Living Car Free - GM/Chysler bankrupcty

They DIDN'T. The Big Three have been losing more and more market share, even with all the support from the feds over the decades and earlier bailouts.

I forgot about that point -- "selling so well for so long" included fleet sales to government and car rental companies. "Losing more market share" among civilians (so to speak) is the more truthful statement.

The fact remains that the $73 dollar an hour amount are weasel words, plain and simply. Do you know what kind of pensions and health care the non-union shops provide?

Do you know how few industries have pensions anymore? I certainly don't have one, so why should I worry if Honda does not offer one? Pretty sure Honda offers some kind of medical insurance, again, mine is probably not as good as what the UAW workers get and I work in Healthcare. And before you say I am jealous, that is not the case, I sincerely hope everyone can make as much money as possible, but I might point out that millions of people work without any kind of insurance or pension at all. I still stand by my opinion that they got greedy plain and simple. Not putting all the blame on the Unions, there have been bad decisions made, the economy, etc are all to blame, but the Unions have made it all but impossible for these companies to be profitable, in fact last I heard, impossible to be profitable was the terms used.

Do you know how few industries have pensions anymore? I certainly don't have one, so why should I worry if Honda does not offer one? Pretty sure Honda offers some kind of medical insurance, again, mine is probably not as good as what the UAW workers get and I work in Healthcare. And before you say I am jealous, that is not the case, I sincerely hope everyone can make as much money as possible, but I might point out that millions of people work without any kind of insurance or pension at all. I still stand by my opinion that they got greedy plain and simple. Not putting all the blame on the Unions, there have been bad decisions made, the economy, etc are all to blame, but the Unions have made it all but impossible for these companies to be profitable, in fact last I heard, impossible to be profitable was the terms used.

John Galt, is that you? :rolleyes:

John Galt, is that you? :rolleyes:

Who is John Galt?

It was actually a rather humorous jab at me see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Galt

It is what it is, I simply believe that had people not become so damned greedy a lot of this mess would be avoided, I can take the jabs, I still feel that way. I think the companies would still be in trouble, but not like this.

It was actually a rather humorous jab at me see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Galt
Sorry, I couldn't resist. :lol: Somehow seems appropriate these days, though.

We need to separate our wants from our needs. Do you really need a list of the reasons why we'd be better off with fewer cars on the road and more people walking, cycling and using mass transit?

Of course I don't need a list. Anybody who has read these forums very long knows that I'm pretty much a carfree fanatic.

But I'm not talking about what we'd be better off with. I'm talking about what real people in the real world really want. The only reason car sales are down, IMO, is because most people feel they can't afford to buy cars right now. When (or if) their financial situations improve, they will be buying the biggest, most powerful cars that they can afford.

It would be nice if the carfree movement had just won a big victory, but I'm afraid that's not the case!

Since we are all so ignorant, please inform us on why the Big 3 workers "deserve" $73 per hour compared to $43 per hour at Honda? I know this includes more money than just your wage, it is benefits, etc, but please enlighten us as to how you work harder than the other auto manufacturers in the US. http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=39499

I don't doubt for one second that you work hard, I honestly hope you make all the money you possibly can, I would not hold that against anyone, but in my opinion unions have become greedy, and that is part of the reason we are all in this mess we are in, because you are correct, if the big 3 fail it will effect us all. I don't want to see anyone fail, but when the way a company operates makes it impossible for the company to be profitable, something needs to change, the Unions should do more on their part. Its insane what they ask for. The airplane manufacturers are next, those unions have been just as greedy.

You prove bloodshot's point that most people are ignorant when it comes to the auto industry. Auto workers don't make $73 an hour unless they're in upper management. Toyota workers don't make $43 an hour either, unless they're executives. The figures you're citing are total employment costs divided by active employees. Therefore, these figures include costs associated with current workers plus costs for retirees and people on sick leave.

Most of the wage discrepancy between workers in domestic US plants and foreign US plants is attributable to pension costs. Toyota USA and Honda USA have very few retirees because they have only been hiring people in the US for a few years. GM, Ford and Chrysler have been hiring workers for more than 100 years, and consequently have many more retirees. Obviously their pension costs are going to be much greater.

To further complicate the issue, the $73 and $43 estimates are seriously outdated and distorted. A quick google search will give you aome more accurate estimates. Perhaps you'll do that search and post a retraction or correction.

It's very important when discussing complex issues that people make a good faith effort to decipher the facts and figures that they're presenting as fact. Otherwise we waste a lot of time and effort quibbling about minor issues like this one. :)

Do you know how few industries have pensions anymore? I certainly don't have one, so why should I worry if Honda does not offer one? Pretty sure Honda offers some kind of medical insurance, again, mine is probably not as good as what the UAW workers get and I work in Healthcare. And before you say I am jealous, that is not the case, I sincerely hope everyone can make as much money as possible, but I might point out that millions of people work without any kind of insurance or pension at all. I still stand by my opinion that they got greedy plain and simple. Not putting all the blame on the Unions, there have been bad decisions made, the economy, etc are all to blame, but the Unions have made it all but impossible for these companies to be profitable, in fact last I heard, impossible to be profitable was the terms used.

Because some don't have a benefit, you would take it away from those who do? It seems far better to extend the benefit so that all can have it.

If you have a crappy pension plan, I suggest that you organize a union at your workplace. I did, and I still have my defined pension benefits, even though my employer has tried like hell to take it away from me.

People don't have to live like paupers in their old age. Don't sit around waiting for your bosses to give you some crumbs. Organize at your workplace and work to improve your own life.

One thing you guys are missing about the union pension benefits discussion is that in other industrialized countries like Japan the government picks up more of the retirement and health costs- giving their industries the advantage of not having these costs.

I was reading some writings by labor organizers from the late 1800s a few years ago and it struck me how adamant they were that labor had to be organized on a world wide scale to prevent this outsourcing stuff. The labor leaders of 120 years ago or so predicted this kind of thing would happen, where companies would chase the lowest labor costs and reduce all workers to poverty. I have the impression that once workers in the US got a Union job they stopped working for collective bargaining worldwide. They also seemed to make the mistake of organizing along craft lines instead of by industry. It would seem more efficient for managers to have a contract with one union rather than many. It might have been easier for labor to stay focused that way too.

You prove bloodshot's point that most people are ignorant when it comes to the auto industry. Auto workers don't make $73 an hour unless they're in upper management. Toyota workers don't make $43 an hour either, unless they're executives. The figures you're citing are total employment costs divided by active employees. Therefore, these figures include costs associated with current workers plus costs for retirees and people on sick leave.

Most of the wage discrepancy between workers in domestic US plants and foreign US plants is attributable to pension costs. Toyota USA and Honda USA have very few retirees because they have only been hiring people in the US for a few years. GM, Ford and Chrysler have been hiring workers for more than 100 years, and consequently have many more retirees. Obviously their pension costs are going to be much greater.

To further complicate the issue, the $73 and $43 estimates are seriously outdated and distorted. A quick google search will give you aome more accurate estimates. Perhaps you'll do that search and post a retraction or correction.

It's very important when discussing complex issues that people make a good faith effort to decipher the facts and figures that they're presenting as fact. Otherwise we waste a lot of time and effort quibbling about minor issues like this one. :)

Good lord, did you read my post? I said those figures were disputed throughout the internet, I also said that was not JUST an hourly wage, it includes other monies as well. I won't get into a union debate with you here, I won't be organizing one anytime soon, I do just fine and am taking care of my own retirement. I won't retract my comments that the Unions have become greedy, I am not the only one with this opinion it has been discussed to death, I won't continue it here. I am also not an advocate of taking away anything from anyone, if you earned it you should have it. Good luck collecting those pensions when GM goes out of business though, if they do. I look out for myself, and won't depend on any company or union to look out for me.

I look out for myself, and won't depend on any company or union to look out for me.

Good luck with that (and I sincerely mean it!). I know a couple with private retirement accounts who have had to defer their retirements because their principal (not to mention their home) has declined so much in value. Even with the most optimistic predictions, the stock market and bond market won't be back to 2006 values for a good many years.

Of course, my own defined pension plan is only 62% funded right now. It is guaranteed by the good faith and credit of the government, but private plans like 401s and IRAs are not.

I don't know all the answers to the retirement problem. But the auto workers have worked many years to negotiate good retirement plans with the companies. As with nearly everybody else, those plans are in jeopardy right now.

Good luck with that (and I sincerely mean it!). I know a couple with private retirement accounts who have had to defer their retirements because their principal (not to mention their home) has declined so much in value. Even with the most optimistic predictions, the stock market and bond market won't be back to 2006 values for a good many years.

Of course, my own defined pension plan is only 62% funded right now. It is guaranteed by the good faith and credit of the government, but private plans like 401s and IRAs are not.

I don't know all the answers to the retirement problem. But the auto workers have worked many years to negotiate good retirement plans with the companies. As with nearly everybody else, those plans are in jeopardy right now.

I agree, I truly feel very sorry for the people that have worked for so many years with one company just to potentially see their retirement up in smoke. I have never blamed the little guy, the guys on the line, I genuinely feel for them.

The big shots that are making all the decisions, union and corporate will never feel their pain. They won't starve even if their portfolio is cut in a third. They are not in danger of losing their home, etc, or at least they shouldn't be.

It's too bad they never made a serious effort to compete with the Asians and Europeans in making smaller, cleaner and more fuel efficient cars, opting instead to keep pushing size and power while spending millions to lobby against tougher fuel and emissions standards. I've only set foot in the United States a few times in the last couple of decades, but I'm always surprised to see those super macho ads on TV pushing gas-guzzling Hummers, pick-up trucks and SUV's. What a shame!

Do you realize however that it was those Fuel economy standards that in large measure lead Car manufacturers to make large SUV's. The different treatment for trucks in the CAFE standards made it profitable for years for manufacturers to sell large SUV's, and for a long time that's what the market wanted.

Had the Government not distorted the marketplace in the first place with CAFE standards then consumers could actually decide what kind of vehicle they wanted to buy without government induced didtortions.

Who is John Galt?

Try reading a book sometime.

Try reading a book sometime.

But preferably not that (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged) book. It's one of the most overrated pieces of tripe written in the 20th century.

Chryslers are the worst cars on the road and I should pay and extra 2-3k for that out of blind patriotism?

They do have some nice trucks though. That big Dodge with the Hemi is really cool.

They're buying fewer.

Why?

They do have some nice trucks though. That big Dodge with the Hemi is really cool.

Nah... if you don't need the cummings you probably don't need a truck at all. :p

They do have some nice trucks though. That big Dodge with the Hemi is really cool.

Umm, Hemi ooh-ooh! 1953

Nah... if you don't need the cummings you probably don't need a truck at all. :p

Agreed. :thumb:

Patriotism, blind or otherwise, will obviously not influence your decisions anymore than the Chrysler worker's post. It is obvious that you already have your mind made up on this and a whole host of other topics that are in any way related to anything "American."

If you buy a car simply because it is an American brand then you are really not doing anyone any favors. If big companies like GM and Chrysler get to make inferior products for decades and decades but still not go out of business because people are brainwashed into buying them then they will be doomed to make more and more inferior. Basically they will keep digging themselves a deeper and deeper grave with no real reason to try and build a better car when they know people will buy whatever crap them push on them.

I agree about the CAFE standards but the government simply should have updated those laws rather than remove all of them. The auto industry spent billions of dollars to lobby against consumer groups when they did try to change them back in 2003.

We talk about the Government, and Big Business, and The People...but we are a representative democracy, all of those things are one in the same system. Business cannot exist without consumers (the people). Government cannot exist without getting elected (the people voting, with big business financing the campaigns, and lobbying those same politicians later on). It is all a big system where pretty much everyone is somewhat to blame for most of what happens.
The American car companies would not have made the vehicles if they did not sell. The government would not have allowed CAFE standards to relax for SUVs and light trucks if the companies or the people had not wanted it.
Most of what government does is done as a result of the wishes of those who have the resources to be the most powerful lobbyists. If another group wants to change the law, they need to somehow gain the power to become the more powerful lobbyist. It is not a perfect system, in fact flawed in many ways, but it is what we have and pretty much what we are stuck with unless we wanted to revamp the entire constitution.
So they failed, or are failing. So millions economy-wide will be out of work. Do what people from my home stated did or are doing...pack your stuff and move to where the work is. Find another line of work. It sucks, really sucks, but it is pretty much the way the world has always been since the beginning of time...animals and people migrate when the resources dry up, in this case jobs.

I am certainly biased towards buying American cars. That being said, I'm not going to buy a car I don't want if they aren't making them here. That's why my most recent car was a Prius. If there had been a competitive car made by an American company, I would have purchased it. I think someone earlier mentioned that Toyota was still losing money on the Prius. I believe that was only including the development cost. I'm pretty sure each unit sold is profitable. The same thing can be said of every new car model for a couple of years, it costs $10 billion to develop a new car/motor combo.

The American companies could have been competing with a few high mileage models, but they chose not to do so. They always assumed that high mpg equated cheap consumers, which meant low profit margins. This was a mistake that they have been paying for.

I used to have a car that was built for performance, you could literally watch the gas gauge drop when you floored it (of course, it would go back up when the gas leveled back out :) ). However the joy went out of it in 2000 when I realized that we were just wasting the remaining gas reserves for no particular purpose. Too bad the rest of the American public doesn't seem to be able to have this same realization.

My father, who had never bought a foreign car in his life (he's in his 70's), finally had had enough of the junk coming out of Detroit and he bought a Prius. He says it's the best car he's ever owned.

I have always purchased what made the most sense for me at the time. Unfortunately Detroit never really learned how to build a proper small car. They excelled at trucks and other full frame vehicles. I have owned many of Detroit's small and medium cars of the years and for the most part they fell far short of their European/Pacific competitors. AFAIK there is currently no US car company offering a small/medium sized wagon. Ford axed the Focus wagon in 2007, our family purchased two of them, but we are SOL if we want one now.

Aaron:)

FYI, on Monday, the Supreme Court was delaying the sale of Chrysler to Fiat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/09/business/09chrysler.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

Basically, Chrysler says it needs to be sold, and quickly, or else it could go out of business entirely and be forced to liquidate. Most of its investors agree, although there are a few investment funds (notably three based in Indiana) who are contending that the sale is illegal and filed an appeal with the Court.

However, the Court decided yesterday that the previous court decisions were correct and that the deal could go through. Fiat could own part of Chrysler as early as today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/global/10chrysler.html?th&emc=th

FYI, on Monday, the Supreme Court was delaying the sale of Chrysler to Fiat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/09/business/09chrysler.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

Basically, Chrysler says it needs to be sold, and quickly, or else it could go out of business entirely and be forced to liquidate. Most of its investors agree, although there are a few investment funds (notably three based in Indiana) who are contending that the sale is illegal and filed an appeal with the Court.

However, the Court decided yesterday that the previous court decisions were correct and that the deal could go through. Fiat could own part of Chrysler as early as today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/global/10chrysler.html?th&emc=th

Done Deal.

Done Deal.

Yuppers. We might actually see some Alfas and Fiats, whether wearing their original badging or relabeled as Dodge or Chrysler cars.

(I'm posting these in LCF because, since people are still going to be driving cars, it would be nicer if more of them were like these)

I kinda like the Grande Punto, just from looking at it (no knowledge of its reliability record):
http://www.fiat.com/cgi-bin/pbrand.dll/FIAT_COM/showroom/showroom.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1011363429.1244679157@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccceadehhijgfejcefecejgdfkhdfjk.0&contentOID=1074063125#;
http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00366/Fiat_Grande_Punto_A_366949a.jpg

Or the Alfa Romeo Brera (possibly the sexiest hatch on the planet... it looks damn good in person, too):
http://www.brera.alfaromeo.com/
http://www.swotti.com/tmp/swotti/cacheYWXMYSBYB21LBYBICMVYYQ==QXV0B21VDGLVBI1DYXJZ/imgalfa%20romeo%20brera1.jpg

We might actually see some Alfas and Fiats, whether wearing their original badging or relabeled as Dodge or Chrysler cars.

I kinda like the Grande Punto, just from looking at it (no knowledge of its reliability record):



I have never owned a car and know remarkably little about them, but even I know that neither Fiat nor Alfa Romeo are exactly known for reliability. Alfa Romeos are in fact rather legendary for falling apart.


When I was in London in 2006 I didn’t notice any more bicycles than here. But gas was 8 bucks a gallon. Gas prices aren’t in itself going to change people much.

I remember seeing statistics showing that the cars in the UK consume on average about half of the fuel of compared to the average in the US, so the proportion of income spent on fuel is not necessarily all that different from the US, despite the price per gallon (the cars are much smaller, though). London also has a massive public transportation system that is mostly not at all integrated with bicycling.

That said, I've spent some time in London in 97/98 and again recently, and the difference in bicycling is very noticeable. I hardly saw anyone on a bike ten years ago, but now cyclists are a constant, if small, part of the traffic. The city seems to be putting a real effort to increase cycling and the trend looks pretty good.

Many of you would just love the minimalist Fiat Panda. It didn't even have door handles.....

http://fiat.modeles.free.fr/Web_albums/apres_guerre/fiat_panda.jpg

Who says Chrysler can't build small cars... Not long till we see these babies on the street.

http://img.worldcarfans.com/2009/2/medium/fiat-500c_1.jpg

The 300 gets upgraded to a 500. ;) A convertible AND a moonroof!

That said, I've spent some time in London in 97/98 and again recently, and the difference in bicycling is very noticeable. I hardly saw anyone on a bike ten years ago, but now cyclists are a constant, if small, part of the traffic. The city seems to be putting a real effort to increase cycling and the trend looks pretty good.

When I was in London in a hot sunny summer in the mid '90s, maybe '94 I'm not sure, I was impressed with the cyclists but some still wore masks. What impressed me was that they expected their rights to be respected. The image that sticks in my mind is of this old guy on one of those 3 speeds getting cut off by a car. He rode up beside the car and started banging on it yelling at the driver. This happened around the tower with big ben. Maybe that's not really London but it is close. The traffic was pretty thick.
A friend who lived there said when she arrived and they gave her an orientation briefing they told her something like "It doesn't matter what the highway code says- don't hit a cyclists or pedestrian." The company thought that American drivers had to be told not to run over non-motorists.

All these pictures of car are making me very...bored... can't stay... awake.... need... bike pictures... YAWN!



http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:fc-eMa_lLxtiAM:http://talkpractice.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/yawn.jpg

When I was in London in a hot sunny summer in the mid '90s, maybe '94 I'm not sure, I was impressed with the cyclists but some still wore masks. What impressed me was that they expected their rights to be respected.

Yes, Brits have never built many bike lanes, but expect bikes to be ridden among the traffic and be considered vehicles. Most drivers are pretty good about this, at least compared to some other countries.



The image that sticks in my mind is of this old guy on one of those 3 speeds getting cut off by a car. He rode up beside the car and started banging on it yelling at the driver. This happened around the tower with big ben. Maybe that's not really London but it is close.

?

You mean the Houses of Parliament in Westminster? I'd say that ought to qualify :).


The traffic was pretty thick.

I was recently very impressed with people cycling in the Piccadilly Circus among the car traffic. It's pretty much as thick as it gets, narrow lanes, no bike lanes, lots of double-decker buses, and the sidewalks are actually fenced off with iron railing to keep the masses of tourists etc. from stepping into the traffic. If you get squeezed by the cars there is nowhere to go, yet there were cyclists riding inbetween the buses all the time. Not just young men either, but all kinds of folks.


Edit: Google Streetview has got at least one cyclist on Piccadilly, even if he seems to be a spandex case:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=piccadilly+circus&sll=51.510125,-0.133617&sspn=0.002317,0.004565&ie=UTF8&t=h&rq=1&radius=0.1&ll=51.510071,-0.134304&spn=0,359.995435&z=18&layer=c&cbll=51.510088,-0.134453&panoid=5mQH4wCIvPH8Vdof3BmALA&cbp=12,319.33,,0,5.95

Drag the image around with mouse to see the railing and buses.

The American car inventory is too huge. They offer way to many options and way too many versions of the same car. There was always a larger supply than demand. The cost saving would be easy if they simply stopped making so many models. Also, entire cities should never have been so dependent upon a corporation for sustainability (Detroit). It never made much sense economically was a disaster waiting to happen.
My advice would be to slim the model line especially Chevrolet, GM and Chrysler. Why do you need a Malibu and an Impala. Dump the Malibu. And the MSRP game they have played for years is old news.

I can go on and on about what a waste Buick and Pontiac have been. I mean why bother?
Thats what I dont like about American car manufacturers they dont understand the principles of simplicity and making one product very very good. Toyota and Honda have built reputations on two models: Camry and Accord.

What part of this is difficult to understand?

So in the end, they get what they get. If they go bankrupt oh well...their business model was stupid from the beginning.

"Our focus in recent weeks has been on creating a new company from the strongest parts of the old GM, and on doing it with transparency and speed. This has been an especially challenging period, and we've had to make very difficult decisions to address some of the issues that have plagued our business for decades," Henderson said. "We have, in effect, been fixing our bike while we ride it. Now the repair work is almost done, and we're steering the company back onto a path to viability and success. We're ready for the challenge, and prepared to ride as fast as we can." --- Fritz Henderson - CEO GM co.

More here....

http://m.detnews.com/news.jsp?key=487438&rc=an

My father, who had never bought a foreign car in his life (he's in his 70's), finally had had enough of the junk coming out of Detroit and he bought a Prius. He says it's the best car he's ever owned.

I find it kind of puzzling that so many people are willing to use the brand name as an indicator of what is or isn't a foreign car.

Many Toyotas sold in the USA are made in the USA, while many General Motors vehicles are built elsewhere.

And the brand certainly doesn't always tell you who designed the vehicle - the Chevy Prizm is one of quite a few models that were built according to another company's design (Prizm is a version of the Toyota Corolla) but they stuck a plastic badge on it and called it a Chevy.