Next time I need shoes I will buy New Balance, they are one of the few still mostly made in America. I suggest you all do the same.

Not evil, just business. Never saw Obama’s speach yet still not a coincidence. If the bondholders or their lawyers saw a pot of gold at the end of the litigation rainbow, they would still be chasing it.

—And if you do not agree, do some thing so that US manufacturing is back in this country

Why do we need HR 1207?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXlxBeAvsB8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecampaignforliberty%2Ecom%2F&feature=player_embedded

DonC – tough room today (g)

LauraM I totally agree with the anti-protectionist stance.

Nasaman Good story. We gray panthers are a force to be reckoned with.

Be well,
Tag

LJGTVWOTR******** NPNS

Japan’s policy is not so much about portectionism as it is about having an export-driven economy. Same for China and Korea. These countries can very efficiently mass-produce more cars (or anything else) than could ever be consumed by them. It is not possible to have a trade balance with countries oriented to an export market because their policies are designed to prevent it.

Since the 1990s we have effectively chose to assume that our industrial base does not matter, and that we will somehow balance trade by either living off of our “inherited” wealth, by reaping the benefits of the ownership of our intellectual property, and by requiring the Chinese (and others) to turn their trade surplus into U.S. T-Bills. Recent statements by China’s Financial Minister (doubting prudence of further such investment, and calling for an international currency to move the world off of the dollar as the de-facto international currency) show that the status quo is not sustainable. We will have to come to a new arrangement, whether we like it or not. The question is, will we lose our industrial base before we get there?

But, again, Jeffhre is right, it is hard to have this kind of discussion when a significant minority in this country is married to out-dated world views that do not take into account what has happened or what is happening. See my posts with Guido the other day. If we sit by and make no policy choices we will have them dictated to us by other countries as we become increasingly unable to clear our trade deficit, whether China succeeds in its goal of a new international currency or not.

Lets be careful where we tread. You cannot just open pandoras box, choose what you want, then close it.

and #73 koz replied

That was LauraM’svery valid concern. It may play out that way but that isn’t a given. I think the holdout bondholders biggest objection was that they were having something jammed down their throats and not that it didn’t taste good. I bet if some supremely naive fund manager offered them $0.30 for their bonds and the government wasn’t involved they would all have pulled hammies from jumping at the offer. They probably figured they could hardball the government with litigation to squeeze more out of them. When the goverment called their bluff they capitulated since they were looking at a long drawn out, expensive, and time consuming process to potentially (likely) wind up with less.
————————————

The “evil investor” position that you put forward is essentially that given by the President on TV, so as you say, we’ll see. I don’t see it that way. Instead I would say all automotive is now significantly higher risk than before, whether Chrysler or GM. Basically they are both now government enterprises, and the government can (and will) rewrite the rules when convenient.

The car is totally cool, but at the same time the whole thing makes me sad. It’s just not right without a range extender.
____________________
Dude you’re right. If he can’t find a way within a 100 mile radius, with an unbelievably wicked hot, $120,000.00 dollar all electric sports car, to have a great day, then we should all feel sorry for the guy! Cus’ there’s just no hope for him. No hope at all!