Saving car giants will cause havoc, Gordon Brown warns US.

[galileoreloaded]

Source: Times UK

Tensions at the start of the G20 summit run high as Prime Minister deems return to 1930s policies ‘unacceptable’
Gordon Brown



"In a veiled warning to the next American President, Gordon Brown described protectionism as the “road to ruin” yesterday as international tensions surfaced at the start of the G20 summit in Washington.

As world leaders assembled for dinner at the White House last night at the start of the two-day meeting, the backdrop was one of plunging sales and surging unemployment. The New York stock market dropped 350 points after official data showed that US retail sales had fallen by 2.8 per cent in October, the biggest slide for 16 years.

The mood was darkened further with confirmation that the eurozone was now in the grip of recession for the first time since the creation of the single currency in 1999. "

Read more: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article5158583.ece

---

The danger of globalization. Is this the price we will pay "for being good world citizens"??

[Sarah Ibarruri]

1. Okay, why doesn't Gordon Brown want this done? Who stands to lose what over there if we do it? nt

[puerco-bellies]

2. If American manufacutuers fold, euro auto manufacuters will increase market share.

We need to green our transportation, and sell this worldwide. There is nothing to gain by letting our already anemic manufacturing base to further erode. I say the U.S. buy shares to re-capitalize U.S. Auto-manufactures and give the shares to U.S. military veterans, Jobs Corps, and Peace Corps participants. Make the stocks preferred, and must hold for ten years.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

5. Ah well, too bad so sad for Brown! We're going to be the auto hybrid leaders nt

[AllHereTruth]

31. Yeaaaaa right.

I fail to put faith in the American Auto manufactures.

They have been behind the times for...well, ever since foreign cars made their way into the fold. First it was the European cars that out trumped Ford and GM, Now its the Japanese cars.

Heres how i look at it. If a company relies on failed business philosophies, and fails because of it, then maybe it is time for a new day. - Do any of you really think, if Ford or GM were to get a large sum of money, they would become a 'success'

They have failed to realize the need for alternative fuel vehicles, the need for a 'Reliable' car. = Maybe, just maybe, their day is over. Maybe, just maybe, its time for a new day.

[Waiting For Everyman]

36. And 3,000,000 more Americans out of work isn't a problem in your world.

You probably don't remember the days of our industry nor the time before the space program... another thing the naysayers didn't have any faith in.

[AllHereTruth]

37. All im saying is this:

"If a company is too big to fail, it is too big to exist"
-Bernie Sanders

Keep that in mind. Granted, if GM did outright fail, it would have a crippling effect on the US economy. It would be almost devastating. All im saying, is keep it in mind. There are always other care manufactures waiting in the wing with new fresh ideas.

Thats all. Nothing more.

[BeatleBoot]

40. All I'm Saying Is

Come live here in Detroit and raise your kids.

Better yet, come live here, raise your kids, and try to feed them, too.

Dingbat.

[AllHereTruth]

Belive me, i feel you.

As i stated, It would have an almost crippling effect on our country. It is probably needed. I just get a little iffy when it is said "company A is too large to fail"

Also, as i stated, GM and Ford haven't exactly done a good job developing new cars. They have been pushing the same old shit for the last 40+ years. And when the tides starts to head toward a NEW and DIFFERENT type of automobile, they said HELL NO...Now they are paying for it, and i am asked to help them out.

I understand the impact it would have if they were to fail. It would crush our economy.

BUT when a company is told 'Hey guys, you made some awful decisions in the past. You failed to recognize. You are now in some deep shit. But DONT WORRY, the American tax-payer has got your back' - It hits me the wrong way.

It is a tough issue. Thats all im saying.

[Waiting For Everyman]

54. I agree on too big to fail, and that's why they probably should be nationalized

at least to some degree - they need regulating too for their own good, just as the banks do. Second, we can't get to the next generation of companies without an immediate bridge - saving the ones we have, at least for now. If they're broken up later, that's a bridge we cross later.

We can NOT throw any more industries down the drain. That is stupid. We are not all going to be service employees, and we shouldn't be. We need to make things again, and not just spin bogus financial webs - that needs to get real too, which would take a lot of the so-called "profit" (and overpaid jobs) out of it. There again, a step at a time.

But some real restriction on financial practices would help car sales a LOT too. Half the people in this country can't even buy a car as it is now, even though they want to and need one. We blackball people out of the economy now, by catering only to the wealthy (or the lucky). That has to stop, and so do 20% interest rates.

[AllHereTruth]

67. Nationalized

Yes. But that would be socialism :) - I think you hit the nail on the head.

Some institutions need to be, at least partially, nationalized.

[1gobluedem]

92. Why doesn't anybody ever mention unfair trade practices?

That the US market has been flooded with imports at a 2% tariff while Asian tariffs are as high as 21%? Or that Asian hybrid research was state sponsored while US auto companies had to finance it themselves?

Why is unfair trade never, ever mentioned? The playing field has not been level for years.

[amandabeech]

105. Excellent points! Thanks for contributing to the discussion.

And GO BLUE even if it is a disastrous year on the football field. A2 will survive!

LSA '77--History.

[Idealism]

109. Into Japan is actually 32% for US automakers

In China it is also higher than 21% tariffs. You are correct that they pay only 2% to ship them here, which is bullshit. I don't know how else the government wants to undermine the UAW, but when everything to shooting down a bailout, to anti-protectionism, and 'free trade' are used as political weapons-- it hurts the indrusty greatly.

[LiberalFighter]

3. I'm sure Gordon has our best intersts at heart.

Maybe he should go ask Blair what to do now that Bush won't be President.

[jwirr]

18. He sounds like Blair following up on *ss's message.

[DJ13]

4. Yes Gordon, because we all know how well your country is set to handle another

depression

Your country is in even WORSE shape than ours.

Higher debt loads by your citizens, more bad bonds (on a % basis) than ours........

Go ahead Gordon, tell your country that a depression would be better for them after the US goes into one (and drags your country down with it) because idiots like you would rather face another depression than give up your free market orthodoxy by bailing out the Big Three.

Piss off you ignorant assh*le.

[LeftishBrit]

77. You are right on all this. He will be hearing from me.

Unfortunately his main opponent Cameron is even worse than he is (sigh).

[silverojo]

6. Memo to Gordon Brown: Go fuck yourself

The one and only time I'll ever quote Dickhead Cheney. :evilgrin:

[kysrsoze]

104. Maybe we should just sell the Big 3 to foreign companies... like Britain did.

Jaguar, Land Rover, Rolls-Royce, Bentley, Vauxhall, Aston-Martin and Mini are all owned by foreign companies. The last country in the world we should be looking to for advice on how to run a car company is Britain.

[DRoseDARs]

7. Yeah, because putting millions of Americans out of work from just three companies will make...

...magical gold-shitting unicorns fly out of their asses.

*sigh*

Something needs to be done to save US automakers and it has already been proposed that they be given "bailout" money ... WITH FUCKING STRINGS ATTACHED. None of that blank check shit, but actual requirements that they make GOOD use of the money to ensure their solvency and the continuing employment of their workers.

[elleng]

8. We have to do this to save jobs,

not make more cars, eh?

[DRoseDARs]

17. If your post was directed at me, read post #9 below. Those cars don't need to be CO2 spewers...

...nor do all the parts need to come from Chinese sweatshops.

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. Not make more fucking SUVs.

Make the bailout conditional to re-tooling for making hybrids, electrics, things that will COMPETE in the world market. Just because we are seeing $2 gas again does not make the guzzlers fucking sexy again.

The jobs of the next generation will be green - green power, green buildings, green vehicles, every aspect of conservation and recycling which lead us to energy independence.

The bailout MUST be contingent upon that goal.

[tclambert]

25. What about hybrid SUVs? And ethanol fueled SUVs?

Neutered and spayed SUVs?

[RaleighNCDUer]

28. To my mind they are all the same.

The are a fucking hazard to everyone else on the road who does NOT drive something that big or bigger. You can't see around them, and sure as fuck can't see through them. Their headlights are set at the perfect height to blind anyone they come up on from behind. Their higer center of gravity makes them more prone to loss of control and tipping over in an accident.

The only reason they were created in the first place was to put a passanger vehicle on a truck frame to avoid the gas mileage requirements on cars. Now we're supposed to like them just because they're finally being made to comply with MPG standards?

Fuck em all.

[bertman]

35. Calm down, NCevilDUer, some of us LOVE our SUV's. And we would love them even more if

they were fuel-efficient and/or hybrids.

I suppose you probably want all school buses, city buses, delivery trucks, emergency vehicles, 18-wheelers, work vans, pickup trucks with cabs, and anything else larger than YOUR vehicle to stay off the road, so as to make it easier for you to drive?

Maybe you should just stay home. Or take a valium--or two. And don't drive after you take them. You might be a menace to other drivers.

Sheesh.

[RaleighNCDUer]

42. It is bad enough dealing with all those you list without having to

add several million fucking SUVs as well. At least those vehicles have a reason for being behemoths and are not compensating for - whatever you people are compensating for.

Look at the accident records, if you can find them. SUVs are involved in accidents at a far higher rate than normal vehicles, and those accidents are deadlier than those with normal vehicles. YOU are a danger to ME every fucking day.

BTW, what do you mean you 'love' your SUV? It is a fucking car. Don't expend what little emotional range you might have on an inanimate object. I guarantee you, it does NOT love you back.

[bertman]

66. You are a danger to yourself.

[CRF450]

70. Many of us take great pride in what vehicles we own, esp when their so expensive.

I wouldn't trade my two auto's for anything else.

[WriteDown]

93. The truck is awesome n/t

[aquart]

68. IOW, you don't give a damn as long as you get what you want.

Fine, darling. But you do look silly bragging about it.

[EnviroBat]

103. The vehicles you mentioned are NECESSARY.

A fundamental difference. A Suburban with one person at the wheel is a f'ing waste.

[Waiting For Everyman]

47. The best way to discourage them is to price registrations by weight.

That would do much more and be much more fair than gas taxes. Let those who use more, pay more tax. See how much they like SUVs then.

As it is now, "trucks" (the class they're in) actually pay LESS on registrations. At least in my state they do.

[CRF450]

71. Hey, paying more from just using more gas is enough for me.

I like that GM made a hybrid Silverado truck that can get 20mpg+ in the city, but its too expensive for me currently, I would like to see a hybrid system for a smaller mid size truck like my Dakota.

[chatnoir]

91. Amen, brother.

You're not the only one...

[obiwan]

46. How about NO SUV's?

No matter how you slice them, SUV's are a rehash of ideas that are 50 years old. And 90 per cent of SUV owners don't really need them. They are a gross misuse of resources and are very space-and -energy inefficient. Gone are the days when a single person could surround themselves with a 5,000 pound penis extension that gets 15 mpg. Learn how to drive and come to grips with your own mortality.

I am 6'3" tall and weigh 250 lbs. I drive a Honda Fit which gets between 35 and 38 mpg , weighs 2500 lbs., and cost 16,000 brand new. It's not a rolling living room or Barcalounger, but it is quite comfortable for my wife and I and real easy to drive. I worked in engineering for over 30 years, and by any standards, this car is a lot closer than most Detroit iron.

Fuck personal ego. Think globally, act locally.

[Dumak]

72. There should be a weight limit on family automobiles

A lot of heavy SUV drivers are heavy-car aficionados who cite safety as their reason for buying that SUV or other heavy vehicle. What they don't tell you is that in a head-on collision they are hoping that other car is a small one, so they can walk way with out a scratch while that other family has their brains mashed to a pulp. I also notice that, on the whole, SUV drivers will drive more closely to the vehicle in front of them - it should be just the opposite.

Instead, we should be concentrating on weight-uniformity in cars (other than certain commercial vehicles), so that in a head-on collision one car will not overwhelm the other. To improve safety you have to increase the stopping distance and have a stronger car body, which could be done with better materials and a longer front end. I'm thinking a few feet of shock-absorbing foam on the front, or perhaps a bumper that would extend a few feet when on the highway could help quite a bit. This would help in "brick wall" collisions as well.

Some SUV drivers cite concerns over vehicle ruggedness and ice/snow handling ability. However, any all-wheel drive vehicle will handle the ice and snow just as well in all but the most serious snow storms. The most reckless SUV drivers seem to be driving the latest models, most of them not even encountering an ordinary dirt road.

[amandabeech]

86. You also might want bumper height uniformity.

SUVs and four wheel drive trucks generally have a very high bumper that causes lots of damage because it goes right over the top of an auto bumper.

Ford actually has been moving toward uniform bumper height in its vehicles.

[tclambert]

30. Sorry for that. I couldn't resist the silly.

The phrase "fucking SUVs" created strange images in my brain. I agree with you. We should have gone green in the '70s. Brazil made the decision, stuck to it, and achieved energy independence. That should have been us. On the TV show, "Life on Mars" they showed a clip from '73 in which Nixon said we should launch a Manhattan project on energy. And we're still waiting for it. Hell, if we had gotten serious about energy then, we would have fusion power by now. All the raw fuel comes from seawater. And we have long coastlines on 3 oceans. Bolivia and Afghanistan might have problems with foreign sources of energy, but not the US of A, never again.

I have a tiny bit of inside information on what the US car companies are working on. Hybrids and electric cars are top of the list. The little engineering design shops that help them work on those projects are busy as hell. It will still take another 2 years until you really start seeing big progress, but in five years, the auto industry will have transformed. The problem is bridging the gap from now to then, with an economic crisis discouraging car buyers.

[RaleighNCDUer]

45. Strange images indeed.

They started out as a curiosity, then they were everywhere like an overbreeding invasive species.

Maybe they are...

[customerserviceguy]

101. Ironically enough

the only thing that may save Detroit (beyond the coming bailout) is the fact that gasoline is dropping to below $2 a gallon again in many areas of the US. There's still a lot of tooling that's been done to produce gas guzzlers, I'd bet there are a lot of parts in inventory for them, as well.

Maybe we need a federal Auto Loan guarantee program to help people buy Detroit vehicles, it's no dumber than giving someone a student loan for a course of study that has zero job demand.

[StClone]

9. Thom Hartmann suggests

The Employees buyout the shares with Government assist with these qualifications:

1) All cars will within a few years be Hybrid green electric cars/dual fuel (gas/ethanol).

2) The car must be made with majority U.S. made components.

[AllHereTruth]

32. Perfect.

[ben_meyers]

33. Do you mean the Thom Hartman with the

Chartered Herbalist degree from Dominion Herbal College, a Master of Herbology degree from Emerson College, and a Ph.D. in Homeopathic Medicine from Brantridge in England? That Thom Hartman? What are his economic credentials?

[obiwan]

48. What are your automotive and/or engineering credentials?

[ben_meyers]

56. Fortunately they haven't given me a radio show

to pontificate on things that I'm not educated in. I take most of what he says with a grain of salt, keeping in mind that he has the same educational background as the Savage Weiner.

[StClone]

75. Is Obama an Automotive Genius?

Is he going to save the auto industry? Apparently not. Hartmann has experts come on his show and discuss all topics.

[liberalmike27]

64. You can easily find smart people without degrees

Besides, if you don't like what one economist is saying, find another one, and he'll tell you an entirely different thing. Add to that, neither of them may be wrong, but they may just be advocating for the poor and middle class, or the super rich.

Gordon Brown is a rich-fuck conservative. Clearly it probably would be tragic if we went back to protecting our workers in America. That's what protectionism really is.

The crux of our problem is enough jobs, and that the jobs pay well. One way or the other, we need to mandate that, get health care for everyone, which will take the burden off of corporations, as well as individuals, and we tax the rich to get there, as they can afford it.

[StClone]

73. Hartmann outlined Ravi Batra.

Do you know Ravi? He is a Genius Economist and he predicted so much about our current economic mess right down to Obama-style President years ago.

http://www.ravibatra.com/

Hartmann is the BEST, most-informed and informative author and talk show host. Someone that gets stuck on a "Herbalist" has an axe to grind with us all I suspect. What really does that have to do with anything?

[OwnedByFerrets]

41. Thom is THE Man

[ShortnFiery]

82. Thom Hartmann is correct.

I try to find time to listen to his show in the weekday afternoons. He's one intelligent, insightful and well spoken man. :thumbsup:

[fascisthunter]

95. Thom is Brilliant

It's the only way to rebuild our economy. Invest in the American worker and resuscitate the middle class.

Having such a large divide between the rich and poor is always bad for any Democracy and just as worse for any economy. Diversity, adaptation and growth come from a diversity of people with fresh new insight, not from a stagnant, spoiled, privileged upper class that seems almost inbred.

[ConcernedCanuk]

10. Is this the price we will pay "for being good world citizens"?? - You are kidding right?

.
.
.

USA is the next empire to fall

WHY???

because the rest of the world don't like being bullied

and unless Obama starts puling the US military out of over a 100 countries(yes - that's how many countries the USA's got their claws into) then USA will be in the books along with the Roman and British Empires.

Failure.

Empires fail - ALWAYS

What part of the PNAC/BFEE gang just dont get that?

yesus

[galileoreloaded]

19. I completely agree with you. This empire as structured WILL fall and quite soon.

The world needs to worry about what the result looks like.

My goal with that statement was not to provoke nationalistic tendencies, but to illustrate the cost of globalization in the frame of an American ideal of "national sovereignty". This is a global resource battle, and America has been at the forefront for so many years, we have forgotten that we do not necessarily have an intrinsic right to 25% of the worlds natural and fiscal resources, with 10% of the population. The quicker we wake up to that, the quicker we can adjust to our new situation.

The world would do well to note though, as we appear a takeover target in the corporate sense, Americans, especially today, have a fierce independence and more than a little amoral tendency to preserve that independence. Just a thought, not American exceptionalism.

[Waiting For Everyman]

26. Let me remind you of something.

When this highly vaunted sales job of "globalization" started, we had the world's biggest economy, financed right here, on the profits of our production. The fact is, it's our wealth that was spread out to the world. As far as resources go, we have quite enough to get by on our own much better than most countries, which do depend on our exports and selling to us. Once we convert to green transportation, we won't even need oil. We do have some of our own, which if it was not put on the world market, we could probably get by on.

It isn't us who is benefitting from the world, but the world which has risen on our backs. And when we withdraw from our bases around the world, guess how much whining there will be?

It's high time we went back to our own principles of the 1930's (WW2 is long over, after all), which were correct. National soverignty is not some quaint euphemism. If the world would like to test that, they'd be in for a surprise.

We still have lots of hardware if they'd like to get pushy about it.

[obiwan]

52. You mean isolation and imperialism?

[RaleighNCDUer]

57. Isolationism and imperialism are diametrically opposed.

Imperialists decry us keeping our fingers out of everybody else's pies as being 'isolationist', when it is actually just not getting sucked into other peoples' problems, just as Pres. Washington advised us to avoid in his farewell speech.

We have a moral obligation to help other people if we can, but have no right to make demands on anybody else. Is that isolationism?

OTOH, is having 780+ military bases spread across the world imperialism? At the height of the British Empire, outside of the actual nations that Britain had administrative control of like India and Australia and chunks of Africa, Britain had fewer that 20 military bases.

We need to shut down ALL those overseas bases, bring the 1.5 million Americans stationed there home, and apply the money saved to helping our own economy. Is THAT isolationism?

[obiwan]

59. If you have military bases all over the world and interfere with other societies...

... that's imperialism.

If you conduct yourselves without regard to how it affects the world, that's isolation.

The two words are not mutually exclusive. Both can exist simultaneously in regard to the behavior of a government.

The terms are not diametrically opposed in a very real sense.

[obiwan]

61. BTW I wholeheatedly agree with the last comment of your post.

[Waiting For Everyman]

79. So all that basically means is they want to tell us what to do, as

their gopher. That's what we have already, only nobody admits it. The globalists in other countries have been using our wealth and our military that we pay for, to police THEIR domination they send us to create, while they armchair quarterback doing nothing... and then point to how much better their countries are doing without that burden. Nice scam for them while it lasted, but it's over.

The meddling our government has done in other countries is pretty much like what it has done here, to us, to our lower class and our dissidents, and it's been going on since Nixon. And it's our government doing the bidding of the multinationals, which IS "other countries" having their say. They had their say, and they're done. It failed. We never could stop it, but thank God it failed on its own. It's unsustainable in the end. They have collapsed our lower to middle class... which in turn became unable to keep feeding the bank-beast.

The whole globalism experiment FAILED, and it's nothing more than a "kumbaya" veneer to global domination by the multinationals anyway. Time to do what works... running our own country properly within our own borders. Others should do the same and have sensible alliances with us.

[spoony]

114. I don't care what it's called, I say that's common sense!

Think of the trouble we could have avoided just in the last few decades if we'd done what you're talking about!

[FreakinDJ]

11. BULLSHIT - How about some Fair Trade Policies

China's 20% tarrif compared to America's 2% tarrif

The USA can't take any more "All for Wall St" policies

[tclambert]

34. Exactly. Free trade without fair trade isn't free trade at all.

Free trade can't be one-sided. And since we have a vested interest in America doing well, we really ought to take Lee Iacocca's old advice and "Buy American." If Americans quit sending money to Toyota and bought Chevys instead, GM would be fine and would maybe hire some more workers rather than laying off tens of thousands.

[RaleighNCDUer]

53. Then let Chevy build cars that most Americans want to buy.

People don't buy Japanese cars because they are Japanese - they buy Japanese cars because the Japanese are making the cars people want.

[FreakinDJ]

63. Why - so the Chinese can dump on them

Dumping - Knock offs - copyright infringement, the list goes on

This is the single most un-addressed issue because Wall St makes money off cheap foreign labor

[FarCenter]

12. But the UK has no British car industry -- Why would he care?

All the UK makers have been sold off to other manufacturers.

Ford of England is as close to a British automaker as you get these days.

They are extremely dependent on financial services. They could be the next Iceland.

[LeftishBrit]

81. This is exactly why I think he needs to shut up on this

He is carrying on with the Thatcherite economic policies which helped destroy our industrial base, and put us at the mercy of the financial sector. He is fortunately much more administratively competent on economic issues than Blair (if Blair had been in charge when the banks started going down the toilet, I think we'd have ended up even worse than we have), but he's still a fucking Tory in all but name on most such issues.

[goforit]

83. Ahhhhh.....but the Queen bails the Federal Reserve (she owns it) out.

This is why they are SCREAMING!!!!!
And this is also why Bush doesn't want to bail the Auto industry out.
Both the Queen and Bush are anti-America!!!

[LeftishBrit]

115. Are you joking?

The Queen does not own the American Federal Reserve! She has plenty of money of her own in Britain. And she has no political power in Britain - and certainly none over Gordon Brown.

Where do you get your ideas from?

[galileoreloaded]

13. No, no. I am sorry, I am a bit nerdy and I think that everyone knows this stuff.

This isn't a threat of what could happen or what they would like to happen, this is the price, or cost, we must pay for previous "help". See, unless you are really wonky, you probably wouldn't know that the Central banks got together in September and prevented the utter collapse of the US Dollar. This was accomplished by currency "buys", and is public record.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20080918a.htm
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Press Release
Federal Reserve Press Release

Release Date: September 18, 2008
For release at 3:00 a.m. EDT

Today, the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank (ECB), the Federal Reserve, the Bank of Japan, and the Swiss National Bank are announcing coordinated measures designed to address the continued elevated pressures in U.S. dollar short-term funding markets. These measures, together with other actions taken in the last few days by individual central banks, are designed to improve the liquidity conditions in global financial markets. The central banks continue to work together closely and will take appropriate steps to address the ongoing pressures.

Federal Reserve Actions
The Federal Open Market Committee has authorized a $180 billion expansion of its temporary reciprocal currency arrangements (swap lines). This increased capacity will be available to provide dollar funding for both term and overnight liquidity operations by the other central banks.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


See, they (other Central Banks) swapped, or bought mucho dollars, to strengthen the dollar and dollar denominated assets. This would allow the FED to gain a favorable rate of exchange when they go out and sell US Treasuries to fund the debt we are now incurring, you know, the 2.5 Trillion in the last 30 days.

That way, when the dollar gets crushed, and it will, the amount owed foreign banks is actually less as the swap unwinds and resets to the new US Dollar value, and somebody picks up the difference, or the spread. This is the FED. Google "seniorage".

A great side effect was the contraction in commodities, food, gas, etc. just in time for the election.

Our "price" for this help is a country that will rapidly become "undeveloped", ergo, anything that contradicts this quid pro quo will be silenced, and pieces of America sold off. Not the physical assets of course, but the production capacity. We make less cars, somebody else gets to make more, albiet at a higher margin, because they pay their people nothing.

They have us by the short hairs really, because if we resist, they devalue the dollar instantly.

When I tell people here there is no political solution, I really mean there is no political solution. No one administration will be able to undo the fiscal policy blunders of 1968 forward.

The last one who tried to throttle the FED was Kennedy, by executive order, and well, we know what happened to him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110


Anyway, just wanted to clarify.

Cheers.

[amandabeech]

85. Propping up the dollar meant that U.S. goods would be more expensive as imports.

The Euros and Japanese were upset that our exports would beat the bejesus out of them on price, which within reason, really would help our economy and our trade deficit.

Actually, CNBC had a different take on the swaps. The talking heads said that some central banks had insufficient dollars in reserve to cover their dollar-denominated transactions, like loans made in dollars and international commercial transactions denominated in dollars.

Have you heard or read anything like that?

[galileoreloaded]

94. While a short term side effect for sure, we actually just end up importing the inflation anyway,

as we have no domestic source for most of these items.

As far as exports go, that is not really in play, and never really was, as demand and corresponding capacity destruction has taken care of that on its own.

Here is a great article to that effect by a very astute analyst named Dr. Brad Setzer. Keep in mind these are lagging numbers. New data exists, just not compiled.

http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/13/ut-oh-exports-are-starting-to-fall-fast/

If you really want to be shocked, then I should point out the Baltic Dry Index. Basically an index of cargo shipped port to port, it it is off 98% in the last few months.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=agDUznHbUEus

When you read this article and understand that international trade has literally ground to a halt, and the majority of the factories that make our "stuff" are closed, the reality will quickly hit you that what we have here in the US now is the only stuff we are getting for a long, long time.

Now, if you amandabeech are the only one who reads this, then consider yourself lucky, because most here on DU are busy worried about GM, Ford, AIG blah blah. That and the "bailout" was the governments best chance at a one time massive payment to our creditors. They have no idea that massive shortages are coming, and a fast crash in the US, as 30-60% lose their jobs, and real issues ensue. The rest of that other stuff doesn't matter anymore, the party is over.

I reiterate, the party is over, and the US is grinding to halt, quite quickly, and will become rapidly "undeveloped".

Read about international trade, the destruction of the 400 year old "letter of credit", the practical eradication of shipping, and form your own opinion.

[amandabeech]

106. You're not the only one who knows about this stuff, including the Baltic Index.

I've had a personal view of deindustrialization since the 1970s, and have opposed it on various grounds since.

However, we do have some exports, and many of them increase in volume at least when the dollar tanks against the yen and Euro. I have no illusions that the renminbi will float any time soon.

I think that we should do all we can to get industries to move back here, but I do not agree that there are problems in the exports and the financing thereof, and expect problems, I do not expect the virtual doomsday scenario that you do.

[galileoreloaded]

107. Fair enough. Did you know that all steel pipe, called black pipe is made in China?

Not special pipe, all regular Home Depot steel pipe.

If the boat dosen't come, what will the plumbers do even if the have customers.

Multiply this times 50% of all American products.

Just sayin'.

[Mark E. Smith]

14. The industrial gutting of America not to our benefit

No matter what some failed British politician might say.

[obiwan]

49. Agreed. But at the root is PERSONAL GREED and an inability to THINK CRITICALLY.

[dipsydoodle]

15. He's speaking from experience

of attempts to save Rover and MG - which failed.

[Scully]

16. Bailout illegal under international rules?

It is an interesting stance, there, for him to be so adamantly against a bailout designed (in theory) to prevent further economic turmoil on the dollar that the international community banded together to, well, bail out.

The part I don't understand, though, is this line: "The EU said that it was ready to take action against the US at the World Trade Organization if aid for the stricken US car industry was judged by the European Commission as illegal under international rules. "

Could someone please help me out by pointing me in the direction of information that could educate me on why a bailout would be illegal under international rules?

Much appreciated!

[amandabeech]

22. And why the bailout of investment houses, insurance companies and banks

was AOK here, in Britain and around the world?

And China's stimulus package? That's okay?

This is part of OUR stimulus package. We're giving them a loan when the credit markets have totally seized up. That's not permitted?

Enquiring minds want to know.

[obiwan]

55. Let them sink or swim in the economic marketplace.

Greed and poor management will take care of those who profit from a woefully underinformed and ignorant public.

[Odin2005]

50. Fuck the WTO. Fuck the corporatist "international trading rules."

n/t.

[amandabeech]

84. That's how I feel a lot of the time, too. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

20. protectionism is a "road to ruin?"

tell that to Japan, who used it to shield their automakers for decades

[obiwan]

58. Exactly. Japan has been in a negative growth pattern, economically and population-wise...

... for years.

Protectionism as economic policy doesn't work. A global marketplace is unfortunately inevitable.

Societies are like sharks. If they don't keep moving forward, they die. (Japan is slowly dying). Societies are also like living organisms. They are born, achieve a period of omnipotence, and then they lose their vitality and eventually die. In the entire history of civilization, no one society has achieved anything like permanence.

Accept this and you will sleep a lot better.

[amandabeech]

88. Japan was going great guns until the late '80s.

Jeeze, they bought Rockefeller Center, and seemed to be ready to buy all of Manhattan within a couple of years. I lived there then, and there were huge numbers of Japanese businessmen all over the place.

The truth is that there was a huge, and I mean huge real estate bubble going on in Japan with both housing and commercial properties. Rockefeller Center looked cheap to them.

Then the bubble popped, and the Japanese banks were caught with huge underwater loans that a lot of them still haven't written down. Interest rates going to 0 didn't even help much.

Things were improving if gaged by the stock market, at least until fairly recently, but the global slowdown has hit there, too.

Also, they have exported their manufacturing to other Asian countries, including China and to the US for autos.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

23. Gordon Brown:

Telling us the color of the sky is McDonald Plaid. Gordo, you are an insufferable pranny and prat on your best day. Under the words "wanker" and "tossrag" in the dictionary are your pictures.

Stop chewing a brick. We colonists aren't as thick as you might make us out to be.

Now, there's a good lad. Run along and do try to stay out of trouble, or we shall have to be cross with you.

[Waiting For Everyman]

24. Screw globalization - it only benefits the multinational corporations, not us.

Protectionism is good. Whatever we have to do to get it back, it's worth it.

Let's have some high tariffs and encourage our companies to sell to us. Maybe then, they'd care about us having higher wages to spend.

[Sadie5]

29. What they are not saying

What about all the bad decision makers at the top who have so far run these companies into the ground. They need to go and replaced with good thinkers and planners who will do their job and not just collect CEO pay. As each GM outlet went under GM merged the fallen company with one of their moneymakers and had placed the management who had led to the demise of the fallen company in charge of the money makers. Now there are none left to merge with.

[defendandprotect]

27. Agree -- this capitalism deserves to die -- let gov't raise new corporation

to build electric cars -- in the place of these corrupt companies ..

We can subsidize both manufacture and purchase --

[tclambert]

44. It's hard for a startup to build good cars. Cars are just so darn big.

Entrepreneurs have tried it several times without must success. They all had some good ideas. What you need is a few good ideas on top of thousands of solid ideas. Tucker, Bricklin, DeLorean, and maybe now Tesla are examples of what I'm talking about. Tesla has some good ideas, but their cars are expensive, they have money problems, and the company is so tiny (only about 1,000 orders, about 60 filled) that a contrary gust of wind could put them out of business. A successful car company needs to sell millions of units.

Back in the before time, when we had a Big Four in automakers (GM, Ford, Chrysler, and American Motors), the smallest one, AMC, had trouble keeping up because they could only afford to fund development of 1/4 as many new models as the big boys, or less. That means they had to be 4 times as lucky in guessing what would become a "hit" car.

[obiwan]

51. How about the original MINI? Still one of the best automotive uses of resources...

... and space efficiency, and the design is 50 years old. Or the VW Beetle? Or the Renault 2CV? Etc., etc., etc.

[RaleighNCDUer]

60. The reason the small companies can't compete is because of the

existence of the Big Three. It is (in more familiar DU terms) the Greens and Libertarians competing with Democrats and Republicans. The big guys rig the game to squeeze the little ones out.

So LET the big three go under. We would see, as the big 3's assets become available on the cheap to entrepeneurs, dozens of small, green startups that will NOT be squeezed out of the market by the big 3 oligarchy.

When a 250' giant tree falls in the forest, a hundred saplings sprout where it fell.

Let's hear it for the saplings.

[defendandprotect]

76. That's nonsense ...They produced thousands in C A in '90's ...

See: "Who Killed The Electric Car?" -- your library probably has the movie --

They were beautiful cars everyone loved -- they recalled them and crushed them --

What we have is a car industry in alliance with oil industry ...

but you're correct that capitalism isn't about competition, it's about killing the

competition---!!!

Again .. government can subsidize and support such a corporation ....

especially for benefit of the environment and getting gas guzzlers off our roads.


Meanwhile, there are many new materials which would replace what is used now --

steel, for instance, is heavy and impractical. New materials are lighter and

stronger. Also, new materials for body include color all the way thru ...

which eliminates need for painting vehicle. Etc, etc, etc.

[Historic NY]

38. Yeah he wants American car industry to be like the UK's owned by outsiders.

[Odin2005]

39. Hey Gordon, STFU you Neo-Liberal, Free-Trade-Fundie ass.

[Waiting For Everyman]

43. The best part of this recession is...

watching the oil producers we buy from, taking a hit in the wallet, while we get a price cut at the pump. Gee, looks like proof that somebody was profiting bigtime from the gas guzzler cars that were pushed on us for some mysterious reason. What a coincidence! GM made oversized cars, and the fortunes of certain countries and the oil companies rose quite a bit. How nice for them!

This is just a taste of the future when we start up our new auto industry.

[ksimons]

62. I have two words for Gordon Brown - AIR BUS

hypocrites, every last one of em

[onager]

113. I have two more words for him - British Leyland

n/t

[Mithreal]

65. Stick a sock in it, Gordon Brown. nt

[JohnnyRingo]

69. Canada is a protectionist state.

They have trade laws that basically say: "If you don't build it here... You can't sell it here".

That's why there's a Zippo factory in Niagara Falls and auto plants in Windsor. Chrysler and GM don't build cars there to test the heaters.

Personally, I agree with those laws and I love our Canadian neighbors, but if Brown was more of the free trader he seems to represent, those jobs would move south quicker than an Arctic nudist colony in December.

[amandabeech]

87. Canadians have universal health care. I consider that a subsidy

and a protectionist policy.

We should take the rest of the industrialized world to the WTO to force them to get rid of that subsidy!

*sarcasm*

[Lucky Luciano]

74. How 'bout the government gaurantees the healthcare of all

....then this major expense of the Big 3 will have been handled.

It is the ballooning pension and healthcare costs which are crushing the Big 3. The Europeans and Japanese auto companies do not have to pay healthcare like ours do! That is an enormous competitive disadvantge for us!

[amandabeech]

89. Actually, retirement health care costs are going to be paid by a benefits trust.

GM is paying into the trust until 2010 or so, and then the trust will pay the benefits, not GM.

GM is not going to be able to pay into that trust unless it gets some financing.

See my post earlier on this thread--I think that governments providing health care to their working populations are subsidizing industry in contravention of the WTO rules!!!! *sarcasm*

[AndyTiedye]

78. Labor Party?

Seems an odd thing to be coming out of the leader of the "Labor Party".

[LeftishBrit]

80. Blair moved the Labour Party well to the right, unfortunately.

I know someone who calls him 'Maggie's illegitimate son'.

Brown is at least less militaristic, and less convinced that God is on his side; but he is still well to the right of pre-Blair Labour Party leaders (and probably at least two former Tory Prime Ministers) on economic issues.

[fedsron2us]

90. The UK has no large scale domestic owned auto manufacturing company

so Brown can hardly be accused of talking his own book. Indeed, since GM manufactures in the UK under the Vauxhall name and Ford has plants in Southampton so British jobs would be lost if these companies went under.

I seem to remember that back in the 1980s US economists used to revel in lecturing the British government about the iniquity of it propping up the British Leyland and then Rover car manufacturers with taxpayers money.

Hypocrisy is a two way street.

[JVS]

96. That's an interesting interpretation.

The UK has been there and done that as far as the whole propping up car companies to try to save jobs. Who better to tell us from experience that it doesn't work. Also because as you point out, they have no domestic auto industry, they really don't stand to gain by encouraging the demise of the big 3.

[Nihil]

100. Don't go confusing people.

They are much happier when they are comfortably defending their cosy little
state of denial.

You want to prop up an inefficient and bloated domestic car industry?
We've been there, done that and found out the hard way that it doesn't work.

Still, no-one goes broke from betting on the American inability to learn
from history ...
:shrug:

[fujiyama]

97. Well Gordo

I'm sorry to say we actually have an auto industry. Sure they produce a lot of crap that and it is barely surviving and clinging on to dear life. But you guys sold to us (Jaguar and Land Rover) and of course Ford got rid of both because they were a drain (have fun with those Tata!). And yeah, you made some slick cars back in the day, but reliability was never your thing either.

But our industry still exists and many of us are kind of concerned about leaving 3 million or so people without a job. I know you don't care. Go file a complaint with the WTO or whatever you want to do.

[madrchsod]

98. the brits made the worse cars in the world

nothing they made was worth a shit. rotten quality,ugly designs,and way over priced. they watched the world pass them by in every area of manufacturing and innovations. their parts suppliers could`t make anything that worked.

they deserve to be built by TaTa...maybe they can build a decent british car...oh ya MG-(morris garage)- is being built by the chinese

[DainBramaged]

110. TaTa, saying goodbye to British tradition

:yourock: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

When shitty, dangerous cars are made, TaTa will make them even worse.

[madrchsod]

111. they even pay americans to fix their shitty sub assembly parts

so you know they are made by child labor....well cheaper labor than anyone else in south east asia

my daughter was getting rashes from handling their parts and the box they were packed contained dead bugs and rat shit....

[DainBramaged]

112. India, a 'growing' nation. Literally.

[Nihil]

116. Yeah ... that happens at times ...

> my daughter was getting rashes from handling their parts

:evilgrin:

[tama]

99. By all means

nationalize all of them, but properly. Turn them into making electric or other ecologically sane or even remotely sane vehicles, real people's cars. The age of oil will be over and sooner you start adjusting, the less it will hurt.

And remember, people don't need work (to serve interests of rich and powerfull to keep gaming their power games), people need food, clothes and shelter. Safety from violence. A meaningfull place in society and/or community. Ways for self-expression. Spiritual communion in some form or other.

People don't need wage-slavery to fullfill these basic needs. Wage slavery just makes peoples into slaves.

[aldo]

102. Globalization = Neo-colonialism

The Brits up to their usual. As an aside, he is such an ugly SOB,looks like a slab of meat - the evil coming out from the inside.

[investintrains]

108. Gordon Brown, stop slaughtering Afghans and British soldiers

Gordon Brown, stop slaughtering Afghans and British soldiers

Listen to your generals who say the Afghan war is unwinnable

as; your country was taught in the 1870's?

[Strawman]

117. Sure and we can put the entire state of Michigan on welfare, just like England.