popular talk host spreading lies about GM and domestic cars.
11-21-2008, 09:53 AM
#16
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,943
...The automakers don't pay anything in federal taxes - they'd have to make a profit for that to occur! The only way that auto industry contributes anything close to $100B in taxes would be to consider the consider the income tax paid by individuals, property taxes paid by companies to local municipalities, and so on.
A "tax" on a business is always a tax on the consumer.
11-21-2008, 11:14 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Michigan's left coast
Posts: 2,405
Exhibit A
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
Does anyone actually think that we'll recover all of the loaned money, much less actually turn a profit on this boondoggle?
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
Just keep paying your taxes so that the crooks can get their bailout, keep putting your retirement savings into the same stock market that's failed to provide anything resembling a return in the past ten years, and keep putting your savings into banks that turn around and lend out 37 dollars for every dollar in capital. It's the American way!
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
That's a rhetorical question, since the banks themselves took this from a hundred-billion-dollar problem to a several-trillion-dollar problem with their derivative structuring - but I want to hear the banks and Paulson 'fess-up to this. No money without full disclosure. Simple as that.
And even with full disclosure, this bill will still represent the single largest transfer of wealthy from the poor to the rich (or, given this country's tax structure, from the upper-middle-class to the ultra-rich).
And even with full disclosure, this bill will still represent the single largest transfer of wealthy from the poor to the rich (or, given this country's tax structure, from the upper-middle-class to the ultra-rich).
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
My concern is that the bailout won't do anything to prevent the issues you raise above. I think we're just kicking the can down the road a few years (to mix my metaphors), and that if anything, we may just make future problems that much worse.
I also have an engrained belief that sometimes things need to be made worse in order to get better. A $700B band-aid might not allow badly-needed creative destruction to take place.
I also have an engrained belief that sometimes things need to be made worse in order to get better. A $700B band-aid might not allow badly-needed creative destruction to take place.
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
I'm not in favor of any bailout bill that fails to include public executions.
11-21-2008, 12:04 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Yadkinville, NC USA
Posts: 3,180
The automakers don't pay anything in federal taxes - they'd have to make a profit for that to occur! The only way that auto industry contributes anything close to $100B in taxes would be to consider the consider the income tax paid by individuals, property taxes paid by companies to local municipalities, and so on.
Sales tax on every new and used vehicle sold through a dealer - usually a several hundred bucks/vehicle. It's a modest 7.5% here in Nawth Cakalcky now. That adds up.
No new vehicles = no sales tax for the states = oh sh1+, lookout taxpayers.
Personal property tax on every vehicle every year - they only get 1 year of my credit for the first - otherwise it applies to used cars just as well as it does new ones, but it is still pretty huge in summation. Where I live property tax on a new 250SD will hit you about $340/yr your first year. Almost a payment!
Again, no vehicles selling = no sales tax for the states = oh sh1+, lookout taxpayers.
As for he rest of this thread...
FOLKS, WE (TAXPAYERS) HAVE ALREADY LOST... the game is over.
We have allowed the car industry - just like ALL American industry - to regulate it's own activity and direction, and it has been done for the last 2-3 decades based on GREED, NOT good business practices, quality, and the consumer in mind. Because we allowed our government to turn a blind eye, we refuse to go implement policies that prohibit unethical activity, we refuse to govern offshore movement of manufacturing (in fact we fertilize it with tax breaks), we give a guy 12 months at a country club as punishment for embezzling $13-million, and so on... because of all this - WE HAVE LOST.
Now, we must choose how we pay our penalty...
1) pay taxes to bail out these companies and keep people (some anyway) working and making stuff.
2) don't bail them out and have the unemployment lines explode, unemployment benefits and costs go ballistic, state and local governments go broke trying to rebudget without the million$ in taxes mentioned above, and they end up raising our property tax and personal tax rates on income to make up for the difference.
Bed is made, deed is done.
Pay me now, or pay me later... but you will pay me.
SO CHOOSE.
I am NOT for financing a continuation of the death spiral, but I AM for financing a revised car industry. I see it as a better risk for returning my principal with interest as opposed to simply being stuck with a huge bill to pay (via unemployment and governmental budget shortfalls) with no possible return of principle - much less any interest.
* I want to see MAJOR change in policy and management, I want to see realistic and obtainable milestones along a path (or pathS - even better) towards alternative fuels and totally revolutionary products.
* I want people and administrations to be held accountable for meeting these milestones.
* Hold profitable areas of each business as collateral against these milestones - miss a milestone and you forgo all revenue your XXX line of vehicles until it is met.
* I want to see a % of each profitable dollar go into investment towards infrastructure of alternative fuels/modes of transport.
* Funding and timelines of projects are to be disclosed to auditors (proprietary stuff can be kept proprietary).
* I'd like to see a new leadership/administration at GM most of all, Chrysler next, and even 1/2 the folks at Ford replaced.
* VERY CLEAR RULES - you get caught cooking books, you loose your home(s), investments, cars, planes, boats, etc and your @ss goes to JAIL... not the not the lock-in country club. The seized assets will be sold and proceeds used to pay for the investigation, trial, and proceedings, with leftovers divided between 401K holders in the affected company.
* CEO's and execs can not make more than 50-times the average rate of their hourly worker, and they share the same benefits. Take it or leave it. Gives them some incentive to raise their average worker's wage, doesn't it?
* All 3 carmakers should incorporate a governance body to review basic decisions post-BOD, and it must be comprised of a diverse group of people ranging from engineers to production people to salesmen - NONE can be executives. I say shareholders are shareholders... they don't need to be white-collar ones to be important.
I realize that these ideas are easy to put in 1-line sentences and harder to bring to reality, but many things that are worthwhile are hard to accomplish. I think this would be a good start, and it outlines some of the requirements I'd like to see in order for them to get my share of the bailout dough.
11-21-2008, 12:39 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Land of Pleasant Living
Posts: 1,581
Hell yes it was in the news, no question about that.
But it seemed to pass pretty damn quickly under the guise of "the sky is falling." It was kinda rammed at everyone, really before the key problems were understood (hell, they still aren't...at least not by me
).
Oddly enough, however, this super-important "bailout" wasn't important enough to have its own bill. It was added as a rider to an open ERISA bill from March of 2007 (at least in its initial form). So in this age of cutting "earmarks" and riders, the $700B bailout was an earmark on a bill that pushed lots of other crap through (which of course got no attention b/c everyone was focused on the sky falling).
Like you, I'd like to see the automakers survive, and I think they need to make some changes to do that. But I also believe that there is a strange double standard going on here, much of it tied which politicians are on the hook for which interest groups and such (along with a perverse, disgusting trend in this country general population and media elite that America does everything wrong and we need to learn from the enlightened Euros and Japanese). The automakers, who are a bedrock of our economy and our industrial base (absolutely vital for the national security of the country, IMHO), are having to beg for a small cut of the $700B (1/28th of it so far). Whereas the financial companies, who along with poor government policies and drunk-on-credit consumers were actually instrumental in creating the financial tornado we are in right now, seemingly had that $700B thrown right in their lap. "Wow, for me?! Thanks!!" Some of them (along with not a few politicians, and media big shots while I'm at it) probably should be in prison...
I know it hasn't happened quite that simply, but that's my perception through my own biased lenses as an angry, conservative auto engineer and enthusiast (for cars and for our nation).
But it seemed to pass pretty damn quickly under the guise of "the sky is falling." It was kinda rammed at everyone, really before the key problems were understood (hell, they still aren't...at least not by me
).Oddly enough, however, this super-important "bailout" wasn't important enough to have its own bill. It was added as a rider to an open ERISA bill from March of 2007 (at least in its initial form). So in this age of cutting "earmarks" and riders, the $700B bailout was an earmark on a bill that pushed lots of other crap through (which of course got no attention b/c everyone was focused on the sky falling).
Like you, I'd like to see the automakers survive, and I think they need to make some changes to do that. But I also believe that there is a strange double standard going on here, much of it tied which politicians are on the hook for which interest groups and such (along with a perverse, disgusting trend in this country general population and media elite that America does everything wrong and we need to learn from the enlightened Euros and Japanese). The automakers, who are a bedrock of our economy and our industrial base (absolutely vital for the national security of the country, IMHO), are having to beg for a small cut of the $700B (1/28th of it so far). Whereas the financial companies, who along with poor government policies and drunk-on-credit consumers were actually instrumental in creating the financial tornado we are in right now, seemingly had that $700B thrown right in their lap. "Wow, for me?! Thanks!!" Some of them (along with not a few politicians, and media big shots while I'm at it) probably should be in prison...
I know it hasn't happened quite that simply, but that's my perception through my own biased lenses as an angry, conservative auto engineer and enthusiast (for cars and for our nation).
11-21-2008, 01:11 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Michigan's left coast
Posts: 2,405
Agree with you re: INCOME TAX for the corporation, but...
Sales tax on every new and used vehicle sold through a dealer - usually a several hundred bucks/vehicle. It's a modest 7.5% here in Nawth Cakalcky now. That adds up.
No new vehicles = no sales tax for the states = oh sh1+, lookout taxpayers.
Sales tax on every new and used vehicle sold through a dealer - usually a several hundred bucks/vehicle. It's a modest 7.5% here in Nawth Cakalcky now. That adds up.
No new vehicles = no sales tax for the states = oh sh1+, lookout taxpayers.
FOLKS, WE (TAXPAYERS) HAVE ALREADY LOST... the game is over.
We have allowed the car industry - just like ALL American industry - to regulate it's own activity and direction, and it has been done for the last 2-3 decades based on GREED, NOT good business practices, quality, and the consumer in mind. Because we allowed our government to turn a blind eye, we refuse to go implement policies that prohibit unethical activity, we refuse to govern offshore movement of manufacturing (in fact we fertilize it with tax breaks), we give a guy 12 months at a country club as punishment for embezzling $13-million, and so on... because of all this - WE HAVE LOST.
We have allowed the car industry - just like ALL American industry - to regulate it's own activity and direction, and it has been done for the last 2-3 decades based on GREED, NOT good business practices, quality, and the consumer in mind. Because we allowed our government to turn a blind eye, we refuse to go implement policies that prohibit unethical activity, we refuse to govern offshore movement of manufacturing (in fact we fertilize it with tax breaks), we give a guy 12 months at a country club as punishment for embezzling $13-million, and so on... because of all this - WE HAVE LOST.
I am NOT for financing a continuation of the death spiral, but I AM for financing a revised car industry.
[SNIP]
I realize that these ideas are easy to put in 1-line sentences and harder to bring to reality, but many things that are worthwhile are hard to accomplish. I think this would be a good start, and it outlines some of the requirements I'd like to see in order for them to get my share of the bailout dough.
[SNIP]
I realize that these ideas are easy to put in 1-line sentences and harder to bring to reality, but many things that are worthwhile are hard to accomplish. I think this would be a good start, and it outlines some of the requirements I'd like to see in order for them to get my share of the bailout dough.
11-21-2008, 02:48 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: All around
Posts: 2,154
The problem I see with all of this is just the knee-jerk response. If you hold execs accountable, they'll leave the country and move HQ somewhere else. If you try and spike taxes to the wealthy, they'll try to hide it and move it (which is all too easy these days). You cant bail out GM's stupid pension plans without a huge hit to the tax payers which will (honestly) never get paid back. With social security already on death's door I can't logically fathom us burdening ourselves with another retirement system gone wrong.
...This stuff makes me so angry...
...The whole situation is nearly perfectly tailored for Lewis Black to do a routine on... atleast if he did one we'd get a moment of laughter out of the stupidity.
11-21-2008, 06:24 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
Wagoner was asked directly, how much money does GM need to sustain itself... to which Wagoner responded with "... in line with market share of the $25B being sought" or to the effect. I'm not misinterpreting here.
Wagoner didn't or couldn't provide the answer. It's something that he should have known prior to even attending the meeting IMO. The $25B asked for is just the liquidity needed to see the Big 3 through to next year... is the way I interpret things. That doesn't mean that more funds are not needed. Conversely, more funds might be required later on.
Anyways, I'm very disappointed in the way the respective CEOs presented their case. Very poor presentations and they would have certainly failed the interview had I been present.
Therefore, I can understand the detailed survival plan being asked for by Congress. But I also don't understand why the same request wasn't made of the banks? The larger sum should have entailed due diligence wrt the $700B. What has transpired is nothing short of criminal, IMO.
11-21-2008, 11:07 PM
#23
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New England
Posts: 3,749
This is one of the questions that Wagoner dodged in the meeting with Congress.
Wagoner was asked directly, how much money does GM need to sustain itself... to which Wagoner responded with "... in line with market share of the $25B being sought" or to the effect. I'm not misinterpreting here.
Wagoner didn't or couldn't provide the answer. It's something that he should have known prior to even attending the meeting IMO. The $25B asked for is just the liquidity needed to see the Big 3 through to next year... is the way I interpret things. That doesn't mean that more funds are not needed. Conversely, more funds might be required later on.
Anyways, I'm very disappointed in the way the respective CEOs presented their case. Very poor presentations and they would have certainly failed the interview had I been present.
Therefore, I can understand the detailed survival plan being asked for by Congress. But I also don't understand why the same request wasn't made of the banks? The larger sum should have entailed due diligence wrt the $700B. What has transpired is nothing short of criminal, IMO.
Wagoner was asked directly, how much money does GM need to sustain itself... to which Wagoner responded with "... in line with market share of the $25B being sought" or to the effect. I'm not misinterpreting here.
Wagoner didn't or couldn't provide the answer. It's something that he should have known prior to even attending the meeting IMO. The $25B asked for is just the liquidity needed to see the Big 3 through to next year... is the way I interpret things. That doesn't mean that more funds are not needed. Conversely, more funds might be required later on.
Anyways, I'm very disappointed in the way the respective CEOs presented their case. Very poor presentations and they would have certainly failed the interview had I been present.
Therefore, I can understand the detailed survival plan being asked for by Congress. But I also don't understand why the same request wasn't made of the banks? The larger sum should have entailed due diligence wrt the $700B. What has transpired is nothing short of criminal, IMO.
11-22-2008, 05:24 AM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
As members of Congress had posed the question to the CEOs... other industries have failed without receiving govt bailouts, so why should the auto industry receive a govt bailout?
It's funny how they (essentially the same people) have such short memories.
11-22-2008, 06:58 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Michigan's left coast
Posts: 2,405
Wagoner was asked directly, how much money does GM need to sustain itself... to which Wagoner responded with "... in line with market share of the $25B being sought" or to the effect. I'm not misinterpreting here.
Wagoner didn't or couldn't provide the answer. It's something that he should have known prior to even attending the meeting IMO. The $25B asked for is just the liquidity needed to see the Big 3 through to next year... is the way I interpret things. That doesn't mean that more funds are not needed. Conversely, more funds might be required later on.
Wagoner didn't or couldn't provide the answer. It's something that he should have known prior to even attending the meeting IMO. The $25B asked for is just the liquidity needed to see the Big 3 through to next year... is the way I interpret things. That doesn't mean that more funds are not needed. Conversely, more funds might be required later on.
I still swear that there are two separate users who have access to your account. Either that, or you have some mental problems and like to post here when you're off your meds.
11-22-2008, 07:24 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
As someone recently accused me of doing "you seem to look at the negative issues wrt loans/bailouts of the automakers, particularly GM."
I still swear that there are two separate users who have access to your account. Either that, or you have some mental problems and like to post here when you're off your meds.
I still swear that there are two separate users who have access to your account. Either that, or you have some mental problems and like to post here when you're off your meds.
I don't share your view that the automakers (particularly GM) are not deserving of being bailed out. I support the bailout. But I would want to make sure that they come out of this situation with their long term future intact. If they need more than $25B, I say give it to them, but subtract it all from the $700B rescue package allocated to the banks. This has always been my argument.
On the subject of Wagoner leading GM... I have seen him first hand.... and I can honestly say I'm not impressed with his efforts that day. Maybe someone who's been with the one company for 31 years has been there too long? Alan Mulally was certainly no worse than Wagoner but hardly better. Ditto Nardelli.
Gosh, is it that hard to be CEO of a large company and earn big bucks I wonder?
Homework was key that day and none of the CEOs had done theirs.Maybe you should apply for the job of GM's CEO, Eric. I doubt that GM will be worse off.
11-22-2008, 07:50 AM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Michigan's left coast
Posts: 2,405
I don't share your view that the automakers (particularly GM) are not deserving of being bailed out. I support the bailout.
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
Also, since you don't pay attention to everything I write, I don't outright object to saving Detroit.
Maybe you should apply for the job of GM's CEO, Eric. I doubt that GM will be worse off.
11-22-2008, 10:21 AM
#30
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New England
Posts: 3,749
Side note..
what I dont think people realize is this..
If the U.S. goes bellyup and we go into a depression.
Asian car makers that rely heavily on our stupidity can just pull up stakes and head out elsewhere or back home if need be to keep a strong local market in these times of less money.
I mean GM can pull up stakes and come home too and be stable untill this blows over. Ohh wait.. This is GM's home territory..there is no going home when the crap hits the fan. Toyota Honda Nissan and the rest have a saftey net in where they can go home. GM fails here there is no home. Its done and our economy is WAY worse than a smaller U.S.less Asian brand.
Toyota and others are making hand over fist money on US and our ignorance to how we dont care if its made by U.S companies..so what if they are "global" when the crap hits the fan where is home...Last time I checked Toyota Honda or Nissans home HQ is not in driving distance in the continental U.S.!!!. Once the golden cows milk is gone you think they will keep her around? Nope to the butcher shop..putting faith in another countries companies to control our economy is foolish and call it what you want but not the best interest of our..yes OUR country..
EVERY CEO of any major company that drives this country is at blame for every deed that has gone on in the last 30 years selling us out.
Car companies, products and politicians. And running to foriegn brands is not helping our problem..
saved by ZERO??? Yea along with moving forward...HELLO..Toyota is shoving it in our face that they WON...they beat the big three in thier home market!
what I dont think people realize is this..
If the U.S. goes bellyup and we go into a depression.
Asian car makers that rely heavily on our stupidity can just pull up stakes and head out elsewhere or back home if need be to keep a strong local market in these times of less money.
I mean GM can pull up stakes and come home too and be stable untill this blows over. Ohh wait..
This is GM's home territory..there is no going home when the crap hits the fan. Toyota Honda Nissan and the rest have a saftey net in where they can go home. GM fails here there is no home. Its done and our economy is WAY worse than a smaller U.S.less Asian brand.Toyota and others are making hand over fist money on US and our ignorance to how we dont care if its made by U.S companies..so what if they are "global" when the crap hits the fan where is home...Last time I checked Toyota Honda or Nissans home HQ is not in driving distance in the continental U.S.!!!. Once the golden cows milk is gone you think they will keep her around? Nope to the butcher shop..putting faith in another countries companies to control our economy is foolish and call it what you want but not the best interest of our..yes OUR country..
EVERY CEO of any major company that drives this country is at blame for every deed that has gone on in the last 30 years selling us out.
Car companies, products and politicians. And running to foriegn brands is not helping our problem..
saved by ZERO??? Yea along with moving forward...HELLO..Toyota is shoving it in our face that they WON...they beat the big three in thier home market!