[edgeywood]

... The fault cannot be laid at the feet of the workers who accepted an offer from mgmt. And it was not the hardhats who decided that SUVs were the way to go, nor did they lobby the gov't to keep CAFE mileage standards low.

As far as class warfare, I paraphrase Warren Buffet: There is a war between the classes, and my class is winning!

Well said.

Has anyone seen "Who Stole the Electric Car"? They had the technology to provide fuel efficient cars, why didn't they market it?

[Tim]

How about the clowns in Detroit EACH flying to Washington in a PRIVATE JET to ask for a handout????

"Under scornful questioning by members of the House Financial Services Committee, the CEOs admitted that -- at a time when the whole economy is sinking and millions of workers are unemployment -- when they came to Washington to beg for $25 billion in emergency loans, each of them traveled on a private plane.

"There's a delicious irony in seeing private luxury jets flying in to Washington, D.C., and people coming off of them with tin cups in their hands saying that they're going to be trimming down and streamlining their businesses," said Rep. Gary Ackerman, N.Y. "There's a message there."

"I mean, couldn't you all have downgraded to first class or jet pooled or something to get here?" he continued. "It could have at least sent a message that you do get it."

The criticism from Ackerman and other lawmakers -- who travel back to their districts on commercial airlines -- highlighted why the auto executives' request for emergency money remains stuck on the runway. Many members of Congress worry that Detroit has not changed its big-spending, gas-guzzling habits, and that company executives will be back in a few months asking for billions of dollars more to stay afloat.

"My fear is you're going to take this money and continue the same stupid decisions you've made for 25 years," said Rep. Michael Capuano, D-Mass., who noted the U.S. automakers fought him and other lawmakers for years over tougher fuel-efficiency rules that passed in 2007.

All three companies said they require their chief executives to fly on private planes for security reasons. GM and Ford have corporate jets. Chrysler does not, but uses leased or chartered planes.

A round-trip, nonstop commercial flight from Detroit to Washington costs about $400 for a coach seat and $800 for first class. Bill de Decker, president of Conklin & de Decker, an aviation information company, projected that the cost of operating a corporate jet, such as the widely used Gulfstream 5, is about $3,850 per hour, mostly for jet fuel but also crew expenses, airport fees and other expenses. So the round trip would come to about $15,000."

One wonders if they even realized what a stupid mistake this was. Security reasons? What are they, presidents of countries? I wouldn't give them a dime.

[southyards]

Well said.

Has anyone seen "Who Stole the Electric Car"? They had the technology to provide fuel efficient cars, why didn't they market it?

Here's a post I put up a few months ago:

Here’s part of a quote on the movie “Who Killed The Electric Car”: It was among the fastest, most efficient production cars ever built. It ran on electricity, produced no emissions and catapulted American technology to the forefront of the automotive industry. The lucky few who drove it never wanted to give it up. So why did General Motors crush its fleet of EV1 electric vehicles in the Arizona desert?
General Motors rounded up every EV car that they could find and crushed the final 78 of them, despite the EV drivers' offer to pay the residual lease value ($1.9 million was offered for the remaining 78 cars in Burbank before they were crushed). There is, of course, much more to the story which makes viewing “Who Killed The Electric Car” worthwhile. These cars were “phased out” in the 1990’s, which would logically mean that if they were still in production, they would be significantly improved over the earlier models. Unfortunately, it appears that special interest groups and big business had other plans for the EV1.

[TSNSPYDER]

A couple thoughts I have.
All CEOs make way too much money. The percentage they make compared with the lowest paid person in their company is the highest ever.
It's Detroit's own fault. They need to build reliable cars that people want. Once they do find a car that people want, they price it out of everyones league. Example, the new Dodge Challenger. People want Mazdas but they don't want Fords, but doesn't Ford own half of Mazda. They need to look at their own examples.
No bailout, where were the bailouts for the tv manufacturing industry?
Why don't they do this type of bailout? Here's my example of my idea. Let's say a Ford usually sells for $18000, make Ford give an individual $5000 off so the car is now $13000. The government will now give Ford $2500 for that purchase. That way everybody is happy and the money actually moves.
I'm not sure but for a $2.5 billion bailout, this means 1 million cars would sell with this deal.
I actually drove one of those EV cars the first year it came out. I drove one in April 1997. Supossedly, the batteries were bad .....yah right. That's why they took them off market. What scares me is the same guy who killed the EV electric car, is the same one promoting the Chevy Volt.

[Southsider2k12]

A couple thoughts I have.
All CEOs make way too much money. The percentage they make compared with the lowest paid person in their company is the highest ever.
It's Detroit's own fault. They need to build reliable cars that people want. Once they do find a car that people want, they price it out of everyones league. Example, the new Dodge Challenger. People want Mazdas but they don't want Fords, but doesn't Ford own half of Mazda. They need to look at their own examples.
No bailout, where were the bailouts for the tv manufacturing industry?
Why don't they do this type of bailout? Here's my example of my idea. Let's say a Ford usually sells for $18000, make Ford give an individual $5000 off so the car is now $13000. The government will now give Ford $2500 for that purchase. That way everybody is happy and the money actually moves.
I'm not sure but for a $2.5 billion bailout, this means 1 million cars would sell with this deal.
I actually drove one of those EV cars the first year it came out. I drove one in April 1997. Supossedly, the batteries were bad .....yah right. That's why they took them off market. What scares me is the same guy who killed the EV electric car, is the same one promoting the Chevy Volt.

I do believe that would run against existing trade laws, but I am not certain of that. I do know Toyota, Honda, and company would throw a gigantic fit.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=34969.39

'

Steel restructured; auto will too
Between September 1998 and February 2003 34 steel manufacturing and processing plants declared bankruptcy. The manufacturing plants accounted for the production of 44.8 million tons.

To put this in perspective the total capacity of the steel industry in 1998 was just a little more than 100 million tons, so 44.5 percent of our country's steel production was bankrupt.

Some of our country's largest producers (Bethlehem Steel, at 11.3 million tons, National Steel, 7.0 million tons, and LTV, 7.6 million tons) declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Our steel industry management and union leaders said the same thing we're presently hearing from the auto industry management and union officials.

Do not believe that 3 million jobs will be lost. What happened in the steel industry was that other companies (many foreign) bought the plants out of bankruptcy, restructured the agreement with the unions to reduce the legacy costs, restructured the management and work force work rules, and as a result once again became low cost producers of high quality steel.

During the restructuring very few jobs were lost and very little production compromised. It's not an easy transition, but the same thing will happen in the auto industry.

This is a management problem and not a union problem. It's true the legacy costs are killing the auto industry, and the same was true for steel, but there was never a contract that created these legacy costs that was not signed by management.

Steel management and supplier for 48 years,

Leigh Coburn

[digger262]

I work in the automotive industry and most of us have seen this coming for years. The blame is far and wide. Granted, the idiocy of the CEOs to fly private jets begging for money is comical and sad, but Mitch Albom points out some very clear hypocrisy of congress here: http://freep.com/article/20081123/COL01/811230371/1082

[Roger Kaputnik]

MITCH ALBOM

If I had the floor at the auto rescue talks
BY MITCH ALBOM • FREE PRESS COLUMNIST • November 23, 2008

• gsl.recommendCountHrefEnabled='true'; [url="java script:void("] Recommend(494)[/url]
• [url="java script:NewWindow(600,800,"]Print this page[/url]
• E-mail this article
• [url="java script:void(0);"]Share this article:[/url]
  • Del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...COL01/811230371 Buzz up!
• [url="java script:NewWindow(200,200,"][/url]

OK. It's a fantasy. But if I had five minutes in front of Congress last week, here's what I would've said:


OAS_AD('ArticleFlex_1');
#ARALifeWhite300x250Template { width: 300px; height: 250px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px auto; overflow: hidden; } #ARALifeWhite300x250Template table { border: solid 1px #d5d5d5; background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 12pt; font-size: 10pt; margin: 5px; } #ARALifeWhite300x250Template td { text-align: left; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 5px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 12pt; font-size: 10pt; } #ARALifeWhite300x250Template a { text-decoration: none; margin-bottom: 0px; color: #000000; } #ARALifeWhite300x250Template a:hover { color: #e51937; } #ARALifeWhite300x250Template img { padding: 0px; margin: 0px; } Good morning. First of all, before you ask, I flew commercial. Northwest Airlines. Had a bag of peanuts for breakfast. Of course, that's Northwest, which just merged with Delta, a merger you, our government, approved -- and one which, inevitably, will lead to big bonuses for their executives and higher costs for us. You seem to be OK with that kind of business.

Which makes me wonder why you're so against our kind of business? The kind we do in Detroit. The kind that gets your fingernails dirty. The kind where people use hammers and drills, not keystrokes. The kind where you get paid for making something, not moving money around a board and skimming a percentage.

You've already given hundreds of billions to banking and finance companies -- and hardly demanded anything. Yet you balk at the very idea of giving $25 billion to the Detroit Three. Heck, you shoveled that exact amount to Citigroup -- $25 billion -- just weeks ago, and that place is about to crumble anyhow.

Does the word "hypocrisy" ring a bell?


Protecting the home turf?
Sen. Shelby. Yes. You. From Alabama. You've been awfully vocal. You called the Detroit Three's leaders "failures." You said loans to them would be "wasted money." You said they should go bankrupt and "let the market work."

Why weren't you equally vocal when your state handed out hundreds of millions in tax breaks to Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Honda and others to open plants there? Why not "let the market work"? Or is it better for Alabama if the Detroit Three fold so that the foreign companies -- in your state -- can produce more?

Way to think of the nation first, senator.

And you, Sen. Kyl of Arizona. You told reporters: "There's no reason to throw money at a problem that's not going to get solved."

That's funny, coming from such an avid supporter of the Iraq war. You've been gung ho on that for years. So how could you just sit there when, according to the New York Times, an Iraqi former chief investigator told Congress that $13 billion in U.S. reconstruction funds "had been lost to fraud, embezzlement, theft and waste" by the Iraqi government?

That's 13 billion, senator. More than half of what the auto industry is asking for. Thirteen billion? Gone? Wasted?

Where was your "throwing money at a problem that's not going to get solved" speech then?


Watching over the bankers?
And the rest of you lawmakers. The ones who insist the auto companies show you a plan before you help them. You've already handed over $150 billion of our tax money to AIG. How come you never demanded a plan from it? How come when AIG blew through its first $85 billion, you quickly gave it more? The car companies may be losing money, but they can explain it: They're paying workers too much and selling cars for too little.

AIG lost hundred of billions in credit default swaps -- which no one can explain and which make nothing, produce nothing, employ no one and are essentially bets on failure.

And you don't demand a paragraph from it?

Look. Nobody is saying the auto business is healthy. Its unions need to adjust more. Its models and dealerships need to shrink. Its top executives have to downsize their own importance.

But this is a business that has been around for more than a century. And some of its problems are because of that, because people get used to certain wages, manufacturers get used to certain business models. It's easy to point to foreign carmakers with tax breaks, no union costs and a cleaner slate -- not to mention help from their home countries -- and say "be more like them."

But if you let us die, you let our national spine collapse. America can't be a country of lawyers and financial analysts. We have to manufacture. We need that infrastructure. We need those jobs. We need that security. Have you forgotten who built equipment during the world wars?

Besides, let's be honest. When it comes to blowing budgets, being grossly inefficient and wallowing in debt, who's better than Congress?

So who are you to lecture anyone on how to run a business?

Ask fair questions. Demand accountability. But knock it off with the holier than thou crap, OK? You got us into this mess with greed, a bad Fed policy and too little regulation. Don't kick our tires to make yourselves look better.

[Roger Kaputnik]

Look. Nobody is saying the auto business is healthy. Its unions need to adjust more. Its models and dealerships need to shrink. Its top executives have to downsize their own importance.

But this is a business that has been around for more than a century. And some of its problems are because of that, because people get used to certain wages, manufacturers get used to certain business models. It's easy to point to foreign carmakers with tax breaks, no union costs and a cleaner slate -- not to mention help from their home countries -- and say "be more like them."

But if you let us die, you let our national spine collapse. America can't be a country of lawyers and financial analysts. We have to manufacture. We need that infrastructure. We need those jobs. We need that security. Have you forgotten who built equipment during the world wars?

The entire article could have been these sentences and gotten the point across. It is a very good point, and I am going to send a note to our Congressmen.

[Southsider2k12]

The entire article could have been these sentences and gotten the point across. It is a very good point, and I am going to send a note to our Congressmen.

If American's really felt that way, they wouldn't be buying Toyota's and Honda's. THAT is how we really vote on how we feel about the auto industry.

[Roger Kaputnik]

It is a lot like the way greens pay more for organic foods, eg. Are you willing to pay more for less to support an industry? Them Learjets are expensive, you know!

[digger262]

If American's really felt that way, they wouldn't be buying Toyota's and Honda's. THAT is how we really vote on how we feel about the auto industry.

I agree to an extent. But in my opinion, the biggest problem is Americans have become ignorant. They've taken loans on homes and cars because someone else told them they could afford it and didn't do any research on their own. They buy foreign cars because the used to be better made(check any reputable source and see domestics are on par with ANY foreign maker today). I don't believe most Americans understand nor do they care to understand the impact losing the domestic auto industry will have on our country. I also don't believe in 'bailouts' and it sickens me to see our govt giving more money away. But it doesn't sicken me as much as seeing 3+ million additional people out of work in a matter of days will if GM goes bankrupt.

What scares me the most is congress demanding a plan. Yes, the automakers need a plan. They have already done quite a bit in the last 18 months, which would be more evident if the entire industry didn't tank to record low sales volumes. But what scares me is the fact congress HAS NO CLUE WHAT KIND OF PLAN THEY SHOULD HAVE!!! My fear is the big 3 will put together a plan that appeases congress but won't necessarily fix any problems. Congress will be looking for a plan they can use to get their talking points and nothing else. The auto industry is a very unique beast and for congress to think they understand is laughable.

For what it's worth, I think the big 3 have fixed quite a few of their problems and if the industry resumed normal levels of sales they would be fine in the short term. The problem was when the industry was booming in the mid/late 90s they gave bonuses(both white and blue collar) like it was water rather than piling that money back into the company for future products. To really fix the problem, once sales resume(and they will) they need to look long term rather than short term. Yes, they have made mistakes by sticking with SUVs too long but they are at a point now where they have or will very soon have some of the most fuel efficient vehicles made. One of the things you read quite a bit is the disparity between what UAW workers earn vs foreign workers, and rightfully so. But what you rarely see is with the new UAW contracts that were signed last year, starting next year, this gap almost goes away. You see, the 'plan' congress is looking for is already there.(albeit more can and should be done). What the bailout will do is make up for mistakes made 3-8 years ago until the industry recovers.

Sorry for the length and rambling, but I tried(poorly) to convey some things you don't see or hear in the news..

[Roger Kaputnik]

Regarding your statement that Americans have become ignorant, hear! hear! I have advocated for years that mathematical logic and rhetoric return to the nation's schools. Naturally, there is a vast, Übermensch conspiracy against this!

If I understand most of what I have heard about the car industry bailout, it is not grants but loans or equity purchases. I agreee that saving the industrial core is important, a lot more important than saving most of the finance element on Wall Street. The difference in bailouts offered or proposed is telling: Over 30 times more to Wall St., no demand for business plans. Lenin spoke to this a hundred years ago, right on the money, frankly.

Furthermore, the fact that Congress is demanding a plan definitely forms a vacuum [thanks, Ang!]. Does anyone outside the 205xx zip codes think the corporations can come up with a plan over Thanksgiving Day? It is stupid. This sounds like something I have to put in my notes to Mssrs. Lugar, Bayh, and Donnelly. I encourage all of you to contact them, too.

[Southsider2k12]

It is a lot like the way greens pay more for organic foods, eg. Are you willing to pay more for less to support an industry? Them Learjets are expensive, you know!

The Lear jets are nothing compared to the wages and benefits, and their effect on economy. If you believe in the US auto worker, then you should be buying American.

[Roger Kaputnik]

The Lear jets are nothing compared to the wages and benefits, and their effect on economy. If you believe in the US auto worker, then you should be buying American.

Wages and benefits are spread around to a lot of grocery stores, etc. etc. etc. The money for Learjets is just gone, relatively speaking, with nothing to show for it but a fatter exec, figuratively speaking. How did wages and benefits become bad things in America?? It is very 1984.

[Southsider2k12]

Wages and benefits are spread around to a lot of grocery stores, etc. etc. etc. The money for Learjets is just gone, relatively speaking, with nothing to show for it but a fatter exec, figuratively speaking. How did wages and benefits become bad things in America?? It is very 1984.

If they aren't bad, then why do we keep hearing about what management of these companies makes, and their benefit packages?

[Roger Kaputnik]

Salaries and bonuses are not the same as wages and benefits.

The issue is not what people make, it is how the revenue and profits have been managed.

[Southsider2k12]

Salaries and bonuses are not the same as wages and benefits.

The issue is not what people make, it is how the revenue and profits have been managed.

That is a bogus argument that just leads to circular logic. If we are going to raise a stink about what one group makes, then it is a fair comparison to what another group makes. If we are going to look at the benefits one group gets, then it is also fair to look at the benefits of another group. We are reading all over the place about people crying about how much management makes, which in my mind makes the wages of every worker fair to examine to best determine how to return the company to profitability. I don't believe in the politics of class warfare which pit one group against another. Its easy to point blame at one group or another, but in the meantime they have to actually get past the 5 second soundbyte that plays on TV, and figure out how to fix the problems that exist here.

The reality is that this cost structure can not be sustained by Detroit in this economy as long as American's aren't buying US cars. Cutting out a $400,000 jet, while a great zinger for a Senator on TV, does do not anything substantive to plug the hole of General Motors who is burning through $2,500,000,000 a quarter right now. That works out to 0.016 percent of the losses for GM in the 3rd quarter. In other words it doesn't solve a damned thing.

Look no further than our own backyards and to the collapse of steel in the United States. They had to completely restructure their costs in order to even exist today. They did, and the scare tactics that we were fed about all of the losses that were about to take place, never materialized. Only now with the auto industry in trouble, is the steel industry really in trouble. The auto industry needs to be completely re-invented, and that isn't going to happen with only management being examined. Without real changes you could give them all of the bailout money you wanted, and they will be back in DC again looking to be saved.

[Roger Kaputnik]

I think we all have said the same thing.

Speaking of steel, you probably remember when USSteel used their profits to invest in the go-go real estate market in the '80s. Once again, that was a management/financial decision, no hardhats in that meeting! New plants were not on the agenda back then.

You posit the untenable position that labor is to blame for making poor decisions for the corporations they work for. THAT is what is ridiculous. On the other hand, you cannot let management off the hook for poor managing. You will notice that everyone will pay for that.

[Southsider2k12]

I think we all have said the same thing.

Speaking of steel, you probably remember when USSteel used their profits to invest in the go-go real estate market in the '80s. Once again, that was a management/financial decision, no hardhats in that meeting! New plants were not on the agenda back then.

You posit the untenable position that labor is to blame for making poor decisions for the corporations they work for. THAT is what is ridiculous. On the other hand, you cannot let management off the hook for poor managing. You will notice that everyone will pay for that.

If you'll notice I have never excused managements role in this. What I have said all along is that there are more reasons than what is being reported. Much of the "mismanagement" is problems caused by the cost of labor. That has been completely ignored.