Wednesday, May 20, 2009

How the President got the Auto industry behind him...

Once again another example of how those making 250k or less will be paying more money out of their own pockets to pay for "Changes". This article goes on to explain some of the problems we'll have when 2016 gets here. This is a very aggressive timeline, 4 years sooner than what Bush called for, that will be very difficult for the auto industry to meet unless they start throwing heavy stuff that isn't absolute necessary out of the design of the car. Cars will be smaller and lighter....and slower :( . Oh well. What about the big-rigs still cruising the highways. Europe has small cars but they also have small freight trucks. These giants that are on the streets now will demolish one of these toy cars. And not to mention another small car will demolish a small car since it has to be light to meet the 35.5 mpg reequirement.

Anyway, on to my topic. The administration keeps mentioning how they are being supported by the auto industry. Have people already forgotten that the auto industry is now made up by the government. It's like me saying I support myself! Was Ford for this?? I really don't know? I guess I would have to do some research. All I know is, those that accepted bailout money don't have much say. They have no say over their pay, their executives, their board of directors, their budgets and what cars they design and sale! And what happens to those of us who own cars in 2016 that aren't paid for and don't meet this requirement? Are we going to have to pay some sort of "gas guzzler" tax? What would be the trade in value for a car that doesn't meet these requirements??? A lot of people can't afford new cars! They have to wait until they're used to buy the car. What about them? What are their options? If the auto industry is actually going to make money out of this deal it will have to be in the customers best interest to buy a new car. If we have an option then most people will pass on buying toy cars that are not safe just to save $1000 a year on gas. That means the auto manufactures will have a bunch of cars sitting on lots that no one has. Either way, someone loses!! Give them the time they need to build a car that is safe and what people want to actually pay for!! Who really wants to be passing a line of semi's while driving one of those new smart cars!!?? Not me!!!!!! Don't rush this! And notice that in this article it talks about the weight these environmentalists carry!! It's crazy!! Forget the economy, forget our pockets, forget about what the customer wants, make some crazy tree huggers happy!! There has to be common ground here. We can't let the gov't make such huge, reckless decisions that will not benefit the majority of the people out there! And again, don't give me this crap that the auto industry is behind Obama and his folks when they have no choice but to stand behind him and support him!! They can't go to the bathroom without his permission!!!

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-05-19-auto-safety-small-cars_N.htm

2 comments:

Spencer said...

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Charles Krauthammer on Obama's auto intervention:

"Bizarre and constitutionally suspect as these interventions may be, the transformation of the American system will come from elsewhere. The credit crisis will pass and the auto overcapacity will sort itself out one way or the other. The reordering of the American system will come not from these temporary interventions, into which Obama has reluctantly waded. It will come from Obama's real agenda: his holy trinity of health care, education and energy. Out of these will come a radical extension of the welfare state; social and economic leveling in the name of fairness; and a massive increase in the size, scope and reach of government.

If Obama has his way, the change that is coming is a new America: "fair," leveled and social democratic. Obama didn't get elected to warranty your muffler. He's here to warranty your life."

From an April 3 column:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/02/AR2009040203287.html

Nick said...

And the thing is, you see so many signs that make you think that Charles Krauthammer is telling the truth and not some over excited journalist, or whatever he is. So many things say that your quote is true!