The baloney about "nobody wants GM cars"...

jonjon714
Posts
5916
Joined
4/29/2008
Location
Virginia Beach, VA US
11/19/2008 2:04pm
Question - What can the stockholders do in this situation? Can they force the ax to come down on the current management? Can a government deal be struck the stockholders?
11/19/2008 2:04pm
kb450 wrote:
So... fuck the 324,000 GM workers to prove a point? Brilliant! Not sure what the answer is but I think something has to be done in...
So... fuck the 324,000 GM workers to prove a point? Brilliant!

Not sure what the answer is but I think something has to be done in one direction or another to save 324,000 jobs. That is an awfull lot of people to screw to teaching 3 guys a lesson. Just my opinion.
It will be up to the CEOs. They can take the money and cut their own pay and get rid of their jets and everything else...
It will be up to the CEOs. They can take the money and cut their own pay and get rid of their jets and everything else, or not. If not, their companies fail. Let's see how "committed" those idiots are.
WhKnuckle wrote:
That's just like the silly argument about earmarks. Earmarks are about 0.01% of the US budget - and yet some people want to make earmark reform...
That's just like the silly argument about earmarks. Earmarks are about 0.01% of the US budget - and yet some people want to make earmark reform their whole fiscal policy. It's not a serious discussion, it's childish.
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get pampered, fly private jets, etc. They simply shouldn't. If that is a deal-breaker for them, then obviously they don't need the money that badly.
kb450
Posts
141
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Anderson, SC US
11/19/2008 2:04pm
jonjon714 wrote:
Spin, read Romney's op-ed piece and see what you think of that... If somehow what he says can be achieved I believe not only will things...
Spin, read Romney's op-ed piece and see what you think of that...

If somehow what he says can be achieved I believe not only will things get better, they'll get great for the American Auto Industry...
All due respect, you really care what spin thinks???
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL US
11/19/2008 2:05pm
flarider wrote:
I still have not read about UAW offering concessions or pay cuts
WhKnuckle wrote:
They just did in 2007. Yeah, they should do it again, but if you cut hourly wages by 30%, it's not going to save them. All...
They just did in 2007. Yeah, they should do it again, but if you cut hourly wages by 30%, it's not going to save them. All auto makers are going the same direction, GM is just worse because they're the biggest.
So the solution is federal subsidization of GM?
So every year or so we're supposed to fork up money to give to them to pay bloated salaries, benes and so management can live the life of luxury?
Where does it stop?

They said they need 5 BILLION a month to operate....5 billion, and that the loan will keep them afloat in this present market until end of next year....one year.

So then what?

The Shop

WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
11/19/2008 2:09pm
It's funny, because I'm not so sure just writing them a check is the answer. I think investing money in them is the answer. But I'll tell you what ISN'T the answer - for tens of millions of Americans to take a lot of joy in their demise, to think this is a matter of principle. Where were all those principles when our beloved Secretary of the Treasury was all in panic because Goldman Sachs might go under?

Tell me this - what is more important, our auto manufacturers or Goldman Sachs?

I'll say it again - if the big 3 go down, we're in a depression and historians will say that was the stupidest thing any group of Americans ever did.
kb450
Posts
141
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Anderson, SC US
11/19/2008 2:10pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 9:15pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
That's just like the silly argument about earmarks. Earmarks are about 0.01% of the US budget - and yet some people want to make earmark reform...
That's just like the silly argument about earmarks. Earmarks are about 0.01% of the US budget - and yet some people want to make earmark reform their whole fiscal policy. It's not a serious discussion, it's childish.
This is off topic but needed to respond.

Earmark are now part of the budget? That is moronic. It is serious money. Infact if my math is correct it is 5,000,000,000 more than GM is asking for in the bail out.

Yea, that is childish!
jonjon714
Posts
5916
Joined
4/29/2008
Location
Virginia Beach, VA US
11/19/2008 2:11pm
flarider wrote:
So the solution is federal subsidization of GM? So every year or so we're supposed to fork up money to give to them to pay bloated...
So the solution is federal subsidization of GM?
So every year or so we're supposed to fork up money to give to them to pay bloated salaries, benes and so management can live the life of luxury?
Where does it stop?

They said they need 5 BILLION a month to operate....5 billion, and that the loan will keep them afloat in this present market until end of next year....one year.

So then what?
Current management has to go now!!!!! Any bailout must be contingent upon this!!!!

What happened to what you said earlier?

What about Mitt Romney? Appoint him trustee to the auto industry and give them the 25B bailout

I trust Mitt can get them out of the hole..
kb450
Posts
141
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Anderson, SC US
11/19/2008 2:12pm
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get...
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get pampered, fly private jets, etc. They simply shouldn't. If that is a deal-breaker for them, then obviously they don't need the money that badly.
Holy shit, we actually agree on something. I got hope for you afterall.
11/19/2008 2:12pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
It's funny, because I'm not so sure just writing them a check is the answer. I think investing money in them is the answer. But I'll...
It's funny, because I'm not so sure just writing them a check is the answer. I think investing money in them is the answer. But I'll tell you what ISN'T the answer - for tens of millions of Americans to take a lot of joy in their demise, to think this is a matter of principle. Where were all those principles when our beloved Secretary of the Treasury was all in panic because Goldman Sachs might go under?

Tell me this - what is more important, our auto manufacturers or Goldman Sachs?

I'll say it again - if the big 3 go down, we're in a depression and historians will say that was the stupidest thing any group of Americans ever did.
And I'll say it again - if the CEOs want public money to fund their private corporations, and they want to cut worker pay and benefits, then they better be willing to cut their pay to the levels (at least) that I suggested and sell off the private jets and other amenities. If not, then they don't need the money that badly.
jonjon714
Posts
5916
Joined
4/29/2008
Location
Virginia Beach, VA US
11/19/2008 2:13pm
I'll say it again - if the big 3 go down, we're in a depression and historians will say that was the stupidest thing any group of Americans ever did.

Additionally, how long before the price of an Accord or Camry goes up 30%?
WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
11/19/2008 2:14pm
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get...
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get pampered, fly private jets, etc. They simply shouldn't. If that is a deal-breaker for them, then obviously they don't need the money that badly.
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of business, 3 million people should lose their jobs, and America should go into a depression because a CEO rode somwhere in a private jet. News flash - ALL CEOs go places in private jets.

You people just don't think. You don't have the capacity. I'm sorry, but you are one stupid SOB.
11/19/2008 2:16pm
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get...
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get pampered, fly private jets, etc. They simply shouldn't. If that is a deal-breaker for them, then obviously they don't need the money that badly.
WhKnuckle wrote:
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of...
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of business, 3 million people should lose their jobs, and America should go into a depression because a CEO rode somwhere in a private jet. News flash - ALL CEOs go places in private jets.

You people just don't think. You don't have the capacity. I'm sorry, but you are one stupid SOB.
My uncle is a CEO of two companies and has never flown in a private jet anywhere.

Do you agree, or not, that the moron CEOs that got us into this mess should have to cut their wages and benefits? Or do you think that burden should fall solely on the past, present and future workers at their companies?
WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
11/19/2008 2:20pm
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks they should as a person whose opinion is of so little value that it's not even worth talking to them.
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL US
11/19/2008 2:20pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of...
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of business, 3 million people should lose their jobs, and America should go into a depression because a CEO rode somwhere in a private jet. News flash - ALL CEOs go places in private jets.

You people just don't think. You don't have the capacity. I'm sorry, but you are one stupid SOB.
NOT CEO's of bankrupt and failing companies requiring taxpayer handouts to stay afloat, at least they shouldn't
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL US
11/19/2008 2:23pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks...
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks they should as a person whose opinion is of so little value that it's not even worth talking to them.
NO ONE HAS SAID GO OUT OF BUSINESS

They need to cut their losses and legally REORGANIZE
WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
11/19/2008 2:24pm
My uncle is a CEO of two companies and has never flown in a private jet anywhere. Do you agree, or not, that the moron CEOs...
My uncle is a CEO of two companies and has never flown in a private jet anywhere.

Do you agree, or not, that the moron CEOs that got us into this mess should have to cut their wages and benefits? Or do you think that burden should fall solely on the past, present and future workers at their companies?
A "CEO of two companies" isn't a CEO of any company that's big enough to HAVE a CEO. CEOs work way too hard to be working for two companies at once.

Who gives a shit how these people travel? Keep your eye on the ball. Well, look who I'm talking to, of course you don't get it.

No wonder George Bush got elected twice.
11/19/2008 2:24pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks...
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks they should as a person whose opinion is of so little value that it's not even worth talking to them.
You didn't answer my question.
11/19/2008 2:24pm
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get...
It's not about that. It's about having lazy, unimaginative, spoiled morons continue to run things as if nothing's wrong. They get paid their same amount, get pampered, fly private jets, etc. They simply shouldn't. If that is a deal-breaker for them, then obviously they don't need the money that badly.
WhKnuckle wrote:
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of...
That's the most perfect example of the stupidity that I'm talking about. You are a fucking idiot - you think the company should go out of business, 3 million people should lose their jobs, and America should go into a depression because a CEO rode somwhere in a private jet. News flash - ALL CEOs go places in private jets.

You people just don't think. You don't have the capacity. I'm sorry, but you are one stupid SOB.
It was none of our business whether they flew private jets until they conned us into the last 25 billion on the grounds they'd restructure..........


now whats the excuse, where are the provisions they made,

knuckle, maybe time for a nap.
11/19/2008 2:25pm
My uncle is a CEO of two companies and has never flown in a private jet anywhere. Do you agree, or not, that the moron CEOs...
My uncle is a CEO of two companies and has never flown in a private jet anywhere.

Do you agree, or not, that the moron CEOs that got us into this mess should have to cut their wages and benefits? Or do you think that burden should fall solely on the past, present and future workers at their companies?
WhKnuckle wrote:
A "CEO of two companies" isn't a CEO of any company that's big enough to HAVE a CEO. CEOs work way too hard to be working...
A "CEO of two companies" isn't a CEO of any company that's big enough to HAVE a CEO. CEOs work way too hard to be working for two companies at once.

Who gives a shit how these people travel? Keep your eye on the ball. Well, look who I'm talking to, of course you don't get it.

No wonder George Bush got elected twice.
So you disagree? You think that the workers should get pay cuts and benefits cut, but the executives and CEOs should just be left to make all the money they can and have all of their expenses paid for luxury items like private plane travel?
rocrac
Posts
2454
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Indianapolis, IN US
11/19/2008 2:29pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 9:15pm
The last thing this county needs is a 11% immediate hit to the unemployment rates but the bigger issue is who is going to keep buying the amount of vehicles it takes to keep the big 3 afloat down the road? Sorry I can't see it.

America has been fat and bloated with spending on credit. The auto industry is tanking just like the housing industry because the easy credit just isn't there any more and may never be again.

The major players in the credit card industry are forecasting record defaults and Suzy homemaker is not going to be dropping a couple of hundred at bed, bath and beyond anytime soon.

Maybe sending all those decent paying manufacturing jobs oversees a little while back wasn't such a good idea after all.
WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
11/19/2008 2:29pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks...
The solution is for Americans to understand that those three companies can't be allowed to go out of business. And Americans should dismiss anyone who thinks they should as a person whose opinion is of so little value that it's not even worth talking to them.
flarider wrote:
NO ONE HAS SAID GO OUT OF BUSINESS

They need to cut their losses and legally REORGANIZE
Read this slowly - Chapter 11 isn't an option. They can't possibly get the DIP financing in this market - they'd need a minimum of 30 billion dollars and they can't possibly get it. If they try, they'll fail and they'll go out of business.

Bankrupt car manufacturers aren't going to sell any cars unless there's some guarantee they'll survive. Who would buy a car with a warranty that is going to be worthless and know the car itself is going to be worthless?

One option is for the government to provide DIP financing and run the reorganization. That's a very problematical approach, but it could work. But what I keep hearing is, Let 'em die, they deserve it. Well, Goldman Sachs deserved it. AIG deserved it, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac deserved it. And any of those could have gone out of business without 1% of the impact of a GM going out of business.
11/19/2008 2:33pm
Wagoner (GM CEO) makes $8.5 million a year, PLUS has all of his bills paid, such as private-jet travel, limos, etc.

His average worker makes $56,000 per year.

Cut out all of his benefits, including his health insurance (to the same level as the workers) and pay him 25x the average worker, which is about $1.4 million a year with no bonuses. Take away the jet and limos and the rest and let him pay his way through the world like a regular person.

Why is that asking too much, when he's asking for so much from the workers to sacrifice?
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL US
11/19/2008 2:42pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
Read this slowly - Chapter 11 isn't an option. They can't possibly get the DIP financing in this market - they'd need a minimum of 30...
Read this slowly - Chapter 11 isn't an option. They can't possibly get the DIP financing in this market - they'd need a minimum of 30 billion dollars and they can't possibly get it. If they try, they'll fail and they'll go out of business.

Bankrupt car manufacturers aren't going to sell any cars unless there's some guarantee they'll survive. Who would buy a car with a warranty that is going to be worthless and know the car itself is going to be worthless?

One option is for the government to provide DIP financing and run the reorganization. That's a very problematical approach, but it could work. But what I keep hearing is, Let 'em die, they deserve it. Well, Goldman Sachs deserved it. AIG deserved it, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac deserved it. And any of those could have gone out of business without 1% of the impact of a GM going out of business.
BK 'em, then give the bail out
Spinner
Posts
3198
Joined
8/1/2006
Location
Fayettenam, AR US
11/19/2008 2:42pm
Would it be possible to let the American people VOTE on whether or not they should get a bailout? I mean, after all, it's ultimately our money they're getting, right?
WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
11/19/2008 2:43pm
The CEO of Goldman Sachs would wipe his ass with a GM paycheck. What's the point? America should go into a depression, we should let the only large manufacturing industry in America go out of business because you think they pay their CEO too much?

You're seriously too stupid to even debate. Your brain circuits don't even connect to the right wires.
brainbasket
Posts
1531
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Ventura, CA US
11/19/2008 2:44pm
There's some good points on both sides in this thread.

There's a financial angle:
If GM can't get financing for it's products it can't sell them. Same goes for Toyota and the rest.
Even if financing were available, if people aren't willing to take on new debt to buy a new car, then GM and the rest suffer too.

There's an economic angle:
The domestic manufacturing base has been in trouble for years, but it employs millions of people that don't necessarily work for the Big Three.
The US has bailed out Chrysler, the airlines, and the steel industry in the past and it turned out OK for 2 out of 3 of those industry's.
But the legacy costs (retiree health care and pensions) couldn't be sustained when the economy was in an upswing, so in a downturn the expectation should be that they will make matters worse.

The 'moral' angle:
Are the domestic automakers too big to be allowed to fail?
Should companies who have been behind the competitive curve for decades, be subsidized with public money?
Should the compensation of CEO's be slashed, causing the good CEO's to leave and the slackers with nothing better going on to hang on? (The answer to that one is pretty clear IMO - CEO's pay is a red herring in this)

If they end up in a Ch. 11 reorganization they could come out of it stronger than they were before.
If the gov gives them low/no interest loans, they could rise up after the end of the current downturn.

Here's another idea:
If the UAW was offered an ownership stake in the companies it could change the entire industry. Currently they are still in an adversarial relationship with management.

Good stuff ...
jonjon714
Posts
5916
Joined
4/29/2008
Location
Virginia Beach, VA US
11/19/2008 2:46pm
Good post brain....
11/19/2008 2:47pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
The CEO of Goldman Sachs would wipe his ass with a GM paycheck. What's the point? America should go into a depression, we should let the...
The CEO of Goldman Sachs would wipe his ass with a GM paycheck. What's the point? America should go into a depression, we should let the only large manufacturing industry in America go out of business because you think they pay their CEO too much?

You're seriously too stupid to even debate. Your brain circuits don't even connect to the right wires.
Your insults aren't working. You still can't concede that their pay and their benefits are ridiculous. How can you be for lower taxes for middle-class people (and higher taxes for the rich), as you've stated previously, and also be for CEOs making ridiculous sums of money (along with flying private jets, taking limos, etc.) while asking their workers to take huge pay and benefit cuts, all while the same CEOs are asking for TAX MONEY to bail them out from their bad decisions?

Post a reply to: The baloney about "nobody wants GM cars"...

The Latest