Should we just let GM, Ford and Chrysler fail?

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by bcp

but, they are manufacturing garbage now.
let them go.

That is arguable. I am not fond of Dodge or Chrysler products myself but they have a market.

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by wollybugger

So let em get this straight:

Unions demand compaies to provide their workers salaries and benifits far unbalanced than comparative non-union positions.

So much so, that the company, to get positve profit margins, has to substitute plastic parts instead of metal (famous Ford transmission failure mode).

So the products reliability tanks .... while costs increase ... putting them out of the competitive market. And the union chiefs sit in their rockers, looking the other way?

AND OUR GOVERNMENT HAS TO BAIL THEM OUT??????

NO WAY!!!

Lets all remember when you say "GM" we are not talking about a bowtie logo or a half dozen cigar smoking big wigs in a board room, they already have their money, we are talking about 266,000 people with mortgages, car payments, kids with braces and kids in college.

Also there are retirement accounts that will go bad and health care accounts that will have to be taken over. And guess what, there is a government organization that just like Fannie and Freddie is in charge of looking after retirement plans from big business called Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) So even if it fails tax payers are going to get hit more than likely.

[vraiblonde]

Should we just let GM, Ford and Chrysler fail?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Pete

GM directly employs 266,000 people, Ford 90,000, Chrysler 133,000 with an estimated 4 million other jobs directly related to supplying parts and or services.

4.4 million jobs would be lost. Asia would have no domestic competition. Every dollar of profit spent on vehicles would leave the country destined to foreign corporate offices.

That's their friggin' problem. Just like a welfare recipient, if there is no incentive to be independent, people will happily let someone else support them. If the government refused to bailout these poorly run companies, they would have to start thinking about operating costs, like other companies do, instead of doling out huge salaries, bonuses and perks.

[Plan B]

1
US makers built/build plenty of high MPG cars that compete well with world cars; quality is close, even or better, but US buyers either wanted those SUVs, or were too blinded by Japanese build quality perceptions to give US makes a fair shake. Ex; a Malibu will outperform any world car of comparison, but old notions persist in the dull US buyer's mind; crisp performance, roomy, 31mpg in the one I rented, and not cookie-cutter looks like the nisson. And since SUVs and lt trucks sold so well, they perceive that that is all the US can build.

2
Conservatives who shout 'drill, baby drill' are who by large bought said SUVs and trucks they did not need. Like a Harley, it is their phallic object to worship...

3
Knocking unions means you also close-minded, and do not know your history. They are no different from us, and look after their own self-interest.

4
Auto workers will never fully find other comparible work, and will be a drag on the recovery. And they have skills this country needs to maintain from a defence standpoint. Remember NAFTA...

5
Like the AIG and bank deals, we should get part public ownership, so when they recover (like Chrysler and Harley did), it will pay itself off, or more.

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Should we just let GM, Ford and Chrysler fail?

Yes.



That's their friggin' problem. Just like a welfare recipient, if there is no incentive to be independent, people will happily let someone else support them. If the government refused to bailout these poorly run companies, they would have to start thinking about operating costs, like other companies do, instead of doling out huge salaries, bonuses and perks.

So what do we do with the economic chaos post failure? 4.4 million people unemployed, even more homes in foreclosure, and if you look Michigan already is one of the highest welfare states and this would tip the entire state into failure. Can a whole state go bankrupt?

[ylexot (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Plan B

And they have skills this country needs to maintain from a defence standpoint.

Such as...?

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Plan B

1
US makers built/build plenty of high MPG cars that compete well with world cars; quality is close, even or better, but US buyers either wanted those SUVs, or were too blinded by Japanese build quality perceptions to give US makes a fair shake. Ex; a Malibu will outperform any world car of comparison, but old notions persist in the dull US buyer's mind; crisp performance, roomy, 31mpg in the one I rented, and not cookie-cutter looks like the nisson. And since SUVs and lt trucks sold so well, they perceive that that is all the US can build.

i agree, I have owned US built autos my entire life and with the exception of 1 dodge never had a lemon. But there are those who wont buy Ua period because of a notion that imports are 10 fold better. Would a "Buy USA" campaign help?

2. Conservatives who shout 'drill, baby drill' are who by large bought said SUVs and trucks they did not need. Like a Harley, it is their phallic object to worship...

If I can afford to drive my gas guzzler who's right is it to say I can't have one? The fact is I can afford it and when I bought it gas was $2 a gallon, if I had known gas would hit $4.25 I would have made a different decision but I have it now and I am stuck with it. Even at $4 a gallon i could still afford it.

3
Knocking unions means you also close-minded, and do not know your history. They are no different from us, and look after their own self-interest.

I know the history of Unions and I know that in history they had a purpose but that purpose has long passed with increased government labor laws and safety regulations. They exist now to extort business and if you cannot admit that the UAW and ever growing labor costs have not put GM, Ford and Chrysler in a position of extreme disadvantage contributing directly to the trouble GM and Ford are in you are the one close-minded.

4
Auto workers will never fully find other comparible work, and will be a drag on the recovery. And they have skills this country needs to maintain from a defence standpoint. Remember NAFTA...

I agree and again point to the UAW as being the biggest reason Mexican workers are now assembling cars with Ford on the front.

5
Like the AIG and bank deals, we should get part public ownership, so when they recover (like Chrysler and Harley did), it will pay itself off, or more

Reasonable

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by ylexot

Such as...?

WWII many car manufacturing, truck manufacturing plants were converted into wartime manufacturing plants.

Fairly easy to convert a car manufacturing plant into an artillery manufacturing plant, or small armored vehicle plant.. or even a helo or small aircraft plant.

Most are so big, they could pick up the wartime effort and still build cars and or trucks.

Run LMTV's off of one side of their warehouse while Corvettes are coming out the other side.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Plan B

1
Ex; a Malibu will outperform any world car of comparison, .

Aren't Malibu's made by Saab??

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by itsbob

WWII many car manufacturing, truck manufacturing plants were converted into wartime manufacturing plants.

Fairly easy to convert a car manufacturing plant into an artillery manufacturing plant, or small armored vehicle plant.. or even a helo or small aircraft plant.

Most are so big, they could pick up the wartime effort and still build cars and or trucks.

Run LMTV's off of one side of their warehouse while Corvettes are coming out the other side.

I don't know if that is still a capability. First off back in the 40's everything was hand built. Changing the line wasn't all that difficult. Now with so much automated could the robots be reprogrammed? Do they have the clearance for larger vehicles?

Next, is it realistic to think that we will get into a conflict that would require us to build 10,000 bombers or 25,000 tanks?

Lastly the equipment we build today is infinitely more complicated and complex. It is not the same as welding together tank hulls and bolting on tracks.