You know a funny thing happened at work today. These guys at work were talking about bailing out the us auto industry. They said we had to no matter what. I then asked them what cars they drove.... Not a single one of them drove a US made car.
It makes no sense to bailout the us auto companies if no one buys them. I myself have never bought a non us made car but if ti goes it goes... Just like the steel industry... Its a free market.
You don't think that if these companies go under there will not be a huge increase in people receiving government aid.
I understand your point, however is the US government suppose to buy All these unsold cars? What's the point to manufacture cars people aren't buying? When the government runs out of money buying these cars, what now? You just prolonged the ordeal...
I understand your point, however is the US government suppose to buy All these unsold cars? What's the point to manufacture cars people aren't buying? When the government runs out of money buying these cars, what now? You just prolonged the ordeal...
I'm not saying we should just hand over the money with no strings attached. There should definitely be a list of objectives that the companies have to meet to order to obtain the funding. Also we shouldn't just hand over the entire amount all at one time. The companies would have to meet a set of objectives before any more funds are issued. I would never support handing over billions of dollars to companies that have shown to be inept at managing themselves.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I'm not saying we should just hand over the money with no strings attached. There should definitely be a list of objectives that the companies have to meet to order to obtain the funding. Also we shouldn't just hand over the entire amount all at one time. The companies would have to meet a set of objectives before any more funds are issued. I would never support handing over billions of dollars to companies that have shown to be inept at managing themselves.
Yeah but we did with AIG and now they want more... Good luck with these companies actually setting up a plan and firing all their top leadership who drove them to the ground. It would simply be better to give a cheap loan to a startup car manufacturer or give the money to Honda/Toyota/whoever else to come here and setup shop to replace those jobs with guranteed positions for x amount of years.
You don't think that if these companies go under there will not be a huge increase in people receiving government aid.
They may, but it costs $9 billion to operate GM every single day. Let's suppose we bail them out. Then they come back again in a month or two just like AIG. Do we do it again? If not, then did we just waste a crap load of money?
Moreover, the cost of unemployment insurance does not even compare to the labor costs of the organization. Going further, than tack on capital costs ect.
I can see why this will hurt economically, letting them fail. But, businesses are resourceful.,... so who knows what they would do otherwise.
The problem is we are dealing with now is MORAL HAZARD. These businesses think they are going to get a bailout. What we need is someone to step in and say.... NOPE.... no more unless you are directly tied to housing.
Housing is the problem. That's the cause. Until that is remedied, we will continue to experience problems elsewhere because we will remain in a contraction.
Yeah but we did with AIG and now they want more... Good luck with these companies actually setting up a plan and firing all their top leadership who drove them to the ground. It would simply be better to give a cheap loan to a startup car manufacturer or give the money to Honda/Toyota/whoever else to come here and setup shop to replace those jobs with guranteed positions for x amount of years.
And we should learn from our mistakes. We shouldn't just hand over the money with no string attached. Like I said i would never endorse an idea to just hand over money to a company without stipulations and oversight. I guess it's a moot point arguing because are government will never do that so I will end up opposing the bail out.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Of course there will! Remind me again how what you're proposing has anything to do with preventing these companies "going under".
I haven't proposed anything. All i have said is I would probably support the bail out if there where stipulations attached to it to ensure that the companies receiving the money didn't just continue with their bad management process. Never once did I propose a plan or even state that any type of bail out would save these companies.
If I was to propose a plan it would be to infuse a limited amount of capital to these companies in order for them to restructure themselves to run more efficiently and for research into more energy efficient and affordable vehicles. There would be a list of objectives that management would need to meet in order for them to receive a second phase of capital if so needed. This way you are not merely bailing out a company but investing in it. Again I would only support a plan like this one not some no strings attached blank check which is what Congress will likely do.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
It would simply be better to give a cheap loan to a startup car manufacturer or give the money to Honda/Toyota/whoever else to come here and setup shop to replace those jobs with guranteed positions for x amount of years.
That is sort of what I was thinking. Instead of giving money to a failing company, why not give it to a successful company as an incentive to open up a bunch of plants in the US. I mean lets say GM and Ford both go under tomorrow. I don't think the other car companies with their current production levels could meet the demand for cars. But if they could increase their production level they could make a lot of money. So why not make a loan to say Toyota to allow them to open up a bunch of plants in the US (or to buy and retool a bunch of GM plants) and then let the companies that are broke fail.
That is sort of what I was thinking. Instead of giving money to a failing company, why not give it to a successful company as an incentive to open up a bunch of plants in the US. I mean lets say GM and Ford both go under tomorrow. I don't think the other car companies with their current production levels could meet the demand for cars. But if they could increase their production level they could make a lot of money. So why not make a loan to say Toyota to allow them to open up a bunch of plants in the US (or to buy and retool a bunch of GM plants) and then let the companies that are broke fail.
I would also support that as well.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
That is sort of what I was thinking. Instead of giving money to a failing company, why not give it to a successful company as an incentive to open up a bunch of plants in the US. I mean lets say GM and Ford both go under tomorrow. I don't think the other car companies with their current production levels could meet the demand for cars. But if they could increase their production level they could make a lot of money. So why not make a loan to say Toyota to allow them to open up a bunch of plants in the US (or to buy and retool a bunch of GM plants) and then let the companies that are broke fail.
A loan would be completely unnecessary. Obviously, if GM and Ford die, a big portion of the market opens up to competition. Companies like Honda and Toyota have been building factories in the US for the past 20 years -- I have no doubt they'd continue to do so and would act quickly to capture that market share.
While using federal money as investment is certainly preferrable to using it for bailouts, who in their right mind would trust Washington to make good investments???
A loan would be completely unnecessary. Obviously, if GM and Ford die, a big portion of the market opens up to competition. Companies like Honda and Toyota have been building factories in the US for the past 20 years -- I have no doubt they'd continue to do so and would act quickly to capture that market share.
While using federal money as investment is certainly preferrable to using it for bailouts, who in their right mind would trust Washington to make good investments???
Oh for sure they would act quickly to capture the market share, I only proposed using government money in this way instead of using it to prop up dying companies if they were going to spend it anyways. And use the money so that say if GM dies they get the car companies to build or buy extra plants in North America, rather than say building more plants in other countries.
Oh for sure they would act quickly to capture the market share, I only proposed using government money in this way instead of using it to prop up dying companies if they were going to spend it anyways. And use the money so that say if GM dies they get the car companies to build or buy extra plants in North America, rather than say building more plants in other countries.
I agree that the approach you propose is better. However, if you have to bribe companies to build production facilities in your country, chances are you have some fundamental problems you need to deal with.
I only read the first page but my opnion on the auto industry is this:
If they didn't continue making shitty cars since the 80's we wouldn't have this problems. The big 3 are nothing but lazy cost cutting pussies who's only incentive is to build cars for Rent a Wreck and Hertz. To some people, quality isn't that important, but most car people care. Sit inside of a new Avenger or Focus (cheap plastic, poor styling, sloshy performance), then sit inside of a Jetta. I guarentee you a fully loaded Avenger is still worse then a base Jetta.
I will continue buying European cars till I die. A European car is miles better then anything this country has to offer, or Japan as well.
I only read the first page but my opnion on the auto industry is this:
If they didn't continue making shitty cars since the 80's we wouldn't have this problems. The big 3 are nothing but lazy cost cutting pussies who's only incentive is to build cars for Rent a Wreck and Hertz. To some people, quality isn't that important, but most car people care. Sit inside of a new Avenger or Focus (cheap plastic, poor styling, sloshy performance), then sit inside of a Jetta. I guarentee you a fully loaded Avenger is still worse then a base Jetta.
I will continue buying European cars till I die. A European car is miles better then anything this country has to offer, or Japan as well.
Apples and Oranges...
Base 09 Focus MSRP: $14,985
Base 09 Jetta MSRP: $17,340
You get what you paid for. That Jetta is about 2,500 more. I don't know too much about dodge advenger. I prefer American cars to Imports myself.
I only read the first page but my opnion on the auto industry is this:
If they didn't continue making shitty cars since the 80's we wouldn't have this problems. The big 3 are nothing but lazy cost cutting pussies who's only incentive is to build cars for Rent a Wreck and Hertz. To some people, quality isn't that important, but most car people care. Sit inside of a new Avenger or Focus (cheap plastic, poor styling, sloshy performance), then sit inside of a Jetta. I guarentee you a fully loaded Avenger is still worse then a base Jetta.
I will continue buying European cars till I die. A European car is miles better then anything this country has to offer, or Japan as well.
Can I have a VW R44 instead? Or one of the new 73MPG diesels?
The thing with the diesel technology is that we know it can be used cleanly and efficiently because they use diesel locomotives (filtered) in coal mines. It's not un reasonable to imagine that they can be made reasonably efficient and much more environmentally friendly.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
Can I have a VW R44 instead? Or one of the new 73MPG diesels?
The thing with the diesel technology is that we know it can be used cleanly and efficiently because they use diesel locomotives (filtered) in coal mines. It's not un reasonable to imagine that they can be made reasonably efficient and much more environmentally friendly.
That too. US automakers are lazy, but now GM is spending money on a half electric car. The Volt runs about 30-40 miles on one charge then the gas engine kicks in. Not only that, but GM has been making Hybrid SUV's. How STUPID and lazy is that? A hybrid SUV is like ordering a Big Mac without cheese because your on a diet. It's still bad either way.
VW and other German companies are just using diesel. Its cheaper, easier, very fuel efficient, and better for the environment compared to older diesels.
In the case of The Bluetec from Benz, the gases from the exhaust have a solution put into them turning something like 70-80%? of the nitrogen oxides into nitrogen and water! They run very cleanly.
Yeah they are similar I believe, but as BMW says, (in reference to Mercedes BlueTec)
'You can also get the cleanest diesel from BMW, but you get performance, too.'
Another bailout for the big 3 is garbage. Start making better cars and you'll be fine. People want smaller more fuel efficient cars, Ford, Chevy, and GM aren't getting it done on that end.
I say let them die. Let Toyota and Hyundai build plants in the US and there will be plenty of jobs.
I bet GM is kicking themselves now for killing the EV1. No bailout for the big three. Not the Government's job to rescue poorly managed companies.
I only read the first page but my opnion on the auto industry is this:
If they didn't continue making shitty cars since the 80's we wouldn't have this problems. The big 3 are nothing but lazy cost cutting pussies who's only incentive is to build cars for Rent a Wreck and Hertz. To some people, quality isn't that important, but most car people care. Sit inside of a new Avenger or Focus (cheap plastic, poor styling, sloshy performance), then sit inside of a Jetta. I guarentee you a fully loaded Avenger is still worse then a base Jetta.
I will continue buying European cars till I die. A European car is miles better then anything this country has to offer, or Japan as well.
Quality isn't really the problem other than they have to cut costs to pay those ridiculous union wages.
Blame the workers for making terrible cars and requiring too much pay to do it.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
During the last great depression the auto industry was shut down. Auto plants were contracted for not cars but military components. This was good for our domestic economy and good for our foreign policy efforts.
Instead of a bailout why not contract the big three to produce energy infrastucture; geothermal technology, solar panels, wind turbines, hydropower components, power grids. Investments that would leave us something to show ourselves. Save or even create jobs with recession bargin wages for our tax dollars. Investment that would yield dividends too long term for the private sector. Our big three could lead the world in a new economy. Big oil windfall taxes could help with the funding.
Perhaps industry today is too specialized to convert. Perhaps the recent drop in oil prices will prohibit windfall taxes. Perhaps unions would obstruct. But perhaps some outside the box thinking could expand our options beyond handout vs job loss.
Having worked in the auto industry, and specifically finance I have a very "insider" view of how/what has caused GM to fail.
There are many aspects but the main causes in my mind are (Keep in mind that I have worked at GM for slightly more than a year:
1) The UAW
2) Crappy Products
3) The US Government
4) *EDIT* The dealer network
Unfortunately, the Union has a huge power over the whole automotive industry. When times were good at GM, the union workers' wages and benefits kept increasing. The problem is, that when times go bad you can't proportionately decrease their benefits and salaries. The Big 3 tried several times but succeeded in having month long strikes which cost billions in revenues! In the end, the UAW tried to keep the gravy train going as long as they could at the expense of the company. This factor has made the big 3 so uncompetitive. For example, when we look at a product program, we look at the expected sales price and the expected revenue and of course we go forward with a product program that will make money. A big problem about small cars is that you can't mark those up a lot, and with such disproportionate wages, there was no way for small cars to make financial sense in that context.
2) Yes, GM made some really shitty products (Aztec cough cough), but now they are truly good and I don't just say that cause I work there. I'm from Europe so I'm not saying this in blind faith. That's not to say that I like all the upcoming product...The new El Camino looks horrible (yes, one is coming).
3) Yup, the US government has some blame in this in an indirect way. When the Japanese manufacturers started entering the US market, the US did not put tariffs on the Japanese cars (which is how it should be, I'm all for free markets), however the opposite was not true. Also, the Japanese government subsidies a lot of the engineering work done by their manufacturers as well as on some commodities.
4) The dealer network makes it SUPER expensive to get rid of brands. Which causes GM to have tons of brands which cannibalize each others sales and divide up our marketing budgets into too many small segments rather than several big ones. If GM restructures, I think the new GM would look like this: Chevy, Cadillac, and Saturn, the rest would be axed.
I have a know some people that have negotiated with the UAW, and I saw some of the requests that were made to GM. This is just to provide some humor.
1) Petty theft should not be punished unless it is for profit
2) Porn addiction should be considered a disability
3) Every UAW worker at a specific plant (I forget which) should get free internet at home, a laptop and computer training.
Here is one thing I can't get over. If a UAW worker is laid off from a plant, they go into a JOBS bank until they can find work for them again. That's fine, BUT in a JOBS bank a UAW worker earns 85% of their salary and can stay home! I would gladly take a 15% pay cut to just chill at home.
I don't know how the bailout is going to happen. But I think to really help GM, the UAW has to go back to realistic/competitive wages.
Besides that, GM needs capital to keep going on until the market regains confidence. If that happens, I think GM has high chances to start turning a profit and repaying the loan back.
I hope none of my fellow detroit PJ fans are UAW workers
Anyway, the point of this post is not to defend GM's mistakes in the past, but to show that it's more complicated than "they make shitty products". Besides, assuming that GM still made horrible cars, it would take Billions and 3 years...GM wouldn't last that long, hence the bailout.
Guess we have to wait and see what happens!
Cincinnati '03 Flooded venue!
Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet!
Nijmegen '07
Werchter '07
April Fools ~ LA1
The reason why Japanese and German auto companies with factories in the US are able to survive is because they don't allow their employees to unionize.
Those employees are paid competitive wages, but no pension and no retirement medical.
I'm all for unionization. I used to work in lower mgmt at UPS which is unionized, and that company stays financially strong and its employees are ensured fair treatment by the Teamsters.
However, it sounds like the UAW takes worker protection to a whole new level that borders on the ridiculous, and which makes other unions look bad just for being a union.
Comments
Tax payers.
It makes no sense to bailout the us auto companies if no one buys them. I myself have never bought a non us made car but if ti goes it goes... Just like the steel industry... Its a free market.
I wish you the best of luck making that case.
You don't think that if these companies go under there will not be a huge increase in people receiving government aid.
I understand your point, however is the US government suppose to buy All these unsold cars? What's the point to manufacture cars people aren't buying? When the government runs out of money buying these cars, what now? You just prolonged the ordeal...
I'm not saying we should just hand over the money with no strings attached. There should definitely be a list of objectives that the companies have to meet to order to obtain the funding. Also we shouldn't just hand over the entire amount all at one time. The companies would have to meet a set of objectives before any more funds are issued. I would never support handing over billions of dollars to companies that have shown to be inept at managing themselves.
Of course there will! Remind me again how what you're proposing has anything to do with preventing these companies "going under".
Yeah but we did with AIG and now they want more... Good luck with these companies actually setting up a plan and firing all their top leadership who drove them to the ground. It would simply be better to give a cheap loan to a startup car manufacturer or give the money to Honda/Toyota/whoever else to come here and setup shop to replace those jobs with guranteed positions for x amount of years.
They may, but it costs $9 billion to operate GM every single day. Let's suppose we bail them out. Then they come back again in a month or two just like AIG. Do we do it again? If not, then did we just waste a crap load of money?
Moreover, the cost of unemployment insurance does not even compare to the labor costs of the organization. Going further, than tack on capital costs ect.
I can see why this will hurt economically, letting them fail. But, businesses are resourceful.,... so who knows what they would do otherwise.
The problem is we are dealing with now is MORAL HAZARD. These businesses think they are going to get a bailout. What we need is someone to step in and say.... NOPE.... no more unless you are directly tied to housing.
Housing is the problem. That's the cause. Until that is remedied, we will continue to experience problems elsewhere because we will remain in a contraction.
And we should learn from our mistakes. We shouldn't just hand over the money with no string attached. Like I said i would never endorse an idea to just hand over money to a company without stipulations and oversight. I guess it's a moot point arguing because are government will never do that so I will end up opposing the bail out.
I haven't proposed anything. All i have said is I would probably support the bail out if there where stipulations attached to it to ensure that the companies receiving the money didn't just continue with their bad management process. Never once did I propose a plan or even state that any type of bail out would save these companies.
If I was to propose a plan it would be to infuse a limited amount of capital to these companies in order for them to restructure themselves to run more efficiently and for research into more energy efficient and affordable vehicles. There would be a list of objectives that management would need to meet in order for them to receive a second phase of capital if so needed. This way you are not merely bailing out a company but investing in it. Again I would only support a plan like this one not some no strings attached blank check which is what Congress will likely do.
That is sort of what I was thinking. Instead of giving money to a failing company, why not give it to a successful company as an incentive to open up a bunch of plants in the US. I mean lets say GM and Ford both go under tomorrow. I don't think the other car companies with their current production levels could meet the demand for cars. But if they could increase their production level they could make a lot of money. So why not make a loan to say Toyota to allow them to open up a bunch of plants in the US (or to buy and retool a bunch of GM plants) and then let the companies that are broke fail.
I would also support that as well.
A loan would be completely unnecessary. Obviously, if GM and Ford die, a big portion of the market opens up to competition. Companies like Honda and Toyota have been building factories in the US for the past 20 years -- I have no doubt they'd continue to do so and would act quickly to capture that market share.
While using federal money as investment is certainly preferrable to using it for bailouts, who in their right mind would trust Washington to make good investments???
Oh for sure they would act quickly to capture the market share, I only proposed using government money in this way instead of using it to prop up dying companies if they were going to spend it anyways. And use the money so that say if GM dies they get the car companies to build or buy extra plants in North America, rather than say building more plants in other countries.
I agree that the approach you propose is better. However, if you have to bribe companies to build production facilities in your country, chances are you have some fundamental problems you need to deal with.
If they didn't continue making shitty cars since the 80's we wouldn't have this problems. The big 3 are nothing but lazy cost cutting pussies who's only incentive is to build cars for Rent a Wreck and Hertz. To some people, quality isn't that important, but most car people care. Sit inside of a new Avenger or Focus (cheap plastic, poor styling, sloshy performance), then sit inside of a Jetta. I guarentee you a fully loaded Avenger is still worse then a base Jetta.
I will continue buying European cars till I die. A European car is miles better then anything this country has to offer, or Japan as well.
8/7/08, 6/9/09
Apples and Oranges...
Base 09 Focus MSRP: $14,985
Base 09 Jetta MSRP: $17,340
You get what you paid for. That Jetta is about 2,500 more. I don't know too much about dodge advenger. I prefer American cars to Imports myself.
Can I have a VW R44 instead? Or one of the new 73MPG diesels?
The thing with the diesel technology is that we know it can be used cleanly and efficiently because they use diesel locomotives (filtered) in coal mines. It's not un reasonable to imagine that they can be made reasonably efficient and much more environmentally friendly.
diesel cars have become fairly clean running, in some cases cleaner.
http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Uniquely/FutureTechnologies/EfficientDynamics/AdvancedDiesel.aspx
That too. US automakers are lazy, but now GM is spending money on a half electric car. The Volt runs about 30-40 miles on one charge then the gas engine kicks in. Not only that, but GM has been making Hybrid SUV's. How STUPID and lazy is that? A hybrid SUV is like ordering a Big Mac without cheese because your on a diet. It's still bad either way.
VW and other German companies are just using diesel. Its cheaper, easier, very fuel efficient, and better for the environment compared to older diesels.
German FTW
8/7/08, 6/9/09
In the case of The Bluetec from Benz, the gases from the exhaust have a solution put into them turning something like 70-80%? of the nitrogen oxides into nitrogen and water! They run very cleanly.
Yeah they are similar I believe, but as BMW says, (in reference to Mercedes BlueTec)
'You can also get the cleanest diesel from BMW, but you get performance, too.'
I say let them die. Let Toyota and Hyundai build plants in the US and there will be plenty of jobs.
I bet GM is kicking themselves now for killing the EV1. No bailout for the big three. Not the Government's job to rescue poorly managed companies.
Quality isn't really the problem other than they have to cut costs to pay those ridiculous union wages.
Blame the workers for making terrible cars and requiring too much pay to do it.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Instead of a bailout why not contract the big three to produce energy infrastucture; geothermal technology, solar panels, wind turbines, hydropower components, power grids. Investments that would leave us something to show ourselves. Save or even create jobs with recession bargin wages for our tax dollars. Investment that would yield dividends too long term for the private sector. Our big three could lead the world in a new economy. Big oil windfall taxes could help with the funding.
Perhaps industry today is too specialized to convert. Perhaps the recent drop in oil prices will prohibit windfall taxes. Perhaps unions would obstruct. But perhaps some outside the box thinking could expand our options beyond handout vs job loss.
There are many aspects but the main causes in my mind are (Keep in mind that I have worked at GM for slightly more than a year:
1) The UAW
2) Crappy Products
3) The US Government
4) *EDIT* The dealer network
Unfortunately, the Union has a huge power over the whole automotive industry. When times were good at GM, the union workers' wages and benefits kept increasing. The problem is, that when times go bad you can't proportionately decrease their benefits and salaries. The Big 3 tried several times but succeeded in having month long strikes which cost billions in revenues! In the end, the UAW tried to keep the gravy train going as long as they could at the expense of the company. This factor has made the big 3 so uncompetitive. For example, when we look at a product program, we look at the expected sales price and the expected revenue and of course we go forward with a product program that will make money. A big problem about small cars is that you can't mark those up a lot, and with such disproportionate wages, there was no way for small cars to make financial sense in that context.
2) Yes, GM made some really shitty products (Aztec cough cough), but now they are truly good and I don't just say that cause I work there. I'm from Europe so I'm not saying this in blind faith. That's not to say that I like all the upcoming product...The new El Camino looks horrible (yes, one is coming).
3) Yup, the US government has some blame in this in an indirect way. When the Japanese manufacturers started entering the US market, the US did not put tariffs on the Japanese cars (which is how it should be, I'm all for free markets), however the opposite was not true. Also, the Japanese government subsidies a lot of the engineering work done by their manufacturers as well as on some commodities.
4) The dealer network makes it SUPER expensive to get rid of brands. Which causes GM to have tons of brands which cannibalize each others sales and divide up our marketing budgets into too many small segments rather than several big ones. If GM restructures, I think the new GM would look like this: Chevy, Cadillac, and Saturn, the rest would be axed.
I have a know some people that have negotiated with the UAW, and I saw some of the requests that were made to GM. This is just to provide some humor.
1) Petty theft should not be punished unless it is for profit
2) Porn addiction should be considered a disability
3) Every UAW worker at a specific plant (I forget which) should get free internet at home, a laptop and computer training.
Here is one thing I can't get over. If a UAW worker is laid off from a plant, they go into a JOBS bank until they can find work for them again. That's fine, BUT in a JOBS bank a UAW worker earns 85% of their salary and can stay home! I would gladly take a 15% pay cut to just chill at home.
I don't know how the bailout is going to happen. But I think to really help GM, the UAW has to go back to realistic/competitive wages.
Besides that, GM needs capital to keep going on until the market regains confidence. If that happens, I think GM has high chances to start turning a profit and repaying the loan back.
I hope none of my fellow detroit PJ fans are UAW workers
Anyway, the point of this post is not to defend GM's mistakes in the past, but to show that it's more complicated than "they make shitty products". Besides, assuming that GM still made horrible cars, it would take Billions and 3 years...GM wouldn't last that long, hence the bailout.
Guess we have to wait and see what happens!
Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet!
Nijmegen '07
Werchter '07
April Fools ~ LA1
The reason why Japanese and German auto companies with factories in the US are able to survive is because they don't allow their employees to unionize.
Those employees are paid competitive wages, but no pension and no retirement medical.
I'm all for unionization. I used to work in lower mgmt at UPS which is unionized, and that company stays financially strong and its employees are ensured fair treatment by the Teamsters.
However, it sounds like the UAW takes worker protection to a whole new level that borders on the ridiculous, and which makes other unions look bad just for being a union.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
I would definitely want those guys bolting something. They would without a doubt have the strongest forearms.