DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Brassmask on November 18, 2008, 09:11:27 PM
-
So, the execs from the Big 3 automakers (American-made big three 'cause last I heard Toyota had moved into number one or two) were in DC with their hands out insinuating that the unions had driven their American auto industry to ruin while they were turning out cars that only got 18city/22highway.
The right is out there pushing the unions meme and the idea that Chapter 11 is the best way to go (ironically, I again), letting the auto industry implode in America. My point about the irony in this position is that, as usual, the right is thinking ideologically which has been proven, in the last 8 years, to be the opposite of rationally.
Yes, allowing the auto industry to implode would serve their ideological tenets: free markets rule(!), unions have destroyed this nation by driving up costs(!), disaster allows certain people to make billions(!); but, what they fail to understand is if the auto industry is out of business in the US, that will put nearly 3 million people out of work if you count all the dealerships, mechanics, etc.
The irony is when those 3 million go jobless, that would lead this country closer to if not all the way into a depression. Arguments about what technically indicates a recession would be totally moot. The right is demanding because of their irrational ideology a New Depression.
The Dept of Labor has this to say:
The unemployment rate rose by 0.4 percentage point to 6.5 percent in October,
and the number of unemployed persons increased by 603,000 to 10.1 million. Over
the past 12 months, the number of unemployed persons has increased by 2.8 mil-
lion, and the unemployment rate has risen by 1.7 percentage points. (See
table A-1.)
So what's another 3 million, right?
Well, with nearly 14 million out of work, that would give us an unemplyment rate of about, what, 9%? That's what it was in 1930. What's interesting about that is this question. What was the US government's eventual solution to the Depression?
Answer: The New Deal
President-elect Barack Obama has already indicated that he is totally in favor of creating jobs by fixing our infrastructure, or by possibly building a national power grid. What makes right-wingers think he won't go further? Is there some kind of easiness felt for national infrastructure projects that right-wingers don't feel with national health care projects?
IMO, the auto industry should be allowed to crash and burn for the piss-poor way its been run for the last 20 years. Continually they have mass produced crappy vehicles with HORRIBLE gas mileage then demanding that we pay exorbitant prices for upkeep and repair. They've lallygagged on hybrids and electric cars. They've purposely undermined and destroyed hybrid and electric car technologies for unknown reasons claiming that they don't have the technology while thousands of Prii pour into America getting 48 miles to the gallon.
Big picture, though, it will be just another inch towards socialism in America. It won't be RBE, but it will be closer. Keep on keeping on, GOP!
-
Well, Brass, I don't know about the politics of it, but if I won't invest in a GM, or Ford, car for my garage why would I want to invest my tax dollars in bailing them out?
-
The right is out there pushing the unions meme and the idea that Chapter 11 is the best way to go (ironically, I again), letting the auto industry implode in America. ...........
IMO, the auto industry should be allowed to crash and burn for the piss-poor way its been run for the last 20 years. Continually they have mass produced crappy vehicles with HORRIBLE gas mileage then demanding that we pay exorbitant prices for upkeep and repair. They've lallygagged on hybrids and electric cars. They've purposely undermined and destroyed hybrid and electric car technologies for unknown reasons claiming that they don't have the technology while thousands of Prii pour into America getting 48 miles to the gallon.
Welcome to the conservative movement Brassmask.
I think that the reasons you are displeased with the Detroit big three is very much shared with the conservatives.
-
Yes, allowing the auto industry to implode would serve their ideological tenets: free markets rule(!), unions have destroyed this nation by driving up costs(!), disaster allows certain people to make billions(!); but, what they fail to understand is if the auto industry is out of business in the US, that will put nearly 3 million people out of work if you count all the dealerships, mechanics, etc.
I must have missed the news story about someone advocating that the entire U.S. auto industry should collapse. Who is saying this?
The irony is when those 3 million go jobless, that would lead this country closer to if not all the way into a depression.
No, the irony is people who bitch about corporations and oligarchies running the country are clamoring for government to continue being in bed with corporations and the wealthy.
-
They've purposely undermined and destroyed hybrid and electric car technologies for unknown reasons claiming that they don't have the technology while thousands of Prii pour into America getting 48 miles to the gallon.
I think most Priuses are actually built in the USA, perhaps of Japanese parts.They are not flowing into America so much as they are built here.
General Motors has always had extremely good Research and Development facilities. The problem is that it has mostly been research and very little development. They were first with modern electric cars, but they sent them all back to the crusher. Now the Japanese have bested their technology.
The original Chevy Volt was a truly snazzy looking vehicle. But now they have unveiled what it will really look like, and ugh, it's just an updated Malibu.
-
>>No, the irony is people who bitch about corporations and oligarchies running the country are clamoring for government to continue being in bed with corporations and the wealthy.<<
Bingo.
Also, I don't know where Brass got the idea the auto execs are blaming the unions or they want to go chapter 11. If they want to go chapter 11 they don't need government money to do it.
I think Brass is in another dimension again.
Say hello to evil Spock for me Brass!
-
why should soccer Moms making far less bail out the bums making 73 an hour!
let 'em sink or swim
no bailout!
(http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/renojimmy/Comics/GreenVehicles.jpg)
-
why should soccer Moms making far less bail out the bums making 73 an hour!
let 'em sink or swim
no bailout!
==================
Why assembly line workers making a middle class salary piss guys like you off when the fools who decided to stake the future of GM, Ford and Chrysler on huge guzzling SUVs and trucks make twenty times as much makes no bloody sense to me.
The auto execs are the ones who screwed up here. You give a GM union guy a bunch of Avalanche parts, there is no way he could assemble a Prius or anything else from them but a big stupid Avalanche.
The Big Three screwed up, but don't blame the giys who did just what they were told to do. Quality in US cars has gone up a lot in the last ten years or so.
-
yeah sure it's global warmings fault ::)
it is the quality that sucks not the size
all of the american cars are not big
they cant compete head to head on the small vehicles
a small toyota tacoma pickup vs. a small chevy s-10 pickup truck is just no comparison as far as quality
-
(http://www.thecapitalgoldgroup.com/new-york-times-logo.jpg)
Let Detroit Go Bankrupt
By MITT ROMNEY
Published: November 18, 2008
IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won?t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course ? the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.
I love cars, American cars. I was born in Detroit, the son of an auto chief executive. In 1954, my dad, George Romney, was tapped to run American Motors when its president suddenly died. The company itself was on life support ? banks were threatening to deal it a death blow. The stock collapsed. I watched Dad work to turn the company around ? and years later at business school, they were still talking about it. From the lessons of that turnaround, and from my own experiences, I have several prescriptions for Detroit?s automakers.
First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.
That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota?s Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product ? it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.
Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries ? from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.
The new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end. This division is a holdover from the early years of the last century, when unions brought workers job security and better wages and benefits. But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, ?Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.?
You don?t have to look far for industries with unions that went down that road. Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th. This will mean a new direction for the U.A.W., profit sharing or stock grants to all employees and a change in Big Three management culture.
The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms ? all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat.
Investments must be made for the future. No more focus on quarterly earnings or the kind of short-term stock appreciation that means quick riches for executives with options. Manage with an eye on cash flow, balance sheets and long-term appreciation. Invest in truly competitive products and innovative technologies ? especially fuel-saving designs ? that may not arrive for years. Starving research and development is like eating the seed corn.
Just as important to the future of American carmakers is the sales force. When sales are down, you don?t want to lose the only people who can get them to grow. So don?t fire the best dealers, and don?t crush them with new financial or performance demands they can?t meet.
It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. I believe the federal government should invest substantially more in basic research ? on new energy sources, fuel-economy technology, materials science and the like ? that will ultimately benefit the automotive industry, along with many others. I believe Washington should raise energy research spending to $20 billion a year, from the $4 billion that is spent today. The research could be done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration. The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers.
But don?t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass ? they bet on management and they lost.
The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=3 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=3)
-
Some people are under the misconstrued opinion of this mass amount of unemployed, as if there'll be no jobs for them to go to, if the big 3 go bankrupt. Newsflash to those folks, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc., will have no problem looking for hordes of new employees to fill the void when they buy up many of these now non-running American Car plants.
Just don't expect to be making a king's ransom as a salary, is all
-
Yes, allowing the auto industry to implode would serve their ideological tenets: free markets rule(!), unions have destroyed this nation by driving up costs(!), disaster allows certain people to make billions(!); but, what they fail to understand is if the auto industry is out of business in the US, that will put nearly 3 million people out of work if you count all the dealerships, mechanics, etc.
Small problem here - those 3 million people are employed because the big 3 are selling cars to people. If the big 3 cease selling cars, where are those people going to be buying cars?
That's right! From other car companies who will have to increase production to meet the demand created by the implosion of the big 3. And to increase production and sell more cars, they'll have to hire more people, buy more supplies and services, open more dealerships, etc. Net result: probably just as many jobs created as there are destroyed.
-
If the big 3 cease selling cars, where are those people going to be buying cars? That's right! From other car companies who will have to increase production to meet the demand created by the implosion of the big 3. And to increase production and sell more cars, they'll have to hire more people, buy more supplies and services, open more dealerships, etc. Net result: probably just as many jobs created as there are destroyed.
Precisely
-
>>No, the irony is people who bitch about corporations and oligarchies running the country are clamoring for government to continue being in bed with corporations and the wealthy.<<
Bingo.
Also, I don't know where Brass got the idea the auto execs are blaming the unions or they want to go chapter 11. If they want to go chapter 11 they don't need government money to do it.
I think Brass is in another dimension again.
Say hello to evil Spock for me Brass!
Rich, the right wing talking heads have done nothing but blame the unions and their damnable pensions and health care costs. $2200 per vehicle price?
The reason the auto execs don't want to go into Chapter 11 is they know no one will buy a car from a company that is in bankruptcy because who is going to guarantee the warranties?
On the other hand, Ackerman asked the execs today if they were all going to streamline their operations by selling the multi-million dollar private jets they all took to get to the hearing today. None said that they would.
They don't deserve to be bailed out.
-
On the other hand, Ackerman asked the execs today if they were all going to streamline their operations by selling the multi-million dollar private jets they all took to get to the hearing today. None said that they would.
They don't deserve to be bailed out.
================================================
The people who assemble Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, BMWs and Mercedes Benzes here in the US are comparatively well paid, as are those who make GM, Ford and Chrysler products. The difference is in executive compensation, and design of the products.
If the government lends money to these companies, they need to demand that they ditch the private airplanes, huge salaries and other fancy crap, as well as get rid of the geniuses that decided that somehow pushing guzzler SUVs and stupid pimped-out trucks was going to keep them going forever, even though it was clear that the end had come for cheap fuel.
This has to happen before they take it out on the workers. All the workers did was what they were told to do: they were given Avalanche parts, they put together Avalanches. The workers had no say in what it was they built.
-
Realizing that the American auto industry is international, it is still heavily based in Michigan. Toyota, Honda and Nissan, etc. don't have those ties to Michigan. And it is unrealistic to think that all of those unemployed people will be able to get up and move down South (where most of the foreign automakers have factories), although Michigan is already experiencing an exodus of sorts as the State has been suffering for a long time now.
Some people are under the misconstrued opinion of this mass amount of unemployed, as if there'll be no jobs for them to go to, if the big 3 go bankrupt. Newsflash to those folks, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc., will have no problem looking for hordes of new employees to fill the void when they buy up many of these now non-running American Car plants.
Just don't expect to be making a king's ransom as a salary, is all
-
A person does what a person has to do, in order to support themselves and possibly a family. I've moved around plenty. West coast, to East Coast, back now west. Point being there will be jobs, and more likely IF the Michigan big 3 went under, the factories in Michigan would likely be bought up by other car makers, and positions will need to be filled.
In other words, the jobs won't disappear. Auto workers sould simply have to look for them, when they present themselves.
This whole bailout idea of the car industry, as facilitated by the Dems has very little to do with trying to save the American auto industry, near as much is it an effort to save the Union jobs, that ironically have pumped MILLIONS of dollars in campaign donations to pretty much, the Dems
-
This whole bailout idea of the car industry, as facilitated by the Dems has very little to do with trying to save the American auto industry, near as much is it an effort to save the Union jobs, that ironically have pumped MILLIONS of dollars in campaign donations to pretty much, the Dems
===============================================
What is ironic about union members supporting the Democrats? Republicans HATE unions, and have done everything they can to legally destroy them.
A great number of GM and Chrysler products are assembled and some are manufactured in Mexico and Canada, by the way.
-
I find this blog entry by August Pollack to be an informative view on the GM bailout:
http://www.xoverboard.com (http://www.xoverboard.com)
We're all experts
I remember a few years back when there was that whole controversy over Saudi Arabia having access to U.S. shipping ports, and I found it funny how everyone suddenly became an expert on international port security overnight. I feel the same way reading all the kneejerk garbage people are saying about the auto industry.
I'm going to be one of the few people out there who's just going to admit that he knows very little about the entire situation other than what I've already seen on the news. But I am also going to point out that I've already gotten really sick of hearing left-leaning bloggers and pundits talk about how they think that we should "let GM fail." I'm not interested in engaging in debate on this, because I don't know a lot about the labor industry and frankly neither do 95% of you. But I'm smart enough to understand that GM is not some evil robot that is defeated by not giving it money. GM is, in fact, a company composed of several hundred thousand workers, not to mention another several hundred thousand parts distributors and manufacturers reliant on the business of said company, who would all be completely screwed if we just let one of the largest companies in America go under.
I suppose when you don't personally live in a particular house, it's a lot easier to just snark that the best way to fix all the problems with it- the leaky roof, the cost-wasting insulation damage, the termites- is to burn the entire house to the ground and hope the residents find another place to live quickly. That doesn't make it any smarter an idea. It's incredibly disappointing to see so many liberals use the same logic for GM as the right-wingers who were asking why we didn't just drop a nuclear warhead on Iraq because that would have wiped out all the terrorists.
And as far as all you quasi-libertarians out there who have once again decided that the union-negotiated salaries of auto plant workers are somehow a reason to destroy an entire company, you're as always a shining example of why I can't even classify you as complete human beings. Wanting several hundred thousand people to become unemployed because you're jealous they make more money than you isn't a political philosophy; it's a degenerative mental condition.
-
yes we should just blindly hand over billions to a failing company
and asking questions about the lunacy pay of the union workers should be off-limits!
(http://images1.cafepress.com/product/310026501v4_350x350_Front.jpg)
-
Curious that the author talks about "left-leaning" folks being against the bailout. I had thought it was a right-leaning thing.
I find this blog entry by August Pollack to be an informative view on the GM bailout:
http://www.xoverboard.com (http://www.xoverboard.com)
We're all experts
I remember a few years back when there was that whole controversy over Saudi Arabia having access to U.S. shipping ports, and I found it funny how everyone suddenly became an expert on international port security overnight. I feel the same way reading all the kneejerk garbage people are saying about the auto industry.
I'm going to be one of the few people out there who's just going to admit that he knows very little about the entire situation other than what I've already seen on the news. But I am also going to point out that I've already gotten really sick of hearing left-leaning bloggers and pundits talk about how they think that we should "let GM fail." I'm not interested in engaging in debate on this, because I don't know a lot about the labor industry and frankly neither do 95% of you. But I'm smart enough to understand that GM is not some evil robot that is defeated by not giving it money. GM is, in fact, a company composed of several hundred thousand workers, not to mention another several hundred thousand parts distributors and manufacturers reliant on the business of said company, who would all be completely screwed if we just let one of the largest companies in America go under.
I suppose when you don't personally live in a particular house, it's a lot easier to just snark that the best way to fix all the problems with it- the leaky roof, the cost-wasting insulation damage, the termites- is to burn the entire house to the ground and hope the residents find another place to live quickly. That doesn't make it any smarter an idea. It's incredibly disappointing to see so many liberals use the same logic for GM as the right-wingers who were asking why we didn't just drop a nuclear warhead on Iraq because that would have wiped out all the terrorists.
And as far as all you quasi-libertarians out there who have once again decided that the union-negotiated salaries of auto plant workers are somehow a reason to destroy an entire company, you're as always a shining example of why I can't even classify you as complete human beings. Wanting several hundred thousand people to become unemployed because you're jealous they make more money than you isn't a political philosophy; it's a degenerative mental condition.
-
That's what really irks you, isn't it, richie? That some guy that you think is a lesser being than you should actually be allowed to join a union and get paid more than whatever burger-flipper pays your gianormous salary pays you. You have no objections to them paying the demonstrably incompetent bosses bazillions and giving them private aircraft to flit bout in, because someday, your prince will come and bestow executive status upon you.
But peons you can't pee on, that is what gets your goat, isn't it?
The main issue is that US automakers need to make products they can sell to Americans, because unless they do this, no amount of bailout will work.
-
Curious that the author talks about "left-leaning" folks being against the bailout. I had thought it was a right-leaning thing.
At least some of the rightwing wants to bail out the Big Three because they want to see a successful US auto industry in the US not controlled by foreigners. I am sure that all the auto execs are 100% for being bailed out, and they are certainly right wingers.
Those who were elected by people in the auto industry want a bailout for their constituents. There are more line workers than management, and those people would be on the left. Most states have some auto-related jobs in making components and parts for cars, and everywhere has dealers.
The leftists who feel that capitalists should play by their own rules, and go under when they fail are against the bailout.
This is not entirely a left/right issue.
-
Indeed, it is not a right/left thing.
It is odd how lefties and righties are against the bailout for the auto industry but I think for different reasons. The right doesn't like nationalization and loves the freemarket religion. The left doesn't like that the Big 3 have been building gas guzzlers for years and have refused to admit their culpability in global warming.
If it were up to me, I'd either let them fall flat and re-build the burnt, saved village OR give them the money only AFTER they've fired the execs who are there now, sold all private jets, hired new execs who only make a little bit more than union workers and have plans for a several different lines of electric and hybrid vehicles and discontinue any models that get under 40 mpg.
If we're paying the money, we call the shots and we should get all of our demands met.
-
>>If it were up to me, I'd either let them fall flat and re-build the burnt, saved village OR give them the money only AFTER they've fired the execs who are there now, sold all private jets, hired new execs who only make a little bit more than union workers and have plans for a several different lines of electric and hybrid vehicles and discontinue any models that get under 40 mpg.<<
My father-in-law was a UAW guy. Worked for GM for just over 30 years. Did you know you can fit a fifth of bourbon in one of those old style lunch pales?
(http://static.flickr.com/2335/2380973141_9127c2b543.jpg)
Turns out there was a lot of that going around. Then there's the guy they paid $25 an hours to push a broom. Now the auto industry spends millions of dollars to make sure AUW workers can get hard ons.
So sure, the auto execs deserve some of the blame, but so do those greedy unions who are responsible for raising the cost of living for everyone. As for making gas guzzlers, that's what people wanted. Have you looked at what's on the roads out there? The guy next door has two SUV's, a van, a sedan, and a jeep. People wanted them, until gas hit $4 of course.
-
Hey, Rich, trust me, I know the unions have too much pull. My own old man was a Teamster and in the last year of his driving a truck for big shipping company, he got a lot slower and made some mistakes and the union fought to keep him on the job when he probably should have gotten fired. I can understand how that is good for my dad but also how it is entirely unfair for the company he worked for.
But to your point, I agree the unions are partly to blame but the gas crisis was around in the '70's and they destroyed the electric car and went in completely the opposite direction even as people around the world were talking about "peak oil" and global warming. Any executive of a company as large of any of the Big 3 would have been pushing designers towards a clean-burning vehicle or an electric vehicle.
Toyota did it! For a couple of years, Priuses were ordered and waited on. Larry David was driving one on Curb Your Enthusiasm in like 2004, for god's sakes.
From Wiki:
The Prius first went on sale in Japan in 1997, making it the first mass-produced hybrid vehicle. It was subsequently introduced worldwide in 2001. The Prius is sold in more than 40 countries and regions, with its largest markets being those of Japan and North America.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Prius
I mean, the minute that thing went international, the Big 3 should have gotten the hint. So, I think a bailout now would be rewarding them for keeping us dependent on foreign oil and perpetrating global warming. They should have been ahead of the wily Japanese.
-
My father-in-law was a UAW guy. Worked for GM for just over 30 years. Did you know you can fit a fifth of bourbon in one of those old style lunch pales?
You can fit a fifth of Blue Goose Vodka in an executive briefcase, too, and so what? From the photo it looks like someone may have fitted your father-in-law's remains in that particular lunch pail.
The guy next door has two SUV's, a van, a sedan, and a jeep. People wanted them, until gas hit $4 of course.
Why did people want them is the question. Because they were bombarded with advertising for them, because on nearly every TV show the stars drove them, because you can create a demand with advertising where none existed before, and no one knows this better than US companies. HSN is entirely based on selling crap people do not need. The guy next door to you may have a large family and need the van. The SUVs and the Jeep were sold because one or more of the males in the family were made to feel nutless in that van. Maybe he is even greedier than a UAW member.
Is there actually anyone who will tell a megamillinaier company they work for, "Naw, I am making enough already. I don;t need any raise this year." No one ever heard Roger Smith say those words when he was president of GM. He got a nice bonus every year, and every year GM lost market share, lost jobs and made really crappy cars.
I put wheels on Falcons and Comets at the Claycomo, MO assembly plant. I got $2.35 an hour for this, when the minimum was 80ยข. I saved nearly all of it and made it through college nearly debt-free. It was a lot harder work than the minimum wage job I had delivering prescriptions for a drugstore. But it was worth it.
Again, I am not for the bailout unless the Big Three are selling AND ADVERTISING something people will and should buy.
There are plenty of used SUVs around now for the remaining fools that are behind the curve to use to drive Becky-Sue to ballet class. I find the pickup trucks with a bed cover, 4WD and 19 inch wheels and skinny, skinny tires to be the most ridiculous things I have seen here in Miami.