AND 
Pelosi Lays Out Conditions For Automaker Aid
House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D) plans to introduce legislation to the House of Representatives next week to assist the automakers.
Today she issued the following statement laying down the conditions for such aid. She also signaled her continued insistence the aid be from the TARP and that the previously earmarked $25 billion retooling loans be left untouched. This is in contrast to the Bush administration’s contention that aid should only come from the already approved $25 billion, and not TARP which they feel should only go to the financial industry.
Pelosi’s Statement:
“Recognizing the severe challenges facing the domestic automobile industry, whose failure could jeopardize millions of jobs here at home and have a devastating impact on our economy, the House Democratic bill will provide immediate, targeted assistance to allow the carmakers, together with affected unions, time to develop a plan to assure the long-term viability of the industry.
“That plan must reflect these principles:
* Restructure the automobile companies to ensure their long-term economic viability;
* Meet standards for fuel efficiency that ensure the competitiveness of U.S. autos, including new fuel-efficiency standards;
* Deploy advanced vehicle technologies required to compete in the domestic and global market.
“The appropriate source of funding for this short-term assistance is the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) recently authorized by Congress. The Democratic plan includes even stronger limits on executive compensation and assurances to protect the taxpayer.
“Any effort to divert funds from the advanced technology initiative contained in section 136 of last year’s energy bill is a step backward in assuring the viability and competitiveness of the U.S. auto industry.
“A restructured, competitive American automobile industry will continue to play a crucial role in our national economy and in the global marketplace.”
77 Responses to “Pelosi Lays Out Conditions For Automaker Aid”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM Will Not Create a Line of Volt-Branded Vehicles
- Video: GM’s Rough Road Chevy Volt Testing
- Chevy Volt is the Centerpiece for Many Rapidly Emerging Industries
- GM Wins* October Sales Race; Decides to Keep Opel Citing Improved Financial Health
- One-Year Left to Volt Launch: Has the Date Slipped?
- GM’s Expectations for the Chevy Volt
- 7 Questions for Site Founder/Neurologist/NYC Marathon Runner Lyle Dennis
- Volt Chief Frank Weber Going to Opel
- GM Delays Launch of Volt’s ‘Sister’ Car, the Chevrolet Cruze
- GM CEO Says Help Needed to Achieve Mass Adoption of Electric Cars
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Chrysler dismantles electric car plans under Fiat November 7, 2009DETROIT (Reuters) - Chrysler has disbanded a team of engineers dedicated to rushing a range of electric vehicles to showrooms and dropped ambitious... […]Texas
- First Solar buys 117 MW project from solar startup Ausra November 7, 2009First Solar buys 117 MW project from solar startup Ausra: _Link_ (http://www.reuters.com/article/mergersNews/idUSN046821420091105) Given that water... […]Jason M. Hendler
- True believers swamp Fisker opening November 7, 2009True believers swamp Fisker opening _Link_ (http://www.autonews.com/article/20091106/ANA05/911069996/1137) Can you imagine what the roll-out of the... […]Jason M. Hendler
- Zero Motorcycles Announces Consumer Financing November 7, 2009Zero Motorcycles Announces Consumer Financing: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1037942_zero-motorcycles-announces-consumer-financing) […]Jason M. Hendler
- LeRoy1974 November 6, 2009Does the Volt have a trunk in which we can put groceries or a couple of golf bags? All the photos and drawings of the Volt look like it was in an... […]LeRoy1974
- Embrace technology to turn nuclear energy into environmental solution November 6, 2009From the Seattle Times: "STEWART Brand, author of "The Whole Earth Catalog," visited Seattle last week, promoting his latest environmental manifesto... […]misslexi
- Lutz to Head Opel November 6, 2009Der Spiegel reports that Lutz is going to head up Opel: Spiegel Online(link)... […]dagwood55
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
November 15th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Please no
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
“That plan must reflect these principles:
* Restructure the automobile companies to ensure their long-term economic viability;
* Meet standards for fuel efficiency that ensure the competitiveness of U.S. autos, including new fuel-efficiency standards;
* Deploy advanced vehicle technologies required to compete in the domestic and global market.
==========================================
I dunno, this is so vague and open to Interpretation you could drive a 747 through it, *sigh*
Stew.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
“…together with affected unions…” read and as long as there are no union jobs lost. So good luck with that, unless they freeze compensation, and also allow for layoffs without jobbanking, etc. this won’t help. Yes, you can drive a 747 through those words, I think Congress will absolutley find a way to ball this all up. I hope they figure it out, but we pay these guys to do things right, and they could still screw it up for free…
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Vague, too broad. Sloppy work. This means literally nothing.
Let’s be sincere, chances are minimal that the government would enforce adequate measurements to straigh out GM and others. I give less than 5% chances that could be successful.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
I notice there’s nothing in there about restructuring the unionzed workforce contracts… imagine that.
Lessee…
* Sacrifice US foreign policy and drug policy for the unions (e.g. Columbian free trade agreement)… Check
* Sacrifice US manufacturing capability for the unions… Check
Bad things come in threes… what’s next on the check list?
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Pelosi has an uncanny way of frightening the dickens out of me. I think behind that sardonic smile, it’s Halloween all the time.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
I change my vote from Loan with conditions to NO! I do not want the government trying to define a viable business. What we will end up with is a car that looks like a Wildebeest, designed by committee.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
restructuring means everything from modified union wage&benefits, reduced management’s compensation , factory closing etc. pelosi is just to wise to outline steps that will anger the union which has long supported the democrats. let the republicans spell these out ! ho,ho,ho , merry xmas !
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Lyle..
Lets get back to technical stuff.. I got fed up with financial news going on for the last couple of weeks at GM-Volt. Below is some stuff for you to put in website.
Why A123 Didn’t Get the Volt Contract:
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/22186/
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
The economic world as we know it is changing very quickly. The new reality is that we are no longer a consumer-driven, debt-driven society. Fewer cars will be purchased–essentially forever. This means there is tremendous overcapacity. One would expect huge restructuring, including reorganization and liquidation. Even in liquidation, potential new owners will be able to buy up valuable assets like factories, brands, and designs and manage them better than the old GM did. New owners will be able to re-employ the engineers and designers that will now be backed by sufficient capital and new thinking.
This may be the end of our Volt project, or only the beginning, it is difficult to say.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
CEO Nancy is going to set GM straight! Not! This sounds worse everyday. Besides, now that they are “attacking” the TARP money this gives Bush ammunition to veto. Veto he will. “The TARP is strictly designed to keep the U.S. financial system from collapsing, not to bail out companies that have made poor decisions.” or something to that effect.
People, Bankruptcy should not be feared. Yeah, the word sounds horrible but we are NOT talking about liquidation. This will be a three year breather to completely reorganize GM for the new global market. The new era of the electrification of the automobile. If done right, GM will be positioned to be a leader once again. Yes, the Japanese will still be very good competition but at least we will be on better footing. With our current system it’s like running a marathon with a ball and chain around your ankle. We need to cut that chain. I feel bankruptcy is the only way. What else is going to get through to the UAW? Sorry, the current union model is unsustainable. Americans do not support their unfair socialized subsidies that do not position the country to be more competitive in the future. Quite the opposite. It’s time to get realistic and accept that the average worker does not deserve $70 / hour to drive lug nuts. Oh and Mr. Union Worker, drop that attitude where you think you deserve your job and that you don’t have to put forth your best effort. That attitude of it’s you against the company. It’s your company against the world!
How about a new frame of thinking? How about if a union worker does not like the low wages of manufacturing they can work hard to re-educate and find a better paying positions? One that justifies the pay. Do you really think a factory floor employee should be getting paid better than an engineer in a different industry? Come on. Is that the American way? This upsets me because most companies don’t need unions anymore (if you have a union you deserve it). The conditions are now such that unions are not required anymore. If you want a socialistic system don’t you think it should be fairly distributed? Like the police or healthcare? Why should a U.S. infant have no healthcare while you and your family enjoy subsidized healthcare? Is that really fair? How do you justify that?
Don’t people see that selective socialism is no different than giving royal family members preferred treatment? What’s the difference? I don’t see it. It’s not right and it needs to be fixed. Yes, it might artificially build up the middle class and artificially create a market of consumers but the bad side is that the powerful union is able to control the activities of the corporation. How about we let the government do the regulations? How about we let our foreign trade negotiators figure out what’s fair when dealing with global markets?
Why do we have union workers telling us the level of automation that can be used? Where we should be producing products? How much of the revenues are spent on healthcare?
I just fundamentally dislike the current union system. It’s unfair, It’s uncompetitive, it holds back progress and It’s unsustainable.
Thus, I vote for no bailout. I want to see a complete restructuring. The bailout sends a message that the structure is good and only needs a helping hand. Do people think that? Most people here are for a bailout because of the Volt. What would be your thoughts if the Volt program were not in the equation? I’m guessing not so favorable.
I am really for the Volt program, Mr. Lutz’s new design mentality and even Mr. Wagoner’s global strategy. However, even if they can’t admit that their hands are tied they are. They are chained. The bailout is similar to picking up the ball and helping them carry it for a few miles. That’s all. It is not helping to cut the chain. Unless they help with the baggage they are doing nothing but delaying the inevitable.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
OK, what does this proposal mean?
__________________________________
* Restructure the automobile companies to ensure their long-term economic viability;
Does this mean fire people or does this mean drop Hummer?
++
* Meet standards for fuel efficiency that ensure the competitiveness of U.S. autos, including new fuel-efficiency standards;
Does this mean the Volt isn’t a big deal? Just give us 2 million Cruze?
++
* Deploy advanced vehicle technologies required to compete in the domestic and global market.
Does this mean go from 2 electric motors per transmission to 3? (three mode hybrid)
++
“The appropriate source of funding for this short-term assistance is the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) recently authorized by Congress. The Democratic plan includes even stronger limits on executive compensation and assurances to protect the taxpayer.
Protect the taxpayer? This idea went away with the signing of T.A.R.P.
++
“Any effort to divert funds from the advanced technology initiative contained in section 136 of last year’s energy bill is a step backward in assuring the viability and competitiveness of the U.S. auto industry.
Does this mean… ‘Build what we tell you to build’?
++
“A restructured, competitive American automobile industry will continue to play a crucial role in our national economy and in the global marketplace.”
(Restructured) again? What does this mean?
_________________________________
I am willing to hear the government’s proposal on this. I would just like to know what it means.
How about the U.S. Government ordering 1 million EREV mail delivery cars? These routes are typically very localized and performed at lower speeds.
=D~
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Many people mention Chapter 11, but I agree with the article below from the Economist, 11/13/08. Basically, who will want to buy a product from a company which is in brankrupcty? I will not.
“…However, there is considerable scepticism both within the industry and among analysts as to whether Chapter 11 is a way forward for GM and Ford (though it may, some concede, be more appropriate for Chrysler). Mr Cole says that “it would kill them in the market”. The fear is that rather than give the firms a breathing space in which they could complete the restructuring of their operations and extract further concessions from the union, Chapter 11 would set off a downward spiral.
Consumer surveys that suggest that 80-90% of prospective customers would abandon the products of a carmaker that had filed for bankruptcy protection. When airlines went into Chapter 11, most of their passengers stuck with them, reasoning they would be at least be in business long enough for tickets bought for trips just a few weeks away to be honoured.
Cars are different. A car is the most expensive purchase many consumers make, and by buying a car they also enter into a long-term contract. Buyers expect their 60,000-mile warranties to be honoured, parts to be kept supplied and their dealers not to have disappeared. Used-car values are also a critical part of the deal. If the firm that made the car has gone bust, it becomes virtually unsellable secondhand.
A further reason why Chapter 11 might not work for the carmakers, says Mark Oline, an analyst at Fitch Ratings, is that they have very little scope for further cost-cutting. “They’re not being crushed by wage and benefit costs—it’s about revenue and products now,” he says. Bankruptcy would do nothing to speed up the introduction of vital new models.
…”
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
Texas – How quickly you forget. The UAW agreed to wages for new workers that will average $27 per hour last year. The UAW agreed to take on legacy costs in exchange for one-time payments last year. http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070926/BUSINESS01/70926007
If the UAW has to take further cuts to top-tier/senior workers in order to ensure that the company survives, I am sure that they will. What kills me is the knee-jerk villification of unions. There is plenty of blame to go around.
And again folks, the economy is in the toilet because average people in this country have run out of buying power. Unions can be part of the solution, and not just part of the problem. CEO pay to worker pay ratios have to come down; the buying power of the middle class has to be bolstered so that the economy can function. Henry Ford said it long ago: I want my workers to be able to afford to buy the cars they make, so that I can sell more of them. Universal health care has to happen to make US manufacturing more competitive. There are lots of pieces to this puzzle. You can’t just lay it all on the UAW.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Mrs. Pelosi once again proved she is a great leader. What a set of detailed, well defined requirements. No reasons for public outcry once such masterpiece proposal has been formulated.
Read between the lines and you will there that executives can continue to cash in millions of dollars. UAW salaries can continue to be considerably more than the average for similar auto workers. Camaro 2009 can certainly continue to excite STUPID DRIVERS, WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND $*#%$ ABOUT CARS!!!
I AM JUST SO TIRED OF THIS. THESE $*#$% ARE GOING TO GIVE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AWAY AGAIN?? DID YOU KNOW THAT GM NEEDS AT LEAST $12 BILLION ONLY TO CLOSE SELECTED FACTORIES??! ANY SIGNIFICANT HELP IS GOING TO BE IN THE MAGNITUTUDE OF > $50 BILLION. WAKE UP AMERICANS! WAKE UP! DO NOT SUPPORT THIS. IT IS A TRAP.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
It sounds like it is kill or be killed; or GM gets the loan from the Government or it goes bust rather quickly, perhaps in a matter of 4 months. Given the legitimate arguments presented above in the article posted by Laura, the Government officials will argue that the loan is being proposed given that the Chapter 11 is not an option to GM. So the only other way is to rescue the lucky CEO’s and happy “Big 3″ managers. What a way to get rewarded for bad administration. I would like to make millions like those guys do.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
How about the U.S. Government ordering 1 million EREV mail delivery cars/trucks? These routes are typically very localized and performed at lower speeds.
____________________________________
This is what the government is supposed to do. Find ways to be more efficient. This action will take the burden off of state governments to continue operating mail truck refueling stations. And the associated hourly cost of labor. Sure, the mail drivers will have to do more work. They will need to plug the car into a 110v at the end of the shift. No more smoky parking docks? Well, they will just need to breath clean air from now on.
__________________________________
1 million x $25,000 = $25 billion (up front)
This will accomplish three things.
1>It will ensure that EREV technology gets a national foot hold.
2>It will greatly aid GM in meeting a 30MPG average across the product line.
3>It will ensure that even a failing GM must continue down EREV road to complete the order.
=D~
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Come on guys, read between the lines here…”Restructure the automobile companies” This mean everything…..
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
I’m not sure where I heard this but I thought it was a great idea.
Bush fires Cheney, Pelosi moves to VP and leaves with the current administration on Jan 20.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Someone cue the theme music; Conan sir, would you be so kind as to report to congress (with sword in hand) and clean house? Please,please,please, oh god ppllllleeeeeeeeeeeease! Thank-you kindly, yours truely——Oh who cares! Just start swinging already!!!
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Hous Volt Pharteen Says:
November 15th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Come on guys, read between the lines here…”Restructure the automobile companies” This mean everything…..
========================================
Now that does not mean anything, sir. What does it mean by “restructure”? We need details.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Pelosi is a horrible leader and even worse at pork barrel politics–ask the tuna. If you think I don’t know what I’m talking about, read a little bit about the protections she slipped in for the constituents in her district while screwing the rest of the fishermen. I DON’T LIKE HER PULLING THE STRINGS…
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Dave K., regarding the idea to buy GM (Volts?) for mail delivery and plug them, isn’t the Prius better suited for stop-and-go type of operations? I read that in Japan, people get 90mpg with Prius easily on stop-and-go. I worked in the public sector and we were always required to perform evaluations from at least three makers before making purchase decision. I am sorry to tell you that Toyota would likely blow away GM Volt on this specific postal mail application, too. Sorry for the bad news.
Dave K. Says:
November 15th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
It will greatly aid GM in meeting a 30MPG average across the product line.
_____________________________
Being competitive (having an appealing product-line where large quantities will be sold at a profit to sustain the business) means a diverse offering, not just 30 MPG vehicles and Volt.
An affordable vehicle (low 20’s) that delivers 50 MPG is missing.
When will that market be provided with a choice from GM?
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
#13 Laura
We don’t usually use authoritative sources like the Economist here, preferring talk show radio hosts who have no idea what they’re talking about and who, if they have an economics degree, came by it by way of a cereal box. But yes, bankruptcy has many risks. One not mentioned is the inter-connection of the suppliers to all manufacturers.
However, the bailout will happen. If not this term then next. Bush will probably find some fig leaf. If not then he’ll just convince a few more people that he has been the worst US president ever, though in truth there may not be that many left to convert to this view.
#23 Laura
The Volt will beat the Prius like a drum on any type of driving but especially in city driving. The Volt is an EV with a range extender. The Prius is an ICE with an electronic transmission. No contest.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
DonC, do you prefer articles from talk radio or do you prefer articles which depicts sound reasoning? I am aiming to expose articles, regardless of the source as long as it adds value to this noble forum.
No, the bailout may not happen if we could unite. The problem is that there are too many people illuded with the idea that a $35K-$40K electric car is the answer to make GM viable in the mid-term. If most people did understand that is not the case, flooding Congressmen office could revert their thinking.
I disagree with your assessment that the Volt would beat the Prius every time; one thing you do not want to do is to piss off your postman making the poor fellow recharge his vehicle every 40 miles for God sake! That may not make difference for small neighborhoods, but I know lots of postmen driving long-distances to serve major cities.
#23 Laura
The Volt will beat the Prius like a drum on any type of driving but especially in city driving. The Volt is an EV with a range extender. The Prius is an ICE with an electronic transmission. No contest.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
hi Laura #23,
“Prius better suited for stop-and-go type of operations”
__________________________________
Yes, it is, if you live in Japan and are trying to help Toyota. Then buying Prius trucks would help your economy. Also Laura, the EREV truck will perform for a solid week without recharge. The back-up gas engine offers 250 additional miles on top of the nearly free first 40.
BTW: I just emailed the California EPA with my suggestion. I think Arnold will love to close 500 refueling stations and have per vehicle operating costs drop by at least 50%.
=D~
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
The Volt will beat the Prius like a drum on any type of driving but especially in city driving. The Volt is an EV with a range extender. The Prius is an ICE with an electronic transmission. No contest.
_________________________________
Some like to pretend Prius doesn’t have an EV mode for heavy city driving. Some also like to dismiss the reality that the electric-motor is what the wheels are connected to, that the engine is deep inside and can remain motionless up to 100 km/h (62.1 MPH).
It is a design to contest… especially since that type of hybrid is also built by GM.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
For those that don’t like the details given, you should consider this is a friggin statement (read press release) NOT a proposal. I’m no fan of Pelosi, but for a statement it sets the right framework.
There have been several articles like the one Laura posted at #13. The biggest danger may be with the suppliers. Ch 11 for GM will like mean bankruptcy for them and Ch 7 for AC Delco. Ch 11 will quickly turn into Ch 7 without government aid. Successful arbitration, followed with loans would provide the best opportunity for success. My support for this process has nothing to do with the Volt. I firmly believe that Ch 11 will lead to Ch 7, which in turn will change a deep recession into a depression.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
The idea below seems to be favoritsm all the way. Don’t you realize that for billion dollar purchase you have to open up for competitive bids. Why do you think Airbus won the recent tanker deal supply from Boeing, in spite of Boeing being a competent aircraft maker with *finished* products?
================================
November 15th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
hi Laura #23,
“Prius better suited for stop-and-go type of operations”
__________________________________
Yes, it is, if you live in Japan and are trying to help Toyota. Then buying Prius trucks would help your economy
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
The real truth goes deeper than these discussions. It is the reality that Americans did a great job 20 years ago promoting globalization. With the mantra that nations across the world should open up markets and let competition reign. Usually, American cars, goods and services won the competition until recently. So that was very convenient to Americans.
Well, now other nations suffered, lost competition over the years, shut down their factories over the years. Finally some companies have mastered manufacturing and technology and Americans are feeling the taste of how it is real competition. It is absurd to observe people saying that Americans should buy American products without consideration for competitive bids. If you apply your rationale towards other countries and they stop buying American cars, so then you will see GM and Ford going down the hill in less than 2 months.
GM has a chance to succeed if they come up with a line of products which can offer far superior quality and inovative fuel economy at a reasonable price. Is that coming on a timely manner? History will tell.
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
hi Laura #30,
“The idea below seems to be favoritism all the way.”
___________________________________
We are addressing a major economic problem here in the United States. One domino in the current American economic scenario is the cost of a collapsed GM.
1>We can pay former GM employees with unemployment benefits.
2>We can give GM $100 billion and watch the value of the dollar decline.
3>Or we can help GM by increasing orders for vehicles.
You feel it’s better to order 1 million Prius. And let We The People of America support unemployed GM workers with tax dollar compensation. You feel it’s better to order 1 million Prius because they will cost $2000 less per vehicle. And watch your dollar value decline. How does $6 for a loaf of bread sound? $25 for a haircut? A can of coke for $2?
=D~
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
This thread is useless without:
A) Details
B) Pricetag
Seriously, we are going to send this up on Monday and we have nothing, no information? Is it going to be like Christmas morning, were you have to run down to the tree and unwrap it? Zero time for debate means zero time for criticism I guess. Pretty hard to disagree with vague platitudes she gives out here:
“A restructured, competitive American automobile industry will continue to play a crucial role in our national economy and in the global marketplace” — no…you don’t say?
—
“Any effort to divert funds from the advanced technology initiative… is a step backward in assuring the viability and competitiveness of the U.S. auto industry.” — shocker
I really don’t know what else to comment on, it is like eating a piece of dry toast…there it is, whoopee.
/guess I’ll see you in the next thread
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
hi statik #33,
“…it is like eating a piece of dry toast…”
______________________________
Hey bro, the grape jam and butter are over here on the table.
http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/Volt%20New.jpg
I’m off to work, see you all later.
=D~
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Hey, the Govt likes to over spend on common things right? Ditto to the military right? Well, I think their “Fleet” auto’s are old and are in need of a refresh. I believe there are at least 85,000 govt owned as well as an additional State Govt’s maybe 25,000 vehicles accross the country.
I say we sell all the current Ice vehicles and the Govt “Refresh” the fleet with a tall order of say 85,000 + 25,000 ? And pay in advance half of it which should go ONLY to the production of the Volt.
Sound good? Sounds better than a bailout if you ask me.
I just want my Volt!
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Laura, DonC was complimenting your source with his sarcasm aimed at the talk radio drones. Where did you get the idea the Volt HAS to plug in every 40 miles.It is an EREV with 40 miles all electric and then optimized series hybrid after that. It should have about 10-15% better economy than the Prius in city driving in range extended mode. The Prius will be similar or perhaps slightly better at highway economy than the Volt’s range extended mode.
john1701a #28
The Prius is and has been a great car but not an inch has been traveled by a consumer production model that was powered by gas. It has no plug!
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
I have a couple of tehchnical questions on the Volt.
How many Volts is the battery pack?
Whats the AH rating?
What’s the “C” rating on inrush (charge) and Out flow (discharge)?
What is the Voltage of the motor?
Does the battery power go through a step up stage before geting to the motor?
Voltage is not always the same at the motor terminal as it is from the battery terminal.
Thanks
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
Here is a good one:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/169162/page/2
“…
We are now seeing the first political side effects of the open-ended $700 billion rescue of financial institutions. With so much money going to so many recipients, boundaries and rationales need to be established. When is public intervention justified? Who deserves support and why? Otherwise, political firepower will increasingly rule. …”
(Quote)
November 15th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
As much as it pains me to see it…I think they need to go bankrupt to end the nightmare that is their UAW contracts. THAT is the key for them to compete with the Hondas and Toyotas of the world.
Even when Honda or Toyota manufactures a car in the U.S., they are doing it without the unions. Strangely enough…their employees are working in decent conditions and are making a living on their wages.
If those union workers wanted to make the big bucks, they should have gone into a different line of work. Be a doctor, a pharmacist, an engineer. With the exception of high-end and custom car artisans…installing fenders is not supposed to be a freaking career. I did more complicated jobs than that over the summers when I was in high school!
Let the union die…let Gettlefinger go to hell, and then sit back and watch GM and friends get back on their feet. When they can invest in their cars, and technology rather than invested in a bloated and overcompensated union…the competition will be MUCH more interesting. There are more than a few union workers with jobs that would best be done by a robot today…but they’ll never let it happen.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:04 am
fyi, I am laughing my as$ off right now….
There’s still no official word (it’s expected by the end of the year), but it looks as though A123 Systems, a company based on a remarkable new battery chemistry formulated at MIT, won’t be supplying the batteries for the first generation of GM’s new electric car, the Volt. The contract, according to a couple of news reports released in recent weeks, will go to LG Chem, a Korean company.
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/22186/
Of course we still have 5 weeks left till the end of the year. Lets see what happens.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:20 am
Why are all guys so worried about Washington send BILLIONS to Detroit? I mean who knows more about the car business and building cars than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed?
These are the same folks that have big plans to take over your heath care too. They have all the answers for that too. These are VERY smart people with only the best of motives. Everything will be fine when they finally get in charge of your health care and the cars Detroit must build to become world competitors again.
Just look what Barny Frank and Christopher Dodd (from the same political party) did for home mortgages? Sure they took a ton of cash to squash any regulations that might have prevented a disaster. But the important thing is the ’say’ they are for helping “working families”.
Relax. With these guys fully in charge now (and President Obama who took a lot of UAW money) everything will be fine. They really only have YOUR best interest at heart.
bahhhhhwaaaa!!!!!!!
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:32 am
And you guys chastised me of my rant and thought I was just full of anger and sh!t. Well, here’s some validation to my rant.
By Lache’s estimates, GM’s hourly compensation—wage plus fringe benefits—totaled $71 in 2007 compared with Toyota’s $47.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/169162/page/2
My post #40 validates my criticism against what you call an “American Icon” and to boast “Buy American”. Then you proceeded to question the validity of what decisions were made and how they came to their conclusions of “going over seas”. Well, the Volts primary power source will most likely NOT be built by an American company. Why? because of cost. Yup the decision was most likely based on lower cost and you guessed it (actually they did), the American product was too much money. On top of that, it’s newer technology, hence the higher cost.
Well, there’s another black eye for the battered wife. Would you like another?
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:48 am
I applaud Ms Pelosi’s efforts to do something constructive in terms of trying to help the automotive industry and the many jobs. We are all part of the larger problem that got us into this mess in one way or another…I’m sure everyone here has gotten used to an easy credit line and has not taken their own finances seriously until now. No one seems to want to admit personal responsibility, but boy can most of us point the finger. Get over your fears of leadership and maybe we as a nation can get back on track!
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:56 am
Getting, this is my last post.
The A123 battery will be manufactured NOT in the US…
“After accumulating some $132 million in venture funding, it now counts six manufacturing plants in China, 852 employees (at last tally), 120 patents and filing, and the largest lithium-ion R&D team in North America.”
http://www.xconomy.com/2008/01/24/the-a123-story-how-a-battery-company-jumpstarted-its-business/
The writing is on the wall. Read it.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 1:57 am
This is what I’m going to do when I get my bailout, I’m going to buy houses every 40 miles apart all over the country and then I’m going to buy a Volt for each one of them so I will never have to buy gas again yeeeaahhh!!!!!!!
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 2:17 am
Right on WarrenPeace. I read part of GM’s insistence was LG or A123 would need to manufacture here as part of the conditions of a contract award. American jobs were needed. A123 would not (China first), LG Chem said they would (coming to America).
As for Ms. Pelosi, Thank God. A party is now in power that is putting American manufacturing first, middle-class wages first, and our tax rolls over foreign tax rolls first. So unlike the past eight years. Now for the naysayers, with a red carpet and large Welcome mat of open markets (until you read the fine print), feel free to offer your wages with direct competition to foreign labor in India and China. Please, post how well you do. Let’s not forget to vilify your too high labor wages along with the unions. Why? I guarantee you right now, today, senior management is positioning on just that thought – where can I replace _(your name here)______ with cheaper labor and as CEO reap the rewards for making such a bold move to heighten profits – no matter the cost to America.
Never forget that legendary team of “open markets, free markets” are good for American. Rated number 1 for support of “free markets” and one day, these IT workers saw India come along, then China, then South Korea, and more began coming to take their jobs. Many here were asked to train their foreign counterparts and the government of the past eight years threw it’s full support behind that approach. Now, a new poll was released recently. Imagine which group was the most anti free trade of any sector? Of course it was the same IT people who are now staring down the barrel of the gun they loaded. They deserved what happened to their standing in life. Now they know what others faced before them as they screamed to the ceilings about protectionists.
I donated heavily to the elections this year. Thank God the Democrats appear to actually be putting us first. God Bless America and our Democracy.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 2:24 am
Casey, I’m very proud of your efforts to buy multiple homes 40 miles apart and multiple Volts. Keep up the good work. So far, homes are at least built here and so far, the Volt is scheduled to be built here. Single handidly you may pull the country out of recession. Something most of us other posters can’t do.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 2:38 am
USA TODAY article (posted today)
Henry Paulsen, at Treasury unilaterally decides to go it alone, without Congress.
Treasury Notice 2008-83 went virtually unnoticed as the government rushed to cope with the emerging financial crisis in September. And that seems to have been the point. With no public discussion, the Treasury Department gave banks a huge chunk of money — as much as $140 billion, by one estimate — by changing a tax law that had been in place, and the subject of relentless lobbying, for 22 years.
Even by today’s deficit-be-damned standards, that’s a lot of your money. It’s the size of the economic stimulus plan President Bush proposed last winter. It would repair and modernize all of America’s bridges. And it’s on top of the $700 billion financial rescue plan approved by Congress.
Bank CEOs just aren’t making enough I gather. Thank Goodness Henry was looking out for them in his last two months in office. Well, let’s get back to vilifyin union wages that the Middle-Class get.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 3:33 am
So when she says restructuring, is that open to interpretation by the automakers or does that mean Congress now has a template to fill in the details based on investigations. I am thinking the latter. They are going to look at the books and decide if anything is obviously screwed up and decide what to do about it.
All of you who think that Pelosi is going to take over building the Volt, I think you need to relax. These are just outlines of what’s going to be addressed by Congress before it gets approved. Although I would’ve liked to hear Unions more specifically addressed, “restructuring” is a start. We’ll just have to watch and make sure that does include Unions. Write to your congressman about the freakin’ Unions being the problem. Make sure they realize that it’s not enough to just limit the executive salaries and bonuses. 1 guy making the wages of 10 regular employees instead of 50 is awesome, but that doesn’t change the fact that there are still 50,000 employees in Detroit and around the country getting paid twice what they’re worth.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 4:30 am
And get rid of the unions
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:11 am
Talks #9
Thanks for your article, I would like to read them if you’ve got more. This article stated that:
…12 kilowatt-hours should be plenty of energy. The extra four are essentially for insurance against battery degradation…
I’m not sure whether I’m interpreting this right but it seems to suggest that a new battery would give 40 miles on 12 kwh. Then 16 kwh would be give you about 64 miles/charge.The battery may eventually degrade to 40 miles in about 10 years. Is that how you read it ?
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:19 am
# 37 CaptJackSparrow
I have a couple of tehchnical questions on the Volt.
How many Volts is the battery pack?
330 VDC
Whats the AH rating?
16kWh
What’s the “C” rating on inrush (charge) and Out flow (discharge)?
Charge I don’t know, but MG2 puts out 53kW which potentially could all go to the battery at times, discharge is 110kW to match MG1.
What is the Voltage of the motor?
330VAC
Does the battery power go through a step up stage before getting to the motor?
No, but it does get converted from DC to AC
Voltage is not always the same at the motor terminal as it is from the battery terminal.
At the high voltages used and the power electronics being used, I can’t see this as being a problem.
Thanks CaptJack, this takes me back to the old days (last year) where we used to spend ages on this sort of stuff, and Statik was just a doomer, who thought the production car would be nothing like the concept, and GM would probably go bust anyway.
/sigh, it still has FOUR seats ya know….
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:23 am
Guys, don’t beat up on Laura too much. The Prius is not as bad as you are saying. It is capable of series operation up to around 32 mph. However, the new Prius is rumored to be good for around 60 mph (they have not said yet) full electric. If they put in a bigger motor and more batteries then they can match the Volt. It’s that simple. Don’t think the series hybrid design is more efficient than the Prius’ design. It is not.
I will argue that the Prius will be more efficient at highway speeds. Why? At highway speeds (after the battery is drained to 30%) the ICEs will both be the sole energy supplier. The Prius will go from ICE to mechanical transmission to the drivetrain to the wheels. The Volt will go from ICE to a generator to the battery (no exact disclosure on how it will be connected exactly) to the electrical motor to the drivetrain to the wheels. There is more room for efficiency losses. Believe it! At highway speeds the mechanical drivetrain is very efficient. Now, please show me how the series design is more efficient if you disagree.
Don’t just think Toyota is going to give up it’s PR position just because it doesn’t disclose it’s plans. They have done the analysis and have probably determined that a smaller motor and battery are more cost effective and will sell in more volume and generate more profits than the very expensive Volt configuration. It won’t take them much time to up both specs if they are proven wrong. They already have a bigger motor drive for their V6 vehicles (Highlander).
Don’t get too arrogant and think the series hybrid is the end all answer. We won’t know until both the new plug-in Prius and the Volt are released and tested by a 3rd party. I think the Prius will not be as bad as some of you think. I think it will be a great competitor. I hope it is because that will drive both companies to do even better. That’s good for them and even better for us.
Don’t laugh at Laura because she just may turn out to be right. If you do all the efficiency calculations you might have to agree. It’s not like the series design was unknown when the Toyota engineers were designing the Prius. There have been series hybrid trains out for a long time. Series hybrid busses? Already out.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:26 am
51 Ed M.
That’s right, the 40mpc is based on end of battery life. That is why they don’t charge beyond 85%. 4kWh seems a bit high to me though. 2kWh should be enough, unless they expect to lose quite a few cells during the battery life.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:33 am
Texas:
Right on, the Prius can be series at low speed / reverse, and parallel at medium to high, or both. With a beefed up battery it could be really useful.
All this tech talk, woo hoo.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 7:19 am
Let’s not help our biggest industry and let them die. Let the foreigners take over all of our industries. Let’s become a second rate nation and become dependent on all we buy. That is the attitude of the younger generation. Hey, why should I care that much, I’ve lived most of my life when Americans took pride in their country. Well, I do care about about the younger generation although with their ignorance they don’t seem to care. WAKE UP AMERICANS, we can not keep losing our big industries to foreign countries with the profits and designs left in their hands and still be considered a great nation.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 7:23 am
It is capable of series operation up to around 32 mph.
_________________________________
Typo. The current model has a 42 MPH electric-only maximum.
Also, the engine cannot propel the vehicle backward. That direction is power entirely by the electric motor.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 8:40 am
After World War II, the USA was left in a position of prominence in the world. We had modern factories and, except for Pearl Harbor, our lands were untouched by war. Since that time 60 years ago, the other countries of the world have been “catching up.” I expect this to continue.
The surest way to ruin our industries is to advocate intervention and subsidy. Competition will build a stronger industry. The automotive industry in the U.S.S.R was a disaster.
There are plenty of billionaires in this world, and so if GM feels that they need money, they can certainy get it from non-government sources. The only reason they are even coming to the government is because it seems the easiest way to get the money.
The only moral and proper role for the government is to provide a reasonable and fair process for the company to reorganize or liquidate itself (bankruptcy court).
I would have done the same thing with the Wall Street firms that were insolvent.
It is simply totally unacceptable to take money away from hard working Americans (and our children and grandchildren) and use it to subsidize giant companies that made utterly stupid decisions.
This “bailout” way of thinking, if continued, could very well endanger the value of the dollar and cause us enormous problems in the coming years. If the world loses faith in the dollar as a currency and in the USA’s ability to pay its debt, then we will suffer real pain. In contrast, liquidating these unsuccessful businesses will cause only modest pain in comparison.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 8:54 am
#53 texas wrote…
“It’s not like the series design was unknown when the Toyota engineers were designing the Prius.”
=============================================================
You’re right in that the series design was not unknown to Toyota at the time (mid 90’s).
The BIG DIFFERENCE NOW is the newer battery cell chemistries and technologies which are largely the result of recently applied nanotech. This was not around when Toyota started R&D work on the Prius. A NiMH battery to push the Prius (seating capacity 5) 40+ miles and 100 mph would have been HUGE, impractical and costly.
I will give Toyota credit for their ingenuity at the time. Despite the spectacular sales of the Prius, I do feel they have “bet the house” on a losing hand. The true series nature of the E-Flex drive train has many advantages. Some are…..
1. Servicing simplicity.
2. Fewer moving parts…
Check out http://www.cleangreencar.co.nz/page/prius-technical-info
3. Easy transition to NON-ICE Range Extenders as they are developed.
A total ICE failure in a “Plug-In” Prius may leave you with (at best) a speed limited vehicle. Depending on what failed, you may not even have that. Expect to be towed to a Toyota dealership.
A total ICE failure in an E-Flex vehicle would only result in range limitation. Most people would still be in range of their workplace and shopping. You may be close enough to drive to your dealer for service. Non-GM mechanics should easily make the transition to working on the E-Flex “motor-generator”. Removal and servicing will be straight forward.
E-Flex is the Future (I’m really not wanting to sound arrogant).
Take Care All
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 9:15 am
E-Flex is the Future (I’m really not wanting to sound arrogant).
____________________________________
The proper term is “smug“. Get use to it too, if you choose to compare without having real-world data available. Sorry, but that’s the way it works and what the Prius supporters have had to put up with for years.
Also, you seem to be glossing over the reality that “the Future” is still decades away. The 700,000,000 vehicles on the road worldwide are engine-only for many reasons. Moving beyond that requires a lot… like the challenge of making outlets available for everyone for plugging in, not to mention automaker production (building & supply) infrastructure changes.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 9:56 am
#60 john1701a wrote….
““the Future” is still decades away”
======================================================
I’m sorry if I struck a nerve with you.
I’m guessing that you own and drive a Prius. If so, Good For You.
The future is not “decades away” as you say.
The “future” is quietly circling the GM Test Tracks as I write this.
The “future” is being exhaustively tested in the environmental chambers in the GM Battery Lab.
If GM survives in some form and is able to produce the Volt, I believe they will transition several vehicles types to the E-Flex platform well within a decade. If GM doesn’t survive, some other company will produce vehicles with E-Flex technology.
Finally, you stated “the challenge of making outlets available for everyone for plugging in”.
I’m sure that “Public Outlets” with appear in parking lots and garages with “swipe your card” billing for debit cards. Remember that we will always have the Range Extender and our home outlets.
For those that don’t have electricity access at home by choice, they probably shouldn’t consider an E-Flex vehicle.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Don’t think Toyota is sitting on their hands. They probably have series mules testing now. The Prius was unknown until shortly before it was available in Japan.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 10:30 am
“That plan must reflect these principles:
* Restructure the automobile companies to ensure their long-term economic viability;
Here are a few restructure points that should be considered until the loan is repaid.
1. No “cash or stock” bonus or incentives pay for anyone working for GM.
2. No increase in Executive or Management headcount.
3. No salary increases.
4. Salary Cap. No salary over $100k/year for any Executive i.e. President, CEO, CFO, and VP’s.
5. Salary Cap. No salary over $65k/year for any Management and non-Management positions.
6. 80% of the loan is directly used to get the Volt, E-Flex & alternative fuel technology for sale in show rooms.
7. Discontinue production on the 10 least desirable vehicle models and replace with Volt, E-Flex & alternative fuel technology vehicles.
The Government is in the unique position to help these great companies get back in the black for the sake of our country’s prosperity.
NPNS!
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 11:50 am
The future is not “decades away” as you say.
If GM survives in some form and is able to produce the Volt, I believe they will transition several vehicles types to the E-Flex platform well within a decade.
_______________________________________
That is what I meant. By 2019, they could have several models available, a chunk of GM production. By 2029, the remainder of the passenger vehicles could offer it. That’s 2 decades already. Then 1 more is required before replacement of those vehicles purchased in 2028 are replaced.
Try being more realistic & specific when speaking of “the future”. Keep in mind how much resistance there still is to change and how long it actually does take when a new technology is finally embraced. Other industries are slow. Automotive takes even longer.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Pelosi is such a blowhard c**t. I am dissatisfied with the socialism that is now blatantly proffered by our government. This crap will only get worse. Then I hope, the people will wise up and vote the morons out in 2012.
The free market economy will fix itself.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
#46 jbfalaska- you got it! The last eight years has masqarated “free market capitalism” to something that favors the cheapest labor only. The American worker lost big time. Real capitalism is competition based on the quality of products and services, and yes with price, but our system has not focused on quality. That’s what the “free market” should be based on. Our new President gets that! We have systematically divided as a nation and have been distracted with confusing us with terms like “socialism” and “capitalism” We are going into truly unprecedented territory and now we need new definitions that won’t divide us as a nation. Please consider this, it is too important. The Volt will be a new competitive technology that can bring a much needed competitive edge that will benefit this country and many skilled workers.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
#56 Joe
“Let’s not help our biggest industry and let them die. Let the foreigners take over all of our industries. Let’s become a second rate nation and become dependent on all we buy. That is the attitude of the younger generation. Hey, why should I care that much, I’ve lived most of my life when Americans took pride in their country. Well, I do care about about the younger generation although with their ignorance they don’t seem to care. WAKE UP AMERICANS, we can not keep losing our big industries to foreign countries with the profits and designs left in their hands and still be considered a great nation.”
————————————
There are 2 ways that US industries can be saved:
1) They can become competitve.
2) The US can become a socialist, protectionist country.
Seems as though you’d like what’s behind door number 2. A temporary solution. That’s a great way to stick it to the younger generation.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
It is not socialism if we help GM and Ford once. In case you don’t know, the domestic auto companies woke up about 3 years ago. Because it takes about 4 years to develop a complete new car, they were not able to get their block busting new products out in time….before this economy downturn. I tired of hearing socialism, socialism. We help Chrysler years ago and I never heard anyone calling it socialism. Wake up Americans before you turn around and say “we don’t manufacture anything in this country anymore.” Another point to note, the American auto industry is vital to our national defense. Or do you think we can depend on the foreign countries to provide that? I guess most are worried the bailout will hit them in the wallet, but believe me, it will hit you a lot harder if we don’t.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
These conditions don’t have ANY teeth at all. Nothing will change, and GM will continue to build their gas guzzlers.
The conditions should have been more specific. This won’t be effective at all.
Congress had a lot of leverage for GM to meet certain conditions, and they blew it.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
It is preposterous to think that GM had anything to do with half of their sales and their ability to get credit drying up overnight.
GM can be blamed for *part* of their long term market share decrease (The government is to blame for the rest, because they have allowed so many advantages for foreign producers). But this financial crisis is due to deregulation and greed in the financial markets. GM did not cause it and should not be made to suffer for it.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
#68 Joe
“It is not socialism if we help GM and Ford once.”
——————————
Socialism is socialism. That includes the Chrysler bailout.
How much will that one time payment cost? Hundreds of billions. I hope the kids these days are investing in foreign currency.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Since I’m a tax payer in this is my money being used I would only approve a “LOAN” to the American auto industry only on the condition the Unions get their a##es kicked out of there and these employees (including ALL Management) take massive pay cuts. In addition if any of the manufactures fail the government has first rights of the sale of assets to pay back the loan.
(Quote)
November 16th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Another rising view of the actual historical conduct of GM and other “auto makers”.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/11/16-6
(Quote)
November 17th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Where the heck is the requirement for getting the bailout, that the unions get shown the door so the automakers actually have a remote chance at being competitive again?
(Quote)
November 17th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
jbfalaska “As for Ms. Pelosi, Thank God. A party is now in power that is putting American manufacturing first, middle-class wages first…Thank God the Democrats appear to actually be putting us first”
You apparently have more information on what Pelosi is proposing than I have seen, please explain what in this proposal accomplishes this conclusion? I’m not interested in Democrat Kool-Aid talking points from you and DonC so don’t waste anyone’s time, more of the “what” their bailout would do. Please be specific.
I have never bought a GM product in my life, so I don’t appreciate the fervor you on the left want to spend my $ on a company I have no responsibility for, unless of course you can explain yourself. I was planning on buying a Volt, but frankly GM’s chicken little behavior since it became clear the party of big government was coming to power gives me second thoughts.
(Quote)
November 17th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Great photo of Pelosi with her hand out. Give the government money to save GM? I’d rather buy a new GM car and give the money directly to GM.
(Quote)
November 18th, 2008 at 8:15 am
This thread is dominated by disappointed Palin voters (nobody voted for McCain). If they’re government employees or retired military they are, by definition, socialists…living on taxes from my labor and enjoying socialized medicine. They have no right to speak negatively of government intervention since they, themselves, like Palin and McCain, live on the government teat.
IMO the Big Three represent terrible influences, as corporations, on American values. They mostly peddle giant costumes, intended to inflate feeble egos…Hummers for example, though they’re not the worst.
They claim they sell what the buyers demand> giant SUVs. Toyota and Nissan follow suit because the Palin voters, the half of America that doesn’t drive Toyota/Honda et al, are such easy marketing targets.
I say we need one or more American equivalents to VW/Saab/MorrisMinor…
…..each of which was developed in response to WWII in one way or another as ways to invigorate struggling economies. One was Nazi, one was Swedish socialist, and one was British whatever…all were advanced engineering and each was crucial.
All were modern, reliable, and economical. All had their countries’ most advanced chassis and engine designs, all had better electrical systems than their countries’ finest luxury cars (VW was better than Mercedes, Morris was better than Rolls).
IMO the Big Three should be butchered back to the Little Three, not allowed to produce giant gas guzzlers, limited by law to 75% vehicle count production of 25mpg IN TOWN cars and pickups.
(Quote)