Do the Big three deserve a second chance???

devarshi84 · 20th December 2008, 09:43

Another possible example of what the Japanese makers are into.

Tesla responds to Top Gear's test of Roadster - Autoblog

Astleviz · 20th December 2008, 11:54

First of all, I don't think that the analogy of a doctor treating a patient and the govt. giving out money to these 3 companies is correct. But let's assume for a moment that you are right. Let's say that the govt. is indeed a doctor. In that case you are confusing treatment with distributing money.

If someone has an accident, it is the duty of a doctor to treat him but not at his own expense. If you have an accident and you need surgery, the doctors are only supposed to treat you but you or your medical insurance company has to bear the expenses (unless you live in a socialist country where healthcare comes under social welfare). You cannot demand that a surgeon pays for your surgery.

Secondly the reasons you have provided to bailout the big 3 also apply to every single company and individual in the US who has an economic problem (and that makes quite a few of them in the US). Why should the govt. offer money to the big corporations but not the smaller companies and the individuals who have piled up huge credit card debts and mortgages?

Don't get me wrong, I don't care if the US govt. doles out money or not, it's not my money anyway. Secondly I don't have anything against Ford, I currently drive a Ford, my previous car was a ford and if the ford focus is launched in India, that's going to be my next car. I just don't think that it's fair that big corporations should be helped at the expense of the tax payers who themselves have either lost their jobs (or live in the fear of losing their jobs) and are in debt themselves. Specially when the govt. itself has no money, do you know that the total US federal debt is 10.6 trillion dollars and growing every day?

jat · 20th December 2008, 15:46

I am sorry for the analogy of doctor. I just mentioned to get my point of analysis across and not for detailed comparison.

If you have read about the Great American Depression, then you will know that the main reason for such depression was that there was no "bail out" packages at that time. It was free market economy policy which led to it. I am not an expert in economics and I would like the experts here to explain it, but it goes like this - some companies close down due to slowdown and jobs are lost, buying power goes down, more companies feel the heat, so they close down, and more jobs are lost, more buying power goes down, and so on. It is a viscious circle. The bail out packages are to break that circle.

I am not saying that the bail out should be doled out freely (Indian govt did it once and paid a heavy price for it). What I am saying is that if and mind it if and only if those companies come out with concrete plans with accountability, then only they get the money, else they should be kicked out. And this applies to all the companies. I understand govt can't give money to every body, but then it can think of the point where it can break that cirlce and trigger the self sustaining growth. And if it works for those companies, then govt can give the money to them. Or if the trigger is with banks, then govt can give it to banks. And discussing the economy at such level, I feel will be beyond the scope of this site.

Yes, I know about US govt debt and its growth (and thanks for updating the amount). We all knew about the policy. We had a joke quite some time back, that Indians (to be precise - Asians) save so the Americans can enjoy. Most of the money invested is in American securities. And American govt was not bothered about increasing debt. Simple - USA being the largest ecnomomy thought that nothing can happen to them and if something happens, then others who have invested will save them if they want their money back. It was well known that the depression is going to come because of this, only nobody knew when.

OT > I will give one example with Indian context. One guy worked in a govt office for 25 years and withdrew pension for 33 or 35 yrs. Not sure. Now who paid for that pension? Did he save himself or was it from your and my money? So you can see where the point of failure happens.

patientzero · 26th December 2008, 22:44

Sorry to bring up this older post, but I just registered here to say that the viewpoints expressed here are some of the most well thought-out that I've heard in a while, and it's very refreshing to see. There's a lot of hypocrisy going on about this in America right now, and it's nice to see the issue debated reasonably.

20th December 2008, 09:43	#31
devarshi84 Senior - BHPian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Ahmedabad - Tor Posts: 4,024 Thanked: 211 Times View My Garage	Another possible example of what the Japanese makers are into. Tesla responds to Top Gear's test of Roadster - Autoblog
	() Thanks

20th December 2008, 11:54	#32
Astleviz BHPian Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Panjim, Goa Posts: 370 Thanked: 174 Times	First of all, I don't think that the analogy of a doctor treating a patient and the govt. giving out money to these 3 companies is correct. But let's assume for a moment that you are right. Let's say that the govt. is indeed a doctor. In that case you are confusing treatment with distributing money. If someone has an accident, it is the duty of a doctor to treat him but not at his own expense. If you have an accident and you need surgery, the doctors are only supposed to treat you but you or your medical insurance company has to bear the expenses (unless you live in a socialist country where healthcare comes under social welfare). You cannot demand that a surgeon pays for your surgery. Secondly the reasons you have provided to bailout the big 3 also apply to every single company and individual in the US who has an economic problem (and that makes quite a few of them in the US). Why should the govt. offer money to the big corporations but not the smaller companies and the individuals who have piled up huge credit card debts and mortgages? Don't get me wrong, I don't care if the US govt. doles out money or not, it's not my money anyway. Secondly I don't have anything against Ford, I currently drive a Ford, my previous car was a ford and if the ford focus is launched in India, that's going to be my next car. I just don't think that it's fair that big corporations should be helped at the expense of the tax payers who themselves have either lost their jobs (or live in the fear of losing their jobs) and are in debt themselves. Specially when the govt. itself has no money, do you know that the total US federal debt is 10.6 trillion dollars and growing every day?
	() Thanks

20th December 2008, 15:46	#33
jat BHPian Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: SINGAPORE Posts: 265 Thanked: 7 Times	I am sorry for the analogy of doctor. I just mentioned to get my point of analysis across and not for detailed comparison. If you have read about the Great American Depression, then you will know that the main reason for such depression was that there was no "bail out" packages at that time. It was free market economy policy which led to it. I am not an expert in economics and I would like the experts here to explain it, but it goes like this - some companies close down due to slowdown and jobs are lost, buying power goes down, more companies feel the heat, so they close down, and more jobs are lost, more buying power goes down, and so on. It is a viscious circle. The bail out packages are to break that circle. I am not saying that the bail out should be doled out freely (Indian govt did it once and paid a heavy price for it). What I am saying is that if and mind it if and only if those companies come out with concrete plans with accountability, then only they get the money, else they should be kicked out. And this applies to all the companies. I understand govt can't give money to every body, but then it can think of the point where it can break that cirlce and trigger the self sustaining growth. And if it works for those companies, then govt can give the money to them. Or if the trigger is with banks, then govt can give it to banks. And discussing the economy at such level, I feel will be beyond the scope of this site. Yes, I know about US govt debt and its growth (and thanks for updating the amount). We all knew about the policy. We had a joke quite some time back, that Indians (to be precise - Asians) save so the Americans can enjoy. Most of the money invested is in American securities. And American govt was not bothered about increasing debt. Simple - USA being the largest ecnomomy thought that nothing can happen to them and if something happens, then others who have invested will save them if they want their money back. It was well known that the depression is going to come because of this, only nobody knew when. OT > I will give one example with Indian context. One guy worked in a govt office for 25 years and withdrew pension for 33 or 35 yrs. Not sure. Now who paid for that pension? Did he save himself or was it from your and my money? So you can see where the point of failure happens.
	() Thanks

26th December 2008, 22:44	#34
patientzero Newbie Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: SE USA Posts: 1 Thanked: 0 Times	Sorry to bring up this older post, but I just registered here to say that the viewpoints expressed here are some of the most well thought-out that I've heard in a while, and it's very refreshing to see. There's a lot of hypocrisy going on about this in America right now, and it's nice to see the issue debated reasonably.
	() Thanks