Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Cash for Clunkers - Good or Bad Idea?
4110 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 11:42 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
For questions about how the program works or to discuss program details, please visit our discussion titled, "Cash for Clunkers - Does it Work for You?"
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 3:47 pm) Then there are all the downstream jobs that would be affected. Between the B2 there were nearly 10,000 dealerships in NA. If each one only employed 50 people that's 500,000 jobs you've just made disappear." This is just plain wrong. People would continue to buy cars if GM and Chrysler filed for bankruptcy, and someone would produce the cars to meet the demand. The survivors or newly formed auto companies would buy from suppliers, as needed, and the cars would be sold through dealers. If allowed to work, our market system, together with our democratic institutions, rule of law, respect for human rights, etc., though not perfect, perhaps, have a great ability for renewal and regeneration. Too much intervention, while well intentioned, can interfere with the renewal process, and end up causing more misery. The debate between those with a liberal orientation and those with a conservative one (for want of better terms) is endless. It's almost as if we're hard wired in our beliefs. Sure, conservatives may occasionally concede some points to liberals, and visa-versa, but the core beliefs rarely change. I sometimes wonder if some of the concessions aren't offered to demonstrate objectivity and flexibility, rather than out of conviction. One of the factors responsible for dragging these discussions on without resolution is the use of half-truths. The skillful use of half-truths can be very persuasive in scoring debating points. Anyhow, Bob, this is a long way of saying that it's highly unlikely that you and I will succeed in changing each other's mind. That might not be such a bad thing, though, because there would be no need for discussions if everyone agreed on everything. Can we agree on that?
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 09, 2009 4:48 pm) Did you expect to see massive changes in 3 months? Well maybe YOU did. I'm sure that YOU thought that massive infrastructure projects would simply leap off the drawing boards and into full production before summer. According to Krugman and Buffett the $787 Billion is only about 2/3rds of what is actually needed. THAT'S probably why you haven't seen immediate results.  Rest assured though, things have turned around and they're getting better.
|
|
|
Replying to: hpmctorque (Jul 09, 2009 6:05 pm) I had the same opinion last fall before the depths of the crisis hit, that demand and jobs would simply move to the survivors. Then I saw how really bad it was. To kill off GM and Chrysler at that time would have created an economic crater in the midwest because the other survivors, primarily Ford-Toyota-Honda, were in no condition to absorb the shift. It was too much too suddenly. It would have been truly horrendous at the local levels where every GM and Chrysler store in N America would have been effectively put out of business on Jan 1...BLAM!. If this had happened over a period of a couple of years where first one then the other went belly up - in a stronger market situation - then I'd agree that the job losses could have been managed. But not in Dec/Jan/Feb in the depths of our dark winter of economic collapse. The way it's working out is actually a brilliant and effective solution given the short timeframe. Both may survive and actually be stronger with a minimal loss in jobs in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 6:59 pm) ////////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\- \\\\ The liberal media have been feeding us that line for over three months now and it's pure propaganda. There is no credible evidence that anything has "turned around or gotten better" in this year. The credit markets and the economy as a whole is still are in a state of crisis and will likely remain there for the foreseeable future. Think 2011 and then we'll START to things really getting better. In the second half of '09 (likely by September) we'll see how big a hole we're really in. It's an enormous, $5 trillion dollar plus, hole that will take years to recover from. A robust economy is years away. Sorry.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 7:13 pm) Supplier Lear Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Deadline Set for Delphi Bidders; Auction Scheduled Reorganizing should be an easier pill than liquidation though. |
|
|
Replying to: british_rover (Jul 09, 2009 4:48 pm) He did say during the campaign it should be changed. He did circumvent the 5th amendment with his bullying the bond holders in the GM & C faux bankruptcy. You like him that is your choice. I think he is bad for the USA. Difference of opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 7:13 pm) On this we agree. "The way it's working out is actually a brilliant and effective solution given the short time frame. Both may survive and actually be stronger with a minimal loss in jobs in the country." Now that we've spent all this money to save these companies, I hope you're right. However, I think it's way to early to say that it's working our brilliantly. Let's see if the $60 billion + and interest is repaid. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 09, 2009 7:32 pm) As for the topic of this thread though, Yo! Obama & Co! I'm NOT the "rightful owner" of the $4500 you are about to GIVE me on this clunker program in the midst of this present "crisis" but thanks anyway. Just my humble opinion of course...or is that illegal yet? Disagreeing with the current group of propagandists and distortionists? Reeducation camp here I come!!! |
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 4:18 pm) I don't know about maryh3, but I will. Well, maybe not forever, but it'll take a while for me to get over the blackmail that GM and the UAW forced upon the taxpayers. I was against the bailout, and I still feel that the existing UAW workers (those that drove GM and Chrysler to the brink) gave up very little in return for the $30 billion+ that the taxpayers have given them. I think your "successful IPO next year" for GM is just a pipe dream. It's taken me 30 years to forget and move on with Ford after the pos '78 Ford Fairmont they made. and I was fool enough to buy. Though I do not own a Ford product, I may consider one. I had the CTS on my short list of vehicles I was considering, but it's off if it now. Nothing from GM for me.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 3:47 pm) But when your corporations name is Haliburton or Exxon/Mobil the money isn't supposed to carry more weight, but if your name is GM it is --- right? And those 2 companies are sooooooooo darn profitable, and contribute so much in revenues --- whereas GM doesn't. Funny how that works. This has always been our history from the very beginning. Ever heard of Trust-Buster Teddy Roosevelt, Sherman Anti-trust Act, Clayton Anti-Trust Act etc. These acts enforced by US law are supposed to make competition fair so the big guys can't shut out the little guys from competing. Except that in this case the government itself is doing the enabling for the unfair competition. You focus on the UAW an easy whipping boy. Except that in Chicago the exact opposite is happening BECAUSE the Unions are not involved. They won't let big boy Walmart in to compete with the Mom and Pops. And they use the strong arm of the government to discriminate against Walmart and block them from opening stores. And could that possibly be because they won't unionize? The government SELECTIVELY follows the money and the big boy IF they grease the proper pockets only. For a government supposedly founded on the principles that men were equal and should have equal rights to compete -- there is something rotten in the State. There are all the suppliers to the B2 and all their jobs. Make the B2 disappear and all those jobs are gone too....at least at this time in these economic conditions. Not necessarily. People will still need cars. The suppliers will simply start selling more to Honda, Ford and Toyota instead of GM. Someone will have to pick up the slack. Why should they fail? Because they ran out of money, their creditors got sick of waiting for them to turn it around and the government has no business getting involved with the private sector and showing favoritism.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Cash for Clunkers - Good or Bad Idea?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
