• 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 to Lay Off 2000 on Friday, the 20th

calamity said:
He will be at noon tomorrow
Click to expand...

Yes indeed.

However, he has no control over the sales of the Chevy Cruz, and NAFTA can be looked at, just as these workers are, for creating an avenue for GM to reward Mexico over US workers.

Time will tell how that can be corrected.
 
calamity said:
:roll:
Click to expand...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/politicususa/

Notes: PolitiusUsa is an overtly left wing biased news and opinion website. They use strong loaded words and sensationalized headlines to get attention. While PoliticusUsa does attempt to source their information, they sometimes link to other very biased sites. The stories on this website need to be read with caution and be prepared to fact check.
Click to expand...
PoliticusUSA | AllSides


Here's DailyKOS slamming them as shills for Obama:
Politicususa.com Shills for Obama on Whether NDAA Military Detention Applies to American Citizens.

https://symptomaticcommentary.wordp...cususa-as-real-liberal-politics-archive-2012/
 
And you can bet he NEVER gets his "facts" anywhere else......(unless it's equally biased and fits his narrative)
 
NIMBY said:
According to GOP blame rules in 2009, it starts after inauguration.

This is how GOPutinistas blamed Obama for losing 2.2 million jobs his first three months.

Not to mention blaming 10.4% on Obama .
Click to expand...

After? I've heard MANY Republicans blame Obama for the August-September 2008 Market crash. Not only wasn't he president then, he wasn't even president elect. But they blame him. lol
 
vesper said:
Maggie there is a long history of GM and bailouts throughout the Obama administration and prior. At one point the citizens owned the debt of about one quarter of the company. Crony captitalism through the Obama administration to forced the green cars they wanted produced that the government would be the biggest purchasers. There were several problems with the cars and it didn't work out as Obama hoped.

Ford and Chrysler have both announced new jobs opportunies. Only GM who was the bastard child that allowed the government to actually take over their operations is the one claiming layoffs.

We have had a history of car manufacturers in this country All the big Detroit icons, We the taxpayers have been bailing them out for decades because what they negociate with their unions in the end they can't honor.

Add to that every time government makes a car manufacturer re-tool over regulations on emissions for example, it takes millions upon millions to conform to the new laws. Between the unions unable to make good on all the feckless negociating the company had done previously and the new regulations that have poured out of the arse of Obama the last 8 years like a bad case of diarrhea coupled with the increases in corporate taxes, in order to produce a profit for those people who invest in their industry they had no choice but to move their operations elsewhere. In Detroit where most of these car manufacturers home offices resided, the state of Michigan which has been a very blue state in the last couple of decades have also looked to the auto industry to tax feverously to pick up the tab on all the other feckless spending and bills they wanted to pay. Between the state, federal and unions the companies could no longer survive unless they sent their manufacturing to other countries.

Today, Michigan has a Republican governor, and that didn't happen on a fluke. The majority of the people know who sold them out.
Click to expand...

Great post! Most others in this thread are just content lacking chatter and left biased hot air.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
After? I've heard MANY Republicans blame Obama for the August-September 2008 Market crash. Not only wasn't he president then, he wasn't even president elect. But they blame him. lol
Click to expand...

It wasn't "Obama's" fault...but Democrats played a very large role in it nonetheless.
The major catalyst being the subprime mortgage loan market aimed at making mortgages available to those who were deemed "entitled", without having the means in reality to afford those mortgages.
Now, which party persistently believes in "free" stuff to get votes?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932008
 
NIMBY said:
According to GOP blame rules in 2009, it starts after inauguration.

This is how GOPutinistas blamed Obama for losing 2.2 million jobs his first three months.

Not to mention blaming 10.4% on Obama .
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. I was just in another thread the other day where someone was blaming the great recession of 2007 on Obama simply because he "intended" to run in 2008... which made everything crash.
 
yankintx said:
For many of his supporters the shoe will never drop, for others it fell when Trump reneged on his vow to prosecute Clinton, you could actually hear the Clinton haters scream in pain.
Click to expand...

Sure. And, a big sign that they live in denial is the "fake news" trope we hear every time something true is reported about Dumb Donald.
 
calamity said:
Sure. And, a big sign that they live in denial is the "fake news" trope we hear every time something true is reported about Dumb Donald.
Click to expand...

Its amazing he got this far in life, with such a thin skin, he needs to toughen up, he is in for one hell of a rough ride.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
It wasn't "Obama's" fault...but Democrats played a very large role in it nonetheless.
The major catalyst being the subprime mortgage loan market aimed at making mortgages available to those who were deemed "entitled", without having the means in reality to afford those mortgages.
Now, which party persistently believes in "free" stuff to get votes?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932008
Click to expand...

Been down this tired old road a million times here. Not going to do it again, especially with someone who's mind is already made up about 'who was responsible'. I have found that most Dems are willing to blame BOTH sides, which is the truth. While unfortunately most Conservatives and Republicans like you insist is was 99 to 100% the fault of the Dems. Which is partisan BS. Phil Gramm played a large role in deregulating Wall Street. And to keep the economy humming along W also loved pushing the housing bubble. Even so actually most of the banks that failed had nothing to do with the CRA.

There was plenty of blame to go all around, the GOP, the Dems, Wall Street, the Mortgage Banks, the rating agencies who willingly stamped the garbage packages with a AAA rating, Predatory lending, and yes the borrowers too, and on and on. That's the facts. But by reading just this ONE post by you I'm very sure you don't care about the facts. You just want to believe the Dems played a 'large role' so they can buy votes. :roll:

Have a nice day.
 
yankintx said:
How dare you throw cold water on the Trump Party, and by using facts!! Whatever next
Click to expand...

Well trumpettes disagree with it therefore it has to be "fake news".
 
calamity said:
Trump making America Great again, I guess. 2000 future jobs promised in exchange for 2000 layoffs now and 1300 more in March.




The art of the deal.
Click to expand...

Giant who cares? They should have been allowed to crumble. Survival of the fittest. While it may not be social Darwinism for people...it is for corporations who can't figure out how to survive in harsh economic times. There is always room in America for a United States auto maker. ALWAYS. But if you can't survive without handouts you should crash.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
Giant who cares? They should have been allowed to crumble. Survival of the fittest. While it may not be social Darwinism for people...it is for corporations who can't figure out how to survive in harsh economic times. There is always room in America for a United States auto maker. ALWAYS. But if you can't survive without handouts you should crash.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
It's not that clean....it never is as simple as the thrown out, nice sounding tropes.

They would have taken 1000's of other companies with them. GM owed us $2M during that time period. After settlement and other BS, we got about $1.4. I imagine that $2m non-payment would have sunk us too.
 
calamity said:
It's not that clean....it never is as simple as the thrown out, nice sounding tropes.

They would have taken 1000's of other companies with them. GM owed us $2M during that time period. After settlement and other BS, we got about $1.4. I imagine that $2m non-payment would have sunk us too.
Click to expand...

Again. There is always room for other companies. How much better would ford have been if chevy collapsed? It is that simple. I'm not saying it wouldn't have been a bitter pill, but if the company collapsed or was cut to barebones and forced to become more efficient? Forced union cooperation? All that. I'm betting chevy could have come out a much more efficient and stronger company...or...someone else would have filled the void.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
Again. There is always room for other companies. How much better would ford have been if chevy collapsed? It is that simple. I'm not saying it wouldn't have been a bitter pill, but if the company collapsed or was cut to barebones and forced to become more efficient? Forced union cooperation? All that. I'm betting chevy could have come out a much more efficient and stronger company...or...someone else would have filled the void.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You do not understand if GM had been dissolved it would taken all the auto dealers and auto suppliers with it.

Not just the Suppliers that made parts for GM but the ones that supplied parts to Toyota , Honda, and others too.

The US supplies would be gone.
And since all manufactures including foreign and domestic shared supply companies even foreign auto manufacturing plants in the US would have closed shop.

That's why Toyota and Honda wanted congress/ US government to help prevent GM and the Detroit 3 auto companies from dissolving.



1 in every 10 jobs in the US was connected to the auto industry.

The Detroit 3 , US Honda , and Toyota are inter connected. They share the suppliers and if GM and Chrysler failed then the auto parts suppliers would most likely would have also failed causing the US Honda & US Toyota to close thier US factories.

In that scenario all of our autos would be imports.

Take a look at this article:

Why Toyota wants GM to be saved
A GM failure would cause production problems, crush already weak demand and potentially open the door to low-cost competitors.

Last Updated: December 16, 2008: 9:53 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Detroit's Big Three aren't the only automotive companies that want to see the government step in with some much-needed financial help.

Overseas automakers, most notably Toyota Motor, all endorse some form of federal aid to keep General Motors (GM, Fortune 500), Chrysler LLC and possibly Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500) out of bankruptcy.

The Senate killed an effort to get the automakers a stopgap loan last week and now the Bush administration has said it is looking at providing the automakers help from the $700 billion approved to bail out banks and Wall Street firms.

"We support measures to help the industry," said Toyota Motor (TM) spokeswoman Mira Sleilati. "We just want a strong, competitive healthy industry."

This may seem surprising at first, especially considering that much of the opposition to the auto bailout was from senators from Southern states that are home to auto plants operated by Asian auto companies, such as Alabama and South Carolina. But the Asian automakers insist they never lobbied against such help for the Big Three.

And this makes sense after taking a closer look at the dynamics of the auto industry and the intertwined fates of its companies.

Here's why Toyota, Honda Motor (HMC) and other Asian auto manufacturers clearly believe they are all better off if GM and Chrysler survive.

Collateral damage

The overseas automakers, who between them produce more than 3 million vehicles a year at U.S. plants, all worry their production would be hurt if one of the U.S. automakers went under. That's because a Big Three failure would likely lead to widespread bankruptcies in the auto parts supplier industry.

<snip>

Besides sharing suppliers, many dealers sell both U.S. and overseas brands. So the failure of a U.S. automaker could hurt the overseas manufacturers' dealer network and their sales as well, Merkle said.

"There would be a severe disturbance in the force," he quipped.

Economic shockwaves
A collapse of one of the Big Three would also probably cause an even more severe hit to the U.S. economy. That would further eat into demand for U.S. auto sales, which hit a 26-year low in November.

"The U.S. economy would be in shambles," Merkle said. "The robust U.S. economy that Toyota and the others depend on would suddenly not be as lucrative." <SNIP>
Click to expand...

Why Asian automakers want a federal bailout of U.S. industry - Dec. 15, 2008
 
Last edited:
minnie616 said:
You do not understand if GM had been dissolved it would taken all the auto dealers and auto suppliers with it.

Not just the Suppliers that made parts for GM but the ones that supplied parts to Toyota , Honda, and others too.

The US supplies would be gone.
And since all manufactures including foreign and domestic shared supply companies even foreign auto manufacturing plants in the US would have closed shop.

That's why Toyota and Honda wanted congress/ US government to help prevent GM and the Detroit 3 auto companies from dissolving.



1 in every 10 jobs in the US was connected to the auto industry.

The Detroit 3 , US Honda , and Toyota are inter connected. They share the suppliers and if GM and Chrysler failed then the auto parts suppliers would most likely would have also failed causing the US Honda & US Toyota to close thier US factories.

In that scenario all of our autos would be imports.

Take a look at this article:

Why Toyota wants GM to be saved
A GM failure would cause production problems, crush already weak demand and potentially open the door to low-cost competitors.

Last Updated: December 16, 2008: 9:53 AM ET



Why Asian automakers want a federal bailout of U.S. industry - Dec. 15, 2008
Click to expand...

yep. The "We should have let GM go under" trope is extremely short sighted.
 
blackjack50 said:
Again. There is always room for other companies. How much better would ford have been if chevy collapsed? It is that simple. I'm not saying it wouldn't have been a bitter pill, but if the company collapsed or was cut to barebones and forced to become more efficient? Forced union cooperation? All that. I'm betting chevy could have come out a much more efficient and stronger company...or...someone else would have filled the void.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You clearly have no ****ing idea what you are talking about.
 
minnie616 said:
You do not understand if GM had been dissolved it would taken all the auto dealers and auto suppliers with it.

Not just the Suppliers that made parts for GM but the ones that supplied parts to Toyota , Honda, and others too.

The US supplies would be gone.
And since all manufactures including foreign and domestic shared supply companies even foreign auto manufacturing plants in the US would have closed shop.

That's why Toyota and Honda wanted congress/ US government to help prevent GM and the Detroit 3 auto companies from dissolving.



1 in every 10 jobs in the US was connected to the auto industry.

The Detroit 3 , US Honda , and Toyota are inter connected. They share the suppliers and if GM and Chrysler failed then the auto parts suppliers would most likely would have also failed causing the US Honda & US Toyota to close thier US factories.

In that scenario all of our autos would be imports.

Take a look at this article:

Why Toyota wants GM to be saved
A GM failure would cause production problems, crush already weak demand and potentially open the door to low-cost competitors.

Last Updated: December 16, 2008: 9:53 AM ET



Why Asian automakers want a federal bailout of U.S. industry - Dec. 15, 2008
Click to expand...

Sometimes a hard lesson has to be learned. Sucks. But it is true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
Sometimes a hard lesson has to be learned. Sucks. But it is true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What 'lessons'? The car companies are doing fine now. They've hired 10,000's of new employees. They've invested billions in their US factories.

They paid back all the bail out money.

Seems like all in all the bailout worked. Bush started the bailout process, Obama finished it. Both should be thanks for saving thousands of jobs.
 
vesper said:
...
Today, Michigan has a Republican governor, and that didn't happen on a fluke. The majority of the people know who sold them out.
Click to expand...

Ummm... vague allusions to "over" regulations, like clean air (hmm, it's almost like humans breathe the stuff), won't cut it.

Michigan's car industry fell because it sucked. It became bloated, top-heavy, inefficient, and these issues compounded over time into neglecting to innovate and, in doing so, hemorrhaging market share to competitors that operated under those exact same clean air policies.

But you're right about one thing: it's pretty easy to see who sold out their individual thought to tow the collectivist party line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom