|
Originally Posted by Yan
(Post 7967437)
I meant "professions pursued by people with higher education", not "university professors". You must have thought I misspelled "professor" as "professions". I did not.
Now on the same topic, how can you be sure that a number of UAW workers aren't college grads? If what you had in mind is that college grads should get paid more, then I agree. But as a union, you really can't get around that if a number of them are college grads. As an economics student, my stance on unions is that either unions should be for all or for none. It is easier to get to none from the few that we have, but it is hard to go backwards. |
Originally Posted by sunburst
(Post 7968133)
I don't expect a mass exodus away from cars. However, when gas prices got outrageous in the summer, I personally decided to live car-free to the greatest extent possible. It's my small contribution to the green movement, and it's a protest against the price-gouging of the oil producers. Besides, it just feels good to ride everywhere.
Now that it's getting cold in N. California (yeah, go ahead and laugh!), it's putting me to the test, but I haven't faltered yet. I recently even mounted fenders on both my commute/utility bikes. As far as I recall, Light Sweet NYMEX Crude dropped below $44 today. Some are translating that to near or under $1 a gallon in some places. People will start driving again, thinking personal economics more than principle and that is sad, but understandable (for some). Now if the CEOs of the Big 3 continually drive or charter instead of flying in private planes until they retire or are given the boot, then I congratulate them. And congrats to you for taking to cold. It's freezing down here :P EDIT: just checked, it is now rising past $44/barrel. |
Originally Posted by nahh
(Post 7952670)
I would make this a poll, but I feel their is simply too many possible stances on the issue. I see the impending unemployment of thousands of workers as a huge issue. So how do you, as bike commuters, feel about this issue? Discuss openly, and respectfully. |
Originally Posted by lil brown bat
(Post 7966654)
...if you don't bother to think it through.
There is no set of needs -- none -- for which there is not a better solution than an SUV. That includes hauling "3 or 4 kids" (which, by the way, is not a "typical family" anymore...but I digress). A wagon beats an SUV for that job any day. So yes, people did get sold a line of crap. It's their fault they bought it, because -- just as with cigarettes -- there was and is plenty of information out there telling you that this is the wrong choice. But how many people ever avail themselves of that information? Some of us do, but most people don't. Mimivans are a lot more practicable than SUVs, but the are not really more efficient than SUVs in operation. They are still 5000+ pound vehicles. In any case, this is all a digression. It doesn't matter how automotive executives travel, what cars they built before or if they get paid a dollar a year now. The question is, do we want to allow the expertise and tens of thousands of engineering, finance and research jobs to go overseas or not? Do we want to remain at all competent in this industry or just let it become another thing we buy from overseas along with steelmaking, computer making, oil etc? |
Originally Posted by DoB
(Post 7968329)
The SUV is the modern station wagon.
|
Originally Posted by lil brown bat
(Post 7968538)
No, the modern station wagon is the modern station wagon. Guess how I know that? I own one.
Also, Ford is very well known for building excellent small cars. Just not in the US. Same with GM/Opel. They do not need to go from drawing board to showroom, they already have decent cars. The current Focus is one of the best small cars around in terms of both efficiency and safety. Their problem is a cost structure, not their cars. Also, I dispute that millions of jobs will be impacted by a big three bankruptcy. Many of those jobs are related post-sale, and those will not be impacted until the millions of GM & Ford cars are off the road. Given the value that still remains in intellectual property and manufacturing capability, you won't see millions of jobs lost. At least, not in my opinion. At any rate, I'm trying to figure out why this thread is in the commuting forum. :wtf: |
I live in the Dayton, OH area. We have a GM Truck plant (Trailblazers and clones) here that is closing down two days before Christmas. I bike commute daily through a neighborhood that I believe is populated mostly GM workers. As the third and seconds shifts were shut down earlier this year, I began to see working-age folks sitting on lawn chairs in their driveways. They would often wave as I rode by.
Lately, I'm sensing some tension, and one guy actually flipped me the bird last week. I was a bit baffled. It was like he was saying "Screw you buddy for riding a bike. You should buy a truck so I can keep my job." My area will definitely feel the impact. Dayton OH has the most GM employees anywhere outside Detroit. In the short term, U.S. auto plant closures will hurt, a lot. I think in the long term, it'll be viewed as a market share correction that should have naturally occurred a long time ago if not for the billions of dollars U.S. auto makers spent marketing vehicles that were not good for America. I doubt we'll see any difference in the number of bike commuters around here. People who drive pickups and SUVs don't view bikes as a viable transportation. The only people riding bikes around here are hardcore commuters and drunks who lost their drivers licenses. |
[QUOTE=DogBoy;7968745]The SUV/minivan is the modern equivalent to what the station wagon used to be...ie, 7-8 passenger cars with three rows of seats. I have a modern station wagon too...a jetta sportwagen, but I can only get 5 passengers in it. The benefit is in additional cargo space.[/quotes]
Hey, let's move the goalposts some more! A few posts back it was a "typical family" with "3-4 kids" (which is no longer typical, but let's not go there). Now, apparently, it's "7-8 passengers". When I solve that problem, will it suddenly become "a football team plus cheerleaders"? Here is a 1959 Ford Country Squire station wagon, supposedly a "9-passenger" vehicle. Damfino where you'd fit them all. What I do know is that the modern SUV, far from seating "7-8 passengers", seats four or five including the driver. My wagon will do that with ease -- and the SUV doesn't have any "additional cargo space". Trust me, I see plenty of SUVs, I work at a ski area. My wagon has much more hauling capacity than the typical SUV.
Originally Posted by DogBoy
(Post 7968745)
Also, Ford is very well known for building excellent small cars. Just not in the US. Same with GM/Opel. They do not need to go from drawing board to showroom, they already have decent cars. The current Focus is one of the best small cars around in terms of both efficiency and safety. Their problem is a cost structure, not their cars.
Originally Posted by DogBoy
(Post 7968745)
Also, I dispute that millions of jobs will be impacted by a big three bankruptcy. Many of those jobs are related post-sale, and those will not be impacted until the millions of GM & Ford cars are off the road. Given the value that still remains in intellectual property and manufacturing capability, you won't see millions of jobs lost. At least, not in my opinion.
|
Originally Posted by lil brown bat
(Post 7968974)
Hey, let's move the goalposts some more! A few posts back it was a "typical family" with "3-4 kids" (which is no longer typical, but let's not go there). Now, apparently, it's "7-8 passengers". When I solve that problem, will it suddenly become "a football team plus cheerleaders"?
Originally Posted by lil brown bat
(Post 7968974)
Meh. My dad's last American car was a Ford, and it was a lemon. It's possible they made astonishing progress since that suck-ass Tempo, but if you've been burned, why would you bother risking it again?
Originally Posted by lil brown bat
(Post 7968974)
Maybe not, but you don't get bailout money by saying, "The sky isn't falling."
|
Originally Posted by DogBoy
(Post 7969039)
I had a 1983 Ford Tempo as my first car. It went 370,000 miles with very few things ever going wrong beyond normal wear items.
|
Unfortunately, most people's impressions of cars and the autoworkers were formed in childhood, and haven't changed since. Two specifics are the beliefs that US cars are low quality and that unions are strong defenders of lazy overpaid workers. These beliefs are at the level of superstition or mythology. No appeal to reality is likely to change them.
|
Close Roody, but my opinion of Ford is based on horrible experience with a Taurus. I loved the Fairlane, but after the Taurus would never buy a Ford again. {not to mention their current pendance for ugly face forward designs}
On the original issue, this mess has been a long time coming and I don't know the solution but obvious contributing factors are 1. business decisions made based on what's good in 3 months rather than what's good in 3 years 2. overproduction of product 3. lack of an energy policy that taxes motor vehicles based on vehicle weight 4. lack of an energy independence policy 5. lack of willingness of exec's to work in companies interest instead of just their own 6. lack of a cost structure {taxes, health care,etc} in US with rest of world 7. tax policy that encourages companies to generate profits overseas 8. willingness to consider bailout, but not willingness to consider share in profits if bailout works 9. lack of a health care plan for all employees/citizens 10. lack of a retirement plan for all employees/citizens. {soc sec was designed to be supplemental and not the sole source} that's enough food for thought. Perhaps the core of the problem is congresss is mostly lawyers and other professions are not represented. |
p&r
|
Originally Posted by HiYoSilver
(Post 7970499)
Close Roody, but my opinion of Ford is based on horrible experience with a Taurus. I loved the Fairlane, but after the Taurus would never buy a Ford again. {not to mention their current pendance for ugly face forward designs}
On the original issue, this mess has been a long time coming and I don't know the solution but obvious contributing factors are 1. business decisions made based on what's good in 3 months rather than what's good in 3 years 2. overproduction of product 3. lack of an energy policy that taxes motor vehicles based on vehicle weight 4. lack of an energy independence policy 5. lack of willingness of exec's to work in companies interest instead of just their own 6. lack of a cost structure {taxes, health care,etc} in US with rest of world 7. tax policy that encourages companies to generate profits overseas 8. willingness to consider bailout, but not willingness to consider share in profits if bailout works 9. lack of a health care plan for all employees/citizens 10. lack of a retirement plan for all employees/citizens. {soc sec was designed to be supplemental and not the sole source} that's enough food for thought. Perhaps the core of the problem is congresss is mostly lawyers and other professions are not represented. 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 are all national issues. As far as health care, UAW has an outstanding health care package as well as a unemployment package for their union workers... of course those costs are passed onto the auto makers and eventually the consumers, thus we all pay for the benefits that autoworkers get that are often covered in other nations by their national policies. Of course that the automakers took advantage of all of this and touted massive SUVs which we as a nation bought into hook line and sinker is also part of our national problem as well as how much of consumerism is sold to America. Just look at bikes sold in LBSs for an example... how many different styles of slightly different road bike do we really need... |
Originally Posted by DoB
(Post 7961856)
The american taxpayer has been dictating the cars to build all along. This may not jive with your personal aesthetic, but the reason the car companies all built huge trucks and fast sports cars through the past fifteen years was because these are the vehicles people wanted to buy. Those buyers were these same 'taxpayers' that you now think wanted something else.
However, with the car companies reaching for a bailout, it would turn the same consumers in their role as taxpayers, who are required by law to pay taxes that our elected officials would direct to the car companies. So the road the industry is following is this: - auto companies (for whatever reason) cannot compete in free market - they are arguing that it is a public good for the government to save them - government aid means it is the taxpayer who must supply the required funds - so now taxpayer (though elected officials or bureacrats) should now be able to dictate what they make. That means, we - the taxpayers - now get to exert direct influence on what the car companies make. They tried capitalism, that didn't work for them, so now if they want to try socialism they can build the People's Car. I am trying to point out if the car companies really want to be part-owned or financed by the taxpayers it will end up in political/government control of every decision they make, and we'll all end up driving Trabants. They will then fail even more miserably and we will have just delayed letting the market do what it's being doing to them anyway. Further, "bailing out the car companies" doesn't *really* save production line / blue collar jobs because right now the economy *just doesn't need* as many cars as it did a year ago or even 3 months ago. More car factories are going to close; more suppliers are going to go out of business, and more dealerships are going to close no matter what. If we really want to bailout the car companies *without screwing them up forever* the government should just give consumers vouchers for discounts on new cars and let consumers sort out whom they want to live or die. |
Originally Posted by Silverexpress
(Post 7961028)
I recieved an Email from Tom Regan, one of a few whose working on making a South Eastern Michigan city bike friendly. The city of Royal Oak is about 8 miles West of GM's Technical Center. Below is his latest report on how it's going with the advocacy....
I just want to bring into light how the economy is affecting cycling here in Michigan. I'm sure if one or all the Big Three go bankrupt we can pretty much erase any future progress from the work below off the face of the Earth for a time being..... Of course, this is just my thinking for the basis for Mr. Hoover's reply, but then again..... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Biking and Walking in Royal Oak From: Tom Regan Sent: Sat 11/29/08 10:30 AM To: This is an update about our campaign to improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians in Royal Oak. Our task force met with Royal Oak City Manager Tom Hoover and members of his staff on Tuesday, November 25th. We discussed four items. We gave Mr. Hoover and his staff literature from the League of American Bicyclists on how a city can seek certification as a "Bicycle Friendly Community," http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/b...a/communities/ . We suggested that winning this certification should be our long-term goal. We asked Mr. Hoover if the city would hire an outside consultant to write a Non-Motorized Transporation Plan. We estimated that this would cost about $40,000. Mr. Hoover and his staff agreed that Royal Oak would benefit from writing a non-motorized transporation plan, and that it should be done by an outside consultant. However, Mr. Hoover noted that Royal Oak (like nearly all Michigan cities) faces an extremely tight budget. Mr. Hoover stated that our task force should investigate thoroughly if any outside funding sources exist before asking the city commission the question. Several task force members agreed to investigate possible funding sources. If you know of any possible funding sources please let me know immediately by responding to this email. We asked Mr. Hoover about scheduled street repavings that offered immediate opportunities for making streets more bicycle-friendly, such as road diets and bike lanes. The city engineer agreed to investigate this. We discussed special needs and opportunities along Woodward Avenue. Heather Carmona of the Woodward Avenue Action Association agreed to investigate potential funding sources and potential cooperation with neighboring cities. The task force will meet again in mid-December to report on our separate searches for possible funding sources. Reminder, please join us at the next Royal Oak School Board meeting to speak at public comment. Our purpose it to explain why a Non-Motorized Transportation Plan would benefit Royal Oak school children and to ask the school board to support the effort: Thursday, December 11 7:00 pm 1123 Lexington Blvd., Royal Oak, MI 48073 Reminder, please write letters to the editor and call on Royal Oak to take steps to improve bike and pedestrian safety: Royal Oak Mirror ksmith@hometownlife.com Royal Oak Review clangrill@candgnews.com Royal Oak Daily Tribune editor@dailytribune.com Oakland Press vop@oakpress.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The bottom line is that here in the US, we have long subsidized roadways specifically designed for the auto while all but excluding cycle specific or cycle friendly designs. The 1956 Highway act for instance was supposedly for defense, yet that nearly exclusive system is now dedicated to the motoring public. Where is the "bicycle act?" |
Originally Posted by Roody
(Post 7970294)
Unfortunately, most people's impressions of cars and the autoworkers were formed in childhood, and haven't changed since. Two specifics are the beliefs that US cars are low quality and that unions are strong defenders of lazy overpaid workers. These beliefs are at the level of superstition or mythology. No appeal to reality is likely to change them.
|
People grudgingly swallowed the need for a banking bailout rather than take the hit. You can viscerally not want to bail out a banking CEO that makes millions, but you can also prefer that to seeing your $10/hour job wiped out because that millionaire banker didn't get bailed out.
We are seeing a correction to a massive bubble that came from many past mistakes. We can go ahead a take the Hoover approach or we can hold our noses and try and mitigate the disaster. If you want to just let the chips fall as they may, then let the carmakers fold and start reading "The Grapes of Wrath" for tips on your new lifestyle. If you want to mitigate the banking disaster, then think about the impact on the banks you are trying to bail out when the big three default on their outstanding $100 billion (with a B!) bonds. Think about trying to fix the housing mess when all of the workers at the big three and most of their suppliers go into foreclosure and all of the big three retirees stop spending money. Not making a loan to the big three now makes the previous $700 billion banking bailout an exercise in futility. Somehow ending the worst financial crisis since 1932 has turned into a referendum on the quality of a 1983 Ford Tempo and the poor fuel economy of SUVs. Maybe we should just mail the keys to the US to China and stop making payments. We are too dumb to live. |
Originally Posted by BroadSTPhilly
(Post 7970570)
p&r
No religion, barely any politics, and very mature discussion, so I say not yet. And from the way these folks are maintaining some level of respect and dignity, never. |
Originally Posted by Roody
(Post 7970294)
Unfortunately, most people's impressions of cars and the autoworkers were formed in childhood, and haven't changed since. Two specifics are the beliefs that US cars are low quality and that unions are strong defenders of lazy overpaid workers. These beliefs are at the level of superstition or mythology. No appeal to reality is likely to change them.
|
The fact is that the way the big three have been doing business for decades is not sustainable in a global economy.
(CNSNews.com) – The Big Three automakers are forced to pay 85- to 95-percent of union wages and benefits to members of the United Auto Workers union who aren’t working – even if their plants have been closed. This, added to the CEO's taking three separate corporate jets to congress begging to be saved is travesty at it's finest! WTF! Three weeks ago, the top three were asking for $25 billion with no plan whatsoever to how they will not be continuing as "business ads usual". Yesterday that number increased by nine billion ($34 billion). The system is flawed from the CEO down to the front line worker. Having said all that, I don't want to see 10's of thousands of people lose there jobs. But this can not be allowed to continue! |
Originally Posted by riddei
(Post 7971853)
The fact is that the way the big three have been doing business for decades is not sustainable in a global economy.
SOURCE This, added to the CEO's taking three separate corporate jets to congress begging to be saved is travesty at it's finest! WTF! Three weeks ago, the top three were asking for $25 billion with no plan whatsoever to how they will not be continuing as "business ads usual". Yesterday that number increased by nine billion ($34 billion). The system is flawed from the CEO down to the front line worker. Having said all that, I don't want to see 10's of thousands of people lose there jobs. But this can not be allowed to continue! 10 minutes after the automaker CEO's left their intense grilling with congress Citi Bank rolled into D.C., were handed 20 Billion Dollars and flew out on their corporate jets. No questions asked. What is the difference exactly? Some good questins: Are you going to keep making no money down loans to people with no means to repay the loan? Are you going to keep buying CDO's which you have no idea what the underlying assets are worth? What are you going to do with the $20 billion we just handed you? You know....simple questions like that. |
Originally Posted by DoB
(Post 7971173)
We are too dumb to live.
Perhaps this is our wakeup call... |
Originally Posted by DoB
(Post 7971919)
10 minutes after the automaker CEO's left their intense grilling with congress Citi Bank rolled into D.C., were handed 20 Billion Dollars and flew out on their corporate jets. No questions asked.
What is the difference exactly? Where do the bailouts end? "Integrity is doing what is right whether someone is watching or not". (My layman's quote). |
Originally Posted by riddei
(Post 7971990)
Where do the bailouts end? If 2 of the 3 car companies fail in the US you will see unemployment rates in states like Michigan and Ohio ranging from 20% to 30%. Those are the kind of numbers that lead to civil unrest and political extremism if left unchecked. The reaction? 'My 83 Ford Tempo was unreliable so screw 'em'. Sounds reasonable. It is clear to me watching the political climate that people are not grasping what is coming. If you are not in the industries being strangled by the dearth of credit available right now then you have not noticed that sales of equipment and trucks are off by upwards of 70% in October and November year to year. Yu have not noticed that the flat screen TV market is completely glutted and glass screen making companies are idled. You have not noticed that US and Europe car sales are down 45% year to year in the last month. This is not a 'small decline' in GDP. This is off a cliff. I guess this is too bad for the layperson who is not watching internal data. Business as usual is over. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:35 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.