Letter from a Dodge Dealer

[jprad]

Quote from Random.Capital:

That's just it. Either they're morons, or they were making an implicit bet that their position was backstopped by the federal gov't.

Either way, they don't look too good.

Considering that Indiana's treasurer, Mourdock, said that he's not buying any more debt from companies receiving federal funds it's reasonable to think that his decision was based at least in part on "the full faith and credit of the U.S. government."

Game over if enough of the folks buying Treasuries come to the same conclusion as Mourdock...

 

[Shreddog]

Quote from jprad:

Considering that Indiana's treasurer, Mourdock, said that he's not buying any more debt from companies receiving federal funds it's reasonable to think that his decision was based at least in part on "the full faith and credit of the U.S. government."

Game over if enough of the folks buying Treasuries come to the same conclusion as Mourdock...

Man, I am going give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your comment is poorly worded and you don't really think secured Chrysler debt was supposed to be government guaranteed. Because that sure is the way I interpret what you wrote.

 

[Shreddog]

Quote from jprad:

Considering that Indiana's treasurer, Mourdock, said that he's not buying any more debt from companies receiving federal funds it's reasonable to think that his decision was based at least in part on "the full faith and credit of the U.S. government."

Game over if enough of the folks buying Treasuries come to the same conclusion as Mourdock...

Wow, I gave you a very polite out and you didn't take it. Since you are still trolling elsewhere on the boards and not clarifying your statement here, you must be standing by the wording. This is so stupid, I'm genuinely stunned you believe this.

But given that this is what you think, I got an investment tip for ya. Back the truck up on GM bonds, I hear they are backed by "the full faith and credit of the U.S. government" too. Surely the government wouldn't reneg on its "obligations" twice, would they?

 

[dealmaker]

Domestic automobiles lose their sales value because of over production. When a used car manager or a buyer goes to an auction anywhere in United States he looks at hundreds if not thousands of domestic cars and trucks and only tens of imports especially Japanese. At one point in 2005, a used certified 4cyl. Camry Le at the auction was going for more than what you can buy for a new one at a dealer lot. Its simple supply and demand.
Is there a difference between the quality of a Chrysler, GM, Ford and Toyota, Honda? Yes there definitely is but, not thousands of $ worth. Its OVERPRODUCTION to keep more dealers than they should have supplied and fulfill their contract with UAW. In the end GM and Chrysler are in bankruptcy court because of too many dealers and most of all UAW contracts.

 

[jprad]

Quote from Shreddog:

Wow, I gave you a very polite out and you didn't take it. Since you are still trolling elsewhere on the boards and not clarifying your statement here, you must be standing by the wording. This is so stupid, I'm genuinely stunned you believe this.

But given that this is what you think, I got an investment tip for ya. Back the truck up on GM bonds, I hear they are backed by "the full faith and credit of the U.S. government" too. Surely the government wouldn't reneg on its "obligations" twice, would they?

Okay, so you've now proven that you're not only naive, you're sarcasm-challenged.

I'd like to ignore you, but I suspect you're not done convincing me that your family tree has one branch.

 

[qwiktrade]

Quote from dealmaker:

Domestic automobiles lose their sales value because of over production. When a used car manager or a buyer goes to an auction anywhere in United States he looks at hundreds if not thousands of domestic cars and trucks and only tens of imports especially Japanese. At one point in 2005, a used certified 4cyl. Camry Le at the auction was going for more than what you can buy for a new one at a dealer lot. Its simple supply and demand.
Is there a difference between the quality of a Chrysler, GM, Ford and Toyota, Honda? Yes there definitely is but, not thousands of $ worth. Its OVERPRODUCTION to keep more dealers than they should have supplied and fulfill their contract with UAW. In the end GM and Chrysler are in bankruptcy court because of too many dealers and most of all UAW contracts.

Your position is that GM and Chrysler are in trouble because they are selling too many cars? Smart thinking.

 

[Covert]

Quote from Shreddog:

Look, despite your initial rant to me you seem like a rational guy that actually understands the world. And so surely you realize Obama's casting of the bond holders as "greedy speculators" and the bondholders rantings of the end of capitalism are all the same thing - BS posturing as part of a negotiation. If the same comments were made by a plaintiffs attorney on the steps of a courthouse by either side your BS meter would be off the charts. But for whatever reason, you choose to call BS on only one side in this case. I don't doubt there are creditors who claim to have gotten run over (wouldn't you? I sure as hell would in their shoes). But I have a hard time believing they had no clue what they were doing. If they didn't understand that despite being a secured lender their wishes could be overridden by the majority of other secured lenders - then they got an expensive lesson that coattailing the big banks isn't always a sure thing. This isn't Joe Sixpack we're talking about here. And this includes the Indiana pension guys - seriously, they bought secured debt in Chrysler thinking it was conservative? My BS meter just went off the charts. So where you see a left wing conspiracy to destroy contract law I see one big poker game where all sides know their position at the table. And they will say ANYTHING to improve their position at the table.

You're right- I did rant originally- not what I intended to do-
Surely you can see that there's a certain asymmetry to this dispute- the federal govt. vs. private investors. I place NO credence in the argument that we're seeing the end of capitalism- that's not the reality. But my meter goes off when a president calls out a group of investors who are acting legally. I'm not trying to couch this in left vs. right, I'm really not- however, there's no getting around the fact that there is a very liberal dem in the White House. That's just a fact. I also don't want to give the impression that I think everyone is pure here on both sides of the issue. I'm simply breaking it down to the fact that, as I see it, there have been some lines crossed by the fed govt. that I'm not really comfortable with.

Very likely that we'd have better luck debating this with a couple of beers somewhere.

 

[Shreddog]

Quote from Covert:

You're right- I did rant originally- not what I intended to do-
Surely you can see that there's a certain asymmetry to this dispute- the federal govt. vs. private investors. I place NO credence in the argument that we're seeing the end of capitalism- that's not the reality. But my meter goes off when a president calls out a group of investors who are acting legally. I'm not trying to couch this in left vs. right, I'm really not- however, there's no getting around the fact that there is a very liberal dem in the White House. That's just a fact. I also don't want to give the impression that I think everyone is pure here on both sides of the issue. I'm simply breaking it down to the fact that, as I see it, there have been some lines crossed by the fed govt. that I'm not really comfortable with.

Very likely that we'd have better luck debating this with a couple of beers somewhere.

Cheers.

 

[ammo]

keep mind that it aint the prez,its criminals taking advantage of the holes created by weak politicians or bagmen , dem or repub makes no difference, same crimes, same results,he's not going to stop it,if there were the slightest chance of that he would have never been allowed to run in the primary as a repub or a dem, these two parties collectively are the criminals, they are the crooked sherriffs of nottingham

 

[Shreddog]

Quote from jprad:

Okay, so you've now proven that you're not only naive, you're sarcasm-challenged.

I'd like to ignore you, but I suspect you're not done convincing me that your family tree has one branch.

So far you've eliminated bond fund manager and comedian as future career options. What else have you got for us?

The good news is that judging by your posting history you've got a promising future as a troll. Too bad it doesn't pay the bills.

Step 1: troll discussion boards
Step 3: collect profits

Good luck.