PDA

View Full Version : Jesus effing christ - I mean god damn GM


JonIrenicus
02-17-2009, 08:02 PM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abO1EKRCSf1I&refer=home


47 THOUSAND job cuts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@@@@@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


that is the most insane number I have ever heard.

TwinSwords
02-17-2009, 11:32 PM
Welcome to Bushworld.

bjkeefe
02-18-2009, 02:11 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abO1EKRCSf1I&refer=home


47 THOUSAND job cuts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@@@@@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


that is the most insane number I have ever heard.

That was my reaction (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/02/have-you-driven-ford-lately.html), too:

Shorter GM and Chrysler:

Hi, everybody! It's us again! Give us lots more money and we promise to lay off lots more workers! It's a win-win!

AemJeff
02-18-2009, 12:06 PM
That was my reaction (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/02/have-you-driven-ford-lately.html), too:

Meh. I don't know how to evaluate the merits of the numbers they're using, though I'm willing to assume the worst; but laying off fifty thousand is arguably better than sinking completely and killing a quarter-million jobs.

Still, you're right about how about it looks.

bjkeefe
02-18-2009, 12:27 PM
Meh. I don't know how to evaluate the merits of the numbers they're using, though I'm willing to assume the worst; but laying off fifty thousand is arguably better than sinking completely and killing a quarter-million jobs.

Still, you're right about how about it looks.

I'd agree with you about laying off 20-25% of the workforce as being plausibly necessary to save the company, but not on top of all the money they already got, and all the more money they're asking for now. Figuring $30 billion and a quarter-million employees, it's be cheaper to buy the company, shut it down completely, and pay every single one of those people $100,000 each.

I know it's not really that simple, but you get my point.

AemJeff
02-18-2009, 12:50 PM
I'd agree with you about laying off 20-25% of the workforce as being plausibly necessary to save the company, but not on top of all the money they already got, and all the more money they're asking for now. Figuring $30 billion and a quarter-million employees, it's be cheaper to buy the company, shut it down completely, and pay every single one of those people $100,000 each.

I know it's not really that simple, but you get my point.

Totally. It's really the not-simpleness of it that motivated me to post.

JoeK
02-18-2009, 02:15 PM
Before it was cool, a friend of mine used to say FDR would have been considered the worst president ever, had WWII not happened.
I wonder what that forebodes for Obama's presidency. I mean, given there is no major war on a horizon coming to his rescue .

TwinSwords
02-18-2009, 05:38 PM
Before it was cool, a friend of mine used to say FDR would have been considered the worst president ever, had WWII not happened.
I wonder what that forebodes for Obama's presidency. I mean, given there is no major war on a horizon coming to his rescue .

I don't think the things your friend said about FDR forbode anything for Obama.

JoeK
02-18-2009, 05:51 PM
I don't think the things your friend said about FDR forbode anything for Obama.

That sentence has some tortured logic, I'll give you that.
But what I really wanted to ask is when do we start calling this crisis Obama-Depression? How long do we have to wait? May I start calling it now? May I? May I? May I, pleeease?

bjkeefe
02-18-2009, 09:57 PM
That sentence has some tortured logic, I'll give you that.
But what I really wanted to ask is when do we start calling this crisis Obama-Depression? How long do we have to wait? May I start calling it now? May I? May I? May I, pleeease?

Might as well begin right away. After all, it's not like you wingnuts ever hampered yourself with facts before. Why start now?

TwinSwords
02-18-2009, 11:42 PM
That sentence has some tortured logic, I'll give you that.
The logic wasn't tortured: your language was. I was simply poking fun at the sloppy way you seemed to be implying that something your friend said "forebodes" ominously for Obama.

And by the way, there's nothing new about wingnuts hating FDR, and it's certainly not suddenly "cool," despite your fantasies to the contrary. If you thought your friend's opinion of FDR was somehow unusual, you must never have spent much time talking to conservatives about the four term president who remains one of our most beloved for reasons you will never fathom.



But what I really wanted to ask is when do we start calling this crisis Obama-Depression?
I implore you: Go on the record early and often with that lunatic assertion, because when the economy does turn around, it will help to further discredit your already completely discredited worldview.

JoeK
02-19-2009, 01:49 AM
And by the way, there's nothing new about wingnuts hating FDR, and it's certainly not suddenly "cool," despite your fantasies to the contrary.

There is nothing new under the sun. There was nothing new about ideas New Atheists came out with couple of years ago. Still, they were called new with a reason.
The ideas questioning FDR's legacy are not new, but they sure get more air time these days.
By the way, calling it "cool" was ironic and self-deprecating, but whatever.

If you thought your friend's opinion of FDR was somehow unusual, you must never have spent much time talking to conservatives

Those working in MSM (e.g. bhtv's George Johnson) must have spent even less, judging how startled they are when they find out there is a conservative case against New Deal, let alone against the personality cult surrounding FDR. Actually, I don't remember ever hearing anything against FDR in MSM.

about the four term president who remains one of our most beloved for reasons you will never fathom.

Ha, ha. Victorious war leader adored and mythologized by his people - quite a mystery.

I implore you: Go on the record early and often with that lunatic assertion, because when the economy does turn around, it will help to further discredit your already completely discredited worldview.
I imagine when you say you, you mean Republicans and conservatives.
Republicans have been horribly inapt in getting out information on how much blame for the current crisis lies on Democrats (Barney Frank and Chris Dowd) and what a big fat lie "American free market economy" has been for some time. It baffles me why they couldn't do a better job on the former, and still waiting for them to come around and realize the latter.

bjkeefe
02-19-2009, 01:53 AM
I imagine when you say you, you mean Republicans and conservatives.
Republicans have been horribly inapt in getting out information on how much blame for the current crisis lies on Democrats (Barney Frank and Chris Dowd) and what a big fat lie "American free market economy" has been for some time. It baffles me why they couldn't do a better job on the former, and still waiting for them to come around and realize the latter.

Yeah, if there's one thing the GOP and movement conservatives need to work on, it's improving their ability to smear and shift the blame to others. They totally have no idea how to do any of that.

/sarcasm (with apologies to RW)

cragger
02-19-2009, 04:36 PM
From what I saw about the GM plan, they are still keeping five different brands- GMC, Chevrolet, Pontaic, Buick, and Caddilac. So they will still have a good 2.5 times the beauracratic overhead of the companies that have been clobbering them, and continue making too many models with minor differentiation, etc. The plan reeks of "what is the least we can get away with doing, and still get another mountain of cash from the taxpayers".

Seems like the Detroit Three have spent most of their time since about 1970 digging in their heels and being dragged forward by the government and foreign competition, kicking and crying every step of the way.

AemJeff
02-19-2009, 05:08 PM
From what I saw about the GM plan, they are still keeping five different brands- GMC, Chevrolet, Pontaic, Buick, and Caddilac. So they will still have a good 2.5 times the beauracratic overhead of the companies that have been clobbering them, and continue making too many models with minor differentiation, etc. The plan reeks of "what is the least we can get away with doing, and still get another mountain of cash from the taxpayers".

Seems like the Detroit Three have spent most of their time since about 1970 digging in their heels and being dragged forward by the government and foreign competition, kicking and crying every step of the way.

Yeah - I don't completely disagree. Add Saab to the list of brands they own, btw. What excuse does Buick have to continue to exist? Even my father-in-law drives a Camry instead of a LeSabre these days. But, it's also true that Toyota, eg, additionally owns Lexus and Scion, and is thinking of spinning Prius off as a brand; so the bureaucratic overhead problem isn't unique to GM. I'd also say that among American car companies Ford, who, by the way doesn't have their hand out, makes product superior to either of its domestic competitors. (Of my last four cars, two have been Hondas and two have been Fords.) So I'd say it's really sort of a mixed bag.

Like I said to Brendan, I was really just reacting to the generic idea that the scale of the proposed layoff was ipso-facto an indication of evil intent. I'm fully prepared to believe in evil intent from that quarter, but this isn't the evidence that will convince me.

JoeK
02-19-2009, 05:39 PM
What excuse does Buick have to continue to exist?
Chinamen love Buick.

Thumbs up for Chinese! They are my favorite race.