Sayonara auto industry?

[Bill McIntyre]

What a shame. Some Southern Republican Senators just hate unions so much that they are willing to let all those jobs go away. It seems amazing that, after the drubbing the party just took, its willing to take a stand against good jobs for Americans that pay a living wage.

They don't want blue collar workers making a decent living, but when that much bigger bailout went to financial firms, they didn't demand that those white collar workers take cuts in pay and benefits.

Of course its just coincidence that they have plants owned by foreign companies in their states, so this will be good for those companies.

And of course those states gave huge subsidies in taxpayer money to attract those plants, but I guess that's a different sort of welfare.

I hope I'll be able to get parts for my Ford truck next year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/business/12auto.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

[Guido4198]

I know a lot of people who work in those Southern auto plants Bill,and they live quite well thank you. Of course....they actually have to WORK to get money...unlike a lot of the UAW. The U.A.W. contracts are unrealistic, non-sustainable agreements made between idiot executives and greedy union bosses. NEITHER of them had any concern for the long term viability of their companies. The auto exec's totally caved in to stupid UAW demands FOR DECADES just to insure "labor peace" because they believed they could make US pay the price since we had few options. The short-sighted stupidity and greed shown by BOTH sides in this fiasco has always been obvious to me and anyone else with half a brain who looked at it with a critical eye. As long as it was between them, it wasn't MY business. Fast forward to today...their fantasy-land business model has finally collapsed around their ears...they want MY money to prop it up, and I say NO. Representative Bob Corker presented an opportunity for government assistance to the Big 3, provided the U.A.W. got on board and agreed to work for the same compensation as the NON-UAW auto workers in the U.S. The union refused to accept that condition...they (somehow) seem to think that they're worth $70-80.00 an hour, and won't work for less. FINE...let'em go find someplace that will pay that, and NOT need my money to keep it going. I've never had anything even CLOSE to their sweetheart package of pay and benefits, and I'll be damned if I'll willingly keep their golden goose fat.

[Fis_Hunter]

Dodge
I took the info I found here and came up with a total labor cost for a dodge vehicle to be approximatly $1369.33 This does not sound like a lot. What are the other costs which contribute to the price?


3400 people per 24 hour period

3 total shifts worked

1450 total vehicles produced per 24 hour period

1133.3 People working per shift

9066.4 Hours worked per shift

27199.20 Total hours worked per 24 hour period

$73.00 estimated hourly cost per employee to include (Work pool and retiree and medical…)

$1985541.60 daily cost for employees to include (Work pool and retiree and medical)

$1369.33 total cost in hours worked per vehicle produced

This does not include the operating costs of the dodge facility which is 3.7 million SqFt, about 77 football fields and has 900 robots and over 11 miles of assembly line track at Belvidere Ill or the vehicle parts and supplies.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0619/p18s02-hfks.htm

[Grunt]

I think it's a shame that the auto companies are required to use the UAW workers. I guarantee you that there are PLENTY of people who would be willing to go and do the same jobs for half the price. It's just the way it works, $70/hr is ridiculous (quoting the number from our local news station). If the workers still want jobs, maybe they should consider disbanding the union and working for less. Less money is still better than no money.

[jackpine savage]

If 2 of the Big 3 collapse the GOP has just guaranteed it will not hold power in this nation for a long time. While they were poorly run companies, letting the largest manufacturing sector of our country collapse is bad for the US in the long term

[bgbill]

What a shame. Some Southern Republican Senators just hate unions so much that they are willing to let all those jobs go away. It seems amazing that, after the drubbing the party just took, its willing to take a stand against good jobs for Americans that pay a living wage.

They don't want blue collar workers making a decent living, but when that much bigger bailout went to financial firms, they didn't demand that those white collar workers take cuts in pay and benefits.

Of course its just coincidence that they have plants owned by foreign companies in their states, so this will be good for those companies.

And of course those states gave huge subsidies in taxpayer money to attract those plants, but I guess that's a different sort of welfare.

I hope I'll be able to get parts for my Ford truck next year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/business/12auto.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

Bill,

The bailout bill the Republicans wouldn't vote for is not about saving jobs it is about saving the UAW, but it is a short term fix and the big 3 are on their way to bankruptcy if not outright failure, this bailout will not save them, it is just a waste of money and it is about time they voted to stop it.

The Big 3 have made no real changes in their business practices other thaan to beg for money from the taxpayers.

Why should the taxpayers give money to a failing business that has not changed the way it operates and has done nothing to try and become profitable.

The UAW will not budge on the workers who get laid off still getting paid by the employer, why should a laid off worker still get paid when they are not working?

The democrats are trying to use taxpayers money to reward the Unions for them backing them in last months elections, I know in Chicago this is the way things are done, but that doesn't make it right.

Last year GM and Toyota sold about the same amount of vehicles 9.3 million and GM lost I think about 40 Billion dollars and Toyota made 17 Billion Dollars.

Obviously something is very wrong with GM, only a fool would loan them money.

GM is also asking for more money to be loaned to them that their stock is worth, so it seems to me it would be cheaper for the US to buy all of GM's stock and then they could do what they wanted with GM.

As far as you being ale to get parts for your Ford truck, you still will be able to get parts, Ford buys most of their parts from vendors and aftermarket parts and accessories is a big business that will still be around.

[jackpine savage]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200812060002
http://windowsxp-privacy.net/?id=198760192
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/24/opinion/main4630103.shtml?source=RSSattr=Opinion_4630103
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_auto_workers_really_make_more_than.html

Yet some of you still buy into the notion that the UAW workers make 70/hr. It would be more enjoyable reading your posts if they were factual.

[jackpine savage]

"Why should the taxpayers give money to a failing business that has not changed the way it operates and has done nothing to try and become profitable."


All of the financial institutions bailed out should be let to fail then. Of course that would have completely trashed our economy. Hope you retirement fund is doing well because its going to take one hell of a hit today.

[bgbill]

"Why should the taxpayers give money to a failing business that has not changed the way it operates and has done nothing to try and become profitable."


All of the financial institutions bailed out should be let to fail then. Of course that would have completely trashed our economy. Hope you retirement fund is doing well because its going to take one hell of a hit today.

The bailout of the financial business was poorly implemented and has not helped that much.

The stock market plunged after Obama was elected, didn't hear you guys complaining about that.

The Governemnt mostly democrats are working on a plan to take everyones 401k and do what they have done with Social Security.

In a Capatalist market, you have winners and losers, if my company fails, who is going to help me? answer, no one but me.

[CraigC]

Speaking of unions, my old man was a member of the IBEW. Yes he was a proud but unemployed member. Most years he maybe worked 3 or 4 months. That gave him plenty of extra time for other pursuits, like drinking himself into stupors which usually ended up with threats of suicide. It is unfortunate that his liver failed before he had the nerve to pull the trigger.

I have seen the productivity of union workers first hand. I was doing some service on equipment for a client in San Diego a few years back. the ship yard was union. Lots of flack about me not being union, even though there weren't any union workers that had a breathing gas production equipment back ground. Long/short, that ship yard was lucky to get 6 full hours out of those union workers in an 8 hour day. The time of the unions has past, IMO.

Craig

[bgbill]

Speaking of unions, my old man was a member of the IBEW. Yes he was a proud but unemployed member. Most years he maybe worked 3 or 4 months. That gave him plenty of extra time for other pursuits, like drinking himself into stupors which usually ended up with threats of suicide. It is unfortunate that his liver failed before he had the nerve to pull the trigger.

I have seen the productivity of union workers first hand. I was doing some service on equipment for a client in San Diego a few years back. the ship yard was union. Lots of flack about me not being union, even though there weren't any union workers that had a breathing gas production equipment back ground. Long/short, that ship yard was lucky to get 6 full hours out of those union workers in an 8 hour day. The time of the unions has past, IMO.

Craig

Sorry to hear about your father.

It was reported on the news this morning the UAW didn't want to renegotiate their contract until it expires in 2011, that is what is being blamed on the bail out deal falling through.

That just goes to show how stupid the UAW is, again another Union would rather see a company go out of business than to work with them so their workers will still have jobs.

I hope the UAW ends up like PATCO.

[Guido4198]

Jackpine...
My retirement fund is most definitely NOT in good shape. Matter of fact....unless things make a BIG turn-around..I'll most likely not have much left in my retirement fund at all. As a result, I've pretty much reconciled myself to the fact that I'll have to work the rest of my life. That said..I'll be damned if I'm gonna work 'til I'm dead in order to subsidize the U.A.W.'s cushy deal with the Big 3. This whole thing is about the Democrat politicians paying back the Big Labor unions out of MY pocket. NO WAY..!!

[Marcus]

All of the financial institutions bailed out should be let to fail then. Of course that would have completely trashed our economy. Hope you retirement fund is doing well because its going to take one hell of a hit today.

It is a overwhelmingly held opinion that the bailout measures enacted by Roosevelt, post depression, only served to severely prolong it. The bailout measures now are of the same ilk.
My observations of the stock market fall has been due to a loss of confidence in our monetary system. Obama's 'spend our way out of it' attitude hasn't helped this perception.
It makes absolutely no sense to me at all why we should be rewarding any of these poorly run companies. Let these competition snuffing behemoths fail and let a leaner better company replace them. Send the message that failure will not be rewarded...this isn't bizarro world.
Congress is acting on the Big 3 because they were given the power to. If you recall, the major bailout (750 billion) they voted on was pressured thru congress by fear mongering, threats, and then payoffs. Of course the Fed has already said they are ready to spend upwards of 8 Trillion and won't seek congressional approval to do so.
It's been 18 years since Japan tried to spend their way out of a depression and their economy still hasn't recovered.

Here's one congressman who gets it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhOtMbuNIYo

[bgbill]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200812060002
http://windowsxp-privacy.net/?id=198760192
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/24/opinion/main4630103.shtml?source=RSSattr=Opinion_4630103
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_auto_workers_really_make_more_than.html

Yet some of you still buy into the notion that the UAW workers make 70/hr. It would be more enjoyable reading your posts if they were factual.

The wage per hour is based on the actual wage paid oplus the labor burden for that employee.

The UAW was asked to give a concession that would pay their workers the same as the non union plants like Toyota, the UAW said NO.

When GM and Chrysler go out of business and the UAW asks for a handout, the answer should be NO.

Ford should close their Detroit plants and move to labor friendly states like Florida where it is a right to work state, there are plenty of people here who would love to work in a plant making 25 dollars an hour.

***** the UAW.

[fishspearit]

It seems to me that the big issue for the American car industry isn't being discussed. What kind of cars will they build in the future?

Whether they restructure under a 'car czar' or under a bankruptcy trustee, it probably doesn't matter too much. Either way retired employees will probably lose part of their pensions and whoever is holding GM's 60 Billion in debt will get defaulted on, and the car companies will have to negotiate better labor contracts.

The price of gas is what we aren't talking about. $4 a gallon gas is a big part of what sent our economy spiralling down, and made US car manufacturers suffer more than the fuel efficient imports. So now that gas is back down to $1.65, after restructuring, are they going to keep building the same old vehicles? Or are they really going to 'retool' as they have already been given money to do, and start building fuel efficient hybrids? What is being unsaid is that if they retool, the price of gas will have to go back up to make them viable. I see a gas tax in our future if they change the type of cars they make, no matter how the restructuring is done. I'm not happy about the idea of a gas tax, but if we look further than 3 months into GM's future we should be discussing the price of gas and what type of cars they should be building. Are we going to let the free market decide that we still want to drive V-8's until gas goes back up, or do we meddle with the market and steer the consumer and manufacturer in the same direction, together?

[Marcus]

Here's a relevant post from another forum I thought was funny.

"ROTFLMAO

Oh, this is priceless. Have you read Nancy Pelosi's midnight statement about the Senate's refusal to pass the automobile bailout?

Excerpt (emphases and comments mine):

"The House-passed bipartisan legislation protects taxpayers,

Right out the gate, she hits us with this whammy. As if a bailout of the automobile makers somehow actually protects taxpayers! Ha ha ha!

preserves environmental standards

See what I mean? She's such a card! That's funny, Nancy! Declaring that bailing out companies is what preserves environmental standards -- quite the belly laugh, there!

and places tough accountability measures on the auto companies to help ensure their long term viability and competitiveness.

Oh, the tears in my eyes from laughing are making it hard for me to read the rest of her statement! Yes, accountability, Nancy! Just like the accountability we are stringently holding bankers to! My, aren't their feet to the fire, eh?!? Ha ha ha ha!

The House-passed bill demanded deep concessions from all parties -- the executives, shareholders and the union.

Okay, in that list of those making concessions, she forgot to include: the American taxpayers. But her delivery is so spot-on, that I'll just overlook that unimportant little tidbit!

“Senate Republicans’ refusal to support the bipartisan legislation passed by the House and negotiated in good faith with the White House, the Senate and the automakers is irresponsible

OH, THAT DID IT! I'm about to pee my pants, I'm laughing so hard. Ha ha, Nancy says that the Senate Republicans are the irresponsible ones -- not the people who run their businesses into the ground, but those who say we shouldn't rob from Peter in order to pay Paul. My sides are achin' I'm cracking up so hard!

...is irresponsible, especially at a time of economic hardship. The consequences of the Senate Republicans’ failure to act could be devastating to our economy,

She just delivers 'em one right after the other, in rapid-fire delivery! Oh, you Nancy! She even jibed senators by implying they "failed to act" when they just "failed to act as Nancy wanted them to act." She doesn't miss a beat!

All of the preceding was just the warm-up; now, here comes the biggest punchline:

detrimental to workers, and destructive to the American automobile industry unless the President immediately directs Secretary Paulson to explore other short-term financial assistance options, including TARP and those available to the Federal Reserve. That is the only viable option available at this time."

Get it??? If Congress doesn't behave properly, we'll just have the President (is he still around?) take charge of the situation. Like when kids are misbehaving in the back seat of the car, and the dad turns around and gruffly warns, "Don't make me come back there!" But we all know dad is all bark and no bite these days, and the actual situation will be handled by someone(s) else. As if "dad" or these "someone else"es could really solve the problem! Ha ha ha ha!!!...."

[Nate Baker]

The UAW was asked to give a concession that would pay their workers the same as the non union plants like Toyota, the UAW said NO.

***** the UAW.

Yes. No.

This is absolutely a showdown with the union. Unfortunately, the biggest problem isn't current operating costs, it's the costs, both current and future, of the pensions and retiree medical benefits it's responsible for.

That said, we're probably better of with the UAW just like we're better off with a two party political system, but it seems obvious now that UAW is going to have a come to Jesus moment and make some concessions.

But this is just silly. All this hand wringing and posturing over a $25 billion dollar bailout of the backbone of the American manufacturing sector. Our government is about to hand over 40 times that much to the financial sector and we hear almost nothing about holding banks accountable.

We've already given them something like $200 billion, and they essentially said "Thanks" and kept the money. It didn't free up the credit markets in any appreciable way. And the result? The treasury said, "Oops," and changed it's approach. But the banks and AIG are keeping our money.

[Bill McIntyre]

But this is just silly. All this hand wringing and posturing over a $25 billion dollar bailout of the backbone of the American manufacturing sector. Our government is about to hand over 40 times that much to the financial sector and we hear almost nothing about holding banks accountable.

We've already given them something like $200 billion, and they essentially said "Thanks" and kept the money. It didn't free up the credit markets in any appreciable way. And the result? The treasury said, "Oops," and changed it's approach. But the banks and AIG are keeping our money.

Yeah, that's what gets me. No one is worried about the salaries and benefits of those fat cats on Wall Street, but unions have to be broken.

Anyway, now the President is talking about using some of the TARP funds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/13/business/13auto.html?_r=1&hp

[CraigC]

Sorry to hear about your father.

Thanks, but I'm not sorry, for reasons I'll keep to myself. Suffice to say he went when he did or I would probably be in prison for doing a Kevorkian on him during one of his episodes.

Craig

[Bill McIntyre]

Ford should close their Detroit plants and move to labor friendly states like Florida where it is a right to work state, there are plenty of people here who would love to work in a plant making 25 dollars an hour.
.

I'm sure there are. And there are lots of people in Mexico who would love to work for $10 per hour, but then they could lose their jobs because some Asians were willing to work of for $5 per hour. Where does it stop?

We have to decide whether we want a middle class in this country. Someone who is blue collar should be able to live in a decent house and educate his kids so they can become white collar. There is no way to separate the contribution of the white collar guys at the top of the auto industry from the contribution of the blue collar guys. Both are necessary to get cars built. Maybe the white collar guys could get along with a bit less so that blue collar guys can make enough to buy goods and services and keep the economy going. If all we have is an upper class and a lower class, the lower class folks can't afford to buy stuff, and the upper class folks can buy all they need with a fraction of their income. They can only use so many houses and cars.

Work rules is a separate subject. There are lots of abuses. Workers should be required to put in an honest day's work, but then they should earn an honest day's wage.

[divefilm]

I think it's a shame that the auto companies are required to use the UAW workers. I guarantee you that there are PLENTY of people who would be willing to go and do the same jobs for half the price. It's just the way it works, $70/hr is ridiculous (quoting the number from our local news station). If the workers still want jobs, maybe they should consider disbanding the union and working for less. Less money is still better than no money.

Thats true, they are called mexicans, and they live in mexico, and thats where these cars and jobs are headed.

But the CEO will still be rich enough to have you killed with the change in his pocket, so don't lose any sleep over that.

[aaron proffitt]

Thats true, they are called mexicans, and they live in mexico, and thats where these cars and jobs are headed.

But the CEO will still be rich enough to have you killed with the change in his pocket, so don't lose any sleep over that.

Why would we give American taxpayer money to companies that have factories in MEXICO and are STILL losing money ? You knew they already have factories in Mexico ,right ?

[aaron proffitt]

Yes. No.

This is absolutely a showdown with the union. Unfortunately, the biggest problem isn't current operating costs, it's the costs, both current and future, of the pensions and retiree medical benefits it's responsible for.

That said, we're probably better of with the UAW just like we're better off with a two party political system, but it seems obvious now that UAW is going to have a come to Jesus moment and make some concessions.

But this is just silly. All this hand wringing and posturing over a $25 billion dollar bailout of the backbone of the American manufacturing sector. Our government is about to hand over 40 times that much to the financial sector and we hear almost nothing about holding banks accountable.

We've already given them something like $200 billion, and they essentially said "Thanks" and kept the money. It didn't free up the credit markets in any appreciable way. And the result? The treasury said, "Oops," and changed it's approach. But the banks and AIG are keeping our money.

Nate , the hand wringing comes from the fact that over 65% of the country were against the financial market bailout, and Congress heard about it. Now comes a bailout to follow that one.

[Grunt]

But the CEO will still be rich enough to have you killed with the change in his pocket, so don't lose any sleep over that.

What's relevance does this statement have? CEOs are always going to have more money than I have in my pocket, regardless of what country the factory is in. If people work up to those positions, more power to them.

[divefilm]

What's relevance does this statement have? CEOs are always going to have more money than I have in my pocket, regardless of what country the factory is in. If people work up to those positions, more power to them.

I'm saying you suggest they work for minimum wage? So they will starve to death while working.

Good plan.

And good for you for defending the guys who failed their companies and want bailout money that comes from my pocket.

[divefilm]

Why would we give American taxpayer money to companies that have factories in MEXICO and are STILL losing money ? You knew they already have factories in Mexico ,right ?

Yes, I know. But the guys at the top are rich. So they get what they want, while the rest of us have our standard of living chipped away at every year, so the guy at the top can make an extra mil to pay for his private golf course.

But go ahead, defend the CEO's if you want. We still get ****ed either way.

[aaron proffitt]

Yes, I know. But the guys at the top are rich. So they get what they want, while the rest of us have our standard of living chipped away at every year, so the guy at the top can make an extra mil to pay for his private golf course.

But go ahead, defend the CEO's if you want. We still get ****ed either way.

Whose defending the CEOs ? You assume that I don't have a right and wrong barometer that doesn't 'tickle' when a company is going down while the billionaire's continue on ? I was just saying , with respect to the bailout....why give a company money that has sent jobs beyond our borders. Turn off the partisan viewfinder and you would've seen that.

[Grunt]

I'm saying you suggest they work for minimum wage? So they will starve to death while working.

Good plan.

And good for you for defending the guys who failed their companies and want bailout money that comes from my pocket.

I didn't say anything about minimum wage, but I do feel there is room for adjustment. I'm sure they can suffer a little cutback and not "starve to death." Are you saying you would be stubborn enough to want to keep your pay and lose your job as opposed to suffering a pay cut and staying employed? Also, I didn't say I agree with what a CEO gets paid, I said if they work hard enough and get paid that much, more power to them. I don't decide CEO salaries, I think they are all grossly overpaid.

[divefilm]

Whose defending the CEOs ? You assume that I don't have a right and wrong barometer that doesn't 'tickle' when a company is going down while the billionaire's continue on ? I was just saying , with respect to the bailout....why give a company money that has sent jobs beyond our borders. Turn off the partisan viewfinder and you would've seen that.

Not partisan, just misread what you wrote.

[divefilm]

I didn't say anything about minimum wage, but I do feel there is room for adjustment. I'm sure they can suffer a little cutback and not "starve to death." Are you saying you would be stubborn enough to want to keep your pay and lose your job as opposed to suffering a pay cut and staying employed? Also, I didn't say I agree with what a CEO gets paid, I said if they work hard enough and get paid that much, more power to them. I don't decide CEO salaries, I think they are all grossly overpaid.

I would take a pay cut. Unfortunately, companies are changing their business model. My company just figured out that they can save a lot of money by replacing everyone every 3 years or so with someone just out of college. So they will now do this as a matter of company policy. Why? Because they can. Trust me, this will be common practice in a few years.

I know these guys would be more than willing to take a pay cut. They have publicly stated as much. I just think that this is a attempt to destroy unions. If the CEO had his way, no one at that company would make over 3 dollars an hour. And I think this is killing the middle class in this country. But, its starting a solid middle class in Mexico:thumps:

Cost of living goes up every year, standard of living goes down every year.

I just think these UAW guys are pussies because the CEO is still breathing, but that JMO.

[Marcus]

...and while you guys are still complaining about a measly 25 billion...sleight of hand.

"Fed Refuses to Disclose Recipients of $2 Trillion (Update2)
Email | Print | A A A

By Mark Pittman

Dec. 12 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve refused a request by Bloomberg News to disclose the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

Bloomberg filed suit Nov. 7 under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act requesting details about the terms of 11 Fed lending programs, most created during the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

The Fed responded Dec. 8, saying it’s allowed to withhold internal memos as well as information about trade secrets and commercial information. The institution confirmed that a records search found 231 pages of documents pertaining to some of the requests.

“If they told us what they held, we would know the potential losses that the government may take and that’s what they don’t want us to know,” said Carlos Mendez, a senior managing director at New York-based ICP Capital LLC, which oversees $22 billion in assets.

The Fed stepped into a rescue role that was the original purpose of the Treasury’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. The central bank loans don’t have the oversight safeguards that Congress imposed upon the TARP.

Total Fed lending exceeded $2 trillion for the first time Nov. 6. It rose by 138 percent, or $1.23 trillion, in the 12 weeks since Sept. 14, when central bank governors relaxed collateral standards to accept securities that weren’t rated AAA.

‘Been Bamboozled’

Congress is demanding more transparency from the Fed and Treasury on bailout, most recently during Dec. 10 hearings by the House Financial Services committee when Representative David Scott, a Georgia Democrat, said Americans had “been bamboozled.”

Bloomberg News, a unit of New York-based Bloomberg LP, on May 21 asked the Fed to provide data on collateral posted from April 4 to May 20. The central bank said on June 19 that it needed until July 3 to search documents and determine whether it would make them public. Bloomberg didn’t receive a formal response that would let it file an appeal within the legal time limit.

On Oct. 25, Bloomberg filed another request, expanding the range of when the collateral was posted. It filed suit Nov. 7.

In response to Bloomberg’s request, the Fed said the U.S. is facing “an unprecedented crisis” in which “loss in confidence in and between financial institutions can occur with lightning speed and devastating effects.”

Data Provider

The Fed supplied copies of three e-mails in response to a request that it disclose the identities of those supplying data on collateral as well as their contracts.

While the senders and recipients of the messages were revealed, the contents were erased except for two phrases identifying a vendor as “IDC.” One of the e-mails’ subject lines refers to “Interactive Data -- Auction Rate Security Advisory May 1, 2008.”

Brian Willinsky, a spokesman for Bedford, Massachusetts- based Interactive Data Corp., a seller of fixed-income securities information, declined to comment.

“Notwithstanding calls for enhanced transparency, the Board must protect against the substantial, multiple harms that might result from disclosure,” Jennifer J. Johnson, the secretary for the Fed’s Board of Governors, said in a letter e-mailed to Bloomberg News.

‘Dangerous Step’

“In its considered judgment and in view of current circumstances, it would be a dangerous step to release this otherwise confidential information,” she wrote.

New York-based Citigroup Inc., which is shrinking its global workforce of 352,000 through asset sales and job cuts, is among the nine biggest banks receiving $125 billion in capital from the TARP since it was signed into law Oct. 3. More than 170 regional lenders are seeking an additional $74 billion.

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in September they would meet congressional demands for transparency in a $700 billion bailout of the banking system.

The Freedom of Information Act obliges federal agencies to make government documents available to the press and public. The Bloomberg lawsuit, filed in New York, doesn’t seek money damages.

‘Right to Know’

“There has to be something they can tell the public because we have a right to know what they are doing,” said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Arlington, Virginia-based Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

“It would really be a shame if we have to find this out 10 years from now after some really nasty class-action suit and our financial system has completely collapsed,” she said.

The Fed’s five-page response to Bloomberg may be “unprecedented” because the board usually doesn’t go into such detail about its position, said Lee Levine, a partner at Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz LLP in Washington.

“This is uncharted territory,” said Levine during an interview from his New York office. “The Freedom of Information Act wasn’t built to anticipate this situation and that’s evident from the way the Fed tried to shoehorn their argument into the trade-secrets exemption.”

The Fed lent cash and government bonds to banks that handed over collateral including stocks and subprime and structured securities such as collateralized debt obligations, according to the Fed Web site.

Borrowers include the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Citigroup and New York-based JPMorgan Chase & Co., the country’s biggest bank by assets.

Banks oppose any release of information because that might signal weakness and spur short-selling or a run by depositors, Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the Financial Services Roundtable, a Washington trade group, said in an interview last month.

‘Complete Truth’

“Americans don’t want to get blindsided anymore,” Mendez said in an interview. “They don’t want it sugarcoated or whitewashed. They want the complete truth. The truth is we can’t take all the pain right now.”

The Bloomberg lawsuit said the collateral lists “are central to understanding and assessing the government’s response to the most cataclysmic financial crisis in America since the Great Depression.”

In response, the Fed argued that the trade-secret exemption could be expanded to include potential harm to any of the central bank’s customers, said Bruce Johnson, a lawyer at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP in Seattle. That expansion is not contained in the freedom-of-information law, Johnson said.

“I understand where they are coming from bureaucratically, but that means it’s all the more necessary for taxpayers to know what exactly is going on because of all the money that is being hurled at the banking system,” Johnson said.

The Bloomberg lawsuit is Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 08-CV-9595, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). "

[divefilm]

Sounds like an administration is paying back some favors it owes while its still in the whitehouse.

Makes me ****ing sick.

[Marcus]

Sounds like an administration is paying back some favors it owes while its still in the whitehouse.

Makes me ****ing sick.

The Federal Reserve isn't a part of any administration. They are their own entity. They control our money and do as they damn well please because of it.

[bgbill]

Sounds like an administration is paying back some favors it owes while its still in the whitehouse.

Makes me ****ing sick.

The democrats are trying to pay back the unions for their support in last months election with taxpayer money.

[chuam]

The democrats are trying to pay back the unions for their support in last months election with taxpayer money.

It's 15 billion. I guess the other 700 billion that is going to the finance industry is Bush's way of paying back his cronies?

[Scott]

American cars suck. They are big gas guzzlers that break down often.
Bailing that crap out won't make any difference, unless they are forced to make small cars, with better mileage and flexibility to use various fuels oe electric etc..:eek:.

[jackpine savage]

American cars suck. They are big gas guzzlers that break down often.
Bailing that crap out won't make any difference, unless they are forced to make small cars, with better mileage and flexibility to use various fuels oe electric etc..:eek:.

I would agree with you on GM and Chrysler, however I think Ford makes very good vehicles. I have had a Ford truck for 10 years and have had no problems with it and will be buying another come January. Their vehicles explain why they are in the best shape of the Big 3.

[bgbill]

American cars suck. They are big gas guzzlers that break down often.
Bailing that crap out won't make any difference, unless they are forced to make small cars, with better mileage and flexibility to use various fuels oe electric etc..:eek:.

American cars do not suck.

Americans don't want shitbox cars like that.

I could drive any vehicle I want to and I drive Fords, my F250 is almost 9 years old and has over 192,000 miles on it and has had only minor issues, it broke down one time because the fuel pump went out at about 185,000 miles.

What kind of car do you drive?

[Bill McIntyre]

I would agree with you on GM and Chrysler, however I think Ford makes very good vehicles. I have had a Ford truck for 10 years and have had no problems with it and will be buying another come January. Their vehicles explain why they are in the best shape of the Big 3.

When I bought my 1999 F-250, I went to a diver who was the fleet manager for a dealer down in San Diego County. I've been very happy with the truck. But when I asked him about a Ford Focus, he told me that while Ford made good trucks, I should stay away from their cars, so we bought another Honda.

[bgbill]

"Why should the taxpayers give money to a failing business that has not changed the way it operates and has done nothing to try and become profitable."


All of the financial institutions bailed out should be let to fail then. Of course that would have completely trashed our economy. Hope you retirement fund is doing well because its going to take one hell of a hit today.

The Stock Market didn't take the big hit you predicted, It closed up 68 points.

[bgbill]

When I bought my 1999 F-250, I went to a diver who was the fleet manager for a dealer down in San Diego County. I've been very happy with the truck. But when I asked him about a Ford Focus, he told me that while Ford made good trucks, I should stay away from their cars, so we bought another Honda.

Bill,

I have a 2004 Ford Focus, it has been a good car.

My Wife drives a Mecury Villager, it has been a good vehicle.

Seems to me the Ford Fleet Manager doesn't have faith in his product, could that be one of the issues with Ford?

[spaghetti]

Some of you keep blaming the cost of labour, while the cost of labor in the US automobile industry is the same as in France, and much lower than in Germany.

Scapegoating labour is too easy, it's the easy way that dumbass managers use to justify their mismanagent, lack of strategy, lack of talent.

PS-my Ford Focus is a good car for the price.

[jackpine savage]

The Stock Market didn't take the big hit you predicted, It closed up 68 points.

That had more to do with the White House announcing it would use some of the $700 billion TARP money for the auto industry.

[bgbill]

That had more to do with the White House announcing it would use some of the $700 billion TARP money for the auto industry.

It is against the law to use TARP money for the auto bail out, but that won't stop them from doing it.

Has the deal gone through yet, or is Bush just flapping his gums?

The majority of the citizens of the US was against the wall street bail out and they are against the auto industry bail out.

It would be nice if the dickheads in washington would listen to the people they work for once in awhile.

[Rokket1]

BGBILL"Last year GM and Toyota sold about the same amount of vehicles 9.3 million and GM lost I think about 40 Billion dollars and Toyota made 17 Billion Dollars."

"Obviously something is very wrong with GM, only a fool would loan them money."

I was going to post this, but couldn't find or remember the numbers. I agree. I don't want to see a bunch of people out of a job, but something has to make them change.

[jackpine savage]

It is against the law to use TARP money for the auto bail out, but that won't stop them from doing it.

Has the deal gone through yet, or is Bush just flapping his gums?

The majority of the citizens of the US was against the wall street bail out and they are against the auto industry bail out.

It would be nice if the dickheads in washington would listen to the people they work for once in awhile.

Just repeating what I read here.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122909133751001705.html

[jackpine savage]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=david%20leonhardt%20%2473&st=cse

[Bill McIntyre]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=david%20leonhardt%20%2473&st=cse

Great article, but I'm sure those who want to bust the unions will continue to ignore it.

[aaron proffitt]

" ...if we wanted to preserve The Big 3 , we'd have bought more of their cars."


Pretty much sums it up.

[Bill McIntyre]

" ...if we wanted to preserve The Big 3 , we'd have bought more of their cars."


Pretty much sums it up.

Yes it does. Since the early 1970s, the only reason I've owned an American vehicle is because nothing made by the Japanese could tow a boat. I've had two Suburbans and a Ford truck as tow vehicles during that time (I keep them for a long time) but our smaller car has always been foreign.

But that problem won't be solved by forcing the UAW to take cuts in wages and benefits. I drove those foreign cars because they got better gas mileage and were higher quality, and the dealers often offered better service.

[Marcus]

$40/hr for an assembly line worker is ridiculous. But I say again, this 25 Billion is pocket change compared to the 3.2 Trillion already spent, 2 Trillion of it unaccounted for.
That's like comparing 25 cents to $32.

[Bill McIntyre]

$40/hr for an assembly line worker is ridiculous. But I say again, this 25 Billion is pocket change compared to the 3.2 Trillion already spent, 2 Trillion of it unaccounted for.
That's like comparing 25 cents to $32.

Aren't we talking $8 billion, at least for starters?

I agree that $40 seems like a lot for someone who stands there doing the same thing over and over again all day every day on an assembly line, but then I ask myself if I'd be willing to do it for 20 or 30 years. I don't know how I could handle it.

Hell, when I was a stockbroker, I wondered how the old guys around me could have sat there in the same office basically selling stuff for so many years, and at least that job did require some mental activity and understanding (hopefully at least) of sophisticated financial products. One thing I really liked about the Marine Corps- it put me in new places doing new jobs- I might be the admin officer, the operations officer, the maintenance officer, etc., all jobs with different requirements and challenges. But standing there installing the same bolts day after day on an assembly line must be a real challenge to your feeling of self-worth.

Maybe it requires a decent salary just to get people to stay in the job and show up most days, and sober.

[bgbill]

Yes it does. Since the early 1970s, the only reason I've owned an American vehicle is because nothing made by the Japanese could tow a boat. I've had two Suburbans and a Ford truck as tow vehicles during that time (I keep them for a long time) but our smaller car has always been foreign.

But that problem won't be solved by forcing the UAW to take cuts in wages and benefits. I drove those foreign cars because they got better gas mileage and were higher quality, and the dealers often offered better service.


Bill,

It could be the problem with the US automakers is they don't build cars people like, why should we bail them out especially when they haven't done anything to change the way they run their business?

I think Ford builds good vehicles that is why I buy them, I have 3 of them in my driveway and when I buy vans for my service techs they will be Ford's as well.

If the US automakers and their dealers don't make the vehicles people want and provide good service, people will go elsewhere.

I know of a Honda dealership in Tampa and Brandon that is getting rid of all of their senior techs because they have mechanics that will work for $10-$12 an hour, yet the dealer still charges almost $100 per hour for their labor, their service dept. is terrible and now that sales are down the salesmen are like vultures when someone comes in to buy a vehicle.

Car dealers even in these bad times are still screwing customers and they wonder why no one wants to buy a vehicle.

Toyota builds automobiles in the US in non union plants, and they sold about as many vehicles as GM did last year, yet GM lost 40 billion dollars and Toyota made 17 Billion Dollars, obviously there is some major problems with GM and a bail out is not going to do anything except put off temporarily their death.

GM owns Saturn and they are profitable, they are built in a non union plant, could that have anything to do with it?

You can't spend your way out of this mess, it is like trying to dig yourself out of a hole, FDR tried this and he made the situation worse during the depression.

[bgbill]

Aren't we talking $8 billion, at least for starters?

I agree that $40 seems like a lot for someone who stands there doing the same thing over and over again all day every day on an assembly line, but then I ask myself if I'd be willing to do it for 20 or 30 years. I don't know how I could handle it.



Bill,

For every 1 person who would not like working in an assembly plant for $40 an hour, there are hundreds of people who would be willing to take their place.

$83,200 a year for a job that requires no degree and requires you to just show up and work is a lot of money.

I am sure they could get competent people to do the job for far less than $40per hour.

There are a lot of HVAC techs that don't make that kind of money and they have to have a lot more knowledge and the working conditions are worse than working in an auto plant.

[Bill McIntyre]

GM owns Saturn and they are profitable, they are built in a non union plant, could that have anything to do with it?



Saturn has never been profitable, and now they want to dump it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/business/04saturn.html?partner=rss

[bgbill]

Saturn has never been profitable, and now they want to dump it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/business/04saturn.html?partner=rss

Here is a 1993 report in the NY Times talking about them being profitable.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE2DC103EF931A25755C0A9659582 60

COMPANY NEWS; SATURN REPORTS IT MADE FIRST PROFIT IN MAY

Published: June 12, 1993

Saturn said yesterday that it had turned the corner financially and was finally making money. The General Motors Corporation subsidiary reported it made its first profit ever in May, nearly three years after it began making small cars in Spring Hill, Tenn. Saturn did not specify the amount of profit, but said it was enough to achieve a $1,000 bonus award for each of its 8,000 employees. If the company reports profitable operations to G.M. for the full year in 1993, Saturn employees will receive a second bonus. A Saturn spokeswoman, Jennifer Graham, declined to say whether Saturn was expected to remain firmly in the black for the rest of the year now that it is starting a third production crew in Spring Hill.

[bgbill]

Bill,

Here is what Jack Welch said about giving GM money.

About General Motors, he said: Don't hand any money to the automotive industry.

When Welch was pressed on GM, he quipped, “Chrysler's sponsoring this thing, so I don't know what I can say to Mr. Nardelli,” but true stimulus isn't going to happen if $100 bills are dropped out of a helicopter and if corporate bailouts continue to happen.


Bailing out GM just because they're an iconic American company is not sufficient motivation, Welch says -- that's what they said about Pan Am airlines, he said.

[bgbill]

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c90/bgbill/big3.jpg

This pretty much sums it up.

[Marcus]

Aren't we talking $8 billion, at least for starters?


They haven't spent that...yet. It is allocated though.

I'm not trying to trivialize the 25 Billion. I'm just saying that a lot of focus is there when it's not as important as what the Fed is doing to our nation. Historically, all fiat money systems have failed. Our's in on the cusp at the rate it's going.

[Marcus]

"The Fed's balance sheet has ballooned to $2.2 trillion, from close to $900 billion in September, reflecting some of those other activities to get credit flowing again.

Even with all the bold moves, the economy continues to sink deeper into despair. "

Keynesian economics isn't working. The jig is up. Where previously a 1/2 percent rate cut would've sent the DOW shooting upwards, it is now brushed aside like yesterday's news.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081214/ap_on_bi_ge/fed_interest_rates

[FredT]

If 2 of the Big 3 collapse the GOP has just guaranteed it will not hold power in this nation for a long time. While they were poorly run companies, letting the largest manufacturing sector of our country collapse is bad for the US in the long term

Strange

I don't remember the hue and cry over the demise of the US steel and other primary metals industries in the 80s, and that cost more jobs than the big 3 auto folks. Of course the Democrats set up that system of failure in the 70s so it was politically incorrect to point that out while it was happening.


The big 3 business model is broke. The rules for fixing it exist in federal bankruptcy laws, although that is a bit of a slow motion train wreck. the choice is to either let that system work, or define a new system for EVERYBODY.

Let's not forget the root causes of this issue.
1. Congress decided the federally guaranteed mortgage loan companies could be used to perform "social engineering", thus poisoning the system with bad paper. The resultant slow motion credit collapse, for which congress is 90%
responsible, has made it very difficult to sell any vehicles on a credit basis.

2. US automakers persisted in designing and manufacturing vehicles in a dream world where they had no competition. Somebody seems to have now woken them up, but they have 30 years of legacy mistakes to clear.

Going through a structured bankruptcy would allow most of those mistakes to be cleared in an effective manner, but would probably leave the UAW out in the cold in more ways than one. This is also not politically correct, especially for the new majority party, so expect Congress to be covering up like a cat on a tile floor. Should be a good comedy show.

[diverlen]

Strange

I don't remember the hue and cry over the demise of the US steel and other primary metals industries in the 80s, and that cost more jobs than the big 3 auto folks. Of course the Democrats set up that system of failure in the 70s so it was politically incorrect to point that out while it was happening.


The big 3 business model is broke. The rules for fixing it exist in federal bankruptcy laws, although that is a bit of a slow motion train wreck. the choice is to either let that system work, or define a new system for EVERYBODY.

Let's not forget the root causes of this issue.
1. Congress decided the federally guaranteed mortgage loan companies could be used to perform "social engineering", thus poisoning the system with bad paper. The resultant slow motion credit collapse, for which congress is 90%
responsible, has made it very difficult to sell any vehicles on a credit basis.

2. US automakers persisted in designing and manufacturing vehicles in a dream world where they had no competition. Somebody seems to have now woken them up, but they have 30 years of legacy mistakes to clear.

Going through a structured bankruptcy would allow most of those mistakes to be cleared in an effective manner, but would probably leave the UAW out in the cold in more ways than one. This is also not politically correct, especially for the new majority party, so expect Congress to be covering up like a cat on a tile floor. Should be a good comedy show.

Fred, very well said!!!

[Guido4198]

Like Fred Sadi...!!!!!!!!
This has never been about saving an American Industry...blah..blah..blah.
From the beginning...it is, and has always been an effort by the Democrat party to payback their friends in Big Labor with OUR money. The REAL solution is far too simple for Congress....There are plenty of autos being manufactured in America, by American workers...they just aren't in the U.A.W...and THAT is the heart of the problem for the Democrats

[chuam]

Even the competition thinks the bailout is a good idea.

US auto woes spell trouble for Japanese makers too
By YURI KAGEYAMA – 6 hours ago

TOKYO (AP) — In recent years, Toyota has edged closer to overtaking General Motors as the world's biggest automaker.

But now as GM and the entire U.S. auto industry teeter on the brink of collapse, Toyota and other Japanese carmakers are hardly rejoicing. They say the bankruptcy of any of Detroit's Big Three would spell serious trouble for them as well.

Should that happen, "the damage to our business is certain to be tremendous," Toyota Motor Corp. spokesman Hideaki Homma told The Associated Press on Monday. "The conditions for the U.S. auto market are extremely tough right now, and any additional negative is sure to make things worse."

One major problem is that Japanese carmakers in the U.S. share many of the same parts suppliers. If a Detroit automaker were to collapse, suppliers would likely follow, setting off a chain reaction that could would wreak havoc for Japanese production in the U.S., a vital market.

More broadly, the U.S. crisis could lead to huge job losses and further weaken consumer spending, especially for big-ticket items like automobiles. Together, the three big American automakers employ 239,000 workers in the United States. Counting other businesses that depend on the automakers, economists estimate that 2.5 million jobs would be lost if all three companies went out of business.

"Whether it is the impact on consumer confidence or the impact on the suppliers that we all share, having one or more of the major automakers in severe distress has consequences for the entire industry," said Simon Sproule, corporate vice president of global communications at Nissan Motor Co., Japan's third-biggest carmaker.

A possible advantage from a collapse of the U.S. auto industry could come only many years later — perhaps in a decade — when Japanese manufacturers would compete against weaker rivals in the U.S., especially if they further exploit their lead in green technology with hybrids or electric vehicles, said Koji Endo, auto analyst with Credit Suisse in Tokyo.

"But that's for the long, long term," he said. "For now, the situation is bound to get worse for the Japanese."

After the U.S. Senate last week rejected an auto industry bailout, the Bush administration is considering ways of providing emergency aid to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, which have said they could run out of cash within weeks without federal aid. Ford Motor Co. says it can survive 2009, but it has also asked Congress for a line of credit.

While Japanese automakers are in a far better financial state than their American counterparts, they are all getting battered in the shrinking U.S. vehicle market.

In November, when American auto sales plunged 37 percent to their worst level in more than 26 years, Toyota's sales sank 34 percent, Nissan's were down 42 percent and Honda Motor Co.'s fell 32 percent.

Vehicle sales in Japan and Europe are also waning, and even demand in developing economies in China, India and Latin America is weakening.

"This is a global crisis affecting the entire auto industry: No one is immune," said Nissan's Sproule. "And it is in everyone's interest to see a healthy auto industry that is able to manage through this crisis."

Toyota, Japan's top automaker that makes the Camry sedan and Prius hybrid, has already slashed its profit forecast for the fiscal year through March to 550 billion yen ($5.9 billion), or about a third of its previous year's earnings. Expectations are rife another downward revision is coming.

For now, there are even alarming signs the Japanese may be falling in the footsteps of the U.S. automakers, said Endo.

GM, which has already idled five factories this year, announced Friday it is temporarily closing 21 factories across North America. Toyota has also suspended production at several North American plants in recent months.

The region is critical for Japan's automakers — both Toyota and Honda sell more vehicles in North America than they do in Japan.

"There is absolutely no way in my view that the Big Three's woes can work as a plus for the Japanese automakers," said Tsuyoshi Mochimaru, analyst for Barclays Capital in Tokyo.

"So what if there might be a market-share increase some years ahead? The pie itself is shrinking," he added. "Sales volume is plunging. And that's why all the automakers are suffering."

So far this year, Toyota appears to be on pace to overtake GM in global vehicle sales. Last year, Toyota's group sales rose to 9.366 million vehicles, just shy of GM's 9.37 million.

Toyota's Homma notes that 15 or 20 years ago, when there was a backlash among some American politicians and consumers toward Japanese products, Toyota may have gotten criticized as benefiting from — or even causing — U.S. automaker's demise.

But these days, Toyota is no longer viewed as foreign, and consumers understand that Toyota employs American workers and purchases from American suppliers, he said.

"We are a member of the American auto industry," Homma said. "Without (a bailout), chaos is sure to come."

link (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hAChQS0tNAQSUs_D9UOUIW4zCPIwD9537QL82)

[jackpine savage]

Like Fred Sadi...!!!!!!!!
This has never been about saving an American Industry...blah..blah..blah.
From the beginning...it is, and has always been an effort by the Democrat party to payback their friends in Big Labor with OUR money. The REAL solution is far too simple for Congress....There are plenty of autos being manufactured in America, by American workers...they just aren't in the U.A.W...and THAT is the heart of the problem for the Democrats

And the GOP opposition was an attempt to get back at unionized labor. Unfortunately both sides of the aisle have politicized something that demands foresight and leadership, which is lacking from both parties in Congress. I am in favor of helping out the Big 3, only in as much as they have a plan to fix their products. It is a very bad time, economically, to let 2 of the Big 3 fail. Do you all have enough money to see you through a more serious downturn in the economy right now, cause if you dont and the Big 3 go down life will really suck for a lot of people, and not just those working in that industry.

[bgbill]

And the GOP opposition was an attempt to get back at unionized labor. Unfortunately both sides of the aisle have politicized something that demands foresight and leadership, which is lacking from both parties in Congress. I am in favor of helping out the Big 3, only in as much as they have a plan to fix their products. It is a very bad time, economically, to let 2 of the Big 3 fail. Do you all have enough money to see you through a more serious downturn in the economy right now, cause if you dont and the Big 3 go down life will really suck for a lot of people, and not just those working in that industry.

The Republicans know the auto bail out is a bad deal for the taxpayer's that is why they voted against it.

The democrats are doing their best to pay back the unions for helping them win last month, some people would call that pay to play.

FDR tried to help with the depression all he did was cause it to last longer.

Even if the big 3 get their bail out, it will only last until Obama gets in and is able to geive them more money to waste.

Jack Welch and Mitt Romney, both very good business men said it would be a mistake to give the auto makers money.

They have NO plan for fixing anything in their industry, the only thing they did was drive to DC last time instead of flying.

[Bill McIntyre]

FDR tried to help with the depression all he did was cause it to last longer.


Could you elaborate on that?

My understanding is that FDR's increases in government spending were just not big enough to end the depression. The huge increases to fund "the arsenal of democracy" were what finally did the trick. Not being aggressive enough may have contributed to the depression lasting as long as it did, but it didn't make it longer.

[aaron proffitt]

Could you elaborate on that?

My understanding is that FDR's increases in government spending were just not big enough to end the depression. The huge increases to fund "the arsenal of democracy" were what finally did the trick. Not being aggressive enough may have contributed to the depression lasting as long as it did, but it didn't make it longer.

You would know...:D

[Bill McIntyre]

You would know...:D

Not necessarily, and of course there can be honest differences of opinion among economists. Its just that until a couple of people said it here, I never heard that FDR actually made the depression longer.

Well OK, let me hedge that. He did sort of lose heart and make a move to balance the budget rather than just running up the deficit, but I don't think that's the sort of thing these guys are bitching about. I believe Marcus said that Keynesiansm failed, and Keynes would not be for balancing the budget during a recession. FDR wasn't strong enough with the Keynes thing until the war let him be.

[jackpine savage]

Not necessarily, and of course there can be honest differences of opinion among economists. Its just that until a couple of people said it here, I never heard that FDR actually made the depression longer.

Well OK, let me hedge that. He did sort of lose heart and make a move to balance the budget rather than just running up the deficit, but I don't think that's the sort of thing these guys are bitching about. I believe Marcus said that Keynesiansm failed, and Keynes would not be for balancing the budget during a recession. FDR wasn't strong enough with the Keynes thing until the war let him be.

Bill you dont live in the Republican world where everything a Democrat does is wrong.

[bgbill]

Could you elaborate on that?
My understanding is that FDR's increases in government spending were just not big enough to end the depression. The huge increases to fund "the arsenal of democracy" were what finally did the trick. Not being aggressive enough may have contributed to the depression lasting as long as it did, but it didn't make it longer.

Bill,

Below are a few links on how FDR made things worse.


http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/3643

http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v25n4/powell.pdf

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx?RelNum=5409

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=3159

But this is a different issue, the auto industry has a failed business plan and pumping more money into it is not he answer.

I know you want to blame the Republicans for all the evil in the world and I am sure many of the auto executives are Republicans, but just because the Republicans don't want to waste a bunch of money on the auto industry does not mean they are out to get the Unions.

[smartin]

Chrysler is owned by a private equity firm. They won't invest anymore of their own money into the company. So the government should give them my money to stay in business? Forget the whole moral hazard/wiping the constitution with your ass problem. How is this a rational course of action?

[bgbill]

Chrysler is owned by a private equity firm. They won't invest anymore of their own money into the company. So the government should give them my money to stay in business? Forget the whole moral hazard/wiping the constitution with your ass problem. How is this a rational course of action?

Bill and many other Democrats love to complain about rich republicans getting tax breaks, in the case of Chrysler it is even worse they want to give a company that is on the brink of failure (Again) money.

The Government loaned them money before and they recovered, but now they are in the crapper again, and they have no plan to significantly change how they do business other than beg for money now so they can come back for more in March when Obama is in Office.

[SaltyFingers]

Lots of folks appear to be talking out of both sides of their mouths? “Change” won the recent election. Do these same folks think these businesses do not need to change? We are all sympathetic to the union workers as they always get the short end of the stick while some greedy executive who has screwed things up gets a big payday.

Why doesn’t the big three need change & evolve their businesses & products? How does giving them this money not prolog the root issue? Does everyone really think that if the big three go under, we’ll all go back to riding horseback & bicycles (demand for vehicles down)?

I am failing to miss the point of those who are in favor of this bailout.

[bgbill]

Lots of folks appear to be talking out of both sides of their mouths? “Change” won the recent election. Do these same folks think these businesses do not need to change? We are all sympathetic to the union workers as they always get the short end of the stick while some greedy executive who has screwed things up gets a big payday.

Why doesn’t the big three need change & evolve their businesses & products? How does giving them this money not prolog the root issue? Does everyone really think that if the big three go under, we’ll all go back to riding horseback & bicycles (demand for vehicles down)?

I am failing to miss the point of those who are in favor of this bailout.

The point of the bailout is to reward the Unions like UAW for helping the democrats win in last months elections.

The money the big 3 are asking for is to only help them survive until Obama is in Office and can give them more taxpayer money.

They say the bail out is to protect jobs yet the big 3 is already closing plants and laying off workers due to their sales being down about 40%, giving the big 3 executives a bunch of money will not incerease sales which is what is needed to help them survive.

The washington way of throwing money at a problem is not the answer, if it was the DC school system would be a huge success, instead of the miserable failure that it is.

[chuam]

The point of the bailout is to reward the Unions like UAW for helping the democrats win in last months elections.

The money the big 3 are asking for is to only help them survive until Obama is in Office and can give them more taxpayer money.

They say the bail out is to protect jobs yet the big 3 is already closing plants and laying off workers due to their sales being down about 40%, giving the big 3 executives a bunch of money will not incerease sales which is what is needed to help them survive.

The washington way of throwing money at a problem is not the answer, if it was the DC school system would be a huge success, instead of the miserable failure that it is.

Blah, blah , blah, it's all the democrats fault.

Please stop with the same mindless drivel.

While I think the big 3 need to make significant changes to their business model the bailout is not just about the unions. If you think that you are a moron and are just as bad as those you rail against.

The republicans are also using this as a chance to union bust. Concessions need to be made by both the management and unions on this one before a bailout should happen.

The most phuqed up thing about you Brent is you act like you are morally superior when you talk about how the democrats do everything for political gain and then act like the republicans are only doing it for the good of the country and not for any political gain.

Wake up you sound like the biuggest hyporitical moron I have ever met.

[FredT]

The point of the bailout is to reward the Unions like UAW for helping the democrats win in last months elections.




While that may be a minor part of it I believe it's more of a "smoke and mirrors" distraction system to keep congress from actually being held responsible for what CONGRESS set up.

You may refer to the "airline security" mess after 9/11 to see the method that will be employed. Rather than actually creating a security system we got a very visible "passenger harassment" system (per Israeli security pros)
and fell back on the hidden "shoot any hijacked craft down" security system. Of course publicizing that would tend to make folks not fly, so that option was downplayed while the Armed Pilots scam was played on the public. that scam consisted of "having a program" while actively discouraging pilot participation by not scheduling the mandated classes and training and setting the "rules" to the game such that no sane pilot would want to play it.

Develop a memory longer than a couple of weeks and show up at "constituent meetings" while asking hard questions on what is being done by congress to hold their members accountable for bonehead actions taken by members of congress. Patrticulary those in chairmanship positons that ignore the 'unintened" results of their actions. Be sure to ask these questions while the media is actually present and involved so the issue doesn't just "go away."

[Bill McIntyre]

The point of the bailout is to reward the Unions like UAW for helping the democrats win in last months elections.



Or you could say that the point of killing the bailout was to punish unions for traditionally supporting Democrats.

Lets face it- until the Republican party branched out into being the party of the Religious Reich and the flat-earthers, it was the party of the wealthy, while the Democratic base has always been the working classes. So now the Republicans couldn't pass up a chance to bust unions, no matter what the consequences.

[jackpine savage]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26983210#26983210

Maybe it explains why that ass Mitch McConnell described bailing out the banks as "the Senate at its finest" yet led the fight to scuttle any help for the domestic auto industry. The GOP loves to wrap itself in the flag until it comes to saving US companies and jobs.

[divefilm]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26983210#26983210

Maybe it explains why that ass Mitch McConnell described bailing out the banks as "the Senate at its finest" yet led the fight to scuttle any help for the domestic auto industry. The GOP loves to wrap itself in the flag until it comes to saving US companies and jobs.

Its funny, the GOP also crushed a proposal to give returning Veterans priority on jobs and giving more money to disabled vets.

Yeah, they have america's best interest at heart:rolleyes:

[bgbill]

Or you could say that the point of killing the bailout was to punish unions for traditionally supporting Democrats.

Lets face it- until the Republican party branched out into being the party of the Religious Reich and the flat-earthers, it was the party of the wealthy, while the Democratic base has always been the working classes. So now the Republicans couldn't pass up a chance to bust unions, no matter what the consequences.

Bill,

The Auto Bailout is not going to save them, it is only going to waste more money.

The democrats are trying to save the UAW, the republicans are finally taking a stand against these BS bailouts, yes it could be political, but the fact still remains the auto industry needs to do some major changes and part of it is becoming competetive with the other automakers that have plants in the US and sell cars here.

All they have done is beg for money, they have proposed no significant changes and the UAW refuses to budge on their contract.

If I had a choice between a job with a pay cut or no job, I would take athe job with a pay cut and if I didn't like it, I would look for something better or start my own company, but I am not a democrat, I am just a working class Republican.

How long has the big 3 been begging for money saying if they didn't get it they would go out of business within a couple of weeks?

They have said it a few times, yet a couple of weeks go by, they didn't get the money and they didn't go out of business.

They said they need the money because jobs are at stake, yet they have closed some plants and layed off thousands of workers.

Some Credit Unions announced a bailout of chrysler and GM, they are freeing up about 26 Billion dollars to loan people so they can buy GM and Chrysler Vehicles, I am sure GM and Chrysler will say that isn't enough to help them though.

If they can't survive, someone else will buy their assets and start up another company, then the UAW can go in and try to ruin another company.

[SaltyFingers]

For discussion sake, to avoid additional conflict, let’s leave out political parties & name calling out. For those in favor of the bailout, I would be interested in why you think the bailout is a good idea for America. In a capitalistic economy (like it or not - that's what we have - not saying I agree with it or not), why do you think it will turn around the industry, adjust financial balance sheets and increase market shares & value?

Do you honestly think the bailout is not delaying the root problem? If so, please explain. I just don't see it the benefit.

[bhowell]

First, it looks like it is going to be the Big two, I think Ford has decided to go at it alone. They took proactive steps a couple of years ago to secure a line of credit. What Ford wants is a life line if the industry stays at the current level. Trust me, when I say everyone is going to need a life line at the current level. Also why doesn't Chrysler borrow the money from Cerebus??? They bought the company several years ago and had plans on schooling Ford and GM.

I have been republican all my life. However, the Republicans wanted to bail out wall street, an organization that produces nothing, with the exception of making America miserable by watching the daily manipulations of the stock market. They have pumped BILLIONS into these companies, and the average guy still can't get a business loan!!!However, now the same republicans don't want to help one of the only manufacturing concerns left in the country??? With a fraction of what they gave their banking/wall street buddies?? Maybe Detroit is just too far from DC.....How do justify one bail out and not the other. Why don't the banks loan the manufactures the money??

As far as the unions go, the difference in labor cost of $25 per hour is not what is hurting the big three. Legacy cost is huge. When you have a company that is over 100 years old, it is going to be. The biggest portion of the legacy cost is white collar, non-union employees.

Here is a letter a Ford dealer wrote, very informative, wish I cold take credit for it.

Date: Saturday, December 6, 2008, 2:12 PM


This letter is from a Ford dealer in West Virginia. It has been
published in many newspapers and websites over the past few days.

Here is the dealership website:
http://elkinsfordland.dealerconnection.com/ourTeam/?lang=en


Dear Editor:

As I watch the coverage of the fate of the U.S. auto industry, one
alarming and frustrating fact hits me right between the eyes. The fate
of our nation's economic survival is in the hands of some congressmen
who are completely out of touch and act without knowledge of an industry
that affects almost every person in our nation. The same lack of
knowledge is shared with many journalists whom are irresponsible when
influencing the opinion of millions of viewers.

Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has doomed the industry, calling it a
dinosaur. No Mr. Shelby, you are the dinosaur, with ideas stuck in the
'70s, '80s and '90s. You and the uninformed journalist and senators
that
hold onto myths that are not relevant in today's world.

When you say that the Big Three build vehicles nobody wants to buy, you
must have overlooked that GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million
vehicles in the U.S. and Ford outsold Honda by 850,000 and Nissan by 1.2
million in the U.S. GM was the world's No. 1 automaker beating Toyota by
3,000 units.

When you claim inferior quality comes from the Big Three, did you
realize that Chevy makes the Malibu and Ford makes the Fusion that were
both rated over the Camry and Accord by J.D. Power independent survey on
initial quality? Did you bother to read the Consumer Report that rated
Ford on par with good Japanese automakers.

Did you realize Big Three's gas guzzlers include the 33 mpg Malibu that
beats the Accord. And for '09 Ford introduces the Hybrid Fusion whose 39
mpg is the best midsize, beating the Camry Hybrid. Ford's Focus beats
the Corolla and Chevy's Cobalt beats the Civic.

When you ask how many times are we going to bail them out you must be
referring to 1980. The only Big Three bailout was Chrysler, who paid
back $1 billion, plus interest. GM and Ford have never received
government aid.

When you criticize the Big Three for building so many pickups, surely
you've noticed the attempts Toyota and Nissan have made spending
billions to try to get a piece of that pie. Perhaps it bothers you that
for 31 straight years Ford's F-Series has been the best selling vehicle.
Ford and GM have dominated this market and when you see the new '09
F-150 you'll agree this won't change soon.

Did you realize that both GM and Ford offer more hybrid models than
Nissan or Honda. Between 2005 and 2007, Ford alone has invested more
than $22 billion in research and development of technologies such as Eco
Boost, flex fuel, clean diesel, hybrids, plug in hybrids and hydrogen cars.

It's 2008 and the quality of the vehicles coming out of Detroit are once
again the best in the world.
Perhaps Sen. Shelby isn't really that blind. Maybe he realizes the
quality shift to American. Maybe it's the fact that his state of Alabama
has given so much to land factories from Honda, Hyundai and Mercedes
Benz that he is more concerned about their continued growth than he is
about the people of our country. Sen. Shelby's disdain for "government

subsidies" is very hypocritical. In the early '90s he was the driving
force behind a $253 million incentive package to Mercedes. Plus, Alabama
agreed to purchase 2,500 vehicles from Mercedes. While the bridge loan
the Big Three is requesting will be paid back, Alabama's $180,000-plus
per job was pure incentive. Sen. Shelby, not only are you out of touch,
you are a self-serving hypocrite, who is prepared to ruin our nation
because of lack of knowledge and lack of due diligence in making your
opinions and decisions.

We live in a world of free trade, world economy and we have not been
able to produce products as cost efficiently. While the governments of
other auto producing nations subsidize their automakers, our government
may be ready to force its demise. While our automakers have paid union
wages, benefits and legacy debt, our Asian competitors employ cheap
labor. We are at an extreme disadvantage in production cost. Although
many UAW concessions begin in 2010, many lawmakers think it's not enough.

Some point the blame to corporate management. I would like to speak of
Ford Motor Co. The company has streamlined by reducing our workforce by
51,000 since 2005, closing 17 plants and cutting expenses. Product and
future product is excellent and the company is focused on one Ford. This
is a company poised for success. Ford product quality and corporate
management have improved light years since the nightmare of Jacques
Nasser. Thank you Alan Mulally and the best auto company management team
in the business.

The financial collapse caused by the secondary mortgage fiasco and the
greed of Wall Street has led to a $700 billion bailout of the industry
that created the problem. AIG spent nearly $1 million on three company
excursions to lavish resorts and hunting destinations. Paulson is saying
no to $250 billion foreclosure relief and the whole thing is a mess. So
when the Big Three ask for 4 percent of that of the $700 billion, $25
billion to save the country's largest industry, there is obviously
oppositions. But does it make sense to reward the culprits of the
problem with $700 billion unconditionally, and ignore the victims?

As a Ford dealer, I feel our portion of the $25 billion will never be
touched and is not necessary. Ford currently has $29 billion of
liquidity. However, the effect of a bankruptcy by GM will hurt the
suppliers we all do business with. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy by any
manufacture would cost retirees their health care and retirements.
Chances are GM would recover from Chapter 11 with a better business plan
with much less expense. So who foots the bill if GM or all three go
Chapter 11? All that extra health care, unemployment, loss of tax base
and some forgiven debt goes back to the taxpayer, us. With no chance of
repayment, this would be much worse than a loan with the intent of
repayment.

So while it is debatable whether a loan or Chapter 11 is better for the
Big Three, a $25 billion loan is definitely better for the taxpayers and
the economy of our country.

So I'll end where I began on the quality of the products of Detroit.
Before you, Mr. or Ms. Journalist continue to misinform the American
public and turn them against one of the great industries that helped
build this nation, I must ask you one question. Before you, Mr. or Madam
Congressman vote to end health care and retirement benefits for 1
million retirees, eliminate 2.5 million of our nation's jobs, lose the
technology that will lead us in the future and create an economic
disaster including hundreds of billions of tax dollars lost, I ask this
question not in the rhetorical sense. I ask it in the sincere, literal
way. Can you tell me, have you driven a Ford lately?

Jim Jackson
Elkins Fordland

[Marcus]

Not necessarily, and of course there can be honest differences of opinion among economists. Its just that until a couple of people said it here, I never heard that FDR actually made the depression longer.

Well OK, let me hedge that. He did sort of lose heart and make a move to balance the budget rather than just running up the deficit, but I don't think that's the sort of thing these guys are bitching about. I believe Marcus said that Keynesiansm failed, and Keynes would not be for balancing the budget during a recession. FDR wasn't strong enough with the Keynes thing until the war let him be.


Here's some vintage Keynesian propaganda.
http://www.pyrabang.com/view.php?ref=vince&post_id=8719&visitor=true

Didn't quite work out that way did it?

[ducksmith]

For the life of me, I can't seem to understand how people think that poor business practices/decisions of a few get to be the burden of all. Companies that leak money like screen doors on submarines and don't watch their balance sheets end up on the rocks. I feel for those that hitched their wagons to the wrong star but that is not my fault.

Some businesses fail...some businesses fail to plan...some businesses over produce...some businesses have duplicate inventories and overheads...some businesses gave retirement promises that their ass pockets can't afford...some companies are top heavy...

Where is the end to bailouts???

Where is the end to the arguement that they bailed out this so why not that?

I am sorry to those in the auto industry but I believe that the free market should figure out what sinks or swims

[chuam]

For the life of me, I can't seem to understand how people think that poor business practices/decisions of a few get to be the burden of all. Companies that leak money like screen doors on submarines and don't watch their balance sheets end up on the rocks. I feel for those that hitched their wagons to the wrong star but that is not my fault.

Some businesses fail...some businesses fail to plan...some businesses over produce...some businesses have duplicate inventories and overheads...some businesses gave retirement promises that their ass pockets can't afford...some companies are top heavy...

Where is the end to bailouts???

Where is the end to the arguement that they bailed out this so why not that?

I am sorry to those in the auto industry but I believe that the free market should figure out what sinks or swims

So you're ok with continuing to give the finance industry more and mor money?

Having one of the big 3 fail is going to impact a lot more than just the comapny that fails. Youi'll see the ripple effect across all the supppliers. It will have a much bigger impact than people think.

[divefilm]

For the life of me, I can't seem to understand how people think that poor business practices/decisions of a few get to be the burden of all. Companies that leak money like screen doors on submarines and don't watch their balance sheets end up on the rocks. I feel for those that hitched their wagons to the wrong star but that is not my fault.

Some businesses fail...some businesses fail to plan...some businesses over produce...some businesses have duplicate inventories and overheads...some businesses gave retirement promises that their ass pockets can't afford...some companies are top heavy...

Where is the end to bailouts???

Where is the end to the arguement that they bailed out this so why not that?

I am sorry to those in the auto industry but I believe that the free market should figure out what sinks or swims

Free market is what got us here. Free to steal and **** over your investors market.

I think they should allow the bailout, under the condition that the CEO's get publicly executed.

[SaltyFingers]

Having one of the big 3 fail is going to impact a lot more than just the comapny that fails. Youi'll see the ripple effect across all the supppliers. It will have a much bigger impact than people think.

So, the demand for vehicles goes away with the big three? We'll quit driving and parts won't be needed for old cars and new cars will not be built? You don't think they'll be a shift to other vendors?

IMO, I think some will be shut down & lots of money & jobs will be lost and then shifted to other companies. That's what happens when businesses aren't run competitively and do not make profits. Opportunity will exist for someone to pick up the slack.

How will the bailout affect balance sheets and market shares to prevent this from occuring again?

[divefilm]

Opportunity will exist for someone to pick up the slack.


Good point. The Japanese will make out like bandits.

[chuam]

Honestly I think we'll lose more of these manufacturing jobs overseas if anyone of the big 3 go into BK and get to renegotiate their employee contracts. More jobs moving overseas is not a good thing.

[divefilm]

Honestly I think we'll lose more of these manufacturing jobs overseas if anyone of the big 3 go into BK and get to renegotiate their employee contracts. More jobs moving overseas is not a good thing.

I think that is one of the major reasons the big 3 DON'T WANT to fix the problem. They want workers they can pay 10 dollars a day to.

Middle class is a endangered species in this country.

[SaltyFingers]

IMO, that is the problem our legislation should be addressing - how to keep the dollar powerful against foreign currency in a global economy.

[ducksmith]

So you're ok with continuing to give the finance industry more and mor money?

Having one of the big 3 fail is going to impact a lot more than just the comapny that fails. Youi'll see the ripple effect across all the supppliers. It will have a much bigger impact than people think.

Good God Chuam....where in there did you see that I am ok with finance industry bailouts...put your reading glasses on

[bgbill]

I think that is one of the major reasons the big 3 DON'T WANT to fix the problem. They want workers they can pay 10 dollars a day to.

Middle class is a endangered species in this country.

That makes a lot of sense, they want people who can not afford to buy their products in the US.:rolleyes:

[Marcus]

Seem fitting. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu8wssjb3CA&feature=related

[bgbill]

http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/10235271/index.html

Unions are great aren't they:eek:

Only the UAW would complain about taxpayers dollars bailing these slackers out, Ron even speaks of productivity, I guess he didn't see the video of the ford workers hanging out in the bar when they should have been at work.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/10235271/index.html

The Big 3 are destined to fail because of bad decisions by management as well as the Unions being unreasonable, the sooner the better, then someone who knows what they are doing can run these companies.

[bhowell]

Although oddly enough, I normally agree with you. However, several points are wrong:

1) It isn't the big 3, it is Chrysler and GM. Ford is considered by many to be a very well run company. In fact, Mullaly (Ford CEO) was being considered for the car czar position.
2) Toyota, the prized most treasure, greatest company of all (obvious bullshit) is going to lose around 2 BILLION this year.
3) Although I am not a huge fan of the unions, they are getting a bad rap. The new labor contract that was just negotiated and goes into effect 2010 contains many (if not all) of the changes everyone wants now.
4) Much of the problem deals with the people that don't work for the company now. The pensions, and retirement packages are literally crazy. This is for the white collar workers, not the union. I know people that have been retired for 5 years and still make the exact same money and benefits. The legacy cost and benefit packages is the most significant cost that can be reduced.










http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/10235271/index.html

Unions are great aren't they:eek:

Only the UAW would complain about taxpayers dollars bailing these slackers out, Ron even speaks of productivity, I guess he didn't see the video of the ford workers hanging out in the bar when they should have been at work.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/10235271/index.html

The Big 3 are destined to fail because of bad decisions by management as well as the Unions being unreasonable, the sooner the better, then someone who knows what they are doing can run these companies.

[bgbill]

Although oddly enough, I normally agree with you. However, several points are wrong:

1) It isn't the big 3, it is Chrysler and GM. Ford is considered by many to be a very well run company. In fact, Mullaly (Ford CEO) was being considered for the car czar position.
2) Toyota, the prized most treasure, greatest company of all (obvious bullshit) is going to lose around 2 BILLION this year.
3) Although I am not a huge fan of the unions, they are getting a bad rap. The new labor contract that was just negotiated and goes into effect 2010 contains many (if not all) of the changes everyone wants now.
4) Much of the problem deals with the people that don't work for the company now. The pensions, and retirement packages are literally crazy. This is for the white collar workers, not the union. I know people that have been retired for 5 years and still make the exact same money and benefits. The legacy cost and benefit packages is the most significant cost that can be reduced.

Billy,

1) Ford has its issues as well and originally wanted a line of credit, but later said they would be fine, they are the strongest of the big 3 and will probably be the ones who come out of it the best, which is good because I am a Ford guy.

How can you say Ford is a a very well run company with staggering losses they have?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16804725/

DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford Motor Co. lost a staggering $12.7 billion in 2006 — an average of $1,925 for every car and truck it sold and the worst loss in the company’s 103-year-history.

2) Toyota is losing money for the 1st time in 70 years, can Ford or any of the others say that?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/23/business/worldbusiness/23toyota.html?hp

On Monday, Toyota said it expected an operating loss in its auto operations of 150 billion yen, or $1.7 billion, for the fiscal year ending March 31. That would be the company’s first annual operating loss since 1938, a year after the company was founded, and a huge reversal from the 2.3 trillion yen, or $28 billion, in operating profit earned last year.

3) The Unions are one of the reasons the big 3 are not profitable, they are inefficient and care more about the wages and benefits they can get for their workers and could care less if the company they work for survive, management is overpaid as well and have made bad decisions by caving in to the Unions in the past and that is one reason why their legacy costs are so high, chapter 11 will take care of that, also moving the plants to a right to work state will help.

Billy is your Ford Dealership in Atlanta Union?

4) Chapter 11 will take care of past mistakes like this.

[bgbill]

Billy,

I hope you don't own stock in Ford, their stock has been lowered from Caa1 to Caa3 an even lower junk bond status.

On Monday, Standard & Poor's Rating Services said it would not raise its "CCC" junk ratings for General Motors and Chrysler in the near future, despite emergency loans from the U.S. and Canadian governments to help them avoid bankruptcy.

In fact, S&P downgraded Chrysler's corporate rating from "CCC+" to the even lower junk rating of CC.

GM stock prices plunged 14.8% and Ford Stock Prices plunged 15.4% yesterday.

Toyota is losing 1.7 Billion dollars The Wall Street Journal reported that Toyota Chief Executive Katsuaki Watanabe would step down in 2009, according to "people familiar with the situation."

Seems to me that Ford, GM and Chrysler could learn a few things from Toyota.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/23/news/companies/auto_stocks/index.htm?section=money_latest

Who is it that said "Ford is considered by many to be a very well run company"?

If they are a well run company, I would hate to see a bad one, they aren't in a whole lot better shape than GM or Chrysler.

[divefilm]

That makes a lot of sense, they want people who can not afford to buy their products in the US.:rolleyes:

They don't care where they sell their products. All they care is that they get their bonus.

[bgbill]

They don't care where they sell their products. All they care is that they get their bonus.

The United States is where they want to sell their products, there are not many other places that buy the types of vehicles we do (High profit) and the amount of vehicles we do.


I am sure the US automakers are plotting against the workers in the US so they can't buy their products.:rolleyes:

[divefilm]

Well, if they are working the other way (making sure workers CAN buy their products) then they utterly failed. Just like they did with their billion dollar businesses. Big ****ing surprise.

[bhowell]

I knew I shouldn't have prodded BGB. I think most of Fords managment problems happened with Jac Nasser. He almost single handedly destroyed the company. As far as my comment of a well run company, the management team they have now is the best of any car company.

Had this team not taken over when they did, Ford would be far worse than GM now.

BTW-I think Ford stock (F) is a great buy right now.

[divefilm]

Ford is the only one trying to make it work instead of holding up a "will work for food" sign.

[bgbill]

I knew I shouldn't have prodded BGB. I think most of Fords managment problems happened with Jac Nasser. He almost single handedly destroyed the company. As far as my comment of a well run company, the management team they have now is the best of any car company.

Had this team not taken over when they did, Ford would be far worse than GM now.

BTW-I think Ford stock (F) is a great buy right now.

I thought I asked you some reasonable questions and pointed out how much Ford has lost and showed you how their stock has been further de-rated.

If Ford is going to get turned around, their stock may be a good buy right now, but if they go out of business or file chapter 7 or chapter 11, how much is the stock worth?

I had some friends that lost about 1 million dollars worth of their stock when MCI Worldcom filed bankruptcy, they got nothing out of it.

You brought up Toyota and their 2 billion dollar loss,(it is actually 1.7 billion) it is the 1st time in 70 years they have lost money.

I hope that Ford does get turned around, I am a Ford guy and that is what I my family and I drive.

[Samson]

Bailing out these businesses that have failed is a damn joke! What about all the other auto makers out there that have run their businesses properly? The way the market is supposed to work (without the government interfering) is that when poor businesses fail, it creates opportunities for smart businessmen to take over their vacancies left in the marketplace. Where is the reward for these businessmen who have been waiting for such an opportunity to expand???. Ill tell you where,... its gone!! Its pathetic,.... help out the idiots of the world and let the strong intelligent ones hang out to dry.... Capitalism, the Market based economy which this country was founded on is being destroyed! Its survival of the fitest, only the strong survive and the weak die off. It is the way it has always been. Where they have failed, others will rise up and take their place....What this government is doing is turning this once great strong proud nation into a nation of people with thier hands out begging for welfare after they have made bad decisions and failed! A nation that is no longer based on capitalism, but socialism....pretty soon the government will be telling us, not only what kinds of cars we can buy and produce, but how much we will be able to spend for them, how much we can use them, what we can do with them once we own them,... etc. etc. etc.....

Ohh, and by the way,.. feeling sorry for the workers that might be laid off, is also a joke! Half the reason they are in trouble is because the workers unions have driven the wages up so high that the owners can no longer compete with the other auto makers. The damn bailout would have passed the senate, but the one condition they put on the auto makers, which was to reduce your wages in line with the other automakers, was flat out refused to be complied with by the employees........
I weap for the future of this nation........

[Bill McIntyre]

Bailing out these businesses that have failed is a damn joke! What about all the other auto makers out there that have run their businesses properly?


This is such an old thread that I've forgotten some of the figures that I had at my fingertips back then, but you are kidding yourself about those other auto makers. They got huge subsidies of state taxpayer money to locate where they did. I wish I could recall the amount per job that the state of Alabama paid to get an auto plant, but it was mind boggling. It also may be a good long term investment, but it was still tax payer money.

Now you are bitching about tax payer money being used to bail out the US auto makers, but somehow you don't bitch about the taxpayer money that helped the competition get a foothold.

Edit- here is an article that I was looking for.

In 1997, the state of Alabama granted huge subsidies to Mercedes in exchange for a plant that would employ 1,500 people. What were the details of this huge incentive package? $300 million in tax breaks, $253 million in direct incentives, $60 million in Alabama taxpayer money to send fellow Alabamans to Germany for training, and a promise to buy 2,500 of the new Mercedes SUV’s at $30,000 each. Based on just the initial $300 million grant alone, those 1,500 jobs will cost Alabama taxpayers $200,000 per job. Apparently Alabama, not Mercedes, will be paying those salaries for years to come. With deals like these, it’s no wonder foreign automakers have stepped up production in the U.S. We’ll even pay their workers’ salaries for them!

[Christof]

Jackpine...
My retirement fund is most definitely NOT in good shape. Matter of fact....unless things make a BIG turn-around..I'll most likely not have much left in my retirement fund at all. As a result, I've pretty much reconciled myself to the fact that I'll have to work the rest of my life. That said..I'll be damned if I'm gonna work 'til I'm dead in order to subsidize the U.A.W.'s cushy deal with the Big 3. This whole thing is about the Democrat politicians paying back the Big Labor unions out of MY pocket. NO WAY..!!I agree, and my big problem with the Auto industry and the unions is simply "supply and demand"..
Hell, even in my field of medicine, pay goes up and down simply on how many employees are available, and how many patients are seen... so why is it that the UAW and the employees think that when times are bad, sales are down, they should be able to make the same hourly amount and have the same benefits as when times are good? That is communistic in nature.
I got a college degree, have to continually update my education and credentials, and save lives... The auto workers with a few years experience and possibly not even a high school diploma make a lot more than I in hourly wage, and have many times the benefits I do... WTF?? Seems people are more willing to pay for a fancy car than to save their life...
This is only regarding Nursing, I am aware how over-expensive the general medical field is, especially when it comes to pharmaceuticals...

[Christof]

Here's a relevant post from another forum I thought was funny.

"ROTFLMAO

Oh, this is priceless. Have you read Nancy Pelosi's midnight statement about the Senate's refusal to pass the automobile bailout?

Excerpt (emphases and comments mine):

"The House-passed bipartisan legislation protects taxpayers,

Right out the gate, she hits us with this whammy. As if a bailout of the automobile makers somehow actually protects taxpayers! Ha ha ha!

preserves environmental standards

See what I mean? She's such a card! That's funny, Nancy! Declaring that bailing out companies is what preserves environmental standards -- quite the belly laugh, there!

and places tough accountability measures on the auto companies to help ensure their long term viability and competitiveness.

Oh, the tears in my eyes from laughing are making it hard for me to read the rest of her statement! Yes, accountability, Nancy! Just like the accountability we are stringently holding bankers to! My, aren't their feet to the fire, eh?!? Ha ha ha ha!

The House-passed bill demanded deep concessions from all parties -- the executives, shareholders and the union.

Okay, in that list of those making concessions, she forgot to include: the American taxpayers. But her delivery is so spot-on, that I'll just overlook that unimportant little tidbit!

“Senate Republicans’ refusal to support the bipartisan legislation passed by the House and negotiated in good faith with the White House, the Senate and the automakers is irresponsible

OH, THAT DID IT! I'm about to pee my pants, I'm laughing so hard. Ha ha, Nancy says that the Senate Republicans are the irresponsible ones -- not the people who run their businesses into the ground, but those who say we shouldn't rob from Peter in order to pay Paul. My sides are achin' I'm cracking up so hard!

...is irresponsible, especially at a time of economic hardship. The consequences of the Senate Republicans’ failure to act could be devastating to our economy,

She just delivers 'em one right after the other, in rapid-fire delivery! Oh, you Nancy! She even jibed senators by implying they "failed to act" when they just "failed to act as Nancy wanted them to act." She doesn't miss a beat!

All of the preceding was just the warm-up; now, here comes the biggest punchline:

detrimental to workers, and destructive to the American automobile industry unless the President immediately directs Secretary Paulson to explore other short-term financial assistance options, including TARP and those available to the Federal Reserve. That is the only viable option available at this time."

Get it??? If Congress doesn't behave properly, we'll just have the President (is he still around?) take charge of the situation. Like when kids are misbehaving in the back seat of the car, and the dad turns around and gruffly warns, "Don't make me come back there!" But we all know dad is all bark and no bite these days, and the actual situation will be handled by someone(s) else. As if "dad" or these "someone else"es could really solve the problem! Ha ha ha ha!!!...."Nancy Pelosi is has a brain about the size of a cockroach, and is just about as ugly... How the hell that woman has remained in office is beyond me, let alone became the speaker of the house.. I try really hard not to hold it against Kalifornians for keeping her there..
I also do not like Diane Feinstein, but merely for her political ideas, she is pretty smart in my opinion...
Pelosi must be pretty good at, well, you know...

[Christof]

Yeah, that's what gets me. No one is worried about the salaries and benefits of those fat cats on Wall Street, but unions have to be broken.

Anyway, now the President is talking about using some of the TARP funds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/13/business/13auto.html?_r=1&hp
Um, I think quite a few in the banking industry ARE having to face the music on exorbitant salaries Bill.. The schmuck who paid out billions in bonus's, and re-decorated his office for a few million, is now out of a job... Several CEO's have signed contracts for mere dollars a year in salary... Even the CEO's of the big three are making huge concessions in salaries.. But the UAW is refusing to give any concessions whatsoever... F'em.. They are bringing it upon themselves. The union members are the ones that need to stand up to them to save their jobs..

[jackpine savage]

Health care is getting out off hand. I really hope the health care workers make some concessions regarding pay.

[Christof]

Thanks, but I'm not sorry, for reasons I'll keep to myself. Suffice to say he went when he did or I would probably be in prison for doing a Kevorkian on him during one of his episodes.

CraigI have to really agree with you on the union work ethic.. I have several good friends in the unions, and I could only hope for the work conditions they had.. One, for example, was a sheet metal fabricator... He would work a union job 3-4 months a year, then take the rest of the year off, getting unemployment.. Fished all the time.. His jobs were usually Govt contract jobs, he did a lot of work at the Hanford Nuclear facility.. He would go to work, and when they had reached their quota of radiation exposure, usually in about 3 wks work and about 1/10th the amount the regular govt workers were exposed to, that was it.. Work over for 2 weeks... BUT... They still went to work, but merely sat in the cafeteria and played cards, slept in their cars, etc... Part of the contract with the union.... He used to laugh his ass off, and rub it in quite a bit when we were out fishing... Oh, and he had tremendous benefits, and made $32/hr.. This was back in the late 90's.... Poor union member...

[Christof]

Bill,


I know of a Honda dealership in Tampa and Brandon that is getting rid of all of their senior techs because they have mechanics that will work for $10-$12 an hour, yet the dealer still charges almost $100 per hour for their labor, their service dept. is terrible and now that sales are down the salesmen are like vultures when someone comes in to buy a vehicle.That is the sleazeball dealer's fault, not Honda... That dealer is what has become a typical American business owner, with very little conscience.. He will line his pockets and doesnt seem to care that it is his workers, not him, that make his business what it is..

[Christof]

Health care is getting out off hand. I really hope the health care workers make some concessions regarding pay.

Well in the past year I have gone from $32/hr with meager health benefits and a nice $1500/mo housing stipend (tax free), to now making $26/hr, shitty health benefits that dont kick in until 90 days, and then I pay $375/mo, and no stipend....
Also work harder since they have cut jobs and increased workload, not to mention the paperwork has gotten completely out of hand thanks to the "good" lawyers that are just looking out for the folks...
Oh, and did I mention that I have to carry a minimum of $1,000,000.00 in liability insurance out of my own pocket?

[Mutt]

Well in the past year I have gone from $32/hr with meager health benefits and a nice $1500/mo housing stipend (tax free), to now making $26/hr, shitty health benefits that dont kick in until 90 days, and then I pay $375/mo, and no stipend....
Also work harder since they have cut jobs and increased workload, not to mention the paperwork has gotten completely out of hand thanks to the "good" lawyers that are just looking out for the folks...
Oh, and did I mention that I have to carry a minimum of $1,000,000.00 in liability insurance out of my own pocket?

Yep, Nurses and nurse techs have been gettn' shit on pretty hard the last number of years!!!

Just wait...... If these New Guys n Gals that recently Won the House & Senate, et al...Gain Critical Mass It will get much much much worse, in a lot of economic niches!!!!

Hopefully, The "New Young Hope" in the Big House will Reign 'em In!!!

[bikewrench]

I agree, and my big problem with the Auto industry and the unions is simply "supply and demand"..
Hell, even in my field of medicine, pay goes up and down simply on how many employees are available, and how many patients are seen... so why is it that the UAW and the employees think that when times are bad, sales are down, they should be able to make the same hourly amount and have the same benefits as when times are good? That is communistic in nature.


That is the sleazeball dealer's fault, not Honda... That dealer is what has become a typical American business owner, with very little conscience.. He will line his pockets and doesnt seem to care that it is his workers, not him, that make his business what it is..

How do these two statements go together?

[Christof]

Let me separate them for you, as they were separated in this thread.... One is saying that Unions are doing a good job of hosing workers out of their jobs and retirement, the other is saying that the dealer is the one responsible for doing business in a shitty way, his crappy business ethics cannot be blamed on the company who makes his cars..

Hope that sorts it out for you...

[Marcus]

The 2012 Pelosi GTxi SS/RT Sport Edition (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAqPMJFaEdY)

[Christof]

How do these two statements go together?
And also, I hope you are not trying to compare medicine with the auto industry? (per your bold type)
People get sick no matter how the economy is doing, cutting staff, especially in an area like ER, is very stupid at best, and dangerous at worst...

A car dealership closes, small impact on local economy... A hospital closes, BIG impact on local residents...

[mnguy]

Nancy Pelosi is has a brain about the size of a cockroach, and is just about as ugly... How the hell that woman has remained in office is beyond me, let alone became the speaker of the house.. I try really hard not to hold it against Kalifornians for keeping her there..
I also do not like Diane Feinstein, but merely for her political ideas, she is pretty smart in my opinion...
Pelosi must be pretty good at, well, you know...

Don't blame all of us. We can only vote in our congressional districts. Blame San Franciscans. They are her district's constituents.

[Christof]

I know Mike.... I love San Fran, one of my favorite cities as far as location, beauty, etc., but man, it is one f*d up city...

[Mutt]

I know Mike.... I love San Fran, one of my favorite cities as far as location, beauty, etc., but man, it is one f*d up city...


Kinda Bizarre,,,

San Fran- I visited a friend that lived on the Embarquedero (sp?) quite some time ago, right after it was developed...she was paying something like $3k / month in rent, and the people down the hall were paying something like $900.00/ month for exactly the same apt...Go Figure... very strange indeed....The developer had to agree to such when he developed it....