Z284ever

http://www.boycottalabamanow.com/

Shelby has been one of the most vocal critics of the US auto industry.

BTW, Shelby's home state is a haven for transplanted foreign auto manufacturers.

DvBoard

I hate congress/senate. They have no ****ing clue what they spout on in general and if anyone needs to be fired it's the whole lot of them!

guionM

What I find entertaining is it's the conservatives that's coming out so heavily against helping the auto industry. After some of the things I've read here by some people, I find it delicious.

But on the flip side of the same coin, I'm surprized no one here has noticed something obvious. The most outspoken people against helping the US auto industry seem to hail from the south and have a major import automotive brand factory in their state.

The most outspoken, Senator Shelby, comes from a state that has a half billion dollar Toyota engine plant in Huntsville. That's quite an investment. Likely quite a bit of tax revenue in a state that never has actually rolled around in money. Probably makes pretty good campaign contributions too.

Since it only employs less than 900 people, I doubt the good Senator is worried about massive unemployment if things went bad for Toyota.

As I've always said, there is no such thing as right or left in politics outside of getting everyone excited enough to vote for them.

Everyone looks out for those in their own area, regardless as to political affiliation.

All politics is local.

Shelby proves it as much as Pelosi.

Eric Bryant

Right you are, guionM. The southern senators and representatives see the failure of the Big 3 as justification in the economic incentives that were given to the transplants, and the Republicans are eager to see the Big 3 fail because it'll strike a fatal blow to the UAW (and if the UAW falls, then it's probably the end of unions in general).

It's a messy situation - but so is any interaction between business and politics. That's why it's usually better to avoid intanglements between those two entities.

mdenz3

Boycot Alabama? What are you going to boycot? There isn't anythign there.

Z28x

That is what I was thinking

HuJass

AWESOME!!

Somebody should start one for Sen. Corker from TN, also. And any other congress person who is against this.

guionM

Senator Corker hails from a state that has not one but TWO Nissan plants, Smyrna & Decherd. A bit more people involved than Shelby's Alabama plant (about 5,500 employed).

Nissan's Smyrna assembly plant builds its Altima and Maxima sedans, the Pathfinder and Xterra sport utility vehicles & pickups. The Decherd plant builds engines.

Volkswagen is building a plant near Chattanooga due to open year after next.

Kia is considering a plant there.

They scored a coup convincing Nissan to move their North American Headquarters fro Detroit West near LA to Tennesee.

Tennesee has a very aggressive plan to attract import auto industries looking to open factories here in the US.

That's alot of political $$$ to someone who is on their side, and the side of import companys wanting to locate there.

One would think the more money going towards Detroit means less money to use as incentives to lure import brands to locate there with tax breaks and government money to establish an infrastructure around a new factory.


Now, does anyone here still have any so called "conservative", "Free market", "Budget Hawk" delusions about Senator Corker's purpose of standing in the forfront against help for US automakers???

Again, all politics is local.

Anyone want to pull up another vocal critic of federal loans for the US car industry? You won't likely have to dig deep to find the reason for their opposition..... and it's NOT because they are uninformed either. They have better information gathering networks than any of us, and have staffers whose job it is to learn what the congressman doesn't know.

Press will pick all this up eventially.

Chuck!

Ohio is in a peculiar situation. Voinovich has GM and Ford splattered though out the state, but a major Honda plant in Columbus as well as several engine plants along the Indiana border.

And his stance? Voting for the bailouts, but reluctantly.

Hoodshaker

He has other deep pockets to protect as well. I'm sure its all a coincidence though...

Chrome383Z

Probably worried that if the big three are able to make a BIG comeback with the help of this money that import sales might decline therefore putting his factories in possible trouble...???

HuJass

Guion,
And look how vocal the SC (I think) senator is about the bailout. He hates it too. And one from GA. All the "right to work" (what a stupid name for that) states.

Chrome,
You're probably right.


I also believe that their opposition to this measure is a thinly disguised wish to break the unions. They need to man-up and just admit that. It's pretty obvious, as every other word out of their mouths are "union" and "UAW" and "cut" and "concessions".
I wish the media would call these guys out and find out what their real motives for opposing this are.

And I wonder if union wages & benefits are lowered, then wouldn't the transplant seek some sort of concession or concessions from their workers? The only reason they get what they do is to stop the unions from coming in.

5thgen69camaro

ever since that ignorant congressman mentioned "delicious irony", the word delicious leaves an nasty taste in my mouth.

Had you posted that before I swallowed my pride and sent off my letter to my congressman, I wouldnt have. Conservatism, and Liberalism have quantifiable differences. You seem to attribute them to people and when those people change habits change eventually everyone acts like everyone else. In truth an ideoligy is based on core beliefs and guidlines. Under certain circumstances sometimes extreeme one group will eventually take actions that might favor another ideoligy. That doesnt mean there is no such thing as for example the two ideoligys such as conservatism or Liberalism.

People do "play politics" but I dont. I want to know the person Im voting for is anti union, anti govt projects. Keeps govt out of Private industry, restrictions like the liberally suggested national 65 or 75 speedlimit are not imposed. I voted for the loan which means on this issue I moved a little away from pure conservatism rather than it changed definitions. Govt Regulation, Taxes because the plants are based here, previous bad management and Unions for the duration is what I blame. Adding worse restrictions of green requirements and a car czar and I only hope GM pays off the loan early to get away from getting saddled with more disadvantages like this. I could go on and on, but to say its meaningless is not correct. Ending the Unions would be the one Silver lining, however I realized that is the one constituantcy the Dem controlled congress does not want to fail. They have to prop up the evil corprate host so the parasitic Unions can survive. Man what a mess

BTW I went for this because.

National Security as a resource as in WWII

Wagoner and Lutz started to turn GM around

Loan not a investment, Subsadies or stock.

I assumed at the time as it was a loan rather than investment that would keep govt involvement to the minimum of working business models. I was wrong.

guionM

South Carolina Senator, Jim DeMint (R). Dead set against an auto industry bailout.

South Carolina is home to a very large BMW factory and complex that invested a very, very large amount of money to South Carolina.......

...... and presumably, Senator DeMint.

guionM

I remain convinced that there is no such thing as conservative or liberal. These are simply terms to get those who don't like to think for themselves, and prefer everything in black and white, right or left. Thinking in degrees takes effort, as does recognizing that there's such thing as drawbacks and there is no such things as absolutes. I'll make my case based on what you say below.


First, you say you are anti-government. It should stay out of private industry. Yet, you flip and say that it's OK for the government (not private banks or loan institutions) to provide loans. Those loans WILL come with strings attached just like loans from any other entity. At the very least, there must be a reason given to apply for loans and those loans must be used for that very reason. Regardless as to if it's a Bank or lending institution or the Federal Government. You are for a government loan. That pits you against your stated self.

Second, you say you are against Government projects. Yet, I bet you drive your car on a highway pretty often, let alone a surface street. Depending on where you live, you get electricity in your home. You have running water and a sewage system in your house. Guess what pilgrim? Those were the result of Government projects.

Speed limits? The idea of Richard Nixon's administration. Every book I read has him as a Republican.

As far as taxes, lets have a quick education here.

First of all, our taxes are the lowest in the industrialized world. By far. That's why when you see foreigners become super rich, they migrate to the US if they live in a 1st world nation.

Next point is that our expendatures (bills) don't become smaller simply because we refuse to take in more money. Government spending (ironically) went into sharp decline in constant dollars in the 1990s, especially the 2nd half. At the same time income (tax recipts rose) and there was no tax cut. The result, a booming economy, we were paying off out accumulated debt from the 1980s, and we had a very strong dollar.

This past decade, we gave a massive tax cut to the richest 2% while the rest of us got roughly an average of an extra couple of hundred dollars per family. In the meantime, the difference was made up by China who freely bought our debt and today our economy is held hostage to China. If China tomorrow decided to cash in 1/3 of US bonds, notes, and other ways it financed deficit spending, you could pretty much kiss the US economic system goodbye. Our money wouldn't be worth much, and since US dollars are the currency oil is purchased, you would see the cost of oil blast into the strastosphere overnight (although the rest of the world's oil price would be relatively stable).

The "Conservative" approach to finance would be to self finance. However, we've been using China to bankroll our unwillingness to raise the money we need to run the country. That's the stereotypical liberal approach.

Final point, unions. I can go into a whole thesis as to why the union isn't an issue anymore, and the notion it is is rooted in the 70s and 80s far more than it is today. But I'll leave it at this: 1) Labor is 10% of the cost of a new car. A Pizza from your local pizza parlor is about 90%. 2) The UAW has less than 1/3 the members it had in it's heyday in the late 70s. 3) the last 2 negotiating cycles, the UAW gave up pretty much all the items that made it look ridiculous. There are still people I call parrots (those who repeat what they heard without having the foggest idea if it's true or not) who say the UAW is full of people paid $70 per hour turning wrenches. It's very easy to see what the UAW is being paid via internet and a few taps of the keys. Guess that's too much work for some people.