Halo 2 Forum > Off-topic > Debate Forum
 
 
Display Modes Thread Tools
sl1ck
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 8,668
Subtract from sl1ck's ReputationAdd to sl1ck's Reputation sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000 sl1ck IS OVER 9000
#41
11-19-2008
Default

How about a zombie apocalypse and utter and complete anarchy?
Newgy
Level 41
Newgy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,670
Subtract from Newgy's ReputationAdd to Newgy's Reputation Newgy is a novice
#42
11-19-2008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sl1cK_ View Post
First, letís recognize that G.M. doesnít need life support. What it needs is Chapter 11. The bankruptcy process is not a bad thing . indeed, it should be embraced. Bankruptcy allows companies to do tough things they could never do in the normal course of business. It has helped many companies turn themselves around and come out even stronger.
What you have to think about though is: what are the repercussions form the Big 3 going into bankruptcy? What about the cut jobs, which would be in the hundreds of thousands, is that something that the world-economy can handle at the moment?

If we are already on the brink of a massive recession, and the economy is still threatened by a depression if matters aren't taken into control. And even worse than the job cuts, think about all of the retires who lose their pensions and everything else. That will result towards massive SS, wellfare, and everything else... So with the money that the government is going to have to spend between the unemployment, SS/Wellfare, and shelters from the people who lose their jobs and cannot pay for their homes anymore because they got foreclosed... It might not be so much more expensive for the government to do something about it.

Now, I don't think that the Big 3 should be part of the bailout, but something needs to be done about them. We are not in a stable place in the economy to lose that much of the GDP at the moment.

Would the best possible solution to this to have a major buyout of the Big 3 and merge them into one? And in so, conduct a major restructure from corporate down?

Just throwing some ideas out


S t o p . T h i n k . P o s t .

muRda
Godzilla vs. MLK
muRda's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,731
Subtract from muRda's ReputationAdd to muRda's Reputation muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000 muRda IS OVER 9000
#43
11-19-2008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newgy View Post
What you have to think about though is: what are the repercussions form the Big 3 going into bankruptcy? What about the cut jobs, which would be in the hundreds of thousands, is that something that the world-economy can handle at the moment?
I'm only just into learning Macro, but I feel that just letting these companies slowly deteriorate until they become non-existent isn't an option. By allowing the Big 3 to file bankruptcy, the costs for breaking everything down and revamping with green technology will be much cheaper. If you read the article I posted, filing Chapter 11, merging with Chrysler and stripping away the dead heaps of car brands would save GM (and more importantly, taxpayers) billions. Also, the bankruptcy would be government-sponsored and you can read more into that in the article. All in all, I think Obama will end up having to undergo deficit spending like a motherf.cker, but it will probably work out best for the country.

Quote:
And even worse than the job cuts, think about all of the retires who lose their pensions and everything else. That will result towards massive SS, wellfare, and everything else... So with the money that the government is going to have to spend between the unemployment, SS/Wellfare, and shelters from the people who lose their jobs and cannot pay for their homes anymore because they got foreclosed... It might not be so much more expensive for the government to do something about it.
Bankruptcy would turn out to be a short-term Pyrrhic victory for the automakers and the economy. But, as even Sorkin mentioned, the loss of thousands of current jobs could be made up in the future with millions of jobs available with green technology. Unless Congress does not have the power to legislate changes in the current system of SS/welfare, Obama's plan for universal health care could be a saving grace to this problem (maybe, sorta, hopefully?).

Quote:
Now, I don't think that the Big 3 should be part of the bailout, but something needs to be done about them. We are not in a stable place in the economy to lose that much of the GDP at the moment.
I'm just looking at this info (link) and production of motor vehicles makes up only a minor percentage, but I'm too lazy to look into how that would affect other sectors. Tho, you can see that a hit to the financial sector would surely fuck this country over a helluva lot quicker, but the government has to come down on banks with the wrath of 10,000 suns as far as regulation goes. One thing I can think of that might be good with a lowered GDP is lowered interest paid to countries like China and Russia who basically own our ass economically.

Quote:
Would the best possible solution to this to have a major buyout of the Big 3 and merge them into one? And in so, conduct a major restructure from corporate down?
I don't think making a monopoly out of them will be such a good thing. I'm not sure if I read this in the article I posted or in some other one or if I read/saw some economist say that "in order to stay competitive internationally, we must maintain competition domestically." Restrictions should most definitely be placed on union contracts/negotiations since the UAW demands seem bizarrely high when you compare the 120k/yr for GM workers to the 80k/yr for Toyota workers. Also, you're right in suggesting a need for entirely restructuring corporate management. The same tools who 5 years ago thought SUV and Hummer sales could and should allow their companies to survive forever cannot remain holding the reins while this country desperately has to seek the use of alternative fuels to lessen dependence on oil and become competitive in the international market.

Last edited by muRda; 11-19-2008 at 04:42 PM.
Newgy
Level 41
Newgy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,670
Subtract from Newgy's ReputationAdd to Newgy's Reputation Newgy is a novice
#44
11-20-2008
Default

Murda,

First of all, I just want to say thank you for being the first of few to actually post something credible and intelligent.

When I wrote that post, I was trying to write it in a way where it was more of a question, or a thought provoker, because the more that I look into it, the more unsure of it that I am... And I don't know enough about Chapter 11 to make an actual opinion on what I think is right...

So I guess that my big question about it is this... How does it work? Where does the debt go? It can't just vanish. Someone has to pay it off... It's not the government I will presume, because then I'm sure that we would have heard about it by now.

I definitely agree that a monopoly would not be a good thing... That completely gets rid of the competition... But as I think about it more and more, I start to think that maybe it is that Ford, GM and Chrystler, although when compared from a nation-wide point of view, are competitors, but when compared internationally, they are already viewed as one... It's always the US Automakers vs. the Japanese, or the Germans, or their Brits and their not so good cars ... My point is though, that a lot of the time, Ford and GM are heavily related... Which a merger wouldn't be too much of a step, ideologically, forward... I understand the economic implications that it would have... And I do not support a monopolistic auto industry in the United States, I'm just saying that maybe a merger, at the moment, would be better than bankruptcy? Because if they were to declare bankruptcy, they would have to sacrifice a lot of the current jobs that they have in the northern mid-west (I believe it is 6 million jobs in the area-alone).

Or maybe individual buyouts would be better, and if the new buyers were to have a complete restructure from corporate down..?

Another thing that you need to think about with the salary difference is this: The price of living (I believe) is a lot lower in Japan, and there is much less demand for money... Here in the United States over the course of the past couple of years... There has been quite a demand for money because of the stock market, and retirement issues, as well as just the average price to function rises as well... So that does play a part in it... What would be interesting to do research on though would be the difference of wealth between those Japanese workers and the American ones.

[And by the way], I really do appreciate you thinking outside the box on this one


S t o p . T h i n k . P o s t .

Wingman
Level 28
Wingman's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Washington State bitches
Posts: 1,411
Subtract from Wingman's ReputationAdd to Wingman's Reputation Wingman is a novice
Send a message via AIM to Wingman
#45
11-20-2008
Default

I am against obama not because he is black but because his "redistribute the wealth" economic plan did not make any sense to me. But there i nothing i can do because he got elected prez. Don't get me wrong because i still think that he could do wonders for this country and change the course. so if someone could explain to me how this is going to stimulate the economy please do.

Oh ya and off topic :600 million was cut out of government funded scholarships and grants to college. So to those who are currently in college and looking to get in...its going to be expensive
live free
Newgy
Level 41
Newgy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,670
Subtract from Newgy's ReputationAdd to Newgy's Reputation Newgy is a novice
#46
11-20-2008
Default

I'm really not surprised about that... There's no way that the government could continue it's spending on student loans and federal aid for students as it has in the past. The economy just does not support it. And even if the bailout were to not go through, I think that it still would have been done.

I can understand your why you would say that you don't believe in it, a lot of people don't because it doesn't benefit them. And that is fine that they don't support it. It's best that there are people that don't support what a president believes in, ultimately... Because a completely liberal (or Conservative, I just used liberal because it is the administration that we are going to be entering in) is bad news... And I am already not a fan of this liberal-led system that we are going to have...

I, on the other hand, do support Obama, and I believe in his message (don't tell me that I am trend-follower, I have read both of his books, the 60 page pdf, and have done so with both the Conservative party and the Liberal party documents). I believed that Obama would be the best president for future America. I think that he will be able to hold a much stronger international stance than Bush did (that's kind of a given, and not too hard to do), but I also think that he will come off as a lot less aggressive than John McCain, and I think that is important when it comes to dealing with our formerly-strong (but still) allies who do not have the best impression of today's America.

And as for the "distribution of wealth", I'm first going to have to say that Obama actually never said that... It was quoted from a professors conference at Harvard University where another professor mentioned it and the topic was discussed... On the other hand, I do believe that the "no tax cuts for people making less than $200,000 a year is beneficial for most Americans because it is those Americans who are struggling the most to make ends meet. And a lot of the people who make over $200,000 have jobs that shouldn't pay the amount that they do: CEOs, owners, etc... And I don't see why they shouldn't be taxed more, they have more wealth than the middle-class, and it shouldn't be the middle class who has to suffer to the hands of the wealthy... I don't find it right that its okay to make the rich richer and the poor poorer... I think that there needs to be some regulation that helps people who are struggling find it that they can be successful too...

Here is an example that I used in another thread:

Quote:
If you think about the proportions, [Hypothetical Situation] if a lower class individual were to make an income of $20,000 in a year, and he (or she) pays 24% of their income to taxes, that equals out to paying $4,900 out of their $20,000 yearly income. that leaves them with roughly $15,100 to spend that year for the necessities to survive. Now, think about the (lets say...) doctor, who make $100,000 (I'm using the numbers to show the proportion of the separation of wealth and the difference with the tax cuts) and receives a 24% tax on their income, they would spend 24,000 in government taxes... It is obvious that the doctor is making more money than the lower-income individual. But think about it this way, and I am asking you to be open-minded about what I am trying to say, I'm not asking you to agree with me, I'm asking you to just think about what I am trying to say... That lower income individual has $15,100 to spend on living expenses (shelter, food, some form of transportation, clothing, and emergency expenses), and if you think about it, those costs can add up rather quickly. Now think about the doctor, they have $76,000 left for their budget...
That is just how I think of it... I'm not saying that you or anyone else has to follow that same train of thought... All I ask is that more people be open to the idea that it's not so much about income, but more about wealth...

Again, it's my opinion, and I'm not trying to suppress that opinion onto anyone else... Just trying to get more open minds on the subject, that's all.


S t o p . T h i n k . P o s t .

Wingman
Level 28
Wingman's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Washington State bitches
Posts: 1,411
Subtract from Wingman's ReputationAdd to Wingman's Reputation Wingman is a novice
Send a message via AIM to Wingman
#47
11-20-2008
Default

Quote:
Again, it's my opinion, and I'm not trying to suppress that opinion onto anyone else... Just trying to get more open minds on the subject, that's all.
Thank you
live free
Newgy
Level 41
Newgy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,670
Subtract from Newgy's ReputationAdd to Newgy's Reputation Newgy is a novice
#48
11-20-2008
Default

And thank you for exploding at me for sharing my opinion too... A lot of members the past couple of days can't seem to accept the fact that people have opinions and ideologies that are different than their own...


S t o p . T h i n k . P o s t .

MarkedAchilles
MarkedAchilles's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Gainesville, Fl
Posts: 8,298
Subtract from MarkedAchilles's ReputationAdd to MarkedAchilles's Reputation MarkedAchilles is a novice
#49
11-20-2008
Default

I have not supported any of the stimulus plans or bailouts.

They are all retarded.

Some of Obamas top priorities are my top priorities.

Education
Environment
Health Care
Economy
Get out of stupid wars
American Facelift


-i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section


Think You Watch Movies? http://www.halo3forum.com/showthread.php?t=81621
Newgy
Level 41
Newgy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,670
Subtract from Newgy's ReputationAdd to Newgy's Reputation Newgy is a novice
#50
11-20-2008
Default

Marked,

I really wish that you would have elaborated more on your stance on the topics... I'd be interested into hearing what you have to think.


S t o p . T h i n k . P o s t .

 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off