GM on the critical list

[Harry P.]

Harry, your on a roll tonight!

Gary

Don't get me started!

[James Flowers]

You go Harry. No bail outs for any of them. Thats what I've said all along

[CAL]

I agree you can't have it both ways. Going after natural gas reserves means going after them. You can't explore and recover the stuff without touching anything. There has to be a sane balance between developing our gas reserves and protecting the environment. It could be done if sensible people were running our country.

As far as the fact that it will take time to get the infrastructure in place... well of course it will! And the sooner we start, the sooner it will be in place! If we had started 10 years ago, we'd have it in place right now! The best time to get started is today! Saying that we can't use natural gas because the infrastructure isn't in place yet is just running in circles. Let's get the infrastructure in place. Let's start tomorrow! What are we waiting for???

If this country had a sensible energy policy, our cars would be on natural gas right now, and future technologies like hydrogen fuel cells would be well under development... we would actually be in a position to tell OPEC where they can stuff their oil. If we had a sensible energy policy in this country, and if we had sensible, forward-thinking leaders who actually put the needs of the public first.

Yeah but we dont. We have wacko looney-toons running the country.

We're waiting for what we always wait for.... Winston Churchill said it, "You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, only after they tried everything else first." We haven't tried every idodic, stupid, insane idea that wacko looney-toons dreampt up yet.

Corn.. Ethenol E85 ... there's a brilliant idea ... 4 gal of diesel to make 1 gal of ethenol. And you got wackos complaining about food for fuel on top of it.

Speaking of diesels cars more stupid nonsense from Washington haha VW still was able to fix their cars to burn clean on dirty US diesel fuel. Which if either Ford or GM had half a brain and built a decent car would have a global market for diesel cars. They are not what they used to be. Clean, powerful, fun to drive, quiet and get in the neighborhood of 50+mpg. If Audi R10 and Peugoet haven't proven that yet.... Hello.

If everyone in SoCal drove a Porsche Turbo the air there would be something like 35% cleaner because the car is so efficent what is going out the tailpipe is cleaner than what is going in the airbox.

Why GM, Ford, and Chrysler is so far behind the curve is beyond common sense.

Hydrogen is just a carrier fuel it still takes energy to generate so it's not free and it's only really renewable depentant on the source of generation.

Edited November 13, 2008 by CAL

[James Flowers]

Has anyone heard about the car that runs on compressed air That a French guy is putting into production? I seen it in Auto Weekly I believe that is the name of the magazine. The air tanks are made of carbon fiber so they will not explode in a accident . I remember it said that with a on board compressor it could go 800 miles on one gallon of gas. Now if He can do that what else can be done ? I for one can not understand why they can not put alternators on all four axles of a car and recharge the batteries as you drive. I don't think it would be that hard to figure out a gear ratio to keep the alternators at the right output as you drive down a freeway.

[Peter Lombardo]

Well, this thread has sure come a long way from where it started. It is good to see that all of us seem to be informed and engaged. That is a good thing as this set of circumstances will change our world. The bottom line as I see it, America is entering the most volatile and dangerous time in its history, short of the Civil War which threatened to tear the union apart. I must say right up front, this is not intended to promote or criticize a political view, just point out the differences.

With the result of the past week’s election, it is clear that our country is now headed in a very different direction. The economy has not just faltered; it is now on life support. I truly believe that the new administration is inherently extremely leftist. That means that rather than allow the economy to work out the kinks and problems, the government will intervene and, I fear, throw gasoline on an already out of control fire. I say that because, a left or liberal government tenant is that big government is good and people and business cannot be trusted to correct problems. Their ideology is that only government knows best. In their eyes people must be lead and told what to do. Having said that, a liberal government can’t help but intervene and start throwing money, which means “ownership of†around to “cure†the problem.

A few weeks ago, the Democrat controlled House and Senate approved the bank bailout which, if you will remember, was over the objections of the true conservatives in those ruling bodies. I only point that out for context. Conservatives believe in the market system and Liberals believe in Socialism…that is not a knock or slam on either belief that is just the facts. So, we began the government hand outs, which I believe will be shown, in the light of hindsight, to have been major mistakes, but what is done is done. AIG was next, and that is a very curious situation. It is a glaring example of corporate greed and un-trustworthiness’. As the American taxpayers were being forced to bail that company out, the executives, not once, but three times went on expensive retreats, seemingly at taxpayers’ expense.

It is perfectly logical to expect our government to bail out the automobile industry, rather than expect the market to cull the weak from the heard. As I said yesterday, we are at the precipice of a new world order. We, America, have made a sharp turn to the left. This is a deliberate shift to Socialism which the new government has always said is their plan. The reason I say that is that should be perfectly clear when you think about the campaign that just ended. President-elect Obama ran on a platform of higher taxes, income redistribution, healthcare for everyone and government reliance for all essential services. If that is not Socialism, than what is? The American people voted for what is basically the European style of government. As this government begins to flex its muscles and bring their ideas to “law†there will be changes to our economy. Couple those changes to a rapidly changing world economy where Asia and South America are certainly on the rise. I believe America will be firmly entrenched in a second class position when all is said and done.

As we move into a more socialist style of government, we will see more government owned/operated entities. Government owned banks, have now become a reality, government owned Insurance is underway. The Auto Industry is next and then the Healthcare Industry as more Insurance companies begin to falter. The mainstream news and broadcast companies are already in lockstep, so we already have a state owned news media, and once the Fairness Doctrine in instituted, talk radio and maybe even the internet will be stifled. Make no mistake, gentleman, this is a whole new world that we are entering and when the full scope of the plan is known, the bail out of GM or Chrysler or any other business for that matter, will appear very insignificant.

This is the next logical step toward the One World, One Government and One Currency, that I spoke about yesterday. For that vision to become reality, a Capitalist America must be torn down….I fear the wrecking crews are moving into place. Time to put on your hard hats everyone!

Ok, many of you think I am a wacko conspiracy theorist with an active imagination. Maybe I am, or maybe, just maybe I am right…are you willing to take that chance? Go on, I dare you Google George Soros….Google Maurice Strong. Get an Idea of the money and the philosophy behind the headlines today. Remember…â€Change you can Believe in!†Well not all change is good.

[James Flowers]

I believe that A Republican President called for this bail out. That is what I seen on TV and heard on the radio. The House and senate Are not fully controlled by Democrats it still takes cross over votes to pass a bill. I also seen that the Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bail out. Did they not? I think so. So don't just blame the Democrats for this mess.

[Ramcharger]

Before they decide to bailout these companies at my (our) expense, all employees should be forced to take a 50% pay cut. UAW members especially. If you are going to take money from people that make less than you, you should make some sacrifices.

Just my 2 cents, take it or leave it.

[Harry P.]

I tend to agree, and I found one analogy used by the editorial writer to be particularly apt:

"Propping up uneconomical companies is about as productive as pushing a disabled vehicle down the street."

YES!

Or as it's also known, "throwing good money after bad".

[CAL]

I believe that A Republican President called for this bail out. That is what I seen on TV and heard on the radio. The House and senate Are not fully controlled by Democrats it still takes cross over votes to pass a bill. I also seen that the Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bail out. Did they not? I think so. So don't just blame the Democrats for this mess.

However, they were at large responsible for crafting the mess that led to the bailouts. And it was B. Clinton who sign the bill that led us down this path.

[raisin27]

Two things come to mind when I read these posts on GM and the others. First off most of you seem to be under the impression that that the Govt. is giving the automakers billions of dollars. They arent, they are loaning them billions of dollars. This money is to be paid back over time.

The other thing is I remember is when the Govt helped Chrysler in the 80's with loan guarantees, and Harley Davidson with temporary trade restrictions on imported motorcycles. It was determined that it would cost us more if Chyrsler and H-D failed than it would to help them out. The result was Chrysler turned itself around and actually repaid the loans ahead of schedule, and Harley Davidson did the same requesting that the trade restrictions be lifted well before they were to expire.

Just goes to show that sometimes things do work as they are meant to.

Just because you dont work for GM you think it wont affect you if they go under? Think again, even by conservitave estimates the job loss nationwide would be in the millions.

I tend to look at the auto bailout the same way i look at the banking bailout.............its not really right, but we are better off with it than without it.

[old-hermit]

A little story I remembered is very typical of Detroit's blundering. When the Vega and Pinto came out, GM and Ford were hoping to sell them overseas. They forgot to do basic research about other nations auto regs and taxation. Pinto was too wide and would be taxed at a higher rate and Vega engine was 2.3 litres and also taxed higher making both cars uncompetitive price wise. The story may not be true but it sure sounds typical.

Andy

They also forgot to put the steering wheel on the right.

[Harry P.]

Here's an interesting snippet from an editorial in today's LA Times regarding the automaker's bailout:

"As sad as it would be for American icons (like Chrysler) to die and for thousands of people to lose their jobs, propping up failure prevents innovation".

Couldn't have said it better myself. "Hey Detroit, you guys have been doing such a bang-up job that we want to give you billions of our dollars so you can keep on doing what you're doing. Way to go, guys".

As stupid as that sounds,, that's exactly what we're saying.

If I were in charge of handing out money to Detroit, I would make sure there would be some MAJOR strings attached: Elimination of redundant product lines (do we really need Chevies, Buicks and Pontiacs...all basically the same cars?). Elimination of ridiculous energy-wasting monstrosities like Hummers and Yukons and Excursions (or whatever Ford calls their house-sized SUV), an immediate raise in CAFE standards to 30 mpg across the board (any cars that can't meet that standard would obviously be eliminated from production), etc. Hey, if it's our money that the carmakers are getting, then they have to play by our rules!

And as far as the bailout money being a "loan"... what's to guarantee the taxpayers that the companies won't default on those loans and leave us holding the bag? Absolutely nothing, that's what.

That's a chance I don't want to take. Let the marketplace determine the fate of the carmakers, as capitalism is supposed to do. Put the unemployed autoworkers to work in newly created jobs in an aggressive government-sponsored expansion of alt fuel/alt energy programs, and use the bailout money for that purpose instead. Invest in America's future... not its failed past.

[Ramcharger]

Two things come to mind when I read these posts on GM and the others. First off most of you seem to be under the impression that that the Govt. is giving the automakers billions of dollars. They arent, they are loaning them billions of dollars. This money is to be paid back over time.

The other thing is I remember is when the Govt helped Chrysler in the 80's with loan guarantees, and Harley Davidson with temporary trade restrictions on imported motorcycles. It was determined that it would cost us more if Chyrsler and H-D failed than it would to help them out. The result was Chrysler turned itself around and actually repaid the loans ahead of schedule, and Harley Davidson did the same requesting that the trade restrictions be lifted well before they were to expire.

Just goes to show that sometimes things do work as they are meant to.

Just because you dont work for GM you think it wont affect you if they go under? Think again, even by conservitave estimates the job loss nationwide would be in the millions.

I tend to look at the auto bailout the same way i look at the banking bailout.............its not really right, but we are better off with it than without it.

Right. It would have a staggering impact on our economy. While I'm not happy about loaning them money (good money after bad), they need to make serious cuts before asking for help. If they want to be an independent company, act like one. If you need help, make sure you've done all you can to pull yourself out of trouble first, hence the pay cuts for all employees. As for your Chrysler example, aren't they in the same boat as GM as far as being close to extinction? Seems the loans didn't work. Harley is not a good example for this scenario, the circumstances, time line, and solution were for a different problem (let's not debate it here). I will agree the wringing of hands and discussion of "let the bums suffer" has no merit. We based our economy on the auto industry and its in trouble. We need to save it or the impact will be beyond imagination on the scale of the Great Depression. Again, my 2 cents, take it or leave it.

[James Flowers]

However, they were at large responsible for crafting the mess that led to the bailouts. And it was B. Clinton who sign the bill that led us down this path.

The Republicans were in charge for six years and what did they do about it? They could have changed it anytime they wanted in those six years. Bill Clinton might have signed the bill. But do you really think He meant for banks too loan money to folks that could not afford to pay back a loan at all ?

[CAL]

The Republicans were in charge for six years and what did they do about it? They could have changed it anytime they wanted in those six years. Bill Clinton might have signed the bill. But do you really think He meant for banks too loan money to folks that could not afford to pay back a loan at all ?

and what did democrates do the last two years in charge?

No it was a feel good warm and fuzzy left idea that failed because they didn't, or maybe they did, have the foresight to see this coming a mile away. look ma more people owned houses than ever before. Isn't that just great, what a great world we live in... who bloody cares if they can't afford them.

But this is neither the place or time for any of this nonsense.

[Art Anderson]

Right. It would have a staggering impact on our economy. While I'm not happy about loaning them money (good money after bad), they need to make serious cuts before asking for help. If they want to be an independent company, act like one. If you need help, make sure you've done all you can to pull yourself out of trouble first, hence the pay cuts for all employees. As for your Chrysler example, aren't they in the same boat as GM as far as being close to extinction? Seems the loans didn't work. Harley is not a good example for this scenario, the circumstances, time line, and solution were for a different problem (let's not debate it here). I will agree the wringing of hands and discussion of "let the bums suffer" has no merit. We based our economy on the auto industry and its in trouble. We need to save it or the impact will be beyond imagination on the scale of the Great Depression. Again, my 2 cents, take it or leave it.

If one were to say that certain states, certain cities allowed their economic base to be dominated by the auto industry, I would agree with that. While Michigan, in particular, is at least culturally tied to the auto industry, and a couple of neighboring states, particularly Indiana, have a very heavy stake in that industry, it's not really valid to say that the failure of say, General Motors (or all of the Big Three) would spell economic doom for the entire country. Certainly not in a time when the population of the country has passed 300,000,000, the total employee base of the US Big Three somewhere around 300,000 (or one in one thousand). It would take an absolute "worst case scenario", in other words, the total shutdown of every Ford, GM and Chrysler plant in the entire country to take all those workers off the payroll--and that is VERY unlikely to happen.

30 years ago, politico's and financial analysts were writing the obituary of the US steel industry, yet today, more steel is made in the US than ever before--it's just concentrated in a different region--Pittsburgh isn't the epicenter of steel, Gary Indiana is. And, while former steelmaking centers such as Birmingham, Bethlehem, Youngstown, Fontana saw their steel plants fade away, dozens of others have sprung up across the country, feeding off the scrapyards that are out there, just too long a distance from the traditional steel centers for their scrap to be profitable. Forty years ago, seemingly everyone was predicting the end of railroads--after all, they were an obsolete method of moving materials, finished goods, and people--yet today, a much streamlined railroad system is pondering how to grow, in order to handle the growing demand for their services. True, thousands of miles of abandoned and torn up track won't be replaced by new, anytime soon, but in a very real sense, railroads had overbuilt themselves, to levels that were unsustainable. And yes, those changes, those evolutions came with some pretty painful costs--thousands of jobs lost, some towns completely impoverished, and that's not easily swallowed, but a fact of life they were.

When Studebaker closed its doors in South Bend, IN, a grey pall seemed to have loomed over that city for years afterward, notwithstanding that employment grew well beyond the jobs lost when their local icon automaker folded, only in fairly recent times has South Bend truly experienced a decline. But, in St Joseph County, business and industry moved well beyond Studebaker. GM is perhaps the iconic American carmaker, with Ford and Chrysler close behind--they are ours, their makes of cars the makes that our parents and grandparents bought and drove. Perhaps that is the biggest hurt of all--it would be much the same in Japan were Toyota or Honda facing potential oblivion. Germany without Mercedes or Volkswagen, or Porsche? Same thing. But, in the overall scheme of things, none of this is a sort of "Custer's Last Stand", and I say that knowing full well that I, just as with the rest of you, would hate to see anything take out the Big Three.

Art

[James Flowers]

and what did democrates do the last two years in charge?

No it was a feel good warm and fuzzy left idea that failed because they didn't, or maybe they did, have the foresight to see this coming a mile away. look ma more people owned houses than ever before. Isn't that just great, what a great world we live in... who bloody cares if they can't afford them.

But this is neither the place or time for any of this nonsense.

Hit a nerve did it. The truth is what it is, the Republicans had six years to change it and they DID NOT DO IT. END OF story.

Edited November 15, 2008 by mustanglover1951

[CAL]

Hit a nerve did it. The truth is what it is, the Republicans had six years to change it and they DID NOT DO IT. END OF story.

Not really. Seems to be only the beginning of the story. At it's pinnacle the dems didn't do it, either. I guess by your logic that means .... um End of story?

Look, I am not anchored in one or the other, but I believe in logic, truth, what is right, honest and fair. I believe in what is practical and makes good common sense, and quite frankly I haven't seen much if any from either party lately.

But again this isn't the time nor place for this disscussion, if you would like to continue it in another forum let me know.

However, if you keep feeding GM, Ford, Banks and Credit companies, and any other big business to large to fail we'll never upright our economy. Let em all fail. It will be bad... for a while, but this path will be worse in the long run. We are just handing out licenses to big business to be wreckless and irresponsible because there is no accountablility from any one, including the Gov.

[old-hermit]

I believe in what is practical and makes good common sense, and quite frankly I haven't seen much if any from either party lately.

Let em all fail. It will be bad... for a while, but this path will be worse in the long run... there is no accountablility from any one, including the Gov.

As long as "We The People" let a bipartisan government be in control there will be no change !

[James Flowers]

Not really. Seems to be only the beginning of the story. At it's pinnacle the dems didn't do it, either. I guess by your logic that means .... um End of story?

Look, I am not anchored in one or the other, but I believe in logic, truth, what is right, honest and fair. I believe in what is practical and makes good common sense, and quite frankly I haven't seen much if any from either party lately.

But again this isn't the time nor place for this disscussion, if you would like to continue it in another forum let me know.

However, if you keep feeding GM, Ford, Banks and Credit companies, and any other big business to large to fail we'll never upright our economy. Let em all fail. It will be bad... for a while, but this path will be worse in the long run. We are just handing out licenses to big business to be wreckless and irresponsible because there is no accountablility from any one, including the Gov.

I agree totally neither party has done anyone justice. I have said all along no bail outs let them all sink. Those GM, Ford and Chrysler folks can go too work for Toyota or Honda as they would just become bigger without our big three in the picture. Like some have said car companies have died off before and the others took up the slack . I hope I have not made you or anyone else mad at Me that is not my intent.

[MrObsessive]

GM posted this

yesterday of what could happen if they along with the others collapse.

Very interesting...................

[Harry P.]

Hmmmm...GM creating a "help the auto industry" commercial.

Sorta like Pfizer or Merck sponsoring a drug study!

[Ramcharger]

Art, thanks for your insight. Living in the state where Youngstown, Cleveland (steel), and Akron (the former heart of the rubber industry) are does color one's view of the world. You also need to factor in the supporting businesses that would suffer along with the Big Three. Quite an economic mess if they failed. I would agree that it is not a catastrophe we would never recover from. Again, your insight does make it seem less bleak. But I will say the auto industry needs to make significant changes before they ask for money.

[Harry P.]

But I will say the auto industry needs to make significant changes before they ask for money.

That's exactly the problem! They're standing there with their hand held out for free taxpayer money without changing a thing!

That's why I said earlier that any taxpayer bailout money had better come with some major strings attached as far as requiring them to rework their business model to compete in the 21st Century. I'd also include the UAW in on this. You want your union jobs saved by the taxpayers? Then you must renegotiate the ridiculous contracts now in place and solve the "legacy cost" issue.

If those changes aren't required before we give them free money, then we truly are throwing good money after bad. If the UAW and the auto industry don't agree to major changes, any bailout will simply delay the inevitable, that is, the ultimate collapse of the Big Three. In that case, why should we taxpayers be giving them huge sums of money, just to keep a bad business plan going for a little while longer before the ultimate collapse???

[gasman]

GM has good product, but not in this country. look at the new Opel Insignia (The European car of the year btw). we need this car here. this is light years ahead of the new Malibu (which I hate BTW). Cars like this is what will save GM. not sticking a hybrid motor in a Tahoe.