Let the Autos Fail! (Ford / GM / Chrysler)

[deadlyaj]

I thought this bailout was for the financial sector only.. Doesnt bailing out the autos open the door to other companies?

I contracted with GM / Chrysler last year and this place is a black hole. The whole system needs help.

if we do bail them out - should it be conditionary with cafe standards etc?

[WinkyDink]

1. SOOOO glad the Feds let Bethlehem Steel collapse and turn their pensions over to PBGT, which

now gives my widowed mother next to nothing.
http://www.fool.com/personal-finance/general/2006/05/05/your-incredible-vanishing-pension.aspx

I guess the steel industry just wasn't important enough *coughbridgesskyscraperscough*.

[LynneSin]

52. I can attest to that - my stepfather was Bethlehem Steel

and I know all about it

[TankLV]

70. THANK YOU! That's what I've been saying on every post I can find!

They cared NOTHING about steel - why should we care ANYTHING about the dinosaur auto industry?

We can get rid of it and make things that are more USEFULL and BENEFICIAL to society!

It's like trying to save the horse and buggy industry of a hundred years ago - they were, after all, employing THOUSANDS, compared to the "tinkerers" that became the present auto industry. Imagine if we had that mindset THEN...

[doc03]

82. And thank you! I work in the steel industry and

my pension was dumpped on the PBGC, our retirees lost their health coverage. When I reach retirement age I will get a much reduced pension if (any) by then and I will have to pay for my health insurance with that pension. I will repeat this again for about the tenth time the Auto companies and the UAW paid lobbyists to fight tooth and nail to stop any assistance to the steel industry. I have no sympathy for the Auto industry they didn't for us and I don't want to pay my taxes to bail their ass out.

[amandabeech]

106. Steel got screwed and you know how that turned out.

Why not learn from our mistakes?

I'm from Michigan originally, and I think that it is in the best interests of the country to do something to help them get through the current crisis, with strings attached.

However, I also favor doing something to revive steel here in the U.S., along with other manufacturing operations.

Good jobs make good communities and a healthy social and political society.

Also, I wouldn't want my war-time supply lines traversing the Pacific. The North Atlantic was bad enough. Bad guys are still out there and more are being made every day.

[doc03]

112. So you admit steel got screwed and by who? I will

give you a clue, the industry that wants the help now. All the domestic steel users lead by the Auto industry lobbied the Clinton Administration to not give us a bit of help and we were left hanging. Now that it is the auto industry we must learn from our mistakes and help them out. Well I no longer have all those nice benefits and I will retire with a pension less than 1/3 of what a UAW worker gets (providing the PBGC doesn't go under) and I have to pay for my own health insurance. I can't afford to support an autoworkers nice cushy benefits, sorry.

[amandabeech]

116. Well, the auto workers are going to be in your shoes.

I think that you should be helped, too, and that's something that steel can do.

I want to fund the PBGC and give you a Medigap policy. I think that Obama might be open to such a suggestion.

You will pay for their Medicare if GM goes under because UAW workers have ALL their retirement medical bills paid by employers, and they have long-term care insurance backed by GM. If that goes under, then all those folks will be looking to Medicaid. PBGC will crash if the autoworkers and all their suppliers pension plans go under, and the PBGC will have to borrow from the U.S. general fund, which will then sell Treasuries to China to pay for it.

I understand how you feel the way you do. I've had some life-changing problems, too, not of my own making, and I have to remind myself that I don't want anyone else to go through what I did, even if that will cost taxpayer money, too.

You have inspired me to write my Senators and House member. I hope that you will do the same on behalf of your fellow Steelworkers.

[doc03]

119. I am happy we have the Democrats moving into

Washington. My biggest worry is the PBGC, in 15 months I will due to receive a pension of $1317 a month for over 39 years of service in the steel industry. I figure the airlines and maybe the auto industry are going to dump their pensions on the PBGC and maybe just maybe a Democratic President will bail out the PBGC. Bush already made it clear he wouldn't a few years ago, his attitude was that many Americans don't even have a pension so why should they prop up someone else's. I look for the PBGC to seize the Auto makers pension plans and freeze any future benefits to protect themselves. That's what they did before we went bankrupt.

[amandabeech]

121. The airlines have dumped a lot on the PBGC.

It started with Braniff and Eastern in the '80s, but I think that United was the last one to go belly up. Northworst and Delta are merging, so that will take longer to go down. How U.S. Scare continues, I'll never know.

There have been lots of cutbacks.

I agree with the rest of your post.

[anneboleyn]

126. Exactly. I am tired of people screaming to let companies fail, when it means thousands of jobs

and pensions gone. The devastation from GM failing, etc. would be enormous.

[Brazenly Liberal]

2. It's separate from the financial sector bailout

Before we are too cavalier about letting the auto companies tank, think about the real life consequences.

What about some poor schlub living in a small town, working for one of only two or three mid-sized companies in town. They make some small, totally boring sounding part that they sell to stores like Auto Zone or Pep Boys. It ain't show biz, but it's a living.

If the auto companies fail, this guy and approximately a million others like him around the country who don't work for the auto companies but are dependent on that industry are out of work and this isn't exactly a great time to be out of work, fwiw.

And the ripples go out even farther. A major reduction in auto manufacture would mean a sharp increase in the price of used cars, eventually putting anything that runs beyond the economic reach of the unemployed part maker above - a guy who now has to drive to other nearby towns to look for work.

[nebenaube]

5. UM...

I disagree, if the auto companies go down, the after-market parts suppliers will go up because that clunker has to stay alive; since there's no way to buy an expensive import to replace the whole thing.

[Brazenly Liberal]

12. Unfortunately, those clunkers are already on life support

And don't forget - every clunker used to be a new car, but not all used cars survive to become clunkers. Cut off the supply of new cars and the clunkers will become fewer and fewer over time. The number of parts needed will drop and the number of employees making parts will, of necessity, sink like a rock.

[BR_Parkway]

24. 1st off, there are other car manufacturers to produce new cars that

the buying public actually wants. And my used car is far from a clunker, it could last for years with proper care.

But the easier thing to do is take that money, take over GM/Ford, oust the management, retrain the workers into making solar panels, windmills, electric vehicles and rail road cars - instead of propping up an old and dying company, why not take this opportunity to begin transitioning over as well?

That way, the employees aren't hurt - simply the management who made all the poor decisions that got them into the mess they're in now - sounds like a dose of "personable responsibility" to me.

[Kalyke]

30. Who?

I don't like Toyotas (ugly), Nissans (electrical problems out the wazoo), and all those other box and/or bubble cars.

I, however, LOVE my Mustang and my Mom's new Taurus.

[LisaM]

80. Our Hondas (that we bought used) need multiple repairs every year

If I was going to buy a new car (which we can't afford; we bought our Hondas used from friends) I would get an American car.

[BR_Parkway]

93. I love my Subaru personally, but it's a thing - works most of the time

occasionally acts up. 150,000 miles, to be expected to have a breakdown now and again. But we've had since it was new and really can't complain about the quality vs the Jeeps, Lincolns, Plymouths, Chevy's and GMC products we've owned over the years.

[Brazenly Liberal]

35. Redirecting the companies is a fine idea

I used the word "clunker" because I was responding to someone who used it, not out of any ill regard for used cars. We're all about used cars in this house. I drive a car with 300,000+ miles on it and dread the day it will no longer be functional. My husband drives a car with fewer miles on it, but it's one we bought used.

I had only addressed the much narrower issue - whether or not to bail out the auto companies - but I would assume an auto bailout would be done more effectively and thoughtfully than the financial bailout was done. It would be stupid to spend a single cent of taxpayer money to continue doing things that don't work. Any bailout should include requirements that address the product, the management methods and compensation, worker benefits, etc.

[MadBadger]

3. How many people would be unemployed by that action?

just wondering.

[Spider Jerusalem]

21. Three million.

That's the number of people directly and indirectly emplyed by the auto industry.

Note that that's just in the US and doesn't take into account GM, Ford etc operations in Mexico, Canada, South America, the UK, and Europe. The economic impact of the failure of US automakers wouldn't be limited to the US.

[uponit7771]

4. GMAC is a financial company and Paulson wont give them the money. This is ment to kill the Volt , we

...have an oil man in office and something like the Volt (the only series electric car going into production on the planet) is going against Bush admin's buddies priorities.

[chitty]

18. I'm not 100% positve about this but

I don't think GM owns GMAC anymore.

[Occam Bandage]

29. Nissan and Toyota are also producing electric cars. The Volt isn't the only "series" one out there.

Your conspiracy theory does not hold water.

[uponit7771]

50. Name another mass produced series driven car then? Thx in advance

[Warren Stupidity]

6. somewhere around 6,000,000 jobs + pensions

also, at some point there is a national security issue. A nation that has no industrial base is a nation that is very vulnerable in a prolonged military conflict.

A rescue of the auto industry ought to be a partial nationalization that comes with lots of regulatory strings including retooling the industry to produce efficient traditional fuel cars and alternative fuel cars.

[newfie11]

7. If the auto industry goes under it would have far reaching effects

My daughter in law's family lives in a small town in the mountains of western PA. Almost everyone there works in factories making powdered metal. This is used by the auto industry. Without these factories there is no other jobs to support that area. The factory workers support the other businesses in town.

[TankLV]

71. Tell it to Buffalo and other rust belt cities and towns across America who have learned to re-tool

and re-think the basis of their economies and have suffered GREATLY...

[amandabeech]

108. Buffalo is a mere shell of itself.

It had a lot of auto-related manufacturing, you know. They took big hits in the '70s and '80s.

We screwed up by letting manufacturing run overseas. It has brought incredible problems that I'm now tired of writing about.

I don't want to repeat past mistakes here, and I want to revive U.S. manufacturing in general.

[boomerbust]

8. They must be bailed out

And retooled for hybrid and electric vehicles. Painful but necessary.

[KalicoKitty]

22. I agree, they must be bailed out.

Reason, because it affects millions of jobs around us! From the steel and mining industries, plastic factories, robots and conveyer belt companies, dealerships to many, many more.

[Ganja Ninja]

9. How about giving people a generous tax credit for buying small fuel efficient

cars made in America?

[carnie_sf]

27. Oh you mean like the "suv credit"

that Bush instituted? What a great idea

[Ozma]

38. It's a great idea, but there's something illegal about favoring

some companies over others in interstate trade. I'm not sure how it could be structured legally.

[Ganja Ninja]

42. I believe that's covered in most of our free trade pacts.

Wouldn't be the first treaty we've broken.

[MadBadger]

10. Univ of Michigan: 2.5 million people would lose their jobs if 1 of the Big 3 fails

Just heard from Erin Burnett on MSNBC. Do you still think we should let them fail?

[anneboleyn]

127. The repercussions from this would be terrible -- the economies of these states would be ruined.

[deadlyaj]

11. The legacy costs and the UAW costs -- how can the big three ever be profitable?

[Warren Stupidity]

13. universal health care

if implemented properly will reduce labor costs.

[uponit7771]

15. They can shift their legacy health care cost AND their CURRENT health care cost to Gov

...and that's why Obama is right for them.

This is the Bush admins attempt to kill the Volt, the only series electric car to be mass produced in the world.

[MsTryska]

102. This has been my argument for Universal healthcare for a while now...

how come no one else picks up ont he idea that this is actually a good thing for big business and the little people all at the same time.

[spoony]

95. "the UAW costs"?

Sure you're on the right site, Tex? Sorry my family wants a living wage.

[Chisox08]

123. Are you in favor of taking away the pensions of people that worked

hard all of their lives? When people throw this legacy cost bullshit out there they are union bashing, they are bashing the workers. It wasn't the workers fault that the big three auto companies lobbied against stricter cafe standards. It wasn't the workers fault the the big three was against making care more feul effiecient and using alternate sources of energy.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dionysus]

23. wtf?

[Romulox]

63. "Obamacons" are conservatives who crossed party lines to vote for Obama

Their influence on the party is palpable.

[dionysus]

84. ok, i didn't know what you meant.

[Occam Bandage]

31. Because government interference with markets is so right-wing!

:crazy:

[Romulox]

59. Government interference with the FINANCIAL INDUSTRY is job #1

for the rightwingers. :hi:

[LanternWaste]

67. I was under the impression that...

I was under the impression that market interference with the government was Job #1 for the right wing...

[Romulox]

68. Nope. The "market" hasn't pumped $3 trillion into Wall Street in the past couple months

That's been our self-described "free marketeers" (including many who describe themselves as so-called "New" Democrats.)

[LanternWaste]

78. I merely infer from reading and observation.

Ahhh... I do not posses the Absolutism you appear to have, merely infer from reading and observation.

[Romulox]

99. Then your inferences are faulty.

"I do not posses the Absolutism you appear to have, merely infer from reading and observation."

Each one of these words has meaning individually in the English language, but the way you've strung them together is nonsensical. I can only infer that you are sympathetic to the Wall Street bailout, and are therefore trying to characterizing any and all criticism of same as "absolutism".

[Occam Bandage]

75. Not really. The Republicans were more opposed to it than the Dems were.

And few Republicans if any liked the regulation/oversight that the Dems added.

[Romulox]

100. You must not have links to any newspapers in your "favorites"

Bailout Lacks Oversight Despite Billions Pledged

Watchdog Panel Is Empty; Report Is Unfinished

In the six weeks since lawmakers approved the Treasury's massive bailout of financial firms, the government has poured money into the country's largest banks, recruited smaller banks into the program and repeatedly widened its scope to cover yet other types of businesses, from insurers to consumer lenders.

Along the way, the Bush administration has committed $290 billion of the $700 billion rescue package.

Yet for all this activity, no formal action has been taken to fill the independent oversight posts established by Congress when it approved the bailout to prevent corruption and government waste. Nor has the first monitoring report required by lawmakers been completed, though the initial deadline has passed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/12/AR2008111202846.html?hpid=topnews

[citizen snips]

41. yes

even though he is 67 days from taking office
:crazy:

[Romulox]

64. The electorate who voted him in already exist...nt

[trayfoot]

16. Though I have no sympathy for the big 3............

I DO have sympathy for the millions of people whose jobs depend on the big 3 for sustenance. Strings should obviously be attached, but I think we do need to help the auto companies succeed!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. No

I do not want middle class breadwinners flipping hamburgers for eight dollars an hour.

[Doityourself]

19. There is more to this story than meets the eye...there are real reasons why the Bush Admin doesn't

want to bail them out.

One of the biggest: VOLT!

[firedupdem]

20. Sure...millions of people out of work....all supplier companies shut

down...no problem

[amborin]

25. the auto industry is the very heart of the us economy, a major driver

it's not in the same league as any other industry or sector

letting it fail will cause irreparable harm upstream and downstream

[Thrill]

26. You don't just hurt the Auto companies. You hurt the Auto parts makers as well

The ripple effect would destroy the lives of many Americans

[Sensitivity]

32. These are in mexico etc not in U.S.

[Thrill]

34. Not true. There are several here as well. Bosch has plants in Atlanta.

I know a company that makes Alternators in South Carolina for GM.

[azmouse]

36. My husband designs the electronics that go in autos... American autos.

He doesn't know if he'll have a job after January. A lot of Americans would lose jobs if the auto industry went under.

[Kalyke]

28. Then what will I drive?

I HATE foreign cars: no personality, riddled with electrical and sensory problems and the affordable ones are UGLY.

[Ozma]

37. I wonder what you are driving now. I have

owned foreign brand cars for years, made in the USA Toyota, Honda. What's this about electrical and sensory problems? My Toyota's and Honda's have had less repairs than an average American brand, run well beyond 100,000 miles with little problems, (I give them to people close to me, so I see them on the road for 12-15 years).

[Kalyke]

45. A Mustang. A FORD Mustang.

Never a day's worth of issues. My old Mustang didn't even need brakes until it was 10 years old. When I traded it three years ago on this new Mustang, it's only problem was that it needed a clutch. It was 13 years old.

But, what about my other points? I really, really, really think foreign cars are, well, ugly. I don't want to spend a year's salary on something I don't like.

[azmouse]

39. I don't know about any problems with foreign cars,

I just prefer American cars.
I looked at Mercedes and the cars just didn't appeal to me, nor did Saab or Audi.
Just not what I want to drive but obviously lots of other people like them. That's why I want the American car industry to survive... so there is some choice.

[Kalyke]

Thank you!

I don't find most affordable foreign cars attractive... at all.

And I certainly don't want to spend a year's salary on something I think looks more like something Glenda the Good Witch would travel in.

[Kalyke]

47. DUPE

[doc03]

49. I suggest you read the Consumer Reports or Consumer

Digest publications about auto reliability. There are a few American cars that have a excellent reliability record, for the most part the Japanese and now even some of the Korean cars are far better. Now if you just don't like the styling of the foreign cars I will accept that, as far quality, the facts don't support it.

[Kalyke]

54. And I suggest you drive an American car.

Look - I know what car wonks in those publications say, but I also know from personal experience which cars in my family have outperformed - and trust me, it hasn't been the foreign models. And, it's been very consistant.

[doc03]

60. Those ratings of auto reliability come from actual owner

surveys not some "car wonk." I have owned many American cars and still own one I also own a Toyota Tacoma pickup. When I was shopping for the pickup I tried all the small pickups and the American brands were just not competitive in any way. I have not owned a GM car since 1977, that vehicle was the biggest piece of crap I ever owned.

[Pithlet]

85. As someone who should be biased for American cars

because I come from Flint, Mi, and my father and other family members worked for GM for many years, I'll tell you you're flat out wrong. You're personal experience is not the norm. Sadly, American car companies have been flubbing it up. Foreign auto makers for the most part make a more reliable car, as much as it pains me to say so. As far as aesthetics go, that's just subjective. I also happen to prefer foreign cars' looks. US automakers can't seem to make nice looking cars, either. Ford in particular. Ford cars are just nasty looking, to me.

[Romulox]

62. Consumer Reports doesn't really test automobiles, however.

They make "projections".

[doc03]

72. They make projections based on thousands of consumer

surveys on the owners satisfaction of various vehicles. The magazines such as Motor Trend or Truck Trend test vehicles but their testers have their own prejudices, many times the testers disagree on which vehicle they like. One may not like a vehicles ride, the next may not like the styling another may complain about the seating. I subscribed to Truck Trend and they always favored the biggest most impractical vehicle in a group. They would always have a feature on something like the Hummer or the biggest diesel behemoth pickup on the market, neither of which I have any use for. I suspect most of those magazines are just paid shills for the American auto industry since they always push the biggest most profitable vehicles of the big three.

[Romulox]

101. Bottom line: Consumer Reports doesn't test vehicles,

Nor are self-selected surveys statistically valid...

[doc03]

103. So even after reading the summary of thousands of

owner surveys of their experience with various vehicles you think they are all lying and you have superior knowledge. You are totally wrong the Consumer Reports surveys are not just projections you can check the past reliability records of older models according to their owners. Of course with a new model they have to make a projection of the vehicles expected reliability based on past models. Just pick up a Consumer Reports and look at the red circles indicating cars with better than average reliability and they are mostly imports. Look at the American products with all the black circles. Your argument just isn't valid you have no proof other than you said so and refuse to accept any evidence to the contrary. The last GM vehicle I test drove had a loud clunk from something rolling around inside the door panel, a bottle, bolt etc? The last GM vehicle I owned I should have been able to claim Mister Goodwrench as a dependent on my taxes.

[LanternWaste]

77. Predicted Reliability...

CR engages in Predicted Reliability ("projected") ratings for most current model year. Actual testing coupled with consumer surveys done on models older than one year.

[amandabeech]

111. Have you looked at the 2008 Buying Guide?

I just bought a gently used Taurus. Even Consumer Reports likes them.

It looks to me that Honda has retained its edge there, at least with this totally unscientific poll. Toyota looks off a bit.

Beyond that, many U.S. cars do as well as the other Asian makers, and much better than the Europeans.

You want to see lots of black dots? Look at the Mercedes used car entries.

[doc03]

114. This hurts to say but look at Toyota and Honda

their quality has suffered in direct proportion to the increase in their American made models. The ones still made in Japan are much better. The European brands are the worst, last year Mercedes was the only manufacturer that had no recommended models. The American companies have made good progress in guality especally Ford.

[amandabeech]

120. That's an improvement over your previous post.

UAW members might say that the Japanese are locating their new plants far away from the blue states around the Great Lakes where experienced auto workers reside.

That includes highly experienced folks in the trades and technicians who have graduated from specialized, auto-related community college programs in Michigan, for example.

Low skill and low pay are not always the way to go.

I read a report on another forum some time ago that said that Nissan had completely eliminated all written material from its instructions to its line workers in a plant in the South. Nissan was using only pictures.

The Big 3 don't have to do that up North, and neither do the Japanese plants in Ohio.

What would really help the Big 3 would be national health insurance similar to Canada's. You of course know that the Japanese put plants up there for that reason and the fact that the Canadians can all read.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[cameozalaznick]

40. No. We can't let them fail. We need auto manufacturers for

national security reasons. During WWII, all auto manufacturing was halted and factories were re-tooled to build planes, tanks and other things needed for the war effort. Without some kind of manufacturing base, we wouldn't be able to properly defend ourselves if necessary.

[Kalyke]

48. Wow... that's the best point I believe has been made during

this entire debate.

:applause:

[Rosa Luxemburg]

65. no we cannot let the auto industry fail

besides we can hurry up making electric cars

[TankLV]

73. We can and should have a manufacturing base - just maybe not autos...

Again - why bail out the auto industry when people seemed perfectly willing to let the Steel Industry fail with MILLIONS of jobs lost?

The government should spend the money for the WORKERS to get them eased into something else, not to artifically prop up an industry whose time is PAST.

It has been done before, and will be done again...

[Carni]

43. I don't think we can do that... even though I detest GM

And worked there for years.

I believe the auto compainies brought this on themselves, but I don't see on the other hand how the government CAN'T bail them out...We lost our family business of 20 years about 2 years ago, mostly because a Ford plant which employed the bulk of our customers closed.

I fault the auto companies for being dinosaurs, but on the other hand it's not fair that all these employees just have to crash and burn.

I think they should be bailed out with very rigid conditions as to CAFE etc.

[doc03]

44. What everyone fails to recognize is if you bail them out

you just reward them for their incompetence. If they go bankrupt that doesn't mean they will not make cars anymore. The Clinton administration let the steel industry go under, inefficient plants were shut down, the companies dumped their legacy costs, consolidated and others were bought up by foreign companies. The auto companies and the UAW were the biggest opposition to any bailout of the steel industry, they were perfectly willing to let the American steel industry die so they could import cheaper foreign steel. Us workers in the steel industry were forced to accept concessions, the retirees lost their health insurance and our pensions were dumped on the PBGC and were substantially reduced. Did the auto companies or the UAW care, Hell no.

[uponit7771]

51. Like AIG? Come on, compared to what AIG has done GM is a saint.

[blue_onyx]

57. It's the bad choices of these Wall Street financial institution

that have helped put the auto companies in such a bad position. The reason that Gm, Ford, and Chrysler can't get money is because nobody is lending. Consumer can't get credit to buy vehicles either. The auto companies made bad business decisions but the financial institutions, that we have already bailed out, are responsible for the failure of the credit market.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

46. What we need to do

is save the auto industry to keep people at work. They are vital.

I could go on but if you read through the thread you will catch my drift.

[uponit7771]

53. RIGHT!!! 2-3 million jobs ALONE will be lost with a bankrupt GM. Who's going to buy a car from a...

..bankrupt company and compared to what AIG has done there's NO reason why GM shouldn't get what they want

[QueenOfCalifornia]

56. correct

and playing god about whose life will be fucked up is not the job of liberals. Isn't that what the other team does?

[doc03]

55. If they go bankrupt they will still make cars! What they need

to do especially GM is discontinue about 3/4 of their models. They make just a few basic frames and have multiple brands with nothing but a few cosmetic differences. The UAW has to face reality, you can't expect us taxpayers to bail you out when you have ridiculous work rules like the Jobs Bank or whatever they call it. The auto industry and the UAW had absolutely no sympathy for any steel industry bailout, in fact they actually paid lobbyists to prevent us from stopping illegally dumped steel imports.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

69. Lobbyists

are not GM line workers or the woman who works in an office or the many, many dealerships who will close.

I think steel companies should still be making steel too.

No one gives a shit because i am not talking about Sarah Palin or who Obama picks as SoS... but here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4461269

[doc03]

76. Yes lobbyists! The auto industry fought tooth and nail

to sabotage any assistance for the steel industry. IF THE AUTO COMPANIES GO BANKRUPT THEY WILL STILL MAKE CARS. The steel companies went bankrupt by the dozens and we still make steel. A lot of those companies needed to go out of business there was just too much capacity, a manufacturing company can't make a profit running at 50% capacity and paying workers to sit in the cafeteria and watch Reggis and Kelly. Up until a couple months ago the American steel industry was running at about 90% capacity and making very good profits.

[TankLV]

74. No.

[AzDar]

58. If we bail them out, the conditions shouldn't be limited to CAFE standards.

Jobs creation, a prohibition on outsourcing, and new green technologies-development should be mandatory, too.

[doc03]

61. Jobs creation? That's one of the main problems with the

auto industry now, they have a bloated overpaid workforce. A company just can't pay workers for not working and survive, the UAW needs to wake up and smell the coffee or they won't have a meal ticket.

[Romulox]

66. Why isn't AIG or GE required to promise to go green or create US jobs

in return for the massive government bailouts already promised them??? :wtf:

[nolabels]

79. They will just have to survive 67 days or something

Nothing is going to get done till then :shrug:

[AzDar]

81. There should have been ALL KINDS of stipulations, IMNSHO. I still can't believe they just handed

all that money over sans conditions. But, that ship has sailed...

[acmavm]

83. What other industry do we have? We should have bailed out

that auto industry and let Goldman Sach, AIG, and the rest die.

[Barack_America]

86. You might as well nuke Michigan and Ohio while you're at it.

Without the big three those people are all going to starve to death, so we might as well put them out of their misery quickly.

We can call it "Operation Compassionate Conservatism".

What do you think?

:eyes:

[Pithlet]

87. I cannot belive the number of people here who think not bailing them out is a good thing.

It's shocking to me. Do they not realize what happens not just to Michigan and Ohio but to our whole country? If they think things are bad now...

[This One]

88. If they made cars people wanted, I'd be in favor of helping them but they don't

[Pithlet]

91. Okay, so let them fail and take the entire country down with them?

That makes sense how, exactly? Why should we all pay for their mistakes? Do you realize that we do need them, whether or not you have personal disdain for their business practices? Look, I don't think they've made the best decisions, and as I said further upthread, I think foreign companies overall do a better job with their product. And it's not even entirely true that they don't make products the American public want. The fact is they are a major backbone of our industry in this country. Letting them fail would be a major disaster. It's stupid.

[AngryAmish]

107. Who says they will fail?

Bankruptcy means Chapter 11. In shorthand it is business reorginization. They get a time-out from their debts, reorganize, redo contracts that are killing them and move forward.

Wages will be cut and labor rule changes have to be made. The changes have to be negociated. But if the negociations reach an impass, the bankruptcy judge can order changes.

They will be smaller but they will still be there if their product is good. United Airlines is still there. They have lived in Chapter 11 for years.

The fly is if Chapter 11 will kill them: who will buy a car that can't be serviced? On balance, I vote for Chapter 11.

[Pithlet]

124. Not so. For one thing, it would destroy their suppliers.

The pressure of reorganization under chapter 11 would reinforce their bad habits that got them into this mess in the first place. They would seek short term gain at the expense of long term health. And this is assuming they could even do chapter 11 in the first place. Here's a link that explains it better than I can: http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=11&year=2008&base_name=more_on_gm_from_cohn

[Barack_America]

92. Really? You have forgotten the mini-van and SUV craze?

It's not about making the cars people want, it's about being able to make new cars when the collective "want" changes on a dime.

The primary fault of the big 3 is their lack of flexibility and tendency to go "all in" on a particular type of automobile.

[susanwy]

94. "want"

I beg to differ, the writing has been on the wall for years, otherwise Toyota, Honda, and other foreign car sales would not have been steadily increasing. They have produced reliable, safer, more fuel efficient cars and trucks and their business has grown accordingly. The big three have been stuck on pushing crappy gas guzzlers that look "cool". Plus, marketing plays a BIG role in what the "people" want. Your right about lack of flexibility and focus on a particular auto type, but I don't believe "the collective want" has "changed on a dime". We buy what we're offered and can afford, not what we necessarily want.

I don't really care what my car looks like, as long as I can afford to fill the gas tank when gas hits $4-5 a gallon and I care that it has decent safety/reliability ratings. What pisses me off is the big three's lack of innovation! I've been wanting a new car for four years. I know what I "want", a small crossover or suv that gets 20-30 mpg (so I can commute to work), has all wheel drive (because I live where I have to drive in winter conditions more than not), can tow a small pop-up camper (so I don't have to own more than one vehicle), and that can squeeze in a small third row seat (for those occasional trips with kids and their friends skiing or whatever). Toyota makes one, called a RAV4 (19/26mpg, I wish they would make this a hybrid) or better yet the Highlander Hybrid (27/25mpg). But I don't have $34-42K so I waited, thinking the big three would build something to compete (tick, tick, tick). But noooooo, after four years they came out with the Dodge Journey, 15/22 mpg!!! Pathetic. TELL MY WHY DETROIT CAN"T BUILT FUEL EFFICIENT CARS.

Having said all this....I still think we have to bail the bastards out, but only if they agree to pull their head out of their collective asses and we implement universal health care (so WE CAN compete on a level playing field).

[Barack_America]

97. Detroit can build those cars.

They already build them in Europe, for Europeans.

For some reason they either decided that Americans wanted the SUVs, or decided to make Americans want the SUVs and not bring those cars over.

Interesting that decision benefitted the oil companies, ultimately at Detroit's own expense, no?

There are some bad, bad people running Detroit, but I don't see how it helps to punish the workers for that. (which I know you agree with, not suggesting you don't)

I guess that overall we're in agreement.

[PassingFair]

104. The dickheads I work with all drove (and WANTED) SUV's.

The bigger the better.

When I picked my kids up at school, they could
NEVER see my car, because all the SUV's and vans
obstructed their view. Some days, I am NOT exaggerating...
I would be the ONLY parent in the lot with a regular
sized car, and THAT was a STATION WAGON!

This is a bedroom suburb of Detroit, with small
ranch houses. It was WORSE in the richer suburbs.

[amandabeech]

122. I think that you backed up Kristi1696's post.

You may not like it, but there it is.

[PassingFair]

125. I MEANT to!

:hi:

[amandabeech]

128. Okay. Thanks for the correction!!!! *smilies*

[amandabeech]

117. Check out the Ford Escape hybrid.

It has been on the market since 2005, and I'm surprised that you haven't heard of it because it fits many of your needs and may get better city mileage than the Highlander hybrid.

[amandabeech]

113. Then how come they sold all those trucks and SUVs?

People didn't want to buy them?

You live in California and from my observations, Asian cars are very popular there.

But that's not true everywhere.

With the exception of the much maligned Escort and the Saturn, the Big 3 have not done well with small cars.

The big demand for small cars in the U.S. often rises and falls with gasoline prices. Here in MD, the prices are $2 and small change, down from $4 and change just a few months ago.

Unless gas prices go up substantially soon, folks aren't going to be paying big bucks for a new Corolla when a cheap Taurus, that gets 20/27, will do.

Cafe standards should be raised, certainly.

And folks like you might want to try driving a U.S. car from time to time, you might be pleasantly surprised at the improvements over the past several years.

[fujiyama]

90. May as well add Indiana to that list as well

and KY, TN, and other states which have plants.

I hate the idea of companies that made bad decisions get bailed out, but we don't have a choice here unless we want insanely high rates of unemployment.

[spoony]

96. Well put

Because what starts here "radiates" out, and the country ignores the problems with its industrial heart at the rest of its body's peril.

[Juche]

89. Loan them money in exchange for rapid investment in higher MPG cars

Its not going to be a handout of $25-50 billion, but a loan that the auto makers will end up paying back some time in the future. And in return for this loan we can require auto makers to start doing things they normally resist like raising CAFE standards to 40 mpg or more within a decade and speeding up R&D into alternative fuels.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

98. If there is to be a bailout, the first thing to do is fire all top management

immediately with no severance, no bonuses, no pension, no health care, no stock options, nothing. Hit the fucking bricks. Bring in the business equivalent of a judicial special master to oversee restructuring and operations for several years, then turn the companies over to their actual productive employees, not a new "management' team. A worker-owned enterprise will not permit the hog-at-the-trough behavior that is now the standard in large American business. Improved fuel economy standards and required investment in green technologies should also be part of the deal. Not one more full sized SUV should be produced.

[Fran Kubelik]

105. Do not let them fail

Bail them out with conditions. Make this about alternative energy.

[TheKentuckian]

109. I love the people actively campaiging for unemployment in the teens

decimating our manufacturing base, and putting more of a strain on an economic sector damn near on it's deathbed.

We desperately need to be creating jobs with productive wages and we have a group of people that wants to destroy maybe 10 million before we even get started.

It is almost like some people just want a deep depression that we may never recover from.

[lithiumbomb]

129. yeah, i don't think people are thinking this through

The US automakers need some serious reorganizing and downsizing, true. But people need to consider how many people are employed by the auto industry in this country. Many hundreds of thousands. Add indirect employment such as suppliers, and all the community business that support all the people employed... you might have 10 million people out of work plus dozens of communities that are permanently destroyed.

Chrysler is dead. That's a fact. They will be mostly or totally gone within six months. Either bankrupt or sold off in parts. Have GM go bankrupt on top of that, you will then bankrupt hundreds of suppliers that also make parts for Ford, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Kia, Subaru, etc etc etc.

I'm not inclined to reward companies for bad behavior but I don't particularly care to have another great depression on our hands.

Also remember that the big three have huge multinational operations, building cars in hundreds of countries. The ripple effects would be felt worldwide.

And we need to put an end to this "they're not making cars people want to buy" crap. GM sold 170k vehicles in the US in October, for a solid first place. That's a lot less than they sold a year ago, but that's still a _huge_ amount of vehicles, most of which are built in North America.

Everyone is hurting, the difference is GM is out of cash reserves.

http://www.autoblog.com/tag/by+the+numbers/

[On the Road]

110. Yes, the Whole System Needs Help

and part of the process should be dramatic layoffs, work rule simplification, and concessions by executives and hourly workers. Maybe a foreign white knight will emerge to do those things. A government bailout should be contingent on those things so that everyone else doesn't pay for the mess.

I really don't understand the desire to let basic industries fail. The US has done OK without a shoe industry, a toy industry, and a greatly reduced textile industry. Losing the auto industry without a serious attempt to save it is a bad idea.

[shaniqua6392]

115. Which of these prospects would cost more.....

Giving a LOAN of $25 Billion to the auto companies or losing over 3 million jobs immediately? Then the ripple effects would rumble throughout this country to millions more. Then the workers will have to file for unemployment benefits, food stamps and medicaid, etc. Then the workers will lose their homes which will flood the already saturated foreclosed home market. We can not afford to lose this manufacturing base. If we do, we will be vulnerable when it comes to national security too. What are we going to do...ask China to build us some tanks and ship them over? It is just too complicated. I don't think we can put too many conditions on them because it is a loan situation. I know they are running these companies into the ground. I just hope that the people running these companies learned a valuable lesson.

[amandabeech]

118. Has anyone noticed that a lot of the Japanese car companies

locate their U.S. plants in red states?

Notice that the Big 3 have lots of plants in blue states?

Just sayin'.

[madrchsod]

130. you mean some companies build in isolated smaller communities

that give them HUGE tax breaks? tax breaks that extend close to the life of the plant? it`s so much cheaper to assemble cars in the good old usa. what is even better people think they are american companies that keep the profits here in america!

[JCMach1]

131. The government should just buy them outright... GM's market cap currently is about 1.9billion

Buy all three... setup a National Auto Company to manage the big three... Once profitable again and the government capital has been repaid, refloat them as independent companies with the taxpayer profiting from the IPO.

[GTurck]

132. Reynolds Metals...

has gone the way of the Dodo and its obligations taken over by Alcoa which is itself now having problems. We depend on the pension that my husband secured with 39 years of sweat and toil and I don't know where the company pensions are in this mix of bail-outs and high finance.