Should the government bail-out include domestic automakers?

[salty]

Does anyone have a list of the companies that have asked or did receive a bailout recently.

Paul Harvey on the radio yesterday said AIG is asking or received? another 40 billion, to make it 100 billion total, while all the big wigs were caught at a fancy resort, lying about who they worked for.

[Inzane]

Given I don't live in the US I'm not directly affected by this, but I feel for you guys. I would seriously feel kicked in the balls if my government was going to use my tax money to support companies that got themselves in trouble for producing ****** inferior product for most of the last ~15 years (not to mention get themselves in too deep with crappy UAW deals).

[White95Max]

Originally Posted by MotorCity

...estimates are that if JUST ONE of the big three dissapear it will cost us * $175M in just the first year.....

* Based on a report on NPR

Seems to me, if we saved the billions of dollars per month we're spending on wars, we could easily offset the 14.5M per month (=175M/yr) in that estimate.

We're fighting a losing battle by bailing out all these companies. Now that our government has bailed out the financial institutions, any other company can piss and moan, "me too!"
If the executives can't run their business profitably, then they need to change their ways or face the consequences. When small businesses with 10 employees are at risk of going under, do they have a right to use taxpayer money to bring themselves above water? Where do we draw the line? Just because a company is large enough to affect a broad population, they deserve better treatment than smaller businesses?

WE ALREADY HAVE NO MONEY. Why don't we stop spending so d*mn much and start looking at ways to save some? The government seems to have the same money management training as these failing CEOs.

[Picus]

Originally Posted by Yal

I agree its just ridiculous. I'd rather go through the 5-10 year pain of all that unemployment and money loss than give them a dime. These companies were/are run by the same people that were there when oil went scarce in the 70's but less than two decades later they did the same thing all over again and their only pathetic excuse is they just built what Americans wanted
If they go down I truly believe that out of the ashes of the devastation would come a better America. Let it happen.

I have to agree. It seems odd to me that so many people preach personal responsibility with regard to their political views, but then support what is essentially band-aid solution for companies that clearly have no idea to run themselves properly.

Let them go under.

Originally Posted by BAKER

There was another thread on here recently, when one of our American friends jokingly talked about Canada being socialist, re. our medical system paid for by taxes. When does it take away from the capitalist, free market system when the govt. bails out companies in trouble. It almost becomes the govt. running the business? On the other hand, as mentioned in other responses here, it is a huge part of the American economy. In the real world today, the government should be there for the good of the people, and compromises in the system may be necessary.

Heh.

It really is curious to me why so many people generally opposed the wall st bailout, but support this? Is there some sort of good will toward Detroit because they employ "regular blue collar workers"?

[Banacheq]

Originally Posted by Inzane

Given I don't live in the US I'm not directly affected by this, but I feel for you guys. I would seriously feel kicked in the balls if my government was going to use my tax money to support companies that got themselves in trouble for producing ****** inferior product for most of the last ~15 years (not to mention get themselves in too deep with crappy UAW deals).

That's exactly the case and I think it's f'n ridiculous that anyone would even remotely consider bailing out the automakers a good idea.

None of them will simply shutter their operations, they'll be forced to do what every other large failing company does - file for bankruptcy protection or look for a buyer. The buyer however should not be the taxpayers.

Giving them cash to survive does nothing but delay the inevitable and they'll be back in the same position in a few months, maybe a year.

If this does go through, expect to see just about every other industry sticking their hand out and you'll be thought a fool if you don't try to get your "fair share" of the handouts.

It makes me sick!

[Mortil]

Originally Posted by gmblack3a

Oh yes the old dragin' wagon. Parents has a 1974 pontiac grand safari station wagon. I'm guessing it got worse MPG then your neighbors YD gets.

Besides for how tall the SUVs of today are, they are about the same length as a XL denali. I think the wagon was 500lbs less.

Pontiac Grand Safari - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Four kids in our family. We could lay down all the seats in the back and all 4 of us would sleep on the overnight drive to FL for vacation.

I might of bought the hybrid version if they had that in my pickup when I bought it. But I still would be worries about long term reliability with the hybrid system.

i think those station wagons are grose.
Like the New Ford mustang i polished (Mustang GT from -06) the paintjob was lousy and when i drove it the whole interior felt and sounded Cheap . realy realy cheap . and no fun driving . i have more fun driving my Saab 9000 Aero or any other JDM sportscar from the early 90is that is bad .

sweden is what we call "wannabe US" country . the SUV sales increased for a lot of years here. and we are the country that has most Station wagons per %/people

now the Small cars is selling alot here cause to the Economical failure (thank you american banking system)

what i wanted to say . you dont need Large SUVs for a family . and if the "big three" dont hang on the future technology and start making some quality they are smoked.

[MSOsr]

I play golf with a guy that worked for one of the Big 3 and he retired at age 55 at 85% of his salary (which was big enough to support owning a house in Michigan and one in South Florida).

No wonder those companies don't have money!

I agree.....let them file Chapter 11, get concessions from suppliers and unions, and return to profitability.

Mike

[David Fermani]

You can't really blame the union worker for the demise of the auto industry. It's the top tier corporate greed as well as the union diplomats that constantly fight back and forth for more money/benefits. I think the unions were a great thing back in the early days of its creation, but over the last few decades, they've gone out of control and untimately killed the Big 3. I know way too many union auto worker janitors that make $40-50 per hour for doing nothing. That, coupled with overinflated leasing residuals stuck the knife in deeper. It's just a matter of time before all the overseas car manufacturers feel similar pain when their employees start retiring.

[Awsomeshine]

But why do you need a big 6.2 V8 petrol truck, it must be the most uneconomical thing on the road.

I have a Land Rover Discovery with a 3.0L V6 Turbo Diesel engine auto, much faster than my old Range Rover that was a 4.6L V8 and delivers nearlly 40mpg on the motorway here in the UK, plus we use it for towing and actually take it off road.

I think any vehicle that does less than 25mpg (except commercials) should be banned so we don't run out of oil so fast.

I work in the oil industry and it has dropped in price but know that you guys in the States will be back at $5-6 a gallon soon. It will be back at $1.60 a barrel soon. I would rather have upto 40mpg than 19mpg.

[soccerjunky]

Originally Posted by Awsomeshine

But why do you need a big 6.2 V8 petrol truck, it must be the most uneconomical thing on the road.
.

I think any vehicle that does less than 25mpg (except commercials) should be banned so we don't run out of oil so fast.
.

The domestic (USA) automakers are currently under a mandate to ensure that their fleet of vehicles average a certain mpg(can't remember the exact mpg) by the year 2012 i believe.....

BTW i am an english guy who lives here in the USA.. i drive a 8.4l V10 petrol car.. i love the thing and i'm thinking about buying another one before they go out of production....The car can get 24mpg on the hwy but it really depends on how i drive the car on what mpg i'm going to achieve.....

Americans like choice so that is why some drive a 6.2l v8...sure as petrol rose in price lately those vehicles decreased in total sales... whether this leads to a better acceptance of diesel vehicles i have no idea....When it comes to banning cars Americans prefer not to have the government tell them what they can drive but market forces will hopefully lead to changes.....

The actual main issue this country has with oil consumption is the size of the USA and how the country transports its' goods and products...There are literaly hundreds of thousands of 18 wheel trucks on the highways here on a daily basis traveling thousands of miles each..There is no other infrastructure other than a minor rail service. Also most individual states here are bigger than England itself..

With the amount of money the USA is spending on Wars i'm not sure the USA will still be the economic power it is in the next 10 years or so...

But in the meantime i love driving my 8.4l V10 and carrying my concealed weapon...freedoms i would not enjoy in england

god save the queen

[jfelbab]

You all seem to assume that they will go down for the count if not bailed out. More likely they would file for Chapter 11 protection and continue operating. This would give them the ability to renegotiate all their supplier and employee contracts as well as restructure their debt. This most likely would result in a reduced size but they would continue in a restructured and quite possibly a more economical manner. This doesn't mean that they would not be in business at all. It means smaller, leaner and hopefully on a competitive basis with the imports. I'm against this bailout.

[Slickery]

They should only bail them out if they commit to manufacture vehicles in the states, if not then h*ll no. If they keep making those cars in Mexico, then they are not American cars anyway, so who cares.