Posted on 12/07/2008 7:53:28 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
With job losses mounting and Detroit’s Big Three automakers facing a battle on Capitol Hill over emergency federal aid, President-elect Barack Obama on Sunday predicted more hard times for the U.S. economy before it starts to turn around, and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) threatened a potential filibuster of any attempt to bail out the automakers.
”This is a big problem. It’s gonna get worse,” Obama warned on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
“Things are going to get worse before they get better,” he added.
Obama’s comments came on a busy Sunday morning that saw Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice making stops on three talk shows to talk about the fallout from the Mumbai terrorist attacks, and lawmakers clashed over whether a $15 billion “bridge loan” to American automakers should be approved.
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), a staunch ally of the U.S. carmakers, and Shelby, who has emerged as the leading opponent of any aid package for the Big Three, sparred over the whether the American government should rescue U.S. automakers during an appearance on “Fox News Sunday.”
Levin said he was “confident” that Congress would consider a bailout bill for the auto industry, but stopped short of predicting whether it would pass. Democratic leaders in the House and Senate are considering a $15 billion “bridge loan” to help out the automakers.
"I think they're very close to a deal, I think there will be a deal and that will happen in 24 hours," Levin told host Chris Wallace. “Obviously, that's a much more complicated question of whether the votes are there. What I'm confident of is that a bill will be introduced."
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
compression test will tell you that..
We do, Kia, Hyundai, Honda, and Toyota are in the South thriving.
The Auto Industry has worked very hard over the past 4-5 to turn things around.
No, they haven't.
They were within site of their goal when hit with the double whammy of a spike in oil/gas prices which crushed their sales and then the financial crisis came right behind this.
A crisis created by the very government that thinks it can "solve" it. What the auto execs should tell Congress is get the Hell out of their way and get rid of the corporate taxes, "green" car mandates and CAFE standards.
Very few people are buying cars NOW but eventually the customers will come back.
How are customers going to come back? That $15 billion isn't going to trickle down to the consumer, it's going to line the pockets of UAW thugs and Big 3 auto execs and management.
GM and Ford have some really exciting cars out there now and more on the way. If they can make it through the next 18 months they will recover.
Where? The only good car that's out there is the Chevy Malibu. But GM and Ford are being pressured by the government to make "green" cars that nobody is going to buy. Cars are already the most fuel-efficient in automotive history, and ironically laws here prevent fuel-efficient cars sold in Europe by GM and Ford to not be sold here.
Bottom line: You don't know what you're talking about.
I ave never had luck with crated motors from anyone. That is why that was my first suspicion. I always build my own motors, trannys, etc. I had a similar problem where a guy bought a truck with a crate motor installed. Thing kept killing starters. I tried to turn it by hand (this is with nearly 500 miles on it) and could barely turn it at the flywheel.
Tore it down and taped the crank, and it was .0005 out of spec (fat) across the board. Not a lot, but enough. Took it out and went through it and it was one of the worst jobs I had ever seen. knurled pistons, no brass guides, could still see hone marks in the cylinders... just awful work.
And this was a regional distributor of good repute...
I understand socialism very well thank you very much. What I cannot understand if the wish of so many for the death of an industry that has had an enormous impact on our country.
OK, so your against socialism unless your job may disappear, and then your for socialism? You can't have it both ways. I don't want to pay your paycheck unless I buy a car, get it! (Especially at gun point by the IRS)
It has nothing to do with wanting to see the death of the auto industry. Any industry that is not self supporting should fail. Thats the AMERICAN way. Of course, I now feel I live the alternative universe of THE UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF AMERICA, USSA
Do you think we should let the government buy wooden wagon wheels with your tax dollars so the wagon wheel union of 1885 could still be working?
When they get this bailout, and they will, if union auto workers don't take a huge cut in pay, they won't, the bailout money will be wasted, just like MOST of the money the government spends.
Go cry to your union buddies. Shelby is right!
The Big Three's real union problem - (Let's ruin foreign manufacturers in the South too)
Republicans should do the math.
Republicans have already been blamed by moderates for the recent economic meltdown. Nothing they do will change that. You won’t win any moderate votes by bailing out the automakers.
The Republican base (conservatives) are opposed to bailing out the automakers. You will make your base mad and lose votes if you vote to bail out the automakes (on the other hand, you will endear the base to you and gain their votes if you oppose the auto bailout.)
Vote for the bailout: Gain 0 votes from left and lose votes from right.
Oppose bailout: Gain 0 votes from the left, but GAIN votes from the right.
Republicans have nothing to gain from voting for the auto bailout.
“It is not a net benefit to the nation to take from people with a median family income of $50.233 and use it to keep people making $74/hr employed, especially when the latter group is “done making concessions”.”
I assume you were being sarcastic.
$74/hr is about $148,000 per year (not including overtime.)
That’s what bothers me about the auto bailout, we’re taking from people middle class Americans to give the money to people that make more, have a better job, and have a better life.
It’s Robin Hood in reverse. Taking from the poor to give to the rich.
“Mine’s a ‘78 Chevy, almost fully restored.”
I tried to explain to someone the other day that the mechanics of cars haven’t changed that much in the last 45 years. Other than fuel injectors replacing carburators (sp?) there really hasn’t been a MAJOR advancement in car design.
Take a 1965 Mustand and drop it into the middle of a modern parking lot, and it would fit right in. Fewer bells and whistles (creature comforts like the sound system, seats), but as far as the engine and drive train, very little difference.
That’s because the current Mustang might as well BE a 65 Mustang, because the styling is the same and it still has the same primitive stick axle under the back, etc., etc.
And you’ve missed an awful lot about automotive technology. Major advances include variable valve timing, stratified charge heads, Miller-cycle engines, turbocharging as a mass market technology, supercharging as a mass market technology, overdrive transmissions, locking torque converters, drive-by-wire, throttle-less engines, camless engines, flex-fuel engines...the list goes on and on.
The fact remains that today you can get two to four more times the horsepower per unit of displacement than people even dreamed of back in the 60s and 70s. You can get a 2L fourbanger and get over 650 horsepower out of it - and still have it be docile enough to drive to work or the store every day.
My point is that the motor and all the other stuff in the Pontiac is assembled by the same idiots that assembled all the vehicles back then and continue to assemble vehicles and engines for GM to this day.
What you call revolutionary, I call evolutionary.
Everything you mentioned is an improvement on a system, but nothing that radically changes the basic concept/mechanics of an automobile.
Some of the micro-electric cars you see comming out are radical departures from what an automobile was in the past. But what Detroit is putting out?
At this point, I think the real question is, “Who cares what Detroit is putting out?”
And all of those things on that list are just as revolutionary as fuel injection.
Heck, you do know there’s gasoline engines with no spark plugs now, right?
Just for correction purposes...the workers are not getting directly paid $74...an hour...but it is what the Manufactures account for all charges relative to an individual worker.
I agree completely. What is absurd is all the standard features that are wholly irrelevant to the actual delivered product which drive up the cost to incredible heights.
A standard mid-sixties sedan was a very simple thing, both mechanically, and in the way of creature comforts. It was also ultimately very affordable, very durable, and very repairable.
There are still cars from that era in service today, fifty years later. I dare to say you will not find a model from 2010 on the road in 2060. Mid 90's cars are fully depreciated, worth literally *nothing*. The parts are hard to find, and it is generally not worthwhile to rebuild the darn things because the cost is so high to do so, and the return in value (longevity for dollar) is not there.
But people still do ground-up rebuilds on '85 and older stuff, especially pickups and vans, because they will enjoy a long lasting machine with a very low maintenance cost- A high return for the dollars invested. The big 3 auto companies should look at why that is.
I think they need to go back to what made them big. Simple cars, great performance, bang for the buck, long lasting, and always re-buildable. Parts repurposing across decades to guarantee parts supplies. Quit trying to build in every luxury and go for low priced durability. Let the after market guys handle all the bolt-on crap like it used to be. Then they won't be killing themselves in warranties, because they won't have to back them as long- People don't expect as much if they don't have to shell out as much as it costs for a piece of real estate.
Yes, labor and regulation are killing them. But so is their general outlook. They are much more concerned about selling hot air and warranty than they are selling the basic product that they intended to build in the first place. Too much crap and not enough car.
I can't think of too many things worse for this country long-term than a de facto nationalization of the auto industry shudder.
Seems to be part of a pattern.
Polls indicate that most moderates oppose it to, so opposition it actually gains some votes in the middle.
This bailout is generally unpopular with the American public.
How about instead of pushing the bailout, we help them get into a pre-packaged chapter 11?
This is a real missed opportunity for Bush. 2 months ago he should have promised to veto any bailout, but instead offer to personally mediate pre-pack bankruptcy negotiations. Invite representatives of all credit classes to the whitehouse and hammer out a reorg plan. Then get the plan an expidited hearing in the local bankruptcy court.
With the right leadership, GM could have been in and out of bankruptcy in 6 months.
But nooooo, instead he has to endorse this crap sandwich part 2, as Michelle Malkin would say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.