You sound like a Communist. Seriously Comrade.

If you think the economy's bad now, just wait until the Big 3 go under. Do you have any idea how many jobs in this country are connected to the auto industry?

Hey hey hey... don't be badmouthing communists like that.

Every time I hear a completely nonsensical rant like this I wish I had a time machine that could teleport the person to the alternate universe they're wishing for, in the hope that maybe it would rectify their retarded short-sightedness.

if you'd said this in an intelligent manner, i'd agree with you in principle: stupid, wasteful actions should have consequences; that way, people who take stupid, wasteful actions are quickly deposed from any position of power they may have attained, and people who don't take stupid, wasteful actions are able to climb the ladder.

in this case, however, the destruction of these companies would leave much of the country unable to "stand on their own two feet". unless you're a crazy survivalist, it will be somewhat difficult to survive on your own merits when the supermarket can't stock food anymore--not that it will matter, since you won't have a job anyway.

what? no he doesn't. he sounds like the polar opposite of a communist.

Damn it, as much as I hate the idea of bailing out more of these assholes, I don't think there's an alternative. Although the temptation of the "Mad Max" scenario is strong.

I'm still trying to figure out when Bob Dylan said "line them up against the wall and shoot their ass..."

Who's spewing vitriol now FridgeMagnet? Perhaps if you had something more constructive to say about the OP article, I might listen to you instead, all I hear is "blah, blah, blah, O'Reilly." Unless you present some thought provoking ideas in opposition to FTR's article (and I seriously would like to hear them), you just look like a hypocrite to me.

Sounds like a serious case of persecution complex. You should get that looked at.

I'm not at all thrilled with the idea of trying of injecting billions of dollars directly to the banks or the failing auto industry. However, I understand that unless we do something the economy is going to keep spiraling downward and that's something that effects everyone of us. Also, I think about the number of jobs that are going to be lost and It makes my stomach churn. (Do you really want to see that many more people losing their homes, turning to crime and queuing up for a "government handout" anyways?) I know it can be difficult, but we need to develop a long view of the consequences of inaction if we're going to remain productive as a nation.

Also, from what I understand, the auto bailout isn't just a freebee, it would be a low-interest loan, so the money will be headed right back where it came from, with interest. Also, the UAW cannot be blamed for the crisis, they simply build the crappy cars, it's the executives who've been in league with the oil industry who need to get the boot. Sure there ought to be more strings attached (like mandatory efficiency standards), but letting the whole train go flying off the rails just because the conductor is drunk at the throttle isn't the right thing to do.

Honestly speaking though, as a former consumer (I exclusively ride a bike now), I never did like cars being manufactured by the American auto industry. The last two cars I owned were a Mazda RX-7 (Original) and a Toyota Rav-4. I'm considering another foreign car, possibly a VW Jetta Sportwagon TDI or another Toyota (preferably a hybrid). They're more expensive then I really can afford, but its the efficiency of the vehicles and the long-term cost that are driving my interest... If America can start producing similar vehicles, I might consider switching brands, but until then, I guess I'm just going to have to be unAmerican.

Besides, how does that make for a "wannabe" pundit? From Nicholas Kristof and his time-wasting O'Reilly/Darfur lambaste to all of Cal Thomas' deceitful right-tard bloviation, there are pundits all over the spectrum that could be categorized as "confluence(s) of blind dogmatic horseshit" and are still considered the "professionals" posting from within "legitimate" mainstream media.

I wonder whether Fridge would care to make a reasoned enlightened review of the article, filling the rest of us in on Reaper's terrible mistakes as a writer, or was that just another easy jab to blindly throw sideways in the middle of the response left?

The extended supply chain for auto makers would effect 13-17 million jobs; this during a period where the US is experiencing a net decline in the number of jobs available. Nearly 1 in 10 jobs in this country is tied to the auto industry. There is no choice for those 13-17 million citizens, we must provide the automakers with assistance.

Or, we could do it later, after they file Chapter 11 and the pension funds stand in line as unsecured creditors and those autoworkers lose their retirement incomes. My guess is those losses become taxpayer losses later when retiring autoworkers seek federal assistance for retirement.

But automakers have a number of problems that any bail out must address:
- operating profits are unacceptable. They must reduce real expenses - and not simply strip away benefits from the workforce

- product focus must be addressed by meeting an unmet market need. SUVs are high margin products, but fail to meet the market need and adding more blue tooth, video screens, and iPod players looks a lot like granite counters and stainless steel appliances in houses. They are very appealing but simply add customer cost and do nothing to further solidify the industry

- downsizing must take place. Within the US and most of Europe, a discrete market exists. The market does not simply continue to grow to support the growth objectives of auto manufacturers. US companies must find a way to compete for growth in India and China while accepting that US and European buyers are now going to hold onto cars longer, purchase used, and struggle with the expense of new car financing

Detroit has voted Democrat for years and now their unemployment is over 9%, keep voiting them in, it will only get worse!

Gm has over 7,000 dealerships and Toyota has 1200, and they are number one in car sales, Unions are to blame, the majority of the bailout would go to the pension funds of retired, not working, employees, I guess the federal government should pay everyone's retirement fund, right?

The unions have already said they WILL NOT work with management, what do they expect, their cars are shit and so are the people working there!

Oh my, where to start?

You start off with a correlation misinterpretation. There's no reason to assume (probably only enough to guess, begging evidence) that the vote has any causal relation to the unemployment.

Then you connect a ratio of GM to Toyota dealerships, dash off a quick factoid, and then connect that to the unions? What effect do auto unions have on the number of dealerships or sales? Neither of these are affected by union policy. Please provide any evidence or logic to show otherwise.

"The unions" have not made any statement like the one you suggest above. That sounded like a Limbaugh quote, man. Geeez...

dude, what part of 'republican economic policies havent benefitted anyone but the rich in three decades' dont you understand?

On NPR (yes, I am a left-wing tree hugging vegetarian type) I heard a very reasoned rationale for letting the car companies go into bankruptcy. This would not put people out of a job, but the car companies could restructured their obligations in a manner that could allow them to compete.

If we do bail them out., ALL of their top management must be replaced with people that can run a business and not a bunch of morons that let the Toyota's of the world eat their lunch.