After years of ripping off the public I say LET THEM DIE

[cool hand]

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/mar...bail-let-fail/

[LnGrrrR]

This isn't so black and white. Sure, they were idiots, and by all means they deserve to die. However, there's a good chance that the money we infuse into their business will mean more output for American business in the long run, as well as not losing millions of jobs. On the third hand, we've seen that cash infusions do not automatically save a company.

I would say that we should only allow a bailout if they would promise better MPG, more quality, etc etc, but if they don't live up to the promise ten years down the road, then what? I doubt they'll pay us back.

It's a bullet to bite, but I'd vote against this bailout, as I did the Wall Street bailout.

[CosmicCowboy]

Let them go into bankruptcy and reorganize. They have a ty business model based on ty contracts with the UAW. bailing them out. It's just throwing good money after bad...then, who's next?

[boutons_]

Bankruptcy doesn't mean only liquidation.

It can mean continued operations while reorganizing, like the American people have already seen with several airlines.

If the Big3 are bailed out with loans, those loans MUST have strings attached, unlike the stringless $100s of $Bs given to the financial sector.

Strings would be stuff like:

cancelling all Big3 financial support to global warming denier think tanks, lobbyists, shills;

no more lobbying against CAFE, with CAFE itself upgraded and accelerated without a wimper from the Big3.

A certain, progressive percentage of hybrids and full electric vehicles.

No bonuses or stock options for mgmt until the companies are viable/profitable again, and bonuses tied strictly to performance.


IIRC, the US govt/taxpayer has already assumed responsibility for the Big3's pension/retirement plans.

[Anti.Hero]

[LnGrrrR]

You know, railing against the bailout doesn't really seem to have the usual left/right divide. The Wall Stree bailout was divided by those who have 401Ks and stocks/those who don't. I'm sure this bailout will show the same distribution.

[2centsworth]

I'm actually quite happy we're going to lose our manufacturing base. I'm thinking about small weapons manufacturing plant out of my garage, so when WWIII comes along I'll strike it rich.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm actually quite happy we're going to lose our manufacturing base. I'm thinking about small weapons manufacturing plant out of my garage, so when WWIII comes along I'll strike it rich.

Sharpening sticks in the dark, are we?

[DarkReign]

I'm actually quite happy we're going to lose our manufacturing base. I'm thinking about small weapons manufacturing plant out of my garage, so when WWIII comes along I'll strike it rich.

Sharpening sticks in the dark, are we?

[Trainwreck2100]

After years of ripping off the public I say LET THEM DIE

Same could have been said about banks

[Thunder Dan]

But, unlike the banks- these companies didn't have total control over their demise. The banks offered credit to people that shouldn't be given credit- when housing prices dropped, these banks lost big time.

Now, auto companies in America were given a raw deal by the very country they strongly supported for over 100 years. I'll explain, but first if you are going to say things like "they make ty cars" or "their cars suck" --save it,those are opinions and this isn't about that. Not to be a jerk but I know much more about this than you do because a) I grew up in a family that owned 3 car dealerships (including a foreign maker) and b) I have written 2 thesis papers in college so I have studied this subject immensely .


So back in the 70's Americans demanded large cars. Ford, GM and Chrysler offered them the best large cars and were thriving. They had a standard model of production in which they would hire Americans and sell those same cars back to Americans. The philosophy was to sell a product the workers that made it could afford to buy and everything was going great. In the late 70's there was a gas crisis and the Detroit auto companies were opened up to the fact that they needed to build smaller, more fuel efficient cars...which since they didn't ever foresee this crisis (nobody did), they were illprpared to switch a company that has been making one type of car for 70 years overnight into making a different one. ***this is where I start to have a problem with things** Japanese companies saw this as a way to gain more marketshare. Toyota at the time was making very cheap vehicles that nobody desired when they first appeared in the USA in the 80's. What they did though was lobby US Congress to quickly pass emission restrictions on automobiles. Yes, you are reading this correctly, a company from JAPAN paid to have laws passed in their favor in AMERICA. Toyota knew that they currently met those restrictions because they were the restrictions Japan placed on them in their own country. They knew the GM and Ford couldn't switch that fast and still put out a quality product (this is why cars of the early 80's all suck). Congress basically turned their back to the fact that GM,Ford and Chrysler were 3 of the top 10 employers in America. By doing this, they allowed Toyota to gain market share, and the American auto companies were left to struggle to catch up while they were paying pensions of hundreds of thousands of American citizens.

Since then, Toyota has become uber profitable (until the last 2 years) because of the marketshare they have gained back in the 80s. They skip out on paying tariffs by building assembly plants that hire the minimum number of employees needed. They don't have to pay the pensions of former workers (because there are not any). They have the best case scenario thanks to our own congress: they can create the same product as the compe ors, but make more profit because they skip on paying things that benefit the American economy. They don't have to pay to help out schools. They don't help American families put food on their table. They don't employ hundreds thousands of Americans. They don't support the US Steel industry. They don't support the thousands of US companies that supply the US auto industry. And most importantly, they DO NOT BRING PROFITS TO AMERICA- they take American dollars back with them on a plane or a boat to their home country

Yet nobody at all feels any guilt going out and buying one.


I can shoot down every argument there is as to why foreign cars are better than American cars (keeping luxury brands out)

"They hold their value better" --because American companies offer their cars to fleets so there are more of them in circulation. You rent American cars, and most company cares are American cars. "Value" has nothing at all to do with quality- yet, foreign companies will use that as a claim.

"They are more fuel efficient" -- most people pay $4,000- $5,000 more for a foreign hybrid, than they would for an American fuel efficient car. You could buy a Chevy Malibu for about $5,000 less than a Toyota Prius, but the Prius offers better MPG. Does anyone ever think that $5,000 would give you GAS FOR FREE for over 3 years?!

"Better Quality" ---go hit the door of a toyota or a Honda....that "ting" you hear that sounds like a Pepsi can is that quality. Oh, and American companies have caught up AND surpassed foreign companies in most quality standards

[Thunder Dan]

it's funny that Coolhand doesn't know a single person that would be affected at all if the banks and car companies failed.

He must not work at a business that sells a product or service. Do you understand that if companies fail one by one, YOU will be out of work. I don't care what you do, you could be a NFL QB or a computer repairman...if nobody has a job, you don't have a job. We enjoy all the benefits of living in America because others help support the way we live. What is happening is Americans are shipping what money we have overseas, and countries with a more hungry workforce will slowly take our jobs away from us. We can't all have white collar jobs. There is no white collar without the blue collar. America was built with hammers and nails, not with paper and pens. Everyone needs to respect the blue collar for what they bring to our society because without them, there is no us

[kwhitegocubs]

Well, here is the thing - we've given $150 Billion to AIG.

Big3 employ 3 million people directly or indirectly. If they are allowed to go bankrupt (even Chapter 11), a huge percentage of those lose their jobs.

I like boutons plan. $100 Billion invested to them could have multiple positive dividends. Far greater than with the Bank and Wall Street bailouts.

Reduce emissions. Increase MPG by force of will rather than by the wimpy standards we passed. Streamline manufacturing process. Likely decrease brands and models. Keep more people employed.

I do think that UAW needs to tone down their deals further. $28 bucks an hour starting, and an average wage of $40/hr. overall. Total benefits packages amount to $34/hour. According to the UAW! That's insane.

Even with that total being lower because of the new deal, they are still getting the total equivalent of $50 to $70 an hour depending on seniority. Hate to say it, but that's Tenured Professor pay - there is no "blue-collar" or "living wage" argument to be made. They need to take about a 40% pay cut. You can still live plenty good in the rust belt on $20 an hour.

[DarrinS]

With the UAW being overpaid and producing inferior products, how the can the automakers be failing?

[MannyIsGod]

@ this being the fault of a union. Somehow Japan's automakers make cars here and pay great wages with great benefits and make money.

[kwhitegocubs]

Umm, total wages and benefits for Japanese plants is about 40% lower than the UAW. Hence the amount I suggested.

[Thunder Dan]

@ this being the fault of a union. Somehow Japan's automakers make cars here and pay great wages with great benefits and make money.

read my post, it explains all that.


Also, Can anyone answer me if the US Government has ever given money to help one of the Big 3 Auto companies? and if so, what happened?

[boutons_]

"UAW being overpaid and producing inferior products"

UAW doesn't produce inferior, inefficient products, the marketing and engineering depts hand the products to the factories to produce. The quality of US cars has risen greatly in response to the superior quality of foreign cars (as their market share decreased), but then again, it's the auto mfr mgmt that let the quality be so low, and the same mgmt that raised it.

ing weird idea that the factory workers are running the show.

[kwhitegocubs]

Cmon, I'm not anti-union at all, but the UAW wields a ton of power over the Big 3, and to suggest that the workers beholden to UAW are still downtrodden workers inches from being stomped by the feet or an evil corporation is total BS.

There are plenty of people who work for subsidiary corporations (like my father, who was laid off a subsidiary company in Janesville, WI when they scheduled the plant shut-down this year) and make $13 or $14 an hour doing the same level or work. Guess what, my dad had enough to live on - with a house and two cars and a wife. My cause celebre is that people have a reasonable living wage for their work.

However, UAW workers who put in decent overtime and have been there ten years are making more at 30 than a college professor with a Ph.D. likely will when he's 45 (despite the fact that Ph.D. guy still has to account for the negative value of loads of college debt).

And, yes, you are right, R and D has an unlimited budget that is in NO WAY effected by the insane pay rate of GM workers.

Can't someone draw a reasonable line somewhere. Unions started out (rightly) as saviors, and now they have become their own oppressors.

[kwhitegocubs]

Oh, and Thunder Dan "cars of the early 80s suck". Generally yes, but my 1984 Pontiac Sunbird convertible is still running like new.

[101A]

read my post, it explains all that.


Also, Can anyone answer me if the US Government has ever given money to help one of the Big 3 Auto companies? and if so, what happened?

Chrysler w/Iacocca was bailed out in the late 70's.

The K car happened; eventually the mini-van, which kept Chrysler going until M/B bought them in the early '00's.

Your years are wrong. CAFE was passed in 1975 not 80's - and the Big 3 knew it was coming; must have been some thesis.

lol at the sound of the door representing quality in your eyes. The sound of the MOTOR at 100K is what represents quality in mine.

While the U.S. automakes were getting by with its top sellers being F150's, Silverado's and Ram's; the Japs were being led by Accords and Camrys. Gas ed - , you do the math. In the meantime, the Japanese ALSO began to play the American's own game by making compe ive full-size trucks. I'm sorry, Ford has NOTHING to compare in price/performance/comfort with a Honda ing Accord - nothing - G.M. has a Malibu, which NOW is a decent product, but, , it's been so long since they had a decent, bread and butter family car, that it is too late.

The big 3 have had time, they have had loyalty, they have had the CAFE standards rolled back for YEARS; but they have not caught up.

[101A]

"UAW being overpaid and producing inferior products"

UAW doesn't produce inferior, inefficient products, the marketing and engineering depts hand the products to the factories to produce. The quality of US cars has risen very much in response to the superior quality of foreign cars, but then again, it's the auto mfr mgmt who let the quality be so low, and the same mgmt who raised.

ing weird idea that the factory workers are running the show.

No .

Honda runs on a FOUR year model cycle - and has for a long, long time. They completely re-tool each model 2.5 times a decade; bringing the whole thing: chassis, powertrain, ergonomics, safety, up to snuff. The automakers DO NOT do that; the Mustang, from '79 to '04 was built on the same ing platform (the Fox platform in ford speak - which was the platform of that great ride - the Fairmont). 25 YEARS!!! That's not the union's fault - that's bean counters. Heard a report that G.M. still uses a 60 year only press to stamp certain body parts - and that THAT limits what they can do with design. Again, bean counters and management, NOT labor. It IS NOT labors fault that the new 100K plus Corvette ZR-1 still has inside it some switch gear straight off the G.M. shelf; shared with the lowliest of low. I don't see Lexus doing that .

[Thunder Dan]

Chrysler w/Iacocca was bailed out in the late 70's.

The K car happened; eventually the mini-van, which kept Chrysler going until M/B bought them in the early '00's.

Your years are wrong. CAFE was passed in 1975 not 80's - and the Big 3 knew it was coming; must have been some thesis.

lol at the sound of the door representing quality in your eyes. The sound of the MOTOR at 100K is what represents quality in mine.

While the U.S. automakes were getting by with its top sellers being F150's, Silverado's and Ram's; the Japs were being led by Accords and Camrys. Gas ed - , you do the math. In the meantime, the Japanese ALSO began to play the American's own game by making compe ive full-size trucks. I'm sorry, Ford has NOTHING to compare in price/performance/comfort with a Honda ing Accord - nothing - G.M. has a Malibu, which NOW is a decent product, but, , it's been so long since they had a decent, bread and butter family car, that it is too late.

The big 3 have had time, they have had loyalty, they have had the CAFE standards rolled back for YEARS; but they have not caught up.

First, I'm writing this while in a broadcast meeting meeting so I didn't think the exact dates were necessary

But you are missing my point as to how American companies are paying legacy benefits, and overseas brands are skipping tariffs set up by our own ancestors to help strengthen American business. They don't pay their workers the way GM, Ford, and Chrysler pay their workers. They are built plants in small rural towns in the southern United States where the standard of living is so low as it is that they can get by giving someone practically nothing. They are given so many tax cuts to build plants here that they are practically built for free, then they don't have to pay the tariffs set in place by our legislators of years past. But what is really fare is that GM and Ford can't do the same in Japan. They can't find a small little town in Alabama overseas, pay someone $9 an hour, and sake their way out of paying Japan their taxes. , GM is most profitable in China despite that. I don't know about Ford, but Chevy makes some of the best cars and trucks there are today, there is no reason not to buy a American car

[101A]

First, I'm writing this while in a broadcast meeting meeting so I didn't think the exact dates were necessary

But you are missing my point as to how American companies are paying legacy benefits, and overseas brands are skipping tariffs set up by our own ancestors to help strengthen American business. They don't pay their workers the way GM, Ford, and Chrysler pay their workers. They are built plants in small rural towns in the southern United States where the standard of living is so low as it is that they can get by giving someone practically nothing. They are given so many tax cuts to build plants here that they are practically built for free, then they don't have to pay the tariffs set in place by our legislators of years past. But what is really fare is that GM and Ford can't do the same in Japan. They can't find a small little town in Alabama overseas, pay someone $9 an hour, and sake their way out of paying Japan their taxes. , GM is most profitable in China despite that. I don't know about Ford, but Chevy makes some of the best cars and trucks there are today, there is no reason not to buy a American car

Ummmmmm.

Perhaps you haven't heard about Toyota's plant in a small, rural, top 10 largest city in the country in Texas; San Antonio?

The jobs are HIGHLY sought after 'cause they pay real good?

What does G.M. have to replace my Honda minivan? Oh, that's right, G.M. doesn't sell a minivan AT ALL. I can choose from a variety of too-heavy, less useful SUV's.

Also, needed a 4WD SUV (was moving to PA where it snows) - full size - to pull the family RV (30 foot travel trailer). I had a Chevy Avalanche to trade in; nice vehicle, pulled good, had held it's value well. I couldn't find a Suburban that wasn't loaded to the gills in '05 - leather, On-Star, DVD, you name it; dealers wanted 45 - 47K for those. They were nice, but more than I wanted to spend. Ancira Nissan had an Armada, 4wd, with no other options - also had more power and torque than the Chevy - rated for 2,000 more pounds towing - and 10,000 less. Right vehicle, right time.

[MannyIsGod]

The idea that GM or Ford cars equal Honda or Toyota cars is laughable. I've owned 2 late model domestic cars that were not the equivalent. I owned a brand new Alero that was great engine wise but not nearly the equivalent of a Honda Accord. I then owned a late model Ford Escort and was equally disappointed if I were to compare that to a Corolla or Civic. In fact I now drive a Corolla on a regular basis and have driven a Civic on a regular basis over the past 4 years and both are excellent cars.

I know its anecdotal, but I know a lot of other people who feel the same way I do.