Chapter 11, Not Bailouts for the "Big 3"
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
November 18, 2008 8:33am CST
Why should the government bail out the "Big 3" car companies when other giants have been allowed to either go out of business completely or be acquired by other giants? How are GM, Chrysler or Ford jobs anymore sacred to the economy than Delta Airlines, TWA, Miller Brewing or any others?
People say that the domestic car industry needs to be protected, but there is a thriving domestic automobile industry in the US, the "Big 3" just hasn't been able to compete. GM, Chrysler and Ford cars aren't necessarily made in the US, but many cars with "foreign" names are.
The major stockholders of the "Big 3" aren't necessarily Americans so you really can't even argue that the money "stays in the US" when you buy GM, Ford or Chrysler cars.
What needs to happen is the companies go into Chapter 11 status and the government get off their backs by not forcing stupid requirements on them that cost a lot of money with no hope of overcoming the expenses.
The bailout talk has nothing to do with jobs anyway. It is just another power play by the incompetent Do Nothing Duo (Reid and Pelosi). They want to make the government part owner in the companies so they can force their will on the market. The anti American theives don't give a flying flip about the economy, the environment or anything else.
They only care about the power the unconstitutional power they can take.
No Bail Outs!
2 people like this
6 responses
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
18 Nov 08
I think they should be helped if they agree to build cars in America with money they get from the government. Let's face it they are still capable of providing good paying jobs with benefits to Americans. Also, the Chrysler buyout was very successful and made the government money. This could be structured along the same lines. Although you probably don't, I like Obama's idea of giving a tax credit to Americans who buy a hybrid car made by Americans on American soil. In order to make these cars, the car makers need financial help to modernize their plants and I think they should get it.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
19 Nov 08
The overbloated pay and benefits packages are part of the reason the Big 3 can no longer compete with other car makers... even the ones who build cars here in the US.
Another huge cost is all the requirements the government puts on the Big 3 that aren't put on the other companies.
The next problem is mismanagement.
What you get with a straight bail out is all three of the problems being supported with no requirement for change.
Chapter 11 would allow the companies to remain in business, and restructure their debtload, but it would also require changes in the business models, government requirements and pay and benefits packages.
1 person likes this
@devylan (695)
• United States
19 Nov 08
One problem with this that I see, Irisheyes, is how do you know that the manufacturers are going to go to these alternative ways of powering vehicles? I guess they'd have to give them incentives to go this route? Honestly, I don't think hybrids are the best way to go anyway. I mean, it's a start, but I just think there are much better things. Thankfully, they realized ethanol wasn't a good idea before we became dependant on it. Just to be clear, I did vote for Obama, but I just see this idea as you explain it as being flawed. Oh well, he's not in office yet anyway, so I guess we'll just see.
@dozhou (326)
• United States
19 Nov 08
The aftermath of big3 collapse is terrible. Imagine: 2-3 millions of worker lose their job, Our society cannot afford such a huge burden. If the government won't pay for the bailout of big3, it still need to pay for the collapse of them. Save them or not, American government must spend lots of money on it. From this perspective, I think the bailout is the best method. It is necessary.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
19 Nov 08
Chapter 11 isn't going out of business.
1 person likes this
@max1950 (2306)
• United States
19 Nov 08
i totally agree,i just saw it cost them 20,000 to fly to washinton on their corporate jet and a flight on southwest was 225.00 round trip.hey back in the 60's and 70's they made a decent car,but when the asian market came over the big three didn't or wouldn't have the technology to produce a reliable cheap car.if 'everybody didn't have their hand out trying to screw each other and grease their pocketes perhaps they'd make a car that was reliable.it's just the little things that go wrong that you have to go back and forth to the service garage it a pain.then you have the c.e.o.'s of companys that lose 3.2 billion and they still get a 7 figure pay check ah yes the american way,i say you slap em in jail for screwing the public all these years.*********recon----usmc----oooh rah
1 person likes this
@urbandekay (18278)
•
21 Nov 08
With you there Ted, why should government give our money to private firms. As Americans your constitution amendment calls upon you to take up arms and remove such tyrannical governments, should I believe it is lucky Bush has to quit?
Capitalism, a nice idea but doesn't work in practice
all the best urban
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
21 Nov 08
It's a nice idea that has worked every time it has been practiced. In fact, at least in the US, every time there has been deep recessions or depressions, it has been because there was too much interference with the markets.
But that being said, I will agree that no economic system can work in their pure forms. Each have weaknesses that cannot be overcome in and of themselves.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
21 Nov 08
What "protectionism"? The biggest complaint people have here in the US is we have a huge trade deficite. Anytime there is an embargo of anything it is grain, so even the farmers (who are among the most protected group of all) aren't even protected.
I'd love to hear what you call "protectionism".
But again, I'll agree that government officials stick their nasty little fingers in the pie too often for a capitalist nation.
@urbandekay (18278)
•
21 Nov 08
Think again, US is not a capitalist country, all US governments have run heavily protectionist trade policies. A country without free trade is not a capitalist country
all the best urban
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
18 Nov 08
The talking heads running this thing don't seem to know from one minute to the nextwhat their doing with this thing. It's frightneing and comical all at the same time. more acurately, if it wasn't so frightening, it would be commical. A cnbc article compaired them to the Keystone cops. I couldn't have put it beter myself. Today it's the auto industry, tomorrow a bigger more desperate industry willcome crawling in and it will change again. Poulson and Bernanke have more than proven their incompatence and their deeper agenda to all but the most dedicated fans
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
18 Nov 08
They say that there is no reason for governments to rob people of their freedom. All the government has to do is wait long enough and the people will eagerly surrender their freedom. I think that is what we are witnessing now.
1 person likes this
