What is Digg?635 Comments
- theutopian, on 11/19/2008, -44/+498I may not have voted or supported him, but I know and respect the man's business knowledge.
We should listen to him. - pdinatale, on 11/19/2008, -36/+291Romney is a right-wing nut, but I couldn't agree with him more on this. It was only 4 years ago that Rick Wagoner stood up and devoted GM to large, gas-guzzling automobiles, despite the reality that consumers were moving towards more fuel efficient cars. Let him hang. Let the CEO's and management of all three companies hang, then rebuild it.
- killertatt, on 11/19/2008, -26/+192I'm not a Republican, but he's hit the nail on the head here. Unfortunately, since UAW lobbyists have the Democrats wrapped around their finger, I seriously doubt they will follow sound advice like this.
- metuchendude, on 11/19/2008, -21/+145Very sound advice and he's showing is Bain & Co. stripes. He must have read the most recent issue of The Economist, whose sentiments he echoed here. I didn't vote Republican and disagree politically with Romney, but Washington should heed his recommendations. A bailout is just paying political debts to the UAW that will buy another year or two before GM, Ford and Chrysler start shaking the cup again for more taxpayer money.
- Rikety, on 11/19/2008, -15/+118In many respects, Romney would've made a fantastic Treasury Secretary. He has Paulson beat just by walking in the door. Too bad there is so much anti-Mormon phobias going around.
- sgdryer, on 11/19/2008, -12/+107He's right on the money. The automakers (consumer products companies, ultimately) are fundamentally different than Wall Street IBs. The same logic should not apply. Here, if the Big 3 aren't competitive, than we don't need Big 3. Let consolidations, restructuring, and divestment be tools to become competitive in the auto industry again.
BTW, I vote Democrat, but had the Mitt Romney who was the gov. of Mass run for president, I might have supported him. You don't need to be Milton Friedman to see that Detroit needs to burn. - inactive, on 11/19/2008, -25/+110I voted for Obama, but on this Romney totally has my support!
- stillasleep00, on 11/19/2008, -5/+88Can you imagine the difference it would have made if McCain had chosen Romney over Palin? He may have actually stood a chance. Or at least not embarrassed the Republican party into oblivion.
- reposado, on 11/19/2008, -7/+65Obama has made it clear along w/Palosi that they WILL bail out the Michigan(GM, Ford, etc) auto industry. Who woulda thought Michigan which has made gas guzzlers after gas guzzlers and laughing at the prius when it was debuted can go backrupt. Who woulda thought Michigan which has brought us the Hummer, Escalade, and other 9 miles per gallon muscle SUV is ever going to be in trouble? Who woulda thought promising big unions benefits which end up costing $2000 more per car they make vs. competition would ever be in the red.
Now they are going to get TAX DOLLARS to fix their mistakes. Obama has made too many promises to Michigan during his campaign and now will back it up AT THE EXPENSE OF THE REST OF US.
Outrageous!
To be fair this is not a dem vs repub subject. McCain may very well have done the same... the idea of using our money to bail out huge PRIVATE companies when they make mistake after mistake is simply wrong. - alais, on 11/19/2008, -26/+82The big three aren't w/o fault but the lionshare of blame lies with the UAW.
- mazdamx, on 11/19/2008, -6/+60He turned around many companies. Real world experience is hard to argue with. I think he is right on.
- inactive, on 11/19/2008, -17/+70I agree, when the average salary at GM is 78$ an hour and the average salary for a guy working at the Toyota plant in the US is 48$ and hour it's time to restructure to reality.
- JDoorjam, on 11/19/2008, -8/+61He's not a nut. He's a moderate Republican who tried really hard to seem like a far-right Republican in order to scoop the Republican nomination. (Keep in mind that Republicans didn't believe him.) Remember that he was also elected Governor of Massachusetts, and is a fiscal conservative business-type, not a Mike Huckabee/Sarah Palin type.
And, as you've said, his views are worth considering. - lebruf, on 11/19/2008, -15/+65All you retards calling him a right-wing nut job can only acquiesce that he's 100% correct on this issue. You and I both know that the Republican ticket would've been a lot different had the economic ***** hit the fan earlier in the race.
Romney was by far the most qualified to steer us out of this mess, even though I doubt he would've beaten Obama. - Ouze, on 11/19/2008, -11/+52I didn't think much of Mitt Romney before, but I found this to be concise, well written, and well thought out.
- Heidenreich12, on 11/19/2008, -4/+43If you don't make a good product, why should we bail you out? They could have the money themselves if they would just take a paycut. But you know they won't do that
- alexlavr, on 11/19/2008, -7/+44"Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself."
I agree with Romney, the government should spend that $25 billion on research investments that will benefit carmakers in th elong term. Invest in new energy. - TreatsTheBear, on 11/19/2008, -4/+40The last thing we need is for the government to be in the car making business.
This ***** is making me into a conservative. - somedudemanguy, on 11/19/2008, -7/+40It's not like the auto industry is fundamentally any different from any other American industry. They've just had their inefficient asses handed to them by Japan and South Korea.
- JDoorjam, on 11/19/2008, -3/+36He's got to be so pissed off that he didn't get the Republican nomination. He would have been waaaaaaaayyyy more competitive against Obama than McCain, because he can cogently speak to economic issues. And he never would have picked Palin.
I supported Obama, and would have been way more worried if Romney was the man he had to beat. - Coolone84, on 11/20/2008, -5/+38Now lets not get carried away here.
- mugicha, on 11/20/2008, -1/+32Dugg for the bullets.
- kidjay, on 11/19/2008, -2/+31to be fair, a lot of people have paulson beat just walking through the door. the man's a ***** disaster.
- mediaspree, on 11/20/2008, -1/+26I'm so conditioned by digg I read that as "RonPaul 2012!"
- Tetromos, on 11/19/2008, -7/+31Don't look at just the bushiness standpoint of this crisis. Think about the people. I live in Taylor MI, about 6 or 7 miles away from Detroit. My father lost his job a few weeks ago, and STILL cannot find a job today. He is on the verge of foreclosure, and about to lose his car. He has even applied to MCDONALD'S. Still, no job. I know the guys at the head of the big three are *****, but think about all the people in the same situation as my Dad. THOUSANDS of people are going to lose their jobs if Detroit goes under. Michigan is already hit hard economically. Maybe this is just from the view of a 15 year old, but..
- marv0, on 11/19/2008, -0/+24If our US auto companies are doing worse than the non-US companies, then they should be taking a look at the way they run things. Toyota is doing great in the US. Even if it's costing people jobs, we shouldn't be babysitters for failing businesses. Even in these trying times.
Not a fan of Mitt by any means, but it's time companies starting being responsible for their actions, and face the consequences themselves. 700billion is already gone and we don't even know who gets it. - savethejets, on 11/20/2008, -3/+27Nationalize the banks?
Nationalize the land through buying up bad mortgages?
Nationalize the Industry?
uh, you realize this is in essence Communism. - reposado, on 11/19/2008, -8/+31Big Three CEOs Flew Private Jets to Plead for Public Funds.
Each jet ride costs about 20k which is more than the annual household income for many Americans.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/WallStreet/story?id= ... - superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -2/+25Not enough on management? The article advocates replacing ALL the management with executives from other industries, with the ability to make a comeback.
Should he have added they be publicly flogged too? I just don't get what you are missing from his statement that would be more against management than what he's already proposing. - Photokon, on 11/19/2008, -8/+31What a flipper. He's all for the UAW and Big Three while campaigning in Michigan, but now that he isn't politically involved he tells the truth.
- iamdan1, on 11/20/2008, -5/+27Its the UAW that damages the US companies.
- inactive, on 11/19/2008, -0/+21That's what I always thought. In a year where the economy is the issue, Romney would have been his best pick.
- Ouze, on 11/19/2008, -2/+23"All the democrat states are broke every year."
you are wrong
http://democraticactionteam.org/redstatesocialism/ ... - galtenberg, on 11/19/2008, -2/+21Didn't he promise something like a $20 billion loan to Detroit during the Michigan primary? http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/01/romney-sell ... "It wasn't exactly what free-market conservatives wanted to hear: a Republican candidate pledging an infusion of 20 billion federal dollars for an industry that is largely responsible for its own problems."
- ldner77, on 11/19/2008, -2/+21Despite his many pitfalls, this is an article that should be listened to by both Democrats and Republicans alike
- inactive, on 11/19/2008, -3/+21This is what happens when you keep giving in to unions increasing their demands while your company is continuing to lose it's ass financially.
Then they act surprised when their product is inferior to the similar priced competitors' products because of the corners you have to cut to make a certain price point. - inactive, on 11/19/2008, -44/+62Romney 2012!
- reposado, on 11/19/2008, -8/+25"you are definitely utopian (although to me that's dystopian) if you believe this man should be listened to."
And you mr nreber232 who probably lives in a college dorm/apartment with lots of zits should be listened to?
Wealthy people are usually people who have done something right thus have more credibility when it comes to economics than poor people. Sad but true. - rald84, on 11/19/2008, -6/+23how about the CEOs and execs trim their perks (like the private jets they took from detroit to washington) and THEN we start hammering the workers.
- swiftekho, on 11/20/2008, -1/+17Or just not spend the 25 billion.
The question is should we spend 25 billion on this or that. Why is the question "Why should we spend 25 billion on anything?" never asked? - thadjudkins, on 11/19/2008, -2/+18Ditto, I disagree with him socially but I have no issue with that. I respect his ability to see through to the numbers and save failing businesses. That's kind of what we need for a couple of Obama's advisors right now. I think that if we weren't so worried about getting people we agreed with on everything in politics and just looked for people we respect in narrow fields we'd have better experts and less of the quasi-useless generalists that are common in politics ATM.
- Smuikas, on 11/20/2008, -2/+18"General Motors has more vehicles in production right now that get 30mpg or better than any other manufacturer including imports."
This may be, but my 15 year old honda civic got 35mpg or more, highway. And that was an automatic. Where the hell did this 30mpg milestone come from? We're 15 years on from that, and we're still struggling to make cars that are more efficient than my old commuter? Just because fuel efficiency is touted more often nowadays, does not mean that todays cars are more efficient. Even the hybrids aren't THAT much more efficient than my old car. And they have thousands of dollars worth of batteries that need replacing every so often.
When a 12mpg hybrid escalade gets touted as being efficient, there's something ***** wrong. - ddawggin, on 11/20/2008, -3/+18What does being a Mormon have anything to do with knowing the economy?
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/20/2008, -3/+18This is just ignorance. General Motors has more vehicles in production right now that get 30mpg or better than any other manufacturer including imports. That is a fact. You're just espousing a public misconception that has little bases in fact. It's right up their with the "domestic = poor quality" stigma that still holds out from the 70s and 80s.
Yes, GM has made most of its profits off of trucks in recent years. Trucks have been its bread winner, but that's hardly GM's fault. They were building what people wanted (as opposed to what they SAID they wanted), and they were looking forward as well by pushing the aforementioned lines of fuel efficient cars (which have dominated GM's new lines and R&D). It's also worth mentioning that GM currently has a bigger line of Hybrids than any other manufacturer. They were very expensive to develop, but they did it because people like you kept complaining GM wasn't looking forward. Guess what? It was a waste. No one is buying these hybrids or fuel efficient cars they said they wanted. It's surely in part a failure of marketing, but it's also a side effect of this ongoing negative attitude and atmosphere of disdain spread by people like you repeating old stigmas with complete disregard for the facts.
Now, I agree that GM needs some serious restructuring. In fact, I agree with essentially everything Mitt Romney said here. However, the reasons a lot of people think GM is failing are mostly wrong. Mitt seems to have a better understand than most, but what I don't understand is why they don't just write a plan like this into a bail out and force restructuring that way. When over 80% of people say they would not buy a car from a company that has filed for bankruptcy I think Mitt is really underestimating how devastating bankruptcy would be for these companies especially when you consider how incredibly bad the market as a whole has become in recent months. In normal economic times it might make the most sense to let them go bankrupt and rebuild that way, but right now there's a good chance they might not make it back out of a bankruptcy. In the long run, they need major restructuring, but they need to survive long enough to make that restructuring happen and work. If they file for bankruptcy I think you can kiss the American auto industry goodbye a lot sooner than a no strings attached bail-out would bring, but why are we even talking about a no strings attached bail-out to begin with? I don't understand why the only two options are "Give them money and hope" or "Let them go bankrupt and hope." Can't anyone in Washington come up with a better plan than "Cross our fingers and pray"? I guess not. - hinchb, on 11/20/2008, -3/+18He doesn't have to pander to UAW and detroit voters, so now he's telling us what he really thinks.
- TSK05, on 11/20/2008, -1/+16What you mean to say is "uh....he's agreeing with me....ok, I should respect him now." Lets be real: if he had said a bailout is needed, you'd be calling him an idiot.
- inactive, on 11/19/2008, -4/+19His father was President of American Motors, so he should know something about the auto industry for sure.
- tb0n3r, on 11/20/2008, -2/+16I agree. When some high-school dropout is making 150,000 dollars a year while using a pneumatic wrench to put bolts on some ***** car, I just punch myself. But if GM/Ford/Chrysler even think about firing him, or paying him a reasonable wage, every worker goes on strike. ***** UAW.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 637 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is