Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-11-2008, 11:24 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,882,498 times
Reputation: 4459

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
What a lot of you fail to think about is that "Will the bailout work for GM or the other automotive companies?"... by "work", I don't mean let them survive for half a year and then bankrupt and we lose all our bailout money... When I say "work", I mean SAVE the company and know that they will survive for years to come... A lot of the people in the government knows that the bailout won't "save" the company, just prolong its demise... I want to help people, but I rather use that $40 billion and help the unemployed than prevent a company that IS going under from going under right now... so there it is... you want to lose $40 billion for 6 months of working for thousands of workers? Or do we use $40 billion and save MILLIONS of unemployed... mind you the CEO will work another 6 months earning millions of dollars with the bailout... even though they know the company and their gravy train is going to end... So lets look more than 2 months ahead of time, lets look at long term projections... $40 billion ain't worth it...

i certainly agree with this! most people think that bailing out means guaranteed performance but most likely it means throwing more good money after bad. i think americans care about other americans having jobs and keeping jobs, but bailing out failing industries does not save anything, except temporarily. sometimes it is best to start over and use the money more productively, thereby helping more people get and keep jobs over a longer period of time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-11-2008, 11:44 AM
 
Location: Sitting on a bar stool. Guinness in hand.
4,428 posts, read 6,494,247 times
Reputation: 1721
I'll be honest I haven't followed this bailout that closely so if I'm missing something let me know.

Now. How about this for an idea. Instead of the government just giving GM loans. Why does our government do the same thing as we did with AIG and buy into the company and make sure that they have voting stock. Now I know what your saying. Why the hell would we want to do that? Ok here is the big reason I think it would be a good idea. As I've stated on other treads GM created the EV-1 a total electric car (under the Saturn brand) then dismantled it. Well this would be a way to force GM's hand to restart and expand the program. All the cards are right do this now. Oil is dropping like a stone weakening the oil consortium's influence and obviously the big three have little in the way of power. Also let's face it Unions in the auto industry are toast. the unions will either survive by giving in to economic realities and shed a lot of there demands or they will go extinct. So the time is right for big time change.
So why not take advantage of the situation where in the end there would be a good chance for a win/win situation. Where the automakers win by having a new mass production product and the taxpayers win in the fact that we could overall diminish our need for foreign oil, lower emissions of green house gases, create new jobs, lessen our need to use our military in middle east, and if thing work out well we may just turn a profit for our "upfront money."

Seriously guys if we are going to throw money around why not put somewhere where we can not just hopefully turn a profit in the end.....but put in places where we can truly make a difference in helping.......or perhaps changing America's direction in the longterm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 11:58 AM
 
Location: CA
2,464 posts, read 6,457,974 times
Reputation: 2641
Personally I think we should let GM fail I hate to say it, but throwing money at the problem is only postponing the inevitable. I think that company should have read the writing on the wall back in 2001 after 9/11. At that time, I thought for sure that they'd start building cars that would change with the times - more fuel efficient, smaller, etc. They ignored the signs and kept churning out hummers (although, we were buying them), but still, they should of had the more fuel efficient cars ready to roll. I don't have an Ivy League education like some of these idiots at GM, but even I saw this coming... 7 years ago. They should always be looking 5/10 years out and recessions always happen, oil fluctuations occur, American's habits change - I don't see how a company that doesn't know this should be "saved" when eventually they'll fold anyway... it's just a matter of time, if this economy doesn't take them down, unions will.

Just my two cents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 12:17 PM
 
Location: Kansas
3,855 posts, read 13,245,587 times
Reputation: 1734
Quote:
Originally Posted by baystater View Post
As I've stated on other treads GM created the EV-1 a total electric car (under the Saturn brand) then dismantled it. Well this would be a way to force GM's hand to restart and expand the program.
They did already. It's called the Volt.

Everything that was EV-1 is dead. There's probably no more tooling. And all the engineers that designed it have probably moved on to something else. And besides...that was what? 1999? Everything about it is obsolete by now.

My university ended up with one of the EV-1's. GM disabled it at some point before they handed it off to us. There was some talk about doing hydrogen fuel cell research with it. I don't know if it got off the ground or not. It was cool to see one first hand though. Where it failed was that it was a two-seater that didn't offer much cargo space. It was as valueable as a Mazda Miata for hauling groceries and passengers.

At least the Volt offers some more passenger and cargo space....it's just going to be very expensive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 01:06 PM
 
Location: NW MT
1,436 posts, read 3,295,203 times
Reputation: 551
This is a similar post to the one I posted in the parallel poll thread with additional meat... and a few potatoes for garnish.

I sware, the term bailout is being misused way too much these days. Anytime funds switch hands anymore it's a bailout. Bailout, bailout, bailout... WTF !

I fail to see where the current funds allocated to US auto is a bailout ???? These funds were allocated by the US Gov to ANYONE who is/are willing to promote alternative energy so to speak. GM and F both fall under the guidelines set forth for allocation of these funds and are not asking for anything other than that these funds be made available to them sooner than later so they may continue to retool to a different breed of auto ! The slumping economy has impaired their ability to do what they have already been trying to doing ! This was exactly what both F & GM have said in their interviews a couple days ago. For Crist sakes, F went into huge debt over a year ago to get funds to start retooling for the future. How can anyone say they are not doing what the market wants them to do ???

These funds could easily get pissed away a hell of a lot easier and in a way more disturbing way than with US auto.

As stated before, US auto AND (I'll add) the rest of the world auto makers have given people exactly what they want. And there isn't much difference to ANY of the auto makers products around the world as far as efficiency goes. They are all very similar. To say US auto doesn't make vehicles people want is a crock of sh*t !

Last I saw on CNBC yesterday, it was reported that Obama is planning on an additional $25 billion to be given to US auto to be used for pensions and benefits to free up even more cash for them to advance themselves further without financial stress due to economic conditions. Now these funds I would catagorize as a BAILOUT. This is all due to Unions as far as I am concerned and one can hardly blame neither F or GM for that ! Other than the fact that they agreed to the contracts...

Be realistic, US auto can not fail under any circumstance ! It effects way too many other industries WORLDWIDE. If US auto goes by the wayside, The Great Depression will look like a bump in the road in comparison to what disaster will come from it !

Americans better wake up and start realizing that there is about to be a whole new standard of living put in place ! The sooner this happens the better off we all will be, and that ain't no lie !!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Sitting on a bar stool. Guinness in hand.
4,428 posts, read 6,494,247 times
Reputation: 1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjones96 View Post
They did already. It's called the Volt.

Everything that was EV-1 is dead. There's probably no more tooling. And all the engineers that designed it have probably moved on to something else. And besides...that was what? 1999? Everything about it is obsolete by now.

My university ended up with one of the EV-1's. GM disabled it at some point before they handed it off to us. There was some talk about doing hydrogen fuel cell research with it. I don't know if it got off the ground or not. It was cool to see one first hand though. Where it failed was that it was a two-seater that didn't offer much cargo space. It was as valueable as a Mazda Miata for hauling groceries and passengers.

At least the Volt offers some more passenger and cargo space....it's just going to be very expensive.
Ev-1 or the volt or something even better it makes no difference to me. But let face it the A-holes at GM have been dragging there feet for years. Now it time for us to grab them by the hair and drag them probably kicking and screaming into this century. Enough bull about we need to "work on it." They have the technology and now they need to be putting on the market.

As for the expense. it like everything else once they get thing up and running the price will eventually go down. But we got to start some where and we go to start sometime.......and to me that sometime is now. This is just do important to America on so many different levels to put off any longer.


As for hydrogen from what I'm still getting it still not even close to be all that economically at this point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 02:48 PM
 
Location: Mid-Atlantic
1,820 posts, read 4,484,372 times
Reputation: 1929
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2 View Post
Personally I think we should let GM fail I hate to say it, but throwing money at the problem is only postponing the inevitable. I think that company should have read the writing on the wall back in 2001 after 9/11. At that time, I thought for sure that they'd start building cars that would change with the times - more fuel efficient, smaller, etc. They ignored the signs and kept churning out hummers (although, we were buying them), but still, they should of had the more fuel efficient cars ready to roll. I don't have an Ivy League education like some of these idiots at GM, but even I saw this coming... 7 years ago. They should always be looking 5/10 years out and recessions always happen, oil fluctuations occur, American's habits change - I don't see how a company that doesn't know this should be "saved" when eventually they'll fold anyway... it's just a matter of time, if this economy doesn't take them down, unions will.

Just my two cents.
Unfotunately, I have to agree... Unions are no good,except they protect the jobs for those people.
The wages are ridiculous that some of these people make, they make more money than people with Masters or PH'D's-some of them....
We know people at GM as well as their ex-counterpart; Delphi and they make more money than many well educated people and still complain about what they don't get,etc...
They have a job,they will ALWAYS have a job unless their particular plant shuts down (and that isn't going to happen to DELPHI at least) ,they have benefits,they get more days off than anyone I know ,etc...
I would say they should all be very lucky they have the jobs they have,and make the money they make. Some of these people are also able to work OT hours (which I can't understand either,file bankruptcy,cut wages,cut hours,but then pay your people OT wages anyway's?)
There should be no bailout for anyone...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 03:03 PM
 
20,622 posts, read 19,284,184 times
Reputation: 8224
No GM should not be bailed out. We should bailout individuals directly so they may make the purchasing decisions they normally make. Tax credits and rebates would restore the money supply. If we don't then these bailout that have no consumer input will be inevitable. Of course time is running out since more and more people are beginning to hoard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 08:24 PM
 
Location: WA
5,641 posts, read 24,900,444 times
Reputation: 6573
GM will fail... now if we don't fund them, later if we give them money.

Investment is a very bad bet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2008, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,305,478 times
Reputation: 27718
So why did Toyota and Honda do so well compared to GM and Ford ?

Because Toyota and Honda invested the money in their manufacturing so retooling would be cheaper and more efficient. Toyota and Honda continued to make fuel efficient cars.

If anything give Toyota and Honda the money to expand in the US because we already know they can survive. Below is an article on how Honda invested money in itself.

New Honda factories can retool on the fly | projo.com | The Providence Journal projoCars |

snippet:

"But switching from one model to a completely different one still can take weeks and millions of dollars. Ford will spend at least $75 million to overhaul a sport-utility-vehicle plant in Michigan to make small cars, and the work will take 13 months. General Motors Corp. is retooling its Lordstown, Ohio, plant to produce a new model at a cost of $350 million.


The manufacturing dexterity of Honda’s plants, now the most flexible in North America, is emerging as a key strategic advantage for the company."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top