Is GM finished?

[davefoc]

I am just basically thinking wouldnt a more successful product producing company replace them and fill the void left by GM's terrible business practices?

To me it just seems the nature of business, and prolonging it is sort of unfair to the businesses who are doing all the right things and making the better choices. These Companies should be at the forefront and should be receiving money to help continue their better ways.
I feel the money could be better spent on successful companies then those that are failing...

I think a lot of the people that have posted to this thread agree somewhat with this.

I think there might be an argument to be made where some extraordinary event has led to the temporary destabilization of an industry that a short term government assistance package might have value.

One argument is that the sum of the various economic problems to hit the US is this kind of occurence and if the car companies are just provided with some kind of bridge loan they will return to profitability.

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case here. The labor unions and management have cooperated for many years now in a kind of capital burning enterprise where shareholder equity and eventually the very operating underpinnings of the organizations were expended to keep going. What happened to bring this to forefront was some bad economic times which caused the scheme to come undone somewhat before it might otherwise have.

But when the reality of the situation began to take hold there was a lot less enthusiasm for just tossing money at the problem when the problem was so much deeper than a sudden unexpected down turn.

So now Bush has thrown a few billion dollars to Chrysler and GM. They won't fail on his watch, but he also didn't require them to make any commitments toward sustainability. Undoubtedly what the unions and management would like would be to continue to burn through capital, but now they'd like to burn through tax payer capital .

My guess, is that the Democrats will facilitate them for awhile, partially at least, thanks to the cover that Bush has given them. Eventually, the Democrats will abandon them, because in the end dumping billions of dollars into failed enterprises with deeply embedded problems will be a net national loser for them and they are not going to lose national elections because of UAW craziness.

What is particularly difficult to understand was bailing out Chrysler. What purpose does this organization have any more? Its management has shut production down ostensibly for a month. Will Chrysler management really start production back up again? For what, to make more cars that people already aren't buying? My suspicion, is that most of the 4 billion dollars will go to pay UAW workers for sitting at home and doing nothing and possibly to help Chrysler's owners save a few bucks before they shut the place down for good. It might have been better to just shut the place down now and use the 4 billion dollars to help the affected workers, mostly to help them leave Detroit and go some place not dominated by a destructive organization like the UAW.

 

[Roadtoad]

This bailout was not set up to save the automakers. It was set up to save the financial asses of automobile execs, in the same way that we've "saved" the financial services industry. We've been rooked, and all we've done is helped certain people save their portfolios and kept individuals in power who should have had it stripped from them. We've protected someone's power base.

To what end? Certainly not to the benefit of the autoworkers, though that's the claim. In the end, we've simply tightened the noose around their necks, all in the name of preserving their jobs.

We will not be regarded with respect in the years to come for setting up this disaster.

 

[Toke]

We will not be regarded with respect in the years to come for setting up this disaster.

Depends on who will be telling the story
I am sure the people who recieved the money can give it a nice spin.

 

[Roadtoad]

How about our kids?

 

[Toke]

Bad news.
To them it would propably fade among the other ripofs going on right now.
And which version of the story of the death of the american auto industry would be easiest for them to find.

 

[Roadtoad]

All the more reason for us to continue the discussion, and to center on the facts of the matter, rather than merely our own personal complaints, no matter the validity of them. Make sure there's a record of this, and make equally sure that the guilty parties are well known to all.

 

[Just thinking]

Just a note ... now several days after the announced bailout we see the automakers' stocks dipping down around 15 - 20%. GM is back under $4.00 a share.

 

[Furcifer]

This bailout was not set up to save the automakers. It was set up to save the financial asses of automobile execs, in the same way that we've "saved" the financial services industry. We've been rooked, and all we've done is helped certain people save their portfolios and kept individuals in power who should have had it stripped from them. We've protected someone's power base.

To what end? Certainly not to the benefit of the autoworkers, though that's the claim. In the end, we've simply tightened the noose around their necks, all in the name of preserving their jobs.

We will not be regarded with respect in the years to come for setting up this disaster.

And not to keep the ball rolling for 2.5 Million Americans who depend on the automakers to support their families and communities? Come on, while I don't agree with what CEO's and exec's are making at these companies they represent a small fraction of what these companies generate for the economy and the community. The electricity bill for one plant alone runs almost a million dollars a month. Gas and water almost the same. I'm sorry you feel this way, but the math doesn't support this claim that they are protecting portfolios and keeping people in power. It's simply and unfortunate side effect of doing what is right. Hopefully things will change with the bailout, better yet, mandated by the bailout. I'm sick of overpaid exec's taking huge salaries even while companies fail and until now there was little we could do to stop it. Now there's an opportunity to change the bath water, let's not throw out the baby and the basin to do so.

 

[Toke]

And not to keep the ball rolling for 2.5 Million Americans who depend on the automakers to support their families and communities?

No.
I don´t belive that the white house or auto ceo´s care about the workers.

 

[Furcifer]

It might have been better to just shut the place down now and use the 4 billion dollars to help the affected workers, mostly to help them leave Detroit and go some place not dominated by a destructive organization like the UAW.

The Union will go wherever there are workers who see company profits skyrocket while wages and benefits do not. So what if the big 3 fail, it means the market shifts towards the imports. As the market stabilizes and we see a return to profit the Union will have more influence on the workers as they see money trickle out of the country. Once they gain influence they will Unionize and negotiate better pay and benefits for the workers. Pay and benefits the compnay agrees to based on the profit margins they project for the 3 or 4 year duration of the contract. Things will be fine until the meltdown of the financial sector once again and we are in the same situation.

There's a 100 years of history to support this scenario. As far as I'm concerned this is Capitalism and the Free Market at work. The only difference in the next 100 years of this cycle is where the profits go. Instead of being kept within the country they will diverted out. Less money in the country means a lower standard of living. I'm not sure what the income tax rates are for autoworkers in the states, but I can tell you the average line worker in Canada pays 37%. Reduce them down to $15/hr and income tax rates fall to around 22% (Federal and Provincial combined). That's a substantial decrease in revenue for programs and infrastructure in the country. Losses like this mean that incomes will have to adjust across the board, the end result making less, being taxed more.

I'm not saying I'm right. There are certainly other scenerios that could play out. I'm curious what others feel will happen if GM fails (and Chrysler it seems).

 

[Furcifer]

No.
I don´t belive that the white house or auto ceo´s care about the workers.

Like I say, whether you believe that or not, the numbers certainly indicate the average joe has more to gain than the CEO's or the Whitehouse. Not as individuals mind you but en mass.

 

[davefoc]

This is a bit off the subject, but there had been a lot of anecdotal stories for and against the American car manufacturers and based on that I'd like to relate this story and get some feed back.

My father was over for Christmas and he showed me how his ten year old Chrysler head light plastic lenses had clouded substantially. The Chrysler dealer wanted $450 a side to fix the problem.

I thought I'd take a look at how the ten year old headlight plastic lenses had fared on my Honda Accord. They were crystal clear.

Now I was pissed. The government was dumping 4 billion dollars into Chrysler, the organization that was trying to screw my father over like this. I took pictures and was ready for a crusade except as I discussed the situation with my father it turns out that for at least the last six years the minivan has been stored outside. My Honda has been stored in a garage throughout its life.

So what's the deal here? Is this Honda versus Chrysler? Or is this difference mostly caused by the fact that one vehicle was stored in the garage and the other was stored outside?

Of course on a rational basis throwing four billion dollars away on Chrysler isn't more or less justified based on how they're treating my father but I'd still like to understand what's going on here.

 

[Just thinking]

My father was over for Christmas and he showed me how his ten year old Chrysler head light plastic lenses had clouded substantially. The Chrysler dealer wanted $450 a side to fix the problem.

I thought I'd take a look at how the ten year old headlight plastic lenses had fared on my Honda Accord. They were crystal clear.

As are the lenses on my 1991 Acura integra (178,000 + miles).

 

[Furcifer]

This is a bit off the subject, but there had been a lot of anecdotal stories for and against the American car manufacturers and based on that I'd like to relate this story and get some feed back.

My father was over for Christmas and he showed me how his ten year old Chrysler head light plastic lenses had clouded substantially. The Chrysler dealer wanted $450 a side to fix the problem.

I thought I'd take a look at how the ten year old headlight plastic lenses had fared on my Honda Accord. They were crystal clear.

Now I was pissed. The government was dumping 4 billion dollars into Chrysler, the organization that was trying to screw my father over like this. I took pictures and was ready for a crusade except as I discussed the situation with my father it turns out that for at least the last six years the minivan has been stored outside. My Honda has been stored in a garage throughout its life.

So what's the deal here? Is this Honda versus Chrysler? Or is this difference mostly caused by the fact that one vehicle was stored in the garage and the other was stored outside?

Of course on a rational basis throwing four billion dollars away on Chrysler isn't more or less justified based on how they're treating my father but I'd still like to understand what's going on here.

A quick Googling of a headlight assembly http://www.google.com/products?q=1998+OEM+caravan+HEADLIGHT+ASSEMBLY&btnG=Search+Products&hl=en&show=dd
OEM shouldn't run that much higher. If I remember correctly this Assembly is held in by 2 3/8" self tapping sheet metal bolts and, by the book, this shouldn't be more than 1 hour to change.

A quick Googling of a 1998 Accord headlight assembly http://www.google.com/products?q=1998+OEM+caravan+HEADLIGHT+ASSEMBLY&btnG=Search+Products&hl=en&show=dd
Basically the same price as the Caravan, but you will notice there is a cheaper aftermarket part for the Caravan available. The cost of modern headlight assemblies has increased dramatically over the years. Both esthetic's and aerodynamics being the leading factor for a change to larger more expensive and harder to change precision parts. This coupled with the bulb technology has lead to brighter and safer illumination. (HID's aside, that's whole other issue) No one manufacturer is better or worse at the OEM level for replacing these assemblies. Aftermarket is the way to go.

As far as why this has happened, hard to say. Almost all assemblies are fitted with a rubber boot around the bulb mount to keep out moisture. This would be the number one cause of lens clouding, moisture allowed by the boot into the housing evaporates and leaves a condensate or "scaling". Clouding may also be on the outside, from condensate on the lens or by scratching from road dirt, salt etc. Car wax can also cloud on the lens. Lastly the clouding may be a result of a chemical reaction. Certain alcohols will shatter or cause microscopic pitting in the plastic they come in contact with. It is possible that cleaners, waxes or polishes accidentally applied to the lens may be the cause of this clouding, but fairly remote.

I'd check the lens to see if the clouding is on the inside or outside of the assembly. If the reflective surface on the inside of the lens has a condensate on it you can be fairly certain the lens is leaking, either at the boot or cracked, probably along the seam where the two parts (the lens and the reflector) are joined. I think you could use a vinegar and water solution to remove and condensate inside the housing by immersing it in a bath (like cleaning a coffee pot). Replace the lens and check all seals to make sure no water is getting inside. From what your saying here though both sides are clouded. It's more likely the clouding is on the outside of the lens, from road dirt or salt. I'd wipe both lenses with a vinegar and water solution to see if there is any condensate. If it's a case of scratching causing the clouding I'd use a CD scratch repair compound on both lenses. It will smooth out and fill any scratches on the surface, making it crystal clear.

 

[Roadtoad]

Rubbing compound. It will take a few hours, but it should clear up the clouding, is what I've been told.

 

[davefoc]

As are the lenses on my 1991 Acura integra (178,000 + miles).

Did you keep it in a garage?

My Honda has about 195,000 miles. My dad's minivan has about 60,000 miles.

My dad had already found somebody that was willing to take them out and polish them for $175 bucks. I told him that sounded like a good deal to me. I'm sure that it doesn't take that long, but I am always hesitant to mess with body disassembly and reassembly. It seems I never quite get it back together exactly right.

The lenses seemed to be both damaged on the inside and the outside. It did look like that moisture might have found a way into inside because some of the damage seemed like it might have been from water deposits.

 

[WildCat]

There should be weep holes near the bottom of the assembly to allow any water to drain out and the humidity levels inside the assembly to be equal to the outside air. Maybe the weep holes have become clogged?

 

[Furcifer]

Did you keep it in a garage?

My Honda has about 195,000 miles. My dad's minivan has about 60,000 miles.

My dad had already found somebody that was willing to take them out and polish them for $175 bucks. I told him that sounded like a good deal to me. I'm sure that it doesn't take that long, but I am always hesitant to mess with body disassembly and reassembly. It seems I never quite get it back together exactly right.

The lenses seemed to be both damaged on the inside and the outside. It did look like that moisture might have found a way into inside because some of the damage seemed like it might have been from water deposits.

Hmmm, I'll do it for $100 Don't worry about disassembly, it's simply attached by a few "j" nuts and some bolts if not the self tapping metal screws. I never installed the headlights, but I have literally installed 1000's of tail lights in the minivan, 2 screws in the "D" pillar located by a tab in a rubber cup. I can install them in less than 48 seconds

On a side note and more to the issue at hand, the tail light job was a decent job at the time, about 7 years seniority at bidding time. Grab the tail light and a rubber cup, install the rubber cup, connect the tail light to the harness, close the red tab on the connector, locate the tail light tab in the rubber cup, hold and install 2 screws. Repeat 500 times per shift. Then thy added another bolt and a visual check. Still it was a decent job, allowing you to bank 8-10 seconds of free time per job. Get in the hole and dig yourself out, three jobs in a row as fast as you can, giving you almost 30 seconds to read or talk etc. Not the best job, but not a bad one either. The reason I got this job so often will be a jaw dropper to most outside the industry, and a very valid reason why the UAW is to fault for the current situation at the Big 3.

The guy who bid on the job had 8 years seniority at the plant. 8 years seniority. HE HAD ACTUALLY WORKED IN THE PLANT FOR LESS THAN 2 YEARS! After his 90 day probationary period, which he had almost perfect attendance, he succumbed to the rigors of his work. With his medical restrictions, even light duty work was limited. As it was, he got sent home until recovered. After recovery, and getting medical clearance to work, he "struggled" and eventually returned to light duty. The cycle repeated itself, eventually resulting in his retaining 8 years seniority while actually working less than 2 years on the job. Simply put PATHETIC!

The problem? This worker was intelligent enough to work the system. After 90 days you get protection from the Union, not only the Union but worker legislation itself. You can't "injure" a worker on the job then fire them. I agree with this. If you give yourself up to a job and the job cripples you, you deserve time off to recover. Some jobs are demanding and not suited for some people. So be it. The real problem in the doctors than clear these people from working. Scared to make mistakes resulting in lawsuits and increased insurance payments, doctors will put restrictions on workers that complain of pain and discomfort. If you go to 10 doctors and 9 clear you to work, that 1 doctor who doesn't trumps the rest and puts an unnecessary burden on the rest. There's little or no way to get around this unless the company employees private detectives to track and record these people. Case in point, I had a worker who had a "no walking" restriction. He was not allowed to walk on the job, and we had to provide a chair for him to rest on during his light duty job on my line. The company argued that he shouldn't even be allowed in the plant, as his restriction prohibited him from walking the mile or so from the parking lot to the line. Fat chance of that. He was allowed to work, on light duty for several months. After much investigation at the companies cost, he was observed and filmed not only bouncing at a local bar (he was 6'7") but partaking in UFC fighting. Swear to god this is true, and the only Union employee I ever saw fired in my career.

I'm just trying to boil it down for those of you who have never had any experience in the Union environment. The Union did well to protect workers from unfair retribution. Too well. Legislation resulted in loopholes for the worst of the worst to survive and perhaps thrive. The Union can't really be faulted for this. I mean it's crazy, but there are rules that have to be followed. This is more symptomatic of the society we live in than the Union itself. When the cops encounter a criminal holding a hostage by force they are still required to follow procedure and apprehend the criminal. There's little room for them to enact street justice and "eliminate" the problem at the source. Personally, if I had my say, I would support to "elimination" of the threat. Too bad there's laws preventing this.

 

[Just thinking]

Did you keep it in a garage?

My Honda has about 195,000 miles. My dad's minivan has about 60,000 miles.

My dad had already found somebody that was willing to take them out and polish them for $175 bucks. I told him that sounded like a good deal to me. I'm sure that it doesn't take that long, but I am always hesitant to mess with body disassembly and reassembly. It seems I never quite get it back together exactly right.

The lenses seemed to be both damaged on the inside and the outside. It did look like that moisture might have found a way into inside because some of the damage seemed like it might have been from water deposits.

The car was garage kept --- but it more than saw its share of inclimate weather. If the clouding is on the inside, I suspect it was from condensation --- moisture gets in then vaporizes from the heat of the bulb. The coolest place for it to condense is on the lens's face, as it's exposed to the outside temperature most. This will cause a build up of dirt that's carried along with the moisture. The dirt in turn (when it's not humid out) will then get baked on through more use of the bulb. It also helps in creating future points of condensation --- vicious cycle. The best way to clean it out is to remove the lens from the car, remove the bulb, then pour in hot soapy water and let it soak. Rinse thoroughly with repeated rinsings. Let dry with a slight flow of air going through to prevent spotting. Good luck!

 

[Just thinking]

Rubbing compound. It will take a few hours, but it should clear up the clouding, is what I've been told.

Some rubbing compounds are too abrasive and will fog the lens up even more. Try using plastic polish. Make sure it says for use with plastic on the container.

Here are some other choices.