40 Votes

So Here's The REAL Question On The Chrysler/GM Deals- Do You Think Obama KNEW They Would Fail BEFORE He Bailed Them Out?

Agent001 submitted on 4/30/2009 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 2:17:39 PM

68 user comments | Category: Spy News | Source: www.autospies.com

Tag Links: Obama, Chrysler, GM, Nardelli, Gibbs

As I watch this circus on the news regarding the Chrysler bankruptcy and the spin coming out from the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, I just can't help but think that even BEFORE they wasted all this money on the bailouts, they knew it would fail no matter what.

So I ask you all, do you think our President KNEW this would all fail and if so, WHY did we waste ALL this time and money.

And would things be any worse now, if they had done NOTHING?

Seems to me they should have taken that money and just taken care of all the employees/retirees and let what was about to happen, happen.

And lastly, what do you think they are paying off Nardelli to leave.

Think it's more than what they gave the employees? ;)

Agent 001 will be in Santa Barbara this weekend for the BimmerFest show so be sure to keep checking back for E-Class AND Bimmerfest photos.

2009 BimmerFest Photo Gallery

2010 Mercedes-Benz E-Class Photo Gallery

If you want to see your photos running on our homepage photo ticker, be sure to upload your photos on the go by sending them to Mobile@AutoSpies.com

There are photos and then there are AutoSpies.com photos!

AutoSpies.com is ranked number one on Google search for auto shows

So Here's The REAL Question On The Chrysler/GM Deals- Do You Think Obama KNEW They Would Fail BEFORE He Bailed Them Out?

About the Author

FWD Torque Steer. Absolute proof the Devil exists.
— Agent001 (View Profile)

User Comments

I dont know it depends on how you look at it. DID you know they were going to make a TERMINATOR 4 begining of last year.
— B7FAN (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:22:26 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 7

Chrysler needed money, like AIG, Bank of America, etc; to run the core business. Did the President know, well is he an auditor? Could anyone outside of the auditing company, not looking at 20/20 hindsight as reference, known things would have gone the way it did? Will GM enter into bankruptcy? Speculation is all we can do. We are on the outside, as usual playing armchair quarterback because we truly haven't the slightest clue but what is being told to us and the end results.
— inspirion7 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:27:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

But inspiron7,

What Auto Spy reader DIDN'T know it was doomed to fail?

The problem is unsolvable in a short enough timefrmae required.

If they had 10 years to fix it before running out of money, it would be possible.

But these guys are month to month, bleeding profusely.

Our President is a smart guy.

They KNEW.

Which then opens up a whole different set of questions.

001
— Agent001 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:40:09 PM | | Votes: -1

This is a well known psychological phenomenon called "Hindsight bias" or sometimes called the "I-knew-it-all-along" effect, which is the inclination to see past events as being predictable.

No one has a crystal ball, and there is no tooth fairy, or santa clause, or allah, or jesus either. Just grow up and deal with reality head on and not like a grown child. This f#cked up situation is not one person's fault and certainly not the new guy who has been in office for about 100 days. Is it the fault of the previous administration and their contempt for the U.S. Constitution? Probably not entirely.
— America (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 10:25:25 PM | | Votes: 4

Hear, hear. I am with America on this one. Agent001 I love you for this website and many, if not, most of your postings but the political stuff?? I have an idea why not create DemocracySpies? Lets talk about cars here... Its bad enough that we have to deal with the One brand only Lovers here; by mocking everything the current administration does, you become like them. Surely the outgoing administration saw some of this coming, but I suppose Lexus, I mean Republicans, can do no wrong... See what you made me do... now I am talking to you as if you were David969.
— Airliner (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 2:52:49 AM | | Votes: 4

Keynesian economics never worked before and they aren't going to work this time either. Bailouts should have never happened, not for the auto industry nor for any other industry. There isn't such a thing as "too big to fail"-- believing that is the case is part of why we're in this mess.
— mscottc1 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:39:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

so which economics have worked?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:48:18 PM | | Votes: 3

Yes of course he did. It was quite obvious without knowing too much inside info. But he did it to prove to the Americans that he has a good heart and means well as the president of the U.S.. He was also being fair since they bailed out AIG and others. I would've done the same thing even though I don't agree with it.
— SHOWTIME (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:49:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6

if they knew they'd fail, why would they bother trying to bail them out? is this some sort of indirect suggestion of collusion between government and industry?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 2:51:14 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

1995e34: first, I would suggest you check out the Austrian economists at http://mises.org/.....second, I would suggest that the Feds (Obama and company) were more concerned about shoring up the financials of the union members and UAW than they were the manufacturers. If they were really concerned about the manufacturers the government would have told them to follow the BK route long ago.
— eidos2004 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:03:17 PM | | Votes: 4

whats the biggest difference between anarchists and libertarians?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:14:14 PM | | Votes: 2

and i agree, the concern wasn't for the manufacturer. it was for the employees (which happen to be union). was that ever really a question?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:19:31 PM | | Votes: 3

"whats the biggest difference between anarchists and libertarians?"

Libertarians are anarchists with money.

Cute joke, wrong of course, but cute.
— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 4:08:14 PM | | Votes: 2

eidos2004,

that site is interesting, but i can't take it too seriously. the austrian school economists seem to be based on philosophy rather than anything of substance. correct me if i'm wrong, but to sum up their positions, they want the world to be run lawless like the old american west.

much of what has made america a superpower has been the symbiotic relationship between the private and public sector. the private sector can't operate without the public infrastructure, and the public can't operate without a broad economy with markets.

so, i clicked on a link on the von mises institute referencing "green jobs". in this article, the writer argued that because the sun doesn't shine 24/7 and wind doesn't blow 24/7, that green energy production was essentially a means to create jobs that produce absolutely nothing. it suggested public investment in sustainability was essentially hiring people to babysit rocks and tree stumps.

if i were a reader of that site, i'd be insulted. there was no alternate solutions to the impending disaster following peak oil production. if you want to question environmentalists, fine. but this site seemed to be little more than MAD magazine for people that wear monocles.

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 6:17:28 PM | | Votes: -1

1995e34, I thought philosophy was defined as the love of wisdom. Now you redefine it as a non-substantive ideology. My friend, perhaps it might surprise you that in years past disciplines of study in college were classified under philosophy, e.g., philosophy of law, philosophy of biology and so forth. Economics is simply a sub-category of political science (or better philosophy of politics) principally known as a management of a household.

Now, please explain how those definitions are not substantive. Or is your real problem the fact that they (Austrian school) are not compelled to give you warrant for your desire of a concrete experience?

It is quite amazing when I think about people such as yourself, who think that natural (passive) means of energy are great but natural (free markets) passive economic principles are repulsive. Austrians do not believe in lawlessness. I would suggest that the very fact they have philosophical principles are indicative of a lawful system. The problem really coalesces around the rights of the individual in light of the government's tendency to overreach and in the process take away, deny or impede the rights acknowledged in our constitution.

With respect to your comment on peak oil. Is that not a philosophy (a system of principles--perhaps worldview might be preferable) without the empirical data to substantiate your view? Yes, I am aware of the hypothesis but there are no studies, which can provide a believer (such as yourself) with the certitude necessary to bring your personal life into correspondence with what the principles demand. In other words, do you live a life (self-consciously aware) committed to moving away from carbon based energy? If not then what is the point of your arbitrary assertion of substance over their (Austrian school) reasoned approach to addressing the supply and demand of energy with free markets as opposed to someone like yourself, who would rather pursue an unsustainable government usurpation of the markets that will bring us to ruin?

My friend the only insult you should have received would be an uncharitable dismissal of your prose because of your refusal to interpret their (Austrian school) material in a fair manner. If you have a reasoned argument then put it out there. All I read from you mere were assertions without clarity of terms, which would mean that your post lacked substance.
— eidos2004 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:09:25 AM | | Votes: 1

eidos2004,

yes, my life is primarily based around moving mankind away from carbon based energy sources. thats why i became a mechanical engineer. and peak oil will occur, the only question is when. the planet is of a finite size, and has a finite volume of oil. very simple. no philosophical shades of grey to discuss.

and the government endeavors that will occur over the next couple decades will certainly be sustainable. that is the whole basis for developing them. the danish, icelandic, and nordic governments have invested heavily in these technologies and are reaping the benefits. and guess what? most of these nations are able to enjoy similar market freedoms to the united states (according to the heritage foundation's 2009 world ranking).

seriously, the austrian school of economics seems quite beautiful and romantic. but this whole idea of anarchy as a means of human existence is just lazy. you are lusting after some imaginary world that has never existed. i am convinced that by your response, you are smart and educated enough to come up with real solutions to problems. unfortunately, i'd be willing to bet that you live a comfortable enough existence for these ideas to be merely academic.

nobody trying to address the issues that face humanity over the next couple decades will take the austrian school seriously. maybe someday when every human has access to health care, education, and clean water we can talk about the individual. but as for now, we need to continue to work in a pack. we don't have claws and big canine teeth. we can't scale trees with ease. we can only run about 20 mph on a good day. we are social creatures, and all that we have accomplished has been when we have come together as one.

if you hate the government so much, GET OFF THE INTERNET!!! don't use public roads. don't use our water, our telecommunications, or our military.

your thoughts are interesting. i hope to hear back.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 3:17:59 PM | | Votes: 2

I think he bailed them out so they could be allowed to restructure and stay in business.Chapter 11's purpose is to reorganize and legally get rid of creditors. This was a vital factor in allowing these companies to continue.My question is and remains as this-Why isn't the same pressure not being placed on banks. Why are they not being forced to restructure and why doesn't the general public not have the details like our 2 auto companies?
— mini22 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:08:59 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5

I agree with this as well...good points
— SHOWTIME (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:12:52 PM | | Votes: 3

mini22 the purpose of a Chapter 11 is not to get rid of creditors....in fact the creditors are the ones who usually gain possession of the company. The shareholders typically lose most if not all. If they want to get rid of the creditors then they would liquidate, yet, the proceeds would go to the secured creditors first and then to the unsecured creditors until the proceeds are exhausted.

As for the banks, they are of an entirely different matter than what we see with the auto manufacturers. So please, if you have beef with them fine but don't attempt to speak univocally with the two industries.
— eidos2004 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 4:40:11 PM | | Votes: 0

inflammatory headline, as usual.
— holmstar (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:16:14 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6

inflammatory comment, as usual. ;)

001
— Agent001 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 3:19:20 PM | | Votes: -3

Our President is intelligent, very political and a lawyer. Of course he knew that this was the likely outcome, which in itself is not bad, but more importantly it gives him a platform to do what he wants to do.

As a lawyer he understands that under bankrupcy law all debtors have to be treated equally. That is the issue behind this bankruptcy filing and the upcoming one for GM. The deal proposed by Obama for Chrysler and GM does not treat the bond holders proportionally relative to the amount of debt they hold. If you look at the proportion of debt held by the bondholders, the UAW (money owed for the retirement and healthcare funds) and the USA government and the proposed percentage of the equity they each will get in the new company it is not an equitable treatment of the players. There is clear favoritism toward the UAW and the government. Many of the large bondholders are TARP fund receipents so he can bully them into submission. The holdouts are the non-TARP firms who don't need a government bailout because they behaved responsibly and ran their businesses prudently. They are standing up for their rights under USA law.

Obama wants this political platform so he can look like a hero to the UAW who invested heavily in his election. He also wants it so that he can bash these mean money men who are standing up to him. What he never talks about when he mentions the money men is whose money are they investing? A large percentage of it is our money; yours and mine. If you have a 401k, IRA, or pension fund that's your money. State and local government pension funds are heavily into hedge funds as well as corporate stock. So Obama is asking your to take a large haircut. Hoping that your kid will get a scholarship; guess where that mony comes from. Do you work for a public company? That firm needs a healthy stable financial market in order to invest in keeping your job. Private firms need it as well. The list goes on and on. So when Obama bashes the money men he is really bashing all of us. He wants our take "our money" and give it to the UAW.

Yes he knew that this would be the outcome, but it serves his purpose. By the way all he has to do is treat the private bondholders under the terms of USA law and he will have a deal in a minute. Everything is all aligned and ready to go.
— NorthstarSRX (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 5:26:51 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Its sometimes strange to hear Americans bitch about the bailouts of GM/Chrysler by the Obama administration. At a time when the industry is going through its worst phase in NA, it behooves all of us to aleast pay close attention to what this bailout means. The Auto industry far from being another industry is a technology leader industry that supports a huge ancillary engineering base. Its no surprise then that every economic power and corresponding wannabe is trying to get its own auto industry.
Rather than following the time honored tradition of the EU market
leaders like Germany and France to simply kill the competition through tarrifs and protective clauses, Obama has instead simply given the teh local industry the chance to regroup itself through recapitalization and bankruptcy while preserving the competitive market to ensure that consumers get the best choice .
Agent 001 , you often rail against this current administration while deifying the German car manufacturers for their "so called" "superiority".
Let it be known the VW (and by its extension all its sub brands) are controlled by the German state of Bavaria and thus allows it access to funding and sales channels that no other manufacturer in germany enjoys and Porsche despite the financial tricks it has played (which would be guilty of fraud in the US had they been an american company) over the last year to finance its aquisition of VW has yet failed to take control of the board.
And while it is easy to mock the excess of the UAW, let it be known that that entire German govt bends overs when IG Metall goes on strike . Infact, what MB , BMW pay IG Metall union members would make UAW members blush in shame.
MB iteself has been recued by teh state ( not directly by through investment props by the Bundesbank ) teh many times it has shot itself in the foot. Point to example

1) When it got into the Aerospace business and essentially had to recapitalize itself ( companies like Fokker etc were part of MB)
2) Its disastrous buy out of Chrysler

Its no joke that the Social Democrats in the German govt have always been protective of their heavy industry in Germany. Labor conditions and payouts for blue collar workers are teh best in the world. Not to mention that their tax rate would make even an american pinko blush ..

Ditto to france and its protection of Citroen, Renault etc. Not to mention that it protects its electronic industry majors like Thompson to alevel that is almost riduculous.

I do not advocate a constant govt control like Germany and France. Its not in the nature of us americans to do so . However this intervention is far less then what we gave to protect the steel industry , aerospace industry or even Harley Davidson . And while its remains popular to bash the UAW . please do keep in mind that unions brough the wonderful concept of a weekend, health care and retirement and a living wage . Thank them too that that kids arent toiling away at teh age of 5
— izfuney (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 5:45:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Sigh , please do bear with me for the unending typo's in the above comment.

— izfuney (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 5:49:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

a logical comment far outweighs typos.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 6:23:19 PM | | Votes: 1

Aside from the typos, that was a well thought out argument/statement. However, the unions have ruined the auto companies, they are overpaid and lazy. The 21st century unions are comprised of people who knowingly accept their job because they know they have job security and can do whatever they want (i.e. take advantage of their employer) because they know they are irreplaceable. With the vast competition and talent in the workforce, these jobs without the unions, would create a more competitive environment, granted they make the same wages, thus would attract more competent individuals and broaden the spectrum of efficiency. (Case in point unions were formed to keep the employer from taking advantage of the employee, in today’s world that would never happen, employees will forever have the upper hand over the employer) UNIOINS NEED TO GO!!!
— american_made (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 10:20:02 PM | | Votes: -1

The scary thing is this is increasing government and a President who 'chooses' who is deserving of a bailout.

Totally against the principles of how our country was founded.

001
— Agent001 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 7:03:02 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

whats wrong with a big government? are we not a big country? if america is REALLY a democracy, then why is everyone so afraid of the government? we ARE the government.

and which principle in particular are we abandoning?

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 11:21:50 PM | | Votes: 1

1995,

"whats wrong with a big government? are we not a big country? if america is REALLY a democracy, then why is everyone so afraid of the government? we ARE the government."

I would hope after some reflection that you come to realize that the above is a circular argument (circulus in probando). I very veiled and clever one, but one nonetheless. What you have basically said is this:

1) Why should we be afraid of the government?

2) We are the Government.

3) Why should we be afraid of ourselves?

The last is the implied conclusion of your argument. You established equivalence in line 2 ; making lines 3 and 1 equal. It is circular.

Furthermore, when they say that "we are the government"- they do no mean literally. The government is an exterior entity in reality.

Also, the United States is not a democracy- it is a Republic.
— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 9:15:06 AM | | Votes: 1

i agree that the united states is a republic. that was actually part of my point. can we really claim the united states to be great if we have such a disdain for our government? shouldn't we instead say the united states is a great collection of loosely tied individuals? i don't think so. the united states is great; us as a COLLECTIVE, that have helped squash tyranny and allowed great technology and knowledge to flourish.

as well, the government is not a separate entity. just about everyone in the government is a u.s. citizen. the are on our payroll. we employ them. the are not the goddamn boogie man. that attitude is completely counterproductive to the progress of mankind. it helps further the timothy mcveighs of this world that want to sit around polishing their rifle reading the turner diaries, looking for interracial couples to murder.

i can see fearing a government that was an occupying force. maybe some day when martians run d.c., i may fear it. i think there are some entities that have got their hooks in our government that are legitimate cause for concern.

we are not helpless victims of the state. we are the masters of the state. this country is ours. the government is a powerful tool that will bring justice and yes, stable and free markets.

god bless america.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 11:16:45 AM | | Votes: 1

<Chuckle>

I have no need to add anything you what I have already said on this matter, even in light of your comment.

— anataxis (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:33:05 PM | | Votes: 1

Hell,

That is like the 8,000th time that has happened.
— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 1:07:03 PM | | Votes: 1

WE ALL KNEW THEY WOULD FAIL!!!....the Chrysler Fiat cars will be a fiasco and will go the way of the Daimler-Chrysler union.....GM will be smaller but I don't think any smarter....Ford will eventually end up selling more of it's european inspired models. IF and WHEN the market ever 'picks up' again.....the public will only continue to avoid these failed companies and their products.
— doctorproctor (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 7:17:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Oh you mean principles like:

1. White Supremacy

2. White Male Supremacy

3. Overbearing Fundamentalist Christian Talibanequse Values

4. Laissez Faire Capitalism

5. Free Market Feudalism

6. Hypocracy over real Freedom and Justice.

7. White Immigrants being allowed to come over to be superior to people who have every right to be here.

— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 8:42:44 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -6

you are a delusional soviet style revolutionary
— lexusrox123 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 9:09:04 AM | | Votes: 1

With the way you Hicks act, now I see why the Europeans oppressed you.
— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 8:43:43 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -7

Right on baby!!!Hyundai is the biggest bitch racist on this site!!!
— roundwego (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 7:40:23 AM | | Votes: 5

In a way the government did not fail to do what they wanted to do with Chrysler.
The only party who's really really screwed is Cerberus.
The others are just mildly screwed.
— monkeyrun (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 10:00:50 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

001 - do you have a better solution? If your ideas are so much better, why don't you call the White House and speak up.
— SixxFive (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 10:06:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

I tried!

001
— Agent001 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/30/2009 11:31:25 PM | | Votes: 0

Liar, you were too busy hanging out at bimmerfest to care.
— Badgewhore (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:13:23 AM | | Votes: 3

or better yet, don't Agent 001. We just had stupid people running things for 8 years. It's about damn time you just shut the f*** up, sit back, and watch Obama fix this thing.
— DinamoR (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:15:00 AM | | Votes: -2

Hey BimmerMike46, I'm a Black man. White.
— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:12:29 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

can you sour grapes right wing clowns stop whinning about Obama? you were in charge for 8 years and we have nothing but a disaster after a disaster to show for it. The two times in the last 100 years when republicans had the most power (president and biggest majorities in house and senate) where 2001-2007 and first half of 1920's. Funny how both times were followed by the biggest economic disaster in the last 100 years also.

Did you morons know Detroit would go bankrupt when you killed all fuel efficiency/electric car progress and promoted hummers and tahoes? DID YOU? no you didn't, because you're that stupid.
— DinamoR (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:13:03 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

I understand that going to the library is hard, but there's this wonderful thing called, "the Internets." If you just take a quick look, you'll see that Mr George Bush is the one who began throwing money at Chrysler.

Mr Obama's government has orchestrated a bankrupcy, which the bloodthirsty have been calling for for months.

Seems like good, responsible deal making, to me.

When the right wing begins to have real policy initiatives other than blaming Obama and Pelosi for their dyspepsia, it will be good for the nation.

— LauderdaleDriver (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:18:40 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Awww man, I wonder whats going to happen to the Dodge Pickup Trucks White Conservatives like to put Confederate flags on. Plays Banjo!!!! "Ah blung bink"

— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:23:02 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

Its funny that some hicks even like to put Confederate Flags on a Japanese truck!!! LMAO!!!
— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:26:10 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

I can't believe anyone likes Obama and Biden.

Biden is a dolt and Obama is an inexperienced dummy.
— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 12:54:37 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

McCain and Palin sure would have been a breath of fresh air! Yea right!
— 0to60 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 10:36:40 AM | | Votes: 2

I grew up in Camden, NJ 35 miles from Delaware, and I grew up with Biden. Hes a great man. A good Example for Young American White men who want to change their ways from their Colonial Racist upbringings, leave him alone.
— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 1:01:11 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

OK..I'm going to let ya'll in on a little secret...There isn't "a Dimes worth of Difference" between the Republicans and the Democrats...They are OWNED by the same Oligarchs that Really run this country.

Why would "THEY" crash the American Economy...Simple,YOU are being paid TOO MUCH...that effects "THEIR" profitability...THEY need to De-Industrialize America.

Over the next 40-50 years, China will grow as an economic power,and will develop a "Middle Class" of aprox. 750 million people... during this same time period America will enter into a prolonged Depression that will take the US down to 2nd or 3rd world levels.

Maybe at the end of all this (in 40 years) THEY may decide to "Re-Industrialize" the United States so that we can sell Cheap Useless Crap to China.

Before that happens...THEY need to drive down American Wages to a point where YOU (or your Children) will be grateful to work 12 to 16 hours a day..6 days a week.

Welcome to Serfdom.
— TheDepressingTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 2:29:09 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

yeah, yeah...world bank, reptile-alien-jew ruling class...if they are THAT powerful, why even bother with the charades?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 5:25:29 PM | | Votes: 0

You are right. When people that are not rich crys about the man next to him having a job that takes care of the bills and health care over the a company instead of fighting for the same rights you know we are in trouble.
— uaw_lax (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 8:09:58 PM | | Votes: 1

More like, go hang out in the prison yards with you bros.
— roundwego (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 7:41:38 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Let's look at it this way. You see a company that has been losing money for more than a year continuously.. They have no good future plans and their current products are garbage, even the latest ones. Would giving them less than 5 months and helping them financially get them back on their feet? It was obvious they are going to fail..

On the other hand, while GM has been losing money too, their latest products are promising and their quality is finally up with the rest of the world.. this is why GM has a much better chance than Chrysler.. They actually have something they are working on, not just paying debts.
— M53R (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 6:38:56 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

For the many people who are out of work, let's just hope things work themselves out. I prefer seeing employed Americans rather than employed asians.
— roundwego (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 7:43:22 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Stop being racist. It's not like other countries don't have Americans working there.
— M53R (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 10:30:57 AM | | Votes: -1

STFU you pansy.
— roundwego (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 2:37:00 PM | | Votes: 0

Very nice of you.
— M53R (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 4:25:26 PM | | Votes: -2

I see this as a kinda embarassment for Obama. He had them come to washington to beg for the money. He gives them their billions, and then the company fails anyways. So was this a waste of our money and we just held up the inevitable or were they doing this on purpose cause they knew they were holding out for a merger and since Nissan fell through Fiat was next in line.

Aside from that, I'm glad Nardelli is out. The man drove down Home Depot for years and then didn't do much better for Chrysler. I guess bringing it outside help from people who know nothing of the auto industry doesn't help either.

And another note. Why is the governmnet and president proclaiming the bankruptcy instead of the company itself? Last I knew, I had more stock in Chrysler than Obama did since he used my money to help them.
— Whelan (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 11:45:06 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

He probably somewhat knew they were going to fail...but gave the Company too many chances to redeem themselves.
— Type707 (View Profile)

Posted on 5/1/2009 4:23:16 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

I love the way you guys deboost me. The more you dont like my posts, the more I realize I have the right point of view. Most Americans are Stupid, Ignorant, and Naive anyway. We dont even have to talk about social issues on that one. Just look at the stupid cars and trucks most of you drive, and love.

High output, inferior fuel efficiency, redundant coupe shapes that look like penis extensions, Trucks that take up a lane and a half, slush cars with the MPG of a truck and limited cargo capacity, clown car small sedans, and overinflated prices. Lmao!!!

So, Why would I want to have a point of view that most of you agree upon? Come on now lmao!!!!

1. Most of you guys are Panicky (i.e. Swine Flu, 911, a Black man being president, not spending money in an economy that reqiures people to spend in order to grow only making the economy even worse).

2. Racist (We dont have to give examples on that one).

3. Most of you jump to wild conclusions as if you are Paranoid Schizophrenics (i.e. Obama is a Arab, a Black Nationalist, wants to make White people slaves, wants to take away all guns, etc...).

4. Most of you are stupid (you gave W 2 terms, no wonder why the kids are just as stupid).

5. Most Americans are selfish (i.e the type of people who would see a homeless Black person out on the street and scream, "Get a Job Nigg-her").

6. Most Americans Believe in outdated philosophies (i.e. White Male Supremacy, If you dont vote you shoudlnt complain, we should be the worlds cop when we have so many domestic
psycho/socio/economic/moral/infrastructure concerns that will destroy us faster than any of you hicks can say Obama Bin Laden)

By the way, before you Immigrants say if youre so unhappy why dont you move out. Remember that Iam Black, which gives me more right to say what I'm saying and more right to be unhappy.

— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/2/2009 3:52:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Oh, and more right to be here than you people.
— HyundaiSmoke (View Profile)

Posted on 5/2/2009 3:53:05 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]

Email Me When Someone Replies To My Message

So Here's The REAL Question On The Chrysler/GM Deals- Do You Think Obama KNEW They Would Fail BEFORE He Bailed Them Out?

About the Author

User Comments

Add your Comments

Submit an article

Photo Galleries

Cars

Autoshows

Latest Articles