Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Other Side" data-source="post: 843962" data-attributes="member: 17969">Moreluck, &nbsp;Trends in the industry??&nbsp; Lets see, under clinton, domestic auto production was at the highest levels in history.&nbsp; Domestic auto sales dominated the industry.&nbsp; Oil was hovering at&nbsp; bucks a barrel steady for 8 years, unlike under Reagan and Bush were oil went from 6 bucks a barrel to 22 bucks a barrel in 12 years.&nbsp; During the 12 year period of Reagan Bush, domestic auto sales fell to foriegn competition and the majority of auto sales were japanese.&nbsp;During Clinton, domestic production was being stepped up, new jobs were created and demand for high ticket vehicles was skyrocketing.&nbsp;During that time, NOT ONE PERSON in this industry or this country anticipated that in 2000 under GW BUSH and the republican held congress, that oil per barrel would SKYROCKET 400% in the first 2 years killing the domestic auto industry.&nbsp;Same thing happened during Reagan.. With his rise in oil from 6 bucks a barrel to 15 bucks a barrel, domestic companies failed and went out of business.&nbsp; More failed under Bush 1.&nbsp;Under GW BUSH , domestic auto companies again failed with the ridiculous price per barrel.&nbsp; &nbsp;Once oil retreated in the last year of bush for the november elections, it held steady for 2 years before launching again to 115 dollars per barrel.&nbsp; In the meantime, under OBama, our domestic auto makers are taking back huge chunks of marketshare and once again selling good products that people want.&nbsp;AS long as oil can stay near 80 bucks a barrel, the domestic auto industry can survive.&nbsp;The bailouts helped 2 companies turn a profit and pay back the goverment with interest.&nbsp;Ford, opted NOT to take a bailout, but chose to MORTGAGE their recovery through loans they were able to secure through the private industry.&nbsp; PEOPLE believe they did not need a bailout, but they did.&nbsp; They were able to secure financing whereas GM and Chrysler were unable to secure financing.&nbsp;Either way, anytime we can save american jobs we need to do it.&nbsp; The opposite of saving them at the workplace only ends up costing us three times as much in unemployment insurance.&nbsp;Moreluck, the only thing stupid in this conversation is anyone who doesnt understand the industry as a whole.&nbsp;Peace.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Other Side, post: 843962, member: 17969"] Moreluck, Trends in the industry?? Lets see, under clinton, domestic auto production was at the highest levels in history. Domestic auto sales dominated the industry. Oil was hovering at bucks a barrel steady for 8 years, unlike under Reagan and Bush were oil went from 6 bucks a barrel to 22 bucks a barrel in 12 years. During the 12 year period of Reagan Bush, domestic auto sales fell to foriegn competition and the majority of auto sales were japanese. During Clinton, domestic production was being stepped up, new jobs were created and demand for high ticket vehicles was skyrocketing. During that time, NOT ONE PERSON in this industry or this country anticipated that in 2000 under GW BUSH and the republican held congress, that oil per barrel would SKYROCKET 400% in the first 2 years killing the domestic auto industry. Same thing happened during Reagan.. With his rise in oil from 6 bucks a barrel to 15 bucks a barrel, domestic companies failed and went out of business. More failed under Bush 1. Under GW BUSH , domestic auto companies again failed with the ridiculous price per barrel. Once oil retreated in the last year of bush for the november elections, it held steady for 2 years before launching again to 115 dollars per barrel. In the meantime, under OBama, our domestic auto makers are taking back huge chunks of marketshare and once again selling good products that people want. AS long as oil can stay near 80 bucks a barrel, the domestic auto industry can survive. The bailouts helped 2 companies turn a profit and pay back the goverment with interest. Ford, opted NOT to take a bailout, but chose to MORTGAGE their recovery through loans they were able to secure through the private industry. PEOPLE believe they did not need a bailout, but they did. They were able to secure financing whereas GM and Chrysler were unable to secure financing. Either way, anytime we can save american jobs we need to do it. The opposite of saving them at the workplace only ends up costing us three times as much in unemployment insurance. Moreluck, the only thing stupid in this conversation is anyone who doesnt understand the industry as a whole. Peace. [/QUOTE]

Verification