Comments on: White House, Dems. Discuss Auto Bailout

Agreement Closer On $15B Package; Bush Insists Loans Come From Green Cars Fund

Add a Comment See all 114 Comments
by luvcomments December 5, 2008 8:48 PM EST
Am curious, if the auto companies aren''t bailed out, how much will it cost for unemployment benefits (which will be extended) and food stamps (which are never enough, only a fraction needed, to feed a family, and health care (because their ins will end), and all related costs - like extra state govt workers (at good pay :) to service all of this for not only the auto workers but all the others who will lose their jobs as a result, like parts makers and retailers and new car delivery massive-truck drivers, after-market producers and retailers, car dealerships, and so forth ? There aren''t any other jobs for all those people to get, even p-t work hasn''t been included in the current over-all unemployment figures and they are the only kind of work they could find. Am just curious as to the total, really total, cost of all that compared to the bail-out requested. I have absolutely no idea. I am livid that the big banks never had to undergo any scrutiny whatsoever, let alone the inquisition these auto makers are facing at the moment, when Paulson just chucked the money at the banks and ins companies with no legally binding contingencies, merely a request that they lend money to businesses - which they haven''t done. Talk about a double standard. I''m not saying I think the auto makers should get the money, but am curious about the compared cost and the double standard. It''s not what you know, I guess; it''s who you know (or nose).
Reply to this comment
by logicnothuff December 5, 2008 8:36 PM EST
Hey folks, here''s the answer. The loan deal will require GM, Ford, and Chrysler to adopt U. S. Postal Service wage and union structure. No body gets to be a fat cat and the car companies survive. If the Big 3 go under, then America is in for a world of hurt.
Reply to this comment
by wprozak December 5, 2008 8:27 PM EST
yes as far as i am concern , i will never buy another new car or truck from GM again ,since i am paying a price of it ,so works that are layed-off can sit at home a get 50,000$ a year to sit on a lake and fish orsit at home and play with therte wifes, whatever they do ,if they had to do some volunteer work for some charities maybe that would be a little better ,than what they get paided for now ,tell me what other job has a job bank to use ,and beside that no line worker is worth 73$ a hour ,sorry maybe i said it the wrong way ,but that is how a number of us feel ,if it would not hurt the country ,with the big 3 going down i would say let them go ,and then some of these 73$ a hour pople will have to go out and work for 10$ or so like every other worker ,if they brough back the 60 s and 50 s looks they would sell i lot more to ,everything looks the same now sometime you cant even find your own truck ,because they look all the same
Reply to this comment
by candy-apple December 5, 2008 8:20 PM EST
Any bailout for Big Auto must be tied to them making ONLY more fuel efficient HYBRID and ELECTRIC cars, PERIOD!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Condumbistan at 10:48 AM : Dec 05, 2008

Not everybody wants to drive a hybrid or electric car. What do you do for those people?
Reply to this comment
by credibility2 December 5, 2008 8:17 PM EST
This bailout buffet has got to stop, even at the total collapse of these businesses and tangential impact to other sectors in the economy.
Reply to this comment
by wprozak December 5, 2008 8:11 PM EST
yes as far as i am concern , i will never buy another new car or truck from GM again ,since i am paying a price of it ,so works that are layed-off can sit at home a get 50,000$ a year to sit on a lake and fish orsit at home and play with therte wifes, whatever they do ,if they had to do some volunteer work for some charities maybe that would be a little better ,than what they get paided for now ,tell me what other job has a job bank to use ,and beside that no line worker is worth 73$ a hour ,sorry maybe i said it the wrong way ,but that is how a number of us feel ,if it would not hurt the country ,with the big 3 going down i would say let them go ,and then some of these 73$ a hour pople will have to go out and work for 10$ or so like every other worker
Reply to this comment
by ontheleft December 5, 2008 8:08 PM EST
"President George W. Bush said that any bailout extended to struggling U.S. automakers must ensure that taxpayer money is paid back"

Where was the concern about getting paid back the $700 billion for the bailout of the banks? Where was Bush''s concern in spending hundreds of billions for the Iraq War? Where was the concern in doubling the national debt to now over $10 trillion dollars?

$37 billion is a drop in the bucket. If I didn''t know any better, I would think that Bush and the neo-cons want to permanently kill all manufacturing in this country. Only 3 things generate true wealth: manufacturing, mining & agriculture. If GM goes under, it will have widely felt repercussions.
Reply to this comment
by indianaman13 December 5, 2008 7:39 PM EST
How i would keep the car makers alive; just to keep the jobs for workers.
1. Gov buys a # or cars from the makers, and Gov sets the specs that the cars have to be.
a. buying the cars saves the jobs
b. trade these cars to Gov employees for reduced wages and/or make them medium distance transportation vehicles for Gov''''ment work within cities.
c. Employees save money in gas saving over the long run
d. Free car(kinda)
e. Gov''''ment gets cars at a discount, maybe in the form of the loans to keep them afloat until cars are ready.
f. Complete audits of all executives and company finances while the deal is being negotiated
g. If the negotiations and design phase takes overly long, Treasury/Gov/Company could buy union employee homes and pay them part of their salaries
h.
Reply to this comment
by indianaman13 December 5, 2008 7:38 PM EST
h. Cars must be of a good design sporty looking
i. make them modular somewhat to expand upon later
like the Asian compacts
j. If cars like the Tesla, not as sporty of course,
more functional, becomes an American Icon like
the Mustang or the Camaro, job expansion would be
anticipated.
Reply to this comment
by rickwar December 5, 2008 7:36 PM EST
Show of hands on the NO responses.

Please tell us what companies you work for so we can see how well they are managed.

Please, oh please, tell us what you make per hour.

Tell us what your CEO makes in proportion to workers and what % that represents of the companies worth.

How many of you actually paid taxes last year? 40% of America does not.

How many of you own SUV''s?

How many of you are in management?

How many of you own a business?

How many of you mouth to the talking heads but have never claimed bankriptcy?

How many of you would be willing to give up say 50% of your pay?

Come on, show of hands.
Reply to this comment
by ericv2644 December 5, 2008 7:35 PM EST
They should not get a penny, look at the banks got our tax money and kept it DID NOT LOAN A PENNY and to top it off I want everyone to know that Cleveland Based National city exec. 51 of them are getting GOLDEN PARACHUTES TOTALING MILLIONS OF DOLARS I thought that was not going to be allowed. The Auto industry will get the money and do nothing and be back in months asking for more. Let the auto works union give up some of those ridiculous benefits and work rules that hold the company hostage. Let The Union executives work for a dollar like the Executives Are willing to do. LET THEM GO OUT OF BUSSINESS
Reply to this comment
by indianaman13 December 5, 2008 7:34 PM EST
How i would keep the car makers alive; just to keep the jobs for workers.
1. Gov buys a # or cars from the makers, and Gov sets the specs that the cars have to be.
a. buying the cars saves the jobs
b. trade these cars to Gov employees for reduced wages and/or make them medium distance transportation vehicles for Gov''ment work within cities.
c. Employees save money in gas saving over the long run
d. Free car(kinda)
e. Gov''ment gets cars at a discount, maybe in the form of the loans to keep them afloat until cars are ready.
f. Complete audits of all executives and company finances while the deal is being negotiated
g. If the negotiations and design phase takes overly long, Treasury/Gov/Company could buy union employee homes and pay them part of their salaries
h.
Reply to this comment
by rickwar December 5, 2008 7:30 PM EST
In the late 70s, Lee Iocacca took a number of steps to rescue Chrysler then: (1) went under Chapter 11 and renegotiated contracts with the UAW and other folks, (2) the US guaranteed borrowings. These borrowings were later paid back. (3) sold many unprofitable assets, etc. As we all know, Chrysler returned to profitability and Lee was a hero then. Why cannot GM do the same? Lee showed the way.

Posted by ramos937 at 02:24 PM : Dec 05, 2008

Chrysler, while close, never entered chapter 11, the renegotiated some union contracts that later were restored under new contracts.
Reply to this comment
by mbourn2 December 5, 2008 7:26 PM EST
Taxing them to death?!?

They have so many loopholes, many of them barely pay double digit tax rates.

In 2003, GE paid 11% corporate income taxes.

That is HARDLY "taxing them to death".


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by IamHungry68
---------
When you looked at taxes did you consider the employers contribution to Social Security? Did you consider that even though the income of the company is taxes.... any dividends paid to stockholders are also taxed? Did you consider that the incomes of all the workers are also taxed which impacts the wages the employer must pay? Was your 11% just federal or did it include state and local taxes also? Did it include any assessments by cities to maintain the roads around the plants? Did it include the increased cost of business caused by environmental and zoning regulations? Did it include the sales tax that buyers pay for every car? Your numbers come from 2003... What did they pay under Clinton.... How about Carter? What would they pay under an Obama administration? Are you sure that the burden that government places on business is only 11 percent?
Reply to this comment
by rickwar December 5, 2008 7:22 PM EST
I wish Warren Buffett or someone like that would step in and spend $1.35B to purchase the majority of stock in GM and Ford. They know how to run a business and would have no difficulty eliminating the deadwood and waste within those organizations and bring in people that would turn thins around quickly.
Wouldn''''t that be a kick in the butt to all those suits?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by craigh9 at 02:45 PM : Dec 05, 2008

Been there, done that, remember Ross Perot??????
Reply to this comment
by whiskyrokr December 5, 2008 6:37 PM EST
jsd330;
You are exactly right. Good post.
Reply to this comment
by stomarin December 5, 2008 6:32 PM EST

AS PART OF THE BAILOUT TERMS THE AUTO COMPANIES MUST COMMIT TO ALTERNATIVE AMERICAN PRODUCED FUELS TO KEEP THE MONEY IN AMERICA AND CREATE THOUSANDS OF NEW AMERICAN JOBS!!!

WHETHER WE WOULD PAY FOREIGN COMPANIES $700 BILLION OR $100 BILLION KEEP ALL OUR MONEY HERE AND INVEST IN AMERICAN COMPANIES THAT WILL PRODUCE ALTERNATIVE FUEL TECHNOLOGY HERE. THIS TIME NO ISSUE ABOUT THE PRICE OF OIL DROPPING WHICH HAS KILLED NEW TECHNOLOGY EVERYTHING WE WERE SERIOUS ABOUT ALTERNATIVE FUELS.

HYDROGEN HAS MY VOTE.
Reply to this comment
by demdump December 5, 2008 6:08 PM EST
Either that or we stop taxing and regulating business to death. Our friends on the left have such a business is "bad attitude" that it is no wonder business wants to go somewhere else.

Posted by mbourn2

Very good post, this is a great Idea.
Reply to this comment
by Michael Arnold December 5, 2008 6:05 PM EST
Giving these companies this kind of money is a very, very bad idea. Its not going to make any difference except in the very short term. After that, expect mothballed plants as far as the eye can see.

It might make for a good Christmas for $70 an hour auto workers, but they''ll be history by spring of ''09.

Watch.
Reply to this comment
by mbourn2 December 5, 2008 6:05 PM EST
If this is works for more profits but we will lost alot of jobs, do you think this is ok to do this and if you calculated 100,000 companies to do this we all will be out of works and the Chinese will have more money to screws us, do you think this is ok ????


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Demdump at
----
Either that or we stop taxing and regulating business to death. Our friends on the left have such a business is "bad attitude" that it is no wonder business wants to go somewhere else.
Reply to this comment
See all 114 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more. Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: