Autoblog

Well technically his argument still stands. He can just direct it at a different entity now.

↓↑report

i agree with you 100%...They didnt deserve it, they put themselves in this situation because they make utter crap. They still do, people! If you put gold (yes, their cars look pretty good) around crap, it still has crap for insides...... Yeah sure, Toyota ain't doing very hot in initial quality, but im curious how long the cars will last. Probably longer than a Ford.. Transmissions arent supposed to be changed at 100, 000 kilometers(60,000 miles) Ford!

↓↑report

No. They wont. It has nothing to do with making emission standards easier for the car companies. Have you noticed that there are big banks in the EU that are failing right now? Where do you think the car companies get the loans from to finance a car? Banks. They want illegal and worthless money to improve thier cars. They should spend thier PROFITS on R&D. Not 'loaned' money. Next thing you know when the run through this cash they'll want more.

This all has to do with currency not backed up by anything with value. When you start printing money and your economy is based upon debt, it crashes. It crashes hard. None of this economic climate has anything to do with bad decisions, CEOs getting paid too much, or low quality vehicle interiors. It has everything to do with currency that has no value. The more you print, and the more you make up as 'loans' the closer you get to complete failure. You guys arguing about who makes better cars, or whos bailing out who really upsets those that understand what's really going on.

The global economy is collapsing rapidly. You see it everyday, yet most of you don't know it when you do.

↓↑report

GM asked for money to develop the Volt.

How is that different?

You don't think Euro automakers are in trouble? Just wait a little but until the figures start coming out. There will be plenty of requests for "loans". And "loans" is what GM and Ford got.

↓↑report

But it was just a tactic they used to get the money. They are in trouble because the Big 3 have made horrid autos for too long ontop of lying about quality issues.

↓↑report

That's a foolish way to think of it. Because the government gets involved forcing car companies to do things that they themselves can do on thier own, they disrupt the market. Government intervention on any scale like that always makes things worse.

Where do you think the money comes from Simba? You? Me? Our taxes? No. It's completely fabricated in the form of 'credit'. It doesn't exist. So when you say they should finance these forced regulations, I say no. That hurts me. I suffer under inflation so those same companies can sell me a car. So I pay for it many times over. If you are going to require car manufacturers to increase fuel mileage, let them decide how not government. They only screw things up.

Don't believe anything I've said? How often has your income perfectly matched a rise in your cost of living? Never has and never will. We are all suffering more and more because of these 'loans' big companies are granted.

↓↑report

@ Ray...
1) what the hell are you talking about? you're reply is implying that i said governments SHOULD force auto manufacturers to increase their standards, then pay them for it. I never said that, i said if they are going to force they manufacturers to increase their standards at a rate faster than what the market would increase over time, then maybe they should pony up for the costs that are incurred. 2) i'm perfectly aware of where the money would could come, taxpayers, and i'm perfectly aware where the money would come back to with interest in the future, taxpayers.

seriously, i dont even get the point that you're trying to make. because i 1) never said that the govt should be forcing these standards. my only point was that anytime you intervene in a capitalistic market and force suppliers to quickly change their product in a way that requires $$$$$$ for research, you're going to make a lot of companies potentially go into the red, or even go under. i'm speaking from a laisse faire standpoint if you noticed.

↓↑report

I guess I was being confusing. Sorry. Government intervention in any capitalistic environment is a bad idea. I think where I'm unclear what you are saying is that taxpayers are paying it in taxes. If that is inded what you are saying, you are completely and utterly wrong. Doing that would mean they would raise our taxes, which they are not doing. That's a clever ploy to divert attention to the fact that the money for this didn't exist until they created it. That is NOT paid with by taxation. If they raised taxes to get the money for this, it would never pass. The outrage would be immense. So they (the US Government) ask the Federal Reserve to "loan" (create out of thin air/print) them the money to do these things. It's a failed and unecessary plan from the start. All of this is done by inflating the money supply. That's why nothing, no good and services, has gone down in price and stayed there since the Federal Reserve was illegally formed.

It doesn't hurt us in the form of taxation, it does in the form of inflation. The banks assume no risk, the Federal Reserve creates money where it doesn't exist, and the car companies are getting a free ride while WE BUY the products that inflate our money. Everyone wins except the people like you and me. So it doesn't matter what 'needs' to be done, this is the wrong way top do it and it only serves to further devalue our dollar and keep the ultra wealthy wealthy while us poor Joes pay for it with reduced purchasing power and the sweat off our brows. A completely free market is the only true way for the economy to thrive.

↓↑report

ok...thanx for the clarification. your statement is correct as far as the fed just printing more money to finance this, thus causing inflation and killing the dollar...same thing they're going to do w/ the bailout. i was trying to think after reading your first post what it had to do w/ my first, but it seems like you went on a tangent w/ the whole inflation issue when i was talking about market intervention. thats what i didn't understand at first.

↓↑report

@ Ray

Are you SURE the fed is just going to print money? They can reduce the budget for something and shift it to the car loans, they can issue t bills and sell the country to china and japan.
But printing money? yes that will destroy the states. It will also cause inflation the world over, and the poor will suffer.

I disagree about interventation. Goverment should intervene, but just not in this way

↓↑report

@ Ray

Are you SURE the fed is just going to print money? They can reduce the budget for something and shift it to the car loans, they can issue t bills and sell the country to china and japan.
But printing money? yes that will destroy the states. It will also cause inflation the world over, and the poor will suffer.

I disagree about interventation. Goverment should intervene, but just not in this way

↓↑report

sorry about double comments. this crap comment system.

What about europe? do you think they print money too?

↓↑report