DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum The U.S. Auto Industry and the Ripple Effect

What an interesting video... wonder who's behind it?

But here I thought the free market solved all our problems!

I hope to God these companies can get back on track.

We know who's behind that, & even though I dont agree with all those numbers, 95% are very true.

I've been working in a white collor job for 25 years un the auto industry so I'm not just pulling this out of my behind,

I do find it humoruos many on this sight dont believe just what effect the Auto industry has on our economy, some seem to think it's like a local department store, it closes up one day the next something else opens, well it ant.

i'm not saying the goverment should bail out the big three, but there need to be some help in restructuring it's debt and a plan with the goverment to work together to help reline & switch over to more fuel freindly car and making sure those cars a safe. last go around the small fuel efficent cars were death traps work needs to be done, wages & benefits need to be properly structured, alot needs done, saddly people now days will stand around complain and blame who what & why for so long than finally relaize it's to late to do anything, and wonder why unemployment is so high that the goverment cant no longer pay for that.

I'll tell you who's behind this thing.. it's the Big Three... without question. GM ran a huge ad in yesterdays Sunday Plain Dealer saying virturally the same things. One whole page size..

But the point is this, is anything that was said in that vid untrue? No. it isn't.

To have some of our "leaders" in washington saying that we should not loan the industry money seems counter productive to the nations interests..

Should we loan the money,, yes.. I belive so.. should thier be strings attached.. you bet your butt there should be.

I personally don't agree w/ any bailouts - banks, cars, etc. If they fail, let them fail and learn from the mistakes.

Do you think Ford, etc. are going out of business? They'll just file for bankruptcy, eliminate debt obligations and then give it a go again. See KMart for a recent example.

The car manufacturer's are just in too deep to their unions and all the restrictions the unions placed on them. Little did they know that would eventually kill the very company they work at. Unions had a purpose back in 1872 to make sure you did not get killed while at work. Today, all the unions do is make things worse and put co's in serious trouble w/ their silly demands.

Let them file bankruptcy, come out w/ a clean slate and this time around get rid of those unions. If not, then Honda and Toyota can just take over. They appear to know what they are doing.

Agreed. It's not like they will just turn out the lights and fired everyone. They will file bankruptcy and be forced to slim down the union. Look at all the airlines that file bankruptcy and were able to get their act together.

Well, from every source I can find from every direction, one in ten jobs are tied in some way to the auto industry.

So it appears that if people believe paying and additional 10% of our work force unemployment is a more economic and viable answer, don't bail them out. But you may wish to do some number crunching before you try to suggest which of these choices is more economical.

And if you want our nations unemployment rate to be around 17% instead of around 7%, don't loan them the money.

And if you'd like for the foreclosure rates to continue skyrocketing, don't loan them the money.

Sitting on our hands and letting our economy completly fail sounds like a logical way to go.

Quote:

---

Let them file bankruptcy, come out w/ a clean slate and this time around get rid of those unions.

---

How do you suggest they do that. just asking, it's alot easier said then done I agree over zelous union and union who have no knowleadge of economics other than get all you can get has killed the auto industry but the goverment has almost inpossible for bigger companys to drop the unions, smaller ones can but with bigger companys it's alot harder and you need alot of people, it's a major movement to drop a union in a big comapny, It's not that easy.

Neither way is easy....


The auto industry has been in shambles for decades...we did bail out Chrysler 25 years ago...and here they are again.

Government run auto companies...sounds like the USSR to me.

In the end, this is the question that must be asked.....Why are they in the shape they are in??

The answer is not enough people have been buying their product. They wouldn't be in the shape they are in if otherwise.

So, now that that question has been answered, there is a whole slew of other questions to ask.

Quote:

---

Brilliant!

Take a great many jobs where people CAN afford to buy homes, autos and have expendable income, and destroy those. That will help our economy!

---

Right, because the current path they are on is working so well, let's give them MORE money and hope they handle it well..

So Pit, beyond loaning them a ton of money, what exactly is your plan since you don't seem to like anybody elses?

and you think that will solve the problem? I don't agree at all,, who's gonna pay out on the 750,000 retirees out there,,, the PBGC will and that's you and me..

Then we pay all the unemployment as well,, let's see,,, 1 in every 10 jobs tied to the Autoindustry....

And if you think the falling of the American Auto Industry isn't going to effect Honda, Nissan and Toyota,, think again. Many of the same suppliers that are tied to GM, Ford and Chrysler are also tied to Honda, Nissan and Toyota.

The next thing you know, we'll have to prop up the suppliers so they can remain in business for the foriegn auto makers...

This isn't as simple as the Big three filing for Bankruptcy and then reorgainizing. The union won't go quietly into that dark night.. Eventually, they would lose, but they'll go down fighting..

and you keep forgetting about the health care component to this.. everyone does..

There is way more to it than simply filing bankrupcy .. way more..

Any way it goes, we are going to pay.

I would rather take cash to shore up the pension aspect, and just let whatever happens, happen.

Quote:

---

the PBGC will and that's

---

NOT you and me..




http://www.pbgc.gov/


PBGC is a federal corporation created by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. It currently protects the pensions of nearly 44 million American workers and retirees in 30,000 private single-employer and multiemployer defined benefit pension plans. PBGC receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined benefit plans, investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the plans.




I sure as hell better not be being held responsible for the bailout out of more crap that I shouldn't be.

Oh.....I notice that isn't a Camaro or Mustang in your sig.

Let em file chapter 11 like all the airlines did in the past. It only made them better. You got to cut the fat out.

Quote:

---

Then we pay all the unemployment as well,

---

That is paid by the individual States, and is not the domain, nor the responsibility, of the Federal government... and it is something that ALL of them have paid into.
Their Union, the UAW, also has unemployment insurance for ALL of their members.

Actually the quality of the domestic cars has improved to within mere points of the best foreign cars. Especially now that your foreign cars are made here in America.

The biggest issue is price, and a lot of that comes down to the history of the unions, and the extreme costs the US automakers deal with because of the unions. The overhead of the US car makers is astronomical.

I have thought for years they should just close the doors, move next door and reopen under a new name and flip off the union. If I was in charge I would put out a memo, as of Jan1, 2009, the only non-union employees will be allowed. Sure the legal battles will cost a lot, but in the end I bet it saves a ton, and those workers will walk away from the union if it's the difference in getting a paycheck or not.

Don't get me wrong, the unions have provided a great service over the years, but over time it became less of a protector, and more of an instigator. The guys up top have to come up with new demands every once in a while to show the members it's worth the dues to be in the union.

Someone has to pull their head out of their butt and realize that they can't keep on doing things the same way and expect better results in the end.

Quote:

---

NOT you and me..

---

Whew, thanks for clearing that up Purp,, I always thought that the PBGC was a federal agency.... my bad,, OK, so we won't have to support the pensions... but let's hope the PBGC doesn't need a loan...where do you suppose they would go?

Where everybody else seems to be going right now since we seem to be in a cash give away mode.

Quote:

---

Oh.....I notice that isn't a Camaro or Mustang in your sig.

---

It's a 1992 Nissan 300ZX that I bought for 1000 dollars 2 years ago,, and I've spent a fortune to rebuild....

But that's one car of the 4 in my possession or at least of the 4 I have some ownership in.

Last year I bought my wife a 2007 Chevy Trailblazer... Last year I also bought my mother a 2007 Chevy Malibu and the other vehicle I drive is a 1998 Chevy Blazer....

I don't think you are being fair even jokingly bringing up a hobby car when I've spent well over 50k on American cars in the last 16 months.....

they can go anywhere they want, but I would recommend that they start with their local banks..... because they better not get a damned dime from the Feds.

Quote:

---

That is paid by the individual States,

---

Nope, not entirely accurate,,, there is Federal Unemployment insurance I pay into as an employer...

But whats your point, if a state has to pick up the tab for the unemployment don't you think that eventually the state has to come knocking on the Federal door for help.. Are you suggesting we let Michigan file Bandruptcy also,, or how about Ohio.... it's just not the answer we need.

Look at several states are already knocking on the door wanting a share of the 700 Billion dollar thing.

California has requested aid from the Fed just the other day over the horrendous forest fires occuring there.

Don't think for one second that if Michigan, Ohio and any other state that has significant Domestic Auto Manufacturing won't be banging on the feds door for help..

One way or the other, no matter how you slice the pie, it's gonna come down to the Federal Government. Since that's likely in any scenario, then we might as well take control and make sure to do it right....

President Elect Obama had an interesting comment about the auto industry in his 60 minutes interview...

He said:

Quote:

---

ON A BAILOUT FOR AUTOMAKERS:

"We need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can't be a blank check. So my hope is that, over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance, but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan -- what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? -- so that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere, as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere

---

SUSTAINABLE US auto industry! Big difference than just throwing money around.. A Sustainable US auto industry helps the nation heal the financial wounds it has..

I know that many of you didn't vote for Obama,, and I suspect that any quote from him will be met with some distain, but he's not wrong here.. not at all.

Oh, for those that want it, here's the link to that quote:http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE4AG46020081117

Quote:

---

they can go anywhere they want, but I would recommend that they start with their local banks..... because they better not get a damned dime from the Feds.

---

It's pretty unrealistic to think they will go anywhere but to the Federal Government Purp..

Quote:

---

Everybody wants to make it look like no big deal. Everything will just work itself out. Like they believe this is a natural progression in wildlife or something.

---

I don't think it's so much that people want to make it out to be No Bid Deal as much as I think they are just tired of all the failures of companies and the threat of having to use federal money to save them.. It's frustrating... not just to them, but to me also. I understand the feelings that Peen and Purp have for instance.. frustration high and anxiety is running higher. it's a scare time in America.

I just take a different approach... it's like,, whats the value of closing the barn door once the horse gets out... just go get the damn horse and bring it back home, then close the door.. Put a better lock on it this time... But keep in mind, that lock has to be adjusted from time to time.. for as sure as I'm sitting here, someone will figure a way to pick that lock in the future. It may take another 80 years, but they will do it.

DEMOCRATS STILL WANT AN AUTO BAILOUT ...
By Neal Boortz @ November 17, 2008 8:14 AM ...

and 70% of the American people do not.

Democrats are insisting on bringing an auto bailout to the table, even though the Bush administration says that the $700 billion bailout was not intended for this purpose ... and even though it is going to be a very tough fight for Harry Reid in the Senate. But fight they will and this week on Capitol Hill we will hear from auto executives and the United Auto Workers.

Nancy Pelosi came up with a plan that she believes will be enticing enough to get enough Republican support. This plan includes adding certain strings to the auto bailout: new fuel-efficiency standards, development of new technology "to compete in the domestic and global market" and restructuring company finances. The Democrats also want to include limiting executive pay. In other words ... the Democrats feel that they, rather than the consumers, are the ones who know just what kind of cars the manufacturers build. All this is going to do is force the automakers to build cars that the American people have already shown that they just do not want to buy.

The Democrats also want to limit executive pay ... but what about the over-inflated pay of the workers at these auto companies, thanks to union contracts. I've told you this statistic before, but $1,600 of every GM car you buy goes toward the healthcare costs of union workers. For companies like Toyota that aren't unionized - that cost is only $200 per car. GM also spends another $1,000 per vehicle on holiday pay, work rules, plant-shutdown-pay and line-relief to UAW workers. Those are costs that auto makers such as Toyota don't have to worry about. The average Ford, GM or Chrysler union worker makes about $71.00 or more per hour. For Toyota, Nissan and the rest ... about $48.00 per year. Do you detect a small problem here?

If the Democrats are truly concerned about "restructuring company finances" they should start with union contracts. What is clear from this situation is that these companies can no longer handle the burden of unionization ... so why should the Democrats allow this practice to continue if they succeed with their bailout? It will be the taxpayers funding the system that broke these auto companies to begin with.

Of course, this is not how United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger see things. He said over the weekend that union contracts are not the problem. He says the problem is out of his control because these auto makers are suffering from the housing slump, credit crisis, etc. He says, "The focus has to be on the economy as a whole as opposed to a UAW contract ... We're here not because of what the auto industry has done ... We're here because of what has happened to the economy."

Nonsense. The bailout would only delay the inevitable.. and unless something is done right now about the union stranglehold on the auto industry the inevitable is bankruptcy. Let them go bankrupt. That doesn't mean they go out of business ... it means that union contracts can be voided unilaterally by the auto manufacturers and they can then get about restructuring their businesses based on consumer wants rather than political mandates.

By the way ... have you heard of the auto worker's "Job Banks Program?" Well, click here, read this, and then tell me how much you support a bailout:







Jobs bank programs -- 12,000 paid not to work

Big 3 and suppliers pay billions to keep downsized UAW members on payroll in decades-long deal.

By Bryce G. Hoffman / The Detroit News
Morris Richardson II / The Detroit News



WAYNE -- Ken Pool is making good money. On weekdays, he shows up at 7 a.m. at Ford Motor Co.'s Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, signs in, and then starts working -- on a crossword puzzle. Pool hates the monotony, but the pay is good: more than $31 an hour, plus benefits.

"We just go in and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper," he says. "Otherwise, I've just sat."

Pool is one of more than 12,000 American autoworkers who, instead of installing windshields or bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank set up by Detroit automakers and Delphi Corp. as part of an extraordinary job security agreement with the United Auto Workers union.

The jobs bank programs were the price the industry paid in the 1980s to win UAW support for controversial efforts to boost productivity through increased automation and more flexible manufacturing.

As part of its restructuring under bankruptcy, Delphi is actively pressing the union to give up the program.

With Wall Street wondering how automakers can afford to pay thousands of workers to do nothing as their market share withers, the union is likely to hear a similar message from the Big Three when their contracts with the UAW expire in 2007 -- if not sooner.

"It's an albatross around their necks," said Steven Szakaly, an economist with the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor. "It's a huge number of workers doing nothing. That has a very large effect on their future earnings outlook."

General Motors Corp. has roughly 5,000 workers in its jobs bank. Delphi has about 4,000 in its version of the same program. Some 2,100 workers are in DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group's job security program. Ford had 1,275 in its jobs bank as of Sept. 25. The pending closure of Ford's assembly plant in Loraine, Ohio, could add significantly to that total. Those numbers could swell in coming years as GM and Ford prepare to close more plants.

Detroit automakers declined to discuss the programs in detail or say exactly how much they are spending, but the four-year labor contracts they signed with the UAW in 2003 established contribution caps that give a good idea of the size of the expense.

According to those documents, GM agreed to contribute up to $2.1 billion over four years. DaimlerChrysler set aside $451 million for its program, along with another $50 million for salaried employees covered under the contract. Ford, which also maintained responsibility for Visteon Corp.'s UAW employees, agreed to contribute $944 million.

Delphi pledged to contribute $630 million. In August, however, Delphi Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Robert S. "Steve" Miller said the company spent more than $100 million on its jobs bank program in the second quarter alone.

"Can we keep losing $400 million a year paying for workers in the jobs bank and $400 million a year on operations? No, we cannot deal with that indefinitely," Miller said in a recent interview with The Detroit News. "We can't wait until 2007."


Guaranteed employment


The jobs bank was established during 1984 labor contract talks between the UAW and the Big Three. The union, still reeling from the loss of 500,000 jobs during the recession of the late 1970s and early 1980s, was determined to protect those who were left. Detroit automakers were eager to win union support to boost productivity through increased automation and more production flexibility.

The result was a plan to guarantee pay and benefits for union members whose jobs fell victim to technological progress or plant restructurings. In most cases, workers end up in the jobs bank only after they have exhausted their government unemployment benefits, which are also supplemented by the companies through a related program. In some cases, workers go directly into the program and the benefits can last until they are eligible to retire or return to the factory floor.

By making it so expensive to keep paying idled workers, the UAW thought Detroit automakers would avoid layoffs. By discouraging layoffs, the union thought it could prevent outsourcing.

That strategy has worked but at the expense of the domestic auto industry's long-term viability.

American automakers have produced cars and trucks even when there is little market demand for them, forcing manufacturers to offer big rebates and discounts.

"Sometimes they just push product on us," said Bill Holden Jr., general manager of Holden Dodge Inc. in Dover, Del., who said this does not go over well with the dealers. "But they've got these contracts with the union."

In Detroit's battle against Asian and European competitors that are unencumbered by such labor costs, the job banks have become a major competitive disadvantage.


Breaking the banks


Analysts say the jobs bank could be a bigger issue than health care in the 2007 contract negotiations, particularly at Ford. It has a younger work force than GM, meaning any workers Ford sends to the bench are likely to stay there for a while.

"Ford is under pressure from investors to cut costs," said Roland Zullo, a research scientist at the University of Michigan's Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations. "At the same time, the unions are going to be under pressure to protect jobs."

Given that, he expects a compromise that allows for the jobs bank to continue but not on the scale of the current programs. "There's going to be a lot of give and take," he said.

But does the jobs bank make any sense in a climate of shrinking profits and declining market share?

"Labor wants the (jobs bank) because they want protection for their members," Zullo said. But he added that the jobs bank was also designed to help the companies by ensuring that skilled workers did not take their talents elsewhere.

"Companies invest in training," he said. "It protects that investment."

The investment only makes sense when viewed from a long-term perspective, a vantage point Wall Street is not known to favor.

"If they're going after the job banks, that would signal to me that the folks at the top have lost faith in their ability to recoup market share," Zullo said. "That would suggest to me that they really don't see a turnaround."

Analysts and labor experts believe some sort of compromise is inevitable as pressure builds on Detroit automakers to lower operating costs.

"The union probably realizes the money to pay for these programs probably doesn't exist," Szakaly said. "There's going to have to be some give on the jobs bank."

While the job banks may exemplify the sort of excesses that give unions a bad name, experts say it is wrong to cast all the blame in the direction of Solidarity House. He said the leaders of GM, Ford and Chrysler also bear some responsibility for the current problems.

"If these guys built cars people wanted, this wouldn't even be an issue," Szakaly said.


'Put out to pasture'


That view was echoed by Dan Cisco, another member of the jobs bank at Michigan Truck, as he drained a cup of coffee with Pool and other idled workers at Rex's restaurant in Wayne last week.

Ten members of UAW Local 900 are currently assigned to the jobs bank at Michigan Truck. They are all gun-welder repairmen -- or "gunnies." It is a classification each says they earned through decades of hard work.

And none of them is ready to give it up.

While some might envy their life of leisure, workers like Cisco, 56, feel humiliated by the program.

"I felt like I was useless -- like I was put out to pasture," he said. "It's just like how they treated the veterans. During the war, we were heroes. When we came back ... "

Cisco adjusts his cap, emblazoned with the familiar silhouette of a captive American POW, and sighs.

Michigan Truck, which builds the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator full-size SUVs, used to be one of Ford's most profitable plants. Today, the nation is turning away from the big trucks and sport utility vehicles it builds.

Cisco, Pool and eight other gunnies from Michigan Truck have been in the jobs bank program since their positions were eliminated in July. They all have more than 36 years with Ford and are among the highest-paid workers in the plant. They say the company is asking them to accept one of the $35,000 retirement packages it is offering to trim its blue-collar headcount.

Most say they have no interest in retiring -- or spending the rest of their careers doing crossword puzzles.

"We want training," Dale Hall said.

Classes are available, the workers said. They have been invited to take courses on bicycle repair, home wiring and poker. Silk-flower arranging is also available.

"They might as well just give us a basket-weaving class, set us in the corner and let us feed the pigeons," Cisco said.


Community service


Not everyone in the jobs bank is spending their time marking it.

Dan Costilla, a member of UAW Local 602 in Lansing, was a body shop worker at GM's Lansing car assembly plant until it was closed in May. Now, instead of grinding joints, he rides herd over 16 of his former plantmates, making sure they keep their appointments at the local thrift store or Head Start program.

"I'm making sure that everything's going smooth," he said.

In the five months since Costilla and his co-workers have been unemployed, they have been busy mowing lawns for the handicapped, patching roofs for senior citizens and chaperoning youngsters on field trips to the zoo. It is all part of a community service effort organized by the union, with the support of the company.

"They realized you could only sit so long at the job bank office," Costilla said. "Your bones, they get sore after a while sitting down."

Bob Bowen, former president of UAW Local 849 in Ypsilanti, said the original intent of the jobs bank program was that idled workers would be gainfully employed on community projects or learning new skills -- real ones that they could actually use on the assembly line.

"The idea was not to have people loafing," Bowen said. "But that was a concern."

The problem, he said, lies in the way the jobs bank is administered.

Instead of setting up a central authority to manage them, responsibility was largely left to union locals across the country. Some organized community projects and job training. Others passed out decks of cards and hooked up VCRs.

Ken Pool said he can only take so many more World War II documentaries and crossword puzzles.

He and the other members of Michigan Truck's jobs bank planned to meet with a lawyer. They have already filed numerous grievances, accusing the company of age discrimination, but have heard nothing from the union or the company.

Now they are going to see if the courts can help.

As for Costilla and his colleagues, they are getting ready to go back to work at GM's new Delta Township plant. Costilla acknowledges that many of the union members are not looking forward to going back to work at the factory.

"The majority of us would rather stay here doing what we're doing," he said.

"You're not on the line, chasing a car."



http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/

nrtu

Maybe my math is all off, but some things in the ad does not seem to add up. They say that monies payed out is $156b in parts, $54b in workers salaries, $35b in sales people, and $10b in taxes. That comes to a total of $255b. It also says that they do $693.3b in sales. 693-255=$438b left for manufacturing, overhead, and R&D. To me, that seems pretty high to cover those costs. Please help me if I am missing where any major money could be going. Thanks.

I wasn't commenting on the bailout at all... I was simply pointing out the inaccuracies in your statements.
You were throwing around statements that weren't accurate... I corrected it.

And yes, as an employer you do pay FUTA... but again, this is money (like existing state unemployment & workers comp programs) that is ALREADY paid into and paid for, not something that is coming from my pocket.


Pit... as for how much is guaranteed by them, it is much more than you may believe, unless you retired while still of "working age" (i.e. in your 50's) (http://www.pbgc.gov/workers-retirees/benefits-information/content/page789.html).
Currently, up to $4300/month... I'd say that is all they need to guarantee, because you sure as hell aren't going to be struggling at that amount. (even more info on PBGC Guarantee amounts).




If you want my commentary on a bailout to the Big 3... I'm actually fine with it, as long as it is along the lines of what Obama cited... a LOAN, and one LOADED TO THE GILLS with requirements and stipulations and that islegally AIR-TIGHT in favor of the taxpayers for it getting re-paid within 5 years.

I realize that those companies (at least GM) have made strides in reshaping their organizations a bit, but got caught at a bad time by the market crashes, and they need cash to carry them to the other side. I also fully realize the cascading impact of them failing.. it would be like carpet bombing our economy.... BUT, we CANNOT even come close to entertaining ANY thoughts of a bailout of the magnitude that is needed without putting some extremely SEVERE and BINDING restrictions and limitations in place. We CANNOT let a single penny go out the door unchecked and with no regulations or requirements like we just did with that theif Paulson and the Federal Reserve.

Quote:

---

General Motors claims most 30+ mpg vehicles

---

This is about a lot more than fuel efficiency.

Quote:

---

But there's a lot of blame to go around. Firstly, it has been our government NOT acting! Fuel efficiancy standards have been pushed back time and time again.

---

So while foreign auto makers were reacting to fuel crises of the 70s and 80s and ramping up fuel standards and making higher quality smaller more fuel efficient cars on their own initiative, the Big 3 were rolling out the H3 and that's the governments fault for not MAKING them produce more fuel efficient cars? The US automakers made a business decision, a very stupid one... the government should not have to MAKE them react to the inevitable that the rest of the world sees coming a mile away, which is a need for high quality, fuel efficient vehicles.

But Pit, this goes way beyond fuel efficiency. It goes to antiquated manufacturing techniques not being upgraded until it was too late, obnoxiously large overhead caused by the unions, etc.. and in the end, the US automakers have a serious reputation problem when fighting against Honda and Toyota etc..

I happen to drive a Ford, before that I had a Ford and before that I had a Jeep... so don't lecture me on giving anybody a second chance.

Good discussions.

I agree w/ those that are saying - how can you give co's that have PROVEN they are not good at what they do, a ton of money?



Yes there is the 'too big to fail' argument, but come on... Like someone said, we already did this w/ Chrysler. My goodness... how many gov't handouts does 1 company get around here?

I liken it to a fiscally irresponsible person that gets money from an inheritance, lotto, etc and in no time is back to zero. Would you give that person a loan? Of course not. So why do it here?

Here's what I think... in the end, these terribly run companies will have to own up to what they are. At some point. You can put a bandaid on the cut, but when it's this deep, you are only prolonging the inevitable. As someone else said, start over and get people in there that know what they are doing. Steal anyone you can from Honda and Toyota. Over pay them, I don't care. Just get people in that know what the h&ll they are doing already.

If not, let 'em fail. Giving money to the same companies w/ the same people there is just insane. What's the saying... doing the same thing and expecting different results...

Give the same people at the same companies and expecting a different outcome here is insane.