If you're saying Good because you want the slimy suckas who sold you a lemon 15 years ago to go down, than you're an idiot.

if you are saying Good because now GM can level the playing field (since the Japanese government has financed R&D for the japanese manufacturers for years, and they don't have massive legacy costs, and the Japanese auto market is essentially closed to foreign makers), than maybe you are right.

p.s. for all you Toyota buyers out there, where do you think the profits from your purchase go ? Straight our of your country and into theirs. Wake up before the US is an "also ran" like the UK is currently.

↓↑report

Coolio, it all depends on what you buy...

If you buy a new V8 Tundra, then you are supporting one of my friends that works at that plant.. which helps him keep his job.

↓↑report

Coolio, this issue has been beaten to death

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNGV

PNGV, Clinton spend millions to develop a 80 mpg car by working with D3 and D3 only, no one else was allowed to participate, as soon as Bush came into office he said that automakers to not have to follow PNGV, so D3 had R&D financed by the government. Also Bush gave 25 billion to D3 for "restructuring plants"+ Obama want's to DOUBLE this program + US bailed out D2.


So let's see "(since the Japanese government has financed R&D for the japanese manufacturers for years,"----you are right on this point, but as you can see it's not like we do not "help" D3.

↓↑report

What gets anywhere close to that (real MPG rating and not hypermiled junkets) which isn't for all intent and purposes a 2-seater golf cart?

Do you really think an 80 MPG car was a commerically viable venture when gas was $1?

↓↑report

Sea Urchin, do you even research anything, you state as "facts."

Bush did not "give" the D3 $25 billion to retool factories. He initiated a program, through the Energy Department, to give loans to help retool factories for higher fuel economy vehicles. This loan program is open to ANY manufacturer who fits the criteria. Nissan applied, Honda applied and rescinded their application, Tesla applied, and Ford, GM, and Chrysler applied.

GM and Chrysler were told that they could not qualify, as they are not viable.

NOONE has received any money, on this program, yet. We should start seeing approvals, and moneys start to flow, in June of this year.

Short of the GM and Chrysler bailouts (loans you never have to pay back, are bailouts), the US government has rarely helped our automakers in any way. As a matter of fact, with the piles of unfunded mandates (mandatory safety/emissions/fuel economy), they have hurt them far, far more, than they have EVER helped them.

↓↑report

Gloria, ahhhh auto industry in to the only industry that has to comply with governmental laws....that is why we do not dump raw sewage into lakes and rivers anymore and hopefully we will soon stop dumping pollution into the air as well.

↓↑report

I just HAD to get it on this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@no.
In response to: "Good."

Response: Whatever your reason is, it's a fair statement! You're free to do as you wish!

@Coolio

Response: FAIL

@Parkerman
In response to: "If you buy a new V8 Tundra, then you are supporting one of my friends that works at that plant.. which helps him keep his job."

Response: You didn't conisder that the Japaneses auto makers aren't tariffed or import taxed in a way that ever kept the playing field level? Add that kick in the ballz (to the US auto makers) to the fact that US auto jobs wouldn't have been lost if A: Tariffs were in place (which always should be), B: Unions weren't such greedy organiziations C: Due to unfair manufacturing costs (i.e. lack of unions and tariffs for the importers) that US companies had to cut corners in 80 to stay competitive. Thus giving a temporary advantage to import makers in terms of quality. Then it just tumbled!!! So that job that's keeping your friend working costs the US auto worker and indirectly related (i.e. suppliers) workers about 5 jobs.

In the end, your friend working for Toyota costs the entire country!



@Sea Urchin 10:45PM (5/28/2009)
In Response to: "Gloria, ahhhh auto industry in to the only industry that has to comply with governmental laws..."

Response: Are you actually serious or are you not taking your retard pills today?


Here's a page from a US Gov website. Read the index and see what's regulated!

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2008_government_manual&docid=214669tx_xxx-119

↓↑report

Indeed. oh and gasp, monday! the day of the deadline! what news from bloomberg!

↓↑report

I know - this should have been handled like a year ago before the major market downturn forced the devaluation of the NYSE to a point that the rest of the industries out there couldn't absorb the losses.

↓↑report

Huh? You realize GM is not shutting down, right?

↓↑report

They'll be fine. There's nothing wrong with GM that cutting 75% of its products, dealers, and all but 2 divisions (Chevrolet, Cadillac) won't fix. There have always been talented engineers and inspired leaders buried in the confused, contorted GM labyrinth--they'll emerge from C11 trimmed down to size, playing Nissan/Mazda/Subaru's game instead of failing at Toyota's.

↓↑report

Wagoner needed more money

↓↑report

The process started 6 months ago.

I am fairly certain that GM and Chrysler and the Government knew that BK was the only real option, but they needed the time to get their affairs in order to ensure that the bankruptcy process went orderly, smoothly, and most of all as quickly as possible.

Thing is, the plunge in the auto market from last October-on meant that neither company wouldn't survive until the "prepackaged" part of the bankruptcy was put together. And were it not put together, the companies wouldn't have survived the cram-down or traditional C11 BK they would have had to accept.

That's what's taken so long for GM to file, what with the Opel selloff, the Delphi BK, the bondholders, the UAW/CAW, and the dealer body issues to work through.

I am convinced that the last 6 months have simply been about prepackaging the bankruptcy. All the talk of avoiding it has simply been window dressing.

Had GM and Chrysler come out publicly for BK in the beginning, the US Gov't would have had less public justification to give them bailout funds, and they would have blown their negotiations with the UAW and bondholders before they even began.

The way it worked out, GM and Chrysler looked less like the bad guys trying to screw over their debtholders by escaping through the hatch, while the Obama Admin got to look tough by "ordering them into bankruptcy if they didn't satisfy the requirements".

I also assume that, while the loans "won't be paid back" after all on the current deal, the American taxpayer has better prospects anyway, since the US Gov't will probably be selling its stakes at tidy profits once the companies emerge and stabilize down the road.

↓↑report

Oh ok, because you know everything.

↓↑report