U.S. loses $1.3 billion in exiting Chrysler

[TehSuig]

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.

[justin84]

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..

[C.Puffs]

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.

[Mujo2000]

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.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

. Plus the UAW would've lost considerable strength with the foreign companies plants thus lowering the cost for the consumer.

Whether a workforce is unionised or not does not make one ounce of difference to what a consumer pays for a item in the showroom.

[TehSuig]

puhhhleease.

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

Exactly. And therein lies the problem.

[commanding]

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.

[The Kaiser Chief]

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?

[The Kaiser Chief]

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.

[eskachig]

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.

[Flagg]

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 sh!t 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?

[FlintHillBilly]

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

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

Crossfire man! The 300 poor mans bently as well!

[23EightySix]

I liked it.....I give it a B+...COULD have been an A.

How long until candidates and their sleezy minions start saying sh!t 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?

[FlintHillBilly]

Double post.

[The Kaiser Chief]

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.