Fed Up... part 2.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Fed Up... part 2.
The last thread degerated into a flamefest that strayed into areas we have no need in going. I have met quite a few people who have posted here for some time, including our friends in Australia, and although we have differing views on some areas, all (at least with the oldertimers) realize that we're all on the same team... we love cars, and we have at least an appreciation for Camaros (though I'd still like to personally skin the person who signed off on those dame 4th gen power window motors).
The issue here is the survival of the US auto industry. It's that simple, and that blunt. You are either for the industry or you want to see the US auto industry collaspe. Ford is in the best condition of the big 3. Chrysler is in dire condition, but because it can survive at least another 6 months, that puts it in far better financial condition than General Motors.
Because of this, that makes immediately saving the US auto industry a defacto Save-General Motors issue, since GM needs that help now.
This being a Camaro website, and since Camaro is made by General Motors, a General Motors website.
Because of this, anybody who comes in with the opinion that there should be no money given to save the auto industry and that they should be allowed to fail, is in fact saying that they are in favor of the failing, and closing of General Motors, which means the termination and ending of the General Motors made Chevrolet Camaro..... period.
That begs to ask the question of "Why are these people here??"
That was the evolving issue about midway in the last thread that turned into a flamematch between 2 members in the last thread that had pretty much nothing to do with either the start of the thread or the evolving question.
Bankruptcy isn't an option. Anyone who is remotely familiar with the automobile industry understands this. A new vehicle is the 2nd biggest purchase anyone will ever make. At the same time, a new vehicle is one of the biggest emotional and impulsive purchases anyone will ever make. If someone doesn't like a dealer, they may go to another brand. If someone has an issue over a minor item, not only might they decide never to buy that brand again, they will tell others. To 99% of the public, the word "Bankruptcy" means "Going out of Business" .
Unlike buying a ticket from a bankrupt airlines, you goal isn't getting to a destination on the cheap. You aren't as worried about losing money buying an applience from a bankrupt TV or stereo manufacturer because (again) you want something on the cheap. A bankrupt GM isn't going to be giving their cars away for next to nothing (they've done that with rebates and incentives). Also, spending $30K for a new vehicle is different than spending a few hundred on a TV or a plane ticket to Hawaii.
Plus, there's that little fact that GM's value is less than the value of it's assets... greatly so when you include accumulated debt. If GM goes bankrupt, it isn't going chapter 11. It's going straight to Chapter 7, Liquidation, taking everything.... including Camaro.... and everybody (up to 3 million people) with it.
Regardless as to what political association you have, or if you believe in capitalism, communism, the tooth fairy or the easter bunny, by you being here on this site and sharing an enthusiasm for cars.... fast, performance cars, obviously.... any labeling of someone else is ridiculous. Right now you are seeing in Washington how ridiculous labels are:
* A democrat flipped republican (when they became a majority) who waves the flag and calls himself conservative is attempting to block any chance for the US car industry (read: GM) to survive in order to protect the import transplants in his and neighboring states.
* A liberal democrat who has traditionally had the support of treehugging greenies in Northern California has flipped her opposition, not just to bailing out US car makers, but also abandoning her opposition to using funds that were to go towards making US car makers develop and revamp factories to making green cars and has abandoned the stipulation in any deal that automakers reciving the loan abandon lawsuits against states wanting to adopt their own greenhouse gas standards.
* An administration that hasn't even given US carmakers the time of day for 8 years, encouraged the free trade that encouraged corperations to move so many jobs to China (and layed the groundwork for China to export cars here without the tarriffs they have on vehicles imported there) now scrambling to find a way to not be pegged as the Hoover Administration of the 21st century by saving the industry they scorned.
The enemy isn't the UAW. They are a fraction of what they once were. They get paid pretty much what other similar manufacturing jobs pay (including, now, those working at Toyota factories). They have systematically given up on idiotic work rules. They have taken on the responsibility of retiree health care, which was the biggest burden on US automakers. Wages and benefits are non-issues today, and represent less than 10% of the price of a car. Comparable with everything else (what few things they are) manufactured here in the US. When you go out to eat, labor is at least 80% of the price you're paying.
The most efficient plant in the US doesn't have a Toyota or Honda logo at the front gate (regardless at to what Senator Shelby or Corker would want you to believe, and it certainly isn't a non union plant. It belongs to Chrysler, and it's in Toledo Ohio.
The list of the top 10 most efficient plants in North America in 2006 had US automakers with 6 of them... but 4 were slated to close. Why? The vehicles they were making weren't what the public wanted. So, again, laying the blame squarely on the UAW for the big 3's problems is scapegoating. The issue isn't the efficiency of a plant or UAW wages in that plant. It's what comes out of that plant, and the company's ability to sell it.
Consider it this way: You can create the best made product in the most efficient plant in the world. But if not enough people buy it, is it the fault of the people making the product? Is it the fault of the people buying the product (the buy American folks)? Or is it the fault of the people who decided what the product was that was being made?
The problems are different for each 3 automakers. But any loans to the US car industry should and must come with strict stipulations (just as the 700 billion that went to Wall Street should have had). Mainly a comittment to product, a streamlining of management to quickly react to the marketplace, using resources to create practical fuel efficient vehicles (ie: the $27K 42/39mpg Ford Fusion hybrid) instead of showboating no chance vehicles (ie: GM's Fuel Cell car that was supposed to be out next year, but then abandoned) and vehicles that are going to operate at a loss for as far as the eye can see (ie: the Volt).
The Zeta was developed with a hybrid version in mind as well as a diesel. Both were slated for the US as part of the Zeta program. The Kappa program was supposed to yield a series of easy to make, relatively low cost, small vehicles based on 4 cylinder power years ago.
The mindset that stopped these types of great ideas is what's got to change. These ideas came from General Motors people themselves! But things got grinded down through the decision making gears till they disappeared.
Even independent from the disasterous effect on the economy (keep in mind, it was the smaller housing market collaspse that got us to where we are today...so one can only imagine what a auto industry collaspe would do), the big 3, including the General Motors Corperation, need to survive.
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/co...602_380600.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/01/news...vity/index.htm
The issue here is the survival of the US auto industry. It's that simple, and that blunt. You are either for the industry or you want to see the US auto industry collaspe. Ford is in the best condition of the big 3. Chrysler is in dire condition, but because it can survive at least another 6 months, that puts it in far better financial condition than General Motors.
Because of this, that makes immediately saving the US auto industry a defacto Save-General Motors issue, since GM needs that help now.
This being a Camaro website, and since Camaro is made by General Motors, a General Motors website.
Because of this, anybody who comes in with the opinion that there should be no money given to save the auto industry and that they should be allowed to fail, is in fact saying that they are in favor of the failing, and closing of General Motors, which means the termination and ending of the General Motors made Chevrolet Camaro..... period.
That begs to ask the question of "Why are these people here??"
That was the evolving issue about midway in the last thread that turned into a flamematch between 2 members in the last thread that had pretty much nothing to do with either the start of the thread or the evolving question.
Bankruptcy isn't an option. Anyone who is remotely familiar with the automobile industry understands this. A new vehicle is the 2nd biggest purchase anyone will ever make. At the same time, a new vehicle is one of the biggest emotional and impulsive purchases anyone will ever make. If someone doesn't like a dealer, they may go to another brand. If someone has an issue over a minor item, not only might they decide never to buy that brand again, they will tell others. To 99% of the public, the word "Bankruptcy" means "Going out of Business" .
Unlike buying a ticket from a bankrupt airlines, you goal isn't getting to a destination on the cheap. You aren't as worried about losing money buying an applience from a bankrupt TV or stereo manufacturer because (again) you want something on the cheap. A bankrupt GM isn't going to be giving their cars away for next to nothing (they've done that with rebates and incentives). Also, spending $30K for a new vehicle is different than spending a few hundred on a TV or a plane ticket to Hawaii.
Plus, there's that little fact that GM's value is less than the value of it's assets... greatly so when you include accumulated debt. If GM goes bankrupt, it isn't going chapter 11. It's going straight to Chapter 7, Liquidation, taking everything.... including Camaro.... and everybody (up to 3 million people) with it.
Regardless as to what political association you have, or if you believe in capitalism, communism, the tooth fairy or the easter bunny, by you being here on this site and sharing an enthusiasm for cars.... fast, performance cars, obviously.... any labeling of someone else is ridiculous. Right now you are seeing in Washington how ridiculous labels are:
* A democrat flipped republican (when they became a majority) who waves the flag and calls himself conservative is attempting to block any chance for the US car industry (read: GM) to survive in order to protect the import transplants in his and neighboring states.
* A liberal democrat who has traditionally had the support of treehugging greenies in Northern California has flipped her opposition, not just to bailing out US car makers, but also abandoning her opposition to using funds that were to go towards making US car makers develop and revamp factories to making green cars and has abandoned the stipulation in any deal that automakers reciving the loan abandon lawsuits against states wanting to adopt their own greenhouse gas standards.
* An administration that hasn't even given US carmakers the time of day for 8 years, encouraged the free trade that encouraged corperations to move so many jobs to China (and layed the groundwork for China to export cars here without the tarriffs they have on vehicles imported there) now scrambling to find a way to not be pegged as the Hoover Administration of the 21st century by saving the industry they scorned.
The enemy isn't the UAW. They are a fraction of what they once were. They get paid pretty much what other similar manufacturing jobs pay (including, now, those working at Toyota factories). They have systematically given up on idiotic work rules. They have taken on the responsibility of retiree health care, which was the biggest burden on US automakers. Wages and benefits are non-issues today, and represent less than 10% of the price of a car. Comparable with everything else (what few things they are) manufactured here in the US. When you go out to eat, labor is at least 80% of the price you're paying.
The most efficient plant in the US doesn't have a Toyota or Honda logo at the front gate (regardless at to what Senator Shelby or Corker would want you to believe, and it certainly isn't a non union plant. It belongs to Chrysler, and it's in Toledo Ohio.
The list of the top 10 most efficient plants in North America in 2006 had US automakers with 6 of them... but 4 were slated to close. Why? The vehicles they were making weren't what the public wanted. So, again, laying the blame squarely on the UAW for the big 3's problems is scapegoating. The issue isn't the efficiency of a plant or UAW wages in that plant. It's what comes out of that plant, and the company's ability to sell it.
Consider it this way: You can create the best made product in the most efficient plant in the world. But if not enough people buy it, is it the fault of the people making the product? Is it the fault of the people buying the product (the buy American folks)? Or is it the fault of the people who decided what the product was that was being made?
The problems are different for each 3 automakers. But any loans to the US car industry should and must come with strict stipulations (just as the 700 billion that went to Wall Street should have had). Mainly a comittment to product, a streamlining of management to quickly react to the marketplace, using resources to create practical fuel efficient vehicles (ie: the $27K 42/39mpg Ford Fusion hybrid) instead of showboating no chance vehicles (ie: GM's Fuel Cell car that was supposed to be out next year, but then abandoned) and vehicles that are going to operate at a loss for as far as the eye can see (ie: the Volt).
The Zeta was developed with a hybrid version in mind as well as a diesel. Both were slated for the US as part of the Zeta program. The Kappa program was supposed to yield a series of easy to make, relatively low cost, small vehicles based on 4 cylinder power years ago.
The mindset that stopped these types of great ideas is what's got to change. These ideas came from General Motors people themselves! But things got grinded down through the decision making gears till they disappeared.
Even independent from the disasterous effect on the economy (keep in mind, it was the smaller housing market collaspse that got us to where we are today...so one can only imagine what a auto industry collaspe would do), the big 3, including the General Motors Corperation, need to survive.
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/co...602_380600.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/01/news...vity/index.htm
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 82
From: West Middlesex, pa, usa
T
The enemy isn't the UAW. They are a fraction of what they once were. They get paid pretty much what other similar manufacturing jobs pay (including, now, those working at Toyota factories). They have systematically given up on idiotic work rules. They have taken on the responsibility of retiree health care, which was the biggest burden on US automakers. Wages and benefits are non-issues today, and represent less than 10% of the price of a car. Comparable with everything else (what few things they are) manufactured here in the US. When you go out to eat, labor is at least 80% of the price you're paying.
[m[/url]
The enemy isn't the UAW. They are a fraction of what they once were. They get paid pretty much what other similar manufacturing jobs pay (including, now, those working at Toyota factories). They have systematically given up on idiotic work rules. They have taken on the responsibility of retiree health care, which was the biggest burden on US automakers. Wages and benefits are non-issues today, and represent less than 10% of the price of a car. Comparable with everything else (what few things they are) manufactured here in the US. When you go out to eat, labor is at least 80% of the price you're paying.
[m[/url]
My math may be a little off here, but, GM has something like 20,000 union workers. If they all agreed to take a $100,000 a year pay (and benifits) cut and only work for a hamburger a day GM would save 2 billion. Not enough to save them. Perhaps if the workers need to take a $100,000 a month cut?
I just can't understand where all the billions are going, I don't thinks any one else understands either so they just keep saying the workers are overpaid.
Prominent Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Mitch is "Fed Up" too...
http://www.freep.com/article/2008121...1213055/?imw=Y
December 13, 2008
Hey, you senators: Thanks for nothing
A few parting words for the senators who squashed the auto rescue
By MITCH ALBOM
FREE PRESS COLUMNIST
Do you want to watch us drown? Is that it? Do want to see the last gurgle of economic air spit from our lips? If so, senators, know this: You’ll go down with us. America isn’t America without an auto industry. You can argue whether $14 billion would have saved it, but you surely tried to kill it.
We have grease on our hands.
You have blood.
Kill the car, kill the country. History will show that when America was on its knees, a handful of lawmakers tried to cut off its feet. And blame the workers. How suddenly did the workers — a small percentage of a car’s cost — become justification for crushing an industry?
And when did Detroit become the symbol of economic dysfunction? Are you kidding? Have you looked in the mirror lately, Washington?
In a world where banks hemorrhaged trillions in a high-priced gamble called credit derivative swaps that YOU failed to regulate, how on earth do WE need to be punished? In a bailout era where you shoveled billions, with no demands, to banks and financial firms, why do WE need to be schooled on how to run a business?
Who is more dysfunctional in business than YOU? Who blows more money? Who wastes more trillions on favors, payback and pork?
At least in the auto industry, if folks don’t like what you make, they don’t have to buy it. In government, even your worst mistakes, we have to live with.
And now Detroit should die with this?
In bed with the foreign automakers
Kill the car, kill the country. Sen. Richard Shelby, Sen. Bob Corker, Sen. Mitch McConnell, your names will not be forgotten. It’s amazing how you pretend to speak for America when you are only watching out for your political party, which would love to cripple unions, and your states, which house foreign auto plants.
Corker, you’ve got Nissan there and Volkswagen coming. Shelby, you’ve got Hyundai, Honda, Mercedes-Benz and — like McConnell — Toyota. Oh, don’t kid yourself. They didn’t come because you earned their business, a subject on which you enjoy lecturing the Detroit Three. No, they came because you threw billions in state tax breaks to lure them.
And now you want those foreign companies, which you lured, and which get help from their governments, to dictate to American workers how much they should be paid? Tell you what. You’re so fond of the foreign model, why don’t you do what Japanese ministers do when they screw up the country’s finances?
They cut their salaries.
Or they resign in shame.
When was the last time a U.S. senator resigned over a failed policy?
Yet you want to fire Rick Wagoner?
Who are you people?
More money for the lords of Wall Street
There ought to be a law — against the hypocrisy our government has demonstrated. The speed with which wheelbarrows of money were dumped on Wall Street versus the slow noose hung on the auto companies’ necks is reprehensible. Some of those same banks we bailed out are now saying they won’t extend credit to auto dealers. Wasn’t that why we gave them the money? To loosen credit?
Where’s your tight grip on those funds, senators? Where’s your micromanaging of the wages in banking? Or do you just enjoy having your hands around blue-collared throats?
No matter what the president does, history will not forget this: At our nation’s most uncertain hour, you senators stood ready to plunge hundreds of thousands of American families into oblivion. Leave them unemployed, with no health care, on public assistance. And you were willing to put our nation’s security at risk — by squashing the manufacturing base we must have in times of war.
And why? So you could stand on some phony principle? Crush a union? Play to your base? How is our nation better off today now that you kept $14 billion in the treasury? Are you going to balance the budget with that?
Don’t make us laugh.
Kill the car, kill the country. You tried to slam a stake into our chest; you don’t realize how close you are to the nation’s heart. Shame on your pettiness. Shame on your hypocrisy. This is how lawmakers behave two weeks before Christmas? Honestly. What has become of this country?
http://www.freep.com/article/2008121...1213055/?imw=Y
December 13, 2008
Hey, you senators: Thanks for nothing
A few parting words for the senators who squashed the auto rescue
By MITCH ALBOM
FREE PRESS COLUMNIST
Do you want to watch us drown? Is that it? Do want to see the last gurgle of economic air spit from our lips? If so, senators, know this: You’ll go down with us. America isn’t America without an auto industry. You can argue whether $14 billion would have saved it, but you surely tried to kill it.
We have grease on our hands.
You have blood.
Kill the car, kill the country. History will show that when America was on its knees, a handful of lawmakers tried to cut off its feet. And blame the workers. How suddenly did the workers — a small percentage of a car’s cost — become justification for crushing an industry?
And when did Detroit become the symbol of economic dysfunction? Are you kidding? Have you looked in the mirror lately, Washington?
In a world where banks hemorrhaged trillions in a high-priced gamble called credit derivative swaps that YOU failed to regulate, how on earth do WE need to be punished? In a bailout era where you shoveled billions, with no demands, to banks and financial firms, why do WE need to be schooled on how to run a business?
Who is more dysfunctional in business than YOU? Who blows more money? Who wastes more trillions on favors, payback and pork?
At least in the auto industry, if folks don’t like what you make, they don’t have to buy it. In government, even your worst mistakes, we have to live with.
And now Detroit should die with this?
In bed with the foreign automakers
Kill the car, kill the country. Sen. Richard Shelby, Sen. Bob Corker, Sen. Mitch McConnell, your names will not be forgotten. It’s amazing how you pretend to speak for America when you are only watching out for your political party, which would love to cripple unions, and your states, which house foreign auto plants.
Corker, you’ve got Nissan there and Volkswagen coming. Shelby, you’ve got Hyundai, Honda, Mercedes-Benz and — like McConnell — Toyota. Oh, don’t kid yourself. They didn’t come because you earned their business, a subject on which you enjoy lecturing the Detroit Three. No, they came because you threw billions in state tax breaks to lure them.
And now you want those foreign companies, which you lured, and which get help from their governments, to dictate to American workers how much they should be paid? Tell you what. You’re so fond of the foreign model, why don’t you do what Japanese ministers do when they screw up the country’s finances?
They cut their salaries.
Or they resign in shame.
When was the last time a U.S. senator resigned over a failed policy?
Yet you want to fire Rick Wagoner?
Who are you people?
More money for the lords of Wall Street
There ought to be a law — against the hypocrisy our government has demonstrated. The speed with which wheelbarrows of money were dumped on Wall Street versus the slow noose hung on the auto companies’ necks is reprehensible. Some of those same banks we bailed out are now saying they won’t extend credit to auto dealers. Wasn’t that why we gave them the money? To loosen credit?
Where’s your tight grip on those funds, senators? Where’s your micromanaging of the wages in banking? Or do you just enjoy having your hands around blue-collared throats?
No matter what the president does, history will not forget this: At our nation’s most uncertain hour, you senators stood ready to plunge hundreds of thousands of American families into oblivion. Leave them unemployed, with no health care, on public assistance. And you were willing to put our nation’s security at risk — by squashing the manufacturing base we must have in times of war.
And why? So you could stand on some phony principle? Crush a union? Play to your base? How is our nation better off today now that you kept $14 billion in the treasury? Are you going to balance the budget with that?
Don’t make us laugh.
Kill the car, kill the country. You tried to slam a stake into our chest; you don’t realize how close you are to the nation’s heart. Shame on your pettiness. Shame on your hypocrisy. This is how lawmakers behave two weeks before Christmas? Honestly. What has become of this country?
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,400
From: Michigan's left coast
My principles as they relate to capitalism and democracy are far larger than my affection for a particular make or model of automobile.
I have, at various times in the past couple of years, espoused viewpoints that, if widely embraced by the powers-that-be, would put my job and career in jeopardy - any failure of the American auto industry is likely to have a direct impact on my life. So, it'd be real easy for me to ask everyone to ignore the ugly facts of our present situation and to beg for a no-strings-attached-no-questions-asked bailout of the industry.
But just because it'd be easy doesn't make it right - at least not my idea of "right".
If indeed my viewpoint on this subject is no longer welcome here because it doesn't agree with this forum's idea of the "right" viewpoint, then I will respectually take my arguments elsewhere. I certainly will not modify my opinion of the situation, however.
I have, at various times in the past couple of years, espoused viewpoints that, if widely embraced by the powers-that-be, would put my job and career in jeopardy - any failure of the American auto industry is likely to have a direct impact on my life. So, it'd be real easy for me to ask everyone to ignore the ugly facts of our present situation and to beg for a no-strings-attached-no-questions-asked bailout of the industry.
But just because it'd be easy doesn't make it right - at least not my idea of "right".
If indeed my viewpoint on this subject is no longer welcome here because it doesn't agree with this forum's idea of the "right" viewpoint, then I will respectually take my arguments elsewhere. I certainly will not modify my opinion of the situation, however.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Looking around the internet one would not think any of the above was true. Almost every board with comments I have seen goes something like "The whole problem is those guys get paid $100 an Hour!" And it just keeps going on and on.
My math may be a little off here, but, GM has something like 20,000 union workers. If they all agreed to take a $100,000 a year pay (and benifits) cut and only work for a hamburger a day GM would save 2 billion. Not enough to save them. Perhaps if the workers need to take a $100,000 a month cut?
I just can't understand where all the billions are going, I don't thinks any one else understands either so they just keep saying the workers are overpaid.
My math may be a little off here, but, GM has something like 20,000 union workers. If they all agreed to take a $100,000 a year pay (and benifits) cut and only work for a hamburger a day GM would save 2 billion. Not enough to save them. Perhaps if the workers need to take a $100,000 a month cut?
I just can't understand where all the billions are going, I don't thinks any one else understands either so they just keep saying the workers are overpaid.
https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...11#post5737911
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 954
From: Shelton, WA
My principles as they relate to capitalism and democracy are far larger than my affection for a particular make or model of automobile.
I have, at various times in the past couple of years, espoused viewpoints that, if widely embraced by the powers-that-be, would put my job and career in jeopardy - any failure of the American auto industry is likely to have a direct impact on my life. So, it'd be real easy for me to ask everyone to ignore the ugly facts of our present situation and to beg for a no-strings-attached-no-questions-asked bailout of the industry.
But just because it'd be easy doesn't make it right - at least not my idea of "right".
If indeed my viewpoint on this subject is no longer welcome here because it doesn't agree with this forum's idea of the "right" viewpoint, then I will respectually take my arguments elsewhere. I certainly will not modify my opinion of the situation, however.
I have, at various times in the past couple of years, espoused viewpoints that, if widely embraced by the powers-that-be, would put my job and career in jeopardy - any failure of the American auto industry is likely to have a direct impact on my life. So, it'd be real easy for me to ask everyone to ignore the ugly facts of our present situation and to beg for a no-strings-attached-no-questions-asked bailout of the industry.
But just because it'd be easy doesn't make it right - at least not my idea of "right".
If indeed my viewpoint on this subject is no longer welcome here because it doesn't agree with this forum's idea of the "right" viewpoint, then I will respectually take my arguments elsewhere. I certainly will not modify my opinion of the situation, however.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
My principles as they relate to capitalism and democracy are far larger than my affection for a particular make or model of automobile.
I have, at various times in the past couple of years, espoused viewpoints that, if widely embraced by the powers-that-be, would put my job and career in jeopardy - any failure of the American auto industry is likely to have a direct impact on my life. So, it'd be real easy for me to ask everyone to ignore the ugly facts of our present situation and to beg for a no-strings-attached-no-questions-asked bailout of the industry.
But just because it'd be easy doesn't make it right - at least not my idea of "right".
If indeed my viewpoint on this subject is no longer welcome here because it doesn't agree with this forum's idea of the "right" viewpoint, then I will respectually take my arguments elsewhere. I certainly will not modify my opinion of the situation, however.
I have, at various times in the past couple of years, espoused viewpoints that, if widely embraced by the powers-that-be, would put my job and career in jeopardy - any failure of the American auto industry is likely to have a direct impact on my life. So, it'd be real easy for me to ask everyone to ignore the ugly facts of our present situation and to beg for a no-strings-attached-no-questions-asked bailout of the industry.
But just because it'd be easy doesn't make it right - at least not my idea of "right".
If indeed my viewpoint on this subject is no longer welcome here because it doesn't agree with this forum's idea of the "right" viewpoint, then I will respectually take my arguments elsewhere. I certainly will not modify my opinion of the situation, however.
I'd want this money to be a clear loan or loan guarantee. If it's loaned by the US government, the government gets intrest on the loan. 7% for the 1st 5 years, and 9% on the last 2 years of this 7 year loan that cleared the US House. It included a overseer (badly named a "Car Czar") that would have veto power over any expendature over $100 million, and would demand regular progress reports on the automakers return to viability If they refused to abide, or if they missed their goals, the Feds would take back their money, liquidating the company if necessary. All of this was essentially a no lose plan.
Taxpayer money is protected like a sumabitch.
Automakers are forced to be competitive.
Money couldn't be used to move businesses out of the country.
Money couldn't be used to prop up a company till it was chopped up or sold.
The federal government even had incentive to see them succeed by standing to make a cool billion in the deal that the banks wouldn't make (they've gotten plenty of billions from the feds already).
Soon as the money was paid back, even if it was years ahead of time like Chrysler did in 1983, the government is out of the picture.
I can see standing on principal, and I admire that.
But this wasn't a bailout, it wasn't nationalizing a car company, they weren't going to dictate what was going to be made. This was a Two-For-One deal where we prevent a economic collaspse, save the US car industry, and in the end, it doesn't cost us anything.....
....versus watching GM take down most all of the US car industry, push the economy over the edge, and be stuck paying hundreds of billions of dollars in pensions and health care for retirees as well as paying for unemployement, health care, and food stamps for those thrown out of work (since they will crash state unemployment funds and resources), not to mention the billions and billions of lost revenue to local, state, and federal governments which in states that require a balenced budget will jack up taxes quicker than simultaneously slashing spending.
To tell the truth, I suspect in this case might be the better choice, the better choice is the cheaper (or even no-cost) choice.
The easy choice would be to simply sit pat and do nothing.
Principals for democracy and capitalism is pretty useless when those principals contribute to it's very destruction.
Last edited by guionM; Dec 16, 2008 at 02:35 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Good post Guion.
Good article Doug.
This is not going to be solved in a GM fan site.
No "team" is going to convince the other on their viewpoint.
Maybe Jason & Chris should put up a political section, since this has become so politicized.
Really, it's just a waste a bandwith.
I'm at the point right now to say F*** IT!! Let it all collapse! Let's drag the world into a global depression. When most people in America have lost their houses, their belongings, and their savings, let's see how many people will be espousing the wonders of the free market.
At least the smart ones of us will be able to tell the free market-ers; "we told ya so".
Good article Doug.
This is not going to be solved in a GM fan site.
No "team" is going to convince the other on their viewpoint.
Maybe Jason & Chris should put up a political section, since this has become so politicized.
Really, it's just a waste a bandwith.
I'm at the point right now to say F*** IT!! Let it all collapse! Let's drag the world into a global depression. When most people in America have lost their houses, their belongings, and their savings, let's see how many people will be espousing the wonders of the free market.
At least the smart ones of us will be able to tell the free market-ers; "we told ya so".
Prominent Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Scott just posted this on the SS Owner's board....
Tax Fairness for U.S. Auto Makers – The Wall Street Journal
December 16, 2008
Your Dec. 1 editorial "America's Other Auto Industry" questions whether taxpayers should provide temporary federal loans to American automakers, but conveniently ignores one fact: Our taxpayers already give huge sums of financial assistance to foreign car companies right here in the U.S.
As proposed, the requested bridge loans represent roughly $4 billion in assistance to U.S. auto makers, that is, the cost of a low-interest loan. With 240,000 employees spread among the three U.S. companies, that works out to less than $16,000 in temporary taxpayer assistance per job.
By contrast, foreign auto makers receive far more from U.S. taxpayers in various forms of government assistance. In Tennessee, for example, state and local authorities offered Volkswagen $577 million in lowered taxes and other benefits in exchange for the plants it is constructing, at a staggering cost of $288,000 per job created.
Similarly, Toyota is receiving $300 million in support for its plant in Texas, or $150,000 per job created. Alabama provided Hyundai, Toyota, Honda and Mercedes an average of $111,000 in incentives per job. The list goes on. Unlike the temporary assistance GM, Ford and Chrysler are seeking, in almost all the cases, U.S. taxpayer subsidies to foreign companies never need to be paid back.
Let's make sure to keep the discussion balanced. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mercedes, BMW, Kia and Hyundai already receive far more in permanent financial support from our own taxpayers than what the U.S. auto industry is seeking. Our own companies deserve equal consideration, no more, no less.
Stephen Collins
President
Automotive Trade Policy Council
Washington
December 16, 2008
Your Dec. 1 editorial "America's Other Auto Industry" questions whether taxpayers should provide temporary federal loans to American automakers, but conveniently ignores one fact: Our taxpayers already give huge sums of financial assistance to foreign car companies right here in the U.S.
As proposed, the requested bridge loans represent roughly $4 billion in assistance to U.S. auto makers, that is, the cost of a low-interest loan. With 240,000 employees spread among the three U.S. companies, that works out to less than $16,000 in temporary taxpayer assistance per job.
By contrast, foreign auto makers receive far more from U.S. taxpayers in various forms of government assistance. In Tennessee, for example, state and local authorities offered Volkswagen $577 million in lowered taxes and other benefits in exchange for the plants it is constructing, at a staggering cost of $288,000 per job created.
Similarly, Toyota is receiving $300 million in support for its plant in Texas, or $150,000 per job created. Alabama provided Hyundai, Toyota, Honda and Mercedes an average of $111,000 in incentives per job. The list goes on. Unlike the temporary assistance GM, Ford and Chrysler are seeking, in almost all the cases, U.S. taxpayer subsidies to foreign companies never need to be paid back.
Let's make sure to keep the discussion balanced. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mercedes, BMW, Kia and Hyundai already receive far more in permanent financial support from our own taxpayers than what the U.S. auto industry is seeking. Our own companies deserve equal consideration, no more, no less.
Stephen Collins
President
Automotive Trade Policy Council
Washington
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,400
From: Michigan's left coast
Pointing this out isn't unpatriotic, and it isn't anti-GM. I want GM to succeed, and I don't think that any of the proposals floated in front of Congress are paths to success.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Eric,
Other than BK (which won't work), and outright failure, do you see ANY other way for GM to get out of this?
This is not a shot. It's a legetimate question. I'm asking because you seem to be a bright person.
If you guys don't believe a loan will work, then what will (other than BK or failure)?
Other than BK (which won't work), and outright failure, do you see ANY other way for GM to get out of this?
This is not a shot. It's a legetimate question. I'm asking because you seem to be a bright person.
If you guys don't believe a loan will work, then what will (other than BK or failure)?