Automaker bailout

[CTBengalsFan]

So what are people's thoughts on this next fun piece of legislation?

[sois]

I wish the would shrink the big three into manageable chunks. If instead of the big three we had the medium 27, you could let 12-15 of them close up show like the rest of the failing business that don't get bailouts. I guess bankruptcy would do this type of reorganization anyway so my vote is to let them bankruptize.

This is what happens when "companies get too big to fail".

[steggyD]

Their cars suck, they ship too many jobs overseas and we have more foreign car companies employing Americans. Let them fail and let other companies come in and take over. We are still going to need the cars, so they will be built here and Americans will make them. Maybe smaller and more progressive companies can come out of this mess and make some good cars.

[STRAYCAT]

I work at a local car dealership here in cincy. Gm right now is delaying payments for warranty repairs to their dealerships for 2 weeks to keep cash flow going. if they go bankrupt ch 11 they can say fuuck ya we don't owe you now...your on your own...we go belly up. We can't go with out our money coming in. I on the other hand say let them....because they have let the UAW run them in a sense. You can't let the tail wag the dog. Getting 95% pay for nothing is absurd.

[|Elflocko|]

Considering that a number of the banks and institutions that have received large chunks of the that $700 billion that we're footing the bill for have used billions of said funds to pay dividends and executive bonuses, I just don't have that much of an issue with throwing a few billion in the direction of the car makers.


'Course if they actually made a car that wasn't a piece of shit, that would help too...

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='Elflocko' post='726512' date='Nov 21 2008, 02:52 PM']Considering that a number of the banks and institutions that have received large chunks of the that $700 billion that we're footing the bill for have used billions of said funds to pay dividends and executive bonuses, I just don't have that much of an issue with throwing a few billion in the direction of the car makers.


'Course if they actually made a car that wasn't a piece of shit, that would help too... [/quote]
I tell you what's weird. Ford is a quality brand overseas. Seriously. They make cars that are a bit smaller, more stylish, and by all accounts, better made than the stuff for sale back home.



Makes no sense to me at all why they can't do the same thing in the US. No sense at all.

[-GoBengals-]

[quote name='KangarWhoDey' post='726549' date='Nov 21 2008, 01:27 AM']I tell you what's weird. Ford is a quality brand overseas. Seriously. They make cars that are a bit smaller, more stylish, and by all accounts, better made than the stuff for sale back home.



Makes no sense to me at all why they can't do the same thing in the US. No sense at all.[/quote]


cause idiots keeping buying the garbage here, and not only buy it, but promote it, as if its something to be quite proud of...

[|Elflocko|]

Most of the Toyota's and Honda's sold here are made here.


They're not pieces of shit.


It's all in the engineering.


And not having your parts made in Mexico and China...

[Go Tory Go!]

May the Angel Moroni strike me dead, but I agree with Mitt Romney - let a bankruptcy shake things up.

Seeing what went on at AIG really soured me on the federal aid. Basically as soon as the gov't check cleared, they were off to some stupid, lavish, and outrageously expensive corporate retreat for the management, as if business had never been better and they deserved such treatment. Fuck 'em.

[Go Tory Go!]

[quote name='Elflocko' post='726574' date='Nov 21 2008, 01:03 AM']Most of the Toyota's and Honda's sold here are made here.


They're not pieces of shit.


It's all in the engineering.


And not having your parts made in Mexico and China...[/quote]

Really, it's ironic. Toyota's North American headquarters are in Northern Kentucky, and Honda just cut tape on a new factory in Indiana. Meanwhile, Ford closes down their plant in Batavia, OH and opens up a huge facility outside of Mexico City. There is no more American / Foreign car paradigm.

As they did with the Detroit Lions, the retard spawn of Henry Ford have guided their industry into a state fucked up beyond all recognition.

[Homer_Rice]

[s][url="http://forum.go-bengals.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=4637&view=findpost&p=76879"]What I said in April, 2005 in the context of a discussion re Social Security.[/url] Auto stuff towards the middle/end.[/s]

[url="http://forum.go-bengals.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=15756&view=findpost&p=241336"]Edit: Sorry, wrong post. I meant this one from May, 2006.[/url]

[TheBeaverHunter]

[quote]cause idiots keeping buying the garbage here, and not only buy it, but promote it, as if its something to be quite proud of...[/quote]

Sounds like Bengals fans.


On a serious note. This piss poor system has been in place too long. A bankruptcy would cause them to tear it down and build it over, hopefully the right way. The big 3 didn't adapt with the changes. If you look at the styles over the years, the way they produce, and R&D you will see a big difference between them and Toyota. Instead of having a base of 3 platforms onto which build your car, the big 3 sank money into too many platforms, parts, and designs. This on top of the ridiculous pensions that they gave their employees were the cause of their downfall. I am afraid a bailout will only delay the inevitable. The sad part are all of the jobs that are going to be lost due to the closing of secondary factories on top of the actual big 3 plants shutting down and cutting back. Greed and piss poor insight is to blame for this. The sad part is do we really think the government could step in and fix their model? That is kind of the blind leading the blind. Also, note to the Big 3 CEOs....When you go to Washington to beg for money, don't go on a 20k+ private jet.

[Homer_Rice]

This merits a serious response, both for what is correct and for what is mistaken in your view.

[quote name='TheBeaverHunter' post='726707' date='Nov 21 2008, 01:23 PM']On a serious note. [u]This piss poor system has been in place too long.[/u] [b]A bankruptcy would cause them to tear it down and build it over, hopefully the right way.[/b] [u]The big 3 didn't adapt with the changes. If you look at the styles over the years, the way they produce, and R&D you will see a big difference between them and Toyota. Instead of having a base of 3 platforms onto which build your car, the big 3 sank money into too many platforms, parts, and designs.[/u] [i]This on top of the ridiculous pensions that they gave their employees were the cause of their downfall. [/i] I am afraid a bailout will only delay the inevitable. The sad part are all of the jobs that are going to be lost due to the closing of secondary factories on top of the actual big 3 plants shutting down and cutting back. Greed and piss poor insight is to blame for this. The sad part is do we really think the government could step in and fix their model? That is kind of the blind leading the blind. Also, note to the Big 3 CEOs....When you go to Washington to beg for money, don't go on a 20k+ private jet.[/quote]
The below styles correspond to my highlights of your text.

[u]1. It is ironic that the flexible mass production system introduced by GM to counter Ford's Model T has finally failed as a result of the very inefficiencies such a mode of production introduces into the industrial process. At the time, it was a clever marketing concept designed to attract consumers on the basis of an appeal to individuality among the purchasing public. The extra cost factor built in was overcome by GM's nimbleness in retooling plant and other capital expenditures related to this shift in mass production. That's not true anymore and as you say, Toyota and others have surpassed Detroit in this respect.[/u]

[b]2. Bankruptcy of the Chapter 7 kind might be appropriate, but not of the Chapter 11 kind. In either case, this is an interesting area where the the so-called free market meets government intervention. Because there are some very serious national security issues involved, surely even the free market types ought to see that preserving both industrial capacity as well as the skill sets associated with large-scale auto production is vital to our economy. But if you listen to commentary, it seems that many are missing this point. We have apparently become a nation that is not only better at tearing things apart, but one which seems to take some perverse delight in it. That's a sign of how our culture has "de-matured" over the years. Despite the delicious foolishness of handing out oodles of funny money to non-transparently prop up a dead financial system--pretty much by the same standards we are judging the auto industry--we are insisting that we roll the dice with a potentially deadly crippling of our industrial capabilities--almost out of spite for the ineptitude. Classic case of two wrongs don't make a right. Bankruptcy might be the answer but it must be one which is carefully supervised to preserve the baby while the bath water is tossed out.[/b]

[i]Be careful not to smash labor in this process. It isn't the fault of the fellow or gal working the production line that top management has totally fucked up. Deferred compensation is earned compensation [b]at the time the work is performed[/b] and so we must ask ourselves: "Do we really want to breach this threshold?" Put the blame where it lies instead of bashing members of your own class. Any adjustments made ought to be focused on the future, not the past.[/i]

In general, we are entering a very dangerous phase of this financial and economic collapse. We need to be very careful what we wish for. As it is, observing how our leaders are responding thus far, we are in serious trouble. They just cannot get it into their heads that first, the world is financially bankrupt itself, so you cannot save the system. Those quadrillions in debt obligations throughout the speculative world cannot, and will not, be paid. And yet, all we are seeing to date are attempts to preserve those fictitious obligations and to make them good on the back of an already fragile productive base. This is gonna be very, very, very bad unless we wake the hell up soon.

[|kennethmw|]

I think we have to figure out a way to bail out the automotive industry. There are a lot more jobs at risk than I think most people understand, and a large portion of our development as a Middle Class has been the result of the jobs that have been created by the auto industry. I do agree that the big 3, especially GM, have been stubborn for a long time, but over the last 8 years they have been trying to function somewhat more efficently. The quality of the vehicles has improved drastically over the last few years, GM has the best 2 stage hybrid system in the world, and the Volt has enormous potential to be the "green" car platform for the future.

As far as Management is concerned, with the exception of GM, both of the other two CEO's are fairly new and come from industries outside of the automotive industry with strong turn around histories. I think the two of them should be given a chance to work out their companies.

[Jungle1]

I think we need to let the automakers file for bankruptcy. They are not profitable at this point. Until they are profitable, they will keep needing money.

There are reasons they are not profitable. Labor costs, government intervention (CAFE standards), bad management, etc.

If they can file bankruptcy and re-organize, hopefully they can emerge stronger...like the airlines have.

It will be rough, but they can do it. Otherwise, which group is next to fly to Washington with their hand out.

By the way, anyone know how many bureaucrats in DC drive American cars?? It is funny they want to use our money to save a car company many of them do not support.

[STRAYCAT]

By the way, anyone know how many bureaucrats in DC drive American cars?? It is funny they want to use our money to save a car company many of them do not support.




good point... :applaud: jungle

[CTBengalsFan]

[BengalBacker]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='726783' date='Nov 21 2008, 03:30 PM'][i]Be careful not to smash labor in this process. It isn't the fault of the fellow or gal working the production line that top management has totally fucked up. Deferred compensation is earned compensation [b]at the time the work is performed[/b] and so we must ask ourselves: "Do we really want to breach this threshold?" Put the blame where it lies instead of bashing members of your own class. Any adjustments made ought to be focused on the future, not the past.[/i][/quote]

While I don't completely disagree, I don't think the union (and the workers themselves) can be absolved of some of the responsibility.

I've lived in Dayton all of my life, and for as long as I can remember (until the last ten years or so) getting hired at GM was like hitting the lottery. GM was a huge presence in Dayton. I've had lots of friends, relatives and aquaintances who worked for them. Up until the mid nineties, everyone I know who worked there talked about how they could sleep, read, fuck off, every day at work. If someone new came in and they worked too hard or too fast, everyone would make them slow down. Because of the union, it was virtually impossible to get fired no matter how lousy you were as an employee. The workers and the union had the company by the balls.

Keep in mind they were also being paid triple, or more, what people in other factories were making, plus unheard of benefits. I understand that the unions were necessary, and because of them people everywhere, union or not, started making more money and getting better benefits. The problem is, between the unions, the workers, and yes the executives, they milked that cash cow until they killed it. The only competition they had was from Ford and Chrysler, who were operating the same way.

When Toyota and Honda started entering the market, the big three never responded. Slowly but surely, Toyota and Honda, by putting better cars at better prices out there, started taking bigger and bigger shares of the market while the unions at the big three refused to make concessions. They couldn't, or didn't want to see the forest for the trees until it was too late.

So yes, it's hard to blame the people who were lucky enough to have one of those jobs, but back in the 70's and 80's they were constantly striking for more and more, even though they already had it better than everyone else doing similar work. Unions strong-armed their members and management, but no one really cared because everyone was getting rich. Now the cow is about dead. I saw this coming from the time I was about 15 years old. Economic crisis or not, their demise was bound to happen, and it's the fault of the unions, the laborers and management.

[Homer_Rice]

I agree with almost everything you cite, Backer, except I'd still insist that it is management that is to blame for the demise of the auto industry. My argument for that requires more time than I have right now, but in short, those reasons have to do with levels of decision-making that unions are excluded from, such as the capitulation of real industrialists to the financier factions within society.

A few other comments:

1) Keep in mind that the time period you mention is the precise period in which this nation allowed the rust-belt as a result of conscious deindustrialization of the economy.

2) When I was a junior exec in the hotel biz, I had to deal with unions on site. This was in Philly and I have some pretty frustrating memories of the bullshit shenanigans pulled by the shop steward for the painters. Fast forward a decade, and I was an observer of shop floor practices as you described when I went to a brand-spanking new print/mailroom/distribution plant of the New York Times in Paramus, NJ. Beautiful facility, incredibly high-tech. The plant had delayed opening for some time (I think about a year or so) after it had been ready to deploy, simply because the unions and NYT management were engaged in a big struggle over job retention, etc... That's sort of okay, I suppose, given the negotiable and fluid nature of our econ system, though the delay was very costly. What killed me and the VP I worked for at the time was this: as we walked through the plant towards some conveyor and strapping equipment we wanted to see in action (we were in the early stages of refitting our own plant) we saw a worker asleep on top of a pallet of inserts. We poked each other and giggled. An hour or so later, on our way back, the fucker hadn't even rolled over! At that point my boss and I looked at each other and said: "No way that happens in our pressroom."

There is a lot of room for improvement on the union side. No doubt about that. But scapegoating labor for the woes of capital is a worn-out card in the playbook. As you know, I'm an econ-geek, and I'm saying this in measured but strident terms: What we are facing right now cannot, and will not, be solved by standard ploys and tactics. And the dangers are much greater than most of you can imagine. On the other hand, if we knock off the funny business and "politics as usual" crap, the potential for a real worldwide renaissance is there. Really. And while I have become more skeptical in my older age about that possibility, it is what I want to fight for.

[|Elflocko|]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='727021' date='Nov 22 2008, 08:07 PM']I agree with almost everything you cite, Backer, except I'd still insist that it is management that is to blame for the demise of the auto industry. My argument for that requires more time than I have right now, but in short, those reasons have to do with levels of decision-making that unions are excluded from, such as the capitulation of real industrialists to the financier factions within society.

A few other comments:

1) Keep in mind that the time period you mention is the precise period in which this nation allowed the rust-belt as a result of conscious deindustrialization of the economy.

2) When I was a junior exec in the hotel biz, I had to deal with unions on site. This was in Philly and I have some pretty frustrating memories of the bullshit shenanigans pulled by the shop steward for the painters. Fast forward a decade, and I was an observer of shop floor practices as you described when I went to a brand-spanking new print/mailroom/distribution plant of the New York Times in Paramus, NJ. Beautiful facility, incredibly high-tech. The plant had delayed opening for some time (I think about a year or so) after it had been ready to deploy, simply because the unions and NYT management were engaged in a big struggle over job retention, etc... That's sort of okay, I suppose, given the negotiable and fluid nature of our econ system, though the delay was very costly. What killed me and the VP I worked for at the time was this: as we walked through the plant towards some conveyor and strapping equipment we wanted to see in action (we were in the early stages of refitting our own plant) we saw a worker asleep on top of a pallet of inserts. We poked each other and giggled. An hour or so later, on our way back, the fucker hadn't even rolled over! At that point my boss and I looked at each other and said: "No way that happens in our pressroom."

There is a lot of room for improvement on the union side. No doubt about that. But scapegoating labor for the woes of capital is a worn-out card in the playbook. As you know, I'm an econ-geek, and I'm saying this in measured but strident terms: What we are facing right now cannot, and will not, be solved by standard ploys and tactics. And the dangers are much greater than most of you can imagine. On the other hand, if we knock off the funny business and "politics as usual" crap, the potential for a real worldwide renaissance is there. Really. And while I have become more skeptical in my older age about that possibility, it is what I want to fight for.[/quote]


Unions are a large part.


Larger is shitty engineering, and the outsourcing of components to China and Mexico.

[Rumble In the Jungle]

[quote name='steggyD' post='726228' date='Nov 20 2008, 10:45 PM']Their cars suck, they ship too many jobs overseas and we have more foreign car companies employing Americans. Let them fail and let other companies come in and take over. We are still going to need the cars, so they will be built here and Americans will make them. Maybe smaller and more progressive companies can come out of this mess and make some good cars.[/quote]

i'll co-sign to that.

[quote name='GoBengals' post='726568' date='Nov 21 2008, 01:50 AM']cause idiots keeping buying the garbage here, and not only buy it, but promote it, as if its something to be quite proud of...[/quote]

[img]http://www.pugbus.net/artman/uploads/toby_keith.jpg[/img]

i wanna buy me a Ford Truck so i can cruise it up and down the roooooooooooooad

[Jungle1]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='727021' date='Nov 22 2008, 08:07 PM']I agree with almost everything you cite, Backer, except I'd still insist that it is management that is to blame for the demise of the auto industry. My argument for that requires more time than I have right now, but in short, those reasons have to do with levels of decision-making that unions are excluded from, such as the capitulation of real industrialists to the financier factions within society.

A few other comments:

1) Keep in mind that the time period you mention is the precise period in which this nation allowed the rust-belt as a result of conscious deindustrialization of the economy.

2) When I was a junior exec in the hotel biz, I had to deal with unions on site. This was in Philly and I have some pretty frustrating memories of the bullshit shenanigans pulled by the shop steward for the painters. Fast forward a decade, and I was an observer of shop floor practices as you described when I went to a brand-spanking new print/mailroom/distribution plant of the New York Times in Paramus, NJ. Beautiful facility, incredibly high-tech. The plant had delayed opening for some time (I think about a year or so) after it had been ready to deploy, simply because the unions and NYT management were engaged in a big struggle over job retention, etc... That's sort of okay, I suppose, given the negotiable and fluid nature of our econ system, though the delay was very costly. What killed me and the VP I worked for at the time was this: as we walked through the plant towards some conveyor and strapping equipment we wanted to see in action (we were in the early stages of refitting our own plant) we saw a worker asleep on top of a pallet of inserts. We poked each other and giggled. An hour or so later, on our way back, the fucker hadn't even rolled over! At that point my boss and I looked at each other and said: "No way that happens in our pressroom."

There is a lot of room for improvement on the union side. No doubt about that. But scapegoating labor for the woes of capital is a worn-out card in the playbook. As you know, I'm an econ-geek, and I'm saying this in measured but strident terms: What we are facing right now cannot, and will not, be solved by standard ploys and tactics. And the dangers are much greater than most of you can imagine. On the other hand, if we knock off the funny business and "politics as usual" crap, the potential for a real worldwide renaissance is there. Really. And while I have become more skeptical in my older age about that possibility, it is what I want to fight for.[/quote]

What kind of worldwide renaissance do you imagine?

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Jungle1' post='727127' date='Nov 23 2008, 05:47 PM']What kind of worldwide renaissance do you imagine?[/quote]
LOL. I could write a book or two. Better to suggest some conditions in this brief space.

1) What's the relation of an individual human to both the rest of human history and to the universe itself? I have been preoccupied with this question over the years. Partly due to the poverty I have observed in underdeveloped nations, partly because I ought to have died when I was 19 in a serious car accident, and partly because I have always been deeply moved by Socrates' choice. When Crito came to bust him out of jail, Socrates refused. Why?

2) I don't think it is an accident of our nature that humans are often drawn to admiration (or revulsion) to the extremes of human behavior. There are reasons why great scientists and artists are revered by cultures and why great criminals are despised. What are those reasons?

3) What are the material preconditions necessary for the nurturing of truly creative humans who can make, and do make, positive contributions to the species and universe as a whole?

4) What are the intellectual requirements to accomplish the same?

5) What can be done, by individuals, to either creatively participate in the ongoing unfolding of the universe, or, if falling short of that, to help create the condiditons in which such an outcome is more likely for individuals throughout society as a whole?

That's the sort of effort I'll fight for. No starving or disease-ridden children any place on this planet. Ample opportunity to partake in a fruitful life. Having a reason to be able to say, upon one's deathbed: "Well, that wasn't a waste of time."

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Elflocko' post='727043' date='Nov 23 2008, 02:01 AM']Unions are a large part.[/quote]
Thanks. I have reached an epiphany as a result of your persuasive and detailed argument. I think I'll be jettisoning 30 plus years of experience and study now.

[Homer_Rice]

20 billion from TARP for Citi. But the real irony is this: 306 billion in guarentees for other loans, too. "Save Banks, Not People" our new motto.