Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: U.S. loses $1.3 billion in exiting Chrysler

  1. #16
    Member TehSuig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Formerly known as Suigenesis before the great crash
    Posts
    753

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mujo2000 View Post
    That's when the .gov came in. Either way, I don't see why it's OK to shovel money out the window for F-35 or F-22 in order to preserve capabilities and create jobs, but $1.3 billion loss on Chrysler is the heaven falling down.
    There's also the little fact that national defense is a constitutionally mandated function of the federal government. Shoveling tax payer(of Fed created) money into private business is not.

  2. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TehSuig View Post
    There's also the little fact that national defense is a constitutionally mandated function of the federal government. Shoveling tax payer(of Fed created) money into private business is not.
    if that's the case they should end all subsidies..

  3. #18
    How's that Hopey Changey thing workin'? C.Puffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Leading maxima10 around by the nose.
    Posts
    23,395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justin84 View Post
    Sometimes national defense isnt always in the best interest of the everybody. For example: The Bradley and Stryker...
    You'd have to ask the Army if the Bradley and Stryker are worth the money.

  4. #19
    Senior Member Mujo2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Are those Lancashire pigs?
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TehSuig View Post
    There's also the little fact that national defense is a constitutionally mandated function of the federal government. Shoveling tax payer(of Fed created) money into private business is not.
    puhhhleease.

    .gov shovels money at every **** who has themselves a lobyist in D.C. C'mon.

  5. #20
    Member TehSuig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Formerly known as Suigenesis before the great crash
    Posts
    753

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mujo2000 View Post
    puhhhleease.

    .gov shovels money at every **** who has themselves a lobyist in D.C. C'mon.
    Exactly. And therein lies the problem.

  6. #21
    Senior Member commanding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    For God and Country, I pass Geronimo, Geronimo EKIA
    Age
    67
    Posts
    8,587

    Default

    I have a comment loosely related to this....on the Superbowl commercial, with Clint Eastwood, which was a commercial paid for and promoting Chrysler and their family of vehicles.....I liked the "message" of the commercial. I know, it cost a bundle and bailed out Chrysler paid for it, etc.

    However....the message was good IMHO, and whoever paid for it, no matter if it was the Post Office, the White House, the Pentagon, Homeland Security....still thought it was an uplifting message and I prefer that to some of the mindless BS on most commercials during the big game.

    just my 2 cents, even if you don't care.

  7. #22
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    dark side of the moon
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.Puffs View Post
    There's this little thing called "national defense". That's just a bit more important than bailing out union cronies.
    Good Jobs are more important than expensive toys that won´t help you fighting terrorism anyways. Or do you want to rely completely on China?

  8. #23
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    dark side of the moon
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mujo2000 View Post
    I don't see why it's OK to shovel money out the window for F-35 or F-22 in order to preserve capabilities and create jobs, but $1.3 billion loss on Chrysler is the heaven falling down.
    So true...the whole defence sector is too large and depends solely on state expenditures. It will never be really profitable for the state and should be reduced in favour of more commercializable products such as cars and stuff you can actually export in order to correct your trade balance.

  9. #24
    A raging feminist's trauma haunts me to this day
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Age
    32
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.Puffs View Post
    Except it's never that simple. You also have to keep your industrial base intact unless you want to be up $hit creek without a paddle down the road
    That sounds like a good argument about the necessity of ensuring the health of the nation's heavy industry. Look, I'm not down on national defense, I'm just less ideological than you about what constitutes national interests. Preserving a sector of American industry to be reformed and refocused for the future rather than letting it go belly up - to me that seems like a pretty good use of taxpayer money. In the end, all of us are better off I think.

  10. #25
    Milo Drinker of Death Flagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    The (South)Island of Misfit Toys
    Posts
    14,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by commanding View Post
    I have a comment loosely related to this....on the Superbowl commercial, with Clint Eastwood, which was a commercial paid for and promoting Chrysler and their family of vehicles.....I liked the "message" of the commercial. I know, it cost a bundle and bailed out Chrysler paid for it, etc.

    However....the message was good IMHO, and whoever paid for it, no matter if it was the Post Office, the White House, the Pentagon, Homeland Security....still thought it was an uplifting message and I prefer that to some of the mindless BS on most commercials during the big game.

    just my 2 cents, even if you don't care.
    I liked it.....I give it a B+...COULD have been an A.

    How long until candidates and their sleezy minions start saying ***** like "It's half time in America", "It's 4th and long and I need my fellow Americans to block against those Republican linebackers" and "America I need you to help us with a strong safety blitz against the Democrats" and "Let's convert this touchdown and go for 2".

    I'd vote for Clint Eastwood....I understand he's a non-insane liberal libertarian......works for me.....but Chrysler? What're they making that's any good?

    They created the minivan in like 1984......but what have they done lately?

  11. #26
    Zune Free At Last FlintHillBilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Generation lost in debt
    Posts
    10,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by commanding View Post
    I have a comment loosely related to this....on the Superbowl commercial, with Clint Eastwood, which was a commercial paid for and promoting Chrysler and their family of vehicles.....I liked the "message" of the commercial. I know, it cost a bundle and bailed out Chrysler paid for it, etc.

    However....the message was good IMHO, and whoever paid for it, no matter if it was the Post Office, the White House, the Pentagon, Homeland Security....still thought it was an uplifting message and I prefer that to some of the mindless BS on most commercials during the big game.

    just my 2 cents, even if you don't care.
    It was a very good commercial. I liked the message x2.

    Might have been a bit more meaningful if it was filmed in Detroit atleast.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...la_621036.html

    Quote Originally Posted by Flagg View Post
    They created the minivan in like 1984......but what have they done lately?
    Crossfire man! The 300 poor mans bently as well!

  12. #27
    Member 23EightySix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flagg View Post
    I liked it.....I give it a B+...COULD have been an A.

    How long until candidates and their sleezy minions start saying ***** like "It's half time in America", "It's 4th and long and I need my fellow Americans to block against those Republican linebackers" and "America I need you to help us with a strong safety blitz against the Democrats" and "Let's convert this touchdown and go for 2".

    I'd vote for Clint Eastwood....I understand he's a non-insane liberal libertarian......works for me.....but Chrysler? What're they making that's any good?

    They created the minivan in like 1984......but what have they done lately?

    Doesnt Jeep fall under the Chrysler brand?

  13. #28
    Zune Free At Last FlintHillBilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Generation lost in debt
    Posts
    10,791

    Default

    Double post.

  14. #29
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    dark side of the moon
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flagg View Post
    They created the minivan in like 1984......but what have they done lately?
    Not much, since last year they are part of the Italian Fiat Group alongside with Ferrari and Maserati...maybe the Italians would brush up the ghastly designs. They should be in better hands now than before with that Private Equity firm.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •