Should the big three get a blank check?

The Big 3 should get nothing. Let the file for Chapter 11. Excreet the union and the top management of egomaniacs. Hire people who are willing to work. Pay them $14 an hour like they do at Honda. Maybe someday they will begin making cars that are not junk.

The cars currently are not junk. They are suffereing from a bad reputation of the late-70s through early 90s when the cars WERE junk. The pay should match the work though, as it does with the foreign automakers. The Big 3 were living off of high margins from the over-priced SUVs and depending on high sales to go on indefinitely. When that stopped, they were dead. Labor is extremely overpaid, but the autos are actually high-quality for the most part. Germany still makes the best overall autos, with Japan a close 2nd and the US and Korea right there. It's all in reputation, though.

Linda Bledsoe wrote:

The cars currently are not junk. They are suffereing from a bad reputation of the late-70s through early 90s when the cars WERE junk. The pay should match the work though, as it does with the foreign automakers. The Big 3 were living off of high margins from the over-priced SUVs and depending on high sales to go on indefinitely. When that stopped, they were dead. Labor is extremely overpaid, but the autos are actually high-quality for the most part. Germany still makes the best overall autos, with Japan a close 2nd and the US and Korea right there. It's all in reputation, though.

Can someone try to convince me that bankrupcy is not the best option for the big three american automakers? Their management is poor, they still suffer with a poorer reputation that most of their foreign competitors and their labor costs are out of sight. Bankrupcy will force them to re-structure which they probably will not do if they receive federal money.

Realistic wrote:

<quoted text>
Can someone try to convince me that bankrupcy is not the best option for the big three american automakers? Their management is poor, they still suffer with a poorer reputation that most of their foreign competitors and their labor costs are out of sight. Bankrupcy will force them to re-structure which they probably will not do if they receive federal money.

I agree with everything you just said.

I don't think they should get bailed out. The unions are the blame to make them uncompetitive. How many times did you hear of people working while someone slept?
Now they are crying wolf- or look at Ford with the F150 and Taurus, they got lazy and didn't have anything innovative to keep up w/ the market.

It would seem that most Americans are against an auto industry bailout, as am I. However, under the current congress, the will of the majority seems to be irrelevant. They will almost certainly give another huge chunk of OUR money to this industry because it is mostly comprised of liberal democrat union voters. Without those votes, they risk losing their power in the next election. Also, it's another chance to infect the private sector with more government interference and control. Any bailout of any kind for any industry means more government interference and control of those industries. The more control the government has, the more socialist we become. This is exactly what most liberal democrats want. The more control they have, the more dependent the people become. The more dependent they become, the less they are willing to do for themselves. It's a downward spiral that this country has been in for decades. Until the majority of people realize this and vote accordingly, we will continue down the road of incrementalism that will eventually lead to outright socialism. There has never been any socialist government in history that has not eventually failed after years of oppressing its citizens.

They should get nothing. Bankruptcy is what they need to cancel some of their debts and and restructure drastically enough to stand a chance and success going forward. They will not disappear if they go bankrupt, but they will change. If they get help from the government, they'll just limp along...why does anyone think that giving them money is going to help them miraculouosly turn around? Why would these business leaders who did not do something sooner know what to do now?

Linda Bledsoe wrote:

The cars currently are not junk. They are suffereing from a bad reputation of the late-70s through early 90s when the cars WERE junk. The pay should match the work though, as it does with the foreign automakers. The Big 3 were living off of high margins from the over-priced SUVs and depending on high sales to go on indefinitely. When that stopped, they were dead. Labor is extremely overpaid, but the autos are actually high-quality for the most part. Germany still makes the best overall autos, with Japan a close 2nd and the US and Korea right there. It's all in reputation, though.

Interesting opinions on quality. Where do you get your data from? I'd like to research it. Thanks.

A government loan or bailout simply doesn't make sense.

The Big 3 undoubtedly hasn't made profit to get them in the shape their in now, just how can they expect make any future profit?

Sorry Big 3, you are out of your mind to even ask.

Someone please correct me if I am in error...Isn't/wasn't it a fact that a UAW member could draw approximately 85%+ of their base salary even when laid off? I seem to recall that some time ago I was told this by someone who worked for Ford. This person commented that a layoff was fine as long as that amount was paid to them. This sort of situation sure must have added quite a bit to the cost of an automobile.
I do know that back in the 1920s and 1930s auto workers were badly exploited but the current situation certainly could not be considered exploitation. As dire as the situation is now I had seen where the president of the UAW said "No concessions". This makes very little sense. Wouldn't a wage cut(based on a percentage) at all levels of management and labor seem a good way to preserve jobs? One might think a job paying a bit less is better than no job at all. Possibly the UAW pres. remembers earlier situations in other industries where labor accepted a pay reduction to save a failing company and the upper management didn't bother to do so. One would think this could cause more than a small amount of antagonism.

Meow-

I heard almost the same thing, plus compensation for retraining or college under some** conditions.(** I believe when the worker wasn't expected to be rehired back, under original contract terms)

The "No Concessions" should = No Deal IMHO!

They do not deserve a bail out. In the early 80's Lee Iacocca got Chrysler out of the mess they were in. Mabey they should get him to come to their rescue.

Maybe the owers should take a pay cut and quit taking money for the oil companys. So thousands of people dont lose there jobs. We might have fuel efficence cars! ha!ha! That wont happen to many greedy people,that think money is everything!!!!!!!!!!

Bill Mundy wrote:

They do not deserve a bail out. In the early 80's Lee Iacocca got Chrysler out of the mess they were in. Mabey they should get him to come to their rescue.

Even though I deplore Crudler, and vow to never own such a POC, Lee Iacocca demanded employee concessions and product changes, but narrowly got his plan passed by Congress.

Unfortunately Lee is 84 and likely so Retired he is ReReRetired.

Detonador7 wrote:

<quoted text>
Interesting opinions on quality. Where do you get your data from? I'd like to research it. Thanks.

Here is a good start...

http://www.moneyallocator.com/articles/americ...

Go from there to Consumer Reports, etc. Most of the difference (in sales) at this point is perception and preference, not results-based performance.

I own 2 foreign cars that are used on a regular basis and one old domestic that I use in poor weather or to haul stuff, so I am in no way pro-domestic.

Linda Bledsoe wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is a good start...
http://www.moneyallocator.com/articles/americ...
Go from there to Consumer Reports, etc. Most of the difference (in sales) at this point is perception and preference, not results-based performance.
I own 2 foreign cars that are used on a regular basis and one old domestic that I use in poor weather or to haul stuff, so I am in no way pro-domestic.

A few months ago I saw something on one of the cable channels that stated the quality disparity between foreign and domestic autos is no longer, and as you said earlier, it's now just a perception that has carried over from 2-3 decades ago.
Funny thing I own a Tundra that was manufactured here in Indiana, and a Harley that has a lot of Japanese parts in it. My last domestic auto was assembled in Canada.

Linda Bledsoe wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is a good start...
http://www.moneyallocator.com/articles/americ...
Go from there to Consumer Reports, etc.

According to CR, Japanese makers still lead in quality, but ford (US leader) is catching up. German are getting better.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/used-...

They asked for a LOAN. With interest.

The unions have been giving concessions for years.

Every time the union signs a contract with concessions the President of the company gets a years worth of that money as a bonus.

Foreign auto makers in the US don't have retirement pay to cover. If the companies had put enough in the retirement fund when they were supposed to this would not be a problem.

A large chunk of the layoff money comes from State Unemployment.

Upper management pay levels average 800 times employee pay. This is true for all Fortune 500 companies.

The bankers who caused the problem got a bail out. The auto manufacturers who can't get funding because of the problem the bankers caused are asking for a loan.

All you people want to do is punish your neighbors for the failure of suits and scam artists.

Why aren't you people pissed off at the people who caused the problem?

Detonador7 wrote:

<quoted text>
According to CR, Japanese makers still lead in quality, but ford (US leader) is catching up. German are getting better.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/used-...

Japanese are also more expensive. Getting what you pay for will always be a factor to some extent. I am just saying if you are looking to spend say $30,000 on a NEW car, the difference in quality between a Japanese and domestic is negligible.

Steve wrote:

They asked for a LOAN. With interest.
The unions have been giving concessions for years.
Every time the union signs a contract with concessions the President of the company gets a years worth of that money as a bonus.
Foreign auto makers in the US don't have retirement pay to cover. If the companies had put enough in the retirement fund when they were supposed to this would not be a problem.
A large chunk of the layoff money comes from State Unemployment.
Upper management pay levels average 800 times employee pay. This is true for all Fortune 500 companies.
The bankers who caused the problem got a bail out. The auto manufacturers who can't get funding because of the problem the bankers caused are asking for a loan.
All you people want to do is punish your neighbors for the failure of suits and scam artists.
Why aren't you people **** off at the people who caused the problem?

Interesting! May we see some numbers, i.e facts and figures?