E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Just how much of a role would the government have played in supporting Chrysler and General Motors if Mitt Romney had been president?
As First Read reported yesterday, the former Massachusetts governor has worked to couch his opposition to President Barack Obama's decision to bail out the two car companies -- a decision which Romney, who was raised in Michigan, is being forced to confront heading into the state's Feb. 28 primary.
Democrats and the Obama campaign have made a big issue of Romney's 2008 op-ed in The New York Times entitled, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt," especially in light of the signs of encouragement in the auto industry since the bailout. He penned it just weeks after Obama secured the presidency.
Related: Obama touts manufacturing at Wisconsin plant
The piece, published as the automakers were facing a major cash crunch, called for what he dubbed a “managed bankruptcy.” He said the car companies needed to restructure their labor agreements; replace each company's management and rid them of corporate perks; and increase government spending on alternative energy and fuel economy research, which would benefit the industry indirectly.
Of direct government assistance, Romney wrote: "The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk." He stated, declaratively, “Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.”
Since then, Romney has spoken publicly about the bailout, essentially trying to take ownership for the successes of the auto industry's turnaround while decrying Obama's management of the process. Romney argues that the administration basically ended embracing a variation of the strategy he originally advocated.
"The indisputable good news is that Chrysler and General Motors are still in business," Romney wrote Tuesday in The Detroit News. "The equally indisputable bad news is that all the defects in President Obama's management of the American economy are evident in what he did."
The separation between Romney and Obama on the issue of the bailout stems from two issues. First, Romney argues that interests of the labor unions were unfairly favored over some of GM and Chrysler's private creditors. The government-supervised bankruptcy did this, he argues, by allowing the autoworkers’ retirees program an equity stake in the restructured GM in exchange for providing financial support for the bankruptcy.
Second, Romney appears to differ with the president over the extent to which government itself should have stepped forward with money to help stave off liquidation of GM and Chrysler and provide for the restructuring process. The administration's approach did this in the case of GM by essentially establishing a new, restructured company in which the government became a majority shareholder. (Romney argued Tuesday for the government to divest itself from the company.)
Romney's position in the past has been that the private sector could have stepped forward to finance and more effectively manage the bankruptcy process -- especially in a way that would have treated private stakeholders in the companies more fairly.
The right-leaning editorial page of The Detroit News weighed in Wednesday:
But on the key question of whether the automakers could have managed themselves through a traditional bankruptcy without assistance from the government, Romney is wrong. The loans provided by Bush and then by Obama allowed the domestic auto industry to survive the darkest hour of its history and return to thriving operations today.
Critics also contend that Wall Street might not have been in the position to give that financial assistance to Detroit in 2009, as Lehman Brothers collapsed and global credit tightened.
But Romney appeared to add more uncertainty into his position surrounding the bailouts in an interview Wednesday on Detroit talk radio station WJR. Romney said that the government should have been available to step in and provide financing during a structured bankruptcy by way of a bridge loan -- the initial way in which the Bush administration propped up GM and Chrysler at the end of 2008.
Romney explained:
They needed to go through bankruptcy, and if, as part of that process, they needed financial help to get out of bankruptcy -- a bridge loan, or guarantees on sales of cars and so forth -- I said the government should be there to provide that. But the point was they took the wrong process, they wasted a lot of money, and ended up giving the companies to the UAW.
That doesn't necessarily mean that Romney would have pursued the exact path as the Obama administration for restructuring GM and Chrysler, but it does indicate some willingness for a more expansive role for the government during bankruptcy. Spokesmen for the Romney campaign didn't immediately respond to an inquiry seeking clarification.
But in addressing some of the political flak he's taken over the bailout, Romney added on WJR: "I don't imagine that anyone could think I had any interest other than to see the companies to thrive and survive, and that's why the original op-ed piece I wrote describes what I thought was the best way to get that done."
Leave a Comment:
NONE!
Okay the FR Gremlins are at it again! lol
Here you have someone who publicly claimed he thought Detroit should go bankrupt 4 years ago ...
*fast forward*
To fit the new & improved Willard 2.0 with him attempting to take credit for Detroit's success is more then nauseating!
It's called bullsh!t!
None? Not even a little moral support?
Romney argues that interests of the labor unions were unfairly favored over some of GM and Chrysler's private creditors.
That translates into: it's okay if several million American blue collar jobs go away as long as my rich friends can make some money off it
He would have given all of the funding he has given to the DNC!
Mitt would've said.... I'm the President of (Bain, oops, USA).....and I'm here to help!
....bet he saw mega millions to be made by letting them go bankrupt, then coming in to save them!...Vulture Capitalism!
Romney said President Obama has made our economy worse. How can he show up in Michigan and say that with a straight face?
I recall quite clearly when talk about helping out the auto industry was being discussed on cable. And I recall very very little support for these auto workers. Most people thought the auto industry had seen its last days and people were more than willing to see it vanish in Michigan.
Romney's mind set was pretty much in line with what a lot of the media and Americans felt at the time - let them go. Goodbye, thanks for the memories.
Who was it who said back then in Detroit - these jobs aren't coming back.
Was that McCain? Whoever it was, it was pretty much what most people felt. And it was a quitter's mentality. No one was up to the challenge of bringing this industry back.
Except for the auto workers themselves and President Obama.
Romney as well was wrong on the foreclosure matter.
He's wrong on just about everything. But he's rich so people tend to assume he knows what he's talking about.
He doesn't.
Stick with the working and middle classes. They're up to every challenge under the sun. They built this country.
The Romney's of the world haven't a clue about that.
Why in the world should we have looked out for the Private Investors who GAMBLED their money on the automakers instead of looking out for the people who would be hurt the worst in such a shutdown, the workers and retired who had given their very working lives to the Companies and made those rich folks that much richer? I think that is the Right Wing's major point: that they were not able to rape the retirement funds and sell off all the hardware and properties for the profit of the 1% and totally ruin the lives of MILLION of regular hard workers. Instead, it was the corrupt corporate leadership that was shown the door and told to not come back, the jobs and companies along with their supply chains were saved and Not thrown on the Pyre of 'Corporate Profits By Any Means'.
Romney was on the wrong side of this from the beginning and has NO clue as to WHY he was wrong and still argues that his way would have been better when EVERYBODY can see that it was President Obama that did the Right Thing.
Ford didn't get bailed out ....
Why should the country care about the workers who could give squat about anyone else at the expense of the bond holders?
Hi, B.Honest, haven't seen you here in awhile, nice to see you posting; well said, too.
bigbenalaska, no Ford didn't get bailed out but Ford had started their reorganization a couple years before the economy collapsed. Had the economy not collapsed, GM and Chrysler would have had access to loan money from the banks that caused the collapse in the first place--there was no money for anyone to get. That's what too many people ignore.
Jody .... you're right ....
At least are cars are so much better than they were in the late 70's ....
They were really making nothing but junk for a while .... like the Gremlin , Pinto .... "LOL"
None - and we would have cut off unemployment benefits as well.
Ronmey agree with most Americans , let GM go to bankruptcy and reorganize in means new deals with union workers, but Obama decide to bailout GM to protect their base Government Motors . FORD did the hard way and is succeeding. No more to big to fail, no more government take over , this is crony capitalism to protect unions.
He would have done just what "Master grover" would have wanted. Nobody on the right wants to piss-off "Master grover" because he holds there balls so tight.
bigbenalaska. True. In the late 70's and 80's, the auto makers also operated under the old idea that people traded their vehicles every couple years so quality wasn't a focus failing to recognize that wages were becoming stagnant, jobs were disappearing overseas and people could not afford a new car every couple years. Our industry also leaned too heavily on building big trucks, SUVs and gas guzzlers; they failed to keep up with the trend toward more fuel efficient vehicles.
oskar, seriously, you sound a lot like Michigan's GOPer Pete Hoekstra in his infamous anti-American ad that he ran during the Super Bowl.
For another in-depth look at where Romney is wrong on this issue read the article below:
http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/mitt-romney-gets-wrong-detroit-automakers-bailouts-154006392.html
Here is a quote from the article:
Romney will lose Michigan, that's answer enough.
The fundamental problem is the "free market" superstitions that the right-wing believe (or just use as propaganda for plutocracy). Come on, giving rich people tax breaks only helps rich people. Deregulation allows for abuse that causes things like the Great Recession. And when there is a crisis like the Great Recession, the "invisible hand" doesn't correct anything -- Ask the banks when they needed the government to bail them out.
Of course the "free market" versus "fair market" and "venture capitalism" versus "vulture capitalism" is much more complex than this, but it's a good start and easy enough that low-information voters might even start to question the old, failed voodoo economic platform of the GOP/TP.
Manufacturing, which is a national security matter, and the auto industry representing the largest portion of manufacturing must be preserved. And the auto industry, including the unions who sacrificed so much, deserves praise not attacks. Obama/Biden - 2012!
If those "defects in management" lead to a full recovery and kept those companies in business, then they weren't all that defective, were they.
But Mitt's own record with Bain Capital shows several companies that were leveraged to the hilt to pay him multi-million dollar "consulting fees", which resulted in those companies being forced into bankruptcy. Those forced bankruptcies prove that Romney's "consulting" was extremely defective.
Mitt can lie all he wants to Republicans during the Republican Primaries, but if he makes it to the General, Democrats are going to play ALL those tapes back of Romney saying the exact opposite.
I'm sure if Newt had the money he'd love to do that to Romney right now.
Obama / Biden 2012
Now MittTaxPittanceRommel is trying to take credit for the salvation of Chrysler and General Motors and ALL those Jobs and Careers? MittTaxPittanceRommel is a HUGE Liar. Here is a helpful post describing these Politico Criminals and their Dealings... Prez O is smart. He doesn't have to seriously campaign; Just let these RepublicanCrimeCartelThugClowns go public with their unacceptably criminal behavior, and Voila!!!!!
There they are!!!: All TV'd Up! Like Dracula, Frankenstein and The WolfMan; MittTaxPittance Rommel, THEGangrene and, last BUT NOT in the least, The WolfManVomitorium! YESSSSSS!!!!! First off is DRAC: aka MittTaxPittanceRommel, Who will START A WAR WITH Iran, And A very Profitable War for his RepublicanCrimeCartelCorporateMasters AT THAT!! The Count was "nice enough" to expose his taxes!! Hmmm...Let Me See Now...Drac paid 13% on $42,000,000 income EEEZZZZ MONEY: About 5million AND!!! WE American Taxpayer Victims PAID The Count's REMAINING $7,800,000 Tax Liability!!!! Thanks for SUCKING US Dry Drac!!! AND Aren't We "LittlePeople" Thrilled that The Count is nice enough to Let US have the Honor of Paying His Taxes!! He WILL ALLOW Even, the Poor, Whom HE HAS STATED He "DOES NOT CARE ABOUT" To coughUp his Tax Liability!; 'Long as they got A BloodyJob with deductions Drac can get his FANGS into their BloodMoney as small as it might be!
Then There is Frankenstein, err...THEGangrene who, with his department store mannequin "Other Half", will turn to Destructive Rage at the drop of a wrong word or moment!!! EGADZ, This SelfEntitled Creature of Pleasure will Start A War for his RepublicanCorporateMasters AnyWhere, AnyHow, AnyWay, EVEN On The Moon!, as long as there is profit and Franky gets a stipend from it!!! ANYTHING TheGangrene Touches will Putrify and Rot like what is left of OUR AmericanBodyPolitic!!! Watch Franky TRY to Come alive with "lightening" speed at the RepublicanNationalCrimeCartelConvention!!!
Now Comes The WolfMan Vomitorium... What Can be said!! Such a Goot'Lookin'Boy! Ooh Facime! What A Face! How WholeSome!!!! How could he do Anything Unsavory!!! BUT When The CORPORATE SYMBOLS rise in his Bloody Eyes, TheVomitorium begins his hungry and Very Hairy Growling for American Taxpayer's Blood!!!!
Yes!! THERE is your victim Wolfy!! Go and Savage It WolfMan with BloodLust Fangs and All! Our American UniversalHealthCare System!! All of OUR Allys have it, EVEN the TowelHeads Have A NationalHealthCareSystem!, This Political Beast Savaged and ALSO Struck down OUR Bill for AnAmericanNationalHealthCareSystem!!! Then, when The Killing Is Over, Out Steps The 'A nica'Boy Vomitorium; Ooohh!! How CleanCut!! Yes And so are His savage sever wounds on OUR AmericanHealthCareBill!!!!Brother And Sister American Putting these guys In Power is Having Dracula Guard our BloodBanks!!! You Saw What the Count Did......
Seriously folks - and this has nothing to do with partizan politics - let us all unite as a country to keep this clown as far from the Presidency as possible.
It is painfully apparent that all the credible GOP candidates are not prepared to run against Obama; they are timing their run for 2016.
The claims that Obama has done nothing in his first term, the economy is worse than 2008, health care reform is unnecessary etc., etc., cannot and will not sell outside the audiences of Limbaugh and Hannity.
Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie are not stupid people - which is why they at least have a fighting chance against someone other than Obama in 2012, but to run the remote risk of Romney, Gingrich or Santorum - who will say anything to get your vote - mucking up this recovery is just not worth it.
Obama definitely cared most about the unions. He didn't hide that fact and he kicked the private investors to the curb. No surprise. Is there moral hazard there for the future? You bet there is.
When the textile industry fell apart in the south which affected republican votes, the government didn't step in and help out that industry even on a temporary basis. How about the paper industry? How about the steel industry? And yet, Chrysler has received two bailouts in my life time. I could name hundreds of large companies that have literally disappeared and our government didn't bail them out.
I want the auto industry to thrive. I want all industries to thrive. However if we save one we should save them all and of course we cannot do that. So Romney is right that a better deal was out there with less moral hazard.
The car industry because of the unions and because cars are near and dear to the US because of their creation here, is getting preferential treatment.
For taxpayers to get their many billions back GM would need to be trading above 50/sh. That is highly unlikely and thus taxpayers have GIVEN GM 25 billion. BTW, Ford didn't take the bailout, but they did have to go to the private sector to get financing to survive. They were able to do that. GM and Chrysler should have gotten the same treatment.
Romney like most Republicans has a very short memory. The bailout started when Bush was in office and -- their supposed hero, Ronald Reagan, bailed out an auto company.
Yup............Feisty got that right! How does she always get that first word in to every article?
In case anyone has missed it that is the way the venture capital firms make 100s of billions. 1. Let the firm declare bankruptcy and pay back cents/dollar of any debts; 2. Buy the company; 3. Fire all of the workers and management and turn pension plan over to the government; 3. Re-form "new company" with selected managers at lower salaries minus any benefits and bonuses they had before and hire back some workers that now have no pensions and lower wages plus NO UNION.
Try on Bethlehem Steel that I am familiar with although Bain Capital and Romney probably have many more examples.............Job creators my foot......(trying to be nice)
"Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie are not stupid people"
No doubt the current collection of Republican candidates are the biggest bunch of clowns elver to seek the office of President. But -- that's only part of the problem. If Republicans don't come up with some new economic ideas, something other than tax cuts for the richest of the rich and more deregulation, they may go the way of the Whig party of the 19the century.
@ oskar-1391552, supposed GM went bankrupt, do you even realize how many industries GM touches. Now all of those companies would be adversely affected and that would have been an even worse situation. Now you may not agree with the way the President handled the bailout, but unfortunately no-one (not in the President) can control the entire process. The end result is if he didn't do the bailout we WOULD be worse off and then he would get more blame for not doing something. The President can't get praise, support, positive critisism no matter what he does. I wish the country would stop all this negativity toward this man. If he had half the support that Bush, Clinton, Bush did just think where we would be as a country now. I like the saying "it's ok to disagree without being disagreeable" That fits how this President has been treated at every turn.
Both companies should have gone through bankruptcy period...
GM has learned nothing other than now the officially work for the Unions instead of it being unclear...
The Republicans have done nothing but be constantly proven wrong for the last three years. Why does anyone even listen to them any more?
This man has no shame and no position he will not change. And he thinks he can beat President Obama how?
Baloney from all you socialist in training. You make me want to puke everywhere. Obama gave the car companies to the UAW. Regardless of what you socialist think, when you buy stock or bonds in a company as an investor, you should get paid on the liquidation or bankruptcy. This was pure theft by the federal government and a swindle. Honestly, the share price of GM will never get back because of the way the theft occured. No one in their right mind would invest in a company that can be nationalized at the expense of investors. Here you want some stock that means nothing on paper and is guaranteed by no assets? There were a lot of peoples pension funds but you socialist will never think of that.. Sick, twisted and stupid progressives. If you want to chose labor over capital investment and the legal property rights of people, go LIVE in russia or some other 3rd world nation....As far as the bailout, Romney is right. There should have been a bridge loan to get back in business. I look at this as a far different bailout than the banks. The banks committed fraud. The car companies went into the tank along with homeowners because of the fraud. It's not even close to being the same.
Get Real, I guess it must suck to be wrong. Just ask Mitt. The FACT is that GM and Chrystler are still in business, earning profits, and noware expanding their work forces. Another FACT is that it is because of President Obama and the Democrats rescuing them that they are. If Repugs had managed this the U.S. auto industry would have ceased to exist and millions of more people would be out of work. Mitt does care, because all he is interested in is corporate profits for him and his cronies. The FACT is that labor unions ARE GOOD FOR BUSINESS AND GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY. In the 1950s 25% of the labor force was unionized. Today, less than 10% is. Look at the difference in the economy in the 1950s vs today. Yours and Mitt's side was wrong and now all we hear is "sour grapes." And "GM has learned nothing..." Contrary to what Mitt and the Supreme Court say, CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE!!! They don't "learn" like people. GM continues to operate, but has "learned" nothing. We hope that the people running GM have learned from this; I'm sure they have. But stop acting like corporations are aren't children that once they touch a hot stove you the parent can say, "Now I hope you've learned your lesson young man about touching hot stoves." Corporations only "learn" as much as the knowledge base of those who run them.
I wasn't overjoyed when the President decided to loan the auto industry taxpayer monies. But it worked, and we have tax paying jobs to show for it and industry has paid back most of the money. What do we have for bailing out the financial industry? - certainly not jobs because they don't create jobs, and the crooks that took this country for a financial ride have yet to see the inside of prison. And unlike the auto workers who sacrificed wages and benefits - the financial industry didn't and won't sacrifice a dime.
Jolly Joker, I dare you to define socialist. That word has become the boogeyman of the day. I am no socialist in training, I AM A PROUD SOCIALIST. And Let me tell you, President Obama is not a socialist. He, like many other U.S. Presidents have had the government intervene in the economy, but that doesn't make one a socialist. Don't forget Bush's bailout of the banks. Was he a socialist? You are just jealous because we Democrats WON and you Repugs LOST. We were RIGHT. You were WRONG. Now the right can do nothing but cry in its beer over having supported a plan that would have let out auto industry disappear and put millions of people out of work. You put corporations and profits over people and were caught at it. Ha ha ha.
He'd put whatever the minimum needed was to ensure the most profit for his corporate raider buddies - all on the taxpayer's dime.
That's what he would have done.
OK jolly joke, what do you consider a bigger investment? 100,000 dollars or 25 years of your life?
To those who are confused... The fool said let em fail. He wants to be the president now. Biggest flip flopper in political history now wants to take credit for Obamas actions? He said LET EM FAIL!!! Any other dumb questions or false victories righties? Puh thetic!
The right-leaning editorial page of The Detroit News weighed in Wednesday:
Realest501
Do you thik Obama is doing a good job saving American jobs? LOL
Obama is cutting the defense budget base in his anti-military ideology , thousand of Americans jobs we are going to lose, probably more than the autoindustry with no remorse, are you worry about those American workers too?
Dingell calls Romney foe of auto industry
Detroit — Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, painted Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney as a foe of the domestic auto industry who liked to fire workers while unveiling a Democratic National Committee-produced video here at a Thursday press conference.
Romney, who worked at Boston venture capital firm Bain Capital before becoming governor of Massachusetts, ignited criticism in Michigan in 2008 when he wrote a New York Times commentary under the headline "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt."
Romney argued that General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group might have to go through a managed bankruptcy with financing from the government.
The Obama administration required that GM and Chrysler go through managed bankruptcies with government aid but forced company bond holders to take a small fraction of the value of their bonds as compensation and gave the United Auto Workers large stakes in both automakers.
"He was against the automotive rescue every step of the way," Dingell said. "He does not understand what the president did or why he did it."
"Let Detroit go bankrupt is what he said and that he liked firing people," he said.
Dingell added that Romney's experience founding and leading Bain Capital "shows us that his goal was to make money for his investors while giving out pink slips."
In an apparent reference to a Wall Street Journal story this month, the DNC video said 20 percent of the companies that Bain invested in during the Romney era either filed for bankruptcy or closed.
Bain Capital told the Journal that its survey uses a "fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments."
Dingell was joined at the press conference in the UAW's Ford building by three union auto workers who said they wouldn't have jobs if not for the Obama administration's support.
Romney "just shows he lacks the compassion that's part of the job of being a leader," said Vince Precopio, a member of UAW Local 372 in Trenton.
You so right Belfast Lad. Any Republican that really wants to be President is waiting for 2016. They know that none of them stood a chance against Obama. The problem for them is once the Democrat retake congress with an unstoppable majority and fixes this country what Republican will have a chance then.
Obama/Biden 2012
Santorum preferred a "Managed Bankruptcy"? as opposed to a normal bankruptcy - thats political speak for BAILOUT
MittTaxPittance Rommel cares for himself ONLY. He will ruin and Destroy You and Your Family, AS THE COUNT DID THROUGH BAIN CAPITAL, HIS Personal Destructive Tool of SelfEnrichment. He will try to Eliminate Social Security and ANY AmericanNationalHealthCareSystem. MittTaxPittanceRommel is a Loathsome, Exploitative Parasite who will destroy So Many Innocent People. Believe in America?? Yes, and get rid of MittTaxPittanceRommel. This Loathsome PoliticoParasite Is An Unbellievable Catastrophy in waiting, like KingGeorge The VacuumBrained During his Shamefully Notorious Shrubber Reign - 2001 - 2008.
It's hilarious that the socialists on the board are saying that BO isn't a socialist, because I'm a socialist and I say he isn't one lolololol. They seem to be caught in a loop trying to explain Obama's socialist behavior. Socialist is as socialist does, and the old Alinsky dodge isn't going to change it. And it's also pretty obvious that Feisty is a Feisty Iranian.
Your not making any sense their jolly. Go back to Fox and get your talking points straight.
How soon we forget - there was no private capital available that would have been sufficient to get either GM or Chrysler through bankruptcy let alone both of them. The whole economy was on the verge of collapse. The jobs lost at those companies would have had a domino effect costing more jobs for parts suppliers and the entire economy would have collapsed.
Yes, the unions would have been gone as the Republicans would have wanted. But who would have replaced those jobs? The Republicans? With what? The party of no ideas can more precisely be summed up as the party of no idea. The Republican party has grown impotent in governance. Bob Dole once touted the effects of Viagra. Now, Republicans don't even have a single little blue friend. All their friends are red. Maybe it's time to see that color for what nature has used it for for millions of years: a warning color.
So who here is it that has learned nothing?
jolly joker Bless your heart. Your a real piece of work. It sure would suck to live in your America. There's a commie under every rock stuff is really old. Sad to be you.
realest501-- Good job trying to use the Rule of Reason with oskar, who thinks most Americans agree with Romney. And all the right-wing forgetting the web woven under prior Republican administrations, and how the auto industry and their private investors couldn't restructure without the government's help because the banking industry had just melted down.
Vince-545056-- Good for you, we probably need more people who really are socialists as a balance. I'm not a socialist, but would rather be a socialist than a friggin far-right fascist. And I wish jolly joker would stop puking everywhere and keep his puke to himself.
What a Wuzz this Romney Guy is,
Talk about a flip-flooper!
I hope the people in Michigan, clearly understand and remember what they are up against in the Republican primary 2 weeks from now, should they choose to vote for Romney.
The same goes for Walker in Wisconsin, and all other Republican " Terminator Governators" that
were helped to be installed by the Brain wash Notsi-Style propaganda machine of the far right in this
country( The Austerians paid for politicians and their campaign donors).
So the electorate actually voted in, under the influence of propaganda, this republican Governators, because Obama was not " Doing Enough cleaning after the mess " Bully Bush " left at the table.
Better yet, everything that has happened since 2008 is Obama's fault, Right?
It was a Revenge against Obama on the Mid terms, and made the job of this administration actually more difficult, and the electorate lost even more benefits, or even their jobs under this new cadre of Notsi Style Austerian Governators.
Ask any one on the States where this Republican Governators were placed, how their States are doing today, from Georgia to Michigan and Wisconsin.
Everyone saw tax hikes in basic food items like milk and eggs, ask any Georgian about the 259 food items that saw a tax hike as soon as Nathan Deal got installed.
If you need more clarification about this austerians agenda, look no further than Wisconsin.
And the list goes on and on, State by State, where this Republican Notsi like Governators were installed that it's so lame and boring.
And somehow, now this austerians are cranking up phase II of the propaganda machine, for they want you to believe that Romney is the answer and the saviour, just like Bush was in 2000.
As always the easily brain washed electorate is needed to vote in and install these paid for individuals, othewise it would not be Democracy, Right?
Certi-fit auto parts is a business that is own by the Mormon church. However, in order to hold a management position you have to join the church. Although they do provide go-for jobs for the little people. Google the locations retail sale all over United States, manufacturing all over Mexico and South America. This might explain while he made the comment "let the auto industry go broke".
Home office Salt Lake city Utah.
Listen up America! Mitt IS telling us how he will handle the US Economy. When recessions hit and companies struggle, he will make sure that companies like Bain Capital can buy them for 10 cents on the dollar. Strip workers of their pensions and sell off the companies to make them leaner, meaner, and more competitive. This is the same policy by which Corporate interests have sold factories, laid off workers, and taken their cash to build in foreign countries - for the last 40 years. Good for stockholders, not good for the american worker. (most of whom are to poor to own stock portfolios) I must admit - Romney actually believes this would be good for America - otherwise he wouldn't so openly still say it in front of TV cameras and voters. Or he is so out of touch with the working poor, he doesn't realize they don't own stocks like he does.
From what I can gather, Mitt Romney's current position on the auto industry rescue operation is that Obama finally chose to do what Romney would have done, but didn't do it very well.
This closely parallels his "My Mass Health Care reform is different from Obama's national one in that [choose one] a) My plan was a state plan. b) my plan was enacted in a Democrat-dominated state. c) The U.S. Constitution doesn't apply to Massachusetts d) it reaally isn't any different, but I'm hoping if I keep talking long enough people will get bored or puzzled.
Good luck with your tap dancing in Michigan. If you wander into a UAW union hall, be sure to have several big friends with you.
Look how well American Airlines is doing with their bankruptcy; thousands out of jobs, pensions lost, and jobs being sent overseas again. It's sad that Romney doesn't understand that so many vendors for the auto companies, the transportation companies that delivered supplies and autos, all the personell behind the scenes to make it all work would have lost their jobs as well. Instead of the 750,000 jobs a month that Bush cost this country, it would have been more than a million. But isn't that what the Republicans wanted? A one term President no matter what the cost?
This story is just one of the many issues the GOP is now and has always been on the wrong side of. The Republican Party is not competent enough to lead a parade in Lubbock, Texas much less lead the country and Romney is their poster child. No matter what the issue Romney will change his position to fit whatever people want to hear. This guy is a serial liar; he has flip flopped on so many issues it makes my head spin just trying to keep up with his lies. I keep wondering how long it will take honest Republican voters to realize that Romney or for that matter any of the GOP candidates running for the Presidency are not worthy of the office....... I hope Republican voters regain their sanity by November and vote for the ONLY person honest enough and competent enough to be President, that person is President Obama.
HA HA....don't fall for it folks...the whole aritcle is a "what if" fairy tale....
blah blah blah TWO WARS! (forget Libya) blah blahblah blah THE RICHblah blah blah TEA BAGGERS blah blah blah blah G-DUB blah blah blah RUSH blah blah BECK blah blah blah REAGAN blah blah blah What would Romney Have Done?? blah blah blah WALL STREET blah blah blahREPUBLICANS blahblah MILLLIONAIRES blah blah blah PALIN
....on and on ad nauseum.....
It's the Obama supporters that are changing the subject to ANYTHING but OBAMA!!
Doing it for 4 inexcusable years now and the majority of Americans are sick and tired of it!
Mittens Rob-us-blind Flip Flop, the 1%'er actually 0.006% CORPERTE RAIDER and one time governor of Liberal Mass but now he is an arch conservative. Has supported Abortion, Gay Rights, Gun Control, Stem Cell Research and has reverse himself on all of these issues.
He took both sides on the financial bailout, the stimulus bill, the auto loan package;
His biggest Flip-Flop of all Health Care Reform The national Law is modeled on the one that he championed as governor in Mass that requires every citizen to have health insurance. Now he has Flipped-Flopped. Mr. Flop has taken a hard slide to the right pandering and boot licking to the tea party.
Mitt Flip-Flop Rob-us-blind, a wishy-washy, flip flopping spineless politician without any core convictions, principals or believes a man who will say or do anything to get elected telling one crowd one thing and another crowd another. You simply can’t trust this guy to tell you the truth.
Famous Flop quotes:
I like being able to fire people
I’m not concerned about the very poor
Let Detroit go bankrupt
Don’t try to stop the foreclosure process
Who could not be any less convincing as an “ordinary guy” if he literally wore a top hat and monocle?
The only good thing that would happen if Flip-Flop were to get elected It would prove that Conservatism is dead as Flip-Flop would stab the Conservatives in the back.
Mitt Romney wanted the auto-industry to go bankrupt... is anyone surprised?
This is the man who spent 25 years buying companies (with borrowed money), laying off hundreds of thousands of workers, then taking hundreds of millions of dollars for himself as these companies went bankrupt.
The man spent years bankrupting companies and destroying jobs, while making himself and his rich buddies more wealthy. Does anyone actually believe he gives a rat's a$$ about jobs?
What is even more hilarious are all the Republicans trying to convince us that hundreds of thousands of saved jobs, and middle class families working again, is a bad thing. But bailing out corrupt wall-street exec's that caused the problem, and did not create jobs, is a good thing.
It will be very amusing watching Mr. Flip Flop LOSE in the state of Michigan
LMAO!
Breaking news just in.
Mitt Romney fitted with a neck-brace, with as much flip flopping the mittster has been doing , the neck is wearing thin.
How come the Hawkish Romney hasn't sat down with his 5 male adult children and asked them to join the military? Could it be that they already had the chat and decided only the middle class and the poor should fight and die for the wealthy oil Barons
Oh don't worry... I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Gingrich and Santorum start pushing to remove the right to vote for women. They are already trying to strip every other right away from them, I'm guessing that voting will be next.
Jolly Joker: "I look at this as a far different bailout than the banks. The banks committed fraud. The car companies went into the tank along with homeowners because of the fraud. It's not even close to being the same."
So let me get this straight - you have a problem with bailing out the car companies who "went into the tank...because of the fraud" but not with bailing out the banks who "committed fraud"? Can you really say that with a straight face?
Like Romney, you think we should have protected corporate investors, rather than the workers themselves? Who, through no fault of their own - in fact as you pointed out, through the fault of the banks and WALL STREET - were looking at losing everything? Just let them go to bankruptcy, and some private interests could have made money scavenging the pieces left behind, and meanwhile thousands more Americans would have been jobless, foreclosures would have been even higher, "entitlement" benefits would have been strapped even more. I'm sure that would have worked out like you think.....
An exercise in futility - arguing with a right-wing extremist Republican.
"Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie are not stupid people"
Is that the new bar for the GOP? Many times it takes exceptional intuitiveness and neither of these 3 guys have much going for them. Jeb Bush is a moderate that appeared on stage with President Obama at an education conference and spoke glowing words about the Prez.
The other 2 are not the sharpest knives in the drawer.
oskar, defense jobs are not what we need. Infrastructure jobs are. They are what have jump started the economy in recession after recession. This one is no different. The only difference is the party controlling Congress. Unfortunately, the Republican Congress is having nothing to do with creating them. The Party that ran in 2010 to create jobs has done absolutely nothing to create any. That is an indisputable fact. Not everyone voting in November will be brain dead.
Get Real: Both companies should have gone through bankruptcy period...
They did go through bankruptcy.
Jolly Joker: In a bankruptcy, the stock investors are not secured. Therefore, once the company is restructured or liquidated, the original stockholders get nothing. I learned this with both K-Mart and Sunbeam. The bankruptcy courts declared all prior stocks to be valueless and I lost my entire investment. So it doesn't matter whether the government helped GM and Chrysler. The stock investors would have lost their investments as both came out of bankruptcy.
Dog_Blue
"Why should the country care about the workers who could give squat about anyone else at the expense of the bond holders?"
interesting thoughts you have..how about this one...why should workers make millions for CEO's or whoever and millions in profits..and not get a living wage from their hard work ? Bond holders are investors..they have a chance to loose as much as anyone does..but...why should they be protected while the people, workers suffer for poor management by wealthy CEO's more concerned with profits than anything else.? Consider....there would be no businesses without workers. Also consider, the banking industry was bailed out....should not htye have been allowed to fail as you and others would wish on the auto industry ? Tax payers money was used on that one also....
That is what Mitt does. He targets companies (or countries) that are in a low part of an economic cycle. He likes the ones with a big investment in pension plans and other financial vehicles that might benefit working people.
He dismantles them and sells off the pieces. Then he loots the pension plan, takes out a huge loan in the name of the company to pay his management fee and then bails out and leaves just carnage in his wake.
He hates people who work for a living and sees all of us workers as nothing more than somebody to take money from. Unless you have a couple of hundred million dollars, he hates you. If you vote for him anyway, you have plenty of cap room to move up your IQ.
Why does he want to be the President of the United States?
Simple, he sees the country as a huge Bain Capital victim. If he can restructure the federal government, sell off the pieces and loot the retirement plan (Social Security), he wins. He can go from billions to trillions. That is why he wants to be the President. His interests would not be served by a stronger economy, he is rooting for a weaker one.
After he takes all the money and splits it with his friends, they can just go to wherever he is hiding all of his offshore assets. Oh yea, he forgot where all of that is because it is only a couple of hundred million and he has some little people taking care of all of that trivial stuff. Are you kidding me, a "hands off" approach to his own finances. That is a lie and this guy is a crook.
Hey Mitt, that's not Capitalism. That's not free enterprise. It sure as heck ain't Republican. It does, however, acurately reflect how the Conservatives would and do govern. Privatize profit, socialize losses. It's a win-win situation. Just like the Wall streeters who sold known bad mortgages (gained through predatory lending) and gambled whether the market would colapse (credit default swaps) to investors who carried insurance to cover the losses on worthless loans. Win-win. Well, we know how that worked out and who's left paying for it! To think people still vote for these guys who want your pensions, union dues, Social Security, Medicare, freedom and more.
Leave it to Mr. Romney and tea bagging republican extremist in government in general to complain about something working. There motto MUST change to if its broke leave it be. Or if its NOT broke.. Fix it. ; ] The point being is well enough or better is simply never good enough for them [the right]. Mr. Romney is a predatory capitalist, the kind that loves to live off the misery and downfall of others. And creating that downfall to play off of is simply par for the 10,000 dollar course. ; ]
Mr. Romney was at the helm of a predatory "restructuring" firm was he not? So he is simply looking for how to strip or RAPE if you will, the companies profits for his own gain. Hence is slash and burn tactics of negative advertising for his own gain. Its Bain? [that could be a slogan too]
But honestly the man is a liar.
Folks in the media all media call it flip flops or changing there minds. But in the real peoples world we call it LYING. Hes a habitual liar. A pathological liar of no equal in politics as of late. And NO ONE calls him on it. No one. They simply allow it and move on. And without any press with "ca jone a's" you will never have accountability in terms of media coverage. ;]
Cheers
Which Romney?
The one of late that is cowtowing to the radical right would have done nothing... no bailout, no loan, no extra support for people, no concern for the industry, NOTHING.
The one of late that values his personal money and social status more than this country would have also done nothing to revive it... now ask if he would have bought it and sold it for parts? You bet.
The one of yesteryear that the GOP base hates would have done exactly what Bush and Obama did and maybe more. The one of yesteryear cared about this country, it's people, and had a business sense that he let show through and trump any political leanings... but THAT Romney is long-gone... doesn't exist, and never will again.
What happened to Romney has happened to the Republican party in total... they used to be good business people. Now they crave power and money above all. And THAT's not good business.
When will they ask Romney the real questions?
Like:
1."Mr. Romney, explain to everybody how placing your money into shelters overseas so you can get away with paying less then 14 percent in annual taxes is helping Americans?"
2."Mr. Romney, do you send the bulk of your money overseas because you value the trade of other countries over America's, or did you send your money over there so you didn't have to pay as much in taxes as everybody else does?"
3."Mr. Romney, you like to say that you pay what you owe in taxes and not a dollar more. What if the vast majority of America thinks you should pay a lot more? Do you agree with the majority of American people and pay more taxes or tell them you don't care and don't want their votes anyways?"
4. "Mr. Romney, do you think all Americans should pay less then 14 percent of their annual incomes to taxes, like you do, even though that would plunge this great nation into third-world status almost immediately?
5. "Mr. Romney only the rich could take advantage of loopholes you have used to insure you pay less in taxes then almost all Americans who pay taxes. Should that be how America's tax code works? Should rich people, like yourself, pay smaller percent of your income to taxes when people like our military, cops, social workers, firefighters have to pay a great deal more?
Justoneguy - I think you'll be needing a crying towel come November. As has been reported today, Obama's approval rating is climbing now, and is near or above 50%.
Face it Romney is going to have a heck of a time running, when he passed virtually the same health care reform bill as did Obama .
I'd like to share a few excerpts from an essay written for the Daily KOS called "A Voice from the 1%" -
"The [idea] that the rich are getting ever richer while everyone else suffers - was confirmed by a recent report from the Social Security Administration showing that while total employment and average wages remained stagnant, the number of people earning $1 million or more grew by 18% from 2009 to 2010. yet Republicans continue to insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that if anything those "job creators" deserve an even greater share of our national income."
"The one group rarely heard from in this rancorous debate is the 1%, whose incomes and taxes are its focus. I am one of them, and here is my perspective, which may surprise you."
"imagine my amazement this summer when I watched the Republicans in Congress push the United States to the brink of default - and the world to the brink of ruin - over whether to repeal a portion of the Bush tax cuts and raise my taxes by 3.5%."
"Here is a secret about rich people: we wouldn't have noticed a 3.5% tax increase. That is not only because there isn't a material difference between having $1 million and $965,000, which is obvious, but also because most of us don't actually know how much money we are going to make in a given year. Most income at that level is the result of profits rather than salary, whether it comes in the form of bonuses, stock options, partnership distributions, dividends or capital gains. Profits are unpredictable and they tend to vary wildly. At my own firm, the general rule of thumb is that if we are within 5% of our budget for the year, everyone is happy and no one complains. A variation of 3.5% is merely a random blip."
"I was not amazed but disgusted when John Boehner and his crew tried to justify the extremity of their position by rebranding the wealthy as "job creators." While true in a very basic sense, it obscures the fact that jobs are a cost that is voluntarily incurred only as a result of demand. Hiring has no correlation at all to profits or to income - none. Let me keep more of my money without increasing customer demand and I will do just that - keep it. Perhaps I will spend a little more of it, though probably not, but even if I do it won't help the economy very much. Here is another secret of the well-to-do: we don't really buy much more stuff than everyone else. It may be more expensive stuff, sure, but I don't buy cars, or appliances, or furniture, or anything else more frequently than the average consumer. The things I do spend more money on are services such as travel, entertainment, restaurants and landscaping, none of which generate well-paying middle class jobs. There, in a nutshell, is the sad explanation of what has happened to the American economy over the last 25 years of "trickle down" economics."
"there is no question that the increasing income inequality in our society is a bad thing, in the short-term and the long-term, for both workers and for business. It is bad in every way and for everyone, with the sole exception of Wall Street itself."
"My family is from one of the poorest counties in the country, in rural Appalachia. My grandfather was a coal miner who left school after 5th grade to help support his impoverished family. My grandmother wasn't allowed to attend high school because according to her parents women didn't need an education. I never knew my father. My mother and I subsisted on food stamps for several years. I got my first job at 13, working as a bus boy for $2 an hour, and I have never been unemployed in the 37 years since. I worked my way through college, which I paid for myself. When I started my career I worked 60+ hour weeks every week for nearly 15 years before that effort began to pay off. I employ nearly 20 people, I have no debts, and I have no doubt that I have earned every penny I have."
"And yet, I am living proof of Elizabeth Warren's maxim that no one gets rich on their own. If not for the UMWA helping to secure a living wage for my grandfather, I would probably have had to leave school to help support my family, as he had done. If not for my grandmother's passionate belief in the value of the education she was denied I would never have aspired to go to college at all, and if not for my mother teaching me to love books, I would never have been able to succeed there. If not for my wife I would never have been inspired to work as hard as I did to see what I could become in life. How many smart, talented children don't have those positive influences? How many have exactly the opposite?"
"I understand too that but for food stamps, I would have gone hungry as a child, that but for public subsidies and federally guaranteed loans I could never have afforded college. I know that without the internet and airports, both of which were developed with federal taxes, I could not earn an income even close to what I make today. That all seems so obvious to me that I don't understand how anyone could question it, and those are just a few of the many reasons I am happy to pay my fair share of taxes, whatever that share maybe. Paying a lot of taxes just means you make a lot of money, and it is hard, frankly, to complain about that."
"Many of the [Tea Party] crowd seem quite proud of their Christian faith. I am not religious myself, but I am reasonably certain that Jesus would not respond to the poor and unemployed with shouts of "Get a job!""
oskar-1391552 Comment collapsed by the community
Ronmey agree with most Americans , let GM go to bankruptcy and reorganize in means new deals with union workers, but Obama decide to bailout GM to protect their base Government Motors . FORD did the hard way and is succeeding. No more to big to fail, no more government take over , this is crony capitalism to protect unions.
================
..............Oskar. Oskar. Oskar...........get a grip. you've been living in that garbage can much too long, Kermit and Miss Piggy say "Hi". and the Cookie Monster says: "Grow Up". Oskar. grab your Sarah Palin bobble head doll and be happy. PS, what's a "Ronmey". and do most Americans believe what you say?
"The piece, published as the automakers were facing a major cash crunch, called for what he dubbed a “managed bankruptcy.” He said the car companies needed to restructure their labor agreements; replace each company's management and rid them of corporate perks; and increase government spending on alternative energy and fuel economy research, which would benefit the industry indirectly."
So Obama and the Democrats are criticizing Romney for suggesting that Detroit do basically what the Obama Administration actually did.
So what's the basis for the criticism?
PS - Romney is right that the Obama Administration gave the UAW the 'Gold Mine', while the creditors pretty much 'Got the Shaft'. The net effect of that is that lenders will be much more reluctant to lend money in the future to GM - and charge a higher interest rate to compensate for the greater risk of the government giving the lenders 'the shaft' again. That's one of the reasons that I will never buy a GM product again in the future.
Mitt Romney hates Michigan.
The long suffering taxpayers still owns 25.4 billion dollars of GM stock.
The stoock is currently value at about 28.00 a share.
It would have to be at around 55.00 a share for the taxpayers to break even, no interest.
No on will buy GM stock and give Obama another chxnce to hoddoo them when GM goes under this time.
And of course there are a large number of people that would buy a GM vehicle simple because of the Trampling that Obama, Gettleman and the bankruptcy referee gave the Bankruptcy Code of the USA.
Almost certainly they will face a grand Jury as soon as Obama is out of office, he would have been impeached had it not bed for the majority dem, Senate.
We have not talked about the 17 billion that the financial arm off GM, ALLY owes the long suffering taxpayer.
We would have been way ahead had OBama simply handed 100, 000 to each member of the UAW and let GM go bankrupt.
Roy, oskar, imbeciles et all. What you fail to realize is we have the power to control what happens within the boarders of the United States. You don’t want to provide a living wage for your employees, sell your products elsewhere. You do not want to provide a decent pension for your workers that work past a certain age, too simple sell you products in third world countries and see how that works out. There is no need to race to the bottom, we have to set standards and require businesses to abide to them in order to sell here. If we allow products to be sold here that are produced by individuals making 25 cents an hour with no health benefits and no pensions, then we can expect no more. It is our choice and no ones else’s. I am not advocating doing away with NAFTA, only passing laws that require employees being treated equally if you want to sell in the United States, regardless of where that employee is. TOOOOOOOO SIMPLE
Romney is just mad that Bain didn't get a chance to sell GM and Chrysler off for parts.
?????? Let the PRIVATE SECTOR manage the bankruptcy and provide funds???? Is Romney out of his mind???? How the hell could he become an entrepreneur without knowing basic economics??? In a recession, the private sector is typically starved for capital and either cannot or will not invest in any new measures to get the economy rolling. That is why the government comes in as the financier of the last resort in order to jump-start the economy. Wall Street totaled after Lehman Brothers collapsed and had neither the capital nor the boldness to invest in GM, so only the government could step in and help the industry. I find it weird that he neglected to mention that (typically right-winger).
Creepy how a young person like me could outwit the Mitt in his own turf-business!!! That is why I think he should be kept at the boardroom and FAR FAR away from the Oval Office.
And Janus, the taxpayer might be underwater when considering GM's shares, but consider this; the US government's temporary "nationalization" (as I call it) saved the company by giving it a line of credit in order to stave off bankruptcy. The government was (and is) a very efficient mediator between the unions and the executives, and so a deal was made out to restructure the company's finances in order to make it more solvent. And I think that the American taxpayer would rather have made a "bad" financial investment that saved the auto industry instead of saving that $50 billion or so and risk losing 1 million jobs (and the industrial pride of this nation) and a helluva lot of money and assets. Don't you???
OBAMA BIDEN 2012-The only sane people running.
JLS, excellent article from a 1%er. That needs to be plastered on every single message board, and in front of every single Republican. The GOP DOES NOT speak for the 1%... they speak for wall-street and lobbyists, the very people that caused this problem.
I will re-post for importance. EVERYONE should read this.
OOPS! The Romney campaign has made another sequential mistake regarding the news cycle.
Someone has forgotten to keep track of all the Flips and the Flops!
It's apparent that anyone who has followed Mr. Congeniality's campaign knows that Mitt was suppose to be concentrating on all FLIPS in this segment.
With the obscene amounts of money being spent by Mr. 1%'s campaign, one would surely think they could hire someone talented enough to keep things on cycle.
Attention Romney Campaign Managers! Your man Mitt was suppose to be on FLIPS in this cycle, but instead he is concentrating on FLOPS!
If Mitt's handlers cannot keep him current throughout his campaign with regards to his Flips verses his Flops, then how in the world will they ever manage in the White House?
I wonder how soon it will be before they announce Palin as his running mate?
It's just what the GOP needs in order to solidify their base. Ken and Barbie sure would present themselves very well on camera.
OOPS! I guess that will have to wait now for at least 2 more cycles, because everyone knows how big a FLOP a Romney/Palin ticket will be.
Just how much of a "fee" would Romney have charged for what he is proposing should have been done ? Second, would such a capital outflow have jeopardized the company's ability to survive ?
Amazing hindsight this man has...
Romney was only concerned with the funds in the employee pension plan. He would have declared it over funded and converted it to his pockey.
To Jemma 77,
Isn't that the truth?
When the government supported makers of automotive crap fail again, which they inevitably will...because they are still producing crap....what Romney would have done will be a moot point, as it is now. But, when GM and Chrysler eventually go under, despite Obama's ridiculous, pathetic squandering of our tax money, he will still be a hero and a genius in the blind eyes of his adoring lemmings. Go figure.
I don't even believe that Mitt believes what he says about the auto bailouts. His dedicated mission and that of many others is to spin issues, policies and events to make people who are not informed and/or paying attention believe that every single thing President Obama has done is disastrous or treasonous or whatever other overblown hysterical word the can find in the thesaurus. I read a statement from Joe Klein the other day that referred to their "disastrous commitment to hyperbole". Newt is the king of that strategy but, Mitt and Rick are close on his heels. In this, they remind me of a bunch of silly, simple, mean, old women. People who do pay attention and are even moderately informed know this isn't true even if they are not inclined to support the President and I can't see how these guys have any credibility.
Romney should drop out of the race. Too many gaffes. Now for a question??? Did Obama bailout GM and Chrysler with a money bailout. Then GM and Chrysler both go bankrupt anyway. Why the bailout!!
I don't understand, maybe someone can explain. I am dyslexic, slow, ADHD, and has Torettes. That is my excuse.
I read all the above posts and I am afraid for my country. Not because most of you hate for hate's sake. But because you have all these wild opinions about things which, if we are to take your posts seriously, you obviously know nothing about. Just a few examples....
It was the secured debt bond holders who had their asset value reduced, not the stockholders (that happened too, but they had no legal protections against loss of value). The firms didn't go through the bankrutpcy process, though they were bankrupt. We have a well devolped series of bankruptcy laws in the USA and those were short circuited by Mr. Obama (Mr. Bush too but to a lesser extent). We are still owed tens of billions in the deal with GM, money we are unlikely to recover. The cost for each of the jobs saved (since some of you mentioned that these are good tax paying jobs) far exceeds the total tax receipts from all those employed, and the businesses involved, and will for many years to come--this means it's a net loss for the economy (we could have done better by flying a helicopter over GM plant sites and simply shoveled money out of the door, literally).
All, and you should think about this seriously, ALL of the underlying problems with both firms remain fully in place. None of the structural problems which led both firms towards bankruptcy have been fixed, and in a real sense they have been made worse. By spending tens of billions of dollars we've stolen from our heirs to pay for these two firms to remain in business essentially as is we have made ourselves less wealthy, and in a very immoral way too.
And yet the vast majority of posters on this topic hate Romney (he isn't my favorite either, but he is easily a better choice than Obama), and adore Obama. YOU have a worse future ahead of you because of the policies we've been following for decades, yet you wildly applaud what is being done to you. Enjoy your bread and circus.
ir12 " I am not advocating doing away with NAFTA, only passing laws that require employees being treated equally if you want to sell in the United States"
Equal to what? If everyone made minimum wage, that would be treating people 'equally', but I don't think people would be very happy with it. Should those who sacrificed to go to college and make themselves more valuable as employees be paid the same as a high school dropout?
People are generally paid what employers deem their contribution to a company's success to be. What is wrong with that?
JLS: that was one of the most insightful posts I've ever read.
Thank you!
Romney was and is absolutely correct. Obama was simply boot-licking the union puppet-masters, and because of the way the bail-out was structured, it remained bloated and inefficient when it could've emerged leaner and meaner. And now to show for it, GM is faltering again...
Nice reframe, Roy Wilson., Actually, people are criticizing Romney for criticizing Obama for doing pretty much what Romney suggested after the fact.
Hearing Romney talk on the GM/Chrysler rescue plan, reminds me of Romney words about the national health care reform legislation, and how it is different from the "good" legislation he helped enact in Massachusetts: all double-talk and adroit rationalizations. Maybe it is the result too much dreaming of his father marching with Martin Luther King; all that subconscious thought can mess up your mental process.
It is going to be a long summer for the Republicans.
Romney is mega-rich he made the bulk of his money destroying companies that had fallen on hard times. his company, Bain, came in stripped it bare of as much money as he could then left it battered and broke, and then he turned it over to the government to pay the workers health care and pensions because he took everything the company had. Just imagine the size of the dollar signs in his eyes if he could have gotten his hands on GM and Chrysler. To hell with the autoworkers, and the millions of other people and businesses that the auto companies support, taking apart GM and Chrysler is the BIG ONE!!! Let Detroit go bankrupt makes prefect sense to Romney
gm (which the govt. still owns 28% of), has lost billions on their stock leaving the tax payers on the hook, and fiat/chrysler will fail agian. their main problem still remains. bad management and the UAW
g55rumpy
GM and Chrysler failed because of the economic collapse. Stock holders are lucky to have stock at all... had a "Romney" bought them they would have been sold for parts and the stock would be zero. Chrysler will not fail unless we get another Republican president that decimates the regulatory groups and drives another economic collapse.
ROY WILSON-336103
Roy, I've seen you rip Obama a new a$$hole for doing what now seems to be what Romney suggested...
JLS-3799002
Great post. I've been consistently posting that the 3.5% tax on the rich gets lost in the mix for them. To get specific, on a $100,000 project that has a 10% ROI, it means only a $360 difference in taxes... a small business lunch.
The right will deny the authenticity of the article, but I can vouch that many in the author's position see it the same way. Thanks again... is there a link to the essay?
Santorum said basically the same thing ... no bail outs .. he didnt exempt any industry or bank from that comment .. he would have done nothing for the employees in the auto industry or any other industry that was struggeling ... Santorum would have told the employees to pray more .. and turn this counry from a democracy to a theocracy.. where women would have no rights
Republicans attack Obama for higher than expected unemployment, and they attack him for saving literally millions of jobs. For those of you who opposed the auto bailouts, you simply have no idea what you're talking about, and you don't understand how important the auto industry is the country. You're looking for any reason to be opposed to Obama that you can, and I can't really take your opinions seriously on the matter.
The auto bailouts, despite being a fundamentally bad idea, produced one of the best possible results. GM is back to being number 1 in the world. If you really hate the auto bailout, well, I'll play one of your cards and just assume that you hate 'Merica.
Willard would have named his first GM / Chrysler rollout *The Bain Romulyn* after he bankrupted GM & Chrysler ... then after Bain bought it .... he would have bankrupted it again ...
Hi LMarcT,
If Roy did rip Obama for doing what Romney suggested then I would agree. What Romney suggested was wrong too. We have an amazingly well developed bankruptcy system that both firms should have gone through, but didn't. Their stock values would not have gone to zero (I don't think you know much about finance if that is what you believe), but the underlying problems of each firm could have been corrected during the restructuring process. What Mr. Obama did, and is different than what Mr. Romney suggested happen, is to shift tens of billions of our dollars to those firms in order to prop them up during a tough time. This is money we are likely to never recover.
But I think you missed Roy's political point. You say, correctly, that Mr. Obama has essentially followed the same path that Mr. Romney out lined. It's not a perfect fit and there are real differences, but it's fairly similar. And yet leftists posting here are ripping Romeny for wanting both firms to fail, for wanting all their employees to be on welfare, and the list of stupid claims goes on and on. Roy, not that I read anyhow, doesn't seem to take a position either way on the bailouts and was just making the point that the people you align yourself with are hypocritical for bashing Romney for what you claim just above is the same policy as Obama's, whose policy they love and adore. I wish more people would have realized that both ROmney AND Obama were/are wrong about this issue. We should have let both firms go through the restructuring process.
And do you want to know why? Because, assuming your crazy claim that they were failing simply because the economy was slightly contracting is true, there will be MORE bad economies in our future, and nothing done so far in those firms has reformed their most basic problem--their cost to produce a car of similar value to those of their major competitors is much HIGHER than their competitors. Yes, even of those competitors making cars in the USA. Labor costs of more than $70 per hour for unskilled and semi-skilled workers will unltimately destroy both firms, particularly since both firms take more hours to produce each car than their competitors.
Because, assuming your crazy claim that they were failing simply because the economy was slightly contracting...
This statement is hysterical. So now the economy was just "slightly contracting" huh? Yet we hear the incessant whining on a daily basis from the teapublicans how everything is going to end tomorrow. The sky is falling the sky is falling. Looks like they whole lot of you attended the Mitt Romney school of flip-flopping. LOL Now an economic collapse (LMarc's words) becomes "the economy is slightly contracting (Rich's revision).
To this day, Ford supports the action taken by the Obama administration.
A "let them fail" bankruptcy process would have been financially less what the government added to the pot... it would have been devastating to the total industry, not just GM and Chrysler. Memories are always short and those not directly involved find it easy to criticize... we were risking the whole industry, nothing less.
I hope you right wing lemmings wake up from your stupor and see that ALL your GOP candidates are the wackiest pits and scumbags, and just boycott these primaries. Save yourselves some time and gas and just stay home. None of these lying hypocrites really gives a rats azz about you anyway. What will they give you back in return for your vote?! NOTHING!!
@Rich
Stop crunching the numbers and look at the big picture. Those who believed that we should have let GM fail are not thinking of the broad reaching intrinsic value of saving GM and its impact on the entire US economy and culture. I get really annoyed at these armchair experts who simply say, “Shut down GM and destroy the pension benefits of the workers” with nary a thought of the social consequences. These people who view everything through the prism of “the MARKET” and financial models and nothing else. If GM ends up in bankruptcy (Chapter 7), which would entail total liquidation. The company would close its doors, immediately throwing more than 100,000 people out of work. And, according to experts (economists psychologists and sociologist), the damage would have spreaded quickly. Automobile parts suppliers in the United States rely disproportionately on GM’s business to stay afloat. If GM had shut down, due to such a drastic and sudden decrease in demand many if not all of the suppliers would soon follow. Without parts, Chrysler, Ford, and eventually foreign-owned factories in the United States would have to cease operations. The nation’s assembly lines could have gone silent, sending a chill through their local economies as the idled workers stopped spending money resulting in increased crime rates. Gun sales would have gone thru the roof. Did we really want to light such a fuse and start a social revolution? Is this the kind of country we want to live in?
Likewise, everybody is now saying “they should have used Chapter 11 to sort out Detroit, like we did for the airlines”. Well, that might in fact may have been worse, Chapter 11 may have reinforce some of Detroit’s worst habits–starting with its tendency to seek the lowest prices from parts suppliers, even if that means switching companies frequently and paying relatively little attention to part quality. Toyota is famous for taking the opposite approach: It eschews easy savings in order to maintain long-term relationships with suppliers; these relationships, in turn, allow Toyota and its suppliers to collaborate on design and quality. It’s precisely the sort of production technique that the Big Three recently adopted. But, in a Chapter 11 filing, under pressure to improve the bottom line as fast as possible, they’d be unlikely to do that. That’s assuming they even make it to Chapter 11. In the more likely event that GM had to shut down altogether under Chapter 7, as most experts predicted without the bailout, the company’s institutional knowledge would end up on the proverbial shop floor. Among the casualties would have been the Volt and any near-term hopes of any new marketable plug-in from the domestic auto industry.
Fortunately, due to their near death experience the UAW is changing and so is Detroit. GM actually is producing some good cars now, but their financing practices (like everybody else in America) had initially cannibalised a source for future demand but that's turned around now. According to the most recent Harbour Report, the benchmark guide for manufacturing prowess, Chrysler’s factories now match Toyota’s for the most productive, while both Ford’s and GM’s are improving. Of course, GM's progress is incomplete, and they still have a lot to learn but I prefer this picture than what it may have been if we didn't bail them out. I am a financial analyst and hate to be opinionated as it goes against my professional discipline, but it appears that rightwingers appear to be sort of selfish and short-sighted.
It is amply evident that someone slipped several crates of "Culled eggs" into the nests of the flock of "Setting Hens" that hatched these various broods of republicans. The whole gang are "plumb crazy". I mean certifiably! North, South ahem, East, or West, and even those who walk among the tree tops are doing everything they can to make themselves look like "Bedlams Shuns". Paul Ryan, the fiend of Wisconsin's "fairyland" is set to appear with the somewhat dim witted, and ill scripted "David Gregory" on MTP this Sunday. Watch this crazy, with his darting, glazed eyes. Listen to his screeching, well worn spin. Ryan has as much grip on reality as an angry, cobed "Tom cat" has on the air He's climbing. Republicans are a sorry sight. All of 'em!
That's Flip Romney for you.
So it is. He tells a different story in every state. It's really become a GOP mantra though; tell the lie enough, and people believe it. Well, some people believe it. But you can fool some of the people all of the time....
The GOP really has lost it touch. Grand Old Party. They've become like your 98 year old grandma. You can't trust her with her own money, because her decisions don't make any sense anymore. So it is here. They are stuck so far back, that when normal people listen to what they propose, it sounds like the ramblings of a senile group of old, white men.
Time to put the GOP in the old folks home, along with the Whigs.
NEWS FLASH: The Mittster is gonna lose in Michigan, big time. His credibility is all but shot. The battle will be between Ricky Sanitarium and Ron Paulooza. Folks here know he left this state in 1971, so he's really not a native Michigander anymore.
Nah, the Whigs didn't screwed this nation as much as the GOP. Best we stick 'em up in Alcatraz. Maybe then this nation will have some peace and prosperity.
You have to listen to everything Romney says to get where he's coming from. Example, his statement on foreclosures. Where him saying there should be no intervention in the foreclosure process it should be allowed to bottom out is troubling, it's the second part of that statement that caught my attention, "so investors can buy these properties and rent them out". Pretty telling who he is concerned about. It certainly isn't the average middle class citizen.
And why should the country care about the bond holders who could give squat about anyone else at the expense of the workers? It cuts both ways. And when you are a bond holder you assume some risk with your investment so tough noogies, that is the way investing is. But the workers also support many other jobs, for example in real estate, gas stations, grocers, suppliers to the auto industry and so on. So saving the jobs of the workers has a big multiplying effect on the economy. Reasonable estimates are that id GM and Chrysler went bankrupt it would result in the loss of over 1 million jobs.
Nice comment, JHL. Maybe it'll convince America to vote for the smart people in 2012...
I have wondered what has happened to America ever since the 1960s. We have cut taxes tremendously, ruined our foreign policy AND image in the world, and have mounted a huge debt, and without increasing the standard of living of the true job creators, the middle class. Everybody thinks that the government owes them something, whether it be freedom, protection, rights, etc, and yet they keep thinking that they do too much for the government in paying taxes. I wouldn't mind paying a few percent more on my investments if I was a 1%er, as long as the money was spent here in America and not on some foreign adventure in a godforsaken land like Iraq or Afghanistan. Even if I was middle class, if paying taxes would improve my future and that of my kids, I'd do it.
To end this comment, I give you a quote that ALL of you, Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals, tax raisers and tax cutters ought to heed: "Ask not of what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country" JFK, inaugural address, 1961.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
EVERYBODY PAYING THEIR SHARE OF TAXES 2012
AMERICA 2012
DEMOCRAT CONGRESS 2012
It's industry. Many companies have gone bankrupt (protection), reorganized and come back from the realm of collapse. GM with it's creditors and base would have/could have done the same thing. There was way too much to lose right down the line if they (the creditors) had not cooperated. The bailout just decreased the "pain" time they would have gone through and made it easier to manage with the influx of cash. If they were that disorganized that the "situation" just crept up on them, that is what is known in industry circles as piss poor management and more than likely a top heavy organization with more overhead than they could bear. Am I glad GM and Chrysler made it? Yes. Could they have made it on their own? Not sure but the chips would have fallen where they should have. How many times has Chrysler been bailed out in the past only to fall right back into the grips of the same situation?
And yet you all show disdain for the bank bailouts and the worldwide impact that would have supposedly had. Did they need them? As quickly as they recovered and with the profits they are making now it points to no, yet, their business was ALL monetary with few tangible, viable assets to show for it. Only changing hands on paper.
What does Pro-America mean exactly?
Pro-bably broke .......Pat.......
Pro-American reminds me of "I want my country back" when the country didn't go anywhere. Is it pro-American to ship American workers' jobs to China and get tax breaks for it, or hide your money in the Cayman Islands?
Investment managers send your money where ever they can find a benefit or savings for funds ....
Constitutional adherence and control of a run amok effort to destroy the principles and the acceptance of the "oh it's outdated" mindset of the progressive movement and, to ensure that those thoughts and tolerances are not the norm.
Okay Pat? Of course I see your leanings in your posts and I realize you don't see eye to eye as does the Hawkeye but, just my view. I accept yours, don't always agree but I for one conservative, try to see both sides.
The Constitution is outdated. Which is why it needs to be amended, and has been amended.
Or do you believe women shouldn't have the right to vote and certain people only count as 3/5th?
And don't we have a conservative Supreme Court to determine what adheres to the Constitution and what doesn't?
constitution is known as a living document, hence it can be amended. to say the constitution is outdated is inherently un-american.
Romney's position is whatever one will win him an election. He has no core values other than the ones others tell him he needs to have to get elected. He would be the worst President ever because the day after he won the election he would then need to spend a year trying to remember who he was before he started running for office.
@JollyJoker/theboys/Chester
Congratulations, you three toadies are officially a part of the problem and not the answer. Between the two of you I think I saw every Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck ignorant talking point. People like you three are a stone around this countries neck. Stay out of my neighborhood, both of you. You will not be welcome.
Cheste4r, you just joined. You sound like the typical paid troll. How does it feel to be that big of a low life.
He is your President, fool!
I keep seeing people repeat "he refuses to show his education transcripts" - when did this become an issue? Why does anyone care? Did we review in detail the pedigrees, births, education history, job history, financial history, school loan history, thesis, etc. of every President before Obama? I didn't think so. In fact, I have never heard any details about any candidate whatsoever, except when a Republican wants to bash them (Clinton's "i didn't inhale" for instance). The only thing I ever hear about candidates is their political history, and what THEY tell US about themselves. Like Romney talking about his grandpa spitting nails, or that his father sold whatever it was out of his trunk to pay for his honeymoon, like anyone cares. Is anyone corroborating this? Doubt it. We hear anecdotal facts that fluff a candidate's position and make themselves seem more relatable. That's it. But with Obama, of COURSE we need every detail, we need to verify every fact, because for some reason you all think he's a Kenyan socialist (do you think they even know what socialism is throughout most of Kenya, or care?)
Dennis Price,
Use your brain to think for once and leave your emotion at the door. You sound like a little kid at the park who nobody wants to play with.
For all the answers you seem to have how did you miss the basic premise of America. Now how does it feel being ignorant to the country you think your protecting?
Hey Matt,
Yes, when the constitution fails to provide for us the kind of supreme law of the land that we want, we should amend it. And have amended it 17 times. The first ten I don't count as they were a compromise deal with Federalists in order to get ratification of the original constitution. I think where I differ wildly from my liberal friends in the USA is that I prefer we use Article 5 to change our constitution, and our liberal friends simply say the constitution means whatever we want it to mean. Which is scary since it leads to one outcome, and one only--despotism.
It seems to me that the average liberal person in the USA sees no limit to federal power, despite Article 1 clearly listing powers granted to the Congress, Article 2 doing the same for the executive, and Article 3 for the courts. Those three articles, plus the 10th Amendment which specifies that congress is limited to those enumerated powers and that all other powers rest with the states or the people except those prohibited to them, seems to me to be pretty clear and convincing evidence that our constitution is meant to limit federal power. But there is an out. Article 5 spells out how we can amend the constitution to change it. Liberals hate this article, I think, because it makes it too hard to change things. Much better to them, apparently, to just ignore what the law of the land says.
To me it's interesting why anyone would want Obama's transcripts at this stage of the game. He's not applying for job....he already has one. The guys been there for more than 3 years, he's made his own record for people to see and judge. If we need to look at his transcripts to find out if he knows what he's doing or not then we shouldn't be voting.....we're too dumb.
Matt L, @3.6
The Constitution is outdated you say? Hardly
It needs to be amended? Probably
You do know that once amended, the amendment actually becomes part of the document? Probably didn't know that did you?
There are no 3/5 Americans anymore, ALL women have the vote now, Booze is legal today, it says so in the Constitution, you are aware that any law saying Booze is illegal is unconstitutional don't you? I'm sure you do because your post tells me you must have consumed mass quantities of it to post such drivel.
Time after time after time...
Where's the birth certificate? Where's the transcripts? Where's.... ?
Ya know what? Who cares? We all know that the Republican party would just as soon forget George W. Bush ever happened. And we all know why. He was the poster boy for all current economic plans of the frontrunners.
They say you get economic prosperity by cutting taxes. Didn't happen under Bush. They say the national debt needs to be cut back and will be under a Republican president. Didn't happen under Bush. In fact, in all of previous history, nobody spent more. They say all government has to do is get out of the way, get rid of regulations and oversight and business can manage itself. Well, that did happen under Bush and look where it got us!
Fact is, though, it wasn't just Bush. There were 6 years of clear Republican majorities in both houses, too. They share the blame. If you look closely, they are the same people who now roundly castigate Obama for the same things they did under Bush! That's what they don't want you to look too closely at!
Well, Republicans, you are about to find out that voters have long memories. They do remember the Bush years no matter how much you'd like them to forget! Good luck with that!
OK, enough - you can all return to 'bama bashing now!
Hi EEngineer,
You are manifestly wrong. I don't want anyone to forget the Bush years. I also don't want anyone to forget the Obama record to date which, for the most part, has been more of the same direction just at a much faster pace than Bush. We didn't have a free market during Bush's presidency, so please don't blame what we didn't have for the problems we face today.
In fact, if you were a fair person (and I have no reason to believe you are) you would agree that Bush at least tried to reform Fannie and Freddie and the US policies that were regulating us into a financial nightmare. Bush did go to Congress about these things. He spoke about them several times. I wish he had fought harder for what he said had to be done, particularly given that the consequences for failure were what he openly worried about, but you cannot be an honest person and not condemn democrats, including our current president, for refusing to consider ANY reforms to the system that was wildly unbalanced.
If Bush was so bad, as you claim, then your sentence above that republicans are trying to escape blame for those things while blaming Obama "for the same things they did under Bush!", must mean that you think Obama is just as bad as Bush. And we know, don't we, who you will vote for? Please, enough, ENOUGH, with the lies and hypocrisy.
if you were a fair person (and I have no reason to believe you are) you would agree that Bush at least tried to reform Fannie and Freddie and the US policies that were regulating us into a financial nightmare.
No, I don't have to agree with that. Because it didn't happen! Mike Oxley, Republican and hardly a flaming liberal, has a much different memory of events than you do:
The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley, now vice-chairman of
Nasdaq.
He fumes about the criticism of his House colleagues. "All the handwringing and bedwetting is going on without remembering how the House stepped up on this," he says. "What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute."
The House bill, the 2005 Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, would have created a stronger regulator with new powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, to limit their portfolios and to deal with the possibility of receivership.
Mr Oxley reached out to Barney Frank, then the ranking Democrat on the committee and now its chairman, to secure support on the other side of the aisle. But after winning bipartisan support in the House, where the bill passed by 331 to 90 votes, the legislation lacked a champion in the Senate and faced hostility from the Bush administration.
Adamant that the only solution to the problems posed by Fannie and Freddie was their privatisation, the White House attacked the bill.
"We missed a golden opportunity that would have avoided a lot of the problems we're facing now, if we hadn't had such a firm ideological position at the White House..." Mr Oxley says.
Google it... it's all over the Web. That legislation died in Senate committee, Republican controlled. And Bush had plenty of warning too. Consider this NY Times article:
A soft-spoken Texan, Mr. Falcon ran the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, a tiny government agency that oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two pillars of the American housing industry. In February 2003, he was finishing a blockbuster report that warned the pillars could crumble.
Mr. Falcon's report outlined a worst-case situation in which Fannie and Freddie could default on debt, setting off "contagious illiquidity in the market" — in other words, a financial meltdown. He also raised red flags about the companies' soaring use of derivatives, the complex financial instruments that economic experts now blame for spreading the housing collapse.
... Mr. Falcon was in New York preparing to deliver a speech about his findings, his cellphone rang. It was the White House personnel office, he said, telling him he was about to be unemployed.
His warnings were buried in the next day's news coverage, trumped by the White House announcement that Mr. Bush would replace Mr. Falcon, a Democrat appointed by Bill Clinton, with Mark C. Brickell, a leader in the derivatives industry that Mr. Falcon's report had flagged.
Yep, that was Bush's response - fire the messenger! And replace him with somebody deeply entrenched in the very market that he flagged as a problem.
... must mean that you think Obama is just as bad as Bush.
Not at all! Obama has little choice right now, given the mess that Bush left him. And he is actaully expanding employment in this country. Job creation stalled under Bush for the entire 8 years that he was in office, aided and abetted by a Republican majority in House and Senate for 6 of those years. So right back at ya "Please, enough, ENOUGH, with the lies and hypocrisy."
"GM was always the first to cave into the unions and the one company with the highest labor costs"
Had you a real education rather then a purveyor of extremist propaganda you would have included the management costs per unit as well as labor costs per unit.
Try as you and yours may, the FACT is workers have lost amounts of wealth and top one percent have gained record amounts of wealth. My idea is to cut managerial costs if labors wages are cut on any company going through bankruptcy...
To any far right extremist, why hasnt romney given us his transcripts shown us his BC or proven every where and everything he has done since birth and also why did bush do any of this either? Yeah can you see the pattern yet
How much support would Romney have given auto makers? It depends on which day you ask him and whether or not he is in Michigan!
Surprise, surprise, he would have shielded the wealthiest from the consequences of participating in the free market, and stuck it to the actual workers, who build the damn cars.
Exactly right, Amy. By allowing the auto makers to take the traditional bankruptcy route, all pensions, wages, health care, contracts would have been wiped off the books. The taxpayers would have had to pick up the pension costs just as is happening with American Airlines costing us a whole lot more than the initial auto loans and leaving us with a shell of an auto industry. Same thing with the mortage foreclosures, his plan is to let investors buy the homes, fix them up and rent them back to the former home owners. Heartless, cold, calculating money grubber describes Mitt.
Ever notice how the baggers complain how the stock holders took it in the shorts? Guess what baggers, there was more workers, mom and pop shops that provided parts to the auto industry, who also had workers. The stock holders are responsible for having decent management at the head of the firm.
The stock holders are the ones to really blame for the auto industry failures, not the union, union workers or any but the stock holders.
Hurts when the truth comes back to bite you on the ass, doesn't it?
At the time we bailed out GM and Chrysler, virtually every nation in the world with any presence in auto production was subsidizing their auto industry. The US is the ONLY nation in the world where even the thought of allowing such a major industry to go down is debatable.
Jody you are correct and I read your post after I entered mine that explains the same exact scenario....How can I give you more than 1 thumbs up??
........I wonder how many people reading this article know that this is exactly how those companies "came back"...........People at the top made out like the bandits they were, workers mostly did not come back and if they did no union, no pension, fewer benefits and less wages if they wanted the job............Bain Capital.............money in the bank for those leeches.
wait... what? in chapter 11 bankruptcy the stockholders are the last people paid out. your response to this article just outlines how you have no idea how bankruptcy works. try to not comment on things you have no idea about, good way to make yourself not look like an id*ot
remember :
why again should workers get to keep their current contracts if the company that pays them wages is bankrupt? how is that even remotely fair?
obama basically turned bankruptcy law on its head and gave a bailout to the unions LOL
brendan 4
Obama didn't turn the bankruptcy laws on it's head and even if he did WHO CARES
Obama saved thousands of jobs and prevented this country from going into a depression Something the right wing nuts would have liked to see.
It will be a lot of fun watching Mr. Flip Flop LOSE Michigan
Witchking
THIS is the type of thinking one has to adapt in order to support Obama? - Good Grief
@witchking
what? in chapter 11 those jobs would have been saved. workforce might have been trimmed some, but wages and benefits would have been renegotiated as they should have been.. all without the massive bailout they got.
amazing what the court of law can do for a company. having them file chapter 11 would have not put the US into a depression. (but hey, according to liberals, we have been in recovery since 2009, but my food costs 45% more, gas costs 83% more, nice recovery)
the right wing would like to see the USA prosper, just without government intervention.
funny you say who cares, nice thinking with Obama trampling all over law
Life is so much better on these boards by turning on the Ignoring author button on Brendan
OBXRon
I understand that its much easier to block me than face reality
I don't think many people live in your reality.
OBXRon,
Wouldn't real life be so much better if you could just tune out everyone that disagrees with you right? Shut the whole world out and live in your own little phantasy world right? The only people you associate with are the ones that agree with you right?
Welcome to utopia OBX style..... All a bunch of zombies moving in the same direction thinking the same things, doing the same things, saying the same things, buying the same things.
If this is your liberal democrat world, you can keep it, I would rather be dead.
Republicans cannot whitewash the history of the great American auto industry comeback. The GOP wanted to let GM and Chrysler die, and force Americans to buy cars made in Korea or China. This President , along with most Americas, wanted to take a stand and save millions on American jobs and revive an iconic industry and fix the economy. Much to the consternation of Republicans like Mitt Romney that root for the economy to fail, it worked. This is a terrible case of petty whining by conservatives. They rooted against America! http://www.sunstateactivist.org
mattpfl, well said. They were and still are rooting against America and American workers. Everytime they complain about union workers, they are complaining about what has made this country strong, what built the middle class.
I agree - and if you do a deeper analysis of the differences between domestic and foreign automakers, the wages/benefits paid to hourly employees are not all that different.
The main differences are in management structure - US automakers have more mid-and-upper management and they are paid significantly higher than their foreign counterparts (especially the CEOs). US automakers have also historically been slower to respond to customer demand and have a longer path-to-market.
How is CEO pay an example of capitalism but union pay is not?
Might want to recant that GOP thing just a little. It was GW who got the ball rolling.
GW got the ball rolling - then passed it off like a hot potato without any plan or objective. He left it to Obama to figure out the details.
And another example of "I was FOR it before Obama, now I am AGAINST it"
Truth is many of the money managers who would let the auto industry and its workers die probably had a parent who was a union member back in the day, and that union job paid for the little @!$%#e to go to college, become a manager, and then later in life they turn their backs on working people with no hint of shame. Arrogant bastards. Obama 2012!
TNSEVOL, isn't that the truth. Most of the health care bill is from GOP ideas, which they were before now against.
More people are really seeing the GOP for what it is doing to this country. And the baggers said they will take our country back. Well baggers, the 99% will be taking their country back. Thanks for the word bites baggers. Too bad you will be on the outside looking in.
"Republicans cannot whitewash the history of the great American auto industry comeback."
As we all know, 12st century Republicans absolutely HATE any good news be it about the economy, foreign policy, killing BinLaden -- anything. If something good happens -- Republicans hate it. Republicans idea of good news would be a 5% jump in the unemployment rate or $7.00 gasoline. They want America to fail so they can blame it on somebody other than themselves and their failed policies of the past.
HA HA....don't fall for it folks...the whole aritcle is a "what if" fairy tale....
blah blah blah TWO WARS! (forget Libya) blah blahblah blah THE RICHblah blah blah TEA BAGGERS blah blah blah blah G-DUB blah blah blah RUSH blah blah BECK blah blah blah REAGAN blah blah blah What would Romney Have Done?? blah blah blah WALL STREET blah blah blahREPUBLICANS blahblah MILLLIONAIRES blah blah blah PALIN
....on and on ad nauseum.....
It's the Obama supporters that are changing the subject to ANYTHING but OBAMA!!
Doing it for 4 inexcusable years now and the majority of Americans are sick and tired of it!
Republicans don't want America to fail.....just it's marxist, name a czar a minute, spend us to oblivion dictator!
What is alarming to this American reader, is the "government must fix our problem" lacky's, and the extreme "entitlement" population that has arisen!
I guess our public schools, colleges, and unions are producing the best "subversive" communist party ever.
Our Constitutional father's are rolling in their graves at this moment in history!
justoneguy, thank goodness you are justoneguy...... moron... the bes part is John Boehner the current speaker of the house and his name. I like to call him cockblocker boner. That is all he does runs around and tries to stop anything President Obama tries to accomplish. Its funny its just like watching a basketball game when they first let blacks play in one. The white guys didn't know what to do. They were all out of their leagues.
GaryL, the establishment tells our schools what to teach, also, more intelligent people go on to higher education.... you my friend are an idiot....
Romney is DEFINITELY a hypocrite. He masters the Orwellian art of doublespeak; for example, after he claimed that he "was not worried about the poor," he said that he would strengthen their safety net if necessary. And incidentally, he supports the Ryan budget. So Romney, tell me how cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from social programs like food stamps, Medicare, and the like will strengthen the safety net???? It may in your world, but not in reality.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
Stop the fed,
Lemmee help ya here, The ESTABLISHMENT (read government) tells our schools what to teach and what NOT to teach.
In other words a government sponsored curriculum, Right? Gotta have them teaching the right things now don't we? we don't want all our children learning the wrong stuff now do we?
Lets see, Prior to the Department of Education being formed to "Assist" with the education of our children by rules from on high, we had the best education system in the world and about 75% of the worlds high school graduates would fight to come to American Colleges to earn a degree, and 100% of American High School Graduates were able to enter college if they so chose.
Today, it's only about 30% of the world graduates and only for select schools, and only about 50% of American graduates even qualify.
So much for the establishment telling the schools what to teach being a good thing.
You must be one of the benefactors of that government directed instruction....
if you take issue with education Egilman, phone one of the republicans holding office, or call GW in Dallas, Texas. They are the ones who came up with that winner NCLB. You do remember that right? So i agree with you, republicans have ruined education in this country.
Stop the Fed
Careful Stop...your IQ is showing!
Egilman, the reason why education has declined is a lack of focus and modernization on it. We spent billions on education in the Cold War to beat the Soviets, and that is why we were superior. The Department of Education has little to nothing to do with the decline. It's mainly budget cuts, overemphasis on test scores, obsolete teaching methods, distracted students, and low wages for teachers.
I don't know about your state's school system "Egilan", but each school district in our state develops their own detailed curriculum using a basic outline provided at the state level, not the U.S. Dept of Edu. Education only provides testing and performance standards. So, if your kids' curriculum is lacking, it's not the fault of the feds. I suggest you write your local and state officials and participate by attending school board meetings at the state and local levels to voice your concerns. This provided positive results for the me and the parents I worked with via the PTA in my county.
Next, one major factor sited when comparing educational outcomes to other countries is parental participation. For example, its been noted that parents in Asian countries spend about 20% of their annual incomes for tutors or other activities to supplement their kids' education. As a matter of fact, Asian American kids go to the same schools you are whinning about and have positive outcomes. Asian parents even pool their money and have regular Summer tutoring/education sessions. I followed their example and had tremendous results with my children as well as participate in the meetings sighted above. I believe it's the parents' responsibility to insure that their kids are successful in school not the teachers nor Education.
With regard to kids not graduating, again, I believe its up to the parents to insure their kids stay in school. People appear to enjoy pointing the finger at everyone but themselves.
Read between the lines:
What Mittens is saying is that he would have done more to make sure the unions were effectively destroyed. Its kinda like saying, "I was going to help him up, but I would have kicked him frist."
The huge, steaming pile of irony that is Willard Romney
What Mittens would and wouldn't have said is not the issue - he wasn't the President, Obama was, and we all know how he gave the store to the unions for free.
Poor corporate management and union control over the corporations contributed to the failure of the car industry.
The two government hand-out companies would have made it without the large funds paid to them. And have they returned all of the money to the taxpayers yet? Not hardly, for they are still on the hook.
Fiat benefited, as well as the union who will demand higher wages for the workers due to the gov. intervention because of excessive regulations and the poor position of the purchasing power of the workers.
Thank goodness Ford is still alive. We have a US car company moving forward with good technology and management.
winemaker, to quote Newt Gingrich--what a bunch of "pious baloney" you speak.
Those union workers took cuts in pay, cuts in health care, cuts in pensions as their part of saving the auto industry. It wasn't a give away to unions and republicans legislators, and presidential candidates know it but they know they can convince their faithful to buy that crock of baloney. Only republicans whine about living wages as being a give away to those evil union workers while the nonunion employers exploit their workers because they can. Wages are stagnant and in decline since 1980 when Ronald Reagan and the GOP began their assault of unions. That's fact which is quite different from "pious baloney".
Winemaker -
I agree with the poor corporate management, but it is unfair to blame the unions. Ford dealt with the same unions and managed to make it through. The pay and benefits of the union workers were NEGOTIATED - not given to them. GM offered extensive health-care benefits in exchange for flexible work schedules, then health care costs escalated.
GM also had way too many brands, way too many mid-managers, and few too many exciting, quality vehicles I dont believe the union played any part in those management decisions.
And in my opinion the automotive companies may have made it through but the same poor corporate management of the process would have led to massive unemployment. Also the suppliers and other companies that depend on the automotive industry, many of them small business, would have gone under.
No TNSEVOL, I don't agree that it is unfair to blame the unions. And I don't feel that wages/benefits were negotiated. Had the management NOT agreed to the proposals then the union would have held the company hostage until their demands were met. The company and the union both lost revenue had the union elected to strike, as they have in the past.
Company management indeed did not uphold their responsibilities to the stockholders/bondholders by mismanaging the company.
Without intervention by the government, those companies would have gone into Chapter 7 status, with employment for the employees and vendors still intact.
Have there been vendors, small businesses that have gone under today? I believe I read of several.
No, I don't agree that this unprecedented action needed to be undertaken by Obama and his minions.
winey, are you saying Bush was wrong also? Heaven's forbid, bite your tounge. It's always the union's fault for everything, no matter what it is thats wrong. What do you have against fellow Americans that want a liveable wage and benefits?
stick to winemaking...you don't have a clue about anything else
Had the management NOT agreed to the proposals then the union would have held the company hostage until their demands were met. The company and the union both lost revenue had the union elected to strike, as they have in the past.
Gee winemaker, i thought that was the definition of labor negotiations. What do the unions have to bargain with except their labor?
Hey, boss, if you dont pay me a living wage, i'm not going to use the toilet anymore!
LOL, I would advise that you read your posts and think what they mean before you hit the "post comment" button.
@winemaker-4308406 now I may not be Pro-Union but I do think they serve a purpose. If you believe that the corporate bigwigs will care about the little man then you are either a corporate bigwig, clueless, never been laid off or believe that people will always do what is right. The unions are not as good as they should be but without them trying to make managment do what is right there we would have a poorer american workforce than we do today.
I find it ironic that, as I have grown older, I have to wonder how a party touting its Christian values would have adopted the color of Satan, which is also the official color of the old USSR and the communist party. Remember the old saying from the 50's: "Better dead than red"?
I'm not accusing Republicans or others of representing Satan or Communism the way conservatives have accused progressives. I'm just saying that maybe those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
So wrong Winemaker. The union/management relationship had NOTHING to do with the collapse of Chrysler or GM. The banking industry collapsed. Therefor the auto industry had no one to borrow from in a slumping economy to get them through to brighter days. Companies often operate at a loss for a year or two during bad times. They depend on their good credit to get them through. In this case they lost the ability to borrow, and ran out of cash. This had everything to do with the economy and nothing to do with the unions.
Your little story about blaming the unions plays well on Rush's radio program, but it just isn't reality.
I've been thinking along the same lines, Rick. If the GOP preaches about Christian values and small government, why do they feel obligated to attack people's rights (gays, women, unions) even though Christianity (at least how I interpret it) talks about how everyone is equal??? When you think about it, Christianity has some communistic teachings, like egalitarianism and a managed afterlife (Heaven). And why do they think that a government that tells people to buy health insurance (which is a good that benefits EVERYONE involved) is Big Brother (which by the way is the creation of a social democrat named George Orwell, and yet they STILL use it) but a government that tells people who they can marry, whether they can use contraceptives, and that a woman's private parts have to be UNNECESSARILY penetrated is okay???? WTF???
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
Jody,
Why don't we just mandate a law that all employers pay union scale and benefits to all employees nationwide?
That would eliminate all the arguments about union wages and bennies now wouldn't it?
Yes it would. It would also eliminate all need for unions wouldn't it?
Why not? isn't this right up Liberal Democrat street make everyone be paid the same?
Please tell me why this in not a good thing?
It seems Willard is willing to support whatever the weather vane says he should. It largely depends on where he is and who he is talking to. I don't trust him.
But you trust what emulates from the mouth of the Obama? You need to open your eyes and your mind.
...emanates
And you would be shocked to know that many would consider your mind and eyes in need of attention...;-)
Romney is no better than the President as a leader, and has shared almost every one of his policy positions at one point...
Obama/Romney 2012
what's the difference?
One difference is that Romney wants to make contraception illegal, and Obama wants to make it available. Another is that Romney wants war with Iran, and Obama does not. That's enough for me.
Hearthlight,
Contraception is available to anyone who wishes it. All they have to do is pay for it. And if they can't, Planned Parenthood is available to provide it to them at no charge.
So why is it so important to have government intervention into this?
well put -trust me there are hundreds of other reasons - but you summed it up nicely - thx
Heartlight, I don't support Romney or any Republican in the race or on the horizon, but let's not use the right's tactic of misleading information. To the best of my knowledge, Romney does not want to make contraception illegal. Only Santorum might want to do that. The issue there was about requiring employer based health care plans to provide birth control at no cost to the insured, in particular religious employers. (Which by the way I believe they should as anyone who employs workers should be held to he same laws and standards to which all employers are held, especially of they receive government funding). Please, let's not get into the twisting of facts and truth. There's enough of that going on by the GOP, and their candidates, pundits and base.
The Iran part I think is closer to the truth.
Contraception is available to anyone who wishes it.
Have you listened to Rick Santorum? He believes states have the right to outlaw contraception.
winey, why are the baggers against Planned Parenthood? Shows you don't like women, and damn sure don't like women to have birth control pills. I bet you love your vigra pills, right? Not wishing you would OD on them, but it would be funny.
Okay Silly Sally Ann, I made a comment that anyone has access to birth control, and if you can't pay for it, Planned Parenthood will provide it. Now re-read my post. How does this show that I don't like women or provide women the choice to take or not take the pill??
Now you counter with this silly vigra. And no,I have no need for them. But if I did have a requirement, I could purchase them.
Nice ending Silly Sally - the OD funny line. Your entire post is laughable. Sad, but laughable.
winemaker....save your breath! You are speaking to the same folks who railed about Bush about the death toll from the wars and the high price of gas...LMAO!
NOW you hear hardly a peep! Yep, approx. 5-6k deaths in 8 years of war, which is too many....however 2 MILLION babies aborted ANNUALLY without a whisper!
Also, gas was approx. $1.79 when Bush left office and now at the national average of approx. $3.52 a gallon hardly a peep as well from the socialist minions! Gee, I guess the payroll tax savings those "evil" conservatives were not going to renew will save the difference on the delta of $1.72 a gallon for the difference in gas prices....LOL!
Oh, the hypocrisy of the left, and the success of Obammie in getting America to fight the class warfare game amongst itself! The ACORN king, from the most corrupt state, and city in America, as well as the most radical & derisive President EVER!!! If elected in 2012 again, please let us all hail the "messiah!"
Those who are blinded by the serpant with the "forked" tongue.....do so at your own peril! But hey, the government will take care of me!!!!!! LOL!
Gary, you give the government too much credit. Outlawing abortion will not cause it to decrease. A government does not have the power to change human nature. Theocracies don't work. Let me repeat, Theocracies don't work. Stop blaming the 2 million abortions on the "liberals". If somebody wants an abortion, they will hawk all their earthly possessions to obtain one.
GaryL, once again you show your complete lack of education and intelligence. All the big oil companies are controlled by republicans. Every company has a republican as a CEO. Check it out, if you can do the research... idiot. Read about your most corrupt state... from 08
09
2010
2011
2012 and city of chicago but not the state. Interesting what a little research will tell you.
Also what the research will tell you if you can read is that everything is dependent on what criteria you use. I could conceivably use the criteria that because YOU live in wherever you live, THAT is the most corrupt state.
Just the facts man, and a little research. When Bush left office the rebuplibarons lowered gas prices so that would not be ANOTHER thing that democrats went after them for. BUT if you check your gasbuddy like all you morons like to do and do a spread about what was actually going on at the time you might get smacked in the face with the intelligence hammer and see. Its ok though, you probably aren't rich either, just stupid enough to let the republibarons control your mind.
NOW use the brain.... notice if you take a look at the gasbuddy chart for the last month you will see that the price just went up this month, and then WALA the republibarons start talking about how much gas has gone up... Next go to the 5 year chart gas buddy has and look at 07/08, you will see the price is at 4.39 a gallon....wow are you following me... NOW if you take 4.39 and subtract 3.90 from that you will see that gas prices were .49 per gallon HIGHER when bush was in office, and that the prices DROPPED when he left...HMMM makes you think doesn't it...OK maybe not you but we shall continue... NOW look at the stability of the prices all the way to 2010, when the republibarons got the house back....the price remaind stable thorugh ALL the things that were going on in the economy, then WHAMMY the republibarons RAISED the prices to make the democrats look bad and then relative stability again. NOW they need something to throw at the average american, no you are not the average american you are BELOW the bell curve my friend, but I will help to kick start your brain if you will let me, and then they raise the prices again.
More pain for your brain....
now look at the political affiliations, all republibarons... the new CEO of BP, YES another republibaron. Who controls the prices, republibarons.
THINK... yes it is necessary or they shouldn't let you vote.
GaryL, once again you show your complete lack of education and intelligence. All the big oil companies are controlled by republicans. Every company has a republican as a CEO. Check it out, if you can do the research... idiot. Read about your most corrupt state... from 08
09
2010
2011
2012 and city of chicago but not the state. Interesting what a little research will tell you.
Also what the research will tell you if you can read is that everything is dependent on what criteria you use. I could conceivably use the criteria that because YOU live in wherever you live, THAT is the most corrupt state.
Just the facts man, and a little research. When Bush left office the rebuplibarons lowered gas prices so that would not be ANOTHER thing that democrats went after them for. BUT if you check your gasbuddy like all you morons like to do and do a spread about what was actually going on at the time you might get smacked in the face with the intelligence hammer and see. Its ok though, you probably aren't rich either, just stupid enough to let the republibarons control your mind.
NOW use the brain.... notice if you take a look at the gasbuddy chart for the last month you will see that the price just went up this month, and then WALA the republibarons start talking about how much gas has gone up... Next go to the 5 year chart gas buddy has and look at 07/08, you will see the price is at 4.39 a gallon....wow are you following me... NOW if you take 4.39 and subtract 3.90 from that you will see that gas prices were .49 per gallon HIGHER when bush was in office, and that the prices DROPPED when he left...HMMM makes you think doesn't it...OK maybe not you but we shall continue... NOW look at the stability of the prices all the way to 2010, when the republibarons got the house back....the price remaind stable thorugh ALL the things that were going on in the economy, then WHAMMY the republibarons RAISED the prices to make the democrats look bad and then relative stability again. NOW they need something to throw at the average american, no you are not the average american you are BELOW the bell curve my friend, but I will help to kick start your brain if you will let me, and then they raise the prices again.
More pain for your brain....
now look at the political affiliations, all republibarons... the new CEO of BP, YES another republibaron. Who controls the prices, republibarons.
THINK... yes it is necessary or they shouldn't let you vote.
on the 08-12 most corrupt states they took out my http site info...look it up...
Gary L,
You are correct in your conclusion, and I haven't heard a word from Silly Sally, so I guess she can't defend her comments.
My have you gotten the libbie skirts in a bunch with your 9.10 post. The Republicans are always the fault while Obama is just the poor guy who followed Bush.
When will the Obama accountability start?
Will his position on anything matter at all if he loses Michigan in two weeks?...
dangerfield,
For some reason, Romney is starting to remind me of Greg Norman at the Masters.
Would hand stands be a better position for him .... ??
Hey , there's Phine ....
I left you a message on your Phine home page ....
But, if he loses Michigan, It's more like he "jumped" the shark than that he IS the Shark...;-)
big ben, when did you leave message? I didn't get it!
dangerfield,
Yep! A shark Mitt Romney is not! LOL You got me with that one! Still laughing!
Phine , It shows it still pending in your comment section .... says pending your approval .... from what I can tell ....
I left it the day after the super bowl ....
It maybe lost .... ?? .... but still showing from here ....
If Romney loses Michigan he will probably be in a fetal position.......
Hmmm. Try resending it big ben. Or just do it under contact me, and I will email you back.
Alright Phine , I fired it off to you in the contact ....
I copied it from where it was held in your account to contact author ....
Maybe you have a block on me .... "LOL"
No block. And I found the problem and fixed it! And I shot you an email back with some good info!
I'm not seeing your message ....
Maybe you can give me a pointer .... ??
Or it's slow ....
I would go with slow! I will resend it the email!
Phine , I'll check it a little later , I'm being pulled away ....
Like the new look .... reminds me of here .... sea ya
Winemaker -
I agree with the poor corporate management, but it is unfair to blame the unions. Ford dealt with the same unions and managed to make it through. The pay and benefits of the union workers were NEGOTIATED - not given to them. GM offered extensive health-care benefits in exchange for flexible work schedules, then health care costs escalated.
GM also had way too many brands, way too many mid-managers, and few too many exciting, quality vehicles I dont believe the union played any part in those management decisions.
And in my opinion the automotive companies may have made it through but the same poor corporate management of the process would have led to massive unemployment. Also the suppliers and other companies that depend on the automotive industry, many of them small business, would have gone under.
GM is really mismanaged. I was hoping they would clean house of the old farts running the company during the restructure. Unfortunately, if GM had gone under, the same management would have cleaned up with millions in their pockets.
They did boot people out. Do you not remember the republican fits over the President ousting big wigs at GM. in particular the CEO? Funny, republicans were all up in arms about then screeching the President had no right, and now they completely forgot all about it and are all up in arms because heads didn't roll. LOL hysterical bunch!
Obama budget calls for an increase in subsidizing the Volt from $7,500 to $10,000. This car has a ticket price of $41,000 and in 2011 it failed to meet projected sale volume of 10,000. General Motors says the average income of a Volt buyer is $175,000 per year.
The Daily Caller reports that the subsidy “would cost taxpayers $100 million each year if it is approved by Congress, presuming only 10,000 new-technology autos are sold each year.” And if the President reaches his goal of putting 1 million of those kinds of cars on the road by 2015, the subsidy could cost $10 billion.
Couldn't this money be used elsewhere?
[Couldn't this money be used elsewhere?]
Sure … it could to provide additional subsidies for oil companies.
Where the heck did you get that "increase to $10,000" come from? Sounds more like something from a right-wing rumor mill than anything factual. In order to increase that tax credit, Obama would have to get legislation passed by the Republican controlled House, which seems extremely unlikely.
BTW, that "$7,500 tax credit" was from a bill signed by President Bush to encourage sales of plug-in vehicles, it applies to any street legal plug-in vehicle with a sufficiently large battery pack, it has never been limited just to the Volt.
Dennis,
Why doesn't congress just revise the tax codes and do away with all subsidies and close the loop holes. If the Chevy Volt is such a good car people will buy it without asking the government for tax breaks. It is the majority of people the President calls "rich" and should be paying more taxes, so why give them a $7500 to $10,000 in a tax credit to buy this vehicle.
Take away all tax credits and subsidies and pay down the national debt. If a product is good people will buy it.
Hi Sarge,
Our President and other political leaders have called for doing away with all subsidies and close the loop holes so I agree with you "Why doesn't congress just revise the tax codes …"
I believe there are two parts for tax breaks for the Volt.
First the initial purchase is above what average working people can afford.
Second (related to the first) the population of electric cars needs to grow enough so the market will demand charging stations and other support functions. To make sure that there is a long term market it is necessary for them to be convenient for the owners.
CM-6969
Where the heck did you get that "increase to $10,000" come from? Sounds more like something from a right-wing rumor mill than anything factual.
gm-volt.com
Dennis,
No need to be an a@@, I was just asking a question.
thetotas............where you been? It HAS been increased to $10,000!
thetotas NEVER attempt to give out facts and numbers to support your opinion on FIRST READ. This bunch get their merits purely from name-calling and back patting each other for it -FACTS!!???? no way...lol
...He said while snarking at the fact free minds of "this bunch" and patting a suspected team member on the back.
(While the irony that escaped him while in the act of creation comes crashing in like the tide...)
Have a pleasant evening...;-)
Enjoy your evening dangerfield - you know exactly what I mean.
I apologize, it wasn't a right-wing rumor mill, it was a Volt fan-club rumor mill!
Turns out that it actually was part of Obama's proposal, along with a reduction in subsidies for oil companies, recent news I was not aware of earlier. However, this proposal would still have to go through a Republican dominated congress, which is unlikely to want to cut oil company subsidies, let alone increase subsidies for plug-in vehicles.
The President proposes, Congress disposes.
Romney's just ticked off that his buddies in the capital investment industry weren't able to take over and milk the industry for billions in management fees and asset seizures.
Before you go too far, Romney said earlier this week/month/year/campaign he would have let the US car makers die.
Historically, the ONLY way right-wing mobs have maintained control is by distorting the truth and misleading the citizenry.
Imagine what it would sound like if right-wing candidates told the truth about their policies.
Senator Buffoon: "Hi, I'm running for office and I wanted to tell you about my platform. First, I want massive tax cuts for the ultra rich so they will donate more to my future campaigns and give me huge kick-backs and a obscenely paid position after I tire of fleecing the people.
"Second, I want to deregulate every f-ing industry I can get my hands on so BIG BUSINESS can run wild and do any and every destructive thing they can think of. We might even extend the tax credits to MEGACORPS like GE for exporting millions of jobs.
"Third, we will make up some science just because the real thing doesn't support our anti-environment stance. Who needs clean air and water anyway after I am dead and gone.
"Fourth, remember all those government programs that actually help people? You can forget that crap. If the poor and indigent can't pay Mitt Romney's income taxes for him then we will turn them over to the right-wing Flordians for a swift a efficient "final solution."
"Fifth, can't afford an education at the highest levels and most costly institutes? Too bad. You don't deserve one anyway. You also don't get any help with health care costs, job training, job placement or food stamps. That makes you less than human so off to Florida with you."
"Sixth, we can fix the courts. We already own most of them with our collection of kangaroos working for all sorts of mega corps. We made sure people can't do any harm to our corps or hold them accountable for nothing and justice is for those who can afford it.
"That is so over rated, that accountability thing. Who needs it? It didn't work for W and his collection of incompetents, so I say Americans don't want any accountability, oversight or efficient, working government. A lawless, chaotic society offers so many opportunities for abuse and corruption. Embrace it!
"I almost forgot. That infrastructure thing we have ignored since anti-Saint Ronny opened this holy economic class warfare? Now we need about $10 Trillion just to repair the things we should have maintained all along since 1981? Forget that crap, too. Sell ya a national park out west for mining purposes. Or an unsafe bridge in upstate New York.
"Remember my name. I am Senator Buffoon, a proud right-winger, a veteran class warrior, and have I got a boat load of composite to feed all you idiots. So, vote for me. besides, this might be the last free and open election in this country now that the ultra wealthy and Megacorps can now thankful buy any sham election they want or turn it into a parody of democracy,
"A vote for Buffoon is a vote for more destruction of our once proud society!"
Exactly!
Romney said that the gov't should not help out the auto industry and that it should be allowed to fail. No amount of lying or spinning is going to change that fact. He will lose MI because the people there know that he's not to be trusted.
he is actually making it worse with his obvious attempt to revise history
The good thing Mitten's is doing, though....is not flip-flopping. He's finally learned to own up to what he's said in the past. The bad thing (I believe) he's doing...is to come to Michigan to campaign. Seriously, I think this is one state he should have skipped. Outside of our goofy repub governor, I don't think anyone here will have any respect for him. Pretending it's not important and losing here, is better than losing after pouring millions into negative ads and stump blabbing and chumming up to one of his 'home' states, that don't want him.
For all of you voters, I have figured out how to determine when Mitt Romney is lying. His lips will be moving. His position that private financing was available to GM is absolutely 100% wrong. With the Michigan primary looming he is now trying to backtrack his original position of let them go bankrupt and change it. What a scumbag this clown is.
WOW - The GOP just goes into deeper and deeper s--t ! Why not just give up the election and save some bucks. No contest here. A no-brainer.
romney flip flopping around trying to find a position to take... just another day in his run for President.
Romney's words have come back to bit him in the a$$, again. When will people realize this guy takes side or positions according to what fits his goals. Will not be surprised at all if he loses Michigan.
Is he imploding? Do the GOP have a back-up candidate? A real one, not a Santorum..
...It's the GOP, what do you think? ;)
We had government by trial balloon with Clinton, and it would be even more of the same with Romney; he has yet to meet a position he hasn't seen both sides of...if Romney could be the Moderate he was as governor, maybe he'd be ok, but I think he has backed himself into a corner and will owe the radical right too much if he gets in.
Dude... you ran Bain Capital - you don't want to see companies survive... you want to leverage them for every penny you can and then take the money and run, leaving them to go bankrupt and fire thousands of employees...
you mean the real GORDON GECKO - because thats who he is ,find a dying entity with assests - call it a mercy killing ,claim the corpse ,then pillage and feast upon it - good work if you can get it or have the stomach for it and mitt apparently can and does - what a guy - just the kinda guy you want to call mr president -
MEALY MOUTH Romney desperately trying yet again to pull his foot out of his mouth. He made the wrong call on Detroit. Obama made the right call. I'm sooo glad our President is Barack Obama!
You have nothing to compare it too. Saying the other approach would not have worked is not an accurate assessment.
That's the beauty of politics though.
Remember Ford didn't take a bailout and they are just fine.
Bobby
Ford started to restructuring three years BEFORE the collapse of the economy, GM and Chrysler Remember when Ford was losing so much money that it literaly equaled the cost of Mustang every second. Ford put everything they had on the line including the rights for the Blue Oval logo in order for that to happen and they are not out of the woods yet. The "Ford didn't took bailout money" talking point is getting old and dumber by the minute. I am republican and I have to agree with how Bush and Obama handled the crisis that could of been avoided if these two would of followed Ford's steps instead of trying to stomp on Ford's bed. The only thing I was against was the Cash for Clunkers but not for the reasons the Ill informed republicans think.
I am afraid for the future of the republican party as a whole. They welcomed the fringe and the party is ethicly and moraly lost.
none of the GOP wanted to help the auto industry, but if it had been halliburton,or some oil concern, or a phony war based on lies, they would have been all over it.The auto industry is back on top thanks to Obama.People have jobs and its cranking! That ''socialism'' worked out pretty good didnt it?
Back on top huh? Do you live in Detroit? This industry has a long way to go before it's "back on top"
bobby, your as bad as Romney for spinning the situation. Like for Romney, it would be better for you to stop trying to defend the indensible and move on to some other issue where your crtique might have some relevancy. And as for your comment about having a long way to go before it's "back on top". GM is again the number one automaker in the world.
bobby, in today's news: "The third shift in Flint is one of five places where General Motors has added a graveyard shift since it received a $50 billion bailout from the government in 2009." Do you think that this possibly means more jobs? Maybe just a little bit? Oh c'mon, how about one teeny concession from you that the bailout to the auto industry actually had a positive effect. As painful as it may be for you just one very small one. How 'bout it?
Jack,
Your the one trying to put a political spin on things here.
What's your defense for Ford not taking a bailout. They are doing just fine without government help.
I do live in Detroit and have family who works for the auto industry now and in the past. GM is nowhere near what they once were. Of course it had a positive effect and helped. It better when you shell out billions in tax payer money.
However none of the caparisons between what has happened and what "would" have happened are relevant because they can't be measured.
Put your political affiliations aside and look at the situation objectively for once.
Bobby. You know that Ford would go right down with GM right? The domino effect on little businesses that were supplying GM and Ford could be catastrophic (for Ford too).
It doesn't matter how many people thankful to Obama (and taxpayers) for prevented mass layoffs, your hate has no ears for that.
Hate? Please elaborate? Seriously, please do. I just love the hate defense when logic and reason are staring emotion in the face.
Ford would be just fine, in case you need a supply and demand lesson. There would be less suppliers do to overall drop in demand, however there would be suppliers left. Oh yeah you must have forgot America is not the only country who makes cars either.
I am not even a republican and can speak the real truth. What I find most amusing is Obama didn't even start the bailout process, yet all you sheep are trying to give him full credit.
Not to mention all the people who worked for GM and Chrysler who did the real work to make it happen.
Dismount that high horse and insert foot in mouth now.
If every other car dealer in the world gave up to detroit you'd never admit anything.Talk about something you know like lies and rich tax breaks, your a frustrated man, your going to get four more years of Obama to be frustrated about Pal.
Frustrated in the least, more along the lines of amused by the abundance of ignorance. Stick to talking points and blind political support, you'll be happier that way.
1. Where is there any relivance in this statement?
2. It's Detroit
3. Even if the rest of the world stopped making cars, you would probably be ignorant enough to give Obama (a politician) full credit for it. Not the people who actually get the work done.
who helps you with the big words? Obama will be riding to re-election in a new chysler, want me to get you a ticket?