1st Dec 2008, 10:18

Thank you for speaking the truth. This does not get talked about a lot, but it is a fact.

By the way, the US automakers are not asking for a "bailout;" they are asking for a loan. Unlike the the banking industry, who are getting HANDOUTS to use however they please, the government wants to step in and execute a hostile takeover of the auto industries for their nowhere near as massive LOAN.

I do not support the government giving money in either bailouts or loans to any company or industry. It is not their role. But even still, the contrast between how the government treats the manufacturing industries versus the special interest industries (e.g., banking industries, pharmaceutical industries and military industrial complex) is mind boggling. It is equally mind boggling how the government stacks the deck against US manufacturers versus foreign manufacturers, even subsidizing the foreign companies while placing crippling restrictions and obstacles in the way of US companies, as mentioned by the previous commenter.

The following article explains how buying Japanese and other Asian products, even those assembled in America, is totally destroying our country:

http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html

1st Dec 2008, 12:51

I totally disagree that foreign carmakers deciding to produce cars in the USA is "Destroying our country". I happen to be from Tennessee where Nissan, Toyota, Honda, and soon VW have either assembly plants, or plants that produce parts for these cars, like Denso USA. I grew up in the late 70's, early 80's, and prior to the 90's when the first Japanese automakers set up plants here, the region was economically depressed... much like areas of the Midwest now. Since then, the Southern US has become one of the fastest growing economies in the country, plus it enjoys one of the best qualities of living standards in the US. We have in part foreign automakers to thank for helping us transition into this new economy. I imagine that if you're from Michigan, then your opinion that import brands are destroying the US economy might be more confined to the state level.

That being the case, then it's less to do with where a car's brand may originate and more to do with states that are less favorable to manufacturing along with long-standing unions that make manufacturing in these older established areas less profitable. So the problem isn't necessarily the fault of import automakers, but actually that of the US manufacturers as well as the way in which they manage their affairs.

Lastly, the reason that the US government is less than thrilled about handing out loans to ailing automakers is because the big three's problems have been brewing for decades: Their lack of ability in producing comparably built vehicles with the same levels of quality or fit and finish, their total reliance on high profit margin vehicles like SUVs, and their slow adoption of alternative powertrains.

The US government wants to see a plan and how these companies plan to regain their competitive edge. So far, the Big three have failed to deliver anything believable. Do I think they have some good products either now or in the future? Yes. But just as they found in the 70's when the fuel crisis hit, they had been making cars the same way for too long and got caught with their pants down when Japanese cars hit the market with better built, more fuel efficient cars and trucks. Once more, they've done exactly the same thing, with Toyota having had hybrids on the road for almost 10 years with GM's first serious attempt at their own dedicated hybrid coming out in 2010.

GM, Ford, and Chrysler need to get with the program. We can't afford to lose them due to the huge number of jobs we would lose. But at the same time, they make mediocre, "acceptable" cars that are once more - just behind the competition. That needs to change.

1st Dec 2008, 17:59

Thank you 10:18. As a loyal American I have tried to impress upon others the harm that the destruction of our native industries does. It's very hard to make people aware of the fact that although a company may have a factory in the U.S., it still does horrible damage to our economy and lifestyle to send our buying dollars overseas. I realize that patriotism is an outmoded concept, especially among the younger members of our citizenry, but there are dire consequences for turning our backs on our country, especially in times of dire economic circumstances.

As a mechanic for over 40 years, I can assure you that people spend far, far more dollars having imported cars repaired than domestics. A mechanic friend of mine retired a few years ago. He said he started really getting rich once big numbers of Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans hit the 3-year-old mark and were out of warranty. He said he had made more money in just a few years off of imports than he had in 20 years off domestics.

Billions of dollars have been poured into ads creating a myth that anything imported is better. For years Toyota used subliminal ads that featured a broken-down Ford Taurus in the background of every ad. All of a sudden people seemed to "remember" seeing broken down Tauruses everywhere, but could NEVER tell you WHERE. That is the result of subliminal advertising. It works. Never mind that the Taurus was an incredibly reliable car that has far BETTER ratings on this site than Camry. The brain-washed import fans will still chant "I see broken down Tauruses" just as they have been programmed to. I drive a 20-mile stretch of freeway to my company. I see DOZENS of broken down Camrys, Tundras and older Honda Civics, as well as a number of Nissans of all models. In the past 10 years I have seen ONE broken down Taurus, and it was a 1986 model that probably had 300,000 miles on it.

2nd Dec 2008, 11:08

-- I totally disagree that foreign carmakers deciding to produce cars in the USA is "Destroying our country" --

I am referring to our government allowing the Japanese and now other Asian governments to implement policies intended to put US companies out of business, and we let them get away with it as articulated in this article:

http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html

The plants in the states you mentioned may provide benefits in the short term, but US industry going out of business and the Japanese (or anyone else) controlling all industry is not good in the long run. Buying foreign vehicles directly contributes to that happening. Once the Japanese companies control the economy after (God forbid) having put the US companies out of business, you are at their mercy. They will pay you as little as they want, with no incentive to do otherwise. Take a look at how they do not allow unions, albeit the unions are in no way without fault in this whole mess as you mentioned.

Also, this has no influence on my feelings on these matters, but I am from NJ - a decidedly UNFRIENDLY state toward business by most accounts.

-- Lastly, the reason that the US government is less than thrilled about handing out loans to ailing automakers is because the big three's problems have been brewing for decades: Their lack of ability in producing comparably built vehicles with the same levels of quality or fit and finish, their total reliance on high profit margin vehicles like SUVs, and their slow adoption of alternative powertrains. --

I disagree about the quality and fit and finish assertion for reasons several people including myself have mentioned on previous comments, which I do not feel like rewriting and I doubt anybody feels like rereading. But, they are there for anybody who wants to see them.

Regarding the US manufacturers' seemingly over reliance on SUVs, they were just building products people wanted to buy, and making huge sums of money doing it. Can you blame them? It was the increase in gas prices that put the damper on those vehicles. Yet even while people were buying those gas guzzling vehicles in droves, Chevy alone (not combined with other GM divisions) was still building more vehicle models that get 30 MPG or more than Toyota. GM engines are also consistently more efficient than Toyota engines, as indicated by GM being able to offer a more powerful engine in a heavier vehicle, while achieving better fuel economy than import vehicles (particularly Toyota) with less powerful engines in lighter vehicles.

Regarding alternative powertrains, GM designed and sold the first production electric car, the EV1. They are now in the process of producing the first plug-in hybrid with a series drivetrain architecture, which is a much more complicated design endeavor than the parallel architectures currently being produced. Moreover, the parallel designs are not nearly as efficient as people have been led to believe. While they may appease politicians who do not know any better, they are not necessarily a sensible engineering solution, at least not in their current form.

GM also has more ethanol fueled vehicles on the road than all other manufacturers combined. Ethanol, the fuel itself, is another brilliant shoot form the hip political scheme that has extreme problems. But, this is not GM's fault, and they (along with other domestic manufacturers) should be commended for their major commitment ethanol research (for which their thanks was getting shafted by the government's incompetence in the whole ethanol scam), MUCH more so than any import manufacturer. OF course the government conveniently does not mention that.

Regarding fuel cells, GM has been involved in fuel cell research as long as anyone. But the problem fuel cell technology is not necessarily the cells themselves (although they are highly complicated), but the amount of energy it takes to extract the hydrogen necessary to run them - e.g., 75% or more of the energy the hydrogen can even produce. Thus, nobody has been able to come up with a fuel cell vehicle that makes engineering sense to produce.

But, GM is still on the forefront of fuel cell research, coming out before anyone with a test fleet of actual fuel cell vehicles currently on the streets in New York City, Washington DC and Southern California, for which GM received the 2008 Green Car Vision Award from Green Car Journal (I keep up with these things).

-- The US government wants to see a plan and how these companies plan to regain their competitive edge. --

The government cannot even run its own budget without hundreds of billions of dollars heading toward a trillion+ in deficit. It is laughable that they want to stand in judgement of how any real world (as opposed to Washington) runs its operations. The automakers are not blameless for their current situation. But the government should be looking at the substantial contribution THEY made to the situation through oppressive taxes and regulation, instead of pretending as if they have a clue of how to solve anything.

-- just as they found in the 70's when the fuel crisis hit, they had been making cars the same way for too long and got caught with their pants down when Japanese cars hit the market with... more fuel efficient cars and trucks.--

True, but this is not the 70's anymore.

-- Toyota having had hybrids on the road for almost 10 years with GM's first serious attempt at their own dedicated hybrid coming out in 2010. --

As noted above, you are comparing apples to oranges. GM's series hybrid is a completely different and much more challenging to design vehicle than Toyota's parallel design, which is not nearly as efficient or sensible a long term solution.