Oh for crying out loud....

 

 

GM Opens Eighth China Plant, Won't Add Further Capacity Soon

By Tian Ying

 

Dec. 17 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp. opened its eighth vehicle plant in China and said it had no plans for adding further capacity amid slowing demand in Asia's biggest auto market.  "This has been a big year in terms of expansion and it probably will keep us occupied for the foreseeable future,'' Kevin Wale, GM China's president, said by phone today.  He spoke from the northeastern city of Shenyang after the opening of the carmaker's new 2.67 billion yuan ($390 million) plant.

 

GM expects to boost China sales about 9 percent next year as it adds new models and an economic stimulus plan helps revive overall demand.  Auto sales in China have declined in three of the past four months because of the global economic slowdown.

 

GM, the biggest overseas automaker in China, is counting on emerging markets and U.S. aid to help it survive a plunge in North American sales.  The Detroit-based automaker expects to sell as many as 1.2 million vehicles in China next year, Wale said on Dec. 5.

 

Full article at http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aWHbmXZFhiEs&refer=asia

That's good news! Why not take advantage of emerging markets? Isn't that what Toyota did when they came to the U.S. and stole GM's market share? You guys are never satisfied!

They are in no position for expansion, not to mention I'm not crazy about OUR money now going to poorly paid Chinese workers.  This is clearly not a short-term downturn as Mr. Wales states, and GM should be consolidating and contracting rather than spreading out their costs even more.  I can't imagine China's sales' improvements as long lasting as they have had contraction the the fourth quarter and 2009 isn't looking so pretty

 

EDIT:  I should follow up that I really really hope I'm wrong

I have mixed feelings about outsourcing too. I think there's times when it is appropriate and times when it is not. But lets face it - there isn't much room for growth in the U.S. right now. If GM/Ford/Chrysler don't take advantage of opportunity in China, another manufacturer will. Natural fact is that we will thrive off of international development in emerging markets like India (Mumbai has grown like no other because of outsourcing in technology sectors), China, and soon to be Iraq. I'm not qualified to talk about marketing analysis but if that's where the money is, I don't blame them. It can't be about cheap labor as much as it's about convenience for China's emerging market. You have to assemble in the country the product is being distributed in. Otherwise the logistics aren't profitable. You can't bring readily assembled cars onto ships as efficiently as car parts. The more money they make over there, the more likely they are to pay health benefits for employees here. They would also have in China what was Toyota's 'absolute advantage' here in that they had younger employees in our country without the strain of retirees. I don't know what Japans policy stipulations on trade were, but no way in hell was the playing field evened out by GM setting up plants in Japan. hell, their transit infrastructure, small geography and obnoxious topography doesn't even allow for much growth in their own country for competitors. I say it's time we stick it to Toyota by doing this.

^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.

 

I think he's talking about the automatic.

You really have no clue how UAW politics operate. Individual businesses have their workers vote whether to become union or not. The union offers far more protections from dangerous work environments, sexual harrassment, racial discrimination, drug abuse, etc. than ever possible before the union. The only "thugging" going on is firing workers who harass others and create a dangerous work environment.

 

Do you honestly think hospital workers in Toledo would vote to join the UAW if it offered them no benefit?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You apparently misread my comment below, I said nothing of the sort to indicate that Union workers are lazy and bad employees. In fact I have many friends who are in unions that are hard working people.

 

WHat I am saying is that I have a problem with Union organizers who threaten my employees with physical violence if they do not sign their union card. I have a problem with union organizers who offer employees a small cash payment for signing the union card only to have those employees find out that once the union is recognized they will actuall be worse off than they were before hand due to phony union promises.

 

If the union was truly the best bet for them, then these thugs would not have to make up lies to try and convince people to join. The benefits of joining would stand out on the merits and the employees would happily vote to join.

 

WHen you are in a union that may be one thing but when one is being organized, the organizers of the unions are only out to exploit workers.

 

 

This pic is bitter sweet!  The article doesn't say, but is this the Moraine plant?+

 

*edit* nevermind, it is the Moraine plant!

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=6521802

Final SUVs roll out of GM factory

Dayton-area plant's workers now facing bleak job prospects

Wednesday,  December 24, 2008 3:08 AM

By James Hannah

ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

MORAINE, Ohio -- Autoworkers slipped in hugs, photos and goodbyes during breaks at a General Motors Corp. factory that shut down yesterday after 27 years of pumping out cars, sport-utility vehicles and trucks.  It was an emotional day for the factory's 1,080 workers, who were told in June that GM would close the plant in suburban Dayton because high gasoline prices were driving consumers away from the SUVs made there.

 

Outside the plant, Gaylen Turner, president of International Union of Electronic Workers-Communications Workers of America Local 798, pointed to the many empty spaces in the employee parking lot.  "It was a sad, sad feeling for me to look over there and know that just a couple of years ago this was a thriving three-shift operation," Turner said.  "We stand here today with a plant that's closing, with a deep, rich history. It's sad for me and I'm sure for everybody else in there to see it go."

 

David Pryor said the closing of the plant, where both his father and grandfather also had worked, left him downhearted.  "It's kind of upsetting," said Pryor, 34, of West Carrollton.  "Hopefully, I'll get out and find something away from GM."

 

The facility at one time employed 4,200. The closing also will affect 102 Ohio suppliers.

 

Full article at http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2008/12/24/oh_goodbye_gm_1224.ART_ART_12-24-08_C7_F1CB2OP.html?sid=101

The closing also will affect 102 Ohio suppliers.

 

There's way no Ohio can survive this impending depression, well, at least not Toledo or Northwest Ohio (basically an extension of Southeast Michigan). Auto parts suppliers are struggling all over this region. Due to the decreased tax revenues, this should destroy any sliver of hope left that this state has a future. Toledo is going to be the next Buffalo (already half way there), just with auto parts companies instead of grain. This is going to be one hell of a depression (Detroit and Toledo are just the beginning), and it's going to be far more violent than it was in the 1930's.

 

Keep in mind average earnings have been stagnant for years already AND we're fighting two wars! We have a generation of kids (my generation) who've been raised on Ritalin and Grand Theft Auto. We're the future. We don't have a prayer...

 

I weep for our strung out youth.

well gee, that made me feel better! :|

... Thanks a lot of Bush. War was just what we needed...

 

Basically, my attitude is that the bailout buys us maybe another three to six months. If we can't get our sh!t together in that short time period, we're in real trouble...costly Iraq War + tons of forclosures + plus aging infrastructure + high unemployment + loads of unpaid student loans + declining tax revenues + president with lots of potential who may not reach that potential due to the nightmarish mess he's walking into...

There is a HUGE amount reductions that should be taken in the military budget.  I am talking about weapons systems that have gone out of control and outdated Cold War strategic planning.  We could surely cut the budget by $200 Billion/year and that is even before the reductions when we get out of Iraq.

 

That money could be shunted to the states for unemployment benefits, retraining, and funding Medicaid so that unemployed Americans don't have to suffer illness or disability for want of medical care.  We could start deploying renewable energy generation.  We could start building useful infrastructure.

Fiat taking large stake in Chrysler

Deal would be an 'initial' stake, hinting that Fiat could take larger stake

 

ROME - Fiat and Chrysler said Tuesday they have agreed to form a strategic alliance that would give the Italian auto empire a 35-percent stake in the troubled U.S. carmaker and could eventually bring it full control.  The deal means Chrysler, which is fighting off bankruptcy and struggling to sell less fuel efficient larger models, would have access to new markets and cheaper, more environmentally friendly technologies.

 

Fiat Group SpA, which makes Fiat, Lancia and Alfa Romeo vehicles, would gain a foothold in the huge U.S. market.  The company has bounced back recently with cars such as the tiny 500 two-door hatchback, a hit remake of an earlier iconic Fiat model that competes with Daimler AG's Smart, BMW AG's Mini and other very small cars.

 

The two companies said in a joint statement that in exchange for sharing its small-car platforms and fuel-efficient engines, Fiat would take an "initial" 35-percent stake in Chrysler but would not invest cash.

 

More at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28747620/

 

Is Italy a protected market?  Is that why Fiat survives?

Unbelievable.  Just...unbelievable.  I know I come across as anti-Union on these boards, but how can anyone support the UAW after this:

 

 

UAW chief: Restructuring deadline 'unattainable'

Tuesday, January 20, 2009 Ken Thomas, Associated Press

 

Washington- United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger suggested Monday that a mid-February deadline for General Motors and Chrysler to complete their restructuring plans may be "almost unattainable" and no formal talks had commenced between the union and car makers.

 

Gettelfinger told reporters the current Feb. 17 deadline for GM and Chrysler could be moved back "because, honestly, most people that would look at this from a realistic standpoint would say this timeline is almost unattainable.  "I said myself that I hope this wasn't set up to intentionally fail because the people who were a part of this have no idea of the magnitude of what they were asking these companies to do," Gettelfinger said at a pre-Inaugural reception.

 

The Treasury Department provided $17.4 billion in loans to GM and Chrysler last month, but the companies need to file detailed restructuring plans by Feb. 17 that include concessions from the UAW and bondholders.  The bailout engineered by the Bush administration requires GM and Chrysler to achieve "viability" by March 31.  The loans may be called back if the government determines the automakers haven't met that goal.

 

Full article at http://cleve.live.advance.net/business/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/business-11/123244383085790.xml&coll=2

Gettelfinger should be fired.

Is Italy a protected market? Is that why Fiat survives?

 

I don't know, but I think the entire Italian political spectrum is to the left of ours.  Renault is at least partially an enterprise of the French government, and I wouldn't be surprised if Fiat is similarly structured.  In either case, the legacy costs that burden our auto industry are spread across society there.

 

Re the union article, what part of it was so troubling?  Are bank employees expected at this point to concede their health and retirement benefits?  Perhaps, but I haven't heard one account of that.  Why is that so much more important for auto workers to do, when both industries have failed? 

 

Can I break my contracts with student loan providers or other creditors because I no longer find those deals expedient, after the other side has performed their end of the deal?  That sort of free pass is what the union is being expected to grant here, and it's legally unusual to say the least.

 

Are the banks facing a "viability" ultimatum and deadline?  When will they begin their process of revolutionizing the way they do business? 

Unbelievable. Just...unbelievable. I know I come across as anti-Union on these boards, but how can anyone support the UAW after this:

 

 

There is nothing in that article that proves or even attempts to allege that this is the union's fault.  It is just stating that the union leadership doesn't think it is a realistic timeline.

^^Save the discussion of banks for a bank related news forum.  I am ashamed with how the first $350 billion has been handled, but that's not what I'm talking about here, and these are two very different issues.

 

I don't understand how you're okay with the Union being allowed to make no concessions but still receive a big chunk of this bailout money.  Guess what - a lot of that cash is going straight to retirees' bank accounts because the preexsiting contracts between the UAW and Big 3 has NOT been substantially changed.  I don't see how ensuring a thousands of GM retirees still get a big chunk of their old salary with MY MONEY helps the big 3 survive,

 

The UAW insidously refused to compromise last month because it knew the government would not call its bluff, that the big 3 folding would equal 20+% unemployment and that's just not acceptabe.  Instead of agreeing lowering wages/benefits to match Germany and Japan (and thus, yes, altering their original contract), the UAW stuck to their guns and made no real compromise outside of eliminating that one jobs bank program, which affected very few. 

 

Don't you see. a lot of this multi billion dollar bailout is going to RETIREES bank accounts.  Not the Big 3.  The UAW was thus given a huge gift that does not better the Big 3's finances whatsoever.  If everyone else has to compromise by giving the Big 3/UAW (well, really Big 2 since Ford hasn't asked for $$$ yet) all these billions, then why shouldn't the UAW compromise as well. 

 

EDIT: And while I understand this was a timeline issue, the UAW has had days, weeks, perhaps months to make proper concessions or at least come up with a realistic timetable.  They are stalling until March 31, where we get to go through this mess all over again and the Big 3 are likely bailed out again with the UAW giving up very little but getting a whole lot of return. 

The Italian state is generally supportive of industry there. Most of the Euro auto companies were mostly privatized in the 90s (including Renault and Fiat). Lower Saxony remains a major shareholder in VW. Fiat has really gotten its act together over the last ten years. Euros tend to be very nationalistic when it comes to their carmakers (like to US once was). Fiat also was teamed up with GM until the beginning of the decade.

 

The EU has generally open markets within the system, but pretty well protected local industries.

The only way for big 3 pay packages to actually match those of Germany or Japan is for the workers' health and retirement expenses to be covered by some third party.  They don't hang old people out to dry in those countries.  You may be referring instead to foreign plants in deep southern states, states that don't carry their weight in terms of paying for federal welfare benefits they recieve.  Either way you look at it, the spectre of "OK, then who does pay for health and retirement?" will not go away.

 

Paying contracted benefits to retireees is not a gift.  If it is, they paying back my student loans is also a gift.  Either contracts count or they don't.  If we're now saying some don't, we'd better tread carefully on that slippery slope.  I'm all for saying some contracts don't count, although the ones taking care of old sick people are probably not the first ones I'd void.

 

I can also think of better uses for these funds than putting them into big 3 retirement accounts, but I can think of worse ones too.  People spend their retirement checks, and those dollars then bounce around the economy in constructive ways.  Think of it as stimulus money, targeted specifically at rust belt communities.

Paying back your loans is a gift that one does when one can afford it, but when they can't they shouldn't.

Paying back your loans is a gift that one does when one can afford it, but when they can't they shouldn't.

 

I wish the bank, and congress, saw it that way.  If I still owe them most of it at the end, I will die unashamed.

The Italian state is generally supportive of industry there. Most of the Euro auto companies were mostly privatized in the 90s (including Renault and Fiat). Lower Saxony remains a major shareholder in VW. ... Euros tend to be very nationalistic when it comes to their carmakers (like to US once was). ...

The EU has generally open markets within the system, but pretty well protected local industries.

Thanks for the summary.

here's a didja know thing. i saw this old ad on the interwebs tonight.

 

chrysler built our early space program right through 'the right stuff' mercury program:

 

 

I'm not super familiar with the history of Chrysler, but my sense is that the 50s were very good to Chrysler, but that the starting in the 60s and with each passing decade they have failed to keep up.

GM: 'Substantial doubt' about survival

Automaker's annual report says it hopes to get $7.7 billion from the government to remain viable.

By Chris Isidore and Ben Rooney, CNNMoney, March 5, 2009

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors Corp. said in a government filing Thursday that its accounting firm has found there is "substantial doubt" about the automaker's ability to survive.  The embattled automaker made the disclosure in a 480-page filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission.

 

GM has sustained large and continuing losses, while saying it needs additional federal loans to remain in business.  Thursday's statement from the company's auditors presents another hurdle the automaker will have to clear as it makes the case that it deserve additional taxpayer support going forward.

 

The Obama administration, under the terms of the $13.4 billion in federal loans GM has already requested, must determine that the company's plans make it viable in the long run.  The government must determine that GM has a "positive net present value" or else demand repayment of the loans within 30 days - a development that would almost certainly plunge the company into bankruptcy and quite possibly force it out of business.

Does AIG have a positive net present value?

I think the only hope now is to find a way - any way - to get out of contracts with UAW.  The UAW is dying, like many other unions, one way or another.  They can bring the company and a huge chunk of the country down with them if they so choose.  The fact is there are enough people that would do the jobs for a lot less money and benefits.  This would probably be enough to get GM at least breaking even.

Does anyone know how the steel workers dealt with the collapse of that industry?  It seems that they had some incredibly powerful unions.

Lots of companies went out of business instead of dealing with the unions. The UAW created in one Depression ended in the next.

I think the only hope now is to find a way - any way - to get out of contracts with UAW. The UAW is dying, like many other unions, one way or another. They can bring the company and a huge chunk of the country down with them if they so choose. The fact is there are enough people that would do the jobs for a lot less money and benefits. This would probably be enough to get GM at least breaking even.

 

That probably is a big part of the answer.  I would hope that contracts paying these failed execs zillion$ would be similarly scrapped or modified.  There's plenty of manegerial talent available right now too.  If these moves were proposed together, it might go down easier.   

Heh. Did you see the "concessions" that the UAW finally agreed to?

 

An average worker who has been there for 10-years on an assembly line gets paid nearly twice as much as my dad who worked at AK Steel for 30+ years (including benefits). Sorry, working with raw steel and and blast furnaces is a lot more challenging than turning bolts and performing basic manual labor.

 

If GM does declare Chapter 7, does that mean that those fringe benefits to the UAW are eliminated?

Considering that labor and benefits only make up 10% of the cost of a car i doubt autoworkers working for free would save GM. I find it funny how uneducated everyone is on the auto industry.

GM has health care benefits that cost the company $6 billion per year. Their salaries and benefits are among the most expensive in the industry, with pension and benefit costs consuming up to near 60% of GM's total labor expenditure. Including benefits, an average assembly line worker will be paid an equivalent of $70/hour, the highest for the industry. Per GM vehicle, health care and benefit expenditures total $1,500. Taking that on a Chevrolet Aveo, that is 11.5%; on a Silverado, that is 7.3% -- well double than that of Toyota.

 

It is also interesting to note that GM generates no profit for small vehicles (MSRP less than ~$18,000). The individual car dealers actually require that these car models be sold for the dealer to be profitable, and to 'upsize' customers to larger models, but it still returns a negative cash flow to its parent.

GM has health care benefits that cost the company $6 billion per year. Their salaries and benefits are among the most expensive in the industry, with pension and benefit costs consuming up to near 60% of GM's total labor expenditure. Including benefits, an average assembly line worker will be paid an equivalent of $70/hour, the highest for the industry. Per GM vehicle, health care and benefit expenditures total $1,500. Taking that on a Chevrolet Aveo, that is 11.5%; on a Silverado, that is 7.3% -- well double than that of Toyota.

 

It is also interesting to note that GM generates no profit for small vehicles (MSRP less than ~$18,000). The individual car dealers actually require that these car models be sold for the dealer to be profitable, and to 'upsize' customers to larger models, but it still returns a negative cash flow to its parent.

 

Correct, but otherwise there would be no Youngstown.  You don't think the rest of the country doesn't keep NY/LA/DC afloat?  All we get is no-margin Cobalts and urban wreckage.  Not wise to begrudge Youngstown its last bone.  Half my friends still live there.  They're getting angrier by the day.  The same goes for Detroit and several other places.  I mean, how would Cincinnati like it if everyone started buying foreign soap?  I'm not trying to start anything, but I'm telling you that if the nation turns its back on the industrial midwest one more time-- somebody's gonna start something.  It could make 1960s violence look quaint.  We don't need that.  We still haven't cleaned up from the last time.

That wasn't an opinionated piece that I wrote, it was gleaned off of research reports that I completed during an analysis of GM's internal JIT inventory system.

 

To be clear, I do support protectionist policies when they can be carefully crafted. For instance, when China imposes tariffs on imported goods from the United States, but then cries foul when we try to do the same on Chinese imported steel, something has to give.

 

I actually wrote a very lengthy comment under "Is anything made in the USA" thread at SkyScraperCity worth sharing:

 

I had the opportunity to listen in on a lecture by AK Steel CEO James Wainscott at Xavier University recently in regards to AK Steel. It was part of a distinguished speakers presentation. In it, he noted that AK Steel was on the verge of bankruptcy only a few years ago due to a severe drop in customer orders, customer lawsuits, plant inefficiencies and other ills. Through a "3C" turnaround plan, AK Steel was able to rebound. Customer lawsuits were settled, and AK Steel became one of the most admired companies to work for in the United States (Forbes). The company boasted record profits for two years, it's stock price soared to over $70 last year, and it was receiving record orders.

 

Then, in a matter of several months last quarter, the bottom fell out. I remember watching my stock values in the company decline from a high of $73 to $40 when I dropped out; it is down to just over $6 today. Record profits have become near record losses. All, again, in a matter of months.

 

My dad's plant, where he worked for 35 years, has gone from a plant of 6,000 in the 1960s to just over 600 today. When he retired, and returned as a contractor before being laid off just a few months ago, the plant was down to around 500. The lone blast furnace -- the plant once had two, but it was just scrapped last month, has now been idled. It has needed major structural repairs for nearly a decade, but they have been deferred or patched. The 2-mile-long hot-strip is now gone. Most of the major functions of the plant have either been eliminated or reduced. There isn't much hope for the plant; it's in a recall mode right now, but the blast furnace's hearth is cracked, and needs major, costly repairs.

 

I remember exploring the old Detroit Steel mill about 20 miles northwest in Portsmouth, Ohio when I was a kid. And then the adjoining coke plant a few years ago. The town across from my hometown boasted iron industries that were completely modernized in the 1970s but dismantled in the 1980s. Another steel mill in Huntington, West Virginia that has all but become a shell of its former self. And just very recently, one of the nation's largest aluminum smelters just closed only an hours drive from my parents. The adjoining processing facility that depended upon its business is now struggling to make ends meet.

 

Maybe in a year, I can explore my father's old steel mill in Ashland, Kentucky. At least for the photographs and history, and to say that I once worked there too.

 

To get back on topic, Wainscott noted that AK Steel has been battling two fronts: a declining in automobile sales and stainless steel appliances that AK Steel depended on, and unfair trade policies. A great example he shared with us was one particular Chinese steel mill, whose name now escapes me. They began operations only 10 years ago, but have grown to become one of the nation's largest. They export all of their finished goods -- steel beams, cold-rolled stainless steel, and so forth at prices that would otherwise be unsustainable for the company.

 

How?

 

The Chinese government was giving a 70% subsidy to the corporation in order to boost up the profitability of the company and allow it to flood the market in the United States with imported steel. The goal, as Wainscott noted, was to drive out most of the major steel producers in the United States.

 

Has it worked?

 

Quite possibly. There are only a handful of major steel mills left in the United States that are wholly owned by corporations based out of the United States and do not reply on any imported materials (e.g. ore, scrap).

 

What is the solution? Wainscott called for greater pressure on the Chinese government, which is all but ineffective, and for protectionist policies, but as someone noted, that can backfire. Only time will tell if AK Steel will rebound; if not, my father's plant, like many others across the nation, will join the rust heap.

The biggest failure of the English language is having no plural 2nd person pronoun.  Half the time I say "you" in a post I mean the entire human race.  And my reference to P&G was out of familiarity.  There really shouldn't be any in-state or even interstate rivalries going on in this part of the country right now.  I wouldn't mind seeing what all the rust belt states could do if they voted as a bloc in congress, regardless of party, to preserve our employment base.  We might get PA and NJ to join in, and things could get tricky for NY state.  Recent expats down south might start telling their congressmen to back off.  We just need to buy some time to restructure everything.

 

Our model is getting the crap kicked out of it by quasi-communist China.  That steel illustration has been repeated time and time again by many countries.  And they talk about us starting a trade war... give me a break.  We've been losing a trade war for some time, on purpose, because that's our system.   

Sutton proposes clunker trade-in incentive program

Cindy Leise | The Chronicle-Telegram

 

A good way to jump-start the economy would be a $3,000 to $5,000 incentive to exchange gas guzzlers for more fuel-efficient cars, trucks or get a voucher for mass transit, said U.S. Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Copley Township.

 

Sutton introduced the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) Act on Tuesday to give consumers purchase incentives for turning in vehicles that are eight years or older in exchange for more efficient vehicles assembled in the United States...

 

Post edited 9-4-09 to comply with terms of use

 

http://www.chroniclet.com/2009/03/18/sutton-proposes-clunker-trade-in-incentive-program_122/

^ Today's cars get worse fuel economy than older cars because they weigh so much.

^ Today's cars get worse fuel economy than older cars because they weigh so much.

 

I know. Obesity has skyrocketed since the proliferation of fast food. Sh!t's ridiculous.

Modern cars don't weigh anything compared to old ones.  SUVs are heavy, sure, but compact for compact, sedan for sedan, everything is much lighter now.

^ 2009 models are much heavier than their '80s-'90s equivalents, but mostly lighter than '60-'70s cars.

I don't have data from a weigh-off, but I'd be really suprised if todays' Impala weighs more than an 80s one that contains a 305 and two couches.  Or a 90s Caprice, like the cops always had.  That thing is a tank compared to a modern impala.  Cobalt v. 80s Cavalier?  Corolla v. Chevette?  Maybe I'm cherry picking.  But I used to work with a lot of automotive component suppliers, and they said they had to cut cost and weight annually.

 

Edit:  It's closer than I thought... 1990 Caprice 3693 lbs; 2009 Impala 3649 lbs

Edit2: I was wrong on the compact... 1990 Cavalier 2436 lbs; 2009 Cobalt 2991 lbs

 

IIRC, the 1990 Cavalier was a sub-compact; the 2009 Cobalt is a compact.  It would be more correct to compare that Cobalt to Chevrolet's 1989 compact, the Celebrity, which weighed 2700 pounds.  The Celebrity station wagon weighed over 2900 pounds.

 

Note that the latest version of the Honda Civic is much bigger than the Civics of yore.  It is as big as the old Accord.  Motorists buy bigger cars when they can afford them.

There are a lot more safety features and copper wiring in newer cars than there were in old ones.

There are a lot more safety features and copper wiring in newer cars than there were in old ones.

 

I guess that's why standard components have to keep cutting their weight but the cars don't get any lighter.

The weight of American cars (and the poor gas mileage) is heavily influenced by federal safety standards. Cars were lighter and more efficient in the 80s, but were not particularly safe and didn't feel well put together (which explains in small part the adoption of SUV in the early 90s and Japanese cars of the era were even worse - though Toyota started making their cars feel solid first which is what drove their massive growth). Europe still tends to have lower safety requirements (well, different, primarily they don't make car companies design cars that assume an unbelted passenger).

Having owned a number of 80's Japanese-made cars I disagree that they didn't feel well put together.  They did to me, and I got many of them up well above 100,000 miles.  They were also acceptably safe, if you didn't get run over by someone else in their oversized suburban assault vehicle.  SUV's and trucks have turned safety into an arms race- I feel safe because my car can total yours.

80s and earlier Japanese cars were made of substandard metals.  That's why it's so hard to find a decent Datsun 280Z, which I want very badly.  My first car was a 1988 Cavalier that had over 190k, ran perfect, and felt extremely solid.  I now drive a 2003 Corolla that shakes like the dickens on the freeway.  The motor is good and everything works, but it isn't what I'd call solid.

I've driven Japanese and Swedish cars.