WHO On Earth REALLY Thinks Deep Down Obama Can Save Detroit?

Hopefully he can't.

— sold2early (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 7:10:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -19   

Bailing them out would be the wrong thing.
They should have focused on fuel efficient vehicles like everybody else. Focus on new technology. Not focus on shareholders. In the end it gets them all.
What a mistake to think that what happened to europe couldnt happen to the USA.

Lesson learned, time for a new company to do what the market wants and needs and to thrive to provide jobs.
Not keep a dysfunctional company alive that cant survive in the future anyhow. They had an electric car and killed it. This is what you get.

Im sorry for the people who will lose their jobs, but mine aint safe either.

— candywhite (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 7:26:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

I would recommend to Obama the BEST thing he could do is to tell Americans to buy ANY vehicle made in the USA and get a full price tax deduction.

And if you're a small business, you'd get a 2x deduction on any vehicle purchase.

And double all incentives (consumer/small biz owner) if they buy an alternative fuel, diesel or a 27+ MPG (city).

And it would have to be bought before 4/15/09 to qualify.

That would buy all these guys time.

Right now.

001

— Agent001 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 7:38:11 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 12   

Obama is/will a/be/a paper President with a coat of water repellent.

Goodbye GM.

— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 7:53:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -14   

Aside from years of bad product, the UAW and the pensions and other perks have hurt the Big Three.

Let me state before I get slammed here, the people who earned the pensions and other benefits deserve them, it is the promise itself which has hurt the UAW and by default the Big Three.

Being able to clear the books of 2-3 generations of people who have been promised certain items coupled with increasingly better product will help save the Big Three.

I think the UAW needs to be broken, allow the Big Three to operate under a "right to work" climate that doesn't pay someone 90% of their salary when the product they build isn't selling thereby shutting down the factory.

Make the workers of the Big Three accountable for the quality of product produced, don't reward crap with sweet benefits.

That is how the rest of us work, if we don't perform, we get fired and replaced.

-00J

— Agent00J (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 8:03:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

001,

"No one, not Obama, Pelosi, McCain, Palin, Biden, Frank, Romney can SAVE Detroit."

That by far is the sanest thing you've said so far this week!
Turbospyder had a similar post earlier (http://www.autospies.com/news/GM-shares-plunge-after-analyst-sees-them-hitting-zero-37308/) and this is part of what I had to say about it:

"But GM can't die, just like AIG can't die either. It's would cause a catastrophic domino effect on not just Americans, but the global economy as well.
If GM dies, thousands to hundreds of thousands become unemployed by GM.
The ripple effect would continue to the supply chain, the suppliers. Those companies would be forced to layoff employees or go under as well. Then we are talking hundreds of thousands to millions unemployed.
I haven't even gotten to the investors and creditors involved. Individuals 401K plan have investments in funds that incorporate some of the companies that would all fall.
They fall, so will your 401K. Etc., etc., etc.

Yeah, it's a simplistic explanation but it's better than just saying that GM should reap what they sow."

— Bored (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 8:21:33 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4   

Sure he can.

All he has to do is back a merger between Toyota and GM.

In other words, ask Toyota to run GM.

— weaponX (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 8:24:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -6   

Speaking of Obama saving Detroit...has anyone seen the photos on websites of the new OBAMA-MOBILE now undergoing testing?....I'm sure that's a Chrysler 300 from the windshield back....maybe this is the first GM-Chrysler 'merger mobile'?....

— doctorproctor (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 8:56:25 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3   

Maybe the problem is that GM is such a large company. If the loans were made on the condition that all the GM companies be broken into separate companies then if one of the resultant smaller companies goes under, then it's not a catastrophic problem. Anyways, if GM's suppliers can't sell to GM, then whoever gets their market share will also, most likely, they will need parts from those suppliers, so it's not like they will automatically be out of business. The beeakup can be done- just remember Ma Bell and the Brothers Bell.

— kornholio (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 9:00:13 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Great point!! hell we gave billions to the taliban way back and now were fighting them. we waste billions on the war and get nothing in return why can't we pull the troops out and re-structure the big 3 so people won't be getting $35/hr to watch an plastic door panel go by in an air conditioned factory. If they go on strike, fire them and replace them with people who want to work and won't complain abbout their already great pay rate. they'll get the message when they try to find a job in the real world paying over $20 to sit around.

— 85bmw745i (View Profile)

Posted on 11/13/2008 6:52:17 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Can he? I doubt out, but he sure as hell is going to try with whatever it takes. Bushy bailed out Wall Street and the Bankers (a big constituent) and now Obama and Congressional Dems will do it for Domestic Autos AND their Union buddies. Unions gave too much money in this election to the Dems to not get a payback. Hell, you saw Obama already try and talk Bush into doing it when they met yesterday, according to reports. (Nice political move, by the way)
This is not going to be easy. I think Detroit and the Unions dug their grave for many years and we can't afford another bailout of any industry. We can't even afford the one we gave WS/Banks, but now the flood gates are open. Next will be airlines, then what? You have to draw the line somewhere.
I actually like the tax credit/deduction idea mentioned above, but I'm not sure that will do much, especially if people aren't working. Couple that with Obama's promise to raise taxes and renegotiate international agreements (NAFTA) and this thing could unravel more quickly than you can say Great Depression. I'm not an Obama supporter, but I certainly don't want bad things to happen to the US and "hope" some of that "change" he brings works in some way. If he's smart he'll listen a lot more to Buffett/Volcker than Granholm (MI governor). Good luck.

— cktoo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 9:57:01 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Obama is in because he is new, unknown and offers what to some are fresh new ideas. I have great ideas about clean energy by building new nuclear plants, but you sure as hell wouldn't want me around to run them or to deal with an accident.

Obama has never managed anything... not a corner store, not a little league team, not a small town, probably not even the family checkbook. The idea from anyone that he has any concept of how deep in over his head he is just shows how shallow our political system is and how easily you can sell ideas to the unimformed.

The money changers and lawyers that run GM, Ford and Chrysler long since got away from making quality cars and spend more time buying and merging to make them selves bigger with more financial leverage. But the net result is they are poorly managed and do not have a focus on Cars or the people who buy/drive them. So when they fall, the impact will affect everyone. The UAW is it's own topic on greed.

I am a pure capitalist and largely believe you need to let business deal with risk and reward. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I know what it isn't - and that's listening to any idea from anyone with a .gov email address.

— cantaffordone (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 9:57:28 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

suppose there is no bailout. where would that bring the unemployment rate in america? how quickly would we see absolute bedlam?

how does the entire world operate with a collapsed american economy? europe would take a big hit, as would japan. china may just scale down production and execute a few million citizens. russia might just do alright. their soviet infrastructure is dated, but they have enough oil for themselves, and a much more diverse economy than most other oil-driven nations.

would mexico or canada be first to take things over? maybe cuba?

this is a very interesting hypothetical. scary as hell, but interesting.

is there even a possibility some sort of bailout isn't worked out? i certainly can't imagine so.

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 10:07:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4   

Yes he can

— no1listensanyway (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 10:31:54 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

A trillion dollar bailout wouldn't save GM.

Three things have to occur, none are easy so you know Obama definitely won't be carrying out any of them.

1. Disband UAW and liquidate/nullify their legacy costs (company pension payouts will be reduced). Offer an allowance for health benefits, sucks compared to their sweatheart deal that bankrupted GM in the first place, but its better than nothing. Pay comparable to other manufacturers.

2. Force Japan/Korea and anyone else to open their markets (wouldn't help but read on) / unpeg their currency or legislate that they must cover 50% of the allowance paid to above disbanded UAW. If they don't like it, they can sell their cars somewhere else. My thinking is that Toyota would swallow the cost and pass it along. Result will be fewer sales meaning less obligation but more sales to domestic makers. It all evens out.

3. Might as well buy up GM (and Ford) at $2 share and put 50% into holding. Sole purposes are for R&D and to make money with domestically produced fuel efficient vehicles (trucks and SUVs don't count so they can keep those jobs in Mexico). CEO will receive rational compensation as the playing field will be levelled, annual growth/profit/performance will be benchmarked between industry avg and industry leader.

Heavy gov't intervention at first, but in the end will leave GM a publicly controlled but privately operated entity.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2008 11:23:28 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Something needs to done for the big 3, something needs to be done to the uaw. but letting GM fail is not the anwser. If GM fails and 2 million people loose their jobs then in the first 6 months there would be over 20 billion dollars in unemployment benifets just for GM and their suppliers. Right now there is an extention on unemployment to 9 months so there is another 10 billion for the extra 3 months. Then think of foodstamps and medicaid for kids. and the loss of insurance premiums, so there goes Anthem. the list goes on and on. They did it to themselves but just like the banks the govement can't afford to let them fail. I think it would be silly not to spend 50-100 billion to save 1 trillion. Also if they fail the economy would be in shambles for years.

— dlslms (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 12:11:27 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Nobody can save Detroit as it exists today. But that does not mean that the US car industry will vanish. There will have to be a serious restructuring of the business, so that the resulting (smaller) companies are long-term viable. Then (and only then) the Obama administration can help them with loans (at least loan warranties) and incentives/subsidies for improving mileage and/or emissions.

I think the fact that GM and Ford European operations are competitive, producing many good cars well suited to a market with very high fuel prices, proves that they can be successful. But they need to be dramatically reorganized first.

— wac77 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 12:28:34 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

What got the world out of depression in the 30's was WW-2.
So, if you think that can be repeated, then maybe Bush already started the bail-out. You just need to get GM building more military vehicles.
Now if we could just figure out how to get an Impala to reliably traverse sand dunes, we'd have this problem licked!

— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 2:15:50 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

but raising the taxes on corporations, raising capital gains and taxes on the wealthy, or people manking over 250k, 200k, 150k, oops i mean now 120k, will not put any more money in ANY ONES pockets except the government. If Obama wants to get people spending, he will need to slash taxes across the board. FOR EVERYONE! Put more discretionary spending in the consumers hand, and you will see the economy start to turn around. Is it not a surprise to anyone that since Obama was elected the market has reversed the trend that it had made the two weeks up until the election. No one noticed that when the poll numbers from IBD showed them closing the market was swinging up, but as soon as the election concluded, and people fell for smooth talk, the market reacted accordingly to what he plans on doing. You'd be smart to get out now and not pay his capital gains later, of course with such depreciation it will be a while till anyone pays capital gains...

Obama can not save Detroit, first of all, Bush is still president, so it is currently in his lap to solve it, second, the people of Michigan have been electing the same officals for years to D.C. to represent them, and those people have failed them year after year, if they are to stupid to fall for the lies of the UAW bosses, and keep voting the same people in, maybe they shouldn't have those jobs.

Last - we spend WAY more money a year on illegal immigrants than we do on the war...and i'm sure the people of Irag love you wishing that we wouldn't have gone there, they enjoy their freedom, ask the soldiers that come back...i have.

— GodfatherSHM (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 9:56:58 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Bimmerfan25

Why is it that whenever you disagree with someone on this sight, they are a lunitic, crazy, ignorannt, idiot ... enough with the name calling. If you want people to pay attention to your ideas, you might try showing a little respect.

— cantaffordone (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 12:03:56 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

both the new deal and ww2 were enormous government expenditures.

godfathershm, if uncle sam is using tax dollars to contract upgrades to public infrastructure and increased efficiency in the transit system (whether civil or freight), then the money is indeed going back into the pockets of americans.

when was the last time the federal government didn't spend the money it received in taxes? as long as it isn't being spent abroad, its going right back into the economy. its like a monetary enema.

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 4:39:41 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

cantaffordone,

Wow...where to even start...

Obama, actually Obama/Biden, didn't win because they are "new and unknown", they won because they were the better option than McCain/ Palin. If it was Obama vs. McCain, I think it would have been closer, but it wasn't. Adding Palin and the disastrous 8 prior Republican years, McCain wasn't strong enough to pull it off. I don't think there would have been a republican ticket that could overcome the multiple bullet-holes-in-the-feet that the Bush administration had "administered".

If your ideas about clean nuclear energy were any good, you would be running the plant and be prepared to deal with an accident. If you're not prepared to do those things it means you can't possibly have enough information or insight about every aspect of nuclear power or green energy to form a "good idea". You're ignorant. It's like saying "I have a great idea! If people are starving in Africa, why don't they just move to France?".

If Obama had run a corner store, little league team, a small town, you'd just chastise him for not having run a WalMart, Major League ball team, or big city. Your statements are intentionally condescending and inflammatory, not factual or unbiased. Sell ideas to the uninformed? Please. He's not in office because of smoke and mirrors like some worlds fair snake-oil salesman. How do you explain the approval rating for Bush. Are all the people that voted for him who now wish they could take it back all suddenly "uninformed" as well. I mean, based on their logic, they must have been "informed" when they voted...

You're as bad as the right-wing Fox reporters who regularly slipped and called him "Osama" and consistently used his full name, including his middle name Hussein, in an effort to rile up the only kind of people who eat up that kind of below-the-belt attack politics; uninformed Republicans and ignorant racists/ bigots.

Try being informed instead of just opinionated. It's harder, I know, but if you were maybe you'd be shown some respect in return.

— jpighetti (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 4:44:58 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I understand the aurgument for the government not bailing out Detroit. Detroit has never been proactive about anything only reactive to what the market was doing. Further for it took them too long to be even reactive quickly enough. The culture of Detroit has to change. The government should bail them out but put preconditions on Detroit on car development. Further there has to be an analysis on costs to develop small cars versus foreign competition. If the unions are going to continue to be supported(which I'm against)then there has to be tarrifs of some kind on any foreign car maker that has a factory in the US. Provided there is an even playing field then it is all about product. A more immediate reason that Detroit has been going down the tubes is the tight credit market. The government must force banks to lend money. Detroit in the mean time has to down size significantly. Duplicate product lines have to stop asap.

— mini22 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 1:17:19 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

What if GM (& Ford) sold off their foreign plants and companies?
That would generate some cash, and reduce their costs (salaries).
The US gov't should only be bailing US workers/citizens, not employees on other continents!

— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 2:22:20 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I think the best option is a foreign buyer (probably Chinese) who wants the existing dealer network to get a jump in North America.
They would be smart enough to keep the models that are in demand (Sierra, Colorado, Malibu, Impala, Acadia, ...) and kill off the lame ducks.
The gov't just has to impose a rule stating that they keep some portion of the US production capacity going (maybe 75% ???) which can be filled with 50% of the current "good" product and 25% with some tiny cars designed off-shore, or whatever they want.
Then there would be a transition time whereby the foreign maker could reduce production in the US (spread over 2 decades possibly) so that the reduction can be accomplished mostly by attrition (retirements, folks changing careers, etc.) and not affecting existing employees.
Finally, the new owners will be under the existing "domestic content" rules and AutoPac rules, so they have to build the cars from North American parts (mostly) or they are subject to import duties.
In exchange for the initial "American Content" stipulations, the gov't could subsidize the US salaries (partially) ... that would be the extent of the bailout.
This might be a relatively low-cost solution compared to other options.
-just the ideas of the CEO of a small North American manufacturing company...

— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 2:34:58 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Maybe Toyota, Nissan or Hyundai?? Long shot: indianTata?

Strange times indeed.

— mwrmmg (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 3:45:18 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Only Ford will survive, because Europe like it.

The new Mondeo was awarded "Car of the year" in many countries around Europe. The new Ka and Fiesta are big hit here. C-Max and S-Max has strong positions, Transit and Transit Connect still are awarded. Only Focus in not so new, but is better looking than Toyota Auris and cheaper than Civic.

May be Ford made only one mistake in Europe. They should not spend so much money for creating Kuga, when they could bring Edge here. Edge is better looking and enough small for Europe.

So do not worry about Ford, but GM and Chrysler are almost dead!

How did GM suppose that Europe will buy Daewoo under cover of Chevy, even if they are sooooooo cheap!?!?!?!

— OBSERVER1984 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 6:03:33 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

America is typically cruel when it comes to huge, poorly managed companies going under. America practically invented automobile manufacturing, but to be honest the only thing that has mattered to these giants is quarterly profits and not long term viability. They have had 2 HUGE opportunities in the '70's to turn things around and they did nothing. This was in the 1973 oil crisis and in 1978 when Ross Perot, who was the largest stock holder in GM at the time, that he told the GM board that they were losing 1% of the US automobile market to imports every year and they had better come down from their white towers and see the junk they are producing. They got sick of his rants and bought him out for 750 million dollars. Now, the big 3's products are decent, but it's a day late and a dollar short. I say, let them fail and they will then get right-sized and then someone can build them back up from the bottom up. Throwing an influx of cash at the problem will not put their problems in to perspective and I for one DO NOT want my taxes used to delay the inevitable failure of these bloated companies problems.

— stevenv1999 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 9:42:13 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

Canada has no business running America...

We have enough beer and hockey supplies to go round.

**Joke**

Even so, i still do find it funny when I see canadian $5 dollar bills and there are kids playing hockey printed on the bill.

— neutral (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 2:58:16 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Canada has enough trouble running Canada.
That's a bizarre suggestion!

— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 11/13/2008 2:55:53 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Japan rebuilt new factories that were bombed during World War II. America helped build modern plants in the Asian World. Additionally Japan has a National Healthcare system for workers.

America needs to rebuild more modern factories in order to compete with such a model.

It is like going to work and be given a wooden desk with a typewriter, and management tells you to compete with the people on the other side of the room who work in glass offices, armed with computers, printers, scanners and the most expensive software.

Can you compete with such a model?

How efficient could you produce with a typewriter?

Can You type at the speed of a new printer cranking out 100 pages per minute, error-free?

Most Americans would quit before their first day on the job had ended under such conditions.

— mercuryguy (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 10:55:06 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Just something to stew over....immediate 2,000,000 job losses and the according to some labor statistics, up to 15 jobs support each OEM job. Do the math, then see if it would be in anybody's interest for The Big 3 to go belly-up. We're talking depression with a big "D" here if that were to happen. After that with all the guns out there don't think for a moment there won't be a civil war. Hmmmm. BTW, all you green-heads: you'll still need a strong manufacturing base to accomplish your hearts desires.

— GearheadMark (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 11:28:05 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

theSailor,

If GM sold the same number of cars from Jun-Oct2008 as it did in Jun-Oct2007, it would be ROLLING in Billions.

A little research goes a long way.

— neutral (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2008 4:39:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I think the US is long overdo from imposing tariffs on imports. I'm pretty sure other countries do it to our products. This I could see helping Detroit somewhat.

— BMWpride (View Profile)

Posted on 11/13/2008 7:49:38 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Holy crap! An intelligent, informed comment. Is that allowed here?
Seriously, there are some great postings on this topic ... I think some of the Auto-spies would be better at running GM (or the US Gov't) than the management they have now.

— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 11/15/2008 2:36:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Georgemia,
Agree with you on pretty everything you said. Problem is Westerners (including Europeans) are too short sighted to see beyond everyday low prices and "what's in it for me today, not next week, but today?"

This whole living beyond your means garbage is a major cause of the whole financial crisis, not the only reason, but is a big part.

What we need is something to remind people that Wal-mart's second currency isn't in the form of monetary notes.

However, if factories are still in place (shutdown but still standing), it still leaves manufacturing infractructure. The only two problems are it takes time to get them back into working condition, and we assume there will still be people over here who can run them (seems kids over here only want to grow up to be athletes and gangsta ho's).

The United States still holds the status of economic engine. China's stimulus plan will flop simply because their economy is based on exporting slave labour goods, not consuming. They would've been smarter off buying up U.S. mortgages to get Americans buying again. That's off topic. The US should grow some balls and learn to use its economic power and push people around. I like Japanese carmakers but I think they can afford to subsidize US companies (after the gov't walks all over the UAW and straightens them out).

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/14/2008 12:35:12 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I'm really sick and tired of hearing about this crap bailout, paying the rich to get richer. Where are our leaders those who we voted for to help the average people and not their rich friends and themselves in the process? Barack Husain Obama said lots of crap and all he'll do is more crap. Detroit's problem is not money but management and honesty.

— Designer1 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/14/2008 2:41:51 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0