Jeremy, It's unfortunate that people like you and me need to suffer from something we thought we would avoid because we acted responsible

Everyone, Good thoughts! I really learned alot reading (all 7) pages here.

 

I work as a Director of Information Systems for a family owned (not my family......) Long Term Health Care company (ie: nursing homes) Total employees equals around 1250.


No tied-in motivation other than getting a little tired of your pompous rhetoric.

 

I stand corrected here... you simply said you are "nearing retirement" and were referring to your 401)k) losses within a one-year time frame.

If you are "nearing retirement", the point changes little if at all.


Oh, OK....

 

I see...so your only motivation is an unselfish defense of GM and your idea of and enlightened defense is to throw insults?

 

I'm not the one tossing around "oh wise one" etc... that'd be you.

I have not insulted you at all. What I have done is call you out on based your apparent lack of economic knowledge.... using your own statement of your own 401(k) and the pitiful execuation/performance of a 401(k) fund for someone 'nearing retirement'.

In other words... if you can't manage your own retirement fund, I don't put a lot of stock in your big ideas for a large scale economic issue.


As far as motivation, apparently you think there is some hidden agenda on my part... wanna clue me in?

 

Well...I'm sure glad I'm the only one who lost 401(K) value over the past year...how stupid of me not to have gotten new batteries for my crystal ball.

Had you actually bothered to understand the point of my initial post about my 401(K), a point you obviously missed, you would have realized that what I was saying was that the possibility of facing unemployment at my position in life is not inconsequential – a response to the accusation that the possibility of facing unemployment was no big deal (an accusation made by you if memory serves).

If you feel an IT manager is in a better position to advise GM on matters of high finance then I suggest you contact Wagoner immediately.

As to your motivation...I didn't know...that's why I asked.

 

All e-fighting aside.....
Everyone in favor of bailing out GM (and the finance industry, insurance industry, everyone else with their hand out, etc.), don't worry. They'll get their (OUR) money.
Oh, and call it a loan, bailout, whatever. It's only a "loan" when it's paid back though. Considering GM is losing billions of dollars a quarter, how is it that the money is paid back and becomes a "loan" again? It must be pure ***king magic, because I know if I was losing money, I wouldn't be able to make payments on a loan without borrowing more money.....and the spiral continues - just what we all need.

 

The fact that you can't grasp this proves my point even further. If you are "nearing retirement', you should be all but out of risky funds and in those that have guaranteed returns for cash preservation.

No crystal ball required... just common sense.

You asked, I told you, yet you ask a second time.... reason?


Do you see me here spouting out ways to solve GM's problems? No? That's because I'm not. I'm not pretending to be an expert in an area that I am not.

Simple 401(k) management... sure. That's easy. Running General Motors? Nope... Outta my league...

 

Please take the bickering and off-topic banter elsewhere. It isn't welcome.

 

Yeah...no worries for the save GM at any cost crowd...GM will get our money (or should I say China's money which taxpayers of future generations will eventually have to pay back)...all this "discussion" is academic.

Some of the save GM crowd honestly feel it is the best course of action - I respect that position even if I disagree with it.

However, I believe that most of them know, even if they'll never admit it openly, that bailing out GM (or Ford or Chrysler) it's just plain wrong. They know if flies right in the face of what America is supposed to stand for.

As for me, when GM takes this bailout I will wash my hands of GM forever (as I will of Ford and/or Chrysler if they too take the bailout) and I'll walk or ride my bicycle for transportation before I ever own another product from them.

It's a shame too...I seriously was thinking of a fifth-gen or a C6.

 

subscribing to finish reading later... great thread, only through page 2... have to go.

 

Amazing how easy it is for some people to just turn their backs on the facts about what losing ANY of the Big 3 will do to our economy.

You can live without your job? Good for you. What about the millions of other people who can't? But hey, as long as you're OK, **** everyone else. Think they'll find other work? Where exactly?

...and yes, MILLIONS of people... even if the one in ten estimate is way overestimated... one in twenty, one in forty... still... we're talking in the millions for jobs lost in a matter of months. But hey, GM had this coming, right?

That many less people spending money, defaulting on loans, not paying back creditors, seeking government assistance. What other companies beyond those related to automotives will be lost/downsized by the drastic cut in consumer spending?

You think your 401K is bad now? HA!

 

Around and around we go.....

Again, what is to say all that doesn't happen anyway?

GM is asking for BILLIONS of dollars from US WITHOUT A PLAN. Are you kidding me????? If I went to get a business loan with my finances being in the shape of GM right now, without a plan, I'd be told to go straight to hell! Especially now, when lending is tight - even though we just approved a 700+ BILLION DOLLAR bailout of the lending/finance industry. How is loaning GM this money going to help when people can't even get loans to buy their cars anyway? We're supposed to freely lend our money even though the favor isn't being returned to us. Yet we the people are supposed to trust (there's that word AGAIN) GM to clean up their own mess when they have proven unable to do so, and on top of that we're supposed to trust the government in overseeing this effort when they've also proven to be untrustworthy, so we can all watch these millions of jobs disappear anyway?!?!
GM, WHERE IS THE PLAN? NOT THE ONE THAT TAKES EFFECT IN ***KING 2010, THE ONE FOR RIGHT **DDAMN NOW?!?!

 

I know it's not this simple but...

loans are what got us into this mess. How are more loans going to fix it?

 

One thing I fail to understand is why everyone is focusing on the auto industry specifically, and in turn why it would be so much more tragic for GM to go under than any other business.

Take for example the shipping industry...

A large number of trucking companies are facing the same future as GM. Now, just like the argument that 30% of the country's employees are in some way tied to the auto industry, how many do you think are tied to transportation? If enough of these companies shut down, there will be significantly less trucks on the road...which means less transportation of goods, less merchandise on shelves...which means Wal-Mart can't sell as much product, thus less revenue and fewer Wal-Mart employees...

This can continue on into any number of industries and sectors, but you get the point.

So why is everyone so concerned about the auto industry? If any one sextor of the American manufacturing/business industry goes under, the whole thing starts to tremble, with very few exceptions.

Personally, I don't know how I feel about the GM bailout. I'd like GM to be around for a long while, but that's mostly my personal opinion/desire. From what I've read, GM is pretty much screwed. Even if they get the bailout and cut operating costs, it seems like it would only be a matter of delaying the inevitable. The vehicles they offer right now are not selling...they have a massive amount of trucks just sitting on lots (like the H2 & H3), that they either have to take a significant loss to get rid of, or just store indefinitely. Like somebody said before, GM can only survive if they start moving product. How will a bailout do that?

There is a difference between this and the AIG bailout (which I didn't like, BTW). GM deals in vehicles, while AIG deals in cash. A bailout works for banks and investment companies because what they lack is the very product they deal in. But throwing cash at GM is not a solution...it might work, but it doesn't mean it will...it's still a gamble. To make an analogy, if GM were facing a shortage of steel, but there was still high demand for their product (the specific cars GM sells, not just "the car" in general), then the government giving GM $25B in steel would work to save the country, and it would be more similar to AIG. But it isn't a materials problem, it's a problem of high operating costs combined with minimal demand for the product. How does money solve that, other than to nurse it along, hoping things turn around before they need another loan.