Comments on: Auto Agreement?

By: centfan

centfan — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:56:57 +0000

Maybe this is nuts but if you told the American people "we'll catch you if you fall" wouldn't they tend to feel more confident about spending money? If we took these billions and applied it directly to unemployment and only that wouldn't it a) get people spending and b) allow a few of the institutions that are most sick and tired (and greedy and stupid) to die and have whatever is worth something in their guts (portfolio) harvested to the highest bidder? , Yes, I know unemployed people aren't going to spend much and dead companies don't employ people and folks with semi-bad credit are going to find it hard to get a loan outside of a loan shark, but Obama has to stick with "just folks", not the corporate "flavor of the minute". If these industries are smart they survive. If they don't, new and better ones will rise from their rotting, twentieth century thinking carcasses. It's called the Forest Fire Renewal Approach. , If people know that they will keep a roof over their heads even if things get bad... then thing will never get bad because people won't be stuffing their gold bars in their mattresses (you know, like CEO's).

By: Paul-no not that one

Paul-no not that one — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:33:30 +0000

kbang, Barney made what I thought was a strong case. And the pushing back he did with the misinformation was pretty impressive.
.
Your point about the terms is a good one. Bailout suggests a no strings attached bill. And it is anything but.

By: kbanginmotown

kbanginmotown — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:29:00 +0000

@piratewench: The short answer to your question is that the US automakers need LOANS to see them through until new products make it to market. (The MSM likes the term "bailout" - this is misleading). . The automakers ARE in the process of creating newer, more fuel efficient products. Unfortunately, it takes about 3 years to get a new model off of the assembly line. Gas prices can spike in a matter of hours. . As recently as 2007, the Center for Automotive Research (the same group that issued the economic impact warning last week) surveyed auto industry executives to find out what was being done in response to gas prices being $3(!) a gallon. The car companies were already scrambling to make better vehicles by the time gas went to $4. Then people stopped buying cars altogether. . So there you have it. Had gas stayed at $3 this past year, the Biggish-3 may have made it to the goal line. Not now. Do you throw a person a life ring when he's they're in sight of the pier? Or, do you chastise them for not having swam harder, sooner? . @Pnnto: I heard Barney Frank's interview yesterday. D@mn. I wish he'd move to Michigan. I can't recall when I last heard one of our reps make the case for the auto industry as good as he did. . CAR: "Every automotive program has an internal business case that is ultimately controlled by vehicle prices and sales volumes; all aspects of a program plan must meet the resulting budget constraint." KB: And when sales volumes evaporate...it's time for Plan B.

By: Paul-no not that one

Paul-no not that one — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:21:59 +0000

Enjoy the audio if you can demwoman-Barney Frank is not someone Inskeep should treat so shabbily.

By: pirate wench (demwoman)

pirate wench (demwoman) — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:01:58 +0000

PNNTO - thanks, I'll check it out.
.

In the meantime, everyone is talking like the alternatives are bail out or lose the industry and all its suppliers. Let me say first clearly that I am not advocating the chapter 11 option, but that option is an alternative to not having any industry at all, yes? The companies would be forced to restructure but would remain in business, much like what happened with the airlines? Now the consequences for that path may be just as dire, if not more so, than the bail out, but I would like to see all the options for both presented before a decision is made.
.
Now I'll go check out Paul's resource, where this point may have already been addressed, but posting first saved me a back and forth . Or not . Yarr!

By: newfloridian

newfloridian — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:55:56 +0000

Crash and Burn Baby. Sort of like Drill Baby Drill! Huh?

Citigroup is now under $5 a share, most mutual funds drop stocks that go under $5 a share, which means big sell off in the next few days for Citigroup. Good time to short Citigroup. Of course every fund manager, hedgers and savy investor is thinking the same thing. Probably will not be enough buyers to handle all the sell orders on a short frenzy.

Senator Shelby of Alabama: "Unemployed workers taste just like chicken." It's the Republican's new solution to unemployment.

The only good news is that the economy and market may be so far gone by the time Obama takes control on January 20th that they look like heroes no matter what they do!!!

By: bitterpill8

bitterpill8 — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:28:08 +0000

JNS: unfortunately I can't watch tv all day long; just dip in as work allows. I take your point. You are in a competitive business and the urge to get it out first is natural. My point: I can wait a few hours for accurate news. But don't let me dampen your efforts: you are tryng, this is your job and the best of luck to you.

By: sgwhiteinfla

sgwhiteinfla — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:25:04 +0000

marina
.
Are you another spammer from the borgen project?
.
Ill hold my breath waiting for you to answer

By: marina1984

marina1984 — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:22:15 +0000

I wish the candidate would discuss global poverty more. According to The Borgen Project:
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget

By: drgardner

drgardner — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:03:26 +0000

This is a great idea - viable plans for restructuring. It's only reasonable - we're talking about $25B here. We demanded the same level of consideration and planning when we gave the $700B to Wall Street, so it's only fair that we....

Uh...wait...never mind.