[Machjo]

When the stock market crashed and the car industry fell, politicians decided to bail it out.

But here's my question. Since we all know that recessions always come sooner or later, why had politicians not planned for this before? Could they not have asked the police, military, public service, etc. to hold off on car purchases and just keep pushing their old vehicles to the limit?

Had they done that, then when the recession had come, instead of bailing out the car industry, subsidizing car buyers with no real goal in mind other than just creating jobs, we could have just made a bunch of legitimate car purchases instead. This would not be make work jobs anymore since the current cars would have been from the last recession and so pretty old already and in genuine need for an overhaul. I think the car makers would have been happy with this deal too. After all, we all like to think that we've earned our money and not gotten a bail out. Looking at it that way, the car industry would have been more than happy to make these new cars for the military, police, etc. not as a bail out, but fulfilling a genuine need.

This would also mean that while the government would be spending much now on all these car purchases, it would have spent much less on them before, preferring to let the cars get old. So essentially, rather than paying the car industry twice (the first time to buy the cars the government needed, and now to bail them out), it would have had to do so only once (now, to kill two birds with one stone by increasing the demand for cars while replacing vehicles in genuine need of a replacement).

Looking at it that way, government ought to be running on a tight budget in good times, running everything it has into the ground so to speak, until the next recession when finally government could upgrade everything not with make work jobs but legit jobs. So essentially, the only time government departments should have the best, finest, newest, most up to date equipment is right after a recession owing the the government stocking up on the good sales in the recession. In good times, government equipment, services, etc. ought to be running on what it's got.

I don't see why the government could not have established some such policy years ago, or at least establish one now for the next recession. Perhaps this is what the government could have done in fact. It could have informed all of tis government departments to let it know what they need now, because after next year, there will be no more government spending until next election for new quipment.

Again, why could we not establish some such policy now?

[Smallc]

It would have made no difference. Auto companies would have been worse off because the purchases leading up to the recession would have been lower and so there would have been less revenue.

[Machjo]

Smallc, on Nov 1 2009, 01:31 AM, said:

It would have made no difference. Auto companies would have been worse off because the purchases leading up to the recession would have been lower and so there would have been less revenue.

How would they have been worse off? The lack of government business in god times would have prevented them from growing too big in the first place, so the recession-time purchases would have a more significant effect owing to the smaller size of the companies.

By spending all this money in good times, the government made these companies gigantic, so when the economy crashed, we had much bigger companies to bail out, and no option but to bail them out since the government would not even be in need of cars anymore owing to the recent purchases before the recession.

I remember reading that Sweden apparently has a similar policy. For example, when the clothing industry is in recession, the Swedish military stocks up on uniforms, more than it needs, and then does not stock up again until next recession, or something along those lines anyway. I'm not sure of the details, but that could work for Canada too if only the government could restrain itself in good times.

[charter.rights]

Machjo, on Nov 1 2009, 01:38 AM, said:

How would they have been worse off? The lack of government business in god times would have prevented them from growing too big in the first place, so the recession-time purchases would have a more significant effect owing to the smaller size of the companies.

By spending all this money in good times, the government made these companies gigantic, so when the economy crashed, we had much bigger companies to bail out, and no option but to bail them out since the government would not even be in need of cars anymore owing to the recent purchases before the recession.

I remember reading that Sweden apparently has a similar policy. For example, when the clothing industry is in recession, the Swedish military stocks up on uniforms, more than it needs, and then does not stock up again until next recession, or something along those lines anyway. I'm not sure of the details, but that could work for Canada too if only the government could restrain itself in good times.

Don't you know....

The failure of the car industry had nothing to do with production. It was poor investment, and over extending themselves in propping up other poor businesses.

Production costs and profit amount to peanuts in the overall scheme of things, so delaying governmetn purchasing for leaner times would have no effect on the automobile industry.

[Machjo]

charter.rights, on Nov 1 2009, 06:52 AM, said:

Don't you know....

The failure of the car industry had nothing to do with production. It was poor investment, and over extending themselves in propping up other poor businesses.

Production costs and profit amount to peanuts in the overall scheme of things, so delaying governmetn purchasing for leaner times would have no effect on the automobile industry.

Certainly if the problem was bad management, then they'd go down anyway. And if that's the case, then let them fall and retrain the workers for something else. I think the principle still stands though that government ought to be planning for recession in good times, and planning for inflation during recession.

Essentially, in good times, the government cuts back on spending, raises taxes, pays off tis debts, and makes itself as lean as can be tolerated. This would help fight inflation too by the way. Then in bad economic times, that's the time for the government to go on a shopping spree to get all the good deals. We'd benefit since government would be getting a better deal for their buck, and we'd benefit again since this woudl help sabilize the economy a little. I'm sure the police could manage with a clunker for awhile at least. If it's really desperate, then buy the minimal number of cars immedeiately needed, but as for any large purchase, that must wait until recession. Same with army uniforms and all kind so of other things. Otherwisse come recession, we don't know what to spend our money on and so just waste it bailing everyone out.

In good times, plan for the bad times by making sure there'll be something worth spending money on.

[Wilber]

One problem is that there are few vehicles that qualify as police cars. They need full size cars that are very durable even if they aren't particularly efficient, this means full size four door rear wheel drive sedans. Since GM dropped the full size rear wheel drive Impala, there are only two such animals made in North America, the Ford Crown Victoria (most popular with police departments as patrol vehicles) and the Dodge Charger, a distant second as a patrol vehicle but very popular as an unmarked car. The Pontiac G8 had real promise but GM is dumping the Pontiac brand. The same platform is used for the new Camaro and hopefully Chev will also use it for a sedan model in future.

[Smallc]

Actually, Chevrolet is supposed to import what was the G8 branded as the Chevrolet Caprice. You can look it up, I don't have time to find it right now. They do have a car right now though that works for some places in the Impala 9C1.

[Wilber]

Smallc, on Nov 2 2009, 04:55 AM, said:

Actually, Chevrolet is supposed to import what was the G8 branded as the Chevrolet Caprice. You can look it up, I don't have time to find it right now. They do have a car right now though that works for some places in the Impala 9C1.

The Impala is a good car but still a front wheel drive and they haven't been real popular with police departments because in general, FWD's don't stand up as well as RWD cars to the kind of abuse police cars get. Only having a V6 is not a plus either. Torque steer becomes a limiting factor with powerful FWD's. The G8 and Camaro are built on an Australian Holden platform. The local police department has several Chargers that they use as unmarked cars and they are quite popular. They recently got a G8 and so far they are impressed with it. Hopefully GM will continue using the platform for a four door sedan of some type.

[bush_cheney2004]

Wilber, on Nov 2 2009, 12:27 PM, said:

The Impala is a good car but still a front wheel drive and they haven't been real popular with police departments because in general, FWD's don't stand up as well as RWD cars to the kind of abuse police cars get. Only having a V6 is not a plus either...

No doubt....your garden variety police squad is an amazing value for power, endurance, and reliability. People snap them up at auction even though they still have the driver's side spotlight, which I think would come in very handy for deer huntin'!

Anybody old enough will recall which type of vehicle Jake and Ellwood chose....right?

[wyly]

police cars are not the same models as those the public buys...and speaking with a cop about them he says the only ex police vehlicle he would buy are the motorcycles, the cars, suvs and such recieve tremendous abuse and used up very quickly...

[bush_cheney2004]

wyly, on Nov 2 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

police cars are not the same models as those the public buys...and speaking with a cop about them he says the only ex police vehlicle he would buy are the motorcycles, the cars, suvs and such recieve tremendous abuse and used up very quickly...

True, but you could buy a new Mercury Marauder with a lot of cop upgrades....since discontinued.

[Wilber]

bush_cheney2004, on Nov 2 2009, 10:31 AM, said:

No doubt....your garden variety police squad is an amazing value for power, endurance, and reliability. People snap them up at auction even though they still have the driver's side spotlight, which I think would come in very handy for deer huntin'!

Anybody old enough will recall which type of vehicle Jake and Ellwood chose....right?

Ah! the 1974 Dodge Monaco. " Its got a cop motor. 440 cubic inch plant. Cop tires. Cop suspension. Cop shocks and runs good on regular gas". There are guys who collect them. Unfortunately by 1974, early 70's emissions controls had robbed the 440 of 100 horsepower compared to the late sixties models.

[fellowtraveller]

Why haven't the Chrysler 300 series been used as cop cars?
They are big and powerful.

[M.Dancer]

bush_cheney2004, on Nov 2 2009, 02:31 PM, said:

No doubt....your garden variety police squad is an amazing value for power, endurance, and reliability. People snap them up at auction even though they still have the driver's side spotlight, which I think would come in very handy for deer huntin'!

Anybody old enough will recall which type of vehicle Jake and Ellwood chose....right?

Was it pre catalytic convertor?

This post has been edited by M.Dancer: 02 November 2009 - 12:50 PM

[bush_cheney2004]

M.Dancer, on Nov 2 2009, 02:07 PM, said:

Was it pre catalytic convertor?

They are all post hack saw.