It's Your Money... At Least For Now

[TheScotsman]

Well, now it looks like we are going to bail out the auto industry... again. numbers range from 55,000,000,000.00 to 150,000,000,000.00.

I am thinking this is a waste. I don't ever see the big 3 (soon to be 2) ever being competitive on a world market. Let's face it, there is a reason Toyota, Subaru and Nissan are building a high quality machine at prices equal to USA's junk. Not that I don't own 3 of GM's dinosaurs, but about the only thing the USA builders were any good at was the giant SUV. Nothing else achieves the markup needed to pay $70+/HR that the average UAW worker lands after all the benefits are added in. Last year's VEBA contributions from the big 3 hit 85 billion $! Now they want YOU to give them your money to stay in a business that is destined to fail without major changes in what the unions expect to be paid. The US auto industry, as structured is only going to be viable at 1.80/gallon fuel costs. More than that, and the auto makers don't see the profit needed to pay the vultures. High cost production items (like hybrids) will never make it in today's US auto industry. The cost of such vehicle simply gets way too high when it's a labor-intensive product assembled by poorly trained/educated workers backed by union thugs unwilling to understand that it's easy for a mfgr to move offshore.

The house finance comittee is forwarding proposals to tax employer paid health care as an income... too damn funny, isn't that what we heard McCain's attackers say he was planning? Hmmmm looks like that was the pot calling the kettle black, but the sheep of America believed it.

[gaia.plateau]

Source?

[TheScotsman]

CSPAN( Ya, I am that bored this time of the year) had an interview with G. Woodward (might be mistaken, but I was sure it was him) of the CBO.

"Economists have long eyed the tax exclusion as a potentially rich source of funding for health-reform efforts, Ginsburg said. While McCain proposed to eliminate the tax exclusion for everyone, Obama along with a Democratic Congress would be more likely to impose a cap on the amount not subject to taxes to better target people receiving the most benefits."

"What better way to fund the plan than get the people with the most deluxe health-care policies not to be all tax-free?" he said.
Uwe Reinhardt, a health economist at Princeton University, agreed that a progressive taxation of job-based coverage that largely avoids the lower and middle classes could be a palatable compromise for labor and employer groups, who mostly oppose making health benefits taxable.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/obam...&dist=msr_3

That's what happens when you elect someone without knowing a damn thing about just who they are. The way these nut-cases are starting to come out, one can only think they were just waiting for the chance.

[gaia.plateau]

I'm still not seeing anything about the auto-industry bailout. You clearly implied it was an Obama initiative, where is the evidence?

And there's nothing in the article you posted but speculation from flat-earth economists that were fundamentally against universal healthcare to begin with, except for...

Here's a recap of the kind of health reform Obama wants to accomplish:
*
Build on the current employer-based health insurance system
*
Expand access to Medicaid and the state children's health insurance program
*
Require large employers either to offer coverage or contribute a portion of payroll to its cost
*
Require that all children have health coverage
*
Require health insurers to accept all applicants regardless of any preexisting conditions they may have
*
Introduce a Medicare-like government-administered plan similar to the one available to federal workers that would compete with private health plans in a new market called the National Health Insurance Exchange
*
Create a new tax credit to encourage small businesses to provide coverage to their workers
*
Lower family health premiums by $2,500 through projected cost savings

So there's nothing here that hasn't been said before, but the US President-elect himself. I'd love to see a single case study showing an instance where the implementation of universal healthcare didn't exponentially improve a country's economy, because I've done a shit ton of research and as far as I'm aware it doesn't exist (a single case). Edited November 11, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[dafunk5446]

There have been talks, well kinda, the CEO's are basically asking congress do give them a chunk of the bailout money, and its not a obama plan either, if anything it would be a bush plan, and its not even that, they met with congress. Again stupid move if they give them money, if they havent learned in the last 10 years to start making better cars I doubt its gonna happen. Edited November 11, 2008 by dafunk5446

[r1v3th3ad]

I can confirm the auto industry on CNN...it was on in the background today while I was playing video games, but I definitely can confirm scotsman

[TheScotsman]

I'm still not seeing anything about the auto-industry bailout. You clearly implied it was an Obama initiative, where is the evidence?

And there's nothing in the article you posted but speculation from flat-earth economists that were fundamentally against universal healthcare to begin with, except for...

Here's a recap of the kind of health reform Obama wants to accomplish:
*
Build on the current employer-based health insurance system
*
Expand access to Medicaid and the state children's health insurance program
*
Require large employers either to offer coverage or contribute a portion of payroll to its cost
*
Require that all children have health coverage
*
Require health insurers to accept all applicants regardless of any preexisting conditions they may have
*
Introduce a Medicare-like government-administered plan similar to the one available to federal workers that would compete with private health plans in a new market called the National Health Insurance Exchange
*
Create a new tax credit to encourage small businesses to provide coverage to their workers
*
Lower family health premiums by $2,500 through projected cost savings

So there's nothing here that hasn't been said before, but the US President-elect himself. I'd love to see a single case study showing an instance where the implementation of universal healthcare didn't exponentially improve a country's economy, because I've done a shit ton of research and as far as I'm aware it doesn't exist (a single case).

Don't they have radios in Canada anymore?

All we have been hearing is how Obama met with Bush and told him something needed to be done. Hell, that is coming from both the Dems and the Repubs.
With GM trading under 3.00/share at one point today, it's not looking good. I just don't think the US auto industry is capable of surviving, bail-out or not, without some serious changes in the tastes of the average buyer. The fact GM actually had a market for a 2-wheel drive version of the toadhoe says it all. As for healthcare... http://www.rationalmind.net/2007/07/18/soc...ling-in-canada/ http://www.fraserinstitute.org/newsandevents/news/6123.aspx http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/329/7459/192-e http://www.acurehealth.com/articles/Canada...20president.pdf Why would we want a jacked-up healthcare system like Canada?

[Bulldog_916]

I knew that the big 3 couldnt survive making really inefficient SUVs. They kept selling them though until gas got to about 3.50 a gallon, then it was all over. I wish that they could make fuel efficient cars and survive while paying American workers. But they cant. If they do survive, it will be paying Mexicans 5 bucks an hour to put together a car they will sell for $35k.

Buy a PRIUS! Constructed in the good ole' USA. Seriously. Look it up. The only reason I wouldnt buy one is because I love my Frontier too much.

[gaia.plateau]

So because Obama briefly met with Bush to discuss the smooth transition of power and how to deal with geopolitical and economic issues, he's now replaced Cheney and others as his puppetmaster? Do you think he planted some neurological control device in Bush's head? You're actually making the 911 conspiracy theorists seem rational.

Why would we want a jacked-up healthcare system like Canada?

Because you voted for it?

[dafunk5446]

Why would we want a jacked-up healthcare system like Canada?

Have you lived in Canada? Do you actually know what the health system is like? Or are you just basing this off what you have heard from someone? Do you know what they pay for their health care?

Cause I have lived in Canada, I do know what it is like, it is great! and a hell of a lot better then our current health care system. Sure it could use some work, but what government program couldnt? I havent been to a doctor in 8 years (since I moved back to the USA) because I cannot afford to pay the evil blood suckers they call doctors in this country. People who supposedly want to help people physically, while completely ruining them economically. I pray to god I never get hurt, or have to ride in an ambulance cause I will be screwed! Did you know America is (I could be wrong here but Im fairly certain its correct) the only "first world" country to NOT have a socialized medical system?

Check out my other post http://www.hookahforum.com/?showtopic=25900
It has some interesting information you should see, particularly life expectancy, and life expectancy and national expenditures. Edited November 12, 2008 by dafunk5446

[dw914er]

The American auto industry, aka the big 3, need to change up their game. They, both ford and GM, are moving in the right direction, but its alittle too late. The fact that they are companies for SUV's is their problem. They also don't have the reputation of reliability like the foreign companies. Unless they can fix that, they don't have a chance in hell of surviving (unless they pull some sort of green car out of their ass that surpasses the rest).



as for the healthcare hijack. Everyone I have heard from another country like their system (ie Canada and Germany). If done right, its a great system. I just needs to be done right.

[Bulldog_916]

Just to tell you how far I think they've come: I wouldnt be the beta tester for the Chevy Volt. Sorry.

[gaia.plateau]

GM in particular is responsible for a hell of a lot of suffering in the world, and are in fact wreaking socioeconomic havoc, undermining political processes, and vampirically exploiting economies in more countries than any other corporation in the world. I hope with every fiber of my being that they collapse.

In the interest of full disclosure, I drive a Grand Am. But I bought it used for an incredible price. Does that make me a hypocrite?

Edit: for the record I'm not against corporations, I realize that they are an economic necessity in industrial society and only act as they should. I'm against governments using the soft power of their corporations to neo-colonize poor countries and run them into the ground while using their foreign polices like marionettes. Edited November 13, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[ColibriDon]

The American auto industry is under threat of collapse? Oh noes! Seriously, I drive a Ford Mustang and am one hell of a gear head and let me tell you, the build quality of that car isn't that great.

At about 35k miles (This is a 2007 model) of easy driving, I am hearing clinks, binks, creaks, and cracks all over my car. And this is the Mustang we're talking about, when people think about American cars, they think about Mustangs and Pick-up trucks, simple as that.

If the American auto industry does not pull their work together by improving the build quality of their cars, they will fail. If they don't decrease costs, they will fail--why pay 35k for an American car that Toyota will sell you for 20k? The unions have screwed themselves here, they've driven up costs too much and now the industry is facing collapse which is going to kill the jobs they depend on. Is that irony? I don't know but I can tell you one thing, it sure as shit ain't sad.

I love domestics but these companies are destined to fail in the current system. Let them fail and let new companies rise up. Without threat of collapse, what real motivation do these companies have to succeed?

[inino]

i pull a 12 thousand pound trailer, so i need a vehicle produced by the big 3. there is no toyota or honda that will do the trick.

[thecyrax]

Well, gas went under a dollar today in the US.
JESUS.


I say fuck bailing them out.

Let them file chapter 11, get out of these retarded contracts with the fucking unions and completely revamp their organizations.

Well, except maybe Chrysler, they can just die off.

[Kathrynx]

My dad is a manager of internet sales of Texas Dodge (aka a Chrysler affiliate)....since I haven't been home in the states, or had much exposure to current news, I'm not sure if a dying off of Chrysler would be good for him. I certainly wouldn't want him to lose his job, as he is getting fairly close to retirement. As far as I've read here, maybe the company will be bought and put under yet another bigger name? He could always become an English teacher if this ever happened though.

Just my $.02. Edited November 21, 2008 by Kathrynx

[coplinb]

Well, gas went under a dollar today in the US.
JESUS.

where the hell was this at ?!? Edited November 21, 2008 by coplinb

[TheScotsman]

1.76 here.

Diesel is still silly-high, makes me buy the dyed heating-only K1. (Hey, it IS heating the inside in a bit of a round-about way)

[zeppyrkr]

Well first off Gm proposed a 20billion dollar loan, people love the term bailout

anyways from a global standpoint i can't see why non americans think its stupid and dumb but americans come on, are auto industry is about to go under and you are crying about bailing it out, how dependent do want to be????????
and if you seriously think your camarery is so much nicer then a brand new impala your nuts? the thing most people don't understand is GM has a UNION, those fuckers are raping GM. GMs average factory pay is 81 and hour compared to toyotas 41 and hour? im not saying toyotas is horrible although ppl like to look past the factory conditions in japan lol but GM is forced to pay more. This would be a huge loss for america.

Soon america is just going to be filled with buyers because are standards prevent any company from making anything here ... ridiculous

[zeppyrkr]

Another thing that just blows my mind is people talking about how unefficient GMS cars are, im no GM fan boy i actually drive a eclipse which honestly is a piece of shit, after 100k the thing just falls apart. But its an older car, ive been doing a lot of research and GMs are priced right, and have comparable if not better stats, i dont get it? a manual cobalt gets 35 mpg? wtf more do u want and it cost like 15k brand new. ugh im done but as an american i feel we need to keep our auto industry

[Bulldog_916]

It isnt the small cars that I'm worried about, it's the fact that well into the gas crisis they were still making Chevy Tahoes. Toyota came out with the Prius more than 3 years ago. Chevy should have taken a HINT. And for your information, Toyota has plants in several states, Texas being one of them. There should be 2 things that are given in this world: commodities like oil will always go up in price overall because demand will always go up, and population will always go up, therefore you need to prepare yourself for a world in which food, fuel and essentials will steadily go up in price.

[TheScotsman]

prius drivers=jerks (quite possibly retarded)

More than once I have had some suv-hater in a speck-car swerve around me, and cut in front then start playing with their brakes. I guess hybrids don't come with a brain, nor understanding of what would happen if a 9,000# truck went over the top of a tin-foil car the size of a zit. (As Clarkson said... brakes like a duck stopping on a frozen pond) More than anything, one has to ask themselves just why the average citidiot wants to buy a full-frame suv to go do the "mall crawl". (or why there is even a market for a 2wd version of a tahoe)

Talking the public into buying something that is hard to get into, hard to load, rides like crap, is completely unfit for their use, and tips over at the first sign of a side impact, just simply has to be the greatest marketing coup ever! Until the Mahindra & Mahindra pickup shows up this spring, the most efficient small truck is the Ranger, and Ford couldn't give them away, even when there was a good buying public... why? There is something basically wrong with the American public's view of what they need as opposed to what is just silly to own. Until that comes around, we have a problem. High fuel $ will only destroy the economy, not change the public's jacked up idea of "cool to own". It's all about being the best poser, maybe?

Hey, speaking of jacked-up, what is with you Californians shooting the crap out of eachother over a chick-argument at Toys 'r' Us? I'm thinking the frustration of hauling anything home in the prius did it.

[gaia.plateau]

I'll take a pretentious, smug, arrogant, self-absorbed Prius-owning hippie over a hateful, ignorant, arrogant, self-absorbed Hummer-owning redneck most days of the week, personally. They're not as loud, and therefor easier to ignore. Edited November 29, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[TheScotsman]

Get back to your moosehead Gaia