Topic: where is my friggin bailout!?

[333]

IMO if the government decides on a bail out, the Big 3 need to be required to re-write their business plans to align them with long-term profitability - which may mean, reducing their product lines, reduce their multi-billion dollar ad campaigns, cut executive salaries and BONUSES, produce vehicles that are highly fuel efficient (30 MPGs highway is a joke), bring home (back to the US) plants that are over the border, buy US made steel and parts (which will create more US businesses and JOBS).

Most of that has already been agreed to.  But the cost of bringing even one plant would cost more than they're asking for.  I'd like to see them ask the Feds to stop the state tax credits the transplants get.  That would certainly level the playing field a bit by giving the transplants a bit more costs, and making them raise their prices so the Big 3 won't be so easily undercut.  The quality of the products are fairly close at this point.  Why should the Japanese have an advantage?  If the tax credits go away, and the UAW comes to it's senses, I'd call that a pretty even field.

[KeithTurk]

I'm concerned about the Steel companies... but they also didn't figure out how to compete with overseas markets...  same with our car companies... if you can't compete you lose... and not on my dime...

Do I think we need to garuntee loans which might end up on my dime... sure... it's about getting past a rough patch where American's ( myself included ) are keeping perfectly functioning vehicles because of an uncertain ecomomy...  Why incur an expense when you don't "need" to.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens in the next 6 months...

[edbikerii]

I know this is a highly emotional issue, and I don't support bailouts of ANY KIND for ANY business, but out of fairness I think it should be pointed out that the government is not just giving this money away.  These proposed "bailouts", just like the AIG "bailout", will involve large loans that come with very high interest rates and short payment terms (AIG is supposed to pay some 12%/year and pay back in 5 years, I think).

That said, the real question is whether the companies will survive and be able to pay those loans back.

[ekim98]

IMO if the government decides on a bail out, the Big 3 need to be required to re-write their business plans to align them with long-term profitability - which may mean, reducing their product lines, reduce their multi-billion dollar ad campaigns, cut executive salaries and BONUSES, produce vehicles that are highly fuel efficient (30 MPGs highway is a joke), bring home (back to the US) plants that are over the border, buy US made steel and parts (which will create more US businesses and JOBS).

Most of that has already been agreed to.  But the cost of bringing even one plant would cost more than they're asking for.  I'd like to see them ask the Feds to stop the state tax credits the transplants get.  That would certainly level the playing field a bit by giving the transplants a bit more costs, and making them raise their prices so the Big 3 won't be so easily undercut.  The quality of the products are fairly close at this point.  Why should the Japanese have an advantage?  If the tax credits go away, and the UAW comes to it's senses, I'd call that a pretty even field.

 I'm probably wrong but didn't harley get something similar when the jap bikes really started to sell good. Tariffs were imposed and all harley did was raise their prices. And the jap bike manufactures were probably happy as pig's in S++T. They made twice as much per bike and it was our smart government that made us pay more. Did we get a better harley product, some think harley improved, but to me the only improved harley was the v-rod and that had nothing to do with the tariff's and it didn't sell very good. Let the free market determend whom stays in business and keep the government out of free interprise. As far as the union's, well I won't even bother going there, other than to say in IMO just another form of big brother that we would be better off with not having any more. Their no longer what they we're founded for and have no senses to come to.

[edbikerii]

Oh, by the way, senator Shelby (R) from Alabama is really pushing against the big 3 "bailouts" because Mercedes-Benz makes a whole lot of cars in his state, employing lots of workers.  He'd love to see Merceds-Benz get more sales and the big 3 get less.

Personally, I'm against bailouts because I think they are bad for business long-term, but Shelby has other motives, and that bothers me even more.

Of course, the fact that Mercedes-Benz manufactures so many cars in Alabama kind of blurs the definition of "American Manufacturer", doesn't it?

[edbikerii]

I may be wrong, but I thought that the tariffs on the Japanese were on bikes over 750cc.  That caused the reduction of the CB750 to 700cc for a couple years so that the Japanese could avoid the tariffs.

IMO if the government decides on a bail out, the Big 3 need to be required to re-write their business plans to align them with long-term profitability - which may mean, reducing their product lines, reduce their multi-billion dollar ad campaigns, cut executive salaries and BONUSES, produce vehicles that are highly fuel efficient (30 MPGs highway is a joke), bring home (back to the US) plants that are over the border, buy US made steel and parts (which will create more US businesses and JOBS).

Most of that has already been agreed to.  But the cost of bringing even one plant would cost more than they're asking for.  I'd like to see them ask the Feds to stop the state tax credits the transplants get.  That would certainly level the playing field a bit by giving the transplants a bit more costs, and making them raise their prices so the Big 3 won't be so easily undercut.  The quality of the products are fairly close at this point.  Why should the Japanese have an advantage?  If the tax credits go away, and the UAW comes to it's senses, I'd call that a pretty even field.

 I'm probably wrong but didn't harley get something similar when the jap bikes really started to sell good. Tariffs were imposed and all harley did was raise their prices. And the jap bike manufactures were probably happy as pig's in S++T. They made twice as much per bike and it was our smart government that made us pay more. Did we get a better harley product, some think harley improved, but to me the only improved harley was the v-rod and that had nothing to do with the tariff's and it didn't sell very good. Let the free market determend whom stays in business and keep the government out of free interprise. As far as the union's, well I won't even bother going there, other than to say in IMO just another form of big brother that we would be better off with not having any more. Their no longer what they we're founded for and have no senses to come to.

[ekim98]

I may be wrong, but I thought that the tariffs on the Japanese were on bikes over 750cc.  That caused the reduction of the CB750 to 700cc for a couple years so that the Japanese could avoid the tariffs.

 I believe you are correct , but didn't the cost of Honda's take a good jump in priceabout that time also. But that may have been do to our pollution restrictions.

[firecracker]

Directive 10-289 is coming...





           Read Atlas Shrugged.




(I recommend you read The Fountainhead first).

[333]

The tarriffs on 750s was in the early 80s, when all bike sales had slumped bigtime.  The Japanese had 3 and 4 year old bikes, brand new sitting on dealer floors.  All bike sales were down.  But Harley convinced Congress that it was the 750 and larger Japanese bikes that were to blame, so the tarriffs were instituted.  As I see it, it was a case of protectionism, allowing Harley to not build what Americans wanted(a little variety- something other than a v-twin cruiser).

The tarriffs also came at a time when the Japanese were trying to circumvent the high tax cost of importing their products.  They reduced the import taxes by importing cars with no accessories or options.  They then imported these items as parts, lessening the import taxes, and had dealers install things like A/C and radios.  This lowered the tax cost, but did not end it.  It was around then they found out that the only way around import taxes was to build vehicles here

The difference between this scenario and the current auto crises is that Harley didn't (doesn't) want to change the way they do business.  The Big 3, on the other hand, want to change.  They're scared that they will not be around much longer, and all the protectionism in the world won't help them out of this mess.  That, and all the public outcry for green, alternative fuel, hybrid, electric...  They know they need to change, and they don't need Congress to tell them that.  Unfortunately for them, they still need to listen to Congress tell them how to change if they are going to get the loans they need.  But they should ask Congress to stop the tax credits the transplants get.  Those states need the money anyway, with the lack of tax revenue from real estate because of the record home foreclosures.

[putnaja1]

Here's what I want to know..

Why is it that if you wanted to buy a small, fuel efficient car, you end up having to choose between a Chevy Cavalier (now called Cobalt?), or a Honda Civic?  Which car would 99.9% of the population choose?  Which car is hands down more stylish, better on gas, more reliable?  I'm betting 99% of people would pick a Honda Civic.

This country has smart people.  This country has stylish people.  Where the heck were they when the Cobalt was being designed?  What kinda ridiculous styling bullcrap is that?  What gives with the Pontiac Aztec?  What an ugly pile that car is as well!  This is why the American cars are in trouble!  The only stylish cars they seem to make (like a 'Vette or a Viper) are not mainstream market cars, unlike a Civic which is cheap, economical, and stylish. 

Look at Apple Macintosh computers..  They are more expensive, and they are proprietary tech and therefore are more expensive to run over time.  BUT, they are works of art, that work well, and people are willing to pay a premium for them, just because they WANT TO OWN ONE.  While not 100% made in USA, the Macs are designed in the USA.  Why aren't these guys making cars?  Why can't USA car companies make a car that people want to own???

[heffay]

well put naja    much agreed!

[333]

I would just say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  I would choose the Cobalt over the Honda.As far as the Aztec is concerned, I don't think they make it anymore.  It was certainly different.  Every design isn't always a winner, but how will you really know if you don't push the envelope?  You have to break some eggs to make an omelet.

I can only speculate on the Mac thing.  Or at least a theory.  With every election since I've been an adult, We've seen that negative ads work.  And I would characterise their current ads as just that.  They don't tell you too much about how good their product is, they just tell you how bad Vista is.  That wouldn't be so bad if it were true, but I have 2 computers here running Vista, and have never had a single glitch.  As far as the hardware goes, they are about the same.  My daughter has Macs, we used to have Macs.  They suffer from the same problems.  Apple just uses different terminology.

[edbikerii]

Yeah, I quite like the appearance of the Chevy Cobalt, although I think the sedan looks more refined than the coupe.  The coupe's taillights make it look more like a kid's car, which is the point, after all, isn't it?

[boatsdickson]

[Grumpol]

I`d love to get a decent size image of this one

[heffay]

u guys are taking putnaja's examples to literally... you're using them as if they represent wholly what he's trying to say, while they do not.

yes, you like the cobalt better.... maybe you even like american cars more... that means you're one of the few.  beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but most beholders are choosing the other.

its not about specific wants, it is about what is wanted after you count up all the wants and don't wants... its like you're saying your vote counts per individual when voting for the president when really the stats are narrowed down to the electoral college.
 

[edbikerii]

You know, you can argue taste all you want.  I'm not buying a damned Civic.  It is an ugly little #$%*-box with no dignity.  For the same price, I can get a nice, well appointed, Ford Fusion.

I test drove the Accord before I bought my Taurus in 2000, too.  The Accord was smaller, less comfortable, had fewer amenities, and cost almost $5000 more than the similarly-equipped Taurus.  Also, the Honda dealer refused to negotiate on price, claiming that "we don't need to haggle, Honda's sell themselves".  Well I guess that one must have sold itself to someone else, 'cause I'm not that dumb.

I've bought 3 brand new American cars in the last 8 years (two were leases), and I like them better.  They handle better, they feel better, they look better, and they are of superb quality.  I've never had ANY failures with any of them, outside of regular wear-and-tear items like brake pads and tires.

Prior to that, in 1998, I bought a used '94 Ford Probe, which has happily accumulated over 200K miles with no major failures.  I replaced the starter motor once, at 95K miles, and the CV joint failed at about 125K miles.  Certainly nothing to complain about in terms of quality.  Oh, I forgot, my X-wife burned out the clutch at 70,000 miles, but you can hardly blame the car or the manufacturer for her stupidity.  The Ford Dealer replaced it for $600, including parts and labor.  No biggie.  Yes, the Probe was a slightly re-styled and re-badged Mazda MX-6, but frankly, the Probe looks better than the MX-6, and it cost less, too.

Too many people are just stuck thinking in the 1980's, when American cars weren't so good.  Times are different now.

u guys are taking putnaja's examples to literally... you're using them as if they represent wholly what he's trying to say, while they do not.

yes, you like the cobalt better.... maybe you even like american cars more... that means you're one of the few.  beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but most beholders are choosing the other.

its not about specific wants, it is about what is wanted after you count up all the wants and don't wants... its like you're saying your vote counts per individual when voting for the president when really the stats are narrowed down to the electoral college.
 

[tbpmusic]

I think we'll probably see that the Big Three will recover nicely, once they've managed to break the UAW.
They've been longing for that for decades, now they'll have the government's blessing.

I'm not a communist, or even anti-union - but it does seem the UAW has pushed the envelope when you consider the salaries and benefits that line workers get.
I've heard anywhere from $57-$70 per hour average - no wonder they can't compete.
Seems like it's progressed beyond not exploiting the workers to where the company itself is being exploited.


There has to be a happy medium between protecting the workers and enabling the companies to actually compete in a world market.

I'm not denying that it would help, of course, to make a product that matches the Jap's quality.

Just my thoughts.....


bill2

[putnaja1]

You know, you can argue taste all you want.  I'm not buying a damned Civic.  It is an ugly little #$%*-box with no dignity.  For the same price, I can get a nice, well appointed, Ford Fusion.

I test drove the Accord before I bought my Taurus in 2000, too.  The Accord was smaller, less comfortable, had fewer amenities, and cost almost $5000 more than the similarly-equipped Taurus.  Also, the Honda dealer refused to negotiate on price, claiming that "we don't need to haggle, Honda's sell themselves".  Well I guess that one must have sold itself to someone else, 'cause I'm not that dumb.

Granted- I wouldn't drive a Civic either, but I'm not in the market for that car- and I'd still pick it over the Cobalt.  Here's another example:  In 2000, I was in the market for an SUV.  I looked at the Ford Explorer, and I really wanted to buy American.  But, the Ford Explorer set up how I wanted was coming in around 35-40k every time.  I looked and looked, and ended up with a Nissan Xterra that cost 23k.  Now people can argue about the styling issue of this, and I'm sure many people hate the way Xterras look, but for the 6 years I drove that car, I had not 1 problem ever. 

I actually like the way Buicks look- I'm not against all American car styling..  But, I think people that think American cars are equal to the Japanese cars or German cars in reliability or value are closing their eyes to a major part of the problem- this is why the US car companies are in trouble! 

I wanted to buy American the last two cars I've purchased.  But, I refuse to support companies that make substandard, overpriced and unreliable vehicles!  There are too many people that will only buy an American car no matter what the styling or price or reliability.  And therefore, we get the same story year after year on American cars.  I know this country can do better!  Why do the auto manufacturers refuse to do better?

I sincerely hope the US auto manufacturers survive one way or another- strategically I don't think we can afford to let this industry leave our country.  They provide a lot more tech then just cars- and were major contributers to military and the space program as well.

[Really?]

I personally am done with Dodge.  They last few just have constant problems.  Heck, the last water pump change (I wasn't gonna touch it) ran close to $1000.  I am on my third oil pressure sending unit (this is leaking now too) that the warranty won't cover because the oil comes through the center of it so it is an unwarrantied electrical part.  The wife had an identical Dodge, just a different color and the same oil sending unit did the same thing.  The Chrysler we have leaks oil to and it happened just outside of the warranty but they would prolly say the same thing as the other car if it were under warranty.  Lost my trust with them bad.

Now my Camaro Z28 was flawless. Had to get rid of it 'cause three kids wouldn't fit in the back seat.

It might just be japanese next time.  But, cars are to flipping expensive new for me to even look.

I love the commercial for the Kia Sorento I think it is, $12,888 until you read the fine print on the tv screen.  I don't qualify for most of the rebates for that price.

[okie]

I have a neighbor who is involved in the 3rd party extended warranty business for autos.  In order to survive in that business he has to KNOW, which cars need repairs and which cars run forever with no failures.  There are two Hondas in his garage.  

[333]

So, what a couple of you have just said is that money was a leading factor in car purchases.  That brings us back to the ugly fact that the Japanese cars cost less.  And why?  I think one reason is that tax credit thing again.  I read in a Chevy forum that a second Big 3 plant is being courted by a tax credit, just like EVERY ONE of the Japanese plants get.  Michigan is courting GM for the Chevrolet Volt plant to be built in their state, using tax credits as the lure.

FLASH-  As I prepare this post, UAW President Gettelfinger is holding a press conference.  Among other things, he had an email(sender and recipient deleted), said to be from Republican leaders, basically confirming the failure of the bailout loan bill in the Senate as a planned effort to stop the bill.  As this is happening, the Treasury Dept. is issuing statements saying that despite the bill failure, they are willing to use TARP money to bail out GM and Chrysler.

[heffay]

i found my bailout today!

i just took a forbearance on my student loans today... that's 450 bucks PER MONTH for the next 6 months, better suited for paying of higher interest credit card debt!

times are hard, weigh your options... if you need to take a break (if at all possible) then do it.

i've been considering putting off some payments for a while but wanted to stick to my 1 year goal... i wanted to pay my student loans for one year after graduating just to prove that i could do it.   now i know i can... i also know that i'm flat broke!

[boatsdickson]

i just took a forbearance on my student loans today

Thats awesome. Can anyone take one? Id luv to take a few payments away from mine.

[heffay]

forbearances = delay payments, interest still accrues
deferment = delay payments, interest does not accrue

deferments usually only happen when you go back to school or you are below poverty level.
forbearances are pretty easy to get and are usually limited to a maximum of 3 years for the life of the loan.

p.s... you won't actually "take away payment" in either situation... you'll only delay the inevitable. 


w/ the upcoming wedding to my girl and just having graduated and trying to get my business going... i just felt i could spend my money a bit differently to better suit what i'm trying to accomplish.  all the while knowing that... every month i put off payment = 50 dollars additional interest that i'll end up owing.  but that is a drop in the bucket.