Comments on: Canadian Bailout Czar Bails Out

By: rx8totheendoftime

rx8totheendoftime — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:58:10 +0000

Harper had no choice politically and Bushoes/Obama had/have no choice either, because of the macroeconomics of the situation.

To paraphrase Bushoes, letting the car companies go now risks starting the second Great Depression of the 20th/21st century.

Is there a politician who is now alive anywhere in the world that would let that happen or is even capable of taking that chance?

Of course, Bushoes could have done something anytime since January, 2001 to prevent this…guess he was just too busy or just plumb forgot…you know, he made a list then lost it??…guess a Yale MBA isn’t worth what it used to be, except being good at allowing the American equivalent of the Afghan warlords to take over the economy for 8 years…Curly (nyuk, nyuk, nyuk) would have made a better President. Bushoes is lucky my size 13s weren’t thrown at him…a little harder to dodge…Congratulations American voters for a job well done!!

By: mikey

mikey — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:15:52 +0000

And the award goes to crackers, you nailed it dude.Stephen Harper is a ultra conservative.Who knows what Harper would do with a majority.A majority Prime Minister answers only to his own party.As soon as President Bush gave the bailout a green light,Harper had to fish or cut bait.I’ve said it before,the auto industry is the life blood of Ontario.Premier McGuinty has been supportive from the get go.Stephen Harper had to be pushed,to get onboard.

By: Kurt B

Kurt B — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 04:05:51 +0000

Here’s my solution since nobody asked (yet are happy to spend my tax dollars).
Canadian gov’t backstops Magna to buy Chrysler’s Canadian operations – minivans/300/Challenger/Charger. They then supply the vehicles as OEM to Chrysler or directly through the dealers.
That seems a lot better to me than throwing the money straight down the toilet.

By: rcguy

rcguy — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 23:28:48 +0000

<@dougjp :

I think the chances of any repayment are slim to none, because of all the secrecy involved.To me any time there is a lack of info it’s because there’s nothing good to say.

By: dougjp

dougjp — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 23:05:26 +0000

The other parties up here are even worse. They were pushing to be the first, before the US, to give money. Especially the party that is basically Union based. How would that have looked if the US didn’t give money and they promptly went bankrupt?

Our politicians simply threw in the towel. Proof? NO 50% guarantee from Cerberus. What are the chances of seeing any money back at all.

By: rcguy

rcguy — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 23:04:22 +0000

This bailout comes with a bouquet of questions that nobody seems to be asking.

1. Is this going to freeze the employment level in Canada?
2. If so, at what level of employment will get the money to the companies?
3. What is the net revenues and profits in Canada?
4. Are the Mexicans offering loans or cash?
5. Are the Mexicans being asked for bailout money? and if not why not?

By: crackers

crackers — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:52:26 +0000

Harper had no choice. He leads a minority government that nearly got booted out for providing an “economic update” that the opposition parties didn’t like. If he didn’t do it, the government would change hands to a coalition of parties that would try to spend themselves into prosperity.

By: Austin Greene

Austin Greene — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:50:24 +0000

Stephen Who?

By: oldguy

oldguy — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:32:53 +0000

I wonder what GM and Chrysler are providing for collateral for the dough? Obviously anything of value has already been mortgaged to the max..

By: Emro

Emro — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:30:41 +0000

Molsens = Molsons

By: NickR

NickR — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:25:51 +0000

I wrote Harper’s Industry Minister about this bailout, for the second time. Can’t wait to hear back. Stephen Harper, just another goddam panderer.

By: jkross22

jkross22 — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:01:05 +0000

Best. Picture. Ever.