Finally someone did the homework none of you clowns were willing to do:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/news-flash-car-dealers-are-republicans.html

Mountain. Non-existent molehill.

Next.

Dave Rywall on May 28, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Now Dave, you don’t want me to get the genital cuff do you? Get back in your little troll-dawg cage and quit yapping. Jeez, it’s just like you to think that because “someelse” does the work, your point is made. Well, honestly, someone did do the work. Problem is your little peabrain will have to copy and paste hypergeometric into a dictionary order to understand the following link. http://gregq.wordpress.com/2009/05/28/why-cant-liberals-do-basic-stats/
Till then, I told you before: If you can’t run with the Big Dogs, stay on the porch……baaaad troll-dawg

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/news-flash-car-dealers-are-republicans.html

Mountain. Non-existent molehill.

Next.

Remember, Democrats think it’s OK to hurt Republicans.

Q: How do you double the value of a GM or Chrysler car?

MB4 on May 28, 2009 at 3:29 AM

Fill the gas tank after cap and trade?

Trackback from PunditKix.com…

Q: How do you double the value of a GM or Chrysler car?

MB4 on May 28, 2009 at 3:29 AM

Take off the Obama sticker?

With the talk about health care failing and costing us so much money, I’d be surprised if Obama waited long enough to let the Democrats pass the bill. Oh, and, if for some reason it fails (like, all of us praying), I think he’d just go ahead with it anyway.

This would be sort of like if Bush was closing down Hollywood production companies… “Majority of Hollywood Studios are owned by liberal Democrats”

So, what’s the real reason for closing dealerships? It can’t be what they are claiming because what they are claiming makes no sense. I read an article the other day at Slate that attempted to explain the benefits of closing dealerships. All of the “reasons” listed either didn’t make sense or could have been accomplished w/o closing the dealerships.

So, what do I think, imho, is the real reason they are doing it? Take the above example. If you had 5 dealerships and you closed 4, you would still keep most of your sales in that area, although you would certainly lose some business due to the geographic realities of a big city. (I live in LA, so I have some experience w/ this) If your avg dealership was making a profit of $50k/month and you squeezed enough extra business through that dealership to push that to say about $200k/month that might sound like a good thing. Well, since they need to sacrifice like good little citizens (remember, they know Barry could jerk the rug out from under them just like he did the others) they could get by on the original $50k/month like before, right? Who would benefit then? The manufacturer can now raise the price of their cars in the one artificially created area they have any pricing power left, the price to the dealership.

They can’t do that now because a price increase pushed through the existing dealer network would cause them all to wither on the vine since Toyota/Honda/etc dealerships won’t be having to raise their prices at the same time.

More money for Government Motors and a little more incentive to keep sending money to the DNC, all at the expense of the “wrong kind” of dealerships. Win Win!!

…….”This is much bigger than Chrysler,” added Mourdock. “If the words ’secured creditor’ have no meaning, investors are going to ask if the words ‘good faith and credit’ of the U.S. still have meaning.

“Americans depend on bonds purchased by people outside the U.S. right now. If the Chinese investors buying our debt see American bondholders treated this way, is it a long stretch to imagine foreign creditors won’t be either?”
Word is spreading. “I think the punishment for mugging bondholders will be a reduced trust of foreigners in the U.S. legal system and an increase of the interest that foreigners will request for investing in U.S. instruments,” said Ottavio Lavaggi, an Italian bondholder who sued deadbeat Argentina over its $100 billion sovereign bond default in 2001. “There is no free lunch, and robbing bondholders . . . will have consequences.”

If so, this could be a turning point. In “A History of Credit and Power in the Western World,” Scott B. MacDonald and Albert L. Gastmann warned of a direct correlation between credit and power. “The combination of new muscle in industrial manufacturing . . . and finance clearly elevated the military and economic power of the United States, pushing it to the apex of the global credit system,” they wrote.

Is succoring the UAW worth throwing all that away?