Yes. They dawdled away a lot of time getting fat and lazy of the sale of highly profitable SUVs (one figure I read was Ford made an average of $2500 per Taurus, and $12,500 per Navigator).

Like the housing bubble proponents, they apparently thought the SUV fad would never end. So why waste time and energy developing reasonable, high quality, fuel efficient (but lower profit margin )vehicles?

Completely irresponsible.

True to a point. I don't think high mileage cars would have saved them though. That is an easy fix without even changing a platform. Heck they could throw a lean burner in just about any one of their cars and significantly up their mileage in one model year.

I say it was the quality and styling that killed them. The SUV had/has a fantastic (almost disgusting) ROI and ignoring that segment would have been criminal neglect.

I know a guy that works in the local truck plant. A few years ago he was working holidays for triple overtime. Today he works about 2 weeks out of 5. Sadly he could not spent the money he made years ago fast enough. The big 3 should have invested wisely when making a killing. I vote no on a bailout unless it benefits the taxpayer. Sadly that is impossible.

Bailout guaranteed in an election year, not that I approve of it. Then again, foreign car makers get plenty of subsidies, direct and indirect, so it's not exactly a new paradigm. I'd rather see gov't money given to carmakers than to bailout Bear Stearns, Fannie and Freddie, or to I-banks via the 'discount window' as the FED has been doing for months. Where's the outrage over that?