Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16738 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 10:07 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Dec 05, 2008 4:23 am)  I work for the Suburban Collection, pal and my store is in Holland, Michigan (Saturn) but I have access to all of the Suburban Collection, inventory !!! I would assume you know our owner Mr. Fischer ??? I will get to meet him this week. Wagoner and him are real tight !!!  -Rocky |
|
|
Replying to: tlong (Dec 07, 2008 9:20 pm)  -Rocky
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Dec 07, 2008 9:05 pm) And that is about the only reason why I support the bail out. The ripple effect, otherwise I think GM should be broken up and sold. It should go bankrupt because it will take more cash than they are asking for and more time than is politically feasible to save them. Basically I don’t think GM can return to profitability within the next 4 years. They have done nothing to address the loss market share. They are doing little to address the over capacity and I have little faith in their ability to create desirable products that sell at a profit. When people are willing to pay more money to avoid your product, you have got major problems. The last time GM could have righted the ship was ten years ago and now it is too late. Perhaps we could give the loans to the suppliers and just let GM go chapter 7. I don’t think any wise automotive company would be looking to buy up those factories at this point.(The financial market and sales environment is too bad). Nor do I think it would be smart (i.e. some how I don’t think a company that is losing money will be able to keep up with modernizing and replacing broken equipment.). I think that the only thing the bail out can do is delay the day of reckoning. I think that doing what gm needs is also politically not viable. Politicians like to keep as many jobs as possible and keep investors happy. But GM needs to be broken up into smaller separate companies and the only parts of GM that make any sense are Chevy(without the trucks), GMC(trucks/SUV) and Cadillac. The rest are niche brands and overlap. Doing this will cost an extreme amount of jobs (both automaker and dealer) making it very not viable. Not counting reducing the pension and benefits to retirees. And what on earth do you with the bond and shareholders? I don’t think that is going to happen. |
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Dec 07, 2008 9:31 pm) Rocky, if you can do well in this situation then think of how well you'll do when the economy improves! We wish you the best (even if we don't always agree with you!). |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Dec 07, 2008 8:46 pm) >The bottom line is Wagoner, despite his mistakes is a very smart guy. Prezactly. But the problem is more than individuals being swayed by lobbyists; it's that the whole Congress is being run by business money and lobbyists rather than for the people. While they are covering their behinds after giving a blank check to the finance folks and lots of money to keep attention off their lack of control of the leveraged markets and the synthetic markets, they are using the hubbub over the US automakers that they've screwed through the years to keep up fighting each other instead of attacking them. We should be lobbying to get Frank, Dodd, Waters, Raines, and others in jail. Instead we're arguing over some of the UAW being highly paid and benefit-loaded and how it has hurt the business as well; but the way that foreign makers were allowed free rein and given great amounts of value to build plants here rather than putting tariffs on their cars is wrong. We should have required they join up with US companies no more than 49% the way Asian countries are doing. They could build here Snow: Good friend just drove back from a visit/business in Gd. Rapids. Said they had 14 inches of snow!!! We had flurries on Sat that stuck and people couldn't drive in it.
|
|
...GM, Ford, and Chrysler? Which individuals in the business world do you believe are up to the task? Who would you choose for each company and why?
|
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Dec 07, 2008 8:46 pm) I think you are missing the big picture. A big majority of the Congress and soon to be President Obama, see the handwriting on the wall. GM is a dead monkey. I don't think getting rid of Wagoner would make a bit of difference. GM owes too much money and has too little market share left to make a comeback intact. Liquidation would be the quickest way to turn the automotive business back to profitability. Like many have posted the Chinese can buy up the separate companies and sell the cars and trucks that are competitive. The UAW is not part of the scenario. The UAW workers that are wanting to work for wages comparable to the non union shops MIGHT be given a chance to prove their worth. Rocky, one question. If Wagoner is as smart as you say. How did he manage to go all through the CLINTON years selling record numbers of SUVs and not make a decent profit? He never cracked 5% in any year. That is substandard for any Fortune 500 company. Just let GM die....
|
|
Hopefully he has seen the light on that very repressive EFCA bill along with several other tax issues. I hear he is wanting Rush Limbaugh as Sec of Labor.  Now it’s Obama’s Cabinet moves that are drawing the most fire. It’s not just that he’s picked Clinton and Gates. It’s that liberal Democrats say they’re hard-pressed to find one of their own on Obama’s team so far – particularly on the economic side, where people like Tim Geithner and Lawrence Summers are hardly viewed as pro-labor. “At his announcement of an economic team there was no secretary of labor. If you don’t think the labor secretary is on the same level as treasury secretary, that gives me pause,” said Jonathan Tasini, who runs the website workinglife.org. “The president-elect wouldn't be president-elect without labor." During the campaign Obama gained labor support by saying he favored legislation that would make it easier for unions to form inside companies. The “card check” bill would get rid of a secret-ballot method of voting to form a union and replace it with a system that would require companies to recognize unions simply if a majority of workers signed cards saying they want one. Obama still supports that legislation, aides say – but union leaders are worried that he no longer talks it up much as president-elect. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16292.html |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Dec 08, 2008 5:43 am) Yes, it's very wrong that the U.S. allows compaines to set up shop in the U.S. and provide good-paying jobs to Americans so that they can build vehicles that Americans want. And the reason Americans want them is because, with a few notable exceptions, they are superior to what the home team is offering. The fact that Detroit defenders consider this to be "bad" speaks volumes about the pro-Detroit mentality, and why the rest of the country has little, if any, sympathy for GM, Chrysler and the UAW. We can now return to our regularly scheduled whine-a-thon about: currency manipulation, Consumer Reports, unfair trade, environmentalists, Californians, people who buy Toyotas, companies that have the gall to set up factories in the U.S. to employ Americans at good wages...have I missed anything? imidazol97: We should have required they join up with US companies no more than 49% the way Asian countries are doing. Yes, because Japan has been in a recession since about 1990, so therefore, the U.S. should also adopt policies that strangle foreign investment and economic growth, to ensure that our economy remains stagnant, too. Unfortunately, the U.S. didn't follow this path, so we spent most of the 1990s with a booming economy.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 08, 2008 6:18 am) How did he manage to go all through the CLINTON years selling record numbers of SUVs and not make a decent profit? He never cracked 5% in any year. That is substandard for any Fortune 500 company. Just let GM die.... Yet GM has $100 billion in the pension funds. Perhaps that is where the profits went?
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
