Bail out U.S. automakers?

Should the government bail out U.S. automakers?

  • Yes

    Votes: 18 10.0%

  • No

    Votes: 100 55.6%

  • Limited bailout

    Votes: 15 8.3%

  • Need to see the details before deciding

    Votes: 47 26.1%
  • Total voters
    180
I haven't read every post on this thread, so maybe this point has already been raised. I'm not wild about the idea of a bailout for the auto industry but I do wonder, if they fail, who will build the tanks, humvees, trucks, APCs, etc. that the military needs? Seems like something we wouldn't want to outsource to a country that potentially could be an enemy in the future.
 
friar1610 said:
I haven't read every post on this thread, so maybe this point has already been raised. I'm not wild about the idea of a bailout for the auto industry but I do wonder, if they fail, who will build the tanks, humvees, trucks, APCs, etc. that the military needs? Seems like something we wouldn't want to outsource to a country that potentially could be an enemy in the future.
Click to expand...

Oshkosh Truck, for one. I am sure Pierce Arrow and others who make fire engines could retool to pick up some govt contracts too.
 
Keyboard Ninja said:
Say what? How do you achieve 79mpg?
Click to expand...

As I mentioned, perhaps too briefly, that is with a battery conversion.
A second, larger battery pack was added to the system. The car then relies on battery more often to assist the gas engine.
Unfortunately, I make the occasional 40-55 mile round trip which brings my gas mileage down to 79mpg.
If I stuck with 30 mile round trips I would be up around 100! On sub 18-20 mile trips I could maintain 125mpg.
This is the technology that the domestics have been ignoring until very recently. And it is part of the reason, in my opinion, that they are in trouble now.
 
Zathras said:
As I mentioned, perhaps to briefly, that is with a battery conversion.
A second, larger battery pack was added to the system. The car then relies on battery more often to assist the gas engine.
Unfortunately, I make the occasional 40-55 mile round trip which brings my gas mileage down to 79mpg.
If I stuck with 30 mile round trips I would be up around 100! On sub 18-20 mile trips I could maintain 125mpg.
This is the technology that the domestics have been ignoring until very recently. And it is part of the reason, in my opinion, that they are in trouble now.
Click to expand...

I wonder how we best communicate these numbers to Joe Average? While 100mpg sounds great, and there may be advantages, it isn't all gravy.

100mpg is only part of the story - and you are not telling the other part. Whatever energy you don't use when driving w/o the ICE running is coming from the electrical generating station. Which someday may be renewables, or more from nukes, but today is mostly coal.

It sounds like we need several numbers - a plug-in hybrid just cannot be summarized in one number. We might need usage profiles for X% of miles under 20 miles round trip, X% under 40, etc. And then.... cost per mile based on some KWH figure, and then... amount of carbon emitted based on national electrical generation patterns.

I get aggravated when I hear electrics, or fuel cells or other tech referred to as "zero pollution" (I'm not accusing you of this Zathras - just a general comment) - mostly it is just moving the pollution, in some cases creating MORE than just burning gasoline in an ICE.

Hope that doesn't sound like I'm knocking plug-ins or all-EV. I think they can make a lot of sense, and I'd consider one as my next vehicle if they were priced right, but we need numbers that make sense of the situation. MPG isn't a very good number for making sense of a plug-in.

-ERD50
 
Interesting. I have a GM Credit Card and just received the following email message:
-------------

[FONT=Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif]Dear [REWahoo],

You made the right choice when you put your confidence in General Motors, and we appreciate your past support. I want to assure you that we are making our best vehicles ever, and we have exciting plans for the future. But we need your help now. Simply put, we need you to join us to let Congress know that a bridge loan to help U.S. automakers also helps strengthen the U.S. economy and preserve millions of American jobs.

Despite what you may be hearing, we are not asking Congress for a bailout but rather a loan that will be repaid.

The U.S. economy is at a crossroads due to the worldwide credit crisis, and all Americans are feeling the effects of the worst economic downturn in 75 years. Despite our successful efforts to restructure, reduce costs and enhance liquidity, U.S. auto sales rely on access to credit, which is all but frozen through traditional channels.

The consequences of the domestic auto industry collapsing would far exceed the $25 billion loan needed to bridge the current crisis. According to a recent study by the Center for Automotive Research:

• One in 10 American jobs depends on U.S. automakers
• Nearly 3 million jobs are at immediate risk
• U.S. personal income could be reduced by $150 billion
• The tax revenue lost over 3 years would be more than $156 billion

Discussions are now underway in Washington, D.C., concerning loans to support U.S. carmakers. I am asking for your support in this vital effort by contacting your state representatives.

Please take a few minutes to go to www.gmfactsandfiction.com, where we have made it easy for you to contact your U.S. senators and representatives. Just click on the "I'm a Concerned American" link under the "Mobilize Now" section, and enter your name and ZIP code to send a personalized e-mail stating your support for the U.S. automotive industry.

Let me assure you that General Motors has made dramatic improvements over the last 10 years. In fact, we are leading the industry with award-winning vehicles like the Chevrolet Malibu, Cadillac CTS, Buick Enclave, Pontiac G8, GMC Acadia, Chevy Tahoe Hybrid, Saturn AURA and more. We offer 18 models with an EPA estimated 30 MPG highway or better — more than Toyota or Honda. GM has 6 hybrids in market and 3 more by mid-2009. GM has closed the quality gap with the imports, and today we are putting our best quality vehicles on the road.

Please share this information with friends and family using the link on the site.

Thank you for helping keep our economy viable.

Sincerely,
2008_11_qq_sig.jpg


Troy Clarke
[/FONT]
 
I saw these amazing vehicles at the airport today carrying handicapped people to the gates. They carry 50% more people than a Prius, cost 1/2 as much, and don't use any gasoline at all! Infinite mileage! Plus, highway deaths would plummet if everyone converted to them (a crash at 60 MPH has 9 times the energy of a crash at 20 MPH).

And, as a bonus, they go "beep, beep", all the time, not just when backing up (ala Prius).

Yep, let's compare apples to apples with the mileage and utility numbers.
 
Westernskies said:
But 80-100mpg SOUNDS so good.... Don't try to confuse us with the facts, smart guy....;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. Some people (and I'm not addressing Zathras here) get upset when you start using facts. And that logic/reasoning thing can be disturbing for some too.

;)

-ERD50
 
Zathras said:
To me the number one factor in a new car is fuel efficiency. This is why the domestics have lost my business.
I would be driving an EV1 if GM hadn't stopped selling/leasing them and scrapped them.
I will be happy to look at the Volt (which ever company buys the project when GM goes into bankruptcy). And eagerly anticipate the Tesla sedan due out in 2010.
But for the next 2 years, I'll be happy with my 79mpg Prius (that includes a battery conversion).
Click to expand...

Why is fuel efficiency your number one issue? I would think first the fit for the use of the car or truck to your purpose. Then the total cost of ownership.

The Tesla sedan is 60K my Ford F150 cost 15K thats 45K more. At $3.00 a gallon thats 15K gallons of gas! My F150 get about 18MPG, so I can drive 270,000 miles on the difference in price. Pretty sure the F150 won't last that long. I may not last that long. It would take me 18 years to go that far at the rate I drive.

Why pay a premium for milage if the numbers will never work out?

Can't carry a load of firewood in a Prius.
 
Lazarus said:
Why is fuel efficiency your number one issue? I would think first the fit for the use of the car or truck to your purpose. Then the total cost of ownership.

The Tesla sedan is 60K my Ford F150 cost 15K thats 45K more. At $3.00 a gallon thats 15K gallons of gas! My F150 get about 18MPG, so I can drive 270,000 miles on the difference in price. Pretty sure the F150 won't last that long. I may not last that long. It would take me 18 years to go that far at the rate I drive.

Why pay a premium for milage if the numbers will never work out?

Can't carry a load of firewood in a Prius.
Click to expand...

Yep - during the last oil er crisis circa 1973 - got a good used $150 Pontiac Bonneville, V8, dual exhaust, power everything, big wide tires and burnt rubber stop light to stop at will.

:D

In a couple years, Mr Market willing, I was gonna trade my Chevy V6 Equinox for a grownup big ass V8 GMC.

Whaaaaaa! :rolleyes: :angel:

heh heh heh - :cool: Toyota is still running full size truck ads in my part of Missouri. Bleh - but never say never.
 
Lazarus said:
Why is fuel efficiency your number one issue? I would think first the fit for the use of the car or truck to your purpose. Then the total cost of ownership.

The Tesla sedan is 60K my Ford F150 cost 15K thats 45K more. At $3.00 a gallon thats 15K gallons of gas! My F150 get about 18MPG, so I can drive 270,000 miles on the difference in price. Pretty sure the F150 won't last that long. I may not last that long. It would take me 18 years to go that far at the rate I drive.

Why pay a premium for milage if the numbers will never work out?

Can't carry a load of firewood in a Prius.
Click to expand...

I have joined the Green movement and traded in my nasty old gas- guzzlin' high-carbon footprint F150 4x4 hunting truck for something more [-]politically correct[/-] environmentally conscious. Sure, I have had to adjust, but where there is a will there is a way:
 

Attachments

  • elk_car[1].jpg
    elk_car[1].jpg
    6.3 KB · Views: 37
friar1610 said:
I haven't read every post on this thread, so maybe this point has already been raised. I'm not wild about the idea of a bailout for the auto industry but I do wonder, if they fail, who will build the tanks, humvees, trucks, APCs, etc. that the military needs? Seems like something we wouldn't want to outsource to a country that potentially could be an enemy in the future.
Click to expand...
I have asked this many times in several different forums. Why does the bankruptcy of one of the big 3 (say GM) make it inevitable or even likely that the other two would go bankrupt? Seems to me the history of countless industries over decades if not centuries is, when the weakest competitor goes under, the remaining companies in that industry benefit. ie, GM buyers won't disappear from the face of the earth, most if not all will have to buy from another automaker, at least some presumably from Ford or Chrysler. What am I missing?

I am more than a little skeptical that supporters of the bailout seem to use the total collapse of all big 3 manufacturers, all their suppliers, all their dealers and everyone in the towns they're in will all fail. There's no precedent for that I know of to support that - and supporters just use it as a given. Surely there's no possible way they could all go bankrupt simultaneously if they're left on their own.

I hate to see any of them fail, I just think it's inevitable with their legacy costs. And with the UAW saying we aren't giving up anything and the GM CEO saying I'm not resigning - this is a pointless use of taxpayers funds. My employees and I are taking a huge compensation hit right now, not sure why I should be responsible to bailout folks who have pay, pensions and benefits that few of us have.
 
Midpack said:
I have asked this many times in several different forums. Why does the bankruptcy of one of the big 3 (say GM) make it inevitable or even likely that the other two would go bankrupt? Seems to me the history of countless industries over decades if not centuries is, when the weakest competitor goes under, the remaining companies in that industry benefit. ie, GM buyers won't evaporate, they will have to buy from another automaker, at least some presumably from Ford or Chrysler. What am I missing?

I am more than a little skeptical that supporters of the bailout seem to use the total collapse of all big 3 manufacturers, all their suppliers, all their dealers and everyone in the towns they're in will all fail. There's no precedent for that I know of to support that - and supporters just use it as a given.
Click to expand...


Well put. It seems like wherever there is the possibility of a bailout everyone has their hands out.:p
 
2. Change union organizing rules to make it much easier for unions to organize Toyota/Honda plants and their suppliers.


Totally against this. Unions are one of our downfalls. Saying this, I must remember my father in the 50's working at a furniture factory. He was striking more than he was working. Lived on squirrel and rabbit for years.
 
Let them fail. One way or another this society will need to bite the bullet. Keep passing it on to the other generations or take responsibility now.
 
Lazarus said:
Why is fuel efficiency your number one issue? I would think first the fit for the use of the car or truck to your purpose. Then the total cost of ownership.
Click to expand...

For me, it is three reasons. Although, as earlier noted, a vehicle that meets my needs (or at least comes close) is first. Otherwise I would be driving a bike:)
1. I figure the less gas I use the longer we will have gasoline to use. Hate to tell my nephew I wasted precious gasoline when I was younger and because of that, and other wasters, he has none.
2. National security. I hate seeing us borrowing from China in order to send money to people that don't like us (in part).
3. Environmental (and yes, electric cars move pollution from the car to the power plant, but even dirty power plants, processing and transporting the electricity, cough up less co2 than processing, transporting and burning oil)

Lazarus said:
The Tesla sedan is 60K my Ford F150 cost 15K thats 45K more. At $3.00 a gallon thats 15K gallons of gas! My F150 get about 18MPG, so I can drive 270,000 miles on the difference in price. Pretty sure the F150 won't last that long. I may not last that long. It would take me 18 years to go that far at the rate I drive.

Why pay a premium for milage if the numbers will never work out?
Click to expand...

Why do some pay for a sunroof, or leather seats, or seat warmers? For me, it isn't about money, it is about using less of a resource for many reasons.
And unlike a sunroof, it will end up saving me money.

Lazarus said:
Can't carry a load of firewood in a Prius.
Click to expand...

Well, if I needed to carry a load of firewood, I would be unhappy with a Prius, luckily I don't:)
Just out of curiosity, how much wood is that. Actually, by definition, a Prius can carry a 'load' of firewood;)
 
Supposed to be many cars from the 50's in Cuba, but that was the heyday when GM and Ford WERE good.
 
You can make anything limp along at 35 mi/hr. But that takes LOTS of free time and cheap labor, something that the poor Cubans have.

Oops, I forgot that us early retirees and LBYM'ers also have lots of above resources. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Automakers (especially GM) may be reporting to your insurance co
2 3
Replies
69
Views
3K
REWahoo
REWahoo
SecondCor521
College funds and offspring who have "stopped out"
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
livingalmostlarge
L
S
Reconciling micro observations with macro trends? (is the economy really doing well?)
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Koolau
Koolau
R
Final Approach Planning for Retirement
Replies
15
Views
1K
Route246
R
S
Returning to full-time (government) work, mainly to get insurance
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
tryan
tryan

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom