Car dealers are some of the most politically connected people in America. As we reported yesterday, more than a few axed GM store owners demonstrated their political muscles by forcing the nationalized automaker to rescind their franchise terminations. Further back in time, we highlighted the Obama administration’s “stealth” dealer bailout: a car dealer-specific Small Business Administration (SBA) loan program. Under the program, the SBA guarantees 75 percent of a car dealer’s floor-plan line of credit, ranging from $500,000 to $2 million. The SBA’s network of private-sector lenders make the loans. In theory. In practice, it’s been what the Brits call a damp squib. Although Automotive News [AN, sub] fails to put any hard numbers to the program’s failure, they acknowledge that the SBA dealer deal “has had trouble attracting lender participation since its May launch.” Needless to say, the “answer” to the SBA lenders’ entirely understandable reticence/prudence is . . . bigger loans and more federal backing.
The House measure [passed yesterday by a 389-32 vote] would provide federal guarantees of as much as 90 percent on these loans through the end of September 2010 . . . The administration wants loan limits of $5 million and permanent federal guarantees of 90 percent.
To be fair, the higher limit will make the program much more attractive to cash-strapped dealers. Only 30 percent of American auto dealers have vehicle inventories worth less than $2 million, the current maximum line of credit available through the SBA.
Then again, let’s revisit the reason for the [relatively] low loan limit and the limited federal guarantee [via The Charlotte Business Journal].
[Associate administrator for the Office of Capital Access Eric] Zarnikow says the SBA decided to offer a lower guarantee on floor-plan loans because the agency has never made those types of loans before and didn’t want to take “undue risks” on a new, pilot program.
Also, to be honest, why are the feds “investing” in car dealers anyway? And what’s the cost of this program? I mean financially, not politically.
Car dealers are some of the most politically connected people in America.
So are US Senators ala Bob “I’ll piss on GM and the UAW unless it’s to protect my parochial interest at home” Corker. Not much difference here when you scrape away the scales: same lizards underneath.
FWIW: If that is supposed to be a pic of a B-2 breaching the sound barrier, it can’t do that as a subsonic plane.
As for the dealer bailout: of course.
As for the B2 Spirit – I was just about to say the same thing. The Spirit like the F117 is a subsonic cruiser and can’t break the sound barrier.
As for Obama, you gotta give him credit for being smart about the bailouts because the government FORCED all the banks to take TARP funds so none of us would guess which banks were having problems. THIS WAY, there would be no run on the bank (ala: Indy Mac)
It looks like the flying sub from Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.
Come to think of it, the whole GM mess looks a lot like a voyage to the bottom of the sea.
By the looks of the ‘chop, that B2 is headed for the ocean at 750mph…
Maybe a metaphor for GM, but I hope not. No matter how poor an ROI the whole deal is, I’m rooting for the thing to work out.
It can’t break the sound barrier. The picture is a hoax srsly. It also can’t fly. It just uses the surface effect to fool the eye.
If you’ve ever looked out a passenger jetliner window with a view of the wing during a takeoff or approach, if the meteorological conditions are right, you’ll see pretty much the same thing – water vapor condensing in low pressure regions created by the passage of the aircraft.
Either that, or this B-2’s got a Hemi.
Like AMXtirpated said, Prandtl–Glauert singularities can happen at speeds significantly lower than the speed of sound, and should not be used as an indicator that an aircraft has broken the sound barrier.