American Communism!

The "big three" of the American auto industry are eyeing a $25 billion bailout from the Senate... I wonder if they'd actually step up to save the industry themselves when things get rough. (And honestly, this isn't just an American thing—it happens in all capitalist nations). It really makes you ask—what is their actual goal here? I always pictured capitalism as a system where you either make it or you don't... but apparently, once things start creaking, it just morphs into a COMMUNISM-style setup?!?!?!?... If that's the case, it's not even capitalism anymore, it's something else entirely... is that really where we're headed? Are we moving toward a world where someone like Todorich earns his keep while times are good, but then suddenly gets a $10 billion injection from the Treasury when he hits a snag??? (Just exaggerating, I guess)

To me, this is just COMMUNISM, plain and simple.

p.s. Just a little side note—the US has an external debt of about $50 billion—so you could basically bail out the entire American auto industry twice over... though I'm not even sure what the exact figure is right now, in a literal sense.

I'm trying my best not to swear here, but—what kind of Capitalism is this? We're selling off a major Shipbuilder for a single Dollar while simultaneously throwing $25 billion at bailouts for failing auto companies?

It seems American Capitalism has reached a point where we dumped $13 billion into shipyards—seriously guys, $13 billion—and it looks like most of that money just ended up in someone's pocket!!!!!!!!!!! And now that there’s nothing left to squeeze from the Treasury, let's just hand it over for 1 Dollar!?!?!?!

I mean, where does this happen... we really are fools... it’s just a shame for us and for the whole country.

Look, under Capitalism, you’ve got this thing called a market regulator. Here in the States, that’s the Fed. Their whole job is to stop these kinds of crises from happening and shut down speculators and scammers in their tracks. How much the government actually succeeded at that? Well, you can see the results for yourself.

It’s honestly hilarious to claim "liberalism" is to blame when the real issue is just idiots in charge of market stability failing to do their damn jobs.

American Communism? Give me a break! Total nonsense.

Amy Brooks13 said:American Communism? Give me a break! Total nonsense.

?

Amy Lopez6 said:?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. What I meant was: not tomorrow, maybe later.

Clearer now?

Amy Brooks13 said:Maybe I wasn't clear enough. What I meant was: not tomorrow, maybe later.

Clearer now?

I’d argue there's some Communism at work in America—but only when things start getting bumpy... you might not see it that way, I guess.

Amy Lopez6 said:I'm trying my best not to swear here, but—what kind of Capitalism is this? We're selling off a major Shipbuilder for a single Dollar while simultaneously throwing $25 billion at bailouts for failing auto companies?

It seems American Capitalism has reached a point where we dumped $13 billion into shipyards—seriously guys, $13 billion—and it looks like most of that money just ended up in someone's pocket!!!!!!!!!!! And now that there’s nothing left to squeeze from the Treasury, let's just hand it over for 1 Dollar!?!?!?!

I mean, where does this happen... we really are fools... it’s just a shame for us and for the whole country.

This has absolutely nothing to do with American Capitalism.

You can't take one weird outlier or a handful of similar messes and use them to make sweeping statements about how the whole system works. These shipyards were dead in the water long ago, ever since they were state-sponsored relics from the days of Communism. We're just dealing with the wreckage that broken system left behind.

What’s a company actually worth? That depends on how you measure it. In a standard market economy, value is based on profit—what it makes now and what it's expected to make down the road. If it isn't making money and looks like it never will, you liquidate it. That’s market value. That's what tells you its current stock price.

But when you're talking about a startup being built from scratch, market value doesn't exist because the company isn't even on the market yet. In those cases, you talk about the construction cost. It’s whatever it costs to build the facilities, buy equipment, do market research, run ads, train staff, and so on.

When a company is totally busted, market value is gone. Instead, you have what's called liquidation value. That represents how much cash you'd get from selling off every single asset after you've paid off all the debts.

So, what are we looking at with these shipyards? They have negative value. Basically, if you sold everything they own, the cash wouldn't even cover their debts. Most creditors would be left with nothing. Even if mortgage holders got paid first, everyone else gets jack squat.

Which brings up the real question: who would actually want to take these over, and under what terms? Obviously, nobody wants them without some serious government sweeteners.

That one-dollar price tag is just a technicality to say the company was "bought" rather than gifted.

Since the price is a joke, the real negotiations are about the other conditions—which are way more important than a price tag that doesn't mean anything anyway.

What Americans are doing right now isn't Communism. The government is stepping in because things have reached an alarming level, and once the crisis settles down, everything will just go back to normal.
And honestly, I think that's perfectly fine. I don't see any reason why the state shouldn't try to mitigate the damage if they actually have the ability to do so.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Communism.

velvetmaker3 said:What Americans are doing right now isn't Communism. The government is stepping in because things have reached an alarming level, and once the crisis settles down, everything will just go back to normal.
And honestly, I think that's perfectly fine. I don't see any reason why the state shouldn't try to mitigate the damage if they actually have the ability to do so.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Communism.

You’re spot on. We saw a nearly identical scenario play out in Canada where the government offered similar bailouts. Perhaps some people here fail to grasp the sheer scale of job losses we're looking at if action isn't taken. It isn't just about General Motors, Chrysler, and Ford—it's about every single supplier and contractor tied to their supply chains.

velvetmaker3 said:What Americans are doing right now isn't Communism. The government is stepping in because things have reached an alarming level, and once the crisis settles down, everything will just go back to normal.
And honestly, I think that's perfectly fine. I don't see any reason why the state shouldn't try to mitigate the damage if they actually have the ability to do so.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Communism.

Sure, it helps the auto industry, but who exactly are they subsidizing? They're propping up the wealthy just because they hit a temporary crisis😕, but what about the millions of people in America who don't even have health insurance... instead of actually addressing that...

There is zero morality or logic here. They help the rich get even richer while the poor are left to starve or die from illness.🤷

Matthew Watson15 said:Sure, it helps the auto industry, but who exactly are they subsidizing? They're propping up the wealthy just because they hit a temporary crisis😕, but what about the millions of people in America who don't even have health insurance... instead of actually addressing that...

There is zero morality or logic here. They help the rich get even richer while the poor are left to starve or die from illness.🤷

Which rich people?
Where are you getting this idea that everyone working in the auto industry is wealthy?
The vast majority certainly isn't.

Don't worry about healthcare; that's an urban legend. I have plenty of relatives in the USA who don't have a single complaint about how medical care works there.

Look, the wealthy are definitely gonna get their slice of the pie in this mess, no doubt. But the main point of this bailout? It’s about saving jobs and keeping those massive companies—the Big Three—from collapsing. If they let them go under, the whole market would take a massive hit and way too many people would end up out on the street.

velvetmaker3 said:Which rich people?
Where are you getting this idea that everyone working in the auto industry is wealthy?
The vast majority certainly isn't.

Don't worry about healthcare; that's an urban legend. I have plenty of relatives in the USA who don't have a single complaint about how medical care works there.

It depends on how you define "rich." We're talking about corporations that receive government subsidies—and thank God, they are everywhere. The auto industry is just one example. Of course, not everyone is wealthy, but these companies haven't exactly been fighting for the poor, so the real question is where all that money actually ends up.

As for healthcare, it is a massive issue. I don't know where your relatives are located, but according to reliable sources, the problem isn't the poor or the ultra-wealthy—it's the middle class. That’s where the struggle lies. There have even been cases, reported on TV, where a parent had to choose which of their two children to insure because that is simply how the system works. So... yeah.

velvetmaker3 said:Which rich people?
Where are you getting this idea that everyone working in the auto industry is wealthy?
The vast majority certainly isn't.

Don't worry about healthcare; that's an urban legend. I have plenty of relatives in the USA who don't have a single complaint about how medical care works there.

..so what was that Moore documentary about healthcare then? Just some fiction?... I mean, an asthma inhaler costs 80 bucks in America, while it's maybe 5 cents in Cuba...

Amy Lopez6 said:..so what was that Moore documentary about healthcare then? Just some fiction?... I mean, an asthma inhaler costs 80 bucks in America, while it's maybe 5 cents in Cuba...

That documentary is pretty biased; it feels like they're just trying to demonize the whole system so the director can profit off sensationalism and shock value. My family living in the US is actually really happy with the healthcare there. I guess it all just comes down to whatever level of insurance you decide to go with—some plans cover more, others cover less.

Matthew Watson15 said:It depends on how you define "rich." We're talking about corporations that receive government subsidies—and thank God, they are everywhere. The auto industry is just one example. Of course, not everyone is wealthy, but these companies haven't exactly been fighting for the poor, so the real question is where all that money actually ends up.

As for healthcare, it is a massive issue. I don't know where your relatives are located, but according to reliable sources, the problem isn't the poor or the ultra-wealthy—it's the middle class. That’s where the struggle lies. There have even been cases, reported on TV, where a parent had to choose which of their two children to insure because that is simply how the system works. So... yeah.

The auto industry is a perfect example of a sector that millions of non-wealthy people depend on. That's why the industry gets rescued—to prevent car dealerships, mechanics, parts suppliers, factory workers, and their families from going under. We're talking about millions of lives here.
The wealthy are a tiny minority in that group.
It’s better to provide support than to let everyone end up on the street. That isn't Communism.

velvetmaker3 said:The auto industry is a perfect example of a sector that millions of non-wealthy people depend on. That's why the industry gets rescued—to prevent car dealerships, mechanics, parts suppliers, factory workers, and their families from going under. We're talking about millions of lives here.
The wealthy are a tiny minority in that group.
It’s better to provide support than to let everyone end up on the street. That isn't Communism.

First off, the subsidies went directly to the auto industry and the manufacturers themselves. Sure, they rely on their suppliers and various partners, but are you really so naive as to believe these companies lack enough capital to at least maintain a break-even point?
It isn't as if zero cars are being sold; sales have dipped, but it's impossible for that dip to be so severe that it threatens the entire system's viability—especially when you factor in exports.
The issue isn't whether they can reach a break-even point; the issue is that they don't want to just break even. They want to ensure there is still plenty of profit left over for themselves. That is the bottom line.

EDIT: Actually, I suppose calling it a "break-even" situation might be overly pessimistic...

The Big Three have grown far too massive—to the point where they’re becoming a liability to the nation rather than an asset. When they threaten the economy with mass layoffs, the government feels forced to step in just to keep them afloat—and honestly, their twenty-year delusion that a "car" can only be some gas-guzzling V8 monster is entirely their own problem.

Matthew Watson15 said:First off, the subsidies went directly to the auto industry and the manufacturers themselves. Sure, they rely on their suppliers and various partners, but are you really so naive as to believe these companies lack enough capital to at least maintain a break-even point?
It isn't as if zero cars are being sold; sales have dipped, but it's impossible for that dip to be so severe that it threatens the entire system's viability—especially when you factor in exports.
The issue isn't whether they can reach a break-even point; the issue is that they don't want to just break even. They want to ensure there is still plenty of profit left over for themselves. That is the bottom line.

EDIT: Actually, I suppose calling it a "break-even" situation might be overly pessimistic...

Oh, here we go, a conspiracy theory. It's all explained now: there isn't actually a crisis in the auto industry, and the bailouts aren't necessary—it's just a scheme to make the already wealthy even richer. Since you say there's no problem, I won't waste my time on your "greedy elites" conspiracy theories.