Not to want to arque with the other post.
If the auto industry goes bankrupt. So will alot of other businesses. The housing market everything. Those workers keep the money flowing. We cant all have service jobs we have to produce something.

I understand that a lot of businesses will suffer
The people who lived beyond their means and used their houses as though it was an ATM machine are responsible as well as the people who kept buying Yucons and that ilk or the most unsociable vehicles and the gas guzzlers to mow you out of the free ways
I never had a debt and everything I wanted I saved for it before I bought it so if every one worked like that then the only ones who will suffer are the the ones who lived beyond their means.
Let Free enterprise take care of that
If I am in the streets tonight it is because I made the wrong decisions whose fault is that?

Well I an self employed I worked hard to get where I am. I am a landlord I got my first house on a land contract at 9% interest. Since then I worked on ebay and
saved my money. Bought two more houses cash. I just have to point out those auto and steel workers support your grocery stores, textiles, lumber yards, construction, hospitals, fast food, shopping malls, highway construction, pay alot into social security and Taxes. Not to mention all the property tax those workers pay on their houses.

I've got some land east of Miami that I think you would be interested in for townhouses.

I'm sorry to say, but I'm with robert1652 on this one. Over a year ago I decided to live very frugally because I could see where we were headed. I can't be the only one to have seen the way the economy was going.

Screw 'em! Nobody has helped all the small businesses that have gone under so why should we help the big ones.

My response is going to be extremely looked down and I can understand those that oppose it. I undertsand that many businesses depend on the automakers. I feel that we also have many other problems that face this country. Maybe a depression is what we need. I know I know, before you rip my head off at least try and hear me out. Every powerful country must sometimes be challenged to show that they still are the strongest whether it be militarly or financially. I feel that by slipping into a depression, It may alter the entire way our country works. Those that are on welfare and don't deserve it would be filtered oput so that those that need it get it, illegal immigration would be addressed because we would block off our borders and so that unemployed American workers would be given the chance to work and all this other minor bickering about civil liberties and things that are argued about because nothing else major is there to be addressed would be put on hold. So am I extremely nuts by saying this, perhaps but I just think it is a way to look at the faultering economy in a brighter manner

I find it ridiculous that giant banks pocket away billions and trillions (while the CEO-s already pulled out with millions of dollars) and the auto-industry is asking for a fraction of it and they won't wanna give it to them.

I know most people come with the argument, that well american cars sux or similar, but don't forget who employ more people, a bank you might not even known about or a company with hundreds and thousands of workers depending on a paycheck coming in on fridays.

I agree there are so many small business that depend on the big ones as customers. The trickle down will push us into a depresion for sure. If they let the Auto Industries fail then it is a deliberate take down of the economy. The 25 to 35 billion they seek is small potatoes compared to what the economy will lose. It is such a no brainer it boggles the mind. It must be a deliberate attempt to take down the middle class and turn us into helpless peasants

I was just listening to the news, it says, GM might not even survive 'till the end of this month.

WASHINGTON – Stunned by the loss of 500,000 jobs, congressional Democrats and the White House reached for agreement Friday on about $15 billion in bailout loans for the beleaguered auto industry. President George W. Bush warned that at least one of the Big Three carmakers might not survive the current economic crisis.

Several officials in both parties said a key breakthrough on the long-stalled bailout came when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi bowed to Bush's demand that the aid come from a fund set aside for the production of environmentally friendlier cars. The California Democrat spoke to White House chief of staff Josh Bolten during the day to signal her change in position, they added.

The developments unfolded as desperate auto executives pleaded for a second day with lawmakers for loans to help them survive, and the government reported the worst single month's job loss in 34 years.

Pelosi's office issued a statement saying legislation would come to a vote in the House next week. The Senate is also scheduled to be in session to consider steps to aid Detroit's Big Three.

"Congress will insist that any legislation include rigorous and ongoing oversight to guarantee that taxpayers are protected and that resources are directed to ensure the long-term viability and competitiveness of the American automobile industry," Pelosi's statement said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081206/ap_on_go_co/congress_autos


Can you believe this crap ? 800 billion for the wall st tycoons with no strings attached and for 15 billion for an actual industry that produces something and creates jobs by the millions they demand they jump through hoops Pelozi is a stinking traitor to this country as well as most of the elected government. I do not advocate violence but wouldnt it be great if someone tarred-and-feathered these swine!

diversification. if you have one product and one customer, you deserve to go out business. it's just poor planning. it's also capitalism.

and as a note, new figures just came out. quote job loss all you want but unemployment is still not even 7% yet. quit blowing it out of proportion.

The automakers should have dealt with this problem when the oil embargo in the early 70"s happened.Made more fuel efficent cars and trucks.It could,and should have been done.This oil thing has caused us all great big problems,from which we now are suffering from.America is enslaved to they oil companys,middle east oil.I think this is very sad,and just plain stupid!!The tecnology has been there all along,but was,and has been stiffeled by our goverment,and the BIG oil companys,which are bedfellows!I hope the big 3 dont go under,cause this will spell disaster for us all.But you cant say they didnt all do it to themselves."You reap what you sow"

But they did make fuel efficient cars, except they sold it in Europe and other countries. I can show you links to cars made by Ford and GM that most people in USA never even knew existed. The question is, why didn't they sell it in the USA?

nutjob environmentalists and a power-hungry public.

diesel was a big answer to fuel economy as the average diesel gets one and a half times the mileage a gas engine does. not to mention the maintenance costs are much less as diesels last longer and have fewer parts to break (no spark plugs or ignitions systems for starters, the most common cause of misfires). the problem the environmentalists got the notion a diesel was dirtier than gas when in reality, CO and HC emissions are zero while you pay for it in NOx emissions. the latter cannot be helped due to the design of a diesel engine unless you find some way to neutralize it out the tailpipe.

technology was another hurdle. fuel economy is not achieved by using less fuel. there is a perfect ratio required for optimum performance and emissions - 14.7:1 air to fuel. you cannot fudge on this without either being lean and increasing HC and NOx emissions while lessening power or go above, increasing HC and CO emissions (though this often gives power increases)

fuel economy has been increased by improving what already existed: less power loss in the torque converter of automatic transmissions, more efficient ways to inject fuel (from carb to tbi to sequential injection to direct injection now being implemented).

toyota and honda were small in the 1970s and just starting and mostly only produced small cars and small engines that were fuel efficient by nature. the big 3 already had a business model in place for several decades and fuel economy was not on the menu until the crisis. they already had contracts at that point with the UAW (actually since around the 30s IIRC) that would later tie them down.

toyota and honda built off their small engines and developed them as a specialty. think about it, when did honda build a truck? or at least something usable as a truck? it's been the last 5 years or so when the truck market boomed. toyota didn't build a large truck until the 1980s with the T100 and even that is the same size as my new tacoma.

toyota and honda knew they would lose the power and truck game so they stuck with what they knew - reliability and efficiency. the big 3 could not give up their truck game and since that was their big seller, they had to continue developing it whereas toyota and honda could invest entirely in small engines and only had a handful of engines they made in many different cars (22R was in bot the pickup and celica, the 3.0L was in the pickup and camry), further reducing costs.



Ford is the biggest player in the fuel efficient game for the big 3. the Fiesta, while completely comparable to honda and toyota at the time in power and milage was mocked and ridiculed by the big, gas-guzzler loving american public. it was embraced in europe. they now make a super compact called the Ka that's even more efficient. but neither are sold here because the american public didn't want them here. you can't make money on something people don't want to buy.

ford is also the only american company (or any that I've heard of) to make a hydrogen powered car. GM was the only to fully develop and sell an electric car. while toyota and honda looked to the next few years, the big 3 looked too far ahead and it bit them in the ass.

so don't go blaming them saying they never dealt with the problem. Ford more than dealt with the issue but the american public demanded power from the big 3 and expected efficency from the imports. if they had built all these efficient cars they'd still be in the same mess. trucks were never meant to be efficient - they were built to tow and haul. nothing else. it's not the big 3's fault that the american public sucked them up and every soccer mom had to have an excursion. supply and demand made this situation just as much as the excessive costs.

what makes anyone think that after giving all these mismanaging idiots money that theyre not going to FOLD anyway..after pilfering the till on behalf of all the corp execs
amazing how all these well to do people turn to beggars when the purse is open,so quick to kick the man on the sidewalk begging for change..when alot of them are to blame for the reason he's there ..we are all being scammed by those who have been in the business a very long time ..
..no one really possesses a plan to get us out of this mess and will probably wind up throwing good money after bad ..THEN WHAT....

Then you can move to Canada were you will at least have health care. If the automakers tank it will be a depresion worse than the 30's.