CFABLACKBELT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NAY!!! seriously die already! awesome
Nay. They should declare bankruptcy and attempt to restructure. If they don’t survive, then good quality car companies will soak up the competent employees, open more plants in the United States, and meet the residual demand. We’ve already bailed out the American car companies once–it is time for them to swim or sink forever. As an aside, my 2009 Scion Xb, while annoying in some ways, is maybe the easiest car ever to drive and has an amazing turn ratio with a fantastic maintenance record. Why in the heck would anyone even consider buying American cars? Might as well buy Russian!
Nay
15 to 1 so far. Is that the odds of the bailout?
Thought i saw two yeahs - TJR and spierce
I’m a half yeah.
kkent Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nay. > > They should declare bankruptcy and attempt to > restructure. If they don’t survive, then good > quality car companies will soak up the competent > employees, open more plants in the United States, > and meet the residual demand. We’ve already bailed > out the American car companies once–it is time > for them to swim or sink forever. > > As an aside, my 2009 Scion Xb, while annoying in > some ways, is maybe the easiest car ever to drive > and has an amazing turn ratio with a fantastic > maintenance record. Why in the heck would anyone > even consider buying American cars? Might as well > buy Russian! BTW - If the choice is between a bailout and me driving a Scion XB, I am clearly in the bailout camp. I can’t understand why anyone would drive such a demasculating vehicle and then claim “the easiest car ever to drive and has an amazing turn ratio”. There was a time when men didn’t care how easy something was to drive and knew that turn ratio was only for pu$$ies who didn’t know how to do a bootlegger’s turn.
100% Nay. It’s easier to say as government that you’re helping people than that you’re letting a company go bankrupt… which is why they’ll eventually let them go. However, the wise thing to do is to stop kicking a dead horse and move on with life. People will stop working on this dead-end street and look for things that are still worthwile.
And I’ll make sure to buy the last dualie pick-up made in the US to drive over you in your Scion XB.
Uhhh nay. And thats a Detroiter speaking. Let it burn, as they say.
Nay… Show me some f-in cash flow before you ask me for a loan!
CFAdetroit Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Uhhh nay. And thats a Detroiter speaking. Let it > burn, as they say. Oh this is a really bad sign. I think Detroit might burn. Maybe CFADetroit is a looter.
This whole thing sucks, because there really is something there worth saving. Instead of begging for money, it would be good if auto execs had gone to DC with a set of proposals for legislation and partnerships that would actually do some good. “Give us money and trust us” just doesn’t cut it. From an historical perspective, you really have to believe that it’s a different world to bail out investment banks and let your industrial capacity go to seed. There are so many nays out there, I’m changing my vote to “Yay”. Let Goldman burn. Let Merrill burn. Especially let AIG burn. I want my Detroit iron and I want them to keep building it (of course, I’m fine with Detroit aluminum blocks, cobalt-chromium-tunsten steel alloys, etc).
ahahah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nay… Show me some f-in cash flow before you ask > me for a loan! They definitely have cash flow. Like $51,000/minute out the door. It’s a cash torrent.
NAY
JoeyDVivre Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ahahah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Nay… Show me some f-in cash flow before you > ask > > me for a loan! > > > They definitely have cash flow. Like > $51,000/minute out the door. It’s a cash torrent. I mean–talk to me like I’m 3. How can you lend money to that? It’s seems like you’re standing at the grand canyon and saying “gee, think I should jump off?”…
Nay
ahahah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeyDVivre Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ahahah Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Nay… Show me some f-in cash flow before you > > ask > > > me for a loan! > > > > > > They definitely have cash flow. Like > > $51,000/minute out the door. It’s a cash > torrent. > > > I mean–talk to me like I’m 3. How can you lend > money to that? It’s seems like you’re standing at > the grand canyon and saying “gee, think I should > jump off?”… How to VC funds lend money like that? Future prospects. This board is such a mockery of what it should be. You have a bunch of charterholders, or wannabes, screaming trash like this is a bad redux of Wall Street. It’s garbage ideas like corporate raiding that hurt us 20 years ago. Worse ideas like “fundamentals!!!” that hurt us both in 1999 and 2007/2008. If anything, at least the guys who are producing cars are producing something, unlike the cry babies on here. Sometimes I really wonder, for all of the vaunted education and “capital markets” experience, how much any of the people here, or in i-banking, know about life. How’s that $200 oil anyway? Fundamentals still support it?
I would be in favor of a bailout if one could imagine a profitable, globally competitive auto industry at the end of it, but it looks like this is not possible for the American divisions. In that case, the money is better spent trying to develop alternative industries and assisting unemployed autoworkers to find new jobs. There might be some viability in their electric and hybrid lines, which is why I said “no bailout, yes unemployment transition $$$, and yes to funding a holding company that holds divisions that might have a future.” Definitely no to “give us a bunch of money and trust us to do the right thing.” I am concerned about America’s manufacturing base, though. We just don’t manufacture all that much that either we or the rest of the world buy. What we seem to export is raw materials (mostly food), product design, technological knowledge, and of course our assets (mostly in the form of debt). Food isn’t bad, but only 3% of the country is employed in agriculture. Product design may not command the premium it had when credit is not freely flowing. Technology knowledge leadership is tough to maintain and may be slipping as centers of excellence develop outside the US. So if we let the auto industry go, we should think about what else we want to try to manufacture that the rest of the world will want. I think that Obama has a sensible suggestion in green technologies and such, but we’re already behind Europe in a lot of ways on that, and possibly parts of Asia too. So I think it’s a good idea, but I’d like to come up with more. One possible “nice” thing about deflation and/or a currency devaluation of the dollar is that the US cost of living may start to come down, and that may make it more feasible to do more manufacturing here in the US over time as opposed to abroad. However, I think standards of living would have to fall extremely hard before that happens on a large scale, and it would not be a pleasant experience to get to that point.
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would be in favor of a bailout if one could > imagine a profitable, globally competitive auto > industry at the end of it, but it looks like this > is not possible for the American divisions. In > that case, the money is better spent trying to > develop alternative industries and assisting > unemployed autoworkers to find new jobs. There > might be some viability in their electric and > hybrid lines, which is why I said “no bailout, yes > unemployment transition $$$, and yes to funding a > holding company that holds divisions that might > have a future.” > > Definitely no to “give us a bunch of money and > trust us to do the right thing.” > > I am concerned about America’s manufacturing base, > though. We just don’t manufacture all that much > that either we or the rest of the world buy. What > we seem to export is raw materials (mostly food), > product design, technological knowledge, and of > course our assets (mostly in the form of debt). > Food isn’t bad, but only 3% of the country is > employed in agriculture. Product design may not > command the premium it had when credit is not > freely flowing. Technology knowledge leadership > is tough to maintain and may be slipping as > centers of excellence develop outside the US. > > So if we let the auto industry go, we should think > about what else we want to try to manufacture that > the rest of the world will want. I think that > Obama has a sensible suggestion in green > technologies and such, but we’re already behind > Europe in a lot of ways on that, and possibly > parts of Asia too. So I think it’s a good idea, > but I’d like to come up with more. > > One possible “nice” thing about deflation and/or a > currency devaluation of the dollar is that the US > cost of living may start to come down, and that > may make it more feasible to do more manufacturing > here in the US over time as opposed to abroad. > However, I think standards of living would have to > fall extremely hard before that happens on a large > scale, and it would not be a pleasant experience > to get to that point. bchad’s post points to that fundamental lesson in Econ 101 - you produce what you are efficient at producing, and dont waste time on stuff you arent efficient at.