Guest guest Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 strict wrote: " ... <snip> ... For all this holier-than-thou preaching about various things that go on in this mailing list, there's an incredible lack of holistic thinking: it's true, the various companies have managed to get into a big nasty bind, largely of their own making, though not entirely, because it took the companies as management, mismanagement, and unions, to get it there, and the liquidity crunch is the straw that broke the camel's back. What neither you nor Tom care to see is that despite all the negatives (and remember, once again, if you two are capable of it, but it doesn't seem like it) that the auto companies are asking for ****LOANS**** which are being evaluated on business terms for whether or not they can pay them back, and not pure ****BAILOUT**** like the cursed $700+ billion TARP which was forced on taxpayers with no accountability. The reality is should the big 3 go under, everyone in the US is going to be hurting, including the locally- situated foreign car name plate manufacturers, because of how things are all tied together ... <snip> ... " In not bailing the car manufacturers out -- even if you want to call it a ***LOAN*** -- it forces the Big 3 to become accountable. This means people like the CEO and 18 executives of GM will have to learn to live without their outrageous millions in stock and bonuses in order to see GM continue. And taxpayers will be forced to learn to live within their means rather than plunge themselves into debt they cannot handle in good times as well as in bad. Nice personal attack in this portion of your reply, strict. ;-) Raven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.