Detroit Bailout -- Do you support it?

[Yen Sid]

I would be more for a bailout after they have gone through chapter 11, let them file and restructure everything including contracts and such. I know if they restructure they will drastically cut pay but I think having all those jobs saved is much better than them all going to the unemployment line. Get everything back on track and then start slowly getting pay increases and such as long as the market dictates it, there should be no gigantic bonuses for CEO's, especially when they flush the company down the toilet, I could never understand that one. Filing for chapter 11 is the only alternative I see to get everything back in line with todays market, just giving them money will not work, look at the airlines and now the banks. If a person spends their credit cards to the max every month you do not up their limit to get them to stop.

 

[Kathi OD]

GM has to attempt to restructure first. Good Grief, Charlie Brown, just how many of the same car do we need with different trim and name plates on them? They could save millions just by consolidating the brand into 2 or 3 different nameplates. Keep Cadillac, Chevy, and maybe Saturn. I could even see them keeping GMC, but only if they did away with the trucks in the other lines. It just doesn't make sense to me for them to have all those duplicate products out there.

 

[DianeV]

The auto industry just started making the vehicles people asked for. It was fine for a while but no one can afford them now. I dont blame the auto industry for that.

You are talking like another poster stated, millions of people without jobs if something isnt done. Our country depends alot on the auto industry and I hate to think if they fail how many people wont have jobs and how much cars will cost.

 

[RitaE]

While I would desperately love to help the workers associated with the auto industry, there is absolutely no point at all in chaining yourself to a sinking ship.

My problem is that the US Auto Industry does not have a working business model. Given their cost structures and price pressures from competitors who do not have the constraint of Union pay, I have to wonder if our "bailout" money wouldn't be better spent in helping the workers and suppliers move out of the way of the disaster.

Otherwise what are we going to do? Pass laws saying that every family is mandated to buy an American car every 5 years or go to jail?

 

[CruiserMom]

Every day in this country, people are running their own business, making some sort of product, with the intent of getting people to buy their product, so that they have money to make more product to sell to more people. If a competitor makes a better or cheaper product, and people then prefer the competitor's product, then the original business owner has to either change to compete, or go out of business.

Why should the government be expected to give the original business owner money to continue his operations, when it is clear that no one wants their product anymore?

If we give the automakers money, won't that just delay the inevitable? Instead of laying off everyone and going out of business today, it will happen 6 or 12 months from now. We cannot reward their bad business practices. If US automakers cannot compete, they need to go out of business.

 

[MI mom of 3]

1.2 Million jobs seems a bit on the low side to me. This isn't just about employees of the big three - there are also parts factories, shipping companies, insurance companies, aftermarket product suppliers and distributors, auto loan underwriters at banks and credit unions, car dealerships, mechanics, paint & body shops, tire stores, etc. All would be adversely effected if any or all of the big 3 go under or even if they file for Chapter 11.

I read somewhere recently that for every job lost in the auto industry another 12 jobs are lost.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Why should the government be expected to give the original business owner money to continue his operations, when it is clear that no one wants their product anymore?

If we give the automakers money, won't that just delay the inevitable? Instead of laying off everyone and going out of business today, it will happen 6 or 12 months from now. We cannot reward their bad business practices. If US automakers cannot compete, they need to go out of business.

The problem is we can't afford not to. You punish not only the employees of the auto compainies but employees of all related fields and eventually evey single one of us! It's like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Like I said, bail them out with lots of strings attached AND change the way we allow business to be done in this country. It was 'we the people' who stood by and allowed the anti trust laws to be repealed and what happend? Loads of profits and growth at first, then what? The brick wall. As greed set in, the 'players' learned how to work the system to their advantage and there were no rules in place to prevent it. Does Bob Iger deserve a 27 million dollar package to run Disney? Yes, it's a big company but there is still only so much one man can do ... And he ain't even doing a very good job!

 

[Tomader]

I support the bailout. My husband works for an auto supplier. If the big three go down so does he and many more companies. It's easy to judge if you don't have a job on the line. They need to get this money and hope it works.

 

[blanq]

1.2 Million jobs seems a bit on the low side to me. This isn't just about employees of the big three - there are also parts factories, shipping companies, insurance companies, aftermarket product suppliers and distributors, auto loan underwriters at banks and credit unions, car dealerships, mechanics, paint & body shops, tire stores, etc. All would be adversely effected if any or all of the big 3 go under or even if they file for Chapter 11.

I have heard that 1 in 10 jobs in the U.S. is connected to the auto industry, so if the Big 3 go down, so do a lot of other companies. It also has been reported that the job loss could be closer to 3 million. That's huge!

I think it is a huge risk to let the auto industry fail, but am not totally convinced that a bailout will help. I know that the last time one of the Big 3 was bailed out, the government made money on the deal. On the other hand, we have seen the airline industry survive bankruptcy, so maybe the auto industry needs to pull itself up by the bootstraps and reorganize. So, based on my wishy washy response, you can see, I have no real opinion.

 

[leahjade]

So we give them money now and what happens 10 years from now if no one still wants to buy their cars? Do we continue to subsidize and national another industry in this country? And with the unions saying "no" to the smallest cut back in salary or benefits, then let them go work at McDonalds.

 

[JARNJ3]

I voted yes. Because of the millions of jobs and............

I read somewhere that the Dept of Defense has a lot at stake with the big 3 - who's going to manufacture our tanks, missiles. equipment - etc.

 

[hopemax]

The problem is we can't afford not to. You punish not only the employees of the auto compainies but employees of all related fields and eventually evey single one of us! It's like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Not to mention, what will happen to the non-US auto makers that are doing well right now. They use the same suppliers that GM, Ford, and Chrysler use. Without the volume coming from them, what will that do for the prices that Honda, Toyota, etc will see going forward? If the supplier is even around. Can they absorb the shockwave too?

 

[mirmartinez]

Did the airlines ever payback any of the goverment money?

 

[ZephyrHawk]

No I don't support a bailout. And I work in Detroit.

 

[Colleen27]

I think if we're going to be bailing out industries (and obviously, that is the current approach), the auto industry should be at the top of the list. Every job on Wall Street creates 2 other associated job. Every auto job creates an additional four. Given that fact, I cannot fathom why our society and our government are willing to bail out the financial sector but are willing to let the automakers fail.

 

[mirmartinez]

I think if we're going to be bailing out industries (and obviously, that is the current approach), the auto industry should be at the top of the list. Every job on Wall Street creates 2 other associated job. Every auto job creates an additional four. Given that fact, I cannot fathom why our society and our government are willing to bail out the financial sector but are willing to let the automakers fail.

100% agree, I much rather bail out GM than AIG

 

[Colleen27]

It's just not that simple.

No, bailouts are not a good thing but in this case with an estimated 1.2 million jobs on the line the other alternative might possibly take us into a depression.

A few have touted to let the (so called) free market work it out, well, there is no free market and if you believe what takes place in the business world has anything do do with equal and free competition then I have a bridge in Alaska to sell you. It is primarily what got us in this mess (an unchecked market).

What needs to happen is that these bailouts must ooccur just to keep us moving BUT at the same time SERIOUS STRINGS need to be attached so there is no more corporate hanky panky. Cap executive salaries and perks until such time as the Company is able to stand on its own again (after repaying the debt).

Next the governement needs to restablish anti trust laws and corporate governance needs to be held to a higher standard. I know you on the right side of the isle will disagree with more government but I'm telling you (IMO) the system that you consiider 'free market' is broken and cannot or will not fix itself.

I agree.

Just a note, though. It is far more than 1.2 million jobs on the line. CNN has been reporting on a study that estimates the consequences of just ONE of the Big 3 failing at a loss of 2.5 million jobs, 125 billion in personal income, and 50 billion in tax revenues in one year. Regardless of how you feel about the lost of US production capacity and the movement towards a "haves and have nots" service economy, there's no denying that our economy cannot absorb that kind of blow.

 

[RitaE]

I absolutely agree that I'd send my money to help out Detroit over what has happened with AIG any day of the week.

But I still can't see any of these bailouts being successful. Detroit will not turn around until the American Auto Manufacturers start making the cars people want to buy at the price they are willing to pay. It is that simple.

So all those support jobs that are being lost... They are not losing them because they American Public doesn't want to bail them out. They are losing them because the American Auto Industry is crap.

Maybe they should start lobbying Detroit to get their act together in regards to product and cost structure rather than lobbying Congressman and Presidents To Be to start writing corporate welfare checks.

 

[vicb]

I have very strong feelings on this subject but don't want to start any arguments with my fellow dis'ers so I'll just say I voted "yes" and for the record I have lived in MI most of my life (except for a 10 year stint in New England) and my DH currently works for GM (has for 7 years)

GM has to attempt to restructure first. Good Grief, Charlie Brown, just how many of the same car do we need with different trim and name plates on them? They could save millions just by consolidating the brand into 2 or 3 different nameplates. Keep Cadillac, Chevy, and maybe Saturn. I could even see them keeping GMC, but only if they did away with the trucks in the other lines. It just doesn't make sense to me for them to have all those duplicate products out there.

Totally agree with this statement, GM is moving slowly toward this (too slowly but they did end Oldsmobile brand and have been trying to sell off Hummer)

"You can't spit in the state of MI with out hitting someone who is tied somehow to the auto industry. With our already 8.9% unemployment rate, I'm afraid even one of the big 3 going under would drag the entire state down with them."

This is so true and well stated. We've been hurting in MI for several years now. The rest of the country is just catching up with our decline unfortunately.

 

[Colleen27]

So we give them money now and what happens 10 years from now if no one still wants to buy their cars? Do we continue to subsidize and national another industry in this country? And with the unions saying "no" to the smallest cut back in salary or benefits, then let them go work at McDonalds.

I've asked this more than once and not gotten any good answers - Why single out the unions? No one wants to tell the CEOs who refuse to accept limitations on executive pay and golden parachutes to go work at McDonalds. Why is greed at the top good/acceptable, but expecting something more than a paycheck-to-paycheck life at the bottom worthy of condemnation? Why, intalking about an auto bailout, does everyone immediately go to "union greed" and never get around to mentioning that GM's CEO got a 64% RAISE in 2007 despite the company's losses? Or that Ford's CEO made close to 40 million for his first 4 MONTHS on the job in 2006?

A big part of the problem in our economy now lies in the change in the way American companies do business. And that change isn't unions demanding good health insurance and cost of living raises; it is skyrocketing corporate compensation regardless of company performance and a increasing focus on short-term profits over long-term stability. It wasn't the unions that led the Big 3 to keep building big SUVs despite the warnings about energy costs and oil supply; it was a focus on keeping the quarterly earnings high.