I think the guy got a light applause after his speech.
Barney Frank had to use his gavel and said something about the claps.

 

douchebag waas pretty much saying thanks for the cute speech, lets get back to business so we can ask stupid irrelevant questions like what did you fly in on

McCotter apparently seems to be one of the few that actually "get" the severity of the current situation and its potential outcome.

 

I noticed that. He said something like "No, it's been long enough without that stuff." What a grouchy old bastard.

 

I thought he said, "We'll be here long enough without that stuff."

 

He was probably afraid that someone would, rightfully, lay the blame at he and Chris Dodd's feet....for fighting oversight on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac some four years ago.....SOB oughta' be in jail....

 

Excellent speech. Very disappointing that this got no coverage while the drivel about jets and "no plans" got all the coverage.

 

Here's a good read.

http://www.freep.com/article/20081123/COL01/811230371

 

Points out the impact of CAFE - win
Blames credit crisis - fail
Has some very harsh words for the "whiz kids on Wall Street" - massive win
Attacks Congress for passing bailout package for "quote-unquote healthy banks" - Can I buy this guy a beer?
Grins every time he uses the term "healthy institutions" - I should invite this guy and his family over for dinner
Disdain for the "post-industrial economy" - I'll buy this dude a really nice bottle of whiskey as a Christmas present
Mention of the "arsenal of democracy" - He's got my vote for President

Mr. McCotter was spot-on in his closing remarks - there are problems that are bigger than the Big 3, and larger than the economy. We need to take a step back and figure out where this nation is going. We've pissed away our ability to manufacture things of value, and failed to back-fill that gap with anything of substance. The fact that the CEOs of the Big 3 failed to present a convincing plan to Congress shows the massive failure that's occurred on multiple fronts - our representatives in Washington, our labor leaders, and our business management have spent the past few decades engaged in pissing matches against each other, and we're frankly all poorer because of it.

 

Awesome piece.

 

Pretty much the same way I felt while watching the video

 

The lack of any real plan deserves coverage, but how they got to DC was a asinine stunt. It would also be nice if the media, whom all love to tout their "tough" questions, would have asked why the members of congress used the meeting for a circus.

 

I disagree that there was no real plan. Now you can argue whether it was good enough or whether it was presented. But the essential plan is to continue improving content and quality of new cars and use the savings in the new UAW contract to be profitable selling higher content cars.

As for what the money would be spent on? Operations. As in use it to pay vendors and employees instead of having to declare chapter 11.

What's changed over the last 20 years? The labor contract. Previously, the Detroit 3 believed they could not go head to head with the transplants on low margin vehicles (small cars) due to labor cost. The result was cost-cutter small cars that were not (or barely) competitive. In the U.S., we got the old Focus. Elsewhere in the world, you could be the new, much improved model. Going forward, we get the good stuff. Should be the same with the Cruze.

Maybe I'm being naive, but I did see a plan there, and it even made sense. It just came down to the details -- the economist testifying at the hearings insisted that the UAW deal was much better than previous, but still wouldn't let the Detroit 3 compete. I don't know enough about the details to say conclusively that he's right or wrong (and I think you'd need a working crystal ball to be sure), but that comes down to tweaks in the labor contract or in tax code or whatever, it seems to me.

I think the U.S. auto industry (management and labor) got a bum rap, but that's really business as usual in Washington and the media.

By the way, this article was posted a week or two ago, but I think it's useful review.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27609471

 

This really upset me. If the senators are going to play hardball, I wish they'd at least be consistent:


Government reportedly involved in Citi deal

...
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said earlier Sunday he is confident the government and Citigroup “can come up with a plan that ensures Citigroup’s viability, which is really important for the whole economy. ... If you let it go down, millions of innocent people are hurt, and the economy suffers at a time when it’s terribly, terribly fragile,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”
...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27877195/

Why doesn't Citibank have to come back after Thanksgiving with their plan?

Honestly, this situation is just giving me a list of people I'll never vote for if they run for president.

 

I agree. What would greatly help would be a willingness of the UAW to rush the new agreement to be effective ASAP. There is a plan, and it is well thought out and viable. The fact it didn't go into effect sooner is a large part of why the loan is being requested, IMO.


The hearing with the auto CEOs was show biz on the part of Congress... they knew that such a measure was not going to pass.

They passed the bailout for the financials, and it was a resounding unpopular thing for the majority of constituants. The country wants the beatings to commence, the banks were not going to be a whipping boy, the Domestic 3 are handy. As an aside, I find it most interesting that paying people not to work, covering healthcare for those working or not working, you know... the litany of complaints about what has harmed the car business and is considered unsustainable. . . seems to me to be exactly the issues the winning political party feels is a successful plan for a whole country, and you can bet your bottom dollar Senator Kennedy is going to do his best to ramrod healthcare on the taxpayers...

To my way of thinking, the big 3 and UAW get it... entitlements are not sustainable and something quite different has to be done to survive, much less be competitive.

They seem to have more of a plan than our government.