Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Former President Bush Stands By His Decision On Auto Bailoutss

    William Maley

    Editor/Reporter - CheersandGears.com

    February 11, 2012

    Former President George W. Bush spoke this week to a gathering of auto dealers. During his speech, Bush defended his decision on bailing out Chrysler and General Motors.

    "I'd do it again. I didn't want there to be 21 percent unemployment," Bush told dealers.

    Bush told dealers he believed in the free market and in normal conditions, automakers and other businesses should have been allowed to fail.

    "If you make a bad decision, you ought to pay," Bush said. "Sometimes circumstances get in the way of philosophy."

    In late December 2008, Bush agreed to a $17.4 billion bailout for GM and Chrysler as part of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program.

    Bush avoided talking about the current Republican candidates saying the bailout was a bad idea. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has said both Bush and current President Barack Obama were wrong in their decision to do a bailout. Romney said he would have put both companies in a controlled bankruptcy from the start.

    Source: The Detroit News

    http://www.detroitne...uts-d-do-again-

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    It is plain and simple that who ever was in office would have bailed them out. At that time and place it was the only thing that could have been done.

    You can call it different things and you can change a few requirements but in the end they would have gotten the money.

    The one thing GM did that was good was GW started the wheel turning and but let Bama Admin set the ground rules and set it up the way they wanted. He could have played politics and threw a granade out there for the Bama admin would have had to fall on. Like him or not he did put the country first on this decision. It is well known he made many in his own party mad but the man did the best thing he could do for the companies and the incoming admin. Too bad others don't work this way on both sides.

    Now it is up to GM to get this paid off asap. This milk is still spilled as far as GM is concerned. The goverment gave them the mop and it is up to them to mop it up.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Like him or not he did put the country first on this decision. It is well known he made many in his own party mad but the man did the best thing he could do for the companies and the incoming admin. Too bad others don't work this way on both sides.

    Interesting point, but FAIL; he's a Republican!! :wacko:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Like him or not he did put the country first on this decision. It is well known he made many in his own party mad but the man did the best thing he could do for the companies and the incoming admin. Too bad others don't work this way on both sides.

    Interesting point, but FAIL; he's a Republican!! :wacko:

    The partisan Bull Sh!t is what has gotten our country in this mess. We already have too many people voting for someone for the wrong reasons in both parties. Time for us to vote for people for their own thinking and actions and not because they have a D or an R behind their name. Then once elected hold them accountable for what they do and say.

    The next 20 years are going to be ugly in this country.

    Edited by hyperv6
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think the way the auto industry assistance was handled was fine, the real issues are in how the financial industry assistance was handled.

    I too feel the banks were given a free ride.

    Just this week they the present admin tried to make it look like they did a good thing on the Forclosures but it really means little. The goverment is the one who got the forclosure problems started and Freddie and Fannie were Ground Zero. Also we had people out there with no hope of making the payments on most of these homes and they expect those of us who can make our payments to bail them out. I am sorry it is time to hold people accoutable for their actions in and out of goverment. This weeks action was all smoke and mirros as the problem is much greater than a 25 billiond dollar issue.

    As for the way the auto bail out was done. I still think the Unions got too much payback for their political donations to the Dems. I feel they should have a part of the pie but I think they were give too much of the pie. You can't have the inmates running the psych ward. There are too many in the unions that want to bleed the companies till they are no more. They were part of the problem to start with.

    Edited by hyperv6
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think the way the auto industry assistance was handled was fine, the real issues are in how the financial industry assistance was handled.

    I too feel the banks were given a free ride.

    Just this week they the present admin tried to make it look like they did a good thing on the Forclosures but it really means little. The goverment is the one who got the forclosure problems started and Freddie and Fannie were Ground Zero. Also we had people out there with no hope of making the payments on most of these homes and they expect those of us who can make our payments to bail them out. I am sorry it is time to hold people accoutable for their actions in and out of goverment. This weeks action was all smoke and mirros as the problem is much greater than a 25 billiond dollar issue.

    Well... no.... Fannie and Freddie were not ground zero. The sub-prime mortgage mess started with the private investment companies long before F&F got involved. It was the deregulation of the banks that allowed the private mortgage companies to start offering 125% loan to value loans and then repackage them on the equities market. F&F were actually forbidden from doing this. They were limited to 80% - 90% LTV. F&F lobbied congress hard to get that rule lifted because they were getting shut out of the hot real estate market at the time. Buy the time the rule was lifted, the private banks had already been in the game about 7 years.

    Some of the safest mortgages out there are the F&F back mortgages made in these intervening years because of the requirements they put on the homeowner.

    I know it is popular to blame F&F for the sub-prime mess, but the timeline simply doesn't support that conclusion. Yeah they tried to profit from the situation on the ground, but they were about 7 years late... so in terms of "ground zero", they are just the tacky tourist shop selling "I visited ground zero" t-shirts 7 years after the towers fell.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe Ground Zero was a poor term but it all leads back to the goverment forcing loans to those who could not afford them. It happened under Clinton and Bush. The fact is Freddie and Fannie were part of the goverment and contrubuted to the over all issues too. The Goverment wants to regulate the banks and they can not even handle their own.

    The bottom line is both sides are screwing America for money and power and expect the rest of us to pick up the tab.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    uh, the government forced no one to take a loan.

    Again, Fannie and Freddie had lending requirements that the private banks did not. They were still more restrictive than private banks even after they got the regulations lifted. I'm not saying they were innocent, but they certainly were not the cause.

    Now Today, they are being used as vehicles to bail out the banks. The banks are dumping their toxic mortgages on F&F with the government's encouragement.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This was one of only two actions taken by his administration I can actually support. The other was going back to the moon. Everything else was junk. The current administration has made only one decision I can really support, and that is expansion of Amtrak. Once again the rest is junk. Its not the party, it's the people in power...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This was one of only two actions taken by his administration I can actually support. The other was going back to the moon. Everything else was junk. The current administration has made only one decision I can really support, and that is expansion of Amtrak. Once again the rest is junk. Its not the party, it's the people in power...

    Indeed.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Over all regardless if you are a demobot or RepubliRat, The TARP dollars had to be done for the well being of this country. Anyone who wants to blame Bush or Obama, need to wake up to the fact that our current Depression would have been much worse if we did not bail out the financial industry and the auto industry.

    The time now is to cut out the waste and stop being a world police and focus on rebuilding our country as we pay off our Debt.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Over all regardless if you are a demobot or RepubliRat, The TARP dollars had to be done for the well being of this country. Anyone who wants to blame Bush or Obama, need to wake up to the fact that our current Depression would have been much worse if we did not bail out the financial industry and the auto industry.

    The time now is to cut out the waste and stop being a world police and focus on rebuilding our country as we pay off our Debt.

    I'm not against there having been a financial bailout, but the way it was done was beyond patheticly sloppy & irresponsible.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • The EV9 Wind AWD with average transaction price of $62,500 is as close as you can get to a Telluride in the SX-Prestige X-Line trim with average transaction price of $54,200. Yes a difference of $8,300 which gets you a larger auto in the EV based on length and width. Telluride is taller. EV9 has more interior space. Yes the savings has not crossed the full cost of the auto but then the maintenance has not been figured in either, where Kia says every 7,500 miles for a proper synthetic oil change. As such, that would be 4 1/2 oil changes and here they average $100, so add $450 to the gas price, so approaching $5,000 pretty much I will be break even by the end of 2026 in how I see it. The benefit of never having to go to a gas station, no maintenance, it is still very simple for me and if you have no problem with used, then you can save a tone on a certified EV or certified ICE. I am seeing 2yr lease returns with very low miles at way less than the 2yr lease ice return. Thank you for the Tire info, I forgot when I just quickly looked at my paperwork from the free inspection they did and did the dumb stupid math of converting 6/32 to a percentage which is NOT how I should have done it. @Drew Dowdell Made a big mistake in tire life. 60% tire life left based on the new tread depth versus current tread depth. Just looked on the Hankook website for new tire information: Hankook iON evo AS SUV 275/50 R20 tire has a tread depth of 10/32 inches
    • Per Scout's own support site: They only address Apple Carplay   So I hit the chat button and they responded with the following: So at this point, AA/CP is not supported till they state it imo.
    • I want one of these so bad. I wouldn't even worry about the "range extended" version as the EV range will be sufficient enough for me. 350 miles of range is more than enough for me. I'd be fine with like 275+ miles of range.  My only issue is price and if I could swallow a 60-70k depreciating asset.  Oh, I guess my other issue is the dealership/maintenance/repair network situation. I know they're supposed to be building a repair network, but I still worry without any legacy-like established buildings. Yes, they claim to drive to you wherever you are and I'm sure that's only while under warranty, but what happens outside of warranty? Am I paying like a $500 bill to come to my house then to diagnose an issue? 
    • Everything I've read says they will support AA/CP.  I'd LOVE a Scout but I'm not sure if I could swallow the price.  I think it's a mistake to allow Chinese vehicles into Canada or the US.  You're right. They only have children working in near-slave-like conditions. Good point. 🙄
    • Just a weeeeee bit off of the price of vehicle difference..    6/32 is more than 20%. 2/32 is the legal wear marks and most street tires come brand new at 10-11/32. You've likely worn off 4/32 and have 4/32 remaining before the wear bars. If your tires are at 6/32, you're right at 50%. 
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search