General Motors

[Tarfang_Trubasher]

Keep in mind too, many "American" auto makers assemble/manufacture many individual "cells" of a vehicle in Mexico and Romania, then ship them back here for final assembly so they can boast a "made in America" label. Those assembly shops aren't exactly well known for their quality.

-TF

[Kulaf]

You cannot use recalls.....because American autos are held to a higher standard than imports are.

[Kulaf]

Keep in mind too, many "American" auto makers assemble/manufacture many individual "cells" of a vehicle in Mexico and Romania, then ship them back here for final assembly so they can boast a "made in America" label. Those assembly shops aren't exactly well known for their quality.

-TF

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nh ... e=standard

[Partha]

Unfortunately, Embar, you cannot have an economy that puts around 3 million people out of work without severe effects on every part of the economy. You also have to have the national ability to build things - there's no such thing as a purely service economy that would work for a country of more than 300 million people. Also, recent history shows that those car plants are great and dandy for turning out military vehicles that end up needed. Forgive the rational of us who don't want to pile all that up on top of the crises we have already just so that you can keep your wild-eyed Friedmanite theories going.

Nope. Start closing overseas plants. Hire new American workers NOT at UAW contract levels. Get some form of nationalized health care so that they can take those huge money eaters off of their balance sheets, and Detroit (and America as well) looks a heck of a lot healhier. Of course, it would work even better if the next jackanape who suggests developing a new SUV in this economy is publicly guillotined.

[Kulaf]

http://theacsi.org/index.php?option=com ... t+Vehicles

[Embar Angylwrath]

You cannot use recalls.....because American autos are held to a higher standard than imports are.

What? No. Safety standards are safety standards, regardless of who makes the car.

[Klast Brell]

Minimum safety standards apply to all companies. But every company individually decides by what margin they will exceed the minimum.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Been watching the grilling the CEOs of the Big 3 have been taking. The CEOs really failed to make a compelling argument for support. It's obvious that biggest difference between the BIg 3 and other foreign auto makers is the burden the UAW places on the cost structure of those three companies.

Whatever happens, if they get the bailout, or not, you're watching the end of the UAW.

[Partha]

Whatever happens, if they get the bailout, or not, you're watching the end of the UAW.

It's bad form to fap while you're typing, Embar.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I have no idea what "fap" is, and I'm afraid to ask.

Did you see the CEOs make their statements? Not much of a compelling reason to help them. They weren't that strong before, and by their own admission they have bloated product lines and there are too many models to sustain...

Tell me Partha.. why are Toyota, Honda, et al, not at that table? Why are only American car manufacturers there? Given the fact that Toyota, Honda, et al, have production plants here in the US. Hell, even the CEOs were talking about it.

Unions.

The UAW is putting the Big 3 at a global disadvantage. Did you listen to the expert on macroeconomics? He made perfect sense. In essence, his position was this: The Big 3 can make good product... however the Big 3 are saddled with union contracts that inflate costs.. and the Big 3 are also saddled with (get this) efficiency. They get more efficient every year, which means they need less (union) workers, which means they have to buy those (union) workers out at the tune of $105K per year.

Does anyone else on this board have that kind of parachute? Get fired and get handed $105K?

THAT'S the biggest problem with the Big 3. The cost of unions have put them at a competitive disadvantage, and as a result, all of the union jobs are in jeopardy.

[Partha]

Um, yeah.

We'll forget the part where UAW is soon to take the health care costs on themselves.

GM alone said the new contract will save it $3 billion per year, with a big chunk coming from reduced retiree health care costs.

There is no problem with a $25 billion loan to the auto companies with strings attached, certainly fewer than the problems with a $700 billion dollar golden parachute for the financial industries, but Republicans got together and voted for that one. Why? Because AIG doesn't have a union.

In your desire to punish unions, you will destroy the economy. It's like neocon economics. (Oh, wait, The Shock Doctrine. Gotcha.)

[Klast Brell]

The big 3 were doing great while the economy was good. Blaming it all on the UAW is naive. The big three put way too many of their eggs in the gas guzzling truck/SUV basket. The price of gas went up and people started switching to smaller more fuel efficient cars. Then the economy in general took a nose dive and cheap gas didn't matter. People are buying fewer cars. Many of the ones who are still buying are looking at total cost of ownership.
And Total cost of ownership is a big win for the Japanese. Look at this list from Forbes http://www.forbesautos.com/advice/topte ... _to_own_08 The cheapest car on the list is an American car, but the maintenance costs bump it off the #1 spot. About a grand more for repairs and maintenance in the first 5 years.
Toyota, Honda, etc are all seeing reduced sales, but the big three are really taking it in the pooper.

And here are the hard numbers
http://www.motorintelligence.com/fileop ... ales-5.xls

[Embar Angylwrath]

Klast -

The Big 3 weren't doing that well before this happened. They were doing better, but they weren't out of the woods. That was the point of one of the people on the committee... if we give them a loan, will it just reinforce bad management decisions that made them weak in the first place.

Also, it wasn't the Big 3 blaming the unions, it was the macroeconomics professor that was doing that (not so much blaming them, but singling them out as the primary reason the Big 3 will always be at a competitive disadvantage to other car makers). In fact, the professor stated that the Big 3 make pretty good product, but they just can't do it as cheaply as other providers, again, because of the cost of the unions.

It puts the Democrats in bad position... they all know the unions are the reason why the Big 3 aren't competitive, and they know that giving them a loan will just make the American taxpayer a creditir when one of them does eventually file for bankruptcy. The professor was making the argument that Chapter 11 proceedings were probably the best thing that could happen to the industry, since it will allow the manufacturers to shed union contracts, and get cheaper labor costs.

I agree.

[Partha]

Also, it wasn't the Big 3 blaming the unions, it was the macroeconomics professor that was doing that (not so much blaming them, but singling them out as the primary reason the Big 3 will always be at a competitive disadvantage to other car makers). In fact, the professor stated that the Big 3 make pretty good product, but they just can't do it as cheaply as other providers, again, because of the cost of the unions.

So your solution is to have American workers have the same pay and benefits as Mexican workers?

Good call.

[Trollbait]

So your solution is to have American workers have the same pay and benefits as Mexican workers?

Good call.

lol.....Union kool-aid drinker.

The folks at the Honda plant here in Ohio make a comparable wage to the workers at the Jeep plant. Because of Union rules the cost per employee at Jeep is enormous compared to the cost per employee at Honda. The Honda workers are treated fairly and have great benefits.....the Jeep plant workers are afraid of losing their jobs because the company is failing.

Ask those union workers if they would rather have a job or belong to a union and see what their answer is. Because that is the reality and that is the choice they are facing.

[Lurker]

There's no question the union contracts need to be renegotiated. There's also no question that the unions are not responsible for the failure of these companies. The unions are not responsible for the bloated product lines, the misdirected focus, and the mismanagement.

[Klast Brell]

The folks at the Honda plant here in Ohio make a comparable wage to the workers at the Jeep plant. Because of Union rules the cost per employee at Jeep is enormous compared to the cost per employee at Honda.

Can you give us a specific rundown on the wages, etc you mentioned? These subjects are so political charged it helps to see solid numbers to understand the details behind the rhetoric.

[Harlowe]

There's no question the union contracts need to be renegotiated. There's also no question that the unions are not responsible for the failure of these companies. The unions are not responsible for the bloated product lines, the misdirected focus, and the mismanagement.

I think this sums up blame as succinctly as it can be.

I'm not big on unions though. I think in the global market we live in, they no longer make sense.To honestly think that most companies can be successful and compete while paying numerous pensions & healthcare benefits for the rest of an employee's life once he retires - is not even rational.

There has to be a happy medium between union-raped and minimum wage.

[Ddrak]

Unions should be workplace based rather than spanning the entire industry.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

Hire new American workers NOT at UAW contract levels. .

Why are you arguing for hiring workers at non-union levels, (a wise argument), and then argue the UAW should be preserved? Seems to me your stance is the UAW wages/benefits are part of the problem, and then you argue we should keep the problem.

Also, I'd have more sympathy for the Big 3 crying poor mouth if the all three of the CEOs didn't travel on corporate jets to the senate hearings. No cost cutting measures there... (and yes Partha, I know that's a completely different point than the one about unions)

Bottom line... the Big 3 need to be torn down and rebuilt. Management needs to change. Unions need to change. Vision needs to change. That won't happen while the American taxpayer funds current management and current union practices. The American taxpayer needs to step aside and let the Big 3 suffer the consequences of the management and union decisions. Maybe they will fail, maybe not. Maybe they will be cut up and sold, maybe not. Intervention though, is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

Look at AIG, (which the Big 3 are emulating). AIG essentially said "If you don't give us money, we will collapse, and if we collapse, the world will end". Not much different from the armageddon scenarios painted by the CEOs of the Big 3. And guess where AIG isnow? Asking for more money.

For crying out loud.. look at who Cerebus is. And look at the stake they have in the Big 3. Do you really want taxpayer money allocated to preserve a venture capital fund? Those ARE tha "fatcats" the liberals pillory every chance they get. A bailout of the Big 3 is a bailout of the "fatcats".