Who killed GM....

[Lionheart]

Who killed GM....?


Here is a good insight to how gm runs things..


mA2u_KbCs6A

Part 1 of 10

Very good to watch. Tells you about how they think.

[Lionheart]

This is cool....


bsdUfAEIEos

[hey_moe]

Greed,sloppy work and unions!

[thedude247]

Greed,sloppy work and unions!

They brought it on them self's.:stop:

[hey_moe]

I hate to hear or see anything like this happen to a company. The workers suffer the most because they have to do what they are told to do or else. The way cars and trucks are made in this day and time is a joke. The cost of cars and trucks in the last 25 years have gone out the roof and yet they are made cheaper and most of all plastic crap. With fuel going out of sight the auto makers should have a long time ago started making a better car. One that would at lease last a few months before going back to shop for repairs. The employees working on the cars get paid for each car they repair. As a result the more cars you do a so called repair the more money you make. Most of the time the car isn't repaired right or is done half a$$. When you buy an extended warranty it covers everything but what really needs to cover. Bottom line >> " Junk in means junk out".

[Cazzie]

What killed GM and what will kill more automobile manufacturerers is the sheer fact there are too many of them and combined they produced more automobiles than society can saturate. Even if every citizen in every country eligible to purchase a new vehicle were to do so, there would still be a surplus of new automobiles to go around. GM reached saturation level many years ago and yet continued to overproduce. The Koreans are doing the same, no wonder they can give you a 10-year, 100, 000-mile warranty, if the one you bought breaks, they have three to replace it. I won't buy a Korean automobile, not that they may not be fine, it's just those three word names, Kim Jong Il. If his nutcase were to blow a socket and decide to invade South Korea, by-by warrenty.

Caz

[Railrunner130]

Outdated business practices, outdated labor practices, outdated sales practices, failure to move ahead with technologies, failure to quit building more monster trucks than are really necessary, failure to steer the consumers towards more efficient vehicles. Instead of providing a quality vehicle, they provide a longer warranty. Sounds like they were avoiding the problem to me.

[6297J]

I never thought I would live to see capitalism in Russia and a state owned industry in the US of A!

I wonder which marques will disappear forever - Saab? Saturn? Pontiac? I'm sure some of them may be bought by rich consortiums but some will surely vanish.

[Snuffy]

Don't forget ... Engineering firms (and yes automobiles are an engineered product,) are best run by engineers and not bean counters.

[exc141ac]

Since like 60 percent is now owned by the government (read: taxpayers) --
do we all get owner discounts now?

[Fibber]

There is another factor here beside the unions and inept management. many years ago the auto makers were fat. This was because demand was always high. Many in America bought a new car appox every three years. Why? Well a factor was that it was a partial write off on the income tax. Remember that? It the car was a bomb you got a new one and the deduction! I wasn't making much money then but I got a new one almost every three years if not less. Cars were priced very reasonable then. Congress in its' infinite wisdom(s/) eliminated the deduction and at the time was warned that it would hurt demand, and the industry. They did it and so the inevitable happened, demand dropped off. Now 20 year old cars are a norm.

[Cratermaker]

GM has a lesser known contribution to society: Consumer debt!

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/04/17/mm_gmac/

Thanks, GM!

[MudMarine]

You all need to learn the governments role in this mess by passing stupid legislation which played a part in GM's down fall. Not to mention just plain stupidity. I'll NEVER buy another GM product (I've never owned another auto company's product) as long as the government has a hand in running it!! You shouldn't either! Say good by to a crap load of money American taxpayers! We'll never see it returned to us.

[cheezyflier]

apparently i'm in the minority here, but for me, this is one of the tiredest topics anymore. i'm starting to really not care about stuff like this because i didn't break it, and i can't fix it. having never owned a brand new car in my life, i don't see it really effecting me directly. even if i did buy a new car someday (which i doubt i ever would) it wouldn't be an american car anyhow.
in my mind, the players will fix it or they won't. either way, i don't work for them or any sattelite industry. good luck to them, adios, arrevederci, sayonara, cya l8tr, buh-bye.

[wombat666]

You all need to learn the governments role with by passing stupid legislation which played a part in GM's down fall. Not to mention just plain stupidity. I'll NEVER buy another GM product (I've never own another auto company's product) as long as the government has a hand in running it!! You shouldn't either! Say good by to a crap load of money American taxpayers! We'll never see it returned to us.

Mud ....... it's a loan.

And I'm sure the vast number of workers and business's who supply GM with everything from paint to widgets will be relieved.
That aside, if the US auto industry were to go belly up the resulting welfare costs to those unemployed would vastly out weigh the bail out money.

However, GM Australia must be doing something right, their production and sales are steady and the death of GM USA (if it came about) would not have much effect on them.

As to who killed GM ........ how about the 'American Consumer'????

:icon34:

[Cratermaker]

As to who killed GM ........ how about the 'American Consumer'????
Yup, and I'm one of them. I bought a Toyota. I got burned twice by overpriced GM crap. One new, one used. Never again.

As for the loan.... 30 billion? And GM on a good year made 1, 2 billion? This will be a 30 year loan at least.... I hope the interest rate is at least 10%.

[Cerberus]

You all need to learn the governments role with by passing stupid legislation which played a part in GM's down fall. Not to mention just plain stupidity. I'll NEVER buy another GM product (I've never own another auto company's product) as long as the government has a hand in running it!! You shouldn't either! Say good by to a crap load of money American taxpayers! We'll never see it returned to us.

I've got to agree with you mud. If the current government can't assess a single company like GM, I really worry how they are going to manage to run an entire country. Just pretend those billions spent were part of next elections democratic campaign. They had to hold on to the union vote somehow, otherwise those highly democratic areas would have turned on them.

[Cratermaker]

I've got to agree with you mud. If the current government can't assess a single company like GM, I really worry how they are going to manage to run an entire country. Just pretend those billions spent were part of next elections democratic campaign. They had to hold on to the union vote somehow, otherwise those highly democratic areas would have turned on them.
Agreed on the campaign angle.

[JSpal]

You all need to learn the governments role with by passing stupid legislation which played a part in GM's down fall. Not to mention just plain stupidity. I'll NEVER buy another GM product (I've never own another auto company's product) as long as the government has a hand in running it!! You shouldn't either! Say good by to a crap load of money American taxpayers! We'll never see it returned to us.

I agree with all of this, except that I must point out that American auto makers had a hand in lobbying FOR much of that stupid legislation.

Rather than try to produce cars that competed with imports, they lobbied for legislation that would make the requirements for vehicles that were imported to the US different than the laws that exist in their home markets.

Take crash bumpers for example. American laws judge bumpers differently than similar laws in Japan or Europe. As a result, any company that builds cars for for the Japanese or European market and also wants to sell cars in the US have to engineer two sets of bumpers to meet two disparate standards.

The big three lobbied Congress for these laws in the 1970's, not for the interest of vehicle safety, but to make the process of engineering cars for the American market more expensive for European and Japanese automakers.

But it also had the effect of making it more expensive for American manufacturers to engineer their vehicles to for the Japanese and European market.

At the time they didn't care, because the US market was the largest, most profitable in the world. So they willingly ceded the foreign markets to the foreign manufacturers and tried again and again through similar legislation to stem the tide of the imports.

In the last 10 years, since they have seen that the import invasion is not just a fad, and not going to go away, or even stop growing, rather than try to compete they've tried to appeal to American Nationalism, by showing flags and playing patriotic songs in their commercials.

They've also retreated to the only market that they really make good money on anymore, trucks. They've made trucks into family vehicles and they were successful in making people think that they need a 5000lb SUV for their family car for safety reasons. Too bad they couldn't force the oil companies to keep fuel prices to where more people could afford to drive such vehicles.

They've totally brought it on themselves. They ignored trends in design, they ignored trends in engineering, they lobbied for legislation that decreased their own profitability, they laid off and exported the jobs of many of their own customers. Goodbye GM.

If there ever is going to be a viable US Auto Manufacturing industry again, they need to design cars with an eye towards the global market. Without Government subsidy, a local-market-only scheme cannot be a viable business model for a company the size of GM.

[MudMarine]

Mud ....... it's a loan.

And I'm sure the vast number of workers and business's who supply GM with everything from paint to widgets will be relieved.
That aside, if the US auto industry were to go belly up the resulting welfare costs to those unemployed would vastly out weigh the bail out money.

However, GM Australia must be doing something right, their production and sales are steady and the death of GM USA (if it came about) would not have much effect on them.

As to who killed GM ........ how about the 'American Consumer'????

:icon34:

Once again we disagree on all points. I didn't "loan" my money to GM, it was taken by politicians. GM should fail, will fail and life will go on. People find new and better jobs, I have in the past, why can't the auto workers?! It would be MUCH better in the short term to allow GM to tank, the long term multiple bailout to come will damage our economy much more. Use the example of AMTRAC then multiply it by 10, thats what we'll get with a government run car company.

This idea that unions have that working one job for your life is crazy. That is socialism not capitalsim. The idea that the US auto industry will be gone is wrong, we are Americans, we over come and adapt! It's what we do best. Another car company will take GM's place and do a much better job!

[MudMarine]

I agree with all of this, except that I must point out that American auto makers had a hand in lobbying FOR much of that stupid legislation.

Rather than try to produce cars that competed with imports, they lobbied for legislation that would make the requirements for vehicles that were imported to the US different than the laws that exist in their home markets.

Take crash bumpers for example. American laws judge bumpers differently than similar laws in Japan or Europe. As a result, any company that builds cars for for the Japanese or European market and also wants to sell cars in the US have to engineer two sets of bumpers to meet two disparate standards.

The big three lobbied Congress for these laws in the 1970's, not for the interest of vehicle safety, but to make the process of engineering cars for the American market more expensive for European and Japanese automakers.

But it also had the effect of making it more expensive for American manufacturers to engineer their vehicles to for the Japanese and European market.

At the time they didn't care, because the US market was the largest, most profitable in the world. So they willingly ceded the foreign markets to the foreign manufacturers and tried again and again through similar legislation to stem the tide of the imports.

In the last 10 years, since they have seen that the import invasion is not just a fad, and not going to go away, or even stop growing, rather than try to compete they've tried to appeal to American Nationalism, by showing flags and playing patriotic songs in their commercials.

They've also retreated to the only market that they really make good money on anymore, trucks. They've made trucks into family vehicles and they were successful in making people think that they need a 5000lb SUV for their family car for safety reasons. Too bad they couldn't force the oil companies to keep fuel prices to where more people could afford to drive such vehicles.

They've totally brought it on themselves. They ignored trends in design, they ignored trends in engineering, they lobbied for legislation that decreased their own profitability, they laid off and exported the jobs of many of their own customers. Goodbye GM.

If there ever is going to be a viable US Auto Manufacturing industry again, they need to design cars with an eye towards the global market. Without Government subsidy, a local-market-only scheme cannot be a viable business model for a company the size of GM.

Poor management is naturally a huge part of what happened to GM. The government dangled huge dollar signs in front of the GM ex's eyes and they took the bait. They also caved to crazy union demands, ones they knew they couldn't sustain. Please don't forget about the "cafe" standards legislated by Washington. Green cars........I have a can of paint and I'll paint my car green.......:isadizzy::icon_lol:

[MudMarine]

apparently i'm in the minority here, but for me, this is one of the tiredest topics anymore. i'm starting to really not care about stuff like this because i didn't break it, and i can't fix it. having never owned a brand new car in my life, i don't see it really effecting me directly. even if i did buy a new car someday (which i doubt i ever would) it wouldn't be an american car anyhow.
in my mind, the players will fix it or they won't. either way, i don't work for them or any sattelite industry. good luck to them, adios, arrevederci, sayonara, cya l8tr, buh-bye.

It effects EVERY American! I for one refuse to sit by and watch my country go down the crapper. Believe me I understand your fustration! But don't let them turn you off, it's what they want!

[6297J]

Another car company will take GM's place and do a much better job!

Yes, but it won't be American.

I told you ages ago that you should start learning Chinese Mud :engel016:

[MudMarine]

Yes, but it won't be American.

I told you ages ago that you should start learning Chinese Mud :engel016:

Wrong! I'm sorry you have so little faith in a country that's done what ours has, what we have done together as nations. I've yet to see Chinese cars, where are they? One thing I can say for certain is I'll never drive a Chinese car. America will over come and adapt. The idea that some how because of the stituation we're in right now is going to lead us to speak Chinese...........sorry but I find that foolish.

The idea that we survived WWII, for example, and continued forward as a nation should remind people that GM is just a small part of our economy. Granted a important part but if we can help win a world war we can surely overcome one failed auto company. I have that faith.

[GT182]

Since like 60 percent is now owned by the government (read: taxpayers) --
do we all get owner discounts now?

Are you kidding! The taxpayers are not in or any part of the "deal". Walk in to a GM dealership and tell them you want an "owner's discount". Then see how long it takes for them to start laughing at you. Like the old saying..."Play ball with us and we'll shove the bat in yer a**."

GM killed themselves.... unions had nothing to do with it. If it weren't for the unions, GM would have their way and paid minimal wages, and no pensions or health benefits. GMs own stupidity and greed did themselves in. The future of the car industry arrived back in 72 and they ignored it. Remember the first Honda Civic?

[MudMarine]

Legacy costs and union wages had nothing to do with it?

[6297J]

The idea that somehow because of the stituation we're in right now is going to lead us to speak Chinese...........sorry but I find that foolish.

OK, Spanish then!

:mexico:



The idea that we survived WWII, for example, and continued forward as a nation should remind people that GM is just a small part of our economy. Granted a important part but if we can help win a world war we can surely overcome one failed auto company. I have that faith.

Actually one of the biggest reasons we in the UK 'continued forward as a nation' after WWII is because the US lent us the money!
Who do you think is going to be lending the US the cash to get out of this fix?

(:china:)

[Lionheart]

gm couldnt create a profit any longer.

What corporation on the planet needs a loan of 30 Million a year to keep their doors open???? Goodness.

Time to start baking pies! Time to hold a sale! Time to rethink. oops.. too late.


Meanwhile, other companies are working their bah-gee-bah's off, trying to come out with the best cars, marketing them, being careful with their money.


Did you know, BMW have never been in the red? (unless it happened in the last several years). They have always been in the green. About the only car company that has ever done this.


What if...... What if the United States Government turns GM into a 'once-again' powerful company? What if they turn it around into a cool company that is producing legendary cars again? That would be pretty cool. Maybe gm just needs a total overhaul, a complete rebuild, new management, new employment pay strategies, a smarter money flow/work flow system. The possibilities exist. This is a ship that might possibly be saved.

I think, since we have GM now, we could start making electric cars again! The worlds first, mass produced electric car, 'for the people, by the people'. Get the EV team back in there, set them up at Saturn, and get some designers in there and see what awesome car they can come up with.....



Bill

[Lionheart]

Just sitting here thinking on 'What if.....'

In the old days, alot of these guys that started companies wanted their companies to be a good thing for the community. A 'good' car that people would talk about and be proud of, and not think, right after they bought it, that they had been taken.

And a company that took care of their employees. Fed them, gave them lives. Not overpaid them, but paid them fair. They took care of the company because the company took care of them.

And, the 'old world' corporation leader thought of higher plateaus as well, like 'the good of the country', and by this, I mean America, not China. England, not China. You never see that anymore. GM was so quick to build cars everywhere but here. And they did have issues with overpaying, etc, so it was expensive.. Why? What happened...?

I just hope America recovers from this and better corporations are raised up and created that will handle the job better. America needs work, America needs a goal and a dream.... The battle is on...

[kurt190]

[QUOTE=6297J;184627]OK, Spanish then!

:mexico:



Actually one of the biggest reasons we in the UK 'continued forward as a nation' after WWII is because the US lent us the money!
/QUOTE]

Those loans were a two edged sword to say the least.

kurt

[6297J]

[QUOTE=6297J;184627]
Those loans were a two edged sword to say the least.

kurt

McTell me about it!


(Spooky - http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=17207 )

[JSpal]

Poor management is naturally a huge part of what happened to GM. The government dangled huge dollar signs in front of the GM ex's eyes and they took the bait. They also caved to crazy union demands, ones they knew they couldn't sustain. Please don't forget about the "cafe" standards legislated by Washington. Green cars........I have a can of paint and I'll paint my car green.......:isadizzy::icon_lol:

If the Government had not dangled dollars in front of the Execs' faces, GM would already be dead and all those people laid-off.

Also, CAFE standards and emissions laws have historically been much lower than their foreign counterparts. As a result the foreign companies adapted to the higher standards long ago.

GM, Chrysler, and Ford were not forced to adapt. They procrastinated and when gasoline went to $4/gallon, they didn't know how to make a fuel efficient car, the market for their only really profitable product evaporated in less than 6 months, and they were left with no truly viable product.

The flaw with the free-market part of Capitalism is that is has horrible foresight. People rarely adopt new products until there is a real benefit - especially when that product is as expensive as a car. As a result there is no motivation for companies to develop new technology until there is already demand for it.

Regulation is a tool the the people use (through Government) when market forces fail to encourage companies to act in a responsible manner.

GM never had market forces to encourage them to make world-class efficient cars and they fought the Government's attempts to create that impetus through regulation.

If GM had not fought to keep CAFE and emissions standards lower and instead spent that lobbying money on R&D on fuel efficiency instead, their cars would have been competitive in the market when gas prices exploded.

In a business where product cycles can be five years or longer, there is no hope for a company that suddenly finds that there is no demand for their current product. They are five years away from a viable product and have little income to sustain them.

[wombat666]

Once again we disagree on all points. I didn't "loan" my money to GM, it was taken by politicians. GM should fail, will fail and life will go on. People find new and better jobs, I have in the past, why can't the auto workers?! It would be MUCH better in the short term to allow GM to tank, the long term multiple bailout to come will damage our economy much more. Use the example of AMTRAC then multiply it by 10, thats what we'll get with a government run car company.
This idea that unions have that working one job for your life is crazy. That is socialism not capitalsim. The idea that the US auto industry will be gone is wrong, we are Americans, we over come and adapt! It's what we do best. Another car company will take GM's place and do a much better job!

I doubt if the huge number of people ALREADY retrenched (union and non-union, directly and indirectly!) will find it easy in the present financial situation to "find new and better jobs".

Agree that the one job for life fixation is not only ridiculous, it went down the crapper years ago!

I'm very anti-union, just for the record, 100 years or so past they had their place but that was then, the World is a much different place today.

Considering that Germany, Italy, Japan, UK and France (they actually admitted so!!!) along with the bulk of the EU are in a severe reccession, allied to the fact that China has 30M people out of work, I doubt that just saying "The idea that the US auto industry will be gone is wrong, we are Americans, we over come and adapt! It's what we do best" means very much at all.
I'm not meaning to be derogatory, a positive atitude is great, but someone, somewhere, somehow needs to take action, and like it or not, the 'Government' (be it Australia or America, and I hasten to add I wouldn't vote for our lot in a blind fit!!) are who we are stuck with ..............:icon34:

[cheezyflier]

I for one refuse to sit by and watch my country go down the crapper.

too late. the whole country is a bunch of ants standin on a turd thinkin "if the log rolls over we'll drown" no matter if someone flushes. it's still in the toilet.

[MyassisDragon]

Lousy management over many years killed GM.

[Wing_Z]

Actually looking from the outside at all this, the most shocking part is that having "won" the Cold War, America is set to become the biggest socialist force on the planet.
A little homework produces this gem:
In the final part of Das (http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias=stripbooks&field-keywords=Das+Kapital&x=19&y=19)Kapital (http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Das+Kapital&x=19&y=19) Marx deals with the issue of revolution. Marx argued that the laws of capitalism will bring about its destruction. Capitalist competition will lead to a diminishing number of monopoly capitalists, while at the same time, the misery and oppression of the proletariat would increase. Marx claimed that as a class, the proletariat will gradually become "disciplined, united and organised by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production" and eventually will overthrow the system that is the cause of their suffering.
We live in interesting times...

[Henry]

Once again we disagree on all points. I didn't "loan" my money to GM, it was taken by politicians. GM should fail, will fail and life will go on. People find new and better jobs, I have in the past, why can't the auto workers?!
I wish it was that easy
your first point is correct
the second, people find new and better jobs
when you are as old as I
and GM shuts a plant down
the chances of a new and better job
puts me in the Wal mart greeting crowd
GM in europe is probably fine never liked Vauxhalls
but my dad had a few
its a dammed if you do and dammed if you dont situation
looks like the government wants small cars
GM has done well with the large ones
to me there is not one person in the US would be willing
to have a compact GM
so i do believe it will fail.
Why GM failed?
i believe GM, Chrysler and to a point Ford
have all failed
i remember in the 60's
when the Japanese motorcycles came to the UK
then Norton, BSA etc
was standard but Honda etc
just came out with cheaper more accessories
etc etc
its happening here
H

[Cerberus]

gm couldnt create a profit any longer.

What corporation on the planet needs a loan of 30 Million a year to keep their doors open???? Goodness.

Time to start baking pies! Time to hold a sale! Time to rethink. oops.. too late.


Meanwhile, other companies are working their bah-gee-bah's off, trying to come out with the best cars, marketing them, being careful with their money.


Did you know, BMW have never been in the red? (unless it happened in the last several years). They have always been in the green. About the only car company that has ever done this.


What if...... What if the United States Government turns GM into a 'once-again' powerful company? What if they turn it around into a cool company that is producing legendary cars again? That would be pretty cool. Maybe gm just needs a total overhaul, a complete rebuild, new management, new employment pay strategies, a smarter money flow/work flow system. The possibilities exist. This is a ship that might possibly be saved.

I think, since we have GM now, we could start making electric cars again! The worlds first, mass produced electric car, 'for the people, by the people'. Get the EV team back in there, set them up at Saturn, and get some designers in there and see what awesome car they can come up with.....



Bill

You probably mean billions. NASA comes to mind when I think of what the Government can do to a company, been going downhill since the 70's. The technology in 2001 A Space Odyssey was all virtually present at the time with the exception of the super intelligent computer and advances in induced hibernation.

The government hasn’t been able to fulfill my dreams of space exploration and most are now looking to the private sector to do that now. If the United States private sector can accomplish the same thing only a few nations in the entire world can do, and are currently one-upping our own government in making space accessible to all and with fractions of the cost, why should we expect the government to do wonderful things with the car industry that the private sector couldn’t do.

[Henry]

You probably mean billions. NASA comes to mind when I think of what the Government can do to a company, been going downhill since the 70's. The technology in 2001 A Space Odyssey was all virtually present at the time with the exception of the super intelligent computer and advances in induced hibernation.

The government hasn’t been able to fulfill my dreams of space exploration and most are now looking to the private sector to do that now. If the United States private sector can accomplish the same thing only a few nations in the entire world can do, and are currently one-upping our own government in making space accessible to all and with fractions of the cost, why should we expect the government to do wonderful things with the car industry that the private sector couldn’t do.
you have that right!
H

[CrashnBurns]

Why did GM (and Chrysler and Ford) fail?

Less than $2.50/gallon gas!

It's that simple.

While the Prius drivers all lamented that we didn't build small cars, and MM put out that crap about the EV-1, the people with real MONEY, who actually wanted to BUY vehicles, were buying trucks and SUV's faster than we could make them. Talk is cheap, people with dollars in their hand dictate what we sell. How foolish of us for selling what people wanted to buy! What were we thinking?

When gas was less than $2.50/gallon, we had 7 plants turning out trucks and SUV's as fast as we could, and selling every one at a tidy profit.

When gas went above $2.50, the truck market dried up, overnight! We couldn't give them away.

We were back to being idiots because we couldn't convert those plants over to making "Smart" cars in the blink of an eye. Should we have has more small cars, probably. Trucks were selling. Remember, Toyota (the geniuses) were desperately trying to start up THEIR truck plant in Texas, only to slow it down when gas prices soared. Were they idiots too?

Guess what happened when gas prices came back down? People with $$$ wanted TRUCKS again! They just can't get financing now. Don't worry, CEO Obama will have us turning out "global" small cars ASAP. You won't mind driving the same cars as we sell in India will you? They make the "Smart" look HUGE!

Crash

[JSpal]

Getting a little off topic here, but I don't think that's a fair criticism of NASA.

NASA decided at some point that manned space flight was not a fiscally sound concept, especially when their typical project spans multiple Presidential terms making funding uncertain.

A lot more can be done for the same amount of money when you factor out the expense of life support systems - much in the way that the military is going to unmanned aircraft. Thus they do as much as they can without humans going along for the ride.

Just because they NASA isn't delivering on the promises made by science fiction 40 years ago doesn't mean they are failing. The private companies that are moving towards manned space flight aren't making the kind of scientific and research advances that NASA is, they are just working on fantasy day trips for the ultra-rich.

If that's what NASA was doing with tax payer money, even if they were successful, I would consider that a major failure.

[Cerberus]

Getting a little off topic here, but I don't think that's a fair criticism of NASA.

NASA decided at some point that manned space flight was not a fiscally sound concept, especially when their typical project spans multiple Presidential terms making funding uncertain.

A lot more can be done for the same amount of money when you factor out the expense of life support systems - much in the way that the military is going to unmanned aircraft. Thus they do as much as they can without humans going along for the ride.

Just because they NASA isn't delivering on the promises made by science fiction 40 years ago doesn't mean they are failing. The private companies that are moving towards manned space flight aren't making the kind of scientific and research advances that NASA is, they are just working on fantasy day trips for the ultra-rich.

If that's what NASA was doing with tax payer money, even if they were successful, I would consider that a major failure.

You referenced my point, how successful can any company be when the company’s direction is changed every 4 years when a new administration comes into office. GM might become Obama's pet project, but the next person will have their own pet projects to define their administration.

Additionally the Government cannot effectively run a competitive corporation without infringing on the free enterprise system. For example, when it comes time to purchase government vehicles are they going to purchase from Ford who hasn’t needed bailouts, or are they going to purchase from GM the company they aim to make a profit from.

Let’s pretend they do become competitive and so successful that they put Ford out of business, are they going to bail them out just like they did GM and risk their profits, or are they going to be bias and indulge in the same greed that everyone is faulting the private sector with. It seems they can’t be competitive without destroying the principles of our economy and freedom, thus becoming inherently bias which in the end will lead to the same type of greed.

[GT182]

Just because the US Government now has 60% of GM, it doesn't mean GM will become "profitable" again. Look at the national debt and tell me the US Government is capable of being "profitable". It's a verifiable conundrum.

[JSpal]

You referenced my point, how successful can any company be when the company’s direction is changed every 4 years when a new administration comes into office. GM might become Obama's pet project, but the next person will have their own pet projects to define their administration.

Additionally the Government cannot effectively run a competitive corporation without infringing on the free enterprise system. For example, when it comes time to purchase government vehicles are they going to purchase from Ford who hasn’t needed bailouts, or are they going to purchase from GM the company they aim to make a profit from.

Let’s pretend they do become competitive and so successful that they put Ford out of business, are they going to bail them out just like they did GM and risk their profits, or are they going to be bias and indulge in the same greed that everyone is faulting the private sector with. It seems they can’t be competitive without destroying the principles of our economy and freedom, thus becoming inherently bias which in the end will lead to the same type of greed.

I completely agree that the Government should not be doing anything with GM - but for a different reason.

They should be standing back and letting GM collapse and making a plan for how to proceed with the economy when the dust settles.

But people that criticize the Government for stepping should just acknowledge two points.

First, it's not like Obama stepped in to a viable company and nationalized it on a whim. It was already pretty much dead long before he was even elected. If he had not stepped in, if not by now then certainly in the next few months, it would have been completely dead and all those assembly line workers, all the engineers, all the lawyers, all the accountants, all the middle managment, all the sales people at exclusive GM dealers, all the executives would be without jobs.

It wasn't a choice between Capitalism and Socialism for GM, it was a choice between Socialism and oblivion.

Second, stepping in and taking over GM is no more damaging to the concept of free enterprise (or Capitalism or whatever you want to call it) than all of the no-bid contracts that the previous adminstration threw to Dick Cheney's former company for construction projects in Iraq. It undermines market forces that are critical to the stability of a free market system.

Not trying to put words in anyone on this forum's mouth, but I have heard a lot of people in the media lately throwing horrible accusations at our President when the previous President did things as deserving of dirision without receiving so much as a peep.

[Willy]

Just because the US Government now has 60% of GM, it doesn't mean GM will become "profitable" again. Look at the national debt and tell me the US Government is capable of being "profitable". It's a verifiable conundrum.


Somehow I just don't believe that the new GM (Government Motors) is going to do well.

[GT182]

JS, I don't believe the government is really taking over. GM will still run it's self. So over seeing might be a better term, just to keep an eye on things.

[Lionheart]

JS, I don't believe the government is really taking over. GM will still run it's self. So over seeing might be a better term, just to keep an eye on things.

I agree..



Bill

[Cerberus]

Well I personally am a small government person, so don't think Obama is the only one I have criticized over the years lol, and as for Jspal not liking the criticism Obama is getting well I honestly think the media unfairly bashed Bush and Palin on many issues and to a greater degree. Bush was part of the problem and Obama is making things worse as well, and so did most of the guys we have had in office for a long time. I agree completely with you that this same type of bias existed with Cheney's former company, although I will admit they probably were one of the only companies with the infrastructure to pull it off. As government power and debt has grown our freedoms and standard of living have decreased. In the end the Democrats and Republicans are part of the same agenda, they just offer a Copout for the less educated to redirect their dissatisfaction towards every 4 years.

As for choosing between Socialism and oblivion. Well that is an easy one, Americans have been spoiled for too long, we forget that the tree needs to be pruned to produce the best fruit, sure it hurts but in the end the net suffering is less. It is a normal part of the economic cycle to have a down time, but since our current generation spoiled themselves by surviving off of loan and credit card dept they weren’t very prepared for the natural cycle to take effect. Unsuccessful companies fail all the time, their talented designers start up their own companies or they join smaller developing companies adding new ideas and insight. In the end we are overwhelmed with new ideas and then we must weed out those that are not reasonable. This adaptive Darwinism works for nature and has been the principle of our economy for a long time. When you remove the natural predator of the business world then positive development becomes stagnant, and what was once the prey now becomes a parasite to its environment.

On a personal note I am disgusted that so many in our country are adopting Socialist concepts. I will live in a hole in a ground and throw rocks at squirrels before I adopt the principles our fellow Americans have shed their blood fighting against for over 200 years. They alone deserve the right to decide which direction our country heads, and I can’t believe a foreign mentality is being allowed to dishonor them so.

[EasyEd]

Hey All,



GM, Chrysler, and Ford were not forced to adapt. They procrastinated and when gasoline went to $4/gallon, they didn't know how to make a fuel efficient car, the market for their only really profitable product evaporated in less than 6 months, and they were left with no truly viable product.

The flaw with the free-market part of Capitalism is that is has horrible foresight. People rarely adopt new products until there is a real benefit - especially when that product is as expensive as a car. As a result there is no motivation for companies to develop new technology until there is already demand for it.

Regulation is a tool the the people use (through Government) when market forces fail to encourage companies to act in a responsible manner.

GM never had market forces to encourage them to make world-class efficient cars and they fought the Government's attempts to create that impetus through regulation. And are now paying the price as is Chrysler and to a lesser extent Ford.

All the above is absolutely right on. A company must sacrifice some short term profit for long term viability - you can't have it both ways by attempting to manipulate government. That only works for so long. Sad as it is for American workers I'm really happy to see these corporations getting their comeuppance. Out of all of this do you think a single corporation will learn that the future matters? Now how can we get the message through to government to get outta bed with big business and do their job creating a business environment and not corruptly kowtowing to big business because to my children and grandchildren the future does matter.

It was Bush who started throwing money at banks after Lehman Brothers failed finally fully understanding that the sheer size of some of these corporations makes it so that they can't be allowed to fail as the pain would be too great for the nation to endure. Obama gets this also. Sadly I also think this is true. The fallout would be too great and go on for too long. Some might call it healthy pruning but just ask those who would suffer through no fault of their own. The social costs would be simply too great.

The ones that I like are those who run small businesses who would never get a bailout. They like to stand on principle that if they can fail then big guys should fail as well otherwise it ain't fair. Your right it ain't fair... so pragmatism beats principle everytime. I can't help but wonder what their tune would be if the shoe were on the other foot. Anyway the way to make it fair in my opinion is to make everybody small and simply not allow corporations above a certain size. Would there be duplication and all that other cost inefficiency stuff? Yes but everybody would have a job and a future - at least till we find out we don't have enough resources on earth to support all the people - but thats a different discussion. The whole concept of finding efficiencies that eliminate labour while at the same time growing the population on planet earth leads - IMO - to a very very dead end where violence rules. Years ago making corporations small was called trust busting - where are those guys when we need them now? Of course now it would have to be global trustbusting or it won't work. In my opinion any corporation/company big enough that a customer can't get his hands on the throat of the CEO is too big - there is simply too much lack of ethics, honor and accountability - see any CEOs or Bank Presidents goin to jail? Think we will?

My question is will we - as a people on earth and particularly in the US this time actually learn anything from this whole debacle or will it be a we got through the downturn of 08/09 but now lets get back to selfinterest greed above all based business as usual.

-Ed-

PS As for GM being - in part - government owned I don't like it but I see no other choice at the moment. I would expect government to divest itself of any ownership as fast as it reasonably can. If not and it becomes a "revenue" source for government well we've a new problem to deal with. This applies to both the US and Canadian government both of whom own part of GM. This will be something to watch.

PSS JSpal Methinks you could be my brother by my other mother as you tend to say very well almost exactly what I'm thinking.

[JSpal]

On a personal note I am disgusted that so many in our country are adopting Socialist concepts. I will live in a hole in a ground and throw rocks at squirrels before I adopt the principles our fellow Americans have shed their blood fighting against for over 200 years. They alone deserve the right to decide which direction our country heads, and I can’t believe a foreign mentality is being allowed to dishonor them so.

I find it disgusting that someone would ascribe certain political values to veterans with such a broad brush.

My grandfather fought in the Pacific Theater in WW2, but before he died he supported the idea of universal health care. Does that make him less valid of a hero? He didn't join the Army to protect big business. He joined the Army to defend Democracy - the right of the people to decide.

Without giving the cookie cutter answer of "it will be broke before I get old enough to collect" - if you oppose socialist ideals, will you refuse Social Security? If you found yourself gravely ill and uninsured tomorrow would you refuse disability payments or Medicare?

The form of Capitalism we have in this country, with huge corporations as an integral part of every component of our lives, the founding fathers could never have imagined. Yet some people act like they created this country with that type of political and economic system in mind.

In their days corporations were rarely formed, and when they were, they had to have a charter with a certain goal and a time frame (like building a road, bridge, school etc.) and when that goal was achieved they were disbanded. They had no concept of a corporation whose charter was "to make a profit regardless of the cost to society, for as long as we can." This form of business is a creation of the 19th and 20th Century.

So to imply that the founding fathers risked their lives to create a system by which the likes of General Motors has the freedom to act anyway they want, protected by the Constitution from Government intervention is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of historical context.

Capitalism and Democracy are not synonymous. The Constitution of the United States does not mention Capitalism. What it does is set up a system of Democracy where the voters determine the course of the nation.

Just as people on the left were expected to support the previous President in the Iraq War while he was the democratically elected leader, so today should people on the right be expected to support the current President while he does the business the people elected him to do.

It doesn't mean you have to like it.

It just means that you don't question that he is doing what the people that elected him feel like is in the best interest of the country in the current situation. The President still enjoys overwhelming support from the American people, by definition what he does with that support cannot be "un-American" as long as he is acting inside the realm of law and the Constitution.

To say that what he does is un-American is to reject that the process that put him in power is American. It is to reject Democracy.

Anyway, what he has done in not really Socialism. If the bank bailout was real socialism, when the banks were given the money, all of the people running them would have been fired and replaced by government officials. If you wanted an account or a loan from those banks now, you'd go to a Government office. That is not the case.

If whatever he has done with GM were Socialism, he'd be setting up State run car dealerships.

What he is talking about doing with Health Care isn't even real Socialism. He has stated repeatedly that single payer is off the table.

What the President is doing is more like Corporatism. It's Corporate Welfare. The welfare queen that drives a Cadillac that Ronald Reagan spoke of is AIG and GM today. They were handed billions of dollars to keep them in existence, yet still fly their officers around in corporate jets.

It is a handout to be sure, but don't insult Socialism by calling it that.

[JSpal]

Hey All,

And are now paying the price as is Chrysler and to a lesser extent Ford.

All the above is absolutely right on. A company must sacrifice some short term profit for long term viability - you can't have it both ways by attempting to manipulate government. That only works for so long. Sad as it is for American workers I'm really happy to see these corporations getting their comeuppance. Out of all of this do you think a single corporation will learn that the future matters? Now how can we get the message through to government to get outta bed with big business and do their job creating a business environment and not corruptly kowtowing to big business because to my children and grandchildren the future does matter.

It was Bush who started throwing money at banks after Lehman Brothers failed finally fully understanding that the sheer size of some of these corporations makes it so that they can't be allowed to fail as the pain would be too great for the nation to endure. Obama gets this also. Sadly I also think this is true. The fallout would be too great and go on for too long. Some might call it healthy pruning but just ask those who would suffer through no fault of their own. The social costs would be simply too great.

The ones that I like are those who run small businesses who would never get a bailout. They like to stand on principle that if they can fail then big guys should fail as well otherwise it ain't fair. Your right it ain't fair... so pragmatism beats principle everytime. I can't help but wonder what their tune would be if the shoe were on the other foot. Anyway the way to make it fair in my opinion is to make everybody small and simply not allow corporations above a certain size. Would there be duplication and all that other cost inefficiency stuff? Yes but everybody would have a job and a future - at least till we find out we don't have enough resources on earth to support all the people - but thats a different discussion. The whole concept of finding efficiencies that eliminate labour while at the same time growing the population on planet earth leads - IMO - to a very very dead end where violence rules. Years ago making corporations small was called trust busting - where are those guys when we need them now? Of course now it would have to be global trustbusting or it won't work. In my opinion any corporation/company big enough that a customer can't get his hands on the throat of the CEO is too big - there is simply too much lack of ethics, honor and accountability - see any CEOs or Bank Presidents goin to jail? Think we will?

My question is will we - as a people on earth and particularly in the US this time actually learn anything from this whole debacle or will it be a we got through the downturn of 08/09 but now lets get back to selfinterest greed above all based business as usual.

-Ed-

:ernae:

I wrote an editorial for another Website discussing why the system we have now in the US is not really Capitalism.

Companies like AIG do not operate in a Capitalist system because they are not subject to market forces. In addition to being so big we cannot allow them to fail or the consequences for the Society would be to great, at the same time, the people have no power to take enough business away from them (vote with their dollars) to influence their behavior.

In order to take business away from AIG to punish them for bad business practices, you would need to know that the bank you have your savings at, and the bank you have your mortgage at, don't do business with AIG.

Such things are impossible for the consumer to know.

So the impetus for AIG to act responsibly must come from the banks that do business with AGI themselves. But those banks have a charter that says that their first responsibility is to make money for their shareholders. So they can't take their insurance business elsewhere if AIG offers a better deal on a certain financial insurance product.

Thus there are no market forces and without market forces, there is no Capitalism.

I don't know what it is, but it's not Capitalism.

[Willy]

We were doing pretty good on this until politics were brought into it. Any more and I'll close the thread.

[CG_1976]

Agreed Willy:icon29:, Political debates and discussion belong over at Quartermoon Saloon. I find there a much better enviroment to debate and discuss politics.

[Cerberus]

Darn I was excited we were seeing some action around here. Heck I even risked alienating a few customers. I'll move it over into my own thread if that isn't an issue.

[Willy]

Jesse, check your PMs.

[Cerberus]

Just registered. Thanks

[codeseven]

I don't have much sympathy for American auto companies. They made their bed, now they have to lay in it.

A company, any company, can only make inferior products for so long before it bites them in the ***. I blame much of the American auto makers problems on the car companies upper management, or lack thereof. Continueing to spew out ugly, gas guzzling outdated vehicles in economic times when foriegn auto makers are outselling you is just plain suicidal.

But at least some of the blame has to go on the American workers themselves (ofcoarse not all, I guess most are hard working but enough to impact the future of their employer).

Years ago, I wish I had a link for you guys, but years ago I saw a segment on 60 Minutes or 20/20 or one of those type of shows that was about Toyota and American workers. From what I can remember in order for Toyota to sell more cars in America our government forced them to build assembly plants here in the US and hire American workers to run them, sounds fair enough. Toyota parts from Japan and American workers assembling them. Toyota vehicles already had an excellent reputation for quality and reliability.

However, within two years of these new US assembly plants being operated Toyota vehicles saw a sharp decline in thier once rock solid quality and reliability ratings. How could this be? Same Japanese parts and almost identical assembly plants to those in Japan. What it came down to were the American workers themselves. The vehicles were being assembled haphazardly. Loose or missing screws/bolts, misaligned doors hinges, missing bulbs, ect, ect all adding up to careless shoddy workmanship. Apparently the work ethic of Japanese workers was/is much different than American workers. Toyota had to fight with American auto unions to replace assembly plant managers and the workers with documented poor performance in order to get their product back on par. After finally being able to do so Toyota vehicles from these plants were up to par and quality/ reliability ratings returned to what they once were.

I know it was 60 Minutes that had the story on the GM plant (or Chrysler) in a small town in the midwest that was shutting down and being replaced with a Honda plant. Workers were in up in arms about having to work for a Japanese auto maker. They interviewed these workers a year later and were surprised to find how pleased they were with the working envirement, pay and purhaps most surprising of all, now being held accountable for the quality of their work. Pride of workmanship had returned and the end product rolling out of the plant showed it.

Anybody can look in any of Consumer reports Annual Auto Buyers Guides, flip to the back and see youself how year after year American cars rate very poorly yet foriegn cars, especially Japanese cars rate very high. Cheap plastic parts where sturdy metal should be, shoddy workmanship, poor work ethic ie 'ah, thats good enough, who cares' and a reluctance to hold anybody accountable for their actions (oh no, you dont want to do that, maybe their not doing their job because their dog got ran over when they were three years old or something, lets just look the other way) and the result is your end product is going to be crap.

My Dad is a WW2 vet. He seen his buddies get killed while fighting in the South Pacific. He was always the last person that would ever buy anything labled Made in Japan. For years he would only buy American cars, no matter what. After bringing in his Chevy for the 3rd time for transmission problems he was done. He reluctantly bought a Toyota Tacoma and has not had a problem since.

You cant expect people to keep giving you business if your product is consistantly inferior to what the other guy offers.

Now American auto makers say 'we get it now', 'we know what American consumers want and 'now' were going to start making great cars'.

Too little, too late.

[gera]

JS, I don't believe the government is really taking over. GM will still run it's self. So over seeing might be a better term, just to keep an eye on things.

Gary, how can the government " oversee" or "keep and eye" on things when it cannot do it to itself???....goverment intervention, specially with people with very little management experience as head of it, is a medicine that will get the sick, sicker!!!!!..goverments today all over have proven that they are really bad managers, specially those that like to "fatten up" more and more..........get ready for the Chinese, learn Mandarin!!!!:isadizzy::isadizzy:

[gera]

Oh yea......if the Unions keep getting their candy, soon, not even candy will be made in America..The fat Unions and many governments and their laws plus greedy Managers broke GM, Chrysler and more are on line..... (note: Check the labels, many a chewing gum is made in Brazil!!! and China).:sleep::sleep::sleep:

[Lionheart]

He who manufactures is the giant. They are brining in the money. King of the mountain.

In WWII, when war first broke out, America was known as an industrial giant, manufacturing everything 'in-country' and mostly 'only' exporting. Our cars went everywhere.

Now.... now.. oops..


Who are the big industrial giants now? Mexico, China, Taiwan (if thats seperate), India...

India now own Land Rover and several other vehicle plants/names/marques. China is quickly coming up with new marques and plants for other manufacturers (such as gm, Ford, etc).

I wonder if Mercedes and BMW are still mostly in Germany (manufacturing plants)? I know BMW used to make cars in Brazil if I remember correctly. I think VW did also.

Note; One of the best countries for building cars is Germany. Though they have a higher 'cost of living' (thus higher pay wages), their quality is unbeatable, outdoing the Japanese manufacturers. The numbers of mistakes on a Japanese assembly line are higher then the Germans, and thus the Germans win in the end via total numbers produced, (and higher or highest quality).



Billl.

[wombat666]

I wonder if Mercedes and BMW are still mostly in Germany (manufacturing plants)? I know BMW used to make cars in Brazil if I remember correctly. I think VW did also.
Note; One of the best countries for building cars is Germany. Though they have a higher 'cost of living' (thus higher pay wages), their quality is unbeatable, outdoing the Japanese manufacturers. The numbers of mistakes on a Japanese assembly line are higher then the Germans, and thus the Germans win in the end via total numbers produced, (and higher or highest quality).
Billl.

Both Mercedes Benz and BMW have manufacturing plants in China ...... :kilroy:
They do appear to have very strict QC controls in place.

[Cazzie]

BMW also has a plant in South Carolina. Volkswagon is planning on opening a plant in Chattanooga. Ja, ve speak besser Deutch zan Chineze. :icon_lol:

Caz

[airfighterjohn]

Mercedes has a plant in Tuscaloosa, Alabama---A friend of mine has 3 cars, all made in different places. After having numerous problems with her Suburban, she stated she would NEVER buy another US manufactured car...that is, until she found out her Suburban had been assembled in Mexico City, Her Mercedes in Alabama and her Lexus in California...:ernae:

[gera]

Beware of Goverment sticking its hands on "everything" that is how Liberty is lost.......read History if you think its not as "true as the sky is blue"!!!!!..........besides it gets you in the worst of your debts!!!!:kilroy::kilroy:

[FengZ]

I completely agree that the Government should not be doing anything with GM - but for a different reason.

They should be standing back and letting GM collapse and making a plan for how to proceed with the economy when the dust settles.



I agree w/ u 100% on this.

Why put money into a company that drove itself into the ground? The answer: greed...it's all about the money. The gov doesn't care about "saving jobs." They (they as the people who will personally gain financially) are in it to maximize profits. By controlling GM, they can do all sorts of interesting revenue generating schemes...such as merging with foreign companies, put up collateral with banks, selling off IPs,...all the while making millions in commissions, kick-backs, etc...

-feng

[FengZ]

He who manufactures is the giant. They are brining in the money. King of the mountain.

In WWII, when war first broke out, America was known as an industrial giant, manufacturing everything 'in-country' and mostly 'only' exporting. Our cars went everywhere.

Now.... now.. oops..


Who are the big industrial giants now? Mexico, China, Taiwan (if thats seperate), India...

India now own Land Rover and several other vehicle plants/names/marques. China is quickly coming up with new marques and plants for other manufacturers (such as gm, Ford, etc).

I wonder if Mercedes and BMW are still mostly in Germany (manufacturing plants)? I know BMW used to make cars in Brazil if I remember correctly. I think VW did also.

Note; One of the best countries for building cars is Germany. Though they have a higher 'cost of living' (thus higher pay wages), their quality is unbeatable, outdoing the Japanese manufacturers. The numbers of mistakes on a Japanese assembly line are higher then the Germans, and thus the Germans win in the end via total numbers produced, (and higher or highest quality).

Billl.

both Audi and Volkswagen has plants in China :)

http://autonews.gasgoo.com/auto-news/1008559/Audi-China-to-finish-new-assembly-plant-in-Jan-09.html

i think the Germans were one of the first to open auto-plants in China. This is why you see sooooo many Audi A4s on the roads (very cheap to buy in China)...and why most of the Taxis are Volkswagens.

I love Audi btw...sexy designs and excellent performance. Audi R8...drooool...

-feng

[Piglet]

Always wanted one of those Audis since I saw Ronins:ernae: