Should a US Auto Manufacturer Get Another Bailout, if Necessary?

DGUtley · (#1)

I have heard rumblings that two of our larger domestic car manufacturers are in trouble again and that both may need another bailout of some degree. We all know how that went down last time.

The question I have for my friends here on both sides of the political / labor-management and social justice spectrums are:

1. If another auto bailout is necessary, should it be done?
2. Will it be done, if necessary?
3. And, why do you feel that way?

Thank you.

minsterman · (#2)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGUtley

I have heard rumblings that two of our larger domestic car manufacturers are in trouble again and that both may need another bailout of some degree. We all know how that went down last time.

The question I have for my friends here on both sides of the political / labor-management and social just spectrums are:

1. If another auto bailout is necessary, should it be done?
2. Will it be done, if necessary?
3. And, why do you feel that way?

Thank you.

interesting you brought this subject up, I was talking to two retired engineers from GM last week and both feel that GM will be in trouble within 5 years.......

BradleyJaguars · (#3)

1. Assumes facts not in evidence (that G.M. would have failed). Has not and can not be conclusively proven.

2. An economy where failure is not punished is the worst combination of capitalism and socialism, arguably a worse model than pure socialism.

sleeper · (#4)

No, they should have never been bailed out.

bytheway · (#5)

GM is in trouble now! Let's close down all of the dealerships owned by republicans, get rid of their employees, and give the remaining cronies a bunch of money. That should do it.

east_ohio · (#6)

Sometimes against my better judgement I will compromise, and I believe that compromising is necessary. As for the former auto bailout I believe it was necessary and I completely supported it...............If a future bailout becomes necessary I will clearly be against it.

DGUtley · (#7)

East-Ohio -- I don't disagree with you at all. I am philosophically against goverment bailouts of any kind whatsoever. Having said that, 08 was a monstrous fiscal cliff that Obama-as-deity-only-knows what would've happened had that not been done. Yes, I think it helped the UAW b.s., b.s., b.s., but we've been all over that ad nauseum. It was done and it's over.

A second one? Wow, i'd have to say: No. Try to convince me otherwise, but: no.

bytheway · (#8)

Let's bail them out before the election so the company (union) can funnel the bailout money back to the Dems so they can get this clown re-elected.

NBHS_1988 · (#9)

The reason why GM needs more taxpayer money is to support European cross country kickball.

buckeyedan · (#10)

of course the industry will be back in the same position

look if you have an industry that is failing it is failing for a reason - likly it is over extended

bailing it out is - by definition - a temporary fix

to actually fix it you must let the weakest fail and allow the others to gain strength to be more competitive

if you have 5 struggling companies in an industry if you remove 1 or 2 you are left with 3 or 4 much stronger ones that CAN COMPETE gloabally

bailing them out and it leads to the entire group falling further and further behind (because they ARE weak) and they will need a bail out every few years

that are the facts...
bail them out and you will have to repeat it all the time

BGFalcons82 · (#11)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NBHS_1988

The reason why GM needs more taxpayer money is to support European cross country kickball.

:D:D:D
Don't forget Volt Village!!

Grantland · (#12)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGUtley

I have heard rumblings that two of our larger domestic car manufacturers are in trouble again and that both may need another bailout of some degree. We all know how that went down last time.

The question I have for my friends here on both sides of the political / labor-management and social justice spectrums are:

1. If another auto bailout is necessary, should it be done?
2. Will it be done, if necessary?
3. And, why do you feel that way?

Thank you.

GM is one is the other Ford?

bethere · (#13)

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckeyedan

of course the industry will be back in the same position

look if you have an industry that is failing it is failing for a reason - likly it is over extended

bailing it out is - by definition - a temporary fix

to actually fix it you must let the weakest fail and allow the others to gain strength to be more competitive

if you have 5 struggling companies in an industry if you remove 1 or 2 you are left with 3 or 4 much stronger ones that CAN COMPETE gloabally

bailing them out and it leads to the entire group falling further and further behind (because they ARE weak) and they will need a bail out every few years

that are the facts...
bail them out and you will have to repeat it all the time

your hero jim jordan would bail out the abrahms tank people in lima because (he says) he wants to make sure we have the ability to make heavy industrial products... even though we can't sell that product, that product will never be used, and the military DOES NOT WANT ANY MORE OF THAT PRODUCT.

the truth is he is behind the tank because he knows his electoral butt is on the line in a new district--PERIOD.

if he was sincere about the manufacturing base he'd have been all in for the bailout of detroit.

he isn't, he wasn't, and i think i have proved my point well.

minsterman · (#14)

Quote:

Originally Posted by east_ohio

Sometimes against my better judgement I will compromise, and I believe that compromising is necessary. As for the former auto bailout I believe it was necessary and I completely supported it...............If a future bailout becomes necessary I will clearly be against it.

you were for it once---you thought it was a good idea---but you wouldn't be in favor of it again? WHY?

minsterman · (#15)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bethere

your hero jim jordan would bail out the abrahms tank people in lima because (he says) he wants to make sure we have the ability to make heavy industrial products... even though we can't sell that product, that product will never be used, and the military DOES NOT WANT ANY MORE OF THAT PRODUCT.

the truth is he is behind the tank because he knows his electoral butt is on the line in a new district--PERIOD.

if he was sincere about the manufacturing base he'd have been all in for the bailout of detroit.

he isn't, he wasn't, and i think i have proved my point well.

I saw that to about Jim Jordon.....disappointed in his way of thinking about the tank plant too. I wish the department of defense would look into ALL the bases that are around the world......time to shut down some of those.....

east_ohio · (#16)

Quote:

Originally Posted by minsterman

you were for it once---you thought it was a good idea---but you wouldn't be in favor of it again? WHY?

Most if not everything that caused the U S Auto industry to need a taxpayer bailout should be corrected and should never be repeated. The taxpayers should not be put into the position to correct "their" mistake a second time.

falguin · (#17)

GM should have declared bankruptcy and then restructured. It would have done better. GM still hasn't paid back that loan. All of the banks that received TARP loans repaid it. What does that tell you. No more bailouts. Allow the company to fix itself like other businesses that are busted.

docthehun · (#18)

Quote:

Originally Posted by falguin

GM should have declared bankruptcy and then restructured. It would have done better. GM still hasn't paid back that loan. All of the banks that received TARP loans repaid it. What does that tell you. No more bailouts. Allow the company to fix itself like other businesses that are busted.

A little more research was necessary before your post. A number of banks have not repaid their loans. Check it out and get back to us. :)

buckeyedan · (#19)

banks and the auto industry were two different problems

neither should have been bailed out

banks not being bailed out would have probably destroyed the economy for a lot of reasons... but we never should have put them in that position

on top of NO bailouts...
we need to fix the regulations the burden the auto industry AND stop forcing banks to loan to folks who can't afford it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by minsterman

I saw that to about Jim Jordon.....disappointed in his way of thinking about the tank plant too. I wish the department of defense would look into ALL the bases that are around the world......time to shut down some of those.....

look all politics are local...

it's hard to stand on your beliefs when you know it's your district that will get the short term punch...

it's also why manufacturing is not a great industry to build your entire economy around... times change and it's hard to build todays new needs at a plan designed decades ago... so it's easier to build a new on somewhere else

there was a time we didn't expect politicians to be so idelogical and expected them to fight for the folks they represented

NBHS_1988 · (#20)

Keeping an Army tank plant open is a smart thing to do.

You do not know when the US will be going to war, plus, we can sell tanks to our allies, like Israel.

Sorry, we are at war with Islam.