Wednesday, June 30, 2010

#1 and #2 American-Made Cars: Toyota and Honda

#1 Toyota Camry
#2 Honda Accord

"Cars.com's American-Made Index rates vehicles built and bought in the U.S. Factors include sales, where the car's parts come from and whether the car is assembled in the U.S."

For 2010, the #1 American-made car is the Toyota Camry for the second year in  a row, followed by the Honda Accord.  Toyota has two other models in this year's top ten, the Tundra at #7 and the Sienna at #10; and Honda has the Odyssey at #6.  So the two "foreign car companies" - Toyota and Honda - captured half of the top ten spots for American-made cars in 2010, just like last year

Isn't it a bit ironic that the two "most American-made" cars would get towed from the UAW parking lot pictured below? And what about these vehicles built by the "Canadian Auto Workers" - Chevy Camaro, Chrysler 300, Dodge Challenger, Dodge Charger - wouldn't they get towed?


Update: The Mazda 6, Mitsubishi Eclipse, Mitsubishi Galant, and Toyota Corolla are all built by the UAW in the United States - would these union-made vehicles actually get towed?  

47 Comments:

At 6/30/2010 11:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, this is not rational. I wonder about this sort of thing when I see 'Merican built oversized pickup trucks being used to pick up oversized Korean built large screen TVs at Best Buy.

 
At 7/01/2010 12:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And as Mickey Kaus pointed out earlier this year, if you count bonuses, Toyota workers actually make more than UAW workers.

"So will promoters of greater unionization now boast that with unions, workers can earn $2/hour less?"

 
At 7/01/2010 6:17 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

America Made = North America. Union = Union. So, the cars made in Mexico or in the transplants would get towed because they are non-union made and the cars made in Canada would not get towed because they are union made. That's pretty simple.

Would you get a hamburger at McDonalds and go into Burger King and sit down and eat it? Using your logic you would, so try it sometime and see if you get asked to leave. See what happens if you refuse to leave. Your body will get towed out by the police for trespassing. That's the same thing as the parking lot sign.

I don't agree with the signs, especially when the UAW is trying to organize the people who make transplant cars, but I do understand why some people think that way; it is their house. They pay the taxes, too. And no, saying that is the same thing as posting a Mexican or Japanese person off the property is ridiculous. The last time I checked, people were not cars--just like they are not hamburgers.

Anonymous 12:14, maybe we can use that information to bargain a raise next year when we have to meet compensation parity with the transplants :)

This is really a half-empty type of negative posting. Did you notice half of the cars are union made in America? Let's see how it goes next year. The transplants did not improve any from their position last year, did they? This is not an industry where you can stand still like that. It’s a challenge: May the best car win next year!

 
At 7/01/2010 7:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Did you notice half of the cars are union made in America? Let's see how it goes next year."

Well, when Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc. get an enormous government gift (i.e. bailout), maybe they will be able to boos their sales as well.

 
At 7/01/2010 7:59 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"Would you get a hamburger at McDonalds and go into Burger King and sit down and eat it?"

Fair enough, I guess, but the unions don't stop there. If the unions were Burger King, they'd pay their Democrat protectors to restrict my right to buy a burger at McDonalds in the first place.

Oh, but the payoffs would be done legally, so who cares, right Walt?

 
At 7/01/2010 8:15 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Would you get a hamburger at McDonalds and go into Burger King and sit down and eat it?"

Absolutely yes! Indeed, I often purchase DD coffee but drink it at Starbucks (or vice versa). I often use DD and Starbucks bathrooms whether or not I am purchasing during the visit. Why? I am a persistent customer, a consumer of (and payer for) their goods. The moment they ask me to leave, they know I will never come back.

Maybe things are different where you live...

Also: Did the sign apply when Ford/GM owned Volvo, SAAB, Range Rover etc. etc.? I've always wondered how the unions dealt with that.

Lastly--I have specific experience with auto unions; now that I am no longer involved as I was, I can tell you: what a bunch of thugs (IMO). I have absolutely NO sympathy for them or what they have done--and continue to do--to their employers (nor do I have sympathy for their employers for letting it happen). Buh-bye so-called "American" carmakers.

Funny note: Apparently, over the years, one of the union parking lots expanded but the nearby (now encircled) local bar refused to sell. Result? A bar in the middle of the parking lot!

After one of my visits, I stopped in for a beer. Yakking with the bartender, I asked whether having a bar in the parking lot posed a drinking hazard. He replied "Not at all! These guys know their stuff. They never have more'n 2-3 beers at lunch."

I. kid. you. not.

Lastly: Healthcare is going to KILL these guys. Bloated bodies, smoking, drinking, and hunting are all NOT conducive to long-term health.

Yeah, mebbe my soft-palmed urbane upbringing puts a jaundiced spin on alla this 'mericun stuff, but I'mma just callin' 'em as I sees 'em.

Hieronymus

 
At 7/01/2010 8:53 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

anonymous 7:09,

All of the transplants were heavily subsidized by the states they are in. Look it up. It was a feeding frenzy by the states to attract the factories.

What gift. Are you talking about the loan that was paid back years early or the stock that will sold in the future. Many leading economists, including Larry Summers, believe the Treasury (you guys) will be fully paid back and might even profit for the GM help.

You all seem to think the no-action cost/benefit alternative would not have cost you any money. Many of the studies predicted a $300 billion loss to the economy with a GM/Chrysler failure and the domino effect on the suppliers. It looks like the $100 billion loaned to GM/Chrysler, that most or all will be paid back, was a wise choice. Don't you wonder why President Bush used his presidential power to overrule Congress and loan the money? I can tell you it was not to help the UAW or GM/Chrysler because he did not particularly like them, but he did have a Harvard MBA degree and apparently some common sense.

Paul,
Business is cut-throat, but unions did not invent the game. You have to ask yourself: Do you want to be the one with power or the one without? I don't agree with a lot of things labor unions do, but I know if I am out in the woods with a hungry bear, I want a big gun.

Do you wonder why GM's unsecured bondholders came out on the short-end of the stick in the 363 bankruptcy? Let's see: the U.S. Treasury, GM, the UAW, and the bondholders. When the music stopped, there were only three chairs, and the powerful got them. Don't expect any legal system to protect your ass: Protect yourself.

 
At 7/01/2010 9:26 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"Business is cut-throat, but unions did not invent the game. You have to ask yourself: Do you want to be the one with power or the one without? I don't agree with a lot of things labor unions do, but I know if I am out in the woods with a hungry bear, I want a big gun."

Oh, I love Walt's excuses for union thuggery: they all do it.
It's that type of selfish short sightedness that is ruining America. All most of us want is the freedom to live our lives with government off our backs. In Walt's America, you have to hire a goon to go out and crack heads, or you're a sucker.

 
At 7/01/2010 9:26 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"Business is cut-throat, but unions did not invent the game. You have to ask yourself: Do you want to be the one with power or the one without? I don't agree with a lot of things labor unions do, but I know if I am out in the woods with a hungry bear, I want a big gun."

Oh, I love Walt's excuses for union thuggery: they all do it.
It's that type of selfish short sightedness that is ruining America. All most of us want is the freedom to live our lives with government off our backs. In Walt's America, you have to hire a goon to go out and crack heads, or you're a sucker.

 
At 7/01/2010 10:04 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Paul,

In my America, I deal with asymmetrical power relationships as they exist instead of crying “life is not fair.” If you want to fight a gang by yourself, be my guest, but don’t complain when you get the snot stomped out of you. And, yes, I will hire a goon to take care of the goon you send after me.

Government off your back? How does a large corporation not resemble government?

 
At 7/01/2010 10:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What gift. Are you talking about the loan that was paid back years early ..."

Wrong. The loan was paid back in the same way there was a "budget surplus" at the end of the Clinton administration. Check Kiting isn't the same thing as paying your bills.


"Government off your back? How does a large corporation not resemble government?"

Wal Mart, Ford, and Burger King never tried to take my money or make me buy any of their products by force. They woo me with superior value and leave me free to make a choice. The IRS never cut me that kind of slack.

Of course, Union thuggery is inexcusable and people used to overlook it because they didn't see the direct impact on them. Those days are over. It's only too obvious how far the union is willing to shove Obama's C__k down their throat to get whatever largesse they can shower on their members and American Taxpayers be damned. Better enjoy it now before the political pendulum swings in the other direction. Your days are numbered, Walt.

 
At 7/01/2010 10:19 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"And, yes, I will hire a goon to take care of the goon you send after me."

Nonsense. If somebody doesn't want to buy your crappy products, it's not the same as sending a goon after you. How about you just try and compete like the rest of us?

"Government off your back? How does a large corporation not resemble government?"

I'm not forced to buy a corporation's products, at least not until Obamacare kicks in.
Yes, there are rent-seeking corporations. Your response to coercion is to agitate for more coercion, at my expense. You're like some gang-banger fighting for his street corner against a rival gang. The innocent bystanders who get shot should have been packing heat themselves, I guess.

Your mindset is no different than the the typical union thug, though you're obviously more educated than the usual.

 
At 7/01/2010 10:39 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Money is money. And it looks like it will all be repaid with interest, possible profit, and way, way early. Isn't that how business is supposed to work?

"The automaker's equity is worth $70 billion, according to a May 20 report by Eric Selle, a JP Morgan Chase & Co. debt analyst who projects a return of 47-cents-on the-dollar for holders of bonds issued by GM's predecessor, General Motors Corp., that will
be converted to stock and warrants in new GM.” Larry Summers states basically the same thing.

At 60.8% ownership, the U.S. Treasury would receive $42.5 billion of that $70 billion. And the bondholders, who many bought at a deep discount of 12-cents-on-the-dollar when GM was in a junk-bond status, won't come out too bad either. This is break-even or profit territory.

If you take all this and include the non quantitative positive externality of money paid into taxes instead of out of unemployment and welfare benefits, the only negative externality you have is people who wanted GM to fail out of scorn for GM and the UAW or the “American Way.” I think we all realize that the “American Way” with Ozzie and Harriet no longer exists.

If anyone wants to discuss this further, please include some data with your venom.

Paul, everyone's days are numbered.

 
At 7/01/2010 11:44 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Walt G. said: - "Do you wonder why GM's unsecured bondholders came out on the short-end of the stick in the 363 bankruptcy? Let's see: the U.S. Treasury, GM, the UAW, and the bondholders. When the music stopped, there were only three chairs, and the powerful got them. Don't expect any legal system to protect your ass: Protect yourself."

Well, there it is! I see you've finally given up the pretense that that onerous mockery of a bankruptcy was somehow legal. Pure thuggery as morganovich said.

"All of the transplants were heavily subsidized by the states they are in. Look it up. It was a feeding frenzy by the states to attract the factories."

That's how it works, right? You said it yourself: - "In my America, I deal with asymmetrical power relationships as they exist instead of crying “life is not fair.”

"Many leading economists, including Larry Summers, believe the Treasury (you guys) will be fully paid back and might even profit for the GM help."

You understand that Larry Summers kind of HAS to say that, right? Outside of government or GM, who are these "many leading economists"? If you say Krugman, you will have made my point for me.

"Many of the studies predicted a $300 billion loss to the economy with a GM/Chrysler failure and the domino effect on the suppliers."

Again, outside of government or GM where are those "many studies"?

I've got to tell you, Walt, that whole business has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I can't imagine buying a Government Motors vehicle now. Many others I talk to feel the same way.

 
At 7/01/2010 12:06 PM, Blogger Free2Choose said...

"I've got to tell you, Walt, that whole business has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I can't imagine buying a Government Motors vehicle now. Many others I talk to feel the same way."

Count me in with those "many others"....what Ron H. said!

 
At 7/01/2010 12:16 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"Paul, everyone's days are numbered."

So, better loot the village while you still can.

"Uh, to us, those goody-good people who worked shitty jobs for bum paychecks and took the subway to work every day, and worried about their bills, were dead. I mean they were suckers. They had no balls. If we wanted something we just took it. If anyone complained twice they got hit so bad, believe me, they never complained again."

~Goodfellas/Walt G

 
At 7/01/2010 1:27 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

To all UAW/GM haters: I don't have a problem not spending money at your business either. Just put a sign in your stores, schools, insurance offices, barber shops . . . that you will not accept any $$$ that come from GM employees or their families. I will make sure to spread the word so that you will not receive the tainted money. We are your neighbors and friends, but we do not go where we are not wanted.

Paul, you are trying to live in a utopian individualistic world that does not exist. I hope you can find a way to make it better for yourself without making anyone worse off. I really do. In the meantime, I will take my chances with people who have the same interests that I do for the same reasons I buy insurance and still hope my house does not burn down.

 
At 7/01/2010 1:50 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 7/01/2010 1:54 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Ron H.,

It was legal. We don't get to define that--the courts do. Yes, a 363 bankruptcy puts the business' interest above the creditors. I would not like that if I were a creditor. Quite simply, GM screwed the bondholders with the Treasury's help and the UAW came out OK, too. I bet the bondholders wished they had a union! GM needed, or thought they needed, the UAW more than they need the unsecured bondholders ($27 billion). All the secured bondholders ($6 billion) were paid in full. The speculators can still come out better than if they stayed with the old GM (Liquidation Motor Company now). I spent a lot of time on this. Are you sure you want to argue with me on this point?

Can you provide data/studies if you don't like the ones I posted? I don't place much faith in op/ed pieces that cater to populist viewpoints to sell papers. I'll take a serious look at what you post.

 
At 7/01/2010 1:54 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"We are your neighbors and friends, but we do not go where we are not wanted."

But you'll gladly pick our pockets, and actually feel entitled while doing so.



"I hope you can find a way to make it better for yourself without making anyone worse off. I really do."

I'm already there, so are millions of other people who don't view the American economy like a mugger views a defenseless old lady.

 
At 7/01/2010 2:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Paul, you are trying to live in a utopian individualistic world that does not exist."

Why? Because he lives by a set of ideals; a moral standard that says you don't take from others by force, you don't accept what you are not willing to earn honestly, and you don't look for handouts as political favors. Maybe in your world of union entitlements that's considered utopian. For the rest of us, it means living up to a set of values.

YOUR philosophy, not Paul's, is everything that is wrong with this country, Walt.

 
At 7/01/2010 2:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just a delaying tactic: Outside of the Corvette maybe (and that ain't mainstream), GM still can't make a car worth buying.

D'ja catch the latest Consumer Reports panning the Chevy ('scuse me, Chevrolet) Impala?

"Lows
Agility, unsettled ride, rear-seat comfort, rear access, fit and finish."

Little Hyunda, a laughingstock in 1983, now tops even Toyonda. GM? Not so much.

Ford has a couple of good ideas--and I am rooting for 'em--but you will note that Ford is a teensy bit less beholden to its unions.

Chrysler, of course, is dead.

Hieronymus

 
At 7/01/2010 3:01 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Paul and anon,

What has GM or the UAW taken from you that you will not get back? Do you have any dollar amounts or financial forecasts? Anything substantial other than your caustic opinions and name-calling?

Unless any of you guys are Catholic priests, I don't think I will take values or moral lessons from you. Come to think of it, I think I will pass on the priests, too.

Did you ever notice that "political favors" only applies to what someone else gets that you don't? Isn't that the same thing as jealousy? We are all a part of some special interest group. Which one is yours?

 
At 7/01/2010 3:09 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

anon 2:34,

What are you talking about?


GM June 2010 U.S. sales: 195,380
Toyota June 2010 U.S. sales: 140,604


From The Detroit News: http://www.detnews.com/article/20100701/AUTO01/7010430/June-auto-sales-up-over--09--but-dip-from-May#ixzz0sSlzWUYI
Last Updated: July 01. 2010 2:32PM .June auto sales up over '09, but dip from May

 
At 7/01/2010 3:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We are all a part of some special interest group. Which one is yours?"

Veterans of Foreign Wars. You're welcome.

 
At 7/01/2010 3:51 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"What has GM or the UAW taken from you that you will not get back?"

It's hard to say exactly how much the UAW has robbed from the overall economy over the decades. We're dealing with Bastiat's "seen" and "unseen" in this case. Regarding the bailout, we do know in an alternate universe GM's assets would have been sold and the back of the UAW might have been broken, once and for all. Perhaps a good car company like Toyota would be making reliable vehicles with those assets instead of the junk GM churns out.

"We are all a part of some special interest group. Which one is yours?"

I guess I'm in the group that despises rent-seekers and other parasites who use the political process to insulate themselves from the real world.

 
At 7/01/2010 5:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ha! Nothing like a single-point snapshot.

One datum does not make a trend:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/the-truth-about-gms-2010-production-goals/

The trend ain't yer friend, Walt. Your government owner can consume fleet vehicles (i.e., artificially pump what anemic sales there are) for only so long.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/gm-core-brand-sales-up-36-percent-in-june-on-strong-fleet-sales/

Hieronymus (not "Anonymous")

 
At 7/01/2010 5:50 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Paul, business decisions are not made using your type of "make the population happy" analysis. They are made on hard facts such as 1/2 million GM retirees bankrupting the PBCG. Using actual dollar amounts, the loans and investment in GM appear to be better than the do-nothing alternative that could have been taken. Only time will tell. You offer nothing that shows otherwise.

Five of the top ten cars on the original post are union made. That's the same as last year. Toyota is not thought of as quality by quite a few people after their fiasco. It's lonely at the top. We've got some good iron coming out, so don't count us out yet.

Hey, I get you do not like the UAW or GM, but you aren't giving me anything I could not walk into any bar in the country and get from some drunk sitting on a stool. I thought this was an economic's blog. Let's see some.

We are fortunate in the U.S. We are all pretty much spoiled and insulated from the real world.

 
At 7/01/2010 7:38 PM, Blogger Paul said...

".. Only time will tell. You offer nothing that shows otherwise."

Time will not show us the alternative universe where unions didn't get a mega-billion dollar gift from Obama at the expense of the taxpayers.


"..but you aren't giving me anything I could not walk into any bar in the country and get from some drunk sitting on a stool. I thought this was an economic's blog. Let's see some."

Are you kidding? Your defense of union thuggery is "hire your own goon." We're not all on the take, Walt. You just think that because it's the norm in the corrupt hive you live in.

 
At 7/01/2010 8:14 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Paul,

Still sitting on that bar stool calling people names?

Send me your address and I will send you the 50 cents I owe you.

GM received a loan for $49.5 billion and repaid $6.7 billion, so that leaves $42.8 billion to be paid back. There are about 130 million households in the U.S., so each household is owed $329.23. We have about 68,500 active GM employees (we will foot the bill for the 700,000 UAW/GM retirees), so we each owe you 48 cents. I will throw two cents in (I'm good at that!), and mail you two quarters just to shut you up :)

Just add up the other money GM and the UAW owes you, with valid documentation, and we can talk about a payment plan. Until then, I will keep paying my $300-per-week in taxes.

Have fun at last call.

 
At 7/01/2010 11:44 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"Can you provide data/studies if you don't like the ones I posted?"

Walt, you need to be more specific. You have made assertions and expressed a lot of opinion. You can't just say "many studies" or "many leading economists" without references. As I said before, these should be independent of government and GM for obvious reasons. How about links?

"I bet the bondholders wished they had a union! GM needed, or thought they needed, the UAW more than they need the unsecured bondholders ($27 billion)."

They won't be as available next time GM or another large company needs them. Screwing them is a one time thing, and will hurt borrowers in the future. As you said, "Don't expect any legal system to protect your ass: Protect yourself". Lenders will do just that in the future.

What amazes me, Walt, is that you can say that it was OK to do this, and now everything is all right.

The whole proceeding was a blatant payoff by those in office to their union supporters who had paid so much to put them in office. I'm sure you don't see it that way because you are so deep inside, but that's a really common view from out here.

I realize it's pointless to argue this with you. This is all old ground that has all been covered before.

 
At 7/01/2010 11:53 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Hieronymus, FYI you can use your name instead of "Anonymous" in the comment heading by clicking the button just above Anonymous before you hit "publish". It's just as easy, and no URL is required.

 
At 7/01/2010 11:58 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"Money is money. And it looks like it will all be repaid with interest, possible profit, and way, way early. Isn't that how business is supposed to work?"

No, Walt, that's NOT how business is supposed to work. Loans should be paid from EARNINGS, not by taking more money out of my left pocket to pay back money I loaned from my right.

 
At 7/02/2010 12:14 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"Send me your address and I will send you the 50 cents I owe you."

Walt, you continue to miss the point. I can't speak for Paul or anyone else except myself, but I really don't think he's upset that he is owed $.50, He's outraged that it was taken from him, without his permission, in the first place.

I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong.

You can't make it OK by offering to give back the money. It's too late. The damage has been done.

 
At 7/02/2010 6:21 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Ron. H, and et al.,

It was taken with Paul's permission from those who were voted in to represent him. Yes, the system sucks, but most of the world is trying to copy us regardless of that.

I don't know how more specific I can be. GM owes the Treasury $42.8 billion dollars for the investment they made in them. GM paid off the $6.8 billion loan five years early even if you don't like how they did it. Many people refinance their house to pay off the same lender. Is this really any different?

The company is valued somewhere about $70 billion (60.8% that the U.S. owns = $42.56 billion). Larry Summers is sort of known for speaking his mind whether you agree with that him or not (see other posts on this blog about that). Feel free to find another source. I will take a look at what you post.

We have about 68,500 active and salary workers and 500,000 retired GM/UAW members and 200,000 GM salary members. If you assume the PBGC is on the hook for the pensions, you are the PBGC, and none of the assets were transferred to that fund, that would cost you $16.8 billion the first year assuming a pension at $2,000/month for 700,000 people (use your own figures if you like). Now, factor in the $200 or $300 per week the active workers are paying in taxes instead of $500 or so they would withdraw in unemployment and other benefits with a job loss in a down market that cannot be quickly replaced--that's an $800-per-week reason to keep the UAW/GM employee working that's $2.8 billion per year. Now you can add another $2.8 billion per-year or so in wages spent as a consumer. I will leave off the 9 to 12 times’ multiplier effect that an auto manufacturing wage dollar passes through before it gets back to the Treasury.

If you don't like my assumptions, that's fine, but you need to supply some of your own.

I get that you guys are pissed, but I don't see anything from you guys on this world-class economics’ blog that does not belong on the "Rant and Rave" section of Craig's list. Let's remove the emotional baggage, get a calculator, sharpen a pencil, and crunch some numbers economic style. I assume that is what President Bush did to keep Chrysler and GM afloat. He certainly did not do it because he liked GM or the UAW. So, two U.S. Presidents, the Congress, the Treasury, the foreign car makers, and the courts all decided it was a better alternative to try to save Chrysler and GM than liquidate and you folks who can't seem to supply any data don't? Your turn: Let’s see your analyses.

 
At 7/02/2010 6:21 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 7/02/2010 6:49 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Ron H.

I would suggest this link because it is a primary research source for the GM bankruptcy:
https://www.motorsliquidation.com/Home.aspx

I like to do my own research even if it means wading through the legal motions. I like the GAO reports, too, but I know you conspiracy types probably do not.

Use this source for those who want someone else to do the analysis: Crash Course by Paul Ingrassia, Category: Business & Economics, Format: Hardcover , 320 pages, ISBN: 9781400068630,

I don't usually agree with Ingrassia's WSJ op/ed blurbs made to sell papers, but he gets it right when he has 320 pages to work with. It was published earlier this year, and a lot has happened sincer then, but it is still pretty accurate.

 
At 7/02/2010 8:28 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"Still sitting on that bar stool calling people names?"

No, I don't spend my time on bar stools. Your union lifestyle shines through in every comment you make.

"It was taken with Paul's permission from those who were voted in to represent him."

Uh, no, that's not how it works. The people who shook me down to pay off the unions absolutely do not represent me, and I will work to stop union $->Democrat election->union payoff loop from perpetuating.


"I like to do my own research even if it means wading through the legal motions."

And whaddya know, Walt discovered the bailout was a great deal for everyone!* I mean, he could have went either way, but the research just happened to back up his claims!

*Disregarding his constant "hire your own goon if you don't like it" unionist world view.

 
At 7/02/2010 9:14 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Paul,

Do you know how to do research using primary sources? You still have nothing except name-calling and opinion.

 
At 7/02/2010 10:03 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"Many people refinance their house to pay off the same lender. Is this really any different?

Yes, Walt, there's a big difference: when I refinance my house, I don't brag on national TV what a good thing I've done by paying off my house early, with interest.

 
At 7/02/2010 10:40 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Ron H.,

You should be getting your information from the 10-K and 10-Q SEC reports (see the link below). Getting your information from entertainment-owned media is bad news.

How do you insert links in the posting?

http://www.gm.com/corporate/investo
r_information/sec/

 
At 7/02/2010 10:45 AM, Blogger Paul said...

Oh, Walt,


"Do you know how to do research using primary sources? You still have nothing except name-calling and opinion."

Sure, but I haven't spent much time analyzing the bailout beyond reading about the simple injustice of it all, and it's been awhie since I've looked into it period. I readily concede you have read more about this particular shakedown, probably in order to justify it in your own mind. But your fallback on this, and every union payoff, will always be "hire your own goon like my fellow union thugs did if you don't like it," so I will never take your assurances at face value.

 
At 7/02/2010 11:30 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Actually Paul,

We only owe you 1/2 penny each instead of 50 cents. I made a math mistake, and none of you caught it. Imagine that. I will still send you the 50 cents if you want it.

The dollar amounts, workforce data, and U.S. household population are quite public; the legal proceedings, too. You do not have to take anything at all I say at face value. In fact, I would prefer you give me your own analysis using your own reputable sources. You just have not done that. You need to challenge your assumptions whether it is on this matter or any other. Have an original thought and back it up.

 
At 7/02/2010 11:46 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"In fact, I would prefer you give me your own analysis using your own reputable sources. You just have not done that. You need to challenge your assumptions whether it is on this matter or any other. Have an original thought and back it up."

Oh, yawn. Really, I never intended to debate the specifics of the UAW bailout/shakedown. My first response to you was in regards to your McDonalds/Burger King analogy.

You readily offered your unionist view that the wise man hires goons to go and take what doesn't belong to him. After that, nothing you say is going to convince anyone.

 
At 7/03/2010 1:23 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"How do you insert links in the posting?"

Walt, for info on HTML tags, specifically links, look
here. to view links on this comment thread, select "view", "page source" from your browser tool bar. I can't show actual tags in this comment, as they don't display.

 
At 7/03/2010 9:38 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Paul,

Conversely, I am doing what does not come natural to us by using a positive instead of a normative analysis. Reading the source documents is much better than reading them after they have been through the cow on the op/ed pages. You should try that sometime. It will either change your thinking or reinforce what you think you already know.

I like your concept of what the world should be, but it is not that way. Until it is, I will keep my locks, my Glocks, and my CCW. And if you want to send a goon after me, I will have one waiting for him.

If you are being harassed by any union official, you should call the FBI. That's a federal offense, and they take it very seriously (I am not going to elaborate here, but I know this for a fact). If you just want to take being abused without taking direct action, you are going to have a rough life. Sadly, like I’ve said before, it’s a cruel world that favors strong and sometimes ruthless people. You’re going to have to make a choice sometime if you want to be the person getting walked on or the one doing the walking.

Paul, you sound like a good person, and you certainly have the prevailing attitude of what you think happened, and I understand where you are coming from. You just don’t have anything that shows me the $50 billion spent on the UAW/GM bankruptcy was not the best choice given all the alternatives at this time. Something I am missing in my analysis now or something that happens in the future could prove my analysis wrong. I am willing to keep an open mind if someone has anything except their own opinion or the opinion of someone trying to sell newspapers, magazines, or air time.

Ron H.

Thanks. I'll try it!

 
At 7/03/2010 10:50 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Got It

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home