the best way to go, to force restructuring. I don't understand why people on the left oppose chapter 11 bankruptcy for a corporation that is on the verge of going under. It makes all the talk about hating big evil corporations suspect, when they seek to protect them. I know they will say its to protect the average joe working the assembly line, but that big evil corporation is who gave them a job in the first place. I personally see chapter 11 as the only real way out of this mess to be honest.
 
Many people on the right were not happy with those, Bush laid the ground work to allow Obama to become CEO-in-Chief.

It's very sad to see people jsut accepting this behavior.

I agree 100% MrVicchio. Just off the top of my head, I can clearly recall you, the Rev, and some others getting mighty riled up over Bush's corporate welfare. I credit you guys with being consistent on that.

What I don't understand is me being called an anti-bushbot by someone about this issue.

In essence, my stance is that I'd rather see the warranties get backed and allow GM to go under. If GM dies, but the warranties are not backed, people who purchased GM a year or two ago will be hit with serious problems because they have no more warranty.

Sure they shouldn't have bought GM, but some people are patriotic enough that they only buy American because they believe it is better for the country than buying Japanese. Hell, I used to think that way, and still won't buy any car made in another country.

I don't want to see American patriots who used their personal finances to help out an American company screwed by that companies incompetence.
 
While I was at the gym, there was mention of a $4,000 tax credit for the purchase of an American made vehicle, on the TV. Obviously I couldn't hear what they were saying about it, and could only read the headlines, but apparently thats being opposed by the people in the used car market and the auto repair industry. ...

That doesn't need to be one of the big three. My wife's Hyundai was made in Alabama.
 
Personally I'm kind of curious why more Obama supporters and liberals in general aren't more disgusted with this entire Obama corporate bailout plan. Considering that corporate America disgusts so many liberals one would think that the government actually giving bailout money to said corporations would disgust them as well.

Obama is their MESSIAH. He can do no wrong.

If anything bad happens while Obama reigns, it will be Goldstein's fault.

Currently, Bush is filling in for Goldstein, but everyone knows Bush is just Goldstein's tool.

Just wait for the fun when The MESSIAH publicly implements the Two-Minute Hate.
 
Personally I'm kind of curious why more Obama supporters and liberals in general aren't more disgusted with this entire Obama corporate bailout plan. Considering that corporate America disgusts so many liberals one would think that the government actually giving bailout money to said corporations would disgust them as well.

As a Democrat I find this whole bailout ridiculous. These companies should have been allowed to prosper or fail in the free market. There should have been no government interference.

Despite my disgust for the decision to bailout these companies, I am still able to comprehend the reasoning and ability of those doing the bailing (the government) ability to dictate the conditions of their offering (the CEO stepping down, etc.) and protection to consumers of the company being bailed out.
 
As a Democrat I find this whole bailout ridiculous. These companies should have been allowed to prosper or fail in the free market. There should have been no government interference.

Despite my disgust for the decision to bailout these companies, I am still able to comprehend the reasoning and ability of those doing the bailing (the government) ability to dictate the conditions of their offering (the CEO stepping down, etc.) and protection to consumers of the company being bailed out.




This is not how most democrats feel.


What about the workers? Isn't that usually the left's argument?
 
Maybe to protect the consumers who already have GM vehicles under warranty when the company fails?

I'll give you a hint:

It's not the government's job to do that.

If failure of warranty coverage is an issue with bankrupted companies, then a portion of the assets of the bankrupted GM would otherwise waste on uniongoons should be set aside to for warranty coverage....AFTER GM goes into bankruptcy court.

It's what bankruptcy court is for.

How about if we stop wasting my tax dollars and just tell GM to file Chapter 11 (or whatever) and get it over with already?


Where was that exactly?

In your posts, where you keep insisting the government should prop up failed businesses...specifically GM.

That's corporate welfare, and you're supporting it.

Are you saying you don't support the nationalization of GM?

How would I be any type of anti-bushbot, flip-flopping or otherwise?

And anti-bushbot is someone programmed to be anti-bush. The anti-bushbots of the Bush era were all opposed to "corporate welfare".

Suddenly they've been reprogrammed. It appears they were only against Bush Era corporate welfare, they have no problems with Messiah Corporate Welfare.

HINT: This is where you actually support the ad-hom instead of spewing more nonsense.

No. That was where I repeated what I'd already said, that you most likely opposed corporate welfare as recently as five months ago, and now you're praising it.

I could be wrong, what was your FEELINGS about federal agricultural subsidies under the liberal president the Messiah replaced?
 
It's somewhat amusing to see Bushies complain about obama's abuse of office.

Then again...I"m an American. I can say this, you can't, because I voted for neither Bush nor Obama. Only Americans can say that.

Obama supporters were sucked in by a smooth talker and he's mirrored the bush admin so much we should just call him Obushama. It would be awesome if we could see a realistic poll of how many who are condemning this move also condemned Bush's 9/11 airline $$ for silence scheme, otherwise known as the Victims' Fund, which was signed into law on less than two weeks after the attacks. People supporting moves like that is what sets a precedent for later sell-outs to follow.

I'm one of the opponents of that scam, also.

I don't support much that liberal presidents do.
 
While I was at the gym, there was mention of a $4,000 tax credit for the purchase of an American made vehicle, on the TV. Obviously I couldn't hear what they were saying about it, and could only read the headlines, but apparently thats being opposed by the people in the used car market and the auto repair industry. So essentially to help one, you invariably screw the other. I can see where people in the auto repair business would oppose government backed warranties, but outside of that group I don't see why that's a terrible thing in and of itself.

I don't work to subsidize somone else's poor judgement in transportation purchases. If they buy a lemon, let them make lemonade, but don't force me to buy the sugar for them.


Do I think GM should sink? Sure, just as donsutherland stated, Chapter 11 is probably the best way to go, to force restructuring. I don't understand why people on the left oppose chapter 11 bankruptcy for a corporation that is on the verge of going under. It makes all the talk about hating big evil corporations suspect, when they seek to protect them. I know they will say its to protect the average joe working the assembly line, but that big evil corporation is who gave them a job in the first place. I personally see chapter 11 as the only real way out of this mess to be honest.

The leftists don't oppose companies going bankrupt. If the parent company of Winchester went belly up, they'd be cheering. But GM has a few uniongoons working for it, and the uniongoons own a lot of Democrat policians. That should be enough to explain why the Democrats are so eager to throw my money at a particular failed business.
 
This is not how most democrats feel.


What about the workers? Isn't that usually the left's argument?
The workers choose to work their jobs. This is the risk you agree to when choosing to live and work in a community or in a profession supported solely by a single a manufacturer.

I personally would never live in a town/city that did not have multiple possibilities for my employment field.

This is why I label myself "slightly liberal". When it comes to the economy and free market I lean more Libertarian.
 
Last edited:
GM, Chrysler Get Ultimatum From Obama on Turnaround - Automotive * US * News * Story - CNBC.com

On what grounds, constitutional grounds does Obama have to make such a move, make the claim the US Government would back a private companies warranties?

People screamed bloody hell Bush was tapping phone lines to catch terrorist as Government out of control... what the hell do you call this bullsnot?

I think GM did something to piss off Obama somehow and this is payback. It seems to be exactly the way Chicago would handle itself. I mean, we're still pumping in a bunch of money to AIG which continues to engage in fraud with no arrest/trial/conviction going on (any form of "legal" money theft is the type of sleaze Chicago loves best) and it doesn't have anything on the other side. At least GM still has a product, there are cars there. But something is rotten here for sure, and it probably has to do with somehow a slight against Obama and he's just taking it out on GM.
 
I'll give you a hint:

It's not the government's job to do that.

If failure of warranty coverage is an issue with bankrupted companies, then a portion of the assets of the bankrupted GM would otherwise waste on uniongoons should be set aside to for warranty coverage....AFTER GM goes into bankruptcy court.

It's what bankruptcy court is for.

How about if we stop wasting my tax dollars and just tell GM to file Chapter 11 (or whatever) and get it over with already?

I want GM to be allowed to fail. I said that in my first post.

If I'm choosing between giving GM money or using money to back the warranties for consumers of GM products in the past, I prefer the latter.

Right now, those are the choices that are present. I prefer the warranty approach to the handing GM a bunch of money approach.

I don't support corporate welfare. Never have, and still don't. I definitely prefer the warranty approach to the hand-out approach, since GM receives no real benefit form the warranty approach (we both agree it won't do **** to stimulate sales of GM products), while the consumer does gain benefit (they don;t get screwed on their current GM vehicle that is still under warranty when GM goes under).


In your posts, where you keep insisting the government should prop up failed businesses...specifically GM.

That's corporate welfare, and you're supporting it.

Are you saying you don't support the nationalization of GM?

I've never once insisted that the government should prop up failed businesses. Quite the opposite in fact. I'm saying that if they are going to do anything at all, they should protect the consumers who got screwed by these companies, not save these companies that screwed their consumers.


And anti-bushbot is someone programmed to be anti-bush. The anti-bushbots of the Bush era were all opposed to "corporate welfare".

Suddenly they've been reprogrammed. It appears they were only against Bush Era corporate welfare, they have no problems with Messiah Corporate Welfare.

I'm aware of what one is, why do you think that's what I am?

IOW, I'm not doing what you think I'm doing. I am also not an Obama supporter.



No. That was where I repeated what I'd already said, that you most likely opposed corporate welfare as recently as five months ago, and now you're praising it.

But I didn't praise corporate welfare.

I could be wrong, what was your FEELINGS about federal agricultural subsidies under the liberal president the Messiah replaced?

I was against subsidies then, I am against them now. I was against the bailouts when Bush was in office, I'm against the bailouts now that Obama is in office.

I will state that if we are going to spend billions upon billions of dollars, I'd rather see it go to those who were not part of the problem. Right now, my biggest issue with the bailouts is that they are only contributing to the problems.

I don't see backing warranties as contributing to the problem because I don't see it helping GM sell vehicles.

I will say that anyone who buys a GM vehicle at this point is an idiot who deserves to lose their warranty. But someone who bought a year or two ago and is still under warranty is not an idiot and doesn't deserve to get screwed because GM is incompetant.

If we're spending billions of dollars, better to put it there than in the coffers of the incompetent corporation.
 
Back
Top Bottom