Fiat makes final payment to US gov't for Chrysler bailout

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]I'm not sure if this is true, but I've got a steriotype in my head that conservatives actually are more likely to buy american, especially trucks, and liberals are more likely to buy small gas efficient forein cars. I don't know if that's true, I've just seen a few things that would suggest that to me.topsemag55

I'm just afraid I'd end up hurting myself badly on one.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

YellowOneKinobi

:| The company ISN'T failing any more.. It has been restructured and reorganized for profitability.. In normal matters it would have been liquidated.. But if this company were to collapse at this time it would lead to a even greater economic diseaster.. In which we may have far more problems going.. This was necessary due to the failing economy, if our economy was not ailing so badly, I would agree..

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

Here you go Ace. Do some reading, it's go for you.

The auto-bailouts were a joke. Sorry, bud.

Article 1

Article 2

Article 3

SpartanMSU

3 facts

1. The government was paid back in full. (gov't and citizens that footed the money win)

2. The company is not growing and sales are increasing on what is now profit. (state, gov't and citizens win)

3. Jobs have been saved and more are being created because the company is not only making a profit, but sales are increasing (workers win)

My question is, who loses? Guess it's bad the gov't/workers now have more sources of money (I don't see the logic in that)

Now why do you want michigan to fail so badly? I know you've probably got ur head stuck in the ground with all these holes you keep talking about digging, but despite that. I can't believe that you are unaware that 4 companies in Michigan (4th being dow) are the States biggest sources of income, every single one employs 50,000 people are more in this state alone, and the does not include other business that work for those companies which would account for hundreds of thosands of jobs. Ccompanies, including business' ranked 5-20 in this are very small compared to those 4, this is a huge problem with the Michigan economy, and maybe you're unaware of this. The gap is so big, that if one of those 4 went down, there would not be anybody to pick up the slack.

The current unemployment rate in Michigan is over 15%, and if chrysler went down, hundreds of thousands would become unemployed, thousands would have to leave this state, and I don't know how you could consider that a good thing.

Seriously, if you dislike Michigan this much, you should just leave, wanting this states economy to go down in flames isn't helping anybody.

Did you forget to read the article? It explains everything much better than I can. I don't feel like typing a lesson in economics in essay format for you.

But go ahead, think with your heart and not your brain.

Oh, and yes, I just want Michigan to fail, your right. It's not like there are other solutions that would end up better for Michigan and the entire economy in the long run. No, couldn't be. Anyone who doesn't agree with CaveJohnson1 is clearly and idiot and has a strong desire for Michigan to fail. That must be it.

Like I've said, I can't believe you live in this state, it's really really hard not to have looked around you and at least gotten a rough idea that there are some big problems, and to think that Chrysler wouldn't exacerbate these massive problems, ie. 15% unemployment, 4 companies holding up the majority of the economy, ect. then you've got ur head deep in that hole. Maybe you should stop working at your hole digging company long enough to actually talk to people from michigan, maybe turn on the news, or gez, even look at wikipedia....something is better than having no idea at all.

Now, I don't know where you get heart from *cough* having no real arguments so you resort to strawman and ad hominem *cough* this is purely a logic game.

What's for the economy?

Government made it's money back and now is making nothing but profit from this company in taxes (you do remember this is how modern governments make money right? It made over 42 billion dollars last year in income, and considering what tax rates are, that's alot of money that is being pumped into the struggling Michigan and U.S. economies.

50,000 people kept their jobs in the company, and probably another 300,000 thousand kept jobs that were directly tied to that company. You see on the news how there's high unemployment in the U.S. (I think it's like 9%). But for some reason you think putting those people out of jobs would help the economy. I don't even know what to think here on your part.

I don't know what they taught you at MSU (I doubt you went there) but you should have learned that blogs and random sites are not good sources btw. See what I sourced? CNN? That's a good source. Sites called "quando" first source and a site by a guy who is blatently anti liberalthirs source, are not good sources.

The gov't gave chrysler training wheels now the wheels are off, it's continuing to inprove and it even paid the gov't back for the training wheels. I don't see what the problem is.

Next order of business: Bring Alfa Romeo to the US?

realguitarhero5

I would cry tears of joy.

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]I seem to remember you saying that you're going to leave this thread....several times. But it's cool that you've cited articles, rather than discussing those articles or bringing up yours or sombody elses arguments :roll:

3 facts

1. The government was paid back in full. (gov't and citizens that footed the money win)

2. The company is not growing and sales are increasing on what is now profit. (state, gov't and citizens win)

3. Jobs have been saved and more are being created because the company is not only making a profit, but sales are increasing (workers win)

My question is, who loses? Guess it's bad the gov't/workers now have more sources of money (I don't see the logic in that)

Now why do you want michigan to fail so badly? I know you've probably got ur head stuck in the ground with all these holes you keep talking about digging, but despite that. I can't believe that you are unaware that 4 companies in Michigan (4th being dow) are the States biggest sources of income, every single one employs 50,000 people are more in this state alone, and the does not include other business that work for those companies which would account for hundreds of thosands of jobs. Ccompanies, including business' ranked 5-20 in this are very small compared to those 4, this is a huge problem with the Michigan economy, and maybe you're unaware of this. The gap is so big, that if one of those 4 went down, there would not be anybody to pick up the slack.

The current unemployment rate in Michigan is over 15%, and if chrysler went down, hundreds of thousands would become unemployed, thousands would have to leave this state, and I don't know how you could consider that a good thing.

Seriously, if you dislike Michigan this much, you should just leave, wanting this states economy to go down in flames isn't helping anybody.

CaveJohnson1

Did you forget to read the article? It explains everything much better than I can. I don't feel like typing a lesson in economics in essay format for you.

But go ahead, think with your heart and not your brain.

Oh, and yes, I just want Michigan to fail, your right. It's not like there are other solutions that would end up better for Michigan and the entire economy in the long run. No, couldn't be. Anyone who doesn't agree with CaveJohnson1 is clearly and idiot and has a strong desire for Michigan to fail. That must be it.

Like I've said, I can't believe you live in this state, it's really really hard not to have looked around you and at least gotten a rough idea that there are some big problems, and to think that Chrysler wouldn't exacerbate these massive problems, ie. 15% unemployment, 4 companies holding up the majority of the economy, ect. then you've got ur head deep in that hole. Maybe you should stop working at your hole digging company long enough to actually talk to people from michigan, maybe turn on the news, or gez, even look at wikipedia....something is better than having no idea at all.

Now, I don't know where you get heart from *cough* having no real arguments so you resort to strawman and ad hominem *cough* this is purely a logic game.

What's for the economy?

Government made it's money back and now is making nothing but profit from this company in taxes (you do remember this is how modern governments make money right? It made over 42 billion dollars last year in income, and considering what tax rates are, that's alot of money that is being pumped into the struggling Michigan and U.S. economies.

50,000 people kept their jobs in the company, and probably another 300,000 thousand kept jobs that were directly tied to that company. You see on the news how there's high unemployment in the U.S. (I think it's like 9%). But for some reason you think putting those people out of jobs would help the economy. I don't even know what to think here on your part.

I don't know what they taught you at MSU (I doubt you went there) but you should have learned that blogs and random sites are not good sources btw. See what I sourced? CNN? That's a good source. Sites called "quando" first source and a site by a guy who is blatently anti liberalthirs source, are not good sources.

The gov't gave chrysler training wheels now the wheels are off, it's continuing to inprove and it even paid the gov't back for the training wheels. I don't see what the problem is.

I refuse to respond to anythign until you read those article. If it's purely a numbers thing, then you would agree with me. Apparently accounting or finance wasn't your major. All of the information comes from the government due to the Freedom of Information act. They are facts. There isn't even anything to argue here. The sites are irrelevant. They are simply discussing the facts how exactly Chrysler and GM "paid back" their loans. And how the Obama adminstration and the Treasury Department KNEW that GM was lying in it's advertisements about paying back the loan. It's all in THEIR documents. I'm not making this stuff up buddy.

Go ahead though. Keep claiming that I hate Michigan just because I think what's best for the state and country differs from what you think. Just like the people who disagree with the wars in the Middle East hate the U.S. Riiiight. Solid argument.

I refuse to respond to anythign until you read those article. If it's purely a numbers thing, then you would agree with me. Apparently accounting or finance wasn't your major. All of the information comes from the government due to the Freedom of Information act. They are facts. There isn't even anything to argue here. The sites are irrelevant. They are simply discussing the facts how exactly Chrysler and GM "paid back" their loans. And how the Obama adminstration and the Treasury Department KNEW that GM was lying in it's advertisements about paying back the loan. It's all in THEIR documents. I'm not making this stuff up buddy.

Go ahead though. Keep claiming that I hate Michigan just because I think what's best for the state and country differs from what you think. Just like the people who disagree with the wars in the Middle East hate the U.S. Riiiight. Solid argument.

SpartanMSU

FYI, costing thousands of jobs and billions of dollars isn't good for the economy, I don't have to be a finance major to know that. That's common sense.

Once again, way to attack me and not my points again.

I read through your articles, the first and third are from such bad sources and so biasedly written that I don't know what you're thinking.

The second one has some bias against it, but it's much better than the other two, but.....it's about GM, not chrysler. I don't think you bothered to read this, you just copy/pasted the first thing you could find on the net.

Nice, I thought about getting a motorcycle at one point. Cheaper cost, easier/cheaper to maintain, and women seem to love them.

I'm just afraid I'd end up hurting myself badly on one.

CaveJohnson1

I read through your articles, the first and third are from such bad sources and so biasedly written that I don't know what you're thinking.

The second one has some bias against it, but it's much better than the other two, but.....it's about GM, not chrysler. I don't think you bothered to read this, you just copy/pasted the first thing you could find on the net.

CaveJohnson1

I had a fairly long post typed our clearly explaining everything because apparently the sources were too difficult for you to understand. Unfortunately, I accidently exed out of GS. So I'm just going to say this;

The articles I posted got their sources from places like Reuters, CNN, information obtained using the FoI act, the Inspector General for TARP, and an FTC investigation. I guess you didn't bother to click on the links they conveniently provided. They didn't simply make this information up. Hell, even The New York Times and San Franciso Chronicle agree.

The first article I posted was basically to explain to you, in a somewhat detailed fashion, the Supply-Side economists view of this situation, and not just the Keynesian view. Because apparently you think that there's only one school of economic thought and anyone who thinks differently than you is an idiot and just hates Michigan. Under the Supply-Side or Austrian school of economic thought, YOU would actually be the one who hates Michigan, not me.

And obviously the concept of bankruptcy and what happens during one is unknown to you. Try doing a little research. The devil doesn't come out of the ground and burn all the companies assets and employees, if that's what you're thinking.:)

One more thing, can I ask what kind of car you drive?