Ford Power Stroke Nation banner

21 - 40 of 40 Posts

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
One small addition. The original debt (bond holders) financiers before the Government takeover, were forced to take a loss on their money invested by said Government. The Obama administration illegally broke a PRIVATE contract that was agreed upon between GM and it's bond holders. Had GM gone through bankruptcy instead, these holders would have gotten their money. They lost all money put in and were never reimbursed. Basically they absorbed all prior GM debt. To boot those same bond holders were not allowed any purchase of stock at all after the IPO. Wall Street traders would have been locked up and the key thrown away for doing the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
I can't explain the big picture because you can not see it, and you probably never will..
BTW, GM did go into Bankruptcy..
Said investors of any company lose when bankruptcy occurs. This isn't breaking news. When there is a takeover, the bondholders have little to say, and they are damn lucky there was anything left on the table.
Just what is your point?
If your GM's "bondholders" were paid while the company died, and the rest of the nations's GM subcontractors were not, would that be OK in your book?
Do you think GM should have been left for dead, and just toss GM's 252,000 direct employees, and millions of subcontractor employees out on the street??
Would you, or our nation be better off because of it?

Our Government did absolutely the right thing.
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
They most certainly did not go into bankruptcy, otherwise their would not have been a need for a bail out:doh:

Do you even understand what a bond holder is? They were funding GM via purchasing bonds. This capital was used to pay employees and run the entire company. This was in return for money paid back plus a percentage agreed upon at the purchase of the bond later. Our own Government does this as do most every state and city (ever hear of a bond rating?) These persons whom, I guess foolishly, agreed to fund GM's debt lost every last dollar they put in, the same money GM used to operate. When the Government confiscated the company via a GOVERNMENT, not private takeover (a private takeover would have meant the bond holders get their money back plus agreed upon fee) they told the bond holders, whom had put theirs, many other persons money ( retirement funds from every day people for example) etc. to pack sand and that their money was forever gone. Under bankruptcy none of this would have occurred. The company was poorly run, UAW bled it dry, and they went belly up because of it. Why is it any different now. Eventually they will go up again, this time with billions of public dollars with it. Furthermore it is not a Governments place to "allow" success or failure. No where in the 18 enumerated powers is this written.

As for tossing people out in the street. I would not be doing any of that. The UAW would be, and the other automobile companies would grow do to the now bigger market share they have. If they could not meet the needs of buyers, then a new evil investor would start another company via evil "bond holders" and fill whatever void there were. You and I, in the end, get a better product for it and new jobs are formed. Do you think that all these companies around today just came out of nowhere? They came from market need.

What is the big picture that I seem to be not able to grasp? BTW were in not for bond holders, GM and most every company would never have existed in the first place. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
I guess you consider only Chapter 7 true bankruptcy, and maybe so.
Unfortunatly, some companies are too big to fail. Do I agree with it? No.
But, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and I agree with the bail out.
It certainly doesn't change my opinion of the product.

Not only will GM face the same demons down the road, but so will any union automaker, given the right amount of time..
Yes, I understand bonds, and yes, I know you understand the risk involved.
And no, I don't feel sorry for the bondholders who lost their capitol. That's the game..
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with these bailouts


But, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and I agree with the bail out.
:doh:


They lost the bonds at the hands of the Government whom illegally interfered with and broke a private contract, you think this is OK?

But, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few
Karl Marx wrote, and I quote.....
"from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

You claim to understand the bond market, thus the only conclusion is you don't care about the thousands whom lost allot illegally. Therefore ( in your eyes it seems) they are not as important as the "252,000" workers and "millions" ( I would love to see the break down of that info) of subcontractors, why? Millions of citizens will, by your own admission be minus their monies in the future:
Not only will GM face the same demons down the road
for the "good" of a few million (in your words). Is then the few million not the few and the citizens the many? Does this jive with your saying? Why or why not?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
:doh:

I also said the bail outs were the right thing to do, Do you want to argue?
I hold my nose over the whole thing, but Obama did the right thing, is that clear enough?

They lost the bonds at the hands of the Government whom illegally interfered with and broke a private contract, you think this is OK?
Yes, in this case I DOOOOO agree with the move. YESS, it sucks for the Bondholders.......
A little is better than nothing. What would the bonds be worth today if the company no longer exists? Duh....

Do I agree with Eminent Domain? Hell no, but if it betters the world for all, such as an Interstate highway to be built or not to be built, or if it somehow delivers security for others, be it jobs of services, then that's the price some poor individual must pay and it will be the right move for our Govt, do you get it?.
It's the same thing with your Bond arguement.



Karl Marx wrote, and I quote.....
"from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

You claim to understand the bond market, thus the only conclusion is you don't care about the thousands whom lost allot illegally. Therefore ( in your eyes it seems) they are not as important as the "252,000" workers and "millions" ( I would love to see the break down of that info) of subcontractors, why? Millions of citizens will, by your own admission be minus their monies in the future: for the "good" of a few million (in your words). Is then the few million not the few and the citizens the many? Does this jive with your saying? Why or why not?
First, lets fix some spelling..It's spelled in two words, "a lot", not allot.
Two words..
I think you just want to argue your point to death. Although I see your frustration, I have to disagree with your arguement. I'm not really feeling the need to convince you, nor do I really care about your feelings on the matter. We agree to disagree. I'll continue to buy Fords, I just bought a new Chevy for my wife, and I also bought a new Jeep Liberty for my kid. Is it OK to invest in a Chrysler product, or are they on your fail list also?

But just to help you see my point a little clearer.
GM is alive, people are still working and supporting their families. People are buying the product, and it seems the product may be pretty good..
You obviously feel that it would be a better world to let this company fail. Maybe in your own private world, but since the cost of failure doesn't affect you, your family or your life, you are really in no position to lose anything therefore can not see both points clearly, case in point here....
I have nothing to lose either, but many people arouind me have "a lot" to lose.. It's called "big picture"...
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
Arguing with a big government true believer is probably the hardest thing to do in today's country (you ought to try it). It is even harder with voice to text software. Typing is a little difficult at this juncture. I ask for some courtesy in the matter of homonyms or even homophones as it takes a little while to catch them all. You seem to believe that something is only good, true, and possible if it happens through the Federal Government or government in general. Taking from one and giving to another is not charity, it is larceny. No matter if you do it or a group of elected officials do it. You are free to believe as you wish, the problem I have is that under our current Federal Government, your vote AFFECTS (not effects, just saving you some time) my family and it's future. If we were under our Constitution, then what you did in your State would not have an EFFECT in mine. Don't take from my children's future so your wife can drive a certain brand of vehicle. Ford, Honda, Toyota, and many others do not do this, why can Chrysler and GM?

The Interstate Highway System, you really want to argue this was a function of the Federal Government? Claim national defense, as was the original "reason" for it being done, and you can then argue that our Federal Government is limitless. Which would probably suit you fine. Again believe as you must but divorce it from me, my family, and my State. You will find that your system requires my participation, but mine does not reciprocate this necessity. Which is better? Opinions may differ, keep in mind that under mine and our founder's this question is academic at best. Under yours and other statists the question is essential.

If you prefer to parse grammar, spelling, and the matter we can. I am sure quite a few prepositions, run-on and fractured sentences have graced the pages of both of our postings. If you prefer to debate the merits of big government taking from people and then claiming to be helping people at the same time, we can.
I buy based on what is not just a well built and backed product, but what is free market. Given this, one could easily research and find my rants against Ford and Navistar. Were Ford to take bailouts or participate in any other form of fascism tomorrow, then tomorrow they would lose a customer. They would still get some of my labor, risk, and time away from my family in the form of taxed monies. Would this be just, right, or Constitutional?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Did anyone notice the 0-60 times for the Dually w/ the Duramax? Motortrend claimed 7.0 seconds, and at the shootout (Pickuptrucks.com)the time was 8.3 seconds with the same axle ratios and everything. That doesn't sound right at all. I think anyone that is going to put down over 50K will drive both trucks unless they only buy one brand. If they drive both I think they will end up with a blue oval in their driveway.
So far every one I know of that drove both bought the govmotors trucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
Are you serious? Private as in not Government owned, bailed out, etc.
There is a huge difference between PUBLICLY TRADED ( as almost all major corporations are) and PUBLICLY OWNED. LOL

BTW in Government owned ( to prevent confusion ) GM, the IPO went to bailed out banks whom then determined whom could buy stocks. Guess what? Private citizens whom bailed out GM were not among those allowed to buy stock or even given stock in exchange for use of their seized income in the form of Federal Income Tax. Only more bailed out banks, CHINA, and the UAW. China bought tons of stock in GM. hmmm
Just FYI Ford credit took more government money than gmac...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
It's easy to lump people like myself to be lumped in like some liberal, big government lover.
Truth is I started my business young, and up to a few years ago, mortgaged everything I had ever had, made every mistake I could make, and now I have 45+ people working for me. I pay taxes that seem to wipe out the profits I should be taking home. Still, I am extremely fortunate and I'm the LAST guy who you could call a liberal lover of Government.

Having said that, we live in a much more complex global marketplace, one that our founding fathers couldn't have even wildly imagined back when the Constitution was written..
We live in a Capitolistic society that allows for our freedom, as well as a small pond for sharks to prey easily on small fish.
Unions, mobsters, crooked politicians, career welfare cases, Paranha attorneys killing our health care.
It's a complex society, but it works for us and we live a life that is pretty good considering all that is wrong with unbridaled Capitolism.

Now after suffering through an economic theft of our nation's home equity from many, many angles of greed, and our nations 401K savings and borrowing power, I find it hard to let a company the size and scope of GM, AIG or any of the large scumball banks like Citibank fail. Failure, although deserved would affect the final blow to our listing ship of an economy. Consider that..
In a perfect world of Capitolism, they should fail, and let the pieces fall and rebuild where they may. But, what if the economic impact is too great, which I believe would have been enough to push our house of cards off the table.
Sorry, but I don't see this as a chance I would have taken.

I like my lifestyle. I want to preserve it without having to see everyone around my lose their jobs. I provide a service, and my customers have the ability to pay. I like that..
Knowing our tax system, and our Governments penchant for "taking", I'm providing my own security and personal retirement, and not depending on my 401K for anything other than casual spending money when I'm ready move south to enjoy the sun..

You are willing to gamble, I am not. I have much to lose, how about you?
I will support GM for what it is, and that's a "vehicle" that keeps people employed and spending money at my business, and in your community as well.

In closing, what I would like to see are the thieves behind bars. At least Bernie Madoff is getting a little share of hell on Earth before he actually checks in.
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
Ford Credit did not take any Government money, they took a loan form the Federal Reserve directly. I despise the Federal Reserve, but facts are facts. This was addressed earlier in the conversation.

Ford is still private. They did take a loan from the Fed, not the U.S. government. The Fed usually loans to banks first and then to the lenders, but Ford Credit, not Ford Motor took the loan from the Fed. I have my problems with the Fed even existing, but facts are facts.
Normally the Federal Reserve (DID I MENTION I DESPISE THEM?) loans money to banks at a low rate, then said banks loan it to companies and consumers at a higher rate. In this instance the Federal Reserve loaned it directly to Ford, Honda, and other credit arms of corporations at the discounted rate for fast, cheap money. In hopes of unfreezing the credit market. I do not agree with this tactic BTW. Surprised at the number of GM trolls on here.
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
It's easy to lump people like myself to be lumped in like some liberal, big government lover.
Truth is I started my business young, and up to a few years ago, mortgaged everything I had ever had, made every mistake I could make, and now I have 45+ people working for me. I pay taxes that seem to wipe out the profits I should be taking home. Still, I am extremely fortunate and I'm the LAST guy who you could call a liberal lover of Government.

Having said that, we live in a much more complex global marketplace, one that our founding fathers couldn't have even wildly imagined back when the Constitution was written..
We live in a Capitolistic society that allows for our freedom, as well as a small pond for sharks to prey easily on small fish.
Unions, mobsters, crooked politicians, career welfare cases, Paranha attorneys killing our health care.
It's a complex society, but it works for us and we live a life that is pretty good considering all that is wrong with unbridaled Capitolism.

Now after suffering through an economic theft of our nation's home equity from many, many angles of greed, and our nations 401K savings and borrowing power, I find it hard to let a company the size and scope of GM, AIG or any of the large scumball banks like Citibank fail. Failure, although deserved would affect the final blow to our listing ship of an economy. Consider that..
In a perfect world of Capitolism, they should fail, and let the pieces fall and rebuild where they may. But, what if the economic impact is too great, which I believe would have been enough to push our house of cards off the table.
Sorry, but I don't see this as a chance I would have taken.

I like my lifestyle. I want to preserve it without having to see everyone around my lose their jobs. I provide a service, and my customers have the ability to pay. I like that..
Knowing our tax system, and our Governments penchant for "taking", I'm providing my own security and personal retirement, and not depending on my 401K for anything other than casual spending money when I'm ready move south to enjoy the sun..

You are willing to gamble, I am not. I have much to lose, how about you?
I will support GM for what it is, and that's a "vehicle" that keeps people employed and spending money at my business, and in your community as well.

In closing, what I would like to see are the thieves behind bars. At least Bernie Madoff is getting a little share of hell on Earth before he actually checks in.
I said nothing of you being a liberal, as you are not. I am ( in the classical sense, not modern). I know one when I see one, you sir definitely are not one. I did say you were a big government statist, very different. Gambling, as you called it, is the only reason we have anything today. To guarantee no failure is also to guarantee no success. The little "gamble Henry Ford took, or Thomas Edison, or even more importantly our founders. Talk about a gamble.

I also notice the almost purposeful syntax errors in your post, the message is still clear however. It is true I gamble every day I go to work, in ways you may not be able to relate to or imagine, so I will spare that correlation as it is of my choosing to do so. AS for my community. The GM dealer went bust here. The people whom were employed there somehow survived and moved on. We now have two new car repair shops because of this, and the Ford dealer gained a few more sales staff, mechanics and the like. The same for the Toyota and Honda dealers respectively. The GM dealer was a huge Conservative activist in our neck of the woods and was one of the dealers shut down by our all benevolent handlers in Washington. The dealer re-opened a few months ago, shocker with one of the biggest Democrat names in MD. The only caveat, he brought in his own staff.

CapitAlism is not what I endorse or believe in. Free market capitalism is what I believe in. We haven't had this in decades. Most everything today is a form of crony-capitalism ergo Fascism. Elected officials are shoveling our tax dollars to there pals and writing regulations and laws to snuff out there pal's competition. Not much different than Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy, or Adolf's Germany. Even the Soviet's had a from of this in their Communist regimes ( as do the modern day Chinese). You almost recite the statist talking points of our current regime to the "T". Why is that?
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
By the by, Happy 219th Anniversary!:rockon::rockon::rockon:
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
George C, I do like the colors of your truck. I think we will agree on that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Let me also clarify.
When I reference lost GM jobs, I don't necessarily mean jobs working for GM, such as dealership jobs. I live close to Buffalo, NY.
Rust belt heaven.
Many GM, Ford and Mopar subcontracting companies reside there, along with an engine plant, and an axle plant. Lots of jobs to be affected.
A friend of mine has a metal and plastic stamping plant which presses out light housings for the auto industry.
Truck-lite lighting resides 30 miles from me, as well as another company which makes radiators and air conditioning cores for GM. These are the "colateral" damage jobs I refer to.
 

·
Diesel Therapist
Joined
·
153 Posts
I respect and understand that, but could they not also manufacturer for other industries and/or auto makers? Perhaps we could become competitive on the world stage and be a manufacturer for worldwide automakers etc. Ford deifiniteley should have used the suppliers you listed for their radiators in the Job 1 08's.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
695 Posts
Iirc the chevy did stop faster than the ford as well as getting it's self moving faster. I know the exhaust brake outperforms the Ford by a large margin which is a major factor when towing heavy. Like it or not Gov Motors is stealing Fords show.

Not in sales not at all. Gov motors has a long way to go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Not in sales not at all. Gov motors has a long way to go.
Umm, not really, in fact they "GM" are either very close, or outright lead Ford in total sales..
What stops GM from comparable sales for the last 20 years is simply because they are dividing two name-plates as seperate entities, to Ford's one.
I think we can all agree that the Silverado and the Sierra are the same truck that appeals to the same GM buyer, therefore should be counted together in the general popularity contest.
2009 Pickup Truck Sales - Comparing 2008 and 2009 Truck Sales Statistics


2008-09 sales figures claim Ford sold 515,513 F series trucks.
GMC and Chevrolet combined sold 633,609 Silverado-Sierra units.
That makes "Government Motors as you put it, the sales leader by over 118,000 rigs. I don't know if they taught arithmatic in your neck of the wood, but that's more trucks than Ford, which means that Ford is the one with a long way to go.
Around here, there are probably 10 GM trucks to every single Ford. I don't see it, but obviously most people prefer GM.
Personally, I've driven both, and the Duramax has always impressed me more. There is nothing about the 6.7L that makes me want to trade my tuned 6.4L.
IMO,Ford has always had the better looking, better built heavy truck. I guess others disagree in large numbers.
 
21 - 40 of 40 Posts
Top