groosome's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/306489/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/110967-if-cars-are-the-problem-they-can-also-be-the-solution?source=feed#comment-331048 331048
On Dec 16 11:21 AM k9s-4-k8 wrote:

> Much to comment on.
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "......pay a cash rebate to buyers of super-acceptable models that
> are produced (assembled, at least) in the U.S."
>
> This is a typical protectionist proposal I expect to hear from the
> UAW and the Democrat majority in Congress. Cash rebates paid only
> on U.S. built vehicles bypasses international trade laws.
>
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "A “bridge” loan will still be needed by GM to get them through their
> current negative cash flow operating structure. But it will be made
> with the realistic potential of paying off in the future."
>
> The only realistic terms for GM to be relieved of this debt is for
> the U.S. taxpayer to convert it into a grant, or convert it into
> equity which will perform only a bit better than a grant.
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "Moreover, the government should get options on a huge part of the
> equity in GM, thus potentially getting the taxpayers’ money back
> at some point. The company will still need contractual restructuring
> to eliminate legacy costs that now make it uncompetitive. That means
> the bailout funds should come in as part of a pre-packaged restructuring
> that abrogates G.M.’s current legal obligations to its unions, dealers,
> and suppliers."
>
> Either you're suggesting we receive stock in exchange for a $50 billion
> infusion to the UAW,(that's the big 3 deal with the UAW and they
> won't abrogate that deal for anything) or you're just papering over
> one of the major reasons GM will never survive profitably on their
> own without an intravenous drip on taxpayer funds for the remainder
> of this century. Certainly, I don't expect taxpayers will put up
> with that. We will cut our losses after many billions have already
> been flushed on this company.
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "How do we know a government-controlled GM would be smarter than
> the old one? We don’t, but we do know two things. One: new management
> could hardly be dumber than the past management. Two: we’ve just
> elected maybe the smartest President in history - so giving him the
> opportunity to pick the people who will make the GM decisions at
> least provides us with a glimmer of hope. His recent choices for
> leadership positions should give us confidence in his judgement."
>
>
> On the contrary, anyone that thinks they can turn around GM without
> a managed bankruptcy supported with government loans solution, is
> at least as stupid as the former management. As for Barack Obama
> being the smartest President in history? He's not even in the top
> 10. Where do you come up with such crap? Fact of the matter is that
> GM is suffering under the burden of labor expense due to the combination
> of greedy unions and greedy management. Nobody cared a whit about
> shareholders or the long term viability of the company, neither management
> nor the UAW. Automobile manufacturers are beholden to long-term supplier
> contracts and fix costs such as interest on debt for capital investment.
> The unions understand every day they strike costs GM millions. They
> hold tremendous leverage over the company. Management cares about
> year end bonuses. Enough days on strike in any year can dramatically
> curtail profits and leave management with a simple salary and no
> bonus.]]> Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:57:02 -0500
On Dec 16 11:21 AM k9s-4-k8 wrote:

> Much to comment on.
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "......pay a cash rebate to buyers of super-acceptable models that
> are produced (assembled, at least) in the U.S."
>
> This is a typical protectionist proposal I expect to hear from the
> UAW and the Democrat majority in Congress. Cash rebates paid only
> on U.S. built vehicles bypasses international trade laws.
>
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "A “bridge” loan will still be needed by GM to get them through their
> current negative cash flow operating structure. But it will be made
> with the realistic potential of paying off in the future."
>
> The only realistic terms for GM to be relieved of this debt is for
> the U.S. taxpayer to convert it into a grant, or convert it into
> equity which will perform only a bit better than a grant.
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "Moreover, the government should get options on a huge part of the
> equity in GM, thus potentially getting the taxpayers’ money back
> at some point. The company will still need contractual restructuring
> to eliminate legacy costs that now make it uncompetitive. That means
> the bailout funds should come in as part of a pre-packaged restructuring
> that abrogates G.M.’s current legal obligations to its unions, dealers,
> and suppliers."
>
> Either you're suggesting we receive stock in exchange for a $50 billion
> infusion to the UAW,(that's the big 3 deal with the UAW and they
> won't abrogate that deal for anything) or you're just papering over
> one of the major reasons GM will never survive profitably on their
> own without an intravenous drip on taxpayer funds for the remainder
> of this century. Certainly, I don't expect taxpayers will put up
> with that. We will cut our losses after many billions have already
> been flushed on this company.
>
> Jim Kingsdale says:
> "How do we know a government-controlled GM would be smarter than
> the old one? We don’t, but we do know two things. One: new management
> could hardly be dumber than the past management. Two: we’ve just
> elected maybe the smartest President in history - so giving him the
> opportunity to pick the people who will make the GM decisions at
> least provides us with a glimmer of hope. His recent choices for
> leadership positions should give us confidence in his judgement."
>
>
> On the contrary, anyone that thinks they can turn around GM without
> a managed bankruptcy supported with government loans solution, is
> at least as stupid as the former management. As for Barack Obama
> being the smartest President in history? He's not even in the top
> 10. Where do you come up with such crap? Fact of the matter is that
> GM is suffering under the burden of labor expense due to the combination
> of greedy unions and greedy management. Nobody cared a whit about
> shareholders or the long term viability of the company, neither management
> nor the UAW. Automobile manufacturers are beholden to long-term supplier
> contracts and fix costs such as interest on debt for capital investment.
> The unions understand every day they strike costs GM millions. They
> hold tremendous leverage over the company. Management cares about
> year end bonuses. Enough days on strike in any year can dramatically
> curtail profits and leave management with a simple salary and no
> bonus.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/110967-if-cars-are-the-problem-they-can-also-be-the-solution?source=feed#comment-331019 331019 People like you are so far out of touch with reality it scares me. You spout all this garbage like it is going to cure everything without a real plan to do it.]]> Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:39:47 -0500 People like you are so far out of touch with reality it scares me. You spout all this garbage like it is going to cure everything without a real plan to do it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/107845-detroit-s-big-three-and-the-democrats-economic-illiteracy?source=feed#comment-314585 314585 Why did the banking industry write so many loans to people who could not ever repay them, perhaps GREED? ]]> Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:11:01 -0500 Why did the banking industry write so many loans to people who could not ever repay them, perhaps GREED? ]]>