20th Feb 2009, 09:52

"Yes, if making a decision that is 91% in favor of destroying our economy is your choice, go for it."

It takes the decisions of many, especially those leading these companies to destroy our economy.

"Of course neither fuel mileage nor reliability (which is NOT an issue with any domestic) is responsible for the near-bankrupt conditions in the U.S. auto industry."

Chrysler has serious issues with reliability in many of their vehicles in their lineup.

"Rather it is the insane idea that to provide health care to our poor and elderly (as every other civilized country does) makes us evil "socialists", like the UK and Canada. The biggest financial issue facing the U.S. auto industry is the huge cost of healthcare for workers and retirees."

Healthcare is far more important to me than having a vehicle.

"We are now spending MORE money to bail out these companies than it would have taken to provide universal health care for every man, woman and child in the U.S. Hopefully at some point our nation will grow up."

We also are wasting tons of money, pouring it into an industry that has obviously seen its best days. Let them fail and let them learn. And I will keep driving my Nissans.

20th Feb 2009, 16:35

"The biggest financial issue facing the U.S. auto industry is the huge cost of healthcare for workers and retirees."

That and paying their workers twice as much, a burdensome pension system, other "legacy" costs, union requirements that force manufacturers to use more workers than necessary to do any given job, and (lest we all forget) a major recession brought on by a collapse in the credit markets (credit people need to buy cars).

A long drawn out debate about "socialized" health care would be inappropriate to this blog. But, because it's been mentioned here and on other threads, I'd like to chime in.

All available figures related to the cost of such a system are mere estimates and not hard sums. The government doesn't know for sure how much this system would cost (or whether it would be more or less than the auto bailout). Some of the reasons (actually questions) for this are:

Will people overburden the new system every time the hypochondriac media says that a sniffle is a sign of cancer?

How efficient will the system be?

How efficient will the associated bureaucracy be?

Will inefficiency eat up benefits born of scale?

Will voters demand the Nth degree of care with the latest technology?

Will the government then need to regulate prices on medical supplies?

How high up the line will it go?

To keep costs down, will the government begin to regulate our choices (Do you exercise? Do you smoke? Do you drink alcohol? Do you drive a lot?)?

With each new area comes more regulation and more bureaucracy. Will that become unbearably expensive?

They don't know and neither do we. We just know that health care has gotten too expensive, so we're casting around for solutions. Because of Washington's pro/con culture, we can't be sure that those who compile figures are truly independent and covering all the angles.

My biggest concerns with this type of system are that:

#1 Over time it will almost certainly cost more than current estimates suggest (it IS the government after all).

#2 It will erode our freedom further as the government tries to keep costs under control by regulating risky behavior.

I'm not offering a solution, just a warning. Just because someone (even a sincere someone like Mr. Obama, for example) says that it will cost $XXXXXXXX, doesn't make it true. All such figures are little more than educated flights of fancy. Let's just hope and pray that they get it right.

20th Feb 2009, 21:28

I highly recommend Peter DeLorenzo's book "The United States of Toyota" as a MUST READ for all of those who flippantly dismiss the disastrous results of destroying the American auto industry. Read it and then tell us "It doesn't matter if I buy a Toyota (or Honda, Nissan, etc.)".

22nd Feb 2009, 08:04

21:28.

If you read the comments made so far, the overall message you'll get from them is that the "Big Three" are destroying themselves. So simply underscoring the profundity of their failure won't convince many here.

22nd Feb 2009, 10:35

What convinced me was test driving, evaluation behind the wheel, examining the poor warranty duration. I can appreciate Economics 1 and 2, but usually test first hand and bring my checkbook and buy a new vehicle. Who is currently in office, what health care plan I have usually is not the topic of conversation when I buy. I also keep in mind the lack of attention and dealer service I had, and I switched entirely to new domestics.

22nd Feb 2009, 10:59

It isn't particularly insightful to lump all domestic manufacturer's into the Big Three. Their situations are all different. GM will survive at about 70% of its current size. Ford will survive pretty much be unchanged.

Chrysler may go completely under, although Jeep will continue on since in some form since they have a loyal group of buyers.

22nd Feb 2009, 12:20

Why should I spend my money on the junk the American big three are selling?

I have owned 5 different GM's over the last 20 years; all were pieces of junk, have now owned two Toyotas in a row with minimal problems.

And by the way, the two Toyotas I had were built here in Cambridge Ont Canada.

22nd Feb 2009, 16:10

If you read the book cited in comment 21:28 you'll find that destroying the U.S. auto industry by buying from foreign-based companies will potentially wipe out ONE IN EVERY FIFTEEN jobs in the U.S. You may not even realize your job in such varied fields as finance, healthcare or insurance are even RELATED to the U.S. auto industry until you get you pink slip. Happy Depression.

23rd Feb 2009, 10:56

You misunderstand my meaning. I was already aware of how profound a loss of EVEN ONE of these companies would likely be. But simply arguing that that is the case won't convince someone to buy... someone who thinks that their purchase won't forestall the inevitable collapse because as many have inferred, it isn't strictly based on sales. Their point (valid or not) is that the collapse is GOING to happen... either because of mismanagement, union pressure, poor products, or some combination thereof. It's simply a matter of time. They don't think their purchase will make any difference. Until you can find quantitative evidence that the mentioned factors have been fully addressed, they will continue to argue that, no matter what they buy, Detroit will fail for systemic reasons.