Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So in other words if GM hadn't have taken the government money they would have had smaller layoffs like Ford did?
The larger layoffs at GM were coming regardless of whether or not they took government money - and I venture that had they NOT taken government money and simply collapsed the layoffs might well have been EVEN BIGGER.
The fact is, you are trying to make the claim (or at least imply) that the GM layoffs were bigger BECAUSE they took government bailouts - which is *ss-backwards from what the situation was. The government bailout didn't CAUSE the layoffs at GM - GM management's failure to address the issue early (the way Ford managment did) is what caused the heavier layoffs at GM).The longer they waited the worse the problem got. By the time the government stepped in the damage at GM was ALREADy in place and drastic action was going to be necessary.
Again, your apparent lack of even basic logic is appaling.
Ken
PS - and by the way, GM IS on the upswing:
"DETROIT (Reuters) - General Motors Co GM.UL said on Wednesday it was on track to post its first monthly year-over-year U.S. sales increase for the first time in 21 months, amid signs of a gradual recovery for the industry and the economy.
"I would say that clearly there are signs that the economy is emerging from the worst recession in 70 years," GM sales analyst Mike DiGiovanni said in a briefing with reporters at the automaker's Detroit headquarters.
DiGiovanni said GM's October U.S. auto sales were on track for the automaker to show its first year-over-year sales increase since January 2008. "This would be a really positive sign for GM," he said."
Basically we wll all have to wait until we see the next quarter without the cash for clunkers incentive to see how any of them are doing.
To be fair, Ford said in the article that they expect full profitable stability in 2011, so the C4C program did what it was supposed to do, but can't sustain beyond that.
It gave the industry a jolt to carry it through a tough time. I wouldn't expect it to guide profits going forward.
So in other words if GM hadn't have taken the government money they would have had smaller layoffs like Ford did?
Where are you getting that from? Are you just trying to put words in peoples mouths attempting to make your own argument more valid?
I never said that if they didn't take government money their layoffs would have been smaller, what I am saying is that even though they took government money, they still had huge layoffs.
Thats a fact.
No where did I nor anybody else state the positive or negative impacts of the bailout, only that the facts are stating that even with the bailout they still had massive layoffs... fox didn't.
Thus, validating the importance or impact of the bailout. It was a bad decision to give them that money. <---- that is my opinion, and you may quote me on that.
There's no real correlation between taking the money and layoffs. Of course GM had to have layoffs. They fought it for years.
I'm pretty happy that, if our tax money is going to be temporarily invested in the last of our domestic industrial base, that we have strong oversight to get GM righted again and on its own.
Way to go, Ford. Truly a great American company of which we all can be proud!
There's no real correlation between taking the money and layoffs. Of course GM had to have layoffs. They fought it for years.
I'm pretty happy that, if our tax money is going to be temporarily invested in the last of our domestic industrial base, that we have strong oversight to get GM righted again and on its own.
Way to go, Ford. Truly a great American company of which we all can be proud!
By strong oversight, are you referring to Brian Desee the 31 year old not-quite law school grad who has been running Obama's auto task force? Mr. Desee has no automotive experience, other than learning how to drive a car.
If someone tried to write this for a political show like the West Wing, it would get junked as too unbelievable. I guess sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
By strong oversight, are you referring to Brian Desee the 31 year old not-quite law school grad who has been running Obama's auto task force? Mr. Desee has no automotive experience, other than learning how to drive a car.
If someone tried to write this for a political show like the West Wing, it would get junked as too unbelievable. I guess sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
No, I don't mean that. I don't understand that move at all. Even if he is brilliant at it, Obama should have seen the PR nightmare it would create and the image problem. Misstep for sure.
I just meant that I don't intrinsically disagree with gerrymandering a company that has proven itself unwilling to shake itself up over the years.
Essentially, if GM is going to survive, it needed fresh blood to step in. If our tax dollars are going to prop them up, then perhaps we (through our government) are the ones that can force that new perspective in.
I know GM well, and they were stuck in a rut no amount of money would fix. They needed money and structural help. To do one without the other would have been a blatant waste of tax dollars.
By strong oversight, are you referring to Brian Desee the 31 year old not-quite law school grad who has been running Obama's auto task force? Mr. Desee has no automotive experience, other than learning how to drive a car.
Neither did Alan Mulally before he took over Ford - and it just reported a nearly $1 billion profit.
GM's former head Rick Wagoner had nearly 30 years experience and ran the company into the ground.
Political partisanship has been extended to include cheering and booing for success and failure of car companies. Simply amazing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
