Chrysler to file bankruptcy

[ChallengerGary]

I don't have a problem with the taxpayer's owning part of something - it's called stock.  I have a problem with the taxers deciding what to do without any regard for the will of the people.  Can you say taxation without representation?  I have a problem with people that have never had a real job telling anyone how to run their business.  Afterall, these "representatives" of the people constantly spend more money than they make - the exact thing that drives companies to bankruptcy.  If they cannot be bothered to go to work everyday, like you and I; Balance their checkbook, like you and I;  and listen to their bosses (that would be you and I); how can they possibly know what it is like in the real world? 

Also, I never said H. Hoover was a better President than F.D.R.  I just pointed out that some "experts" have said that F.D.R.'s New Deal may have lengthened the Great Depression.  Yes, The FDIC was created during F.D.R's first term.  It was a great idea to restore trust in the banking system.  But if the results without it would have been so drastic such as the collapse of our entire economy, why did the Great Depression last 9 more years?  And why then only as a result of Pearl Harbor and the subsequent entry of the US into WWII did the US economy snap out of it's malaise?  The GI bill had nothing to do with it.  It was the hard work of the US people willing to join together, sacrifice, and get back to work. 

Your argument about tainted water etc also points out the fact that gov't, in our country, has the primary function of watch dog.  Not that of producer of consumer goods.  Want to see examples of how well that works when Gov't runs industry - see the USSR and Cuba.   When you have the watchers overseeing themselves as the producers, you are inviting in corruption, malaise, and stagnation.

Sorry but I do not want to live in a country where the Gov't owns & controls too much.  I want to live in the country that rewards excellence, encourages innovation, and respects the limits of governmental power.

[dutch]

fiat 500 SRT.   

    

[hebeegbz]

where can i place my order for a hemi fiat topolino . boy that would make a great rat trap.

[72hemi]

   

I like it, maybe now Chrysler will be able to compete in the econobox class.

[ragtopdodge]

ragtopchally, you are absolutely correct in saying pure capitalism won't work. Half the communities in the country would be Love Canals. But the point is moot- we are so far from pure capitalism (I assume we both mean unfettered free enterprise) that it merits little discussion. Witness the amount of government involvement in every aspect of our lives. Some necessary, perhaps, but much of it dubious.

More germane to the discussion here is the attitude typified by the photo accompanying your posts- that of what I assume is a minimally educated disgruntled union type advocating "buy American" to save his job.

Every day millions of consumers make economic decisions based on their own economic self-interests. You do it, I do it. From the loaf of bread we buy to the cars we buy to the college our kids select. But let's confine the discussion to autos here. We buy our cars based on a number of reasons, right? Towing capacity, gas mileage, reliabilty, resale value, snob appeal, performance-you name it, whatever factors are important to us. THIS is what sells cars, not where they are made. If Chrysler, or any other auto maker, foreign or domestic, makes what people want, they WILL sell cars. Whether their headquarters are based in Tokyo or Detroit is of little or no consequence to 99% of the consumers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I read you and some others advocating is we should set aside our economic self-interests when it comes to the purchase of automobiles and let where the car is manufactured by the most significant factor in our decision. We should do this in clear disregard of the possibility we COULD be supporting a poorly-managed company producing subquality cars manufactured by unionized workers, half of whom probably drive Hondas or Toyotas or Fords?

Apples v. oranges.

Japan/Korea/Europe has the luxury of ALL their workers having health care.   The big 3 pays BILLIONS of dollars towards healthcare.

Also, Jap/Kor/Euro allows VERY FEW AMerican cars into their markets.  We allow ALL of them.

I agree, all three Detroit companies made poor decisions w/lousy styling and horrid interiors, but they are getting better.  I also think much is made of Japanese reliability.  I had a Toyota Corolla blew its engine TWICE! Toyota Tundras are known for rusted out frames.  I think you have biased media who love nothing but Honda/Toyota.

ALso, if you think buying import is just as patriotic as buying American, then you have diff. values then me and the guy w/the picket sign.

[priderocks]

ragtop, I guess what I was trying to say is that I perceive few consumers viewing economic decisions through patriotic glasses. When someone is trying to decide between a Honda and a Ford, the fact that one company pays more or less for medical insurance than another doesn't really factor into their decision. If you are saying it should, I think that might be unrealistic to expect of a car buyer. It goes back to what I said about economic decisions being made in an individuals self-interest. Few consumers are concerned about level playing fields. And any advertisements by the Big Three in which they whined about Japanese import restrictions would be laughed at by the consumer. I work pretty hard for my money, and when it comes time to spend it, I don't have the financial latitude to factor in social, political, or even patriotic stuff into that decision. Maybe our differences are you feeling purchases should be patriotic rather than economic choices. That may sell US flags, but I doubt it will sell autos.

The other thing people seem to not understand is the reason companies exist in the first place. Companies aren't in business to further social causes. Nor are they in business to further American national interests, such as perserverance of American jobs. They are in business to make money. As an example, there are a ton of illegal immigrants in my town. The local branch of Bank of America caters to those demographics- everything in the bank is in two languages. They facilitate transfers of money to Mexico. Of course, drivers licenses aren't required to cash checks or do transactions, because the illegals don't have them. When I go in the bank, I could easily be in some foreign country. All the tellers are required to be bilingual. If Bank of America can make just as much money servicing illegals as citizens, rest assured they will. They are in business to make as much money as they can, from whoever they can make it from. In fact, B of A would not really care if all their customers were drug runners and gun smugglers.

Chrysler assembles its trucks in Mexico and buys parts from other countries for the same reason B of A serves immigrants. It makes economic sense to do so.

[Chryco Psycho]

Personally I have seen a lot of problems with Toyodas , a lot have major engine failures with relatively low milage . If you are convinced they are made better just keep the wool over your eyes & send you $$ to Japan

[priderocks]

People have different experiences. I have a Toyota pickup I bought new, now with 211,000 miles. The carb has never been touched, period. It runs like a top. I have a 2002 Suburban, also bought new. Failed axle bearings at 51,000 miles. I'm sure people have had great experiences with Suburbans and terrible experience with Toyotas. But all those boring anectdotal stories are meaningless. The point I'm making is the vast majority of people are not playing the Star Spangled Banner (or "O Canada") when they pull into the car dealership.