Comments on: Why Nationalizing GM and Citi Makes Sense http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/ Firedoglake weblog Fri, 17 Feb 2012 13:44:54 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: CasualObserver http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747445 CasualObserver Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:09:23 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747445 <p>GM is already in the ground, you silly person. That’s why they’re wanting Billions of your (and my) money. So they can continue building the Camaros you love so well.</p> GM is already in the ground, you silly person. That’s why they’re wanting Billions of your (and my) money. So they can continue building the Camaros you love so well.

]]> By: ferrarimanf355 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747327 ferrarimanf355 Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:29:37 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747327 <p>… so you’d rather have politicians run GM into the ground instead? Did you even bother to look up British Leyland?</p> … so you’d rather have politicians run GM into the ground instead? Did you even bother to look up British Leyland?

]]> By: waynec http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747255 waynec Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:17:48 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747255 <p>When has the US Government ever operated a business at a profit?<br /> Their mantra is to try get it done no matter the cost.</p> <p> I’d rather bail them out because it is a national security issue.<br /> When China gets their hands on our manufacturing techniques, they will open up their interior to development. Think several Billion people. The US will then become a non-entity.<br /> They will cash in their treasury bonds. We will become a third world country.</p> When has the US Government ever operated a business at a profit?
Their mantra is to try get it done no matter the cost.

I’d rather bail them out because it is a national security issue.
When China gets their hands on our manufacturing techniques, they will open up their interior to development. Think several Billion people. The US will then become a non-entity.
They will cash in their treasury bonds. We will become a third world country.

]]> By: Ian Welsh http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747252 Ian Welsh Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:09:01 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747252 <p>If you really think the car companies running themselves is a good idea, read GM’s financial statement.</p> <p>kthxbai</p> If you really think the car companies running themselves is a good idea, read GM’s financial statement.

kthxbai

]]> By: ferrarimanf355 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747181 ferrarimanf355 Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:26:17 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747181 <p>So you’d rather have the government tell me which cars I should want? If I can’t get them in a Chevy or Ford dealership, then I’ll just go over to the local Nissan dealership and order a 370Z. Leave the Corvette, Camaro and Mustang out of this. They’re American institutions. </p> <p>And if you really think the government telling the car companies what to do is a good idea, please read post #74, kthxbai.</p> So you’d rather have the government tell me which cars I should want? If I can’t get them in a Chevy or Ford dealership, then I’ll just go over to the local Nissan dealership and order a 370Z. Leave the Corvette, Camaro and Mustang out of this. They’re American institutions.

And if you really think the government telling the car companies what to do is a good idea, please read post #74, kthxbai.

]]> By: selise http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747180 selise Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:26:08 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747180 <p>sorry i missed this thread - one other point about today’s discussion with krugman was that he did warn about about trusting him re his comments on geithner et al:</p> <blockquote><p>Should you trust me on this? Maybe not</p></blockquote> sorry i missed this thread – one other point about today’s discussion with krugman was that he did warn about about trusting him re his comments on geithner et al:

Should you trust me on this? Maybe not

]]> By: Ian Welsh http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747166 Ian Welsh Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:13:15 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747166 <p>Funnily enough, I think Krugman’s criticisms of Obama were mostly pretty spot on.</p> <p>Heheh. It’s the benefit of the doubt he gave to Bernanke and Paulson and the bailout I have issues with.</p> Funnily enough, I think Krugman’s criticisms of Obama were mostly pretty spot on.

Heheh. It’s the benefit of the doubt he gave to Bernanke and Paulson and the bailout I have issues with.

]]> By: Ian Welsh http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747165 Ian Welsh Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:12:17 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747165 <p>One of my friends who is a very very good mathematician (world class) took a close look at Bernanke’s papers. His assertion was that the math doesn’t add up in a couple key papers, but that unless you’re willing to spend a lot of time and know a lot, you won’t notice. </p> <p>Take it as datum. However, he then predicted Bernanke’s behaviour (ahead of time) and has been mostly right.</p> One of my friends who is a very very good mathematician (world class) took a close look at Bernanke’s papers. His assertion was that the math doesn’t add up in a couple key papers, but that unless you’re willing to spend a lot of time and know a lot, you won’t notice.

Take it as datum. However, he then predicted Bernanke’s behaviour (ahead of time) and has been mostly right.

]]> By: Hugh http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747157 Hugh Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:20:17 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747157 <p>Obama and his economic team have not been shy about saying what they want to do when they want to. So they have floated a two year $600 billion stimulus and the aforementioned job numbers which can be interpreted in a couple of ways.</p> <p>I pointed out at the time that the stimulus comes out to $300 billion a year and this is likely insufficient, a $400-$600 billion stimulus per year is probably needed. Think back to the transient improvement of the $160 billion earlier this year for comparison. The Obama team has also signaled that much of this will go for infrastructure projects. Nothing bad about that but the question which eCahn asked Krugman earlier today was what happens to those jobs after those projects are done? And in terms of short term stimulus as Ian as often pointed out unemployment benefits and food stamps give a much bigger bang for the buck. </p> <p>There may also be some support for help for homeowners but as far as I can tell nothing comprehensive and consistent, just a general backing for the handful of different programs we are already seeing.</p> <p>No mention has been made of nationalization of banks and without that it is going to be very messy, very expensive, and very partial solution to the toxic asset and credit problems meaning that a recovery will likely be considerably delayed.</p> <p>Finally, there has been almost no discussion of re-regulation. Again this promises a handful of incomplete, partial regulations which will be a lot less effective than they might be.</p> Obama and his economic team have not been shy about saying what they want to do when they want to. So they have floated a two year $600 billion stimulus and the aforementioned job numbers which can be interpreted in a couple of ways.

I pointed out at the time that the stimulus comes out to $300 billion a year and this is likely insufficient, a $400-$600 billion stimulus per year is probably needed. Think back to the transient improvement of the $160 billion earlier this year for comparison. The Obama team has also signaled that much of this will go for infrastructure projects. Nothing bad about that but the question which eCahn asked Krugman earlier today was what happens to those jobs after those projects are done? And in terms of short term stimulus as Ian as often pointed out unemployment benefits and food stamps give a much bigger bang for the buck.

There may also be some support for help for homeowners but as far as I can tell nothing comprehensive and consistent, just a general backing for the handful of different programs we are already seeing.

No mention has been made of nationalization of banks and without that it is going to be very messy, very expensive, and very partial solution to the toxic asset and credit problems meaning that a recovery will likely be considerably delayed.

Finally, there has been almost no discussion of re-regulation. Again this promises a handful of incomplete, partial regulations which will be a lot less effective than they might be.

]]> By: eCAHNomics http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747152 eCAHNomics Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:06:22 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/03/why-nationalizing-gm-and-citi-makes-sense/#comment-1747152 <p>Lurk less often. Nice chatting.</p> Lurk less often. Nice chatting.

]]>