Bangkoktraveler Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Has anybody noticed, GM is near bankruptcy but some claim Chrysler may file before GM and Ford is in deep shit also. We think the airline industry and the housing market are in deep shit but not much has been said about the US Automotive Industry. Is this part of the GWB Legacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Nah, just coincidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Not coincidence! Those pinko, commie leftist made it happen! Don't you find it strange that big businesses that have unions [workers for the devil, I mean pure communism), such as the automotive industries and airline companies, are not reaping what they have sowed (bankruptcy)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamui Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Not coincidence! Those pinko, commie leftist made it happen! Don't you find it strange that big businesses that have unions [workers for the devil, I mean pure communism), such as the automotive industries and airline companies, are not reaping what they have sowed (bankruptcy)? Yeah, of course. Those workers have robbed the big companies and they forced GM, Ford e.g. to produce complete outdated cars instead of putting money into research for new cars. :content: I mean, just have look at Mercedes, Porsche or BMW. The have real strong unions and now look at the cars they produce... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamui Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 I doubt you'd get many people to give up their cars and take the train. The big need is in urban rail lines. I'm old enough to remember them. Every major US city had rail lines, but the Detroit auto industry bought and closed them down. Then they sold the cities buses! Kottke.org has today an interesting link to an AMTRAK story: Train in Vain The American passenger railâ??once a model around the globeâ??is now something of an oddball novelty, a political boondoggle to some, a colossal transit failure to others. The author James Howard Kunstler likes to say that [color:red]American trains â??would be the laughing stock of Bulgaria.[/color]â? The numbers show just how far this once-great system has fallen. In 1960, U.S. rail travelers logged 17.1 billion passenger miles (the movement of one passenger one mile), the standard measure of a systemâ??s reach; by 2000, that number had fallen to 5.5 billion, just one percent of the total travel between U.S. cities that year. (Of course, over this same period, airlinesâ?? passenger miles increased 16 times; even intercity busesâ?? service nearly doubled.) Most of this decrease was seen in the 1960s, as highways and air travel took precedent both in travel plans and in government subsidies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 I think you hit it on the nail this time - government subsidies. We could have nice rail systems in the USA but the bureaucrats say we can not afford it. But we can afford to fight wars, provide health care to Iraqis, build the infrastructure in Iraq but not the USA. Sounds like the bureaucrats have their hands in the back pockets of too many people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 As I understand it, US railways still have to pay a tax slapped on passenger travel during WWII to discourage people from going anywhere. I do know that not so many years ago rail travel cost more than air, which is ridiculous. People have been driven away from the trains. Even if the lines were put back into passenger service, not that many people would start using them again. It used to be second nature to go by rail. Not any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 China is the second biggest lender (502 billion USD, after Japan with 592.2) and it could crash the US economy by asking the money back... False. This is totally dumb and I have explained why already on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 In California Amtrak routinely has delays because it shares the rail with freight and its the freight trains that have precedence. Amtrak is also a huge money loser that is propped up by the government. Its a well known story that Los Angeles' trolley and light rail system was sold out to the car companies who closed it soon after. The city government sold out the city but the trend nationally was highways not train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayT Posted August 1, 2008 Report Share Posted August 1, 2008 I find it hard to believe we can do every thing else BUT get a cleaner, proficient engine that doesn't run entirely on oil. I believe that it already exists. Internal combustion engines that run on 100% ethanol. Alcool I think they call it in Brasil. Eighty-five percent of the cars sold there have flex-fuel engines that can run on either alcool or gasoline. (whichever is cheaper at the time). Brazil ready to raise WTO protest against U.S. ethanol tariffs Wednesday, July 30, 2008 By BRADLEY S. KLAPPER The Associated Press GENEVA - Brazil is likely to ask the World Trade Organization to open a blockbuster case into U.S. ethanol tariffs, a senior official said Wednesday, outlining the first possible dispute to arise as a result of this week's global trade talks collapse. Roberto Azevedo, Brazil's WTO ambassador, said there was a "strong possibility" that the Latin American country would make a formal complaint in September. Brazil would then be able to ask for the establishment of a WTO panel if a two-month consultation period with the United States fails to produce an agreement. The case would concern a U.S. ethanol tariff of 54 cents per gallon, which critics say is designed to protect American corn farmers who cannot produce the fuel as cheaply as sugarcane growers in Brazil. The U.S. considers ethanol the only U.S. product outside the scope of WTO rules, but Brazil would challenge this designation so that tariff cuts on the fuel would have to be a part of any future global trade pact. ...Brazil would make billions of dollars (euros) from lower taxes on ethanol imports, but has struggled getting its fuel accepted as a cheap, eco-friendly alternative to fossil fuels. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.