Fiat and Chrysler Get Hitched
The Supreme Court vacated the stay of proceedings that Judge Ginsburg issued on Monday, and Chrysler and Fiat immediately took advantage of the opportunity and merged. The new "good" Chrysler will be called the Chrysler Group (as opposed to the Chrysler Corporation and Chrysler LLC in previous incarnations), and Fiat will initially own 20% of the new company. Fiat will be allowed to go up to a 35% share, but the US and Canadian governments will have to be paid back first. Although the CNN article here says the UAW will own a 55% share, it is likely that the UAW will select trustees for a trust that will actually own the stock.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Monday, June 08, 2009
The Montauk Monster, The Watermelon and the Viking Funeral
One of last year's most popular blogger subjects last year was the saga of the Montauk Monster. My post is here.
It seems obvious now, but the apparent solution of the mystery of the Montauk Monster involves a dead raccoon, a watermelon, a rubber duck and a Viking funeral.
Of course, why didn't I think of it.
Speaking of watermelons. Here's my PSA for any college student who might be reading this. Never fill a watermelon with vodka. You will drop it, and you will not get the smell out of dorm room carpeting for the rest of the year. Don't ask me how I know that.
Is "Stevie the Rat" Raiding GM's Pension Funds?
Hey, I don't know, but every now and then I like to read something that doesn't even pretend to be civil or neutral. Here's a link to an article by Greg Palast on Alternet.org.
Ginsburg Stops Chrysler-Fiat Merger in its Tracks
Friday, June 05, 2009
Penske Group Rumored to be buying Saturn
A group linked with Roger Penske will be buying Saturn according to Detnews.com. Does that mean that anybody who drives a Saturn doesn't have to pay taxes?
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Cash for Clunkers Legislation Stuck in Neutral
There appears to be pretty strong opposition in the Senate to "cash for clunkers" legislation, multiple bills crashed into roadblocks. The most recent failure involved a bill tied to tobacco regulation. Cash for clunkers has given the auto industry a boost in Germany, but the German market is very different from the US market, high taxes on gas give consumers incentive to buy very efficient cars. Our fuel prices are much lower, and Americans are less likely to buy the highly efficient cars that will satisfy the environmental policy objective of the bill. The bottom line is that any cash for clunkers legislation that has a shot at passing will have a difficult time serving the two competing policy rationales for the bill. Any bill that would substantially stimulate the US auto industry would be so watered down environmentally that the environmental results would be insignificant. Any bill that would significantly help help the environment will likely not give a significant boost to the auto industry.
In the meantime, in theory, continued talk of a $3,500 to $4,500 cash for clunkers incentive on the horizon seems tailor-made to kill current auto sales. Congress needs to either pass a cash for clunkers bill or take it off the table completely. As long as it is a possibility, people will have an incentive to wait rather than buy. Failing that, all of the cash for clunkers supporters should commit now to only supporting legislation that is retroactive to the beginning of June this year.
There appears to be pretty strong opposition in the Senate to "cash for clunkers" legislation, multiple bills crashed into roadblocks. The most recent failure involved a bill tied to tobacco regulation. Cash for clunkers has given the auto industry a boost in Germany, but the German market is very different from the US market, high taxes on gas give consumers incentive to buy very efficient cars. Our fuel prices are much lower, and Americans are less likely to buy the highly efficient cars that will satisfy the environmental policy objective of the bill. The bottom line is that any cash for clunkers legislation that has a shot at passing will have a difficult time serving the two competing policy rationales for the bill. Any bill that would substantially stimulate the US auto industry would be so watered down environmentally that the environmental results would be insignificant. Any bill that would significantly help help the environment will likely not give a significant boost to the auto industry.
In the meantime, in theory, continued talk of a $3,500 to $4,500 cash for clunkers incentive on the horizon seems tailor-made to kill current auto sales. Congress needs to either pass a cash for clunkers bill or take it off the table completely. As long as it is a possibility, people will have an incentive to wait rather than buy. Failing that, all of the cash for clunkers supporters should commit now to only supporting legislation that is retroactive to the beginning of June this year.
Fake Debt Collectors May be Calling YOU
Last week I received a call from a little old lady who kept trying to describe an outrageous debt collection call she received. Everytime she described it, the story was a little different, but I had never heard of a call like that before.
As it turns out, the debt collector may have never been collecting a debt, because there might not have been a debt in the first place. According to ABCNews.com there have been a rash of debt collection calls that involve completely false allegations of defaulted accounts. It's just a scam, probably by overseas con artists. If you receive a call from a client describing a collector who makes threats with a lot of legalese mumbo-jumbo, this may be the type of operator that you're dealing with. The scam operators use stolen identification and sometimes account data to sound official. Probably the biggest tipoff is the demand to wire money right away. Because the collectors are very good at hiding their identity, it doesn't seem like there's much you can do about this type of case other than client education.
Last week I received a call from a little old lady who kept trying to describe an outrageous debt collection call she received. Everytime she described it, the story was a little different, but I had never heard of a call like that before.
As it turns out, the debt collector may have never been collecting a debt, because there might not have been a debt in the first place. According to ABCNews.com there have been a rash of debt collection calls that involve completely false allegations of defaulted accounts. It's just a scam, probably by overseas con artists. If you receive a call from a client describing a collector who makes threats with a lot of legalese mumbo-jumbo, this may be the type of operator that you're dealing with. The scam operators use stolen identification and sometimes account data to sound official. Probably the biggest tipoff is the demand to wire money right away. Because the collectors are very good at hiding their identity, it doesn't seem like there's much you can do about this type of case other than client education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
