Call your Congressional Representatives

[Bruce Nunnally]

GM has info to help with the conversation here.

Tell your U.S. Senators and Representatives that support for the U.S. auto industry is in America’s best economic interest and is a sound investment toward a more competitive future.

I am a consumer who believes it is important to have an American car industry in this country. I am asking for your help.

Some critics call helping America’s automobile industry a bailout. I strongly believe this is an investment to rebuild our nation’s economic engine. If we do nothing, the future our country faces during this downturn is clear. We will see even more economic upheaval, communities will lose substantial businesses and revenue, and thousands of jobs will disappear. The negative impact will be worse than anything we’ve seen in our lifetime.

We are at a crossroads, where given the opportunity, our nation’s auto manufacturers can lead once again. In 2010, we will see labor and health care reforms kick in. We will also see new electric vehicles introduced that will help reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil. And if it weren’t for the recent credit crunch, these companies would be on the road to succeed.

If Congress does not act, it will be the shortest and fastest road from recession to depression. Our economy is suffering enough. Please help prevent further job losses and devastation to our communities. I am asking that you give our nation’s car companies the opportunity to complete this turnaround.

We cannot afford to lose this cornerstone of our economy. We should not depend on other nations for our manufacturing capabilities or new technologies. And we do not want to contribute to an even deeper collapse that will leave too many people facing further economic uncertainty.

[Bruce Nunnally]

Program / scorecard:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi -- Wants to help the Automakers

Representative Barney Frank, D-Mass, Chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services -- crafting a bill for the Lame Duck Session next week to allow part of the $700B bailout for Financial Institutions to be used to help the Auto Makers.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson -- says the $700B is ONLY for Financial Institutions, and that the Automakers should get help from the previous $25B package passed a year late as part of the fuel economy bill last year.

Why can't the Automakers access the $25B already approved? Note that the $25B in loans has been passed, but is not actually available to automakers. First Congress would need to finish designing the process by which automakers would request and be granted loans under that package. Also, under the Energy Department rules for the retooling loans, to be deemed viable an automaker has to prove it could survive without government money.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said today that President George W. Bush was concerned about the industry, but wouldn’t say whether the administration would back broadening the financial industry bailout to include automakers.

Senator Carl Levin, D-Michigan, plans for legislation to aid the industry, saying it will be introduced if the Bush administration fails refuses to approve loans from the $700 billion bailout fund.

Senator Barbara Mikulski, D-Maryland, drafting a bill that would make automobile loan interest deductible from federal taxes.

[JohnnyG]

I'm not buying it, and there would be no end to it. Which industry would be next? The airlines? the baking industry? our old friends the paper industry?

Sorry, I have to go back to the email that was sent around, flawed math and all, that the govt. should distribute that money to each of US with the stipulation that we buy an American car.

Problem solved!

Now, not only would we each be able to buy a new car or TWO with the money, the last email said we would all now be mortgage free!!!!

[thu]

I have to agree with JohnnyG.

Today's NPR Marketplace program (not the Left Wing Considered, er, I mean the All Things Considered show) put things into perspective. They talked about the much ballyhooed 'statistic' of the automobile industry's pervasiveness in our economy (e.g. so many number of jobs created as a result of the existence of the American auto industry). In this program, they said that the Gaming industry (casinos, etc) has a MUCH larger workforce employed directly (working at the casinos) and indirectly (gaming suppliers, hotels, etc) than the automobile industry. IIRC, gaming/casino industry employment was 2x to 3x as big as the auto industry. The casino industry is as in much trouble as the automobile industry, but nobody is talking about bailing it out.

If we bail out the American auto industry, we'll be bailing out everything else, too.

Even though I don't like it, I'd rather see GM, Ford, etc declare bankruptcy, clear out the crap, and streamline their product line than to continue in the current mode, which isn't working. Although I doubt it, we may be at a point where there are too many auto manufacturers. In that case, it might make sense for one or two of them to just disappear. Better to cut things off quickly than to let the situation fester for years resulting in slow recovery.

Sad? Yes.

Painful? Definitely.

Appalling? Maybe not.

What's appalling is the way the Detroit Three have been operating for a loooong time. High overhead, too many product lines, reputation for bad quality, unwillingness to deal decisively with the Unions, etc. Anybody here remember the term "planned obsolescence"?

[Logan]

I have to agree with Bruce.

Yeah, we are not thrilled that GM needs some help. But it's not a bailout. It simply a low interest loan GM needs to bridge out the 'sub prime' mortgage mess.

Even Toyota has suggested it cannot afford for GM to go out of business. The American job loss backlash would ruin the industry.

'Sub prime' mortages were the running joke a couple years ago. The Repubs rasied the red flags. The Dems said make more sub loans available.

Anyway. Here we are.

A big problem with GM is they used to build the whole car. Now they speciallize in assembling cars. So the old GM has a lot of legacy costs. I mean, they literally made the whole car. These issues will eventually die off for lack of a better term.

GM still makes the bodies and the powertrains. The rest is shipped in from outside suppliers. Examples of outside suppliers:

Wheel and tires.

Glass.

Axles.

Instument panels.

Electronics.

Door panels and interior trim.

Headliners.

Exhaust systems.

Stampings.

Tail lamps and headlamps.

None of these are made by GM anymore.

Hence the national problem. If GM goes down, everyone else goes down too. And fast, all due to the 'sub prime' loan mess.

Saw this message from the UAW tonight:

Call For Help!

Please call your Senators and Congressman and let them know how important that the survival of the American Auto Industry and especially General Motors is to you and your Family! This will only take a few minutes as I have a attached a letter with the phone number and an example of a potential phone script. This is only an example as I know our members are extremely bright and will make a compelling case in their own words about the importance of a job, health care, a pension and the overall importance of General Motors survival to the economy of America!

Next Wednesday, Congress will meet and have a discussion about potential legislation that would expand the usage of the $700 Billion Loan package already approved for the bailout of the financial institutions. Current Treasury Secretary Paulson today said that he will not approve the usage of the 700 Billion in rescue dollars for the big financial firms being used for the Auto Industry without direction from the legislative branch of Government.

This is ironic because the big financial firms that caused this mess, making sub prime loans, leaving credit tough to secure and causing a deterioration in consumer confidence, are the very people that the government will bail out! This leaves the poor and the middle class workers trying to support his or her family out in the cold as the company that they work for goes down the drain without the same relief that the financial firms are getting.

Your phone call, email or letter are very important as the public does not understand or in some instances support the requests of assistance to the American Auto Industries. Ask your friends and neighbors to help us. These politicians will pay attention to the number of calls that are receiving ! The following are some key points to remember!

* The requests are for low interest loans which will be paid back to the Federal Government as soon as this financial downturn improves. This is not a gift or bailout! It would be paid back with interest.

* Failure to secure these loans could result in the collapse of the American Big 3. This would cause the loss of over 3 million US manufacturing jobs. This would be catastrophic to our workforce and the retirees who depend on GM, Ford and Chrysler .

* While many pundits are critical of this loan package and are suggesting to just let GM and other domestic manufacturers declare bankruptcy, they have not considered the huge human toll that this would take and the tremendous cost that would far exceed any risks that would be associated with the low interest loans that are being requested.

* Japan, South Korea, China, Mexico, Brazil, Spain, Taiwan, and Canada all closely protect their Manufacturing Industry. These countries all describe manufacturing and especially Auto Manufacturing which these countries consider a matter of National Security for their countries. You can understand that! Who would make our tanks and munitions as GM did in the 1st and 2nd World Wars protecting this country? We could never rely on Japan , China and Korea to help make armaments to protect our democracy!

In Closing, I do not have to tell our UAW/GM Members that GM has never made better cars and Trucks that they are making today! UAW Car and Truck Builders working for GM are building some of the finest products on the road today! This is not our own assessment, these top rankings come from independent analysts like JD Powers, Car and Driver and Consumer Reports. General Motors' product portfolio boasts over 30 cars and trucks getting 30 miles per gallon or better, A full fleet of hydrogen fueled vehicles, Hybrid Technology in all of its brands and an electric car coming out in 2010 which will revolutionize the car industry. General Motors is not a company that America can afford or should let fail due to an economic problem that was created through no actions of this company.

Please make a phone call and send an email today! The GM number to assist you in contacting elected officials in any area is 1-866-927-2233.

[thu]

GM's problem doesn't stem from just the subprime mess. They've been in trouble for much longer. The last time GM had a profit was in 2003, well before the credit crisis. Since then, according to the Wall Street Journal, GM has lost $74 billion. GM's problems are systemic within itself.

There are other industries that are in as much or in deeper trouble than the Auto industry. Do we give them loans, too? The aforementioned Casino industry that is 2x as big as the Auto industry is in as much or deeper trouble. Do we help them too? If not, why not? Are they less important?

How much money do we loan the Casino industry? Oh wait, they are by and large not unionized. I guess that makes them not important.

Then there's the housing construction industry. How much do *they* want?

Pepsi just laid off 3,000. Should we help them, too?

If Toyota falls into trouble, shall we help them as well?

I hear that today that the Tech Industry is headed for a huge fall as well. Industry for that sector is easily larger than the Casino and Auto industries combined. How about them?

It goes on and on.

Using taxpayer-guaranteed dollars to loan them just prolongs the pain. Allowing them to declare bankruptcy allows them to quickly and efficiently shed the 'legacy' items you mention. Better to cut these off quickly than to let them "eventually die off". We've been waiting these legacy items to 'eventually die off' for decades. This will result in a faster recovery than if we just let them limp along in the current mode.

How much longer shall we wait?

We resisted guaranteeing loans to the airlines (they dug their own way out via consolidations, bankruptcies, and layoffs) and we should also resist guaranteeing anything to the auto industry. To do so encourages the current level of inefficiencies which we have to admit are huge.

If want to help the auto industry, let the Detroit Three (no longer the "Big Three") declare bankruptcy, shed the awful Union contracts they've been saddled with, as well as renegotiate with all their creditors and suppliers, and let them compete with Nissan, Toyota, Honda, BMW, VW, etc who have costs well below the Detroit Three. The native industry stays alive and becomes more competitive thanks to the resulting newly-found efficiencies and better terms from their suppliers.

Cheers,

T

[MrEldo97]

I have spent my entire working life in manufacturing (something I now regret, but that is another story) and manufacturing in the USA has no stronger advocate that I. Having said that, the Not So Big Anymore Three have put themselves right where they are through gross mis-management. Let them all declare Chapter 11, appoint receivers who will FIRE THE BODs, Management, break the UAW contracts, reorganize and come out on the other side of Chapter 11 as better, stronger companies.

To be sure, 30 years of absolutely incompetent USG trade policy contributed to the current economic disaster on any number of levels and alternatively the Not So Big Three could sell out to the Chi Comms, thus finishing the squandering of our economic sovereignty…

You can tell that I am absolutely disgusted with our government and look forward to the day when I can “turn on , tune in and drop out” on a tropical Caribbean Isle…

Really, I am beside myself I am so livid with our government and its trade policy.

[JohnnyG]

Since we are into long quotes on this topic, here's one you may find interesting. I feel that for every taxpayer dollar spent, there is a specialist or lawyer looking for alternate ways to use the cash. It could be to boost the balance sheet, or to fund bonuses, or to finance golden parachutes for the executives, but it certainly won't help the people that supply the funds. This country was built on free enterprise, and I'm for sticking with that concept. It does give more meaning to my signature line though.

"LONDON (Reuters) - Experience shows financial crises escalate very rapidly, and need a swift and decisive response from policymakers to break the cycle of panic. Time to reflect, craft thoughtful policies and consider long-term consequences is a luxury policymakers generally don’t have.

But the problem with bold ad hoc responses is they often have unintended consequences. Individual policy actions may prove inconsistent with one another, fail to achieve objectives, and store up larger problems for the longer term.

Developments over the last week suggest the U.S rescue program has fallen into just this trap and is now rapidly unraveling.

The twin pillars of the rescue program are the multiplicity of liquidity and lending programs being offered by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Both programs are now in deep trouble. In fact the various rescue packages risk becoming a textbook example of how poorly designed programs can fail to achieve their objectives.

LIQUIDITY EVERYWHERE BUT MAIN STREET

The Fed has grown its balance sheet from $884 billion to $2.055 trillion in the space of two months and extended almost $1 trillion in additional support to the banking system through the various emergency lending programs enacted or expanded over the last year.

But precious little of this additional liquidity is finding its way through to households and corporate borrowers. In fact, most of it is now sloshing around the banking system like so much excess ballast.

Banks have increased their reserve holdings on deposit with the Fed from $8 billion to $494 billion. This is $488 billion more than the Fed estimates they would ordinarily need to hold for payment clearing and prudential purposes.

Increased reserve holdings have absorbed perhaps half of the liquidity placed into the banking system from the Fed. Much of the rest has almost certainly been invested into the mountain of Treasury bills the U.S Treasury has been issuing. Only a very small proportion is left for re-lending to the real economy.

It is much safer for the banks to lend surplus funds to the Fed and the Treasury than lend to one another let alone to households and corporations. There is no credit risk. Nor is there any liquidity risk because reserve balances can be accessed on demand, and the Treasury bills have short maturities and can be readily re-discounted.

The Fed has made these perverse incentives worse by agreeing to start paying interest on excess reserves. Previously, the lack of interest payments gave banks an incentive to minimize reserve balances. But now reserves pay interest the net cost is low.

Even low returns on Fed balances start to look attractive when adjusted for the high levels of credit and liquidity risk in extending longer-term credits to other banks and real-sector borrowers.

SURPLUS MONEY, NOT ENOUGH CREDIT

Policymakers have ignored the distinction between money and credit (or to use monetarist terminology between narrow money and broad money). The Fed can create unlimited (narrow) money by adding reserves to the banking system. But it cannot create credit (broad money, or lending from the banking system and other financial institutions to one another and to end customers).

This is precisely the problem the Bank of Japan faced throughout the late 1990s and into the present decade. The bank reduced interest rates close to zero, and even resorted to “quantitative easing”.

The result was a huge increase in narrow money but little or no growth in the broader money aggregates as the banks preferred to keep the increased liquidity in their vaults rather than boost lending to customers.

The problem is that credit extensions depend on healthy banks being willing and able to lend, and healthy borrowers willing to borrow and able to repay. Once the economy is trapped into a more than usually serious recession, sound and prudently managed institutions have no incentive to take on more leverage to expand their operations, while lending to weaker institutions that need the money presents an unacceptably high credit and liquidity risk.

Yesterday’s inter-agency statement from the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevent s/press/bcreg/20081112a.htm) notes sternly “the agencies expect all banking organizations to fulfill their fundamental role in the economy as intermediaries of credit to businesses, consumers, and other creditworthy borrowers”. But the stern injunction to start lending again is probably futile.

Until collateral values (especially residential and commercial property) stabilize and there is greater certainty about the economic outlook, there is no incentive for creditworthy institutions to borrow, or banks to lend. But without lending, the contraction will deepen.

THE $700 BILLION TARP SLUSH FUND

TARP is beset by even bigger problems. Recall the $700 billion fund was originally created to provide a buyer of last resort for mortgage-backed securities and other assets that had become illiquid and were allegedly trading only at firesale values, if at all, that did not reflect their fundamental underlying worth. TARP was supposed to aid price discovery and deal with a crisis of liquidity.

But the TARP provided the Treasury secretary with almost unlimited authority over how to use the money, subject only to an oversight board composed mostly of executive branch officials and powers for Congress to invoke the “nuclear option” and disapprove further funding beyond an initial $350 billion.

The fund has quickly mutated. The Treasury used $125 billion for capital injections into nine large national banks, some of whom claimed they did not want or need it. Another $125 billion is being made available for capital injections smaller regional and community banks. Some $40 billion is now being used to support AIG. The Treasury now has just $60 billion of TARP authority before it must risk returning to Congress.

PROGRAM CREEP

Yesterday, the Treasury admitted it now has no plans to begin buying troubled assets, gutting the program’s original purpose completely.

Congress came under intense pressure to approve TARP with the promise that asset purchases could begin within a matter of days of the president signing the bill. Legislators show increasing signs of restiveness that TARP has transmuted into a giant $700 discretionary fund outside the regular appropriation process.

There is frustration that TARP funds are being used to bolster balance sheets (and thereby take off pressure to cut dividends and bonuses), and perhaps pursue consolidation, while there is no new credit flow to households and corporations.

Meanwhile an ever-lengthening list of industries are bidding for TARP bailouts. The Treasury has already extended the program to insurers. American Express and other institutions have turned themselves into commercial banks to access all the federal support on offer.

The auto industry is pressing its own claims to be “systemically important” for a share of the bailout funds. Congress and the administration are now arguing over where to draw the line. TARP is not big enough to bail out all these industries.

But the fundamental problem is that neither Fed liquidity nor TARP deals with the root of the problem - the rising tide of defaults in the residential mortgage market, and the continued fall in home prices and collateral values.

There is a popular misconception that the renewed extension of credit will revive the real economy. But that is putting the cart before the horse. Credit will start flowing again only when banks and potential borrowers can see some sign that the economy, cash flows and collateral is stabilizing.

As several senior Fed officials have indicated, monetary policy has done all it can. Only fiscal policy, combined with the systematic rescheduling of loans and write-down of debt principal, can achieve stabilization in the real economy and the housing market."

[Logan]

Ok..that being said.

Bush has his new Toyota plant sitting in San Antonio. He's happy. He has no need to help GM. He has Texans working for Toyota. Deal done.

That being said...

Toyota San Antonio workers are not building anything. They are sitting on their hands. No layoff policy at Toyota. For now...

Nissian. Brand new corporate headquarters Franklin, TN. Just down the road. Extended buyouts for factory employees at the Smryna, TN plant.

Hyundai. Montgomery, AL. Several weeks shut down. You can use your vaction time. If available.

Honda. Sales down but not out. Honda seems to able to time the market just right. Considered a scrappy brand in Japan. They seem the play the game here in the US dead on. Sales down 35%.

Truth: USA needs to able to build at least a tin can in time of war. Or the wolfs will move in on us. Soup anyone?

All of this is due to 'sub prime' mortages. Translatetion : 'sub prime' equals 'bad loans.'

Mitsubishi tried this about 15 years ago...."Got a heartbeat and $149 a month...see Mitsubishi". Sadly, people did. Bad loans all over. We thought Mitsubishi was done and gone. Guess who saved them? Japan Inc Goverment.

Dont feed me the global economy crap either. War is war. It's happened over and over since the begining of time.

I might have to move away.

[MrEldo97]

This "global economy, post industrial economy" crap comes from these academic elites with heads in the clouds over their academic ivory towers...or do they have their heads up their azzes?

Massachusetts is full of 'em and a short drive through Massachusetts will show you what they've done to the Commiewealth.

[thu]

If we don't allow/force the Detroit Three to go bankrupt, they cannot shed their inefficiencies. If we just loan them money (or worse, give it to them), it will be business as usual - the same thing they've been doing the last 30 years. Their current mode of operation isn't working.

Bankruptcy doesn't mean they disappear. They are not going to liquidate. It allows them to reorganize wholesale - get rid of their legacy structures and begin anew. When the Japanese and Europeans came to town, they had the advantage of starting fresh. Heck, foreign automakers now make cars in the US that get exported! That should tell us something. We should allow/force the Detroit Three to do the same.

Once Detroit does that, we will see a lot of good things from these guys, not the same old way of doing stuff. Otherwise, they will find themselves in the same precarious situation a few years from now when the next crisis comes along.

This gives the Detroit Three the best chance to be the best competitors they can be. It also gives consumers better choices as it will likely result in better products, better service.

I'm afraid that if we don't allow/force the Detroit Three to completely reorganize, the next crisis will result in them disappearing altogether.

[95SevilleSLS]

thu, at first I did not agree with you but after reading all the posts, I can see what you're talking about; and it makes sense. It would be like giving a crying child a piece of candy that they didn't need to just keep them quiet. Yes, it keeps them quiet and happy for a bit, but you're back to the same situation as soon as that piece of candy is gone. Instead of giving the child a piece of candy make them cry it out and they won't ask for it again and deal with it. I hope that made sense.

[brmurph]

I say we do whatever we have to to keep the big 3 around. They may not build the most reliable cars but the ones they do build have personality.

I can't think of any other industry I would really care if the companys went under but cars are so personal (at least to us old timers), I couldn't imaging not being able to buy an American car..

Don't make me buy an import :-(...

[JimD]

Saving specific industries is not a function of government! A temporary helping hand is OK, but government controlled sectors of the economy is not what capitalism or the US economy is about. And you can be sure a "bailout" would contain onerous government controls. Do you really want bureaucrats running the financial or automobile or fillin-the-blank industries? Not me.

Thousands of companies flounder every year. Some go the Chapter 11 route while others simply vaporize. Delta airlines was in Chapter 11 several years ago and they have since acquired Northwest to become a (potentially) viable corporation again.

Where was the hand-wringing when AMC, or Studebaker, or DeLorean disappeared? Capitalism can be an unforgiving mistress.

I do get it that the collective auto industry involves millions of jobs. There will be pain. And then there will be more pain.

[BodybyFisher]

I was very upset when Packard went down also, that was a borderline Cadillac

[JimD]

True; I forgot Packard. And probably others.

At my age, memory is the 2nd thing to fail. And I have forgotten what was the 1st function to fail.

[thu]

There is an excellent article in Monday's Wall Street Journal that specifically addresses this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688631448632421.html

[KHE]

What is not realized is if Congress does not provide a LOAN PACKAGE to the big three and they are forced into bankruptcy, they will go out of business. Who will buy a car from a manufacturer that is in bankruptcy? Would you spend $30000, $40000 or more on a car that might not have ANY service/parts support if the manufacturer goes out of business?

I will reiterate the statement that the consequences of letting the automakers file bankruptcy would be a catastrophic chain reaction to the economy. I was in a meeting at work (we are not in the auto parts supply business) this morning and management stated if the big three go into bankruptcy, it will take out most of our supply base because most of our suppliers are also major automotive suppliers. We are a $1.6 Billion manufacturer and it is highly likely that 75% or more of us will have our jobs eliminated.

If the automakers go under, it will cost the government BILLIONS in unemployment benefits and lost tax revenues. Who will make up the difference. Letting the automakers go into bankruptcy is the quickest path to a depression that I know.

[BodybyFisher]

True; I forgot Packard. And probably others.

At my age, memory is the 2nd thing to fail. And I have forgotten what was the 1st function to fail.

Not at all, we had a 54 Packard Carabean at the time and I remember crying at the time, it was very upsetting to me as a kid.. I loved the Packard

[howex]

Man I can’t believe what I’m reading here; of course we have to help out the auto makers. If we fail to do it, you’ll be able to point to the Midwest as the epicenter of the Bush depression and once the dominoes start to fall you better be prepared because it will eventually get to you.

Before you beat up on GM, Ford and Chrysler and how bad they are run, try to remember they are not playing on an even playing field.

First, every state that has a foreign auto maker in it subsidizes their plants with hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks. It shouldn’t shock anyone that the legislators that have been crying the loudest for no loans for American auto companies have foreign auto companies in their districts. Traitors!

Second, do you think it a coincidence that all these plants are in the Southeast? The free traders have decimated the manufacturing base in this area, when you have no work they look like pretty good jobs. I don’t mean to offend anyone but the fact is, this is also the least educated workforce in America.

Did you know that American car companies can’t build manufacturing plants in Japan? The world’s second largest economy and we can’t build a plant in it. Seems fair to me!

Did you know that Japan caps the number of cars we can import to their country and we have to pay a 22.5% tariff on every car we sell there? Seems fair to me!

Did you know that the government of Japan subsidizes 80% of their U.S auto-makers health care costs?

Did you know that the Japanese government is a full partner for the auto companies’ research and development? Seems fair to me!

Now folks this is just what the Japanese do to us and they are one of our best trading partners, What Korea and China do is far worse, subsidies’, currency manipulation, etc,etc . I’ll bet you didn’t know that as we speak Toyota is trying to get a $56 billion loan from the German government.

Seems to me that if U.S automakers were playing on a level playing field these foreign cars may not looks quite so attractive.

But what gets my goat the most is to hear Americans complaining that a group of workers have the guts to stand together and fight for a better life for themselves and their families. What is wrong with a company taking care of loyal employees in their old age? If the companies don't do it than you and I surely will. Seems to me they should be commended, not condemned.

So all of you folks complaining about the unions,(no I’m not a union member) Please feel free to forfeit your vacation with pay, the 7 or 8 paid holidays, the health care, the 40 hour week with overtime after 40, the safe work environment, and just about every other work benefit you take for granted now days. Somebody stood together, putting their livelihoods on the line for those benefits you enjoy today. You should thank them!

[thu]

There is misunderstanding by members of this board what 'bankruptcy' means. A company that goes into Chapter 13 bankruptcy continues to operate. It does not disappear unless it's a liquidation (Chapter 7) bankruptcy.

Almost all the US airlines have gone through one or more Chapter 13 bankruptcies in recent memory. As a result, they have come back stronger than ever.

The kind of bankruptcy many are advocating for the Detroit Three is a Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Chapter 13 bankruptcy is also known as a 'reorganization' bankruptcy.

From today's Wall Street Journal:

[bankruptcy] is often viewed as a kind of death, but this is misleading. Bankruptcy is an opportunity for a company (or individual) to make a fresh start. A company in financial distress faces the danger that creditors will try to seize its assets. Bankruptcy gives it some respite. It also provides an opportunity for claimants to figure out whether the company's financial trouble was the result of bad luck or bad management, and to decide what should be done. Short-cutting this process through a government bailout is dangerous. Does the government really know whether a company should be saved?

More on this at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122826736608874577.html

[OynxSTS]

I can support the bailout/loan with ONE big stipulation...

If Rick Wagoner stays... No bailout... Zero Nada Zilch...

If Rick goes of his own free will WITH NO SEVERANCE PACKAGE...

Then ya... GM has a chance and give them the loan.

The sad truth is that as long as Rick Wagoner is running the show; our favorite car manufacture is dead and this is only good money after bad.

[MrEldo97]

As a condition of any USG bailout, whether the company makes cars or swindles gullible investors and home buyers, the entire upper management and boards of directors of those companies should resign, be fired and/or prosecuted (if there is evidence of wrong doing or gross incompetence or negligence, with ALL personal property forfeit to the USG). I find it to be an incredible stretch of the imagination to believe that this economic disaster is just the “ebb and flow” of business. I have travelled throughout the northeast and Midwest and seen first hand what bad management and “Free Trade” has wrought on the USA over the past 25 years.

To be sure, the current situation proves the failure of the “Free Trade” and “laisseiz faire” economic policies followed by our government.

Fair Trade – yes, Free Trade – no.

So much for Sarbanes-Oxley…

[MAC]

What will GM accomplish with a bridge loan?! Also, GM can no longer afford the high costs of doing business, particularly high wages, pensions, and medical costs. I was on the side of letting GM go bankrupt, however, I can also see that it may not be the best thing and would likely bring about years of restructuring (assuming GM survives). I want GM to survive, which is why any loan should have strict oversight and requirements including the eventual resignations of the chairman and rest of the board. It's time to clean house not just continue business as usual. The current board has failed miserably to maintain GM's competitive edge. It would be an insult to allow the chairman to remain at the helm. I also believe the entire board should be up for review and dismissal. Any argument that the current board is experienced and knowledgeable about the auto industry is frivolous in light of where GM is today. Make no mistake, the current board only had a vision as far as their bank accounts.

[OynxSTS]

Bail out just failed in the Senate....

Time to PANIC!