I'd rather see the stipulation that it go to help retain jobs in the US and any company who is headquartered outside the country or continuously outsourcing and killing off US jobs not be eligible.

 

Somebody just woke Dubya up from his slumber... alas he's not in favor of spreading the $700B originally dedicated to the bailout of financial institutions...

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...811110396/1148

 

Apparently some sort of rescue package - beyond the previous $25billion - was agreed to today. Reportedly, Wagoner says that he won't accept the money if the government stipulates that he resigns.

 

I am greatly disliking the tone that he has brought to many of articles that quote him.

It is like a little kid who isn't getting what he wants.

"I will get a bailout, and I will get it on my terms, or............... I will sink the country by letting GM fail."

So there (he then stomps off with a scowl on his face).

You can't tell that I have a 6-year-old............. can you??

 

I just read an article about the push Pelosi is making to get the money to the big 3. In the same article, it mentions how Bush wants Congress to take care of the Free Trade act with Columbia.
Putting it all together (even though the article didn't mention it), I bet Bush will want to make a deal. He'll want the passage of free trade with Columbia in return for aid to the automakers.

 

Oh.............. you are half a day behind at least.

There was an article about that very thing, already.

I think you will find some fun add-ons from both sides.

It makes me sick (I don't mind the free trade with Columbia............. but I have a feeling there is going to be some tree hugging goodies added also).

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27671594

 

I’ve been following the triumphs, trials and tribulations of our domestic auto industry for many years (some of those years for personal reasons and some for professional reasons).

I understand that a failure of any of the Big Three, and particularly GM would be a truly devastating blow to our economy in general and to the families and communities who directly and/or indirectly depend on GM and its subsidiaries and suppliers. Nevertheless, I am absolutely opposed to any bailout of the industry.

Detroit’s problems are systemic – they will not be solved and will never go away simply by throwing money their way. Detroit sits on a four-legged stool of Senior Management, a Board of Directors, the UAW and its employees.

While there is nothing wrong, as a whole, with Detroit’s employees; its unimaginative Senior Management and Board of Directors and the equally unimaginative and unreasonable UAW must be fundamentally changed or the Detroit automakers cannot survive no matter how much money is given or loaned to them.

A bailout now, especially with funds that the Federal government simply doesn’t have, without the fundamental internal changes required will only perpetuate a failing business model - a business model that GM seems absolutely unwilling to change (or even truly admit is a failure).

 

This whole bailout just seems to me that while a it isn't in the best interest of any taxpayer letting GM then Ford and Chrysler go down would just shift the burden to a later date. IF they all go down in succession then the full brunt of millions of jobs lost and the impact on all the social programs and the overall loss of a large part of a full industry would plunge many states and the nation into a very certain and long recession. It may be cheaper for the Gov't to throw them some billions of dollars now with the hopes that this downturn in the economy won't last long and they can eventually get back on their feet rather than absorbing a severe blow to the economy that could undermine all the other efforts to turn things around. So it’s either pay money now from a pool or more taxpayers and a recessed economy or pay later right to the former employees in a much more recessed economy. Another point to mention is if these auto companies fail and the jobs are lost they are not going to come back to the US so easily.

 

Mmmm...

I wonder more and more about whether some here are GM fans or not.

GM has certainly made mistakes in the past, but I have never sensed they wanted to throw the baby out with the bathwater in order to stay in business.

The transplant manufacturers do not have the history or lagacy costs the big 3 do. It's a bit presumptious to assume a company woven as deeply into the notion of a financially healthy middle class can be so easily characterized as unimaginative. If I am not misunderstanding, you work for a transplant. I'm certain you enjoy your job and all things associated with you employer.

IMO, the transplants from asia are anything but imaginative. Good at what they do? Yes. Quite adept at providing appliance type vehicles? Absolutely.
Fortunate to be agile and unencumbered regarding their labor costs? Oh yes!
Willing to put enough folks here to work to avoid any protectionist backlash? No disagreement.

Too much good product from GM is being produced, in the offing, and unfortunately temporarily set aside due to market forces and legislation which GM really doesn't control, for me to sit idle when someone state GM is "unimaginative". That is unadulterated crap Mr. Nashville.

This very site is resonant with GM's abilities to kindle a fire in people's automotive passions. I still note there are few to no songs written about Asian cars Robert, but they may be forthcomming. If I were but presciant enought to foretell what the future brings I would play the lottery and eschew the trappings of hard work.

The UAW has missed some writing on the wall, and maybe union leadership has overreached.

However, I do believe unions have had their place in establishing a middle class. I know of no US based corporate entity which embraces the side casualties that seem to come with a"global economy".

I believe the economic realities forced upon folks are dealt with in the best way they can be addressed.

Personally, I don't see a world that is locked armed and singing camp songs.

We are all facing the realities of poorly minded government and other's governments.

Being on the winning or losing end has a lot to do with one's perceptions of the changes and their subsequent results.

Whatever any may think about participating in a loan to home country business is certainly a valid position.

I just offer my unabashed belief that GM has done a whole lot more than folks are willing to admit at this point in time. I also believe GM's value to our people has not run it's course.

Asian companies are certainly cunning. Certainly adept.

As for being imaginative? I'm not buying it.

 

This is not about being a “fan” or not being a fan and in any case, being a “fan-atic” is a dangerous position to be in if one is trying to see reality.

I'm not sure what you mean by that statement or what the "baby" is that you are referring to.

What is presumptuous is to ascribe human emotion to a behemoth company like GM or to believe that GM, as a company, actually cares about a middle class.

Moving on, GM’s legacy costs are a direct result of their own decisions and the UAW’s own ridiculous demands and unwillingness to see beyond their own petty need to justify their existence.

I love my job.

Then you and I have a very different opinion about imagination. Is it imaginative to keep building huge trucks and SUVs while doing little to build good cars? Is it imaginative to agree to labor contracts that pretend the country is still living in the 1960’s when Detroit was the only game in town? Is it imaginative to take the huge profits Detroit was making off of trucks and SUVs and not re-invest them in building a more efficient company?

Is it imaginative for Detroit to spend its time and resources into lobbying to protect its gas guzzlers? Bob Lutz has been quoted as saying that hybrids like the Toyota Prius "make no economic sense."…does that sound imaginative to you? Lutz and his ilk are the people the taxpayers are being asked to bail out!

Detroit has and is making some great vehicles but if that’s your only definition of “imagination” then I would suggest you reconsider it. That aside, if you think there haven’t been some equally imaginative and great cars from outside the U.S. then you haven’t been looking.

Yes, foreign nameplates are very good at what they do which is to supply dependable vehicles at reasonable costs that a lot of people want to buy (which is, perhaps, what GM/Ford/Chrysler should have been concentrating on).

Fortune has nothing to do with transplants being unencumbered (at least you recognize how encumbering the UAW is) with onerous labor cots…being good at the business of producing vehicles and providing good, well paying, jobs without slashing their own throat to do so is why they aren’t encumbered with those labor costs.

As for “enough” workers here…you need to read some history…the transplants are here precisely because, rather than being willing to compete head to head, the UWA and Detroit lobbied for and got protectionists trade laws passed in the mid-late ‘70’s which suddenly made it less expensive for Asian and European manufacturers to build cars here than “there”.

Again, I’m not just talking about great cars. Every business has to face issues and forces it can’t control…the mark of a great company is that it identifies and recognizes the forces it can’t control and then prepares for them – it doesn’t go hat-in-hand to the taxpayers asking for a handout.

Passion is a great thing and certainly, GM has and does and I’m sure will, make vehicles that instill passion in people. However, passion only goes so far and it doesn’t go far enough to make a profit on.

GM will never sell enough Camaros or Corvettes nor will Ford sell enough Mustangs nor will Chrysler sell enough Chargers or 300s to be profitable no matter how passionate some happen to be about those vehicles.

The UAW has missed the whole building. They served their purpose 60-80 years ago but that purpose is very long passed and as big as the auto industry is, it is hardly the “source” of the middle class nor has the UAW been anything more than a drop in the ocean in establishing the middle class.

Is that the same government Detroit now wants to save it?

Well…they haven’t done enough; if they had, they wouldn’t need the Feds to go borrow money from China to give to them to prop-up a failed business model.

This just my $0.02 of course - take it or leave it as you wish. But my opinion is not based on perception; it's based on a belief that a failing business needs to fail...that poor business decisions need to be punished; not rewarded.

 

The big three don't deserve any bailout. Buying time is like giving blood to a bleeding patient.

You don't use tax payer money to save some garbage business. This isn't china or russia. Bankrupt em, fix em, shrink em and lets go. Wash away the bad business model, the horrible management, the unions, the bad product, the freaking dealerships.

Thats a fix.

 

..... and when the dust settles, instead of 25 billion or whatever the end amount is, you start talking 100 billion when the dust settles.

Pensions? The government has to assume.

Unemployment? The crash of GM alone will push unemployment up to over 9%... and that doesn't include all the people who's job depends on supplying GM.

Unemplyment insurence and social assistance to those displaced? State governments are already at the breaking point. This will push them over.

This is a situation that so-called conservative dogma, so-called free market rhetoric, or anti-government ranting isn't going to fix. In fact, it stands a strong chance at hitting the US economy hard enough at the exact wrong time to start the dominoes falling towards a depression.

Keep in mind, it took nothing more than a crash in lending for houses to mushroom to this point. Knock off the US automotive industry, and the repercussions as well as the strains on government services and drop in revenue is going to have even bigger repercussions.

In short, need to shelve the idealogy and focus on actually solving the problem.

 

that makes no sense.

bankruptcy so the changes can be made to whatever decent business is left.

Pensions if funded are fine. If not then GM applies for distressed termination, the government takes over and bounces off the limit if it exceeds it. Cap and trim the pensions starting at the top. Most seniority gets 100%, younger guy gets less.

Let unemployment top out. It's been done before, it will correct itself.

Social assistance ? Minimal at most for those in most need. Government doesn't pick up the tab. If the feds or the states can't afford it then thats it. You get what you can and move on.

That is fixing the problem.

 

On that point we are in absolute agreement; the problem is that giving money to the Big Three doesn't do anything to solve the problem at all.

That's to say nothing of the hundreds or thousands of industries that feed into the automotive supply chain that have been in trouble for years - if you give GM or Ford or Chrysler money, can it stop there? I don't think so.

If it did stop there it would certainly be unfair to the tens of thousands of families who aren't fortunate enough to work for one of the Big Three but do work/depend on one of the businesses that are part of the complete automotive industry.

This is hardly the first time that the U.S. has faced a foreboding economic shift nor is it the first time that entire industries/occupations have been essentially wiped out but changing economic circumstances or even natural disasters.

We've been well beyond 9% unemployment before...it's hard but not impossible to deal with.

There was a time when 50% of our population was involved in farming; now it's more like 2%...there was the dust bowl and the near total collapse of mining that has devastated various areas of the country...the countryside of our nation is littered with skeletons of towns and cities that were once thriving communities living life high the hog that now are marked by a few crumbling foundations of buildings long abandoned.

Changes like that are NEVER easy nor are they supposed to be.

If government money could truly solve the problem I'd be all for it...but it won't solve the problems of Detroit nor will any attempt to artificially protect the industry from competition...throw money at Detroit now and it will never stop - it will be a beast that devours every penny in Washington and will still want more.