	Agent009 "The vanity of others offends our taste only when it offends our vanity"
	View My AgentSpace

Which Of These Three Is The Best Hope For US Automakers?

Agent009 submitted on 04/24/2008 Official AutoSpies Timestamp: 1:52 PM
from: www.autospies.com

[76] user comments | category: Misc News

Print this Page |

Digg It |

del.icio.us

Which Of These Three Is The Best Hope For US Automakers?

With plummeting sales and an economy that many think is on the verge of a recession. The outlook for US automakers isn’t exactly looking the best. After years of investing in a fat cow market selling gas guzzling SUVs, the bottom has literally fallen out of the market with the rise in fuel costs. Investing too much in short term gain, and not enough in for the long haul the big three found they were in a poor position for a dramatic shift in buyer needs.

Whether or not these wounds are self inflicted or not, we might soon face the fact that the traditional “big three”, might become the “big two”, or even the "only one". This has happened in the past, with American Motors Corporation (AMC), famous for such abominations as the Pacer and the Gremlin in the 80’s, sold out in 1987 from a similar situation. We could also be seeing and much different picture today, if there wasn’t a federal bailout of Chrysler in 1979, when Chrysler faltered. And yet again Chrysler seems to be back in exactly the same situation as before.

Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have come down on the side of the automakers for a federal bailout if need, while John McCain steadfastly refuses federal intervention.

So the big question is does the US government need to bailout the automakers if they can’t recover similar to Chrysler received in the past? Poor planning doesn't give you an excuse for a bailout.

After all there are a lot of jobs and livelihoods at stake here and should these people pay the price for poor leadership?

Let us know which of today’s candidates offers a safe harbor for these companies and what guarantees should the government get if a company receives the assistance?

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://agent004.myautospies.com/users/150/Sample-Gallery/sample1.JPG[/img]

GodfatherSHM - 4/24/2008 2:12:26 PM

+23 Boost

The real question is, do you believe what any of the canidates are going to say about helping those companies? No...Obama and Clinton only say they will help because they want the union votes, and McCain says they won't intervene because he is trying to be anti big brother. In my opinion it is not the governments job to save these companies, it is their fault for putting themselves in the situations that they are in, and they have to deal with the consequences. Yes it might affect lots of people, but after all the strikes/assembly line shut downs, because they wanted MORE money and MORE days off, which are considerably more than I make, and there fore it has caused the price of cars to soar, I do not feel sorry for anyone. If I make bad decisions there is no one there bailing me out, I have to face the music, so should over greedy corporations.

reply to this comment

M35MT - 4/24/2008 4:04:46 PMView My AgentSpace

+11 Boost

Very well said. I didnt exactly support the recent wall st welfare w/ Bear Stearns either. I like what McCain says, hopefully he follows through on it.

Oh, and, there's a difference between communication/strategy, and just handing over billions to 'bail them out'. I'm all for cummication, but dont just hand over money.

EI34 - 4/24/2008 2:36:05 PM

-5 Boost

Is that McCain in the middle? 8-P

reply to this comment

w209w114 - 4/24/2008 2:36:22 PMView My AgentSpace

-2 Boost

That picture is great!!!! I'm voting for McCain regarless. Just my preference. I dont trust Obama and Hillary is a socialist fanatic.

Neither Democrats have presented any economic stimulus plans such as what John McCain has done for this immediate summer, instead of waiting until he's president to do something about the economy then. After the speeches and rallies and biased media coverage is over, this just goes to show who really cares.

reply to this comment

M35MT - 4/24/2008 4:12:49 PMView My AgentSpace

+3 Boost

Hillary a socialist fanatic? Boderline Communist...

w209w114 - 4/24/2008 4:32:59 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

M35MT, lol I didnt wanna use the C word but since you mentioned it! :)

cdoke - 4/24/2008 7:19:36 PMView My AgentSpace

-1 Boost

"I was born in the Soviet Union"

That isn't an argument. Ayn Rand was born in Russia- in fact she witnessed the Russian revolution. There can be no doubt to anyone who has read her, what her opinion would be on this matter as her writings were certainly not ambiguous. She admittedly probably would use the word "statist" is lieu of socialist or communist, however.

cdoke - 4/25/2008 12:09:41 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

That message was to a messsage that...well isn't there anylonger. You cannot use birth as an argument for something that has little to do with it. In particular when there is no unianimous position among those of the same birth- which is the point above.

bimmerfan25 - 4/25/2008 11:30:06 PM

+2 Boost

people born in the soviet union would know what communism is, unlike some stooge who just listens to the brainwashing propaganda of the right wing media

cdoke - 4/26/2008 5:19:07 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

You fool. Ayn Rand was there saw it and hated any form of government intervention in the economy. The message that disappeared was of an antithetical position to hers. It isn't an logical argument. period.

Logic is used because it is universally understood and requires no specific life experience to understand. Yes, living in the Soviet Union (not being born there necessarily) does give one first hand knowledge of the subject, but it does not give exclusive knowledge, nor does it make any presupposition about the role of the government in the economy correct.

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 2:39:28 AM

0 Boost

people need to ALSO consider, pendulums swinging from one extreme to ANOTHER.

i have actually enjoyed reading ayn rand in my innocent youth. i still respect her as a STORYTELLER.

but POLITICALLY, i place her slightly to the right of Genghis Khan!

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 2:46:09 AM

+1 Boost

i also have an acquaintance, who verges on being a neo-nazi. he is of Cuban heritage, so it is somewhat inderstandable, altho' it is difficult to be SYMPATHETIC.

his family was likely upper middle class before Castro booted out Batista and his neo-fascist regime. but he himself is a laborer/tradesman.

his support of the GOPpies is actually against HIS OWN economic interest. identifying with his grandpappy's interests makes him favor policies against HIS OWN current interests.

cdoke - 4/27/2008 9:53:08 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

For the love of God- unless you managed to see the post that was removed, my comment makes little sense.

I am not arguing Ayn Rand's politic! A certin supposition was made, Ayn Rand is an example of the antithesis from the same starting point.

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 2:43:14 PM

+3 Boost

There is probably only room for the big 2 now. A spokesperson on talk radio said: “We have to stop paying people $50 per hour to hang a bumper on a car” Well the reality is that many US jobs fall into this same category. By targeting sections of our economy like this, what we are really saying is that we should all strive for lower pay and thus a lower standard of living. How many people even know their true cost of a doctor visit these days? Everyone is reaching for more and giving and getting less.
Our country needs to decide if we want to build cars anymore. And if not, we will be obligated to spend big on retraining the autoworkers. But the bigger question is:
What does the US produce anymore?
How many desk jobs can we really have?
How many more insurance policies can we write?
I would think the market is saturated in these fields already.
That said, the big 3 hitting people with $40,000 loans for 4 years was asking too much of working class families struggling to pay a mortgage and a hefty car payment that never seemed to end. Then the car at trade-in is worth less than the amount they still owe (“Upside down in the loan”)

reply to this comment

M35MT - 4/24/2008 4:24:01 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

No one should be making 50/hr for standing on an assembly line. Especially in the south where we build our cars, where the cost of living is incredibly cheap.

That's the problem, the American worker always complains, wants to work less, get paid more, have more time off. LAZY.

Bmw8ter - 4/24/2008 10:12:03 PM

+5 Boost

"the American worker always complains, wants to work less, get paid more, have more time off. LAZY."

You mean the American "Union" Worker.

A nonunion worker will ask you "what do you want and when do you need it, because I don't get any benefits, and I can lose my job for not producing results or no reason at all?"

The majority of Americans, in general, will kill themselves with work just to make ends meet.

That's a piss-poor generalization there, moron.

arnmsctt - 4/25/2008 12:04:14 PM

+3 Boost

"You mean the American "Union" Worker."

I've always just come to this website to read articles and hear differing opinions. However, I had to register so I could respond to BMW8ter's comment. My father has worked at GM/Delphi for 30+ years and is a member of the union. He raised me to be a hard-working, open-minded person who values education. He's far from lazy and that may be the reason he's one of the few union-workers with 30+ years that is still employed at the Delphi plant in Dayton. However, when calling someone else a moron for generalizing, please don't do the same. I'm not very easily offended, nor do I usually take comments on forums personally, but this was an exception. I've heard stories from my father about many of his coworkers being lazy and such, but he's also spoken of many coworkers that are dedicated to their job and take pride in making quality products. The lazy to hard-working ratio may be slightly worse for unionized occupations but a ratio does exist.

In short, stereotypes are never 100% correct.

Sort of a side note, he's said several times that the head of the union is one of the best politicians he's seen. Very two-faced.

zorbeeze - 4/25/2008 12:54:15 PM

+1 Boost

"the American worker always complains"
Wow, talk about generalizing a whole countries population. No, not every American worker is lazy and not even the majority. A small minority of Americans can be considered to be lazy and they always go for unionized jobs. Because that's the only place they can get a job. Non-union corporations would fire these people within a month of employment. The problem is the Union itself. People should be held accountable for their actions and there are a few people who take advantage of the Union system and do not do their job.

Bmw8ter - 4/25/2008 3:34:32 PM

+2 Boost

arnmsctt....my comment isn't to say that all union workers are lazy. In my current experience on a construciton project, managing the contracts for nothing but union workers, these guys are a bunch of bums. The mindset is "why spend 100 hours completing a task, when I can spend 1000 hours and still have a job and benefits?". This kind of complacency is what runs costs through the roof.

We pay workers $50+/hour just to stand around waiting for a delivery that their craft can unload. Whoa now!!! don't let an iron worker unload something electrical, because there will be a fist fight in the yard, and the BAs will swarm this place screaming BREACH!!!

Then there's the bus operator that makes $60/hour driving a van alllll day long. This guy just ripped a $6k+ payday in one weeks time by slipping under the radar and working more than 40hrs; and still has a job.

For every 1 good union worker, there seems to be about 5 bad ones.

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 2:58:29 PM

+4 Boost

The big 3 are now headed in a new direction, Satisfy Wall Street first. Putting investors ahead of the customer is a big mistake. The big 3 don’t care about number of units sold anymore. It is now about the amount of profit on each car.
The big three should keep producing and sell them cheaper so more people can afford them. They are overlooking the working poor market.
Ford should build a modern day Model A. Big, cheap and durable. With the ailing economy, and people losing their homes, people will likely be packing up and moving to different cities to find work, they will need a cheap vehicle that they can pack their “folded tent” into without going bankrupt by funding a high car payment.
No one needs highly complex cars anymore where you need to be a rocket scientist in order to maintain it.
Years ago people kept cars for 6 to 10 years, because they were built to last. People were able to save money by maintaining them themselves in the driveway. Today most of the cars being sold are built as disposable, far to complex for most people to work on them.

reply to this comment

Hantra - 4/24/2008 3:18:08 PMView My AgentSpace

+4 Boost

>>"The big 3 are now headed in a new direction, Satisfy Wall Street first. Putting investors ahead of the customer is a big mistake."

The US GOVERNMENT is now headed in a new direction, Satisfy Wall Street first. Putting COMPANIES and LOBBYISTS ahead of the taxpayer is a big mistake.

Which is why it makes no difference which of these three get in whatsoever. They're all taking us in the same direction.

1000rrRider - 4/24/2008 3:09:19 PM

+4 Boost

The big three should offer car insurance with their leases. Along with oil companies insurance companies are ripping people off big-time and combined with high fuel prices most people can't afford new American cars / SUVs which are not very fuel efficient.

reply to this comment

w209w114 - 4/24/2008 3:30:29 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

Right. And the world has been ending since it began. Go hide in your cave.

reply to this comment

GodfatherSHM - 4/24/2008 4:02:51 PM

+8 Boost

the collapse of the US will not be Republican or Democrat, to say so is just plain ignorant. It is government driven as a whole. No politician in office listens/cares about what the people are saying. People need to keep political bias out of this to truly see the real problem. I blame BOTH sides of the aisle, and anyone can find fault in anything that either side does.

reply to this comment

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 2:59:05 AM

+2 Boost

a bit simplistic, don't you think?

look at the state of the country today. compare it to the state at the end of the clinton administration.

the bushites have RUN THE COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND.

with the state of the national debt, why are the richest 5% paying EVEN LESS TAXES, while the rest of us get a one time PALTRY $600 'rebate' and DEBTS our GRANDKIDS will still be paying off? the whole middle class is UPside DOWN with respect to debts vs. whatever gov't "benefits" we got. (including the most stupid, useless war we ever got conned into.)

1995e34 - 4/28/2008 12:36:07 AM

+1 Boost

i can certainly blame the dems for one thing: not having the balls to say PRIOR to the iraq war that it was a scam. they let their political careers get in the way of doing the right thing and blocking the war. nobody believed saddam was a threat. not bush. not clinton. nobody.

why didn't they speak up? the "liberal" media was being so sympathetic to the bush administration, they never questioned any of it. if the media was half as liberal as people claim, gulf war 2 would never have happened.

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 3:13:34 PM

+3 Boost

All of the candidates are trying to throw the American people a bone. Choose your poison, either tax-free gas or free healthcare. Take your pick. Either way, this economy is headed for tough times.
As much as I agree that the UAW needs to face reality and expect realistic pay that is in-line with the rest of the world, not bailing out the auto industry or not retraining the army of autoworkers will be the Third blow to our economy, like the Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisis, Credit Banking Crisis and Energy Crisis that Alan Greenspan quietly swept under the carpet. We must be vigilant and proactive to advert a further downward spiral.
If the UAW became unemployable overnight back in the 70s, this would have been a doomsday scenario for the US. The president would be on TV detailing recovery plans for the nation. Today it is like a football game. Choose your side, and boo the loser, as there are no winners in this game.

reply to this comment

1000rrRider - 4/24/2008 3:20:24 PM

+1 Boost

When the US is in a big recession it is still way better off then any other country in the world during their most booming times.

reply to this comment

andraz - 4/25/2008 1:56:19 AM

+2 Boost

Aha, do you know there are countries outside of USA borders? That do fairly well?

1000rrRider - 4/25/2008 10:30:33 AM

+1 Boost

Sure there are countries with tiny populations like Bermuda, UAE, Switzerland, and Luxemburg which do well but they are small and almost irrelevant in size. Even if China with it’s 1.3 billion people catches up to the US in Total GDP some day. It will never match the US in per capita GDP. I also believe that like with most laptops and plasma TVs it’s only a matter of time when most parts and less expensive cars from all manufacturers will be built in China.

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 3:29:00 PM

+3 Boost

The New York State Car Inspection is like the Spanish Inquisition now, most people are forced to buy a new car every few years, or face huge repair bills to get the cars within the State parameters.
I have been purchasing the same American car for years now, on the basis that the model I drive is the lowest cost to insure, a huge factor here in New York State. Fuel economy is a far less consideration in comparison to the cost of Insurance. The triple 5-star crash rating is paramount from a cost standpoint.
Insurance, Inspection and the nearly 10% Sales Tax eclipses all other expenses including the interest on the loan.
I haven’t really seen crash ratings this high from the imports. Within the domestic cars a select few have had this rating for over a decade. These ratings are set by the Insurance instate, so there is no fudge factoring here.

reply to this comment

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 3:36:35 PM

+2 Boost

Oh yea. If your car doesn’t pass New York Sate Inspection, you have to turn over your keys, because you forbidden to drive it home. You can arrange to have it flat bedded though. However, it is expensive to get the voided inspection sticker removed as a detailed work detail is required to get it reversed. Essentially the Car’s computer under the hood is uploaded to Albany.

reply to this comment

EnnNorak - 4/24/2008 4:00:34 PM

0 Boost

I'm opposed to any state regulation of the auto industry or private vehicles. State and Canadian provinces are into the vehicle inspection game because dealer bodies have unduly influenced politicians so that dealers can make more money ripping off consumers on inspection fees.

Let's stop this left-wing government war on the auto industry as cars are responsible for only a small overall share of planetary pollution. Auto safety regulations benefit the insurance industry and enhance the big brother role of government and takes away your right to determine how much of your family budget should be spent on safety rather than basic survival like food and housing. If your house is in foreclosure and you have to feed junk food and soft drinks to your kids why would you want to be forced to spend on safety when you are the best person to evaluate risk based on the overall condition of the vehicle and your driving habits.

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 3:58:39 PM

+1 Boost

Everyone bashes the US autos with the term Gas Guzzler. But I see the New Lexus Flagship is now bigger taller and wider than even the Town Car Stretch model.
Yesterday I saw a Toyota Hylander go roaring by me on the Thruway. The Hylander is a huge 4x4 vehicle. How much gas does it guzzle at 80MPH? It can’t weigh much less than a Lincoln Navigator as they are nearly the same size. I think Honda and Toyota just have better marketing teams, and better TV commercials. “Buy a Honda and we will get you past the gas station.” Does anyone driving a Toyota 4x4 really believe this utopian concept? Cars and trucks have engines people, that burn fossil fuels, end of story. There is no avoiding the obvious. A front grille emblem will not change this. Maybe going downhill with a tailwind you might see a half gallon per mile difference, not even enough savings to buy you a cup of coffee.

reply to this comment

0to60 - 4/25/2008 5:36:18 PM

+1 Boost

A highlander???? A highlander isnt THAT big! Who let grandpa near the computer again!?!

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 3:08:15 AM

+1 Boost

LOL! highlanders even have (or at least had) FOUR cylinder base engines.

rocker - 4/24/2008 4:13:15 PM

+1 Boost

Reagan(and I loved this man) should have never bailed out Iacocca and Chrysler. I do not like Iacocca and I do not think he helped America, he was trying to save face. Go jump in a Pinto or a K-car. This is what we have to thank Iacocca for. Public or private, you should manage your company to make money, if not shut the doors. A few people or a few thousand losinf their jobs is better than risking an entire nation.

reply to this comment

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 4:19:51 PM

+2 Boost

Time to get Lee Iacocca out of retirement and back on the test track with Cars Zig Zagging behind him.
We’ve been down this road before. Chrysler in 1979 and Ford in 1986.
The Lebaron Convertible and the Chrysler Minivan and more importantly the industry first 5/50 Warrantee saved Chrysler from going under, and brought them back to profitability and popularity. This was a bold move and a “thinking outside the box” step to a dismal situation. Remember, at the same time the US was facing a scary Energy Crisis, with “We will not Freeze in the Dark” slogans and gas stations posting out of gas signs everywhere. But good olde Iacocca saved us all. He even upped the ante the following year by giving us 7 years 70,000 mile warranties on trucks, an unheard of concept at the time. This guy is a true American legend.
Then the Taurus Saved Ford in 1986. For $12,995 you could buy a brand new Taurus your choice Wagon or Sedan same price. This was a tremendous value for struggling families. Even the poor were driving them as a more luxurious alternative to taking the bus. And this was a car with generous proportions, certainly not an econo-box.
The big three need to bring back innovation and value for the money.

reply to this comment

adamsaf723 - 4/24/2008 4:23:33 PM

+1 Boost

There are much more important things I think the presidential candidates should be worrying about. Americans don't have federal assistance towards car companies are their dealbreakers for the election.

reply to this comment

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 4:36:59 PM

+1 Boost

Oh yea, the reason Reagan bailed out Chrysler? Chrysler was building our Army Tanks. Which meant No Chrysler, no tanks, and a risk to the security of our nation.
Of course today we might want to think about outsourcing our outdated Army Tank production to China as the only thing the US has left to export is our technology and jobs since we no longer build anything anymore. Hopefully China will remain our friends because with a little bit of red spray paint they could easily change the White American Star to a Red Chinese Star for less than 5 cents per Army tank. There’s Chinese efficiency for you.

reply to this comment

TTRaceRR - 4/25/2008 6:20:04 PM

+1 Boost

REAGAN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH BAILING OUT CHRYSLER. As a matter of fact, REAGAN OPPOSED ANY TYPE OF LOAN GUARANTEES as he later revealed. Reagan would have let the company fail putting tens of thousands of employees and craftsman out of work from Chrysler and hundreds of other suppliers. Carter was president when the bank loans were simply guaranteed or backed by the US government. CHRYSLER REPAID THE LOANS EARLY. Contrary to popular belief, CHRYSLER DID NOT RECEIVE ANY MONEY FROM THE US GOVERNMENT. I say bring back Iaccoca and elect him president and get us out of this economic disaster that has been brought opon us by the current administration.

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 4:51:45 PM

+3 Boost

The US needs to re-think this policy of the relentless pursuit of selling labor jobs to the lowest bidder.
I love the Chinese people, I just dislike their leadership that bans the importation US goods, but freely accepts our jobs. It needs to be a two way street and we will all benefit.

reply to this comment

mini22 - 4/24/2008 4:57:43 PM

+2 Boost

Look everyone makes good points here. My biggest gripe is to make sure that the 3 US auto makers start out on the same footing as the imports that have plants in the US.I'm guessing for example no unions,reduced hourly wages and reduced healthcare costs.As long as that is the same for everyone then the playing field is equal. At that point the US auto makers are on their own. The point is the cost to produce a small car should be the same for GM as it is for Hyundai.

reply to this comment

mercuryguy - 4/24/2008 5:35:22 PM

+2 Boost

The big auto plants are dangerous places to work; people get injured there, daily. Getting rid of the labor unions in exchange for worker’s safety may not be the best idea.

reply to this comment

blacktip007 - 4/24/2008 5:56:04 PM

0 Boost

+1 for kraut master... you numb nuts who dont follow european history are doomed to repeat things that have been shown to be wrong. This society eats its young. Social darwinism is cool until you are the one at the bottom of the food pyramid. Hopefully the process works and we reach a point of equilibrium. In the end the sweetness you think you are eating may become your poison.

reply to this comment

EL34 - 4/24/2008 6:23:25 PM

-7 Boost

We;re you all waiting for me to chime in on this political discussion :-?

I thought so :-o

First off there's no way a staunch Republican will ever get elected President because of the war in Iraq.

Second off I don't think silly Hillary or bonehead Barack can get elected because of too many goof-ups.

So therefore, ex-POW John 'punk' McCain will be elected and of course he will choose me to be Director of Real Estate.

PS, there is nothing wrong with the auto industry, it just needs some of you to get up off your @$$3$ and buy a new car, preferably American ;->

reply to this comment

CommonSense01 - 4/24/2008 7:53:40 PM

+2 Boost

"We;re you all waiting for me to chime in on this political discussion :-?"

No.

reply to this comment

ICON - 4/25/2008 1:53:13 AM

+1 Boost

coprius...you have got to be joking or out of your mind..."There's nothing wrong with socialism and it sure as hell beats capitalism"?

Please give me an example of where socialism has been a big success????

"It's about time we make the rich people pay their fair share!" ?????WTF Joking right?

You sound like the typical ignorant - emotion driven - fact devoid underachiever who doesn't even know that the top 1% of all wage earners (those making $295,000 and above) pay over 34% of all Federal Income Tax yet earn less than 17% of all the income earned.

What would make you happy? That top wage earners pay 50-60-70% of all federal taxes?

How about some personal responsiblilty as the modus operendi for our country and let people improve their own lot without thinking that the govt is going to fix their lives...and let industries like the auto industry compete on an equal footing with their foreign counterparts.

Taxing success and initiative is the fastest way to destroy an economy. I never got a job from a poor person...

And if you feel like becoming a little more enlightened consider the following quote by
A great man from humble circumstances who once said,

"There is not, of necessity, any such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. . . . The prudent, penniless beginner in the world labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself; then labors on his own account for awhile, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This is . . . the just, and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way for all — gives hope to all, and . . . improvement of conditions to all. If any continue through life in the condition of the hired laborer, it is not the fault of the system, but because of either a dependent nature which prefers it, or improvidence, folly, or singular misfortune."
-Abraham Lincoln

Got that off my chest....so tired of ignorance, but not as "bitter" as Obama. :)

back to autos......

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 4/25/2008 10:29:18 AM

-1 Boost

socialism has been a success in france, the united states, allover.

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 4/25/2008 10:30:49 AM

-1 Boost

can you name a single country that actually has totally free markets?

reply to this comment

ICON - 4/25/2008 1:18:05 PM

0 Boost

"socialism has been a success in france, the united states, allover" pretty generic and unsubstantiated statement.

France's new president is trying to reverse the course of their socialistic course because they are not a competitive nation. And when was the US considered a socialistic country? Stop blathering and don't let facts confuse you.

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 4/25/2008 3:31:29 PM

0 Boost

iguess corporate welfare isn't exactly socialist. what would you call it?

our markets are far less free than we want to think they are, though.

the fact is, the united states isn't socialist OR capitalist. it's a mixed economy including free and planned aspects. why does everyone pretend there aren't massive portions of our economy that are planned? does nobody read?

we have public schools, libraries, fire departments, roads, military, parks, etc...

why pretend we are something that we are not?

who are we fooling?

i don't let the facts confuse me, i let them enlighten me. anyone that believes the united states is a capitalist country is fooling themselves. i don't know of any capitalist countries, and furthermore, i'm not sure any have ever existed.

the whole point in becoming a nation is to be able to do as a community what we can't do as individuals. to preserve our safety, health, education, and economic prosperity. it's just a degree of how much power you entrust in your community.

reply to this comment

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 3:50:18 AM

+2 Boost

this is MOST amusing. despite the nominal ideology of the leadership, it can be said that one of the MOST CAPITALISTIC countries today is CHINA!

yep. you read that right. look at all their highly successful factories, outcompeting those in just about every other country! chinese merchants have also been NATURAL, EXPERT capitalists for HUNDREDS of years.

AND, a large part of their CURRENT success, is their adopting some of the ROBBER BARON practices of late 18th century america: EXPLOITATION of workers.

they have also retreated from one of their base commie promises: the "Iron Ricebowl."

russia's now booming economy is following the chinese model: state supported rampant capitalism. with an american twist: unsuppressed GANGSTERISM!

you guys still hung up on the capitalist vs. communism 'conflict' need to WAKE UP and wipe the scales off your eyes. BOTH SYSTEMS have pluses and minuses. until the general american populace WAKES UP to this basic fact, we will NEVER be able to compete on an equitable basis.

HOW a gov't manages the mix to the benefit of the majority (masses if you will) is what counts in the end.

among the basic SOCIALIST policies we MUST adopt to be competitive in the 21st century, is state guaranteed HEALTH CARE for all, and FREE higher education for all that qualify, to the highest levels any given individual is capable of.

much of this can be paid for by eliminating CORPORATE welfare (including in the "defense" industries), and savings from reforming our health care industry, the MOST INEFFICIENT among advanced nations.

reply to this comment

EL34 - 4/24/2008 8:15:47 PM

-3 Boost

Anyone hear Hillary say the famous Truman line "If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen"?

I doubt if Hillary could scramble an egg :-\

I know for sure I wouldn't drive with her. She would be yelling the entire trip.

reply to this comment

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 3:56:08 AM

+2 Boost

yeah, you probably can't even BOIL WATER either.

1995e34 - 4/24/2008 10:03:12 PM

+1 Boost

we may need to ween corporations off welfare. they are used to subsidies, and i'm not sure america is ready for the individual fiscal restraints REAL free markets require.

reply to this comment

andraz - 4/25/2008 1:58:48 AM

+2 Boost

One note:
even Obama is considered mid to right wing politician in Europe.

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 4/25/2008 10:19:20 AM

+1 Boost

in the grand scheme, he really is rather moderate.

mercuryguy - 4/25/2008 2:09:23 AM

+2 Boost

I heard on Nightly Business Report (PBS) this evening that Ford just made a big comeback and posted a $100M profit. It surprised Wall Street, which actually expected a 15 cent loss in earnings per share. Here is the kicker though; the profit wasn’t made by selling more cars. This profit was made primarily due to sending large numbers of workers off to early retirement. Wow, Some comeback.
Usually plants that adopt a “Do more with less”, attitude find that innovation gets replaced with conformity and then quality suffers as a result. No one wants to do the job of 4 to 5 missing people.
It amazes me, that Ford, with it high technology used in building the new V12, 600Hp engine for the 2009 Aston Martin, can’t use that technology to build a better sedan that is affordable to the masses.

reply to this comment

mercuryguy - 4/25/2008 2:27:13 AM

+1 Boost

Here is a better strategy for Ford:
Ford Division Lineup:
Trucks Only. This division should have mostly Commercial Showrooms for people buying vehicles for work and industry. Vehicle Segments: Pickups, a few SUVs, Pickups, Commercial Trucks and Diesels.
Mercury:
Cars-Sedans and Crossovers only. No Trucks. Since Mercury already has better trim levels and more luxury, price these cars at the entry level Ford price point. V6 twin Turbos and small Diesels power plants.
Lincoln:
Luxury Cars Only and some select Luxury Crossovers. Maybe just 1 Flagship SUV. Develop a badly needed Flagship Sedan, with a Diesel 2 wheel drive. Include performance and handling for a big car at an attainable price for regular Americans that drive interstates for work and vacations. It should be roomy enough for 4 business executives. With a 5.0L Diesel, the engine should be quite enough for a business-level sedan. Trash the V6 Turbo concept, which is not a good match for this segment.
Ford has way too many blurred models. Less models with more acute focus is needed. Having a lot of models is a 1960s idea, gone with the Buick Rivera with its dedicated production line. (The Riveara was made on its own exclusive single production line) I think Riveara at one time was held even higher than the Cadillacs.

reply to this comment

GodfatherSHM - 4/25/2008 8:53:16 AM

+1 Boost

are you willing to dismiss the Mustang? I am not a Ford fan, but I don't think getting rid of the Mustang would be a smart move. But I completely understand what it is you are saying, in general all car companies need to trim their vehicle options.

mercuryguy - 4/25/2008 2:42:43 AM

0 Boost

I haven’t seen Hilary do anything to relive New York State of high Gas prices and High Sales Tax on Automobiles to help working families.
If Hilary was intelligent, she would temporarily repeal the New York State Gasoline Tax, and cut the Sales Tax on New Autos purchased in New York State. Even the Road Tolls are going up yet again to the tune of another 10% next year. Although I’m in favor of Tolls to keep the roads maintained, these prices go up well beyond the rate of inflation and people’s paychecks simple can’t keep up.

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 4/25/2008 10:28:09 AM

0 Boost

public transportation.

mercuryguy - 4/25/2008 2:49:47 AM

+1 Boost

I challenge the candidates to put for this sensible plan to save the US Auto industry and help working families in the process:
Customers purchasing a new car from the Big 3 get to write the purchase and Finance charge for this auto off their Federal Income Taxes. Limit this to 1 Vehicle per household so people don’t rig the system.
This will get people out buying US cars again. If you are American you should buy American, if you are unsure, this plan will help make it easier for you to decide.

reply to this comment

gsh23 - 4/25/2008 5:13:31 PM

+2 Boost

scandinavia works pretty well with socialism. well, it doesnt really matter what type of government a country has. its all about money right? so whoever can play the system better (be free markets, regulated markets, or communist) will win. communism seems to work in china because one day, everything (or not already) is made there. why? because the average american has a standard of living much higher than the average chinese. now you tell me if you were leader of a country which system seems to work better? keep a standard of living that is sustainable and trick the people into believing thats the best it can be (and as an ancillary reward, having happier people when they receive petty rewards) or having constantly unhappy people trying to make ends meet with a lifestyle that cant last forever?

life sucks, one way or another.

reply to this comment

bimmerfan25 - 4/25/2008 11:32:09 PM

0 Boost

noone wants socialism. we want common sense. 50 million americans don't have health insurance. the fact that the people in charge of health care more about profit then helping people is disgusting. health care should be like the police and fire departments- nationalised. Period.

reply to this comment

ChicaneShooter - 4/27/2008 4:13:06 AM

+1 Boost

i FULLY agree. see my post above under coprius'.

A4ORCE - 4/26/2008 3:19:08 AM

+1 Boost

Imho, ultimately, all three are just different flavors of vanilla. Take your pick: Regular, low-fat, non-fat.

reply to this comment

To post a comment for this story, you must first Login.

If you do not have an account, you will need to Register (It's Free!).

Most Recent Stories

New EPA Ratings May Cripple Volt And Other Hybrids 2009 Opel / Vauxhall Astra teaser Lexus announces model year price changes on select models Audi Q7 V12 TDI breaks cover BMW 3 Series Sedan and Wagon Facelift show up at German dealerships Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG Black Series Billboard Advertisements