Chef Emeril Lagasse likes to say that "pork fat rules," but he is referring to actual bacon, NOT referring to government spending.
The current Obama stimulus plan that just passed the House was, thankfully, not voted for by any Republicans. Good for them. See here for an excellent analysis of the pork fat in the current plan by the Wall Street Journal.
Rush Limbaugh (who is calling the current stimulus spending plan a "porkulus" program) also had an interesting proposal for a bipartisan stimulus plan in the Wall Street Journal today, link here.
Showing posts with label bail out. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bail out. Show all posts
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Jerry Flint/ Forbes article on Auto Bailout
Excellent article, link here, in Forbes.com from Jerry Flint, one of my favorite authors regarding the auto industry. Some good paragraphs excerpted here:
It is easy for politicians to make rules and just declare that cars and trucks must get 35 miles per gallon, or 40 or 50. Unfortunately, the people making such proclamations and legislation do not understand what is possible and what is not possible. Nor do they understand whether consumers will buy cars that deliver exceptional mileage but lack all the other attributes that people want in an automobile.
Politicians should also stop using words and phrases that are misguided and misleading. One example: "If we could land a man on the moon, we can build a car that is free of pollution and earth-warming emissions."
Yes, for several billion dollars, the industry could build one such perfect car. That is what Jack Kennedy, NASA, the guys with the Right Stuff and America did: Create the technology to land two men at a time on the moon. They did not build spaceships to take 16 million tourists to the moon each year.
(Later referring to politicians who overuse the words "gas guzzler"...)
Those two silly words mean any vehicle that someone holier-than-thou thinks burns too much fuel. If you need it to carry your four children, it is a gas-guzzler. If you need it to make it through the snowdrifts or rutted farm roads, it is a gas-guzzler. If you need it to tow your trailer with donated goods down to Goodwill, it is a gas-guzzler. Funny, Air Force One, the giant Boeing (nyse: BA - news - people ) 747 at Obama's disposal, is not a guzzler. Nor is that new presidential limousine that probably weighs about as much as an armored truck.
It is easy for politicians to make rules and just declare that cars and trucks must get 35 miles per gallon, or 40 or 50. Unfortunately, the people making such proclamations and legislation do not understand what is possible and what is not possible. Nor do they understand whether consumers will buy cars that deliver exceptional mileage but lack all the other attributes that people want in an automobile.
Politicians should also stop using words and phrases that are misguided and misleading. One example: "If we could land a man on the moon, we can build a car that is free of pollution and earth-warming emissions."
Yes, for several billion dollars, the industry could build one such perfect car. That is what Jack Kennedy, NASA, the guys with the Right Stuff and America did: Create the technology to land two men at a time on the moon. They did not build spaceships to take 16 million tourists to the moon each year.
(Later referring to politicians who overuse the words "gas guzzler"...)
Those two silly words mean any vehicle that someone holier-than-thou thinks burns too much fuel. If you need it to carry your four children, it is a gas-guzzler. If you need it to make it through the snowdrifts or rutted farm roads, it is a gas-guzzler. If you need it to tow your trailer with donated goods down to Goodwill, it is a gas-guzzler. Funny, Air Force One, the giant Boeing (nyse: BA - news - people ) 747 at Obama's disposal, is not a guzzler. Nor is that new presidential limousine that probably weighs about as much as an armored truck.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Toyota Supports Bailing Out Weaker Competitors
This is a really interesting point of view from Toyota. See CNN article here. Toyota would prefer that the US government actually help bail out GM / Chrysler to keep them in business.
At first, this doesn't seem to make sense. Why would Toyota want to save a competitor? Well, if you read down in the article, you see why:
The final concern for the overseas automakers is a longer-term problem. The failure of a U.S. automaker could open the door for a Chinese or Indian automaker to buy up the assets of the failed company and create a new low-cost competitor in the U.S.
"You could open the door for foreign companies to buy distressed assets at rock-bottom prices," he said. He pointed to India's Tata (TTM) and China's Geely as two automakers in the developing world that are already on record as being interested in expanding into western markets like the United States.
So Toyota wants to keep GM / Chrysler in business because they think that they are EASIER TO COMPETE AGAINST than those who would replace them if they failed. Just think about that for a minute...
At first, this doesn't seem to make sense. Why would Toyota want to save a competitor? Well, if you read down in the article, you see why:
The final concern for the overseas automakers is a longer-term problem. The failure of a U.S. automaker could open the door for a Chinese or Indian automaker to buy up the assets of the failed company and create a new low-cost competitor in the U.S.
"You could open the door for foreign companies to buy distressed assets at rock-bottom prices," he said. He pointed to India's Tata (TTM) and China's Geely as two automakers in the developing world that are already on record as being interested in expanding into western markets like the United States.
So Toyota wants to keep GM / Chrysler in business because they think that they are EASIER TO COMPETE AGAINST than those who would replace them if they failed. Just think about that for a minute...
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Torn on bailout
I have to admit, I'm not sure what to make of the recent bailout / financial crisis. There are many folks whose opinions I have read and respected in the past that are disagreeing on this. On one side are traditional conservatives like Rush Limbaugh (link here) and local Libertarian radio talk show host Jeff Ward that feel that this government intervention is socialistic and should be avoided, and they praise House Republicans and Democrats who did not support the measure.
On the other side, there are folks like Adam Bold, who I rely on for advice with mutual fund selections in my 401k. I've learned quite a bit from his radio show, and he typically does a good job of explaining difficult financial concepts with good analogies. Link here for a segment from his radio show talking about the issue. His take is that we're at risk of a major financial shutdown in credit (which many businesses need to operate daily) that will hurt all Americans, not just companies who made too many risky / bad bets on subprime mortgages / CDOs / etc.
On the other side, there are folks like Adam Bold, who I rely on for advice with mutual fund selections in my 401k. I've learned quite a bit from his radio show, and he typically does a good job of explaining difficult financial concepts with good analogies. Link here for a segment from his radio show talking about the issue. His take is that we're at risk of a major financial shutdown in credit (which many businesses need to operate daily) that will hurt all Americans, not just companies who made too many risky / bad bets on subprime mortgages / CDOs / etc.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Let them fail!
I really have a problem with the government continuing to bail out companies (large banks, insurance companies, airlines, car companies, etc.) that have made poor management decisions and underestimated risk in their investments. Part of true capitalism is letting the market work and letting those companies that did run their businesses well succeed (and not try to steal their "windfall" profits), and let those that do not perform well fail. Letting poor performing companies fail prevents more capital from chasing continuing bad investments.
Further, the government providing the bailouts is essentially nationalizing these companies, making our country and our economy more and more socialistic. Umm, wrong direction, folks.
Further, the government providing the bailouts is essentially nationalizing these companies, making our country and our economy more and more socialistic. Umm, wrong direction, folks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
