White House, Dems. Discuss Auto Bailout

Agreement Closer On $15B Package; Bush Insists Loans Come From Green Cars Fund

(CBS/AP)  Jolted by the loss of thousands of jobs, congressional Democrats and the White House reached for agreement Friday on about $15 billion in bailout loans for the beleaguered auto industry. President George W. Bush warned that at least one of the Big Three carmakers might not survive the current economic crisis.

Several officials in both parties said the breakthrough on a long-stalled bailout came after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi bowed to Bush's demand that the aid come from a fund set aside for the production of environmentally friendlier cars. The California Democrat spoke to White House chief of staff Josh Bolten during the day to signal her change in position, they added.

Congressional budget analysts have said tapping the fuel-efficiency program for a broader auto bailout would net only $7.5 billion in short-term cash but amended that to say adjustments were possible that could double that amount. Pelosi and environmentalists had opposed making use of those funds. Instead, they wanted the administration to take money from a $700 billion financial industry bailout that cleared Congress last fall.

Pelosi's office issued a statement saying legislation would come to a vote in the House next week. The Senate is also scheduled to be in session to consider steps to aid Detroit's Big Three.

"Congress will insist that any legislation include rigorous and ongoing oversight to guarantee that taxpayers are protected and that resources are directed to ensure the long-term viability and competitiveness of the American automobile industry," Pelosi's statement said.

Officials in both parties also said the legislation would include creation of a trustee or group of industry overseers to make sure the bailout funds were used by General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC for their intended purpose. The funds are designed to last until March, giving the incoming Obama administration and the new Congress time to consider the issue anew.

The developments came as desperate auto executives pleaded for a second day with lawmakers for loans to help them survive, and the government reported the worst single month's job loss in 34 years.

Employers slashed 533,000 jobs in November, shooting the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent, the Labor Department reported Friday.

Separately, GM announced it will cut shifts at factories in Lordstown, Ohio, Orion Township, Mich., and Oshawa, Ontario, in February as a result of slumping auto sales. About 2,000 jobs were involved, bringing the year's total to 11,000.

At the White House, Bush declared the economy was in a recession, and he urged a gridlocked Congress to act quickly on a multibillion-dollar industry bailout - with taxpayer protections.

"We are going to have to have some give here," replied Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, a senior House Democrat, expressing optimism that compromise might be possible. It wasn't clear whether he was prodding Bush or Pelosi with his comments, but Republicans said there had been no lessening in Bush's refusal to tap the $700 billion financial industry bailout fund to help the automakers.

There were also fresh calls during the day for the Federal Reserve to come to the rescue of the Big Three, possibly in the form of low-cost loans. And Frank said he had talked with Tim Geithner, President-elect Barack Obama's choice for treasury secretary, a possible sign of involvement by the incoming administration.

"I am concerned about the viability of the automobile companies," a somber Bush said.

The president added, "I'm concerned about those who work for the automobile companies and their families. And likewise, I am concerned about taxpayer money being provided to those companies that may not survive." Bush did not elaborate, but executives at both GM and Chrysler have warned that their storied corporations could collapse by year's end.

---

Web Exclusive: GM Dealers Feel Pinch

---

The chief executives of GM, Ford and Chrysler, testified for a second day before Congress in support of their plea for a $34 billion bailout in the form of loans. "We believe this is the least costly alternative," Chrysler chief executive Bob Nardelli said.

For the day, at least, their appeals were overtaken by the severity of the job loss figures.

Frank said repeatedly that the unemployment statistics had quieted talk of allowing one or more of the automakers to go bankrupt.

"I think it's fair to say that the jobs report today, this disastrous jobs report, has heightened the interest in doing something." With trademark wit, he added, "If we are lucky we will come out with a bill here that nobody likes, because any bill that any individual liked couldn't pass."

Chrysler President Jim Press suggested the market for the Big Three's cars could evaporate quickly without emergency aid.

"All this talk of bankruptcy has caused our customers and our suppliers to have a lack of confidence, we've got to restore that confidence," Press said on CBS' The Early Show. "By the first quarter, we could run into difficulty paying our bills."

And President-elect Barack Obama wasn't stepping forward with an alternative. Frank, who has been dealing with both the financial bailout and the auto rescue proposal as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said Obama is "going to have to be more assertive than he's been."

Bush renewed his call for Congress to rewrite an existing $25 billion program intended to help the industry make more fuel-efficient vehicles. But the president did not explicitly foreclose other options, and Republican aides said the White House might be open to some sort of compromise.

Absent an agreement, the Senate appeared likely to convene next week for a series of votes on various alternatives, all of which would be doomed to failure. Any measure would require a 60-vote majority, an impossibility barring an agreement that involves both parties.

Nardelli, GM chief executive Rick Wagoner and Ford CEO Alan Mulally all drove to Washington this week with detailed plans describing how their companies would use loans to make their industry more competitive in the long run, material that congressional leaders had demanded as a condition for considering a bailout bill.

Repentant after a botched first crack at bailout pleas, the companies' executives said they were willing to overhaul their companies and own up to past errors.

"We made mistakes, which we're learning from," GM chief Rick Wagoner said. Ford CEO Alan Mulally also acknowledged big missteps, saying his company's approach once was "If you build it, they will come."

United Auto Workers union President Ron Gettelfinger, aligned with the industry in pressing for the aid, told senators that any kind of bankruptcy, even a prepackaged one, was not "a viable option." Gettelfinger said consumers would not buy autos from bankrupt companies, no matter the terms of the arrangement.

He also warned that without action by Congress: "I believe we could lose General Motors by the end of this month."

It wasn't enough for some skeptics.

"I don't know how they're going to make it," Sen. Richard C. Shelby, R-Ala., said of the auto makers.

Shelby said Chapter 11 bankruptcy was their way to stay in business. Asked Friday morning on CBS whether there was anything the auto executives could say to change his mind about government aid, Shelby said: "Absolutely not."

[niceface19]

no bail out for these billionaires what so ever, they did so much harm to our economy by producing those gas guzzlers that killed so many people on the streets.

[firehose12]

"We''re looking at a death sentence" for the auto companies, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., the Senate Banking Committee chairman

*************

The only death sentance will be to taxpayers if you bloated Congressmen approve a bloated auto bailout.

Leave it to dumbfvck Democrats to screw things up.

[craigh9]

Why does our gov''t feel the need to re-create the wheel. Chapter 11 Bankruptcy affords all the protection, oversight, and flexibility to allow the big 3 to survive.
All the government needs do is give an assurrance that if financing cannot be obtained through banks in that senerio - THEN the government could provide that money THROUGH the bankruptcy process.
The concept that people will not buy cars from a company that is in bankruptcy is absurd. There is NO EVIDENCE in the history of so many comapnies that have gone that route that it is even remotely true. If consumer confidence will not allow the public to buy at that time - what in the world do the BIg 3 see as a difference maker when they are in front of congress with their hat in thier hand looking for bailout money. Either way there is no gaurantee that the companies will survive so the consumer confidence issue will impact them no matter how this unfolds

[docpeter1953]

From the above title, ''Auto Bailout May Be Tied To Big 3 Overhaul: Congress May Demand Restructuring Of Automakers In Exchange For $34B Rescue Package''

_________________

May be tied? May demand?

How about WILL BE REQUIRED IF!

[rrozsa-2009]

As a consumer, I would be a whole lot more likely to buy an auto from a company that is restructured and overhauled through Chapter 11 than from one who just receives a great big bailout and then continues their same practices which have failed for them in the past. For one thing, Chapter 11 could get them out of those union contracts which have inflated the American auto prices out of existence. They need to start back from square one. UAW has become a huge burden and is no longer needed in this day and age. We have OSHA now to enforce humane work conditions.

[nolalou]

Why does our gov''''t feel the need to re-create the wheel. Chapter 11 Bankruptcy affords all the protection, oversight, and flexibility to allow the big 3 to survive.

Posted by craigh9

The big problem with that approach, is recent polls show about 30% of Americans would not buy a car from a company in Bankruptcy. Would you spend 20 thousand or more on a car, if the company might not exist a year from now? Where you you get warranty service or parts?

[rrozsa-2009]

to nolalou - Did people stop making advance travel reservations on airlines that went through bankruptcy a few years back? Do you think people will buy cars from these companies without the bailout, knowing that they are likely to be back in the same situation in a few months? Then what?

[rrozsa-2009]

Sorry, I meant will people buy cars from the companies WITH the bailout, WITHOUT restructuring through Chapter 11....

[condumbistan]

Any bailout for Big Auto must be tied to them making ONLY more fuel efficient HYBRID and ELECTRIC cars, PERIOD!

[craigh9]

The big problem with that approach, is recent polls show about 30% of Americans would not buy a car from a company in Bankruptcy. Would you spend 20 thousand or more on a car, if the company might not exist a year from now? Where you you get warranty service or parts?

Posted by nolalou at 10:42 AM : Dec 05, 2008

There a number of misnomers going around about this. I believe these nuumbers are manufactured by those that would benefit most by the findings. Americans buy what they need within the confines of what they can afford. Through Chapter 11 the Big 3 could offer those $30K vehicles that are not selling now at $24,000 and many people would jump at the chance to save $6K up front and run the risk of difficulty down the road.
The other absurd notion floating is that closure of any of the big three means EVERYTHING GOES AWAY - which is nonsense. The first thing they would do if they are going out of business is to sell off their assets and without doubt many entrepeneurs would step forward to purchase pieces that they could run profitably - specifically parts and overall popular vehicle manufacturing.
Everyone is in this all or nothing mentality trying to sway their personal position - fact is the "ancillary concerns" would occur but will most certainly be managed through opportunity for others to get involved and run profitable businesses.

[mrmeatspin]

They did until the Republicon Congress of 1995 eliminated all fuel economy standards. Every American made SUV you see on the road is a result of Republicon deregulation of fuel economy standards.

Posted by ConDumbistan at 10:51 AM : Dec 05, 2008
+ report abuse

*****************

and that in mind, is that why most liberals in liberal california BOUGHT THE BIGGEST SUV on the planet????

and of course liberals needs a law to tell them what to think..what to buy and what to do

[mrmeatspin]

Any bailout for Big Auto must be tied to them making ONLY more fuel efficient HYBRID and ELECTRIC cars, PERIOD!

Posted by Condumbistan at 10:48 AM : Dec 05, 2008
+ report abuse

*********
you are too stupid to understand the real problem here..

take away the problem ..which is the management and the work force..OR ELSE you would have a company the make the worst managed THE MOST EXPENSIVE HYBRID AND ELECTRIC CARS...understand it now or do you need oliver stone to make a movie explaining this to your liberal shallow arse?

[condumbistan]

Posted by MrMeatSpin
and of course liberals needs a law to tell them what to think..what to buy and what to do

I know for fact that all those Californians in SUV''s are all Republicons. All Americans need restrictions of what they can buy, especially when the end result harms society and the planet as a whole, and even more so when a similar product accomplishes the same thing with less harm to the planet. As far as what to think and do, the Republicon Evangelical Freaks are professionals at restricting our personal freedoms and choices.

[soose95]

I''m hearing a lot of plans to comply with this bailout however, the tidbit that''s always missing is substantial cut at the top.

Don''t tell me that agreeing to a $1 annual salary means anything since we''ve been taught so well, that "perks and payoffs" can be embedded so deeply that no one can ever find them, except the one receiving them.

[firehose12]

I know for fact that all those Californians in SUV''''s are all Republicons. All Americans need restrictions of what they can buy, especially when the end result harms society and the planet as a whole, and even more so when a similar product accomplishes the same thing with less harm to the planet. As far as what to think and do, the Republicon Evangelical Freaks are professionals at restricting our personal freedoms and choices.

Posted by Condumbistan at 11:03 AM : Dec 05, 2008

I am a Democrat and have a Chevy Suburban 10 mi to the gallon, a V8 truck maybe 12 miles to the gallon, a Boat etc...

I go to church ? I do not feel any restrictions on anything ?

You point is pretty soft at best. I dont think as society we need to point fingers. Our own party Democrats want to spend our kids future on an Auto bailout - I say No !

How about you ?

[firehose12]

I know for fact that all those Californians in SUV''''''''s are all Republicons. All Americans need restrictions of what they can buy, especially when the end result harms society and the planet as a whole, and even more so when a similar product accomplishes the same thing with less harm to the planet. As far as what to think and do, the Republicon Evangelical Freaks are professionals at restricting our personal freedoms and choices.

Posted by Condumbistan at 11:03 AM : Dec 05, 2008

I am a Democrat and have a Chevy Suburban, 10 mi to the gallon, a V8 truck maybe 12 miles to the gallon, a Boat etc...

I go to church ? I do not feel any restrictions on anything ?

Your point is pretty soft at best. I dont think as society we need to point fingers. Our own party Democrats want to spend our kids future on an Auto bailout - I say No !

How about you ?

[craigh9]

The need for "GREEN" and higher MPG issues are extremely important in their own right but are simply not part of the current issue.
If we mandated that the whole focus needed to be on electric cars we would need a bailout plan in the $100''s of Billions since that technology will not be profitable for years. Do we need to get there - yes, but the issue is short term survival. The way to do that is cut cost to cut MSRP''s on vehicles to sway the public back to considering purchasing at this time and within the big 3. A Bridge Loan will make that very difficult as all it does is have money being spent while people talk about how to accomplish the goal.
Chapter 11 ASSURERS the necessary changes occur quickly and provides the protection, flexibility, and financing options necessary to survive and then ultimately thrive in the future.

[condumbistan]

The GOP Congress of 1995 eliminated all fuel economy standards, thus creating the 12 mpg SUV and 11 mpg pickup trucks. GOP anarchy and deregulation are the cause of all that now ails every sector of the US economy. Republicons tried this same scam in the 1920s, thus leading to the Great Depression. ONe thing that we can all count on from Republicons, is since they never read, they are bound to reapeat their failed past. The fools that put Republicons in power beginning in 1981 are too ignorant to go through life unregulated. These pigs need restictions imposed upon them, for the good of America society.

[qutlaw104]

Gary Ackerman
He told the automakers they faced "the fury of the American public" and that was making it harder for Congress to reach a consensus.

I don''t know why he is concerned about public opiion, they have never shown cocern before.

[FHMullane]

They have to change. The Big Three''s CEOs are too arrogant and are married to their ideas. Those ideas don''t work. Bring in new advisors and get America''s car industry back on track. We were once an industrial leader... Have we dumbed down this much that we cannot get it back... it does require people to WORK HARD and make some sacrifices... like not buying every piece of *** that China sends over here and living within their means.... duh...

[condumbistan]

Posted by fhmullane
Bring in new advisors and get Americas car industry back on track.

Bring in Al Gore as the new US auto czar, but only after Big US Auto is forced into some sort of prearranged managed bankruptcy.

[glenn_lewis]

As part of its first bailout, the government negotiated options to buy up to 1.2 billion shares of common bank stock that was valued at $27 billion. These are options that were allowed to expire BECAUSE OF FALLING STOCK VALUES. Taxpayer just loses $27b. ACCOUNTABILITY IS OF THE ESSENCE.

[mycommentspg]

Cut salaries, cut out bonuses, cut fluff jobs, cut other expenses, make more fuel efficient vehicles. Never mind, that would make sense and be out of the question.

[nolalou]

I agree with the NY times editorial on conditions congress should impose in order to approve a loan to the big 3 auto makers (it''s a loan, not a bailout!), which states in part

"For starters, it must demand that the three companies%u2019 top executives resign. Only new management can enforce the deep cultural change needed to overhaul the industry. And, it must impose real, enforceable environmental rules. The European Union is aiming for a fleetwide fuel-economy of 50 miles per gallon in 2015. In the United States, Congress last year enacted a target of 35 miles per gallon by 2020."

From the news today:

The government says employers axed 533,000 jobs in November, the most in 34 years, and the unemployment rate rose to 6.7 percent.

Add anywhere from 100,000 to 3.5 million to that number.

Keep *** around and that''s exactly what you''re looking out.

Stop trying to "redesign" the industry if you have no clue of how the automotive industry actually works, with lead times, requirements for cash flow and credit. CEO salraies have *** little affect on multi-billion dollar corporations.

The problem here is the credit market at the moment which translates into sales and operating capital. Normal time any of these makers could go to lenders and get the cash they need.

By the way it''s not a "bailout" folks it''s a request for a loan with interest that at the moment can''t be had anywhere but through the govt, not just here but other countries.

Make the *** loan, stop f''ing around. The next job could be yours.

[arnldmartin]

I must be missing the point here!We gave 700 billion dollars to the banking system whose overwhelming greed got us into this in the first place but we can''t give 34 billion to the carmakers to survive so we can maybe save 1.5 million jobs????I say let the banking system fail and save the automakers jobs.

[torva-2009]

Posted by Condumbistan at 11:25 AM : Dec 05, 2008

It really is irrelevant that congress eliminated fuel efficiency standards back in 1995.

The responsibility for gas guzzling cars rests with the consumers that continued to buy them despite early indications that oil prices will continually flucuate (actually rising more with increase demand), warnings about the environment, and the fact that these consumers have/had a high tolerance for poorly made products and a misguided sense of patriotism - buy American brands despite that a majority of materials used to make American brands are actually imported.

And despite concrete evidence of the weakiness in our gas and diesal supplies and production, as evidence by what happened to gas prices after Hurricane Katria...American consumers continued to indulge themselves with inefficient vehicles...

It is absolutely ludicrous to think congress is going watch out for consumer...

People need to take responsibility for their own actions and stop with the expectation that the government is going to take care of us, especially considering how we as a society don''t like paying for taxes that would be needed so the government could provide services!

[torva-2009]

If you want a bailout...then close the overseas plants, rebuild/relocate them here in the U.S. and hire the American workforce so we will have more taxpaying taxpayers so the government will money to lend!

NO BULL OR NO MONEY...and the CEOs and the board of directors must resign without the golden parachutes!

[sly_64]

Buy an American made car, it''ll fall apart in 3 years so you have to buy another car. Buy a forign car and it''ll last for at least 10 years. Give me a figggin break. Stop this madness now !!! If they made a halfway decent product, the public would bail them out by buying cars.

[edward1975-2009]

Do not give them dime one till all other avenues are exhausted. Taxpayers monies are not to be used for those who run their businesses into the ground. These bailouts are nothing but CEO''s trying to keep their failed business practices and high salaries intact.

[manolakas-2009]

Give me a break about the foriegn quality! I''ve owned Ford and Lincoln cars my entire life and NEVER had a problem. Yes Toyota & Honda make quality cars, but the rest of the forign makers have had serious problems with quality (i.e., Nissan, Mercedes, Volkswagon, etc.). Now that Toyota has become so large, they also having some problems with certain cars. It''s not hard to confirm this, just go to JD Powers or Consumer Report.

[koyt1]

To the Big 3 and the UAW - everyone else in the country are sick of your salaries, wages, pensions, and being paid to stay home. No one that I know has any confidence in purchasing an automobile manufactured by you. I do not want my tax money going to you just to see you back in one year wanting more.

[sly_64]

Give me a break about the foriegn quality! I''''ve owned Ford and Lincoln cars my entire life and NEVER had a problem. Yes Toyota & Honda make quality cars, but the rest of the forign makers have had serious problems with quality (i.e., Nissan, Mercedes, Volkswagon, etc.). Now that Toyota has become so large, they also having some problems with certain cars. It''''s not hard to confirm this, just go to JD Powers or Consumer Report.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by manolakas

My point is you should not have to buy a new car every 3 years, like the auto makers want you to.

[unlresources]

When is enough, enough. This started off as a meager $25 billion dollar proposition, then a $34 billion one, now I hear it''s jumped to over $60 billion and this is the first step since the Big 3 will come calling again so this will cost easily $100-200 billion in the long run. If the Big 3 want to save the industry, tighten your belts. Cut the salary of assembly workers in half, lose the job bank incentive, take an early retirement, go back to school for re-training, and quit paying your dues to the Automotive Mafia (UAW). It''s to the point now where do you cut your pay keep your job or watch your job disappear forever because you''re over-paid. Will an automotive worker take a pay cut to save their job and the automotive industry? I doubt it!!

[terrorislame]

Top Reasons to NEVER Vote RepubliCON

They HATE Working People !
They Hate the idea of workers having Rights !
They think everybody should be Happy to Serve them.
They think the constitution is to be like Charmin.
They take a Wide-Stance against Human Rights !
They want to pollute every stream,Kill every animal and rape all land to make more money.
They want to award Huge contracts to their friends in business without accountability.
They would rather tell a lie on credit before telling the truth for cash.
They only want to obey laws that they choose to.
They only want to count the votes that favor them.
They use hypocrisy,bigotry and fear tactics daily.
They are the Scum of the earth and should be used as bio-fuel.


They Love Big Companies !

[cowman290]

I hope there is no bailout unless there is a complete restructure including the biggest expense, labor. What the UAW demanded and the companies agreed to is ridiculous. Union labor seems to be the sacred cow that no one in Washington wants to openly discuss. That is why there is no support for a bailout amongst the majority of US citizens. Someone stated in a previous post that Obama must full fill an IOU based on campaign rhetoric to the UAW. I sure hope not.

[odinnasgaard]

My point is you should not have to buy a new car every 3 years, like the auto makers want you to.

Posted by sly_64 at 12:59 PM : Dec 05, 2008

I don''t know of many people who buy a new car every 3 years. I know people who lease cars and get new ones every 2 years, and most of those are foreign cars (Mercedes, Lexus, etc). My newest American made car is 5 years old, and I have another one that is 12 years old. Nothing wrong with either one. I can walk around the parking lot at work here and the new cars I see in the lot are mostly foreign made, a few older Hondas, and a lot of older Dodge, Chevy and Fords. I don''t know where you get the idea that American made cars only last 3 years.

[mbourn2]

Top Reasons to NEVER Vote RepubliCON

They HATE Working People ! --- We ARE the working people. We don''t expect Government to take care of us.

They Hate the idea of workers having Rights --- Workers should have the right to contract with an employer for what ever the MARKET value of their job is. If a legal American citizen is willing to do the job for less then it would be irresponsible for a company to pay more for no reason.... Thats how you get compans that need bailouts... Just ask the UAW.

They think everybody should be Happy to Serve them. --- No idea what this means. I have worked since I was 10 and am offended when someone who does not even try to work gets to take what I earn.

They think the constitution is to be like Charmin. --- Not sure what this means. Republicans have traditionally been strict constructionist. (look it up)

They take a Wide-Stance against Human Rights --- If that means protecting human rights around the world when Libs think we should look the other way then... Yes.... Guilty.`

I could go on.... but the post would be too long and you get the idea anyway...

[craigh9]

I must be missing the point here!We gave 700 billion dollars to the banking system whose overwhelming greed got us into this in the first place but we can''''t give 34 billion to the carmakers to survive so we can maybe save 1.5 million jobs????I say let the banking system fail and save the automakers jobs.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by arnldmartin at 12:17 PM : Dec 05, 2008

If the banks were allowed to fail EVERY major manufacturing compnay in the country would be shuttered by now - INCLUDING THE BIG 3

The difference is the financial SYSTEM is an intrical part of every bit of business in this country. The big 3, while large and certainly would cause great pain initially if they closed, only provide one type of product that would still be available - not only through other companies, but would be made available through new owners that would buy up pieces of the existing big 3 and run them profitably.
This is not an either or - there are many options in between, its just that the fat cats and the UAW that are sucking the companies dry don''t want things to change.
No help to banking would have created tremendous chaos - no help to the auto industry only creates short term manageable pain.

[be_real]

CEO''s are not worth the millions they get pay. This crisis proves it.

[demdump]

A couple of year ago I got layoff from a company , because the CEO wanted a litle more than 8% profit per quater so what did he do ? He decided to move a whole division to China and layoff my whole dept.

SO THIS IS ANY PRESIDENT FAULT ??????ANY ONE.

I''m telling you all the CEO''s here are the one to blame..

[acadianasoun]

No more bailouts not even for the big three.Uncle Sam should send the taxpayers that money.The country would be in great shape with in weeks.Thats the bailout this country needs.Besides it''s our money.We should get it instead of giving it away to to these big shots.They will never pay this back they are already to far in the hole to every come . Take my word some of these car companies will be closed with or without a bailout loan.Please don''t throw away our money.

[mbourn2]

A couple of year ago I got layoff from a company , because the CEO wanted a litle more than 8% profit per quater so what did he do ? He decided to move a whole division to China and layoff my whole dept.

SO THIS IS ANY PRESIDENT FAULT ??????ANY ONE.

I''''m telling you all the CEO''''s here are the one to blame..


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Demdump
-----------
"Blame"? A CEO has a fiduciary obligation to the share holders of his corporation. If he can move part of his operation to a more business friendly environment then he has a duty to do so. I live in Minnesota and South Dakota runs adds on Twin Cities Radio every day trying to get companies to relocate across the boarder because of the tax benefits..... guess what... it works.

[ramos937]

I am aginist the auto bailout because of the below:

Ford - Ford has stated many times that it is profitable but wants the money only for insurance purposes.

Chrysler - Chrysler is owned by Cerberus Capital Management, NYC. Cerberus owns many companies here and aboard. It is capitalized at over $24 billion. It will not come to Chrysler''s rescue because it wants us to do that. If Chrysler does become profitable somehow, Cerberus stands to make billions.

GM - In the late 70s, Lee Iocacca took a number of steps to rescue Chrysler then: (1) went under Chapter 11 and renegotiated contracts with the UAW and other folks, (2) the US guaranteed borrowings. These borrowings were later paid back. (3) sold many unprofitable assets, etc. As we all know, Chrysler returned to profitability and Lee was a hero then. Why cannot GM do the same? Lee showed the way.

[demdump]

boarder because of the tax benefits..... guess what... it works.

Posted by mbourn2

If this is works for more profits but we will lost alot of jobs, do you think this is ok to do this and if you calculated 100,000 companies to do this we all will be out of works and the Chinese will have more money to screws us, do you think this is ok ????

To the Big 3 and the UAW - everyone else in the country are sick of your salaries, wages, pensions, and being paid to stay home.

Posted by Koyt1 at 12:53 PM : Dec 05, 2008

You mean like a real job should be VS what we bought into as "competetive world economy wages"?

Do the math with the government current cost calculator. Say in 1974 you made $10.00 per hour today to mantain the same standard of living you need to make $43.61 and what are the UAW guys making per hour not counting benefits? Less than that. If in 1970 you made minimum wage you now need to make 9.72 per hour. What is minimum now? 7.25

In a metro area say your making 20 per hour now or 41,000 what type of house can you buy if you''ve never had one before? Even at 6 times your basic wages you could only affor a 240,000 home and you''d be tight.

Real jobs require real wages and the fact is most are not keeping up. So go ahead and blame the unions then ask how well are you doing?

Most of the gripes? Jealousy

[craigh9]

Tired of the political blow hards
- it is NOT the gov''ts job to bailout private companies
- NO WAY that the big 3 close without the bailout
- IF SOMEHOW THEY DID CLOSE - 40% of their operations would be back up and running withing 6 months and another 40% within another 12 months due to REAL business people buying the pieces and running them profitably- yes, thats a 20% reduction, but that is the MINIMUM redcution required to make the Big 3 profitable. Do we want 18 months of that pain - NO, but the bridge loan only prolongs the insanity and the pain will come anyway

[sepa2]

How about lawmakers accountability. They failed to provide leadership for so long. Carter in 1979 in his energy policy predicted energy crisis around 2000 and advise Detriot to change ways and get ready. But Reagan came everything became big (and wasteful with the full blessing of the public) and SUV era started. Bushes and Clinton did nothing and simply tow the line. Meanwhile lawmakers got millions to keep quite. Now they are acting like we told you so and is very annoying to say the least

[jsd330]

When enough is enough.
posted by unisources
I don''t know were you gpt your 60 million figure from, probobly Rush Limbaugh . What about Citigroup they came running back for more money, AIG is doing the same thing and they are an insurance company. I don''t hear anything about the employees of the banks taking a pay cut to save their jobs. I noticed you said the UAW workers should take a pay cut, what about management taking a pay cut. I am sure the suprvisors make a heck of a lot more then the workers do. Some people I know work at both GM & Ford, and they have all said they would be willing to take a pay cut, and they have taken pay freezes in the past and were supposed to get bonuses at the end of the year based on profits. Well the companies screwed them on that . They hid their true profits.
From my understanding if they cut their pay in half they would make about 13.00 per hour. At the toyota plant in Kentucky the workers make 25.00 per hour. I say let them freeze their wages until everyone else catches up, give them the loan, if your going to bailout insurance companies with their over inflated policy prices whats the difference.

[trying8]

I am not sure I am for the bailout either, but as I work in a dealership for one of the BIG 3 it will directly affect me. One point is we dont HAVE to buy new cars every three years we want to. That seems to be the problem we all want bigger better more all the time. Housing crisis because people who really couldnt afford a bigger better house got a bank to loan them that money and now we are being asked to take care of that problem. Not one of the bankers or insurance companies were grilled in front of America as to why this happened. Yet everyone seems to be taking delight in the process of running these compainies through the mud first. Only after they were spending our tax dollars on lavish vacations did we cry foul and that seems to have died down. Do we know what they are doing now??? Anyone watching them???
I agree that the Big 3 have dropped the ball in many areas but quite honestly this public flogging of these corporations is not doing the little guys (individual dealerships) any good. Not only the auto workers and Big 3 corporate execs are going to be affected..