Remember that Ford was also a proponent of the GM/Chrysler bailout. What did they get from it? They got parts suppliers who were still operating to sell Ford parts – the same suppliers sell to all three, and many would not have survived had G and C gone under. So Ford’s financial health and very survival had a vested interest in the other two companies being bailed out…much like the financial health of the US.
They would not have gone under. They could have filed for bankruptcy (which they did anyway), reorganized and continued operations. The difference is that it would have happened according to law instead of violating the bankruptcy laws. It also would not have cost the taxpayers anything. But we had to put the labor unions first and foremost because the were the great supporters of lawless Obama.
Also, remember that Ford almost moved itself into bankruptcy by concentrating only on big pickup trucks and Suburban Assault Vehicles. When they realized that passenger cars were still desired by the American public, they took out the loans necessary to re-tool. At that time, the economy had not yet tanked to the point that the banks used their bailout money to ensure that no one could get a loan, which happened to GM and Chrysler, as well as to millions of small-business owners who ponied up tax dollars to save the banks, only to get the back of the banks’ hand when asking for loans.
Thank you for the link Harley.It was a good article, but in checking some of the statements made, found it to be incomplete. The gov’t is projected to have lost 14 billion in the bailout but it is projected that the losses to Americans and american business would surpass the original 50 billion given by over twice.When Lee Iaccoca rescued Chrysler after they got a gov’t bailout, I don’t recall any of the vitriol that these bailouts garnered. Fourteen billion is less than what the US paid in disaster aid in 2012 for fires, hurricanes, floods, etc. American’s paid less than 100 each in order to save to car companies and countless small businesses as well as protecting the pensioners.That’s less than the cost of one month of telephone/cable/internet service and it kept all of those people in the tax paying group with good jobs.It’s more than worth it to me.Respectfully,C.
Ahab: I assume you’re aware that Ford got huge bucks from the government for “alternative vehicle development”, just like Tesla, but Tesla has paid the money back.
The owner of Tesla is starting a cross-country tour in their new sedan, and he’s established the “fueling stations” across the country to help boost the market.
AND, speaking of “boost”, folks ARE aware that same owner of Tesla also owns the company that is now PRIVATELY under contract to deliver supplies to the International Space Station, and like Rutan/Branson, is getting ready to enter the space tourism business!
Combining marketing, and engineering, genius, is what built American business, NOT tax breaks, elimination of union labor, or overseas banking of profits to stash the cash, and cost the country!
^^It’s been well over a year, maybe two, since our local dealer (who sold out) had one in, but the last time I looked at a Cadillac Escalade, it was right at $63,000!! Ah, for the days when a BMW 2002 was only about three grand! My buddy always liked BMW’s now has a 5 series station wagon, but he got it off E-Bay used, and got a good deal.
OR, remember the DKW’s, first front wheel drive in the U.S., three cylinder two-stroke engines! Of course, while folks may not know what a “Deek” was, they may know it’s grandkids, they’re now called Audis! (Which, Audi now has a very fast hybrid racing prototype, as does Toyota.)
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
And it’s driving Republicans NUTS! (as posted elsewhere in comments!) Back to Number ONE in the world again.
ConserveGov over 10 years ago
Ford is actually doing even better, and they didn’t need a taxpayer funded bailout.
CasualBrowser over 10 years ago
Remember that Ford was also a proponent of the GM/Chrysler bailout. What did they get from it? They got parts suppliers who were still operating to sell Ford parts – the same suppliers sell to all three, and many would not have survived had G and C gone under. So Ford’s financial health and very survival had a vested interest in the other two companies being bailed out…much like the financial health of the US.
Mneedle over 10 years ago
They would not have gone under. They could have filed for bankruptcy (which they did anyway), reorganized and continued operations. The difference is that it would have happened according to law instead of violating the bankruptcy laws. It also would not have cost the taxpayers anything. But we had to put the labor unions first and foremost because the were the great supporters of lawless Obama.
I Play One On TV over 10 years ago
Also, remember that Ford almost moved itself into bankruptcy by concentrating only on big pickup trucks and Suburban Assault Vehicles. When they realized that passenger cars were still desired by the American public, they took out the loans necessary to re-tool. At that time, the economy had not yet tanked to the point that the banks used their bailout money to ensure that no one could get a loan, which happened to GM and Chrysler, as well as to millions of small-business owners who ponied up tax dollars to save the banks, only to get the back of the banks’ hand when asking for loans.
chazandru over 10 years ago
Thank you for the link Harley.It was a good article, but in checking some of the statements made, found it to be incomplete. The gov’t is projected to have lost 14 billion in the bailout but it is projected that the losses to Americans and american business would surpass the original 50 billion given by over twice.When Lee Iaccoca rescued Chrysler after they got a gov’t bailout, I don’t recall any of the vitriol that these bailouts garnered. Fourteen billion is less than what the US paid in disaster aid in 2012 for fires, hurricanes, floods, etc. American’s paid less than 100 each in order to save to car companies and countless small businesses as well as protecting the pensioners.That’s less than the cost of one month of telephone/cable/internet service and it kept all of those people in the tax paying group with good jobs.It’s more than worth it to me.Respectfully,C.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
Ahab: I assume you’re aware that Ford got huge bucks from the government for “alternative vehicle development”, just like Tesla, but Tesla has paid the money back.
The owner of Tesla is starting a cross-country tour in their new sedan, and he’s established the “fueling stations” across the country to help boost the market.
AND, speaking of “boost”, folks ARE aware that same owner of Tesla also owns the company that is now PRIVATELY under contract to deliver supplies to the International Space Station, and like Rutan/Branson, is getting ready to enter the space tourism business!
Combining marketing, and engineering, genius, is what built American business, NOT tax breaks, elimination of union labor, or overseas banking of profits to stash the cash, and cost the country!
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
^^It’s been well over a year, maybe two, since our local dealer (who sold out) had one in, but the last time I looked at a Cadillac Escalade, it was right at $63,000!! Ah, for the days when a BMW 2002 was only about three grand! My buddy always liked BMW’s now has a 5 series station wagon, but he got it off E-Bay used, and got a good deal.
OR, remember the DKW’s, first front wheel drive in the U.S., three cylinder two-stroke engines! Of course, while folks may not know what a “Deek” was, they may know it’s grandkids, they’re now called Audis! (Which, Audi now has a very fast hybrid racing prototype, as does Toyota.)