Should the US Gov't Bail Out the Auto Industry?

[Darth_Yuthura]

Some people have described the effects on the US economy if the big three go under, but what about the damage done to the economy by bailing them out? It would also send a bad signal to every other corporation that have taken their steps very carefully. Ford and GM made bad business choices and these are the consequences. They CAN NOT just be bailed out because they were bad investments in the first place.

 

And don't forget that taxpayer dollars would be used, making people pay even more out of their pockets to provide for everything else in the budget for maintenance, services, and military.

[Jae Onasi]

A bailout bill passed the house but there was opposition in the Senate--the Republicans want up-front concessions from the UAW in order to fund any bail-outs.

[machievelli]

Yes, they have made had done some really stupid stuff- i.e paying some of their employees to just sit around, but I think that they do need some help. There has to be a balance though, because what they are asking for is really quite a lot of money. I think that the Big 3 should make some major changes in how they run their company and their employees. But yes, if it will work, I think that, in the long run, it will be beneficial.

 

The economy is really taking some hard hits as of late...

 

 

The most recent amt mentioned (17 billion dollars) is less than one half of one percent of what the bloated leech called the Federal government extorts out of us every year. If we bail them out the Union has to be reined in too. So far they have driven seven or eight airlines and the American merchant marine into the ground, and forced most companies to outsource overseas rather than pay what they demand.

 

Oh BTW, the bailout bill collapsed in the senate exactly because the unions still want to be able to jack up their wages.

[Tommycat]

So bloody sick of the UAW.

 

I think most of all I feel that the bailout will only delay the inevitable. So long as the bloated wages of the Union and Execs continue, the big 3 will eventually die. So we'll get to foot the bill for an ultimately futile effort.

 

Edited to add:

Best description I can think of. It's like putting a band aid on a bullet wound. Until you fix the real problem ultimately you lose the patient.

[Web Rider]

So bloody sick of the UAW.

 

Yeah, at $70 an hour, on a 40 hour workweek, for say, 45 weeks out of the year, that's almost 150,000 a year. That's crazy for factory labor. 50,000 a year would be a LOT in my opinion for factor labor.

[Yar-El]

Yeah, at $70 an hour, on a 40 hour workweek, for say, 45 weeks out of the year, that's almost 150,000 a year. That's crazy for factory labor. 50,000 a year would be a LOT in my opinion for factor labor.

I get around $89 an hour, and I work 50 hours a week. I agree. $50,000 a year is not very much. I make a pretty oky paycheck. I have a cousin that works for Ford, and he gets around $60,000 a year. He has two kids to take care of, and he is barely getting by.

[Web Rider]

I get around $89 an hour, and I work 50 hours a week. I agree. $50,000 a year is not very much. I make a pretty oky paycheck. I have a cousin that works for Ford, and he gets around $60,000 a year. He has two kids to take care of, and he is barely getting by.

 

For an average middle-class family(2 parents, 2 kids, few cars), it should be about double that needed. I was talking for just a single-person supporting only themselves.

 

Most people actually, with the exception of the very rich, are only 1 paycheck away from poverty.

[Yar-El]

For an average middle-class family(2 parents, 2 kids, few cars), it should be about double that needed. I was talking for just a single-person supporting only themselves.

 

Most people actually, with the exception of the very rich, are only 1 paycheck away from poverty.

Affordable education alone will not solve this problem.

 

I can't put myself in the Big Three's shoes. How can you keep a straight face and ask for bail out money when others are not getting paycheck adjustments for survival? It stinks.

[Jae Onasi]

I get around $89 an hour, and I work 50 hours a week. I agree. $50,000 a year is not very much. I make a pretty oky paycheck. I have a cousin that works for Ford, and he gets around $60,000 a year. He has two kids to take care of, and he is barely getting by.

If he''s barely getting by on that salary, he needs to re-evaluate his spending.

[Yar-El]

If he''s barely getting by on that salary, he needs to re-evaluate his spending.

He has two kids, two dogs, house, two cars, and he does some slightly foolish spending. His wife works 30 hours a week. He gets it from his dad; however, my uncle gets $132 per hour. He can afford the extras.

[ForeverNight]

$132.00/hour????

 

 

Holy!

 

At a 40-hour work week and 47 weeks a year...

 

That's: $248160.00 a year... that's almost a quarter-mil a year.

 

What does he do???

 

---

On Topic:

 

Yeah, the Big Three should just declare bankruptcy so they can shed some of their Union responsibilities for now and produce a decent car at a decent price.

 

If they have to pay people $70/hr and meet pension and other requirements for all the eligible workers than the car prices go up! There's a reason their losing money.

 

But then the media makes those three CEO's appear to be the big-bad companies because their not taking care of the [Outrageously Powerful] Union members.

 

Yeah, "Big-Bad-Evil-Companies".

[Tommycat]

Hang on a minute. I get around $20 an hour in my IT job. I have a degree. I have bills to pay. Before, I was able to pay for me, my wife, two kids, a dog and a house... and my wife was drinking like crazy. Some people need to reign in their spending. I actually feel bloody rich not having to pay for all of that. *sigh* I'm not being paid enough....

 

Note: I live in a low cost of living area, so perceptions about the insane pay of factory workers may be slightly skewed.

[Q]

I'm opposed to any bailout for the same reasons Bimmerman gave. GM and Chrysler should file for bankruptcy and tell the UAW what to go do with itself. The UAW leadership would only have istself to blame for such an outcome.

 

I was also opposed to the previous bailout. Companies that can not manage themselves should go into receivership.

[GarfieldJL]

Okay, from what I've heard, at least one of the CEOs of the big three just got there, and that's the President of Ford, so I wouldn't blame him for the mess he got left by the guy before him.

 

Also Ford is in much better shape than General Motors and Chrysler.

[JediAthos]

I think that perhaps Jay Leno made a good point in his monologue one night. (I'm paraphrasing by the way) He made a comment to the effect of if we bailed out those snakes on Wallstreet why not the auto industry?

 

Imo..Wallstreet are the ones that shouldn't have gotten the bailout. Whatever the auto industries mistakes are they cannot be as severe as the passel of idiots on Wallstreet which some would argue are either directly or indirectly the cause of a great many of the economic problems we currently face.

[mur'phon]

The difference is that not bailing out the big three is bad in the short term, good in the long term. Not bailing out Wall street would have been catastrophic in the short term, and make any recowery take a lot longer.

[GarfieldJL]

The difference is that not bailing out the big three is bad in the short term' date=' good in the long term. Not bailing out Wall street would have been catastrophic in the short term, and make any recowery take a lot longer.[/quote']

 

No, the money is only going to end up going to the UAW, which is one of the Democrats' chief providers of campaign money.

[Darth Avlectus]

Ironic how wall street and the banks have already been bailed out and there hasn't been much talk about THEIR plans. Nor will there ever be any investigations into who caused that whole mess. (Cough-cough) Rahm Emanuel and Franklin Rains AKA Fannie Mae & Freddie Mack. Coincidence right?

 

Blagoijovech? A sacrificial lamb. Who knew what and When did they know?

They didn't know and it was all poor judgement? Oh, great. I feel really secure with such IDIOTS in charge.

I'm not making hasty generalizations: In Chicago, the "straight'n'sober" genuine types don't live there for long.

 

BTW:

What the flock have these thieving pirates on wall street done for the workin' folks lately? When was the last time any of them braved a 30-40 ft. climb up the side of a house to put in heat tape conduit in the middle of a blizzard? I can tell you this much; they take a spill in their profession, they can start over; I have no life insurance so if I take a spill and die my family is *screwed*. Hell, they're still screwed if I live 'cuz of the hospital bill.

--------

What's up with 14 AIG execs EACH taking $25K private jets to hawaii for a one week "seminar" with all the luxury of a king? On bailout money no less?

I think we need to impale someone.

 

------

Any case I totally agree with giving these companies more than a slap on the wrists, bailout or not. Also, we should not punish the ones who inherit the mess. Fat chance we'll ever scathe the bandits though. It's a good goal to aim for, still.

 

We are faced with an ugly situation with ugly solutions and even uglier outcomes either way.

 

On the one hand:

Bail 'em out. If we had arbitrary individuals to run these corporations we would need them to

1) not be government agents,

2) not be tied into government in any major way,

AND

3) not have any current or past connections to any corporations whatsoever.

 

I think the American people would go for it in this case.

Fat chance that'll be the case: In a practical sense, to do so requires a past leadership in either one, or the other, or both. If their past was good...yeah, fine...but there is no guarantee the person will do the right thing, is there?

 

Coming up with a plan. Frankly I don't see how any plan would work while the uneven play field of NAFTA is still going. Unless the US auto makers became part of it and took advantage of it. Which would defeat part of the whole idea of having a US manufacturing, US based auto maker. Oh sure they'd survive but it would still be adverse to the economy for many of the same reasons as letting it fail. Namely taking jobs away from US citizens.

 

We'd be left with business, albeit government run. Some of you think that might be a good thing but I'd say turn your direction to utilities and "natural" sd monopolies and their failures...a popular example of bad might be what Erin Brockovich fought against. Gov't. solutions are okay for a time, but eventually would have to switch over. Making a lasting impression and discouraging future diverging sounds like a nice idea. Keeping it gov't run would still run into most of the same problems.

 

Arbitraters to watch all sides is nice on paper, but in reality it is like saying government will watch government or corporate will watch itself and the market solves all. Money/power talks, and BS walks.

 

 

On the other hand:

If the one on top is incompetent, let 'em burn. Let the businesses fail. Suffer damage to our economy.

Not only lose jobs, but now there is no manufacturer based in the USA. We already have near zilch manufacturing in this country. If a natural disaster hit and isolated us from our imports from the rest of the world (and given the earth's activity patterns could happen any day now)...I'm sure you could figure that one out.

 

Another may rise up to seize the mantle. We could take bailout money, watch these newcomers like hawks and help 'em up.

Does anyone know of any enterprising companies? I sure don't--but just because I can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there, right???????

 

Frankly I don't see the US auto manufacturers surviving.

-----------

Part of our solution is transparent public audits: going through every job with a fine tooth comb and figuring out what jobs actually deserves to earn what wages/salary.

We obviously cannot have leaf blowers earning as much as doctors and we cannot have doctors take a cut in pay to match leaf blowers. (credit Michael Savage for analogy)

Tedious and messy but it has to be done sooner or later. We cannot afford not to do it.

------------

 

Unions. Yeah, tell me about it.

I'm not entirely convinced the mafia is gone.

 

I've had to work with these @$$holes. Such idiots and such waste.

 

Rewarding ineptitude and incompetence. Even paying workers to not work. That is a bunch of BS. Stiflers of competition and innovation MUST GO. Or at least need major overhaul. Again, Fat chance.

 

Vanir, you talk like "dinosaur" of technology is necessarily such a bad thing.

I have one counter example for electronics.

 

Microwaves. Most of what goes wrong in these is usually a small thing easily fixed/replaced. Yet so many are sent to the dump, sadly.

Vast majority are like this. If the problem is something not easily fixed, scavenge the spare parts--you would be surprised how simple microwaves themselves are. Harmless electrically when unpowered after roughly 12-24 hours.

 

Parts are often interchangeable. I am not kidding, these are so easily user serviceable with common sense, good caution, a little self education (for free), and a bit of mechanical skill and novice electronics skill, most people could do it.

Rather than spend $50 every 2 years for a new one each time, why not just spend some extra cash now for parts to replace what goes wrong? If it will give you another 15 years of service, think how much you could save over that period... PM me if you want to know more

 

As far as electronics, Vanir, no we cannot lose that.

We'll need to select carefully what to evolve and what not to evolve, though.

 

Micro sizing. Good for energy efficiency. And bad by making it impossible to repair things... so long as the stuff can be processed and broken down into raw materials for reuse... The waste must be cut out. Something which means engineers and developers must start taking into consideration BEFORE coming up with a product.