It is currently Tue Apr 16, 2024 12:56 PM


All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:49 PM 
Camping Dorn
Camping Dorn

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:48 PM
Posts: 159
Part of me thinks that it would be wise for the government to bail them out because of the amount of jobs that will be lost if they go under, but a larger part of me thinks the government should let them fail because of the way their companies have been run.

One of the things that kills me is how much an autoworker makes vs. how much they actually work. And then they have the cajones to think that they actually deserve all the benefits they get. Living here in Michigan and growing up here, I know what most autoworkers do when they get to work, and most of the time it's jack shit. In fact I know people that go to work at GM and all they do is either sleep or watch movies all shift long and get paid large dollar amounts to do so. The UAW has put the big 3 in this mess and I would like nothing more than to see the UAW go away for ever.

I would be interested to see what other people's opinions are on this issue.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:00 PM 
Bridge Dweller

Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:03 PM
Posts: 4844
Aren't the actual workers kind of a thing of the past for the most part anyhow? Machines and robotic technology are taking more and more of the work people used to do now, aren't they?

I don't like the overblown figures given for the work force of the auto industry either.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:15 AM 
I schooled the old school.
I schooled the old school.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:39 PM
Posts: 5011
Quote:
Living here in Michigan and growing up here, I know what most autoworkers do when they get to work, and most of the time it's jack shit. In fact I know people that go to work at GM and all they do is either sleep or watch movies all shift long and get paid large dollar amounts to do so.


Your characterization of "most" autoworkers is bullshit. If it was "most" autoworkers, I seriously doubt our factories would put out as many cars as they do.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:32 AM 
Cazic Thule owned RoA
Cazic Thule owned RoA

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:19 AM
Posts: 1656
Location: Baltimore, MD
EQ1: Sarissa Candyangel
WoW: Sarix
This is the result of union worker quotas, requiring 500 employees to do a job that 250 can now do due to automation. They basically have a policy that requires overhiring.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:40 AM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:34 AM
Posts: 1969
Location: Porkopolis
EQ1: Draagun Dwarvepunter
WoW: Draagun
They made an inferior product that nobody wanted.

Let them die.

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:49 AM 
Froaaak!!!
Froaaak!!!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:10 AM
Posts: 1859
Location: San Antonio, TX
EQ1: Rugen Payne
WoW: Mathaen
I was amused to hear that they dug up the ev1 from where they buried it. Too little, too late.

Let them tank.

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:51 AM 
Trakanon is FFA!
Trakanon is FFA!

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:58 PM
Posts: 1464
I'm all for letting them fail except that they are one of the few industries that actually produces something that gets exported if you disregard Chrysler. If the executives had proposed breaking the union and restructuring with a goal of raising exports, then maybe a bailout could be a good thing. As their proposal stands, no.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:59 AM 
Camping Dorn
Camping Dorn

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:48 PM
Posts: 159
Quote:
Your characterization of "most" autoworkers is bullshit. If it was "most" autoworkers, I seriously doubt our factories would put out as many cars as they do.


Do you personally know people who are autoworkers? I do, and I can tell you for a fact that what they do is basically sit and wait for the machine to stop working (which doesn't happen often) and then they might have something to do. All the while making $40/hour or more to do so.

The reason the factories put out as many cars as they do is because most of the stuff is automated now by robots and it doesn't require real people to do the work. But like someone else said, the unions have quotas that they must have X amount of employees.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:48 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:35 PM
Posts: 3926
Sorry, I just can't bring myself to care about how little they work vs. how much they make. If that's life fulfillment for em, I'll be happy to chuck over a bit of change their way in the form of the bailout.

That being said, I'm not entirely for the bailout, but for different reasons. The above is just a silly excuse to cry about it because you're jealous they're making something for doing nothing.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:03 PM 
Camping Dorn
Camping Dorn

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:48 PM
Posts: 159
It's not that I'm jealous of them receiving a lot of money for doing nothing. It's that they keep wanting more and more for not doing anything in return because they "deserve" it. It goes along the same lines at the Ford CEO saying he'll work for a $1 salary for the next year if they get the bailout. Well, hell I think anyone would take a $1 salary if they had been making $21 million a year for the past several years. It's not like he's hurting for money.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:23 PM 
Fell for 50,000 points of Damage
Fell for 50,000 points of Damage

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:31 PM
Posts: 526
EQ1: Miramicha - retired
WoW: Miramicha - retired
Eve Online Handle: Jake Rivers - active
Astro Empires: Miramicha - simmer
Kenyana wrote:
Part of me thinks that it would be wise for the government to bail them out because of the amount of jobs that will be lost if they go under, but a larger part of me thinks the government should let them fail because of the way their companies have been run.

One of the things that kills me is how much an autoworker makes vs. how much they actually work. And then they have the cajones to think that they actually deserve all the benefits they get. Living here in Michigan and growing up here, I know what most autoworkers do when they get to work, and most of the time it's jack shit. In fact I know people that go to work at GM and all they do is either sleep or watch movies all shift long and get paid large dollar amounts to do so. The UAW has put the big 3 in this mess and I would like nothing more than to see the UAW go away for ever.

I would be interested to see what other people's opinions are on this issue.


Everytime I turn around there is news of another plant being shut down and jobs being shipped off to mexico.

If no one is buying these gas guzzling vehicles the big 3 have been building for the last century, then why should they be bailed out?

The big 3 made there bed with the oil companies, and now they must lay in it.

How will giving these guys billions of dollars save jobs? That is a very short term solution with very little bang for the buck.

Tough to them, they will have to sink or swim.

_________________
Jake Rivers - Senex Legio
Get off my Lawn alliance


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:41 PM 
10 Years? God im old!
10 Years? God im old!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:13 PM
Posts: 857
Location: Madison, WI
EQ1: Annastazia
WoW: Gravestone
Terms of the bailout have to include not allowing any additional jobs to leave the US and a guarantee that jobs will be brought back that have left.

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:54 PM 
Do you smell that?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:47 PM
Posts: 451
$30/hr is a lot of money?


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:10 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:22 AM
Posts: 3609
Location: DFW
EQ1: Ghaani (retired)
WoW: Gabbath (retired)
Rift: Gabbath (retired)
SWOR: Gabbath/Gh'anni (retired)
no bailout.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:57 PM 
Avatar of War
Avatar of War

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:56 AM
Posts: 179
$30/hr is ~60k a year. Average household income in the States is ~50k a year so yes 60k for doing nothing is a lot.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:03 PM 
Vanguard Fanboy!
Vanguard Fanboy!

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:07 PM
Posts: 2689
You forget that everyone on this board is super-rich, Kit.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:03 PM 
Trakanon is FFA!
Trakanon is FFA!

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:58 PM
Posts: 1464
I'm generally against the bailout for many reasons, the union being one of the largest. But, 60k isn't really that much. They aren't being paid to sit around but are paid for being ready and trained to recognize when the machines are failing to do the job and fix the machines as rapidly as they safely can to get production up & running again. Do you really want some minimum wage worker to decide what the 'safe' parameters are during the building of your vehicle? I don't.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:17 PM 
Camping Dorn
Camping Dorn

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:48 PM
Posts: 159
Quote:
They aren't being paid to sit around but are paid for being ready and trained to recognize when the machines are failing to do the job and fix the machines as rapidly as they safely can to get production up & running again.


The people watching the machines waiting for them to fail are not the ones who fix them. It's the millwrights that fix the machines. And no I don't want minimum wage people watching the machines, but a lot of these people make much more that $30/hr. I know there are numbers all across the board, but when you figure in how much the average autoworker makes, including all the benefits, it's closer to $90k/year.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:22 PM 
Train Right Side!
Train Right Side!

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:32 PM
Posts: 1005
The unions are breaking these companies, it's the fundamental difference between our auto industry and industry overseas. Do people really think that the Japanese are simply better engineers and the reason behind their superior product?

'The Big Three' have made mistakes (mainly the reliance on their cash cow pickups) but these issues hardly warrant total annihilation. Find a way to allow them to break their contracts with the unions, possibly through bankruptcy, and not affect consumer confidence (perhaps an impossible task) and things will turn around in short order.

_________________
Kuwen Furyblades
Hunter of Memento Reejeryn
Champion of Faydark


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:35 PM 
Trakanon is FFA!
Trakanon is FFA!

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:58 PM
Posts: 1464
While breaking the unions is nice in theory, it won't happen. The Democrats control Congress and are about to control the Presidency. Would you have the government take over funding the retirees? Because that, in my opinion, is what is killing the Big 3, not the current workforce but the fact that people were allowed to retire too early considering how long they are living.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:20 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:35 PM
Posts: 3926
Quote:
Do people really think that the Japanese are simply better engineers and the reason behind their superior product?


/raise!

Well, that and Ford/GM/Chrysler insisting on keeping production the same on gas-guzzling vehicles rather than refocusing their efforts on smaller fuel-efficient cars. That's parrotted all over the place, but it's still a very important point that reeks of common sense.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:42 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:22 AM
Posts: 3609
Location: DFW
EQ1: Ghaani (retired)
WoW: Gabbath (retired)
Rift: Gabbath (retired)
SWOR: Gabbath/Gh'anni (retired)
Hmmm, interesting
Quote:
Myths and realities about Detroit-based automakers and their cars
By MARK PHELAN / Detroit Free Press

The debate over aid to the Detroit-based automakers is awash with half-truths and misrepresentations that are endlessly repeated by everyone from members of Congress to journalists.

Here are six myths about the companies and their vehicles, and the reality in each case.

Myth: Nobody buys their vehicles.

Reality: General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC sold 8.5 million vehicles in the United States last year and millions more around the world. GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of about 560,000 so far this year. Globally, GM remained the world's largest automaker in 2007, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide – about 3,000 more than Toyota.

Ford outsold Honda by about 850,000 and Nissan by more than 1.3 million vehicles in the United States last year.

Chrysler sold more vehicles here than Nissan and Hyundai combined in 2007 and so far this year.

Myth: They build unreliable junk.

Reality: The creaky, leaky vehicles of the 1980s and '90s are long gone. Consumer Reports recently found that "Ford's reliability is now on par with good Japanese automakers." The independent J.D. Power Initial Quality Study scored Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Mercury, Pontiac and Lincoln brands' overall quality as high as or higher than that of Acura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, Scion, Volkswagen and Volvo.

Power rated the Chevrolet Malibu the highest-quality midsize sedan. Both the Malibu and Ford Fusion scored better than the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.

Myth: They build gas-guzzlers.

Reality: All of the Detroit Three build midsize sedans the Environmental Protection Agency rates at 29-33 miles per gallon on the highway.

The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Malibu gets 33 mpg on the highway, two miles a gallon better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel-efficient Ford Focus has the same highway fuel economy ratings as the most efficient Toyota Corolla. The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Cobalt has the same city fuel economy and better highway fuel economy than the most efficient nonhybrid Honda Civic.

A recent study by Edmunds.com found that the Chevrolet Aveo subcompact is the least expensive car to buy and operate.

Myth: The automakers already got a $25 billion bailout.

Reality: None of that money has been lent out and may not be for more than a year. In addition, it can be used only to invest in future vehicles and technology, so it has no effect on companies' cash shortfall because of the economic slowdown.

Myth: GM, Ford and Chrysler are idiots for investing in pickups and SUVs.

Reality: The domestic companies' lineup has been truck-heavy, but Toyota, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz and BMW have all spent billions of dollars on SUVs and pickups because trucks are a large and historically profitable part of the auto industry. The most fuel-efficient full-size pickups from GM, Ford and Chrysler all have higher EPA fuel economy ratings than Toyota and Nissan's full-size pickups.

Myth: They don't build hybrids.

Reality: The Detroit Three got into the hybrid business late, but Ford and GM each now offers more hybrid models than Honda or Nissan, with several more due to hit the road in early 2009.


When the cost to make a Ford/GM/Chrysler has $2,000 more in labor costs than other automakers before the first wrench is tightened then we have an issue


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:05 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:35 PM
Posts: 3926
The point is not whether they have some fuel-efficient and reliable smaller cars in their lineup. The question is how much of a focus their whole product lineup is when you compare them to Honda and Toyota.

The article itself states that they're truck-heavy, and then proceeds to dig for an excuse for its being a myth by stating that "HISTORICALLY" they are good for profit. Well, no shit, I can find you a rabbit-eared TV that sold well "HISTORICALLY". The point is, they didn't adapt to the markets quickly enough. Fuel prices skyrocketed, and they didn't change strategy(for the most part) and kept high emphasis on large vehicles with lower MPG.

The article also goes on and on about "MIDSIZE" cars and trucks. That's not where the bulk of the market is going to be shifting in a situation like this. Only one brief mention of the Cobalt/Civic comparison, and we're supposed to believe that they're very competitive with smaller cars. Hah.

That was the least interesting article I've read in a long time. Talk about searching far and wide for excuses for the same companies whose CEO's flew(originally) to beg for money in private jets rather than their own company's cars. They're stupid and have no sense of strategy. Period.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:29 AM 
Vanguard Fanboy!
Vanguard Fanboy!

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:07 PM
Posts: 2689
Yah, if everything in that article is true, then they have even LESS of an excuse to be needing money.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:19 AM 
I schooled the old school.
I schooled the old school.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:39 PM
Posts: 5011
Where's myth number 7? You know, "the auto workers don't do any work" myth?


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:58 AM 
Blackburrow Lover!
Blackburrow Lover!

Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 12:29 PM
Posts: 634
Location: Crestview, FL
EQ1: Arunhah
WoW: Scathain
Rift: Arunhah
EQ2: Scathian
Quote:
The article itself states that they're truck-heavy, and then proceeds to dig for an excuse for its being a myth by stating that "HISTORICALLY" they are good for profit. Well, no shit, I can find you a rabbit-eared TV that sold well "HISTORICALLY". The point is, they didn't adapt to the markets quickly enough. Fuel prices skyrocketed, and they didn't change strategy(for the most part) and kept high emphasis on large vehicles with lower MPG.
How can you claim that they didn't react to the markets quickly enough when they are outselling the competition in the United States? It seems to me that they reacted about as well as can be expected.

Obviously their problem is not in making the sales, the problem is turning a high enough profit on those sales.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:37 AM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:34 AM
Posts: 1969
Location: Porkopolis
EQ1: Draagun Dwarvepunter
WoW: Draagun
Notice that propaganda article talks about "the now" - the reason they are in this mess is because of the last 20 years of shit products.

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:37 AM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:35 PM
Posts: 3926
Quote:
How can you claim that they didn't react to the markets quickly enough when they are outselling the competition in the United States? It seems to me that they reacted about as well as can be expected.

Obviously their problem is not in making the sales, the problem is turning a high enough profit on those sales.


Wrong, making sales is a huge part of their problem. I will admit that labor unions and a number of other factors related to them being a U.S.-based company play a factor, but they have failed a number of different fronts where Japanese automakers have succeeded. GM, Ford, and Chrysler sales have been steadily losing ground against Honda and Toyota for years now - especially for worldwide sales. And we should be talking about worldwide figures rather than strictly US-based figures, even though they're losing ground there as well.

"Globally, GM remained the world's largest automaker in 2007, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide – about 3,000 more than Toyota."

After 70 YEARS of being the top automaker GM is about to lose it, I guess we're supposed to feel good that they totally WHOMPED Toyota by 3000 units. Ford and Chrysler are both behind Honda and Toyota in worldwide sales.

We should be talking worldwide sales because the US market, at least for the past few years, has represented a sort of last bastion of the SUV and larger car market. The rest of the world is even more focused now on smaller more fuel-efficient cars than it has ever been. You may have sold a few gas-guzzlers there before, where now you're barely selling any.

In short, no, they did not react quickly enough. Not when they're losing ground against Japanese automakers for many years in a row.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:15 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:34 AM
Posts: 1969
Location: Porkopolis
EQ1: Draagun Dwarvepunter
WoW: Draagun
Unions? Really?

I think these companies have more employees overseas then they do domestically.

One of their reps on c-span this morning said they have about 200k domestic employees and over 200k in other countries.

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:31 PM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:35 PM
Posts: 3926
That, and just generally the benefits that they give their employees are significantly higher(even after they're done working there) than Japanese and European automakers. Not an evil idea by any means, but arguably they went a bit too far when more of their former workers are still getting benefits from working there than people who are actually still working there.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:50 PM 
We Have Cookies!
We Have Cookies!

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:27 PM
Posts: 2450
Location: California
EQ1: Cakvala
WoW: Cakvala
LoL: Cakvala
Unions are a horrible concept and I hope they fade away in the next 10 years... they are a paratsite that sucks the life out of any company... The government should inforce certain policies unions have that are positive for the employee but High Union Dues and the way they are ran are not a good thing at all...

I dont think the Big Three should get a bail out but the Government should buy them out and restructure the company, for a certain timeframe then release the company back to whomever it chooses to run it again. but thats me, and I know this idea is probably to complicated.

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 1:36 PM 
The Lurker at the Threshold

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 2:54 PM
Posts: 4156
Location: Atlanta, GA
EQ1: Vanamar
WoW: Kallaystra
Rift: Tarathia
Unions aren't a bad concept.

Worker protection was a wonderful thing back when most companies exploited every single worker that was employed there.

Now they're still a good concept, just driven deep into the pit of corruption and greed.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:25 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Posts: 388
Fribur wrote:
Where's myth number 7? You know, "the auto workers don't do any work" myth?


It's not that they don't do any work. It's that they don't do work commesurate with their salaries. All you have to do is compare their salaries to any other automaker employee in the United States outside of Detroit.

So the question for you Fribur - why should a Detroit lineworker get paid 50% more than someone who does the exact same job for Toyota, but works in South Carolina instead?

I mean, the Japanese aren't stupid, there is a reason they don't open plants in Michigan, and instead open plants in right-to-work Southern states, and that is to avoid unions.


The US automakers are not good business. They make inferior products (yes, a few car models are OK, most are so-so, some are plain bad), they did not plan well for the future (all automakers are suffering.....why the US more than Japan or Germany? Oh that's right, overproduction of SUVs, underproduction of fuel efficient cars, like I mentioned in another thread, nothing has changed since 1970, read The Reckoning).

And also......they overpay their employees. All that needs to be rectified. You don't do that by throwing money at bad businesses. They need to change their business models, which means almost from the ground up, they need to build more fuel efficient cars, they need to have a more reasonable pension plan, and they also need to fix their pay structure for their employees.

Otherwise, giving them out tax dollars is basically subsidizing these bloated salaries for people to make an inferior product that no one wants. A bailout won't fix these fundemental flaws. Bankruptcy restructuring might.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:44 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:46 AM
Posts: 1398
WoW: Drajeck
DraagunSoulstealer wrote:
Notice that propaganda article talks about "the now" - the reason they are in this mess is because of the last 20 years of shit products.


That's exactly my feeling. You want me to just forget the "shit" you put out for 20 years??? My 1st brand new vehicle was a chevy pick up (I think it was 1993 or so), and what a horror story that turned into for me.I won't gore you with the boring details, but I would never by another GM product after that low quality truck and even lower quality customer service I received. I got a Toyota truck after that and have had it for the past 5 years. Night and day quality difference.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:52 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Posts: 388
Just did a bit of Googling, here's an article about how much union workers are making in Detriot.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2134086/posts

Quote:
Union Workers at Big Three Automakers Average $73 an Hour
CNSNews ^ | November 18, 2008 | Pete Winn

Posted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:07:19 AM by Mr. Mojo

(CNSNews.com) – Economists in Michigan, the long-time home of the auto industry, say they don’t support the proposed multi-billion dollar bailout of Big Three automakers Chrysler, GM and Ford.

One reason why, they say, is the ultra-high labor costs for union workers employed by the Big Three. It costs over $73 per hour on average to employ a union auto worker, according to University of Michigan at Flint economist Mark J. Perry.

“Is it right to tax the average worker making $28.50 to bailout workers whose labor cost is over $73 an hour?” Perry asked.

He explained that in 2006, widely available industry and Labor Department statistics placed the average labor cost for UAW-represented workers at the former DaimlerChrysler at $75.86 per hour. For Ford it was $70.51, he said, and for General Motors it was $73.26.

“That includes the hourly pay, plus the benefits they’re receiving and all the other costs to General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, including legacy costs – retirement costs, pensions, and so on – so it’s looking at the total labor costs per hour worked for workers,” Perry said.

For U.S. workers at Toyota, however, the per hour labor cost is around $47.60, around $43 for Honda and around $42 for Nissan, Perry added, for an average of around $44.

“So we’re looking at somewhere around a $29 per hour pay gap between the Big Three and the foreign transplants that are producing cars in the United States,” Perry, chairman of the economics department, told CNSNews.com.

The average union worker at Chrysler, meanwhile, received 150 percent more in compensation than U.S. workers generally.

“Using Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers, the average compensation for manufacturing workers is around $31.50, and the average hourly compensation, including benefits, for the average worker in the U.S. economy is around $28.50,” Perry told CNSNews.com.

If you annualize Chrysler’s labor cost of $75.86 an hour per worker over a 35-hour week, for 50-weeks a year, the yearly compensation comes in at almost $133,000 per worker per year.

“That’s the cost to Chrysler of those workers,” Perry added. “That’s not necessarily what the worker would receive in a paycheck.”

Perry, meanwhile, said he is not personally in favor of a bailout.

“The question is, where do you stop? Would this just be a downpayment on a continuing bailout that they would need in the future?” he asked.

“Once we’re in for $25 billion, or $50 billion, it’s going to be a lot easier for them to ask for more money later,” he added.

The alternative to a bailout, Perry said, would be bankruptcy.

“We have a bankruptcy law to protect companies that need to go through reorganization for protection from their creditors,” Perry said.

Perry noted that proponents of a bailout cite a study that shows that one job out of every 10 jobs in the U.S. economy is tied to the auto industry.

“If we want this industry to be competitive and survive for the next decade or more, they really have to get their labor costs in line with reality and the global marketplace,” he said.

“Maybe it is time for the production to shift towards companies that have lower labor costs; that are more efficient and more productive. Even if that wasn’t production that took place in Michigan by United Auto Workers, it would still be production that would take place somewhere in the U.S. economy. So we would still have a large number of jobs tied to the auto industry.”

Hart C. Posen, a business school professor at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, said there are many economists who still question the 1979 bailout of Chrysler – and whether it was the right thing to do for the auto industry. He is one of them.

“There is no evidence that, in the long run, having bailed out Chrysler we’ve done anything good for the Michigan economy,” Posen told CNSNews.com

“My sense is that even with the bailout, one or more of those firms will disappear anyway,” he added. “There is significant overcapacity in the American automobile industry, and it is typically inevitable when there is significant overcapacity that some of it gets eliminated.”

A bailout directly to automakers will only delay the inevitable, Posen said.

“Historically, one of the strengths of the U.S. economy has been its willingness to let inefficient firms fail and redeploy those resources – money, but also people – to new and potentially more successful businesses. I think that has always been one of the distinctive strengths of the U.S. economy.”

Michael LaFaive at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a free-market foundation in Midland, Mich., said all bailouts are bad policy – at least from an economic standpoint.

“They encourage what should be discouraged – basically commerce becoming supplicants of the federal government – or some other level of government. They discourage prudent decision-making on the part of business management and entrepreneurs. After all, if there is someone else there to pick up your mess, why be careful?”

Even President Bush, who supports the bailout, seemed to hint that contracts guaranteeing high compensation levels to UAW members are a stumbling block to reaching an agreement.

“The automakers have over time made some decisions based on their needs for their employees, and some of those decisions might have to be reworked, going forward,” White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said Monday.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:54 PM 
I schooled the old school.
I schooled the old school.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:39 PM
Posts: 5011
Quote:
So the question for you Fribur - why should a Detroit lineworker get paid 50% more than someone who does the exact same job for Toyota, but works in South Carolina instead?


I didn't say they should. In fact, I think they shouldn't.

Quote:
It's not that they don't do any work. It's that they don't do work commesurate with their salaries. All you have to do is compare their salaries to any other automaker employee in the United States outside of Detroit.


This is not what was said. I was responding to comments like this:

Quote:
Living here in Michigan and growing up here, I know what most autoworkers do when they get to work, and most of the time it's jack shit.


It is interesting to me that there are people here that are apparently pissed that some guy is making $73 an hour (INCLUDING benefits), while at the same time these people are apparently ok with some CEO making 100s of millions while driving their country straight into the ground. And no, I'm not talking about you, Nekrotic.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:05 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:46 AM
Posts: 1398
WoW: Drajeck
If the government kept bailing everyone out because they arn't competitive, we'd still have USA made typewriters as a major industry. Sink or swim on your own. You don't get to keep all the extra money during good years and then have the taxpayers bail you out for the bad years.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:11 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Posts: 388
Fribur wrote:
It is interesting to me that there are people here that are apparently pissed that some guy is making $73 an hour (INCLUDING benefits), while at the same time these people are apparently ok with some CEO making 100s of millions while driving their country straight into the ground. And no, I'm not talking about you, Nekrotic.


Apples and oranges Fribur. First, we both can agree CEOs get paid too much, I know you and I agree on that point from past discussions. But a lot of companies overpay their CEOs. Not many companies overpay their regular employees. So CEO salaries isn't a reason why the US automakers are failing....otherwise there would be a lot of other companies out there failing also.

And I am NOT saying that employee salaries is the sole reason the US automakers are failing....but I am saying it is a contributing factor.

Here, you are talking about unskilled labor (apparently it only takes a few hours to train a lineworker, someone correct me if I'm wrong) making $133,000 per year, with benefits. Imagine coming out of high school (or not!) and being able to make over $100,000 (with benefits) a year STARTING SALARY. I doubt there's many jobs you can find like that.

Now, I can say I see something wrong with that, but I'm also OK if you say, well, if they can find a job that pays them that much, good for them.

What I'm not OK with is....if your business fails, then don't expect to get bailed out by the US taxpayers. Like the article I linked mentioned, I don't see why people making $28/hour need to bail out people making $73/hour.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 8:13 PM 
Camping Dorn
Camping Dorn

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:48 PM
Posts: 159
I'm pretty sure Fribur was refering to me when he said

Quote:
It is interesting to me that there are people here that are apparently pissed that some guy is making $73 an hour (INCLUDING benefits), while at the same time these people are apparently ok with some CEO making 100s of millions while driving their country straight into the ground. And no, I'm not talking about you, Nekrotic.


I'm also pretty sure that no where in my post did I say it was OK fro a CEO to make 100's of millions while driving their company into the ground. In fact, I'm pretty sure I said something to effect of

Quote:
It goes along the same lines at the Ford CEO saying he'll work for a $1 salary for the next year if they get the bailout. Well, hell I think anyone would take a $1 salary if they had been making $21 million a year for the past several years. It's not like he's hurting for money.


But apparently he hasn't taken the time to read the whole thread or his reading comprehension is severely lacking.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:05 PM 
We Have Cookies!
We Have Cookies!

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:27 PM
Posts: 2450
Location: California
EQ1: Cakvala
WoW: Cakvala
LoL: Cakvala
Quote:
Now they're still a good concept, just driven deep into the pit of corruption and greed.


Yes they are there to protect the employee but that will never happen they always become corrupted and greedy. They need to go and strict goverment laws/policies need to be started to keep employers from shiting on your employees

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 7:11 AM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:34 AM
Posts: 1969
Location: Porkopolis
EQ1: Draagun Dwarvepunter
WoW: Draagun
"Slave Labor: It gets shit done"


Was on a t-shirt from t-shirt hell, I think.

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 2:15 PM 
Camping Orc 1
Camping Orc 1
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:23 AM
Posts: 460
Location: Bedlam & Squalor
American transportation demands are changing, and these companies need to adapt or be replaced by ones that can.

It sucks that people have to lose their jobs, just as it sucked that the U.S. took an economic downturn when big finance went under. But neither of these are reasons to stick to systems that are showing themselves to be defunct.

Fuck corporate welfare.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 6:27 PM 
The Sleeper
The Sleeper
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:30 PM
Posts: 1674
Location: Miami, FL
EQ1: Leolan
Rift: Leolan
Nek, there's some misleading data in the report you quote...
Quote:
He explained that in 2006, widely available industry and Labor Department statistics placed the average labor cost for UAW-represented workers at the former DaimlerChrysler at $75.86 per hour. For Ford it was $70.51, he said, and for General Motors it was $73.26.

“That includes the hourly pay, plus the benefits they’re receiving and all the other costs to General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, including legacy costs – retirement costs, pensions, and so on – so it’s looking at the total labor costs per hour worked for workers,” Perry said.

For U.S. workers at Toyota, however, the per hour labor cost is around $47.60, around $43 for Honda and around $42 for Nissan, Perry added, for an average of around $44.
So essentially, that $73/hour is including the cost to pay for past employees' benefits. That doesn't necessarily belong in an hourly wage.

Granted, the numbers for Japanese automakers are generated the same way, but they don't have the long history of supporting their employees the way American automakers do.

I'd like to see what the numbers are without benefits for past employees included, to make the comparison more fair.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:16 PM 
Trakanon is FFA!
Trakanon is FFA!

Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 8:43 PM
Posts: 1323
ShareefRahim wrote:
$30/hr is a lot of money?
I think $30/hr is a lot of money. That's over $60,000 a year.

My first job out of college only paid $45k. Even at that amount, I was able to put 20% of my income into retirement, owned a condo, and drove a new car.

So, for people with reasonable financial skill, $60,000/year is a ton of money. At that rate, you can retire a millionaire pretty easily - especially if you have a wife who makes any cash at all.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:16 PM 
Train Right Side!
Train Right Side!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:08 PM
Posts: 955
Location: Boston
Yes, $30/hr is a lot of money, considering that minimum wage is under $10/hr, and median household incomes tend to range somewhere around $40k/yr ($20/hr) in most areas of the country.

_________________
Hope is the new black.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:14 AM 
Trakanon is FFA!
Trakanon is FFA!

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:58 PM
Posts: 1464
So, now congress is pushing for a "Car Czar" who will be appointed by Bush (because his appointments are always so competent) and have the authority to 'supervise' the Big 3 and assess whether they are moving in a sound direction regarding competitiveness, business model, and maybe environmentally friendliness. Not only will this person's powers extend that far but in addition s/he will have the authority to recall the government loans and stop any future loans. Not report to congress and have them exercise their authority, no.

Nancy Pelosi is once again showing her lack of a backbone or any sense of responsibility. She really needs to go, and soon. I will give the maximum to any candidate, regardless of party, who challenges her in a real way next election.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:36 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Posts: 388
The other big problem is the amount of money you are giving them.

I read today the initial loan is going to be about $14-$15 billion, short of what the automakers were asking for, which I think was around $35 billion.

I understand this is suppose to be a small bandaid until the Obama adminstration can come fully into power and it can be dealth with on a long term basis.

But this is even more worrisome, because the figures I see being thrown around now are that the Big 3 will need over $100 billion, mainly because auto sales are going down, and they will not sell the number of cars they currently are projecting as part of their reconstruction.

Once you give them money, you can't stop. If you give them a $35 billion loan, and they still are going bankrupt, you have to give them more. If you don't, you will never see a dime of your original $35 billion back.

If anything, this goes to show NO COMPANY should be so large as to have such a profound effect on our economy. They should break the Big 3 up into smallar companies. Turn GM into Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, Saturn, Hummer, etc....turn Ford into Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, and Volvo. Then each smaller company can sink or swim.

The country isn't going to sink to the bottom of the ocean if Hummer, Volvo, or Saturn go bankrupt. Part of the problem is these companies are so big, there are so many jobs and companies tied into them, so it drags a large part of the economy down with them.

I thought we had anti-monopoly laws for a reason! Why do we have these incredibly large automaker amalgamations dictate policy for us by holding our economy hostage?


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:11 PM 
Train Right Side!
Train Right Side!

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:32 PM
Posts: 1005
That's just it, they cannot be competitive as separate entities; just the other day the CEO of Fiat commented that by the time the crisis is over there will be six players left globally and that the future for the industry is even more mergers.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/fiat-ceo-predicts-only-six-global-automakers-to-survive-crisis.html

_________________
Kuwen Furyblades
Hunter of Memento Reejeryn
Champion of Faydark


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:48 PM 
Vanguard Fanboy!
Vanguard Fanboy!

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:07 PM
Posts: 2689
Well, the more I hear about the mismanagement of the bailout money, the more I find myself against bailouts of any kind now.

It's really getting old. I mean, I knew it was going to happen, but I guess I was hoping for the best. I should have known better.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:53 PM 
We Have Cookies!
We Have Cookies!

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:27 PM
Posts: 2450
Location: California
EQ1: Cakvala
WoW: Cakvala
LoL: Cakvala
And the more companies come out of the wood work for the free hand outs.

Sigh.

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:05 PM 
I schooled the old school.
I schooled the old school.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:39 PM
Posts: 5011
Quote:
Well, the more I hear about the mismanagement of the bailout money, the more I find myself against bailouts of any kind now.

It's really getting old. I mean, I knew it was going to happen, but I guess I was hoping for the best. I should have known better.


This is how I'm feeling too.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:52 PM 
Uh, I mean EZboard Sux!
Uh, I mean EZboard Sux!

Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:20 PM
Posts: 17
Location: Indianapolis
Why not enact tax incentives for companies/people that invest in/bail out these ailing corporations? Rather than simply forking over cash, we can make private citizens forking over their cash more attractive.

Alternatively, don't large corporations file for bankruptcy and reorganize pretty much all the time? Several of the big airlines that are still flying today are now or were recently "bankrupt" in the legal sense. Someone with a better grasp of finance would be able to better explain this, but Chapter 11 is not the end of a corporation (usually).

I'd say the $15 billion would be better spent on creating a new WPA/PWA to help combat unemployment and rebuild what is, honestly, an ailing infrastructure.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:54 AM 
Shelf is CAMPED!!
Shelf is CAMPED!!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:24 PM
Posts: 1918
Location: Location
EQ1: Binkee
WoW: Wilkins
Rift: Wilkins
LoL: ScrubLeague
owned.

enjoy your losses today, everyone invested in companies that aren't gm or ford

_________________
Image


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:21 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Posts: 388
Argrax wrote:
That's just it, they cannot be competitive as separate entities; just the other day the CEO of Fiat commented that by the time the crisis is over there will be six players left globally and that the future for the industry is even more mergers.


First, that's the CEO of Fiat talking, of course the entire automotive industry is crying out the sky is falling, because they need help.

Secondly, mergers don't automatically happen. In the United States at least, large mergers have to be approved. So you can prevent, if you wanted to, these large automaking conglomerations from forming.

kermode wrote:
Alternatively, don't large corporations file for bankruptcy and reorganize pretty much all the time? Several of the big airlines that are still flying today are now or were recently "bankrupt" in the legal sense. Someone with a better grasp of finance would be able to better explain this, but Chapter 11 is not the end of a corporation (usually).


Yep, that's just it, declaring chapter 11 doesn't mean the company disappears, it means it's giving time to restructure their finances and the government is giving them time to get back in the black.

The automakers do make one good point, which is if they go Chapter 11, people are going to get nervous about buying their cars, so it may turn into a vicious cycle. But when the airliners went Chapter 11, they were worried also that people might not fly their airline because people would be worried they were skimping on maintenance and safety costs.

The airline company is a good example you brought up. People talk about the Big 3 automakers in such grandiouse terms and their legacy and place in American History, I read somewhere yesterday how they are essentially the reason for the ENTIRE EXISTENCE of the American industrial machine.

Let's not forget even just a few decades ago that the airline industry was dominated by the two pioneers and dominating companies in their industry, namely Pan Am and TWA. Most of you probably had never flown on either, but there was a time when they were the two giants. Now, did the entire airline industry go belly-up when they went bankrupt? No, smaller, more competitive airlines emerged, or became more profitable. One of the biggest success stories is Southwest Airlines.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:24 PM 
Vanguard Fanboy!
Vanguard Fanboy!

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:07 PM
Posts: 2689
Quote:
People talk about the Big 3 automakers in such grandiouse terms and their legacy and place in American History, I read somewhere yesterday how they are essentially the reason for the ENTIRE EXISTENCE of the American industrial machine.

Let's not forget even just a few decades ago that the airline industry was dominated by the two pioneers and dominating companies in their industry, namely Pan Am and TWA. Most of you probably had never flown on either, but there was a time when they were the two giants. Now, did the entire airline industry go belly-up when they went bankrupt? No, smaller, more competitive airlines emerged, or became more profitable. One of the biggest success stories is Southwest Airlines.


Yeah, when companies start to become such institutions that people start believing that we cannot live without them, it's high time we all stepped back and ask ourselves if we shouldn't take a serious reassessment of the situation, and if said companies aren't actually having an overall negative influence.

I wonder where communications would be today if Ma Bell had never been broken up. /ponder


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:50 PM 
Trakanon is FFA!
Trakanon is FFA!

Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 8:43 PM
Posts: 1323
It is a very challenging subject. One thing that baffles me is that we dropped 750 BILLION with little hesitation, and now a 14 billion dollar loan is being treated as the coming of the apocalypse.

There is part of me, like most people, who wants to say "if he dies, he dies." But, I think it is a little more complicated than that because you're talking about a major backbone of our ability to support industry at all in this country.

I guess this is my stance... if we are talking about the US government buying senior, convertible bonds in the companies while other stakeholders are automatically converted to equity positions while substantial oversight of restructuring is set in place - I think I support that a bunch - I think it makes sense for the country as a whole. And really, I support 30+ billion for that because I believe we will see most of that money come back, with interest.

What I can't support is dumping 14 billion in unstable debt that will serve to pay pensions of cover losses for 1-3 more years.

One other item worth noting is that the auto industry really cannot support 6-7 major producers. Competition is simply too fierce.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:24 AM 
The Sleeper
The Sleeper
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:30 PM
Posts: 1674
Location: Miami, FL
EQ1: Leolan
Rift: Leolan
Orme, a Singing Bard wrote:
One other item worth noting is that the auto industry really cannot support 6-7 major producers. Competition is simply too fierce.
If that's the case, shouldn't we be supporting our businesses here in America at the expense of international competitors?


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:03 PM 
Lanys Supporter
Lanys Supporter

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Posts: 388
Leolan wrote:
If that's the case, shouldn't we be supporting our businesses here in America at the expense of international competitors?


Do you drive an American car?

Do you buy products only made in America?

Would you be willing to ban all imports from ,say China, if that meant the average American could no longer shop at Walmart and buy products at 1/2 the cost of what it would take to make in America?

Again, business has gone global. American's don't care if a product is made in the USA or not, they are concerned about price and quality.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:42 PM 
The Sleeper
The Sleeper
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:30 PM
Posts: 1674
Location: Miami, FL
EQ1: Leolan
Rift: Leolan
I agree there, mostly. I'm posing the question from a policy perspective though.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Automaker's bailout?
PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:58 AM 
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!
Trolling like there is no tomorrow!

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:35 PM
Posts: 3926
Quote:
If that's the case, shouldn't we be supporting our businesses here in America at the expense of international competitors?


Yes, and we can support them by letting bad businesses fail to make room for new GOOD American auto companies that fill in gaps not taken over automatically by Japanese companies. You let these 3 fall, and I will guarantee you at least one maybe two new BETTER auto companies will pop up here in America to take its place by aspiring entrepreneurs.

Maybe never(or at least not for a long time) as powerful as Honda/Toyota/etc, but there's always a better chance after this shitstorm that they won't do as many stupid things that the big 3 did.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Theme created StylerBB.net
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y