As GM Goes, So Goes...

As I read "Tough Times in Troubled Towns," today's third installment of Nick Turse's Tough Times series, this one on the nationwide meltdown of America's most vulnerable municipalities, I couldn't help thinking about an old line that, by my childhood in the 1950s, had become a kind of national folk wisdom: "As General Motors goes, so goes the nation." (Indeed, as befit the rise of the U.S. as an imperial power, "nation" was sometimes replaced with "world.") Of course, in those days, if you were the head of General Motors, it wasn't so unreasonable to imagine that you controlled the fate of the nation and the planet. Not only were you atop a global powerhouse of a company, but you might still be going places.

After all, in 1953, Charles Wilson, GM's president, did become President Dwight D. Eisenhower's secretary of defense. Asked in his Senate confirmation hearings whether he would have a problem making governmental decisions that might not be in the interest of GM, he famously replied that he found it hard to imagine a conflict of interest "because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa." (Soon, that would be simplified to: "What's good for General Motors is good for the country.")

Only a few years after Wilson stepped down, a new President, John F. Kennedy, asked Ford's president, Robert S. McNamara, to step into the very same post. At that moment, it seemed true indeed that, as Big Auto went, so went the world. Of course, that was before McNamara and his "whiz kids" got us deep into, but not out of, the Vietnam War. Now, that's so much ancient history -- though today, you might imagine a new version of the old adage, based on Bush and Obama administration staffing decisions at the Treasury Department: What's good for Goldman Sachs is good for the country.

In any case, if Wilson's statement seems like history, the old GM line doesn't. As General Motors goes, so goes America. How sadly true. We know just how GM is going these days -- down the tubes; and, as Nick Turse indicates, so, too, go the towns and small cities not only in the vicinity of the Big Three's collapse, but countrywide. He concludes:

"It isn't surprising that towns which relied heavily on the collapsing auto industry and the building trades are going belly-up first, but what about the rest of America's towns and even big cities? The same economic forces are battering them, and while they may have been able to withstand immediate collapse, there's no guarantee that town after town won't be deep in the red, drowning in joblessness, and facing catastrophe as the American depression drags on."

Charles Wilson must be tossing and turning in his grave.

Comments (54)

1. Well, probably find few defenders of Eisenhower here among our local Right...

   by their own standards, he was a "naive peacenik" on his military-industrial complext stance....

   and a "raging Marxist" when it came to his top marginal tax rates and his creation of the Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare!

   Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 3:03pm

2. Like most leftist threads, this one is long on looking back and short on seeing a potential future.

   As has been the American history, the future will be shaped by developing technologies in transportation, energy, and communications.

   No one even has a clue what our manufacturing industries in these areas will even be comprised of, much less what and who will be involved from the 20th century.

   In fact, what is less sure is whether the socialist Democrats will even allow private enterprise to develop without government control.

   Posted by antisocialist at 02/23/2009 @ 3:38pm

3. Posted by antisocialist at 02/23/2009 @ 3:38pm

   Again, this is from a man who makes his living selling people insurance....

   because the GOVERNMENT says they MUST buy it....

   lecturing us on "private enterprise developing without government control"!!!

   Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 3:59pm

4. Latest history revisionism; Vietnam was McNamera's war not JFKs or LBJs, what will they make up next?

   Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 4:17pm

5. GM was America's primary provider of war materials during WWII just like all of the auto industry. Why do you think there are no 1942-1945 collector cars to be found, since they did not make ANY during that time. Yea, they were a power and union wages and entitlement programs did NOT eat up all the production costs either as they now do!

   Unionism has sucessfully KILLED of most of american industry since WWII and now the leftist and socialist Undemocrats continue to subsidise this homegrown parisite with your and my tax dollars!

   Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 4:23pm

6. Again, this is from a man who makes his living selling people insurance....

   because the GOVERNMENT says they MUST buy it....

   lecturing us on "private enterprise developing without government control"!!!

   Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 3:59pm

   1. I answered you previously as to your statement on mandates being irrelevant. But here again

   "As to the whole mandate. How many middle and lower class income earners can afford to pay damages or repairs today, much less the threats of lawsuits?

   Posted by antisocialist at 02/23/2009 @ 3:33pm"

   Anyone who actually cares about keeping their homes, retirement funds, college funds, and future earnings will buy insurance regardless of any state mandate.

   Secondly, I sell more life insurance than property and casualty because people do want peace of mind and they want the advantages of a tax free retirement savings at the same time. And there are no mandates involved in life insurance.

   But as I said, your entire argument that I'm only succeeding because of govt mandates just doesn't wash.

   there is far more money in homeowner insurance than auto and the only mandate there is by the lenders not govt, to protect the loans with the homeowner getting the real life benefit.

   Posted by antisocialist at 02/23/2009 @ 4:30pm

7. Vietnam was McNamera's war not JFKs or LBJs, what will they make up next?--------Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 4:17pm

   Okay so first, you argued that the President has the Constitutional authority to circumvent the Congressional power to declare war (in your support of the War Powers Act and general love of authoritarianism)...

   NOW you argue that two PRESIDENTS were circumvented in war-making by the Secretary of Defense?!??!?!?!?!?! Gee, Larry, who IS in charge of us going to war?

   Posted by antisocialist at 02/23/2009 @ 4:30pm

   Didn't say you were "only succeeding" because of a GOVERNMENT mandate, my pure libertarian friend...

   but you DO make a portion of your living off of providing a service that the GOVERNMENT FORCES people to purchase.

   Hardly "private enterprise developing without government control", is it???

   Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 4:35pm

8. Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 4:35pm

   1. your first is arguing a point made by Rio, not me.

   2. As I said, even without govt mandates my business would succeed just as well, because only a fool would put everything they have at risk including their auto.

   Most people actually care more about their future and their families. would some not participate? Sure, but in a state like California that still leaves 10's of millions who aren't that stupid.

   Most responsible people are not irresponsible with their families and their possessions.

   Posted by antisocialist at 02/23/2009 @ 4:42pm

9. 1."Of course, that was before McNamara and his "whiz kids" got us deep into, but not out of, the Vietnam War." (Engleharts creative history)

   2.Vietnam was McNamera's war not JFKs or LBJs, what will they make up next?--------Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 4:17pm

   Okay so first, you argued that the President has the Constitutional authority to circumvent the Congressional power to declare war (in your support of the War Powers Act and general love of authoritarianism)...

   Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 4:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person

   Is this the beginning of another journey you are taking into the pointless forest J"ulio (aka Mask)?

   Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 4:45pm

10. There is an article, linked at Drudge I believe, that mentioned of some 20 members of Magic's `Auto Team', there were only 3 members who drive a legacy American car.....

    Upon reading that article, I thought, damn....just like the bank bailouts! The same folks who caused the problems are now in charge of `fixing' the problems.

    In the case of US automakers, it is these same mostly Libs/Progressives who massively bought non-US autos and heavily contributed to the impending bankruptcies of GM & Chrysler.......

    Once Japan conquered Cali.......it was over!

    Posted by Happy at 02/23/2009 @ 5:22pm

11. The American auto industry is finished, absolutely finished. Management and the UAW have both been so incompetent and so greedy that they have destroyed what had at one time been a symbol of American achievement and know-how and prosperity. Almost no one wants to buy an American car today--and who can blame them? Other countries' automakers produce better cars and often do so in the US, providing jobs for Americans in poor regions of the country (wisely steering clear of the hell hole of the Upper Midwest, especially Michigan). It's time to move on--it would be an utter waste, the height of folly, to invest one more penny in the formerly "Big Three." And further investment would not help them anyway. They will collapse into a pile of cheap junk and scarred lives no matter what Obama and his union pals think.

    Posted by feinfein at 02/23/2009 @ 5:39pm

12. Posted by Happy at 02/23/2009 @ 5:22pm

    "In the case of US automakers, it is these same mostly Libs/Progressives who massively bought non-US autos and heavily contributed to the impending bankruptcies of GM & Chrysler......."

    Just as Bill Clinton, Dodd, Frank, and Pelosi are largely responsible for the housing crisis (through the required making of bad loans through the CRA and their lack of oversight of Freddie Mac and FNMA), the Democrats are responsible for the destruction of the US auto industry. Labor laws turned one of our greatest industries into a jobs program and slush fund for Democratic politicians.

    I know a guy in Spring Hill, Tennessee who does a lot of business with local auto workers who were transplanted there from Detroit. The autoworkers are absolutely despised by the locals, because the UAW members are the laziest, most obnoxious bunch of losers the native Tennesseans have ever seen. It's no wonder Saturn failed, and it's no wonder the the US auto companies can no longer compete.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/23/2009 @ 7:05pm

13. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo

    Watch Barney Frank claim that Freddie Mac and FNMA are sound and should be making risky loans.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/23/2009 @ 7:30pm

14. Is It Any Wonder The Market Continues To Sink?

    By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, February 20, 2009 4:20 PM PT

    Last Oct. 13, in trying to explain why the market had sold off 30% in six weeks, we acknowledged that the freeze-up of the financial system was a big concern. But we cited three other factors as well:

    • The imminent election of "the most anti-capitalist politician ever nominated by a major party."

    • The possibility of "a filibuster-proof Congress led by politicians who are almost as liberal."

    • A "media establishment dedicated to the implementation of a liberal agenda, and the smothering of dissent wherever it arises."

    No wonder, we said then, that panic had set in.

    Today, as the market continues to sell off and we plumb 12-year lows, we wish we had a different explanation. But it still looks, as we said four months ago, "like the U.S., which built the mightiest, most prosperous economy the world has ever known, is about to turn its back on the free-enterprise system that made it all possible."

    Posted by pontificus at 02/23/2009 @ 7:34pm

15. Posted by feinfein at 02/23/2009 @ 5:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Right in a nutshell thats it! Ford like some Republican governors at LEAST had the good sense to walk away from bailout money, negotiated with their workers and are now picking up market share like never before!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 8:05pm

16. Son of Porkulus on the Way!

    Congressional Democrats, apparently immune to any sense of irony, used the occasion of President Obama's Fiscal Responsibility Summit to unveil the most bloated discretionary spending measure ever--a $410 billion omnibus spending bill that is left over from last fall. The Democrats waited until President Obama was in office to move the omnibus bill forward, as President Bush had threatened to veto it.

    The bill represents an 8 percent increase over last year's funding for the same nine appropriations categories. Some of that increase, at least, represents earmarks with which the Democrats have littered the bill--an astonishing 9,000 so far. Press secretary Robert Gibbs was reduced to stammering incoherence when he was asked today about the Congressional Democrats' utter lack of fiscal sanity.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/23/2009 @ 9:47pm

17. I'd say that Son of Porkulus (or is it Bride of Porkulus?) is good for another triple digit loss on the Dow tomorrow. Maybe the Obamanation can pass some legislation commanding the stock market to go up! Why not? Why should Magic be subject the mercies of some arbitrary free market!

    Posted by pontificus at 02/23/2009 @ 9:57pm

18. Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 4:45pm

    Sorry for the mix-up.

    So JFK and LBJ were helpless to the machinations of Robert McNamara?

    Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 10:06pm

19. According to your buddy Englehardt! Yea!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 10:19pm

20. Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 10:19pm

    I don't see him exonerating Kennedy and Johnson for Vietnam?!??!??!?

    Simply commenting on the ineptness of "corporate genius" Robert McNamara.

    BTW, do YOU blame McNamara or Kennedy and Johnson for Vietnam?

    (Yep, it's a booby trap...and you're jusst the booby to fall into it. Attack Democrats?...oops, that means you think the Vietnam war was a bad idea from the start. Defend Democrats?....never, but that means you think Vietnam was a mistake too...and an old war-horse anti-Commie like you couldn't do that, could you?...heheh)

    Posted by Mask at 02/23/2009 @ 11:00pm

21. Only a few years after Wilson stepped down, a new President, John F. Kennedy, asked Ford's president, Robert S. McNamara, to step into the very same post. At that moment, it seemed true indeed that, as Big Auto went, so went the world. Of course, that was before McNamara and his "whiz kids" got us deep into, but not out of, the Vietnam War.

    You don't really read anything do you Mask? What do you think he meant by "Of course, that was before McNamara and his "whiz kids" got us deep into, but not out of, the Vietnam War." He sure did not say JFK and LBJ's war did he?

    Comprehension is just as fundamental as reading! Try it!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 11:18pm

22. Posted by pontificus at 02/23/2009 @ 7:05pm

    CRA! CRA! CRA!

    would you like a cracker?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/23/2009 @ 11:57pm

23. 'Asked in his Senate confirmation hearings whether he would have a problem making governmental decisions that be in the interest of GM, [GM's president Charles Wilson] famously replied that he found it hard to imagine a conflict of interest "because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa."'

    We haven't outgrown this naïveté as a nation, have we? Of COURSE, there's a difference between running a corporation and running a government agency. It's like the difference between playing football for your own team and serving as a referee.

    If we understood the divergence between each corporation's interest and the common interest during the fat times -- so that we could regulate all corporations efficiently and fairly and prevent them from using funny-money schemes -- then we wouldn't have to spend so much money to bail them out during the lean times.

    Posted by JakobFabian at 02/24/2009 @ 07:23am

24. Posted by comancheamerican at 02/23/2009 @ 11:18pm

    I doubt Mr Englehardt thinks the President of the USA has no powers over war-making.

    But again, do you think the Vietnam War was a mistake as he does?

    Posted by Mask at 02/24/2009 @ 07:30am

25. "In the case of US automakers, it is these same mostly Libs/Progressives who massively bought non-US autos and heavily contributed to the impending bankruptcies of GM & Chrysler....... "

    Millions of people from across the political spectrum have purchased imports because the "Big Three" could not or would not market relevant, well-built automobiles.

    When the first gas crisis reared its ugly head, GM and ford brought us tripe like the Vega and the Mustang II, respectively. They were like the automotive analogs to the current Republican modus operandi, in that they were the same old shit, (or worse), only repackaged.

    Remember the GM slogan "This is not your father's Oldsmobile."? Oddly enough, that statement was true.

    My father's Oldsmobile went 230 thousand miles.

    Posted by drhammer at 02/24/2009 @ 11:34am

26. Thanks, doc...I missed that...

    "In the case of US automakers, it is these same mostly Libs/Progressives who massively bought non-US autos and heavily contributed to the impending bankruptcies of GM & Chrysler..."---Posted by Happy at 02/23/2009 @ 5:22pm

    So GM and Chrysler are going belly-up because "Libs/Progressives" aren't buying their cars??!?!?

    But shouldn't HAPP and the "true majority" make up for that???

    Posted by Mask at 02/24/2009 @ 12:07pm

27. Posted by feinfein at 02/23/2009 @ 5:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    you are a great humanitarian.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/24/2009 @ 1:38pm

28. Thank you very much, M. duBois.

    Posted by feinfein at 02/25/2009 @ 01:16am

29. Posted by emile duBois at 02/24/2009 @ 1:38pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Among other things we always find reality is far removed from existential experiences of most leftist idealouges, but that trait is expected. Humanitarian expectations and the economic reality of profitable operations in a highly competative market is an unrealistic fantasy best reserved for the hollywood boxoffice!

    If you feel the need become a contributor to the new charitable organizations your new fueher has started called "Feed the Rustbelt" economy or "Reward your Union Enforcers"!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/25/2009 @ 01:31am

30. Posted by Mask at 02/24/2009 @ 12:07pm

    "So GM and Chrysler are going belly-up because "Libs/Progressives" aren't buying their cars??!?!?"

    As we all know, or should, GM and Chrysler are going belly-up because decades of Democratic pro-UAW legislation has made them unable to compete with foreign auto companies, especially those that operate here in America. Anyone familiar with UAW work practices and work culture can verify that on an anecdotal basis.

    "But shouldn't HAPP and the "true majority" make up for that???"

    Who in their right mind would buy the American alternative to the Accord or the Camry, whatever that is? Even liberals aren't that stupid, as the choices of Obama's staff so amply demonstrates.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/25/2009 @ 08:53am

31. "Who in their right mind would buy the American alternative to the Accord or the Camry, whatever that is?"----Posted by pontificus at 02/25/2009 @ 08:53am

    You're debating the wrong guy, PONTI...

    "In the case of US automakers, it is these same mostly Libs/Progressives who massively bought non-US autos and heavily contributed to the impending bankruptcies of GM & Chrysler..."---Posted by Happy at 02/23/2009 @ 5:22pm

    Maybe you and HAPP should call Rush and see which is right???...heheh

    Posted by Mask at 02/25/2009 @ 08:56am

32. Posted by Mask at 02/25/2009 @ 08:56am

    Some people foolishly 'Buy American' since they are misled by the use of false patriotism to prop up bad government policies. I am not one of them. Their heart is in the right place, but they would really be better off if they would help stop the policies, or put a stop to the politicians who put those politics forth. I don't see how people in Texas can vote out politicians from Michigan, however.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/25/2009 @ 09:06am

33. How do I buy an American car? Do I buy a Ford made in a plant in Mexico or a Toyota ;ade in Tennesee?

    Posted by Mistral at 02/25/2009 @ 10:19am

34. Posted by pontificus at 02/25/2009 @ 09:06am

    Again, talk to HAPPY...not to me.

    He's the one blaming the collapse of GM & Chrysler on "Libs/Progressives buying non-US autos".

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 02/25/2009 @ 10:43am

35. Posted by Mistral at 02/25/2009 @ 10:19am | ignore this person | warn this person

    look for the union label...

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/25/2009 @ 10:48am

36. talk to HAPPY...not to me.

    He's the one blaming the collapse of GM & Chrysler on "Libs/Progressives buying non-US autos".

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 02/25/2009 @ 10:43am

    A more complete picture, the pending `cause of death', ranked in deadly effects, high to low:

    1) Labor unions 2) Gov. regulations like CAFE 3) Company Mgm't 4) Lib/Progressives' unending love for imports (ie, the Euro worship)

    It's the flyover Americans who have kept the US auto companies in business by buying their trucks and dowdy sedans......I've bought both Chevy & Ford trucks and custom van....even a Taurus & Capri!

    Posted by Happy at 02/25/2009 @ 11:25am

37. Posted by Happy at 02/25/2009 @ 11:25am

    Oh, NOW you want to "complete the picture"?....heheh

    But still, you disagree with PONTI when he said -

    "Some people foolishly 'Buy American' since they are misled by the use of false patriotism to prop up bad government policies. I am not one of them."----Posted by pontificus at 02/25/2009 @ 09:06am

    Posted by Mask at 02/25/2009 @ 4:38pm

38. But still, you disagree with PONTI when he said -

    "Some people foolishly 'Buy American' since they are misled by the use of false patriotism to prop up bad government policies. I am not one of them."----Posted by pontificus at 02/25/2009 @ 09:06am

    Posted by Mask at 02/25/2009 @ 4:38pm

    NO, note Ponti said "Some people"....and he's right! As for me, US pickups were, and still are in most respect, kings of the road! Nobody makes custom vans able to cruise the Rockies and carry family of 4 and their living room.......And Taurus was a great car until it hit 50k miles......the Capri was a fantastic (but admitted German-made when I bought it) V-6 & still the fastest I've ever driven in.

    Why do you quibble over such piddly ass bs?

    Posted by Happy at 02/25/2009 @ 4:56pm

39. So GM and Chrysler are going belly-up because "Libs/Progressives" aren't buying their cars??!?!?

    But shouldn't HAPP and the "true majority" make up for that???

    Posted by Mask at 02/24/2009 @ 12:07pm

    GM, Chrysler and Ford are getting hammered because the same majority stock holders in these companies are also majority stock holders in Toyota, Mazda, Kia etc., diversity is the name of the investment game.

    It's legalized insider trading folks. You have a large amount of stock in GM and have a large say in what goes on at GM, but you've also invested in Toyota and it's cheaper (in the 70's) to retool Toyota and to hire Japanese workers to build the cars. So, instead of retooling the American car companies, they said, let's maximize our bottom line, get as much as we can without retooling the factories and invest overseas where it's cheaper to build new cars.

    It isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with libruls bying rice burners. It has to do with business execs turning out the same pieces of shit engines and slapping a different body on top of an old frame.

    While all of this is taking place, these dishonest titans slowly moved there investments away from the North American car companies and reinvested in the Japanese counter parts. How did Bush senior say it....It's a question of who owns whom. You average American saw the writing on the wall way back then with the outsourcing problem. It didn't matter who owned what, American workers were being screwed and we still are.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2009 @ 5:10pm

40. As promised, the Zero will be raising your electricity and gasoline costs, as well. Thank you Democrats! Thank you Obama!

    Carbon rules to boost gasoline, electricity costs by 6%-7% By Steve Gelsi Last update: 11:18 a.m. EST Feb. 27, 2009 NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Carbon dioxide emissions will draw a price of about $13.70 a ton based on President Barack Obama's proposed federal carbon cap included in his budget proposal, Point Carbon Managing Director Veronique Bugnion said Friday. A carbon price of $13 per ton would produce an increase in the cost of gasoline of 12 cents per gallon, a 6% increase over current retail gasoline prices. A 6.8% increase for average retail electricity rates is also projected, though Bugnion added that more coal heavy regions might see higher increases. Some of the increase might be offset by new renewable energy construction under renewable electricity standard proposals in the House and Senate, Point Carbon noted.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 11:25am

41. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2009 @ 5:10pm

    "It isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with libruls bying rice burners. It has to do with business execs turning out the same pieces of shit engines and slapping a different body on top of an old frame."

    The American auto companies labor under a huge competitive disadvantage compared to Japanese companies. Most of these costs result from UAW labor contracts forced upon them by the government. This is why the US auto companies no longer have the funds to invest in R&D.

    BTW, the Japanese auto companies are far more profitable than American auto companies.

    "While all of this is taking place, these dishonest titans slowly moved there investments away from the North American car companies and reinvested in the Japanese counter parts."

    No shit, sherlock. You folks made American auto companies unable to compete, so investors are putting their money elsewhere. And if, as expected, Japanese car companies making cars here are forced to accept unions through the Union Intimidation Enablement Act (aka card check) they will simply move their operations and jobs overseas. And we will all pay much, much more for vehicles, and become poorer. But that's what the left is all about, isn't it? Poorer people dependent on the State?

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 11:32am

42. BTW, Obama's carbon tax plan announced today is expected to result in an immediate increase in the cost of gasoline by $0.12 per gallon and of electricity by 6 percent. This is just as a start, and they are expected to be higher in states that use a lot of coal for electricity.

    Hope and change is here!

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 11:38am

43. No shit, sherlock. You folks made American auto companies unable to compete, so investors are putting their money elsewhere. And if, as expected, Japanese car companies making cars here are forced to accept unions through the Union Intimidation Enablement Act (aka card check) they will simply move their operations and jobs overseas. And we will all pay much, much more for vehicles, and become poorer. But that's what the left is all about, isn't it? Poorer people dependent on the State?

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 11:32am

    First of all Ponti, how did "us" folks make the American car companies unable to compete?

    Pull your head out man. What has killed the American car companies is the fact that they stuck with the V8 engine and huge frames. The assembly line workers had nothing to do with this choice and I'd wager that the engineers didn't either. This was a business decision not to compete in the economy car business which was about as stupid of a business decision all three car companies could have made.

    So, based off that, even corporate weenie heads aren't that stupid. So, why wouldn't they stop make the gas hogs and start making more fuel efficient cars like the Japanese? Try looking at the board of directors for the big three instead of at UAW. UAW is small potatoes compared to the major stock holders of these companies.

    I'll go you one further. If you want to drive wages down in an area, just close plants down....but the downside of this is that your workers won't be consumers either. See, that's the catch. Without consumers, there's nobody to buy the products no matter where they're made. No workers, no product. The people have more power than they realize. Consumers can boycott products, and workers can strike.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 11:41am

44. More hope and change! Stock market at 7,050 this morning, lowest in 15 years. Every time Obama speaks, it loses hundreds more points. Any idiot knows the last time you want to raise taxes is in a recession, but it seems Obama is unaware of even this fundamental fact, as he proposes to raise taxes on virtually EVERYTHING to pay for his huge socialistic expansion of government. This country is headed for a major fucking depression because of Obama and the idiots who voted for him.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 11:42am

45. Please refresh our memories here of how we started this economic downslide. Who was president? Who wanted to ramble into Iraq like John friggin Wayne and set things to right...and we're still paying for it? Who spent billions upon billions propping up defense contractors while in Iraq? Who deregulated any oversight of wallstreet, the banking industry, the department of energy, politicized just about every department in the federal government to look the other way at big business corruption including the FDA and so on? It sure as hell wasn't Obama.

    Jesus Christ couldn't undo the damage W did in the time frame you've given Obama. You are just pissed because you actually may have to pay some taxes and actually pay for the wars you rambled on and on about being such a grand endeavor. Now, it's time for all of us to pay the piper. You may be correct on one thing though. We may very well end up in another depression, but the cause is about 30 years of failed Reaganomics. Trickle down is complete B.S. and time has proven it.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 11:54am

46. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 11:41am

    "What has killed the American car companies is the fact that they stuck with the V8 engine and huge frames. The assembly line workers had nothing to do with this choice and I'd wager that the engineers didn't either. This was a business decision not to compete in the economy car business which was about as stupid of a business decision all three car companies could have made."

    Umm, excuse me because obviously you haven't been reading the news much. If you did, you would realize that a) American companies cannot compete on low-margin vehicles (i.e, small vehicles) because of their inherent labor cost disadvantage with respect to foreign car companies and b) for this reason they concentrate on making and selling big, expensive SUV's. The only things they can make money on are high-profit vehicles like big SUVs, which are the first thing that people stop buying when oil goes up. Educate yourself, for god's sake.

    " UAW is small potatoes compared to the major stock holders of these companies."

    Not. The direct costs of the UAW for Chrysler and GM are estimated at about $3,000 per vehicle over and above what Japanese, Korean, and Chinese companies are paying. That cost disadvantage cannot be borne on a low priced car, but it CAN be absorbed for a $70,000 Escalade. Thus, American car companies concentrate on selling the big SUVs.

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 12:02pm

47. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 11:54am

    "Jesus Christ couldn't undo the damage W did in the time frame you've given Obama. You are just pissed because you actually may have to pay some taxes and actually pay for the wars you rambled on and on about being such a grand endeavor. Now, it's time for all of us to pay the piper. You may be correct on one thing though. We may very well end up in another depression, but the cause is about 30 years of failed Reaganomics. Trickle down is complete B.S. and time has proven it."

    So, let's see - you're against the deficit spending of GWB for a war in Iraq (presumably because you did not support that), but you think it's therefore fine that Obama spends trillions MORE that we don't have? Does this make sense to you?

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 12:41pm

48. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 11:54am

    You know Wolfie, every day I meet people like you, people who are so indoctrinated into this leftist cult nonsense that they can't even recognize the absurdities in their own thinking. It's fascinating, in the same way that Hare Krishna and Scientology is fascinating.

    I mean, haven't you ever asked yourself why, if spending $1 trillion on government stimulus makes sense because it somehow generates wealth and thus gets us out of this recession, why then don't we spend trillions more and generate even MORE wealth and make us all rich? If giving the government $1 trillion of peoples' money to spend makes more sense than letting people spend it themselves, wouldn't it make even MORE sense to let the government spend $10 trillion, or even 100 percent of taxpayers' money? Don't you ever ask yourself these questions? Or is it really just all about how much you can get through the government, from other people, that you didn't earn, and to hell with the consequences?

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 12:48pm

49. "The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

    Margaret Thatcher

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 12:57pm

50. As a native Detroiter, what's missed perhaps by some is to consider where the underlying research, design and engineering work is done on a car model, that is, if you're trying to determine the "domesticity", as it were, of a car.

    Toyota, Nissan, or whomever may indeed be screwing a car together here under the right conditions (i.e., a State GIVING them a site and assorted tax breaks, for starters), but, you'll note, the real brain work is all overseas.

    Just offering another basis of comparison, and, I think, a more realistic one.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 02/27/2009 @ 1:26pm

51. Or is it really just all about how much you can get through the government, from other people, that you didn't earn, and to hell with the consequences?

    Posted by pontificus at 02/27/2009 @ 12:48pm

    Ponti, I view the government as providing the following services or stated differently, a public collective spending venture. Roads, bridges, infrastructure, courts, laws, and regulation of those laws and anything else that is a common need of the majority of the citizens of that country.

    Now, lets look at your side of the equation. You think that businesses will self-regulate and follow self imposed laws? LOL Not a chance. You end up with what we had under W. The wild west business wise. I don't think the government is the end all solution to everything, but unregulated business certainly has proven it doesn't work too well either.

    As far as the government bailing out the banks....I think the banks should have to pay back the bailout money with interest and they shouldn't be allowed to default. The Bush administration made it more difficult for ordinary people to declare title 11 bankruptcy and the same should be applied to businesses. Especially the ones taking part in shady loaning schemes as well as their wallstreet counterparts.

    The corporate execs who broke the laws should be prosecuted just like anyone else who is caugth with their hands in the cookie jar.

    The only thing most working people have to defend them from the super rich is the government. I'd trust a government of the people more than I would trust some self appointed executive to rule my life.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 2:27pm

52. but, you'll note, the real brain work is all overseas.

    Just offering another basis of comparison, and, I think, a more realistic one.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 02/27/2009 @ 1:26pm

    I would agree with the first part of what you said where foreign automotive manufacturers are getting huge breaks to set up shop in the U.S.

    The second part about the engineering outside the U.S. being better isn't true at all. If that was the case, all of our students would be going to Japan and Germany to study engineering, but it's the other way around. China, Japan, Germany and our other competitors send the bulk of their students to the U.S. for advanced engineering degrees.

    This brings up another thing. Our univeristy system in the U.S. does quite well. It's a mixture of private and public funding. Private schools compete with state schools and even the state schools get private funding. Don't under estimate the U.S. engineering capability, we still have the edge on technology.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2009 @ 2:47pm

53. Wolfie,

    My purpose was not to put down American engineering. What I was trying to say was that while foreign nameplates may have a manufacturing presence (i.e., assembly jobs) over here, much of what they do remains overseas. Wasn't trying to say that what they do overseas was better. Instead, I was merely offering another way of considering how much domestic content a particular car consists of, that is, to consider the non-assembly part of car-making, too. By mentioning "real brainwork" as I did, I mis-implied superiority. Not intended. It is just that I know for fact that many, if not most, foreign nameplates do most of their research, design and engineering elsewhere. Whereas, the domestic nameplates do most of theirs here. To be sure, all manufacturing requires brainwork in research, design, and engineering, no matter who is doing it. And, of course, we need all the mfg. jobs we can get. And that's at every level. :)

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 03/01/2009 @ 3:10pm

54. The American auto companies labor under a huge competitive disadvantage compared to Japanese companies. Most of these costs result from UAW labor contracts forced upon them by the government. This is why the US auto companies no longer have the funds to invest in R&D.

    Just try: Please visit http://www.vietnam-beauty.com or http://www.welcome-vietnam.info to know better about the beauty of Vietnam.

    Posted by vnttn at 03/01/2009 @ 9:54pm