Should the US govt bail out the American Auto Giants?
-
I say no, if they'd build decent cars that ppl actually want then they wouldnt have that problem... OMG GM makes a couple cars that get over 30mpg... wow most import cars have been getting that for years... And wow new technologies that euro and jap cars have had forever too...
-
MisterCMK;246303 wrote:
So you are willing to put thousands of families out of work simply to punish them for working for a company that is struggling? Meanwhile, we are giving money to all of the banks and other financial institutions that simply push money around on paper and are part of the problem we are in to begin with?I do not agree with that bail out either...and yes, I have no sympathy for those families as they will collect unemployment or get a new job.
-
MisterCMK;246304 wrote:
I see you have never been involved in a union and have yet to understand the benefits and protections that it provides to the member as well as the company that employs union workers.Actually I am quite educated and understand how unions work...back in he good ol days, they did a great thing for employees and employee's rights. These days they create too high of costs and are effecting profitability of most companies.
-
MisterCMK;246308 wrote:
Exactly. All these companies need is a little help in some tough and trying times. I don't think anybody here can say that they did not need a little help from friends/family in their lives.There is a big difference here...helping out a family/friend or helping out a company that the main goal is to create profits and build stock value. Apples to oranges...at least Ford has enough cash flows right now to last the longest of the big 3.
-
MisterCMK;246306 wrote:
Unemployment does not provide enough for these families to live off of. Why not spend the money and help out some struggling companies get back on their feet rather than simply throwing it at unemployment.Why because they already got $50 million grant so they could GIVE AWAY 0% financing and that wasn't even good enough to turn things around. Why give more when they show no light @ the end of the tunnel?
-
MisterCMK;246306 wrote:
Unemployment does not provide enough for these families to live off of. Why not spend the money and help out some struggling companies get back on their feet rather than simply throwing it at unemployment.Because this is the thing ruining our country by spending money that we dont have, creating higher inflation. Governments should not get involved in these type of things. To the people that don't have jobs need to remember one thing " It is not what your country can do for you, it is what you can do for your country". :icon_rr:
-
SmitEvo;246312 wrote:
I do not agree with that bail out either...and yes, I have no sympathy for those families as they will collect unemployment or get a new job.Meanwhile they will end up defaulting on loans, credit cards, etc and exacerbating the downward plunge of the financial markets when we could have helped.
-
SmitEvo;246313 wrote:
Actually I am quite educated and understand how unions work...back in he good ol days, they did a great thing for employees and employee's rights. These days they create too high of costs and are effecting profitability of most companies.Brian, you and I both know that book learning is completely different than real world experience. Reading about a union in a book or in the news does not give you any real life insight into the benefits of them.
-
MisterCMK;246317 wrote:
Meanwhile they will end up defaulting on loans, credit cards, etc and exacerbating the downward plunge of the financial markets when we could have helped.Look at it from the Macro point of view...it wont happen that way. Something else will always take the big 3's place. Why wont they be able to find another job? You act like it would be the end of the world.
-
PSI2HI;246315 wrote:
Why because they already got $50 million grant so they could GIVE AWAY 0% financing and that wasn't even good enough to turn things around. Why give more when they show no light @ the end of the tunnel?Too little, too late my friend. Rather than trying to nickel and dime the help for them, lets simply bite the bullet and give them the leg up that they need.
-
MisterCMK;246318 wrote:
Brian, you and I both know that book learning is completely different than real world experience. Reading about a union in a book or in the news does not give you any real life insight into the benefits of them.Nope, but analyzing income statments for case studies involving unions vs companies that do not have unions sure does. Give me some real life insight of a union CMK....tell me how they make a company more profitable.
-
SmitEvo;246316 wrote:
Because this is the thing ruining our country by spending money that we dont have, creating higher inflation. Governments should not get involved in these type of things. To the people that don't have jobs need to remember one thing " It is not what your country can do for you, it is what you can do for your country". :icon_rr:Inflation is inevitable, there is no argument about that. We can argue all we want about what put is in this situation, but the bottom line is that it needs to be dealt with now.
-
MisterCMK;246320 wrote:
Too little, too late my friend. Rather than trying to nickel and dime the help for them, lets simply bite the bullet and give them the leg up that they need.The real question is "why" are they in this situation...and dont blame the current economic conditions. This has been happening for a while.
-
SmitEvo;246319 wrote:
Look at it from the Macro point of view...it wont happen that way. Something else will always take the big 3's place. Why wont they be able to find another job? You act like it would be the end of the world.That is all well and good, however there are many constraints in place already. If this were a free market then yes, you would be correct. However, when there are constraints put on the markets the game changes.
-
MisterCMK;246323 wrote:
Inflation is inevitable, there is no argument about that. We can argue all we want about what put is in this situation, but the bottom line is that it needs to be dealt with now.Why does it need to be dealt with? Let them go bankrupt and other companies take them over and help them run profitably. Most people wouldnt even lose thier jobs...
-
MisterCMK;246326 wrote:
That is all well and good, however there are many constraints in place already. If this were a free market then yes, you would be correct. However, when there are constraints put on the markets the game changes.What constraints? Elaborate please? I always thought we had free markets in the United States...
-
SmitEvo;246321 wrote:
Nope, but analyzing income statments for case studies involving unions vs companies that do not have unions sure does. Give me some real life insight of a union CMK....tell me how they make a company more profitable.So only having one small part of the story makes you an expert? I never made and claims or comments regarding a union's impact on profitability of a company. I simply said that the union brings many benefits to the table for both the union worker and the company that employs the worker. Now, as a preemptive comment, I will say that the unions are primarily for the worker, not the employer. However, by playing by the union rules for things such as termination, education requirements, work days, etc, the company can remove many instances where the employee claims that they were unfairly treated or whatnot.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login