Bankruptcy and Reorganization for Detroit?

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:54:34 -0800 (PST), Lloyd > wrote:

>On Nov 23, 7:27*pm, Dave Head > wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 18:45:45 -0500, edward ohare
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >Have the people who support this lost their minds?
>>
>> >Consumers know reorganizations sometimes fail. *Issues concerning
>> >future availability of parts, resale value, and whether anyone will be
>> >around to honor their warranties will be considered by them before
>> >making a purchase from an automaker in bankruptcy reorganization.
>>
>> >Durable goods manufacturers cannot be operated successfully during
>> >bankruptcy reorganization. *
>>
>> >Taxpayer money cannot bail out Detroit. *Only consumer money, spent on
>> >the purchase of Detroit's vehicles, can bail them out. *It appears way
>> >too late for that.
>>
>> No, its not.
>>
>> Here's how to sell Detroit Iron:
>>
>> 1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>
>
>oh good Lord, a right-wing anti-government kook.

What's anti-government about changing the way taxes are levied?
>
>> 2) The huge overhead of cars made in the USA incurred from the income tax is
>> removed, and "Detroit Iron" gets really cheap.
>
>Makes no sense.

Sure it does. All that $$$ that was being paid to the feds for the income tax
can be used by the car companies to lower the price of their cars.

>>
>> 3) Replace the income tax with a consumption tax (don't whine about the poor -
>> they'll get compensation for the basic necessities of life).
>>
>
>Yeah, charge everybody another 30% when they buy a car. That'll get
>more people to buy cars!

The price of American cars should stay about the same.

>> 4) The prices of cars built in this country are taxed back up to where they
>> used to be via the consumption tax.
>>
>> 5) People now have a whale of a lot more money by the amount of their income
>> tax witholding. *
>
>No they won't. If your tax is revenue neutral, in fact, the middle
>class will pay more because the rich will pay less.

? The middle class isn't going to buy any yachts, or fuel to run them. The
middle class isn't going to buy personal bizjets. The middle class isn't going
to buy $100,000K+ cars. The rich are. They will pay the most tax.

>>Some will buy a new car, and that will be more than there were
>> before since they have all this extra money.
>>
>> 6) The cars _not_ built in this country, which were not experiencing the burden
>> of paying US income tax, will not experience the lowering of their price.
>>
>What burden does the income tax put on cars?

The US corporate income tax is either the 2nd highest, or the highest on the
planet, depending on who you ask or what source you use. All that money that
was being sucked out of the American car companies via the income tax could
instead be used to lower the price of their cars.

>
>> 7) The cars _not_ built in this country will then be taxed by the amount of the
>> consumption tax.
>>
>> 8) The people that have decided to use their windfall $$$ from not paying
>> income tax to buy a car are way more likely to buy Detroit Iron, since it's
>> going to be waaaaay cheaper than the cars built other than in the USA.
>>
>> 6)
>
>You've been worshipping at the foot of right-wing talk radio too long;
>it's mushed your brain.

It's Denny Hastert's plan, really. I'm just supporting it.

Brent P wrote:
> On 2008-11-24, marcodbeast > wrote:

>> Make up my mind, will ya?
>
> It's the same thing. Read it again. You ain't worth the time.

It took you long enough, Brent. You were arguing with someone either
stupid enough not to realize the difference between a descriptive
(non-capitalized) name and a "branded" name which may or may not bear
much resemblance in its nature to the non-capitalized one, or dishonest
enough to pretend he didn't know the difference. For example, he would
undoubtedly either not be able to understand the difference between
"Democratic Party" and "democratic party" (any number of terms could be
used in the example) and/or pretend that the two are synonymous.

As you say, a waste of time.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

On 2008-11-25, Bill Putney > wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>> On 2008-11-24, marcodbeast > wrote:
>
>>> Make up my mind, will ya?
>>
>> It's the same thing. Read it again. You ain't worth the time.
>
> It took you long enough, Brent. You were arguing with someone either
> stupid enough not to realize the difference between a descriptive
> (non-capitalized) name and a "branded" name which may or may not bear
> much resemblance in its nature to the non-capitalized one, or dishonest
> enough to pretend he didn't know the difference. For example, he would
> undoubtedly either not be able to understand the difference between
> "Democratic Party" and "democratic party" (any number of terms could be
> used in the example) and/or pretend that the two are synonymous.
>
> As you say, a waste of time.

I think he was playing on a couple of typos looking back at it.
whatever... he doesn't want to discuss ideas but trivialities like you
mention above.

Lloyd wrote:
> On Nov 24, 12:15 pm, Brent P >
> wrote:
>> On 2008-11-24, Lloyd > wrote:
>>
>>>> 1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>> oh good Lord, a right-wing anti-government kook.
>> Everyone who is against theft by government is "a right-wing
>> anti-government kook" to a central planner.
>
> Calling taxes theft just shows how radical, out on the fringe you are.

When it is taken for things not provided for by the Constitution - yes -
that is theft. That ought to send you off into quite a tangent or three.

Do you agree with Obama (you know - the guy that's going to swear in
January to uphold the Constitution) that this country has a major flaw
created by the Constitution? Or do you think he was wrong?

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:27:55 -0600, Brent P
> wrote:

>On 2008-11-24, edward ohare > wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:27:14 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>
>>
>> Well, we just doubled the federal debt in the last 8 years with mere
>> cuts in income taxes, so I suppose getting rid of income tax
>> completely wil.... I know... it will produce more total tax
>> revenue!!!! Ronald Reagan taken to the max!
>
>The debt doubled by having wars on credit and corporate welfare and
>bailouts. Lowering taxes on individuals is never a bad thing.

Corporate income tax, Federal and some states combined,comes in around 39%.
Repeal that too. Watch American companies get profitable. Watch some of our
old industries come back - electronics, textiles, etc.

"Dave Head" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:27:55 -0600, Brent P
> > wrote:
>
>>On 2008-11-24, edward ohare > wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:27:14 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, we just doubled the federal debt in the last 8 years with mere
>>> cuts in income taxes, so I suppose getting rid of income tax
>>> completely wil.... I know... it will produce more total tax
>>> revenue!!!! Ronald Reagan taken to the max!
>>
>>The debt doubled by having wars on credit and corporate welfare and
>>bailouts. Lowering taxes on individuals is never a bad thing.
>
> Corporate income tax, Federal and some states combined,comes in around
> 39%.
> Repeal that too. Watch American companies get profitable. Watch some of
> our
> old industries come back - electronics, textiles, etc.

So long as you're paying American-scale wages they'll stay right where they
are. The average factory worker in Malaysia earns $52 for a 44/48-hour week,
a shade over $1 an hour. The minimum wage in the US is $6.55 an hour. I
suppose while you're repealing everything you could repeal the minimum wage
as well. Set it at 85¢ an hour like it was in 1950 and companies will indeed
be coming back.
-- Ernie

On 2008-11-25, Ernie Jurick > wrote:

> So long as you're paying American-scale wages they'll stay right where they
> are. The average factory worker in Malaysia earns $52 for a 44/48-hour week,
> a shade over $1 an hour. The minimum wage in the US is $6.55 an hour. I
> suppose while you're repealing everything you could repeal the minimum wage
> as well. Set it at 85¢ an hour like it was in 1950 and companies will indeed
> be coming back.

All a minimum wage does is keep workers with low productivity and/or
little experience out of the job market because they cannot compete on
cost. The more productive/experienced person will be hired. If an
employer cannot get $6.55/hr plus other expenses out of a worker he
simply won't be hired. Simple as that. Any work worth more than the
minimum wage is driven by supply and demand unless a union is involved
that through a monopoly on labor drives the cost above market rates.

By the way, 85 cents in 90% silver US coin (as it was in 1950) works out
to $6.34 based on today's closing price of silver.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:44:48 -0800, "Ernie Jurick"
> wrote:

>
>"Dave Head" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:27:55 -0600, Brent P
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On 2008-11-24, edward ohare > wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:27:14 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, we just doubled the federal debt in the last 8 years with mere
>>>> cuts in income taxes, so I suppose getting rid of income tax
>>>> completely wil.... I know... it will produce more total tax
>>>> revenue!!!! Ronald Reagan taken to the max!
>>>
>>>The debt doubled by having wars on credit and corporate welfare and
>>>bailouts. Lowering taxes on individuals is never a bad thing.
>>
>> Corporate income tax, Federal and some states combined,comes in around
>> 39%.
>> Repeal that too. Watch American companies get profitable. Watch some of
>> our
>> old industries come back - electronics, textiles, etc.
>
>So long as you're paying American-scale wages they'll stay right where they
>are. The average factory worker in Malaysia earns $52 for a 44/48-hour week,
>a shade over $1 an hour. The minimum wage in the US is $6.55 an hour. I
>suppose while you're repealing everything you could repeal the minimum wage
>as well. Set it at 85¢ an hour like it was in 1950 and companies will indeed
>be coming back.
>-- Ernie

With a tax adavantage of having no corporate income tax, and the fact that the
American worker will be much better educated than the $1 / hr (peasant) worker,
the employer will be able to use much more advanced techiques and automation to
make up the difference - probably more than make it up. And then wait until
transportation costs catch up with importing things - the price of shipping
stuff across the ocean is absolutely going to skyrocket if AlGore gets his
carbon cap-and-trade nonsense instituted, and it looks like he will. There are
no commerical nuclear cargo ships - they all run on fossil fuel.

Dave Head wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:44:48 -0800, "Ernie Jurick"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "Dave Head" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:27:55 -0600, Brent P
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2008-11-24, edward ohare
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:27:14 GMT, Dave Head >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, we just doubled the federal debt in the last 8 years with
>>>>> mere cuts in income taxes, so I suppose getting rid of income tax
>>>>> completely wil.... I know... it will produce more total tax
>>>>> revenue!!!! Ronald Reagan taken to the max!
>>>>
>>>> The debt doubled by having wars on credit and corporate welfare and
>>>> bailouts. Lowering taxes on individuals is never a bad thing.
>>>
>>> Corporate income tax, Federal and some states combined,comes in
>>> around 39%.
>>> Repeal that too. Watch American companies get profitable. Watch
>>> some of our
>>> old industries come back - electronics, textiles, etc.
>>
>> So long as you're paying American-scale wages they'll stay right
>> where they are. The average factory worker in Malaysia earns $52 for
>> a 44/48-hour week, a shade over $1 an hour. The minimum wage in the
>> US is $6.55 an hour. I suppose while you're repealing everything you
>> could repeal the minimum wage as well. Set it at 85¢ an hour like it
>> was in 1950 and companies will indeed be coming back.
>> -- Ernie
>
> With a tax adavantage of having no corporate income tax, and the fact
> that the American worker will be much better educated than the $1 /
> hr (peasant) worker, the employer will be able to use much more
> advanced techiques and automation to make up the difference -
> probably more than make it up. And then wait until transportation
> costs catch up with importing things - the price of shipping stuff
> across the ocean is absolutely going to skyrocket if AlGore gets his
> carbon cap-and-trade nonsense instituted, and it looks like he will.
> There are no commerical nuclear cargo ships - they all run on fossil
> fuel.

LNG?

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:23:56 -0600, "marcodbeast" > wrote:

>Dave Head wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:44:48 -0800, "Ernie Jurick"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Dave Head" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:27:55 -0600, Brent P
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2008-11-24, edward ohare
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:27:14 GMT, Dave Head >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Repeal the income tax - ALL of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, we just doubled the federal debt in the last 8 years with
>>>>>> mere cuts in income taxes, so I suppose getting rid of income tax
>>>>>> completely wil.... I know... it will produce more total tax
>>>>>> revenue!!!! Ronald Reagan taken to the max!
>>>>>
>>>>> The debt doubled by having wars on credit and corporate welfare and
>>>>> bailouts. Lowering taxes on individuals is never a bad thing.
>>>>
>>>> Corporate income tax, Federal and some states combined,comes in
>>>> around 39%.
>>>> Repeal that too. Watch American companies get profitable. Watch
>>>> some of our
>>>> old industries come back - electronics, textiles, etc.
>>>
>>> So long as you're paying American-scale wages they'll stay right
>>> where they are. The average factory worker in Malaysia earns $52 for
>>> a 44/48-hour week, a shade over $1 an hour. The minimum wage in the
>>> US is $6.55 an hour. I suppose while you're repealing everything you
>>> could repeal the minimum wage as well. Set it at 85¢ an hour like it
>>> was in 1950 and companies will indeed be coming back.
>>> -- Ernie
>>
>> With a tax adavantage of having no corporate income tax, and the fact
>> that the American worker will be much better educated than the $1 /
>> hr (peasant) worker, the employer will be able to use much more
>> advanced techiques and automation to make up the difference -
>> probably more than make it up. And then wait until transportation
>> costs catch up with importing things - the price of shipping stuff
>> across the ocean is absolutely going to skyrocket if AlGore gets his
>> carbon cap-and-trade nonsense instituted, and it looks like he will.
>> There are no commerical nuclear cargo ships - they all run on fossil
>> fuel.
>
> LNG?
>
LNG is a fossile fuel and contains carbon, and will produce CO2 when burned.