Auto Agreement?

But the executives flew there on private jets! Shouldn't that change everything?
-
And did you see that dress Michelle wore on election night?
-
By the way, Obama worked out for 90 minutes this morning. He wore the same socks he wore yesterday. According to sources.

GM says if you can't beat em, join em as bank holding companies
.
Screw 25 billion, 700 billion here we come!
.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/20/news/companies/gmac/index.htm?postversion=2008112008

And the GOP's losses in the rust belt continue...

Who's next for a bailout? Time Warner?

Sweet! Huge coke/meth party at GM's Waldorf suite tonight! Save me some Ashley DuPre!

You know its not such a bad idea. If GMAC can get money with the stipulation that make loans -- to car buyers which is supposedly why GM is having this immediate cash flow problem that could be helpful. and he11 they would be the only bank to get an infusion of cash and actually make loans -- that was the original plan right?.

pourme,
Sounds great. Are you bringing glow sticks or will the government cover it?

WHOA NELLIE!
.
The GMAC bank holding company deal would be for credit operations only. they have to promise not use any money for manufacturing operations.

We are all bank holding companies now!

JNS my suggestion for a headline: Auto Neurotica

Ha. No glow stick budget for me - two boys to send to college. I want to see Carl Levin do that "You spin me right round like a record baby" dance.

Deal might be back on

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/27/12441/4780/768/612477

I'm cheering for the bomb throwers.

The financial firms were basically handed billions with no strings attached. This led to scenarios where the investment banks etc., had the monies but they sat on them, refusing to oil the mechanisms of lending for which the money was intended. It also allowed for some high-living beanos for senior management to take place and nothing could be done about it.

Is it too much to ask that these loans come with a whole load of strings attached? Boot out failed management, positions within the company for overseers, perhaps stakes in the companies for money lent? Perhaps most importantly of all, a clear agenda of things to be accomplished before the next tranche of each loan is forthcoming.

CP: you're da bomb!

kaboom

This is so confusing for me - really, I'm not being snarky.

I know thousands and thousands of jobs and pensions are at stake if we don't bail out, but if we do bail out, what guarantees do we have that we're not just pouring more money down the toilet? And, on an individual level, aren't we supposed to be working our way out of the personal debt we're crushing ourselves with? How does taking out a big loan for a new, gas-guzzling car (because, that's what's available to buy, that's why) fit with that? And, how does a bail out change the cars Detroit builds in the short run? And what would the difference be if they went into chapter 11? Can't someone lay out the alternatives clearly and objectively so we can choose the lesser evil? I don't believe there's a good solution here, but can't we at least get a clear idea of the reality of the choice before us before we give billions more away?

first of all just because so many people chose to buy those big azz gas guzzling SUV's doesn't mean those were the only cars available to buy.
.
for the last two months all they have been saying is that we have to bail out wall street its about confidence its psychological. well you want to see a psychological blow to the economy that is the equivalent to a financial tsunami --let the auto industry implode and watch 3 million jobs evaporate just before Christmas.
.
Like I said there is no shortage of stupidity in America -- Not you pirate wench, but the Richard Shelby, Andrew Sorkin, Mitt Romney et al, saying chapter 11 is the only way out.
.
What's obvious is that Detroit is already on the way back - should they have done this earlier --yes! But they are doing it now. Are we really going to cut off our nose to spite our faces here really?

demwoman if you can stomach NPR's Inskeep this interview with Barney Frank is pretty helpful. It was for me anyway.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97187470

JNS: Not to rain on your parade: but isn't "there are reports" premature. Are you under the gun to post before things are actually decided upon? This is still not a done thing.

pirate wench: Don't think of this as a business decision; think of this as an electoral decision. The Dems probably know that Detroit is broken, but they also employ 3 million workers and votes. The prospect of turning Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota, and Indiana into something that looks like the West Coast or the Northeast has to be tempting.
.
At the same time, you're right. In the current trajectory, it sounds like an enormous money pit. Cue Obama two top priorities, health care and energy. I think he's thinking that if he can somehow rejigger health care to take that burden off the Big 3, that's one step towards efficiency. Then somehow gradually convert auto manufacturing to the alternative energy revolution that Obama was envisioning during the campaign.
.
Could it work? What other choice do we have? Remember when the steel industry went under? The rust belt, which goes somewhat up and down Appalachia, stayed rusty and went Republican for a generation. To paraphrase an impolitic comment, without jobs and economic security, people will cling to guns and religion (ie. go Repub).

Dee I came across this about what is likely Shelby's motivation.

.
"There is much discussion on the web about the fact that Senator Shelby of Alabama is the most quoted opponent of a Detroit bailout, but he is never asked about how the foreign auto companies in his right-to-work state would benefit mightily if they lose their competition building inefficient SUVs (in the case of Alabama, it's Mercedes and two other foreign manufacturers of gas-guzzlers)"

here is what I just posted at rick sanchez's myspace page

While we are railing against the largesse of the CEOs of the Big 3 its very important that we not lose sight of the big picture. The 3 million workers that will be affected by the collapse of the Big 3 do not get to
.
1. Approve CEO salaries
.
2. Approve CEO golden parachutes
.
3. Approve of the purchase of luxury airplanes
.
4. Get to ride in those luxury airplanes
.
So while we are all dismayed by their hubris lets not forget that the bridge loan is not to save THEIR jobs. I am sure most of them will be fine if the Company goes under. We are doing it to help the line workers who will lose their jobs and their health care and then probably lose their homes as well. And we are doing it for the economy of this country that wont be able to pay for all of the social services including unemployment pay that would be brought on by the Big 3 collapsing. That should not be an option for us.

thread goes to JNS