Suppose it's Chrysler.  That's the most likely one to go.  Thirty plants involved, and someone else may be interested in picking up 2-3 at most.  If it's GM or Ford, they'll undoubtably close their own corresponding plants, so you're still looking at 30 plants going down.  Each of those 30 plants supports one community, whether it's a small town or a portion of a larger metro area.  Each of those 30 communities gets wiped out.  Only then do we begin to measure the effects of the suppliers that have to close as well.  There goes another couple dozen communities, give or take. 

 

I don't care if that's done "orderly" or not, it's disasterous.  If there is no possible way to keep all of the big 3 open, we need direct government investment in those plants to keep them running and employing roughly the same number of people.  Who cares what they're making, have them make Bush statutes of solid iron.  The point is to keep dollars flowing into and around those stricken communities. 

 

and who's at fault and were the signs there since the mid '70's?

 

Again, the car company's AND the unions have not changed their MoO and now want us to bail them out.

 

Secondly, many workers failed to reeducate themselves or learn a new skill.

 

I'm pissed the phuck off!  This money should not go to the car company's as we'll never see it again.

Would you like to see Toledo again?  Get a good look now.  I can't think of a place more Chrysler-dependent.  Imagine Carty Finkbeiner having a MDA-style telethon to pay for gas to keep frozen pipes from destroying the Seagate Tower.   

Would you like to see Toledo again?  Get a good look now.  I can't think of a place more Chrysler-dependent.  Imagine Carty Finkbeiner having a MDA-style telethon to pay for gas to keep frozen pipes from destroying the Seagate Tower.   

 

Unfortunately we don't share the same views.  I find proping up a dead company wasteful and those people, communities, etc that are caught up in this unfortunate casualties.  But that's life.

don't have much to add to what 327 has already said.

 

Its amazing how many people are willing to let their hatred of unions or their unquestioning love of pure capitalism blur their judgment of what is best for the country.

 

we are in a severe recession. people are unable to receive the financing required to make significant purchases like buying a car. Thus, we are extending a loan to two of the big three automakers so they will not go bankrupt and cause millions to become unemployed (current estimate is that roughly 3,000,000 would lose their jobs if the big three closed up shop), further deepening our recession and possibly leading to a depression.

 

If the Big 3 failed, the federal gov’t would spend far more than 14 billion cleaning up the mess. Apparantly for some on urban ohio (who apparantly have the same political views as Southern Senate Republicans), it is worth it to stick it to the uaw. how dare workers demand health care and a retirement!? dont they know that such luxuries should only be extended to those who shower before work and not after work?

 

and im not even mentioning the loss in municipal, state and federal taxes. Everyone here wants more funding from the state for public transportation. Well, when the state has less money for such funding, you can bet they are not going to increase their investment in public transportation.

 

This is a loan people. We will get it back with interest, just like we did the last time we provided a loan to an auto company.

 

^^^So are you saying that because someone presently or in the past worked for the Big Three, then he is entitled to a bailout as opposed to people who've been layed off or struggled in EVERY other profession.  Should Big Auto always be bailed because there are cities/towns that refused to diversify and instead put all their eggs in one basket and refused to branch out due to some old school, blue collar mentality that things will be the same, that manufacturing will return, etc???  Are those cities/towns more special than other cities/towns that have suffered due to this severe recession but aren't dependent on Big Auto??? 

 

I have blue and white collar friends left and right either being laid off or in serious jeapordy of losing their jobs, but because they don't work for the Big Three or in Wall Street, they are on their own.  That's just insane.   

 

 

>how dare workers demand health care and a retirement!? dont they know that such luxuries should only be extended to those who shower before work and not after work?

 

A lot of people who post on this website have worked manual labor jobs when they were younger or they still do.  If you've never worked a $1 over minimum wage warehouse, you won't ever understand the frustration everyone has with the anointed ones not only making 3X+ as much money for the same kind of work, but acting like they're entitled to it -- that it's somehow "American" when in fact it's completely un-American.  If the union dissolved and these guys were brought back down to earth cars would be thousands of dollars less expensive. 

 

 

don't have much to add to what 327 has already said.

 

Its amazing how many people are willing to let their hatred of unions and their unquestioning love of pure capitalism blur their judgment of what is best for the country.

 

we are in a severe recession. people are unable to receive the financing required to make significant purchases like buying a car. Thus, we are extending a loan to two of the big three automakers so they will not go bankrupt and cause millions to become unemployed (current estimate is that roughly 3,000,000 would lose their jobs if the big three closed up shop), further deepening our recession and possibly leading to a depression.

 

If the Big 3 failed, the federal gov%u2019t would spend far more than 14 billion cleaning up the mess. Apparently for some on urban ohio (who apparantly have the same political views as Southern Senate Republicans), it is worth it to stick it to the uaw. how dare workers demand health care and a retirement!? dont they know that such luxuries should only be extended to those who shower before work and not after work?

 

and im not even mentioning the loss in municipal, state and federal taxes. Everyone here wants more funding from the state for public transportation. Well, when the state has less money for such funding, you can bet they are not going to increase their investment in public transportation.

 

This is a loan people. We will get it back with interest, just like we did the last time we provided a loan to an auto company.

 

 

For me, it has NOTHING to do with the hatred of Unions but the decades long mismanagement of the industry as a whole.

 

It amazes me who some people can carelessly "assume" other hate with no real evidence!  pot meet kettle!

 

If the big three fail - AND WHERE IS IT INDICATED ALL THREE WOULD FAIL AT THE SAME TIME - it would be their own doing.

 

If people were so concerned with the Auto Industry why weren't you concerned decades ago?

Besides, there are plenty of non-union industries that pay their employees as well as unions, and have excellent health care plans. 

I know the Big Three filing Chapter 11 or godforbid Chapter 7 claims would spell the death of a lot of towns, perhaps even a significant portion of the midwest, but that's the price of capitalism. It sucks, it's perhaps even unfair, but it simply is.

 

To hell with capitalism then.  What's the system there for, if not to create general prosperity?  If it fails to do that, then use a different tool.

 

Honestly, I hope that someone comes into the fields that some of you work in with employees making less money and benefits.  Then we'll see what your opinions are on the matter.  Till then, all I'm hearing is "let them eat cake".

And another thing, I am tired of people acting like because the unions did the nation a great service earlier this century, then to blame them for ANYTHING would invalidate the earlier good they've done.  That's almost as dumb as that insulting 'you're either pro Iraq war or anti troops' mentality

And another thing, I am tired of people acting like because the unions did the nation a great service earlier this century, then to blame them for ANYTHING would invalidate the earlier good they've done.  That's almost as dumb as that insulting 'you're either pro Iraq war or anti troops' mentality

 

Really?

No one is saying they can't be blamed for anything.  But some people are putting all the blame on workers who want to be able to maintain the reasonably middle class lifestyle they've built up.  There wasn't this much outrage over the Wall Street rapists' salaries, for chrissakes!

"I know the Big Three filing Chapter 11 or godforbid Chapter 7 claims would spell the death of a lot of towns, perhaps even a significant portion of the midwest, but that's the price of capitalism.  It sucks, it's perhaps even unfair, but it simply is."

 

"To hell with capitalism then.  What's the system there for, if not to create general prosperity?  If it fails to do that, then use a different tool."

 

Honestly, I hope that someone comes into the fields that some of you work in with employees making less money and benefits.  Then we'll see what your opinions are on the matter.  Till then, all I'm hearing is "let them eat cake"."

My company has informed us, not surprisingly, that there will be no raises or bonuses this year, both of which were certainly anticipated 11 months ago.  As such, my coworkers and I are essentially making less money, and you know what, I accept that because it's better than being laid off.

 

No one is saying they can't be blamed for anything.  But some people are putting all the blame on workers who want to be able to maintain the reasonably middle class lifestyle they've built up.  There wasn't this much outrage over the Wall Street rapists' salaries, for chrissakes!

 

I complained just as much.  I don't think any industry should get a bail out!

There sure is a lot of outrage now regarding that $700 billion

My company has informed us, not surprisingly, that there will be no raises or bonuses this year, both of which were certainly anticipated 11 months ago.  As such, my coworkers and I are essentially making less money, and you know what, I accept that because it's better than being laid off.

 

Good for you.  I'm making less, too.  But I'm not getting all salty with what other workers have over it.

 

 

>how dare workers demand health care and a retirement!? dont they know that such luxuries should only be extended to those who shower before work and not after work?

 

A lot of people who post on this website have worked manual labor jobs when they were younger or they still do. If you've never worked a $1 over minimum wage warehouse, you won't ever understand the frustration everyone has with the anointed ones not only making 3X+ as much money for the same kind of work, but acting like they're entitled to it -- that it's somehow "American" when in fact it's completely un-American. If the union dissolved and these guys were brought back down to earth cars would be thousands of dollars less expensive.  

 

 

 

 

and i would have no problem with those workers if they attempted to organize and after doing so, they sought a contract that gave them decent health care and retirement as well as a pay increase. in fact, i would join them on the picket line if their employer refused to bargain with them.

 

You see this disparity and think, those autoworkers need to be knocked down in their wages. I see the disparity and think that others who put in honest days work should be paid a living wage with health care benefits and a reasonable retirement as well.

 

and i don't understand why people argue that "If the union dissolved and these guys were brought back down to earth cars would be thousands of dollars less expensive." yeah, thats obviously true. and if companies didn't have to pay their workers at all, cars would be cheaper still.

MTS, you seem to fall in the "unquestioning love of pure capitalism" camp, per your own words:

 

"I find proping up a dead company wasteful and those people, communities, etc that are caught up in this unfortunate casualties.  But that's life."

 

Obviously the company is not dead. Two, I reject the idea that government can't be a force of good to mitigate the damages of an already very damaging recession

 

MTS, you seem to fall in the "unquestioning love of pure capitalism" camp, per your own words:

 

"I find proping up a dead company wasteful and those people, communities, etc that are caught up in this unfortunate casualties.  But that's life."

 

Obviously the company is not dead. Two, I reject the idea that government can't be a force of good to mitigate the damages of an already very damaging recession

 

 

OK "dead" was over dramatic, so I'll revise that to say, "a poorly managed company."

>how dare workers demand health care and a retirement!? dont they know that such luxuries should only be extended to those who shower before work and not after work?

 

A lot of people who post on this website have worked manual labor jobs when they were younger or they still do. If you've never worked a $1 over minimum wage warehouse, you won't ever understand the frustration everyone has with the anointed ones not only making 3X+ as much money for the same kind of work, but acting like they're entitled to it -- that it's somehow "American" when in fact it's completely un-American. If the union dissolved and these guys were brought back down to earth cars would be thousands of dollars less expensive.

 

 

 

 

and i would have no problem with those workers if they attempted to organize and after doing so, they sought a contract that gave them decent health care and retirement as well as a pay increase. in fact, i would join them on the picket line if their employer refused to bargain with them.

 

You see this disparity and think, those autoworkers need to be knocked down in their wages. I see the disparity and think that others who put in honest days work should be paid a living wage with health care benefits and a reasonable retirement as well.

 

and i don't understand why people argue that "If the union dissolved and these guys were brought back down to earth cars would be thousands of dollars less expensive." yeah, thats obviously true. and if companies didn't have to pay their workers at all, cars would be cheaper still.

 

Agreed, except that I doubt cars would be substantially cheaper to buy if they cost less to make due to lower labor costs.  Most likely, the majority of savings would go to pay and bonuses for execs and profits for stockholders.

And another thing, I am tired of people acting like because the unions did the nation a great service earlier this century, then to blame them for ANYTHING would invalidate the earlier good they've done.  That's almost as dumb as that insulting 'you're either pro Iraq war or anti troops' mentality

 

Whooops:)

 

And I can't stand when people talk about how the autoworkers deserve to make a good salary, good benefits, yadda yadda as if they're the only ones.  Guess what, a lot of EVERYONE ELSE WHO WORKS HARD deserves the same thing, only they're not getting it because they don't have the same pull as Big Auto or UAW.

I agree that autoworkers do not deserve more than other manufacturers who put in the same hours and have the same physically demanding jobs. Thus those workers who are "not getting it" should contact the UAW and ask about advice for organizing their workplace!

 

;-)

I agree that autoworkers do not deserve more than other manufacturers who put in the same hours and have the same physically demanding jobs. Thus those workers who are "not getting it" should contact the UAW and ask about advice for organizing their workplace!

 

;)

 

:wtf:

And I can't stand when people talk about how the autoworkers deserve to make a good salary, good benefits, yadda yadda as if they're the only ones.  Guess what, a lot of EVERYONE ELSE WHO WORKS HARD deserves the same thing, only they're not getting it because they don't have the same pull as Big Auto or UAW.

 

I share your opinion on this one, but lowering their wages seems downright destructive compared to raising others' wages, if you want to deal with the disparity.  If it weren't for union wages creating a solid top end of the blue collar scale, all manufacturing wages, and presumably all similarly-skilled service wages, would be sustantially lower than they already are.  Part of the problem for unions is that so many of today's workers don't fit under 1930s labor and employment laws.  Many worker and wage protections only apply to hourly, non-administrative, non-manegerial employees.  There are a lot less of those, proportionally, than there once were, and that has benefited corporations a great deal.  The labor and employment laws need to be rewritten to give modern service/administrative workers some leverage.   

...so I guess this bailout is another reason to hate Bush.  That he's not letting the auto industry collapse.

 

 

...so I guess this bailout is another reason to hate Bush.  That he's not letting the auto industry collapse.

 

For me it's another reason to view him as being more practical than he's made out to be.  He made a similar counter-partisan move during his first term, by supporting high steel tariffs to prevent a collapse.  It worked.  Bush has usually stopped just short of letting his ideology drive him off a cliff.  Iraq is still a mess, but at least he changed his strategy in time to settle it down some before he leaves.  I had a feeling he'd eventually throw a bone to Detroit.

 

Like Churchill said of America, Bush does the right thing after all other options are exhausted.

and what is the mess in Iraq?  Did you prefer the death camps?

^ You have got to be kidding.  OK fine, there's no mess at all.  My point is that Bush did a good thing today.  The people of Ohio and surrounding states have reason to thank him.

In march the industry will still need another bail out. You just can't make people buy cars. And with them seeking a bailout. It's just as bad as bankruptcy. I would't buy a car from them with the shape they are in.

>I share your opinion on this one, but lowering their wages seems downright destructive compared to raising others' wages, if you want to deal with the disparity.  If it weren't for union wages creating a solid top end of the blue collar scale, all manufacturing wages, and presumably all similarly-skilled service wages, would be sustantially lower than they already are.  Part of the problem for unions is that so many of today's workers don't fit under 1930s labor and employment laws.  Many worker and wage protections only apply to hourly, non-administrative, non-manegerial employees.  There are a lot less of those, proportionally, than there once were, and that has benefited corporations a great deal.  The labor and employment laws need to be rewritten to give modern service/administrative workers some leverage. 

 

 

The more the minimum wage is raised in the US, the more those jobs that don't physically need to be here are sent elsewhere.  The 40-hour work week was in certain ways a disaster because so many hourly people now work just 35 hours because companies don't want to pay the benefits or overtime.  This means tons of hourly workers have two jobs just to get over 40 hours worth of work.  Meanwhile companies put low-level managers on salary and then work them 70-80 hours a week.  My first salary job was $25k and 80 hours a week.  I quit after two months because they lied to me about what the job was going to be and I could make more money delivering pizzas. 

 

And unfortunately the hourly worker crowd tend to have no savings because they buy new cars, car stereos, lottery tickets, have outrageous cell phone bills, have 9,000 channel cable, buy thousands of DVD's, etc.  And that's before considering the cigarette addictions, drug habits, drinking, and kids out of wedlock.  The New York Times ran a story a few weeks ago about Chinese peasants making $2,000/year saving 70% of their income.  The average hourly worker in the US making $15,000 doesn't save that much!

To touch on a couple issues, yes a Chrysler bankruptcy would hurt Ohio, but unless we're ready to go ahead with American Leyland then I think they just can't be supported beyond March of 09 unless they some path to success, which I seriously doubt (there is no K, minivan, LH, or Chrysler 300 waiting to save Chrysler). GM is mediocre corporation with too much financial liabilities, Chrysler is a bad company and really hasn't been well since the early 70s.

 

Unions are to blame because they became involved in managing the work process and not simply focusing on wages and a minimal understanding of workplace safety.

 

 

Raising wages would be an absolute disaster. Unemployment would skyrocket. You can have zero unemployment if you eliminate a minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage or encouraging unionization would have the inverse effect.  Just look at how companies cutting bonuses this year have saved jobs within the company. Increasing wages right now would exacerbate this crisis like no other. I can't believe anyone would promote that right now.

 

And unfortunately the hourly worker crowd tend to have no savings because they buy new cars, car stereos, lottery tickets, have outrageous cell phone bills, have 9,000 channel cable, buy thousands of DVD's, etc.

 

And that is precisely what keeps the American economy afloat.

 

Precisely. The fact is, most people who are rich, are rich because they were able to delay gratification like that. When most people are spending all of their disposable money, it keeps the economy as a whole, going, but the people who are rewarded by that spending are the people who manage to save and invest in the companies that make profit from spending. Essentially, people who are smart about their finances depend on people who are not. The average multi-millionaire makes 100-200k a year and lives in a 200-400k home. Some make as little as 70-80k a year and still have like a 6 million net worth at the age of 50. There's plenty of statistics to back it up. They just don't spend, they invest.

 

That is the reason why there is a huge disparity in wealth distribution in this country.

If we can create Blackwater and privatized prisons, I'm sure we can get a company to tool some factories and make military vehicles. If they need to acquire licenses for some patents, just get 'em from Toyota and such. Hehehehe.

Jeep? Hahahaha. Ask any Jeep owner who has had their car more than 5 years how their transmission is holding up.

 

Yeah, I think I would trust Toyota more. Besides, Japan is probably our biggest first world ally. They're the second greatest world super-power behind us. We rely on each other. We recently collaborated with them on missile interception technology in case Mr. Kim Jong Il tries to pull a fast one in the Pacific. We can both capture missiles now! We have a very strong alliance. Toyota also has a huge vested interest in the U.S. They don't have much of a market the countries who we're at war with.

GM isn't really needed imo but I'm not surprised if they passed the loan. Did the unions give in and lower wages/benefits? What were the major stipulations?

We do need to do something about our health care system. However, Japan's 'universal health care' isn't as simple as you think. Employers are required to pay the majority of your health care premium unless you are self employed. The only advantage they have is that health insurance doesn't produce a profit. The efficiency of the Japanese health care system is largely due to the fact that they have such healthy lifestyles. They probably have the healthiest diet out of any country.

 

Precisely. The fact is, most people who are rich, are rich because they were able to delay gratification like that. When most people are spending all of their disposable money, it keeps the economy as a whole, going, but the people who are rewarded by that spending are the people who manage to save and invest in the companies that make profit from spending. Essentially, people who are smart about their finances depend on people who are not. The average multi-millionaire makes 100-200k a year and lives in a 200-400k home. Some make as little as 70-80k a year and still have like a 6 million net worth at the age of 50. There's plenty of statistics to back it up. They just don't spend, they invest.

 

That is the reason why there is a huge disparity in wealth distribution in this country.

 

A classmate made an almost identical argument to me the other day.  He's writing a book about it, one that you just summarized fairly well.  He also manages his family's trust fund and went to college on a track scholarship.  Doesn't think any of that had anything to do with his being able to "save small amounts" over the years.  As someone mentioned above, there is a "let them eat cake" undertone to this line of thought.  It's as if anyone who's poor is some charicature of Dionysian wastefulness, and they're fools too because the road out of their struggles is so darn simple.  All four billion of us are glad to hear that.

 

I have a different theory.  The reason for the huge disparity is that it increasingly takes money to make money.  The economic value attached to each individual at birth, that of an able body and an untrained mind, has dropped considerably throughout our lifetimes.  In other eras, the marketable value on that "free" capital was how so many people were able to move out of the lower classes.  The value of worldy goods, be it real estate or cash or whatever, has risen during the same time frame.  I don't think you're accounting for the additional costs our society places on not having X amount of money at the moment you need it.  For people with cash flow issues, even if they live spartanly and save diligently, these Whammys in the game of life keep their piles from getting all that big.  I'm talking about charges that better-off clients or customers or victims don't have to pay.  There's statistics on that too.

 

Very few people are making 70k-80k grand without considerable education.  That capital may have been as free to them as their body and mind, or it may have been acquired through an arrangement in which none of that spillover money you speak of reaches them for the first 30 years of their career.  This is often true of people making 30k-50k as well.  Without middle class blue collar jobs, less and less capital will ever be controlled by people who don't start with any. 

 

 

 

And unfortunately the hourly worker crowd tend to have no savings because they buy new cars, car stereos, lottery tickets, have outrageous cell phone bills, have 9,000 channel cable, buy thousands of DVD's, etc.

 

And that is precisely what keeps the American economy afloat.

 

And that is precisely what has made America into an overly-consumerist society where we have excessive amounts of mass-produced junk, and are willing to sacrifice things like human rights, our planet, or whatever else is necessary to buy as many goods as cheaply as possible.

 

And unfortunately the hourly worker crowd tend to have no savings because they buy new cars, car stereos, lottery tickets, have outrageous cell phone bills, have 9,000 channel cable, buy thousands of DVD's, etc.

 

And that is precisely what keeps the American economy afloat.

 

And that is precisely what has made America into an overly-consumerist society where we have excessive amounts of mass-produced junk, and are willing to sacrifice things like human rights, our planet, or whatever else is necessary to buy as many goods as cheaply as possible.

 

Don't overlook the fact that they're buying what they can't afford. What good is it for our economy when idiots buy a bunch of stuff they can't or won't pay for?

One of the most frustrating things about being a Detroiter or Toledoan is that people just don't understand the unions. Yes, this is a very liberal, union-dominated part of the country (really, the only place in America left that's quite like this). Yes, the labor movement began here and that legacy lives on (no one has forgotten the Auto-lite strikes). And yes, the UAW exerts incredible political influence on the Democratic party in Detroit and Toledo, but for good reason. There are a lot of misconceptions about the UAW and a lot of propaganda against it.

 

Clearly you do not understand unions as well. Unions prey on the innocent worker and are solely seeking to boost the bottom line of the union leaders while the average worker suffers. Unions look at the world as trying to take a bigger piece of the pie from the company and management to give to the union leadership (not the worker), whereas the company's goal is to grow the pie bigger so both the employees and the management can reap the benefits.

 

I have personally been involved in union campaigns at places where I have worked. I have had employee that have been harrassed and threatened with physical violence by union thugs (of the SEIU not UAW) if they do not sign the Union Card. They have politely asked that the union thugs go away but to no aveil. The union has resorted to paying the employees $500 cash if they sign the union card. I find it funny that they call this free choice. They make up lies about what benefits the worker will get if they join the union only to have the employee regret this decision because they make less money to support their families (due to the union dues) then they would otherwise make if they did not sign.

 

I am all for allowing workers the right to organize, but this is an individual choice and Unions deserve the bad image they have cultivated over the years because they do nothing to foster free choice but rather exploit the average worker to fill their own coffers, So as far as negative propoganda against the union, you are clearly misinformed or full of BS, because I personally have seen their exploitive tactics firsthand.

FWIW, Cincinnati is actually a more unionized town than Toledo. The difference is the kind of industry and unions. Detroit and Toledo have more industrial unions and large industrial complexes, whereas Cincinnati's unionism has been mostly of the trade variety.

...so I guess this bailout is another reason to hate Bush.  That he's not letting the auto industry collapse.

 

Ah, Obama supports this too. And why should the auto industry be punished when the financial snakes get a free lunch? You know, the auto industry is practically all that's left of America's manufacturing infrastructure. Once you lose that, there's no going back. There are a lot of strong reasons to maintain a manufacturing infrastructure in your country.

 

Do you think we would have made it through WW2 without the auto industry? They called Detroit "The Arsenal of Democracy" for a reason...

 

Actually I was being sarcastic in that comment about the bail-out. 

 

 

>FWIW, Cincinnati is actually a more unionized town than Toledo. The difference is the kind of industry and unions. Detroit and

 

The General Electric plant is notorious for sleeping and other typical union abuses.  A lot of hourly non-union guys making deliveries to that plant have to sit for hours while they take their time unloading, getting back from the break room, etc.  This is why management has moved a lot of the military contracts out of Cincinnati, most of that plant is empty, and there is little manufacturing there anymore. 

 

But to compare General Electric to General Motors for a second -- one is diversified into railroad equipment, jet engines, and kitchen appliances while the other one just keeps making cars.  Is there some kind of anti-trust condition keeping GM from doing other things besides manufacturing cars?

 

Also, people comparing the wages of Japanese versus American companies, when to some extent that doesn't matter when it takes thousands more guys to do the same thing.  My guess is Toyota and Honda don't tolerate sleeping, showing up drunk, sneaking out to go to bars, do drug tests, have a strict attendance policy, etc.  Meanwhile GM workers are well known to actually break equipment or "lose" tools so that the line will shut down. 

Why is the trunk release on my Cobalt so clunky, and why does one have to slam the door to close it, when my Acura door closes with a whisper and the trunk pops open without a sound?

Sadly GE is probably in nearly as bad a shape as GM, but they hide it better. GE Capital is probably in almost the same shape as GMAC and if this 'thing' goes worldwide, GE's high cost diversification probably won't help much.

 

There was a lot of crushing lay-offs in Cincy 20 years ago when GE downsized that facility with passing of the Cold War. Lots of stories of engineers being hit, plus a couple big strikes that ended up with big layoffs.

 

Your Cobalt cost a fraction of what your Acura cost.

 

Yeah, that's like me asking why my brother's late model Cadillac runs over rail road tracks almost as smoothly as a regular road, yet my mom's late model Corolla feels rough on any road. It's all an economic compromise. Still, I think I would take a Corolla over a cobalt.

"I don't know much about anything, but I slept at Ohio University Express last night!"

 

--anonymous

Jeep? Hahahaha. Ask any Jeep owner who has had their car more than 5 years how their transmission is holding up.

 

 

The first car I ever owned was a 1992 Jeep Wrangler.  I still own it and it runs great...starts up every time!  Last couple years it started grinding a bit when downshifting into 2nd, but as it approaches 17 years old, I am not going to complain.

^You're an exception. Jeeps are notorious for transmission problems. My mom had to replace the transmission (like $3,500) on her 2000 Grand Cherokee only 3 years after she bought it. The car was only 4-5 years old.