Merry Christmas, Detroit, from your already-broke Uncle Sammy; Update: Bush video added
posted at 9:45 am on December 19, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Bailout mania continues. George Bush will give the Big Three automakers a whopping $17.4 billion loan package from TARP funds in order to keep them limping along until March 31:
The government will offer up to $17.4 billion in loans to the ailing U.S. automakers and expects General Motors and Chrysler LLC to access the money immediately, a senior administration official said on Friday.
Some $13.4 billion will be made available in December and January from the $700 billion fund that was originally designed to rescue struggling financial institutions, but the loans would be called back if the automakers cannot prove they are viable by March 31, the official said.
Viability would be mean that the companies must have a positive net present value, which doesn’t necessarily mean immediate profitability but would require them to reach that point relatively soon, the official said.
So the government, already in debt over 10 trillion dollars, will use its line of credit to give a loan to companies going bankrupt from their own debt load — and demand viability in 100 days. Who wouldn’t love that deal?
Supporters of a government bailout of the auto industry managed to hoodwink the administration in part through some very misleading statistics. They claim that 10% of all American jobs get direct or indirect support from the Big Three automakers, a claim repeated by Senator Carl Levin on NBC’s Meet the Press. ABC News says that they’re off by a factor of almost seven:
In an effort to convince Congress to bail out the U.S. automakers, company executives, union leaders and politicians have made the compelling argument that the industry directly and indirectly supports one in every 10 jobs in the country. The only trouble is nobody wants to take ownership of that statistic, which is almost certainly false.
The figure is routinely attributed to the Center for Automotive Research, but officials at the nonprofit organization, which has ties to labor and government, claim they never said it and have no idea where it came from.
“It’s such an exaggeration. I kind of grit my teeth every time I hear it,” said Debbie Maranger Menk, a project manager at the center who researches the industry.
The Center, she said, estimates some 350,000 people in the United States are directly employed by automakers, both foreign and domestic, and that 2.1 million jobs are indirectly connected to the industry including suppliers.
That 2.1 million jobs figure is in line with what most economists estimate to be the number of people supported by vehicle manufacturing, according to economist Richard Block a professor at Michigan State University’s School of Labor and Industrial Relations.
We have over 135 million jobs in the US. Anyone claiming 10% of American jobs is related to the auto industry would have to show almost 14 million people working directly or indirectly for the auto industry in general. The auto industry as a whole in the US affects a seventh of that, and GM, Ford, and Chrysler would only affect a portion of those 2.1 million jobs.
Well, now the auto industry affects all of our jobs. We’re all coughing up enough money for a down payment on a new car from every family in America, only without actually getting the car. And even if we’d used that money to buy a new GM, Ford, or Chrysler instead of it being a loan, none of the three would have shown a profit from the sales anyway. They’re losing money on every car they sell, and neither management nor labor shows much interest in changing those calculations. They just want a Governmentus ex machina to rescue them from their own folly without having to sacrifice anything … and George Bush just gave it to them.
Update (AP): Here’s the announcement.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
I heard third hand that Bush was warned in no uncertain terms that the great depression is at hand, and that nothing, but nothing is more important than maintaining employment. Short of this having happened, it’s nearly impossible to understand his motives.
JiangxiDad on December 19, 2008 at 10:55 AM
All of this Christmas joy…Now do you believe Bush can find a soft spot in his heart, and pardon jailed Border Patrol agents Compean, and Ramos?
byteshredder on December 19, 2008 at 10:56 AM
Oil is down and will stay down for awhile, but it will eventually rise in price again. I think this past summer really did change the psychology of the U.S. driver, as even with the sharp drop in price people are still driving less. The love affair with the SUV/LT is ending and Detroit should reinvent the automobile to get better mileage while still having most of the features Americans like in their vehicles. For the life of me, I still can’t figure why there isn’t a hybrid minivan, except for the fact that the minivan market segment has shrunk while other wagon-y vehicles have been offered to entice buyers. But Chrysler may come out with a hybrid minvan soon, if they stay in business of course.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 10:57 AM
I’m not blaming the entirety of the B3’s woes on the UAW, but it can’t be argued that the UAW is certainly #1 or #2 on the list.
So, I fail to see how being “fixated on busting unions” isn’t at least part of a solution.
Although I do fail to see how bailing out the B3/UAW at any cost helps.
jdub on December 19, 2008 at 10:57 AM
The big three is the entire industry. They are at the top of the food chain and support all of the other companies down the line. The big three are at the end of the assembly line, and trouble for them affects all of the suppliers and everyone else connected to them 100%.
AND – if you think that a new American car company can be launched from scratch, where are they going to get the money to do this in the first place. That’s right – a loan. Something that all of you (.. “you” who are against this) are already opposed to. The auto companies getting a loan.
wise_man on December 19, 2008 at 10:59 AM
No, the existing U.S. auto industry assets will just sit and rot. Been there, seen that in the rust belt enough already. And the innovation part of the auto industry will leave the U.S. for good, making it that much more difficult to restart a new American car company.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
P. J. O’Rourke reminds us of the reason for the season.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
So where’s my bailout? I only want about $100,000. It’ll be cheap and I promise to spend it.
rbj on December 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Right. Venture capitalists will show no interest in the fact that all of a sudden, competition for US-made cars has dropped to nothing, and is ripe for the taking.
That’s the same logic that says that the stock market can go all the way to zero without anyone buying up shares once they go low enough.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 11:02 AM
I really like the condition placed on the loan that requires the automakers to re-pay the loan in full if they can’t prove their viability by March.
Umm….from where will they get the cash to re-pay the loan? Maybe it’s just me, but having obtained my fair share of loans (as a consumer), I know the first question the bank requires an answer to is “prove you can re-pay the loan”. A planned future bankruptcy doesn’t qualify as “proof of ability to repay the loan”. Unless you live on Planet Bizarro.
BobMbx on December 19, 2008 at 11:02 AM
They aren’t being nationalized against their will. They are begging the government to steal my money and hand it over to them.
Buddahpundit on December 19, 2008 at 11:05 AM
What venture capital? Last time I checked, credit was kinda hard to get. I don’t think you appreciate what’s happened over the past few decades to other auto-related industries like tires, where shuttered plants were never reopened as imported tires took over the market.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 11:08 AM
All the folks working for Toyota, Honda, etc. down south would disagree. Same for the parts distributors.
The B3 are the biggest, most influential, certainly, and add higher value than the others, which are HQ’d overseas. But it’s dishonest to state that the B3 are 100% of the automotive sector in the U.S.
It’s quite clear, I think, that most of the people against the B3 loan are against it because the loan is coming from the government, i.e., them.
I doubt very much that anyone here is actually against private financing of a business venture. I doubt very much that if a private entity wanted to loan the B3 some cash right now, anyone commenting here who wasn’t a shareholder of the lending entity would have a problem with that.
Either you didn’t recognize the distinction or didn’t care when you posted that.
You seem to be a pretty sharp guy, so I’m forced to assume that you were being willfully intellectually dishonest.
jdub on December 19, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Don’t know what to say on this one. Just woke up, and coffee hasn’t worked yet. Here in Ca. the a**bite DemocRATS, put a 13 cents a gallon gas tax, 2 1/2 percent more off of our pay checks three quarters of a cent on sales tax. I was steamed when I went to work. Then, Arnuld, had a press conference. He said he will veto the DemocRATS proposal. And they are going to have to do more to make it easier for all in Ca. Other wise Ca. will go down the tubes. A lot are leaving Ca. in droves. Maybe The One would have given the Big Three more money if Bush didn’t do this? Don’t know. Don’t like it. But it is obvious that they will do as they see fit. Regardless of what we feel. I don’t think Ford is getting money. At least that is what I heard. But then again. The Media says one thing then another.
sheebe on December 19, 2008 at 11:10 AM
How different our nation may be today if,, instead of a new tone,, instead of reaching across the aisle,, instead of appeasing Democrats,, instead of ignoring or overlooking the crimes and corruption of the Democrats for the sake of bipartisanship,,, President Bush had stood true to conservative principles throughout the past 8 years.
A major reason we are where we are today is the lack of leadership coming from the White House. President Bush wanted to stay above all the bickering and partisanship,,, well, that’s where the wars are fought and won. Down in the trenches.
He fought pretty hard against those who would destroy America from abroad,,, while he continually appeased the party that would destroy America from within.
I still like him,, and admire him. He did what he thought was right. He is not evil,, just wrong. I hope he has a great retirement.
JellyToast on December 19, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Even Toyota, Honda, and Volkswagon have yet to come up with reasonably affordable hybrids. Chrysler would have to pull off quite a feat to overcome their engineering departments. I will gladly eat crow if they manage to do so, though.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 11:10 AM
I am just overjoyed at the news that Russia is suffering for us throwing our oil into the harbor. Eat crap and die Pootie Poot.
1.00 a gallon or lower is fine by me. Screw ‘em.
johnnyU on December 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM
I’m saying venture capitalists will be looking for startups to take the lead in the newly abandoned American auto industry. With competition down, and still a sizable segment of the population wanting to buy domestic-made, it will be a magnet for entrepreneurs.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Toyota has already hinted at pulling back those “wonderful” benefits once they don’t have to deal with Detroit. That includes busting unions and cutting benefits far lower as a part of their willingness to turn on the South. That means they’ll turn on their own, non-union workers.
There’s asking for large amounts of concessions in good faith and there is just open desire to kill the companies in order to sink the union.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 11:14 AM
He gave in to Detroit.
Nice try at revisionism.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Mr. Bush continues to not disappoint! Senate Republicans stood up and did the right thing and stopped this silliness and Mr. Bush did what he and John McNumbnuts do oh so well…he shoved it back up their collective keisters! Nice job, Mr. President! But, hey, don’t pardon those border guards! We don’t want to irritate our good friends south of the border El’ Presidente’!!!
I’m very glad I am no longer a Republican but an independent conservative which I shall remain for a very very very long time!!!
sabbott on December 19, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Just because it was made in a former GM factory doesn’t make it any more of a Detroit styled car.
Now domestic made, and Detroit engineered(with respect to larger size, V6/V8 preference at a low price, not the perceived lack of quality) would be fine.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 11:18 AM
I will never settle for a Hybrid. They are useless and don’t do any better gas wise. Many friends have nothing but trouble with them. Once they get 100,000 miles on them.
sheebe on December 19, 2008 at 11:18 AM
If you believe that new blood can’t take over and succeed while keeping the assets and discarding the liabilities, what makes you think the current companies can succeed when they are married to the liabilities.
Buddahpundit on December 19, 2008 at 11:21 AM
Rewarding incompetence has now become the official policy of the US government.
Where are today’s leaders?
huckleberryfriend on December 19, 2008 at 11:25 AM
I will never buy a vehicle from a bailed out auto maker. From this day forward, I consider every union-made vehicle an extortion machine on wheels. Tainted, rancid and filthy. An abomination that would not, and should not, exist, were it not for this ransom.
RushBaby on December 19, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Prove that they won’t.
uncivilized on December 19, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Good question.
the rustbelt / B3 comparison starfleet_dude makes is interesting as well… I’m detecting a pattern.
The rustbelt collapse came about as a result of the relevant industries’ becoming unprofitable due irreversible market conditions… you could no longer make steel the way those industries were doing and remain competitive in the U.S.
But, obviously, you can still make money in the US making cars. Cf Toyota, Honda, etc.
It’s cute to try and lump the decline of the rust belt in with the B3’s current woes, but the two phenomena have different causes, and occurred under different conditions.
Again, though, I assume that starfleet_dude knew that when he posted.
jdub on December 19, 2008 at 11:29 AM
I won’t buy from a manufacturer that makes it impossible to separate a V6/I6/V8 from a luxury line.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Not sure that’s completely accurate. A lot of people assume that they’ll go back to business as usual, and place the likelihood of such high enough that it seems to them to be an unacceptable risk for the putative return.
I think a lot of the frustration people are feeling over this has to do that were they shareholders in a private institution offering the loan, they’d at least be (a little more) able to vote the board out immediately.
At the very least, they’d be able to sell their stake in the company. Not so here. We’re all in this together. No getting out of this particular portfolio.
jdub on December 19, 2008 at 11:33 AM
I’m proposing a bailout for Stevie (me)! We can call it the TARP Omnibus Redirect of Dollars to Stevie 2008-2009 Stimulus Bill.
All I’m asking for is $5,000,000. Chump change really considering recent offerings by Uncle Sam! And what, I’m sure you are asking, will this do for the US and the current financial mess.
Let me explain. I will pocket the first $1,000,000 (Rainy Day Fund) which I anticipate never having to pay taxes on or to have to pay back. (We all know that these “loans” will be forgiven under Barack Obama). Of the second $2,000,000 I pledge to grease the gears of our political system by “contributing” money to politicians willing (and able) to 1) sponsor this bill and 2) ensure its passage. Regarding the final $2,000,000 I pledge to circulate this money right here in the Minneapolis economy. Can you imagine what this will do to support not just local merchants but also how much I will support state and local government with my sales and use taxes?
So, please write your local pol. today and urge passage of this important legislation today! Our nation depends on your participation!
sabbott on December 19, 2008 at 11:33 AM
oh he will at our expense…he’ll be BWANA at the ranch full of illegal brown-skinned serfs working for him….it gives him such a feeling of power…
right4life on December 19, 2008 at 11:39 AM
It’s dangerous to assume that starfleet_dude knows things.
Buddahpundit on December 19, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Bush’s act probably doesn’t matter because Obama will soon flood his union buddies with cash. The left bought Obama the White House and he’ll now use your money to pay his debts.
rplat on December 19, 2008 at 11:41 AM
jdub, the reason why the Japanese and European automakers opened up plants here in the first place was that the U.S. had quotas on imports. Which would obviously be pointless if GM and Chrysler went under. Hey, we can just import more cars from China, right?
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 11:47 AM
OK. So this is how America dies.
Time to plot my tax revolt. No more feeding the pig.
LimeyGeek on December 19, 2008 at 11:51 AM
where is this money coming from? If we can bail out car makers, why is Social Security going broke? What a bunch of idiots in DC!!!!!!!!!!!
ultracon on December 19, 2008 at 11:53 AM
tartan on December 19, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Well, here’s the stated investment strategy of Cerberus Capital Management, who owns Chrysler:
They left out the part about stealing the taxpayers’ money once those companies have been run into the ground under their stewardship and they no longer consider adding capital a wise move.
The only hope for Detroit is the annihilation of the UAW. Only then is there any chance for them to turn it all around.
califcon on December 19, 2008 at 11:54 AM
During the current year Bush has assured that he will go down in history along with other economic no nothings such as Hoover and among revisionists such as Amity Shlaes and myself, FDR. It is hard to see how Obama could have done worse. He will have his chance and will compete with FDR at prolonging the economic pain.
burt on December 19, 2008 at 11:56 AM
Better than allowing Elaine Chao to help sell our government out to the Far East via the side door.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 11:59 AM
The money lent to the big 3, the pensions and health insurance, which amount to a loan from the workers, were all gambles that didn’t pay off. Its time to recognize that the people who made those bets have lost. It happens.
Once we recognize this, we can have the hardware of the care manufacturing business producing without these “legacy costs” under new investors (no, they haven’t disappeared), so long as we get rid of the absurdity of the UAW.
If you want a domestic car industry (as apposed to a government car industry) that’s the way it’s got to be.
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 12:00 PM
So you wish to allow government to interfere in order to hasten their demise?
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Sounds to me like Bush is giving them the same terms that were offered by the Senate plan. I’d say that’s a good thing and forces them to reorganize and the UAW to make concessions to become competitive with the foreign transplants. I think I heard him say March 31st or controlled bankruptcy, Chapter 11.
Texas Gal on December 19, 2008 at 12:02 PM
I prefer NO government interference. These two companies belong in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. That is exactly what Chapter 11 is all about. And a bankruptcy judge could nullify the UAW contracts in favor of a business plan that might actually work.
But I do think that the UAW needs to be broken and crushed and killed dead before there is ANY hope of GM, Chrysler and, to a lesser extent, Ford surviving as viable enterprises.
califcon on December 19, 2008 at 12:06 PM
One of them crumbling and stopping production will boost the other two.
I’m not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing at this point.
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Well, it is government interference the way the South wants it. Once Detroit goes, so do all of the good things about working for the transplants- especially Toyota. They look to put the screws to their own if Detroit goes.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 12:11 PM
As soon as the first dollar hits their bank accounts, I will pledge to never buy their products again. They have conspired with government to violate the Constitution and steal our money.
I wanted to buy a big pickup, RAM, F350, Silverado….but now it looks like I’ll be giving Nissan my money.
LimeyGeek on December 19, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Interesting how some people look at the mechanics of the free market and see implements of torture. Ink blot.
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Seth, I don’t understand how you arrive at that conclusion. Based on the economy in Detroit and Michigan, don’t you think there would be plenty of people who would take those low-skilled jobs at a total compensation package of $43/hour?
How in hell did it ever come to be that low-skilled assembly line labor ended up with total compensation rates of over $70/hour in a place where you can buy a nice house for under $100,000?
How do you justify the auto makers’ continued “partnering” with the UAW, when they are selling each vehicle AT A LOSS?
Down in Tennessee, Alabama and Georgia, they’re making nice quality cars that people actually want to buy, they’re making a tidy profit on each one, the workers are making a decent living. What’s wrong with that picture?
Judging by your comments, I have to ask how long you’ve been part of the UAW . . .
califcon on December 19, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Ask Toyota about some documents of theirs that describe such exact measures.
Using the “free market” that never existed to justify implements of torture?
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 12:18 PM
The Toyota trucks are awesome, half the truck people I know have switched to them in the last couple of years and love them. They are also VERY well-priced.
And, c’mon, Seth, tell us how long you’ve been part of the UAW greed machine. Unless it embarrasses you . . .
califcon on December 19, 2008 at 12:23 PM
If they can lower the compensation to their employees, that is a natural function of the free market, and in reality a return to what those levels would be without the distortion of the UAW. It is the letting of air out of an overinflated balloon, not the application of thumbscrews or the wringing of dishtowels.
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Zero. The Big Three just happen to make cars that don’t skimp on performance. They do not make oversized and glitzy golf carts certified for highway use for the masses. Nor do they reserve 6/8 cylinder engines for the luxury segment and truck drivers.
What Toyota has reserved for the luxury crowd, the Big Three gives to the masses.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 12:27 PM
So, your main concern is cheep horsepower?
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 12:33 PM
LMAO! If what you say above is true, they WHY have they been losing massive market share to the well-run companies who produce those “golf carts” you sneer about? Does it have something to do with gas prices and the fact that very few people need a 6 cylinder engine, much less an 8?
I always buy used cars. Have driven all kinds. Jap cars are, very simply, far more reliable and need far less in the way of repairs.
Detroit created its own problems and I am seething with resentment that our government is giving them MY hard-earned money without any change in their suicidal business model.
califcon on December 19, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Sorry but I just can’t bring myself to click on Bush’s video. I was hoping his term would run out before I would have to listen to his ridiculous pronunciation and diction of the English language. Finally eight years of embarassment is over. Heh I worked on his campaigns too. I was hoping he would improve with time but he never did. I wonder what his thought process is like. er,uh, internets,
See Ya………………………..
sonnyspats1 on December 19, 2008 at 12:43 PM
This can be said about the last 3 years of his presidency.
angryed on December 19, 2008 at 12:46 PM
Bumper sticker on my Toyota Corolla:
American Taxpayers Did Not Pay For This Car
Save America, Buy Import! (Ford are OK)
Apologetic California on December 19, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I’m calling BS on that whole statement. If you buy used cars I’m guessing you repair them yourself, probably with aftermarket parts. Try pricing original equiptment parts and see how you like the cost and wait to get them in stock for your jap scrap rice burner.
sonnyspats1 on December 19, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I disagree. The love affair hit a rough patch at $4 a gallon. But even at $4 a gallon for most people, it’s still not worth going to a sub-compact. The fact of the matter is Americans haul stuff, pack kids in the car to go places, have dogs to transport, tow boats/trailers and just like big toys. And you can’t do that with a Prius. Plus the fact that 1/2 of the population is overweight or obses makes it hard to fit into the Hyundai Accents of the world.
When you take the media hype of $4 a gallon out of the equation, for most people in the middle and upper middle class, the extra $$ was negligible. If you drive 10K miles a year the difference between 15 MPG and 30MPG at $4 a gallon is $222 a month. Yes, it is real money, but is it worth giving up a lifesyle, safety and comfort that comes with an SUV? I say no.
Problem is as I have said here before, American cars companies have too many costs. It is the $73 an hour they pay UAW workers that is driving GM/Chrysler out of business. It’s not the fact they make Tahoes and Ram Trucks.
angryed on December 19, 2008 at 12:55 PM
The U.S.S.R II
History repeats itself, first as tragedy with Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin, and then as farce with George W. Bush reprising the role of Karl Mark and Barack H. Obama set to reprise the role of Vladimir Lenin.
Tav on December 19, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Well. After buying American all my life, I’d decided that I never would again, since the auto workers seem to feel I owe them a better living than the average citizen.
However! At least I can now continue driving my Ford with some pride!
Alana on December 19, 2008 at 12:57 PM
People are by nature fickle, it is easy to persuade them of something, but difficult to keep them persuaded.
- Niccolo Machiavelli
MB4 on December 19, 2008 at 12:59 PM
The problem can be truncated to “seem to feel I owe them a living.”
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 1:06 PM
Clever. btw, that’s USSA.
JiangxiDad on December 19, 2008 at 1:08 PM
I have to give President Bush some credit here for stepping up and doing the responsible thing by not letting Detroit fall between the cracks of his outgoing and Obama’s incoming administration. Not that it’s unreasonable to also think that he’d just as soon not have the end of GM and Chrysler as the end period of his term in office, of course.
Republicans can also actually be thankful, as you can be sure that if GM and Chrysler had been allowed to go under, the Democrats would have one very big card to play over and over again during 2009 as the U.S. economy likely struggles.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 1:09 PM
MB4, you haven’t heard drivers filling up the SUVs next to you in amazement saying it only cost them $50 to fill up. Trust me, those $100 a tank days have left a biig impression on their minds as well as their credit card balances.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 1:11 PM
Actually, I am a woman and checking the oil is as far as I go. I have them thoroughly checked prior to buying, immediately do whatever they need and then just drive them.
I’ve had a used (one owner) top of the line Infiniti for almost 4 years and, aside from 3 electric window motors, it has needed exactly nothing. The OEM motors were over $300 each. My guy put in rebuilts for $75 each. Works perfect. My total investment in this beautiful car has been less than $5000 (including the original purchase and the four new tires I just put on.)
My previous car was a Ford Contour, which I actually really liked, it was a surprisingly good car. But I took it in to the mechanic every few months just to have him check everything. When I bought the Infiniti, he said you do NOT have to do that with this car, it needs nothing. And he was right.
califcon on December 19, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Thankful that Republicans suffer less politically from the ignorance of the voters, while suffering more economically from the consequences of supporting failure?
Count to 10 on December 19, 2008 at 1:13 PM
the sole issue here: unions. no other discussion necessary.
kelley in virginia on December 19, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Dude,
Bush will be blamed for everything in 2009 no matter what.
And in 2012 guess who Michigan will vote for? Here’s a hint…it’s the guy with the letter “D” after his name. The fact Bush threw $17B at that decrepit state will mean nothing come election time. Ditto for Ohio and Indiana.
Maybe W. can send $100B to Hollwyood too. After all if he’s throwing money at people who have never and never will vote for a Republican, why not?
And the truly scary thing is this guy still have a month left in office. God only knows what more shit he can do during his last days. Can we please have a quickie constitutional amendment to let Obama take over Jan 1?
angryed on December 19, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Ford has had it’s own problems over the years and went through some tough times (Firestone tires failure, etc.) and changed management that helped to pull it back up. They also have UAW union contracts but are still solvent right now even in this economy. So it seems to me that something is going right at Ford that is not going right at GM and Chrysler.
And Ford trucks are great vehicles. That’s why Toyota came out with the Tundra to compete.
Personally I don’t buy foreign cars because I tend to keep my vehicle far beyond the warranty and according to my friends who do buy foreign cars once you start having to pay for the repairs they are very expensive.
I’ve always bought American made vehicles. I believe that buying American pertains to autos as well as Walmart. I drive a fully loaded Ford Explorer XLT right now, I love it! When I decide to replace it I will buy another Ford.
Texas Gal on December 19, 2008 at 1:20 PM
Note to the dumbbell: you can give them other peoples’ money until your last day in office, but you can’t make people buy their shitty cars! They are toast (boycott GM and Chrysler!)and fortunately, so are you, almost.
james23 on December 19, 2008 at 1:26 PM
How is spending money the government doesn’t have doing the responsible thing? All GWB did was kick the problem down to Obama by giving failing companies enough money to stay afloat until the new administration takes over and is in a position to give the UAW all that they have been promised.
Nothing has been solved here nor are GM and Chrysler in any better a competitive position now than they were yesterday. Unless you are one of those overpaid UAW members, this whole thing should make you very mad.
highhopes on December 19, 2008 at 1:27 PM
I don’t see any less SUVs on the road and I don’t see them going any less over the speed limit. Well, not before we entered our
Ice AgeAl Gore’s Apocalyptic Global Warming anyway and it will last about as long.MB4 on December 19, 2008 at 1:38 PM
What’s amusing is there are lemon laws to protect us if we buy a car that doesn’t work. I’m doubtful there are any lemon laws to cover the junk companies into which we just bought.
Scranton on December 19, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Bush has turned into an embarrassed loser. You can see it in his face and manner, especially on the recent interviews he has been doing. It’s even getting more difficult for him to put sentences together in regards to the financial crisis. He’s clearly operating on Bernanke/Paulson’s views.
It’s all over his head at the moment causing him to throw away any vestige of conservatism. It is poetic justice that it is happening now as he leaves office. Karma if you will. He never has had a fiscal conservative bone in his body. He will be forever linked with government irresponsibility as Clinton is to a blue dress. Bush and the Repubs will be the benchmark for incompetence. It is the reason that the Dems and Obama are in power.
Finally here is Fred Thompson bitch slapping Bush et al for the lunacy they are subjecting us to.
http://blip.tv/file/1528079
patrick neid on December 19, 2008 at 2:09 PM
No, thankful that the Republican Party isn’t so dim as to think a not-so-healthy dose of Hoovernomics is going to help the economy.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 2:15 PM
Sadly, I think that’s the bottom line (and I do mean BOTTOM line.) This bailout nonsense highlights one of the biggest deficiencies of socialism. Capitalism isn’t perfect, and free markets have economic downturns with painful recoveries, but they tend to recover by addressing the original cause of the problem. Unfortunately, it takes some time for the system to identify these causes and devise solutions, and the electorate tends to become panicky during the adjustment period.
Socialism almost never resolves a downturn by addressing the true cause of the problem, because it allocates resources according to political influence, and the people who caused the problem tend to have a tremendous amount of influence. The party who can make the most compelling emotional appeal, or most frightening threats, gets the resources it needs, with no reciprocal obligations. That’s why the people who caused the quasi-socialist subprime industry to collapse are not only free from responsibility for their actions, but actually have more power and influence than ever. It’s also why the last people who will ever be held to account for the horrid state of American education are the members of the teachers’ unions, or the beaureaucrats at the Department of Education. For its beneficiaries, the inefficency of socialism is a feature, not a bug.
As with any other recipient of politically directed bailouts, the auto industry will do nothing to correct its problems, and will instead direct all its energies toward securing the next bailout. Some easy predictions:
1. The auto industry is highly unlikely to ever “repay” these “loans.”
2. The quality of American autos will decline, as a token effort at cost control is made. Since labor and management costs are politically untouchable, material costs will be cut.
3. The amount of money donated to Democrat politicians by the auto workers unions, and auto company management, will go up dramatically.
Doctor Zero on December 19, 2008 at 2:16 PM
True, the deficit will have to be addressed once the economy is on the mend. But the bridge to cross right now is the one over the deflationary abyss we’re now at the edge of. Look at it this way – we can either help GM and Chrysler out, or we can pay unemployment to a few million more people. I prefer keeping people working.
starfleet_dude on December 19, 2008 at 2:19 PM
What’s worse?
The UAW wins.
We lose.
Kini on December 19, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Thanks King George.
True_King on December 19, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Party man through and through, Repubs can do no wrong. Oh wait, yes they can, if they start listening to conservatives and Christians, then the Repubs are baaaaddddd mmeeeeennnnnn!
True_King on December 19, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Shame Toyota can’t come out with a pony car. They can come up with a pony truck, but anything else not for the masses.
Yes, I do value having a lot more car for my money. That’s what I get with anything Detroit. Not just Ford. Not just GM. Not just Chrysler.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Get bent, true king
wise_man on December 19, 2008 at 3:13 PM
If that’s what you call more performance per dollar.
Pardon if I don’t want to press the gas pedal and it be lacking. Pardon if I want a bass note coming from the engine, not from crafted exhaust. At least Ford can deliver on those, and even has noted that in their engines.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Whether the President’s/Not-so-Big-2’s plans succeed or fail is irrelevant. The President’s actions here are immoral. He has no right to use taxpayer money to fund private businesses. That is not what government if for; it is an injustice. It’s true that what they really need is more of a free market, not less. But that argument aside, economic difficulties do not justify robbing even one Peter to pay a single Paul, much less thousands who (at least in part) did it to themselves.
JDPerren on December 19, 2008 at 3:15 PM
That doesn’t mean you give the environmentalist Left a victory by sinking the company *and* the union.
There are 3 choices:
1)The Company
2)The Unions
3)The Solution
Pick wisely. Otherwise you might wonder why Toyota turned mean.
sethstorm on December 19, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Sigh. I can’t say anything more (at least not without a torrent of swearing).
batter on December 19, 2008 at 3:16 PM
I might consider a Ford Truck since they are taking any of our money. I shall not, however buy any of GM or Chrysler’s products! Too bad because I was seriously thinking about a Corvett in the spring. I think it is a seriously great car and a bargain considering what you get but I will wait for VW/Porche to buy that division out and produce an even better car. It won’t be long before GM is toast and the greedy pricks in the UAW are 100% done…including their pensions. 100% of zero will not look as good to them then…
sabbott on December 19, 2008 at 3:34 PM
The same kind of ‘loan’ that Vinnie offers to the neighborhood Jewish jewelers. It’s not Bush’s money to give to private business. It’s taxpayer money and it’s not the function of the Federal Government to assist them, no matter how much trouble they’re in or why. If he had the least inkling of understanding of the free market he claims to favor, he would have advocated removing the conditions that have brought GM and Chrysler to this point. He doesn’t and he didn’t.
JDPerren on December 19, 2008 at 4:11 PM
I agree with you about the value for the money and that’s why I buy American made vehicles. I don’t trade a vehicle in every 4-5 years for a new one. But I think what Detroit failed to do was understand that they need to make cars that appeal to all American consumers and they’ve stood by and watched the foreign market take that share for a long time now as if they were blind to what was happening under their noses. People buys cars based on their lifestyle and transportation needs. As America changed. City dwellers moved to the suburbs and became commuters, they chose fuel efficent vehicles. The population is aging and retirees are on fixed incomes. In most households both adults are working and use 2 vehicles, etc.
I think it’s been a case of auto executives living in glass towers and out of touch with average consumers and auto designers creating what they wanted Americans to buy rather than designing what Americans would buy.
Now they see Toyota moving into the full size truck market. That just tees me off! The reason they don’t move into the pony car market is because it’s not that large any more.
Texas Gal on December 19, 2008 at 5:13 PM
No, it’s the same type of loan that Chrysler got a few decades ago. And they paid it back, JDPerren.
wise_man on December 19, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »