This isn't a popular opinion, but I'm sayin' it anyway.

[flamin lib]

I keep hearing that the domestic car makers screwed up by making the vehicles they made. Bull shit. It was not their product offering that killed them. In fact, the Europeans and Asians imitated our US offering. GM has had an SUV for forty years. It’s only been the last fifteen that you could get a BMW or Toyota SUV.

Besides, it only made sense to push the big beasts. The IRS offered a huge deduction for “light trucks” used for business. A Lincoln town car and an Escalade cost about the same but after the tax breaks the SUV was virtually paid for by the IRS. That's why every Realtor used the monsters to haul their skinny butts around. Moreover, the SUVs carried a profit margin of $7,000 or more while smaller vehicles made less than $2,000. If your business had two offerings and one made that much more money than the other which would you advertise?

Was it the quality? I don’t think so. The delta on complaints for the top ten rated vehicles was less than 1%. The top end vehicles from both Ford and GM hold their re-sale value as well as any import.

What killed the US companies is the uneven playing field created by government policies in the other industrialized nations and the economic meltdown caused by the Bush administration. Europe and Asia both offer universal health care and pay for most of the R&D into new technology. Our companies have to shoulder all that cost themselves. The world wide economic collapse is hurting the European and Asian car makers as badly as it is ours. I watched George Bush address the G20 nations. He repeated the free market litany, saying it was the source of all innovation and the best market model for competitive growth. In the same sentence he cautioned them not to interfere in the free market with governmental support BECAUSE THE FREE MARKET CAN’T COMPETE WITH THAT BUSINESS MODEL.

It’s time the United States came into the twentieth century (now that we’re at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first) and provide health care for our citizens, a real and fully funded national retirement plan and government support for R&D in critical industries. And while we’re at it maybe do something about the huge discrepancy in CEO vs average worker compensation.

There, I said it and feel better.

[Kolesar]

1. Increase the Medicare tax on *all* employers and make all Americans eligible

Then, both the domestic and import brands of automakers would be paying for health care for Americans.

[Demeter]

2. No Denying the Need for Universal Single Payer Health Care

but there is the fact that Detroit refused to compete against Volkswagen and Japan in the 70's, and lost the entire economical transportation market.

[flamin lib]

5. Not entirely true but close.

The US makers screwed up twice. They did offer economy cars back in the 70's but they were poorly made and couldn't measure up to the imports but the fact is that the US market didn't support the econobox cars. Toyota tried importing the Corolla back then and almost went broke due to lack of sales. It wasn't until the Asians began importing the more expensive models that they gained market share.

Later, when the Fed stepped in to help them out by adding import duties to the Asian cars the US companies just raised their prices to match the increased costs of the imports. They put short term profit above long term market share.

[sinkingfeeling]

3. I agree.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. I think you have the beginnings of a plan there.

Universal health care, a decent government-run retirement plan, and maybe employee ownership of the companies. Let the guys on the floor set the salaries of the guys in the tower.

Edwards Deming keeps coming to mind.

Demings 14 Points Summarised

1. Create constancy of purpose and continual improvement – long term planning must replace short term reaction
2. Adopt the new philosophy – by management and workers alike.
3. Do not depend on (quality) inspection – build quality into the product and process
4. Choose quality suppliers over low cost suppliers – to minimise variation in raw materials and supply.
5. Improve constantly – to reduce variation in all aspects e.g. planning, production, and service.
6. Training on the job – for workers and management, to reduce variation in how job is done.
7. Leadership not supervision – to get people to do a better job, not just meet targets.
8. Eliminate fear – encourage two-way communication, encourage employees to work in the organisation’s interest.
9. Break down internal barriers – department’s in an organisation are “internal customers” to each other and must work together.
10. Eliminate slogans (exhortations) – processes make mistakes not people. Management harassment of workers will create bad relations if no effort made to improve processes.
11. Eliminate numerical targets – management by objectives (targets) encourages low quality.
12. Remover barriers to worker satisfaction – including annual appraisals
13. Encourage self improvement and education for all
14. Everyone is responsible for continual improvement in quality and productivity – particularly top management

[notadmblnd]

6. the way I understand it, is that they want a loan.

Loans that they would normally obtain through private entities. However, due to the financial crisis, those loans are froze up. Those at the fed are giving money to the banks, yet the banks are using it to buy other banks instead of making loans to the people who would normally be getting them. Some one correct me if im wrong, but that's the conclusion I've come to in regards to the whole thing.

[flamin lib]

7. Yes, that is true. However the big three have been bleeding money

for quite some time now. It's a combination of things; lower profits than the competition, lost short term cash flow (bridge loans) and lost sales due to the consumer credit crunch.

The US companies could survive any one of these but all three at one time is more than they can handle.

edit to add:

That's what Chrysler asked for and got when they were in such deep doo, a loan. Lee Iaccoca actually paid the loan back before it was due.

[notadmblnd]

10. Well it didn't help that they got rid of all the people who bought their products

their employees. The quest for cheap labor is what I think did them in. So many people have been pushed into poverty due to the lack of jobs in this country that there is no longer enough members of the middle class to sustain these companies. There's certainly not enough rich to keep them afloat.

[Winterblues]

12. Actually ford Motor company had a good Profit the 1st quarter of this year.

Also it would be interesting to compare Executive salaries of american Companies with Executive Pay of Japanese or Korean or Chinese Companies...They are in it as a team and Americans are in it for themselves..

[grace0418]

8. All I have is anecdotal evidence. My dad bought Fords,

and they all sucked. I couldn't figure out why he kept buying them. He had to get the engine replaced on his Escort wagon twice in the space of five years. Two of the three cars I've owned have been Hondas and I've never had problems with them. My 10-yr-old Civic runs like a charm with basic maintenance. So quality is an issue for me and others that I know.

However, I totally agree with you that universal healthcare and government support for R&D gives European and Asian carmakers the advantage.

[flamin lib]

11. I drove Fords for years. Had both Mercury Cugars and T-birds.

My cars went 200k miles with only one failure and that was the dealership, not the car.

When Ford hired the idiot from England he killed those two vehicles. Stupidest thing I've ever seen. The were the last front engine rear wheel drive full size cars in the mid price category. If they had stretched the wheelbase five inches and made them with 4 doors every police force in the US would have bought them. Most police fleets call for front engine rear drive because they handle so much better in pursuit situations. Some departments actually bought PU trucks to fill shortages before the spec was re-written to reflect reality of only front wheel drive supply.

Ford is in a class by itself; they don't have a clue about where to go with styling, models or promotions. That company is, from a management standpoint, already dead.

[Ioo]

9. UHC would go a long way to making US Car makers whole again NT

[phantom power]

13. You know, when people like me criticize the Big3...

it's those overpaid CEOs we are bashing. Not "the American auto industry," in the sense of all the people employed in that industry.

The auto CEOs have been whining about having to compete with foreign business models since the 80s, when Japan clobbered them the first time. In fact, I understand what they're saying, on the other hand, their response to that situation has been to spend gobs of money fighting CAFE standards tooth and nail for the last 30 years. It was about as useful as invading Iraq as a response to 9/11.

They haven't spent one dime on lobbying for universal health care or Govt R&D spending. As the saying goes, show me your budget and I'll tell you what you value.

I know this is getting to be a long time ago, but back in the 70s, the big-3 made a lot of crappy cars. They didn't do it because they had to, they did it because they could, until foreign competition forced them to get their shit together. They lost a lot of customer loyalty from that, and some of that loyalty they haven't ever recovered. That may be a bitter pill, and I place the blame on CEOs, not auto workers, but the blame sure as hell isn't on the people purchasing foreign cars.

[unblock]

14. good points, but domestic car makers aren't innocent bystanders of government policies

the government didn't just decide to give giant tax breaks for suvs out of the kindness of their heart and/or stupidity of their brain.

they gave giant tax breaks for suvs because domestic car makers spent a ton of money bribing politicians to make it happen, so that they could make giant profit in an area where they had no foreign competition.

really, the tax incentives were just another form of rebate that the domestic car makers offered to push the suvs, they just found a way to make you and me pay for them as well.

you can blame government for going along, but that's the business model that's evolved in this country. corporate strategy includes lobbying and getting laws changed to suit you purposes.

[flamin lib]

20. The tax breaks were an example of the law of unintended consequences.

The intent was to subsidize small farmers and construction companies that used bona fide "small trucks". The upshot was that everybody who could claim some sort of business use, i.e. Realtors, took advantage of it. Then the car companies classified minivans as light trucks to evade CAFE standards.

The car makers just took advantage of the rules to make the high profit SUVs more saleable.

[bertman]

15. Good points, flamin lib, but the area where they screwed up in a big way was ignoring the

opportunities that new technology would have presented for more FUEL EFFICIENT SUV's, light trucks, and for American autos in general.

It appears that their inability to initially compete with the Japanese made them revert back to plan A: sell more bigger vehicles since the gas is cheap and the government is willing to subsidize them. In common lingo this is called sticking your head up your ---, or in the sand. Take your pick.

Those executives who were paid multi-MILLIONS of dollars per year, plus huge bonuses, were being paid to THINK OF THE FUTURE, no just to run the company today. Planning and vision were missing because they took the easy way out with the status quo. Not only did they buy fail to show any foresight or concern for the future, they actively supported keeping our CAFE standards low even when Congress was on the verge of making some upward adjustments. That was inexcusable negligence due to total focus on short-term profit.

Yes, the imports did make their own versions of the SUV to compete in our market, but they did not neglect the visionary market of smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles that require low maintenance and give 200,000 miles of trouble-free service.


Disclaimer: I think we should give the Big 3 immediate bridge loans to keep them afloat until we can get a full-blown package together to help them restructure. Also, the current executives should be fired and fired upon. And that would be better than they deserve for their massive ineptitude and greed.

[tjwash]

16. Actually...the tax break for the SUV's was meant for farmers so they could write off their trucks.

Believe it or not, there really was nothing sinister, or conspiratorial about that tax break. It was originally put in so that farmers, and construction people that actually do need to use bigger trucks for their jobs, got to write their personal vehicles off on their taxes, if they used them on the job. It was just so damn poorly written, that it became a really well known loophole that anyone could exploit. It sucks that the IRS never closed it.

And GM could have beaten Toyota to the hybrid easily. Remember when GM came out with the EV1 in '96, before anyone even thought about incorporating hybrid technology in a production vehicle? They killed it because gas was relatively cheap at the time, and didn't want to spend the money that would have been required to advance the battery technology. Everyone in America wanted their big fucking gas hogging SUV's and kind of looked down in derision at anyone who would dare to think forward a little and drive a geeky little car like that. What happened? the execs at Toyota saw an opportunity, and dumped millions into R and D and came out with the Prius, AND, most importantly, they now own all the hybrid tech patents.

Your health care point is a no brainer...but the biggest thing that killed GM was their complete lack of vision.

[izzybeans]

17. That's true, but we've never been a free market, especially in the auto-manufacturing world.

The "free market" is a myth made by intellectual children who suck on mental candy-canes and bubblegum lollipops (e.g. ideology filled b-school textbooks).


I agree though that our businesses would benefit greatly if we took healthcare off their books. Any business person who doesn't see that plan fact, has sucked down too many Kool-aid filled lollipops to recognize what's good for them. Seriously, it's like telling a child that Santa Claus isn't real and that toys aren't really made by elves, and that consumer products don't arrive by magical flying, predictive sleighs.

That being sad, our big three couldn't manage their way out of a fucking hole. They are blaming their health care costs for their own mismanagement. it's not that hard to worry about product quality and a competitive product mix. I mean, there are only so many Ford F150, F250 F350's a person needs. But they came in so many wonderful colors, right? Just pick one that works for the people that actually require heavy towing capacity and move on to what the rest of us wants. There must of been someone in the market research department ready to blow their own brains out over the stupidity of their CEO's strategic decisions. "Excuse me sir, but have you notice all of the Civics on city streets? No, well have you seen the inventory at our retailers? No? Perhaps we should ramp up our Focus production. No? We've just lost another 5% market share this quarter. Oh? So that's my fault? I see." :foot steps: :door closes: :the sound of a revolver: :thump:

[question everything]

18. Are the Toyota and Honda employees in Alabama and in Kentucky

offered health and pension benefits by their employers?

[izzybeans]

19. They are in indiana.

The specifics, though I'm unsure. My cousin works for Toyota. They are the most sought after employer in his town of 150,000.