1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Michigan Auto Bailout: Dunderhead Mitt Romney Got it 100% Wrong!!

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012.

  1. #1
    In November 2008, as the nation was in the throes of the most miserable financial crisis in 80 years, with financial institutions crashing, no credit anywhere, a housing market that was tanking and the auto industry, one of the cornerstones of American economic success teeter tottering into disaster, threatening to take out another 1 to 2 million people into unemployment, the heads of Ford, GM, and Chrysler went into Washington DC before the Bush administration to plead for financial assistance from the government.

    Mitt Romney wrote this very assertive OP Ed piece the next day in the NY Times with this headline Let Detroit Go Bankrupt

    Here is exactly what he said in the first 2 paragraphs

    Romney Got every part of these first 2 paragraphs WRONG How could the so called business wizard of the GOP be 100% wrong? (well at least he was consistent!!! :) )

    Lets look at the first two paragraphs:

    First sentence:
    Last year all 3 Detroit automakers showed a profit. First time since 2004 all 3 auto makers showed a profit in the same year. Uh...mitzi....guess it didn't go away. Try kissing goats. you got it wrong.

    Second Sentence:
    Mitty boy: You got this one wrong also. Total US new vehicle sales tanked in 2009 to 10.6 million. The year before it had fallen to 13.5 million. For a 9 year peiod before that, with significant consistency total US new vehicle sales averaged about 17.2 million vehicles/year. Wow. The recession just crushed the industry. At its bottom the industry lost about 40% of sales.

    Holy crow. The auto industry didn't cause the recession but it clearly was devastated by it. It lost 40% of all sales. That clearly cost a ton of jobs on top of jobs.

    Since the bailout here are annual sales in 2010 and 2011.

    2010 11.8 million
    2010 13.0 million

    Well it is coming back!!! Its not where we were but its infinitely better than at the bottom.

    But here is the great news about US auto sales:

    GM, Ford, and Chrysler are leading the rebound. They are all selling more cars and they have all gained market share.

    So 3.5 years after Mitty made his business smart comments...we are seeing the exact opposite.

    Mitt Romney So far You are equal to 100% FAIL


    2nd Paragraph: What else did Mitt the business wizard assert back in 2008.

    Lets see: With the bailout and carefully restructured financings:

    Detroit auto manufacturers:

    A) Overall restructured themselves:

    B) Market share has increased
    C) Labor costs and retiree benefits have been reduced
    D) New technologies are abundant
    E) Per JD Powers surveys Detroit automakers have shown faster increases in auto reliability than any other manufacturers
    F) Hirings have increased

    G). The Detroit managed bailout has dramatically succeeded and things are looking good.

    Mitt: If you are the wizard of GOP economics I just feel pure pity for the other GOP candidates steeped in 16th century concepts that will lead to the same disaster the GOP brought us with the last recession.

    Mitt: Stick to your country club!!
     
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  2. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #2
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  3. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Likes Received:
    208
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #3
    Earlpearl, why do you keep talking about Ford like they got a bailout? Why do you keep talking about growth of market share like a tsunami in Japan had nothing to do with that?
     
    Obamanation, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  4. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #4
    1. I never said Ford received a bailout. Can't you read?
    2. Ford, GM, and Chrysler increased market share against all competitors including European cars, Korean, and Japanese cars. In fact GM had to shut a plant down slowing down production and sales b/c of the tsunami.

    Americans bought cars made by Americans. I know you Right Wing extremists have spent a couple of years trying to convince Americans not to buy autos built by Americans. It must be discouraging to you to see that Americans buy cars built by Americans. The net result is that after the miserable recession that destroyed the auto industry...buying cars built by Americans means that more Americans go back to work. I know that disappoints you.

    Please explain why the Right Wing GOP extremists have held a position that only bin laden would find acceptable??
     
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  5. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Likes Received:
    208
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #5
    It so happens that I do buy American cars. I own two Fords. My current two Fords replaced my previous Fords. I had actually considered changing over to a GMC Sierra with a duramax on my last purchase, but then the bailout happened and I swore I would never buy a GM product. Ever. I'l be damned if I help sponsor the crony capitalism you seem to think is so great, unless I'm one of the cronies receiving the capital.

    By the way, all your touting of the American Auto recovery has been lead by Ford, who has done quite nicely in spite of the fact the US government directly funds it's competition. Amazing, isn't it?

    Oh, and regarding Chrysler, no one who has ever owned one would buy another.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2012
    Obamanation, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  6. ApocalypseXL

    ApocalypseXL Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,098
    Likes Received:
    101
    Best Answers:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    215
    #6
    @OP You know I agree with the auto bailouts because without ford and other US brands there would be only minor brands (and Renault) to make fun off . I'm a petrolhead but your style of yelling out info from 2008 to defend the current failure in chief helps me loose my appetite . There are tons of flaws in the US Republican party but you choose to pick on something that is utter idiotic and you add a ton of propaganda lard on top . For that alone I hope Obama GTFOs .
     
    ApocalypseXL, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  7. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #7
    Chrysler sales soar; market share rises

    According to the article..which is based on hard facts representing actual sales numbers and quoting a Chrysler rep: "Looking back, we were the fastest-growing automaker in the country, increasing our market share 1.3 percentage points during 2011."

    In the US market share changes by tenths of a percentage point at a time. Chrysler had a significant improvement in 2011.

    O_Nation: you really should take my course...and pay me up front. Its so much better to rely on facts rather than the bin laden perspective.
     
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  8. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #8
    @Apocolypse:

    Take the Romney OP ED. Read through his sentences. Review the data.

    Was he 100% wrong or 200% wrong?
     
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  9. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Likes Received:
    208
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #9
    [​IMG]


    Like I said, not people who have owned one. Nothing like a vehicle that falls apart at 40k miles. They should change their slogan to "Nothing devalues like a Chrysler"


    Chrysler sales, year over year
    1999 2,638,561
    2000 2,522,695
    2001 2,273,208
    2002 2,205,446
    2003 2,127,451
    2004 2,206,024
    2005 2,304,833
    2006 2,142,505
    2007 2,076,650
    2008 1,453,122
    2009 931,402
    2010 1,085,211
    2011 1,369,114

    Now there is a winning chart. Chrysler sucked long before 2008. Just let them die already.
     
    Obamanation, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  10. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #10
    @O_nation:

    I know it just kills you and your political theories that the Romney/Extremist view was only at minimum 100% wrong. oh...and he is supposed to be the brains and experience of the GOP candidates.

    Its sad that you and your cohorts continue to support the bin laden perspective on destroying America.
     
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  11. ApocalypseXL

    ApocalypseXL Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,098
    Likes Received:
    101
    Best Answers:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    215
    #11
    Don't let Chrysler die but tell them to freaking improve . Their build quality is someone horrendous on a lot of models and their engines could be seriously retuned . The fact that their flagship division is a sinking boat speaks eons about them . If Chrysler would sell their Mopar , Dodge and Jeep brands then they could die and absolutely no one would miss them . Chrysler already killed the Plymouth brand , the way things are going I'm afraid that trend will continue .

    Also earl "destroying America" seriously ? What do you think uncontrolled immigration and trade deficit will do ?
     
    ApocalypseXL, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  12. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Likes Received:
    208
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #12
    Thats like telling a person with stage 5 lung cancer that has metasticized to the bones to be heal themselves. Throwing taxpayer money at them is just stupid. Diamler considered them a liability when they pawned them off to Fiat. Tell me again why we essentially bailed out Fiat?

    Very true.

    Jeep and Dodge used to be fairly desirable. Even the Jeep brand is now considered a problematic loser. The only way to save any of them, IMO, would be to sell them to a company with a decent management team. Perhaps Ford.
     
    Obamanation, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  13. Bushranger

    Bushranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,524
    Likes Received:
    66
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #13
    I've always been a Ford man. I had wanted a PT cruiser (Chrysler) last year until I test-drove one. Feels like plastic and had no guts. Ended up buying a new Kia but I couldn't bring myself to trade in the Ford. I still use my Ford the most because it feels more like a real car. I switched to a 4 cylinder because of rising petrol costs but seeing my Ford is on LPG it costs roughly the same to run as the Kia. My Ford is now 17 years old but still feels so much better than the brand new Kia.
     
    Bushranger, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  14. ApocalypseXL

    ApocalypseXL Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,098
    Likes Received:
    101
    Best Answers:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    215
    #14
    Jeep would probably prosper more anywhere . They are the best 4x4 americano mobile , now that Hummer is gone there are no serious competitors , plus their build quality is more then decent . I do have to admit that their market share has shrunk by a lot in the past 5 years BMW and Merc killing most of their high end customers .

    Dodge still is a serious name , mostly because they are outrageously unpractical yet somehow a very desirable look and feel . Dodge and Mopar are icons of a glorious past and should always be available for purchase . TBC (maybe)
     
    ApocalypseXL, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  15. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #15
    Just to reiterate with one more day before the Michigan and Arizona primaries:

    As to the loans and bailouts of the Detroit automakers:

    Mitt Romney, the guy in the GOP that clearly knows more about business than any other of the GOP candidates: The guy with all the business experience:

    HE GOT EVERY PART OF HIS OP ED On the impact of a bailout/loan/government investment in American business at a time of crisis----100% WRONG

    How about that? The GOP/Right Wing Extremist/ Candidate GOT EVERY POINT WRONG!!!!

    and that dunderhead knows infinitely more about business than all the other GOP candidates put together.

    Now that is a sad sad commentary.
     
    earlpearl, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  16. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    72
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    130
    #16
    Strange, the way I remember it, the automakers went in front of CONGRESS. Congress at the time was dominated by a 2/3rds Democratic Party majority. you know, the Democrats - the Party of the United Auto Worker's Union.

    And from what I remember, Ford did not want any money. It was forced upon them because Pelosi was concerned that if Ford didn't take money it would signal to the markets that General Motors was in deep shit.

    Mitt Romney was not in government and not involved. So let me rephrase for you:

    Barack Obama So far You are equal to 100% FAIL

    General Motors still has the same problems.

    Now you are dreaming.

    Earl, I would not presume to lecture you on real estate because that is your area of business. The automotive industry is MY area of business. In the long run, the bailout of General Motors hurt the U.S. economy.
     
    Corwin, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  17. Bushranger

    Bushranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,524
    Likes Received:
    66
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #17
    [video=youtube;Qg5eSM5cJdU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg5eSM5cJdU[/video]

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20ford.html

    http://useconomy.about.com/od/criticalssues/a/auto_bailout.htm

    You probably need to research your facts there a little more Corwin.
     
    Bushranger, Feb 27, 2012 IP
  18. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #18
    Corwin: You're injection of congress into significant economic events as an explanation for what occurred or didn't occur is incredibly pathetic and a futile effort to rewrite history.

    The auto makers went in front of congress and Congress couldn't agree what to do.

    George Bush made the initial loans. No body else.

    In fact he reminded us of that earlier this past month. He went on to explain exactly why he made the decision to do so. He also said he would do it again!!!!!

    Facts;

    http://www.freep.com/article/201202...s-again?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s
     
    earlpearl, Feb 28, 2012 IP
  19. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    72
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    130
    #19
    O.K., in this situation I definitely have some information the general public does not have.

    This was sometime in the mid-90's (so forgive my memory fuzziness) either California or the U.S. government approached Ford to build an electric car. Ford didn't want to do it, claiming it wasn't marketable. Finally, the government started throwing grant money at Ford and at around $1 Billion Ford said "yeah, we'll take the money, we're not stupid". But Ford agreed only to research and didn't want to build an electric car.

    Yes, Ford spent the $1 Billion on R&D. I know for certain that not all of it related to electric cars, but I'm sure it looked good on paper. Ford learned that if you keep saying "no" to government money you get much better terms. Ford invested the $1 Billion in R&D and made a profit off it.

    I think G.M. also had government incentives for E.V.s but I never knew G.M. as well as I knew Ford.

    Skip to the bailouts: Ford was in better shape because they had a reputation for reliability that G.M. didn't have. This resulted in much lower warranty repair costs for Ford. The sales figures don't tell the complete story - a lot of G.M.'s sales profits were being eaten up by company waste. Ford is much more efficient, with a lower warranty repair rate. But like with the banks, the government was concerned that if any company didn't accept a bailout, it would signal to the market that the companies that accepted bailouts were in deep trouble and that would spell disaster.

    The problem with electric cars is typified in this hypothetical: A man drives his pregnant wife to the hospital in his EV. On the way to the hospital, the EV runs out of juice, and the mother and fetus die. Theoretically the father can sue and win a sum more than the car company is worth. This is because there is no legal history for these things.

    There was a similar lawsuit early in airbags, a drunk kid slammed into the back of a truck at 120mph. The cables of the battery sheared off so the airbag never deployed, not that it would have mattered. But the jury awarded the family $120M because the plaintiff's lawyers gave the jury unrealistic expectations about airbags, because the technology was new.


    The President doesn't have the authority to make loans. The President can't spend a dime without Congress' approval.

    You are confusing how government works with the language of politics. That's like saying "JFK put the first man on the moon". JFK didn't do that, Buzz Aldrin did.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2012
    Corwin, Feb 28, 2012 IP
  20. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Likes Received:
    208
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #20
    Does any of this blather change the fact that Ford is kicking ass without taking bailout money, while the other two of the big three have been given billions in bond holder money stolen by the federal government and still cant hold a candle to Ford?

    Earlpearl, why don't you just retitle the thread and pitch it to the DNC for their campaign slogan.

    Crony Capitalism Works! Giving billions of taxpayer dollars to private companies that contribute to your election war chest may not improve your quality of life, or make us competitive with our foreign competition, but with luck, it will keep the evil Mitt Romney out of the White House

    Hmm.. It could work!
     
    Obamanation, Feb 28, 2012 IP