calvinandhobbes said:then there's the GM CEO blaming the financial meltdown as the core problem. That's funny given Toyota is facing the same metldown, the same tough market, yet they seem to be doing just fine.
Really? Toyota's doing just fine? Some of you need a little stroll down reality lane.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/19/business/19ports.php

JesseLivermore said:Incarnate said:calvinandhobbes said:then there's the GM CEO blaming the financial meltdown as the core problem. That's funny given Toyota is facing the same metldown, the same tough market, yet they seem to be doing just fine.
Really? Toyota's doing just fine? Some of you need a little stroll down reality lane.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/19/business/19ports.php

That article is a real eye-opener. No cars are selling, including Toyotas.

And Japan (and most industrialized nations) dump a ton of money into their businesses (i.e. Toyota, Sony, etc.). The Japanese gov't pays for the worker's health care, they give monetary assistance, and money for R&D. US companies are on their own and have to pay for their employees health care costs. It's an unfair playing field. And China throws off the true value of their currency.

700 billion for banks who hoard it like pigs....yeah, that's fair. At least give 25 billion (of that 700 billion) to the car companies. They build something and provide jobs and health insurance for working class people.

mlayu said:deallover said:Braney Frank this morning on NPR said that $25B is just a loan with us as a number 1 creditor so that we ar first when payback time comes.

Same guy that said that Fannie and Freddie were fundamentally sound prior to nationalization.I am pretty sure that $25B is significantly more than the current market cap of GM. Market cap represents the public's opinion of the value of their assets, and this $25B is the taxpayers' money for all intents and purposes. So what exactly do they have that we would want in exchange for our $25B should it come to that?

GM also has foreign subsidiaries that, to the best of my knowledge, are quite profitable at this juncture. How about they use THAT money to bail themselves out?

I say let GM enter BK reorg or fail outright. Other companys build an equal or superior product more efficiently. Whether it is now or later, the insane union contracts and dealer agreements will be the death of GM.

trifate said:I like how everyone said let the big 3 fail. The same people bitch about the price of new Toyota and Honda's. If the big 3 fail there are 3 less car MFG so supply will drop and prices go up. The more car MFG the better for the consumer. But people are stupid and when there are only 2 choices when it comes to car shopping we will get bent over by toyota or honda.

I didn't see anyone complaining about the price of Toyotas or Hondas in this thread...

Incarnate said:calvinandhobbes said:then there's the GM CEO blaming the financial meltdown as the core problem. That's funny given Toyota is facing the same metldown, the same tough market, yet they seem to be doing just fine.
Really? Toyota's doing just fine? Some of you need a little stroll down reality lane. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/19/business/19ports.phpWhoa there, Tex. I said they are doing fine in that they are still profitable.. Times are definitely down at Toyota relative to where they were last year, but compare the two situations. Toyota made, what, $1.4 billion in 3Q08 during a time of plummetting sales. Sure it's way off, but it's still profitable. A company making profits during their trough is a viable business model. To the contrary, GM lost $2.5 billion in the same time. That's called an unviable business model. Even this lowly engineer can figure that one out. We could switch to comparing cashflow (which is more important these days), but that only gets worse.

And guess what...if any or all of the big 3 go under...that's more sales to be had by Toyota, hence, more profit. Still think things are horrible for Toyota? I for one, don't really think things are that bad. When Toyota is losing $2.5 billion a quarter, or $1 per quarter for that matter, during a recession, let me know and I will reassess my view of the Japanese automaker.

note: I don't currently own a Toyota or stock in Toyota. Just calling it like I see it.

shahhere said:erinm said:trifate said:I like how everyone said let the big 3 fail. The same people bitch about the price of new Toyota and Honda's. If the big 3 fail there are 3 less car MFG so supply will drop and prices go up. The more car MFG the better for the consumer. But people are stupid and when there are only 2 choices when it comes to car shopping we will get bent over by toyota or honda.

I didn't see anyone complaining about the price of Toyotas or Hondas in this thread...

No, he meant that we are NOT complaining about them because once the US 3 Car manufactures go out there will be less competition.

Though I sort of agree with what Erinm is saying I also can see that there are other companies waiting to pickup the slack namely Kia & Hyundai. I would also include other manufactures such as the Indian Car Company (Tata) which has been making quite a bit of headway in the past few years especially with their Nano car (i know it a Piece of crap but the timing is right). There are other manufactures in the UK/Europe that would have no problem transitioning in the US with their smaller and fuel efficient car lines.

Shahhere

He did imply that people were complaining about Toyota and Honda prices, but I think the FW community probably owns more Toyotas and Hondas than the general public.

The Big 3 are touting statistics that are based on the fact that if they fail, their business will be completely gone and millions of cars just plain won't get made. We know that isn't the truth, some buyers of Buicks will become customers of Honda, Kia, Toyota, Nissan... etc. Sure, some cars won't get made, but that will help level supply and demand, but the remaining auto makers will just make more cars (if there is demand for them).

Our driveway has one Honda and two Chevys in it... guess which one was made in the US? Yep, the Honda. It also has the most miles on it, is the most reliable, most fuel efficient, and has the lowest cost of ownership.

JesseLivermore said:4) There is ZERO question, to be fair, that because of their already precarious balance sheets, the Big 3 were much more vulnerable to the credit crisis and economic downturn than their foreign competition. We can argue about fault now, but it's too late to do that if we really are interested in helping to save millions of jobs and a critical (IMO) American Industry.but there is a question as to whether this loan would save the jobs, or merely delay their loss. also, see #66) There is ZERO question that at least 3 million, and as many as 5 million jobs will be lost if we lose these three companies, and that will mean worse economic conditions for all, and less competition for American Consumers.sure there is question. many challenge the 3 million figure. I for one do. I trust these CEO's and their propoganda machines as much as I trust the Tobacco CEO's in front of congress. they are counting car mechanics....gee, guess cars disappear once GM is gone. The ones already sold don't need any repairs. Sheesh. Not to mention GM's existing sales would be taken up by other companies. These are the same CEO's that claimed that imposing higher MPG requirements would hurt domestic sales because Toyota doesn't have to do it as well. BS. Of course they would. ANYONE selling cars in America would have the same requirements.
Perspective. After doling out 2 trillion to banks and Wall Street, with part of that taxpayer money being hoarded or used to pay bonuses and high executive compensation at the recipient entities, a lot of jobs can be saved and a lot of constructive good for the American Economy can be achieved with a fraction of that sum allocated as a loan to the Big 3, even if 2 of these companies survive (Ford and GM, for example).translation: even if you disagree with the Wall Street bailout, what's fair is fair, you have to bail out everyone. Well, no. No you don't.

erinm said:The Big 3 are touting statistics that are based on the fact that if they fail, their business will be completely gone and millions of cars just plain won't get made. We know that isn't the truth, some buyers of Buicks will become customers of Honda, Kia, Toyota, Nissan... etc. Sure, some cars won't get made, but that will help level supply and demand, but the remaining auto makers will just make more cars (if there is demand for them).quit arguing supply and demand. that has nothing to do with economics, this is about.....no, wait, this is economics, it's all about supply and demand. If it isn't about supply and demand, it must be about politics. But that couldn't be the case, now, could it?Our driveway has one Honda and two Chevys in it... guess which one was made in the US? Yep, the Honda. It also has the most miles on it, is the most reliable, most fuel efficient, and has the lowest cost of ownership.There you go again, using reason. Quit that. Reason has no place in Detroit or DC.

darkmeridian said:

This is basically raising our taxes so we can support a guy making $50 with better health benefits, job security, and pensions than we have. It's disgusting.

I disagree completely. The UAW workers make almost the same amount as the non-UAW workers that work for Honda and Toyota make. Very few (if any) make $50, and most start at $14-15/hour. You also forget that many of the Big 3 make their cars in other countries, so they aren't even paying American workers. I know that Toyota workers in the US make very nice wages, yet Toyota doesn't have the same problems. Toyota workers in the Georgetown, KY plant average $30/hour. UAW workers average $27/hour.

Why aren't people concerned about the huge salaries and bonuses at the top? Why do we begrudge the WORKERS their wages, but seem to think that upper management earns their millions?

http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_fo...

Most Unions pose limitation on the type and quantity of work that their workers can do. I am sure the UAW has such provisions too... These quite possibly interfere in worker productivity.