Is GM finished?

[BeAChooser]

I thought the unions owned the Democratic Party.

It's a symbiotic relationship I imagine. Just ask Obama and Andy Stern.

 

[a_unique_person]

Looks like GMAC and Government Motors got another bailout.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34629214/ns/business-economy_at_a_crossroads/

Got to keep those democrat owned and operated unions solvent.

It's the finance part of the former GM, wholly independent now, IIRC.

 

[ZirconBlue]

I wasn't quite sure what ZirconBlue meant with his response, but since when did the Democratic Party own the unions. I thought the unions owned the Democratic Party.

I was rolling my eyes at yet another BAC post that is made up almost entirely of conservative soundbites. "Government Motors"? Really?

And the fact that this is GMAC, which is a financial company that was spun off from GM, and which, as far as I know, has little-to-no involvement with any unions, makes it particularly annoying.

ETA: A financial company that, as I understand it, is hurting, not because of the auto industry, but because of home mortgages. Despite the "GM" in the name of the company, this is part of the financial sector bailout, more than the auto industry bailout.

 

[Prometheus]

My understanding is that, while GMAC has been nearly crippled by its mortgage business, and is no longer directly connected to GM, it is still vital to the auto industry, as it is one of the primary wholesale lenders that allow car dealers to keep their showrooms well stocked ahead of sales.

 

[Furcifer]

My understanding is that, while GMAC has been nearly crippled by its mortgage business, and is no longer directly connected to GM, it is still vital to the auto industry, as it is one of the primary wholesale lenders that allow car dealers to keep their showrooms well stocked ahead of sales.

Exactly. The finance and purchase of automobiles is probably the largest motivating factor in the NA economy. Without it there won't be a recovery. Change is indeed good, but in this case "repair" is much more essential.

Obama's green energy revolution means nothing without a strong economy to support it. That economy can only come from a healthy NA automotive sector.

 

[davefoc]

Exactly. The finance and purchase of automobiles is probably the largest motivating factor in the NA economy. Without it there won't be a recovery. Change is indeed good, but in this case "repair" is much more essential.

Obama's green energy revolution means nothing without a strong economy to support it. That economy can only come from a healthy NA automotive sector.

If health of the North American automotive sector was the most important issue the US government would have allowed Chrysler to go under, since maintaining excess capacity for vehicles of limited market appeal through government interference is exactly the opposite of what one would do if one was interested in stabilizing and strengthening the North American automotive sector.

And of course, if one was actually interested in strengthening the North American automotive sector one would have allowed a normal bankruptcy for GM to go forward where unions and all other stakeholder interests were reduced to the point that GM would have been viable. That, of course, was not done for exactly the reason that BeAChooser suggested, union cronyism principally by the Democrats. Almost certainly, the North American automobile sector would have been stronger if the government had done nothing. As it is now the government is now a 60% owner of GM and the political implications of that may be devastating for GM and Detroit. GM will not be allowed to eliminate unproductive work rules, it will be forced to pay wages that will give it no chance to compete in the world market and overtime it may just fade away. And Detroit will remain the basket case it is, completely unable to attract world class manufacturers because of entrenched anti business policies and anti-business attitudes.

The thing which BeAChooser will generally fail to mention is that the initiator of this disaster was Bush who threw money at GM without any point other than to keep GM alive for a few months until Obama took over. The value returned to the average taxpayer for the money thrown away on this fiasco approached zero. For months GM executives and the unions divided up the Bush largess with taxpayer money like pirates dividing up the results of a pillaging expedition.

 

[Furcifer]

If health of the North American automotive sector was the most important issue the US government would have allowed Chrysler to go under, since maintaining excess capacity for vehicles of limited market appeal through government interference is exactly the opposite of what one would do if one was interested in stabilizing and strengthening the North American automotive sector.

And of course, if one was actually interested in strengthening the North American automotive sector one would have allowed a normal bankruptcy for GM to go forward where unions and all other stakeholder interests were reduced to the point that GM would have been viable. That, of course, was not done for exactly the reason that BeAChooser suggested, union cronyism principally by the Democrats. Almost certainly, the North American automobile sector would have been stronger if the government had done nothing. As it is now the government is now a 60% owner of GM and the political implications of that may be devastating for GM and Detroit. GM will not be allowed to eliminate unproductive work rules, it will be forced to pay wages that will give it no chance to compete in the world market and overtime it may just fade away. And Detroit will remain the basket case it is, completely unable to attract world class manufacturers because of entrenched anti business policies and anti-business attitudes.

The thing which BeAChooser will generally fail to mention is that the initiator of this disaster was Bush who threw money at GM without any point other than to keep GM alive for a few months until Obama took over. The value returned to the average taxpayer for the money thrown away on this fiasco approached zero. For months GM executives and the unions divided up the Bush largess with taxpayer money like pirates dividing up the results of a pillaging expedition.

I can assure you your conspiracy as it relates to the Unions and the Democrats is not shared by the majority of the people here in the Motor City.

I know we don't see eye to eye on this Dave (Happy New Year by the way), but I'm firmly convinced the money is best spent reviving the automotive sector, rather than siphoning it off to China (take a look at the recent news in regards to the stimulus money going over seas to build wind turbines. Don't tell me you didn't see that coming)

Currently that means giving money to the finance companies so people can start buying cars. American cars! It's the best solution to the current problem. Period.

(incidentally, I'm not sure if you've heard, but the Challenger has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any car at 98% )

 

[BeAChooser]

I was rolling my eyes at yet another BAC post that is made up almost entirely of conservative soundbites. "Government Motors"? Really?

And the fact that this is GMAC, which is a financial company that was spun off from GM, and which, as far as I know, has little-to-no involvement with any unions, makes it particularly annoying.

ETA: A financial company that, as I understand it, is hurting, not because of the auto industry, but because of home mortgages. Despite the "GM" in the name of the company, this is part of the financial sector bailout, more than the auto industry bailout.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...on-in-third-u-s-bailout-package-update2-.html

“The Obama administration has decided to keep GM alive one way or the other and they need GMAC to do it,” said David Olson, president of mortgage research firm Wholesale Access in Columbia, Maryland. The firm counts GMAC as a client. “To bail out the car companies you need to bail out the finance companies.”

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.co...uto-Bailout-Isn-t-Over-GMAC-May-Get-More-Aid/

The company's role in the American auto industry is pivotal. GMAC is now the primary finance company providing loans to those buying General Motors and Chrysler products.

 

[BeAChooser]

The thing which BeAChooser will generally fail to mention is that the initiator of this disaster was Bush who threw money at GM without any point other than to keep GM alive for a few months until Obama took over.

Without a doubt, Bush was a fool on this issue. He threw money at the auto companies for no apparent reason other than desperation about the failing economy, a desire to be viewed as a nice compassionate guy by everyone, and perhaps a wish to shove the problem onto the next president. Now Obama's reason is simply to keep the unions that provide a HUGE portion of democrat campaign funding happy.

 

[Furcifer]

Now Obama's reason is simply to keep the unions that provide a HUGE portion of democrat campaign funding happy.

Do you have anything to confirm this? I don't know one way or the other, all I can tell you is around here, in probably the largest union member per capita area, this doesn't seem to fly. I just don't hear this being discussed in Detroit. In fact I probably hear the more grumbling about the Democrats than I do Republicans. I say your full of beans BAC.

Anyway, I'm off to wish in the New Year. Happy New Year to you too.

 

[ZirconBlue]

(incidentally, I'm not sure if you've heard, but the Challenger has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any car at 98% )

It sure is a sweet looking automobile. I love the revived pony cars - Mustang, Camaro, Challenger - that have come back in recent years.

Of course, for me, Chrysler has done an excellent job of designing cool-looking vehicles for well over a decade. It's the quality that's been missing. Has Chrysler improved in that arena in the same way that at least some Ford and GM models have?

 

[daenku32]

My Ford has 180k miles on it.

The myth about poor domestic car quality is just that, a myth.

 

[ZirconBlue]

My Ford has 180k miles on it.

The myth about poor domestic car quality is just that, a myth.

While I appreciate that your second sentence may very well be true, your first sentence, being an anecdote of one single vehicle, doesn't really support that assertion.

There have been some posts earlier (I believe in this thread, but perhaps in another) that seemed to provide evidence that GM and Ford have caught up (or, at least, are catching up) with the Japanese in terms of quality. My question was whether Chrysler has similarly improved in recent years.

 

[davefoc]

I can assure you your conspiracy as it relates to the Unions and the Democrats is not shared by the majority of the people here in the Motor City.

I'm not exactly sure what that meant, but the Democratic union connection is a friggin disaster for California. Massive public sector pensions have been committed to that far outstrip private pension plans and that far outstrip the state's ability to pay them. The fact is that money in politics equals results and the unions have got a strangle hold on California that is strong enough that it is not quite clear how it all ends, but it won't continue as it is because there just isn't enough money to maintain the insanity.

Of course we could all vote for Republicans so that the US bankrupts itself with massive crony driven defense spending and wars with questionable justification that are fought poorly and with the principal goal of enriching Republican cronies.

I know we don't see eye to eye on this Dave (Happy New Year by the way),

And happy new year to you. One of my New Year's resolutions is to hold off on any more anti-auto bailout rants for at least a few days.

but I'm firmly convinced the money is best spent reviving the automotive sector, rather than siphoning it off to China (take a look at the recent news in regards to the stimulus money going over seas to build wind turbines. Don't tell me you didn't see that coming)

Well, as you suggest, we certainly don't see eye to eye on the utility of the auto bailouts, but money sent to China is just a fact of life when the Republicans were determined to slam the country in to massive debt. Why would the Chinese loan us money unless they wanted control over US policies and to jump start their industries. The first step to ending that is to stop borrowing and the Democrats are in no mood to do that while there is still money to be borrowed.

Currently that means giving money to the finance companies so people can start buying cars. American cars! It's the best solution to the current problem. Period.

(incidentally, I'm not sure if you've heard, but the Challenger has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any car at 98% )

I did look up a review of the Challenger:
http://www.thecarconnection.com/fullreview/dodge_challenger_2009_quality_3

The thing that stuck out for me was this:

One frequent gripe with domestic cars is that their overall quality lags behind that of competing imports. While this has changed markedly in recent years, the Challenger Dodge still suffers from a disappointing lack of overall refinement. The materials quality is lambasted more than fit and finish in reviews read by TheCarConnection.com, as ConsumerGuide feels that the "Challenger's cabin houses plenty of cheap plastic, but everything is nicely assembled." Jalopnik's reviewer also slams the "horrifyingly plastic interior," while Car and Driver says that the Dodge Challenger SE's "mostly black interior features some silver-painted plastic that does less to warm up the interior than to reflect its cheapness." Fortunately, ConsumerGuide points out that Dodge Challenger "R/T and SRT8 are available with chrome, faux carbon fiber, and suede accents that help dress up the interior a bit."

For years, you've been able to buy stripped down American cars with crappy looking interiors for about the same cost that you could buy a nice looking, moderately equipped import. Ford and perhaps GM seem to have figured out how to make cars that have nice looking interiors at competitive prices with the imports. It sounds like Chrysler is still trapped in a time warp. I thought the chromed plastic doodads that dominated Detroit styling for decades were relentlessly ugly. Apparently Chrysler still thinks that design motif is what people want or at least that's what they're going to make whether people want it or not.

Anyway, Happy New Year again to one and all.

 

[davefoc]

My Ford has 180k miles on it.

The myth about poor domestic car quality is just that, a myth.

Hah, I sold my Honda Prelude with 209,000 miles and it was still going. I think that proves unequivocally that Hondas have better quality than Ford. I guess this completely disproves ZirconBlue's assertion that one can't draw valid general conclusions from single data points.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Hah, I sold my Honda Prelude with 209,000 miles and it was still going. I think that proves unequivocally that Hondas have better quality than Ford. I guess this completely disproves ZirconBlue's assertion that one can't draw valid general conclusions from single data points.

Curses! Foiled again! I'll get you next time, davefoc!

 

[BeAChooser]

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
Now Obama's reason is simply to keep the unions that provide a HUGE portion of democrat campaign funding happy.

Do you have anything to confirm this?

You want evidence?

What happened in the Obama negotiated GM bailout? Where did the equity of the existing shareholders go? Well, 40% of it was given to GM's unions. Chrysler's unions got 55% ownership. A multi-multi-multi billion dollar GIFT from the democrats courtesy of US taxpayers. And they got seats on the corporate boards. Not only that, but union member were allowed to keep their far better than average health benefits and pension plans. The Washington Post stated that the "union can boast that it has been promised no loss in ‘base hourly pay, no reduction in . . . health care, and no reduction in pensions,’” even though union wages and benefits are what helped fail the companies.

Furthermore, do you know that democrats have buried provisions in the Health Care bills that would let the union members keep their cadillac health care plans without added costs which the rest will have to bear if we buy such plans? Also buried are provisions that will make up for what concessions the unions did make to VEBA (their retirement plan) during the bailout in order to get their 40%/55% equity shares. Maybe it has something to do with the millions of dollars the UAW union bosses gave Obama in the last election. You think?

 

[Furcifer]

It sure is a sweet looking automobile. I love the revived pony cars - Mustang, Camaro, Challenger - that have come back in recent years.

Of course, for me, Chrysler has done an excellent job of designing cool-looking vehicles for well over a decade. It's the quality that's been missing. Has Chrysler improved in that arena in the same way that at least some Ford and GM models have?

In terms of customer satisfaction and the cost of repair and maintenance yes. The number of recalls is down as well. Everyone makes a good car these days.

As dave pointed out, I think Chrysler still lacks in fit and finish. I think this plays well to the Challenger. Stick your head in one and take a look. They have a very retro feel to them while being modern. Do you but a 600 hp car because the fascia has 5 mm tolerances, or do you buy it because its got 600 hp to the rear wheels? They should just have a speedo, a gas gauge and a place to keep your speeding tickets in order.

 

[Furcifer]

You want evidence?

What happened in the Obama negotiated GM bailout? Where did the equity of the existing shareholders go? Well, 40% of it was given to GM's unions. Chrysler's unions got 55% ownership. A multi-multi-multi billion dollar GIFT from the democrats courtesy of US taxpayers. And they got seats on the corporate boards. Not only that, but union member were allowed to keep their far better than average health benefits and pension plans. The Washington Post stated that the "union can boast that it has been promised no loss in ‘base hourly pay, no reduction in . . . health care, and no reduction in pensions,’” even though union wages and benefits are what helped fail the companies.

Furthermore, do you know that democrats have buried provisions in the Health Care bills that would let the union members keep their cadillac health care plans without added costs which the rest will have to bear if we buy such plans? Also buried are provisions that will make up for what concessions the unions did make to VEBA (their retirement plan) during the bailout in order to get their 40%/55% equity shares. Maybe it has something to do with the millions of dollars the UAW union bosses gave Obama in the last election. You think?

I think you have a little convoluted impression of what the unions do and don't have. The UAW and its members have given up considerable advancements due to restructuring. It seems like you are talking about a specific Union other than the UAW. Most of the union workers have given up pay and benefits they easily would have seen 5 years ago.

As for the health care I'm not really sure. I haven't kept abreast of what's going on there, and I haven't heard much in the local news. Are you considering the fact that the Unions and the businesses they, for lack of a better term "service", are the number 1 purchasers of health care? If you're a bulk volume buyer you usually get fringe benefits and discounts the average joe on the street doesn't. Just a consideration.


I should probably do a little research now and get a little more educated on what's going on. I just popped in because I saw the thread revised, and I wanted to rib dave about the Challenger. As usual with this thread, concerns I see voiced don't appear to be as much an issue for us here in the Union capital of the world. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[Roadtoad]

In terms of customer satisfaction and the cost of repair and maintenance yes. The number of recalls is down as well. Everyone makes a good car these days.

As dave pointed out, I think Chrysler still lacks in fit and finish. I think this plays well to the Challenger. Stick your head in one and take a look. They have a very retro feel to them while being modern. Do you but a 600 hp car because the fascia has 5 mm tolerances, or do you buy it because its got 600 hp to the rear wheels? They should just have a speedo, a gas gauge and a place to keep your speeding tickets in order.

That's not a performance car. That's a wannabe on wheels.

Part of owning a Performance Car -- note the caps -- is that you are able to keep it performing over the years you own it. (If you're not going to own it any longer, rent one.) Consider that no Chrysler product provides even a dipstick for the automatic transmission, according to my mechanic. Want one? No problem. $80, out the door.