Big 3 US Auto Makers New Ad Campaign

[wingsdad]

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/wingsdad/Big3AdDec08.jpg

I make my living handling newspaper advertising for car dealers.
I'm not extremely busy these days.
Thanks partly to the attitude in this ad, I've been forced to sell 3 fine guitars since August as my income has dwindled.

[R_of_G]

There's little I can say without delving into what would be considered politics, so let me simply say

(A) that fake ad is a great piece of satire and well-done

(B) I hope the Big 3 solve their own problems or go bankrupt bc they are not entitled to a dime of our tax money. Free markets are free markets. If we interfere, it's not capitalism, it's something else entirely.

[Glacies]

I apologize if this is over the line political, but I don't think that the money given in bailouts is actual money the government had sitting around. They're just "inventing" it - it's the very definition of inflation. I don't beleive in it either.

[ted s]

I understood that the money was being borrowed from the Federal Reserve, which is actually a private institution ? This interest on this borrowed money will be payed for on the backs of the tax payers.
Much the same in Canada as I understand it.
I think I just crossed the line.

[R_of_G]

I believe you are correct in your understanding of the source of this money. It was Fed Reserve money all of which would be billed to the taxpayer. What it is the definition of is a tax increase.

[just strum]

I think they should use it to buy guitars and gear and give it to members of forums that have over 100,000 posts. But that's just my opinion and it sort of takes the edge off of political subject concerns.

What say Robert, can you apply for a bailout cash infusion. You can use the percentage of American members as your qualification.

[street music]

If GM would have one of their private jets take me to D.C. I would go before congress and ask for my 1/2 a million to bail me out of debt and still have enough to put back in my retirement what the stock market took from me this year. I'll agree to keep my pay rate below $100,000 a year and pay it back at the rate of 3% a year and not give myself any more fun than I currently enjoy.

[just strum]

If GM would have one of their private jets take me to D.C. I would go before congress and ask for my 1/2 a million to bail me out of debt and still have enough to put back in my retirement what the stock market took from me this year. I'll agree to keep my pay rate below $100,000 a year and pay it back at the rate of 3% a year and not give myself any more fun than I currently enjoy.


You should be recognized for doing your part. If more Americans would be willing to make the sacrifices that you offer, America would be back in its feet in no time.

[Childbride]

Wings,

:rotflmao:

[sumitomo]

I think all the politicans should drop the soap so us tax payers can show them just how it feels.Sumi:D

[marnold]

I'm originally from Michigan. Just realize that if the Big Three go under, the entire state will be annihilated. Michigan is already first (or last, depending on your point of view) in the U.S. in employment rate at 9.3%. If you think the bailout is bad, just wait until the welfare bill comes in. That will be money--to say nothing of jobs--that we'll never get back.

Don't get me wrong, I'm smart enough to realize that the Big Three and the UAW have worked hand-in-hand in making this situation the way it is. I just question the wisdom of letting literally millions of people lose their jobs to make a philosophical point.

[ted s]

Agreed Rev, either way we are in a heeps'o'trubs. It's not just the US, it's North America and further.

[SuperSwede]

This financial plague is all over the world now..

[R_of_G]

It's really a choice between welfare systems, individual or corporate. Giving any private industry public money is the equivalent of welfare. I see it as a lot more than a philosophical point to be made. Where exactly do we draw the line? If an industry is responsible for x-number of jobs we should give them our tax money when they fail because of their own shoddy business practices with no guarantee we will ever see that money again?

It's not that I have no sympathy for those who will lose their jobs, I lost mine two weeks ago because of the economic downturn so I know exactly how they will feel. That said, the answer is not to start handing out free cash to prop up businesses which should be out of business. I fail to see how increasing the tax burden of the average person is going to benefit the economy in any way.

[Andy]

they close plants, lay off workers,yet they still refuse to accept paycuts. sad

[Bloozcat]

This isn't really politics per se since members of the two political parties are represented on both sides of the issue. What it is, is bad business. The big three have been appeasing the UAW for a long time now and in the process, mortgaging their future business viability. In the back of their little, short sighted, immediate gain minds, the execs at the big three always knew that the day would come when the market would no longer bear the burden. Well that day is here and it's time to pay the piper.

I understand that the UAW came about for some very good reasons. But it's also true that an unchecked UAW has now become as oppressive as that which they fought against in their beginning. Business only works when management and labor work as partners, and not as adversaries. Management has to be sensitive to employee needs, and unions must be careful not to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Well, the goose is dead in Detroit. The UAW is now responsible for $3000.00 of every new car produced by the big three (especially GM).

Now here's where politics comes into play: The UAW has been really pushing for the bailout money because the auto makers would be under government mandate and control (like the federal gov't knows anything about running a business?!?). There was little in the proposed bail out deals that would have forced the UAW into any serious re-negotiation of contracts with the automakers. Both houses of Congress and the incoming administration are pro-union, so the UAW knows it wouldn't have had to seriously re-negotiate their deals with the automakers. All that would have resulted from this band aid fix is that the big three would have gotten a temporary stay of execution. The underlying problems weren't fixed, and it would be simply throwing good money (ours, the taxpayers) after bad.

Bankruptcy is another story. An impartial bankruptcy judge would expect concessions from both sides. Some shared pain as is appropriate under the circumstances. Not only would the UAW be compelled to enter into binding negotions with the auto makers, the bankrupty judge could order them into the negotiations - and hold both parties accountable for the terms of any agreements reached during the long process of coming out of bankruptcy. It's worked for the airlines, why should the auto industry be treated as a special case?

Remember names like Desoto, Packard, Studebaker, Nash, Hudson, AMC, Willys? They all went out of business because they couldn't compete against what became the big three (although Nash and Hudson did get a breif reprieve when they formed AMC). Now it's the big three's turn. What were once small upstarts have out competed the big three in the game they used to dominate. Survival of the fittest, capitalist Darwinism, evolution of the species so to speak.

And so goes the business cycle....:)

[tjcurtin1]

Good points, Bloozcat. I would add the failure of management to manage and plan. For years everyone else has been looking at the US auto industry and saying, :when are they going to wake up and start preparing for high-efficiency vehicles, electric vehicles and other innovations that would be essential for the future of anyone in the automotive business?! But, no, they fought any of that and instead kept churning out the giant gas-guzzlers. The lead time for new products is years, now they are screwed.

The other thing that made me laugh (and grimace at the same time) was the call for US autoworkers to 'take what the Japanese autoworkers get'. However, this was not asked (as far as I heard) of the CEOs. If I am not mistaken, Japanese ceo's make a much lower ratio in comparison to their workers, than the US ceo's... It ought to apply all around, and the ceo's here ought to be 'satisfied' making one tenth what they do now....

[peachhead]

I think all the politicans should drop the soap so us tax payers can show them just how it feels.Sumi:D

:rotflmao: :bravo: