Jump to content

Boycott GM?


ANTAUS

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

By focusing on Rush and Hugh, the author is attempting to dismiss any possibilities of boycott as merely right-wing driven. In effect, the author is suggesting that only right-wing types have a problem with Government intrusion of the free market, and using Rush and Hugh Hewitt to influence moderates and left-minded persons (because of their dislike of them) against any negative feelings they have toward GM and Chrysler. Evidently the author believes people aren't capable of thinking for themselves.

 

I have every intention of boycotting GM/Chrysler based on principle, not bias.

Edited by RangerM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as l think it is wrong to reward failure & punish companies like Ford who have not demanded anything, and have had to suffer a lot of pain as not to be a burden on anybody.

 

It's good to know that Obama will be their to support the US Auto-Worker and stand by their them in difficult times even if GM shut down 14 plants, it might be Ford that needs the helping hand one day.

 

Chrysler, Ford & GM need to build more of its vehicles in North America, not shut down 14 plants down like GM just did.

 

If there is to be a boycott it should on the Honda, Nissan & Toyota as the Japanese are operating a closed door to American cars sold in Nippon,

a couple of hundred Fords, fifty Chevy & Chrysler sales every month in Nippon is a closed door, whilst the US let them flood the US with 100,000's every month.

Edited by Ford Jellymoulds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than calling for boycotts, the media should be calling on the people to support Ford.

Support the company that has done the hard work and turned their own fortunes around.

A company that didn't lay in its own filth and expect to be bailed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than calling for boycotts, the media should be calling on the people to support Ford.

Support the company that has done the hard work and turned their own fortunes around.

A company that didn't lay in its own filth and expect to be bailed out.

 

Follow the money. Media persons (Rush included) will endorse Ford when they get their check from Ford.

 

Hannity (for example) doesn't knock GM (that I know of). GM is a sponsor.

 

The American people have their own minds. They should use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't know any of this was happening, I find it amusing though...I never listen to negative angry people who have an axe to grind, it solves nothing. Oh yeah wasn't Ford boycotted by the AFA for awhile...another senario that didnt work...Hmm maybe they should by GM. So while one angry group isnt buying it for one reason, another angry group is....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a great idea... boycott the company that the government it up to its' elbows in.

 

let's boycott GM so the taxpayers see ZERO monies returned.

 

How frickin' asinine.

 

Maybe these clucks need to recommend the opposite. Buy all the GM you can so the gov't (taxpayer) gets their money back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Follow the money. Media persons (Rush included) will endorse Ford when they get their check from Ford.

 

Hannity (for example) doesn't knock GM (that I know of). GM is a sponsor.

 

The American people have their own minds. They should use them.

 

Why should we boycott American companies that employ American workers and pay benefits to over a million retirees? That would be crazy and suicidal and only make a bad economy that much worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should we boycott American companies that employ American workers and pay benefits to over a million retirees? That would be crazy and suicidal and only make a bad economy that much worse.

I am not now, nor have I ever said to not buy from Ford. I have every intention of replacing (or supplementing) my Ford Ranger with another Ford. Ford took the initiative to solve their problems themselves, and deserve the full support of the American people.

 

GM/Chrysler got the taxpayers to buy their way out of their self-inflicted problems. I will not buy from GM/Chrysler, so long as they have an unpaid balance owed to the taxpayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Follow the money. Media persons (Rush included) will endorse Ford when they get their check from Ford.

 

Hannity (for example) doesn't knock GM (that I know of). GM is a sponsor.

 

The American people have their own minds. They should use them.

 

 

You won't see Glenn Beck knocking GM either. So much for his principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't see Glenn Beck knocking GM either. So much for his principles.

I like Beck, but like anyone you hear on TV/Radio, you have to consider each talking point individually. Some can be valid, while others may result from ulterior motives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Beck, but like anyone you hear on TV/Radio, you have to consider each talking point individually. Some can be valid, while others may result from ulterior motives.

 

I never heard of beck before I saw him on a YouTube video when he was on the View.

I gotta agree with Woopi and Barbara Walter that he's a "LYING SACK OF DOG MESS" (by WG) and Barbara Walters took him to task for lying, mischaracterization, and not checking his fact.......she IS an old school journalist from fluff to serious news.

 

On his site he claims he was ambushed! Never mind that he knew weeks in advance: before the train ride, before the View. Sounds to me he orchestrated the whole thing for his own noterity.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/20/w...e_n_205845.html

 

Back to a GM boycott.....it's stupid. If GM doesn't do well they take claim for it.....more self serving rhetoric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If people boycott GM and Chrysler because they've taken government money, are they also going to boycott companies that get tax abatements?

Government Money = Money taken from the taxpayer (by force)

 

Tax Abatements = Money never taken (in the first place) from the companies (or the citizens) by the Government.

 

If you don't see the difference, read again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Government Money = Money taken from the taxpayer (by force)

 

Tax Abatements = Money never taken (in the first place) from the companies (or the citizens) by the Government.

 

If you don't see the difference, read again.

 

I can see the difference, but thanks for the helpful reading and comprehension advice.

 

The money "never taken" has to be made up by others or in the form of services that never happen. That's how it works in the world I live in, although maybe not in the world you long for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see the difference, but thanks for the helpful reading and comprehension advice.

 

The money "never taken" has to be made up by others or in the form of services that never happen. That's how it works in the world I live in, although maybe not in the world you long for.

 

It's simply a different viewpoint. Here's what I mean.

 

You (probeGT) go to work. You spend your time and effort, in exchange for a specific amount of money. That means the money is yours. It's no one else's, because it was your time and your effort that was required to obtain it.

 

When the government taxes you, it's still your time and your effort. That has not changed. When the government takes whatever monies and puts them toward the program 'du jour', it was your time and your effort that was required to pay for it.

 

When the government taxes you less (a tax abatement), the Government isn't doing anything for you, that you hadn't already done for yourself through your time and your effort.

 

When the government takes money that you exchanged for your time and your effort and gives it to someone else, the government is doing something for them.

 

That's how it works in my (and your) world.

Edited by RangerM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GM and Mopar went to DC with hands out, how is this "intrusion"? They both wanted to downsize and cut dealers for years, but since dealers are 'businessmen' they think they walk on water. So, this is spun into 'attack on free enterprise'?

 

GM and Mopar f'ed up, and dealers think they should get $$$? Why dont they just go to China for cars to sell. No problem selling products made in a cummunist nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the government taxes you less (a tax abatement), the Government isn't doing anything for you, that you hadn't already done for yourself through your time and your effort.

 

This seems like a huge (and inaccurate) assumption. When my local govt. gave abatements for the garish new Bass Pro Shop, Bass Pro Shop did not build the roads leading up to it, did not extend services to it, etc., governments did. This scenario seems to be the one played out under most tax abatements. . . see for example the current NCR HQ move from Dayton to Atlanta where they're actually talking about using stimulus money to help build infrastructure for the new HQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the fact that this is not the same thing (at all) as the GM/Chrysler fiasco, let's break this down....

This seems like a huge (and inaccurate) assumption. When my local govt. gave abatements for the garish new Bass Pro Shop, Bass Pro Shop did not build the roads leading up to it, did not extend services to it, etc., governments did.

If the local gov't gave abatements for the Bass Pro Shop, all it meant was that they would be free from taxes. Building of roads, services, etc is not a tax abatement. Besides, you are ignoring the fact that this is a State/Local expenditure, not Federal.

This scenario seems to be the one played out under most tax abatements. . . see for example the current NCR HQ move from Dayton to Atlanta where they're actually talking about using stimulus money to help build infrastructure for the new HQ.

I would question the legality of using stimulus funds for that. It would seem to be a violation of the US Constitution's prohibition of favoring commerce in one State over another (presumably because they're using Federal funds). The Constitution does refer to States' ports, but I'd think this would still apply.

Edited by RangerM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the local gov't gave abatements for the Bass Pro Shop, all it meant was that they would be free from taxes. Building of roads, services, etc is not a tax abatement. Besides, you are ignoring the fact that this is a State/Local expenditure, not Federal.

 

But the roads were still built--by the government--and somebody had to pay for them--so it isn't as if Bass Pro shop did all the work on their own, etc. Your previous post argued that the government didn't do anything for companies that got tax abatements.

 

I thought you were going to make the distinction between state/local and federal as I was typing last message. Again--to me--I'm not making a distinction because I still pay both kinds of taxes. I do understand your principle of right of state/local v. federal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's amusing that it's popular to believe that money is 'wasted' on taxes--that tax money purchases nothing of value.

 

Also, given the gigantic bailouts of the financial industry and the auto industry (on a global scale: cf Porsche looking for gov't money, Honda and Toyota borrowing from the Japanese gov't, Fiat borrowing money from Italy, etc.), it seems unwise to assert that inefficient operations are the exclusive province of government.

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
Reply to this topic...

×   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.


×
×
  • Create New...