Grassroots Motorsports

Register Log in to GRM
- Community

Birthdays
Recently on the Classic Motorsports forums

Subscribe get a full year for only $23.95 Sample Free Test Drive—no strings attached

Login to post Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Auto Loan comes through

1 2

Dec. 19, 2008 3:59 p.m. HiTempguy Reader

Tim Baxter wrote:

That's the thing.. it's NOT hourly wages. The hourly wages are somewhere between 23 and 40 bucks or so, depending on who you ask. I have no idea what the actual numbers are... it's when you add in the retirement and health care costs that it balloons out of control.

Our current health care system is bad for business.

Of course, the UAW hasn't done much to help either. I'm not giving them a pass.

I wouldn't exactly say your current health care system is bad for business. I'd say that the UAW gets too much health care IMO. Plus the crazy freakin' job bank but lets not go there!

Macleans (Canadian business/world issues magazine for those who have never read it) stated that the average COST of a college/university prof. in the states is around $96K US (so thats yearly cost to an employer). You know what the average cost of a domestic autoworker was? $130K US. Do you see a problem with somebody with grade 12 education earning more then a uni prof? I sure as hell do. We have the SAME issues in Canada with the CAW; people who simply DO NOT under ANY circumstances deserve the kind of benefits + cash they are receiving.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:06 p.m. Salanis SuperDork

Just to throw something else in there about the whole ripple effect. It's interesting to hear Ford's stance. It looks like Ford is doing alright. They're not happy, but they're sufficiently healthy to weather the current economic storm.

However, they're pushing to keep the other two afloat because they're afraid that if those two collapse, it will kill off a bunch of parts suppliers that Ford depends on. Ford is afraid that, even though their viable, they wouldn't be able to survive the loss of so many of their parts suppliers.

I don't know what I think of that... but it is something I'm pondering.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:10 p.m. Dr. Hess SuperDork

When I worked in a union, the costs to the company was 3x my gross pay. The government got 1/3, the union got 1/3rd and I got 1/3rd gross, then the government(s) took their 1/3rd from the 1/3 I got. So I guess the true breakdown was: Government 4/9ths, union 1/3rd, pre-Dr. Hess 2/9ths. I'm sure the government got a chunk of the union's 1/3rd also, but I don't know the breakdown of that and the unions are pretty good numbers playahs'.

Our current health care system has been rigged to fail so Hill Care can be pushed on us and we'll beg for it.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:12 p.m. Dorsai New Reader

This loan went through for one reason only - Bush's Legacy. Bad enough he's got Iraq, Katrina, the Wall St. Implosion... he didn't also want "credit" for the US auto industry closing on his watch. He's punted the problem to the next guy in office.

The bit of genius I keep hearing and trying to figure out is Congress telling GM to merge with Chrysler. Why the hell would they do that? Chrysler has huge overhead, too many dealers, and too few products that anyone wants to buy. The only beneficiary I see in GM taking on Chrysler is Cerberus Corp's bottom line.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:17 p.m. oldsaw Reader

I hate to see the billions wasted, but no one wants the industry to fail on their watch.

Now, when they come back for more money in a few months and Obama's at the helm, well, he's going to catch all kinds of E36M3 if he coddles-up to union/management demands. The general public is against a bailout now; what going to happen when it comes to Version 2.0?

If Obama concedes to the Detroit cabal, provides funding and dictates what kind of vehicles are produced (even if said vehicles are not economically viable), he 'll likely end up increasing fuel taxes and "force" a life-style change by executive mandate. That will make him real popular, right?

That's a first step to a one-term presidency as I don't think his lofty rhetoric can appease voters in the current recession.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:19 p.m. carguy123 HalfDork

Keep in mind we are in a WORLDWIDE RECESSION not just a US recession. So is Bush to blame for the world's probs? He's just getting our end of it and we have come out pretty dang good compared to other parts of the globe.

Almost all of the issues you see on TV and in the paper had a foreign genesis. Foreign companies owned lots of B mortgage paper and couldn't afford it, AIG's issue was a 24 hour call by a French(?) company, etc., etc.

And then there's all them foreign cars that are to blame for all the Big 3's problems :)
Dec. 19, 2008 4:26 p.m. Thinkkker SuperDork

The only way i can see any of this truly helping them is to go ahead and force them to Bankruputcy. Cancel all contracts out union and otherwise then step in and go, "ok, you can get some money, but you better do something"

In the current state this is just not a pretty picture.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:45 p.m. Capt Slow Reader

I don't like this crap at all.

Since this comes from the executive branch and not congress the automakers don't need to present reform plans like they were going to need to do with the congressional plans.

The CEO of Cerbius (Chryslers owner) is our former treasury secratary. Cerbius is staffed with a bunch of people who used to work in the white house. Cerbius was the one pushing for the merger with GM. Who would benifit from the merger, Cerbius and Cerbius alone everyone else would get the shaft including all the employees at Chrysler. Cerbius is doing E36 M3 to trun Crysler around...

This is going to end in failure... and how do we get money back from a company that declaire bankruptcy?
Dec. 19, 2008 4:47 p.m. carguy123 HalfDork

Thinkkker you seem to think like most people, well everyone but the union guys and the politicians.

Without some CHANGE in the current car system I'm agin it.

Hmmm me and Barack do have something in common. I think I'll go shoot myself now.
Dec. 19, 2008 4:50 p.m. Type Q HalfDork

Thanks to those of you who looked for real numbers. There is plenty of blame to go around in this situation. This situation may be similar to the late 50's when the Eisenhower adminstration faced with a mild recession put togther a package of help that kept Studebacker and Packard affloat. They lasted to around 1963 IIRC. We may very well lose on the big three yet. If we can delay it until the rest of the ecomony is less vulnerable, it may be worth the money.
Dec. 19, 2008 5:11 p.m. HiTempguy Reader

Type Q wrote:

Thanks to those of you who looked for real numbers. There is plenty of blame to go around in this situation. This situation may be similar to the late 50's when the Eisenhower adminstration faced with a mild recession put togther a package of help that kept Studebacker and Packard affloat. They lasted to around 1963 IIRC. We may very well lose on the big three yet. If we can delay it until the rest of the ecomony is less vulnerable, it may be worth the money.

I think that everyone would agree, with the emphasis put on giving them as LITTLE money as possible to do so.
Dec. 19, 2008 5:12 p.m. AngryCorvair Dork

Clay wrote:

I hope the people boycott to show their displeasure with this "deal."

sure, just like they're boycotting the banks.
Dec. 19, 2008 6:57 p.m. Canute New Reader

Tyler H wrote:

Holy E36 M3! I'm in the wrong business.

No you're not, they're in trouble . This is definitely an attempt to try to placate UAW labor. They'd be in a lot better shape if they could: 1. Switch to 401k like everyone else. If I worked for them I would demand it. 2. Shoot the jobs bank in the head. 3. Kill the provisions that say how many people are required for each job. Stifles productivity and automation. 4. Wow, paying for health care is a huge problem in this country.

Some form of representation for labor is necessary, but the big unions are too corrupt. Interesting that the only one that told them to get lost was Ford. I see a number of new Fords out here in ForeignAutoLand. They also sell a lot of cars in Europe. Unfortunately they're so intertwined that if the other two fail Ford will be in trouble too. Chrysler could just sink beneath the waves and I wouldn't notice...
Dec. 19, 2008 7:05 p.m. Twin_Cam Dork

AngryCorvair wrote:

Clay wrote:

I hope the people boycott to show their displeasure with this "deal."

sure, just like they're boycotting the banks.

$300 billion to banks, people go about their business. $13.4 billion to car companies...WHAT THE @^!@ ARE YOU PEOPLE berkeleying SMOKING? E36 M3 FOR BRAINS ELECTED OFFICIALS!

The imbalance is...noticeable.

EDIT and note to the mods: If the F-bomb is in all caps, the filter doesn't pick it up. FYI.
Dec. 20, 2008 9:32 a.m. DILYSI Dave SuperDork

Twin_Cam wrote:

AngryCorvair wrote:

Clay wrote:

I hope the people boycott to show their displeasure with this "deal."

sure, just like they're boycotting the banks.

$300 billion to banks, people go about their business. $13.4 billion to car companies...WHAT THE @^!@ ARE YOU PEOPLE berkeleying SMOKING? E36 M3 FOR BRAINS ELECTED OFFICIALS!

The imbalance is...noticeable.

EDIT and note to the mods: If the F-bomb is in all caps, the filter doesn't pick it up. FYI.

The bank one was bullE36 M3 too. They had the good sense to ramrod it through before people could get pissed. One of the theories on how the Republicans lost so bad in the house and senate is that traditionally conservative voters saw how many Republicans voted for the bailout, and let them lose.
Dec. 20, 2008 2:12 p.m. Schmidlap New Reader

/Big Business Conspiracy theory on/

What I'm wondering is how much the Detroit 3 really are losing per month. Were they doing some creative accounting and pulling ahead a lot of costs to make the last few months seem much much worse than they actually were.

Did the Detroit 3 decide to put a bunch of costs on the books this quarter, that they ordinarily would have paid some time next year? This would have helped them make themselves appear to be in much worse shape than they actually were so the government would be more willing to step in and give them cash, and if they have a lot less costs to pay for in 2009, they can have an amazing turnaround and show the government that they've turned things around and deserve a much bigger loan.

/Big Business Conspiracy theory off/
Dec. 20, 2008 2:42 p.m. Xceler8x HalfDork

I'm sure the numbers have been massaged at least some to fit whatever Big Idea needed buy-in at the time. No conspiracy theory needed. That's just business. I'm not saying falsified but massaged and weighted to some extent.
Jan. 28, 2009 1:24 p.m. Josh Reader

Did some posts in this thread get disappeared? It showed up in the latest topics list, but the last post is over a month old.
Jan. 28, 2009 1:29 p.m. Tim Baxter Online Editor

I think this is the one a spammer posted in yesterday.
Jan. 28, 2009 1:45 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader

I think it's a conspiracy. I could have sworn i posted in this bad boy this morning.
Jan. 28, 2009 1:45 p.m. Josh Reader

Well go ahead and disappear me too then :).

1 2

You'll need to log in to post.