MERGED: Has anyone read this (bankruptcy) about GM?

[detroitboy]

Originally Posted by zforce

It depends. From a Company that has held our country together for over 100 years. YES! From a company that has little significance on our heritage and history, than the answer is: NO.

You mean you would't buy a 78 Mazda at 10 times what it sold for new to add to your collection? I don't think anybody would. Hmm...maybe everybody ought to rethink buying foreign cars since they obviously do not hold their value in the long run like our American cars do. Can we figure out a way to educate the American consumer?

[fastball]

This is a good thing. If they can get the cash to the automakers without using the bank bailout funds, that works even better for our country.

One caveat here: I do support if stipulations be put on the funds..... this cash is not meant to pay out for healther/legacy costs, fatten the pockets of the board or CEOs (yes, even our good friends Rick and Bob shouldn't get a dime of it), or be used for anything but to keep the lights on and the water running....

untill

GM reorganizes to become a more profitable company, including transferring the load of healthcare and legacy to VEBA in 2010 (when, even during tough economic times, they should start cutting losses drasticly and edge back toward the black).

I insist this loan should be just strictly to get GM to that point, and I will be very dissapointed in GM if it goes to anything else.

[69 Hugger]

:flag2: Yes, Buy :flag2:

[Fandango]

The automaker aid bill, which is NOT A BAILOUT, is merely a very nice loan to help out with old contracts and union stuff, pentions? Scott if you could help us out.

This one is a modest 25 billion and it helps out 3 auto makers. 3 huge companies with umpteen employees.

This in unlike the REAL BAILOUT, 700 Billion for the spa treatments at AIG and the regulated gambling industry in Wall Street.

Am I with everyone one this? Or am I just not getting it.

In a word: GOOD!!

for AMERICAN AUTO INDUSRTY!!

[350 HRSS]

This is EXCELLENT news...and a good positive post I was waiting to read, so I could have a good Friday night

I also heard the news about the 500b the CEOs were getting...on Fox tonight...I can't understand how the people are letting them get away with this...

[RealQuickCamaro]

This is not just in the U.S.A, its happening all around the world
The government has already come to the table with $25 billion in support and that's before the global economic crisis hit. Yesterday, Australia announced over $2 billion in support for its auto sector. There's a proposal before the European Union to the tune of some 40 billion euros,"



and also By The Canadian Press

WINNIPEG - Industry Minister Tony Clement says he's investigating the possibility of a joint Canada-U.S. bailout of North America's ailing auto industry

[Supermans]

The auto sector will always get Government help as it is like oil part of the life blood of the economy. Without a healthy supply of automobiles, the economy would suffer greatly and I mean everybody involved with making them and not just the buyers...

[Nickdago]

He probably dislikes the unions because lets face it this is more of a bailout for the unions then it is the BIG 3. I have not heard anyone who has not said unless the BIG 3 get their UAW contracts reworked that they will be able to survive. They can not compete with the foreign non union auto companies building cars right here in the Good Ole USA with the contracts they have got themselves shackled to. Especially when you are talking about building more and more smaller cars which have less profit built into them.

[trm0002]

Originally Posted by Shifty 6

Dude its totally because I want my car!!!

Agreed- at least WE get a direct benefit from something in this mess.

Originally Posted by Nickdago

He probably dislikes the unions because lets face it this is more of a bailout for the unions then it is the BIG 3. I have not heard anyone who has not said unless the BIG 3 get their UAW contracts reworked that they will be able to survive. They can not compete with the foreign non union auto companies building cars right here in the Good Ole USA with the contracts they have got themselves shackled to. Especially when you are talking about building more and more smaller cars which have less profit built into them.

They're inseparably intertwined. The bailout is indeed for the Big 3 but it is directly because of the unions. I'm not a big fan of unions but it's probably not for the reasons you think. I'm all for everyone getting a piece of the pie. When times are good and things are prosperous, I wholeheartedly believe all those involved should benefit from it including stockholders, management, and employees. The problem is how they structured it; inflated wage and benefit contracts. When times are good- and they were for a long time- that structure works well. Problem is when times are bad or not quite as good. Structured as it is in the contracts, you can't "take it back" or reduce it when things take a turn for the worse. That's the discrepancy you see between the Big 3 at $78 an hour (wages and long-term benefits) and the $40 something an hour you see at the "foreign" car plants here in the US.

There is no "adjusting" the union in bad times- that's the problem. They still demand their $78 an hour because "it's in the contract". I submit that when you're dealing in that level of corporate America, where thousands of employees are the norm, that the contracts should have been base pay + bonuses based on how the company is/was doing. When things were good for GM, the union members would have got bonuses and still made their money (probably more) but when things took a downturn, GM would have had a much easier time reconciling the problem(s).

Then there's the "grievances". What total BS. I can tell you from talking with my uncle who used to work for the railroad, that there were people out there who should never have been in control of a 100,000 ton train. Believe me or not, there was a drunk engineer that my uncle as brakeman had no choice in his mind but to "blow in". Guess what happened? My uncle was blacklisted and the union saved this guy's job by rescinding around a thousand grievances. Did they take care of their own? Yes, but at what cost? You want this guy behind the controls of a 100 ton locomotive? I don't.

Then there's how to get rid of someone who's not doing their job...

Then there's how to advance someone who actually is over someone with more seniority that isn't...

Then

Then

And we wonder why the Big 3 are in trouble.

[TAG UR IT]

Originally Posted by fastball

This is a good thing. If they can get the cash to the automakers without using the bank bailout funds, that works even better for our country.

One caveat here: I do support Bush if he insists stipulations be put on the funds..... this cash is not meant to pay out for healther/legacy costs, fatten the pockets of the board or CEOs (yes, even our good friends Rick and Bob shouldn't get a dime of it), or be used for anything but to keep the lights on and the water running....

untill

GM reorganizes to become a more profitable company, including transferring the load of healthcare and legacy to VEBA in 2010 (when, even during tough economic times, they should start cutting losses drasticly and edge back toward the black).

I insist this loan should be just strictly to get GM to that point, and I will be very dissapointed in GM if it goes to anything else.

My name is Tag and I approve of this message.

Now....anymore threads about GM and a "bailout" or ....anything for that matter should remain in this thread. I'm really getting tired of umpteen threads covering the same topic.

Please....keep it here with the loans and such.

[camaro_z28]

Yes

[nester7929]

As long as they could service the Camaro if it had problems, I would buy from GM under bankruptcy.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by trm0002

Agreed- at least WE get a direct benefit from something in this mess.



They're inseparably intertwined. The bailout is indeed for the Big 3 but it is directly because of the unions. I'm not a big fan of unions but it's probably not for the reasons you think. I'm all for everyone getting a piece of the pie. When times are good and things are prosperous, I wholeheartedly believe all those involved should benefit from it including stockholders, management, and employees. The problem is how they structured it; inflated wage and benefit contracts. When times are good- and they were for a long time- that structure works well. Problem is when times are bad or not quite as good. Structured as it is in the contracts, you can't "take it back" or reduce it when things take a turn for the worse. That's the discrepancy you see between the Big 3 at $78 an hour (wages and long-term benefits) and the $40 something an hour you see at the "foreign" car plants here in the US.

There is no "adjusting" the union in bad times- that's the problem. They still demand their $78 an hour because "it's in the contract". I submit that when you're dealing in that level of corporate America, where thousands of employees are the norm, that the contracts should have been base pay + bonuses based on how the company is/was doing. When things were good for GM, the union members would have got bonuses and still made their money (probably more) but when things took a downturn, GM would have had a much easier time reconciling the problem(s).

Then there's the "grievances". What total BS. I can tell you from talking with my uncle who used to work for the railroad, that there were people out there who should never have been in control of a 100,000 ton train. Believe me or not, there was a drunk engineer that my uncle as brakeman had no choice in his mind but to "blow in". Guess what happened? My uncle was blacklisted and the union saved this guy's job by rescinding around a thousand grievances. Did they take care of their own? Yes, but at what cost? You want this guy behind the controls of a 100 ton locomotive? I don't.

Then there's how to get rid of someone who's not doing their job...

Then there's how to advance someone who actually is over someone with more seniority that isn't...

Then

Then

And we wonder why the Big 3 are in trouble.

I agree with this 100%. The Unions have directly been a big part of the failure occurring in the US auto market. The government should lend a hand, but it is the Unions that need to become more flexible when the money is given to them. I bet the people in charge of the unions are coming out like bandits with the loan money from the government when it arrives...

[MCPOAJ]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Seriously, though -- what company spells out their business plan to the public? They'll be outlining it to Congress who will ultimately decide their fate...and I hope they get the hint.

yea and they have been making cuts. its in this thread right here > http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9440