Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 700,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads.
I don't thinnk they should be bailed out again. What would be great is filing bankrutcy just to make all the contracts null and void. It could be done with a plan on doing it quickly and eefectively --- but therein lies the problem, GM can't plan - never could so that won't change now.
I really think it could be done with the right leadership and a thorough but quick plan in place, it would get rid of the legacy costs that are bringing them down as well as some other costs. Even after another bailout their costs will remain high unless thos contracts are changed -- and right now I am not sure there is another way to change the contracts. Something else other than bailout money needs to be done to address the issue.
Like I said in a previous post the bailout money is a bandaid fix to a severed limb. It is not the answer
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan and Sometimes Orange County CA
4,627 posts, read 3,645,802 times
Reputation: 1791
the companies need to survive to 2010. If they can get that far, they have a chance to correct themselves. If they fail by then, they are doomed to fail and should be allowed to do so. ALthough I hate bailouts, I would like to see the government give them the chance. If it is just a loan, then there is at least a chance that it will nto cost the taxpayers much.
I don't thinnk they should be bailed out again. What would be great is filing bankrutcy just to make all the contracts null and void. It could be done with a plan on doing it quickly and eefectively --- but therein lies the problem, GM can't plan - never could so that won't change now.
I really think it could be done with the right leadership and a thorough but quick plan in place, it would get rid of the legacy costs that are bringing them down as well as some other costs. Even after another bailout their costs will remain high unless thos contracts are changed -- and right now I am not sure there is another way to change the contracts. Something else other than bailout money needs to be done to address the issue.
Like I said in a previous post the bailout money is a bandaid fix to a severed limb. It is not the answer
You're right because that money doesn't exist. It's all about future taxes to be collected on future wealth produced -- which is just like credit which is the problem. It's still about spending money we don't have.
No bailout will help GM. It's sales have dropped due to lack of consumer spending, aka., no job ,no money, no credit! One thing is for sure though, GM will file for bankruptcy but the unintended/intended consequence of this whole matter will be for certain, and that is that you will see and end to the auto industry union.
Bankruptcy would help GM because it can sell off some of it's plants, it can reorganize. The Big 3 have become too big. They became big by buying up others, but now is the time to divest themselves of some plants.
By selling the plants, they can become independent, bring in new management and be more competitive. The successful product lines can continue of course. GM makes a very nice dependable truck that will still be in demand.
The big three will be bailed out without a doubt,because the democrats owe the UAW big time for the election. The UAW and the Dems have been in bed together since the union was formed.
One other article I read brought up some good points. Check out this quote:
Yet even foreign automakers that build cars and trucks in the United States could be affected. Companies like Toyota Motor Corp., Nissan Motor Co. and Honda Motor Co., with plants scattered throughout the South and Midwest, get their parts from the vast, multilayered network of U.S. suppliers that employs about 800,000 people.
Most U.S. auto suppliers were forced to diversify into supplying foreign automakers to survive. Now the foreign automakers rely on this same supply base. If the Detroit 3 collapse, so do the suppliers. If the suppliers collapse, so do the foreign automakers (whose lines will shut down).
I don't understand, we bail out irresponsible airlines, we bail out farmers, but we won't bail out automakers? And they are loans to the automakers, not grants.
For those of you advocating for the collapse of the Detroit 3, I'm sure you'll be the first ones packing your bags and leaving Michigan after it happens.
I don't understand, we bail out irresponsible airlines, we bail out farmers, but we won't bail out automakers? And they are loans to the automakers, not grants.
For those of you advocating for the collapse of the Detroit 3, I'm sure you'll be the first ones packing your bags and leaving Michigan after it happens.
They are ONLY loans if they can be paid back....I don't think they can be paid back. So, the government goes into the hole again saving companies that haven't figured out how to cut their costs etc. The only way GM came recover is get RID of legacy costs. It has to happen, to begin to turn the industry back around.
I posted this on another thread, but I'm just curious whether it would make any sense to use government money to help the auto industry transition away from cars and become the manufacturers of the next generation of sustainable energy - wind mills, solar generators, hybrid vehicles, etc... Michigan could become the epicenter of a new industrial revolution rooted in sustainability and the Big 3 could be its engines.
Companies like GE started out making appliances and now they have fingers in diverse industries. It seems like the Big 3 keep betting on the car, not realizing that the auto era is ending in the North America. We will never again be the suburban nation we became after WWII.
That combined with the simple fact that GM is rooted in a mindset right out of 1960 is a lethal combination (I have many relatives in GM and they would be happy to churn out Hummers until the end of time). Ted Turner was right - they were milking the moment in the 90s when trucks were selling like gangbusters, ignoring the impending collapse. It makes it hard to imagine just giving them money without using it to leverage the industry in a new direction is going to do any good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 700,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads. 
Linear Mode
