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 Do You Favor A Government Loan To The Detroit 3?
3958 messages, Last post on Oct 02, 2009 at 4:52 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: morin2 (Dec 05, 2008 6:58 pm) According to a recent post by '62, the laid off still take unemployment and then the jobs bank kicks in *after* the unemployment is exhausted. |
|
|
Replying to: jimbres (Dec 05, 2008 8:05 pm) I agree wholeheartedly. As far as berri saying the state pays unemployment. Look at your W2 for SUCI. You pay State Unemployment Compensation Insurance. You are paying for that not the state. The state and Federal government do not PAY for anything. We the tax payers pay for all services rendered. The Jobs Bank was gotten by thug tactics used by the UAW. Big 3 just has Stupid management that buckled instead of locking them out when they had the chance. As recently as last year.
|
|
|
Replying to: morin2 (Dec 05, 2008 6:58 pm) So having to sell cars for less than it cost to build them, is doing the right thing? Why do you think nobody else has benefits like these. They would like to stay in business, and make money. I guess making a profit is not important, as long as the union is happy, right? What kind of benefits will they be getting when the automakers go bankrupt? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 05, 2008 8:22 pm) However I agree with you about stupid management. I see why they agree back when they had 90% of the market but as market share and profits dropped this benefit should have been the first to go. I am a pro union guy, and I think some changes in the governance of unions are long overdue. |
|
BEFORE the financial mess Detroit was losing market share. And that's not a problem that was going to turn around very fast. Even assuming they get some bridge loans, even assuming that those bridge loans get them back to some kind of stable situation, they're still going to be fighting to turn around the persception, fair or not, that they build an inferior product. The legacy of the K cars seems to be pretty hard to shake off. 
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Dec 06, 2008 6:08 am)  Congress nears accord on Detroit 3 bailout Funds would come from previously approved environmental legislation Harry Stoffer Automotive News | December 5, 2008 - 12:15 pm EST WASHINGTON -- Democratic leaders of Congress indicated this evening they have reached agreement on a bailout plan for the Detroit 3. The accord is designed to provide short-term loans to General Motors, Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC to prevent an industry collapse and allow a comprehensive restructuring of the companies early next year, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement. Congress is scheduled to vote on bailout legislation next week. Democratic leaders also have reached agreement with the White House on the plan, a senior congressional aide told Reuters. The package totals between $15 billion and $17 billion, the aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Pelosi suggested she was willing to fund the emergency loans out of a $25 billion package already approved to help automakers retool for fuel-efficient vehicles. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had previously opposed that approach, which is favored by the Bush administration. Under the agreement, Pelosi said she would demand "a guarantee that those funds would be replenished in a matter of weeks" and that automakers would not delay work on improved fuel economy. The loans would allow the Detroit 3 to maintain operations until President-elect Barack Obama takes office Jan. 20. Taxpayer protection At hearings this week, GM CEO Rick Wagoner and Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli said that without a combined $11 billion in emergency loans by year end, they would not have enough money to meet their financial obligations. That funding was part of a $34 billion request for loans and credit lines. Pelosi said that "Congress will insist that any legislation include rigorous and ongoing oversight to guarantee that taxpayers are protected." The New York Times quoted Reid as saying he expected House and Senate "votes next week on a responsible plan to help the millions of Americans who rely on a healthy auto industry for their livelihoods.” But Reid added: “We will need support and cooperation from Republicans to determine what that vote happens and whether it will succeed." Ford said in a statement Friday night that it is "encouraged" by the promise of congressional votes next next week. As recently as Thursday, Pelosi and Reid had insisted that the Bush administration make the emergency loans to the Detroit 3 out of a $700 billion rescue fund for financial institutions. The administration said it did not have that authority. Consensus built for an interim rescue package after more than five hours of testimony today before the House Financial Services Committee. Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said he was “more optimistic than before” that GM and Chrysler would get enough federal loans to live until next year when the Congress and the Obama administration can take up a more complete rescue measure. That package could be completed with stringent government oversight, milestones and possibly equity rewards for the risk of lending the money, Frank said. He said failure to act immediately would be an “unmitigated disaster” for an already-fragile U.S. economy. Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally said his company doesn’t immediately need loans but is supporting GM and Chrysler to prevent a failure and the consequential collapse of the domestic parts supply base. Ford says it may need $9 billion if one of its rivals doesn’t survive. The Detroit 3 CEOs and UAW President Ron Gettelfinger testified to Congress for a second consecutive day Friday. Responding to lawmaker questions, Chrysler’s Nardelli said a $4 billion interim package would suffice for his company. Wagoner said GM needs about $4 billion by January and up to $10 billion through March. |
|
|
Replying to: joel0622 (Dec 06, 2008 6:17 am)  Ford's pretty well along on their reorganizing and "right-sizing." GM's still trying to decide what size is right (instead of creating a flexible infrasructure), and Chrysler is still trying to decide to put the Viper engine in the 300c or in the Charger.  Ford WILL have a supply problem if one of those others goes belly-up...they'll probably need the money to keep enough suppliers afloat long enough. Personally I like the idea of giving suppliers a bailout if GM or Chrysler fails, rather than giving it to GM or Chrysler. That opens the field for any car company to survive on their own merits (Ford), a newcomer to come in and start up (say Tesla, just as an example) AND for parts to still be available if GM and Chrysler fail (face it, we're gonna need those, which means we'll end up paying to keep the suppliers afloat anyway).
|
|
|
Replying to: joel0622 (Dec 06, 2008 6:17 am) NO Problem Pelosi, just keep those printing presses rolling. You have an ironclad retirement for life with your fancy pension plan. So it should be a MERRY CHRISTMAS for Detroit, with a $15 billion handout from the struggling tax payers. It will be interesting to see how they repay our generosity. Will management and the UAW pull in their belts and put their greedy tendencies on hold? |
|
|
Replying to: bpizzuti (Dec 06, 2008 6:31 am) PARTS is PARTS. Where would any automaker be without parts? That makes a lot more sense than giving cash to a parts assembler that has proven they do not know how to build cars that are wanted or make money. |
|
|
Replying to: morin2 (Dec 05, 2008 6:58 pm) Whatever Congress or the Executive branch have done last week or 5 years ago, is irrelevant to the present and deciding what is right and fair? To add to errors by committing the same errors/biases is not correct. These few companies happen to be doing the right thing - both to their employees and to the taxpayer who saves the cost of paying those benefits. They were forced into a contract by the unions. How the Big3 and their unions use their money is their business - they decide. If they wish to give it all away in pay, bonuses, stock options, Job Banks, and excessive pension pay and benefits that's they're business. They have made those choices over many years. Now that that they have burned thru all their money, they want taxpayer $ to continue on!  THAT is the problem I have with it. They screwup, and everyone else (on average) who does not make as much or expect that sort of pension is being asked, or should I say forced to pay for them! I'd rather see my tax dollars used to help companies that make something than companies that sell paper. You mean your Social Security funds and your descendants lower standard of living w/higher taxes. Because any $ loaned that is not repayed is tacked onto our $11,000,000,000,000 national debt. The federal government does not have limitless $; it is funded by people who invest in Treasuries and such. If the government continues to act like the Big3 and use it's reserves in give-aways to people and corporations, the U.S. government ends up in a similar position as the Big3 today. When the government is so far in debt, and the average consumer is so far in debt, there will be no recovery for many, many years. That may be now. We need to end bailouts and giveaways; and STOP using the jealousy arguments of "they got this last year and were wasting $ in Iraq, ... ". We need to stop government spending anytime we can. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Do You Favor A Government Loan To The Detroit 3?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
