Off-Topic: Actually not funny

Sardis Lake Topics

(Sardis Lake Specific)

14 messages

Updated 6/12/2021 10:41:52 AM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,635 messages

Updated 5/25/2024 7:08:03 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Sardis Lake Fishing

(Sardis Lake Specific)

4 messages

Updated 3/25/2010 6:02:17 PM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	Yankee06
	Subject:	Actually not funny
	Date:	7/10/2009 1:09:20 AM

Thanks for the video on ganster government. I had heard about it but hadn't seen it.
-There is nothing funny about this process. I've listened to the car companies provide their rationale for cutting so many dealerships, and it sounded pretty poor to me. Dealerships cost them very little money. Dealers are a pretty much pay-as-you-go operation. They buy the cars from GM, etc., then they sell them. GM pays for national advertising and the dealers pay for local advertising. In some cases, GM will help the dealers for short periods for various reasons.
-The real problem here is the "new" decision making process that will go on in these businesses. The decision making process will not be financial, it will be political. We can see that already by GM's decision to put its new small car plant in Michigan.
-I spent a good part of 40 years studying the old Soviet Union. The reason its economy was in such a shambles was that so many "economic" decisions were made by government and party officials for "political" reasons. IF the money is coming from Washington, then company leaders will have to listen to Washington "guidance." If they don't, they'll be out. Already, government has appointed a car czar, and his office has representatives in GM providing them guidance on what is and is not acceptable to Washington. Dark thinkers might see this as similar to the USSR's old political commissar system. ...Now I believe that if we are putting $60 billion into GM, then we have the right to tell themwhat to do, but do we have the knowledge to do so?
-Personally, I think we should have let Chrysler fail in 1978. Had we, GM might have learned a lesson and become a more competitive company
-Next question: how does Ford survive. Can Ford compete with GM, if GM is going to receive a steady supply of money from DC?
-This issue of economic decision making for political reasons provides the political party in power with...well,...with a lot of power. Worse, the companies and people depending on the government money have a vested interest in seeing that the party that provides them the money STAYS in power. SO larger and larger numbers vote for this party. This process ends with a one party system.