Ron Paul gives fantastic speech on the auto Bailout

You have good intentions, but you have no idea how these companies operate. When you pondering over these bailouts and such I believe you are confusing your brain with your ass. You can't give bailouts to dysfunctional companies. All these guys are doing is eating through the capital like Pac-man.

They have horrible contracts with unions and suppliers and guess what? The only way to tell them off is through bankruptcy. They are NOT profitable no matter how much money you throw at them, eventually they will grind through it all and they will be back to losing money.

The automakers are nothing more than health care companies who make a couple shitty cars.

 

The evidence is against you, in my opinion. And in most of your own politicians' and economists' opinions too, it seems. Have fun paying the overwhelming societal costs of that degree of unemployment. Some European countries tried it in the 1980's, in their determination to avoid bailouts. They screwed up badly. I think your politicians might be willing to try to learn something from their calamitous experiences with it. I'd jump at it, if I were you.

Heaven forbid that you should ever be willing to look at the history of transport or telecommunications systems of continents other than your own, then, just in case you ever learn anything that might embarrass you.

 

Where is this evidence?

I want to know how giving money to a business with a flawed business model is going to help it at all?

What are you talking about?

 

Oh great we have someone posting who doesn't have a clue telling us we haven't got a clue..

 

I'm talking about all the formerly mismanaged industries in other countries that have been saved, and become profitable, by handouts of exactly the type that you're criticising. All the ones you and Dr. Paul remain unaware of because you prefer to be guided by ideology and dogma rather than by historical observation and analysis.

 

Wow. I love when people post about something/someone they obviously know nothing about. Dogma, that's really funny. Again, I encourage you to actually research Ron Paul and his economics before commenting further. We have a lot of Ron Paul experts on this forum....

And you still haven't posted proof after several people, including myself, have asked for it. Please provide proof of companies that have been completely successful, including some in the U.S., after being bailed out.

 

I'd like some examples and proof like I asked before.

Do you know how these companies run? Why they have no cash? Where are their costs? How do you plan to fix them?... Perhaps you'll answer this time...

 

None of those is my problem or my business. I resent your cheap attempt to refute my point of view by dragging in extraneous matters simply because I've demonstrated the factual inaccuracy of some of the opinions offered here. All I was doing was pointing out that some of the statements made above, and some made by Dr Paul, are factually mistaken and ignore the lessons of history. Fortunately, the majority of your politicians have a little more sense (which is doubtless part of the reason why Dr Paul was never a serious or electable candidate for the Presidency, and clearly your electorate just about thought so too, this time, as you've apparently for once ended up with someone with rather more intelligence and sensitivity who's rather less dogma-driven and more of a realist).

 

Thanks for proving our point that you really don't know what you're talking about. Nothing you say is going to be taken seriously unless you can provide some proof. You enjoy trying to make Ron Paul look like an idiot, but without any proof or information to backup your stance, it's not Ron Paul who's looking bad here....

Edit: alexa_s, do you have me on ignore or are you just choosing to completely ignore my responses?

 

No proof? No problem. Baseless arguments are a dime a dozen on this forum..

And you never know.. if you post enough, some may worship you for it.

 

All i have to say is Doctor Paul was the only guy that is free from special interest influence and he was the only guy who had teh guts to speak the truth on many matters (like our destroying democracy in iran for one) and he also serves on the banking oversight comittee and basically made the head of the federal reserves http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkUc0k2ePhk so his knowledge of finance might be a tad bit more then urs or mine.

 

All you have demonstrated is the ability to make a statement without providing any sort of proof to back up your position.

 

That's a good point. Doubt you would EVER see Ron Paul influenced by special interest groups or advocating for tons of PORK to be added to bills so they can pass. Can't say that for many other Congressman...

 

To preface this, I am and always have been a Ron Paul supporter (and donate to the max every time), my family's voted for him since 1988 (when he ran as the Libertarian candidate). That said, our auto industry is vital. I don't think a bailout is a solution, however, there is no way in hell American workers can compete with Nazi China's slave labour.

While I despise Madison on almost every other issue, the Madisonian tariff system took us from a mere 5% exporter to over 50% of the world's exports being from US. It wasn't until we took down our tariffs, and allowed everyone else to tariff the crap out of us, that we got screwed.

Free Trade means not allowing China to devalue their currency (as if it's not hard enough to compete), not allowing for instance, many of our asian partner's to ban/heavily tax US auto imports, despite US importing their autos heavily from them. It was impossible to buy american where I live, and I had to pay 8 grand just be allowed permission to import my US car, and a special tax for driving it every year.

I mean, free trade would be bad enough cuz we'd have to compete with slave labour, but it's worse than that, we actually allow them to tariff, tax, ban, our exports, while we leave ourselves unprotected. That's what FTA's are all about. Allowing them to be protectionist against us, but making sure we don't protect ourselves.

The solution is a 15% tariff flat across the board, or else at the very least truly demanding literal free trade as well as demanding worker's rights for foreign workers (i.e. no chinese sweatshops allowed, require living wages, etc.) so we have a fair chance of competition.

A well-thought out tariff system would flip our trade deficit overnight, revitalize our industries, and provide a new source of income for government. Perhaps they could cut taxes with the surplus gained, which would in turn boost our domestic business even further. I hate Madison, but the proof is in the pudding, his tariff worked, and worked well. It wasn't until the tariff of abominations (which unfairly tariffed goods the south was importing and used it to pay for infrastructure in the north, which was vital 30 years later in defeating the south ironically) which almost started the civil war in 1832, that tariffs started to be less and less popular, eventually reaching an amazing level of ignorance on trade issues today.

No one in their right mind can avoid the truth that we are just importing our way to fiscal suicide.