I wonder how much money they are getting from Mexico? Or Canada? Has anyone heard? I think we should at least match those funds.
I would also like to see them ask Exxon-Mobil. :lol:

 

I would bet the oil company ceo's enjoyed watching the big 3 ceo's sitting in the hot seat and having their asses handed to them......:lol:

 

As far as I am concerned we need to let these financial institutions and car manufacturers all go into receivership. They apparently don't have the management capability to run these businesses. Either that or they have literally skimmed the profits from them. It is not the business of government to bail out ANY business. It is also not the business of government to thrust all these ridiculous mandates upon industry. Government needs to get back to doing what it was originally intended. We should get back to a constitutional government. This country does very well when the government stays out of our lives and businesses. Part of the problem is lawyers being elected to office. They enact all of these laws for the rest of us, while exempting themselves, and then if and when they leave office they take cushy positions with lobbying firms (law firms) and pick our pockets.

 

GMAN said:

Except for the fact that the financial institutions are linked to the financial functionality of the entire World, and that the Big 3 are linked to millions of American jobs.... I might agree. However, I would have to choose the latter over the former as to your assessment of their management capabilities. They are perfect examples of the capitalist greed that has ravaged the middle class of our great country.

I would agree in principle with the first sentence, and can find no constitutional justification for it (although there is precedent,) but I'm not sure I agree with the second sentence. I agree that many regulations are, on the surface, ridiculous.... but, I believe there is constitutional justification for regulatory actions by our government.

Not looking for a fight here, Gman. But, I've been doing a little "refresher" reading on our form of government, and how it came to be, and the responsibilities entrusted to the various departments and offices, and it makes me question the basic tenets of your (and many others') argument.

Just so that I understand the argument/position of some of you, can you please give me your interpretation of WHAT was originally intended, and what you consider a "constitutional" government? (And for added credit, can you explain where you think we went wrong?)

Well, I can certainly understand and agree with your concern that the government should stay out of our individual lives! I agree that they should have no "patriot act" rights to eavesdrop on my personal communications, no "religious or divine right" to define for me what I (if I were a woman) can do with my condition of pregnancy, no right to regulate the natural resources of the land that I might choose to ingest into my body and mind, and no right to insist I protect my life by wearing a seatbelt!

But, I believe that from its very inception, one of its primary functions was to protect the worker OR consumer from the abuses of business owners, and to regulate trade and commerce in ways that protect the viability of the working class (and our economy.) It is not enough to just GIVE AWAY tax credits to the rich to "supposedly" create jobs. Those jobs need to be protected and fairly compensated. (for the record, I am against unions, but am more against capitalist abuses.)

This is a convenient agony, and to some extent I agree. We HAD a good discussion on this long ago. But, in practicality, only lawyers have the skills needed to adequately interpret and understand the MASS of legislation in our government, and thereby to protect us from those who would abuse us. I think the days are LONG GONE when Farmer John could represent the agricultural interests in ANY one part of this country, let alone propose or vote on legislation that affects those in ALL parts of the country.

And please don't just respond with a claim to States' Rights under the 10th Ammendment, which is only SLIGHTLY less defined in our Constitution than the People's rights set forth, equally as ambiguously, in the 9nth. BOTH are just "feel good" legislation, and were superceded from the beginning by the framers of our Republican form of government.

There is no doubt that, from the very beginning (after the Revolution and the Constitutional congress) the major power in this country was vested in the Executive Branch, with the purpose of forming a "more perfect union" under Federal Law.

Given then, that we are all one country, ruled by a centralized government that pretends to represent ALL OF US, what SPECIFIC ideas do you have to "modify" our form of government, or its practices that would return us to our origins and STILL be fair and equitable to ALL U.S. citizens?

Can you give me specific examples or proposals that would improve the economy, our schools, our health care system, and our foreign affairs?

I really AM all ears.

 

You really AM a bullshitter Hobo! :micro: Go to bed. :cheers:

 

Bed my AZZ! I just got HOME! I'll be here all night!

[ Heh, heh.... but I DID have to question that statement myself! I guess it would be slightly untrue to say I was ALL "ears." :rofl: ]

 

I like the vehicles that I have. Okay, okay I'll add in my wife's car as well. Not really caring about the whole "which is better" argument to be honest. I have a 1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.9 Limited with 130k miles (recently purchased), a 1998 Chevy Metro with 99k miles (rolling barbeque pit that still averages 39 mpg at highway speeds), and my wife has a 1998 Chevy Malibu with 119k miles. At present all three are running great with no major problems. Then again I've always made it a point to ensure they're all serviced regularly. Now, the question I have is likely gonna start a debate but hey, good debates here are always good...

If the foreign manufacturers are so much better, how come none of them make a heavy-duty pickup truck with a diesel for those of us with a need for one? Not that I'm even concerned with buying something different than the Dodge or the Ford I'm looking at. I know simply too many happy and satisfied owners of those trucks (as well as Chevy H.D.'s).

http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/bl...ll-size-sales/



Also, don't forget that the next edition Nissan Titan will be built by Dodge and re-badged! I know, old news...

http://www.nissannews.com/newsreleas...A?mid=1&id=401

http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/new...lertitan2.html

 

I can only speak from my recent new car buying experience around Indy. I spoke with several salesmen about diesel powered pick-ups. Standard answer: "We won't even take 'em as a trade in."

Why would the foreign manufacturers want to enter in to a clearly unprofitable and small 'niche' part of the market?

 

They still selling them Pintos?? How much did they pay you to take one off their hands? :lol2:

 

Its not about which patch of real-estate the bolts were turned on. If you guys want to help support the Jap economy thats your business... but I personally will only buy from American OWNED companies when possible. Harley front ends have been made in Japan (look behind the brake caliper) since the 70's and a lot of other parts are made in Canada and other places, but its still an American company. How will this country survive if all our money is being sent overseas? Yes a few jobs have been created because of it, but much more have been lost. If you dont take care of your own... your own wont take care of you.