Thread: Dodd Says Auto Bailout Lacks Votes in Senate

Originally Posted by Ausinus

The cars being built in the South are a piece of shit; foreign cars are far superior. The US is losing the automobile market and as globalization continues the US auto industry will pretty much tank and the focus will be on East Asia and Europe.

American cars get a bad rap and are built to extremly high standards. Contrary to what your ignorant messiah thinks most American cars aren't scheduled for a tune-up until 100,000 miles. Before making more ignorant statements maybe you should look at consumer reports regarding maintenance on foreign cars compared to US cars.

Originally Posted by Six

American cars get a bad rap and are built to extremly high standards. Contrary to what your ignorant messiah thinks most American cars aren't scheduled for a tune-up until 100,000 miles. Before making more ignorant statements maybe you should look at consumer reports regarding maintenance on foreign cars compared to US cars.

I am unaware of what Obama thinks about his matter, I am citing experience and my own analysis - foreign cars are on average far superior, and I would have a European car save for the fact that I cant easily buy parts for it over here.

Additionally the United States will not be able to compete with other nations in the auto industry, the only reason I can think of why Europe has managed to compete is that it focuses on luxury vehicles rather than more commercially available vehicles.

Originally Posted by Six

American cars get a bad rap and are built to extremly high standards.

Hilarious.

Originally Posted by Six

Contrary to what your ignorant messiah thinks most American cars aren't scheduled for a tune-up until 100,000 miles.

Citation please.

Originally Posted by Six

Before making more ignorant statements maybe you should look at consumer reports regarding maintenance on foreign cars compared to US cars.

Maybe you should provide us a link to back up your allegations.

Originally Posted by Ausinus

The cars being built in the South are a piece of shit; foreign cars are far superior. The US is losing the automobile market and as globalization continues the US auto industry will pretty much tank and the focus will be on East Asia and Europe.

My Nissan was built in Tennessee

While that is what Dodd said, He also said that the Dept. of Treasury already has the authority to use tarp funds for the auto industry.

Dodd also told reporters that the Treasury department "confirmed" to him that it already has authority to use the TARP funds for the auto industry. For that reason, Dodd said, Democrats should consider waiting for President-elect Obama to take office so Treasury can act without legislation.

So this is pretty much a done deal if you ask me, it just seems like who is the current President when it happens is the only question.

Dodd: Auto bailout lacks GOP support - Nov. 13, 2008

Personally I say let them fail. The handwriting has been on the wall for quite a while and I have been told my whole life that ignorance is no excuse. If the market for new cars has collapsed, simple rules of supply and demand tell me that we don't need as many manufacturers. Let them fail or merge or whatever any other company has been doing to survive for the last couple of years.

Originally Posted by metheron

Personally I say let them fail. The handwriting has been on the wall for quite a while and I have been told my whole life that ignorance is no excuse. If the market for new cars has collapsed, simple rules of supply and demand tell me that we don't need as many manufacturers. Let them fail or merge or whatever any other company has been doing to survive for the last couple of years.

Nah - metheron, I hear what you're saying, but that a) isn't going to work this time, and b) it's not what we want to have happen.

MORE verticalization is defintely DEFINITELY not the answer! Right?

Here is the answer: SPINOFFS.

Think about it. That solves EVERYONE's problem!

Look - you KNOW it's going to happen ANYWAY, right? The only real question is, whether it happens under bankruptcy protection or not.

So, here's how it works: you get a BIG corp like GM, to spin off its subsidiaries, like say, Cadillac. That, becomes a new company, requiring funding and stock and all that, and that makes the investment bankers VERY happy. And, the investors, now have LOTS of new opportunities, which by all accounts, will be much BETTER than the old ones, so THEY'RE happy too - and now suddenly, money comes back IN to the investment and banking arena, and THEY'RE happy TOO! And, the American consumer, is now the beneficiary of COMPETITION instead of a monopoly, so now WE benefit TOO!!!

See how that works?

Originally Posted by nonsqtr

Nah - metheron, I hear what you're saying, but that a) isn't going to work this time, and b) it's not what we want to have happen.

MORE verticalization is defintely DEFINITELY not the answer! Right?

Here is the answer: SPINOFFS.

Think about it. That solves EVERYONE's problem!

Look - you KNOW it's going to happen ANYWAY, right? The only real question is, whether it happens under bankruptcy protection or not.

So, here's how it works: you get a BIG corp like GM, to spin off its subsidiaries, like say, Cadillac. That, becomes a new company, requiring funding and stock and all that, and that makes the investment bankers VERY happy. And, the investors, now have LOTS of new opportunities, which by all accounts, will be much BETTER than the old ones, so THEY'RE happy too - and now suddenly, money comes back IN to the investment and banking arena, and THEY'RE happy TOO! And, the American consumer, is now the beneficiary of COMPETITION instead of a monopoly, so now WE benefit TOO!!!

See how that works?

That sounds good, however the Democrats seem determined to not let that happen. They seem to want to continue to fund their 'business as usual' approach. What you are suggesting, at least it sounds from GM's standpoint would have to come in bankruptcy if you believe their rhetoric and the gov't seems determined to not let them get there.

See, ideas like yours comes from times of strife and adversity. When they think their answer is to go to the government for a handout instead of coming up with internal solutions that they may not be comfortable with, but lead to their survival then we have a problem.

The people seem to recognize this, why not the gov't?

Originally Posted by metheron

What you are suggesting, at least it sounds from GM's standpoint would have to come in bankruptcy if you believe their rhetoric and the gov't seems determined to not let them get there.

Yeah, I was thinkin' about that part. The only real down-side to that concept, is a "dilution" in the shareholder value for the GM parent company.

BUT, several things are true there:

a) their stock is sittin' at three dollars right now, and by all accounts it's going to be worthless in three months or less, so, I'm not really sure how much of an issue "dilution" is anymore -

b) when they sell off a subsidiary, they become cash-rich, and they oughta LIKE that, right now. That oughta be a GOOD thing, right?

and c) a smart guy like Paulson, can probably find some kinda way to minimize the pain for "existing shareholders", like, maybe, convert some of their stock. That's what usually happens in cases like this, right? they get some preferred stock or somethin'? So, there you go. Voila. Piece o' cake.

Yeah, I would think, the GM shareholders would much rather come out of this with "something", than "nothing at all". Seems to me, that GM might actually be doing the RESPONSIBLE thing, shareholder-wise, by startin' to think about spinning off "now", rather than waiting for all the bankruptcy thing -

'Cause look, once THAT happens, then they're under REGULATION, which means they no longer have the flexibility to maneuver. Now they gotta get a JUDGE's permission to do stuff, right?

AND, plus, think of it this way - all those executives, when they "leave" GM and move to the new companies, guess what? They get "golden parachute" payments. So THEY'RE happy too! EVERYONE's happy!

Ha ha - and they TOO, oughta be very VERY happy, to get out of this with "something", rather than "nothing". Know what I mean?

And consumer-wise, I don't think anyone would really miss Cadillac it they just kinda "went away" for a year, and then re-emerged as a new incarnation. People would either just wait a year to buy a new car, or, buy somethin' else for a year if the really need one.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure this would work. I'm gonna float this in a few places and see what happens.

Originally Posted by nonsqtr

Yeah, I was thinkin' about that part. The only real down-side to that concept, is a "dilution" in the shareholder value for the GM parent company.

BUT, several things are true there:

a) their stock is sittin' at three dollars right now, and by all accounts it's going to be worthless in three months or less, so, I'm not really sure how much of an issue "dilution" is anymore -

b) when they sell off a subsidiary, they become cash-rich, and they oughta LIKE that, right now. That oughta be a GOOD thing, right?

and c) a smart guy like Paulson, can probably find some kinda way to minimize the pain for "existing shareholders", like, maybe, convert some of their stock. That's what usually happens in cases like this, right? they get some preferred stock or somethin'? So, there you go. Voila. Piece o' cake.

Yeah, I would think, the GM shareholders would much rather come out of this with "something", than "nothing at all". Seems to me, that GM might actually be doing the RESPONSIBLE thing, shareholder-wise, by startin' to think about spinning off "now", rather than waiting for all the bankruptcy thing -

'Cause look, once THAT happens, then they're under REGULATION, which means they no longer have the flexibility to maneuver. Now they gotta get a JUDGE's permission to do stuff, right?

AND, plus, think of it this way - all those executives, when they "leave" GM and move to the new companies, guess what? They get "golden parachute" payments. So THEY'RE happy too! EVERYONE's happy!

Ha ha - and they TOO, oughta be very VERY happy, to get out of this with "something", rather than "nothing". Know what I mean?

And consumer-wise, I don't think anyone would really miss Cadillac it they just kinda "went away" for a year, and then re-emerged as a new incarnation. People would either just wait a year to buy a new car, or, buy somethin' else for a year if the really need one.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure this would work. I'm gonna float this in a few places and see what happens.

Once again, you have an idea that would maybe work in a buyers market but given the state of consumer spending it simply would not work. No matter how you package a deal if there are no buyers then there will be no company. Also, any prudent business man would not dare take on those pesky union contracts while basically having a start up.

Look, the big three have allowed themselves to get too big and their bureaucracies too wide within their company. If they want to survive, much like our government, they need to cut the size of their company back down to a manageable system. That means eliminating jobs, perks and salaries, factories, models, and get this union contracts. Of course there is a great deal more that would have to be done as well.

They have had companies look them over and no deals were made because of how complex the company has become. The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. They are so strung out that it would be nearly impossible to purchase a division without having to buy up or into other companies that provide the support for the manufacturing operation. Simple stuff really, like parts, there is no industry standard say on engines and transmissions compared to say the electronics industry were parts are pretty much everywhere at competitive prices. The automobile industry is too specialized.

Good idea though and is a possibility with hundreds of other companies.