Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

    Originally posted by 5mn_Major View Post
    2004 Audi A4. I've had a series of repairs. But man, can that car corner.

    You want reliability...its pretty much Japanese.
    I thought Audi was German...

    Comment


    • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

      Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
      I thought Audi was German...
      Ya...German cars are indeed engineered for performance like nothin I've driven. Tried a used BMW for a couple years also. But they have reliability problems.
      Go Gophers!

      Comment


      • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

        Originally posted by 5mn_Major View Post
        Ya...German cars are indeed engineered for performance like nothin I've driven. Tried a used BMW for a couple years also. But they have reliability problems.
        Even the VW's? Obviously Germans look at performance, what with their "recommended 81.25 MPH" highway system.

        Comment


        • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

          Originally posted by mookie1995 View Post
          i'll ask you since you appear to know as resident expert on GM-China....
          are the cars GM sells in china imported? or produced 'domestically'?
          cost to make?
          sell price?
          # of? (i still see too many chinaman riding bicycles)
          share of that $0.90/sh profit this quarter that came from prc?

          ..this you probably don't know, but i'll still ask
          US epa type restrictions on prc production and their cost to gm's unit cost on prc produced autos?

          thank you in advance!

          China & US sales both approx 2.5M vehicles out of 9M sold globally. Cars are generally manufactured over there with some joint partnernships and a couple controlled by GM itself. Operating income in China was 1.9B vs 7.2B in North America for 2011. Also the company regained the worldwide #1 car maker designation it had lost for a couple of years to Toyota.

          Originally posted by DaveStPaul View Post
          What I've been starting to wonder is: What if America's post-WWII successes weren't because we have an innate edge, based on more freedom, more entrepreneurship, more opportunity, more immigrants' genes, etc.; what if it was only because we had more people? More people means more factories, quicker improvements, etc etc, eventually the cheapest products, and now the world wants to buy everything from you. Bingo, prosperity.

          Obviously you have to have a society set up in a way that allows all those people to get stuff done. China's had more people than the US forever, but they (to say the least) didn't have things set up to make things very well. But what if it was only a matter of time until the other largest countries started seeing that if you get your basic **** together and have a bunch of factories making a bunch of products, you can't help but end up making them cheaper, and then you're selling, and your people are getting jobs, etc.?

          I don't know if I really think all this yet. And China clearly has issues to work out in the near future. But if economic success on a world-wide stage turns out to be largely a matter of who has more people, then all the things Rover and FlagDUDE are observing are both true, but not relevant to the big picture.
          A very good question. My take is that the US was in a situation in the 1950's that it will most likely never be in again, where most of Asia was still a backwater while Europe was destroyed by the worst war mankind has ever seen. Interestingly this is the era conservatives who are generally older tend to like to revisit.

          In the 50's a laissez faire approach to business may have been a good idea as the US was unchallenged as a global economic power. Therefore, there would be no need to intervene because the overall picture (US growth and dominance) wouldn't be affected. The problem which rightward leaning people have trouble realizing is that this approach became hopelessly out of date by the 70's at the latest as first Japan then China and others started catching up. As the 80's rolled around, a faulty and disasterous thought process took hold that we need not manufacture goods anymore but that a service economy would do the trick so do nothing to help businesses dealing with illegal trade practices such as dumping or using slave laborers to produce cheaper.

          What we have learned since then, as industry after industry has gone overseas (electronics, textiles, steel, etc) is that infact we can't just rely on a service industry to sustain the economy. Furthermore, other countries who do support their domestic companies when needed ate our lunch. Some would say this is inevitable due to wage differences. I don't. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th biggest economies tend to be net exporters over time. Of those, only one, China, gets by on cheap labor. Germany and Japan are so called "high cost" economies who are still managing to produce good for export. That's why conservatism has no practical application in today's world. Maybe it did work 60 years ago, but times change and our friends on the right stubbornly refuse to come to grips with that, and would rather enact policies fit for that bygone era.
          Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

          Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

          "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

          Comment


          • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

            If Obama wins re-election, he'll likely get a chance to bail out GM (really their union) again:

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoo...kruptcy-again/

            Comment


            • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

              Originally posted by Bill View Post
              If Obama wins re-election, he'll likely get a chance to bail out GM (really their union) again:

              http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoo...kruptcy-again/
              Ummmm....Bill, you need to check your Daily Knuckledragger e-mail updates. Somebody posted this two pages ago. Don't you guys talk to each other?
              Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

              Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

              "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

              Comment


              • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                Originally posted by Rover View Post
                China & US sales both approx 2.5M vehicles out of 9M sold globally. Cars are generally manufactured over there with some joint partnernships and a couple controlled by GM itself. Operating income in China was 1.9B vs 7.2B in North America for 2011. Also the company regained the worldwide #1 car maker designation it had lost for a couple of years to Toyota.



                A very good question. My take is that the US was in a situation in the 1950's that it will most likely never be in again, where most of Asia was still a backwater while Europe was destroyed by the worst war mankind has ever seen. Interestingly this is the era conservatives who are generally older tend to like to revisit.

                In the 50's a laissez faire approach to business may have been a good idea as the US was unchallenged as a global economic power. Therefore, there would be no need to intervene because the overall picture (US growth and dominance) wouldn't be affected. The problem which rightward leaning people have trouble realizing is that this approach became hopelessly out of date by the 70's at the latest as first Japan then China and others started catching up. As the 80's rolled around, a faulty and disasterous thought process took hold that we need not manufacture goods anymore but that a service economy would do the trick so do nothing to help businesses dealing with illegal trade practices such as dumping or using slave laborers to produce cheaper.

                What we have learned since then, as industry after industry has gone overseas (electronics, textiles, steel, etc) is that infact we can't just rely on a service industry to sustain the economy. Furthermore, other countries who do support their domestic companies when needed ate our lunch. Some would say this is inevitable due to wage differences. I don't. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th biggest economies tend to be net exporters over time. Of those, only one, China, gets by on cheap labor. Germany and Japan are so called "high cost" economies who are still managing to produce good for export. That's why conservatism has no practical application in today's world. Maybe it did work 60 years ago, but times change and our friends on the right stubbornly refuse to come to grips with that, and would rather enact policies fit for that bygone era.
                If you want to look at policy, that's understandable, but the thing to not do is enact a policy that is designed to screw us over. As much as you don't want conservatives to live in the 1950's, I don't want liberals to continue to live in the 1900's. We're at the point where people are educated enough to make good decisions about their careers and health (at least I would think), so perhaps it's time to back off on some of the legislation. Back off on the minimum wage requirements, as that will help to allow more people to be hired instead of causing an artificial price floor. Also, no more bailouts or government takeovers. If they fail, let them fail. The government is getting to the point where it itself is becoming a monopoly, and should be under the audition of the Clayton Antitrust Act.

                Comment


                • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                  Originally posted by Rover View Post
                  Ummmm....Bill, you need to check your Daily Knuckledragger e-mail updates. Somebody posted this two pages ago. Don't you guys talk to each other?
                  Perhaps you should tell your buddies to check your daily ******* updates, because it's starting to sound like a broken record.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                    Originally posted by Rover View Post
                    Ummmm....Bill, you need to check your Daily Knuckledragger e-mail updates. Somebody posted this two pages ago. Don't you guys talk to each other?
                    Do you seriously think GM is in fine shape?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                      Originally posted by Bill View Post
                      Do you seriously think GM is in fine shape?

                      Can't say what the standard for "fine" shape is but I'll define what I think about it.

                      1) Company is profitable to a significant degree (7.6Bn last year I believe)

                      2) Company is far better off than pre-bankrupcy where too much debt and bad deals with workers was strangling company (now #1 automaker again).

                      3) US Govt will end up making money on the deal in total even if selling the stock at a loss.

                      Somebody asked me if I have bought GM stock. I actually bought Ford stock, for one simple reason which was Ford was trading @ 2X earnings while GM was higher. Unfortunately for me Ford is STILL trading at 2X earnings but c'est la vie. GM is now a viable going concern, and who among us would have thought that three years ago? The notion that its about to become bankrupt again is from one conservative Club for Growth hack writing for Forbes who has no insight into the industry.
                      Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

                      Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

                      "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

                      Comment


                      • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                        Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
                        If you want to look at policy, that's understandable, but the thing to not do is enact a policy that is designed to screw us over. As much as you don't want conservatives to live in the 1950's, I don't want liberals to continue to live in the 1900's. We're at the point where people are educated enough to make good decisions about their careers and health (at least I would think), so perhaps it's time to back off on some of the legislation. Back off on the minimum wage requirements, as that will help to allow more people to be hired instead of causing an artificial price floor. Also, no more bailouts or government takeovers. If they fail, let them fail. The government is getting to the point where it itself is becoming a monopoly, and should be under the audition of the Clayton Antitrust Act.
                        Sorry Flag but the notion that we'd be better off if all the big banks fell in a panic sell off and the auto industry went too just so we'd be in compliance with conservative orthodoxy makes zero sense. We're not in a classroom here. We're talking in the real world. I'm perfectly happy to give Bush credit where its due. Every major world economy acted to shore up its banks. Why? Because unless you want us to go back to the barter system you need financial institutions. The cost to the US in the grand scheme of things was minimal, and millions of jobs were saved. Having spoken with my grandparents who were in the work force during the Great Depression I can tell you we should be in no hurry to bring about another one.

                        No bailouts is a great slogan. Unfortunately in extreme cases (once every 70 years hopefully) it needs to happen for the greater good. No good would come out of not having a banking industry in the US anymore unless you are fluent in Mandarin and therefore would be able to get a mortgage from the only remaining financial institutions worldwide.
                        Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

                        Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

                        "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

                        Comment


                        • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                          Originally posted by Rover View Post
                          Can't say what the standard for "fine" shape is but I'll define what I think about it.

                          1) Company is profitable to a significant degree (7.6Bn last year I believe)

                          2) Company is far better off than pre-bankrupcy where too much debt and bad deals with workers was strangling company (now #1 automaker again).

                          3) US Govt will end up making money on the deal in total even if selling the stock at a loss.

                          Somebody asked me if I have bought GM stock. I actually bought Ford stock, for one simple reason which was Ford was trading @ 2X earnings while GM was higher. Unfortunately for me Ford is STILL trading at 2X earnings but c'est la vie. GM is now a viable going concern, and who among us would have thought that three years ago? The notion that its about to become bankrupt again is from one conservative Club for Growth hack writing for Forbes who has no insight into the industry.
                          I bought some Ford when it was at $2. Sold it WAY too early, but it was still at a profit, so I'm not going to complain about it. A positive gain is a positive gain.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                            Originally posted by Rover View Post
                            Sorry Flag but the notion that we'd be better off if all the big banks fell in a panic sell off and the auto industry went too just so we'd be in compliance with conservative orthodoxy makes zero sense. We're not in a classroom here. We're talking in the real world. I'm perfectly happy to give Bush credit where its due. Every major world economy acted to shore up its banks. Why? Because unless you want us to go back to the barter system you need financial institutions. The cost to the US in the grand scheme of things was minimal, and millions of jobs were saved. Having spoken with my grandparents who were in the work force during the Great Depression I can tell you we should be in no hurry to bring about another one.

                            No bailouts is a great slogan. Unfortunately in extreme cases (once every 70 years hopefully) it needs to happen for the greater good. No good would come out of not having a banking industry in the US anymore unless you are fluent in Mandarin and therefore would be able to get a mortgage from the only remaining financial institutions worldwide.
                            Although the FDIC exists, banks are still authorised to stop all payments when they see a panic, so the insurance is really just a bunch of BS, like most government stuff is. One thing that did exist during the New Deal was the split of financial institutions going across state lines. I'm not saying that we should have something as drastic as that, but bringing some redundancy to our system and removing the "single point of failure" is a good idea. Cheques and balances, as it were. Look at what's failing the EU: the ECB. It's a single point of failure requiring every tension cable (read: country) to be strong. We can't have states create their own money because it's not allowed by the Constitution. I'm not even sure if regional currencies would be allowed (each of the 12 Federal Reserve Banks). One thing I am certain of, though, is the USA is just too gosh darn large to be federally governed as it is now.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                              Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
                              By single payer, you mean you want mommy and daddy government to give you everything, similar to exactly how Medicare works. Death panels, here we come.
                              Over the current system? In a heartbeat! Medicare for all is aok by me, cover the basics and let people buy supplements if they want more. And while I giggle at the idea of death panels (which, if you want to be serious exist now anyways since every insurance company has a committee that decides who gets what care and why) in the way Sarah "I Really Am this Stupid" Palin talked about them I have no problem with rationing care to a point.

                              Anything is better than the current system...anything.
                              "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
                              -aparch

                              "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
                              -INCH

                              Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
                              -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

                              Comment


                              • Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play

                                The "death panels" demagoguery probably set back health care in this country by twenty years, if not more.
                                Northeastern Huskies Class of 1998 / BS Chemical Engineering
                                Notre Dame Fighting Irish Class of 2011 / PhD Chemical Engineering

                                But then again, isn't holding forth on an extreme opinion from a position of complete ignorance what these boards are all about? -- from a BigSoccer post by kerrunch

                                Britney can't sing. At all. She sounds like a cross between a crackhead chipmunk that had more than a couple beers and a drowning cat. -- DHG on the MTV VMAs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X