Does this bother anyone besides me?

[tking]

I didn't think the government should step in when they first started bailing out the automakers, but this is very strange to me.

GM exec stepping down at request of White House. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gm_wagoner)

[Tallen]

I didn't think the government should step in when they first started bailing out the automakers, but this is very strange to me.

The whole thing stinks. GM should have been preparing for economic hard times, the writing was on the wall 5 or 6 years ago a least. And now that they have accepted the socialist agenda for their company, expect a lot more of this kind of thing. http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_8_218.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxdm824MNUS)

Ford was smart, they turn down the bail out and they will survive.






http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb112&pp=ZNxdm824MNUS (http://www.smileycentral.com/dl/index.jhtml?partner=ZSzeb112_ZNxdm824MNUS&utm_id=7920)

[tking]

The whole thing stinks. GM should have been preparing for economic hard times, the writing was on the wall 5 or 6 years ago a least. And now that they have accepted the socialist agenda for their company, expect a lot more of this kind of thing. http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_8_218.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxdm824MNUS)

Ford was smart, they turn down the bail out and they will survive.






http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb112&pp=ZNxdm824MNUS (http://www.smileycentral.com/dl/index.jhtml?partner=ZSzeb112_ZNxdm824MNUS&utm_id=7920)

Yeah, socialism...that's what I'm afraid of. It almost seems like that IS the agenda for this administration.:L36:

[Yodas_Prodigy]

Agee with this thread!!

[travelah]

I didn't think the government should step in when they first started bailing out the automakers, but this is very strange to me.

GM exec stepping down at request of White House. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gm_wagoner)

I predict GM and Chrysler will not survive as viable companies, at least not in any resemblance to what they are today. Just look around and note the number of new GM or Chrysler products you see on the roads now. The dealer lots are full, the OEM part orders are rock bottom and GM has now resorted to directly attacking Ford to generate truck sales. ... Dire news ahead.

[JBaker45]

Yeah, socialism...that's what I'm afraid of. It almost seems like that IS the agenda for this administration.:L36:
I am surprised how many people have no problem with socialism.

I was bold enough to tell my boss (well, he is also my personal friend) that he was a socialist. And he agreed with me! :L10:

[Swordman53]

I didn't think the government should step in when they first started bailing out the automakers, but this is very strange to me.

GM exec stepping down at request of White House. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gm_wagoner)

Actually, I have no problem with this. btw - Here is another link to read.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29944834

When a company goes into receivership the banks have a right to impose new management on that company to protect their assets. This is not socialism or communism, but capitalism.

GM and Crysler have borrowed billions from the taxpayers with the government acting as a bank. If they are not viable entities, then the 'bank' has the right to change management.

[Tallen]

I am sure the Obama team dealing with the Auto Industry has no idea what they are doing, after reading this mornings news.

[Tallen]

Actually, I have no problem with this. btw - Here is another link to read.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29944834

When a company goes into receivership the banks have a right to impose new management on that company to protect their assets. This is not socialism or communism, but capitalism.

GM and Crysler have borrowed billions from the taxpayers with the government acting as a bank. If they are not viable entities, then the 'bank' has the right to change management.

The government is not a banking system, which is another move toward a socialist agenda..., nationalizing the banking system. It looks to me that Obama's agenda is to put his hands on everything uniquely American, and change it in some manner. Health, wealth, business and welfare seem to be first. A scary time for setting what will come in the future.

[Tallen]

Agreed.

[tking]

Actually, I have no problem with this. btw - Here is another link to read.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29944834

When a company goes into receivership the banks have a right to impose new management on that company to protect their assets. This is not socialism or communism, but capitalism.

GM and Crysler have borrowed billions from the taxpayers with the government acting as a bank. If they are not viable entities, then the 'bank' has the right to change management.

Except that this isn't a bank. This is the United States Government. It makes me shudder, to tell you the truth. If we hold to this type of action, the government can feasibly be in control of lending companies, insurance companies, and we're already on our way to government-controlled health care. There's no stopping place.

By definition this is not capitalism:

cap·i·tal·ism
Pronunciation:
\ˈka-pə-tə-ˌliz-əm, ˈkap-tə-, British also kə-ˈpi-tə-\
Function:
noun
Date:
1877
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

The government should never have gotten involved in the first place...not with this, AIG, or the banking industry.

[tking]

The government is not a banking system, which is another move toward a socialist agenda..., nationalizing the banking system. It looks to me that Obama's agenda is to put his hands on everything uniquely American, and change it in some manner. Health, wealth, business and welfare seem to be first. A scary time for setting what will come in the future.

lol...guess we were thinking the same thing at the same time :L14:

[Tallen]

The government should never have gotten involved in the first place...not with this, AIG, or the banking industry.

I agree Terri, what would be the result of the government holding the mortgages of our houses? I bet they would tax us some how in order to keep our property, we would report to another bureaucracy and fill out more information for the government.

I can just feel the incompetency of such an entity as the Depart of Mortgages. :L8:

[tking]

I agree Terri, what would be the result of the government holding the mortgages of our houses? I bet they would tax us some how in order to keep our property, we would report to another bureaucracy and fill out more information for the government.

I can just feel the incompetency of such an entity as the Depart of Mortgages. :L8:

I don't even want to think about it. I can remember my parents, decades ago, saying we didn't have to worry about communism or socialism being brought in by another country, our own country would come up with it on its own. They opted out of farming when the government first dipped its fingers into it in about 1962 or thereabouts. They weren't interested in letting the government start its control of farming. Look where we are today. Unless you happen to be independently wealthy or have other lucrative income besides your farming which allows you to do as you please, the government controls your every farming move. We deal with it every year.

[Tallen]

I wasn't thinking of farming when I posted what I did, but that is a good example. Right down to the government wanting to tax farmers for cow flatulence and rain water run-off.

Yeah right, the government is really helping us there. :L50:

[tking]

I wasn't thinking of farming when I posted what I did, but that is a good example. Right down to the government wanting to tax farmers for cow flatulence and rain water run-off.

Yeah right, the government is really helping us there. :L50:

I heard an interesting little tidbit on NPR about the methane tax on cattle the other day. The reason this has come about is due to the fact that cattle weren't included in the carbon credit thing. Unreal. I wonder if they're gonna levy huge taxes on the bags of manure that landscaping companies (or even Wal-mart and such) sell and use?...lol. Oh but wait, that'd be double taxation wouldn't it..:L8:

[Tallen]

The Carbon Credit is a joke, as you know. You should see the games that are being played with that. It's sick.

Did you know that there are carbon brokers, that trade in pollution credits? And recently there has been talk about expanding this to sulfer, so you would be taxed for your nitrogen and your sulfer. It's nuts.

BTW, check out this ARTICLE (http://www.carbonoffsetsdaily.com/usa/obama%e2%80%99s-involvement-in-chicago-climate-exchange-the-rest-of-the-story-5581.htm). Obama's has personal interest in pollution brokering.

[tking]

The Carbon Credit is a joke, as you know. You should see the games that are being played with that. It's sick.

Yeah, trading air...makes a lot of sense to me :L55:. But then we trade grain on paper, soooooooo:L50:

[Tallen]

Yeah, trading air...makes a lot of sense to me :L55:. But then we trade grain on paper, soooooooo:L50:

I know it is crazy. :L8:

[Tallen]

A side note about pollution trading. It is predicted to become the world's largest market. Can you believe that? Carbon (polution), will become the world's leading commody!!!

SEE HERE (http://www.greenchipstocks.com/aqx_p/8088?gclid=CPTks-rnypkCFQdN5QodzzTt5Q)

[Tallen]

Al Gore's hands and feet are dirty to, he has a stake in promoting pollution. Check this out.

SEE ME (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/06/04/gore-invests-carbon-credit-company-will-media-care) :L9:

[Swordman53]

The government is not a banking system, which is another move toward a socialist agenda..., nationalizing the banking system. It looks to me that Obama's agenda is to put his hands on everything uniquely American, and change it in some manner. Health, wealth, business and welfare seem to be first. A scary time for setting what will come in the future.
I did not agree with the government's bailout. But would you rather they had allowed this to go through instead of challenging the viability of the plan?

Personally, I think GM has two options - break the unions and pay their employees what Toyota and the other Japanese firms pay ($45 per hour versus $70 per hour), or shut down all non-profitable divisions and put approximately 2/3 of their workforce on the streets.

I think Crysler is lost.

[Swordman53]

Except that this isn't a bank. This is the United States Government. It makes me shudder, to tell you the truth. If we hold to this type of action, the government can feasibly be in control of lending companies, insurance companies, and we're already on our way to government-controlled health care. There's no stopping place.

By definition this is not capitalism:

cap·i·tal·ism
Pronunciation:
\ˈka-pə-tə-ˌliz-əm, ˈkap-tə-, British also kə-ˈpi-tə-\
Function:
noun
Date:
1877
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

The government should never have gotten involved in the first place...not with this, AIG, or the banking industry.
See my note to Tallen.

We did the same for Crysler in the 1970s and they were able to pay us back.

We did the same for Harley-Davidson and they were able to pay us back.

We have a much larger situation here, but government loaning money is not unprecidented.

[Tallen]

I did not agree with the government's bailout. But would you rather they had allowed this to go through instead of challenging the viability of the plan?

Personally, I think GM has two options - break the unions and pay their employees what Toyota and the other Japanese firms pay ($45 per hour versus $70 per hour), or shut down all non-profitable divisions and put approximately 2/3 of their workforce on the streets.

I know this sounds bad, but I think it is best to let GM go into bankruptcy. This will let them deal with their high cost, unions and other problems. They may come out stronger if this were to happen. Look at the airline industry and the airplane manufacturers for instance. These industries went through similar crisis, had to trim down and get competitive. They are stronger now, and guess what..., no bailouts.


I think Crysler is lost.

Me to.

[TigerBunny]

Al Gore's hands and feet are dirty to, he has a stake in promoting pollution. Check this out.

SEE ME (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/06/04/gore-invests-carbon-credit-company-will-media-care) :L9:

He's been in it from the beginning.

[Tallen]

As far as Chysler goes, we bailed them out 30 years ago to now get to the same place again.

We shouldn't have bailed them out either time.

[Tallen]

He's been in it from the beginning.

Yep, he benefits from fear mongering.

It's his living, since his wife has told him to go and do something. :L39:

[travelah]

Actually, I have no problem with this. btw - Here is another link to read.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29944834

When a company goes into receivership the banks have a right to impose new management on that company to protect their assets. This is not socialism or communism, but capitalism.

GM and Crysler have borrowed billions from the taxpayers with the government acting as a bank. If they are not viable entities, then the 'bank' has the right to change management.

Generally, the banks have some say as secured creditors if the company goes into receivership but it is not a standard practice to replace the senior management of a firm when it is in receivership. The only leverage the government had was to refuse further funding if it's demands were not met. GM should bite the bullet, shrink down to Chevrolet and get the government out of it's bed.

Chrysler couldn't make a go of it as an operating unit of Daimler. I don't have a clue why they think they can make it through a merger with that miserable Italian tin can manufacturer.

[tking]

See my note to Tallen.

We did the same for Crysler in the 1970s and they were able to pay us back.

We did the same for Harley-Davidson and they were able to pay us back.

We have a much larger situation here, but government loaning money is not unprecidented.

Yet look at Chrysler now. If they paid us back, we're getting shafted in spades this time around. It should've never been done. They do NOT want to get the government as their CEO. The unions need to be taken down a notch and forced to get in line with the vehicle market. They've driven themselves right out of a company.

The government loaning isn't my main issue (although it is a big one...see my post about farming... the government is involved in every single aspect of it including "loaning" payments to farmers so that they can store their wheat and still pay the bills). My main issue is that they've stepped into private enterprise to be the CEO of the company basically. They've forced a CEO out of his chair, and they have essentially performed a take-over. That is one of the scariest things I can think of. What private enterprise is next and where will it stop?

[Athanasius]

[quote=JBaker45;29376]I am surprised how many people have no problem with socialism.

Our young people have been conditioned in the public school system to accept socialist/Marxist ideas. Obama is a Marxist, as is Clinton. Marxism has never worked, and it won't work here. Obama has managed to destroy much of our capitalist system in just a few months. However, Americans sit by (many with their hands out), and like frogs in water being brought to a boil, won't realize what's happening to them until it's too late. Dobson was right years ago when he said Christians need to take their kids out of the public schools of propaganda and brain washing.

You gotta wonder, folks, is it too late for America? Have we been so dummied-down and conditioned to "take, take, take," that the days of free enterprise are past? Trust one who worked in the benefits business for years and years, welfare breeds dependence and destroys self-respect and ambition.

[Tallen]

welfare breeds dependence and destroys self-respect and ambition.

Amen!

[John T]

don't blame me--i voted for mccain